First.

_________________

you son of a

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

I guess I don't have your HoF vote.

_________________

now you get to go down as the guy who first called for his firing

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Well, look at his track record so far with the Bears since his hiring. No wins. No visible progress with Jay Cutler. No indication he understands defense. Hasn't beaten Green Bay. He's got to go.

I have a good feeling I'll be right faster than the Fire Lovie crowd was.

_________________

Hard to argue.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George

Reminds me of my Fire Dale Sveum thread.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014

Here's some data for the Fire Trestman! file.

Contrary to Emery's description of the Bears' new head coach, Trestman did not consistently achieve excellence as an NFL offensive coordinator. Here's his record (far right column is NFL points ranking, second from right is yards):

1989 CLE 16th 14th
1995 SFO 2nd 1st
1996 SFO 6th 3rd
1998 ARI 13th 15th
1999 ARI 29th 30th
2000 ARI 24th 29th
2002 OAK 1st 2nd
2003 OAK 25th 26th

Lots of mediocre to horrible years there for Air Canada.

_________________

Mully and Hanley picked up my point that they could have kept Lovie AND hired Trestman as an OC thus keeping the strenghts intact while getting everything they were going to get from Trestman as a HC.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Your point is a good one, but we should remember that Emery's claim is that he values Trestman's "leadership qualities" as much as his offensive expertise. As Emery said yesterday, "Trestman has shown that he can command a locker room...and that's demonstrated by the fact that he has won championships."

It is, of course, laughable that Emery considers Trestman a "great leader" because he excelled in the CFL, an eight-team league that occupies the same space in the Canadian cultural imagination as syrup-making and snowshoeing. Emery's assessment of Trestman's ability is almost as absurd as Noisewater's argument that Arians and Trestman are basically the same guy because Arians beat a bunch of mediocre teams this season as the Colts interim head coach. At least Arians was excelling against NFL competition. For the past 9 seasons, Trestman has been outsmarting a bunch of goofs who might not get a second interview to be head coach at Maine South.

_________________

That is how I see it. It is not difficult to motivate CFL players. They are on the fringe of football thankful to have a job. It would be like motivating semi pro players.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

There were issues with all of them. I think I wanted Arians too, but I'm not as down on Trestman as you guys. From what I heard in interviews the issue with him was his personal/leadership skills. Maybe he learned that in the CFL.

I'm excited there is no more Lovie, I could not stand his philosophies. From the press conference I got the feeling he is the complete opposite. Maybe it will translate to success maybe they will fail miserably but I welcome the change and am excited about the possibilities.

I'm not saying that Trestman is doomed to failure. Rather, I'm simply pointing out that he comes surrounded by a lot of questions, particularly since he didn't achieve consistent success as an offensive coordinator and hasn't been employed in the NFL since 2004. On paper, the Arians hire would have been more impressive, especially since his OC here would have been Ken Whisenhunt. But only time will tell about both guys.

_________________

Looking at it right now, if offensively philosophy was a primary consideration, I like the team of Chudzinski/Turner. That was not going to happen here. Trestman/Kroemer is probably a good hire for the offense. I don't know what it will mean for the team.

I guess any shift from defense to offense is a positive one as that is clearly the priority in the current NFL.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

It would have been nice if he could have gotten a job that would let him take Wisenhunt and Grimm. We could kind of compare teams. They were pretty bad in AZ so there is no guarantee they would have done a good job here either.

Arians has been with a lot of teams in different roles. Why? Is that by choice or is he being released by the teams?

This is something that really annoys me about Chicago fans. A lot of you didn't care about who the new coach was. Just getting rid of Lovie is all that really mattered. You'll create ways to like the new guy. As a fan I want to win the SB but knowing we're going to have a competitive team every year gives me something to look forward to. Some years that's good enough to sneak into the playoffs and win SB's like the Packers and Giants.

Lovie didn't keep the team competitive. Bears snuck into the superbowl and lost but they were never Giants or Packers level. Who did you want? Or did you want to keep Lovie?

They will create ways to like him now, but it won't take long and most of them will want him gone too. The next coach is always going to be the great one, until he is hired.

It will be funny to see folks like spaulding longing for the days of Lovie.

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

Won't happen. I never wanted Wanne back over Lovie. Sometimes ya gotta move on. This team could be a mess next year and it won't change my feelings.

They had 10 and 11 wins in 2 of the last 3 seasons and would have had 10 the other year if Jay didn't get hurt. That's pretty competitive.

They were never like the Packers or Giants recently, that I agree with. But that quip about the Superbowl is just not true. The Bears were without question the best team in the NFC that season. They were not perfect by any means, few playoff teams are. Keep in mind that despite the poor defense and turnovers in the Super Bowl, they were down by 5 points with the ball in the 4th quarter.

You can get on Lovie for a number of different things, but he did NOT "sneak into the superbowl"

_________________

You have to recognize when it is time to move on. The Bears were stagnating and they were within 2 years of a major philosophical shift anyway. There simply are not enough young playmakers to sustain the defense into the future AND it is becoming clear that offense wins championships.

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

Good post by GD. I liked Lovie and most of the time,his teams came ready to play. Bears always seemed close most Sundays. Lovie could never get it right on offense even after getting Cutler and Marshall. It was time.

_________________
favrefan said:"Chris Coghlan isn't gonna pay your rent, Jimmy."

I think this team had 1 more year. That could have been good enough to win a championship. I don't personally feel they were that far away even though they didn't make the playoffs. Blowing it up really doesn't make sense to me. Making a move just for the sake of making a move isn't smart to me. This was a team that never quit on it's coach. That's shouldn't be anything to write home about but we see it happen very often. Now not only have you gotten rid of the coach but you let the defensive coordinator walk too. That means we're basically in rebuilding mode. I don't like it. I don't like 4 win seasons even if they do bring good draft picks. It's not fun to watch.

I disagree

You are so right on this one Spaulding.

_________________

Bad sports thought.

No, the Bears never may have been @ the NYG or GB "level", but they sure as hell didn't "sneak" into any Super Bowl. It is arguable that they were not only the best team in the conference (as mentioned in another post), but that they were the best team in the League that year.

I agree that @ this point that Lovie had to go. Being "competitive" hasn't been enough to get the team into the playoffs more than once in the past 6 yrs.

No it's not. Maybe they didn't exactly sneak in in the conventional sense, but they had lots of luck that season.

It was a down year for the NFC the year the Bears went to the Super Bowl. No where near as strong as it has been the last 3 or 4 years.