Pete or Holmgren

[hawknation2018]

Pete hired Dan Quinn, so you're only helping the argument for Pete..........and the question was Best Hawk's Coach, so you can't include Holmgren's time in GB.

What has Pete Carroll done without Dan Quinn as his DC?

What he usually does. Underachieve.

Dan Quinn in his short head coaching career has done more without Pete Carroll, than what Pete Carroll has done in his long HC career without Dan Quinn.

That’s an incredibly small sample size. And it’s a red herring that distracts from the principal argument, which is whether Carroll or Holmgren was the better Seahawks HC. Clearly, Carroll was when you look at the objective facts.

The Seahawks led the NFL in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn, just like they led the NFL in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn.

Since 2015 (again, a small and arbitrary sample size that distracts from the real conversation), Carroll and Quinn have each made the playoffs twice, and Carroll has the slightly better winning percentage during that time frame. Atlanta regressed last season too, as the offense that led them to the Super Bowl fell off. The big difference is Carroll fired his underperforming OC, which should help improve the offense, while Quinn chose to keep Sarkisian this year.

 

[Chapow]

Pete hired Dan Quinn, so you're only helping the argument for Pete..........and the question was Best Hawk's Coach, so you can't include Holmgren's time in GB.

What has Pete Carroll done without Dan Quinn as his DC?

What he usually does. Underachieve.

Dan Quinn in his short head coaching career has done more without Pete Carroll, than what Pete Carroll has done in his long HC career without Dan Quinn.

That’s an incredibly small sample size. And it’s a red herring that distracts from the principal argument, which is whether Carroll or Holmgren was the better Seahawks HC. Clearly, Carroll was when you look at the objective facts.

The Seahawks led the NFL in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn, just like they led the NFL in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn.

Since 2015 (again, a small and arbitrary sample size that distracts from the real conversation), Carroll and Quinn have each made the playoffs twice, and Carroll has the slightly better winning percentage during that time frame. Atlanta regressed last season too, as the offense that led them to the Super Bowl fell off. The big difference is Carroll fired his underperforming OC, which should help improve the offense, while Quinn chose to keep Sarkisian this year.

This (emphasis mine).

We had the #1 scoring D in the NFL in 2012.
Dan Quinn became our DC in 2013.
Dan Quinn was hired by Pete Carroll to run the defense that was already the best in the league before he (Quinn) got here.
And yet Dan Quinn gets all the credit and Pete gets none? That actually makes sense to you?

 

[Fade]

Pete hired Dan Quinn, so you're only helping the argument for Pete..........and the question was Best Hawk's Coach, so you can't include Holmgren's time in GB.

What has Pete Carroll done without Dan Quinn as his DC?

What he usually does. Underachieve.

Dan Quinn in his short head coaching career has done more without Pete Carroll, than what Pete Carroll has done in his long HC career without Dan Quinn.

That’s an incredibly small sample size. And it’s a red herring that distracts from the principal argument, which is whether Carroll or Holmgren was the better Seahawks HC. Clearly, Carroll was when you look at the objective facts.

The Seahawks led the NFL in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn, just like they led the NFL in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn.

Since 2015 (again, a small and arbitrary sample size that distracts from the real conversation), Carroll and Quinn have each made the playoffs twice, and Carroll has the slightly better winning percentage during that time frame. Atlanta regressed last season too, as the offense that led them to the Super Bowl fell off. The big difference is Carroll fired his underperforming OC, which should help improve the offense, while Quinn chose to keep Sarkisian this year.

Led in Scoring Defense, loaded roster (#1 in DVOA) and couldn't make it to the NFC Championship Game on those years. Underachieved.

Since your crediting Carroll with hiring Dan Quinn. You must also credit him for keeping CaBevell around all those years, losing the locker room, and destroying his would be dynasty. Pete had to blow the damn thing up because he had lost control. I am sorry, but Holmgren would've handled it much better. Pete is on some Jeff Fisher 7-9 BS. The difference is he has Russell Wilson to get him to 9-7, 10-6.

Regardless of the smaller sample size Quinn has made a Superbowl and an NFC Championship Game without Carroll. Pete hasn't without Quinn despite fielding the best team in football multiplie years, he can't make an NFC Championship game without Dan Quinn.

Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Mike Holmgren > Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

 

[scutterhawk]

Let's try this then. If Pete took over the 2004 team does he win a Super bowl and if Mike took over the 2013 team would he keep Wilson and win a Super bowl.

