Jump to content

Packers Fire Mike Mccarthy, Joe Philbin named Interim HC


Hawkfan191

Recommended Posts

13 hours ago, Dubz41 said:

My last shot on this thread.  I disagreed that MM was this historic innovator (though that seems to be sacrilege here).  I admitted that he was a good coach and a class individual, but not the innovator people were claiming.  Guys who are/were innovators had coaching trees that experienced some level of success.

That was twisted to BB's coaching tree, though I never claimed BB to be an innovator- he is probably the best coach of his generation (and like you said- maybe of all time).  Anyway, being a great innovator is not the same as being a great coach, though sometimes both can happen.  BB's coaching tree had nothing to do with it because BB is not an innovator, but rather a great coach.  Nit picking? Yes, I can be accused of nitpicking.

The walter quote I through in for fun (God forbid you could have fun here) because it was so over the top.  I do like Charlie Campbell's draft information on that site though.  Funny weird how that's also anethema.

I appreciated that take. Walter is just another pundit who probably thinks he knows more than he actually does, but hey, sometimes the simplest analyses are the best ones, and it really did feel like fans of other teams (like literally every other team) were able to see the Packers HC situation with more clarity than many (not necessarily most) their own fans.

Of course McCarthy did a lot for us so it's understandable that he won a lot of people over, it just means people who did not have that feeling were able to more quickly realize it was not working any longer. Yet it still kind of amazes me how much zealous support the guy still retains from some contingents of the fanbase (this site especially).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gopher Trace said:

>FF Packers subforum when somebody pokes fun of McCarthy.....

CTUbh5VXAAAz_Eb.jpg

xD

This isn't true for McCarthy, it isn't true for Thompson, it isn't true for anybody. 

The reason people like me get so upset is because the complaints are so unfounded. 

It's also annoying when people who clearly have self-esteem issues about their own bodies have to resort to using physical insults on a man because you kinda just want to tell them to hop on a treadmill so they can stop needing to make fun of McCarthy's weight to make themselves feel better, but that's beside the point I'm trying to make here. 

It's like with Thompson.  Everybody says he sucked at drafting, hated free agents, blah blah blah. 

Thompson was frequently in the mix for free agents.  We didn't know about them until after.  He was frequently in the mix for trades.  We didn't know about them.  It is a fact that he tried to get Gonzalez, Moss, Lynch.  Now think of the ones he tried to get that we don't know about. 

Then with McCarthy.  Everybody blames his offense for being stale, blah blah blah.  It wasn't that.  It was not the scheme.  Scheme does not matter.  Unless your scheme involves your receivers running out of bounds and waving for the ball while standing out of bounds, scheme doesn't matter in this league.  Every effing route is scheming someone open.  There is no scheme that doesn't scheme someone open, and I'm sick of hearing McCarthy never schemed anyone open. 

It's all about execution.  Our offense was almost identical against the Falcons as it was to the Cardinals game.  What was different?  Philbin's approach to practice, how he reached his players, the execution.

If people want to fault McCarthy for losing his team, fine.  He did, clearly.  They weren't performing for him.  That was either them having lost faith in him, him not preparing players for game action enough, him not having them ready for game speed, all of the above plus more.

But when people sit there and act like it was a scheme thing, I get really frustrated because scheme had nothing whatsoever to do with McCarthy's failures here. 

McCarthy is gone.  It's not about defending McCarthy with me anymore.  I'll still support him elsewhere, but I am a Packer fan and that Packer fandom comes before players, coaches, GMs, everything.  What I am defending is not McCarthy, not Thompson, but the truth.  If somebody said that Hitler was a bad painter, I would argue the hell out of that and contradict that, too.  Not because I like Hitler, but because I like the truth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Outpost31 said:

This isn't true for McCarthy, it isn't true for Thompson, it isn't true for anybody. 

The reason people like me get so upset is because the complaints are so unfounded. 

It's also annoying when people who clearly have self-esteem issues about their own bodies have to resort to using physical insults on a man because you kinda just want to tell them to hop on a treadmill so they can stop needing to make fun of McCarthy's weight to make themselves feel better, but that's beside the point I'm trying to make here. 

It's like with Thompson.  Everybody says he sucked at drafting, hated free agents, blah blah blah. 

Thompson was frequently in the mix for free agents.  We didn't know about them until after.  He was frequently in the mix for trades.  We didn't know about them.  It is a fact that he tried to get Gonzalez, Moss, Lynch.  Now think of the ones he tried to get that we don't know about. 

Then with McCarthy.  Everybody blames his offense for being stale, blah blah blah.  It wasn't that.  It was not the scheme.  Scheme does not matter.  Unless your scheme involves your receivers running out of bounds and waving for the ball while standing out of bounds, scheme doesn't matter in this league.  Every effing route is scheming someone open.  There is no scheme that doesn't scheme someone open, and I'm sick of hearing McCarthy never schemed anyone open. 

It's all about execution.  Our offense was almost identical against the Falcons as it was to the Cardinals game.  What was different?  Philbin's approach to practice, how he reached his players, the execution.

If people want to fault McCarthy for losing his team, fine.  He did, clearly.  They weren't performing for him.  That was either them having lost faith in him, him not preparing players for game action enough, him not having them ready for game speed, all of the above plus more.

But when people sit there and act like it was a scheme thing, I get really frustrated because scheme had nothing whatsoever to do with McCarthy's failures here. 

McCarthy is gone.  It's not about defending McCarthy with me anymore.  I'll still support him elsewhere, but I am a Packer fan and that Packer fandom comes before players, coaches, GMs, everything.  What I am defending is not McCarthy, not Thompson, but the truth.  If somebody said that Hitler was a bad painter, I would argue the hell out of that and contradict that, too.  Not because I like Hitler, but because I like the truth. 

You could have saved yourself a lot of time by admitting that yes, what I said is, in fact, true.

'Can't tell you how many replies I got where people took offense not with the substance of what I said against McCarthy but the lack of politeness. Obviously the ones about his weight get the most grief, but one other guy clutched his pearls over me calling him an "inflexible idiot," not because the charge is untrue or anything but just with the tone of it and he invoked this tired old cliche about "EVERYTHING HE DID FOR US!" which frankly just makes saying that stuff -- although I'm not really proud of it -- kind of enjoyable and makes me want to do it more.

I felt the same way over the outpouring of sympathy for Eli Manning after he was benched last year. It was nauseating (the mass-grieving, not the benching).

Ironically, some of (not saying you did this) the people defending him were accusing critics of doing with Aaron Rodgers what some fans did with Brett Favre... while pretty much being guilty of that with McCarthy himself. Invoking the past and how much success we enjoyed under him for refrain... is a Favrian defense of the highest order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Brit Pack said:

I just can't stop thinking what if the Minny game there was no flag and Eddie Pleasant caught that int in the Cards game (or they didn't convert 3rd and whatever silly long it was) we would be 7 & 6 and MM would still have a job and we would be heading into the playoffs even though we had been playing pants all season. Just two plays and everything is different!!!

But McCarthy had avoided the guillotine for a few years prior. We needed to get rid of him this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Howler said:

But McCarthy had avoided the guillotine for a few years prior. We needed to get rid of him this year.

Disagree with this.  This was the first year McCarthy underperformed.

We were 4-1 with Rodgers last year.

Went to the Championship game the year before.

THIS was the first year McCarthy's team underperformed.  Unless you expect Hundley to keep us in contention with no defense whatsoever, and if you do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

Disagree with this.  This was the first year McCarthy underperformed.

We were 4-1 with Rodgers last year.

Went to the Championship game the year before.

THIS was the first year McCarthy's team underperformed.  Unless you expect Hundley to keep us in contention with no defense whatsoever, and if you do...

