-
other then having the respect of his players Lovie leaves much to be desired. He isnt horrible but in game decisions have been a sore point of his tenure. Also the fact under Lovie we havent had a balanced attack between offense and defense shows his biggest short coming. We have always been a two phased team between defense and special teams. IDK if I can say Lovie is a top ten HC if he cant lead a balanced team.
-
-

Originally Posted by
motownbear
other then having the respect of his players Lovie leaves much to be desired. He isnt horrible but in game decisions have been a sore point of his tenure. Also the fact under Lovie we havent had a balanced attack between offense and defense shows his biggest short coming. We have always been a two phased team between defense and special teams. IDK if I can say Lovie is a top ten HC if he cant lead a balanced team.
and of those ranked above smith, reid, peyton, ryan and couglin also haven't had blanced teams either and do not find tomlin all that balanced either
-
I wasnt judging those guys just Lovie lol
-
High Fives / Like - 1 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-

Originally Posted by
motownbear
I wasnt judging those guys just Lovie lol
but when he is put into a top 10 list and judged andthose guys ahead of him, shouldn't we use the same criteria for ALL? and if the other coaches have the same deficits, it wouldn't make him fall in rankings..
-
for sure if you would like me to critique each coach I would. But to me Im interested in Lovie cause that is the one that affects my team. And to me allot of what you see in coaches success is the GM to Coach relationship. There has to be sound judgement in acquiring talent and assistant coaches by both especially when you have someone involved in that process like Lovie is. So far to me at least I have not enjoyed a Bears offense over an entire season since Lovie has been a HC. That is pretty pathetic that we can not in his amount of time coaching get a decent offense going Im sorry but that isnt top ten material in my book
-

Originally Posted by
motownbear
for sure if you would like me to critique each coach I would. But to me Im interested in Lovie cause that is the one that affects my team. And to me allot of what you see in coaches success is the GM to Coach relationship. There has to be sound judgement in acquiring talent and assistant coaches by both especially when you have someone involved in that process like Lovie is. So far to me at least I have not enjoyed a Bears offense over an entire season since Lovie has been a HC. That is pretty pathetic that we can not in his amount of time coaching get a decent offense going Im sorry but that isnt top ten material in my book
Ok that's your opinion and not going to change it, Guess disagree and because all the others have same or different 'warts", to me he is still in the top 10.. different strokes for different folks- just saying if not just talking a specific coach but a "ranking of all 32 coaches", you do have to look at all 32 not just the one for your team
-

Originally Posted by
dabears54
in 1997 cohwer went 11-5, lost in the conf champsionship 24-21 to the Sb champ bronco's.. then went 7-9,6-10 and 9-7..
after parcells won the SB in 1986 with giants- went 6-9,10-6(missed playoffs both years)
sean peyton after losing to bears in the NFC championship went 7-9 and 8-8
But regardless of that I'm not judging Lovie in comparison to anyone else. I'm judging him on his own merits alone and to me his record of success is only slightly above average and to me that doesn't get him into the top 5.
-

Originally Posted by
soulman
But regardless of that I'm not judging Lovie in comparison to anyone else. I'm judging him on his own merits alone and to me his record of success is only slightly above average and to me that doesn't get him into the top 5.
how can you "rank" anything without comparing the people in the ranking to each other? isn't that what a " ranking" all about? A comparsion to everyone else in the subset ranking?
-

Originally Posted by
dabears54
how can you "rank" anything without comparing the people in the ranking to each other? isn't that what a " ranking" all about? A comparsion to everyone else in the subset ranking?
Other then Rex Ryan do you feel he has got an ill rating? If any thing he is better then Ryan but worse then Shanahan(unless we are ignoring past accomplishments)
-

Originally Posted by
motownbear
Other then Rex Ryan do you feel he has got an ill rating? If any thing he is better then Ryan but worse then Shanahan(unless we are ignoring past accomplishments)
As said originally think #8 is fair and correct.. though with a SB WIN, he IMo would move ahead of couglin, ryan and depending on what peyton does in 2011, him also. Reid is always the tough one for me, he's very good "O" coach, but relies too much on the passing game and can't run worth a lick, and never wins the big game, but his consistency is remarkable. So despite no rings , still would have him ahead personally, but can see why others would knock reid w/o a ring.
and on shanny the 1990's shanny YES ahead of most, BUT the last 5 years shanny or NOW? not so sure..as with ALL the HC's that won a SB and reitired, they look alot WORSE the 2nd time around and NEVER has a HC ever won the SB with a 2nd team- and so far in redskin land looks like its like it was with gibbs the 2nd time around,the game passed him by
Shanny last 5 years as he is 9-7, 7-8.8-8 and 6-10 with ZERO playoff games and actually since 2000, shanny has only ONE playoff win the last 11 years...not exactly a top HC..
Last edited by dabears54; 04-07-2011 at 12:03 PM.