Packers next Head Coach.. (1 Viewer)

[sho nuff]

The offensive line played much better the second half of the season.

Running wise they did...once Klemm was pulled...and even when Whitticker was out of there.But still nothing to write home about...allowed too much pressure on the QB.

 

[lucky55]

Off topic a little; who do you all think the next OC for the niners will be?

 

[Jason Wood]

Anyone remember a no-name Offensive guy named Andy Reid?

I was going to point this out Mr. Pack. While many of us [myself included] are quick to question a move like the hiring of McCarthy, Andy Reid had never even been an NFL offensive coordinator [McCarthy has been an OC for six seasons on two teams] when the Eagles hired him.

 

[Ghoti]

It will be very interesting to see what happens next year.The initial response out of Wisconsin appears to be that the hire was mediocre at best, hostile at worst. I don’t see a lot of people shouting “great hire!” about this one. The sensible fans are taking a wait-and-see approach, but there are a lot more people who are unhappy before this guy even puts on his headphones. Some of that is unfair because of unrealistic expectations. There were no Bill Parcells types out there for the taking, and hiring an unknown name can bring this kind of reaction. Coaches have to start somewhere.Fair or not, I have a feeling that McCarthy will be on the hot seat from day one, and Thompson can officially consider himself there as well. If this team struggles again next year, it could get very ugly. If they Packers show improvement the naysayers will go away, but I think there will be a short leash if things go sour.

 

[Challenge Everything]

If Bates leaves I truly hate this hire. Bates should have had the job and if they bring in McCarthy as the OC that would have surely improved that position for the Packers. I am not liking this Thompson guy at all right now.

 

[Billy Ball Thorton]

Well you could say the glass is half full with this hire.atleast Green Bay is looking at the #1 overall pick next season.

 

[The Alchemist]

It looks like he already has some people in mind for offensive coordinator according to the Green Bay Press Gazette...

League sources said McCarthy sold Thompson on his ability to run an offense based on the West Coast system the Packers have used since 1993, but perhaps with some changes in blocking schemes from what they’ve done in the past. The sources said McCarthy wants to hire one of two men as his offensive coordinator, Paul Hackett or Jeff Jagodzinski, and that will dictate the direction of the offense.Hackett, his mentor at the University of Pittsburgh and with the Kansas City Chiefs, is the Tampa Bay Buccaneers’ quarterbacks coach. He has a close relationship with Bucs coach Jon Gruden, so he might not be willing to leave the Bucs.Jagodzinski, a Wisconsin native and the Packers’ tight ends coach from 1999 to 2003, is Atlanta’s offensive line coach and would bring a zone-blocking scheme based on what the Denver Broncos use in their version of the West Coast system. Jagodzinski has learned that blocking scheme over the last two seasons from former Broncos assistant Alex Gibbs, who joined the Falcons in 2004. The Broncos hired Gibbs as offensive line coach in 1995 when they adjusted their offense to become more run-oriented and have aging quarterback John Elway throw mostly on short dropbacks.

The rest of the article can be found HERE

 

[hobbes4]

This is a bad hire. You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast. He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers. IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

 

[MrPack]

This is a bad hire. You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.

He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast. He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers.

IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

Mike Sherman, is that you?

 

[Ed Suspicious]

I know this is probably just nerves after the dramatic start to the off season, but this smacks of mediocrity. It seems to me that TT is more interested in finding diamonds in the rough than winning superbowls. I hope I am eating my words next season.

 

[hobbes4]

This is a bad hire.  You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.

He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast.  He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers. 

IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

Mike Sherman, is that you?

No, Sherman and Haslett are on a jet toasting to their newfound opportunity to land a head coaching job elsewhere while getting out of two poor and desperate situations

 

[packersfan]

This is a bad hire. You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.

He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast. He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers.

IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

Mike Sherman, is that you?

