Is Packers' McCarthy the NFL's best coach?

[SnakeLH2006]

http://www.620wtmj.com/sports/green-bay-packers/201607401.html
__________________________________________________ _______

LOLLOLOOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOOOOLLLLLLOOLOLLLL.

He's ok. But he's too complacent with passing non-stop (granted Arod is the best QB right now)...and not establishing the run...and really makes some bonehead playcalls given statistics...I mean how many times will he run on 3rd and 1 given our abysmal running game to get that 1st down. I don't mind MM as a coach (I'm not bashing him really...but there's a few coaches I'd rather have) but would take Belichek, Fox, or any of the Harbaugh brothers, or even Cowher or a few NFL coaches in broadcasting in a nano-second....Just saying.......and oh yeah..he praises that douchebag JerkMichael Finley alllll the time...that guy is a huge waste. Show some balls and bench his cheating lying thug punkass. Snake met that thug once and knows many stories bout that scumbag....and many more do now...and they work with him EVERY day and know he's a bitch...and see him underperform and show up late...and still play him and pay him..he still makes $8.5 million...sickening..I'm just looking at on the field production though..and he sucks vs. his contract.

[Pugger]

I realize you are no fan and he isn't perfect by any means but MM is regarded as a top 10 head coach by most folks. Belichick is #1.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000157180/article/bill-belichick-tom-coughlin-sit-atop-current-nfl-coach-rankings

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/sports/best-current-nfl-coaches-339516.html

http://www.nfl.com/photoessays/09000d5d82849b56#photo=1

http://www.athlonsports.com/nfl/ranking-nfls-top-10-head-coaches-2012

http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/27641/power-rankings-top-10-nfl-head-coaches

[King Friday]

Can't see McCarthy as a top 5 coach. He has some limitations. He's a good coach, but I can't put him in the elite class at this point, and he needs to produce several more years of consistent 12 win seasons with an MVP caliber QB to prove himself. Hell, Mike Sherman could win 10-12 games with Favre.

[gbgary]

coach? got to be one of the best but his play-calling has always been an issue.

[Mazzin]

I agree with Gary. The play calling leaves much to be desired, but as far as him and his staff getting all they can out of their young players. Phenominal

[woodbuck27]

Mike McCarthy... The NFL's Best Head Coach?

Best! Best!! Best!!! Echo ....... No! NO!! NO!!!

Hell no! When I watch Mike McCarthy in any big game I see:

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSzUTKN5fI6R0sdmsr0e-IvKatNDAIhzAR4Cdh5ScV9k79wKMLGzA

A deer in the headlights.

Next question.

[pbmax]

Belichick I understand. Even get Harbaugh love. But John Fox? Really?

One losing Super Bowl appearance in 20 years plus Elway for a year in the AFC West?

He is Lovie Smith with a better QB.

[Bretsky]

Belichick I understand. Even get Harbaugh love. But John Fox? Really?

One losing Super Bowl appearance in 20 years plus Elway for a year in the AFC West?

He is Lovie Smith with a better QB.


IMO John Fox is way better than Lovie. He's a great communcator and leader. I'd take MM over Fox fwiw.

IMO our guy is a very solid coach. Very good.....certainly not elite. Easily top 10....maybe around the 5 area for the optimiists and around the 10 area for the pessimists.

[Bretsky]

I must admit I really do like Adam Schein....but for some of the same reasons I like Chuckie...I find him very entertaining.
However, he is the ultimate Packer Homer.

Listening to him the last years, he has MM in for weekly talks all the tiem and kisses some serious ass.

He has also predicted Green Bay would win the last two Super Bowls.....and kind of called the run they had the year they did win it.

[Bretsky]

I'm not a buyer into Andy Reid anymore; I need to see him do something in KC before setting him in thetop 10
I must life Jeff Fischer more than most......he'd be in that range.
I also like Pete Carroll more than most...I think he's dam good as well
I also like Sean Payton more than most...he's in that range as well

Guys like Mike Tomlin, MM, both Harbarughs, Sean Payston......at this point to me they all fall in a similar range

There is only one Hoody Genius, and until somebody wins their 2nd Big Show Coughlin deserves the 2 spot

[pbmax]

I'm not a buyer into Andy Reid anymore; I need to see him do something in KC before setting him in thetop 10
I must life Jeff Fischer more than most......he'd be in that range.
I also like Pete Carroll more than most...I think he's dam good as well
I also like Sean Payton more than most...he's in that range as well

Guys like Mike Tomlin, MM, both Harbarughs, Sean Payston......at this point to me they all fall in a similar range

There is only one Hoody Genius, and until somebody wins their 2nd Big Show Coughlin deserves the 2 spot

I am with you on Andy, though I think he is an excellent coach, he might be burned out. Not as high on Fisher or Carroll. Like Payton and Tomlin.

Also, you should start pestering Rastak to come in for the draft. Time is running out.

[Mazzin]

Pete Carrol..maybe, but Fisher? Come on what has he done?

[red]

no to m3, not even close

he has no ability what so ever at adjusting during a game, and IMO, thats a pretty big part of coaching

[woodbuck27]

Looking at the numbers for Mike McCarthy Vs Bill Belichick and Tom Coughlin.

I have to give this to Mike McCarthy:

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTwLz4lW2hhdOjuheTUPiKpJpAyY9s9d Z0MUugmXjfbIgkd89Zo

That's my best tuxedo.

I don't get it why people put the hate on Pete Carroll. Everytime I see that man on NFL Access he's more impressive.

Tom Coughlin...yaa gotta love that guy. He's a tough little Irishman, with a good heart down deep. He's a fricken hard working HC like Hoody.

Woohahh. I've likely got that wrong.

Who works harder than Bill Belichick?

[Bretsky]

It was not fair that Hoddy Coach Genius was able to hire Hoody Offensive Coordinator Genius last year

That would be like Ted Thompson hiring the best former GM out there who has plenty of game lift in Scott Pioli.........hmmmmmmmmmmmm

[Pugger]

no to m3, not even close

he has no ability what so ever at adjusting during a game, and IMO, thats a pretty big part of coaching

Yeah, he really sucks the bag. Who wants a lousy coach that is 80-42 in 6 years? Let's bring back Sherman.

*sarcasm off

[red]

Yeah, he really sucks the bag. Who wants a lousy coach that is 80-42 in 6 years? Let's bring back Sherman.

*sarcasm off

yup, and everyone said sherman was the greatest ever before he was let go too. who's he coaching for now?

oh, and BTW, sherman had a better win percentage at green bay

edit, my numbers were wrong. m3 has the better win percentage

[Pugger]

Sherman is the OC for that powerhouse Miami Dolphins. His winning percentage in GB was .578 and MM's is .660. MM isn't perfect by any stretch but I'd rather have him instead of Sherman all day long.

[smuggler]

Shermy handcuffed himself with inferior talent because he was a weak GM.

[swede]

Shermy handcuffed himself with inferior talent because he was a weak GM.

So you're saying he was a better coach than MM because at the end Shermy's GM blew chunks.

I am actually thinking about this.

[SnakeLH2006]

I just wanna say..I don't hate MM..He's excellent at bringing up the young players TT drafts...most coaches couldn't/wouldn't wanna do that. He's a top 10 current coach for sure. His passing mind is elite. His gameplanning really sux at times...but Bretsky brought up Mike Tomlin and Payton...both coaches I'd take in a heartbeat. I think MM and even TT to a degree (Hawk, Finley)...fall into a bind with their own guys thinking they can make them work...but they don't.

I don't have a beef with MM so much as I laughed at the article about MM being elite. He's a damn great teacher...a pretty good coach...and a piss-poor play-caller when it comes to adjusting to the league...aka 2012's entire season.

I'm not saying Shermy was a better coach...he's not at all...but had similar records with elite QB's...albeit Favre was nowhere near Arod now...and MM is a better coach...but similar records till the wheels fell off for Shermy. Shermy could get a running game going...and their playcalling was similarly bad.

[woodbuck27]

So you're saying he was a better coach than MM because at the end Shermy's GM blew chunks.

I am actually thinking about this.

I think he (smuggler) got that right.

Can you imagine how very tough it is to be an NFL HC and the teams GM? For most people that try that you might predict one thing. That isn't necessarily good to huge success. After some time, yet more than likely. The real passion for what you aimed to achieve will result in you being:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-VoDpdT6M090/UGBmMyO73SI/AAAAAAAACU4/m8fXGBxtXSc/s1600/burnt+toast.jpg

You have to be bordering on genious; a hard worker and somehow trecherous to get that done very well.

You have to be at least slightly masochistic and/or have an enormous ego. Seldom good things.

PACKERS !

[pbmax]

Sherm had more ups and downs than a roller coaster. Every season started slow, then there was an emotional appeal in the Marriott Airport Conference Room B and a winning streak. Then it petered out and they limped home.

And no one remembers the hiring of someone to manage the 2 minute drill and challenges. Sherman was the perfect coach for a run first team. But he couldn't manufacture a D (without Donatell) or a passing game (with Schroeder) to match it.

[Zool]

Sherman had Favre, Ahman Green and what basically everyone on this board would call the best O-line in recent memory. He was the quintessential deer in headlights. He was bad bad bad. People have some sort of crush on him for getting in Sapp's face. Take that away and what do you remember about him?

