Mike McCarthy At A Crossroads

Sports Illustarted's Don Banks writes that the Packers coach is under some of the most pressure in the league.

After ten years in Green Bay and after guiding the Packers to a franchise record seven straight playoff appearances, you would think Mike McCarthy was sitting pretty as the third-longest tenured head coach in the National Football League.

The truth is a bit more complicated.

Sports Illustarted's Don Banks has an excellent column up this week looking at the pressure McCarthy is under entering the 2016 season. 

Money quote:

As good as the Packers have been for so long under McCarthy, this much I know from covering the league since 1990: A team staying at status quo, be it at the high end or the low end, is rarely a good thing in the NFL. It creates frustration that inevitably builds, and some of that frustration finally seeped out at times in Green Bay last season.

With several elements swirling around the head coach, it’s fair to look at the 2016 campaign as the make-or-break year of McCarthy’s tenure. Either he will find a way to reinvigorate the offense and return it to the upper echelon of the league, or teams will continue to stymie his best efforts and his players will continue down their paths of frustration to the point where they tune him out completely, if they haven’t started to already.

Far fetched? Don rightfully cites the famous Bill Walsh addage that head coaches have a shelf life of about ten years. McCarthy has reached that milestone and finds his team in need of a jump start. This is probably the most important offseason Mike McCarthy has ever faced during his time in Green Bay. 

0 points

Comments (141)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
Razer's picture

May 28, 2016 at 08:56 am

While I have generally been a supporter of the GM/Coach, I agree with the sentiment of this assessment. The steps forward matched by the steps back is getting a little frustrating. I get that, age, injury, cap and contract considerations keep things in constant motion but it seems that we have settled into an 'almost good enough' mode.

Of particular concern are the errors that we make around coaching. In recent years, McCarthy has made numerous mistakes with his positional coaches and has been forced to hit reset repeatedly. No dedicated WR coach, the ex-Lions RB coach, under performing TE coach, the Tom Clements debacle. By now, he should have a well-oiled machine, instead he is testing out another flyer.

As Mr. Nagler cites, the frustration seeps out when the guys running the ship don't appear to be quite right.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:57 am

NE is always swapping out coaches too. That's just football and being a head coach. One position coach can click with one group of players and never click with another group. Matching the coaches experience and personality withat the players in a field where coaches are always moving up positions and changing teams. It's like one big coaching square dance where the same people usually stay in pro or college football, but just change their title and their team. But when you lose your team you need to make a change. He hasn't lost his team. Dom capers had a few rough years with Charles woodson, and mccarthy had some rough patches with rodgers this past year. They will be fine. It's not easy to win a superbowl. The offense has to bounce back though and show some new wrinkles.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:06 pm

Mr. Banks overlooks one important factor that MM has in his favor.

As long as the (mostly) benign Wisconsin press corps keeps telling the faithful that they are so, so lucky to have a coach like MM (and GM like TT), I see no reason for MM to be worried about his job security.

Getting to 1 Super Bowl in 10 years with Hall of Famers at QB each and every year might not cut it with some other NFL franchises, but the Pack won the Super Bowl after the 2010 season and that seems to be good enough for the foreseeable future.

And because I reckon MM's got another 5 years or so before ARod retires, making the playoffs should continue to be a given while #12 remains the QB.

Thus, given recent past performance, I expect more regular season success, followed by further exposure in the playoffs, followed by the usual excuses (and letting go of another coach or two).

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:14 pm

"As long as the (mostly) benign Wisconsin press corps keeps telling the faithful that they are so, so lucky to have a coach like MM (and GM like TT), I see no reason for MM to be worried about his job security."

Sorry, but this is silly.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:52 pm

"Silly?"

Why is the premise that a largely benign/supportive press corps means MM and his boss TT have little reason to fear when it comes to their job security, "silly?"

Why is it "silly" to think that MM would be under a lot more fire if he were coaching elsewhere?

The Packers have had Hall of Fame QBs every year since TT and MM arrived in GB (11 and 10 years ago respectively).

The Steelers have been to 3 Super Bowls (and won 2) since TT arrived.
The Giants have won 2 Super Bowls since TT/MM arrived.
The Patriots have been to 3 Super Bowls (and won 1) since TT/MM arrived.
The Seahawks have been to 3 Super Bowls (and won 1) since TT arrived.
The Broncos have been to 2 Super Bowls (and won 1) since TT/MM arrived.

P. Manning appeared in 4 Super Bowls (winning 2) after TT arrived.
Tom Brady has appeared in 3 Super Bowls (winning 1) since TT/MM arrived.

If one believes Aaron Rodgers is as good a QB as Manning & Brady (as I and many others do), I fail to see why getting to (and winning) a single Super Bowl should shield MM (& TT) from criticism regarding their relative lack of post-season success. Yet, with few exceptions, the Wisconsin press uncritically praises "offensive genius" MM.

Or perhaps it is the word BENIGN that you find discomfiting?

Obviously, labeling the press corps covering the Pack as "benign" is nothing more than a subjective opinion, but I take comfort in knowing that, in addition to my own perception that this group is mostly made up of individuals who go out of their way to avoid criticizing the Packers generally and MM/TT specifically, Bob McGinn views them same way; "the largely benign media corps in Wisconsin." http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/packers-not-above-the-fray-of-win...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:10 pm

Great post yet all these packer fans are,absolutely satisfied with just 1 stinking SB and pretty much 1 and done in the playoffs and 2 hail Mary passes away from not even making the playoffs

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:40 pm

So, in other words you would be fine with one SB win if the Packers played in multiple SBs but lost all but one like the Patriots, Steelers and Seahawks. How does that make any sense? Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

May 28, 2016 at 02:30 pm

Nice to see that some Packer Fans are actually paying attention. -- Here's a horrible thought. -- AR plays another 5 or 6 seasons with MM as his HC with TT still using the Packers as his fantasy league team. The Pack will probably win more than they lose (because of AR) but they never see the SB again. -- As a result, the Pack will have gone about 30 years with two of the best QBs in the history of the game & only win 2 SBs. --- That's a nightmare scenario that's fast approaching. -- (FYI- the media corps in Wisconsin is benign.... but who really cares?)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 28, 2016 at 03:09 pm

Here's another horrible thought, the Vikings had the best RB to come along in years and NEVER MAKE THE SB. They could NEVER manage to put a "Team" around him to make a serious run. How many times have they even made the Playoffs, 2, 3, 4?? The Vikings haven't done Dick!! 0-4 in Superbowls and those were what, 40 years ago???? At least the Packers won a few and played in another.

I could see if you were a fan of a winner, but you come here and talk smack and have absolutely nothing to say about your own team because there's nothing to say. It's tough when you've been nothing but a loser.

Your Lucky, Cheesehead TV is one of those sites that lets ANYONE post and they may do so THAT SAME DAY. At the Daily Norseman (Or whatever it's called) you have to wait a day and then they kick you off if you even suggest the Vikings Suck!!!

BTW Gerber Boy..You're TERRIFIED the Packers and Rodgers just might be healthy this year and if that's the case you know you'll take up your regular 3rd or 4th place spot again.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:37 pm

Loved it NP. Put them in their place.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:33 am

LOL...Thanks Tundra..

