Cpdaly23 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 I’m getting an uneasy feeling that when the hire is announced, I’m going to be pining for McCarthy... slim picking this year, so go for the ultimate boom or bust and hire McDaniels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primo Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 Personally I don’t think organization has done a good enough job of making this job attractive outside of Rodgers and a few zero superstars and the management structure between Murphy, Gutey and Russ Ball is a joke. There needs to be a line of authority. Been a lifelong Packer fan and mocked when the Vikings had the “triangle of authority “. This is basically it. Attractive job, yes but let’s not kid ourselves messy situation and one that makes it less attractive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 10 minutes ago, Primo said: Personally I don’t think organization has done a good enough job of making this job attractive outside of Rodgers and a few zero superstars and the management structure between Murphy, Gutey and Russ Ball is a joke. There needs to be a line of authority. Been a lifelong Packer fan and mocked when the Vikings had the “triangle of authority “. This is basically it. Attractive job, yes but let’s not kid ourselves messy situation and one that makes it less attractive. There is a "line of authority" with clear lines of communication and cooperation between the parties. Exactly what you'd want. Regardless, please cite instances where this "failed management structure" has had some effect on some known / public issue(s). Point out where it's failed and how. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 I do wonder how attractive the GB job will be relative to whatever other open positions become available. I'd think the CLE job would already be more appealing to many HC candidates. The most valuable commodity on the Packers roster is a 35 year old QB coming off the worst season of his career. On the offensive side you have Rodgers, Adams, Bak, and a lot of question marks. On the defensive side I honestly don't know what to think. There are some pieces there, but it never seems to come together. If the next HC doesn't get things (Rodgers as much as anything) turned around relatively quickly, I think this franchise is primed for a handful of down years. If nothing else it would be interesting to see how GB fans who came on-board during the Favre/Rodgers era react to a few seasons of losing. Hard to believe it's been over 25 years since Favre took the reigns at QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_gb Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 10 minutes ago, Mazrimiv said: I do wonder how attractive the GB job will be relative to whatever other open positions become available. I'd think the CLE job would already be more appealing to many HC candidates. The most valuable commodity on the Packers roster is a 35 year old QB coming off the worst season of his career. On the offensive side you have Rodgers, Adams, Bak, and a lot of question marks. On the defensive side I honestly don't know what to think. There are some pieces there, but it never seems to come together. If the next HC doesn't get things (Rodgers as much as anything) turned around relatively quickly, I think this franchise is primed for a handful of down years. If nothing else it would be interesting to see how GB fans who came on-board during the Favre/Rodgers era react to a few seasons of losing. Hard to believe it's been over 25 years since Favre took the reigns at QB. The most valuable commodity the Packers have is job security, this isn't a job that opens up often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 6 minutes ago, Nick_gb said: The most valuable commodity the Packers have is job security, this isn't a job that opens up often. Green Bay has had its fair share of "short timers." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primo Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 51 minutes ago, Leader said: There is a "line of authority" with clear lines of communication and cooperation between the parties. Exactly what you'd want. Regardless, please cite instances where this "failed management structure" has had some effect on some known / public issue(s). Point out where it's failed and how. Point out where this management structure has been successful? My point is to early to tell. All I am saying it is an unknown structure and one that I think will create problems. It may work it may not but I would think a coach would want to report to someone Making the decisions ( if he can’t make it themselves) rather than a peer. This is like a corporate structure where there is all kinds of drama and politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 3 minutes ago, Primo said: Point