Winning cures everything.

---

Does it? I don't trust Mike McCarthy's decision making any more now after the Cowboys victory than I did after the loss to the Buccaneers.

---

Thank God every player on the Packers does not have your mental fortitude.

Thank God that the players, who were on the field all last week in practice.... Sitting through preparation film meetings.... Instructed on focus, and priority going into the Dallas game did not share your opinion.

If they did... they would have never been prepared, because they did not believe they could ever achieve.

However, thankfully the Packer Players were not on board with your thoughts Nonstop.... In fact they believed, and rewarded that belief by presenting their HEAD COACH with THE GAME BALL LAST SUNDAY..

But the hell with that thought. What the hell do the players know? It is not like they are posting on a forum, and as informed and wise as we are all.

---

I slow clap you, sir. I slow clap you.

Nonstop -- What I'm about to say I've said enough to warrant a suspicion that I have a man crush on you, but you are an obvious intelligent person. Give me more years on this planet (so far I've only got 22) and I think [hope] I'm neck and neck with you. To sum it up -- I think you are an obviously intelligent person -- seem to be a good analytical mind, good writer, and quick witted. Which is why it is very difficult for me to continue to see you look McCarthy's way for criticism.

I think far too many claims about his playcalling have gone largely unsubstantiated. The issue of short passes, for instance, has yet to be substantiated by any significant game film or statistics. McCarthy's playcalling featured a wide array of short passes against Dallas. Statistically we faired worse against the 'Girls than the Vikings (sans sacks). This "throwing downfield too much" or "spreading it out/getting away from the west-coast offense's roots" claim people are throwing around always seems to forget the production. There's a lot of yards gained by this offense so far. Nearly every flaw chink in the armor is connected to poor offensive line play and not inept playcalling. People knock the draw play -- I say how do you call plays on 3rd and 22? People knock the draw play YET it gives us the option to run from shotgun at the three yard line (Tampa Bay game; result? touchdown). People say we don't run the slant ENOUGH yet we run it all the time.

You can cherry pick a particular drive in a particular game -- but in general I'm quite confident that you'll find playcalling to be the least of our worries.

I really am onboard with the criticisms of McCarthy regarding continued penalty issues -- we have too many of them and regardless of the coaches role in their frequency the bottom line is they need to stop. What I'm absolutely NOT prepared to do is blame our lack of success on playcalling. This seems to be a major beef with you. Help me understand it. I'm basing my opinion off what I see. I don't imagine a mind like yours operates any differently. So what's our disconnect here?

---

---

One win against a good cowboys team does not a season make.

But it sure makes you feel happier.

As a fan I absolutely hate losing. I am on a downer until Wednesday.

Then I start to think about the next game and try to put a positive light on things.

It is just a natural instinct (and probably a knee jerk reaction to losing) to call out who you feel is to blame.

This team has so much talent it was just unbelievable that we should lose to the then winless Buccs, that the fans wanted something done and vented their feelings.

But as they say "Any given Sunday"

---

Right now, anyone calling for coaching changes is going to be sorely disappointed. No one on the Packers staff is going to be fired before the end of the season. Even though Campen probably deserves it, he'll still probably be here for the rest of the season.

The Packers finally have a bit of momentum after a tough, grind it out victory. People can site the Cowboys were banged up in this game, but we were missing a few key pieces too. Just like in '07 when we were missing KGB and Woodson for that game against the Cowboys.

It's one week at a time. SF is a very beatable team. They needed 5 INTs against Cutler to pull that one out. The Packers need to do a good job of containing Gore and let Smith try to beat them through the air. You know you'll see plenty of Woodson on Davis, so the defense should be able to do their part. No reason we shouldn't be able to win this game. If the Packers can keep the play up like they had against the Cowboys, 10-6 and a Wild Card is definitely doable.

---

I say there is ample evidence to be highly critical of Mike McCarthy.

Of course I want him to succeed, and I truly believe he does many things right.

I'm with Non on this one. I don't recall if Non is advocating any kind of coaching change mid-season--I don't think so--if he is, we are parting company on that one.

The players handing Mike a game ball is a good thing, of course. I don't think anyone has ever doubted Mike's "X's and o's" abilities. Some of us have some serious reservations about which "x's and o" decisions he makes as the situation unfolds.

I think that fans do that with every head coach in this league, at least at times.

I don't like the way Mike goes about the business of inspiration.

That's right, I am critical of his (to me) lack of inspirational skills. If he talks to his players the way he talks to (us), well, the player will no doubt come away with the how to do something, but just might miss out on the why. The penalties, the missed assignments, all those mental errors...

I was reading a post game blog from another site the other day. Just as Pack93z likes to concentrate on the DL and linebacker play as a game goes on, this blogger did something a little bit different than the traditional watching of the whole picture that most of us do.

He was at the game. He watched all the principals subsequent to a penalty. The offending player, the position coach, and of course Mike.

No one ever said shit to anyone after those penalties...not once. This on a team that was getting BOO'd for those penalties by it's own fans, for very good reasons.

Maybe there is a carryover bunker mentality in that locker room, and maybe they have a cohesiveness borne from the fiasco or something..this is possible, and the presentation of that game ball is evidence that the players like and respect Mike. I don't think that was ever in doubt.

