FO Needs to Stay Out of LaFluer's Way

[G0P4ckG0]

Topic title should be: "FO needs to stay out of Gutekensts' way". It will take a couple more years for Gute to exorcise the demons of TT & MM's philosophy in regards to both the Draft and free agency. The worst thing about the current state of the team with a new (and young) head coach is that Rodgers is nearing the end of his career. The next 5 years will be very interesting to say the least and I hope we won't have to endure another Favre-like soap opera.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

People have bosses where they work. The power structure this year, is no different than last year. and clearly from the Thread title to most posts after, it's not about who the head coaches boss is.

I don't think there is any question you are correct, but I think some are wondering if this structure is a good structure.

Again, IMO I think from the outside looking in the setup appears that it could/should work just fine. Not sure last year is a going to be a glowing example of how the dynamics between Murph-Gute-McCarthy(coach) work, but I will take it over the way things were being run towards the end of the TT reign. I watched the press conference when the Packers hired MM. It was just TT and Mike at the table and Ted basically said "I did this, I thought this and I decided this". Sometimes big decisions should be looked at from different perspectives and by only having one guy making those decisions, things can go South pretty fast.

 

[Half Empty]

any body gotta link that says Murphy is calling the shots? anybody? I mean last year, Ted was still calling the shots, or so we heard from numerous guys on here. Not Gute, Not Murphy, Ted. Gute was the yes man. Then of course FA started and there were fewer and fewer of those guys. But as soon as Gute was hired, it was almost comical some of the conspiracy stuff that was come up with on here. Murphy was too busy trying to make money and not involved in the team aspect enough. If I cared to, I could go back and find enough posts to fill a page. Then it was M.Murphy needed to step in and reign in Ted, cut him loose, fire some coaches and make the head coach make some staffing changes. But he cared more about Titletown District than the team. Now the president, GM and Russ Ball go thru the process of finding a new HC that hasn't even named a staff yet, and you guys have Murphy pegged again LOL

Does anybody ever just **** and see what actually transpires before forming opinions, let along strong ones?

Probably not, because this is an Internet sports forum populated by people who receive nothing tangible from the Packers and whose opinions affect nothing. Anyone who desires a waiting period for any topic need not participate until sufficient time has passed.

 

[Mondio]

Probably not, because this is an Internet sports forum populated by people who receive nothing tangible from the Packers and whose opinions affect nothing. Anyone who desires a waiting period for any topic need not participate until sufficient time has passed.

yes, that's exactly what i'm saying, that and if you don't work for them you can't have an opinion (insert giant ****ing eye roll) LOL

OR, there is a definite difference between saying something like, "do you think the Packers power structure is odd or workable" and "do you think Murphy and Gute have final say in coaching staff" or "do you think they have too much power in choosing staff" or " is it possible that Gute and Murphy don't have any say in coaches other than opinions the new HC may solicit" or perhaps start a discussion where you posit, " what are the odds Murphy is really the defacto GM, President, HC, play caller on game day, OC, DC and yo momma"? and then have a discussion.

all of those are far different than this

Forcing a GM or HC to accept failed coaches because of loyalty is the most ridiculous, most assured way to continue to hold your organization back.

 

[Half Empty]

OK, I'm getting closer. Questions are acceptable but opinions aren't?

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

OK, I'm getting closer. Questions are acceptable but opinions aren't?

Some don't like strong opinions if they differ from theirs

 

[Mondio]

OK, I'm getting closer. Questions are acceptable but opinions aren't?

yeah, that's my point again LOL

being able to hold and discuss opinions and realizing they are still just opinions is probably the missing ingredient for some. Yet here we are, with a thread full of people not even a couple hours into a new head coach acting like they know everything going on when a staff has not even been named. our new HC hasn't even committed to any of those coaches being retained yet, here were are stating his staff is being forced upon him by Mark Murphy. LOL You can't recognize the difference?

 

[Mondio]

Some don't like strong opinions if they differ from theirs

you're not really that obtuse are you?

 

[AmishMafia]

Players like Hyde, Hayward, and Rollins have nothing to do with the point I was making about Pettine and the impact he's had on the defense. What did HaHa do when he got to Washington?

I've been on the record multiple times saying that Capers was awful especially towards the end, but it's undeniable that he also didn't have much talent to work with as well.

Yes! It is deniable!!!

I will ask again, what does bad coaching look like compared to lack of talent?

What does it matter what Haha did in Washington? Did it not look like he was a rising star at one point? He was on the all rookie team. He went to a pro bowl and in 2014 was 2nd team all-pro. He was top player listed on some NFL "the next superstar" lists. Do you think he wasnt talented and not capable of being good?

Why doesnt Hayward and Hyde factor into your thought process? You cant ignore information that doesnt match your agenda. It shows that very talented players did not do as well in Green Bay. Thay means you either think that somehow they became talented after leaving the Packers, or that coaching in some way, limited their success. And if coaching limited them, isnt it likely that other players were limited as well?

Or, come up with another explanation. But dont tell me that the major issue was a lack of talent. That just doesnt make sense.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

you're not really that obtuse are you?

Nah, would call myself more of an astute guy. My comment wasn't directed at anyone in particular, if you took offense to it, you shouldn't. Its hard not to notice that there are many posters with varying opinions here, which is a great thing, it is what makes this place so interesting and worthwhile. However, there are also a few that take it very personal when another poster's opinion doesn't match with their own. I would call these the entertaining (for me) extreme posters.

 

[Dantés]

What does a lack of talent look like as compared to bad coaching?

A big part of a coach's job is developing talent.

Laugh if you want about saying Haha is talented, but he was. At one time, Haha was on most lists as thee upcoming breakout player. He was on the upswing and looked like he was going to be an impact player. You can say the same about Perry. To a lesser degree, it's also true about Hyde, Haywood, randall and Rollins. Hyde and Rollins are all pro - after they left. Did they suddenly become talented?

LeFleur became OC in LA and went from last to first in offense with 9 of 11 starters. Did they suddenly become talented?

Packers ended 1958 in last place. There were 15 players on the roster who were eventually all pro or hall of fame. That is a lot of talent that won only 1 game in a season. I doubt they would have achieved that in their careers if Lombardi didnt come to town.

Well... sort of.

In 2016, the top trio of receivers for the Rams were Kenny Britt, Tavon Austin, and Brian Quick.

In 2017, they were Cooper Kupp, Robert Woods, and Sammy Watkins.

In 2016, their LT and C were Greg Robinson and Tim Barnes. 60% of their snaps at one of the guard spots were filled by Cody Wichmann, who has been out of the league since that season.

In 2017, their LT and C were Andrew Whitworth and John Sullivan.

Coaching and talent combined to make the huge difference.

 

[PackAttack12]

Yes! It is deniable!!!

I will ask again, what does bad coaching look like compared to lack of talent?

What does it matter what Haha did in Washington? Did it not look like he was a rising star at one point? He was on the all rookie team. He went to a pro bowl and in 2014 was 2nd team all-pro. He was top player listed on some NFL "the next superstar" lists. Do you think he wasnt talented and not capable of being good?

Why doesnt Hayward and Hyde factor into your thought process? You cant ignore information that doesnt match your agenda. It shows that very talented players did not do as well in Green Bay. Thay means you either think that somehow they became talented after leaving the Packers, or that coaching in some way, limited their success. And if coaching limited them, isnt it likely that other players were limited as well?

Or, come up with another explanation. But dont tell me that the major issue was a lack of talent. That just doesnt make sense.

Okay. I need to ask a clarifying question before I can go any further here.

Are you saying that the Packers have had enough talent to consistently field good defenses? And are you also saying that the Packers had enough talent to field a top 10 defense this season?

 

[AmishMafia]

Okay. I need to ask a clarifying question before I can go any further here.

Are you saying that the Packers have had enough talent to consistently field good defenses? And are you also saying that the Packers had enough talent to field a top 10 defense this season?

Yes. The Packers' defenses underperformed the last 5 or 6 seasons under Capers.

