FVBrewerFan

You've said similar things before, and I don't understand it. You don't think fans of lots other franchises in various sports expect to win? That's ONLY Packer fans? Seems like a bit of a strawman argument. I think the vast majority of Packer fans DID expect this team to make it to more than one SB over this long TT/MM era. I think that was a reasonable expectation. Losing multiple times at home in the playoffs and blowing the game at Seattle lands on the HC. Is he 100% responsible? Of course not. But you also can't say he doesn't deserve any of the blame. Packer fans are no different than any other fans. A coach becomes unpopular, everyone piles on. As I said earlier, I agree there's no need to be gleeful about it either. But some fans that wanted him gone are openly gloating about it, and that's fine with me too. It is a sport, and fans are allowed to get excited about these things. I don't feel sorry for MM. The man has a SB ring, a street named after him, millions of dollars, and will coach again.

What precedent? If the next QB is as good as Rodgers, he can have a say in who the HC, OC, and/or QB coach is as well. What's the downside? It's not like you're letting Rodgers pick the HC, but maybe he would buy-in if he's at least involved.

Extremely small sample size. If there's a candidate who checks all the boxes and seems like the right coach at the right time, then it's a really bad idea to dismiss him just because a couple other have failed. Far more coaches with NFL HC experience have failed than college coaches. People used to say the same thing in the NBA until Brad Stevens came along.

I wonder how much injuries plays into the bad special teams? This assumes the Packers have suffered more injuries the last 5 - 8 years than most teams and I don't know if that's the case. But if it is then you are continually putting new guys out there on special teams who are either cast offs from other teams or practice squad dudes. It's a big part of it. The last 3-4 spots on the game day roster change every week. Mostly due to injuries. So yea, the ST units change constantly every week. Then you add the fact practices are so limited now, this is what you get. That said, the biggest issues on ST haven't had anything to do with those things. Crosby's missed FG, Williams fumbled punt return, Montgomery taking it out of the end zone, then fumbling. Those are all vets making mistakes. But yea, the week to week failure to down the ball inside the 20, holding penalties, offsides, etc. largely due to new guys coming on and off ST every week with little practive time.

Why? Because he's a FA at the end of the season, and if they know they're not going to be able to re-sign him why let him go for nothing? Lakers make no sense though, as they're not going to compete this year.

Holmgren and MM were QB coaches, and not safe picks- each won a SB rather quickly. I dismiss the "HC experience" qualification, there a lot of bright guys out there who would have no problem being a great HC from day one.

Middleton getting benched didn't help matters either. Can't say whether that was a good/bad thing long term, but it was certainly unusual. Rumors are Middleton wants a max deal, so could be reading too much into it but something may be going on with him. Who knows, maybe a blockbuster trade coming soon.

The problem with that is, most teams will block an assistant coach from pursuing a promotion to a coordinator role (Packers blocked Tom Clements and Ben MacAdoo for years). Which likely eliminates anyone from the Saints, Chiefs or Rams from contention for the OC position. I'm also not crazy about installing a third defensive scheme in 3 years, since hiring a defensive-minded HC likely means the end for Mike Pettine. I wouldn't mind having 3 defensive schemes in 3 years. I'm neutral on Petttine, the secondary is decimated and the defense still isn't horrible. But if the new HC wants to bring in a new DC, that's fine by me. Can't be afraid of change, and if the new HC wants a new DC, need to trust that decision. Don't get me started on blocking coaching interviews, it's ridiculous. But you really need to take it one step at a time. Find the best/right HC, that's step one. If that happens to be a defensive coach, then yes, you eliminate some of those names you mentioned as OC. But you can't base your decision on HC based on who would/ wouldn't be available as OC. There are plenty of bright offensive minds out there.

