Thread: Thinking the Unthinkable

I was thinking about the Lovie situation -- I try not to think very often as it irritates my wife -- and I know there is a pretty good possibility that Lovie might get extended and so i tried to figure out how that might happen, but every option I go down doesn't make too much sense to me. But I know I am biased against his staying so I thought I would outline my thoughts and see if some peopl on the other side of the fence like Henry, Benji and JABF would consider this and maybe propose something that I could not think of or maybe an option that doesn't make logical sense to me might make sense to someone that wants Lovie to stay. The mind can always justify what it wants to justify, so I want to get more than my own opinion. So here goes.

There is a good chance the last two games will be won by the BEars. The last two teams are the sort of teams that we have been beating all year, so nothing new here for me at least. To me this would just reinforce that we can beat easy teams but not good teams and proves nothing. However, I can already see people saying that Lovie can "turn things around" by winning the last two games. So while I see winning the last two games as completely expected and proving nothing other than what he has already proven - able to beat easy teams, there are some that think it will mean more than that. So then I thought, well Emery is a football guy and he should know better, but you can't ever count on anything..... SOOOOOOO....

For arguments sake, lets just say that the decision has been made not to terminate Lovie. Let's try not to use this thread to say why he should be terminated or why not. There are so many other threads that do that. The premise here is that he WILL NOT be teminated. So let's see how that would work.

Option 1. No temination, but no extension.

This puts Lovie in a lame duck situation. Some have said that the Bears would not do this, but I think it's a possibility.

Pros:
1. Allows the Bears to keep from paying Lovie 6M to either stay on the couch or to coach for someone else (A good investment if it is GB IMO). Saves the Bears 6M. I don't think it would save on any other coaches because if they left prior to their contract, the Bears would not have to pay them. Just Lovie, so this option saves 6M

2. Allows us to see what Lovie can do with more weapons. He already got a #1 WR and a potential #2 WR, but this may not be enough for Lovie to have a good year. We can see what he is capable of with a better line.

3. Lovie might not want to be a lame duck coach and may leave on his own, saving the team 6M

4. Keeps the team from having to solve the salary condundrum (see below under option #2 cons)


Cons:

1. It can be argued that this just puts off the change of direction the team needs because of short term monetary considerations.

2. Having a lame duck coach will make it very difficult to bring in good talent - especially at OC. This would limit us to internal candidates, which has not worked well for us thus far. Any good external candidate that was told that they would become the HC by doing well at OC, would only be helping Lovie be successful by doing well - in fact it would be a conflict of interest to put anyone in that position.



Option 2. No termination, with an extension.

Pros:

1. Keeps Lovie from being a lame duck coach and gives the team the opportunity to bring in a better OC.

2. Keeps Continuity


Cons:

1. Keeps Continuity

2. Lovie has not proved he can win against winning teams. If he is renewed, the cost of letting him go if he continues this trend goes up.

3. Salary issues. Lovie is being paid as the 5th best coach in the league. His performance does not match his pay. Does Emery continue to pay him like a top 5 coach? Does he bring down his salary to be equal to his performance? If so, does Lovie walk away? Does he decide to stay but with no contract to tey and justify a higher salary for an extension next year?

This last issue is what led me to believe that there was no really good ending to keeping Lovie. We may knowingly have to overpay Lovie just to have the priviledge of keeping him as our HC.

Option 3. I don't see any other options, but if you do post 'em


So with these in mind, does it make sense to keep Lovie under any circumstances? I could not find justification, but would honestly like to hear from some that can better justify Lovies staying here.

Feel free to add to the points above if I have missed anything. Let's just try to stay away from any justifications for keeping or letting Lovie go. Remember, that decision has been made. What we want to see is if having made that decision, it withstands logical scrutiny in the end.

Happy Holidays!