Hub Arkush: Bears Low-Balled Chud

[madlithuanian]

I can confirm that...

 

Right now the perception out west is that the Bears are flailing at everyone. They don't get talked about too much on west coast radio but right now, they are getting hit pretty hard.

 

[madlithuanian]

Thank you for that statement!

 

Disagree though on the rest. You say it is whining and we should just wait until they hire someone, but the Bears are making themselves look like blundering idiots, and I think fans have every reason to be upset at the moment. In terms of the media, the Bears at the moment are just a step below that of Al Davis, and many are even pointing out that a coach choose Al Davis over us. That sort of embarassment warrants comments.

 

I think there may be a tad less complaint if our history of coaching moves was better. But lets be honest. We are not entering this w/ a great rep in hiring coaches, and the manner is which the team has gone about this makes it appear even worse.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

We just differ in opinion.

 

Forward thinking business look ahead, those in trouble or poorly run try to stop the bleeding.

 

Do we realy think the NFL sill stop playing games for over a year? Any decent franchise can weather that out. And if you don't act, others with more balls will.

If the Bears don't have football for a full-season, they will still have significant operational expenditures that will go out despite no football. If they had two head coaches under salary, you might be talking about a pretty significant increase with no revenues to off-set them.

 

The Bears are looking forward when they made this decision and it should enable them to come out of the strike with cash to spend. If they weren't forward thinking, they might come out of a strike without a ton of money sitting in there coffers and have to wait a full season to refill those coffers.

 

It isn't like teams just have 30 million laying around while a lock-out happens. Especially an organization that doesn't have cash flows from other businesses to really help support them.

 

Oh and i fully expect a significant lock-out at this time. The sides are incredibly far apart and unless one side caves in big time we will see a significant work stoppage.

[madlithuanian]

Who really knows what's exactly in the coffers. I beleive they can weather it out with ease.

 

If the Bears don't have football for a full-season, they will still have significant operational expenditures that will go out despite no football. If they had two head coaches under salary, you might be talking about a pretty significant increase with no revenues to off-set them.

 

The Bears are looking forward when they made this decision and it should enable them to come out of the strike with cash to spend. If they weren't forward thinking, they might come out of a strike without a ton of money sitting in there coffers and have to wait a full season to refill those coffers.

 

It isn't like teams just have 30 million laying around while a lock-out happens. Especially an organization that doesn't have cash flows from other businesses to really help support them.

 

Oh and i fully expect a significant lock-out at this time. The sides are incredibly far apart and unless one side caves in big time we will see a significant work stoppage.

 

[nfoligno]

I think you are missing the point of the discussion madman. Lucky says the bears are cheap, and argues that, even if you take into consideration Lovie's extension, when you look at the contracts put together, he would still paid average or below average. Thus, he argues the extension does not offset the initial cheap contract, and further proves the owners are cheap.

 

I argue that while the initial contract was low, the extension (a) even when averaged out still puts Lovie way above average among HCs and ( shows the owners are not in fact cheap, but simply have a different philosophy than some others.

 

You get an owner like Dan Snyder, who will go out and hire big names and pay big dollars. He will even go and get a coach to come out of a decade old retirement and pay him very well. How did that workout again.

 

You have many teams though which do not go this route. They hire coordinators. They hire young guys who could be the next big thing.

 

Look at the Super Bowl this year. Is either team led by a coach who was an experienced HC prior to joining that team? Nope. Caldwell was the assist HC/QB coach for Indy when Dungy retired. Payton was also the QB coach/assist HC for Dallas when he took over NO. Okay, how about if we spread it out to the teams knocked out last year. Childress was the OC for Phily prior to becoming Minny's HC. Ryan was previously the DC for Baltimore.

