Plenty of good coaches stop being successful after a certain number of years. It's at least possible MM has reached his expiration date with the Packers.
ChilliJon posted:I still maintain this team misses Montgomery. Guy was targeted 18 times in his small sample of work and caught 15 of them. By far the best ratio of any of the young guys. Janis has been targeted 11 times for 2 receptions this year. Monty is very hard to jam at the line. He's a strong muthereffer.
I realize it's comforting to think Montgomery would be a big help to the offense, but I just don't see it. Montgomery is a great athlete and an exceptional returner, but he's not a natural receiver. He struggles to locate the ball. He's a RB who plays WR.
The reason Montgomery was successful at the start of the year is the same reason the entire Packers offense was humming at the start of the year - opponents were still playing a deep shell and letting AR dink and dunk down the field. Once they figured out these WRs couldn't get open deep, defenses changed their entire approach and crowded the line. Take away the bubble screens and the quick hits and Monty would have suffered the same fate as Cobb, Jones, Adams, etc. The only WR who seems like he can get open against these looks is 84, and he can't get on the field consistently.
Boris posted:Talent is not the issue.
Talented teams don't necessarily win in this league. It takes more than talent
So your answer is?
MM is a Hall of Fame level coach based on objective statistics. I'm going to get flamed for that, but that's the truth. Here's the entire list of coaches who have won at least 50 games and at least 1 Super Bowl. They are ranked based on winning percentage. MM is 6th of that group of 25. Every coach in front of him is either already in the HOF or is Bill Belichick.
All 5 guys above him in winning percentage with rings won them with HOF QBS (Starr, Peyton Manning, Tom Brady) or Pro Bowl level QBs (Bob Griese (8 time Pro Bowler) and Ken Stabler (4 time Pro Bowler). So the argument that he's only gotten lucky because of having Favre and Rodgers is a weak one - given that you'd have to make that argument about almost every coach who wins a Super Bowl. The exceptions might be Brian Billick, Joe Gibbs, and Mike Ditka.
1. John Madden 75.0% 103-32-7 (1 Super Bowl ring)
2. Vince Lombardi 73.8% 96-34-6 (2 Super Bowl rings)
3. Don Shula 67.6% 328-156-6 (2 Super Bowl rings)
4. Tony Dungy 66.8% 139-69-0 (1 ring)
5. Bill Belichick 66.6% 223-112-0 (4 rings)
McCarthy is 6th at 65.7% (104-54-1 with 1 ring)
Who's behind him in winning percentage who also has Super Bowl rings? George Siefert (114-62); Mike Tomlin (91-52-0); Bill Cowher (149-90-1); Joe Gibbs (154-94-0); Bill Walsh (92-59-1); Tom Landry (250-162-6); Sean Payton (86-57-0); Mike Holmgren (161-111-1); Pete Carroll (92-67-0); Bill Parcells (172-130-1); Chuck Noll (193-148-1); Mike Ditka (121-95); Brian Billick (80-64); Mike Shanahan (170-138-0); Jon Gruden (95-81); Tom Coughlin (170-149); Tom Flores (97-87); Dick Vermeil (120-109): Weeb Ewbank (130-129-7).
slowmo posted:GBP1 posted:
The loss vs Seattle was a gut-twister and heart-breaker. Could it be after that "give-away win" the leaders on this team have lost their faith in MM? Despite the quirky errors in the last four minutes. That game was lost on coaching choices.
The team lost faith in MM---which is why they started 6-0. Not to dwell on the NFC championship---but taking a knee on an interception which could have been returned a long way, and trying to catch an onsides kick instead of "doing your job" had a lot to do with it.
Not to dwell on the possibility that some players may have lost at least some faith in MM after last year's disaster in Seattle, but I recall one Packer player who seemed to question MM's play calling during that contest.
TT has completely ignored the TE position which was always a critical piece to MM's offense. Rodgers and Quarless are not #1 TEs. There are always veteran TEs available and TT has drafted junk for years now. There is no excuse for that.
MM deserves blame for not scheming guys open. He is stubborn and lazy. That is where the schism between MM and Arod is right now. MM probbaly blamed it all on Clements playcalling which probably pissed ARod off. MM isnt willing to adjust that he needs to scheme guys open via motion and combo packages.
NJWIS posted:TT has completely ignored the TE position which was always a critical piece to MM's offense. Rodgers and Quarless are not #1 TEs. There are always veteran TEs available and TT has drafted junk for years now. There is no excuse for that.
MM deserves blame for not scheming guys open. He is stubborn and lazy. That is where the schism between MM and Arod is right now. MM probbaly blamed it all on Clements playcalling which probably pissed ARod off. MM isnt willing to adjust that he needs to scheme guys open via motion and combo packages.
He completely ignored the TE position--by drafting Finley in 2008, who was then hurt and career ended in 2013. Yep, ignored that position and drafted "junk" for years.
And, of course, we can completely revamp the offense and timing that goes with route running "via motion and combo packages" mid season (because, I suppose, you weren't calling for that the first 7 weeks). Wow.
I've never heard the McCarthy's lazy thing before. Congratulations.
Why would MM be stubborn about not scheming to get guys open. I agree that they haven't done that, but I don't agree he's doing it purposely just to be stubborn. That makes no sense.
The problem I see with the passing game is that defenses are playing exclusively press man and bump and run against our receivers and not allowing them to get open. Dallas played zone and guys were open, but the man coverage seems to stifle the receivers.
I'd like to see more routes to beat the man coverage. More crossing routes, slant routes when they're off, corner routes, more trips, etc. More Cobb in the backfield motioning opposite trips, more wheel routes from Cobb, etc. Anything that Pittsburgh does with Antonio Brown I want to see Cobb doing.
what do you call it then? He's just stubborn? ok fine hes just stubborn. The guy doesn't want to create plays that put wrs who cant beat man coverage into favorable matchups. Hes stubbron because he doesnt want to admit he needs to change what hes doing because it worked for 10 years.
MM keeps saying in his PCs after the losses that guys have to learn how to get open. time to face facts none of the WRs are able to beat man coverage it seems.
Fair or not, the guy MM is often compared to is Mike Holmgren. And I think MM stacks up favorably on many fronts. While he may not have Holmgren's track record with QBs, MM is still very successful in QB development. Unlike Holmgren, MM is a much better employee and employer. MM doesn't crave GM power, and sets a much better example on handling adversity. To this day Holmgren still talks about how he was robbed in that Super Bowl vs. Seattle. He would never handle that Fail Mary game with the class MM did.
The one area where I think Holmgren has a decisive edge over MM is the quality of assistants. It's remarkable to think of the coaching talent that Holmgren had coming through Green Bay. Some of that may be luck, but GB was often not only more talented than other teams, they were smarter than them. That's just not the case with MM. It's been very hard seeing them get out-schemed and frankly out-prepared vs. teams like the Bears, Cardinals, Broncos, etc.
Why would he be stubborn about it? He wants to be successful, he's not going to stifle his offense just because he prefers certain routes. Maybe he is calling those routes and they have also been unsuccessful. Maybe the personnel is just not conducive to those routes being effective.
Grave Digger posted:Why would MM be stubborn about not scheming to get guys open. I agree that they haven't done that, but I don't agree he's doing it purposely just to be stubborn. That makes no sense.
The problem I see with the passing game is that defenses are playing exclusively press man and bump and run against our receivers and not allowing them to get open. Dallas played zone and guys were open, but the man coverage seems to stifle the receivers.
I'd like to see more routes to beat the man coverage. More crossing routes, slant routes when they're off, corner routes, more trips, etc. More Cobb in the backfield motioning opposite trips, more wheel routes from Cobb, etc. Anything that Pittsburgh does with Antonio Brown I want to see Cobb doing.
I think MM is stubborn for the same reason many of us can be stubborn - when you have success you become set in your ways. I agree that it's not deliberate, but given his success as a head coach, he probably thinks the scheme is just fine. Either the players can't execute or defenses have caught up to them. Frankly, I think it's a little of both.
I think your second point is exactly right...defenses would never play press coverage in the past b/c they feared Rodgers extending the play and burning them deep. This set of WRs just can't do that, so press away. MM and staff hasn't adjusted yet.
Stupid Lazy Face
Grave Digger posted:Maybe the personnel is just not conducive to those routes being effective.
Yep, there is no way Randal Cobb could run a route like this.
3 step drop and the ball is out.
Packers have waaaaaaaaaaaaay too many plays where AR is standing around for 5,6,7 seconds or more and then gets sacked.
Was a flag thrown on the NEP WR who is blocking downfield, to clear the Time & Space ?
No way our TE doesn't get flagged for the pick.
Mike Shannahan didn't forget how to coach either. He hung on for 13 years, probably 3 too long if you ask Denver fans. Tom Coughlin is another guy who is probably a little over-due. After awhile a coach's style gets stale. All I am saying is that I think it is a possibility we are seeing MM's era coming to end. I hope not because I like him.
The 6-0 start doesn't mean diddly. It's not how you're playing at the beginning of the season, it's how you are playing at end. And when these times have gotten tough, this team is playing uninspired...that's falls at the feet of the coaches.
Also, no way in hell that DB was full press coverage.
Agreed
Hungry5 posted:Was a flag thrown on the NEP WR who is blocking downfield, to clear the Time & Space ?
