I'll take it back to what I always ask at these times...who would you replace Pace and Fox with? You can complain about them all you want...who are you replacing them with thats better?
I'll take it back to what I always ask at these times...who would you replace Pace and Fox with? You can complain about them all you want...who are you replacing them with thats better?
Depends, who's going to be available for hire in the offseason? Cannot really answer the question until answers are available to pick from. I would keep Pace, and I'd do it for another 2-3 years minimum. Kinda like discussion who the Bears should pick w/out knowing how the college season unfolds and knowing where the Bears pick. What point is it talking about Garrett or Kizer or whoever if the Bears end up picking 5-10. Neither is making it there.
I'll take it back to what I always ask at these times...who would you replace Pace and Fox with? You can complain about them all you want...who are you replacing them with thats better?
+ 1,000 That's my thought too. And someone always brings up crazy names (like "just hire The Chin" or other people who have zero chance of coming to the Bears).
Yeah seqq, we're banged up, lack talent, and seriously lack depth but that does not necessarily add up to 1-5, soon to be 1-7 unless we also lack......here it comes......a decent HC who can lead and overcome those obstacles the way the best HCs do.
Ya' see here's the thing. Fox was a product who was sold to us as being that kind of HC when in reality he's the polar opposite. He can't win unless his team IS hitting on all 12 cylinders like a big old purring Rolls Royce Merlin aviation engine in a P41.
This is a guy whose more lost than Trestman was right now and in every presser he finds anyone else to blame but himself. As wonky as Tresty was at least he did take the blame for most of his issues 'til very end before he scapegoated Cutler. Fox is already doing that now and has yet to make one mea culpa for some of the worst personnel decisions I have ever seen from a HC with his years of experience.
So you can fiddle away on this tune you want to play forever if you choose to but I'm not dancing to it. Facts are facts. This is a very bad football team. Far worse than it's talent would indicate and the last fact is that it is John Fox's bad football team and no one else's.
I thought Fox was brought in as an experienced HC, unlike Trestman, Lovie, Jauron, Wannstedt...at least that's how i saw it. And it's good to know they were running on all cylinders at least once this year...or am i not suppose to take that literally
More lost than Trestman due to the fact that he says different things to the media...wtf?...And what are these horrendous personal decisions that make you lose your mind?
I'll take it back to what I always ask at these times...who would you replace Pace and Fox with? You can complain about them all you want...who are you replacing them with thats better?
Depends, who's going to be available for hire in the offseason? Cannot really answer the question until answers are available to pick from. I would keep Pace, and I'd do it for another 2-3 years minimum. Kinda like discussion who the Bears should pick w/out knowing how the college season unfolds and knowing where the Bears pick. What point is it talking about Garrett or Kizer or whoever if the Bears end up picking 5-10. Neither is making it there.
I'm of the mind you can't keep changing coaches every two years. To me it doesn't help the team whatsoever unless the guy being hired is a freakin rock star. Fox is going to get a third year, and in my opinion he should. This team still needs talent, we talked about the deficiencies still in place all off season, and now some of you act like those conversations never took place...like we were locked and loaded and ready to go for the playoffs. Some people around here didn't think we'd have a winning season...it is what it is. Did I think we'd be better this year? Yep, and that still may occur...there's still 10 games left. I'm not gonna get over excited about anything.
Depends, who's going to be available for hire in the offseason? Cannot really answer the question until answers are available to pick from. I would keep Pace, and I'd do it for another 2-3 years minimum. Kinda like discussion who the Bears should pick w/out knowing how the college season unfolds and knowing where the Bears pick. What point is it talking about Garrett or Kizer or whoever if the Bears end up picking 5-10. Neither is making it there.
I'm of the mind you can't keep changing coaches every two years. To me it doesn't help the team whatsoever unless the guy being hired is a freakin rock star. Fox is going to get a third year, and in my opinion he should. This team still needs talent, we talked about the deficiencies still in place all off season, and now some of you act like those conversations never took place...like we were locked and loaded and ready to go for the playoffs. Some people around here didn't think we'd have a winning season...it is what it is. Did I think we'd be better this year? Yep, and that still may occur...there's still 10 games left. I'm not gonna get over excited about anything.
I don't disagree, but when the team doesn't seem to be heading in the right direction and the talent is better then I have to start questioning the coaches. Here is what I believe: This team is vastly more talented then 2 years ago(at least on def) The injuries are a problem, but they have been an ongoing problem for about 4 years now. I don't know if it's a league wide issue now but it always seems the Bears have multiple key people missing vast amounts of time. The problem is a general lack of discipline there are WAY to many flags. This is also heavily slanted b/c I had no want for Fox to be the HC of this team, while I didn't think it would look like this, I never thought Fox could do much more then get a base to build upon. Since he cannot seem to even get that going I'm not sure why you keep him around.
I guess I should've ended with the Patriots or should they never be used as a comparison?
My point was that good teams are resilient. They grind through injuries while bad teams let injuries define them.
Since you want to get nit-picky and draw on numbers you are wrong about the Bears having as many players out for the year as the Chargers. The Chargers have 17 players on IR & 12 of them are no doubt done for the year. The Bears do have 13 on I-R, 5 of which are out for the year. I'll let you get the calculator out.
Dallas has 6 on I-R but none of them are named Tony Romo nor Dez Bryant.
I listed a couple teams off the top of my head that had some injuries to major pieces of their team to make a point. I don't know maybe I'm wrong. Maybe bad teams just have more injuries year after year and good teams that win with injuries they are just really lucky or they go to church more or something.
I could go on and argue that 1 or more of the 6 slated starters on I-R actually are not NFL starters but that is getting away from my point....or is it?
So now we are breaking it down to who is definitely gone for the year vs who is only going to miss a significant part of the season lol ok my bad!
Yes, your bad indeed for there is no 'now' as if something has changed.
It was always just as you had quoted me 'no team has had season ending injuries like the Chargers'.
season ending injury -> definitely gone for the year
I'll take it back to what I always ask at these times...who would you replace Pace and Fox with? You can complain about them all you want...who are you replacing them with thats better?
+ 1,000 That's my thought too. And someone always brings up crazy names (like "just hire The Chin" or other people who have zero chance of coming to the Bears).
So I guess you don't ever fire anyone if that is the criteria. I don't even know why teams conduct interview then. All these teams firing their coaches without knowing who they are going to replace them with. We should still have Jureon then. Because by now it would be like his 15th year with the team and surely the rebuild would be complete. I mean what could possibly go wrong with holding on to a mediocre coach for years and years (cough-cough-Jeff Fisher-cough-cough). Guess the Cubs made a huge mistake in firing Renteria. They should have stuck with him. By all means if something isn't working, hang on to it forever because the law of averages would mean that at some point it will work right?
If we want to go there, why let Cutler do because who are you going to replace him with? Can you name a name? Are you sure he's going to be better? If you don't have someone in mind apparently you can't replace him.
So I guess you don't ever fire anyone if that is the criteria. I don't even know why teams conduct interview then. All these teams firing their coaches without knowing who they are going to replace them with. We should still have Jureon then. Because by now it would be like his 15th year with the team and surely the rebuild would be complete. I mean what could possibly go wrong with holding on to a mediocre coach for years and years (cough-cough-Jeff Fisher-cough-cough). Guess the Cubs made a huge mistake in firing Renteria. They should have stuck with him. By all means if something isn't working, hang on to it forever because the law of averages would mean that at some point it will work right?
If we want to go there, why let Cutler do because who are you going to replace him with? Can you name a name? Are you sure he's going to be better? If you don't have someone in mind apparently you can't replace him.
I'm not saying we shouldn't fire Fox at some point. And of course teams fire coaches and GM's in order to get better. We've had 6 GM's and HC's in the past 5 years (3 of each). If Pace and Fox get replaced then it will be 8. You can fire your GM's and HC's every year if you want to. Change them like you change your underwear if you want to.
But can you win that way?
History says no.
That doesn't mean you don't fire Fox. It's just a bad situation we're in right now as a franchise. Real bad.
