Should Holmgren be added to the Ring of Honor?

[Subzero717]

Fair point but it is a ROH not the HOF. Plus, Knox is in so the criteria has been set already.

In that case, were in for a long haul of mediocre people getting in. I think we will be first to 100 after all.

Outside of winning a Super Bowl what is it he needed to do to get in, in your opinion?

 

[Throwdown]

I always thought the ROH was for Fan favorites that were good or great at their jobs, of course you have the HOFers, but ROHee's were good players.

Shaun Alexander is a shoe in for this, along with Hasselbeck, So why not Holmgren? He helped lead the best years this franchise has ever had.

I think some people have the ROH confused with what it was all about.

 

[Cartire]

Fair point but it is a ROH not the HOF. Plus, Knox is in so the criteria has been set already.

In that case, were in for a long haul of mediocre people getting in. I think we will be first to 100 after all.

Outside of winning a Super Bowl what is it he needed to do to get in, in your opinion?

For coaches, and coaches only, nothing outside of a superbowl. And to be honest, they better have had a long winning tenure as well. But thats just me I guess. In 50 years from now (hoping the game is just as big as it is now), the Ring of Honor better not be full of a ton of coaches who didnt win the big dance for us. I want the ROH to still have merit and not be 100+ people. The greatest of the great, not the best of the okays.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

For coaches, and coaches only, nothing outside of a superbowl. And to be honest, they better have had a long winning tenure as well. But thats just me I guess. In 50 years from now (hoping the game is just as big as it is now), the Ring of Honor better not be full of a ton of coaches who didnt win the big dance for us. I want the ROH to still have merit and not be 100+ people. The greatest of the great, not the best of the okays.

It's been almost 40 years and there's one coach. I don't think you have too much to worry about man. Holmgren will be in there.

 

[HawkAroundTheClock]

It's funny that if the officiating in XL was on the level, the "yes" percentage for this poll would be much closer to 100%.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

I really like Holgrem, but I think hes a tad overrated. My reasons:

1) He benefited greatly from division realignment. The NFC West has pretty much been a joke in the 00's with the exception of a few teams on different years.
2) His record isnt anything spectacular during that time at 86-74
3) A single NFC Title is all his accolades during that time (I dont count div titles). And where thats still good, show me another teams ring of honor coach with something less.

Guy did good things for seattle and had a great tenure here, but honestly, I think because we were smacked around in the AFC West for so long, we want to praise him to early. Give it 10 more years and we'll see what the Hawks accomplishments are. If we havent been able to top what he did, then by default, I guess he could join the ring.

This drives me crazy. The guy coached here for a decade. I get you're not a huge fan, but at least get his dang name right. HOLMGREN. It's not Holgrem, Holcrum, Holcran, Holgrum, or even Holdjfaksjfjt. HOLMGREN.

*Horcrux.

 

[BlueTalon]

Fair point but it is a ROH not the HOF. Plus, Knox is in so the criteria has been set already.

In that case, were in for a long haul of mediocre people getting in. I think we will be first to 100 after all.

Knox? Mediocre? Seriously?

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Fair point but it is a ROH not the HOF. Plus, Knox is in so the criteria has been set already.

In that case, were in for a long haul of mediocre people getting in. I think we will be first to 100 after all.

Knox? Mediocre? Seriously?

Yeah Knox was the man. He could well end up in the hall of fame one day.

 

[Bigpumpkin]

Perhaps some thought ought to be given to the idea that Seahawk Head Coaches should be considered for the Ring of Honor .....after they are elected to the Football Hall of Fame? :177692:

 

[Zebulon Dak]

Perhaps some thought ought to be given to the idea that Seahawk Head Coaches should be considered for the Ring of Honor .....after they are elected to the Football Hall of Fame? :177692:

Perhaps some thought has already been given to that idea....? unno:

 

[Tech Worlds]

Fair point but it is a ROH not the HOF. Plus, Knox is in so the criteria has been set already.

