Extend Mike McCarthy?

[Shanedorf]

The Packers  roster is drained from 8 consecutive years of making the playoffs - that's how the NFL works, much to the chagrin of Packer fans

But rather than accepting that reality, fans blame the HC, the GM, the QB because they expect full consistency at all times. Reverse draft order hurts consistently good teams - and that's the way the League wants it.

Slow starts. The Dope Sheet laid it all out and we talked about it here recently- the slow starts comment isn't supported by the record.
The Packers started 4-0 in 2015, 3-1 in 2016, 4-1 in 2017. In 2014, they started out 2-2 and went to the NFCCG

We also know that the Packers use the 1st (4) games of the season as their preseason - same as the 2-2 Pats and 1-2-1 vikes and the 2-2 start for the World Champion Eagles. Much of that is because they don't play starters in preseason and it takes time to get up to speed

I'm guessing you didn't see the Rams game, the Packers were anything but flat. And what you see as flat, I see as guys learning new roles, new defense, new offense etc. You can't fly around when you're still a bit uncertain over what to do. As far as not hitting anybody - the Packers and every single defense in the league has been neutered by the NFL rules. GB lost a game over "hitting" people, you think that doesn't have an impact ? Defenders are making business decisions every week and choosing soft over 5 digit fines. That's not a Packer thing, that's a league-wide issue. I miss it too, but we have to accept that this is the new NFL

And while I freely admit to owning a nice pair Green & Gold shades, I try to support my comments with actual evidence.
And far too often the evidence doesn't support the dour outlook of the frequently negative Packer fan base.

Pederson and McVay are the exceptions - did you forget to mention the other 25 that failed ? 

Todd Bowles, Steve Wilks, Dan Quinn, Josh McDermott, Hue Jackson, Jim Caldwell, Sean McDermott, Chip Kelly, Marc Trestman, Vance Joseph, Adam Gase, Dirk Koetter, Gus Bradley, Jay Gruden, Ben Mcadoo, Bill OBrien and on and on and on. Old "proven" coaches fail in new HC positions too - John Fox is one example and Bill Parcells in Dallas is another.

Thanks for your thoughtful responses on this topic- I appreciate your insight, but see things differently

[vegas492]

I did not watch the Rams game.  I did my very best to jinx the Rams and let the Packers win.  Didn't quite work out as I had hoped.

I'll say this...if the Packers use the 1/4 of the season as their pre-season?  Then fire the coach that allows that to happen.  Especially this year when that part of the schedule was significantly easier than the stretch they are on right now.

I believe that getting hot at the right time is how you make a mark in the post season.  Getting a slow start against poor competition can negate that hot finish.  Almost did in the 2010 team.  Remember, it took an almost improbable punt return to get us into the playoffs.

Seems to me like the trend is to have a new head coach with a good QB.  I'm looking at your list.....Jay Gruden was successful.  Bill O'Brien is still humming.  I'd love to see what Gase would do with Rodgers.  And again...I'm 50/50 whether or not GB should move on.  I think you can make the case for and against Mac.

[Hands]

If Green Bay doesn't sign MM long-term...watch how fast he would get picked up by another team. Yeah, he's no BB....but BB was no Lombardi either. NFL HCs have a a pretty well defined segments of bad/good/very good/ and great. During the last 20 years, maybe two greats: Parcells and BB. I would put MM in the very good catagory. So if you replace MM, who's the great or very good coach that you're going to replace him?   

[{Family Ghost}]

1 minute ago, Hands said:

If Green Bay doesn't sign MM long-term...watch how fast he would get picked up by another team. Yeah, he's no BB....but BB was no Lombardi either. NFL HCs have a a pretty well defined segments of bad/good/very good/ and great. During the last 20 years, maybe two greats: Parcells and BB. I would put MM in the very good catagory. So if you replace MM, who's the great or very good coach that you're going to replace him?   

Going to take a chance on another first time offensive minded head coach like Holmgren, Sherman, and McCarthy and hope it works out similarly.  Someone like DeFillipo might fit in well in GB.

[Cheesehawk]

11 minutes ago, Hands said:

If Green Bay doesn't sign MM long-term...watch how fast he would get picked up by another team. Yeah, he's no BB....but BB was no Lombardi either. NFL HCs have a a pretty well defined segments of bad/good/very good/ and great. During the last 20 years, maybe two greats: Parcells and BB. I would put MM in the very good catagory. So if you replace MM, who's the great or very good coach that you're going to replace him?   

Eh, BB has easily overtaken Lombardi as the greatest HC of all time. Not really much of a debate imo

[TheOnlyThing]

45 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

The Packers  roster is drained from 8 consecutive years of making the playoffs - that's how the NFL works,

Poor Patriots, 15 of 16 years in the playoffs (and going 11-5 in the non-playoff season) must have absolutely drained that team of any hope.

Oh wait, they've won 4 straight, are 6-2 on the year, and have already beat the high-powered Chiefs you say?

Well, maybe, just maybe when you have one of the top QBs to ever play the game just making the playoffs should be a floor not a ceiling.

And maybe the Packers roster is drained because the previous GM's drafting was not all that good over the last half of his tenure and, unlike the Patriots, he refused to make any trades for players and largely avoided veteran free agents.

Maybe.

[Packer_ESP]

32 minutes ago, TheOnlyThing said:

Poor Patriots, 15 of 16 years in the playoffs (and going 11-5 in the non-playoff season) must have absolutely drained that team of any hope.

Oh wait, they've won 4 straight, are 6-2 on the year, and have already beat the high-powered Chiefs you say?

The fact that we are living the era of the GOAT coach along with the possibly GOAT QB does not disprove Shanedorf's point. The NFL absolutely works that way and it has been proven time and time again - in fact, the Patriots and to a lesser extent the Packers are the only exceptions to that rule.

Winning a Tour de France is hard - the fact that some of the best cyclists in history won it 5 times in a row does not make it any easier.

[packfanfb]

7 minutes ago, Packer_ESP said:

The fact that we are living the era of the GOAT coach along with the possibly GOAT QB does not disprove Shanedorf's point. The NFL absolutely works that way and it has been proven time and time again - in fact, the Patriots and to a lesser extent the Packers are the only exceptions to that rule.

Winning a Tour de France is hard - the fact that some of the best cyclists in history won it 5 times in a row does not make it any easier.

With a healthy Aaron Rodgers, the playoffs are and pretty much should be a given every year. If they aren't, either your GM or HC, or both have failed at their jobs.

The reason our results have waned in recent years isn't because "that's the way of the NFL" as you might suggest for other teams. "Other teams" don't have Rodgers and haven't had him for 10+ years. Rather, its because (A) we had a GM who lived and died by roster building 95% through the draft. That works when drafting is good (that's the living part) and doesn't work when your drafts don't turn out well (that's the dying part). We've been "dying" more than "living" in recent years under Thompson because his drafts got worse...this is pretty simple to understand. Lesser drafts = lesser talent on the roster + no outside help to replace or improve upon that lesser talent = a weaker roster. Luckily, throughout all of this, we've still had Rodgers who can outright carry this team at times (see 2016).  

Next, the (B) reason our results have waned is because our HC still coaches like it's 2011 when we had Nelson, Jennings, Driver, Jones, Cobb and Finley simply going out play after play and being "better" than the guys on defense. As our roster has depreciated (thanks Ted), including at WR and at other critical positions, McCarthy has pretty much stayed the same. Now some blame falls on Rodgers who has not adapted his game either (accepting the short passing game, throwing to RBs, etc.), but as the HC, McCarthy has never changed his philosophy over the years. That catches up to you. You get stale. You get boring. You become an inconsistent team. McCarthy isn't so much a "poor" coach; rather, he's just been HC of the Packers too darn long. 

