Good Intentions

[packrulz]

Mike Vandermause column: Green Bay Packers' good intentions don't put W's in win column

By Mike Vandermause • mvandermause@greenbaypressgazette.com • October 10, 2009


If only the Green Bay Packers would have followed through on their good intentions, they might not be languishing in third place in the NFC North.

It’s one thing to talk the talk, but in many key areas the Packers have failed to walk the walk.

Is it any wonder the Packers are struggling, when you consider how many times they have broken their resolutions this year?

Let’s look at several examples that help explain their plight:
The run game

Coach Mike McCarthy has steadfastly said he’s committed to running the football. Yet there always seems to be an excuse why it doesn’t happen.

Maybe it’s unfavorable down-and-distance situations, or the flow of the game, or any number of other reasons. In reality, McCarthy doesn’t have much confidence in his run game.

The Packers rank 22nd in the NFL in rushing yards per game and 28th in attempts per game, but even those below-average figures are deceptively high because quarterback Aaron Rodgers has rushed 17 times for 104 yards. Take away Rodgers’ scrambles and the Packers would rank No. 30 in rushing yards and No. 31 in attempts.

Those are terrible numbers for a team that supposedly wants to pound the ball on the ground late in the season when the weather turns nasty. It stems from a combination of factors: The offensive line is failing to open holes, Ryan Grant isn’t taking full advantage of his opportunities and there isn’t a credible change-of-pace back on the roster that can keep defenses honest.

It’s hard to blame McCarthy for not running more often when all of those factors are working against him. But the buck stops with him, and his insistence on sticking with the zone-blocking scheme must be scrutinized. In McCarthy’s four seasons, the Packers have ranked 23rd, 21st, 17th and 22nd in rushing yards. Whatever excuse is offered, the fact remains those numbers aren’t good enough.
Penalties

How often have we heard McCarthy talk about cleaning things up regarding the Packers’ penchant for penalties? Yet the trend of the past four years shows no signs of letting up this season. The Packers rank 12th in penalties and are on pace to finish with close to the second-highest single-season total since McCarthy arrived.

This category alone won’t kill a team, as evidenced by the Packers leading the league in penalties in 2007 yet finishing 13-3. But when combined with several other problem areas, it can take a serious toll.

You have to wonder if there’s a proper level of accountability when someone like Jarrett Bush, who has a penalty-prone reputation on special teams, was rewarded with a hefty raise after last season.
The offensive line

The Packers were bound and determined to stop shuffling their offensive linemen to provide more stability. Yet as soon as left tackle Chad Clifton went down with an injury, the game of musical chairs began with Daryn Colledge shifting to left tackle and Jason Spitz to left guard. It put the Packers in the precarious position of having two players lined up away from their best positions, and two players on the right side (Allen Barbre and Josh Sitton) with a combined two career starts.

The results have been disastrous. The Packers lead the NFL in sacks allowed by a wide margin with 20. Just five other teams have given up more than 11 sacks this season, a stunning indication of how bad things are. At this rate, the Packers will shatter the single-season record for sacks, and quarterback Aaron Rodgers will suffer a serious injury.

The blame rests squarely on General Manager Ted Thompson’s shoulders, and the Clifton injury is no good excuse. Thompson has been given five years to construct an offensive line, but his inability to provide the Packers with an adequate backup at one of the most important positions was inexcusable. An injury to a 33-year-old tackle shouldn’t send the entire house of cards tumbling, but that is what happened.
Signing of free agents

Thompson’s offseason decision to sign free agent safety Anthony Smith, who played three years in the Pittsburgh Steelers’ 3-4 defense and had 14 career starts to his credit, spoke volumes about the need for a veteran backup in the secondary. But when injury-prone Atari Bigby went down early, Smith was nowhere to be found. Thompson cut him coming out of training camp.

That proved costly in a pair of losses. Third-year player Aaron Rouse was so bad in his start against the Cincinnati Bengals that the Packers cut him. Derrick Martin, with a mere three career starts, was exposed by Brett Favre as an impostor in the Packers’ loss to the Minnesota Vikings. Martin wasn’t ready for a starting role and played badly enough to get yanked from the lineup.

Thompson knew his team needed depth at safety, yet he inexplicably put the Packers in a vulnerable position. Veteran cornerback Charles Woodson was so frustrated that he publicly pointed to Smith’s absence as a factor in the loss to the Vikings. It’s never good when the general manager is correctly called out by one of his players.
The basics

The Packers have blamed some of their struggles on a breakdown in fundamentals. After months of practice that included organized team activities, minicamp, training camp, the preseason and a month’s worth of regular-season games, you would think the fundamentals wouldn’t be an issue. Yet that’s what we keep hearing.

So either the coaches aren’t effectively imparting their message, the players aren’t taking that information and applying it, or it’s a combination of both. Or, perhaps “flawed fundamentals” is code for not being as good as your opponent.
The new 3-4 defense

When it was repeatedly suggested there might be growing pains adapting to the 3-4 defense, Thompson and the Packers coaches generally downplayed the notion. One month into the season, lo and behold, the new scheme is suffering through its share of ups and downs.

The defense can’t seem to put together a game in which it stops both the run and pass. It’s been an either/or proposition.

The Packers’ belief that they could successfully switch to a new scheme without upgrading the talent looks like flawed thinking at this point. Last year under Bob Sanders, the Packers’ defense ranked a subpar No. 22 in points allowed. After four games under new coordinator Dom Capers, the Packers rank exactly the same.

Most alarming has been a lack of pressure on the quarterback. The Packers ranked a lowly 25th in defensive sacks last year with 27, or an average of 1.7 per game. So far this year, the Packers have dropped to 26th in sacks at 1.25 per game.

It’s one thing to talk about upgrading the defense, but like so many other areas on this team, it’s another to carry it out.

Mike Vandermause is sports editor of the Press-Gazette.

[Bretsky]

The blame rests squarely on General Manager Ted Thompson’s shoulders, and the Clifton injury is no good excuse. Thompson has been given five years to construct an offensive line, but his inability to provide the Packers with an adequate backup at one of the most important positions was inexcusable. An injury to a 33-year-old tackle shouldn’t send the entire house of cards tumbling, but that is what happened.
Signing of free agents

Thompson’s offseason decision to sign free agent safety Anthony Smith, who played three years in the Pittsburgh Steelers’ 3-4 defense and had 14 career starts to his credit, spoke volumes about the need for a veteran backup in the secondary. But when injury-prone Atari Bigby went down early, Smith was nowhere to be found. Thompson cut him coming out of training camp.

That proved costly in a pair of losses. Third-year player Aaron Rouse was so bad in his start against the Cincinnati Bengals that the Packers cut him. Derrick Martin, with a mere three career starts, was exposed by Brett Favre as an impostor in the Packers’ loss to the Minnesota Vikings. Martin wasn’t ready for a starting role and played badly enough to get yanked from the lineup.

Thompson knew his team needed depth at safety, yet he inexplicably put the Packers in a vulnerable position. Veteran cornerback Charles Woodson was so frustrated that he publicly pointed to Smith’s absence as a factor in the loss to the Vikings. It’s never good when the general manager is correctly called out by one of his players.


I'D JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I AM NOT THE AUTHOR :lol:

[woodbuck27]

That article smacks TT in the belly and it tells the truth. How long will he go on with so few real answers. Maybe I'm too impatient.

The " we like what we have here's " are old. Where is the depth on our team? The growth? The signs for optimism? Really.

[woodbuck27]

The blame rests squarely on General Manager Ted Thompson’s shoulders, and the Clifton injury is no good excuse. Thompson has been given five years to construct an offensive line, but his inability to provide the Packers with an adequate backup at one of the most important positions was inexcusable. An injury to a 33-year-old tackle shouldn’t send the entire house of cards tumbling, but that is what happened.
Signing of free agents

Thompson’s offseason decision to sign free agent safety Anthony Smith, who played three years in the Pittsburgh Steelers’ 3-4 defense and had 14 career starts to his credit, spoke volumes about the need for a veteran backup in the secondary. But when injury-prone Atari Bigby went down early, Smith was nowhere to be found. Thompson cut him coming out of training camp.

