Thread: Bears really don't have a backup at Urlacher's position.

Originally Posted by The Benjamin

the LB drafting is almost as bad as the safety drafting..... The Bears are currently 0-8 when looking for LBs

This is one reason why I'm looking forward to Emery's effect on the team over the course of a few off-seasons. I do believe he'll bring in better talent. Yes, he'll make some mistakes, and he'll have draft misses too. But he'll have a much better success rate than JA did. BTW, Jerry Angelo didn't bring Urlacher here (for those who may not be aware of that fact). Brian was here when JA got here.

Lovie may be an "average" coach. But I believe that with a better OC, and with better talent, we can be successful at the Super Bowl level with him as HC.

Maybe I'm naive and drinking the Emery kool-aid, but I do believe there are better things ahead for us as Bears fans. And it's not really fair to think anyone can recover this team from the Jerry Angelo mess in 1 short off-season. JA dug us a huge hole with draft misses and mediocre talent (yes, he did some good, but not enough).

Originally Posted by The Benjamin

No, but JA did draft Briggs

My only complaint is that for every Briggs there seemed like a dozen Omiyle-types came.....along with midget RB's, swimming pool jumpers & Air Currie (who never caught a single pass for us in a regular game). He brought in a small army of garbage and mediocre talent.

We now have DeCicco ;)

being a bit more serious, Roach can play MLB with Hayes as SLB. Not that bad. I'd take a look at DeCicco too if we have a bigger lead

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

Lovie may be an "average" coach. But I believe that with a better OC, and with better talent, we can be successful at the Super Bowl level with him as HC.

That right there is what drives me nuts when evaluating management. Being willing to accept mediocrity due to fear of change. I am talking about in the corporate world and it translates here. Ownership will say stuff very similar to what you said here. "Well, if we get some good people around him, I think we'll be ok".

I liken it to trying to keep burglars out with a door that has weak door jambs and holes in it. Then the owner says to the contractor, "well, can we just patch up the holes and put some really strong wood and metal around the frame to hold it up?"

Um, yeah. That would work. Parts of the door itself would still be weak. You would spend almost as much (more in the long run because in the end, the door HAS to be replaced - it simply is not doing it's job) and then you'll have to go back and fix all the stuff that had to be done to try and retain the old door.

Why all the effort to try to shore up one part with stronger ancilliary parts? Replace the questionable part AND shore it up with strong parts around it. Now you have something that will exceed your expectations. If all the effort that has been put into finding strong people around Lovie had been put into finding an exceptional coach, then that exceptional coach would have gone about find other exceptional talent around him and that would solve this whole issue. What is the fascination in keeping Lovie? Unless you really believe that there is no other that can do the job better or that Emery is not capable of finding that person, then I just don't get this.

Emery was brought in to fix the team either you trust him to do it or you continue to tie his hands and worry that he will make it worse. You can't have it both ways. ok, now I feel better

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

That right there is what drives me nuts when evaluating management. Being willing to accept mediocrity due to fear of change. I am talking about in the corporate world and it translates here. Ownership will say stuff very similar to what you said here. "Well, if we get some good people around him, I think we'll be ok".

I liken it to trying to keep burglars out with a door that has weak door jambs and holes in it. Then the owner says to the contractor, "well, can we just patch up the holes and put some really strong wood and metal around the frame to hold it up?"

Um, yeah. That would work. Parts of the door itself would still be weak. You would spend almost as much (more in the long run because in the end, the door HAS to be replaced - it simply is not doing it's job) and then you'll have to go back and fix all the stuff that had to be done to try and retain the old door.

Why all the effort to try to shore up one part with stronger ancilliary parts? Replace the questionable part AND shore it up with strong parts around it. Now you have something that will exceed your expectations. If all the effort that has been put into finding strong people around Lovie had been put into finding an exceptional coach, then that exceptional coach would have gone about find other exceptional talent around him and that would solve this whole issue. What is the fascination in keeping Lovie? Unless you really believe that there is no other that can do the job better or that Emery is not capable of finding that person, then I just don't get this.

Emery was brought in to fix the team either you trust him to do it or you continue to tie his hands and worry that he will make it worse. You can't have it both ways. ok, now I feel better

Here's how I come down on this BIH. I am not saying to require Emery to keep Lovie. If he thinks he should be replaced after this year, then fine. I'm 100% OK with that.

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 always 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 rather being smart, and taking the quickest and most direct route to having a class franchise for years to come, and win multiple Super Bowls.

99, yeah we agree on many points but also disagree on some.

There are certain times that are better than others if you are going to make changes. I believe that one of those time periods is upon us.

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.

I totally agree. As a matter of fact, if Emery decided that Lovie was our best course, I may not agree, but I would be completely behind him and continue to support Lovie.

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.


Of course. No one is advocating opening up the window and starting to throw out whatever you can get your hands on. Emery was brought in here to analyze the problems and get them fixed. Any changes would have to be within that framework. I thought that was a given. You have to take a look at the total body of work. The improvements that have been made and any associated progress or lack thereof given those improvements. Then you have to decide what were the problems. Then you devise a plan and act. And Emery may well decide that Lovie is not to blame. Just because I think he is part of the problem does not mean Emery will see it that way.

I just believe Lovie Smith will take this team to the next level (quickly) with the kind of talent Emery has acquired,



Well, that's just it. We now have one of the better WR groups in the league. No improvement in the passing game EVEN WHEN CUTLER HAS PROTECTION. So we just continue to upgrade different areas and see if the same thing happens, or do we pause and try to disct this before moving forward? I think you need to figure out if coaching/play calling has something to do with that before forging ahead. Otherwise you commit to a road that you can't get off of for many more years. And yes, any mediocre manager can succeed given enough excellent talent around him. Just as the old broken up door can hold up given enough reinforcement. Is that enough? And why is enough ok? An excellent manager with excellent help around him will obviously outperform the manager in the first scenario. Why should that not be our goal? Lovie would succeed with strong enough people around him. But would that have been his success? Or the success of the people that propped him up? So what did he add to the party then?

Shooting for a mediocrity usually only gives you even less. Shoot for what you really want or above and you may actually achieve what you want.

I don't believe that building on what we now have is "accepting mediocrity" but rather being smart, and taking the quickest and most direct route to having a class franchise for years to come, and win multiple Super Bowls.

This is where we really disagree. I think it is accepting mediocrity. How else do you define our continued sniffing and missing the post-season? That is the definition of mediocrity. I think being smart is looking at the time frame you are in -- A new GM, a team that seems to be stuck in gear even after an infusion of talent, a sub-par OC chosen by the HC (for the same reasons you want to keep Lovie - because he did well at OL coach and it kept from rebuilding), the HC contract about to end, etc. And at some point you make decisions that might be tough short term but best long term.

I am not saying I am right. Obviously these are opinions I believe in, so I THINK I am right, but maybe in fact your approach is the right way. All I can say is that it is not an approach I would take. And I am really looking forward to seeing what Emery does here. I think much will depend on these last four games.