I read a David Haugh article this weekend and was disappointed in his statement that what should matter most is stability, and that somehow Bates could not provide that while Martz could. His theory was apparently something about how Martz being a "known quantity" equates to stability. First off, the notion that what they need most is stability is wrong, stability has resulted in nothing but mediocrity and failure for three years, and they already have plenty of stability since the vast majority of the people in power with the Bears are still in power. This team isn't desperate for stability, they are desperate for new blood and change. I'm not a strong Martz advocate as I see him as somebody who would be pushed out the door with Lovie when the inevitable axe comes falling on all of them, and I see them having to go with another new system for Cutler. However, if they do go with Martz, it wouldn't necessarily mean they have to let him go with Lovie. Plenty of coaches have found a good deal of success in their 2nd stint after being viewed as a failure. Martz is "only" 58 and his record in STL matches up well with other 2nd chance guys like Coughlin, Belichick and Dungy. He could be sold as an experienced "name" head coach if he is Lovie's replacement, and if he is hired, I think I'd prefer he be given that chance, instead of starting over again with what would be a 28 year old Cutler. The goal with this hiring should be somebody who can be here longterm.