That's a big question, difficult to answer in this off-the-cuff format. Your points no question are valid and important. Experience is huge, too. Bill Walsh was among those who thought a head coach in the NFL should stay with a team for only 10 years. There's probably more roster turnover now than there was when he was coaching, but the point remains valid. The Packers are long-tenured at the top with Thompson and McCarthy. That stability has been an advantage in many ways. It doesn't remain one forever. But I can't say I have the answer as to when's the best time to move on. We'll have to see how things look at the end of the season.
It might have seemed that way, but from what I remember, the tweets were all what other players were saying about Bennett's accusations, which was news, and pointing out Bennett's inconsistencies, which were pretty stark. So I think it was just a newsy, fast-changing, provocative topic, not the lack of objectivity. I mean, Bennett's story just didn't add up. Now, he's not the devil incarnate. These guys are mercenaries, and he didn't want to play for a team that he didn't think had a chance at the SB anymore. Don't blame him for feeling that way at this point in his career. But his story didn't add up, and that's what I saw in the tweets by reporters.
We'll get a better understanding of that over the next few weeks. My guess is, it was just a good matchup. The Bears run the ball really well, but the Packers' run D has been good this season. And with a rookie QB and a terrible WR corps, the Bears just aren't equipped to gash teams in the passing game. Much tougher tests, this week with Flacco and especially the week after with Roethlisberger/Bell/Brown.
I can't speak to Freeney, haven't seen him play much and there's a decent chance he's more a product at this age of all that talent around him in Seattle. But I also wonder if he would have been worth signing, anything to help this rush at this point. I'm surprised too. I was sure the last two years that they'd draft an outside rusher in the first two rounds, and they didn't. I get that you can't lock in on a position, that's where you make big mistakes when you force picks and pass on talented guys. It's more important to get a difference maker at any position than a decent player at one of need, so that's why teams like to take the best available. But pass rushers are so important to winning, I too think they should approach this more like Pittsburgh, which seems to draft an OLB in the first two rounds every-other year.
Yeah, I think so. I actually thought they might bring him along a little more slowly because of all the football he's missed.
I have to admit, I usually have a lot of trouble telling the difference between just getting beaten and quitting. It seems like every time the Packers have lost even a game over the years I get emails or questions from people saying they weren't ready to play, or in this instance that they quit in those games. And what I'm saying is, it's really hard at least for me to tell the difference between that and just not making plays. It is possible to play poorly while still giving your all. I'll also say that a few times on defense in the games you mention, it looked bad. Bad or blown coverages, no pass rush. I don't know if some players quit, but something was missing. Last week they played pretty well, but against a bad offense. As to the accountability, Ted Thompson is responsible for all football matters. If he doesn't like what's going on, he has to get McCarthy to change that, or make a change there. If the executive committee is that unhappy with the results on the field, it's remedy is to convince Mark Murphy to make a change at GM. One of the strengths of this organization is that football people make the football decisions without interference from administration, and they sink or swim on their results. No system is close to flawless, but you can't have executive committee members, who have no training in football, to be interfering in any way with what football does. If the EC doesn't like the results, then make a change at the top of football. But let football run football.
Dr. Bob Anderson is the go-to guy for professional athletes with foot injuries. You might remember reading in the past that a guy needing foot surgery flew to Charlotte, NC, for the procedure. That was to see him. He's a Wisconsin guy and a college classmate of Packers doctor Pat McKenzie, and they decided to team up when McKenzie built a new practice as part of the Titletown District project. That's a big coup for McKenzie and Green Bay to get Anderson.
I've thought a little bit about this, and maybe. They have a ton of needs so really can use all those picks. OLB, CB, WR, TE, T, G, all big needs. They should use multiple picks at OLB IMHO. So there are plenty of needs, and the more picks, the better the chances of finding a few players. But I could see maybe a strategic trade up for somebody, maybe from the fourth round to the third, something like that. I don't think they're going to have 14 picks. I'm not positive but I think the most compensatory picks you can get is four. I can't remember if they have a pick from a past trade also. So they're probably looking at 11 picks, with at least one of the compensatory picks a likely third (for Lang). And Bennett doesn't count against them in the formula now because he was cut just before that deadline. So that will improve one of the other picks. Put it this way: They have some draft ammo.
Well, it would be good to know if he can play because of Bulaga's shaky future, that's for sure. But they have games to win too. So I'd play Spriggs if they think it's even between him and McCray. But if they think McCray is better, I'd stick with him.
Yeah, I think he'd be a great coach too. I don't know how hard he's pursued it, for one. One thing about coaching in the NFL, it's an all-consuming profession. The lifestyle isn't good unless you just absolutely love it. So perhaps he doesn't want to give up family time and the like. But I haven't asked him how hard he's tried to get a coaching job. He'd have to start at the bottom, that's the way it works even for great ex-players. Next time I see him I'll ask.
I have to say, Williams was kind of impressive at Chicago. Looked like he ran with a little more abandon and instinct than on his handful of carries before that game. And he broke tackles. That's a great quality from November-on if you play in Green Bay. So he can be a big factor without putting up the same eye-catching numbers as Jones had when he was playing. That would help Hundley a lot. I'm sure it helped him against the Bears, and he'll need it again this week against a defense that's good at taking the ball away.
I'm sure the fumble in Atlanta in the NFC championship game is a factor. But even more than that is how well the rookie RBs have played. When they had to play Jones, he proved to be a dynamic guy. Then Williams came through last week. I'm guessing the thinking is, they'd rather have the halfbacks running it if they're good than the FB. Lots of football to go though. Seven games is nearly half a season.