Chicago Bears Offseason 2012

[minnesotacubsfan]

Can someone paraphrase what he says?

[jersey cubs fan]

Can someone paraphrase what he says?

 

I was late, but heard all of George's. He basically talked about the structure, ownership hires president/CEO, president/CEO hires GM with consultation from ownership, GM hires coach with consultation from president/CEO, ownership. This was Phillips call, he came to George with the idea of firing Angelo and keeping Lovie. George provided his opinion and that of the rest of ownership and allowed Ted to make the move. It sounds to me like they are going to be hiring a guy who can work with Lovie (that's fine by me), as opposed to some Bill Parcells power hungry type. That GM will have a year or two to live with Lovie before he can decide to keep him, or go with somebody else. And again, that works for me.

 

Get a real OC who is up to the challenge and a personel guy who will address offensive line and WR and this team can be right back in the playoffs next year, no question.

[minnesotacubsfan]

It sounds to me like Polian would not be in-line for the gig. He was a vice chairman and more than just a GM, but the Bears are looking strictly at a GM to fit in between Phillips and Lovie on the power structure.

missed this post, thanks

[minnesotacubsfan]

Can someone paraphrase what he says?

 

I was late, but heard all of George's. He basically talked about the structure, ownership hires president/CEO, president/CEO hires GM with consultation from ownership, GM hires coach with consultation from president/CEO, ownership. This was Phillips call, he came to George with the idea of firing Angelo and keeping Lovie. George provided his opinion and that of the rest of ownership and allowed Ted to make the move. It sounds to me like they are going to be hiring a guy who can work with Lovie (that's fine by me), as opposed to some Bill Parcells power hungry type. That GM will have a year or two to live with Lovie before he can decide to keep him, or go with somebody else. And again, that works for me.

 

Get a real OC who is up to the challenge and a personel guy who will address offensive line and WR and this team can be right back in the playoffs next year, no question.

it's sad when an accountant knows we aren't making good personnel decisions before or GM realizes it

[jersey cubs fan]

I should also add that George praised Jerry's professionalism and was very clear in his support of Ted remaining in his job.

[The R-Train]

Can someone paraphrase what he says?

 

I was late, but heard all of George's. He basically talked about the structure, ownership hires president/CEO, president/CEO hires GM with consultation from ownership, GM hires coach with consultation from president/CEO, ownership. This was Phillips call, he came to George with the idea of firing Angelo and keeping Lovie. George provided his opinion and that of the rest of ownership and allowed Ted to make the move. It sounds to me like they are going to be hiring a guy who can work with Lovie (that's fine by me), as opposed to some Bill Parcells power hungry type. That GM will have a year or two to live with Lovie before he can decide to keep him, or go with somebody else. And again, that works for me.

 

Get a real OC who is up to the challenge and a personel guy who will address offensive line and WR and this team can be right back in the playoffs next year, no question.

it's sad when an accountant knows we aren't making good personnel decisions before or GM realizes it

My cousin knew we were making poor personnel decisions and he's a waiter at Steak N Shake.

[jersey cubs fan]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/alternatethumbnails/story/2012-01/67124175-03142252.jpg

 

Look at those eyes.

 

The pointless John Mullin asked George if he wanted to go the route of Jerry Jones and be the owner/GM. He said no.

[minnesotacubsfan]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/alternatethumbnails/story/2012-01/67124175-03142252.jpg

 

no.

you [expletive] IDIOT

[Guest]

"Egos and head butting led to the departures of Jerry Angelo and Mike Martz. Not a good situation the last 2 years. Awful environment to work."

 

- Dez Clark

[brinoch]

George isn't a great speaker, but I like what he's saying and how he's saying it. He's blunt and clear.

 

?

 

Is this an online thing?

 

http://www.csnchicago.com/live_bears

 

Thanks.

[jersey cubs fan]

George isn't a great speaker, but I like what he's saying and how he's saying it. He's blunt and clear.

 

?

 

Is this an online thing?

 

http://www.csnchicago.com/live_bears

 

Thanks.

 

I just clicked on this link to see if they had the whole thing up and the whole CTL crew is chit chatting about their kids and nannies and angelo

[davell]

The Saints have a ton of good FA this year, including Brees. Aubrayo Franklin, Tracy Porter, Marques Colston and Carl Nicka are all FA as well. Nicks is pretty damn good, much better than any of the OT's avaialble. Is adding him enough to make the line average? I like Louis and Williams actually. In fact, I was a fan of Webb. At least until these last couple of weeks. Carimi certainly looks the part, but I like him better on the right side, where I think he can be elite, versus being averagish on the left. Where on the line do we add? Or does it matter? Louis could become a floater, I guess, if Nicks is added. Maybe draft a LT early as well, 1st or 2nd round. Putting Webb on the bench, in the process. Or do you hope that the more experience he gets, the better he'll be? At any rate, Nicks and a number 1 wideout can and should be handled in FA, in my opinion.

