Capers not 1st, 2nd choice---JS

[Bretsky]

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/37945919.html

[Gunakor]

Why do they print garbage like this. Who cares. Is the guy we hired any good? If so, does it matter if he was the first or second or fifth choice? Why should any of us reading this story care?

[Bretsky]

for what it's worth I could care less about the blog

It was interesting so I posted it

[Bretsky]

Why do they print garbage like this. Who cares. Is the guy we hired any good? If so, does it matter if he was the first or second or fifth choice? Why should any of us reading this story care?


good gossip

it's why chicks read people magazine

[TheCheese]

Well it looks like it worked out because I'm glad we got Dom. Also found the part interesting where Williams said Green Bay had the most young talent out of all the teams that contacted him.

It's going to be real interesting to see what Dom does with all the talent we have. Man I'm stoked for the 09 season.

[Bretsky]

we can call ourselves the

DOMinators

[Gunakor]

Why do they print garbage like this. Who cares. Is the guy we hired any good? If so, does it matter if he was the first or second or fifth choice? Why should any of us reading this story care?


good gossip

it's why chicks read people magazine

I suppose. To me it just looks like the media trying to stir up drama where there is none. Whether or not he was the first choice is irrelevant, because Capers is a phenomenal defensive coach. If we are going to switch over to a 3-4, he's the guy to coach them up to do it.

I just hope he doesn't install a new package one year and bolt for a HC job the next like Jags did...

[bobblehead]

bottom line is this. Any of the above could probably have done a fine job and it will come down to the talent on the field. Dom is perfectly capable and has a proven track record. I'm fine with him.

[Joemailman]

we can call ourselves the

DOMinators

The Capers Crusaders

[channtheman]

I like the choice we made at DC so I don't care what choice he was. I think that they must have something against MM and I guess want to show that he can't get what he really wants so he has to resort to his "second" choice.

[Lurker64]

I think the Williams angle is plausible. But if it came down to a vote by Williams's family and they chose New Orleans over Green Bay, I can't fault the Packers organization for that (or really blame Williams). I think the Haslett thing is a stretch, particularly since the Rams HC vacancy was filled around the same time Capers was hired, and Haslett is still on the market (though it makes sense that the Haslett camp might want to create the impression that he was the Packers' second choice after Williams, since he's still trying to get a job). If McCarthy wanted to (and Haslett was amenable), he could have signed Haslett. I never put much stock in McCarthy hiring Nolan in the first place.

So personally, I'm thinking that Capers was McCarthy's second choice, after Williams.

[Patler]

They often say, sometimes the best trade for you is the one you don't make. Same can be said for signings in FA, coaching searches, whatever.

Ever since sportswriters became gossip columnists instead of news reporters for sports topics, they have a need to be ahead of the announcement and they need to be right, or make themselves appear to be right. This smacks of a rehabilitation effort pure and simple. Otherwise, why does it matter at all? It's not like MM was turned down by everyone with experience, and had to go with a neophyte DC, who was a risk. People reject very good job offers for a number of reasons. There is not always a negative inference against the employer because of it.

Even if Capers wasn't first on the list, after MM finally met and interviewed him, MM could very well be saying to himself, "Thank Goodness! Why didn't I contact him earlier?"

It doesn't matter one bit right now who turned it down, how many were offered the job, or who wasn't interviewed. All that matters is if the guy who is hired gets the job done. If he doesn't, then maybe those other things become relevant, but until then they are a waste of column inches, in my opinion.

[vince]

Well said Patler.


I think the Haslett thing is a stretch, particularly since the Rams HC vacancy was filled around the same time Capers was hired, and Haslett is still on the market (though it makes sense that the Haslett camp might want to create the impression that he was the Packers' second choice after Williams, since he's still trying to get a job).
There were two days between the announcements of Spags as HC of the Rams and Capers as DC of the Packers. So if Haslett was offered the Packers job, as the anonymous source indicated, it must have been withdrawn. It's probably more likely that this is more spin from an agent, as you say Lurk.