In reality, McCarthy has the easiest head coaching job in the NFL because of Rodgers' abilities. Rodgers makes plays like the throw in Dallas in 2016 and turns a playoff loss on McCarthy's record into a win. He does this all the time. We just take it for granted. In spite of that, Rodgers only twice in his entire career has had a 1st round bye....twice. That's not all on McCarthy. That's not all on Thompson. Some of that is on the players, injuries, bad luck, whatever. But a lot of it is on the HC and GM.   

[Shanedorf]

39 minutes ago, Cheesehawk said:

Eh, BB has easily overtaken Lombardi as the greatest HC of all time. Not really much of a debate imo

Lombardi won 5 Titles in 7 years, it took BB 2 decades to catch him.
Lombardi also won 3 Titles in row, an achievement that has eluded Belichick and every other coach in the NFL.
And Lombardi did it without institutional and serial cheating....that's a black mark that Belichick has to own, not unlike Lance Armstrong.

Lombardi was 5-1 in Title games, BB is 5-3. Yet BB has "easily overtaken" Lombardi ?

That doesn't mean BB isn't a brilliant mind and one of the greatest coaches of all time in any sport. He most certainly is.
But "not much of a debate" is kinda silly given the facts.

Lombardi was talked about in the same way then, that BB is talked about today. At the peak of his career Lombardi could have run for President of the US if he wanted to, that's how revered he was. But most of you weren't on the planet at that point in time, so you know more about BB than Vince

Perhaps a better way to say it is that they were each the Greatest of their Generations -  because football rules, strategy, salary cap and players' physiques have changed so much over the intervening years.

[AlexGreen#20]

13 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

Lombardi won 5 Titles in 7 years, it took BB 2 decades to catch him.
Lombardi also won 3 Titles in row, an achievement that has eluded Belichick and every other coach in the NFL.
And Lombardi did it without institutional and serial cheating....that's a black mark that Belichick has to own, not unlike Lance Armstrong.

Lombardi was 5-1 in Title games, BB is 5-3. Yet BB has "easily overtaken" Lombardi ?

That doesn't mean BB isn't a brilliant mind and one of the greatest coaches of all time in any sport. He most certainly is.
But "not much of a debate" is kinda silly given the facts.

Lombardi was talked about in the same way then, that BB is talked about today. At the peak of his career Lombardi could have run for President of the US if he wanted to, that's how revered he was. But most of you weren't on the planet at that point in time, so you know more about BB than Vince

Perhaps a better way to say it is that they were each the Greatest of their Generations -  because football rules, strategy, salary cap and players' physiques have changed so much over the intervening years.

Lomabardi played in an era with how many teams?

Lombardi played with what measures in place to ensure league parity?

[Cheesehawk]

47 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

Lombardi won 5 Titles in 7 years, it took BB 2 decades to catch him.
Lombardi also won 3 Titles in row, an achievement that has eluded Belichick and every other coach in the NFL.
And Lombardi did it without institutional and serial cheating....that's a black mark that Belichick has to own, not unlike Lance Armstrong.

Lombardi was 5-1 in Title games, BB is 5-3. Yet BB has "easily overtaken" Lombardi ?

That doesn't mean BB isn't a brilliant mind and one of the greatest coaches of all time in any sport. He most certainly is.
But "not much of a debate" is kinda silly given the facts.

Lombardi was talked about in the same way then, that BB is talked about today. At the peak of his career Lombardi could have run for President of the US if he wanted to, that's how revered he was. But most of you weren't on the planet at that point in time, so you know more about BB than Vince

Perhaps a better way to say it is that they were each the Greatest of their Generations -  because football rules, strategy, salary cap and players' physiques have changed so much over the intervening years.

I know Packers fans love the 13 NFL Championships thing, but NFL Championships do not equal Super Bowls. BB has done it in a system that is designed to make sure it doesn't get done.  I'm not gonna argue the last point because that is absolutely true.

[Shanedorf]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

Lomabardi played in an era with how many teams?

Lombardi played with what measures in place to ensure league parity?

