An article that questions our coaches

[nfoligno]

Couple tid bits from a Mulligan article in the Sun Times,

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...mully30.article

 

Payne was benched for not being able to defend the pass, but, lo and behold, he's now used as a deep safety in nickel downs because the player starting ahead of him, Danieal Manning, moves down into the box in passing situations. In other words, Payne, who isn't good against the pass, is only used in passing situations. Does that make sense?

 

Man, I have been saying that since camp when the staff said this was their plan. It just never made sense to me. Payne was removed from the FS position in favor of DM, mainly due to his lack of ability to cover, especially downfield. Yet our "plan" has our moving him back to FS in situations where (a) you basically know they are going to pass and ( often are going to be looking downfield. If we are in a nickel situation, wouldn't it make the most sense to put your best cover guys onto the field. I understand the idea of DM to nickel, but only if you have a solid cover guy who can play FS. When we go to the nickel, I would rather see either Graham or Vasher or FS. Better yet, why not just use Graham or Vasher at nickel DB and keep DM at FS. Point is, you want cover guys out there on passing downs.

 

Article then went on to discuss a play where Olsen was basically lined up against a DE. As the article says, Olsen isn't a very good blocker in the first place, so expecting him to solo block a DE is very questionable. Turner claims he can't just rotate Clark in on such situations, as it would tip the play. I would rather tip the play than expose our players like this. Even if the play is "tipped," if the right personnel is on the field, I think you still have a better chance of success.

 

Continuing,

 

Part of the problem is that teams have gone to five defensive backs and covered him with a cornerback when the Bears go to two-tight-end sets. Turner said the Bears would rather go with Johnny Knox as a third receiver than simply split Olsen out wide.

 

Huh? Olsen was very effective split out last year. This is a big reason why I want to move Clark back into a starting role. Olsen just can't block, and his starting is simply hurting more than helping. We can still get Olsen plenty of snaps by using 2 TE sets, or simply playing Olsen as a WR. Frankly, I see no reason not to use more 4 receiver sets, w/ Olsen being one of the 3.

 

He also throws this out there:

 

Moving Hunter Hillenmeyer back to middle linebacker in a swap of the strong-side linebacker spot to Nick Roach might help get the plays called faster and clearer, but if you think Hillenmeyer is going to do a better job of lining people up, consider the fact Hillenmeyer could've done that from strong safety last week.

 

First thing that came to mind for me was, does our staff allow the SLB to call plays? Urlacher, our MLB, has been our playcaller on D. When he went down, that role fell to Hunter, who replaced Urlacher in the middle. When he went down, that duty fell to Roach, again, in the middle. The other week, we had Roach in-between two experienced veterans in Briggs and Pisa, and yet it was Roach in the leadership role calling plays? It seems like the staff simply has pinpointed a position rather than a player to make the play calls, and this seems like a joke to me. Playcalling responsibility should fall on the person most capable of doing it, rather than whoever is playing a position.

 

We talk about this stuff in general often enough. A key function of the coach(s) is to put players in the best position to make plays. From there, it is on the players to get it done, but if the players are put into weaker positions from the start, it is much harder to look good and play well, and IMHO, that is the case for us.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Really a great piece by Mulligan.

[bear trap]

Couple tid bits from a Mulligan article in the Sun Times,

 

Article then went on to discuss a play where Olsen was basically lined up against a DE. As the article says, Olsen isn't a very good blocker in the first place, so expecting him to solo block a DE is very questionable. Turner claims he can't just rotate Clark in on such situations, as it would tip the play. I would rather tip the play than expose our players like this. Even if the play is "tipped," if the right personnel is on the field, I think you still have a better chance of success.

