Pete or Holmgren

[hawksincebirth]

I'm not going to rank Pete Carroll over Holmgren because he assembled the most talented young roster the NFL has ever seen in 20 years. And then proceeds to mismanage and bumble around for several seasons, team gets blown up because the coach lost control of the whole situation, and now has to start over. That is the definition of underachieving.


When the documentary comes out for this era of Seahawks football. 30 for 30, or whatever. That is what it will be about. How Pete screwed it up.

Holmgren > Carroll.

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

Yea refs admitted in person and cried they cost the team a ring... so it was pretty much the same lol.. 1 robbed super bowl vs one title for pete not that far of. When did hawks fans forgive xl al of a sudden

 

[Fade]

I'm not going to rank Pete Carroll over Holmgren because he assembled the most talented young roster the NFL has ever seen in 20 years. And then proceeds to mismanage and bumble around for several seasons, team gets blown up because the coach lost control of the whole situation, and now has to start over. That is the definition of underachieving.


When the documentary comes out for this era of Seahawks football. 30 for 30, or whatever. That is what it will be about. How Pete screwed it up.

Holmgren > Carroll.

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

You're looking at it from a results perspective.

I am looking at it from a hand they were dealt perspective.

The ultimate job of a coach is about getting the most out of your team.

Pete W-L record is better, but he was dealt a far superior hand, and then proceeded to squander it. Context is everything.

Pete had a HoF caliber RB, the #1 scoring defense for 4 consecutive seasons (unheard of), and a cheat code at QB.

All of that, and he can only muster 1 Superbowl. Holmgren didn't even have half of that, but found a way to consistently win, and get his team into the playoffs.

Pete Carroll wouldn't be able to go to a Superbowl with Holmgren's team, but Holmgren could win a lot of Superbowls with Carroll's team.

Holmgren did more with less. Carroll did less with more.

 

[JGreen79]

I'm not going to rank Pete Carroll over Holmgren because he assembled the most talented young roster the NFL has ever seen in 20 years. And then proceeds to mismanage and bumble around for several seasons, team gets blown up because the coach lost control of the whole situation, and now has to start over. That is the definition of underachieving.


When the documentary comes out for this era of Seahawks football. 30 for 30, or whatever. That is what it will be about. How Pete screwed it up.

Holmgren > Carroll.

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

You're looking at it from a results perspective.

I am looking at it from a hand they were dealt perspective.

The ultimate job of a coach is about getting the most out of your team.

Pete W-L record is better, but he was dealt a far superior hand, and then proceeded to squander it. Context is everything.

Pete had a HoF caliber RB, the #1 scoring defense for 4 consecutive seasons (unheard of), and a cheat code at QB.

All of that, and he can only muster 1 Superbowl. Holmgren didn't even have half of that, but found a way to consistently win, and get his team into the playoffs.

Pete Carroll wouldn't be able to go to a Superbowl with Holmgren's team, but Holmgren could win a lot of Superbowls with Carroll's team.

Holmgren did more with less. Carroll did less with more.

You want to talk about the hands that were dealt? Holmgren took over a team that was one game out of the playoffs, mismanaged the roster to the point he lost his GM duties, then proceeded to work poorly with the team's Gms afterword. Pete took over the remnants of Holmgrens team one year removed, built it up together with the GM. Pete was dealt the worst had of the two by far.

Both coaches botched what they had build, but I highly doubt Pete's team will ever reach the low that Holmgrens did.

To add, Pete took Holmgren/Mora's dumpster fire to a playoff win agaist the defending Superbowl champion. I'd call that getting the most out of your team. Holmgren lost to a team in the playoffs that had already beat him twice, even though Holmgrens team had won the division.

 

[Fade]

I'm not going to rank Pete Carroll over Holmgren because he assembled the most talented young roster the NFL has ever seen in 20 years. And then proceeds to mismanage and bumble around for several seasons, team gets blown up because the coach lost control of the whole situation, and now has to start over. That is the definition of underachieving.


When the documentary comes out for this era of Seahawks football. 30 for 30, or whatever. That is what it will be about. How Pete screwed it up.

Holmgren > Carroll.

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

You're looking at it from a results perspective.

I am looking at it from a hand they were dealt perspective.

The ultimate job of a coach is about getting the most out of your team.

Pete W-L record is better, but he was dealt a far superior hand, and then proceeded to squander it. Context is everything.

Pete had a HoF caliber RB, the #1 scoring defense for 4 consecutive seasons (unheard of), and a cheat code at QB.

