Official FIRE Mike McCarthy thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Tony Oday]

I still think MM should be fired. How is Montgomery not getting the rock more? No deep balls on single high saftey, used to be bread and butter. Not a fan of his collapse mentality in clutch situations.

[Pugger]

I still think MM should be fired. How is Montgomery not getting the rock more? No deep balls on single high saftey, used to be bread and butter. Not a fan of his collapse mentality in clutch situations.

I firmly believe Ty is not getting more carries because of his sickle cell trait.

Not that many weeks ago I was in favor of replacing MM but not now. He kept this locker room together when things were going south and IMO that is a big deal.

[Patler]

For the ninetieth time this month I'd like to point out again...MM has did a good job with the talent given to him....with the talent given to him.
If the season goes array....there is only one spot to point

So, what, nothing short of a Super Bowl victory is good enough?

There was a time when you said if the Packers ever won a Super Bowl under TT you would revise your opinion of him and hold him in similar regard as you did Wolf, who also won just one. As I recall, you did accept TT after 2010 .... for about one season.

One of the articles someone linked recently, which was about a former player, coach, front office person or the like, hit the nail on the head. Packer fans are friendly, warm and courteous, but have an odd sense of entitlement.

Most sports fans understand that sometimes seasons go bad, and that Championship seasons are uncommon. They evaluate their coaches, GMs etc. by reasonable standards of overall effectiveness and competitiveness. Packer fans, on the other hand, seem to think they are entitled to Super Bowl wins, and someone has failed and should be replaced if that does not happen.

Obviously the ultimate goal is a Super Bowl win, and when that does not happen over an extended period evaluations should be made. I think in assessing blame there are questions to ask:

If the Packers had won the Super Bowl in 2014, would you be calling for anyone's head regardless of what the final outcome is this year? I wouldn't, and I suspect you wouldn't either.

What if they had made it to the Super Bowl in 2014, but lost? For me the answer remains, no, but it is less certain without knowing how the game would have been lost.

So then I look at the 2014 NFCCG. Did they lose that game because of a lack of talent? I say, no. They dominated most of that game, not unlike the game this past Sunday. In my opinion, that game was lost because of coaching decisions and coaching effectiveness, not because of talent deficiency.

Then I look at the other huge playoff disappointments, and I don't see the losses occurring from a lack of talent, but to the extent not from fate or bad luck, from coaching decisions and/or coaching effectiveness. I see these as very similar to Holmgren's SB loss with the Packers. That game wasn't lost because of talent deficiencies either.

With all of that said, if I am at the point of thinking a change is needed, the first hot seat is firmly beneath the coaching staff because of the manners in which playoff departures have occurred.

Getting back to this season, if they win out the remaining games, no one should be in jeopardy. I think TT has assembled some good young talent and depth, even though he may not have found a budding super star recently. If they win out, MM will have salvaged a sinking ship that could have plunged to the depths, and he will deserve to stay. However, his struggles the last two seasons coupled with his playoff performances overall would have him on a somewhat short leash for me.

Anything less than 3-0 would have MM's tenure under review. A loss to the Bears would be big in my decision making. Going 1-1 against the Vikings and Lions, not so much.

[run pMc]

I think he's done enough to keep his job. He has his brain farts but IMO he's a good coach...the team could do a LOT worse, and I'm not sure who's out there who could do better. Josh McDaniels? Please. Not after his Denver stint.

[Fritz]

So, what, nothing short of a Super Bowl victory is good enough?

There was a time when you said if the Packers ever won a Super Bowl under TT you would revise your opinion of him and hold him in similar regard as you did Wolf, who also won just one. As I recall, you did accept TT after 2010 .... for about one season.

One of the articles someone linked recently, which was about a former player, coach, front office person or the like, hit the nail on the head. Packer fans are friendly, warm and courteous, but have an odd sense of entitlement.

Most sports fans understand that sometimes seasons go bad, and that Championship seasons are uncommon. They evaluate their coaches, GMs etc. by reasonable standards of overall effectiveness and competitiveness. Packer fans, on the other hand, seem to think they are entitled to Super Bowl wins, and someone has failed and should be replaced if that does not happen.

