Packers' Season in Review, Volume 2: Pessimism

[YoHoChecko]

http://www.pigskinheaven.com/gallery/files/7/gree.gif

WARNING: You are now exiting the no-spin zone. Be sure to check out the companion article, Volume 1: Optimism

The Green Bay Packers, 2005:
A Season in Review

4-12. What can you say about the 4-12 Green Bay Packers? Certainly not anything good. This was a lost season for the Cheeseheads. While many would point to the injuries as a cause for their woes this season, it clearly was not the case early in the season, when they managed to lose to the Lions and the Browns in the first two weeks, missing only Javon Walker.

It also was not injuries that led to the difficulties of the offensive line. While C Mike Flanagan struggled through injuries, the two new guards were perfectly healthy and perfectly unable to get the job done throughout the first half of the seaon. One of them, Klemm, was eventually benched for the season in favor of Scott Wells, formerly a back-up center. And Ahman Green may have been injured, but take a look at his numbers prior to the injury: 77 carries for 255 yards; an average of 3.3 yards per carry. In fact, behind the "re-worked" offensive line, the Packers managed to average over 4 yards per carry in only 4 games all season long.
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/25/257104.jpg
On the other hand, the passing game seemed to be off to a decent start. Favre was completing a career-high percentage of his passes, albeit for a pretty low yards-per-attempt. His yards and TDs were on track to hit 4,000 and 30 again. However, all along, he was throwing too many interceptions. Some could be chalked up to his recievers, as Robert Ferguson showed a genuine inability to fight for a ball and win, and Donald Driver watched the game-clinching interception against the Steelers be scooped off of the deflection caused by his own two hands.

However, somewhere along the way, Favre lost that which makes him great. His ability to play can be debated, but it is clearly still there to an extent. But the thing that seperated Favre and made him a star was his love for the game and his passion to play. Around week ten, he lost even that, and showed all the passion for the game of a typical NFL punter, leading to a league-high 28 interceptions.

With Javon Walker out, Favre playing mediocre football, a patch-work O-line, and no running game, there is almost nothing to like about the Packers' offense in 2005. Driver did his best, but he's not an elite wide receiver... and he was pretty much all they had.

On the defensive side of the ball, the Packers' improvement was much bally-hooed. However, a fair amount of that was smoke and mirrors. The Packers finished 7th in yards allowed, but a good portion of that is explained by the numerous times they gave up scores against a short field. It's not that they got the defensive stop, it's just that the opponent only had to drive 22 yards to get a TD. Furthermore, the passing game that finished first in the league was primarily because teams so often had leads or knew that it was easier to run against the Packers anyway. In terms of yards per pass allowed, the Packers finished 14th, and that coming against such QBing greats as Brad Johnson, Kyle Orton, Tommy Maddox, Seneca Wallace, Kyle Boller... you get the point.
http://media.scout.com/Media/Image/22/229008.jpg
Furthermore, their run defense fell apart, allowing better than 4.0 yards per carry in 8 of their last 9 games, and they coupled these failures to limit their opponents yards per carry and per pass with mediocre-at-best performance on third downs and especially in the red zone, where they allowed opponents an average of 4.8 points per red zone possession. The biggest failure of the defense, however, was the failure to create turnovers. The Packers finished second-to-last in the league in takeaways, with only 21. Considering that their offense had a league-worst 45 giveaways, that certainly hurts. So the run defense was below average, the pass defense was average (against bad opponents) and the red zone and turnover numbers were pretty awful. That doesn't leave much to gloat about for that great improvement, now does it?

The team as a whole finished with several close outcomes, causing many to say that they were "close" to being a better team. However, the failure to win close games just further points out the short-comings of the team. What, if not coming through in the clutch, defines a good team? Any team that cannot function under the pressure and learn how to win close games and close out games in which they lead is not a good team. It is a team with potential, but it is a weak team, at leats mentally... emotionally. And that describes the Green Bay Packers this season. Pretty much any way you look at it, in 2005 the Packers were just a bad team.

