Mike McCarthy - What Happened in Green Bay?

[Mr. Scot]

10 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

You know, looking back, this seems incredibly dumb thing for a HC in the modern NFL to believe. One need only examine the list of SB winners and their qb's to come to a very different conclusion.

That was a pretty common mindset among defensive coaches for a long time.

[hepcat]

16 minutes ago, BrianS said:

I'm still terrified of McCarthy.  Read the whole article, not just the excerpts.  There are multiple sources in the article saying that McCarthy failed to change and adapt.  This is exactly what we had with Riverboat, except offensively instead of defensively.

Sure, the article confirms what everyone continues to say:  "Rodgers is a prick".  Ok, I get it.  But it doesn't give McCarthy a lot of credit either.  Getting massages while assistants run meetings?  Not wanting to bring in assistants who might challenge you?  Man, that's too much like what we already had.

I do agree that McCarthy doesn't excite me. I agree that a lot of what I read about his time in Green Bay reminded me of Rivera in Carolina.

To me he should be a backup candidate if a younger up-and-coming coach doesn't work out. He has experience and would definitely not be a failure in Carolina. He might deliver some playoff seasons for the Panthers. But I don't think he'd win a Super Bowl, and that's the ultimate goal.

[Tbe]

2 minutes ago, hepcat said:

I do agree that McCarthy doesn't excite me. I agree that a lot of what I read about his time in Green Bay reminded me of Rivera in Carolina.

To me he should be a backup candidate if a younger up-and-coming coach doesn't work out. He has experience and would definitely not be a failure in Carolina. He might deliver some playoff seasons for the Panthers. But I don't think he'd win a Super Bowl, and that's the ultimate goal.

None of these candidates excite me. Bieniemy and Stefanski could be great but are a gamble. The “Mc’s” seem like guaranteed mediocrity.

[JARROD]

Yeh,... the OC is picking draft picks now. It would be really stupid if Aaron to hold that kind of grudge.

No one should forget that if Mike really didn’t like or believe in Aaron that when Brett Favre decided not to retire and come back, Mike wouldn’t have made the push to have Brett out instead of just bringing him back. That would have been the right call at the time. Brett was “Favre” from being “done” at that point and was still better than Rodgers the last 3 seasons he played.

So— I don’t know if this is all true or like the other “sources” that said a bunch of stuff that Aaron emphatically said was all made up.

I think Mike would be a great coach for the Panthers. Tepper already said he was all about long term vision so Mike would have the time to build the team to work his way in accordance to the owner vision.

 

[1of10Charnatives]

3 minutes ago, Tbe said:

None of these candidates excite me. Bieniemy and Stefanski could be great but are a gamble. The “Mc’s” seem like guaranteed mediocrity.

Anything is a gamble when you are hiring a head coach unless you go for the sure fire mediocre. Look past this offseason and try to think of all the times a solid proven winner has been available on the open market for hire as a HC. They are few and far between. Every great coach become one because at some point someone took a gamble on him. Right now from what we know, I'd much prefer gambling on Bienemy or Stefanski to other more "known" options.

[t96]

1 hour ago, Mr. Scot said:

I'd call Tom Brady the prime example.

I don’t disagree that many are egotistical with Brady being a prime example, you said you couldn’t think of one who isn’t. I don’t think either Manning brothers have a huge ego.

[Snake]

1 hour ago, rayzor said:

It does make me feel a little better about the possibility, but just a little and it also makes me more apprehensive. Too focused on offense putting defense on the back burner? My feeling remains that he would be an offensive version of Rivera. It's just taking it to a different level.

Also, message getting old after 5 years? I'm thinking no matter who we pick, unless we get a Lombardi in the first 5 years, we need to be moving on in 5 years and starting all over with a new HC. It's just too big of a thing to ignore or overlook. Unless a head coach gets a ring in the first 5 years, it's not going to happen. After 5 years, things go south. HCs peak in their first 5 and after that messages get old and old players become complacent. 

Rebuild every 5 years unless you've got a situation that has risen to the top and is able to sustain that level. I see no indication that this should not be the case.

This biggest and hardest thing for me to get over is the reality that no HC has win a Lombardi with two different teams. Those are just odds that I can't take on and I challenge anyone who puts stock in analytics to frame that in such a way that it could be seen as a risk to take on.

It wouldn't be a terrible thing to be a offensive Rivera if you can be more successful. Rivera won a bunch of games for us and probably would have won more if Hurney was fired with Fox. I think the Pete Carrolls and BB of the NFL come once in 60 years and we are not going to have that luck. I just want a super bowl. 

[1of10Charnatives]

17 minutes ago, t96 said:

I don’t disagree that many are egotistical with Brady being a prime example, you said you couldn’t think of one who isn’t. I don’t think either Manning brothers have a huge ego.

They either do not, or are adept at hiding it. I wouldn't begin to claim to know one way or the other. Either way, having been raised as the son of a former starting QB could very well be a factor in it. Archie may have raised his boys to not have the big head, or he may have raised them to be adept at hiding it. I'd like to think the former, but can't rule out the latter.

[Tbe]

29 minutes ago, 1of10Charnatives said:

. Right now from what we know, I'd much prefer gambling on Bienemy or Stefanski to other more "known" options.

I prefer them as well.

[hepcat]

20 minutes ago, t96 said:

I don’t disagree that many are egotistical with Brady being a prime example, you said you couldn’t think of one who isn’t. I don’t think either Manning brothers have a huge ego.

The Manning brothers have many rumors about being assholes. Peyton Manning shoved his balls in the face of a female trainer when he was in college. There are other much worse rumors I am not able to search for while I'm at work.

[t96]

6 minutes ago, hepcat said:

The Manning brothers have many rumors about being assholes. Peyton Manning shoved his balls in the face of a female trainer when he was in college. There are other much worse rumors I am not able to search for while I'm at work.

The one you mentioned is the only one I’ve heard and I’d tend to give him the benefit of the doubt since it is in 100% contrast with everything else I’ve seen from him. 
 

And even if that happened and there are other things, you can be a complete asshole to some people and still be humble when it comes to your talent/profession. Peyton and Eli’s actions and demeanors when benched speak much more than any of these “rumors.”

[hepcat]

2 minutes ago, t96 said:

The one you mentioned is the only one I’ve heard and I’d tend to give him the benefit of the doubt since it is in 100% contrast with everything else I’ve seen from him. 
 

And even if that happened and there are other things, you can be a complete asshole to some people and still be humble when it comes to your talent/profession. Peyton and Eli’s actions and demeanors when benched speak much more than any of these “rumors.”

I mean you're right, they haven't had any major stories about them come to light other than the one with the trainer in college with Peyton. And everything else I've heard about them is rumor. I don't know them personally. I just get the feeling they could have been massive bullies while they were in high school. And that they aren't the nicest dudes down deep. But I admit that's my own opinion, and goes along with the "these guys are all alpha males and all have massive egos" narrative.

[Wes21]

Mike is a quality coach, but Aaron is right that he was terrible as a playcaller.  Rodgers really did have to bail him out time and time again.  His scheme was old and stale, and he was never that great at it to begin with.  But they kept winning, as Rodgers kept making him look better than he was, so Mike kept calling plays as if he was actually as good as Aaron made him look.

 

If we can get Mike and have someone else call plays, I'm all for it.  His attention to details of the game are tremendous.  He's not Belichick level detailed, but his players knew things and did things that you wouldn't see with most other teams.  Even the hail mary's were heavily practiced and scripted.

[raz]

3 hours ago, t96 said:

The one you mentioned is the only one I’ve heard and I’d tend to give him the benefit of the doubt since it is in 100% contrast with everything else I’ve seen from him. 
 

And even if that happened and there are other things, you can be a complete asshole to some people and still be humble when it comes to your talent/profession. Peyton and Eli’s actions and demeanors when benched speak much more than any of these “rumors.”

no, no, no.  the whole family terrorized her for years.   included it in books.   they are giant douchebags, well at least peyton and archie.  can't remember if eli got involved