Mike McCarthy Retires His Sharpie: Clements Promoted to Playcaller

[pbmax]

First the huge caveat: this report is being generated by human pilot fish Chris Havel and reported out by WDUZ. So reader beware. Wilde has said he can't confirm and no one else has weighed in, oddly.

Clements to be Asst Head Coach with playcalling duties.

Edgar Bennett promoted to Offensive Coordinator.

This report actually makes ZERO sense in the details. TC is already a coordinator and at most might need a pay boost if he adds play caller to list of duties. Bennett doesn't need a promotion to chime in on offense or game management. The only way these moves make sense is if Bennett will literally work with McCarthy ONLY on game management.

[pbmax]

Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde · 11m 11 minutes ago
Texted 3 offensive players. None had heard of McCarthy giving up play-calling duties. Of course they wouldn't have been told yet. #iMessage

Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde · 16m 16 minutes ago
McCarthy at 2014 NFL Meetings: "If I felt we would be better served to have someone else call the plays, frankly, I’d give that up."

[woodbuck27]

It might just be a lot of fog and mirrors?

[Joemailman]

First the huge caveat: this report is being generated by human pilot fish Chris Havel and reported out by WDUZ. So reader beware. Wilde has said he can't confirm and no one else has weighed in, oddly.

Clements to be Asst Head Coach with playcalling duties.

Edgar Bennett promoted to Offensive Coordinator.

This report actually makes ZERO sense in the details. TC is already a coordinator and at most might need a pay boost if he adds play caller to list of duties. Bennett doesn't need a promotion to chime in on offense or game management. The only way these moves make sense is if Bennett will literally work with McCarthy ONLY on game management.

It makes sense to give TC play calling duties if it means keeping him here instead of losing him to a team who will make him OC with play calling duties. Likewise, it might be enough to keep Bennett here instead of losing him to a team that wants to make him OC.

[Joemailman]

Rob DemovskyVerified account ‏@RobDemovsky

From 2 sources: #Packers coach Mike McCarthy looking at different possibilities w/ his offensive/play calling staff but nothing finalized.

[Joemailman]

Tom Silverstein @TomSilverstein · 4m 4 minutes ago

It's about team oversight. If true, MM would listen to calls, just like Belichick @lmlas572: O has been great for years. Why shake it up?
View conversation
0 replies 2 retweets 2 favorites
Tom Silverstein @TomSilverstein · 19m 19 minutes ago

Just saying giving up play calling makes sense after NFCC. @by_JBH: That @TomSilverstein didn’t squash the report adds some credibility.
View conversation
0 replies 1 retweet 3 favorites
Tom Silverstein @TomSilverstein · 23m 23 minutes ago

Team lost its way in NFCC; needed MM's direction. Oversight is hard when calling plays. @jrehor: Cryptic @TomSilverstein More changes coming
View conversation
0 replies 2 retweets 3 favorites
Tom Silverstein @TomSilverstein · 34m 34 minutes ago

It makes sense. More changes coming, but can't confirm those now. @MarkWWellner: if it's @TyDunne or @TomSilverstein I'll believe, not havel
View conversation
0 replies 8 retweets 4 favorites

[pbmax]

It makes sense to give TC play calling duties if it means keeping him here instead of losing him to a team who will make him OC with play calling duties. Likewise, it might be enough to keep Bennett here instead of losing him to a team that wants to make him OC.

OK, but the other team isn't the leverage. If either are under contract, M3 can refuse the move unless they are candidates for the HC position.

The leverage would be if their contracts are up and they haven't re-signed.

[pbmax]

Demo confirmed by Wilde, though there are still no confirmed details.

Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde · 3m 3 minutes ago
Per #NFL source, #Packers coach Mike McCarthy has been "considering" offensive/playcalling changes but hasn't made or shared final decision.

Jason Wilde @jasonjwilde · 1m 1 minute ago
So while I can't say @WDUZ's/Havel's report is 100% correct, it very well could be. Person I talked to didn't have that level of detail.

[pbmax]

It makes sense. More changes coming, but can't confirm those now.

Man, what other changes are coming that Spoon knows about?

And he answers:

Tom Silverstein ‏@TomSilverstein 3m3 minutes ago
What I know about #Packers staff: MM not done finalizing any changes. Team oversight a concern after NFCC. Play-calling part of discussion.

[denverYooper]

Man, what other changes are coming that Spoon knows about?

And he answers:

Tom Silverstein ‏@TomSilverstein 3m3 minutes ago
What I know about #Packers staff: MM not done finalizing any changes. Team oversight a concern after NFCC. Play-calling part of discussion.

I think M3 is heeding your call for an overhaul of his endgame approach. I wonder if he will spend a lot of time in the offseason working on improving his game management.

[Joemailman]

I think M3 is heeding your call for an overhaul of his endgame approach. I wonder if he will spend a lot of time in the offseason working on improving his game management.

If these changes happen, I think 2 things happened late in the NFCC game to cause it. First, the guys on defense were acting like they has won the game with Burnett's INT even though there were 5 minutes left. They needed someone to tell them the game wasn't over. Second, it turns out MM didn't even know Matthews was out of the game during the last 2 Seattle drives in regulation. Not that Matthews would have been sent in there if he had known. But it does suggest Mm was missing a lot because he was so wrapped up dealing with the offensive side of the ball. Not calling plays would make him a better head coach on the sidelines IMO.

[pbmax]

I think M3 is heeding your call for an overhaul of his endgame approach. I wonder if he will spend a lot of time in the offseason working on improving his game management.

Hope so. That th87 list in the other thead, despite the fact that it is only thin slice of overall success, is depressing.

Pete Dougherty ‏@PeteDougherty 7m7 minutes ago
Talked to NFL source, confirmed McCarthy strongly considering changes, including Clements calling plays & Bennett as OC, per @WDUZ report

[pbmax]

If these changes happen, I think 2 things happened late in the NFCC game to cause it. First, the guys on defense were acting like they has won the game with Burnett's INT even though there were 5 minutes left. They needed someone to tell them the game wasn't over. Second, it turns out MM didn't even know Matthews was out of the game during the last 2 Seattle drives in regulation. Not that Matthews would have been sent in there if he had known. But it does suggest Mm was missing a lot because he was so wrapped up dealing with the offensive side of the ball. Not calling plays would make him a better head coach on the sidelines IMO.

Agree completely on both. The fact that McCarthy addressed both in some detail means they are on his mind. Also a good demonstration of how late game strategy does not rely solely on the QB and FG kicker.

[red]

this would be good news if true, my big knock on fat mike is his ability to be overwhelmed at times and to think he's smarter then the other coach, when he usually isn't

mike can now oversee the whole team while someone else lets a-rod call the deep plays on every 3rd and 2

[red]

big promotion for edgar, he'll be a head coach in a year or two now imo

[King Friday]

I think it is a good move if it ultimately happens. The head coach should not be burdened too heavily in one area of the team. McCarthy needs to let the offense stand on its own...and he needs to make sure he's more connected to the defense and special teams.

If anything, it'll help his ability to use the red flag more efficiently...because he won't be worrying about the next play to call.

[denverYooper]

this would be good news if true, my big knock on fat mike is his ability to be overwhelmed at times and to think he's smarter then the other coach, when he usually isn't

mike can now oversee the whole team while someone else lets a-rod call the deep plays on every 3rd and 2

This is the other part of it. That offense will practically run itself because of Rodgers.

[Joemailman]

Would this be good news or bad news for the Kuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhn fans?

[red]

and really, its all about the platy sheet that fat mike is always looking at. M3, TC and rodgers will work on the play sheet during the week, and on sunday, TC will just have to look at the sheet and send in the 2 or 3 options on the sheet to a-rod

[red]

Would this be good news or bad news for the Kuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuhn fans?

i really hope they don't re-sign him no matter what, imo he's gotta be one of the most over rater players in the game, and not worth much more then the vet minimum for what he actually does

[pbmax]

i really hope they don't re-sign him no matter what, imo he's gotta be one of the most over rater players in the game, and not worth much more then the vet minimum for what he actually does

He's actually become a respectable lead blocker. He is the only one out of the players who 'play' FB for the Packers.

[Joemailman]

i really hope they don't re-sign him no matter what, imo he's gotta be one of the most over rater players in the game, and not worth much more then the vet minimum for what he actually does

Actually, he's not really much above the vet minimum now. I think it's about 860,000 for a player with 7-9 years. I think he makes 1 million.

[mraynrand]

If this story had been broken by Brian Williams, it would have more credibility.

[Joemailman]

If this story had been broken by Brian Williams, it would have more credibility.

Nah. Any rumor started by Brian Williams would be immediately shot down.

[oldbutnotdeadyet]

I would consider this the 2nd step on the way to the superbowl, after firing slocum.

[gbgary]

cool if true. i think Rodgers would agree. he and mehcarthy get along great but you could see his frustration at times with the play calling.

[pbmax]

I am less concerned with the play calling as with game management/specific clock situations.

Yoop is right, if this means he overhaul's his approach to the end of games, then its great.

[Pugger]

Could Mike be doing this to keep other teams from pilfering Clements and/or Bennett?

[red]

Could Mike be doing this to keep other teams from pilfering Clements and/or Bennett?

maybe, but are there that many job openings left right now?

[Joemailman]

I would consider this the 2nd step on the way to the superbowl, after firing slocum.

I hope you're not suggesting this requires a 7 step program.

[Joemailman]

FWIW, NFL Network is going with the story. http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000469403/article/tom-clements-takes-over-packers-playcalling-duties

[call_me_ishmael]

He's actually become a respectable lead blocker. He is the only one out of the players who 'play' FB for the Packers.

I would much rather have a big ass Polynesian like the Seahawks had.

[gbgary]

I wonder if it has anything to do with the death of his brother. trying to reduce stress and work load.

[Guiness]

Could Mike be doing this to keep other teams from pilfering Clements and/or Bennett?

I'm surprised Bennett hasn't gotten more attention yet, and if next year goes well for him I expect he'll start to get some calls.

[Rastak]

Why wouldn't the OC be calling the plays? Seems like a hypothetically odd setup.

[Pugger]

I'm surprised Bennett hasn't gotten more attention yet, and if next year goes well for him I expect he'll start to get some calls.

This move might be to keep Bennett around. If this report is true then the only way Edgar will leave now is if another team offers him a HC job. Clements is a pretty sharp guy. I just read his bio on the Packer website and his resume is pretty impressive. You don't graduate from Notre Dame magna cum laude if you are a dummy.

http://www.packers.com/team/coaches/tom-clements/bb67e02f-a2b1-4543-83af-00f437249c9f

[woodbuck27]

If these changes happen, I think 2 things happened late in the NFCC game to cause it. First, the guys on defense were acting like they has won the game with Burnett's INT even though there were 5 minutes left. They needed someone to tell them the game wasn't over. Second, it turns out MM didn't even know Matthews was out of the game during the last 2 Seattle drives in regulation. Not that Matthews would have been sent in there if he had known. But it does suggest Mm was missing a lot because he was so wrapped up dealing with the offensive side of the ball. Not calling plays would make him a better head coach on the sidelines IMO.

That's how I saw it.

[woodbuck27]

Could Mike be doing this to keep other teams from pilfering Clements and/or Bennett?

You make the obvious for need and easy to make changes first after a thorough evaluation.

The focus is winning the NFC and then the Super Bowl. To get there it's obvious there must be some major change on the coaching side. You're aware of Aaron Rodgers reaction post NFCC game. Your aware of a predominance of criticism of MM's play calling and game management. He needs to be more hands on during games and what's going on around him.

Mike McCarthy is feeling other pressure or being pressed to make changes that simply make sense. It's obvious that MM struggles trying to make play calls and manage the games. This struggle is in direct proportion to the overall skill of the opponent. He gets out coached.

Have you studied th87's posts in "ARE WE GIVING AROD A FREE PASS ??????????????????" ?

[Patler]

Why wouldn't the OC be calling the plays? Seems like a hypothetically odd setup.

Considering the OC hasn't called plays ever for MM, what's the difference if its MM or the Assistant HC calling the plays?

MM might be on the cutting edge of something here. There was an article a while back that suggested this very thing. An assistant HC in charge of play calling. The argument was that with as complex as offenses have become in player groupings, the OC has a lot of player management responsibilities during the game. Not an issue for GB and other teams where the HC calls plays, but shouldn't the HC have other things on his mind, too?

So, why not a coach who can focus entirely on play calling duties?

[woodbuck27]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/08/report-packers-considering-changes-to-offensive-staff-play-calling-responsibilities/

Reports: Packers considering changes to offensive staff, play calling responsibilities

Posted by Josh Alper on February 8, 2015, 4:51 PM EST

" Silverstein reports the goal is greater “team oversight,” something that became a concern when the team “lost its way” in that title game loss to the Seahawks. In the past, McCarthy has said he’s willing to make a change with play calling “if I felt we would be better served to have someone else call the plays.” ..."

Comment woodbuck27:

I believe this has to be a positive and hopefully gives the team the edge they wouldn't have as it was on the sidelines.

[Rutnstrut]

But there are so many on here touting how peachy everything is as it is now. Myself, I think this would be a very wise move. I wonder what the odds are that this was started by TT and he is just letting stubby take credit to save face? Probably not, but hey it's the off season and fun to think about things like that.

[woodbuck27]

But there are so many on here touting how peachy everything is as it is now. Myself, I think this would be a very wise move. I wonder what the odds are that this was started by TT and he is just letting stubby take credit to save face? Probably not, but hey it's the off season and fun to think about things like that.

This news may be the death knell of 'Homerism' at Packerrats. :???:

Then I'm thinking ....why take the juices out of this forum!?

Isn't it the case that blindness precedes blind?

I do know this:

You never gain anything in the future with a mere shrug or tossing your hands in the air.

[denverYooper]

No thread is complete without the wails of the disaffected fringe.

[woodbuck27]

No thread is complete without the wails of the disaffected fringe.

Strength to those with discerning minds. :-)

[denverYooper]

Strength to those with discerning minds. :-)

Indeed :)

[pbmax]

Considering the OC hasn't called plays ever for MM, what's the difference if its MM or the Assistant HC calling the plays?

MM might be on the cutting edge of something here. There was an article a while back that suggested this very thing. An assistant HC in charge of play calling. The argument was that with as complex as offenses have become in player groupings, the OC has a lot of player management responsibilities during the game. Not an issue for GB and other teams where the HC calls plays, but shouldn't the HC have other things on his mind, too?

So, why not a coach who can focus entirely on play calling duties?

There you go, arguing for more staff again!

[pbmax]

This move might be to keep Bennett around. If this report is true then the only way Edgar will leave now is if another team offers him a HC job. Clements is a pretty sharp guy. I just read his bio on the Packer website and his resume is pretty impressive. You don't graduate from Notre Dame magna cum laude if you are a dummy.

http://www.packers.com/team/coaches/tom-clements/bb67e02f-a2b1-4543-83af-00f437249c9f

I often get this policy wrong, but I believe that a coach under contract no longer has the right to interview with another team, no matter if the new position is a promotion or not. This is how M3 has previously prevented Philbin, Clements and McAdoo from interviewing (eventually 2 did leave). The only exception is when the interview is for Head Coach.

The only way an assistant is ever free and clear to interview with other teams without permission, is when their contracts expire. Its possible that both Clements and Bennett's contracts are expiring, but no one has reported that, at least that I am aware of.

[pbmax]

But there are so many on here touting how peachy everything is as it is now. Myself, I think this would be a very wise move. I wonder what the odds are that this was started by TT and he is just letting stubby take credit to save face? Probably not, but hey it's the off season and fun to think about things like that.

There's the rub. Most everything is peachy (overall second best winning percentage for 20 years don't happen to average franchises), but nothing is beyond improvement.

You would get not argument that the D didn't need to improve. But Capers wasn't the sole issue. Once the personnel pictured cleared up a bit, Capers got his groove back. Hell, he got it back at the end of last year when Doc Jennings was still his starter at safety.

On offense, while vince made a blistering and persuasive case for the conservative approach in the Seattle game, most would agree that the 4 minute offense tended to slow down WAY too fast. It wasn't a total catastrophe, but could be used better. The Packers have run the clock off against several opponents this year and have passed for first downs in late situations. But the offense didn't take advantage of every high leverage situation they had this year either.

[ThunderDan]

There's the rub. Most everything is peachy (overall second best winning percentage for 20 years don't happen to average franchises), but nothing is beyond improvement.

You would get not argument that the D didn't need to improve. But Capers wasn't the sole issue. Once the personnel pictured cleared up a bit, Capers got his groove back. Hell, he got it back at the end of last year when Doc Jennings was still his starter at safety.

On offense, while vince made a blistering and persuasive case for the conservative approach in the Seattle game, most would agree that the 4 minute offense tended to slow down WAY too fast. It wasn't a total catastrophe, but could be used better. The Packers have run the clock off against several opponents this year and have passed for first downs in late situations. But the offense didn't take advantage of every high leverage situation they had this year either.

While I don't know this as fact, it does seem pretty clear that MM and TT evaluate every aspect of the Packers every year and aren't afraid to make changes. Every player and every coach gets graded. That is how you build and keep a winning NFL franchise.

I am skeptical on the change in play calling responsibilities. Our O has been fantastic for the last 20 plus years. Did Holmgren and Sherman call the O plays when they were head coach?

And last but not least, I can't wait until next year when we get to the 4 minute offense to seal a game and we throw 2 of the 3 downs, don't make a first, only burn 45 seconds off the clock and Red starts screaming how can MM forget about the run game at this point in the game!

Honestly, it doesn't matter who or what is called on O in that situation. If it doesn't work everyone will be screaming that the Pack should have done the exact opposite. Too much run!!!! Too much pass!!!!

I agree we should have been running the football in SEA late in the 4th quarter to burn clock and SEA timeouts. Only an unbelievable string of events occurred that cost us the game. A team collapse after dominating a game for 55 minutes. 97 out of 100 times if GB makes the exact same play calls on O the team wins.

[pbmax]

I agree we should have been running the football in SEA late in the 4th quarter to burn clock and SEA timeouts. Only an unbelievable string of events occurred that cost us the game. A team collapse after dominating a game for 55 minutes. 97 out of 100 times if GB makes the exact same play calls on O the team wins.

Agree with running twice at least. But the pass can't just be on third down like it was in the first clock killing series. If you are going to pass, you have to make it difficult on the D. Hard to argue with the choice of run plays because the QB is limited and its obvious they didn't think he could run play action.

Also agree that its possible the play calling won't get better, we would be doing well if it doesn't get worse considering the Packers led the League in scoring.

However, I hope M3 uses his new found time (if this happens) to rethink those 4th and short at the goal line plays. Its a huge leverage play for the Packers and they kicked twice. Even if you whiff on a 4th down O play, if the team is prepared for the stadium to go wild, you have a scuffling offense backed up to its own goal posts. The field position alone is worth four points.

[ThunderDan]

Agree with running twice at least. But the pass can't just be on third down like it was in the first clock killing series. If you are going to pass, you have to make it difficult on the D. Hard to argue with the choice of run plays because the QB is limited and its obvious they didn't think he could run play action.

Also agree that its possible the play calling won't get better, we would be doing well if it doesn't get worse considering the Packers led the League in scoring.

However, I hope M3 uses his new found time (if this happens) to rethink those 4th and short at the goal line plays. Its a huge leverage play for the Packers and they kicked twice. Even if you whiff on a 4th down O play, if the team is prepared for the stadium to go wild, you have a scuffling offense backed up to its own goal posts. The field position alone is worth four points.

Three in the hand is worth Four in the bush?

[Patler]

There you go, arguing for more staff again!

Ya, I was thinking that. But, that is the way of the league. Average staff size continues to increase.
Seems a bit crazy.

One article said Bennett could remain as WR coach in addition to OC. Apparently several teams have the OC in charge of a position group, too.

Now....if we can just find a Special Teams Assistant- Long Snapper,.........
Come to think of it, shouldn't there be different ones for long (punt) snapping, and "kind of long" snapping (FGs and extra points)?

[woodbuck27]

Three in the hand is worth Four in the bush?

3 X 3 = 9 Pts and the Seattle offense likely starting at it's own 20 yard line or better.

or

Even 1 of three and 7 Pts = 13 pts or 4 More Pts and as it went down in the 4th Qtr:

The Packers secure the 'W' with clock management; not forced to drive late to try to at least gain a tie game in regulation.Too many times we've seen Mike McCathy call a game to secure a tie (or come up short) when more aggressive play calling in that game would have secured easy wins.

The good news.

Mike McCarthy won't be calling the plays as at least an attempt to exceed his style/personality and get the Packers past the real contenders and a Super Bowl. Real hope exceeds 'the same ole' and coming up short.

GO PACK GO !

[Pugger]

You make the obvious for need and easy to make changes first after a thorough evaluation.

The focus is winning the NFC and then the Super Bowl. To get there it's obvious there must be some major change on the coaching side. You're aware of Aaron Rodgers reaction post NFCC game. Your aware of a predominance of criticism of MM's play calling and game management. He needs to be more hands on during games and what's going on around him.

Mike McCarthy is feeling other pressure or being pressed to make changes that simply make sense. It's obvious that MM struggles trying to make play calls and manage the games. This struggle is in direct proportion to the overall skill of the opponent. He gets out coached.

Have you studied th87's posts in "ARE WE GIVING AROD A FREE PASS ??????????????????" ?

You know very well I've read that thread. I just have a different opinion than you do about Mike's play calling. Is that allowed Woody? Good grief. Why are you so condescending towards me at times? Don't be such a Neanderthal. Just because I'm not a man doesn't mean I don't know anything about football.

If McCarthy feels this move will make the team better I'm all for it. I suspect he wasn't thrilled to learn from reporters in his post game presser that Clay was out of the game late in regulation and Sherman's injury. I doubt we'll see a drastic change in our offense if indeed these reports are true.

[Pugger]

I often get this policy wrong, but I believe that a coach under contract no longer has the right to interview with another team, no matter if the new position is a promotion or not. This is how M3 has previously prevented Philbin, Clements and McAdoo from interviewing (eventually 2 did leave). The only exception is when the interview is for Head Coach.

The only way an assistant is ever free and clear to interview with other teams without permission, is when their contracts expire. Its possible that both Clements and Bennett's contracts are expiring, but no one has reported that, at least that I am aware of.

You might be right. I now recall Mac recently blocked a team from interviewing Van Pelt. We are all just speculating here anyway. This move may be just freeing up Mac to oversee everything on game days and nothing more.

[woodbuck27]

You know very well I've read that thread. I just have a different opinion than you do about Mike's play calling. Is that allowed Woody? Good grief. Why are you so condescending towards me at times? Don't be such a Neanderthal. Just because I'm not a man doesn't mean I don't know anything about football.

If McCarthy feels this move will make the team better I'm all for it. I suspect he wasn't thrilled to learn from reporters in his post game presser that Clay was out of the game late in regulation and Sherman's injury. I doubt we'll see a drastic change in our offense if indeed these reports are true.

" You know very well I've read that thread." Pugger

I asked the question (as just a maybe?) you hadn't read and then got the jest of th87's analysis.

Your opinion is 'of course' yours. You can defend that as you please.

Your poo pooing the changes. Understanding th87's efforts of analysis in my view supports that someone other than Mike McCarthy may 'in fact' call plays better. That this change was due. The results being positive or not?

That will be a wait and see and another evaluation and possible adjustment in the future.


" Good grief. Why are you so condescending towards me at times? Don't be such a Neanderthal. Just because I'm not a man doesn't mean I don't know anything about football." Pugger

Feel as you may about that. Your just another member here to me. Stand by your beliefs and do so (if I may suggest) without bringing sexism into it. If you demand a certain courtesy then so may others at Packerrats may demand the same. That's not realistic here. That's not a part of what Packerrats is.

I don't treat you without courtesy and respect. I may not always agree with you.

[ThunderDan]

Your poo pooing the changes. Understanding th87's efforts of analysis in my view supports that someone other than Mike McCarthy may 'in fact' call plays better. That this change was due. The results being positive or not?



I thought the analysis of th87 showed that ARod shouldn't be given a free pass in the end of game situations; that ARod needed to improve in the last part of the 4th quarter in close games when we are trailing.

And until we have data for all of the other teams and QBs, trying to make a broad conclusion from one data point is crazy.

[Pugger]

" You know very well I've read that thread." Pugger

I asked the question (as just a maybe?) you hadn't read and then got the jest of th87's analysis.

Your opinion is 'of course' yours. You can defend that as you please.

Your poo pooing the changes. Understanding th87's efforts of analysis in my view supports that someone other than Mike McCarthy may 'in fact' call plays better. That this change was due. The results being positive or not?

That will be a wait and see and another evaluation and possible adjustment in the future.


" Good grief. Why are you so condescending towards me at times? Don't be such a Neanderthal. Just because I'm not a man doesn't mean I don't know anything about football." Pugger

Feel as you may about that. Your just another member here to me. Stand by your beliefs and do so (if I may suggest) without bringing sexism into it. If you demand a certain courtesy then so may others at Packerrats may demand the same. That's not realistic here. That's not a part of what Packerrats is.

I don't treat you without courtesy and respect. I may not always agree with you.

I'm not poo pooing the changes at all. I think it is a good move, frankly. Now Mike can oversee everything on game day and I doubt we'll see a big change in our offense. I've never had an issue with MM's play calling. IMO most of the time when plays don't work it is an execution problem. If our offense converts a few more 3rd downs the outcome of the NFCC game is very different and we aren't discussing most of the stuff on this forum right now.

I guess it is your choice of words towards me and condescending tone that bothers me. I try to treat everyone here with courtesy no matter who they are except perhaps at times with trolls like Tank. We do banter here with colorful language that isn't seen on other forums. I don't have problem with that. Some of the kidding around and teasing is fun. But I'm not some young kid who just fell off the turnip truck. I've been watching football longer than you might think.

[mraynrand]

Not an issue for GB and other teams where the HC calls plays, but shouldn't the HC have other things on his mind, too?

There's a whole set of gestures and gesticulations that a HC needs to develop to be truly considered great.

http://img.pandawhale.com/86317-Pete-Carroll-pointing-laughing-kc3y.gif

http://img.pandawhale.com/79815-Jim-Harbaugh-Pete-Carrol-angry-1hKm.gif

[3irty1]

Considering the OC hasn't called plays ever for MM, what's the difference if its MM or the Assistant HC calling the plays?

MM might be on the cutting edge of something here. There was an article a while back that suggested this very thing. An assistant HC in charge of play calling. The argument was that with as complex as offenses have become in player groupings, the OC has a lot of player management responsibilities during the game. Not an issue for GB and other teams where the HC calls plays, but shouldn't the HC have other things on his mind, too?

So, why not a coach who can focus entirely on play calling duties?

I suspect the reason for not having more play-calling specialist coaches is because they'd be obvious targets of poaching if they were any good at their job. A HC who calls plays is really the only way to ensure continuity.

[woodbuck27]

I thought the analysis of th87 showed that ARod shouldn't be given a free pass in the end of game situations; that ARod needed to improve in the last part of the 4th quarter in close games when we are trailing.

And until we have data for all of the other teams and QBs, trying to make a broad conclusion from one data point is crazy.

I don't give a damn what other teams are doing ThunderDan. What would have been to use your word 'crazy'; would have been to see Mike McCarthy calling plays again next season.

Shared blame between Aaron Rodgers and Mike McCarthy's conservative play calling to protect leads instead of being aggressive and simply crushing the opposition? We're aware that Aaron Rodgers commands a good share of the play calling. It's not his style to just get by on offense in any game. That's more of how MM plays it.

This decision to alter who calls plays is more than just the NFCC and Seattle.

In Seattle and the NFCC game 'the audible' was compromised by a) the crowd noise B) Aaron Rodgers limited mobility.

Looking at that collapse. What contributed to an outstanding number of errors. What bite the Packers in the ass most; was MM's conservative play calls early in the game; when Seattle was gift wrapping the Packers the game and Mike McCarthy refused to take advantage.

In my view of things and what the Packers needed to do looking to next season is make a change. Obviously the Powers in the Packer organization agreed.

My analysis clearly found that changes had to be made on ST's and certainly in regards to that and the punting game. kicking protection and KO returns. From watching games and Mike McCarthy it was obvious to me that the same patterns of conservatism showed up. I record and study every Packer game I can get. I see his conservatism. I see his record tossing flags. I see him kicking FG's when he should punt. I see him with the blinders on and not aware of things as much as he should be.

His unawareness of his best defensive players status (Clay Matthews) late in the NFCC was damning. When Clay Matthews left that game it began to slip away.

I concur with your suggestion ThunderDan.

Why not take the lead and determine just what exacatly caused 4th Qtr. comebacks to fail? What caused two score leads to become reduced to single score leads?

or

Use all the time that might take to simply applaud the changes we all see happening. :-)

[woodbuck27]

I'm not poo pooing the changes at all. I think it is a good move, frankly. Now Mike can oversee everything on game day and I doubt we'll see a big change in our offense. I've never had an issue with MM's play calling. IMO most of the time when plays don't work it is an execution problem. If our offense converts a few more 3rd downs the outcome of the NFCC game is very different and we aren't discussing most of the stuff on this forum right now.

I guess it is your choice of words towards me and condescending tone that bothers me. I try to treat everyone here with courtesy no matter who they are except perhaps at times with trolls like Tank. We do banter here with colorful language that isn't seen on other forums. I don't have problem with that. Some of the kidding around and teasing is fun. But I'm not some young kid who just fell off the turnip truck. I've been watching football longer than you might think.

GO PACK GO !

[Smidgeon]

I suspect the reason for not having more play-calling specialist coaches is because they'd be obvious targets of poaching if they were any good at their job. A HC who calls plays is really the only way to ensure continuity.

Unless they have the "Assistant HC" title...

[pbmax]

Three in the hand is worth Four in the bush?

I can see it being hard to turn down 3 on the first drive. But the second was handed to you. Up 6 is great but not a huge deficit. A 4th down TD there was well worth the effort, especially after a Seattle TO left their offense deflated.

[pbmax]

I suspect the reason for not having more play-calling specialist coaches is because they'd be obvious targets of poaching if they were any good at their job. A HC who calls plays is really the only way to ensure continuity.

Hoody has probably provided some impetus in the other direction. At one point I think he had a ball boy calling plays after his OCs left to be Head Coaches.

[pbmax]

There is a bit of a disconnect in tying these changes to the 4 minute offense. Of all the late game calumny's, this was not the most egregious example (might be the worst loss, but had multiple causes beyond the 4 minute offense) of the mis-application of the 4 minute offense. Mike even waited until 5 minutes were left.

I suspect that M3 and T2 thought that game should have been decisively in the Packer win column and look at least at the 4th quarter as poorly managed.

I hope he takes the time to alter the 4MO and reconsiders the early 4th and goals, but I think its more the 4th quarter game facts (Thomas, Sherman, Matthews injuries) that have them upset.

[Rastak]

Considering the OC hasn't called plays ever for MM, what's the difference if its MM or the Assistant HC calling the plays?

MM might be on the cutting edge of something here. There was an article a while back that suggested this very thing. An assistant HC in charge of play calling. The argument was that with as complex as offenses have become in player groupings, the OC has a lot of player management responsibilities during the game. Not an issue for GB and other teams where the HC calls plays, but shouldn't the HC have other things on his mind, too?

So, why not a coach who can focus entirely on play calling duties?

Look, having one guy come up with the game plan (at least that's the majority of OC responsibility) and having someone else call the plays he puts into the gameplan isn't remotely unheard of. Head coaches do it all the time, just seems odd that a guy who isn't the head coach and isn't responsible for putting the gameplan together would.

[red]

maybe fat mikes vagina hurts because of everyone ripping on his play calling, maybe TC is a patsy?

i remember i once had a boss that told me and my coworkers that he "pays us to be wrong", so he never has to look bad

[pbmax]

What would have been to use your word 'crazy'; would have been to see Mike McCarthy calling plays again next season.


Yeah, 1st in the league in scoring is kinda crazy, especially when you are doing it all wrong.

[woodbuck27]

Yeah, 1st in the league in scoring is kinda crazy, especially when you are doing it all wrong.


First in the league in scoring but you certainly know there was no balance between what the Packers did at home Vs on the road.

[Pugger]

First in the league in scoring but you certainly know there was no balance between what the Packers did at home Vs on the road.

And this is really puzzling. In years past our road record was much better than it was this past season. :huh:

[pbmax]

And this is really puzzling. In years past our road record was much better than it was this past season. :huh:

New center and pass pro explain much of the variance. Once Bulaga got healthy and Linsley more experience, it wasn't as much of an issue.

That said, M3 has a very good road record overall. It was his home record that used to worry people.

[woodbuck27]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2358925-pros-outweigh-the-cons-in-packers-removing-mike-mccarthy-as-playcaller

Pros Outweigh the Cons in Packers Removing Mike McCarthy as Playcaller

By: Zach Kruse , NFC North Lead Writer

Feb 9, 2015

POLL:

Should Mike McCarthy relinquish his role as playcaller?

Yes 70.9%

No 11.7%

Unsure 17.4%

Total votes: 2,523

[ThunderDan]

Excellent, we are going to go to running the Packers by majority vote.

Only two more years until we are fighting for a 6-10 record like back in the 70s.

[woodbuck27]

Excellent, we are going to go to running the Packers by majority vote.

Only two more years until we are fighting for a 6-10 record like back in the 70s.

Your optimism is noted and recorded. :-)

For you to be correct Packer failure is imminent.

I believe your wrong.

[mraynrand]

Excellent, we are going to go to running the Packers by majority vote.

Only two more years until we are fighting for a 6-10 record like back in the 70s.


But there are so many on here touting how peachy everything is as it is now....

[ThunderDan]

Your optimism is noted and recorded. :-)

For you to be correct Packer failure is imminent.

I believe your wrong.

I guess you missed my point. Please reread my post. I said if majority vote runs the Packers.

It is fun discussing the Packers and our views. But we have no idea what it truly takes to run an NFL franchise from day-to-day or year-to-year. While I might like or not like certain decisions, I am happy to let TT and MM make the choices.

[woodbuck27]

I guess you missed my point. Please reread my post. I said if majority vote runs the Packers.

It is fun discussing the Packers and our views. But we have no idea what it truly takes to run an NFL franchise from day-to-day or year-to-year. While I might like or not like certain decisions, I am happy to let TT and MM make the choices.

Did I misinterpret sarcasm in your post?

To get to the grass roots of it:

The point of producing a Poll's results is to demonstrate how Packer fans view the changes in play calling responsibility that came about by a combination of necessity and a coaching/management decision.

Packer fans are considered amongst the most knowledgeable of all NFL fans. Fans are capable of seeing the needs for change. I certainly saw this need and I'm positive tens of thousands of other Packer fans did as well.

I also do believe that Aaron Rodgers and other Packer players are totally onboard with this internal decision to make things run better overall. If the change doesn't work out then a reassessment will be made along with an adjustment.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Finally! It's official. Stubby confirmed it at his noon press conference. Clements will call plays.

One less thing for me to gripe about...And I've been griping about it all season. :-)

[Smidgeon]

Finally! It's official. Stubby confirmed it at his noon press conference. Clements will call plays.

One less thing for me to gripe about...And I've been griping about it all season. :-)

And Clements is the one that AR absolutely raved about. I'm down with this.

[Smidgeon]

I never thought I'd be excited about coaching changes, but something about this has me all rosy.

I think until this point, McCarthy has been operating as an Offensive Coordinator who is also a head coach, and that's been his specialty. Now, I think we'll see just how good of a coach he is. I wouldn't be surprised if the other facets of the team improved dramatically with his attention. It's no surprise that the offense has always been good and that the defense improved when he started paying more attention. Now watch special teams get its collective rear in gear.

I'm lauding this move.

He's finally becoming a fully formed head coach. And he already was pretty good.

[Smidgeon]

Interestingly enough, I thought it worth noting that the playcalling change wasn't something T2 pushed for. It was all M3.

Actually, that doesn't surprise me, but it's worth noting for the contingent who thinks T2 is pulling M3's strings.

[mraynrand]

I don't think this is change for the sake of change, and I think this is in response to a cold evaluation of the season and attempts to get better. I like it. A good organization is always looking to improve.

[Pugger]

I don't think this is change for the sake of change, and I think this is in response to a cold evaluation of the season and attempts to get better. I like it. A good organization is always looking to improve.

Bravo to Mike for looking at himself in the mirror and not shy away from making a change like this. Not many HCs would do this. The most intriguing development IMO is the hiring of Montgomery. I suspect they are grooming him to eventually be Dom Capers' heir apparent.

[BZnDallas]

I agree with y'all. It seems like this team has been lacking MMs focus on the rest of the team. Now that he's going to be more head coach I can see improvement all the way around. If that happens this team can be scary good and scary good for a long time as they are still sooo young. I love the idea of a smooth transition to a new D coordinator. Year or two too late, but its a great idea you can really only accomplish if your current D coordinator knows he's leaving soon. And this new guy Montgomery can share some knowledge with Capers and maybe keep Capers from going off the deep end from time to time. Only time will tell I suppose.

[denverYooper]

I don't think this is change for the sake of change, and I think this is in response to a cold evaluation of the season and attempts to get better. I like it. A good organization is always looking to improve.

Agreed. I have to wonder if the death of his brother after their playoff loss really brought things into sharp focus for M3. This seems like a move aimed at both improving the team's overall tactical direction and reducing Stubby's workload.

[MadScientist]

Well if the Packers are as innovative in play calling next year as they are in creating positions for assistants, they'll go 19-0.

[woodbuck27]

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTjJHvgTgBH4CbrGh8QDIrAtp9TFtOaN 6eZwNryhMEKZBhfNmrsrg

EVERYONE SEEMS HAPPY ... HAPPIER ! :-)

Now .... if wist43 can just 'dial up 'FIRE Dom Capers' it would be perfection.

GO PACKERS ! GO PACK GO ! !

[woodbuck27]

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSDLnhdpUzqMqDwPS6MafXkc0zEFcePl o2YqqTVulIPlfm47tmXQw

[Carolina_Packer]

Excellent, we are going to go to running the Packers by majority vote.

Only two more years until we are fighting for a 6-10 record like back in the 70s.

6-10 after 1978, so I guess 4-10 prior to 1978? :-)

[Carolina_Packer]

I heard Rich Gannon on his show on Sirius-XM NFL Radio saying he didn't like the move because he thought so highly of MM's play calling ability in the league and thought that TC might not be as good as McCarthy. I hope TC doesn't miss a beat, or that McCarthy doesn't get the itch back to call plays if Green Bay's offense struggles early on as they've been prone to do lately.

[pbmax]

I am going on record as being worried about this move(s).

The one clear area he could have known more and adjusted to was Matthews injury in regulation, but he claims not much will change.

On special teams, this might make a difference as a coach and several writers suggested having the HC in the meetings is going to focus the vets on the units.

On offense, he didn't need to improve as a play caller but has passed that off. He did need to retool his situational coaching and we get no idea if that will happen. Being in all three coaches meetings isn't going to help that.

I think there is opportunity here (after all he isn't going to tell us everything) but I also think there is danger.

Not to mention I don't know how Van Pelt is going to coach QBs and WRs together.

[Patler]

Obviously, there is risk in this. The only aspect of the Packers that has been consistently good has been the offensive output. Just as obviously, MM was a huge part of that, so changing that is risky.

On the other hand, defense and special teams have ranged from very bad to lackluster during most of MM's time, only reaching "OK" a couple times. If MM can instill in those groups the same focus and consistency that the offense has had, the results could be significant.

It's hard to make significant improvement in most things without undertaking some degree of risk. These changes will make for an interesting subplot to the 2015 season.

[vince]

I've never seen this type of arrangement of coaches. I like it, though it does add a few chiefs to the reservation.

I think this is a big vote of confidence in Rodgers' control and command of the offense too. Clements, the former quarterback, seems to have a constant chip on his shoulder. He hates the media so he's got that going for him.

McCarthy is looking right over their shoulder, and my sense is that, like others have said, McCarthy has a way of improving what he gets involved with, so I'd say there's a benefit to him becoming more involved in all three phases.

Rodgers' on-field command of the offense somewhat reduces the importance of playcalling role anyway. The obvious rapport that Clements and Rodgers have puts two like-minded QBs in command, with the proven playcaller right there.

Edgar Bennett too, is obviously a stud of a coach too in McCarthy's eyes, and his increased role would seem to be a good thing. But let's face it, he's still 3rd in command (probably 4th actually behind Rodgers) so he's covered too if coordinator inexperience rears it's head.

I'd say the offense remains in capable hands - as long as Rodgers stays upright anyway. You got a coach on the field and three coaches on the sideline. Between em all they'll get it figured out.

[woodbuck27]

I'm not so naïve to imagine that after nine years Mike McCarthy suddenly had the light come on and all by himself decided to make so many important changes with accompanying risk. Mike McCarthy is easy to profile as a conservative man in terms of decision making.

a) He's rarely disturbed the teams coaching staff unless of a departure. An exception was bringing in Dom Capers as DC.

b) Suddenly....gone is the Mike McCarthy with that signature look clutching and hiding behind a play sheet; so absorbed in the play calling. I believe I read that to come before a microphone and make a formal announcement of this (personal decision?) before the media ....wasn't easy. If you make the decision then shouldn't it be easy to be proud to announce that?

c) Suddenly after nine seasons, Mike McCarthy almost magically came to the realization that he misses the things that a Head Coach is responsible for off the field (offense, defense and ST's), and on it during games. The HC is loaded with responsibility and must certainly be held responsible after designations.

Suddenly for Mike McCarthy the 'light came on' and he arrives at the realization (as many fans already see) !

i) That he fails to know when to toss a challenge flag so as not to blow a time out.

ii) Otherwise fails to call out officiating on their decisions because he's so concerned with his next play call.

iii) That he's unaware of the status of his MVP on 'D' (Clay Matthews) over an approximately 20 minutes of real time (including commercial breaks).

iv) That he.... didn't ensure proper alignment on the faked FG that was the catalyst for the Seattle comeback. Forget blocking a FG attempt when you have a 16 point lead. To allow a TD was simply outrageous incompetence. MM was ultimately responsible for that error in strategy. He was also responsible for ensuring that Brandon Bostick knew exactly what he had to do on the hands team on the successful Seattle onside kick.

Don't blame the player that you train and place in the action. It's MM's responsibility to ensure every man knows his assignment and simply ..... does his job !

As the Packers Head Coach he's responsible for it all after what the teams GM gives to him to work with..

Suddenly Mike McCarthy of his own avails hands (maybe?) what he does best over to a man Tom Clements who he's had on his staff for nine years in two capacities (QB Coach and the last three seasons as the Packers OC). That's the same Mike McCarthy that post NFCC game got all pissy on Jan. 18 RE: any question on his play calling post game and after a historic team collapse and blown Super Bowl bid. " He ...wasn't going to question 'his' play calls."



That ... wasn't the correct response. Too many of MM's responses wern't correct.


Suddenly ....and within just three weeks (and with about a week away due to a family matter of loss). All by himself. That post game Mike McCarthy makes many significant changes to his coaching staff including:

a) Dismissing a ST Coordinator (and rumored friend) that has been questionable in terms of competence for over the top too many years and still employed with MM's grace.

b) Hiring two more additions to his coaching staff. Former San Francisco 49ers offensive line coach Mike Solari was hired to assist offensive line coach James Campen and Jerry Montgomery was hired to help with the defensive front and assist DC Dom Capers.

c) Promote Tom Clements from Packers OC to Associate Head Coach with play calling responsibility.

d) Replace Clements with Edgar Bennett as OC.

e) Add responsibility to the job description of coach Alex Van Pelt who's now QB's coach and WR's coach.

f) Address the ST vacancy by formally (after rumor)...make Ron Zook ST Coordinator and Jason Simmons his assistant.

Mike McCarthy as Green Bay Packers Head Coach has little to celebrate since 2010-11 but failure in the post season (playoffs). His losing record screamed ...change.

I know that Aaron Rodgers wasn't happy how the NFCC game was handled from his HC's perspective.

I know that a responsibility of a competent Head Coach is to groom his coaching staff for promotion. Mike McCarthy has been obviously stagnant or neglected that duty until yesterday, 12 Feb. 2015.

I believe that Mike McCarthy was allowed the privilege he's earned as a solid Head Coach looking at the entire NFL as a comparison. I believe that Mike McCarthy was allowed to save face. I believe that Mike McCarthy was by certain means and persuasion called out to make these post NFCC game changes and to do so as a clear result of the monumental failure that has been brewing for the last four years.

If he failed to do so. I believe Mike McCarthy might very well have been put on notice. Another season like we've endured since the last Super Bowl might have ended in his dismissal.

[denverYooper]

Obviously, there is risk in this. The only aspect of the Packers that has been consistently good has been the offensive output. Just as obviously, MM was a huge part of that, so changing that is risky.

On the other hand, defense and special teams have ranged from very bad to lackluster during most of MM's time, only reaching "OK" a couple times. If MM can instill in those groups the same focus and consistency that the offense has had, the results could be significant.

It's hard to make significant improvement in most things without undertaking some degree of risk. These changes will make for an interesting subplot to the 2015 season.

This is where I see it. M3, from what I gather, has mostly focused on the offense and given wide berth to the other coaches to run their areas of the team. Maybe it is his approach and preparation that need to be percolated through the rest of the areas of the team.

[ThunderDan]

Just heard on the radio this morning that it was MM who wanted all of the changes.

He went to TT and Mark Murphy with his year-end evaluation of the team and said here are the change I think we need. Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. MM said that's how he wanted to run the team next year and TT and Murphy agreed.

[woodbuck27]

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Journal/Issues/2009/02/20090209/Opinion/NFL-Head-Coaches-Hold-The-Toughest-CEO-Job-In-America.aspx

NFL head coaches hold the toughest CEO job in America

PATRICK LENCIONI

Published February 9, 2009

[woodbuck27]

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1666834-a-detailed-list-of-an-nfl-coachs-responsibility

A Detailed List of an NFL Coach's Responsibility

By Andrew Garda , Featured Columnist

Jun 9, 2013

Comment woodbuck27:

This is from BR yet a decent one page and informative read.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Just heard on the radio this morning that it was MM who wanted all of the changes.

He went to TT and Mark Murphy with his year-end evaluation of the team and said here are the change I think we need. Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. MM said that's how he wanted to run the team next year and TT and Murphy agreed.

If true, I give Stubby all the credit in the world.

Obviously, all was not right with the status quo. A team cannot suffer the collapse we did in the NFCC and not try to prevent the same thing from happening in the future. It's typical that upper management wanted to look at the collapse as an aberration. They're satisfied with success. Stubby actually believes his own press clippings. His goal is a Super Bowl win and last year he was as close as he could come to a Super Bowl...and failed. Big time.

As all good leaders do, he took charge of the situation and shook things up. He wants more accountability in phases of the team he had neglected in the past.

Stubby swallowed his ego and did what he thought necessary to reach his goal.

Great stuff. So great I might even stop calling him Stubby.

...Nah, Stubby it is.

[woodbuck27]

Just heard on the radio this morning that it was MM who wanted all of the changes.

He went to TT and Mark Murphy with his year-end evaluation of the team and said here are the change I think we need. Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. MM said that's how he wanted to run the team next year and TT and Murphy agreed.

" Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. " ThunderDan

Then what are we the Green Bay Packer fans to think of the decision making skills of Mark Murphy and Ted Thompson?

Of their overall management skills?

[pbmax]

Just heard on the radio this morning that it was MM who wanted all of the changes.

He went to TT and Mark Murphy with his year-end evaluation of the team and said here are the change I think we need. Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. MM said that's how he wanted to run the team next year and TT and Murphy agreed.

Did they mention who the source was?

Gives the lie to my theory Ted was pushing for M3 to pull back a bit.

Get the feeling M3 was steamed his team was knocking Seattle around and didn't finish the job?

[Maxie the Taxi]

Did they mention who the source was?

Gives the lie to my theory Ted was pushing for M3 to pull back a bit.

Get the feeling M3 was steamed his team was knocking Seattle around and didn't finish the job?

Ba da bing!

[ThunderDan]

Did they mention who the source was?

Gives the lie to my theory Ted was pushing for M3 to pull back a bit.

Get the feeling M3 was steamed his team was knocking Seattle around and didn't finish the job?

It was Tom Pippins from Fox 6 Sports out of Milwaukee who said TT and Murphy were not onboard with MM's changes initially.

[Smidgeon]

Did they mention who the source was?

Gives the lie to my theory Ted was pushing for M3 to pull back a bit.

Get the feeling M3 was steamed his team was knocking Seattle around and didn't finish the job?

M3 was the source. It was attributed to him in the JS blog about the changes:

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/291700331.html

[Deputy Nutz]

I think this was a smart move by McCarthy, but one that was an outcome forced by the loss to Seattle. Maybe the loss pointed out the obvious to McCarthy that you can't oversee the entire team and call plays. He just went and increased his coaching staff so that is telling me that he saw some holes and is going to the wall to fix things before they become glaring weaknesses. I think coaches are now going to be accountable for the decisions with McCarthy. No longer can McCarthy just rely on his coaches to make crucial decisions without his input. If he would have conferred with Slocum before the fake field goal maybe things would have played out differently, if he knew that his best defensive player was hanging out on the side line the last 5 minutes of the game he could have addressed the issues and got him back out on the field.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Bingo, Nutz!

[pbmax]

M3 was the source. It was attributed to him in the JS blog about the changes:

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/291700331.html


(On making the change) Where I was prior years is irrelevant. Something I felt very strongly about. When I told Ted about the decision, he was like, 'Woah, are you sure you want to give up play calling?"

Yeah, but a) there is no Murphy and b) that doesn't mean Ted didn't say something has to change with game management.

I can agree I am surprised this was the change.

[pbmax]

I think if M3 knows Matthews is out it changes the Offense more than the Defense. He doesn't overrule medical; in fact I am not sure there has been a single case of him doing so. He's more likely to fib about what he knows about how bad an injury is.

Not attacking Sherman was just a plain failure. If Nelson or Cobb don't know then people aren't just paying attention.

[Smidgeon]

Also from GBPG:

At his press conference Thursday to announce the coaching changes, McCarthy said that even general manager Ted Thompson and team president Mark Murphy were taken aback when he informed them of his plans to hand over play calling to assistant Tom Clements.

[pbmax]

Also from GBPG:

At his press conference Thursday to announce the coaching changes, McCarthy said that even general manager Ted Thompson and team president Mark Murphy were taken aback when he informed them of his plans to hand over play calling to assistant Tom Clements.

OK. Probably a partial quote at JSO then.

[Pugger]

" Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. " ThunderDan

Then what are we the Green Bay Packer fans to think of the decision making skills of Mark Murphy and Ted Thompson?

Of their overall management skills?

I don't think anything is wrong with their management skills. They are giving MM a compliment - they like his playcalling abilities and might not agree with Mike that he should have ceded that. And Mike can always change his mind if it doesn't work out.

[pbmax]

" Both TT and Murphy thought that MM should continue play calling and urged MM to not make as drastic of a change. " ThunderDan

Then what are we the Green Bay Packer fans to think of the decision making skills of Mark Murphy and Ted Thompson?

Of their overall management skills?

McCarthy said he looked at a couple of different combinations of restructures before deciding on this. I doubt changing play calling duties is what either Ted or Murphy asked for, despite suggestions here from red (I think) and Maxie along those lines.

