Pompei: "Why didn't the Bears want Jim Harbaugh as head coach? It's a mystery."

[Visionman]

why?

If it was as a HC with a GM being fully over him, and in a readonable contract, it would be tolerable.

But most full control and a Gruden contract? Lunacy…

 

[dbldrew]

If it was as a HC with a GM being fully over him, and in a readonable contract, it would be tolerable.

But most full control and a Gruden contract? Lunacy…

Got it your worried about the McCaskeys money..

I dont really care if he gets a 7 year deal or even a 10 year deal if he is bringing the Bears to Championship games and Superbowls..

 

[Anytime23]

Nagy's record with Fangio was 12-4, made the playoffs and if not for the double doink, the NFC championship.

When Harbaugh was in SF, their D was always in the top 5. The O was only top 1/2 of the league once and never top 10.

That said, what Jim did counts but i think it may be overstated and it's important that he has someone he can work with, a previous association like the Minn. GM.

There were rumors that the Bear talked to Jim before starting their official GM search. My guess he laid out the rules like picking/approving his GM and the search group didn't want any part of that dictatorship. In Minn, Harbaugh may have that GM he's willing to work with.

I said before this began that there's a couple coaches that you could take before a GM and that may actually be necessary. Harbaugh was one of those.

Fair points but Jim was the CEO that team needed and put together the staff for them to be successful. 3 successful years, competing at a high level. Nagy has 1 good year on the back of Fangio after inheriting him and we say how well Nagy the CEO held things together after that.

They never contacted Jim. Don't believe the rumors of backchanneling discussions. Dave Wannstedt, a friend of Jim's said that he spoke to him and that the Bears never reached out. His statements were definitive.

 

[Visionman]

Got it your worried about the McCaskeys money..

I dont really care if he gets a 7 year deal or even a 10 year deal if he is bringing the Bears to Championship games and Superbowls..

He won’t. And giving someone that type of contract means you’re a lot less likely to fire them when they need to be gone. Imagine sticking with a failed HC for not 1 or 2, but 5 years beyond their worth. That would be the reality…

 

[remydat]

and they're still idiots for firing him.

And yet they seem to be doing quite fine without him. Been to a Super Bowl and 2 NFC championships.

Sorry giving Harbaugh roster control and a 7-10 year deal at 10m per is not a good idea. Now if he was asking for less then I would consider it.

 

[remydat]

Realistically we are the perfect franchise to give all that power to someone like Harbaugh, because there is so little football knowledge and expertise at the top levels of the organisation. Let him run it.

Sadly the people at the top of the organisation would rather more non threatening options, who will allow them to stay in their 1920s bubble and not get challenged or taken out of their comfort zone.

I don’t want to knock Poles and Eberflus at all - they might be great and fingers crossed they are. But their profiles are very McCaskey-typical and that hasn’t been too successful so far. No risk, no reward.

McCaskey and Phillips have rarely gotten involved in any personnel decisions. That is really not the issue. The issue is Harbaugh's record as a talent evaluator is a spotty and if you give him say 10 years and 100m and it doesn't work out you can't really get rid of him before say year 8. Imagine if he pisses everyone off like he is prone to do by year 4. Are you going to fire him and then have to pay 60m for him to go coach another team? Coach contracts are guaranteed.

The Raiders are in the process know of trying to see if they can get out from Gruden's contract on the basis he was in breach due to the scandal that got him fired. Gruden is suing that he is still owed the 70m or so still left on his contract.

 

[dbldrew]

He won’t. And giving someone that type of contract means you’re a lot less likely to fire them when they need to be gone. Imagine sticking with a failed HC for not 1 or 2, but 5 years beyond their worth. That would be the reality…

5 year HC contract and 5 year GM contract is still 10 years worth of contracts so not really seeing the problem here if 1 guy is handling both with a 10 year contract

 

[Bearly]

Harbaugh took over the 24th ranked offense and turned them into the 11th..11th.. and 11th ranked offense.. you want to compare that to Nagy?

I'm sure he did want more control, thats rumored to be the reason he left the 49ers is because of a power struggle with him and the GM..

But its not like the Bears already had someone in place where it would not work out.. they have no gm.. no football guy at all.. Get him and let him run it how he wants..

No he didn't. They were 26, 11, 24 and 20. You're talking points and that often comes from being given field position. That said, I agree that it was an overstatement.

 

[remydat]

5 year HC contract and 5 year GM contract is still 10 years worth of contracts so not really seeing the problem here if 1 guy is handling both with a 10 year contract

This is dumb logic. You will still have to hire a GM as you still need someone to oversee the personnel process. It is just that Harbaugh will have final say on acquisitions.

Also money is not infinite. If you give him 10 years and 100m and it fails after year 4, the issue is you are not going to want to eat 60m in salary. So do you end up hanging onto him just to save money. Or if you do fire him and swallow the 60m then you are silly if you think that 60m isn't going to affect how much they have to spend in FA. Teams don't just piss away 60m with no consequence.

 

[MakeMyDay]

5 year HC contract and 5 year GM contract is still 10 years worth of contracts so not really seeing the problem here if 1 guy is handling both with a 10 year contract

Put the shovel down, you're to dumb to use it

 

[MikeDitkaPolishSausage]

5 year HC contract and 5 year GM contract is still 10 years worth of contracts so not really seeing the problem here if 1 guy is handling both with a 10 year contract

Ummm no it’s not. It’s 5 years……..

 

[MikeDitkaPolishSausage]

Put the shovel down, you're to dumb to use it

He’s digging his own grave, so it’s ok.

 

[remydat]

Ummm no it’s not. It’s 5 years……..

It is like saying if someone can 5 years each for 2 crimes that there is no difference if the sentence is concurrent or consecutive. Like tell that to the dude have to serve 10 years instead of 5.

 

[didshereallysaythat]

Because they're a gutless, dogshit organization that wouldn't dare bring in anyone with that type of personality.

I won't say dogshit but they definitely are gutless.

The McCaskeys will always choose yes men that will always do things "the Bears way" when asked. People that are a lone wolf that question the status quo are off limits. That is the problem with ownership... and it's not just the Bears. They are afraid of going outside their comfort zone. And bringing in guys like Ernie Acorsi and Bill Polian are just a waste of time because you are bringing in people to tell you what you want to hear to relieve your own confirmatin bias.

The Bears might get lucky and fluke their way into a deep run into the playoffs. But it will be a one off. One we have seen in 2001, 2005, 2006, 2010, 2018 etc. Unless they get super lucky with these hires but I just don't see it.

 

[Nelly]

Apparently Harbaugh is serious about possibly taking the Vikings job. That would be quite a surprise.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

I wish Harbaugh all the best with Kirk Cousins as his quarterback.

 

[dbldrew]

No he didn't. They were 26, 11, 24 and 20. You're talking points and that often comes from being given field position. That said, I agree that it was an overstatement.

Pro-football-reference has them ranked as 11th for all 3 of his playoff run years. Also yards do not win games points do, so I will take points over yards for production any day

 

[dbldrew]

This is dumb logic. You will still have to hire a GM as you still need someone to oversee the personnel process. It is just that Harbaugh will have final say on acquisitions.

Also money is not infinite. If you give him 10 years and 100m and it fails after year 4, the issue is you are not going to want to eat 60m in salary. So do you end up hanging onto him just to save money. Or if you do fire him and swallow the 60m then you are silly if you think that 60m isn't going to affect how much they have to spend in FA. Teams don't just piss away 60m with no consequence.

its not really dumb logic.. You are going to pay a HC 8-10 mil per year and a GM 1-3 mil per year and the speculation with the new TV deals and the revenue that will generate the cost of HC is going to jump to around 15 mil per year and proven great HC is going to be closer to 25mil per year.. So where is the saving really? I guess if you fire him in year 3 or 4 then yes your going to eat a bigger chunk of change.. But if your current unproven GM/HC option doesnt work out your going to be back in the market for another GM/HC.. but now in a more expensive market.

Whats more likely, the unproven guys (that George loved) is going to crash and burn, vs the experienced guy that has had great success as a HC?

This isnt about worrying about the McCaskeys money, its about building a team that doesnt suck..

 

[run and shoot]

Maybe they just looked at what happened to the raiders with Jon Gruden and said "fuck that, we don't want to be on the hook for paying him for seven more years if he flames out after three."

I don't think they have to pay if it's determined Gruden did something unbecoming of NFL character standards. I forgot
the exact verbiage....maybe somebody knows.

 

[onebud34]

its not really dumb logic.. You are going to pay a HC 8-10 mil per year and a GM 1-3 mil per year and the speculation with the new TV deals and the revenue that will generate the cost of HC is going to jump to around 15 mil per year and proven great HC is going to be closer to 25mil per year.. So where is the saving really? I guess if you fire him in year 3 or 4 then yes your going to eat a bigger chunk of change.. But if your current unproven GM/HC option doesnt work out your going to be back in the market for another GM/HC.. but now in a more expensive market.

Whats more likely, the unproven guys (that George loved) is going to crash and burn, vs the experienced guy that has had great success as a HC?

This isnt about worrying about the McCaskeys money, its about building a team that doesnt suck..

That question makes zero sense. Harbaugh hasn't shown the ability to be a GM