What's changed with Favre (for the better)?

[The Leaper]

Sherman had his problems, but he was the O-coordinartor for Holmgren for at least a year in Seattle, and had been in the system for a while.

Being an OC for one year...especially under a head coach like Holmgren who is going to retain a lot of control...doesn't cut it for me. McCarthy was OC in two places and had time to develop himself as an OC...and the difference between him and Sherman in that regard is quite noticeable.

[mraynrand]

Sherman had his problems, but he was the O-coordinartor for Holmgren for at least a year in Seattle, and had been in the system for a while.

Being an OC for one year...especially under a head coach like Holmgren who is going to retain a lot of control...doesn't cut it for me. McCarthy was OC in two places and had time to develop himself as an OC...and the difference between him and Sherman in that regard is quite noticeable.

Sherman ran a good offense. When not strapped by injury (2002 and 2005), it was among the best in the league. Favre had one of his finest years statistically in 2004. He was a lock for MVP in 2002 until the injuries hit. The running game was dominant for several years. He won in Minnesota on the strength of a balanced offensive attack in 2000, 2003, and 2004. He was in the Holmgren offense for a number of years before getting the O-coordinator spot, and he's O-coordinator again. You can like McCarthy better, and argue that he has more experience. That's fine. But you can't deny that Sherman had a lot of success in Green Bay running the offense. His 'experience' or lack of it, didn't affect that. He's a different guy than McCarthy, and ultimately (I hope) McCarthy will be a lot better. But Sherman was no slouch running the offense.

[The Leaper]

Sherman ran a good offense.

I never said Sherman ran a poor offense.

I'm saying his lack of experience explains why he wasn't as able to give Favre control of the offense...it takes greater experience to be able to grant your QB that kind of control and be able to coach up the rest of roster on how to interact with that. Sherman couldn't do it...he was almost exclusively from on OL background and had little experience with handling skill position players.

You can sit here and try to defend Sherman's experience based on offensive success...but that is pointless. You can succeed in spite of inexperience...and that was largely what happened to Sherman. He certainly possessed some great positives as well as a coach. However, it doesn't change the fact that he was still inexperienced as a head coach.

Up until now, I really hadn't noticed that difference between him and McCarthy...but it is really quite noticeable when you look at it.

[Patler]

By all reports, Sherman was an absolute control freak. Thus, he gave Favre no control over the plays being run. Fvare mentioned one time that he changed plays no more than a couple times a game under Sherman. That is definitely not the case with McCarthy.

Can't complain about the production under Sherman, for the most part. However, I have always complained about how rigid he was in 2005, first staying with the same offense that he had run the preceding years in spite of not having the same types of players at guard, and then adapting little after losing so many backs and receivers. He continued to try to do the same things, run the same plays, with little success.

McCarthy this year is showing quite amazing willingness to adapt to his players and their abilities. His offense and play calling are just about opposite of what he wants them to be. I give him a lot of credit for that.

[mraynrand]

By all reports, Sherman was an absolute control freak. Thus, he gave Favre no control over the plays being run.

Can't complain about the production under Sherman, for the most part. However, I have always complained about how rigid he was in 2005, first staying with the same offense that he had run the preceding years in spite of not having the same types of players at guard, and then adapting little after losing so many backs and receivers. He continued to try to do the same things, run the same plays, with little success.

It took him too long to adjust. But by the end of 2005, the Packer almost never ran U71 packages. In fact, Sherman was pretty much allowing Favre to throw on every down. Surprisingly, the Packers were in a number of games against better teams, but broke down. There was nothing left at the end of 2005 - Samkon was hurt and Favre was trhrowing to Andre Thurman. You could be right about the control freak thing though. I think that's what hurt him as GM after Hatley died - it's reasonable to assume he was acting the same way as coach.

[mraynrand]

it takes greater experience to be able to grant your QB that kind of control and be able to coach up the rest of roster on how to interact with that.

?

[Merlin]

I think the biggest difference is in the head coach. Sherman did not allow audibles. He put faith in his plays and not in Favre. Sherman ran more of a disciplined offense, McCarthy is the opposite. He sends in 2 plays, one running and one passing. He relies and what Favre sees in the defense and allows him to check into what he thinks will work. The other difference in the coaching style has to do with personell. Sherman did not change his offense based on what he had for personell, McCarthy has. I think the change in coaching style has made Bret a more accurate reader of defenses and thus made him a better QB.

[Noodle]

I don't think Shermy drew up a bunch of plays like "chuck it down the middle and hope for the best" or "drill the ball in to triple coverage and trust your gun" that poor ol' Brett had to run against his better judgment.

So I don't think Favre's greater control over LoS decisions is the whole explanation. He's playing differently. Maybe some injury is healed, or he has peace of mind, or the dang lightbulb finally went on, I don't know.

I do know that I'd take this version of Favre over any other QB in the league right now, and over any other version of Favre to have played in the past.

[mraynrand]

I never said Sherman ran a poor offense.

You can sit here and try to defend Sherman's experience based on offensive success...but that is pointless. You can succeed in spite of inexperience...and that was largely what happened to Sherman. He certainly possessed some great positives as well as a coach. However, it doesn't change the fact that he was still inexperienced as a head coach.