Pete would have been very displeased with Holmgren's Defense, so, the same refitting would apply to BOTH Coaches.
Pete would let someone else run his Offense, with one major stipulation....TAKE CARE OF THE BALL he would then retool the Defense, ESPECIALLY the Secondary, because that is his strength.
Would Holmgren keep Wilson?, maybe, but he would be relegated to backup, and he would try and find himself a Steve Young clone, a WCO Quarterback prospect to nurture, because that is his strength, now, IF Holmgren came in AFTER the 2013 season, and AFTER witnessing Russell Wilson's rise to stardom, he'd probably re-design the Offense to accommodate for his style of play, but NOT during the beginning stages of the 2013 Season.
2013 was the year that RW had established himself as a top tier Quarterback.
I get where y'all are trying to pair Holmgren's Offensive moxie with Pete's all world Defense....The ALL WORLD Defense that Pete built.
Oh and, NO ONE was going to defeat the Stealers in the Jerome Bettis Bowl, not even Pete.
Holmgren & the Seahawks got dry-hosed in that game.

 

[scutterhawk]

Pete hired Dan Quinn, so you're only helping the argument for Pete..........and the question was Best Hawk's Coach, so you can't include Holmgren's time in GB.

What has Pete Carroll done without Dan Quinn as his DC?

What he usually does. Underachieve.

Dan Quinn in his short head coaching career has done more without Pete Carroll, than what Pete Carroll has done in his long HC career without Dan Quinn.

That’s an incredibly small sample size. And it’s a red herring that distracts from the principal argument, which is whether Carroll or Holmgren was the better Seahawks HC. Clearly, Carroll was when you look at the objective facts.

The Seahawks led the NFL in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn, just like they led the NFL in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn.

Since 2015 (again, a small and arbitrary sample size that distracts from the real conversation), Carroll and Quinn have each made the playoffs twice, and Carroll has the slightly better winning percentage during that time frame. Atlanta regressed last season too, as the offense that led them to the Super Bowl fell off. The big difference is Carroll fired his underperforming OC, which should help improve the offense, while Quinn chose to keep Sarkisian this year.

Led in Scoring Defense, loaded roster (#1 in DVOA) and couldn't make it to the NFC Championship Game on those years. Underachieved.

Since your crediting Carroll with hiring Dan Quinn. You must also credit him for keeping CaBevell around all those years, losing the locker room, and destroying his would be dynasty. Pete had to blow the damn thing up because he had lost control. I am sorry, but Holmgren would've handled it much better. Pete is on some Jeff Fisher 7-9 BS. The difference is he has Russell Wilson to get him to 9-7, 10-6.

Regardless of the smaller sample size Quinn has made a Superbowl and an NFC Championship Game without Carroll. Pete hasn't without Quinn despite fielding the best team in football multiplie years, he can't make an NFC Championship game without Dan Quinn.

Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Mike Holmgren > Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Pete Carroll, IN SHORT ORDER, takes OUR SEAHAWKS to two Super Bowls in a row, winning the first one 43 to 8, and with INJURIES to TWO of his LOB, takes one of GOAT Quarterbacks down to ----> ONE <----play from winning the Seahawks 2ND SB, AND to top that off, he did it with none other than CaBevell.......Holmgren Super Bowl WINS?, ZILCH, NONE, NADA, ZERO.
I liked the hell out of Holmgren, but Pete Carroll has orchestrated MORE playoff games WON, in a shorter period of time, 'AGAIN', that's even WITH CaBevell mucking up the Offense.
so #1 is Pete Carroll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>#2 is Mike Holmgren, no contest.

 

[KiwiHawk]

Mike Homgren squeezes a square peg into a round hole.

Pete Carroll changes the shape of the hole.

And I think that is the fundamental difference between the two, and why Carroll is a better overall coach.

During the Holmgren years we always got frustrated with him making a player play a certain way to fit the system. He liked prototype players with prototype numbers. Carroll looks for freak athletes with intelligence, who study the game, and adapts his system to leverage their strengths and mitigate their weaknesses.

 

[mrt144]

Mike Homgren squeezes a square peg into a round hole.

Pete Carroll changes the shape of the hole.

And I think that is the fundamental difference between the two, and why Carroll is a better overall coach.

During the Holmgren years we always got frustrated with him making a player play a certain way to fit the system. He liked prototype players with prototype numbers. Carroll looks for freak athletes with intelligence, who study the game, and adapts his system to leverage their strengths and mitigate their weaknesses.

I don't know man, I see Pete as more of 'change the shape of the hole but then claim it's still round' kinda coach. I mean, run first team, that had a clinically dead run game...

 

[pittpnthrs]

Mike Homgren squeezes a square peg into a round hole.

Pete Carroll changes the shape of the hole.

And I think that is the fundamental difference between the two, and why Carroll is a better overall coach.

During the Holmgren years we always got frustrated with him making a player play a certain way to fit the system. He liked prototype players with prototype numbers. Carroll looks for freak athletes with intelligence, who study the game, and adapts his system to leverage their strengths and mitigate their weaknesses.

I don't know man, I see Pete as more of 'change the shape of the hole but then claim it's still round' kinda coach. I mean, run first team, that had a clinically dead run game...

Yeah talking about squeezing a square peg into a round hole, thats Carroll to a tee. Being stubborn to a fault and keeping his philosophy of running the ball first even though the team didnt have the horses to do so and couldnt. Lord, it was hard to watch. Just a complete failure to adapt. Thankfully Russ was able to cover up a ton of the coaching issues, but still hard to watch. Speaking of having players and using their strengths,,,,,,I can promise you that Holmgren wouldnt have picked up one of the best pass catching TE's in the league and wasted him by having him block.

 

[Fade]

What has Pete Carroll done without Dan Quinn as his DC?

What he usually does. Underachieve.

Dan Quinn in his short head coaching career has done more without Pete Carroll, than what Pete Carroll has done in his long HC career without Dan Quinn.

That’s an incredibly small sample size. And it’s a red herring that distracts from the principal argument, which is whether Carroll or Holmgren was the better Seahawks HC. Clearly, Carroll was when you look at the objective facts.

The Seahawks led the NFL in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn, just like they led the NFL in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn.

Since 2015 (again, a small and arbitrary sample size that distracts from the real conversation), Carroll and Quinn have each made the playoffs twice, and Carroll has the slightly better winning percentage during that time frame. Atlanta regressed last season too, as the offense that led them to the Super Bowl fell off. The big difference is Carroll fired his underperforming OC, which should help improve the offense, while Quinn chose to keep Sarkisian this year.

Led in Scoring Defense, loaded roster (#1 in DVOA) and couldn't make it to the NFC Championship Game on those years. Underachieved.

Since your crediting Carroll with hiring Dan Quinn. You must also credit him for keeping CaBevell around all those years, losing the locker room, and destroying his would be dynasty. Pete had to blow the damn thing up because he had lost control. I am sorry, but Holmgren would've handled it much better. Pete is on some Jeff Fisher 7-9 BS. The difference is he has Russell Wilson to get him to 9-7, 10-6.

Regardless of the smaller sample size Quinn has made a Superbowl and an NFC Championship Game without Carroll. Pete hasn't without Quinn despite fielding the best team in football multiplie years, he can't make an NFC Championship game without Dan Quinn.

Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Mike Holmgren > Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Pete Carroll, IN SHORT ORDER, takes OUR SEAHAWKS to two Super Bowls in a row, winning the first one 43 to 8, and with INJURIES to TWO of his LOB, takes one of GOAT Quarterbacks down to ----> ONE <----play from winning the Seahawks 2ND SB, AND to top that off, he did it with none other than CaBevell.......Holmgren Super Bowl WINS?, ZILCH, NONE, NADA, ZERO.
I liked the hell out of Holmgren, but Pete Carroll has orchestrated MORE playoff games WON, in a shorter period of time, 'AGAIN', that's even WITH CaBevell mucking up the Offense.
so #1 is Pete Carroll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>#2 is Mike Holmgren, no contest.

Dan Quinn did.

Those other years Pete couldn't even sniff the NFC Championship game.

Quinn then went to ATL immediately turned them around, and put them in the Superbowl.

 

[Fade]

Greatest Seahawks Coach Math

Championships
1 > 0

Conference Titles
2 > 1

Playoff victories
9 > 4

Most-consecutive seasons with playoff victories
5 > 3

Playoff winning %
64% > 40%

Regular season winning %
62% > 54%

Most-consecutive games without losing by more than 7 points
65 (NFL record) > 17

Most-consecutive games without losing by more than 10 points
95 (NFL record) > 17

Years leading NFL in scoring offense or defense
4 > 1

Talent level & Dan Quinn skew those numbers drastically.

Without Dan Quinn Pete's Entire NFL Career, not just the Seahawks.

= Championships = 0

= Conference Titles = 0

Dan Quinn immediately took the Falcons to the Superbowl after he left. Pete benefited from that.

Dan Quinn & Russell Wilson have totally distorted people's view of Pete Carroll.


Mike Holmgren's Entire NFL Career, not just the Seahawks.

Championships = 1 (2)

Conference Titles = 3

The first part of your post is pure conjecture. Carroll hired Quinn for a reason. Atlanta has had success imitating Carroll’s philosophy, though they haven’t won a Super Bowl. Just like Jacksonville and San Francisco are having some success imitating Carroll, among others. You can’t separate the players and coaches whom Carroll acquired, just like you can’t separate the players and coaches under Holmgren.

Also, you’re separating out three injury-plagued seasons post-Quinn. The Seahawks finished #1 in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn. The Seahawks were #1 in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn. Carroll has had enormous influence on the way the game is played, which is something Holmgren never had.

As for your 2nd argument, if you want to talk about pre-Seahawks coaching career (which is not really the discussion) then you would have to factor in Carroll’s incredible success in college football: consecutive national championships, seven-straight seasons with Top 4 finishes, and NCAA records for most-consecutive games without losing by more than 7 points and by 10 points. Carroll has had amazing successes at both levels, which is very rare.

College???? LMAO Where Pete Carroll had 35 1st rd picks every year. Completely irrelevant.

Mike Holmgren no influense??? John Gruden, Andy Reed, etc, etc. Actually he has had more influence in the NFL than Carroll. Dan Quinn is the only successful coach to spawn off of Pete Carroll. He is also was only with Pete for a very short time, which was smart by him.


#1 Defenses in 2012 & 2015, loaded rosters (#1 DVOA) still couldn't sniff the NFC Championship game those 2 years.

The only 2 years where they weren't a dysfunctional albeit talented mess. Was the 2 years Quinn was there. Quinn leaves and it goes right back to being dysfunctional. Not a coincidence. Quinn goes on to lead the Falcons to the Superbowl. Carroll blows up his own team because he can't manage it, and lost control. That doesn't sound like a great coach to me.

Holmgren > Quinn > Carroll

Holmgren to lead and coach the team, + run the offense.

Dan Quinn as the DC.

Would be the best combo.

 

[scutterhawk]

That’s an incredibly small sample size. And it’s a red herring that distracts from the principal argument, which is whether Carroll or Holmgren was the better Seahawks HC. Clearly, Carroll was when you look at the objective facts.

The Seahawks led the NFL in scoring defense in 2015 without Quinn, just like they led the NFL in scoring defense in 2012 without Quinn.

Since 2015 (again, a small and arbitrary sample size that distracts from the real conversation), Carroll and Quinn have each made the playoffs twice, and Carroll has the slightly better winning percentage during that time frame. Atlanta regressed last season too, as the offense that led them to the Super Bowl fell off. The big difference is Carroll fired his underperforming OC, which should help improve the offense, while Quinn chose to keep Sarkisian this year.

Led in Scoring Defense, loaded roster (#1 in DVOA) and couldn't make it to the NFC Championship Game on those years. Underachieved.

Since your crediting Carroll with hiring Dan Quinn. You must also credit him for keeping CaBevell around all those years, losing the locker room, and destroying his would be dynasty. Pete had to blow the damn thing up because he had lost control. I am sorry, but Holmgren would've handled it much better. Pete is on some Jeff Fisher 7-9 BS. The difference is he has Russell Wilson to get him to 9-7, 10-6.

Regardless of the smaller sample size Quinn has made a Superbowl and an NFC Championship Game without Carroll. Pete hasn't without Quinn despite fielding the best team in football multiplie years, he can't make an NFC Championship game without Dan Quinn.

Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Mike Holmgren > Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Pete Carroll, IN SHORT ORDER, takes OUR SEAHAWKS to two Super Bowls in a row, winning the first one 43 to 8, and with INJURIES to TWO of his LOB, takes one of GOAT Quarterbacks down to ----> ONE <----play from winning the Seahawks 2ND SB, AND to top that off, he did it with none other than CaBevell.......Holmgren Super Bowl WINS?, ZILCH, NONE, NADA, ZERO.
I liked the hell out of Holmgren, but Pete Carroll has orchestrated MORE playoff games WON, in a shorter period of time, 'AGAIN', that's even WITH CaBevell mucking up the Offense.
so #1 is Pete Carroll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>#2 is Mike Holmgren, no contest.

Dan Quinn did.

Those other years Pete couldn't even sniff the NFC Championship game.

Quinn then went to ATL immediately turned them around, and put them in the Superbowl.

Now, you're conjecture reaching. LOL
It's your belief that Pete deserves zero share of credit for fielding an outstanding Defense.... pretty sad.
Pete still produced winning culture, even BEFORE having Quinn in the mix, AND even AFTER he was gone.
Pete Carroll is without a speck of doubt, the BEST Head Coach in Seahawks History.
By the way, Quinn has had his share of defeats to go along with his successes. EVEN Bill Belichecker & Co. loses very winnable games..........THEY ALL DO.

 

[Fade]

Led in Scoring Defense, loaded roster (#1 in DVOA) and couldn't make it to the NFC Championship Game on those years. Underachieved.

Since your crediting Carroll with hiring Dan Quinn. You must also credit him for keeping CaBevell around all those years, losing the locker room, and destroying his would be dynasty. Pete had to blow the damn thing up because he had lost control. I am sorry, but Holmgren would've handled it much better. Pete is on some Jeff Fisher 7-9 BS. The difference is he has Russell Wilson to get him to 9-7, 10-6.

Regardless of the smaller sample size Quinn has made a Superbowl and an NFC Championship Game without Carroll. Pete hasn't without Quinn despite fielding the best team in football multiplie years, he can't make an NFC Championship game without Dan Quinn.

Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Mike Holmgren > Dan Quinn > Pete Carroll

Pete Carroll, IN SHORT ORDER, takes OUR SEAHAWKS to two Super Bowls in a row, winning the first one 43 to 8, and with INJURIES to TWO of his LOB, takes one of GOAT Quarterbacks down to ----> ONE <----play from winning the Seahawks 2ND SB, AND to top that off, he did it with none other than CaBevell.......Holmgren Super Bowl WINS?, ZILCH, NONE, NADA, ZERO.
I liked the hell out of Holmgren, but Pete Carroll has orchestrated MORE playoff games WON, in a shorter period of time, 'AGAIN', that's even WITH CaBevell mucking up the Offense.
so #1 is Pete Carroll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>#2 is Mike Holmgren, no contest.

Dan Quinn did.

Those other years Pete couldn't even sniff the NFC Championship game.

Quinn then went to ATL immediately turned them around, and put them in the Superbowl.

Now, you're conjecture reaching. LOL
It's your belief that Pete deserves zero share of credit for fielding an outstanding Defense.... pretty sad.
Pete still produced winning culture, even BEFORE having Quinn in the mix, AND even AFTER he was gone.
Pete Carroll is without a speck of doubt, the BEST Head Coach in Seahawks History.
By the way, Quinn has had his share of defeats to go along with his successes. EVEN Bill Belichecker & Co. loses very winnable games..........THEY ALL DO.

Winning Culture but can't make an AFC or NFC Championship game in his entire Head Coaching career without Quinn. Even when fielding the most talented team in the league in some of those seasons.

Explain.

 

[scutterhawk]

Pete Carroll, IN SHORT ORDER, takes OUR SEAHAWKS to two Super Bowls in a row, winning the first one 43 to 8, and with INJURIES to TWO of his LOB, takes one of GOAT Quarterbacks down to ----> ONE <----play from winning the Seahawks 2ND SB, AND to top that off, he did it with none other than CaBevell.......Holmgren Super Bowl WINS?, ZILCH, NONE, NADA, ZERO.
I liked the hell out of Holmgren, but Pete Carroll has orchestrated MORE playoff games WON, in a shorter period of time, 'AGAIN', that's even WITH CaBevell mucking up the Offense.
so #1 is Pete Carroll>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>#2 is Mike Holmgren, no contest.

Dan Quinn did.

Those other years Pete couldn't even sniff the NFC Championship game.

Quinn then went to ATL immediately turned them around, and put them in the Superbowl.

Now, you're conjecture reaching. LOL
It's your belief that Pete deserves zero share of credit for fielding an outstanding Defense.... pretty sad.
Pete still produced winning culture, even BEFORE having Quinn in the mix, AND even AFTER he was gone.
Pete Carroll is without a speck of doubt, the BEST Head Coach in Seahawks History.
By the way, Quinn has had his share of defeats to go along with his successes. EVEN Bill Belichecker & Co. loses very winnable games..........THEY ALL DO.

