Official 2010-11 NFL Thread

[MurcieOne]

Agreed. I've loved Lovie Smith as a football coach. Ever since his days with the Rams actually. The Bears' fanbase will never embrace him for being a players' coach. They have one image in their head when it comes to a football coach and that's Ditka. For some stupid reason, Lovie will never live up to that. I remember wanting Lovie to get hired as the Cowboys coach for a long time. I think he's probably the most underrated coach in the league behind Raheem and Reid.

 

I like Lovie Smith the man. I don't like Lovie Smith the football coach. I don't care that his personality is as interesting as wallpaper.

 

The issues that I have Lovie Smith come from odd personnel decisions, poor clock management, poor replay challenge decisions, stubbornness and the lack of development of our draft picks.

 

I guess my question is. . . what makes Lovie a good coach? What does he do (doesn't call plays)? What is his stamp on this team (takeaways?)? The only players that I feel have really developed under his tenure are Lance Briggs, Charles Tillman and maybe Daniel Manning. I know that Angelo is ultimately responsible for acquiring talent, but some blame for draft failures belongs on the coaching staff too (which Lovie is responsible for). Anyone remember Zachary Bowman? Lovie was on his jock all summer long and even named him the #1 CB during training camp. Bowman hasn't substantively played since being benched in favor of Tim Jennings week 3 against the Packers.

 

Again, what makes him a good coach? Does he influence the offense? I suppose its possible he told Martz to rein things in. Has he helped Dave Toub make the Bears a consistent force on special teams? I don't really know, nut it doesn't really seem like it. Does he help Rod Marinelli call the defense? Maybe, but it doesn't really appear that he does. I guess that leads me to: If he isn't calling plays, and he has trouble developing talent . . . then what is his stamp on this team?

 

If I had to argue on his behalf, I'd say that he is a good leader of men. The players seem to genuinely love him. They play hard for him. That is an admirable quality but a good coach should get his team to play hard regardless of their feelings for him. I'd rather have a head coach who was truly an expert at something. Like Rex Ryan on Defense (ignoring tonight), BB on Defense, or Andy Reid on the Offensive side. It follows that I do not believe that Lovie Smith is an expert on defense.

 

Still, if the Bears make the playoffs I believe he deserves to fulfill the final year of his contract regardless of the result. A playoff berth this year would be no small feat and earns Smith a chance to develop this offense under Martz (hoping that he stays) and add to this rag-tag defensive secondary. The Bears should not, however, rush into extending his contract. I still don't believe that this is an elite football team and this team needs to show that it can compete in all phases of the game.

 

/end diatribe.

 

 

 

[chw42]

I like Lovie Smith the man. I don't like Lovie Smith the football coach. I don't care that his personality is as interesting as wallpaper.

 

The issues that I have Lovie Smith come from odd personnel decisions, poor clock management, poor replay challenge decisions, stubbornness and the lack of development of our draft picks.

 

I guess my question is. . . what makes Lovie a good coach? What does he do (doesn't call plays)? What is his stamp on this team (takeaways?)? The only players that I feel have really developed under his tenure are Lance Briggs, Charles Tillman and maybe Daniel Manning. I know that Angelo is ultimately responsible for acquiring talent, but some blame for draft failures belongs on the coaching staff too (which Lovie is responsible for). Anyone remember Zachary Bowman? Lovie was on his jock all summer long and even named him the #1 CB during training camp. Bowman hasn't substantively played since being benched in favor of Tim Jennings week 3 against the Packers.

 

Again, what makes him a good coach? Does he influence the offense? I suppose its possible he told Martz to rein things in. Has he helped Dave Toub make the Bears a consistent force on special teams? I don't really know, nut it doesn't really seem like it. Does he help Rod Marinelli call the defense? Maybe, but it doesn't really appear that he does. I guess that leads me to: If he isn't calling plays, and he has trouble developing talent . . . then what is his stamp on this team?

 

If I had to argue on his behalf, I'd say that he is a good leader of men. The players seem to genuinely love him. They play hard for him. That is an admirable quality but a good coach should get his team to play hard regardless of their feelings for him. I'd rather have a head coach who was truly an expert at something. Like Rex Ryan on Defense (ignoring tonight), BB on Defense, or Andy Reid on the Offensive side. It follows that I do not believe that Lovie Smith is an expert on defense.

 

Still, if the Bears make the playoffs I believe he deserves to fulfill the final year of his contract regardless of the result. A playoff berth this year would be no small feat and earns Smith a chance to develop this offense under Martz (hoping that he stays) and add to this rag-tag defensive secondary. The Bears should not, however, rush into extending his contract. I still don't believe that this is an elite football team and this team needs to show that it can compete in all phases of the game.

 

/end diatribe.

 

+1.

 

[LittleHurt05]

The good news is that New England has to come to Chicago, while Green Bay still has to go to Foxboro. I don't see the Bears winning this Sunday, but I really don't think the Pack can leave Boston with a win either.

[Balta1701]

The good news is that New England has to come to Chicago, while Green Bay still has to go to Foxboro. I don't see the Bears winning this Sunday, but I really don't think the Pack can leave Boston with a win either.

Remember, no matter how good they looked last night, this Patriots team is the same one that lost to Cleveland, badly, a few weeks ago. They're on a short week, coming off an emotional, rivaly game, while frankly the Bears were probably looking ahead to this game.

 

I wonder if Urlacher still remembers that play 5 years ago where Brady made him look foolish as the ballcarrier. I remember it, so I bet he does.

[iamshack]

Remember, no matter how good they looked last night, this Patriots team is the same one that lost to Cleveland, badly, a few weeks ago. They're on a short week, coming off an emotional, rivaly game, while frankly the Bears were probably looking ahead to this game.

 

I wonder if Urlacher still remembers that play 5 years ago where Brady made him look foolish as the ballcarrier. I remember it, so I bet he does.

The Patriots are not going to overlook a 9-3 Bears team.

 

The Patriots can be beaten...but it's going to take an effort very similar to the one against the Eagles, perhaps better even, for it to happen.

 

Can't wait. Early line has New England -2.5.

[Balta1701]

The Patriots are not going to overlook a 9-3 Bears team.

 

The Patriots can be beaten...but it's going to take an effort very similar to the one against the Eagles, perhaps better even, for it to happen.

 

Can't wait. Early line has New England -2.5.

You're absolutely right.

[iamshack]

I like Lovie Smith the man. I don't like Lovie Smith the football coach. I don't care that his personality is as interesting as wallpaper.

 

The issues that I have Lovie Smith come from odd personnel decisions, poor clock management, poor replay challenge decisions, stubbornness and the lack of development of our draft picks.

 

I guess my question is. . . what makes Lovie a good coach? What does he do (doesn't call plays)? What is his stamp on this team (takeaways?)? The only players that I feel have really developed under his tenure are Lance Briggs, Charles Tillman and maybe Daniel Manning. I know that Angelo is ultimately responsible for acquiring talent, but some blame for draft failures belongs on the coaching staff too (which Lovie is responsible for). Anyone remember Zachary Bowman? Lovie was on his jock all summer long and even named him the #1 CB during training camp. Bowman hasn't substantively played since being benched in favor of Tim Jennings week 3 against the Packers.

 

Again, what makes him a good coach? Does he influence the offense? I suppose its possible he told Martz to rein things in. Has he helped Dave Toub make the Bears a consistent force on special teams? I don't really know, nut it doesn't really seem like it. Does he help Rod Marinelli call the defense? Maybe, but it doesn't really appear that he does. I guess that leads me to: If he isn't calling plays, and he has trouble developing talent . . . then what is his stamp on this team?

 

If I had to argue on his behalf, I'd say that he is a good leader of men. The players seem to genuinely love him. They play hard for him. That is an admirable quality but a good coach should get his team to play hard regardless of their feelings for him. I'd rather have a head coach who was truly an expert at something. Like Rex Ryan on Defense (ignoring tonight), BB on Defense, or Andy Reid on the Offensive side. It follows that I do not believe that Lovie Smith is an expert on defense.

 

Still, if the Bears make the playoffs I believe he deserves to fulfill the final year of his contract regardless of the result. A playoff berth this year would be no small feat and earns Smith a chance to develop this offense under Martz (hoping that he stays) and add to this rag-tag defensive secondary. The Bears should not, however, rush into extending his contract. I still don't believe that this is an elite football team and this team needs to show that it can compete in all phases of the game.

 

/end diatribe.

 

His "stamp" is clearly takeaways and scoring on the defensive side of the ball. The Bears lead the league in takeaways since Lovie arrived. I think that's pretty clearly the key of his defensive philosophy.

 

As for his strengths, I think he prepares the team well. I believe he creates good schemes, good game plans, whatever you want to call them. The Bears are also fairly consistent in regards to their motivation to play a game. They do not seem to be as subject to letdowns or overlooking opponents as much as some other teams do.

 

As for his weaknesses, he clearly has some in-game issues. He seems to be poor at clock management and challenges, as you said.

 

Overall though, I believe he has been the best Bears coach of my lifetime. Certainly better than Mike Ditka. More consistent than Dick Jauron. Obviously better than Wanne. Maybe it's not saying much, and maybe he's not Bill Bellichick or Mike Tomlin, but there's not a lot of head football coaches I would rather have than Lovie Smith.

 

[Balta1701]

His "stamp" is clearly takeaways and scoring on the defensive side of the ball. The Bears lead the league in takeaways since Lovie arrived. I think that's pretty clearly the key of his defensive philosophy.

 

As for his strengths, I think he prepares the team well. I believe he creates good schemes, good game plans, whatever you want to call them. The Bears are also fairly consistent in regards to their motivation to play a game. They do not seem to be as subject to letdowns or overlooking opponents as much as some other teams do.

 

As for his weaknesses, he clearly has some in-game issues. He seems to be poor at clock management and challenges, as you said.

 

Overall though, I believe he has been the best Bears coach of my lifetime. Certainly better than Mike Ditka. More consistent than Dick Jauron. Obviously better than Wanne. Maybe it's not saying much, and maybe he's not Bill Bellichick or Mike Tomlin, but there's not a lot of head football coaches I would rather have than Lovie Smith.

Well said Shack.

[LittleHurt05]

His "stamp" is clearly takeaways and scoring on the defensive side of the ball. The Bears lead the league in takeaways since Lovie arrived. I think that's pretty clearly the key of his defensive philosophy.

 

As for his strengths, I think he prepares the team well. I believe he creates good schemes, good game plans, whatever you want to call them. The Bears are also fairly consistent in regards to their motivation to play a game. They do not seem to be as subject to letdowns or overlooking opponents as much as some other teams do.

 

As for his weaknesses, he clearly has some in-game issues. He seems to be poor at clock management and challenges, as you said.

 

Overall though, I believe he has been the best Bears coach of my lifetime. Certainly better than Mike Ditka. More consistent than Dick Jauron. Obviously better than Wanne. Maybe it's not saying much, and maybe he's not Bill Bellichick or Mike Tomlin, but there's not a lot of head football coaches I would rather have than Lovie Smith.

 

Well said. His best strength is that this players all like to play for him, and they always show up ready to play and he has them ready. Sometimes that tends to be overlooked in a coach, but look at what happen in Dallas with Wade Phillips. Lovie is not gonna outcoach Bellicheck, but when he surrounds himself with great assisstants like he has this year, he doesn't have to worry about that as much.

[MexSoxFan#1]

Championship.

 

 

Fixed

[MurcieOne]

His "stamp" is clearly takeaways and scoring on the defensive side of the ball. The Bears lead the league in takeaways since Lovie arrived. I think that's pretty clearly the key of his defensive philosophy.

 

As for his strengths, I think he prepares the team well. I believe he creates good schemes, good game plans, whatever you want to call them. The Bears are also fairly consistent in regards to their motivation to play a game. They do not seem to be as subject to letdowns or overlooking opponents as much as some other teams do.

 

As for his weaknesses, he clearly has some in-game issues. He seems to be poor at clock management and challenges, as you said.

 

Overall though, I believe he has been the best Bears coach of my lifetime. Certainly better than Mike Ditka. More consistent than Dick Jauron. Obviously better than Wanne. Maybe it's not saying much, and maybe he's not Bill Bellichick or Mike Tomlin, but there's not a lot of head football coaches I would rather have than Lovie Smith.

 

Love Smith is certainly a better coach than Mike Ditka? I agree that Ditka's career has been inflated by his personality and Chicago's love for the meatball. But how is Lovie Smith CERTAINLY a better head coach than Mike Ditka? In reality, I think they two coaches are somewhat similar outside of their personalities. Both are stubborn and are at their best when surrounded by good assistant coaches (see Buddy Ryan). I'd say he's CERTAINLY better than Jauron but I don't know if I'd go so far with Ditka. This highlights the disturbing trend of sub-standard Bears head coaches hires. Wannestedt, Jauron, Lovie. All first time head coaches, all poor developers of talent.

 

I agree that Lovie's stamp on this team is takeaways. That's acceptable. Under Lovie the Bears have been an opportunistic team. I just don't know how much weight that carries.

 

Also, when you say he creates good schemes or game plans . . . I disagree with that. The Cover-2 is a fine scheme when you have appropriate personnel, but they didn't last year and he continued to run the same base C-2. Lovie was the signal caller last year and in back-to-back games the Bears were humiliated by teams who consistently torched them on quick slants over the middle. Additionally, when was the last time you watched a Bears game and said "Wow, the Bears really out game planned the other team?" The Bears probably have the worst blitz schemes in the league.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

His "stamp" is clearly takeaways and scoring on the defensive side of the ball. The Bears lead the league in takeaways since Lovie arrived. I think that's pretty clearly the key of his defensive philosophy.

 

As for his strengths, I think he prepares the team well. I believe he creates good schemes, good game plans, whatever you want to call them. The Bears are also fairly consistent in regards to their motivation to play a game. They do not seem to be as subject to letdowns or overlooking opponents as much as some other teams do.

 

As for his weaknesses, he clearly has some in-game issues. He seems to be poor at clock management and challenges, as you said.

 

Overall though, I believe he has been the best Bears coach of my lifetime. Certainly better than Mike Ditka. More consistent than Dick Jauron. Obviously better than Wanne. Maybe it's not saying much, and maybe he's not Bill Bellichick or Mike Tomlin, but there's not a lot of head football coaches I would rather have than Lovie Smith.

 

Well said, sometimes my own Lovie-hate gets out of proportion. I'd accept him staying around a few more years as long as him and Angelo aren't tied together. No one can make any excuses for him.

[HuskyCaucasian]

Albert Haynesworth suspended for the last 4 games by the Redskins

Defensive lineman Albert Haynesworth was suspended without pay by the Washington Redskins on Tuesday for the last four games of the regular season, capping a saga that began last offseason.

 

The Redskins said the move was made because of "conduct detrimental to the club."

 

The suspension comes after a long, difficult back-and-forth between Haynesworth, a two-time All-Pro with a $100 million contract, and first-year Washington coach Mike Shanahan, who won two Super Bowls with the Denver Broncos.

....

In the team's statement Tuesday, Shanahan said Haynesworth "repeatedly refused to cooperate with our coaching staff in a variety of ways over an extended period of time."

 

Shanahan also said Haynesworth "consistently indicated" to defensive coaches that he wouldn't play in certain defensive packages and refused to follow coaches' instructions in practice and during games.

 

Furthermore, according to Shanahan: "When Albert was at Redskin Park [on Monday], he told our general manager Bruce Allen that he would no longer speak with me. Although suspending any player is not a decision that a head coach enters into lightly, I believe the situation has reached the point where the club clearly has no alternative."

[Balta1701]

There's a lot of chatter that his "Illness" that cost him last week's game was a hangover.

[MurcieOne]

Albert Haynesworth suspended for the last 4 games by the Redskins

 

How's that $41 million dollars of guaranteed money looking right now? Oof. What an absolute circus of a situation between Haynesworth and Shanahan. Both sides look like total idiots.

