Are the Bears a Legit spot for Shanny?

Going back to the thread title...Chicago is in a much bigger mess than us, at least we have a semblance of WR corps and a pretty good defense. Only thing Chicago has going for it is that Urlacher might come back next season.

Shanny would have to be an idiot to pass up DC for Chi Town even if the money is better.

Going back to the thread title...Chicago is in a much bigger mess than us, at least we have a semblance of WR corps and a pretty good defense. Only thing Chicago has going for it is that Urlacher might come back next season.

Shanny would have to be an idiot to pass up DC for Chi Town even if the money is better.

More importantly the Chicago franchise is very conservative financially. Not to be confused with cheap a la the Bengals and Cardinals but from what I've read they seem to go out of their way at times to save money. One of the main reasons they're considering keeping Lovie Smith is because they still owe him money.

Showing any interest in the bears{if he is not already signed and we dont know it} will def give him leverage.Everyone,and i mean everyone,knows we will overpay to get our man.Also shanny could use this to help get more control if he is hired,i.e. he has final say over personel descisions.I wouldnt mind him as a coach but i dont want him making personel descisions,he did a lousy job of that in Denver

Nice quote but when you say we will over pay for our man, who do you me by we? Im a big fan but i have not written any checks to sign or pay the coaches of the Redskins.

When will the time come that the Redskins can keep a coach for more than 3 years. This has to contribute to our poor recorder over the past 10 years. If you look at the other teams in the NFC East look how long their HC has been in place. These teams seem to have much more success with this method of keeping the same HC and system. I hope we can learn something from them when it comes down to selecting a Head Coach.

When will the time come that the Redskins can keep a coach for more than 3 years. This has to contribute to our poor recorder over the past 10 years. If you look at the other teams in the NFC East look how long their HC has been in place. These teams seem to have much more success with this method of keeping the same HC and system. I hope we can learn something from them when it comes down to selecting a Head Coach.In my opinion, Zorn wasn't bad enough where he had to be fired after two years for the good of the team, but the coaching staff itself needs a shake-up. If you didn't cut your losses with Zorn here, he just becomes a lame duck coach all of next year. It's highly possible that the offense wouldn't improve under Zorn in a third year.

I'm not convinced Shanahan will last more than two years here either. Not that I think he'll get fired, but the temptation to resign will always be there because better jobs will come available. I think if Kyle Shanahan coaches here for a season, and gets a head coaching job in this league after that, that Mike Shanahan will not end the streak of non-Gibbs head coaches that only captain the ship for two years or fewer.

Shanahan will coach here more then 2 years, I promise... how could you not collect the ultimate pay day for your family for generations. He will make it work, have faith SKINS!

In my opinion, Zorn wasn't bad enough where he had to be fired after two years for the good of the team, but the coaching staff itself needs a shake-up. If you didn't cut your losses with Zorn here, he just becomes a lame duck coach all of next year. It's highly possible that the offense wouldn't improve under Zorn in a third year.

I'm not convinced Shanahan will last more than two years here either. Not that I think he'll get fired, but the temptation to resign will always be there because better jobs will come available. I think if Kyle Shanahan coaches here for a season, and gets a head coaching job in this league after that, that Mike Shanahan will not end the streak of non-Gibbs head coaches that only captain the ship for two years or fewer.I think the opposite about both Shanahans. I'd expect Mike to be here for a good 5 years with the expectation that he'll be succeeded by Kyle.

I'm sorry, but there's not a prominent coach out there that would take the Bears job right now. Who wants to step in and deal with a "franchise" QB who has lost all confidence? Or enter their first draft without the luxury of a first round pick? Also, the ownership in Chicago is very frugal when it comes to free agent acquisitions (minus the Cutler trade). It's going to be a very long time before the Bears start winning again.

Just crap to drum up hype to increase rag sales or hits on the net. Chicago is a mess and can't up the ante like The Danny can.

In my opinion, Zorn wasn't bad enough where he had to be fired after two years for the good of the team, but the coaching staff itself needs a shake-up. If you didn't cut your losses with Zorn here, he just becomes a lame duck coach all of next year. It's highly possible that the offense wouldn't improve under Zorn in a third year.

I'm not convinced Shanahan will last more than two years here either. Not that I think he'll get fired, but the temptation to resign will always be there because better jobs will come available. I think if Kyle Shanahan coaches here for a season, and gets a head coaching job in this league after that, that Mike Shanahan will not end the streak of non-Gibbs head coaches that only captain the ship for two years or fewer.


Biggest mistake in hindsight was the way Turner was canned. 7-6 in 2000 and DS pulled the plug, and didn't give Turner a shot at making the playoffs a second time around. Fault the Norv all you want, but with the exception of Gibbs, he had the best O scheme around. In fact he probably had the best O scheme even over Gibbs. THe current bunch of WRs and JC would have broken records ala Johnson/Westbrook/Connell/Alexander in '99 with that system in place. Screw this WCO crap.