Stuffing the run

[longtimefan]

Green Bay Packers have learned how to stuff the run | greenbaypressgazette.com | Green Bay Press-Gazette

Coach Mike McCarthy’s switch to a 3-4 defense with coordinator Dom Capers has shored up one of the great deficiencies for the Green Bay Packers last season — their run defense.

Last January, McCarthy fired defensive coordinator Bob Sanders because the 2008 Packers didn’t stop the run (No. 26 in the NFL in yards allowed and yards allowed per carry) or rush the passer (No. 25 in sacks percentage).

Capers this season has made a modest gain getting after the quarterback — the Packers rank No. 18 in sacks percentage a little past the halfway point.

But with essentially the same personnel, he has turned one of the NFL’s worst run defenses into among its best. The Packers rank No. 4 in yards allowed and average rush per carry.

“Going into the season, Mike asked me many times, can we stop the run?” Capers said this week. “Based off of last year (on videotape), I know we didn’t always stop the run, but I felt we would because of our people. But I was concerned after the Cincinnati game. I didn’t have a good feel after that game, but I’ve had a pretty good feel since that point in time.”

The Packers’ run defense has met the challenge aside from the Week 2 home loss to Cincinnati when Cedric Benson controlled the day while rushing for 141 yards and a 4.9-yard average per carry.

And it’s not like the Packers have fattened their stats against patsies. They’ve had two strong performances against Minnesota’s Adrian Peterson (50 carries for 152 yards and a 3.0-yard average in two games); a more-than-good-enough day against St. Louis’ Steven Jackson (27 carries for 117 yards, 4.3-yard average); and good day against Dallas’ quality tandem of Marion Barber and Felix Jones (a combined eight carries for 32 yards, 4.0-yard average).

This week, they’ll face another of the league’s better halfbacks in San Francisco’s Frank Gore, who is averaging 5.2 yards a carry. The 49ers are limited offensively, so coach Mike Singletary is looking to play close, low-scoring games that include a steady dose of Gore to keep the clock moving.

McCarthy, who was the 49ers’ offensive coordinator in Gore’s rookie year of 2005, described Gore as a power runner with the ability to squeeze through small holes and finish runs unusually well.

“Very instinctive, tough runner, the ability to run behind his pads,” McCarthy said. “He is definitely one of the better running backs I have seen do that.”

Gore will be facing a Packers’ run defense that has made substantial gains because of several factors, beginning with Capers.

When McCarthy hired Capers, he talked about the difficulties he had as an offensive coordinator running against the 3-4. He said he’d have to throw out half the run plays in his playbook because the blocking schemes fit poorly against the 3-4, where in essence five players are lined up on the defensive line (three linemen and two outside linebackers).

Perhaps it’s just a coincidence, but nine of the top 10 run defenses in average yards allowed per carry, and seven of the top 10 in average rush yards per game, play 3-4 defenses. Counting Arizona as more of a 3-4 than a 4-3 — the Cardinals run a mix of both — then less than half (13 of the 32) of the teams in the league run a 3-4.

Capers, like almost every defensive coordinator in NFL history, espouses the need to stop the run first, even though the NFL is primarily a passing league.

Several defensive players said Wednesday they haven’t noticed Capers spending an unusual amount of time on run defense compared to previous coordinators, but they think the 3-4 seems better for stopping the run, probably because the defensive line essentially consists of three defensive tackles in nose tackle Ryan Pickett and defensive ends Cullen Jenkins and Johnny Jolly, or occasionally rookie B.J. Raji.

“It’s working for us, so there’s got to be something to it,” Jenkins said.

Capers also has called plays with the commitment to the run in mind. Most notably, his game plan against Minnesota was to shut down Peterson, who might be the best halfback in the NFL. But that meant calling fewer blitzes than Capers would have liked for fear Peterson would gash the blitz for a big play, and the Packers didn’t sack quarterback Brett Favre in the two games. Nevertheless, the commitment was to stop Peterson first.

“If you’re playing a good running team, you’ve got to have some run (stopping) calls in there,” Capers said. “If you think you’re going to just win one-on-ones against a good running team, that’s not always going to be the case.”

Several players are having a better season stopping the run than last year.

