Put Mike in one end of the building and Pete in the other, Let John do his research and put his head together with each of them separately and bring in Howard Mudd for the Line decisions.
Mike calls the offense Pete dictates philosophy and runs the defense and you would have a great team for a long time. Each side has his strengths, Mike went all in on offense and his defense was secondary and tried to fill with F.A.'s Pete is just the opposite and went all in on defense and our line suffered, also due to Cables grip on his position and Petes loyalty. You can't beat Refs, no coach can. by the way a game can be steered and you get a oops were sorry is your best response.
Both Coaches had missed opportunities, Mike wanted the big hat but his real skill was teaching and offense and developing QB's . Yes he was conservative, but so is Pete in a lot of ways, Pete takes shots but wants to use the run game as much as Mike wanted to use the short passing game for ball control.
Ray Rhodes never had the horses on defense to be a real impact coach as well, he was left with the try to find guys that work, some hit like Chad Brown, others didn't Like Kirkman. Our Pass rush and secondary was never really formidable, We had Springs and Robinson for a time but not much more as a collective unit. We picked up tired DE's a lot. We had the same third down issue with Holmgren hold on 1st and 2nd but third down big gain.
As far as our SB with Holmgren, play any other location other then Pittsburgh and I think we win due to the love for the Bus situation that was going on there.