rawaction

Yeah, Fisher is at best a lateral move to Lovie. They both need to be accompanied by strong offensive minds and their value comes from working with the defense and relating to the players.

Spaeth has been in the league for 5 seasons and the most receptions he's had is 17. The ship has probably sailed when it comes to hoping he can be a solid receiver. Yeah, my post was more to point out Kellen's ability (still pretty young). But you're right, Spaeth ain't catching many passes.

Doubt that happens. Tice has said he sees him as a RT.

Way I see it. The Bears job is clearly the best available GM job. - Raiders need a change to the entire organizational culture. They have consistently been one of the most inconsistent and undisciplined team in the league. Oh and they have no draft picks to use anytime soon to improve the team. - The Rams have quietly been rumored to be an option for moving back to LA. They may or may not have a franchise QB. Bradford has missed most of 2 of the last 3 seasons due to injury (going back to OU). They have several holes on the team and need a new coaching staff. - The Colts are an interesting job, but does anyone really want to be the GM that screws up the Luck/Manning situation? Trade Manning and watch him win with another team would be damning. Keep both, sit Luck for a year and waste a bunch of money that could be spent on other positions is a bad idea waiting to happen. Trading the pick would bring a huge haul, but Luck could go somewhere and turn into what the Colts had with Manning. They also have several holes to fill, some very key FAs (Garcon, Wayne, Mathis) and not a lot of money to play with. - The Bears have money to play with. They do have some stability on the coaching staff. They have a franchise QB. A team that went to the NFCC game a year ago and was on their way to 10 wins with a healthy QB. Have a large market, 4 draft picks in the top 82, and a decent amount of money to play with next year.

Interesting article. I agree with the OL take. Webb is clearly the weak link as everyone else is serviceable. But there aren't a lot of options in free agency. On this list, http://nfltraderumors.co/2012-nfl-free-agents/, the only top 50 FA in this class that is an OT is 33 year old Kareem McKenzie. The rest of the FA class at OT is reclamation projects or injury prone players (Jared Gaither). And this isn't a great draft for LTs if you pick outside of the top 10. Even if you pick an OT at 19, it's going to be a 50/50 proposition if he's even more effective than Webb next year. As for the TE position, I know the GM is going to take the approach that you have to have a pass catching TE. But who says Spaeth and Davis can't be that? Spaeth caught 47 balls as a college SR. Kellen Davis is 6-7 and ran a 4.65 40 at the combine 4 years ago, and had a 16.0 ypc average as a SR at Michigan St. Kellen is a FA, but I don't see the need to overpay for Finley or Fred Davis just to have a dynamic TE when Davis/Spaeth aren't completely incapable of being solid receivers.

Would be perfect. I hate to get my hopes up, but the forcing the GM to keep Lovie leads me to believe McKenzie is the target.

This seems far more complicated than it has to be. It sounds like you want a future OC to come in and apprentice under Tice who will be running (but not calling plays) a dumbed down version of Martz's offense. I'd much rather just have a new OC come in and start bonding with Jay today. I want to start catering to his needs as well, and I think he needs his long-term, or at least potentially long-term, offensive coordinator brought in to the program today. He may not want a new offense this year, but one way or another he's going to get one because Mike Tice is not Mike Martz, or anything even close to him. As for his biggest motivator to stay, it's going to be money and hopefully the potential to continue a relationship with whoever the OC that is hired this year. Cutler's best chance of making the most money is to start winning ASAP with the Bears. They aren't going to allow him to get to free agency unless he sucks or gets hurt, and in that case, he's not making much money as a 31 year old. Keeping Tice around to sort of run the system that Martz ran is just delaying the inevitable, which is a new system being installed. Yeah, I guess I agree. I just want to make sure Jay's cool with everything. Doesn't seem like he's liked much of what's gone on with this organization since he's been in it.

Yeah that's how I feel. The only possible ways around this are either getting a guy with an offense Jay is familiar with or bringing in a guy at OC who is going to survive if Lovie is canned in the near future. At least the latter way wouldn't mean 4 of 5 years with a new offense. Or a guy who runs an offense that you can reasonably expect will be similar to the potential next guy. I see no reason to force Tice into the role. He's almost certainly not the best candidate available. And his background is more west coast offense than Martz. That situation just screams "self fulfilling prophecy of failure" to me. You have to go get a real OC who can run a real offense and potentially be connected at the hip to Jay for the next 6-8 years. Lovie has 2 years on his deal and if the Bears have any sort of decent season next year he's going to be around more than a season. He could easily get another extension before the next season ends. But the Bears screwed the pooch on this 3 years ago when they kept Turner around. They went for sloppy seconds on the same pooch when they hired 60+ year old Martz the following year. Honestly, I can see it both ways. I agree that Tice probably won't be very good at OC. But I guess I don't see him as more than just a figurehead....Bob Babich style from a few years ago. I'd like to think they'd bring in a QB coach as a playcaller. But the goal shouldn't be to hope Tice can be a serviceable OC. It should be to stabilize the position for the foreseeable future. But my concern is Jay and Jay only. At some point, the organization has to cater to him. I'm sure if a new OC comes in and he throws for 4500 yards next year, he'll be fine. But he has said he doesn't want another offense, he wants WR help, he wants OL help, he liked Olsen. The Bears haven't done anything he's wanted. What's motivating him to stay here after 2013 when his contract is up?

