Martz?!?!?!

[azbearsfan]

I found this. Is this guy reputable?

[bschmaranz]

Okay. So I guess we're gonna REALLY clean house after next season.

[Pixote]

I found this. Is this guy reputable?

 

Bogus.

 

Anyone who wants to can register with that site and post articles.

 

We had a couple of guys register with this forum so they could post links to their articles on the Bleacher Report and spam our site. The articles sucked.

 

If you notice Andy who wrote the article is mentioning himself as the beat reporter breaking the news for a program on the Score that does not even exist.

[azbearsfan]

Bogus.

 

Anyone who wants to can register with that site and post articles.

 

We had a couple of guys register with this forum so they could post links to their articles on the Bleacher Report and spam our site. The articles sucked.

 

If you notice Andy who wrote the article is mentioning himself as the beat reporter breaking the news for a program on the Score that does not even exist.

 

 

I remember that guy. He got ripped on here. lol

[bradjock]

The article has been deleted. I remember that guy and he was annoying.

 

On a side note, the Chicago papers are saying Martz is a leading candidate. My problem is this: Martz's system does not favor TE's. This is a bad idea for the Bears since TE is arguably our best and deepest offensive position. Look at what Vernon Davis did after Martz left San Fran.

[Connorbear]

The article has been deleted. I remember that guy and he was annoying.

 

On a side note, the Chicago papers are saying Martz is a leading candidate. My problem is this: Martz's system does not favor TE's. This is a bad idea for the Bears since TE is arguably our best and deepest offensive position. Look at what Vernon Davis did after Martz left San Fran.

Phillips said no one has been hired at this point.

 

Peace

[nfoligno]

Honestly, Martz has numerous flaws.

 

I am sure Jason will like the idea of Martz as he would be one of the more exciting OCs we have had since the razzle dazzle Crowton, who I know he loved. But like you, I just feel Martz would be a really poor fit.

 

Martz had incredible success w/ StL. Greatest show on turf. Since then, he has failed w/ SF and Det. You can talk about talent, but I think a big part of the problem is Martz has a very particular system, and tries to force players into it. Sound familiar?

 

In StL, he didn't have a QB w/ the biggest arm, but in Warner, he had a QB who could make very, very quick reads and very accurate throws. He also had exceptional route running WRs. Holt and Bruce were not running a ton of go routes. They were running loads of slants, both short and deep. And they were very difficult to contain. As Warner would do a great job of not only hitting the WR, but hitting them in stride, there would be significant YAC as well. Now throw in Marshall Faulk, as dangerous as a runner as a receiver. Oh yea, and they had a superior OL that protected Warner.

 

He tried to run a similar system in Det and SF, but it didn't work. I have a hard time seeing how we matchup with this system either. Cutler and Warner are very different QBs, and (a) I am not sure Cutler could run such a system and ( frankly, it would almost seem a waste of his talent. Our WRs have not proven to be exceptional route runners, and that would be a death nail for this system. Also, in Stl, to say the least, the QB and WRs always seemed on the same page. Miscommunication issues we have had would only be further exposed in a Martz system. We don't have the OL to run it. Forte is about the only good fit, and Forte could end up being a fantasy favorite in such a system as he would have so dang many catches and space to run in.

 

Overall though, I just do not see Martz' system fitting our personnel, and question how much Martz would alter his system as opposed to trying to force our players into it.

 

The article has been deleted. I remember that guy and he was annoying.

 

On a side note, the Chicago papers are saying Martz is a leading candidate. My problem is this: Martz's system does not favor TE's. This is a bad idea for the Bears since TE is arguably our best and deepest offensive position. Look at what Vernon Davis did after Martz left San Fran.

 

[madlithuanian]

Then Martz should be a perfect fit for our band of misfit coaches!

 

Honestly, Martz has numerous flaws.

 

I am sure Jason will like the idea of Martz as he would be one of the more exciting OCs we have had since the razzle dazzle Crowton, who I know he loved. But like you, I just feel Martz would be a really poor fit.