He can love those guys (which I think he does) and they can love him (which I think they do) but when you are trying to lead a group of young millionaires into (the sports equivalent of) battle, a nice healthy dose of fear instilled into those people is almost a requirement. I read Winston Moss' interview on the JSOnline this week. It was refreshing, because he was quite candid about the fact that several (he named 'em, too) players were put on notice that their jobs were on the line. This is about the first time I can recall reading something like that.

Those same players are the same ones that we are now praising for their stellar play this week.

Imagine that.

So I'm agreeing with Non, but with a completely different set of "requirements" as to what I feel is lacking from Mike.

He is (overall) a very good coach in a technical sense.

His leadership skills are too persuasive in nature (this is a legitimate methodology for leadership--"persuasive") and not authoritarian enough in nature. ("authoritarian" is the flip-side of persuasive).

The best leaders combine the two methodologies as circumstances dictate. Mike does not do this well, imo.

When done just right, his players would love him, just as I suspect they do now.

When done right, they would also fear him, just the right amount. They might now, a little, but not enough... Not nearly enough.

As I was thinking on the way to work this morning, I got to thinking...

This week is a battle of coaches named "Mike."

I asked myself, which of the two Mikes would I rather have as coach of a team I'm a fan of, and why?

And I realized that I just like fire in the eyes and mud in the teeth coaches more. No rational reason really. I want an accountant to do my taxes if I ever get rich enough to afford one, and I want a fire-breathing dragon as my head football coach. Not the other way around.

I wish we had Singletary. Sigh.

---

for what it's worth, one game (win) isn't redeeming McCarthy in my mind. i'll be silent for now, but it's going to take a whole lot more than one friggin' win to keep me silent.

---

Another excellent thread, and one in which I had an hour to sit down to and respond to thoroughly.

I've said repeatedly I'm not advocating a coaching change (though I have also said that short of a dramatic improvement in his overall performance, I don't think McCarthy is going to be offered another contract extension). I just said that one game, one victory, isn't enough to get me over my suspicions of Mike McCarthy -- which, I might add, date all the way back to the 2007 Cowboys game and were reinforced in the NFC Championship game. If he puts together a string of successive solid games, I'll let up on the gas a little. But right now I don't trust this team to be consistent on a week-to-week basis. They have this unsettling tendency to play well against good teams and fall flat on their face against bad ones.

---

Nonstop, I know you're reaching back further than this, and I know the team collapsed against Tampa, but what do you call our victories this year against the Lions and the Browns in light of your description of the Packers "unsettling tendency to play well against good teams and fall flat on their face against bad ones?"

---

One win means nothing if it's not sustained so I won't shutup nor take back what I feel was lousy back to back performances by players and coaches. Sometimes you have to go through hell to get to where you want to be.

---

Oh, just shut up Zero.....just shut... up!

:pottytrain2:

---

Child please we need MM gone for us to win the super bowl.

---

With the O-line we have, I think the Wild Card game should be the goal right now. I'm not too happy about the running back situation either. We're in the light heavyweight division and have been for more than a decade. What keeps me encouraged is the young talent we have. One of these years though, Uncle Ted is going to have to solidify some weaknesses with free agency. Remember boys, it's a marathon, not a sprint.

---

I said a tendency. I didn't say it was inevitable. I mean it happens with unsettling frequency. They don't always play well against good teams either. It's a correlation, not a certainty.

And forgive me if I don't take too much away from a stomping of the Lions and Browns (remember, the Lions played us well into the fourth quarter last year). If we start winning convincingly against the good teams, I'll put more credence into our victories over bad teams.

---

It's the old weak sister argument Nonstop. Some people think getting to the playoffs by beating the crappy teams around the league is an accomplishment. Personally, I don't. When you can beat the good teams in the league in a convincing manner, then you have arrived. And when you are so good that other teams automatically chalk up a loss when they see you on the schedule, then you are where every fan wants its team to be. But then sustainability becomes a problem. Usually what happens is the GM blows his wad every year trying to keep it together. The Packers have gone through all phases of this stuff.

I'd say where we are is about the 93 Packers or so. A few more pieces and we can start really competing. Our problem amongst ourselves on this board is patience. I understand all of the win now people's point of view, but frankly, we are just not there yet. The only coaches head I've called for was Sherman and Vanilla Bob, but I get why people don't like McCarthey.

---

You can mark me on the James Campen fire bandwagon. ;)

Seriously.. we really need to plug someone in on the offensive line staff that can put together a solid line, with solid fundamentals. IN addition have the ability to put together both an effective pass protection scheme and make a decisive decision on a run blocking scheme.

IMO opinion, as I mentioned in late 07.. this group isn't progressing.. two years later.. same bucket just older.

---

I think we need to address the offensive line in the 1st round this year. After we draft a LT like Brian Bulaga or Ciron Black or someone of that nature. After that I think we should go for someone like Jahvid Best (RB, Cal) in the second round or perhaps another lineman, a RT.

If we get the two tackles solidified, I think we can put Lang at LG and keep Spitz at center and then keep Sitton at RG.

It would be nice to get a RT or LT in FA so that we can get a good RB to help out Ryan Grant in the 2nd round. Jahvid Best would be a great change of pace back, and could probably even win over the starting job. CJ Spiller would be nice too but there's no way he drops to the 2nd round.

Ok, now I'm done with my draft rant.

---