Here is the basic stat line for the Jets on Saturday:

12-15. (80%)  182 Yards.  I TD.  No INT's.  171 yards rushing on 41 carries (4.17 average).

Compare that to the shootout in Arizona between the Cards and the Packers. There' no doubt that it's great to be able to pass the ball effectively in the NFL.  Ron Jaworski continually cries out:  "Points are scored in the passing game in the NFL, not in the running game."

He's right.

Still the Jets had the top rated defense and the top rated rushing attack in the NFL last season.

Just like the '85 Bears had.

Here are the stat lines for the two playoff games and Super Bowl in 1985:

Giant game:  11-21. (48%)  216 Yards.  2 TD's.  No INT's.  147 yards rushing on 44 carries (3.34 Average)

Ram Game:  16-25. (64%)  164 Yards.  1 TD.  No INT's.  91 Yards rushing on 33 carries (2.76 Average).

Super Bowl:  12-24.  (50%)  256 Yards.   0 TD's.  No INT's.  167 Yards rushing on 49 carries (3.40 Average).

A couple of observations between the Jets game and the '85 Bears playoff run:

Average number of passes thrown:  21.  Average number of rushing attempts:  42

Twice as many rushes than passes.

NO Interceptions.

The '85 Bears led the NFC in scoring that season.  They did that by playing great defense, running the ball extremely well and by making timely plays in the passing game.

Jim McMahon played in the original West Coast Offense at BYU and holds more passing records than any other QB in NCAA history.  There's little doubt in my mind that if he played in a passing system (like in SF, SD or Miami) that he could've put up huge numbers in the NFL.

He didn't.  He played for the Bears.  In a cold city for a Neanderthal HC.  For a team who was noted for great defense and running the ball.  That said, you still have to make big plays in the passing game to win in the NFL.

And in that area Jim McMahon excelled.  He might not've thrown the most passes.  He did, however, make the most out of the passes he threw.

After the Super Bowl in 1985, Don Shula (who was no friend of the Bears, Mike Ditka and especially Buddy Ryan) said that Jim McMahon played about as great a game at the QB position in the Super Bowl as he'd ever seen. (McMahon had two rushing TD's in that game and also had a 60 yard bomb to Willie Gault that was inches away from being a 90 + yard long TD).

The Jets and Mark Sanchez played a great game Saturday, on the road in Cincinnati, where the Bears got shellacked earlier in the season.

Great defense, a dependable running attack and timely passing can still take a team a long away in even today's NFL.

And the best part is that the three aren't mutually exclusive.  A team can have all three components working at the same time together, without one interferring with the other.

A balanced attack can take a team a long ways in the NFL, even a team with a rookie HC and QB like they have in NY.

Kurt Warner put on a clinic yesterday.  More TD's (5) than incompletions (4).

Great QB play in the NFL is actually very simple.  It involves three things:

1.  Leadership.  There are two men on the field in the NFL that must be leaders for the team to succeed.  The HC & the QB.   Most (not all, but most) winning (SB) teams have both a HC and QB that have no shortage of leadership skills.

2.  Decision Making.  Here a guy like Kurt Warner excells.  Last season, on their way to the SB, a few Arizona Cardinals came out publicly in the Arizona Republic and stated the biggest difference between having Warner under center and having Matt Leinart under center.  They stated that Warner is "Better and quicker at spotting the open receiver.  They weren't being critical of Leinart.  They weren't stabbing him in the back.  They were just stating the facts.

And that's what Warner does.  He drops back, makes his reads and gets rids of the ball ASAP.  He makes his O-Line look much better by doing that, than by hanging on to the ball too long.

3.  Accuracy:  The ability to put the ball almost exactly where you want it to go.

And that's it.  One intangible (Leadership) and two 'tangibles' (Accuracy and Decision Making).

All the other stuff (Height, weight, running ability, arm strength) mean very little without the three criteria listed above.

Jay Cutler is as big and strong as any QB in the NFL.  He has an arm that's second to none. 

That said, Cutler's tenure with the Bears in the NFL will be defined largely on these three things:  Leadership, Accuracy and Decision Making.

The NY Jets defense was ranked #18 last season under Eric Mangini (based on points allowed).  In comes Rex Ryan with his new system and the Jets are now #1 (8th in rushing, 1st in passing).

The Packers defense was ranked #22 last season.  In comes Dom Capers who scraps their 4-3 and implements his 3-4 and watches the Packers defense rise to #7 (1st in rushing, 5th in passing).

How come both teams made dramatic improvements in one single offseason with new schemes while we went from #16 to #22 with the same scheme? (And of course both teams are in the playoffs while we AGAIN sit by the big screen).

Our Chicago Bears once unleashed the greatest defense in NFL history under DC Buddy Ryan.

How come  we have to watch his son coordinate the most confusing and highest blitzing defense for the Jets
while we stay with a scheme that allows the offense to dictate to us, instead of our defense dictating to their offense?

