Is ownership really that bad?

vabearsfan15

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 12, 2013
Posts:
5,559
Liked Posts:
3,812
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.
I agree with you in the past few years Bears ownership has demonstrated patience and a sense of loyalty to Pace/Nagy. They haven't seemed to meddle. Pace was given the green light to trade up for Fields, and make as many trades as he did. We seem to spend all our Cap space, etc.

But what I think has influenced the narrative, especially on here, is that ownership refused to hire an inside trusted candidate like Chris Ballard because he wanted to ditch Cutler and go elsewhere with the QB position. It was a stipulation in taking the job and ownership wanted to stay with Cutler. We then hired Pace. Ballard eventually went to the Colts.

Then add in that the media loves to praise Colts management and point to them as a highly run franchise. Afterall Wentz chose to go there and refused to go to the Bears...etc, etc.
 

Shepard

Renegade
Donator
Joined:
May 31, 2013
Posts:
1,971
Liked Posts:
859
Location:
SE WI
I'd be embarrassed to be a man who needed outsiders to consult him about quality football personnel when my grandfather founded the league. My entire life was leading to me running the organization and I took so little care to learn everything about the business that I let it be run by an accountant.
I'd be more embarrassed on displaying this lack of humility year in and year out. Have the humility to HIRE someone to make decisions. "Oh we'll bring in Ernie Accorsi to help...." (That worked) "Oh we'll bring in Bill Polian to help"...they just don't get it.

The McCaskeys were well known attorneys in the 80's...not football people. All they have to do is hand the keys to a football person to make decision and sit in the owner's box....but no. They insist on making the hires and getting it wrong.
 

gilder121

I don't care nearly as much anymore
Donator
Joined:
Sep 9, 2012
Posts:
1,817
Liked Posts:
1,377
Location:
MSP
So instead of a football guy hiring the GM, you pay for consultants and end up with a Ryan Pace
Ryan Pace was endorsed by many football guys. It's not like Ted used his accountant background to go to Deloitte and grab an internal auditor to be GM. Ted was actively getting a football guy endorsed by football guys, interviewed by football guys, signed off on by those football guys. He just got one that wasn't good enough.

But if you want George and Ted to only do the business side and only have the football guy report to the board, fine, I have no issue with that. Just remember that Pace, Nagy, and every other football guy you hate was a football guy endorsed by a football guy. Adding another level of beaurocracy to the football hierarchy in the name of getting more football guys doesn't personally change my level of optimism.
 
Last edited:

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
7,632
Liked Posts:
4,303
I'd be more embarrassed on displaying this lack of humility year in and year out. Have the humility to HIRE someone to make decisions. "Oh we'll bring in Ernie Accorsi to help...." (That worked) "Oh we'll bring in Bill Polian to help"...they just don't get it.

The McCaskeys were well known attorneys in the 80's...not football people. All they have to do is hand the keys to a football person to make decision and sit in the owner's box....but no. They insist on making the hires and getting it wrong.
These types of fakes are so dumb. “All they need to do is bring in a ‘football person’ to hire the GM “ So they bring in a “football person” as a consultant to hire the GM and its “Noooo! Not THAT person!”

Just say you’ll only be happy if they hire YOUR preferred candidate…even though you’re not a “football person” yourself…
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
7,944
Liked Posts:
5,451
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.
Several things wrong with this and the OP.

No, ownership has not done a good job on firing people when they should have. The idea that the OP is trying to sell is that it is an honorable thing the the McCaskey does by not firing a HC/GM in the middle of the season.

Well, you missed the whole damn ocean trying to defend the pond. Nagy and Pace should have been fired after the season ... in 2021!. George messed up by giving them one more year. THAT was the problem.

Yes, you wouldn't build a house as well as a professional. The thing is that you would only build one house for yourself once in your lifetime.

The Halas/McCaskeys have been building their houses for over 100 years. George, Mike and the rest of the McCaskeys were actually born into that house building business. They grew up around it.

George and Mike were/are the chairman of the board of that professional business. Shouldn't the chairman of the board have a clue as to how a business operates?

If you were born into a house building family, you would naturally learn the ins and outs of the business, if nothing else, to be able to jump in a day or two help with emergencies.

If you ever decided to build your own house, coming from that house building background, you would be able to build a decent house with some choice assistants.

Well, George, when building his own house, constantly has to call outside contractors to do everything. What is worse is that, after calling outside contractors before, he has to call them the next time for renovations because he never learned anything the first time. And even worse, he is the Chairman of the Board, he refuses to learn the business and he also refuses to add a president of construction to help the business gain stability.
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
7,944
Liked Posts:
5,451
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...
I think that it would cool to bring back Michael McCaskey, seeing that he died in 2020. The Bears could use a zombie chairman of the board.
 

pinkfloydster

Active member
Joined:
Aug 31, 2013
Posts:
655
Liked Posts:
384
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.
The Bears are the only franchise in the NFL to never have a QB throw for 4000 yards. Johnny Morris has led the Bears in total receiving yards for the last 55 years. I ask you, what is the one constant during that time horizon?
 

Shepard

Renegade
Donator
Joined:
May 31, 2013
Posts:
1,971
Liked Posts:
859
Location:
SE WI
These types of fakes are so dumb. “All they need to do is bring in a ‘football person’ to hire the GM “ So they bring in a “football person” as a consultant to hire the GM and its “Noooo! Not THAT person!”

Just say you’ll only be happy if they hire YOUR preferred candidate…even though you’re not a “football person” yourself…
Its nothing against that person they bring in- not at all. It just hasn't worked so why do it again? If their guidance doesn't pan out much like Accorsi did with Pace...Accorsi doesn't care. He gets paid and goes on his merry way. Its the same with Polian...what does he care if it goes poorly?

Hire a President. Let them conduct the process and then just stay out of it.

In regards to being happy if they hire MY candidate...GTFOH. I'm a "fan" just like George said he was and that's the problem.
 

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
7,632
Liked Posts:
4,303
Its nothing against that person they bring in- not at all. It just hasn't worked so why do it again? If their guidance doesn't pan out much like Accorsi did with Pace...Accorsi doesn't care. He gets paid and goes on his merry way. Its the same with Polian...what does he care if it goes poorly?

Hire a President. Let them conduct the process and then just stay out of it.

In regards to being happy if they hire MY candidate...GTFOH. I'm a "fan" just like George said he was and that's the problem.
Who hires the president? And if the President doesn’t do a good job, who’s in charge of firing them?

So how exactly is this scenario any different, other than it being someone YOU may personally approve of more than Polian?
 

Shepard

Renegade
Donator
Joined:
May 31, 2013
Posts:
1,971
Liked Posts:
859
Location:
SE WI
Who hires the president? And if the President doesn’t do a good job, who’s in charge of hiring them?

So how exactly is this scenario any different, other than it being someone YOU may personally approve of more than Polian?
It has nothing do with who I personally want- I haven't alluded to that at all. Hire a permanent President who will have a dog in the fight after the process is finished.

Put someone in place who is accountable for that decision...owners aren't accountable at all because they don't have to be. Maybe Pace needed someone to report to these past years when he decided to restructure Trevathan's contract (seriously look at that mess!) or giving Glennon 18million...rather than Ted Phillips "overseeing" him (we can go a lot further, but I digress). With George...it won't be any different.

An actual football President or an overseer to the GM can give them actual structure and accountability. Who that team President would be? I have no idea. Go offer around the league and make the highest paid executive in sports if you need to. You're the fucking Bears and you shouldn't care about money in this regard.
 

gilder121

I don't care nearly as much anymore
Donator
Joined:
Sep 9, 2012
Posts:
1,817
Liked Posts:
1,377
Location:
MSP
Accountability comes from the person above you holding your feet to the fire on any mistakes you make? That's a very retro management style.
 

Shepard

Renegade
Donator
Joined:
May 31, 2013
Posts:
1,971
Liked Posts:
859
Location:
SE WI
Accountability comes from the person above you holding your feet to the fire on any mistakes you make? That's a very retro management style.
Holding feet to the fire? I don't know if that's what I'm looking for- but at least offer guidance. There isn't any with their Phillips/George.

My main point is by hiring a Team President...you can go get whoever you want. You could go to a guy like Eric DeCosta (just an example) of Baltimore, make him the highest paid executive in sports and let him do what he wants. If he wanted to be the GM? Cool. If he wanted to hire his own GM? Cool. If he wanted to hire a GM who would then hire a coach? Cool. If he wanted to hire the new coach AND GM? Cool.

I can't explain it any better than this.
 

Forty-six

Member
Joined:
Nov 8, 2020
Posts:
74
Liked Posts:
80
As others have mentioned, the team has largely been mediocre over the past 50+ years outside of the run in the 1980's and early 2000's. Throughout that time there have been different GM's, coaches and players. The only constant throughout that time is ownership. Fans are looking for someone to hold accountable for the general sense that this organization has massively underachieved throughout its history. Two Super Bowl appearances (good God, Carolina has made two SB's) and one Super Bowl win is not acceptable. When looking at the NFL, there are certain organizations that set the bar for consistency and excellence. In my opinion, those organizations are...

New England
Pittsburg
Green Bay
San Francisco
Denver
Baltimore
Cowboys

Why are some organizations consistently good to great from decade to decade? Is it luck? Nope, it's the ownership, the structure they put in place and the people they hire and the support they give that creates a culture of winning. The Bears should be in the group of organizations that I've listed above but they are not and that rests squarely on the shoulders of ownership.

Maybe you're right and ownership is just as frustrated as the fans and they have been trying madly to fix this thing. If that is the case (I don't think it actually is) then you'd expect the lack of success would drive ownership to make significant changes throughout the organization and fundamentally alter the structure, leadership, the board, etc. Those types of sweeping changes have never come about and so the takeaway is ownership is satisfied running a second or maybe third tier organization that puts a mediocre product on the field 9/10 seasons and that continues to be doormats to Green Bay.
 

stelz

Heavily Medicated
Joined:
Nov 25, 2021
Posts:
673
Liked Posts:
112
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Ryan Pace was endorsed by many football guys. It's not like Ted used his accountant background to go to Deloitte and grab an internal auditor to be GM. Ted was actively getting a football guy endorsed by football guys, interviewed by football guys, signed off on by those football guys. He just got one that wasn't good enough.

But if you want George and Ted to only do the business side and only have the football guy report to the board, fine, I have no issue with that. Just remember that Pace, Nagy, and every other football guy you hate was a football guy endorsed by a football guy. Adding another level of beaurocracy to the football hierarchy in the name of getting more football guys doesn't personally change my level of optimism.

I think it’s more: Accorsi saying, here’s some guys that are qualified. Pace is one of them, and Ted and George start vibing with Pace for non football reasons, because neither of them have “football backgrounds” despite being an owner and a 20 year employee. Because of this, they glaze over when Pace starts “talking football,” and all they hear is “winning, Sean Payton, Drew Brees, etc.” They are unable to determine he is not qualified and go ahead and over promote Pace, who in turn is unable to see through Matt Nagy’s bullshit a few years later.

I hope Polian is able to screen out the Pace’s and the Nagy’s of the current candidates, because George and Ted won’t be able to. Anybody whose been in football for multiple years is going to have people endorsing them, hopefully BP will be able to wade through all that.

Your solution makes good sense but don’t hold your breath.
 
Last edited:

stelz

Heavily Medicated
Joined:
Nov 25, 2021
Posts:
673
Liked Posts:
112
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Shouldn't the chairman of the board have a clue as to how a business operates?

Yes. Absolutely. But the reality is that he doesn’t and that’s where we are at. They need to identify the GM who built an organization they admire and find his number to come to the Bears and pay it.

Nope
 
Last edited:

Visionman

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 28, 2017
Posts:
7,632
Liked Posts:
4,303
It has nothing do with who I personally want- I haven't alluded to that at all. Hire a permanent President who will have a dog in the fight after the process is finished.

Put someone in place who is accountable for that decision...owners aren't accountable at all because they don't have to be. Maybe Pace needed someone to report to these past years when he decided to restructure Trevathan's contract (seriously look at that mess!) or giving Glennon 18million...rather than Ted Phillips "overseeing" him (we can go a lot further, but I digress). With George...it won't be any different.

An actual football President or an overseer to the GM can give them actual structure and accountability. Who that team President would be? I have no idea. Go offer around the league and make the highest paid executive in sports if you need to. You're the fucking Bears and you shouldn't care about money in this regard.
You’re missing the point. You can hire 20 guys to be above the GM to hold him/them accountable. But in the end, George is still at the top, making that initial decision.

All your scenario does it make more guys for George to decide to fire or not.
 

Shepard

Renegade
Donator
Joined:
May 31, 2013
Posts:
1,971
Liked Posts:
859
Location:
SE WI
You’re missing the point. You can hire 20 guys to be above the GM to hold him/them accountable. But in the end, George is still at the top, making that initial decision.

All your scenario does it make more guys for George to decide to fire or not.
So you're good with George and company deciding on the next GM? Wouldn't you rather go and offer an established team GM/President (hell even offer Peyton Manning to be team President) from elsewhere and let them decide? They could offer established GMs or other VPs to be their new football czar....rather than offering promotional opportunities to just be GM.

The team ownership board could then evaluate that person collectively and in an unbiased view. Instead...they're evaluating George and telling him he's doing fine...thus he picks someone to be the GM who has never been a GM before. Thats really poor.

I'm not missing the point. You are.
 

Top