out where this management structure has been successful? My point is to early to tell. All I am saying it is an unknown structure and one that I think will create problems. It may work it may not but I would think a coach would want to report to someone Making the decisions ( if he can’t make it themselves) rather than a peer. This is like a corporate structure where there is all kinds of drama and politics. You're the one that called it a joke. Now you're backing off that and saying: Its too early to tell. Its an unknown structure that will create problems but may work out Its like some corporate structure with drama and politics. And lastly - the one I really like - is putting it on me to show where its been a success, Thats a pretty good dodge. I wont banter with you about it as clearly you're thoughts are undefined. I've always counted on people - not positions - making things work. Toiling together in a joint / collaborative / structured venture to achieve good things. I think it can work - see absolutely no reason it cant - and minus any specifics from you how its NOT working - I dont need to "prove" a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Primo Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 1 minute ago, Leader said: You're the one that called it a joke. Now you're backing off that and saying: Its too early to tell. Its an unknown structure that will create problems but may work out Its like some corporate structure with drama and politics. And lastly - the one I really like - is putting it on me to show where its been a success, Thats a pretty good dodge. I wont banter with you about it as clearly you're thoughts are undefined. I've always counted on people - not positions - making things work. Toiling together in a joint / collaborative / structured venture to achieve good things. I think it can work - see absolutely no reason it cant - and minus any specifics from you how its NOT working - I dont need to "prove" a thing. Neither do I. All I am saying my opinion is it won’t work. You put it on me to prove where it has already failed. My entire point is not a normal NFL structure of which the NFL Craves. So regardless of what you want to think there are many examples including the one I voted where it has failed. As far as my thoughts, I am very clear that I don’t think this will work. I think there will end up being a power structure and politics. I dodge nothing your are free to my opinion as are you. I prefer the Structure Ron Wolf creates vs the executive board of the 70s and 80s. thats all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 49 minutes ago, Primo said: Point out where this management structure has been successful? My point is to early to tell. All I am saying it is an unknown structure and one that I think will create problems. It may work it may not but I would think a coach would want to report to someone Making the decisions ( if he can’t make it themselves) rather than a peer. This is like a corporate structure where there is all kinds of drama and politics. Pittsburgh? Philly to an extent. New England if you're just going by titles even. Realistically, how many organizations in the league do you think a GM could die the coach without the owner being on board? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Packerraymond Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 2 hours ago, Primo said: Personally I don’t think organization has done a good enough job of making this job attractive outside of Rodgers and a few zero superstars and the management structure between Murphy, Gutey and Russ Ball is a joke. There needs to be a line of authority. Been a lifelong Packer fan and mocked when the Vikings had the “triangle of authority “. This is basically it. Attractive job, yes but let’s not kid ourselves messy situation and one that makes it less attractive. If anything the triangle makes the job more attractive for the HC and less for the GM, but we already have our GM in place. The coach comes in with a guaranteed seat at the table with the team president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Fussnputz Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 59 minutes ago, Primo said: Neither do I. All I am saying my opinion is it won’t work. You put it on me to prove where it has already failed. My entire point is not a normal NFL structure of which the NFL Craves. So regardless of what you want to think there are many examples including the one I voted where it has failed. As far as my thoughts, I am very clear that I don’t think this will work. I think there will end up being a power structure and politics. I dodge nothing your are free to my opinion as are you. I prefer the Structure Ron Wolf creates vs the executive board of the 70s and 80s. thats all For me it's more about who is in those positions, rather than the structure. Bring in good people and success will follow. Bring in incompetent people and no form of structure will make for success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
packfanfb Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 49 minutes ago, Packerraymond said: If anything the triangle makes the job more attractive for the HC and less for the GM, but we already have our GM in place. The coach comes in with a guaranteed seat at the table with the team president. Yes and no. First, it depends on what that seat at the table actually means for the coach (does it involve personnel decisions, etc). If not, you want your GM to actually be a GM, not one who has to get approval on personnel decisions with the President and/or others. I think Gute will be able to attract a good candidate with the sentiment that he is going to be aggressive to build a talented roster, not just through the draft, but right now through FA, etc, something every coach wants to hear. Only problem is can Gute make that promise or does he have to run it by Murphy everytime he wants to make a move? Not sure a coaching candidate is going to trust that process and it could be a turnoff. There was an article about McDaniels not to long ago basically hitting on this (him being wary of structures like ours). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mazrimiv Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 2 hours ago, Nick_gb said: The most valuable commodity the Packers have is job security, this isn't a job that opens up often. Having 25 years of HOF level QB play tends to reduce the need to replace the HC. Ray Rhodes was replaced quickly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
{Family Ghost} Posted December 23, 2018 Share Posted December 23, 2018 18 hours ago, Chili said: My current head coach candidates rankings, this will be changed and updated as the weeks go by: Top Tier: Dave Toub (PC), Pat Fitzgerald (PC), Chris Peterson (PC), Lincoln Riley (PC) Notch Below Tier: Josh McDaniels (PC), Vic Fangio (PC), David Shaw (PC), Kris Richard, Mike Pettine (PC), Tom Herman (PC) Lukewarm Tier: Dabo Swinney (PC), Eric Bieniemy, Jim Schwartz (PC), Matt Campbell (PC), Bottom Tier: Marquand Manuel, Joe Woods, Dan Campbell (PC), Zac Taylor, Jim Leonard (PC), Todd Monken (PC), Kevin Stefanski (PC), Raheem Morris (PC), Adam Gase (PC), Jay Gruden (PC), Ken Wistenhunt (PC), Aaron Glenn, Nick Sirianni, Dennis Allen (PC), Darren Rizzi (PC), Todd Bowles (PC) Rock Bottom Do Not Want Tier: Joe Philbin, Pete Carmichael, Matt LaFleur (PC), Jim Caldwell (PC), Joe Lombardi, John DeFilippo (PC), Rex Ryan (PC) Ruled out of the running: Mike Shanahan, Bruce Arians, Jim Harbaugh, John Harbaugh KEY: Red = NFL offence Green = NFL defence Purple = NFL Special Teams Blue = College offence Orange = College defence (PC) = Playcalling Experience Candidates for Coordinator roles: Offence: Dan Campbell (TE), Zac Taylor (QB), Adam Gase (QB), Jay Gruden (QB), John DeFilippo (QB), Joe Lombardi (QB), Shane Steichen (QB), Mike Kafka (QB), Sean Ryan (QB/WR), Gary Brown (RB), Joel Thomas (RB), James Saxon (RB), Freddie Kitchens (RB), Darrell Hazel (WR), Greg Roman (TE), Tom Manning (TE), Justin Peele (TE), Aaron Kromer (OL), Shane Waldron (TE), Mike Munchak (OL), Gary Kubiak (QB), John Morton (WR), Harold Goodwin (OL), Darrell Bevell (QB), Ken Dorsey (QB), Rob Chudzinski (TE) Defence: Aaron Glenn (DB), Ryan Nielsen (DL), Jay Rodgers (DL), Raheem Morris (DB), Anthony Weaver (DL), Karl Dunbar (DL), Jeff Ulbrich (LB), Adam Zimmer, (LB), Vance Joseph (DB), Steven Wilks (DB), Steve Spagnuolo (DB), Todd Wash (DL), Torrian Gray (DB), Todd Bowles (DB), Jack Del Rio (LB) I think I'm with you on this. I like Toub the best of the NFL options, but I'd rather go get an offensive wizard who runs a top college program. Toub is an impressive coach .. he's the best in the business when it comes to special teams, but there is that question mark in regards to offensivive pedigree. Chris Peterson would be the perfect choice for us, with Lincoln Riley being #2. Both guys are offensive wizards and could take Rodgers right back to the top. I like Dabo Swinney .. he runs a great program at Clemson and is a WR coach by trade. From a pure character standpoint I like Pat Fitzgerald a lot, but offense isn't his forte. I've got Chris Peterson as my #1 choice right now, but I'm not sure any of these guys outside of Toub would actually take the job. We really may have picked the wrong year to have a head coaching opening .. so many of these candidates have nagging questions about them. McDaniels is an excellent offensive coordinator, but do you want him leading your room? Bienemy has never called plays. Fangio as a head coach .. I don't see it. I just don't see very many at all that wow me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.