New Bears Coach

[Bears4Ever_34]

Cincinatti fans will tell you that having two "alpha-male" WR's doesn't work. Not to mention, we're paying BM 9 million per. We can't lock up that much in one position.

 

We need a competent TE and a speed guy off the edge who can stretch the field. If Johnny Knox could return to form, that would be ideal but that ain't likely happening. Either way, we could get both of those for far less than what Wallace would cost.

Yeah it's not a likely scenario. If Jerry Angelo wasn't an idiot, the Bears should have had Wallace a couple of years ago before they took Jarron freaking Gilbert instead. Wallace said the Bears were the most interested team going into the draft. Thought he would be there for sure..

[Bears4Ever_34]

I listened to part of a podcast the other day (I forget which show it was) and some guy from Canada spoke very highly of Trestman. He even went as far as to say that his offensive approach is a lot like the New England Patriots. That it's unpredictable.

 

As for Bevell, I like him a little more than I did a couple days ago. The more you read up on a guy the more he starts to stand out. I like what he's done adapting his offense to fit Russell Wilson's skill set. That Seattle offense really evolved from Week 1 of the season if you remember. For the first 6-7 weeks it was mostly Marshawn Lynch runs on 1st and 2nd downs and only throwing when they had to. Then they unleashed the read option on the Bears and the whole thing took off from there. Wilson became a prolific passer and was one of the best quarterbacks in football this season. I like him (Bevell). I wouldn't be mad if he ended up getting the job. I would prefer somebody young, and he's the only finalist that fits that bill.

[Guest TerraTor]

This is all in the top thread.

 

BTW, don't forget about Arians.

 

 

My bad

[Lucky Luciano]

Agreed. Is there anyone who doesn't want to see us continue with our current defense? Our defense was good. Our special teams was good. Our offense was putrid.

 

That being said, we are letting Dave Toub interview for other special teams jobs which indicates we don't want him back. WTF??? To me that would rank up their with firing Chico and replacing him with Bob Babich. Not good.

 

count me in as wanting a serious change in our defense and it's philosophy. whether our defense was dictated by marinelli or lovie smith it is not a defense that causes any concerns to the upper tier offensive teams in the nfl. it's the most predictable and easy to defeat defense in the entire nfl no matter what the rankings look like.

 

just what has marinelli accomplished that puts him in the rarefide air?

 

the blitz packages are ridiculous and the backward movement of our linebackers nearly every down is even more so considering that was figured out in 2007 by every NFL coach there is and now used by an aging linebacker corp who need all the help they can get and this gives them nearly none. the non-contact or super soft zones by our corners on and off the LOS is indicative to colossal failure in every sense if you play good coached offenses in post season. are our memories so completely fogged over that the last superbowl we were in is just a distant haze? doesn't anyone remember THIS season and the ease opponents moved the ball against us in the final two minutes of any half?

 

all of our linebackers worth a dam are 30+. without urlacher (even considering his career is or nearly over) or briggs what does our defense look like? we have no tackles who can create pressure up the middle and our star DE is old and on his last leg. can anyone imagine how pathetic this defense would be without peppers?

 

for everyone interested in hiring an offensive oriented head coach what you are handing him is a defense that opponents can move the ball on at critical times. what does the bend and don't break defense do? it takes your offense off the field throughout the game and keeps them from scoring points. it causes your defense to be worn out by mid third quarter even IF you have a young defense which we are not even close to having.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

No DT's who can create pressure up the middle? Really? You know, Henry Melton is still on the team.

[Bears4Ever_34]

I agree with some of you that would like to see a change in scheme from a defensive perspective as well. I would be heavily in favor of hiring Greg Williams to run the defense. The defensive studs on our team right now are all getting older with the exception of Melton. To me, it doesn't make much sense to keep a defense that's reliant upon these older guys to keep making plays. Maybe the plan is to give it another year while the coach gets situated, and then after Marenelli's contract runs out they'll just bring in a new guy.

