Extend Mike McCarthy?

[{Family Ghost}]

If we only had Jordy Nelson all of our problems would be solved.

[beekay414]

Should've left Mac in Massachusetts 

[MacReady]

Just now, vegas492 said:

Calling for Outpost...Outpost, line one.  Please tell us why GB isn't very good in the red zone this year.

Basically, Rodgers is a picky diva and he only trusts Jordy Nelson. 

[Kenrik]

11 minutes ago, Packerraymond said:

I mean we're the Green Bay Packers with a QB most of us fight for being one of the GOATs. I don't enjoy watching losing football and I'm not proud of looking up at the Chicago freaking Bears or the Vikings. That's unacceptable to me.

I'm not a cut or fire everyone guy but this is not acceptable to the standard that you should hold for this roster. This isn't a team that should be closer to a top 15 pick than a division championship halfway through.

You should probably start to cheer for baseball where there is no salary cap and parity is hard to find. Yankees, Redsox or Dodgers would be good choices. 

[TheBitzMan]

43 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Looking at everything since 2015, tell me honestly Rodgers hasn't depreciated.

Tell me how it isn't the coach's job to get the most out of his players. 

On top of that we cannot get rid of Rodgers, leaving MM the only option unless we want to do this dance for the rest of Rodgers' career. Also judging by the fact Murphy gave him an un-publicized 1 year extension, I'd say they have been thinking about moving on for awhile now. Let Gute take this team into the next generation.

[Packer_ESP]

50 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Looking at everything since 2015, tell me honestly Rodgers hasn't depreciated.

This is the Extend Mac thread, not your Aaron depreciation thread. They're intertwined though, I understand the confusion.

[Packerraymond]

41 minutes ago, Kenrik said:

You should probably start to cheer for baseball where there is no salary cap and parity is hard to find. Yankees, Redsox or Dodgers would be good choices. 

What a lame response. The Packers gave Rodgers a record breaking deal to compete for SBs, we should be. Obviously my expectations match that of our management. I sure as hell hope Gute isn't as laissez faire as you. If I want to relax and enjoy something I'll watch a movie or Outpost trying to convince me Julio Jones isn't good.

[Scoremore]

40 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Basically, Rodgers is a picky diva and he only trusts Jordy Nelson. 

C'mon Outpost wouldn't go that far.  And yes ESP is it Aaron or MM?  Or both?  One thing I do know is that Aaron hasn't been the same.  We never did really get to see his form  after the collar bone as he injured his knee right away.  We haven't seen a completely healthy Aaron yet.  Even with the injury he's played pretty well considering.  Guy is off his game.  Without Aaron playing like Aaron were are going to have problems.

At the same time think it is fair to say MM isn't the most innovative guy.  NE schooled us. really did.  Hoped with the addition of Philbin we would see better results.   I have confidence the Packers will make the right decision on MM one way or the other.  We as fans simply don't have access to all the information inside of the organization.  If MM is tired and burnt out well you move on.  If not I'd still like to keep him.  Give him another year to turn it around.  My stance on the state of the Pack.  

[Bignutz]

As some have said, I think MM will retire after the season.

 

[Cheech]

19 hours ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I don't mean to say that defensive concepts can't be stale because obviously things like the Tampa 2 and the 4-6 have gone out of style, but nothing Dom did was really old fashioned.

You could argue the deployment of his schemes situationally were problematic, but he was always trying new things and working to adjust. 

His defense his last two years here was basically unrecognizable schematically from the 09 defense he started with. 

The state of our secondary on his final seasons was just unsurvivable. Injuries turned a decent unit into a mangled trash heap. 

Yeah, Dom experimented with a lot of fronts in his last 5 years, but they were never executed well.  

The secondary absolutely suffered due to the lack of talent.  But watching Matt Stafford pick the defense apart had as much to do with him knowing where he was going with the ball before the snap as it had to do with the lack of talent.  

Watching Brady look confused *at times* was and is a huge step up in the "scheme" department.

[Cheech]

 

 

I meant to expand on this but got caught up "networking" (drinking bourbon next to a guy who had a rooting interest in the MNF game). Let's get it.

