What bothers me is

[nfoligno]

I guess I look at it this way. Bennett is struggling in practice, and doesn't look good. Both the OC and WR see him struggling and do not believe he is ready to enter games. By all reports I have read, and even Bennett's own admission, he struggled that rookie year to pickup the offense and thus I think it very fair to say he was not looking good in practice.

 

Is it your opinion then that the HC should have gone against the opinion of the HC and WR coaches and forced the rookie to play even though he was looking lost in practice? I guess I just don't see that.

 

Look, I think Turner and Drake made a mistake in how the choose to develop Bennett, asking him to learn all WR positions rather than one, but I am not sure such a decision is one the HC should have jumped in and countered. What is the point of having assistants if you are not even going to allow them to do their job. By all reports, the staff realized their mistake and tried to limit his study, but by then it was too late.

 

I have no problem blaming Lovie for many things, but I just don't see it here.

 

I follow. No one was lining up to be either coordinator. Because they knew the team is run by jackasses (no disrespect to hard working mules...). We settled. On both counts.

 

But I do still somewhat disagree. When Bennett sits the entire season, that's on both of them at minimum.

 

If Smith cannot handle simple oversight, then he is unfit to be a HC. If Angelo can't handle simple oversight, then he is unfit to be a GM. If Teddy-boy can't handle simple oversight, then he is unfit to be Pres..

 

We have 3 powerful people who are unfit for their jobs.

 

[nfoligno]

By all reports, Bennett looked lost in practice. Lovie would have seen that, as well as the offensive coaches. I just don't understand the believe that Lovie should have stepped in and forced Turner to play Bennett when the kid looked lost in practice.

 

i agree. whether a head coach is offensively or defensively minded is of no consequence. good ones are able to work with their coordinators on both sides of the ball and give input especially if the problems are as plain as the nose on your face. even if they have little to do with the intricate parts of a game plan they have to have a grasp of the overall picture and if one aspect of your teams play is continually bad you have to know enough to do something about it.

 

for lovie to have no input on offense because it is not his forte' is ridiculous. does not a defensive guru/coordinator not understand how an offense at least generally works in order to implement a successful defensive scheme week to week? if things are not working it is his duty to find out why and correct the problem if possible working with his GM. if the coaching staff is lacking to find another or bring in players that will make the system work.

 

[Lucky Luciano]

By all reports, Bennett looked lost in practice. Lovie would have seen that, as well as the offensive coaches. I just don't understand the believe that Lovie should have stepped in and forced Turner to play Bennett when the kid looked lost in practice.

 

i really wasn't commenting about the bennett situation just the overall consensus of lovie's coaching attributes of staying out of an area he supposedly knows nothing about, offense. he should have stepped in when shay was his OC and moved him into a different direction overall on how the offense was being utilized with the personnel he had on the team.

 

same goes for when turner came into town. if lovie did not understand there were fundamental problems with our offensive line over the last 2 years or look at the game film and determine that frankie O plain flat out sucked at LG or that greg olson was whiffing on blocks at every opportunity and did not give turner some input then that is a major problem for a HC.

 

referring back to the bennett situation... i really can't say without looking at film whether bennett should have been given an opportunity to start or not. although i will say that whether he had the entire system down during the season, or not, lovie should have stepped in and told turner to dumb down some plays to give bennett some real game experience just to see what kind of a 1st day player they drafted and project how he WOULD play when he did have the system worked out. it is only common sense that you want to at least see the potential of key young players before the season ends so you can determine how to proceed the following offseason.

 

it's lovies job to see that all aspects of his team are working at maximum capacity including special teams and offense whether that is his specialty or not.

 

 

[madlithuanian]

Esactly!

 

I've always felt, that at minimum, even a great defensive mind has to know something about the offenses he's defending agasint!

 

A good manager doesn't wait until the season's over to make a change. You nip it in the bud as soon as possible. You stop the production line if you have a faulty product. You don't keep rolling out bad product and wait for the recall later.

 

i agree. whether a head coach is offensively or defensively minded is of no consequence. good ones are able to work with their coordinators on both sides of the ball and give input especially if the problems are as plain as the nose on your face. even if they have little to do with the intricate parts of a game plan they have to have a grasp of the overall picture and if one aspect of your teams play is continually bad you have to know enough to do something about it.

 

for lovie to have no input on offense because it is not his forte' is ridiculous. does not a defensive guru/coordinator not understand how an offense at least generally works in order to implement a successful defensive scheme week to week? if things are not working it is his duty to find out why and correct the problem if possible working with his GM. if the coaching staff is lacking to find another or bring in players that will make the system work.

 

[madlithuanian]

For every Bennet, you know there is an Aromoshodu. There reaches a point at certain positions that it simply can't hurt to try something new regardless if during Club Med you dropped a margarita.

 

Yes. The HC is there to make the tough decision, especially when what has been happening isn't getting it done. Put him in on some plays. Again, you're focussing on one guy in Bennet, and that may be valid. The point here is there are far more guys/instances that Smith should have stepped in. For instance, the McKie plunges.

 

You know me, I will blame Smith for the weather if I can see a fit. But, seriously, the guy deserves the grief here even from non-haters.

 

I guess I look at it this way. Bennett is struggling in practice, and doesn't look good. Both the OC and WR see him struggling and do not believe he is ready to enter games. By all reports I have read, and even Bennett's own admission, he struggled that rookie year to pickup the offense and thus I think it very fair to say he was not looking good in practice.

 

Is it your opinion then that the HC should have gone against the opinion of the HC and WR coaches and forced the rookie to play even though he was looking lost in practice? I guess I just don't see that.

 

Look, I think Turner and Drake made a mistake in how the choose to develop Bennett, asking him to learn all WR positions rather than one, but I am not sure such a decision is one the HC should have jumped in and countered. What is the point of having assistants if you are not even going to allow them to do their job. By all reports, the staff realized their mistake and tried to limit his study, but by then it was too late.

 

I have no problem blaming Lovie for many things, but I just don't see it here.

 

[madlithuanian]

Bingo!

 

If he can't do that, he is not qualified for the job.

 

it's lovies job to see that all aspects of his team are working at maximum capacity including special teams and offense whether that is his specialty or not.

 

[nfoligno]

You said,

 

But I do still somewhat disagree. When Bennett sits the entire season, that's on both of them at minimum.

 

And that is what I was arguing. Previously, the discussion was a more broad level of how much Lovie meddles w/ the OC. Without judging right or wrong, I simply argued that Lovie does little w/ the offense and our OC is in a way a HC#2.

 

 

For every Bennet, you know there is an Aromoshodu. There reaches a point at certain positions that it simply can't hurt to try something new regardless if during Club Med you dropped a margarita.

 

Yes. The HC is there to make the tough decision, especially when what has been happening isn't getting it done. Put him in on some plays. Again, you're focussing on one guy in Bennet, and that may be valid. The point here is there are far more guys/instances that Smith should have stepped in. For instance, the McKie plunges.

 

You know me, I will blame Smith for the weather if I can see a fit. But, seriously, the guy deserves the grief here even from non-haters.

 

[nfoligno]

To an extent, I agree, but would add,

 

- Our defense, the area in which Lovie was supposedly so knowledgable about, sucked (IMHO) worse than the offense. If he can't even take care of the side of the ball he knows the most, how the hell do you expect him to be able to take care of the offense too.

 

- Its easy to look in hindsight and say we should have done this or that at this point or that point. but in real time, it isn't so black and white. I mean, your saying he should have stepped in w/ Shea, an OC who was in his first and only season w/ the Bears. Especially w/ a new coach (Shea) new system, new players, etc, things take time. How soon is Lovie supposedly to step in and say we need to change? Or think more recent. Last year, it was said prior to the season the OL would need time to come together, and more specifically, Omiyale would need time. He sucked, but Angelo signed him and all knew (similar to a rooke) he would need time. He got some, didn't get better, and was benched. You can argue that should have happened quicker, but how much?

 

At the end of the day, I read your comments and you paint the picture of a real micromanager. What is the point of having all those coaches if the HC is not going to allow them to do their jobs. I know your argument is, if it isn't working the HC should step in, but even then most HCs are going to give their assistants an opportunity to right the ship first.