Allowing for the reality that we don't know yet whether this was a good hire or a bad one, his comments about the Saints' offense are right on the money. Despite all the talent they had offensively, their offensive efficiency was often poor, McCarthy often showed no indication he knew how to establish a running game and often mis-used McAllister badly and obviously Brooks was an erratic QB.

 

[sho nuff]

Well you could say the glass is half full with this hire.

atleast Green Bay is looking at the #1 overall pick next season.

 

[sho nuff]

This is a bad hire. You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.

He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast. He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers.

IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

I think he was run out more as a scapegoat for Haslet.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

This is a bad hire.  You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.

He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast.  He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers. 

IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

Mike Sherman, is that you?

Allowing for the reality that we don't know yet whether this was a good hire or a bad one, his comments about the Saints' offense are right on the money. Despite all the talent they had offensively, their offensive efficiency was often poor, McCarthy often showed no indication he knew how to establish a running game and often mis-used McAllister badly and obviously Brooks was an erratic QB.

What talent? Horn and McCallister and????? Brooks was beyond erratic, and the fact that he got him to play as well as he did is a testament to his ability to coach if you ask me. It isn't like the Saints were stacked offensively here. They had one receiver and one running back. Their QB was just not very good, and almost wholly uncoachable. Which was a big reason why McCarthy left.

 

[packersfan]

This is a bad hire. You cannot compare McCarthy's tenure with the Saints to what the Saints did this year in a season that saw Deuce hurt, Horn hurt and the entire team moving from city to city without ever getting the comfort of having a home.

He was run out of NO because the offense was terribly inconsistent. He is the mind that decided Deuce didnt need a FB and tried to turn him into a Faulk/Westbrook clone. Deuce runs better in between the tackles and McCarthy took that away. He never was able to get a TE involved despite having Boo Williams and Conwell. And if he doesnt have a good def coordinator the team is toast. He seems to be a stop gap and desperation play to keep Favre in town for a couple more years while being able to develop Rodgers.

IIRC, he did bring Brooks to NO which was a good move despite Brooks being dumber than a brick. One trick pony(EYE for QBs) wont win in the NFL.

Mike Sherman, is that you?

Allowing for the reality that we don't know yet whether this was a good hire or a bad one, his comments about the Saints' offense are right on the money. Despite all the talent they had offensively, their offensive efficiency was often poor, McCarthy often showed no indication he knew how to establish a running game and often mis-used McAllister badly and obviously Brooks was an erratic QB.

What talent? Horn and McCallister and????? Brooks was beyond erratic, and the fact that he got him to play as well as he did is a testament to his ability to coach if you ask me. It isn't like the Saints were stacked offensively here. They had one receiver and one running back. Their QB was just not very good, and almost wholly uncoachable. Which was a big reason why McCarthy left.

Horn has been an elite WR; McAllister viewed as one of the top talents in the NFL at his position and for all of his issues Brooks has incredible physical talent. That has never been in question. Stallworth also is a talented WR (though inconsistent) and Pathon was a solid NFL WR. Talent has rarely been lacking in New Orleans on the offensive side of the ball.

 

[Jason Wood]

It will be very interesting to see what happens next year.

The initial response out of Wisconsin appears to be that the hire was mediocre at best, hostile at worst. I don’t see a lot of people shouting “great hire!” about this one. The sensible fans are taking a wait-and-see approach, but there are a lot more people who are unhappy before this guy even puts on his headphones.

Some of that is unfair because of unrealistic expectations. There were no Bill Parcells types out there for the taking, and hiring an unknown name can bring this kind of reaction. Coaches have to start somewhere.

Fair or not, I have a feeling that McCarthy will be on the hot seat from day one, and Thompson can officially consider himself there as well. If this team struggles again next year, it could get very ugly. If they Packers show improvement the naysayers will go away, but I think there will be a short leash if things go sour.

I will say this, credit to Ted Thompson for taking HIS guy and not doing the safe thing and bringing in a retread like Mooch because it would've been well received by the talking heads.It wasn't that long ago that...