[iamshack]

Love Smith is certainly a better coach than Mike Ditka? I agree that Ditka's career has been inflated by his personality and Chicago's love for the meatball. But how is Lovie Smith CERTAINLY a better head coach than Mike Ditka? In reality, I think they two coaches are somewhat similar outside of their personalities. Both are stubborn and are at their best when surrounded by good assistant coaches (see Buddy Ryan). I'd say he's CERTAINLY better than Jauron but I don't know if I'd go so far with Ditka. This highlights the disturbing trend of sub-standard Bears head coaches hires. Wannestedt, Jauron, Lovie. All first time head coaches, all poor developers of talent.

 

I agree that Lovie's stamp on this team is takeaways. That's acceptable. Under Lovie the Bears have been an opportunistic team. I just don't know how much weight that carries.

 

Also, when you say he creates good schemes or game plans . . . I disagree with that. The Cover-2 is a fine scheme when you have appropriate personnel, but they didn't last year and he continued to run the same base C-2. Lovie was the signal caller last year and in back-to-back games the Bears were humiliated by teams who consistently torched them on quick slants over the middle. Additionally, when was the last time you watched a Bears game and said "Wow, the Bears really out game planned the other team?" The Bears probably have the worst blitz schemes in the league.

Wow. I could not disagree with you more.

 

 

How about 9 days ago?

 

[MurcieOne]

Wow. I could not disagree with you more.

 

How about 9 days ago?

 

What was the gameplan? Get pressure on Vick with 4 pass rushers, make him throw underneath and tackle well? That is the same game plan every week and it is working this season because Peppers is a beast, Izzy is competent and the DT's are getting a modicum of penetration up the middle.

 

I am willing to admit that I am wrong if you can specifically remember anything to the contrary. But it certainly looked like the Bears playing the Bears Defense against the Eagles. Nothing special. No special blitzes. No special looks. Dick Lebeau, Jim Johnson, Gregg Williams Lovie Smith is not.

[iamshack]

What was the gameplan? Get pressure on Vick with 4 pass rushers, make him throw underneath and tackle well? That is the same game plan every week and it is working this season because Peppers is a beast, Izzy is competent and the DT's are getting a modicum of penetration up the middle.

 

I am willing to admit that I am wrong if you can specifically remember anything to the contrary. But it certainly looked like the Bears playing the Bears Defense against the Eagles. Nothing special. No special blitzes. No special looks. Dick Lebeau, Jim Johnson, Gregg Williams Lovie Smith is not.

You know what, I'll just pull out my game film that I have been breaking down all week long and diagram all of our blitz schemes for you. Are you kidding me? You seriously want me to describe to you our defensive game plan in detail?

 

I think it's actually a strength when your defense doesn't have to call a bunch of exotic blitzes because your base package can handle what that particular offense has decimated every other defense doing. And as for game planning, I am certain there were certain wrinkles put in to defend Vick and DeSean Jackson as well. The result of the game makes it pretty clear that they gameplanned the Eagles pretty well.

 

Is your only definition of a coach a guy that can dial up pressure with exotic blitz schemes?

 

Do you think Mike Ditka designed the 46 Defense?

[Chisoxfn]

Blitzes in general shouldn't be done a whole heck of a lot.

[MurcieOne]

You know what, I'll just pull out my game film that I have been breaking down all week long and diagram all of our blitz schemes for you. Are you kidding me? You seriously want me to describe to you our defensive game plan in detail?

 

I tried to make a point about Lovie's game planning ability and you countered it by pointing out a single game against the eagles. I was just hoping you could substantiate your position with something other than "look at the result." The Bears defense played great against Vick and I am thrilled that we won. I have no ill will against him, I just think the Bears can find a better head coach.

 

Lovie Smith will be the head coach of the Chicago Bears next year, unless they somehow lose their last 4 games. Even if they do I can see Angelo and Phillips rationalizing the circumstances and keeping him around. I don't really trust either of them to find a competent replacement anyway. So nevermind.