[woodbuck27]

Sherman had Favre, Ahman Green and what basically everyone on this board would call the best O-line in recent memory. He was the quintessential deer in headlights. He was bad bad bad. People have some sort of crush on him for getting in Sapp's face. Take that away and what do you remember about him?

He worked his butt off. Long long hours. That man certainly tried and tried way too hard.

The result: Just what happens to most mere mortals.

Big Burn... Burn out ! How did we know that?

He was visable. He was the Green bay Packers HC .............. and GM.

[Guiness]

So you're saying he was a better coach than MM because at the end Shermy's GM blew chunks.

I am actually thinking about this.

I don't think that's quite what smuggler meant - but there is truth in saying that his record probably would've been better if he hadn't been given GM duties.

The question has to be if a trained monkey could've strung together winning seasons after being gifted Favre, Ahman, Henderson, Driver, Freeman, Butler, Sharper, Rivera and Whale, then got bookend tackles in Clifton and Tauscher, along with KGB in his first draft in 2000! Hell, looking at that list, maybe the monkey wouldn't have to be trained! :)

[Patler]

I don't think that's quite what smuggler meant - but there is truth in saying that his record probably would've been better if he hadn't been given GM duties.

The question has to be if a trained monkey could've strung together winning seasons after being gifted Favre, Ahman, Henderson, Driver, Freeman, Butler, Sharper, Rivera and Whale, then got bookend tackles in Clifton and Tauscher, along with KGB in his first draft in 2000! Hell, looking at that list, maybe the monkey wouldn't have to be trained! :)

Then, throw in the added detail that during Sherman's years as a coach, no other NFC North team had a winning record. MN and Chicago each had a decent year or two, but the best either could do for the six years Sherman was in GB was MN having a .500 record.

Sherman could count on 5 or 6 wins each year just by not being awful. His record against decent teams was not very good.

[Guiness]

Then, throw in the added detail that during Sherman's years as a coach, no other NFC North team had a winning record. MN and Chicago each had a decent year or two, but the best either could do for the six years Sherman was in GB was MN having a .500 record.

Sherman could count on 5 or 6 wins each year just by not being awful. His record against decent teams was not very good.

I think I inherently knew that, but kind of forgot. Yet another reason Sherman didn't seem to get a sniff for another HC gig after leaving Green Bay with a lofty record.

For a few year after '92 all the teams in the NFC North (except TB, but they never were very far north!) were pretty competitive, in '97 both wild card teams were out of the north, but that didn't last very long.

[3irty1]

I don't see a coach I'd rather have than MM in the league right now. His ability to formulate a game plan is very special. He's a master strategist on the level of Hoody IMO. People on here whose main problem with him is his playcalling are fixated on one or two instances or wrongly think we should be running the ball more. He's as good of a playcaller as exists in the NFL. There is no doubt that his staff are excellent teachers as well.

I don't really buy into the Harbaugh/Schwartz "motivator" personality but if I did I might not like MM. I don't need a head coach that will grab face masks and spit in faces. These guys are highly paid professionals. If a player needs additional motivation beyond that then kick them the fuck off the team.

One problem I have with MM is that I have questioned his time management. That was something Sherman was king of so maybe that's just got me spoiled. Also he is possibly too loyal to his coaches and players, giving 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th chances where we would probably give 2. Gutting the staff after 2008 was probably too late. Many times I've felt a player must have naked pictures of him.

I think Coughlin probably deserves the honor of top coach right now based on record. That team are amazing road warriors and nobody has done more with less than Coughlin IMO. I'm not sure what his recipe is but it certainly works.

[Patler]

I think I inherently knew that, but kind of forgot. Yet another reason Sherman didn't seem to get a sniff for another HC gig after leaving Green Bay with a lofty record.

For a few year after '92 all the teams in the NFC North (except TB, but they never were very far north!) were pretty competitive, in '97 both wild card teams were out of the north, but that didn't last very long.

Just to throw a few numbers out there. From 2000 thru 2005:

Packers - 57/39
Vikings - 48/48
Bears - 45/51
Lions - 30/66

[Patler]

I think Coughlin probably deserves the honor of top coach right now based on record. That team are amazing road warriors and nobody has done more with less than Coughlin IMO. I'm not sure what his recipe is but it certainly works.

Yet, at one time, some thought Coughlin might be one of those guys who just didn't have what it takes to be successful in the post season. Eleven years as a head coach with somewhat so-so results.

[pbmax]

McCarthy might also be the League's best wedding/proposal photographer.

