Chemistry and McCarthy

[RashanGary]

Favre was talking about why he was better this year. He said the way he watched video. He said they have meetings and open dialog where the recievers and Favre just talk about the video as they watch it and strategize. He said he knows some teams don't do that. He said they never did that here until recently (I took it as being when Sherman left).

MM lets players be themselves. It's loose, but focused. Sherman wanted everything his way. The players weren't really empowered to make decisions and have ideas. It seemed like he micromanaged and took the fun out of the game. This is all hindsight, but it's something I'm picking up on this team compared to the playoff losers of the past.

Not to blame it all on Sherman the coach. I'm sure Sherman the GM had something to do with it too. That nightmare is over though, we should just be happy with this team

[RashanGary]

Off topic, but I'm listening to Rouse. He seems like a great kid. Very humble and focused on the team.

[Fritz]

Not sure about Shermy. On the one hand there is that perception that he was too tight and didn't let people - players or coaches - make suggestions or disagree with him. On the other hand, there was this completely opposite criticism that he couldn't control Favre - that he let Favre play the cowboy and try to throw deep all the time.

Paradoxical ideas, it seems to me. So I dunno.

[retailguy]

Not sure about Shermy. On the one hand there is that perception that he was too tight and didn't let people - players or coaches - make suggestions or disagree with him. On the other hand, there was this completely opposite criticism that he couldn't control Favre - that he let Favre play the cowboy and try to throw deep all the time.

Paradoxical ideas, it seems to me. So I dunno.

JH can figure it out. His mother is Miss Cleo....

[Bretsky]

While Sherman certainly appears to be a good man, all indications are he turned into a power freak that was tough to coach under.

Favre going from Sherman to MM has revitalized his career IMO.

It was absolutely ludicrous for Sherman and Rossley to send the message to Favre not to audible. Just pure stupid. It distanced Favre from the game plan and IMO he wasn't nearly as prepared going into games as he is under Mike McCarthy. And then he did stupid things more than he should have.

What McCarthy has done is given Favre some ownership interest in this offense. He hasn't had coaching like this since Mike Holmgren left.

[RashanGary]

Favre had some very telling things in his latest press conference about watching video. He said the players didn't have time set aside to communicate and get on the same page. Now they watch video together and communicate. It's part of their weekly preparation.

It seems to fit the MS micromanageing theory that the media hinted to later in the Sherm regime.



MS seemed like a decent guy, or at least he played one in his weekly artical. From everything I hear, he was hard to deal with at work and he became a real problem when he got demoted. I'm just glad he's gone. this team is doing great. Maybe it's the GM. Maybe it's the coach, but either way, MS being gone looks like a big part of the solution.

[Scott Campbell]

That would seen to bode well for a Favre return. It might also help explain why it didn't take him long to make up his mind on a return for this year.

[RashanGary]

That would seen to bode well for a Favre return. It might also help explain why it didn't take him long to make up his mind on a return for this year.

Another good point. Having fun helps.

[FritzDontBlitz]

I had to find this old article from a thread motife started right after the 2006 draft. Judging from the date, it must have been after the first mini-camp. I found it very enlightening then and even moreso now:

Sydney Speaks! I like what I see!
Mike McCarthy By: Harry Sydney

Date: May 19, 2006

Harry Sydney is not one to sugarcoat anything when it comes to expressing his feelings about the Green Bay Packers. He will tell fans what they need to hear, or read. He explains in his column today why he is as optimistic as ever about the Packers.

Lately I have been asked, “What's up with my new change of attitude?" I'm not sure what those that ask mean? Then they say that I seem more positive about the Green Bay Packers, and I say I am because of the things I am seeing take place. Let me explain:
I'm not going to sound positive when I see things that I believe aren't about winning football. You must understand that I am a FOOTBALL HOMER, not necessarily a PACKER HOMER, so I'm never, and I mean never, going to say things look great when they don't. I'm not going to make any excuses for a player, or a coach. That's not my style. A mistake is a mistake; bad play is bad play. As I've said before my opinions are based on years of experience as a player and a coach.

My years at San Francisco under Bill Walsh and George Seifert taught me about winning football and what it took to get to Super Bowls. I learned how to be a student of the game which is different than just being a player. I learned how to see the big picture, not just focus on my job but everyone's job. That's what a student does because that makes him a better player. Then when Mike Holmgren was hired in 1992 he brought the same philosophy to Green Bay that he had learned in San Francisco. The standards began to change. I also was part of that transformation and the benefits of those changes were two more Super Bowl trips, winning one. I have been very lucky to be part of four Super Bowls being one of only 11 men in the history of the NFL to have played and coached in a Super Bowl and won. Let the truth be known if the Packers would have won the game against the Denver Broncos I would have been the only individual in the history of the NFL to have won four back to back Super Bowl games two as a player and a coach. I'm not saying that to blow my own horn, but to let you know when I say something it's because of my love of the game and my knowledge of it. Nothing is based on emotions, and trust me, nothing is personal!!!!

My change of attitude with the Packers is because of the fact that thus far I like what I've seen. I didn't like what I saw under Mike Sherman and his regime. I didn't like his decision-making process, play calling and the way he handled the different situations during his tenure. Mike Sherman is gone now and Mike McCarthy is here. I have coached with both of them. Trust me, they are different people. The best way I can explain the difference is telling you a story about each. When Sherman and I were coaching together we had a home game and it was roughly 11:40, 20 minutes before the game. We were just getting ready to walk through the tunnel and he stopped me in a panic and he said to me, “Harry, what happens if they use this defense because we didn't practice against it?" I said to him, “Listen, Mike, they only used this defense 5% of the time and we couldn't practice against everything, so if they do use it the players and us as coaches will have to adjust." That really confused him, so I further explained. I said, “We teach them how to handle black and white but they get paid to handle gray; that's why they are professional athletes." Needless to say he spent a lot of the game expecting something that never happened. So if you have read my articles lately, or if you live in the Green Bay area, and have heard me on the radio on Monday or Tuesday, you might have noticed a little change in my tone.

Now it's only fair that I tell you one of my McCarthy stories. I can't remember the game, but I remember the event. We were playing a team that liked to blitz a lot and during the game they hadn't, but McCarthy was waiting to see the look and he was always in Brett's ear telling him regardless of what play we have called that when you see that look change the play and go for the jugular. Finally, we got the look and Brett saw it. He changed the play, touchdown, it was that simple. I saw a coach prepare his player to execute, but much more I saw McCarthy give Brett Favre permission to use his knowledge and experience to be successful, but at the same time not see a ghost.

Let's make no mistake about it, I'm still going to tell it like it is. I do like Mike McCarthy and respect him but that doesn't really matter because you need someone to tell you what you might not want to hear but need to hear, whether you like it or not. I don't bleed green and gold, but I DO LIKE WHAT I SEE!

[MJZiggy]

What McCarthy has done is given Favre some ownership interest in this offense. He hasn't had coaching like this since Mike Holmgren left.

I wonder how much freedom M1 really gave to Favre. I remember video of him calling for a backup because Favre was "all over the place out there" then he changed his mind. I know that the later in Holmgren's tenure they were, the looser things got, but I wonder where M1 was in relation to his successors.

[Harlan Huckleby]

Not sure about Shermy.

I can't remember talking much about Holmgren or Rhodes or.... who was the coach back in the 80's - Ditika? - no Infante ... years after those guys left. But Sherm remains close to the hearts of packer fans. Heads are still nodding, tears falling, fists clenching.

[Carolina_Packer]

[quote="FritzDontBlitz"]I had to find this old article from a thread motife started right after the 2006 draft. Judging from the date, it must have been after the first mini-camp. I found it very enlightening then and even moreso now:

Sydney Speaks! I like what I see!
Mike McCarthy By: Harry Sydney

Date: May 19, 2006

Now it's only fair that I tell you one of my McCarthy stories. I can't remember the game, but I remember the event. We were playing a team that liked to blitz a lot and during the game they hadn't, but McCarthy was waiting to see the look and he was always in Brett's ear telling him regardless of what play we have called that when you see that look change the play and go for the jugular. Finally, we got the look and Brett saw it. He changed the play, touchdown, it was that simple. I saw a coach prepare his player to execute, but much more I saw McCarthy give Brett Favre permission to use his knowledge and experience to be successful, but at the same time not see a ghost.

Given the date of Sydney's article, wouldn't this have been before Brett even played a down for MM as head coach? Was Sydney referring to 1999, when MM was QB coach? I don't understand.

[FritzDontBlitz]

[quote="Carolina_Packer"]

I had to find this old article from a thread motife started right after the 2006 draft. Judging from the date, it must have been after the first mini-camp. I found it very enlightening then and even moreso now:

Sydney Speaks! I like what I see!
Mike McCarthy By: Harry Sydney

Date: May 19, 2006

Now it's only fair that I tell you one of my McCarthy stories. I can't remember the game, but I remember the event. We were playing a team that liked to blitz a lot and during the game they hadn't, but McCarthy was waiting to see the look and he was always in Brett's ear telling him regardless of what play we have called that when you see that look change the play and go for the jugular. Finally, we got the look and Brett saw it. He changed the play, touchdown, it was that simple. I saw a coach prepare his player to execute, but much more I saw McCarthy give Brett Favre permission to use his knowledge and experience to be successful, but at the same time not see a ghost.

Given the date of Sydney's article, wouldn't this have been before Brett even played a down for MM as head coach? Was Sydney referring to 1999, when MM was QB coach? I don't understand.

Yes, it was. I thought it would be interesting to note the distinction Sydney saw between the two before M3 had coached his first season. It also seems to explain the difference we see in Favre now compared to what we saw under Sherman.