McCarthy is a great coach

[Un4GivN]

Whisenhunt went 3-20 as the Titans head coach, McCarthy has lost 21 regular season games since the start of the 2011 season. Mentioning those two teams in the same category is ludicrous.

McCarthy also has Rodgers... That could explain some of the victory differentials. Doesn't mean either is getting the most out of the talent that they have. And in that way, they can be compared.

 

[Un4GivN]

If you change players but not improve the quality of the players, changing the coach will make no difference. Again, what is your evaluation of the OT talent Campen has available to him? Here's mine: Bulaga was a first rounder who has struggled with injury, Bakhtiari was a 4th rounder who has battled injuries since preseason and that has ended any hope he would improve his play from last season. Barclay is a UDFA who has never been even adequate at OT - he's an OG. And Jeremy Vujnovich is a UDFA on the PS. You apparently think another OL coach can significantly improve the play of the current "talent" at OT. I think you are suggesting firing Campen just for the sake of it and ignoring the real problem: Lack of talent available.

Two points here...

Draft position really means next to nothing... Are you more likely to hit higher. Sure.

New England started

LT -- Sebastian Vollmer 2nd round 7th year?
LG -- Shaq Mason 4th round, Rookie
C -- David Andrews Undrafted Rookie
RG -- Josh Kline Undrafted 3rd year
RT -- Cameron Fleming 4th round 2nd year

And they are 3rd in the league in total yards. And have allowed the same number of sacks in 84 more attempts.

Is this Rodgers? The offensive line?

And two...

I think we are seeing a culmination of many problems and trying to put it into one spot too often. Is it the offensive line, Rodgers, the receivers, the play calling, coaching?

It's a very difficult task to pinpoint. Most likely it is all of them underachieving. That is why I got back to coaching. If I feel like the team is not preforming to the talent that they have. To me that is coaching.

And this also bring me back to the fire that this team does not seem to possess. So yes I do feel coaching changes can make a difference. Even if they aren't a "better coach" maybe the players are fired up by them. Maybe they play with some fire.

I also don't condone this mid-season and if anything is to be done should be done after the season once everything shakes out. But I dont think coaching changes are a bad thing for a team that is underachieving.

 

[JBlood]

I think you are suggesting firing Campen just for the sake of it and ignoring the real problem: Lack of talent available.

We obviously disagree. But you can have the last word.

 

[Half Empty]

Nope, you just had it.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

No this isn't a homer opinion or green and gold glasses stance but rather a theory. For years McCarthy has focused 95% of his time on the offensive side of the ball and the packers have had great success.

In 2015 he gave up that focus to be a "big picture" coach. What really happened in my view is he gave up the offensive duties to focus 60 to 70% of his time on defense. Look at the results this year outside of the Denver game. The defense has been playing well, even great in the game against Minnesota. However look at how far the offense has fallen, this leads me to my theory.

Mike McCarthy is a great coach, but a terrible hiring manager. His offensive and defensive staffs do not perform when he isn't directly over seeing / supervising them. Look at the few coaches who have gone else where. Joe philbin, flop. Ben McAdoo, mixed results. I've been thinking about this the past few days, thoughts?

I don't think I agree with some of this idea. The last time McCarthy "focused" on defense the Packers unveiled their "quads" defense which was AWFUL. I think McCarthy is spending time with both offense, defense and special teams but I think the biggest change is being made on game days. He's probably just as involved during the week in offensive game planning. McCarthy is a very good coach but he's been an offensive guy his entire career. I'm not sure how much value he would add to the defensive gameplan; I'm not saying his attention isn't a positive, just not sure that I would give him the bulk of the credit for the defense this year. I would say the improved play of Datone Jones, Mike Daniels (somehow playing even better this year!) and the terrific secondary players that Thompson has added the last couple years are the biggest reason that the defense has improved (though I think last year's defense was better than most remember, Football Oustiders ranked the packers with the 16th best defense last year and they have the 11th best this year).