There were some serious rough patches that were rescued by Rodgers magic. 2015-2016 specifically comes to mind with the Rodgers Hail Mary in Detroit, which literally picked the team off the mat. In retrospect, we were better off losing that game (7-5 record with 4 to go if that pass is incomplete) and letting the changes occur within their natural progression. Team ended up beating the Redskins in the first round and then narrowly losing to the Cardinals in OT, while people forgot how broken the team was prior to the Rodgers to Rodgers miracle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

THIS was the first year McCarthy's team underperformed.  Unless you expect Hundley to keep us in contention with no defense whatsoever, and if you do...

I agree it's hard to fault MM for losing with Hundley at QB. Although, I also think MM is partial to blame for thinking Hundley was capable. He always said he was happy with his QB room and had confidence that Hundley could get the job done. Maybe privately he was singing a different toon, but I can only judge him based on the comments he made publicly. And publicly he made it clear he had all the confidence in the world in his backup QB. Whether he was lying or not doesn't really matter. The Packers didn't replace him, and MM continued to watch Hundley perform badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KingOfTheNorth said:

I agree it's hard to fault MM for losing with Hundley at QB. Although, I also think MM is partial to blame for thinking Hundley was capable. He always said he was happy with his QB room and had confidence that Hundley could get the job done. Maybe privately he was singing a different toon, but I can only judge him based on the comments he made publicly. And publicly he made it clear he had all the confidence in the world in his backup QB. Whether he was lying or not doesn't really matter. The Packers didn't replace him, and MM continued to watch Hundley perform badly.

What is he supposed to say? is he supposed to belittle him in public? there is nothing to be gained by that. it's dumb to judge him by those public comments. Which great FA backup QB would you have liked for them to replace Hundley with at the time? or what resources would you have been willing to spend on that? Making a mountain out of press conference statement is just indicative of someone seeking out anything they can stretch into a criticism for lack of sufficient knowledge to make criticism in the relevant areas of a football coach (scheme, playcalling, teaching ability). 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/14/2018 at 4:41 PM, TransientTexan said:

What is he supposed to say? is he supposed to belittle him in public? there is nothing to be gained by that. it's dumb to judge him by those public comments. Which great FA backup QB would you have liked for them to replace Hundley with at the time? or what resources would you have been willing to spend on that? Making a mountain out of press conference statement is just indicative of someone seeking out anything they can stretch into a criticism for lack of sufficient knowledge to make criticism in the relevant areas of a football coach (scheme, playcalling, teaching ability). 

 

 

Not sure how I am making a mountain out of anything. I said MM is partially to blame for the issues with Hundley.  MM's specialty is coaching up QBs, and yet Hundley showed minimal signs of improvement as time went on. Your entire response makes it seem like i just raked MM over the coals, when all I did was mention he was partially to blame for Hundley's development. I am not saying he had to say anything different in the press conference. I get he really had no choice, but his actions reflected his comments in the press conference. That's where he had a choice, and that's where he is to blame. Hundley was not cutting it, and a change needed to be made. MM publicly stated it didn't need to happen, and his actions backed that up. Unfortunately,  the games didn't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, KingOfTheNorth said:

Not sure how I am making a mountain out of anything. I said MM is partially to blame for the issues with Hundley.  MM's specialty is coaching up QBs, and yet Hundley showed minimal signs of improvement as time went on. Your entire response makes it seem like i just raked MM over the coals, when all I did was mention he was partially to blame for Hundley's development. I am not saying he had to say anything different in the press conference. I get he really had no choice, but his actions reflected his comments in the press conference. That's where he had a choice, and that's where he is to blame. Hundley was not cutting it, and a change needed to be made. MM publicly stated it didn't need to happen, and his actions backed that up. Unfortunately,  the games didn't. 

I mean, Hundley wasn't actually that bad as a backup QB. He was basically average and was a poor fit in addition with what the team was doing with Rodgers.

 

I don't know why I care anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I mean, Hundley wasn't actually that bad as a backup QB. He was basically average and was a poor fit in addition with what the team was doing with Rodgers.

 

I don't know why I care anymore. 

Whatever man, I don't care about anything

Lol

Any time I hear people talking about not caring or caring I think if how Channing doesn't care about anything. That's what cool kids do

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...