[CBFF] Jerry Angelo: Confident of Arrogant?

[Tom Shannon]

http://bloggeddrain.typepad.com/cbff/2006/06/jerry_angeo_con.html

Jerry Angelo: Confident of Arrogant?
By Tom Shannon

What is the difference between confidence and arrogance?  If Rasheed Wallace
predicts victory, is it the confidence of a player who has to believe his
team can win?  Or is the conceit of a performer who has won a little too
often a little too easily? It's a tough line to walk.


In my opinion, no one associated with the Chicago Bears defines this paradox
better than GM Jerry Angelo.  Sometimes Angelo seems to believe in his
player personnel moves more than the Pope believes in virgin births.  You
don't have to look far into the recent history of the franchise to see the
best example.


Bringing up the QB situation last year is like beating a dead horse.  At
least, theoretically.  But there are still lessons to be learned from it
and, sickening as it is, we can't let go of it too easily.  The Bears went
into March 2005 with Rex Grossman and Chad Hutchinson in and two at the
position.  Though Grossman did (and does) look good, he had started only a
handful of games due to injury.  It had and has gotten to the point where
Grossman might be characterized as "injury prone" (see below).  Even worse,
Chad Hutchinson, though talented, was also totally unproven.  Sounds like a
situation where a reliable veteran backup was needed, right?  Something to
get you through if the worst happened?  Apparently, not.  Angelo decided to
draft a QB, Kyle Orton.


In order to understand this move, I think we have to dig a little into
Angelo's thought process.  Hindsight is 20-20 but looking back I really
don't think its hard to see what was running through his mind.  He drafted
Grossman.  He wanted Hutchinson before the Cowboys got him and picked him up
after they had given up on him.  He knew these were good players -
absolutely knew it for sure.  In fact, he was so confident that it would
work out, despite questions from both scouts and fans, that when Orton was
still available, he had to take him in the draft.


We all know what happened.  Grossman got hurt (again) and Hutchinson wasn't
as good as Angelo thought.  Orton started most of the year and, hanging by
his fingernails week after week, got the Bears by.  But the offense was
miserable.


There's no getting around the fact that Angelo was directly responsible for
that mess.  "Why?" you ask.  "Don't you expect a guy to have confidence in
his ability?" you ask.  "Considering the limits of the salary cap, don't you
have to take the occasional risk?"  Yes, you do.  But you also have to
minimize that risk.  Every human being I know who was good at what they did
had confidence in themselves.  And every one of them who was responsible for
others also had to consider the fact that he or she might be wrong.  They
had to do what they could to minimize the consequences should that happen.
The reason why Angelo was particularly at fault there was because he owed it
to himself and the franchise (and the fans) to make sure that, no matter how
sure he was that he was right, he kept an insurance policy of some type -
even in the form of a washed up veteran - just to make sure the offense
didn't completely tank should he be wrong.  He failed to do that and in a
year where almost everything went right for the Bears defensively, they
nearly wasted it by consistently coming up short offensively.


Why am I bringing this up now?  Isn't this ancient history (in NFL time)?
It doesn't matter now, right?  Sorry but I'm afraid it does.  Fast forward
to March 2006.  Going into the draft, fans and scouts agreed for the most
part that the Bears had offensive needs at receiver.  Specifically at TE
where Desmond Clark is a veteran who has never performed to his capabilities
with the Bears, and at WR where a rash of injuries hampered the development
of a crop of younger players, most prominently of Mark Bradley.  The players
at these positions were picked or signed or in some way committed to by
Angelo.  Despite the fact that they have consistently under produced (as in
the case of Clark) or are otherwise unproven (like Bradley), Angelo is
confident that these players will come through.  The result?  A series of
draft picks that will provide little or no help at these positions.


Yes, the Bears stuck to their board and didn't reach for a TE.  That's
usually a good thing.  But given the situation, shouldn't they have given in
this once and done it?  Shouldn't Angelo have at least considered that he
might be wrong about these players and acted to hedge his bets at least a
little?  These questions are where the rubber meets the road when making
practical decisions in the NFL.


I happen to agree with Angelo on all of the points above.  But I'm still
worried, not just about this year, but about the long term future of the
franchise.  What disturbs me most about the final choices that were made
this year at these two positions is that Angelo has (once again) failed to
learn quickly from the mistakes of the past.  Yes, after years of taking
chances with the QB position, he finally signed Brian Griese and the Bears
now have a proven, quality backup capable of starting and, of not just
surviving, but of excelling.  That's great and I whole heartedly applaud the
move.  But what about the new points of weakness?  Now, instead of Grossman,
we have Bradley and others coming back at WR (injury prone?) to worry about.
Instead of Hutchinson, we have Clark and a host of standins (unproven?).


Different positions.  Same situation.  And the same decisions.  Albert
Einstein defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again and
expecting different results.  Perhaps we should tack it on to the definition
of "arrogance" as well.

------------
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll
kill you.
            -- Oscar Wilde