Someone would still have to lose even if they showed up for a full 60 minutes As for 😄
As for what makes a bad play call most of the time its whether the play works or not. A first down run for no gain is a bad call and predictable. A first down run that gains 6 yards is a good call. A second down run that gets stuffed for a 3 yard loss is a bad call and predictable. A second down run that gains 4 yards and a first down is a good call. A third and 1 pass that gets a TD is a good call that mixes things up a third and 1 pass that is intercepted is a bad call and abandoning the run.
Obviously there is a little more to it than that but what it really comes down to is execution on the field by the players and perception off the field by the fans. Yes, there are times when a particular play may not have been the best one to call but it still comes down to whether or not it works. No coach will call plays he doesn't think will work.
Predictable play calling is a bit different. The more predictable you are the less likelihood the play will succeed and I can see that in Mike McCarthy a quite a bit. The thing is, if you have the talent being predictable is not always bad.
Originally Posted by: sschind
The Packers are the ONLY team that doesn't play a full 60 minutes, though :)
I'm pretty sure we're on the same page here so I'm just adding to, rather than refuting your points.
Rodgers audibles at the line, which makes it even tougher for us to know and thus critique what M.M. called. Furthermore, what is "predictable." In the most simplistic sense there's a 50-50 guess of what you'll do (run v. pass) but there is a lot more to a play than that - the routes you run, which side you run to, how you line up against the defense, I could go on, but you get my point.
As for your final point, didn't Lombardi once say that you should be able to tell the defense what play you're going to run and still gain at least 3 yards each time?