The only thing I can figure is they decided the Colts were bad enough in the secondary, they were going to take advantage of it.
That is evidently the case in constantly going deep and thereby not controlling the ball, and that miscalculation must fall to the coach. In the previous 2 1/2 games the plan was to use West Coast-style short routes to control the ball, so the problem is not Rodgers following a new plan.
Then, on the few underneath routes they decided the Colts SS could be had, forgetting that it was Richard Rodgers trying to do the "having". RR cannot outrun anybody; he's yet to break a tackle in his time in the league. Good hands and good routes are not enough when the other receiving dimensions are so poor. In the earlier games Montgomery was used as a TE receiving proxy out of the backfield while R. Rodgers was ignored.
Why so stubbornly go back to an old formula that has not been working when the more recent formula has been far more successful? Why back-burner an approach that got you league leading 3rd. down conversions and top-of-the-heap time of possession, and so few punts? I could possibly understand it with a QB who's bad in the red zone and needs long strikes. Rodgers has high facility in getting the ball in the end zone from close range...why not run the offense that gets him in position?
Now, McCarthy gets high credit for switching the offense from set-up-the-downfield high gear to ball-control-low-gear with very good results, during halftime no less, in the Dallas game, and again in the 4th. quarter of the Colts game.
Why, oh, why does he bang his head against the wall with a failing formula when the alternative was working so well? You're going to make the opponent try to stop what's been failing rather than make them adjust to what's been working?
My suspension of disbelief is over.
The only bright side I can find is McGinn calling into question McCarthy's viability. That could signal 4 straight wins.