Obviously the ultimate goal is a Super Bowl win, and when that does not happen over an extended period evaluations should be made. I think in assessing blame there are questions to ask:

If the Packers had won the Super Bowl in 2014, would you be calling for anyone's head regardless of what the final outcome is this year? I wouldn't, and I suspect you wouldn't either.

What if they had made it to the Super Bowl in 2014, but lost? For me the answer remains, no, but it is less certain without knowing how the game would have been lost.

So then I look at the 2014 NFCCG. Did they lose that game because of a lack of talent? I say, no. They dominated most of that game, not unlike the game this past Sunday. In my opinion, that game was lost because of coaching decisions and coaching effectiveness, not because of talent deficiency.

Then I look at the other huge playoff disappointments, and I don't see the losses occurring from a lack of talent, but to the extent not from fate or bad luck, from coaching decisions and/or coaching effectiveness. I see these as very similar to Holmgren's SB loss with the Packers. That game wasn't lost because of talent deficiencies either.

With all of that said, if I am at the point of thinking a change is needed, the first hot seat is firmly beneath the coaching staff because of the manners in which playoff departures have occurred.

Getting back to this season, if they win out the remaining games, no one should be in jeopardy. I think TT has assembled some good young talent and depth, even though he may not have found a budding super star recently. If they win out, MM will have salvaged a sinking ship that could have plunged to the depths, and he will deserve to stay. However, his struggles the last two seasons coupled with his playoff performances overall would have him on a somewhat short leash for me.

Anything less than 3-0 would have MM's tenure under review. A loss to the Bears would be big in my decision making. Going 1-1 against the Vikings and Lions, not so much.

I agree with what you've posted, except for the part in boldface type. I believe that fans are fans, and any fan base that had the level of success the Packer fanbase has experienced would be acting the same way Packer fans act. For example, because Detroit has been losing for so long, right now, a playoff appearance and one win in the playoffs would be acceptable to many Detroit fans. But, if next year they fail to go further than that, there will be complaints and calls for heads to roll. Packer fans are spoiled, but so would any fanbase be.

Except maybe Cleveland. If they went 8 - 8 two years running they might get a ticker tape parade.

[bobblehead]

The team might be able to lure an even better candidate to Green Bay, Josh McDaniels, by offering a $5M-plus annual salary and the GM title.

Replace two birds with one stone, as the saying goes.

Do we get to trade a bunch of picks for the right to tim tebow in that scenario??

[bobblehead]

LOL, I would be shocked if MM is fired this year. He'd need one more year of .500 play. Y'all know we had the best team in the league two years ago and it was only botched up by a PLAYER not following instructions, right?

Yes and No. If your coaching decisions for an entire half of football put that player in a position to lose the game....

MM has to learn to not take his foot off the gas and start counting possessions with an entire half to go. Its bad coaching. Players can't just turn it on again when the game gets close again. Plus if put them on their heels, that is when big plays happen.

[bobblehead]

I believe Cliff Christl said that the difference between all teams in the league were the number of plus players (game changers and players that made others better) that each team had. During that 2010 season, we had Woodson, Matthews, Collins, and possibly Raji on defense. On offense we had Rodgers (probably a double plus) and maybe Jennings and Finley. We lost only Finley for an appreciable amount of time.

This year, at the beginning of the season, we had Shields, Matthews, and possibly Daniels on defense. On offense, we had Rodgers (not a double plus anymore) and Lacy. The only plus players we're playing with are Daniels and a fading Rodgers.

I agree with you that this season is a lot different than 2010 for impact of injuries. If it's true that plus players are the difference between teams in this league, we're really going to struggle to make 8-8 with this roster.

Cliff was right and wrong. QB is and always will be the most important position. After that, Left Tackle and Pass rushers. After that, you can design around your talent. My personal favorite method for todays NFL is the Cowboys/Seahawks (before they paid Wilson) approach. Put together a dominant offensive line, control the clock, keep your D rested and keep your game managing QB in positions to excel (3rd and 3, or 2nd and 1).

Where cliff was wrong is that if you have gaping holes, no amount of 5 star talent can overcome it (think Erik Walden...read option). a cast of 4 star talent makes some 4 star guys look like 5 star talent (my opinion on Clay...who is 5 star at ILB, but 4 star at OLB). Guys like Bakteria look better when Sitton is bulldozing next to him. Your DB's look good when guys are getting to the QB. etc, etc.

[bobblehead]

Great post. I was thinking earlier today that we lack difference makers on our team, compared to others. Even if all the guys you mentioned were healthy, we can't measure up to teams like New England, Seattle, Arizona, Atlanta, and a bunch more, including Dallas. We have severely overrated the talent on this team.

I think many of us understand this talent. Remember, Stubby wouldn't bench bambi barnet for Bishop until he had no choice. Nobody knew how good Raji and Mathews would be at the start of 2010. Is Randall ready to make that leap (if healthy). How good might Clark be? Is Adams ready to break out now that Jordy is healthy? Can cook contribute yet? Is Spriggs the real deal at LG? As the time since this post has shown, things change...and fast. Since we aren't getting a new GM coach for a bit yet, I'm excited to see what TT does with the Peppers/Shields money. Might we see another dive into FA?

[bobblehead]

A lot of times, threads like this are over-reactions to short term shit and generally not justified. This time it's different. McCarthy is either stupidly stubborn or stubbornly stupid - take your pick. .

Considering the source, this is the most damning post in the history of internet!!

[pbmax]

Yes and No. If your coaching decisions for an entire half of football put that player in a position to lose the game....

MM has to learn to not take his foot off the gas and start counting possessions with an entire half to go. Its bad coaching. Players can't just turn it on again when the game gets close again. Plus if put them on their heels, that is when big plays happen.

I just don't get it. Its not a binary choice. You can waste clock AND get first downs. You don't need to lineup in goal line, 2 TE offense with a FB and WR,then just run into the teeth of the defense if they are going to get the ball back.

If you had Favre or Stafford back there, maybe I am worried about a pick. But Rodgers isn't going to throw one very often. You just need to remind him that a sack is better than a throw away. Just don't start circling and retreating before going down. Bail like Peyton Manning.

[hoosier]

Cliff was right and wrong. QB is and always will be the most important position. After that, Left Tackle and Pass rushers. After that, you can design around your talent. My personal favorite method for todays NFL is the Cowboys/Seahawks (before they paid Wilson) approach. Put together a dominant offensive line, control the clock, keep your D rested and keep your game managing QB in positions to excel (3rd and 3, or 2nd and 1).

Where cliff was wrong is that if you have gaping holes, no amount of 5 star talent can overcome it (think Erik Walden...read option). a cast of 4 star talent makes some 4 star guys look like 5 star talent (my opinion on Clay...who is 5 star at ILB, but 4 star at OLB). Guys like Bakteria look better when Sitton is bulldozing next to him. Your DB's look good when guys are getting to the QB. etc, etc.

If you have holes I bet 22 five-star players could make up for it. The 2010 team was even better than beveaux remembers, because he forgot about Tramon, who was with maybe one exception the best cornerback in football for the last two months of the season, and it wasn't because the pass rush on that team was anything close to irrepressible: they had CMIII, Raji and Jenkins, an occasional blitzing Woodson, and that was pretty much it.

[bobblehead]

Pete Daughter's article that the Packers simply lack playmakers is just true.

I love that term...playmakers. Show me a playmaker on a winning team that isn't surrounded by talent. What exactly is a playmaker? A guy who makes plays all by himself??...no such thing.

[mmmdk]

McCarthy will make Packers strong again. McCarthy will make Packers proud again. McCarthy will make Packers safe again. And McCarthy will make Packers great again.

[bobblehead]

For the ninetieth time this month I'd like to point out again...MM has did a good job with the talent given to him....with the talent given to him.
If the season goes array....there is only one spot to point

So you think he coached a good game against seattle in that monumental collapse? You think he did a good job leaving Erik Walden in long enough for Kapernick to run for 180 yards biting on the same play over and over? You think it was good early in his career when he practiced indoors because the weather outside made it hard to get quality reps in?