Trestman > Lovie

[jason]

I love Trestman. Last night is what I've wanted to see for years. Get up on a team with an offensive scheme? KEEP RUNNING THAT SCHEME! Step on their throat! Do not let them breathe! That's exactly what the offense did last night under Trestman. He did not change, get conservative, let off the gas. He said, "Let's run our offense and try to score." I loved every second of it.

 

We all know Lovie would have let off the gas when the Bears got about 28. A two touchdown lead may as well be 100 points to Lovie Smith. That would have guaranteed a bunch of three-and-out drives because of conservative play-calling, followed by an elastic defense more worried about eating time than stopping the opponent.

 

It's nice to have an offensive minded coach for a change.

[Connorbear]

I love Trestman. Last night is what I've wanted to see for years. Get up on a team with an offensive scheme? KEEP RUNNING THAT SCHEME! Step on their throat! Do not let them breathe! That's exactly what the offense did last night under Trestman. He did not change, get conservative, let off the gas. He said, "Let's run our offense and try to score." I loved every second of it.

 

We all know Lovie would have let off the gas when the Bears got about 28. A two touchdown lead may as well be 100 points to Lovie Smith. That would have guaranteed a bunch of three-and-out drives because of conservative play-calling, followed by an elastic defense more worried about eating time than stopping the opponent.

 

It's nice to have an offensive minded coach for a change.

Too bad our defense absolutely sucks now.

 

Peace

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Too bad our defense absolutely sucks now. Peace

 

I think if our defense stayed relatively healthy, it would've been in the upper half. Not having a solid MLB does hurt, Bostic just isn't ready. Plus all the other losses, just hasn't been our year on that side of the ball.

 

 

 

 

 

[jason]

Too bad our defense absolutely sucks now.

 

Peace

 

But that's not really coaching. That's only partially coaching. Lovie could be in Chicago this year and the D would still suck. You can't lose the starting DE to FA, your starting DT and backup DT to injury, two starting LBs to FA/retirement, another two starting LBs to injury, and the starting CB to injury, and still expect a good defense. Not to mention the fact that two replacement LBs are rookies, one currently starting DT was obtained off the street, one DE is aging and hampered by injuries all year, and both safeties - the weakest point of the defense - are the only guys who've been able to stay on the field.

 

Lovie being in Chicago would have virtually zero impact on the defense this year.

[madlithuanian]

It is indeed a pleasant change. Hopefully, many more like that to come!

 

I love Trestman. Last night is what I've wanted to see for years. Get up on a team with an offensive scheme? KEEP RUNNING THAT SCHEME! Step on their throat! Do not let them breathe! That's exactly what the offense did last night under Trestman. He did not change, get conservative, let off the gas. He said, "Let's run our offense and try to score." I loved every second of it.

 

We all know Lovie would have let off the gas when the Bears got about 28. A two touchdown lead may as well be 100 points to Lovie Smith. That would have guaranteed a bunch of three-and-out drives because of conservative play-calling, followed by an elastic defense more worried about eating time than stopping the opponent.

 

It's nice to have an offensive minded coach for a change.

 

[CrackerDog]

I love Trestman. Last night is what I've wanted to see for years. Get up on a team with an offensive scheme? KEEP RUNNING THAT SCHEME! Step on their throat!

 

Lovie always had the luxury of knowing he could win a game once he had a 2 TD lead. Trestman doesn't with this injured bunch. While I'd love to give him 100% credit, I'm not sure he wouldn't have eased off the gas a little to burn clock. I didn't feel comfortable we were going to win until 2 minutes left in the game. You can't trust this D.

 

Whatever, I've been wrong for decades about the Bears needing to be a Defense based running team due to weather, apparently. So what the hell do I know?

[Connorbear]

But that's not really coaching. That's only partially coaching. Lovie could be in Chicago this year and the D would still suck. You can't lose the starting DE to FA, your starting DT and backup DT to injury, two starting LBs to FA/retirement, another two starting LBs to injury, and the starting CB to injury, and still expect a good defense. Not to mention the fact that two replacement LBs are rookies, one currently starting DT was obtained off the street, one DE is aging and hampered by injuries all year, and both safeties - the weakest point of the defense - are the only guys who've been able to stay on the field.

 

Lovie being in Chicago would have virtually zero impact on the defense this year.

Never said it was coaching. Just noted it was too bad our defense is abysmal now.

 

Peace

[jason]

Lovie always had the luxury of knowing he could win a game once he had a 2 TD lead. Trestman doesn't with this injured bunch. While I'd love to give him 100% credit, I'm not sure he wouldn't have eased off the gas a little to burn clock. I didn't feel comfortable we were going to win until 2 minutes left in the game. You can't trust this D.

 

Whatever, I've been wrong for decades about the Bears needing to be a Defense based running team due to weather, apparently. So what the hell do I know?

 

He had the luxury, but that didn't mean he had to play it safe that way over and over again. There were many he lost which were directly related to him shutting things down. Which was crazy because if he kept coaching the team the way that got the lead, there was a very good possibility the lead would increase.

