RealGM

Posted: **Wed Dec 17, 2014 6:34 pm**

Flames24Rulz wrote:Name 14 coaches that are better than MM, or 10 GM's better than TT. It's impossible.

Jesus, just re-read this. It's opinion, you knob. It's not impossible, much less even settle-able argument-wise.

Also, "in the top half" or "in the top third" does not mean they are ranked as exactly #14 or #9. I would probably rank them a little higher if I had the time. Good lord.

Posted: **Wed Dec 17, 2014 7:15 pm**

Jollay wrote:
Flames24Rulz wrote:Name 14 coaches that are better than MM, or 10 GM's better than TT. It's impossible.

Jesus, just re-read this. It's opinion, you knob. It's not impossible, much less even settle-able argument-wise.

Also, "in the top half" or "in the top third" does not mean they are ranked as exactly #14 or #9. I would probably rank them a little higher if I had the time. Good lord.

Jeez relax, former moderator.

Posted: **Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:39 pm**

th87 wrote:
Jollay wrote:
Flames24Rulz wrote:Name 14 coaches that are better than MM, or 10 GM's better than TT. It's impossible.

Jesus, just re-read this. It's opinion, you knob. It's not impossible, much less even settle-able argument-wise.

Also, "in the top half" or "in the top third" does not mean they are ranked as exactly #14 or #9. I would probably rank them a little higher if I had the time. Good lord.

Jeez relax, former moderator.

Yeah, really. Chill out. I don't think that a simple "lulz" had to elicit a response like that, but okay.

Posted: **Wed Dec 17, 2014 10:50 pm**

th87 wrote:
Jollay wrote:
Flames24Rulz wrote:Name 14 coaches that are better than MM, or 10 GM's better than TT. It's impossible.

Jesus, just re-read this. It's opinion, you knob. It's not impossible, much less even settle-able argument-wise.

Also, "in the top half" or "in the top third" does not mean they are ranked as exactly #14 or #9. I would probably rank them a little higher if I had the time. Good lord.

Jeez relax, former moderator.

Posted: **Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:46 pm**

TT is a top 5 GM in the NFL and I don't like TT that much. MM is a middle of the pack coach. It is hard to rate MM with Favre and Rodgers at QB. How can you judge a coach that always had a HoF QB.

I think MM is a bone head on the field but the Packers develop young players very well and seems like they really like MM.

TT has a NFL team that is a contender and 99% of the roster was drafted by TT. That is amazing. I don't agree with 75% of the stuff TT does but I understand he is a top GM even if allot of it was luck or not. I feel like Rodgers makes any team a contender.

I do not think most GM's could make the playoffs with 90% of the roster players they drafted. But I also feel like the Packers could be so much better if TT used all his tools.

TT and MM might be the perfect combo. I don't think a GM and HC get along better than those two.

Posted: **Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:02 pm**

Godgers wrote:TT is a top 5 GM in the NFL and I don't like TT that much. MM is a middle of the pack coach. It is hard to rate MM with Favre and Rodgers at QB. How can you judge a coach that always had a HoF QB.

From what I've seen in McCarthy's (currently) 9 seasons in Green Bay is that he's an average head coach who has rode the coattails of his first ballot HOF QBs to good regular season records,but in the big late season games and in the playoffs when coaching becomes a much bigger factor and he actually has to COACH for the Packers to win and not just ride Aaron Rodgers he has looked like a buffoon for the most part.

We can debate what's a big game in the regular season I guess,but we can all agree that a playoff game would be considered a big game and if you take away the 2010 season which is taking away 1 out of 8 seasons,the Packers playoff record under MM is 2-5 and we don't even make the playoffs in 2010 if the Eagles and Desean Jackson don't pull off that epic come-back vs the Giants.

I'm not saying we shouldn't give MM credit for 2010 don't get me wrong.I give him credit for that,but that also shouldn't give him a pass for the pathetic 2-5 over the other 7 seasons either.2 playoff wins over 7 seasons when you've had first ballot HOF QBs who are 2 of the best QBs in the history of the NFL in all 7 of them,that is scary bad.

And that 2-5 looks even worse when you put it into context.

1 of the 2 wins came against a mediocre Vikings team lead at QB by Joe Webb...who? Exactly.The other came against the Seahawks way back in 2007.

2 of the 5 losses (Giants 2011/49ers 2012) were two of the most humiliating losses in Packer history.

Thank God Desean Jackson returned that Giants punt for a TD in 2010.

But yes,I know none of that matters and if the Packers are 1 and done this season for the 3rd time in the past 4 years and 4th time in the past 6 years you'll still be an idiot if you don't think McCarthy is a great head coach....I mean the guy like totally won a Super Bowl 4 years ago.

Posted: **Thu Dec 18, 2014 11:21 pm**

I am more of a what have you done for me lately person. I think 2010 was very fluky and the cards fell right for the Packers despite all the injury's

If this team misses the playoffs or loses its first playoff game, I would fire everyone. I would go after Harbaugh and give a new group a chance to see what they can do with Rodgers. This team underachieves every season. I am also sick of having a crap defense forever.

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:24 pm**

MM really helped develop Rodgers though. Let's not act like ARod was some finished product when MM took over in 2006. If you want to give Tom Clements the credit, that's fine too but atleast MM had the foresight to have some kind of development path for QBs when he got the job.

Even got Favre to throw less INTs.

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:25 pm**

The ol' "Take away the Super Bowl season" argument. Quite possibly the lamest argument I have ever seen in the history of arguments. :lol:

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:54 pm**

I don't think some people really realize how good that team in 2010 was. Sure we were a 10-6 team in the regular season, but think of the losses that season. The flag debacle in Chicago, the games they battled injuries against Washington and Miami, the game against the Falcons where there was a 14 point swing at the goal line, the games against Detroit & New England where Rodgers was concussed...

Keep in mind how good the defense was that year too, especially compared to what we've seen before that and after that.

We blew just about everybody out in 2011 with the team much healthier than it was the year before. I don't understand how anybody can call 2010 a fluke.

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:16 pm**

I always thought MM was a great Monday through Saturday coach. He's gotten much better during the games at not making bone head timeouts or challenges. Instead of weekly, those mistakes are once a month.

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 4:35 pm**

Flames24Rulz wrote:I don't think some people really realize how good that team in 2010 was. Sure we were a 10-6 team in the regular season, but think of the losses that season. The flag debacle in Chicago, the games they battled injuries against Washington and Miami, the game against the Falcons where there was a 14 point swing at the goal line, the games against Detroit & New England where Rodgers was concussed...

Keep in mind how good the defense was that year too, especially compared to what we've seen before that and after that.

We blew just about everybody out in 2011 with the team much healthier than it was the year before. I don't understand how anybody can call 2010 a fluke.

Yeah, Rilamann's argument is terrible. The whole "MM is only good because of Favre and Rodgers" thing is a pretty tired argument too.

The only reason Mike Holmgren was good is because of Brett Favre and our ridiculous defense during that time.
The only reason Peter Carroll is good is because he has Wilson and an insanely good defense.
The only reason Bill Belicheck is good is because he has Brady.
The only reason Sean Payton is good is because he has Drew Brees.
The only reason <Insert all of Peyton Manning's coaches here> were good was because of Peyton Manning.
The only reason that Tom Coughlin ever won was because they had an elite front four and because Eli randomly played like a super star.
The only reason Harbaugh had success as the 49ers coach was because he had elite defensive talent.

You can make that stupid argument with every coach who has success. You need talent to win in the NFL and in any professional sports league.

I'm convinced the only way that some people around here would think a coach is actually good is if they took a bunch of no named scrubs and won a title with them. Even then... some of those scrubs would have to play incredibly well and some people around here would still say the coach is holding them down.

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:26 pm**

MM is a coach that coached the team for 8 years, made the playoffs 6(?) times, won super bowl, kept a clean program, and still hasn't lost the team despite being known for being strict. It's amazing how much longevity his team and staff has in today's NFL.

Posted: **Fri Dec 19, 2014 5:40 pm**

Newz wrote:I'm convinced the only way that some people around here would think a coach is actually good is if they took a bunch of no named scrubs and won a title with them. Even then... some of those scrubs would have to play incredibly well and some people around here would still say the coach is holding them down.

This is exactly right. It's baffling to me how someone as consistently successful as McCarthy (hell, he held the team together with spit and cardboard after Rodgers got hurt last year) gets as much **** as he does. Is he the best coach in the NFL? I'd probably say no. But other than Belichick, he's been the most consistently successful coach over the last 8 years despite consistently fielding one of the most inexperienced rosters in the league and having significant turnover on the depth chart.

Posted: **Sat Dec 20, 2014 12:26 am**

I wouldn't can McCarthy by any close to small stretch of the imagination, but does anyone here think our chances next year would be negligibly less if we had any of about a dozen other guys currently in the NFL? (Belichick? Philbin? Carroll? Harbaugh? Fisher? Pagano? Arians? Fox? Reid? Payton? Kelly? McCoy? Tomlin? Even Tom Coughlin (that may be stretching it). If most of any of these guys took the reins next year I would feel almost the same about our odds to reach the SB as I would with McCarthy.

That's why I said he somewhere in the top half. He is. You can rationally make a case he's one of the best few, or I think it's personally reasonable to think he's in the 8 to 14 range somewhere as well.

Of course if you watch one guy every week you see all his mistakes. Just be glad you're not watching Mike Smith this year...it would take you back to Ray Rhodes.

Posted: **Sat Dec 20, 2014 7:28 pm**

Jollay wrote:I wouldn't can McCarthy by any close to small stretch of the imagination, but does anyone here think our chances next year would be negligibly less if we had any of about a dozen other guys currently in the NFL? (Belichick? Philbin? Carroll? Harbaugh? Fisher? Pagano? Arians? Fox? Reid? Payton? Kelly? McCoy? Tomlin? Even Tom Coughlin (that may be stretching it). If most of any of these guys took the reins next year I would feel almost the same about our odds to reach the SB as I would with McCarthy.

That's why I said he somewhere in the top half. He is. You can rationally make a case he's one of the best few, or I think it's personally reasonable to think he's in the 8 to 14 range somewhere as well.

Of course if you watch one guy every week you see all his mistakes. Just be glad you're not watching Mike Smith this year...it would take you back to Ray Rhodes.

This is a real good post and I agree pretty much 100%.

Like I've said before,I don't think MM is a bad coach and I wouldn't fire him just to fire him.The players like him and he does know how to develop talent,Martyconlon put it pretty well saying he's a really good Monday through Saturday head coach and he's a decent gameday coach as long as it's not a meaningful game or playoff game.

My thing with MM and what makes him an average head coach at the end of the day is the big games and playoff games,it's like MM goes brain-dead and the team always comes out flat and or falls apart in the big games like we seen last week vs the Bills and we've seen multiple times in the playoffs.

Not saying we have to win the Super Bowl every season obviously,but damn at least show up in the playoffs and be competitive and maybe even win a game once in awhile.

Say what you want about the ''take out 2010" argument but the fact of the matter is 2 playoff wins over a 7 season span with Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers is pretty damn bad,especially if you think MM is an elite or top 5 head coach in the league.

Maybe winning the Super Bowl in 2010 gives him a pass for the other 7 seasons with some Packer fans but not me.Like I said on here the other day,MM could win 2 playoff games over the next 10 seasons and you're still going to have some Packer fans giving him a pass because of that 1 Super Bowl,that's just how some Packer fans are.

But if someone like Belichick only won 2 playoff games over a 7 year span with Tom Brady those same people would be burning him at the stake despite winning 3 Super Bowls and playing in 5.

No elite coach with a first ballot HOF QB would only win 2 playoff games over a 7 season span,it just wouldn't happen.

RealGM

Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game

Re: Bills Post Game