It is currently Sat Apr 27, 2024 8:24 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:21 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 14, 2004 9:58 am
Posts: 4456
Location: @ ROH Show Near Me.
pizza_Place: Freezer.
rogers park bryan wrote:
Lovie has done a good job in his time here.

But with the possible work stoppage looming, no reason to extend him now


Theyve been in the mix for a title 3 of 7 years


Lest we forget the Jauron Wannstedt combined ONE playoff win


Agree. I still see zero evidence of him head coaching during games. But they won more this year than I expected. (What did I expect? Zarro wins)

_________________
Middle Aged Crazy, like Uncle Terry


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 8:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16485
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
jimmypasta wrote:
I think right now the Bears should dump Phillips, Angelo & Lovie & bring in a football guy to run the Bears & hire Cowher to coach the team.


FIXED.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81627
Scorehead, how many times did Cowher lose in the playoffs before he won the super bowl?


Lovie has gotten em within striking distance of a title 3 times. Lovies first seven years probably stack up against Cowhers forst 7


The ironic thing is, Cowhers successs was due in large part to the backing of the organization for 15 years and the organizational stability.


Thats an example of the stability I want, which is why id consider keeping Lovie long term.



Actually Cowhers first seven years and Lovies careers are similiar.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 10:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:56 pm
Posts: 37159
Location: ...
i'm sure during that time, there were steeler fans who wanted cowher fired at some point.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2011 11:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33018
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
If they extend him they are going to be up shit creek with no paddle. The offense needs work and Lovie doesn't know how to run it. He has an aging defense with nobody in the pipeline that he cannot run without a Peppers/Harris, Urlacher, and a decent safety. If this happens in 4 years this team will be in complete disarray.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16485
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
The Bears are a dysfunctional & odd organization. They do just enough to keep their jobs, but they will never become an elite football organization like the Steelers, Patriots or Colts unless they fire Ted Phillips & bring in a football guy to run the team, instead of an accountant. Good companies & organizations are always trying to improve & get better. The Bears are comfortable & happy being what they are. Sure, they'll have a decent year every now & then but they can not win consistently every year. I still cant understand why the McClaskeys dont have higher expectations for their business.
Lovie's head coaching performance in the NFL championship game was pathetic. He is who we have always thought he was.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:11 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:22 pm
Posts: 1987
Spaulding wrote:
with nobody in the pipeline.......... If this happens in 4 years this team will be in complete disarray.


If Angelo is picking the talent, this could be the case no matter who is coaching.

Look at this year. Sure, they greatly exceeded most people's expectations, but yesterday was their chance. The defense is getting old and even the brutal o-line's best 2 players are old. Look at all the starters and tell me who you think has a really good chance of playing better next year than they did this year? Webb (almost by default)? Anyone else you'd bet on?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 7:46 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:03 pm
Posts: 4944
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
When can we get a white coach?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 8:04 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 20, 2009 3:10 pm
Posts: 9673
Location: Schaumpton
pizza_Place: Piece Pizza and Brewery
Spaulding wrote:
If they extend him they are going to be up shit creek with no paddle. The offense needs work and Lovie doesn't know how to run it. He has an aging defense with nobody in the pipeline that he cannot run without a Peppers/Harris, Urlacher, and a decent safety. If this happens in 4 years this team will be in complete disarray.



A lot of HC's focus primarily on one side of the ball or the other. They then hire someone they trust to run the other. Aging defense? No one in the pipeline? Don't blame Lovie for that.


In an ideal world, sure I'd love to let him go into next season w/o an extension and see how we come out next year. However, with the way of the land in the NFL and the 'just how things work' etiquette, the Bears should slap at least another 2 years onto his deal

_________________
Team Cutler.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:07 am 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2005 6:03 pm
Posts: 4944
See, this is why Spaulding is one of my favorite posters out here.

Why would you extend Lovie? Do you really trust him to develop a massive youth movement? Do you really want to watch him screw up the clock some more, or drive you nuts with his challenges?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80164
casual fan wrote:
Spaulding wrote:
with nobody in the pipeline.......... If this happens in 4 years this team will be in complete disarray.


If Angelo is picking the talent, this could be the case no matter who is coaching.

Look at this year. Sure, they greatly exceeded most people's expectations, but yesterday was their chance. The defense is getting old and even the brutal o-line's best 2 players are old. Look at all the starters and tell me who you think has a really good chance of playing better next year than they did this year? Webb (almost by default)? Anyone else you'd bet on?


