nfoligno

I think this would be a pretty good hire. In Fewell, like w/ Rivera, we would add a DC that has more versatility, rather than the likes of Lovie and Babich, who only know the cover two. Under Rivera, we ran the cover two, but also had a DC that knew other schemes and could tweak it or totally get away from it when necessary. When we had Babich and Lovie calling the plays, we simply didn't have that sort of knowledge. If the cover two wasn't working, they didn't know anything else well enough to change. Buffalo has not exactly had great talent, and yet their defenses usually were considered to have performed at a level above their actual talent. Further, several players, especially in the secondary, developed well, and they had a very good pass defense. Sure, Lovie would still push for his scheme, but in a DC like Fewell, when that scheme isn't working, we would at least have a DC that knows other schemes well enough to adapt when necessary, which would be a nice change.

Okay, I realize everyone wanted Lovie gone. I did too. After taking a day, I began to think about some positives. Several of the positives are based on "what ifs," and we will have to see what comes of the near future situation. But this is why I am not as upset today. 1. I don't like Lovie. Frankly, I was never high on him from day one, and felt we went to the SB in spite of him more than due to him. With that said, we did go to the SB w/ him, so regardless how much credit any want to give, it is possible. I think the key more than Lovie is who is below Lovie. An army can have a so-so general if it has solid majors, captains, sargeants. 2. As much as I dislike Lovie, it is the assistants I have far more felt killed this team, though Lovie was also essentially an assistant (DC) this year. Honestly, I believe the assistants are a greater factor in the wins and losses than the HC. The HC (usually) isn't calling plays or actually working and developing players. Those under him are. Between last year and this year, we have gone through and fired pretty much everyone. Defensive assistant replacements last year were actually not bad (DL, LB, DB). We simply failed at DC, and hopefully that is rectified this year. And now we get to focus on offense, and the coaching failures there. 2a. On defense, who we hire to be our next DC is going to be a big deal. While we didn't get want we wanted in the release of Lovie, at the same time, I get the feeling Lovie has been pressured some the way some on this board would like. He is not simply promoting one of his own. While he talked about sticking w/ the cover two at the press conference, but also followed that up w/ some comments about having to be open. That gave me a bit of hope that we will not simply hire another TB/St.L cover two boy. That doesn't mean I expect some drastic change, but it could mean we see a situation like when Rivera was added. You can still talk about cover two, but tweak it such that it is effective, as I believe we did a few years back. 2b. On offense, I like several names I have heard thus far, and in general, like the direction is seems like we are taking. Further, while you always have to be careful what you wish for, I have a hard time believing we will actually get worse coaching. I believe our OL coach was one of, if not the worse OL coach in the NFL. Turner was too often a joke as a playcaller, and we had a QB coach who didn't get along w/ our prized QB. It was a bad situation, at has to get better. So while we may still have Lovie, as seen in the past, if those under him may make a greater difference. When we went to the SB, we had a different DC and DL coach. We may again have solid guys in those positions, and this time have better offensive coaching too. 3. As much as I wanted Lovie gone, did anyone really have that much trust in Angelo making our next coaching decision? There have been many threads discussing whether Lovie and Angelo are tied together. I personally believe this move slides that answer toward the positive. Either Lovie and his new staff win, or we finally get the total overhaul so many want. IMHO, we are better off with that situation than we would be if we allowed Angelo to hire a new HC, only to potentially see Angelo fired in another year or so and then be again in a situation where we bring in a GM w/ a HC he didn't choose. It really comes down to who we bring in now. That Marinelli will not be the DC is big for me. When that was first reported, it made me more sick than the news Lovie would be retained. Now, for me at least, there is some bit of hope. Even Fewell, who has been thrown out there several times, would seem an upgrade to me. He has the ties to Smith to make Smith comfortable, but isn't just a cover two guy. I actually think he has done a pretty decent job in Buffalo, which doesn't have a lot of elite talent, and he did a good job of developing talent while there. He would bring more diversity to the defense than we have seen since the SB. On the other side of the ball, whether it is Martz, or the guy from USC, I just believe we are looking at a better situation. Key for me as much as who the new OC will be is who will be the new OL coach. So I know everyone is sick to their stomach that Lovie is still the coach, but I do think there is still a lot of positive that can result from this, and if that positive doesn't happen, I feel we are closer than we would otherwise be to the total house cleaning so many want.