[vettepack94]

that is really sad

[YoHoChecko]

I was thinking of posting a poll asking which version of the Packers' season recap people thought was closer to the truth, given that they're both based on facts and statistics, it's just a matter of interpretation... but I haven't been getting many responses, so I'm assuming the poll would yield similarly sparse results

[vettepack94]

I was thinking of posting a poll asking which version of the Packers' season recap people thought was closer to the truth, given that they're both based on facts and statistics, it's just a matter of interpretation... but I haven't been getting many responses, so I'm assuming the poll would yield similarly sparse results

That would be a good idea but I wouldn't know which to pick that would be hard. Most likely the first post that was full of good news and just bad luck for the Packers.

[LaxEagle]

As usual, a great article goes unread. I just read this one, and have not yet read your first report, but will very shortly.

All the problems you listed are clear and concise, even though many people dont acknowledge most of what you have to say. Yes Brett Favre had a down year. Many people, including myself originally, claim that it is the players around Favre that made him look so bad in a lot of situations. And on a few occasions, those people would be accurate as the overall talent on the offense this year was absolutely dismal (of course that is my personal evaluation). The o-line was bad, the recievers were bad, etc, etc. Coaching was also a problem, but changes are being made so we don't need to go into detail about a lot of that.

Q: Why is it that we were so poor this year?

A: Well stat boy summed up the logistics of it, but there were precursor details that allowed me to identify a losing season weeks before the first snap. One of my favorite football buddies and I were talking prior to the preseason start, and he asked me flat out what I thought the Packers would do this year with regards to their record. I told him, "Well "I'm and optimistic person, I'll go ahead and say 5-11 to 7-9 range. 7-9 if they are healthy and Favre carries them again." Well, 4-12 isn't too far off, and we really could have been 2-14 if things really went bad.

Again, this begs the question of why? Well obviously there is not a short list answer as to why the Packers lost 12 games this year other than they didn't play as good on sunday as the team they were playing. But I believe contributing factors have been assembling to come to this point. Poor draft classes with the combination of poor development by young players has been absolutely detrimental to this organization as a whole. Rarely in the past 8-10 years have we had a marquee talent come out of the draft. This doesn't mean we haven't had good players, because we have. Just rarely any impact type players. Add to this the poor coordinating by both the offensive and defensive coaches, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Off season acquisitions are another problem that has plagued this team. Letting go of your top two offensive lineman, and not finding adequate replacements is a start, but the overall lack of aggression when going after talented players is the other problem. Mark Roman, Adrian Klemm come to mind on the recieving end, but there are too many to name that we have passed up on.

I hate to say it, but I think it's time for Brett to go because we need to start truly rebuilding for sustained long term success (Look at New England), and there is no way to do that with Brett still at the helm. On top of that, I do not believe Ted Thompson is capable of taking us in the right direction. Where has he been in the recent past? Seattle. Where is Seattle now? Think about it. Then there's our grand new head coach, Mike McCarthy. Offensive Coordinator of the San Fransisco 49ers. The 49ers haven't been successful on offense in quite some time, so how is it he has the qualification of being a HC? Yeah, thats what I thought too.

Piece the puzzle, and the reason behind the Packers losing ways really isn't all too puzzling.

[YoHoChecko]

As usual, a great article goes unread. I just read this one, and have not yet read your first report, but will very shortly.

All the problems you listed are clear and concise, even though many people dont acknowledge most of what you have to say. Yes Brett Favre had a down year. Many people, including myself originally, claim that it is the players around Favre that made him look so bad in a lot of situations. And on a few occasions, those people would be accurate as the overall talent on the offense this year was absolutely dismal (of course that is my personal evaluation). The o-line was bad, the recievers were bad, etc, etc. Coaching was also a problem, but changes are being made so we don't need to go into detail about a lot of that.

Q: Why is it that we were so poor this year?