The Packers have one of the top 3 offenses in the NFL since M3 started calling the plays. You do not start by fixing what isn't broken when looking to improve. If anything, this is an admission that the other areas of the team need help.

Other play callers, Bill Walsh, Joe Gibbs (I think he called his own offense but not certain), Holmgren, Shanahan, Gruden and Payton have won big.

There are other ways to structure game management and situational football so the HC isn't overwhelmed. This is just one option.

[woodbuck27]

McCarthy said he looked at a couple of different combinations of restructures before deciding on this. I doubt changing play calling duties is what either Ted or Murphy asked for, despite suggestions here from red (I think) and Maxie along those lines.

The Packers have one of the top 3 offenses in the NFL since M3 started calling the plays. You start by fixing what isn't broken when looking to improve. If anything, this is an admission that the other areas of the team need help.

Other play callers, Bill Walsh, Joe Gibbs (I think he called his own offense but not certain), Holmgren, Shanahan, Gruden and Payton have won big.

There are other ways to structure game management and situational football so the HC isn't overwhelmed. This is just one option.

Backing up a bit.......

RE: MM being HOT after games and closed to media questions that can corner you:

I can sympathize with Mike McCarthy and the stress he was under immediately following the NFCC game.

Who could be at their best in such a dramatic case as that game turned out. The shock factor was very much alive.

When he gets a question RE: the integrity of his play calls he might take that personal as he's right at that time processing it all and he knew there was a whole lot wrong in that game as Aaron Rodgers and other Packers and .... well thousands of people did. He wasn't going to take all the blame at least not at that time without a thorough analysis. That's a normal human survival instinct. Secondly the media looks for the sensational story. He's got to be sensible enough not to give it to them.

We know here at Packerrats that there were 15-20 things obviously wrong and Green Bay Packers and the NFCC game.

It was then expected that there had to be change. If you weren't there you certainly weren't paying attention.
'
It's MM's job with 'emphasis on real and honest', to act on the negative (s) and certainly not dismiss them. Maybe those he reports to ( TT and ? Mark Murphy) simply waited to see what he came up with after some exhaustive and deadly honest analysis. MM has also just suffered the loss of a younger brother.

Maybe when he comes forward with a decision to drop play calling that surprized them and so they (gave MM) spoke the words to him they thought he might normally hope to hear?

"Drop play calling Mike..are you sure?"

I'm totally ignorant as to the politics and the NFL Owner > GM and > HC relationship. I mean in terms of manners, ethics and decorum. Hopefully normal decency presides.

If I was MM's GM and gave him free rein as the Packer HC and saw what we saw in that NFCC game. Ethically I couldn't FIRE MM. I might be crossing a boundary even questioning his game management and play calling. ie

"After all I have him installed in his position and without glaring issues I should stand by him through years end on into the total review and evaluation > the next season."

There's this too.

Ted Thompson isn't exactly the most visible GM. In fact one of my major issues with TT is that he's so behind the scene. Maybe he simply hoped or trusted after the flop in Seattle that MM had to get this one right?

[Carolina_Packer]

If Sean Payton has another bad season, he might consider the same idea, especially if this improves things for the Packers. Although, one could argue that Green Bay was 2 minutes and change from a Super Bowl, and while the way they blew it was disappointing, they were so close, which is better than New Orleans can say this year.

Can anyone here recall another team that had a head coach who called plays and removed the responsibilities from himself? I know in Dallas Jason Garrett had the responsibilities removed, but I'm not sure it was his idea.

[Deputy Nutz]

There is no owner so the accountability will always fall on McCarthy and Thompson. It seems like Thompson never speaks, so the focus fall on McCarthy to be the figure head for the entire franchise and has to take the biggest brunt of fan disappointment and questioning the direction of the franchise.

[woodbuck27]

There is no owner so the accountability will always fall on McCarthy and Thompson. It seems like Thompson never speaks, so the focus fall on McCarthy to be the figure head for the entire franchise and has to take the biggest brunt of fan disappointment and questioning the direction of the franchise.

TT is something else. :???:

[Patler]

For me, it's quite simple. MM should be the one who hires the coaches and defines their duties. He knows what success he has had as the play caller. He also knows if he feels he lacks the necessary controls and inputs elsewhere on the team because of the distractions of play calling. He also knows if he feels "stale" as a play caller, if he is losing his edge, if he and AR mesh as well as they could, if AR has earned the right to have more control/input, if that can be done better thru Clement, etc.. He knows Clement well, he knows AR well. He knows their strengths and weaknesses. Maybe he feels he himself is burning out, and he needs to rejuvenate himself by changing his involvements with D and ST.

If MM thinks this is the best thing to do, they have to do it; because it is MM's job to make these types of decisions for the team. Ultimately, he is the one who will be held responsible.

Great improvement always entails risk. This is no different. The status quo seemed to make them a playoff contender annually, but not the team to beat. Perhaps this will push them up the next step.

[ThunderDan]

TT is something else. :???:

Yeah, he helped build the Seahawks team that made it to the playoffs twice and the Super Bowl once. Then he came to the Packers who have won the Super Bowl once and gotten to the NFC Championship game 3 times in 10 years.

[woodbuck27]

I don't think anything is wrong with their management skills. They are giving MM a compliment - they like his playcalling abilities and might not agree with Mike that he should have ceded that. And Mike can always change his mind if it doesn't work out.

I'm trying to come to terms or get a grip on TT being outside of the loop in such important decisions.

ie .... Who has ultimate authority? Who has final say?

[Patler]

All of these decisions seem to me to be squarely the responsibility of the head coach. If the GM or President is involved in hiring the staff under the head coach, or deciding who should call plays, or who should coach what, he is meddling, in my opinion.

[woodbuck27]

Yeah, he helped build the Seahawks team that made it to the playoffs twice and the Super Bowl once. Then he came to the Packers who have won the Super Bowl once and gotten to the NFC Championship game 3 times in 10 years.

Your classic response. In my view that's an argument that the corner store Packer teen fan would lean on.

I'm not here to argue or debate this (these) very important for the Packers future move (moves).

You don't seem to understand what I'm getting at? Maybe this might help:

What is a little bit but ................................. a little bit. I'm not happy with 1 NFCC win in three trys.

I believe that by far a majority of Packer nation would agree with my position.

When you discover something contrary to that bring it to the table.

[Patler]

Your classic response. In my view that's an argument that the corner store Packer teen fan would lean on.

I'm not here to argue or debate this (these) very important for the Packers future move (moves).

You don't seem to understand what I'm getting at? Maybe this might help:

What is a little bit but ................................. a little bit. I'm not happy with 1 NFCC win in three trys.

I believe that by far a majority of Packer nation would agree with my position.

When you discover something contrary to that bring it to the table.

If you need to attribute blame, doesn't the Seattle collapse feel more like a failure by the coaching staff than the front office?
Aren't the changes made so far directed toward remedying those failures?

Do you really think a GM should hire the assistants for the HC?
Do you really think the GM should decide the responsibilities of the assistants?
Do you really think the GM should decide who will call the plays?

I can answer unequivocally "No" to each of those questions.

[woodbuck27]

All of these decisions seem to me to be squarely the responsibility of the head coach. If the GM or President is involved in hiring the staff under the head coach, or deciding who should call plays, or who should coach what, he is meddling, in my opinion.

When is meddling an excuse for competent assessment and proper reaction?

Looking at 'the Big Picture' and winning the next Super Bowl as being really what it's all about. As a Packer fan I don't expect less. I can't assume that Aaron Rodgers (any Packer Roster player) could desire less.

I believe that the Team owners or in this case Mark Murphy and GM Ted Thompson and HC Mike McCarthy must be on the same page in terms of the Operation Goal of Success = Super Bowl.

[woodbuck27]

If you need to attribute blame, doesn't the Seattle collapse feel more like a failure by the coaching staff than the front office?
Aren't the changes made so far directed toward remedying those failures?

Do you really think a GM should hire the assistants for the HC?
Do you really think the GM should decide the responsibilities of the assistants?
Do you really think the GM should decide who will call the plays?

I can answer unequivocally "No" to each of those questions.

Then if my response was in opposition it wouldn't matter.

This thread isn't at all directed to upper management error or towards Packer GM Ted Thompson and Mark Murphy. To go there is a smoke screen.

Isn't this thread about how Mike McCarthy got to dropping the play calling duties and serving his responsibility to gather and account for a competent.coaching staff?

[Bossman641]

I can't wait til next year. We will never have to worry about the play-calling to finish out a game again :roll:

I'm a little apprehensive on this move. Hopefully any loss in offensive performance will be offset by gains in ST and defense.

[pbmax]

I can't wait til next year. We will never have to worry about the play-calling to finish out a game again :roll:

I'm a little apprehensive on this move. Hopefully any loss in offensive performance will be offset by gains in ST and defense.

Be careful what you wish for, re: conservative play calling.

http://www.realfootball365.com/articles/bills/2052

In general, the complaint was he was too conservative. Of course, he really didn't have a good QB.

[Patler]

Then if my response was in opposition it wouldn't matter.

This thread isn't at all directed to upper management error or towards Packer GM Ted Thompson and Mark Murphy. To go there is a smoke screen.

Isn't this thread about how Mike McCarthy got to dropping the play calling duties and serving his responsibility to gather and account for a competent.coaching staff?

We can always debate a difference of opinion, no matter how strong we are in our beliefs.

I think these changes were MM's to decide on and make, and his alone.

[Maxie the Taxi]

So Clements did "a poor job of handling the offense when he was in charge" in Buffalo? Is Stubby just ignorant of this "fact?" Maybe this is an elaborate ruse on Stubby's part to deflect criticism. He gives playcalling over to Clements; Clements screws up; then, Stubby takes playcalling back and the experiment ends forever.

Clements will do fine. If he doesn't, Bennett or someone else will. Rodgers does most of it anyway.Just so Stubby doesn't go back to doing it.

I had two major complaints about Stubby's playcalling: first, it hurt his game management abilities because his head was constantly in his playcard; and second, it hurt his game management abilities because his head was constantly in his playcard.

[Striker]

The Bills offensive personnel under Mularkey/Clements -

QB - Holcomb/Losman
RB - McGahee
WR - Lee Evans/Eric Moulds/Josh Reed/Roscoe Parrish

[ThunderDan]

Your classic response. In my view that's an argument that the corner store Packer teen fan would lean on.

I'm not here to argue or debate this (these) very important for the Packers future move (moves).

You don't seem to understand what I'm getting at? Maybe this might help:

What is a little bit but ................................. a little bit. I'm not happy with 1 NFCC win in three trys.

I believe that by far a majority of Packer nation would agree with my position.

When you discover something contrary to that bring it to the table.

If pointing out TT accomplishment as a GM and his overall positive contributions to two franchises is my "classic response" I will take that as a compliment. Thank you.

And then you go to the old, "It is so obvious that I can see what is wrong with the Packers if I was GM Green Bay would have won 5 Super Bowls in the last 10 years" response.

Let me explain something to you Woody. Neither you nor me nor anyone here has any real idea what happens inside 1265. But to even suggest that Murphy, TT and MM don't realize that there is room for improvement and try to improve the franchise daily is senile.

[mraynrand]

I think these changes were MM's to decide on and make, and his alone.

I agree. And I also believe that Stubby talks to TT all the time for advice and input and that they probably agree on most if not all of the moves.

I believe it is all sunshine, rainbows and little furry ponies at 1265.

[Joemailman]

I believe it is all sunshine, rainbows and little furry ponies at 1265.

Nice call.

http://imgs.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/inalameda/2010/06/01/ponies_and_rainbows.jpg

[woodbuck27]

I agree. And I also believe that Stubby talks to TT all the time for advice and input and that they probably agree on most if not all of the moves.

I believe it is all sunshine, rainbows and little furry ponies at 1265.

Of course they communicate all the time.That includes PR moves as well.

TT and MM are tied at the hip and thus you have MM's 9 year tenure as HC of the Green Bay Packers and counting.

[woodbuck27]

Edit ....

Let me explain something to you Woody. Neither you nor me nor anyone here has any real idea what happens inside 1265. But to even suggest that Murphy, TT and MM don't realize that there is room for improvement and try to improve the franchise daily is senile.

"But to even suggest that Murphy, TT and MM don't realize that there is room for improvement and try to improve the franchise daily is senile."

senile adjective:

1. (of a person) having or showing the weaknesses or diseases of old age, especially a loss of mental faculties.

I disagree with your repugnant statement as valid in terms of any membership here at Packerrats. To introduce such judgement on any mans/womans views regarding the inner works and operation of a Pro Sports franchise sparks of the reaction of an obsessed fan.

[mraynrand]

Of course they communicate all the time.That includes PR moves as well.

TT and MM are tied at the hip and thus you have MM's 9 year tenure as HC of the Green Bay Packers and counting.

Hopefully all the changes lead to a SB win next year. I believe!

[woodbuck27]

Hopefully all the changes lead to a SB win next year. I believe!

I'm feeling more optimistic. It's going to be an interesting watch. :-)

GO PACKERS ! GO PACK GO ! !

[woodbuck27]

We can always debate a difference of opinion, no matter how strong we are in our beliefs.

I think these changes were MM's to decide on and make, and his alone.

I'll give 'YOU' my best here:

maybe? and yet......

I lean towards believing that MM and TT are very close in regards to any significant decision regarding change as that simply makes decent or common sense. Now I do live in a different culture. Maybe that fact reflects some difference in our views?

[pbmax]

The Bills offensive personnel under Mularkey/Clements -

QB - Holcomb/Losman
RB - McGahee
WR - Lee Evans/Eric Moulds/Josh Reed/Roscoe Parrish

C'mon, let me have some fun with Bossman!

:D

[woodbuck27]

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ73iRlBZy64X-1ggOLNwCEIinqjJxmXUpzWco7TsAaZAy_hWBzBw

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRIyyGCAlbEO1vwM4AoneiJ1jLMpC4_E znzph35AXdw-6L2Mxmaeg

I said to Ted.. " Uhhh jhessss....

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQYhNvnxzGhPFIif589g_PFfIABx5GTA m72A1b0FH3OQ98mPb3l

..... Not even a small sheet !?

What else could I do ! "

[Patler]

I wish I could remember the coaches involved, but I have memories of HCs injecting themselves on the opposite side of the ball from where their expertize was, and mucking it up extensively. MM has said that he has a lot more to give the team, that he intends to divide his time equally among O, D and ST; and that he will be the third ST coach.

Is he overvaluing his expertize?

[Maxie the Taxi]

I wish I could remember the coaches involved, but I have memories of HCs injecting themselves on the opposite side of the ball from where their expertize was, and mucking it up extensively. MM has said that he has a lot more to give the team, that he intends to divide his time equally among O, D and ST; and that he will be the third ST coach.

Is he overvaluing his expertize?

IMO, no. I think the coaching thing is important but itself can be overvalued. As far as the weakest phases of the team go, D and ST, Ted will have more to do with their improvement than coaching. We need better players in those phases.

[mraynrand]

I wish I could remember the coaches involved, but I have memories of HCs injecting themselves on the opposite side of the ball from where their expertize was, and mucking it up extensively. MM has said that he has a lot more to give the team, that he intends to divide his time equally among O, D and ST; and that he will be the third ST coach.

Is he overvaluing his expertize?

1) Would you ask the same Q of Cheat? In other words, are you undervaluing Stubby? :)

2) Isn't this what the HC (or any leader) is supposed to do? Not try to micromanage each department but oversee things and make sure things are running properly. My guess is that he won't 'inject' himself so much, rather he will offer great nuggets of insight and foster accountability and evaluate success metrics and other corporate jargon.

Stubby will tour the facility, picking up slack, using a machete to cut through red tape. And offer nuggets of insight:

http://secretgeek.net/image/wally_104042_done.strip.gif

[pbmax]

I wish I could remember the coaches involved, but I have memories of HCs injecting themselves on the opposite side of the ball from where their expertize was, and mucking it up extensively. MM has said that he has a lot more to give the team, that he intends to divide his time equally among O, D and ST; and that he will be the third ST coach.

Is he overvaluing his expertize?

I do worry about two things:

1. Change at 1265 takes forever to take place on Defense and Special Teams. The only positive shock to either unit usually is the arrival of a new player (Dix, Cobb, Hayward, Hyde). The Defense in the last two years have improved on this, and after slow starts the defense has been outperforming the offense. If this isn't a coincidence, its a hugely positive development, on par with anything Hoody does with his units. We have still yet to see ST improve during a season.

So some way, McCarthy and Capers have bucked a trend and engineered two improving defenses in the last two years. One of the adjustments, the 4-3, was a mess, but Capers was able to turn the rest of the straw into spun gold by the end of the year.

If M3 offers his expertise in breaking down opponents film and self study, rather than scheme changes, I think its a huge positive.

Its far less clear what ails ST. There have been suggestions, from Zook and media, that there might have been complacency on the part of some veterans on ST units. McCarthy can solve that by just being a flashlight into a corner of the meeting room where he rarely appeared before. As soon as someone unexpected gets cut from ST, people will pay attention. But I think its easy to overplay this, regardless of whether M3 has a Pete Carroll "Competition Wednesday", plenty of young and UDFA players have excelled on the Packers. I don't think the level of complacency on this team is high.

But M3 also asked Slocum to be aggressive and not to be risk-averse. Outside of surprise onside kicks, that has been a mess. I am not sure M3 has a successful overall view of his ST units.

2. Situational Football. M3 needs to update his approach to this and its one thing that hasn't really been addressed. He did not seem moved by concerns that Matthews status was unknown to him for a time during the Seattle game and I am not sure if he has discussed the Sherman injury. So while not calling plays might make him more aware, this doesn't seem to be his focus.

If it was, it could make a big difference.

On offense, he still needs to figure out why certain Defenses flummox Rodgers and his receivers. And he still needs a 4 minute offense that makes use of his best weapon. If he was using Rex Grossman to hand off with a lead and 5 minutes remaining, I would understand. But its Rodgers, who even injured, doesn't normally toss hump balls.

He is perfectly capable of fixing this. If he looks at it.

[Maxie the Taxi]

Well said, pb. I second your thoughts. On the complacency thing...Complacency doesn't always take the form of laziness or lack of aggressiveness. Sometimes it takes the form of settling into a routine and not seeing the forest for the trees. I always thought the role of the leader was to ask tough questions, i.e., challenge routines and the status quo.

That might be hard for Stubby to do. He's the type of guy who seems to like things planned out.

[red]

someone needs to spend some time trying to figure out a redzone offense that works for us

[woodbuck27]

Well said, pb. I second your thoughts. On the complacency thing...Complacency doesn't always take the form of laziness or lack of aggressiveness. Sometimes it takes the form of settling into a routine and not seeing the forest for the trees. I always thought the role of the leader was to ask tough questions, i.e., challenge routines and the status quo.

That might be hard for Stubby to do. He's the type of guy who seems to like things planned out.

Mike McCarthy has pride. As the Head coach of the esteemed Green Bay Packers he looked flat out beaten by to much in the NFCC game. He had to do some inner speak and conclude that he screwed up on several levels in Seattle.

I'd love to know how he reacted on the trip back to Green Bay? How did he react to any player disappointment (s)? Did any of that fire him into a mode that has led to the multiple changes that most here agree hopefully, will be progressive and get the Packers over the hump? How did his conversations go with his coaches and with Ted Thompson in those hours of that trip back to Green Bay?

What's with the fricken hush-hush act !? Everything seems so secretive. It does get to the unreal and believing a lot of what does come out went down as it's being presented.

I believe that there were lot of pissed off Packer players and personnel. Maybe a proof that is true is the silence we observe in regard to key packer player/leaders. It seemed to me that at the end of last season Mike McCarthy had painted himself into a damage control corner. If I was correct about 2013-14 and add the way 2014-15 ended. Mike McCarthy as Packer Head coach had to make enough changes to help ensure a buoyant start for his rosters return.

Big changes were in my observation and from my checks on Packer Nation....overdue.

One of those changes was to ensure that he does a better job of dealing with his total job description in 2015.

[Pugger]

Hush-hush act? I'm not sure what you're speaking of. Everyone over at 1265 keeps things close to the vest until an announcement is required. What a horrible week that was for McCarthy. On Sunday his team implodes in front of God and everybody and we miss a golden opportunity for a championship and then a couple of days later his younger brother drops dead. :sad:

Kudos to him for making these changes. I don't doubt it was hard for him to give up calling plays. He said he really loves doing that but he decided to do what he thinks is for the good of the team. I hope he is right and we are even better this coming season.

[Patler]

1) Would you ask the same Q of Cheat? In other words, are you undervaluing Stubby? :)

2) Isn't this what the HC (or any leader) is supposed to do? Not try to micromanage each department but oversee things and make sure things are running properly. My guess is that he won't 'inject' himself so much, rather he will offer great nuggets of insight and foster accountability and evaluate success metrics and other corporate jargon.

