No love for Lovie? (1 Viewer)

[Captain Blowhard]

Please explain why you think that means they should be ashamed that they signed him to a contract that was in line with his market value when he signed it.

Simple. Because it's been out of line with his market value for about a year now. At the very least for the last few months. J

There is no market value for Lovie Smith because he is already under contract. Market Value indicates what is currently being paid for new head coaching hires. That market is around $4.5 million because of the Petrino signing. Lovie Smith is under contract.I would not be embarassed by that fact if I were the Bears. Maybe you think Lovie Smith is currently underpaid but he was probably overpaid his first year when he had no idea what he was doing. You want to be paid on a stict performance basis, sign 1 year contracts every year.

Is it an embarassment that the Phillies are paying the reigning NL MVP $500,000 this year? No, that is the contract that he signed and the system that was negotiated by his union.

Stop crying for Lovie Smith.

That's true, Lovie is under contract. I guess by your tone you're inferring he should just shut up and play out his contract then? While you can argue the legal technicality of the matter, Lovie being under contract, the truth of the matter is that it is standard operating practice to reward people like Lovie with extensions in the last year of their contract. The only times, in fact, when that doesn't happen (when a team allows a player or coach to hit the market) is when that team either doesn't want the player/coach back or they feel there is no way to re-sign them for the price they're willing to pay.

Sorry, I just don't see that cavalier attitude of "he's got a contract and he should live with it" as being a sound argument given past practice and precedent. That attitude *if* taken by the Bears management will insure Lovie walks.

Nobody is saying the contract he signed wasn't a fair contract when he signed it. But enough already: pay the man and pay him now.

 

[DrJ]

Please explain why you think that means they should be ashamed that they signed him to a contract that was in line with his market value when he signed it.

Simple. Because it's been out of line with his market value for about a year now. At the very least for the last few months. J

There is no market value for Lovie Smith because he is already under contract. Market Value indicates what is currently being paid for new head coaching hires. That market is around $4.5 million because of the Petrino signing. Lovie Smith is under contract.I would not be embarassed by that fact if I were the Bears. Maybe you think Lovie Smith is currently underpaid but he was probably overpaid his first year when he had no idea what he was doing. You want to be paid on a stict performance basis, sign 1 year contracts every year.

Is it an embarassment that the Phillies are paying the reigning NL MVP $500,000 this year? No, that is the contract that he signed and the system that was negotiated by his union.

Stop crying for Lovie Smith.

the truth of the matter is that it is standard operating practice to reward people like Lovie with extensions in the last year of their contract.

And that I don't disagree with. But here we are, with one year left on his contract and they are attempting to reward him. Joe is intimating that they were wrong for not extending him last season, 2 years into his deal with 2 years still remaining. With him having a deal in place that was VERY fair at the time he signed it.I'm just not going to pile on Bears management for their actions in past decades like everyone else is, just because Lovie's agent made a few vague statements to the media. None of us know what the Bears are offering and Lovie is demanding for certain, so to say that either side is wrong based on this information is entirely ridiculous.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Bears are the cheapest team in the league. They've always thrown nickels around like manhole covers. This doesn't surprise me a bit.

Lovie will get his contract. Might not be Parcells type money, but he'll get it.

Parcells had a 4 year $17 million dollar deal. So yes, Lovie will be payed Parcells money if he accepts what is reported to be the Bears current offer.Billick just got $5 million a year - he's been a head coach far longer and has WON a Superbowl.

Supposedly, the only coaches that would make more money than Lovie if he takes the Bears offer are coaches that have either won a Superbowl and Fox and Reid. Reid has been to what - 4 NFC Championship games and has been a coach longer. Fox has been to 2 and has been a coach for longer. They both have resumes that command more than Lovie.

Is 4 million maybe a tad light? Maybe... But Lovie doesn't deserve 5 million yet. The middle ground will be found.

Again, I know you follow this closer than I do. Who is reporting the Bears are currently offering 4 million?J

It's a number I've been seeing on the Bears message boards quite a bit. I'm looking for a link to substantiate it at this point, but I'm not finding much. Really, everything on this entire thing is just rumor and speculation at this point though. Which is why I don't understand how people can jump to conclusions with almost no concrete information...Here's a quote I found regarding it: Which is why you both are WRONG, as the latest number from the ESPN analyst who broke the story is that the Bears are offering 4 mil a year for 4 years, and Lovie is seeking 5 mil a year for 5 years.

So, I'm guessing these numbers were reported on an ESPN broadcast of some sort...

So all this "Don't complain because the Bears ALREADY have a more than fair offer on the table" is based on something we think ESPN might have said somewhere according to what we think we read on an internet message board?J

 

[Joe Bryant]

Please explain why you think that means they should be ashamed that they signed him to a contract that was in line with his market value when he signed it.

Simple. Because it's been out of line with his market value for about a year now. At the very least for the last few months. J

There is no market value for Lovie Smith because he is already under contract. Market Value indicates what is currently being paid for new head coaching hires. That market is around $4.5 million because of the Petrino signing. Lovie Smith is under contract.I would not be embarassed by that fact if I were the Bears. Maybe you think Lovie Smith is currently underpaid but he was probably overpaid his first year when he had no idea what he was doing. You want to be paid on a stict performance basis, sign 1 year contracts every year.

Is it an embarassment that the Phillies are paying the reigning NL MVP $500,000 this year? No, that is the contract that he signed and the system that was negotiated by his union.

Stop crying for Lovie Smith.

the truth of the matter is that it is standard operating practice to reward people like Lovie with extensions in the last year of their contract.

And that I don't disagree with. But here we are, with one year left on his contract and they are attempting to reward him. Joe is intimating that they were wrong for not extending him last season, 2 years into his deal with 2 years still remaining. With him having a deal in place that was VERY fair at the time he signed it.I'm just not going to pile on Bears management for their actions in past decades like everyone else is, just because Lovie's agent made a few vague statements to the media. None of us know what the Bears are offering and Lovie is demanding for certain, so to say that either side is wrong based on this information is entirely ridiculous.

Wrong. Don't misunderstand. I think the Bears are wrong for telling him they want to see another year and he can stay the lowest paid coach in the league coming off a Coach Of The Year season and then when he says, "Yessir" and then goes out and puts his team in the Super Bowl in the "show me again" year, the Bears appear to be hemming and hawing. That just looks cheap.

J

 

[Liquid Tension]

Heard on Mike & Mike this morning on the way in that Lovie's agent told them that they were nowhere near a decision on a new contract, and unless something completely unexpected happens soon, Lovie will fill out his current contract (1 more year) as the lowest payed coach in the NFL.

This is ridiculous and hopefully, just a move by his agent to get a rise out of the public and get the Bears' attention. I don't know anyone in the city of Chicago that would be happy if Lovie doesn't get a new contract.

Edit to add link: http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...-bear22.article

I had a feeling about this when they lost. A win would have made the pressure nearly unbearable on ownership to pay the guy.

He won Coach of the year in 2005 and was told "let's see you do it again" before a new contract was given. So he nodded his head and took his team to the Super Bowl. Evidently, that wasn't enough.

Now we need to know a lot more before we too get excited, but he HAS to make at least the going rate for good NFL coaches. What they're doing now is a disgrace.

They'd better pay now or they will be paying later when they try to hire the new guy after the 07 season.

J

Lovie may be a good overall coach, tough for me to say what goes on behind closed doors. His team has performed extremely well and some credit is deserved, but he is an AWFUL game day coach and maybe the Bears realize this? He made some decisions that could have cost him games.Again, he may be a great coach before the lights come on and that has a ton of value, but he is lost during games.

 

[DrJ]

Please explain why you think that means they should be ashamed that they signed him to a contract that was in line with his market value when he signed it.

Simple. Because it's been out of line with his market value for about a year now. At the very least for the last few months. J

There is no market value for Lovie Smith because he is already under contract. Market Value indicates what is currently being paid for new head coaching hires. That market is around $4.5 million because of the Petrino signing. Lovie Smith is under contract.I would not be embarassed by that fact if I were the Bears. Maybe you think Lovie Smith is currently underpaid but he was probably overpaid his first year when he had no idea what he was doing. You want to be paid on a stict performance basis, sign 1 year contracts every year.

Is it an embarassment that the Phillies are paying the reigning NL MVP $500,000 this year? No, that is the contract that he signed and the system that was negotiated by his union.

Stop crying for Lovie Smith.

the truth of the matter is that it is standard operating practice to reward people like Lovie with extensions in the last year of their contract.

And that I don't disagree with. But here we are, with one year left on his contract and they are attempting to reward him. Joe is intimating that they were wrong for not extending him last season, 2 years into his deal with 2 years still remaining. With him having a deal in place that was VERY fair at the time he signed it.I'm just not going to pile on Bears management for their actions in past decades like everyone else is, just because Lovie's agent made a few vague statements to the media. None of us know what the Bears are offering and Lovie is demanding for certain, so to say that either side is wrong based on this information is entirely ridiculous.

Wrong. Don't misunderstand. I think the Bears are wrong for telling him they want to see another year and he can stay the lowest paid coach in the league coming off a Coach Of The Year season and then when he says, "Yessir" and then goes out and puts his team in the Super Bowl in the "show me again" year, the Bears appear to be hemming and hawing. That just looks cheap.

J

How do you know the Bears are hemming and hawing though? Again - what's the offer on the table, and what are Lovie's demands? Until someone can answer those questions, there's really not much we can conclude. If you found out that Lovie and his agent's interpretation of market value was $7 million per season, would that change your opinion any?

 

[Skinsfansince72]

I'm not a bears fan, but this is just baffling to me. The guy wins coach of the year, they give him nothing, he then tops that by taking them to the superbowl and basically dominating all competition for the better part of the year and they give him the cold shoulder. Have they forgotten what the franchise was before Lovie took it over? Seriously, give the man what he has earned

'He already got what he earned. The Bears were paying him to do what he's done.

 

[Pat Patriot]

Please explain why you think that means they should be ashamed that they signed him to a contract that was in line with his market value when he signed it.

Simple. Because it's been out of line with his market value for about a year now. At the very least for the last few months. J

There is no market value for Lovie Smith because he is already under contract. Market Value indicates what is currently being paid for new head coaching hires. That market is around $4.5 million because of the Petrino signing. Lovie Smith is under contract.I would not be embarassed by that fact if I were the Bears. Maybe you think Lovie Smith is currently underpaid but he was probably overpaid his first year when he had no idea what he was doing. You want to be paid on a stict performance basis, sign 1 year contracts every year.

Is it an embarassment that the Phillies are paying the reigning NL MVP $500,000 this year? No, that is the contract that he signed and the system that was negotiated by his union.

Stop crying for Lovie Smith.

That's true, Lovie is under contract. I guess by your tone you're inferring he should just shut up and play out his contract then? While you can argue the legal technicality of the matter, Lovie being under contract, the truth of the matter is that it is standard operating practice to reward people like Lovie with extensions in the last year of their contract. The only times, in fact, when that doesn't happen (when a team allows a player or coach to hit the market) is when that team either doesn't want the player/coach back or they feel there is no way to re-sign them for the price they're willing to pay.

Sorry, I just don't see that cavalier attitude of "he's got a contract and he should live with it" as being a sound argument given past practice and precedent. That attitude *if* taken by the Bears management will insure Lovie walks.

Nobody is saying the contract he signed wasn't a fair contract when he signed it. But enough already: pay the man and pay him now.

Lovie absolutely has the right to ask for an extension anytime he wants and the Bears have a right to say NO. If that is the case, which there is no indication that it is, then Lovie has to shut up and coach and play out his contract.Joe is saying that in a 4 year contract, after 2 years Lovie asked to renegotiate and Chicago said "No, show us again." I'm not sure where Joe got that. I dont remember seeing that. Well, now Lovie has had 2 good years in a row and is asking for an extension. Typical practice is that they work out an extension. That might happen but if it doesnt, Lovie needs to coach and shut up.

I believe if you outperform your current contract, you need to make that up in your next contract. I dont believe this TO like practice of opening up a 4 year contract after 2 years because you somehow feel you have outperform the teams' and your own expectations.

 

[easy like sunday morning]

I am so disgusted with the Bears for this attitude. I have been a Bears fan since I was old enough to follow the NFL. The Bears are so cheap it is ridiculous. Lovie deserves to get PAID. If they don't come to an agreement before the start of the season Lovie should and will cut off negotiations. Then he should take his good coaching skills and record somewhere else. This is ridiculous.

 

[SeveredHorseHeads]

Are people really saying that the Bears shouldn't negotiate this contract? They should just give Lovie whatever he wants? Why would they pay him more than they have to?

They'll get him signed for the price he is worth and for what he is willing to take.

This is a bizarre thread. The Bears aren't cheap for negotiating a contract any more than Lovie is greedy for negotiating.