All of the available talent was concentrated on fewer teams rather than diluted by spreading it across 32 ?
Reverse draft order, no free agency. BB doesn't win as much without free agency to bolster his drafts

Each era in the NFL was completely different and each of these coaches dominated their era

[AlexGreen#20]

10 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

All of the available talent was concentrated on fewer teams rather than diluted by spreading it across 32 ?
Reverse draft order, no free agency. BB doesn't win as much without free agency to bolster his drafts

Each era in the NFL was completely different and each of these coaches dominated their era

Talent had nothing to do with it, there was a one game playoff for the league championship. Rather than playing four rounds of playoffs, one game was played.

Even if you had a 40% chance of winning the one game playoff, that's a better chance at winning a superbowl than a team that would win 70% of it's playoff games today. Those aren't even remotely comparable accomplishments. 

[Shanedorf]

38 minutes ago, Cheesehawk said:

I know Packers fans love the 13 NFL Championships thing, but NFL Championships do not equal Super Bowls. BB has done it in a system that is designed to make sure it doesn't get done.  I'm not gonna argue the last point because that is absolutely true.

Nobody talking about 13 Championship, just the 5 that Lombardi won.
The fact that they changed the name of the Title game didn't make it any tougher to win or a greater accomplishment. It was a marketing tool.
If fact, it was easier back then because the AFC was inferior at the time. Lombardi won against the best of the best in his era

I note that neither you nor AG has addressed the issue of the serial cheating, while emphasizing how BB overcame a system designed for parity
Well, did Bill overcome it because he was the greatest, or did he overcome it because he cheated so often ?

…Several of them acknowledge that during pregame warm-ups, a low-level Patriots employee would sneak into the visiting locker room and steal the play sheet, listing the first 20 or so scripted calls for the opposing team's offense. (The practice became so notorious that some coaches put out fake play sheets for the Patriots to swipe.) Numerous former employees say the Patriots would have someone rummage through the visiting team hotel for playbooks or scouting reports. Walsh later told investigators that he was once instructed to remove the labels and erase tapes of a Patriots practice because the team had illegally used a player on injured reserve. At Gillette Stadium, the scrambling and jamming of the opponents' coach-to-quarterback radio line -- "small s---" that many teams do, according to a former Pats assistant coach -- occurred so often that one team asked a league official to sit in the coaches' box during the game and wait for it to happen.
Sure enough, on a key third down, the headset went out.

And this on videotaping:

...The allegations against the Patriots prompted NFL executive vice president of football operations Ray Anderson to send a letter to all 32 team owners, general managers and head coaches on Sept. 6, 2006, reminding them that "videotaping of any type, including but not limited to taping of an opponent's offensive or defensive signals, is prohibited from the sidelines."

But the Patriots kept doing it. In November 2006, Green Bay Packers security officials caught Matt Estrella shooting unauthorized footage at Lambeau Field. When asked what he was doing, according to notes from the Senate investigation of Spygate that had not previously been disclosed, Estrella said he was with Kraft Productions and was taping panoramic shots of the stadium. He was removed by Packers security.

The ESPN link below goes into much greater detail on all of the cheating that Belichick was caught for. I doubt most will bother reading it.

The other link is from former head of Refs Mike Periera on the Pats cheating, when they stole the balls from the referees pre-game

http://www.espn.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/13533995/split-nfl-new-england-patriots-apart

https://www.newsday.com/sports/football/mike-pereira-on-patriots-deflate-gate-this-is-cheating-1.9829649

 

[TransientTexan]

32 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

All of the available talent was concentrated on fewer teams rather than diluted by spreading it across 32 ?
Reverse draft order, no free agency. BB doesn't win as much without free agency to bolster his drafts

Each era in the NFL was completely different and each of these coaches dominated their era

This assumes the talent pool has stayed the same size since the 60's. The country's population has grown (as populations tend to do) by 80% since then. Also, I think it is harder to find draft steals today. It's the information age, and harder to keep players a secret if your scout finds a blue-chipper in the backwoods somewhere.