Just to throw this out there. While I could be wrong, but believe team gear is part of revenue sharing, so not buying a team shirt, jersey, or whatever, really doesn't hurt the team.

Not only that, but there have been numerous reports of a very icy relationship between Cutler and Pep.

Just to throw out there, but Marinelli talked in the past about how unhappy he was as a HC. How it was so much more demanding and nerve racking than he realized, and how happy he was to be back to his old DL job. Now, I realize that may be typical talk for anyone demoted, but after going coaching the 0-16 Lions, you can bet life was pretty miserable. He may just enjoy being back to the job that he knows well, is very comfortable with, and is held in high regard. If he took the DC job, he would again be under the microscope, and may simply still not be ready for it.

No. I don't think so. That is frankly a poor way to run the team. If we suck again and fire Lovie, then you basically fire everyone. A new HC needs to hire his own staff. Too many problems come up when you have a HC that is forced to keep/hire an assistant he didn't want. Its one thing when Dungy is told he has to keep Indy's OC. In that situation, you have a highly successful OC. But if our team stinks, I doubt any assistant (minus maybe Toub) gets the same level of respect. What could be interesting is, the bigger profile of the assistant we hire, the greater the potential he could be Lovie's eventual replacement.

One. Big difference between changing OC, DC and assistants for a year than changing HC and/or GM. Even if the ownership thinks it possible to have a total house cleaning in the near future, that would not prohibit making lesser changes. Two. The key question is going to be, why wait. Money is going to be a key reason. Over and over again I read about how owners are hesitant to make dramatic moves right now w/o knowing whether or not there will even be football in 2011. That is true even more for us w/ the league's highest paid coach. People can talk cheap, but ownership doesn't want to eat Lovie and Angelo's deal, while adding on however much more, w/o even knowing if the new hires will be working in 2011. I think there is a 2nd part here too. I think the ownership simply likes Angelo and Lovie. They want to give both one more chance.

Haugh, per Twitter, reported on the Score, said Marinelli to DC was discussed, but the team intends to search outside the org for a new defensive signal caller. God, if only this is true.

I have no issue w/ Turner's release. Others may be deserving (are deserving) but that doesn't touch the fact that Turner sucked also. Even if you ignore us "arm chair QBs", many analists, former players, coaches, etc have talked about how predictable Turner's playcalling has been. I think our offense did what it did inspite of Turner far more than to his credit. Turner deserved to be fired, regardless of who else stays and goes. I am not thrilled by our keeping Lovie, but that was at least expected to some extent. What really disgusts me though is promoting Marinelli. Sorry, but he did nothing to warrant a promotion. Further, he doesn't have experience as a DC. He went from DL coach to HC, and back to DL coach. His elevation to DC reminds me way too much of when Lovie promoted Babich. I expected to keep Lovie, while firing most all of the offense. Of all the aspects I had hope for was that Angelo would force Lovie to add a DC who was not part of his inner circle, much the same way as when we hired Rivera, despite Lovie wanting someone else (I believe Babich). While Lovie would still be the HC and you know he would want his defense, at the same time, we saw that a DC like Rivera, someone who wasn't a cover two specialist, can tweak the D enough to maintain the cover two image, while also adapting it to be more effective. So of all the things announces so far that makes me sick, Marinelli's promotion is the one that makes me the most disgusted.

Angelo has a few more years on his deal. If there is no football in 2011, I could be wrong, but I believe the teams are still on the hook for the salaries. Numerous articles have been written talking about how many owners are making decisions today based on the potential that there will not be football in 2011, and thus no revenue, yet they will still have to pay the salaries. For the Bears, for example, if they fired lovie, they would be on the hook for not one, but two salaries of coaches who would not be actually working.

Just wondering, but could our not firing Lovie be more an indictment of Angelo? Could it be that the team is not ready to fire Angelo, but at the same time, not sure whether he will remain long term? If Angelo is in hot water, does it make sense to fire Lovie this year, have Angelo hire a new HC? The more I think about it, the more I think this has a lot to do w/ Angelo. I don't think our owners are ready to fire Angelo, but not willing to allow him to hire a new HC either. That could mean that next year, assuming we don't see big gains, will end in a total house cleaning.

