Interesting read on the McCaskey's, etc...

[madlithuanian]

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/professor/...-of-nbc-is.html

 

 

Bears bunker mentality nothing new; snub of NBC is

.Brad Palmer on 11.19.09 | 1 comment | .The Bears have long had a bunker mentality at Halas Hall. It is born out of arrogance and insecurity, bordering on paranoia and can be traced to Michael McCaskey (the man behind the curtain) and Jerry Angelo.

 

 

A decade or so ago, I was doing a live-shot for Channel 7 in the comfort of one of the Bears meeting rooms at the original Halas Hall, having been given permission by the public relations director because of a snowstorm. McCaskey happened by and said I should be outside, snowstorm or not.

 

 

I asked him if he thought any other company would take that stance toward a major media outlet providing it with free publicity. McCaskey's response, "We don't need the publicity." I could almost hear George Halas groan. There was a time when the team's founder hand-delivered his releases to the newsrooms of the city's newspapers.

 

 

Little has changed in the ensuing years under McCaskey's reign, and now the Bears have decided to ratchet their anti-media posture up a notch. According to Sun-Times beat writer Brad Biggs, the Bears have denied NBC-TV access to any of their people for sitdown interviews for Sunday's pregame show, "Football Night in America."

 

What are the Bears afraid of? Looking more foolish than they already are? Probably. The Bears are in denial. By bunkering in, they don't have to submit themselves to any questions that might prove embarrassing or acknowledge any failures.

 

 

 

The problems with the Bears start at the top. That would be Michael McCaskey, not Ted Phillips. While Ted has the title of President and CEO, he is just a buffer for Michael. Ted was elevated to his position for one purpose, to get a stadium deal passed. Mayor Daley refused to deal with McCaskey, finding him too arrogant and unreasonable.

 

 

McCaskey wasn't so much "fired" by his mother, Virginia, as he was "bumped" upstairs where he would be able to maintain a lower profile. He's been flying under the radar ever since. But make no mistake, he remains the man in charge of the overall operation.

 

McCaskey gave in to his lack of expertise on football matters by hiring a headhunter to locate his general manager. Jerry Angelo, who worked in the player-personnel department of the Tampa Bay Bucs, got the nod. The move received a lukewarm response around the league.

 

The Bears storybook season of 2001 under Dick Jauron put Angelo's desire to name his own coach on temporary hold, but when the Bears reverted to form, Angelo fired Jauron and tried to hire LSU coach Nick Saban. But Saban wanted control of player acquisitions and Angelo wasn't about to give that up. So, he hired Lovie Smith, a former colleague at Tampa.

 

The results pretty much speak for themselves. The Bears did reach the Super Bowl in 2006, thanks in part to an easy schedule and the magic of return specialist Devin Hester. The Bears only played three games against teams with winning records during the season (2-1) and had the benefit of a first-round bye and two home playoff games in January against Seattle and New Orleans.

 

Since then, it's been all downhill. They've let a lot of good players get away while failing to find suitable replacements. Jim Finks, the archiect of the 1985 Super Bowl champs, always made the offensive line a priority in the draft. The only offensive linemen on the Bears roster that were drafted by Angelo are Chris Williams and Josh Beekman.

 

The situation does not promise to get any better anytime soon. The Bears have already traded away next year's first and second-round picks. They continue to insist they are a "running" team and continue to operate a "dink and dunk" passing game with their so-called franchise quarterback.

 

So long as the McCaskeys own the team, don't expect any significant changes. Jim Finks didn't want to work for Michael, and I doubt any other high-profile general managers or coaches will either. Don't think league insiders aren't savy about the goings on in Chicago. The only meaningful change would be for the McCaskeys to sell. And that's something the family has been considering, not that they'll ever admit it.

 

[LT2_3]

Interesting read. One thing to remember though, Brad Palmer is a spiteful, drunk, idiot.