Yeah that's how I feel. The only possible ways around this are either getting a guy with an offense Jay is familiar with or bringing in a guy at OC who is going to survive if Lovie is canned in the near future. At least the latter way wouldn't mean 4 of 5 years with a new offense.

Yeah, I don't get to hear them much. But Funk is always a pretty big homer and was especially so last night. He was downright insulting the Hawks and Josh Smith. Things like "this is the Hawks team we know" and "Smith will do stupid stuff" comments are uncalled for. But I don't know why anyone could hate Stacey King. He's kinda awesome. He's basically a hype man. He's Flavor Flav.

Any scenario with the Steelers and Lions losing, I'm perfectly fine with.

D(coy)ROSE

Hahahahaha!

The Broncos have to score, too. Pick 6. Fumble return. Kick return, something.

I knew this run was coming, but I hate that it took so damn long and I had to sit thru an hour of boredom first.

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?

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.

If I was a betting man, I'd bet the Broncos to cover. 8 point dogs at home is insanity. Broncos D is overrated, but I think they stop the run game and they are good enough to not let the Steelers get big plays on them. When the Steelers can't get big plays they struggle offensively. They're not a Patriots team that's going to dink the ball down the field for 15 plays. Not saying the Broncos are going to win, but I think they keep it within 8 points.

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.

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.

That's a personel issue. So are we throwing it just to throw it or are we throwing it because we're good at it? That's my point. It's a passing league, but the Bears shouldn't be passing just because everyone else is. They suck at it, so they should run more because they were actually good at it.

Pass-happy is good. The Bears had the 9th most rushing attempts in the league. Missing out on another year of Cutler in his prime was no blessing. yes. it is a passing league, what is everyone's fixation with going back to the days of the wing-t? People that keep preaching "it's a passing league" are just as bad as the people who want to run the ball more. You do whatever works best. It's only a passing league if it works. The Bears were a good running team, why take that away? The Bears gave up a ton of sacks the last 2 years, why continue to try and pass? The Bears having the 9th most rushing attempts is a good thing when Forte was 6th in the league in yards per carry for RBs with over 150 carries (2nd for RBs over 200 carries). The Bears having the 9th most passing attempts would be bad if they got sacked once every 7 passes like last year. The Bears don't magically win or lose based on whether they run or pass the ball a certain number of times. no, but the teams that pass are the teams that win, regardless of what the bears do. Bears went 19-8 with a healthy Cutler the last 2 years and they weren't anywhere near pass happy. Teams that pass are teams that win only when they are actually good teams. Ask the Eagles.

Because their QB is the best player on the field. And the more you have him throw, the more likely it is for him to be off the field when you don't have him adequately protected from getting hit on most of those passes. Granted, throwing a ton works for Brees, Brady, and Rodgers who are the most talented players on the field, but they also have good protection.

Pass-happy is good. The Bears had the 9th most rushing attempts in the league. Missing out on another year of Cutler in his prime was no blessing. yes. it is a passing league, what is everyone's fixation with going back to the days of the wing-t? People that keep preaching "it's a passing league" are just as bad as the people who want to run the ball more. You do whatever works best. It's only a passing league if it works. The Bears were a good running team, why take that away? The Bears gave up a ton of sacks the last 2 years, why continue to try and pass? The Bears having the 9th most rushing attempts is a good thing when Forte was 6th in the league in yards per carry for RBs with over 150 carries (2nd for RBs over 200 carries). The Bears having the 9th most passing attempts would be bad if they got sacked once every 7 passes like last year. The Bears don't magically win or lose based on whether they run or pass the ball a certain number of times. Because the Bears being a good running team didn't translate into them being a good overall offense. If they can remain good on a per carry basis and improve the passing game they'll be in business. I don't expect them to go wide open like NE, GB, or NO but they obviously have to get wayyyy more productive in the passing game. They were a league average offense when healthy, there were top 10 in scoring also when healthy. They won't get more productive in the passing game by throwing more behind an inadequate OL and terrible WRs.

Why do people keep asking this question? Everybody in the NFL is one season away from potentially being fired. I'm sure the new guy will get a 2-3 year contract, depending on how in demand he is. The Bears job offers a lot of potential. It's one of only 32 OC positions in the NFL, and several of those are OC in name only, since the head coach is the real guy in control. Yes, everyone is 1 season away from being fired, but why go into a situation that looks like only 1 year is the most likely scenario. It's why Bates choose Seattle over the Bears. It's why other OCs weren't jumping at a chance to come here 2 years ago. The only way a new guy comes in, I believe, is if he has a legit shot at being a head coach in the very near future. AKA an experienced OC or a former HC.