As you know, I've been watching the Packers passing game very closely. I don't want to say exactly how much I've watched it, but suffice it to say that I have seen every passing play at least a dozen times. (I don't want to say I'm the foremost expert on the Packers passing game but I also don't not want to say that.) (If you need me to sit in on a podcast to talk about the Packers passing offense I will try to make time to do that.)  When most people talk "scheme," they're talking about "scheming a guy open." So let's start there.  The Packers are varying their pre-snap looks like they haven't done in a very long time. If you want to feel fancy but also don't feel like doing a lot of work, pay attention to their formations next week. They're throwing a lot of interesting stuff out there.  Lot of tight formations, stacked formations and full backfield looks. I'm a big, BIG fan of what they've been throwing out there before the snap this year.  So now we're talking route combinations. When people complain about the Packers offense, this is the talking point. "They rely on their wide receivers to beat the man across from them too much." For this year, I don't think that's true. Not counting WR screens/smoke throws, I'd estimate that 5% of the Packers plays rely on isolation routes. There's a thought behind most of what they do; whether that's to clear out the underneath for a deep route or vice versa.  That's a misconception among Packers fans. The idea that they only run isolation routes is an outdated one that people still cling to because they read an article about it one time. I don't blame anyone for that. I'm not being snarky. That's just how it is.  So you've got thought in your routes. That's great! That's your "scheme." Guys are being schemed open. Or, at least, that's the thought. Sometimes it doesn't work, but that's just football. You can have a great offensive playcall that is defended well. It happens.  If that happens, it doesn't mean the scheme is bad; it just means the defense played it well. That's an important distinction that often gets lost in the shuffle. I've said it before & I'll say it again: a "failed" offensive play isn't always on the offense. Defense plays a part.  The Packers have their double-post/wheel stuff. They've got slant/flat. They've got any number of different offensive ideas that are tossed out there. If we're looking solely at the playbook, they have some really nicely drawn-up plays. 

Now here comes the big BUT (and I cannot lie)...

Context matters. Situation matters. You can have a bevy of tremendous plays, but if it's 3rd & 4 and all of your receivers are running 20 yard routes, that's a problem.  If the running game is rolling and you start calling a bunch of 10+ yard passing concepts, that's a problem. If you have a RB capable of doing damage in the passing game out of the backfield, you have to use that.  A big part of offensive concepts are built on using ALL parts of the field. Whether that was Bill Walsh or Don Coryell, that's the idea. Use the pieces you have to do the damage you can. Stretch the field horizontally, then hit them vertically. Flip it up and reverse it.   You saw the big play the Patriots hit to Gordon this past week with the threat of the pass in the flat to the RB. Why is that? Because they target that area. They use that as a huge part of the passing game, then hit you over the top when you react.  To me, that's a huge area where the Packers are failing. The individual plays themselves are fine. The sequencing is a problem.

 

 

On this particular play, there was a maddeningly lack of patience in running the shot play, and it may have killed it for this season.   That, to me, seems like a fundamental issue. From the outside looking in, there doesn't appear to be a lot of thought put into setting anything up. Every play is its own individual entity: a leaf on the wind.  There needs to be a natural building, and I don't see it.  But let's be clear: it's not just the coaching. As fans, there is a natural reaction to seeing Rodgers hold the ball, run around then throw it away. It's usually something like this: "Why can't the coaches scheme anything open?"  It's a perfectly reasonable sentiment, but it's not always true. Sure, sometimes it falls into the trap I just described, but Rodgers also hasn't been himself this year, for whatever reason.  There are times when a guy is schemed open and Rodgers doesn't pull the trigger in time. Windows can be incredibly small, and Rodgers hasn't been pulling the trigger early in the game.  Now, whether that's Rodgers or the coaching, I can't say, but it is definitely an issue. It's not the fault of the scheme every time Rodgers holds the ball.  And now, my last point. Forget about the scheme, the playcalling and Rodgers himself. There is a maddening lack of window dressing. Pre-snap movement has increased this year, but there still isn't a ton of it.  here needs to be more. More pre-snap movement. More misdirection. More everything. You need to get the defense leaning then hit those gaps. 

 I'm trying to be a student of the passing game and I have a VERY long way to go, but I at least know what works and what doesn't at this point, and WHY things work and why they don't.  And here is what I know: to be successful, you need to threaten the defense that you COULD use every part of the field. And, while the Packers do some of that, they don't set up enough tendencies to hit the counters.  We need more pre-snap jet sweep motion. We need the man running the jet sweep to get the ball on the handoff sometimes, and other times get the ball thrown to him in the flat after a fake. We need to show that we can pull that off successfully.  But "successful" doesn't need to be a 70 yard touchdown. It can be a series of 7-15 yard gains over the course of 5 games. It needs to be a threat. So that, when defenses see that motion, they lean that direction, then you JAB THE KNIFE IN THEIR RIBS with a pass over the top.  Like I said at the top: the scheme is fine. The Packers need a better sense of sequencing, more window-dressing and more tendencies set up to kill teams with down the road.  Running an offense is tough, man. I know I couldn't be a playcaller. I know the Packers have some pieces in place to be successful, but they're missing some key elements right now and it's killing them.

 

 

 

I did some lunchtime reading today.  I copied/pasted the thread from Twitter.  (Cue the hate for the opinion based off of the media platform it was shared on.) 

I think it is worth a read.  Edit: This dude is absolutely worth following on Twitter.  Very few reporters who are employed to cover the Packers study as much as this guy.  

[AlexGreen#20]

18 minutes ago, Cheech said:

 

 

I meant to expand on this but got caught up "networking" (drinking bourbon next to a guy who had a rooting interest in the MNF game). Let's get it.

As you know, I've been watching the Packers passing game very closely. I don't want to say exactly how much I've watched it, but suffice it to say that I have seen every passing play at least a dozen times. (I don't want to say I'm the foremost expert on the Packers passing game but I also don't not want to say that.) (If you need me to sit in on a podcast to talk about the Packers passing offense I will try to make time to do that.)  When most people talk "scheme," they're talking about "scheming a guy open." So let's start there.  The Packers are varying their pre-snap looks like they haven't done in a very long time. If you want to feel fancy but also don't feel like doing a lot of work, pay attention to their formations next week. They're throwing a lot of interesting stuff out there.  Lot of tight formations, stacked formations and full backfield looks. I'm a big, BIG fan of what they've been throwing out there before the snap this year.  So now we're talking route combinations. When people complain about the Packers offense, this is the talking point. "They rely on their wide receivers to beat the man across from them too much." For this year, I don't think that's true. Not counting WR screens/smoke throws, I'd estimate that 5% of the Packers plays rely on isolation routes. There's a thought behind most of what they do; whether that's to clear out the underneath for a deep route or vice versa.  That's a misconception among Packers fans. The idea that they only run isolation routes is an outdated one that people still cling to because they read an article about it one time. I don't blame anyone for that. I'm not being snarky. That's just how it is.  So you've got thought in your routes. That's great! That's your "scheme." Guys are being schemed open. Or, at least, that's the thought. Sometimes it doesn't work, but that's just football. You can have a great offensive playcall that is defended well. It happens.  If that happens, it doesn't mean the scheme is bad; it just means the defense played it well. That's an important distinction that often gets lost in the shuffle. I've said it before & I'll say it again: a "failed" offensive play isn't always on the offense. Defense plays a part.  The Packers have their double-post/wheel stuff. They've got slant/flat. They've got any number of different offensive ideas that are tossed out there. If we're looking solely at the playbook, they have some really nicely drawn-up plays. 

Now here comes the big BUT (and I cannot lie)...

Context matters. Situation matters. You can have a bevy of tremendous plays, but if it's 3rd & 4 and all of your receivers are running 20 yard routes, that's a problem.  If the running game is rolling and you start calling a bunch of 10+ yard passing concepts, that's a problem. If you have a RB capable of doing damage in the passing game out of the backfield, you have to use that.  A big part of offensive concepts are built on using ALL parts of the field. Whether that was Bill Walsh or Don Coryell, that's the idea. Use the pieces you have to do the damage you can. Stretch the field horizontally, then hit them vertically. Flip it up and reverse it.   You saw the big play the Patriots hit to Gordon this past week with the threat of the pass in the flat to the RB. Why is that? Because they target that area. They use that as a huge part of the passing game, then hit you over the top when you react.  To me, that's a huge area where the Packers are failing. The individual plays themselves are fine. The sequencing is a problem.

 

 

On this particular play, there was a maddeningly lack of patience in running the shot play, and it may have killed it for this season.   That, to me, seems like a fundamental issue. From the outside looking in, there doesn't appear to be a lot of thought put into setting anything up. Every play is its own individual entity: a leaf on the wind.  There needs to be a natural building, and I don't see it.  But let's be clear: it's not just the coaching. As fans, there is a natural reaction to seeing Rodgers hold the ball, run around then throw it away. It's usually something like this: "Why can't the coaches scheme anything open?"  It's a perfectly reasonable sentiment, but it's not always true. Sure, sometimes it falls into the trap I just described, but Rodgers also hasn't been himself this year, for whatever reason.  There are times when a guy is schemed open and Rodgers doesn't pull the trigger in time. Windows can be incredibly small, and Rodgers hasn't been pulling the trigger early in the game.  Now, whether that's Rodgers or the coaching, I can't say, but it is definitely an issue. It's not the fault of the scheme every time Rodgers holds the ball.  And now, my last point. Forget about the scheme, the playcalling and Rodgers himself. There is a maddening lack of window dressing. Pre-snap movement has increased this year, but there still isn't a ton of it.  here needs to be more. More pre-snap movement. More misdirection. More everything. You need to get the defense leaning then hit those gaps. 

 I'm trying to be a student of the passing game and I have a VERY long way to go, but I at least know what works and what doesn't at this point, and WHY things work and why they don't.  And here is what I know: to be successful, you need to threaten the defense that you COULD use every part of the field. And, while the Packers do some of that, they don't set up enough tendencies to hit the counters.  We need more pre-snap jet sweep motion. We need the man running the jet sweep to get the ball on the handoff sometimes, and other times get the ball thrown to him in the flat after a fake. We need to show that we can pull that off successfully.  But "successful" doesn't need to be a 70 yard touchdown. It can be a series of 7-15 yard gains over the course of 5 games. It needs to be a threat. So that, when defenses see that motion, they lean that direction, then you JAB THE KNIFE IN THEIR RIBS with a pass over the top.  Like I said at the top: the scheme is fine. The Packers need a better sense of sequencing, more window-dressing and more tendencies set up to kill teams with down the road.  Running an offense is tough, man. I know I couldn't be a playcaller. I know the Packers have some pieces in place to be successful, but they're missing some key elements right now and it's killing them.

 

 

 

I did some lunchtime reading today.  I copied/pasted the thread from Twitter.  (Cue the hate for the opinion based off of the media platform it was shared on.) 

I think it is worth a read.  Edit: This dude is absolutely worth following on Twitter.  Very few reporters who are employed to cover the Packers study as much as this guy.  

Echoes a lot of what I wrote in the Packers/Rams 3 drives thread. Only thing I'll say is that we would use literally every timeout and get called for 69 delay of games every week if we started using heavy presnap motion.

Also if you look at the pass distribution metrics, the Packers are easily in the top half of the league in distribution. Most of the bad teams are barely throwing it past the LOS.

[Stevein2012]

1 hour ago, Cheech said:

Yeah, Dom experimented with a lot of fronts in his last 5 years, but they were never executed well.  

The secondary absolutely suffered due to the lack of talent.  But watching Matt Stafford pick the defense apart had as much to do with him knowing where he was going with the ball before the snap as it had to do with the lack of talent.  

Watching Brady look confused *at times* was and is a huge step up in the "scheme" department.

Yeah it wasn't just that our defenses had Ladarius Gunter covering Julio Jones it was Ladarius Gunter passing off Julio Jones to 30 yards of space in every direction in a playoff game.  Whether the players were talented enough or not hardly anybody could actually execute the scheme without some massive back breaking mistake over and over again year after year and it's not like some early rust would work itself out throughout the season, things were just as bad 16 weeks in as in week 1.

[MacReady]

It's gonna be so fun this year when we beat Miami, lose two in a row to the Hawks and Vikings where everybody will say McCarthy will officially get fired, then we run the table in the regular season and sneak into the playoffs with some miracle help from other teams.

Then we will beat Philadelphia in the Wild Card round, get our revenge against the Rams, play the Vikings (who get their revenge against the Saints) in the Championship game.

The Super Bowl will either be a Steelers rematch, a Chiefs rematch in our hundredth year in the league or the Patriots.  We learned all we needed to learn about the Pats this week and will defeat them in the Super Bowl.  Rodgers will destroy the Steelers defense and Ben will throw a bad interception, or we will outlast the Chiefs in a shootout thanks to a couple plays where Petrine confuses the young Mahomes.

Can't wait for McCarthy to either be extended after his second Super Bowl win, retire on top or get traded to the Browns for a first round pick this year and next.

[Norm]

4 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

If we only had Jordy Nelson all of our problems would be solved.

Not untrue. His beautiful smile would fix the locker room with cutting everyone.