[AZ54]

count me in as wanting a serious change in our defense and it's philosophy. whether our defense was dictated by marinelli or lovie smith it is not a defense that causes any concerns to the upper tier offensive teams in the nfl. it's the most predictable and easy to defeat defense in the entire nfl no matter what the rankings look like.

 

just what has marinelli accomplished that puts him in the rarefide air?

 

the blitz packages are ridiculous and the backward movement of our linebackers nearly every down is even more so considering that was figured out in 2007 by every NFL coach there is and now used by an aging linebacker corp who need all the help they can get and this gives them nearly none. the non-contact or super soft zones by our corners on and off the LOS is indicative to colossal failure in every sense if you play good coached offenses in post season. are our memories so completely fogged over that the last superbowl we were in is just a distant haze? doesn't anyone remember THIS season and the ease opponents moved the ball against us in the final two minutes of any half?

 

all of our linebackers worth a dam are 30+. without urlacher (even considering his career is or nearly over) or briggs what does our defense look like? we have no tackles who can create pressure up the middle and our star DE is old and on his last leg. can anyone imagine how pathetic this defense would be without peppers?

 

for everyone interested in hiring an offensive oriented head coach what you are handing him is a defense that opponents can move the ball on at critical times. what does the bend and don't break defense do? it takes your offense off the field throughout the game and keeps them from scoring points. it causes your defense to be worn out by mid third quarter even IF you have a young defense which we are not even close to having.

 

 

Given that the defensive personnel will be nearly identical next season how will a significant change in DC and scheme improve the D?

 

I see our best chance at winning in the playoffs as keeping or slightly improving our D while dramatically improving our offense. I can't see where a significant change in scheme, something players like Tillman, Briggs, Urlacher (if he's back), Jennings, Roach, Conte, Wright, Melton, Wootton, SMC, and Paea have never run will make the defense better next year. If we're talking about long term then yes.

 

I look at our offense with a good QB, Pro Bowl WR, Pro Bowl RB and tend to think a few good moves (Oline) and better scheme/coaching can change things for the better now. While our defense might not be dominate they are good. IMO that is our best near term combination to win in the next year or two.

[Lucky Luciano]

No DT's who can create pressure up the middle? Really?

 

yea, really.

 

how many games this season did we play before we ever even seen a line stunt? how many times during a game did we take our best pass rusher in peppers off the end to play the tackle position? why do you suppose that is?

 

this is what our tackles did for sacking the quarterback this season even considering peppers is a HOF defensive end getting double teamed 75-85% of the time...

 

idonoje 7.5 sacks - how many of these were from the left defensive end position?

2.5 rams

2 detroit

.5 titans

1 cards

1.5 sacks against teams with winning records - .5 SF 1 MIN

11 games after the bye week = 5 sacks - 1 DET .5 TEN .5 SF 1 MIN 1 ARIZ 1 DET

 

melton 6 sacks

.5 jax

.5 carolina

5 sacks against teams with winning records - 2 IND 1 GB 1 DAL 1 MIN

11 games after the bye week = 1.5 sacks - .5 CAR 1 MIN

 

paea 2.5 sacks

.5 rams

.5 det

.5 titans

1 sack against teams with winning records - seahawks

11 games after the bye week = 1.5 sacks

 

you ask how does this reflect on the DC? count the sacks and if you can find a statistic (i don't know where to look) for DT pressures on a qb throughout the season this sack stat alone for the final 11 games is beyond pathetic. it reeks of no adjustments being made to compensate for opponent offenses watching game film and changing their tactics and blocking schemes while we plod on the same way as always.

 

our rushing defense?

 

opponents averaged 4.2 yds per carry against us rushing for the season. we were ranked 14th in the NFL if i'm not mistaken.

 

in 11 games after the bye week there were THREE games in which we didn't give up more than a hundred yards in rushing. TWO against the mighty lions and the other against the formidable cardinals.

 

marinelli has 2 HOF players on defense in peppers and url. a multiple all-pro pro-bowler in briggs. a good #2 CB in peanut and he has improved our defense how?

