Packers Roster Projection

Pakrz posted:

There's a lot that goes into the backup QB evaluation.  Preparation, scout team looks, assisting during games, film study in the proverbial QB room, etc.  Hundley might stand out from the others in those areas that make him more valuable to the organization. 

Captain Obvious says: It doesn't matter who the backup is if 12 goes down again.. .

But that's the problem.  Hundley had been in the system for awhile and was caught completely flat-footed.  Hey looked like a rookie.  Again, if MM can't evaluate players while they are on the field AND in the classroom, he should've been **** canned. 

Who should've fired McCarthy??  And how long ago??

Asking for a friend.

Well... you're talking to a guy that has called for MM to be sent packing several times so you won't get much of an argument here.

PackLandVA posted:

Who should've fired McCarthy??  And how long ago??

Asking for a friend.

Murphy, when he cleaned house.  He left one turd in the corner.  Dumb****.

Please continue to ask for a friend.  

edit:  BTW, much better than your victim card.  I'd rather you talk **** than call for teacher.

Henry posted:

PackLandVA posted:

Who should've fired McCarthy??  And how long ago??

Asking for a friend.

Murphy, when he cleaned house.  He left one turd in the corner.  Dumb****.

Please continue to ask for a friend.  

edit:  BTW, much better than your victim card.  I'd rather you talk **** than call for teacher.

So Murphy should've fired McCarthy after last season?  But not sooner?

When you have Rodgers covering all your failures, yeah.  He was completely and utterly exposed.  Do you think there was a single pundit in all of football that would've suggested firing MM before last year?  No.  Nice swing and miss.

And let me make this abundantly clear.  The reason why I think MM should've been fired was his management, not his playcalling, which seems to be the staple around here for why he should've been fired.  Maybe his clock management sucks but it's his overall organizational management is what ****ed this team more than anything.  I'm guessing that's why we kept hearing about "silos" being the issue.

I'd put money on it that Rodgers saved MM from getting sacked.

Wrong. 

(edit - directed at your first post, "Do you think there was a single pundit in all of football that would've suggested firing MM before last year?" )

If Capers was as big a failure you and everyone else could see for several years (the game passed him by and the defense was predictable), then he should've been fired.  And that was McCarthy's job.  And if McCarthy is/was too stubborn to do it out of loyalty or any other reason, then it was up to Thompson to force McCarthy's hand.  If that meant firing MM, then he should've. But Ted didn't do it (unless he was forbidden to do so by Murphy.  And lets' be honest, that's not the case.).

I haven't been on some Thompson "told you so" wagon for years and years as you claim.  The fact is, TT let MM keep Capers.  And that stunted the team and Rodgers career.

So what you're saying is the whole apparatus broke down?  

Oh, and let me add this bee to the bonnet.  If Rodgers got upset about losing Van Pelt and has constantly said he endorses MM's playcalling, do you think that wouldn't have an impact of if MM was fired or not?  So how do you unseat a guy who hangs onto a turd like Capers if your HOF QB is going to get pissed off with an upcoming contract on the horizon?  Why is MM still here? 

And no, it's not the entire reason.  TT was too soft as well but that's pretty solid reason to put off the decision

Murphy literally had to dismantle the organizational structure which existed under Harlan and there's no knowing why Gee Your Hair Smells Terrific actually landed the GM spot.  I'm curious as to how much power he will wield. 

So add that to the chicken/egg grabass of TT failing The Wizard and Super OC being stubborn and blah, blah, blah, blah.  Go ahead and tell me Rodgers, a hardcore competitor with more than a few brains and opinions, didn't play into the entire equation.  Oh yeah, MM is still here.

Game day bucket go boom.  

Henry posted:

So what you're saying is the whole apparatus broke down?  

No - what I'm saying is that Capers defense was a problem for several years, just as I mentioned a page or two back.  And EVERYONE who pays any attention to football knows it - fans, commentators, other coaches, etc.  But Rodgers ability to make their offense so dynamic and bail out the defense so often made it a bit easier to overlook.

I agree with you about MM as a coach.  I think he's pretty damn good, although a lot of coaches would look good with Rodgers.  But from my POV (albeit, as a simple fan), it seems like he's not very good at handling his coaching staff, namely Capers. 

And that is where I think TT stumbles.  And not just in the past year when AR was on the sideline. The Packers actually had some pretty good personnel on the D side of the ball for several years (after 2010).  How many Conference Championships or other playoff games did they lose since 2010 because of the defense.  The answer is ALL OF THEM.  The never lost because the offense couldn't produce.

So to me, the answer to the defenses' problems over the years are either scheme (Capers), personnel, or lack thereof (Thompson) or a combination.  I tend to think it's been almost completely scheme since 2010 because the Packers have had good defensive players drafted that have flourished elsewhere (although the recent drafts appear to be not that great).

So to me, it all boils down to who was gonna fix the defensive scheme.  And as I've said before over and over, it MM wasn't gonna fire Dom, then TT should've done it himself, even at the risk of losing McCarthy. 

This, to me, is the biggest indictment of TT (with not fixing MLB/Hawk for 5 years a close second).  The Packers were very close to making the SuperBowl several times since 2010 and really had the talent to get there and win but for the defense.  And so many years of Rodgers prime have been wasted because of defensive miscues and the ability to make a stop.

TT clearly is a major reason the Packers were able to get back to the promised land after some down years with Rhodes/Sherman/etc.  He built an amazing team with tremendous drafts, savvy FA moves and salary cap maintenance.  And the Packers are still benefiting in many ways because of his leadership.  But IMO, he started to slip several years ago.  I saw it, and so did other posters.  But it seemed like God forbid anyone would even hint at criticizing without facing the wrath of others.  I think he was a great asset to the franchise, but I'm not at all sad he's been replaced.  Let's see what Gutekunst can do.  Hopefully he'll be as successful.  If not, next man up.

Henry posted:

Oh, and let me add this bee to the bonnet.  If Rodgers got upset about losing Van Pelt and has constantly said he endorses MM's playcalling, do you think that wouldn't have an impact of if MM was fired or not?  So how do you unseat a guy who hangs onto a turd like Capers if your HOF QB is going to get pissed off with an upcoming contract on the horizon?  Why is MM still here? 

And no, it's not the entire reason.  TT was too soft as well but that's pretty solid reason to put off the decision

Murphy literally had to dismantle the organizational structure which existed under Harlan and there's no knowing why Gee Your Hair Smells Terrific actually landed the GM spot.  I'm curious as to how much power he will wield. 

So add that to the chicken/egg grabass of TT failing The Wizard and Super OC being stubborn and blah, blah, blah, blah.  Go ahead and tell me Rodgers, a hardcore competitor with more than a few brains and opinions, didn't play into the entire equation.  Oh yeah, MM is still here.

Game day bucket go boom.  

If Rodgers is that much of a prima donna that he's gonna try to control who the HC is, then screw him.  And I mean that in all seriousness. 

But I don't think AR is a prima donna, not to the extent that he'd pout and take his ball home if MM were fired.  Sure, he'd would've probably been pissed, just like with AVP.  But he also knows his job is not to manage to personnel decisions of the team.  And I'm confident he would play like the best QB in football regardless of who the HC/OC is.  I think he's subtlety make his disappointment in the defense be know on more than one occasion.  Just as he's been subtle about the team maybe needing to explore FA a bit more in the past.

See my "ah-ha" statements above.  We've been leaving Rodgers out of this whole equation.  How Murphy did the purge makes all the more sense.  They didn't go all in and endorse MM, they let him roll on a one year contract . . . right along with Rodgers contract.  

I won't fault anyone criticizing TT not utilizing FA more and really starting to miss on picks at the end.  I'll own my bad takes but when you have to wait to see if the draft is going to suck along with the moves TT did make in FA I think it's pretty simplistic to say you knew.  You didn't like the strategy but no one knew.  The only thing we did know is The Wizard blew balls. 

If you're looking at the linear chain of command, you absolutely have an argument but I don't think any organization is that cut and dried when you have a once in a lifetime talent like Rodgers.  Bert gave us a pretty good example as well. 

And as far as the "I told you so", unfair to lump you in with the human stain crowd but for **** sake's, be a dick, don't be a victim.  This is x4.

