No one is disputing that, are they? No.

Let me be clear. I am saying we didn't lose that game because the coach was "ULTRA MEGA DUPER conservative".

This is where I'm coming from.

Seahawks
2014 15.9 (1st)
2013 14.4 (1st)
2012 15.3 (1st)

That means they don't give up many points.
That means when you can put points on the board, you put points on the board.
That means when you had three shots at (or inside) the 7 yard line (this happened TWICE) and fail to get a TD, you take the points.

What indication do you have that you're going to get it with one more try against the leagues best defense? You take the points.

Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool 

It is clear that the players failed to execute but that doesn't mean the coaching was aggressive, because the opposite of conservatism is aggression and you have to agree we didn't show any aggressive move in the whole game.

From the 1 yard line many many many coaches will go for it, Mike kicked a FG twice!
And then from midfield you almost have a chance to win the game if you can get 1 freaking yard, you have Aaron Rodgers and Eddie Lacy and you punt to get 26 yards of field, tell me this isn't a lame call...
Finally you say we were milking the clock but in practice Mike kneeled down 3 times with 4 minutes left on the clock to just give the opponent the chance to win the game, again, having Rodgers as the QB.

Originally Posted by: luigis 

mi_keys- does McCarthy get credit for calling blitzes? I have no doubt that he and Dom talk general concepts about how they want to approach a team. But I can't accept the fact that he tells his DC he wants to blitz more or less. Or even go into a prevent defense. Mike may tell the DC that he is playing too soft too soon or too aggressive in a game but other than that I can't see him getting into any kind of specifics.

Originally Posted by: wpr 

What about the offense? Does this take into consideration a HC trying to burn the clock for the whole second half of a game that he is going away from the type of offense that got the team the lead. And that he has become very predicable by calling running plays almost exclusively? Especially one 1st and 2nd downs. That the play calls have put them into 3rd ad very long time after time?

If it survey doesn't factor these into his dynamics then their data is suspect.

GB built an insurmountable 16-0 lead.

Originally Posted by: Barfarn 

Mike's a great coach. Sometimes situationally he can get a little hay-wire but I've never seen a coach who hasn't done that every once in a while. I'm so thankful to have him coaching out beloved Packers.

Originally Posted by: DarkaneRules 

I wasn't thrilled with the 4th down attempt in the 3rd Q but I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. I guess Mike wanted to go out of his way to prove to ll of us that he isn't conservative.

The play they called was horrible. NYG had 9 guys in the box. I would have preferred to have Ty fake inside and then bounce it outside to the left. The receiver - I didn't see who it was- was taking the defender with him so it was open outside. The right side wasn't.

Perhaps it would have made more sense to run a fake punt to the up blocker. If it failed he would have still been about where Montgomery ended up. At least the middle of the line would have wouldn't have been packed to tight.

Originally Posted by: wpr