The sorry years

[Mondio]

Absolutely. Harlan did so much with so little fanfare to keep this franchise going strong.Murphy is doing a fine job following in his footsteps.

I mean, yeah, he hired Ron Wolf, but he was one of the top dogs in the organization for a long time, and for most of his time, they were a joke of the league. Not sure what all of his duties were, but he was at or near the top of the decision making process for the GB Packers for a lot more than Ron Wolf and he followed that up with making Mike Sherman HC and GM.

He hired Wolf, but Wolf did the heavy lifting and so did Holmgren

 

[TJV]

I mean, yeah, he hired Ron Wolf, but he was one of the top dogs in the organization for a long time, and for most of his time, they were a joke of the league. Not sure what all of his duties were, but he was at or near the top of the decision making process for the GB Packers for a lot more than Ron Wolf and he followed that up with making Mike Sherman HC and GM.

He hired Wolf, but Wolf did the heavy lifting and so did Holmgren

I disagree. Harlan became president and CEO on June 5, 1989. Previously Robert Parins was president for about 7 years. In November of 1991, Harlan hired Wolf. But more importantly he changed the structure of the organization. When Harlan took over, HC Infante and Tom Braatz, the VP of football operations, shared power with interference from the executive board. Braatz wasn’t given the full power his title indicated because in ’87 Parins didn’t want to appoint him Gregg’s boss. One of the candidates for the job Braatz accepted in 1987 was Ron Wolf. I heard Harlan in a radio interview quite a while ago relate that he talked to Wolf at the time and as they drove Wolf back to the airport, Wolf told Harlan he wouldn’t accept the job because of the power-sharing arrangement. (That was an indication of Wolf’s intelligence and patience.)

So Harlan didn’t have control of the organization until he became president in June of ’89. Infante was going into his second year as HC and was about to embark on that “majik” season but by the middle of the ’91 season it was obvious Infante wasn’t the answer and Harlan decided to do more than just replace the HC and/or pseudo GM: He decided one football man was needed to run the football side of the organization. No more shared power and interference from the executive board would be either eliminated or minimized. One man had to be in control with the ability to fire and hire the HC, the employees in the personnel department, and the scouts. So he fired Braatz and left the fate of Infante in the hands of the new VP of Football Operations/GM. He had a handful of candidates for the job but his first priority was to hire Wolf, who at the time was director of player personnel of the Jets. Because Harlan gave Wolf total control of football operations, Wolf accepted the job. Wolf wouldn’t have come to Green Bay unless Harlan first fixed the organizational structure and if Wolf wouldn't have accepted the job, someone else would have had total control, a very important change IMO.

Harlan did make mistakes. In addition to “falling in love” with Mike Sherman to the degree he was unwilling to hire a VP/GM who would be his boss when Wolf left (kind of repeating the mistake Parins made regarding Braatz and Gregg), he was complicit to some degree in anointing John Jones to replace him in 2007 (which caused an employee “revolt”). Harlan did fix the mistake of elevating Sherman with the hiring of Thompson (who was required to retain Sherman for one season as a condition of his taking the job), and the hiring of Murphy fixed the Jones situation.

But Harlan deserves credit for two huge accomplishments in Packers history: Fixing and then “re-fixing” the structure of the organization and his campaign for the referendum to fund the renovation of Lambeau Field. He campaigned tirelessly: He'd greet factory workers at 5AM and campaign in restaurants and coffee shops around town. He went door-to-door and Harlan famously accepted phone calls from fans during his entire tenure. He was convinced the renovation kept the Packers competitive financially, an argument I agreed with at the time.

Weigh the positives and negatives of Harlan’s career as president and CEO and it’s not even close. Of course we can’t know what would have happened in the past if one event were changed. But IMO without Harlan it’s very unlikely Wolf would have ever come to Green Bay. No Wolf, no Holmgren; No Wolf, no Favre, etc. And who knows about the referendum which passed 53% to 47%. Considering the percentage of Packers fans in Brown county, hardly a slam dunk.

