I think a lot of people are missing the big picture. If Lovie were hired, it would be more for the level of respect he would instantly bring from players and fans. One of the biggest reasons I didn't want Schiano back was for his poor reputation throughout the league with players. For every McCoy singing his praises, there was a Michael Bennett trashing him. That's going to take a toll when it comes time to lure free agents. Lovie would be the quickest way to build goodwill with the rest of the league. Unlike some of the other big name coaches available (looking at you Shanny), he parted ways with the Bears with a winning record and good reputation.
It's not like we didn't get any free agents under Schiano
IMO, we overpaid Goldson last season based on the fact that it was very much a buyer's market. His 5 year contract was worth 18 million more than Glover Quin's 5 year contract. I understand he's had a couple of pro-bowls, but is he worth almost double what a two year younger Quin was? Even Jarius Byrd made less last season than Goldson after signing a 1 yr contract, and he is darn sure a better player.Other than Goldson, what other big FA did we sign after word about Schiano's reputation got out?
So, that's the goal, huh, to not get worse?
dalbuc: "Look, the question is can he coach? Yes, he is a guy who has proven he can get a team to the SB."And all he needs is for Devin Hester lightning to strike again. Sound promising.
dalbuc: "Look, the question is can he coach? Yes, he is a guy who has proven he can get a team to the SB."And all he needs is for Devin Hester lightning to strike again. Sound promising.
wow, so we are gonna parse being good that way? How about this he piled up a 56% win % and never had a franchise QB. He's not riding the coattails of some great QB to glory when he wins he is doing it the hard way.
You make it sound like spending all your resources on defense and sticking with a crappy QB is a plus.
Sometimes you got to make due with what you got. Like the situation this team is currently in. Glennon ain't ever going to be better than Brees, Ryan or Newton. So how do we win this division? Anyways, his team did trade a bunch of picks to get a QB.
And remained in the bottom third in the league with him. There's really no way you can portray this favorably. If Lovie is our HC, we'll need a GM who can save him from himself. That sucks.
And remained in the bottom third in the league with him. There's really no way you can portray this favorably. If Lovie is our HC, we'll need a GM who can save him from himself. That sucks.
LOL
In Lovies last 3 years they were never top 10 in points per game (the only stat that matters). They were #2 this year. No thank you.
well hopefully Tedford would have something to say about that
You make it sound like spending all your resources on defense and sticking with a crappy QB is a plus.
They tried to get the best QB they could in Cutler but he's unstable. It isn't like he didn't want a better QB. Sometimes you have to play the hand you are dealt.
The past is the future. Belichick sucks as a HC. See Cleveland
dalbuc: "Look, the question is can he coach? Yes, he is a guy who has proven he can get a team to the SB."And all he needs is for Devin Hester lightning to strike again. Sound promising.
wow, so we are gonna parse being good that way? How about this he piled up a 56% win % and never had a franchise QB. He's not riding the coattails of some great QB to glory when he wins he is doing it the hard way.
Well said. A big part of getting a franchise QB is being lucky enough to be in position to get one. Lovie never was and still built a good team in Chicago.
My main issue with Lovie is that he is so focused on defense. He hasn't shown the ability to field a good offense whether that was his "fault" or not, after 9 years as HC you would think he'd have gotten something at least respectable going on. I want our coach to be an offense guy. The league has changed and continues to change. The rule changes still haven't reached their full fruition. People are still learning how to exploit them. And there will be more changes coming down the road as Gooddell continues his quest to turn the NFL into the NBA. It is going to get harder and harder to succeed based off of a good defense as having a "good" defense is going to become harder and harder to achieve, and will have less and less impact as time goes on.I worry that Lovies' success in CHI wasn't just his ceiling, but that he actually overachieved a bit with a fair amount of luck. I don't like being dependent on an OC for our offense because that means losing that OC once they become successful. I'd rather have stability on O than on D.
dalbuc: "Look, the question is can he coach? Yes, he is a guy who has proven he can get a team to the SB."And all he needs is for Devin Hester lightning to strike again. Sound promising.
wow, so we are gonna parse being good that way? How about this he piled up a 56% win % and never had a franchise QB. He's not riding the coattails of some great QB to glory when he wins he is doing it the hard way.
Well said. A big part of getting a franchise QB is being lucky enough to be in position to get one. Lovie never was and still built a good team in Chicago.
Exactly. The Bears were almost always picking towards the back end of the 1st round because...well...he won a lot of games. Somehow that's a negative to a guy who supported giving Greg Schiano more time.
My main issue with Lovie is that he is so focused on defense. He hasn't shown the ability to field a good offense whether that was his "fault" or not, after 9 years as HC you would think he'd have gotten something at least respectable going on. I want our coach to be an offense guy. The league has changed and continues to change. The rule changes still haven't reached their full fruition. People are still learning how to exploit them. And there will be more changes coming down the road as Gooddell continues his quest to turn the NFL into the NBA. It is going to get harder and harder to succeed based off of a good defense as having a "good" defense is going to become harder and harder to achieve, and will have less and less impact as time goes on.I worry that Lovies' success in CHI wasn't just his ceiling, but that he actually overachieved a bit with a fair amount of luck. I don't like being dependent on an OC for our offense because that means losing that OC once they become successful. I'd rather have stability on O than on D.
fair point, not knocking it, but Seattle has a great defense and top 5 or 10 running attack and a 26th passing attack (I think)
