Paul Moyer Comments

[RiverDog]

Amazes me that folks want to get rid of either Pete or Russ. Pete's a top 5 coach, and has put together incredible records like almost no other. And, I disagree with those that say the game has changed or passed him by. Regardless of recent events, a strong defense and a balanced attack is the most proven way to win. Am I a little unhappy with Russ's comments? Yup, but we are in no position to trade him. Will not, should not. As, they will have a tough time spending a bunch of $ rebuilding the OL. Pete's as good as anyone when it comes to dealing with disgruntled players, and I suspect we'll see some progress in the not too distant future.

I shouldn't have said that I'd rather see Pete get fired. I am not advocating that he get fired, at least not this season.

But he's going to have to re-invent himself if he expects to win anymore championships in the near future. He doesn't have the horses on defense to play his usual Pete Ball. While I don't like how this is all coming down, I actually agree more with Russell than I do with Pete as far as how to improve the team. Pete needs to open up his offense if he's going to win championships with the way this team is currently configured.

As far as Pete dealing with disgruntled players, yes, he's above average and generally has a good handle on his locker rooms. But this is different. He's never had to deal with a disgruntled quarterback that's a bigger star than he is and is in a power struggle with him over the direction of the team.

I don't want to get rid of Russell, either, but he's going to have to bury the hatchet with Pete if he's to continue. It's clear that he and the Hawks are at odds with each other, but just how unhappy and if it's repairable remains to be seen.

[Aseahawkfan]

My point is that the game is changing to favor the offense.

You stated the league is changing to offense oriented football. My point was that defense still wins championships. We won our Super Bowl with a super strong defense 43-8.

The league can move to offense all it wants, but when it comes to playoffs and crunch time the team with the substantially better defense usually wins out.

Even the New England Patriots, the most dominant franchise in the past 20 years, was led by a defensive coach who won most of their Super Bowls when their defense was top 5 or 10 in the points allowed column.

Defense feeds into offense. The more stops, the more pain you can inflict, the more you can wear down and dominate your opponent on defense, the more likely you are to score more points and win.

[RiverDog]

My point is that the game is changing to favor the offense.

You stated the league is changing to offense oriented football. My point was that defense still wins championships.

Defense alone doesn't win championships. Two years ago, the Chiefs had the 17th ranked defense. The year before that, the Pats took home the hardware with the 21st ranked defense. Even this season, the Bucs had a top 5 passing offense to complement their top 10 defense.

My point is that the style of offensive football that Pete employs, ie a run heavy, ball control offense, requires that he has a top 5 defense. He's not going to win a championship playing his style of football in the same manner as the Chiefs and Patriots have done. He no longer has the talent on the defensive side of the ball to take a team deep into the playoffs unless he changes his basic philosophy.

It's undeniable that teams are favoring head coaches with offensive backgrounds. In the past 5 years, NFL teams has hired just two first time head coaches with defensive backgrounds (Patricia and Vrabel). The prototypical first time NFL head coach are offensive guys in their 30's and early 40's, guys like Sean McVay, Kyle Shannahan, Matt Rhule, Kevin Stenfaski, Joe Judge, and Kliff Kingsbury.

[Aseahawkfan]

Defense alone doesn't win championships. Two years ago, the Chiefs had the 17th ranked defense. The year before that, the Pats took home the hardware with the 21st ranked defense. Even this season, the Bucs had a top 5 passing offense to complement their top 10 defense.

My point is that the style of offensive football that Pete employs, ie a run heavy, ball control offense, requires that he has a top 5 defense. He's not going to win a championship playing his style of football in the same manner as the Chiefs and Patriots have done. He no longer has the talent on the defensive side of the ball to take a team deep into the playoffs unless he changes his basic philosophy.

It's undeniable that teams are favoring head coaches with offensive backgrounds. In the past 5 years, NFL teams has hired just two first time head coaches with defensive backgrounds (Patricia and Vrabel). The prototypical first time NFL head coach are offensive guys in their 30's and early 40's, guys like Sean McVay, Kyle Shannahan, Matt Rhule, Kevin Stenfaski, Joe Judge, and Kliff Kingsbury.

