McCarthy speaks· Page 2

Wade
Veteran Member

15 years ago

Nice to know HC and assistants may not be on same page with respect to one of the three OL people are most optimistic about.

:(

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

DanJustDan29
Registered

15 years ago

#12

Tim Tebow = Packers next Running Back.*

*hahaha jk

Teamwork is what the Green Bay Packers were all about. They didn't do it for individual glory. They did it because they loved one another. -Vince Lombardi

TheEngineer
Registered

15 years ago

#13

Nice to know HC and assistants may not be on same page with respect to one of the three OL people are most optimistic about.

:(

"Wade" wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking Wade. They still seem to be indecisive in regards to how to fix our OL.

blank

RaiderPride
Senior Member

15 years ago

#14

Nice to know HC and assistants may not be on same page with respect to one of the three OL people are most optimistic about.

:(

"TheEngineer" wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking Wade. They still seem to be indecisive in regards to how to fix our OL.

"Wade" wrote:

I love it.

There better well be more than one person who has a voice, and can voice that opinion during the off season. That tells me there is no dictatorship in the coaching staff of my Green Bay Packers.

By the time Camp is closing.. They will all be united on the task, and will have known that their voice was heard. That is called positive management.

""People Will Probably Never Remember What You Said, And May Never Remember What You Did. However, People Will Always Remember How You Made Them Feel."

Wade
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#15

Nice to know HC and assistants may not be on same page with respect to one of the three OL people are most optimistic about.

:(

"RaiderPride" wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking Wade. They still seem to be indecisive in regards to how to fix our OL.

"TheEngineer" wrote:

"Wade" wrote:

I must respectfully disagree.

This is not year one of the McCarthy era. This is coming up on year five. This is not year two of the Thompson era. This is coming up on year six.

This is not a disagreement about the backup of an offensive line without substantial questions.

This is a disagreement about the best place to put the person who is arguably, right now, the third best offensive lineman on the roster. And even if one believes not just Sitton and Wells are better but that Clifton and Tauscher are as well, the way people are talking about Lang and his "technique and attitude and potential", five years into McCarthy's tenure, he and his coaches should not be having this kind of disagreement.

What is good management in year one or year two is evidence of managerial failure in year five.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

Stevetarded
Registered

15 years ago

#16

Nice to know HC and assistants may not be on same page with respect to one of the three OL people are most optimistic about.

:(

"Wade" wrote:

Exactly what I was thinking Wade. They still seem to be indecisive in regards to how to fix our OL.

"RaiderPride" wrote:

"TheEngineer" wrote:

"Wade" wrote:

I don't think the issue is "where is he best at", I think it's "where is he best at for the team?" I think they believe Lang has the most potential at the G position but could still be a good RT. The problem is we have 2 LGs and 1 old RT with no real back up. So you either put him at his best position (LG) and have no back up for either tackle or you keep him at RT where he will be ready to back up and eventually overtake Tauscher while also serving as emergency LT.

I think the draft will sort out a lot of this but I don't really see it as a big issue at the moment.

blank

Wade
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#17

But my point is that we ought not to have to ask "what's the best for the team" in this particular way this far into McCarthy's tenure and Thompson's tenure. Four+ years in we should not be in the position where you have "2 LGS and 1 old RT with no real back up".

That we are says something, and IMO not something positive, about the quality of MM's and TT's decisionmaking over those 4 or 5 years.

Given that we are in this position, sure, it makes sense to be going back and forth within the staff.

But we shouldn't be in this position.

And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)

doddpower
Veteran Member

15 years ago

#18

But my point is that we ought not to have to ask "what's the best for the team" in this particular way this far into McCarthy's tenure and Thompson's tenure. Four+ years in we should not be in the position where you have "2 LGS and 1 old RT with no real back up".

That we are says something, and IMO not something positive, about the quality of Mike McCarthy's and Ted Thompson's decisionmaking over those 4 or 5 years.

Given that we are in this position, sure, it makes sense to be going back and forth within the staff.

But we shouldn't be in this position.

"Wade" wrote:

I don't think it's nearly as big of a deal as you do. It's EARLY offseason and there's going to be debate and differing opinions about players especially young ones. Every team has some position they need to address, ours just happens to be the Oline. Is there a team that is just perfect top to bottom? Perhaps occasionally, but there is only one champion each year. That doesn't mean that the other 31 teams are no good.

I agree that the situation could be better, no doubt. But none of us have ANY clue what's going to happen between here and week 1. A stud player could fall to us somewhere along with other picks / free agents / trades and the situation could be largely resolved.

There will ALWAYS be some position that could be much better. Ours just happens to be offensive line and perhaps secondary, both of which should be much better this year. It's not about how things look right now it's how things look during the season and I'm not as concerned about the Oline as many are. We just need a solid draft.

