Matt LaFleur will fix McCarthy's game-management woes
Matt LaFluer is hiring a game-management specialist, which is something Mike McCarthy should have done a long time ago.
When it comes to new Green Bay Packers head coach Matt LaFleur, we really don't know what to expect.
Obviously, we expect him to run an offense that is fun to watch and with Aaron Rodgers, he should be able to make that happen. Beyond the fact that he will run one of those new-fangled offenses (said in old man voice), we are still getting a picture of who this guy is.
Well, one bit of news I came across this week, made me feel much better about LaFleur and how he will try to fix the game-management issues that have impacted the Packers for years.
For years, the Packers have been screwing up key moments in the game and on many occasions, poor clock management or poor-decision making in key moments has killed them.
How many times have we seen Mike McCarthy take a timeout on defense late in the second quarter, only to give up points?
What's worse though is all the times he wasted timeouts and just made poor choices like against Seattle. Not going for that fourth down was asinine and there are too many instances to recall where the Packers had to let the clock run out because he or Aaron Rodgers burned an unnecessary timeout.
McCarthy was good at a lot of things, however, game management wasn't one of them. Matt LaFleur may not be the best either. But at the same time, he's bringing on someone to help and that's genius.
According to Rob Demovsky, LaFleur has said not having a game-management specialist will get you fired.
He's not wrong.
The game-management specialist will be part of the coaching staff and will focus only on those important decisions. Managing the game can mean going for a fourth down or deciding to challenge. To me, it's every decision the coach can make that impacts the game outside of calling plays and changing personnel.
Whether or not to go for it on fourth down? When to challenge? When to go for two? All that stuff. Clock management too. In fact, that's probably the most important.
McCarthy wasn't awful in every aspect of his game management but he seemed to make random decisions and when it comes to managing the clock, especially timeouts, he was flat-out bad.
He was the play caller, so I can get how that is difficult to do. He talked about being too distracted after the NFC title game in Seattle. That led to him not understanding the situation or missing something. Either way, he made a lot of bad decisions over the years and in the NFL, the margin is so narrow, a bad decision or two can be the difference between a win and a loss.
I can't say if LaFleur will get the best out of Aaron Rodgers or if he will be the offensive genius the Packers are hoping he can be. However, after hiring a game-management specialist, something I have wanted to see McCarthy do for years, I at least feel confident about his ability to improve the Packers when it comes to managing the game.
__________________________
Chris is a sports journalist from Montana and has been blogging about the Packers since 2011. Chris has been a staff writer for CheeseheadTV since 2017 and looks forward to the day when Aaron Rodgers wins his second Super Bowl. Follow him @thepackersguru
Comments (26)
TKWorldWide
February 24, 2019 at 09:47 am
That would be a most welcome change.
NickPerry
February 24, 2019 at 11:14 am
Now this is interesting and actually pretty damn smart. LaFleur is a first year HC with ONE year of play calling duties as a OC. With all the additional responsibilities he'll have during a game why not get a little assistance on those things that can win or loss you a game? Matt's head could/should be going 100 mph the first few weeks of the 2019 season. Having a guy assistant him, talk him through things, or just take a bit off his plate until he gets his sealegs why not?
I'm liking this dude more and more as with each passing week. Seems MLF doesn't have a huge ego or much of one anyways. McCarthy would have NEVER hired someone to assist him in these areas no matter how bad he was in them in most cases.
Leatherhead
February 24, 2019 at 10:13 am
I'm kind of laughing my arse off here....
There is so much stuff going on in the games that is in your head during a game....and then you're supposed to make some kind of genius decisions on the fly...
You've got 45 players, a dozen assistant coaches, the refs, the clock, etc. etc.
You can make some strategic decisions ahead of time, such as "We're going to try to get the last possession of the first half" and HOPE that they work out.
I mean, if you call time out before the end of the first half, and get the ball back, and then we score before the half AND get the kickoff for the second half, you look like a frickin' genius.
And if you don't get a stop and your opponent scores, you look like a frickin' idiot.
dobber
February 24, 2019 at 10:31 am
As you say, Chris, I would argue that this is the primary reason why an HC shouldn't be calling plays on either side of the ball.
I think it will be telling if a rookie HC consistently handles TOs, manages challenges, and plays the clock much better than the Packers' outgoing long-term HC. Some of this is brains, some is just having a feel for the flow of the game, some is analytics. That said, I'm not a huge fan of analytics in football. Some sports, like baseball, where it's mostly one-on-one play lend themselves to it and--IMO--have mostly been ruined by it. If the reports are true that analytics led MM to believe that it was better to shoot for chunk plays than to possess the football and move the ball (and to adjust his scheme and playcalling that way), then he got what he had coming.
NitschkeFan
February 24, 2019 at 10:42 am
Since most teams already have a dozen or more coaches, it makes sense to have one specialist in "game management". I'm surprised that most teams hadn't done this a long time ago.
But many of the scenario's, like when to call time outs with less than 2 minutes in a half, when to go for a 2-point conversion, etc. recur many times throughout the season (and year after year). I would think half of this stuff should be on "auto-pilot" and planned ahead of time.
dobber
February 24, 2019 at 10:45 am
I've started to shift to the perspective that PATs should go the way of the dinosaur and most teams should go for 2 pretty much every time. I have to grudgingly admit that this is a result of analytics (which I just denounced above).
CAG123
February 24, 2019 at 01:53 pm
Why? PATS aren’t even a sure thing anymore since they moved them back.
splitpea1
February 24, 2019 at 03:13 pm
This dinosaur says kick the point.
Do we have an injured kicker? Are there a lot of swirling winds inside the stadium? Have the Packers demonstrated great proficiency in short yardage situations? Shouldn't they mainly be focused on driving the ball down the field and scoring touchdowns before they worry about getting funky with the conversions?
Leatherhead
February 24, 2019 at 08:43 pm
Dobber, I've argued that point all along. I say go for two all the time, unless a one point conversion wins the game.
Along with not returning punts and a few other things. We should de-emphasize the kicking game. Go for it more. Punt/kick it less.
Slim11
February 25, 2019 at 12:17 pm
Most teams have done this, even at the D3 level.
Several years ago, I saw one of my college games and heard their "game management specialist" at work. I was sitting directly behind the bench.
When offense was on the field, he was monitoring down, distance and clock. As an example, on third-and-long, he was calling "punt team alert!" When defense was on the field, and forced a third-and-long, he called "punt-return team alert!" At the end of the first half, and the game, he was by the HC's side telling him down and distance, time remaining and number of time outs remaining for each side.
When coaches are on the sideline huddling with their respective players, the game management specialist takes a little off everyone's plate and allows them to focus more on the moment and not have to worry about missing a special team responsibility or such. IMO, it's overkill but may be worth it.
mamasboy
February 24, 2019 at 01:41 pm
The size of a coaches ego sometimes interferes with wanting a "game manager" by his side. It's good to see that MLF can set his ego aside for the good of his team.
Bert
February 24, 2019 at 11:17 am
Kinda refreshing to see that MLF is interested in the details and his ego isn't so big that he is unwilling to recognize where he can use some help.
Lare
February 24, 2019 at 06:24 pm
Yes, LaFleur apparently isn't afraid to admit that he may need some assistance in game management decisions in order to help them win games.
McCarthy apparently couldn't admit that and it cost them some wins.
CAG123
February 24, 2019 at 11:37 am
On a side not there’s a possibility that Justin Houston becomes a cap casualty the man has 18.5 sacks the past two seasons and had 5 FF 3 FR and a pick last year. He definitely still has something left in the tank won’t be as splashy as Dee Ford or Clowney but could be a nice low key signing.
Community Guy
February 24, 2019 at 12:24 pm
the timing of this idea seems appropriate, as this became an increasing area of weakness for the Packers. not all, but a lot of, time-management decisions can be made based on analytics (probabilities and statistics).
that said, i think there should be an element of intuition involved. for example, the Head has a feel for his own team and knows there is a good chance to push through a running play when time-management might suggest a pass play to preserve time.. or, maybe the coach feels the defense has a 3 and out coming even though analytics might suggest the opposing offense is about to use a lot of time in its next drive. there are still complex human elements in decision making that a game management specialist may not be considering.
jannesbjornson
February 24, 2019 at 12:42 pm
A bit of Game Theory never hurts and as the Boy Scouts say: "be prepared".
I would imagine an offensive assistant in the booth will follow the challenge replays etc and relay the information faster to the HC. The O coordinator will have a down and distance play sheet there for the call given defensive alignment. These plays have been pre-determined in weekly planning just move the process along faster. The goal this year is to Not burn TOs because the QB could not decipher the message.
stockholder
February 24, 2019 at 01:09 pm
I don't see any changes coming. The players know a new skipper is running the ship. The complaint box has been removed. The difference will be right or wrong now.
Ryan3468
February 24, 2019 at 01:40 pm
If you don’t score 50% on a two point conversion it isn’t working. I think a lot of teams wouldn’t be getting close to 50%. Cody Parker night still have a job if it was that easy to go for two. Analytics have to be adjusted to what a team is actually capable of otherwise the math is skewed and you will be out of a job.
Leatherhead
February 24, 2019 at 08:57 pm
Actually, league-wide, we're better than 50%. Quite a few teams did pretty well, but not one single team did it enough.
The Chargers made 6 out of 8. Why aren't they going for it every time? There were 4 teams that tried it once, failed, and never tried again!! Jacksonville did try again, lost again, and that was it. Hell, Green Bay was 3 out of 4 . 12 teams tried it at least 5 times and made it at least 60% of the time. Nobody tried it more than 10 times (Cleveland) and they were 4 out of 10.
Go for it. De-emphasize special team and take your chance with your high dollar unit and your super-duper QB.
splitpea1
February 24, 2019 at 03:46 pm
If LaFleur feels the need to hire a game manager, that's great. If he doesn't, that's great too. I don't recall Mike Holmgren needing any help in this aspect, and for the most part, I thought he did an outstanding job.
PAPackerbacker
February 24, 2019 at 03:47 pm
I stated many times last season that game management skills were lacking and cost the Packers victories. Understanding the need for better game management is a move in the right direction. It just makes sense to have a coach that will focus on game management. This move should have been made years ago. I salute LaFleur for recognizing the need and importance of game management and having the fortitude to do something about it.
porupack
February 24, 2019 at 06:42 pm
I'll judge the game manager is worthwhile if GB stops deferring the coin toss. That seems the stupidest fad in the last 10 years to me to defer coin toss. Never turn down the opportunity to take the ball first! You have 50% chance of getting one more possession than even number of possessions, assuming no turnovers. WTH defer if you are confident that your offense can go out an execute in any weather or situation, crowd noise, whatever? If you're not confident your offense can go out in any situation and weather, then you aren't coaching. WTH. Get the ball first every time you can.
jannesbjornson
February 24, 2019 at 06:58 pm
You defer only if your defense is Dominant and there is a high probability you will get you the ball back on downs and good field position. Its nice to get the ball first thing third quarter, especially if you are behind but to go Three and Out with a run, run, 3rd and long, punt scenario you just gave away momentum and set yourself up to be Fired as a HC. Never could see the logic of not letting Rodgers try to get the Pack points asap.
Leatherhead
February 24, 2019 at 08:59 pm
I like getting the 3rd quarter kickoff. The game is decided in the second half, not the first.
CoachJV
February 24, 2019 at 09:56 pm
During all of those NFCC years, including the SB year, AR was dominant in the No Huddle/hurry up offense. Back then he took yardage in chunks, not going for the bomb...
I hope we get back to some of that kind of thing...
Add that to the misdirection, disguised sets, and a run game and we can be dominant again....
701Packer
February 25, 2019 at 01:00 pm
But will he run shotgun toss in short yardage situations?