There is a reason MM basically got 1 year once GoodorGone sat at his new desk

PackLandVA posted:

If Rodgers is that much of a prima donna that he's gonna try to control who the HC is, then screw him.  And I mean that in all seriousness. 

But I don't think AR is a prima donna, not to the extent that he'd pout and take his ball home if MM were fired.  Sure, he'd would've probably been pissed, just like with AVP.  But he also knows his job is not to manage to personnel decisions of the team.  And I'm confident he would play like the best QB in football regardless of who the HC/OC is.  I think he's subtlety make his disappointment in the defense be know on more than one occasion.  Just as he's been subtle about the team maybe needing to explore FA a bit more in the past.

This is why hero worship is for chumps.  I don't think Rodgers is strong-arming everyone or even being that much of dick about it but his mere presence is definitely a consideration.  Hell, maybe he is a prima donna, hard to say.  He's made it clear in the past he wants MM around.  

Don’t care if my boyfriend IS a primadonna.....HE’S the best damn QB in the league and can be whatever the hell he wants to be, primadonna or not.  JMHO.   

Going back to an earlier comment someone made ... I agree that after some rookies flash surprising talent in pre-season, they should be allowed to play earlier in the next pre-season game so they’re competing against (possibly) better level of talent.   Thinking of Kumerow and MVS here.   Hope they’ll do that this week, but they never have and it makes no sense to me.  We know what Cobb aand Adams can do; let them sit.

We know what Yancey can do too, which is squat.

Pakrz posted:

Well... you're talking to a guy that has called for MM to be sent packing several times so you won't get much of an argument here.

Yeah.  Prior to the Super Bowl win. 

I wouldn't argue either.

AR is incredible isn't he?

We're wasting a lot of money, as a franchise.  The list of things we need is much shorter than what we currently have.  I mean, I guess it's a rule to have a 53 man roster.  Maybe a practice squad, too, I'm not sure.  But a coaching staff and a front office?  Wasted money, I think.  What we need:

Rodgers.

Dillon Day.

Bakhtiari.

Tim Boyle.

A defensive player.

Anything else is probably an impediment.  And the above may actually be excessive.  I don't think there's a rule against playing with less than 11 on either side of the ball.

Rodgers and Bill Brasky seems like enough

might even be overkill

The King and His Court 

GrainBelt66 posted:

Pleeeaaase

I would love to see him on the Vikings. 

It would be fun 

Henry posted:

Pakrz posted:

There's a lot that goes into the backup QB evaluation.  Preparation, scout team looks, assisting during games, film study in the proverbial QB room, etc.  Hundley might stand out from the others in those areas that make him more valuable to the organization. 

Captain Obvious says: It doesn't matter who the backup is if 12 goes down again.. .

But that's the problem.  Hundley had been in the system for awhile and was caught completely flat-footed.  Hey looked like a rookie.  Again, if MM can't evaluate players while they are on the field AND in the classroom, he should've been **** canned. 

Be very cautious with what you wish for. 

Next coach could end up being a b. Childress clone. 

I will never go back to that again.... Devine, starr, gregg, infante.....

i think I would completely quit the NFL rather than living through that type of crap show again. 

Key word above is ‘again’. 

I have been around for a while, almost 50 years as a Packers fan. I never want to relive the 70s and 80s in my lifetime. 

MM3 is fired, he will have a new gig within 2 days.  Most likely in Cleveland, GB east. Probably would have about 15-20 teams to choose from at the end of this season. 

MM3 is a fine HC, he simply has loyalty (too much) problems. 

Or, maybe he is afraid of change?

Henry posted:

Oh, and let me add this bee to the bonnet.  If Rodgers got upset about losing Van Pelt and has constantly said he endorses MM's playcalling, do you think that wouldn't have an impact of if MM was fired or not?  So how do you unseat a guy who hangs onto a turd like Capers if your HOF QB is going to get pissed off with an upcoming contract on the horizon?  Why is MM still here? 

And no, it's not the entire reason.  TT was too soft as well but that's pretty solid reason to put off the decision

Murphy literally had to dismantle the organizational structure which existed under Harlan and there's no knowing why Gee Your Hair Smells Terrific actually landed the GM spot.  I'm curious as to how much power he will wield. 