[rawaction]

I left work and came home, so didn't get to respond right away. But I think this is a miscommunication. I wasn't disputing that Cutler could throw. Hell, he probably has one of the top 3 arms in the NFL. I was talking about the offense's ability in the pass game in general. But the main issue seems to be that you guys are talking about getting better in the future, while I was talking about the 2011 team. I don't know where the miscommunication came in but do you guys really think I am that stupid to not think the Bears need to get better at passing the ball? Or that I think Cutler sucks at passing the ball? I think I have been posting here long enough that I would get the benefit of the doubt.

 

My point was that the current Bears (2011) version was better served taking advantage of their ability to run the ball (hence me citing Forte's ypc) rather than continuing to try to "keep up with the Breeses" and just throw the ball because of having a talented QB. I will agree like every sane person should that the Bears need to get better throwing the ball.....IN THE FUTURE. Everything this offseason should be done to make the passing game better. That's a no brainer. But nothing could have been done with the 2011 team to make them better at throwing the ball.

[jersey cubs fan]

I left work and came home, so didn't get to respond right away. But I think this is a miscommunication. I wasn't disputing that Cutler could throw. Hell, he probably has one of the top 3 arms in the NFL. I was talking about the offense's ability in the pass game in general. But the main issue seems to be that you guys are talking about getting better in the future, while I was talking about the 2011 team. I don't know where the miscommunication came in but do you guys really think I am that stupid to not think the Bears need to get better at passing the ball? Or that I think Cutler sucks at passing the ball? I think I have been posting here long enough that I would get the benefit of the doubt.

 

My point was that the current Bears (2011) version was better served taking advantage of their ability to run the ball (hence me citing Forte's ypc) rather than continuing to try to "keep up with the Breeses" and just throw the ball because of having a talented QB. I will agree like every sane person should that the Bears need to get better throwing the ball.....IN THE FUTURE. Everything this offseason should be done to make the passing game better. That's a no brainer. But nothing could have been done with the 2011 team to make them better at throwing the ball.

 

I think you are grossly underestimating how the passing game was progressing while Cutler was still in there, and how vital it was to winning the next few games and contending in the playoffs. Going conservative wouldn't have helped them.

[rawaction]

I left work and came home, so didn't get to respond right away. But I think this is a miscommunication. I wasn't disputing that Cutler could throw. Hell, he probably has one of the top 3 arms in the NFL. I was talking about the offense's ability in the pass game in general. But the main issue seems to be that you guys are talking about getting better in the future, while I was talking about the 2011 team. I don't know where the miscommunication came in but do you guys really think I am that stupid to not think the Bears need to get better at passing the ball? Or that I think Cutler sucks at passing the ball? I think I have been posting here long enough that I would get the benefit of the doubt.

 

My point was that the current Bears (2011) version was better served taking advantage of their ability to run the ball (hence me citing Forte's ypc) rather than continuing to try to "keep up with the Breeses" and just throw the ball because of having a talented QB. I will agree like every sane person should that the Bears need to get better throwing the ball.....IN THE FUTURE. Everything this offseason should be done to make the passing game better. That's a no brainer. But nothing could have been done with the 2011 team to make them better at throwing the ball.

 

I think you are grossly underestimating how the passing game was progressing while Cutler was still in there, and how vital it was to winning the next few games and contending in the playoffs. Going conservative wouldn't have helped them.

 

Then you aren't reading what I write. I specifically pointed out in this thread a couple times that the Bears were 9th in scoring and top 1/2 of the league in total yards when Cutler was healthy. And obviously, it was pretty clear the passing game was getting better. And I never said anything about being conservative. I said do what's best for the team. Best for the team was what they were doing. It wasn't to throw the ball more because everyone else is doing it. It was to keep with the run game because it was actually good, and better than the passing game. I never said they should run more. I never said they should throw less.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seemed to me that you were implying that the Bears should be in your words "pass happy". You even went as far as to imply that being 9th in rushing attempts was somehow a waste of Cutler's talent in his prime. The major disagreement I have is that being 9th in rushing attempts was what got the Bears to being a respectable offense when they were healthy. That wasn't a bad thing as you implied. It was necessary with the personnel on the roster. I agree it's nowhere near a long-term solution to the offense and the Bears need to get better at it in the offseason, but I didn't imply otherwise anywhere in this thread.