 

[iamshack]

I tried to make a point about Lovie's game planning ability and you countered it by pointing out a single game against the eagles. I was just hoping you could substantiate your position with something other than "look at the result." The Bears defense played great against Vick and I am thrilled that we won. I have no ill will against him, I just think the Bears can find a better head coach.

 

Lovie Smith will be the head coach of the Chicago Bears next year, unless they somehow lose their last 4 games. Even if they do I can see Angelo and Phillips rationalizing the circumstances and keeping him around. I don't really trust either of them to find a competent replacement anyway. So nevermind.

I can counter with plenty of games if I actually look, but I don't feel that is necessary. His win-loss record seenms to me as a pretty good indicator. The level of defenses he has built in his tenure here seem to contradict your point as well.

 

If you're going to argue that he's not a great coach, fine, but don't use Mike Ditka as your counterpoint. Give me a break.

[nitetrain8601]

His "stamp" is clearly takeaways and scoring on the defensive side of the ball. The Bears lead the league in takeaways since Lovie arrived. I think that's pretty clearly the key of his defensive philosophy.

 

As for his strengths, I think he prepares the team well. I believe he creates good schemes, good game plans, whatever you want to call them. The Bears are also fairly consistent in regards to their motivation to play a game. They do not seem to be as subject to letdowns or overlooking opponents as much as some other teams do.

 

As for his weaknesses, he clearly has some in-game issues. He seems to be poor at clock management and challenges, as you said.

 

Overall though, I believe he has been the best Bears coach of my lifetime. Certainly better than Mike Ditka. More consistent than Dick Jauron. Obviously better than Wanne. Maybe it's not saying much, and maybe he's not Bill Bellichick or Mike Tomlin, but there's not a lot of head football coaches I would rather have than Lovie Smith.

 

This + 100. Also Murcie, I don't understand how you say he's stubborn, then a few sentences later how he was willing to remove Zach Bowman from the lineup without hesitation and put in Jennings as the starter. I think you're clearly talking about the Rex situation in which the Bears had no better options. Noneeee.

[lostfan]

Huge game here coming up. Not so much in terms of the standings or being a do-or-die game, but in terms of the matchups against the Patriots. The Bears aren't New England, they don't blitz and gamble to let Brady burn them, they play mostly zone defenses. Hopefully Marinelli is ready to mix up the coverages a little. Brady will get his, he'll do the 7-12 yard gain thing and exploit the seams like every team tries to do (but better), so the D-line has to be on fire. If that doesn't happen we're f***ed, they can blitz but that comes with a price against this kind of offense. The s***ty turf should slow down Welker and Woodhead a little, but the Bears are a fast defense. They just have to tackle and keep the runners in front of them.

 

The last time the Bears played the Patriots 4 years ago it was an ugly game for both teams, and mostly ugly on the Bears' end because Grossman looked like s***. Obviously Cutler >>> Grossman.

[lostfan]

BTW I'm actually kinda disappointed that McDaniels got fired and didn't stay until next year, I was hoping we could've traded Webb for Clady and a first.

[Balta1701]

Huge game here coming up. Not so much in terms of the standings or being a do-or-die game, but in terms of the matchups against the Patriots. The Bears aren't New England, they don't blitz and gamble to let Brady burn them, they play mostly zone defenses. Hopefully Marinelli is ready to mix up the coverages a little. Brady will get his, he'll do the 7-12 yard gain thing and exploit the seams like every team tries to do (but better), so the D-line has to be on fire. If that doesn't happen we're f***ed, they can blitz but that comes with a price against this kind of offense. The s***ty turf should slow down Welker and Woodhead a little, but the Bears are a fast defense. They just have to tackle and keep the runners in front of them.

 

The last time the Bears played the Patriots 4 years ago it was an ugly game for both teams, and mostly ugly on the Bears' end because Grossman looked like s***. Obviously Cutler >>> Grossman.

If the Bears go into the Patriots game with the same game-plan, letting the opponent hit those 5-10 yard passes and stopping them there, they're going to get eaten alive. The Patriots have come out and said that's their game now without randy Moss; they hit those shorter passes and have become a run after the catch team. If they try to re-do the Packers game earlier this year, they'll get eaten for lunch.