How come four of those 1985 Bears (Jeff Fisher, Mike Singletary, Ron Rivera and Leslie Frazier) coach for OTHER teams and not us?

The history of OUR Chicago Bears is written with physical, punishing defense.  Even when the team sucked the Bears were known for kicking ass and punishing the other teams offense.  No teams wanted to play the Bears back in the day.  They might (probably) would win, but boy would they pay a steep price for that victory.  (Gamblers long ago learned to bet against teams that played the Bears the week before.  They were usually too beat-up to win the following week).

How come we have long ago lost (for the most part) that reputation?

Dick Butkus played on crappy Bear teams.  He is a perfect symbol of the Bears once-punishing defense in a losing cause.

Guys like Mike Singletary, Dan Hampton and Richard Dent played on the greatest defense/team in NFL history.  They are some of the symbols of ass-kicking defense on a dominating team.

What legacy have the McCaskey's left us in the past quarter century when it comes the great tradition of 'Bear Defense?'

Just wondering. 

(And just for the record I don't hate the McCaskeys. I DESPISE those people.  They should be allowed to own a Dairy Queen or a Subway shop.  But certainly not OUR Chicago Bears)!

and makes one of the dumbest comments I've ever seen:

Defensive end Adewale Ogunleye said he is confident Smith and his staff can get the Chicago Bears back to the Super Bowl

"In this league, any coach can do it," Ogunleye said, adding that a coach needs a little bit of luck and the right guys playing well. "At the end of the day, it comes on us as the players. We just weren't consistent enough," Ogunleye said.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=4796337

Really Wale???

Any coach can do it.  So there's really no difference than a Jim Zorn and a Bill Belichick?  If so, then why did the Redskins just cut loose Zorn for Shanahan?

Wale says a coach needs a little luck.  I agree.  A little luck goes a long way in any profession.  Few injuries would be an example of this in the NFL.  A lucky bounce here and there.

He then says that a coach needs the right guys playing well.  Umm, ya think QUALITY coaching has anything to do with that Wally?  I sure do.

Great coaches help make good players excellent.  And excellent players players great.  And great players HOF'ers.

Adewale doesn't seem to understand basic logic.  He apparently doesn't understand that players drafted by teams like the Patriots and Indianapolis, for example, have fewer misses than many other teams.

Does he think that they are geniuses at picking players?  Perhaps.  But the coaching they get afterwards has a LOT to do with that equation too. An awful lot.

Does anyone doubt that the exact same drafted defensive player would have a better chance of succeeding if coached by Bill Belichick, as opposed to a Lovie Smith?  Not me.  Maybe just a slightly better chance.  But a better chance nonetheless IMO.

Does anyone think that Joe Montana would be considered one of the all-time greats if he had Pep Hamilton as his QB coach and Ron Turner as his OC, instead of the great Bill Walsh?  Please.

Virtually every 85 Bear was elevated to some degree playing under coaches like Mike & Buddy.

It's almost hard for me to believe that he made this comment.  I almost expect nonsense from Bear management and Lovie.  But now the players?  (Perhaps there's something in the water or air ducts at Halas Hall)

ANY coach can do it?  Incredible.

Here's why:

McDaniels announced Friday he's benching Marshall, his Pro Bowl wide receiver, for the team's pivotal season finale against Kansas City on Sunday.

"Our word for the week has been accountability. And we're looking to put the 45 guys on the field on Sunday that want to play together, want to help us try to win and qualify for the playoffs," McDaniels said. "... And anybody that showed any indifference to that, we'll play without them.

McDaniels's contol over his highly paid players is similar to the way Mike Singletary lowered the hammer on underachieving TE Vernon Davis last season in Singletary's FIRST game as an interim HC in the NFL (talk about laying a foundation and sending a message)!.  Davis is now having a Pro-Bowl caliber season under Mike Singletary in 2009 and was named a team captain before the season started.

Singletary took over a .327 team from Mike Nolan and has them around 500 in his first year +.

Also:

The 49ers' average margin of defeat has gone from 14.9 points in 2007 to 11.4 in 2008 to 8.7 this season. Discard the 35-point loss to Atlanta on Oct. 11, and the average margin of defeat this year drops to 4.3.

2007 was all Mike Nolan.  2008 was 50-50 Nolan and singletary.  2009 was all Mike Singletary.

He took the exact same players Mike Nolan had and made a HUGE improvement on the defense.

All of this renders this comment from Tony Dungy as STUPID:

"The question I always ask people when they talk about making coaching changes or GM changes is, 'Who are you going to get better?' " Dungy said. "Are you going to improve the situation, and are you just making the change because you feel like you need to change something? And there aren't a lot of people out there better than Lovie Smith and Jerry Angelo. So if they do make a change, I would say good luck in finding that next person."