 

[Mondio]

he hired Wolf, Wolf and Holmgren built the team. He deserves some credit, but I wouldn't make him out to be more than he was. I don't know how likely or unlikely it would have been we would have hired Wolf. Seems he was a traditional football guy, I think the opportunity at resurrecting a storied franchise was appealing to him.

I'm not sure what his effect was on the referendum, I'm just appalled the people of brown county could be so completely short sighted that it wasn't a slam dunk with 100% of the voters supporting it. a half freaking percent sales tax on a team that generates millions and millions and millions every year for that city in revenues, tax base, and JOBS for the people that live there. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. I'd hate to think what GB would be without the Packers. That city has its share of problems already.

 

[El Guapo]

You're right that the sales tax has helped out the Packers and Green Bay. I believe that the tax is set to expire this year in fact. There are some people (and I'm one of them) that are opposed to public funding of sports stadiums, which is why I loved the concept of the Packers "stock" sale. I bought a share to put my money where my mouth was regarding public funding.

As for Harlan, you're using the same argument that some use to belittle Thompson's role in the Packers success - he got lucky with Rodgers and everything else is a result of that luck. Harlan did a lot of work behind the scenes to make the Packers successful. Even if his one act was to hire Wolf, who hired Holmgren, who ..... (blah blah blah) ..... then he deserves credit, and more than just some. Given Harlan credit for everything that he did does belittle anything that Wolf, Holmgren, Reggie White, or the team trainer did doing that time. It was a team effort and trying to pick apart the individual variables for targeted merit is a fools exercise.

 

[Mondio]

why shouldn't the city of green bay and their population help fund the stadium? That city is nothing to write home about, take away what the Packers Generate for that city and they'd be even less. The fact they didn't want a half percent sales tax to help keep a giant revenue generator in terms of jobs for the citizens and tax base for the city tells me a good portion of the residents don't value big picture visions.

and i'm not belittling anyone. I don't think Harlan should get any more credit than he does. It would be like me saying Wolf got lucky with "Favre" and everything else is the result of that luck and i most definitely am NOT saying that. Thompson, like Wolf have worked within the rules they have to work with extremely well in building good teams capable of competing in December and January when it counts. Just like I think Mark Murphy is doing ok, that's about all I thought Harlan did. He hired the guy that built the team. I think the success built by Wolf and Holmgren had more to do with funding that stadium than early morning meet and greets by Harlan.

The guy was part of the success, i recognize that, but when writing the story about the 90's Packers, he's a part of a chapter and names like Wolf, Holmgren, Favre and Reggie are the book.

 

[sschind]

why shouldn't the city of green bay and their population help fund the stadium? That city is nothing to write home about, take away what the Packers Generate for that city and they'd be even less. The fact they didn't want a half percent sales tax to help keep a giant revenue generator in terms of jobs for the citizens and tax base for the city tells me a good portion of the residents don't value big picture visions.

In all honesty do you really think there would be no Packers in Green Bay today had the referendum not passed. I think a lot of people were thinking why do we need this its not like they are going anywhere and that maybe one reason the vote was closer than one might expect.

No one can say for sure what the state of the Packers would be today. It may be safe to assume it may not be quite a rosy as it is had not the extra revenue stream been added but I think we would still have Green Bay Packer football and the stadium would still sell out and the city would still be benefiting hugely by the Packers presence. when you have that "guarantee" its not too difficult to see why some voters might not want the extra burden.

I'm not saying I feel that way just that some fans might.

 

[Mondio]

I never said there would be no Packers in GB if they had not passed the referendum. I said it showed a good portion of that city is extremely short sighted when it comes to what that team means to the city. The economic impact that the Green Bay Packers has on Brown county is probably exponentially larger to the citizens than their half percent sales tax they had to contribute to the funding. A lot of which was paid for people from outside Green Bay itself anyway. just in back to school shopping, GB draws from an area much, much larger than Brown county as there isn't much once you head north and west till Wausau.

