Mike McCarthy Continues to Frustrate

Before this starts to sound like a "This is the head coach's fault and no one else's, dammit" ...

• Dom Capers made the biggest mistake he's made with the Packers when he (seemingly) didn't insist on a timeout as the Patriots used the no-huddle offense to drive down the field and take the lead in the fourth quarter. You can't spend three-and-a-half quarters dictating the tempo to your (allegedly) superior opponent, then let them take it back in a single sequence of plays while you sit there idly and do nothing to stop them. You also can't dictate matchups as well as the Packers did, then let the opponent find a favorable matchup and use the no-huddle to exploit it.
• Shawn Slocum is one of the worst special-teams coaches in the NFL. Beyond the miserable embarrassment of an offensive lineman returning a kickoff 71 yards, there is no consistency whatsoever in the return, coverage, or kicking teams. Mason Crosby boots a beauty for a touchback one time, then (kicking in the same direction) throws up a laugher that might get inside the opponent's ten. The special teams seem to commit a fatal error once a week. Sometimes they get bailed out, sometimes they don't. 

Now, on to the main point.

You just can't say Mike McCarthy simply isn't getting the job done. There are things he does incredibly well. Like Capers, McCarthy devises wise gameplans that exploit favorable matchups. When the offense is clicking, he often adds to that rhythm and allows his guys to make plays.

Not only that, but Packer fans have to appreciate his willingness to think outside the box and take risks. There aren't a lot of risk-takers among NFL head coaches, and more often than not, the ones who are end up being successful. McCarthy is a risk-taker. He'll call onside kicks, go for it on fourth down, and call for shots downfield in situations where other coaches wouldn't dream of it.

He also abandons the run, forgets he has his backup quarterback playing, and doesn't manage the clock well.

We saw virtually all of these traits in Sunday's loss to New England ... for better or worse.

McCarthy called for an onside kick on the opening kickoff after deferring the coin toss win to the second half (this is smart, in my opinion, by the way, in most cases). His team got a field goal, and they got Matt Flynn into the game early. He was smart with Flynn for most of the night, keeping him out of situations where his inexperience could hurt the team. They ran almost as much as they threw, which was a stunner, given how quickly and decisively McCarthy abandoned the run in a loss to Detroit the previous week.

The run was effective, which probably helped keep the head coach from giving up on it, but this is what he needed to do for his young quarterback last week. Call run plays, and have the patience to see the plan through. When the Packers have done that, they've been good enough running the ball to make everything else effective. When they've given up on it too quickly and easily, you get results like the Bears and Lions games.

But when the fourth quarter came around, McCarthy got away from the plan just enough. After two up-the-gut calls for John Kuhn that started with a first down from the New England two, McCarthy called for a shotgun pass by Flynn.

No play-action. No bootleg. Just a straight drop.

Inexplicable.

The Kuhn calls will be questioned by many, but he's a good straight-ahead runner with value on the goal line. Nothing wrong with giving him a shot. But when you've run the ball that well, held the ball that long, and are playing a team that Cris Collinsworth noted once or 15 times was down a couple linemen, you can't just give up on the run in a key spot.

I had someone on Twitter lecture me about the importance of timeouts in close games, as I ripped the Packers' staff for not using one during the aforementioned touchdown drive. I get that, but timeouts aren't going to help you late in close games if your team's coach appears to have flunked the Andy Reid School of Clock Management.

McCarthy blew his two remaining timeouts at a bad time during Green Bay's final drive, which was hurt a lot by a sack that was caused by Bryan Bulaga making a rookie mistake and not reading the play properly. That happens, but McCarthy got caught because his team clearly wasn't ready to run a two-minute drill, even though the clock was under a minute and they needed a touchdown.

Given how Green Bay kicked away their three timeouts in the second half, what good did it do to let Tom Brady and the Patriots carve them up on what turned into the winning touchdown drive?

Use a timeout there, get your guys settled, and maybe even make a defensive stop to hold New England to zero or three points. Do that, or take care of business on the goal line earlier in the fourth quarter, and the timeouts don't matter at the end.

Either way, the ultimate responsibility falls on the head coach. While McCarthy has done a good job in many areas this season, he's come up short in others. Despite a myriad of injuries that would have crippled most teams, the Packers are somehow still in control of their playoff fate. Win two home games, and they're in. But while McCarthy has had a few "Coach of the Year" moments this year, he himself has admitted shortcomings in others, most notably the embarrassing loss to Detroit, in which the Packers mustered all of three points against an awful defense.

It might not be time to can the head coach, but how long can management tolerate him not showing improvement -- namely, more consistency -- in his game and clock management?

The Packers have lost four times by three points each and twice by four. That's six losses by a combined total of 20 points. In those losses, the team had the ball, with a chance to win the game late or in overtime, in all but one (the Atlanta game). At some point, they have to find a way to win close games.

Anything less, and it's golfing season early.

Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy Deserve Credit

I try to be fair.

When I think people deserve to be criticized, I will do so. It works this way in my writing, and it works this way when I'm on the radio. If someone's performance merits criticism, I'm willing to do it, regardless of who it is. No one can be immune.

Earlier this season, I was highly critical of Green Bay Packers management, specifically general manager Ted Thompson and head coach Mike McCarthy.

In the spirit of fairness, however, it seems we've reached a point where the two need a certain amount of credit thrown their way.

Packers Deny the Obvious

It's hard to argue that anything good came out of Green Bay's loss to Chicago Monday night ... unless you're not a Green Bay fan.

The Packers melted down in front of the nation, committing so many penalties (18) that if you cut the number in half, it's still too many for a team to be guilty of in a game. It's beyond absurd, really, that an NFL team not named the Raiders could commit that many fouls in a 60-minute game.

The other (actually, there were so many of these that "Another" would be more appropriate) startling development was how quickly coach Mike McCarthy abandoned the run.

Tuesday, McCarthy defended himself and his run game. Of course, there appears to be no run game to defend in Green Bay right now, but McCarthy says that's not the case. He spoke about John Kuhn and Brandon Jackson, who received all the designed carries Monday night (Aaron Rodgers had a couple scrambles).

"You have to look at what's the definition of the run game. I looked at this particular game, and I felt that our running backs were productive," McCarthy said.

"I thought Brandon and John played well with the opportunities that they were given with the ball in their hands and what was put in front of them.

"I thought the running back production was a positive in the game."

The numbers don't support a strong showing for the running game, but McCarthy seemed to hint that he was considering Julius Peppers, Lance Briggs and Brian Urlacher as part of the evaluation.

He declared, once again, that Jackson and Kuhn are good enough to take the Packers to a winning season.

"I like our running backs. We are going to use them accordingly to get the ball down the field. I'm not trying to sell something that is not true," McCarthy said.

"Just because you don't line up and run it 25 times from the 'I' doesn't mean you are not committed to being productive with your running backs. If you look at the dynamics of our offensive personnel, we have the ability to play in a box offense. We have the ability to play in a spread offense. That is to our credit, and we're going to utilize that the best we can."

I get that the Bears play good defense. But the run game -- defined as the ability to matriculate the ball down the field without it being in Rodgers' hands or being thrown -- sucks.

Kuhn tried to get a few yards by cheating, but the Bears successfully challenged the play and exposed the officials' incompetence. He's okay, but nothing special, and he sure isn't going to break any long runs the way Ryan Grant did.

Jackson couldn't find a hole if he ran on a golf course.

The answer is not Dimitri Nance, a green back who was plucked off a practice squad, and so far has shown nothing to indicate he shouldn't be shipped back to a practice squad.

I'm not here to trumpet a free agent like Willie Parker. I'm also not here to say that Ted Thompson should actually use his phone for the greater good and deal for Marshawn Lynch.

But Thompson and McCarthy can't merely accept the offense as it is.

The lack of a running game -- again, defined as the ability to hand or pitch the ball to a thing called a running back and move the ball down the field that way -- is going to kill this team.

Rodgers is a very good -- if not great -- quarterback, but if he throws 45-50 passes a game because the Packers can't and/or won't run the ball, the Packers will see their season end before the NFC Championship Game.

That's not acceptable for a team with Super Bowl aspirations.

No one thought the Packers would be in a spot where they needed a running back. You can't predict injuries, and you can't have a contingency plan for every player who can suffer a serious injury.

But when you get caught with your pants on the ground, it's time for action, not thumb-twiddling.

Oh, and apparently, "denial" ain't just a river.

McCARTHY OBVIOUSLY PISSED

Packers head coach Mike McCarthy held his pre-camp press conference Saturday in Green Bay. The first ten minutes went by without a single question unrelated to that Favre guy.

Obviously, this is the big story surrounding the Packers. However, he's not on the football team, and there's no guarantee he'll ever be again. It's not quite like asking a coach about a player who is holding out, or a guy who is injured and trying to get healthy before camp starts.

Reporters want to know what's going on with Favre. Perhaps they should try asking him. Then again, unless it's a neutered environment with a buddy in the media, Favre's not likely talking.

Not surprisingly, McCarthy seemed a bit perturbed by this. Hard to blame him.

"Well, it has gone on so long for me personally I can't really recall if I was surprised," McCarthy said. "But the way it has gone has been disappointing, I'll say that. You can say that is a surprise."

When asked to expound on that, McCarthy said: "I don't think this is necessary, why we're here today and just the course it has gone."

Also, McCarthy said the June 20th conversation he had with Favre, in which the quarterback said he was told the team was moving on and didn't want him back, wasn't quite as definitive as Favre described.

..."It's not like Brett Favre called me up and I said, 'No way you can't come back.' That wasn't the case."

Surely, no one in the Packers organization wanted this. At the same time, after watching Favre hold them over a barrel for three straight years with this retire-or-not-retire stuff, they can't be terribly surprised.

With Favre apparently threatening to report to camp, the Packers are in an interesting bind.

What do you do?

ESPN's Michael Smith made an idiot of himself on SportsCenter, saying that he didn't think the Packers could trade Favre. Of course, he didn't bother to lay out a way to make "Favre on the roster" work, and only a complete buffoon would think the Packers are going to release Favre knowing he wants to play for the Vikings.

It's really easy to say that the Packers can't trade Favre, but they've committed to Aaron Rodgers, and they're committed to keeping their word. I find it hard to believe anyone could fault the Packers for that with a straight face, but it seems many are setting themselves up to do just that.