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

May 29, 2016 at 06:35 am

Gerber boy...I think I just let out a little pee when I read that. High five, man.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:43 pm

How many coaches have the Vikings had since 2006? And they are still 0 for forever in NFL Championships and SBs. 56 seasons of futility soon to be 57. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:01 pm

Post of the year! Direct hit!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 11:20 am

Sorry, Packeraaron, but this statement is right on the money!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:45 pm

Wow you nailed it great post I agree making the playoffs every year seems to be their goal then yoyr right the excuses fly after a liss olin the playoffs blame the TE coach cause none of the packer TEs are worth a damn fire the WR coach cause none of them are fast and none can run correct routes 15 games into a season.I know TT has alot of man crushes on here and to some people can't do no wrong but alot if blame needs to be put on his shoulders I feel for not being more aggressive in FA and fixing glaring holes 4 years in the making

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 29, 2016 at 09:00 am

1) Ummmmm....David Riese, The Packers didn't have a WR Coach last year which was one of the biggest reasons why the Packers WR struggled.

2) IF you're really a Packers Fan you should be excited about the new TE Coach the Packers hired. He took a TE who caught 44 passes in 6 NFL Seasons and help turn him into a TE who caught 79 Passes for 1042 Yards and 9TD's.

3) You should also be excited about the new RB Coach, look what he did with Gurley, Tre Mason, and Zak Stacy in St. Louis. Shame on MM for hiring Sam Gash in the first place. WHY would you EVER hire and Ex Lions Coach???

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 11:23 am

So, Nick Perry, according to you. "If you really are a Packers fan....." No room for facts and objectivity?? You should give all of us a seminar on 'How to be a Packers fan'. What nonsense!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

June 01, 2016 at 05:26 am

Nonsence?? Facts?? Objectivity?? Perhaps you're right but I was mearly pointing out the "Fact" The Packers didn't have a WR coach last year, at least one that wasn't a QB Coach as well and is still there so how could he have been fired?

Also the coaching changes MM did make should have Packers Fans excited! Both these coaches have been doing good things with the players they've been coaching. There's reasons to be optimistic instead of pessimistic.

Question Mr. Nonsense, what if Darrell Bevel had actually called for Marshawn Lynch to run the ball from the 2 yard line instead of passing the ball? Do you think Patriots Fans would be calling for Bill Belichicks head? After all it would be 11 years of failure counting last year had Lynch RUN the ball.

No need to be rude, you sound like a guy who used to post here. Thompson tWins, Trumps, and a multitude of other names used for his over the top affection of Ted T and Donald Trump.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 10:31 am

Look, let's level-set (read: start with the obvious and uncontested facts).

MM IS worried about his job security. If he wasn't, he wouldn't have stenciled the Marginot line on Eddie Lacy's waist-line or fire several assistants.

But you have to place MM in perspective ... and let me hasten to add I'm a MM supporter with qualifications.

Let's compare MM with Martin Lewis, the Bengals' Default. Lewis, an alleged defensive genius based upon his Ravens' resume, is 0 for the playoffs, his defense sans Mike Zimmer is Swiss Cheesehead, and dog garn it if ol' Marty pants isn't sittin' back smokin' Cubans, drinkin' Margaritas with no a worry in the world. That's benign bro.

MM has come under withering criticism for this and that elucidated in great detail in the some of the trailing posts, including mine. But look, let's level set on the Delta between MM and Starvin' (for a playoff win) Marvin Lewis.

MM has hoisted a Lombardi and coached several other teams deep into the playoffs several other times. His players for the most part overachieve. He didn't bitch and moan when TT failed to back-fill for Jordy last year, though he had a perfect right to.

MM also did a tremendous job coaching job, probably his most underrated unspoken of coaching achievement ever, when he led the Packers superbly after A-Rodge, at whose altar every Packer fan worships, needlessly killed the Packers' season by holding on to the ball way way too long allowing some undistinguished Bears DL douche named Shea McClellin to make a name for himself by ending Rodgers' and the Packers' season by allowing said D-B to throw Rodgers to ground like a rag doll.

MM also devised, albeit inexplicably abandoned, a jumbo short-yard package with Raji as RB in 2010 which included options that allowed Raji to catch a TD pass that year. Incidentally, some deep inside baseball, sources close to Raji are saying he temporarily retired because he's pissed he's not getting enough touches on O. Stay tuned on that one.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 11:28 am

First of all, it's Marvin Lewis, and I won't bother to correct all your vocabulary errors.
Lewis didn't and doesn't have an "All World QB" to run his offence.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 30, 2016 at 04:38 pm

A Marvin Lewis apologist, ... I luv it.

Ok, so let's expand on the comparison between MM and ML, vocab exceptions aside.

Which coach had his best receiver fall off a truck and biff it?

Which coach has a bee-itch LB so labomatized that in one minute he makes the INT of his life, runs the tunnel like Neon Deon Pee-on Himself, and a few minutes later urinates on himself and his team by cheap-shotting a WR thus killing the Bengirls season?

Which head coach is so despised in his own town that the newest bar near Paul Brown Stadium is called "Starvin' Marvin's?"

Which head coach has a team with the most felonies and misdemenors in the NFL since he took over his team?

Just sayin.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
holmesmd's picture

June 01, 2016 at 06:14 am

Uumm...you mean "offense"? SMH, lol

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Mr.Bigg's picture

May 31, 2016 at 05:49 pm

I realize this is tangental, but the Patriots have 17 players who are not at workouts this summer. Does this sound like a problem with management and head coach? I could only imagine how the walls would be tumbling down in GB if 17 players failed to report for summer workouts. MM is doing very good in my mind.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 09:14 am

Every offseason is important in Green Bay since the fans expectations are usually very high. Prior to the free agency/salary cap era Bill Walsh's addage was very applicable to the head coaching position. But who besides Aaron Rodgers on the Packers current roster has heard MMs message for 10 years? Most of the team has played 5 years or less for MM. Plus many of GBs FAs stay with the Packers if TT offers them a contract. Jordy, Cobb, Daniels, Burnett, Shields, Sitton, Lang, Bulaga, and others have all chosen to remain in GB when they became FAs. While I agree that coaches can become stale MM and the Packers must be doing something right. Rather than concern about becoming stale it's more likely that MM has lasted this long because he is an excellent football coach, who knows that he is a football coach without aspirations to become a GM or have complete control ala Holmgren. He is resilient, he has integrity, he takes care of his players, he has double digit winning seasons in spite of late round draft picks, numerous injuries, rule changes, staff changes, etc... How many head coaches have come and gone in his own division since he became HC in Green Bay? Yes, I agree that this is an important off-season for MM but I believe that TT, MM and Aaron Rodgers are here for the duration unless the team has a few successive losing seasons and unless devastated by injuries I don't see why that should happen. Many HCs have come and gone since the 2006 season and my guess is that they are all wishing that they had MMs message. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 28, 2016 at 09:30 am

Well said! And how long is Bill Belichick HC of New England Cheatriots?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:27 am

This will be his 17th season at NE.
Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 11:29 am

And Belicheck has had an All-World QB as well!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spock's picture

May 28, 2016 at 09:45 am

Since '61.
Couldn't agree more; the Packers are consistently one of the youngest roisters in the NFL so your point about "who besides Aaron Rodgers on the Packers current roster has heard MMs message for 10 years?" is well made. Always enjoy your posts, particularly since they are, if I can use the term, "gentlemanly". I have never heard you disparage another poster and we could use more of that attitude in this and other message boards!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:41 am

Spock - I appreciate your kind thoughts about my posts. I enjoy yours as well. We're all here by choice and to share our thoughts about Packers football. Since none of us know each other there is no reason to get personal or bring an attitude, neither of which are necessary or add anything to the discussion. Disagreements are fine and should be viewed as an opportunity to develop the discussion as long as we remain respectful of each other. Saying that I have had my moments where l have lost it with a poster or two over the years. In any case we as bloggers make this site what we want it to be. If we keep it open and respectful we'll enjoy it that much more, if we let it become angry and nasty it will become unpleasant for everyone. We're fortunate to have Jersey Al, Aaron Nagler and the contributing writers who give us high quality content on their own time. Let's make the best of it. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:32 am

So your hapoy with only 1 super bowl with 2 of the best qbs to ever play well I'm not this team should have more 2011 15-1 and they screw the pooch MM has messed up alot of big ganes the Giants in 11 the Seahawks in 14 this a what have you done for me lately league and lately he hasn't done nothibg.Im not hapoy with 1 and done in the playoffs

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:08 pm

David - I am not satisfied with one and done either but if you think that we should have more than one SB because we have a great QB, then why is Tom Coughlin the only NFL coach to have won more than one SB since MM became coach of the Packers. And look at where the Giants are now and have been since 2011. Would you rather be the Giants or the Packers right now. If a HOF QB is the answer why haven't the Patriots with Tom Brady only won one SB since 2006 with all their nefarious efforts at cheating. The Colts only won one with Peyton Manning. Would you rather be New Orleans with Drew Brees? Where have they been since 2009? Maybe it's because a HOF QB can't play by himself as we saw last season when Aaron Rodgers played with a battered OL, his #1 RB missing in action most of the season and at one point without his top 3 WRs and virtually no TE. Let's not forget that the Packers have usually had one of the most injured teams in the league every season except 2014 or that MM and his staff work with late rounds picks and UDFAs every season. His staff has also been picked over during his tenure and he has successfully adjusted to those changes as well. Yes, we probably should have one more SB. But despite going 15-1 in 2011 we did not have a championship defense that year. In 2014, the defense folded up 31/2 minutes before the game was over and gave away a 12 point lead against a team that never believed they were out of it. MMs team has been one play away from the SB a few times. If his gets his team that far, his players need to make a play. I appreciate your frustration but which coach or team would you trade the current Packers situation for? I'm know that I'm not making that trade. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:53 pm

Well said as usual Since 61. Your summary of what Rodgers had to work with and overcome, perfectly put last year in the right perspective. Now maybe those who think he is on the decline will come to their senses.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Hematite's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:43 am

Well played "Since 61"!
Well played!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:05 pm

Was Tony Dungy a bad coach?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:17 pm

To be fair to McCarthy, David, if Bostick - a player Thompson refused to cut even though his own personnel people wanted him gone and McCarthy made clear wasn't going to play - just does his job, McCarthy has at least two SB appearances and possibly two Lombardi trophies.

I tend to think you'd have a different view of McCarthy if that were the case. Has McCarthy underachieved? Probably. But lets be realistic when assigning blame for "messing up in big games."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bearmeat's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:46 pm

True. But who kept Shawn Slocumb for so long? Who stopped throwing the ball the last 5 minutes of regulation?

That fail was on ALL involved. It still ticks me off to this day.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:54 pm

Great post who only scored 16 points in the first half when they could of scored another 10 to 14

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:33 pm

Or no points at all! Interesting view. If you are not able to score TD in 6 attempts, why do you think you will score in 7th?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:38 pm

Yes, Bearmeat, which is exactly what I wrote after the game. Doesn't change the point I was making, which is that perceptions of McCarthy would be very different.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:52 pm

Never should of cone down to that Bostic play and I'm tired of people blaming him they should of had at least 27 points at halftime and if they did that botched ilonside kick never would of happened.
MM clamed up in the 2nd half with his ridiculous play calling.Every single announcer on the NFL network after that game made the same claim
Let's blame Bostic and not blame the O for gagging away Points before half or going into a coma after half let's all blame Bostic typical packer fan.
That game should of been 27-0 at half at the least not 16-0.
MM is not a bad,coach I just think hes,war to slow in making adjustments and really screwed the pooch last year in not putting the packer receivers in better position to make plays

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:37 pm

Yes, we should all listen to the talking airheads on the NFL network because they have all had brilliant coaching careers and are there to get ratings and not to discuss the actual game on the field. You and the NFL airheads seem to forget that Rodgers was playing on one leg in the Seattle game and that had an impact on the play calls and audible especially early in the game. Due to his injury Rodgers could not roll out or move around to avoid the pass rush. This means that he would have been exposed to, extra hits and may not have made it through the game. The game plan for the Seattle game was excellent and well executed until the final 4 minutes of the game. The defense blew a 12 point lead and that has nothing to do with play calling. BTW, play calling is always viewed through the lenses of the play results or the final score. If the Packers held on to win that game and the following SB everyone would be saying what a great game plan we had for the Seattle game being on the road, in the rain with Rodgers playing injured and everything. It's fine to complain but at least know what you are watching before being so critical and negative. In the meantime, thanks for playing. Case closed. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 29, 2016 at 12:43 pm

Since 61. Very good points but I see it that we asked too much of the D in that game and if we were more agressive on O in second half, D would not have been as tired as they were. Who knows but thats what I think about, over and over.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 29, 2016 at 06:16 am

ARE YOU SERIOUS?? The NFL Network?? To each his own I guess, just never been a fan of The NFL Network Crew myself. They were playing Seattle IN Seattle. Rodgers had a strained calf and could barely move which obviously cut what they can do offensively down. Seattle has had one of the best defenses for the last several years so with a limited Rodgers they maybe should have scored another TD instead of FG, but to suggest they "Should Have" scored TD's each time is is crazy.

I'll get on board with you about most of the 2nd half. Playing "Not To Lose" instead on "To Win" is never a good thing and most times bites you in the ass. Burnetts INT with 5:07 can be argued until the end of time. Go down, not go down? Without a Seachicken within 20 yards of him he should have ran and went down just before any contact. OR had Peppers knocked Wilson or anyone on their asses instead of telling him to go down the Packers just might have scored. They had 5 players in front of Burnett, at worst it's a FG but most likely a TD. MM ran 3 times, lost 4 yards and that was all Seattle needed.

Slocum SHOULD HAVE conceded the 3 points. Not covering anyone who went 5 yards past the LOS, there's just no excuse. I can still see House running after Ryan, A.J. Hawk stuck in the middle between the Receiver and Ryan (Should have been W/Receiver all along) and that Stadium coming alive after a play that should have been easily shutdown.

ERRRR..Now I'm pissed off all over again! Thanks!!! LOL

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:01 pm

What does it say about MM that after 9 years as HC, he dresses a player for the NFC Championship game who, according to Mr. Nagler, "wasn't going to play" (I am assuming he means at TE rather than just on STs)? What does it say about MM's relationship with the GM who foisted Bostick on him?

What does it say about TT that he shackled his HC with a player that the HC apparently made clear he wasn't going to play?

Perhaps most critically, what does it say about a press corps that has not, to my knowledge, ever written a substantive piece on a personnel decision that (according to Mr. Nagler) the GM & HC vigorously disagreed about and ended up playing a pivotal role in the Pack not advancing to the Super Bowl?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:40 pm

Lol. I wrote about it. But you know me, I'm just part of the benign Wisconsin press corps.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 30, 2016 at 01:57 am

Totally forgot about Bostick and that play. Following the game, I had the part of my brain where that memory resided surgically removed as the PTSD was killing me. Thanks for reminding me of another key reason why MM doesn't suck.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 11:33 am

I think you guys are living in a fantasy world. I have never seen so many "ifs" "could haves" and "buts". But, "whatever floats your boats"

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

May 30, 2016 at 08:47 pm

If the personnel people wanted to cut Bostick but TT refused, that is news to me.

If MM made it clear that Bostick wasn't going to play, that is news to me.

Maybe I missed those news articles in the benign Wisconsin sports media, despite reading two blogs daily, including this one. It is possible, I suppose, that they existed but I forgot them.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 31, 2016 at 10:37 am

It may not have been reported, but Bostick was a guy with incredible physical skills who got zero playing time. That tells you everything you need to know about the douche. He had one responsibility on the play that killed a year's worth of work ... block. That's it. And the guy couldn't even get that right. That tells you everything you need to know about the artist formerly known as Mr. Bostick.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 31, 2016 at 10:46 am

"It may not have been reported, but Bostick was a guy with incredible physical skills who got zero playing time. That tells you everything you need to know about the douche."

Jeff Janis?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 02:46 pm

Lets eat grandma

Let's eat, Grandma!

Punctuation is your friend.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 02:51 pm

Double post removed.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:04 pm

Spot on, particularly your comment about MM's integrity. The guy's as high character as high character gets. Unlike A-Rodge, who chose to punch MM in the gut to the press after last year's Oakland game for his alleged incoherent, inconsistent game plan, but never took accountability for repeatedly missing open throws ... apparently that's MM's fault too.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Mr.Bigg's picture

May 30, 2016 at 07:58 am

My job is being a director of an arts organization. My experience with motivating people is similar...not exactly for sure. What did MM do last year with not calling plays and combining wide Receiver /QB- he was keeping things "fresh" for himself and his staff. This "keeping things fresh" is essential to long time coaches/directors because if the staff/coach is not excited/interested/frosty/inspired then the players will not be. Now did the changes work out last year? No, they didn't. Would they have worked out if Jordy was healthy and the offense line was healthy and his QB healthy? The answer to that might have been "yes." I look forward to the ever shifting MM as he freshens up after a long season.....

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 30, 2016 at 10:30 am

I agree, and several others here have said these kinds of things: MM is always changing things up. Whether it's responsibilities, approach, etc., he's always adjusting what's going on in his staff and locker room. He's one of the more active coaches in self-assessment and making adjustments. This is, in part, why I don't worry too much about things getting stale for him.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 10:25 am

Careful what you wish for. To all the MM haters out there ,HCs are hard to come by, especially the good ones. The Packers have a system in place to keep them in contention every year. I see fans of other teams acting like they won the lottery, if their team even gets a sniff of the playoffs. 7 straight years is something to crow about and it's become expected of this team. So when people start talking about "mistakes" MM has made, they've made a lot more good choices than bad ones.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:10 pm

Last year we lost the division crown, lost to all our divisional rivals (at home) and lost another year of Rodgers. This is not about being a hater, this is about slipping back or at best staying at the same level. We had a staff that couldn't keep their premier back from over-eating and staying up late. We had WR's who didn't know how to progress past running into the defender's arms. As much as we didn't perform on the field, we did a piss poor job off the field.

MM could easily keep filling his resume with winning seasons until Rodgers declines but can he and his staff coach up the decent talent that we have to championship levels. I am looking for MM to bring a complete season and strong staff to the party this year. Otherwise Packer fans will have to be happy with watching other teams play for conference crowns and Super Bowls.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:24 pm

Really? The WR's were so banged up it was ridiculous. That's MM's fault? The o-line was not much better. The Lacy thing is a mystery, I thought players got fined for being overweight. Maybe they thought Lacy would be better at 260? Because they keep winning, they have coaches and front office personal leaving all the time. Maybe you should by season tickets to Ford field or Soldier Stadium. The lolions and barelys have had how many HC's now? Where have they gone, nowhere. A healthy Packer team would have been in the NFCCG again last year.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:01 pm

It was MM fault that he didn't adjust his plays to help his receivers get open.He admitted that after the season.Its TT fault his TE and ILB both suck probably the worst starting ILB in all of football when the bears went out and signed the best 2 inside ones in FA.
It's MM fault that announcers as,well as former coaches question his making adjustments and being out coached banged up or not if the packers win 12 games last year the pathetic injury excuse isn't used but since they came in 2nd it's all the injuries fault

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

May 29, 2016 at 06:55 am

You are an idiot if you are serious. I hope you don't judge parents that way. You expect way to much out of something that is a team sport. Until I see your name on a coaches roster shut the fuck up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 01:42 pm

Nitchke, You are nothing more than a Neanderthal when you talk like that on a forum. You are also probably a bully in the real world.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

May 31, 2016 at 12:38 pm

Ok, dshlong.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:10 pm

David-

Do yourself a solid and lay off the hookah before you post. Help his receivers get open? What tape are you watching? Davante Adams couldn't beat your mailman on a skinny post even if it was a pick play. Randall Cobb couldn't separate if his life depended on it. James Jones is so slow FedEx refused to hire him because management decided they couldn't guarantee he'd get there on back shoulder overnight. Richard Rodgers is so slow his parents enrolled him in the offseason in montessori.

Wake up and smell the molasses bro. The Packers' WRs are so slow 5.0 in the 40 may become the new normal.

You can only put so much lipstick on pigs and the Packers' WRs are decidedly porcine.

Just sayin.'

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:05 pm

I don't hate MM.

I also don't know have enough information to know whether he is principally responsible for the Packers not advancing to the Super Bowl the past 5 seasons or not.

What I do know is that Denver went to the Super Bowl after the 2013 season, fired the HC who took them to the Super Bowl in 2013 (and playoffs in 2014), and won the Super Bowl after the 2015 season with a brand new HC.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:45 pm

...and how are they set up going forward?

I get the desire to sell the farm for a championship, consequences be damned. But having lived through the 70s and 80s, I guess I appreciate the fact that the Packers are positioned to be contenders every year, no matter how frustrating each ending might be.

But I def get the frustration, no doubt.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

May 28, 2016 at 02:51 pm

"Sell the farm?"

Is bringing in a good mid-range FA to beef up the ILB position selling the farm?

Is bringing in a good mid-range OL to beef up the depth on the OL selling the farm?

I doubt it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 28, 2016 at 08:17 pm

Talk about signing an OL all you want, but going into last season--after a 2014 season that was very good if not outstanding--pretty much everyone was convinced that OL was a strength of this team. Nobody foresaw what happened to/with that unit last season and if TT had signed a FA OL in the off-season, everyone...
1. would've fallen over in a dead faint over his signing someone.
2. would've called for his head signing a guy and wasting cap room at a position that seemed so strong.

It's easy to make player personnel calls 12 months after the fact...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

May 29, 2016 at 01:18 pm

Thats exactly what would have happened. Noone thought anything but that we were at least set at OL for awhile.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:18 pm

Samson,

Those would have been reasonable moves, no question.

But I was responding to the idea of Denver selling out to win a title, not what the Packers should have done this past offseason.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
KenEllis's picture

May 28, 2016 at 05:07 pm

How is Denver set up going forward?

Well, if the Broncos do not return to the Super Bowl for another 5 years they'd match the Packers run from 2011-2015 (after just winning 1 and appearing in another Super Bowl over the past 3 seasons).

And is the goal really to just make the playoffs?

Personally, I'd rather have been to another Super Bowl and missed the playoffs during the past 5 seasons rather than "celebrating" playoff appearances when the Pack finished 8-7-1 and 10-6 and were never serious contenders for winning the Lombardi.

I also lived through the 70s & 80s, and find the notion that, with Aaron Rodgers (and Brett Favre before him) playing QB, we must be satisfied to be "positioned to be contenders" to

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 05:38 pm

I see that you conveniently passed over 2014, when the Packers lost the conference championship in overtime after a 12-4 season. Well, of course you passed over it! If you hadn't, how could anybody take you seriously when you say that the Packers "were never serious contenders for winning the Lombardi?"

Smooth. Very smooth.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 28, 2016 at 05:41 pm

Shhh...you're not allowed to use actual information against hyperbole...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 28, 2016 at 05:40 pm

"Personally, I'd rather have been to another Super Bowl and missed the playoffs during the past 5 seasons rather than "celebrating" playoff appearances when the Pack finished 8-7-1 and 10-6 and were never serious contenders for winning the Lombardi."

This makes no sense. The Packers win a SB in 2010, make the playoffs every year since, and you're unhappy. You'd be happier if they didn't make the playoffs and were non-competitive for the last 5 years? An 8-7-1 year when they were crippled by an injury to an HOF player? A 10-6 season when they were crippled by injuries to the offense across the board? Otherwise they WERE SB contenders.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:20 pm

I am the opposite. I would rather celebrate always being in the mix and winning divisions and having a shot in the playoffs. I would be frustrated terribly as a Giants fan and winning two Super Bowls but not even making the playoffs the other 5 seasons. That's the sort of performance that requires coach changes.

Playoffs are at best a 50/50 proposition every game. Every game is against another top team in the league. And to win a Super Bowl you have to win 3 or 4 of these 50/50 games in a row. No team can honestly set a "goal" of winning the Super Bowl or the season is a waste. All they can set is giving themselves a shot to win it at the end. And the Packers have done well at this, and no team has had more heartbreaking playoff losses. But in part that is because they are always in the playoffs and always in the playoff games at the end.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:20 pm

"And is the goal really to just make the playoffs?"

This is the biggest strawman in the world.

Nowhere have I or anyone said "The goal is to just make the playoffs!"

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

May 28, 2016 at 05:54 pm

I'm guessing you're 43 years old since you were 29 in 2002 when you were married which means you were born 1973 and at most 7 come the 80's...how did you live through the 70 ' s. : )

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 10:11 pm

Maybe he's just shitty at math Taryn.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:19 pm

Seems more like a Brian Williams self believing bs that isn't true...but let's play along right.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:14 pm

Well, that's a creepy bit of Googling you've done.

Did Google also tell you I attended my first game when I was three with my Grandfather, who had season tickets?

You never miss a chance to be clueless, Taryn. It's impressive.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:17 pm

Being carried or in a stroller attending a game does not justify " living through " the 70 Packers as you implied it to mean. If I'm clueless to your baby abilities to comprehend the game then it's because I cannot be so easily duped as many here are by accepting your infinite baby powers. Give me...no give us more respect. You may call me clueless if you desire but I'm not liar or fabricator of such bs as this and worse is your thinking it believable by the many here less those who already think you a Divinity.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:22 pm

P.S.....Is using Google now creepy to find simple facts about bs stories? Do you yourself not use it?
Hypocrite!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 29, 2016 at 06:38 pm

Are you suggesting I wasn't alive when I was 5 years old watching games with my Dad every Sunday? And watching them lose? A lot? The Packers ruined more autumn Sundays than I care to remember.

You clearly don't know a thing about me, despite your creepy Googling.

I most certainly lived through the 70s. And you most certainly are clueless.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

May 29, 2016 at 07:14 pm

I have not said you weren't alive but you didn't live through those dark days as implied at first and even now stating such at 5 yrs of age. Did you watch games on you dad's knee etc, no doubt, but let's keep the woe is me and upset stomach, head tensions suffered from ineptitude on the field to realistic measure. We're you drawing out the faults with your crayons and dissecting blown coverages.
Just simply say you began to get more in the late early 80's....80-83 when at the age of 8 it may be more reasonable to say you endured some of the pains for what those pains actually were.
Also, wasn't it you that put the info on sites, Google, LinkedIn etc, so people can look you up to know about you.....please stop. You got called on a bs statement. " Live through it " like your baby years. : )

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

May 29, 2016 at 08:03 pm

Hey Tarynfor12, I happen to like the way you write. I also agree with you. Where were you this weekend. I looked for you at Bally's. I eeked out a $500 win, but it's getting harder & harder on the strip. I could have used some help, although I don't think my wife would have liked me hanging with you.

We had some Damn good players in the 70's & 80's. Lynn Dickey was Great. Johnny Gray was about as Good as we ever had. My memory escapes me on others. We had the Stork for a while, not sure of the year?

I lived through the 70's & 80's & was glad to see The Majik Man in a GB uniform. I won a lot of Money on him at Virginia. I don't know what made the difference? We had teams as good, & yet he brought us out from oblivion.

I don't remember anymore. Did we win or lose the Monday Nighter against Washington? 46-45 or something like that? I know we had good players, I guess we just didn't have enough. Seems to me it came down to Defense. I lived through the 70's & 80's. We weren't that bad, we just weren't as good as Stahlbach & The Cowboys, Bradshaw & Pittsburg, or for that matter McMann & the Bears among others. We had good players, just not enough of them, as I remember.

LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 01:54 pm

Ignore Taryn. He/she is just a bitter person!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Spud Rapids's picture

June 01, 2016 at 09:14 am

The frustration is nothing more than lofty expectations. I don't know why the general attitude on this blog is centered around our belief that we are somehow "entitled" to more super bowl wins because we have Rodgers.

Here is a simple fact: the postseason is crazy! One bounce can decide the game. If the ultimate goal is the superbowl then it starts with making the playoffs. McCarthy and Belichick are the only two HC that have a streak of 7 straight playoff appearances. Pretty stellar if you ask me.

How come I haven't heard anyone cite a potential replacement for McCarthy? If he is not getting done in all of your eyes then who should replace him?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 28, 2016 at 10:37 am

Marvin Lewis. I'm out.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:27 am

How much of this sane Ole same Ole can be attributed to our walking corpse TT to me he doesn't do anything to help MM out.4 years and he never improved the TE position his ILBs are still one of the worst in all of football.
MM is not a magician he can't pull talent out of his ass .Now I know the coaching is on him and his failure to adapt to play calling is also on him but when you have a GM who refuses to add vets or make trades or well breath this is the end product.
Listen to azz clown Murphy talk he's absolutely happy with the way things are his comments are well we make the playoffs every year he has the same attitude as TT .

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Branden Burke's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:09 pm

David, I can see you're passionate. But it is hard to be a perennial contender in today's NFL. We should enjoy that for as long as we can until the next 70's-92 drought.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Samson's picture

May 28, 2016 at 02:46 pm

David -- It's called coattails. -- Take away AR & both TT & MM would have been long gone. -- Those who continually defend both TT & MM are content with 10-6 and love using that same old excuse .... "It's hard to get to the SB, at least we're not the Lions or Vikings or Bears."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:51 pm

"4 years and he never improved the TE position"

...and yet, until the bulk of the OL and WR went down with injuries last season, this has been an elite offense. Someone reiterated a very important sentiment on the Jared Cook thread: it's not about positions, it's about pass-catchers. Any time your TE lines up wide, he's a big WR, not a TE.

Many argue that this is a result of ARod...you're damn right it is! And the "if you remove Rodgers this team is in trouble" argument is absolutely correct: If you remove an HOF caliber player from just about ANY team, they're going to suffer mightily. The fact is that he is here, he makes things go, he isn't going away, and--yes--TT did make the pick that brought him to town. If you argue this team would be no good if TT never picked him, your version of revisionist history is crap because everything has been built around the HOF QB in GB (Favre or Rodgers) for the last 20+ years. Everything changes--every draft pick, every FA signing--if he's not there.

The bottom line is that--agree with him or not--TT is ultra cautious with the cap. I would argue that he's likely several years ahead of his time because the change in compensatory picks (making them tradeable) will ultimately drive other teams even further toward his extreme end of the roster management spectrum.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 28, 2016 at 12:56 pm

Some teams have never won the super bowl and yet we are pissed if we don't win it every few years ...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
David Riese's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:21 pm

Most teams gave never had 2 HOF qbs leading the way so yes I expected more SBS when fare played though at least he was in 2 and expected absolutely mire than 1 so far with rogers and both TT and MM are equally to blame for having just 1

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PackerAaron's picture

May 28, 2016 at 01:41 pm

JUST 1. Just. Packers fans are so spoiled.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 28, 2016 at 06:57 pm

I wonder what it's like on the Patriot blogs...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
EdsLaces's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:48 am

Very spoiled.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Since'61's picture

May 28, 2016 at 04:18 pm

It's very probable that had Holmgren remained with the Packers he would have another SB with Favre. He should have won the SB with Seattle but the officials cost him the game and his QB was not nearly as good as Favre so it's probable he could have won another if he stayed in GB. However it's difficult to blame the Packer organization because Holmgren took another offer. Thanks, Since '61

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
NickPerry's picture

May 29, 2016 at 09:54 am

Exactly Since '61. I've wondered more than once had Holmgren stayed what the Packers might have accomplished. Holmgrem was a great Coach AND was great with Favre.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
3rdigraphics's picture

May 28, 2016 at 03:03 pm

It's pretty simple really: if you're not growing you're dying. That's a business mantra but it sure as hell applies to a cut-throat league like the NFL.

This applies to BOTH MM/TT - both are tied at the hip and both are stuck in their ways right now. They both need to grow.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dschwalm's picture

May 30, 2016 at 01:59 pm

Finally, a voice of reason. Thanks "3rd"

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
phillythedane's picture

May 28, 2016 at 03:21 pm

Please, people, don't drink and blog this weekend.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

May 28, 2016 at 09:10 pm

For the love of god, people..

Having a HoF QB does not in any way guarantee winning multiple super bowls.

Get it out of your head.

The end.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 28, 2016 at 10:28 pm

Manning won 2 he had everything to do with winning it all last year,*cough cough*. Forget about the int he threw to lose to the Saints. What about the great Trent Dilpher too. And the comment about Denver making it to 2 since TT arrived is so true. Its also true that Denver would have liked to forfeit the game against Seattle. Sure would be nice to see my team make it to the SB and get embarrassed in front of millions of viewers world wide.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Dennis Thompson's picture

May 28, 2016 at 10:28 pm

Rarely find a good article from a beat writer. Thompson has been so one sided the last 6-7 years. There is no balance in bringing in free agents. Instead resigning oft injured players like Bugala.

Giving Cobb the big contract was stupid as well.Rogers is left carrying this team just as Brett did

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:48 am

Re-signing Cobb was definitely a mistake on paper but I love Randall's competitiveness and his versatility in being able to be a RB and returner with reliable hands.

Free agent signings are always a gamble but TT totally f$&@ed MM by failing to trade for a speedy wideout after Jordy went down, though MM compounded the problem by failing to play Janis early and often.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 30, 2016 at 10:38 am

They went the James Jones route and he seemed to be effective for a couple weeks. I agree: he's never been a "speed" guy. The issues in trade are:
1. ...who is going to give you anything worthwhile without forcing you to pay a king's ransom? Especially early in the season when everyone fancies themselves to be a contender.
2. ...how long will it take a player obtained in trade to learn the playbook enough to be an effective piece in the offense?

How often to player trades--especially decent players--happen mid-season?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

May 28, 2016 at 11:41 pm

There is no crossroads. Every season is important and a team has to feel like it is progressing. In 2014 the Packers had the NFCCG in their grasp and lost it like sand falling through your fist. In 2015 the Packers stumbled and looked far from the same team. Yet they were a play or so away from going to another NFCCG, so how much real stumbling was there?

Most people appear to believe there are reasons for the stumble in offensive production in 2015 and are optimistic for 2016. But similar struggles this season and grumbling will certainly intensify.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:34 am

MM suffers from four significant consistent failures.

First, his plays are utterly unimaginative, particularly his running plays. The only time all year we saw innovative running plays was in the Skins game. He loves the stretch play left which never ever works. when the ground game is working he refuses to stick with it, even when the backs rip off back to back 7-9 yard runs.

Second, he for some unknown reason gags in the red zone. His play-calling in the red zone versus the Cardinsls was particularly atrocious.

Third, he's a terrible personnel manager. How does Jeff Janis sit and rot while Davante Adams and Randall Cobb consistently fail to separate?

Fourth, he inexplicably abandoned the jumbo pshort-yardage page the Packers ran so successfully in 2010 with Raji at RB despite the fact the Pack sucks in short yardage.

Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how did you like the play-calling?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 30, 2016 at 10:45 am

"Second, he for some unknown reason gags in the red zone."

I don't think it's really an unknown reason. Teams that tend to spread the field and rely on vertical route trees to generate openings tend to bog down when the field is compressed and the defenders have the benefit of the end-line to help themselves out.

"Third, he's a terrible personnel manager. How does Jeff Janis sit and rot while Davante Adams and Randall Cobb consistently fail to separate?"

We have absolutely no idea what Jeff Janis looks like in practice. He might be god-awful and only active on game days because he's an very good gunner. If you can't trust him in practice, how can you trust him in a game? If you watch him play, he really only seems to run two routes. If your guy is only running two routes, that becomes very easy for a defense to defend.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 31, 2016 at 10:55 am

"Second, he for some unknown reason gags in the red zone."

I don't think it's really an unknown reason. Teams that tend to spread the field and rely on vertical route trees to generate openings tend to bog down when the field is compressed and the defenders have the benefit of the end-line to help themselves out.

