Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

[Bretsky]

http://packers.scout.com/2/689793.html

A few comments from the mighty Harry

"I will get to the Redskins, but I feel I have to address what happened last weekend before I can move on. I know everyone knows that you normally don’t win many games when you turn the ball over and I accept that. Just like I know that there isn’t any player that has said, “You know what? This is a good time to fumble and hurt my team.” James Jones is a rookie that Mike McCarthy has used as the poster child of what not to do, and I understand getting on him, but do it behind closed doors. Don’t throw him under the bus. It’s like McCarthy is saying, ‘It’s because of your mistakes we lost,’ but there were many others that contributed to the loss. I guess that comes with being a rookie. Even though the Bears didn’t get any points out of either one of Jones’ fumbles, he got benched to prove some point.

At the same time when Charles Woodson fumbled you can see him smiling on the ground after he knew he coughed it up. I didn’t see him or Brett being called out after that bonehead interception. I know they are veterans but I say, ‘So what?’ Their mistakes were just as costly.

With all that said, the score was 20-20 with 14 minutes left in the game and the Packers didn’t answer the bell. They got so much involved in the turnovers and penalties that they forgot how to play, and Mike McCarthy seemed to lose focus. I have been praising his ability to make game-time adjustments and he didn’t, and that’s why they lost. Good teams, which is what the Packers are trying to be, don’t get caught up in feeling sorry for themselves because they realize it’s not what happens to them in the process of the game because things happen. There are fumbles, interceptions and penalties, but it’s how you handle adversity that really matters.

Sometimes as coaches it’s too easy to point fingers at what players did or didn’t do instead of looking in the mirror. When the score was 20-20 the Packers offense went three series with just three plays and out, and whose responsibility is that? Should the players call out the play-caller and say, ‘Didn’t we practice that all week? Didn’t you know what to expect? and Bench him for his mistakes.’ The last time I looked this is a team game and this week the Packers will need everyone playing at their best to win. You can’t do that if you are scared to make a mistake because as soon as you think that way you will."

[Tarlam!]

Good article, IMO. I must admit, it's got me thinking....

[Patler]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

http://packers.scout.com/2/689793.html

A few comments from the mighty Harry

When the score was 20-20 the Packers offense went three series with just three plays and out, and whose responsibility is that? Should the players call out the play-caller and say, ‘Didn’t we practice that all week? Didn’t you know what to expect? and Bench him for his mistakes.’ The last time I looked this is a team game and this week the Packers will need everyone playing at their best to win. You can’t do that if you are scared to make a mistake because as soon as you think that way you will."

I agree with his criticism of benching Jones for as long as MM did. A couple series, the rest of the 1st half, maybe. But he should have been able to forget it and start fresh the second half.

But, the paragraph I quoted above seems to presume that if a play doesn't work, it's because it was the wrong play. It ignores the players' responsibilities to perform the plays called. Perhaps the calls were good and one or two players performed poorly each time, causing the plays to fail.

[Fred's Slacks]

I don't think its justified to rip into M3 for only getting on the rookie. M3 has shown that veteran's are not immune to criticism. He's ripped into the veterans when he feels they aren't showing focus. Jones' case was different than Favre's and Woodsen's. Jones made the exact same mistake on basically back to back plays. I agree that he shouldn't have been benched as long as he was, however the short ass chewing was not out of line.

[MJZiggy]

I thought what you wanted when dealing with mistakes was to learn from it, then forget it. How is he supposed to do either if M3 waits until halftime to chew Jones out. Firstly you're putting distance between the mistake and the consequence and letting him stew about it for the rest of the half and as a result, the learning is diminished AND he can't just forget about because it gets brought up again later. I agree, however, about not leaving him benched as long as he was. We needed him in the game.

[Patler]

I agree.

Chew him out immediately, if that is your style.
Bench him if you think it helps for a few series, maybe the rest of the half.
Approach him at half, ensure his head is together, tell him the past is the past and put him out in the first series of the second half.

[Bretsky]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

http://packers.scout.com/2/689793.html

A few comments from the mighty Harry

When the score was 20-20 the Packers offense went three series with just three plays and out, and whose responsibility is that? Should the players call out the play-caller and say, ‘Didn’t we practice that all week? Didn’t you know what to expect? and Bench him for his mistakes.’ The last time I looked this is a team game and this week the Packers will need everyone playing at their best to win. You can’t do that if you are scared to make a mistake because as soon as you think that way you will."

I agree with his criticism of benching Jones for as long as MM did. A couple series, the rest of the 1st half, maybe. But he should have been able to forget it and start fresh the second half.

But, the paragraph I quoted above seems to presume that if a play doesn't work, it's because it was the wrong play. It ignores the players' responsibilities to perform the plays called. Perhaps the calls were good and one or two players performed poorly each time, causing the plays to fail.

On the other hand, if your strategey is not working, I read the article to imply you should modify it. MM seemed a bit stubborn in half two and that did us no favors. Of course one or two players performed poorly; it's called the OL run blocking in that half.

[MJZiggy]

I still think he changed his calling due to his own temper and if he did it for any other reason, I'd say ok, but if M3's temper caused us to lose that game, that would really piss me off.

[Bretsky]

ANOTHER INTERESTING PART OF THE ARTICLE

Before I talk about this week’s article I must clear the air about something. On Wednesday, PackerReport.com correspondent Steve Lawrence made a mistake in calling me out because he put my name on it so he must have wanted my attention, so he got it. He made it seem like I didn’t know what I was talking about, so of course I did some investigating to find out who the hell this guy was that was questioning my knowledge.
Like I have said time and time again I will put my knowledge up against anyone, so Mr. Lawrence I guess you want to play with the big boys, so let’s play. Tell us what you really know and where did you get all your experience from, or did you just watch TV thinking one day people will listen to you. And, yes, it’s true you don’t have to have played the game at the highest level to understand it. Many haven’t, but if you haven’t don’t call someone out that has played it, coached it and

[Bretsky]

As many as you know I do like MM, but to be honest I put him at blame for this loss just as much as anything else. Consider this.

I haven't heard him take any responsibility for his own mistakes.

He defended his playcalling by saying the Bears safties were in cover 2 so he had to run because they took away the pass. Teams do pass against Cover 2 all the time, and in reality the Bears were in cover two for some of the first half when Favre ripped through the Bears offense like we were playing the Cleveland Browns. In half two the Bears just tried to take away the slant more; there were other alternatives.

He didn't want his WR's to fumble any more catches and didn't want BF to throw any more INT's, so it was too much run run for most of the second half until the final drive.

Favre was nearly unstoppable in the first half; MM played scared instead of going for a knockout punch. You can beat the cover 2 with a passing game if you choose.

He was afraid to take chances, something you have to do to win. We need to re-establish the Lambeau dominance and Sunday would have went a long way toward doing that; Lovie is not 3-0 at Lambeau Field

Even with all those turnovers, penalties, breaks, we could have won and should have won. And after winning despite all those factors going against us, we'd be debating if we can take the next step to be a dominant NFC force....rather than being leery about facing a dangerous Redskin team tomorrow.

[Patler]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

On the other hand, if your strategey is not working, I read the article to imply you should modify it. MM seemed a bit stubborn in half two and that did us no favors. Of course one or two players performed poorly; it's called the OL run blocking in that half.

I see absolutely no stubbornness in his second half play calling at all. Second half offensive plays from scrimmage:

1. p - 13 yds
2. r - 6 yds
3. r - 3 yds
4. r - (-3 yds) Most reports say it was there, except for a missed block by Coston.

At this point no reason to think the run game is dead.

5. r - 5 yds
6. r - 0 yds
7. pass intercepted

At this point, with the Bears in a defense you SHOULD be able to run against, the running game still shows it can get 5, 6 yards on a play. It's not being stoned by any means, but they seem to have botched two, while gaining 14 yards on three others. No reason to abandon the running game at this point.

8. r - 1 yd
9. r - 3 yds
10. r - 4 yds.

This series started at the 10 right after Favre's interception. No it did not get the first down you wanted, but again it didn't show the run game to be dead. One bad play, and two that showed you can gain yards running. These were the three plays made by Briggs, in which McCarthy said the guards missed their blocks.

At this point he has run the ball 8 times, and 5 of those plays good for 21 yards indicate you can pick up yardage on the ground. You just need to be as consistent in blocking as in the first half when runs went for 29, 8, 7, 5, 2 (TD), 3, 2, 2, 1, 10, 15, 3, 4 yards.

Thereafter he called a run on first down the next series, with two passes (incomplete) thereafter, 4 consecutive passes the next series, p, r (on 2nd and 4), p, p the next series and no runs thereafter.

The calls when made, with the field and game situations in mind, make sense. At no point did the running game look totally dead as it has earlier in the season.

[BallHawk]

Coaching alone never loses you a game. It can put you in a really bad position, but ultimately it's the players that need to execute. You could have Lombardi coaching a team, but if the team consists of Taco Wallace and Tim Couch how many games are you going to win?

I do largely put this loss on MM shoulders for numerous reasons, but in the end it was Favre who threw the boneheaded INT, Jones and CW that fumbled, and the defense that couldn't get it done.

[Bretsky]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

[quote="Patler"]

On the other hand, if your strategey is not working, I read the article to imply you should modify it. MM seemed a bit stubborn in half two and that did us no favors. Of course one or two players performed poorly; it's called the OL run blocking in that half.

I see absolutely no stubbornness in his second half play calling at all. Second half offensive plays from scrimmage:

1. p - 13 yds
2. r - 6 yds
3. r - 3 yds
4. r - (-3 yds) Most reports say it was there, except for a missed block by Coston.

Playcalling is about keeping defenses off balance. In half one we attacked. On second and four that was opportune to pass. MM's conservtivism right from the start here began the rythym killer

And I don't care about "most reports". Every play players can miss their blocks. MM called the plays trusting that the OL and Running game could be successful. He was wrong



At this point no reason to think the run game is dead.

5. r - 5 yds
6. r - 0 yds
7. pass intercepted

Yes, another predictable first two plays; kudos again for the predictability of protecting a lead. It put Favre in an obvious pass and Bears put on pressure, and Favre makes a bad mistake. 2nd and Five again was the time to pass, but MM was dedicating his team to the run.

At this point, with the Bears in a defense you SHOULD be able to run against, the running game still shows it can get 5, 6 yards on a play. It's not being stoned by any means, but they seem to have botched two, while gaining 14 yards on three others. No reason to abandon the running game at this point.

8. r - 1 yd
9. r - 3 yds
10. r - 4 yds.

TIME TO ADMIT FAILURE BY NOW AND SHOW SOME STONES. They should have been able to succeed the two previous series and failed. But hey, since our young and weak OL "should" be able to run, let's keep trying. Botching TWO out of FIVE running plays is an indicator what they are doing is not working. Two straight Three and outs would be another obvious indicator.

THAT PLAY CALL SERIES WAS SICK

This series started at the 10 right after Favre's interception. No it did not get the first down you wanted, but again it didn't show the run game to be dead. One bad play, and two that showed you can gain yards running. These were the three plays made by Briggs, in which McCarthy said the guards missed their blocks.

WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FIRST DOWN PASS, HOW CAN YOU SAY THE RUN GAME IS NOT STINKING UP THE JOINT HERE ? It is failing and I flet that watching the game. Three three and outs when you stubbornly try to do what Green Bay is weakest at.

At this point he has run the ball 8 times, and 5 of those plays good for 21 yards indicate you can pick up yardage on the ground. You just need to be as consistent in blocking as in the first half when runs went for 29, 8, 7, 5, 2 (TD), 3, 2, 2, 1, 10, 15, 3, 4 yards.

AT THIS POINT MM HAS ALREADY RUINED THE RYTHYM OF AN EFFECTIVE FIRST HALF OFFENSE. And five rushes for 21 yards and three botched rushes is failing this offense.

Thereafter he called a run on first down the next series, with two passes (incomplete) thereafter, 4 consecutive passes the next series, p, r (on 2nd and 4), p, p the next series and no runs thereafter.

The offense was way way way out of their game by now; MM should get a lot of the blame for taking a dominating offense in half one to a terrible offense in half two.

The calls when made, with the field and game situations in mind, make sense. At no point did the running game look totally dead as it has earlier in the season

We played the second half right into the Bears hands. MM called plays scared. It failed

[Harlan Huckleby]

I'm on both sides of the fence. I don't think Jones allowing the ball to get punched out twice is any worse than Favre's interception. Defenders are going to make plays. On the other hand, I'm not going to second guess MM for benching him. That seems reasonable to me, even if I would have put him back in after a quarter.

Hey, now I'm on THREE sides of fences, didn't realize that was even possible!

[Patler]

Re: Harry Sydney throws some darts at MM

Playcalling is about keeping defenses off balance. In half one we attacked. On second and four that was opportune to pass. MM's conservtivism right from the start here began the rythym killer

[/b]

My God, on the second and 4 play he had called seven consecutive pass plays leading up to it! Why was it so "opportune" to pass an 8th consecutive time???? At that point it is just as likely that the Bears were thinking pass, expecting that the Packers had reverted to their tendencies of the previous weeks.