 

Martz had incredible success w/ StL. Greatest show on turf. Since then, he has failed w/ SF and Det. You can talk about talent, but I think a big part of the problem is Martz has a very particular system, and tries to force players into it. Sound familiar?

 

In StL, he didn't have a QB w/ the biggest arm, but in Warner, he had a QB who could make very, very quick reads and very accurate throws. He also had exceptional route running WRs. Holt and Bruce were not running a ton of go routes. They were running loads of slants, both short and deep. And they were very difficult to contain. As Warner would do a great job of not only hitting the WR, but hitting them in stride, there would be significant YAC as well. Now throw in Marshall Faulk, as dangerous as a runner as a receiver. Oh yea, and they had a superior OL that protected Warner.

 

He tried to run a similar system in Det and SF, but it didn't work. I have a hard time seeing how we matchup with this system either. Cutler and Warner are very different QBs, and (a) I am not sure Cutler could run such a system and ( frankly, it would almost seem a waste of his talent. Our WRs have not proven to be exceptional route runners, and that would be a death nail for this system. Also, in Stl, to say the least, the QB and WRs always seemed on the same page. Miscommunication issues we have had would only be further exposed in a Martz system. We don't have the OL to run it. Forte is about the only good fit, and Forte could end up being a fantasy favorite in such a system as he would have so dang many catches and space to run in.

 

Overall though, I just do not see Martz' system fitting our personnel, and question how much Martz would alter his system as opposed to trying to force our players into it.

 

[bowlingtwig]

Then Martz should be a perfect fit for our band of misfit coaches!

I do not like Martz at all to run this system. I like his style of offense as it does open things up and scares the defensive coordinator. If Lovie believes with what he has been saying since day 1 then Martz should not be here for 2010. Lovie says we get of the bus running the football. Martz's offense doesn't really do that. Also his style of offense can get a QB killed if the Oline can not protect long enough. I am a huge fan of bringin in Jeremy Bates. He has past ties with Cutler and he does know what to do with him. I also heard that he is a young guy that tells it like it is and doesn't have a problem getting in the QB's face for making mistakes. Thi is exactly what we need.

[madlithuanian]

Exactly!

 

I do not like Martz at all to run this system. I like his style of offense as it does open things up and scares the defensive coordinator. If Lovie believes with what he has been saying since day 1 then Martz should not be here for 2010. Lovie says we get of the bus running the football. Martz's offense doesn't really do that. Also his style of offense can get a QB killed if the Oline can not protect long enough. I am a huge fan of bringin in Jeremy Bates. He has past ties with Cutler and he does know what to do with him. I also heard that he is a young guy that tells it like it is and doesn't have a problem getting in the QB's face for making mistakes. Thi is exactly what we need.

 

[jason]

Honestly, Martz has numerous flaws.

 

I am sure Jason will like the idea of Martz as he would be one of the more exciting OCs we have had since the razzle dazzle Crowton, who I know he loved. But like you, I just feel Martz would be a really poor fit.

 

Martz had incredible success w/ StL. Greatest show on turf. Since then, he has failed w/ SF and Det. You can talk about talent, but I think a big part of the problem is Martz has a very particular system, and tries to force players into it. Sound familiar?

 

In StL, he didn't have a QB w/ the biggest arm, but in Warner, he had a QB who could make very, very quick reads and very accurate throws. He also had exceptional route running WRs. Holt and Bruce were not running a ton of go routes. They were running loads of slants, both short and deep. And they were very difficult to contain. As Warner would do a great job of not only hitting the WR, but hitting them in stride, there would be significant YAC as well. Now throw in Marshall Faulk, as dangerous as a runner as a receiver. Oh yea, and they had a superior OL that protected Warner.

 

He tried to run a similar system in Det and SF, but it didn't work. I have a hard time seeing how we matchup with this system either. Cutler and Warner are very different QBs, and (a) I am not sure Cutler could run such a system and ( frankly, it would almost seem a waste of his talent. Our WRs have not proven to be exceptional route runners, and that would be a death nail for this system. Also, in Stl, to say the least, the QB and WRs always seemed on the same page. Miscommunication issues we have had would only be further exposed in a Martz system. We don't have the OL to run it. Forte is about the only good fit, and Forte could end up being a fantasy favorite in such a system as he would have so dang many catches and space to run in.

