McCarthy and "Close Games"

[get louder at lambeau]

I'd agree with you, but I'd also say that you've got an inaccurate projection too.

When I said McCarthy is average, I think you nailed it when you said "he is what he is". Occasionally he'll strike lightning in a bottle and we'll look like world beaters. But can we build on that? I'm not so sure.

I'm watching pre game warm ups for the Falcons right now. What we'll see out of them tonight are plays that they do well consistently. We'll see 25 carries out of turner, most likely. We'll see a fair share of TE dumpoffs to Gonzalez, and we'll see some passes out there for Roddy White to take away from the defense. In short, we'll see a few creative plays, but the bulk will be "this is who we are, and this is what we do". It's been successful to the tune of 2 losses, vs our 6. (Yes, injuries explain some of that, stick with me for a minute more.)

I'm just not convinced that "a team" can build on McCarthy's creativity. A team can build around plays they do well. They can execute them better and better over time (ala U71). They can improve and extend them and change looks and just flat out execute them. McCarthy's way? Not so sure. Too much change and finesse, and less repetition.

I believe I see too much "what's next coach?", out of the players, and less "I can do that again, just get me the ball".

I think it's tougher for McCarthy's team to build off the 45-17 drubbing, than it would be for the Falcons. Guess we'll see next year, huh? In the meantime, we'll see which Packers show up next week. Will it be the week 3 version, or the week 16 version? With McCarthy, you never know. With the Falcons? I think the difference is clear, guess I'll find out in the next hour or so.

So you babbled on for a while, but you never said why Vince was "inaccurate".

[HarveyWallbangers]

I'm watching pre game warm ups for the Falcons right now. What we'll see out of them tonight are plays that they do well consistently. We'll see 25 carries out of turner, most likely. We'll see a fair share of TE dumpoffs to Gonzalez, and we'll see some passes out there for Roddy White to take away from the defense. In short, we'll see a few creative plays, but the bulk will be "this is who we are, and this is what we do". It's been successful to the tune of 2 losses, vs our 6. (Yes, injuries explain some of that, stick with me for a minute more.)

Now, what if Atlanta lost Turner and Gonzalez in the first few weeks do to injury? It's much easier to give it to Turner (or Grant) 25 times/game. It's much easier to ensure that Gonzo (or Finley) gets it 6 times/game. It's a lot different when you have exactly one star offensive weapon (Jennings). Driver has been hurt and ineffective much of the year. Jones and Nelson are who they are. You never know what you'll get out of Jackson. McCarthy has had to be creative.

I'm just not convinced that "a team" can build on McCarthy's creativity. A team can build around plays they do well. They can execute them better and better over time (ala U71). They can improve and extend them and change looks and just flat out execute them. McCarthy's way? Not so sure. Too much change and finesse, and less repetition.

I don't think there's a right way or a wrong way. I actually think McCarthy's approach is similar to Hoody's approach. Some games Brady will dink and dunk. Other games he'll throw the deep ball. Other games they'll run BenJarvis 25 times. Hoody's offense is multiple and he exploits the other team's weakness.

[Bossman641]

I agree with HW and here is my reasoning.

Today, the most important position on the field is QB. It's hard to argue with the results MM has gotten from that position since being here. He appears to be one of the best teachers of QB's in the league. The offensive statistics speak for themselves since MM's arrival as well:

2010 - 8th in PPG
2009 - 3rd in PPG
2008 - 5th in PPG
2007 - 4th in PPG
2006 - 22nd in PPG

I have my criticisms of him (abandons the run too easily, gets too cute with playcalls sometimes, clock management, sticks with assistants too long) but it's hard to argue with the overall body of work. The defense had the one year in 2008 where they blew leads repeatedly, which has since been rectified with Capers.

Everyone complains about the offense not having a go-to play while leaving out the fact the offense is missing a top 5 TE and top 15 (or so) RB. The money play in the red zone last year was fade to Finley. It was unstoppable. Another one of the money plays was play-action bootleg and toss it short to Finley in the flat. For better or worse, MM is a tinkerer when it comes to the offense. Ya, it would be nice to have a play we could hang out hat on but I think that's more than made up by the number of sub-packages MM utilizes. I'd imagine that as a defensive coordinator it has to be an absolute bitch to try and game plan for this offense (when healthy).

Special teams has no doubt been the weak spot and we will see what happens with that this offseason. While I understand that Slocum has been dealt a tough hand with the revolving door of ST players, I still think he needs to go. In MM and Capers I think we have top 10 coaches on both sides of the ball. Two pieces of the puzzle are complete.

[denverYooper]

Now, what if Atlanta lost Turner and Gonzalez in the first few weeks do to injury? It's much easier to give it to Turner (or Grant) 25 times/game. It's much easier to ensure that Gonzo (or Finley) gets it 6 times/game. It's a lot different when you have exactly one star offensive weapon (Jennings). Driver has been hurt and ineffective much of the year. Jones and Nelson are who they are. You never know what you'll get out of Jackson. McCarthy has had to be creative.

I don't think there's a right way or a wrong way. I actually think McCarthy's approach is similar to Hoody's approach. Some games Brady will dink and dunk. Other games he'll throw the deep ball. Other games they'll run BenJarvis 25 times. Hoody's offense is multiple and he exploits the other team's weakness.

Turner missed 5 games last year, Matty Ice missed 2 games, and the Falcons were 9-7. I don't think Turner missing 5 games is the whole difference btw last year and this but Atlanta's offense sure seems to struggle when they can't get production in the running game (like last night).

[mraynrand]

I go back to what I said about the players. Belicheck is pretty good except I have never seen him win without Tom Brady (ok, one season of Cassell after the winning tradition of the team was set). What you say about younger coaches and extreme success....Mike Smith has never won his division. That is extreme success??

I'll give you reid and hoody...and Parcells when he returns to the field next year. After that its open to debate.

Isn't it interesting that Parcells really didn't do much without Hoodie?

[RashanGary]

I'm watching pre game warm ups for the Falcons right now. What we'll see out of them tonight are plays that they do well consistently. We'll see 25 carries out of turner, most likely. We'll see a fair share of TE dumpoffs to Gonzalez, and we'll see some passes out there for Roddy White to take away from the defense. In short, we'll see a few creative plays, but the bulk will be "this is who we are, and this is what we do". It's been successful to the tune of 2 losses, vs our 6. (Yes, injuries explain some of that, stick with me for a minute more.)

Good point!


I see the points the others are making. MM has done a great job working with the team. The players respect him. They talk to him. He's great at working with the super-ego's in the NFL. He's done an amazing job with Rodgers and it looks like Flynn too. He's incredibly flexible, creative and innovative. He'll find ways to attack defenses weaknesses that are just awesome. Overall, I like him in the top 6-10 range of coaches and I still think he has a chance to be a SB winner. He has enough strengths that I like our chances with him better than anyone but the very proven elite.

But just because i like his overall job, it doesn't mean I can't dislike parts of it. I agree with you completely. MM is so flexible and so creative that they don't have an identity at all. They don't really hang their hat on anything. I think that makes for wildly inconsistent offnese. Sacks, throw aways, negative carries. . . .I think all of those go up when you're team is running plays they're not as comfortable with. He leans more toward outcoaching the other team than he does outplaying them. Like you, I don't want to take away his strengths, but I would like to see them develop some form of identity while keeping some of the flexibility and creativity too. He's so good at it, I think it's worked so well for him that he ended up taking it too far.

If we start out next season again stumbling and bumbling around new plays only to find out 8 games in taht we have to go back to basics but be behind the 8ball because our offense was so wildly inconsistent for the first half of the season, there is NO EXCUSE. He's getting to the point in his coaching career where he has to correct these reoccuring problems or his teams won't win championships. It's not the talent in weeks 1-6 or 1-8. They take off after teh offense decides to go back to what they do best. It's the coaching. I'm fairly certain of that. If it happens again next year, I give up hope on him. This is my single biggest issue with McCarthy and because it' costs so many games, all of his talent goes to waste. He has to run the plays we're good at and mix in the otherstuff more slowly throughout the season so we don't stumble three years in a row.