A: Well stat boy summed up the logistics of it, but there were precursor details that allowed me to identify a losing season weeks before the first snap. One of my favorite football buddies and I were talking prior to the preseason start, and he asked me flat out what I thought the Packers would do this year with regards to their record. I told him, "Well "I'm and optimistic person, I'll go ahead and say 5-11 to 7-9 range. 7-9 if they are healthy and Favre carries them again." Well, 4-12 isn't too far off, and we really could have been 2-14 if things really went bad.

Again, this begs the question of why? Well obviously there is not a short list answer as to why the Packers lost 12 games this year other than they didn't play as good on sunday as the team they were playing. But I believe contributing factors have been assembling to come to this point. Poor draft classes with the combination of poor development by young players has been absolutely detrimental to this organization as a whole. Rarely in the past 8-10 years have we had a marquee talent come out of the draft. This doesn't mean we haven't had good players, because we have. Just rarely any impact type players. Add to this the poor coordinating by both the offensive and defensive coaches, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Off season acquisitions are another problem that has plagued this team. Letting go of your top two offensive lineman, and not finding adequate replacements is a start, but the overall lack of aggression when going after talented players is the other problem. Mark Roman, Adrian Klemm come to mind on the recieving end, but there are too many to name that we have passed up on.

I hate to say it, but I think it's time for Brett to go because we need to start truly rebuilding for sustained long term success (Look at New England), and there is no way to do that with Brett still at the helm. On top of that, I do not believe Ted Thompson is capable of taking us in the right direction. Where has he been in the recent past? Seattle. Where is Seattle now? Think about it. Then there's our grand new head coach, Mike McCarthy. Offensive Coordinator of the San Fransisco 49ers. The 49ers haven't been successful on offense in quite some time, so how is it he has the qualification of being a HC? Yeah, thats what I thought too.

Piece the puzzle, and the reason behind the Packers losing ways really isn't all too puzzling.
There are some interesting things to discuss here... a lot of them, and I am eager to get into them... but I'd like to wait until you've read part one, as well, so once you have, let me know, and we'll get started

[LaxEagle]

Ok, I read it and it was another quality review. Go ahead and start up the discussion.

[YoHoChecko]

Alright, I'll start with the past: I agree that over the past several years there has been a pretty steady decline in the flow of fresh talent into the Packers for a while now. In my opinion, it was mainly Mike Sherman's doing, as GM, coming up with Kampman, Walker and Barnett as pretty much the only solid contributors out of his drafts, that I can think of. The quality of the drafts has been pretty average, at best.

As far as free agency, we need to find a middle ground. I am more on Ted Thompson's side in thinking ti should be explored with caution, rather than signing a lot of big-name/highly-paid players. But I also agree that more solid role players need to be signed. Guys who will actually contribute. When you think about it, when discussing who has made a big impact for their new team in free agency, usually only 2-4 names come up in conversation, and the rest are just solid contributors. So why take a big money risk? Just sign the contributors... Thompson goes to the exptreme and signs guys who actually don't even contribute, and he could step up....

So that's some discussion on your views of what's been going on in Green Bay

[YoHoChecko]

I hate to say it, but I think it's time for Brett to go because we need to start truly rebuilding for sustained long term success (Look at New England), and there is no way to do that with Brett still at the helm. On top of that, I do not believe Ted Thompson is capable of taking us in the right direction. Where has he been in the recent past? Seattle. Where is Seattle now? Think about it. Then there's our grand new head coach, Mike McCarthy. Offensive Coordinator of the San Fransisco 49ers. The 49ers haven't been successful on offense in quite some time, so how is it he has the qualification of being a HC? Yeah, thats what I thought too.

Piece the puzzle, and the reason behind the Packers losing ways really isn't all too puzzling.
Alright, so looking forward. Thompson was an executive for Seattle when the team was being built, and now they're the NFC champions. He worked with the cirrent regime, as opposed to have been replaced by the current regime, so I don't see that as a negative. He also worked with Ron Wolf, and of course that's not a negative. That doesn't mean he's definately the man for the job, but I like what I've seen of him so far... MOSTLY.

