Lovie...true to form

[Alaskan Grizzly]

This...

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...rs-coaches.html

 

... is why Lovie is appreciated.

[madlithuanian]

Good read.

 

I still have some issues with him, but the article rings true.

 

This...

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...rs-coaches.html

 

... is why Lovie is appreciated.

 

[Lucky Luciano]

He wasn’t even asked about the play itself. He was asked if there was at least merit to the argument that you might want to run a safer play in that situation, so at the very least you settle for a field goal for an unlikely halftime lead that would’ve sent the Bears into the locker room feeling pretty good about themselves and the Raiders wondering why they’re losing to Hanie at home.

 

‘‘No. Maybe from you it is [a legitimate argument],’’ Smith said. ‘‘It didn’t work, so, of course, you’re going to get criticized when something doesn’t work. Next time it will.’’

 

Mark Potash mpotash@suntimes.com November 29, 2011

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...rs-coaches.html

 

i have to ask, lovie is appreciated by who?

 

i agree that throwing players and coaches under the bus to the media is usually counterproductive but to state nonsense and attack the media, for no logical reason, is not productive either ("No. Maybe from you it is.").

 

this goes back to the image lovie portrays of being stubborn and arrogant to a fault and in my opinion makes him look foolish trying to justify bad or questionable coaching decisions (or for that matter bad COACHES). it has happened in past years when bad play calling and poor clock management leaked over into future games when lovie tried to justify his poor decisions in the red zone after stating the same tripe as in this article to the press, "next time it will" or "I'd do it again".

 

it is a very poor coaching practice to risk losing a game just to try and prove a point. next...

 

1. does anybody in the world at this point believe lovie is going to attack his HAND PICKED coaching staff? let's face it, there really are not many options left out there for him to choose from.

 

2. does it also lead one to believe that lovies knowledge of an offense is practically zero? how can you criticize something you have no clue about?

[Alaskan Grizzly]

I think you're mistaking Lovie being curt with him bailing on the media. What I take it as his him saying "hindsight" is indeed 20/20" and it is easy to critique, or in this case, question a call(s) that didn't work. Conversely, if it does work the coach is called a wizard, a brain, a prodigy, etc. etc. And the media doing so is lazy and repetitive, which I believe is the point Lovie is trying to make.

 

I think it not surprising that many here will recall several weeks ago, after New Orleans(?), that Martz "got it" finally and began to adjust the offense. There were stories that Lovie talked to him behind the scenes (like last year) to get him to adjust. And he did. What would he a complish by admonishing Martz, or any coach for that matter, in public only for the media to feast on? That is not effective leadership or management. That was the point of the article.

 

"2. does it also lead one to believe that lovies knowledge of an offense is practically zero? how can you criticize something you have no clue about?".

 

I believe Lovies title is 'Head Coach'. Not Offensive Coordinator or even Defensive Coordinator. What knowledge, speculatively, does he need? I think until Oakland things were going pretty well for the previous 5 weeks on offense. So Hanie had a rough go at it and somehow Lovie has no knowledge of offense? Hmm.

 

And as far as Lovie being appreciated; it's the players, ownership and a couple fans that like having the team at 7-4.

[madlithuanian]

You know I have my issues with Smith, but I can easily see why is is appreciated.

 

The players do love him. It's rare for him to call anyone out in public. One the rare occasion he does, it usually motivates or is a pre-cursor to a pink slp for the player.

 

The owners love him because he's good enough to get into the playoffs with some regularity, is a nice guy, and realize the players play for him.

 

The coaches probably like him because he doesn't throw anyone under the bus.

 

All this is on the surface for the most part. he basically circles the wagons and says jack. Similar to Billichick. Except Lovie comes off a little better dressed. He' irritating to fans and media. But, for those in the inside, I can see where he's very appreciated. He keeps his cards close to his vest. We fans and media don't like it, but I'll bet management and players do.

 

Over the years, I've changed from disliking Smith more than JA to now hating JA more. Smith appears to be learning a bit. I wish he could force adjustments more mid-game for one. But I've seen inprovements. He no longer has DB's 20 yards off the LOS on every play. There is some hope he could get better with a staff that is complimentary (Tice? "Run fisrt") and a GM that can get him some damn talent.

 

My glass is half on him. Not full nor empty. Just 1/2. Whereas my glass on JA is bone freaking dry with residue of rat poison.

 

 

I think you're mistaking Lovie being curt with him bailing on the media. What I take it as his him saying "hindsight" is indeed 20/20" and it is easy to critique, or in this case, question a call(s) that didn't work. Conversely, if it does work the coach is called a wizard, a brain, a prodigy, etc. etc. And the media doing so is lazy and repetitive, which I believe is the point Lovie is trying to make.

 

I think it not surprising that many here will recall several weeks ago, after New Orleans(?), that Martz "got it" finally and began to adjust the offense. There were stories that Lovie talked to him behind the scenes (like last year) to get him to adjust. And he did. What would he a complish by admonishing Martz, or any coach for that matter, in public only for the media to feast on? That is not effective leadership or management. That was the point of the article.

 

"2. does it also lead one to believe that lovies knowledge of an offense is practically zero? how can you criticize something you have no clue about?".

 

I believe Lovies title is 'Head Coach'. Not Offensive Coordinator or even Defensive Coordinator. What knowledge, speculatively, does he need? I think until Oakland things were going pretty well for the previous 5 weeks on offense. So Hanie had a rough go at it and somehow Lovie has no knowledge of offense? Hmm.

 

And as far as Lovie being appreciated; it's the players, ownership and a couple fans that like having the team at 7-4.

 

[Mongo3451]

This is Lovie's greatest attribute. Is there a classier coach in the NFL?

[Alaskan Grizzly]

My glass is half on him. Not full nor empty. Just 1/2. Whereas my glass on JA is bone freaking dry with residue of rat poison.

 

I knew you'd break eventually. The guy seems to be a class act. Does he frustrate me sometimes? You bet. But I still like what and who he is.

 

As far as JA (no not Jack A**) the other one, I'm right there with you. I would be fine with both he and Martz leaving next year.

[madlithuanian]

Ha!

 

 

I knew you'd break eventually. The guy seems to be a class act. Does he frustrate me sometimes? You bet. But I still like what and who he is.

 

As far as JA (no not Jack A**) the other one, I'm right there with you. I would be fine with both he and Martz leaving next year.

 

[Lucky Luciano]

I think you're mistaking Lovie being curt with him bailing on the media. What I take it as his him saying "hindsight" is indeed 20/20" and it is easy to critique, or in this case, question a call(s) that didn't work. Conversely, if it does work the coach is called a wizard, a brain, a prodigy, etc. etc. And the media doing so is lazy and repetitive, which I believe is the point Lovie is trying to make.

 

i believe it was a legitimate question by the media that had to be asked that most everyone knew wouldn't be answered. i don't believe the hindsight 20/20 scenario is applicable here. that was a high risk call given the game situation, position and down. throwing against the grain is dangerous for any QB let alone one without even 1 game as a starter in the NFL in the freaking red zone where defenses are condensed into a 10 yard zone. for proof of that look what happened with cutler on the same call in a previous game.

 

I think it not surprising that many here will recall several weeks ago, after New Orleans(?), that Martz "got it" finally and began to adjust the offense. There were stories that Lovie talked to him behind the scenes (like last year) to get him to adjust. And he did. What would he a complish by admonishing Martz, or any coach for that matter, in public only for the media to feast on? That is not effective leadership or management. That was the point of the article.

 

A. new orleans was the 2nd game of the season. i think by the time any message was sent or received it was probably after the detroit loss. that said, even if it were after the packer loss, that is three games into the season. does it usually take TWO to FOUR horrible games for a 'supposedly good' head coach to finally force a change (he was also getting crucified by the media) that should have been a halftime adjustment? don't you think it is important to protect the only franchise QB we have had in almost 30 years from career ending injury or death?

 

didn't we run into offensive problems LAST season in the same vein as this? so i have to ask, doesn't lovie even watch what is going on offensively in practice or get a legitimate idea what the freaking game plan is from his offensive coordinator prior to gameday? is it some kind of surprise to him every week what our offense does on the field?

 

B. did i ever say he should publicly rip into his coaches? no. but, with that said do you really need to antagonize the press for doing their job of asking hard questions when warranted? to me the statements "No. Maybe from you it is." and "next time it will" said it all about the coaches attitude during his press conference. this is not some new way lovie handles his duties of holding these. he has done this for years.

 

"2. does it also lead one to believe that lovies knowledge of an offense is practically zero? how can you criticize something you have no clue about?".

 

I believe Lovies title is 'Head Coach'. Not Offensive Coordinator or even Defensive Coordinator. What knowledge, speculatively, does he need? I think until Oakland things were going pretty well for the previous 5 weeks on offense. So Hanie had a rough go at it and somehow Lovie has no knowledge of offense? Hmm.

 

And as far as Lovie being appreciated; it's the players, ownership and a couple fans that like having the team at 7-4.

 

so just what is his job description to you if he needs no knowledge of offense or defense? if he is not responsible for whether the offense or defense works week to week, is it just calling time outs and giving press conferences? if those are his key roles he even does that poorly.