 

plus how much was him and how much was lovie? why would you want to saddle a NEW coach with old garbage like we did emery when he got here? if the new coach wants a new system GIVE IT TO HIM. marinelli is a stop gap in my opinion that we might as well dump now for a better candidate with a fresh set of ideas like the niners seem to be doing. do we have the players? yea why not? or are we somehow married to this lovie 2 crap until every premium defensive player retires?

[Lucky Luciano]

Given that the defensive personnel will be nearly identical next season how will a significant change in DC and scheme improve the D?

 

I see our best chance at winning in the playoffs as keeping or slightly improving our D while dramatically improving our offense. I can't see where a significant change in scheme, something players like Tillman, Briggs, Urlacher (if he's back), Jennings, Roach, Conte, Wright, Melton, Wootton, SMC, and Paea have never run will make the defense better next year. If we're talking about long term then yes.

 

I look at our offense with a good QB, Pro Bowl WR, Pro Bowl RB and tend to think a few good moves (Oline) and better scheme/coaching can change things for the better now. While our defense might not be dominate they are good. IMO that is our best near term combination to win in the next year or two.

 

i just don't see the GOOD talent we have as some magnificent plus anymore. they are old. if not now when we get a fresh coach with a fresh set of eyes and outlook then when?

 

i see absolutely no reason we can't adjust our defensive scheme to any other out there at this time. we have an entire offseason and the draft before training camp and i just can't believe that the players we have on this roster can't possibly play anything but the lovie 2 crap. and if that is so then it is imperative that we get rid of that talent now no matter who it is.

 

year after year we keep beating the dead horses because it supposedly will kill our chances to win next seasons superbowl if we make the needed changes or draft the player that needs to develop.

 

i can truthfully say right now that there is a one in a thousand chance the bears win the superbowl with the talent we have and a new coach in one season. so let's freaking build now for the future DECADE instead of tying off bleeders with the hope it's really going to make any serious difference.

[Stinger226]

i just don't see the GOOD talent we have as some magnificent plus anymore. they are old. if not now when we get a fresh coach with a fresh set of eyes and outlook then when?

 

i see absolutely no reason we can't adjust our defensive scheme to any other out there at this time. we have an entire offseason and the draft before training camp and i just can't believe that the players we have on this roster can't possibly play anything but the lovie 2 crap. and if that is so then it is imperative that we get rid of that talent now no matter who it is.

 

year after year we keep beating the dead horses because it supposedly will kill our chances to win next seasons superbowl if we make the needed changes or draft the player that needs to develop.

 

i can truthfully say right now that there is a one in a thousand chance the bears win the superbowl with the talent we have and a new coach in one season. so let's freaking build now for the future DECADE instead of tying off bleeders with the hope it's really going to make any serious difference.

A good coach takes the players he has and makes them the best he can. We have lots of area's of need, but you cant fix everything in one year. Add some FAs and a good draft and we have a shot at the playoffs. Where our problem comes in is we are in no mans land with the draft, not bad enough to get a high pick and not good enough to make the playoffs. You always try to win every year, cant say (we wil rebuild this year) go with want you can do, hope for the best.

[Stinger226]

yea, really.

 

how many games this season did we play before we ever even seen a line stunt? how many times during a game did we take our best pass rusher in peppers off the end to play the tackle position? why do you suppose that is?

 

this is what our tackles did for sacking the quarterback this season even considering peppers is a HOF defensive end getting double teamed 75-85% of the time...

 

idonoje 7.5 sacks - how many of these were from the left defensive end position?