 

There aren't a lot of people better than Lovie Smith, Tony?   Are you f'ing serious?  Hell, I just named TWO I'd rather have commanding the troops in Chicago.  And there are more like that working as assistants.

I hereby nominate this sentence from Dungy (And there aren't a lot of people out there better than Lovie Smith) as the first official STUPID statement of the new year!

Congratulations Mr. Dungy!

There seems to be some confusion regarding Jay Cutler's audible to DA to end Monday nights game against the Vikings.  Ron Turner called a running play and Cutler audibled to a pass.  Some saw that as Cutler saying "Screw this . . . I'm going for it all."

That's not what happened here.  Cutler himself said he simply called an audible from a running play to a passing play, based on his look at the blitzing defense.  This is almost standard procedure in the NFL.

As Mike McCarthy said regarding Aaron Rodgers:

McCarthy became sold on giving his quarterback the option to run a play in an opposite direction or change it from a run to a pass after watching defenses become more sophisticated. Rodgers has full authority to change certain plays, but he is expected to act as an extension of the head coach.

"The run-pass thing, everyone's doing it," McCarthy said of an audible or a so-called "check-with-me" system. "It's not, are you doing it, it's how you're doing it. Everybody does it differently. Sean Payton does a good job of it in New Orleans. Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, they have a lot on their plate and they're able to do it and do it at a high level.

As I stated elsewhere, if Cutler didn't have that authority or option this season, that would help explain a lot of the problems on offense.

BTW:  Jim McMahon and Mike Ditka used to get into blow ups all the time.  McMahon had the freedom to audible but that wasn't the biggest problem between the two.  Oftentimes McMahon would change the play in the huddle, before he got a look at the defense.

RT Keith VanHorne:  "Certainly there were some explosions on the sidelines.  He'd send the play in and McMahon would say 'Screw that, we're not running that we're gonna run this.  And it would work.'

McMahon:  "He (Ditka) wanted to be in charge of things and at times it wasn't the right way I thought."

That wasn't defiance (contrary to the Punky QB's image).  That was a QB who had a better understanding of what was happening on the field at that time than the coaches.

We can only hope that Cutler one day becomes that proficient at the mental part of the QB position.   Having the strongest arm in the game is great.  Knowing what to do with it is even better.

Your Chicago Bears met the Indianapolis Colts in the Super Bowl after the 2006 season.

The Bears lost.  No shame in that.  One team always has to lose that game.  It doesn't mean they suck.  It's just the way it is.

Since then, however?   The Colts are 39-7!  (The Bears?  21-25).

How can that be?  The Colts are 32 games OVER 500 since then.  The Bears 4 games UNDER 500 since then.

Let the HouseCleaning begin, my friends.

(Unfortunatley) when people defend Lovie/JA as taking us to the SB in 2006, they obviously don't understand that, in NFL terms, that was light years ago.  Dinosaur years.

What happened three years ago really doesn't matter anymore.  Since then, teams like the Colts have prospered and teams like the Bears have severely underachieved.

Again, let the HouseCleaning begin (on January 4th, 2010)!

BTW:  If the McCaskey's bring back either JA and/or Lovie in 2010, this tells us ONE of TWO things:

1.  Either these are the STUPIDIST owners in NFL history.

or 

2.  The McCaskey's think that Bear fans are the STUPIDIST fans in NFL history.

It's either one or the other here (or, I guess, quite possibly both)  But it's certainly not 'None of the Above.'

There are two types of owners in professional sports.

1.  Those that want to win it all.

2.  Those that desperately want to win it all (and will do everything humanly possible to make that happen).

No knowledgeable person would deny that George Steinbrenner was the latter.  To him, anything short of winning the World Series was a failure, no matter how many games the Yankees might've won or how much money they might've made.

To him, success or failure was defined by this:   "Did then Yankess win it all, or did they not?" (This, by the way, is good news for long suffering Cub fans.  Tom Ricketts and his family are fans first (unlike the Tribune Corporation) and will almost certainly do all they can to finally make the Cubs WS Champions.  They might fail or end up being lousy owners, but few will doubt their sincerity or intentions).

In the NFL, owners such as Dan Snyder, Jerry Jones and Robert Kraft were fans first and do all (and spend all) they can to win.  With regards to guys like Jones and Snyder, I take serious issue with many of their decisions, but I never doubt their desire to win.

There's an old saying in the NFL regarding players: "Everyone wants to win.  Not every has the will to prepare to win."  Nobody goes out on the field to lose, but not everybody has the desire of, say, a Larry Fitzgerald, who this past offseason personally flew in and housed NFL WR greats like Jerry Rice & Cris Carter to help him and some of his WR breathern to getter better as WR's.

Not every player has the desire to work their asses of in the offseason, like say a Walter Payton or a Jerry Rice.

With regards to the McCaskeys, not every owner has the will to:

A)  Hire the right HC for the job, not just nice (politically correct) guys like Wanny, Dick and Lovie.