I am not sure about this particular play, but based on my years of football viewing that flag is hardly ever thrown during the eleventy billion times this type of play is run in the NFL every year by almost every team except GB.
First I've heard the 6-0 start doesn't mean diddly thing. It's like I've logged in to the learning annex.
Brak posted:Also, no way in hell that DB was full press coverage.
He couldn't be if the WR was lined up in a stack behind the TE as he should have been. That is the whole point of the play!
There are formations and routes designed to deal with press coverage.
It has been done before.
Oh good. Was hoping Free Safety would logon this morning to help out.
Good morning sir. 
Boris posted:
This is practically the same roster that was an eyelash away from making & probably winning a Super Bowl last season.
Returned all 5 OL starters with an established RB & MVP QB.
Talent is not the issue.
Talented teams don't necessarily win in this league. It takes more than talent
Two major differences in terms of talent from last season:
- Jordy Nelson is missing.
- Our QB isn't playing at a level never seen before. He is just slightly above AVG this season.
In my opinion, the QB play has masked a weak team for years.
Grave Digger posted:The problem I see with the passing game is that defenses are playing exclusively press man and bump and run against our receivers and not allowing them to get open. Dallas played zone and guys were open, but the man coverage seems to stifle the receivers.
I'd like to see more routes to beat the man coverage. More crossing routes, slant routes when they're off, corner routes, more trips, etc. More Cobb in the backfield motioning opposite trips, more wheel routes from Cobb, etc. Anything that Pittsburgh does with Antonio Brown I want to see Cobb doing.
That's on the head coach to fix. Neither of your solutions, which I agree with, have been done in the 8+ weeks of the offense being ineffective. At least haven't been done enough to consistently deal with the way defenses now play this team. We played the team that blitzes more than any other team and we ran I believe 2 screen passes all day, one of which went for the TD.
Grave Digger posted:He's not always given running plays that are conducive to his style of running.
That's on the head coach to fix. I agree seeing Lacy go E/W makes no sense to his strengths.
Grave Digger posted:Winny Moss needs to be sent packing.
That's on the head coach to hire and hold his assistants accountable. And to make good hires.
Grave Digger posted:the biggest difference to point to is the shuffling of the coaching staff. Bennett is not coaching WRs and they have regressed. Van Pelt is spending more time with WRs and the QB is struggling. The HC isn't supervising the gameplan and the O is stagnant. The big mistake with this team is what McGinn pointed out recently, McCarthy is hoarding coaches rather than putting everyone in a spot where they are best served. Rather than let someone leave he is cramming guys at the top and it appears to be hurting more than helping. What do Bennett and Clements even do? We only need 1 OC! Who is coaching the WRs because I only see Van Pelt with Rodgers? McCarthy needs to straighten out the staff. Clements should go back to being QB coach, let Van Pelt actually focus on WRs, let Bennett be the OC, etc. This was a SB team a year ago and the biggest change is the coaching staff...obviously talent is needed, every team should add talent every year, but what good is talent if the staff is a mess!
That's on the head coach. Again, the head coach makes these decisions. These decisions are screwed up. In addition to the lack of accountability of his staff.
Grave Digger posted:He hasn't. He's still one of the best coaches in the league.
I look at your quotes above this one and it's why I just can't agree that he's one of the best head coaches in the league. He hasn't shown an ability to adjust to defenses stopping the offense this year. At all. I can't see a single thing that he's tried to do differently to address it. He doesn't maximize the skills of players at times. I've seen less of trying to exploit what the defense does - yesterday nothing done to address blitzes, last year he doesn't attack a one armed Richard Sherman at all. He sticks with underperforming assistants far too long. He makes odd choices as assistants. The team had epic playoff losses under his watch multiple times, including the biggest playoff choke job I've ever witnessed in my 45 years.
Again, I think he's a very gifted offensive coach for the most part. I just don't see that one of the best head coaches in the league. As a head coach he feels very average to me.
Brak posted:First I've heard the 6-0 start doesn't mean diddly thing. It's like I've logged in to the learning annex.
Of course starting 6-0 means something.
It is starting 5-0 (and 6-1) that mean nothing as the Atlanta Falcons have proven this season.
Homer says it every week on the Packer post game show. You can watch any random game and guys will be more open on the first few plays of the game than any Packer WR will be in an entire game. While the Packers clearly have a lousy group of WR there has to be some way to get them open.
Why didn't see see any screens yesterday?
I don't recall seeing much of Kuhn either. Nobody wants to see him running the ball but the guy is a really good blocker. With an OL in shambles keeping him in for pass protection may have been a good idea.
Arizona was teeing off and the Packers had no answers whatsoever. 9 sacks? I mean come on, there has to be a way to counter that. It's not like Arizona is the 85 Bears or the 86 Giants with Hall of Famers all over the place on defense. They only had 25 sacks on the season going into the game yesterday.
