our coaching staff is well below our old one.

[Smart]

Mel Tucker is a downgrade (at least running the 4-3 Tampa 2) from Rod Marinelli. He'll either switch to a defensive scheme he is more comfortable with, or he'll be fired. Other than that, the new staff is better.

Trestman is a great offensive mind in a way that Lovie was never a great defensive mind. Lovie needed a good DC to succeed, as evidenced by his failures without Rivera and Rod. We no longer need two great coordinators. With the right DC, Trestman's staff will reach levels which Lovie's never could.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

We played like crap against better teams last year for the most part. Generally a new Head coach and new coaching staff isn't going to win the superbowl the first season. 4 new o-linemen including 2 rookies had to have time to gel and they played very well. Offensively we did pretty well. Defensively not so much. Its still only speculation if we would have won more or not and the same could be said for every team that had injuries. I expected 8 wins (+/- 2) based soley on a new coach and staff. Lovie took a 7-9 team and went 5-11. Lovie took the 14th ranked defense and made it the 15th ranked defense. He took the 28th ranked offense and made it the 32nd ranked offense in his first season as head coach.!!! I'm sure you were saying how much greater Dick Jauron was after that first year debacle by Lovie. A lot of people were thinking the Bears may not win as many games but the team may be bettter. At least something got better. The ST weren't as bad as it seemms and if they had a in his prime Devin Hester, it may have been better. The least you cake is give Trestman the same consideration you gave Lovie.

We improved our talent from last year, New staff should not mean expecting less wins. No freaking way we don't win 3 or 4 more games if we had even a average def. We had injures to star Def players. I don't think we were SB bound.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

We played like crap last year and won 10 games then added 4 New Olinemen a real TE and a offensive minded coach. So why would anyone expect 8 or 9 wins this year? Injures killed us or we would have hit 12 IMO. But anyone expecting 8-9 wins is just stupid. I'm guessing you had us at 8-9.

I expected 8 during the preseason. After we got off to the good start and I saw how bad some of our opponents were, I upped it to 10, but then after Cutler went down 8 seemed realistic again.

While I did not expect the defense to get THIS much worse (nor the offense to get as much better as it did), I did expect a significant falloff. The defense had been aging and not being replaced adequately by the draft, and it was obvious to a lot of us on here that the defensive line depth was poor. For all the things I and many others got wrong this year, I think we all saw that one coming, and boy did it ever.

I actually thought it would take Trestman more time to get the offense (particularly the line) to gel, so if you want to call me stupid, that's fine. But the predictions that were flying around about 13 wins seemed outlandish. He's a first year coach.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Mel Tucker is a downgrade (at least running the 4-3 Tampa 2) from Rod Marinelli. He'll either switch to a defensive scheme he is more comfortable with, or he'll be fired. Other than that, the new staff is better.

Trestman is a great offensive mind in a way that Lovie was never a great defensive mind. Lovie needed a good DC to succeed, as evidenced by his failures without Rivera and Rod. We no longer need two great coordinators. With the right DC, Trestman's staff will reach levels which Lovie's never could.

But they will reach it because of better talent. Really when did Lovie ever get real players for the offense? How successful would Tman have been giving the same players as Lovie had on offense. Either way well never know but I blame the lack of offensive players in Lovies time here more then Lovie or any of his staffs. I do like Tresman but I don't like his staff.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

I expected 8 during the preseason. After we got off to the good start and I saw how bad some of our opponents were, I upped it to 10, but then after Cutler went down 8 seemed realistic again.

While I did not expect the defense to get THIS much worse (nor the offense to get as much better as it did), I did expect a significant falloff. The defense had been aging and not being replaced adequately by the draft, and it was obvious to a lot of us on here that the defensive line depth was poor. For all the things I and many others got wrong this year, I think we all saw that one coming, and boy did it ever.

I actually thought it would take Trestman more time to get the offense (particularly the line) to gel, so if you want to call me stupid, that's fine. But the predictions that were flying around about 13 wins seemed outlandish. He's a first year coach.

I had the Bears at 11. I see no reason to expect a drop off to a team that added a ton of talent. But no I don't think anyone is stupid. We're all guessing. But you were only right by injuries.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

I had the Bears at 11. I see no reason to expect a drop off to a team that added a ton of talent. But no I don't think anyone is stupid. We're all guessing. But you were only right by injuries.

Injuries ALWAYS happen. We also got lucky in some ways on injuries. The WRs and offensive line were remarkably healthy.

Every team, every roster, needs to be evaluated in terms of it's 53 man depth. Not the starting 22. The Bears roster has been thin for a few years now, thanks to Angelo. It wasn't invalid to look at the defense, see a thin and old depth chart, and say to yourself "hmm...this could be a problem."

 

[leomaz]

We improved our talent from last year, New staff should not mean expecting less wins. No freaking way we don't win 3 or 4 more games if we had even a average def. We had injures to star Def players. I don't think we were SB bound

So Lovie takes a 7-9 team drafts Tommie Harris, Tank Johnson, Bernard Berrian, and Nathan Vasher. Picks up Thomas Jones, John Tait, Rueben Brown and Robbie Gould among others. Trades for Adewale Ogunleye and promptly goes 5-11. I'm sure you were saying what a crap team and coaches we have? They already had Urlacher, Briggs Tillman,Izzy and mike brown. The defense went from 14 to 15 after adding all that talent. And the offense went from 28 to 32 after adding all that talent. They didn't have a chance to make the playoffs. What did Lovie do that was so great his first season that Trestman hasn't done? Seems like richig was correct in his assement that it is bizzaro world except at least in Trestmans first season we had a chance for a playoff spot.

 

[leomaz]

mistakes happen.