So add that to the chicken/egg grabass of TT failing The Wizard and Super OC being stubborn and blah, blah, blah, blah.  Go ahead and tell me Rodgers, a hardcore competitor with more than a few brains and opinions, didn't play into the entire equation.  Oh yeah, MM is still here.

Game day bucket go boom.  

I do not disagree with you, but, who, in your mind is out there to replace him?

Please remember that MM3 is the winningest coach in GB history. 

Any coach you name will be ridiculed and, probably, hated by the masses as much as you seem to hate MM3. 

Who is out there to replace him?

bitching about him and wanting him replaced is fine by me. 

But, please provide an alternative. 

Timmy! posted:

The King and His Court 

My father played against him when he barnstormed the country back in the 1950s  

michiganjoe posted:

One thing people have to remember about Hundley: the tape doesn't lie. The idea that the light will suddenly go on and all the struggles he's had from the pocket since his days at UCLA will magically disappear is just wishful thinking. Time for the Packers to move on.

You nailed it, best predictor of the future is the past

GrainBelt66 posted:

Henry posted:

Pakrz posted:

There's a lot that goes into the backup QB evaluation.  Preparation, scout team looks, assisting during games, film study in the proverbial QB room, etc.  Hundley might stand out from the others in those areas that make him more valuable to the organization. 

Captain Obvious says: It doesn't matter who the backup is if 12 goes down again.. .

But that's the problem.  Hundley had been in the system for awhile and was caught completely flat-footed.  Hey looked like a rookie.  Again, if MM can't evaluate players while they are on the field AND in the classroom, he should've been **** canned. 

Be very cautious with what you wish for. 

Next coach could end up being a b. Childress clone. 

I will never go back to that again.... Devine, starr, gregg, infante.....

i think I would completely quit the NFL rather than living through that type of crap show again. 

Key word above is ‘again’. 

I have been around for a while, almost 50 years as a Packers fan. I never want to relive the 70s and 80s in my lifetime. 

MM3 is fired, he will have a new gig within 2 days.  Most likely in Cleveland, GB east. Probably would have about 15-20 teams to choose from at the end of this season. 

MM3 is a fine HC, he simply has loyalty (too much) problems. 

Or, maybe he is afraid of change?

I totally agree on the thoughts about MM.  I think you are very correct when you say he would have another job within 2 days if he still wanted to coach and you know Cleveland would have him on speed dial immediately.  

But, I also don' think the Packers organization would allow another run of coaches like we had in the 70's and 80's.  Back then the board had their fingers in everything and didnt leave things (or hire) true football guys.  Now the way things are set up they have real football people around and are allowed to run the team.

I would hope you are correct. 

But, the thought of going back to that scares the **** out of me....

GrainBelt66 posted:

Henry posted:

Pakrz posted:

There's a lot that goes into the backup QB evaluation.  Preparation, scout team looks, assisting during games, film study in the proverbial QB room, etc.  Hundley might stand out from the others in those areas that make him more valuable to the organization. 

Captain Obvious says: It doesn't matter who the backup is if 12 goes down again.. .

But that's the problem.  Hundley had been in the system for awhile and was caught completely flat-footed.  Hey looked like a rookie.  Again, if MM can't evaluate players while they are on the field AND in the classroom, he should've been **** canned. 

Be very cautious with what you wish for. 

 

You think Rodgers isn't going to make the next coach look great?  We know what MM looks like without Rodgers, which is ****.  Why would anyone think MM holds the key to anything but tripping over his own dick.

GrainBelt66 posted:

Henry posted:

Oh, and let me add this bee to the bonnet.  If Rodgers got upset about losing Van Pelt and has constantly said he endorses MM's playcalling, do you think that wouldn't have an impact of if MM was fired or not?  So how do you unseat a guy who hangs onto a turd like Capers if your HOF QB is going to get pissed off with an upcoming contract on the horizon?  Why is MM still here? 

And no, it's not the entire reason.  TT was too soft as well but that's pretty solid reason to put off the decision

Murphy literally had to dismantle the organizational structure which existed under Harlan and there's no knowing why Gee Your Hair Smells Terrific actually landed the GM spot.  I'm curious as to how much power he will wield. 