In that case, were in for a long haul of mediocre people getting in. I think we will be first to 100 after all.

Knox? Mediocre? Seriously?

I don't think dude was around during the Knox era because he obviously has no idea what he is talking about.

 

[Hawkboi]

Holmgren is certainly in the Ring Of Honor! He earned it.... Even though he has a Street named after him in Greenbay, he's a Seahawk..... :thirishdrinkers:

 

[Hasselbeck]

Abso-freaking-lutely.

 

[Hasselbeck]

I really like Holgrem, but I think hes a tad overrated. My reasons:

1) He benefited greatly from division realignment. The NFC West has pretty much been a joke in the 00's with the exception of a few teams on different years.
2) His record isnt anything spectacular during that time at 86-74
3) A single NFC Title is all his accolades during that time (I dont count div titles). And where thats still good, show me another teams ring of honor coach with something less.

Guy did good things for seattle and had a great tenure here, but honestly, I think because we were smacked around in the AFC West for so long, we want to praise him to early. Give it 10 more years and we'll see what the Hawks accomplishments are. If we havent been able to top what he did, then by default, I guess he could join the ring.

- What was Holmgren supposed to do? Go "hey NFL, could you please align the 3 best teams in the league into the division please? thanks!"

- Remove the rebuilding year in 2000 and his injury riddled, Mora distraction final season.. and suddenly you're looking at a coach that produced winning seasons in 7 of 8 years with a Super Bowl appearance to boot. That's a pretty damn good run as Head Coach for ANYBODY.

He absolutely deserves to be in the ring of honor and it's not even a question. Put Holmgren there. Put Hasselbeck there when he finally retires. Put Shaun Alexander there. All 3 deserve it.

 

[Zebulon Dak]

He absolutely deserves to be in the ring of honor and it's not even a question. Put Holmgren there. Put Hasselbeck there when he finally retires. Put Shaun Alexander there. All 3 deserve it.

Yes, yes and yes. And I believe all 3 will eventually be there. Give it 3-4 more years.

 

[sutz]

Voted yes, but I'm actually a little iffy on it. If it didn't happen, I wouldn't cry about it. But if it does, that's OK.

He did coach the most successful season in team history.

 

[SoulfishHawk]

In what universe is Knox a mediocre coach? wow

 

[theENGLISHseahawk]

I suppose if Chuck Knox is in there then he almost has to be, but for me neither would be.

You can't retire a coaches jersey so I think a place in the ROH should be reserved only for the first coach to get us that elusive title.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

We're not talking about the Hall of Fame or retiring numbers here, this is a ring of honor. You honor those that mean the most to the franchise. Holmgren fits every criteria there is for a Ring of honor.

Except like others have already mentioned, were ready to put people into the ring too fast. It loses a lot of its merit when we jump the gun and put people in to fast. This is also coming from someone who thinks that it should be a minimum 10 years before HOF eligibility. Faces are too fresh in our memory to objectively judge them. The question here did offer the choice to say no. Im just defending my reasoning with that choice. I do set the bar high though. Others may not agree with my standards, but they are high.

Regardless whether you give it 10 years or not, time will not erase the fact that he was the first HC to bring a conference championship and bring us to the Super Bowl. Would you look back on Largent's accomplishments based upon today's standards and pull him out of the Hall of Fame? Do you see how silly that argument is? Knox achieved milestones during his tenure. Holmgren achieve the next milestones that surpassed those of Knox. Many records were broken as well. Selection is based upon what he accomplished during his tenure. He was the one that raised the bar for fan expectations regarding this franchise.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

I got nothing against Holmgren getting in. I wouldn't do it for another 7 to 10 years though.

I think the criteria isn't as high as what I would prefer so I suppose he is as good a candidate as any.

As far as your question... Knox was a better coach.

The results don't agree with your assessment of Knox, who never made it to the big dance. Holmgren did so 3 times. Knox was a very good coach, but was a bit like Schottenheimer in that his teams played hard all season but didn't peak when it counted. I disagree with your assessment.