 

do you think lovie has a real grasp of offense with or without hanie at qb? i'm not talking X's and O's but the general concept on how they plan to attack teams each week and whether it is working or not and how to adjust during a game by giving input to is OC? you don't believe that is important?

 

as far as defense, this IS lovie's show. that is why we ended up with marineli (sp) as DC after TWO LONG years of babich failing miserably and lovie himself failing for another. isn't marineli another coach that fits lovie's scheme? didn't we see rivera fired because he wanted to expand on other defensive ideas and concepts?

 

this idea of lovie being appreciated by the players to me is just not that important to me as long as it doesn't get like the wanny regime. of course they like him. they also liked dick jauron. that does NOT make either one a good+ head coach.

 

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

i believe it was a legitimate question by the media that had to be asked that most everyone knew wouldn't be answered.

 

I think that it was OBVIOUSLY a bad call, because it didn't work out. Had it worked out, then Martz would have been genius. If for only one play. Again, Lovie's point being that. Sometimes the risks don't equal the rewards. And if I'm not mistaken, Cutler pointed out that he thought Martz was testing Hanie to see his limits and will more than likely tweak the offense more to his style. And, all things considered (especially with three INT's) to only lose by 5 is not all that horrible.

 

doesn't lovie even watch what is going on offensively in practice or get a legitimate idea what the freaking game plan is from his offensive coordinator prior to gameday? is it some kind of surprise to him every week what our offense does on the field?

 

Don't know, as I'm not on the sideline or at practice. But I gotta believe some sort of conversation is going on. The team was on a 5 game winning streak and are still "in the hunt".

 

so just what is his job description to you if he needs no knowledge of offense or defense? if he is not responsible for whether the offense or defense works week to week,as far as defense, this IS lovie's show.

 

I agree that Lovie is more inclined to comprehend better the Defense but BECAUSE he is neihter the O or D coordinator, he is not responsible for designing the play, just for the implementing and outcome. And ultimately he takes responsibility for all of it, especially after the game. And if he chooses not to answer the questions from the media, so be it.

 

didn't we see rivera fired because he wanted to expand on other defensive ideas and concepts?

 

Again, don't know. Not sure that is why he was "fired". I do know that Ron Turner was let go for failing at what he was supposed to be doing. Babich was ultimately replaced by Marinelli because he too was ineffective, or at least something wasn't clicking.

 

this idea of lovie being appreciated by the players to me is just not that important to me...

 

So? To me, if I were a player, it would be more important that I got along with my coach rather than despise him.

 

Not sure who your idyllic coach would be but whomever they were I'm sure they would have many flaws that could be brought up. I'm not sure what it is exactly you don't like about Lovie but he is the Head Coach and the team is and has done well under his leadership. Those results are fact.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

i believe it was a legitimate question by the media that had to be asked that most everyone knew wouldn't be answered.

 

I think that it was OBVIOUSLY a bad call, because it didn't work out. Had it worked out, then Martz would have been genius. If for only one play. Again, Lovie's point being that. Sometimes the risks don't equal the rewards. And if I'm not mistaken, Cutler pointed out that he thought Martz was testing Hanie to see his limits and will more than likely tweak the offense more to his style. And, all things considered (especially with three INT's) to only lose by 5 is not all that horrible.

 

doesn't lovie even watch what is going on offensively in practice or get a legitimate idea what the freaking game plan is from his offensive coordinator prior to gameday? is it some kind of surprise to him every week what our offense does on the field?

 

Don't know, as I'm not on the sideline or at practice. But I gotta believe some sort of conversation is going on. The team was on a 5 game winning streak and are still "in the hunt".

 

so just what is his job description to you if he needs no knowledge of offense or defense? if he is not responsible for whether the offense or defense works week to week,as far as defense, this IS lovie's show.

 

I agree that Lovie is more inclined to comprehend better the Defense but BECAUSE he is neihter the O or D coordinator, he is not responsible for designing the play, just for the implementing and outcome. And ultimately he takes responsibility for all of it, especially after the game. And if he chooses not to answer the questions from the media, so be it.

 

didn't we see rivera fired because he wanted to expand on other defensive ideas and concepts?

 

Again, don't know. Not sure that is why he was "fired". I do know that Ron Turner was let go for failing at what he was supposed to be doing. Babich was ultimately replaced by Marinelli because he too was ineffective, or at least something wasn't clicking.

 

this idea of lovie being appreciated by the players to me is just not that important to me...

 

So? To me, if I were a player, it would be more important that I got along with my coach rather than despise him.

 

Not sure who your idyllic coach would be but whomever they were I'm sure they would have many flaws that could be brought up. I'm not sure what it is exactly you don't like about Lovie but he is the Head Coach and the team is and has done well under his leadership. Those results are fact.