Offense alone does not win championships. Kind of a dumb thing to say, eh? You don't need to state the obvious.

But this idea you have that the league is going with offense is ridiculous. Strong defense will beat strong offense, especially a strong pass rush. Even the poster child for the new breed of great QBs was made to look pedestrian by a strong pass rush. Even our guy Russell Wilson got worked by a strong pass rush. Even a great O-line won't stop a strong, athletic pass rush.

So these teams can keep building their strong, flashy offenses. But the team that spends the time to build a strong defense with a pass rush will take the day if the offense is serviceable.

Who has won a Super Bowl of the coaches you listed? I'm not even sure as none of those coaches except McVay even register with me. So who cares if some team is hiring flashy offensive coaches if it isn't amounting to much.

You love to cherry pick those stats. Points allowed is the measure of a defense. Keeping points off the board even if an opponent racks up yards.

Chiefs won the Super Bowl with a number 7 Points Allowed.

Tampa Bay 8th points allowed.

New England 7th PA in 2018.

Eagles 4th PA.

Broncos 4th PA.

Seahawks 1 PA and 1 Yards.

Ravens 12th PA. The surprising anomaly since they were very balanced.

2012 Giants a total anomaly. Giants seem to have the Patriots number as they were worse in nearly every measure.

2010 Packers: Points allowed 2.

I could go on. But strong defense usually beats strong offense. I'd gladly take enough offense with a beast defense for winning championships. And let coaches like McVay and the list you made have their flashy offenses, while I build a defense that makes them look stupid when in the playoffs.

[RiverDog]

But this idea you have that the league is going with offense is ridiculous.

First off, I didn't say that the league is "going with offense". I said that the league is going with offensive head coaches. That is an undeniable fact.

Secondly, my argument isn't about offense vs. defense. My argument is about Pete's style of play, particularly his offensive style, ie run heavy, ball control. It only works when you have a top 5 defense such as he had early during his stint with us.

And lastly, Pete does not have the personnel he needs to field a top 5 defense.

[NorthHawk]

Our problem is we have a weak Defense and Pete wants to complement it with a restricted Offense.
Even if we have a good Defense, the Offense will still be held back by his philosophy and thus we have a greater chance of losing.
The goal should be to have a great Defense and a great Offense, but that's not Pete's way. And it's frustrating for Offensive players who can do better.

[TriCitySam]

"I am not advocating that he get fired, at least not this season."

That's a conversation I don't get. Other than Belichick, WHO has a better coaching record than Pete? Andy Reid has a slight win % advantage, but has the same # of SB wins and 1 more conference title, but has coached in the NFL a LOT longer (almost 50% longer). WHO has won more Super Bowls? Just Belichick. Payton hasn't, Tomlin hasn't, Harbaugh hasn't, McVay hasn't, Gruden hasn't. More conference titles in the past 30 years? Other than Belichick and Reid (with his 1 more) - NOBODY. So, we can get rid of Pete - and whining about the coach is a favorite pastime of fans, but they really don't understand how tough it is, how everything has to go exactly right. There is a very, very high chance we'll be spending the next 15 years talking about the good old days.

[c_hawkbob]

"I am not advocating that he get fired, at least not this season."

That's a conversation I don't get. Other than Belichick, WHO has a better coaching record than Pete? Andy Reid has a slight win % advantage, but has the same # of SB wins and 1 more conference title, but has coached in the NFL a LOT longer (almost 50% longer). WHO has won more Super Bowls? Just Belichick. Payton hasn't, Tomlin hasn't, Harbaugh hasn't, McVay hasn't, Gruden hasn't. More conference titles in the past 30 years? Other than Belichick and Reid (with his 1 more) - NOBODY. So, we can get rid of Pete - and whining about the coach is a favorite pastime of fans, but they really don't understand how tough it is, how everything has to go exactly right. There is a very, very high chance we'll be spending the next 15 years talking about the good old days.

Replace Pete with Russ and all the other coaches with their respective QB's and you could make the same inverse argument. I think QB's have every bit as much, if not more, to do with a team's success than their coaches. Pete lets Russ get away and we're back to a 7-9 to 9-7 team every year just hoping to make it to the playoffs. IMO of course.

[RiverDog]

"I am not advocating that he get fired, at least not this season."

That's a conversation I don't get. Other than Belichick, WHO has a better coaching record than Pete? Andy Reid has a slight win % advantage, but has the same # of SB wins and 1 more conference title, but has coached in the NFL a LOT longer (almost 50% longer). WHO has won more Super Bowls? Just Belichick. Payton hasn't, Tomlin hasn't, Harbaugh hasn't, McVay hasn't, Gruden hasn't. More conference titles in the past 30 years? Other than Belichick and Reid (with his 1 more) - NOBODY. So, we can get rid of Pete - and whining about the coach is a favorite pastime of fans, but they really don't understand how tough it is, how everything has to go exactly right. There is a very, very high chance we'll be spending the next 15 years talking about the good old days.

These past 6 years, Pete's performance reminds me a lot of Marty Schottenheimer, a former NFL head coach that has a better regular season winning percentage than Pete. They do/did very well in the regular season and it looks good on a resume, but they can/could never get to the Super Bowl.

At some point, we can't be content with just winning our division or making the playoffs. Where that point is, I can't say. All I will say is that point, in my mind, hasn't arrived. But I am getting to the point where I'm tired of hearing people read to me Pete's resume. I want to win another Lombardi, and if that means taking a chance that a coaching change could end up relegating us to spending the next 15 years talking about the good ole days, then so be it. There are no guarantees, either in sticking with Pete or in moving on.

[Hawktawk]

Pete was 7-9 7-9 till Russ got there. That said Russell’s rookie deal allowed Carroll to build a fearsome defense bringing in vets like Avril and Bennett , drafting Wags etc. the great success of that team was basically 2 seasons with back to back super bowl appearances . But they had basically the same defense for several more years and have not won a divisional game since 2014. It’s just time to face the facts . They are a show horse , always considered a dark horse to win it all but truly playing poor football in the postseason.Russ is in the words of Bob Irsay “Star Wars statistics in the regular season but very little hardware to show for it. Famously he was referring to Peyton manning . It is worth noting Manning went to 2 more Super Bowls and his defense definitely won that one .

But let’s face it . What has Russ done on the field against better playoff teams you start seeing in the divisional. Hell we were one and done 2 of the last 3 years and not competitive against a GB team that was destroyed the following week by the 9ers.
None of the divisional losses since 2014 were even competitive with mad comeback attempts making the final score closer than the games . The loss to a Rams team playing a guy with a broken finger that the coach hates so bad he traded him was brutal . Playing without Donald half the game and Russ went 11-27 with a pick 6, clearly his worst playoff performance ever . Time to smell the coffee . Something is wrong in wonderland . Somethings off with Russ.

[TriCitySam]

"Replace Pete with Russ and all the other coaches with their respective QB's and you could make the same inverse argument. I think QB's have every bit as much, if not more, to do with a team's success than their coaches. Pete lets Russ get away and we're back to a 7-9 to 9-7 team every year just hoping to make it to the playoffs. IMO of course."

You are correct, it generally takes both (although we have seen pretty average guys like Dilfer, Brad Johnson, Flacco win SB's). Not so much with "average" coaches winning a SB. You have to have I have some doubt RW would have even made starter under Mora (or many others). Tomlin has been successful, but he's had Ben; Payton had one of the top QB's of all time in Brees (and 1 SB to show for it). Reid has had Mahomes - and was known for getting knocked out of the playoffs before he came along.


My earlier comments was that I didn't understand folks wanting to get rid of either Russ or Pete. I don't think Tom Brady wins a SB with Jerry Glanville and I don't think Belichick wins a SB with Jim Zorn.

[TriCitySam]

[quote="RiverDog"[/quote]These past 6 years, Pete's performance reminds me a lot of Marty Schottenheimer, a former NFL head coach that has a better regular season winning percentage than Pete. They do/did very well in the regular season and it looks good on a resume, but they can/could never get to the Super Bowl.

