Skip to main content

From the article: 

All things weren't equal, and that included Arizona's coaching advantage. McCarthy played it safe yet again, and it ended up costing his team another postseason in the prime of the 32-year-old Rodgers' career. He coached to put off losing as long as possible. Arians coached to win, and while it raised some eyebrows and nearly cost his team the victory, he made far more defensible decisions than his counterpart.

McCarthy's choice was safer and attracted far less attention, but that doesn't make his decision the correct one. Instead of going by the book, McCarthy could take a page out of Arians'. A lot of coaches should.

Anyone have a link to Barnwells article about Arians getting his ass jammed down his throat a week later by River Boat Ron? Or River Boat Ron getting schooled two weeks after that? 

Green Bay was a broken ****ing mess in 2015. Much of that is squarely on Mike. The Seattle loss messed 2015 up something fierce. 

But I think 2015 is as close as Bruce Arians is getting to something Mike owns. Same goes for Ron. 

Its hard to win a Lombardi. 

ChilliJon posted:

Anyone have a link to Barnwells article about Arians getting his ass jammed down his throat a week later by River Boat Ron? Or River Boat Ron getting schooled two weeks after that? 

Green Bay was a broken ****ing mess in 2015. Much of that is squarely on Mike. The Seattle loss messed 2015 up something fierce. 

But I think 2015 is as close as Bruce Arians is getting to something Mike owns. Same goes for Ron. 

Its hard to win a Lombardi. 

Exactly!  No one even gave the Packers a chance at winning that game.  The Packers played a good game and could have won, but now everyone says the coach let them down.  Give me a ****ing break.  This fan base is getting more and more like a bunch of spoiled brats everyday.  I'm not looking this up because I really don't give a ****, but how many teams have won two Lombardi's in the last 20 years?  Not many.  That is for ****ing sure.  So, please STFU!!!!!!!!!!!

The ONLY thing that deciding we should have gone for two actually does is that the odds of winning (those are even shaky because our stats were not built on Abbs and Janis) may have been higher going for 2 than going to OT.  That's it.  No guarantee of winning, not even a likelihood of winning.  If all this moaning and groaning is for the simple better chance of winning...get over it! 

Hungry5 posted:
FreeSafety posted:


and our best player to find a better chance of winning.

 

While we will likely never find out, I wonder if AR wanted to go for 2 with the personnel they had available, and accountable?



#20pagesbeforethedraft

As competitive as AR is, and probably almost any QB who makes it to the NFL level, I am thinking he would have wanted the ball with a chance to win the game from just 2 yards out even if John Kuhn was the only eligible receiver on the play.

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×