Official nice things to say about Mike McCarthy thread

[gbgary]

That's just the headline, Red. He's a good coach and probably a decent person. He doesn't spend much time blasting anyone else. He even has kind words for Rodgers, who half the state thinks fired the coach.

But I find it ironic that Mr. Silo Straddler (Murphy) isn't any better at bridging gaps than this. Though I have met few people who agreed that they needed to be fired because they were the problem. Everyone always has an angle on it that shifts blame.

My fear is that the inability of the front office to get the coaching staff to move on what needs to change and improve is going to be just as bad tomorrow as its been in the past. And Murphy is not the guy to fix this. The entire coaching search has made this impression on me. I fear they are looking for a savior of a designer, not a person who will adapt to what needs to be done.

mccarthy doesn't seem like a bridge-burner to me. wasn't surprised he didn't go postal.

murphy is doing what an owner would be doing (which is his role). things needed to change and so far it's been a 180. they're trying to adapt to the new nfl. will Rodgers adapt? how much will his ridiculous contract hamper that? those are my fears.

what do you think the front office needs the staff to move-on from to change and improve? the only thing left is rodgers style and mindset. as i mentioned that's a big deal. if it happens great...but if it doesn't? maybe him personally? that was the front office's responsibility...and it's too late for that now...or is it?

[pbmax]

what do you think the front office needs the staff to move-on from to change and improve? the only thing left is rodgers style and mindset. as i mentioned that's a big deal. if it happens great...but if it doesn't? maybe him personally? that was the front office's responsibility...and it's too late for that now...or is it?

That was awkwardly phrased. I want the front office to insist on changes in season and during the off-season in order to take advantage of talent that is available.

For instance, I would prefer them not to let Jones wear out a spot on the bench for 6 games before making him your starter.

If the coach says we need to stop scheming to get people open and just get better at the fundamentals, I want the FO to ask "why you aren't doing both?"

So if the TEs either can't block or can't catch, what is plan B Mr. Play Action Pass? That is a question they should be talking about right now.

[gbgary]

That was awkwardly phrased. I want the front office to insist on changes in season and during the off-season in order to take advantage of talent that is available.

For instance, I would prefer them not to let Jones wear out a spot on the bench for 6 games before making him your starter.

If the coach says we need to stop scheming to get people open and just get better at the fundamentals, I want the FO to ask "why you aren't doing both?"

So if the TEs either can't block or can't catch, what is plan B Mr. Play Action Pass? That is a question they should be talking about right now.

ok. those things are gute's things...not murphy's. i think that's happening so far. let's see how the first 6 games go...whether we see improvement/adaptation. they can only do so much in one year. it's a pretty poor team. in rodgers last 22 starts they're 10-12. take away the minn (where he was hurt) and det (when he came back too soon) games and they're 10-10.

[pbmax]

ok. those things are gute's things...not murphy's. i think that's happening so far. let's see how the first 6 games go...whether we see improvement/adaptation. they can only do so much in one year. it's a pretty poor team. in rodgers last 22 starts they're 10-12. take away the minn (where he was hurt) and det (when he came back too soon) games and they're 10-10.

We might not know until a couple of seasons in, so I agree it will take time. Both Gute and La Fleur seem more at ease with the press than Ted and Mike so it won't be as obvious where the holes in the operation are.

I am mostly extrapolating from the very mundane way the hiring and comments have been so far. I see this as business as usual at 1265; maybe it won't be that way all the time.

But I haven't seen a sign its going to change, the most positive aspect of the entire hiring is that La Fleur was no one else's candidate. And like everything else here, that is a two sided coin.

[gbgary]

We might not know until a couple of seasons in, so I agree it will take time. Both Gute and La Fleur seem more at ease with the press than Ted and Mike so it won't be as obvious where the holes in the operation are.

I am mostly extrapolating from the very mundane way the hiring and comments have been so far. I see this as business as usual at 1265; maybe it won't be that way all the time.

But I haven't seen a sign its going to change, the most positive aspect of the entire hiring is that La Fleur was no one else's candidate. And like everything else here, that is a two sided coin.

definitely by then...with 2+ drafts in. rodgers will be 2+ years older too. it'll be interesting. i don't see anymore SB's in the rodgers era though. just not enough cap.

[Joemailman]

That was awkwardly phrased. I want the front office to insist on changes in season and during the off-season in order to take advantage of talent that is available.

For instance, I would prefer them not to let Jones wear out a spot on the bench for 6 games before making him your starter.

If the coach says we need to stop scheming to get people open and just get better at the fundamentals, I want the FO to ask "why you aren't doing both?"

So if the TEs either can't block or can't catch, what is plan B Mr. Play Action Pass? That is a question they should be talking about right now.

Worried at all about a slippery slope if you have the front office dictating in-season changes to the coach? I'm thinking of Mike Pettine being told in 2014 to start Johhny Manziel when the Browns were 7-6. An extreme example perhaps, but an example nonetheless.

[gbgary]

Worried at all about a slippery slope if you have the front office dictating in-season changes to the coach? I'm thinking of Mike Pettine being told in 2014 to start Johhny Manziel when the Browns were 7-6. An extreme example perhaps, but an example nonetheless.

murphy's said he's not getting involved in personnel and i haven't seen the slightest inkling that gute would make an onfield call. that would be poison. the cowboys. as long as everyone stays in their lane (russ ball) i think they'll be fine.

