Is he saying you should stop being a fan if your team is bad? The Bears have been run of the mill incompetent for awhile now but I agree, this is a really bad take.

Blind, absolutely loyal fandom equalled 108 years of losing, and now the Browns again.

Laurence Holmes‏Verified account
@LaurenceWHolmes
37m37 minutes ago
More
Good news for #Bears organization...they still have a lot of Stans that always side with whatever the TEAM says regardless of the 4 straight years of 10 losses or more. #ChicagoBrowns

Is he saying you should stop being a fan if your team is bad? The Bears have been run of the mill incompetent for awhile now but I agree, this is a really bad take.

It just occurred to me, is the "Stan" reference alluding to the crazy fan in the Eminem video?

It just occurred to me, is the "Stan" reference alluding to the crazy fan in the Eminem video?

How dumb to use that reference assuming that everyone is familiar with horrible music.

It's clearly anti-Polack

It's clearly anti-Polack

This is the new Buzzword

Laurence Holmes‏Verified account
@LaurenceWHolmes
37m37 minutes ago
More
Good news for #Bears organization...they still have a lot of Stans that always side with whatever the TEAM says regardless of the 4 straight years of 10 losses or more. #ChicagoBrowns



Like the true Dan Bernstein playbook, always telling fans how they should feel about their team.

Is he wrong? NFL teams inspire blind loyalty to authority figures and the Bears are far from an exception.

Did you skip every post other than the first?

Did you skip every post other than the first?

I think its about blind loyalty. Every Bears fan should want Pace and Fox gone. I guess some don't?

The smart fans have wanted Fox gone since he got here.

Pace gets one coach hire that's truly his own, but this shit can't go on longer than two more years before everyone from Ted on down needs to be flushed.

This is why as a GM you don't accept a job where you don't get to pick your coach. Now, you are in year 3, and you've been horrible at your job so far. You already got a coach fired. You have to go out and convince someone else "Hey, join up with me, and if we don't win in year 2 then I'm fired and you are working for a new GM or you are fired with me!". So now, coaches are going to choose any other place to coach and you are stuck with whatever coach has no other options and isn't willing to wait a year to see if someone else is interested.

If you were a betting man, the odds are incredibly high that Pace, if he keeps his job, is fired for poor performance in the next 2-3 years. His only real shot is if (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky saves him, and even that draft pick looks stupid because he unnecessarily gave up a ton of picks(you know, things that help rebuilding teams) to get him.

Even if you keep him, you aren't more likely to succeed. There is absolutely no reason to believe he has a higher chance of success than whoever else you would get to replace him. The best argument for him is "Well, maybe he's not bad and a coach with a much bigger resume may just be bad!" which is certainly true but also not exactly comforting to know that we are blaming the guy who has taken two other teams to the Super Bowl over the guy that built good running back depth in a passing league!

This is why as a GM you don't accept a job where you don't get to pick your coach. Now, you are in year 3, and you've been horrible at your job so far. You already got a coach fired. You have to go out and convince someone else "Hey, join up with me, and if we don't win in year 2 then I'm fired and you are working for a new GM or you are fired with me!". So now, coaches are going to choose any other place to coach and you are stuck with whatever coach has no other options and isn't willing to wait a year to see if someone else is interested.

If you were a betting man, the odds are incredibly high that Pace, if he keeps his job, is fired for poor performance in the next 2-3 years. His only real shot is if (Pro Bowl QB) Trubisky saves him, and even that draft pick looks stupid because he unnecessarily gave up a ton of picks(you know, things that help rebuilding teams) to get him.

Even if you keep him, you aren't more likely to succeed. There is absolutely no reason to believe he has a higher chance of success than whoever else you would get to replace him. The best argument for him is "Well, maybe he's not bad and a coach with a much bigger resume may just be bad!" which is certainly true but also not exactly comforting to know that we are blaming the guy who has taken two other teams to the Super Bowl over the guy that built good running back depth in a passing league!