 

 

Okay, here is what really burns me up... Two years ago cedric bumson was pulled on passing plays in favor of peterson. WTF? It was okay then??? (OH okay they claimed he didn't know how to pass block, he looked pretty good last weekend) Almost everytime bumson was on the field it was gonna be a run, and when he went out it was a pass? Is that NOT tipping it to opposing team? I said it all year that year and yet they kept doing that with benson. Good god this is a classic statement as to why turner has to go b/c he can not see past his own stupidity! If we don't make the playoffs, I think lovie should be next. I know, I know bears won't eat the salary, but I'm starting to wonder: Could that happen? JA appeared pretty upset in his comments on the site after the game. Thinkin he may be trying to protect himself? Everyone says JA and Lovie are tied at the hip, but one's got to wonder if after this season JA doesn't pull out a pocket knife and cut the line to save his own butt.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Okay, here is what really burns me up... Two years ago cedric bumson was pulled on passing plays in favor of peterson. WTF? It was okay then??? (OH okay they claimed he didn't know how to pass block, he looked pretty good last weekend) Almost everytime bumson was on the field it was gonna be a run, and when he went out it was a pass? Is that NOT tipping it to opposing team? I said it all year that year and yet they kept doing that with benson. Good god this is a classic statement as to why turner has to go b/c he can not see past his own stupidity! If we don't make the playoffs, I think lovie should be next. I know, I know bears won't eat the salary, but I'm starting to wonder: Could that happen? JA appeared pretty upset in his comments on the site after the game. Thinkin he may be trying to protect himself? Everyone says JA and Lovie are tied at the hip, but one's got to wonder if after this season JA doesn't pull out a pocket knife and cut the line to save his own butt.

I think this is a new organization post-Cutler and if the GM thinks they need a new coach, the team will get a new coach. They need to handle it that way at least. In the grand scheme of thing, what is a wasted $10-12M for the coach when your one of the most popular franchises in America, one who has a QB that could not only be the face of the franchise but one of the faces of the NFL (if the Bears succeed).

 

This is it for Lovie.

[nfoligno]

I think the chance for Lovie to go is better than most think, but at the same time, simply missing the playoffs will not be enough, IMHO.

 

Lovie put his neck on the line by taking over the defense. Thus far, I would say he has gotten nicked on the neck, but the question is, will he have his head totally cut off? If our team goes downhill further, and the D is a key reason, it would not surprise me if changes were made. At minimum, I think Lovie would try to force a DC on Lovie, much as he did when Lovie was first hired and not allowed to hire the DC he wanted, but instead given Rivera. How Lovie accepts this may factor in whether he keeps his job.

 

To me though, the biggest key to whether or not we eat the salary and cut ties w/ Lovie may come down to the players. In the last game, it really appeared the players (a) were not prepared for the game and ( tuned Lovie out. If the players turn a deaf ear to their coach, then I think a change is possible.

 

I do not expect Lovie to be fired, and I think it would essentially take a total collapse for it to happen, but I do think it possible. While we are invested in Lovie, we are far more invested in the players, and if Lovie is not seen as a coach who can get the most out of the players, then he simply is not good for our top investments.

 

I think this is a new organization post-Cutler and if the GM thinks they need a new coach, the team will get a new coach. They need to handle it that way at least. In the grand scheme of thing, what is a wasted $10-12M for the coach when your one of the most popular franchises in America, one who has a QB that could not only be the face of the franchise but one of the faces of the NFL (if the Bears succeed).

 

This is it for Lovie.

 

[NAMEDSONPAYTON2]

Okay, here is what really burns me up... Two years ago cedric bumson was pulled on passing plays in favor of peterson. WTF? It was okay then??? (OH okay they claimed he didn't know how to pass block, he looked pretty good last weekend) Almost everytime bumson was on the field it was gonna be a run, and when he went out it was a pass? Is that NOT tipping it to opposing team? I said it all year that year and yet they kept doing that with benson. Good god this is a classic statement as to why turner has to go b/c he can not see past his own stupidity! If we don't make the playoffs, I think lovie should be next. I know, I know bears won't eat the salary, but I'm starting to wonder: Could that happen? JA appeared pretty upset in his comments on the site after the game. Thinkin he may be trying to protect himself? Everyone says JA and Lovie are tied at the hip, but one's got to wonder if after this season JA doesn't pull out a pocket knife and cut the line to save his own butt.

