rangercal Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(knightni @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 12:53 AM) Reminds me of the year that the NL had to use Joe Girardi to start the All Star game. start? He didn't play Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knightni Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(rangercal @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 10:57 AM) start? He didn't play My bad. But he was take off of the golf course the day before to be on the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daa84 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 clark is a great run blocker, to give him some credit, but at teh same time, he isnt even near close to the top recieving TEs out tehre. This is a very very weak pick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 01:51 AM) Actually I've long said I thought Shoop would make a good coach. He wasn't near the s***ty offensive coordinator everyone made him out to be. Hell, his offense wasn't all that crappy when we got to the playoffs. It was conservative and took advantage of our very strong defense (which is sometimes what you want). You could make a case that with a good defense you don't want to get too agressive because you end up putting your defense in a tough spot, plus you don't give them proper rest. Shoop did have his flaws, but he's a very good mind and a hard worker and I know Jon Gruden is a big fan of his. I think the Raiders could do far worse (and have most of the time) than Shoop. I think he'll prove most Bear fans wrong. The flaw with his offenses were that we absolutely had s*** for talent. Its the truth. I will agree to this to an extent. But when he was with the Bears, he also had a hard time with being flexible in his game plan, and that bit us in the ass more times than I could count. Sure, the personel sucked, but there were plays he would run, specifically the 3 yard slant on a 3rd and long, that just made no sense whatsoever. When the Bears went to the playoffs, he was exposed for not being able to adjust. The Offense wasnt spectacular that year, but it wasnt as bad as the next two years. And the Eagles knew what Shoop was running before he was going to run it. I do think he will have some success doing something though, although I think the Raiders is biting off more than he can chew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted January 26, 2006 Author Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(Chisoxfn @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 12:51 AM) Actually I've long said I thought Shoop would make a good coach. He wasn't near the s***ty offensive coordinator everyone made him out to be. Hell, his offense wasn't all that crappy when we got to the playoffs. It was conservative and took advantage of our very strong defense (which is sometimes what you want). You could make a case that with a good defense you don't want to get too agressive because you end up putting your defense in a tough spot, plus you don't give them proper rest. Shoop did have his flaws, but he's a very good mind and a hard worker and I know Jon Gruden is a big fan of his. I think the Raiders could do far worse (and have most of the time) than Shoop. I think he'll prove most Bear fans wrong. The flaw with his offenses were that we absolutely had s*** for talent. Its the truth. Shoop is a run of the mill QB coach, and he never accomplished anything as a OC (talent or not). I don't see that deserving of a head coaching spot. And I would say a 3rd and 9 screen pass was a greater flaw than his talent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 01:19 PM) I will agree to this to an extent. But when he was with the Bears, he also had a hard time with being flexible in his game plan, and that bit us in the ass more times than I could count. Sure, the personel sucked, but there were plays he would run, specifically the 3 yard slant on a 3rd and long, that just made no sense whatsoever. When the Bears went to the playoffs, he was exposed for not being able to adjust. The Offense wasnt spectacular that year, but it wasnt as bad as the next two years. And the Eagles knew what Shoop was running before he was going to run it. I do think he will have some success doing something though, although I think the Raiders is biting off more than he can chew We also had like 3 quarters of Shane Matthews for cripes sake. He had his hands tied because Jauron was basically a lame duck coach in JA's mind and Shoop didn't get the QB he wanted (which was Plummer). Instead he got stuck with Slash. I agree Shoop had flaws, but he was a really smart mind and honestly I'm a fan of conservative offenses because I think it keeps you out of mistakes and thats what can lose you games. I realize it was vanilla, but the Steelers run a vanilla offense (aside from the trick plays) and it works well and really works well when you have a good defense and play in the cold. I know one thing, a lot of people thought we could do no worse than Shoop but Terry O Shea had his head so far up his ass it wasn't even close. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 (edited) I thought when it came down to it, Shoop and Shea had the same offense. And Shoop wanted Delhomme, not Plummer. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...bears-headlines Shoop was among the Bears assistants who wanted to sign quarterback Jake Delhomme instead of Kordell Stewart in 2003 to replace the injured Jim Miller. Shoop's quarterbacks for the final two Bears seasons included Miller, Stewart, Chris Chandler, Henry Burris, Cory Sauter and rookie Rex Grossman Edited January 26, 2006 by kyyle23 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 I wasnt a fan of both but Schoop > Shea....... I havent decided on Turner yet going to give him another season b4 i make judgement.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(kyyle23 @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 03:40 PM) I thought when it came down to it, Shoop and Shea had the same offense. And Shoop wanted Delhomme, not Plummer. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...bears-headlines Thats right. My fault. I remembered the guy ended up doing real well. But Shea's offense was completely different or at least was supposed to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 26, 2006 Share Posted January 26, 2006 QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 03:43 PM) I wasnt a fan of both but Schoop > Shea....... I havent decided on Turner yet going to give him another season b4 i make judgement.... Turner seems a little more agressive. Basically a more experienced Shoop, imo. I think Shoop with the right guy (ie Gruden) would have been great. He's got that experience now and he's got a bright mind. I know a few people around football and when I would bash them, they'd bring up how he's really respected around the league as an up and coming mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted January 27, 2006 Author Share Posted January 27, 2006 Hahahahahahaha, I knew it had to be a joke. LAKE FOREST, Ill. - Desmond Clark isn't going to the Pro Bowl after all. Two days after the Bears tight end was added as the NFC's "need player," the NFL acknowledged Friday that it had made an error in selecting Clark and announced that he would be replaced by Philadelphia Eagles long snapper Mike Bartrum. Bartrum was chosen as the need player by NFC coach John Fox of the Carolina Panthers. "Our office mistakenly informed Desmond Clark that he was selected to the NFC all-star team as the long snapper," said NFL spokesman Michael Signora. "He is actually the Bears' backup at the position." The confusion apparently resulted from the way the Pro Bowl voting is conducted. With no separate category on the ballot for long snappers, teams are asked to indicate which of their players can long snap. Each team must then vote for one of those players with either its first or second choice at a certain position. Every NFL player is listed on the ballot, but with no separate category for long snappers, the Bears' Patrick Mannelly must be grouped with the offensive tackles. That means the only way that Mannelly can be voted to the Pro Bowl is if a team chooses him over an elite tackle like the Rams' Orlando Pace or the Seahawks' Walter Jones. It appears that Clark, a third alternate at tight end, initially got the call because he was listed on the ballot as the only starter in the NFL capable of long-snapping. Bears coach Lovie Smith thinks that adding a category for long snappers will eliminate embarrassing situations like the one that occurred with Clark. "I think that's definitely something to consider," Smith said. "You're sending enough players over there to play a game and that's a big part of it. You have a punter and a kicker, so naturally you need a snapper too. And most teams have a snapper that doesn't do anything else." Six Bears players were voted to the Pro Bowl, but middle linebacker Brian Urlacher, center Olin Kreutz and safety Mike Brown will not play in the Feb. 12 game in Hawaii because of injuries. Defensive tackle Tommie Harris is slated to start for the NFC squad, while linebacker Lance Briggs and cornerback Nathan Vasher will be reserves. All three players are making their first appearance in the NFL's annual all-star game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Replaced by a long snapped. ahahahahaha.. how do you feel now Clark? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 thats kind of cold..... if u say a guy is going to the pro bowl u better damn let him go..... even if it was an error. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 Its not like Clark had any right to be anywhere near the Pro Bowl in the first place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted January 27, 2006 Share Posted January 27, 2006 QUOTE(Felix @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 11:41 PM) Its not like Clark had any right to be anywhere near the Pro Bowl in the first place oh no doubt he is far from deserving..... id make him like 9th alternate for the TE position =p..... but to tell a guy he is going and than 2 days later be like oh im sorry that was a mistake 2 bad u arent coming..... i think is wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.