I like Jay, but seems like we're kind of screwed from his point of view. What do you think about Jay's comments? Ignore Colin, he's looking for an angle.

---

Can we get a transcript?

---

I agree.

I'm not as worried about what has already gone down. My primary concern is what is going to happen going forward.

---

I don't know this, but I've always thought Jay Glazer has seemed to have a pretty good in with someone high in the Packers stuff. Like when there was something to be secretly reported by the Packers insiders... some how Glazer has come up with out of nowhere and sorta promoted Pro-Packers stuff randomly. I don't have an example in mind as it's been a while... but for some reason I've thought for a while it might be MM (as usually it was more coaching stuff, not scouting stuff).

But the fact that Glazer said he was texting with MM right after, makes me feel they have more credibility with that thought... so I wonder if Glazer and MM might be somewhat friends.


That being said, Glazer is absolutely right, that based on normal NFL standards, the Packers handled MM firing poorly.... as Glazer said, other top coaches were taken to the side and told we're going in a different direction, how do you want to handle the break... instead of just firing them. And I've read a stat (I have no idea if true or not) but the stat said MM is only the 2nd Super Bowl winning head coach to ever be fired mid-season (I assume that means by the team they won the Super Bowl with).

So yeah, it seems like the Packers poorly handled the firing. But I don't think that's gonna stop people from wanting the job. I think looking into the future of what they have to work with, will be a much bigger factor. Such as, do they like what they're heard about Murphy/Gute/Packers players because surely they're heard much more back channel stuff as Glazer said, than we would ever. Though this firing wouldn't help... but the future they would be in would be much more important... like how much control do they get... and are they forced to keep Pettine? (though they worked fine with the Bears head coaching search).


Though it's interesting Glazer basically said, the Packers excuse for firing MM is to get started on their next search is total BS.... I think he might have a great point there... UNLESS the Packers want to seriously consider Joe Philbin.



But going back to their list of things head coaches look for...
1) Owner/Stability (I might want to add GM in there too)
2) Franchise QB
3) Overall Roster

Murphy is a bit of a question mark as far as acting owner, as he's fairly new. But the Packers stability had been great... one of the teams with the least amount of head coaching turn overs. While they were talking long term with QBs... as a new head coach, you're only sure you're gonna get what 2-4 years? I think Rodgers will be able to play 2-4 more years, and Packers QBs have been fairly stable in recent decades. Overall Roster... that one is iffy, because you can look at it from multiple view points.


But overall I think the Packers would rank extremely high on the stability factors of #1 and #2... which should in theory put them in a good spot for looking for available head coaches... though like I've said, if we were gonna change, I would of changed a couple of years ago because I thought they were a lot more clearly better options that have gone elsewhere (Eagles, 49ers, Rams, Bears all got guys I thought would be very good head coaches) and now I'm not nearly as sure... though I think the OCs for the Titans, Saints and Chiefs should all be watched.

---

I still don't get all the angst over the mid season firing. If you've decided to move on from a coach how is it more respectful to make him put in all the work and time to coach 3 or 4 more meaningless games while having to answer questions every week about if they think they'll get fired when the decision has already been made.

I also find it funny how Glazer is talking about showing respect while suggesting going behind the coaches back (back channels) to conduct a search while he's still coaching the team is somehow more respectful???

So a prospective head coach looks at the situation and decides "If I go to GB and only win 4 games by week 13 I might lose my job On the other hand if I go to Cleveland and only win 4 games by year 3 I might lose my job. I think I'll go to Cleveland.

I want to argue with you that the context matters in this situation but then I think of what happened to Ray Rhodes.

---

I think they handled the firing in an exemplary fashion. They did MM a favor by doing it now versus the end of the year.


It’s an advantage to the team because they are the first in line to look.

Also, if a prospective coach, you know that there is an opening in Green Bay versus NOT knowing and you can have your people begin to make inquiries...I will bet they are getting calls already.

They are smart enough not to broadcast if, when, and from whom inquiries have been made.

---

Yeah, if your scared of potential failure that's the right way to think... but let's be honest, if they were scared of potential failure then they wouldn't be seeking a head coach job... so I strongly doubt prospect head coaches have the same mindset that you're using... as they ones scared are staying put...

Every so often we hear a player say they think they're the best, and we just laugh because it's clear they're not the best... high level coaching is the same ... they're not scared to gamble on themselves (even when they should be).


In the last 30 years, the Packers have had 6 head coaches (or 5 if you don't count temp Joe Philbin) In the last 10 years, the Browns have had 6 head coaches (or 5 if you don't count temp Greg Williams).

So with the Packers you have the potential to possibly stay 3 times longer.

Also the Browns drafted QB Johnny Football AND FORCED the coaches to play them, even though the coaches didn't want too, which is why Kyle Shanahan left after a single since gle because they weren't letting the coaches decide who plays, and that might be why Mike Pettine never wants to be head coach again

---

For the record I was trying to make a joke. I think being the head coach of the Packers would be a very attractive position for almost any prospective candidate.

I don't think the next GB coach has to worry about being fired in the middle of the season even if he only has 4 wins by week 13. It was a cumulative occurrence and I don't think MM was fired because of that.

The thing is most people realize and probably agree that it was time for the Packers to move on from McCarthy and they don't have a problem with the firing they just don't like the way it was done. Some thought they should have waited until the end of the season and let Mike decide how to approach it. Some don't even have a problem with the middle of the season thing they just thought they should have waited until Monday to do it.

I felt right from the start of the season that if they had a bad season he would be gone but I felt they would wait until the season was over. For many of the reasons Glazer pointed out I didn't see any benefit from doing it midseason. In fact I was so sure they would wait I didn't stop to think of the potential fallout if they didn't. Honestly, if I were McCarthy I think I'd prefer it this way. The uncertainty is gone now, he has an extra 4 weeks paid vacation and he can spend his time deciding on what he wants to do. He can start researching potential landing spots (watching game film of Baker Mayfield and developing a plan for him if the Browns should come calling for example) I don't think McCarthy lost anything in this except maybe a bit of pride. On the other hand potential employers may question his abilities because he was so bad the Packers didn't even let him finish out the year. However, I don't think that will be an issue. MM has his track record and it will stand on its own. The first 13 weeks are what GM's and owners are going to remember about McCarthy's 2018 season and not the fact that he didn't get to finish the last 4.

For the Packers I think it was a bit of a knee jerk reaction to a bad game. Murphy probably had a threshold and it was reached and he pulled the trigger. What do they gain from it? Unless Joe Philbin is a serious candidate for the HC spot they gain very little. If he is they gain the advantage of a 4 game pre season so to speak. If he is just a placeholder they risked alienating legitimate potential candidates. Just like so many people are down on McDaniels for bailing on the Colts some candidates may be down on the Packers for bailing on McCarthy the way they did.

I do think Murphty is probably second guessing himself right now for the way he handled it because of the fallout but I think in the long run it won't make any difference.