Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 3 of 55 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 814

Thread: Lovie Smith

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    9,725
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by La_Biblioteca View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBears1127 View Post
    Frankly, you're wrong. If we were contenders every year like you said, we would have made the playoffs more than three times in his 8 year tenure. And I put a little blame on Angelo for this, but Lovie has not done much to help the offense either. Every OC he has hired has been a failure.
    By "contenders" I mean, we've had the ability to make the playoffs. In 07, we lost out due to like, everyone being hurt. In 09, Urlacher was hurt, and there were a lot of games we could have won. In 2011, Cutler gets hurt, if he doesn't we almost definitely make the playoffs, and now I feel like our team is gonna be good for a long time. Lovie has done his part in making our team successful. It's not his fault for injuries and so what I said is correct. Our worst record not including 2004 under him is 7-9. That's pretty darn good.

    As for his OCs, and them failing, it's not all the OC's fault that they had no talent outside of Cutler. Furthermore, we've been way more successful than most teams since his tenure. It's true, we've only made the playoffs a few times, but we could have been in SO many more times if a few things that went wrong hadn't. Lovie has given us the ABILITY to be contenders no matter what because his defenses have been so dominant.
    Lovie has been given excuses every single year we haven't made the playoffs and I'm getting sick and tired of hearing them. There are no excuses this year. Even with a poor o-line. Guess what? Green Bay won a SB with a poor o-line. The Bears offense was supposed to light it up this year, or at least be a pretty good offense, and we haven't seen that. We have the weapons to be a very good offense, but they are hindered due to an incompetent OC. Who hired that person? Lovie.

    And if our defense falters to the point where we don't win games because of Urlachers absence, how would you want to continue running this system? Urlacher is getting older and weaker every year so I'm pretty sure he'll continue to have these types of injuries.

    Anyways, I don't want to jump the gun because we're still in good shape to make the playoffs and go deep, but I won't be surprised to see the unfortunate become a reality again.

    Dumb and dumber

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    The Milkyway
    Posts
    11,627
    vCash
    1500
    It would be hard to argue keeping Lovie if we miss the playoffs. However, I don't think there is a better coach out there. Having injuries to key members of the football team will hurt any coach if they don't have the players on the roster to step up.

    While I believe that Lovie has done a lot of things right, I think some things he has gotten dead wrong. Never finding the right OC to compliment his defense. Never fixing the O line problem for the last 3 years. And not developing his offensive players.

    Having a strong OC with experience at the position could have helped in all of those areas if the OC had the same philosophy that Lovie does. A run first mentality that promotes having the edge in time of possession.

    Let's be honest, this is the first year in Lovie's time here that he has had some talent on offense. The problem is that his OC doesn't have any experience calling a game or very little experience. The same OC has not done a good job for what we first hired him for. The O line is still bad. If it wasn't for Jay's allusiveness, we would have given up even more sacks.

    Truth is we had at the beginning of the season on our roster on the O line, 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder. Not one of them will play the whole season at the position that they were drafted to play. That speaks to coaching and evaluating talent or the lack thereof. And the best player on the O line was a player drafted in the 5th round. There is a problem there. I believe that if the Bears would have had this lineup at the start of Training Camp and kept it through the season, we would have had a very good and solid O line. C. Williams/Rachal/Spencer/Louis/Carimi. Yes, they would have had some growing pains but they would have been fine. Tice would have had to change some of the scheme, but they would have been fine.

    Lovie's loyalty to Tice, who hasn't demonstrated that he is capable of doing his job, maybe his down fall.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    9,725
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jordan Rules View Post
    It would be hard to argue keeping Lovie if we miss the playoffs. However, I don't think there is a better coach out there. Having injuries to key members of the football team will hurt any coach if they don't have the players on the roster to step up.

    While I believe that Lovie has done a lot of things right, I think some things he has gotten dead wrong. Never finding the right OC to compliment his defense. Never fixing the O line problem for the last 3 years. And not developing his offensive players.

    Having a strong OC with experience at the position could have helped in all of those areas if the OC had the same philosophy that Lovie does. A run first mentality that promotes having the edge in time of possession.

    Let's be honest, this is the first year in Lovie's time here that he has had some talent on offense. The problem is that his OC doesn't have any experience calling a game or very little experience. The same OC has not done a good job for what we first hired him for. The O line is still bad. If it wasn't for Jay's allusiveness, we would have given up even more sacks.

    Truth is we had at the beginning of the season on our roster on the O line, 3 1st rounders and a 2nd rounder. Not one of them will play the whole season at the position that they were drafted to play. That speaks to coaching and evaluating talent or the lack thereof. And the best player on the O line was a player drafted in the 5th round. There is a problem there. I believe that if the Bears would have had this lineup at the start of Training Camp and kept it through the season, we would have had a very good and solid O line. C. Williams/Rachal/Spencer/Louis/Carimi. Yes, they would have had some growing pains but they would have been fine. Tice would have had to change some of the scheme, but they would have been fine.

    Lovie's loyalty to Tice, who hasn't demonstrated that he is capable of doing his job, maybe his down fall.
    Agree, especially with the last sentence. Lovie's stubbornness has only negatively impacted the team. Always made staffing decisions based on who he's worked with, and most of those guys did not work out.

    Dumb and dumber

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    71,413
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBears1127 View Post
    Agree, especially with the last sentence. Lovie's stubbornness has only negatively impacted the team. Always made staffing decisions based on who he's worked with, and most of those guys did not work out.
    Yup hot rod has been terrible for the defense and Martz didn't lead the offense filled with **** to a top 5 scoring offense or to the NFC championship while jay was healthy. Damn lovies coaching choices!

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    9,725
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub_StuckinSTL View Post
    Yup hot rod has been terrible for the defense and Martz didn't lead the offense filled with **** to a top 5 scoring offense or to the NFC championship while jay was healthy. Damn lovies coaching choices!
    I said most of the guys did not work. Lovie has done a good job with the defense obviously, but the offense has never been consistently good under his tenure. Mike Martz was not a good OC. We were all happy to see him leave because his offense destroyed Cutler, didn't let him audible, and he was too pass happy. He was better than Tice, but that's not saying much.

    Dumb and dumber

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    71,413
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBears1127 View Post
    I said most of the guys did not work. Lovie has done a good job with the defense obviously, but the offense has never been consistently good under his tenure. Mike Martz was not a good OC. We were all happy to see him leave because his offense destroyed Cutler, didn't let him audible, and he was too pass happy. He was better than Tice, but that's not saying much.
    Martz' offense was averaging 27 points a game last year before cutler went down. When he changed the game plan last year that o was ****ing great

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    21,997
    vCash
    1500
    The Bears were top 5 in scoring but the offense has never been. You gotta take out Hester's returns and the D scores.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    9,725
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub_StuckinSTL View Post
    Martz' offense was averaging 27 points a game last year before cutler went down. When he changed the game plan last year that o was ****ing great
    Yes, but looking back at that stretch, who did we beat? Detroit was the best team we beat in that stretch and they weren't that good of a team anyway. I want to see the Bears offense put up points on teams like GB, SF, Houston, etc, then I'll say I'm impressed with them.

    Dumb and dumber

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    71,413
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by WOwolfOL View Post
    The Bears were top 5 in scoring but the offense has never been. You gotta take out Hester's returns and the D scores.
    The d was not as opportunistic last year w scoring last year
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBears1127 View Post
    Yes, but looking back at that stretch, who did we beat? Detroit was the best team we beat in that stretch and they weren't that good of a team anyway. I want to see the Bears offense put up points on teams like GB, SF, Houston, etc, then I'll say I'm impressed with them.
    We beat atl det and Philly. All weren't that bad last year when we played them

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    9,725
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub_StuckinSTL View Post
    The d was not as opportunistic last year w scoring last year


    We beat atl det and Philly. All weren't that bad last year when we played them
    I'll give you ATL, but Philly? They were pretty average.

    Dumb and dumber

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    71,413
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by DaBears1127 View Post
    I'll give you ATL, but Philly? They were pretty average.
    Average? Maybe but they weren't bad at all and their oline was much better not to mention shady was shredding last year

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    21,997
    vCash
    1500
    Pretty sure we got 8-9 TD between D/ST last year

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    71,413
    vCash
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by WOwolfOL View Post
    Pretty sure we got 8-9 TD between D/ST last year
    6 through 11 weeks so while we were averaging 27.5 points a game for 302.5 points if you take away the 42 points on d and st scores that's 260.5 points and still averaging out to almost 24 points a game. That's good.

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    21,997
    vCash
    1500
    You got a short memory, C.

    http://www.pro-football-reference.co...s/chi/2011.htm

    And for some reason they don't have Urlacher's fumble rec TD against ATL

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Los Angeles County, CA
    Posts
    21,997
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Cub_StuckinSTL View Post
    6 through 11 weeks so while we were averaging 27.5 points a game for 302.5 points if you take away the 42 points on d and st scores that's 260.5 points and still averaging out to almost 24 points a game. That's good.
    It is but I don't think its top 5

Page 3 of 55 FirstFirst 123451353 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •