Saints expected to be very interested in former Packers/Cowboys HC Mike McCarthy [McCarthy will interview early next week] (26 Viewers)

[St. Widge]

There are pros and cons on this possible signing as with every other candidates.

The most important thing is that with McCarthy you know what you get. A very competitive coach, who has not been able to take the next step after winning one Super Bowl.

To me, his weakest point is to keep calm in high pressure situations. There was terrible management of plays and clock on some of Dallas' playoff games. Makes you wonder about preparation and communication on the last 2 minutes of the game.

One thing I will be very curious about, is McCarthy building a staff. In Dallas, when named coach he inherited Kellen Moore and hired Dan Quinn. It seems that Mike Zimmer was another Jerry Jones' hires.

I think McCarthy will be comfortable inheriting Kubiak and Rizzi, if no better choices are available, but I have no clue how will he build a new defence for the saints.

I'm not sure that McCarthy and Kubiak work on the same staff. I believe that McCarthy is pure West Coast guy and Kubiak is a Shanahan/Kubiak system guy. Maybe McCarthy would like to implement that system, but it's not a natural fit.

As far as Rizzi, it's really hard to have the guy that was just the interim HC on your staff when you are the new HC. Too many guys will be tempted to look to Rizzi if they don't like something the new HC does.

But, McCarthy has been in the NFL for a long time and knows a lot of people so I would think he would be able to assemble a good staff and probably already has a group that will go with him wherever he goes.

 

[Saints 318]

This thread is entertaining

 

[DaveXA]

My least favorite candidate is Mike McCarthy. He is the high-floor, low ceiling candidate. If you feel we need a real change in direction and culture, he is not the coach. He is the status-quo choice. On the other hand, if you believe that the Saints have been victims of bad luck and bad bounces and are legitimate contender, then he may be your high guy. He would bring some stability. He is not a bad coach. But at this stage of his career, he is a mediocre coach.

Yes, he has great career numbers. But in Green Bay, he had Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers as his quarterbacks, an incredible front office led by Bob Harlan and Mark Murphy, and very talented teams. And he had talent in Dallas. There are reasons other than Katrina that Sean Payton wanted badly the Green Bay job in 2006.

Are there people in Green Bay who think the Packers should have kept McCarthy and would prefer McCarthy over LaFleur? Not many. And I suspect most in Dallas think Jerry kept McCarthy too long as head coach. There are reasons that two different teams parted ways with him.

Regarding the question of whom do I prefer, I am tended to say none of the above. I am not thrilled about Glenn--who seems to be the prohibitive favorite. I would open the field as wide as possible and am willing to throw deep. We are going nowhere in the next two years anywhere. My fear is that two years from now some reporter will be asking Loomis why he is right person to be general manager, and he will still be saying because he had success before. I wonder if Mickey uses that criterion for evaluating his financial advisor. I doubt it.

It's really weird to think they kept him too long when he's a year removed from 3 straight 12 win seasons and 2 division titles in those 3 years, not to mention being a top 5 offense during that time.

And fwiw, the Packers haven't done any better since McCarthy left. They're 3-5 in the playoffs compared to McCarthy's 10-5 playoffs record with the Packers. So...eh.

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

And you don't know if the retreads are going to be good either. In our last cycle Doug Pederson had the best resume. Fired. Daboll was the hottest coordinator...Hanging by a thread now with the Giants.

I sure don't, which is why I don't make dramatic declarations about them.

 

[Saint Greg]

I sure don't, which is why I don't make dramatic declarations about them.

Alright. The post you quoted didn't look like a "dramatic declaration" to me.

 

[sfidc3]

It's really weird to think they kept him too long when he's a year removed from 3 straight 12 win seasons and 2 division titles in those 3 years, not to mention being a top 5 offense during that time.

And fwiw, the Packers haven't done any better since McCarthy left. They're 3-5 in the playoffs compared to McCarthy's 10-5 playoffs record. So...eh.

I was about to say, so they should have fired him after a 12-5 season?

 

[St. Widge]

Guillermo, he builds a defense by hiring Mike Zimmer.

Were Zimmer six to eight years younger, he would be someone I would be interviewing to be head coach. He may have had an off year in Dallas, but he knows defense.

You would prefer Zimmer's .562 career winning percentage and 2 playoff wins over McCarthy's career .608 winning percentage, 1 Super Bowl win, and 11 playoff wins?

