The Bears role model

[ASHKUM BEAR]

I remember a few years back, most likely on the other board, a lot of people were saying (me included) that the Bears are trying to model themselves after the New England Patriots. This was brought up because the Bears weren't targeting big name FA's. The Patriots were winning Superbowls left and right, built there team through the draft, plugged holes with either mid level FA's or older vets that wanted to come for a shot at a title. When one of their players became a nuisance about getting more money, they let that player go.

 

Now after thinking about that thread, I look at what the Patriots have been doing the last two years. It seems like they have flipped their philosophy and are now actively pursing the bigger names (Peppers, A. Thomas, etc.).

 

I just wonder how many more years it will take the Bears to figure out their role model has abandoned them, unless they may have changed their role model to Pittsburgh b/c they just won a Superbowl. Just wondering if any of the old board members remember this philosophy?

[Wesson44]

I remember a few years back, most likely on the other board, a lot of people were saying (me included) that the Bears are trying to model themselves after the New England Patriots. This was brought up because the Bears weren't targeting big name FA's. The Patriots were winning Superbowls left and right, built there team through the draft, plugged holes with either mid level FA's or older vets that wanted to come for a shot at a title. When one of their players became a nuisance about getting more money, they let that player go.

 

Now after thinking about that thread, I look at what the Patriots have been doing the last two years. It seems like they have flipped their philosophy and are now actively pursing the bigger names (Peppers, A. Thomas, etc.).

 

I just wonder how many more years it will take the Bears to figure out their role model has abandoned them, unless they may have changed their role model to Pittsburgh b/c they just won a Superbowl. Just wondering if any of the old board members remember this philosophy?

I do, but I think the biggest problem with the Bears is tradition. We build this team from past glory and not by what we need. Right now we need a passing game with both a QB and WR, but we let Brees go to the Saints, Moss,TO, Holt and all the other good players get away and and take noaction with big time players. I sometime wonder do we even look at trying to get some of these guys.

[Chitownhustla]

I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe the Bears will ever be like the Pats in drafting or bringing in FA. One reason and it starts with the owner. Mcaskey sucks. I love the Bears and will always but after this free agency non activity im finding it harder and harder to want to spend money on the Bears knowing it goes into the Mcaskey pockets. I actually had an offer on PSL Seats through the Bears web site that was accepted and i cancelled cuz i have been so pissed off. Everyone on this board will agree that there are some glaring needs on this team, yet the Bears sign no one!? I hope they have some huge moves in the works behind the scene cuz this is unthinkable.

 

I honestly think the Mcaskey's want to be a .500 team. It means we are good enough to give the fans hope. Maybe we make it to the playoff's if the ball bounces our way, and we are not bad enough to have a top 5 draft pick.

[madlithuanian]

Actually, the pat's have always been brining in FA's...just many came due to the success the team was having. Rodney Harrison come to mind as one major example. Also, Corey Dillon. Without those guys, the pat's don't have some of those rings.

 

Being successful requires succes in all areas. Drafting, FA, etc...

 

I remember a few years back, most likely on the other board, a lot of people were saying (me included) that the Bears are trying to model themselves after the New England Patriots. This was brought up because the Bears weren't targeting big name FA's. The Patriots were winning Superbowls left and right, built there team through the draft, plugged holes with either mid level FA's or older vets that wanted to come for a shot at a title. When one of their players became a nuisance about getting more money, they let that player go.

 

Now after thinking about that thread, I look at what the Patriots have been doing the last two years. It seems like they have flipped their philosophy and are now actively pursing the bigger names (Peppers, A. Thomas, etc.).

 

I just wonder how many more years it will take the Bears to figure out their role model has abandoned them, unless they may have changed their role model to Pittsburgh b/c they just won a Superbowl. Just wondering if any of the old board members remember this philosophy?