Mike McCarthy was the offensive coordinator for the worst offense in the league last year. Crazy, then, that he's promoted to a head coach. He, however, was the OC in New Orleans for 5 years prior, and while they were inconsistent, they certainly were considered at least a dangerous offense. His reasons for leaving New Orleans, allegdly, were partially due to his not liking that no one but him would stand up to Aaron Brooks when he made stupid mistakes and smiled about it. I think that's a good thing... but the best thing about Mike McCarthy is that he knows his weaknesses.

He is a passing guy, and he has immersed his staff with offensive line-oriented guys who specialize in the running game. He is seeking a balance of his abilities and his weaknesses. I think that, aside from Jim Bates, McCarthy was the best canidate we interviewed. Head coaching is more about a personality and motivation than a "system." System coaches coordinate at the NFL level, and once they get to the head coaching level, they need the right mentality to succeed. Who's to say if McCarthy will have what it takes. I don't know. But I can't say that it's a bad choice yet. I can't make that judgement.

Finally, as far as Favre and rebuilding, I don't understand the general view of "rebuilding" that involves starting completely over. I think that you should always play to field as successful a team as possible, immediately... and you can do that while also looking towards the future. Having a completely young team, including at QB, does not accomplish that goal. Building the defense and the running game up around an aging QB for one or two years, so that it then can also help support the young, inexperienced QB later seems to make the most sense to me, rather than having everyone be young at the same time.

[j43214]

As usual, a great article goes unread. I just read this one, and have not yet read your first report, but will very shortly.

All the problems you listed are clear and concise, even though many people dont acknowledge most of what you have to say. Yes Brett Favre had a down year. Many people, including myself originally, claim that it is the players around Favre that made him look so bad in a lot of situations. And on a few occasions, those people would be accurate as the overall talent on the offense this year was absolutely dismal (of course that is my personal evaluation). The o-line was bad, the recievers were bad, etc, etc. Coaching was also a problem, but changes are being made so we don't need to go into detail about a lot of that.

Q: Why is it that we were so poor this year?

A: Well stat boy summed up the logistics of it, but there were precursor details that allowed me to identify a losing season weeks before the first snap. One of my favorite football buddies and I were talking prior to the preseason start, and he asked me flat out what I thought the Packers would do this year with regards to their record. I told him, "Well "I'm and optimistic person, I'll go ahead and say 5-11 to 7-9 range. 7-9 if they are healthy and Favre carries them again." Well, 4-12 isn't too far off, and we really could have been 2-14 if things really went bad.

Again, this begs the question of why? Well obviously there is not a short list answer as to why the Packers lost 12 games this year other than they didn't play as good on sunday as the team they were playing. But I believe contributing factors have been assembling to come to this point. Poor draft classes with the combination of poor development by young players has been absolutely detrimental to this organization as a whole. Rarely in the past 8-10 years have we had a marquee talent come out of the draft. This doesn't mean we haven't had good players, because we have. Just rarely any impact type players. Add to this the poor coordinating by both the offensive and defensive coaches, and you have a recipe for disaster.

Off season acquisitions are another problem that has plagued this team. Letting go of your top two offensive lineman, and not finding adequate replacements is a start, but the overall lack of aggression when going after talented players is the other problem. Mark Roman, Adrian Klemm come to mind on the recieving end, but there are too many to name that we have passed up on.

I hate to say it, but I think it's time for Brett to go because we need to start truly rebuilding for sustained long term success (Look at New England), and there is no way to do that with Brett still at the helm. On top of that, I do not believe Ted Thompson is capable of taking us in the right direction. Where has he been in the recent past? Seattle. Where is Seattle now? Think about it. Then there's our grand new head coach, Mike McCarthy. Offensive Coordinator of the San Fransisco 49ers. The 49ers haven't been successful on offense in quite some time, so how is it he has the qualification of being a HC? Yeah, thats what I thought too.