A winning and prominent team is very profitable to the city, a little stadium renovation with a half percent sales tax from the steel roofless shed it was before was the least they could do.

 

[TJV]

... tells me a good portion of the residents don't value big picture visions. ... I don't think Harlan should get any more credit than he does.

It’s funny you mention the big picture – you are missing the big picture regarding Harlan. When Harlan created the VP of football operations/GM job it was the first time that position existed in Green Bay: Someone in charge of football operations who was not also HC. If Harlan would have done the same thing Parins did when he took over for Olejniczak – stick with the status quo - it’s extremely likely Wolf never would have come to Green Bay.

And the more you argue about the short-sightedness of the population of Brown County, the more valuable Harlan’s role in getting the referendum passed.

 

[Mondio]

You're right, Harlan should have a statue and streets named after him. He wasn't exactly the first person to employ a GM separate from a head coach. Such a visionary.

 

[yooperpackfan]

I never said there would be no Packers in GB if they had not passed the referendum. I said it showed a good portion of that city is extremely short sighted when it comes to what that team means to the city. The economic impact that the Green Bay Packers has on Brown county is probably exponentially larger to the citizens than their half percent sales tax they had to contribute to the funding. A lot of which was paid for people from outside Green Bay itself anyway. just in back to school shopping, GB draws from an area much, much larger than Brown county as there isn't much once you head north and west till Wausau.

A winning and prominent team is very profitable to the city, a little stadium renovation with a half percent sales tax from the steel roofless shed it was before was the least they could do.

"steel roofless shed", shame on you for dissing the sacred ground of Lambeau Field!

 

[El Guapo]

Karma has a funny way of working into things

 

[TJV]

You're right, Harlan should have a statue and streets named after him. He wasn't exactly the first person to employ a GM separate from a head coach. Such a visionary.

Smart *** reply aside, you seem to be struggling with the concept of cause and effect. You go from posting you aren’t “sure what all of (Harlan’s) duties were” before he became president (implying the dark ages were partly his fault when he wasn’t in charge) to posting you don’t know how Harlan’s organizational change affected Wolf's decision to take the job, to posting you’re not sure what effect Harlan had on the referendum passing, yet you’re certain Harlan doesn’t deserve much credit. We agree on one thing: You don’t know very much about it. And you obviously don’t let the facts get in the way of your opinions.

 

[Mondio]

speaking of smart *** replies, anyway. Harlan was part of the decision making "group" earlier in his career. Yes or yes?? GB did not have a person like Wolf or even a position Wolf could take and instead they had a different structure, yes, or yes? You don't think he had his hand in lots of decisions BEFORE Wolf arrived on the scene? Anyway, I get it, you think the book should be about Harlan. I tend to think he played a small part. An important one, yes, but in the grand scheme of things, this story is about Wolf, Favre, Holmgren, Reggie and many others.

I didn't say I didn't know how his change in the organizational aspect affected Wolf's decision to come here. I said he did something many teams have done before and it was just as likely Wolf said he wanted control of roster decisions and if he wanted him to make it happen, as it was Harlan had some vision in his sleep and turned the franchise around. I don't think he did anything revolutionary.

as for the effect Harlan had on the referendum, I tend to think the Green Bay Packers winning had more to do with it than his early morning meetings. You have proof to the contrary? LOL.

It's not like I dislike the man, I just don't think the 90's Packers are a result of Bob Harlan. I think they're a result of many other much more important people.

 

[TJV]

Harlan was part of the decision making "group" earlier in his career. Yes or yes??

Harlan was one of many but Parins was in charge – Harlan couldn’t have made the change until 1989 when he was in charge.

I didn't say I didn't know how his change in the organizational aspect affected Wolf's decision to come here.

No, what you posted was: “I don't know how likely or unlikely it would have been we would have hired Wolf. Seems he was a traditional football guy, I think the opportunity at resurrecting a storied franchise was appealing to him.” If that were true, why didn’t Wolf take the job in 1987?

