Jump to content

LaFleur's Lieutenants - Coordinator/Staff Thread


incognito_man

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, {Family Ghost} said:

Yeah .. this deal sucks.  I'm starting to get the idea the Packers are becoming a clown show.  Getting rid of good coaches is bad business.

I get the "logic" but like if you buy some failing business you don't have to fire every single guy. You need to be smart enough to look at what guys weren't at fault and are assets going forward. Maybe there's just stuff we don't know that would change my mind. But he sure seemed like a good coach to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Norm said:

Maybe there's just stuff we don't know that would change my mind

There were some comments that seeped out from the players meeting with the hiring committee, seems like Murphy and the FO are hell bent on cleaning house vs keeping talent that was part of the previous regime

Campen and Whitt are both very talented coaches, but they are apparently "tainted" by their association with the past

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, deathstar said:

What about Spriggs, Murphy, Taylor... I mean Campen was a great coach for us but it’s been awhile since we’ve had a player emerge like Bakh or Lang.

Taylor was undrafted and appeared to be an average starter for a while. Linsley wasn't a high pick. Murphy was a 7th and Jason at least started to look better lately. I don't think you can expect a ton more than that honestly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, vegas492 said:

This is where I'm reminded of an AG quote about Lane Taylor as "hot garbage" when he was young!  Made me laugh out loud then.  And...it was true.

He's an example of great coaching to get the best out of player who is willing to take to coaching.

When we signed him to that deal I think the whole thread but like two or three people was like lolllol wut. Myself included. 

Football is weird sometimes

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Chili said:

Actually that's not quite right. We need to be careful not to twist his words:

So they were strong candidates but didn't stand out. He never said they did not impress.

I get it... exact words matter. But it still remains, Mark Murphy didn’t come out and say something like hey we had a lot of amazing candidates, it was very tough to pick the best man because they all stood out and impressed Brian, Russ and myself... but out of all of them LaFleur stood out slightly more.

He said none stood out... I translate that to none impressed, it was just the tone of his story telling. Now he might of done it to up sell LaFleur. But I’m willing to bet if they did... they would of did second interviews. I read it exactly how Mark put it out there. LaFleur was the first and only to stand out in a crop of “meh”. So they jumped to hire him.

I appreciate Mark’s honesty, not knocking him for it. But like other during and after the press conference... the way Mark worded it was interesting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like Monken as an OC, but I'm not sure there are many similarities between his offense and LaFleur's.  Nathaniel Hackett's philosophy is a closer match I believe.  Kubiak would be a good match .. maybe Defilippo and Jim Bob Cooter as well.  Maybe we need to think philosophical match more than anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...