DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Holmgren - Part III

I also think that the WCO would fit Cribbs very well if they move him to RB. We dont have a vertical threat on offense so our current WR would also benefit from a short calculated passing game. We have a Westbrook type RB already with JC.

I hope that Holmgren will move Cribbs to RB as his main position...It would give us the ability to have wrinkles to our WCO offense that other teams dont have......a player like Cribbs

If we fire him, he still gets paid doesn't he?

j/c

From Peter King's MMQB (Tuesday Edition)

How did Randy Lerner get Mike Holmgren? Can the Titans make it? Was Mike Tomlin right? Are the Saints flawed? Is Clay Mathews in Clay Matthews' league? Can Brett Favre and Brad Childress kiss and make up?

Quick takes on the events of the week:

• The Browns recruited Mike Holmgren the right way. We all want to be loved. Holmgren still feels the sting from getting his GM powers taken from him in Seattle five years ago, and the reason he wasn't into returning to the Seahawks when they called last week was owing in part to him being just a piece of the puzzle in the front-office structure. In Cleveland, he'll invent the structure.

Holmgren told me 13 months ago how he's coached in the northwest, west and midwest, and that being part of one of the traditional eastern franchises really appealed to him. Cleveland's more Midwest than east, obviously, but it's one of those traditional NFL cornerstones with great history and rabid fans that appeals to him.

And the owner, Randy Lerner, didn't pressure Holmgren. He knew that leaning on him wasn't going to get it done; he knew he had to give Holmgren time to think about this and to do it his way. This week is a good example why Holmgren's taking the job. In an ideal world, the Browns would have loved to get this done and announced Monday or today; but Holmgren and his family wanted a peaceful Christmas week. So that's what they have.

Now, looking ahead, the Browns need an answer at quarterback. With Brady Quinn (foot) out for the year, Holmgren has to look at tape and decide if Quinn's the guy going forward or if the Browns need to get one, and then use Derek Anderson as the bridge to the 2010 rookie. The Browns are in good position to take advantage of a deep draft in 2010, with 11 picks (extra third-, fifth-, fifth- and sixth-round picks) and a salary structure the current regime fixed to be in manageable shape.

With Cleveland playing better the past couple of weeks, it's not a slam dunk that Holmgren will come in and clean out the coaching staff. Eric Mangini has gotten votes of confidence from a few players recently, and the team showed a lot of fight in victories over Pittsburgh and Kansas City. It's hard for me to imagine Holmgren keeping Mangini because I think he prefers someone who coaches the West Coast scheme he believes in (Marty Mornhinweg perhaps). But we'll see when he puts Mangini under his microscope after the New Year.

link

Quote:

---

Is Mangini willing to bring in an OC that's a WCO guy or does he insist on keeping Daboll?

---

Mangini has no choice but to accept whatever Holmgren decides he should know that if he is fired he will not get another HC job for a while.

In my opinion he is done sooner or later I dont think he would be willing to just coach football and not butt his head into other FO affiars

This off season is going to be THE most interesting off season since 99... No questions about it..

Think about it.. we have a 1 year HC and coaching staff in place that is on the hot seat.

We have a ton of injured players

We have two QB's with huge question marks above thier heads

We have the right side of the Oline that needs work (although I really loved Hank at RG sunday)

We have a running back that just broke JB's single game rushing record and whos going to be a FA next year.

We have a FB that makes big holes

We have a RB on IR that started out looking like the real deal last preseason....

We have a STer that owns the LEAGUE record for KO returns for TD's who wants a new contract and frankly, he deserves it.

We lack a # 1 Receiver and maybe, for all we really know, a #2.

We have a huge hole at TE even if Moore sticks.

We need to address the LB's and the entire secondary with the possible exception of Wright..

We have holes at GM and maybe even some other personal positions.

and for 10 years, the FO has run around like a chicken with it's head cut off.....

Did I mention we have 11 Draft picks in April and we aren't sure who's gonna do the final picking (Just kidding, we know..)

And just to confuse things more,, we have a new Team president starting in a few weeks that probably will want to run the WCO and 4-3 D.

Boys and Girls,, hang on to your hats.. this is gonna be one wild ride between now and TC......

I stopped reading this piece of ..... journalism .... right about here .....

Quote:

---

One obvious candidate is Jim Mora, who might be out in Seattle, depending on who the team's next general manager is.

