[Disclaimer: Stank-0 was planning something to celebrate our 400th post, but didn't want to mess with M0yo's post. We'll try to milestone #500
UPDATE!: Obviously, Stank-0 didn't learn to count properly. This is the 400th. Thanks those of you who have been with us for a minute. We won't stop, we can't stop.]
Stank-0 is perplexed about Mike Holmgren potentially going to "save" the Browns franchise. Make no mistake, the Browns need saving, like a stripper needs dollar bills. Unfortunately, Mr. Holmgren is not the man to do it.
What can Holmgren hang his hat on to qualify for this job? He won a Super Bowl back in 1996 with Brett Favre. Since? He took the Pack back the next year and lost. Then he took the Seahawks in 2005 and they lost to the Steelers. What exactly is he supposed to bring to the table?
He has a gift for "molding quarterbacks?" Really? Let's see. Joe Montana, Steve Young, Brett Favre, and Matt Hasselbeck have all been under his tutelage. Out of that bunch, Hasselbeck is the only one he can really claim credit for. The others are HOFers and we are to believe that Holmgren is the reason?
Let's break this down with help from Wikipedia.
In SF, he was QB coach under Bill Walsh, then offensive coordinator.
In GB, he was coach with a 71-23-1 (74.1% winning %) record, capped with two Super Bowl appearances and one win. Not bad until you remember this was right at the end of the NFC's Super Bowl dominance. For about 15 years, the NFC could send anyone and be assured of a W. So with that qualifier, this Super Bowl smack down of the Patriots doesn't look so great anymore. Then he snapped the NFC win streak the very next year by losing to the Denver Broncos.
In Seattle, he was coach with a 72-56( 56.3% winning %) record, capped with a lone Super Bowl appearance which resulted in a loss. This was a poorly officiated Super Bowl, and that's putting it kindly.
One constant with his teams has been good QB play, which Cleveland is lacking. To have a good quarterback, you need a complementary run game and serviceable offensive line. He had both of those in GB and Seattle.
Stank-0 feels like this is Joe Gibbs' second return all over again. Some coaches are good and some are lucky. Holmgren seems to have fallen squarely in the latter. Holmgren isn't a bad coach or he would have been summarily dismissed, but Stank-0 doesn't seen the infatuation.
If there was one or two coaches to pull out of retirement, it would be Tony Dungy and possibly Bill Cowher. In the time it took Stank-0 to type "Cowher" he talked himself out of it. So that leaves Dungy, however, Stank-0 likes hearing him dispense football knowledge on Sunday Night Football.
Is Stank-0 off base? Is Holmgren better than presented here? Whom else should be given a crack at helping the Browns?
0 comments: