Week 12: Bears (4-6) vs. LSB (2-8) Noon FOX/780

[Guest]

Can you imagine going 5-11 and having to pick in the 20s in the draft? LOL

 

I'm just hoping for the opposite of the 2010(?) Saints-Seahawks playoff gsme with New Orleans hosting this time.

[Guest]

Bob Avellini convicted with his 6th DUI.

 

Someone take that dudes car away already. Yikes.

[Banedon]

So, there's a lot of drama going on in Washington...enough that PFT has an article questioning whether Gruden might be out after only one year. How would you guys feel about him coaching the Bears if Trestman is out?

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/11/20/could-gruden-be-one-and-done-in-washington/

[jersey cubs fan]

So, there's a lot of drama going on in Washington...enough that PFT has an article questioning whether Gruden might be out after only one year. How would you guys feel about him coaching the Bears if Trestman is out?

 

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/11/20/could-gruden-be-one-and-done-in-washington/

 

Maybe he could be a good head coach, but he sure as hell wouldn't be atop my list.

[WrigleyField 22]

He'd be a good OC if we went with a non offensive minded HC hire.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rawaction]

I've thought a lot about this, but I think Trestman has to stay as the coach of this team. There's just too much fluctuation when teams change coaches, playbooks, and potentially QBs. And there is so much value in HC-or-OC/QB stability. Brady/Belichick, Payton/Brees, McCarthy/Rodgers, Manning/Manning. It helps having a great QB, but Brees showed what can happen without your coach that orchestrated most of your success.

 

I don't think the Bears are trading Cutler, so they are (for a lack of a better word) "stuck" with him. I think you stick with Trestman as the Bears are just 1 year removed from being a near offensive juggernaut, and Cutler is on pace to have his best year of his career, despite the turnovers being too high and points too low. I think you gotta stick with Cutler/Trestman combo and hope it all comes together next year (if it doesn't in the last 6 games) with a revamped defensive scheme.

 

Of course, this is the Bears so they will just promote Pasqualoni instead of hiring a legit D coordinator.

[jersey cubs fan]

Zach Zaidman ‏@ZachZaidman · 1m1 minute ago

Trestman: "Jay has the ability to put it anywhere he wants."

 

 

Kristin Cavallari @KristinCav

@ZachZaidman This is true.

[UMFan83]

Zach Zaidman ‏@ZachZaidman · 1m1 minute ago

Trestman: "Jay has the ability to put it anywhere he wants."

 

 

Kristin Cavallari @KristinCav

@ZachZaidman This is true.

 

I have a feeling that's not a real tweet

[Banedon]

John Clayton says that Cutler was almost benched before the Vikings game:

 

“He was on the verge of getting benched, I’m telling you this right now. They had a meeting of the minds last week. They wanted to make sure Jay was executing the plays on a more consistent basis instead of just standing back there and just throwing the ball they way that he wanted to, and so he executed the plays better. Had he not done that, you would have seen him on the bench.”

[UMFan83]

If that's true they might be on their way to getting rid of him after the year

[WrigleyField 22]

I've thought a lot about this, but I think Trestman has to stay as the coach of this team. There's just too much fluctuation when teams change coaches, playbooks, and potentially QBs. And there is so much value in HC-or-OC/QB stability. Brady/Belichick, Payton/Brees, McCarthy/Rodgers, Manning/Manning. It helps having a great QB, but Brees showed what can happen without your coach that orchestrated most of your success.

 

I don't think the Bears are trading Cutler, so they are (for a lack of a better word) "stuck" with him. I think you stick with Trestman as the Bears are just 1 year removed from being a near offensive juggernaut, and Cutler is on pace to have his best year of his career, despite the turnovers being too high and points too low. I think you gotta stick with Cutler/Trestman combo and hope it all comes together next year (if it doesn't in the last 6 games) with a revamped defensive scheme.

 

Of course, this is the Bears so they will just promote Pasqualoni instead of hiring a legit D coordinator.

I question how good a D coordinator we can even get. It's a risky proposition for a coach coming into what could be a one year job. You're likely taking a chance on someone with less than top notch credentials. Unlike the HC job which would probably be highly sought after, the DC job isn't as enticing, even relative to it obviously being a lesser position.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WrigleyField 22]

John Clayton says that Cutler was almost benched before the Vikings game:

 

“He was on the verge of getting benched, I’m telling you this right now. They had a meeting of the minds last week. They wanted to make sure Jay was executing the plays on a more consistent basis instead of just standing back there and just throwing the ball they way that he wanted to, and so he executed the plays better. Had he not done that, you would have seen him on the bench.”

Consider me skeptical. I guess it could be a send a message type thing, but it's not like Claussen is a potential future QB.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SpongeWorthy]

I've thought a lot about this, but I think Trestman has to stay as the coach of this team. There's just too much fluctuation when teams change coaches, playbooks, and potentially QBs. And there is so much value in HC-or-OC/QB stability. Brady/Belichick, Payton/Brees, McCarthy/Rodgers, Manning/Manning. It helps having a great QB, but Brees showed what can happen without your coach that orchestrated most of your success.

 

I don't think the Bears are trading Cutler, so they are (for a lack of a better word) "stuck" with him. I think you stick with Trestman as the Bears are just 1 year removed from being a near offensive juggernaut, and Cutler is on pace to have his best year of his career, despite the turnovers being too high and points too low. I think you gotta stick with Cutler/Trestman combo and hope it all comes together next year (if it doesn't in the last 6 games) with a revamped defensive scheme.

 

Of course, this is the Bears so they will just promote Pasqualoni instead of hiring a legit D coordinator.

The next bad loss and you'll sing a different tune

[WrigleyField 22]

Also how much weight does the argument hold when our first year with the new offense was pretty damn successful.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rawaction]

The next bad loss and you'll sing a different tune

 

Yep, that's me! An irrational flip-flopper. My 12 years posting on this message board has proven exactly this.

[jersey cubs fan]

Also how much weight does the argument hold when our first year with the new offense was pretty damn successful.

 

what argument?

[Guest]

Also how much weight does the argument hold when our first year with the new offense was pretty damn successful.

 

what argument?

 

i think the continuity with a coach as a prerequisite for being very good part

[jersey cubs fan]

I've thought a lot about this, but I think Trestman has to stay as the coach of this team. There's just too much fluctuation when teams change coaches, playbooks, and potentially QBs. And there is so much value in HC-or-OC/QB stability. Brady/Belichick, Payton/Brees, McCarthy/Rodgers, Manning/Manning. It helps having a great QB, but Brees showed what can happen without your coach that orchestrated most of your success.

 

I don't think the Bears are trading Cutler, so they are (for a lack of a better word) "stuck" with him. I think you stick with Trestman as the Bears are just 1 year removed from being a near offensive juggernaut, and Cutler is on pace to have his best year of his career, despite the turnovers being too high and points too low. I think you gotta stick with Cutler/Trestman combo and hope it all comes together next year (if it doesn't in the last 6 games) with a revamped defensive scheme.

 

Of course, this is the Bears so they will just promote Pasqualoni instead of hiring a legit D coordinator.

 

continuity with good coaches help, but Trestman is not a good coach and the staff is terrible.

 

I think Cutler's time is all but done here, Marshall isn't going to be around very long and there is no reason to keep Trestman for continuity purposes.

[WrigleyField 22]

Yes. If it's the right coach, being new won't matter. And you're already talking about flipping 2/3 of the phases anyways.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rawaction]

I've thought a lot about this, but I think Trestman has to stay as the coach of this team. There's just too much fluctuation when teams change coaches, playbooks, and potentially QBs. And there is so much value in HC-or-OC/QB stability. Brady/Belichick, Payton/Brees, McCarthy/Rodgers, Manning/Manning. It helps having a great QB, but Brees showed what can happen without your coach that orchestrated most of your success.

 

I don't think the Bears are trading Cutler, so they are (for a lack of a better word) "stuck" with him. I think you stick with Trestman as the Bears are just 1 year removed from being a near offensive juggernaut, and Cutler is on pace to have his best year of his career, despite the turnovers being too high and points too low. I think you gotta stick with Cutler/Trestman combo and hope it all comes together next year (if it doesn't in the last 6 games) with a revamped defensive scheme.

 

Of course, this is the Bears so they will just promote Pasqualoni instead of hiring a legit D coordinator.

I question how good a D coordinator we can even get. It's a risky proposition for a coach coming into what could be a one year job. You're likely taking a chance on someone with less than top notch credentials. Unlike the HC job which would probably be highly sought after, the DC job isn't as enticing, even relative to it obviously being a lesser position.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Yeah, that's an issue. But I'm proposing Trestman for the long-term, or at least as long as the Bears are "stuck" with Cutler, which is 2 more years at least to avoid cap hell, and if all goes well, obviously he and Trestman are here for the duration of Cutler's career.

 

I think the bigger issue is that Trestman has no ties to any prospective good DCs. DCs usually get hired by coaches they've coached with or known for years. Either that or they are promoted position coaches on the same team. Plus, because Trestman and Emery are older, I think they will be more apt to go after another older guy instead of a young up-and-comer.

 

I'm willing to give Trestman 1 more year because of last year's record breaking season and this year's stats which look good other than points. But if they are even thinking about getting rid of Cutler, then everybody probably needs to go then. I don't know why you keep Trestman and give him a lesser QB when he couldn't win with Cutler. I don't know why you keep Emery if he couldn't hire a coach to win games with his franchise QB.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, that's an issue. But I'm proposing Trestman for the long-term, or at least as long as the Bears are "stuck" with Cutler, which is 2 more years at least to avoid cap hell, and if all goes well, obviously he and Trestman are here for the duration of Cutler's career.

 

I think the bigger issue is that Trestman has no ties to any prospective good DCs. DCs usually get hired by coaches they've coached with or known for years. Either that or they are promoted position coaches on the same team. Plus, because Trestman and Emery are older, I think they will be more apt to go after another older guy instead of a young up-and-comer.

 

I'm willing to give Trestman 1 more year because of last year's record breaking season and this year's stats which look good other than points. But if they are even thinking about getting rid of Cutler, then everybody probably needs to go then. I don't know why you keep Trestman and give him a lesser QB when he couldn't win with Cutler. I don't know why you keep Emery if he couldn't hire a coach to win games with his franchise QB.

 

I wouldn't necessarily call Cutler "Emery's francise QB". Emery gave him an extension that was relatively team friendly but he inherited Cutler and I am pretty sure he would never go out and choose Cutler as his guy under different circumstances.

 

Personally I would just hire a real NFL GM, HC and staff, let them fart around with Cutler for a year as they get their roster set-up and look for their own QB. As soon as Cutler can be released in a financially viable manner. If you want to keep Trestman around to babysit on the way out the door you can, but that's just a waste of time in my opinion.

[Soul]

I know you are right, but I'm not very happy about it.

 

 

I'm definitely hoping Emery doesn't get the chance to choose another HC. If keeping Trestman another year or two accomplishes that then it's a silver lining.

[rawaction]

I've thought a lot about this, but I think Trestman has to stay as the coach of this team. There's just too much fluctuation when teams change coaches, playbooks, and potentially QBs. And there is so much value in HC-or-OC/QB stability. Brady/Belichick, Payton/Brees, McCarthy/Rodgers, Manning/Manning. It helps having a great QB, but Brees showed what can happen without your coach that orchestrated most of your success.

 

I don't think the Bears are trading Cutler, so they are (for a lack of a better word) "stuck" with him. I think you stick with Trestman as the Bears are just 1 year removed from being a near offensive juggernaut, and Cutler is on pace to have his best year of his career, despite the turnovers being too high and points too low. I think you gotta stick with Cutler/Trestman combo and hope it all comes together next year (if it doesn't in the last 6 games) with a revamped defensive scheme.

 

Of course, this is the Bears so they will just promote Pasqualoni instead of hiring a legit D coordinator.

 

continuity with good coaches help, but Trestman is not a good coach and the staff is terrible.

 

I think Cutler's time is all but done here, Marshall isn't going to be around very long and there is no reason to keep Trestman for continuity purposes.

 

Lovie wasn't a good coach either. He was just very good at what he did (defense). If Trestman can get the offense to play like it did last year and most of last week, then he has value.

 

For some non-elite QBs that have some OC/HC stability and some success, Eli Manning has 2 rings out of his stability, Romo/Garrett haven't won a bunch but have always had a great offense (and Garrett is a terrible coach), Dalton/Lewis, Big Ben/Tomlin.

 

I just think it's more likely to have success with the Trestman/Cutler combo in the forseeable future than it is to start all over again with a new coach and/or QB.

[jersey cubs fan]

Lovie wasn't a good coach either. He was just very good at what he did (defense). If Trestman can get the offense to play like it did last year and most of last week, then he has value.

 

For some non-elite QBs that have some OC/HC stability and some success, Eli Manning has 2 rings out of his stability, Romo/Garrett haven't won a bunch but have always had a great offense (and Garrett is a terrible coach), Dalton/Lewis, Big Ben/Tomlin.

 

I just think it's more likely to have success with the Trestman/Cutler combo in the forseeable future than it is to start all over again with a new coach and/or QB.

 

Lovie also got his players to play hard, something Trestman is incapable of doing. Trestman's offense took a big step back this year. It isn't comparable to Lovie's defense.

 

All you're doing is delaying the inevitable and praying for a miracle. If the cap situation is such that they have no choice to do it, whatever, but there is no point in pretending stability is the problem with the Bears.

 

 

They have a shaky at best GM running the team, an inept coaching staff, a terrible defense and their QB isn't anywhere good enough to make up for all the other weaknesses.

Edited November 20, 2014 by jersey cubs fan

[WrigleyField 22]

I can see the thought process. You're basically going to take a roll of the dice on a DC and STC and try and get Trestman to basically be a good OC again, when the alternative is a roll of the dice on a complete revamp. And if it doesn't work out, there probably isn't too much long term damage done and probably a cleaner break in regards to player personnel.

 

It definitely ties Emery to Trestman much more. If he fires Trestman this year he definitely gets to make another HC pick. It's a lot less likely if he goes ahead and the team doesn't get better.

 

I'm not going to be shocked or upset either way re: Trestman. No change to D or ST would be the real shocker.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk