MM's Presser-Redskins Week

Grave Digger posted:

Matt Hasselbeck was a franchise QB in his prime. He's not an all-time great or a HOFer, but he had a fine career with a lot of playoff experience and SB appearance. 

Denver's situation in 2011 and GB's situation is apples/oranges. Shannahan was 44-52 in his final 6 years with 1 playoff appearance. This wasn't a sudden wall that Denver hit where Shanny became stale, it was a downward spiral for 6 years running. McCarthy is 60-28 over the last 5.5 season and hasn't missed the playoffs yet. Although we are under .500 now, we haven't actually seen McCarthy have a losing season in the last 9 years. Denver also had to schlog through a couple bad years where they made a terrible decision to raid the Belichick tree for the front office and HC until Elway came aboard and hired an experienced and successful HC in John Fox (whose owner fired him after he thought the team had tuned him out and he was washed up btw). 

We'll agree to disagree GD. I don't believe Hass was ever a franchise QB anymore than Dante Culpepper or Rich Garcia.  Let's hope that it doesn't take 6 years in GB to finally admit there's a decline. Now about the Packers GM..........

Goalline posted:

He sure looked reliable dropping that ball last week. A really poor man's Bubba Franks.

Except for that whole blocking thing that Bubba was actually good at, you mean.

Is it me or did it seem like McCarthy was talking to his players in that speech...

Va. Packer posted:

We'll agree to disagree GD. I don't believe Hass was ever a franchise QB anymore than Dante Culpepper or Rich Garcia.  Let's hope that it doesn't take 6 years in GB to finally admit there's a decline. Now about the Packers GM..........

Regardless of how you classify Matt Hasselbeck, he was a high performing QB for Seattle over much of Holmy's tenure there with half a dozen playoff wins and a SB appearance. He was a reliable QB at worst. The point overall though was that someone stated McCarthy is no Holmgren because McCarthy has had HOF QBs his whole career, ignoring the fact that Holmgren had a HOF QB in his prime for half his career and a high performing QB in his prime through the latter half. Good coaches can look great with great QBs (McCarthy, Holmgren, Kubiak, Fox etc.), good coaches can look bad with bad QBs (Lovie Smith, Kubiak, Fox, etc.), but truly bad coaches don't generally have consistent success even with good/great QBs. Maybe some early success like Barry Switzer or Brad Childress, but they peter out pretty quickly. 

Good coaches can look great with great QB's

You forgot Belichick with Brady

Goalline posted:

He sure looked reliable dropping that ball last week. A really poor man's Bubba Franks.

Good point. The YPA on throws to Bubba (5.8) was about the same as RichRod (5.7). The difference was that Bubba Franks was an outstanding blocker at TE. He was a big part of the reason Ahman Green had so many holes to run through in the early to mid 2000s. I've never seen a guy with RichRod's size be such a poor blocker.  

Boris posted:

Good coaches can look great with great QB's

You forgot Belichick with Brady

The starting QBs in Cleveland from 1991-1995 were the following (Wikipedia)

1995	Vinny Testaverde (12) / Eric Zeier (4)
1994	Vinny Testaverde (13) / Mark Rypien (3)
1993	Bernie Kosar (7) / Vinny Testaverde (6) / Todd Philcox (3)
1992	Bernie Kosar (7) / Mike Tomczak (8) / Todd Philcox (1)
1991	Bernie Kosar (16)

 

Also from Wikipedia:

From 1991 until 1995, Belichick was the head coach of the Cleveland Browns. During his tenure in Cleveland he compiled a 36–44 record, leading the team to the playoffs in 1994, his only winning year with the team. Coincidentally, his one playoff victory during his Browns tenure was achieved against the Patriots in the wild card round during this postseason. In Belichick's last season in Cleveland the Browns finished 5–11, despite starting 3-1. In November of that year in the middle of the ongoing football season, Browns owner Art Modell had announced he would move his franchise to Baltimore after the season. After first being given assurances that he would coach the transplanted Baltimore Ravens, Belichick was instead fired on February 14, 1996, one week after the shift was officially announced.^[14]

When you look around the league, sans NE, and see where successful teams are like Dallas, Seattle a few years back, Carolina, etc it's no secret they benefited from being in drafts where they were picking in the top 10 each round.

No amount of high draft picks will help Minnesota, however. 

McCarthy: "You have to run the football"

Did he let the GM know about this need ? Thanks Ted

Still find it interesting when comparing the draft results pre-Superbowl(2010) to the last six drafts. Many variables to the draft, but losing guys like John Dorsey, John Schnieder, and Reggie McKenzie(later) seem to have made a significant difference in the results. 

Replacing  guys like Joe Philbin and Ben MacAdoo is no easy task either.

packerboi posted:

@ESPNMichele 2m2 minutes ago

McCarthy: "You have to run the football" -- Packers have dropped back to pass on 71.4% of plays, 2nd highest in the league this season

Sister Christine!

Got another sissy sounding name for RB. First "Lacy: and now "Christine"

Next RB candidate? She has a certain... zest of living. 

Aw hell.  Now I've gone and pissed off Officer Cavetoad by thinking its super easy to just pick up a RB mid season.

Dean Lowry thinks its cold

Dean Lowry likes going to Bullfights on Acid. 

Dean Lowry got back together with Taylor Swift

CAPackFan95 posted:

Dean Lowry likes going to Bullfights on Acid. 

who doesn't?  it's the only way!

Dean Lowry can kill two stones with one bird

http://m.packers.com/news/arti...tories-GB_sf42636603

Maybe not as much trouble behind the scenes as we think? Shocking when DumVante is the voice of reason...

“We 100 percent buy into everything Coach Mike has to say,” Adams said. “He’s been winning around here for a long time. I think the Green Bay nation kind of gets spoiled when they see a lot of big plays and see the flashy things, and then you might go through a little bit of adversity and everybody is blaming coach and doing all these things, when you have to realize there’s a lot more into it than that."

I have not bought the media's creation of a locker room schism/power struggle at all. That's all media and singular quotes ballooned up to draw attention - you know, the way all "information" is presented these days. but what I see on the field is not making sense. if they can pull themselves up it will be an incredible sight.

If Clay would just cut his hair...

Grave Digger posted:

http://m.packers.com/news/arti...tories-GB_sf42636603

Maybe not as much trouble behind the scenes as we think? Shocking when DumVante is the voice of reason...

“We 100 percent buy into everything Coach Mike has to say,” Adams said. “He’s been winning around here for a long time. I think the Green Bay nation kind of gets spoiled when they see a lot of big plays and see the flashy things, and then you might go through a little bit of adversity and everybody is blaming coach and doing all these things, when you have to realize there’s a lot more into it than that."

Hey Ankles, I'd take a sustained ****ing drive at this point.

There's that adversity football again . . . for 2 years.

Hungry5 posted:

packerboi posted:

@ESPNMichele 2m2 minutes ago

McCarthy: "You have to run the football" -- Packers have dropped back to pass on 71.4% of plays, 2nd highest in the league this season

Sister Christine!

WE'RE SAVED!!!!

Rodgers ripping Florio during his presser. Gotta love Aaron!!

That's what you get for dissing cancer patients...

Orlando Wolf posted:

Rodgers ripping Florio during his presser. Gotta love Aaron!!

Rodgers and other players, like Adams, probably do support MM.  Despite what we see and allegedly hear about the rift between AR and MM, I think Rodgers is smart enough to know and respect his HC for all the work he has done and for giving him the opportunity to replace TOG.  So I don't buy into the "rift" as many reporters claim there is.

However, I think there are other indicators that demonstrate MM has a slipping grip on this Packers team and it is not only evident in the performance of AR.  Small issues: Lack of focus, lack of communication, lack of urgency, lack of imagination, lack of discipline, lack of confidence, lack of execution, lack of chemistry and there more.  All of these issues singularly by themselves don't sabotage a team's efforts to win consistently.  But collectively many of these issues, if not all, surfaced in almost every game since last year's loss to the Broncos...after a BYE week.  These last two games vs Indy and Tenn were prime examples of a team that has lost its way...and that is on MM. 

**** changes on a dime in the NFL. Could easily swing back in McCarthy's favor.

Yea, but it was the best week of practice eva!

El-Ka-Bong posted:

If Clay would just cut his hair...

I'd prefer he take a play out of Reggie's book and get that hammy healed.

So you're saying he should visit a shaman?

RichRod could excel in a specific role (red zone target/decoy), IF we had the luxury of having 2 actual TEs ahead of him. Of course, that's more unlikely than not for the Pack. It would be a shame to lose his hands, but if he can't block, I'd rather find somebody that can.

Back in the TOG era, I (seriously) used to wonder if Favre needed glasses or had gone color-blind. He had this pesky habit of missing (or ignoring) wide-open receivers trying instead to force a throw into double- or triple-coverage.
The consensus was the Packers fortune depended entirely on BF, and if he failed, the team was doomed. Even with Reggie (and so many others).
This is the first year I've seen ARod doing exactly the same things. We've seen INTs that I'm confident we would've never seen 2 years ago that were poor throws/decisions, no matter the spin put upon it. The same 'as goes Rodgers, so do the Packers' naturally falls to him whether he believes that or not. The only other (supposed) playmaker on this team is CM3, and if he's not on the field, there's nobody else. 

I don't like where these trends are heading...

"RichRod could excel in a specific role"

Wal-Mart Greeter? Scarecrow? Big n Tall Mannequin? 

Zamboni racer.

Pulling the Budweiser wagon?

See, these are the kind of insights that keep me coming back to x4.  Nobody can break down the suck quite like this board.

  

To be a decoy you have to actually be a threat. No one covers Justin Perillo because...well...he's Justin Perillo. RichRod is usually open because the D misjudges how slow he is and actually run by him. 

Cook was a full participant again today. 

MichiganPacker posted:

The one I bet they'd like to have back is Casey Hayward.

I usually like TT's moves, but this is one I hated.  Keeping an old aging Peppers and not signing a young Hayward was just a bad bad move.

Hayward is currently ranked as the 10th best CB in the league.  Peppers has looked like he's given up (or is just out of gas).  I can't understand the decision here.

I understand TT wanting a big collection of pass rushers and I understand the logic of wanting to get rid of Sitton a year too early and save some money. What I don't understand is how they looked at Peppers vs. Perry/D. Jones/Elliot/Fackrell and determined it was worth keeping him at his salary. I think Pepp is a good guy and has some left in the tank, but paying him that much to basically be a part-time player seems questionable. It's especially odd to me when you consider the logic applied to the Sitton situation. 

Hopefully the payoff comes in the playoffs where Peppers should still have a lot in the tank. 

Sitton situation was all about his attitude; challenging management, teammates, & coaches to a point that it could not be tolerated. Much different situation than Peppers. I'd guess that the reasoning with Peppers was that the "book" on him has always been that he plays much better when highly motivated by a playoff atmosphere, & thus he would make big plays in the biggest games.