Jump to content
North Side Baseball

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    19,041

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by WrigleyField 22

  1. WrigleyField 22
    I don't care his reasoning, resting him is a good idea. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  2. WrigleyField 22
    Lovie was a consistent winner, and he was not a dud personality. He was a strong personality where it mattered, with his players. The problem was simply he did not win enough due to offensive blind spots. Yes. Getting to the SB in Chicago seemed to give him too much power, or Angelo was week and let go of too much power. I actually like Lovie as a HC a lot, Trestman as an OC under him? Could that work? It would have worked and it almost did, but fell apart and we ended up with Terry Shea for Lovies first season. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  3. WrigleyField 22
    Because if you're saying that Urlacher wouldn't have been a good player without Lovie I find that ludicrous. It's just a logistical thing. Coaches have better stuff to do than policing small locker room stuff so he empowers certain players to maintain leadership at that level so and steps in if they don't do it well. Thus the coach can focus on bigger things. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  4. WrigleyField 22
    Just to be clear here Soldier: Player::General:Coach, right? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  5. WrigleyField 22
    Kreutz was terrible and the team was a complete joke for half his time on the roster. There's always a need for leadership and Briggs was also a horrible option for that role. Urlacher filled that role and was a star impact player who made a difference. Kreutz was a freaking center, one of the least important jobs on the starting offense. His leadership was based on being a dick and didn't make anybody any better. He was the face of the offense when the team couldn't play offense. All this. Agreed. Kreutz was a lunatic who did nothing except start [expletive] likely to get himself off. Urlacher I'll give some credit to, but I think a lot more goes to Lovie. I think coaches who can actually manage their players has the most impact as opposed to some monster player-leader creature. I think the coach creates the structure that allows his best/most respected players to take on some of the locker room leadership. Sure, but that still comes back to the coach being the more important component. Precisely, it all comes back to the coach. He is the general and the Urlachers are the platoon leaders. They still gotta be good soldiers. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  6. WrigleyField 22
    Kreutz was terrible and the team was a complete joke for half his time on the roster. There's always a need for leadership and Briggs was also a horrible option for that role. Urlacher filled that role and was a star impact player who made a difference. Kreutz was a freaking center, one of the least important jobs on the starting offense. His leadership was based on being a dick and didn't make anybody any better. He was the face of the offense when the team couldn't play offense. All this. Agreed. Kreutz was a lunatic who did nothing except start [expletive] likely to get himself off. Urlacher I'll give some credit to, but I think a lot more goes to Lovie. I think coaches who can actually manage their players has the most impact as opposed to some monster player-leader creature. I think the coach creates the structure that allows his best/most respected players to take on some of the locker room leadership. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  7. WrigleyField 22
    Kreutz was terrible and the team was a complete joke for half his time on the roster. There's always a need for leadership and Briggs was also a horrible option for that role. Urlacher filled that role and was a star impact player who made a difference. Kreutz was a freaking center, one of the least important jobs on the starting offense. His leadership was based on being a dick and didn't make anybody any better. He was the face of the offense when the team couldn't play offense. All this. Mainly I guess I just want someone who makes sure we don't do 3 different coverage schemes on a given play. A S or MLB who sees the whole field. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  8. WrigleyField 22
    Once we realized other offenses aren't punting anymore we had no use for Holmes anyways. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  9. WrigleyField 22
    Hypothetical land- Trestman had to improve all three phases for me to even think about retaining him. Kromer (with 5 games as interim) could improve the offense and get the other two phases to just try a little harder and I'd consider retaining him. Until any of that happens tough the hypothetical land is steered towards complete coaching overhaul. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  10. WrigleyField 22
    2-4 I really don't know what he has done to show he's the guy for the job. OC in name only of a poorly run offense. He was fairly well regarded before Chicago and has worked under good Head Coaches. He supposedly is the OC but it's hard to know how much he actually does. To be plausible it first would require a dramatic turnaround if he became interim and he seems to me the most likely candidate to become interim if Trestman was canned mid season. There doesn't seem to be a great track record of interims who secured a long term role (Frazier, Singletary, Garrett the three that pop in my mind). Just thinking about what it would take for a same offense/new defense scenario and while Trestman has to do a lot more to make a case, Kroner could make a good case just by improving the offense since he doesn't have all of Trestman's current negatives. The offense hasn't been good enough for me to bother thinking of ways to try to keep it stable. Sure, if they fired Trestman tomorrow and everything magically worked the way it was supposed to, then I'd entertain the idea of bringing back Kromer. But you would still have a very poor overall coaching staff and need major changes. I don't have interest either at this point but since Trestman/Rex was brought up, I thought this was a more palatable version if something like that happened (given the pre-reqs outlined) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  11. WrigleyField 22