 

Overall though, I just do not see Martz' system fitting our personnel, and question how much Martz would alter his system as opposed to trying to force our players into it.

 

Do I like the idea of Martz? Hell yes. He would make the offense dangerous again. He would put up 30+ a game. And don't be mistaken about his time after St. Louis, because Kitna tore it up with Martz. What has Kitna done without Martz? Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

I like the idea of an experienced OC, with a history of success, something the Bears have not had in...well, forever. Do I fear he may waste TE talent? Yes, based on his history. But it is not like Turner has maximized the talent on the roster. You guys act as if Turner was the reason for any TE success, rather than a hindrance (which is what he was).

 

Give me an OC that makes our offense formidable again, and I can live with the "possibility" that he won't use the TE right. Of course, since he is a bonafide offensive guru, I prefer to cross my fingers and have faith that he will maximize Olsen's talent...something NEVER done by Turner.

[CrackerDog]

Do I like the idea of Martz? Hell yes. He would make the offense dangerous again. He would put up 30+ a game. And don't be mistaken about his time after St. Louis, because Kitna tore it up with Martz. What has Kitna done without Martz? Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

I like the idea of an experienced OC, with a history of success, something the Bears have not had in...well, forever. Do I fear he may waste TE talent? Yes, based on his history. But it is not like Turner has maximized the talent on the roster. You guys act as if Turner was the reason for any TE success, rather than a hindrance (which is what he was).

 

Give me an OC that makes our offense formidable again, and I can live with the "possibility" that he won't use the TE right. Of course, since he is a bonafide offensive guru, I prefer to cross my fingers and have faith that he will maximize Olsen's talent...something NEVER done by Turner.

 

I generally don't agree with Jason but I do here. And in my opinion, this is a one to two year experiment anyway. My only concern is Martz is probably a better indoor guy than out. You aren't going to throw it around like crazy in December in Chicago. With that said, I think Martz is smart enough to realize this. I'd welcome his being hired by the Bears.

[nfoligno]

Do I like the idea of Martz? Hell yes. He would make the offense dangerous again. He would put up 30+ a game. And don't be mistaken about his time after St. Louis, because Kitna tore it up with Martz. What has Kitna done without Martz? Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

Yea, I remember Kitna having a nice little FF season there putting up nice yardage totals. But did that pass happy offense of Martz really make that offense successful? Or did he just inflate the passing totals?

 

In 2006, Kitna put up a whopping 4,200 passing yards. But he threw only 21 TDs, while also tossing 22 picks. Further, he was sacked 63 times. And talk about pass happy. Kita launched the ball about 600 times, not to mention the 30 something carries he had, and you know those were broken pass plays. Take out Kitna broken play runs, and they had only about 270 carries that year. That is greater than a 2-1 pass/run ratio.

 

In 2007, Kitna had another big year in terms of passing yards, but only 18 TDs, and 20 picks. And once again, they dropped back to pass nearly 600 times while running it less than 300.

 

Kitna threw a ton. No doubt. But was the system really a good one? He threw for a lot of yards, but not a lot of scores. He got the QB killed in a pass happy system, which also saw a ton of turnovers. He all but refused to run the ball. Yes, I realize that team had many issues, and the OL was high among them. But that offense, while it inflated Kitna's numbers, was not very successful, and I would add put added pressure on an already struggling defense.

 

SF was another story, as Samauri Mike become HC and really pushed Martz to run it more and run a different system. The results were pretty bad.

 

In Stl, Martz truly made a name for himself, but he also had great pieces in place to get it done. Give him credit, no question, but he has not proven capable of equalling that success elsewhere. Further, I think he has also shown to be yet another coach who forces players into his system, regardless whether they are a good fit or not. His offense puts up more yards through the air, but at the sacrifice of yards on the ground. Further, he could move the ball downfield, but could not score. When I look at what we have, and look at Martz' system, I just do not see a good fit.

