As a High School Offensive Coordinator myself, I feel that there is a lot of unfair criticism coming at McCarthy and this offense. ( I know that HS and the Pro Game are two Totally different levels - However Coaching Philosophy and techniques often Parallel ) And there is a huge factor on why McCarthy scripts his first 17 plays, but we'll get to that later.

As posted above, Scripting your first 10, 12, 15, or 17 plays often has many disadvantages and advantages. I read through some of the posts and most of you hit on some of these advantages, but I wanted to share my take on it. Mainly it avoids mental errors from your players, because usually those scripted plays are plays that your players preform the best on, they might be the best plays in your playbook or the worst. (i.e. they are more comfortable with that play for whatever reason)

Also, it keeps the defense totally off balance because since the play is scripted, it might be 3rd and 7, a clear passing situation, and the play on the script could be either a designed run, a screen, draw, or pass. Or it could be 1st and 5 and at that point in your script you have a 4 All Go (4 Verticals) called. It all depends on how you design your script through your week of practice and film breakdown.

Most of the time I script my first 10 based on two factors -
What plays are our players most comfortable with?
Which plays are designed to take advantage of the schemes the opposing defense tends to lean towards (what fronts do they like to run, how aggressive are they in their blitzing, which coverages do they use the most)

Once again I know the level I coach on and the level McCarthy is on are on two totally different levels, I am sure he uses somewhat of the same way of thinking while scripting. Some coaches will script others tend to disagree with it, it all comes back to how they were brought up as coaches and their overall personality type.

The biggest reason that the Packers need to script their first 17 is because of our inability to run the ball. I have read many things on our lack of being able to run the football. Which is a fair criticism, however the blame is now being put on McCarthy. What I mean by this is, is that when most people say "run the football" they mean power offense like you see the Steelers, Ravens, and Chiefs run it (There are more teams that do this well I just cant pull any off the top of my head right now). In past years we have been able to do this with some effectiveness. However with the loss of Grant we will never achieve this until our depth at the Running back position is addressed. Brandon Jackson, James Starks are not every down backs, at least from what I have seen from them.
I have heard people say "well its the coaches job to get his players ready and execute the play." This is true, but when you do not have the personnel to effectively do that, why would you call that play in a game? I know for a fact that if the coach isn't confident about it during practice, no matter what he says on NFL network or his Pressers, during the game hes not going to come out in a double tight I formation and try to pound it out.
- yes we have done this in the past couple games, especially the lions, but rarely did we see 'power' offense, a lot of draws, screens, play action passes and stretch plays were called.

This reason, our inability to run the ball effectively, goes back to scripting your first 17 plays. Why? Because when your offense is knowingly unable to run the ball at will, you have to use every tool available for you to get an advantage on the opposing defense. While they are some draw backs to scripting, the advantages outweigh the losses in my eyes.

---

If it was not the point of this thread to bash McCarthy for scripting plays, why is the thread called "Why it's ridiculous to script your first 17 plays" and why is most of the initial post devoted to bashing McCarthy for scripting the first 17 plays? Oh, I get it, it's just for effect, like the Cullen Jenkins on IR thread a couple weeks ago.

As to your point about the same complaints being made against McCarthy for years: There will always be plenty of internet geniuses around to bash an offensive coordinator's play-calling. You could probably find the same litany of complaints for any offensive coordinator for as long as he's been in the league. I especially love the one about the importance of getting favorable down-and-distance--as if the offensive coordinator chooses how many yards the offense is going to gain on a play, and it's just a matter of choosing to gain more yards. Another guy complains that the offense does not dictate enough to opposing defenses, a criticism which contradicts all of the complaints about scripting plays. He could've saved everyone a lot of time by just saying that the offense needs to play better, or better yet, saying nothing at all.

I think the offense's main problems this year have been caused by injuries (mostly Grant and Finley, but Donald Driver as well) and poor blocking by the offensive line. The pass blocking solidified eventually, at least for awhile, but the run blocking has never gotten on track, and I don't think it would be very effective even if we had Grant, though it would probably not be as bad. Thompson and McCarthy together can be criticized for that, as it seems to be a product of their overall approach to offensive line play--too many finesse guys, and a lot of mid-round OL draft picks that have not panned out ( Spitz, Barbre, and Giacomini, at least, not to mention the second rounder Darryn Colledge).

My one pet peeve with McCarthy's play-calling this season has been the downfield throws on third and short (and even fourth and short). I don't mind that once in awhile, but he's done it too many times with too little success. I think some of the reason for that has been Donald Driver's drop in performance due to injury. He was the best third-and-short guy we had. But Jennings, Jones, and Nelson should be able to pick up most of the slack, and they've either failed to do that or they have not been given the chance.

