Kyyle23

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) Were those flukes? Or DJ's good coaching? I dont think Ints are flukes, you do. I think it is a result of good positioning, smart plays, and there is a little luck involved in deflections. But you seem to think it is luck, and only luck.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 12:03 PM) I thought that was 04-05? Are you talking about the B2B Ints against Cleveland and SF to end the game? Because if you are, that was Jaurons 13-3 year http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/chi/2001.htm

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:58 AM) I don't get it...if you ask any NFL coach what are the largest determining factors in who wins or loses a football game, each and every one of them would list "turnovers." Lovie's teams led the NFL in takeaways over his nine year tenure in Chicago. Say what you want about Lovie's game management skills or his offenses, but the man is one of the best defensive coaches in recent NFL history, IMHO. No arguments here. Whatever he does, he does it well. Peanut was a good defender before Lovie came in(I still remember that INT against Minnesota where he basically beasted on Moss and just took it away), but he became something else entirely within lovies system.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:52 AM) No, it's when those interceptions literally win the game for you that it becomes a fluke. I mean seriously, when you watched that season when Mike Brown and the defense won 2-3 games in a row in the last 5-6 minutes, that's normal? That's not fluky? No one ever stepped back and thought "s***, this team is not nearly as good as their record, we got bailed out by those lucky plays?" Devin Hester returning kicks against Arizona - no one else though that was lucky the Bears came back and escaped with a win? At some point yeah, you chalk it up to good players making good plays in a good defensive scheme. But everyone that paid attention to those games knew the team wasn't as good as the record indicated. And the reason is that everyone knew those wins should not have been wins because of those lucky plays. You mean when it was Dick Jauron coaching, and not Lovie Smith?

QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:49 AM) He was. He also had one of the greatest offenses ever assembled and was an incredible offensive mind. And, Lovie Smiths defense.

QUOTE (Lamar Johnson 23 @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:35 AM) Your opinion please...let's say that (for whatever reason) the Angels offered Albert Pujols to the Sox for Paul Konerko, straight up, no financial incentives. Do you think Reinsdorf would okay the deal? In 5 years you would be crying about Reinsdorf handcuffing the Sox finances and making it impossible for them to make any other moves.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:35 AM) Reread what I posted - I've said 10-15 of his victories have come from lucky defensive plays or special teams plays. Not sure how anyone can really dispute that. This year against the Panthers - is Newton throwing a pick 6 in the closing minutes good coaching? Or a fluke? I've credited Lovie for bringing in his defensive scheme and coaching up the defense. I refuse to consider him "above average," however, for being good at half of the game of football. Good coaches win games through "lucky defensive plays or special teams plays", that is how it is done. You dont just minus out those victories from a coaches record because of the way it was done. By your definition every interception that ever happened could be considered a fluke or lucky. The offense consistently sucked in Lovies tenure, there is no getting around it. But there isnt just offense and defense. there is offense, defense and special teams, and Lovies teams consistently performed above average in 2 out of those 3 facets of the game. Its not worth arguing with you about because you dont like Lovie and I am glad he is gone and looking forward to the next era.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:15 AM) Show me where people put the blame on Cutler. If the offense sucks, it's not Cutler's fault, it's Lovie's fault. If Cutler throws a red zone INT, it's because the line sucks. Ultimately, nothing is ever his fault. Man, you need to look no further than this thread during games for the past 4 years.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:07 AM) By its very definition... the new .500 is .560

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 11:04 AM) It won't change my mind, I just want to know how you can label him as above average given the results over the last 9 years. And I would like to know how you can discredit his entire defense as being lucky and based on flukes.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:56 AM) How is a sub .560 winning percentage and playoff appearances 3 times in 9 years, going 3-3, "above average?" He was a good defensive coach and a f***ing horrendous offensive coach. That's indisputable. How can you just ignore half of his job? Nothing I will say will change your mind. You already think everything he does is based on luck and flukes. Why bother arguing with you? I never said he was the best ever, but he is above average

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:51 AM) I say it as Cutler is one Bear who is coddled by the fans. Face it, the guy has struggled in big games, and his leadership up until this point in his career, has to be questioned. The QB is the focal point of every team. He needs to grow up. Maybe having a kid and a new offense will do that, but he is Jeff George right now. WTF? Are you serious?

