POLL: Your choice for Packers next H.C.

ibanezjp · Post #1 » by **ibanezjp** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:34 pm

Since this seems to be the only thing that matters now as a Packers fan I figured we could discuss your favorites and why. I have been on the McDaniels bandwagon for a couple months. I think he’s learned what not to do from his time in Denver and with Brady’s endorsement Rodgers should trust him and have faith in the system thus restoring Rodgers to Godgers. Would be fine with Riley. On the fence about Defilippo and don’t want Harbaugh or Aryans.

Post #2 » by **humanrefutation** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:46 pm

We'll make this the Mac thread going forward.

I'd prefer Riley over anyone. No thank you to Harbaugh (he's been crap since the Ravens won in 2013), Arians (who is out of the game). LaFleur is an interesting candidate as he came from the Sean McVay tree, but he might be too green.

Flames24Rulz · Post #3 » by **Flames24Rulz** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 5:55 pm

Based on how Vikings fans have criticized the playcalling from DeFilippo, I'm not really sure I'd want him. Riley's my guy, but I don't really think I'd be upset with anybody. I think all of those guys would be upgrades over MM at this very moment.

Post #4 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 6:05 pm

Riley. Easily.

Ron Swanson · Post #5 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:11 pm

Arians or DeFilipo. No thanks on college coaches. Riley could be the next Sean McVay or the next Chip Kelly. Have no idea if his offensive scheme is gonna translate to the NFL and that's not a risk I'm willing to take.

ibanezjp · Post #6 » by **ibanezjp** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:22 pm

Sorry I misspelled Arians, lol. I hadn't though about LeFleur. I think the biggest issue with Riley is we haven't even heard a breadcrumb of a rumor that he wants to leave OU correct?

Kerb Hohl · Post #7 » by **Kerb Hohl** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:27 pm

I'm not sure what to think about Arians. He was an innovative mind, but the game also passed him by as it did McCarthy about 3 years ago. Arians seems smarter to evolve, but chucking 10 50+ yard passes isn't the way to go anymore. He did seem to scheme guys open more often, but give me the youngest, best, and brightest in that category.

Post #8 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:39 pm

The question of college schemes translating to the NFL is now a dead argument. The best NFL offenses are adopting college schemes, not the other way around.

Post #9 » by **humanrefutation** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 7:54 pm

Flames24Rulz wrote:Based on how Vikings fans have criticized the playcalling from DeFilippo, I'm not really sure I'd want him. Riley's my guy, but I don't really think I'd be upset with anybody. I think all of those guys would be upgrades over MM at this very moment.

DeFilippo is interesting case considering how good the Philly QBs looked with him as QB Coach and how **** they've looked since he left. That isn't necessary indicative of his ability to mold QBs, especially as the Vikings offense has been decidedly average this year, but it does make me wonder if he'd be a good candidate here.

Post #10 » by **MickeyDavis** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:12 pm

I like Riley but I don't see Murphy hiring him.

Mags FTW · Post #11 » by **Mags FTW** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 8:39 pm

Read on Twitter

Ron Swanson · Post #12 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:39 pm

ReasonablySober wrote:The question of college schemes translating to the NFL is now a dead argument. The best NFL offenses are adopting college schemes, not the other way around.

Nah. It's more applicable given the defensive rule changes, sure. It's hardly a dead argument at this point though. I'm willing to listen to how specifically Riley's air-raid offense can translate and how he'll be able to adapt his scheme to work against bigger, better pro athletes. (i.e. will those 4-wide, zone-read run plays work with our personnel?).

For all the criticism over our offense's lack of complex route trees, OU runs just as many basic slants and fly routes off of play-action as any other college offense. These are the kinds of things that most college-to-the-pros coaches have historically struggled with evolving. I still have my reservations.

Post #13 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:48 pm

Ron Swanson wrote:
ReasonablySober wrote:The question of college schemes translating to the NFL is now a dead argument. The best NFL offenses are adopting college schemes, not the other way around.

Nah. It's more applicable given the defensive rule changes, sure. It's hardly a dead argument at this point though. I'm willing to listen to how specifically Riley's air-raid offense can translate and how he'll be able to adapt his scheme to work against bigger, better pro athletes. (i.e. will those 4-wide, zone-read run plays work with our personnel?).

For all the criticism over our offense's lack of complex route trees, OU runs just as many basic slants and fly routes off of play-action as any other college offense. These are the kinds of things that most college-to-the-pros coaches have historically struggled with evolving. I still have my reservations.

