Cliff Christl's interview with Dick Corrick, former player personnel director

[Carolina_Packer]

http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-cliffs-notes/article-1/Dick-Corrick-John-Madden-topped-Packers’-list-of-coaching-candidates-in-1984/e05f5d4a-451f-4d97-88bd-c59b15ba96cd

I know many on the board are old enough to recall the leaner times of the 70's and 80's when Bart took over as HC and GM with one arm tied behind his back because of the John Hadl trade made by Dan Devine. Dick Corrick was one of Bart's closest advisors during Bart's coaching tenure. His insights are very fascinating to me, as a fan, like many of you, who suffered through a lot of head-scratching decisions, like Rich Campbell being picked over Ronnie Lott in 1981. To this day, I still can't believe that happened.

It's one thing to be bad and then to have personnel people who have good people under them to help dig their way out in future drafts. There was no free agency until 1993, so what you drafted, traded for and signed off the street or waiver wire was who you had to play with. To be a bad team that makes poor choices, only compounds issues and keeps you bad. This article takes me back to so many of those bad/unlucky decisions.

-Changing to the 3-4 without having the proper personnel was a mistake.

-Drafting Rich Campbell over Ronnie Lott...ouch.

-Drafting Steve Atkins over Joe Montana when the Packers didn't need (at the time of the draft) another running back as they had just drafted Eddie Lee Ivery.

The list goes on. I think Bart was just too loyal to people who gave him bad advice and the article makes Judge Parins sound a bit like a fly by the seat of his pants kook. Bart was in over his head, unfortunately. I can't believe the team took the bait on the 24 hour rule to hire Gregg. I had never heard that one. You'd think the brass would have learned their lesson from trying to re-capture the 60's again. Once Bart was let go, they should have looked to go in a decidedly different direction, but didn't.

Great article by Cliff.

[Fritz]

Great stuff there. And I'd agree with your assessment - I believe Starr was in over his head as a GM and coach. Man, those were bad times. I remember them well. In those pre-internet days, the only way I had to follow the Packers was to cut out from the newspaper the list of the Packers's draft picks, then look for them the few times the Packers came on television (usually only twice a year, when they played the Lions), or read the brief team updates that were given in The Sporting News, to which I subscribed for several years.

It sounds like the whole organization was just a mess, thanks to the (lack of) leadership at the very top - Judge Parrins sounds like a complete amateur.

[Pugger]

This article is exhibit A on why the HC shouldn't also be the GM.

[KYPack]

Ah the Montana draft.

The guy they picked in the 3rd (NT Charles Johnson) was just barely a guy. A so-so NT. Packer scout Red Cochran was adamant the Pack should draft Joe Montana. The story came out that Zeke worked Montana and wasn't all that impressed. Cochran thought he had convinced Starr that Montana was a steal in the 3rd and we would draft Joe Cool. When the Packers picked Johnson, Red swore and tossed his clipboard across the room.

In Starr's book, he called the Johnson pick the biggest mistake of his GM career and admitted it was his biggest regret.

[Fritz]

Guess ol' Zeke doesn't come off too well as a judge of talent here, either.

And the game has changed. These days, guys with somewhat iffy college resumes, like EJ Manuel and that other what's-his-name, Gino Vanelli or whatever, come to mind here. Both guys whose college resumes lacked somewhat but were seen as having some potential. A guy with Montana's slightly sketchy college resume would never, ever last through the third round today.

It wasn't as much a quarterback's league back then. Witness the Herschel Walker trade. But Joe Cool helped change that.

Lots of blame to be passed around. A few what-ifs here and there, and Starr could've come off as also one of the great coaches or GM's of the time - but being Bart, he didn't have the makeup to make those what-ifs happen.

