2024 Weekly Report Card: Matt LaFleur

[XPack]

Will try to do one every week.

Week 1 - D

Team looked woefully under prepared. Play calling wasn't convincing and overall quite sloppy. Going in with a random new QB and K wasn't ideal and we'll see how good that turn out to be.

Overall, a disappointment as this is way below his ability as a coach.

 

[OldSchool101]

Idk. This is tough because it’s Week 1. We still scored 29 points though and should’ve been 32 points. That’s actually a decent O start. The INT deep in Packer territory killed us.

I’d give Matt a C-

 

[lambeaulambo]

I got a report card for ya. Lafluer was Pepe Lepew. Hafley trots out a swiss cheese d that cannot stop anyone. Got run on non stop. SOLID D for a grade. Anytime your D gets housed you r below avg. He wears the crown and once again we saw an unprepared team.

 

[tynimiller]

LOL I chuckle at this....different country travel, new DC, still youngest offense in the league and we went out and put up 29 on a solid defense against a team with a loaded offense.

If it weren't for drops by nearly every single one of our main WRs and some clear and apparent week 1 bugs/rust whatever you want to call it from Love and the OL this team should have won and were in it the entire time. Now had this been the Panthers we did this against I get the D and such but I'm no lower than a C+ looking at the whole picture personally.

 

[Half Empty]

LOL I chuckle at this....different country travel, new DC, still youngest offense in the league and we went out and put up 29 on a solid defense against a team with a loaded offense.

If it weren't for drops by nearly every single one of our main WRs and some clear and apparent week 1 bugs/rust whatever you want to call it from Love and the OL this team should have won and were in it the entire time. Now had this been the Panthers we did this against I get the D and such but I'm no lower than a C+ looking at the whole picture personally.

Hard not to stop reading after that intro.

 

[tynimiller]

Hard not to stop reading after that intro.

It is however very relevant when grading thoughts on a coach - my baseball coaches could train, push, teach all they wanted....and they could even call the pitch I was to throw....but from that point on it was me. If I let my cutter sail in and hit the hitter - that is not on the coach at all, that's on me.

Jayden Reed was so self critical of himself even though many would say he had a good game - he brought up the drop but more importantly some failures in blocking. He's been taught, trained and continually engrained what to do....but the players have to execute it.

I just think many are from a chosen place of ignorance allowing the fact it ended in an L drive so much of their thoughts. Seriously, if just a couple drops don't happen solid chance we win and the game from a scheme, gameplan and such doesn't change hardly any.....yet folks would be saying B such...

 

[Pugger]

If we want to rag on MLF for the team appearing to be unprepared perhaps starters should play more in the preseason. Yes, there is always the risk of injury but is getting hurt in August any worse than in week one or two?

 

[Krabs]

I'm in the C- area. Couldn't punch it in after two early turnovers. Even if they score one TD there they win the game. They get another TD called back for 12 men on the field. They didn't get a 2 point conversion, which was not a very creative play call at all. The defense, while they did get turnovers, could not stop the run again. It's getting so old to watch. Then there is this as an extra kick to the groin.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Magooch]

The trouble for me is not any one particular issue in a vacuum but it's that it seems like the same issues have pretty consistently cropped up over MLF's tenure.

Some "week one rust" is to be expected, sure. But how many times now have we came out week 1 (or after the bye or extended breaks) and felt like we looked underprepared? It'd be one thing if this was the first time, but that's not the case.
Go back year by year. LaFleur's first season...we open with a 10-3 over the Bears. Later that season we come out after the bye and get smoked by SF, 37-8.
Year two we also open with a win - 43-34 over Minnesota, but nearly give it away...and again come out after the bye and this time get smoked by Tampa, 38-10.
Year three we get ran over by the Saints to kick off the season, 38-3. We win after the bye (45-30 over Chicago), but do also take a loss (to KC, admittedly) 13-7 after the "mini bye". We get a first-round bye in the playoffs, and return to lose to SF, 13-10 in the divisional.
Year four we again open the season with a loss, this time getting cooked by Minnesota. 23-7. We lose to Tennessee 27-17 on Nov 17, then have another "mini bye" and come out with extra prep to lose to Philly 40-33. (And then close the season with a 20-16 loss to Detroit in a game with everything to play for for us and nothing to play for for them)
Year five we open with a good win vs the Bears, but take a 19-17 loss to the Broncos out of the bye.