Reply: The teams that are highly successful in the red zone don't compress the field in the red zone. They run from spread formations and force the defense to pick their poison. We don't. Successful teams in the red zone also rely on a complex package of plays designed specifically for the red zone which typically involve things like sugar huddles, TEs running patterns against the grain getting lost in the fog and shuffle passes to RBs. The Patriots and the Steelers are always the best in the business in designing this sort of tom-foolery. In our case, we had one great short yardage jumbo package which involved a DT being a blocking back or RB and we abandoned it. Last year, in the Cardinals game MM called for Rodgers to sneak one time and a bootleg another time (both failed miserably) when the RBs were running the ball well. That's called stupid. Not dumb. Stupid.

"Third, he's a terrible personnel manager. How does Jeff Janis sit and rot while Davante Adams and Randall Cobb consistently fail to separate?"

We have absolutely no idea what Jeff Janis looks like in practice. He might be god-awful and only active on game days because he's an very good gunner. If you can't trust him in practice, how can you trust him in a game? If you watch him play, he really only seems to run two routes. If your guy is only running two routes, that becomes very easy for a defense to defend.

Reply: Forget how Janis ran in practice. Who cares? What we know for certain is that he was the only receiver with the speed to separate and what we learned in the Cardinals game is that when given the opportunity, the guy was great. What we knew from tape was that Cobb, Jones and Adams couldn't separate if their lives depended on it and Adams has terrible hands. Everyone says MM changes things up, but he let Janis sit and rot when he knew the other receivers sucked large.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

May 31, 2016 at 01:43 pm

"If your guy is only running two routes, that becomes very easy for a defense to defend"

Tape says, obviously not. If it weren't for balls being horribly under thrown or out of field of play, Janis would of had multiple 1-2 touchdown games. If you need the games for verification - yet we all seen them - I can go back on GamePass and document them.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 31, 2016 at 03:15 pm

No need for multiple games. Just refer to the (most important) Playoff game against the Cardinals. Janis should have had 3 TDs - EASILY - maybe 4. Janis simply ran past the CB twice but Rodgers pass was badly under thrown and on the 2nd time Janis ran past the CB Rodgers threw the ball past the goal post. The 4th one is the post play that we are split on who to assign blame.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Rossonero's picture

May 29, 2016 at 07:28 am

Haha wow, Since '61 is owning fools on here! Love it. Personally, I don't think McCarthy is at a cross roads. Don't underestimate the importance of continuity. Continuity does not mean settling for less. In the case with McCarthy, it has meant consistently winning, albeit some extremely frustrating playoff losses. As Since '61 pointed out, McCarthy's message isn't getting stale since the majority of the players turn over every 4-5 years anyway.

The question I always ask to all the MM haters is this: if you're so hot to fire McCarthy, who would replace him? That's when I hear crickets.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 29, 2016 at 10:31 am

People forget that change does not always mean improvement. When you reside in the top 1/4 of the league on a regular basis there's a lot more room to go down than there is to go up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 10:36 am

Nick Saban.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Rossonero's picture

May 29, 2016 at 12:53 pm

Saban is a wonderful coach, but he already had a brief (and unsuccessful) foray with the Dolphins, going a combined 15-17.

Perhaps there is some hot shot coordinator out there, but do you really think the Packers would hire him? Probably not. They'd lean more toward an internal candidate or a former Packers coach that's currently in another organization.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LomVinceBardi's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:32 pm

You're 1000% correct. And no, they'd never hire him. They'd instead hire some internal candidate to replace MM who would, like Phil Bengsten, underscore why all the criticism of MM is misplaced. But Saban would take the job if offered and would be a phenomenal coach. Saban has nothing left to prove as a college coach, but he has one gaping hole on his resume and taking the Packers to the promised land would check that box. Saban would only leave Bama for the perfect sitch and coaching the Packers with Rodgers in Rodgers' final 4-5 years would be such a situation. But I honestly believe that if Jordy and Rodgers stay healthy next year we win another Super Bowl and we may go undefeated. I seriously believe the talent level is that high. And don't be surprised to see Raji reconsider his decision to retire before the season starts.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Jimmy Ryan's picture

May 30, 2016 at 05:46 am

LomVinceBardri, Nick Saban? NO.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Jimmy Ryan's picture

May 30, 2016 at 05:45 am

Keyboard stuck.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 30, 2016 at 07:14 am

Funny, in life most people don't like change. They'll go through their daily grind year after year, bitching and whining about someone else. Usually they're so unhappy with their own miserable existence it makes their day to see someone get fired. It resorts to name calling and negative comment after negative comment. If it came to face to face confrontation, they would back down every time. Has MM and TT made mistakes, sure, they're human. Football is extremely grueling for a GM and HC mentally and the long hours they spend are unbelievable. The average person puts in a 40 hour week and is done for the weekend, except when they go blogs and dislike comments.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Nlozano527's picture

May 29, 2016 at 10:09 am

For all the hate that McCarthy gets from this fan base, one would think that the Packers are at an all time low as a franchise. Lets not get short sighted here, people. With the current leadership of TT/MM this team has been nothing short of the gold standard in this league. I understand that it is always easier to blame the coach or GM when things don't go perfect (i.e. win the superbowl) but when is it appropriate to assign blame to the players? As unbelievable as Aaron Rodgers has been for the past eight seasons, he has been far from perfect in some of the biggest moments in his career. The 2014 NFC Championship debacle has as much to do with his questionable play during some very key moments as it does with McCarthy, Capers, Bostik, Burnett, CMIII or any other individual who has been assigned blame for that loss. Yet I never hear anybody say, "If Rodgers would've hit Jordy in the end zone on that out route" or "If Rodgers didn't have some type of miscommunication with Cobb when he threw that interception"....then maybe the game would have had a different outcome. However just because Rodgers has fell short a few times in big moments, I'm not one to throw out the baby with the bathwater. I think McCarthy deserves the same amount of respect.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 29, 2016 at 04:56 pm

Going against the grain -- I like it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PETER MAIZ's picture

May 29, 2016 at 10:25 am

McCarthy will be under pressure to deliver and be at the big show this year. When he's nervous, he studders and repeats himself. Somehow, his playcalling has cost the Packers dearly some years.
We don't even know if he can make the offense a top 5 for this year. Jordy's return to his previous stellar play is by no means guaranteed. Montgomery may only see half the season. So I can see where the defense will be. I can see where the front o-line will be. I have no clue about the rest of the offense. A late Packers collapse at the end of the season will mean the guillotine for Mike. Not winning the NFC North ain't going to be pretty. For Mike, it's getting there or being benched for good.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
al bundy's picture

May 29, 2016 at 10:35 am

I don't think packer fans are wrong in any way wanting and expecting excellence. With that said to me it's mm coaching Phil that is the real problem. It's old school and old school ain't working anymore. One example. Now with red flags, replays, clock management and game management are diff. Add in play calling duties and mistakes start to happen. It's overload in critical games. Mm has proven to me he can't do it all, so he makes thing simpler, which gives opposing defenses an easier time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 29, 2016 at 05:07 pm

Along with the fake FG missed assignment, HHCD non-attemp to defend Wilson's cross-body damn near pylon to pylon toss up prayer pass for the 2-pt conversion, Rodgers not targeting a 1-armed Sherman,forgetting how to tackle Lynch, or Burnett forfeiting immediately after intercepting a should've been game-ending INT...but hey -- what are you gonna do? No one wants to talk about that. It's much easier to blame play-calling. Less work.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Yamin Colis's picture