[Guiness]

I really don't pay much attention to coaching in the league, other than the teams we play against, and stuff that makes headlines, so here's my viewpoint.

I don't like a lot of what McCarthy does, and agree with many that he gets too cute at times. BUT (and that's a big butt) I look around our division, and we've got the best coaching situation - Childress was a mess, don't know what their new guy will be like. Schwartz - who knows so far, seems to be pulling that team along. Development wise, he's probably where McCarthy was 5 years ago. I don't want to step back five years. Lovie - well, by all accounts he's done a good job this year, but overall his body of work is not great. He certainly couldn't do anything with Cutler last year, and his QB seem to still have brain farts (4 INT's to Hall?). So McCarthy is, IMO, the top coach in our division.

Then looking around the league at some of the collosol screw-ups, I'm just happy to have some continuity. Steve Spurrier, anyone? What about Mangini? Want to dust off an old, out of touch guy like Joe Gibbs or Art Shell? The mess that Wade Phillips made?

Comments were made about Parcells - I'm not so sure I'd want him around. Seems like he's left without completing his contract from everywhere since his days with the Giants. Left NE after a disagreement with Kraft. Not sure what happened with the Jets. 'Retired' instead of coaching his last year in Dallas...only to show up in Miami the next year. He signed a four year contract with Miami, but I think he was only there for 2.

[vince]

I agree with damn near everything Harvey, Bobble and Boss said.

JH, I think you're mischaracterizing the start of this season by grouping it with last year's early struggles. This year's team started out 3-1 and averaged damn near 30 pts./game until Finley went down. What they did well was use Jermichael Finley when they had 3rd downs and needed a reception, among other things. When he went down (and Rodgers was concussed) the offense suffered for 2 or 3 games. You can blame McCarthy for this if you wish - and I agree that part of the blame lies with him, but there were clearly other dynamics involved. The offense has ultimately rebounded better than I feared they would without Finley. Jennings has stepped up big and the team is finding ways to keep him from being doubled and taken out of the game, to McCarthy and Rodgers' credit. And Rodgers has really been throwing the ball well and distributing it all over the field the second half of the season.

[mmmdk]

Not even McCarthy uses the injury card as an excuse; that leaves his followers/apologists in a rather pathetic light. Sorry for the harsh remark but I just don't believe present injuries to second tier Packer players are significant enough. Ok - Finley is truely missed and Grant is good too but lack of depth at RB and a below average OL is the true culprit. This is on TT; yet I back TT 100% . It's not like AR, Clay, Tramon or Chuck were put on IR. Being knicked is part of the game and happens to all NFL teams.

Someone here on PR said that McCarthy is one of the best NFL coaches from monday till saturday; Sundays (or game days) he's more average. Brilliantly said btw (who was it?)
Stubby has called 2 good games straight...yet blew it (again) with clock management in NE & thankfully the NY game wasn't close. Bears should keep it close sunday....

[mission]

Someone here on PR said that McCarthy is one of the best NFL coaches from monday till saturday; Sundays (or game days) he's more average. Brilliantly said btw (who was it?).

Me.

[mmmdk]

Me.

Well said!

McCarthy just needs to "fix" those sundays!

[sharpe1027]

Not even McCarthy uses the injury card as an excuse; that leaves his followers/apologists in a rather pathetic light. .

As far as I know MM doesn't post at Packerat$, does that paint you in rather a pathetic light?

[vince]

The "McCarthy as a Poor Playcaller" myth has been thoroughly debunked on numerous occassions. He has consistently controlled time of possession and produced elite offenses in both yards and points. Try again mm.

[Bossman641]

Not even McCarthy uses the injury card as an excuse; that leaves his followers/apologists in a rather pathetic light. Sorry for the harsh remark but I just don't believe present injuries to second tier Packer players are significant enough. Ok - Finley is truely missed and Grant is good too but lack of depth at RB and a below average OL is the true culprit. This is on TT; yet I back TT 100% . It's not like AR, Clay, Tramon or Chuck were put on IR. Being knicked is part of the game and happens to all NFL teams.

