George McCaskey Is Not Inclined to Change the Bears Organizational Structure In Any Way

Social Navigation

George McCaskey Is Not Inclined to Change the Bears Organizational Structure In Any Way

Chicago Bears

Chicago Bears Chairman George McCaskey did interviews with 670 The Score and ESPN 1000 in Chicago on Thursday afternoon. And while I plan on diving deeper into both of those chats later on, I did want to address something that stuck in my craw in both radio hits first.

McCaskey ended both interviews saying “Go Rams!”

An obvious nod to the Packers’ opponent this weekend wasn’t unexpected. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. So in this case, Bears fans are Rams fans this weekend. Heck, I, myself, have stated our Twitter account is a Rams fan account for the second time in three weeks. Who woulda saw that coming in 2017?

Anyway, it’s not that I have an issue with that statement, in a vacuum. In fact, I think it’s good that McCaskey admitted losses to the Packers hurt more than others. When something hurts, it means you care. Once you become apathetic to a result, that’s when problems arise. With that being said, I have no problem with the Bears’ chairman fetishizing beating the Packers. However, I do take issue with not being aggressive toward attaining that goal.

In interviews with ESPN 1000’s Marc Silverman and Tom Waddle, as well as 670 The Score’s Danny Parkins and Mark Grote, McCaskey was asked about the Bears’ organizational structure. McCaskey was also asked if he would consider changing the structure for the betterment of the football team. When presented the opportunity to consider it, McCaskey declined to do so:

To me, I interpret this as George McCaskey wanting to beat the Packers, but having no idea on how to get his own team to do so. Hence, he finds himself hoping someone else doing his dirty work for him. That’s not the right way to go about running a football team. Saying Packers losses hurt more than others is one thing. But standing pat after losing by a 76-41 aggregate score and losing 9 of 10 in the series says you don’t really believe that first thing.

Even still … the most frustrating part might be the reluctance to change. McCaskey cited being a Cubs and Blackhawks fan who saw organizational structure changes spark those teams to titles in the 2010s. He even made reference to being close with Cubs owner Tom Ricketts. And yet, a real reluctance to change because he is happy with the structure and the people in place.

For the sake of comparison, this is what the Bears’ organizational structure looks like at the top:

•   President/CEO Ted Phillips
•   GM Ryan Pace
•   Vice President Brian J. McCaskey
•   Vice President Patrick McCaskey

And this is what the Packers’ organizational structure looks like at the top:

•   President Mark Murphy
•   General Manager Brian Gutekunst
•   Executive Vice President/Director of Football Operations Russ Ball

In 2018, the Packers re-organized their power structure. You can read about it in detail here. To be brief, Gutekunst and Ball work together and report to Murphy. In other words, the Packers’ vice president is a football guy who works with their GM as a top football guy. Meanwhile, the Bears’ vice presidents are family members. And as we learned yesterday, McCaskey leans on the board of directors and family when he isn’t consulting rival owners when it comes to his football team.

The Packers’ reasoning behind creating this chain of command to increase communication within the organization. And considering how much McCaskey, Phillips, Pace, and Nagy talked about collaboration yesterday, you’d think this would be something they’d consider doing for the sake of the franchise. Instead, the Bears seem OK with maintaining the status quo.

And that’s the shame of it all. Talking about wanting the Packers to lose is fine and dandy. But if you’re not actively improving your franchise to do so yourself, then words are meaningless.

Author: Luis Medina

Luis Medina is a Writer at Bleacher Nation, and you can find him on Twitter at@lcm1986.