Skip Bayless, America's Least Favorite Sportswriter Ever, says the Seahawks are "frauds".
My personal favorite moment:
I still say coach Mike Holmgren's Super Bowl legacy was mostly a product of Brett Favre's offense and Reggie White's defense.
Umm...dipshit? Who built "Favre's offense"? Who took Favre from being the clueless and cocky Falcon backup and made him into a Hall of Fame QB? And who has watched from Seattle as Favre's career slowly disintegrated without him?
Oh yeah, that Holmgren guy.
I was considering parsing this line-by-line, but this is Skip Bayless. Picking on him for lousy writing is kinda like swatting a fly with a Buick: overkill.
Posted by Frinklin at January 20, 2006 10:19 AM | TrackBackLet me preface this by saying that Skip Bayless is, indeed, an idiot, and that I'm as tired of the "Holmgren can't coach" coventional wisdom as you are.
That said, however, if it's inappropriate to say that Holmgren would have been nothing without Favre (and it is), it's equally inappropriate to say that Favre would have been nothing without Holmgren. Favre's career has "disintegrated" without Holmgren because Favre is old and breaking down. (Also, Favre's "disintegration" is overstated... up until this year, his numbers have been pretty consistent, barring a moderate two-season dip right after Holmgren's departure.)
Would Favre have had the same career if Ted Marchibroda or Dan Reeves or Marty Schottenheimer been the Packer coach instead of Holmgren? Would he have gone to the Super Bowl? Maybe, maybe not. Call it 50-50. Would Holmgren have gone to the Super Bowl, and had the same success, with Drew Bledsoe or Warren Moon or Brad Johnson as his quarterback? Maybe, maybe not. I think it's slightly more likely that Favre would have succeeded without Holmgren than vice versa, but mostly it's a wash. No need to pick on Favre to defend Holmgren.
On the other hand, "swatting a fly with a Buick" is a great line. Swatting a fly with a Buick? Definite overkill. Swatting Skip Bayless with a Buick? Now you're talking.
Posted by: Mediocre Fred at January 20, 2006 01:03 PMYeah... that probably came out wrong. I by no means want to denigrate Brett Favre's career. Though I am throughly tired of the constant ass-kissing he gets from various media outlets.
What I should have pointed out, though I haven't done any through anaylsis of it (because I'm lazy) is that since Holmgren left for Seattle, Favre has been more prone to overplaying. His biggest weakness is trying to force the issue and making big plays the other way. I'd be willing to bet that has happened far more often since Holmgren left.
Admittedly though, I haven't done the research.
Oh, the Buick line? I totally stole that.
Posted by: frinklin at January 20, 2006 01:52 PMOh, and I know I'm in the minority here, but I actually liked Bayless' books on the Cowboys.
I figured you probably didn't mean to spit on Favre's career, but I wanted to clarify, since it did sort of come off that way.
Generally, I agree that Favre became more of a gunslinger after Holmgren left, more convinced of his own game-changing abilities and less constrained by the system. The best evidence for that is his TD-to-interception ratio, which has been markedly lower post-Holmgren. (Also, his rushing yards dropped noticeably, although I can't really explain why. Did he decide to become more of a pocket passer, or did his legs give out on him?)
All in all, I think Holmgren was able to control Favre, and his riverboat-gambler/hero tendencies, better than any coach he's had since.
If you feel like checking my conjectures, here's a place to start:
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/FavrBr00.htm
Posted by: Mediocre Fred at January 20, 2006 02:50 PM