If Holmgren hopes to have an active role in the Xs and Os, Jim Zorn makes sense, too. He has experience in the top job, and he'd surely defer to any guidance or suggestions Holmgren might make.

---

Umm ..... no thanks to either guy.

As far as bringing in Holmgren to set up a system that runs anything other than the WCO - you don't hire a world-renowned pastry chef and order a hamburger

I think that you need a competent and capable head coach .... no matter what system he runs.

Then you also need an exceptional GM/Personnel Guru who can find players that fit the Head Coach's system.


I don't think that a Team President necessarily says "I ran the WCO as a Head Coach .... so I want a Head Coach who will as well." It would be like the CEO of GM looking for someone who ran a plant "exactly" the same way he did when he was in that spot while passing over a better candidate who did things a little different, but got outstanding results.

In the end. the capability of both the GM and HC are more important than any system they run.

Besides, a HC is a "big picture" position. You hire people (coordinators and position coaches) to handle the "grunt work". You set the agenda and goals, and let your people do their jobs, while monitoring for results and team/player performance, and offering guidance when something is not up to your standards.

The Team President does this on an even bigger scale.

Quote:

---

I don't think that a Team President necessarily says "I ran the WCO as a Head Coach .... so I want a Head Coach who will as well."

---

But since Holmgren did run a WCO and was a GM choosing offensive players for a WCO he has a lot of experience in what type of player is needed to make that successful. And since he was so successful at it as a coach his knowledge of the skill set required for that system is indispensable.

If Holmgren brings in a GM who is familiar with picking players for the WCO and hires a HC who is also very familiar with the WCO, and an OC who runs it then that makes four of them on the same page regarding the offensive system. That goes a long way in helping set a vision, the goals necessary to reach it, drafting players for it and signing FA's. (btw, gone is the idea that FA's will not want to come here. Holmgren brings a lot of credibility in that regard)

The same might be common for the defense. We already know that Holmgren ran a 4-3 as a coach. He may want his GM and HC and DC to be like-minded in that regard as well. Why run a defense in which any one of them is less experienced than the other three? (btw, for the same reason as above we might find the pickin's better when we search for our Coordinators and Assistants)

For some reason I'm thinking we'll not have first-timers at the Coordinator positions. At least I hope that's the case.

I'm not saying the Holmgren is a lock to do all this. But it makes a lot of sense when building an organization in which everyone has to have the same vision and be on the same page at all times.

For one it virtually puts a halt to any power struggle or strong disagreements in that area before it can even get started. For another each of the "big three" would have valuable input when requested. With Holmgren's deep coaching experience, knowledge and success you'd like to be able to go to him for guidence and have his input come from that experience and knowledge in what he knows best. And you'd like to go to him with that same scheme being what you know best as well. It's a lot easier to have valid, fruitful discussions that way.

I'd hate to give up the 3-4. I'd love to bring in players who have the talent to play it well. But for the sake of one vision, one goal and the President, GM and HC being of one mind I'd be glad to see the change. (Do we realize that we've had a financial executive as the President of our team up until Monday?)

The WCO would take a little time to get rolling because it's not a simple offense. But too, I'd be willing to wait that out while we bring in players who can run it and become efficient at it.

I see sweeping changes coming our way. Last year will be last year and I doubt that any of it will be brought forward into next year. On the other hand, Holmgren might want his own "evaluation year" as Mangini and Savage/RAC before him used. But maybe Holmgren and an experienced GM won't need that as much as the "first-timers". Not to say that we'll come out of the gate on fire. But we may see rebuilding the first year instead of waiting until the second year as has been the case with the last two regimes.

I believe next season we'll not have a QB controversy for the first time since our return and will have forgotten about Mangini by the time training camp closes. At least I hope.

Ytown,, MH was hired as the Top DAWG (I think that should be his title) and as such, I have to believe he was given the mandate.., fix this mess..

Not that it's guarantee, but I bet you he will want to go with what he's most familiar with... And I am betting hes gonna want guys that know the things he feels they need to know to run his plan..

Right now, My guess is that the only coach that is safe is Seely.... Just a guess..

But the thing is Toad...is there a TRUE West Coast System out there today??? Every system out there is an amalgamation of parts of every type of offense out there. All of the offenses have some West Coast, some Air Coryell, some Spread, etc, etc, etc...Philly might be the closest and you can't tell me that they are a "West Coast Offense".....

