Alaskan Grizzly

In response to your comment bolded: "Coulda, shoulda, didn't." But to really look at who did what and partly why this discussion came up. Cutler lost to the Green Bay Packer defense 9 out of 10 times. Rodgers has beat the Chicago Bears defense a majority of those times. (Keeping in mind QB's don't play against each other directly). For most of those wins by Rodgers, the Bears defense was regarded as one of the better units. Until the year McCown won against GB and Wallace played them. Last year was the worst performance by a Chicago Bears defense in team history. Theoretically it shouldn't have mattered who was playing QB since the defense wasn't as able to keep the offense off the field. So using the "shoulda, coulda, woulda" theory, there is very much the possibility that Rodgers would NOT have won that game just as much as he could have. One thing has been proven more than one flash in pan performance (McCown's) is that Cutler has not performed well against the Packers. That is a fact.

And Connor.

So where does one define a "successful" coach? In the 'modern era' of football there have only been 48 Super Bowls of which have been won by 30 coaches. Of course there are oodles of others that haven't even gotten that far. How about those that have been there multiple times only to lose? Marv Levy? He made four consecutive appearances but won none of them. Is that a conviction of his ability as a coach or his players? Or how about Dan Reeves? He made four appearances with two separate teams and lost all four. Or how about Don Shula's 3-2 record in the Super Bowls? Just because coaches like George Seifert and Barry Switzer won a Super Bowl, doesn't mean they were great coaches. They inherited a great team from a previous coach. Ditka was there to build the team to where it ended up. Yes he had a good staff but that goes to his "coaching" ability. What caused he and his team to not win anymore Super Bowls was more his stubbornness than his lack of coaching ability.

Being of a miltary background I prefer the hotheads. Results are more instantaneous. Although I don't necessarily like the 'touchy feely' (or less animated) approach there are those that have succeeded. Landry was one. So too was Dungy and to some extent Belichick. But more firebrands seem to get results: Cowher, Ditka, Coughlin, Jimmy Johnson, Parcells, Peyton, Gruden, and Walsh to name a few.

"Everyone relax K-E-E-P C-A-L-M. Mmkay? "

...unless you're Lucky Luciano. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...ml#.VFptZNm9LCS

Well if Cutler were to actually throw against coverage by Rodgers I might be more impressed. But since he (Rodgers) doesn't play defense then your "fact" is sorta moot. The fact that Cutler's had ten opportunities to play against GB and only one once says more.

This was commented on earlier during another thread. The thought of Cutler moving out of the pocket might actually make better sense. He seemed to do better while in Denver doing this. I don't think Cutler is made to be a pocket passer. Although Jason always thought Cutler HAD to run I always was of the opinion he chose to be more mobile. With Trestman it really isn't all that much a stretch since Steve Young, who was coached by Trestman, was pretty successful as a mobile QB. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...1104-story.html

Just a reality recap on that game, Josh McCown was the QB during that win. Just sayin... But my positive side looks at things like overall stats etc and the Bears currently lead the overall wins between the two with 93 to GB's 90. And the largest win margin (61-7 in 1980 - *source Wikipedia). And lead in Divisional titles (18-15*). And hold the larger all-time record (739-542 to GB's 708-542 *). So on 'Any Given Sunday' great things can happen and I feel like we're due.

http://mweb.cbssports.com/nfl/writer/jason...rity-is-tenuous Leaders on the team need to lead. Not bitch. Emery has put Trestman in a predicament in a few instances IMO.

What's funny is many said if the D could improve and Cutler played well (to include the offense overall) then the team would have a chance. At this point the D has improved (since last year) with an overall ranking at 19th (although that's slid from 14th a few weeks back). So where is the overall disconnect? Is it really the ST first and foremost then the D or?? Another thing I think crazy is the Bears are halfway done with the season and have only played one game in the division. Maybe if they pull it together things could look up a bit?

I think the key to 2014 season Act II will be how the team comes out for the next game against GB. If they look prepared and either win or play a close game then things could look up for the remainder of the season. Sometimes a break can do wonders. Other times it can prolong the inevitable. I'm a believer in 'anything can happen'. I would be immensely proud if they were to come out and play a fantastic game at Lambeau then continue on with a winning season before the curtain call.

We must soldier on. Cheers.

This too shall pass. Cheerio mate.

Well played sir. As I sit here in the setting sun of Florida I raise my glass to you. Heading on my way to Chicago tomorrow to visit some family and buy some Bears gear...hopefully at a reduced rate.

Since your opinion is shite I'd say you're wrong. Although I agree in not getting rid of Trestman just yet. He's not the one screwing up on O it's Cutler. But I suspect his days will be numbered should this losing streak continue. Wade Phillips should never be considered for any conversation as a HC...anywhere. The reason you probably don't like JH is because he's a hard ass. I sense you are of the sensitive nature so no wonder you don't like him. Especially since you think he's too much like Ditka; which in that context means you don't like strict discipline coaches. But how do you explain the winning records in both instances (minus Ditkas tenure in NO)? Harbaugh would be just about perfect for Chicago. Strict, winning record (Stanford and SF) and is familiar with Chicago since he's played there before. Seems almost too perfect . And with him they should either keep Herring as DC or Bryan Cox for Atlanta. Another hard line coach.

Amen!!

Yep

Or not...

I'm actually relieved that Ola will be playing in Mills' place. Mills has resembled J'Marcus Webb far too often this year. Let's see; future HOF QB with winning record at home and other elements weighing heavy in NE favor... Should be a blowout. But for some reason I actually think the Bears will win. Similar odds have been faced with unfamiliar results. Oh... And the Bears are 3-0 on the road.

Ouch good one.

In a random span of 1996-2006 Shannahan was able to get his Denver Broncos to the playoffs seven times. Twice winning the Super Bowl in that timeframe. For the three years to include years 2006-08 including Cutler...mediocrity. (2006: 9-7 *Cutler was officially named the starter in November of this year by the way, 2007: 7-9, 2008: 8-8). Would you look at that, a perfect .500! How interesting. Hmmmmmmmm... Turner was OC for the Bears from 93-96 and again 05-09. In that timeframe he coached both Eric Kramer and Rex Grossman. Both players set respective team records in yards passed during his tenure* (Source: Wikipedia). And one made a Super Bowl appearance. hmmmm.... Wow, you are ok with totally discounting his overall record of 53-32 and the fact he too made two Super Bowl appearances while with the Rams? And to answer your question where he is currently? Broadcasting just like Bill Cowher, Tony Dungy, Steve Mariucci, Mike Ditka, Jay Gruden, Brian Billick, etc, etc, etc.... (Quiz: besides broadcasting, what's common between all these guys?) Not much I can offer in recourse on this one other than to say his overall HC record was 32-33 (to include a few 8-8 and 9-7 records). Let's see, who does that remind me of??? Hmmmmm..... Oh there's the answer I was looking for. He "landed in Chicago with the WORST PERSONNEL ON ANY ROSTER"? What? Unless I was mistaken, Cutler was there when he arrived, as was Marshall and Jeffery (both arrived in 2012) and uhmmmmm, who was it? Forte. Oh yeah those guys are Horrible...well at least most of them. As usual you prove yourself to be nothing more than a blowhard.

PLEASE NOONE SUGGEST WE THROW THE REST OF THE GAMES TO GET A BETTER DRAFT PICK!!! x 1,000,0000

I second your thoughts. I recently read an article that mentioned what you did above (bolded). Obviously I have a bias for Lovie but that aside some of the others mentioned; Shannahan, Turner and Martz were/are revered for the respective specialties. Mostly offense in nature. Each have had a hand in successful teams and some (Martz/Shannahan) have been to Super Bowls to prove it. At any rate, I also agree with Mad that it is unfortunate that the critics have been slowly proven right about Cutler. I admittedly have been one of them but deep down inside I wanted to be wrong. (Call it a form of reverse psychology). When Cutler came to Chicago in 09 I was beside myself with anticipation. I bought in full time. But slowly lost my trust in each game killing interception and turnover. I still look at him and wish he could just 'figure it out' but fear that won't happen. I'm convinced he's a newer version of Rex Grossman where he doesn't have the field vision needed to perform consistently at the elite level. As far as Trestman. I have faith if given the right QB for his system, he could prove successful. I think he also thought Cutler could be taught but is finding it challenging beyond his own expectations. Maybe something will click in the remaining 9 weeks of play, we can only hope.

So to measure them in only their time with the Bears and considering McCown's "lightning in a bottle", where has Cutler shown a spark of an ability to lead the team to where he should? In his 6 years (?) with the team he has shown he is mediocre at best. I know he has a 'winning record' and is better than good on most days but where has that gotten us? I've made the same arguments for Lovie in years past and was rebutted that mediocre isn't what people wanted in Chicago. They wanted playoff and more importantly Super Bowl wins. Has Cutler provided any of these opportunities? All of what you said before could be true but what I see in the highlighted sections are excuses. How do you explain having an OC/Head Coach tailor made to help Cutler? An oline built to protect Cutler, talent bought and drafted to supplement Cutler (Bennett, Jeffery, BM and Forte) yet the same mistakes keep cropping up? You say he's "developed" bad habits as a result of these excuses? Explain to me exactly how it is a QB stares down a receiver, in a clean pocket or not, to allow the defense to cover the play? Maybe the gunslinger mentality is a result of his having to improvise sure, but hasn't he been called that almost all of his career? To include the one year he made the Pro Bowl in Denver? I'm not sure that Clausen is the answer. In fact, if you read previous posts of mine, I'm not as sold on him as I was McCown based on his pre-season play. But sitting for a game or two with an "unspecified injury" could send a message to Cutler that he could spend the remainder of his 2.5 years on the bench if he doesn't fix what ills him. The problem with Cutler is he has good days followed by equal and sometimes more devastatingly bad days. He makes bad choices at bad times. And not just once or twice (like "other QB's do) but consistently. This is Cutler, ala Jeff George. Cutler may very well pull off a win against New England. He's been close before. But how will he do two weeks later against GB...in GB? As soon as he strings together 2-3-4-5 good games in row, I will consider apologizing for my doubt.