Pickett has taken well to the move to nose tackle in the 3-4 and is one of the Packers’ unsung performers holding up blockers and not getting washed out of the middle of the line. Inside linebacker Nick Barnett is playing faster the farther removed he gets from his knee-reconstruction surgery last year. Jolly ranks No. 4 on the team with 49 tackles.

“I think Jolly has stepped it up when you talk about the past playing the run,” said Reggie McKenzie, a Packers director of football operations. “I can say he’s definitely playing the run better, because he’s more of a playmaker mentality, he’ll get after the passer, he’ll do stuff like that. That’s one guy. I just think they’re all playing. Pickett is real stout.”

Jenkins said the key to the run defense is cornerback Charles Woodson. He is the team’s best defensive back and has a team-leading five interceptions, but he’s also the club’s second-leading tackler with 55. He’s been a fearless and sure tackler when filling lanes and shooting gaps on outside runs, which has set a standard for the defense.

“Sometimes you get a little worried about him hitting some of those backs,” Jenkins said. “But I tell you what, he gives up his body for the team out there, he plays hard. You can’t ask anything more from him.”

The only shaky run defense came against Cincinnati, when Benson consistently picked up solid gains on his 29 carries — his long run was for only 14 yards. He rushed for 78 yards on 13 carries in the Bengals’ 21-point first half and helped them control the ball and clock for much of the game.

Because that was Week 2, Cincinnati was able to use several formations and plays it hadn’t shown in the preseason, and the Packers had trouble adjusting within their new scheme. The chances of getting unexpected looks diminishes as the season goes on, and the players’ growing familiarity with the 3-4 can make it easier to adjust on the fly.

“A lot of the earlier stuff has to do with learning the defense and knowing where you’re supposed to be,” Barnett said, “learning when they do an overload how we’re supposed to set the front. It’s building blocks. This is the first year of the 3-4 defense, but we’re learning.”

Jenkins...."its working for us"

Wasnt he someone that blasted this scheme not to long ago?


I love the fact that they are stopping the run I think to many times last year they couldnt which led to them losing.

If I have time after taking kids to school I am going to look up the stats from last year


After 9 games last year

22.8 points per game

1391 total rushing yards.......155 rushing yards per game

4.8 rushing yards per att


This year

19.9 points per game

838 total rushing yards........93 per game

3.5 per att

 

[PackersRS]

And we have played some pretty good RBs...

I think that's the best thing Capers has done... Shore up the run D.

The only game in which it didn't work out was against the Bengals.

 

[DILLIGAFF]

Stopping the run will even become more of an advantage as the weather gets worse. Ravens at home in Dec. and the chicago/steelers both away on grass. Thats a big advantage playing those type of teams in the conditions that will exsist in DEC.

Now if we can add a little more pressure on the QB, this switch to the 3-4 will be worth it.

This year as far as looking ahead to the playoffs, both the vikings and Saints look like they will lock up home field advantage, both in Domes.

 

[Hauschild]

They stuffed Petersen twice for the most part. The problem is, their defense can't consistently stymie opposing passing offenses. Brett Favre is a given, but Josh Freeman???

 

[PackersRS]

They stuffed Petersen twice for the most part. The problem is, their defense can't consistently stymie opposing passing offenses. Brett Favre is a given, but Josh Freeman???

Tampa Bay they clearly took it lightly. It shouldn't serve as a parameter, other to indicate that this HC can't keep a team focused and motivated...

 

[Quientus]

Tampa Bay they clearly took it lightly. It shouldn't serve as a parameter, other to indicate that this HC can't keep a team focused and motivated...

If you are going to argue the above ... Then you have got to give McCarthy credit as well for the Dallas game ...

However, more and more I think it's about the attitude of the players more than anything ... - Seemingly the players had already won against Tampa, even before the game was played ... - And that is always dangerous in the NFL ...

Oh, and I just read another interview with Jenkins ... - Seems like he is full of praise of the same defense that he "railed" on not that long ago ... - What is up with that ? ... - "Waffling much" ? (irony) ...

 

[longtimefan]

Oh, and I just read another interview with Jenkins ... - Seems like he is full of praise of the same defense that he "railed" on not that long ago ... - What is up with that ? ... - "Waffling much" ? (irony) ...

