So what's MM's problem?

[MJZiggy]

Again, the knock on Bill Cowher and Dean Smith and others like them is that they couldn't win the big one. This sounds remarkably similar to the lament now being given that MM can't win the close games.

Hey, I wonder if people would be happier if the Pack had gotten blown out in say, eight or nine of those close games. MM would still have the same coaching record, but it'd look like he was better in close games.

Another way to look at that 5-15 record is that if MM wasn't such a good coach, they'd have gotten blown out in games that should not have been even close. Hmmm....

Now that you mention it, when is the last time we were truly blown out?

[rbaloha1]

Now that you mention it, when is the last time we were truly blown out?

Irrelevant. Its about playoffs and super bowls. After all the Packers expectations are different than the Browns or Lions, etc.

[Guiness]

Now that you mention it, when is the last time we were truly blown out?

maybe it's just me, but I consider last Sunday's loss to the Lions a blow out!!!

[Pugger]

maybe it's just me, but I consider last Sunday's loss to the Lions a blow out!!!

No. Heck, had Jennings caught that pass in the end zone we'd all be marveling about Flynn saving the day.

[rbaloha1]

maybe it's just me, but I consider last Sunday's loss to the Lions a blow out!!!

In one sense. MM is good for gamblers -- maybe that is why there is so much MM love?

[Bretsky]

Tony.......a bit crude on the response to Jimmy H as our coach; I'd still puke if the Pack hired him but he might be a good NFL coach someday.
I continue to think MM is an average NFL coach. It would be a fun thread...ranking the coaches from 1-32....bring out lots of arguments

My guess is I'd put MM somewhere between 14-20

[MJZiggy]

Irrelevant. Its about playoffs and super bowls. After all the Packers expectations are different than the Browns or Lions, etc.

You're obviously young enough not to have endured too many blowouts. You can't win playoffs and super bowls if you're getting blown out. Why do you think your expectations are different than the Browns or Lions?

[Patler]

The bottom line is the OC position is the carrot that all outstanding OL coaches are striving for. We have a fine, fine damn fine defense. We have a great passing attack. Any outstanding OL coach across the league would be licking their chops to fix our big weakness. But we can't hire laterally, we have to promote.

Why can't GB you hire laterally to get a good O-line coach? It is done all the time. However, the field you are limited to includes assistants with expiring contracts, and more likely, those on the staffs of fired head coaches. Assistants do not like to get the rep of jumping from staff to staff, so most will stay if offered a renewal, but not always, and most work on 2-year contracts at most. However, when the HC is fired, most assistants are granted the right to look elsewhwere, and many times the staff is let go in its entirety. That is where you can often find a proven coach with success at the area you want him.

[bobblehead]

Irrelevant. Its about playoffs and super bowls. After all the Packers expectations are different than the Browns or Lions, etc.

If that is true, then its irrelevant what his record is in close games....which is basically what I have been saying. I want to make the playoffs consistently AND win some games with an eventual Lombardi Trophy.

BTW, anyone have a clue as to when the 2nd overall team in the NFL (and first in the NFC) in point differential didn't make the playoffs was??

[bobblehead]

Now that you mention it, when is the last time we were truly blown out?

Ask that question again say.....Monday morning.

[rbaloha1]

You're obviously young enough not to have endured too many blowouts. You can't win playoffs and super bowls if you're getting blown out. Why do you think your expectations are different than the Browns or Lions?

My point is those teams have never reached the super bowl -- the Wolf/TT era has brought us numerous years of super bowl contention. Trust me, I was around for the Starr era.

[retailguy]

Being a Marty disciple, I always wondered whether his lack of clutchness would rub off.

However, if we're going to count that stat, we also have to consider that he never gets blown out.

Umm. Well that's not my recollection, so I looked it up.

September 10, 2006 Chicago Bears L 26–0
October 2, 2006 Philadelphia Eagles L 31-9
November 5, 2006 Buffalo Bills L 24-10
November 19, 2006 New England Patriots L 35-0
December 3, 2006 New York Jets L 38-10
December 23, 2007 Chicago L, 35-7
September 21, 2008 Dallas L, 27-16
November 24, 2008 New Orleans L, 51-29

I just looked at scores. I'm sure all wouldn't be considered a "blowout", it depends on how you define the term. I personally think the team was "blown out" three times last season - Cincinnati, and the two Vikings games. The scores were close enough to not qualify in my mind, however, the team didn't play well in any facet of the game.

So, McCarthy has trotted out more than a fair share of "stinkers" in my mind.

I don't necessarily want to fire the guy, but I really do question whether or not we can win it all with him and Ted.

[rbaloha1]

Umm. Well that's not my recollection, so I looked it up.

September 10, 2006 Chicago Bears L 26–0
October 2, 2006 Philadelphia Eagles L 31-9
November 5, 2006 Buffalo Bills L 24-10
November 19, 2006 New England Patriots L 35-0
December 3, 2006 New York Jets L 38-10
December 23, 2007 Chicago L, 35-7
September 21, 2008 Dallas L, 27-16
November 24, 2008 New Orleans L, 51-29

I just looked at scores. I'm sure all wouldn't be considered a "blowout", it depends on how you define the term. I personally think the team was "blown out" three times last season - Cincinnati, and the two Vikings games. The scores were close enough to not qualify in my mind, however, the team didn't play well in any facet of the game.

So, McCarthy has trotted out more than a fair share of "stinkers" in my mind.

I don't necessarily want to fire the guy, but I really do question whether or not we can win it all with him and Ted.

Let me reply with my MM apologist mindset -- it was during the early years of his career but recently there are no blowouts. Maybe another Belichek if we keep him around.

[Joemailman]

Umm. Well that's not my recollection, so I looked it up.

September 10, 2006 Chicago Bears L 26–0
October 2, 2006 Philadelphia Eagles L 31-9
November 5, 2006 Buffalo Bills L 24-10
November 19, 2006 New England Patriots L 35-0
December 3, 2006 New York Jets L 38-10
December 23, 2007 Chicago L, 35-7
September 21, 2008 Dallas L, 27-16
November 24, 2008 New Orleans L, 51-29

I just looked at scores. I'm sure all wouldn't be considered a "blowout", it depends on how you define the term. I personally think the team was "blown out" three times last season - Cincinnati, and the two Vikings games. The scores were close enough to not qualify in my mind, however, the team didn't play well in any facet of the game.

So, McCarthy has trotted out more than a fair share of "stinkers" in my mind.

I don't necessarily want to fire the guy, but I really do question whether or not we can win it all with him and Ted.

To me a blowout would be a game that is essentially over after 3 quarters. MM suffered several his first 3 years, but hasn't suffered one since New Orleans in 2008. Buffalo in 2006 was no blowout. The game was tied in the 4th quarter. At any rate, I think MM does a good job of getting his team to play competitive football every week. I agree that whether or not he can win a championship is open to question.

[pbmax]

And 11 point loss (less than two TDs) is a blowout? I guess if the definition of a loss is either close OR blowout. But if there is a middle ground, I think less than two scores easily qualifies for that.

And rb, five were not just during the early years, but during the FIRST year when beloved Shaper, Wahle and Rivera had been let go.

McCarthy's point differential and overall record demonstrate that he wins big and loses close. Isn't that what the Packers want? Does anyone want to win close and then get blownout while losing?

The problem is too many avoidable losses, close or not. Silverstein was on the radio hammering away at this record in close games. And he said it had to mean something because it wasn't just a couple of games. He assumes because his sample size COULD be smaller that it must be significant. But that record says good and bad things about McCarthy, it is not an indictment of him as a coach and tells you little unless you find the same errors in his blowout wins. And those answers are well known by now: bad special teams, penalties, problems with the 4 minute drill settling for FGs and adjusting to the capabilities of his offense (O line, RB, QB). Previously you could have included the defensive staff, before the change to Capers.