Bill Belichick was woefully overmatched as a head coach in Cleveland

**** Vermeil was a washed up coach who hadn't sniffed the NFL for 15 years

Andy Reid was a QB coach who certainly wasn't prepared to be an NFL head coach

...etc...etc...

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks. Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed. Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

And let me say this. In no way am I predicting that McCarthy's the next big thing. But he's not a bad hire, or a bad coach.

 

[Klecker]

The Miami defense didn't seem to suffer with Bates leaving. They improved in points allowed and turnovers in 2005. 22.1 points under Bates to 19.8 in 2005. Turnovers went from 25 under Bates to 31 in 2005.

They allowed 317. 4 yards per game in 2004 vs 305.9 under Bates.

Is this due to what Jim Bates wasn't, or what Nick Saban is? I think that most Packer fans would rather have Nick Saban in charge of the defense (or whole team, for that matter) than Jim Bates, but they'd rather have Jim Bates than those available to take the reins from him.

 

[packersfan]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

I listed 5 players at the main skill positions who all have good or much better NFL talent. The Saints had a talented offense. That has never been in dispute to the best of my knowledge.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed.

I agree. But that doesn't change the fact he has incredible physical talent.

Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

The numbers this season really are meaningless. McAllister and Horn were hurt and Brooks just imploded. Having watched the Saints when McCarthy was there the one word that jumps out clearly is "frustrating." It had to be frustrating as hell to be a Saints' fan watching that team fail to live up to its talent level, constantly have issues in the Red Zone and woefully mis-use a top-talent RB as was so often the case. Again, I have said there's obviously a possibility that McCarthy will turn out to be a great hire by Thompson. I'm not burying the move. I'm merely saying that McCarthy's credentials are hardly impressive. This isn't the second coming of Mike Holmgren in terms of credentials by any stretch.

To echo another point, I'm also glad Thompson didn't hire a retread like Mooch or Bates due to the fact he's going to be 60 and I don't believe that would've been the right move to make. But given the other more appealing candidates available, McCarthy doesn't seem to stack up.

And if McCarthy was such a great candidate, how come nobody else seemed to want him?

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

I listed 5 players at the main skill positions who all have good or much better NFL talent. The Saints had a talented offense. That has never been in dispute to the best of my knowledge.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed.

I agree. But that doesn't change the fact he has incredible physical talent.

Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

The numbers this season really are meaningless. McAllister and Horn were hurt and Brooks just imploded. Having watched the Saints when McCarthy was there the one word that jumps out clearly is "frustrating." It had to be frustrating as hell to be a Saints' fan watching that team fail to live up to its talent level, constantly have issues in the Red Zone and woefully mis-use a top-talent RB as was so often the case. Again, I have said there's obviously a possibility that McCarthy will turn out to be a great hire by Thompson. I'm not burying the move. I'm merely saying that McCarthy's credentials are hardly impressive. This isn't the second coming of Mike Holmgren in terms of credentials by any stretch.

To echo another point, I'm also glad Thompson didn't hire a retread like Mooch or Bates due to the fact he's going to be 60 and I don't believe that would've been the right move to make. But given the other more appealing candidates available, McCarthy doesn't seem to stack up.

And if McCarthy was such a great candidate, how come nobody else seemed to want him?

Well, I'm curious who these other more appealing candidates are? Are/were they really any better than McCarthy? I'm having a hard time believing they are. The Packers wanted Childress, and didn't get him. I think they got Childress light.

 

[MrPack]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed. Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

I've got to agree here. You need more than a great WR and a decent RB to make an Offense go. You need linemen, and a supporting cast.

 

[packersfan]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

I listed 5 players at the main skill positions who all have good or much better NFL talent. The Saints had a talented offense. That has never been in dispute to the best of my knowledge.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed.

I agree. But that doesn't change the fact he has incredible physical talent.

Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

The numbers this season really are meaningless. McAllister and Horn were hurt and Brooks just imploded. Having watched the Saints when McCarthy was there the one word that jumps out clearly is "frustrating." It had to be frustrating as hell to be a Saints' fan watching that team fail to live up to its talent level, constantly have issues in the Red Zone and woefully mis-use a top-talent RB as was so often the case. Again, I have said there's obviously a possibility that McCarthy will turn out to be a great hire by Thompson. I'm not burying the move. I'm merely saying that McCarthy's credentials are hardly impressive. This isn't the second coming of Mike Holmgren in terms of credentials by any stretch.

To echo another point, I'm also glad Thompson didn't hire a retread like Mooch or Bates due to the fact he's going to be 60 and I don't believe that would've been the right move to make. But given the other more appealing candidates available, McCarthy doesn't seem to stack up.

And if McCarthy was such a great candidate, how come nobody else seemed to want him?

Well, I'm curious who these other more appealing candidates are? Are/were they really any better than McCarthy? I'm having a hard time believing they are.

All of that obviously remains to be seen and will be played out starting next season. My personal No. 1 choice was Sean Payton followed by Ron Rivera. I would've liked Childress over McCarthy as well but the Packers obviously never got a shot at him -- due in large part reportedly to Childress not being sure the Packers really wanted him.

The Packers wanted Childress, and didn't get him. I think they got Childress light.

I'm still wondering why no other team -- and there are obviously a ton of them that need new head coaches -- showed strong interest in McCarthy if he was such a strong candidate.

 

[hobbes4]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed. Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

is this what McCarthy told you in the interview?

 

[mektarus]

It will be very interesting to see what happens next year.

The initial response out of Wisconsin appears to be that the hire was mediocre at best, hostile at worst.  I don’t see a lot of people shouting “great hire!” about this one.  The sensible fans are taking a wait-and-see approach, but there are a lot more people who are unhappy before this guy even puts on his headphones.

Some of that is unfair because of unrealistic expectations.  There were no Bill Parcells types out there for the taking, and hiring an unknown name can bring this kind of reaction.  Coaches have to start somewhere.

Fair or not, I have a feeling that McCarthy will be on the hot seat from day one, and Thompson can officially consider himself there as well.  If this team struggles again next year, it could get very ugly.  If they Packers show improvement the naysayers will go away, but I think there will be a short leash if things go sour.

I will say this, credit to Ted Thompson for taking HIS guy and not doing the safe thing and bringing in a retread like Mooch because it would've been well received by the talking heads.It wasn't that long ago that...

Bill Belichick was woefully overmatched as a head coach in Cleveland

**** Vermeil was a washed up coach who hadn't sniffed the NFL for 15 years

Andy Reid was a QB coach who certainly wasn't prepared to be an NFL head coach

...etc...etc...

 

[MrPack]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

I listed 5 players at the main skill positions who all have good or much better NFL talent. The Saints had a talented offense. That has never been in dispute to the best of my knowledge.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed.

I agree. But that doesn't change the fact he has incredible physical talent.

Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

The numbers this season really are meaningless. McAllister and Horn were hurt and Brooks just imploded. Having watched the Saints when McCarthy was there the one word that jumps out clearly is "frustrating." It had to be frustrating as hell to be a Saints' fan watching that team fail to live up to its talent level, constantly have issues in the Red Zone and woefully mis-use a top-talent RB as was so often the case. Again, I have said there's obviously a possibility that McCarthy will turn out to be a great hire by Thompson. I'm not burying the move. I'm merely saying that McCarthy's credentials are hardly impressive. This isn't the second coming of Mike Holmgren in terms of credentials by any stretch.

To echo another point, I'm also glad Thompson didn't hire a retread like Mooch or Bates due to the fact he's going to be 60 and I don't believe that would've been the right move to make. But given the other more appealing candidates available, McCarthy doesn't seem to stack up.

And if McCarthy was such a great candidate, how come nobody else seemed to want him?

Well, I'm curious who these other more appealing candidates are? Are/were they really any better than McCarthy? I'm having a hard time believing they are.