[madlithuanian]

True enough. But even drunk, spiteful idiots can be right sometimes...

 

Interesting read. One thing to remember though, Brad Palmer is a spiteful, drunk, idiot.

 

[nfoligno]

While I am under no illusion that Mikey is completely out of the picture, at the same time, I just question how involved he is. Mikey was most involved, and hated, at a time when we lacked a more legit NFL organizational structure. We did not have a GM, and frankly, even the authority given to Hatley was a bit unusual. Mikey was very involved in each and every decision. I just question how involved he is today.

 

Many who just can not let go of the past insist he is the voice behind every negative move. I'm just not buying it. Even reading the piece below seems to move show a lack of involvement. It talks about Phillips going w/ a hiring firm, which found Angelo, rather than Mikey being more directly involved. It talks about how Saban wanted personnel power, which Angelo was not willing to give. It talks about Angelo choosing then Lovie, and we all know Lovie wanted "his guys" Again, no Mikey.

 

While not saying he is totally out of the picture, I just question the way some still have to point back to him for the woes of today.

 

Finally, he says no other high profile GM would want to work for Mikey, but does he really make a case for why? Angelo has not seemed to lack financial resources to compete w/ other teams. I have never heard even rumors that Mikey forces Angelo to draft a player, or sign a player. I question this statement.

 

Further, I would point out there are plenty of other teams that are well known to have far worse situations. In Dallas, Jerry Jones meddling is well known, yet that didn't stop Bill Parcells from taking the job. How about in Wash, where they have been able to get numerous guys in there few would have thought possible. Al Davis gets numerous guys, whether Green or Gruden. Pretty solid guys in Tenn, w/ a flat out nuts owner. Point here is, there are plenty of owners who are very well known to be far more meddling then ours, and yet they are able to hire big names. If you want to say we would not eat Lovie's deal while also handing out massive dollars for a Shanny or whoever. Fine. If you want to say Angelo is not going to hire a coach that wants personnel power. Fine. But to simply say no big name would work for Mikey. I think that is a joke.

 

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/professor/...-of-nbc-is.html

 

 

Bears bunker mentality nothing new; snub of NBC is

.Brad Palmer on 11.19.09 | 1 comment | .The Bears have long had a bunker mentality at Halas Hall. It is born out of arrogance and insecurity, bordering on paranoia and can be traced to Michael McCaskey (the man behind the curtain) and Jerry Angelo.

 

 

A decade or so ago, I was doing a live-shot for Channel 7 in the comfort of one of the Bears meeting rooms at the original Halas Hall, having been given permission by the public relations director because of a snowstorm. McCaskey happened by and said I should be outside, snowstorm or not.

 

 

I asked him if he thought any other company would take that stance toward a major media outlet providing it with free publicity. McCaskey's response, "We don't need the publicity." I could almost hear George Halas groan. There was a time when the team's founder hand-delivered his releases to the newsrooms of the city's newspapers.

 

 

Little has changed in the ensuing years under McCaskey's reign, and now the Bears have decided to ratchet their anti-media posture up a notch. According to Sun-Times beat writer Brad Biggs, the Bears have denied NBC-TV access to any of their people for sitdown interviews for Sunday's pregame show, "Football Night in America."

 

What are the Bears afraid of? Looking more foolish than they already are? Probably. The Bears are in denial. By bunkering in, they don't have to submit themselves to any questions that might prove embarrassing or acknowledge any failures.

 

 

 

The problems with the Bears start at the top. That would be Michael McCaskey, not Ted Phillips. While Ted has the title of President and CEO, he is just a buffer for Michael. Ted was elevated to his position for one purpose, to get a stadium deal passed. Mayor Daley refused to deal with McCaskey, finding him too arrogant and unreasonable.

 

 

McCaskey wasn't so much "fired" by his mother, Virginia, as he was "bumped" upstairs where he would be able to maintain a lower profile. He's been flying under the radar ever since. But make no mistake, he remains the man in charge of the overall operation.