[Fritz]

After that JSO blog, a lot of readers seemed to write things that indicated that either Williams was insane for or lying about choosing New Orleans, or that Williams' comments proved that McCarthy/Thompson are incompetent and desperate.

I think, first, given Gregg Williams's statement that Green Bay offered him the coordinator's job, it seems clear that McCarthy's greatest priority was getting a defensive coordinator who had both experience as a coordinator and a good reputation. Those qualities seem to have trumped all others - an up-and-comer, the advantage of youth, it has to be a guy who uses___(fill in the blank) defensive scheme.

So it seems not to have mattered much to MM whether the scheme was 3-4 or 4-3. He just wanted someone with an excellent reputation (of the four we know he interviewed, Capers and Williams had the highest reputations) and experience as a coordinator.

Secondly, those people who call McCarthy into question because Williams turned down the job are in my estimation way, way overboard. Why is it so difficult to accept the possibility that a guy with a family might ask his family where they'd like to be? If his youngest son is a hot prospect as one article suggested, it would make sense to live and go to college in the south. Why do people think southern schools produce so many high-ranking football teams so consistently? The weather is warmer, you can play more throughout the year. So I wish people would give it up and stop attacking Williams, McCarthy, Thompson, whoever. Maybe Williams's stated reason for going to New Orleans is simply the truth.

As for Haslett, again, there are those "sources close say" crap, which in this whole defensive coordinator search have proved to be wrong most of the time. So I throw out the angle that Haslett was also offered the job. I think that's just more irresponsible speculative reporting.

[RashanGary]

Now I believe Greg Williams turned us down. I'm surprised because if talking strictly football, I think this was the best job out there. He has other priorities.


That said, I think Capers will be great. MM hardly knew him, so maybe he wasn't the first interview, but I don't doubt MM thought he was the best after finally talking to him. I'm very, very, very happy with everything Capers. Everything about him is impressive except his hair.

[Kiwon]

Well, I like that they got Vonnie Holliday's opinion about Capers.

Why not ask someone representing those who will be working with him the closest - the players?

[mraynrand]

This smacks of a rehabilitation effort pure and simple. Otherwise, why does it matter at all?

As Fritz suggests, it requires a biot of rehabilitation by MM as well, since it looks like the desire for a 3-4 didn't determine his choice of DC. Either way, this is a big waste of time. Back in the day (the mid 80s), I'd get my Packer Report delivered to me at college a week after all this came down, I'd read one article on it and go back to studying - or drinking - depending on the time of day. Ho Hum.

[cpk1994]

I like the choice we made at DC so I don't care what choice he was. I think that they must have something against MM. Yeah. Its called not bednig over backward to appease Favre. The Urinal Garbage didn't exactly hide the fact that they were not happy that McCarthy and Thompson didn't cave in and let Favre have what ever he wanted. It even got to the point that Cliff Christl came out of retirement to write a hit piece on Thompson. I have no respect for that pile of rubbish anymore.

[Pugger]

I thought it was a positive article about MM and the organization, frankly. Williams was looking out for his family and I don't begrudge him for that. Capers in the end will probably be the best choice so sometimes things like this happen for a reason. But seriously, who the hell cares if Capers wasn't #1? Capers said he talked to numerous teams so this stuff wondering if someone is the #1 choice doesn't mean squat. :roll:

[mraynrand]

I like the choice we made at DC so I don't care what choice he was. I think that they must have something against MM. Yeah. Its called not bednig over backward to appease Favre. The Urinal Garbage didn't exactly hide the fact that they were not happy that McCarthy and Thompson didn't cave in and let Favre have what ever he wanted. It even got to the point that Cliff Christl came out of retirement to write a hit piece on Thompson. I have no respect for that pile of rubbish anymore.

If this is the article you are thinking about, it's not a hit piece and it wasn't written for the Urinal Scented.