That proved costly in a pair of losses. Third-year player Aaron Rouse was so bad in his start against the Cincinnati Bengals that the Packers cut him. Derrick Martin, with a mere three career starts, was exposed by Brett Favre as an impostor in the Packers’ loss to the Minnesota Vikings. Martin wasn’t ready for a starting role and played badly enough to get yanked from the lineup.

Thompson knew his team needed depth at safety, yet he inexplicably put the Packers in a vulnerable position. Veteran cornerback Charles Woodson was so frustrated that he publicly pointed to Smith’s absence as a factor in the loss to the Vikings. It’s never good when the general manager is correctly called out by one of his players.


I'D JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I AM NOT THE AUTHOR :lol:

Mike Vandermause appears to want TT called to the mat. Personally I'll admit I have had (have) little faith in our GM. He needs to give 100% to improving the Packers every day and be really out there trying 'at least' in most Packer fan eyes.

[Bretsky]

Personally I'm still optimistic in this squad and with a bright young QB I think we're headed in the right direction.

Ted Drafts well overall.
He got us a QB and Promising WR's

But IMO he's failed us on he OL and has had enough time.

[denverYooper]

A pretty good summary of issues so far. Some quick and probably incomplete thoughts b4 I run out the door...

Agree on penalties -- to a point. Offensive penalties are more concerning than D. Often seems like aggressive D draws more penalties. That said, our O is ranked 3 right now.

Do we look better w/o injuries to LT and SS? Jared Allen sure made our LT issue look pretty bad. SS is a nettlesome problem. I think they gambled on Martin and found he wasn't as ready as they'd hoped. That and Bigby went down right off the bat. Given Atari's history, maybe the risk/reward was not there. I wish I knew the whole story on Smith, but it probably wasn't just TT's decision to cut him.

We've also played one of the harder schedules to start the season: 2 3-1 teams and a 4-0 team among our first 3 games.

[packrulz]

I think half of those sacks ARod held the ball too long, TT cutting Smith was baffling, maybe he was hard to coach? If M3 says he's going to be more committed to running the ball then do it! The offense is so predictable. There is no excuse for them to not be grooming new tackles by now. The more I look at this team I see the same problems from a year ago.

[red]

wow, great article

i can't argue with any of it

[retailguy]

You just wait until Justin Harrell the poster sees this article. He'll tell Mike Vandermause that he leads an unhappy life with so much hate built up inside!


[begin sarcasm]
I'm a much happier person since I grudgingly admitted that Ted's way is the right way.

This season is totally Rodgers fault - the offensive line is JUST FINE. Ted really has provided us with a consistently versatile group of guys, who are just punching bags for the real issue. [end sarcasm]

[pbmax]

I can't comment much on Smith versus Martin, save for experience in the system. Smith had an undeniable edge there. If Martin is the better pro prospect (not just special teams), then its understandable. Its also understandable that while effectively this was the switch, it was the presence of Rouse that cost Martin a spot on cut down day.

But the twin Rouse decisions are baffling. Missed all but a week and a half of camp and then was retained despite his known limitations moving in space and the little playing time in the new system. Then when injury made it imperative he play acceptably, he failed and was cut. This and backup tackle are the real questions for T2.

Patler might want to weigh on this, but unlike the Corey Williams trade, where in March/April it looked like the Packer's had depth at tackle, Jenkins was healthy and KGB would recover in plenty of time from a simple arthroscopic procedure, it was never clear at the beginning of 09 that we had a true backup left tackle. The answer's were eventually Moll and Meredith.

Moll getting traded for Smith is fine if Meredith can man the position. But he can't and ends up on the practice squad so we can keep 6 guards + centers on the 53 man roster.

[MJZiggy]

Yeah, some of this stuff baffles me as well.

[pbmax]

I think half of those sacks ARod held the ball too long, TT cutting Smith was baffling, maybe he was hard to coach? If M3 says he's going to be more committed to running the ball then do it! The offense is so predictable. There is no excuse for them to not be grooming new tackles by now. The more I look at this team I see the same problems from a year ago.
Rodgers Responsibility for Sacks
Vikings (http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/63649842.html) 3 of 8
Bengals (http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/62485812.html) 1 of 2
Bengals (http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/60115057.html) 1 of 6
Bears (http://www.jsonline.com/packerinsider/59292087.html) 1 of 4

McGinn is not consistent assigning responsibility for each pressure, hit or hurry, so these numbers do not speak to his culpability there, but Rodgers is clearly not David Carr back there. If the pressure continues, however, he will probably get there eventually.

[Scott Campbell]

I'm bothered more by the way were playing than the 2-2 record.

[red]

I'm bothered more by the way were playing than the 2-2 record.

oh absolutely

it seems like this team is regressing as a whole, instead of progressing like a young team should

[SkinBasket]

Every week we have those 3 FBs on the 53 man squad, I lose a little confidence in Ted.

[Fritz]

It's not what many of us more optimistic posters expected at this point, and it's not what anyone here wants.

I am most disappointed in the penalties and the play of the offensive line.

Again, I'll say it: there's time for this team to get to that 10-6 and the playoffs place, as long as there are no major injuries.

If there are no major injuries but the team finishes at 7-9 or worse - even if they win their last two or three - then it might be time for the team to can MM, and perhaps Thompson.

In some regards, the worst scenario - as someone here has pointed out - would be a healthy team and an 8-8 or 9-7 finish, where the team misses the playoffs but finishes strong.

Then what? Do you give MM and TT another season - the idea they finished strong, the line will be experienced, all that - or do you say, y'know, it's been five years, and MM and TT just don't have the team moving in the right direction?

That might be the toughest call. I'm not even sure where I'd stand. I generally think a GM should be given five years - I think rebuilding done right takes time, sorry - but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

[retailguy]

Then what? Do you give MM and TT another season - the idea they finished strong, the line will be experienced, all that - or do you say, y'know, it's been five years, and MM and TT just don't have the team moving in the right direction?

That might be the toughest call. I'm not even sure where I'd stand. I generally think a GM should be given five years - I think rebuilding done right takes time, sorry - but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

So, you're giving the guy credit for "rebuilding" when he insisted he wasn't rebuilding, and, his handpicked coach, said all the dreamhouse needed was a coat of paint?

There is a time for the GM to be decpetive, and that IS NOT when he's talking to the hometown fans about the direction of the team... Sorry, Fritz, I disagree.

[Fritz]

I don't know of many GM's who say to their fans, yes, we suck and we're tearing it all apart this year. So hang on, because it's going to take a couple years.

Maybe the Lions' new GM. But that's about it.

I didn't buy MM's line about the coat of paint crap, but I expected it.

So I'm okay with a five year plan.

But we're in year five now, and the team needs to step up - including the coach and GM.

TT is limited now in what he can do, but if there's a veteran left tackle out there who could come in and be serviceable if Clifton can't go again somewhere, well, sign him. I know Waldo doesn't agree, but this shuffling hurts the team - not just in the one left tackle spot, but in the two others that get shifted as well.

And besides, Colledge sucked at left tackle. Sorry, he did.

Like I said, IF the team stays healthy but finishes 7-9 or worse, I don't think it's a tough call to can MM and TT too. And if they go 10-6 and are in the playoffs, okay. That buys them a year.

But what if they go 8-8 and 7-9 with no big injuries, but they finish strong?

Then what?

Tough call.

[retailguy]

Ted is not getting fired this year. I would say that it doesn't matter what the record is...

McCarthy? that's another story.

[retailguy]

I don't disagree with anything else you said Fritz, except the honesty part.

You could walk a "finer" line than Thompson did. He purposely came out and said we would not do something, and then did exactly what he said we wouldn't do. No reason for that. Plenty of other ways to handle that.