The difference this year (I would think) is that he doesn't have to spend time figuring out the next play call, he can pay more attention to the overall game and what's happening. So, for example, in last year's NFC championship, he could have made the team aware that two of Seattle's best defensive players were playing with one arm (which is still one of the biggest knocks on the coaching in that game, how did nobody know Thomas and Sherman were hurt?!? They required surgery in the offseason for goodness sake!).

 

[Sunshinepacker]

I have no idea what input Campen has in evaluating offensive line talent. Maybe Thompson and McCarthy go with the guys he wants. Maybe not. The facts are clear: He's fielded average or below average lines the majority of his tenure. You can accept the results, change players, or change the coaching. The coaching change hasn't been tried.

There's an easy way to figure this out. How many Packer's offensive linemen have gone to another team and been really good?

 

[Half Empty]

How many of any team's linemen have gone on to be really good elsewhere?

As to the specific question you ask, who is going to determine if they've been really good? Would just going to a different team and starting for them count?

 

[JBlood]

How many of any team's linemen have gone on to be really good elsewhere?

Newhouse starts for the Giants, who currently have a better rated line (by DVOA) than the Packers. Dietrich-Smith started at center for the Bucs last year, and plays this year on the no. 8 ranked offensive line in the NFL. Allen Barbre, terrible for us, starts for the Eagles. Breno Giacomini starts for the no. 5 ranked pass blocking line of the NY Jets.

None of them are future HOFers, but are serviceable linemen that would add needed depth on our line--maybe even starters. They were all expendable under our offensive line coaching staff.

 

[PackerDNA]

Newhouse starts for the Giants, who currently have a better rated line (by DVOA) than the Packers. Dietrich-Smith started at center for the Bucs last year, and plays this year on the no. 8 ranked offensive line in the NFL. Allen Barbre, terrible for us, starts for the Eagles. Breno Giacomini starts for the no. 5 ranked pass blocking line of the NY Jets.

None of them are future HOFers, but are serviceable linemen that would add needed depth on our line--maybe even starters. They were all expendable under our offensive line coaching staff.

They're all still sub par players, and not missed. As a matter of fact, I've seen a couple of them highlighted for sub par performance by a couple of analysts on football segments/programs.

 

[Half Empty]

Newhouse starts for the Giants, who currently have a better rated line (by DVOA) than the Packers. Dietrich-Smith started at center for the Bucs last year, and plays this year on the no. 8 ranked offensive line in the NFL. Allen Barbre, terrible for us, starts for the Eagles. Breno Giacomini starts for the no. 5 ranked pass blocking line of the NY Jets.

None of them are future HOFers, but are serviceable linemen that would add needed depth on our line--maybe even starters. They were all expendable under our offensive line coaching staff.

Remember that I also asked for a definition of good. I thought about answering as you did, but the post right after yours is the reason I didn't. People will employ subjectivity and semantics to support their own arguments.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Newhouse starts for the Giants, who currently have a better rated line (by DVOA) than the Packers. Dietrich-Smith started at center for the Bucs last year, and plays this year on the no. 8 ranked offensive line in the NFL. Allen Barbre, terrible for us, starts for the Eagles. Breno Giacomini starts for the no. 5 ranked pass blocking line of the NY Jets.

None of them are future HOFers, but are serviceable linemen that would add needed depth on our line--maybe even starters. They were all expendable under our offensive line coaching staff.

Newhouse is currently the 73rd rated tackle by Pro Football Focus. He's given up 4 sacks, 6 hits and 34 hurries. So he's still bad.

Giacomini is PFF's 70th rated tackle. He's given up 2 sacks, 6 hits and 35 hurries. So he's also still bad.

The Eagles have been mocked all season because their guards are terrible. Barbre is PFF's 66th ranked guard. He's still bad.

Dietrich-Smith was good for the Packers. He actually played better for the Packers than he has on any other team since. The only reason the Packers moved on was because they wanted a bigger center.

The NFL is full of poor players that start. Starting does not mean a player is that good. No offensive linemen from the Packers has gone to another team and played appreciably better.