 

Going back to the Omiyale example, how do you know it wasn't Lovie who ultimately stepped in and demanded he be benched?

 

i really wasn't commenting about the bennett situation just the overall consensus of lovie's coaching attributes of staying out of an area he supposedly knows nothing about, offense. he should have stepped in when shay was his OC and moved him into a different direction overall on how the offense was being utilized with the personnel he had on the team.

 

same goes for when turner came into town. if lovie did not understand there were fundamental problems with our offensive line over the last 2 years or look at the game film and determine that frankie O plain flat out sucked at LG or that greg olson was whiffing on blocks at every opportunity and did not give turner some input then that is a major problem for a HC.

 

referring back to the bennett situation... i really can't say without looking at film whether bennett should have been given an opportunity to start or not. although i will say that whether he had the entire system down during the season, or not, lovie should have stepped in and told turner to dumb down some plays to give bennett some real game experience just to see what kind of a 1st day player they drafted and project how he WOULD play when he did have the system worked out. it is only common sense that you want to at least see the potential of key young players before the season ends so you can determine how to proceed the following offseason.

 

it's lovies job to see that all aspects of his team are working at maximum capacity including special teams and offense whether that is his specialty or not.

 

[madlithuanian]

I still stand by that. It's the whole season! And one where we were obviously struggling at WR.

 

I will judge right and wrong. I only wish my verdict could result in Smith's ouster...

 

I understand your point better now though. Although I still correctly balme Smith.

 

You said,

 

But I do still somewhat disagree. When Bennett sits the entire season, that's on both of them at minimum.

 

And that is what I was arguing. Previously, the discussion was a more broad level of how much Lovie meddles w/ the OC. Without judging right or wrong, I simply argued that Lovie does little w/ the offense and our OC is in a way a HC#2.

 

[nfoligno]

Always remember. I thought Smith sucked even the year we went to the SB. I was ripped then for stating my believe that we went to the SB in spite of Lovie. My opinion sure as hell has not gotten better since then.

 

My above arguments are more in general than specific. I do not care for the idea of a micro-managing HC. That doesn't mean he never offers input, direction or even flat out orders, but by and large the HC needs to have some trust in his assistants, especially when talking about the one on the side of the ball the HC knows the least. When that trust fails, it isn't simply time to make a suggestion, but a personnel change.

 

Again, this is a broad and general belief. When it comes to Lovie, feel free to blame him for everything from the development of a WR to the cost of beer at the stadium. Works for me. I never wanted Lovie, and still can't stand him.

 

I still stand by that. It's the whole season! And one where we were obviously struggling at WR.

 

I will judge right and wrong. I only wish my verdict could result in Smith's ouster...

 

I understand your point better now though. Although I still correctly balme Smith.

 

[madlithuanian]

Hey, you'll always get mad props from me on that nfo! I remember you were even pretty much vehemently oppposed to him being hired as a HC becasue his STL D was smoke & mirrors.

 

I don't like micro managers in general...but when we have glaring problems that a 12 year old could see from just playing Madden '09, it's no longer micro. It's macro. And I think due to his other weaknesses, it's apparent he is in over his head at his job.

 

Actually, I don't want to blame him for the price of beer at Soldier! It's actually reasonable, especially if you've ever been to the Staples Center in LA!

 

Always remember. I thought Smith sucked even the year we went to the SB. I was ripped then for stating my believe that we went to the SB in spite of Lovie. My opinion sure as hell has not gotten better since then.

 

My above arguments are more in general than specific. I do not care for the idea of a micro-managing HC. That doesn't mean he never offers input, direction or even flat out orders, but by and large the HC needs to have some trust in his assistants, especially when talking about the one on the side of the ball the HC knows the least. When that trust fails, it isn't simply time to make a suggestion, but a personnel change.

 

Again, this is a broad and general belief. When it comes to Lovie, feel free to blame him for everything from the development of a WR to the cost of beer at the stadium. Works for me. I never wanted Lovie, and still can't stand him.

