Mel Tucker Background

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BSBEARS, Apr 8, 2014.

  1. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +2,289 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,717ß
    Ric:
    I know that sentence was not aimed at me, but you would be surprised at how much stupid I can pack into one sentence !!!

    We agree on a lot, but we really never have agreed on the Tucker thing. I think a lot of why the players stink was because of Tucker. But it is just my opinion. The D either works well this year or it does not. My biggest fear - and I do think there is at least a reasonable chance of it being the case - is that Tucker in indeed inept, but noe he has enough talent around him to shore him up and allow him to continue to stay. That keeps a weak link. Not saying that is for sure the case, but right now we can't rule it out either.
  2. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,619
    Likes Received:
    3,034
    Ratings:
    +3,667 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,848ß
    BiH we only disagree b/c I refuse to place any blame on anyone last year. And again during the year players don't develop under the DC he's working on game planss, it's the positional coaches that develop your talent. So player development isn't his job, so that point is moot and it's also why the positional coaches got shit canned.

    Go back and watch how poorly the Bears D played when it lost a fraction of what the Bears lost last year, Tommie Harris OR losing Urlacher and no one else of much significance, they dropped into the teens. How would they have looked if they had lost multiple pro bowlers at every level of the D, and some of their backups? Would it have been unplausible to see a team w/out BU OR Harris drop to the teens then lose other probowlers sink to the mid 20's? And I'm not expecting Tucker to be as good as Lovie, that would be unfair, Lovie is a HC b/c of how good he was as a DC, Tucker isn't there.

    Martz, Lovie, Parcells, Bellecheck all need players w/enough talent to execute their gameplans, and when they didn't their teams weren't good to hold Tucker to a higher standard and then say he still sucks(if the D is decent to good this year) is really putting him in a lose lose situation and is unfair.

    Hell think of how much of a fail Trestman would have been if his #1 WR was Hester Bennett as the #2 no depth at WR, had no OL worth a damn, and no TE, then lost Cutler for the year, would he have been a failed experiment and have everyone lamenting letting Lovie go? Or since he had 2 pro bowl wr's, 2 pro bowl OL, a pro bowl RB(3 of those guys were pro bowlers before him btw) the others were high 1st and 2nd picks was his system allowed to succeed? If he had lost Cutler, Marshal, Garza, Boggs, and Forte wouldn't we on this board said, well what did you expect his O to look likee?

    I'm more then allowing a wait and see approach and if the system fails then I'll put it on the coach, if the players don't execute then I'm putting it on the players. Martz was a fail b/c his system sucked, Lovie wasn't a fail even when his D's were in the teens b/c the players couldn't execute the same system that the starters could.


    and no the comment wasn't directed at you, but it still holds funny in so many ways to who it was directed to.
    • Like Like x 1
  3. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,993
    Likes Received:
    2,642
    Ratings:
    +3,058 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,784ß
    All of your points are well taken. Let's hope the Bears have a good season and the defense really comes to life this year. Regarding those "Lovable Loser" Cubs, they've had plenty of stinky players AND coaches over the past 50 or so years I've been a fan. But like with the Bears, I'm hoping "this is their year" to win a championship. Hope springs eternal :-)
  4. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,625
    Likes Received:
    755
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    781ß
    Haha...what would you have if you didn't have hope! Cubs have also had plenty of GOOD coaches who won elsewhere...whats the common denominator? Players!
    • Like Like x 1
  5. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,619
    Likes Received:
    3,034
    Ratings:
    +3,667 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,848ß
    Ex Cubs coach that went to the Reds or Indians comes to mind.
  6. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,625
    Likes Received:
    755
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    781ß
    Boom! If I could like that post a thousand times I would! Key Point:

    Hell think of how much of a fail Trestman would have been if his #1 WR was Hester Bennett as the #2 no depth at WR, had no OL worth a damn, and no TE, then lost Cutler for the year, would he have been a failed experiment and have everyone lamenting letting Lovie go? Or since he had 2 pro bowl wr's, 2 pro bowl OL, a pro bowl RB(3 of those guys were pro bowlers before him btw) the others were high 1st and 2nd picks was his system allowed to succeed? If he had lost Cutler, Marshal, Garza, Boggs, and Forte wouldn't we on this board said, well what did you expect his O to look likee?
  7. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +2,289 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,717ß
    I can buy what you are saying in terms of positional development to some degree. Primary responsibility is the position coach, but when those goals are not being met, it flows up to the DC. and it seemed no one was ever in position. But hey... regardless... even though we are coming at it from different perspectives I think at this point, we both have a wait and see attitude. I want Tucker gone, but only if he continues to suck. If I'm wrong and he shines this year, hey, I'm all about keeping him. I want a top D and I have no issue with Tucker himself... just the product he put on the field last year.

    This long time period between anything actually happening is just conducive to rehashing of old opinions. They keep coming up because there is nothing new to reinforce either one side of the argument or another, so everyone stays entrenched in their positions. Once we start to see how the season unfolds, then people are going to probably all either rally behind or against Tucker. I just hope I have misread him and he is going to put an aggressive, hard hiting defense on the field that teams are going to dread wanting to play against. I'd go make up a Tucker jersey and wear it!
    • Like Like x 1
  8. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,993
    Likes Received:
    2,642
    Ratings:
    +3,058 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,784ß
    This is one reason why I am excited about Emery coming to the Bears. I like a lot of what I see in Emery so far. He won't be perfect, and he'll have some draft busts just like everyone has (even the best GMs). But my point is that I think we may have a guy who can hit a better percentage regarding player acquisition than the average GM. If this truly is the case, and he can keep our talent level high, in this age of cap constraints, then we could see some GREAT years here with the Bears. I'm thinking we could have sustained success. This will not only help Tucker succeed, but you ARE right about player talent. You can only do so much as a coach with poor talent. Sure, coaching is critically important, but you do need the talent.

    This coming season is going to be a watershed year for the Bears under Emery. We fans, will have a number of questions answered by the end of the season - and not just the Tucker issue. I do believe the Bears franchise is heading into something good here. I like that George is our current McCaskey, and Emery seems an upgrade over Angelo, and Trestman looks very promising as a head coach (and not just for his offense skills......he'll make sure the defense is fixed, one way or another). It is a good time to be a Bears fan. Regarding Tucker, I hope I have made it clear here, that:

    1. Last year doesn't count, and this year is a fresh start to show us what he can do.
    2. I'm hopeful the guy does an excellent job (I'm not hating on the guy, I just want the Bears to win).
    3. I'm all about winning. I'm tired of not winning championships (Bears & Cubs).

    That's all. I just want to win. I'm not so impressed with excuses we trot out over the years and decades as to why we didn't win a championship. Hey some may be very valid. But in the end I just want to win.
  9. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,619
    Likes Received:
    3,034
    Ratings:
    +3,667 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,848ß
    BiH, I'm not so much entrenched as I'm in no mans land w/a white flag hoping for a truce. :)
  10. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,625
    Likes Received:
    755
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    781ß
    I concur. I just want the Bears to win. Thats why I have no problem with aging veterans being let go, because I root for the Bears, not the Urlachers, or Briggs, or Tillmans...the Bears.

    As for your pain as a baseball fan...I'm a Yankees fan...I only had to deal with the 80'2 to early 90's....sorry!
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +2,289 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,717ß
    Probably me more than you. At this point, I see nothing to tell me Mel is any good and until I do I guess I am entrenched. But I will say that I am really open to and even more important - hopeful that I'm wrong.
  12. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,625
    Likes Received:
    755
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    781ß
    Couple of points...what could Tucker have done during the season regarding the position coaches? Also, Tucker did not put out that product. Those players were given to him, and then they got hurt. He has no control over that. All he controls is scheme and play call...and we know he didn't even have full say over scheme because he had to run Lovies system to keep the boys happy.
  13. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,619
    Likes Received:
    3,034
    Ratings:
    +3,667 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,848ß
    Well remember I never said he was good, merely he gets an incomplete b/c not even Lovie could have kept that ship afloat last year, even w/BU and Izzy. Mainly b/c there is nothing that makes me think that BU would have stayed healthy last year and Izzy would have still been sitting behind Shea playing the Bass role; but Bass played pretty well.
    • Like Like x 1
  14. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +2,289 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,717ß
    Certainly fair enough
    • Like Like x 1
  15. dachuckster

    dachuckster Veteran SuperFan

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +341 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    174ß
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +2,289 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,717ß
    dahuckster -- thanks. good article. There are valid points in there both for Tuckers fault and his defense. The ones where he faults Tucker are pretty much in line with mine --

    "But there are elements that Tucker had direct control over, which he should be judged by and held accountable for, specifically in-game adjustments, communication and pressure packages — the last of which has plagued Tucker his entire tenure as an NFL defensive coordinator."

    he seemed no good at ajustments, communications was a disaster and we saw that several times, and the packages he used didn't seem to be very creative and were sometimes too repetitive and predictable, and a general lack of pressure with any group he has coached. In the last game where we had healthy veterans, however, it seemed that we did our best, so an argument can be made that he was on the upswing. The end statement is pretty much where we are all at right now --

    "By bolstering the pass rush with a new group of defensive ends, Tucker will finally have an opportunity to work with legitimate talent up front. Thus, next season will prove if the poor output has simply been a byproduct of a lack of talent and not scheme or a combination or both."

    Everyone is taking a wait and see approach, but I still say that I think it will be better, but might not be what it could be under an aggressive and creative defensive architect. I hate to be second best at anything. Like I said... I just want a hard hitting attacking defense that other teams don't want to face. A defense that just plains stops you or beats you up trying.
  17. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,619
    Likes Received:
    3,034
    Ratings:
    +3,667 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,848ß
    So a few things, i"m not done reading yet
    1) good find Dahuckster.
    2) Bears were playing a 4-3 under which means the DT is next to the RDE, not the other way. If they stick w/this that means Allen is the RDE and if he gets his way Ratliff is the DT.
    3) As they point out looking at Tuckers past is a mixed bag, ya he didn't have success but he also didn't have talent, not sure why he's been highly sought after as a possible HC(prior to chicago DC) I see nothing but incompletes leaning to bad
    4) This is not a team looking to just get pressure from the front 4 while the back 7 sits back to stop long plays. They'll blitz multple players from multiple positions. This is a very complex D, not a simple Cover 2 so inexperience or lack of understanding is going to haunt it for better or worse.

    okay so i'll finish up, it was shorter then I thought.

    5) the team b/c the front four couldn't get it done was forced to limit their looks(it doesn't say it, but I will) b/c their were to many inexperienced and too many lack of talent players on the roster, to mostly a mug look. This limited the effectiveness of the look and made it easier to prepare for.
    6) This is the key, this year if the team is MOSTLY healthy there is no reason not to see a HUGE uptick in the D, it's by far the most talent Tucker has ever had to work with, which isn't saying much b/c he's never really had any previously, but this is going on a near dream for a DC, Allen, Ratliff on the line, 2 young up and comers there also, Briggs DJ at the LB and 2 young guys to fill out the other LB, 2 pro bowl CB's and..well then there is the cluster puck at the S position, but it's got to be better then last year. Considering this is a O team now, that is a hell of a lot of talent to work with.
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2014
    • Like Like x 2
  18. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,625
    Likes Received:
    755
    Ratings:
    +935 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    781ß
    Good article. A couple of things...I love how he illustrated a coverage in which Conte rotated down, while Wright replaced him, which disproves another posters constant claims that the Free Safety is always the last line of defense in a defense. Also, perhaps Tucker blitzed less because the replacements for said players just couldn't handle the schemes? As a DC I'm not going to run something my players are not capable of executing. Thats about all I can think of. I know some people will say "the replacements should have been able to execute it...that falls on the coach", and to that I'd say not so fast. Each player has a skill set that allows them to do certain things. When a group of players with certain skill sets get lost to injury it's not a given their replacements will be able to execute what they can as well if at all. For instance, on offense, the play calling would change DRASTICALLY if Forte, Jefferey, and Marshall went down(the equivalent to what happened on D). There is no way it could be run the same way AT ALL.
    • Like Like x 2
  19. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Position Coach

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    7,388
    Likes Received:
    1,623
    Ratings:
    +2,289 / 10 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,717ß
    good assessment, and pretty fair too. I had the same thoughts on #3. Really not sure either. Maybe they saw something I don't, but I want to be fair with the guy. I want to see what he can do now.
    • Like Like x 1
  20. dachuckster

    dachuckster Veteran SuperFan

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    517
    Likes Received:
    285
    Ratings:
    +341 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    174ß
    I thought it was balanced and objective. And I am glad to have contributed something.

Share This Page