MM and AR Rift

[swhitset]

I fully agree that MM relied on his QB school and it helped the team. However, unless the CBA is altered to allow that back in, MM needs to find a way to compensate for its loss.

Perhaps but that is a completely different issue than what you have been taking about. You started out claiming that McCarthy was a poor coach in need of replacement even though his record speaks otherwise. It was then suggested that Rodgers, and I suppose, Favre. are solely responsible for that. I’m not sure what Mcarthy’s ability to develop backup QBs has to do with that. Flynn was only brought up to point out that McCarthy’s offense can be successful with only a decent QB as opposed to the dumpster fire QBs like Hundley and Tolzien.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Perhaps but that is a completely different issue than what you have been taking about. You started out claiming that McCarthy was a poor coach in need of replacement even though his record speaks otherwise. It was then suggested that Rodgers, and I suppose, Favre. are solely responsible for that. I’m not sure what Mcarthy’s ability to develop backup QBs has to do with that. Flynn was only brought up to point out that McCarthy’s offense can be successful with only a decent QB as opposed to the dumpster fire QBs like Hundley and Tolzien.

I thought I was discussing a different point. I thought the school point was, somewhat unrelated. If NFL rules have taken away something that the coach does well then that stinks for the coach but it's not an excuse for being worse post-rules change. That's not really related to my view on his offensive scheme, that's more related to his "QB-Guru-manship".

I have also stated that I think he was a good coach when he was hired but that he hasn't evolved with the game. A point that I don't think is refuted by mentioning something that happened 5+ years ago.

I get it, sides have been drawn. There are those that think MM is an offensive genius who just needs his players to execute and Rodgers to do what he's supposed to. There are others that think Rodgers is covering up flaws in MM's coaching. It's fun to go round-and-round on this (that's what forums are for) but I don't really think anyone is going to change someone else's mind on this.

 

[Mondio]

Why is it that Rodgers can only cover up MM’s flaws? It’s certainly a 2 way street. Favre was great under Holmgren, careless under Rhodes, and a bit loose under Sherman and an MVP candidate again with MM. He then wasn’t so hot with the jets and got back into a system he was familiar with and shined again. Coaches matter too.

Rodgers has never had to perform under anyone else and everyone assumes he’d just be great. At this point he’s probably be pretty good in most places, because he was developed well. It maybe, just maybe MM runs an offense that plays to his strengths?

I never claimed MM was Gods gift to offense, but this notion that he’s just been lucky is silly and shortsighted.

 

[swhitset]

I thought I was discussing a different point. I thought the school point was, somewhat unrelated. If NFL rules have taken away something that the coach does well then that stinks for the coach but it's not an excuse for being worse post-rules change. That's not really related to my view on his offensive scheme, that's more related to his "QB-Guru-manship".

I have also stated that I think he was a good coach when he was hired but that he hasn't evolved with the game. A point that I don't think is refuted by mentioning something that happened 5+ years ago.

I get it, sides have been drawn. There are those that think MM is an offensive genius who just needs his players to execute and Rodgers to do what he's supposed to. There are others that think Rodgers is covering up flaws in MM's coaching. It's fun to go round-and-round on this (that's what forums are for) but I don't really think anyone is going to change someone else's mind on this.

Actually I don’t think he is an offensive genius, but I do think he is an above average offensive coach. He has other qualities that I think may be even more important though. Not everything that makes a team successful happens on game day . The Packers rarely have a lot of Locker room problems, and if they do... it is not discussed publicly. I think McCarthy is a big influence on this. He is a classy guy, and sometimes this frustrates some fans, but I think it is one of the biggest reasons that the team remains stable even when things aren’t going well.

 

[Mondio]

Actually I don’t think he is an offensive genius, but I do think he is an above average offensive coach. He has other qualities that I think may be even more important though. Not everything that makes a team successful happens on game day . The Packers rarely have a lot of Locker room problems, and if they do... it is not discussed publicly. I think McCarthy is a big influence on this. He is a classy guy, and sometimes this frustrates some fans, but I think it is one of the biggest reasons that the team remains stable even when things aren’t going well.

Some of the adversity he’s kept this team together thru is an excellent quality in itself. Have seen multiple seasons and situations where other teams with good players fold, and they never did. Always stuck together and worked thru it. They’ve been successful far more often than not.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

Flynn did not have an exemplary career. I'm just saying I liked him and thought he was a good backup.

It seems you didn't get the point I was trying to make, I liked Flynn as a backup in Green Bay. For some reason he wasn't as successful anywhere else though.