[bobblehead]

You just wait until Justin Harrell the poster sees this article. He'll tell Mike Vandermause that he leads an unhappy life with so much hate built up inside!


[begin sarcasm]
I'm a much happier person since I grudgingly admitted that Ted's way is the right way.

This season is totally Rodgers fault - the offensive line is JUST FINE. Ted really has provided us with a consistently versatile group of guys, who are just punching bags for the real issue. [end sarcasm]

Love ya RG, but if JH posted this same thing about you the admin would be all over him. Our admin is not a neutral party.

[Rastak]

You just wait until Justin Harrell the poster sees this article. He'll tell Mike Vandermause that he leads an unhappy life with so much hate built up inside!


[begin sarcasm]
I'm a much happier person since I grudgingly admitted that Ted's way is the right way.

This season is totally Rodgers fault - the offensive line is JUST FINE. Ted really has provided us with a consistently versatile group of guys, who are just punching bags for the real issue. [end sarcasm]

Love ya RG, but if JH posted this same thing about you the admin would be all over him. Our admin is not a neutral party.


No, I have a feeling he looks at total body of work and not individual posts. I would.

If you are a shithead day in day out eventually you get your ass tossed. It's that simple.

[woodbuck27]

I don't know of many GM's who say to their fans, yes, we suck and we're tearing it all apart this year. So hang on, because it's going to take a couple years.

Maybe the Lions' new GM. But that's about it.

I didn't buy MM's line about the coat of paint crap, but I expected it.

So I'm okay with a five year plan.

But we're in year five now, and the team needs to step up - including the coach and GM.

TT is limited now in what he can do, but if there's a veteran left tackle out there who could come in and be serviceable if Clifton can't go again somewhere, well, sign him. I know Waldo doesn't agree, but this shuffling hurts the team - not just in the one left tackle spot, but in the two others that get shifted as well.

And besides, Colledge sucked at left tackle. Sorry, he did.

Like I said, IF the team stays healthy but finishes 7-9 or worse, I don't think it's a tough call to can MM and TT too. And if they go 10-6 and are in the playoffs, okay. That buys them a year.

But what if they go 8-8 and 7-9 with no big injuries, but they finish strong?

Then what?

Tough call.

If the Packers don't win a minimum of 9 games this season should TT be fired? That event would take care of MM as well. As it looks now we will be fortunate to win ten games. The condition of our OL and running game as it is at the present time being, most evidently our downfall. Whatever it takes we must see a big improvement in these areas. That determination falls on TT and our HC. Not just the O-line coach.

I also see problems with our secondary and an aging Al Harris.

GO PACKERS!

[retailguy]

You just wait until Justin Harrell the poster sees this article. He'll tell Mike Vandermause that he leads an unhappy life with so much hate built up inside!


[begin sarcasm]
I'm a much happier person since I grudgingly admitted that Ted's way is the right way.

This season is totally Rodgers fault - the offensive line is JUST FINE. Ted really has provided us with a consistently versatile group of guys, who are just punching bags for the real issue. [end sarcasm]

Love ya RG, but if JH posted this same thing about you the admin would be all over him. Our admin is not a neutral party.

JH said the very same thing to me two weeks ago in the 1st two pages of Nutz's excuse thread. I was just repeating it back and attributing the comments towards Mike V. instead of me, that's all..

Yeah, the admin warned me twice about posts, but did it privately. I haven't had a public rebuke yet. Not sure how he does things, but sometimes you just don't hold your tongue... Hopefully he understands, if not, then I'll be posting with 'borat' sooner than I'd like... :)

[Packers4Ever]

I think half of those sacks ARod held the ball too long, TT cutting Smith was baffling, maybe he was hard to coach? If M3 says he's going to be more committed to running the ball then do it! The offense is so predictable. There is no excuse for them to not be grooming new tackles by now. The more I look at this team I see the same problems from a year ago.