 

I've always thought that was nonsense, and couldn't wait to see what would happen with an offensive minded coach in Chicago. I hated the ground-and-pound, try to squeeze out a 3 point win that Lovie Smith lived by. It's purely defensive and a play-it-safe attitude. I bet when Lovie played basketball in HS he was the guy who tried to talk his coach into running the four-corner offense and holding the ball for the final 5 minutes of the game instead of taking the shot. He probably climbed five feet of rope in gym class and decided to hang out, not wanting to take the risk of of a long fall if he tried climbing to the top.

 

I'm just glad we both got the opportunity to see and offensive mind come to Chicago to see whether either of us were right.

[Mongo3451]

I really don't care if our head coach is offense or defensive minded, but I do agree on the aggressive nature of Trestman. If he makes the smart decisions on 4th down and field goals, I'm totally good.

 

On the Lovie note: I believe his style of coaching is dead alongside the Tampa Two D.

 

 

 

[CrackerDog]

I really don't care if our head coach is offense or defensive minded, but I do agree on the aggressive nature of Trestman. If he makes the smart decisions on 4th down and field goals, I'm totally good.

 

On the Lovie note: I believe his style of coaching is dead alongside the Tampa Two D.

 

That aggressiveness is why I give him a break on the few busts this season. I can tolerate errors related to "going for it" much more than those that are commited by being too passive. And while I agree with you he needs to improve his decisions at times, you have to take the good with the bad when a coach is prone to being aggressive.

 

I wonder if he's "setting the tone" this year with his team. Making them feel he believes in them. Not saying he won't be that way next year, just wondering if this is partially the result of his nature, partially due to his needing to learn the NFL and somewhat also due to his telling his team he has high expectations and he believe they'll make him look good when he asks them to make that fourth and one. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit for being philosophical but after watching Phil Jackson and other good coaches over the years, it wouldn't surprise me if this "winners attitude" is something he's cultivating.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

On the Lovie note: I believe his style of coaching is dead alongside the Tampa Two D.

 

I will agree that the Tampa 2 could be waning. Both Dallas and Chicago run it but don't have the people to support it any longer.

 

However, not sure that your assesment of Lovie is quite right. An 84-66 combined record and teams looking for a new coach may prove otherwise.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

In Minnesota, Trestman failed to step on the throat of anyone. He got so conservative after the Bears built the comfortable lead and stayed conservative in overtime as well. He knew damn well with our defense and a good Cowboys offense that he had to keep his foot down and thankfully the Bears executed (and the Cowboys couldn't hold onto any of the potential interceptions that were thrown).

[Alaskan Grizzly]

In Minnesota, Trestman failed to step on the throat of anyone. He got so conservative after the Bears built the comfortable lead and stayed conservative in overtime as well. He knew damn well with our defense and a good Cowboys offense that he had to keep his foot down and thankfully the Bears executed (and the Cowboys couldn't hold onto any of the potential interceptions that were thrown).

 

 

Fortunately the one they did actually catch was negated by the def holding call.

 

But I think it safe to say that most teams see what could happen even if you build a sizable lead and aren't able to maintain it. (Denver vs NE).

 

In all fairness, McCown's numbers have been pretty similar over most of his games this year (suggesting they have'nt been as conservative as some suggest) its just that penalties have literally wiped points off the board in some cases. Sometimes more than once.

[CrackerDog]

He had the luxury, but that didn't mean he had to play it safe that way over and over again.

 

Besides having the luxury on D, his offense typically sucked. If you have a 7 point lead, the ball and there's 3 minutes left in the game, in his defense, it might make sense for you to run it 3 times and punt rather than having your O give the game away.

 

Dude, I know what you're saying and I prefer that stomp your opponent philosophy myself. I'm just saying, if you put yourself in Lovie's shoes it's pretty easy to understand why he did what he did, much of the time.

[jason]

Besides having the luxury on D, his offense typically sucked. If you have a 7 point lead, the ball and there's 3 minutes left in the game, in his defense, it might make sense for you to run it 3 times and punt rather than having your O give the game away.

 

Dude, I know what you're saying and I prefer that stomp your opponent philosophy myself. I'm just saying, if you put yourself in Lovie's shoes it's pretty easy to understand why he did what he did, much of the time.

 

That was every bit his fault, from beginning to end. We saw in his last year that he held significant sway when it came to the draft; so, if he wanted better offenses he should have drafted accordingly. The fact is, he didn't. He focused nearly all effort on defense, eschewing any offensive progression through the draft. And he was obviously instrumental in the decision-making process regarding offensive coordinators. Gameplan as well. I'm sure he told every one of his coordinators to play it close to the vest and not to try anything too fancy.

 

I still don't think it was easy for him to do what he did. There were multiple times during his tenure where the Bears were beating a team soundly, and once they got the lead he shut things down. He played the clock when all he had to do was keep playing as they were. That's why I like what Trestman did this week against the Cowgirls.