 

[Mondio]

I haven't been really following any of those teams to know how good the offensive lines are or how they look individually. Maybe they help them out on every play, I don't know. But other than a couple games, EDS didn't look like anything but a back up to me. Barbre and Breno? Heard all about their "potential", but we never developed any of it here, because they sucked. Always read how much they could do, but never saw it on the field. The fact they're starters anywhere now surprises me because of how they looked here. Newhouse is a starting tackle???? oh my.

now those are my impressions from watching them here, if they are truly holding their own on other teams at their respective positions, I'd say it says something about our Oline coaching, and it's a position and coach i've been critical of in the past. I think we've gotten less out of more with that group consistently thru the years. There's been reasons, from scheme changes and injury, and the way they blocked middle to end of last year was outstanding and made me rethink my position. This year has me back to my old way of thinking.

 

[Mondio]

Newhouse is currently the 73rd rated tackle by Pro Football Focus. He's given up 4 sacks, 6 hits and 34 hurries. So he's still bad.

Giacomini is PFF's 70th rated tackle. He's given up 2 sacks, 6 hits and 35 hurries. So he's also still bad.

The Eagles have been mocked all season because their guards are terrible. Barbre is PFF's 66th ranked guard. He's still bad.

Dietrich-Smith was good for the Packers. He actually played better for the Packers than he has on any other team since. The only reason the Packers moved on was because they wanted a bigger center.

The NFL is full of poor players that start. Starting does not mean a player is that good. No offensive linemen from the Packers has gone to another team and played appreciably better.

you must have posted while I was typing, so it appears they are all still most likely bad.

 

[Un4GivN]

Newhouse is currently the 73rd rated tackle by Pro Football Focus. He's given up 4 sacks, 6 hits and 34 hurries. So he's still bad.

Giacomini is PFF's 70th rated tackle. He's given up 2 sacks, 6 hits and 35 hurries. So he's also still bad.

The Eagles have been mocked all season because their guards are terrible. Barbre is PFF's 66th ranked guard. He's still bad.

Dietrich-Smith was good for the Packers. He actually played better for the Packers than he has on any other team since. The only reason the Packers moved on was because they wanted a bigger center.

The NFL is full of poor players that start. Starting does not mean a player is that good. No offensive linemen from the Packers has gone to another team and played appreciably better.

This is a poor argument anyways... Who would let go of a top caliber lineman they had faith in? Look at Sitton and Lang. You lock them up. Not them go.

I would say the Packers let them go for a reason.

 

[JBlood]

The NFL is full of poor players that start.

Good stats.

 

[milani]

No this isn't a homer opinion or green and gold glasses stance but rather a theory. For years McCarthy has focused 95% of his time on the offensive side of the ball and the packers have had great success.

In 2015 he gave up that focus to be a "big picture" coach. What really happened in my view is he gave up the offensive duties to focus 60 to 70% of his time on defense. Look at the results this year outside of the Denver game. The defense has been playing well, even great in the game against Minnesota. However look at how far the offense has fallen, this leads me to my theory.

Mike McCarthy is a great coach, but a terrible hiring manager. His offensive and defensive staffs do not perform when he isn't directly over seeing / supervising them. Look at the few coaches who have gone else where. Joe philbin, flop. Ben McAdoo, mixed results. I've been thinking about this the past few days, thoughts?

MM is a very good coach but not necessarily a great coach. He game plans well but does not always make the mid game adjustments as someone like Bill Belichick. In 2010 he pulled off a miracle considering the mountain of injuries the Packers had that season. I think he gave the team a " nothing to lose attitude " and it paid off. Where he tends to come up short is at crunch time. Mental toughness in a team and its players comes from the coaching. You could see it from Kevin Greene in 2010. It was not there against Seattle last January in crunch time. The losses to the Lions and Bears this year were a great example. The games were handed to us and we could not execute. Neither he nor TT have been able to get us an impact TE since Finley left and it shows on the field.

 

[PackerDNA]

Remember that I also asked for a definition of good. I thought about answering as you did, but the post right after yours is the reason I didn't. People will employ subjectivity and semantics to support their own arguments.

Not something I do, HalfEmpty.
And there's nothing subjective or semantic about it. They are all- based on their career performances- career backups and fringe players who have generally sucked when needed to start or play regularly. All are guys who I look at and say, well we're stuck with them for now.
All are very , very replaceable.

