AZ54 Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 Buried at the end of this article is a line about how Emery wanted SMC moved to LB back when Smith was still in town. ---------------------------------------------- http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post...s-trade-for-suh But I think what a lot of folks don’t know is that, according to sources, Emery actually wanted that transition to take place a lot sooner, but Smith was reluctant to move McClellin to linebacker. ---------------------------------------------- If true it seems to indicate that SMC was somewhat of a Lovie choice although that does not absolve Emery at all for the pick. He had other options on the board at the time in Chandler Jones and Whitney Mercilus. This does bring up a ton of questions. At the top of the list for me is why didn't we switch him last year when Trestman and Tucker came to town? I don't expect Emery to ever address this as that is not his style, nor would I want to hear it. I just don't want people in the organization running around bad-mouthing past decisions when they felt something else should have been done. That is not good for team chemistry. Emery has owned up to the fact that drafting SMC to be a DE was a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 It does bring up a ton of questions. We know it was Lovie's decision to keep him at DE his rookie year. So why not the switch last year? I'd speculate it's because our defense was damn good going into last season. We wanted to take the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach. Shea did show promise as an off the edge pass rusher and had value on passing downs. Especially when you think about the 3 sack Packer game early in last season. That was before all our defensive tackles were hurt and we were forced to play Shea as an every down lineman. We saw the exact same thing with Mark Anderson. Heck, I'd speculate that if Henry Melton doesn't get injured last season, our d-line would have continued to be productive. Shea would have done well in a more limited role and he never gets moved to linebacker. Buried at the end of this article is a line about how Emery wanted SMC moved to LB back when Smith was still in town. ---------------------------------------------- http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bears/post...s-trade-for-suh But I think what a lot of folks don’t know is that, according to sources, Emery actually wanted that transition to take place a lot sooner, but Smith was reluctant to move McClellin to linebacker. ---------------------------------------------- If true it seems to indicate that SMC was somewhat of a Lovie choice although that does not absolve Emery at all for the pick. He had other options on the board at the time in Chandler Jones and Whitney Mercilus. This does bring up a ton of questions. At the top of the list for me is why didn't we switch him last year when Trestman and Tucker came to town? I don't expect Emery to ever address this as that is not his style, nor would I want to hear it. I just don't want people in the organization running around bad-mouthing past decisions when they felt something else should have been done. That is not good for team chemistry. Emery has owned up to the fact that drafting SMC to be a DE was a mistake. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 When there's an obvious flaw, like the why didn't we switch him last year then flaw, I don't really buy into sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 If true it seems to indicate that SMC was somewhat of a Lovie choice although that does not absolve Emery at all for the pick. He had other options on the board at the time in Chandler Jones and Whitney Mercilus. This does bring up a ton of questions. At the top of the list for me is why didn't we switch him last year when Trestman and Tucker came to town? I don't expect Emery to ever address this as that is not his style, nor would I want to hear it. I just don't want people in the organization running around bad-mouthing past decisions when they felt something else should have been done. That is not good for team chemistry. Emery has owned up to the fact that drafting SMC to be a DE was a mistake. Bolded sorta confirms what many have said ever since that draft. Lovie got too involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 Bolded sorta confirms what many have said ever since that draft. Lovie got too involved. That draft and many before, Phil's first draft sure felt like Angelo was still pulling the strings. At least they threw anchor before the boat hit shore. I think repairs could be made this year to float again and then they can start adding the upgrades to operate at full speed next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 Exactly. It dint' appear broke 2 seasons ago. So they left it well enough alone. Now, after last season, it was obvious that they should have. Better late than never. It does bring up a ton of questions. We know it was Lovie's decision to keep him at DE his rookie year. So why not the switch last year? I'd speculate it's because our defense was damn good going into last season. We wanted to take the "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" approach. Shea did show promise as an off the edge pass rusher and had value on passing downs. Especially when you think about the 3 sack Packer game early in last season. That was before all our defensive tackles were hurt and we were forced to play Shea as an every down lineman. We saw the exact same thing with Mark Anderson. Heck, I'd speculate that if Henry Melton doesn't get injured last season, our d-line would have continued to be productive. Shea would have done well in a more limited role and he never gets moved to linebacker. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted April 26, 2014 Report Share Posted April 26, 2014 Bolded sorta confirms what many have said ever since that draft. Lovie got too involved. Lovie was the power source on the team Emery was forced to buy into. He had no choice but to go along with Lovie as the year developed. He has some responsibility but Lovie was entrenched in the control of the team, and he just went with the flow. With new coaches coming in and a couple vets brought in to be LBers, just didnt make sense at the time when he showed some promise in a limited role. It became a disaster as the season progressed on and cant really change positions in mid season, so he sucked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrackerDog Posted April 28, 2014 Report Share Posted April 28, 2014 Lovie was the power source on the team Emery was forced to buy into. He had no choice but to go along with Lovie as the year developed. He has some responsibility but Lovie was entrenched in the control of the team, and he just went with the flow. With new coaches coming in and a couple vets brought in to be LBers, just didnt make sense at the time when he showed some promise in a limited role. It became a disaster as the season progressed on and cant really change positions in mid season, so he sucked. Could also be our DC sucks and Lovie was able to hold things together while he wasn't. Although the significant injuries certainly didn't help. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradjock Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Could also be our DC sucks and Lovie was able to hold things together while he wasn't. Although the significant injuries certainly didn't help. My guess is a little bit of both. Although while we repeatedly rolled out Shea to get burnt at DE, Lovie made the same mistake with Mark Anderson. And with Mark Anderson, Alex Brown was sitting on the bench. WTF??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 My guess is a little bit of both. Although while we repeatedly rolled out Shea to get burnt at DE, Lovie made the same mistake with Mark Anderson. And with Mark Anderson, Alex Brown was sitting on the bench. WTF??? Buuuuut.... Anderson had 12 sacks in his rookie year and played opposite Ogunleye. Both of who were pretty good. Alex Brown was no slouch mind you, just a good rotational option in 2006. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted April 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Anderson was only good when he wasn't blocked. That happened a lot his rookie year but as soon as someone got their hands on him he did nothing. He should have never been promoted to a starting role ahead of Brown. Anyone who watched any replays (aka film) could see that. It was just one of many Lovie mysteries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted April 29, 2014 Report Share Posted April 29, 2014 Anderson was only good when he wasn't blocked. That happened a lot his rookie year but as soon as someone got their hands on him he did nothing. He should have never been promoted to a starting role ahead of Brown. Anyone who watched any replays (aka film) could see that. It was just one of many Lovie mysteries. He had a lot of those moments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.