All of that, and he can only muster 1 Superbowl. Holmgren didn't even have half of that, but found a way to consistently win, and get his team into the playoffs.

Pete Carroll wouldn't be able to go to a Superbowl with Holmgren's team, but Holmgren could win a lot of Superbowls with Carroll's team.

Holmgren did more with less. Carroll did less with more.

You want to talk about the hands that were dealt? Holmgren took over a team that was one game out of the playoffs, mismanaged the roster to the point he lost his GM duties, then proceeded to work poorly with the team's Gms afterword. Pete took over the remnants of Holmgrens team one year removed, built it up together with the GM. Pete was dealt the worst had of the two by far.

Both coaches botched what they had build, but I highly doubt Pete's team will ever reach the low that Holmgrens did.

To add, Pete took Holmgren/Mora's dumpster fire to a playoff win agaist the defending Superbowl champion. I'd call that getting the most out of your team. Holmgren lost to a team in the playoffs that had already beat him twice, even though Holmgrens team had won the division.

That was Ruskell/Mora's dumpster fire, and what is scewing things towards the negative thought on Holmgren. Ruskell dragged down what Holmgren had built into the abyss, and then people proceed to attach that stank on to Holmgren.

I am not debating Holmgen the personell man. Only his ability as a Head Coach.

I've already stated that was Pete Carroll's best coaching job in this thread. 2010.

7-9 record though.

Based on the logic I have been told in this thread it was one of his worst coaching jobs because he only went 7-9.

Higher W/L record means you're a better coach regardless of talent.

But I am glad you agree with me that it is all relative to the talent you have, not W/L record.

 

[scutterhawk]

I'm not going to rank Pete Carroll over Holmgren because he assembled the most talented young roster the NFL has ever seen in 20 years. And then proceeds to mismanage and bumble around for several seasons, team gets blown up because the coach lost control of the whole situation, and now has to start over. That is the definition of underachieving.


When the documentary comes out for this era of Seahawks football. 30 for 30, or whatever. That is what it will be about. How Pete screwed it up.

Holmgren > Carroll.

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

You're looking at it from a results perspective.

I am looking at it from a hand they were dealt perspective.

The ultimate job of a coach is about getting the most out of your team.

Pete W-L record is better, but he was dealt a far superior hand, and then proceeded to squander it. Context is everything.

Pete had a HoF caliber RB, the #1 scoring defense for 4 consecutive seasons (unheard of), and a cheat code at QB.

All of that, and he can only muster 1 Superbowl. Holmgren didn't even have half of that, but found a way to consistently win, and get his team into the playoffs.

Pete Carroll wouldn't be able to go to a Superbowl with Holmgren's team, but Holmgren could win a lot of Superbowls with Carroll's team.

Holmgren did more with less. Carroll did less with more.

C'mon man, you're fooling yourself with selective memory.
When has Marshawn Lynch EVER been considered "Money" in the Red Zone like Shawn Alexander was...1,880 yards, when did Lynch ever accumulate those kind of numbers...Walter Jones = HOF... WHICH Offensive Tackles on Pete's teamS are even in that same discussion.
Which Left Guard in Pete's All Pro Offenses are even on the same Continent as Holmgren's Steve 'The Road Grader' Hutchinson????
Pete has more wins in a shorter time frame than Holmy.
Holmgren's Defenses were INFERIOR to Pete Carroll's, that's an obstacle for a Offensive minded Coach.
IF Holmgren had Pete's acumen for putting together a Defense like Carroll's, he would have done almost as good at winning Championships as Pete Carroll.
The fact that YOU'RE admitting that Holmgren could win more with Carroll's players, tells me that Pete is superior at finding talent, and EVEN in the Quarterbacks category....Sometimes, a smart Coach has to know how to just get the hell out of the way.....ONE 43 - 8 victory, and the following year, a few injuries short of winning a second Lombardi with the Seahawks....Hands down, it's Pete Carroll over Mike Holmgren.

 

[misfit]

I'm not going to rank Pete Carroll over Holmgren because he assembled the most talented young roster the NFL has ever seen in 20 years. And then proceeds to mismanage and bumble around for several seasons, team gets blown up because the coach lost control of the whole situation, and now has to start over. That is the definition of underachieving.


When the documentary comes out for this era of Seahawks football. 30 for 30, or whatever. That is what it will be about. How Pete screwed it up.

Holmgren > Carroll.

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

You're looking at it from a results perspective.

I am looking at it from a hand they were dealt perspective.

The ultimate job of a coach is about getting the most out of your team.