 

That does not mean I want a John Shoop, conservative system, but I don't think we need the mad scientist either. We need a coach who will utilize the players we have on the roster, and run a system that puts them in a position to do well. I think Martz would get Cutler killed, and we would not see a reduction in turnovers, and may in fact see an increase.

 

I like the idea of an experienced OC, with a history of success, something the Bears have not had in...well, forever.

 

I agree here, which is a key issue of mine w/ Bates. While he has a good relationship w/ Cutler, I want a more proven signal caller. Further, I just have an issue w/ the idea of looking at coach who, I believe, we would have no interest in if not for his ties to Cutler.

 

Do I fear he may waste TE talent? Yes, based on his history. But it is not like Turner has maximized the talent on the roster. You guys act as if Turner was the reason for any TE success, rather than a hindrance (which is what he was).

 

Turner didn't maximize the talent of our WRs, but does that mean we shouldn't try to add someone who would? In SF, Martz all but ignored Vernon Davis. One year after he is gone, leads the team w/ something like 80-1,000-13.

 

Give me an OC that makes our offense formidable again, and I can live with the "possibility" that he won't use the TE right. Of course, since he is a bonafide offensive guru, I prefer to cross my fingers and have faith that he will maximize Olsen's talent...something NEVER done by Turner.

 

Again, I want to do more than cross my fingers that a coach will do something history suggests he won't. I want an OC that will run a system based on the talent we have, rather than force our talent into a system which it may not fit. I want an OC that will make our entire offense a weapon, rather than just make our QB a FF favorite. I want an OC that will help produce more scores and fewer turnovers, while I think Martz will not improve our scoring but would get Cutler that interception record. I want an OC that does more to help the QB from getting killed, not one that puts the QB in position to be murdered.

 

I too want a good, experienced OC that will make our offense one to be feared, both on the ground and through the air. I simply do not think that is Martz.

[Mongo3451]

No way in hell do I want Martz near this football team. His system worked once and it was a perfect storm. He has since tried and failed miserably. He's a little nutty for what we need...

 

[bowlingtwig]

No way in hell do I want Martz near this football team. His system worked once and it was a perfect storm. He has since tried and failed miserably. He's a little nutty for what we need...

I guess the question now that Bates is going to go to Seattle with Carroll, who else is a possible option other than Martz. I don't want Martz as he will get Cutler killed.

[jason]

Do I like the idea of Martz? Hell yes. He would make the offense dangerous again. He would put up 30+ a game. And don't be mistaken about his time after St. Louis, because Kitna tore it up with Martz. What has Kitna done without Martz? Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

Yea, I remember Kitna having a nice little FF season there putting up nice yardage totals. But did that pass happy offense of Martz really make that offense successful? Or did he just inflate the passing totals?

 

In 2006, Kitna put up a whopping 4,200 passing yards. But he threw only 21 TDs, while also tossing 22 picks. Further, he was sacked 63 times. And talk about pass happy. Kita launched the ball about 600 times, not to mention the 30 something carries he had, and you know those were broken pass plays. Take out Kitna broken play runs, and they had only about 270 carries that year. That is greater than a 2-1 pass/run ratio.

 

In 2007, Kitna had another big year in terms of passing yards, but only 18 TDs, and 20 picks. And once again, they dropped back to pass nearly 600 times while running it less than 300.

 

Kitna threw a ton. No doubt. But was the system really a good one? He threw for a lot of yards, but not a lot of scores. He got the QB killed in a pass happy system, which also saw a ton of turnovers. He all but refused to run the ball. Yes, I realize that team had many issues, and the OL was high among them. But that offense, while it inflated Kitna's numbers, was not very successful, and I would add put added pressure on an already struggling defense.

 

SF was another story, as Samauri Mike become HC and really pushed Martz to run it more and run a different system. The results were pretty bad.

