Mel Tucker Background

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

  1. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    2,183
    Ratings:
    +3,209 / 12 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,170ß
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    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.
     
    #21
  2. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    23,256
    Likes Received:
    3,405
    Ratings:
    +4,137 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,493ß
    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.
     
    #22
    • Like Like x 1
  3. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Assistant Head Coach
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    11,547
    Likes Received:
    3,437
    Ratings:
    +4,094 / 4 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,497ß
    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 :-)
     
    #23
  4. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    Ratings:
    +1,712 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,025ß
    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!
     
    #24
    • Like Like x 1
  5. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    23,256
    Likes Received:
    3,405
    Ratings:
    +4,137 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,493ß
    Ex Cubs coach that went to the Reds or Indians comes to mind.
     
    #25
  6. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    Ratings:
    +1,712 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,025ß
    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?
     
    #26
  7. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston Coordinator

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    8,883
    Likes Received:
    2,183
    Ratings:
    +3,209 / 12 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,170ß
    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!
     
    #27
    • Like Like x 1
  8. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Assistant Head Coach
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    11,547
    Likes Received:
    3,437
    Ratings:
    +4,094 / 4 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,497ß
    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.
     
    #28
  9. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    23,256
    Likes Received:
    3,405
    Ratings:
    +4,137 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,493ß
    BiH, I'm not so much entrenched as I'm in no mans land w/a white flag hoping for a truce. :)
     
    #29
  10. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    2,872
    Likes Received:
    1,251
    Ratings:
    +1,712 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    2,025ß
    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!
     
    #30
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page

Copyright © DaBears.com. This site is a news, entertainment and information site covering the Chicago Bears and their fans.
DaBears.com is an independent fan site and not associated with the Chicago Bears, National Football League, or any other media site.
All content is provided by, and for, Bear fans. We invite your participation and suggestions.