Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Green Bay Packer Football' started by Da-news-now, Sep 9, 2017.
I really don't mind McGinn. Over the years he's kinda gone from "drinkin' buddy Bob" to "cranky uncle Bob". It's Ok though because everything isn't always sunshine and rainbows at 1265 and someone needs to say the bad stuff once in a while.
Mostly I didn't think his overall story was bad, but when I see specific stuff that seems off I think it's fair game.
The draft picks part was just conjecture on his part and there is nothing to back up his contention that the draft was "blown" in Rds 5-7 because we didn't draft more defense. Heck, he could have done the work . . . who on defense that is a meaningful contributor was a late Rd pick? I did a quick check and the answer is . . . nobody. There are a couple of UDFAs who contribute, in Thomas and Brice, but not one draft pick after Rd 4 is even on the team on the defensive side. How exactly does McGinn believe that a late Rd pick would have made any difference. That part of his story just made no sense to me.
It does seem like that with some of his s. I tend not to mind it until he starts going way over the top. Gives a good counterpoint to a lot of the fluff pieces.
No one is saying it's always sunshine and rainbows but it isn't all bad either and virtually every McGinn article that we see linked here has a negative tone to it. He has to see something good in this years version of the Packers. A team coming off a loss in the NFCCG that worked hard to improve its defense through draft and free agency can't be all bad can it?
In football, accepting how well you played today isn't acceptable. You always have to strive to play even better. That means you need to criticize how well the team, each individual player, and coaching staff is doing based on past performance, today's performance, and what needs to be done next week. The season is too short to allow for complacency, and acceptance of less than maximum effort each week to set in.
Anyone in the media who puts out flowery articles about how peachy everything is usually is a team shill whose job is to make it easier to sell tickets, or a person whose real knowledge of the sport is lacking.
A reporter, who tells the truth, and realizes that you need to move forward constantly, will go out on a limb and say things that will often rile the team as a whole, management, and a lot of fans that see things through green and gold glasses.
Although I don't always agree with McGinn, I think his articles gives us food for thought. I like a lot of what he writes, but does it have to be so long? War and Peace is shorter than each of his articles!
Why is being optimistic immediately labeled 'GnG glasses'? Honestly, I coached hardball for 17 years and in that time I learned very quickly that a positive attitude is much more useful in conquering the teams objectives than negativity. Why can't some admit that the defense played one hell of a game? That doesn't mean things are 'peachy', it means progress is being made. These guys are professionals and I'm pretty sure the only 'peachy' time is the one week after you win the SB. So the goal I believe everyone shares is the SB victory (nobody is trying to finish #2).
Sorry if this comes off a little hard, but NONE of us are as smart as we think we are or we would be employed in some way by an NFL team. We banter our ideas around. Sometimes some of us might really prove to type something very insightful. Otherwise, we're all just rooting for the Pack. So, instead of denigrating someone with the GnG glasses or undies, just accept the fact that some approach situations with optimism and some approach with skepticism (for lack of a better word). One is not necessarily better than the other. But, McGinn comes off as sour grapes.
Schneider or Dorsey, either one would be a welcome change for me. They both built great defenses very quickly. Ted has had 7+ years and still hasn't gotten it done. The 3 RB's was way overkill, imo. There can be gems found later in the draft. Richard Sherman went in the 5th, for crying out loud! It was stupid taking all those RB's and WR's. With this group, it would have taken a Stefon Diggs to crack the lineup! Just. Plain. Dumb.
In no way was I inferring anything other than there are some fans out there who just bubble over everything coming out of the front office, and some of them don't have a clue as to who is even on the team outside of Rodgers and Matthews. They're fans, but not realistically.
Be that as it may, I still have no confidence in the coaching staff, nor the front office, to produce a championship, despite having years of talent to make it happen.
Fair enough but everyone thought Ron Wolf and Holmgren were the best ever and they only won 1 SB. It takes more than talent to make it happen. It takes health, coaching, and a fair amount of luck. The last SB the Pack won, they barely made the playoffs. The year the Giants stopped the Patriots from going 19-0 was the same thing and they needed an incredibly lucky catch on the top of the helmet to do it.
I certainly don't think McCarthy & Thompson are nearly the talent that Holmgren & Wolf were. I also don't believe that they would have been capable of engineering the turn around that they did in turning the Packers into a winner, after two decades of being a door mat. Just my opinion, for what it's worth.