"Small, powerful contingent" could be blocking Holmgren's return to Seattle

Former Seahawks coach Mike Holmgren is interested in returning to the team with a front-office role that entails significant influence over the operation.

But there are growing indications he’s not wanted there.

John Clayton of ESPN reports that “there is a small, powerful contingent” that may block Holmgren’s chances of returning. 

The leader of the pack undoubtedly is CEO Tod Leiweke, who likely wants to run the show his way — and who knows that it would be much easier to make that happen by hiring someone who would be indebted to Leiweke for providing the opportunity.

These political realities ignore the question of whether Holmgren is the right man for the job.  Clayton proclaims that Holmgren is “clearly the best choice,” which should go a long way toward keeping Clayton in the Big Show’s good graces.  But how can Clayton or anyone know the identity of the best candidate without knowing the identity of all of them?

For now, the list of possible choices is unclear, probably because the search firm is asking all potential candidates to keep their status as potential candidates quiet.  So without knowing who is and isn’t in the mix, there’s no way of knowing whether the guy who served as both G.M. and coach of the Seahawks for several years before giving up the G.M. title would be able to succeed there as the G.M. only.

17 responses to “"Small, powerful contingent" could be blocking Holmgren's return to Seattle

  1. Glad to see the nickname you gave him “The Big Show”, isn’t used anymore. That was without a doubt the dumbest and least accurate thing that could ever be said about him.

  2. Why is Holmgren considered such a great choice for this job? Didn’t he pretty much fail as a GM/Coach when he first went to Seattle with years of high expectations and .500 results? So much so that they took away his GM duities?
    Or maybe I just remember things wrong.

  3. Hey, Seattle, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!
    However, it happens to be about as broke as broke gets at the moment, so maybe the ego of an executive isn’t the highest priority. But it’s hard to argue with Tod’s record of success with this team, right…?

  4. @ karpsta
    I think everyone agrees with you on that one. No one here with any sense of football history knows he is an over rated coach.

  5. Seattlle would be smart to choose someone from the staff of experts that are now working for ESPN. This group of insiders, former players and former coaches all seem to have all the solutions. You can get them cheap.

  6. …Number of times Seahawks went to Super Bowl with Mike Holmgren in charge= 1…
    …Number of times Seahawks went to Super Bowl with anyone else in charge= 0…
    …nuff said…
    …Bring Back Mike Holmgren…

  7. karpsta
    Maybe, just possibly, not having Head Coaching duties will allow Holmgren to have more time and energy to devote to player personnel issues.
    He, Shanahan, Pat Riley, you name it. Its too much to put on ones plate.
    It appears to me that maybe he knows something about football. 3 Super Bowl appearances suggest he might not be a bad choice.
    I hope the Browns get him. If he works hard and still has gas left in the tank, the other teams in the AFC North are going to be getting really uncomfortable. It should be interesting.

  8. Is this the same small, powerful contingent that remembers that in his 104 years of coaching Holmgren won one Super Bowl 87 years agao when Brett Favre was his quarterback?

  9. Holmgren’s last year in Seattle = 4-12
    Cupboard = Bare
    Ego = HUGE
    Seattle is smart to pass on him. He is legend in his own mind.
    Cleveland should think twice before they bring that ego in-house.

  10. I just don’t get why everyone is so sold on Holmgren as a GM. He failed badly last time he had that role didn’t he? He was a good coach, sure, but he’s a bad GM. If the Browns get this guy we’re doomed for another decade. PFT, please save this reply because it is so obvious Holmgren is a disaster waiting to happen wherever he GM’s….yet people call him a savior? Am I that smart? I just don’t get why I’m always right and all these guys that run the Browns are always wrong. Yet, I’m unemployed, and they are billionaires…It’s why I hate the world.

  11. To those who remember, Holmgren didn’t exactly fail as a GM. He took over a team in dissaray and built them into a winner, culminating in a Super Bowl (even though he had given up his GM duties that year).
    His downfall was to be both Coach and GM.
    He didn’t do all that bad as a GM, picking up Shawn Alexander, Hutch and Darrell Jackson as well as trading for Matt Hasselback for almost nothing.
    No other coach is Seattle’s history had his record.
    I think he would do OK as a GM, given a couple of years to straighen the team out.

  12. Holmgren built a team which went to the Superbowl in 2005. All of the following idiocies – the loss of Hutchinson, the Alexander contract, the dismal state of the O line just to name a few – are Ruskell. Holmgren would be an excellent GM and would be able to build a team to return Seattle to the Superbowl. If the Seahawks management wants to play politics then they can return to the 11 year (yes, 11) playoff drought that Seattle enjoyed until Holmgren came on board.
    His short stint as GM saw him build a team that gave him the following: 72-56 (56.3%) regular-season record and a 3-4 (42.9%) postseason record, including an AFC West Division title (1999), one NFC Wildcard berth (2003), four consecutive NFC West Division titles (2004, 2005, 2006 and 2007), an NFC championship (2005), and the Seahawks’ first-ever berth in a Super Bowl.
    The final year – and this year – saw the fruition of Ruskell’s plan as a GM.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!