Ex-Packers rip Holmgren for SB XXXII - The Orange Mane

BigPlayShay · 02-03-2008, 10:34 PM

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/nfl

Ex-Packers rip Holmgren for SB XXXII
Posted: Sunday February 03, 2008 08:11AM ET

There was a time, when the Packers were dominating the National Football League in the mid-1990s, general manager Ron Wolf and coach Mike Holmgren were viewed as an ideal combination. They were viewed as a template for organizational success. Now we learn Wolf primarily blames Holmgren for the Packers' loss to the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII. Wolf said Holmgren was "pig-headed" in failing to adjust to the protection schemes to account for the Broncos' blitzes. In Wolf's view, Holmgren was aware of what needed to be done but didn't do it because he arrogantly believed in his own approach. Former Packers safety LeRoy Butler said Holmgren was more interested in "showing off" than making a simple fix that would have made a difference in the game.

Atwater His Ass · 02-03-2008, 10:36 PM

I find that almost impossible to believe. You don't throw Super Bowls down the drain. I beleve 100% that Holmgren used the strategies that he thought gave his team the best chance to win. It's not like we won the game going away.

Wes Mantooth · 02-03-2008, 10:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atwater His Ass

I find that almost impossible to believe. You don't throw Super Bowls down the drain. I beleve 100% that Holmgren used the strategies that he thought gave his team the best chance to win. It's not like we won the game going away.

why not? his arrogance and hot head lost the sb against the steelers

rugbythug · 02-04-2008, 12:06 AM

Blitz Pickups would not have stopped TD

gunns · 02-04-2008, 12:10 AM

I thought maybe this was about that "walking, standing up TD" when Holmgren thought it was a 1st down. You're in the SB and don't know what down it is

Bronco Jamus · 02-04-2008, 12:12 AM

It was the right call. We were going to score anyway.

lex · 02-04-2008, 12:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rugbythug

Blitz Pickups would not have stopped TD

Bingo. They couldnt win because they couldnt stop Terrell...and thats even with Terrell missing time with his migraine. Besides, who is to say that Denver wouldnt have made their own adjustments.

Bronco Jamus · 02-04-2008, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lex

Bingo. They couldnt win because they couldnt stop Terrell...and thats even with Terrell missing time with his migraine. Besides, who is to say that Denver wouldnt have made their own adjustments.

I can only wonder what we would have done to that team had TD played the whole game. They probably would have had to take big Gilbert out on a stretcher.

gunns · 02-04-2008, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bronco Jamus

It was the right call. We were going to score anyway.

Not for the reason it was called.

wabbit · 02-04-2008, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lex

Bingo. They couldnt win because they couldnt stop Terrell...and thats even with Terrell missing time with his migraine...

That's really the long & short of it; adjustments & blitz packages weren't going to stop that Bronco running game.

Hard to understand how these guys can't let it go a decade after the fact.

Sheesh.

Bronco Jamus · 02-04-2008, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wabbit

That's really the long & short of it; adjustments & blitz packages weren't going to stop that Bronco running game.

Hard to understand how these guys can't let it go a decade after the fact.

Sheesh.

Because they were supposed to whip the Broncos. They believed their own press clippings to. It was supposed to be 14 in-a-row for the NFC anf the team from "Title Town".

chrisp · 02-04-2008, 08:47 AM

In some ways that win was one of the biggest superbowl upsets ever, becuase with 13-straight wins everybody thought the NFC just had to turn up to win the superbowl, and with four losses (varying from 'heavy' to 'humiliating') in previous bowls we were one of the key poster-children for AFC inferiority.

I remember all kinds of stuff in the media about how boring the superbowl had become and about how we should restructure the league to end NFC dominance and it all came to a swift end that one Sunday.

Orange_Beard · 02-04-2008, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigPlayShay

http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/nfl

Ex-Packers rip Holmgren for SB XXXII
Posted: Sunday February 03, 2008 08:11AM ET

There was a time, when the Packers were dominating the National Football League in the mid-1990s, general manager Ron Wolf and coach Mike Holmgren were viewed as an ideal combination. They were viewed as a template for organizational success. Now we learn Wolf primarily blames Holmgren for the Packers' loss to the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII. Wolf said Holmgren was "pig-headed" in failing to adjust to the protection schemes to account for the Broncos' blitzes. In Wolf's view, Holmgren was aware of what needed to be done but didn't do it because he arrogantly believed in his own approach. Former Packers safety LeRoy Butler said Holmgren was more interested in "showing off" than making a simple fix that would have made a difference in the game.

This second guessing is such childish horse****. He is the coach, of course he is going to do it his way. "His way" is why you made him the coach.

WolfpackGuy · 02-04-2008, 10:12 AM

I don't know why Wolf and Butler would imply that Holmgren was pigheaded. The two big plays off blitzes for Denver came in the first half. If anyone didn't adjust, it was defensive coordinator Fritz Shurmur. He had NO answers for the 3 quarters TD played. If I remember right, I believe the Broncos basically took Butler out of the run game by a simple switch of formations.

Spider · 02-04-2008, 10:16 AM

Went through this same **** with Reggie White .........

Merlin · 02-04-2008, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Atwater His Ass

I find that almost impossible to believe. You don't throw Super Bowls down the drain. I beleve 100% that Holmgren used the strategies that he thought gave his team the best chance to win. It's not like we won the game going away.

I guess you never heard of the Rams and Martz era as HC

ro_50 · 02-04-2008, 11:14 AM

If I remember correctly, that Packers D, while stout against the run, wasn't a great pass rushing team (minus Reggie White).

Merlin · 02-04-2008, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrisp

I remember all kinds of stuff in the media about how boring the superbowl had become and about how we should restructure the league to end NFC dominance and it all came to a swift end that one Sunday.

I remember Madden, while cleaning his chin, said Denver could do EVERYTHING right, and still did not have a chance of making close. Too bad he was not in the booth in the SB that yr, it would have been nice to see him cleaning himself while trying to explain how Denver was beating the Pack and his boy.

lex · 02-04-2008, 11:34 AM

The media was too enraptured by Favre and cheesheads that they completely neglected to notice that the year before Denver was 13-3. Even though they stubbed their toe after resting players several weeks, they were still 13-3. That year Denver killed the Patriots in Foxboro by 30 points when the Packers beat the Patriots by 14 points on a neutral field. And Denvers running game was even more potent in 1997. Basically, SBXXXII was a game 2 years in the making and the national media failed to recognize this. In 1996 Green Bay defeated the team in the AFC that deserved to be in the SB, but New England wasnt the best team. In 1997, they played that team.

Not only that but Denver wasnt just playing the 97 Packers. They were also playing a host of other negative forces. In addition to playing a very good Packers team they were also playing the ghosts of 1977, 1986, 1987, and 1989. And thats in addition to trying to overcome the NFCs win streak. And the fact that Denver successfully navigated their way past that and dominated the LOS, just goes to show that the Broncos were really better than the Packers. If Denver would have played the Packers 10 times, I wouldnt have been shocked if Denver wins 10 of them because of how they so thoroughly dominated the LOS. Besides, the negative forces that I mentioned would be most prevalent in game 1.

Don Flamenco · 02-04-2008, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lex

The media was too enraptured by Favre and cheesheads that they completely neglected to notice that the year before Denver was 13-3. Even though they stubbed their toe after resting players several weeks, they were still 13-3. That year Denver killed the Patriots in Foxboro by 30 points when the Packers beat the Patriots by 14 points on a neutral field. And Denvers running game was even more potent in 1997. Basically, SBXXXII was a game 2 years in the making and the national media failed to recognize this. In 1996 Green Bay defeated the team in the AFC that deserved to be in the SB, but New England wasnt the best team. In 1997, they played that team.

Not only that but Denver wasnt just playing the 97 Packers. They were also playing a host of other negative forces. In addition to playing a very good Packers team they were also playing the ghosts of 1977, 1986, 1987, and 1989. And thats in addition to trying to overcome the NFCs win streak. And the fact that Denver successfully navigated their way past that and dominated the LOS, just goes to show that the Broncos were really better than the Packers. If Denver would have played the Packers 10 times, I wouldnt have been shocked if Denver wins 10 of them because of how they so thoroughly dominated the LOS. Besides, the negative forces that I mentioned would be most prevalent in game 1.

QFT!

Spider · 02-04-2008, 11:59 AM

SB 32 was a game of matchups ...... 2 people on the Pack D had to be dealt with ..... LeRoy Butler And Gilbert Brown , so Shanny lined up Rod Smith and Ed Mac on one side , put Sharpe on the other , this isolated Butler on Sharpe , then Gilbert was only good in a Box , Denvers small Oline riped right through the rest of the packers , The Pack was unable to answer this game plan effectively ....... The Game wouldnt have been that close of Atwater didnt alligator his arms on a sure pick , and the 5 th down the pack got on the opening drive .......

Spider · 02-04-2008, 12:00 PM

But if TD couldnt have came back , Denver loses ......

Merlin · 02-04-2008, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spider

But if TD couldnt have came back , Denver loses ......

Yeah, but if Favre gets hurt Denver wins without TD

We can all plays this game

Spider · 02-04-2008, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Merlin

Yeah, but if Favre gets hurt Denver wins without TD

We can all plays this game

Only difference is , TD was Hurt .... TD couldnt even see on the td play near the end of the first half

Merlin · 02-04-2008, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spider

Only difference is , TD was Hurt .... TD couldnt even see on the td play near the end of the first half

He wasn't hurt, he had a headache. Suck it up!

kidding

02-03-2008, 10:34 PM	#1
BigPlayShay Ring of Famer Novaking Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 4,241 Adopt-a-Bronco: Got Cut	Ex-Packers rip Holmgren for SB XXXII http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/nfl Ex-Packers rip Holmgren for SB XXXII Posted: Sunday February 03, 2008 08:11AM ET There was a time, when the Packers were dominating the National Football League in the mid-1990s, general manager Ron Wolf and coach Mike Holmgren were viewed as an ideal combination. They were viewed as a template for organizational success. Now we learn Wolf primarily blames Holmgren for the Packers' loss to the Broncos in Super Bowl XXXII. Wolf said Holmgren was "pig-headed" in failing to adjust to the protection schemes to account for the Broncos' blitzes. In Wolf's view, Holmgren was aware of what needed to be done but didn't do it because he arrogantly believed in his own approach. Former Packers safety LeRoy Butler said Holmgren was more interested in "showing off" than making a simple fix that would have made a difference in the game.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

02-03-2008, 10:36 PM	#2
Atwater His Ass Ring of Famer Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 5,374 Adopt-a-Bronco: None	I find that almost impossible to believe. You don't throw Super Bowls down the drain. I beleve 100% that Holmgren used the strategies that he thought gave his team the best chance to win. It's not like we won the game going away.

02-04-2008, 12:06 AM	#4
rugbythug Church Eyes. Salty Dog Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 3,822 Adopt-a-Bronco: Mr. Miller	Blitz Pickups would not have stopped TD

02-04-2008, 12:10 AM	#5
gunns I WANT DEFENSE! Defense, defense, defense Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Always Hoping Posts: 11,744 Adopt-a-Bronco: Defense	I thought maybe this was about that "walking, standing up TD" when Holmgren thought it was a 1st down. You're in the SB and don't know what down it is

02-04-2008, 12:12 AM	#6
Bronco Jamus Ring of Famer Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Denver Posts: 1,636	It was the right call. We were going to score anyway.

02-04-2008, 08:47 AM	#12
chrisp Friend of the unsung Not into the football......yet Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 1,304 Adopt-a-Bronco: Danny Trevathan	In some ways that win was one of the biggest superbowl upsets ever, becuase with 13-straight wins everybody thought the NFC just had to turn up to win the superbowl, and with four losses (varying from 'heavy' to 'humiliating') in previous bowls we were one of the key poster-children for AFC inferiority. I remember all kinds of stuff in the media about how boring the superbowl had become and about how we should restructure the league to end NFC dominance and it all came to a swift end that one Sunday.

02-04-2008, 10:12 AM	#14
WolfpackGuy Call me, "Maybe" Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Delaware Posts: 5,694	I don't know why Wolf and Butler would imply that Holmgren was pigheaded. The two big plays off blitzes for Denver came in the first half. If anyone didn't adjust, it was defensive coordinator Fritz Shurmur. He had NO answers for the 3 quarters TD played. If I remember right, I believe the Broncos basically took Butler out of the run game by a simple switch of formations.

02-04-2008, 10:16 AM	#15
Spider Mr Diplomacy I survived Tebow Mania at the Mane Join Date: May 2001 Location: Elway was just an arm =MacGruder Posts: 84,438 Adopt-a-Bronco: Von Miller	Went through this same **** with Reggie White .........

02-04-2008, 11:14 AM	#17
ro_50 Ring of Famer Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Somewhere in Jersey Posts: 3,782	If I remember correctly, that Packers D, while stout against the run, wasn't a great pass rushing team (minus Reggie White).

02-04-2008, 11:34 AM	#19
lex Bowlen Sold Us Out! The Broncos have been DisemBowlened Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Chi-Town Posts: 10,253 Adopt-a-Bronco: None	The media was too enraptured by Favre and cheesheads that they completely neglected to notice that the year before Denver was 13-3. Even though they stubbed their toe after resting players several weeks, they were still 13-3. That year Denver killed the Patriots in Foxboro by 30 points when the Packers beat the Patriots by 14 points on a neutral field. And Denvers running game was even more potent in 1997. Basically, SBXXXII was a game 2 years in the making and the national media failed to recognize this. In 1996 Green Bay defeated the team in the AFC that deserved to be in the SB, but New England wasnt the best team. In 1997, they played that team. Not only that but Denver wasnt just playing the 97 Packers. They were also playing a host of other negative forces. In addition to playing a very good Packers team they were also playing the ghosts of 1977, 1986, 1987, and 1989. And thats in addition to trying to overcome the NFCs win streak. And the fact that Denver successfully navigated their way past that and dominated the LOS, just goes to show that the Broncos were really better than the Packers. If Denver would have played the Packers 10 times, I wouldnt have been shocked if Denver wins 10 of them because of how they so thoroughly dominated the LOS. Besides, the negative forces that I mentioned would be most prevalent in game 1.

02-04-2008, 11:59 AM	#21
Spider Mr Diplomacy I survived Tebow Mania at the Mane Join Date: May 2001 Location: Elway was just an arm =MacGruder Posts: 84,438 Adopt-a-Bronco: Von Miller	SB 32 was a game of matchups ...... 2 people on the Pack D had to be dealt with ..... LeRoy Butler And Gilbert Brown , so Shanny lined up Rod Smith and Ed Mac on one side , put Sharpe on the other , this isolated Butler on Sharpe , then Gilbert was only good in a Box , Denvers small Oline riped right through the rest of the packers , The Pack was unable to answer this game plan effectively ....... The Game wouldnt have been that close of Atwater didnt alligator his arms on a sure pick , and the 5 th down the pack got on the opening drive .......

02-04-2008, 12:00 PM	#22
Spider Mr Diplomacy I survived Tebow Mania at the Mane Join Date: May 2001 Location: Elway was just an arm =MacGruder Posts: 84,438 Adopt-a-Bronco: Von Miller	But if TD couldnt have came back , Denver loses ......