 

In Stl, Martz truly made a name for himself, but he also had great pieces in place to get it done. Give him credit, no question, but he has not proven capable of equalling that success elsewhere. Further, I think he has also shown to be yet another coach who forces players into his system, regardless whether they are a good fit or not. His offense puts up more yards through the air, but at the sacrifice of yards on the ground. Further, he could move the ball downfield, but could not score. When I look at what we have, and look at Martz' system, I just do not see a good fit.

 

That does not mean I want a John Shoop, conservative system, but I don't think we need the mad scientist either. We need a coach who will utilize the players we have on the roster, and run a system that puts them in a position to do well. I think Martz would get Cutler killed, and we would not see a reduction in turnovers, and may in fact see an increase.

 

With all that said, nobody can argue that his offense, IN DETROIT, with JOHN FRIGGIN KITNA, put up huge stats. Now just imagine what he could do with a MUCH better QB in Cutler. Is there a risk? Sure. But isn't that risk just as bad, if not worse, with some lame one-year guy who'll come into Chicago with his "big break" in coaching? Or even worse, a guy getting the shot because the Bears front office knows he'll be a Lovie Smith whipping boy. I think so.

 

Do I fear he may waste TE talent? Yes, based on his history. But it is not like Turner has maximized the talent on the roster. You guys act as if Turner was the reason for any TE success, rather than a hindrance (which is what he was).

 

Turner didn't maximize the talent of our WRs, but does that mean we shouldn't try to add someone who would? In SF, Martz all but ignored Vernon Davis. One year after he is gone, leads the team w/ something like 80-1,000-13.

Take the bad with the good, good with the bad. Turner ignored the WRs for the most part, and didn't do much to help the TEs or RBs either. With Martz, at least the Bears would get maximization out of the WRs. And since Olsen is essentially a big WR, I'm hoping that Martz has learned from his mistake with Davis in SF. Once again, it's a risk I'd be willing to take for an offense that is nearly guaranteed to score 30+ a game.

 

Give me an OC that makes our offense formidable again, and I can live with the "possibility" that he won't use the TE right. Of course, since he is a bonafide offensive guru, I prefer to cross my fingers and have faith that he will maximize Olsen's talent...something NEVER done by Turner.

 

Again, I want to do more than cross my fingers that a coach will do something history suggests he won't. I want an OC that will run a system based on the talent we have, rather than force our talent into a system which it may not fit. I want an OC that will make our entire offense a weapon, rather than just make our QB a FF favorite. I want an OC that will help produce more scores and fewer turnovers, while I think Martz will not improve our scoring but would get Cutler that interception record. I want an OC that does more to help the QB from getting killed, not one that puts the QB in position to be murdered.

 

I too want a good, experienced OC that will make our offense one to be feared, both on the ground and through the air. I simply do not think that is Martz.

 

Will there be risks with Martz? Yes. Will there be more with him than with others? Yes. But think about the benefits and detriments, the floors and the ceilings. With Martz, both are high. As I see it, Martz's floor is higher than the majority of OC's floors, and his ceiling is leaps and bounds about others. Turner couldn't hold Martz's jock strap, and Shoop couldn't hole the cup.

 

Since this is more than likely a one year experiment any way, let's shoot for the moon. I'm sick of the Bears not going for it. I'd rather see a team that goes for it, tries to take risks and destroys the other team, versus the "hold'em close and hope to win in the end"-approach from Lovie and company.

[jason]

Other thoughts about Martz:

 

-After Detroit let go of him, they suddenly became the only team to go 0-16 in NFL history.

-While in Detroit, Shaun McDonald and Mike Furrey put up huge numbers. Read those two names again.

-Kevin Jones, yes, the same one who has pretty much never looked all that great since college or good since his rookie year, had 93 receptions during the two years with Martz

-Kevin Jones, yeah, the same one, had arguably the best year of his career in 2006, and still had a great year in 2007 considering he was injured and had to split some carries with TJ Duckett

-Kitna put up 39 TDs and 42 INTs in two years with Martz, while playing with an OL arguably worse than Cutler's THIS YEAR, and an overall team that was inarguably much worse.