 

McCaskey gave in to his lack of expertise on football matters by hiring a headhunter to locate his general manager. Jerry Angelo, who worked in the player-personnel department of the Tampa Bay Bucs, got the nod. The move received a lukewarm response around the league.

 

The Bears storybook season of 2001 under Dick Jauron put Angelo's desire to name his own coach on temporary hold, but when the Bears reverted to form, Angelo fired Jauron and tried to hire LSU coach Nick Saban. But Saban wanted control of player acquisitions and Angelo wasn't about to give that up. So, he hired Lovie Smith, a former colleague at Tampa.

 

The results pretty much speak for themselves. The Bears did reach the Super Bowl in 2006, thanks in part to an easy schedule and the magic of return specialist Devin Hester. The Bears only played three games against teams with winning records during the season (2-1) and had the benefit of a first-round bye and two home playoff games in January against Seattle and New Orleans.

 

Since then, it's been all downhill. They've let a lot of good players get away while failing to find suitable replacements. Jim Finks, the archiect of the 1985 Super Bowl champs, always made the offensive line a priority in the draft. The only offensive linemen on the Bears roster that were drafted by Angelo are Chris Williams and Josh Beekman.

 

The situation does not promise to get any better anytime soon. The Bears have already traded away next year's first and second-round picks. They continue to insist they are a "running" team and continue to operate a "dink and dunk" passing game with their so-called franchise quarterback.

 

So long as the McCaskeys own the team, don't expect any significant changes. Jim Finks didn't want to work for Michael, and I doubt any other high-profile general managers or coaches will either. Don't think league insiders aren't savy about the goings on in Chicago. The only meaningful change would be for the McCaskeys to sell. And that's something the family has been considering, not that they'll ever admit it.

 

[defiantgiant]

True enough. But even drunk, spiteful idiots can be right sometimes...

Honestly, this just reads like another in the endless series of Chicago sportswriters who spend their time griping about the Bears' media relations, rather than talking about anything relevant to football. Sure, Lovie Smith is dishonest with the press. He thinks that giving out team information to the media puts him at a competitive disadvantage. I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I'm glad he's making that decision based on what he thinks is best for his football team, not on what the writers at the Trib and the Sun-Times would prefer. His job (and Angelo's, and all the players') is to win, not to make nice to guys like Palmer.

 

The same thing goes for this blackout. The explanation they gave was that everybody in the organization, players and coaches alike, needs to focus on winning against Philly, rather than explaining themselves to the media. THAT'S TRUE. The Bears' playoff chances are infinitesimal at this point, but I'm pretty sure a loss on Sunday would mathematically eliminate them. If ignoring the media means that the Bears win some games, then I hope the Bears black out the media every week of the season, and guys like Palmer, Telander, and Rosenbloom can write all the stupid diatribes they want.

 

...to pull from Palmer's own article (if you can call it that,) people don't remember George Halas for delivering press releases to the newspapers by hand. They remember him for winning football games, and building a great organization. But apparently if it were up to Palmer, the Bears would bring back Jauron or Wannstedt and go 2-14 every year, as long as they made sure to schedule lots of interviews in between losses.

[nfoligno]

First, let me just point out that I have said this piece is a joke, and the writer offers little of value, though the snow storm/Mikey story was interesting.

 

With that said....

 

He thinks that giving out team information to the media puts him at a competitive disadvantage. I don't know if he's right or wrong, but I'm glad he's making that decision based on what he thinks is best for his football team, not on what the writers at the Trib and the Sun-Times would prefer. His job (and Angelo's, and all the players') is to win, not to make nice to guys like Palmer.

 

but you are taking Lovie at his word here. You honestly believe that Lovie believes he needs to skip an interview, and that is the difference between his being able to prepare his team and not? Further, I would ask how our up coming game affects Angelo, who also declined the interview. If the Lovie said no player would be made available, as he wanted them to keep their focus on the game, I could better understand. Hell, while I think it a bit more of a stretch, if Lovie felt he was in the same position as the players, and couldn't afford to lose focus, fine. But I just do not understand how this argument flys when the team's GM declines the interview.

 

The same thing goes for this blackout. The explanation they gave was that everybody in the organization, players and coaches alike, needs to focus on winning against Philly, rather than explaining themselves to the media. THAT'S TRUE. The Bears' playoff chances are infinitesimal at this point, but I'm pretty sure a loss on Sunday would mathematically eliminate them. If ignoring the media means that the Bears win some games, then I hope the Bears black out the media every week of the season, and guys like Palmer, Telander, and Rosenbloom can write all the stupid diatribes they want.

 

Again, how does the team needing to focus on Phily matter one bit when it comes to Angelo? What exactly is Angelo doing that is so crucial to our game this weekend?

 

 

 

 

[madlithuanian]

Good points.

 

To me it juest boils down to a few things...

 

1. It is a pure given that we all could care less if wins were hapenning. But, they are not. So, therefore, when times are bad, everything is under scrutiny.

 

2. Declining an interview during these tough times for the team just reads as circling the wagons to get away from negative press. It's pleaing the 5th. We all know that when one does so, it does not mean guilt. But, sometimes the impression could be just the opposite and that someone is hiding.

 

3. I hate to say it, but it's not just the media that wants the interview. I WANT IT! want to hear Costas ask the tough question and have JA or Smith answer it. I have no issue with Cutler declining...to me a player before the week if fair to say I'm not soing it, I already spoke on Wed and I need to get ready for the game. I could almost even give Smith a pass...if the team were not doing so poorly. But really, for JA to decline, as you mentioned, is pure hiding from the issues.

 

4. If the team wins on Sunday, some of the negativity could be brushed off. However, if they lose, the miscroscopes will be focussing even closer. And I'm sure other outlets other than Costas and NBC would like to ask some tough questions. Every loves to bash the media. I do it too. But I also realize they are needed. The readers need to attempt to keep the media in check by calling out BS, etc...but overall, don't fall into the trap of discounting the media as a kneww jerk reaction.

 

5. I'm sure the Palmer character has some issues... He was asked to go stand in a sotrm by Mikey-boy afterall! Regardless, he still might be onto something. Do you really in your heart of hearts feel that Mikey is out of the picture/ We can debate how involved, but I think he is involved. And if he's not, whoever is calling the shots over Teddy is f'ing this this up big time.

 

The big hope that I got out of the article is that there is thought of selling the team... Again, could be pure BS, but it's honestly the one big hope I have for this team. Otherwise I fear continual repeating of past mistakes by the regime since Finks' departure...

 

 

 

 

[defiantgiant]

Again, I'm not saying that Lovie and Angelo are right, just that their heads are in the right place. I can't think of an overwhelming reason why ignoring the media would help you get a win, but if they believe it's what they have to do to win, then I'm glad that they're doing what they think is necessary to beat Philly. And I don't see any reason to think that they DON'T believe that: it seems more plausible that Lovie and Angelo believe the media's contributing to a lack of focus than that they're lying about believing that, for no apparent reason.

 

EDIT:

Madlith, I guess I could see that being the case. I'll say this, though: these guys need to win, regardless of whether they do interviews and answer the tough questions. If they were winning, I wouldn't care about interviews. When they're losing, I still don't care about interviews - it's not like they make up for losses. You could be as honest and forthright a coach as anyone has ever seen, and if you go 4-12 every season, you're toast regardless of how many tough interviews you submit to.

 

At the end of the day, I want a winning coach, whether he talks to the media or not. And I want a losing coach to leave, even if he tells me all about why we lost and how hard he's trying.

[Connorbear]

At the end of the day, I want a winning coach, whether he talks to the media or not. And I want a losing coach to leave, even if he tells me all about why we lost and how hard he's trying.

Outstanding!!!! I would add, I want a winning coach whether he wears his emotions on his sleeve or not.

 

Peace

 

[madlithuanian]

I hear ya. It's the "connor" take! Winning is all that matters.

 

I look more at the big picture...I also look at my folks as an example. My mom and dad no longer follow vehemently. They watch when they can,etc... My dad is curious as to what the problem is. He's not scouring newspaper articles (since he lives in California), or blogs, etc... He casually wants to know. (Obviosuly, besides me telling him...) An interview with the GM would be good for people like him. By not doing so, he senses a problem.

 

Football is more than sport. It's entertainment. And it is also quasi-tax supported and protected under anti-trust. So, there's a part of it in which fans, from casual ro rabid want info, and feel they are owed it. That feeling may be wrong, but it is still there. But not providing the interview, the Bears are basically failing to entertain. (And they obviously haven't been entertaining on the field unless you've been an opponent...)

 

I too am from the school of just win...but I think that's a given in every post.

 

 

 

EDIT:

Madlith, I guess I could see that being the case. I'll say this, though: these guys need to win, regardless of whether they do interviews and answer the tough questions. If they were winning, I wouldn't care about interviews. When they're losing, I still don't care about interviews - it's not like they make up for losses. You could be as honest and forthright a coach as anyone has ever seen, and if you go 4-12 every season, you're toast regardless of how many tough interviews you submit to.

 

At the end of the day, I want a winning coach, whether he talks to the media or not. And I want a losing coach to leave, even if he tells me all about why we lost and how hard he's trying.

 

[madlithuanian]

Didn't see that coming a mile away!

 

Outstanding!!!! I would add, I want a winning coach whether he wears his emotions on his sleeve or not.

 

Peace

 

[Mongo3451]

I look more at the big picture...I also look at my folks as an example. My mom and dad no longer follow vehemently. They watch when they can,etc... My dad is curious as to what the problem is. He's not scouring newspaper articles (since he lives in California), or blogs, etc... He casually wants to know. (Obviosuly, besides me telling him...) An interview with the GM would be good for people like him.

 

Problem is; you rarely get anything you can hold on to from our GM. I THINK IT'S LESS ABOUT FOCUSSING ON WINNING THIS GAME THAN IT IS - GETTING BAD PRESS.

 

JA - brings in Cutler but fails to protect him = bad press

Lovie - Mr. "trust me" finally places his neck on the chopping block by taking reign of "his" defense and it sucks.

Marinelli - Brought in as the best off-season aquisition (BC) Has made zero impact.

Cutler - despite the lack of OL and weapons does not get a free pass for making so many ill advised throws in the red zone.

 

Those are our headliners and none of them get good press. That's why they are not talking. Your folks are better off hearing your version of the truth.

[defiantgiant]

Problem is; you rarely get anything you can hold on to from our GM. I THINK IT'S LESS ABOUT FOCUSSING ON WINNING THIS GAME THAN IT IS - GETTING BAD PRESS.

 

JA - brings in Cutler but fails to protect him = bad press

Lovie - Mr. "trust me" finally places his neck on the chopping block by taking reign of "his" defense and it sucks.

Marinelli - Brought in as the best off-season aquisition (BC) Has made zero impact.

Cutler - despite the lack of OL and weapons does not get a free pass for making so many ill advised throws in the red zone.

 

Those are our headliners and none of them get good press. That's why they are not talking. Your folks are better off hearing your version of the truth.

 

If this blackout were about avoiding bad press, why did they wait until now to do it? They've been getting lambasted in the Chicago media for more than two years. I think if there's one thing we can say for sure about Lovie, Angelo, et al. it's that they don't care at ALL what the press has to say about them.

[Connorbear]

Didn't see that coming a mile away!

Yeah, I'm just a bit predictable!!!

 

Peace