madlithuanian Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Interesting stats...quite similar... http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/FontWa0.htm 8 years at Det's HC (and I think his first year in 88 he was interim coach for the tail end of their season...) 4 playoff appearances Actually a better playoff percentage than Smith... Right now Smith is only 3-8...potential to go 4-9 The players loved Fontes. Just sounds very very familiar... And Fontes was booted after 1 losing season following 3 playoff appearances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Interesting stats...quite similar... http://www.pro-football-reference.com/coaches/FontWa0.htm 8 years at Det's HC (and I think his first year in 88 he was interim coach for the tail end of their season...) 4 playoff appearances Actually a better playoff percentage than Smith... Right now Smith is only 3-8...potential to go 4-9 The players loved Fontes. Just sounds very very familiar... And Fontes was booted after 1 losing season following 3 playoff appearances. Fontes didn't take his team to the Superbowl. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chitownman Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 At this point Connor, I feel that is totally irrelevant in regards to the Super Bowl appearance. I think at this point it was a total fluke and the last time Smith's team made the playoffs some how, we lost the NFC Championship at home against the Cheese Heads which should never be acceptable. I do remember that Cutler was knocked out of the game however, losing to the Cheese Heads is never acceptable what so ever. Wish that Papa Bear had never bailed them out to keep them around to play against. I am hating that team more and more and losing as many times now against Aaron Rodgers (yes Rodgers is an outstanding QB) is starting to look like losing to #4 once again. We need to get better coaches in place and at this point I am scared how bad we will be exposed for our weaknesses and how badly we are going to lose to our #1 rival once again. So any comparison to Wayne Fontes is totally acceptable. BYE BYE LOVIE!!!! DON'T LET THE DOOR HIT YOU ON THE ASS AS YOU LEAVE!!!! You may have been something at one point however, now you need to just go away. Fontes didn't take his team to the Superbowl. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 But, just like Smith...nor did he win a SB. Fontes didn't take his team to the Superbowl. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 But, just like Smith...nor did he win a SB. Fontes was 1-4 in the playoffs. Smith is 3-3. He went to a Superbowl. I am not defending Lovie. I think he should be gone. However, just looking at the #s, he was a better head coach than Fontes. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Wayne Fontes had Superman and kryptonite all in one player. Barry Sanders. He was widely regarded as the most dynamic runner of all time. While that may be the case, he was also a drive killer. I don't think any running back in history had more negative yard rushes than Sanders. That being said, he tried to manage it and failed. Sanders was a big fan of Fontes, but had his greatest year the year after Fontes was replaced by Bobby Ross. Ross took them to the playoffs in his first season. Ross too, tried to manage Sanders ability. Ross' style is rumored to have caused Sanders' abrupt retirement the following season. If I remember correctly, it was Ross who started pulling Sanders out of the game when they got into scoring position. Lovie has Lovie... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I too believe Smith is better than Fontes...but the similarities are too close for comfort. Bottom line, and we're in agreement, is that neither are good enough for the Bears. The Bears need better. I'd like to find a poor man's Billicheck. Someone who has SB coaching wins as a coordinator, maybe didn't quite get it done in his first HC gig...but that can do so here. Not sure who that is. I hope Emery does. Caldwell? Fontes was 1-4 in the playoffs. Smith is 3-3. He went to a Superbowl. I am not defending Lovie. I think he should be gone. However, just looking at the #s, he was a better head coach than Fontes. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Not the same comparison, but Smith had Url in his prime. And most argue that Url could have been better under different schemes like Blache's. Maybe not Superman...maybe the Flash. But superhero nonetheless... Wayne Fontes had Superman and kryptonite all in one player. Barry Sanders. He was widely regarded as the most dynamic runner of all time. While that may be the case, he was also a drive killer. I don't think any running back in history had more negative yard rushes than Sanders. That being said, he tried to manage it and failed. Sanders was a big fan of Fontes, but had his greatest year the year after Fontes was replaced by Bobby Ross. Ross took them to the playoffs in his first season. Ross too, tried to manage Sanders ability. Ross' style is rumored to have caused Sanders' abrupt retirement the following season. If I remember correctly, it was Ross who started pulling Sanders out of the game when they got into scoring position. Lovie has Lovie... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Wayne Fontes had Superman and kryptonite all in one player. Barry Sanders. He was widely regarded as the most dynamic runner of all time. While that may be the case, he was also a drive killer. I don't think any running back in history had more negative yard rushes than Sanders. That being said, he tried to manage it and failed. Sanders was a big fan of Fontes, but had his greatest year the year after Fontes was replaced by Bobby Ross. Ross took them to the playoffs in his first season. Ross too, tried to manage Sanders ability. Ross' style is rumored to have caused Sanders' abrupt retirement the following season. If I remember correctly, it was Ross who started pulling Sanders out of the game when they got into scoring position. Lovie has Lovie... I still blame Brett Farv for Barry Sanders' retirement. The guy runs for 2000+ yards and has to share the MVP with Farv because, at that point, the media is absolutely blowing Farv on a regular basis. Disrespect made Barry Sanders retire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I still blame Brett Farv for Barry Sanders' retirement. The guy runs for 2000+ yards and has to share the MVP with Farv because, at that point, the media is absolutely blowing Farv on a regular basis. Disrespect made Barry Sanders retire. LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 Seriously, one more reason to hate Favre! I'm in! LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I still blame Brett Farv for Barry Sanders' retirement. The guy runs for 2000+ yards and has to share the MVP with Farv because, at that point, the media is absolutely blowing Farv on a regular basis. Disrespect made Barry Sanders retire. Ha! Just to clarify, he played another season after the 2K. Favre still blows though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I have bouts of wanting Lovie gone like yesterday, other days I think maybe he can make it work. When we were 7-1 i was liking what i was seeing. I know the teams we played were not the toughest teams in the NFL but when we played Houston we played with them and could have won that game had the O shown up. Since then the team has not looked too good. What would really make my decision really easy would be knowing what role Lovie had in Drafting and view on the oline. If it was JA, having all control on who was signed and drafted then maybe I would want to give Lovie some more time with Emery running the show. If Lovie had a big say on who was drafted then get his ass out of here. He should have gone with JA. I still blame Lovie for 54 being in the condition he has been in this year. There was no reason 54 should have been out there when he got injured. I wonder how different 54 would have been this season had he been able to train like he normally does in the off season. Would he have tweaked his hammy while simply running??? I know you cant say one way or the other but it is a fact when you have a hurt knee you favor the other leg. I know this from personal experience. It throws your whole body out of whack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 12, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I wrestle with it yearly it seems... I really have given Smith a chance. And really, until we don't win the SB this season, I still will. But, it just seems the worst case seems to always happen, no matter how great we start. It's really a tease. I just get the feeling Smith is a good HC, just not a great one. And his coordinators are far from good. It's just our talent is good. But, that mix only seems to get us so far. Something isn't working. And the common thread is one man... We could be worse with a change. But we won't get better w/o one. I have bouts of wanting Lovie gone like yesterday, other days I think maybe he can make it work. When we were 7-1 i was liking what i was seeing. I know the teams we played were not the toughest teams in the NFL but when we played Houston we played with them and could have won that game had the O shown up. Since then the team has not looked too good. What would really make my decision really easy would be knowing what role Lovie had in Drafting and view on the oline. If it was JA, having all control on who was signed and drafted then maybe I would want to give Lovie some more time with Emery running the show. If Lovie had a big say on who was drafted then get his ass out of here. He should have gone with JA. I still blame Lovie for 54 being in the condition he has been in this year. There was no reason 54 should have been out there when he got injured. I wonder how different 54 would have been this season had he been able to train like he normally does in the off season. Would he have tweaked his hammy while simply running??? I know you cant say one way or the other but it is a fact when you have a hurt knee you favor the other leg. I know this from personal experience. It throws your whole body out of whack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted December 12, 2012 Report Share Posted December 12, 2012 I wrestle with it yearly it seems... I really have given Smith a chance. And really, until we don't win the SB this season, I still will. But, it just seems the worst case seems to always happen, no matter how great we start. It's really a tease. I just get the feeling Smith is a good HC, just not a great one. And his coordinators are far from good. It's just our talent is good. But, that mix only seems to get us so far. Something isn't working. And the common thread is one man... We could be worse with a change. But we won't get better w/o one. One thing that got me when playing the 49ers, they kept talking about how creative the 49ers are with thier formations and how great the coaching is. Look at what Iron Mike did this pretty much the same team. Do you ever hear that about the Bears coaching staff?? The one thing you hear is the Bears coaching staff teaches taking the ball away and the Bears are great at it. You also hear the bears run their Defense everyone knows what it is.... Im sure there are little wrinkles in what the Bears D does week in and week out but I do not believe enough. The O has not gotten into any type of groove all year. Another coach that always seems to have our number is Dom Capers... the GB D always makes our O look like shit. There is no doubt the Bears have some real good talent. Would a change be for the better or the worse?? That depends on the hire, which I would have to trust Emery. I think for Lovie to save his job he has to at least make it to the playoffs. Its going to take Lovie gettting this team fired up. They should not have came out so flat against the Vikings last weekend. I hope he gets the guys fired up against the Packers, I got $100 riding on it with a Packer buddy of mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted December 13, 2012 Report Share Posted December 13, 2012 I wrestle with it yearly it seems... I really have given Smith a chance. And really, until we don't win the SB this season, I still will. But, it just seems the worst case seems to always happen, no matter how great we start. It's really a tease. I just get the feeling Smith is a good HC, just not a great one. And his coordinators are far from good. It's just our talent is good. But, that mix only seems to get us so far. Something isn't working. And the common thread is one man... We could be worse with a change. But we won't get better w/o one. Odds are the team will be worse than it currently is. With the defensive players currently on the roster, many are reaching the tail end of their careers (Urlacher, Tillman, Peppers) and have been in the same system. Most likely the new HC will want to implement something different in a defensive scheme. Probably not going to work as well with some of these named players. The defense will be in rebuild mode from day 1. And in all reality that is and has been the team's cornerstone for years now. And to be frank, I am of the opinion that the Offense won't be that much better even if you change out the o-line for all 1st round talent (drafted or through FA). Watch the game this last week between NE and Houston and you'll see what I'm talking about. Brady was dumping the ball in two step (or shorter) drops and didn't give the defense time to put on a rush. And the pocket formed around him was a true pocket. And if Brady needed it, he stood there...still with quick reads and passes. Sure occasionally he would be able to stand back and look over the choices but so has Cutler. I really don't think Cutler knows the defintion of pocket passing. He is accustomed to scrambling and prefers it that way. As I've said before when he was in Denver, Shannahan designed the offense to reflect that. Cutler did the same thing in Vandy. That is simply who he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2012 I do basically agree. However, the decline is inevitable. Whether it's one more year of "almosts" and then the blow-up...the blow-up is coming. I'm not certain of Cutler either...but I think with a better OC, some infusion of talent on the OL in FA & draft, we will have a better idea. Sadly, the evidence all points that we're not going to be able to get it done with Smith, and with a potenail new HC, not for a while. Get used to life as a Cubs fan...just wait until next year. Odds are the team will be worse than it currently is. With the defensive players currently on the roster, many are reaching the tail end of their careers (Urlacher, Tillman, Peppers) and have been in the same system. Most likely the new HC will want to implement something different in a defensive scheme. Probably not going to work as well with some of these named players. The defense will be in rebuild mode from day 1. And in all reality that is and has been the team's cornerstone for years now. And to be frank, I am of the opinion that the Offense won't be that much better even if you change out the o-line for all 1st round talent (drafted or through FA). Watch the game this last week between NE and Houston and you'll see what I'm talking about. Brady was dumping the ball in two step (or shorter) drops and didn't give the defense time to put on a rush. And the pocket formed around him was a true pocket. And if Brady needed it, he stood there...still with quick reads and passes. Sure occasionally he would be able to stand back and look over the choices but so has Cutler. I really don't think Cutler knows the defintion of pocket passing. He is accustomed to scrambling and prefers it that way. As I've said before when he was in Denver, Shannahan designed the offense to reflect that. Cutler did the same thing in Vandy. That is simply who he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted December 13, 2012 Report Share Posted December 13, 2012 Odds are the team will be worse than it currently is. With the defensive players currently on the roster, many are reaching the tail end of their careers (Urlacher, Tillman, Peppers) and have been in the same system. Most likely the new HC will want to implement something different in a defensive scheme. Probably not going to work as well with some of these named players. The defense will be in rebuild mode from day 1. And in all reality that is and has been the team's cornerstone for years now. And to be frank, I am of the opinion that the Offense won't be that much better even if you change out the o-line for all 1st round talent (drafted or through FA). Watch the game this last week between NE and Houston and you'll see what I'm talking about. Brady was dumping the ball in two step (or shorter) drops and didn't give the defense time to put on a rush. And the pocket formed around him was a true pocket. And if Brady needed it, he stood there...still with quick reads and passes. Sure occasionally he would be able to stand back and look over the choices but so has Cutler. I really don't think Cutler knows the defintion of pocket passing. He is accustomed to scrambling and prefers it that way. As I've said before when he was in Denver, Shannahan designed the offense to reflect that. Cutler did the same thing in Vandy. That is simply who he is. 1. Agreed that a new HC would likely make this team worse, but I'm willing to take one quick step back in order to go two forward. 2. All first rounders on the OL, something even I am not asking for, would certainly make the OL better. To say otherwise is just ignorant. 3. "And if Brady needed it, he stood there" is what allows Brady the freedom to do what he wants. There is no rush because he knows he's safe. It's why he feels comfortable dumping it off or waiting on a longer route to develop. His quick release only accentuates that fact. 4. I agree to some extent with your closing comments regarding Cutler's style, but I think even Fran Tarkenton's scrambling was spawned from pressure. Any QB in the NFL aside from maybe Vick would much rather sit in the pocket for 5-seconds and comfortably find the WR breaking open. I'm sure if the Bears' OL protected Cutler from potential concussion for an entire game, and then sustained that protection over the course of a few games, he's start to trust more, his mechanics would get better, and he'd be more comfortable in the pocket. BTW - The reason he scrambled at Vandy was because he was playing for Vandy and against actual SEC talent; that was scrambling out of necessity more often than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted December 13, 2012 Report Share Posted December 13, 2012 name='Alaskan Grizzly' date='Dec 12 2012, 07:28 PM' post='111475'] Odds are the team will be worse than it currently is. With the defensive players currently on the roster, many are reaching the tail end of their careers (Urlacher, Tillman, Peppers) and have been in the same system. Most likely the new HC will want to implement something different in a defensive scheme. Probably not going to work as well with some of these named players. The defense will be in rebuild mode from day 1. And in all reality that is and has been the team's cornerstone for years now. I challenge that. Let's take the Colts for example. Can you name 3 players on each side of the ball that were on the team last year. I'm willing to wager nobody on this board can do it. With a couple of additions, our D will be fine. With a few additions our O will be fine also. What's not fine is our talent development and evaluation. That begins and ends with Lovie. And to be frank, I am of the opinion that the Offense won't be that much better even if you change out the o-line for all 1st round talent (drafted or through FA). Watch the game this last week between NE and Houston and you'll see what I'm talking about. Brady was dumping the ball in two step (or shorter) drops and didn't give the defense time to put on a rush. And the pocket formed around him was a true pocket. And if Brady needed it, he stood there...still with quick reads and passes. Sure occasionally he would be able to stand back and look over the choices but so has Cutler. Agree short term, vehimently disagree long term. If Cutler ever saw a pocket like Tom Brady has he would think he was on an episode of Punked. I challenge anyone to show me a clip of Cutler in a pocket with time to throw without either being in "max protect" or the defense "rushing three" to try to get a turnover. If we