All of that obviously remains to be seen and will be played out starting next season. My personal No. 1 choice was Sean Payton followed by Ron Rivera. I would've liked Childress over McCarthy as well but the Packers obviously never got a shot at him -- due in large part reportedly to Childress not being sure the Packers really wanted him.

The Packers wanted Childress, and didn't get him. I think they got Childress light.

I'm still wondering why no other team -- and there are obviously a ton of them that need new head coaches -- showed strong interest in McCarthy if he was such a strong candidate.

You keep playing up to the "most popular candidate" theory here, why? What makes your guys so much better than McCarthy? No one knows yet.No one knew Reid either, but you substantiate Reid by saying he was with a good program at the time. So was Morhninwig before he took the job with Detroit. How did that work out for your theory?

I am willing to give this choice the benefit of the doubt - for now.

You don't like McCarthy, we get that. I'm just saying no one knows anything right now about how successful or unsuccessful he will be.

Time will tell. He could be a bust, but he could also be a diamond in the rough.

 

[strykerpks]

I'm really not sold on this hiring, but I'm also not ready to cast McCarthy into the depths of head coach hell yet eitherThis may have been mentioned in this thread already but one interesting point my boss brought up as we were talking about it this morning was that possibly McCarthy is just a transition guy. Face it, the Packers are in (or ready to begin) a rebuilding phase. Possibly he wanted to throw someone in the driver seat until the majority of the pieces are in place and then in 2 years or so will bring in his 'big name' coach. Thoughts?

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed. Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

is this what McCarthy told you in the interview?

No, that's what was widely reported in the press. I assume the beat writers covering the Saints and Packers no more about it than I. Feel free to try to find a way to bash me though.....

 

[Man in the yellow hat]

I'm really not sold on this hiring, but I'm also not ready to cast McCarthy into the depths of head coach hell yet either

This may have been mentioned in this thread already but one interesting point my boss brought up as we were talking about it this morning was that possibly McCarthy is just a transition guy. Face it, the Packers are in (or ready to begin) a rebuilding phase. Possibly he wanted to throw someone in the driver seat until the majority of the pieces are in place and then in 2 years or so will bring in his 'big name' coach. Thoughts?

An interesting theory, but then why not just run with Sherman while they rebuild then?

 

[hobbes4]

I'm really not sold on this hiring, but I'm also not ready to cast McCarthy into the depths of head coach hell yet either

This may have been mentioned in this thread already but one interesting point my boss brought up as we were talking about it this morning was that possibly McCarthy is just a transition guy.  Face it, the Packers are in (or ready to begin) a rebuilding phase.  Possibly he wanted to throw someone in the driver seat until the majority of the pieces are in place and then in 2 years or so will bring in his 'big name' coach.  Thoughts?

An interesting theory, but then why not just run with Sherman while they rebuild then?

I subscribe to this theory. I do think McCarthy will be able to teach Rodgers alot about being an NFL QB. I just dont think he has the tools to command the entire fleet. This hiring gives them an out in 2 years if it doesnt work while not damaging the heir apparent to the great one.

 

[Ghoti]

I'm really not sold on this hiring, but I'm also not ready to cast McCarthy into the depths of head coach hell yet either

This may have been mentioned in this thread already but one interesting point my boss brought up as we were talking about it this morning was that possibly McCarthy is just a transition guy.  Face it, the Packers are in (or ready to begin) a rebuilding phase.  Possibly he wanted to throw someone in the driver seat until the majority of the pieces are in place and then in 2 years or so will bring in his 'big name' coach.  Thoughts?

An interesting theory, but then why not just run with Sherman while they rebuild then?

Sorry, I don't buy that theory. You try to put the best person in, period. Thompson's job is not so secure that he can afford to try something like that. Nobody in the NFL has that kind of job security.

 

[Fla\/\/ed]

I will have a problem with this hire if he brings in Paul Hackett to be the OC.That will make me puke!

