Is McCarthy the problem?

[Rutnstrut]

Who do you think made Rodgers what he is today? Favre?

Do you think Rodgers wouldn't be one of the best without stubby? I very much doubt that.

[mraynrand]

Do you think Rodgers wouldn't be one of the best without stubby? I very much doubt that.

I think there's a good chance he wouldn't. He had to shed his tedford indoctrination and learn new mechanics. He got to play in/run one of the best schemed offenses in the past 10 years. There was a pretty good chance he would have gone to a terrible team and have had a Joey Harrington career. there were probably a handful of teams that would have developed him at the same level. And sure, I give him a lot of credit for his success, but great players can suck in terrible environments, even if they develop OK. See for example Steve Young at Tampa Bay.

[MadScientist]

I think there's a good chance he wouldn't. He had to shed his tedford indoctrination and learn new mechanics. He got to play in/run one of the best schemed offenses in the past 10 years. There was a pretty good chance he would have gone to a terrible team and have had a Joey Harrington career. there were probably a handful of teams that would have developed him at the same level. And sure, I give him a lot of credit for his success, but great players can suck in terrible environments, even if they develop OK. See for example Steve Young at Tampa Bay.

So you're saying that had Favre retired earlier, Joey Harrington could have taken over the Packers and lead them to Super Bowl greatness?

[mraynrand]

So you're saying that had Favre retired earlier, Joey Harrington could have taken over the Packers and lead them to Super Bowl greatness?

I don't think Stubby can save every QB. There was some guy they drafted in the second round who didn't pan out IIRC.

[pbmax]

The problem with those run rates is that when you run is almost as important as how much you run.

Last year McCarthy at times seemed to loosen up in the 4 minute offense and pass more when trying to burn clock. Problem was that on several occasions, he went run-run-pass from conservative formations before putting out his 3 WRs package for 3rd down. He might as well have sent Western Union onto the field.

This is Marty Schottenheimer level thinking. That there is a formula to win and if you follow it, you will win. Also, if another team is aware of the formula and counters it, then you just need to win harder.

The answer is to play smarter. You want to burn clock as priority #1 in the 4 minute offense? Then put your pass catching back out there in single back with 3 WRs or 2 TEs, with at least one in the slot. Then go pass-run-run or anything other than telegraphed play calls.

The good thing about those run rates is that it does support the idea that M3 is not far off the mark. He just needs to get over down and distance considerations and try to hurt the defense with some confusion.

[Rutnstrut]

I don't really dislike stubby's way of coaching, except. I hate his unwillingness to realize his "plan" isn't working and gameplan on the fly. That willingness to scrap a preplanned game plan and shift on the fly is what makes BB superhuman compared to other coaches. IMO stubby would never have brought a team back in the SB from behind like Belichick did. I do feel stubby would be the coach lose the lead in a big game though.

[mraynrand]

I don't really dislike stubby's way of coaching, except. I hate his unwillingness to realize his "plan" isn't working and gameplan on the fly. That willingness to scrap a preplanned game plan and shift on the fly is what makes BB superhuman compared to other coaches. IMO stubby would never have brought a team back in the SB from behind like Belichick did. I do feel stubby would be the coach lose the lead in a big game though.

That's why he's Stubby. Still, ya gotta admit, they were down by 14 to Seattle and came storming back (was Favre the one who changed the gameplay on the fly, was it Stubby or both?) and absolutely destroyed Seattle in 2007; Down by 17 at AZ and within about 2 feet of an OT win on that overthrow to Jennings. That's about as good as you can get comeback-wise in the playoffs. They gave up big leads versus Pittsburgh in the SB and Dallas in Divisional last year and still won. Seattle was their huge blunder, that's the only significant lead where they ended up losing in the playoffs, but it was only a two score lead (12 points).

[MadScientist]

The problem with those run rates is that when you run is almost as important as how much you run.

Last year McCarthy at times seemed to loosen up in the 4 minute offense and pass more when trying to burn clock. Problem was that on several occasions, he went run-run-pass from conservative formations before putting out his 3 WRs package for 3rd down. He might as well have sent Western Union onto the field.

This is Marty Schottenheimer level thinking. That there is a formula to win and if you follow it, you will win. Also, if another team is aware of the formula and counters it, then you just need to win harder.

The answer is to play smarter. You want to burn clock as priority #1 in the 4 minute offense? Then put your pass catching back out there in single back with 3 WRs or 2 TEs, with at least one in the slot. Then go pass-run-run or anything other than telegraphed play calls.

The good thing about those run rates is that it does support the idea that M3 is not far off the mark. He just needs to get over down and distance considerations and try to hurt the defense with some confusion.

Perhaps a good part of the problem lately is the personnel available. A RB that can catch and two TE's with one optionally split wide sound great, but when your TE's are crap (R.Rodgers and whoever when Cook was out last year) or one receiving TE (Cook) and a plodding piss-poor blocker (Rodgers). it just doesn't work like you would want it. Add to that a RB situation where you either had a plodding pounder (Rip or previously Fat Eddie), or a converted WR who will really struggle against a stop-the-run front, and you have a situation where it doesn't matter what you want to do, the players aren't going to do it very well.

This year they could play around with Monty and Rip in the backfield, the two good TE's and Jordy, which has potential for power running or 4 credible receiving threats and a bodyguard / safety valve for AR. At least on this forum it sounds good.

[pbmax]

Perhaps a good part of the problem lately is the personnel available. A RB that can catch and two TE's with one optionally split wide sound great, but when your TE's are crap (R.Rodgers and whoever when Cook was out last year) or one receiving TE (Cook) and a plodding piss-poor blocker (Rodgers). it just doesn't work like you would want it. Add to that a RB situation where you either had a plodding pounder (Rip or previously Fat Eddie), or a converted WR who will really struggle against a stop-the-run front, and you have a situation where it doesn't matter what you want to do, the players aren't going to do it very well.

This year they could play around with Monty and Rip in the backfield, the two good TE's and Jordy, which has potential for power running or 4 credible receiving threats and a bodyguard / safety valve for AR. At least on this forum it sounds good.

True for the recent past with the Cook exception, but I was looking forward with my suggestions.

Despite the lack of threatening TEs, M3 can still line up 3 wide in years past and threaten both pass and run. Does the lack of a TE hurt when attacking the middle? Sure. But there are other ways to stress the defense.

[Joemailman]

http://www.tmj4.com/sports/green-bay...nings-comments

Rodgers responded in defense of his coach, saying he’s more concerned with the opinions of his teammates and coaching staff.

“I’ve made it pretty well known how I feel about Mike,” Rodgers said. “He’s our leader and...we follow his lead and we love Mike. We believe in him, and he believes in us, and so we got his back.”

[Maxie the Taxi]

Is Stubby the problem?

The buck stops with him. He and his entire staff including Capers should go. Their act is stale. Being a Packers fan nowadays is like watching a long-running TV series that is past it's prime. The plot is predictable. I don't care if Stubby rallies the troops and runs the table. It's time for some new blood.

[texaspackerbacker]

There are a lot of worse head coaches around. McCarthy is ok when it comes to not overtly blowing games. He just doesn't take risks sometimes when they need to be taken to win tough games. (I hate to use the word conservative for that - try too cautious).

And regarding his staff, I've said many times, we would be seriously hurting without the creativity of Capers, given the lame personnel that Ted Thompson has saddled this team with. THAT is squarely where blame needs to be assessed - on Ted Thompson.

[gbgary]

for the most part.

[Rutnstrut]

There are a lot of worse head coaches around. McCarthy is ok when it comes to not overtly blowing games. He just doesn't take risks sometimes when they need to be taken to win tough games. (I hate to use the word conservative for that - try too cautious).

And regarding his staff, I've said many times, we would be seriously hurting without the creativity of Capers, given the lame personnel that Ted Thompson has saddled this team with. THAT is squarely where blame needs to be assessed - on Ted Thompson.

But Ted drafted Rodgers, that makes him a genius.

[mraynrand]

But Ted drafted Rodgers, that makes him a genius.

No, but he's OK when it comes to not overtly blowing every pick in all his drafts. Be careful: we really don't want to heap unnecessary praise on these losers.