I fully agree that MM relied on his QB school and it helped the team. However, unless the CBA is altered to allow that back in, MM needs to find a way to compensate for its loss.

Yeah, it's really mind-boggling that the Packers are holding on to a head coach not being able to develop backup quarterbacks into future HOFers without them getting any snaps in practice

I get it, sides have been drawn. There are those that think MM is an offensive genius who just needs his players to execute and Rodgers to do what he's supposed to. There are others that think Rodgers is covering up flaws in MM's coaching. It's fun to go round-and-round on this (that's what forums are for) but I don't really think anyone is going to change someone else's mind on this.

Well, unfortunately you don't get it at all. I haven't seen any poster suggesting McCarthy is an offensive genius but there's absolutely no doubt he's one of the best play callers in the business. He definitely has some flaws but you should be careful what to wish for when talking about replacing him though.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Perhaps but that is a completely different issue than what you have been taking about. You started out claiming that McCarthy was a poor coach in need of replacement even though his record speaks otherwise. It was then suggested that Rodgers, and I suppose, Favre. are solely responsible for that. I’m not sure what Mcarthy’s ability to develop backup QBs has to do with that. Flynn was only brought up to point out that McCarthy’s offense can be successful with only a decent QB as opposed to the dumpster fire QBs like Hundley and Tolzien.

No accountability at all in this organization. The offenses struggles are 100% on Hundley , and none on the coach constructing the gameplan? McCarthy looked as lost as Hundley did. People reference a few games in 2013 against bad opponents as proof that he's a good offensive coach, but Rodgers was on a path to have perhaps his best season. The offense was good then, it is not now. And McCarthy's struggles have never come against the poor teams, he just looks completely outclassed when facing a superior opponent. Hundley had some good games as well, and they usually were in line with how bad the other team is. It suggests that the success is due to the talent, not the coaching.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

And McCarthy's struggles have never come against the poor teams, he just looks completely outclassed when facing a superior opponent. It suggests that the success is due to the talent, not the coaching.

It shouldn't be surprising to anyone that it's tougher to put up a lot of points against elite defenses.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

It shouldn't be surprising to anyone that it's tougher to put up a lot of points against elite defenses.

There's struggling against good opponents, and then there is having a grenade blow up in your hands, which is what happens when Rodgers is out. The struggles with Rodgers are reasonable, though I believe he'd be unstoppable with a better scheme and someone to stretch the field. The performance without Rodgers against better teams is just unacceptable. We look like a bottom feeder team.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Some of the adversity he’s kept this team together thru is an excellent quality in itself. Have seen multiple seasons and situations where other teams with good players fold, and they never did. Always stuck together and worked thru it. They’ve been successful far more often than not.

This I believe is part of the reason why Murphy decided to have him report directly to him and not the GM because he understands MM's value in this regard. And when you get a new GM like Gute who's going to be doing things different, you want to make sure you keep him reeled in and not changing out the head coach without really giving him a fair hearing on the situation. And I do think so far Gute has been doing a pretty good job, but gotta keep an eye on him and make sure he stays in his lane.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

There's struggling against good opponents, and then there is having a grenade blow up in your hands, which is what happens when Rodgers is out. The struggles with Rodgers are reasonable, though I believe he'd be unstoppable with a better scheme and someone to stretch the field. The performance without Rodgers against better teams is just unacceptable. We look like a bottom feeder team.

There's no doubt McCarthy didn't do a good job game planning with Hundley as the starter but his lack of talent contributed to the offense struggling as well. It might be worth noting that the Packers faced six top 10 scoring defenses with Hundley playing in 10 games.

Over the past three seasons the Packers have played top 10 scoring defenses a total of 23 times averaging 22.7 points. That is four points above the average of how many those teams have combined to give up. That number increases to 6.7 points above average when solely considering games in which Rodgers played (25.5 and 18.8 points respectively).

It doesn't seem the Packers struggled against those defenses compared to the rest of the league.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

There's struggling against good opponents, and then there is having a grenade blow up in your hands, which is what happens when Rodgers is out. The struggles with Rodgers are reasonable, though I believe he'd be unstoppable with a better scheme and someone to stretch the field. The performance without Rodgers against better teams is just unacceptable. We look like a bottom feeder team.

Again, stats without Rodgers are meaningless nothingburgers.

I mean, if in the highly unlikely event Wilson goes down and Hundley sees the field in Seattle and stinks out the joint there, are MM's critics going to say that Pete Caroll is a sucko for not being able to win without his starter? Or that he stinks at developing backups? I'm going to bet not.