    2-4 I really don't know what he has done to show he's the guy for the job. OC in name only of a poorly run offense. He was fairly well regarded before Chicago and has worked under good Head Coaches. He supposedly is the OC but it's hard to know how much he actually does. To be plausible it first would require a dramatic turnaround if he became interim and he seems to me the most likely candidate to become interim if Trestman was canned mid season. There doesn't seem to be a great track record of interims who secured a long term role (Frazier, Singletary, Garrett the three that pop in my mind). Just thinking about what it would take for a same offense/new defense scenario and while Trestman has to do a lot more to make a case, Kroner could make a good case just by improving the offense since he doesn't have all of Trestman's current negatives. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  12. WrigleyField 22
    It's a scenario that works in theory. But well past the point of practicality, even if the offense turns it around the next 7 games. An interesting scenario is this- Trestman gets canned within the next two weeks and Kromer takes over as interim HC and the offense looks better in the last 5 weeks and Kromer does well with the locker room. Do you give Kromer the chance full time with his own DC hire (Rex if you like). I can't recall how Kromer did as interim of NO that one year, but that's kind of why I bring him up in this hypothetical. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  13. WrigleyField 22
    Like another dumpoff to Forte? Maybe? Seems like there should be TE dump offs or something else when one guy clears out two deep. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  14. WrigleyField 22
    I also would love to watch coaches tape and find out if all these bombs to Jeffery in double coverage is the best throw because it seems like something else should be open. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  15. WrigleyField 22
    Probably. I think the problem with Cutler is not the turnovers that people understandably freak out about, but the fact that he isn't making plays. He's been "fine", but this team is so bad they need him to be super beast to win. To me it just seems like he used to have a to of picks on really risky throws that I could live with because they had high reward. The high reward stuff has like vanished and it's like he's gotten worse protecting the ball in the pocket (re: fumbles) Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  16. WrigleyField 22
    Nobody should be surprised by this. Annoyed? I guess. But surprised? No. Yep. Few NFL teams make changes midseason (this isn't the hitting coach on a disappointing baseball team) and the Bears (at least to me) seem to be even more conservative than most franchises. I don't get the idea that few teams make changes midseason. Is there some sort of list proving this to be the case? Seems to me at least one or two teams fire their head coach during the season every year, and that doesn't even take into account coordinator or position coach changes. I think the article I read last night said 22 in the past 15 years or something. Almost all of these happen very early in like after a 0-4 start or very late with the interim getting 3-4 games. Bears are one of 5 teams never to fire a HC mid-season. Not sure about coordinators. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  17. WrigleyField 22
    He's almost certainly going to be our best option for at least two more years after this one. Which is why if this new mediocrity is permanent, we are so probably screwed. You can win with current Jay Cutler as your QB, but you need to be really good everywhere else, and we're nowhere close to that. Is his mediocrity permanent or the last three weeks? If the last three weeks are permanent, well yea [expletive]. I'm still projecting him as higher than that though, even though he'll almost certainly have some games like it. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  18. WrigleyField 22
    It would seem odd for no chatter this morning if so but maybe Emery or higher just handed down a decision Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  19. WrigleyField 22
    Yeah, it's really looking more and more like a missed opportunity. He'll still be likely our best option for a couple years. Maybe if you don't love anyone at the top of this draft you can trade down and get some additional depth which allows you to get a developmental QB. Or keep the whole gang around for a tank job and a top pick for a QB in 2016. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  20. WrigleyField 22
    So if that's the case who's our Cedric Benson? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  21. WrigleyField 22
    Let's just play straight cover one with Mundy in the box all day if AP is back. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  22. WrigleyField 22
    Meet/meat is a great mixup especially going the other way. I saw a "meet pizza" on a menu in Europe. Hello pizza, pleasure to meet you. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  23. WrigleyField 22
    Careful with that, you might break your leg. Let them kick each other. Win win Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  24. WrigleyField 22
    Not so fast my friend. Teddy Bridgewater is probably poised for a huge breakout game. If AP plays the Vikings will score 30+. I don't even care about the possible top three pick I just want to get to 7 or 8 losses sooner so we can just kick guys like Briggs to the curb and go all youth movement. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  25. WrigleyField 22
    It's the lack of a competent QB on the other team. Any competent QB can hang 40 on these guys. The exception to that was Matt Ryan, who probably would have done the same if all his receivers weren't dropping passes. Miami had an average QB, but they also had an elite defense. Minnesota has a crappy QB situation and while their defense isn't bad, they aren't as good as Miami. Manuel looked pretty good too though. Still a high risk they give up many scores, though if they could manage to actually all play the same coverage every play maybe they hold them to 21 and we lose 21-20. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
×
×
  • Create New...