I mentioned that in my posting

 

[PackersRS]

If you are going to argue the above ... Then you have got to give McCarthy credit as well for the Dallas game ...

However, more and more I think it's about the attitude of the players more than anything ... - Seemingly the players had already won against Tampa, even before the game was played ... - And that is always dangerous in the NFL ...

Oh, and I just read another interview with Jenkins ... - Seems like he is full of praise of the same defense that he "railed" on not that long ago ... - What is up with that ? ... - "Waffling much" ? (irony) ...

It's the coach's job to keep players focused. That was on MM.

I would give MM credit, if it were not for the coincidential "come-to-jesus" meeting with players-only before the Cowboys game.

 

[Quientus]

It's the coach's job to keep players focused. That was on MM.

I would give MM credit, if it were not for the coincidential "come-to-jesus" meeting with players-only before the Cowboys game.

So if the team wins, it's despite the coach, whereas when the team loses it's because the coach is poor ?

And how do we know that the Coaching staff perhaps didn't suggest the players to sit down and get the "air cleaned" ? ...

I'm not saying that is what happened, however, seeing that the team (Packers) gave the Dallas game ball to McCarthy along with the comment made about how it was the players fault for the Tampa Bay game and not McCarthy's ... You have to wonder ...


McCarthy clearly stated before the Tampa game that it was not to be taken lightly ... and that losing teams at home are always dangerous to play ... - I seriously doubt that McCarthy hadn't stressed this to the players as well before hand ... - If the players don't listen, then it's not the coach's fault ... - But more the players not being professional enough, which is IN-exusable in the NFL ...

 

[JerseyAl]

Speaking of giving Mike McCarthy credit, even I was forced to do so after this game. He did a good number of things right (3 challenges not withstanding). He was one of the three things that made me smile. If you haven't seen it yet, I wrote about it here:

3 Reasons to Smile… l Packers Lounge

 

[DILLIGAFF]

If you are going to argue the above ... Then you have got to give McCarthy credit as well for the Dallas game ...

However, more and more I think it's about the attitude of the players more than anything ... - Seemingly the players had already won against Tampa, even before the game was played ... - And that is always dangerous in the NFL ...

Oh, and I just read another interview with Jenkins ... - Seems like he is full of praise of the same defense that he "railed" on not that long ago ... - What is up with that ? ... - "Waffling much" ? (irony) ...

In all fairness to Jenkins he felt they were being held back, against Dallas they had alot more plays in the play book that they used. Jenkins just wanted to run the defense with all the bells and whistles.

 

[PackersRS]

So if the team wins, it's despite the coach, whereas when the team loses it's because the coach is poor ?

How the hell did you conclude that from what I've said, when I specifically mentioned why I think it was the players on that particular instance? Only because you wanted to...

And how do we know that the Coaching staff perhaps didn't suggest the players to sit down and get the "air cleaned" ? ...

I'm not saying that is what happened, however, seeing that the team (Packers) gave the Dallas game ball to McCarthy along with the comment made about how it was the players fault for the Tampa Bay game and not McCarthy's ... You have to wonder ...

Well, at least even you see that that suggestion was far-fetched...

They gave the ball to MM because they think of him as their pal... Which is kind of the problem. A coach isn't supposed to be a friend. He's supposed to be more like a father.

McCarthy clearly stated before the Tampa game that it was not to be taken lightly ... and that losing teams at home are always dangerous to play ... - I seriously doubt that McCarthy hadn't stressed this to the players as well before hand ... - If the players don't listen, then it's not the coach's fault ... - But more the players not being professional enough, which is IN-exusable in the NFL ...

McCarthy stresses every pressconference that they'll clear it up in the penalty department, yet he never helds them accountable for nothing. Nobody loses their starting job, nobody gets repremended... They don't listen because they know nothing will happen if they don't do as they're told.
----
Now, do you or do you not agree that it's the coaches job to keep players focused, and when an entire team seems lacking fire in certain situations, THE ENTIRE TEAM, lacking consistency, the coaches aren't doing a very good job?

Do you or do you not agree that, when a gameplan is failing, and there doesn't seem to be any kind of adaptation, it's the coaches fault?

Do you or do you not agree that when there's excess of penalties, season after season, it's the coaches fault?