Packers should come back to their senses by retiring their fears
By Cliff Christl | Special to NFL.com
GREEN BAY, Wis. -- While it might seem contradictory, in truth, strong leadership often is exerted in subtle ways.

That also happened to be Bob Harlan's style during his 19 years as the Green Bay Packers' principal executive.

He rarely, if ever, overruled the people under him, but he influenced important decisions through his wisdom and guidance, especially in his areas of expertise -- public and community relations. And he did so in such a way that the Packers rarely were embroiled in bitter and enduring controversies during his reign.

Perhaps his lasting legacy will be that he was the best goodwill ambassador this storied, 90-year old franchise ever had.

That's why it's hard to imagine that the ongoing dispute between Brett Favre and the Packers would have dragged on this long or become this contentious if Harlan was still CEO. No matter how one slices it, the Packers likely will start training camp on Monday faced with a PR nightmare like none other in their history.

There was a time in this ongoing soap opera when playing the blame game was senseless.

There were no bad guys when Favre was waffling over his future -- theatrics and all -- and the Packers were deciding to move forward without him as their quarterback. It's still senseless to blame either side for anything that transpired from the time a choked-up Favre announced his retirement in early March until he asked for his release in a letter delivered July 12.

Favre changed his mind about retirement. Big deal. How many coaches and athletes in the pro ranks haven't? Is there anyone who goes through life without wavering or changing course on any number of important decisions?


Jonathan Daniel / Getty Images
Brett Favre isn't the first to follow up an emotional farewell press conference with an attempt to return to the playing field.
At the same time, the Packers shouldn't be faulted for deciding to give Favre's job to Aaron Rodgers. Some might find that to be a rather curious decision, considering Favre was coming off a banner season, but it's not an unusual step in the National Football League. Teams are forever looking to replace older players, future Hall of Famers included. As the late George Young, general manager of the New York Giants' first two Super Bowl champions, was fond of saying: "It's a young man's game." The 38-year-old Favre, at least as a Packer, simply became a victim of that tenet.

There are also plenty of historical precedents to defend each side's position.

Favre isn't the first Packers star to retire and then want to unretire.

The late Reggie White announced his retirement before the 1998 season, changed his mind the next day, played another year and announced his retirement again. This time, he sat out a season, returned for one with the Carolina Panthers and finally retired for good on his third try. Hall of Fame tackle Forrest Gregg retired five times -- after the 1965, '68, '69, '70 and '71 seasons -- but didn't follow through until after playing one final season in Dallas. The immortal Don Hutson announced his retirement before each of his last three seasons, only to change his mind each time. Before his last year, 1945, he didn't commit to playing until just 48 hours before the opener. Hutson also considered retiring before the 1939 season, but was coaxed back and reported to camp nine days late.

In fact, Vince Lombardi's retirement as coach of the Packers and Favre's as a player have followed parallel tracks. Lombardi announced his retirement in an emotional press conference soon after Super Bowl II and essentially cited burnout as the reason. And, by all accounts, he regretted his decision by the time training camp arrived five months later. When the 1968 season ended, he asked out of his contract as general manager of the Packers and bolted to Washington to coach again.

On the flip side, Favre also isn't the first Packers great to be pushed out the door. Hall of Famer Paul Hornung, team leader and most valuable player of the Packers' first two championship teams under Lombardi, was dumped in an expansion draft. The legendary Ray Nitschke was benched and essentially shamed into retirement. Hall of Fame tailback and Green Bay native Arnie Herber was waived at the age of 31 during the final week of training camp in 1941, when he was just a season removed from leading the Packers to an NFL title.

But where this latest story line turned ugly was after Favre declared that he wanted to play again and general manager Ted Thompson responded by saying he'd take Favre back, but only as a backup. That's what has given this story life and given the Packers a black eye. It's what has embittered the greatest player in the franchise's history, invited a barrage of criticism from the national media and disaffected many of the team's fans.

After all Favre has done for the franchise -- more than anyone, he rescued it from the misery of the 1970s and ‘80s that threatened its very existence -- the Packers are unwilling to offer him the same opportunity or courtesy they've extended to other older players whose services were no longer needed.

When White decided he wanted to play again in 2000, the Packers willingly released him from his contract. When 12-year veteran William Henderson had the itch to play again last year after being told he no longer fit in the Packers' plans, Thompson released him, announcing that he was doing so to give Henderson a chance to "pursue other opportunities" with no strings attached.

The hunch here is that there has been only one team for which Favre really wants to play, and that's the Minnesota Vikings. And the reason being is that's the only place where he'd have a legitimate shot at winning another Super Bowl.

The Vikings had the No. 1-ranked run defense in the league last year and have added the best pass rusher in the game in defensive end Jared Allen. In Adrian Peterson, they have the NFL's most explosive runner. And their offensive line is good enough so that Favre shouldn't be constantly running for his life.

All Minnesota needs to become the NFC's preseason favorite is a quarterback.

With any other potential contender -- Tampa Bay, Chicago, Baltimore, the Jets -- Favre would have to carry a full load on offense. And he has suggested in the recent past that such a role would have little appeal to him.

The retiring kind ... or not

Brett Favre was supposed to be fishing or golfing by now -- oblivious to what day of the week it is -- like so many other retirees. But he got the itch to play football on Sundays. Take a look at how his tearful goodbye to the game he loves turned into a war of words with the Packers' front office ...

» Complete Favre retirement timeline ...
No doubt that also has been the Packers' greatest fear -- that Favre will sign with the Vikings. In all likelihood, it was the impetus for their cockamamie response to Favre's request to be released: That he could come back, but only to carry a clipboard.

In other words, they're playing scared.

If Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy truly believe the Packers are a better team with Rodgers at quarterback, they should have the courage of their convictions. If they have as much confidence in Rodgers and their team as they say they do, they shouldn't fear facing Favre in another uniform.

The Packers could have defused this controversy and made this a much less messy divorce if they had given Favre his release soon after he asked for it. Had they exercised the kind of PR savvy that marked the Harlan administration, they would have released Favre and simply announced that they were doing so only to honor his request.

They still could do that and eliminate what could be a major distraction throughout camp.

Or they also could think outside the box and reap a nice return.

Why not trade Favre to the Vikings? After all, that would be the team most likely to part with a high draft pick in return.

Sure, there would be tremendous risk involved. It would substantially improve the Vikings' chances of winning the Super Bowl this coming season. Then again, New England's loss last February served as yet another reminder that championships aren't won on paper. Moreover, many of the Vikings' best players are on the downside of their careers, and such a trade might even hurt them in the long run, especially if they lose another draft pick over the Packers' tampering charge.

Over the past three years, the Packers have said goodbye to two other key players, Darren Sharper and Ryan Longwell, knowing full well that both could sign with the Vikings, as both ultimately did. But rather than fret the consequences, the Packers responded by winning four of the six meetings between the two teams.

If Thompson should have learned anything from his mentor Ron Wolf, it was that when faced with a tough decision, be bold. But he has been anything but as of late.

The Packers have told Favre they don't want him back as a starting quarterback, yet they're acting as if they're terrified that he'll come back to haunt them.

It just doesn't compute.

[cpk1994]

I like the choice we made at DC so I don't care what choice he was. I think that they must have something against MM. Yeah. Its called not bednig over backward to appease Favre. The Urinal Garbage didn't exactly hide the fact that they were not happy that McCarthy and Thompson didn't cave in and let Favre have what ever he wanted. It even got to the point that Cliff Christl came out of retirement to write a hit piece on Thompson. I have no respect for that pile of rubbish anymore.

If this is the article you are thinking about, it's not a hit piece and it wasn't written for the Urinal Scented.


Packers should come back to their senses by retiring their fears
By Cliff Christl | Special to NFL.com
GREEN BAY, Wis. -- While it might seem contradictory, in truth, strong leadership often is exerted in subtle ways.

