jersey cubs fan

I'm not sure why. I can't think of any offensive coaches who are more useless than the Colts' staff. Peyton Manning is their offensive coordinator. He was on the Tampa staff for years with Lovie, and has been in Indy for a while. That would explain the Bears interest. But you are right, it's nearly impossible to judge an Indy offensive coach because of their unique situation with Manning. At least one would hope he's learned from Peyton.

He chose to take an offer that he had instead of waiting on an offer he may never get. It just doesn't make any sense that people would be afraid to take the Bears position while taking other jobs that are just as, and in reality much more, unstable. Oakland's staff turns over every year. There are only 32 teams in this league. Guys aren't going to tell the Bears not to offer them jobs because the future is a little uncertain. Every single coaching job in the NFL is uncertain. Nobody is guaranteed anything other than their contract. People are fired from every team, every year, and sometimes before the year even begins. The Jets had, by all accounts, a hugely successful year compared to expectations, and they just had signifciant turnover. The Giants won the Super Bowl 2 years ago and canned a bunch of guys. Chicago and Lovie are taking their time. That is the issue. Guys are taking the first thing they are offered instead of waiting on an offer that they may never get.

That's a good question. Normally we try and tie in the cities involved for the menu. Obviously in this case you'd have to go all New Orleans, because Indy offers nothing. I need to get on that menu.

Not really. For that to be true he would have had to have 2 offers sitting on the table. Most of the time you will see teams give guys offers they can't refuse so as to persuade them not to go to the next interview. You will hear them say things like "don't let him get on the plane home". The fact that he agreed to coach Oakland before he even interviewed with the Bears says, A) Oakland was more aggressive in their pursuit, B) He jumped at the first concrete offer. It does not tell you he turned down an offer from the Bears or chose Oakland over the Bears. Chicago was no sure thing. An interview may not have led to an offer. These guys have to take what they can get sometimes, and jumping at the first good offer is commonplace. I know the media and many others will frame it as "spurning the Bears" but that is not at all accurate.

I believe this guy: If they want him, he should be able to talk this week. However, the asst head coach tag may make it tough to get permission.

You must be a Colts fan or something, because I don't recall ever thinking the Bears would win, nor do I remember hearing anyone pick the Bears. There weren't that many people picking the Bears. The Manning/Grossman "matchup" put a dent in most of those arguments.

It deflates the theory that everybody is spurning the Bears, but it indicates they weren't prepared for this search going in and were unable to identify good candidates.

Yeah...the deliberate pace is really hurting them. I think they'll end up falling back to Martz in the long run. He's been there all along, but I would have to think that at some point, he will become offended and no longer make himself available. There's nothing wrong with doing your due diligence, but you can't make the obvious candidate sit around and look silly for a month.

So prior to reading that he was bailing on the interview, I was conflicted about whether this guy was a good candidate. He's got OC experience, albeit not all that great. He's helped develop Flacco, but Baltimore runs a fairly conservative running style attack that won't help the Bears. It sounds like he accepted the Raiders position before talking to the Bears, which probably means Oakland offered him the job with the expectation that he not go on anymore interviews. If the Bears wanted this guy, their deliberate pace isn't helping things, but I'm not sure they really missed a great opportunity.

Why are you a Saints fan? I'm guessing the combination of their frenchiness, the fact that they went to europe, the sympathy factor with katrina and the fact that Indy is basically all that Europe hates about the US, big fat white people eating terribly bland food. Or maybe he just has money on them.

A 92-96 fastball that touches 97 seems to have some variation built in, no? What more of a range do you want? If he's throwing a fastball, changeup and curve, he's changing things up. And the guy had reliever written all over him from the start, so I'm not sure what the problem is.

So what makes you think Ernie is senile? The fact that he's happy, positive, and optimistic? I became a Cub fan in 1954 and Ernie was my favorite player throughout the years. His attitude and outlook hasn't changed in those 56 years, so I don't know what you're basing your comment about senility on. He certainly is an improvement over the sullen, greedy, media-hungry, drug crazed players of today. The fact that he's always walking around somewhere in his own damn world. Sure, he's a happy, positive guy. But he's also pretty far out in left field most of the time. Edit: Also, "Drug crazed players of today?" Really? With the hippin and a hopping and the bippin and a boppin.