Winning Culture but can't make an AFC or NFC Championship game in his entire Head Coaching career without Quinn. Even when fielding the most talented team in the league in some of those seasons.

Explain.

.
2012 pre-Quinn, and again in 2015.
There's NO USE in trying to talk you off the ledge, I could explain (as MANY OTHERS HAVE), but your dislike for Pete Carroll gets in the way of reason, so it's a waste of time.
Pretend.

 

[adeltaY]

What is all this about Dan Quinn? What has he won as a HC? No hate for DQ, he was a great DC. Your way of thinking is flawed though, just like the person who said we haven't accomplished much since Wilson got paid.

Dan Quinn as DC --> Make two SBs, win one --> Dan Quinn leaves --> Haven't made SB since --> Pete can't make SB without Dan Quinn... Let me try:

Shanahan as OC --> Falcons make SB --> Shanahan leaves --> Falcons don't make SB --> Quinn needs Shanny to make SB... seem fair to you?

Overly simplistic thinking that ignores a multitude of factors, especially given that you don't know the degree of influence Pete had vs. Dan had on the defense. For the record, the Falcons defense has been mediocre to disastrous since Quinn has been there. Oh, they aren't as talented as what we had. I wonder who assembled and developed that talent.... Also you trumpet Quinn leading his team to the SB, yet fail to mention the horror-show that ensued when he got there.

 

[Ad Hawk]

What is all this about Dan Quinn? What has he won as a HC? No hate for DQ, he was a great DC. Your way of thinking is flawed though, just like the person who said we haven't accomplished much since Wilson got paid.

Dan Quinn as DC --> Make two SBs, win one --> Dan Quinn leaves --> Haven't made SB since --> Pete can't make SB without Dan Quinn... Let me try:

Shanahan as OC --> Falcons make SB --> Shanahan leaves --> Falcons don't make SB --> Quinn needs Shanny to make SB... seem fair to you?

Overly simplistic thinking that ignores a multitude of factors, especially given that you don't know the degree of influence Pete had vs. Dan had on the defense. For the record, the Falcons defense has been mediocre to disastrous since Quinn has been there. Oh, they aren't as talented as what we had. I wonder who assembled and developed that talent....

Fade creates causation when mere correlation applies. Fallacious arguments don't become true simply because they're reiterated constantly and with strong adjectives.

 

[Fade]

What is all this about Dan Quinn? What has he won as a HC? No hate for DQ, he was a great DC. Your way of thinking is flawed though, just like the person who said we haven't accomplished much since Wilson got paid.

Dan Quinn as DC --> Make two SBs, win one --> Dan Quinn leaves --> Haven't made SB since --> Pete can't make SB without Dan Quinn... Let me try:

Shanahan as OC --> Falcons make SB --> Shanahan leaves --> Falcons don't make SB --> Quinn needs Shanny to make SB... seem fair to you?

Overly simplistic thinking that ignores a multitude of factors, especially given that you don't know the degree of influence Pete had vs. Dan had on the defense. For the record, the Falcons defense has been mediocre to disastrous since Quinn has been there. Oh, they aren't as talented as what we had. I wonder who assembled and developed that talent....

Fade creates causation when mere correlation applies. Fallacious arguments don't become true simply because they're reiterated constantly and with strong adjectives.

And yet without out Quinn those 2 years. Pete Carroll has done next to nothing in the NFL as a HC.

 

[Fade]

Dan Quinn did.

Those other years Pete couldn't even sniff the NFC Championship game.

Quinn then went to ATL immediately turned them around, and put them in the Superbowl.

Now, you're conjecture reaching. LOL
It's your belief that Pete deserves zero share of credit for fielding an outstanding Defense.... pretty sad.
Pete still produced winning culture, even BEFORE having Quinn in the mix, AND even AFTER he was gone.
Pete Carroll is without a speck of doubt, the BEST Head Coach in Seahawks History.
By the way, Quinn has had his share of defeats to go along with his successes. EVEN Bill Belichecker & Co. loses very winnable games..........THEY ALL DO.

Winning Culture but can't make an AFC or NFC Championship game in his entire Head Coaching career without Quinn. Even when fielding the most talented team in the league in some of those seasons.

Explain.