had an OL with talent, we would be moving people off the ball in the run game, the offense would be able to utilize all routes without extra protection. That's why the Pats are so successful, because the full threat is always there. For our offense, the full threat is not there. So defenses can play us differently knowing we aren't going to put up a ton of points to make them pay for their scheme. I really don't think Cutler knows the defintion of pocket passing. He is accustomed to scrambling and prefers it that way. As I've said before when he was in Denver, Shannahan designed the offense to reflect that. Cutler did the same thing in Vandy. That is simply who he is. See above. And I don't give a crap what Cutler likes. He still needs a good OL to succeed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted December 13, 2012 Report Share Posted December 13, 2012 1. Agreed that a new HC would likely make this team worse, but I'm willing to take one quick step back in order to go two forward. 2. All first rounders on the OL, something even I am not asking for, would certainly make the OL better. To say otherwise is just ignorant. 3. "And if Brady needed it, he stood there" is what allows Brady the freedom to do what he wants. There is no rush because he knows he's safe. It's why he feels comfortable dumping it off or waiting on a longer route to develop. His quick release only accentuates that fact. 4. I agree to some extent with your closing comments regarding Cutler's style, but I think even Fran Tarkenton's scrambling was spawned from pressure. Any QB in the NFL aside from maybe Vick would much rather sit in the pocket for 5-seconds and comfortably find the WR breaking open. I'm sure if the Bears' OL protected Cutler from potential concussion for an entire game, and then sustained that protection over the course of a few games, he's start to trust more, his mechanics would get better, and he'd be more comfortable in the pocket. BTW - The reason he scrambled at Vandy was because he was playing for Vandy and against actual SEC talent; that was scrambling out of necessity more often than not. I was chiseling through typing mine while you were posting this. Like... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted December 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 13, 2012 That could be the funniest line this year! If Cutler ever saw a pocket like Tom Brady has he would think he was on an episode of Punked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted December 14, 2012 Report Share Posted December 14, 2012 I challenge that. Let's take the Colts for example. Can you name 3 players on each side of the ball that were on the team last year. I'm willing to wager nobody on this board can do it. With a couple of additions, our D will be fine. With a few additions our O will be fine also. What's not fine is our talent development and evaluation. That begins and ends with Lovie. I like a "challenge": On "O" = Donald Brown, Reggie Wayne and Austin Collie. On "D" = Mathis, Freeney and Angerer. And I don't give a crap what Cutler likes. He still needs a good OL to succeed. Say what you will, not "giving a crap" and all but if Jay saw this.... ...I'm fairly certain he would still scramble. He's been doing it for years and that is in his DNA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted December 14, 2012 Report Share Posted December 14, 2012 Say what you will, not "giving a crap" and all but if Jay saw this.... insert photos ...I'm fairly certain he would still scramble. He's been doing it for years and that is in his DNA.[/b] That's ridiculous and you know it. The Vandy stuff is a non-starter because he played at Vandy against crazy better talent. He had to scramble. I know this because I went to some of the games at Vandy. And the offense was different at Denver by design, with more movement, but it wasn't like he got a solid pocket and said, "screw it, I'm running." When he has a pocket, he sits down and throws or he moves within the pocket and throws (i.e. the Denver pic you posted). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted December 14, 2012 Report Share Posted December 14, 2012 That's ridiculous and you know it. The Vandy stuff is a non-starter because he played at Vandy against crazy better talent. He had to scramble. I know this because I went to some of the games at Vandy. And the offense was different at Denver by design, with more movement, but it wasn't like he got a solid pocket and said, "screw it, I'm running." When he has a pocket, he sits down and throws or he moves within the pocket and throws (i.e. the Denver pic you posted). Hes still being mobile and on the run in the picture in Denver. So why, if he "had" to run at Vandy and "has" to run at Chicago would you agree that his running, as part of the plays, in Denver was by design? There seems to be missing an element of logic to the timeline. Whether he has to or had to, he has a history of doing it and I still think prefers to be an out of pocket passer. And for the record, I don't think he should be playing this weekend. 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.