Kevin Jones comes back
by propheteer on Mar 6, 2009 5:12 PM CST
171 comments
Profootballtalk's own Mike Florio has reported that Kevin Jones has re-signed with the Bears. I like this deal a lot; it provides solid depth behind the overused Matt Forte. In addition, KJ should be at 100% this year because now he's two years removed from major knee surgery. I'd estimate that KJ will average 8-12 touches per game in order to give Matt a much deserved reprieve. KJ and GW will battle it out in training camp for the backup spot.
UPDATE: Per the Sun Times, here's how Jones' contract is broken down (Helmet tip: SackMan):
According to a league source, Jones receives $1 million in bonus money--a $500,000 signing bonus and a $500,000 roster bonus. His base salary this year will be $1 million. He was a workout bonus worth $350,000 in 2010 and a base salary of $1.15 million.
0 recs |
171 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
The details...
Kevin Jones has agreed to terms with the Bears on a two-year contract worth approximately $3.5 million. The deal includes a $1 million bonus and $2 million in the first season.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
BTW
I’d like an official break down of this deal… as the quote above is wish-washy.
Is the $1 mil bonus part of the $2 mil in 2009?
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 6, 2009 5:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OK... here it is.
According to a league source, Jones receives $1 million in bonus money—a $500,000 signing bonus and a $500,000 roster bonus. His base salary this year will be $1 million. He was a workout bonus worth $350,000 in 2010 and a base salary of $1.15 million.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
The Bears basically let the Bills negotiate his contract...
And matched the Bills offer twice.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:14 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Probably a really stupid question but
how do you customize the link like that?
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 6, 2009 5:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You mean the quote box?
You made a custom link in your post… so I’m guessing you know how to do that.
Just copy the quote from the article… paste it… highlight it…. and click the quote button.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That was me, Sack
lol.
Propheteer….when you hit reply to my comment, you’ll see a chain to the right. Write something, highlight it, then hit that chain. Paste your link, click “Open in New Window,” then you’ll be good.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 6, 2009 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I had three wishes
for a J.A. pocket book to resign Jones, St.Clair and get Sharper. I’m 1/3 of the way there.
by luckie815 on Mar 6, 2009 5:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I hope you only go 1/3
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope he goes 2/3
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 6, 2009 5:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope you go 0/1
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't get it.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 6, 2009 5:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You type that way too often. LOL.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 5:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Fine! keep your little joke to yourself.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 6, 2009 5:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It was simple math. LOL.
I don’t want either guy… you want one of those guys.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 6, 2009 6:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, I'm not very good at math.
And yes, I want St.Clair. Why? Because he gives us experienced, durable and versatile depth. Go on keep making fun of me.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 6, 2009 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I ALSO Hve Three Wishes
#1. Jerry Angelo FIRES Lovie Smith
#2. JA then convinces the McCaskey’s to put the team up for sale, strongly suggesting someone like Mark Cuban as the potential new owner.
#3. After that Jerry Anglelo resigns.
A man can dream!
by GeoMak on Mar 6, 2009 9:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
IF I WAS A GENIE
Id grant all three wishes and just for those FANATASTIC WISHES and give you three more.
Great minds do think alike.
Lovie=Disease
by stumpo on Mar 6, 2009 11:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't you know that the McCaskey's carry the blood of Halas?
The descendants of George Halas are the keepers of the flame and you want to trade the blood of Halas for Mark Cuban? Are you kidding me?
GeoMakAttack, you need to do some serious soul searching my friend. I suggest some reading material, Halas by Halas the autobiography of George Halas to start.
This is the great franchise of the Chicago Bears which started from nothing but a dream from George Halas himself and is now a billion dollar empire and is still a family owned team with direct bloodlines to Papa Bear. The Bears are the second oldest team in the NFL and one of the most respected and professional sports franchises in all of sports. Mark Cuban? Do you know that George Halas once owned, coached and played for the Bears at the same time? This man gave his entire life, heart and soul for the Bears to be what they are today. God forbid….
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 11:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hmmm did the bears win a superbowl under Halas?
no. never even came close. and thats because he was being as cheap as the McCaskey’s are now.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 12:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No Super Bowls, just EIGHT WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS!
Halas died in 1983. He had eight world championship titles which were super bowls before they called them super bowls! Incredible! that’s the problem with today’s generation of fans, you don’t know your damn history.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You Kids Kill Me
I will reply to both Haight/ifuwanna:
Ifuwanna hit the nail on the head. Papa was as cheap as the McCaskeys. There was however one hugh, GRAND CANYON size difference. Papa Bear was a football genius; the McCaskey’s are F’ing idiots:
Case in point. What were Halas’ last coaching decisions? That’s right, retaining Buddy Ryan as DC and hiring Ditka as HC. Not bad. Not bad at all.
The McCaskey’s (starting with brain dead Michael)? Replacing legendary coach Mike Ditka with Dave Wannstedt! And then, as if that wasn’t enough, they follow that POS up with Dick and Lovie.
I actually like Dick and Lovie, but all three of these guys follow the same pattern: Good DC’s who are generally missing the one essential element necessary for being a great HC: LEADERSHIP.
The Bears are average. They are good. And that’s it. If being average and good is enough for you guys, then you’ve come to the right place.