---

The thread title is a direct quote of the original thread title from a New Orleans Saints fan forum. The point of that thread was to bash McCarthy for his inflexibility in reacting to play-by-play changes in game situations as Saints' offensive coordinator in the 2002 season. I was quoting the posts to point out that many of the complaints we have about McCarthy have been leveled against him for years by fans of other teams for which he worked. Fans in that thread were saying almost word-for-word the same things we've been saying this year.

Would you have preferred that I simply culled out the specific phrases that supported my position, instead of providing the context in which they were placed? I provided in the original post my commentary indicating exactly what my point in posting these quotes was. I think the subtitle I placed on this thread was also indicative of the point I was trying to make. The fact that the thread was about scripting plays was incidental.

I do agree with you that there will always be armchair quarterbacks, and it's not like the fans I quoted have any greater level of expertise than anyone else. Again, my main point was that fans have reacted to McCarthy's system in similar ways ever since he was an OC for the Saints. That doesn't mean it's wrong or that his system is bad, just that the same patterns seem to re-emerge year after year.

---

My feeling is that McCarthy wouldn't need to script plays if his bleeping playbook wasn't so damn complicated and if he weren't so damn captivated by finessing and tricking the other team.

I'd rather be a running team, everyone knows that. But, okay, we're a passing team. I get that. But you don't have to be a finesse passing team. You can have a take-no-prisoners attitude, "make them stop us" approach.

Tell your team, "look". We're the GB effing Packers. The only difference between the Lombardi packers and the McCarthy packers is that they shoved the ball down the other guys throat with the sweep, three yards, and a cloud of dust; whereas we shove it down their throat with the slant and five wides or whatever.

"Pass" doesn't have to mean "finesse" just because that's what Bill "No One's More Overrated Than Me" Walsh said.

You're a Pittsburgh working class boy, Mike.

You don't need to finesse the likes of Belichek or Smith or Coughlin. You just gotta beat the crap out them.

Tell your OL that they're job is to be the meanest MFs that ever protected a passer, remind your WRs that all non-Packer DBs are frigging pansies who hate having to tackle.

Scripting then is simple:
1. Beat the crap out of the other guy. Complete pass.
2. Beat the crap out of the other guy. Complete pass.
3. Repeat until you score.
4. Repeat.

---

Okay, from now on I will remember to ignore your thread titles and focus on the subtitles, and I will be prepared for lengthy posts that are 3/4 "context" before finally getting to the point.

So here's what you said at the end of the initial post:

"Slow starts to games . . . too many penalties . . . unimaginative playcalling . . . absence of screens . . . quarterback getting killed . . .

Sound familiar?

These quotes date from 2002, by the way.

I guess Mike McCarthy doesn't learn."

A couple of these complaints are completely generic: "unimaginative playcalling" and "too many penalties." What team's fans don't accuse their OC of unimaginative playcalling? Too many penalties is another common complaint of all fans, and I don't know if this one is true of McCarthy's offenses in Green Bay anyway. Last year it was a problem for the team as a whole, though it seemed like it was more on the defense. This year the penalties haven't been a major problem relative to other teams.

The other three criticisms have some merit, I think. It's just that for me this is not enough to raise a red flag about Mike McCarthy not learning from his mistakes. Like every coach, he does have some clear tendencies. One of them is throwing the ball downfield, hence when his offense is not clicking the QB is going to take a lot of hits. And he doesn't run a lot of screens. I would like to see a few more of those myself.

Slow starts to games is the criticism here that has the most merit, I think. I often wonder if McCarthy makes things overly complex. This could also explain slow starts to seasons. It could be taking his players awhile to get into a rhythm.

On the minus side of your argument, at least one of those fans complained about McCarthy running the ball too much, which runs counter to what is said about McCarthy now regarding the running game.

---

"Slow starts to games . . . too many penalties . . . unimaginative playcalling . . . absence of screens . . . quarterback getting killed . . ."

Just from my experience.. Slow starts to games is on the players not the playcaller, OC, or Head Coach. Ive gone into far too many games with the mind set of 'starting fast' with our best, most aggressive play calls, and it has totally backed fired, either the play didnt work, or we didnt execute. Usually when a team 'starts out slow' they are either a.) not a very good team, or b.) the players came out FLAT, which usually is what I have seen from the Packers.

And NonstopDrivel, I understand the context of your post, I just thought I might be able to add a little insight to maybe what is going through McCarthy's head, since I have somewhat/very little of an experience of the things he goes through.

---

But if a team comes out flat more often than they should, given their talent level, isn't that on the coach, to at least some extent? Coaches are in charge of having their players mentally prepared for games.

---