NFL Wild Card Round: Packers @ Bears on January 10th at 7:00 PM

[Underachiever]

30 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

Yes, my premise is they were never as talented as they thought they were. LaFleur did not have 13 win talent and managed to win just 9 games. Rather he had around 9 win talent to begin with. 
 

If they fire LaFleur the Packers should send Gutekunst packing too, and start fresh adding more talent to hang with the big dogs. They should not fire LaFleur out of a belief they’re a championship caliber team and it’s his decisions keeping them from the summit of the mountain. 

But were they as talented as a team that outscored Chicago 41-6 in the first halves or not as talented as a team that got outscored 68-30 in second halves? The one that got a ten-point lead at Cleveland or the one that blew that lead? Had they been consistently outplayed, that’s one thing, but the manner in which this team lost is beyond the talent level. If they clean house, I’m fine with that. Just don’t do the same thing and run it back with the “youngest team in the NFL” and expect different results. 

[JosephC]

21 minutes ago, yourout said:

Is Sean McDermott .....MLF with a better QB?

Regular season is hard to compare, because the AFC East has been a joke division since the Patriots tailed off.  Still, the Bills have posted 7 straight 10+ win seasons.  They haven't had an 8-9/9-8 .500 dropoff like the Packers did in 2022/2023.

Winning in the playoffs is hard.  Divisional strength still might play a role in the playoffs (home field), but things like that get largely wiped away.  McDermott has a 7-7 playoff record.  LaFleur has a 3-6 playoff record.  So there is a big difference there.

One thing that really weighs heavy in my evaluation of LaFleur is how they went into the 2021 playoff as the #1 seed and got KO'ed by the 49ers in their first game.  They had home field, and blew it.  Can't say that LaFleur didn't have as good of a QB, as Aaron Rodgers was the AP league MVP.  Including that playoff game and all the games that have happened since, the Packers are on a 38-34-1 run (1-4 in playoffs).

Looking at the complete picture...no, I don't think McDermott is MLF with a better quarterback.  I think McDermott is a better NFL head coach.

[HarryDoyle]

4 minutes ago, Underachiever said:

But were they as talented as a team that outscored Chicago 41-6 in the first halves or not as talented as a team that got outscored 68-30 in second halves? The one that got a ten-point lead at Cleveland or the one that blew that lead? Had they been consistently outplayed, that’s one thing, but the manner in which this team lost is beyond the talent level. If they clean house, I’m fine with that. Just don’t do the same thing and run it back with the “youngest team in the NFL” and expect different results. 

There's nothing wrong with the talent on this team. A team dearth of talent doesn't consistently jump out to double digit leads to start games. They are a better team than the Bears. in 180+ minutes of game time, the Bears only led for roughly 90 seconds of it yet still won two out of the three games. The difference is the Bears find ways to win and the Packers find ways to lose. That falls on the coach. Nobody beats the Packers more than the Packers do.

[homer]

27 minutes ago, yourout said:

Is Sean McDermott .....MLF with a better QB?

worse

[yourout]

11 minutes ago, homer said:

worse

Coach or quarterback?

[homer]

4 minutes ago, yourout said:

Coach or quarterback?

I think he's a worse coach

[HarryDoyle]

3 minutes ago, homer said:

I think he's a worse coach

Well, he's rumored to be on the hot seat too if he doesn't break through and comes up short of the Super Bowl again. I wonder if the Rich Eisens of the world will defend him too.

[Jopal78]

45 minutes ago, HarryDoyle said:

There's nothing wrong with the talent on this team. A team dearth of talent doesn't consistently jump out to double digit leads to start games. They are a better team than the Bears. in 180+ minutes of game time, the Bears only led for roughly 90 seconds of it yet still won two out of the three games. The difference is the Bears find ways to win and the Packers find ways to lose. That falls on the coach. Nobody beats the Packers more than the Packers do.

It’s a 60 minute game. It’s irrelevant how big of a lead you amass if you don’t win. 
 

There is no realistic way to coach up Nixon, Valentine, Diggs, the CBs they signed off the street etc. so they do not leave receivers running open downfield. Why? Because they’re not talented enough players to do that play after play in the NFL.

Likewise, there’s no amount of coaching that is going to keep their D lineman in their gaps and their edge players in containment because they’re not talented enough to do it all the time.
 

Finally the players on the OL not being able to beat their man to create running lanes, and the running backs not being explosive enough to make the first defender miss are uncorrectable by any amount of coaching.  

McManus wasn’t lined up correctly he didn’t  land the kicks he needed to. No amount of coaching is going to make a 10 year vet change what got him to the pros. 
 

So you’re right the Packers beat themselves,  but it’s not by scheme, play calling or strategy. It’s due to lack of execution which always comes down to talent. 

[HarryDoyle]

20 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

It’s a 60 minute game. It’s irrelevant how big of a lead you amass if you don’t win. 
 

There is no realistic way to coach up Nixon, Valentine, Diggs, the CBs they signed off the street etc. so they do not leave receivers running open downfield. Why? Because they’re not talented enough players to do that play after play in the NFL.

Likewise, there’s no amount of coaching that is going to keep their D lineman in their gaps and their edge players in containment because they’re not talented enough to do it all the time.
 

Finally the players on the OL not being able to beat their man to create running lanes, and the running backs not being explosive enough to make the first defender miss are uncorrectable by any amount of coaching.  

McManus wasn’t lined up correctly he didn’t  land the kicks he needed to. No amount of coaching is going to make a 10 year vet change what got him to the pros. 
 

So you’re right the Packers beat themselves,  but it’s not by scheme, play calling or strategy. It’s due to lack of execution which always comes down to talent. 

Dude, I'm not going to debate you on this because you're not worth the hassle. My opinion of the talent level aligns with most people who have played/coached/covered the NFL. I'll take their word and my own opinions over yours.

[JosephC]

McDermott now 8-7 in the playoffs.  Certainly not eye-popping, but again, winning playoff games is hard.  His playoff winning percentage of .533 is better than Don Shula, Sean Payton, Mike McCarthy, Pete Carroll and Mike Ditka.  Also worth noting is that he started coaching the Bills in 2017.  The last time the Bills had been to the playoffs was 1999.  The last time they had won a playoff game was 1995.  So it's not like he inherited a great situation in Buffalo.

[yourout]

1 hour ago, homer said:

I think he's a worse coach

I think he's pretty much the same. 

MLF is obviously a better game week coach but he's a much worse game day coach.

[homer]

Josh Allen is a first ballot HOFer and an absolute freak athlete. He is one of a handful of players who can single handedly win games. He covers up a lot of mismanagement.

[wallus]

Give me Cignetti.... Google him.

[Jopal78]

1 hour ago, HarryDoyle said:

Dude, I'm not going to debate you on this because you're not worth the hassle. My opinion of the talent level aligns with most people who have played/coached/covered the NFL. I'll take their word and my own opinions over yours.

… and there it is. The Brewer fanatic way: Claim you’re right a throw an insult.

[Recovering Chicagoan]

1 hour ago, Jopal78 said:

It’s a 60 minute game. It’s irrelevant how big of a lead you amass if you don’t win. 
 

There is no realistic way to coach up Nixon, Valentine, Diggs, the CBs they signed off the street etc. so they do not leave receivers running open downfield. Why? Because they’re not talented enough players to do that play after play in the NFL.

Likewise, there’s no amount of coaching that is going to keep their D lineman in their gaps and their edge players in containment because they’re not talented enough to do it all the time.
 

Finally the players on the OL not being able to beat their man to create running lanes, and the running backs not being explosive enough to make the first defender miss are uncorrectable by any amount of coaching.  

McManus wasn’t lined up correctly he didn’t  land the kicks he needed to. No amount of coaching is going to make a 10 year vet change what got him to the pros. 
 

So you’re right the Packers beat themselves,  but it’s not by scheme, play calling or strategy. It’s due to lack of execution which always comes down to talent. 

I agree that the Packers’ talent level seems a bit overrated by some. I also think MLF’s main weakness seems to be the inability to make good in-game adjustments. If he were better in that area, the Packers would likely have had a few more playoff wins over the last few seasons.

[HarryDoyle]

43 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

… and there it is. The Brewer fanatic way: Claim you’re right a throw an insult.

Point out the insult. And I am right.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

My issues with MLF started when the Packers kicked a FG down by 8 against Tampa in the NFCCG. They had Aaron Rodgers and they kicked a FG to go down by 5 and give the ball to Tom Brady for the last 2 minutes knowing the game is over if they get a first down. They didn't even do an onside kick which you might be able to justify. 

It's forgiveable if it didn't completely tell you what kind of coach LaFleur is and set the stage for the rest of his tenure. He's scared. He's afraid of the big mistake that will lose the game. 

For the umpteenth time, I do think he's a great coordinator. I think given a week to prepare and script out plays, he's quite good. I think he can coach young offensive players and develop them to succeed. When he has to adjust on the fly, or counter his opponent's adjustments, he's among the worst in the league. His scripted plays last night had the Bears hapless. 

In-game adjustments, challenges, timeouts, control of his emotions during games...he's terrible. That's what a HC is supposed to be good with. The coordinators do most of the other stuff. That's what he is, a coordinator. 

Seven years is enough. He's not breaking through in years 8 to 10. I hope the Packers recognize that too. 

 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 hour ago, homer said:

Josh Allen is a first ballot HOFer and an absolute freak athlete. He is one of a handful of players who can single handedly win games. He covers up a lot of mismanagement.

Gee, sounds like a guy I know. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

I don't get the notion of LaFleur being a hot name that can "cash in" elsewhere. Not saying it isn't true, but I don't understand who is looking at what he's done where and thinking, oh man, yes, let's get that guy!

[homer]

41 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

Gee, sounds like a guy I know. 

Eddie Lacey?

[HarryDoyle]

22 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I don't get the notion of LaFleur being a hot name that can "cash in" elsewhere. Not saying it isn't true, but I don't understand who is looking at what he's done where and thinking, oh man, yes, let's get that guy!

OH, I have no doubt he can take a moribund franchise and turn them into a perennial #7 seed within three years.

[Sixtolezcano]

24 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I don't get the notion of LaFleur being a hot name that can "cash in" elsewhere. Not saying it isn't true, but I don't understand who is looking at what he's done where and thinking, oh man, yes, let's get that guy!

NYJ, Tenn., AZ, Vegas, NYG, Cleveland……

[LouisEly]

18 hours ago, RedStickBrew said:

Badger hockey is a good bridge from now until the beginning of baseball. Give it a try 

I'd love to.  But, like everything else is turning into including the NFL, you can't have only one streaming service to watch.

Have to subscribe to B1G+, Peacock, etc., on top of your standard service.

Or does B1G+ actually carry all games (including basketball) even if they are on Peacock?

[RedStickBrew]

45 minutes ago, LouisEly said:

I'd love to.  But, like everything else is turning into including the NFL, you can't have only one streaming service to watch.

Have to subscribe to B1G+, Peacock, etc., on top of your standard service.

Or does B1G+ actually carry all games (including basketball) even if they are on Peacock?

You’re correct, it’s incredibly annoying to have multiple streaming services for watching sports in general. I watch most hockey games on Big +. There have been sporadic hockey games on BTN. Peacock hockey has only been for games v Notre Dame as I recall. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 hour ago, Sixtolezcano said:

NYJ, Tenn., AZ, Vegas, NYG, Cleveland……

He will fail in any of those places besides maybe Arizona because there isn't a QB. He could possibly be the guy to resurrect Murray, Dart maybe in NYG?

Even those moribund franchises, their dream is to win the Super Bowl. It would make more sense to find the next Reid or McVay rather than a retread that didn't win his conference with Aaron Rodgers. I think you are probably right, but it makes no sense to me. 

I just don't see what makes LaFleur an attractive candidate.