Are there any Chicago parallels with the Seattle successful turnaround?

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by JustAnotherBearsFan99, Mar 2, 2014.

  1. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    8,378
    Likes Received:
    1,698
    Ratings:
    +1,816 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    75ß
    Pete Carroll came to Seattle in 2010. I love the team he's built there. He methodically put the pieces in place to have sustained success in Seattle - but it's interesting to note that it took him 4 years to get the team where it ultimately needed to be and to win a Super Bowl.

    The more I see of Emery and Trestman, the more I like. But I do see some parallels here with Seattle. It's going to take time to get the team built up to be a powerhouse. It's going to take a few years to build a team that we ultimately need to replace Rodgers & the Packers as the division champs & to win a super bowl.

    I just don't see us doing this in Trestman's 2nd year here. There's just too much that needs fixing, on defense in particular. What do you guys think?
  2. BSBEARS

    BSBEARS Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2014
    Messages:
    1,198
    Likes Received:
    361
    Ratings:
    +443 / 3 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    235ß
    I will be pleasantly surprised if it were to happen in yr 2 of Trestman. But with an average defense getting some playoff experience should be achievable in yr 2 with the offense we have. Just so many twists this yr.

    Lets say rd 3 or 4 a good offensive player on the board. ( TE, OT ??) I hope we take them but it will hurt the defense rebuild but if they are the best available it helps more long term. More twists than normal this year, just hoping Emery can pull all this off, He is earning his pay this year.
  3. short faced bear

    short faced bear Assistant Head Coach DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    10,265
    Likes Received:
    1,109
    Ratings:
    +1,156 / 0 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    13ß

    I believe that there a certain parallels and perhaps a foundational aspect or two but certainly no blueprint to copy or emulate. Things move and evolve way too fast, following a trend many times mean your behind the curve. I do think Emery and co. are filling holes and fixing things faster than JA ever could/would.
    • Like Like x 3
  4. jackiejokeman

    jackiejokeman Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2013
    Messages:
    1,232
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ratings:
    +163 / 1 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    79ß
    The 1984 CHICAGO BEARS ... no not the 1985 CHICAGO BEARS ... The 1984 CHICAGO BEARS.

    If you watched it ... you saw it coming.
  5. zelezo vlk

    zelezo vlk Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    146
    Likes Received:
    22
    Ratings:
    +22 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    Are there any? Well there are some but Pete is such a unique NFL coach that its almost impossible to compare.
  6. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    621
    Likes Received:
    553
    Ratings:
    +637 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    20ß
    I really don't see many parallels yet, other than a whole new GM and coaching staff coming in. That's not to say ours wont be even better once they get rolling.
    I think the biggest difference is this:
    The Seahawks caught lightening in a bottle with Russel Wilson, much like the 49ers did with Kaepernick. In only his second season in the League, he led his team to a Superbowl Championship. That's unprecedented. Now, one could argue that it was the Defense that actually took them there, but in this era, the only way they were able to build that Defense was because they didn't spend $20 million dollars in Cap space for their QB. Hell, they didn't even spend $5 million for their QB. That allows for a LOT of flexibility.

    In Chicago, our GM and Coach already had a franchise QB, they just had a load of crap around him. Now they have built a pretty damn good offense around that QB in only their 1st year, and like most others teams, they have to pay that QB. Now we build an "adequate" to "good" Defense (we can't afford a "great" Defense, so don't expect it), and if the Offense continues to get better, then an "adequate" to "good" Defense is all you will need.

    Actually I see more differences between these two teams than I see similarities.

    I find it silly considering how little Wilson makes off of his 3rd round rookie contract that so many media people were espousing how the Seattle team has been built to be good for a long time. I call BS. Wilson just took them to the Superbowl and he has a ring in his second season. If his agent isn't already talking to them about a new contract, then he's not doing his job. I don't care if he still has three years on his contract, you still have to try and strike while the iron is hot. They may be unsuccessful, but if the Seahawks get through one more year without dumping a load of cash in Wilson's lap, then they should consider themselves very lucky. Once that time comes, and with a ring on his finger, it will be a large contract, they will not be able to afford to keep that Defense in tact. Honestly, I give Seattle two more years to be as good as they are, MAX, and that's only if luck and injuries don't change on them as well.
    • Like Like x 2
  7. soulman

    soulman Pro-Bowler SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,614
    Likes Received:
    1,156
    Ratings:
    +1,392 / 0 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    533ß
    Playoffs yes, should have been there this year and would have been if we'd stayed healthy on defense. Super Bowl? No, not without a top ten defense to go with that offense and so far I don't see it happening. Phil past mistakes have set them back. Guys who should be stepping up or have stepped up haven't or aren't even playing so with so many free agents vs so many needs I can't see any way to do much more than get then to the middle of the pack this year. Besides, I think Tucker will be gone before it happens. I just don't think he's the right guy.

Share This Page