Stubby will tour the facility, picking up slack, using a machete to cut through red tape. And offer nuggets of insight:


No, I am absolutely not undervaluing MM. Just raising a question for discussion. I don't have a clue what he knows about D, or particularly ST. I can see that there might be carryover between O and D, but not so much for ST, yet that is where he essentially named himself an assistant coach.

I think it is valid to ask the question about any HC who wants to become "involved" in an aspect he has no experience with. Not saying he will fail, but just because he is good with offense doesn't mean he will improve ST by being there. There can be conflict as well over who is in charge in the players' view. There was no question who was in charge of the offense, it was MM. The OCs knew it. The players knew it. If he now intends to spend equal time in all three phases..........?

Truth be told, I like the changes; but I also recognize there is no certainty that he can help the D or ST. If nothing else, maybe it will up the importance factor for D and ST knowing the HC is there. I wouldn't doubt for some there was a feeling of lesser importance because of little to no involvement of the HC, and the fact they all knew as we did that the team goes only as far as the offense carries it.

[Patler]

someone needs to spend some time trying to figure out a redzone offense that works for us

It was just a few years ago they were outstanding in the red zone, wasn't it? Heck, Crosby never seemed to get an attempt under 35 yards. Is it just that the DCs have caught on to what he does?

[woodbuck27]

It was just a few years ago they were outstanding in the red zone, wasn't it? Heck, Crosby never seemed to get an attempt under 35 yards. Is it just that the DCs have caught on to what he does?

http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/red-zone-scoring-pct

NFL Team Red Zone Scoring Percentage (TD only)

[Pugger]

http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/red-zone-scoring-pct

NFL Team Red Zone Scoring Percentage (TD only)

Very interesting to see OAKLAND #1. :shock: Another interesting thing was seeing Seattle was worse in the red zone than we were!

[Patler]

Very interesting to see OAKLAND #1. :shock: Another interesting thing was seeing Seattle was worse in the red zone than we were!

Probably has something to do with having had very few trips to the red zone.

[Patler]

Another example of how we have been spoiled. I think most of us had the feeling the Packers were really bad in the red zone this year. Yet, they were #11. But, we have been accustomed to them being:

#1 - 2012
#3 - 2011
#4 - 2010
#5 - 2008
#7 - 2009
#9 - 2007

[pbmax]

Another example of how we have been spoiled. I think most of us had the feeling the Packers were really bad in the red zone this year. Yet, they were #11. But, we have been accustomed to them being:

#1 - 2012
#3 - 2011
#4 - 2010
#5 - 2008
#7 - 2009
#9 - 2007

Clearly you should never pass in the red zone.

[mraynrand]

Clearly you should never pass in the red zone.

Where does the Packer offense rank on second and goal on the 1 in the Superbowl?

[mraynrand]

I don't have a clue what he knows about D...

just an abstract thought question: I hear this claim a lot (one side of the ball knows nothing about the other side), but it can't be true, right? To design and run an effective offense, you have to understand defenses and vice versa, no?

[pbmax]

Where does the Packer offense rank on second and goal on the 1 in the Superbowl?

They are hiring a coach from UCLA to work on that exact question.

[mraynrand]

Not saying he will fail, but just because he is good with offense doesn't mean he will improve ST by being there. There can be conflict as well over who is in charge in the players' view. There was no question who was in charge of the offense, it was MM. The OCs knew it. The players knew it. If he now intends to spend equal time in all three phases..........?

Perhaps he is just a good coach, and knows enough about all aspects to give insight as needed, and oversee without interfering.

[pbmax]

just an abstract thought question: I hear this claim a lot (one side of the ball knows nothing about the other side), but it can't be true, right? To design and run an effective offense, you have to understand defenses and vice versa, no?

Yes, but....

That understanding involved what the defense will react with if you do X, Y or Z. It also involves calculations of relative strengths.

It does not require the ability to put together an entire, comprehensive and thorough offensive system. Its doesn't mean you could assemble the syllabus to get it installed in 14 offseason weeks and it doesn't mean you can teach it.

But its not impossible to solve. Lot's of people over-reacted to Andy Reid naming his O line coach the new D coordinator. And there were problems in the transition. But by midseason, that unit was performing better than the O.

So really McCarthy's choice here is whom will have control of the details. If its him, it will be rough. If he is just there to lend experience and a keen eye, then I don't think it will be a problem.

[Smidgeon]

It was just a few years ago they were outstanding in the red zone, wasn't it? Heck, Crosby never seemed to get an attempt under 35 yards. Is it just that the DCs have caught on to what he does?

No more Finley.

[Joemailman]

Packers red zone efficiency in the Rodgers years:

2008: 61.29% (5th)
2009: 60.42% (7th)
2010: 62.69% (4th)
2011: 65.22% (3rd)
2012: 68.52% (1st)
2013: 50.72% (26th)
2014: 57.14% (11th)

With the exception of 2013 when Rodgers missed half the season, the numbers have been fairly consistent, ranging from 57.14% t0 68.52%, never finishing below 11th. It's possible the loss of Finley has been a factor. Losing James Jones may have been a factor as well. He was a major endzone target in 2011-2012.

[hoosier]

Packers red zone efficiency in the Rodgers years:

2008: 61.29% (5th)
2009: 60.42% (7th)
2010: 62.69% (4th)
2011: 65.22% (3rd)
2012: 68.52% (1st)
2013: 50.72% (26th)
2014: 57.14% (11th)

With the exception of 2013 when Rodgers missed half the season, the numbers have been fairly consistent, ranging from 57.14% t0 68.52%, never finishing below 11th. It's possible the loss of Finley has been a factor. Losing James Jones may have been a factor as well. He was a major endzone target in 2011-2012.

Interesting. If I didn't know any better I would have thought Lacy and the emergence of a pound-it-out running game would have offset the losses of Finley and Jones. Apparently, and despite Lacy, they still have difficulty getting yardage on the ground when the opponent most expects it.

[pbmax]

Interesting. If I didn't know any better I would have thought Lacy and the emergence of a pound-it-out running game would have offset the losses of Finley and Jones. Apparently, and despite Lacy, they still have difficulty getting yardage on the ground when the opponent most expects it.

On this topic, the wist theory of Packer Offensive lineman does hold, like a stopped clock being right two times a day.

They don't have a surplus of drive blockers and running versus a stacked box creates challenges they can struggle to solve.

[Joemailman]

On this topic, the wist theory of Packer Offensive lineman does hold, like a stopped clock being right two times a day.

They don't have a surplus of drive blockers and running versus a stacked box creates challenges they can struggle to solve.

Perhaps they don't have the horses (or oxen) to improve, but I wonder if they've brought in Solari to try and improve that.

[mraynrand]

Perhaps they don't have the horses (or oxen) to improve, but I wonder if they've brought in Solari to try and improve that.

He's not a physician, is he? Couldn't it just have been that Sitton and Lang were injured in such a way as to primarily affect drive blocking?

[Joemailman]

He's not a physician, is he? Couldn't it just have been that Sitton and Lang were injured in such a way as to primarily affect drive blocking?

I don't know if it's really been the Packers strong point though.

[mraynrand]

If true, I give Stubby all the credit in the world.

Obviously, all was not right with the status quo. A team cannot suffer the collapse we did in the NFCC and not try to prevent the same thing from happening in the future. It's typical that upper management wanted to look at the collapse as an aberration. They're satisfied with success. Stubby actually believes his own press clippings. His goal is a Super Bowl win and last year he was as close as he could come to a Super Bowl...and failed. Big time.

As all good leaders do, he took charge of the situation and shook things up. He wants more accountability in phases of the team he had neglected in the past.

Stubby swallowed his ego and did what he thought necessary to reach his goal.

Great stuff. So great I might even stop calling him Stubby.

...Nah, Stubby it is.

Yes it will always be Stubby - his seemingly unyielding stubbornness is his greatest attribute and sometimes his achilles heel.

Can't blame 'em TOO much for the collapse - after all they were on Lombardi time and thought the game was already over.

[th87]

I can't prove this, but it probably would've been better to take shots at the end zone as soon as we got inside the 20, instead of slowly matriculating the ball down the remainder of the field. As the offense gets closer, the field shrinks for Rodgers, there is no Finley, and we're still not good enough to pound it in.

[gbgary]

I can't prove this, but it probably would've been better to take shots at the end zone as soon as we got inside the 20, instead of slowly matriculating the ball down the remainder of the field. As the offense gets closer, the field shrinks for Rodgers, there is no Finley, and we're still not good enough to pound it in.

this pretty much.

[pbmax]

I can't prove this, but it probably would've been better to take shots at the end zone as soon as we got inside the 20, instead of slowly matriculating the ball down the remainder of the field. As the offense gets closer, the field shrinks for Rodgers, there is no Finley, and we're still not good enough to pound it in.

That may very well be true, but I would suspect McCarthy doesn't agree.

[Smidgeon]

What I thought was a funny quote from M3's presser:


I don't see Eddie as a slow starter. Based on the things I read, the play-caller just needs to give him the damn ball in September. His first year, he made a huge impact for our football team. The number of tackles he broke was the highlight of his rookie season. Year 2, the ability to play first, second and third down was impactful for us. The focus was to get him the ball more in the passing game. Very smart, instinctive player. The understanding he has of our protection schemes. I think Eddie made the big step you look for.

Quite astute. And now you know he pays attention to what's being written about him and his team.

[mraynrand]

I can't prove this, but it probably would've been better to take shots at the end zone as soon as we got inside the 20, instead of slowly matriculating the ball down the remainder of the field. As the offense gets closer, the field shrinks for Rodgers, there is no Finley, and we're still not good enough to pound it in.

Packers didn't have the four/five vertical threat they used to that allowed them to create gaps in the coverage. And defenses play back more. But they did have the pass protection to do it.

[Pugger]

Yes it will always be Stubby - his seemingly unyielding stubbornness is his greatest attribute and sometimes his achilles heel.

Can't blame 'em TOO much for the collapse - after all they were on Lombardi time and thought the game was already over.

:lol:

[Smidgeon]

Didn't want to start a new thread, so I'm putting this here.

M3 certainly is confident about his football team:


The Packers have a statistical breakdown that McCarthy called "the 16 principles of championship offense and defense."

"We hit 13 of the 16 on offense," McCarthy said. "And the three that we didn't get, I think we were like one play or two plays off. So you know, if we could play at this level of offense from here on in, it will be the best offense pro football has seen."