Thread: Jeremy Bates hired as QB coach/Passing Game OC?

Originally Posted by Kidla

I don`t believe too much of anything Lovie Smith says.He says things like we`ve been to the playoffs 1 out of the last 2 years instead of 1 out of the last 5 or 6 whichever it may be.But anyway he does like to play games with what he says and thats fine.To me,and this is just my opinion,it seems like Emery talked to Cutler and said who do you work well with.After he got his answer,he may have had a conversation with Coach Smith.After that conversation,Lovie may have gotten the idea it might be a good thing to keep the guy HAPPY who can hire or fire you after next season.I think Lovie may have been a little PO`d with Bates after he turned him down 2 yrs ago.This is just my opinion.

I would agree with this statement, except for the fact that with any business, things can change quickly. Lovie Smith could very well have meant that Jeremy Bates was the most qualified man for the job. I do tend to believe that the Bears were at a point of desperation at getting a QB coach, so they finally buckled under the pressure and got Jeremy Bates. JMHO.

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Go figure.... After denying the Bears the opportunity to speak with Zorn about the QB coach position, KC just let him go. I'm not sure I understand that.

And I guess that he would have been preferable to Bates since they asked to speak to him first?

I'm starting to need a roadmap, LOL

Bears roadmaps often lead nowhere houston. Sometimes they lead you down freeways with uncompleted bridges. Best to invest in a GPS then at least you'll no where you are.

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Do you guys think Zorn would have been better than Bates?

I'm ok with Bates but just wondering what the consensus is...

Frankly, I thought Zorn was an intrigueing prospect, but I think my preference would have been Bates, only because there is less learning curve in learning what Jay is most comfortable with and they start out their new offense with a bit of a head start from that perspective. Other than that, who knows.

For those old enough to remember- this is the sense I'm getting with this Tice/Bates 'O' philosophy : I'm guessing it might be alot like the 70's Raiders when they had Stabler, Branch, Biletnikoff, Casper, Van Eeghen etc. A run 1st O .... but also one that kept the chains moving with smart effective passing plays & one that would hit the bomb often enough to keep the D worried about it .

Cutler = Stabler ( actually Cutler has more talent )
Knox or a V.Jackson = Branch ( this slot is all about running long routes that threatens the D long )
Bennett = Biletnikoff ( players who are similar all about hands )
Davis or ? = Casper ( yes big reach but all we need is someone who will catch the ball for 1st down on 3rd down )
Forte = Van Eeghen ( Forte runs for more yards and has better hands anyways and isn't a FB but who cares )

- add in a solid enough D which the Bears should have hopefully .... and there you have a team quite similar to the 70's Raiders ( who were pretty damn good back then) and a Bears team that's a legit SB threat.

A throwback team that would be fun to watch. And more likely to keep Cutler healthy which is the key.

Originally Posted by Blue Horse-shoe

For those old enough to remember- this is the sense I'm getting with this Tice/Bates 'O' philosophy : I'm guessing it might be alot like the 70's Raiders when they had Stabler, Branch, Biletnikoff, Casper, Van Eeghen etc. A run 1st O .... but also one that kept the chains moving with smart effective passing plays & one that would hit the bomb often enough to keep the D worried about it .

Cutler = Stabler ( actually Cutler has more talent )
Knox or a V.Jackson = Branch ( this slot is all about running long routes that threatens the D long )
Bennett = Biletnikoff ( players who are similar all about hands )
Davis or ? = Casper ( yes big reach but all we need is someone who will catch the ball for 1st down on 3rd down )
Forte = Van Eeghen ( Forte runs for more yards and has better hands anyways and isn't a FB but who cares )

- add in a solid enough D which the Bears should have hopefully .... and there you have a team quite similar to the 70's Raiders ( who were pretty damn good back then) and a Bears team that's a legit SB threat.

A throwback team that would be fun to watch. And more likely to keep Cutler healthy which is the key.

You forgot to add the player from the Raiders who would resemble Roy Williams. lol