Holmgren or McCarthy

[LambeauLombardi]

Holmgren 75-37 (66%), 1 SB Win, 2 SB Appearances, 9-6 playoff record (with Packers)
McCarthy 121-70-1 (63%), 1 SB Win, 1 SB Appearance, 10-8 playoff record

Holmgren had more short term success, McCarthy has more wins and been around longer. Who do you got?

 

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

Holmgren had better coaches under him that eventually went on to be head coaches with other teams, plus he worked with Ron Wolf.

To bad he got such a big head when offered a coach and general manager position with the Seattle .

MM contract is short, so he has to produce next year or else.
If not, he'll be buying his own donuts.

 

[GleefulGary]

As just a coach? Holmgren easily.

If Holmgren wants to be a GM...well, then I might have to say no. But Holmgren is/was easily the better coach.

 

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

I read a comment once when Holmgren was in Green Bay, with all the greats he was given
to work with, any trained ape could of coached that team.

What Say?

 

[Dantés]

Holmgren for sure.

 

[Gonepackin]

McCarthy NFCC 1-3, nuff said.

 

[El Guapo]

I read a comment once when Holmgren was in Green Bay, with all the greats he was given
to work with, any trained ape could of coached that team.

There are many teams full of talent...up until this point Jacksonville was a case in point. Many trained apes tried by only Marone made it work. Holmgren wasn't surrounded with talented players. He was surrounded with talented coaches. Favre obviously had talent but the brain of a house cat. Holmgren was a great coach. I would even say that Sherman was a better coach. I'm not knocking McCarthy, but just think that we've had an impressive run of head coaches if you ignore the Ray Rhodes year.

 

[Djepacker]

Longing for those days again..Sure do miss Reggie and it was so exciting every year we were getting better and better. Holmgren and Fritz, Mooch and Gruden...don’t forget Nolan Cromwell on Special Teams...it was great!!

 

[LambeauLombardi]

2009-2012 I thought McCarthy was well on his way on passing Holmgren considering Holmgren was only there for about 7 years. The underachieving last 5 years for McCarthy makes me say Holmgren pretty easily. We never saw what Holmgren was without Favre, but I assume he would have done better with his backups (Brunnell and Pederson) than McCarthy has with his (outside of Flynn it's been awful). We also saw Holmgren do good decent with another franchise so you assume if he were put into that type of situation in Green Bay he'd do a better job than McCarthy. I understand it's up to the GM to bring good backups, but HC also has a big part of it too.

 

[ARPackFan]

Holmgren was the better coach and a much better offensive mind.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

Holmgren was the better coach and a much better offensive mind.

You know the crazy thing is, Holmgren just about always got the same criticism that McCarthy does about sitting on leads and taking his foot off the gas pedal in big games. Yup, I heard it, I heard it many times.

The one reason I'd put Holmgren down as a better coach was that he didn't tolerate bad QB play at all and would've kicked Hundley off the roster with just one bad game. He proved this by showing Rubley the door when he ****ed up against Minny in 1995 during the game that both Favre and Detmer left with injuries. I do wish MM would take notes from that.

 

[rmontro]

You know the crazy thing is, Holmgren just about always got the same criticism that McCarthy does about sitting on leads and taking his foot off the gas pedal in big games. Yup, I heard it, I heard it many times.

True, Holmgren was very conservative.

There was a lot of talk about him winning a Super Bowl with two different teams before Seattle lost to Pittsburgh.
Holmgren was able to successfully deal with Favre, who must have been a bit of a headache. McCarthy has had Rodgers most of his coaching tenure.
Holmgren's defenses were better than McCarthy's for the most part, although I'm not sure how much they had to do with that side of the ball. My suspicion is that Holmgren was a little more involved.

 

[swhitset]

There are many teams full of talent...up until this point Jacksonville was a case in point. Many trained apes tried by only Marone made it work. Holmgren wasn't surrounded with talented players. He was surrounded with talented coaches. Favre obviously had talent but the brain of a house cat. Holmgren was a great coach. I would even say that Sherman was a better coach. I'm not knocking McCarthy, but just think that we've had an impressive run of head coaches if you ignore the Ray Rhodes year.

You lost all credibility when you claimed Sherman was better... not to mention that saying Holmgren didn't have talented players lmao ?.. really??

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

True, Holmgren was very conservative.

There was a lot of talk about him winning a Super Bowl with two different teams before Seattle lost to Pittsburgh.
Holmgren was able to successfully deal with Favre, who must have been a bit of a headache. McCarthy has had Rodgers most of his coaching tenure.
Holmgren's defenses were better than McCarthy's for the most part, although I'm not sure how much they had to do with that side of the ball. My suspicion is that Holmgren was a little more involved.

Well, I do believe Fritz Shurmur was a better defensive coordinator than Dom Capers. Plus, Holmgren also had Andy Reid managing the offensive side of the ball as well so he may have had a little more flexibility to manage the rest of the team as a whole. I think both did a pretty good job reeling Favre in because even though Favre had a short period under McCarthy, it was made known pretty clear right there that his days of becoming bigger than the team were over.

