WrigleyField 22

Here's the current/active coaches with 9 wins/season and at least 50 wins, to give a sense of sustainable success: Defense: Belichick, Tomlin, Carroll, Rivera, Mike Smith Offense: Reid, McCarthy, Payton ST: John Harbaugh Just missed: Pagano (D), Zimmer, (D), Arians (O), Garrett (O), Caldwell (O), Jim Harbaugh (O) Your list presented in anotherway: Defense: Brady, Roethlisberger, Wilson, Newton, Ryan Offense: McNabb, Rodgers, Brees ST: Flacco Just Missed: Luck, Bridgewater/Bradford/Keenum, Warner/Palmer, Romo/Prescott, Stafford, Smith/Kaepernick So it's a QB list as much as a coaching list. I am asking myself now, who are the top QB's that aren't on this list? The 50 win threshold & active status eliminates quite a few: E. Manning, Rivers, Carr, Cousins I'm sure the credit goes to coaches and QBs both and in some cases other ways to build a team (elite running/defense teams), but we all know its a QB league. Nothing shocking there, but I think it's clear that Mitch needs someone doing a great job developing him, even if it's not necessarily the HC. So one interesting thing I did read about DeFillipo is that he's actually coming out of contract so Philly can't block him from leaving for a OC job. Granted, if he has any success, he probably ends up leaving for a HC job the next year a la Gase, but I did think it was an interesting wrinkle to the search process.

Not to be cynical or downplay Wilkes credentials, but I can't think of a widely talked about offensive coach who would have met the Rooney rule requirements (other than Shaw maybe, who isn't realistic IMO). So we were almost surely going to get a defensive coach interview with Wilkes or Austin or someone else if for no other reason than being the top minority candidates. Even the official recommended list was short on offensive minds among minority candidates. that was my first thought too but i felt like a jerk for thinking it Yea I know what you mean... On the plus side I've seen pretty much no Rooney rule speculation in the written media, so that's a positive in that journalists finally stopped noting that every minority candidate maybe is just a token interview (yes, the way I did). I feel like in the past, a minority candidate couldn't be mentioned without throwing in that nugget.

horsefeathers. That. Not to be cynical or downplay Wilkes credentials, but I can't think of a widely talked about offensive coach who would have met the Rooney rule requirements (other than Shaw maybe, who isn't realistic IMO). So we were almost surely going to get a defensive coach interview with Wilkes or Austin or someone else if for no other reason than being the top minority candidates. Even the official recommended list was short on offensive minds among minority candidates.

Granted, it was under an offensive HC, but his work in Philly looks pretty good too.

I mean aren't these interviews typically all day affairs if they go well? If McCaskey is there, he could be there for the first hour and last hour and be "present" while having little to no influence on anything important. Phillips can be present an extra hour on top of that, mostly to talk about the team facility renovations.

I'd be worried about a coach who didn't believe they could coach up Trubisky. Not that he is some sure thing, but I want a guy who can adapt to his talent too and not get so narrowed in on a singular QB talent. I'd be worried about Fangino, honestly. Its setting up like a Ryan/Ditka situation. The Defense is good, is there anyway we keep Vic with a new offensive HC? Probably not and that's okay.

I'd be worried about a coach who didn't believe they could coach up Trubisky. Not that he is some sure thing, but I want a guy who can adapt to his talent too and not get so narrowed in on a singular QB talent.

Is Fox fired yet?

Depends where others fall, but they lose most tiebreaker, so 9 is probably a good guess.

Pffft, Bulls are pulling way past 8 seed.

I don't think that's meatbally. Talent still trumps, but culture matters.

FO isn't going anywhere regardless.

We knew Pace was going nowhere, so this was the best case to make sure the best coaching candidates wouldn't be turned off by a potential lame duck GM. So that's a 3 year GM extension and 5 year HC contract?

If I were a Bears fan I think Landry would be the guy I’d want the most in FA i'd like an outside guy too Going to have to draft + sign a guy since no fringe guy emerged this year.

Do any contenders have a mid first rounder cuz he's not waiving his no trade for a bottom fringe playoff team.

Ya, no chance Eagles would let him take an OC interview anyways. Hes a QB coach, i doubt the Iggles could block a move up. That being said, he and Pace would be one of the youngest GM/HC combos in the league They 100% can block him from any non HC job, coordinator or otherwise. The only way they couldn't would be if his contract was up.

HC Ya, no chance Eagles would let him take an OC interview anyways.

By the way, its not in respect to the rest of the league. Its the 10% you mentioned. Plus, the pairing up of guys. Plus, the rep that may or may not actually be a factor. Just don't see us pulling the elite. And grabbing the Boozer type isn't going to do anything but put us back where we were. We ARE in a position to try and grab an RFA though. Haven't looked closely at who all is there, but structuring a deal for one of them could be interesting. Canela or Hood maybe? Not sure who else is out there, other than Jabari. But there's not anything inherently special about that 10%. One of those is already back to being nothing, another very well be back to not being special soon, and the other was already the best regular season team ever before attracting an elite FA. You are special until you aren't and vice versa.

Is Jimi a Niko autocorrect? Because none of those other guys is really driving these wins. I mean at best they are ensuring really bad players don't see the floor, but I'm not entirely convinced some of those bad players wouldn't look better on this current iteration of the team. Niko is kind of the big question though. You either don't think he factors into future plans at all and want to try and salvage the tank, or figure this was kind of the potential that was always there and he either fits in a future rotation or at worst is more attractive as a trade piece for a star than as a trade piece in a dump. yeah, i'm really conflicted with the niko thing. he's not THIS (23 PER) good but it would be really annoying if this is a true breakout and we're shipping him off. If he can be ~18 per player, him + expiring Rolo seems like a decent start to any consolidation trade package. If he somehow is a 20 per player, he finally reached his potential. If he's still a 14 per player, I'm not sure the lost opportunity cost ends up being that dramatic (mainly because we may start losing again then).

Is Jimi a Niko autocorrect? Because none of those other guys is really driving these wins. I mean at best they are ensuring really bad players don't see the floor, but I'm not entirely convinced some of those bad players wouldn't look better on this current iteration of the team. Niko is kind of the big question though. You either don't think he factors into future plans at all and want to try and salvage the tank, or figure this was kind of the potential that was always there and he either fits in a future rotation or at worst is more attractive as a trade piece for a star than as a trade piece in a dump.

I'm okay accepting the fact that the Bulls won't get an elite FA in the sense that only 10% of the league's teams have attracted a turly elite FA in the past 10 years, so the odds are just naturally small, but whatever that next teir of teams is, the Bulls are there in FA and they'll have money. The biggest hangup will be their own standards probably (i.e. I could totally see them passing on Cousins for dumb reasons) Any line of argument which starts at the Bulls just naturally starting at some big disadvantage in FA with respect to the rest of the league is wrong and dumb.

Its horsefeathering weird. I have been pro tank, wanting to trade Jimmy, tank for a few years..... First site of being potentially average and its kind of an unexpected fun. I DO want one of the elite guys at the top of the draft. But, there's a part of me that stupidly thinks Lauri and Dunn can both develop into All Stars and we find a FA that actually would sign in Chicago..... Gun to my head, I hope we trade Niko soon. But, I'm not thinking that it'll happen, because he needs to produce for another 15-20 games before I'd think a team could conceivably give up a mid to late 1st for him. In typical Bulls fashion, they're not even tanking right. But, it is kind of fun, even if its going to hurt longterm probably. A lot of tanking teams were just left with a bare cupboard. Maybe the Bulls cupboard wasn't as bare as they thought. I'm not even that high on him, but you failed to mention Lavine too. Even Niko, although older since he came into the league at 22, is still just a 4th year player. Even if they could somehow go back to sucking, it's clear this team isn't primed for a Philly or mid-aughts OKC type multi year tank. So the Bulls just have to let the chips fall where they will, even if it means winning games with their young guys. The key is they will have to find that FA prize, and within a couple years find also that magical consolidation trade. If those two things don't happen, then be prepared to blow up a perennial 4-5 seed type 04-05 Bulls team before locking in a bunch of nice role players and fringy all stars into bloated contracts.

When most of your roster have less than 4 years experience.... ya :dontknow:

It's way too soon to say that. Just like it’s too early to say Trubisky was the right pick Kind of, but not the same, imo.

Ive been saying it: Trubisky was the right pick I missed this earlier but Watson plus the draft picks used to move up is looking like the better move than trading up to get Trubisky. It's way too soon to say that.