Earl34 Posted March 16, 2010 Report Share Posted March 16, 2010 I was home sick today for the first time in five years. I laid there hoping that the Good Lord would just take me and I found a really nice distraction from my physical woes: The Mike Holmgren/Eric Mangini press conference. It took my mind off of things albeit for a little while I have to say again: Mike Holmgren is one smooth dude. I've never really understood what makes one a "football czar" but I'm starting to understand why Holmgren was the right man for this job. I think part of the reason he's convincing is that he has enough experience and respect so that when he says something, that's it. The buck stops there. He handles the media in a way that you wished would have been done long before now. He's laid back but authoritative. He seems to do an excellent job of putting things into perspective (such as why we didn't get first rounders for former first rounders). The fact is that Eric Mangini could have made any of the statements that Holmgren did but it wouldn't be good enough. I don't know that a lot of people have thought about Tom Heckert very much. Holmgren is the face of the franchise but I think that we need to appreciate Tom Heckert and who he is. The Eagles have long been one team whose model of management I've liked. They generally don't overpay. They'll do what they need to do to improve the team. They won't be held hostage by players. They understand value. It's a management style that assumes a larger plan and is disciplined. At the end of the day, it's a respectable approach. I think that many people will be able to accept whatever moves are made as long as we feel that due diligence was done and we pursued whatever avenues were needed. It's pragmatic. It's unemotional and that's a good thing. We aren't going to be bogged down by "what ifs" and "what fors". We won't be paralyzed when we need to cut bait with a player who isn't performing. I think that the biggest difference I see though is with the coach (Mangini). He's more laid back (it seems). The personnel guys answer personnel questions. He seems like he can focus on coach stuff rather than answering questions about free agents or the draft or some front office issue because he's the only one at the podium. I am curious to see what he'll do on the field in 2010. I will say that I'd hoped for better things in 2009 as we all did. Having watched him at the Jets with my brother who is a season ticket holder, I was very hopeful. When I step back though, I see a common thread. This is a coach who's had some big underdog wins in his career. If you look at the years that he's had an uninjured legitimate QB starter (Pennington, Favre before the bicep) his record is one of playoff contention. While he may have had his down performances, he's also shown flashes that he can outcoach the best of them (he's beaten Belichick, Fisher and Cowher). The Pittsburgh win last year was an excellent example. He beat the defending champs in bad conditions with a team whose lineup had significant plugins off of the practice squad. The team played for him. Josh Cribbs played for him. They found a way. I, for one, feel good about what he could do with more talent. I personally think that over the years Bill Belichick was more afraid of him than any other assistant he lost and I think that's a very real and very encouraging sign. The depth on this team will be vastly improved in year two and you'll see players 1-53 consist of a better level of NFL talent. It will be professional in its approach and in the expectations and accountability. We have the building on the same page. We have direction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.