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:40 AM) Most teams do a lot better with their starter than their back up. I never said he was awful, he's just not anywhere near elite. Blame everything else. That's what Jay would do, and if he's awful vs. GB, if that's reason enough to criticize Lovie, it should be reason enough to let Cutler have it. You say that as if Cutler never has been criticized for his play against GB

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:40 AM) Every other team emphasizes turnovers. Every other team tries to turnover the ball and return kicks/punts for touchdowns. Lovie just happened to have maybe the best special teams coach ever, the best return man ever, and some really good defensive players. But good defensive players don't magically cause stupid QB's to throw terrible pick-6's. LOL. You wont give Lovie any credit for anything. At least you are consistent with that. He wasnt the best coach ever, but he was definitely above average

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:22 AM) There is nothing about Jon Gruden's coaching record that says anyone should want him. People just see him on tv and drool and say "give me" because they are familiar. quit being a sad sally. you are just mad because you arent on a beach

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:17 AM) I don't get why everyone wants Jon Gruden. The guy's a complete moron on MNF, and his career coaching record was basically the same as Lovie's (95-81). Sure, he won the big game, but he was nothing special over his last 6 seasons as a head coach after taking over Dungy's ready-to-win team in 2002. He is not my preference, I actually really want McCoy now that I have been reading these stories about him. I just think getting Gruden wouldnt be the worst thing in the world, but he is not my #1

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 10:03 AM) I really don't understand this mindset. The NFL has changed more in the past 5 seasons than any other time over the last 3 decades, and people want to bring in old men who have been out of the game the entire time? New blood, please. Well, part of my statement was new blood. The other was oldies but goodies. Plus, Gruden isnt exactly old

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 09:57 AM) And I still maintain he's the luckiest coach in the league. Having your defense score so many points is fluky, not matter how much emphasis he puts on turnovers. thats fine. its wrong, but thats fine. Apparently St Louis and Tampa were all lucky when Lovie was there too.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 4, 2013 -> 09:42 AM) Yeah, I can understand the difference of opinion on him...but I think the fact that Belichick met with him last summer and implemented the fast pace goes pretty far towards whether his innovations are just gimmicks or not. It doesn't matter to me whether his kids translate to the NFL or not...it only matters whether his ideas transfer to the NFL. I think they do. I understand what you are saying about his ideas, but i think his personnel dictates his playcalling. He wont be able to run his Nike factory out there anymore against the Converse kids. It will be interesting to see how he runs an NFL team though. I just dont know if I want to see the Bears as the guinea pig

Im really not that enamored with Kelly TBH. He seems really gimmicky, his entire offense is predicated on his athletes being so much faster than everyone else on the college level. Not many of his kids translate to the NFL. I would be happy if Emery stuck with the NFL offensive minds, and if he brought in a Gruden/Holmgren/Cowher, that would work too.

Ben Davis. Never Forget(part 2)

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 3, 2013 -> 04:39 PM) And has for a number of seasons. I got a chance to listen to some sports talk today....my god there are people who were surprised/shocked Lovie got fired? Some even angry? WTF? Missing the playoffs 5 times in 6 years, 6 times in 9 years is f***ing pathetic. Lovie was incredibly average as a coach and his record supports that - beat the crap teams, lost to the good teams. Good f***ing riddance. Well, his record was 81-63, so he wasnt exactly average

QUOTE (MexSoxFan#1 @ Jan 3, 2013 -> 03:58 PM) I love this post, especially the bolded part... I also can't stand the fact that the Bears really really suck at HB screens or creating plays to get Hester in open space to best utilize his speed/quickness. I agree that they have no idea how to run a screen, but i completely disagree about Hester. He has been given so many opportunities to do something with his speed and quickness and he dances and goes backwards. Hester has been his worst enemy

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jan 3, 2013 -> 01:28 PM) Yeah, digital distribution is the next thing for consoles. I heard the new Xbox is trying to land a deal with a big cable company, basically to combine the two to make one set top box for gaming, tv and movies. Couldnt you see this sort of backfiring too though? Say you dont pay your cable/bundle deal on time, does your downloaded content go away until you pay your bill? Also, you have to imagine if it Time Warner/Comcast, there will be a large contingent of people that wont buy it simply because they dont want to change their subscription from dish or just outright hate comcast(me) or time warner. Seems like a risky play to combine them.