Jump to content

Bears Have Informal Agreement with Cowher


DABEARSDABOMB
 Share

Recommended Posts

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...ions-26.article

3. Word is out that the Bears already have an informal agreement with former Steelers coach Bill Cowher for 2011 if the Bears don't make the playoffs next season. Who's going to take a job with the Bears that is likely to be a one-year deal with no shot at the head coaching job?

 

All I can say is...Schwwwwiing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is the case then they should not leave Lovie hanging so far out to dry. Make the damn change already and give Cowher what it is that he wants. Show the fans that you do get it and stop playing dumb ass games with everyone involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly!

 

Man up, ax this lame duck, get on with the real hires and stop this atrocious and embarassing dog & pony show!

 

Can Virgy just come out, fire Teddy as president (demoting him to bean counter), saying she's disppapointed that he couldn't see this happening and trusted him, fire Zombie and JA, put Brian McCaskey as president (or any other McCaskey than Mikey-boy), hire Cowher in whatever damn capacity he wants and have him hire the rest?

 

I know...it's a lot to ask for.

 

If that is the case then they should not leave Lovie hanging so far out to dry. Make the damn change already and give Cowher what it is that he wants. So the fans that you do get it and stop playing dumb ass games with everyone involved.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will never know, but I wonder if things would have been different if not for the CBA issues. If there was not the potential of a work stoppage, might the owners simply have eaten Lovie's deal and made the move today. As hard as it is for so many to believe our owners would ever eat that sort of coin, I honestly believe the CBA issues were a huge factor. Not only would they have eaten Lovie's $11m, and then had to pay Cowher and his staff considerably more, but they would also face the potential of lost revenue in 2011. That means they would be paying two coaches to do nothing that year.

 

If that is the case then they should not leave Lovie hanging so far out to dry. Make the damn change already and give Cowher what it is that he wants. Show the fans that you do get it and stop playing dumb ass games with everyone involved.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will never know, but I wonder if things would have been different if not for the CBA issues. If there was not the potential of a work stoppage, might the owners simply have eaten Lovie's deal and made the move today. As hard as it is for so many to believe our owners would ever eat that sort of coin, I honestly believe the CBA issues were a huge factor. Not only would they have eaten Lovie's $11m, and then had to pay Cowher and his staff considerably more, but they would also face the potential of lost revenue in 2011. That means they would be paying two coaches to do nothing that year.

Correct. That is why they didn't clean house this yr.

 

Peace :dabears

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will never know, but I wonder if things would have been different if not for the CBA issues. If there was not the potential of a work stoppage, might the owners simply have eaten Lovie's deal and made the move today. As hard as it is for so many to believe our owners would ever eat that sort of coin, I honestly believe the CBA issues were a huge factor. Not only would they have eaten Lovie's $11m, and then had to pay Cowher and his staff considerably more, but they would also face the potential of lost revenue in 2011. That means they would be paying two coaches to do nothing that year.

I think the biggest fear was paying two coaches not to coach. I honsetly believe that and you know what, I can't necessarily blame the team that much. They could have been paying 12M to just the head coaches to not coach (Lovie and Cowher) and that would be a pretty big disaster.

 

If the lockout wasn't looming or there was more certainty that everything would go smoothly with a new CBA, we would have seen Lovie fired.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All well and good. But I just think that there's more in the coffers than giving them a pass on poor long term foresight.

 

I love hearing about all this work stoppage and CBA... It doesn't all come crashing in 2011. 2012 will probably result in even greater profits for the owners...for more than likely many many moons. So, you take on a little water one year in order to sail through calm waters for decades...

 

I mentioned it earlier, but to me this is a franchise that seems to be playing scared.

 

We will never know, but I wonder if things would have been different if not for the CBA issues. If there was not the potential of a work stoppage, might the owners simply have eaten Lovie's deal and made the move today. As hard as it is for so many to believe our owners would ever eat that sort of coin, I honestly believe the CBA issues were a huge factor. Not only would they have eaten Lovie's $11m, and then had to pay Cowher and his staff considerably more, but they would also face the potential of lost revenue in 2011. That means they would be paying two coaches to do nothing that year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry. i just don't buy it as anything other than the team being cheap and not being forward thinking.

 

It's a total full on cop out.

 

This organization can weather out a storm for one year to make even greater profits down the road.