[madlithuanian]

I have a hard time arguing agasint what you're saying... This team basically is 500. Once in a while we do well...once in a while we suck eggs. But mostly, we do seem to hover at .500. Thus we never get great draft picks, etc...(and when we do, we botch them). And yet it appears good enough for us die hards to keep lining their pockets. It is true, nothing will change without the fans truly boycotting an inferior product. But it's in our blood to follow. It's a Catch 22. The only real hope is a change in ownership once Virginia passes away... And I, for one, won't be hoping for someone that nice to pass away. So, I'm only doing what I can, and that's boycotting going to games and buying new product. The TV revenue will be there regardless, so I have no problem watching and cheering. But at least I'm not directly putting loot in the McCaskey coffers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm sorry but I find it hard to believe the Bears will ever be like the Pats in drafting or bringing in FA. One reason and it starts with the owner. Mcaskey sucks. I love the Bears and will always but after this free agency non activity im finding it harder and harder to want to spend money on the Bears knowing it goes into the Mcaskey pockets. I actually had an offer on PSL Seats through the Bears web site that was accepted and i cancelled cuz i have been so pissed off. Everyone on this board will agree that there are some glaring needs on this team, yet the Bears sign no one!? I hope they have some huge moves in the works behind the scene cuz this is unthinkable.

 

I honestly think the Mcaskey's want to be a .500 team. It means we are good enough to give the fans hope. Maybe we make it to the playoff's if the ball bounces our way, and we are not bad enough to have a top 5 draft pick.

[AZ54]

The Pats were a good team until they found a cornerstone in Brady, a guy likely headed to the Hall of Fame. Suddenly once you have that guy everything else looks so much better. Yet be realistic, the Pats haven't always won in dominating fashion. Take that QB level down a notch to occasional Pro Bowl level and are they still wearing 3 rings? I remember people criticizing their owner for being cheap when they let key players walk away and signed nearly washed up vets to fill in cheaper. I don't want to belittle their success but that one guy was key piece to the puzzle and he alone attracted several of those key vet players who at the end of their career just wanted a shot at a ring. Find a franchise QB and we'll attract some of those guys too.

[lemonej]

That is so true and the same can be said for assistant coaches getting HC jobs tied to that one guy's success.

[nfoligno]

I don't know that NE is the role model Angelo tries to copy. I think it is simply TB. Take a look at what TB did when Angelo was there. They built through the draft, adding some FAs here and there, but those they build through the draft and only used FA to add to the team, not build it. Further, I think TB more than NE made a much harder push to re-sign their own FAs.

 

To me, TB is far more our model. We run the Tampa two defense, or a similar scheme. We base our team around defense first, special teams next and then offense, which I think also fits with how Angelo has tried to build this team. And Angelo builds the team through the draft, and player retention, w/ a smaller number of FA splashes.

 

That may not be how TB does things today, but it is what TB did when Angelo was there under McKay, and was the system under which he learned.

 

I remember a few years back, most likely on the other board, a lot of people were saying (me included) that the Bears are trying to model themselves after the New England Patriots. This was brought up because the Bears weren't targeting big name FA's. The Patriots were winning Superbowls left and right, built there team through the draft, plugged holes with either mid level FA's or older vets that wanted to come for a shot at a title. When one of their players became a nuisance about getting more money, they let that player go.

 

Now after thinking about that thread, I look at what the Patriots have been doing the last two years. It seems like they have flipped their philosophy and are now actively pursing the bigger names (Peppers, A. Thomas, etc.).

 

I just wonder how many more years it will take the Bears to figure out their role model has abandoned them, unless they may have changed their role model to Pittsburgh b/c they just won a Superbowl. Just wondering if any of the old board members remember this philosophy?

[lemonej]

I don't know that NE is the role model Angelo tries to copy. I think it is simply TB. Take a look at what TB did when Angelo was there. They built through the draft, adding some FAs here and there, but those they build through the draft and only used FA to add to the team, not build it. Further, I think TB more than NE made a much harder push to re-sign their own FAs.