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/202113691.html?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

http://www.620wtmj.com/news/local/202016891.html

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k75/paisans_2006/m3_photog.png

[Fritz]

I may never shed my 70's football mentality, and so I will probably always be uncomfortable with MM's run/pass ratio. But he's got a fine record and he's won a Superbowl. More recently, by the way, than Bretsky's vaunted "Hoody Genius."

I think there's a lot of pressure on MM in this "draft and develop" regime. He doesn't get much time to get rookies and first year guys ready and productive, since it's all about rolling over the roster so you don't end up with weird cap perambulations. If he had the luxury Lombardi did in terms of grooming young players, imagine what he could do.

Ah, if only players were shackled to their teams forever, like in the good ol' days...

[wist43]

I may never shed my 70's football mentality, and so I will probably always be uncomfortable with MM's run/pass ratio. But he's got a fine record and he's won a Superbowl. More recently, by the way, than Bretsky's vaunted "Hoody Genius."

I think there's a lot of pressure on MM in this "draft and develop" regime. He doesn't get much time to get rookies and first year guys ready and productive, since it's all about rolling over the roster so you don't end up with weird cap perambulations. If he had the luxury Lombardi did in terms of grooming young players, imagine what he could do.

Ah, if only players were shackled to their teams forever, like in the good ol' days...

I don't think there's much pressure to win in Green Bay right now... it seems everyone is content with having won a SB a couple of years ago, and as long as we just keep to TT's draft and develop program, all will be well - whether we win the SB or not... although I don't consider us to be a legit contender.

We'll be a perennial playoff team, and should win our division for another year or two... that's good enough for most Packer fans.

With TT living by the draft and street FA's only, the draft is our Superbowl.

[Fritz]

I don't think there's much pressure to win in Green Bay right now... it seems everyone is content with having won a SB a couple of years ago, and as long as we just keep to TT's draft and develop program, all will be well - whether we win the SB or not... although I don't consider us to be a legit contender.

We'll be a perennial playoff team, and should win our division for another year or two... that's good enough for most Packer fans.

With TT living by the draft and street FA's only, the draft is our Superbowl.

"The draft is our Superbowl" is a term used in cities like Detroit and Miami, which haven't sniffed at a SB in years and years and years. You get your team into the playoffs, and it's all a big roll of the dice from there.

Come on, Wist. Your narrative is flat out wrong. Enjoy what is one of the premier organizations in the NFL. This is a good ride, especially if you grew up in the 70's and 80's like I did and had to endure horrible GM-ing (the John Hadle trade, drafting Rich Campbell) and indifferent teams.

[pbmax]

Considering how many callers on sports talk radio are screaming for Thompson to sign somebody, I doubt all of Green Bay is happy with good enough. People are still calling for his head.

But it is true that one Super Bowl win puts a different spin on his method. The papers would be shouting from the rooftops otherwise.

[3irty1]

I may never shed my 70's football mentality, and so I will probably always be uncomfortable with MM's run/pass ratio. But he's got a fine record and he's won a Superbowl. More recently, by the way, than Bretsky's vaunted "Hoody Genius."

I think there's a lot of pressure on MM in this "draft and develop" regime. He doesn't get much time to get rookies and first year guys ready and productive, since it's all about rolling over the roster so you don't end up with weird cap perambulations. If he had the luxury Lombardi did in terms of grooming young players, imagine what he could do.

Ah, if only players were shackled to their teams forever, like in the good ol' days...

Understand why McCarthy's run/pass philosophy is what it is. The truth is that running the ball has diminishing returns for a good team, even if the running is very effective. What I mean by that is that running the ball effectively shortens the game since it keeps the clock moving. In a shorter game, the better team has less opportunities to be better... leading to upsets. This is fundamentally why running is an underdog strategy in today's NFL. In theory, to maximize our advantage of having the best QB in the league (and by far the best QB at throwing down the sidelines) we should be running the ball just enough to open up the whole playbook. Also in obvious helpful situations like to close out the end of a game with the lead.

[Zool]

Fans who call in to radio talk shows ranting, I equate to the barking dog down the street. They don't actually know why they're barking but they've been doing it so long they don't know how to stop. How many teams are legit superbowl contenders multiple years running? Are there any other than the Patriots of the early 00's? If being a playoff team year after year isn't enough, then you're not watching for the enjoyment. You're watching to have something to bitch about.

[Smeefers]

I think Wist is right. There isn't much pressure. The reason is because we keep getting to the playoffs. We're consistently a contender and won a super bowl not so long ago, so a lot of people have backed off and simply hope for the best.

I'm one of those people. I'm not worried about the team. We're probably getting back to the playoffs again this year, we'll probably win the division. Depending on how we play through the season, we might get to the super bowl. If a couple calls go our way, a couple guys don't get injured and we make a couple plays, there's a very real possibility that we could win it. When you have the tools to go deep in the playoffs, which I believe we have, that's usually all it comes down to. A play here and there.