 

[PackAttack12]

There's struggling against good opponents, and then there is having a grenade blow up in your hands, which is what happens when Rodgers is out. The struggles with Rodgers are reasonable, though I believe he'd be unstoppable with a better scheme and someone to stretch the field. The performance without Rodgers against better teams is just unacceptable. We look like a bottom feeder team.

Rodgers' career numbers are historically great. From his all time best passer rating to his all time best TD/INT ratio, etc.

Tough to make the argument he would look even better than he's looked in Green Bay in a different system. You can say it is all Rodgers if you'd like, but the head coach and the system ALWAYS has something to do with it.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Rodgers' career numbers are historically great. From his all time best passer rating to his all time best TD/INT ratio, etc.

Tough to make the argument he would look even better than he's looked in Green Bay in a different system. You can say it is all Rodgers if you'd like, but the head coach and the system ALWAYS has something to do with it.

At the same time, you can look at those numbers and make a case that he's among the best ever, yet some newbies are coming into the league with no experience and making his current production look like child's play.

If you think that McCarthy is a good coach,I don't know what to tell you. That's like saying that former coaches from the Browns are actually great coaches , but couldn't win because they had scrubs at QB instead of the greatest QB of all time. Of course any offense and team will look completely different with the most talented QB ever. You judge the coach by the way they handle things without him, and it's been terrible. If he were a winning coach, he'd at least be a .500 coach without Rodgers IMO. But he hasn't been close.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

At the same time, you can look at those numbers and make a case that he's among the best ever, yet some newbies are coming into the league with no experience and making his current production look like child's play.

You judge the coach by the way they handle things without him, and it's been terrible. If he were a winning coach, he'd at least be a .500 coach without Rodgers IMO. But he hasn't been close.

It seems you have a hard time understanding that Rodgers has been injured for all of this season.

Aside of Belichick, which other head coaches are over or at .500 with a backup quarterback??? I'm especially looking for someone who has been given only a fifth and seventh rounder as well as undrafted free agents to work with over the past 10 years.

 

[PackAttack12]

At the same time, you can look at those numbers and make a case that he's among the best ever, yet some newbies are coming into the league with no experience and making his current production look like child's play.

lol

Get back to me when they do it consistently over 10+ years.

If you think that McCarthy is a good coach,I don't know what to tell you. That's like saying that former coaches from the Browns are actually great coaches , but couldn't win because they had scrubs at QB instead of the greatest QB of all time. Of course any offense and team will look completely different with the most talented QB ever. You judge the coach by the way they handle things without him, and it's been terrible. If he were a winning coach, he'd at least be a .500 coach without Rodgers IMO. But he hasn't been close.

I cannot defend his record without Rodgers.

But I also know that the Rodgers who came into the league is not the Rodgers that we saw 3-4 seasons later. McCarthy deserves a ton of credit for helping facilitate the player Rodgers became.

I've always said that McCarthy is not an elite level head coach. But he's a very good coach. And his system works for Rodgers. The two of them together, regardless of how you divvy out the share of the credit, have been a very lethal tandem.

To suggest McCarthy has nothing to do with that is just laughable to the point that it boarders on insanity.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

It seems you have a hard time understanding that Rodgers has been injured for all of this season.

Aside of Belichick, which other head coaches are over or at .500 with a backup quarterback??? I'm especiall looking for someone who has been given only a fifth and seventh rounder as well as undrafted free agents to work with over the past 10 years.

Tennessee and Arizona had much better winning percentages with Blaine Gabbert. Gabbert is not better than Hundley. Indianapolis also had a winning record with a backup a few years ago, and were roughly as successful as GB last year with a QB who flew into town a week before the season began. And that roster is considered utter trash and the coach has been fired. It puts into perspective what we are without Rodgers.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

lol

Get back to me when they do it consistently over 10+ years.


I cannot defend his record without Rodgers.

But I also know that the Rodgers who came into the league is not the Rodgers that we saw 3-4 seasons later. McCarthy deserves a ton of credit for helping facilitate the player Rodgers became.

I've always said that McCarthy is not an elite level head coach. But he's a very good coach. And his system works for Rodgers. The two of them together, regardless of how you divvy out the share of the credit, have been a very lethal tandem.

To suggest McCarthy has nothing to do with that is just laughable to the point that it boarders on insanity.

Also, it seems a lot of posters like to talk about him inheriting Favre on the roster, and it seems they need to be reminded Favre was playing really bad when MM walked in here. Hell I remember most sports analysts at the time were saying he needed to retire immediately because he was cooked and thrown a record high number of interceptions the year before. I don't think he would have gotten to keep playing in the league for the next five years if Mike McCarthy had not revamped the offense and resurrected his career.