 

To me, TB is far more our model. We run the Tampa two defense, or a similar scheme. We base our team around defense first, special teams next and then offense, which I think also fits with how Angelo has tried to build this team. And Angelo builds the team through the draft, and player retention, w/ a smaller number of FA splashes.

 

That may not be how TB does things today, but it is what TB did when Angelo was there under McKay, and was the system under which he learned.

Tampa under McKay went after FAs Simeon Rice,Brad Johnson and Keyshawn Johnson at the time all top tier at the time they went after them. They also did a tremendous job in the drafting of players like Brooks,Sapp,Lynch,Barber,Alstott,Dunn etc.

 

The only top tier FA that the Bears pursued was Musin Mohhammed.Jon Tait was a sought after player that the Bears over paid for at his position which was RT which backed other teams off. All the rest have been minor deals.If I had to say what the Bears model is it would be more like the Steelers with an emphasis on the draft and resigning your core players.The Bears just haven't developed their talent as well as the Steelers.With both these teams being run by families whose sole source of income is the team you can see why they might be similar in how they approach business.

[nfoligno]

Despite what you say, Tait has to be included in the bit ticket additions though, regardless how acquired. Also, Wale should be included in the mix, as he was a very big ticket addition. That he came through a trade should not matter.

 

So we added Moose, Tait and Wale, all of which were expensive additions.

 

As for TB, Rice was a big name addition, but was he really top tier. I seem to recall Rice having to sign basically a one year deal w/ TB. As I recall, it was a long term deal, but had a prove it first year as the 2nd year had a massive payout, but he could have been cut cheap before that. As he proved himself, TB kept him, but the point still is that his deal was far from what you would consider an elite DE getting. In fact, I would argue Wale got a deal greater. The year TB signed Rice, he was coming off one of his worst seasons since entering the NFL w/ the lowest tackle and 2nd lowest sack totals.

 

Very similar w/ Brad Johnson, who was coming off a bad year (2,500 yards, 11 TDs and 15 picks) w/ his 2nd team (TB was his 3rd team). He got a good overall deal, but not great, and was given an extension a couple years later.

 

The point is, I think history shows TB was not quite as aggressive in FA as you make them out to be, and our adding Tait, Moose and Wale looks very similar.

 

As for Pitt being the model, I would very much argue against that. Angelo is all about player retention, and he does this by extending players prior to their hitting FA. Pitt is very much different. Pitt loses tons of players because they simply have the "dime a dozen" mentality. That may be extreme, but they constantly lose players because (a) they don't want to pay market value once they hit FA and ( they are very stubborn about extending contracts early. But Pitt simply (a) drafts so well and ( has been so well coached they their losses are simply not felt nearly so much.

 

Angelo has said many times TB is his model. I honestly am not even sure why such a debate. Not only has he pointed to TB as his model, but his actions support his words. Like TB, he builds through the draft and uses FA to add, not build w/.

 

Tampa under McKay went after FAs Simeon Rice,Brad Johnson and Keyshawn Johnson at the time all top tier at the time they went after them. They also did a tremendous job in the drafting of players like Brooks,Sapp,Lynch,Barber,Alstott,Dunn etc.

 

The only top tier FA that the Bears pursued was Musin Mohhammed.Jon Tait was a sought after player that the Bears over paid for at his position which was RT which backed other teams off. All the rest have been minor deals.If I had to say what the Bears model is it would be more like the Steelers with an emphasis on the draft and resigning your core players.The Bears just haven't developed their talent as well as the Steelers.With both these teams being run by families whose sole source of income is the team you can see why they might be similar in how they approach business.

[madlithuanian]

I think you're right...

 

But, why? At best it got one ring...and after Angelo had left. And now they are in disarray.

 

Why wouldn't you pattern yourself after more successful franchises? Steelers, Patriots, etc... ?

