Official Fire Mike McCarthy Thread

[ZachMN]

Jason Wilde was just on here in Mpls and he said that MM's offense is predicated on winning one on one battles which is fine when you have the talent. I am sure some of you already knew this but it told me MM is the large part of the problem. A good coach adapts to what he has and makes it work. There are circumstances when you can build a team to your preferences but in light of the way the league works and the reality of the defenses you are going against is this a good philosophy?

[pbmax]

Quick question re: the road losses: which teams (specifically NE, LAR, MN, SEA) have worse talent than the Packers. Be honest and line 'em up across the board. Which teams have QBs being outplayed by Rodgers? Do the Packers have a well stocked defense with multiple pro bowl players? Who are their difference-makers? If you find yourself saying "Gee, the Packers really have a mostly depleted defense and a pretty marginal offense with a historically underperforming QB" you might begin to wonder about whether the problem is mostly coaching or mostly personnel. My point is that EVERYONE around the NFL thinks the Packers win because Rodgers plays great football, not because they are loaded with talent. And this year, the cupboard is almost completely bare, and Rodgers is mostly playing like a slightly above average NFL starter. So whose fault is that?

They play good teams tough enough to convince me there is better talent available that a sub 500 team. They can play better D than the Rams or Patriots, but they are young and inured so there are breakdowns. They don't have Seattle's D. They are more talented offensively (but not more effective) than NE and pretty even with the Vikes.

Some of that is scheme, like McCarthy's scripted plays, which Silverstein says are tailored to Rodgers preferences for scheming certain things open. This was an adjustment made after they fell behind by double digits versus Wash and Detroit.

But once the game plan is used up, the base stuff fails to deliver. Same happens to the defense, though Pettine has rescued his D with 2nd half adjustments. The offenses only answer in the 2nd half is a scrambling comeback.

The talent isn't the same as it was in 2014. But its not a bare cupboard.

If they can make that drive late in the Vikings game with medium, quick and on-time throws, the question is where is that offense the rest of the time they are scuffling?

Rodgers is the talent. Its the coaches job to set him up. If the quick stuff works, they need to call it. Yet they insist on looking for one on one matchups down the sideline despite repeated misfires.

[mraynrand]

Jason Wilde was just on here in Mpls and he said that MM's offense is predicated on winning one on one battles which is fine when you have the talent....There are circumstances when you can build a team to your preferences but in light of the way the league works and the reality of the defenses you are going against is this a good philosophy?

This is a common line of complaint, and it has it's merits, but at some point, you have to stop and say "Hey wait a minute, any offense worth it's spit kinda relies on guys winning one-on-one battles, all over the offense, from linemen, to running backs, to WRs." Other teams get beat because they have only one outstanding skill player and defenses take that guy away, leaving other guys who can't win 1on1 battles. MN wins 1on1's with two WRs and a TE. Some scheming helps, but ultimately, you have to have talent to win battles and a QB who can consistently deliver the ball on time with accuracy. Packers right now are lower than they've been in all three areas.

[mraynrand]

They play good teams tough enough to convince me there is better talent available that a sub 500 team.

but you could argue that they play them close because of coaching lesser talent up, no?

Do the roster line-up D and O and tell me whether the Packers come out on top. But be fair about how the doubly injured Rodgers and the three rookies in the secondary, etc. etc. are really playing.

[wist43]

McCarthy is as good as gone, and I think that's a good thing.

The league has caught up to his offense, and he refuses to adjust... he wrote his own ticket out of town.

[pbmax]

but you could argue that they play them close because of coaching lesser talent up, no?

I could. On ether side of the ball. But I think the script versus basic playbook tilts the evidence against McCarthy. Haven't made up my mind about Pettine yet.

Now that doesn't explain why Rodgers is suddenly struggling with accuracy or playing like he has forgotten how to read a progression. But I do think there is a plausible explanation, though its impossible to prove.

The only explanation I have read that makes sense to me (among those not making sense are 1) Rodgers is a coach killer, 2) Rodgers is old, 3) Rodgers is too hurt currently) is that Rodgers and McCarthy had a break sometime in 2015 when what formerly were Rodgers tweaks to the offense because THE offense, the only one that worked over the extended O downturn. And that became the extended offense. If you want an example, think about the ineptitude of the Packer offense late in the Cowboys playoff game. Rodgers made 2 or 3 ridiculous plays to lead the Packers to that win. If you subtract some health, O line pass pro and receivers from that offense add some QB downturn, you get dreck.

One reason I am not worried about Rodgers future is the yards per attempt figure. After a decline from absurd heights in 2011 (with upticks in 2014), he is trending back up. Which means he is being effective again down the field though the offense doesn't have many points to show for it.

                                                                      
Year      Cmp  Att Cmp% Y/A AY/A  Rate  QBR NY/A ANY/A Sk% 4QC GWD  AV
2010      312  475 65.7 8.3  8.4 101.2 69.2 7.37  7.50 6.1   0   1  15
2011*+    343  502 68.3 9.2 10.5 122.5 84.5 8.22  9.39 6.7   0   1  23
2012*     371  552 67.2 7.8  8.5 108.0 71.2 6.64  7.33 8.5   2   3  16
2013      193  290 66.6 8.7  9.0 104.9 60.6 7.78  8.00 6.8   1   1   9
2014*+    341  520 65.6 8.4  9.5 112.2 78.3 7.68  8.65 5.1   1   1  21
2015*     347  572 60.7 6.7  7.1  92.7 60.3 5.67  6.10 7.4   2   2  14
2016*     401  610 65.7 7.3  8.1 104.2 73.8 6.48  7.24 5.4   0   2  18
2017      154  238 64.7 7.0  7.2  97.2 64.4 5.80  5.99 8.5   2   2   7
2018      255  413 61.7 7.9  8.8 101.7 52.4 6.80  7.59 7.6   2       2
Care     3443 5308 64.9 7.9  8.5      103.6 6.87  7.42 7.0  13  19 157

Provided by Pro-Football-Reference.com: View Original Table
Generated 11/26/2018.

[pbmax]

Rodgers is missing reads and opportunities that he hasn't before which is killing 3rd down efficiency and red zone numbers,

But his play hasn't fallen off a cliff. The O is slightly less talented and McCarthy hasn't gotten the offense and Rodgers to adjust.

That is on the coach.

[gbgary]

Rodgers is missing reads and opportunities that he hasn't before which is killing 3rd down efficiency and red zone numbers,

But his play hasn't fallen off a cliff. The O is slightly less talented and McCarthy hasn't gotten the offense and Rodgers to adjust.

That is on the coach.

yup. whoever the new coach is is going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. i hope they're hungry and up to the challenge for the long hall...if they're allowed to go the long hall.

[Joemailman]

yup. whoever the new coach is is going to be stuck between a rock and a hard place. i hope they're hungry and up to the challenge for the long hall...if they're allowed to go the long hall.

There doesn't need to be a long haul. It's a very fine difference between winning and losing in the NFL. Look at Philly the last few years:

2016: 7-9
2017: 13-3 and Super Bowl Champs
2018: 5-6

Packers need to fix their 3rd and 4th down conversion rates on offense. That's their biggest problem. That doesn't require a 4 year plan.

[Joemailman]

Updated odds to be the next NFL head coach fired (@betonline_ag):

Mike McCarthy +400
Todd Bowles +425
Steve Wilks +450
John Harbaugh +500
Vance Joseph +700
Dirk Koetter +700
Doug Marrone +800
Adam Gase +1000
Pat Shurmur +1000
Sean McDermott +2500

[Bossman641]

There doesn't need to be a long haul. It's a very fine difference between winning and losing in the NFL. Look at Philly the last few years:

2016: 7-9
2017: 13-3 and Super Bowl Champs
2018: 5-6

Packers need to fix their 3rd and 4th down conversion rates on offense. That's their biggest problem. That doesn't require a 4 year plan.

Agreed, for all their struggles the offense still has the key positions filled in qb/lt/#1 wr. There's a lot to do elsewhere in both offense and defense but a lot of money will be freed up between cobb/cm3 and possibly perry/graham

[pbmax]

Updated odds to be the next NFL head coach fired (@betonline_ag):

Mike McCarthy +400
Todd Bowles +425
Steve Wilks +450
John Harbaugh +500
Vance Joseph +700
Dirk Koetter +700
Doug Marrone +800
Adam Gase +1000
Pat Shurmur +1000
Sean McDermott +2500

Wait, is that the money line? Doesn't that mean M3 is least likely in the list to be fired?

[pbmax]

Wait, is that the money line? Doesn't that mean M3 is least likely in the list to be fired?

If it works like a game, you would need to bet $2,500 to win $100 when Sean McDermott is fired.

[Joemailman]

Wait, is that the money line? Doesn't that mean M3 is least likely in the list to be fired?

No. I believe it means if you bet $100 MM gets fired, you win $400.

[pbmax]

No. I believe it means if you bet $100 MM gets fired, you win $400.

The original article does state explicitly that McCarthy is leading candidate to get the boot. But that notation really through me off. In a money line bet on a game, it might be Packers +130, Cardinals +105 or something like that. You need to bet $130 to get $100 for a Packers win, or $105 to get $100 for a Cardinals upset.