DePack
Cheesehead
His record did go like that somewhat. He took an 8-8 team went 9-7, 12-4, 12-4, 10-6, 10-6 then 4-12.
Interesting article...
- Thread starter TomAllen
- Start date
DePack
Cheesehead
tromadz said:
12 teams make the playoffs. One wins the Championship. On average, teams win the Championship one time every 12 years they are in the Playoffs. By your way of thinking 31 coaches should be fired every year. This is why the rest of the football world was amazed when Sherman got fired!
Why does Tony Dungy still have a job?
i said a coach should get fired after only 1 year of trying? no. dont put words in my mouth. you're more mature than that(......)
sherman had more than 1 year.
Sherman tried his best...got to the playoffs....didnt do the job when he got there. Sorry.
sherman had more than 1 year.
Sherman tried his best...got to the playoffs....didnt do the job when he got there. Sorry.
all about da packers
Cheesehead
tromadz said:
1 game? Do you really think McCarthy and Sanders are going to become better in one game? No.
And that is my point. McCarthy and Sanders have potential, but so did Joey Thomas. Sherman and Bates have a track record of success (or at least some form of success). You honestly expect McCarthy and Sanders to not screw up in their 1st year?
Sherman and Bates were a greater duo. Can McCarthy and Sanders become better than those two? Sure. Unfortunately they need time. And time is not on the side of Brett Favre, William Henderson, Ahman Green, Donald Driver, et al.
digsthepack
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 2,486
- Reaction score
- 0
Um...allaboutdapackers...Holmgren was not the first choice for the HC job when he was hired. Really, what bearing does not being the first choice have on matters. Good coaches, just like good players, come from a lot of places and all they really need is the chance to shine. Let's see if MM and crew shine before making any conclusions.
I have no problem with a new coach "******** up" a few times...it is part of the learning curve. I DO have a problem with a coach and staff making the same friggin mistakes over and over during a 5 year span...that would be MS again.
Try again.
dude, you gotta get some better analogies/comparisons going here.
I have no problem with a new coach "******** up" a few times...it is part of the learning curve. I DO have a problem with a coach and staff making the same friggin mistakes over and over during a 5 year span...that would be MS again.
Try again.
dude, you gotta get some better analogies/comparisons going here.
Zero2Cool
I own a website
digsthepack said:
So, if Mike Holmgren wasn't the first choice who was? Bill Parcells?
digsthepack
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 2,486
- Reaction score
- 0
Bill Parcells AND Marty Schottenheimer!
AADP...Holmgren was a THIRD choice!
From the JS online archives...read the last paragraph.
The current state of the Packers is disheartening to say the least. We have gotten spoiled in the last 13 years. Let's look at Packers history and also play a little "what if?".
What if the wretched 1988 Lindy Infante team hadn't rallied and beat the Cardinals in the last game of the year. As I remember it, the Packers, and not the Cowboys, would have had the first overall pick. They certainly would have taken Troy Aikman instead of Tony Mandarich.
Instead of Mandarich, what if they had picked Barry Sanders? What if they had picked Derrick Thomas or Deion Sanders, who were taken 4th and 5th? What if they had traded down for a late 1st rounder and another couple lower round picks? What if they had traded for a Pro Bowl QB, RB or pass rusher, even if it took more picks and players?
The way it turned out, anything they would have done would have seemed better than taking Mandarich. It was obvious to me, a lay person, that he was juiced up on steroids in college. I never bought that thyroid disease or whatever he said caused him to lose weight while he was in Green Bay.
In this week's post-game chat, Cliff Christl referred again to a scout who told him that the league has a few playmakers and everyone else are "just bodies." I never wanted to believe that, thinking football is a real team sport. My opinions have changed in recent years, though.
Without Moss, the Vikings are struggling. The defensive help they signed in the off-season is either injured or not much help. Defenses play the Vikes different without Moss there. Look at how busy the Packers were trying to account for the Panthers' Smith. As a result, other guys were open all over the field.
Let's put Randy Wright, Chuck Fusina or even Lynn ****ey at the helm of this Packers team. They'd still be 0-4, but probably wouldn't even have a first down in 4 games.
If they had picked Aikman, I think they may have improved enough to save Tom Braatz's job, if not Infante's. They would not have needed a QB or a new GM for that matter. No Ron Wolf, maybe no Mike Holmgren. Also, it was a personal quest for Wolf to get Brett on whatever team he was with. Remember, Brett was a 3rd stringer who was in Jerry Glanville's doghouse in Atlanta.
While Aikman was a fine QB, who will most likely be in the HOF, he was no match for Brett in his prime. He also had a shorter career due to concussions. Could he have been the trigger man to put the Packers over the top? I don't think so.
