MM: Biggest Pussy Ever· Page 11

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

I'm not saying McCarthy is "immune" but I also fell I can challenge in cases when I don't see it the way certain people call it.

"warhawk" wrote:

Of course -- that's the point I'm trying to make. The whole purpose of a forum is discussion and debate. Some of us will have opposing viewpoints on varios issues. It would be a very boring forum if we didn't.

My objection is to the people who say or imply that we shouldn't criticize, that it's somehow out of line. I wouldn't tell people they shouldn't defend McCarthy, so I don't think they should say we shouldn't criticize. (I do my share of McCarthy defense anyway, and I was one of the few Ted Thompson stalwarts in the early days of that fiasco.)

You ask when a victory will be enough. I think the the answer to that is fairly simple. A victory, no matter how narrow, that comes against an opponent of superior or comparable talents and abilities, when the slim margin of victory is caused by the other team's solid play, not this team's own mistakes. I've said many times that while I never like it when my team loses, it doesn't bother me nearly as much if they lose to a superior opponent after putting up a valiant fight. It's when they beat themselves that it drives me nuts. I suppose there is a bit of truth to the snide comment that some have made on this forum that fans would rather be routed than suffer a narrow defeat. At least then they know that they lost to a better team and don't have to make so many "If only . . ." statements.

wpr
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#102

This thread has nothing to do with McCarthey being a pussy and everything to do with McCarthey playing not to lose. It pisses me off that we dominated 3 quarters of football and weren't whooping it up on the sidelines for the fourth quarter instead of getting bailed out by Tramon in the end.

Getting off the accelerator makes McCarthey's game plan questionable to some of us, quit being so sensitive and let us critique should we so choose. That is what a forum like this is for.

"warhawk" wrote:

If this is so then I think the Headline for the thread should read a little differently, don't you?

"DakotaT" wrote:

absolutely. that was nerdman being nerdman. ost of us ignored it.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#103

I think I may have inadvertently started a battle here. I don't believe I said there was a problem? Did I imply there was?

"Zero2Cool" wrote:

Nope, I was just soliloquizing. Wadeing, if you will. I get philosophical sometimes.

ILikeThePackers39
Registered

13 years ago

#104

I wonder how many close games the Packers will have to lose before people stop finding the cautious, don't-make-mistakes, play-not-to-lose strategy defensible.

Because the funny thing is, they do make mistakes. They're not fundamentally sound. They're not disciplined. And every so often (more often than not in one-possession games), it comes back to bite them in the ass.

10-6 was good enough (just barely) to get into the playoffs this year. You can afford a few losses in the regular season and it's not the end of the world.

You can't afford a single loss in the playoffs. One loss and you go home.

Just because decisions happen to work out in the end, doesn't mean they were the right decisions, just as the fact that a decision happens not to work out doesn't necessarily mean it was the wrong decision. I don't know why people seem to think a coach should be immune to criticism just because he happened to win the game. We're fans of the team, not blind sycophants of the staff.

I do agree that "pussy" is too strong a word. I just lack confidence in McCarthy's ability to consistently field an offense that will consistently attack the other team until it is hopelessly defeated. I think he'll win more often than not, but he'll always leave us nervous as hell when the games really count.

"warhawk" wrote:

...and I wonder when a win will ever be good enough. I hear the running game sucks and then nothing when it doesn't. I hear the Oline sucks and then nothing when it doesn't. I hear we suck against the run and yet we are 6-1 in games we have played against teams among the top 10 in rushing (take that Jimmy Johnson).

I'm not saying McCarthy is "immune" but I also fell I can challenge in cases when I don't see it the way certain people call it. People talk about past games and even the 4th and 27 which I find ironic because in most of these games we lost to a FG.

We had leads in this game in the 2nd half of 11 and five. Not 3 or tied. You want McCarthy to "go for it" but oh no, don't do anything stupid and turn the ball over. I think it becomes a case of having your cake and eating it to.

You don't turn the ball over on the road. We already had twice and were lucky it didn't cook our goose but oh hell, put the "foot on their neck" you pussy.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I'm obviously in line with you on this take.

One, we're not taking into account how that drop deflated the team. From Rodgers' reaction on down, that play was a mental shot. McCarthy might have taken a quick pulse and decided he'd had his shot. I don't know, I'm not the head coach.

Greg also dropped a nice long pass. I think shots were taken and drops were made - so since he finally had access to a running back who was going to get him 4-5 yards a pop, he went that route because it was working consistently. That man like consistency, and he wasn't getting it from his wideouts.

I don't have a problem with people questioning the coaching. It's what fans do. And I don't think Warhawk's saying you can't question the coaching. I do think he and I disagree with the "pussy" characterization, because they did take shots. And those shots failed, so they turned to what was working - running the ball and playing defense.

blank

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#105

I think most of us in this thread have taken issue with the "pussy" comment, so I don't think our opinions are as disparate as you seem to believe.

Pack93z
Select Member

13 years ago

#106

I think most of us in this thread have taken issue with the "pussy" comment, so I don't think our opinions are as disparate as you seem to believe.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Correct.. that is the biggest disagreement with the thread.. not the challenging of the decision to play it safe. That point is debatable IMO.

But this thread is an example of why I don't find gameday chats enjoyable at all.. well in addition to that it is distracting to the game.

People over react.. over dramatize plays in the game.. dropping this guy sucks without really looking at the play overall..