I expect Forte and Knox to be better, which is pretty significant. Forte played at a Pro Bowl level the second half of the season.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
good dolphin wrote:
Douchebag wrote:
[ Nobody thought this team would be even relevant this season, and they were a drive away from possibly going to the Super Bowl. You have to give him some credit. ?


I do give him credit. He gets to keep his job at 5.5 million next year. He hasn't earned job security.


Lame duck coaches usually work out great for a team. This talk of not extending him is silly to me. The guy took a team that many here predicted to win 4 or 5 games to the NFC championship game and even with all of the things that went wrong in the game they still had a chance to beat a Packers team with superior talent (even with the injuries). You can say he was lucky but luck doesn't win you 7 to 8 more games than everyone thinks you will win. If you honestly look around the league you won't find 10 coaches that are better than him. He has raised the expectations around here. A bad season is now 7-9 or 9-7. He's done all of this IMO without a lot of talent. Give him a little talent and he usually gets you a bye in the playoffs. Adding a year or 2 to his contract gives the team some stability. It allows him to still control the locker room.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:39 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 10:57 am
Posts: 2104
Location: NW side
pizza_Place: Benny's on 26th in Berwyn
The gold standard in the NFL is the championship - I think that the Bears organization has been more than fair to Lovie, and I don't see him going looking anywhere else if management doesn't extend his contract this offseason. It's obviously inevitable that a deal is going to get done, but I won't be happy if they give him more than an extra two years. You still have to win in order to keep your job in this league...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:43 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33018
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
HOVA wrote:
Lame duck coaches usually work out great for a team. This talk of not extending him is silly to me. The guy took a team that many here predicted to win 4 or 5 games to the NFC championship game and even with all of the things that went wrong in the game they still had a chance to beat a Packers team with superior talent (even with the injuries). You can say he was lucky but luck doesn't win you 7 to 8 more games than everyone thinks you will win. If you honestly look around the league you won't find 10 coaches that are better than him. He has raised the expectations around here. A bad season is now 7-9 or 9-7. He's done all of this IMO without a lot of talent. Give him a little talent and he usually gets you a bye in the playoffs. Adding a year or 2 to his contract gives the team some stability. It allows him to still control the locker room.


A lot of the things that went wrong are his fault.

I think he has taken them as far as they can go. Glad you are happy with 7-9. I'm not.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 10:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Spaulding wrote:
HOVA wrote:
Lame duck coaches usually work out great for a team. This talk of not extending him is silly to me. The guy took a team that many here predicted to win 4 or 5 games to the NFC championship game and even with all of the things that went wrong in the game they still had a chance to beat a Packers team with superior talent (even with the injuries). You can say he was lucky but luck doesn't win you 7 to 8 more games than everyone thinks you will win. If you honestly look around the league you won't find 10 coaches that are better than him. He has raised the expectations around here. A bad season is now 7-9 or 9-7. He's done all of this IMO without a lot of talent. Give him a little talent and he usually gets you a bye in the playoffs. Adding a year or 2 to his contract gives the team some stability. It allows him to still control the locker room.


A lot of the things that went wrong are his fault.

I think he has taken them as far as they can go. Glad you are happy with 7-9. I'm not.


Ultimately when things go wrong on the field it does fall on the head coach. That being said there is no way you're being reasonable if you blame him for everything that goes bad and also refuse to give him credit when things go well. No one said 7-9 or 9-7 was good. It isn't. It's what many would call mediocre. Those were teams that had a lot of injuries and not a lot of talent. While I don't like the records I believe just getting some of those teams that far was a hell of a job. There are a lot of teams that missed the playoffs this year that had better talent than the Bears. The only team in the playoffs with less talent was the Seahawks. The dislike for this guy after nearly taking a team with not a lot of talent to the SB is really insane.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:09 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80164
HOVA wrote:
good dolphin wrote:
Douchebag wrote:
[ Nobody thought this team would be even relevant this season, and they were a drive away from possibly going to the Super Bowl. You have to give him some credit. ?


I do give him credit. He gets to keep his job at 5.5 million next year. He hasn't earned job security.


Lame duck coaches usually work out great for a team. This talk of not extending him is silly to me. The guy took a team that many here predicted to win 4 or 5 games to the NFC championship game and even with all of the things that went wrong in the game they still had a chance to beat a Packers team with superior talent (even with the injuries). You can say he was lucky but luck doesn't win you 7 to 8 more games than everyone thinks you will win. If you honestly look around the league you won't find 10 coaches that are better than him. He has raised the expectations around here. A bad season is now 7-9 or 9-7. He's done all of this IMO without a lot of talent. Give him a little talent and he usually gets you a bye in the playoffs. Adding a year or 2 to his contract gives the team some stability. It allows him to still control the locker room.