Piece the puzzle, and the reason behind the Packers losing ways really isn't all too puzzling.

I have read both yoho's articles and now yours. There are many points I can't argue with. I will agree that the draft has been a major area of concern
and players taken have either been cut or traded or simply are not panning
out ( Carrol,Sanders ) ( Joey Thomas gone as well ). I was also concerned with the LACK of activity in FA while other teams were clearly making moves to improve in our Division.

The Fact that you predicted a 5-11 or 7-9 season comming into this most recent campaign is a mystery to me though ? I will admit when I saw the schedule comming into the season I said to myself OH this looks bad, but
never did I see a nose dive like 4-12 happening . While it's easy to sit back
now and say this and that, I attribute it to 3 major things.
1. Faliure to replace the guards.
2. Injuries ( HUGE in my opinion ). ( 9-7 with starters)
3. Bad Luck ( never got the bounce in the close ones ).

I have a feeling it could be another tough season next year, but not this bad. Like you I don't know or have confidence in these new coaches or TT,
I want to be proven wrong about them Badly.:cool:

[YoHoChecko]

I have a feeling it could be another tough season next year, but not this bad. Like you I don't know or have confidence in these new coaches or TT,
I want to be proven wrong about them Badly.:cool:
Look, I know my credibility here is low, because I've been a big TT apologist... and many of you may have noticed my two-day near silence after Bates left, because I was so upset... and I couldn't defend him for a little while. I still very much wish Bates had stayed. I honestly wouldn't have minded if they did to Bates what the Jets are doing to heimerdinger... they're making him stay to play out his contract. Is he really going to be better off as a D-coordinator elsehwere? Once he had time to settle in, he'd realize that to be true. But I can't blame him for wanting out... not at all.

Anyway, I've side-tracked here... my point is that I had my doubts about the staff like all of you. I wasn't sure. I listened to the press conferences, I read up on the staff hires. I had my personal preferences... But depending on who is hired as QB coach, I find myself really liking the staff. I'm not lying, really, I like this staff. I dunno if mcCarthy will be a good HC, but I do think he has built up a pretty good support system. I mean, of course he's got nothing like the Redskins or Dolphins, obviously, but I do think they have a solid young coaching staff in place. I'll be open to criticize once things get going...

and for the record, when Mike Sherman was named GM, I complained. I openly disagreed with the choice, even though it was highyl recomended by Ron Wolf, whose opinion is highly valued. I don't just blindly approve of everything the organization does. I am willing to criticize... but I do like most of this staff, and am eager to see how the rest of it fills out.

[LaxEagle]

I didn't like Mike Sherman because it seemed he had an inability to motivate his players when it really mattered. There were many times (with many exceptions) that the Packers came out flat and then nose dived in the second half when they really needed to get something going.

I can't say that I don't like McCarthy or his staff, but I am skeptical only because of the lack of impressiveness on his resume. I feel his hiring is something of TT throwing an old friend a bone, what has he done to earn it?

I don't like our organizations shortcomings in the FA period. Not because they don't sign the big name players, but because they don't sign anyone that has a respectable track record. I don't want to see a waste of cap space on some big-name-soon-to-be-wash-up. I want to see them sign some players that had good seasons in other places, can provide veteren leadership to our young players, and really want to win. I just don't see the upside to losing Sharper, Wahle, Rivera (3 pro bowl caliber players), and replacing them with scrubs/unknown rookies (Collins did a great job this year, don't get me wrong).

I look at rebuilding in a different light than "starting from scratch", although there are undoubtedly similarities. Having the quarterback of our future is somthing that will happen sooner or later, and I say why not sooner so we can get his rocky first season out of the way. We can't do that with Brett here, but it has to come. The more experience our next quarterback gets, the better off we will be here in GB. We already have a ton of young talent on both sides of the ball, so really rebuilding doesn't mean we have to change very much at all.

We need to scrap the worst draft pick ever made by Mike Sherman as well (BJ Sander, 3rd round P). Get a new P and start over. I'm tired of this guy, he's had more than enough chances to show that he can succeed and has failed miserably. Although this last year was an improvement over his non-playing rookie season, I still say we let him go.

I feel we need to draft the following positions in the upcoming draft.

LB, DL, QB, HB, WR

LB and DL need to be taken care of early in the draft, QB and HB in the middle rounds, and WR middle to late. I want Chapman gone, and as much as I used to love Fergy, I think he has to go too. I really hope that Tmurph has a great recovery and shows us all what I think he is capable of, and I hope the same again for Jwalk. DD is as solid a #2 as you can get in this league and I love his heart and steadfast play more than almost anyone else on the team (W. Henderson, B. Favre).

Changes need to be made, and this off season there is going to be a lot of them. I just really hope that the Packers can get this one right.

[YoHoChecko]

I didn't like Mike Sherman because it seemed he had an inability to motivate his players when it really mattered. There were many times (with many exceptions) that the Packers came out flat and then nose dived in the second half when they really needed to get something going.

I can't say that I don't like McCarthy or his staff, but I am skeptical only because of the lack of impressiveness on his resume. I feel his hiring is something of TT throwing an old friend a bone, what has he done to earn it?A very fair question, indeed. However, I think that "deserving it" is a very loose term. If TT thinks he'll make a good coach, then he deserves it. No one can say that TT didn't do his due dillignece in a coaching search. he interviewed several canidates, took a look at even more. It came down to Bates and this guy... and he thought this guy was a better fit. I wanted Bates... a lot. But this guy was my second choice, and that came without meeting either of them. Also, consider that Bates has not been offered any other head coaching jobs, nor interviewed for them. Something must be holding him back... I dunno what, but there's SOMETHING there that we don't know. I think he'd make a good head coach, but no league owners seem to agree.


I don't like our organizations shortcomings in the FA period. Not because they don't sign the big name players, but because they don't sign anyone that has a respectable track record. I don't want to see a waste of cap space on some big-name-soon-to-be-wash-up. I want to see them sign some players that had good seasons in other places, can provide veteren leadership to our young players, and really want to win. I just don't see the upside to losing Sharper, Wahle, Rivera (3 pro bowl caliber players), and replacing them with scrubs/unknown rookies (Collins did a great job this year, don't get me wrong).
I agree. Like I said, we need to find a middle ground. A lot of that falls on the pro personnel scouting department, too... unless TT just isn't listening to them. But I agree, more solid players have to be added, as opposed to Klemm and Earl Little and the like. But I agree with TT that free agency should be approached rather conservatively... he's just even more conservative than I'd prefer.


I look at rebuilding in a different light than "starting from scratch", although there are undoubtedly similarities. Having the quarterback of our future is somthing that will happen sooner or later, and I say why not sooner so we can get his rocky first season out of the way. We can't do that with Brett here, but it has to come. The more experience our next quarterback gets, the better off we will be here in GB. We already have a ton of young talent on both sides of the ball, so really rebuilding doesn't mean we have to change very much at all.
The way I see it, as far as a new QB goes, you want to have a veteran in place until you can build up around them to the extent that the pressure on the newcomer is minimized. Think about Kyle Orton, for instance, who was able to come in and have his rough rookie season, full of mistakes and inconsistency, but still win games. The defense is on the rise, andthe offensive line needs work. I would not want to put a young, inexperienced QB out there right now. However, when you have a solid O-line, a running game, a solid defense and good weapons on offense, a young QB can make mistakes without it costing the team in great amounts. Therefore, I think this team is one year away from being ready. Let Favre, who has experience and awareness and ability galore, try to carry the team. Let Favre use his pocket awareness to avoid the rush from the patchy O-line. Favre can handle these challenges, while a young QB liekly could not. If, after this season, the running game and defense seem in tact and ready to go, then it will be a good time to introduce a young QB... at a time when inconsistent QB play won't completely kill your chances at a successful season.


