nfoligno Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Just wondering, but could our not firing Lovie be more an indictment of Angelo? Could it be that the team is not ready to fire Angelo, but at the same time, not sure whether he will remain long term? If Angelo is in hot water, does it make sense to fire Lovie this year, have Angelo hire a new HC? The more I think about it, the more I think this has a lot to do w/ Angelo. I don't think our owners are ready to fire Angelo, but not willing to allow him to hire a new HC either. That could mean that next year, assuming we don't see big gains, will end in a total house cleaning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Just wondering, but could our not firing Lovie be more an indictment of Angelo? Could it be that the team is not ready to fire Angelo, but at the same time, not sure whether he will remain long term? If Angelo is in hot water, does it make sense to fire Lovie this year, have Angelo hire a new HC? The more I think about it, the more I think this has a lot to do w/ Angelo. I don't think our owners are ready to fire Angelo, but not willing to allow him to hire a new HC either. That could mean that next year, assuming we don't see big gains, will end in a total house cleaning. When does Angelo's contract end, and hypothetically, what happens to Angelo (and his salary) if there's no football in 2011? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clnr Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 If I recall correctly, Angelo has a contract over the 2013 season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted January 5, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Angelo has a few more years on his deal. If there is no football in 2011, I could be wrong, but I believe the teams are still on the hook for the salaries. Numerous articles have been written talking about how many owners are making decisions today based on the potential that there will not be football in 2011, and thus no revenue, yet they will still have to pay the salaries. For the Bears, for example, if they fired lovie, they would be on the hook for not one, but two salaries of coaches who would not be actually working. When does Angelo's contract end, and hypothetically, what happens to Angelo (and his salary) if there's no football in 2011? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan2000 Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Just wondering, but could our not firing Lovie be more an indictment of Angelo? Could it be that the team is not ready to fire Angelo, but at the same time, not sure whether he will remain long term? If Angelo is in hot water, does it make sense to fire Lovie this year, have Angelo hire a new HC? The more I think about it, the more I think this has a lot to do w/ Angelo. I don't think our owners are ready to fire Angelo, but not willing to allow him to hire a new HC either. That could mean that next year, assuming we don't see big gains, will end in a total house cleaning. You're thinking something along the lines of trying to avoid the situation we had with DJ being HC when Angelo came in and being stuck with DJ. In Jerry's case it is kinda a wash because he brought in his own coach and look where that got us. But I can see us wanting to replace HC and GM at the same time. From that stand point is logical if that is the plan so when Angelo is replaced the new GM could bring in his coaching staff and have a real fresh start. But if if your in a "stay the course" mode with the thought of in a year or two completely cleaning house why bring in a new OC if you are considering bringing in a new GM who will inevitably bring in a new coach and new staff next year or the year after. It would explain the thought of elevating Rod so technically you are staying the course there. I think it's possible they felt they had to make some changes to appease the fans so they can say they made changes. But they may be prepping for a real house cleaning. But the question remains why wait to do it if it's likely to happen baring significant improvement of the product on the field? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nfoligno Posted January 5, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 One. Big difference between changing OC, DC and assistants for a year than changing HC and/or GM. Even if the ownership thinks it possible to have a total house cleaning in the near future, that would not prohibit making lesser changes. Two. The key question is going to be, why wait. Money is going to be a key reason. Over and over again I read about how owners are hesitant to make dramatic moves right now w/o knowing whether or not there will even be football in 2011. That is true even more for us w/ the league's highest paid coach. People can talk cheap, but ownership doesn't want to eat Lovie and Angelo's deal, while adding on however much more, w/o even knowing if the new hires will be working in 2011. I think there is a 2nd part here too. I think the ownership simply likes Angelo and Lovie. They want to give both one more chance. You're thinking something along the lines of trying to avoid the situation we had with DJ being HC when Angelo came in and being stuck with DJ. In Jerry's case it is kinda a wash because he brought in his own coach and look where that got us. But I can see us wanting to replace HC and GM at the same time. From that stand point is logical if that is the plan so when Angelo is replaced the new GM could bring in his coaching staff and have a real fresh start. But if if your in a "stay the course" mode with the thought of in a year or two completely cleaning house why bring in a new OC if you are considering bringing in a new GM who will inevitably bring in a new coach and new staff next year or the year after. It would explain the thought of elevating Rod so technically you are staying the course there. I think it's possible they felt they had to make some changes to appease the fans so they can say they made changes. But they may be prepping for a real house cleaning. But the question remains why wait to do it if it's likely to happen baring significant improvement of the product on the field? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 All these moves mean, is that the McCaskey family is still firmly in charge of this team. This move reeks of ineptitude and penny pinching. They save around 8 figures by keeping these clowns and are counting on us fans to continue to sell out their stadium, buy their concessions and buy their NFL merchandise. I am boycotting all of it. If billboards, polls and paper ads are not heard from the fans, we need to make them pay by hurting their pocketbook. I'll be a fan as ususal, but the extent will be TV and internet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted January 5, 2010 Report Share Posted January 5, 2010 Rock on! I'm in on the boycott too! All these moves mean, is that the McCaskey family is still firmly in charge of this team. This move reeks of ineptitude and penny pinching. They save around 8 figures by keeping these clowns and are counting on us fans to continue to sell out their stadium, buy their concessions and buy their NFL merchandise. I am boycotting all of it. If billboards, polls and paper ads are not heard from the fans, we need to make them pay by hurting their pocketbook. I'll be a fan as ususal, but the extent will be TV and internet. 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.