AZ54

True that… http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Dallas_Cowboys_season After falling to the Minnesota Vikings in the divisional round of the 2009-10 NFL Playoffs, the Cowboys sought to defend their NFC East division title and contend for a Super Bowl Championship, particularly given that Super Bowl XLV would be played at Cowboys Stadium. However, this did not happen and after a 1–7 start Wade Phillips became the first coach in Cowboys history to be fired during the season. He was replaced by offensive coordinator Jason Garrett.[1] The Cowboys finished the season 6–10, 3rd place in the NFC East, and failed to reach the playoffs. However, under Garrett the team's record was 5–3 as compared to the 1–7 start under Phillips. So they fired the head coach and everyone knows Wade Phillips ran the team with a country club atmosphere. But in 2009 they were ranked 2nd in the NFL in defense allowing just 15.6pts/game. Pasqualoni wasn't there in 2009 he was off doing his thing in Miami: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.uconnhuskies.com/sports/m-footb...oni_paul00.html He served as defensive coordinator with the Dolphins and his defense allowed just 19.8 points per game in 2008 as the Dolphins won the AFC East Championship. His 2009 defense led the NFL in sacks per pass attempt. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Herring and Pasqualoni have both been around and/or had a lot of success in their careers. Like most of us, it hasn't always been good but in reviewing both of their biographies I see a lot more success than failure. These are small snapshots of their careers but it appears there is one trend for both of these guys….they coach linebackers and their players and defenses get after the QB. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reggie_Herring Although Herring only held the Texans position for two years, he coached the 2003 league-leader in tackles, Jamie Sharper. In 2004, Herring left the NFL to become defensive coordinator and linebackers coach at North Carolina State University. His first year at North Carolina State, the Wolfpack defense led the nation in total defense after ranking 89th in that category the year prior. ...Herring was hired by the Dallas Cowboys on February 8, 2008. He worked as the team's linebacker position coach under head coach Wade Phillips. With the help of his tutelage, the Cowboys led the NFL in quarterback sacks (59) during the 2008 season.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Pasqualoni Pasqualoni's 14-year record with Syracuse was 107–59–1. His only losing season was in 2002 with a 4–8 record. Most seasons of his tenure saw Syracuse competing in the Top 25 in the country. ...In 2006, Pasqualoni became the coach of the linebackers, being influential in Demarcus Ware's success in that position.

http://www.syracuse.com/poliquin/index.ssf..._a_chicago.html http://voices.suntimes.com/sports/inside-t...th-bears-staff/ Sure looks like he was hired. It's odd the Bears didn't make an announcement on it the day it happens. I like his experience level, no clue on whether or not he's a good coach.

It took Tillman 9 seasons to get to the Pro Bowl and Briggs made it there on his 3rd season. Forte made the Pro Bowl in his 4th season. The only players he drafted that went to the Pro Bowl in their first or second season were Hester, Knox as returners. So I'll stand on my point that we haven't seen two players that are starters make the Pro Bowl on either their first or second season. Looking back Angelo really only hit on the 2003 (Tillman, Briggs, Wade, Gage) and 2004 (T. Harris, Berrian, Vasher) drafts, followed by 2008 (Forte, E. Bennett). http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/chi/draft.htm It is surprising how few of his draft picks stayed on the roster into their second contract. There is no expectation for everyone drafted to be a Pro Bowl player but I think we should end up with some solid players that will stick around for more than 3-4 seasons.

Hard to believe we drafted a guy, an Olinemen no less, who went to the Pro Bowl in his rookie season. In the most critical position we needed to hit on in the draft Emery did it, and did it well, even if most of us were saying WTF when he made the pick. He has had his misses in the draft, most notably Hardin (I'll say the book is still out on SMC as I think he is a good football player miscast as a DE), but when we signed him to be our new GM if anyone was asked if he'd be considered a success if he drafted a Pro Bowl player in each of his first two drafts (Jeffrey, Long) I can't think of anyone who would say no. We're doing something different than what we had done the previous 9 seasons.

Seems clear the report was premature. Seems clear though that we are looking at coaches with 3-4 experience. I am also wondering if this guy was going to end up with the title of Asst. DC? Given his experience running defenses is Trestman hedging his bets a bit by pursuing coaches who might be able to step in if Tucker fails again next year? I thought it was odd a former head coach (lots of head coaching experience) would suddenly want to drop back to just a LB coach. That's certainly possible but I'd see it more likely if he had an Asst DC title. I'd like to see the list of other candidates so we can get a better feel for what Trestman is doing but this search has been a very quiet one.

I don't see anything anywhere stating he was hired by the Bears. Here's his bio and he has a pretty good record especially with defense. It is unclear why he was fired mid-season and going from HC at UConn to Bears LB coach seems like an odd transition. http://www.uconnhuskies.com/sports/m-footb...oni_paul00.html

I don't see where #6 is needed as they have already achieved that level of mediocrity without the injuries to key players.

Doesn't seem like the right personality to lead that team out of it's misery. In fact it appears they took what they ended up with instead of going out and getting their guy who was reportedly Whisenhunt.

There's a lot of talk about Tucker throwing the position coaches under the bus. I've considered it myself. But step back for a minute and ask yourself this: If we're changing schemes to a 3-4, or even some sort of hybrid, which coaches on defense would you need to replace? I can't sit here in Arizona on a sunny 60 degree day (had to get that in) and say I know these guys backgrounds but here is what I'm thinking... Is Phair a coach, who was brought in by Marinelli, more knowledgeable in the 4-3 scheme Lovie ran than he is the 3-4? How about Tibesar? Is he a LB coach with experience in the 3-4? As far as Hoke, the backend of a defense doesn't necessarily change….either man or some type of zone..if we go to a 3-4. We've mixed those up over the years despite all the sniping about cover 2. Again, if we are changing our scheme then shouldn't we change to coaches who can coach the new scheme and have experience with it? There may be a lot less of "you suck" and more of "I need somebody else with more experience in the direction we're going." For Tibesar I know nothing but the bad play of our rookies. Phair OTOH had some success developing Wooton and Melton, even made Collins into a good player for us. Seems like he might have deserved a second chance unless he doesn't have experience in the new scheme. Trestman, Tucker, et al have been silent about our new direction. I'll be watching for who they are interviewing and their backgrounds to get an indication of where we are going in terms of our scheme.

Firing two position coaches not entirely unexpected, nor is keeping Tucker around. I was non-committal on these decisions because I simply feel the coaches (Trestman) would be the only one's in position to really know how things were happening on the field, in the group meeting rooms, locker room, etc. Those are just things that we can't possibly know. That and the fact they forced Tucker to maintain Lovie's scheme led to the decision he deserved a second chance with his own system. If we had fired Tucker and went out to interview new coaches that would be their number one concern….will you give me the freedom to run my system my way? That alone may have hindered who would be interested (refer to Washington Redskins meddling ownership impact on coaching search). Than handcuffs are off now but Tucker is certainly on a short leash in 2014. Show us what you got.

I don't believe this is Phil Emery's style at all. We're saying he's sorta not happy with Tucker and might want to fire him IF he can get somebody but that guy is busy right now and we're not sure he'd want the Bears' job. No. Phil and Trestman will go through their process and make the determination to stay or go. Then he will put together a thorough list of candidates (likely done by Week 15 if he wanted Tucker gone) and be interviewing them without waiting for one guy who is still coaching a playoff team. At this point I believe the decision has already been made to keep Tucker. Delaying that further is just disrespectful to him because it is hindering his ability to seek a new job with all these new head coaches. I don't believe Emery nor Trestman would do that to him. I feel the delay in announcement is now centered around defining what direction we are going with the defense. Do we even want to announce that as it tips our hand before the draft. Of course who we go after in FA could tip our hand anyway so it likely doesn't make that much difference. In fact I won't be surprised to hear more "hybrid" tossed around just to muck it up further for everyone. One other note. By firing Lovie the Bears made a statement to the players he was not getting the job done as HC. By keeping Lovie's D in tact including scheme and terminology and forcing a new guy to run it the Bears were telling their players that guy we just fired was a pretty good coach and ran a pretty good scheme. They sent a mixed message to the players. When Bruce Arians took the Cardinals job he inherited a very good defense, and IMO a good defensive coordinator in Ray Horton. Reporters asked Arians if he would keep Horton since he was successful and for continuity. Arians flatly stated NO. While he respected the job Horton had done, keeping coaches around from the previous regime just gives players a place to go complain about the new changes. He had seen it too many times in his career. Fire them all and the players know the new sheriff is serious about making changes and improving things and if they don't like it they have but one man to come to talk to…him. By keeping Lovie's scheme (and some of the previous coaches) we may have created some of that locker room drama Arians speaks of. Think about training camp. Players would see immediately the differences in Tucker and Lovie coaching the same defensive scheme. I believe though that the players still wanted to win and worked to perform well overall. It is possible as injuries mounted and left voids in on-the-field leadership players trusted the scheme less (hey we no longer have the man who built it) and began playing more as individuals just trying to make the play. Having some dissension and lack of trust in the scheme, or lack of trust in the new coach to run the old scheme properly, would not be out of the norm thus the reason for Tucker to coach from the sidelines. If Tucker stays then the message has to be that we trust him. Blow up the D and let Tucker build what he wants from scratch and in so doing get rid of the ghost of Lovie in the locker room.

Remember these guys? Chris Harris...Defensive Quality Control Coach. Played a couple years under Lovie was well respected for his knowledge and leadership on the field. Jon Hoke...Defensive Backs Coach. Coached a couple years under Lovie Smith helped bring Peanut and Jennings to their first Pro Bowls. Helped Chris Conte and Major Wright play in a serviceable manner in 2012. I like Hoke and think he got the best performance we've ever seen from Bowman this past year. Mike Phair...Dline coach. Helped Henry Melton go from former RB to Pro Bowl DT. He helped Corey Wootton turn into a pretty good player at DE and then had him play acceptably out of position at DT this past season. The fact these guys were still around from a very good year in 2012 to a disaster year in 2013 means we had coaches on the roster that knew the nuances of the D and had coached it successfully before. That's either more damning of Tucker for leading us down the road to disaster, or more validation that in fact the injuries to all of our DTs, Briggs, and Tillman were too much to overcome in that system with so many rookies and 2nd year players on the field...Bass, Bostic, Greene, Frey, and any rent-a-DT that showed up.

Lots of their fans quit on them and refused to buy tickets. The video is worth watching….twice. LMAO

If true, that's a stroke of genius right there. Maximize flexibility while still forcing as much of Cutler's cap hit to year 1 as possible, which maximizes future cap space. If we pursue Michael Bennett and agree to terms needing more cap space….make it so. If we don't get him on our terms and sign a lesser quality player keep the cap hit on Cutler's deal

All players count against the cap but if you sign a veteran player to a minimum contract they have a reduced cap hit. Here's a couple links that explain it. http://overthecap.com/explaining-the-minimum-salary-benefit/ http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/i...-salary-benefit

Looks like the Bears did the same thing with Jenning's contract as they did with Cutler's. Jennings is signed for four years but if he's not performing well enough to be worth the $5mil/yr in years 3 or 4 we can cut him with no cap hit. I'm guessing they did the same with Slauson but can't find any details on what Slauson got paid. If we're sitting with just $2mil in cap space then there are definitely some cuts headed our way. Peppers seems like a must now along with Michael Bush, Podlesh, and Weems. Earl Bennett may join them too if they feel Wilson is ready to step up. This is likely to bring about a lot of emotions but if we are serious about switching to a 3-4 I can see a 33yr old Briggs getting cut unless Lovie would want to trade for him down in Tampa. We won't get much in exchange, likely a late round pick, but the cap space will allow us to pursue the players that fit the new scheme and who can help bring along the younger players in terms of learning assignments. If Bostic and SMC are the future at OLB then they might as well get experience there from game 1. DJ Williams can be re-signed, perhaps even cheaper than last season, to help fill the leadership void. I'm prepared for anything to happen.

I just want to let Stinger know there is no reason for him to change his photo.

You are asking that question of Bears fans so I'll give you the answer: NOTHING

Gotta add Bass as OLB and Washington as OLB as well. Green may be a better fit as ILB.

Few thought Emery would fix the Oline in one offseason but he got it done. We have a ton of cap space, something like $50mil, just a lot of positions to fill and Cutler just took up a big chunk. I see no reason we can't replace Tillman's $8mil/yr salary by signing Jarius Byrd, if we want to. I agree, we won't get 6 defensive starters out of the draft but two is a realistic possibility. What we will have is more youth and hopefully better talent in our depth. That's where the previous GM fell short…lack of drafting good talent that could fill out our depth chart. The youth movement also includes players like Bass, Washington and our two LBs from last years draft. Who are the old guys on the defensive side of the ball? The 30 and over crowd includes: Tillman, Jennings, Briggs, Peppers, Ratliff, Hayden, DJ Williams, and Anderson. Bowman is 29. I've made it well known that I would cut Peppers. We reportedly eat $7.5 mil in dead cap space depending on when we cut him but we also free up another $10.5mil. I would like Tillman back by the way but for a lot less money. Emery might be ready to move on from Tillman although he didn't sound that way in his press conference, and he also sounded very positive on DJ Williams but I'd say both are on the fence. Players like Anderson may be gone as we move SMC and Bostic around. Hayden won't be back. Ratliff? Briggs will be back. Realistically the two main players we're talking about are Tillman and Peppers. What happens will depend a great deal on what scheme we transition to, if we change at all.

I finally got a chance to watch the Emery press conference, at least part of it. He has a lot of conviction in terms of building this team and how we came up short this year (not just that we did). If you work for him there is no way you are not uncomfortable about your future. Trestman's generally a quiet guy but got the same sense from him too. We'll see how that translates this offseason. As far as the 3-4 or 4-3. This is what I see that gives us some insight but no detail: http://www.chicagobears.com/news/article-1...04-1960071e0fa6 --------------------------------------------------- Moving forward, Emery wants to build a "physical, fast, playmaking defense that causes disruption," something he says he saw in the first three games of the season when the Bears intercepted five passes, recovered six fumbles and scored three defensive touchdowns. "The No. 1 thing is score. The No. 2 thing is to create turnovers. No. 3 is to cause disruption to the opposing quarterback," Emery said. "We have to create more confusion pre-snap and more disruption post-snap on the opposing quarterback." --------------------------------------------------- Not clear that the Lovie 2 defense is gone but seems to indicate he wants a more diverse scheme. If I asked football fans what defense causes the most disruption to what offense's want to do I don't think anyone will say Lovie's scheme but you'll get a lot of "Steelers 3-4" in those answers. One thing to note is the value he places on having the defense score. Something to keep in mind as we head toward the draft because Emery might go after the playmaking DB first. We are now a week after the season ended and no word on Tucker…so he is still getting "evaluated".

Not at all but that doesn't change the evaluation and the business decision.

In a league where FGs win most games I'll be happy to keep Mannelly around for another season for vet minimum. Vets his age get a reduced cap hit that makes it easier to keep them around. We're not going to save much money so might as well keep him. Hester can go. Hasn't done much at all this season and he does not have the short area quickness that he used to have to break tackles. He's not a bad returner but he also takes far too many fair catches on punts that should be returnable for someone who prides themselves on being an elite returner. My other reason for cutting him is that he's one dimensional (returner) and I want to add a speed WR to our roster to mix in with the big boys. I think Jacoby Ford (or someone like him) can fill this role for us and do KR/PR as well as Hester. Ford is a better WR than Hester ever was but we only need him on offense for maybe 7-15 plays a game. He hasn't done much in his career in Oakland and this past season was a complete disaster. He should be cheap as a FA as long as he understands he's not a #1 or #2 WR. I expect Marquess Wilson to step up next year and with him and Ford out there we become much more explosive. For the rest of the FAs listed in the OP the real topic isn't so much who should be brought back as who should get long term deals. I think we should bring back a guy like Steltz because safety for us is a big need and he plays special teams. That does not mean I wouldn't also like to see us draft some competition for him or sign some other FAs to compete for his role. If he got cut in camp on a contract that had no signing bonus (or very small one) I don't really care. If we don't sign them and go after another similar FA I don't care. Players in the category: Collins, Costanzo, Britton, Garza, Anderson, Wright. Players I'd like to see get long term deals: Wootton, Ratliff (only for 2-3yr because I think he can help solidify a huge need), McCown (2yr). I'd like Melton back but he may end up with a 1yr prove it deal.

It could be argued that paying him $18mil to play next year would be dead cap space. I'll take the $7.5 mil in dead cap space and use the $10.5mil in change to sign a DE and two DTs.

Yes, your a right but we're going to have a youth movement on defense and that means lower cap hits on that side of the ball. Take the cap hit early on Cutler's deal and then in 2-3 seasons his hit drops significantly. I assume with this structure on the salary guarantees if we cut Cutler after two seasons we don't have a lot of cap hit.