 

[Jason Wood]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

I listed 5 players at the main skill positions who all have good or much better NFL talent. The Saints had a talented offense. That has never been in dispute to the best of my knowledge.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed.

I agree. But that doesn't change the fact he has incredible physical talent.

Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

The numbers this season really are meaningless. McAllister and Horn were hurt and Brooks just imploded. Having watched the Saints when McCarthy was there the one word that jumps out clearly is "frustrating." It had to be frustrating as hell to be a Saints' fan watching that team fail to live up to its talent level, constantly have issues in the Red Zone and woefully mis-use a top-talent RB as was so often the case. Again, I have said there's obviously a possibility that McCarthy will turn out to be a great hire by Thompson. I'm not burying the move. I'm merely saying that McCarthy's credentials are hardly impressive. This isn't the second coming of Mike Holmgren in terms of credentials by any stretch.

To echo another point, I'm also glad Thompson didn't hire a retread like Mooch or Bates due to the fact he's going to be 60 and I don't believe that would've been the right move to make. But given the other more appealing candidates available, McCarthy doesn't seem to stack up.

And if McCarthy was such a great candidate, how come nobody else seemed to want him?

Well, I'm curious who these other more appealing candidates are? Are/were they really any better than McCarthy? I'm having a hard time believing they are.

All of that obviously remains to be seen and will be played out starting next season. My personal No. 1 choice was Sean Payton followed by Ron Rivera. I would've liked Childress over McCarthy as well but the Packers obviously never got a shot at him -- due in large part reportedly to Childress not being sure the Packers really wanted him.

The Packers wanted Childress, and didn't get him. I think they got Childress light.

I'm still wondering why no other team -- and there are obviously a ton of them that need new head coaches -- showed strong interest in McCarthy if he was such a strong candidate.

Why is the number of interviews important? If I'm an NFL GM, I want to find that special difference maker, not the re-tread that every GM thinks to bring in because he won't get crucified by the media and fans if he hires him.Honestly, would you have been happier with Maurice Carthon? He's gotten, by several accounts, three or four interviews.

 

[Aaronstory]

I will have a problem with this hire if he brings in Paul Hackett to be the OC.

That will make me puke!

My buddy here at work (I live in NY) is giving me all sorts of grief over this. I read that he wanted to bring in Hackett and almost started to cry...

 

[MrPack]

Why is the number of interviews important? If I'm an NFL GM, I want to find that special difference maker, not the re-tread that every GM thinks to bring in because he won't get crucified by the media and fans if he hires him.

Honestly, would you have been happier with Maurice Carthon? He's gotten, by several accounts, three or four interviews.

Like I said, he's hung up on this "most popular candidate" theory, which means absolutely nothing.

 

[packersfan]

You keep playing up to the "most popular candidate" theory here, why?

Because it at least provides us with an indication who is being highly thought of and who is coveted. It's not an automatic guarantee of who will succeed but it provides us with strong clues as to who NFL people believe have the best chance to succeed.

What makes your guys so much better than McCarthy?

I never said any of them were better. However, there were aspects to the top two I mentioned that I personally preferred.

No one knows yet.

Agreed. And I said that.

No one knew Reid either, but you substantiate Reid by saying he was with a good program at the time.

Which he was. And there were stories written before Reid left Green Bay which said his stock was rising among NFL execs and he stood an excellent chance of being a head coach after what proved to be his final season in Green Bay had ended. And that obviously came to pass.

So was Morhninwig before he took the job with Detroit. How did that work out for your theory?

It proves that not every coach is going to succeed. I assumed we all agree that's a given.

I am willing to give this choice the benefit of the doubt - for now.

As am I. I have never said this was a bad hire. What I have said was I'm not impressed with McCarthy's resume.

You don't like McCarthy, we get that.

I have never said that. Please see the sentence above for what I actually have said.

I'm just saying no one knows anything right now about how successful or unsuccessful he will be.

I agree and I have said that as well.