Tacker...so you don't remember...lol...

Anderson was 29/49 for 364 yds as the Browns beat the Seahawks in OT 33 to 30.

Oh o.k..so Walrus will look back at that game and go.."Hmmmm,DA was good..he was good..he beat my team..wow..dude has the stuff..oh wait a minute I need to look at tape..maybe I'll just rewind all of the 07 games, and only look at the first 7 games..I'll ignore everything else up till now.."

"RRRRRRiiight"...he doesn't have to look at 32 games to see how flawed DA is..

you're right Pete...the NFL is all about evolving. Defenses catch up with any offense out there. OC still have to be innovative and format an ever changing offense...the WCO has evolved into many different variations. From the 2 TE WCO of the Colts. Even Andy Reid has evolved into a different variation.

That is what is so good about getting Holmgren - he has one of the best offensive minds and can devise a new and better offense if need be. Something we just haven't had.

JMHO

Effective by any name: Holmgren disputes 'West Coast' title, not results

Thursday, September 9, 1999

By CLARE FARNSWORTH
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER





Mike Holmgren's offense has been called many things.

Innovative. Prolific. Quarterback friendly. Even foolhardy.

Just don't call the system he has brought to the Seahawks the West Coast offense. Not in front of Holmgren, anyway.

Sure, its roots are firmly planted in the pass-oriented offense Bill Walsh introduced to the NFL in the 1980s while he was head coach of the San Francisco 49ers. Sure, Holmgren was Walsh's quarterbacks coach for three seasons. Sure, Holmgren was then the team's offensive coordinator for three more seasons after Walsh gave way to George Seifert.

But there's more to Holmgren's scheme than a catchy, and geographically correct, name.

"That was a phrase that fit at the time," said Holmgren, who was hired in January to do the same thing for the Seahawks that he had done in seven seasons with the Green Bay Packers -- turn a longtime loser into a perennial power.

"What I get tired of hearing is the West Coast offense this and the West Coast offense that," he said. "I think that's kind of a lazy term, really. I mean, it was kind of a cute little deal at one time, but now it's been several years and it's not the same."

Holmgren is one of the primary reasons the West Coast offense has evolved. He started fiddling with the offense while with the 49ers. He began full-scale revisions after becoming the Packers head coach in 1992. He is doing a little more massaging with the Seahawks.

The offense Walsh used in winning three Super Bowls and Seifert adopted in winning two more has been spread throughout the league. Walsh also passed it on to Dennis Green, who took it to the Minnesota Vikings; Sam Wyche, who used elements of it while coaching the Cincinnati Bengals and Tampa Bay Buccaneers; and Paul Hackett, who introduced it in Kansas City as the Chiefs' offensive coordinator before leaving last year to become head coach at USC. Mike Shanahan learned it while serving as Seifert's offensive coordinator and now runs a variation of the offense in Denver. Green taught it to Brian Billick, now head coach of the Baltimore Ravens. Four others who have become head coaches learned the system from Holmgren in Green Bay -- Ray Rhodes (Packers), Steve Mariucci (49ers), Jon Gruden (Raiders) and Andy Reid (Eagles).

Among them, Walsh (1981, 1984, 1988), Seifert (1989, 1994), Holmgren (1996) and Shanahan (1997, 1998) have won eight Super Bowls, including the past three and six of the past 11.

"Of the guys who have branched off from the West Coast offense, Mike has really, really added a tremendous amount to it," said Brent Jones, who developed into a Pro Bowl tight end with the 49ers during Holmgren's stint as offensive coordinator and now is an NFL analyst for CBS. "There is obviously the base West Coast offense, but Mike has tinkered with so many plays and added so many new ones that it really is his offense."

The best place to start dissecting Holmgren's offense is at the beginning. Just what is, or was, the West Coast offense?

"It's the ball-control passing game that sets up the running game," Jones said. "But it has evolved. People talk about it being short passes, but it's much more than that. It has become high-percentage passes and also the opportunity to create big plays down field."

Offers Holmgren: "Often times a short pass will be substituted for another running play. It's easier. If you gain 6 yards on a run, what's Barry Sanders average per run? No one averages 6 yards a carry."

