BearFan PHX

All contracts are subject to passing a physical. Poles shouldnt get or lose points for that. I also think in general Poles is doing a good job. its way too early to judge his competency, but the way he is proceeding looks right to me, and all of us. But I also think he is young and new, and will make some mistakes along the way. I think that he should have had a better idea of Ogunjobi's injury status. I think older more seasoned and experienced GMs have back channels, and personal relationships that give them info. i think agents don't screw with them as much too, because they know they have to deal with them again later. Poles, as far as i can see, is doing a good job, but he is not perfect, and i think it's OK to note his successes and failures.

I totally agree. and having the patience to do that will bring better results than trying to load up now on overpriced free agents.

Overall, I'm liking Poles' discipline. The free agents are all fillers, he's not taking anyone long term. I still think that if he was a more seasoned GM, he would have known about Ogunjobi's injury status, maybe thru contacts, maybe because the agent respected / feared him more. But I know there will be some growing pains with any new first time GM, and overall, while our team isnt going to be that good this year, I am on board with what he's doing. Patience and building thru the draft are exactly what we need after this endless cycle of new GMs trying to add a few pieces to a core that really doesnt exist, and getting us trapped in cap and draft hell while huge holes still exist on the roster (like the offensive line!)

And also learning on the job, like when Hanley forgot to check the box on the form about a linebacker. Its an error, but you learn from it, and grow into the job. As for congratulating Poles for not signing the guy anyway and hoping it would work out, i agree. That was a good move, but maybe he should have known this outcome was possible and factored that into his decision in the first place. All in all, this WAS a mistake by Poles. And it cost us another big signing, a player who went to another team that we could have afforded. That he didnt compound the error by making a second error in signing him doesnt mean the initial error didnt happen.

Seems like Ogunjobi just edged out Stallworth from Indi. Then we find out he's not healthy, and having missed on Stallworth in the meantime, we have to sign Jones. And in signing Jones so much cheaper, did we miss out on another top FA signing as they all already went? So is that a mistake by Poles for not knowing that Ogun might fail his physical? Is this the kind of thing that GMs who are more plugged in and can make phone calls usually know? Might the idea that he had surgery mean that if the two were equally rated, then you go with the one without the question mark? Or maybe Stallworth sucks and Eberflus has first hand knowledge of that? Still we might have signed a WR or OL with our one big FA. Making a big splash on a guy you cant sign is a bad move by Poles.

I wanted St Brown the year he was drafted, so this will be a good chance to get a look at him.

The Bears claimed Tennessee RB/returner Darrynton Evans off of waivers on Friday. He will be in the mix as a returner.

I think, since they are going back to a Tampa 2, that one of these two speedsters will play the Urlacher rangy middle linebacker. And together they will be great in nickel.

I do think this is a very important position. Whether it falls to Jim Arthur, or Brent Salazar, or both, their success will have a lot to do with the team's success.

It looks like on offense, and in this as well, that they are pulling from the familiar, and from outside both.

The Bears hired Jim Arthur as Strength and Conditioning coach today. Arthur was a protege and assistant of Rusty Jones, who was our S&C coach from 2005 - 2013 during the Lovie Smith era. Rusty is widely respected around the league and works in Indianapolis now. It's pretty clear that we are going back to the Tony Dungy / Lovie Smith tree for a 4-3 cover 2 type defense, and supporting staff philosophies, all the way down to S&C. And this is a very good sign. At least there is some kind of cultural cohesion. Everyone working toward the same vision of defense. In 2014, when we changed philosophy on S&C, I posted this article to this board about losing Rusty. Injuries were up, and since then we haven't been able to move anyone in the running game year after year, regardless of scheme or players. This S&C hire could be very significant indeed.

Right. Getsy talks about figuring out the players' strengths, and designing an offense to fit them. He spoke about how a playbook isnt really a set of plays, but an offensive approach. This is the anti-Nagy.

yes thank you, I agree. I forgot about Jaylon - youre right

6 blue chippers: Mack, Quinn, Roquan, Fields, Montgomery & Mooney?

I agree. The challenge will be to unify a vision between all of them. The upside is you're definitely not building an echo chamber. Lots of different points of view from different teams and traditions.

26 out of 32 teams have hired a black head coach or general manager in the past. So come on.

I dont think the NFL is racist. I think they would hire ANYONE if it meant theyd win more games. And the disgusting idea of tanking games is to get a better draft pick to win more games. If true, it deserves the harshest response, but in the end, these guys will do ANYTHING to win games. SO I dont believe that owners pass on coaches and general managers of color that they think would help them. The problem here, as alleged, is that the Giants had already decided to hire Daboll, and interviewed Flores just to satisfy the Rooney rule. And whats wrong with that? The purpose of the Rooney rule was to get more candidates of color interview experience and exposure to clubs. It wasnt to force anyone to make a hire on anything other than the belief that they would be best for the job. Im not against the Rooney rule per se, but it is the component of this that brings race into it. It is the corruption. Like I said, Im fine with it as long as clubs can still hire who they want. But lets not turn it on its head and call it disingenuous, and then blame the teams for that! Its the rule that creates the hypocritical issue. I dont believe there is a team that thinks "coach X would bring us to a Super Bowl, but we dont want them because of race" - thats ridiculous.

me too, but i wanted too much money LOL

lol Ive been called worse

Ahahaha! It SHOULD!

A couple points: His age is less the issue than the fact thqt he's been out of the loop for a while. It's not about being 73. If he was 48, and hadnt been in football since he was 35, that'd be a problem too. On the flip side, it is possible that a lot of the interviews are for the purpose of gathering information; which coaches and GMs want to work together, what a GMs philosophies are (which can help in predicting their behavior in the draft in the coming years), what they each think of our roster, what to do with Mack or Fields. There are lots of good reasons to interview people that you dont intend to hire. Theres also doing favors for friends and contacts, giving them the extra hype of an interview, or in some cases, experience with these kind of interviews. So I dont think we can assume based on their wide net that the Bears dont have a narrow short list theyve been holding the whole time.

Phillips and McCaskey think cute little ideas, like keeping Lovies defense, as if their precious input would help. Sort of like how Nagy never adjusted too. Let's hope the next guy tells them to stfu.

I think theres a decent amount of luck involved too. Everyone knows who the names are. We have favorites, and a few we want to avoid, but by and large, if you picked them out of a hat, youd probably have the same outcome - a decent candidate who needs to prove it. Hopefully Polian can avoid the few turds, and then the rest is how you play the hand, more than which cards you draw. So yeah, we can get this right without making a genius move, but we have to be lucky.

that all makes sense

does having the GM who has oversight over the coach share an agent with the coach present a conflict?