[jersey cubs fan]

Then you aren't reading what I write. I specifically pointed out in this thread a couple times that the Bears were 9th in scoring and top 1/2 of the league in total yards when Cutler was healthy. And obviously, it was pretty clear the passing game was getting better. And I never said anything about being conservative. I said do what's best for the team. Best for the team was what they were doing. It wasn't to throw the ball more because everyone else is doing it. It was to keep with the run game because it was actually good, and better than the passing game. I never said they should run more. I never said they should throw less.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seemed to me that you were implying that the Bears should be in your words "pass happy". You even went as far as to imply that being 9th in rushing attempts was somehow a waste of Cutler's talent in his prime. The major disagreement I have is that being 9th in rushing attempts was what got the Bears to being a respectable offense when they were healthy. That wasn't a bad thing as you implied. It was necessary with the personnel on the roster. I agree it's nowhere near a long-term solution to the offense and the Bears need to get better at it in the offseason, but I didn't imply otherwise anywhere in this thread.

 

I was replying to you and all the others ripping the Martz supposedly overly pass happy offense. I think you implied strongly you thought the Bears were passing way too much and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

[rawaction]

Then you aren't reading what I write. I specifically pointed out in this thread a couple times that the Bears were 9th in scoring and top 1/2 of the league in total yards when Cutler was healthy. And obviously, it was pretty clear the passing game was getting better. And I never said anything about being conservative. I said do what's best for the team. Best for the team was what they were doing. It wasn't to throw the ball more because everyone else is doing it. It was to keep with the run game because it was actually good, and better than the passing game. I never said they should run more. I never said they should throw less.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seemed to me that you were implying that the Bears should be in your words "pass happy". You even went as far as to imply that being 9th in rushing attempts was somehow a waste of Cutler's talent in his prime. The major disagreement I have is that being 9th in rushing attempts was what got the Bears to being a respectable offense when they were healthy. That wasn't a bad thing as you implied. It was necessary with the personnel on the roster. I agree it's nowhere near a long-term solution to the offense and the Bears need to get better at it in the offseason, but I didn't imply otherwise anywhere in this thread.

 

I was replying to you and all the others ripping the Martz supposedly overly pass happy offense. I think you implied strongly you thought the Bears were passing way too much and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

I never ripped Martz being pass happy. I ripped him for his playcalling and playcalling only. I know you won't re-read the thread because you don't want to be proven wrong, but I never once said Martz passed too much.

[jersey cubs fan]

Then you aren't reading what I write. I specifically pointed out in this thread a couple times that the Bears were 9th in scoring and top 1/2 of the league in total yards when Cutler was healthy. And obviously, it was pretty clear the passing game was getting better. And I never said anything about being conservative. I said do what's best for the team. Best for the team was what they were doing. It wasn't to throw the ball more because everyone else is doing it. It was to keep with the run game because it was actually good, and better than the passing game. I never said they should run more. I never said they should throw less.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seemed to me that you were implying that the Bears should be in your words "pass happy". You even went as far as to imply that being 9th in rushing attempts was somehow a waste of Cutler's talent in his prime. The major disagreement I have is that being 9th in rushing attempts was what got the Bears to being a respectable offense when they were healthy. That wasn't a bad thing as you implied. It was necessary with the personnel on the roster. I agree it's nowhere near a long-term solution to the offense and the Bears need to get better at it in the offseason, but I didn't imply otherwise anywhere in this thread.

 

I was replying to you and all the others ripping the Martz supposedly overly pass happy offense. I think you implied strongly you thought the Bears were passing way too much and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

I never ripped Martz being pass happy. I ripped him for his playcalling and playcalling only. I know you won't re-read the thread because you don't want to be proven wrong, but I never once said Martz passed too much.

 

I'm not sure how what you wrote wasn't in-line with what others were saying about not running enough, but if you say so, fine.

[rawaction]

Then you aren't reading what I write. I specifically pointed out in this thread a couple times that the Bears were 9th in scoring and top 1/2 of the league in total yards when Cutler was healthy. And obviously, it was pretty clear the passing game was getting better. And I never said anything about being conservative. I said do what's best for the team. Best for the team was what they were doing. It wasn't to throw the ball more because everyone else is doing it. It was to keep with the run game because it was actually good, and better than the passing game. I never said they should run more. I never said they should throw less.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seemed to me that you were implying that the Bears should be in your words "pass happy". You even went as far as to imply that being 9th in rushing attempts was somehow a waste of Cutler's talent in his prime. The major disagreement I have is that being 9th in rushing attempts was what got the Bears to being a respectable offense when they were healthy. That wasn't a bad thing as you implied. It was necessary with the personnel on the roster. I agree it's nowhere near a long-term solution to the offense and the Bears need to get better at it in the offseason, but I didn't imply otherwise anywhere in this thread.

 

I was replying to you and all the others ripping the Martz supposedly overly pass happy offense. I think you implied strongly you thought the Bears were passing way too much and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

I never ripped Martz being pass happy. I ripped him for his playcalling and playcalling only. I know you won't re-read the thread because you don't want to be proven wrong, but I never once said Martz passed too much.

 

I'm not sure how what you wrote wasn't in-line with what others were saying about not running enough, but if you say so, fine.

 

Nobody in this thread actually said anything about not running enough. I said people wanting to be pass happy are just as bad as people who want to run the ball more. How does that come close to say that the Bears are not running enough?

[jersey cubs fan]

Nobody in this thread actually said anything about not running enough. I said people wanting to be pass happy are just as bad as people who want to run the ball more. How does that come close to say that the Bears are not running enough?

 

That wasn't the only thing you wrote. But like I said, if you claim you weren't critical of Martz for calling too many passing plays, fine. It's a pointless discussion now.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Then you aren't reading what I write. I specifically pointed out in this thread a couple times that the Bears were 9th in scoring and top 1/2 of the league in total yards when Cutler was healthy. And obviously, it was pretty clear the passing game was getting better. And I never said anything about being conservative. I said do what's best for the team. Best for the team was what they were doing. It wasn't to throw the ball more because everyone else is doing it. It was to keep with the run game because it was actually good, and better than the passing game. I never said they should run more. I never said they should throw less.

 

Maybe I'm reading it wrong but it seemed to me that you were implying that the Bears should be in your words "pass happy". You even went as far as to imply that being 9th in rushing attempts was somehow a waste of Cutler's talent in his prime. The major disagreement I have is that being 9th in rushing attempts was what got the Bears to being a respectable offense when they were healthy. That wasn't a bad thing as you implied. It was necessary with the personnel on the roster. I agree it's nowhere near a long-term solution to the offense and the Bears need to get better at it in the offseason, but I didn't imply otherwise anywhere in this thread.

 

I was replying to you and all the others ripping the Martz supposedly overly pass happy offense. I think you implied strongly you thought the Bears were passing way too much and that just doesn't make any sense to me.

 

I never ripped Martz being pass happy. I ripped him for his playcalling and playcalling only. I know you won't re-read the thread because you don't want to be proven wrong, but I never once said Martz passed too much.

raw, I'm completely confused what point you are trying to make. if it was what the bears should have done in the last 6 games of the season, how the hell does that have anything to do with this offseason thread?

 

Resign Forte?

[davell]

I think our passing game was pretty simple honestly. Roll Cutler slightly outside, set, and watch him make throws no one else can. Which was the downfall of Hanie, a guy who just had nothing remotely close to Cutler's talent.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I think our passing game was pretty simple honestly. Roll Cutler slightly outside, set, and watch him make throws no one else can. Which was the downfall of Hanie, a guy who just had nothing remotely close to Cutler's talent.

I don't think that's accurate

[JonJayCutler]

Wow I didn't intend for my post to start a huge debate over offensive philosophy. The point I was trying to make is that the Bears were incapable of winning with Martz's style of offense simply because they lacked the WRs and protection to run it. The blessing from Cutler's injury comes by getting a new GM who fills the roster with better talent on the line and at WR, allowing for the Bears to succeed at passing at the level needed to be a championship contender. They proved in the early part of the last two seasons what happens when a team incapable of running a pass-first offense decides to do so. Running Forte was the absolute key to this offense's success, and to pretend otherwise is ignorance.

 

But with the right people around Cutler, the Bears can have a powerful passing game. If not on the level of the Saints and Packers, at least on the level of the 2008 Broncos when Cutler threw for 4,500 yards. It just clearly wasn't going to happen with Angelo, which was evident when he failed to sufficiently address both the OL and WR positions.

[Soul]

This is all very exciting, but I can't agree with keeping Lovie and thus forcing some kind of shoehorn operation to take place in hiring your GM.

 

If you're going to clean house, just clean [expletive] house. Lovie is not important or indispensible enough to warrant limiting potential organizational leadership candidates.