Time will tell. He could be a bust, but he could also be a diamond in the rough.

I agree and have never said otherwise.

 

[packersfan]

I'd hardly call two good players "depite the talent." That's two guys. And a QB who pretty much sucks.

I listed 5 players at the main skill positions who all have good or much better NFL talent. The Saints had a talented offense. That has never been in dispute to the best of my knowledge.

Brooks' problem is he's an uncoachable headcase, and I don't think that can be disputed.

I agree. But that doesn't change the fact he has incredible physical talent.

Again, take a look at the numbers without McCarthy. The reason McCarthy left was because he was hard on Brooks, and Brooks didn't like it. Brooks complained to the staff, and McCarthy decided that was enough.

The numbers this season really are meaningless. McAllister and Horn were hurt and Brooks just imploded. Having watched the Saints when McCarthy was there the one word that jumps out clearly is "frustrating." It had to be frustrating as hell to be a Saints' fan watching that team fail to live up to its talent level, constantly have issues in the Red Zone and woefully mis-use a top-talent RB as was so often the case. Again, I have said there's obviously a possibility that McCarthy will turn out to be a great hire by Thompson. I'm not burying the move. I'm merely saying that McCarthy's credentials are hardly impressive. This isn't the second coming of Mike Holmgren in terms of credentials by any stretch.

To echo another point, I'm also glad Thompson didn't hire a retread like Mooch or Bates due to the fact he's going to be 60 and I don't believe that would've been the right move to make. But given the other more appealing candidates available, McCarthy doesn't seem to stack up.

And if McCarthy was such a great candidate, how come nobody else seemed to want him?

Well, I'm curious who these other more appealing candidates are? Are/were they really any better than McCarthy? I'm having a hard time believing they are.

All of that obviously remains to be seen and will be played out starting next season. My personal No. 1 choice was Sean Payton followed by Ron Rivera. I would've liked Childress over McCarthy as well but the Packers obviously never got a shot at him -- due in large part reportedly to Childress not being sure the Packers really wanted him.

The Packers wanted Childress, and didn't get him. I think they got Childress light.

I'm still wondering why no other team -- and there are obviously a ton of them that need new head coaches -- showed strong interest in McCarthy if he was such a strong candidate.

Why is the number of interviews important? If I'm an NFL GM, I want to find that special difference maker, not the re-tread that every GM thinks to bring in because he won't get crucified by the media and fans if he hires him.

I answered that question above. And I specifically stated that I wanted to see Thompson pursue a coordinator and none of the top candidates in that group are retreads. Steve Mariucci is a retread. Same with Wade Phillips. I'm glad Thompson didn't go that route.

Honestly, would you have been happier with Maurice Carthon? He's gotten, by several accounts, three or four interviews.

Nope. And it's not a question of hiring the guy with the most interviews. It's about hiring the guy you believe is the most qualified. Thompson obviously believes McCarthy is that guy and he obviously could be proven correct.

 

[strykerpks]

Ted Thompson press conference on now....it's a 3 year deal

 

[packersfan]

Why is the number of interviews important? If I'm an NFL GM, I want to find that special difference maker, not the re-tread that every GM thinks to bring in because he won't get crucified by the media and fans if he hires him.

Honestly, would you have been happier with Maurice Carthon? He's gotten, by several accounts, three or four interviews.

Like I said, he's hung up on this "most popular candidate" theory, which means absolutely nothing.

That isn't remotely close to being accurate.

 

[Iron_Far]

You keep playing up to the "most popular candidate" theory here, why?

Because it at least provides us with an indication who is being highly thought of and who is coveted. It's not an automatic guarantee of who will succeed but it provides us with strong clues as to who NFL people believe have the best chance to succeed.

Time will tell. He could be a bust, but he could also be a diamond in the rough.

I agree and have never said otherwise.

Incorrect. It provides the best source of LEAKED and erroneous info fed to press monkeys to your favorite football tidbits website.

