first thing the bears need to do get him some speaking skills
Printable View
first thing the bears need to do get him some speaking skills
Yes, but that means he had two head scouting positions open and he actually could have put Ruskell in for either and he chose to let him go. I like what he did. I am assuming having been in scouting this long, he knows exactly who he wants.Quote:
Originally Posted by draw2anderson35
Well that's not saying anything to those who understand how the game works they don't already know. It's far less expensive to build through the draft and develop your own talent than to buy it or rent it on the open market, especially with the changes in rookie contracts dictated by the new CBA.
One question on everyone's mind should be. "was the talent that bad or did the coaching staff fall down on the job developing some of these guys"? Or in other words how much of the blame goes to Angelo vs how much goes to Lovie and his crew?
I don't really have the answer to that but in my opinion neither Lovie or Jerry Angelo are very good evaluators of talent. Their habit of drafting "athletes" as opposed to good football players brought in a lot of disappointing prospects who never made an impact at all. The list is lengthy.
If one notices anything peculiar about the Bears's draft picks from 1998-2011, most of the good players who came along in the system through the draft did so during the time Emery was scouting in Chicago. Think about it: Olin Kreutz, Brian Urlacher, Mike Brown, Anthony Thomas, Charles Tillman, Tommie Harris, Lance Briggs, Nathan Vasher, etc. All of those players came along before or in the first year of the Lovie Smith era of football with the Bears. I think you're right about Lovie's lack of ability in judging talented players, soul. Outside of 2008 and 2011, the 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, and 2010 drafts were all kind of mediocre. I don't know if it was all on Angelo or what, but Lovie has to throw in a mea culpa there someplace since when he took over as coach, even the defensive talent dropped off in the draft.Quote:
Originally Posted by soulman
Bears Tim Ruskell Out Before Bears Even Introduce Phil Emery
Chicago will reorganize front office under new GM Brad Biggs
http://s7.addthis.com/static/btn/sm-share-en.gif Print This January 30, 2012, 02:48 PM EST
1 Comment
http://cdn.cloudfiles.mosso.com/c191...static/NL3.png
The Chicago Bears didn’t get around to introducing Phil Emery as their new general manager Monday afternoon before his first move was clear.
Tim Ruskell is out. The club’s director of player personnel, who was one of five candidates interviewed to replace Jerry Angelo, has left the organization. The Bears classified it as a “mutual decision,” but Ruskell had one year remaining on his contract and it’s unlikely he would just walk away from a pay check for more than 12 months. Emery is expected to hire two men to replace Ruskell – a director of college scouting and a director of pro personnel. Ruskell, the former Seattle Seahawks general manager, came on board two years ago when Angelo reshuffled the deck.
The departure of Ruskell should dispel the notion Emery might consider a good ol’ boy network. That is because when Emery was hired as the director of college scouting for the Atlanta Falcons in 2004, Ruskell was the man who hired him.
Follow me on Twitter: @BradBiggs
Brad Biggs covers the Bears for the Chicago Tribune
This is old, but so very sweet, news. I could relive this over and over for days. Weeks even.Quote:
Originally Posted by soulman
That's a great point and actually one issue I have with the Lovie group. Toub seems to be able to take almost anyone they give him and come up with a respectable if not great special teams unit. Tice had done pretty well with the OL, but I don;t see much player development otherwise. I thought that Grossman showed signs of brilliance at times but nothing ever came to be. (of course that could all be on him).
I have never thought they did a good job of player development.
Quote:
Originally Posted by soulman
I have always believed and continue to believe that Lovie and his coaching staff has had far too much say in personnel decisions since the Superbowl year, and they gave themselves far too much credit to think that they were all good enough to mold good players out of great athletes with mediocre talent. That is partly on Jerry Angelo for allowing more say from the coaches and not recognizing their limitations, but it also shows that Lovie and Co. are inadequate in evaluating the talent of their own players and themselves. Prior to the Superbowl, Angelo had assembled a relatively good offensive line (John Tait, Reuben Brown, Olin Kreutz, Roberto Garz and Fred Miller). A group that was far from great, but very respectable. Angelo found all those guys except for Kreutz. Once we made it to the Superbowl and Lovie received his first extension (and arguably more say in personnel), the O-Line began to fall into disarray as did other parts of the team.
I have never been one to point the finger at one or the other, as none of these guys work in a vaccuum. They evaluate and consult together and arrive at a concensus. As a result, I think its disingenuous to look at the personnel decisions since 2006, put the blame of our failures on a lack of talent, and excuse the head coach for the result. Jerry and Lovie should share all the credit that was due and all the blame as well. I hope that when Mr. Emery talks of giving Lovie great say in the war room, that he is doing so as a diplomat and remains cognizant of what happened to Angelo. While we do not know the whole story of what has been happening at Halas Hall over the past few years, I'm sure Phil Emery has a pretty good idea.
With that said, I think Lovie is an outstanding person and at least an average to slightly above average coach. I just think he should be a bit more limited in personnel choices.
I find that to be particularly the case at the WR position. You see other teams turning draft picks, even mid-to-low picks (UDFA in Colston's case), into quality receiving threats over time but not the Bears. The last above average WR the Bears developed was Booker and that was years ago. No doubt a lot of the blame for that has to go to JA for not emphasizing the position enough and drafting quality prospects with real potential. But some of the fault also has to laid at the feet of the one person who has thus far escaped the Angelo-Martz-Day-Ruskell housecleaning...and that is Daryl Drake. Why he hasn't been canned is beyond me. Either it's because of inertia/"continuity" or because no one else wants that job for obvious reasons (Bears WRs suck and there's very little to work with). Keeping DD is the only quibble I have thus far with the off-field personnel moves the team has made the last month.Quote:
Originally Posted by bearsinhouston
I agree completely and a Bears sportwriter (think it was Pompei) recently wrote an article containing the very same idea. Lovie is a "B" as a HC but seems to be a "D" when it comes to talent/potential evaluation, especially on Offense. Whether it was Lovie or Martz or a combo thereof, JA was too influenced by their faulty opinions of players...cue up Manu, Collins, CTaylor, Roy Williams, etc. Doesn't absolve JA of his screwups--the buck stops at the GM's desk when it comes to personnel acquisition--but I do think it was a negative factor as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by 4DaBERS
I'm encouraged that the Bears and now Emery have repeatedly emphasized "talent evaluation" as a key factor for the new GM position. The coaching staff certainly should have input and influence but Emery must make the final call and overrule when necessary. He's gotta be the guy whose talent evaluation ultimately has the final say.