Holmgren concedes he has stuck with the Walsh philosophy. But it is the variations on that original theme that have set Holmgren's system apart:


Power running game: The 49ers were a finesse team under Walsh. Holmgren made them more physical. Less flim-flam and more wham-bam, if you will. He took that approach with him to Green Bay and now Seattle.
"The difference between what we did in San Francisco and what Mike is doing here and what Mike Shanahan is doing in Denver is the use of the I-formation," said running back Ricky Watters, who has been reunited with Holmgren in Seattle after flourishing in this offense with the 49ers and a variation of it with the Eagles. "What we did in San Francisco obviously worked, but I think it's a much more potent offense when you have the power game with the finesse."


One-back sets: The original West Coast offense featured split backs, with the 49ers' Wendall Tyler and Roger Craig sharing the load as rushers, receivers and blockers.
"We run a lot more single-back, four-receiver offense than we ever did in San Francisco," Holmgren said.


The screen pass: Using the back, or backs, as an outlet or even primary receiver plays right into Holmgren's spread-the-field, pass-to-set-up-the-run or even pass-rather-than-run doctrine.
In Holmgren's first season as 49ers offensive coordinator, Tom Rathman and Craig combined for 122 receptions. In Green Bay, Edgar Bennett had a 78-catch season in 1994 and teamed with Dorsey Levens to catch 109 passes in 1995.


The tight end: Holmgren always has been partial to tight ends. He realizes the value of finding a player who can use his size and speed to create mismatches and provide another option for stretching the middle of the field.
He saw how effective a pass-catching tight end could be during his time as an assistant coach at Brigham Young University under LaVell Edwards.

"Mike brought much more significance to the tight end position," Jones said. "Part of Bill's offense was to use the tight end. But Mike brought in some ideas that he had from BYU and it sparked an evolution in the position."

In the past 10 seasons, the tight ends in Holmgren's offenses have combined to average 60 receptions. The primary beneficiaries have been Jones, who had 56 catches in 1990; Jackie Harris, who had 55 in 1992; and Mark Chmura, with 54 in 1995. By comparison, Christian Fauria caught 37 passes last year to tie the Seahawks' club record for a tight end that was set in 1976 by Ron Howard.

The numbers say Holmgren's approach works. The 49ers ranked 1-2-3 in the league in total offense during his three seasons as offensive coordinator (1989-91). After a couple of retooling seasons in Green Bay, the Packers' offense ranked in the Top 10 the past five seasons, including No. 4 in 1997 and No. 5 last year.

In 13 seasons as an NFL assistant or head coach, Holmgren has worked with and helped develop a Who's Who of Pro Bowl performers -- quarterbacks Joe Montana (who was voted to three all-star games) and Brett Favre (5); running backs Craig (3) and Levens (1); wide receivers Jerry Rice (6), John Taylor (2), Sterling Sharpe (3) and Antonio Freeman (1); and tight ends Chmura (2) and Keith Jackson (1).

Despite this success, there always have been skeptics. Like the reporters who greeted Holmgren the day he was introduced as head coach of the Packers.

"My first press conference in Green Bay, they're looking at this passing-game offense and asking, 'You know how cold and miserable it gets in November and December?'" Holmgren recalled, unable to hold back a smile. "I said, 'Yeah, and I think it can work.'"

In seven seasons under Holmgren, the Packers were 27-1 at home in November and December, and 5-0 in home playoff games.

"Mike made that offense go in cold weather," his late veteran defensive coordinator, Fritz Shurmur, once said. "He was the first guy to really do that. When he first went to Green Bay I remember people saying, 'Oh, it won't go.'"

Favre made it go. The Packers' exciting, and excitable, passer became a three-time league MVP while directing an offense Holmgren likes to call quarterback friendly. Having the right quarterback is the common thread to having success running the West Coast offense and its many variations. In San Francisco, it was Montana and is still Steve Young. In Denver, Shanahan had John Elway. In Minnesota, Green has had Warren Moon, Brad Johnson and Randall Cunningham.

"It's just a way of making things easier for your quarterback, so you have to design it for whoever that happens to be," Shanahan said.

Whether it's Elway, Young, Favre or Jon Kitna.

"You have to have the quarterback," Holmgren said. "You've got to have that guy so he's making good decisions most of the time, and he's pretty accurate. If you don't have that, then you might as well run the ball."