At some point, we can't be content with just winning our division or making the playoffs. Where that point is, I can't say. All I will say is that point, in my mind, hasn't arrived. But I am getting to the point where I'm tired of hearing people read to me Pete's resume. I want to win another Lombardi, and if that means taking a chance that a coaching change could end up relegating us to spending the next 15 years talking about the good ole days, then so be it. There are no guarantees, either in sticking with Pete or in moving on.[/quote]

We saw how well firing Shottenheimer worked for the Chargers....they're still wishing for the "good old days".

[RiverDog]

We saw how well firing Shottenheimer worked for the Chargers....they're still wishing for the "good old days".

Mike McCarthy had a .618 winning percentage, 6 NFC North titles, finished 1st or 2nd in the NFC North in 10 out of 12 seasons which included 8 straight playoff appearances, 4 NFC Championship game appearances, and a Lombardi. That's arguably a better overall resume than Pete's. The Packers didn't exactly fall off into the abyss when they fired McCarthy as they've gone 26-6 with two straight NFCCG appearances since.

[Aseahawkfan]

Honestly, it feels like Pete has lost his way more than Russ. Pete and John look more to trades than sifting talent to maintain the team now. They don't have that same energy they had when they first came in. They seem to have a mentality where they think they're one great player away from a Super Bowl. They keep taking excessive chances in the draft that don't work out. They no longer bring a large number of free agents and such into camp to sift. Pete and John have lost the mojo.

I'd keep Russ myself, find a young and hungry coach to try again if I had to choose. To me that's the more important element than whether they have an offense or defense background. It's that hunger that I want to see again. That desire to win and the energy to sift for talent until you find the players that will help you win. That was the energy that carried us to a Super Bowl including all the strong role-players we found to make the team great.

[RiverDog]

Honestly, it feels like Pete has lost his way more than Russ. Pete and John look more to trades than sifting talent to maintain the team now. They don't have that same energy they had when they first came in. They seem to have a mentality where they think they're one great player away from a Super Bowl. They keep taking excessive chances in the draft that don't work out. They no longer bring a large number of free agents and such into camp to sift. Pete and John have lost the mojo.

I agree. My only disagreement is how this is all coming down. I do not like the thought of the star player having more influence over an organization than the head coach. If Russell is that smart, then make him a player-coach like they've done in the past with Bill Russell and Pete Rose.

I'd keep Russ myself, find a young and hungry coach to try again if I had to choose. To me that's the more important element than whether they have an offense or defense background. It's that hunger that I want to see again. That desire to win and the energy to sift for talent until you find the players that will help you win. That was the energy that carried us to a Super Bowl including all the strong role-players we found to make the team great.

I agree about Russell, but I'm not quite ready to kick Pete/John to the curb. I don't think we're that far away from the Super Bowl.

[Hawktawk]

Saw some comments from M Rob today . He questioned how Wilson could ever walk back into a locker room where he told his line they sucked. He thinks it is over for sure , maybe this year . He also brought up the promotional literature that completely omits Russ .it’s bad

[Aseahawkfan]

Russ doesn't want to coach. We have no idea what Russ really thinks. We only know there is some kind of major issue as omitting your starting QB who set a franchise record for TDs from the season ticketholder letter is not an accident. Stupid, but not an accident.

I don't see that happening unless Pete and John are seriously thinking about trading their all-star QB. The only acceptable trade to fans would be Russ for Deshaun Watson. Any other QB would not be well received. Maybe the 1st round pick for the number 1 overall QB might do it, but if that QB failed then once again the hate train starts running.

I'm not sure why Pete and John have put themselves in this stupid situation. But they better have a plan to get out of it.

[Hawktawk]

Russ doesn't want to coach. We have no idea what Russ really thinks. We only know there is some kind of major issue as omitting your start QB who set a franchise record for TDs omitted from the season ticketholder letter is not an accident. Stupid, but not an accident.

