Quote:
I think we agree on most things. I do think there is this urge to completely diminish Ditka's contribution to those Bear teams <cough> Bernstein <cough>. Ditka wasn't Gibbs, Parcells or Walsh, but he was a good coach for the Bears.
I give credit to Finks to bringing in most of the players to the Super Bowl team. And I certainly give credit to Ryan. But if Finks would have found a good quarterback in the 70's, the Bears probably would have won a division title or two before Ditka. For a former quarterback, he was lousy in picking them for the Bears until McMahon was available, and who knows if Finks would have drafted a QB that high if Ditka and Halas didn't have a say.
Ryan was also here four years before Ditka, and they didn't win really anything. Ryan also would have kept Len Walterscheid instead of Dave Duerson. And I think Ditka pushed Ryan to replace
Jim Osborne with Steve McMichael. So Ryan wasn't infallible. And Ditka's offenses did move and control the football for the most part, which helped the defense. I think the four years under Armstrong, the Bears never finished better than 22nd in total yards on offense. From 1983 thru Ditka's last year, they never finished below 13th in total yards.
Vainisi was an accountant, not a player personnel guy. He was Ditka's confidant. Actually if McCaskey doesn't fire Vainisi at the end of the 1986 season, Vainisi may have convinced Ditka to handle the 1987 strike a bit differently, not be so pro Spare Bear.
yes, for sure, more common ground that not. daniel from deerfield knows which evil generation ditka belongs to, knows how the man from bannockburn leans politically. ditka bad. easier than dumping on la russa.
as far as the rest...i felt the bears had a semblance of a defense prior to ditka's arrival. you'd get the occasional blow-out loss on astro-turf, 33-9...but, the club did make the playoffs in 79 and usually played everyone tough, defensively. no way that the greatest ever nfl defense started at ground zero in 1982. neil armstrong made his mark on D, ryan with minnesota...both came from the viking school, brought over by another ex-viking, finks. you can't argue against the minnesota defense from the late 60's on through the 70's.
as far as vainisi, i remember the contract hampton was happy with during vainisi's tenure. at the prime of his career, signed an extension that made him the 5th or 6th highest paid DL in the league. i looked it up:
Quote:
CHICAGO -- Chicago Bears defensive lineman Dan Hampton has signed a four-year contract extension starting in 1986 that will make him one of the highest-paid defensive lineman in the NFL.
The four-year package agreed to Wednesday is estimated worth $2.7 million.
just for that, virginia should have made vainisi an honorary mccaskey. other contracts that were also advantageous to the bears. i agree with you, vainisi was the first sign of stormy waters between the coaching staff and upper management. mike and mom sent a message to iron mike by firing the guy who saved the mccaskey's millions.