Printable View
Not paying Lovie his last year IF he was fired, and having to give him an extension so he's not a lame duck coach, cause it's frowned upon in the NFL? Let him finish his contract out, then decide. Put alittle heat to Lovies feet. Extension and a NEW OC cause Lovie is staying, new OC, AGAIN. Leave the ship as is, let Lovie do what he has to, but let him finish his contract out and go from there.
the problem is you're not going to be able to get a top flight offensive coordinator to come in here for one season...i think if you keep lovie without giving him an extension, we're stuck with mike tice or maybe jeremy bates, but a more likely scenario would be for tice to remain o.c. and bates to call plays...Quote:
Originally Posted by yttocs
i don't see a scenario where he finishes out his current deal...i think he'll either be fired or given an extension, and what happens over the next four games will decide which of those happens...
I just stay with the "who should replace him" question
well german that answer is easy if the budget for the replacement is high. Now lets say the budget suggests garbage bin shopping then the answer to your question gets allot harder
I posted this in the Urlacher thread, that was talking about Lovie. It probably belongs here so that's why I'm putting it in this thread too, since it pertains to keeping or firing Lovie:
Quote:
I'm not at either extreme with the issue of keeping or firing Lovie. I just try to look thoughtfully at the potential advantages/disadvantages that will be the consequences of either decision. I want to see us have a class franchise like the elite franchises of the NFL that have won multiple Super Bowls, and are often making deep runs in the playoffs.
It's not a simple formula for getting there. Otherwise we'd have 32 franchises performing at that level. Instead we have maybe 3 or 4.
It's not simply changing coaches either. Often the teams that perform the best over time are the ones who don't change coaches very often. Fans love to change coaches, thinking it is the fast track to a Super Bowl. Kind of like thinking that buying more lottery tickets will make them rich. It doesn't always happen that way. I look at teams like Detroit and see what "change" can do for a team. Granted, there is a time when it pays off to change coaches. This is what Emery needs to decide this off-season, and it's not a black and white decision IMHO. There are shades of gray here.
I believe the quickest route to a Super Bowl win, is to build on what we now have. To me, our weakest link was Jerry Angelo. Others disagree with me about this, and that's fine. I just believe Lovie Smith will take this team to the next level (quickly) with the kind of talent Emery has acquired, and will continue, to bring in. I love what he's done so far. He clearly understands football talent better (light years better) than Angelo.
The problem is that he's only had a few months to begin digging us out of the hole Jerry Angelo dug for this Chicago Bears team. But he's got a great start.
The fans often want instant gratification. Some have already complained here in this forum about Emery's moves. I guess they think getting yet another GM is the answer. Like buying another lottery ticket is the answer to their financial woes. Well. Life isn't always an "instant gratification" thing.
I think that bringing Emery here, coupled with us getting significantly better talent, coupled with us having a solid defense, special teams, and an offense that has the beginnings of being solid (an oline, TE & OC, away from being solid IMHO) then why would we want to bring in a new head coach, and certainly there would follow, the influx of all new coordinators and coaches (I'd be shocked if any sub coaches remained except for maybe Cutler getting Bates a pass), and new schemes on offense, defense, and special teams, and then getting the correct players to optimize those schemes........well, I begin to think there is some downside here. And the end result could be a worse situation than what we have now. Ask Detroit how this scenario can play out.
I don't believe that building on what we now have is "accepting mediocrity" but it could simply be a smart move on Emery's part, and taking the quickest and most direct route to having a class franchise for years to come, and win multiple Super Bowls.
Scotty touches on an interesting point. I will add that martz was allowed to finish out his contract. Just because "most" franchises do something, doesn't mean that the bears do it the same way.
Good point. I hadn't thought about that.Quote:
Originally Posted by XaosGorilla
Quote:
Originally Posted by yttocs
I'd agree w/that but if your always having to hold those feet to the fire for him to produce isn't it time to change the HC anyway?
LOL. And the worst part is that even after you hold his feet to the fire and he makes the playoffs, he doesn't go very far anyway and the next year it's right back to where it was before. How many times to we want to see that movie?
Quote:
Originally Posted by short faced bear
Coaching talent is a key to winning. But the other key is player talent. One without the other, doesn't do much for you. I look at the offensive line as "Exhibit A" of how we've expected the coaches to make chicken salad out of chicken poop. For years, the other exhibits were our WR's, QB's (a small army came and went under Jerry Angelo's tenure), and a ton of worthless to mediocre players at virtually all of the positions.
You can hold the coaches feet to the fire until you burn his legs off - but if you lack true talent, all you have in the end is a coach without legs. :smile:
We can already see better talent coming in, under Emery's watch. It will get even better with a 2nd off-season. He will build a solid oline, and I'll bet the other positions of need will get serious attention, both in the draft and FA.
I blame Jerry Angelo for most of our woes. I blame Lovie Smith for some too. But mostly I blame Jerry.