B)  Swallow contracts when they desperately need to be swallowed (as in the case of right now).

C)  In short, make the TOUGH decisions to bring the Lombardi Trophy back to Chicago, not just the 'fiscally prudent' decisions that they will argue for (poor us, we only have a team that is worth a BILLION + dollars)!.

There is NO doubt in my mind that the average Bear fan (here and elsewhere) suffers MORE than the current owners, GM, coaches and players when it comes to losing football.  Most Bear fans have a sicker feeling in their stomachs after a loss than does the organization (IMO)

For those people (unfortunately) it's 'just business.'  For most of us, however, it's a life-long passion!

And that's the sad reality here.

Someone here at WCG defended the McCaskey's as 'not being the worst owners in sports.'

I could not agree MORE!  They aren't close to being the worst owners in sports.  Not by a long shot.

They just don't (however) have the WILL to make the tough decisions and to do the right things to put the Chicago Bears back where they belong . . . roaming the NFL landscape as the Monsters of Midway as they were in 1985 and before.

That's the sad reality . . . and it SUCKS!

for us . . . that we HATED to lose.

That is one of the greatest comments ever heard by me from a player about his head coach..

Who said it?  Michael Irvin once said that about his former head coach Jimmy Johnson.

After an especially tough defeat to the Redskins in Washington, JJ went ballistic on the plane ride home.

He heard some laughter in the back and felt that at least one of his players wasn't taking the loss nearly as hard as he was.  JJ started throwing a tantrum on the plane, getting in the faces of several players, including his favorite son, Michael Irvin.

Thus Irvin's comment that "Jimmy made losing so uncomfortable for us that we didn't do it often."

Did JJ go crazy like that after every loss? Probably not.  But I'm pretty sure he was even extra miserable to be around after most losses.

Those that think that a head coach's role is all about scheme (and little about things like motivation) really don't understand the role of the head coach in the NFL.

The head coach MUST set the tone for his team.

Lovie's tone is almost robotic.  His tone has no sense of urgency at all.  It says "Hey, we'll be alright.  There's still a lot of football left to be played."

Guys like Jimmy Johnson (and Mike Ditka) have a tone that exudes passion and energy and 'Ass Kicking the Opponent.'  A tone that says (during a rough patch) "WE can and WILL turn this around ASAP."

A tone that makes it really uncomfortable to be around their head coach when they are losing.

Players take their cue from their head coach.  It may be the 'cerebral' cue from guys like a Bill Walsh or a Billl Belichick.  Or the Neanderthal cue from guys like Parcells, Ditka and JJ.

Or it may be neither, in the case of Lovie's boys.

What a collective waste of talent this team is.

The fact Lovie's job status is still in debate (and not a foregone conclusion) speaks volumes about this organization.

If the McCaskey’s really liked and cared about Lovie Smith (and I believe that they do) they would do the only humane thing possible January 4th, 2010:

They’d FIRE his ASS!  

Why?

Actually it’s quite simple:

A) Lovie has lost this team.

B) In the past 30 years. 94% of the head coaches who have won the Super Bowl did it in five years or less. Next season will be Lovie’s seventh in the Windy City. I just don’t see Lovie as a 6%’er. If (and that’s a big IF concerning the McCaskeys) the goal is to win the Super Bowl, Lovie is bucking some major odds here.

C) The Bears would be doing Lovie a BIG, BIG favor by canning him.

Tell him "Lovie, here’s a check for 11 million. Take a much needed break from the pressure. Take the wife and kids to Disneyland. Travel the world. Go golfing. Maybe do some TV. Do whatever you want. Get off the treadmill and relax. You deserve it."

You’ve been a loyal soldier. Now take some time off and recharge your batteries.

D) The Bears, right now and for the immediate future are clearly only the 3rd best team in their division. Brett Favre is coming back next year. So too the hated Packers. Thank God for Detroit (but they’re not too far behind us at this point - actually where are closer to the Lions regarding wins and losses than we are to either GB or Minnesota).

In summary, Lovie will be the lamest of lame ducks next season and he’ll be looking up at two teams in his division. Add to that equation the fact that the Bears are without both their 1st and 2nd round draft choices next year and the sad reality is this: It would almost take a miracle for Lovie and his staff to challenge Minnesota and GB for the NFC North next season.

If you really cared about Lovie you would NOT (I repeat NOT) put him through this next season.  2010 is almost certainly a disaster waiting to happen under these circumstances.

And if/when they fall short early on, things are gonna get REAL ugly around Halas Hall and throught Chicagoland and beyond.

BTW: All this talk about what a great head coach/ general manager Mike Holmgren was with the Seattle Seahawks?

Not really. He was 86-74 in his ten seasons there (nothing wrong with that). However (and fortunately for Holmgren) he was in a division with three teams (St. Louis, Arizona and SF) who struggled mightily for most of that decade (the Rams since 2003, the 49ers since 2002 and the Cardinals all the way up until 2008).

Lovie and the Bears don’t have that luxury. The Vikings and Packers are both quality teams who aren’t going away anytime soon (sad to say). It’s time to ‘retool’ in Chicago. It’s time to put Lovie out of his misery and start over. In today’s NFL, the right head coach/staff, coupled with some intelligent free agent signings and draft picks are all that is needed to turn things around pretty quickly.

That time is just around the corner (January 4th, 2010)!

After all, it's really just the humane thing to do here.

 

 

1. All 32 NFL teams split all TV revenue equally. It doesn’t matter who plays on Prime Time games. It doesn’t matter if you are in NY or Chicago (large TV markets) or in KC, GB, or Pittsburgh (small TV markets).

All TV revenue is split evenly amongst the teams. Supposedly this TV money is enough to cover the salary cap. That means, that before one ticket (or one hotdog, beer, jersey or parking pass) is sold, all NFL teams have already made enough money to cover their largest cost (player salaries).

2. Attendance revenue is split 60-40. That means that (after some home team expenses are deducted) the home team takes 60% of the gate while the visiting team takes 40%.

Not all stadiums are the same size. And most (but not all) games sell out. Still, there are a ton of tickets bought and paid for each Sunday in the NFL. No worries there.

3. Appreciation. Year after year, almost all NFL teams rise (significantly) in value.

Let’s look at an extreme example. Jerry Jones paid 140 million for the Cowboys in 1989.

They are now worth 1.6 BILLION. That’s not a bad investment in twenty years, now is it?

The McCaskey’s inherited the Chicago Bears (meaning they paid NOTHING for the team). The Bears are now worth close to a BILLION.

Yes, I’m sure they have had some inheritance tax issues and other things to deal with , but still……

Are you f’ing kidding me.

We’re talking about a BILLION dollars here!

4. In the world of sports (and in the world of business - your Microsofts and Googles notwithstanding) there may be no better deal than owning an NFL team.  Period.

Owning an NFL team means you own a 'recession-proof' cash cow.  That's what it means.  If anyone tries to spin that differently tell them this:  "If it's NOT that way, why not sell the team?"   (They'll be lining up around the block to buy YOUR team)!

Virtually the only way to lose money in the NFL as an owner is to literally gamble it away (as ex-Philadelphia Eagle owner Leonard Tose once did).

5. For the Bears to NOT fire Lovie Smith and bring in a replacement at the end of this season can only mean one of two things:

1. These people (the McCaskey’s) are completely delusional.   Somehow they have to then think that Lovie Smith has head coaching skills that few others have in NFL circles.  Seriously.  (No SANE person would even suggest a line of BS like that).

(So excuse me while I laugh my ASS off over that one).

2. They  (the McCaskey's) literally are the cheapest owners in sports and what’s more, are making an ASS out of Bear fans world wide.

It can only be #1 or #2 here (and yes, the ‘scatological’ reference here is fully intended by yours truly)!

No single, sane person can make even ONE compelling argument for which to keep Lovie Smith and his Merry Band of Misfits into 2010 and beyond.

Not ONE!

(Hell, I'd have more respect for Lovie if he went all  'Charlie Weis' at this point.  Weeks before ND canned him, Weis said that "If they were going to fire him, he really couldn't disagree, based on crazy things like records and such)!

This is pathetic.  It truly is.

 

 

 

 

 

The QB as Team Leader.  (Not just leader of the offense).

The head coach leads everybody (players, coaches, trainers, etc) with his vision for the team and with his ability to prepare his players and coaches to achieve that vision.

The QB leads the offense and by extension the defense and the special teams. He’s the only player with his hands on ball virtually every play. All players have to have the necessary confidence that he can lead the team to victory for the team to succeed.  The Pittsburgh Steelers had the number one defense in the NFL last season.  James Harrison of the defense made one of the great plays in Super Bowl history with his 100 yard interception return for a TD at the end of the first half.

But their great defense failed to stop Kurt Warner, Larry Fitzgerald and the Cardinals at the end of the game. They were 2:37 away froma a stunning upset.  At that point, all eyes (including those of the Steelers) were on QB Ben Roethlisberger.  Will he or won't he.  And of course, he did.

The object of the game is to score more points than the other team.  I don't care how great your defense is or isn't . . . you have to score to win.  That's why the QB is the leader of the team (or at least should be/better be).

Great teams almost always have great leadership at the QB position. Whether it’s the quiet leadership of a Joe Montana (Joe never said two words. His teammates knew, however, that he would usually make the plays necessary to move the chains) or the much more vocal leadership of a guy like Dan Marino (who had no problem cussing out any of his teammates in the huddle, on the sideline or anywhere else).

Quiet. Or Vocal. Or a combination of both.

Chad Pennington’s  65.61 completion percentage is the highest in NFL history among QB’s who have thrown at least 1,500 passes (Kurt Warner and Steve Young are next in line).

