The Packers Opponent: A Look at the Washington Redskins

Heading into their matchup on Sunday, the Green Bay Packers and Washington Redskins are teams that appear to be heading in opposite directions.

The Packers lost on Sunday to their rival the Minnesota Vikings and lost the NFC North division championship in the process, the week before that they got absolutely spanked by the Arizona Cardinals 38-8.  Besides those two losses, the team has looked lethargic on offense for the entirety of the season.  The Redskins enter Sunday having won five of their last six games after only winning four of their first ten to start the season. They also appear to not only have found a passing attack, but maybe their quarterback of the future.

Anyone who is reading this is probably already aware of most of that and you also probably already know much of what happened to the Packers during their season and where they are currently at heading into the playoffs, so lets take a look at how the Redskins got here.

Heading into the season the Redskins were a team that was supposed to contend for third in their division with the Giants and not hang with the Cowboys or Eagles. While most teams enter the year with promise and optimism, the Redskins entered the year by benching Robert Griffin III in favor of Kirk Cousins and lead the entire country to question what the hell was going on there. Most people assumed coach Jay Gruden was simply making a statement and once Cousins struggled, he would pull him in favor of RGIII. That never happened. At least, pulling Cousins for RGIII never happened, Cousins struggled plenty to start the season.

No matter who the quarterback was, the Redskins were looking to be a run-heavy team. Alfred Morris was expected to be one of the last bell-cow running backs in the NFL and it was expected that Washington would run him into the ground this year and then let him walk in free agency next year with exciting and explosive rookie Matt Jones sitting behind him. That theory lasted all of one game.

Alfred Morris had a good week one with 121 yards on 25 carries... he would only get 20 carries or 100 yards once each the rest of the season. Week two saw the takeover - if you can call it that - of Matt Jones. Showing his explosiveness and potential the young running back was too much to ignore and would settle in as the de facto main running back in a time-share with Morris. Neither would have a particularly good season, in fact the running game as a whole for Washington was rather pathetic, but more on that later.

As I mentioned earlier, Kirk Cousins struggled to start the season. Cousins threw multiple interceptions in four of the first six games for Washington while failing to throw multiple touchdowns in any of those games. Despite the slow start Cousins would pick it up and turn into one of the bigger surprises in the league and has saved his best performances for last, finishing the season by throwing 11 touchdowns in the final three games despite only 89 pass attempts. On the whole - at nearly 70 percent - Cousins ended up leading the NFL in completion percentage and turned Jordan Reed, when healthy, into one of the most dangerous tight ends in the league and helped to remind people that DeSean Jackson is not only a total idiot but is still very much relevant and can change the game on any play. Even with the incredibly poor start over his first six games, Cousins would end up in the middle of the pack in the NFL in terms of touchdowns (29) and interceptions (11), pretty respectable considering how he started.

At the end of the day, the Redskins start and stop with the Kirk Cousins and the passing game. The run game and defense are dreadful, just truly awful. Which gives me a lot of hope for the Packers on Sunday. 

Washington ended up winning five of their last six games, making them one of the hottest teams in the NFL entering the playoffs. Looking at their last six games however makes their 5-1 record look a little less impressive. Don't get me wrong, they won the games and that's all you can do, but it's not like any of those teams were tough.

To close the year, starting in week 17 and going backwards, the Redskins played:

-The hapless Cowboys who ended up losing their last four games and had no interest in being there the final week of the season.

-An Eagles team that lost two of their last three and this was the game that got Chip Kelly fired.

-The Bills at home, nothing wrong with that, it's a good win but hardly anything to brag about.

-The Chicago Bears who were in the midst of losing four of their last five games.

-The Dallas Cowboys again, in fact with this Dallas win, Washington became the only team Dallas beat all season without Tony Romo.

-The New York Giants who were in the midst of losing six of their last seven.

Hardly a who's who of the NFL. In fact if you take the record of the last four games of the season for those six teams (Dallas twice) the combined record would be 6-18. Playing in the NFC East in general gave Washington a very easy schedule this year. The Redskins only ended up playing two games against what would turn out to be playoff teams this year. In those two games they lost a combined 71-26. Contrast that to the Packers who played seven games against playoff teams and finished with a 3-4 record and being outscored 155-182 in those games (basically the differential of the Arizona game). 

For a team that was supposed to be a run-heavy team entering the season and ended up running the ball the 11th most times by percentage with a run-percentage of 42.4 percent the Redskins were a-w-f-u-l awful while running the ball this year. Washington finished 30th in the NFL in yards per carry this year despite an incredibly easy schedule against very poor run defenses. The Redskins torched the NFL's worst run defense (Saints) to the tune of 209 yards on 31 carries. Despite the success in that one game, they still had EIGHT other games against the remaining bottom ten teams in the NFL in yards per rush defense. In those eight games against bad run defenses the Redskins averaged a pathetic 3.72 yards per carry.

In the blowout of Dallas last week, Alfred Morris was able to become the first Redskins player to rush for 100 yards since Matt Jones did that in week two. During that 13 game drought the Redskins had individual game-highs in rushing of 38, 62, 20, 21, 29, 27, 92, 10(!!!!!!), 78, 49, 62, 84 and 49 yards. Meaning that five times the 'Skins failed to get a rusher to 30 yards and once had a game-high of only 10 rushing yards (that was Chris Thompson too, not Jones or Morris).

Matt Jones has electric big-play potential, but he also has consistency issues and a fumbling problem. Alfred Morris looks about as "meh" as a player can be and Chris Thompson is actually a pretty nice pass-catching/third down back, he just is not the guy you want carrying the load out of the backfield.

The Redskins rushing attack is bad, their defense is not much better. Here are the defensive ranks for the Redskins on the season:

Points per game allowed (17th)

Passing yards per game allowed (25th)

Yards per pass allowed (25th)

Rushing yards per game allowed (26th)

Yards per rush allowed (31st)

Interceptions forced (22nd)

Fumbles recovered (1st)

The only thing the Redskins defense does well is force and recover fumbles, with 1.0 fumbles recovered per game, they lead the NFL. Despite that, they are the eleventh worst team in the league at forcing interceptions. When teams aren't fumbling, the Redskins aren't stopping them. Washington is the second worst team in the league in yards per carry allowed and the eighth worst team in yards per pass allowed. They are a decent 17th in points per game allowed... but that goes more into how many possessions teams get so it's hard to say how good or bad that is.

The Packers shouldn't have an issue passing or running the ball on the Redskins and if the Green Bay offense does struggle and still manages to win this game, the rest of the playoffs will be tough because Washington has by far and away the worst defense of the NFC playoff teams.

I see no reason why the Packers should struggle with this game and if they do, that should say about all we need to know about this team this year. Green Bay should be able to throw the ball on Washington, run the ball on Washington, and stop the run against Washington... that just leaves stopping Kirk Cousins and the pass game. If the Packers can stop DeSean Jackson from making big plays and figure out how to cover Jordan Reed (because that guy is a beast), they should be able to control this game. 

0 points

Comments (110)

Fan-Friendly This filter will hide comments which have ratio of 5 to 1 down-vote to up-vote.
NickPerry's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:37 am

The Packers have to run the ball, run, run, then run some more. Jeff mentioned it, 31st in YPA which translates into 4.8 yards per carry. Lacy should be used early and often in this game and when Starks is used he better hold on to the damn ball.