Pete W-L record is better, but he was dealt a far superior hand, and then proceeded to squander it. Context is everything.

Pete had a HoF caliber RB, the #1 scoring defense for 4 consecutive seasons (unheard of), and a cheat code at QB.

All of that, and he can only muster 1 Superbowl. Holmgren didn't even have half of that, but found a way to consistently win, and get his team into the playoffs.

Pete Carroll wouldn't be able to go to a Superbowl with Holmgren's team, but Holmgren could win a lot of Superbowls with Carroll's team.

Holmgren did more with less. Carroll did less with more.

And you're not going to give Pete any credit for what he did with that talent? Who's to say that Holmgren could even get the defense to perform at that level. Let alone the defense being Pete's specialty and what he can do with secondary? A lot of personalies that Pete has managed would have been shipped out of town a long long time ago too with Holmgren so I dont think you would of kept that group together anyways.

 

[HansGruber]

It's a stupid question.

Who brought you a ring?

I thought Holmgren could do it, but he showed up like Cobain post-93. Just when you thought it was good, he was taking the 12-guage cure to a sinus infection. Everybody's like, oh hey, he got it figured out. And then, that's it, brains all over the greenhouse!! I'm walking out of Detroit wanting to believe it was the refs fault, but we all knew better. Holmgren Seahawks choked harder than fake-blonde Kurt swallowing a Mossberg while shooting Chinese heroin.

Carroll got it done. Like a boss.

It's a stupid question. Just stupid.

 

[NJlargent]

Carroll is a one hit wonder. He simply cannot manage a locker room and he can’t win without a far superior roster. Plus our teams have shown up to many games where we seem unprepared and sleepwalk through the first half. That’s subpar coaching. He was nails in 2011 but is not even a fraction of that now.

 

[Vesuve]

Sorry, Pete got us a Bowl, no other questions can be asked.

Ditto.

Period.

Full-stop.

 

[BigMeach]

I think we're done. You apparently live in a world where the Holmgren era was very different from what it actually was.

You're looking at it from a results perspective.

I am looking at it from a hand they were dealt perspective.

The ultimate job of a coach is about getting the most out of your team.

Pete W-L record is better, but he was dealt a far superior hand, and then proceeded to squander it. Context is everything.

Pete had a HoF caliber RB, the #1 scoring defense for 4 consecutive seasons (unheard of), and a cheat code at QB.

All of that, and he can only muster 1 Superbowl. Holmgren didn't even have half of that, but found a way to consistently win, and get his team into the playoffs.

Pete Carroll wouldn't be able to go to a Superbowl with Holmgren's team, but Holmgren could win a lot of Superbowls with Carroll's team.

Holmgren did more with less. Carroll did less with more.

You want to talk about the hands that were dealt? Holmgren took over a team that was one game out of the playoffs, mismanaged the roster to the point he lost his GM duties, then proceeded to work poorly with the team's Gms afterword. Pete took over the remnants of Holmgrens team one year removed, built it up together with the GM. Pete was dealt the worst had of the two by far.

Both coaches botched what they had build, but I highly doubt Pete's team will ever reach the low that Holmgrens did.

To add, Pete took Holmgren/Mora's dumpster fire to a playoff win agaist the defending Superbowl champion. I'd call that getting the most out of your team. Holmgren lost to a team in the playoffs that had already beat him twice, even though Holmgrens team had won the division.

That was Ruskell/Mora's dumpster fire, and what is scewing things towards the negative thought on Holmgren. Ruskell dragged down what Holmgren had built into the abyss, and then people proceed to attach that stank on to Holmgren.

I am not debating Holmgen the personell man. Only his ability as a Head Coach.

I've already stated that was Pete Carroll's best coaching job in this thread. 2010.

7-9 record though.

Based on the logic I have been told in this thread it was one of his worst coaching jobs because he only went 7-9.

Higher W/L record means you're a better coach regardless of talent.

But I am glad you agree with me that it is all relative to the talent you have, not W/L record.

You're hilarious man, just making up arguments to prove your point throughout this thread. Special scenarios. The question was, who was the better coach. An NFL coach wears numerous hats , to pick one hat, take it , throw it on the other guy and say "well if, this, then, that" is absolutely ludicrous and proves nothing.

The unknown of Holmgren being handed the team Pete created and how he'd do will never be answered, so you can't use it as a point. You skirt fact for fiction and you've got everyone riled up, which is pretty hilarious... gotta give you credit there.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Sorry, Pete got us a Bowl, no other questions can be asked.

Ditto.

Period.

Full-stop.