Hell, even last year during the San Fran game, I didn't think we played so poorly that there's no reason we should have even been in the building with them. Come halftime we were tied up. Then San Fran went on a run and we could never catch up. Stuff happens, but I honestly think that we could have been the team that went on the run or at the very least, with our offense, we could have stayed even with them. I don't think their team was hand and fist better than ours. If a handful of plays had went our way instead of theirs, we could have easily been in the super bowl.

I think we have the same shot this year and who knows, those plays or calls might just go our way. No need to worry about something like that in April. I don't believe there is any move or moves we could make that would guarantee us a super bowl win.

[Fritz]

Fans who call in to radio talk shows ranting, I equate to the barking dog down the street. They don't actually know why they're barking but they've been doing it so long they don't know how to stop. How many teams are legit superbowl contenders multiple years running? Are there any other than the Patriots of the early 00's? If being a playoff team year after year isn't enough, then you're not watching for the enjoyment. You're watching to have something to bitch about.


What he said.

[wist43]

"The draft is our Superbowl" is a term used in cities like Detroit and Miami, which haven't sniffed at a SB in years and years and years. You get your team into the playoffs, and it's all a big roll of the dice from there.

Come on, Wist. Your narrative is flat out wrong. Enjoy what is one of the premier organizations in the NFL. This is a good ride, especially if you grew up in the 70's and 80's like I did and had to endure horrible GM-ing (the John Hadle trade, drafting Rich Campbell) and indifferent teams.

The playoffs can be a crapshoot to be sure - our run to the SB a few years ago atests to that. We caught fire, faced favorable matchups for our style of play, and, as Ron Wolf says... a fart in the wind.

The landscape has changed in the NFC... too many good power teams. We were the 6th seed when we won the SB, but all of the teams in front of us were flawed and/or finesse teams.

SF stomping us twice last year was not an accident. It's gonna happen again - unless we get tougher in the trenches - which I don't think is going to happen. I think we'll be better next year with Perry and Worthy coming back, and all of the young guys having a year in an NFL conditioning program.

Even with improvement however, our finesse philosophy doesn't matchup against power - SF pushed us around in the trenches on both sides of the ball - they can dominate us physically, and proved it twice... can't sidestep that.

[woodbuck27]

"The draft is our Superbowl" is a term used in cities like Detroit and Miami, which haven't sniffed at a SB in years and years and years. You get your team into the playoffs, and it's all a big roll of the dice from there.

Come on, Wist. Your narrative is flat out wrong. Enjoy what is one of the premier organizations in the NFL. This is a good ride, especially if you grew up in the 70's and 80's like I did and had to endure horrible GM-ing (the John Hadle trade, drafting Rich Campbell) and indifferent teams.

The 1970's - 80's were the equivalent to this period 'depicted below' for Packer fans:

http://static.tvgcdn.net/MediaBin/Galleries/Shows/A_F/Da_Dd/Dark_Ages/season1/dark-ages6.jpg

THE DARK AGES.

[pbmax]

I think we all vastly underestimate the pressure these guys are under. This isn't the Falcons where most of the city only notices if the playoffs happen to come by. Same with Miami.

Its a step down from Pittsburgh and New York, mainly due to size. Maybe New England though that is an entirely recent development.

[Fritz]

The playoffs can be a crapshoot to be sure - our run to the SB a few years ago atests to that. We caught fire, faced favorable matchups for our style of play, and, as Ron Wolf says... a fart in the wind.

The landscape has changed in the NFC... too many good power teams. We were the 6th seed when we won the SB, but all of the teams in front of us were flawed and/or finesse teams.

SF stomping us twice last year was not an accident. It's gonna happen again - unless we get tougher in the trenches - which I don't think is going to happen. I think we'll be better next year with Perry and Worthy coming back, and all of the young guys having a year in an NFL conditioning program.

Even with improvement however, our finesse philosophy doesn't matchup against power - SF pushed us around in the trenches on both sides of the ball - they can dominate us physically, and proved it twice... can't sidestep that.

So we were somehow lucky that year, is what I read you as saying. You're discounting that Super Bowl, and you're sure that luck will not happen again because
SF is too tough, too physical for a pink-skirted team like Green Bay, which deliberately chooses to play pussyball.

Look, Wist, you can see it any way you want, but it seems clear you're never going to be happy, ever. Green Bay acheived the greatest prize in the NFL three years ago, but you think it was somehow luck and so doesn't quite count. You admire SF as more manly and better, but they haven't won a SB in many years, though they did go last year.

Sure it looks good for them, and I agree they are more physical than the Pack. But the Bears reputedly are too, as are the Giants, and neither of them got very far last year. I would like you like to see the team get more physical. I don't disagree. But I don't discount the quality of this team nor its chances as you seem to.

Watching that playoff loss was hard. The defense was awful that day - all of 'em, even Matthews. I want this year's team to be a little tougher. They could use a Wayne Simmons or two, for sure. But I'm not going to bemoan this team's chances, either. I really do think it's about, in part, catching fire and believing completely and playing out of your head when the playoffs roll around. But that's impossible to bottle up, which is partly why the playoffs are so fascinating.

[woodbuck27]

So we were somehow lucky that year, is what I read you as saying. You're discounting that Super Bowl, and you're sure that luck will not happen again because
SF is too tough, too physical for a pink-skirted team like Green Bay, which deliberately chooses to play pussyball.

Look, Wist, you can see it any way you want, but it seems clear you're never going to be happy, ever. Green Bay acheived the greatest prize in the NFL three years ago, but you think it was somehow luck and so doesn't quite count. You admire SF as more manly and better, but they haven't won a SB in many years, though they did go last year.

Sure it looks good for them, and I agree they are more physical than the Pack. But the Bears reputedly are too, as are the Giants, and neither of them got very far last year. I would like you like to see the team get more physical. I don't disagree. But I don't discount the quality of this team nor its chances as you seem to.

Watching that playoff loss was hard. The defense was awful that day - all of 'em, even Matthews. I want this year's team to be a little tougher. They could use a Wayne Simmons or two, for sure. But I'm not going to bemoan this team's chances, either. I really do think it's about, in part, catching fire and believing completely and playing out of your head when the playoffs roll around. But that's impossible to bottle up, which is partly why the playoffs are so fascinating.

Again... I looked at that exit point in the playoff's 'Green bay Packers at San Fran 49ers', few days ago.

If Jeremy Ross doesn't blow it? Poor lad! What might have changed in terms of us and momentum?

Even as that went; we went into the dressing room tied at halftime. In that first half.

Our best players were guys like DuJuan Harris, James Jones and Sam Shields. Clay Matthews was up and down but he had to face a gritty LT inspite of him not being 100%. Aaron Rodgers hit Greg Jennings early and then for the longest time he was forgotten. Why?

Sure Crabtree, Gore and Kaepernick looked good. You cannot take that away from the 49ers. Our 'D' helped them to that.

I saw it on the negative side... another way. We went flat in the second half.

The Packers ran out of gas. It was like there was a virus on that roster. Aaron Rodgers was certainly not 100% or under the weather. He simply couldn't get into any groove in that game. He was forever getting game time early in that game and he got restless. Aaron Rodgers is a very intense man. Yet got in there and us squared up. All the same, Aaron Rodgers never looked comfortable in that game.

Having posted that I have to add this.

On that day the Green Bay Packer were facing a very solid San Francisco 49ers team. That team 'will be' tougher this season. So will the Seattle Seahawks. So will the Atlanta Falcons.

Ted Thompson needs a killer draft. We need alot of breaks this season in the adversity Dept. to be serious contenders. The Green Bay Packers have to work their tails off. Aaron Rodgers 'again' must be the NFL MVP.

Give us all that and then 'maybe'... 'just maybe' we win the Super Bowl.

The point is this. The same goes for any serious contending team in the NFL.

So many things have to go just right for any team to be crowned Super Bowl Champions.

Will we be forgotten or mentioned as a maybe? I believe it will be the latter.

GO PACK GO !

[Pugger]

So we were somehow lucky that year, is what I read you as saying. You're discounting that Super Bowl, and you're sure that luck will not happen again because
SF is too tough, too physical for a pink-skirted team like Green Bay, which deliberately chooses to play pussyball.

Look, Wist, you can see it any way you want, but it seems clear you're never going to be happy, ever. Green Bay acheived the greatest prize in the NFL three years ago, but you think it was somehow luck and so doesn't quite count. You admire SF as more manly and better, but they haven't won a SB in many years, though they did go last year.

Sure it looks good for them, and I agree they are more physical than the Pack. But the Bears reputedly are too, as are the Giants, and neither of them got very far last year. I would like you like to see the team get more physical. I don't disagree. But I don't discount the quality of this team nor its chances as you seem to.

Watching that playoff loss was hard. The defense was awful that day - all of 'em, even Matthews. I want this year's team to be a little tougher. They could use a Wayne Simmons or two, for sure. But I'm not going to bemoan this team's chances, either. I really do think it's about, in part, catching fire and believing completely and playing out of your head when the playoffs roll around. But that's impossible to bottle up, which is partly why the playoffs are so fascinating.

We could have used Bulaga, Benson, Perry and Bishop in the playoffs too.

Do any of you think the Ravens were the best team last year? They, like other teams lately (like we did in 2010) got hot at the end of the season and won it all. Getting some of these guys back (I don't know about Benson. He isn't resigned yet. Maybe his foot isn't right?) plus our new draft picks will do wonders for this team. All we have to do is get back in the playoffs and anything can happen.

[Pugger]

Again... I looked at that exit point in the playoff's 'Green bay Packers at San Fran 49ers', few days ago.

If Jeremy Ross doesn't blow it? Poor lad! What might have changed in terms of us and momentum?

Even as that went; we went into the dressing room tied at halftime. In that first half.

Our best players were guys like DuJuan Harris, James Jones and Sam Shields. Clay Matthews was up and down but he had to face a gritty LT inspite of him not being 100%. Aaron Rodgers hit Greg Jennings early and then for the longest time he was forgotten. Why?

Sure Crabtree, Gore and Kaepernick looked good. You cannot take that away from the 49ers. Our 'D' helped them to that.

I saw it on the negative side... another way. We went flat in the second half.

The Packers ran out of gas. It was like there was a virus on that roster. Aaron Rodgers was certainly not 100% or under the weather. He simply couldn't get into any groove in that game. He was forever getting game time early in that game and he got restless. Aaron Rodgers is a very intense man. Yet got in there and us squared up. All the same, Aaron Rodgers never looked comfortable in that game.

Having posted that I have to add this.

On that day the Green Bay Packer were facing a very solid San Francisco 49ers team. That team 'will be' tougher this season. So will the Seattle Seahawks. So will the Atlanta Falcons.

Ted Thompson needs a killer draft. We need alot of breaks this season in the adversity Dept. to be serious contenders. The Green Bay Packers have to work their tails off. Aaron Rodgers 'again' must be the NFL MVP.

Give us all that and then 'maybe'... 'just maybe' we win the Super Bowl.

The point is this. The same goes for any serious contending team in the NFL.

So many things have to go just right for any team to be crowned Super Bowl Champions.

Will we be forgotten or mentioned as a maybe? I believe it will be the latter.

GO PACK GO !

I still get miffed when I think how we stopped running the ball in the second half. :???:

[wist43]

So we were somehow lucky that year, is what I read you as saying. You're discounting that Super Bowl, and you're sure that luck will not happen again because
SF is too tough, too physical for a pink-skirted team like Green Bay, which deliberately chooses to play pussyball.

Look, Wist, you can see it any way you want, but it seems clear you're never going to be happy, ever. Green Bay acheived the greatest prize in the NFL three years ago, but you think it was somehow luck and so doesn't quite count. You admire SF as more manly and better, but they haven't won a SB in many years, though they did go last year.

Sure it looks good for them, and I agree they are more physical than the Pack. But the Bears reputedly are too, as are the Giants, and neither of them got very far last year. I would like you like to see the team get more physical. I don't disagree. But I don't discount the quality of this team nor its chances as you seem to.

Watching that playoff loss was hard. The defense was awful that day - all of 'em, even Matthews. I want this year's team to be a little tougher. They could use a Wayne Simmons or two, for sure. But I'm not going to bemoan this team's chances, either. I really do think it's about, in part, catching fire and believing completely and playing out of your head when the playoffs roll around. But that's impossible to bottle up, which is partly why the playoffs are so fascinating.

It's a new season Fritz... that SB win is a memory. I enjoyed it just like all Packer fans, but now it's on to the business of winning another one. Where do we stand relative to the competition??

The NFC in 2013 is a much tougher conference than it was in 2010-2011. In 2010 Atlanta was the #1 seed, and Chicago #2. Atlanta was just learning what it takes to be a playoff team, and Chicago is Chicago. Philadelphia was a flawed/finesee team as well.

2013 on the other hand - SF is just a beast; Seattle is better than Green Bay; as are the Giants, and Falcons. Much, much tougher row to hoe than in 2010.

So the competition is better... what is the condition of our team?? Is Green Bay a better team today than it was in January 2011?? I would argue that Green Bay has taken a step back. We've lost a lot of good players - Collins, Clifton, Jennings, Jenkins, Woodson... we're worse at C and LT, and our front seven is a mess.

Those games against the 49er's weren't a fluke - they completely dominated us physically. X's and O's had a little to do with it - Capers is an idiot - but the fact is, SF beat us up, literally beat us up, and we were helpless to stop the beating.

[SnakeLH2006]

Sherman had Favre, Ahman Green and what basically everyone on this board would call the best O-line in recent memory. He was the quintessential deer in headlights. He was bad bad bad. People have some sort of crush on him for getting in Sapp's face. Take that away and what do you remember about him?