Top 10 this year? They finished 18th. Here are the facors in why we finished there:
1. Injuries
2. Depth
A. Lack of quality backups (talent)
B. Backups didnt develop (coaching)
3. Lack of offense controlling the ball
A. defense on the field longer means more stats for opposing teams
B. Defense gets more tired
4. Conversion to new scheme

Weighing it all, I think we are just out of the top 10 talent wise.

 

[AmishMafia]

Coaching and talent combined to make the huge difference.

Certainly you need both. Personally, I think coaching is much more important. But talent can cover some coaching shortcomings. Yesterday, at the press conference, it was brought up that there was complacency and lack of accountability of staff and players. This is MMs issue. It's a HC issue not related to Xs and Os but more of a culture problem. Rodgers, are most talented player, played well below his talent level. Why? Did he become less talented or is it coaching? I would say a big part of that is MMs responsibilty for culture. Coaching.

 

[PackAttack12]

Yes. The Packers' defenses underperformed the last 5 or 6 seasons under Capers.

Top 10 this year? They finished 18th. Here are the facors in why we finished there:
1. Injuries
2. Depth
A. Lack of quality backups (talent)
B. Backups didnt develop (coaching)
3. Lack of offense controlling the ball
A. defense on the field longer means more stats for opposing teams
B. Defense gets more tired
4. Conversion to new scheme

Weighing it all, I think we are just out of the top 10 talent wise.

The injury excuse is really getting old. Every time in the NFL deals with injuries, yet somehow with the Packers it becomes an excuse every single year.

You say we didn't have quality backups, yet the coaching staff is supposed to turn chicken soup into chicken **** on a consistent basis lol. That's just unrealistic. At some point, the coaches have to have something to work with.

I don't think you and I are far off in our beliefs. You actually made a pretty compelling case for Pettine in the above text. I'm just not going to sit there and act like we have all of this talent, and that all of the issues defensively are on the coaching staff.

It takes talent and coaching.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yes. The Packers' defenses underperformed the last 5 or 6 seasons under Capers.

Top 10 this year? They finished 18th. Here are the facors in why we finished there:
1. Injuries
2. Depth
A. Lack of quality backups (talent)
B. Backups didnt develop (coaching)
3. Lack of offense controlling the ball
A. defense on the field longer means more stats for opposing teams
B. Defense gets more tired
4. Conversion to new scheme

Weighing it all, I think we are just out of the top 10 talent wise.

I think LeFleur summed it up pretty well in one statement yesterday. He will be looking for consistent improvement, while acknowledging that this happens in small increments. IMO, that was what the Packer team in general has lacked too often, especially on the defensive side of the ball in regards to individual players. I can only really point to 2 starters who have consistently gotten better, Kenny Clark and Blake Martinez. Otherwise, there were guys who showed signs of development, but seemed to either take 2 steps backwards and 1 forward or just fizzle out altogether. I put that on coaching.

I realize injury, scheme, team dynamics, etc play a big role in the way the team performs as a whole, but when you look at players individually, each and everyone of them should be improving on an individual basis. The defense needs to get better at that, as will the offense.

 

[Dantés]

Certainly you need both. Personally, I think coaching is much more important. But talent can cover some coaching shortcomings. Yesterday, at the press conference, it was brought up that there was complacency and lack of accountability of staff and players. This is MMs issue. It's a HC issue not related to Xs and Os but more of a culture problem. Rodgers, are most talented player, played well below his talent level. Why? Did he become less talented or is it coaching? I would say a big part of that is MMs responsibilty for culture. Coaching.

I tend to think they're equally important. Your example is sound, but I can counter it with one of my own. Mike Pettine is a good coach and teacher. By the time the season ended, he had what, 3 starters left from week one? He wasn't able to overcome that issue. Talent.

 

[AmishMafia]

The injury excuse is really getting old. Every time in the NFL deals with injuries, yet somehow with the Packers it becomes an excuse every single year.

You say we didn't have quality backups, yet the coaching staff is supposed to turn chicken soup into chicken **** on a consistent basis lol. That's just unrealistic. At some point, the coaches have to have something to work with.

I don't think you and I are far off in our beliefs. You actually made a pretty compelling case for Pettine in the above text. I'm just not going to sit there and act like we have all of this talent, and that all of the issues defensively are on the coaching staff.

It takes talent and coaching.

It's a list of factors that determined how our defense performed. Not a list of excuses. I think you can agree that injuries will affect the performance of the defense. Right?

More talent will help us do better. Of course. Poor coaching was a greater factor than talent in our defense sucking under Capers.

Consider this as well: Capers defenses had a pattern of doing well for 2 or 3 years and then getting progressively worse. This is every job he had. It's not a coincidence. I dont know why, but I think its 2 things. 1. He is poor at developing players and 2. He gets more complicated with his scheme and the rookies arent taught the basics at the level of the first 2 years. Just my theory. In most of his positions there was a consistent GM situation. So we can assume the quality of incoming players did not change.

 

[rodell330]

Don’t worry folks! Murphy will assemble the best staff possible for Lafleur

 

[AmishMafia]

I tend to think they're equally important. Your example is sound, but I can counter it with one of my own. Mike Pettine is a good coach and teacher. By the time the season ended, he had what, 3 starters left from week one? He wasn't able to overcome that issue. Talent.

Why weren't the young pups ready to play? As my previous to PA12 contends, I dont think Capers developed talent. Those are all TT and company drafted players. Did our scouting department start evaluating players poorly? Or is it more likely that a coach who history of developing players is very spotty, is responsible? Neither of us knows for sure, but to me the evidence points to Capers more than TT.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I tend to think they're equally important. Your example is sound, but I can counter it with one of my own. Mike Pettine is a good coach and teacher. By the time the season ended, he had what, 3 starters left from week one? He wasn't able to overcome that issue. Talent.

I think Pettine did a pretty good job this year with what he was given to work with and yes, the injuries didn't help, but they are always going to be a part of the game and require a team to have to adapt and rely on its depth. IMO, the future success of the Packer defense is not just going to be the way Pettine schemes it, but the individual talent of the 23 or so guys that make up the defense. Having all those guys at their best and ready to play will only come about with good roster moves by Gute and assistant coaches who know how to coach and improve individual players.

 

[AmishMafia]

Don’t worry folks! Murphy will assemble the best staff possible for Lafleur

Good grief. Time to get over it. McDaniels isnt the HC and it's probably McDaniels fault more than Murphy.

Trust me, I'm upset as well. I was looking forward to those box seats.

 

[PackAttack12]

Good grief. Time to get over it. McDaniels isnt the HC and it's probably McDaniels fault more than Murphy.

Trust me, I'm upset as well. I was looking forward to those box seats.

rodell can't seem to understand that McDaniels clearly didn't make that much of an impression on the Packers' brass. He's just pissy because his emphatic proclamation that McDaniels would be the coach didn't come to fruition.

Trust me. If the Packers thought he was THE guy, they would have hired him. All of this nonsense about not being able to pick his own staff and such is insane.

 

[PackAttack12]

It's a list of factors that determined how our defense performed. Not a list of excuses. I think you can agree that injuries will affect the performance of the defense. Right?

More talent will help us do better. Of course. Poor coaching was a greater factor than talent in our defense sucking under Capers.

Consider this as well: Capers defenses had a pattern of doing well for 2 or 3 years and then getting progressively worse. This is every job he had. It's not a coincidence. I dont know why, but I think its 2 things. 1. He is poor at developing players and 2. He gets more complicated with his scheme and the rookies arent taught the basics at the level of the first 2 years. Just my theory. In most of his positions there was a consistent GM situation. So we can assume the quality of incoming players did not change.

We definitely had some talented guys come and go, but for instance whenever you had to rely on LaDarius Gunter to play meaningful snaps, you have a talent problem. It's a little bit of both, and I think both are in the process of being remedied.

 

[Mondio]

McDaniels isnt the HC and it's probably McDaniels fault more than Murphy.

I think it's worth repeating.