Pennington is almost universally respected in the NFL. Usually quiet and unassuming. But he is a leader.

Herm Edwards: “He always prepared himself to be the guy. And once he was the guy, he took the burden of the team and put it on his shoulders.”

After their 1-15 season in 2007 the Dolphins signed Pennington in 2008 after he was cut loose by the Jets.

(From Dennis Dillon of the Sporting News):  Miami started out 0-2 in 2008. In the first practice before their third game things turned ugly. That’s when the Dolphins saw a different side of Pennington, who chastised the players using language that would have made his mother blush. “I guess he felt us sliding back to the losing culture we had the previous year,” said WR Greg Camarillo “and he wasn’t going to allow it.”

“Weak-Armed” Chad Pennington helped lead the 1-15 Dolphins to an 11-5 record last season.

I don’t know what kind of leader Jay Cutler is or isn’t. Few do. The only ones who do know are the ones that have been a part of the teams he has played on. Not any of us on the outside looking in.

All I know is that unless, at some time, he puts the ‘Team on his Shoulders’ (like Herm Edwards says) and unless he’s willing to get in guys faces as to “Not allow them to slide into a losing culture” (as Greg Camarillo said) then the Bears aren’t going anywhere. They’ll just have a really strong armed QB guiding them into mediocrity.

Jay has stated that he grew up a Bears fan. Perhaps he can revisit Bear history. Say what you will about Jim McMahon. He set more NCAA passing records than any other QB in college football history. He authored one of the greatest college comebacks (the 1980 Holiday Bowl - #4 on ESPN‘s list of Greatest Bowl Games ) when BYU was down 45-25 with less than four minutes remaining against SMU. The highlight of that comeback was when McMahon defied head coach LaVell Edwards by refusing to take his offense of the field to punt the ball away on 4th and two late in the 4th quarter. McMahon went to the sideline and screamed at Edwards not to give up.  That this was Bull S++T, according to McMahon. Edwards relented and McMahon and his offense gained the first down and kept alive the drive and eventually pulled out the stunning upset.  (Edwards:  The guy (McMahon) was upset to no end and so I said "OK, go back in we're going for it").

LaVell Edwards is no slouch.  He's a HOF college head coach.

Jim McMahon arrived at Halas Hall after being drafted with a beer in one hand and a cocky, arrogant attitude in the other. And then promptly backed it up. He hung out with the offensive line and they loved him for it (MIke Ditka:  "Those guys would've done anything for Jim"). He played the game (again quoting Mike Ditka) with “reckless abandon.” His teammates couldn’t help but respect that. He went ’toe to toe’ with Mike Ditka when need be. Who on Earth yells at “Iron Mike?” Jim McMahon did. Usually it happened (according to RT Keith Van Horne) after Ditka would send in a play and McMahon would say: “F==K that, we’re not going to run that. We’re going to run this.” And McMahon’s play would work.

Jim McMahon: “He wanted to be in charge of everything and it times it wasn’t the right way I felt.”

Did McMahon do that to be disrespectful? Not at all.  He just wanted to win. (Mike Ditka, from his book 'In Life, First You Kick Ass'):  "McMahon, I think what you have to understand about him -whether you love him or hate him-is that he is one of the most competitive people on the planet."

Leadership. It’s a beautiful thing. He defied his college coach when he wanted to punt the ball away and essentially surrender the game. That act of defiance led to one of the greatest Bowl games ever. He often defied his head coach in Chicago cause he knew more about the offense that Iron Mike did.

Which then leads to quotes like this:

Mike Ditka

"I don’t care how great Walter Payton was. I don’t care how good our defense was.
We don’t win the Super Bowl without McMahon. Period!” (ESPN SportsCentury).

And I don’t care how much talent a QB does or does not have.  How strong his arm is or isn't. Without the ability to execute; to lead and inspire and motivate his troops, his team probably isn’t going very far.

 

 

 

I like Jay. I hope he becomes a an all-time great in the Windy City. I really do.

But here’s the problem: (one of them).

After the ‘85 Bears demolished the NFL, no assistant coach was hotter than Buddy Ryan. Norman Braman hired Buddy to coach his Eagles the following season. At the press conference to announce the hiring of Buddy Ryan, Braman introduced Ryan as “the next Vince Lombardi of the National Football League.”

This isn’t a post about the merits of Buddy Ryan. It’s about this: When you introduce your new head coach as the next Vince Lombardi, it makes it awfully hard to criticize him later on. Braman was a car salesman from Florida. Even though he owned the team, who was he (a friggin’ car saleman) to ever criticize Ryan (a life-long football coach and creator of the most devastating defense in NFL history), the man he publicly compared to Vince Lombardi?

Answer? He wasn't anybody capable of criticizing Buddy Ryan.  At least not when it came to the X's & O's of football.

That’s problem #1 with Jay. Last summer it seemed like the only person in North America not in love with Jay Cutler was Josh McDaniels. Everyone else, from sea to shining sea, was opining on how great Cutler was and could be.

It would be pretty hard not to get a big head over that kind of adulation. And I’m sure that Jay Cutler has never been accused of having low self-esteem.

And the problem thus becomes this. How do the Bears (management & coaching staff) criticize the man they went out on a limb and acquired, at such a heavy cost? A man they anointed as ‘Their Saviour.’

Answer? Not easily.

Cutler is often compared (rightfully so) to a young Brett Favre.  The old-time gunslinger masquerading as the modern day NFL QB. I can live with that. Those guys can win you a lot of games (and lose you more than a few along the way).  And they're never boring.  Even if they throw a pick to lose the game, you at least were entertained.

But Favre had Mike Holmgren (and guys like Jon Gruden, Steve Mariucci and Andy Reid, among others), coaching him in Green Bay.

All disciples of Bill Walsh, who was probably the greatest QB coach in NFL history.  Brett was the 'anti-Joe Montana' as Montana was purely a percentage player.  Joe Cool had zero gunslinger in him.  But that's alright.  Holmgren and his staff, schooled in the Bill Walsh/Joe Montana school of QB'ing adapted.  They let Brett be Brett while also helping turn him into more than just a gunslinger.  They helped turn him into a winner.

The Bears have Lovie, Pep and RT.

Not good.

Mike Ditka and Jim McMahon fought like cats & dogs. No problem. They won a Super Bowl together. And in no way did Holmgren and his staff baby and coddle Brett Favre. They too won a Super Bowl.

This is a real bad combination. A QB who has (rightly or wrongly) been anointed as one of the great young QB’s in the game, with a FO that can’t criticize him and a coaching staff that seems unable to ‘coach’em up.’

Not good.

 

If you’re just going to screw up when you hire his replacement? If that’s the case you might as well just leave him there. Eventually he might figure it out (and win it all).  I  mean the great Bill Cowher took 14 years to finally win the Super Bowl.  Mayber after 14 years Lovie can win one too.

It’s just that simple.

The McCaskey’s have hired three (almost four) HC’s post Mike Ditka:

1.  Dave Wannstedt

2.  (almost hired Dave McGinnis)

3.  Dick Jauron

4.  Lovie Smith

See a pattern here? I sure do.

All were DC’s . All were considered ‘Nice Guys.’ And all were more suited to be coordinators, not HC’s.

All of those guys were missing the ‘it’ factor: The ability to lead their team. To demand excellence. To get the very most out of their players.

Many love Mike Ditka. Many bash him. This fact, however, remains. He took over a team with some talented players and some players just picking up paychecks. Iron Mike came in (all red faced with veins bulging) and got rid of the trash on the team. The players who were remained knew exactly who was running the show in Chicago.  He left Zero dounbt about that.  And he also led the Bears to their dominating Super Bowl victory in 1985.  Yes they had Walter Payton.  Jim McMahon.  Buddy Ryan.  Mike Singletay.  etc, etc etc.

But Mike Ditka was front and center there (for the record, I'm not the biggest Mike Ditka fan in the world.  Far from it.  But I give credit where credit is due.  And Iron Mike was the 'straw that stirred the drink' for the '80's Chicago Bears.

The incomparable Dan Hampton was once asked this question:

“What kind of coach was Mike Ditka?”

Hampton: “What kind of coach? He was a prick. But he was OUR prick!”

Higher praise has rarely been spoken about an NFL HC. (Hampton also said that in all his years in football, he was never around a coach who motivated his troops as well as Mike Ditka).

Mike McCaskey and his family got rid of Iron Mike and set out to hire the “Anti-Ditka.” Yeah, that makes sense.

The botched hiring of Dave McGinnis is all one needs to know about the incompetence of the McCaskey’s (most notably Michael).

A little background here. After firing Dave Wannstedt after the 1998 season, McCaskey interviewed Dave McGinnis for the HC’ing job. McGinnis used to be the LB coach for the Bears (under Bear DC Vince Tobin) and was now the DC for the Arizona Cardinals (undern Arizona HC Vince Tobin).

McCaskey wanted to hire McGinnis as his new HC and announced that fact to the media. Unfortunately, he hadn’t reached contractual agreement with McGinnis beforehand. McGinnis felt embarrassed and betrayed and decided that he wouldn’t be a part of the Chicago Bears after that. That botched hiring ultimately cost Michael McCaskey his place as the GM of the Chicago bears (so some good came out of it).

But here’s the best part. Dave McGinnis was a CRAPPY HC! After his botched hiring by the Bears he went back to Arizona as Vince Tobin’s DC and eventually replaced Vince as the HC of the Arizona Cardinals when they fired Tobin in 2000.

McGinnis was 17-40 before the Cards fired him after the 2003 season. 17-40! That’s a .298 winning percentage! Pathetic. (Hell any blogger here could've probably gone .298)!

Cardinal fans cried when McGinnis was fired. Why? Cause they loved old Dave. He was as nice a guy as humanly possible. People in Arizona felt really bad when he was fired. Oh, they wanted him gone. No doubt. He was a terrible HC. He was a great cheerleader. But a terrible HC. They wanted him gone. No two ways about it. But they felt really bad cause he was such a nice guy.

This is the guy who Michael McCaskey tried to hire, and it cost him his job.

When it comes to hiring HC’s, the McCaskey’s have proven themselves to be almost completely clueless.

There's an old saying:  "Nice guys finish last."

There's another old saying:  (HOF'er Dan Hampton: "What kind of coach was Mike Ditka?  He was a PRICK.  But he was OUR prick!)

(That quote from Dan Hampton was stated on an episode of the program "Beyond The Glory - Mike Ditka" which ran on Fox Sports).

Here's an idea.  How 'bout hiring a HC in the vein of a Mike Ditka, or a Buddy Ryan, or a Mike Singletary,  than (nice guys )like Dick Jauron and Lovie Smith, among others.  Just a suggestion.

What a joke. (Poor Papa Bear is probably tired from rolling over in his grave).

 

A cursory look at last season's passing leaders will show guys like Cutler, Brees and Warner in the top ten in most catagories.

For example,regarding passes completed and passing yardage they are 1-2-3 (Brees, Warner & Cutler).  And so on. 

They also had three of the worst defenses in the NFL last season (Saints - 26th, Cardinals - 28th and the Broncos - 30th).

Their team records in 2008? 

Saints:  8-8.

Broncos: 8-8.

Cardinals 9-7.

Almost identical.  Three of the best passers in 2008 with three of the worst defenses in 2008.  Great passing/terrible defenses averaged out to almost identical,average type (8-8, 9-7) records.

By contrast Warner now has the #14th ranked defense (up 14 spots from last season) and is now 6-3.  Brees has the #17 ranked defense (up 9 spots from last season) and is now 9-0.

It's pretty simple.   The problem with the Chicago Bear is their defense.

They went from being ranked 3rd in 2006, to 16th in both 2007 & 2008.  They are currently ranked 19th.  Needless to say, they are going in the wrong direction here.  Obviously.

Last season the 5 teams with the best winning records in the regular season (Tennessee, Pittsburgh, NY Giants, Indianapolis and Carolina) were ranked #2, #1, #5, #7 and #12 in team defense. 

The 4 teams with the next level of best records in 2008 (all 11-5) were Baltimore, New England, Miami and Atlanta.  Those teams ranked #3, #8, #9 and #11 in team defense in 2008.

The 9 teams with the best records in 2008 ranked from #1 - #12 in team defense. 

75% of the teams in the top 12 in defense in 2008 had the best records (ranging from 11-5 to 13-3) in 2008.  That's not a coincidence.

A mother has to remove a Band-Aid from her young child. She says “Close your eyes. I’m going to rip this Band-Aid off really fast. It will hurt less that way than if I remove it slowly.”

Does it hurt when she rips off the Band-Aid as fast as possible? Yes. .

Would it hurt more if she did it slowly and dragged out the process? Again yes.

The Bears are a disaster. It’s time to make a Band-Aid decision:

Do we want to want to go into the next off season with a Band-Aid approach? That is , with JA and Lovie trying to apply Band-Aids to the patient in the hopes that the patient heals?  A patch here and a patch there?

Or do we want to rip off the Band-Aid and replace many of this underachieving team (GM, head coach, assistant coaches and dead weight players)?

I vote for the latter.

The Bears have been a 500 team since their Super Bowl run in 2006. They are underachievers.  Recent disasters against Cincinnati, Arizona and San Franciso provide visual, indiisputable evidence of this fact.  Once in a while fine.  Three in four weeks is completely unacceptable.

They made a huge trade for Jay Cutler, who, with the proper coaching, still has more than enough time to become a franchise QB in the NFL. (Jay Cutler has less interceptions in his first three seasons than HOF’er John Elway or future HOF’er Peyton Manning). Cutler is still a young player. They need to build their team around him and surround him with the best possible coaching (sorry Lovie & Ron).

It’s time for regime change at Halas Hall. It’s now time to open the windows there and air out the building. They desperately need a breath of fresh air and a change of scenery. 

I would rather they took a step backwards next season (if that's possible) if it meant that they were able to assemble the nucleus of a team (management, coaches and players) that can compete at a high level on a consistent basis (ala Pittsburgh, New England and Indianapolis).  To my knowledge nobody has ever accused anyone in the Steeler organization of being geniuses.  They just do things the right way and collect their Lombardi trophies.

Just the thought of listening to Lovie and JA this coming off season talking about how they are going to turn the Bears around in 2010 makes me want to vomit.

At the very least, if that time comes to pass, would someone please have the courtesy of covering their mouths with a couple of Band-Aids.  Please.