jason

Passing Yards: 4400 Passing TDs: 35 Interceptions: 18 Completion %: 62 Long: 90 Sacks: 38

Like others, I completely understand the point of your post. But the answer I have is, you miss all the shots you don't take. With Turner, we have seen over and over that he will not provide anything substantial. He will not show improvement. He will continue to make absolutely ignorant, pee-wee football calls. I just couldn't deal with that for another season.

Dude...why do you keep spouting this nonsense? Would a true, big-time, legit #1 WR be nice? Yes, absolutely. Right now, however, it's a luxury that takes a back seat to necessity. Furthermore, what's with the Hester bashing? To be quite honest, it's coming off as incredibly ignorant. Hester made strides this year as a WR that are pretty amazing considering his time at the position. His explosive ability is unquestionable. His hands were pretty sure. His route running skills were very good. He just needs to learn more about adjustments, and probably study the playbook a bit more. He played in two less games this year than the last, and he surpassed nearly all of the previous year's numbers. And if not for a few overthrows, he probably would have had a few more long-bomb TDs that would have put his numbers somewhere near 900 yds and 6 TDs. Continuing with the "Hester is useless at WR" talk is just plain stupid.

You KNOW I wanted the Martz hire to happen. I've been on board for over a year, since I called for Turner's firing and Martz's hiring after the 2008 season.

Precisely. I just don't see how the Bears offense doesn't experience a MAJOR upgrade next year. Sure, the defense may do poorly, or even worse than last year, but it's not like Lovie's crew (coaches and players) have really been top notch for a while now.

Exactly what I was going to say. Replacing Turner with Shoop would have been a MAJOR downgrade. Replacing Turner with Martz is an inarguable upgrade. It may not be the ideal upgrade for the players the Bears have, but there is no denying it's an upgrade.

Awesome video. It was enlightening, exciting, and enraging. What was most upsetting was the absolute lack of running highlights on offense. How pathetic. It was nice, however, to see all the bombs from Cutler...and there could have easily been about 4 or 5 more.

We sure weren't a dominant team because of the offense either. 19th in the NFL in scoring doesn't scare anyone. The D did poorly, but the O sucked just as much.

02 - 04 was a rough time of transition for the Rams, from Kurt Warner to Marc Bulger. It also happened to coincide with the dwindling of Marshall Faulk's competency. I can't say why his teams didn't punch it into the endzone more often, but I'm sure if you look at the passing TDs and the rushing TDs for Martz's teams combined, I'm willing to bet that they are in the top of the league.

Good points. What I see is this: 1999 OC with Rams 2000-2005 HC with Rams 2006 OC with Lions (Kitna over 4000 yds passing) 2007 OC with Lions (Kitna over 4000 yds passing) 2008 OC with 49ers (two bum QBs almost get 4000 yds) Is Martz a risk? Yes. Does he present the probability that Cutler will be sacked a lot? Yes. Is the risk of Martz less than the other possibilities? Yes. Is the reward of a Martz offense greater than other possibilities? Oh, hell yes.

That's what I see. With Martz bringing in his offensive mind, the Bears offense immediately gains notoriety, and becomes dangerous for any opponent. I'd say it's a safe bet that the Bears would end up with a top ten offense. If the D does ANYTHING (and there are no injuries), the Bears are in the playoffs, IMHO.

