So after so much bally-who about his poor clock management, poor play calling, poor health and poor outlook for continuing his career past this season early in the season, followed by some quality wins and a decidedly well called game vs. Houston, how do we feel about Coach Holmgren now? I admittedly have criticized or opined about him for all the above issues, thinking maybe he had lost the fire. He certainly seems to be in mid-season form right now, just in time for mid-season. Does anyone still want to fire him? How about induct him into the ring of honor? Let's hear it 'Hawk fans, what are your thoughts this week?
Thursday, October 20, 2005
How do you like me NOW?!?!
So after so much bally-who about his poor clock management, poor play calling, poor health and poor outlook for continuing his career past this season early in the season, followed by some quality wins and a decidedly well called game vs. Houston, how do we feel about Coach Holmgren now? I admittedly have criticized or opined about him for all the above issues, thinking maybe he had lost the fire. He certainly seems to be in mid-season form right now, just in time for mid-season. Does anyone still want to fire him? How about induct him into the ring of honor? Let's hear it 'Hawk fans, what are your thoughts this week?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Im starting to think he is more unlucky then conservative, or just a bad play caller at the end of a game...
ReplyDeleteHe finally decides to be aggressive, and it doesnt work, making everyone who jumped on him to stop being so conservative look stupid...
Im still on the fence with him, as I was last year...as long as the Mack Strong runs on 3rd and 1 stop...and this team stops being predicted (the fake play against Atlanta was awesome)...ill be happy with him...
Whenever anyone has called for Holmy's head, I've always asked one question, and am still waiting for a good response: "who is available who is any better?"
ReplyDeleteMH is a very good coach, who has run into some terrible luck at the end of games, but let's not forget that we wouldn't be IN those games, if not for the play calling the previous 55+ minutes.
He brings a level of respect and name recognition, being on the Competition committee and having been to the SB with his two previous clubs. This is also a good selling point when trying to recruit marquis free agents to the Nortwest corner of Egypt!
In my humble and uninformed opinion, unless we win the SuperBowl, I don't see Mike Holmgren coaching the Seahawks beyond the limit of his current contract. He seems exhausted, both mentally and physically, and he's not a young man anymore.
However, if he DID want to stick around for a few more years, that would be just fine by me.
Posted by alba
Here's my take. Holmgren, as an offensive coordinator and playcaller, is one of the best in the business. I've never doubted that about him.
ReplyDeleteNow, the negatives: First, he doesn't understand defense. Can't scheme it, can't find players who fit it, and certainly can't choose defensive coordinators. Sidwell was a joke, and Ray Rhodes is the worst defensive coordinator I've ever seen.
However, since Holmgren has ceded much of his personnel power to Ruskell and the rest of the front office, I'm feeling better about him. If he's content to remain the head coach and offensive player caller, and can find a defensive coordinator who understand that blitzing on third and long is basically like handing your opponent the game (see the Washington game from this year if you don't believe me), the Hawks can continue to suceed. Under those circumstances...I'd love it if Mike stays for a while.
Posted by Zach
Mike is just old school, I think at times he can be far too conservative. I also think he has been in so many damn games, as a coordinator and a coach, that he sometimes thinks "well the last time I did this in the same situation I got burned". It can be a good or a bad thing, I just wish he took more of a chance evry now and then
ReplyDeletePosted by Steve G
I love Holmgren, and Rhodes as well. I hope they stay for a long time.
ReplyDeletePosted by PaulieP
I think holmgren is a great play caller. He does a good job of handling the offense. In the past it was the dropped balls that had let him down. This year we don't have that problem and our offense is in first place. If he can get the defense to play just a little better i think that we can go very far. As long as he doesn't screw up towards the end of games and runs the hell out of Shaun Alexander i am okay with keeping him.
ReplyDeletePosted by o-meezy
I am actually rather pleased with Holmgrens playcalling so far this year. Honestly I feel in the past, its been the players abilities that have limited what he can do, i.e dropped passes, which forces him to call plays where the catch is easier.