I think that the only GM in the league who would have given a 1st round pick for Favre probably was Wolf. What if Brett sat the bench in Atlanta for a few more years? Would he have been out of the league without really accomplishing anything? It's entirely possible.
Barry Sanders, Derrick Thomas and Deion Sanders were certainly difference makers. Would they have put the Packers over the top? Not likely. The Lions never went anywhere with Barry Sanders, as great as he was.
Thomas and Deion Sanders were defensive playmakers. Deion Sanders maybe would have made a big difference because of his ability to score on picks and returns, but bring the Lombardi back to Green Bay? As a final piece of the puzzle, yes. As "the man," no.
Packers take Mandarich. He flops. Braatz and Infante get fired. Wolf gets hired. Wolf hires QB and west coast offense guru Holmgren because Parcells and Schottenheimer turn him down. Wolf trades for "his man" Brett. Reggie White is so impressed with Brett, he says Brett was a big reason he signed as the biggest FA catch of all time. Soon the Lombardi comes back to Titletown.
I guess that Mandarich pick wasn't so bad after all. It's fun to play "what if?"
AADP...Holmgren was a THIRD choice!
From the JS online archives...read the last paragraph.
The current state of the Packers is disheartening to say the least. We have gotten spoiled in the last 13 years. Let's look at Packers history and also play a little "what if?".
What if the wretched 1988 Lindy Infante team hadn't rallied and beat the Cardinals in the last game of the year. As I remember it, the Packers, and not the Cowboys, would have had the first overall pick. They certainly would have taken Troy Aikman instead of Tony Mandarich.
Instead of Mandarich, what if they had picked Barry Sanders? What if they had picked Derrick Thomas or Deion Sanders, who were taken 4th and 5th? What if they had traded down for a late 1st rounder and another couple lower round picks? What if they had traded for a Pro Bowl QB, RB or pass rusher, even if it took more picks and players?
The way it turned out, anything they would have done would have seemed better than taking Mandarich. It was obvious to me, a lay person, that he was juiced up on steroids in college. I never bought that thyroid disease or whatever he said caused him to lose weight while he was in Green Bay.
In this week's post-game chat, Cliff Christl referred again to a scout who told him that the league has a few playmakers and everyone else are "just bodies." I never wanted to believe that, thinking football is a real team sport. My opinions have changed in recent years, though.
Without Moss, the Vikings are struggling. The defensive help they signed in the off-season is either injured or not much help. Defenses play the Vikes different without Moss there. Look at how busy the Packers were trying to account for the Panthers' Smith. As a result, other guys were open all over the field.
Let's put Randy Wright, Chuck Fusina or even Lynn ****ey at the helm of this Packers team. They'd still be 0-4, but probably wouldn't even have a first down in 4 games.
If they had picked Aikman, I think they may have improved enough to save Tom Braatz's job, if not Infante's. They would not have needed a QB or a new GM for that matter. No Ron Wolf, maybe no Mike Holmgren. Also, it was a personal quest for Wolf to get Brett on whatever team he was with. Remember, Brett was a 3rd stringer who was in Jerry Glanville's doghouse in Atlanta.
While Aikman was a fine QB, who will most likely be in the HOF, he was no match for Brett in his prime. He also had a shorter career due to concussions. Could he have been the trigger man to put the Packers over the top? I don't think so.
I think that the only GM in the league who would have given a 1st round pick for Favre probably was Wolf. What if Brett sat the bench in Atlanta for a few more years? Would he have been out of the league without really accomplishing anything? It's entirely possible.
Barry Sanders, Derrick Thomas and Deion Sanders were certainly difference makers. Would they have put the Packers over the top? Not likely. The Lions never went anywhere with Barry Sanders, as great as he was.
Thomas and Deion Sanders were defensive playmakers. Deion Sanders maybe would have made a big difference because of his ability to score on picks and returns, but bring the Lombardi back to Green Bay? As a final piece of the puzzle, yes. As "the man," no.
Packers take Mandarich. He flops. Braatz and Infante get fired. Wolf gets hired. Wolf hires QB and west coast offense guru Holmgren because Parcells and Schottenheimer turn him down. Wolf trades for "his man" Brett. Reggie White is so impressed with Brett, he says Brett was a big reason he signed as the biggest FA catch of all time. Soon the Lombardi comes back to Titletown.
I guess that Mandarich pick wasn't so bad after all. It's fun to play "what if?"
Zero2Cool
I own a website
I knew of Parcells, but didn't know about Schottenheimer.
all about da packers
Cheesehead
digs, what I mean by not being first choice is that McCarthy lost out on the job, because it was handed over to Bates. Unfortunately Bates and TT had a fallout, after which TT handed the job to McCarthy.
I'm not saying the Packers were better than the steelers because they won 4 games last year. I'm saying that Brett has little time left. The chances of winning it all are greater with having Brett now, as compared to having Rodgers in his first/second year. That is why I think Sherman/Bates duo should have been kept, because they gave the best oppertunity to win NOW, although McCarthy/Sanders may be best for the future. I don't think it would have made a huge difference if we had fired Sherman/Bates after this year, and hired McCarthy next year. McCarthy isn't going to bring this team out of the grave, no one could do that. I just think with Sherman/Bates, this team would have faught harder while being put 6 feet under. Ultimately, IMO, the Packers are going to go into all out rebuilding mode, once Favre retires. I'd rather have a new coach then, as opposed to now, because ultimately Sherman/Bates gave us a greater shot to get into the playoffs this season.
I'm not saying that McCarthy/Sanders don't give us a shot at all, because they do have an outside chance. History is against them though.
I'm not saying the Packers were better than the steelers because they won 4 games last year. I'm saying that Brett has little time left. The chances of winning it all are greater with having Brett now, as compared to having Rodgers in his first/second year. That is why I think Sherman/Bates duo should have been kept, because they gave the best oppertunity to win NOW, although McCarthy/Sanders may be best for the future. I don't think it would have made a huge difference if we had fired Sherman/Bates after this year, and hired McCarthy next year. McCarthy isn't going to bring this team out of the grave, no one could do that. I just think with Sherman/Bates, this team would have faught harder while being put 6 feet under. Ultimately, IMO, the Packers are going to go into all out rebuilding mode, once Favre retires. I'd rather have a new coach then, as opposed to now, because ultimately Sherman/Bates gave us a greater shot to get into the playoffs this season.
I'm not saying that McCarthy/Sanders don't give us a shot at all, because they do have an outside chance. History is against them though.
all about da packers
Cheesehead
To be clear, I am not saying that the Packers are a crappy team. I'm saying based on what I have heard/thought through ultimately at the end of the day, they don't have the players to be able to get them into the playoffs now.
When I say six feet under, I mean the fact is that with so many rookies and 1st/2nd year players, the Packers are going to have some major screw ups, it is inevitable. Ultimately I believe that Sherman/Bates would have allowed for thsoe mistakes to be less impactful as compared to McCarthy/Sanders, who are both in their first year.
When I say six feet under, I mean the fact is that with so many rookies and 1st/2nd year players, the Packers are going to have some major screw ups, it is inevitable. Ultimately I believe that Sherman/Bates would have allowed for thsoe mistakes to be less impactful as compared to McCarthy/Sanders, who are both in their first year.
all about da packers
Cheesehead
tromadz said:
It will, for sure. However to expect Rodgers to come in and have this team in the thick of things come playoff time isn't realistic. Rodgers will need time to step out of Favre's shadow, become his own player. The comparisions are going to be endless the first year, and Rodgers won't get anywhere with people saying "if Favre was here, so and so what have happened".
I dont expect Rodgers to be a starting QB whenever favre leaves.
And with Favre playing this year (Sanders first year....kinda like Bates had his first year last year and did well...but sanders only has an 'outside chance' ) and maybe\probably next year... not really worried about the QB position.
Zeros pizzaman said Favre is playing next year i believe.
and if this is about doing some damage in favres last years...maybe you understand my frustration with the sherman era. I mean, now, Favre is all but retired (2 years tops it looks like) and people want NFC titles and superbowls...with a rookie HC and 2nd year GM. right.
And with Favre playing this year (Sanders first year....kinda like Bates had his first year last year and did well...but sanders only has an 'outside chance' ) and maybe\probably next year... not really worried about the QB position.
Zeros pizzaman said Favre is playing next year i believe.
and if this is about doing some damage in favres last years...maybe you understand my frustration with the sherman era. I mean, now, Favre is all but retired (2 years tops it looks like) and people want NFC titles and superbowls...with a rookie HC and 2nd year GM. right.
digsthepack
Cheesehead
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2005
- Messages
- 2,486
- Reaction score
- 0
By the time the next QB takes over, we will have a bad-*** defense and a re-established running game...the same things that allowed TRENT DILFER to win a SB. Whether it be Rodgers or not, this team is being built for now, and for the transition after Favre retires....with football foundations...defense and a run game.
I am not too worried.
I am not too worried.
warhawk
Cheesehead
digsthepack said:
Amen.
Anyone already blasting MM and Co. is showing only that they are against change period. Not just this change.
Sherman lovers. Love 'em all you want. But don't ask me to be in that camp after watching a team I just knew was going to win the Philly game and the NFC to the team we fielded against Atlanta. Ya, that team that had NO DEPTH, our starters were shot from a brutal season, we were bruised, abused, and battered in our own backyard.
Add up all the wins, whatever, that was a SINKING SHIP!
Lare
Cheesehead
I'm probably in the minority, but the Packers don't have to win the Super Bowl for me to feel they've had a successful season. I guess I'd rather see them be competitive every year and have a chance to get there by making it into the playoffs than continually being in a rebuilding mode.
I realize there's a happy medium but we also have to realize that it's a lot easier to be in the "Rebuilding Mode" group every year than it is the "Playoff & Super Bowl" group every year. Just ask teams like the Cardinals and the Saints.
That said, as much as I admired Sherman for his success I also felt it was time for him to go simply because I didn't see the team progressing in any area. I also felt a good part of his success may have been due to playing in a weak division and having one of the best QBs of all time during his entire tenure here. That these factors may have padded his success rate may also have been indicated by their lousy postseason record.
At any rate, Sherman is gone and it's now time for the TT & MM show. TT has risked his job on the selection of MM and if he fails, so does TT. I think we'll know in a year or so if either of them will be successful in their present position.
I realize there's a happy medium but we also have to realize that it's a lot easier to be in the "Rebuilding Mode" group every year than it is the "Playoff & Super Bowl" group every year. Just ask teams like the Cardinals and the Saints.
That said, as much as I admired Sherman for his success I also felt it was time for him to go simply because I didn't see the team progressing in any area. I also felt a good part of his success may have been due to playing in a weak division and having one of the best QBs of all time during his entire tenure here. That these factors may have padded his success rate may also have been indicated by their lousy postseason record.
At any rate, Sherman is gone and it's now time for the TT & MM show. TT has risked his job on the selection of MM and if he fails, so does TT. I think we'll know in a year or so if either of them will be successful in their present position.
digsthepack said:
All the current GM had to do was to give Favre a couple of weapons at WR and protect his ***, and the Pack could be competing for championships THIS YEAR!
I would be worried digs because TT did not have to disassemble this whole team to field a competitor. What I would worry about is if some of TT's rookie picks don't pan out in a year or two, then he has alot further to go to build a winner then when he started. We're talking maybe 4-5 years, and it could be the same situation that we had with Sherman--waiting for the payoff that never comes!
warhawk
Cheesehead
all about da packers said:
I hope your not serious when you speak of "Mr. Nerves of steel when it's nut-cuttin' time" making fewer bone head decisions than somebody else. Trust me. If the decision came down to who would choke the least when it was the most important. They made the right decision.
The fact that we have SO many first and second year players is because we DON"T have many 3rd, 4th, and 5th, year players(when guesss who was in charge) other than a couple of starters and a few free agents.
Rather than considering KEEPING MS around to "help these young fella's" along, we should have gotten rid of him two years ago. I believe our roster would be much more enabling for final Favre run that way.
DePack
Cheesehead
tromadz said:
Why do you avoid most of my post and address just a minor point. Why does Dungy have a job?
BTW....keep pushing AADP's buttons, Ryan won't pull your *** outta the fire too many more times :lol:
NDPackerFan
Cheesehead
As was stated earlier, life will go on without Favre. Packer fans will have to learn how to adjust all their adoration. Watch the Bear fans drool over Urlacher and their D...and rightfully so.
Watch AJ Hawk come out and play like Brian Urlacher plus tax and the Packers defense will soon be the best in the NFC North and among the best in the NFL...life will move on.
As long as Favre is still here, let's all enjoy the last season or however many he has left because he's a living legend.
Watch AJ Hawk come out and play like Brian Urlacher plus tax and the Packers defense will soon be the best in the NFC North and among the best in the NFL...life will move on.
As long as Favre is still here, let's all enjoy the last season or however many he has left because he's a living legend.
DePack said:
What is dungys playoff record?
How many times have they gone passed the 1st round?
How many times have they just barely lost in their losses?
and AADP gets what he gets. I dont hold back cuz people have a mod banner. I should have a mod banner! MUAH! :babe:
TOPackerFan
Cheesehead
tromadz said:
Dungy was 2-4 with the Bucs. He made it to the second round twice, losing both games.
With the Colts I think he's also 2-4. The Colts have made it past the first round by way of a bye twice and by way of a win once; however Dungy has only ever won one second round game with the Colts (i.e. made one AFC championship game).
