OldSchoolSnapper
-
Posts
11,900 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
25
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Events
News
2026 Milwaukee Brewers Top Prospects Ranking
Milwaukee Brewers Videos
2022 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
Milwaukee Brewers Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits
Guides & Resources
2023 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
2024 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Picks
The Milwaukee Brewers Players Project
2025 Milwaukee Brewers Draft Pick Tracker
Store
Downloads
Gallery
Everything posted by OldSchoolSnapper
-
They can essentially cut both of those guys this year if they want to with minimal consequence. He should have just signed Stokes to the same deal he got elsewhere though. They both sucked but I don't see many giving him a pass, it's probably the first thing people point out about his last offseason, which was awful and face was saved by getting Parsons, who fell into their lap with a deal anybody would have made. A certain poster will disagree, but I believe consensus is generally that the game management snafus have been more frequent and more disastrous than any FO failures in the last handful of years, and that talent generally hasn't been the issue. Even with this OL which was not very good this year, they were solidly positioned to win a bunch of games they lost.
-
If I could have my pick of the litter I would go after Brian Flores. Belichick tree, won't have a tolerance for sloppiness that has plagued ST, defensive-minded, hungry for the opportunity.
-
That's gonna be a no from me, dawg.
-
Pretty bad team all year and there's an argument that prior to Rodgers they had the worst QB play in the league for about the last seven seasons. The exit was bad but I thought it was a fairly dignified exit for Rodgers after the Jets, leading a bad team to a division title and proving he definitely could still play.
-
At least the take that the negotiating is a ruse is gaining steam and actually being floated as a possibility, so I can still dream that this loser isn't coaching my favorite team next year.
-
Probably the only time in my Wisconsin sports fandom where I actually have no fear of the guy leaving and dunking on us with his new team. In fact I hope we get to play him. -
I enjoy making jokes about Bisaccia but my technical brain can't help but believe this guy is in the league because he has a great reputation for a reason. I don't think the Packers roster ST appropriately. Bo Melton is a roster spot that some other teams use on a specific ST ace that they go out and find specially for that purpose. And our OL couldn't run block worth a lick this year anyway so it doesn't surprise me the backups can't execute a punt without a hold or allow a few kicks to get blocked. I don't think they roster anyone with the intention that they will be a good ST player. They only worry about the 30 or so guys who will see the field on offense or defense and their reserves. The TLDR is that I don't think another coordinator is the solve.
-
Yeah... We had a looooot go our way in that game. It made it that much worse. We dodged a lot of the typical Packerisms and it was like it wasn't enough, we had to keep going to the well until we were sure we lost. The more I think about it, retaining MLF is emblematic of a lot about this team. It's a fair assessment that firing him is risky. But it is so apparent to me they absolutely won't win it with him. Keeping him on is essentially saying "We'll make the playoffs, and I like our chances to win a game there, sure we are likely to melt down in humiliating fashion but we won't finish 7-10." They are afraid to get it wrong and have a losing season that makes them look bad. They're afraid to be vulnerable and really go for it, so they are, like usual, opting for the safe path with the smallest reward.
-
That precisely why this extension talk is such a puzzle. I think it's bonkers to extend this guy right now even if he isn't fired. If I were him I'd be happy just not being fired and coaching for my job next year. I'd fire him, but not doing so is understandable. Extending him is insane, IMO. I do think at least playing in an NFCCG - without Aaron Rodgers - has to be the bar for MLF for clear. Setting the bar at "win the SB" is too luck dependent.
-
Not be successful. Win the Super Bowl. It is asking a lot of a first-year coach to implement his stuff and culture and that the team immediately wins the Super Bowl, because that would be the point of firing LaFleur. Losing the WC or DV is not going to be seen as successful. Point was that the Packers likely believe internally that it is more likely they reach SB sticking with what has at least gotten them to the playoffs, than they are starting from scratch. That is the Catch 22 of firing a coach who has "won a bunch of games." It is easy to fire someone who went 7-10. It takes cajones to do it when you are coming off what realistically would have been back-to-back at least 11-win seasons we were headed for before all those injuries. (We punted the last game of the year in consecutive seasons, our QB was concussed, etc.). Comping other sports especially CFB just isn't the same at all. It can be done in the NFL, yes, I believe Gruden did it in TB. But it's asking a lot and is risky from their perspective.
-
This feels like the twilight zone. I can't fathom multiple execs thinking this guy is worth $10 million a year.
-
I would really like if someone out there did some quant on Gute because I think people would be surprised to see where he lands as far as drafting goes. I think he's probably better than most but maybe I'm wrong. All teams have flop picks, his get magnified here obviously. Prior to this past offseason, it felt like he generally crushed in FA too. He flopped big time this past year though. Parsons made up for what would have really made him look bad. Golden looks like a solid player and LaFleur looks like an idiot for wasting him. I voted to keep him and fire MLF. I am just not convinced there is a big issue with Gute or a guy that you know can come in and do better the way that I am with MLF.