So Lovie takes a 7-9 team drafts Tommie Harris, Tank Johnson, Bernard Berrian, and Nathan Vasher. Picks up Thomas Jones, John Tait, Rueben Brown and Robbie Gould among others. Trades for Adewale Ogunleye and promptly goes 5-11. I'm sure you were saying what a crap team and coaches we have? They already had Urlacher, Briggs Tillman,Izzy and mike brown. The defense went from 14 to 15 after adding all that talent. And the offense went from 28 to 32 after adding all that talent. They didn't have a chance to make the playoffs. What did Lovie do that was so great his first season that Trestman hasn't done? Seems like richig was correct in his assement that it is bizzaro world except at least in Trestmans first season we had a chance for a playoff spot.

Robbie Gould actually signed with the team and played in 2005. I'm.

 

[leomaz]

mistakes happen.

I think the future is looking bright

 

[richig07]

We played like crap last year and won 10 games then added 4 New Olinemen a real TE and a offensive minded coach. So why would anyone expect 8 or 9 wins this year? Injures killed us or we would have hit 12 IMO. But anyone expecting 8-9 wins is just stupid. I'm guessing you had us at 8-9.

New coach, new regime, etc...

It's pretty simple really. This team was starting all over from scratch.

 

[blh7068]

Robbie Gould actually signed with the team and played in 2005. I'm.

Not lame at all Leo, you corrected yourself. Doug Brien( who replaced Edinger, IIRC) was so bad that he only lasted a handful of games. Robbie was signed off the street during that 05 season...I think he was doing some sort of carpentry work before joining the team.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Not lame at all Leo, you corrected yourself. Doug Brien( who replaced Edinger, IIRC) was so bad that he only lasted a handful of games. Robbie was signed off the street during that 05 season...I think he was doing some sort of carpentry work before joining the team.

He was on top a house roofing when the Bears called, he hung up on them twice thinking it was a friend pulling a prank.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Like I said almost all your fellow bears fans here were saying 8 to 9 wins. And lets not fool ourselves with your 10 win season in '12...I don't feel like that argument again.You were an 8 or 9 win team that year too disguising yourself as a borderline playoff team.

Almost all = about 3 guys. And they were only right because of injuries to key Def players.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Injuries ALWAYS happen. We also got lucky in some ways on injuries. The WRs and offensive line were remarkably healthy.

Every team, every roster, needs to be evaluated in terms of it's 53 man depth. Not the starting 22. The Bears roster has been thin for a few years now, thanks to Angelo. It wasn't invalid to look at the defense, see a thin and old depth chart, and say to yourself "hmm...this could be a problem."

I think we had this conversation last year. Predictions are based on your starting lineups. No one can predict injuries. We lost Briggs,Tillman,Melton and many more missed time. I think we would have hit 11 easy if healthy. But this thread is about our new staff, any thoughts on them Cali?

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

You can't predict specific injuries, but you can definitely predict that injuries will hit, and hit key guys. Same is true for every team in the league. Yeah we wod have hit 11 if healthy, but if our opponents were all healthy, we wouldn't have won 6.

I think it's premature to just Trestman yet. On really anything. Head coaches need time to establish their creds. One big thing about head coaches is what happens to team chemistry over time. We will see how he does. Obviously I like the direction of the offense, hopefully it stay at this performance level or gets better. Time will tell.

 

[leomaz]

Same is true for every team in the league. Yeah we wod have hit 11 if healthy, but if our opponents were all healthy, we wouldn't have won 6.

Its safe to say if Rodgers plays the whole game we probably would have lost. Injuries hit everyone.

 

[richig07]

I have a hard time getting over the fact that a Robbie Gould miss cost us the division.

I mean, it's not Robbie's fault by ANY FREAKING stretch of the imagination. But that's what makes it so frustrating. He's so money, and it was indoors... 47 yards. God damned man... Just not our year.

 

[leomaz]

I have a hard time getting over the fact that a Robbie Gould miss cost us the division.

I mean, it's not Robbie's fault by ANY FREAKING stretch of the imagination. But that's what makes it so frustrating. He's so money, and it was indoors... 47 yards. God damned man... Just not our year.

Straight down the middle of the field. The funny thing is, according to tbe so-called self anointed experts, he would of made that fg no matter what if it was 1st, 3rd or 4th down. not a chance he or anybody can make a fg on 2nd down

 

[Smart]

A 47 yarder is not guaranteed on any down. Statistically, his chance of making it was about 70%, which means he will miss three out of every ten. It wasn't anywhere close to guaranteed, which is why it was one of the most boneheaded calls in recent memory. People say "well, we might have fumbled", but the odds of us fumbling pale in comparison to the odds of missing that field goal. It was boneheaded.

 

[leomaz]

asinine statement

A 47 yarder is not guaranteed on any down. Statistically, his chance of making it was about 70%, which means he will miss three out of every ten. It wasn't anywhere close to guaranteed, which is why it was one of the most boneheaded calls in recent memory. People say "well, we might have fumbled", but the odds of us fumbling pale in comparison to the odds of missing that field goal. It was boneheaded.

But there is absolutely no gaurantee that they gain positive yards.....ZERO. so you are in fact saying no matter what it would have been different had he gone for it on 1st, 3rd or 4th down? That is the most BONEHEADED STATEMENT EVER!!!!! Any number of scenarios could have happened. The way the game was going and the bizarre calls. I was ecstatic he choose to kick it on 2nd down, absolutely thought there was zero chance the most accurate kicker in nfl history would miss a staight on 47 yd fg in a fucking dome. Hell I would be confident he would make it at home. So would 99% of Bears fans. I love a coach who won't be held down by what ifs and second guessing. The problem with any of your odds is that in reality it is always 50/50.