Coach of the year

Does "are they for real" actually make a difference? Lovie has gotten blood from a turnip, won a billion games with Kyle Freaking Orton and he's managed to sweet the NFC South, which is arguably the best division in the league. They could completely suck next year, but that doesn't affect how well they've performed this year.

 

Good question, but my issue with Lovie Smith is that I don't think that Chicago's record is so much a result of his coaching as pure luck. Some of it has undoubtedly been coaching, and a lot of it has definitely been great performances by the defense, but I think luck has played more of a role with the Bears than almost any other team in the league this season.

 

the only other guy who has done as much with as little would be saban.

Luck or no luck, they've been winning lots of games nobody would have expected them to win.

 

It's Coach of the YEAR, as in this year. What a team did previously is irrelevant.
I wouldn't say any of those mentioned aren't worthy, but the Bears are easily the biggest suprise of the year. Luck or not, they are winning.

 

I find this very likely considering he didn't use any 'protection' on his hands, ear, or heads for the Chicago game on Sunday night.

 

True, but he does have them in the right mindset to roll with it and that D is no joke.

 

Do I really need to point out the obvious, that the award is supposed to honor the coach who did the best coaching job that season? If your team is winning because of luck and it looks like they probably won't sustain that success, that's not a credit to the coach. I already pointed out that Dick Jauron got Coach of the Year in 2001 when the Bears finished 13-3. Does anyone still think he was the best coach that season?

 

Chicago is not 10-4 because of luck. They are 10-4 because they have outscored their opponent 10 times since September 11.

Luck is a bi-product of hard work. Smith put together a nice scheme, and is getting the most out of that defense. Agreed?

Orton has slipped from a below-average game manager to just downright pitiful. Low temps and rare poor field position proved that in the first half on Sunday. Grossman is not great, but better than Orton. Jones is a good RB, rushing behind one of the NFL's top offensive lines.

Hey, it may not all be due to Lovie. But they are good. Very good. And that's not luck, that's performance.

 

I remember when Lovie had his first presser he said they were gonna beat Green Bay and they did, first game they played. It impressed me.

 

It has been argued on this board that coaching the the NFL makes little/no difference in a team's development/performance.

I have argued that is does matter. Not in every single case, but more times than not, a coach/staff who has his/their shit together will win games, divisions, playoff games, conference titles, and Super Bowls.

With that said, I think that Lovie Smith has his shit together. Posting 10-4 with Kyle Orton behind center is impressive. He has worked around it.