-
It's not that they'd need 2 seasons to be OK, but they aren't going to fire the guy after 1 year if he goes 10-7 and loses the WC. Ben Johnson and Liam Coen are great, but they probably aren't going to win the Super Bowl (Coen isn't), either. If the expectation is to win NOW, it's not a fair expectation to put that on a first-year coach. It can happen, but it's unlikely. Perhaps misguidedly, they think they can win it right this moment, and that MLF is the most realistic path there. Me? I'd say that if they hit on the hire, they'd at least a better chance than doing it with MLF. I don't think he's the "we have a good chance with him" coach that they do.
-
I thought the tea leaves were pretty obvious he wasn't getting fired. -Policy was on his hiring committee -He expressed support in the final weeks, offering up their perseverance in the face of a rash of injuries as praise for MLF -They said the decision would not be based on Saturday's game beforehand -He wouldn't have said anything at all if firing were on the table -And to me, the biggest reason: Whether or not they are, they think they're close. If you bring in someone new, that's starting at zero with scheme, style, culture, etc. You are going to have to give that new guy at LEAST two seasons. They don't want to wait, they want to do it now. I think that's a mistake, but I think that's their position. I'm with you though. I'm a casual next year if this season doesn't get a guy fired, simply because there is no chance they are winning it with MLF. If they weren't expected to contend it would be one thing to find some value in a rebuild, they are now accepting purgatory and yeah, I'm out. I already consciously stopped buying tickets to games, but I'll be a box score checker if this plays out like this.
-
It's fine if people want to make a case for him. But let's be serious about it. His best seasons came when Rodgers had a chip on his shoulder because we drafted Love. He responded by winning two MVPs and throwing nearly 50 TD passes. That era accounted for MLF going 39-10. It can't just be glossed over by saying "Well that wasn't all Aaron." It is pretty obvious it was almost entirely Aaron. He has one losing year at 8-9 where Aaron is clearly hurt (and just old), which again had playoff expectations in preseason and they suddenly aren't so great anymore. He is 29-21 without Aaron Rodgers. That's OK, above average even. It's not "super hot candidate" great. A super hot candidate is always a coordinator from a dominant unit, a la Aaron Glenn or Ben Johnson. I think most teams would be looking for that, not a guy that hasn't won playoff games with even the best hand at the table. But let's say he is at the top of the list. The Packers shouldn't be in the sandbox for candidates with Arizona, Tennessee and New York. They are looking for a coach to get them into title contention. I don't think MLF would be a hot candidate for any of those kinds of openings, granted they open up a lot less frequently.
-
Idk man, it's hard for me to say that wasn't an incredible throw. That's a catchable, yes difficult, but catchable ball for Watson placed in the only spot it can be. Not the kind where you're mad he doesn't get it, but with no timeouts, I can't feel any kind of way that Love threw that ball. It actually ticks me off reading all the nonsense about how he "doesn't have the X factor." That pass is all of those things.
-
They hit 94% in Cleveland as well. LaFleur cannot manage a clock or play situational football. He can't be a HC. He also nearly caused them to lose in Dallas (another game they blew a two score lead) - and I don't want to hear that it was Love on the final play - because it was Matt's management a minute earlier that caused all the chaos in the first place. The only defense I will offer MLF is the mantra going around that we'd miss the playoffs under the old rules is a bit disingenuous. The Packers played the last game of the year like a bye week last year and this year - they don't do that unless the spot is already wrapped up. Last year in particular, they won 11 games, which gets you in easily about 99% of years. In '23, being the 7 seed was seen as a major success of a season during a rebuilding year. This year, they are easily playing for the #2 or #3 in the last week if it made sense to do so. It's kind of one those lying statistics.
-
I forgot the Rams are 5 not SF. I was thinking SF was going to Chicago next week. The Rams are a different team outdoors especially in a place like Chicago that is about the worst place they can be. Seattle will beat SF. Still think Chicago has a good a chance as anyone. The NFC just isn't that great where you can say they don't have a chance. They absolutely have a chance.
-
He'd have to get fired first and my gut feeling is that Policy has already told him he's more or less okay. I believe they will retool one more time and try to address what they can, hope that Parsons can join them and some point and be as effective, and hope next year is luckier than this. Golden sure looked like the guy to be opposite Watson next year.
-
The Bears are going to win the Super Bowl, aren't they? They'll score 40 points on SF and I believe the Rams will win in Seattle and give HFA back to the Bears. The Rams are not the same team in January outside that they are indoors. I am now forced to root for SF which is just about as bad as it gets. Or I get "lucky" and get to root for Seattle. Disgusting. The Rams are benign to me but 3/4 in the NFC field can be launched in into the sun. Really hope the AFC wins this year.
-
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.
-
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!
-
Gee, sounds like a guy I know.
-
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.
-
It has plenty to do with it when you literally cite his age as a reason they can't possibly be friends.