That also happened to be Bob Harlan's style during his 19 years as the Green Bay Packers' principal executive.

He rarely, if ever, overruled the people under him, but he influenced important decisions through his wisdom and guidance, especially in his areas of expertise -- public and community relations. And he did so in such a way that the Packers rarely were embroiled in bitter and enduring controversies during his reign.

Perhaps his lasting legacy will be that he was the best goodwill ambassador this storied, 90-year old franchise ever had.

That's why it's hard to imagine that the ongoing dispute between Brett Favre and the Packers would have dragged on this long or become this contentious if Harlan was still CEO. No matter how one slices it, the Packers likely will start training camp on Monday faced with a PR nightmare like none other in their history.

There was a time in this ongoing soap opera when playing the blame game was senseless.

There were no bad guys when Favre was waffling over his future -- theatrics and all -- and the Packers were deciding to move forward without him as their quarterback. It's still senseless to blame either side for anything that transpired from the time a choked-up Favre announced his retirement in early March until he asked for his release in a letter delivered July 12.

Favre changed his mind about retirement. Big deal. How many coaches and athletes in the pro ranks haven't? Is there anyone who goes through life without wavering or changing course on any number of important decisions?


Jonathan Daniel / Getty Images
Brett Favre isn't the first to follow up an emotional farewell press conference with an attempt to return to the playing field.
At the same time, the Packers shouldn't be faulted for deciding to give Favre's job to Aaron Rodgers. Some might find that to be a rather curious decision, considering Favre was coming off a banner season, but it's not an unusual step in the National Football League. Teams are forever looking to replace older players, future Hall of Famers included. As the late George Young, general manager of the New York Giants' first two Super Bowl champions, was fond of saying: "It's a young man's game." The 38-year-old Favre, at least as a Packer, simply became a victim of that tenet.

There are also plenty of historical precedents to defend each side's position.

Favre isn't the first Packers star to retire and then want to unretire.

The late Reggie White announced his retirement before the 1998 season, changed his mind the next day, played another year and announced his retirement again. This time, he sat out a season, returned for one with the Carolina Panthers and finally retired for good on his third try. Hall of Fame tackle Forrest Gregg retired five times -- after the 1965, '68, '69, '70 and '71 seasons -- but didn't follow through until after playing one final season in Dallas. The immortal Don Hutson announced his retirement before each of his last three seasons, only to change his mind each time. Before his last year, 1945, he didn't commit to playing until just 48 hours before the opener. Hutson also considered retiring before the 1939 season, but was coaxed back and reported to camp nine days late.

In fact, Vince Lombardi's retirement as coach of the Packers and Favre's as a player have followed parallel tracks. Lombardi announced his retirement in an emotional press conference soon after Super Bowl II and essentially cited burnout as the reason. And, by all accounts, he regretted his decision by the time training camp arrived five months later. When the 1968 season ended, he asked out of his contract as general manager of the Packers and bolted to Washington to coach again.

On the flip side, Favre also isn't the first Packers great to be pushed out the door. Hall of Famer Paul Hornung, team leader and most valuable player of the Packers' first two championship teams under Lombardi, was dumped in an expansion draft. The legendary Ray Nitschke was benched and essentially shamed into retirement. Hall of Fame tailback and Green Bay native Arnie Herber was waived at the age of 31 during the final week of training camp in 1941, when he was just a season removed from leading the Packers to an NFL title.

But where this latest story line turned ugly was after Favre declared that he wanted to play again and general manager Ted Thompson responded by saying he'd take Favre back, but only as a backup. That's what has given this story life and given the Packers a black eye. It's what has embittered the greatest player in the franchise's history, invited a barrage of criticism from the national media and disaffected many of the team's fans.

After all Favre has done for the franchise -- more than anyone, he rescued it from the misery of the 1970s and ‘80s that threatened its very existence -- the Packers are unwilling to offer him the same opportunity or courtesy they've extended to other older players whose services were no longer needed.