 

[Pat Patriot]

Are people really saying that the Bears shouldn't negotiate this contract? They should just give Lovie whatever he wants? Why would they pay him more than they have to?They'll get him signed for the price he is worth and for what he is willing to take.This is a bizarre thread. The Bears aren't cheap for negotiating a contract any more than Lovie is greedy for negotiating.

 

[imeimex]

I am a Bears fan and very gracious for what Lovie Smith has done, but it is good business sense to let him coach this year on his current contract. The reasons are:

1. His value has never been higher, and it is unlikely the Bears repeat the 13-3 season and a Super Bowl appearance.

2. Next years offseason will be filled with big name/highly paid coaches and I still see Lovie as a pay scale below these guys. The "free agent" coaches for next year will include Parcells, Cowher, Schottenheimer, possibly Gruden, Jeff Fischer, Andy Reid, John Fox, Jack Del Rio, Jim Mora Jr. This does not include the college coahes that may or may not want to make the jump. the guys listed above getting the 5-6 million dollar contracts and I see Lovie a step below in the 4-4.5 million range.

I understand that Lovie should be rewarded for his sucess, but it is bad business sense to overpay Lovie just because he agreed to a low contract in the first place. Plus this season we will see if it was Rivera's inability to adjust defenses during games or if as I suspect it is Lovie who is to in love with his cover 2 to make scheme changes when it is clear the offense has figured out the weaknesses.

 

[flapgreen]

I am so disgusted with the Bears for this attitude. I have been a Bears fan since I was old enough to follow the NFL. The Bears are so cheap it is ridiculous. Lovie deserves to get PAID. If they don't come to an agreement before the start of the season Lovie should and will cut off negotiations. Then he should take his good coaching skills and record somewhere else. This is ridiculous.

 

[SeveredHorseHeads]

I am so disgusted with the Bears for this attitude.

What attitude? The attitude of negotiating contracts?

 

[trader jake]

I enjoy the "reasons" why the Bears are being wise to not reach a contract with Lovie.

The only reason is that they are tight fisted money grubbers. I can respect a hardnosed negotiation as much as the next guy but at a certain point you gotta call BS. That time is upon us and the Bears organization is stinking up the place right now.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

I can tell you this much for sure, the mood with some of the McCaskeys after the Superbowl was worse than if they never made it in the first place. You couldn't even bring up the Bears for weeks, and even now its totally a sore subject. Some took it almost personally and seem really embarrassed by it. I mean over the edge hurt. Nervous twitch and everything (which I cracked a joke about and was subsequently shot down coldly)I know they like Lovie, but its completely true that they ultra frugal.All I can hope is all the overall negativity isn't being channeled toward this negotiation. Lovie, IMO, is the best coach the Bears have had since Buddy Ryan and most marketable since Ditka. They would be fools to let him feel under appreciated.But all you can do is with that family sometimes. They do what they want. There is no rhyme or reason sometimes. It just is.

Do you know them? How so?J

"Them" not so much. I have worked with Kevin McCaskey for over ten years.Having said that, I used to talk more to him about football, but I have relocated my business to Florida and only go to the floor of the exchange for 2 weeks every quarter. I just got back last week, but as you can imagine, and as I said, the Bears were a pretty sore subject.Information usually goes one way anyway - from me to him - and even that not so much now that I'm in Florida and the Bears have gotten good. But I feel I can comment on the general mood when I was there.Course, now I may be in trouble, but hopefully this will slip by. PS Even Kevin says you gotta with his family sometimes. ETA After rereading more of the thread IMO People are overreacting - IMO Lovie will be resigned and I really doubt there are any hard feelings anywhere with Lovie and the Bears.

 

[ChampBailey24]

Please explain why you think that means they should be ashamed that they signed him to a contract that was in line with his market value when he signed it.

Simple. Because it's been out of line with his market value for about a year now. At the very least for the last few months. J

There is no market value for Lovie Smith because he is already under contract. Market Value indicates what is currently being paid for new head coaching hires. That market is around $4.5 million because of the Petrino signing. Lovie Smith is under contract.I would not be embarassed by that fact if I were the Bears. Maybe you think Lovie Smith is currently underpaid but he was probably overpaid his first year when he had no idea what he was doing. You want to be paid on a stict performance basis, sign 1 year contracts every year.

Is it an embarassment that the Phillies are paying the reigning NL MVP $500,000 this year? No, that is the contract that he signed and the system that was negotiated by his union.

Stop crying for Lovie Smith.

That's true, Lovie is under contract. I guess by your tone you're inferring he should just shut up and play out his contract then? While you can argue the legal technicality of the matter, Lovie being under contract, the truth of the matter is that it is standard operating practice to reward people like Lovie with extensions in the last year of their contract. The only times, in fact, when that doesn't happen (when a team allows a player or coach to hit the market) is when that team either doesn't want the player/coach back or they feel there is no way to re-sign them for the price they're willing to pay.

Sorry, I just don't see that cavalier attitude of "he's got a contract and he should live with it" as being a sound argument given past practice and precedent. That attitude *if* taken by the Bears management will insure Lovie walks.

Nobody is saying the contract he signed wasn't a fair contract when he signed it. But enough already: pay the man and pay him now.

Lovie absolutely has the right to ask for an extension anytime he wants and the Bears have a right to say NO. If that is the case, which there is no indication that it is, then Lovie has to shut up and coach and play out his contract.Joe is saying that in a 4 year contract, after 2 years Lovie asked to renegotiate and Chicago said "No, show us again." I'm not sure where Joe got that. I dont remember seeing that. Well, now Lovie has had 2 good years in a row and is asking for an extension. Typical practice is that they work out an extension. That might happen but if it doesnt, Lovie needs to coach and shut up.

I believe if you outperform your current contract, you need to make that up in your next contract. I dont believe this TO like practice of opening up a 4 year contract after 2 years because you somehow feel you have outperform the teams' and your own expectations.

Teams often cut players even if there are still a few years left on the contract so I don't see why players or coaches shouldn't be able to negociate something even if they're still under contract.

 

[DrJ]

I enjoy the "reasons" why the Bears are being wise to not reach a contract with Lovie. The only reason is that they are tight fisted money grubbers. I can respect a hardnosed negotiation as much as the next guy but at a certain point you gotta call BS. That time is upon us and the Bears organization is stinking up the place right now.

Yeah, we're 2 weeks into the negotiation process. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!

 

[DrJ]

Joe is saying that in a 4 year contract, after 2 years Lovie asked to renegotiate and Chicago said "No, show us again." I'm not sure where Joe got that.

It did happen. Phillips even said in an interview just before the Superbowl (when the Lovie contract talk started heating up in the media) that it was never about the money and that he wanted to see a larger body of work and make sure that he had the right guy for the job long term.So they obviously knew it was going to cost more if that larger body of work was positive, and say they are prepared for it.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Joe is saying that in a 4 year contract, after 2 years Lovie asked to renegotiate and Chicago said "No, show us again." I'm not sure where Joe got that.

It did happen. Phillips even said in an interview just before the Superbowl (when the Lovie contract talk started heating up in the media) that it was never about the money and that he wanted to see a larger body of work and make sure that he had the right guy for the job long term.So they obviously knew it was going to cost more if that larger body of work was positive, and say they are prepared for it.

It is in the Bears best interests to resign him now. I am VERY confident a deal is going to be done soon (the next 2 weeks or so ~ definetely before the draft).

 

[DrJ]

Like I said, strangely reminiscient of the Scott Skiles deal. Agent comes out and says a bunch of stuff to the media to put fan pressure on the organization. Instead of telling the truth, that a deal is imminent, he says that "talks have broken down". Fans throw a fit about nothing.

Also Blowhard, I never answered your Skiles question properly I noticed. Skiles took an undermanned Bulls team, that started the season like complete and total garbage and was way at the bottom of the standings, to the playoffs and almost won a series. Because of that, fan support for him was huge. Agent comes out, spews a bunch of crap about how in his 20 years of being an agent he had never experienced something as horrific as dealing with the Bulls. Scott Skiles ends up signing a deal, the same deal the Bulls offered with a tiny bonus incentive added in to save face, a day later.

You simply don't take agent speak at face value in the midst of a contract negotiation. He knew what reaction his statement was going to cause, and most people ate this stuff up and happily obliged.

Obviously the Bears are proving to be a world class organization from top to bottom. Hopefully that will afford them more leeway the next time some agent comes out talking about how terrible they are in the middle of a contract negotiation.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Good job Bears for doing the obvious and right thing here.

J