It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 8:49 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57239
Frank Coztansa wrote:
RFDC wrote:
No coach changes defensive schemes in the middle of the season.

If Martz & Lovie can change and tweak offensive schemes midseason like they did last year, why can't the change defense schemes? I'm not saying start over, but outside of the Atlanta game, the defensive scheme this year (whatever that may be) is not working. They are getting torched on the run and giving big plays week after week. Part of that is execution and that is on the players as well as the coaches, but part of it is the scheme too.


Lovie and the D coaches are making tweaks on the defensive scheme. Martz did not scrap his scheme and start over. No coach scraps a scheme mid season. People do not realize what they are asking for and it would not be a help to this team. You change schemes in the off season, not mid season.

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


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 7:55 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Lovie is a winning coach.

And do you think that is because of Lovie or in spite of him?

He obviously does somethings very good, but there are many many many games where his decision making and gameplanning has been questionable at best. I don't know if I can point to one in game desicion where you look back and said "The Bears won because of that move Lovie made," but there are a lot where you can look back and say, "I can't believe Lovie did that. Could have cost the Bears the game." For examples, his 17% success rate with challenging plays...

I'm not beating the 'FIRE LOVIE' drum, I just think that the dude is way overloved. He has a good overall record as a head coach. I think only a small part of that is him. A small part of it is luck, and the biggest part of it is that he has had some really good players under him on D, and some guys that have made some big plays on offense when the offensive under Lovie has been not good overall.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
i do not expect lovie to scrap his lame cover 2 base defense, he is a one trick pony..the only reason it has had some success in the past is because briggs/urlacher/tillman and recently peppers..that is great personal not a great scheme...this team has tried and failed to find a safety every year since they realized mike brown could not stay healthy. i do not expect martz to change either..that is who lovie hired and he knew what he was getting...i will be happy when lovie and martz are gone with angelo and the bears get run a 3-4 base defense with that can disguise the blitzer and actually confuse a qb into making a mistake....the main reason this team is bad is drafting and most of that falls on angelo but lovie has more input than you think.

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Frank Coztansa wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Lovie is a winning coach.

And do you think that is because of Lovie or in spite of him?

He obviously does somethings very good, but there are many many many games where his decision making and gameplanning has been questionable at best. I don't know if I can point to one in game desicion where you look back and said "The Bears won because of that move Lovie made," but there are a lot where you can look back and say, "I can't believe Lovie did that. Could have cost the Bears the game." For examples, his 17% success rate with challenging plays...

First of all

Scoreboard

Career record 66-52-0
Championships won NFC North (2005, 2006, 2010)
NFC Championship (2006)



Secondly, we wouldnt neccessarily know about moves Lovie made that won games. In fact we likely would not know.




I guess people forget the One playoff win in the previous TEN YEARS before Lovie got here.


Granted, some of the stuff you said is true and Lovie has faults, but if they guy is gonna keep winning at a .560 clip and getting to the NFC championship game every three years, Im good with that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
championships games and division titles are meaningless unless you win the superbowl...all last season did was push the team back in the draft and get angelo and smith another season to fail...the ten years before lovie were bad yes...but i was not happy with those fools either.

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:06 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
I get what you are saying, Roger. I'm just saying that there is a lot of evidence that supports the fact that he is not nearly as good as his record suggests. Last year was really the only time I had seen him make noticeable moves in games that helped the team (benching certain players, etc).

Another knock on his is look at the amount of "Lovie guys" that have been brought in here and failed....and I mean failed miserably; Adam Archuletta, Terry Shea (who in turn brought with him Jonathan Quinn), Pisa Tinoisamoa (who was a good player, but he was ouchy in STL and ouchy with the Bears, and now he's out of football because he is ouchy), Orlando Pace, promote Bob Babich to Dcoord, etc.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:11 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
312player wrote:
championships games and division titles are meaningless unless you win the superbowl

Im of the opinion if you keep getting there, youll win one eventually.

Hell they were down 5 in the 4th quarter of the one they were in.



312player wrote:
...all last season did was push the team back in the draft and get angelo and smith another season to fail...the ten years before lovie were bad yes...but i was not happy with those fools either.

