Jump to content

16th Coach of the GB Packers (let the search begin)

squire12

By squire12
in Green Bay Packers

Recommended Posts

SSG

SSG

Posted
Posted
Just now, TheBitzMan said:

You are equating McDaniels morals with that of a domestic abuser? I get not liking McDaniels but this is a big time stretch. For being such a scumbag the best coach and qb of all time sure seem to love him. 

Josh McDaniels has no morals to equate and he's shown it multiple times over his career as a coach.  But yes, as far as coaches goes he's at the bottom of the barrel just as Gregg Hardy was among players. 

I put very little in what BB or Brady think of McDaniels.  They directly benefited from him being a liar.  From him screwing over the Colts and telling his soon to be assistants to get bent, they aren't his concern despite them being in Indy solely because of him. 

 

I don't know how ANYONE can rationalize the treatment of those assistant coaches who's only mistake was taking Josh Mcdaniels at his word.  His agent even dumped him because of his lies, deceit and lack of morals.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AlexGreen#20

AlexGreen#20

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Mike Lombardi wrote the following in his latest column at The Athletic.  It may be why the Packers chose this time to dismiss McCarthy.  

Here's the link to the story, but it's a pay site.  I got a 50 percent off deal a while back .. wanna say it was $30 for a whole year.  It's been worth it.

https://theathletic.com/690841/2018/12/03/green-bay-packers-head-coach-search-aaron-rodgers/

 

Murphy should not limit his search to just offensive coaches. He should spend time searching the college ranks and find a head coach who understands how to install and develop a complete program. Brian Kelly of Notre Dame, Lincoln Riley of Oklahoma, Matt Campbell of Iowa State and Matt Rhule of Baylor should be a few of the college candidates on Murphy’s list. Kelly is represented by Trace Armstrong, who also represents Josh McDaniels and now former Packers head coach Mike McCarthy, which might explain why Murphy felt the need to make the change now. Murphy could not have conversations with anyone Armstrong reps without going behind McCarthy’s back.  So as much as this move screams “why now,” and “why not wait until the end of the season?”  Murphy had to act now in order to show consideration and respect to all parties involved.

Kelley killed a kid

Riley isn't leaving

Campbell is meh for me, but I get why he's getting an interview.

Rhule is 7-17 in the big 12 though again I kinda get it with that program being where it was when he took over.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gopackgo972

gopackgo972

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I do NOT like McDaniels as a person, but he might be what Rodgers needs.  At the same time, I'm not sure he's what this team needs. 

The front office needs to do whatever it can to maximize Aaron’s final years. If that means hiring McDaniels so be it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sasquatch

Sasquatch

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Outpost31 said:

I do NOT like McDaniels as a person, but he might be what Rodgers needs.  At the same time, I'm not sure he's what this team needs. 

A while back I thought the same - that McDaniels might be good for a guy like Rodgers (Diva experience).  Now I'm thinking they might end up hating each others guts, LOL.  I'll pass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheBitzMan

TheBitzMan

Posted
Posted
Just now, SSG said:

Josh McDaniels has no morals to equate and he's shown it multiple times over his career as a coach.  But yes, as far as coaches goes he's at the bottom of the barrel just as Gregg Hardy was among players. 

I put very little in what BB or Brady think of McDaniels.  They directly benefited from him being a liar.  From him screwing over the Colts and telling his soon to be assistants to get bent, they aren't his concern despite them being in Indy solely because of him. 

I don't know how ANYONE can rationalize the treatment of those assistant coaches who's only mistake was taking Josh Mcdaniels at his word.  His agent even dumped him because of his lies, deceit and lack of morals.   

You have a right to your opinion, I just think you are way over-exaggerating the affects of his decision. He was fired by his agent because his agent also represents the Colts GM, Chris Ballard. The agent had to let go of one of them, he chose McDaniels. 

The Patriots offered him a substantial raise to return after he had accepted the position. This is called a counteroffer and people take them all of the time. There were also questions about Luck going into this year, up until the point of backing out, McDaniels still hadn't seen him throw. He has 4 young kids and moving them to Indy for an unsure QB situation or accepting a substantial raise to stay home makes sense from a personal standpoint. 

The assistant coach thing was a bad move on his part. They took his word and signed the contracts. You know who also did something similar, Bill Belicheck. Is he the same scumbag you say McDaniels is?

Nothing is as black and white as you want it to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Leader

Leader

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Ragnar Danneskjold said:

To me, the interesting aspect of the change in organizational structure is the commentary in the MMQB article about how things started off the rails under Thompson.  It seems to me that there was more that went into this than McCarthy's opposition to Russ Ball.

It looks to me at this point that it wasn't a power grab for Murphy, but an attempt to build checks and balances in the system.  The trouble with the prior system was that smart employees don't jump levels to complain about their boss, so if the coach is a personality that respects chain of command, Murphy has limited options for getting the truth out of the subordinates to the GM.

The new system allows better feedback.  Murphy's is a football guy- pro bowl safety, former athletic director that has hired successful coaches, so it is not like the old days when the executive committee was too involved in the football decisions.  If Murphy isn't a dictator and uses the structure to get the information out and make good decisions then this system will work.  

It will be interesting to see which direction they go, as I am not convinced that the structure changes despite reports that it is a done deal.

Agree

Good synopsis.

Dont think it rocket science and have considered previous attempts to describe changes either as too drastic or over simplified reasoning to support a preconceived negative view.

I'm a firm believer in people coming together, allowing their skills to mesh as they work in collaboration towards a shared goal. Does that always work? No. If it did the concept of office politics wouldnt exist. Personally - and using readings readily available on the internet - I think the power structure (read: efforts to collaborate and communicate) had become fossilized. It wasnt happening - for whatever reason. I cant know why (have some hunches....) but I dont create alternate realities.

So the current structure put in place - initially and primarily - to remove those impediments. The varying power structures had a hub - Murphy - who would both  insure and monitor the flow of information and collaboration - which is best for the overall organization - his direct responsibility.

Personally - and again I dont know squat - here's my hunch :: I suspect Mr. Ball was making a bit of a territory play. TT was losing a bit of what made him a dynamic leader and Ball was making his play to move up the ladder.

MM - being lower on the power ladder - voiced his opinion to simply be heard more. "I gotta put up with the $hit decisions you guys are making and would just like somebody to hear me out"  The Scouts and many of the personnel department split for other organizations cause nobody was listening - PLUS - the Packers had already moved a bunch up people up the ladder of offical titles and salaries - in a effort to hold on to them. Eventually the pimple had to be burst - TT had to go / move on - so "flow" could happen again within the system. (A somewhat graphic description....but perhaps is serves the purpose).

I see no reason the structure cant succeed - as it still demands performance and excellence from those in its hierarchy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing


×
×
  • Create New...