I want more than that. Iwant above average/great. Look at the NY Giants. Another old guard NFL franchise. Both are storied NFL franchises. Both have nevver been accused of lavishing money around. Both are located in two of the GREATEST cities in the US of A.
The Giants keep on winning. They have spanned the Parcells era to the Coughlin era.
Once Ryan and then Ditka left, we’ve been VERY VERY average (at best).
Please though reread this first sentence of mine:
Ifuwanna hit the nail on the head. Papa was as cheap as the McCaskeys. There was however one hugh, GRAND CANYON size difference. Papa Bear was a football genius; the McCaskey’s are F’ing idiots:
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Papa Bear was a football genius
I won’t dispute that. But how do you explain the Butkus/Sayers years. Up to that point, two of the greatest players at their position in NFL history but no superbowl, playoffs, or multiple winning seasons?
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 12:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your taking a small portion of a long storied history.
Your statement has no bearing.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Look
I KNEW you were going to say that. I just KNEW it. OK.
Maybe George had other things on his my (considering he founded the league , ran the team, coached, etc).
Let me rephrase it for you. COMPARED to the McCaskeys George Halas was a genius.
Hell, compared to the McCaskeys I think even you (ifuwannacrownem) are a GENIUS!
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Listen to me very carefully.
You do not take what George Halas spent his entire life to build and sell it to Mark Cuban! This is not a secret that the McCaskey’s are cheap. But I (ME), can take pride in that my team, The Chicago Bears are still family owned by the blood of George Halas. I dread the day that we trade that for Mark Cuban.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I said a guy like Mark Cuban
I respect your loyalty. And I respect that you are fine with losing.
Tell you what though. Take a drive to New England. Talk to THOSE people. Ask them if they are unhappy that the origanlal owners (the Sullivans) sold the team and that after passing through Victor Kiam, it ended up in the hands of (Mark Cuban type) Robert Kraft.
Ask the good people of Foxboro and beyond if they regret the fact that Kraft bought the team?
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
When the Patriots became a team in 1959....
The Bears already had 7 World Championships!
And Robert Kraft is not a Mark Cuban type. Robert Kraft is way ahead of Mark Cuban.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Patriots
Dude. You’re not making any sense here. What does how many championships the Bears had by 1959 have to do with the McCaskeys?
Cuban and Kraft are almost EXACTLY alike. Please. You are embarrassing yourself now. They are rich fans who bought their teams and put almost all of their effort and money into winning.
They’ve had different results but that doesn’t change the fact that they are almost exactly alike.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You embarassed yourself a long time ago.
You have no respect for tradition. No respect for George Halas, wanting to sell his team to an outsider. Without George Halas there is no Chicago Bears and maybe no NFL.
Why don’t you take up fan hood with the next expansion team, owned by Mark Cuban!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Tradition
You make no sense.
I respect the tradition of the Halas led Bears. I (along with guys like Mike Ditka and JimMcMahon, among many others) DON"T respect the “tradition” of the McCaskey’s.
Saying that without George Halas there is no league or Bears is an obvious statement.
DOES THAT MEAN THE MCCASKEYS GET A FREE PASS CAUSE THEY WERE RELATED TO THE GUY?
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:56 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LOL.
George Halas’ famous last words were, “Anyone but Michael.”
That being referred to: he didn’t want his grandson inheriting the team.
He married Virginia, but he loathed her brother Ed…
They used to hold regular morning team meetings with the entire staff. George would basically talk a bunch of nonsense, until Ed McCaskey would leave the room. After Ed left the room, Halas would regularly say, “There goes the stupidest SOB I’ve ever met.” And, then he’d start the real meeting.
Halas would be much happier in his grave if the team were NOT in control of the McCaskeys.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 12:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I beg to differ.
Virginia Halas McCaskey, George Halas’ daughter, is THE owner of the Chicago Bears. In 1999 Virginia fired her own son, Mike McCaskey and hired Ted Phillips as President and CEO.
Do you think that George Halas would want anyone else to own the Bears besides his own daughter?
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 1:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Read the biography.
Halas’ vision was to leave the team in his son’s hands : George “Mugs” Halas Jr.
But, Mugs tragically passed in in 1979 at age 54. Halas didn’t want any of the McCaskey boys to control the team. Especially Ed (Virginia’s husband) and Micheal (the eldest grandson).
I got the relations confused in my earlier post.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 2:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Virginia owns 80.3 % of the team.
Pat Ryan owns the other 19.7%.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 2:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's great... now let's get back to Halas' wishes.
HE DID NOT WANT THE TEAM IN THE MCCASKEYS HANDS!
Go read the biography and you’ll get a better understanding of the man, the history, and his wishes for the franchise after his passing.
Until then, I can’t continue this conversation with you… because you don’t know how it all unfolded.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 2:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I read every book by and about George Halas...
there is my friend. We all know that he wanted Mugs to take over the team and we all know what he thought about Ed and Mike. And we all know how he felt about Virginia. I’m telling you what you apparently don’t know. Virginia is THE owner of the Bears, not Mike.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 3:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OMG. Why is everthing so painful to discuss with you?
Yes, I know Virginia is the owner of the team. Great. Grand. Move on… and actually participate in the root of the discussion.
Let’s recap how this started:
1. You were upset because someone wanted Cuban to own the Bears… you saw that as disrespectful to George Halas.
2. I pointed out that if Halas had his way, the McCaskey’s wouldn’t have ownership of the team.
3. You pointed out that Virginia owns the team = True. Great. Grand. Move on…
4. I reminded you that Halas absolutely positively did want the McCaskeys, specifically Ed and Michael, to have any managing control or ownership of this team.
Therefore… my original premise: if Mark Cuban owned this team, Halas would probably be smiling in his grave, so long as the McCaskeys had no part of the franchise.
DO YOU GET THIS CONVERSATION NOW?
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 4:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, Halas is smiling in his grave because....
Virginia owns the team and Mike has nothing to do with the team.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 4:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Whatever.
Who do you think dismantled the 85 Championship team and ran Halas’ two self-appointed successers (Vainisi and Ditka) out the door > It was Mikey himself. The damage was done right away.
All George kept saying was “Anyone but Michael.” And, Mikey ran the team, and ruined it. And, he’ll get it back when Ginny passes away.
Now, I’ve had enough of this discussion… that’s gone virtually nowhere.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Whatever.
EXACTLY. And it’s been downhill ever since.
In the quarter century since then, the Bears can best be described as average.
Not terrible like the Cardinals, not excellent like The Steelers, Pats etc.
Average.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 5:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your still crying over spilled milk.
From 20 years ago!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 5:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
By the way...
“Papa Bear, The Life and Legacy of George Halas” is not Halas’ autobiography. It is called “Halas by Halas”
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 3:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I never refered to it as an autobio
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 4:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone but Michael
You are correct. And further proof of Papa Bears “intelligence.”
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 5:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Just an FYI
This….
Ifuwanna hit the nail on the head. Papa was as cheap as the McCaskeys. There was however one hugh, GRAND CANYON size difference. Papa Bear was a football genius; the McCaskey’s are F’ing idiots:
….is a paragraph, not a first sentence.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 7, 2009 12:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
George Halas founded the National Football League...
The shape of the football today = the ball George Halas designed to take advantage of his T-formation aerial attack.
Hash marks in the middle of the field = George Halas.
The invention of the MLB position = George Halas, when he moved George Connor from OT to LB to stop the Eagles rushing attack.
The modernization of the TE positon = George Halas, when he used Mike Ditka as more than just a typical blocking end.
The list goes on and on.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 12:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you very much!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
nobody is disputing his accomplishments
but once again, no superbowls. as for innovation, Paul Brown made as many if not more. Facemasks, radio transmitters, Studying game film, the inclusion of African-Americans in the league, the west coast offense, and a coaching tree which still thrives today.
Like i said Halas was great pre superbowl era. but to have arguably the greatest MLB and RB on your team at the same time and never make the playoffs, that’s bad ownership. I don’t care who you are, I don’t care what your past accomplishments has done. it doesn’t absolve years of ineptitude.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 1:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your talking about two players on opposites sides of the ball.
This is not a one man sport. There are 10 other players on each side of the ball needed to play the game. So Halas was a loser because of this? His record was 318-148, 68% winning percentage.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 1:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I never called him a loser.
his record has nothing to do with the conversation. I’m talking about Halas the Owner, not Halas the Coach. and halas the owner couldn’t put a front office together.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 2:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Except the office in the 80's
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 2:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your neglecting the championship years.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 2:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no I'm not
because once again, I’m not talking about what he did as a coach. it’s what he did strictly as an owner.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 2:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your totally not making sense.
Your clearly frustrated. Halas has always been the owner!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 3:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
but not always the coach
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 3:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You Forgot the Use of Game Films
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell
by phastphil on Mar 7, 2009 1:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I know all about Halas
Really. You’re just going to have to take my word for it.
Mark Cuban? Yeah, you’re right. I really wouldn’t want a guy that revived an almost dead NBA franchise, who spares no expense on said franchise and who lives and dies with every victory/loss running the Monsters of the Midway.
You’re right. What the Hell was I thinking?!!!!!!!!!
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
An NBA franchise!
Listen to yourself!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Actually have to agree with you on this one
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 7, 2009 12:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You are right.
Someone would have to sit down with Mark and explain the difference between a football and a basketball.
That might be a deal killer here.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's a ludicrous argument
1) You’re assuming that Cuban would put the same effort into the Bears that he has the Mavericks, which won’t happen, mainly because he would own TWO teams.
2) It’s a pipe dream at best to even think that Cuban would buy the Bears.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 7, 2009 12:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
LIKE a MARK CUBAN
Like a Robert Kraft. A guy that, beyond just OWNING the team, WASNTS/NEEDS to win.
The McCaskeys (not Halas) are far closer to the Bidwills of Phoenix than most people care to realize or understand.
They just want to keep their team going and to turn a profit. If they win, OK. They’ll take it. But winning has NEVER been their priority. Never!
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Spring Training
Gotta run to see the Cubs and Brewers.
Why don’t one of guys (like the guy who did JA’s draft picks) run a comparison between a few old guard NFL franchises (like the Bears, Cardinals and Giants)from the early 80’s when the McCaskey’s took over.
The Bears: Better than the Cardinals, not as good as the G-Men. When the best thing you can say about yourself is that you are better than Bidwill, you’re in trouble.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 12:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Take off, split.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Very good to see
One less position to worry about in the draft and he’s a solid player. Now only if we had a solid o-line hmmmm.
"URLACHER IS GOD"
by Acreman20 on Mar 6, 2009 5:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well, there it is fellas....
We got our one two punch in the back field. looking good!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 6, 2009 5:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
http:
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 6, 2009 5:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I dont know about this one...
I mean, I guess it makes sense, and it’s a relatively cheap contract, but there’s been all this talk in house about Wolfe getting more reps as a #2, so does this mean Wolfe’s gonna take the back seat again? I still think he’s got some good potential to break a big one at any time…
by DieHardBearsCubs on Mar 7, 2009 7:39 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
nice cheap deal
unfortunately you get what you pay for. kevin jones is decent and the contract is cheap, but certainly does not provide a 1-2 punch. If Forte is a “punch” Jones is like a slap with a glove. If I thought he was going to see the field enough to prevent Forte from getting injured, i’d be happy, i just don’t see that happening. as our roster stands right now if/when Forte needs a breather we might be better off kneeling for 3 downs and punting because Forte is the only offensive (running and receiving) threat we have and only guy that scares opposing Ds.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 9:03 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Devin Hester and Greg Olsen aren't receiving threats?
Stop kidding yourself. Desmond Clark isn’t a receiving threat?
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 11:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
FORTE LED THE TEAM IN RECEPTIONS!!
we need wide receivers
at least one that can compete with Forte for most receptions on the team
none of the guys you mention were able to do that last year
and he Forte a rookie
right now we still do not have that
ok… maybe we draft a WR, but at #18 we will get JAs version of the best WR after Crabtree and maclin are gone.
I say since Crab is THE BEST WR (and considered the best “football player”) available, at the position we need most, get him.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 11:56 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You said Forte is the only threat we have on offense....
and we might as well kneel the ball when he is not on the field. We have other threats, Devin Hester is a BIG threat. You are correct, we need a wide receiver. But your comment is silly. And Forte leading the team in receptions is a bad thing? Thank goodness we have a back that can catch the ball. When is the last time we had a back that can do what he does?
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 12:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Forte is Awesome
It is just sad that he is the one and only dimension to the Chicago Bears offense. As good as he is, he is the only player teams have to key in on. Hester is good, but he can’t play 2 wide receiver spots which is basically what the Bears rely on him to do. because Forte can catch that many passes does not excuse not having a receiver who can do the same on an NFL team
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 12:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Umm...Olsen?
He’s a huge part of their offense, and if it weren’t for him creating space on the outside our WRs would look even worse than they do now. Hester is still developing, and it’s a well-known fact he made great strides last year (only his second year ever at the position).
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 1:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If you read his comment....
you will see his point.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 1:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
being part of the Bears offense is not a huge accomplishment
number 1 reason is that Forte as a rookie led in both receptions and rushing attempts. Yes Hester and Olsen both have talent and are from the U. but neither could compete with Forte. Can they all continue to improve on the current course, yes. Would a sure fire number one wide receiver (Crabtree) improve the offense dramatically, YES. The anticipated effect of this on Forte is fewer touches but a higher number of yards per catch/run. not indicting the vaunted offensive weapons of the Bears and all, but if you think the Bears have legitimate offensive weapons you just haven’t been paying attention.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 2:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You said
It is just sad that he is the one and only dimension to the Chicago Bears offense
.
My point is that Forte is not the only weapon on the offense. Olsen helps open up running lanes because of his ability to get downfield. Not only that, he usually occupies the attention of one safety when doing a fly or seem pattern. Hester’s speed has the same effect, basically keeping the SS out of the box a lot of times (aids Forte).
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You sound as if Matt Forte leading the team....
in rushing and receptions is a bad thing. And Hester and Olsen are not “competing” with Forte. Their teammates.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 2:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
if olsen led the team in rushing attempts
you’d say hey that is pretty impressive because that is not even his main responsibility. Their running backs must suck if the TE is leading in rushing attempts. Same thing applies to Forte leading in receptions. while it is impressive, it is also a bad sign and if you do not realize that it is largely due to the ineptitude of the Bears other skill position players that Forte gets such a large percentage of touches then you clearly have not been watching the Chicago Bears. The Bears offense has not been good for awhile. Yes Forte is awesome, but the offense is still not very good.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 2:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
just a nugget of info
olsen wasn’t even the starting TE last season. but still managed to be the second best receiver on the Bears roster. Olsen is indeed a playmaker and I’ll even go as far as to say that if the offense gels next season, he’ll be the best play maker on this team.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 2:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I vote that Forte will lead the team in TDs again.
But, Olsen could end up with 5 or 6 TDs.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 2:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope so!
I plan on retaining him in my keeper league. I’d predict somewhere between 10-12 total TDs.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 2:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Huh?
Like most RBs Forte is the key to the Bears offense, but again, he’s not the only weapon. Why bring up Olsen running the ball? It’s like asking your DT to cover a WR. Why don’t you talk about how he’s progressed as a blocker in the running game? That’s where he can directly effect Forte’s production and have an impact on the running game.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 2:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I focus on more relevant things...
Olsen is good but nothing you have said even addresses the fact that even if everything you say about Olsen is true we still need a WR. no matter how good Olsen is.
i don’t talk about obvious shit like “TE block more” because that is simply minded.
Why don’t you talk about those things if that is what interests you? You have enough trouble just being yourself so don’t worry your little brain about what you think I should be writing about.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 3:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
As frustration sets in....
There also goes all self control.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 3:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
OK fellas
keep it civil
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 3:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Who's brain is little?
Whenever personal insults are thrown around, it usually means the individual making them has the mental capacity issue.
The argument had nothing to do with getting another WR, which obviously I condone, but what players were “dimensions” on the offense. You stated that Forte was the only one, while I respectfully disagreed because it’s plain as day that Olsen and Hester are indeed playmakers.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 3:40 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
hester and olsen may be able to make plays
but neither or them are starting #1 Wide Receivers. They can be “playmakers” or whatever you want to call them, but without an addition to the receiver corps our offense will remain on of the league’s worst (it as if this is a newsflash to you peeps). So yes there are different dimensions to our offense than Forte, they just are not good enough to sustain an offense on their own. without Forte most teams can shut down what you are now reinventing to be a fearsome duo of hester and olsen. keep dreaming about their “playmaking abilities” because those led us to have one of the worst offenses in the league last year, while they were both out performed by a rookie RB.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 4:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
ok
i remember seeing games last season where Olsen and Hester picked up Forte’s slack because he was injured or the bears couldn’t get the ball going on the ground (new orleans sticks out in my mind). I saw the Bears open a sunday night game against the eagles with Orton running a no huddle offense, Throwing a Beautiful toss to Olsen. I saw Hester beat all world cornerback Asante Samuel for a TD in that same game. you seem to forget that hester is learning on the job, olsen is not even the starter, Ortons the QB and the line sucked ass. I’m not arguing that we need a new number one receiver, but it would be foolish to overlook the talent or lack thereof on this team.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 5:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't of said it better
He also fails to understand that the learning curve for a RB is very short compared to TE and WR.
Olsen is already a top-10 TE in the entire league after just his sophomore season (54 catches/574 yds), and was tied for seventh in TDs (5). He accomplished all this with one of the worst offenses in league last year. You can’t possibly deny that since you said so many times how bad it was.
Hester improved by a whopping 39% in receptions from his first year ever as a WR and his second. He also had a very respectable 13.0 per catch average in a very un-dynamic offensive attack.
Based on those numbers they’re improving at a very good rate. If you can’t see that they’re “dimensions” as you call them, then you need help.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 5:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no such thing as "couldn't of"
when is the last time you “of” ed something? learn english then come see me.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 6:07 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Priceless
Excuse me, it’s “could have.” I didn’t realize I was being monitored by the grammer police. With that said, your reply listed below shows that you have a more serious problem with the English language.
i don’t talk about obvious shit like "TE block more" because that is simply minded.
Why don’t you talk about those things if that is what interests you? You have enough trouble just being yourself so don’t worry your little brain about what you think I should be writing about.
What?
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 6:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Now that is funny!
What do you think of your gramer there Not It All.
“Learn English than come see me.” That’s funny sh1t.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
WOW...maybe the 3rd time is the charm...
not “could have”. it was “couldn’t of” by which you meant could not have. not “could have”.
Seriously you don’t even know wtf you are saying so don’t even step to me.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 6:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You lose
Why are you changing the subject? The only feasible reason is because you have conceded our argument.
Again, please refer back to your rediculous grammer, writing, punctuation and your penchant for run-on sentences. I’m going to call you “Pot” from now on.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 6:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
anybody who reads anything you post loses
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 6:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
but you've been reading his posts.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 6:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Anyone
who follows your posts lacks creativity. Try an original thought for once.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 6:49 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I am even further convinced of your new name.
Not It All.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 5:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope not.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You seriously think that Hester and Olsen don't have...
play making abilities?
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 5:36 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
you seriously gonna tell me how good the Bears passing offense is??
newsflash it is terrible. u dolts are right Hester and and Olsen are good players on what is still one of the worst passing offenses in the league. congratulations all around.
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 6:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No one is even arguing the fact that...
our passing game isn’t very good. Your so frustrated that you forgot what you were arguing about. Now that is funny!
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:15 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i look forward to your first relevant and thoughtful post
if you cannot read and comprehend what’s going on don’t reply and expect everything to be dumbed down to your level
by No It All on Mar 7, 2009 6:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
O.k., Not It All.
Count to ten, take deep breaths. Everything is gonna be alright. Your a good Bear fan.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like it!
Now draft Ian Johnson and have him, Wolfe, and Peterson compete. I supported drafting Wolfe, but there’s got to be a reason why they don’t use him.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell
by phastphil on Mar 7, 2009 11:01 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Wolfe is
to small and one dimensional. The defenses know it’s going to be a screen because of his size.
by luckie815 on Mar 7, 2009 12:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No, it's because of Turner's lack of creativity.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 1:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Darren Sproles
He’s small and the Chargers seem to be able to use him for more than screen passes. I’m not saying Garret Wolfe is another Sproles, but you can’t just let him run the ball one or two times a game and when it’s not successful throw up your arms and say the guy can only run screen passes. Improvements in the O-Line would help.
"The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt." - Bertrand Russell
by phastphil on Mar 7, 2009 2:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
The Bears are not ready to get rid of Wolfe. Hopefully we can find a way to get him more touches.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 2:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If his body
was as big as his heart, he would be great. How long are we going to keep roster spots open for just special teams players, such as Davis, A.P. and Wolfe.
by luckie815 on Mar 7, 2009 2:06 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
when will we start utilizing Wolfe correctly?
by SamuraiMike50 on Mar 7, 2009 3:29 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Turner
He needs to install some kind of spread formation with 4 WRs (Olsen as one) in order to utilize Wolfe’s playmaking ability. That way he can call draws, delays, and screens without being so predictable.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 3:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
very smart observation
but i doubt turner would do something that visionary
by SamuraiMike50 on Mar 7, 2009 5:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It's not visionary
Many teams use it, and a few have it as their base offense (Pats and Chiefs).
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 5:44 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's a hard offense to install...
when your lousy tackles need help from your TEs and backfield to pass protect.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 5:42 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Show me a team that doesn't need Tightends and Running backs....
to help pass protect. There will always be situations where it is necessary.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 5:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well... yes, captain obvious. Of course that is the case.
But let’s stop cherry picking my statements for once, and try commenting on the content of the discussion.
It’s not a very good idea to make the spread your base offense, if you’re tackles are weak in pass protection, because they won’t get any help from the TEs in pass protection.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 5:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You got me mixed up with someone else, Captain.
I never said anything about a spread offense. And it doesn’t matter what offense. Tight Ends and Running Backs are always going to be needed to help pass protect.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
In case you missed it... we're talking about the spread offense.
Let me recap for you…
1. I said (in not so many words), it’s not a good idea for the Bears to run the spread: because our poor tackles won’t get help in pass protection from the TEs and RB in the spread formation.
2. You chimed in about every team needing TEs and RBs to help pass protect.
3. I re-directed you back to the original conversation… the one that discusses the absence of help in pass protection in the spread formation.
Sorry you couldn’t be here today for this discussion.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 6:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I tell ya what
you’re arguing with everyone today. :)
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 7, 2009 6:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Not unless
you’re QB is Tom Brady or Peyton Manning.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 6:08 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah right!
You think Brady and Manning never needed help from the TE and RB? Their good but not invincible.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Upgrade
That’s why they need to draft another tackle who has the ability to pass block fairly well. It would give Turner more flexibility to mix it up every once in awhile.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 5:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
THE FINAL WORD
As many of you know by now, I turned in my membership cards to the Lovie Smith, Jerry Angelo and McCaskey family fan clubs some time ago.
I truly respect loyality as fans such as you guys. I should know, I’ve been a life long Cub fan. I get it and I respect it. Really. I hate bandwagon fans.
That said, the city of Chicago and fans such as yourself deserve better.
I just compiled a list of recent past SB winning teams. While unscientific, it is revealing.
This is a list going back to the Jimmy Johnson day at Dallas and shows the number of years it took all the SB winning coaches (and their front offices and owners) to win the SB.
Jimmy Johnson – 4 years
Mike Holmgren – 5 years
Mike Shanahan – 3 years
Dick Vermeil – 3 years
Brian Billick – 2 years
Bill Belichick – 2 years
Jon Gruden – 1 year
Bill Cowher – 14 years
Tony Dungy – 5 years
Tom Couglin – 4 years
Mike Tomlin – 2 years
Seriously, I know that there are different factors in play here (such as Gruden walking into an excellent team and winning it in one year) but it is revealing. I was a little surprised by it myself.
With the exception of Cowher, every other coach took 5 years or less.
Lovie is going on his 6th.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 5:53 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Why are you wasting your time on such a lame argument?
Lovie has been to the Super Bowl. Fine he didn’t win it but he has gotten there, in less than 5 years. Lame argument. Do you think that the Rams would have gone to 2 super bowls if Lovie hadn’t been the DC of those defenses?
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 5:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
So... I guess previous coaching stints don't count?
Yep… you are correct. It’s a very unscientific list you put together.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that.
We know it's the most valuable position on the football team. We've gone through so many scenarios at that position we can write a book, moreso on what not do."
-- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
.
by SackMan on Mar 7, 2009 6:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What kind of point are you trying to make? You have Bill Cower who took 14 years!
Your trying a little to hard to come up with something. That’s just silly.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think the point being made here is this.
In pretty much the last two decades, every team that won the SB (with the exception of Cowher) won it in five years or less with the New Regime. Same with Ditka and the 85 Bears ( four years).
It clearly suggests that new regimes (like JA and Lovie), if they haven’t won it in five, probably aren’t going to win the SB. That’s all. Is it some kind of guarantee? Of course not. It is, as they say, what it is.
BTW (Haightminow), Pete Giunta, not Lovie, was the DC for the SB Rams.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 6:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That is very much incorrect
Check out this article. We’ll wait for your apology.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 7, 2009 6:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
BTW:
Please don’t ever tell me that (so and so CURRENT HC) was a DC or an OC on a SB winning team. That means NOTHING to me as far as THIS conversation goes.
Norv Turner and Dave Wannstedt were SB winning coordinators. Credit where credit is due. And both were/are bad or mediocre HC’s (unless you can find me ONE Bears fan who begs to differ regarding Wanny).
Previous coaching stints DON’T count in this conversation. That’s part of the problem in the NFL. People like owners and GM’s think that just because a guy can coordinate an offense or defense well, that he’ll be a good HC.
Nothing, and I mean NOTHING could be further from the truth. Just look at recent guys like Scott Linehan, Cam Cameron and Rod Marinelli. All excellent position coaches coordinators . . . and TERRIBLE HC’s.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 6:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Your telling me that Lovie Smith wasn't the DC of the Rams when they went to the Super Bowl in 2001?
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
i thought he was
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 6:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He was, I'll put $ on it. This guy is confused.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He is wrong
I posted a link above.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 7, 2009 6:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Lovie
I’m saying he wasn’t the DC when they won the SB in 1999. That’s all.
I know he eventually was the DC in St. Louis. Just not when they won (and they certainly didn’t get back there cause of him; it was probably due more to Martz and the offense).
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 6:43 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Not really
His defense had a pretty big impact that year. He was brought in specifically to help “right” the ship so to speak. I believe they improved quite a bit. Although, I’m way too lazy to look up the stats right now.
"I'm not so mean. I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something." - Dick Butkus
by propheteer on Mar 7, 2009 6:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
History
of course, is relevant.
And here’s the most RELEVANT comment of all. Something that continues to elude so many people working in the NFL (and sitting at home watching).
Past performance as a successful OC or DC in no way, shape or form is an indicator of future success as a HC.
Now, here’ where it gets tricky. Look at the list of previous SB winng coaches. Most (with exceptions like Mike Ditka and Jimmy Johnson and Tom Coughlin, WERE NFL coordinators). That’s just the fact.
So, if almost all SB winning HC’s were at one time NFL coordinators, what point I are you trying to make, GeoMak?
It’s this. Being an excellent coordinator WITHOUT being a “Leader of Men” as HC is useless!
This single example crystalizes this concept. In his book “Overrated and Underrated” ESPN’s Sal Paolantonio cites Norv Turner as the most overrated HC in the NFL. Why? Lack of leadership.
The great Jerry Rice (the Niners version of OUR late, great Walter Payton) said this regarding Turner (who briefly was his HC in Oakland): “He could not motivate the players. He had NO control.”
That’s a direct quote. And it sums up the “good coordinator without great Leadership skills as failed HC in the NFL.”
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 6:50 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Great
I never get tired of the whole leader of men and motivator rap
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 6:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
DUDE.
I don’t know you (ifuwannacrownem) or any of you other guys. I’m sure you are all nice guys and rabid Bear fans (which I respect).
If any of you ever get out to Phoenix look me up and we;ll have a few cocktails.
That said, respectfully, comments like this (I never get tired of the whole leader of men and motivator rap) are kind of ignorant.
It might not matter to you but it matters to guys like Jerry Rice (and hundreds of other GREAT NFL players).
Really.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 7:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I apoligize
but i think in terms of motivation, Lovie ranks pretty high on that list. but with a roster like Chicago’s, who can stay motivated?
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 7, 2009 7:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow! This is like beating a dead horse!
GeoMakAttack, just stop, please. I’m thinking that maybe you are just pretending to be a fan of the Bears because you are lonely.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 6:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Wow
So I’m guessing that you’re happy with the McCaskey, JA and Lovie Smith regime?
It’s been 25 years since the Bears won it all (under Halas).
I see no hope on the horizon for WINNING it ALL, for GREATNESS, with these people in charge.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 7:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wrong again! Just stop Geo.
Halas was already dead for two years when the Bears won it all.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 7:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Wrong Again
Come on. OF COURSE he was dead. And, as I stated in one of my first posts, he hired DITKA and retained Ryan, along with Jim Finks and everybody else. Just cause he died right before all of HIS hires dominated the league like NEVER before doen’t negate what he did.
Then compare that to all the great Hires by the McCaskeys in the last quarter century.
Wanny. TERRIBLE HC.
Jauron. Nice guy, average HC.
Lovie. Nice guy , average HC.
For the love of God, I know that you are smarter than this.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 7:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Wrong Again
Come on. OF COURSE he was dead. And, as I stated in one of my first posts, he hired DITKA and retained Ryan, along with Jim Finks and everybody else. Just cause he died right before all of HIS hires dominated the league like NEVER before doen’t negate what he did.
Then compare that to all the great Hires by the McCaskeys in the last quarter century.
Wanny. TERRIBLE HC.
Jauron. Nice guy, average HC.
Lovie. Nice guy , average HC.
For the love of God, I know that you are smarter than this.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 7:22 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Clearing up Lovie
Just to set the record straight, my list was only about SB WINNING HC’s, not just those that got there.
That’s where haighminow first brought up Lovie and his SB trips and respectfully, this comment:
Do you think that the Rams would have gone to 2 super bowls if Lovie hadn’t been the DC of those defenses?
Is wrong in that while he was the DC on the SB losing team, he wasn’t the DC on the SB winning team.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 6:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If I am wrong than so be it. I am not afraid to say I am wrong.
But you said, BTW (Haightminow), Pete Giunta, not Lovie, was the DC for the SB Rams. If I have my years mixed up than I am wrong. But you said that Lovie was not the DC of the Rams. That is wrong, admit it.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 7:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I should have said
SB winning coaches. Therein lies the confusion.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 7:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
this place is a god damn train wreck anymore.
by mike b on Mar 7, 2009 7:20 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Get off the track!
you will get run over.
Passion For The Game, Loyal To The Name, Chicago Bears, I Trust In Thee, Standing Strong Since 1983.
by Haightminow on Mar 7, 2009 7:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
no, its the kiddie train
more annoying than dangerous.
by mike b on Mar 8, 2009 12:16 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
My email is at the bottom
Let me know how we can make it better.