Angelo has been awful now for a while. Id like to see what Lovie would do if maybe he had ONE DECENT FIRST ROUND PICK to work with.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jun 19, 2006 2:47 pm
Posts: 13380
Location: The far western part of south east North Dakota
pizza_Place: Boboli
For me, three playoff appearances in 7 years is not a winning record.

Maybe I'm just too demanding (maybe I'm just like my mother...)...

_________________
Juice's Lecture Notes wrote:
I smell a bit....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:16 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
rogers park bryan wrote:
312player wrote:
championships games and division titles are meaningless unless you win the superbowl

Im of the opinion if you keep getting there, youll win one eventually.

the Minnesota Vikings of the 1970s, the Buffalo Bills of the 1990s, and Philadelphia Eagles of the 2000's, all wrote:
Yeah sure....

:lol: :P

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:20 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Killer V wrote:
For me, three playoff appearances in 7 years is not a winning record.

Maybe I'm just too demanding (maybe I'm just like my mother...)...

Its better than most and the 3 playoff wins are kind of a big deal. Maybe im just afraid to go back to the Jauronstedt years


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:23 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Its better than most and the 3 playoff wins are kind of a big deal. Maybe im just afraid to go back to the Jauronstedt years

But here's the thing. In recent years, there have been teams that have won FOUR playoff games during just ONE season (round, whatever) of NFL playoffs- Packers, Giants, Steelers

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 8:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 10:15 am
Posts: 27591
pizza_Place: nick n vito's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Killer V wrote:
For me, three playoff appearances in 7 years is not a winning record.

Maybe I'm just too demanding (maybe I'm just like my mother...)...

Its better than most and the 3 playoff wins are kind of a big deal. Maybe im just afraid to go back to the Jauronstedt years





i was pissed when jauron had that insanely lucky season 13-3 because i knew jauron would get an extension and it was a bad move..just like lovie last season with him getting so lucky he got an extension..another bad move like jauron's extension. i am confident you backed the jauron extension at the time..am i wrong?

_________________
The Original Kid Cairo wrote:
Laurence Holmes is a fucking weirdo, a nerd in denial, and a wannabe. Not a very good radio host either.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:10 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
312player wrote:




i was pissed when jauron had that insanely lucky season 13-3 because i knew jauron would get an extension and it was a bad move..just like lovie last season with him getting so lucky he got an extension..another bad move like jauron's extension. i am confident you backed the jauron extension at the time..am i wrong?

Why would you think that? Of course not. I never liked Jauron. And people talk about Lovie's horseshoe, 2001 was the luckiest season of all time, thats why they got housed by Philly.


Last year and 2001 are not even close to comparable and Jauron didnt have 2 other playoff appearances including a SuperBowl


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:51 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Frank Coztansa wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Lovie is a winning coach.

And do you think that is because of Lovie or in spite of him?

It's a large enough sample size by now combined with having a shitty GM the whole time that it's fair to say it's because of Lovie. If it's not because of Lovie than it's because of the players, meaning it's because of Angelo. I'm gonna confidently say Lovie is better at his job than JA is at his.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:56 am 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 08, 2006 6:17 pm
Posts: 102657
pizza_Place: Vito & Nick's
I agree.

That still doesn't mean Lovie is as good as his record indicates.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
It's more fun to be a victim
Caller Bob wrote:
There will never be an effective vaccine. I'll never get one anyway.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: In defense of Lovie
PostPosted: Fri Oct 14, 2011 10:00 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 11:17 am
Posts: 72380
Location: Palatine
pizza_Place: Lou Malnatis
Frank Coztansa wrote:
I agree.

That still doesn't mean Lovie is as good as his record indicates.

Im not sure what you mean by that. First of all, his record isn't outstandingly awesome. It's pretty good. And he has been a pretty good coach. Second, dont all of us pretty much agree that Angelo is a shitty GM? He's done a terrible job of getting Lovie talent, especially on the offensive side of the ball. So if anything, that leads me to think Lovie is a better coach than his record would indicate, not worse.

_________________
Fare you well, fare you well
I love you more than words can tell
Listen to the river sing sweet songs
To rock my soul


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 46 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Warren Newson and 40 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group