uffda udfa
10 years ago
http://www.espnwisconsin.com/common/page.php?feed=2&id=15911&is_corp=1 

ESPNWisconsin: There haven’t been a whole lot of instances where you’ve flat-out benched a player. That happened at the end of 2012 with Jeff Saturday, but you tend to give your players a lot of rope to pull themselves up if they’re struggling. Is that a philosophical thing, or are you reluctant to invest a ton of time and practice reps in a guy all offseason and training camp and then pull the plug on him if he plays poorly when the season begins?

McCarthy: You may not flat-out bench somebody, but I think sometimes you … you don’t really play with 11. There’s plenty of instances where you may only play a guy in base instead of sub or vice-versa. Position has a lot to do with it. Your backup has a lot to do with it. That’s a good question. I’ve never thought about it. To me, I trust the evaluation of the coaches. We sit here and they say, ‘Hey, this is who I think should play this week.’ There have been guys benched on special teams a number of times.


---He's NEVER thought about it? This answer is as troubling as his non answer about not being able to beat the elite teams rather only the teams in the NFCN. I'm telling you that is EXACTLY what the goal is...to beat the NFCN teams to win divisional championships to keep Packer fan fat dumb and happy. It works. How and I why I'll never understand.

EDIT: There's a very good piece from Peter King at SI.com regarding our defensive woes...this part is the money statement:

The biggest problem is that type of scheme is not Capers’ forte. If the Packers took a more objective look at their personnel in the offseason, McCarthy might have come to the conclusion that it might better fit a coordinator with a more hybrid scheme. McCarthy and Capers are stuck together now. With few personnel and scheme options available, they’re going to be hard-pressed to get it turned around into a championship-level unit.

---I really liked the fact that Peter King pointed out that Aaron Rodgers covers a "lot of ills". Hmmm. Where have I heard that before? It is so freaking sickening that our fan base is largely clueless so this fraud of a HC and GM tandem remains in place wholly ineffective at directing a ship that has Aaron Rodgers aboard.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


DoddPower
10 years ago

How and I why I'll never understand.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I'll never understand why some fans take the things that the organization says publicly so literally. Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and others all know exactly what they are saying (or not saying) to the media. It's decisive and on purpose, and doesn't necessarily reflect the truth or reality most of the time. The same people that fall in their traps are probably the same ones that continuously fall for fluff political rhetoric, too. Most of the time, it's empty words and nothing else.

uffda udfa
10 years ago

I'll never understand why some fans take the things that the organization says publicly so literally. Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and others all know exactly what they are saying (or not saying) to the media. It's decisive and on purpose, and doesn't necessarily reflect the truth or reality most of the time. The same people that fall in their traps are probably the same ones that continuously fall for fluff political rhetoric, too. Most of the time, it's empty words and nothing else.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



[grin1] So, you believe Mike McCarthy is lying when he said he never thought about it? I don't.

I guess I can understand your spin of that statement because minus that it's indefensible and if you don't like objectivity you'll fight that with everything you have.

We have the wrong people running this thing without any question but you don't believe that.
UserPostedImage
Ted Thompson sits on his hands per former GM: "because they’ve had 25 fricking years of great quarterbacks. Of course it works. Try it without a special quarterback."


DarkaneRules
10 years ago
Looking across the league, McCarthy is still one of my favorite coaches. He's not in my top 5 I don't think, but hey, I'm not the brass. I'll let them figure that out. As it stands, I believe in McCarthy. I got the dude's back.
Circular Arguments: They are a heck of an annoyance
nerdmann
10 years ago

I'll never understand why some fans take the things that the organization says publicly so literally. Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, and others all know exactly what they are saying (or not saying) to the media. It's decisive and on purpose, and doesn't necessarily reflect the truth or reality most of the time. The same people that fall in their traps are probably the same ones that continuously fall for fluff political rhetoric, too. Most of the time, it's empty words and nothing else.

Originally Posted by: DoddPower 



He's good at developing QBs. He developed Aaron and Matt, but wasn't able to bring Brohm or Coleman along. Harrell didn't have the physical attributes.

I think he thinks too much and I disagree with his offensive philosophy.

Here's one thing he said that I do not take seriously:

THE FOUNDATION FOR THE NEW DIRECTION OF THE GREEN BAY PACKERS WILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITH THREE KEY COMPONENTS OF OBTAINING "PACKER PEOPLE," CREATING "STABLE STRUCTURE" AND CONCENTRATING ON "CHARACTER AND CHEMISTRY."

A POSITIVE ENVIRONMENT WILL BE CREATED WITH "LEADERSHIP" THAT KEEPS ITS EYE ON THE TARGET OF ESTABLISHING A CHAMPIONSHIP FOOTBALL TEAM.

THE DIRECTION WILL BE FUELED WITH CONSTANT COMMUNICATION TO ENSURE EVERYONE IS ON BOARD. WE WILL ATTACK THE VOYAGE WITH ENERGY AND ENTHUSIASM TO OVERCOME THE OBSTACLES THAT WE WILL ENCOUNTER.

THIS VISION IS ENHANCED WITH RESOURCES AND TRADITION THAT STANDS IN THE FOREFRONT OF PROFESSIONAL SPORTS ORGANIZATIONS.


“Winning is not a sometime thing, it is an all the time thing. You don't do things right once in a while…you do them right all the time.”
DoddPower
10 years ago

[grin1] So, you believe Mike McCarthy is lying when he said he never thought about it? I don't.

I guess I can understand your spin of that statement because minus that it's indefensible and if you don't like objectivity you'll fight that with everything you have.

We have the wrong people running this thing without any question but you don't believe that.

Originally Posted by: uffda udfa 



I don't necessarily believe he's lying, I just think he rarely says anything of substance to the media. Fluff answers. Ted Thompson does the same thing, as does many NFL coaches and executives. It's just the way it is. Trying to thoroughly analyze things that say is just an exercise in futility, imo.

To answer your question: No, I do not think Ted Thompson or Mike McCarthy truly say what the think to the media. It has nothing to do with objectivity. Even if he was saying exactly what you or I wanted him to say, I would say the same thing. It's mostly rhetoric. Have fun analyzing every word they say though to fit your subjective narrative.
DoddPower
10 years ago

He's good at developing QBs. He developed Aaron and Matt, but wasn't able to bring Brohm or Coleman along. Harrell didn't have the physical attributes.

I think he thinks too much and I disagree with his offensive philosophy.

Here's one thing he said that I do not take seriously:

Originally Posted by: nerdmann 



I don't disagree with anything you are saying. I think he's a good coach, but not a great coach. I would like a bit more of a hard-ass. But the Packers offense will be OK. My biggest problem with him is keeping the likes of Dom Capers around. That's borderline inexcusable, imo.
Zero2Cool
10 years ago
Mike McCarthy is not good at developing QB's, if that were true, one of the previous QB's would have had success elsewhere. McCarthy is good at creating an offensive that QB's can succeed in.

I believe in McCarthy as a Coach OR as Play Caller, not as both.
UserPostedImage
Mucky Tundra
10 years ago

Mike McCarthy is not good at developing QB's, if that were true, one of the previous QB's would have had success elsewhere. McCarthy is good at creating an offensive that QB's can succeed in.

I believe in McCarthy as a Coach OR as Play Caller, not as both.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 



Definitely agree with the bolded part. McCarthy has never struck me as a xs and os genius who can micromanage the game like Belichick but I'm not sure that many other coaches could have been as successful with the talent given him and the amount of young guys he's had to coach. But that might be the problem now-the core guys are no longer younger players and his message+approach needs to be re-tuned but at that point I don't think he's capable. I thought he might have been last season after his reaction to the loss vs the Eagles but he quickly reverted back. I stated in the chat after the 49ers loss that McCarthy should be in the hot seat and I still believe that.
“Nah. I like having the island. It’s pretty cool...not too many visitors”
UserPostedImage
"I’ve got it." -Aaron Rodgers
Tezzy
10 years ago
I believe in McCarthy because he has won. I am ready to reevaluate McCarthy as the coach after each season here on out.
On top of every beard grows a man.
"The Bears are shell-shocked... and it's breaking my heart."
Fan Shout
packerfanoutwest (1h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath
packerfanoutwest (1h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.
packerfanoutwest (1h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed
Zero2Cool (4h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them
Zero2Cool (4h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?
bboystyle (4h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner
Zero2Cool (4h) : Ahh, ok.
bboystyle (4h) : yes due to tie breaker
Zero2Cool (4h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.
Zero2Cool (4h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?
bboystyle (4h) : Minny isnt going to lose out so 5th seed is out of the equation. We are playing for the 6th or 7th seed which makes no difference
Mucky Tundra (5h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network
beast (5h) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th
beast (5h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly
Zero2Cool (5h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.
bboystyle (5h) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed
Mucky Tundra (6h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv
Zero2Cool (6h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno
beast (6h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?
packerfanoutwest (6h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans
Zero2Cool (7h) : I see what you did there Mucky
Zero2Cool (7h) : dammit. 3:25pm
Zero2Cool (7h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm
Mucky Tundra (7h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground
Mucky Tundra (7h) : Yeah baby!
Zero2Cool (8h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah
Zero2Cool (9h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.
beast (9h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue
Zero2Cool (10h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's
Zero2Cool (10h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.
packerfanoutwest (10h) : ok I stand corrected
Zero2Cool (10h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th
Zero2Cool (10h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?
beast (10h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.
beast (10h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out
Zero2Cool (10h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.
beast (10h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games
beast (10h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality
beast (10h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs
Zero2Cool (10h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread
Zero2Cool (10h) : I literally just said it.
packerfanoutwest (10h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't
Zero2Cool (10h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.
Zero2Cool (10h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.
packerfanoutwest (10h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what
Zero2Cool (10h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.
packerfanoutwest (10h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in
packerfanoutwest (10h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker
packerfanoutwest (11h) : if bucs win out they win their division
beast (11h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us
Please sign in to use Fan Shout
2024 Packers Schedule
Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
Eagles
Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
COLTS
Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
Titans
Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
VIKINGS
Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
Rams
Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
CARDINALS
Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
TEXANS
Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
Jaguars
Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
LIONS
Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
Bears
Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
49ERS
Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
DOLPHINS
Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
Lions
Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
Seahawks
Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
SAINTS
Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
Vikings
Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM
BEARS
Recent Topics
3h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

4h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

9h / Random Babble / Martha Careful

22-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

19-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

19-Dec / Random Babble / Zero2Cool

18-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

17-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / wpr

17-Dec / Featured Content / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

16-Dec / Feedback, Suggestions and Issues / Mucky Tundra

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

16-Dec / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

Copyright © 2006 - 2024 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.