And the year before that, and the year before that, and......... :roll:

[pbmax]

I think half of those sacks ARod held the ball too long, TT cutting Smith was baffling, maybe he was hard to coach? If M3 says he's going to be more committed to running the ball then do it! The offense is so predictable. There is no excuse for them to not be grooming new tackles by now. The more I look at this team I see the same problems from a year ago.


And the year before that, and the year before that, and......... :roll:
Last year's offensive line performed relatively well. Those tackles were getting old and their pass blocking was not shut down like it used to be, but it was better than average. There was not fire drill going back there. Not until Moll had to fill in for Tauscher.

In case no one has noticed, the middle of the O line has developed into a strength. Even Wells took a step forward. Its just hard to notice now that our Left Guard is at Left Tackle. Thompson's approach works, but its become a matter of timing. There was no one ready to be Left Tackle if Clifton went down.

The Williams had a much easier time on the road versus the Rams than they did against the Packer interior at home. And this was a Rams offense that despite its offensive problems, was going up and down the field almost at will today.

[bobblehead]

You just wait until Justin Harrell the poster sees this article. He'll tell Mike Vandermause that he leads an unhappy life with so much hate built up inside!


[begin sarcasm]
I'm a much happier person since I grudgingly admitted that Ted's way is the right way.

This season is totally Rodgers fault - the offensive line is JUST FINE. Ted really has provided us with a consistently versatile group of guys, who are just punching bags for the real issue. [end sarcasm]

Love ya RG, but if JH posted this same thing about you the admin would be all over him. Our admin is not a neutral party.

JH said the very same thing to me two weeks ago in the 1st two pages of Nutz's excuse thread. I was just repeating it back and attributing the comments towards Mike V. instead of me, that's all..

Yeah, the admin warned me twice about posts, but did it privately. I haven't had a public rebuke yet. Not sure how he does things, but sometimes you just don't hold your tongue... Hopefully he understands, if not, then I'll be posting with 'borat' sooner than I'd like... :)

I read that thread too. I'm not defending JH, was merely thinking you should take the high ground. I've called out JH in the past too, even though I like his football posts he gets too into it and takes/makes it personal too often. I just think its best if we can not provoke him, then if he gets himself booted it completly on him.

[bobblehead]

I think half of those sacks ARod held the ball too long, TT cutting Smith was baffling, maybe he was hard to coach? If M3 says he's going to be more committed to running the ball then do it! The offense is so predictable. There is no excuse for them to not be grooming new tackles by now. The more I look at this team I see the same problems from a year ago.


And the year before that, and the year before that, and......... :roll:
Last year's offensive line performed relatively well. Those tackles were getting old and their pass blocking was not shut down like it used to be, but it was better than average. There was not fire drill going back there. Not until Moll had to fill in for Tauscher.

In case no one has noticed, the middle of the O line has developed into a strength. Even Wells took a step forward. Its just hard to notice now that our Left Guard is at Left Tackle. Thompson's approach works, but its become a matter of timing. There was no one ready to be Left Tackle if Clifton went down.

The Williams had a much easier time on the road versus the Rams than they did against the Packer interior at home. And this was a Rams offense that despite its offensive problems, was going up and down the field almost at will today.

Now I'll toot my own horn...I was begging and confident that we would draft an LT at 9 this year unless all 4 of the good ones were gone. Not sure how Oher is developing, but it would be nice to have him on the roster. Even nicer than having Raji around I'm thinking.

[superfan]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

[falco]

I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

I don't think TN lets him go though.

[Partial]

I really don't think they're going to fire Fisher, especially after the previous few winning seasons. He's had really bad stretches in the past, don't forget. They lost a superstar and are paying the price. They turned over D coordinators. They banked on an old QB (who isn't a timeless wonder like another one). In my opinion, there record isn't totally shocking given the competition they've played.

Fisher will stick around there past this season. You can count on that. In the crazy event he does not, hell yes, fire MM and send the brigade down to knock on his door (ala Rex Ryan to Bart Scott) and demand he comes with.

[Zool]

If you are a shithead day in day out eventually you get your ass tossed. It's that simple.

Skin and Nutz were discussing this very topic in another thread.