 

I don't know that NE is the role model Angelo tries to copy. I think it is simply TB. Take a look at what TB did when Angelo was there. They built through the draft, adding some FAs here and there, but those they build through the draft and only used FA to add to the team, not build it. Further, I think TB more than NE made a much harder push to re-sign their own FAs.

 

To me, TB is far more our model. We run the Tampa two defense, or a similar scheme. We base our team around defense first, special teams next and then offense, which I think also fits with how Angelo has tried to build this team. And Angelo builds the team through the draft, and player retention, w/ a smaller number of FA splashes.

 

That may not be how TB does things today, but it is what TB did when Angelo was there under McKay, and was the system under which he learned.

[Mongo3451]

But, why? At best it got one ring...and after Angelo had left. And now they are in disarray.

 

Why wouldn't you pattern yourself after more successful franchises? Steelers, Patriots, etc... ?

Why do franchises have to pattern? I would set my own bar as a leader. I lieu of copycatting, I would prefer to stay ahead of the curve.

[lemonej]

Nfo I know what JA has said about which franchise he has come from and has pointed to but that franchise has taken some of the aspects that one of the most cosistent winning franchises over the last 35 years which is longer than Tampa has even existed.The defense that both the Bears and Bucs run was the base defense for the Steelers when they were winning 4 Super Bowls during the 70's the Cover 2.This defense was learned by Tony Dungy as a member of the Steelers secondary and then as a coach on Chuck Nolls staff after his playing days. If we look at the way the Steelers run their franchise today I do recall Hines Ward getting deals renegotiated a couple of times during his career and this past season they franchised one of their OT's.Also they have made a couple of significant additions through trade with Jerome Bettis and Kevin Greene both coming via trade. The bulk of their roster is basically through the draft with a few additions like Charlie Batch,Tommy Maddux and Byron Leftwitch via FA.Back in those days all teams built through the draft and trade here and there because there was no FA.Back in the 80's when the Bears dismantled that team what franchise did they resemble more Tampa or Pittsburgh? When they allowed the likes of Gault,Marshall,McMahon,Dent,Duerson and Wilson leave the team.We still have the same ownership no matter who supposedly is picking the players

[madlithuanian]

You need to have a leader before you can lead...

 

Why do franchises have to pattern? I would set my own bar as a leader. I lieu of copycatting, I would prefer to stay ahead of the curve.

[Lucky Luciano]

As for TB, Rice was a big name addition, but was he really top tier. I seem to recall Rice having to sign basically a one year deal w/ TB. As I recall, it was a long term deal, but had a prove it first year as the 2nd year had a massive payout, but he could have been cut cheap before that. As he proved himself, TB kept him, but the point still is that his deal was far from what you would consider an elite DE getting. In fact, I would argue Wale got a deal greater. The year TB signed Rice, he was coming off one of his worst seasons since entering the NFL w/ the lowest tackle and 2nd lowest sack totals.

 

rices salary:

 

"Tony Dungy and the Tampa Bay Buccaneers were one of the few teams that saw Simeon as a worthwhile gamble. He signed a 5-year deal worth more than $30 million, but would make just $1 million for the 2001 campaign."

http://www.jockbio.com/Bios/Rice/Rice_bio.html

 

1998 - 10 sacks

 

1999 - rice recorded 16.5 sacks and went to the pro-bowl.

 

2000 - he only recorded 7.5 sacks and was in a contract dispute with bidwell.

 

"With his original contract expired, Simeon was due for a big bump in pay in 2000. The subsequent negotiation dragged on through training camp, and he did not lay cleat on grass until the second game of the regular season."

http://www.jockbio.com/Bios/Rice/Rice_bio.html

 

2001 - free agent. this was one of the most important free agents the bears could have picked up.