Stevetarded
Registered

15 years ago

#19

But my point is that we ought not to have to ask "what's the best for the team" in this particular way this far into McCarthy's tenure and Thompson's tenure. Four+ years in we should not be in the position where you have "2 LGS and 1 old RT with no real back up".

That we are says something, and IMO not something positive, about the quality of Mike McCarthy's and Ted Thompson's decisionmaking over those 4 or 5 years.

Given that we are in this position, sure, it makes sense to be going back and forth within the staff.

But we shouldn't be in this position.

"Wade" wrote:

We aren't in that position, with Lang we either have a very young starter at LG and no back up RT or we have a back up and future starter at RT while there is a competition at LG between 2 starters. Not both.

blank

zombieslayer
Registered

15 years ago

#20

Let's not forget that in the last 7 games, Aaron got sacked 10 times. So most of the sacks were from the Cows game and earlier.

The OL stats are deceptive. The big IF is which OL will we see? Will we see the OL in the last 7 regular season games, or the first 9?

My concerns are with depth. I don't think both of our OTs will last 19 games this year.

As fans, all we can do is hope Ted Thompson & company will address our 2 major issues. Dodd says it's OL and the secondary. I respectfully disagree. I think it's OL and pass rush. Our secondary took a hit when Harris went down. Williams is on the way up. Woody proved he hasn't lost a step. Collins is a Pro Bowler. Bigby is not as bad as people make him out to be.

Depth in the secondary will be addressed. You can bet on it.

I'd like to see someone who can generate more pressure besides CM3. This is a combination of personnel and us sometimes lacking the aggression it takes to take the opposing QB down.

And to the reporters, is it possible to give an injury without mentioning Tebow? We're not going to get him so why waste a question on him.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

Zero2Cool (3h) : Lions shopping Jameson Williams?

packerfanoutwest (11h) : Packers General Manager Brian Gutekunst says Green Bay’s roster can win, even without adding anyone in the draft.

Zero2Cool (11h) : It's a poor design. New site has SignalR like our gameday chat

wpr (12h) : Ah today's Shout was very quick to post.

wpr (12h) : now 3

Zero2Cool (13h) : Who? What?

beast (21h) : What is he supposed to say? He doesn't want players currently on the team?

Martha Careful (21-Apr) : meh

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : Sounds like Walker and Wyatt will be with Packers for beyond 2026

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : It's so awesome.

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : new site fan shout post fast

wpr (21-Apr) : Slow posting in Fan shout.

wpr (21-Apr) : Only 4

Zero2Cool (21-Apr) : If only we had a topic to read about and discuss it. That's something new website must have!!!

dfosterf (21-Apr) : Justice Musqueda over at Acme Packing put up an excellent synopsis of the Packers 1st round options this am

wpr (19-Apr) : 5 days

beast (18-Apr) : 6 days

wpr (17-Apr) : 7 days

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : sounds like Packers don't get good compensation, Jaire staying

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Nobody coming up with a keep, but at x amount

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Trade, cut or keep

dfosterf (16-Apr) : that from Jaire

dfosterf (16-Apr) : My guess is the Packers floated the concept of a reworked contract via his agent and agent got a f'

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Yes, and that is why I think Rob worded it how he did. Rather than say "agent"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Same laws apply. Agent must present such an offer to Jaire. Cannot accept or reject without presenting it

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : I'm thinking that is why Rob worded it how he did.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The Packers can certainly still make the offer to the agent

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Laws of agency and definition of fiduciary responsibility

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Jaire is open to a reduced contract without Jaire's permission

dfosterf (16-Apr) : The agent would arguably violate the law if he were to tell the Packers

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : That someone ... likely the agent.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : So, Jaire has not been offered nor rejected a pay reduction, but someone says he'd decline.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovksy says t was direct communication with someone familiar with Jaire’s line of thinking at that moment.

Zero2Cool (16-Apr) : Demovsky just replied to me a bit ago. Jaire hasn't said it.

dfosterf (16-Apr) : Of course, that depends on the definition of "we"

dfosterf (16-Apr) : We have been told that they haven't because he wouldn't accept it. I submit we don't know that

dfosterf (16-Apr) : What is the downside in making a calculated reduced offer to Jaire?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers are receiving interest in Jaire Alexander but a trade is not imminent

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Jalen Ramsey wants to be traded. He's never happy is he?

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : two 1sts in 2022 and two 2nd's in 2023 and 2024

Zero2Cool (15-Apr) : Packers had fortunate last three drafts.

dfosterf (15-Apr) : I may have to move

dfosterf (15-Apr) : My wife just told the ancient Japanese sushi dude not enough rice under his fish

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I think a dozen is what I need

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Go fund me for this purpose just might work. A dozen nurses show up at 1265 to provide mental health assistance.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Maybe send a crew of Angels to the Packers draft room on draft day.

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : I am the Angel that gets visited.

dfosterf (14-Apr) : Visiting Angels has a pretty good reputation

Zero2Cool (14-Apr) : what

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

25 - 27

Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM

BEARS

22 - 24