I keep hearing that all this big name coaches that are available need to have full control in order to come coach a team.

My question is when has this worked for an organization and led to a Superbowl win?

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

Thats not a bad point, but I would counter by saying whatever the fuck Lovie and/or Angelo is doing simply is not working. Nobody else at this point can do any worse.

_________________

I agree Lovie and Angelo have done crap and I am ready for both of them to leave.

It just makes me nervous to hear all this talk about giving complete power to a head coach because I cannot think of one example where that worked. And I was just curious if I was missing an example.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

I don't know if Cowher had full control, but he won an SB. Holmgren had a lot of control in Seattle (if not full) and he at least made it to the SB. Not sure about Shannahan or Billick, but both won a SB as well.

_________________

I don't think Cowher had full control in Pitts when he won a Superbowl.

Holmgren I believe had full control when he got to a Superbowl...but Lovie got to a SB as well and lost, when Holmgren actually won a SB, he did not have complete control.

Shanny only had complete control in Denver after the Superbowls (and after Elway).

Billichek may have had it and won a superbowl, I am not sure on that one.

It just seems that for the most part these guys win a Superbowl and after that it is when they start demanding complete control and then it normally does not work out. And if that is true, why should the Bears (or any team) hand over complete control to one guy???

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

Holmgren was stripped of his GM power before he got to the Super Bowl with Seattle. They told him that he could either relinquish control or leave altogether. It was a disaster with him at the helm. Also, for the record, people in Seattle absolutely HATE Holmgren.

Good thing we want to bring him in here.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

Could he be any worse than what we currently have on the sidelines?

_________________

Yes.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

Man, just thinking about the things you guys hate about Lovie, the thought of Holmgren coaching this team is delightful in a schadenfreude sort of way. Questionably challenges? Clock mismanagement? Questionable play calling? Poor talent evaluation? That's pretty much Holmgren to a tee.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

The Exception to the Rule

No one has complete control in Dallas as long as Jerry Jones is there. He had it in Miami and did nothing with it.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

He was the GM in Dallas. Thats why the draft picks worked out. He was the one guy Jones trusted enough

No doubt Johnson had a lot of power in Dallas, but I don't think he is an example of real complete control the way guys are talking today. There is no doubt in my mind that Jones had his hands in the middle of everything Johnson did, and I believe that was part of his frustration and why he ended up leaving.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

While we're on the subject of "when's the last time...?", when is the last time a coach was fired from one team long after a period of success, then went on to be successful somewhere else? The only one I can think of is Dungy, which is somewhat hilariously the only coach that has won a super bowl in the past decade that Bears fans don't want (but it has nothing to do with race! Heaven forfend, no...)

Who else fits the profile? A few retired and then unretired, but even there the record of success is mixed (Holmgren, Jimmy Johnson, and Parcells are the most successful, but Holmgren's teams generally underperformed and Parcells/Johnson never saw another Super Bowl).

RFDC: even if Jones had some control, the Cowboys probably won more in spite of him than because of him. Jimmy Johnson is probably the best example. But that was a long time ago.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

Right you have a better chance with a Head Coach that didnt work out the first time...like Bellicheck with the Browns or Shannahan with the Raiders

I'm not panning for Holmgren, IB. I'm just panning for a new coach. Lovie has proven dozens of times that he is a boob and does not deserve to be a head coach in Chicago anymore. Its very eivdent that this team has given up on Lovie and its time to bring in somebody else.

Let me ask you this, IB. What has Lovie done since game 1 of last season to help the Bears win? Give me some solid examples of what he has done say in the past 25-30 games to put them in a better position to win?

Lovie continually puts his team in a position to lose rather than win. Holmgren may not be the answer, but Lovie certainly is not either. I don't give a shit about the success in 2005 and 2006. This team has regressed since the Super Bowl and most, if not all of that, is on squarely on the shoulders of Lovie Smith and Jerry Angelo.

_________________

I'm pretty sure Ozzie Newsome was still the GM when they won

_________________

That's the funny thing: the failure coaches have done OK in some limited examples. As a rule they've probably sucked the second time around too. But a couple have done fine.

But all this "we need to bring in a PROVEN COACH and not a "COORDINATOR" talk is unmitigated BS. This isn't college football where you just poach a head coach from Conference USA and call it a day. Generally, you get a good coordinator and make him head coach, then throw money at him to stay.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

IMO this thread has nothing to do with Lovie, for the most part I think we all agree Lovie should be gone.

My whole point in this is we should think twice about just wanting to hand full control to one of these big name guys because it has not worked in the past.

I would love to have Cowher be the head coach, but I also think he would need a separate GM to take care of that work. I think it is too much for one guy to try and do both head coach and GM at the level it needs to be done in order to win a Superbowl.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

so, given this analysis, it appears that coaching does not matter.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

You obviously cannot read.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

They overhauled the defensive system last year, which prevented the defense from being a complete disaster and left them competitive in most games. Of course, their quarterback played pretty decent last year.

But mostly this is a mug's game. What does Bill Belicheck do to "put your team in a position to win"? Just to ask the question is to show that it's nonsense. His teams, of course, do win, but very rarely do you sit down and say "man, he really put his team in a position to win there." Coaching is a lot more subtle than that, and 95% is what we never see during the week.

That's why I don't subscribe to the change-for-the-sake-of-change point of view. All of these so-called great coaches had seasons much worse than this one. Very rarely in life is "anything" better. At this point in their careers, Holmgren, Gruden, etc. are just "anything". The only coach I wouldn't put into that category is Cowher, but even there, his career in Pittsburgh wasn't just one long stretch of unmitigated success.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

Top Coordinators List

Well take the Wind and Cam Cameron are two candidates for the Bellichek bounce back.

Again, I am not saying lets bring in Holmgren and give him full control.

I've seen enough of Lovie to know that he sucks and he will not get this team into the playoffs again, much less the Super Bowl. Judging from the performances on the field yesterday (among other games), there are player on the roster that feel the same way.

_________________

Written on Cleveland Sports Fan Message Board in 1995

ok then coaching matters, but we have no way of identifying what good coaching is.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

ok since you are so bright, then give us an example of a coach who had complete control as a head coach and GM who won a superbowl?

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."

i dunno. ask irish boy. he knows everything.

_________________
Reality is your friend, not your enemy. -- Seacrest

Dick Vermeil?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!

Just compared to you

_________________
Fire Phil Emery