He took them to the Super Bowl as a lame duck coach.

People continue to hold up this year as a testament to Lovie's abilities. I say look at what he has done over the life of the current contract he is working under. How many times have the Bears been burned by overestimating coaches at the end of a good year. It happened with Juron and it happened with Lovie before this year.

I would place Lovie as tied for the 5th best coach in the NFC behind Reid, Coughlin, Smith, Peyton and tied with Shanahan. I'll have to think about the AFC a little more but off the top of my head Belicek, Tomlin and Harbaugh are all better in my opinion.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:14 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
GD he had another year at $1.5M left on his deal.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 11:52 am 
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 2:22 pm
Posts: 1987
good dolphin wrote:
casual fan wrote:
Spaulding wrote:
with nobody in the pipeline.......... If this happens in 4 years this team will be in complete disarray.


If Angelo is picking the talent, this could be the case no matter who is coaching.

Look at this year. Sure, they greatly exceeded most people's expectations, but yesterday was their chance. The defense is getting old and even the brutal o-line's best 2 players are old. Look at all the starters and tell me who you think has a really good chance of playing better next year than they did this year? Webb (almost by default)? Anyone else you'd bet on?


I expect Forte and Knox to be better, which is pretty significant. Forte played at a Pro Bowl level the second half of the season.


Those are the two I thought about as well. Strictly by the numbers though, I wonder. I don't know if I would bet the over on 1,600 total yards on Forte or 1,000 yards on Knox. Like everything with the offense, it could come down to what the o-line looks like next season.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 12:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
I thought the O-line was good during the playoffs. Kruetz getting older is the biggest problem. The offense will have to carry this team going forward if they are going to win it all. I think the defense will start to decline.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 2:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 17, 2005 2:35 pm
Posts: 80164
casual fan wrote:
[I expect Forte and Knox to be better, which is pretty significant. Forte played at a Pro Bowl level the second half of the season.


Those are the two I thought about as well. Strictly by the numbers though, I wonder. I don't know if I would bet the over on 1,600 total yards on Forte or 1,000 yards on Knox. Like everything with the offense, it could come down to what the o-line looks like next season.[/quote]

Start with the understanding that it will be no worse than this year.

I have a feeling Forte explodes next year. 1,200 rushing yards is obviously possible as it has already been achieved. 1,300-1,400 with 500 receiving yards is a distinct possiblity.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 22, 2006 6:46 pm
Posts: 33018
pizza_Place: Gioacchino's
HOVA wrote:
Ultimately when things go wrong on the field it does fall on the head coach. That being said there is no way you're being reasonable if you blame him for everything that goes bad and also refuse to give him credit when things go well. No one said 7-9 or 9-7 was good. It isn't. It's what many would call mediocre. Those were teams that had a lot of injuries and not a lot of talent. While I don't like the records I believe just getting some of those teams that far was a hell of a job. There are a lot of teams that missed the playoffs this year that had better talent than the Bears. The only team in the playoffs with less talent was the Seahawks. The dislike for this guy after nearly taking a team with not a lot of talent to the SB is really insane.


Whose fault is the no talent part? Angelo is partially to blame, but JA is not the reason we had AA, Manumaleuna, Mark Anderson over Brown, Ron Turner revisited, or the entire reason they kept drafting DL. Todd Collins should not be on a roster. He has had more control after the superbowl appearance and they look worse.

When I said the other day that he gets a lot out of his less talented players I was wrong. I think they play hard for him but I don't think he has ever developed anybody. Maybe Bowman.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 25, 2011 4:48 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB

Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 4:29 pm
Posts: 33838
Here's the point many are missing. Even if we let him go into his last year of his contract and the Bears have a bad season, they'll still reup him. They like him. Virginia lovies him. If they didn't fire him this past year, they won't fire him one season removed from the NFC championship game. They like the way he handles the media. They like that he's not a screamer and yeller. The Bears also like that he's a non drinker and a devout Christian. These things are important to the McCaskey's. We had Ditka but they'll never go back to his kind again. Never. If one day they are forced to fire Lovie, they'd look for another Lovie.