We need to scrap the worst draft pick ever made by Mike Sherman as well (BJ Sander, 3rd round P). Get a new P and start over. I'm tired of this guy, he's had more than enough chances to show that he can succeed and has failed miserably. Although this last year was an improvement over his non-playing rookie season, I still say we let him go.I agree, Sander needs replacing, especially given that he can't punt in bad/cold weather. There are some solid punters that should be available in the 6th or 7th round this year.


I feel we need to draft the following positions in the upcoming draft.

LB, DL, QB, HB, WR

LB and DL need to be taken care of early in the draft, QB and HB in the middle rounds, and WR middle to late. I want Chapman gone, and as much as I used to love Fergy, I think he has to go too. I really hope that Tmurph has a great recovery and shows us all what I think he is capable of, and I hope the same again for Jwalk. DD is as solid a #2 as you can get in this league and I love his heart and steadfast play more than almost anyone else on the team (W. Henderson, B. Favre).
I disagree that we need a WR. Walker and Driver will be the starters. I, unlike you, would like to see Chatman back as a backup punt returner and a 3rd or 4th option at WR. He definately, to me, proved he deserves a roster spot based on his WR play. Then we have Rod Gardner, who has expressed a desire to stick around, and Terrance Murphy. So even if Ferguson goes, we have 5 WRs, and I don't dislike this group at all.

However, we do need help on the D-line at DE... we have only 3 actual DEs on the roster, and we need some pass-rushing help from the front 4. We also need a LB early, as you said. RB depth and CB depth should also be addressed in the draft, and then another developmental QB should be added.

We agree on quite a lot here... only the need for WRs and the retirement of Favre keep us apart here... and to me, I think that winning is possible this seaosn with Favre and next season without Favre... no other way. And given that scenario, Favre's staying out is in our best interest.

[LaxEagle]

Yes very good discussion indeed. I am not too sympathetic to TT, I just have a bad feeling about him and his decision making process, but can easily be turned around with a good draft class and some activity in the off season.

Lets just hope that he really is taking it in the right direction, regardless on whether or not we like/dislike his philosophy.

[j43214]

Yes very good discussion indeed. I am not too sympathetic to TT, I just have a bad feeling about him and his decision making process, but can easily be turned around with a good draft class and some activity in the off season.

Lets just hope that he really is taking it in the right direction, regardless on whether or not we like/dislike his philosophy.

Ferg has got to go. Chapman has been very very consistant as a receiver.
I agree with the above quote 100% and agree that the team came out flat
several times and in the second half several times. I could never understand this ? I know it all boils down to the coach but you would think the team
would be motivated without a pep talk. Whatever it takes I guess. It has to stop though !

[YoHoChecko]

Ferg has got to go. Chapman has been very very consistant as a receiver.
I agree with the above quote 100% and agree that the team came out flat
several times and in the second half several times. I could never understand this ? I know it all boils down to the coach but you would think the team
would be motivated without a pep talk. Whatever it takes I guess. It has to stop though !
I think it's not necessarily that the team "came out flat" as much as the fact that early on in the second half, Sherman or Rossley would make calls that set the tone that they were "playing safe" instead of "going for it" and when you're trying to get fired up for a big second half, those "safe" decisions can really let some air out of the tires. So no matter how fired up the guys are at halftime, Sherman would kill it with his actions back on the field.... in my opinion

[LaxEagle]

I think it's not necessarily that the team "came out flat" as much as the fact that early on in the second half, Sherman or Rossley would make calls that set the tone that they were "playing safe" instead of "going for it" and when you're trying to get fired up for a big second half, those "safe" decisions can really let some air out of the tires. So no matter how fired up the guys are at halftime, Sherman would kill it with his actions back on the field.... in my opinion


Yeah thats pretty much what I was trying to say, but it always "appeared" that they were flat, regardless of it was due to coaching or not.