I don't see that happening unless Pete and John are seriously thinking about trading their allstar QB. The only acceptable trade to fans would be Russ for Deshaun Watson. Any other QB would not be well received. Maybe the 1st round pick for the number 1 overall QB might do it, but if that QB failed then once again the hate train starts running.

I'm not sure why Pete and John have put themselves in this stupid situation. But they better have a plan to get out of it.

I agree deshaun Watson is the only suitable replacement that would keep fan interest up. I know he was not remotely as talented as Russ but Tim Tebow was a cult hero in Denver and really had fans all over the world. Elway traded him but brought in a horse . Let’s see the plan . Frankly I’m tired of Russ BS . Love the guy , the incredible plays he makes, the games we’ve won and the records he’s set . But as MRob pointed out he got paid top money twice which required cutting g players . Then he pulls this ? He’s worth a lot right now . It’s clear to
Me he wants out. I just hope there’s a plan B.

[obiken]

Deshaun Watson is the only suitable replacement that would keep fan interest up. I know he was not remotely as talented as Russ but Tim Tebow was a cult hero in Denver and really had fans all over the world. Elway traded him but brought in a horse . Let’s see the plan . Frankly I’m tired of Russ BS . Love the guy , the incredible plays he makes, the games we’ve won and the records he’s set . But as MRob pointed out he got paid top money twice which required cutting g players . Then he pulls this ? He’s worth a lot right now . It’s clear to
Me he wants out. I just hope there’s a plan B.

DW is in the same league as RW, sorry but he is. I would trade DW for RW in a heartbeat, but ONLY because of their age. DW is faster, younger, and taller. Either way HT, this is a moot point, because while DW would love to come to Seattle, not a chance in the infernal regions RW is going to TX.

[RiverDog]

Russ doesn't want to coach. We have no idea what Russ really thinks.

We have no idea what Russ really thinks but we know he doesn't want to coach? I'm confused.

We only know there is some kind of major issue as omitting your start QB who set a franchise record for TDs omitted from the season ticketholder letter is not an accident. Stupid, but not an accident.

I don't see that happening unless Pete and John are seriously thinking about trading their allstar QB. The only acceptable trade to fans would be Russ for Deshaun Watson. Any other QB would not be well received. Maybe the 1st round pick for the number 1 overall QB might do it, but if that QB failed then once again the hate train starts running.

I'm not sure why Pete and John have put themselves in this stupid situation. But they better have a plan to get out of it.

I'm not convinced that it was Pete and John that put themselves into this position. Being that the lines of authority clearly indicate that it's Pete/John's job to manage the team, I would tend to lean towards their side. But in most organizations, successful managers not only accept but solicit the opinions of their subordinates, so they could, indeed, have made some mistakes in this relationship. It's not a good feeling to work/play for a dictatorial manager/coach.

[Aseahawkfan]

We have no idea what Russ really thinks but we know he doesn't want to coach? I'm confused.

How are you confused? You ever hear Russell Wilson state he wanted to be a player coach? Ever?

And we don't know what he thinks as far as wanting to be traded or about this whole situation with the FO or head coach. None of them have said a thing. But the season ticketholder letter is a clear indicator of one of the two things:

1. There is something going on with Russell and the team management.

2. The PR department is dumb as a box of rocks.

I'm thinking 1 is more likely. But we don't know what any of them are mad about, what caused it, and what is going to happen because of it. None of them is talking to us. Right now we're all going off rumors with the only official source of a problem a season ticketholder news letter with a glaring omission.

I'm not convinced that it was Pete and John that put themselves into this position. Being that the lines of authority clearly indicate that it's Pete/John's job to manage the team, I would tend to lean towards their side. But in most organizations, successful managers not only accept but solicit the opinions of their subordinates, so they could, indeed, have made some mistakes in this relationship. It's not a good feeling to work/play for a dictatorial manager/coach.

Pete seems pretty far from a dictator. But we've been watching this song and dance since Russ has been in the league. Russ will start passing more. We'll get rolling. Team will hit a rough patch usually with Russ throwing more interceptions, then Pete shuts down the higher volume passing offense and goes back to ball control, low turnover football. Turnover ratio is Pete's number one metric for winning. It has a lot of support over the years as teams with a positive turnover ratio generally win more. He's always concerned about turning the ball over.

According to the Seahawks, we will find out shortly something about Russ. We'll see what that is.

[obiken]

I think they come to an agreement, at least in the short term, its the only way to go ASHF.

[c_hawkbob]

According to the Seahawks, we will find out shortly something about Russ. We'll see what that is.

You know something I don't? Because there is certainly nothing from the Seahawks about any impending statement on their website.

[RiverDog]

We have no idea what Russ really thinks but we know he doesn't want to coach? I'm confused.

How are you confused? You ever hear Russell Wilson state he wanted to be a player coach? Ever?

No, I haven't heard him say he wants to be a coach some day. Have you ever heard him say that he never wants to be a coach?

And we don't know what he thinks as far as wanting to be traded or about this whole situation with the FO or head coach. None of them have said a thing. But the season ticketholder letter is a clear indicator of one of the two things:

1. There is something going on with Russell and the team management.

2. The PR department is dumb as a box of rocks.

I'm thinking 1 is more likely. But we don't know what any of them are mad about, what caused it, and what is going to happen because of it. None of them is talking to us. Right now we're all going off rumors with the only official source of a problem a season ticketholder news letter with a glaring omission.

We don't 'know' how willing Russell is to being traded, but we can make some reasonable assumptions, that if he were dead set against it, all he had to do is send out a tweet and deny the rumors, and secondly, he wouldn't have allowed his agent to publicize a list naming the teams he is willing to be traded to.

I'm not convinced that it was Pete and John that put themselves into this position. Being that the lines of authority clearly indicate that it's Pete/John's job to manage the team, I would tend to lean towards their side. But in most organizations, successful managers not only accept but solicit the opinions of their subordinates, so they could, indeed, have made some mistakes in this relationship. It's not a good feeling to work/play for a dictatorial manager/coach.

Pete seems pretty far from a dictator. But we've been watching this song and dance since Russ has been in the league. Russ will start passing more. We'll get rolling. Team will hit a rough patch usually with Russ throwing more interceptions, then Pete shuts down the higher volume passing offense and goes back to ball control, low turnover football. Turnover ratio is Pete's number one metric for winning. It has a lot of support over the years as teams with a positive turnover ratio generally win more. He's always concerned about turning the ball over.

Pete is definitely a player's coach at least from a behavioral and interpersonal standpoint, ie the locker room. Whether or not that extends to his coaching philosophy is another matter.

According to the Seahawks, we will find out shortly something about Russ. We'll see what that is.

I've seen published reports that claim that we should find out something by next week, but it wasn't attributed to the Hawks.

[NorthHawk]

I've seen published reports that claim that we should find out something by next week, but it wasn't attributed to the Hawks.

I've heard that too. Is there some league date (Cap or other) that impacts when trades can or optimally be completed or is it just an opinion from the writer so as to give teams involved time to reset their draft boards?

[c_hawkbob]

The 17th starts the new league year and opens free agency. It's also a typical time for teams to hold press conferences addressing the upcoming year so that's probably where the "we'll find out soon" speculation is coming from.

[RiverDog]

The 17th starts the new league year and opens free agency. It's also a typical time for teams to hold press conferences addressing the upcoming year so that's probably where the "we'll find out soon" speculation is coming from.

That makes sense. Thanks!

[Aseahawkfan]

No, I haven't heard him say he wants to be a coach some day. Have you ever heard him say that he never wants to be a coach?

You said player-coach like Bill Russell. But now you back off that statement like the weak statement it was. It was nonsense. Russ said nothing about being a player coach. Not even sure why you toss nonsense like that out there.

Pete is definitely a player's coach at least from a behavioral and interpersonal standpoint, ie the locker room. Whether or not that extends to his coaching philosophy is another matter.

You harped on Pete being too soft on the players and letting the inmates runt the prison mentality, now you're backing off on it? Which one is it? If he too stifling or too loose?