Here you go.

Ron Swanson · Post #14 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:12 pm

Good read. I agree with some things (basic simplicity vs. complexity philosophy in opening up underneath routes) and disagree with others (classic Ringer hipsterism in labeling the use of multiple fakes and jet sweeps as "revolutionary"). NFL offenses are borrowing things from colleges probably more than at any point in history, yet you're also seeing a "re-tread" leading the way in this philosophy with Andy Reid in KC.

And the reasoning IMO is because it's easier to more seamlessly integrate a lot of these concepts (as opposed to completely "adopting" a college spread offense) from someone accustomed to offenses already at the pro-level. Think that DeFilipo and Arians are two guys who are not only more proven offensive minds but also adaptable. If I honestly had to choose a "Mike Budenholzer" in waiting in the NFL, Arians would be the closest comparison.

Post #15 » by **ReasonablySober** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:31 pm

Ron Swanson wrote:Good read. I agree with some things (basic simplicity vs. complexity philosophy in opening up underneath routes) and disagree with others (classic Ringer hipsterism in labeling the use of multiple fakes and jet sweeps as "revolutionary"). NFL offenses are borrowing things from colleges probably more than at any point in history, yet you're also seeing a "re-tread" leading the way in this philosophy with Andy Reid in KC.

And the reasoning IMO is because it's easier to more seamlessly integrate a lot of these concepts (as opposed to completely "adopting" a college spread offense) from someone accustomed to offenses already at the pro-level. Think that DeFilipo and Arians are two guys who are not only more proven offensive minds but also adaptable. If I honestly had to choose a "Mike Budenholzer" in waiting in the NFL, Arians would be the closest comparison.

Sure, but two years ago he hired the guy who invented the Pistol offense in college to come and teach him his new schemes.

Ron Swanson · Post #16 » by **Ron Swanson** » Wed Nov 28, 2018 10:44 pm

So maybe that's the route you go then (because everyone knows Reid calls the plays there). If we were Cleveland, the Jets, or Jacksonville, then I'd be all for rolling the dice on Riley. Let him mold and develop a young QB and build through the draft. He's just not my first or second choice. Too risky for me given the title window that we have during Rodgers' career.

Lippo · Post #17 » by **Lippo** » Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:59 am

Riley would work, maybe someone outside the box like Mike Leach....or Kingsburry and that TT coach line.

Mags FTW · Post #18 » by **Mags FTW** » Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:29 am

Ron Swanson wrote:So maybe that's the route you go then (because everyone knows Reid calls the plays there). If we were Cleveland, the Jets, or Jacksonville, then I'd be all for rolling the dice on Riley. Let him mold and develop a young QB and build through the draft. He's just not my first or second choice. Too risky for me given the title window that we have during Rodgers' career.

Yeah, Riley would have a learning curve for the pro game that might take too long given Rodgers’ age.

Post #19 » by **MickeyDavis** » Thu Nov 29, 2018 2:01 pm

It will be interesting to see where MM goes. Cleveland is talked about of course with Dorsey being there. He'll definitely get some interest because he's a "Super Bowl winning coach who developed Rodgers ".

Post #20 » by **humanrefutation** » Thu Nov 29, 2018 5:13 pm

Mags FTW wrote:
Ron Swanson wrote:So maybe that's the route you go then (because everyone knows Reid calls the plays there). If we were Cleveland, the Jets, or Jacksonville, then I'd be all for rolling the dice on Riley. Let him mold and develop a young QB and build through the draft. He's just not my first or second choice. Too risky for me given the title window that we have during Rodgers' career.

Yeah, Riley would have a learning curve for the pro game that might take too long given Rodgers’ age.

I'm not sure what you mean by "learning curve." It's the same game with generally the same rules. The biggest adjustment for head coaches transitioning from college is the fact that your players actually have power. That does require getting used to, but Riley would have the same problem if he was working with Cleveland or the Jets or Jacksonville. If anything, working with a HOF QB like Rodgers will probably make that transition easier in some respects because he's actually good at football and Riley wouldn't have to spend time building up his skillset.

Unless this team hires a retread, pretty much every head coach is going to have a learning curve of some kind. I'd rather hire the smartest, best playcaller and decisionmaker and surround him with some veteran coaches who can help guide him on some of the intricacies that separate college HC versus NFL HC instead of hiring a lesser candidate simply because they were an OC somewhere for a couple years.

Who do you want as the next Head Coach