 

[Carl]

MM is a very good coach but not necessarily a great coach. He game plans well but does not always make the mid game adjustments as someone like Bill Belichick. In 2010 he pulled off a miracle considering the mountain of injuries the Packers had that season. I think he gave the team a " nothing to lose attitude " and it paid off. Where he tends to come up short is at crunch time. Mental toughness in a team and its players comes from the coaching. You could see it from Kevin Greene in 2010. It was not there against Seattle last January in crunch time. The losses to the Lions and Bears this year were a great example. The games were handed to us and we could not execute. Neither he nor TT have been able to get us an impact TE since Finley left and it shows on the field.

They've also gotten it done at crunch time in four games this season (Bears week one, Chargers, Seahawks, and Lions last week) and the week before Seattle last season vs. Dallas.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

They've also gotten it done at crunch time in four games this season (Bears week one, Chargers, Seahawks, and Lions last week) and the week before Seattle last season vs. Dallas.

They did perform much better in the second half last week. But it was won because of terrific execution by the Rodgers on the final play and terrible coverage by the Lions; they were certainly did not receive the ball with enough time to drive it down the field.

The stands earlier in the year were promising, as the defense is usually what blows the games for us late in games. Our awful receivers and kicker have been what has done us in this year.

 

[Rick 12]

The example about Edgar would be another hypothesis I would like to test, I think he is a good coach as well, but it seems without McCarthy there looking over his shoulder the units EB is responsible for have floundered (since he is the offensive coordinator the receivers and offensive line fall under him). I would say he gets a pass this year to grow into the role.

As far as McCarthy being too loyal, I think everyone on this board has said this at one time or another (slocum), and that goes back to McCarthy's faults as a hiring manager or in other words GM of the coaching staff. The staff doesn't have enough either talent or teaching ability to be left on their own to teach skills to their players and hold them accountable to be professionals

That is a dumb statement this team would not have won as many games over the years if that were true do you people know how hard it is to get to a SB let alone win one wow you people are clueless !

 

[Patriotplayer90]

That is a dumb statement this team would not have won as many games over the years if that were true do you people know how hard it is to get to a SB let alone win one wow you people are clueless !

It's incredibly hard to get to a SB, but it's much, much easier to do with a QB like Rodgers. It's pretty clear this year that he's surrounded with mediocre to average talent on offense. And the defense should shoulder the blame for at least 3 of the last 4 exits from the playoffs.

He's a good coach, but one needs to be a great coach or have great talent in order to won more than 1 SB. McCarthy is a far cry from Belichick, and the talent on this team isn't close to enough to carry him.

 

[Carl]

That is a dumb statement this team would not have won as many games over the years if that were true do you people know how hard it is to get to a SB let alone win one wow you people are clueless !

When you insult people's intelligence, you should try not writing a post that's borderline illegible.

 

[Carl]

It's incredibly hard to get to a SB, but it's much, much easier to do with a QB like Rodgers. It's pretty clear this year that he's surrounded with mediocre to average talent on offense. And the defense should shoulder the blame for at least 3 of the last 4 exits from the playoffs.

He's a good coach, but one needs to be a great coach or have great talent in order to won more than 1 SB. McCarthy is a far cry from Belichick, and the talent on this team isn't close to enough to carry him.

Offense has certainly had it's struggles in the playoffs in many recent years too.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Offense has certainly had it's struggles in the playoffs in many recent years too.

True, and That had to do with the talent, IMO. Rodgers has a lethal arm, but Cobb, Jones, and Adams aren't scaring anyone. If he had the weapons of Arizona, their offense would be unstoppable.

 

[weeds]

When you insult people's intelligence, you should try not writing a post that's borderline illegible.

Come on Carl, the guy was obviously typing with his thumbs and had to complete his thought in a hurry...before he forgot what his point was. Hence ... the run-on sentence and lack of punctuation. (Yes! In a previous life, I was a school marm. I might have played Miss Beedle on Little House...not sure... flashbacks...)