[Deputy Nutz]

If you are a shithead day in day out eventually you get your ass tossed. It's that simple.

Skin and Nutz were discussing this very topic in another thread.

The skinbasket is one sick nut, I have no idea where he got the idea to post those disgusting pictures :cnf: .

[Deputy Nutz]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

The name I was pondering was Mike Shannahan. You can't argue with his record and his ability to put together a very good offensive line and running game. His team fell apart on him especially on the defensive side of the ball in 2008, but the man can coach. I don't think you give him full control and authority on all things management, but he is a very good coach.

[pbmax]

I don't think Shanahan or Cowher will consider a situation unless they get final say. They will compromise on the personnel guy, but only if they get final word.

Holmgren is going to want to approve the personnel guy. And Holmgren has enough charm and notches on his belt to get another combo coach-GM gig.

[retailguy]

I don't think Shanahan or Cowher will consider a situation unless they get final say. They will compromise on the personnel guy, but only if they get final word.

Holmgren is going to want to approve the personnel guy. And Holmgren has enough charm and notches on his belt to get another combo coach-GM gig.

Yeah, all three of these guys will "probably" get what they want.

Wouldn't it be a hoot if Murphy canned both Thompson and McCarthy and we wound up with Holmgren part 2? I'd sense that'd piss a lot of people off based on how he left in 1998...

Edit - Already Shanahan to DC rumors out there.... Claiming a private deal in the works too! I'm betting that Cowher lands in Carolina. Shanahan and Holmgren get fought over between Dallas and Washington, with the loser going to Dallas...

[The Shadow]

2-2 and already discussing a housecleaning?
My, my.

[Deputy Nutz]

I don't think Shanahan or Cowher will consider a situation unless they get final say. They will compromise on the personnel guy, but only if they get final word.

Holmgren is going to want to approve the personnel guy. And Holmgren has enough charm and notches on his belt to get another combo coach-GM gig.

I think if there is a balance there between Cowher/Shanahan with a GM or VP of player personnel I am ok. They are too good of coaches and they know what they need to run their systems.

I keep forgetting about Cowher, if he would be just the little bitty bit interested I would give him the farm.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

Cowher, Shanny. Holmy are gonna want 8-10 mill a year.

You guys honestly think we are gonna pay that kind of cheddar?

[bobblehead]

I really don't think they're going to fire Fisher, especially after the previous few winning seasons. He's had really bad stretches in the past, don't forget. They lost a superstar and are paying the price. They turned over D coordinators. They banked on an old QB (who isn't a timeless wonder like another one). In my opinion, there record isn't totally shocking given the competition they've played.

Fisher will stick around there past this season. You can count on that. In the crazy event he does not, hell yes, fire MM and send the brigade down to knock on his door (ala Rex Ryan to Bart Scott) and demand he comes with.

Now that is rich...you are criticizing a team for sticking with an older QB the very season after he went 13-3....and its not like he retired then tried to come back on the eve of training camp after missing all the off season work...priceless.

[bobblehead]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

The name I was pondering was Mike Shannahan. You can't argue with his record and his ability to put together a very good offensive line and running game. His team fell apart on him especially on the defensive side of the ball in 2008, but the man can coach. I don't think you give him full control and authority on all things management, but he is a very good coach.

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

[Fritz]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

The name I was pondering was Mike Shannahan. You can't argue with his record and his ability to put together a very good offensive line and running game. His team fell apart on him especially on the defensive side of the ball in 2008, but the man can coach. I don't think you give him full control and authority on all things management, but he is a very good coach.

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

Doesn't that just make him an even more natural hire if MM gets the Ziggy? (Not the MJ Ziggy)

[Deputy Nutz]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

The name I was pondering was Mike Shannahan. You can't argue with his record and his ability to put together a very good offensive line and running game. His team fell apart on him especially on the defensive side of the ball in 2008, but the man can coach. I don't think you give him full control and authority on all things management, but he is a very good coach.

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

Regardless what he runs, it works.

[Brando19]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

The name I was pondering was Mike Shannahan. You can't argue with his record and his ability to put together a very good offensive line and running game. His team fell apart on him especially on the defensive side of the ball in 2008, but the man can coach. I don't think you give him full control and authority on all things management, but he is a very good coach.

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

Regardless what he runs, it works.

I wouldn't mind Shannahan. One name everyone is in love with is Bill Cowher...but I am not. Look how long it took him to win a SB. How about Mike Holmgren back in Green Bay?

[Partial]

but if the team stays relatively healthy but finishes 9-7, even if they win their last three or four in a row - man, I don't know.

Guess I'll know more as the season progresses.

If GB finishes 8-8 or higher, I don't see either McCarthy or Thompson getting canned - after all, it will be at least a 2 game improvement in the win column over last year, and if Murphy wants to keep those guys and takes a lot of questions on the subject, he will certainly point to that as a reason to keep them.

I still like both McCarthy and Thompson for the most part. That said, if Tennessee continues to lose at this rate Fisher might not make it to 2010, and I would be very happy to dump McCarthy and hire him if he is available.

The name I was pondering was Mike Shannahan. You can't argue with his record and his ability to put together a very good offensive line and running game. His team fell apart on him especially on the defensive side of the ball in 2008, but the man can coach. I don't think you give him full control and authority on all things management, but he is a very good coach.

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

Regardless what he runs, it works.

I wouldn't mind Shannahan. One name everyone is in love with is Bill Cowher...but I am not. Look how long it took him to win a SB. How about Mike Holmgren back in Green Bay?

More of a QB problem then anything imo. They had Kordell Stewart, Tommy Maddux and a few other guys (I'm sure) running the show in between Neil O'Donnell and the super bowl berth of 95-96 to 2005 when they made it with Roethlisberger. They went to championship at least 3 times in 10 years, which is extremely impressive imo.

[pbmax]

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

Regardless what he runs, it works.
Worked better with Elway. 4 double digit win years out of 10 since the Original NFL Draft Evader retired. He is kind of all over the map. Including dismantling what was once a good defense mid-decade. And it wasn't getting better for him.

Year....Ws....Ls.....Coach.......Pts....Yds....Pts ....Yds
2008.....8.....8.....Shanahan.....16.....2.....30. ....29
2007.....7.....9.....Shanahan.....21....11.....28. ....19
2006.....9.....7.....Shanahan.....17....21......8. ....14
2005....13.....3.....Shanahan......7.....5......3. ....15
2004....10.....6.....Shanahan......9.....5......9. .....4
2003....10.....6.....Shanahan.....10.....7......9. .....4
2002.....9.....7.....Shanahan......7.....3.....15. .....6
2001.....8.....8.....Shanahan.....10....22.....21. .....8
2000....11.....5.....Shanahan......2.....2.....23. ....24
1999.....6....10.....Shanahan.....18....14.....11. .....7

[retailguy]

I agree with you...but you realize that he runs the ZBS right?

Regardless what he runs, it works.
Worked better with Elway. 4 double digit win years out of 10 since the Original NFL Draft Evader retired. He is kind of all over the map. Including dismantling what was once a good defense mid-decade. And it wasn't getting better for him.

Year....Ws....Ls.....Coach.......Pts....Yds....Pts ....Yds
2008.....8.....8.....Shanahan.....16.....2.....30. ....29
2007.....7.....9.....Shanahan.....21....11.....28. ....19
2006.....9.....7.....Shanahan.....17....21......8. ....14
2005....13.....3.....Shanahan......7.....5......3. ....15
2004....10.....6.....Shanahan......9.....5......9. .....4
2003....10.....6.....Shanahan.....10.....7......9. .....4
2002.....9.....7.....Shanahan......7.....3.....15. .....6
2001.....8.....8.....Shanahan.....10....22.....21. .....8
2000....11.....5.....Shanahan......2.....2.....23. ....24
1999.....6....10.....Shanahan.....18....14.....11. .....7


With a change of scenery he could go back to cheating against the cap. He's going to Washington. give it up.