Pack-A-Day Podcast - Episode 2663 - A Closer Look at Matt LaFleur's Playcalling!

November 09, 2025 at 06:21 pm

Unlike you, I don't want the Packers to do okay....and ML has shown zero growth in his position. Championship is what I seek for GB. We need a few more pieces....and the right HC and the GM who hits on more OL draft picks.

November 09, 2025 at 11:13 pm

PhantomII, you do realize the "did OK" that Leatherhead is referring to is Vince Lombardi and the Green Bay Packers going on to win three straight NFL championships, don't you? 1965, 66, 67. The only "three-peat" in NFL history.

November 10, 2025 at 05:51 am

That's the joke comparing the 2. I have seen nothing from our current HC to remotely think he can get a Championship done especially surrounded by assistants who will never move up themselves. Great leaders surround themselves with up and comer types that are driven to win....I don't see that......anywhere.....and I see a lot of player regression as well who were more dominant before.....GB has not Won in 15 seasons....I don't think it will be anytime soon in it's current form. Upgrades needed at OL/ DL/CB change of pace RB2 and now a TE1. We made zero moves.

2 replies + - | show all | hide all

November 10, 2025 at 08:58 am

Per Leatherhead's post, his point is that there were people, just like you, saying the exact same things you are now, back then, about Lombardi and his Packers.

So if people back then could be so wrong back then, maybe people today can be so wrong, too.

13TimeChamps

November 10, 2025 at 10:19 am

I remember the 1965 season well. I don't recall anyone wanting Lombardi (HC) or Starr (playcaller) removed or fired.

While I agree with not wanting anybody on the current team fired, certainly not during the season, I don't see what any of that has to do with the 1965 Packers.

Leatherhead

November 10, 2025 at 09:34 am

The joke is on you. I’m not comparing the teams, I’m mocking the short-sighted fans., like you

November 11, 2025 at 12:25 am

7 years and going......No Championship....a bunch of choke jobs. ML is not the HC to build GB into what it needs to be to win the Lombardi. Hopefully our new President feels the same and applies pressure on our GM a bit also. I don't think 7 years is short sighted. It's time to find the right guy...not the guy who would coach for less because your franchise did not want to pay 2 veteran coaches at the same time.....because that's what we got.

November 09, 2025 at 11:15 pm

4 downvotes for a lesson in the short-sightedness of Packers fans to dismiss a coach and team that ended up being the greatest in franchise history.

4 People who don't want to be bothered with learning a life lesson.

What can you do?

TKWorldWide

November 10, 2025 at 12:59 pm

When people call for firings, the only way they are satisfied is by seeing people fired. I guess.

Green Bay Shareholder

November 10, 2025 at 11:26 am

How many times has Matt Lafleur won a Championship Game up to this point for Titletown ? Pretty easy math. I understand the point but it is a pointless point. Lombardi had already proven his Big Game success - by the way much earlier in his career than Lafleur who still hasn't in his 7th year I believe, Lombardi had won 3 by then and there were zero teams getting in the Playoffs unless they won their division. And he had a team of losers and turned them into Championship Winners, Perennial All Pros and Hofers. Are you kidding with this analogy.

2 replies + - | show all | hide all

TKWorldWide

November 10, 2025 at 01:00 pm

“Pointless Points” would be an awesome team name for either a minor league baseball team or a fantasy football team.

November 10, 2025 at 10:46 pm

I'm sure you knew the greatness that was in Bill Belichick when you watched his early success coaching the Cleveland Browns.

Turophile

November 10, 2025 at 02:44 am

There is a tendency (among fans) to blame MLF for his playcalling. If you break things down (as Andy did) you can see that execution is a bigger problem.

If you argue this out with another fan, their almost inevitable response is a dismissive comment that head coach is responsible for how the players execute on the field anyway.

Now that is true, but misleading. If the problem was mainly playcalling (which it isn't) then Matt needs to alter his playbook and playcalling. BUT, If the problem is more about execution, Matt needs to modify how players are coached before a game. Different problem, different solution.

Don't get me wrong, the playbook should we tweaked all the time and the head coach should be regularly self-scouting what works and what doesn't. However, the primary solution here, is a change in how players are coached.

Maybe Matt needs to be more of a hard-ass WITH HIS COACHES, to get THEM to up their game or be replaced. That doesn't have to mean they should be screaming at the players, it means they need to find ways to have players doing the right thing play after play. They must be tasked to find what works. If they can't do that, they (a coach) should be tagged for replacement at the end of a season just as poor players are regularly replaced with (hopefullly) better ones.

A ruthless approach, but necessary. Head coaches shoiuld never be 'comfortable' with coaches under them. He should always be looking for coaching upgrades, just as you always look to upgrade positions on your team...........and I'm not sure Matt puts enough emphasis on that.

It is in the nature of humans to get comfortable with those people around them, I understand that - but head coaches must also be demanding and make changes briskly, when necessary. The NFL is a tough business to be in, always has been.

PS Nice comment, Leatherhead......4 downvotes.......why ?

2 replies + - | show all | hide all

November 10, 2025 at 05:56 am

Because ML is not the answer....

Leatherhead

November 10, 2025 at 12:37 pm

Well, they booed Santa Claus in Philadelphia.

The position coaches are under contract, and good position coaches aren't going to want to work under a "hard-ass" when they can get a position somewhere else, with maybe a raise and a nicer title. It's about being a good manager and good leader.

Here's my take on playcalling: Most plays will work if they are executed correctly. I was told that about 40 years ago by coaches who'd been doing it for over 20 years, so I didn't really argue, and I'm happy I didn't because it's 100% correct.

The fabled Packer sweep worked because it was executed. The famous Bart bombs on 2nd and 2 worked because they were executed. The Sneak worked because Kramer got his guy blocked.