[Carolina_Packer]

Was there ever a draft during Starr's tenure where you though he nailed it? I think generally there were more question marks about decisions made while looking around the league seeing players for whom the team passed on like Montana and Lott, as well as bad luck drafting Eddie Lee Ivery where he gets hurt, or Bruce Clark to anchor the 3-4 NT, and him not signing and going to Canada. Then there were curious drafts where they draft multiple LB's in a row, multiple DE's in a row, multiple RB's in a row, and in the article, Corrick's comments were interesting where he acknowledged that they didn't need to draft two running backs in a row in 1979 with Ivery and Atkins, but Atkins was the highest rated guy on their draft board at the time of the pick. I don't know if teams tried to move back and acquire extra picks back in that day, but that's the perfect scenario to do that. Perhaps there wasn't that much flexibility back in the day when making picks, but, you still have your judgement, and if you don't need a second running back, and you like Joe Montana, sure, you might get a few head scratches for picking him higher than anyone else, but if he goes on to have the kind of career he had, then he's the original Brett Favre to pull the team out of doldrums. Now, of course they would have still had the same players on the rest of the roster, and the same decision makers at the top, so who knows how well he might have done with the Packers back at that time.

[Patler]

Was there ever a draft during Starr's tenure where you though he nailed it? I think generally there were more question marks about decisions made while looking around the league seeing players for whom the team passed on like Montana and Lott, as well as bad luck drafting Eddie Lee Ivery where he gets hurt, or Bruce Clark to anchor the 3-4 NT, and him not signing and going to Canada. Then there were curious drafts where they draft multiple LB's in a row, multiple DE's in a row, multiple RB's in a row, and in the article, Corrick's comments were interesting where he acknowledged that they didn't need to draft two running backs in a row in 1979 with Ivery and Atkins, but Atkins was the highest rated guy on their draft board at the time of the pick. I don't know if teams tried to move back and acquire extra picks back in that day, but that's the perfect scenario to do that. Perhaps there wasn't that much flexibility back in the day when making picks, but, you still have your judgement, and if you don't need a second running back, and you like Joe Montana, sure, you might get a few head scratches for picking him higher than anyone else, but if he goes on to have the kind of career he had, then he's the original Brett Favre to pull the team out of doldrums. Now, of course they would have still had the same players on the rest of the roster, and the same decision makers at the top, so who knows how well he might have done with the Packers back at that time.

!978 looked good right from the start. 1977 wasn't bad either.

[Carolina_Packer]

!978 looked good right from the start. 1977 wasn't bad either.

Then the 1979 season happened! :whaa:

[Fritz]

Ah the Montana draft.

The guy they picked in the 3rd (NT Charles Johnson) was just barely a guy. A so-so NT. Packer scout Red Cochran was adamant the Pack should draft Joe Montana. The story came out that Zeke worked Montana and wasn't all that impressed. Cochran thought he had convinced Starr that Montana was a steal in the 3rd and we would draft Joe Cool. When the Packers picked Johnson, Red swore and tossed his clipboard across the room.

In Starr's book, he called the Johnson pick the biggest mistake of his GM career and admitted it was his biggest regret.


Ted Hendricks was an absolute monster and a madman - the Mad Stork. Why they didn't meet his contract demands in a non-sal cap era is hard to understand. He made that defense intimidating.

Why, Bart, why?

[Patler]

Ted Hendricks was an absolute monster and a madman - the Mad Stork. Why they didn't meet his contract demands in a non-sal cap era is hard to understand. He made that defense intimidating.

Why, Bart, why?

Hendricks had signed a futures contract with the WFL and was in the final year of his NFL contract, which was the only reason GB got him in the first place. It was assumed he was leaving for the WFL at the end of the year. The WFL went bankrupt, and as I recall Hendricks made it clear to GB that he had no desire to come back there. Starr traded his rights for a couple 1st round draft picks as I recall.

It was a situation that needed to be cleaned up, and at least Starr got decent value in return.

[Fritz]

I thought e article mentioned that Hendricks actually was bargaining with Green Bay for a time. Maybe not.

[Patler]

I thought e article mentioned that Hendricks actually was bargaining with Green Bay for a time. Maybe not.

My recollection is that it was something like this:

"OK, I'll resign with GB for the largest NFL contract ever, 100% guaranteed."
"For the Raiders I will sign a great LB contract, and with more standard terms"

The more I think on this, I think it was during the time when the league determined appropriate compensation after a FA left. FAs weren't yet completely "free". Residual rights remained in their former team, and the acquiring team paid whatever compensation the league determined was fair. It wasn't really a trade negotiated by the teams either. The league awarded compensation to the Packers after the deal was done, and as I recall the Raiders weren't real happy with it.