What we learned

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

I don't doubt that, but we'll never know the inner-dynamics of the dysfunctional talent acquisition failure, during Jerry Angelo's tenure here. But the "personnel buck" stops with the general manager IMHO. The Chicago Bears franchise is a billion-dollar entity comprised of a number of people assigned full time, year round, to judge talent. They, like the coach, answer to the GM. The GM pulls the draft trigger.

Certainly, a coach should have SOME input regarding personnel. It is input only. The GM alone is ultimately responsible for the talent provided to the coaches.

---

Absolutely. But think about it. If you had sole responsibility for something and your trusted manager who is going to use the guy tells you he really doesn't want him, what are you going to do? Or if he tells you that someone is exactly the guy he is looking for? If there is someone head and shoulders better, that's easy, but usually the choice is much grayer. Just because someones ultimate responsibility does not mean they are making the choices by themselves. I would bet the very opposite. You want to build concensus and also want to be sure you are giving your HC the tools he says he needs/wants.

I think laying it all on the GM is simplistic. Unless, of course the GM is also the HC. Then you have one person to point the finger to. But even there, he is going to take serious input from his Coordinators as to who they want to make their game work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Absolutely. But think about it. If you had sole responsibility for something and your trusted manager who is going to use the guy tells you he really doesn't want him, what are you going to do? Or if he tells you that someone is exactly the guy he is looking for? If there is someone head and shoulders better, that's easy, but usually the choice is much grayer. Just because someones ultimate responsibility does not mean they are making the choices by themselves. I would bet the very opposite. You want to build concensus and also want to be sure you are giving your HC the tools he says he needs/wants.

I think laying it all on the GM is simplistic. Unless, of course the GM is also the HC. Then you have one person to point the finger to. But even there, he is going to take serious input from his Coordinators as to who they want to make their game work.

---

I am simplistic here. Certainly Lovie should have input in the process. Input, not control.

I hope we finally have a GM who will be "The Boss" who will be fair, but firm with Lovie Smith. I think he will have no problem setting boundaries with Lovie. Lovie is not the GM. Lovie works for the GM. He is the coach, not the manager. Ultimately he will be fired by the GM if he doesn't produce. I believe George will be a great CEO who will back Emery 100% regarding Lovie.

Regarding Ric's last post, I'm not saying Ric is wrong on this. Ric may be 100% right in his assessment of how dysfunctional the Bears were, during Michael McCaskey's CEO tenure, (during the Jerry Angelo regime). The Chicago Bears may very well have been so dysfunctional, that they let Lovie take over the GM duties too. If that happened, that is sick IMHO - Lovie is a marginal head coach. He'd be pure crap as a GM. He may have had Jerry Angelo as his toadie. Who knows. I don't even care at this point. I just want to see the personnel department functioning at a high level, and a strong - SMART - general manager cracking the whip.

Lovie is on thin ice now. Emery is the big new dog on the block. Lovie will have input, but not control over GM issues, including personnel issues. If Lovie has a problem with that, he will politely be shown the door. Lovie is hanging onto his job by his fingernails right now. He has very little juice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

I used to think the same thing, but there were two games were Cutler actually had time. No difference in the offensive production to speak of. I am worried about that. But we need to fix the Ol first. That will allow more runs which will take even more pressure off. If that doesn't fic the passing game, then it's something else entirely.

---

I dunno, BiH, Cutty had reasonable protection on the surface in the Houston game and the recent Minny game too, but it goes beyond just sacks allowed. The pass pro probably looked better than it really was because Jay was using his feet well (which I like and he's good at) and because we were playing a lot of max protect (7-8 blocking/chipping). The latter really limits your receiving options compared to 5 or 6 and makes the secondary's job a lot easier. In addition, in both those games there were multiple key drops and penalties that cost us huge.

JABF, he had some input before the SB, he had a lot more(not saying all or most, just a lot more) after the SB, and it was during that time that the drafts really started to take a dump.

MP -- Agreed. I actually think we are both on the same thought process here. What i was referring to was more of a drill down than the bigger picture. Cutty can fire the ball quick. Remember when the protection was so horrendous that he literally didn't have much more time than to get the ball in his hands on some plays? We were all wishing that he could just get a little time. I know many of us (and I am included) thought that if they could just get a LITTLE time, he could make things happen. Well, he got more than a little in several games and it made no difference. Not all on Cutty -- he made some bad throws, maybe some bad decisions, players dropped balls, plays were called and protection was such that it was easier to cover our WRs, but the assumption that all Cutler needed was a little time is not holding up with me any more.

It's more systemic than that. Why are the WR's dropping more than usual? Extending the inability to catch -- why cand any of our TE's hold onto a ball? Is there a common denominator in either training, a trainer, attitude, whatever... Someone needs to get down to root cause. it's not just once, and it is across the board.

The protection, I understand. We have a barely adequate group there. I am actually surprised Cutler is not gatting hammered more than he is. If we had plenty of time for Cutler in every game, would we have an explosive offense? I've seen some glimpses and I'm not as sure as I was before. That's all I'm saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MPBears68

I dunno, BiH, Cutty had reasonable protection on the surface in the Houston game and the recent Minny game too, but it goes beyond just sacks allowed. The pass pro probably looked better than it really was because Jay was using his feet well (which I like and he's good at) and because we were playing a lot of max protect (7-8 blocking/chipping). The latter really limits your receiving options compared to 5 or 6 and makes the secondary's job a lot easier. In addition, in both those games there were multiple key drops and penalties that cost us huge.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

JABF, he had some input before the SB, he had a lot more(not saying all or most, just a lot more) after the SB, and it was during that time that the drafts really started to take a dump.

---

That's a great observation. I'm just saying that if it happened it was a dumb move on the Bears part. The guy is a marginal coach at best, and if he's the reason we drafted midgets, swimming pool jumpers and the failed boutique player projects - then what a crime. Emery will have the cajones to never let that happen. It's ultimately Emery's neck on the line if we bring in a bunch of mediocre and crap players.

I can make what we learned pretty simple because we learn the same lesson every year yet never seem to find a way to change it. Insanity at it's best rules.

1) No NFL team can even contend for control of it's own division let alone a championship without consistent production from it's offense. Defense may win championship games but you need and offense to get you to one.

2) Lovie Smith is no longer able to get his team in a position to win in "crunch time". For several years now we've watched the Bears lose game after "must win" games. Here's a few; 1) the loss to Houston a few years back that cost us a playoff spot, 2) a failure to put the Packers away two years ago and shut them out of the playoffs altogether 3) an inability to beat them in the regular season last year, 4) two straight losses to supposedly weaker teams this year that have compromised this season. I'm sure one or two of you will find a couple I've missed as well.

Since their SB appearance the Bears have been or nearly been a .500 ball club and Lovie Smith is no longer a winning coach. His winning record is based on ancient history and in the "what have you done for me lately" world of the NFL he's simply a mediocre HC with nothing but a mediocre W/L record to show for it.

What we all should have learned by now is that we will not win any championships as long as Lovie stays. We traded for a new QB, we bought a future HOF DE, we got rid of JA and brought in a GM who knows how to make good personnel decisions, Phil Emery showed his worth by making some great strides adding to the talent and the depth of the team, and after all of this where do we stand. Who or what is the only constant that remains?

As much as I like Lovie and as much as I hate the thought of losing some key players and starting over maybe it's time. In fact maybe it's even past that time. Lovie isn't winning anything any longer. It's not just championships that he's lacking at it's regular season games that need to and should be won and it's games against the top teams in the league where it's so obvious that his team is under prepared and he is being woefully out coached. It's been going on for the last five years so how does that pattern change if the same guy is in charge?

Well it won't. We've made just about every other change that can be made short of fielding a decent OLine and that's become a failure because a guy who is supposed to be one of the best OLine coaches in the NFL hasn't gotten the job done in four years and has done even worse as an OC than he's done as the line coach. If Lovie stays I can't see a damn thing changing next year either. If anyone else has a different opinion let's hear it along with your reasons.

The bottom line is that you can't get rid of 53 players and start all over again from scratch. Since Lovie arrived we've turned over about 99% of our players anyway. No, you have to look at whose running the show and why he just can't seem to get the job done. As much as I know it's gonna hurt for many reasons it's time to let Lovie go and maybe Urlacher as well. Clinging to a past that just hasn't quite made the grade isn't worth the disappointments and heartache of one more season like the last four or five have been. It really is time to swallow that bitter pill and move on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrDynamite32

Ravens fired Cam Cameron yesterday. Perhaps the Bears can give him a look once the season's over.

---

Can we call him now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KenMasters

Can we call him now?

---

LOL, let's not even bother. The glow is off Cam Cameron as well. Fired from his HC job after a very short stay and now let go by the Ravens before the season is even over. I'll pass.

We have a guy who has been tried and tested as a play caller and de facto OC who knows the game and two of his best players capabilities very well. It's only the fact that so far Lovie has failed to use him and left Tice to sink or swim along with the fortunes of this season that's kept him in second position.

We already have a new OC under contract. We just need to promote him and my guess is that's exactly what will happen this offseason. My guess is Lovie will get to live out his contract and Bates will be handed the offense and the right to hire some of his own staff.

The farther removed Lovie is from having any say whatsoever in that offense the better off we are. This should be the reverse of what happened when Halas hired Ditka. Buddy Ryan as DC went with the job of Bears HC and Halas made no bones about it.

Now Emery needs to force a change in how this team is being handled at the HC level. Lovie, Marinelli and that crew have full say over the defense but Jeremy Bates gets to run the offense and has one year to get the job done with no interference from Lovie at all.

If we're gonna keep Lovie around this is the only way it has a prayer of working. Lovie is not an offensive schemer, he can't contribute anything useful on that side of the ball and he can't even hire an OC who can put together a half way decent offense. So bifurcate those responsibilities and let Bates do what he can to resurrect some kind of offense from the heap Tice has created.

It's the only chance we have that things might improve in 2013. If Emery isn't gonna do that then he might just as well fire Lovie after the season is over and start to rebuild. One more year of things being run as they are now won't change the results and we still won't have a championship team.