.
2012 pre-Quinn, and again in 2015.
There's NO USE in trying to talk you off the ledge, I could explain (as MANY OTHERS HAVE), but your dislike for Pete Carroll gets in the way of reason, so it's a waste of time.
Pretend.

2012

He had the best team in the NFL (#1 DVOA). He couldn't make the NFC Championship Game. He blew 5 4th qtr leads that year. Finishing with an epic choke job on the road in ATL. Pete Carroll has stated that has kept him up many a night. Held back his impressive Rookie QB the 1st half of that season. He later admitted it was a mistake to do so. Winning 1 playoff game against an injured RG III. Is that impressive to you? It sounds like underachieving to me.

2015

He had the best team in the NFL (#1 DVOA). He kept his bumbling offensive coaching staff intact. The Players turn on Pete for not firing anyone after the debacle. They blow a bunch of 4th quarter leads then go and proceed to get blown out in Carolina.

These are the 2 years you're going to cite to prove Pete Carroll is better than Holmgren? I know why though. Pete hasn't had a lot of good years.

Coaches are supposed to get the most out of their teams. So it is all relative. I am not saying win the SuperBowl every year, but is it too much to ask to make the Conference Championship game when you have the most talented team in the NFL? #1 Defense, a wizard at QB, & Beastmode. Was the deck not stacked enough for him?

His 7-9 Season in 2010 was his best coaching job. That team flatout sucked. But he got the most out of them.

Not so much his other seasons.

Pete does less with more. That is his track record, it is what he does.


The objective of coaching is to do more with less. Belichick is the master of this.


Holmgren is also way better than Pete at doing more with less.


Pete's management of the team post debacle has been very bad. So bad in fact he had to fire nearly his entire coaching staff, and jettison many star players who he could no longer handle. HE LOST THE TEAM.

The irony is you're the one pretending friend.

I am living in reality.

 

[hawksincebirth]

Give Mike Holmgren the Seahawks rosters of '12-'16 and he wins more than 1 superbowl guaranteed.

This times infinity. Great memories under holmgren, I recall far less fans back in those days. I went to a local south king county high school for two years, and was the only hawk fan I can recall. Pete got the hardware, holm would coach pete under the table on gameday though imho.
Depending on how this season and next goes I think opinions may sway towards holm

1 super bowl win with the roster we had is not something to be proud of, holm was robbed of one aswell

 

[hawksincebirth]

You misread me. I said he never would have created those rosters in the first place.

If he inherited them? Well, I have my doubts about any coach willingly leaving with that roster. But say Pete died and Holmgren took over... it's hard to know, but he would never have stood for our O-line and running game, so he may have gotten rid of some D in order to get some O.

Line them up

'12-'16

Pete Carroll wins 1 superbowl.

Now give Holmgren the same shot.

How many does Holmgren win?

Doubt he wins more than one, if that. His approach to the offense would never allow Russ to scramble the way he did. He was too straight-laced. He wouldn't have known how to make our disfunctional offense work the way Pete does. This roster was made by Pete to match his game philosophy, not MH's.

Too many people here overvalued the past roster thinking we should have been SB winners 3-4 years straight. That's ludicrous, and only wishful thinking. We had a good roster, but it wasn't that much better than the next best rosters; just stacked in different areas. Holmgren was a good coach, but didn't even have his own team ready to beat the Refs in his only SB with us.

He definitely would of ran in with lynch that’s one thing we can bank. Shawn Alexander made a fortune off of one yard td runs lmao done

 

[hawksincebirth]

You misread me. I said he never would have created those rosters in the first place.

If he inherited them? Well, I have my doubts about any coach willingly leaving with that roster. But say Pete died and Holmgren took over... it's hard to know, but he would never have stood for our O-line and running game, so he may have gotten rid of some D in order to get some O.

Line them up

'12-'16

Pete Carroll wins 1 superbowl.

Now give Holmgren the same shot.

How many does Holmgren win?

Holmgren would never have the same roster during that time period because so many of our best players were handpicked by Carroll (Marshawn Lynch, Kam Chancellor, Earl Thomas, Richard Sherman, Bobby Wagner, K.J. Wright, etc.).

The defense never would have approached the same level of dominance without Carroll’s philosophy and development.

Now, Carroll as HC and Holmgren as OC would have been legendary.

Give holmgren same roster he may win 4, Bennett would not of had false starts every other down that’s for sure. You completely dodged the question. Same roster- different coach