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/catch_all/nfl_image/w_sapp_m_sherman_120409_wide.jpg

Still makes the Snake rigid.

Sapp is lucky he wasn't shot years ago in his Thug Life stage....or even now I guess. Guy is an absolute moron.

MM is a better coach, but Shermy wasn't that bad. It's almost as if some peeps think the talent was THAT much better under Shermy and he just did it with twiddle-sticks. MM is a good coach...better than Shermy, but the guy won some games..not a SB..but wasn't terrible. You want a bad coach in the Favre era....look up Ray Fuckin Rhodes.

[Fritz]

When Green Bay went through that playoff run, I don't remember anyone on this board talking about how easy the playoff opponents looked. Not at all. That's just you revising history, Wist.

Yes, teams are tough this season. And yes, Green Bay could use some toughness up front. I've been advocating for a first, second, or third round defensive tackle and/or defensive end, and somehwere in the middle, maybe, an inside linebacker. I'd like to see the draft lean once again toward defense.

Okay, so let's focus on the future, then. That means no one's won anything yet. We have paper champions, as we always do at this point in the season, but no one's won anything. So let's see how it plays out.

[Pugger]

http://static.nfl.com/static/content/catch_all/nfl_image/w_sapp_m_sherman_120409_wide.jpg

Still makes the Snake rigid.

Sapp is lucky he wasn't shot years ago in his Thug Life stage....or even now I guess. Guy is an absolute moron.

MM is a better coach, but Shermy wasn't that bad. It's almost as if some peeps think the talent was THAT much better under Shermy and he just did it with twiddle-sticks. MM is a good coach...better than Shermy, but the guy won some games..not a SB..but wasn't terrible. You want a bad coach in the Favre era....look up Ray Fuckin Rhodes.

Yes, Rhodes was the worst but Harlan was an idiot giving Sherman the GM job on top of HC.

[Fritz]

Agreed there, Pug. I never did like the idea of one guy having both jobs. It's too tempting for the coach part to think short term, thus fucking up the team long term. A GM has to think long term most of the time, and Shermy just didn't do that. We know this because of the cap mess and team mess he left.

[pbmax]

Sapp is many things, including a con artist. But stupid is not one of his traits.

[woodbuck27]

Sapp is many things, including a con artist. But stupid is not one of his traits.

Yes Warren Sapp can do stupid things 'sometimes' but he's not stupid. Those stupid things never got his ass fired. We all have done stupid things. Life is an education.

I watch this man all the time and closely on NFL Access and he's respected.

[woodbuck27]

Yes, Rhodes was the worst but Harlan was an idiot giving Sherman the GM job on top of HC.

If Robert E. "Bob" Harlan was an idiot!?

What does that say for the Green Bay Packers Organization?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Harlan

The Green Bay Packers !

[Pugger]

If Robert E. "Bob" Harlan was an idiot!?

What does that say for the Green Bay Packers Organization?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Harlan

The Green Bay Packers !

Okay, if you're gonna split hairs let's say he was idiotic giving Sherman both the GM and HC jobs. Sheesh.

[woodbuck27]

Okay, if you're gonna split hairs let's say he was idiotic giving Sherman both the GM and HC jobs. Sheesh.

That's alot better. I see it this way. Bob Harlan made a mistake. Anyone who makes a mistake shouldn't be framed with a tattoo like judgement. I cannot ever accept that the Chairman of the Green Bay Packers should deserve such a label, Pugger.

In any final analysis. It comes down to the Green Bay Packers Organization and 'no other person (s)'.

The GREEN BAY PACKERS !

[Pugger]

That's alot better. I see it this way. Bob Harlan made a mistake. Anyone who makes a mistake shouldn't be framed with a tattoo like judgement. I cannot ever accept that the Chairman of the Green Bay Packers should deserve such a label, Pugger.

In any final analysis. It comes down to the Green Bay Packers Organization and 'no other person (s)'.

The GREEN BAY PACKERS !

I think you are the only one who thought I was calling Harlan an idiot. But he WAS an idiot when he gave Sherman the GM job but that doesn't label him as such. I would imagine we all do idiotic things at times but that doesn't make us idiots.

[woodbuck27]

I think you are the only one who thought I was calling Harlan an idiot. But he WAS an idiot when he gave Sherman the GM job but that doesn't label him as such. I would imagine we all do idiotic things at times but that doesn't make us idiots.

Do you recall that song and some lyrics that go something like:

"Spin ... go round ... in circles" by Doctor Hook?

It's OK if you feel that way about Bob Harlan. I simply disagree. He errored making Mike Sherman GM and HC.

PACKERS !