- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 14,987
- Liked Posts:
- 14,786
Auto correct is far too annoying to be turned on here- I can live with a typo here or there if it means not having to undo auto correct mangling "Trestman" every time I type it.
From a chat with Michael C. Wright when he was asked about how successful Arians would have been here:
@mikecwright: What’s that cliché about hindsight? It’s so easy to look at Bruce Arians' 6-1 record in Arizona and dream about what could have been. But I’m a firm believer of another cliché: It’s about the Jimmys and Joes, not Xs and Os. That’s not to say Arians isn’t a better coach than Marc Trestman. I really don’t know. But what I do know is it would be overly simplistic to try and compare what Arians and Trestman have done over their respective tenures because there are too many other dynamics at play. Obviously, the personnel in Arizona and Chicago are different and roster turnover rates at the respective franchises aren’t the same either. Also, you’ve got to remember that Arizona had been horrible for quite a while, meaning the Cardinals probably have more high picks than the Bears. That’s not even getting into the differences in the coaching staffs top to bottom. In my estimation, something as seemingly insignificant as a strength and conditioning staff could truly be a difference maker between what might be going on with one ballclub compared to the next. So while it would be easy for me to say the Bears would be better off with Arians, you could truly be able to say that only if he were placed in the exact same situation as Trestman and flourished.
For all of this Arians love, I think Mike Pettine should be the COTY. Rookie coach - avoided popular opinion (Johnny Football), doing it with a bunch of no-names and with their best player suspended for the year and with some big injuries on o-line.
The fact that Cleveland is 5-3 and in the thick of things in a tough division suggests should earn Pettine some consideration.
Rodgers era isn't over. He'll get 1 or 2 more most likely. (unfortunately)
It was an easy decision since Flynn new the playbook and coaching staff.yes. and wouldn't you expect the bears in that situation to go back to the last guy on the roster rather than actually try to improve?
Not as long as Brady and manning are still in the league.
That is kinda interesting. We hear a lot of the GB being run so well with 20
years of two of the best qbs to ever play the game and only one SB for each.
Goes to show that it's a team game.
ust wanted to bump this after reading a piece by Mike C Wright.You can't just take out the first three games. Also, three games is hardly enough to bitch about regressing. I might as well say "See the team is improving!" after the next win. Instead, look at season to season. They aren't playing well this year and no one is arguing that but don't be a dumbshit and make ridiculous arguments, as hard as that is for you.
Based on all the responses to your comment I'd say you're the only meatball who agrees with what you're saying. Not entirely surprising though.