 

[Lucky Luciano]

To an extent, I agree, but would add,

 

- Our defense, the area in which Lovie was supposedly so knowledgable about, sucked (IMHO) worse than the offense. If he can't even take care of the side of the ball he knows the most, how the hell do you expect him to be able to take care of the offense too.

 

this is the reason if we had competent personnel running this bisquit bake, like a good GM or even more important a good president of football operations, we wouldn't be having this conversation. i fully don't expect lovie to take care of ANY aspect of this franchise. his system is dated and has been proven not to work (at the very least without major changes) yet in my opinion he lacks the knowledge to change it, thus a one trick pony who will live and die by his own sword. the only reason we still employ him is because of his salary obligations, certainly not because of his prowess as a football mind or a leader of men.

 

Its easy to look in hindsight and say we should have done this or that at this point or that point. but in real time, it isn't so black and white. I mean, your saying he should have stepped in w/ Shea, an OC who was in his first and only season w/ the Bears. Especially w/ a new coach (Shea) new system, new players, etc, things take time. How soon is Lovie supposedly to step in and say we need to change? Or think more recent. Last year, it was said prior to the season the OL would need time to come together, and more specifically, Omiyale would need time. He sucked, but Angelo signed him and all knew (similar to a rooke) he would need time. He got some, didn't get better, and was benched. You can argue that should have happened quicker, but how much?

 

i disagree that it's hindsight and in my opinion it is black and white right in your face in many instances. you ask "how soon is lovie supposed to step in"?

 

example: if you have a franchise quarterback (maybe the first qb in over 25 years who truely is competent) and he is getting the ever lovin crap pounded out of him at nearly every snap how long do you put this caliber of player in jeporady of a career ending injury without making some real changes? me? after one game and i see our entire left side of the line getting blown up play after play i want to know who, why, and how to stop the bleeding right now before a guy i just gave TWO first round picks is on IR or has a career ending injury. in any case the red flags have come to full mast and i will know what the problem is NOW, not 8 games from now and certainly not in the offseason.

 

i have a meeting and talk to our offensive coaches. is it a one game anomyly or is there something really wrong either in the scheme or the personnel? do you change the types of plays called? do you change the blocking schemes? do you max protect the qb? do you change the way your qb is attacking offenses such as rollouts, shorter routes, etc.? but certainly after 3 games and the same thing is going on i force a change into the way our offense is being run at least for the short term. that is not even coaching, it's common sense and it seems lovie possesses none.

 

let me ask you or for that matter anyone on the board... if you watched greg olson whiff blocks as regular as he did and the players moving by him kept hitting the qb untouched, wouldn't you want to talk to your OC? your line coach or TE coach to see if anyone is trying to teach this guy how to block off the line? i would force olson to spend an entire week working on this problem if i expected a TE to help protect our qb from damage.

 

 

At the end of the day, I read your comments and you paint the picture of a real micromanager. What is the point of having all those coaches if the HC is not going to allow them to do their jobs. I know your argument is, if it isn't working the HC should step in, but even then most HCs are going to give their assistants an opportunity to right the ship first.

 

Going back to the Omiyale example, how do you know it wasn't Lovie who ultimately stepped in and demanded he be benched?

 

if seeing the obvious and asking for accountability and change for major faults that are continuously being made is micromanaging then yes, i want a micromanager. i don't feel it should have taken us an entire season to discover that moving our backers up to the LOS to fake blitzes and having them drop back wasn't working after 2 games. i don't feel watching our corners play 10 yds off the LOS every down and giving up the easy first down yardage we did takes a whole season to figure out and react to. i don't feel i needed to watch frankie O for 8-10 freaking games or MORE before deciding a change was due while your franchise qb was running for his life at the snap. and if it takes lovie this long to either get it or respond then it's long past due for him to collect his last paycheck!!

[madlithuanian]

I'm pretty sure you know where I stand on this...

 

let me ask you or for that matter anyone on the board... if you watched greg olson whiff blocks as regular as he did and the players moving by him kept hitting the qb untouched, wouldn't you want to talk to your OC? your line coach or TE coach to see if anyone is trying to teach this guy how to block off the line? i would force olson to spend an entire week working on this problem if i expected a TE to help protect our qb from damage.