Disagree with decisions of the game.. or players upon the field.. but at least do it with a little overall respect. IMO anyway.

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

warhawk
Senior Member

13 years ago

#107

I'm not saying McCarthy is "immune" but I also fell I can challenge in cases when I don't see it the way certain people call it.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

Of course -- that's the point I'm trying to make. The whole purpose of a forum is discussion and debate. Some of us will have opposing viewpoints on varios issues. It would be a very boring forum if we didn't.

My objection is to the people who say or imply that we shouldn't criticize, that it's somehow out of line. I wouldn't tell people they shouldn't defend McCarthy, so I don't think they should say we shouldn't criticize. (I do my share of McCarthy defense anyway, and I was one of the few Ted Thompson stalwarts in the early days of that fiasco.)

You ask when a victory will be enough. I think the the answer to that is fairly simple. A victory, no matter how narrow, that comes against an opponent of superior or comparable talents and abilities, when the slim margin of victory is caused by this team's own mistakes. I've said many times that while I never like it when my team loses, it doesn't bother me if they lose to a superior opponent after putting up a valiant fight. It's when they beat themselves that it drives me nuts. I suppose there is a bit of truth to the snide comment that some have made on this forum that fans would rather be routed than suffer a narrow defeat. At least then they know that they lost to a better team and don't have to make so many "If only . . ." statements.

"warhawk" wrote:

It's been a tough year with six "what if's" but I happen to be one that wonders WHAT IF this year was without Mike McCarthy anchoring the team and keeping them focused. Game ready week in and week out. That created confidence and a belief system they are riding now did it not? One blow out the wrong way and the wheels could have come off this thing real quick. They had all the reasons and excuses lined up.

Never happened. I just wonder if more credit than critisizm shouldn't be in order? I mean we lost two overtimes in a row and a heartbreaker at NE and have gone on to beat three teams with a winning record and two division champs in a row.

Could it be the Packer players feel THEY should be Division Champs and who installed the confidence for them to feel that way in the first place? The players cook the meal but who put the recipe together that gives them the confidence there is not anybody they can't beat right now?

For me, you see, there is a lot more to it then running Kuhn on a 3rd and two and not converting.

"The train is leaving the station."

Pack93z
Select Member

13 years ago

#108

For me, you see, there is a lot more to it then running Kuhn on a 3rd and two and not converting.

"warhawk" wrote:

Bingo.. the why.. the what happened.. the flow at that point.. what the opposition is doing.. the chess game within the game.. beyond the successful play verse the failed play.

Especially beyond the statistics..

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

wpr
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#109

I think most of us in this thread have taken issue with the "pussy" comment, so I don't think our opinions are as disparate as you seem to believe.

"Nonstopdrivel" wrote:

I almost boycotted this thread because of the stupid title. came in today after it was 5 pages long knowing that other issues were being discussed.

Nonstopdrivel
Preferred Member

13 years ago

#110

I think McCarthy gets lots of credit, actually. I give him lots of credit. Even when I disagree with him, that doesn't mean I necessarily think he's wrong in an absolute sense. As I said above, it's a philosophical (or methodological, if you will) difference. There are lots of things in life where people do things differently from me and get just as good or even better results. Doesn't mean I'm necessarily going to do it their way.

It's all just a thought exercise anyway. It's not like I'll ever have the opportunity to be a professional coach.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

packerfanoutwest (2h) : both games Watson missed, Packers won

Martha Careful (4h) : I hope all of you have a Merry Christmas!

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Oh I know about Jacobs, I just couldn't pass up an opportunity to mimic Zero lol

buckeyepackfan (14h) : Jacobs was just sat down, Watson re-injured that knee that kept him out 1 game earlier

buckeyepackfan (14h) : I needed .14 that's. .14 points for the whole 4th quarter to win and go to the SB. Lol

Mucky Tundra (14h) : Jacobs gonna be OK???

Zero2Cool (14h) : Watson gonna be OK???

packerfanoutwest (18h) : Inactives tonight for the Pack: Alexander- knee Bullard - ankle Williams - quad Walker -ankle Monk Heath

packerfanoutwest (18h) : No Jaire, but hopefully the front 7 destroys the line of scrimmage & forces Rattler into a few passes to McKinney.

packerfanoutwest (18h) : minny could be #1 seed and the Lions #5 seed

Zero2Cool (20h) : We'd have same Division and Conference records. Strength of schedule we edge them

Zero2Cool (20h) : I just checked. What tie breaker?

bboystyle (20h) : yes its possible but unlikely. If we do get the 5th, we face the NFCS winner

Zero2Cool (20h) : Ahh, ok.

bboystyle (20h) : yes due to tie breaker

Zero2Cool (20h) : I mean, unlikely, yes, but mathematically, 5th is possible by what I'm reading.

Zero2Cool (20h) : If Vikings lose out, Packers win out, Packers get 5th, right?

bboystyle (20h) : 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 (21h) : beast, the ad revenue goes to the broadcast company but they gotta pay to air the game on their channel/network

beast (22h) : 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 (22h) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (22h) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (22h) : 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 (22h) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (23h) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (23h) : 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 (23h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (23-Dec) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (23-Dec) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (23-Dec) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (23-Dec) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (23-Dec) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (23-Dec) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (23-Dec) : 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 (23-Dec) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (23-Dec) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (23-Dec) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

34 - 0

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS