George Seifert > Bill Cowher / Jimmy Johnson???

Johnson built a powerhouse in Dallas and was the last dynasty. His pedigree is without peer, as a player won the National Championship at Arkansas (teammate of Jerry Jones), NCAA Championship at Miami and SB Champ. Cowher was blue-collar with only one SB. Didn't innovate and played 3 yards and a cloud of dust. Siefert, took a secondary with 3 rookies and a free agent and made them Champs in year one. Took over from the Master and won the SB. Losing the three-peat was the #1 loss for 49er fans, but he came back and won in 94. Cowher was in with the in crowd coming from Pittsburgh, and JJ was a vibrant personality. Siefert on the other hand was low key and subdued. His record speaks for itself and he belongs in the HOF as much as the other two if not more.

Originally posted by CardinalGold:

Seifert inherited a SB winning team from Walsh. He won 2 SBs off that talent but made poor draft, personnel, and coaching decisions which led to the slow demise of the dynasty (if FA were as active then as it is now, it would have been a faster demise).

Johnson took a 1-15 franchise and drafted and coached it to 2 SBs himself and set it up for a third under Switzer. If Jerry didn't have such a big ego and fire Johnson, the Cowboys might have been a Patriots like dynasty.

So yeah, JJ deserves the HoF over Seifert. And I say that as a Cowboy hating Niner fan since 1982.

Horrible and ignorant take. Wow. Seifert went 14-2 three times in his first 4 seasons. He went 12-4 in his final year as coach. There was no "demise" on his watch. Eddie D fired him because he failed to get back to the SB in 95 and 96. The demise came from losing Young, salary cap hell, and firing Mariucci. BTW, Walsh was GM in 1999 and 2000, and had 2 crap drafts.

Seifert didn't make draft decisions. He was the coach. Carmen Policy was the GM.

The Cowboys wouldn't have been a Patriots dynasty. They were way too volatile.

Originally posted by 49er-from-Yavin-IV:

Originally posted by CardinalGold:
I'll add that if Mike Shanahan had been made HC things likely would have been better for the 49ers. He was great at identifying RB talent (exactly our missing piece) and we struggled at OC once Shanahan left. Remember the failed Mark Trestman experiment.

That would have been my preference before the 1995 season, but how do we fire a head coach that just won the Super Bowl?

Yup, people forget that Shanahan had a LOT to do with that run. And Pete Carroll had a LOT to do with the dominant defense in the subsequent year.

Seifert was a good number two man... but no,... I wouldn't take him over the other two options. Even though Jimmie Johnson is a flat out criminal.

Originally posted by Geeked:

Originally posted by 49er-from-Yavin-IV:

Originally posted by CardinalGold:
I'll add that if Mike Shanahan had been made HC things likely would have been better for the 49ers. He was great at identifying RB talent (exactly our missing piece) and we struggled at OC once Shanahan left. Remember the failed Mark Trestman experiment.

That would have been my preference before the 1995 season, but how do we fire a head coach that just won the Super Bowl?

Yup, people forget that Shanahan had a LOT to do with that run. And Pete Carroll had a LOT to do with the dominant defense in the subsequent year.

Seifert was a good number two man... but no,... I wouldn't take him over the other two options. Even though Jimmie Johnson is a flat out criminal.

Seifert's Carolina tenure is really hurting him (even though he went 8-8 & 7-9 1st 2 seasons there). Voters prolly thinking of him of taking over the team from Walsh, with Montana and the vets, not getting credit with those teams and the Steve Young 49er teams either. I do think he will get in next season.

Originally posted by Geeked:

Originally posted by 49er-from-Yavin-IV:

Originally posted by CardinalGold:
I'll add that if Mike Shanahan had been made HC things likely would have been better for the 49ers. He was great at identifying RB talent (exactly our missing piece) and we struggled at OC once Shanahan left. Remember the failed Mark Trestman experiment.

That would have been my preference before the 1995 season, but how do we fire a head coach that just won the Super Bowl?

Yup, people forget that Shanahan had a LOT to do with that run. And Pete Carroll had a LOT to do with the dominant defense in the subsequent year.

Seifert was a good number two man... but no,... I wouldn't take him over the other two options. Even though Jimmie Johnson is a flat out criminal.

This take ignores the fact that Seifert was the guy running most of those SB Defenses for Walsh in the 80's. Carroll did well here but he came to this team to learn the Defense and that was clear when you saw him implement it in Seattle with his own twist.

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by _Goldblooded_:
I think Johnson deserves it. Cowher I disagree with.

Hell Mike Tomlin has the same resume as Cowher. Is he gonna get in?

Tomlin has two SB wins so yes.

He only won one SB but he has a good chance of getting in. He's never had a losing record and the recent AB saga boosted his reputation a ton.

Originally posted by Fanaticofnfl:

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by _Goldblooded_:
I think Johnson deserves it. Cowher I disagree with.

Hell Mike Tomlin has the same resume as Cowher. Is he gonna get in?

Tomlin has two SB wins so yes.

He only won one SB but he has a good chance of getting in. He's never had a losing record and the recent AB saga boosted his reputation a ton.

You're right, one as HC and one as a member of the Bucs coaching staff.

I'm not sure how Cowher got in

I will say there is a bias against the 49ers players/coaches getting into the HOF:

Dwight should have been in long ago. For the life of me, Stallworth and Swann are in, but the most iconic play in NFL history, Clark isn't in. Plus, his stats are similar to Stallworth

Seifort should have gotten in long ago, well before Cowher. Jimmy Johnson is a first ballot and it's a damn shame he didn't get in.

Craig should have been in.

TO should have been first ballot.

Jerry Rice shoiuld have been the last person giving his speech to close out the hall of fame ceremony. They usually save the best for last. Instead, they gave that honor to that jack off, Emmitt Smith.

I don't care about how the media see these current 49ers but there is a tremendous bias against them as far as the HOF goes.

Originally posted by pdizo916:

I will say there is a bias against the 49ers players/coaches getting into the HOF:

Dwight should have been in long ago. For the life of me, Stallworth and Swann are in, but the most iconic play in NFL history, Clark isn't in. Plus, his stats are similar to Stallworth

Seifort should have gotten in long ago, well before Cowher. Jimmy Johnson is a first ballot and it's a damn shame he didn't get in.

Craig should have been in.

TO should have been first ballot.

Jerry Rice shoiuld have been the last person giving his speech to close out the hall of fame ceremony. They usually save the best for last. Instead, they gave that honor to that jack off, Emmitt Smith.

I don't care about how the media see these current 49ers but there is a tremendous bias against them as far as the HOF goes.

It doesn't help that Dallas always puts their minions in the media booth. See:

-Don Meredith
-Troy Aikman
-Tony Romo
-Deion
-Jimmy Johnson
-Darryl Johnston
-Jason Witten

...so they get to spin and continue the "Murricuh's Team!" narrative

Originally posted by jcs:

Originally posted by Geeked:

Originally posted by 49er-from-Yavin-IV:

Originally posted by CardinalGold:

I'll add that if Mike Shanahan had been made HC things likely would have been better for the 49ers. He was great at identifying RB talent (exactly our missing piece) and we struggled at OC once Shanahan left. Remember the failed Mark Trestman experiment.

That would have been my preference before the 1995 season, but how do we fire a head coach that just won the Super Bowl?

Yup, people forget that Shanahan had a LOT to do with that run. And Pete Carroll had a LOT to do with the dominant defense in the subsequent year.

Seifert was a good number two man... but no,... I wouldn't take him over the other two options. Even though Jimmie Johnson is a flat out criminal.

This take ignores the fact that Seifert was the guy running most of those SB Defenses for Walsh in the 80's. Carroll did well here but he came to this team to learn the Defense and that was clear when you saw him implement it in Seattle with his own twist.

Not only that, but if what Seifert did were so easy, why didnt Richie Pettibon win after Joe Gibbs? Why don't Ray Handley win after Bill Parcells? Keeping a winning team going, let alone having multiple SB wins, championship game appearances, etc is no small feat. No team ever viewed 12-4 as a bad season, except San Francisco. THAT is how high the standards were. We have mostly sucked since then and many fans still have that mindset.

if joe namath can get into the fall of fame anyone can and craig should

Johnson and Seifert should be in, not Cowher though

SEIFERT - never got the credit because Bill Walsh had built a POWER HOUSE team... it was also sad to see how Seifert was the 1st coach to not be LIFTED after winning the Super Bowl.

He was also remembered for not able to beat the Packers and Jimmy Johnson in the Playoffs.. People really looked at Seifert the way they looked at Barry Switzer or even Jon Gruden.. Coaches who just INHERITED a team ready to be GREAT..

You can only blame us. We fired Seifert because he didn't win enough for us. So if we didn't see him as a great coach at the time why would HoF voters?