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

Read the thread. Plenty of people claiming preternatural insight into who will or will not be a successful head coach.

 

[No2DC]

My least favorite candidate is Mike McCarthy. He is the high-floor, low ceiling candidate. If you feel we need a real change in direction and culture, he is not the coach. He is the status-quo choice. On the other hand, if you believe that the Saints have been victims of bad luck and bad bounces and are legitimate contender, then he may be your high guy. He would bring some stability. He is not a bad coach. But at this stage of his career, he is a mediocre coach.

Yes, he has great career numbers. But in Green Bay, he had Brett Favre and Aaron Rodgers as his quarterbacks, an incredible front office led by Bob Harlan and Mark Murphy, and very talented teams. And he had talent in Dallas. There are reasons other than Katrina that Sean Payton wanted badly the Green Bay job in 2006.

Are there people in Green Bay who think the Packers should have kept McCarthy and would prefer McCarthy over LaFleur? Not many. And I suspect most in Dallas think Jerry kept McCarthy too long as head coach. There are reasons that two different teams parted ways with him.

Regarding the question of whom do I prefer, I am tended to say none of the above. I am not thrilled about Glenn--who seems to be the prohibitive favorite. I would open the field as wide as possible and am willing to throw deep. We are going nowhere in the next two years anywhere. My fear is that two years from now some reporter will be asking Loomis why he is right person to be general manager, and he will still be saying because he had success before. I wonder if Mickey uses that criterion for evaluating his financial advisor. I doubt it.

This is Mick's last hire because his age, so I think he'll lean on the safe choice. That screams McCarthy, possibly Glenn (if he wants to go with a first-time coach)

 

[DavidM]

This is Mick's last hire because his age, so I think he'll lean on the safe choice. That screams McCarthy, possibly Glenn (if he wants to go with a first-time coach)

If that’s the case, alternately he could make a bold choice. Whatever decision he makes, there will be plenty of room to interpret and criticize the unspoken reasons for those who find interest in that.

We really don’t know.

 

[Hubig]

I much rather McCarthy or Joe Brady(OC playcaller) over Glenn. Just like Underhill said, it is much easier to find DC's than it is OC's who will get poached when they do a good job. If they do go with Glenn, the moment the OC looks good with this roster, he's getting a bunch of HC interviews in the next cycle and do you really wanna go thru that drama?

 

[No2DC]

If that’s the case, alternately he could make a bold choice. Whatever decision he makes, there will be of plenty of room to interpret and criticize the unspoken reasons for those who find interest in that.

We really don’t know.

As always. However, I was against the deer on day one; some decisions scream disaster. He was a losing coach, and we gave him a chance anyway.

 

[St. Geezy]

I much rather McCarthy or Joe Brady(OC playcaller) over Glenn. Just like Underhill said, it is much easier to find DC's than it is OC's who will get poached when they do a good job. If they do go with Glenn, the moment the OC looks good with this roster, he's getting a bunch of HC interviews in the next cycle and do you really wanna go thru that drama?

Yep. One of several reasons I prefer an offensive coach in today’s game. I also just feel the game is better managed when you have an offensive guy viewing everything in the game from an offensive perspective.

 

[Boy_of_wonder75]

If we're talking pure preferences, Glenn is my first choice. What I've seen of him in the act of coaching looks promising, and, all things considered, I like the idea of having the Saints' first black head coach during my lifetime. That said, McCarthy is a good coach and would do well, I think.

 

[BoNcHiE]

Can I interest you in enough playoff wins to win a Super Bowl and get to 4 NFC Championship games?

I get it, and I get why people will downvote my post, but McCarthy has been a regular-season wonder the last eight seasons, and he's been loaded with talent along the way.

He's 61-years-old, which means you probably only get five seasons of him even if he does get us back to the playoffs, and there are serious questions about how much of his offensive success in Dallas was him or Kellen Moore given things got worse after Moore left, even with Dak on the field. Before that, he had prime Aaron Rodgers to work with and still ended his tenure in GB with two losing seasons.

There's a ton of faith being put in what he did a decade ago. Sean Payton has had much more recent playoff success, and he's also shown he can win no matter who is at QB (including his 9-8 season here with a carousel of scrubs). He's had one losing season in the last seven years, and that was Denver last year when he had to work with arguably the worst roster in the NFL, and he still won eight games.

I'm just not a fan of McCarthy as a candidate today. I don't think we are getting 2014-era McCarthy.