 

[PackerfaninCarolina]

You lost all credibility when you claimed Sherman was better... not to mention that saying Holmgren didn't have talented players lmao ?.. really??

This is why I said in the other thread that Sherman gets continually let off the hook and not beatup enough for causing the 4th and 26 loss.

 

[Mondio]

I don't think Holmgren was all that much better if at all. MM managed Favre pretty well too, the offense has rarely been an issue. Holmgren was as conservative as they come, I can't believe people would forget that. Defensively we were better. How could we not have been. Reggie White alone makes the gap large. Gilbert, Santana, Sean Jones, Koonce and Simmons? Both better than Ryan and Blake. We were good on DB's when we had Williams and WOodsons and Shields was probably better than Newsome and Evans, but Butler and Robinson were better than the Safeties we have now. and Fritz was a heck of a defensive coach too. a lot of people don't rememberr, but a lot of players were relieved when Holmgren was gone and let's not act like there weren't a lot of disappointments when he was here. All those Dallas games where they were better and we just coldn't get them, fine I get it, but then we were better than Denver in every way and lost in that super bowl.

I think they're both fine coaches. I think a lot of people's present day disappointments are clouding their judgements

 

[swhitset]

I don't think Holmgren was all that much better if at all. MM managed Favre pretty well too, the offense has rarely been an issue. Holmgren was as conservative as they come, I can't believe people would forget that. Defensively we were better. How could we not have been. Reggie White alone makes the gap large. Gilbert, Santana, Sean Jones, Koonce and Simmons? Both better than Ryan and Blake. We were good on DB's when we had Williams and WOodsons and Shields was probably better than Newsome and Evans, but Butler and Robinson were better than the Safeties we have now. and Fritz was a heck of a defensive coach too. a lot of people don't rememberr, but a lot of players were relieved when Holmgren was gone and let's not act like there weren't a lot of disappointments when he was here. All those Dallas games where they were better and we just coldn't get them, fine I get it, but then we were better than Denver in every way and lost in that super bowl.

I think they're both fine coaches. I think a lot of people's present day disappointments are clouding their judgements

I agree with all of that except maybe the better than Denver part .... That Denver team was pretty dang good.

 

[Mondio]

they weren't slouches that's for sure, but GB on paper should have dominated that game. Offensively I would have given the nod to GB at pretty much every position except RB and TE. Defensively, there's no reason Denver should have scored that many points on GB and GB's offense should have controlled the game rather than the other way around.

 

[rmontro]

I don't think Holmgren was all that much better if at all. MM managed Favre pretty well too, the offense has rarely been an issue.

Nothing against McCarthy, but Favre won three MVPs under Holmgren.

they weren't slouches that's for sure, but GB on paper should have dominated that game. Offensively I would have given the nod to GB at pretty much every position except RB and TE. Defensively, there's no reason Denver should have scored that many points on GB and GB's offense should have controlled the game rather than the other way around.

I disagree that GB should have dominated that game on paper. I've posted the team stats for both Denver and GB, and they are very comparable. Denver actually had the #1 offense in the league in both points and yards. Green Bay could have won, but those two teams were very evenly matched.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I would give the nod to Holmgren. One thing I am convinced of, the Food must be REALLY good for a HC living in Green Bay.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Alex]

I would give the nod to Holmgren. One thing I am convinced of, the Food must be REALLY good for a HC living in Green Bay.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

What blows me away is they have access to trainers, equipment, and dieticians yet a lot of coaches are bigger than some of the linemen.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

What blows me away is they have access to trainers, equipment, and dieticians yet a lot of coaches are bigger than some of the linemen.

Seems to be a trend around the NFL for sure. Most of these guys were former players, I guess they kept the appetite and dropped the staying in shape part out of their lives? I would imagine many meals are eaten at their desks.

MM looked like a "bruiser" in his days at Baker U.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Mondio]

Stress, its effects are palpable

 

[Wi. Mike now in Florida]

Longing for those days again..Sure do miss Reggie and it was so exciting every year we were getting better and better. Holmgren and Fritz, Mooch and Gruden...don’t forget Nolan Cromwell on Special Teams...it was great!!

And just another reason we should of won more SB's

 

[sschind]

You know the crazy thing is, Holmgren just about always got the same criticism that McCarthy does about sitting on leads and taking his foot off the gas pedal in big games. Yup, I heard it, I heard it many times.

The one reason I'd put Holmgren down as a better coach was that he didn't tolerate bad QB play at all and would've kicked Hundley off the roster with just one bad game. He proved this by showing Rubley the door when he ****ed up against Minny in 1995 during the game that both Favre and Detmer left with injuries. I do wish MM would take notes from that.

He did stick with Favre through some pretty rough patches in the beginning and gave him a lot rope. I love the clip where he says something like "put the backup in" then he say "forget it" or something like that.

As far as Rubly goes it was not so much bad play as it was one play. Had he not made that play who knows how long he may have stuck around.

I'm not saying you are wrong as he may well have canned Hundley but I don't necessarily see him as the hard a** towards QBs as you say. I mean he had Favre and after he figured it out how much attention was really paid to any other QB?