 

This is how I see it= Our playcalling especiallally offense is,"" O.K. we'll call this play to surprise them,naaaaa they'll think we're trying to surprise them, let's call what they expect and hope their thinking surprise". That's one reason why so so so many of us say we are predictable. We try to out think opponents but we wind up getting out thunk.

[madlithuanian]

Excatly! nfo and I said simlar last season... As David Byrne would say..."Same as it ever was..."

 

This is how I see it= Our playcalling especiallally offense is,"" O.K. we'll call this play to surprise them,naaaaa they'll think we're trying to surprise them, let's call what they expect and hope their thinking surprise". That's one reason why so so so many of us say we are predictable. We try to out think opponents but we wind up getting out thunk.

 

[nfoligno]

you mean like a game where we enter w/ one of the top rushing offenses, yet a weak pass offense, and we play a team that has one of the worst run defense, and best passing offenses, and yet we come out throwing thinking we will catch them by surprise. Unfortunately, this actually happened.

 

 

This is how I see it= Our playcalling especiallally offense is,"" O.K. we'll call this play to surprise them,naaaaa they'll think we're trying to surprise them, let's call what they expect and hope their thinking surprise". That's one reason why so so so many of us say we are predictable. We try to out think opponents but we wind up getting out thunk.

 

[NAMEDSONPAYTON2]

you mean like a game where we enter w/ one of the top rushing offenses, yet a weak pass offense, and we play a team that has one of the worst run defense, and best passing offenses, and yet we come out throwing thinking we will catch them by surprise. Unfortunately, this actually happened.

 

Exactly,stuff like that.

[BigDaddy]

I also believe this franchise changed when we brought in Cutler. The landscape changed. We can't have a coach who can't get this team ready to play, one that still misuses the talent almost reminiscent of Dave Wannstedt. There is simply no damned excuse good enough. This guy is the highest paid coach in the NFL and if he can't maintain a good level of play with some injuries, he's simply not worth the money we're paying him. You expect new coaches, guys who don't make shit to have an issue with injuries but there are too many coaches who have proven that they can win regardless of injuries and I can think of two of them, Coughlin and Bellichek who aren't making as much as Lovie is. So missing the playoffs should and I hope does cost Smith his job. I'm not sure Angelo will have any choice in the matter otherwise he's likely to go as well. I know he brought in Cutler but he's brought in Lovie too and all tyhe defensive misfires he's had are bound to weight heavily on somebody. The interesting part in all of this is that the Bears cannot afford another misfire on the HC. This is the third guy since Ditka to fail and they need a winner badly which is another reason I think Lovie goes this year. It's gonna cost them a bundle to eat Lovies contract so they couldn't possibly replace him with an unknown commodity. THAT will never happen. It MUST be a proven winner, a guy like Holmgren, Shanahan, Cowher or maybe Gruden, but I think one of the first three is the guy. Personally, I would love to see them fire Angelo and Lovie and bring in Holmgren as GM and Cowher as HC. I know people talk about HCs wanting GM responsibilities but I think thats way overblown and hot air. You give a good HC a great personnel/football guy and they will be happy.

[jason]

As always, Turner insists on inserting the square peg into the round hole, all the while ignoring common sense often enough for nearly everyone who has seen multiple games to question his coaching ability.

 

This absolutely MUST be Turner's last season in Chicago.

[Mongo3451]

As always, Turner insists on inserting the square peg into the round hole, all the while ignoring common sense often enough for nearly everyone who has seen multiple games to question his coaching ability.

 

This absolutely MUST be Turner's last season in Chicago.

I haven't agreed with the fire Turner comments untill this season. There has been one thought I had that was the deal breaker for me. For the length of time Turner has been our OC, what is our "bread and butter" plays? Don't all good teams have them? Don't all good OC's establish them? That's the rub with me.