The Packers best offense is to keep Reed off the field who IS a beast and Jackson who's still faster than ANY Packer except maybe Shields. Cousins completes 75% of his passes at home so he's even better there. He's had 23 TD's and 3 Int's his last 10 games and had a passer rating over 100 in 8 of his last 10.

This game isn't a walk in the Park, especially for the 2015 Packers.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:23 am

Nothing will be a walk in the park for this team. That's the demoralizing thing from where I'm standing: I keep waiting for this team to buckle down and become a real grinder...show some tenacity and play with an attitude, at least enough to overcome its issues and win games. We just haven't seen that kind of heart.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 07, 2016 at 09:24 am

This is the playoffs. This is where our veterans will step up. This is where I do believe we will see this team play with the heart and aggressiveness.

The playoffs are a completely different season. I fully expect this team to play with the passion that we really haven't seen as much this season. When you listen to comments and players I expect to see them ready to kick some ass...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:17 pm

That's for sure. Want a win but it's time to see 3 to 4 quarters of our best football.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:37 pm

How about 2 Quarters of great football and 2 Quarters of OK-Good football?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:17 pm

I'll take It! Just no bad ones. Maybe we could have 55 minutes of good to very good as long as the other 5 minutes are not a disaster. And of course not the last 5 minutes of the game.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:03 am

If Lacy's rib can hold up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 07, 2016 at 07:38 am

I think this week we will see an improvement from the offense. I think now that the pressure is on for the playoffs we will see players step up their games.
On offense I think we will see 2 players having big impacts.
-James Starks I think has his rebound performance. The only thing that has slowed him down this year has been his fumbling.
-Davante Adams. Last week he quietly made some big plays. He broke tackles and caught the ball well. It seemed like there was a bit of a confidence boost which for him is a huge thing. He is a talented player, but throughout the season he seemed to lose his confidence. Last weeks game I think was a confidence building game for him and I think this week we will see him have an impact.

Pretty much everyone is picking the Redskins to win. Mostly because they have played really well down the stretch. But just like the story says, they played against teams that were just not good or playing well and had almost nothiing to play for.

Also people have forgotten that the Packers have a pretty good defense. The gave up 10 points against the Vikings and only 67 yards rushing to the Rushing champ. Against Arizona, they gave up 24 points to the Cardinals. One drive started at the 50, another started at the 28. They only gave up 1 TD drive of more then 50 yards. Oakland they gave up 20 points. Dallas they shut out minus 1 drive. Against Detroit they gave up 23.
The last 4 games they are giving up on average. 19 points a game. Packers defense has been very good, but have been put into some bad position by their offense with their turnovers.

I truly think the Packers have a few tricks up their sleeves on offense and we will start to see them this week. I think we will see a little more misdirection type of plays that we haven't seen for a few weeks. Plays like the one against Dallas with Cobb motioning into the backfield, faking the hand off to him and throwing to Starks in the flat. I think we may see a little more creativity in their plays.
At least I hope so...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DukeDivine's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:37 am

Oh "hope," You screw with our emotions every Tuesday through Sunday only to be crushed by reality. Please, "hope," come to fruition for at least one week...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 09:03 am

I too think and hope that with playoffs here they will step up their game, whole team and especially MM. But I thought that last week as well, with the Division title on the line. I really have no strong indication that they will, they are an enigma.
Just hope they do the things most of us have pointed out over and over and let the chips fall where they may. Win or go down fighting and play at least 3 solid quarters of Packers football. Go Pack Go.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 07, 2016 at 07:46 am

Good article Mike. On paper and in the match-up department things look favorable for this game. I don't put much credence in who they beat and who we beat especially since we've been getting beat a lot. It all comes down to execution and, in our case, the play of our offense. I have confidence that the defense will play stout. Hopefully Shields will be available to help with their weapons.

If Rodgers and company show up we will win. If we score points we will force them to take chances and we will win again. In the past, I would not have worried that our offense would force a foot race - today, it is a crap-shoot. Time for some people to step up.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
dobber's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:09 am

I see the key to this game being whether the Packer pass rush--which has disappeared at times this season--can get to Cousins. The reason why Washington looks so threatening is that they keep Kirk Cousins clean. They are tied for 4th in the league in sacks allowed (meaning 4th in a good way), so he hasn't had to deal with a lot of adversity this season. Put him on his back and get his jersey dirty a few times early in this one and we'll see how effective he is.

Don't lose sight of the fact that Washington is much better running the ball at home than they are on the road, somethiing like 4.2 YPC at home v. 2.9 on the road.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:50 am

The next time that Washington beats a team with a winning record will be the first time that they have beaten such a team this year. To expand a bit on what Mike said, they have only played THREE teams with a winning record all year, and they lost to all three by a combined 46-105. They played two 8-8 teams, losing to ATL and beating BUF with a combined score of 54-50.

I envision Clay Matthews getting in Cousins' grill and screaming "You Like That!" on several occasions after blasting him into next week. Packers win, 24-17.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Razer's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:25 am

I hope that you are right. I just don't know where the 24 points will come from...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:38 am

24 points is only one point more than their season average of 23. And there is this... This year Green Bay has played against the following defenses ranked in least points allowed:
1 (SEA),
3 (KC),
4 (DEN),
5 (MIN, twice),
6 (CAR) and
7 (ARI).

That's almost unbelievable. The only team in the top 7 scoring defenses that GB did NOT play is CIN, and they played the #5 team twice. Granted, the Pack still aren't right offensively, but still this has to count for something.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 07, 2016 at 09:01 am

Great analysis. I honestly didn't know they played that many top defenses.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Steve Cheez's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:10 pm

Maybe they're top defenses because they got to play us...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:38 pm

Well let's see. Below are the defenses in question, followed by the average number of points that those defenses allowed all season, followed by the number of points the Packers scored against them. (The MINN number is an average of the two games).

SEA 17.3 / 27
KC 17.9 / 38
DEN 18.5 / 10
CAR 19.3 / 29
MIN 18.9 / 21.5
ARI 19.6 / 8

In only two of the cases above did the Packers offensive production fail to exceed the defense's scoring average.

The Packers scored an average of 22.1 points in their seven games against top seven defenses. A defense that allowed 22.1 ppg would have ranked 15th in scoring average league wide.

So no, I don't think playing GB really made them to be top scoring defenses.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Steve Cheez's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:55 pm

Wow, I was just being snarky. Thanks for the analysis, Marpag1.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:34 pm

LOL. I know. I like a good snark now and then myself. But i do think it is interesting to see that Green Bay actually scored halfway decently against first rate defenses.

Also, of the nine games that were NOT played against top seven defenses, none of them were against defenses that really sucked as far as ppg are concerned. GB did not play a team lower than 23rd in scoring defense.

To me this has to be a considered when we talk about GB offensive futility. It's pretty damn hard to get confident, rolling and in rhythm when every other game you face up to a SEA or a KC.. And even the games in between weren't pushover defenses. They really didn't face anyone in the bottom third, no Jacksonvilles or New Orleans who were giving up 30 points a game. That's gotta matter.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

January 07, 2016 at 04:07 pm

Good point marpag, but isn't that a roundabout way of saying the Packer offense is mediocre? After all, you'd expect a top offence to beat a good defence from time to time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 04:18 pm

No argument from me. Yes, the Packer offense IS mediocre. And yes, you would expect a good offense to beat a good defense from time to time. As it is, they beat the #1 scoring defense (SEA), as well as #3 (KC) and #5 (MIN). And in those three games GB scored an average of 31.7 points.

