Is ownership really that bad?

[jazzmcfunk]

I've been thinking about this for a while and I'm wondering what the biggest complaint is with the ownership. I know that many feel that ownership should have fired Nagy and Pace during the season, but doesn't loyalty count for anything? I mean if you look at it from that perspective, isn't that a good quality (annoying at times, yes, but still an overall good quality)? In a world where there is often no loyalty at all, this should mean something.
Is it that there is an evident lack of football knowledge? It seems that making an effort to bring in people who are more 'subject matter experts' makes sense. If you don't know something, admit it, and then find someone who does. The search that they are undertaking for both GM and HC is taking a long time, but isn't that a good thing? Doesn't it indicate that ownership wants to pick the right people? What's wrong with that?
When I think of the Bears, I think of an organization that prides itself on tradition, of being a cold weather smash and grind football team. We don't have much drama like Vegas or Cincy or Cleveland, and I think that ownership has something to do with that.

These are legit questions I'm asking because I don't know. I don't live in Chicago, so I haven't interacted with the franchise in the same way that many of you have. My experience in life is that the grass is always greener on the other side. I just wonder if things would be worse with new ownership.

 

[ThatGuyRyan]

this should go well

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

Yes.

 

[NCChiFan]

It is their Team. To do with it as they see fit. Obviously, to this point the ownership, for whatever reason has been patient, to a fault, with mediocrity or worse.

 

[jazzmcfunk]

this should go well

Haha. I know what I'm getting myself into, but am genuinely curious to know what people don't like about the current owners.

 

[jazzmcfunk]

It is their Team. To do with it as they see fit. Obviously, to this point the ownership, for whatever reason has been patient, to a fault, with mediocrity or worse.

Not trying to be a jerk here, but how do we know if they are okay with mediocrity and losing seasons? If they are people who pride themselves on being classy, wouldn't they keep the dirty laundry to themselves? Again, isn't this a good quality? I understand it's frustrating, as I have been frustrated with the team too, but I can't imagine that they have been happy. Some things that are frustrating to fans could be seen as a good attribute, if looked at through a different lens.

 

[NCChiFan]

Not trying to be a jerk here, but how do we know if they are okay with mediocrity and losing seasons? If they are people who pride themselves on being classy, wouldn't they keep the dirty laundry to themselves? Again, isn't this a good quality? I understand it's frustrating, as I have been frustrated with the team too, but I can't imagine that they have been happy either. Just saying some things that are frustrating to fans could be seen as a good attribute through a different lens.

Just look at the evidence. I've been watching this Team since the '60's. Aside from the Mid 80's and a brief time in the learly 00's this Team has been mediocre at best. That's a lot of decades.

 

[ThatGuyRyan]

Haha. I know what I'm getting myself into, but am genuinely curious to know what people don't like about the current owners.

Look at George's record since he took over as Chariman and then go look at Ted Phillips. How he has survived for as long as he has is criminal to the fan base.

 

[jazzmcfunk]

Just look at the evidence. I've been watching this Team since the '60's. Aside from the Mid 80's and a brief time in the learly 00's this Team has been mediocre at best. That's a lot of decades.

I don't disagree that the team has been more bad than good in recent history. I'm just wondering why there's a belief that the owners aren't just as frustrated as we are with the overall performance. I know if I owned the team that I would be, but I also know that I wouldn't be selling the team either.

 

[NCChiFan]

I don't disagree that the team has been more bad than good in recent history. I'm just wondering why there's a belief that the owners aren't just as frustrated as we are with the overall performance. I know if I owned the team that I would be, but I also know that I wouldn't be selling the team either.

Had they been, heads would have rolled faster through the decades.

 

[TexasBearfan]

Look at George's record since he took over as Chariman and then go look at Ted Phillips. How he has survived for as long as he has is criminal to the fan base.

what other family business could a kid "take over" and every time they need to make a change they have to hire someone that knows who to hire because the guy who has been part owner his entire life has no idea who to hire or what to do? Why is he the CEO if he doesn't know how to run the company? Yes the structure is bad and stupid for a company. He is the leader who gets paid the most and tells everyone he's "just a fan"....yet the hiring decisions come down to him? They're drunk on this power and money because they know suckers like me will keep renewing directv every year and watch this mismanaged underperforming amateur hour routine and keep buying the hats because it's what I grew up with

 

[PickSix]

Yes.

ROFLMAO…..Hell Yes.

Next topic.

 

[Ares]

The person at the top is the ultimate tone-setter.

If you work for an old woman who has left her son(s) in charge, in George/Teddy, and neither she nor they have managed to figure out the right formula to build a winning football team, then it doesn't matter so much what you do or say, because the team is expected to fail, it is their norm.

Once failure becomes your norm, you need leadership change to reset the dynamic between the team/coaches and the person (It should be one authority figure, not 3) at the top.

Failure has been the norm for the Bears for 30+ years, and I'm sure many would argue 50+.

The Bears have shown they will tolerate really bad players, coaches, losing horribly, under this regime.

They also showed, with Lovie, that they could find competent coaching and then still find a way to fail.

This team finds a way to fail because they coach/play for Owners who don't care about winning football games, they simply care about the checks they get, and little more.

 

[mattb78]

Its a fair question. Yes ownership has done a good job on firing people when they should have, the problem is the hiring part.

It shows their intentions are good, and they are trying to win.. they just don't know how.

I could give 110% effort into building a house but it wouldn't come out near as well as someone who actually understands how to build it.

 

[KennyH]

The biggest difference with ownership and fanbase is that ownership have to live with their decisions, while the fanbase (and I would include the media in that) can quickly forget what their decisions were at the time and then create a revisionist history based on what has since happened.

The recruitment of Nagy and Pace was generally well received at the time, the Mack trade had people overjoyed, almost no one wanted Mahomes with a top pick, no one saw the car crash that Kevin White pick was going to be etc etc.

Listening now, everyone wants Mahomes, Arians or any number of draft picks that worked - so easy with hindsight

Don't get me wrong, Trestman was a disaster most saw, I think many wanted Deshaun more than Trubisky (and the trade up was definitely daft) and of course Nagy should have been canned last year.

But no, probably not as bad as some make out, but could clearly have done better, maybe much better??

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

Haha. I know what I'm getting myself into, but am genuinely curious to know what people don't like about the current owners.

Historically?

The Bears being cheap goes back to George Halas, of whom was said "threw around nickels like manhole covers". Its something that just stuck in the zeitgeist of the fandom, and transferred over to the McCaskeys when Papa Bear died.

Since then, because that stuck around, and it was something that always riled up the fanbase, you had "journalists" who to this day will go back to that trope to sell newspapers, article clicks, get stream numbers, etc. The "journalists" don't really care about the accuracy of it any more - all they care about is that they can easily get attention from a very stupid section of the fanbase by pandering to that attitude, which only further fosters that attitude and helps it grow.

So that's part of it. A large part of it is a media creation tapping into something that was indeed there before in the past, but has been exploited to the max by those in media for their own benefit.


The other part of it, is that frankly, it hasn't been a good ownership.

Michael McCaskey, the first McCaskey to take over, famously announced a Head Coach before he accepted the position, as a way to try to force the candidate to sign (it backfired in a big way). Michael also famously almost wrecked getting Soldier Field rebuilt because he was getting destroyed at the negotiating table by Daley's team. If you want to know why Ted Phillips is held in such high regard by the McCaskey family, he salvaged the Soldier Field situation from a very toxic place. As bad as the whole UFO landing thing looks, it could have been MUCH worse - that's how pissed Daley was.

A lot of the really bad can be directly attributed to Michael McCaskey. And that sort of thing does stick. Michael has nothing to do with the business now - he was kicked out. But his family still does, and they've run the Bears like a mom and pop shop. They've been too overly trusting of other owners and NFL people on how to run their own organization, and while they haven't been cheap in a very long time, they also have been too old-fashioned and gullible in how they approach things.

Now, the McCaskeys are weird and insular, and sometimes they get shit on for that. But really, most of these owners are. The Glaziers are out and out weirdos. Davis walks around rocking a haircut that screams "pedophile", the Maras are as out of touch as the McCaskeys are. Shad Kahn just had to fire Urban Meyer because he cared more about the prestige than the man when he hired him - the NFL owners are a very rich, very clueless bunch.

The McCaskeys certainly aren't alone in that...

 

[jazzmcfunk]

Look at George's record since he took over as Chariman and then go look at Ted Phillips. How he has survived for as long as he has is criminal to the fan base.

Fair point; but again, that's loyalty of the owners. Not necessarily a bad aspect from a traits perspective. You do realize that we also enable ownership to run business this way by continuing to support them; again just playing the devil's advocate....

 

[ThatGuyRyan]

Fair point; but again, that's loyalty of the owners. Not necessarily a bad aspect from a traits perspective. You do realize that we also enable ownership to run business this way by continuing to support them; again just playing the devil's advocate....

Speak for yourself, I don't buy merchandise or tickets (since 2018)

 

[jazzmcfunk]

Historically?

The Bears being cheap goes back to George Halas, of whom was said "threw around nickels like manhole covers". Its something that just stuck in the zeitgeist of the fandom, and transferred over to the McCaskeys when Papa Bear died.

Since then, because that stuck around, and it was something that always riled up the fanbase, you had "journalists" who to this day will go back to that trope to sell newspapers, article clicks, get stream numbers, etc. The "journalists" don't really care about the accuracy of it any more - all they care about is that they can easily get attention from a very stupid section of the fanbase by pandering to that attitude, which only further fosters that attitude and helps it grow.

So that's part of it. A large part of it is a media creation tapping into something that was indeed there before in the past, but has been exploited to the max by those in media for their own benefit.


The other part of it, is that frankly, it hasn't been a good ownership.

Michael McCaskey, the first McCaskey to take over, famously announced a Head Coach before he accepted the position, as a way to try to force the candidate to sign (it backfired in a big way). Michael also famously almost wrecked getting Soldier Field rebuilt because he was getting destroyed at the negotiating table by Daley's team. If you want to know why Ted Phillips is held in such high regard by the McCaskey family, he salvaged the Soldier Field situation from a very toxic place. As bad as the whole UFO landing thing looks, it could have been MUCH worse - that's how pissed Daley was.

A lot of the really bad can be directly attributed to Michael McCaskey. And that sort of thing does stick. Michael has nothing to do with the business now - he was kicked out. But his family still does, and they've run the Bears like a mom and pop shop. They've been too overly trusting of other owners and NFL people on how to run their own organization, and while they haven't been cheap in a very long time, they also have been too old-fashioned and gullible in how they approach things.

Now, the McCaskeys are weird and insular, and sometimes they get shit on for that. But really, most of these owners are. The Glaziers are out and out weirdos. Davis walks around rocking a haircut that screams "pedophile", the Maras are as out of touch as the McCaskeys are. Shad Kahn just had to fire Urban Meyer because he cared more about the prestige than the man when he hired him - the NFL owners are a very rich, very clueless bunch.

The McCaskeys certainly aren't alone in that...

Hey man - I really appreciate you taking the time to write all that out. It makes a lot more sense to me now. Daley - is that the same Daley who backed JFK in the 1960 election? If so, that was a while ago.

 

[Visionman]

Look at other teams. Every single one of them will have fans screaming owners are cheap, incompetent, all about the money, etc, when things aren’t going well. It isn’t just a Chicago thing…