[RiverDog]

You said player-coach like Bill Russell. But now you back off that statement like the weak statement it was. It was nonsense. Russ said nothing about being a player coach. Not even sure why you toss nonsense like that out there.

I said that the Hawks should make Russell a player coach, and I was saying it more or less tongue in cheek. I did not say that Russell wanted to be a coach, rather that he was acting like he should be treated as one, and that the Hawks might as well make him a player-coach.

Pete is definitely a player's coach at least from a behavioral and interpersonal standpoint, ie the locker room. Whether or not that extends to his coaching philosophy is another matter.

You harped on Pete being too soft on the players and letting the inmates runt the prison mentality, now you're backing off on it? Which one is it? If he too stifling or too loose?

It's a balancing act. I don't think Pete should be caving into Russell's demands, but I also think that that he should be open enough to listen to his players, especially veteran players like Russell, and if he feels that their suggestions are sound, to run with them.

[jshawaii22]

So, it turns out that the Rah-Rah-Rah is just a cover up for Pete's Iron Fist of Fury. If the media says it, everyone believes it. Looks a lot like Sherman, ET, Bennett and others were right about the 'locker room' after all. It's more and more looking good for the media and Pete doesn't like change.

[obiken]

So, it turns out that the Rah-Rah-Rah is just a cover up for Pete's Iron Fist of Fury. If the media says it, everyone believes it. Looks a lot like Sherman, ET, Bennett and others were right about the 'locker room' after all. It's more and more looking good for the media and Pete doesn't like change.

Thats it, I agree!

[TriCitySam]

Mike McCarthy had a .618 winning percentage, 6 NFC North titles, finished 1st or 2nd in the NFC North in 10 out of 12 seasons which included 8 straight playoff appearances, 4 NFC Championship game appearances, and a Lombardi. That's arguably a better overall resume than Pete's. The Packers didn't exactly fall off into the abyss when they fired McCarthy as they've gone 26-6 with two straight NFCCG appearances since.

McCarthy is .600 as a head coach, Pete is .606. But Pete coached for the Jets ....McCarthy had Farve and Rogers his whole career, Pete not such good luck. No way you can make a credible argument that McCarthy is better than Pete. Wanna get rid of Pete? Good luck, you'll need it. Who you gonna hire??

[RiverDog]

McCarthy is .600 as a head coach, Pete is .606. But Pete coached for the Jets ....McCarthy had Farve and Rogers his whole career, Pete not such good luck. No way you can make a credible argument that McCarthy is better than Pete. Wanna get rid of Pete? Good luck, you'll need it. Who you gonna hire??

As noted, the two coaches have comparable W/L percentages and they both have one Lombardi. Pete has two SB appearances, McCarthy has been to just the one. McCarthy has been to 4 NFCCG's, Pete's been to two. They have nearly identical playoff records, McCarthy having a slight edge .556 to Pete's .524. Pete has been fired from two NFL jobs, McCarthy has been fired from one.

Those are very similar resumes and one can make a logical argument for either coaches' case. Now if you want to start picking out things like McCarthy having Favre and Rodgers his whole career or that Pete hasn't been to an NFCCG for 6 years, you start getting into intangibles that could go on forever. Bottom line is that at least statistically, their NFL coaching records are very similar.

I am NOT saying that we should get rid of Pete, at least not this season, so please, stop suggesting that I am. I want to see how this season plays out, in particular, how he handles this current crisis surrounding his star QB. But I don't worship the ground he walks on, either.

[TriCitySam]

I am NOT saying that we should get rid of Pete, at least not this season, so please, stop suggesting that I am. I want to see how this season plays out, in particular, how he handles this current crisis surrounding his star QB. But I don't worship the ground he walks on, either.

No coach is perfect.....I'm saying, there's not an owner or GM in the league that would take Mike McCarthy over Pete. He's a legit top 5 coach and there's a 95% chance the next one is worse. Unfortunately fans like to complain about their coaches, guys howled about Knox and got 14-34 Flores; howled about Holmgren and got Mora.....