 

-In SF, the combination of Shaun Hill and JT Sullivan put up 3700 passing yards, 21TDs, 19INTs, and were significant for the only times in their careers. SHAUN HILL AND JT SULLIVAN! Both of those guys are bums, and they're lucky to even be in the NFL.

-Frank Gore went for over 1000 yards rushing with Martz.

-Yes, Vernon Davis regressed while Martz was the OC, but let's look at these facts:

2007: QBs were Trent Dilfer and #1 pick Alex Smith for 13 games, that Hill scrub for two games, and Chris (LOL) Weinke for one game. So, that is 13 games of competent QBs.

2008: QBs were SHAUN HILL AND JT SULLIVAN!

2009: QBs were SHAUN HILL and #1 pick Alex Smith. Guess what? You know all those TDs Vernon Davis got? His breakout season? 3 TDs from that douche Shaun Hill, and 10 from Alex Smith.

 

I propose the idea that Martz may have limited the TE somewhat, but the TEs were much more limited by the scrubs at QB during the 2008 season.

 

-----------------------

In short, his positives still outweigh his negatives in my opinion. I'm crossing my fingers hoping the Bears get him.

[nfoligno]

Martz would get Cutler freaking killed. In Martz system, Kitna was sacked more than any QB in the league. Yea, bad OL, but what bothered the hell out of me (I had Kitna in FF as a backup and followed) was Martz did nothing to help Kitna get away from pressure. Sound familiar? You, I, and others have complained about how Turner didn't do enough to help compensate for weak protection. Well, neither did Martz. Further, Martz system doesn't utilize a QB on the run. You can talk about how you hope he does this or that, but if something is not part of his system, I think you are lying to yourself if you think he suddenly will write it into his playbook.

 

I get the idea of going for it, and it is likely a one year job, but I would rather that OC not get out QB killed.

 

Look, I think a big reason you want Martz is because you (a) don't want someone like Bates and ( don't think we will get anyone else exciting. I get that. But that still just doens't feel like a good reason to me to hire Martz.

 

Especially w/ a QB like Cutler, and what I think could be an exceptional group of young receivers, I don't want a John Shoop. I want someone who can maximize our passing game. No question. But that still isn't enough reason for me to like Martz. I think he is a horrible fit for our talent. I don't think he would get along w/ Cutler, and think his system would hurt not only Cutler, but the team as a whole. Frankly, I would rather get a guy w/o experience (but who was previously involved in a good passing game) rather than Martz.

 

I have seen what Martz brings to the table. No thanks. He is like so many others who make a name for themselves when everything was perfect, but after leaving that situation, their rep takes a dive. Lets be honest. Its not that difficult to look good when everything is perfect. IMHO, a coach is far more impressive when he gets more out of less, and I just don't see it w/ him.

 

With all that said, nobody can argue that his offense, IN DETROIT, with JOHN FRIGGIN KITNA, put up huge stats. Now just imagine what he could do with a MUCH better QB in Cutler. Is there a risk? Sure. But isn't that risk just as bad, if not worse, with some lame one-year guy who'll come into Chicago with his "big break" in coaching? Or even worse, a guy getting the shot because the Bears front office knows he'll be a Lovie Smith whipping boy. I think so.

 

 

Take the bad with the good, good with the bad. Turner ignored the WRs for the most part, and didn't do much to help the TEs or RBs either. With Martz, at least the Bears would get maximization out of the WRs. And since Olsen is essentially a big WR, I'm hoping that Martz has learned from his mistake with Davis in SF. Once again, it's a risk I'd be willing to take for an offense that is nearly guaranteed to score 30+ a game.

 

 

 

Will there be risks with Martz? Yes. Will there be more with him than with others? Yes. But think about the benefits and detriments, the floors and the ceilings. With Martz, both are high. As I see it, Martz's floor is higher than the majority of OC's floors, and his ceiling is leaps and bounds about others. Turner couldn't hold Martz's jock strap, and Shoop couldn't hole the cup.

 

Since this is more than likely a one year experiment any way, let's shoot for the moon. I'm sick of the Bears not going for it. I'd rather see a team that goes for it, tries to take risks and destroys the other team, versus the "hold'em close and hope to win in the end"-approach from Lovie and company.

 

[azbearsfan]

I agree with this. Cutler can't take another beating like this year. With Martz it would be worse

Martz would get Cutler freaking killed. In Martz system, Kitna was sacked more than any QB in the league. Yea, bad OL, but what bothered the hell out of me (I had Kitna in FF as a backup and followed) was Martz did nothing to help Kitna get away from pressure. Sound familiar? You, I, and others have complained about how Turner didn't do enough to help compensate for weak protection. Well, neither did Martz. Further, Martz system doesn't utilize a QB on the run. You can talk about how you hope he does this or that, but if something is not part of his system, I think you are lying to yourself if you think he suddenly will write it into his playbook.

 

I get the idea of going for it, and it is likely a one year job, but I would rather that OC not get out QB killed.

 

Look, I think a big reason you want Martz is because you (a) don't want someone like Bates and ( don't think we will get anyone else exciting. I get that. But that still just doens't feel like a good reason to me to hire Martz.

 

Especially w/ a QB like Cutler, and what I think could be an exceptional group of young receivers, I don't want a John Shoop. I want someone who can maximize our passing game. No question. But that still isn't enough reason for me to like Martz. I think he is a horrible fit for our talent. I don't think he would get along w/ Cutler, and think his system would hurt not only Cutler, but the team as a whole. Frankly, I would rather get a guy w/o experience (but who was previously involved in a good passing game) rather than Martz.

 

I have seen what Martz brings to the table. No thanks. He is like so many others who make a name for themselves when everything was perfect, but after leaving that situation, their rep takes a dive. Lets be honest. Its not that difficult to look good when everything is perfect. IMHO, a coach is far more impressive when he gets more out of less, and I just don't see it w/ him.

[defiantgiant]

Nfo, I agree with pretty much everything you've said. Martz's system constantly hangs his quarterback out to dry. He frequently calls plays that allow an unblocked rusher and don't have ANY checkdown target for the quarterback. I remember an interview in Detroit where he said (regarding one of those plays) that the unblocked guy was "the quarterback's responsibility." I'm all for getting the most out of the passing game, but that's fundamentally unsound playcalling. And Kitna's totals look gaudy, but so would nearly anyone's if they threw as often as he did.

 

One thing that hasn't been touched on yet: Martz runs an Air Coryell variant that uses very different concepts/terminology from Ron Turner's West coast offense. I doubt that many, if any, of our current players have any experience in a Coryell offense, since not many coaches use it (outside of Martz, Norv Turner is the only other guy I can think of.) On top of that, even among Coryell guys, Martz's playbook is notoriously complicated and difficult to learn. If we're looking for a turnaround next season, Martz would be a very bad choice: basically every player on offense would be going back to square one, then trying to acclimate to a brand-new offense that's much more complex and demanding than the one they've been running. And that's to say nothing of the fact that basically none of them, except for Forte, are well-suited for a Martz offense.

[dawhizz]

No to Martz as well. Avoid him like the plague. I don't know why would would bring in an offensive coordinator who minimizes the only offensive threat you have (Greg Olsen). Remember, Vernon Davis did nothing in SF until Martz left. I'll take the GB guy. Which probably means it will be Martz.

[jason]

When will the lame Vernon Davis argument end? Look at the QBs, PLEASE.

 

A final thought:

Is the possible explosion from a Martz offense worth the risk? I don't know. But choosing most of the other names being passed around is just like saying, "let's hope Lovie and the D step up, because the O will not come close to carrying the team."

 

may as well go for it with Martz. Rememver, you miss ALL the shots you don't take.

[BearSox]

I hope we hire Martz, cause that will most likely signal the end to Lovie'and JA's reign of terror (hopefully they put Phillips back into accounting or something as long as he no longer has any power over personnel or the staff).

 

Look what Martz did in his previous two stints. He was brought there to revive each teams offense, and while they did see some increases (notably with the passing game, but they passed more than any other team), Martz complete refusal to run the ball as well as his enormous ego caused him to be canned.

 

Sure, Cutler might pass for more than 4,000 yards, but expect him to be hit as much or even more, as well as another year of him having a 1:1 TD:INT ratio. Don't expect us to run the ball at all. And expect a lot of chaos in the coaches office with Mike Martz enormous ego.

 

Hopefully they hire Martz just so the McCasky's can finally wake up and turn this ship around. The Bears are a team and org that has always prided itself on a punishing defense and a strong and powerful running attack. Next year with the pass happy O and the shitty D (as long as Lovie has the final say, this D will suck), there will be no choice to do a complete overhaul.

 

Plus, with the complete lack of physicality and the things the Bears and Chicago pride themselves on, we could be major players for Cowher.

[nfoligno]

Funny thing is, while I do not want Martz, I do want another coach who does in fact run the Air Coryell system. I want Saunders.

 

I realize that if we added Saunders, he would bring a very different offense and new terminology, but at the same time, I think he does it more effectively. Martz may run a version of the Air Coryell, but I think Saunders does it better. Martz doesn't know how to run that system in conjuction w/ a run game, but Saunders does. Priest Holmes and Larry Johnson were equally effective as runners and receivers under his system, and I think the same could hold true for Forte. He could put up great numbers in such a system, under Saunders, while I think he would be forgotten in Martz' system. Further, while both (Martz/Saunders) run versions of the Air Coryell, I think Saunders does more to tweak the system to the talent he has. I also think he does more to help the QB offset the pass rush, and doesn't get his QB killed in the process.

 

Nfo, I agree with pretty much everything you've said. Martz's system constantly hangs his quarterback out to dry. He frequently calls plays that allow an unblocked rusher and don't have ANY checkdown target for the quarterback. I remember an interview in Detroit where he said (regarding one of those plays) that the unblocked guy was "the quarterback's responsibility." I'm all for getting the most out of the passing game, but that's fundamentally unsound playcalling. And Kitna's totals look gaudy, but so would nearly anyone's if they threw as often as he did.

 

One thing that hasn't been touched on yet: Martz runs an Air Coryell variant that uses very different concepts/terminology from Ron Turner's West coast offense. I doubt that many, if any, of our current players have any experience in a Coryell offense, since not many coaches use it (outside of Martz, Norv Turner is the only other guy I can think of.) On top of that, even among Coryell guys, Martz's playbook is notoriously complicated and difficult to learn. If we're looking for a turnaround next season, Martz would be a very bad choice: basically every player on offense would be going back to square one, then trying to acclimate to a brand-new offense that's much more complex and demanding than the one they've been running. And that's to say nothing of the fact that basically none of them, except for Forte, are well-suited for a Martz offense.

 

[defiantgiant]

Well, Saunders' offense isn't as high-risk or as unbalanced as Martz's, but it's still a very complicated one. When he was with the Redskins, there were reports that he had a 700-page playbook containing 1,800 offensive plays. Yikes.

 

However, I found a pretty good article where Saunders walks a bunch of reporters through the Coryell route terminology, and he seems to think that his playbook is actually easier to learn than others, despite being so huge. Specifically, he says that it's more of a reference book and that players don't really have to memorize it all, because the basic concepts in a Coryell offense are really simple.

 

It's an interesting point: where in West Coast offenses you have to memorize and interpret a bunch of weird terminology, in a Coryell offense you can just listen to the playcall - if you hear 741 and you're the #1 receiver, you run a 7 route. If you're the #2 receiver, you run a 4 route. That's pretty simple...it could be simple enough for our developing WRs to nail it down very quickly. Here's a choice quote from Saunders in that interview: "If you can count from zero to nine, you can be a wide receiver in our offense." I think Hester could probably handle that.

 

If we did get Saunders, though, I think it'd be worthwhile to devote a lot of attention to upgrading the run-blocking on the offensive line and bringing in a bulldozing short-yardage back. Saunders' scheme isn't great in short-yardage, and when had success in Kansas City, he had a really, really incredible o-line and Larry Johnson. We'd need better personnel to pick up 3rd-and-1 on the ground if we got Saunders, but we need that anyway.