Now that would be different, especially for Mike Holmgren.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


P-I reporter Clare Farnsworth can be reached at 206-448-8016 or clarefarnsworth@seattle-pi.com

NRTU

This is a cut and paste comment about Mike Holmgren that is very informative and gives you some insight about Holmgren's impressive resume.
There are some on here who say he's not going to be succesful because he's never held the position before. Well everyone has done their job for the first time. Some successful, some not so successful, but often times your past experience leading up to that opportunity has everything to do with it. This man's past is freaking impressive and I can't think of a person with a better resume to have prior to starting a new job. Again, I did take this information from another site and poster so I appologize for not doing this type of homewok myself, but here it is-
"JackTBurton wrote: This is a fantastic hire. I know there are some people who are unsure - deservedly so in some rights because though he is one of the all time greats to ever roam the sideline he has when he had multiple duties in Seatle he had mixed results, both fairly positive and some negative ones to boot.

But what he is a football man. He played at USC for John Mckay. Not a bad coach or football man by rights. Then he honed his craft at his alma matter high school and jumped to a the college ranks to work under Lavelle Edwards at BYU, again not a bad guy to learn the ropes from either. Then he worked for a man named Bill Walsh. The same Bill Walsh who worked and learned the craft from some local guy named Paul Brown. With the 49ers he worked with arguably one of the best teams to ever play the game and worked with the likes of Joe Montana and Steve Young, got a couple of rings.

Then he went to a perrinial bottm feeder team in Green Bay and worked with a savvy GM Ron Wolf and built a pretty special little club, helped develop a extremely raw but talented QB who turned out to be another all time great at his position also to note he has a penchant for identifing both players and assistant coaches - at one time he had on his roster the following - Favre, Mark Brunnel, Matt Hasselback and an little known guy named Kurt Warner. He formed a staff that consisted of assistants that were considered competent football men, enough so they were able to go on to head coaches on thier own in Jon Gruden, Ray Rhodes, Andy Ried, Mary Morningwieg, Mike Mcarthy, Dick Jauron and Steve Marrucci. He has an eye for people that work under him and has the knowledge and ability to develop thier talent but what they did in the careers afterwards and without him are debatable but you can not argue the fact he knows coaches and people who work for him, he knows how a staff should be filled and run. He won a superbowl in Green Bay against the other football titan Bill Parcells and lost the other one due to a unorthodox gamble of letting a team score in order to get the ball back to try to win the game.
He left Green Bay and went to another perrinial loser up in the Northwest.
There he took on the Big Show persona and had mixed results running an orginization and coaching on Sundays. Something he was later said to say was too much for one man to do. But once he was able to concede he worked with a GM and from a personnel standpoint did pretty damn good. Again built a team that was a perrinial contender and made a trip to the Super Bowl - again, got jobbed by the refs but that is another case in itself.

So when you take his whole body of work from being a Bill Walsh/Paul Brown disciple, his pedigree of playing under McKay and also working under Edwards. His penchant for putting together a extremly competent staff, his eye for talent on a personnel standpoint (though not perfect but there is not a person in that field who is) and the fact he has been on numerous teams as an assistant that have had success in the college ranks, won Super Bowls as an assistant developing a handfull of hall of famers on the way and the fact he has won a Super Bowl as a head coach and has been there two other times tells me he knows football, he said it is in his blood and his resume really backs that up. He may not be the perfect guy, I don't think there is such a thing but I believe his is the perfect guy right now for this down trodden organization. He will fix this mess one way or another. As far as how he fills out his staff from the GM to the HC. All I will say is this, I can only go by what he has done and he does know how to identify, hire and work with football men, he has done it in the past.

I know everyone is split over the Mangini question and the best way to logically process it is pretty simple. Mike Holmgren knows coaches. If he feels Mangini can work under him and be successful I think the guy stays. Now there is more to it such as philosophies and personalities that need to be establised and resolved going forward come into play but his track record of identifing coaches leaves me to believe if he decides Eric can work for him he will and Eric accepts the terms and remains and could be very well succesful in his time here. But if not and he decides that Mangini is not going to fit in with the grand plan so be it. In the end whatever the verdict will be our orgnization will be for the better and we are one step closer to be succesful here.

It is exciting guys and though there are some doubts and unknowns going forward one thing is clear, we finally have someone who knows what you need to do to be succesful in the league. All he needs to do is do it now....
"

Quote:

---

Oh o.k..so Walrus will look back at that game and go.."Hmmmm,DA was good..he was good..he beat my team..wow..dude has the stuff..oh wait a minute I need to look at tape..maybe I'll just rewind all of the 07 games, and only look at the first 7 games..I'll ignore everything else up till now.."

---

wow,, let's just exaggerate some ok

Geesh,,, if you go back and look at the transcript of fridays radio interview with Holmgren,, when asked aboiut Quinn and Anderson,, he (and I"m paraphrasing now) said that he hadn't seen that much of Quinn but remembered Anderson from the game they played against the Browns....

But go one step further, at that point in 2007, DA was the starting QB.. Now tell me, what HC doesn't look at film of the Oppositions starting QB?

So he probably does know more, in fact a lot more about DA than he does about Quinn..

Having said that, I don't know what he thinks of DA.. He may like him, or he may think he's a waste of flesh Dunno....,

And you can bet, he won't say much right out of the gate next week... He'll be mum on the subject until he's ready to make a decision....

One thing I'm pretty sure of is this, MH has worked with some of the Best QB's around.. Montana, Young, Majkowski, Favre and Hasselbach. THe man knows QB's and he knows Offense..

Don't be surprised if he choses one of these guys to stay for a year or two (ala Majkowski) until he finds his next Favre or Hasselbach...

So whatever he says,, I've gotta give the devil his due,,,

New name to the GM derby?

http://www.packers.com/team/staff/mckenzie_reggie/

I really like that Kid Shipely ! .. Going to keep my eye on Pike ( qb ) now through the work outs !

This thread is no good without pics!!!

Very good read about Holmgren's offensive mindset.

Quote:

---

Power running game: The 49ers were a finesse team under Walsh. Holmgren made them more physical. Less flim-flam and more wham-bam, if you will. He took that approach with him to Green Bay and now Seattle.
"The difference between what we did in San Francisco and what Mike is doing here and what Mike Shanahan is doing in Denver is the use of the I-formation," said running back Ricky Watters, who has been reunited with Holmgren in Seattle after flourishing in this offense with the 49ers and a variation of it with the Eagles. "What we did in San Francisco obviously worked, but I think it's a much more potent offense when you have the power game with the finesse."

---

What this says to me is that Mangini's more traditional power game does have a place in the Holmgren version of the WCO-like offense. Just b/c Holmgren and Mangini are from two different schools doesn't mean they are totally incompatible. So its not as simple as "different philosophies, must change coaches" that the national media has been saying.

Further, I would say that mixing the best of two different proven schemes provides a way to better keep opposing defenses off balance.

NRTU
I think peopple are going overboard on MH.
I'm in favor of the hire for the simple fact that it will keep Lerner from making more football (?) decisions.
His 1st order of business should be to hire a GM.This decision willbe entirely his to make.
Secondly,along with his GM,rebuild the scouting dept.There's a reason this team is void of talent,and it goes much,much deeper than Mangini.
Decide on the HC.While your imput will be greatly appreciated,this will be your GM's call,and one of the reasons you hired him.
WCO,4-3 vs.3-4,those decisions are not in your job description.Put competant people in place,stand back,and allow them to do thier jobs.
The most important task is to get talent in here,worring about what kind of schemes to run won't accomplish that.

Quote:

---

I'm in favor of the hire for the simple fact that it will keep Lerner from making more football (?) decisions.
His 1st order of business should be to hire a GM.This decision willbe entirely his to make.
Secondly,along with his GM,rebuild the scouting dept.There's a reason this team is void of talent,and it goes much,much deeper than Mangini.

---

This is absolutely true.

Quote:

---

WCO,4-3 vs.3-4,those decisions are not in your job description.Put competant people in place,stand back,and allow them to do thier jobs.
The most important task is to get talent in here,worring about what kind of schemes to run won't accomplish that.

---

I don't agree with this. One of the reasons for our problems through the years is the disconnect between the talent evaluators and the schemes we are trying to run. Or lack of an identity, making the needs of the team hard to identify. One example is that we decided to run the 3-4, but we never drafted/signed enough talented LBs to run it.

I feel we need a strong top down philosophy from Holmgren, then he goes and hires a GM (and possibly a HC if he decides to) who will be on board with executing that vision (and preferably has experience with whatever scheme we decide). Then these guys can get good talent that fits the vision. Good talent alone isn't enough.