[pbmax]

Worried at all about a slippery slope if you have the front office dictating in-season changes to the coach? I'm thinking of Mike Pettine being told in 2014 to start Johhny Manziel when the Browns were 7-6. An extreme example perhaps, but an example nonetheless.

Oh, absolutely. I don't want Jerry Jones on the sideline or whoever gives the Bears their worst ideas.

I used to be staunchly against any of this, preferring the Wolf model (or perhaps the non-Modell model) and the two people on stand alone islands (GM, coach).

But the breadth of evidence (often the Steelers) seems to suggest that great coaches are basically trained, not hired. The odds of returning to glory with recycled great coaches aren't good. But Thompson was categorically opposed to managing his head coach on this level. And McCarthy had very mixed success changing his strategies on offense and couldn't sustain success on D. Part of this is talent, obviously and Fritz is right that someone should have had a serious talk with Ted about efforts to fix the defense. But Capers wasn't helping enough either.

After 2011, it becomes clear that teams can adjust to the big play offense (Giants, Seattle and San Fran) and M3 took way too long to fix that. He had some good ideas (no huddle, Lacy, sign a pass catching TE) but more often than not it was his QB that took his team to the playoffs. If the QB couldn't do it, the team was sunk.

ST just never functioned and I don't buy draft and develop as the reason. We are talking about 2-4 players at the most and that is not the difference between good and league worst.

I still admire McCarthy. He did eventually solve that Seattle D but then the game planning Schottenheimer sabotaged his best efforts.

[pbmax]

murphy's said he won't get involved in personnel and i haven't seen the slightest inkling that gute would make an onfield call.

There needs to be an organizational standard about what is a blip (random FG miss even if at crucial time) and fundamental approach flaw (too many blocked kicks in a season, can't make FG from 39-40 yards).

The GM needs to set those parameters with the coach. If its not up to snuff, you spend time to fix. Its a little bit of Sherman with better player procurement. When he decided they needed better receivers, they got them. Problem was the approach cost them depth and talent everywhere.

Needs checks and balances like everything else.

[MadScientist]

"It couldn't have been handled any worse. Anytime you lose a close game, it's a difficult time emotionally afterward, but when you lose a home game at Lambeau Field in December, it's really hard. And that hasn't happened very often. I walked out of my press conference, and I'm thinking about the game, thinking about how our playoff shot was now minimal. That's where my head was at. And when I was told Mark Murphy wanted to see me -- and the messenger was cold and the energy was bad. Mark said it was an ugly loss, and it was time to make change. He said something about the offense and the special teams, and he didn't think it was going to get any better. There was no emotion to it. That was hard," he said.

Honestly that description sounds like it was handled about the best that a situation like this could have been. The firing should have been handled without emotion, and once the decision was made to fire MM, the firing should happen as soon as reasonably possible. Does he really think the firing should have sounded like Mr. Spacely firing George Jetson, or all teary-eyed? Or maybe he thinks it would have been better if he stay on for the last 4 games, while Gute and Murphy started to search for his replacement? If the team looked like it quit on him before, it would have been a total shit-show those last 4 games. About the only thing that would have done was give the Packers the 3rd pick in the draft after they lost them all.

[SudsMcBucky]

as long as everyone stays in their lane (russ ball) i think they'll be fine.

https://www.ispot.tv/ad/IlZP/at-and-t-wireless-ok-tattoo-parlor

[gbgary]

Honestly that description sounds like it was handled about the best that a situation like this could have been. The firing should have been handled without emotion, and once the decision was made to fire MM, the firing should happen as soon as reasonably possible. Does he really think the firing should have sounded like Mr. Spacely firing George Jetson, or all teary-eyed? Or maybe he thinks it would have been better if he stay on for the last 4 games, while Gute and Murphy started to search for his replacement? If the team looked like it quit on him before, it would have been a total shit-show those last 4 games. About the only thing that would have done was give the Packers the 3rd pick in the draft after they lost them all.

right. they even welcomed him back to talk the staff and the players. sounds more than fine to me. if anything it may have been a little over the top.

[mraynrand]

Worried at all about a slippery slope if you have the front office dictating in-season changes to the coach? I'm thinking of Mike Pettine being told in 2014 to start Johhny Manziel when the Browns were 7-6. An extreme example perhaps, but an example nonetheless.

That’s an excellent example. The move killed that team. It undermined Pettine’s authority. Everyone was looking past him.

[call_me_ishmael]

Said it once, said it 1000 times. Mark Murphy looks horrible in hindsight on that move and it was a mike-sherman-chicken-shit type of move unbecoming of the Packers. Mark Murphy right now is on thin, thin ice in my book. He has shown himself to be a hair above inept.

[MadScientist]

murphy's said he's not getting involved in personnel and i haven't seen the slightest inkling that gute would make an onfield call. that would be poison. the cowboys. as long as everyone stays in their lane (russ ball) i think they'll be fine.

Sure we have. Gute said stop using Montgomery over Jones - by trading Montgomery.