Update Saints to interview Mike McCarthy in middle of this week, 1/26-2/1 per Pelissero [Underhill: McCarthy would have to be the current favorite] (32 Viewers)

[Saintstigerking]

Like Dallas, Green Bay & Rodgers’ success stemmed from McCarthy. Those were still McCarthy’s rosters in the immediate seasons after he left. He developed Rodgers since he came into the league and helped put him in position to be an elite QB throughout his career.

Those Cowboys teams were Dak, Lamb, Pro Bowl O-Line, Parsons and dozens of role players that arguably aren’t 53 man roster level. The secondary were ballhawks who can’t consistently cover. They take tons of chances to pad int/pbu stats but always gave up plays just as much. Which is why they couldn’t stop the 49ers and Packers in the playoffs when it mattered.

McCarthy plus the 5-6 player nucleus (including OL) maxed those teams out to 12-win—divisional round when they only were 9-win talent. National media hyping up Dallas every year because of America’s team rep doesn’t mean they were actually talented outside of QB, WR1, OL & the edge rusher. McCarthy made them a consistently winning team again.

You’re making my point for me thanks. The few players Dallas has is way better than what we have. So how’s McCarthy gonna do with this heap of scrap?

 

[Saint KayBee]

Could be. I do seem to recall that Payton didn't have as much influence early in his career, but I could be wrong.

What helped Payton most was that he had his quarterback early and it was apparent during the start of the 2006 season, even if Brees wasn’t lighting up the board with points. How Brees ran the offense gave everyone comfort.

Then there was the defense. It was an adept unit at playing with a lead but if the opposing defense kept the Saints out of the end zone and could counter with points of their own, things could get uncomfortable. This became apparent in the 2007-2008 seasons and Payton had to make a tough choice on a good friend, in the name of winning or going down with what was becoming a leaky ship.

Then 2009 happened and the Loomis-Payton relationship was permanently changed.

 

[Saintstigerking]

Sure, and what did they do in the playoffs? About as much as McCarthy did in Dallas. Not much.

Thanks for making my point. You understand you’re arguing with yourself?

 

[St. Widge]

Based on this information, it looks like the Saints will be interviewing Brady, Moore, and maybe Kingsbury before they interview McCarthy. That tells me that they are not dead set on McCarthy and that they are open to any of the guys they are talking to. They may not have the right list and they may not pick the right guy, but at least they are going to get one of the guys they want and aren't going to just go with the safe and easy choice with McCarthy. So, they may not get it right, but the process is much better than it was last time.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

I am one who would not be excited if McCarthy is our new head coach.

Admittedly, I have difficulty articulating my unease. I do not think McCarthy is a bad coach. But despite his record, I do not think that at this time he is an exceptional one. In most years in Green Bay, he won. But in Green Bay, with one of the great (if prickly) quarterbacks in football and one of the great front offices in the league, he had a greater margin of error than his coaching colleagues. And that superlative front office decided after the 2018 season that the Packers would be better served with Matt Lafleur as their head coach.

In Dallas, his first and last years were unexceptional, and his three teams from 2021 through 2023 won in the regular season but faltered in the postseason. It seems that McCarthy's teams largely played up to the level they should have played but on the whole did not exceed it.

And McCarthy has been an NFL head coach, a profession that can age those in it quickly, for 18 years. He is 61 but looks a decade older.

Finally, if McCarthy is the choice, what does it say about how the Saints organization sees its team and its future direction? I believe a McCarthy selection says that we believe we can win immediately, and that we have largely been doing the right things the past three years and that a rebuild on some level is not necessary. I believe that is the wrong diagnosis and the wrong treatment plan.

 

[St. Geezy]

Based on this information, it looks like the Saints will be interviewing Brady, Moore, and maybe Kingsbury before they interview McCarthy. That tells me that they are not dead set on McCarthy and that they are open to any of the guys they are talking to. They may not have the right list and they may not pick the right guy, but at least they are going to get one of the guys they want and aren't going to just go with the safe and easy choice with McCarthy. So, they may not get it right, but the process is much better than it was last time.

Starting to sound more and more like they’re saving McCarthy for last. They want him, but maybe they want to see if anyone else wows them first.

 

[St. Widge]

Starting to sound more and more like they’re saving McCarthy for last. They want him, but maybe they want to see if anyone else wows them first.

I kind of think it indicates that they are open to any of the candidates and they want to talk to all of them to see who has the best plan and who is the best option. I know Underhill has said that he thought that McCarthy was going to be the obvious choice, and he does have fans in the FO, but it appears that he's not quite the favorite Nick would have thought he would be. And I think if he really was their clear choice at this point they would go ahead and hire him so he can start building his staff without risking losing assistants.