The counterpoint, of course, here is that two of those games (SEA and KC) were at the beginning of the season. Both of those teams started slowly, and GB has been getting worse.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Dan Stodola's picture

January 08, 2016 at 01:34 pm

All the emphasis on starting fast this season has translated to a struggling finish. I said before the season, its very difficult to peak twice in a season. Much rather start slow and finish strong as was usually the case under McCarthy. Cant have it both ways.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:33 pm

Downvoter you really can not be serious.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
jeremyjjbrown's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:33 pm

Downvoter you really can not be serious.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 07, 2016 at 10:13 pm

What is worry some isn't what we dd against this top defenses, its what we did against the other defenses.
Chi- 13
SF - 17
Det - 16

And two of those at home.

Also, Seattle and KC were not nearly the teams they are today as when we played them.

Like to think this is a defense we can beat. I think we can generation 24 points on offense if we don't pile up the stupid mistakes. If we can control the clock, we have a good shot.

If we have Bahk back and reasonably able, the offense should do much better.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DukeDivine's picture

January 08, 2016 at 08:50 am

Sounds good at first but really does nothing for me as they scored 16 and 13 vs the Lions and Bears and I expect them to make the Washington defense look like a top 5 unit too. Its up to the cornerback-less defense and the special teams. 2015 offense makes every defense look like those listed above. It's hard not to have a clunker every once in a while when you punt 35 times per game but please, Tim, no 28 yard shanks this week!!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
DukeDivine's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:40 am

Hoepfully blasting him to the offseason rather that "blasting him into next week."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
marpag1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:43 am

:) Good one.

I meant, "Next week while he is vacationing in the Bahamas and nursing his aching bones."

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
ray nichkee's picture

January 07, 2016 at 09:41 am

Funny stuff guys.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Thegreatreynoldo's picture

January 07, 2016 at 07:37 pm

Great analysis, excellent thread, with a good article as usual from Mike Rueter. Thanks to Marpag1 in particular for the info. This is what this website can be at its best!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
TommyG's picture

January 07, 2016 at 09:53 am

The packers should have no problem rushing or passing against the skins? Really? Did AR suddenly become the AR of past seasons? Is MM going to line these guys up like he did during the first drive of last week before totally abandoning a sensible rushing attack? The packers will absolutely struggle against the Redskins but not because of anything the Redskins do. No, the packers will struggle because they are struggling this season.

This is an extremely winnable game; almost laughingly so. Our defense may look very good if the pass rush materializes. If not expect to watch our coverage unit struggle.

Our D Must play lights-out in order for our team to have a chance.

Our O must do a serviceable job at the very least.

If the D takes a day off or the O craps TE bed again we are looking at an embarrassing loss to the Redskins in that dump of a stadium.

I'll be there if anyone wants to grab a beer.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
packsmack's picture

January 07, 2016 at 11:51 am

Washington's defensive DVOA: 21st. Average defensive DVOA of opponents in Packers 6 losses: 11th. Really all you need to know.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Paul Ott Carruth's picture

January 07, 2016 at 12:11 pm

Washington runs a simplistic coverage scheme, preferring to base out of single high. They predominantly play Cover 3 on the back end, but as has been customary this season, he will play a significant amount of Man Free with a low hole rat at times when facing McCarthy’s preferred Zebra personnel grouping (11 personnel). You will rarely see off-coverage even though traditional Cover 3 has the corners in off-coverage. Washington does disguise their Cover 3 intentions by showing press looks and bailing out late. Either way, the inherent structure of their defense suits them well in their match-up against Green Bay.

Washington’s offense has some decent talent. Reed is the obvious match-up concern. He’ll get some touches, but based on their ability to handle Rudolph last week, I believe the Packer defense will keep him in check. Granted, Rudolph is nowhere near the caliber of athlete that Reed is, the Packers know he is Cousins go to receiver and security blanket, much like Rudolph is to Bridgewater. 3rd and Medium will determine their success. I expect Burnett and Clinton-Dix to help in bracket coverage in zone schemes. Don’t be surprised to see a healthy dose of 2 Man in long yardage situations.

Should the defense hold Washington to 14-17 points, the Packers should be able to win this game. It will be a struggle though. If Washington scores 20 the Packers should win this game. I don’t believe they will. In reality, this game is all about McCarthy’s ability as a play-designer, personnel user, and play-caller. If he fails to adjust his philosophy and adapt it to the personnel at his disposal, the offense will look like the Junior Varsity offense it has since Week 4 when it put up 17 points on a putrid 49er defense. It was said by many that McCarthy taking over the reins would cure all ills. I said it wouldn’t make any difference. It’s McCarthy’s vision and philosophy that has been the hindrance. This has been born out. This offense is essentially non-functioning because McCarthy refuses to adjust to the press coverage and 8 man boxes he’s been seeing. Other offensive minds can beat what the Packers have been seeing with inferior talent at the skill positions. If they couldn’t press man would be the only coverage run by every team. This is potentially McCarthy’s last opportunity to show he is the “genius” people claim he is. If the defense holds court as they have been and the offense leads the team down the road to defeat as it has, don’t be surprised if you see a change at 1265 Lombardi in the most unexpected of ways.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
TommyG's picture

January 07, 2016 at 12:17 pm

Thanks for the breakdown. I swear I learn something new each time you post; especially the lingo.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:29 pm

Very informative as usual. Always learn something.
Totally agree with the bottom line, MM is the key more than ever. It's time he makes the necessary in game adjustments that have been so painfully obvious to just about everyone here. Now or never. This game will tell us all we need to know about him and the coaching staff.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:54 pm

I don't know, man. I'd like to believe we'd see a change if they come out flat again & lose 20-13 or something close like that but w/these guys & their supporters, the glass always seems to be half full even w/10 games saying different.

I'm going to predict, regardless of outcome, the biggest change we'll see is the offensive cooks in the kitchen getting kicked out and MM either assigning one guy as OC while firing the rest or bringing in someone like Philbin or McAdoo after cleaning out the kitchen. That's about it unless they promote TT and elevate Elliot to keep him around. I can't see anyone on defense or ST's getting the boot since overall those sides of the ball have been keeping us in games this season over and over.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:06 pm

Why go backwards with Philbin even if he can help. New blood is needed to stimulate. Why would McAdo come back to Green Bay with him high on the Head Coach list.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 04:31 pm

I agree re new blood but we also have to stick with the system we have in place, right? I think we just need a fresh take on play calling, not necessarily an entire system change. Philbin was heavily involved in calling plays in 2011 to us going 15-1, if I'm not mistaken. McAdoo would be my choice but you're right, he seems to be in the lead in NY right now.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Curry Rambeau's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:22 pm

Exactly.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Curry Rambeau's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:22 pm

Exactly.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Paul Ott Carruth's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:49 pm

I would tend to agree with you. Based on his personality and history, it would be unlikely Ted Thompson jettisons McCarthy. It's not impossible though. That being said, if the offensive futility continues and is the major contributor in a loss in Washington, I think McCarthy could be on his way out, if not at the hand of Thompson then by his own choice. The 10 year expiration date is a very real thing in the professional ranks, especially when you are dealing with impatient owners. This makes Green Bay's situation different as there is no single owner to answer to. Yet, it's possible McCarthy's message is getting stale. Also, I think it's important to consider the fact that he lost his brother and it isn't a stretch to think that it's taking a toll on his emotional health and well-being. Losing a family member gives you perspective on what's important and this is, after all, just a game. With that being said, however, this business requires drive and intense focus on a daily basis. Is McCarthy's personal loss a contributing factor? Merely speculative, although, it was suggested the loss of Philbin's son contributed to the depressed demeanor of the team during the divisional round in 2011. It wouldn't surprise me the least to see McCarthy walk away after this season on his own accord.

I suggested after last season the Packers bring in a OC from a different school of thought. I believe one of the biggest impediments to the offense had been the myopic nature surrounding the team. Every team has a philosophy but every so often it needs to be challenged to either reaffirm or to reorganize your process. The Packer offensive staff has been very stagnant in this regard. You don't win with yes men and that is what I see.

This isn't about McCarthy's intelligence of football. He knows no more or less about football theory than any other coach. This about continuing to place the square peg in the square shaped hole when the hole is actually circular in nature. In fact, this isn't anything new. McCarthy's kryptonite had been man under 2 deep. Remember 2011 vs. Kansas City? 2011 vs. the Giants in the playoffs? In fact, man under 2 deep had been the bane of his passing offense since that point and other teams have utilized it with success. The Seahawks, with their superior secondary, were able to neutralize Nelson from their traditional single high look and the offense suffered because of all of the vertical stems. Typically single high against the Packers was a death sentence. It wasn't for Seattle due to personnel and it isn't for other teams with lesser talent on the back end this year due to Nelson's absence. This should tell all viewers something. It isn't about what you know. Smart football coaches are a dime a dozen. Coaches who can handle fluid situations with the personnel at their disposal are what you need.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 04:41 pm

I agree losing MM's brother may be playing into this (nice point I totally forgot about, btw) but unless Mike chooses to walk away which, give his stubborn demeanor, I can't see him wanting to walk away with a whimper out of the team like this season especially if this weekend comes out flat.

Further, if he doesn't choose to walk away on his own volition, I can't see Thompson firing him no matter what happens. You mention impatient owners and Thompson has shown nearly zero interest in what the fans' take on the team is, right or wrong, ever since he was hired so I don't see that stopping now even if Mike puts up a playoff stinker. I think Aaron Nagler tweeted something about the fact that there's zero chance TT fires a guy after tens wins and a playoff birth and I agree. That is, unless Ted knows more about these 'team quitting on him' theories out there than we do anyway.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:22 pm

POC. Reading your post only made me more frustrated. Great analysis. Any interest in coaching?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:31 pm

I think a lot of us know POC. he already did coach :)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 11:45 pm

Next year,?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:46 pm

Thank you POC, I always enjoy your posts, and I learn something new from them every time.

I understand your points, and I think you may be correct in many points. But I would like to add something, and really get your take on it, if you wish to respond.
"Typically single high against the Packers was a death sentence. It wasn't for Seattle due to personnel and it isn't for other teams with lesser talent on the back end this year due to Nelson's absence."
Agreed - but I do think the problem this year is compounded with the diminishing play of A. Rodgers - he is terribly inaccurate, at least compared to the past few seasons. When he has receivers open he wildly overthrows them or is at least not accurate enough for the most part to actually give them a fighting chance. So while play design, game planning, and maybe play calling by McCarthy may be major culprits, so is the decline in Rodgers' play. I have seen a lot of plays this season with ending drives instead of resulting in 1st downs had it been for better throws by Rodgers - throws he used to routinely make in past seasons.
It certainly didn't help to have Adams and other WRs on occasion drop very catch-able balls, but it is not always the receivers fault.

And while there may be an explanation of why McCarthy may not be 100% focused due to the loss of his brother, on the surface there isn't a similar reason for Rodgers. His play did decline, though, noticeably, even clearly visible for a casual observer like me. And I would just like to get your take on it. Something is up with #12, and it is not good.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Curry Rambeau's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:14 pm

I was anticipating your return with a sane, intelligent post. Maybe this will quiet the junior high rants and raves I've seen on CHTVblog over the last 2 months. It's big boy time now kids. The pre-season is over, and let's see if this team is capable of overcoming its lack of talent and bland coaching.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:40 pm

POC, coach for the next 9 years, then come back to posting here.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

January 07, 2016 at 12:37 pm

" If the defense holds court as they have been and the offense leads the team down the road to defeat as it has, don’t be surprised if you see a change at 1265 Lombardi in the most unexpected of ways."

I think it is becoming expected. This was the talk on local radio yesterday. The discord between MM and #12 is becoming apparent. It is all but out in the open. A frustrating game plan and #12 is likely to say something, and MM is likely to be gone. We'll see how this weekend goes.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:08 pm

Would prefer MM does what he must do, but if he doesn't the focus has to be on him. Team has too much talent injuries notwithstanding to lay the eggs it has this year. Doubt any real changes will be made, but we shall see. I do think that it is very possible that Philbin comes back as OC, and I'd like to see Bennett back with the WRs. Anyone have any ideas for other possibilities.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:13 pm

I would like to see Bennett back as WR coach but he's already been promoted, you can't bust a guy down like that and expect him to put up the same effort. I think they promoted him too soon and will need to let him go outright to solve the problem. Maybe they could steal someone from the AZ or CAR WR staff? Those guys are doing something with little and/or know how to develop good talent there.

As for Philbin, I like the idea from the aspect it would put Rodgers at ease if MM just gave him the keys and let him do his thing. I dislike the idea because he's another member of this regime's system that isn't going to add much new flavor to it. McAdoo's developing his own style in NY so him coming back could provide some new looks which'd be great if he doesn't get the NY job. One guy I really like that could solve both the WR and OC problem is Mike Shula but I think he's enjoying working in Carolina and will likely be up for a HC job fairly soon so he's probably not going to take a lateral move like that.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

January 07, 2016 at 07:00 pm

"Maybe they could steal someone from the AZ or CAR WR staff?"
yeah, Ricky Proehl was a pretty darn good WR himself... Darryl Drake in Arizona is just there since 2013, and was the prior 9 years with the Bears at WR coach - didn't really get good results there, and the few good ones they've had (Marshall) already came as good players.
At the same time, you usually cannot hire from other teams if their contracts are not up, unless a promotion is given. And that would mean OC or HC or assistant HC. Not sure those guys are really that good...

On the other hand, there certainly are coaches on those teams who people wouldn't want here. Or were already in Green Bay, but run out of town. Remember Bob Sanders? Now coaches LBs in Arizona. Curtis Fuller - he was with the Packers as assistant ST coach - and let go as well.

I don't know. I think what POC said, maybe bring in some people from different systems, and not just yes men who had been with the same HC for years. I think it would be a great mistake to bring Joe Philbin back. He is just a yes man. And I really don't see the great offensive mind when looking at him. Remember the great idea of the zone blocking scheme? And looking at Miami, they really did not play well offensively when he was there at all. I think the man is over-rated as an offensive coach. Plus, where would he fit in? Have another cook in the kitchen?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
rajahking's picture

January 07, 2016 at 12:57 pm

Game seems like a toss up to me... I have (homer's disease) faith that the Packers are generally more talented, but this is their stadium in the playoffs, and their passing has been way better than ours. Its also going to be loud and they are going to come out energized.