 

Take a look at this article to further my point,

 

http://www.indysportsnation.com/sports/blo...,0,370426.story

 

At the end of the day, Lucky will argue the team doesn't go out and get big name coaches w/ price tags to go along with their resumes for the very simple reason that they are cheap. I argue it is more a philosophical difference than simply a financial one. I argue that if you look around the league, many (most) teams are actually led by HCs who did not have prior HC experience, yet not all these owners are considered cheap. I point to an owner like Jerry Jones, and owner few call cheap, but has been well known to in fact be cheap when it comes to hiring his staff.

 

To me, its just like the draft. It isn't a question of what philosophy or direction you follow, but who you take. If you believe in best player available, or draft for need, what matters at the end of the day is who you end up with. If you pick ends up a stud, how many are going to argue your philosophy. If you traded down from a high pick for multiple picks, it is the end result that matters. If those players bomb, they someone like Lucky will say we were cheap and traded down. If those picks boom, you will not hear anyone complain we were too cheap to pick high.

 

Same thing w/ coaching. Lets say for the hell of it Lovie not only took the team to the SB, but continued the success after that. Lets say Lovie was considered an upper tier HC today. Would anyone really be jumping on this board to claim our owners were cheap when the found him? Nope.

 

So that is our argument. He says cheap. I say its more philosophy.

 

Bottom line, getting to the SB when his contract was pretty much up forced the hand. And Teddy Boy overpaid with a poor contract (for the Bears).

 

Had we not reached the SB, the contract would have been FAR less. I'd say, maybe look at the average of coaches that got to the Super Bowl. not that I have...but I think that would give a better comparision.

 

[madlithuanian]

Gotcha.

 

It's hard to see clearly when steam's coming out of one's ears!

 

I think you are missing the point of the discussion madman. Lucky says the bears are cheap, and argues that, even if you take into consideration Lovie's extension, when you look at the contracts put together, he would still paid average or below average. Thus, he argues the extension does not offset the initial cheap contract, and further proves the owners are cheap.

 

I argue that while the initial contract was low, the extension (a) even when averaged out still puts Lovie way above average among HCs and ( shows the owners are not in fact cheap, but simply have a different philosophy than some others.

 

You get an owner like Dan Snyder, who will go out and hire big names and pay big dollars. He will even go and get a coach to come out of a decade old retirement and pay him very well. How did that workout again.

 

You have many teams though which do not go this route. They hire coordinators. They hire young guys who could be the next big thing.

 

Look at the Super Bowl this year. Is either team led by a coach who was an experienced HC prior to joining that team? Nope. Caldwell was the assist HC/QB coach for Indy when Dungy retired. Payton was also the QB coach/assist HC for Dallas when he took over NO. Okay, how about if we spread it out to the teams knocked out last year. Childress was the OC for Phily prior to becoming Minny's HC. Ryan was previously the DC for Baltimore.

 

Take a look at this article to further my point,

 

http://www.indysportsnation.com/sports/blo...,0,370426.story

 

At the end of the day, Lucky will argue the team doesn't go out and get big name coaches w/ price tags to go along with their resumes for the very simple reason that they are cheap. I argue it is more a philosophical difference than simply a financial one. I argue that if you look around the league, many (most) teams are actually led by HCs who did not have prior HC experience, yet not all these owners are considered cheap. I point to an owner like Jerry Jones, and owner few call cheap, but has been well known to in fact be cheap when it comes to hiring his staff.

 

To me, its just like the draft. It isn't a question of what philosophy or direction you follow, but who you take. If you believe in best player available, or draft for need, what matters at the end of the day is who you end up with. If you pick ends up a stud, how many are going to argue your philosophy. If you traded down from a high pick for multiple picks, it is the end result that matters. If those players bomb, they someone like Lucky will say we were cheap and traded down. If those picks boom, you will not hear anyone complain we were too cheap to pick high.

 

Same thing w/ coaching. Lets say for the hell of it Lovie not only took the team to the SB, but continued the success after that. Lets say Lovie was considered an upper tier HC today. Would anyone really be jumping on this board to claim our owners were cheap when the found him? Nope.

 

So that is our argument. He says cheap. I say its more philosophy.