Up until now, I really hadn't noticed that difference between him and McCarthy...but it is really quite noticeable when you look at it.

OK, I get it. Sherman ran a good offense, but he succeeded despite no experience. He had some great positives, but was inexperienced. He is different than McCarthy. Experience allows you to cede control to your QB and then coach up the guys around him to deal with it. That's what McCarthy's experience allows, but Sherman's did not.

And I assume you think it's the more experienced coach who will ced control to the QB and coach up the guys around him to deal with it, but the inexperienced coach will try to control everything? Seems to me, it would be the exact opposite - an inexperienced coach would cede control to the experienced QB. But whatever. Why not just say you like McCarthy better because he's winning right now?

Also, by the end of 2005, Sherman had 6 years experience at Head Coach - 6 more than McCarthy, with just one losing season - an injury riddled, rebuilding year. If you want to say Sherman should have done better, I'd say, perhaps, without the injuries in 2002 he might have won it all. IF you like McCarthy's experience more, including a misearable year at San Fran and some average years at N.O., that's OK too. IF you like the way the Packers are playing this year - so do I. I like the fact that they have the best defense they've had since 1997. IT will keep them in a lot of games. But I'm hard-pressed to buy the experience argument.

[fan4life]

I think it is that McCarthy has entrusted him with the offense. Favre is given complete freedom to change the play, or to run variations as he sees fit based on the defense alignment. It was much more rigid under Sherman. Favre even expressed frustration a few years ago when he said it was difficult coming to the line of scrimmage, realizing that the play called would not work because of the defensive alignment, but not having the freedom or flexibility to change it. Sherman feared feared screw-ups or mis-communications so much that he preferred to just throw a play away when the defense had guessed right. Then, too, he had a lot of different player packages and each different combination only practiced certain plays. Favre said at times when he could check off to a different play, the players in at the time were not the ones who had run it, so he couldn't check to that play.

McCarthy seems to have designed a scheme with much more flexibility in it, and leaves it up to Favre to call the variation among several running and receiving options that he thinks will work best. This has to be refreshing and exciting for a player as experienced as Favre who hasn't had that kind of control in the past. It should make it much more exciting and rewarding for him.

Heck, on the record-setting throw he looked like Payton Manning, running down the line to make sure the TE knew the changed route expected from him. Did you ever see that under Sherman?

This is spot on

Yes, it is.

[Joemailman]

I think Brett spends a lot of time reading the posts here at Packerrats. I think we have inspired him, and we probably all deserve a lot of credit for his turnaround.

[Scott Campbell]

Did he get sacked at all this week? I think he's not getting so banged up, and that has to help.

Knock on wood.

[Guiness]

I dunno what has changed, but you have to think that if the Pack contiues this way (pass happy, no significant running game) that he has to be in the running for MVP this year!!!

HE was the difference on Sunday. Sure, the D held the Vike's for the most part, but swap QB's, and the score is flipped.

[Packnut]

Fvare

I think it is that McCarthy has entrusted him with the offense. Favre is given complete freedom to change the play, or to run variations as he sees fit based on the defense alignment. It was much more rigid under Sherman. Favre even expressed frustration a few years ago when he said it was difficult coming to the line of scrimmage, realizing that the play called would not work because of the defensive alignment, but not having the freedom or flexibility to change it. Sherman feared feared screw-ups or mis-communications so much that he preferred to just throw a play away when the defense had guessed right. Then, too, he had a lot of different player packages and each different combination only practiced certain plays. Favre said at times when he could check off to a different play, the players in at the time were not the ones who had run it, so he couldn't check to that play.

McCarthy seems to have designed a scheme with much more flexibility in it, and leaves it up to Favre to call the variation among several running and receiving options that he thinks will work best. This has to be refreshing and exciting for a player as experienced as Favre who hasn't had that kind of control in the past. It should make it much more exciting and rewarding for him.

Heck, on the record-setting throw he looked like Payton Manning, running down the line to make sure the TE knew the changed route expected from him. Did you ever see that under Sherman?

You nailed it. THAT is the diffference in Favre this season. It's not he's being careful or MM has him under control. The single most glaring difference is the freedom Brett has to change the play. If you examine all the big plays, most are a result of Favre changing the play.

[Deputy Nutz]

He has always enjoyed playing the game, nothing has changed their, but the only comments I have heard about retirement is that Favre is all but willing to come back in 2008 and compete again for the Packers. So there is no silly retirement talk. He is relatively injury free, he has a freedom on offense that he rarely had under Sherman and Rossely. In fact he made several comments about this in 2004 and 2005. Favre is at his best, when he is able to read a defense make the play change at the line of scrimmage and attack the defense where it was weak. Anyone remember the 1996 Super Bowl? Favre threw two touchdown passes on audibles.

I also think Favre let his guard down with his teammates and stopped feeling sorry for himself being the old man of the team. He always had a bond with Donald, but Jennings mentioned several times how he wants Favre's confidence. Favre realizes that he is the leader on offense but he also has something in common with the guys in the locker room. he plays football like the rest of them, and he can still hang out and talk football.