Realistically? I don't. And that's the problem. JA doesn't seem to like drafting OL. The previous coaches didn't know how to coach OL. And from their horrible decisions this year, it's evident they are MUCH higher on the current OLinemen on the roster than anyone else who actually saw the games could possibly be. Agreed; they are better. It was pretty clear early that Pace was washed up. Like you, I had hoped for more. Once it became apparent, the staff should have moved Williams to LT. They didn't, which is one of the several hundred reasons I'm down on them. Agreed all around. The fact that it took nearly the entire season is a major indictment on this staff. More or less agree, but none of the three looked good for any stretch of time this year. Omiyale was atrocious, and the fact that he improved near the end is almost a guarantee since he couldn't get much worse. Kreutz is overrated at this point in his career, but he'll stick. Garza was OK at best, but probably a bit overrated...which is hard when you are only OK to begin with. I wouldn't be upset if the Bears found replacements for all three. My expectations are that the team will ignore the OL for the most part like they usually do. They will draft a project in the 5th who will "challenge" for one of the starting OG positions (read: red-shirt most likely, bench warmer at best). Status quo will remain, and they'll "get off the bus running." Tice will be mentioned as "one of the best OL coaches out there," and we'll see bad OL play for several weeks. The praise will continue, the OL will continue to underperform. Williams will show why we drafted him in the first, but the other guys will be shown to be the liabilities they are. The Bears will need OL in the 2010-2011 draft. Pessimistic? Yep. But it's probably true.

Try to make semi-intelligent posts, please. He's not terrible and you know it. Is he great? No. Is he good? Yes. Is he a dangerous player who can take it to the house every time he touches the ball? Obviously. The key here is, he's still learning the nuances of the position, and the Bears put big money into his contract. Therefore, he's not going anywhere.

1 - You can't be that in love with him to mortgage the future (which is what it would take to get him). 2 - This offense can dominate if the OL is fixed. Yes, dominate. The passing game, with nearly no OL, looked dangerous this year. If the OL could actually open up some holes for the running game, the passing game would become lethal. 3 - Everyone keeps talking about WRs, but getting a WR would be a stupid draft selection. Hester isn't going anywhere. Bennett looks like a solid possession guy. The Bears may have struck gold with Knox. Aromashodu exploded at the end of the year. And they STILL don't know what they have in Iglesias, a guy who was highly touted coming out of college. OL, OL, FS, DE, FB...those are the needs.

Completely agreed. Nearly all the risk is on the owners, and the players get an abnormally large portion of the pie compared to numerous other industries. Just look online at various pro sports teams that have lost money on a fairly consistent basis while their players continued to rack up millions. And what choices did the owners have? Either risk financial future by keeping up with other teams, or get rid of the team and cut losses. This seems very one-sided to me, and I don't think the players are shouldering their portion, especially considering the fact that most cities are hesitant to pay for new stadiums with taxes from people already struggling in a weakened economy.

Very true. I'm nearly positive that JA started thinking about the football ramifications of Adams' death within an hour after hearing about it.

Just FYI... A friend of mine with quite a bit of knowledge in this area explained to me that this sort of thing is very difficult to detect in athletes, specifically larger athletes like NFL Linemen. Tests that would indicate heart issues would produce the same results that large athletes have normally. On top of that, before trades are done in the NFL, I'm quite sure there is an extensive amount of testing done, none of which indicated heart problems. Sad to hear about the news, but it's highly unlikely that the NFL could have prevented anything.

Awesome.

I view them almost equally. In pass/run terms... Martz 75/25 Saunders 55/45 Or something like that. As defiantgiant mentioned in a post above, keep in mind that Martz made offenses on the Lions put up huge stats, with a garbage OL, nearly nonexistent RBs, and average QBs. Meanwhile, Saunders had incredible OLs, great RBs, and decent QBs. I think if you give Martz the tools Saunders had, and you'd see a marked improvement.

When will the lame Vernon Davis argument end? Look at the QBs, PLEASE. A final thought: Is the possible explosion from a Martz offense worth the risk? I don't know. But choosing most of the other names being passed around is just like saying, "let's hope Lovie and the D step up, because the O will not come close to carrying the team." may as well go for it with Martz. Rememver, you miss ALL the shots you don't take.

I'm in the same camp, MadLith. I've had it with these guys, especially Lovie. And I'm sure we'll be even sicker if the guys who come in as replacements all have ties to old Lovie Smith days.

1. I don't know that Olsen has really improved, per se. 2. I think the WRs have been there more than once, and just needed a competent OC or stud QB. Enter Cutler, without the competent OC, and results happen. 3. Regarding who could have done better than Lovie this year given the limitations in personnel, are you serious? Half the coaches in the NFL probably would have done better, because they wouldn't have had a limp-dick OC, and they wouldn't have been wedded to the horrible idea of the Cover-0. As others have said, the best part is that Lovie and Co. are on a short leash this year...as they should have been before this season even began.

Good article, Connor. But I read the most important piece in the subtitle, "He's a proven coach with ties to Lovie Smith and organization." That's what it all comes down to. It's less about getting someone good, and more about getting one of Lovie's boys.

Other thoughts about Martz: -After Detroit let go of him, they suddenly became the only team to go 0-16 in NFL history. -While in Detroit, Shaun McDonald and Mike Furrey put up huge numbers. Read those two names again. -Kevin Jones, yes, the same one who has pretty much never looked all that great since college or good since his rookie year, had 93 receptions during the two years with Martz -Kevin Jones, yeah, the same one, had arguably the best year of his career in 2006, and still had a great year in 2007 considering he was injured and had to split some carries with TJ Duckett -Kitna put up 39 TDs and 42 INTs in two years with Martz, while playing with an OL arguably worse than Cutler's THIS YEAR, and an overall team that was inarguably much worse. -In SF, the combination of Shaun Hill and JT Sullivan put up 3700 passing yards, 21TDs, 19INTs, and were significant for the only times in their careers. SHAUN HILL AND JT SULLIVAN! Both of those guys are bums, and they're lucky to even be in the NFL. -Frank Gore went for over 1000 yards rushing with Martz. -Yes, Vernon Davis regressed while Martz was the OC, but let's look at these facts: 2007: QBs were Trent Dilfer and #1 pick Alex Smith for 13 games, that Hill scrub for two games, and Chris (LOL) Weinke for one game. So, that is 13 games of competent QBs. 2008: QBs were SHAUN HILL AND JT SULLIVAN! 2009: QBs were SHAUN HILL and #1 pick Alex Smith. Guess what? You know all those TDs Vernon Davis got? His breakout season? 3 TDs from that douche Shaun Hill, and 10 from Alex Smith. I propose the idea that Martz may have limited the TE somewhat, but the TEs were much more limited by the scrubs at QB during the 2008 season. ----------------------- In short, his positives still outweigh his negatives in my opinion. I'm crossing my fingers hoping the Bears get him.

With all that said, nobody can argue that his offense, IN DETROIT, with JOHN FRIGGIN KITNA, put up huge stats. Now just imagine what he could do with a MUCH better QB in Cutler. Is there a risk? Sure. But isn't that risk just as bad, if not worse, with some lame one-year guy who'll come into Chicago with his "big break" in coaching? Or even worse, a guy getting the shot because the Bears front office knows he'll be a Lovie Smith whipping boy. I think so. Take the bad with the good, good with the bad. Turner ignored the WRs for the most part, and didn't do much to help the TEs or RBs either. With Martz, at least the Bears would get maximization out of the WRs. And since Olsen is essentially a big WR, I'm hoping that Martz has learned from his mistake with Davis in SF. Once again, it's a risk I'd be willing to take for an offense that is nearly guaranteed to score 30+ a game. Will there be risks with Martz? Yes. Will there be more with him than with others? Yes. But think about the benefits and detriments, the floors and the ceilings. With Martz, both are high. As I see it, Martz's floor is higher than the majority of OC's floors, and his ceiling is leaps and bounds about others. Turner couldn't hold Martz's jock strap, and Shoop couldn't hole the cup. Since this is more than likely a one year experiment any way, let's shoot for the moon. I'm sick of the Bears not going for it. I'd rather see a team that goes for it, tries to take risks and destroys the other team, versus the "hold'em close and hope to win in the end"-approach from Lovie and company.