ReplyDeletePosted by gumbostu
Aaaahhhhhhhhhh! B)
ReplyDeletePosted by Vinnyhawkalugi
Great responses everybody. Since I posted, I get to respond!
ReplyDelete"He finally decides to be aggressive, and it doesnt work, making everyone who jumped on him to stop being so conservative look stupid... " Gonna need an example of when his aggressive playcalling didn't work out this year.
" "who is available who is any better?"" Not that I want Mikey's head just yet, but available with potential, and history: Greg Knapp (OC Atl), Ed Donatell (DC Atl), Monte Kiffen (DC TB). Probably available, Pete Carroll (HC USC) is going to come back to the NFL soon I would think. And how about Mike Singletary (AHC/LB SF), big HoF name, defense minded, motivator. I think as long as you offer head coach job they can be taken from other teams.
"being on the Competition committee" uhhh, that hasn't actually worked out very well for us.
And regarding luck... "Chance favors the prepared mind."- Louis Pasteur.
I still think the Jax game would've been won if we had run the LEADING RUSHER IN THE NFL more than four times in the second half, when up by one, down by 7, and even down by 10. In all that likelyhood would've cut down on turnovers, therefore cutting their scoring. And I think had they run one more play in the Slurs game, a run wouldv'e been fine, I think we'd have won, although that truly is speculation.
Obviously he is a very good coach, and he does probably bring some "name brand" recognition. And he is doing a pretty good job. I loved the pass plays at the end of the StLoser game, even though we ended up punting. My take is he said, "We can do what we want, and if it doesn't go quite to plan, ST or D can handle it." And they did. Conservative, fraidy cat stuff demoralizes the team in a close game if you ask me.
""well the last time I did this in the same situation I got burned". It can be a good or a bad thing" Good point!
"As long as he doesn't screw up towards the end of games and runs the hell out of Shaun Alexander i am okay with keeping him. " That is what I am saying!
And Vinny, you are welcome, I knew you'd like this post and the responses. You da man, keepin' the faith.
Posted by JoSCh
Coaches get WAY too much of the CREDIT when teams win, and WAY too much of the BLAME when they don't.
ReplyDeleteThe truth is, each piece on its own CANNOT make a significant difference in a ball club (or any organization for that matter).
HOWEVER, if your COACH, FRONT OFFICE, and PLAYERS are equally TALENTED, and all on the same page, you can do great things.
Throw in a FAVORABLE SCHEDULE and AVOIDING the INJURY bug and you're defintely a lock to go far in the league.
To WIT: Bill Bellicheck, Cleveland Browns. No players, no Front Office, No Glory. Bill Bellicheck, New England. Great Front Office, Focused Overachieving Players, Lots of Glory.
To WIT: Mike Holmgren, Green Bay Packers. Best QB of modern era, Great Front Office, Outstanding Defensive End, Lots of Glory. Mike Holmgren, Pre-2005 Seattle Seahawks: Questionable players (K-Rob, C. Terry, A. Simmons, etc.) Questionable Front Office (Whitless, Fergy, uninvolved P. Allen) No Glory.
NOW, with Tim Ruskell, Mike Reinfeldt, Todd "don't call me Monica" Leiwke, and an involved Paul Allen, we have a VERY STRONG front office.
NOW, with Matt Hasselbeck peaking, Shaun Alexander maintaining his stride, and the GREAT ATTITUDE of the other stars and role players on the team, we seem to have the right mix of players.
NOW, with the Lambs and Cards and 9ers seemingly fading due to lack of talent, injuries, or both, and the Eagles seemingly struggling, and the NFC North looking like the CFL, we may even have the luck of an EASY SCHEDULE.
With all these volatile and precious resources finally coming together in a synergistic manner, NOW is certainly NOT time to start messging with any one major ingredient, like the HEAD COACH.
And besides, none of those guys on your list have ANY HC experience, and they could wind up being the next Ray Handly, Dave Campo, or Rich Kotite!
What I'm saying is there's no shortage of POTENTIAL replacements, but there is NO PROVEN HEAD COACH available that I would take over Holmgren at this time.
Posted by alba
"NOW is certainly NOT time to start messing with any one major ingredient, like the HEAD COACH " simma-don-now. I didn't say I'm ready to fire him, can't fire him anyway, as I am a fan...
ReplyDelete"none of those guys on your list have ANY HC experience" Nobody is born to it, Mike didn't have any before GB if I am not mistaken.
"NO PROVEN HEAD COACH available " available head coaches were always fired from their last job... or I guess some retire, did Denny Green retire? I know Gibbs did. But most are fired. Or not resigned after their contract runs out, which is like being fired. I don't want a retread, I'd rather have someone fresh, but only as long as they didn't make wholesale changes to the coaching staff. Again, I posted this mostly to mess with the folks calling for Mikey's head earlier (myself included, I'm sick) and see what they thought. And I have to rebuff anything you say hippie skimmer praise ho.
Posted by JoSCh
Josch, to answer your question of when his aggressiveness did not work...
ReplyDeleteRams game, when he passed 3 straight downs...I was happy to see him try to go back up field, but that one backfired...
I personally like the aggressive approach, but it blew up in his face, making me along with others look like jackasses for hounding him to be aggressive...really thats the only time I can remember him being aggressive...
ANOTHER EXAMPLE!...just remembered another example...Houston Texans, he had a minute to get the ball back, called a timeout at the end of the half, only to have it picked...loved to hear him wanting to go downfield again, just didnt work...
I hope this does not end his aggressiveness where he says 'the fans saw it didnt work, so im trying it...', but I doubt it...its a new Holmgren, too folks.
(did I just say folks??!?)
Posted by adp
Uhh, we won both of those games adp. So it didn't backfire. I assume in the lambs game you are talking about just prior to the punt fumble and recovery, that series? If thats the case, the aggressive play calling on offense sent a message to ST and D, "I trust you guys to bail me out if the mudstomping I intend to lay on the sheep misfires, you got my back, right?" And they did. All my own personal opinion and speculation, but I think aggressive play calling (if you have the players to execute) leads to aggressive playmaking. Its why 2 minute drills work.
ReplyDeletePosted by JoSCh
the Houston one led to a pick...thats costly, the game was not over, so we had no idea if we were gonna win at the time
ReplyDeletethe Rams game HURT US...you cannot tell me, that you expect our team to survive that game the way they did...im not saying we lost because of the aggressive playcalling, im saying we were unlucky the two times we've tried it, because it didnt go our way...this is still the Seahawks, and we all experienced several heartbreaks last year...during the Rams game, im positive nearly every Seahawk fan said 'oh no here we go again' after the aggressive play didnt work
im all for the aggressive play...but I am saying that the two times we tried it, it led to something that could of costed us big...even a Houston loss (you never know...they score, have momentum...i dunno)
Posted by adp
Two things ADP, first I think the Houston game was well beyond over when the pick occured.
ReplyDeleteAnd as for the Rams game, I most definitely 'did' expect the Hawks to win, and just as they did, by the skin of their teeth (allowing, in my opinion, the Rams a chance to 'think' they've got a shot next time.
That game was everything I thought it would be, including the outcome.
I just think too many people are comparing ;this' Seahawk team to last year's team, and they are nothing alike. Different defensive core, different WRing Corp, and different attitude. This is the team we 'thought' we had last year only with 'attitude'.
Posted by Vinnyhawkalugi
missing my point, guys...
ReplyDeletePosted by adp
"too many people are comparing ;this' Seahawk team to last year's team " There it is.
ReplyDeletePlus I refuted your statement of "im not saying we lost because of the aggressive playcalling, im saying we were unlucky the two times we've tried it, because it didnt go our way", with "aggressive play calling... leads to aggressive playmaking". Even if it results in a loss I'd rather seem them play to win than to play not to lose, bad bounces happen and can't be controlled. But wimpy play calling can be.
Posted by JoSCh
oh without a doubt...better to play to win, but Holmgren now has reasons why he shouldnt be as aggressive, as he could cite those attempts...not saying he would, or should...but he could...
ReplyDeletei remember him saying something like...hes being more aggressive because he trusts this team more...in different words
Posted by adp