Grave Digger posted:I'd keep McCarthy and sell Rodgers for someone's draft.
I'd probably stick with the 1st ballot hall of fame QB, because he's still in his prime. If said QB was seven years older, I'd probably lean towards your thinking.
I don't see this as being a case of irreconcilable differences, for what that's worth.
Grave Digger posted:If Rodgers isn't listening to his HC then why is he the keeper over McCarthy? Why wouldn't he do the same to another HC? I'd keep McCarthy and sell Rodgers for someone's draft. I like Rodgers fine, but I don't think he's untradable.
For once, we agree. If this continues next season then it's time to sell. Nobody is hoping for that, but that would be the prudent move.
Fond Du Arrigo posted:Grave Digger posted:I'd keep McCarthy and sell Rodgers for someone's draft.
I'd probably stick with the 1st ballot hall of fame QB, because he's still in his prime. If said QB was seven years older, I'd probably lean towards your thinking.
I don't see this as being a case of irreconcilable differences, for what that's worth.
Lookin more like a 2nd ballot HOF'mer lately.
Big difference with Wes Welker and Damaryous Thomas or Wes Welker and Rob Gronkowski or even Danny Amendola and Rob Gronkowski vs Randall Cobb and ???Dick Rodgers? Justin Perillo? Davonte Adams?
There has to be some kind of threat of something else coming for defenses to open up holes. Right now defenses only fear Rodgers backshoulder throw to Jones...how long before CBs start jumping that! We don't disagree FS, but defenses aren't playing 2 deep coverage vs. GB that often, they're playing single high Safety with a one low to stop the run and cut off those crossing routes. We aren't testing anyone deep so that 1 deep Safety could probably just bring is cell phone on the field and play Candy Crush and have the same level of effectiveness. Against our 3 receiver sets they have 3 CBs in man, a Safety, and at least 1 LB covering the zones on the short and intermediate throws...they're rushing 4 to 6 on any given play, putting 3 CBs on an island, dropping the rest to stop those crossing routes and one single high Safety. In the past that would have been INSANE to do against GB...most DC's didn't have the sack to do it and the ones that did beat us! Defenses are playing high risk coverage and it's paying off because they know for sure that GB's receivers can't win. Rod Marinelli was the only pussy too scared to do it. Mike McCarthy has always dared teams to play this coverage because he always had the horses to beat it, he doesn't have the horses...he has a thoroughbred, a bunch of colts, an old quarter horse and a couple draft horses in the passing game.
So when the D plays that kind of coverage, what fukin scheme works? It's the same thing I said with the D. When the players can't execute then no scheme works.
The GBP Rules posted:For tallant issues just take a look at the 2014 draft. Thompson drafted Davante Adams. All of these guys were on the board at that time:
Allen Robinson - RD2 1300 yards, 14 tds
John Brown - RD3 - 960 yds, 7 tds
Jarvis Landry - RD2 - 1100 yds, 4 tds
Donte Moncrief - RD3 - 750 yds, 6 tds
Martavis Bryant - RD4 - 760 yds, 6 tds in 10 games. Tall, athletic WR the Packers have never had.
This isn't just missing on 1 guy, that happens all the time. This is whiffing on 5 guys who have had a big impact on their current teams. Moncrief, Brown and Bryant were passed a 2nd time to draft Khyri Thornton.
But no one was saying that when the season began. All signs pointed to Adams being the best of that entire hunch...
FreeSafety posted:Packers have waaaaaaaaaaaaay too many plays where AR is standing around for 5,6,7 seconds or more and then gets sacked.
THIS X 100.
In fact, I thought the same thing back in 2008 to early 2009 when the offensive line was shaky in pass protection. Of course, around the middle point of that 09 season everything seemed to fall in place and the rest is history...but the fact remains now that the current state of our roster probably isn't conducive to running an offense built around the deep air game.
So fire McCarthy and hire Belichick. He seems to be the only one that knows what the **** is going on.
You make it sound so easy
SteveLuke posted:Whatever you think of the Peppers signing, and I think it was a good one, I can not imagine calling his contract "modest."
In terms of guaranteed money and cap commitment, it's modest. The Packers could cut him this year at any time and the cap damage is minimal. Premier pass rushers are getting QB money...
GBFanForLife posted:So fire McCarthy and hire Belichick. He seems to be the only one that knows what the **** is going on.
Can you imagine if MM would have elected to kick off in overtime and lost the Patriots did yesterday? Belichick has Tom Brady and Gronkowski and passes up an opportunity to guarantee that Brady gets the ball in OT to set up a situation where they lose the game without their offense getting a chance? Mornigweg did that a few years ago and got roasted. Belichick does it and some people are thinking it was a brilliant move that just didn't pay off.