 

[KingPrawn]

Getting into this thread a little late, but can somebody explain why all the love for Jim Bates? Why are people so dissappointed in the hiring of McCarthy because they should have hired Bates?

 

[Muahahaha]

Adam Shefter reporting that "One of the reasons that they went for him is that he is very close with Brett Favre, as close as Brett Favre can be with a coach....They speak once a week....And now there are a lot of people around the league who expect Brett Favre to return now because McCarthy is the coach...."Just now on NFL Total Access.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

What a bad hire.  The 9'ers offense was one of the worst in NFL history last year.  Good luck all GB fans.  

So you want to base the hire just on what he did last year?

Why not - they fired just on this year.

If you believe this, you have no clue what you're talking about.

I see. Well I do believe that so perhaps you could help with the clues then. Do you think if Sherman had a winning record this year (for the sixth straight year) he would have still been fired?

 

[MrPack]

Adam Shefter reporting that "One of the reasons that they went for him is that he is very close with Brett Favre, as close as Brett Favre can be with a coach....They speak once a week....And now there are a lot of people around the league who expect Brett Favre to return now because McCarthy is the coach...."

Just now on NFL Total Access.

Adam Shefter They asked McCarthy in the press conference if he keeps in touch with Favre. He replied " I spoke to him last year, that was the last time I spoke to him"

 

[MrPack]

What a bad hire.  The 9'ers offense was one of the worst in NFL history last year.  Good luck all GB fans.  

So you want to base the hire just on what he did last year?

Why not - they fired just on this year.

If you believe this, you have no clue what you're talking about.

I see. Well I do believe that so perhaps you could help with the clues then. Do you think if Sherman had a winning record this year (for the sixth straight year) he would have still been fired?

More than likely not. Depends on the record.You really think they fired him based on one year? Not even remotely close to the truth. Read the Mike Sherman was fired thread for your answers.

Here's a synopsis: He choked in big games, wasn't a good game coach, made poor game decisions. Couldn't win the big game.

Those are your basic reasons. This season was rife with injuries and had no bearing on why he was fired.

 

[Kleck.]

Adam Shefter reporting that "One of the reasons that they went for him is that he is very close with Brett Favre, as close as Brett Favre can be with a coach....They speak once a week....And now there are a lot of people around the league who expect Brett Favre to return now because McCarthy is the coach...."

Just now on NFL Total Access.

Adam Shefter They asked McCarthy in the press conference if he keeps in touch with Favre. He replied " I spoke to him last year, that was the last time I spoke to him"

I was just going to post the same thing.

 

[vitaflo]

Adam Shefter reporting that "One of the reasons that they went for him is that he is very close with Brett Favre, as close as Brett Favre can be with a coach....They speak once a week....And now there are a lot of people around the league who expect Brett Favre to return now because McCarthy is the coach...."

Just now on NFL Total Access.

Adam Shefter They asked McCarthy in the press conference if he keeps in touch with Favre. He replied " I spoke to him last year, that was the last time I spoke to him"

Last year was only two weeks ago.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

Adam Shefter reporting that "One of the reasons that they went for him is that he is very close with Brett Favre, as close as Brett Favre can be with a coach....They speak once a week....And now there are a lot of people around the league who expect Brett Favre to return now because McCarthy is the coach...."

Just now on NFL Total Access.

Horrible hire. How long do you think Brett is going to play? And you're that desperate to have him back next year? I'd be pissed if I was a Packer fan.

 

[uwgb96]

Getting into this thread a little late, but can somebody explain why all the love for Jim Bates? Why are people so dissappointed in the hiring of McCarthy because they should have hired Bates?

Bates did a very nice job with the defense this year. I think the speculation when he was brought in was that if Sherman was let go the job was his for the taking.I'm sure he is very dissapointed he didn't get the job, but I fail to see why it's a forgone conclusion he is going to leave. He's not going to get a HC job, so why not stick around another year and build on what he did this year and maybe be a hot commodity next year?