Since they want to keep him, it's easier to extend him now rather then take the hate from fans of extending him next year after a possible losing season. Cuz after a losing season fans will just know he's not gonna be fired after getting an extension. Get it? Bottom line is they like him and it doesn't matter what anybody else thinks.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 9:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Spaulding wrote:
HOVA wrote:
Ultimately when things go wrong on the field it does fall on the head coach. That being said there is no way you're being reasonable if you blame him for everything that goes bad and also refuse to give him credit when things go well. No one said 7-9 or 9-7 was good. It isn't. It's what many would call mediocre. Those were teams that had a lot of injuries and not a lot of talent. While I don't like the records I believe just getting some of those teams that far was a hell of a job. There are a lot of teams that missed the playoffs this year that had better talent than the Bears. The only team in the playoffs with less talent was the Seahawks. The dislike for this guy after nearly taking a team with not a lot of talent to the SB is really insane.


Whose fault is the no talent part? Angelo is partially to blame, but JA is not the reason we had AA, Manumaleuna, Mark Anderson over Brown, Ron Turner revisited, or the entire reason they kept drafting DL. Todd Collins should not be on a roster. He has had more control after the superbowl appearance and they look worse.

When I said the other day that he gets a lot out of his less talented players I was wrong. I think they play hard for him but I don't think he has ever developed anybody. Maybe Bowman.


It's obvious you've made your mind up a while ago. Lovie is to blame for everything. They win in spite of Lovie. Lovie eats babies. I get it. Reality is Lovie has a say in the final roster but Lovie doesn't get to draft players or make financial decisions. He can suggest a need to Angelo but he doesn't get to pick the players. They keep drafting DL because that is a very important piece in Lovie's scheme. Unfortunately the guys they draft generally suck. Lovie has guys playing key roles on his team that probably aren't talented enough to be in the NFL. What player has left the Bears and went on to have success with another coach? No one. Therefore how can you say Lovie and his staff isn't coaching them up? As far as Collins I believe Martz had more to do with that. For whatever reason he just didn't trust Hanie. He felt better with a veteran guy and Lovie allowed him to do his job.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16485
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
HOVA wrote:
Spaulding wrote:
HOVA wrote:
Ultimately when things go wrong on the field it does fall on the head coach. That being said there is no way you're being reasonable if you blame him for everything that goes bad and also refuse to give him credit when things go well. No one said 7-9 or 9-7 was good. It isn't. It's what many would call mediocre. Those were teams that had a lot of injuries and not a lot of talent. While I don't like the records I believe just getting some of those teams that far was a hell of a job. There are a lot of teams that missed the playoffs this year that had better talent than the Bears. The only team in the playoffs with less talent was the Seahawks. The dislike for this guy after nearly taking a team with not a lot of talent to the SB is really insane.


Whose fault is the no talent part? Angelo is partially to blame, but JA is not the reason we had AA, Manumaleuna, Mark Anderson over Brown, Ron Turner revisited, or the entire reason they kept drafting DL. Todd Collins should not be on a roster. He has had more control after the superbowl appearance and they look worse.

When I said the other day that he gets a lot out of his less talented players I was wrong. I think they play hard for him but I don't think he has ever developed anybody. Maybe Bowman.


It's obvious you've made your mind up a while ago. Lovie is to blame for everything. They win in spite of Lovie. Lovie eats babies. I get it. Reality is Lovie has a say in the final roster but Lovie doesn't get to draft players or make financial decisions. He can suggest a need to Angelo but he doesn't get to pick the players. They keep drafting DL because that is a very important piece in Lovie's scheme. Unfortunately the guys they draft generally suck. Lovie has guys playing key roles on his team that probably aren't talented enough to be in the NFL. What player has left the Bears and went on to have success with another coach? No one. Therefore how can you say Lovie and his staff isn't coaching them up? As far as Collins I believe Martz had more to do with that. For whatever reason he just didn't trust Hanie. He felt better with a veteran guy and Lovie allowed him to do his job.


Yea. The McClaskeys suck as owners & business managers. They would rather be comfortable than get serious about building a top notch organization. The current Bears organization is a dysfunctional mess & they are a laughing stock around the league. This entire off season will include the festering of the Cutler situation, which was a PR disaster for the Bears due to Lovies injury paranoia.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Jan 26, 2011 1:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:03 pm
Posts: 42982
Scorehead wrote:
This entire off season will include the festering of the Cutler situation, which was a PR disaster for the Bears due to Lovies injury paranoia.

It's a PR disaster because the average sports fan is a fucking idiot.

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 55 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group