If we had a more mature team, with more leadership, then we might be able to overcome MM's lack of motivational skills, as we did in 2007. But we sure have a talented team, and it's the coaches job to max their potential and demand perfection every single snap.

 

[longtimefan]

RS..

How do you know the players were not "reprimanded"? We know they are not being benched/losing playing time and they cant be fined (at least publicly) but we do not know he isnt yelling at them...I happen to know he does yell at the players, just never hits the media

 

[PackersRS]

RS..

How do you know the players were not "reprimanded"? We know they are not being benched/losing playing time and they cant be fined (at least publicly) but we do not know he isnt yelling at them...I happen to know he does yell at the players, just never hits the media

That Finley tweet?

By reprimended, I mean right after they made the stupid play. Waiting for the film will only do any good to the next game, if that much.

I know it's old school, but Lombardi, Shula, even Holmgren... the player knew if he made an idiot decision, they would hear it in the minute they went to the bench.

And it worked back then.

The way MM is doing clearly isn't working.

 

[longtimefan]

That Finley tweet?

By reprimended, I mean right after they made the stupid play. Waiting for the film will only do any good to the next game, if that much.

I know it's old school, but Lombardi, Shula, even Holmgren... the player knew if he made an idiot decision, they would hear it in the minute they went to the bench.

And it worked back then.

The way MM is doing clearly isn't working.

okay I would agree with that..

I would like to see him get on a player right after the play....But from what I gather is he likes to handle stuff away from the public..

 

[PackersRS]

okay I would agree with that..

I would like to see him get on a player right after the play....But from what I gather is he likes to handle stuff away from the public..

Which would be fine if we had the type of players that are mature enough to respond to that. But it seems like either our players have the memory span of a fish, or just don't care about what he says in the lockerroom, because it's all bark and no bite...

I once thought it could be a plot from the players to fire MM.

But now I just think it's his approach. I honestly believe that he appears more like a "friend" to the players than a "father", which would explain why the players like him to the point of give him the ball game, yet don't "fear" him enough to execute what he says in a consistant basis.

In the end, I think the key word is "consistency". And in order to do that, there must be discipline, focus and determination from all players every snap, which is what is lacking in this team.

But hey, maybe the friend approach can work. There's still a lot of ball left to play...

 

[Quientus]

How the hell did you conclude that from what I've said, when I specifically mentioned why I think it was the players on that particular instance? Only because you wanted to...

I did *NOT* conclude anything ... on the contrary ... I was asking a question ... - Again you jump to conclusions ...

Well, at least even you see that that suggestion was far-fetched...

Again I was postulating ... Because from what I'm told ... McCarthy does infact reprimande players, however he almost never and by choice, never do it publically ... Because that is not how he (McCarthy) "run things" ...

They gave the ball to MM because they think of him as their pal... Which is kind of the problem. A coach isn't supposed to be a friend. He's supposed to be more like a father.

Ah ... Would seem you know why the players gave the Game Ball to McCarthy ... Despite of what was being said by the very same player, who gave him the Game Ball ... (look up the video clip, if you are not sure what I'm referring to ...)

McCarthy stresses every pressconference that they'll clear it up in the penalty department, yet he never helds them accountable for nothing. Nobody loses their starting job, nobody gets repremended... They don't listen because they know nothing will happen if they don't do as they're told.

Again, - Perhaps that is truly McCarthy's paradox ... - Because right now ... On the Packers team, there really is NO substitution if he wants to bench a player ... Because then you would probably argue the other way around, that McCarthy is being a fool, because he is benching the best choice he has for that position ... - If you are going to reprimande players and "punish" them by benching them ... it kinda requires you have a competent back-up to fill that particular spot ... And as everyone knows ... the Packers are stretched thin this year ...

Now, do you or do you not agree that it's the coaches job to keep players focused, and when an entire team seems lacking fire in certain situations, THE ENTIRE TEAM, lacking consistency, the coaches aren't doing a very good job?

So by that definition, whenever a player is executing poorly, it's because the coach is failing at his job ? Because that is in essence what you are saying ... Ofcourse it's the coach's job to motivate, *HOWEVER* if the players aren't listening, it's NOT the coaches fault ... - Again my point is ... it's just not as black and white as *YOU* want it to be ...