[RiverDog]

No coach is perfect.....I'm saying, there's not an owner or GM in the league that would take Mike McCarthy over Pete. He's a legit top 5 coach and there's a 95% chance the next one is worse. Unfortunately fans like to complain about their coaches, guys howled about Knox and got 14-34 Flores; howled about Holmgren and got Mora.....

The point of making a comparison between Pete and McCarthy wasn't about which coach is better, it was to counter your claim that we'd be doomed for 15 years should we ever part ways with Pete. McCarthy was the best HC the Packers have had since Lombardi and they're doing just fine without him.

[obiken]

The point of making a comparison between Pete and McCarthy wasn't about which coach is better, it was to counter your claim that we'd be doomed for 15 years should we ever part ways with Pete. McCarthy was the best HC the Packers have had since Lombardi and they're doing just fine without him.

River not sound argumentative, but the best coach the Packers had since Vince Lombardi was Holmgren hands-down. McCarthy got a ready-made team handed to him, Mike did a complete rebuild on the Packers. I’ve never been impressed with McCarthy, and I never will be. I agree with you in principle on your point as long as you find a good replacement coaches are easier to find than franchise quarterbacks. I think had Knox or Holmgren had Russell Wilson they would’ve won a Super Bowl.

[c_hawkbob]

According to Colin Cowherd (a huge Wilson fan):

"I’m told the Chicago Bears are trying to make a move on Russell Wilson and trying to create a move that is so good Seattle can’t say no."

"Here's how it works, Chicago gives Seattle five first-round picks... Now they may not be great picks if they get Russell Wilson, but they give up five first-round picks. Nobody else is probably going to offer that."

https://www.chicagobearshq.com/update/C ... EjNjORvdZU

5 picks at 25 or later? I still wouldn't do it, not unless they can arrange for this year's to be high enough to get Justin Fields or maybe Trey Lance.

[RiverDog]

The point of making a comparison between Pete and McCarthy wasn't about which coach is better, it was to counter your claim that we'd be doomed for 15 years should we ever part ways with Pete. McCarthy was the best HC the Packers have had since Lombardi and they're doing just fine without him.

River not sound argumentative, but the best coach the Packers had since Vince Lombardi was Holmgren hands-down. McCarthy got a ready-made team handed to him, Mike did a complete rebuild on the Packers. I’ve never been impressed with McCarthy, and I never will be. I agree with you in principle on your point as long as you find a good replacement coaches are easier to find than franchise quarterbacks. I think had Knox or Holmgren had Russell Wilson they would’ve won a Super Bowl.

Holmgren was the Packer's HC for 7 years, McCarthy was with them for 13. But I wasn't trying to start a debate over which head coach was better than another. It was to counter this notion that if we were ever to part ways with Pete that it would likely result in an immediate implosion that would last for as long as 15 years. The Packers parted ways with one of their best HC's in club history yet they've gone to the NFCCG in 2 straight seasons since his departure.

[Hawk Sista]

I agree Bob! We need a QB and pC & JS haven’t done so well in the first round anyway. 5 more Malik McDowells? No thanks!

[RiverDog]

5 picks at 25 or later? I still wouldn't do it, not unless they can arrange for this year's to be high enough to get Justin Fields or maybe Trey Lance.

My understanding is that they can only trade 3 picks in one deal unless it's on draft day.

I wouldn't assume that all 5 of the Bears' #1's would be #25 or later. If Russell went to the Bears, he'd have zero weapons. The Bears best receiver is Allen Robinson and he's more of a mid range receiver possession type receiver, and with the 2nd worst cap space and no draft picks, they'd really have to get creative in improving their roster. Plus their OL ranked in the bottom 1/3 last season, worse that ours.

I agree with Cbob. We would have to come out of this with a good, young QB not named Mitchell Turbisky before I could get on board with it. If this trade were to happen, I'd predict that it'd be a disaster for both teams unless we could somehow manage to parlay some of those picks into a top 5 pick and get one of the top college QB's, ie Lawrence or Fields.