Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Nads786

Packers Hire LaFleur

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

I feel GB are sorta missing the point here...every other team who has brought in one of the young innovative OCs has paired them with a young QB...not a guy like Rodgers...he is basically his own OC at this point in his career...if anything they needed a leader like Dan Campbell or a quality defensive guy...happy they have taken this route but just seems a bit strange.

They are following a formula that doesn't fit their team situation. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Pool said:

pWAR9jI.gif

Yep. You win. Lol

 

He might not be a bad hire. I don't know a ton about him but even if he is highly intelligent and creative, he still has to be able to own the locker room. 

 

Hopefully he can't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well GB seems to be following the trend of what other clubs are doing in hiring a young and bright offensive mind.

I'm not going to say this is a good or bad hire because you just never know, there's so many variables that go into being a good coach.  This hiring is just as risky as the Nagy hire last year considering the age and experience of both of these guys going into their first job.

The one thing though that I've noticed from LaFleur just from interviews is that he's kind of monotonous in the way he speaks, which may mean nothing in the end, but just being able to resonate and connect with your players is one of the more underrated aspects of being a head coach.  We'll see.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, topwop1 said:

the way he speaks

I guess you haven't listened to McCarthy over the years talk about monotonous lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope this starts the same revolving door trend at HC as we have had over the years (minus Lovie). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

I just hope this starts the same revolving door trend at HC as we have had over the years (minus Lovie). 

Often teams get used to winning and then fall on hard times and over react and have trouble digging out of the hole.  I think you are seeing that in Denver.  You may end up seeing it in Pittsburgh.  

They do have a lot of high picks.  Things could go either way with them.  Rodgers is going to fall off at some point in near future and they have to find a next guy like everybody else.  That takes high pick or picks to get done.

He didn't play well this year, but didn't look like he lost much arm strength and speed yet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

I feel GB are sorta missing the point here...every other team who has brought in one of the young innovative OCs has paired them with a young QB...not a guy like Rodgers...he is basically his own OC at this point in his career...if anything they needed a leader like Dan Campbell or a quality defensive guy...happy they have taken this route but just seems a bit strange.

The young OC trend has typically involved an OC with experience under a prominent HC coordinating a successful offense. LaFleur's hiring bucks that trend.

It's not to say that LaFleur won't be successful, but I find it risky to pair such an unproven coach with an all-time great QB who may be quick to turn on him if there's any initial failure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

The young OC trend has typically involved an OC with experience under a prominent HC coordinating a successful offense. LaFleur's hiring bucks that trend.

It's not to say that LaFleur won't be successful, but I find it risky to pair such an unproven coach with an all-time great QB who may be quick to turn on him if there's any initial failure.

To be fair LaFleur coached as the OC under McVay who is pretty prominent HC, and he has just as much experience as Nagy did calling plays before he got the Bears job.

I know we all want to see GB fail haha but yeah this could end up being a really good hire for them.  It could also end up being really bad.  It's a high risk/high reward type of move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Often teams get used to winning and then fall on hard times and over react and have trouble digging out of the hole.  I think you are seeing that in Denver.  You may end up seeing it in Pittsburgh.  

They do have a lot of high picks.  Things could go either way with them.  Rodgers is going to fall off at some point in near future and they have to find a next guy like everybody else.  That takes high pick or picks to get done.

He didn't play well this year, but didn't look like he lost much arm strength and speed yet. 

Agree on Pitt. It don't look good for the future. Tomlin has his hands full, that's for sure. Too much finger pointing going on behind closed and open doors that is causing for major distractions. 

Yeah I am in now way counting out the Packers. I have spent too much of my time in the past 20+ years wishing for the collapse and it has not happened yet. So until that building is completely leveled I can't count em out. All I can do hope that it starts with Lafleur (I know very little about him to hold an opinion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

Agree on Pitt. It don't look good for the future. Tomlin has his hands full, that's for sure. Too much finger pointing going on behind closed and open doors that is causing for major distractions. 

Yeah I am in now way counting out the Packers. I have spent too much of my time in the past 20+ years wishing for the collapse and it has not happened yet. So until that building is completely leveled I can't count em out. All I can do hope that it starts with Lafleur (I know very little about him to hold an opinion).

Everyone here is in awe of Packers.  It depends on your age I think.

Packers were great in 60s.  But they had a long stretch in 70s and 80s when they were terrible and were known for being terrible.  In 80s TV shows people would be in long comas and joke would be to coma victim "wanna bet the Packers?" because they were bad for so long after being so good.

They turned it around in 90s, pretty much starting with Reggie White signing, then later getting Favre and Rodgers, and have been mostly pretty good since.  Those days are frame of reference for most on these boards.  But its a mixed bag for me, I grew up in 80s when SF was the model NFL franchise.  They went downhill when DeBartolo Jr., who ran things, was forced to resign after getting charged with a felony.  Apparently management does matter.  

Patriots stunk most years before Parcells turned them around and then Belichick took over.  Most younger people think of Patriots as really good, but they were synonymous with suck for a really long time.

Oakland used to be known as a great franchise too.  I was just as much a Raiders fan as a Bears fan as a kid due to black uniforms, logo and cool Autumn score they always played with Raiders highlights on Sat. morning tv.  Al Davis started running it into the ground in recent years before he died and when he was older.  He started just being lazy with scouting and always taking fastest guy in draft or buying into media hype on this guy or that guy.  But he was the man and made a bunch of great moves for over a decade.  Raiders used to be known as winningest team in all of pro sports and held that title for a long time.   Madden was an amazing coach, people think of him as a goofball announcer, but he won something like 80% of his games.  His coaching record was crazy.

Pittsburgh as probably been the most consistently good franchise over my lifetime.  They are almost always competitive, winning titles here and there and completely dominated the 70s. 

Bears hey day was in the 40s.  LOL.  They haven't been consistently good since.  Just flash years and the legendary 85 season.  But historically they are usually pretty competitive and physical.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More replies in the thread on who the Packers hired than there is for any Bear related topic since the double doink. 

I think the Packers are in your heads and they should be! tick tock, tick tock. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the 80s the Bears were really good. They won the division in 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90. That was really their hayday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Golfman said:

More replies in the thread on who the Packers hired than there is for any Bear related topic since the double doink. 

I think the Packers are in your heads and they should be! tick tock, tick tock. 

What else are we going to talk about? I would feel the same way if it was the Vikings or Lions getting a new coach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Golfman said:

More replies in the thread on who the Packers hired than there is for any Bear related topic since the double doink. 

I think the Packers are in your heads and they should be! tick tock, tick tock. 

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Nads786 said:

What else are we going to talk about? I would feel the same way if it was the Vikings or Lions getting a new coach.

20 something comments and counting is pretty normal for this forum on non-Bears breaking news.  You can expect more comments on division rivals.  

GDT has 600+ comments.

Packers had game day threads for Bears in their forum when they weren't playing the Packers.  Who is in whose head?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  



×