McCarthy has already proven that he is able to coach, as long as he has some on-field leadership present as well within the team ... Something the Packers have lacked severely (it would seem) ever since Favre left ...

Do you or do you not agree that, when a gameplan is failing, and there doesn't seem to be any kind of adaptation, it's the coaches fault?

Actually from watching the games ... There seem to be several indication of the coaches trying to adapt, but the players lacking the ability to execute ... and also the players lacking ability to adapt to the current game situation ... (I'm mainly referring to Rodgers here ... and his short passes and check down targets ... - They are *THERE*, but wasn't being used - untill the Dallas Game ...) - *That* is NOT the coaches fault, but more the players' fault ...

Do you or do you not agree that when there's excess of penalties, season after season, it's the coaches fault?

To some extent ... But not only ... If the players aren't listening ... no amount of reprimanding nor "punishment" will make the situation better ... Jolly's comment after the game before the Dallas game is a very good indication of a player, who isn't really being professional enough ... Sad part is ... Who did you want McCarthy to replace him with ?

If we had a more mature team, with more leadership, then we might be able to overcome MM's lack of motivational skills, as we did in 2007. But we sure have a talented team, and it's the coaches job to max their potential and demand perfection every single snap.

There are plenty of "mature" players who *should* be leading on the Packers team ... - I fault the players more than I actually fault McCarthy at this point ... The Dallas Game kinda proved that point ...

Compare the Tampa game to the Dallas game ... - It was the same players (with a few select exceptions), - yet the game played in each was totally different - like 180 degrees different ...

That to me says more about the players, than it does about McCarthy ...

Which would be fine if we had the type of players that are mature enough to respond to that. But it seems like either our players have the memory span of a fish, or just don't care about what he says in the lockerroom, because it's all bark and no bite...

If what you said above was true it would be IN-exusable from a professional NFL player ... - In fact that could be argued to being close to acting like a "Diva" or bunch of "Diva's" ...

I once thought it could be a plot from the players to fire MM.

Again, IF that were even close to being true ... the entire squad ought to be fined and reprimanded by the Organisation in public ...

But now I just think it's his approach. I honestly believe that he appears more like a "friend" to the players than a "father", which would explain why the players like him to the point of give him the ball game, yet don't "fear" him enough to execute what he says in a consistant basis.

I seriously doubt that ... - Again ... McCarthy didn't seem to have those problems in 2007 ... - And I'm saying that even though I'm a huge Favre fan ...

In the end, I think the key word is "consistency". And in order to do that, there must be discipline, focus and determination from all players every snap, which is what is lacking in this team.

I agree, however, it is also about consistency from the players ... Not only the coach, however, in all sports, mostly when a team is performing poorly, the coach is the first to be blamed, and when it goes well, the players are the first to get credit, not the coaches ...

Case in point ... New England Patriots ...

But hey, maybe the friend approach can work. There's still a lot of ball left to play...

Just because McCarthy doesn't publically berate his players, doesn't mean he doesn't berate them ... - And I seriously doubt you would like if he did ... - Because I would bet you would be among the first to "rail" on him for doing it publically and not internally then ...

 

[longtimefan]

RS,I really believe your far off base here..

I have heard things from insiders that what your saying isnt true at all..

Leadership seems to lacking, and look no further then the best player on the D

 

[PackersRS]

Those "questions" I'll reffer to them later.

Ah ... Would seem you know why the players gave the Game Ball to McCarthy ... Despite of what was being said by the very same player, who gave him the Game Ball ... (look up the video clip, if you are not sure what I'm referring to ...)

He said it was their fault. I never said it wasn't, my point is that a really great coach will will his players, and not depend on their temperament...

Again, - Perhaps that is truly McCarthy's paradox ... - Because right now ... On the Packers team, there really is NO substitution if he wants to bench a player ... Because then you would probably argue the other way around, that McCarthy is being a fool, because he is benching the best choice he has for that position ... - If you are going to reprimande players and "punish" them by benching them ... it kinda requires you have a competent back-up to fill that particular spot ... And as everyone knows ... the Packers are stretched thin this year ...

Nah, I don't buy that. Porter was benched for one game. What happened on the game he came back? 2 sacks.

So by that definition, whenever a player is executing poorly, it's because the coach is failing at his job ?

Consistancy. That's what I'm talking about. When the WHOLE TEAM lacks consistancy. Again, you seem to be making a question, but that's really an innapropriate conclusion.

Because that is in essence what you are saying ...

See? Here's the innapropriate conclusion. "You don't want the Nam War? You're a communist."

Ofcourse it's the coach's job to motivate, *HOWEVER* if the players aren't listening, it's NOT the coaches fault ... - Again my point is ... it's just not as black and white as *YOU* want it to be ...

If the players, all of them, aren't listening, then IT IS the coaches fault. They aren't being able to make the players believe in them.

McCarthy has already proven that he is able to coach, as long as he has some on-field leadership present as well within the team ... Something the Packers have lacked severely (it would seem) ever since Favre left ...

Duh, that's exactly what I've been saying. So he's a good coach as long as someone can motivate the team and be a leader. He lacks the leadership necessary to be a coach, and if someone can do that job for him, then it's fine. If not, then it's not. That's what the problem is.

Actually from watching the games ... There seem to be several indication of the coaches trying to adapt, but the players lacking the ability to execute ... and also the players lacking ability to adapt to the current game situation ... (I'm mainly referring to Rodgers here ... and his short passes and check down targets ... - They are *THERE*, but wasn't being used - untill the Dallas Game ...) - *That* is NOT the coaches fault, but more the players' fault ...

I knew that it would end up being Rodger's fault somehow. To quote Jersey Al, "what have you been drinking?"

He has adapted? HE SAID IT HIMSELF HE ONLY LET RODGERS CALL THE SHOTS AGAINST THE DALLAS GAME, AND WE ALL KNOW HOW THAT WENT.

If you trully believe that McCarthy has indeed called for more short passes and more runs, prior to the Cowboys game, then there's no point in discussing with you.

To some extent ... But not only ... If the players aren't listening ... no amount of reprimanding nor "punishment" will make the situation better ... Jolly's comment after the game before the Dallas game is a very good indication of a player, who isn't really being professional enough ... Sad part is ... Who did you want McCarthy to replace him with ?

If they aren't listening, he's not doing a good job in selling his philosophy. It *could* be because he appears more as a friend than a father.

Who did I want him to replace him with? Raji. Wynn. Obviously they're not as good as Jolly, but see the Joey Porter case.

There are plenty of "mature" players who *should* be leading on the Packers team ... - I fault the players more than I actually fault McCarthy at this point ... The Dallas Game kinda proved that point ...

Yes, they should. But it's the coaches job to make sure they do. The Dallas game proved exactly that, that if the players can rile up, than we can make it. If not, don't count on the coaches to do it,

Compare the Tampa game to the Dallas game ... - It was the same players (with a few select exceptions), - yet the game played in each was totally different - like 180 degrees different ...

That to me says more about the players, than it does about McCarthy ...

That, to me, says exactly my point, that McCarthy couldn't keep them focused to that game. It tells me that during McCarthy's tenure, the Green Bay Packers have been a VERY irregular team, capable of playing a great game one day, and an awful game the next.

If what you said above was true it would be IN-exusable from a professional NFL player ... - In fact that could be argued to being close to acting like a "Diva" or bunch of "Diva's" ...

So the WHOLE team is composed of Divas? That is hard to swallow...

Again, IF that were even close to being true ... the entire squad ought to be fined and reprimanded by the Organisation in public ...





I seriously doubt that ... - Again ... McCarthy didn't seem to have those problems in 2007 ... - And I'm saying that even though I'm a huge Favre fan ...

And even though I hate him for playing in Minnesota, that's exactly my point. Favre had the kind of leadership that allowed this team to lack such a coach. The kind of leadership Rodgers don't have. The fact that one has been in the league for 17 years, and the other for 5, with only 1 and a half season playing, doesn't change that. And it doesn't change the fact that MM isn't a good coach enough to exercise that leadership, something that is IMHO condition sine qua non to be a great HC.

I agree, however, it is also about consistency from the players ... Not only the coach, however, in all sports, mostly when a team is performing poorly, the coach is the first to be blamed, and when it goes well, the players are the first to get credit, not the coaches ...

Case in point ... New England Patriots ...

I can see what you're saying, but when you use Bill Belichick as an example of that, then you must not have been in this earth for quite some time. Just so you know, there have already been petitions to change the Lombardi Trophy to the Belichick Trophy...

Just because McCarthy doesn't publically berate his players, doesn't mean he doesn't berate them ... -

Different players react differently to the same circunstances. McCarthy needs to find what's the best approach to his players. His current approach isn't working.

And I seriously doubt you would like if he did ... - Because I would bet you would be among the first to "rail" on him for doing it publically and not internally then ...

You obviously don't know me well enough to make that claim. I've said it before that I WANT him to do it, and I mentioned why. If you're just going to ignore it, then good day sir, I said good day.

 

[PackersRS]

RS,I really believe your far off base here..

I have heard things from insiders that what your saying isnt true at all..

Leadership seems to lacking, and look no further then the best player on the D

What that I am saying is wrong?

Leadership, that Barnett and Woodson aren't leaders enough?

Look, I understand what you're all saying, that we should've more leadership on the field, and I completely agree, however, that doesn't change the fact that we don't have leadership enough off the field.

 

[Quientus]

Colledge put on "Notice" ...

Click Here ...


Also another interesting stat ... Full Story.

Most fans wouldn't recognize how effective McCarthy's teams have been when it comes to ball security. When a team excels by eliminating mistakes, fans often forget about the alternative and assume that's the way it always is.
In this case, McCarthy's success is the byproduct of spending an inordinate amount of practice time, having a staff of assistant coaches hammering it home day after day and finding skill-position players who buy into what the head coach is selling.
"Everybody preaches taking care of the football, but it's like anything in the game of football . . . how important is it to you?" McCarthy said Friday. "It's something I've always believed in. We do ball security every single day. It's definitely shown up on Sundays."
The Packers are tied for second place in fewest interceptions with five and tied for third in fewest fumbles with three. They haven't lost a fumble in the last four games.
At its current rate of eight turnovers in nine games, Green Bay would finish with 14, breaking the club record of 19 set in 1972 during a 14-game schedule.

But hey ... McCarthy is a "bad coach" and doesn't know how to motivate ... - Have to make you wonder, doesn't it ?

 

[longtimefan]

Nice article

 

[PackersRS]

Click Here ...


Also another interesting stat ... Full Story.







But hey ... McCarthy is a "bad coach" and doesn't know how to motivate ... - Have to make you wonder, doesn't it ?

Clearly you don't read what I post, or only read bits of it...

I never said McCarthy didn't have qualities as a coach... Ball security is one of them. Play design is another.

But, right now, unfortunately, his flaws in motivation and adjustability are outweighing his positive aspects.

But as I've stated numerous times before, I don't care if MM stays, as long as we're winning. I would actually like that very much.

So, if he can rebound, and if the team is willing to rile up for him, then it's a good thing, he should stay.

But if he can't correct the same mistakes this team has been making since 2007 (penalties and bad finish), then he needs to go.

 

[longtimefan]

RS Ithink your view on the fact that he wants to be a friend indicates that you think he can't coach and that the players dont respect him..

This article about turnovers indicate that the players do listen to him in that regard...

So why is it they can grasp the ball security lessons, but not the penalty lessons

 

[PackersRS]

RS Ithink your view on the fact that he wants to be a friend indicates that you think he can't coach and that the players dont respect him..

This article about turnovers indicate that the players do listen to him in that regard...

So why is it they can grasp the ball security lessons, but not the penalty lessons

My indication that he wants to be friends doens't mean I think he can't coach and that players don't respect him. It means that he's not a complete coach (right now) and that the players don't fear him.

The turnovers issue is the base of his philosophy. It's what he enphasises the most.

It's not black on white, they either listen fully to him or just don't.

I really doubt he demands less penalties with the same intensity as he demands ball security and turnovers.

Actually, it's exactly because he made the team so good at turnovers that we have a chance to win every game.

But when your leader doesn't care that much about an issue, the followers won't care that much. And McCarthy has said over and over again that he's not that worried about penalties.

Also, the method he utilizes on training. On the bye week, he trained a lot less than teams usually do.

And his quote from the Tampa Bay game, that he had overtrained the team...

Like Lombardi said: Practice does not make perfect. Only perfect practice makes perfect.