 

[HogsNSaints]

I am one who would not be excited if McCarthy is our new head coach.

Admittedly, I have difficulty articulating my unease. I do not think McCarthy is a bad coach. But despite his record, I do not think that at this time he is an exceptional one. In most years in Green Bay, he won. But in Green Bay, with one of the great (if prickly) quarterbacks in football and one of the great front offices in the league, he had a greater margin of error than his coaching colleagues. And that superlative front office decided after the 2018 season that the Packers would be better served with Matt Lafleur as their head coach.

In Dallas, his first and last years were unexceptional, and his three teams from 2021 through 2023 won in the regular season but faltered in the postseason. It seems that McCarthy's teams largely played up to the level they should have played but on the whole did not exceed it.

And McCarthy has been an NFL head coach, a profession that can age those in it quickly, for 18 years. He is 61 but looks a decade older.

Finally, if McCarthy is the choice, what does it say about how the Saints organization sees its team and its future direction? I believe a McCarthy selection says that we believe we can win immediately, and that we have largely been doing the right things the past three years and that a rebuild on some level is not necessary. I believe that is the wrong diagnosis and the wrong treatment plan.

I think you share the sentiment of the majority of us. It’s not that McCarthy is “bad”, but he has had almost 20 years worth of opportunities with much better situations and largely underachieved.

I would hope that most of us can agree that Rodgers and Dak are better QBs than Carr. I would hope we all agree that Dallas’ young/prime talent on defense is much better than our aging talent on defense.

I just don’t know why we would think he can accomplish more in New Orleans than he did in GB/Dallas, and he’s only won 1 playoff game in his entire tenure as the Cowboys HC. It seems like settling to hire McCarthy.

 

[St. Geezy]

I think you share the sentiment of the majority of us. It’s not that McCarthy is “bad”, but he has had almost 20 years worth of opportunities with much better situations and largely underachieved.

I would hope that most of us can agree that Rodgers and Dak are better QBs than Carr. I would hope we all agree that Dallas’ young/prime talent on defense is much better than our aging talent on defense.

I just don’t know why we would think he can accomplish more in New Orleans than he did in GB/Dallas, and he’s only won 1 playoff game in his entire tenure as the Cowboys HC. It seems like settling to hire McCarthy.

Would you take back Sean Payton?

 

[HogsNSaints]

Would you take back Sean Payton?

Yes, we’ve had this argument like 3 times already. They are not as comparable to me, as they are to you.

 

[St. Geezy]

Yes, we’ve had this argument like 3 times already. They are not as comparable to me, as they are to you.

Sorry. Don’t always keep track of who says what. Everyone for the most part are just faceless avatars to me.

I think we are both repeating ourselves a plenty though. lol

 

[Rexman100]

Yes, we’ve had this argument like 3 times already. They are not as comparable to me, as they are to you.

What’s the difference between? Besides weight and pettiness?

 

[Hubig]

If McCarthy is your defacto guy, you'd know his interview date by now. They haven't even scheduled it yet, its just "sometime next week"

 

[St. Widge]

I think you share the sentiment of the majority of us. It’s not that McCarthy is “bad”, but he has had almost 20 years worth of opportunities with much better situations and largely underachieved.

I would hope that most of us can agree that Rodgers and Dak are better QBs than Carr. I would hope we all agree that Dallas’ young/prime talent on defense is much better than our aging talent on defense.

I just don’t know why we would think he can accomplish more in New Orleans than he did in GB/Dallas, and he’s only won 1 playoff game in his entire tenure as the Cowboys HC. It seems like settling to hire McCarthy.

It's clearly your opinion, but I don't think that's the opinion of the majority of us. I think the majority of us think McCarthy would be a kind of boring hire but he's also a guy that has had a huge amount of success in the NFL as a HC and would still be a good choice. And if McCarthy only does what he did in GB and Dallas, I don't know how we could have an issue with the hire. Even what he has done in the last 4 years in Dallas is vastly better than what we have done in the last 4 years.

And if Dak is better than Carr, it's not by much.

 

[cdogg]

I think you share the sentiment of the majority of us. It’s not that McCarthy is “bad”, but he has had almost 20 years worth of opportunities with much better situations and largely underachieved.

I would hope that most of us can agree that Rodgers and Dak are better QBs than Carr. I would hope we all agree that Dallas’ young/prime talent on defense is much better than our aging talent on defense.

I just don’t know why we would think he can accomplish more in New Orleans than he did in GB/Dallas, and he’s only won 1 playoff game in his entire tenure as the Cowboys HC. It seems like settling to hire McCarthy.

Dak is the worst big game QB I’ve ever seen.