GB did not have a person like Wolf or even a position Wolf could take and instead they had a different structure…

That’s the point. What were the chances of a change if Parins remained president? Zero or zero? Without Harlan’s change no Wolf, without Wolf… See, that’s cause and effect. Of course Wolf and Holmgren played a huge part, but they were in Green Bay because of Harlan. And of course other teams hired men to control football operations but that wasn’t the case in Green Bay since Lombardi left.

as for the effect Harlan had on the referendum, I tend to think the Green Bay Packers winning had more to do with it than his early morning meetings. You have proof to the contrary? LOL.

I don’t know how much you were paying attention during that time – from all you don’t know, I’m guessing not much. Of course it wasn’t Harlan alone, but he played a huge role.

 

[Mondio]

my goodness, he was with the org since the 70's. He was top 3 or better in the "organizational hierarchy" for much of it before '89. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know the Packers sucked for much of that time, minus a strike year playoff game, and that something should should change. Gee thank Harlan for your wicked insight and prophetic visions and prompltly following it up with Mike Sherman LOL. maybe he should have done his job better then and fostered some communication between Holmgren and Wolf??? Maybe?

you and your "don't know". YOU don't know either. You have an opinion that Harlan was a much bigger player in all of this than I do. He was part of a losing organization for a long, long time as one of the decision makers. he hired Wolf and Wold did the rest.

 

[TJV]

Apparently you don't know what being a president of an organization means. Shortly after he took control things changed. And yes, he made a mistake with Sherman, as I detailed above.

maybe he should have done his job better then and fostered some communication between Holmgren and Wolf??? Maybe?

Like what? Tell Holmgren to control his massive ego? Tell Wolf to retire before he was ready? There's more brilliant insight on your part.

You can have the last word on this - you're just not worth the trouble.

 

[Sky King]

As an astute administrator, Harlan recognized that football operations needed autonomy from meddling by the Board and others, including himself. He picked the best man for the job who also picked the best man for the job, and so on. Then he got out of their way and let them do what they did best. Several of the contributions to this thread have refreshed my memories of all that. Thanks to the insightful posters above.

 

[profile_removed]

I missed the 70's primarily because I was too young and hospitalized a lot as a baby, but I came along to watching the Packers in '81. My personal "low" point came in '87. We drafted Brent Fullwood in the 1st round. This being the same year Bo Jackson was drafted in approximately the 7th round. Fullwood's first touch of the season, he runs a kick off back, only to fumble the ball on the 3 yard line, and if memory serves correct it was recovered by the kicking team! Though looking back on it now I often wonder HOW we beat the Redskins (Superbowl champs) on Monday night in '83!

 

[Packerlifer]

I missed the 70's primarily because I was too young and hospitalized a lot as a baby, but I came along to watching the Packers in '81. My personal "low" point came in '87. We drafted Brent Fullwood in the 1st round. This being the same year Bo Jackson was drafted in approximately the 7th round. Fullwood's first touch of the season, he runs a kick off back, only to fumble the ball on the 3 yard line, and if memory serves correct it was recovered by the kicking team! Though looking back on it now I often wonder HOW we beat the Redskins (Superbowl champs) on Monday night in '83!

I think your memory or mine is a little hazy here. Fullwood was drafted a year after Bo Jackson. He was in fact the "successor" to Jackson at Auburn. Tampa Bay took Bo with the first overall pick in 1986 but balked at allowing him to play major league baseball as well as in the NFL. There were also some violations committed by the Bucs in dealing with him before the draft so when Jackson refused to sign with them they forfeited the pick. That allowed Al Davis of the Raiders to grab him in '87.

Teams, including the Packers, were unwilling to draft and sign a player who might not be available for half the season because of his baseball commitment. When Jackson reentered the draft in '87 Fullwood hadn't yet imploded and was a Pro Bowler in '89. His attitude caught up with him and the Packers in 1990. By then, though, it was all hindsight.