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Also, it seems a lot of posters like to talk about him inheriting Favre on the roster, and it seems they need to be reminded Favre was playing really bad when MM walked in here. Hell I remember most sports analysts at the time were saying he needed to retire immediately because he was cooked and thrown a record high number of interceptions the year before. I don't think he would have gotten to keep playing in the league for the next five years if Mike McCarthy had not revamped the offense and resurrected his career.

You act as if Favre isn't extremely inconsistent, and that he didn't have a season 2 years later with a different coach and team which blew that season out of the water. Anyway, that was 10 years ago. Jeff Fisher and Rex Ryan were 2 of the best at this time, and look where they are now.

MM has had a terrible record the past few years without Rodgers. Anything said to the contrary is just an excuSe. Losing one player is no excuse for your team becoming crap. Rodgers certainly didn't need an excuse when he won games despite injuries to other players.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

You act as if Favre isn't extremely inconsistent, and that he didn't have a season 2 years later with a different coach and team which blew that season out of the water. Anyway, that was 10 years ago. Jeff Fisher and Rex Ryan were 2 of the best at this time, and look where they are now.

MM has had a terrible record the past few years without Rodgers. Anything said to the contrary is just an excuSe. Losing one player is no excuse for your team becoming crap. Rodgers certainly didn't need an excuse when he won games despite injuries to other players.

1. Not at all, I was merely pointing out the mess that McCarthy inherited from Sherman and what he did to help Favre get back on track. Deny it all you want but it did happen. Would Favre have been sought after by the Jets and Vikings if McCarthy hadn't worked to help him succeed again in 2007 or the Packers just already decide to move on from him after 2005? Well nobody can answer that one truthfully because it would only be speculation, but I truly believe Favre had his stock soar back up again because of McCarthy's work in 2007.

2. Ridiculous and that has no relevance to anything

 

[Patriotplayer90]

1. Not at all, I was merely pointing out the mess that McCarthy inherited from Sherman and what he did to help Favre get back on track. Deny it all you want but it did happen. Would Favre have been sought after by the Jets and Vikings if McCarthy hadn't worked to help him succeed again in 2007 or the Packers just already decide to move on from him after 2005? Well nobody can answer that one truthfully because it would only be speculation, but I truly believe Favre had his stock soar back up again because of McCarthy's work in 2007.

2. Ridiculous and that has no relevance to anything

The success , or lack thereof, of a coach with a 20 plus sample size of games without Rodgers is irrelevant? No wonder you all are so blindly loyal to this team, and why management feels no need to change anything.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

The success , or lack thereof, of a coach with a 20 plus sample size of games without Rodgers is irrelevant? No wonder you all are so blindly loyal to this team, and why management feels no need to change anything.

Maybe because management is smart enough not to listen to Madden-playing fans with no real head coaching experience.

 

[Sunshinepacker]

Well, unfortunately you don't get it at all. I haven't seen any poster suggesting McCarthy is an offensive genius but there's absolutely no doubt he's one of the best play callers in the business. He definitely has some flaws but you should be careful what to wish for when talking about replacing him though.

Well, apparently I DO get it. This is the NFL, supposedly the best coaches in the world. If you tell me he's one of the best in the business then that means he's one of the, what, top-7 offensive play callers on Earth? That qualifies as genius in my book. Don't start hedging now...

 

[Patriotplayer90]

Maybe because management is smart enough not to listen to Madden-playing fans with no real head coaching experience.

Well I can't fix a transmission either, but I know when one is broken. Kind of like how people were calling for Capers to be fired years ago when management was sitting on their hands, until it became painfully obvious. And they obviously think something is wrong with the offense, if Philbin was brought in.

 

[swhitset]

You act as if Favre isn't extremely inconsistent, and that he didn't have a season 2 years later with a different coach and team which blew that season out of the water. Anyway, that was 10 years ago. Jeff Fisher and Rex Ryan were 2 of the best at this time, and look where they are now.

MM has had a terrible record the past few years without Rodgers. Anything said to the contrary is just an excuSe. Losing one player is no excuse for your team becoming crap. Rodgers certainly didn't need an excuse when he won games despite injuries to other players.

What exactly do you hope to accomplish by these posts? There are a few in here that agree with you, others that don't. I happen to be one that doesn't. Nothing you have said is likely to sway me. If Rodgers were to leave, and another decent QB came in, and after giving him time to retool and build his team around that situation McCarthy was unable to be successful... then you would have a point. At this point all you have is unsubstantiated speculation trying to mask itself as fact.