You get the picture. LaFleur does a lot of things well, but it seems like when an opponent is given a bit of extra prep time he's consistently the one caught flat-footed.

Go back through the game threads for the past few years and I suspect you will also start to note some trends in that - as above - it's just the same complaints over and over again. Questionable situational play calling. Bad clock management. Burning timeouts all over the place. Gets outcoached when opponent is given extra prep time. And so on. And that's not meant to be overly critical because every coach has blind spots and weaknesses, but if nothing else it's a bit bothersome that with LaFleur it seems like these same weaknesses have been known/visible for a while now yet there's little-to-no signs of improvement in these areas, either.

So, I don't know. Week One I guess I'd give it like a C, C-? Nothing too egregiously bad, but not exactly a coaching masterclass, either - just a pretty average day at the office with some suspect decisions that make me tend to grade maybe slightly below-average.

 

[XPack]

LOL I chuckle at this....different country travel, new DC, still youngest offense in the league and we went out and put up 29 on a solid defense against a team with a loaded offense.

If it weren't for drops by nearly every single one of our main WRs and some clear and apparent week 1 bugs/rust whatever you want to call it from Love and the OL this team should have won and were in it the entire time. Now had this been the Panthers we did this against I get the D and such but I'm no lower than a C+ looking at the whole picture personally.

Solid is probably the last word, I'd have chosen to describe our D last game.

And the whole season starting sluggishly has now become a default excuse and we've totally given up on idea of wanting to start off hot. Given all our divisional and conference rivals managed to get a win, just makes this way harder to take in.

In general, the decision on backup QB and K should have been taken way earlier and addressed in FA better that we don't go in blind on Wk 1.


I don't expect perfection in Wk 1, but the overall strategy and preparation have been below par.

 

[tynimiller]

Solid is probably the last word, I'd have chosen to describe our D last game.

And the whole season starting sluggishly has now become a default excuse and we've totally given up on idea of wanting to start off hot. Given all our divisional and conference rivals managed to get a win, just makes this way harder to take in.

In general, the decision on backup QB and K should have been taken way earlier and addressed in FA better that we don't go in blind on Wk 1.


I don't expect perfection in Wk 1, but the overall strategy and preparation have been below par.

Re - read my comment where in the world did I say our defense was solid??

LOL I chuckle at this....different country travel, new DC, still youngest offense in the league and we went out and put up 29 on a solid defense against a team with a loaded offense.

If it weren't for drops by nearly every single one of our main WRs and some clear and apparent week 1 bugs/rust whatever you want to call it from Love and the OL this team should have won and were in it the entire time. Now had this been the Panthers we did this against I get the D and such but I'm no lower than a C+ looking at the whole picture personally.

 

[Mavster]

LOL I chuckle at this....different country travel, new DC, still youngest offense in the league and we went out and put up 29 on a solid defense against a team with a loaded offense.

If it weren't for drops by nearly every single one of our main WRs and some clear and apparent week 1 bugs/rust whatever you want to call it from Love and the OL this team should have won and were in it the entire time. Now had this been the Panthers we did this against I get the D and such but I'm no lower than a C+ looking at the whole picture personally.

Philly was ranked 30th last year in ppg allowed and 29th in defensive DVOA.

 

[tynimiller]

Philly was ranked 30th last year in ppg allowed and 29th in defensive DVOA.

Okay couple things, last year. That front seven they have is special, you can discuss how they struggle second half or he season but only football ignorant people don’t respect that front.

 

[PikeBadger]

I'd give LaFleur a D or D+ at best. I wasn't impressed at all by his performance.

 

[Krabs]

I'd say that this week was much better. They came in with a solid game plan and executed it. I'm going B- and mainly because of the second half. The Colts adjusted to stopping the run and the Packers didn't really adjust to their adjustments. I understand that Willis is the backup and they didn't want to make a mistake that would cost them the game. For example, a pick six or something crazy like that. Overall, it was a good and much needed win with Love on the bench.

 

[Magooch]

Overall, I thought this was an improvement too and I thought we approached the game with a really solid plan.

One could probably make a complaint that we kept it ultra-vanilla and didn't really adjust much at all in the second half when things largely stopped working...but one could also say that we did enough in the first half to mostly just "coast" in the second half.

Richardson and Hurts are two of the more dangerous QBs in the league with their legs (IMO) and we really contained both of them very well. Something like 70 total rush yards between the two of them. While I am still a little apprehensive about our rush defense on the whole, this is a step in the right direction. Feels like in previous years both of them probably would've rushed for twice as much as they did, if not more.

If I had to pick one thing to quibble over it's that I still feel like at times LaFleur leans a little too risk-averse, a little too far towards playing not-to-lose rather than playing to win. That's okay in week 2 with a new backup QB, but I'd like to see a bit more killer instinct developed later in the season.

 

[XPack]

So, week 2 vs Indianapolis Colts:

A far more composed team which had a plan and executed it to perfection (other than Myers barfing on the ball )

MLF's experience with Love probably helped a lot in designing a run heavy game plan and keeping Malik's thrown to simple and minimum. It also helped that Malik was quite good at executing and his decision making was on point.

We started off hot, but let the game get away a bit. A good start, but there needs to be more variation as Titans would be gearing up for more of the same. MLF needs to work on his in-game adaptation a bit more.

Solid A- for this week.

.

Titans looks to be a mess across the board. If we stop Pollard, we should be able to get a W.

 

[Schultz]

The trouble for me is not any one particular issue in a vacuum but it's that it seems like the same issues have pretty consistently cropped up over MLF's tenure.

Some "week one rust" is to be expected, sure. But how many times now have we came out week 1 (or after the bye or extended breaks) and felt like we looked underprepared? It'd be one thing if this was the first time, but that's not the case.
Go back year by year. LaFleur's first season...we open with a 10-3 over the Bears. Later that season we come out after the bye and get smoked by SF, 37-8.
Year two we also open with a win - 43-34 over Minnesota, but nearly give it away...and again come out after the bye and this time get smoked by Tampa, 38-10.
Year three we get ran over by the Saints to kick off the season, 38-3. We win after the bye (45-30 over Chicago), but do also take a loss (to KC, admittedly) 13-7 after the "mini bye". We get a first-round bye in the playoffs, and return to lose to SF, 13-10 in the divisional.
Year four we again open the season with a loss, this time getting cooked by Minnesota. 23-7. We lose to Tennessee 27-17 on Nov 17, then have another "mini bye" and come out with extra prep to lose to Philly 40-33. (And then close the season with a 20-16 loss to Detroit in a game with everything to play for for us and nothing to play for for them)
Year five we open with a good win vs the Bears, but take a 19-17 loss to the Broncos out of the bye.

You get the picture. LaFleur does a lot of things well, but it seems like when an opponent is given a bit of extra prep time he's consistently the one caught flat-footed.

Go back through the game threads for the past few years and I suspect you will also start to note some trends in that - as above - it's just the same complaints over and over again. Questionable situational play calling. Bad clock management. Burning timeouts all over the place. Gets outcoached when opponent is given extra prep time. And so on. And that's not meant to be overly critical because every coach has blind spots and weaknesses, but if nothing else it's a bit bothersome that with LaFleur it seems like these same weaknesses have been known/visible for a while now yet there's little-to-no signs of improvement in these areas, either.

So, I don't know. Week One I guess I'd give it like a C, C-? Nothing too egregiously bad, but not exactly a coaching masterclass, either - just a pretty average day at the office with some suspect decisions that make me tend to grade maybe slightly below-average.

I get and agree with what you are saying about week 1. As far as teams being better prepared with more time wouldn't you have to track when the opponent had their bye the week before playing GB?

 

[Magooch]

I get and agree with what you are saying about week 1. As far as teams being better prepared with more time wouldn't you have to track when the opponent had their bye the week before playing GB?

Outside of “equal rest/prep” times (week 1, playoffs, non-bye periods, etc) I suppose that’s true enough. I guess broadly speaking what I mean is that when we “should” in theory be the better-rested and-or better-prepared team…. Anecdotally at least it feels like that’s seldom the case...

 

[milani]

So, week 2 vs Indianapolis Colts:

A far more composed team which had a plan and executed it to perfection (other than Myers barfing on the ball )

MLF's experience with Love probably helped a lot in designing a run heavy game plan and keeping Malik's thrown to simple and minimum. It also helped that Malik was quite good at executing and his decision making was on point.

We started off hot, but let the game get away a bit. A good start, but there needs to be more variation as Titans would be gearing up for more of the same. MLF needs to work on his in-game adaptation a bit more.

Solid A- for this week.

.

Titans looks to be a mess across the board. If we stop Pollard, we should be able to get a W.

Barkley and Taylor have hurt us. I hope we can stop someone.