Thread: Should we do a clean slate evaluation of everything?

I think there is something behind this logic. On the other side, last years SB winner has a 4-3.

I've always believed that the type of defensive scheme is not as important, as how well you run the scheme on a given team - and the quality of the personnel that you have. I will always remember John Madden commenting on the Bears-46 defense during a game in 1985. He said it wasn't the scheme that made Chicago's defense great, but the quality of the players running the scheme.

He was 100% right.

It is a good topic, and I found the data interesting BIH.

One other point. An NFL team has a huge investment in personnel resources. It's not just a "money investment" but rather, some of these players are not easy to replace at any cost. For every Andrew Luck or even a Russell Wilson, you see so many failures - even 1st round picks fail often.

We have some great assets on the Bears. These assets can be replaced but not easily, and certainly not in a wholesale gut job move. Wise GM's and coaches understand that you do have to work with existing resources to a certain extent. Sure, you can gut a team and do a major rebuilt, over a 3 or 4 year period of drafts and expensive FA moves, but that's not the best way IMHO.

Smart GM's and coaches maximize the quality of the product that they put on the field, by judiciously upgrading your roster continually. Annually. I like this thoughtful approach much better. You can still change schemes, but it's not surgery with a chainsaw. You make roster moves with fine surgical precision. That's what I see in the best franchises, like NE. They may change schemes over the years, (and have), but they're pretty thoughtful in how they put their team together every year.

Idiots do the Josh McDaniels approach, that he used in Denver. Big change. Then failure. Then the team has to fire you and start over...

I guess my point is that it's not unreasonable for the Bears to want a new coach to be a bit judicious with existing talent (like Cutler) in the beginning. Then if you find you need to change, fine. But we have so many holes to fill right now, why on earth would you go after a new franchise quarterback - certainly not right out of the chute in 2013. Focus on the oline, TE's who can catch a football and block, a WR upgrade for Hester, a guy to replace Urlacher (and Peppers and Tillman are no spring chickens......those replacements are coming up as problems sooner rather than later).

Well no matter what that research tells us the Bears don't have the excess cap space or draft picks to make any major changes defensively for 2013. Any move away from what we play now will need to be gradual and I'm sure that has played a major role in the coaching search.

The reality is we have players who play extremely well in the system we use now and until we can replace them with others we're pretty much stuck where we are defensively and where we are isn't a bad place to be stuck.

We have one All Pro CB another is a Pro Bowl CB (the only time two from one team have ever been elected Pro Bowl starters) we have a Pro Bowl DE, a WLB whose been to so may Pro Bowls they just decided not to elect him this year even though he had another Pro Bowl year, we have a future HOF MLB who should return, a Pro Bowl 3t DT who needs to be resigned, a LDE who had a break out year and has future Pro Bowler written into his script, and a pretty good looking all purpose playmaker who was our 1st round pick last year.

So why would anyone want to breakup that gang or force them to play differently than they have? I'm like Emery. Convince me that we could do any better playing a different style of defense with this bunch or that we could somehow afford the guys it would take to make a major change in that defense now.

Well no matter what that research tells us the Bears don't have the excess cap space or draft picks to make any major changes defensively for 2013. Any move away from what we play now will need to be gradual and I'm sure that has played a major role in the coaching search.

The reality is we have players who play extremely well in the system we use now and until we can replace them with others we're pretty much stuck where we are defensively and where we are isn't a bad place to be stuck.

We have one All Pro CB another is a Pro Bowl CB (the only time two from one team have ever been elected Pro Bowl starters) we have a Pro Bowl DE, a WLB whose been to so may Pro Bowls they just decided not to elect him this year even though he had another Pro Bowl year, we have a future HOF MLB who should return, a Pro Bowl 3t DT who needs to be resigned, a LDE who had a break out year and has future Pro Bowler written into his script, and a pretty good looking all purpose playmaker who was our 1st round pick last year.

So why would anyone want to breakup that gang or force them to play differently than they have? I'm like Emery. Convince me that we could do any better playing a different style of defense with this bunch or that we could somehow afford the guys it would take to make a major change in that defense now.