I'M A MAN! I'M 22!
by ChiFan13 on Mar 8, 2009 12:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wield the ban stick on those annoying arguments which run to 40 comments back and forth between three or four people, for one thing. Give them a private thread in which to slag each other off once their contribution to the discussion has surpassed the “useful” stage…..
by Spongie on Mar 8, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My big complaint with:
The McCaskeys: It started with Yale grad (not football educated) Michael McCaskey and has never stopped. They aren’t very smart and have a reputation for being cheap. That’s a bad combination and after 25 years Bear fans deserve better.
JA: Like most GM’s he has his share of hits and misses (compare that list posted here earlier of all his picks with any other GM’s. It would probably be similar). They ALL do. That said he is often MORE concerned with covering his ass than with making the team the best if could be. Not giving a proven NFL QB (Warner) an opportunity to compete against his #1 (Grossman) is exhibit A. Giving Thomas Jones away (for next to nothing, no less) because Jones and his #1 pick Benson played the same postion (even though Jones was a team leader and Pro-Bowler, and Benson had done NOTHING yet) is exhibit B.
Lovie. Not demanding enough. It’s nice to want to treat all your players like men and expect them to be self motivated and so on. Unfortunately, in the NFL,that has been PROVEN not to be the case. Guys like Bill Parcells were master motivators, even with his two best players (LT and Simms).
And Bear fans saw that up close and personal in 1982 when Mike Ditka took over. Mike Singletary initally hated the idea of Ditka coming to Chicago as the new HC (he was a lunatic according to Singletary). I
In Ditka’s first team meeting he basically said “Follow me men, and in three years we’ll win it all – although I know, by looking around this locker room, that half you won’t be here when we do.”
After that, Singletary said that Ditka was “Exactly the kind of guy we need here now.”
And he was. He quickly started getting rid of all the dead weight, and he and Ryan started whipping the rest of their asses into shape.
And almost ALL those guys, to this day, love Ditka and Ryan for it.
by GeoMak on Mar 7, 2009 7:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Whatever pal
Your one of those guys who likes to scream statements of the brilliantly obvious and to think you know what goes into coaching offense and defense. Why don’t you go back to reading your book on motivational cliches while watching the movie scene where Knute Rockne cajols the team to win won for the Gipper.
by BLou on Mar 7, 2009 9:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
RE: Whatever
Say What?
scream statements of the brilliantly obvious -——Apparently it’s not very obvious otherwise so many here wouldn’t disagree.
to think you know what goes into coaching offense and defense———Well, having never played in the NFL but following it as closely as I have for years, I’d say I think I know a lot of what goes into coaching and defense in the NFL.
You, like many others, completely miss the point on the essence of being a great HC (or coaching period) in the NFL.
It’s not about “Yelling” or “Screaming” (although some greats like Parcells and Ditka would certainly fit that bill)
It’s not about “motivational” speeches or things like that (Ditka, however, did give a pretty damn good pre-game speech).
It’s about Leadership. PERIOD. Things like yelling and motivational speeches may or may not be part of HC’s “personality.” Nobody yelled louder than Lombardi. Nobody said less than Landry. Yet both were great leaders.
Leadership at the NFL level is revealed in comments like this about Buddy Ryan:
Mike Singletary: We were like little kids, and Buddy was our Father.
Jerome Brown: I’d sell my body for Buddy.
Ahmad Rashad: How could a man who publicly looks like such an ass have so many players who love him to the dying end?
Bill Parcells: Buddy Ryan is a Neanderthal, and he attracts Neanderthal players.
Gerry Philbin: I played under him at the University of Buffalo and the Jets. It got mean, cruel. I’ve never seen anyone better at brining the animal out of you. If you didn’t hit as hard as he wanted, he’d humiliate you in front of everyone. Guys like me loved him, though. He was just so brutally honest.
Doug Plank: He didn’t care about the little stuff once you proved you were one of his guys. Just one word from him, and he knew we’d be ready to kill.
Dan Hampton: You had to pay a price to get in that circle, but once you did, it was like the Green berets. An aura. A badge of courage. You’d look at those who couldn’t pay the price with disdain.
You’ve got to realize this isn’t hockey or basketball. This isn’t striped shirts and a tie. This is football. Buddy’s way works in football.
Read those statements and try to picture ANYBODY saying those types of things with reference to Vince Tobin (who replaced Buddy with the Bears) and with Bear HC’s like Dave Wannstedt, Dick Jauron and Lovie Smith.
Ain’t gonna happen.
by GeoMak on Mar 8, 2009 12:05 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Is this a private club?
Or can anyone post?
by Just Dave on Mar 7, 2009 8:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
you just put a comment up
welcome to the inner circle just dave. feel free to post anytime.
OH! STEWIE!! GET OUT THE WAY BOY! GET OUT THE WAY!
-Stacey King
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 8, 2009 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Awesome... very awesome.
I just had a feeling that KJ would end up signing with someone else… and I’m glad he didn’t. Hopefully, Jones is 100% this season… with the contract the Bears gave him, I hope to see him with around 800 yards this season.
Good job Jerry!
Ryan Perilloux in 2010!!
by Dane Noble on Mar 8, 2009 12:05 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