May 29, 2016 at 02:37 pm

All y'all talking crap about MM and TT are lowkey kinda stupid I mean for a team that had no true #1 reciver and no running game and a not a super star defense they did pretty damn good I mean come on. They went 10-6 and made it into the playoffs hell they almost made it to the NFC championship game so get off they dick and let them do their job

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

May 29, 2016 at 07:17 pm

Just in case anyone is interested. GB is currently the Favorite @ 6-1 to win the SB, a head of

New England @ 6 1/2 - 1
Seattle 7 1/2 - 1
Pittsburg 8-1

GB started out @ 10 -1, the other 3 were all 8-1

GB is currently Favored to win the NFC @ 3-1, just a Tick a head Seattle 3 1/2 -1

GB started out @ 4-1 & Seattle started @ 3-1

Minnesota is 16-1 to win the SB & 6-1 to win the NFC
Chicago is 35 - 1 to win the SB & 14 - 1 to win the NFC

LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 30, 2016 at 07:21 am

Happy Memorial Day Tom. Hmmmm, favored again.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

May 31, 2016 at 03:19 pm

Hey 4thand1, Back at you. I've been telling you for several years, there is Too Much Money bet on GB. Vegas put them 4th, but their Huge contingent of fans are not satisfied unless they are on top. I'm going to watch the odds for a couple of weeks. I hope they go back up. I'm going to bet them either way.

LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 30, 2016 at 07:23 am

They will get lucky and win it all again. you suck UD

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
lucky953's picture

May 30, 2016 at 12:37 am

I think Mr. Banks ignores an important difference about the GB franchise-no owner or ownership group whose frustration could be acted out by firing the coach. Pressure on McCarthy FROM WHOM? Fans? The board is all that matters and this team is competitive, fills the seats, is regularly on Prime Time, makes the playoffs year-over-year and is making tons of $$$. This IS Success people. What planet are you living on?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

May 30, 2016 at 07:26 am

Exactly lucky.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 30, 2016 at 08:05 pm

And where does that $$$ go? This isn't some fortune 500 company paying out dividends to stockholders or lobbyists. It goes back into the team and facilities, and into the community.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

May 31, 2016 at 01:28 pm

If there is any crossroads it is because the offense looked so unlike the offense of any Rodgers era team of the last 7 years. Entering the season expectations were high as the team returned the whole squad and every position seemed set with only backups in question. But once the season started there wasn't a receiver on the team that looked like he could beat tight coverage at the line. It didn't take Josh Norman to cover packers receivers in 2015, any old d back would do just fine. So we have to hope that not only was the loss of Nelson key but we have to hope there was something wrong with Cobb, Montgomery, and Adams cause none of them looked like anyone to strike fear into any NFL defense. Add to it that the offensive line looked entirely average and Eddie lacy looked like he wanted to join Trent Richardson in the bust category, and the result was a team that at times looked entirely devoid of any weapons at all

People appear to think this will turn around this year and I hope this is correct. But I went into the 2015 season predicting the Packer offense would set records for yards and points, so this year I will just wait and see what happens.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

May 31, 2016 at 04:02 pm

Mike McCarthy needs to turn things around quickly in the playoffs or is in danger of taking over the mantle from Marty Schottenheimer of consistently losing playoff games in dramatic and odd fashion.

Yes, he made it once and won it, and that’s recorded in history.

But since then, has a current string of loses that are somewhat embarrassing in nature, and another lose with such dramatics will cement the crossroads label. The aforementioned playoff game loses; where not lost on a single botched play but rather with the lack of consistent fundamental play, imagination, physicality brake downs, and you gotta be kidding me mental brake-downs. All facets of the game that should have been corrected during the regular season. Professional teams should roll into the playoffs flawless, error-free! And thats just not the case here, McCarthy's team is showing up at playoff time, ill-prepared, hence the crossroads talk…

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

May 31, 2016 at 08:36 pm

"McCarthy's team is showing up at playoff time, ill-prepared,"

Ill-prepared teams get spanked and embarrassed. i would argue that wasn't the case against Washington or Arizona last season.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DrealynWilliams's picture

May 31, 2016 at 08:45 pm

I'd like to see a premiere QB go up against a #1 ranked Defense on the road with only their 4th,5th and 6th WR.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4EVER's picture

June 01, 2016 at 11:44 am

Gees, my ill-prepared reference wasn’t a cancer, more like two closely matched heavy weights going at it. Where one team plays a more consistent game of fundamentals, plays a cleaner mental game, and in the end, more prepared too end the game. Hence, the throw to Fitzgerald in OT, was most definitely designed to confuse a rookie.

I’ll skip the Washington Ladies game…

On to Arizona!

Penalties; GB (8): ineligible man down field, pre-snap (4), unnecessary roughness, 12 men on the field, defensive holding, ARZ (3): pre-snap (1), illegal come back block, hands to the face.

3 dropped passes; Abby (2), Cobb(1).
3 dropped interceptions (1 sure pick six).

Unforced missed opportunities; 2 under-thrown (1) sure TD, 2 over-thrown (1) sure TD, and AR/Janis on diff page for sure TD.

Thrown pick 6; luckily taunting and hands to the face (excepted) brought it back.
Blitz got thru consistently, forcing 2 field goals.
McCarthy has a poor challenge record and it continues in the playoffs.

Final drive with 1:53 left on the clock:
1. Kick return wall fails for the first time all day, start final drive @ 14.
2. AR from the pocket, throw way off the mark to Abby.
3. Rushing 4, AR sacked @ 4.
4. AR incomplete deep to Janis (pass interference?).
5. Rushing 4, AR flushed, running for his life, complete deep to Janis to ARZ 36 UNBELIEVABLE.
6. Pre-snap penalty, RR not set. Rushing 4, AR flushed, running for his life, incomplete deep in endzone to Janis.
7. RUSHING 3, AR flushed, running for his live to the GB 35, thrown away short right.
8. Rushing 6, AR running for his live, sends a prayer, complete to Janis for TD, UNBELIEVABLE.

Worst drive in NFL history ending in 7 points! OK, maybe not the worst drive, yet the OL did not look good. In the end; just too many unforced errors, miscues, and mental lapses to over come.

The young guns: Ryan, Randall, Janis, Abby played some out-standing ball. The Defense played a hell of a game; haunting Palmer into erratic play, and stuffing the run. Yet 3 dropped int, 2 of those with one going for six would have put the game away for the Pack.

Did I say Masthay sucks?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
toolkien's picture

May 31, 2016 at 04:08 pm

I know McCarthy isn't going anywhere unless he wants to, but I doubt the Packers will win, or even appear in, another Super Bowl during the McCarthy/Rodgers time remaining.

It is frustrating to have every year end with McCarthy saying "where going to get THAT fixed for next year". He DOES get IT fixed, but a new rupture appears. The Packers haven't lacked potency, they've lacked consistency. Players get out of shape (Raji, Lacy), injuries mount from what looks to me like TECHNIQUE issues. The team caved at the end of the 2014 season in the NFCCG. It took about three playoffs burned through before McCarthy realized that it is a tougher brand of football come the playoffs and the team needs to be prepared for it - bit it isnt. The list goes on.

The Packers and Patriots are the two best teams since 2007, but the major difference is Belichick gets the problems fixed prior to the season beginning, McCarthy gets the problems fixed after the season is over.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
L's picture

June 07, 2016 at 04:23 pm

Don Banks is a moron.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.