Not only that, we don't know what happened in the locker room after the game, Or especially what the conversation was like between MM and Murphy. For all we know, MM made it an easy decision by his reaction to the loss. I mean, even in his presser after the game he just sounded defeated. He has the last couple weeks as well, but even moreso yesterday. So it wouldn't surprise me if Murphy talked to him and came away with the impression that MM was simply "done" emotionally. That, along with the fact we really haven't heard players strongly supporting him through all this. It was long past due, and I agree with you that's the way this business works. He will be fine, he'll coach again, and it's probably best for him in the long run. I wanted this since the playoff loss to Seattle, but I'm not enjoying this either. Just necessary.

I would prefer a HC with a defensive background, hire innovative OC that can focus exclusively on that. But I'm open minded. I really don't care if it's a re-tread, college coach, current OC, whatever. We don't know half of what they know about any of these candidates, so I just hope they get it right.

He has a .693 career OPS against LHP, so it was really stupid to acquire him if that was the reason. I think the bolded part pretty much sums up the deal. Stearns felt the need to make a big move, and looked past Schoop's warts hoping that his hot week prior to the trade would carry over. The truth is, though, Schoop is the exact type of hitter Stearns had shown he was trying to get away from by signing Cain and trading for Yelich and to a lesser extent, Moustakas. Schoop is very much a player Doug Melvin would have loved, but while he has the type of bat that can carry a team for short stretches in a Babe Ruthian style, it is no even close to sustainable due to his poor approach and lack of discipline. I was super excited about the deal when it happened, but I naively was looking past Schoop's warts and was thinking, or rather hoping, he would be the middle-of-the-order bat the team desperately needed at the time. I was completely wrong on that front. Thankfully Moose was decent, Shaw improved, Yelich became super human and Braun channeled his 2011 self, and when combined with terrific pitching, it was enough to go on that great run and win the division. I think Stearns likely had a different deal in mind involving Ortiz (I'm guessing for Gausman or another 2B), and when that deal fell apart, he panicked and grabbed Schoop because he felt the need to grab someone at the deadline. It happens. I'd love to see them get some value out of Schoop, but if it doesn't happen, oh well I guess. You can't compound mistakes by prolonging them. It also wouldn't surprise me to see him go somewhere else and be great again. I just don't ever see that happening for the Brewers. I agree with everything you said, except I don't think it was a panic move. I think he wanted pitching and couldn't get a deal done that he thought was fair. So he figured Schoop, while not the ideal type of hitter, could still be an upgrade for the stretch run- especially since he appeared to be "hot" at the time. Catch lightning in the bottle for a month or two. I think it was a calculated risk, not a panic move.

I never said adding muscle alone will make him a really good player. He needs to develop his entire game. Remember, Giannis wasn't very aggressive early in his career either. Still isn't aggressive when it comes to shooting. He came into the NBS with even less high level basketball experience than Giannis. Given that, I'm still optimistic. And besides, Kevin Garnett said Maker will be an MVP one day. ; )

I don't think Maker is terrible. He gets eaten alive by "true" big bulky centers in the post. That's no different than Henson in that regard. It's not Maker's fault he's forced to play a role his body isn't ready for yet. Otherwise, he's very active and athletic for a "big" guy on the defensive end. And he does block and alter a lot of shots. He just needs to continue to develop his body and his game. But a big guy who can shoot and be a rim protector on the other end is worth putting in the time to see what he can become.

Patriot Has anyone watched this show? (on Amazon Video.) Very quirky. Is it a drama? comedy? Can't really put it in a box, which I why I really liked it. Got mixed reviews, and I can see how people didn't like it as I almost stopped after the first episode. One of those shows that needs your full attention to really get into the mood of the show, catch all the subtle humor, flashback/ flash forward scenes, etc. I guess I loved it because it's very different, and really loved how it was produced, casting, etc. the more I watched it.

Yea, way back when he was entertaining because he was different. Wasn't afraid to take a stand, and the banter between callers from different cities was pretty funny. It just got old, and you're right it seems like a skit now. Anyone in the Fox Valley remember Shane Sparks? Don't know why, but I thought he was hilarious. Part of it, like Czaban, is sports talk is more entertaining for me when they talk about other things besides sports sometimes. Not everyone can pull it off, but I really enjoyed listening to both those guys.

The issue isn't the deal, or the guaranteed amount of $300,000. Also, no issue in having him in the mix in ST. It's just that I'm not real high on using a 40 man spot for him. Maybe the plan is to roll with Pina/Kratz to start the year and bring Nottingham up after a month or two. I guess worse case, if they come across another catcher who is better they can dfa Kratz and see if he stays with the org in AAA.

He’d always pay his share for a meal he took part in, but he’d be the last guy to volunteer to drive or buy a round. He’d chip in just often enough to avoid being labeled a free loader. He didn’t mind being labeled as cheap. Now he’s got plenty in the bank the first guy to volunteer to cover group expenses. But yeah, he’s kind of a character. Still love the guy, though. Your friend is Ted Thompson?

Couple other thoughts on this subject. I've noticed the concept of inheritance is largely gone by the wayside. My father is in his 80s and takes pride that he still has something to pass down to us kids. That's after a life of working a blue collar job. It's not a lot, but it is to him. I don't have the same feelings about it. I joke with my kids, but also tell them I'm serious not to expect anything left for them. Maybe there will be something left, maybe not, but I don't feel any pride or urge to do so. The other thing I'm curious about, what are your thoughts about when to start taking SS? The way I understand it there's the earliest age (for me 62) then full retirement (67) and then I can wait until I think 71/72 and get an even higher amount. I did the math a long time ago but don't remember how it turned out.

I've come full circle. Many years ago I listened to a ton of sports talk- both local and national. I can't stand it now, I literally never listen to it. The only exception is if I happen to be in the car after a Packers loss, because, well, those callers are gold. Must get good ratings though, and probably with the age group advertisers love.

FIRE, lol. Never heard of it, but the concept has been around forever, just constantly rebranded. I have no problem with people who want to adhere to this. I do have a problem when some treat at as a religion, and feel the need to save me from myself. (Not saying anyone here is doing that!) I could have a smaller home and/or mortgage, I don't. I could travel less and spend less on entertainment, I don't. Best way I can describe it, we live within our means but not below our means. Just my own opinion, I rather do things now with friends and family rather than when I'm 80. For all I know, I won't even be around to enjoy it when I'm 80. I just try to balance as best I can "live for today" vs "save for tomorrow."

Well, you say something like that and you can't expect people to ignore it. Thing is, I would have been open to that. Too late now, the cap hit they would take for trading Rodgers would make a trade impossible. Just for fun though, let's take the cap hit out of it. Say you could get 4 1st round picks out of Oakland. That's something I would need to think long and hard about before turning it down. Not only would you get those picks, you would free up a massive amount of cap room that Rodgers takes up. Closest thing to Fantasy Football, only for real. Packers would then have SEVEN 1st round picks in 2019/2020 and almost unlimited cap space. They could literally draft anyone they wanted the next two years, and sign anyone they wanted. Think about that. Also, QBs entering the NFL lately seem to be much more prepared for the transition. Partly because modern NFL offenses aren't super complex, like the Packers offense. Not that it would be automatic they draft a really good one, but with all those picks and FA available they should be able to find either a Goff type or Cousins type. No Aaron Rodgers maybe, but a good QB with a much better supporting cast. That has been the challenge, and will continue to be the challenge. Find cap room for 49 other players (or whatever it is) with what's left over after paying Rodgers. That means you can't afford to make mistakes on other semi-large contracts and you need real impact from rookies and 2nd year players. Basically, the old "everything has to go exactly right." When you look at both options, having unlimited cap space and a ridiculous number of 1st round picks isn't that crazy at all.

Not an excuse, but Rodgers knows by now what a SB contending team looks and feels like. I think its tough for him to go out there knowing its a lost season.

It truly has come full circle. Its why you need to sense these things early in pro sports. Better to make a move too quick than too late when it comes to GMs and coaches. They've wasted so many years.

Unbelievable. Yea, they've had a ton of injuries but so many srupid plays in all three phases of the game every single week. Sorry, but directly responsible or not that falls on the coach. MM has lost this team a long time ago.

Because kids dont tackle with their head down, they learn how to do that in the NFL for some reason.