So add that to the chicken/egg grabass of TT failing The Wizard and Super OC being stubborn and blah, blah, blah, blah.  Go ahead and tell me Rodgers, a hardcore competitor with more than a few brains and opinions, didn't play into the entire equation.  Oh yeah, MM is still here.

Game day bucket go boom.  

I do not disagree with you, but, who, in your mind is out there to replace him?

 

This is stupid question and always has been and let me tell you why.  If this mentality was held by NFL teams there would be nothing but recycled coaches throughout the league instead of half of the league. 

Gee, maybe we could luck into another overrated OC with management issues.  Philbin is sitting right there, same thing as the other Siamese OC.

Yeah, they can do better.

Favre in his prime made Ray Rhodes look like Lombardi.

This. I think teams lining up for a shot at MM is a bit aggressive unless Rodgers was part of the deal. Mikes biggest issue is his body of work without Rodgers playing QB. A fact made worse after Pederson won a SB against Brady with a backup.

Never been a fan of the argument of “Who are you replacing him with?” Either. If your not getting better you’re moving backwards. This is a big year for Mike.

Mr. Magoo would win with AR at QB.

Henry posted:

GrainBelt66 posted:

Henry posted:

Pakrz posted:

There's a lot that goes into the backup QB evaluation.  Preparation, scout team looks, assisting during games, film study in the proverbial QB room, etc.  Hundley might stand out from the others in those areas that make him more valuable to the organization. 

Captain Obvious says: It doesn't matter who the backup is if 12 goes down again.. .

But that's the problem.  Hundley had been in the system for awhile and was caught completely flat-footed.  Hey looked like a rookie.  Again, if MM can't evaluate players while they are on the field AND in the classroom, he should've been **** canned. 

Be very cautious with what you wish for. 

 

You think Rodgers isn't going to make the next coach look great?  We know what MM looks like without Rodgers, which is ****.  WTF would anyone think he holds the key to anything but tripping over his own dick.

He looked OK with Matt Flynn a few years back. Aaron Brooks, etc.

If Rodgers goes down for the season, they are done. If Rodgers goes down for 5-6 games, they need someone who can keep them in it for that time period. Hundley was 3-7 last year in his starts (I include the first Vikings game where Rodgers got hurt in the 1st quarter), but those 3 wins came against three bottom feeders (Browns, Bears, and Bucs). A Matt Flynn level (circa 2010-11) backup QB, probably wins 5-6 of those 10 games and they are playoff bound again.

MM past (excluding Hundley) suggests he's at least an above average QB coach. Is Kizer an improvement over Hundley? As Henry said, Hundley had 3 years in the system and his offensive skills essentially consisted of "drop back and pass to Davante Adams if he is open- if Adams isn't open, run around." A QB off the street could have done that with 2 days of practice.

If Rodgers is out again this year and the backup QB comes in an looks unprepared again, then it's time to consider moving on from MM.

heyward posted:

Mr. Magoo would win with AR at QB.

you are right, Troy Akiman  gave Barry Switzer a super bowl ring.

Grave Digger posted:

Favre in his prime made Ray Rhodes look like Lombardi.

Favre threw 22 TDs and 23 interceptions that year. Granted, without him they'd have been even worse, but Favre went into "screw it, I'm playing rocket ball" mode many times that year. In their 8 losses, Favre threw 6 TDS and 16 interceptions. Favre needed a strong coach he respected much more than Rodgers does.

If Ray Rhodes would have had Aaron Rodgers instead of Favre, they'd have probably won 10-11 games that year.

If Ray Rhodes is the benchmark then MM should've been fired immediately following the last game.  Do you think they would've went 7-9 without Rodgers first few games?  No, they wouldn't.   Maybe we can go after Coughlin or how about Jeff Fischer?  Let's keep making excuse and recycling coaches. 

MM is fine OC.  I don't have an issue with playcalling (for the most part).  His overall management sucks.  He was good with Brooks and Gannon because that was his focus.  I don't trust him to accurately assess his own coaching staff and the constant turnover is a good indicator of that as well.  When he "focused" on the defense due to continued Wizard failure the offensive side started to slip.  

Coming full circle, I don't trust him to get reps to the right players either.  He will stick with that stiff Hundley and guys that could contribute will be playing 3rd string.

He's not a good HC.