When White decided he wanted to play again in 2000, the Packers willingly released him from his contract. When 12-year veteran William Henderson had the itch to play again last year after being told he no longer fit in the Packers' plans, Thompson released him, announcing that he was doing so to give Henderson a chance to "pursue other opportunities" with no strings attached.

The hunch here is that there has been only one team for which Favre really wants to play, and that's the Minnesota Vikings. And the reason being is that's the only place where he'd have a legitimate shot at winning another Super Bowl.

The Vikings had the No. 1-ranked run defense in the league last year and have added the best pass rusher in the game in defensive end Jared Allen. In Adrian Peterson, they have the NFL's most explosive runner. And their offensive line is good enough so that Favre shouldn't be constantly running for his life.

All Minnesota needs to become the NFC's preseason favorite is a quarterback.

With any other potential contender -- Tampa Bay, Chicago, Baltimore, the Jets -- Favre would have to carry a full load on offense. And he has suggested in the recent past that such a role would have little appeal to him.

The retiring kind ... or not

Brett Favre was supposed to be fishing or golfing by now -- oblivious to what day of the week it is -- like so many other retirees. But he got the itch to play football on Sundays. Take a look at how his tearful goodbye to the game he loves turned into a war of words with the Packers' front office ...

» Complete Favre retirement timeline ...
No doubt that also has been the Packers' greatest fear -- that Favre will sign with the Vikings. In all likelihood, it was the impetus for their cockamamie response to Favre's request to be released: That he could come back, but only to carry a clipboard.

In other words, they're playing scared.

If Thompson and coach Mike McCarthy truly believe the Packers are a better team with Rodgers at quarterback, they should have the courage of their convictions. If they have as much confidence in Rodgers and their team as they say they do, they shouldn't fear facing Favre in another uniform.

The Packers could have defused this controversy and made this a much less messy divorce if they had given Favre his release soon after he asked for it. Had they exercised the kind of PR savvy that marked the Harlan administration, they would have released Favre and simply announced that they were doing so only to honor his request.

They still could do that and eliminate what could be a major distraction throughout camp.

Or they also could think outside the box and reap a nice return.

Why not trade Favre to the Vikings? After all, that would be the team most likely to part with a high draft pick in return.

Sure, there would be tremendous risk involved. It would substantially improve the Vikings' chances of winning the Super Bowl this coming season. Then again, New England's loss last February served as yet another reminder that championships aren't won on paper. Moreover, many of the Vikings' best players are on the downside of their careers, and such a trade might even hurt them in the long run, especially if they lose another draft pick over the Packers' tampering charge.

Over the past three years, the Packers have said goodbye to two other key players, Darren Sharper and Ryan Longwell, knowing full well that both could sign with the Vikings, as both ultimately did. But rather than fret the consequences, the Packers responded by winning four of the six meetings between the two teams.

If Thompson should have learned anything from his mentor Ron Wolf, it was that when faced with a tough decision, be bold. But he has been anything but as of late.

The Packers have told Favre they don't want him back as a starting quarterback, yet they're acting as if they're terrified that he'll come back to haunt them.

It just doesn't compute.Well it does clearly show that Cliff has no clue what the business of football is and that Cliff obviously doesn't understand that you don't improve a division rival at your expense. Not to mention that he cites Darren Sharper and Ryan Longwell going to the Vikings as his compelling argument as to why Favre should be given to the VIkes. It was pure and utter trash.

[HarveyWallbangers]

I liked Cliff, but that article showed that he didn't retire too soon.

[mraynrand]

I completely disagreed with the article with respect to trading Favre to the Vikings. I was strongly against that. I think Christl was trying to be a bit controversial. But my point remains: even if the article is crap and/or you disagree with it, it wasn't a hit job on anyone - at most it was critical of Thompson, and it wasn't written for the Urinal Scented.

It does serve as a reminder that Thompson ultimately dealt with the Favre situation pretty well.