Skip Peete Named New RB Coach

I also don't see the logic behind these hires, were these guys the best available options right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Sorry 99, when you hire people, hire people that will make a difference... people that will make you better. You and I both had issues with the staff under Lovie not being able to develop anyone. About being tired of mediocrity. How do you see these two hires being different? Now, I can accept the "just give the guys a chance" argument. And I plan to. But to say someone is being chicken little when two guys were hired that have regressed their positions and a concern i voiced about that is just unfair.

Doesn't matter that you don't agree. I see it as a concern. Will it be? I hope not, I think position coaches are extremely important. I saw the effects of lousy position coaches here already and I was hoping this was going to be different. I am not being a downer. I am still very optimistic but I don't like or understand these last two hires and I'm just saying so.

---

I am willing to give Emery and Trestman a chance to show us what they've got. We're in the first full week of Trestman's tenure - heck, the 2012 season hasn't even ended yet. All I am saying, is give this a chance.

We may find ourselves pleasantly surprised.

Regarding the Lovie regime - we based our opinion on 9 years "body of work" and not 1 week. All I am saying is give this a chance before we get our knickers in a knot. :smile:

(One other point. It's not like we're going to get Bill Belichick to come fill one of our position coach openings. The guys we are hiring, I actually believe are reasonable hires. But maybe I'm stupid here)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

Sorry 99, when you hire people, hire people that will make a difference... people that will make you better. You and I both had issues with the staff under Lovie not being able to develop anyone. About being tired of mediocrity. How do you see these two hires being different? Now, I can accept the "just give the guys a chance" argument. And I plan to. But to say someone is being chicken little when two guys were hired that have regressed their positions and a concern i voiced about that is just unfair.

Doesn't matter that you don't agree. I see it as a concern. Will it be? I hope not, I think position coaches are extremely important. I saw the effects of lousy position coaches here already and I was hoping this was going to be different. I am not being a downer. I am still very optimistic but I don't like or understand these last two hires and I'm just saying so.

---

Hope I'm wrong but I gotta go with the "chicken Littles" on this one. Pretty unimpressive hire on paper. Doesn't scream "excellence" to me. And it is not like MT is the de facto RB coach too like he is for QB.

I agree that Forte and Bush probably don't require much individual coaching nearly as much as they need better play calling and OL performance. But it would be nice to have a RB coach who could say...help develop Allen or whoever else we bring along in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AtomicTommy

I'm a "chicken little" because I feel like if you are going to rebuild a coaching staff from scratch, you should hire the best possible candidates? Fine. Then call me a chicken little. haha

Just make sure I have the NFL ticket in my coop.

Fine... maybe you and Soulman feel that these coaches are just there to look good and carry a position dedicated clipboard around for Trestman, or whatever... but I feel like you might be in the minority on this one. Make no mistake, these position coaches matter. I think the most arrogant of players would say they matter. Let me see if I can think of an example of an arrogant QB... oh, Jay Cutler! If position coaches didn't matter, do you think Jeremy Bates would have ended up in Chicago? I just feel like I'm taking crazy pills when I hear someone say that they don't matter after all the flack the position coaches have recieved over the last several years... in particular, the Offensive Line coach, the WR coach, the TE coach... lol

---

Maybe I make light of it a little too much Tommy but those guys are not more important than who we have as a HC and who's gonna fix that line. RB and WR don't need as much fixing but I trust Emery's judgement and therefore I trust Trestman's until proven otherwise.

Ergo I'm not worried about Peete or Cavanaugh or the guys he brings down for Canada. Right now based on his history I'm simply gonna assume he knows what he'd doing because I have no idea who would be any better for what he has in mind and neither does anyone else.

So all this fretting about whether this guy or that guy was the best available is just more mental masturbation. We don't even know who the bet fits are and I gotta think that Trestman does because that's why Emery hired him. He's just as anal and detailed as Phil is.

Edit: Right now we should be paying as much attention to who we get to run the D as anything else. THAT is where I have my concerns not the offensive staff.

Can't we give these guys more than one week of the off-season before we judge their work? The 2012 season hasn't even ended yet. We don't even know the entire coaching staff yet. And we're already worrying?

Let's see the product they put on the field this year before we start doubting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

I am willing to give Emery and Trestman a chance to show us what they've got. We're in the first full week of Trestman's tenure - heck, the 2012 season hasn't even ended yet. All I am saying, is give this a chance.

We may find ourselves pleasantly surprised.

Regarding the Lovie regime - we based our opinion on 9 years "body of work" and not 1 week. All I am saying is give this a chance before we get our knickers in a knot. :smile:

(One other point. It's not like we're going to get Bill Belichick to come fill one of our position coach openings. The guys we are hiring, I actually believe are reasonable hires. But maybe I'm stupid here)

---

oh, I'm still really pumped on Trestman and the new possibilities. But you look at what these two guys have accomplished, and don't see a lot to be excited about them. I don't think that saying that is the same as saying that Trestman should be tarred and feathered. It is just exactly what it seems... Two hires that I don't see being improvements and possibly backward steps. Have we lost the ability to be critical of things just because there is a new HC? If Billicheck would have hired these two, I think it would have been fair to ask what he saw in them.

No one is saying Trestman is no good or that he will fail or even anything close to that. Just that these two hires are... questionable. I call 'em as I see 'em.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

oh, I'm still really pumped on Trestman and the new possibilities. But you look at what these two guys have accomplished, and don't see a lot to be excited about them. I don't think that saying that is the same as saying that Trestman should be tarred and feathered. It is just exactly what it seems... Two hires that I don't see being improvements and possibly backward steps. Have we lost the ability to be critical of things just because there is a new HC? If Billicheck would have hired these two, I think it would have been fair to ask what he saw in them.

No one is saying Trestman is no good or that he will fail or even anything close to that. Just that these two hires are... questionable. I call 'em as I see 'em.

---

I do agree that these two guys are not exciting choices. But because I'd like to give Emery and Trestman some time to show us (prove to us) they can put a quality team on the field, I'm going to trust them for now.

I'm one of those guys who is basically trusting, until I see that trust isn't justified. I'm a "glass half full" kind of guy. Maybe I'm naive. Time will tell...:smile:

I see some positives in his bio and they must of worked together in Oakland.

Lovie was supposed to be running the D but needed the best DL and LB assistants he could find. If these guys fit the HC's system to a tee then fine. If not the sky is at least cracked. If it all starts up front and in the trenches then these guys are Sergeants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

meh... at best. I don't see this guy as a RB training machine

---

Do such exist? If I had to rank order the following in establishing a good rush offense, I'd say:
1 Good run blocking OL
2 Good running back
3 Good play caller
4 Good rb coach

And you would be welcome to throw in good passing threat in above the rb coach. Point being, the rb coach's influence is hard to tease out from all the other, bigger, influences.