 

I think the biggest fear was paying two coaches not to coach. I honsetly believe that and you know what, I can't necessarily blame the team that much. They could have been paying 12M to just the head coaches to not coach (Lovie and Cowher) and that would be a pretty big disaster.

 

If the lockout wasn't looming or there was more certainty that everything would go smoothly with a new CBA, we would have seen Lovie fired.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Till I hear it announced in an official press conference, I will not even wast time getting my hopes up. I'm not going to be like Charlie Brown and have Lucie pull the ball away so I can land on my back.... Every time I get even slightly excited about candidates whether it be OC, DC, or HC the news comes out that he goes somewhere else or drops out of the running. Once a mistake, twice a coincidence, three times a pattern. The pattern is getting old. As names continue to pop up and we get excited when there's a guy that we like when just days prior we were excited about the last guy who ended up going somewhere else. Just as our search for OC/DC goes so it is with the HC position. We were hoping to see the Bears clean house, I know I'm not the only one who would have danced around like an idiot if we'd have done so and brought in Cowher. But Lovie's still here and we just filter candidate after candidate through our interview process and onto their new job somewhere else or back with their current job. I imagine the candidates are more like the person who drives by a Garage sale and pops out to look to see if anything interests them but realize it's just garbage gets back in the car and goes on. We've heard rumors about Cowher supposedly interested in the Bears, supposedly we reached out to him, supposedly there was a chance he'd be here as the 2010 coach.

 

Point is right now all we have is speculation, I'm holding out for something more tangible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing but conjecture. No way, in my opinion, do they have any kind of an arrangement with Cowher. If they wanted him, a change would have already been made.

 

Peace :dabears

I really don't believe anyone outside of Halas Hall or Cowher knows the truth, but leaks happen.(and sometimes on purpose) The most recent rumor may be a little damage control to restore faith in the family. That being said, I think there may be some validity to all of this. Will it play out? Who knows? I can only hope.

 

One thing I am pretty sure of, is that we probably won't be better this year than last. It can be argued many ways, here are my 3 main negatives. Lovie is still here, Urlacher won't make that much difference and a new OC will take some time to get used to - IMO. I still believe if this is all lame duck, Turner would probably have the best shot at saving Lovies ass. They should not have fired him.

 

Anyone who knows me knows I love a good conspiracy. From reading the attached article at the beginning of the thread, my interest is peaked. This one will keep me fueled till it plays out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is the case I would think Lovie would already be on his way packing. If your going to do it a year from now you might as well just get it done with now if Cowher has already agreed (Which is highly unlikely considering he said he'd never talk about a job with a team that already has a coach). I have always been hoping for Cowher but I don't believe this report.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is the case I would think Lovie would already be on his way packing. If your going to do it a year from now you might as well just get it done with now if Cowher has already agreed (Which is highly unlikely considering he said he'd never talk about a job with a team that already has a coach). I have always been hoping for Cowher but I don't believe this report.

Maybe Cowher wasn't quite ready yet... :pray That's the beauty of conspiracy theories. You can't debate them almost infinitely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No way.

 

If the Bears wanted and had an agreement with Cowher, they'd be foolish to take a chance that someone else could come along and steal him, or drive his price up by letting it stay unsigned. Angelo would love it too, because he'd be the guy that landed another big fish.

 

I understand that the Bears don't want to pay two coaches, that makes sense, but if that is the deal, then at best, Cowher would be on the radar, and he'd be a fool to commit without a salary agreed on, and without knowing his other options. And without all that in place, at best, they are preliminary discussions.

 

So yeah, I highly doubt this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is nothing but conjecture. No way, in my opinion, do they have any kind of an arrangement with Cowher. If they wanted him, a change would have already been made.

 

Peace :dabears

 

Connor, couldn't agree with you more. This is obviously an op-ed piece written by another disgruntled Bears fan. It has as much creedance as a claim that aliens live on Pluto. Wait, Pluto isn't a planet... Anyhow, most of you will recall that Tom Coughlin was in a similarly tenuous spot as Lovie when the season ended. Jerome Bettis even came out during the end of the season saying that Cowher wanted to go to New York. What's to say he (Cowher) wasn't "assembling a staff" to go to New York?

 

Good luck Lovie and the Bears in 2010.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But will it matter at that point? If there is no football, does it really matter who our HC is?

 

And if next year it looks like a lockout will happen, Lovie will remain as the Bears coach and the team will essentially not hire anyone until it is decided we will play football again.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...