The fact that a RH set-up man is priority number 1 is just beyond absurd. There's absolutely no need for another arm down there. They need a real starting pitcher.

He backed out: http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/01/hue-jackson-wont-interview-with-bears-after-all.html This is screwy. At this point, the only justification for taking so much time would be the intention of signing a coach who is in the super bowl. However, it is my understanding that those guys are available for interviews this week, and so if the Bears are going to sign one, we'd hear about it very soon. How do these names keep getting floated with absolutely no progress being made on any of them?

I don't think Ernie gets it. People are raving lunatics and wouldn't forgive him. If you are talking about just Cubs fans, then you will get some lunatics that will never forgive him, some lunatics that will freak out early and then get over it, some mildly annoyed that will eventually get over it, and some people that won't really care. I'd bet heavily on the 2nd category being the largest. As for the population as a whole, everybody already includes him in that group, so I'm not sure what sort of longterm negative there would be. In the short run people would freak, but that's about it.

http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2010/01/bears-talking-to-ravens-hue-jackson-for-offensive-coordinator-post.html Bears are set to interview Baltimore QB coach.

http://deadspin.com/5456548/a-video-treasury-of-brett-favres-season+ending-interceptions/gallery/

They didn't wipe the floor. Chicago was in it until the end. The yardage isn't that meaningful, since that was essentially what the Bears were designed to do, give up yards but not the big play. First, I didn't say they did. I said they came pretty close. And the Colts defense was designed the exact same way as the Bears, so I don't think that distinguishing on those grounds is terribly relevant. Indy may have been designed that way, but they weren't as good at implementing that design. The difference was Indy's offense was much better, but Chicago defense was also better and that was a game throughout.

The thing is, it's not that crazy at all to want to come to the Bears. Maybe not for Martz, but most coaches are steering clear of the Bears due to all of the uncertainty surrounding the team. You need supreme confidence in your abilities and the offensive personnel to take a job that requires performance right off the bat. I am not so sure about this "stearing clear" story. Everybody lists Bates on that list, which is silly considering all he did was accept the first job that was offered to him with his current boss, instead of waiting around to see where the Bears decided to go. And for some reason, the Packers coach's name keeps getting thrown into this story when he was denied the chance to speak with the Bears in the first place, let alone turn them down. At most, you can say this Chudzinski guy may have steared clear. However, considering he works for the brother of the guy who was just fired, and works with another guy Lovie fired, you can easily see where somebody might think they wouldn't want to work here for other reasons. And it's not even clear if they actually offered anybody the job yet. They seem to be taking their time and choosing to speak with lots of people. That's a good way to miss out on people who are going to be inclined to take what they can get, especially in an offseason with such little turnover in the coaching ranks.

They didn't wipe the floor. Chicago was in it until the end. The yardage isn't that meaningful, since that was essentially what the Bears were designed to do, give up yards but not the big play.

With Minny and New Orleans at the top, this point can be emphasized with the likely (for now) retirement of Brett Favre and the status of New Orleans the last two years. They were 7-9 and 8-8 before this season a nearly identical level of disappointment post 2006 as the Bears, with the difference of having an elite unit during that time. The Vikings are a team that could easily backslide. Chicago could go out and win 11 next year without being a huge surprise. But they do need to improve some things to do so.

They made it to the Super Bowl with poor coaching, I don't see why it's so difficult to imagine them having a better 2010 with Lovie around. And we don't even know who all the coaches will be yet.

The thing is, it's not that crazy at all to want to come to the Bears.

We're not looking at careers. They are playing the game this season. So yes, there are two killer QB's. I consider a guy to be a killer QB who set the NFL RECORD for completion % in a season this season and led the NFL in passer rating and TD's this season. I'll state that without a doubt I believe Manning is the best QB who ever played in the NFL. However, if you are talking about killer QB's right now, then Brees is in that discussion. There's still a difference in the QBs though.

Who are these idiots?