The fact MM doesn't use the injury card is to his credit, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. Coaches rarely publicly criticize players, GM's give coaches votes of confidence and then fire them the next day. Hard to believe that what coaches is what they actually feel.

Sorry for the harsh words, but anyone that believes the number of Packer injuries is in any way "normal" has no clue what they are talking about. Look who is lining up opposite CM3, the 5th stringer. Look at the DL, the regular rotation includes the 5th, 6th, and 7th stringers.

The defense has been hit with a greater number of injuries, the offense has been hit with the bigger impact players. Bring back even 5 of the guys on IR (Finley, Grant, Neal, Chillar, and Jones) and there is no doubt in my mind the team has at least 3 more wins.

[mmmdk]

The fact MM doesn't use the injury card is to his credit, but that doesn't mean it isn't true. Coaches rarely publicly criticize players, GM's give coaches votes of confidence and then fire them the next day. Hard to believe that what coaches is what they actually feel.

Sorry for the harsh words, but anyone that believes the number of Packer injuries is in any way "normal" has no clue what they are talking about. Look who is lining up opposite CM3, the 5th stringer. Look at the DL, the regular rotation includes the 5th, 6th, and 7th stringers.

The defense has been hit with a greater number of injuries, the offense has been hit with the bigger impact players. Bring back even 5 of the guys on IR (Finley, Grant, Neal, Chillar, and Jones) and there is no doubt in my mind the team has at least 3 more wins.

Defense has gotten better as reserves have excelled; I've stated this numerous times! So you miss Barnett & Bernett? Jones? What has he ever done? Chillar is missed though. Defense has been fantastic and offense has sputtered as Finley & Grant went to IR...the 2 none pro bowlers. Remove some big names and we can talk. BTW, McCarthy truely isn't a dick about injuries, many coaches throw the injury card...just like the spineless thrown post you presented.

No harsh words from me anymore - you're an idiot, Boss(worth)!

[HarveyWallbangers]

Defense has gotten better as reserves have excelled; I've stated this numerous times! So you miss Barnett & Bernett? Jones? What has he ever done? Chillar is missed though. Defense has been fantastic and offense has sputtered as Finley & Grant went to IR...the 2 none pro bowlers. Remove some big names and we can talk. BTW, McCarthy truely isn't a dick about injuries, many coaches throw the injury card...just like the spineless thrown post you presented.

Barnett wasn't a big loss. Who knows with Burnett--since we don't know how good he would have gotten. Jones was a loss because I think he's better than Zombo, but something you can overcome. Chillar was a loss. Losing Matthews for the time we lost him hurt. Losing Jenkins has hurt a lot. Losing Pickett for a few games hurt a lot. I think Mike Neal was a big loss. I think without the injuries, the defense could have been better than just good. They could have been dominant. You put the pass defense with a healthy DL that dominated against the run last year (while adding Neal), and you could have had something special.

Losing Finley and Grant were big losses. We've lost all 6 games by 4 points or less, and I think you could argue that if we were mostly healthy in those games, we would have won. Bears game was just our ineptitude. No injuries to blame. We were hurt a great deal in the Miami and Washington losses with the loss of Finley and Matthews. We were hurt a great deal in the Detroit and New England losses with the loss of Rodgers. I think Grant and Finley would have been a big help in the Atlanta loss. Oh well! It is what it is. Let's finish this season on a high note and then hope for better health next year.

[swede]

Special teams has no doubt been the weak spot and we will see what happens with that this offseason. While I understand that Slocum has been dealt a tough hand with the revolving door of ST players, I still think he needs to go.

Especially in light of the fact that his coaching pedigree is laughable--he is basically of friend of McCarthy's with more experience running a construction business than running an NFL team's ST squad.

MM is a great head coach with two glaring flaws: he is a bedwetter late in the game when the pressure is on, and he hires and hangs on to some pretty bad assistant coaches.

[Smidgeon]

Barnett wasn't a big loss. Who knows with Burnett--since we don't know how good he would have gotten. Jones was a loss because I think he's better than Zombo, but something you can overcome. Chillar was a loss. Losing Matthews for the time we lost him hurt. Losing Jenkins has hurt a lot. Losing Pickett for a few games hurt a lot. I think Mike Neal was a big loss. I think without the injuries, the defense could have been better than just good. They could have been dominant. You put the pass defense with a healthy DL that dominated against the run last year (while adding Neal), and you could have had something special.

Losing Finley and Grant were big losses. We've lost all 6 games by 4 points or less, and I think you could argue that if we were mostly healthy in those games, we would have won. Bears game was just our ineptitude. No injuries to blame. We were hurt a great deal in the Miami and Washington losses with the loss of Finley and Matthews. We were hurt a great deal in the Detroit and New England losses with the loss of Rodgers. I think Grant and Finley would have been a big help in the Atlanta loss. Oh well! It is what it is. Let's finish this season on a high note and then hope for better health next year.

I think Jones was a better run defender than Zombo (and probably pass defense--at least, that's what I've heard), but probably a wash in pass rush.

And remember when they played the Redskins and Shanahan (or their O-line--can't recall) said that the Packer D-line was the hardest to play against in the NFL? And they play the Giants twice per year.

[Bossman641]

Defense has gotten better as reserves have excelled; I've stated this numerous times! So you miss Barnett & Bernett? Jones? What has he ever done? Chillar is missed though. Defense has been fantastic and offense has sputtered as Finley & Grant went to IR...the 2 none pro bowlers. Remove some big names and we can talk. BTW, McCarthy truely isn't a dick about injuries, many coaches throw the injury card...just like the spineless thrown post you presented.

No harsh words from me anymore - you're an idiot, Boss(worth)!

The biggest losses on the defensive side of the ball have been along the DL and OLB.

Burnett - who knows what he could have grown into. He started the year tentative and overall I've been ha[[y with Peprah. Little if any loss of performance.

Barnett/Chillar - little to no loss in base package. Definite effect in sub packages, which Capers plays extensively. There's a reason GB is one of the poorer teams against TE's.

Poppinga - no loss IMO

Jones - small loss of performance going to Zombo. Definite loss going to Walden and Francois.

CM3 missing 1.5 and slowed in others - huge

Neal - big loss

Harrell - no loss since he has never contributed anyways

Jenkins and Pickett missing games and being slowed - huge loss

Defesively, the losses have moved the defense from being able to dominate games to being very very good instead.

Offensively, Tasucher has been little to no loss. But Finley and Grant aren't big enough names for you? Are you kidding me? From listening to Rodgers and MM talk during the offseason, it sounded like they designed the entire offense around Finley. When Finley was still healthy, I thought Rodgers was forcing it to him too much. The blessing to Finley could have been a blessing in disguise if it had only been for a few weeks IMO, as it forced Rodgers to look at other guys again.

I could care less what you think about me. I know you hate McCarthy. It's just funny that you act like losing Grant and Finley should have no effect on an offense.

Tell me which teams would be able to lose their starting RB and TE and have no dropoff.

[vince]

he is a bedwetter late in the game when the pressure is on

I think the notion that McCarthy somehow chokes and doesn't know what to do late in the game is completely preposterous.

He is a risk-taker and sometimes goes for the homerun when his gut tells him its time. If his confidence in his players is justified, the call is forgotten. If the players don't execute, McCarthy sucks. The players in the game at the time haven't always executed, but that's a whole lot different than the characterization that he chokes up in crunch time.

The facts show that his team has been good at crunch time in certain years at and not good other years. Overall the results have been a bit below average (15-20 unless of course you're one who only counts the games the Packers lose this year by 4 or less). Doesn't mean he chokes by any means.

As the QB and surrounding cast (including the defense and ST) continues to mature, I suspect the results in close games will trend toward the mean again.

Hopefully, his stellar record in games decided by more than a score remains as well.