George Seifert

When you look at overall records, and maintaining greatness, i think George Seifert doesnt get enough credit for the job he did here.

Now i understand that Walsh created the WCO, the winning mentality, was responsible for all personal moves and knowing who to sign, who to cut, etc, and he won the first 3 rings. but if you look at overall records....Seifert actually was just as good, maybe a bit better as far as wins/losses.

There seems to be this common opinion that Seifert just took over the reigns of a dynasty and sat back and coasted on it. however, id argue he did a phenomenal job of building his own teams, and keeping the Niners on top. outside the 1989-1990 super bowl win over Denver, i think he deserves full credit.

you can make an argument Walsh had everything setup to repeat in 89, but after that, the team choked away a surefire Super Bowl title against the Giants the very next season, and then ran into the Montana injury problems, missing the playoffs in 1991, and a division in the team among which QB should play.

he made the right call going with Young and letting Montana go, and we pulled right back out of it and dominated once more, including another Super Bowl win in 94. maybe a Walsh team takes 1 or 2 more Super Bowls in those years we finished runner up to Dallas and New York, maybe not.

overall, Seifert was 98-30 as Niners HC in 8 seasons, winning 7 division titles in those 8 years, and missing the playoffs at 10-6 in 1991, which almost always gets you in. Seifert was 10-5 in the playoffs. he averaged a 12-4 record as 49ers head coach.

Walsh was 92-56, but if you throw out his first 2 rebuilding seasons, and the strike year in 1982 hes 81-29 in 7 seasons (after 3 were removed). he won 6 division titles in those 7 seasons, and was 10-4 in the playoffs. he averages an 11-5 record in those 7 years.

im not saying Seifert was better, Walsh probably deserves credit for 4 of the 5 super bowls, and was clearly the best of all time, but Seifert didnt just coast on Walsh's team. maybe for 1 season in 89, but after that he was on his own, and he did an outstanding job.

I recall the day they announced him 'stepping down'...I was distraught to say the least. I honestly believe they would have had at least 1 more Super Bowl under him...probably more.

I always liked George...he was a helluva d-coordinator and head coach. And yes, you could make the argument that he was given a ferrari for the '89 season...but he kept it up instead of letting it fall apart. He never let his position become bigger than the team.

Yet for all his accomplishments, you never hear his name mentioned for HOF consideration. Odd?

Siefert sucked when he didn't have the best talent in the league and an owner that spared no expense.

I apreciate him, but think he is one of the more overrated HC's in Niner history.

I mean look at the talent, and the assistant coaches that he had to work with, how could he have NOT be successful?

Originally posted by WINiner:
Siefert sucked when he didn't have the best talent in the league and an owner that spared no expense.

I apreciate him, but think he is one of the more overrated HC's in Niner history.

I mean look at the talent, and the assistant coaches that he had to work with, how could he have NOT be successful?

Nah, I think the truest measure of Siefert's legacy was Superbowl 29. -You have to remember that we had lost 50% of our talent (not to mention o-line/d-line experience/wealth) during the early 90's, entering a 'flux' rebuild stage, and was having to make due with an inexperienced/mediocre 'foundation'. -Until Carmen Policy gave him a license to spend and bring in 'his' own players onto the defense (drafting Bryant Young, acquiring Sanders, and Norton).

-Steve Young's advanced development was also 'much' to do with Siefert's legacy, complimenting Steve with Shanny at OC really helped this team, as well as Steve Young's focus into maturity as a 'team player' within the WCO.

He was an awesome D coordinator (his D was top ten every year he was the DC) and a good head coach (won ten games or more every year as the 9ers HC) what doesn’t he get credit for?

Sure he benefited for taking over a HOF team from a HOF coach and having so many HOF players and assistant coaches. This is evident when he went to Carolina and had none of that and did not have a winning season in his three years as the HC there.

Good coach not great.

Originally posted by 9erfan4life:
He was an awesome D coordinator (his D was top ten every year he was the DC) and a good head coach (won ten games or more every year as the 9ers HC) what doesn’t he get credit for?

Sure he benefited for taking over a HOF team from a HOF coach and having so many HOF players and assistant coaches. This is evident when he went to Carolina and had none of that and did not have a winning season in his three years as the HC there.

Good coach not great.

Originally posted by 9erfan4life:
He was an awesome D coordinator (his D was top ten every year he was the DC) and a good head coach (won ten games or more every year as the 9ers HC) what doesn’t he get credit for?

Sure he benefited for taking over a HOF team from a HOF coach and having so many HOF players and assistant coaches. This is evident when he went to Carolina and had none of that and did not have a winning season in his three years as the HC there.

Good coach not great.

Spot on target..

I think his failure in Carolina damages his legacy.

Originally posted by WINiner:
Siefert sucked when he didn't have the best talent in the league and an owner that spared no expense.

I apreciate him, but think he is one of the more overrated HC's in Niner history.

I mean look at the talent, and the assistant coaches that he had to work with, how could he have NOT be successful?

When in the hell did he not have the best talent and an owner that spared no expense? Dude won two Superbowls in a 5 year span.

He will always stand in the shadow of Walsh. But then, he probably never would've gotten where he did without Walsh. I agree that people underestimate just how hard it is to maintain greatness and keep a team at the top the way he did. But I think we all understand that Walsh's achievement in getting the team to the top and building the organization from nothing is the greater accomplishment.

A cynic will say "All Seifert did was not mess it up." But the truth is most coaches probably would've messed it up, and very few would've been able to get the team back to the Super Bowl (and complete domination) the way he did in '94. I think that by the time Seifert retired from the 49ers, that argument had been laid to rest. The trouble is, he came back and did a face plant in Carolina. Before the Carolina experience, his place in history was secure. He had the most amazing W/L record in history, he'd done nothing but succeed at every level, and I think everyone recognized that the '94 team was his accomplishment. But in Carolina, all that slipped away and all the achievements were tarnished.

I suspect that when coaches like Bill Cowher and Jimmy Johnson turn down millions of dollars to come back, what they're thinking about is George Seifert and Chuck Noll.

Originally posted by jesserdumas2:

Originally posted by WINiner:
Siefert sucked when he didn't have the best talent in the league and an owner that spared no expense.

I apreciate him, but think he is one of the more overrated HC's in Niner history.

I mean look at the talent, and the assistant coaches that he had to work with, how could he have NOT be successful?

When in the hell did he not have the best talent and an owner that spared no expense? Dude won two Superbowls in a 5 year span.

When he was at Carolina

Originally posted by BobS:
I think his failure in Carolina damages his legacy.

I agree. I mean, a 1-15 season? vomit.

It's obvious Seifert's first Superbowl team was on Walsh's coat tail, but the 94 team was his team all the way. My biggest gripe with George was giving up on Charles Haley in 91. Shipping him to Dallas was on Carmen, but I wish Seifert could have found a way to work things out.

I also wonder how things would be today if we just let George take the Cleveland job in 89 and we went with Holmgren.

Seifert will always be the Larry Holmes of the Niners. Damn good, but too close to the flame (Ali/Walsh) for his own performance to be distinguished in its own right.

In defense of Seifert, he did start the the whole merry-go-round of defensive substituitions and defensive specialist that you see today. So when guys like Ahmad Brooks gets sacks on third downs, you can thank Seifert for that.

My only gripe with him is the 92 season, and being ousted from the playoffs by his former assistant, Holmgren, in 95 and 96.