But the difference is, I don't think fans would expect 15 wins next year. That is my key point. I wanted/want a new HC, along w/ most every other coaching position on this team. I think our scheme, player development, playcalling, etc flat out sucks, both on offense and defense. If we hired a new staff, no, I would not expect SB in the first year. Hell, as bad as this team is, playoffs might be as high of a goal as we could hope. But just because I wouldn't expect SB in year one doesn't mean hiring a new coach wouldn't be the right thing to do. You have to look more long term. I do not think Lovie Smith is the HC to lead this team out of the situation it is currently in. I think the best we can hope for w/ Lovie is mediocrity, and I want more, even if that means not improving in the short term.

Flat out makes me sick. Turner gone was obvious and necessary, as will be the departure of most of the offensive staff. Last year it was most all the defensive assistants fired, and this year it will be the offense. What makes me flat out sick is Marinelli being promoted to DC. I don't even think he lived up to the hype as the DL coach, and that is the area he is supposed to be some genius. Why should anyone believe he can handle the DC duties? He has never even been a DC before, has he. I hope our offense is lights out next year, because I have a feeling out defense is only going to continue to get worse.

SWEEEEEEEEEEEEET! I get to see a Bears game w/o even having to travel next year. F'ing better win this time. Last time I saw the bears play here in Dallas was on Turkey day a few years ago, and it was just plain ugly. I believe Quinn started, replaced by Krenzel, who was no better. Can't recall if Hutch got in the game or not.

Very short-sighted view of things. Often new coaches need time to build up the team, especially as most new coaches enter pretty bad situations. I don't think it right to look at how new coaches did in their 1st year and decide whether or not we should make a decision based on that.

Technically speaking, there is still no new CBA, and thus Orton can be retained for simply a RFA tag, which likely isn't more than about $1m. Even if Orton had another year or two on his deal for cheap, I would stick to my comments.

In your one statement lies a far greater and more complex problem. "staff's inability to evaluate and develop players" Here's the age old question. Which is the greater issue? Ability to evaluate players, thus add talent to the roster, or ability to develop players, thus get more production from what you have. Take the DL as an example. Few would argue we have gotten enough production out of this group. But is that for lack of talent or lack of production? Angelo has invested quite a lot of picks of late into the DL, and yet we have seen minimal results. Is the problem Angelo and the scouts can't evaluate talent, or is the problem we have added talent, but coaching has failed to develop that talent. WR is another position to look at. We have a player like Bennett, who has looked good this year, but was never even given a chance last. We have Arashamado, who our QB begged to see on the field, yet our coaches never gave a 2nd look until injuries forced the situation. Is our situation at WR really so lacking in talent (thus weak evaluation) or is the problem more of a developmental/coaching one. If we don't know what is the problem, how the hell do we fix it?

This is not meant as a knock on Orton, though I know some will take it that way, but as up and down of a season as Cutler had, I feel far more confident moving forward trying to build the offense around Cutler than I would if Orton were on the team this past year. If Orton were still a bear, I think we would be putting QB at or near the top of our list of needs.

Honestly, I think the offense gets more talk because how to fix it seems easier, thus easier to talk about. Upgrade offensive coach and OL, and you upgrade the offense as a whole. Defense is far more muddled. Most here would love to replace the DC, but that is Lovie. Assume for the moment Lovie is not fired. I think it likely Angelo will tell Lovie he can't due the dual role thing again, and from what I have read coming from Lovie, it sounds like he would be fine with that. Lovie has said doing both roles was much harder than expected. But who do we insert? Do we simply promote Marinelli, or allow Lovie to hire another cover two guy? I don't think many fans would be happy with either, but will Angelo really push hard enough to hire a DC that doesn't have the Lovie or cover two ties? I think many fans could better deal w/ retaining Lovie if we went out and hired a good DC that wasn't just going to be another Lovie/Cover two yes man, but I have less confidence that will happen. Okay, how about the players. DL - Wale is as good as gone IMHO. Anderson could be back, especially if there is not a new CBA, and he is only a RFA. Here is the problem as I see the DL. We have spent a 3rd on Harrison, a 3rd on Gilbert, a 4th on Melton and now a 2nd on Gaines. How much does anyone expect us to spend on a FA when we have this many untested young players on the team? I think Angelo could be looking for development of what is on the roster, rather than spending big to add. That is a risky proposition. LB - I think we will see little change, and like w/ Anderson, may even keep Williams if there is no new CBA. Briggs, Urlacher and whoever is still a damn good LB corp. CB - We have issues here. Vasher is gone. Tillman is average. Bowman started most of this season, and was average to below average. Graham doesn't seem to be considered in the mix, and you have to wonder about Moore, who never was given so much as a chance. definite need, but this is among the most expensive positions. S - I think we can get by w/ what we have at SS. Between Afalava, Steltz and Payne, we have three similar players who can play SS. The problem is FS. But Angelo has never gone out and tries to add a ball hawking centerfielder, which is what we need. To me, the key problem, player wise, is on the DL. The further problem is, we have spent so many picks on the DL, I just question how much we should expect to add here.

I agree 100% that we don't use a high pick on a RB. Sad that a 3rd round pick will be a high pick for us next year. I would consider a RB w/ as high as a 5th, but that's about it. I disagree on the type of back we should be looking at though. I want a power back. If we added a speedy back, how does that compliment Forte? I realize Turner has stunk getting Wolfe time, but I think part of the problem is, when do you sub Wolfe for Forte? What does Wolfe do better than Forte? Forte (think more last year) showed solid speed, was an effective blocker, and a very good receiver. Maybe Wolfe has a touch more speed, but Forte is just too much better in the other areas. I don't think it would be that different if we looked at another speedster RB. You often look at those sort of players for 3rd downs, but Forte is an excellent 3rd down back also. I think we are going to add a RB, and likely at the expense of AP. That means we keep Wolfe. What I want to see added is power, not speed. Forte has nice power, but not great power. A power back would better compliment Forte than a speed back IMHO. Ideal would actual be to find a legit FB that can also take short yardage carries.

I think you could go back to the 3rd or 4th week of the season. Many on this site predicted we would at some point here about how Forte was playing hurt. It seems like that is a fairly common trend. After the season is over, players who didn't play up to expectations are said to have been playing all year hurt. I remember it all too well w/ Tait and Moose, as well as many others. Doesn't necessarily mean it isn't true, but saying they are healthy all year, only to say they were playing hurt all year when the season is over comes off a bit like, "dog eat my homework" excuse.

While far from what I want, I think Lovie stays. Turner gone is obvious IMHO. I think we could see, similar to the defense this year, a who new group of faces on offense. Lovie will be forced to hire a new DC, and not one he would otherwise want. This is not what I want, but simply what I think happens. Momentum was such that I thought Lovie could go, but after upsetting Minny on national Tv, followed by a win to end the season, I think Lovie's job could be safe.

Okay, I realize we have a lot of injuries, but Bennett and some others are still good to go, yet Hester is handling all return (punt/kickoff) duties so far. Question is, are we seeing (a) Team showcase Hester for the purpose of a future trade? ( Team trying to get a look to see if Hester can return to this role in the future, or © Team simply going w/ Hester due to a shortage of bodies.

I've talked about this too. Our development thus far of Gilbert reminds me of Daniel Manning. We draft the kid, and in camp, I remember talk of DT as Melton was our rookie to be developed at DE. Then Melton goes down, and I don't recall what, but something else happened, and Gilbert is now talked about as a DE. Then trade a 2nd for Gaines, and Gilbert is again moved back to DT. Even now, I don't think the coaches have a clue what his best position is. We are going to work him at DT, but is that because we feel it is his best position, or because we just traded a 2nd for Wale's replacement?

I don't think the added power Lovie got went to this area. When Jauron was here, Dick had power similar to what Lovie does now. Jauron had absolute power over his staff. That was why JA could never fire Shoop. Jauron had control over his staff. Further, while JA had power over what players were added to the team, Jauron had total control over the 53 man roster. What I mean is, JA had the power to decide who the 53 would be, but Jauron had power over how to handle those 53. So he choose who started and where. I remember there was a point when JA cut a player that Jauron supposedly liked, and shortly after, Jauron benched a young player JA had drafted and liked. Whether true or not, this was the sort of way each could use their power. Same thing today w/ Lovie. Lovie does not have control over who the team drafts or signs. He may have some say, but he always did as the HC w/ tight ties to the GM. There may be players on the roster who Lovie liked and asked JA to draft for him, but this didn't happen to due his new deal, and I would bet similar was done well before he signed his extension. So I don't buy that Okwo or whoever were Lovie picks. They may have been players Lovie was high on, but they were still Angelo picks.