 

[PikeBadger]

speaking of smart *** replies, anyway. Harlan was part of the decision making "group" earlier in his career. Yes or yes?? GB did not have a person like Wolf or even a position Wolf could take and instead they had a different structure, yes, or yes? You don't think he had his hand in lots of decisions BEFORE Wolf arrived on the scene? Anyway, I get it, you think the book should be about Harlan. I tend to think he played a small part. An important one, yes, but in the grand scheme of things, this story is about Wolf, Favre, Holmgren, Reggie and many others.

I didn't say I didn't know how his change in the organizational aspect affected Wolf's decision to come here. I said he did something many teams have done before and it was just as likely Wolf said he wanted control of roster decisions and if he wanted him to make it happen, as it was Harlan had some vision in his sleep and turned the franchise around. I don't think he did anything revolutionary.

as for the effect Harlan had on the referendum, I tend to think the Green Bay Packers winning had more to do with it than his early morning meetings. You have proof to the contrary? LOL.

It's not like I dislike the man, I just don't think the 90's Packers are a result of Bob Harlan. I think they're a result of many other much more important people.

It ALWAYS starts at the top. Harlan deserves as much credit as the others. He would have certainly bore the brunt of the blame if his changes had not worked out.

 

[Mondio]

sure, because when Sherman did less with more all those years, it wasn't Favre getting the blame for INT's, or Sherman for not getting wins, the stories and blame were all about Harlan

When GB has come up short these last few years, it wasn't Murphy getting the blame, it was Ted Thompson, Mike McCarthy, Dom Capers, our offensive line, our Defense etc.

I get that all the dominos have to line up for things to go well, but i'm not one to subscribe to the line of thinking that just because you have a title or a position you've done as much as the people that have actually done the work like Wolf and Holmgren and Favre and Reggie and the rest. They don't even compare.

 

[sschind]

I never said there would be no Packers in GB if they had not passed the referendum. I said it showed a good portion of that city is extremely short sighted when it comes to what that team means to the city. The economic impact that the Green Bay Packers has on Brown county is probably exponentially larger to the citizens than their half percent sales tax they had to contribute to the funding. A lot of which was paid for people from outside Green Bay itself anyway. just in back to school shopping, GB draws from an area much, much larger than Brown county as there isn't much once you head north and west till Wausau.

A winning and prominent team is very profitable to the city, a little stadium renovation with a half percent sales tax from the steel roofless shed it was before was the least they could do.

Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. I meant it as a rhetorical question and not a question to you specifically. I agree with you I was just trying to pose a possible explanation as to why some may have been opposed.

 

[profile_removed]

I think your memory or mine is a little hazy here. Fullwood was drafted a year after Bo Jackson. He was in fact the "successor" to Jackson at Auburn. Tampa Bay took Bo with the first overall pick in 1986 but balked at allowing him to play major league baseball as well as in the NFL. There were also some violations committed by the Bucs in dealing with him before the draft so when Jackson refused to sign with them they forfeited the pick. That allowed Al Davis of the Raiders to grab him in '87.

Teams, including the Packers, were unwilling to draft and sign a player who might not be available for half the season because of his baseball commitment. When Jackson reentered the draft in '87 Fullwood hadn't yet imploded and was a Pro Bowler in '89. His attitude caught up with him and the Packers in 1990. By then, though, it was all hindsight.

Bo eventually got drafted in '87 like Fullwood. Facts remain. Had Green Bay taken a shot with Bo, he wouldn't have probably been hurt in the playoff game against Cincinnati, and who knows a 30 old Bo who slightly past his prime by age, but with less mileage on his legs in Holmgren's offense...we may have taken away one of Dallas' superbowls in the early 90's or SF's in '94, and gotten 2 or 3 in a 5 year period.

Drafting Brent Fullwood led to Darrel Thompson, and Vince Workman. Bo would've given way to Edgar, or Dorsey or both. To me that's a better bridge to Edgar and Dorsey.

 

[Shirley Waldron]

Help me