2.5 rams

2 detroit

.5 titans

1 cards

1.5 sacks against teams with winning records - .5 SF 1 MIN

11 games after the bye week = 5 sacks - 1 DET .5 TEN .5 SF 1 MIN 1 ARIZ 1 DET

 

melton 6 sacks

.5 jax

.5 carolina

5 sacks against teams with winning records - 2 IND 1 GB 1 DAL 1 MIN

11 games after the bye week = 1.5 sacks - .5 CAR 1 MIN

 

paea 2.5 sacks

.5 rams

.5 det

.5 titans

1 sack against teams with winning records - seahawks

11 games after the bye week = 1.5 sacks

 

you ask how does this reflect on the DC? count the sacks and if you can find a statistic (i don't know where to look) for DT pressures on a qb throughout the season this sack stat alone for the final 11 games is beyond pathetic. it reeks of no adjustments being made to compensate for opponent offenses watching game film and changing their tactics and blocking schemes while we plod on the same way as always.

 

our rushing defense?

 

opponents averaged 4.2 yds per carry against us rushing for the season. we were ranked 14th in the NFL if i'm not mistaken.

 

in 11 games after the bye week there were THREE games in which we didn't give up more than a hundred yards in rushing. TWO against the mighty lions and the other against the formidable cardinals.

 

marinelli has 2 HOF players on defense in peppers and url. a multiple all-pro pro-bowler in briggs. a good #2 CB in peanut and he has improved our defense how?

 

plus how much was him and how much was lovie? why would you want to saddle a NEW coach with old garbage like we did emery when he got here? if the new coach wants a new system GIVE IT TO HIM. marinelli is a stop gap in my opinion that we might as well dump now for a better candidate with a fresh set of ideas like the niners seem to be doing. do we have the players? yea why not? or are we somehow married to this lovie 2 crap until every premium defensive player retires?

We ended up the #1 rated defense in the Aikman ratings, which factors in many different aspects of the game. With TOs being a key. We were a good defense not a great one, let the new coach decide who he wants, I dont really care. A good coach fits the scheme to the players you have to work with, adaptable to what ever. Im ok with that.

[Stinger226]

Bevell as well. I just think that offense fits our personnel better than a lot of deep passing. We don't have any burners at receiver. Now if they shocked the world and spent money on Mike Wallace, perhaps I would change my mind.

We can draft a speedy wr, we need to get a TE and OL in FAgency and draft a OL, MLB, and speedy WR in the draft. We dont have as much money under the cap as some people think on here. We still have to sign Melton and that will cost 5-6 mill, doesnt leave us with big money to spend on everything we need.

[lemonej]

The fact that the Cowboys hired 72 year old Monte Kiffin that coaches the same style of defense that the Bears used during Lovie's tenure tells me that some people still believe that scheme is still effective.The current teams remaining in the playoffs gave up a minimum of 28 points.All those teams have some form of the 3-4 defense.I watched repeatedly teams isolate one of the linebackers out in coverage by using a back or TE. I'm not endorsing the cover 2 but would like a more attacking style of the 4-3 simlar to what Perry Fewell does with the Giants.

[jason]

The fact that the Cowboys hired 72 year old Monte Kiffin that coaches the same style of defense that the Bears used during Lovie's tenure tells me that some people still believe that scheme is still effective.The current teams remaining in the playoffs gave up a minimum of 28 points.All those teams have some form of the 3-4 defense.I watched repeatedly teams isolate one of the linebackers out in coverage by using a back or TE. I'm not endorsing the cover 2 but would like a more attacking style of the 4-3 simlar to what Perry Fewell does with the Giants.

 

I think your post is intended to advocate for the cover-2, but the key to what you said is, "The current teams remaining in the playoffs".

[jason]

Given that the defensive personnel will be nearly identical next season how will a significant change in DC and scheme improve the D?

 

I see our best chance at winning in the playoffs as keeping or slightly improving our D while dramatically improving our offense. I can't see where a significant change in scheme, something players like Tillman, Briggs, Urlacher (if he's back), Jennings, Roach, Conte, Wright, Melton, Wootton, SMC, and Paea have never run will make the defense better next year. If we're talking about long term then yes.

 

I look at our offense with a good QB, Pro Bowl WR, Pro Bowl RB and tend to think a few good moves (Oline) and better scheme/coaching can change things for the better now. While our defense might not be dominate they are good. IMO that is our best near term combination to win in the next year or two.

 

Odd, because I see where a defensive change would help them tremendously. A DC who does the following could easily improve the defense: Make it unpredictable. Year in and year out we have heard about the Lovie-2's strengths and weaknesses, and one of the latter is the fact that absolutely everyone knows what's coming from the Bears' D. Whether they stay in the cover-2 shell X% of the time is nearly inconsequential because opponents' players and coaches have said the Bears just line up in what you know they will do and dare you to beat them (i.e. "They are who we thought they were!"). A new DC could implement a few things (e.g. DL stunts, DE flexibility for inside rushes, LB blitzes, DB blitzes, lessened frequency of the MLB being 20 yards deep) that could maximize the aging talent on the defense. If Marinelli is up to the task, then it's not big deal. But my impressions of him adjusting (during the game, after the game, during his tenure with the Bears) aren't great.

[adam]

Odd, because I see where a defensive change would help them tremendously. A DC who does the following could easily improve the defense: Make it unpredictable. Year in and year out we have heard about the Lovie-2's strengths and weaknesses, and one of the latter is the fact that absolutely everyone knows what's coming from the Bears' D. Whether they stay in the cover-2 shell X% of the time is nearly inconsequential because opponents' players and coaches have said the Bears just line up in what you know they will do and dare you to beat them (i.e. "They are who we thought they were!"). A new DC could implement a few things (e.g. DL stunts, DE flexibility for inside rushes, LB blitzes, DB blitzes, lessened frequency of the MLB being 20 yards deep) that could maximize the aging talent on the defense. If Marinelli is up to the task, then it's not big deal. But my impressions of him adjusting (during the game, after the game, during his tenure with the Bears) aren't great.

I have to agree 1000%. Just look at Urlacher's sack totals, not completely related to scheme, but a big part. The defense became so predictable, and I know everyone despised the late game "protect the lead prevent" that just prevented us from winning. Lovie even preached that "we are not going to do any special" and "we are just going to line up and make you beat us". To me that is almost a stubborn approach. Why not play into the strengths of your players within a scheme and exploit the opponents weaknesses?

[balta1701-A]

I have to agree 1000%. Just look at Urlacher's sack totals, not completely related to scheme, but a big part. The defense became so predictable, and I know everyone despised the late game "protect the lead prevent" that just prevented us from winning. Lovie even preached that "we are not going to do any special" and "we are just going to line up and make you beat us". To me that is almost a stubborn approach. Why not play into the strengths of your players within a scheme and exploit the opponents weaknesses?

Because outside of the last-2 minutes fails...it kept working. Teams that would average 40 a game would come into Chicago and struggle to put up 20, and would only get to 20 because the Bears' offense would help them out with a turnover.

 

That defense works. It keeps teams from scoring, it's effective, year after year.

 

The problem for the Bears has been that they don't have an offense to win a tough game when the opponent scores 20 and haven't had that consistently the entire time.

[bowlingtwig]

Because outside of the last-2 minutes fails...it kept working. Teams that would average 40 a game would come into Chicago and struggle to put up 20, and would only get to 20 because the Bears' offense would help them out with a turnover.

 

That defense works. It keeps teams from scoring, it's effective, year after year.

 

The problem for the Bears has been that they don't have an offense to win a tough game when the opponent scores 20 and haven't had that consistently the entire time.

Couldn't agree more. Im not a huge fan of the cover 2. I would like to be a bit more aggressive at times but for ppl to dismiss it entirely is nuts. Ask urselves. What would our record have been without that defense. How about back when we made super bowl if it wasn't for that defense plus an extraordinary special teams we dont make SB and i wonder if we would have even made playoffs. That defense may not be sexy but more times than not it gets the job down. Look at that high flying offense of GB with 1 of the best qbs in the game downright struggle to put up 25 against us. The fact remains that offense is the problem. If u change defensive schemes now then we are in a complete rebuild mode

[bschmaranz]

McCoy to San Diego: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8845746/...go-chargers-job

[rockren]

McCoy to San Diego: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8845746/...go-chargers-job

 

That developed quickly.....right after the Bears notified him he wouldn't be back.

[bowlingtwig]

I heard i believe from adam schefter that 1 thing that made Trestman do successful in the CFL is that he didn't meddle with personel decision. He let the talent evaluators bring in the talent and he created a system to fit the personel that he was given. I hope he gets job

[Bears4Ever_34]

Trestman and Emery have similar personalities. Unless Bevell or Arians nail their final interviews it's gotta be Trestman's job to lose.

[Lucky Luciano]

The fact that the Cowboys hired 72 year old Monte Kiffin that coaches the same style of defense that the Bears used during Lovie's tenure tells me that some people still believe that scheme is still effective.The current teams remaining in the playoffs gave up a minimum of 28 points.All those teams have some form of the 3-4 defense.I watched repeatedly teams isolate one of the linebackers out in coverage by using a back or TE. I'm not endorsing the cover 2 but would like a more attacking style of the 4-3 simlar to what Perry Fewell does with the Giants.

 

here is the conundrum... are you talking about the cover 2 (the steelers or bucs used) or are you talking about the lovie 2? because i can tell you with authority the difference is HUGE. i have beat my brains out for over 5 years trying to convey that the system lovie smith implements is NOT the same.

 

with the steelers of the 70's the cover 2 was NOT the primary defense under carson. it was implemented under certain situations against specific opponents offenses no different than the 46 is now. he adjusted during game time as to what worked. he also had the horses to make his version of it work and keep offenses guessing where they were coming from. my god he had some of the best defensive talent in NFL history.

 

the tampa 2... again this cover 2 defense is NOTHING like what we ran under lovie smith. IMPORTANT: they had a perennial pro-bowl CB in barber who could play man and bump and run off the LOS. his bookend CB also could play pretty well because the bucs had a perennial pro-bowl safety in lynch and some decent talent along side him at FS to make up the difference. they also had warren sapp who consistently collapsed pockets along mcfarland who was a pretty good tackle in that system. they had 2 pro-bowl linebackers to go along with their DB's and had a killer DE in s. rice chasing qb's to kingdom come.

 

under lovie smith we had about 1/2 of what it takes to make that system work even IF it wasn't figured out. after mike brown started breaking down we had NO safeties worth a tinkers dam who are key in this type of system, we had not a single CB who could play bump and run off the LOS which is CRITICAL in this system and especially since the new chuck rules. we never, never, never play/played our corners up to bump any receivers off their routes because they were never taught how to by lovie or just plain good enough to do it and our safeties were not good enough to compensate for this failure. our DE's were rarely in double digit sacks until pepperman and our tackles after t. harris broke down were pathetic.

 

that is why under the lovie 2 we always had a vacated zone 5-8 yards off the LOS for an easy completion by anybody. why do you think we made nobody qb's look like they belonged in the pro-bowl? because lovie smith was going to run this system come hell or high water because he didn't have enough football brains to adjust it or go with something that worked with the PERSONNEL HE HAD!!!

 

you can not rely year after year on the same system of defense, or offense for that matter, without changing how you attack your opponent. you have to evolve or even devolve to an older scheme at times just to mix it up and keep your enemy guessing. which brings me to this...

 

the lovie cover 2 as we know it will NOT work consistently against good offensive teams. they will run you into the ground and keep up those extended 5-7 minute 3rd and 4th quarter drives that keeps your offense on the sidelines when they should be doing the same to our opponents. especially with aging players the defense is just out of gas by the start of the 4th quarter!!!

 

final NOTE: parts of the cover 2 can be used in a defensive scheme just like i mentioned the 46. it just can't work the way we run it consistently and anyone who believes that marinelli is some savior that is going to bring our defense to all-world status without serious change is sadly mistaken.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

La Canfora tweeted that he thinks it'll be Arians.

[scs787]

we talking 3-4 here with all the scheme change talk? If so I like it!