As counterintuitive as it seems, I think we have to come out and smack them with some big plays. I don't have faith that we can, especially early, put together consistent drives that result in real points. The 2 yard screen to Cobb (who will drop it) or Rodgers (who will be tackled), or slowly developed draw play to Lacy for a yard type plays we have been plagued with this year will just mean short drives.

Rather have the chance to get some big plays, so I say designed rollouts, downfield passing, to open it up. Then see what the game says and go from there.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:49 pm

I heard this game compared to the Raiders matchup and I'm starting to believe it, especially since they're predicting 40-50deg and rain during the game last I heard. That won't be good for either offense but considering they have a great TE they could ride Reed up and down the field enough to win this one on us. Our offense has had ball security issues and catching issues all year and it's been magnified in rain games like Chicago/Oakland ones so a rainy mess favors them, I think.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:09 pm

Just win. I don't care about matchups. I don't care about the way this team has looked. I don't care if we throw 60 times. Or if we only have 80 yards passing. Go in....scrap.....beat the guy in front of you. Force some fumbles. Just win. And if you win one.....maybe....just maybe you can win another one. I just don't want to see lethargic route running, poor blocking, and our QB on his ass. Just go there and get the W. Play hard. Play like the world is against you. And all this Rodgers doesn't like McCarthy, Rodgers doesn't like Janis, Rodgers wants to live in Cali....B.S. Conjecturing can finally take a rest.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:49 pm

Sold me. No lethargic route running, absolutely. Have seen my share of that the last few games. I too want to see them come out like the world is against them. On D or O. That's what I want to see. Oh that and none of the head scratching strategy from MM and no damn wasted TOs.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Curry Rambeau's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:30 pm

I think we all want them to step up, but if the talent on this team hasn't gotten it after 16 games, it ain't gonna magically appear against Washington. The real speed and quickness is in the Packers defensive secondary, and not the offense.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:37 pm

I don't think the Packers were trying to win too hard last week, I also don't see Kirk Cousins coming up big either , so I think the Packers win.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 07, 2016 at 01:39 pm

WHY DOES EVERYONE KNOW THIS BUT MM!! He was too stubborn to do anything about specail teams last year until it cost us a SB. Is he too stubborn to realize his receivers need help. He keeps talking about needing to win the 1 on 1's. THEY CAN'T. STOP TRYING - OR RESIGN!
But with some brains in schemes, maybe they will get open anyways.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/pete-prisco/25441306/after-further-r...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:08 pm

Its basically what I have been saying for a very long time.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:58 pm

Please forward link to MM. Nah never mind he would not adjust anyway. Send it to 1265 Lombardi Attn?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:00 pm

I also think MM gets fired , he had the second half of the season to right the ship and he didn't. Enough is enough before it's too late . It would not be hard to bring in a quality coach knowing they have Rodgers at QB. I actually think Tom Coughlin would jump at the chance.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RCPackerFan's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:04 pm

So you want a 70 year old to be our next coach?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:56 pm

Sure why not. Just in time for Rodgers' prime years.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:46 pm

No WAY that happens unless the team comes out against Washington totally flat w/body language that says they're basically packing it in to regroup in the offseason. As long as TT's GM, he's going to stick w/MM no matter what just like the two of them do 'their guys' from the draft. The closest I could see this coming to fruition is if Elliot Wolf got the GM job this offseason, TT was promoted, and Wolf basically gives Mike next year to fix it or else.

As for Coughlin, there's no way I'd want him as our coach. Every time something bad happens on the field, he has the prototypical 'old man staring off into confused space' look about him. This team needs youth & energy injected into it if anything. If MM were actually to be replaced this offseason, the only guy besides Adam Gase that would interest me would be Hue Jackson, who's worked with high powered offenses before.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

January 07, 2016 at 04:29 pm

What was the look on MM's face after Coughlin's Gints kicked Packer butt in 2007 & 2011 playoffs? Or the look on MM's face after one of his many early playoff exits? That old man just might know something about how to win.

It also looks like Coughlin had a decent relationship with Eli. That's gotta count for something, even if Eli isn't the prima donna #12 is becoming. Come to think of it, 2015 ARodg is basically Eli: flashes of brilliance between stretches of mediocrity. The packers could use a guy who knows how to handle a QB like that.

At any rate, this isn't a high powered offence, so I question the need for a high octane specialist.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:00 pm

Did you watch this year's MNF matchup between the Eagles and Giants? Giants didn't even look like they wanted to be there despite multiple opportunities given to win the game to them by the Eagles. Coughlin's past his prime. We need energy, youth, & innovation for the offense. Why do you think Coughlin took McAdoo FROM us 2 years back and now he's being talked about as successor there? He improved them, not the other way around.

As for his relationship w/Eli, how many times in Eli's career has he walked off the field w/the 'aw shucks, that was a shame, oh well' face after an INT. Rodgers may not show it much but you know he cares every time he throws an INT. Coughlin kept feeding into Eli's manner rather than getting on to him about it. If you're worried about prima donnas (which I don't subscribe to w/AR at ALL, btw), the last thing you need's a coach unwilling to kick them in the ass like Coughlin refused to with Eli for years.

2015 is an aberration. Our offense has typically smoked people and has the potential to if you believe Jordy/Montgomery returning can change things along with maybe a new TE added to the mix. Most of our problem's been schemes, not personnel. If Adam Gase can get guys open in Chicago with 1/10th the talent (remember they didn't have White/Alshon/Bennett/Forte most of the year), with the right adjustments we can be back to 30+ points/game easy in 2016 if we hired a similar offensive mind.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:17 pm

A lot of people seem to forget about our injury situation. We have like 17 guys on the injury report. 1/3 of the roster. Which everyone knows. But not too many people mention the guys on the field playing injured. It's not like injuries automatically heal and then bam....you're good. Just because guys are playing doesn't mean they're even close to 100%. Let's take a look:

Offense
Cobb: shoulder. No way that's healed yet.
Jones: hamstring. You're joking if you think a hamstring can fully heal during a season.
Adams: ankle x 2. He's gutting it out folks. So...yes...he's slow. He wasn't slow last year. Same injury just IR'ed Monty for the season
Abbredaris: Concussion. Then Chest injury.
Hmmmm.....wonder why our receiving core is so weak!!???

Sitton: Ankle...and now Back.
Bakhtiari: Ankle
Bulaga: Ankle, knee
Linsley: Knee
Lang: Neck
Taylor: knee
Hmmmm....that's out entire OLine and then some. Tretter had an injury too. Wonder why our protection has been poor?

Lacy: Ankle and now rib
Hmmmm....wonder why our running game has been weaker. Couple this with our battered Oline.

Defense
Clay: ankle. Yes....it's still listed.
Guion: Foot
Raji: groin and now concussion
Neal: hip
Perry: shoulder
Daniels: hamstring
Datone: neck
Mulumba: knee
Elliot: quadricep
Hmmmm....wonder why our pass rush has been inconsistent?

Look Packer fans. Just because our guys are playing doesn't mean they're all playing to their potential. In fact....not even close. Kudos for the lot gutting it out. But until you go play a sport when you're injured enough to show up on a report and still try to play......it's not easy. It fricken hurts. And in football......just wow.
This team is alot better when even just 50% healthier. Come down from that ledge. I didn't make any of these injuries up......they're all either on the current report, or ones from just a few weeks ago.

I get it....all teams are injured this time of year. But comparatively to Az, Carolina and seattle. Not even close. It takes some luck to get through a season. Just be glad we can watch at least one more game with these guys that truly are brave to play under these conditions. GPG.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
brewers_rule's picture

January 07, 2016 at 02:33 pm

While I agree in premise that the Redskins are the worst team in the playoffs and thus should present an easy matchup GB should capitalize on, I hate the 'who have they played' argument in today's NFL because it's meaningless almost week to week now.

The same critical analysis that you're doing here, I've been screaming about in regards to Seattle since they went on their little hot streak starting in Week 11. They beat the following: 49'ers, Steelers (barely), Vikings, Ravens, Browns, and the Cardinals while losing to the Rams at home. The only playoff teams that are there are the Vikes, Steelers, and the Cards, the latter literally having zero to play for in Week 17. The rest were all AWFUL teams aside from the Steelers who it took them to the last minute to beat at home, yet all we're hearing is how unbeatable they are? Why can't we use the exact same argument against them as the Redskins? And then there's Seattle's traditionally awful playoff road record and lack of running game. Add in the fact that they never should have won any of the Cowboys, Lions, or Steelers games and you're looking at a 7-9 team out of the playoffs instead of a 10-6 one everyone's claiming is awesome again.

Schedule results can be twisted a lot of ways in the NFL today (I've mentioned GB's previous) so records aren't a good measuring stick. I'd put more stock into the fact that Washington's defense isn't good, especially vs the pass, myself, BUT GB's offense isn't doing well either so that could be a wash. Going to be a very tough game to call Sunday once again for Pack fans.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:13 pm

The Packers have sent out a call for any and all kitchen sinks to have on hand to throw at the Washington ' Redskins ' this week in hopes of saving face.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Curry Rambeau's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:37 pm

lmao :)

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 07, 2016 at 11:48 pm

Tarynfor12, "Saving Face" from what?? I'll have a Nickel on GB. I might even put $2 Bucks on Minn. It wouldn't surprise me if both GB & MINN win this weekend.LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:19 pm

Where are you placing your bet at in Las Vegas? Perhaps I can find time to by and witness this confident wager since I'm also a Vegas resident. I don't usually go to the casino but.....

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:26 pm

Tarynfor 12, Bally's or Paris

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:31 pm

Tarynfor 12, Bally's or Paris. I'll be in Black Leather, with a Fedora with Peacock Feathers. But I won't be alone.LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:35 pm

Tarynfor12, Christie will be with me. Say Hi if you see me. LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:38 pm

Tarynfor12, CHRISTIE will be with me. Say Hi if you see me.LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tarynfor12's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:50 pm

OK, I'll do my best to get there come Sunday.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
LASVEGAS-TOM's picture

January 08, 2016 at 04:05 pm

Tarynfor12, I'm booked for 5 day's, but we'll be leaving Sunday. Try today or tomorrow.LVT

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
WinUSA's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:14 pm

I have read all the dis and confidence the Skins and their fans are touting....these guys are just primed for picking.

McCarthy and team will be ready.... I think they are just were I would want them...underdogs, dissed, and pissed.

Go Packers!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:25 pm

The chances of MM losing his job after one down season with all the surrounding factors that resulted in 10-6 and a playoff berth is as close to zero as you will ever get.

One of the most successful programs of the last decade isn't spitting out its coach after this season- even if the Packers completely bomb on Sunday.

I can't imagine anyone who actually follows the Packers believing otherwise.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

January 07, 2016 at 03:57 pm

No one is clamoring for McCarthy to get fired in the actual professional sports world. Just a few fans that think a new regime is the answer and a few pundits and media groups fishing for stories of sensationalism to rile up some readers.

There are many here that would probably want that to happen, but it just seems like such a losing proposition. New Head coaches are going to make drastic changes and will usually take three to four years to get "their" guys. So those that propose Rodgers has a few prime years left, that's what we want to do with them? Experiment? We have a coach with a winning acumen to rival only Belicek in the last decade. Please tell me who the upgrade is..........Jim Tomsula? Nick Saban? Sarkesian? Gase? Lovie Smith? Jackson? No thanks on all of the above.

The truth of the matter is, the best coaches out there are coaching their teams at a high level and aren't about to be let go. So you can take a chance at a Chip Kelly or a coordinator with a pedigree like McDaniels or Philbin, and the results there could be even worse.

Be very careful what you wish for.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
barutanseijin's picture

January 07, 2016 at 04:35 pm

I think there's a chance he leaves on his own. He doesn't seem to be completely there this season.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:50 pm

Never happen. Too proud a person.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:04 pm

I'm back. I just got released from the asylum. This team has driven me off of the deep end.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 05:40 pm

Welcome back and not a moment too soon.. Just in time for the real fun.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:27 pm

Remember when the season started? Couldn't wait! This is the second season the pretenders have been weeded out. I honestly don't know what to expect. Can this team play for at least 3 1/4s? If they play for 3 they win. Here's my fearless prediction, NFCCG will be GB at home against Seattle.
Packers 21 Seattle 17.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 08, 2016 at 07:46 pm

so 2 fans don't like this? hhmmmmm

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Paul Ott Carruth's picture

January 07, 2016 at 06:46 pm

Coaches can and do get fired after having winning seasons. I also understand the concern as well. Tampa Bay hasn't been the same since Gruden was fired. In seven seasons he won a Super Bowl and reached the playoffs 2 other seasons. His teams were gutted, lost draft picks, suffered numerous key injuries (Cadillac Williams) and were in salary cap hell, yet he was able to make hay with Jeff Garcia as his quarterback. He was fired after a 9-7 season in 2008.

Lovie Smith was fired after a 10-6 season. All he did was direct a team to the Super Bowl and win the NFC North 3 times in 8 years. Look at the offensive talent this guy had a QB. Rex Grossman? Cutler? It's a miracle they won as many games they did with those guys at the controls. I honestly thought Trestman would be an upgrade in offensive approach from Lovie's staff. Schematically it was but Cutler was not reined in. Marc wasn't strong enough to lead the team. Which leads us to John Fox. The jury is still out on John in Chicago, but let's look at his tenure in Denver.

Denver posted a 46-18 record in his tenure (2011-14). His record in order of season was: 8-8 (Tebow), 13-3 (Manning), 13-3 (Manning), 12-4 (Manning). His teams won the AFC West 4 straight years and reached the Super Bowl in 2013. He was 3-4 in the playoffs (42% winning %age). Manning started 48 games in this span (75% of all starts). Yet he was fired. Why? Elway did not feel his teams were mentally tough or prepared. With Kubiak at the helm the Broncos fell off the map by going.......12-4 and earning the #1 seed with a real shot of reaching the Super Bowl. According to some on this site, a change in coaches always leads to upheavel. Here's a newsflash.....not always folks. Chip Kelly led the Eagles to the playoffs in year 1 following a regime change and went 10-6 the next year as well.

Just a note of comparison. From 2011-14 the McCarthy led Packers went 46-17-1, nearly an identical record as those Fox led Denver teams in the same time span. Same amount of division titles, 1 fewer win in the playoffs (2-4) and no Super Bowl appearance. Rodgers started 56 games in that time span for an (87.5%) starting rate. Flynn started 4, Tolzien 2, and Wallace 1 during the injury year of 2013.

Just because your head coach leads a team to a great record and several division titles doesn't mean they're safe. Football is a team game. Injuries happen to every team (see the Patriots), some teams have inexperienced offensive lines (see Denver), etc., etc. Everyone is managing some type of "crisis" on their teams. Everyone is trying to cover up their shortcomings in their teams. No team is perfect. The question is, which teams are led by coaches that manage these situations and accommodate for a teams deficiencies when they arise? Has McCarthy? He's got the playoffs to show that he has.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Bohj's picture

January 07, 2016 at 08:06 pm

POC. I'm confused. Is this a pro McCarthy argument or against? I like your numbers. But I'm not sure your Broncos illustration was a good comparison for or against the argument of new regime. I believe the Broncos would be in the same position now if Fox were still the coach give or take a loss or two. That D is pretty damn legit.
If Kubiak wins the big one.....I will stare in amazement.

As far as Kelly goes. His decisions baffle me. He loves the no huddle spread and shred. And it worked well his first year with Reid's speedy personnel. But then he gutted the hell out of all the speed he had. And then they were awful.

I still believe that if this team were a "fraction" healthier, we would be singing a different tune right now. And you can speculate about Playcalling all you want, but if the guys on the field don't get it done, then those schemes were crap too. All schemes work if you throw it right or block it right, or get open or catch the ball.

Without being a former coach. My eyes have seen guys dropping catchable balls (execution). Rodgers getting hit too often (missed blocks). Holding calls creating third and longs (execution). Rodgers losing faith in his protection and injury riddled receivers which leads to him getting happy feet in the pocket and panicking and then missing throws (execution). We catch 6 more footballs this season and have four less holding calls, entire drives and games change. The men on the field are responsible for getting the play to work. Even if we think the play is shit.

And don't take it from me the amateur armchair guy. Player interviews keep saying, its always a missed assignment or two. Always at the wrong time. Lang. Sitton. Cobb. Matthews. Pep. Leaders I respect have said as much. Just execute what was called and it will work.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Oppy's picture

January 07, 2016 at 09:42 pm

Yes, coaches can and do get fired after winning seasons.

My personal opinion is, you're not paying attention to the way the Packers operate if you think that Ted Thompson is going to fire Mike McCarthy after what is, without a doubt, one down season.. where we're still in the playoffs.

Not speaking about any other franchise, any other coach, any other circumstance.

I value your insight into coaching. However, I think everyone who follows the Packers should be very surprised if the Packers fired Mike McCarthy following a loss to the Redskins. It would be about as uncharacteristic a move as I could imagine the Packers making.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 07, 2016 at 10:24 pm

Agree! Can't be on top every year. Too many factors involved and some of those are just plain random. No coach knows everything, they learn along the way just like everyone else. Can't just toss years of building a solid organization because of on blip, and no dout this year was a blip.

Shouldn't tire someone unless you can get someone better instead. And where you gonna find him, among all the other coaches that just got fired or among the coordinators who have never been head coaches in the NFL befor.? For a team like TN or TB, maybe not such a tough call, but for a perennial playoff team having a tough stretch???

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
MarkinMadison's picture

January 07, 2016 at 10:42 pm

First, I think the Packers win against Washington.

Second, I don't think MM gets fired.

That said, like so many things with the Packers, just because you bet on the predictable thing doesn't mean you're right. Florio put it out there the MM could get fired if there is a bad loss to Washington. I don't think he needs to pull B.S. out of his hind end at this stage of his career. He's not Skip Bayless or Jim Rome either. Also, we're seen tension between #12 and MM for years now. And let's face it MM wanted #4 gone, so maybe he is just not the guy to manage an established NFL QB.

Also, consider that the front office has been bleeding talent for years now, and Elliot Wolf is being viewed as a prime candidate for the Chicago job. If TT is getting close to retiring, now might be the right time to pass the keys to a new GM. And with a new GM typically comes a new coach.

Change is going to happen sooner or later. That is reality. Every year every team evaluates all of their personnel, and that is another reality. If the Packers bomb out against Washington you really telling me that McCarthy CAN'T be fired?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 08, 2016 at 05:12 am

Every team has deficiencies and the team with the least will usually win. The problem is the Packers have more than usual. Team speed at WR, injuries, at both WR and 0-line are the biggest.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
PaulRosik's picture

January 08, 2016 at 07:41 pm

Teams that expect more or think they are ready for the Bowl and then underperform can certainly fire their coaches. And the Packers may fit into that category this season unless a playoff run occurs. I hardly think of Chip Kelly as a success story for that circumstance however. If Denver finishes the season they will certainly be a success as was Tampa when they brought in Gruden and got a Super Bowl out of Dungy's players. But most cases you can think of fall into the category of the Chiefs fire Marty Shottenheimer after continual playoff appearances but failures in the playoffs and then have 5 playoff appearances in the next 20 years. Same with Tampa - after Gruden won that Super Bowl they have made the playoffs only twice more in the last 13 seasons. Dallas won a last Super Bowl the season after Johnson left but then became a tire fire for the next 20 years and counting.

The point is that if you pick the wrong coach and start losing it is very hard to turn it around and start to win again. This is certainly a regular season that requires some examination of what happened and why. The plan has not been working and adjustments have been missing. But you better be damn sure of what comes next if you fire a staff. In most cases it becomes a long rebuilding effort and two or three coaches down the line before a team is a consistent winner again. After Lombardi it took 6 coaches until the next Super Bowl win. After Holmgren it took three. It's not as easy to pick the right guy as it seems.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 07, 2016 at 10:20 pm

Isn't it clear that MM waited too long to fix things last year. Was it even him or was he forced to? Maybe that's why he took back the play calling mid-season.

But everyone except him seems to know that the Packers need to run better schemes to get guys open. And he hasn't done it in half of a season. Maybe the coaches don't have the time to come up with totally new schemes and get them working. But it sure seems that they aren't even trying. And not trying is a pretty good reason to get fired.

Making the playoffs is meaningless to a team that was minutes away from a SB and whose defense is playing their best in years. If MM is satisfied with that, then I'm not satisfied with him. He never had the killer instinct.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
CallingIt's picture

January 07, 2016 at 10:38 pm

Man, some folks seem ready to eat their young around here. Adversity does not make or break a man, it merely shows what he's already made of. Looks like a few folks around here are made of jello.

How many remember how it used to be? Maybe next year, year after year, coach after coach. Now everybody's smarter than the guys who actually do the job. The annual mantra, 'fire MM', 'fire TT'. Wonder if anybody would want to play in the NFL at all if they let all of us be in charge...

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 07, 2016 at 11:26 pm

It's tough to be a head coach in the NFL nowadays.

The case against MM is simple.

When he continually talks about the receivers needing to get open and not coming up with schemes to get them open, it is frustrating.

When he says things like "there's very little difference between the # 1 seed and #6 seed", that is ridiculous.

When he said he doesn't know what all the complaining is about when the Pack was 10-4 because they lost 3 close games and got blown out by only 1, it shows that was being defensive about the obviously problems with the offense.

We don't know what he says in private but our experience with him has been he is slow to change and that might have cost us a SB last year.

It's hard to tell what it cost us this year as there have been a ton of injuries. So everyone is frustrated. But the buck stops with him.

In my dreams, he reads this board. Everything changes in Washington. Seahawks basically forfeit in the ice game setting up a rematch for us with the Panthers who we beat with our D. But based on the last game against them, I can't even dream we beat Arizona.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

January 08, 2016 at 05:46 am

"When he says things like "there's very little difference between the # 1 seed and #6 seed", that is ridiculous." No it's not. There isn't much difference between Carolina and Seattle, and we might as well see Seattle in January going to Charlotte and winning. There also isn't that much difference between the other playoff teams. Anybody remember last year's NFC playoffs? Detroit almost beat Dallas, who almost beat the Packers then, and both games came down to some dubious calls by refs. Packers almost beat Seattle, and would've had it not been for a certain boneheaded TE who wanted to catch the ball instead of blocking. And Packers then beat Seattle this season, and was the better team. The NFL is a week to week league, and anything can happen in the playoffs. Every team has play makers, and it is a game of inches.

With a couple of plays going against their favor, the Packers could've finished 8-8, with a couple of plays going in their favor, they could've finished 12-4. And no matter what people think, they could win the NFC this year. Not likely, but it can happen. On a good day, they can beat any NFL team. On a bad day, they could lose to every NFL team.

Just imagine the Packers get over Washington, and then a few more players return from the injury list. And let's say Vikings beat Seattle and Packers go to Carolina. That match up would be not too bad for the Packers, and just in case one or two key players for Carolina gets injured in practice, which can happen any practice in the NFL, and the Packers could very well beat Carolina.

And I distinctly remember that before the season, there were a lot of writers and commentators saying that the Packers still hadn't closed the talent gap between them and Seattle and the Cowboys, who were seen as top NFC contenders. Well the Cowboys were the worst NFC team this season. Seattle was soundly beaten by the Packers. Turns out, the teams to beat this year in the NFC are different. If you look back at my comments, I said in mid October that the NFC would have to go through Charlotte. I am living down here and see those guys play quite often. They are very good, but not unbeatable. However, when i made that comment, some posters here used to ridicule me and say that they'd have no chance to win the NFC. Well here we are...

Anything can happen. That's why it is so entertaining to watch the NFL.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 08, 2016 at 07:32 am

This response isn't worth a respsonse. :)

It just so happens that Seattle is the hottest team now so the direct 1 to 6 comparison might actually be the other way - the bottom is the best.

The point is that there are a few playoff teams playing really well and have all year. Seattle corrected things and are back. If you think that the top 3 playing teams (Seattle, Carolina, Arizona) and the bottom 3 (Packers, Washington & Minn) are in the same category, then there is nothing else to talk about.

Upsets can happen on any Sunday. But they are just that - upsets. Since 2010, we have been going into most games expecting to win. Now we have to hope for a playoff upset. That is a sad state of affairs.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Packer_Pete's picture

January 08, 2016 at 10:13 am

if you believe your own logic, how could you possibly say this after last weekend:
"If you think that the top 3 playing teams (Seattle, Carolina, Arizona)". Arizona clearly does not belong on the same field as Seattle, or am I wrong? So you should come up with a different categorization then...
But whatever, every single weekend upsets can and do happen in the NFL. We all know who "should" win. But we don't know who "will" win before. Otherwise I'd double my money every single weekend by betting everything on the "sure winner".

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
pacman's picture

January 08, 2016 at 11:33 am

Just having some good natured debate here.

My categorization is not based on the whole season or 1 week. More like the last half of the season.

With our D, Packers might win on Sunday (although with Randall out now that becomes even more difficult) But what is you confidence level past that? We used to think we could beat any team. Now it is hope.

But if our WRs stop sitting in traffic and keep moving, I'd say anything is possible if AR still remembers how to throw a lead pass.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
croatpackfan's picture

January 08, 2016 at 03:54 am

Mike, thank you for very good overview... Lets hope Packers will use what is offered!

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Archie's picture

January 08, 2016 at 08:33 am

McFatty's job should be on the line for this game.

Skins are a hot team, especially in the passing game. They have a hot QB with lots of excellent weapons to throw to, including a great TE.

Who wins?

To win this game, GB has got to shut down or seriously slow down WASH's passing attack. That will likely mean INTs. Will that happen? Not likely. Shields will be idle a month even if he plays and Randal is back on the injury list with hamstring issues. So Pack will need to rush Cousins to stop him. I'm talking all out blitzing. That is a dangerous formula but it is probably GB's only chance to win. The winner of this game probably draws AZ in R2. Nuff said.

WASH 24
GB 20

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Lphill's picture

January 08, 2016 at 12:16 pm

I am not saying MM is not a good coach just that maybe it's time to bring in some fresh ideas , maybe bringing Philbin back helps or a true wide receiver coach , hey bring in Donald Driver to coach the receivers. Why not?

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
Tundraboy's picture

January 09, 2016 at 12:58 pm

I wonder if DD would make a good WR coach. This would have been the year to find out. Next year we may not be able to gamble, but who knows.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RedskinsOverPack's picture

January 10, 2016 at 04:30 am

These are some great stats.. whatever you need to make you all feel better I guess.

Can disrespect our Skins all day long by saying defense is "AWFUL" and run game is "pathetic" and all this junk about their schedules vs. The daunting schedule of the Packers.. Pfff .. It all means nothing you know that right?

Fact of the matter is you guys are going to have to score points and more than you think. Bash us all you want but we can put points on the board.

Teddy and Co dropped 20 pts on you guys in week 17 and that offense has Adrian Peterson and nothing else that really scares anyone. Pack the box and make it tough to run and what do they have? And that squad put 20 on you.. How are you going to hold off Desean, Pierre, Jordan, and Crowder? Mix in a couple runs to keep play-action viable and that's all we need. We're going to hang points on the board and I'm sorry the eye test simply tells me your squad isn't winning no shootout..

That's not even touching on your non-existent o-line (due to injuries of course) going up against bunch of hard working guys who can create great pressure including premier pass rusher in Kerrigan.

Soo bash us all you want and give yourself some confidence w/ these stats..

We're the better team right now and that's pretty easy to see if you're just honest with yourself. Vegas thought so when they opened line w/ skins as favorites only to have the historically public play of packers push line to favour the Pack.

Just do us one solid should we win (which of course I think we will) Don't just shoot down your squad as bunch of bumbs for losing to the "lowly" Redskins.. Take it for what it will be.. A loss to a better team on the day and show some respect to a team on the rise.

Best of luck and let's all enjoy the game!

#HTTR

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
4thand1's picture

January 10, 2016 at 08:49 am

Were pissed for not putting up 30+ a game. I don't think of the skins as lowly, but the NFCE is really bad. You guys hire coaches like the Bengals taking dumb cheap shots. Don't get too excited, I don't see either team advancing after this game. After toady, we may be looking for a coach, but we all highly doubt it. The x factor today will be Lacy and Rodgers.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0
RedskinsOverPack's picture

January 10, 2016 at 11:34 pm

Hey.. Respect.

You're honest and I wanted to make sure I came back here and paid good fans my dues.

Had our shot early but can't leave points on the field w/ legend like A Rod behind centre in playoff matchup. That's a man you guys must appreciate while he's in a Packer jersey.

Better team tonight won so enjoy, good on ya and best of luck.

PS: don't like the Cobb mocking thing but hey I don't think he's real serious or mean spirited in it.

+ REPLY
0 points
0
0

Log in to comment and more!

Not a member yet? Join free.

If you have already commented on Cheesehead TV in the past, we've created an account for you. Just verify your email, set a password and you're golden.