 

in 2001 the highest paid DE was marcellus wiley DE at $11,000,960

 

we paid the great DE bryan robinson $8,843,666, an overall top ten in the league salary, then the following year made him a DT. 2 years prior to this robinson contract signing, simeon rice recorded 16.5 sacks. more than bryan robinson in his entire 4 year career in chicago. we also had daniels who never recorded double digit sacks in his entire career also.

 

i believe this was hately's idiocy (but not positive as this was angies first year also in chicago) who let this diamond slip through his fingers because they thought he was a one dimentional player. the only problem was that one dimention was the weakest link on our entire defense, the pass rush. this was a player that would have made us way, way better and solidified our entire defense for years and could have made the difference in our playoffs that year.

 

instead, rice went on to TB to record 5 years straight of double digit sacks. this left us with yet another STUPID landmark for our great management over the years.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nf...29-salaries.htm

[DaBearSox]

The Bears role model is Scrooge McDuck...

[Lucky Luciano]

The Bears role model is Scrooge McDuck...

 

here is something to think about.... how many times have bear DE's recorded double digit sacks since 2000?

 

answer: 2 times.

 

once in 2005, ogy with 10 and once in 2006, anderson with 12. that is the entire total for the most important position on your defense.

[nfoligno]

Is it your belief then ownership is running the show? If not, I do not see what the point of the 80s bears is.

 

Does Pitt build through the draft? Yes. But my point is difference between TB and Pitt is TB puts a higher priority on re-signing their own players. They do so, often, by early extensions, which is something Pitt does not do. You mention Ward, but in fact, he was in a VERY hot dispute w/ ownership not long ago because he wanted a new deal, and ownership said it was their policy to not extend players w/ more than one year remaining on their contract. Ward stewed for a year, then finally got his deal done, but many many others have simply been allowed to walk away.

 

When you draft/coach as well as Pitt, you can get away w/ this. Frankly, I am not sure there is a team in the league that resembles Pitt. Most any other team in the league that would allow as many upper tier players to walk away would not sustain a high level of success, but that is what Pitt has been doing. They draft well. They coach well. They ignore players requests for extensions until they only have one year left. Even then, they don't get extreme in their contracts, which is why so many choose to wait another year and max out in FA.

 

Angelo is different. From the start, he was looking at players w/ multiple years left on their deals for extensions. He was quite to extend Azumah, and tried to extend Holdman and Colvin when both had two years left.

 

I can see why some would look at Pitt, or NE, as examples we try to follow. Each build their team primarily through the draft. Angelo is similar in that regard. But I think a big difference is in player retention, which we advocate far above either NE or Pitt, and are far more like TB when Angelo was there.

 

Nfo I know what JA has said about which franchise he has come from and has pointed to but that franchise has taken some of the aspects that one of the most cosistent winning franchises over the last 35 years which is longer than Tampa has even existed.The defense that both the Bears and Bucs run was the base defense for the Steelers when they were winning 4 Super Bowls during the 70's the Cover 2.This defense was learned by Tony Dungy as a member of the Steelers secondary and then as a coach on Chuck Nolls staff after his playing days. If we look at the way the Steelers run their franchise today I do recall Hines Ward getting deals renegotiated a couple of times during his career and this past season they franchised one of their OT's.Also they have made a couple of significant additions through trade with Jerome Bettis and Kevin Greene both coming via trade. The bulk of their roster is basically through the draft with a few additions like Charlie Batch,Tommy Maddux and Byron Leftwitch via FA.Back in those days all teams built through the draft and trade here and there because there was no FA.Back in the 80's when the Bears dismantled that team what franchise did they resemble more Tampa or Pittsburgh? When they allowed the likes of Gault,Marshall,McMahon,Dent,Duerson and Wilson leave the team.We still have the same ownership no matter who supposedly is picking the players

[nfoligno]

You do what you know. Simple as that.

 

Think in terms of a coach. If you have a coach who spends all his coaching career in one system, and then you hire that coach, what system do you expect him to run? You can argue he should change the system all you want, but if that is the system he knows, that is the system he will stick w/.

 

I think you're right...

 

But, why? At best it got one ring...and after Angelo had left. And now they are in disarray.

 

Why wouldn't you pattern yourself after more successful franchises? Steelers, Patriots, etc... ?

[balta1701-A]

once in 2005, ogy with 10 and once in 2006, anderson with 12. that is the entire total for the most important position on your defense.

A sack producing DE is really considered the most important position on a defense?

 

I dunno, I guess it can be (Thinking about the Giants) but my instinct says that it's heavily dependent on the ability of the other people on the line. It's hard to point at 1 specific spot and say it's always the most important position.

[madlithuanian]

It's up there...w/o Hampton and Dent, Singletary's usefulness would have been far more minimal...

 

A sack producing DE is really considered the most important position on a defense?

 

I dunno, I guess it can be (Thinking about the Giants) but my instinct says that it's heavily dependent on the ability of the other people on the line. It's hard to point at 1 specific spot and say it's always the most important position.

[Lucky Luciano]

A sack producing DE is really considered the most important position on a defense?

 

I dunno, I guess it can be (Thinking about the Giants) but my instinct says that it's heavily dependent on the ability of the other people on the line. It's hard to point at 1 specific spot and say it's always the most important position.

 

there is a reason why defensive ends or cornerbacks are the highest paid positions on the entire defense and maybe on the entire team next to qb.

 

they are the main personnel to stop a passing attack. if you don't have ends to harass the qb you are in serious trouble. prior to one year by ogy (2005) and one by anderson (2006) it was 1993 when we had defensive ends (dent and armstrong) that recorded double digit sacks. that is really, really a bad statistic if you expect to win in the nfl.

[lemonej]

Is it your belief then ownership is running the show? If not, I do not see what the point of the 80s bears is.

 

Does Pitt build through the draft? Yes. But my point is difference between TB and Pitt is TB puts a higher priority on re-signing their own players. They do so, often, by early extensions, which is something Pitt does not do. You mention Ward, but in fact, he was in a VERY hot dispute w/ ownership not long ago because he wanted a new deal, and ownership said it was their policy to not extend players w/ more than one year remaining on their contract. Ward stewed for a year, then finally got his deal done, but many many others have simply been allowed to walk away.

 

When you draft/coach as well as Pitt, you can get away w/ this. Frankly, I am not sure there is a team in the league that resembles Pitt. Most any other team in the league that would allow as many upper tier players to walk away would not sustain a high level of success, but that is what Pitt has been doing. They draft well. They coach well. They ignore players requests for extensions until they only have one year left. Even then, they don't get extreme in their contracts, which is why so many choose to wait another year and max out in FA.

 

Angelo is different. From the start, he was looking at players w/ multiple years left on their deals for extensions. He was quite to extend Azumah, and tried to extend Holdman and Colvin when both had two years left.

 

I can see why some would look at Pitt, or NE, as examples we try to follow. Each build their team primarily through the draft. Angelo is similar in that regard. But I think a big difference is in player retention, which we advocate far above either NE or Pitt, and are far more like TB when Angelo was there.

That was my point really,when I brought up the Bears' of the 80's and the fact that they basically chased off two GMs(Finks and Vanisi) as Mikey got more involved.JA has a background with TB but he also has a background with the NYGs where Parcells and Belechick come from and if you look at how the Giants were run back during the Parcells years you can see similarity to NE today. So what I'm really saying is that the Bears are run in a manner that takes aspects of both organizations personnel styles.This is a lot better than when Mikey and Wannie tried the Jerry Jones style in the 90's.

[madlithuanian]

Oh agreed.

 

Doesn't mean it's good for the overall long term health of the franchise though...

 

You do what you know. Simple as that.

 

Think in terms of a coach. If you have a coach who spends all his coaching career in one system, and then you hire that coach, what system do you expect him to run? You can argue he should change the system all you want, but if that is the system he knows, that is the system he will stick w/.