He also dismantled and squandered the opportunities that one of the best teams of all time afforded him. Yes, he built the team -- but since then dumb decisions, and poor in game management and locker room management has caused it all to come crumbling down. Nepotism also played a part, he kept incompetent coaches on the offense while "preaching" COMPETE! He even threw away that mantra for the players. There was an incongruity between what he was teaching and what he was actually doing.

He built a legendary team, yes, but coaching is much more than just team building and talent acquisition. I feel as if his offensive philosophies, clock management and poor locker room control have been holding back his teams.

 

[Fade]

Sorry, Pete got us a Bowl, no other questions can be asked.

Ditto.

Period.

Full-stop.

He also dismantled and squandered the opportunities that one of the best teams of all time afforded him. Yes, he built the team -- but since then dumb decisions, and poor in game management and locker room management has caused it all to come crumbling down. Nepotism also played a part, he kept incompetent coaches on the offense while "preaching" COMPETE! He even threw away that mantra for the players. There was an incongruity between what he was teaching and what he was actually doing.

He built a legendary team, yes, but coaching is much more than just team building and talent acquisition. I feel as if his offensive philosophies, clock management and poor locker room control have been holding back his teams.

Pretty much. I had Carroll as the greatest coach in Seahawks history. Then how he handled everything post "the play" has been one screw up after the other. Hypocracy & Contridictions galore, the team tuned him out, and he had to blow it up and start over.

Alexander vs. Lynch is a great analogy for Carroll vs. Holmgren

Lynch is clearly the better running back talent wise, but Alexander had the better stats. Because of course he was in a better offense with superior O-Line. Put Marshawn Lynch on those Jones / Hutch teams and it wouldn't even be close.

Kind of like give Holmgren John Schneider & Dan Quinn, with that roster? Holy Crap!

 

[hawknation2018]

There is no point in having this conversation with someone who does not recognize Carroll as a great coach, the Seahawks only Super Bowl winning coach, with nine playoffs wins, four-straight years with the #1 scoring defense, and NFL records for consistent competitiveness.

The fact that you think Quinn is a better coach than Carroll makes the conversation a non-starter. Quinn has not won a Super Bowl as a head coach, has only one division title, has a worse HC record since 2015, and his teams continue to regress. Quinn has continued on with Steve Sarkisian as his OC and has gone from one of the best offenses in NFL history to a pathetic offense. It's a ridiculous argument.

 

[907Hawk]

The Hawks were lucky to have these two coaches, but I would give it to Carroll. :irishdrinkers:

 

[hawksincebirth]

Holmgren doesn’t get out quarterbacked by case Keenum and Mitch trubisky

 

[onepicknick1]

Can't believe this is a discussion. Wilson would of never thrived in the WCO NEVER just look at the INT bring back memories like a GB game. Pete hands down is the better coach but lets let Holmy pick the OL could you imagine SA running behind the line we have, The only one who made it look good was Lynch.

 

[Fade]

Can't believe this is a discussion. Wilson would of never thrived in the WCO NEVER just look at the INT bring back memories like a GB game. Pete hands down is the better coach but lets let Holmy pick the OL could you imagine SA running behind the line we have, The only one who made it look good was Lynch.

Wilson played in the WCO at NC State. Wilson would've been amazing with Holmgren, and Wilson will be amazing when the next guy comes in. Which I'm willing to bet will be running a variation of the WCO. LaFleur, DePhilippo, etc.

 

[onepicknick1]

Can't believe this is a discussion. Wilson would of never thrived in the WCO NEVER just look at the INT bring back memories like a GB game. Pete hands down is the better coach but lets let Holmy pick the OL could you imagine SA running behind the line we have, The only one who made it look good was Lynch.

Wilson played in the WCO at NC State. Wilson would've been amazing with Holmgren, and Wilson will be amazing when the next guy comes in. Which I'm willing to bet will be running a variation of the WCO. LaFleur, DePhilippo, etc.

I stand to be corrected it just seems Russ has a hard time reading the D to get that short pass out. he seems to pick a favorite target and sticks with them unlike most QB's in the WCO spreading the Baal around.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

Nobody is getting open. Geezus

 

[Danny Darko]

Reasons I'd pick Pete:

His system is geared to win quick with young talent. He can recover from changes like we are seeing this year much quicker than the nuanced system Holmgren ran that required almost 3 seasons to get down.

Pete, as many have mentioned, has also done better as a talent evaluator to the point that several teams now look for Pete guys in drafts where initially his picks were laughed at. (see jags, falcons, panthers, etc... )