Bears paving the way for Lovie to replace Dungy in 2008
![]() |
|
|
I'll start this by saying I love Windy City Gridiron. I love the fans there (especially my favorite "troll"-- Chad), and the head writer there (WCG) is the blogfather to many of us here at SB Nation. We all take our lead from WCG and Grizz at BTB.
That said, the Bears, as an organization, are run by a team of blind monkeys with thumbs up their butts. They are like the monkeys from that Monster.com commerical, where the lone homo sapien has to deal with his monkey bosses, constently having to tolerate their stupidity. Seriously, what are these idiots in Chicago thinking lowballing Lovie Smith? I have an idea.
Jerry Angelo is the head schmuck over in Chicago. He hired Lovie Smith in 2004, and Smith was not his first choice. Nick Saban was. Good thing for Bears fans Angelo did not get "his guy" and settled instead for Smith, a man that can coach circles around the highly over-rated Saban. Next season, Lovie Smith will be the lowest paid head coach in the NFL. Coordinators on bad teams like Houston (Mike Sherman), Tampa Bay (Monte Kiffin), and Washington (Al Saunders) will make more money than the head football coach for the NFC Champion Bears. Heck, Monte Kiffin' 31-year-old son Lane Kiffin will make more money coaching the friggin' Raiders next year than Smith will.
How utterly disrespectful and pathetic.
By lowballing Smith now, the Bears are sending a clear signal: they don't want Lovie back in 2008. As a Colts fan, I'm thrilled by this. Why? Because Lovie Smith is the most obvious candidate to replace Tony Dungy when he retires in 2008.
I've stated earlier that Dungy will indeed hang it up after '07. Family, religious work, and a general feeling of accomplishment will prompt him to walk away from football. Smith is one of the most respected football coaches in the NFL. He took a dead Bears franchise and in two years made them a playoff team. In three years, they were in the Super Bowl. And yet, despite all he has accomplished with the Bears, Smith and Bears management have reached an impasse on a new contract extension. Why is there an impasse? Who knows. Who cares. There shouldn't be. The Bears should pay Smith whatever he wants for however long he wants. Smith has earned it. He's the best coach to grace the Bears sideline since George Hallas.
![]() |
|
|
If there's an impasse, it is clearly the fault of Bears management and/or the owner, not Smith. Bears ownership and management were around when the Bears were garbage. It was only when Smith arrived that the Bears started winning.
I stated some time ago that if the Bears do not extend Smith's contract and Lovie walks after 2007, Jerry Angelo should be fired on the spot for gross stupidity. The way things are shaking out now, it looks as if it is Angelo that is pushing Lovie out the door. There's a wonderful article that I hope Jerry Angelo does not read, penned by the guru himself, Mr. John Clayton at ESPN (the only good writer the Mickey Mouse Club has). The article talks about how the teams with the best winning percentange the last five years are teams with coaching continuity: New England, Indianpolis, Pittsburgh, Seattle, and Philadelphia. It talks about how stupid many NFL owners are for constantly overhauling their coaching staffs (example: the morons in San Diego).
The point is if you have a good coach, keep him. Lock him up for a looooooong time. It will create stability within your organization. It will ensure that free agents will want to come and play for your team, like Adam Vinatieri stating that playing for Dungy was a big reason why he came to Indy (remember, he turned down New England's offer, which would have made him the highest paid kicker in NFL history). So, the only reason I can think of to let Smith go is Jerry Angelo wants to bring in one of "his guys." Cross Saban off the list. Saban didn't like the press second-guessing his genius, so he retreated once again to the protected walls of college football. Perhaps someone like Mike Singletary or maybe even ousted Bears DC Ron Rivera. Perhaps that's why Lovie Smith let Rivera go. Who knows.
Again, as a Colts fan, I am relishing the Bears making fools out of themselves lowballing Lovie. If/when he walks away, the Colts could be right there to snatch him up and have him replace his mentor, Tony Dungy. There's no sane reason this should happen. The Bears should lock Smith up. However, if they don't, the Colts should make the Bears pay for such stupidity.
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
I think Lovie deserves the job.
I would love to have Lovie Smith, though.
by Skin Patrol on Feb 22, 2007 12:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Not necessarily
Jim Mora Jr. was doing a decent job in Atlanta before he was kicked to the curb because his QB sucks.
Is Smith leaves, he is in another casualty of stupid ownership and management. I can understand firing someone because they are incompetent, but firing someone even though you are winning?
by BigBlueShoe on Feb 22, 2007 12:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
You misinterpreted me
While good coaching (ie. producing Ws) doesn't ensure that one's job is safe -- like Marty and Mora -- bad coaching (persistent production of losses) is a great way to get fired. The winningest teams are the ones with the longest tenured coaches, but this is intuitive since coaches that don't lose a lot are far less likely to get fired.
by Skin Patrol on Feb 22, 2007 1:10 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Not necessarily true...
Personally I think Head Coaches are a bit overrated. The job is basically to ensure consistancy and not screw anything up. There are very few coaches who can take a mediocre team and take them to a Championship. It takes a great front office, a consistent staff, scheme, and system, AND GREAT PLAYERS.
With decent coordinators, I could take the freaking Colts or Chargers to 8 wins. If Norv Turner takes the Chargers to anything less than 14 wins, should he be considered a Failure? How about if he doesn't win the Superbowl or at least the AFC Championship game? The fact is, its extremely hard to get there, and even harder to do it consistently.
by the21eraser on Feb 22, 2007 1:48 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Again...
I said that losing games was a good way to get fired. You brought up playoffs. In 15 seasons as the head coach of the Steelers, Cowher has never lost more than 10 games and has had exactly 3 losing seasons, only two of those in a row.
If Norv Turner should be considered a failure for any reason, it should be for what he's done and not what he fails to do. He is a failure.
by Skin Patrol on Feb 22, 2007 1:58 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
It works both ways...
I don't completely disagree with you. Look at what Sean Payton has done with the Saints. On the same hand, the Saints went out and got some new talent. If Jim Haslett had an improved defense, Reggie Bush, Drew Brees, and a healthy Deuce McCallister do you think he could have won more games.
Coaches don't win games, TEAMS do. Sometimes it is best to blow it up and start over, but it takes more than a new head coach. You have to get players who fit well with the coach and scheme, and NFL owners aren't patient enough to see it through. I just think people are too quick to blame things on coaches.
by the21eraser on Feb 22, 2007 2:50 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Disagreement?
by Skin Patrol on Feb 22, 2007 5:26 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
Saunders?
by BigBlueShoe on Feb 22, 2007 12:51 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
I think Gregg Williams
Either/or would be fine with me, as I think they're both outstanding coaches. I do not think Saunders is trying to become a head coach (again) though I am certain that GWilliams is (again).
by Skin Patrol on Feb 22, 2007 1:06 PM EST up reply actions 0 recs
lovie's next job
by bluegirl on Feb 22, 2007 7:40 PM EST reply actions 0 recs
Do not use my pain
by WCG on Feb 23, 2007 8:47 AM EST reply actions 0 recs

by 


























