Bears a deep team?

[Canth]

Bingo.

And in typical CCS fashion...posters are already counting eggs that didn't hatch.

AntMill or Mooney - one of these guys has to step up. I don't want to hear how "we have to spread the ball around so much they'll have a hard time putting up stats." That's straight bullshit. Playmakers find a way to get their numbers. Find a way to be undeniable. If you watched the games last year, the roster isn't so good that an individual couldn't step up...the problem was NO ONE stepped up.

In fairness to Mooney, he needs a qb that can accurately throw the ball down the field. His numbers will go up a good chunk just from being able to hit those plays that were missed last year. Based on college production, Fields certainly seems to be able to do that.

Miller on the other hand, needs to learn how to execute within the offense. There are just too many coaches comments about running the correct route, timing, etc for me to think all his issues were qb related. He has his own things he needs to figure out.

 

[Black Rainbow]

I mostly agree with this. At the same time, I feel like Mooney did step up as a rookie. Just the qb play was quite poor. With solid qb play his numbers would of been really impressive. So let’s hope he’s the guy that takes another step and that we get the qb play we need for him to showcase that success

I agree about Mooney.

To be clear, I'm talking about the skill players as a group. No one was super impressive outside of ARob.

We need at least one other WR putting up solid numbers - like 800 & 7 TDs. Then defenses cannot just single out ARob and his numbers will be better.

One WR & Kmet stepping up. Monty is what he is. Then I cannot complain.

If these things don't happen it will not make much difference if Fields is starting.

 

[knoxville7]

I agree about Mooney.

To be clear, I'm talking about the skill players as a group. No one was super impressive outside of ARob.

for sure. Need a 3rd guy to step up. As fucked up as it sounds to say, maybe that guy can be Cohen? I just wish he would get over running side to side and out of bounds

 

[sevvy]

"When Pace signed Jeremiah Attaochu, he brought in the best reserve pass-rushing outside linebacker the team has had since Khalil Mack was acquired. They truly can have Mack rest for a few downs or series and still expect high production."

Literally whomst?!?!?

Hey, he had 5 sacks last year. If we get 5 sacks out of him, I'll be fucking ecstatic.

 

[Payton!34]

With the salary cap in play every team will have depth issues at a position or 2.

Do you also notice the price tag of starting nfl qb's? Even 2nd tier ones like Tannehill are making big bucks which puts more strain at other positions to fit the roster limit.

another reason why you shouldn’t waste (money opinion) a year of an obvious top ten draft talent. I think it’s also obvious to every bear fan and others to be quite honest that fields is the most talented qb to be drafted!

 

[MDB111™]

for sure. Need a 3rd guy to step up. As fucked up as it sounds to say, maybe that guy can be Cohen? I just wish he would get over running side to side and out of bounds

I think Cohen being back should be the X factor. Provided Nagy stops running him up the gut and gets him consistent time.

 

[dabears70]

This whole thread is someone trying to convince themselves a problem isn't a problem.

If Roquan goes down...you got Christian Jones and Trevathan at ILB - yikes.

Average QBs will be able to pick apart that pass D.

 

[dabears70]

Hilarious

 

[dabears70]

Hey, he had 5 sacks last year. If we get 5 sacks out of him, I'll be fucking ecstatic.

5 sacks in i think it was 12 games.

 

[vabearsfan15]

This whole thread is someone trying to convince themselves a problem isn't a problem.

If Roquan goes down...you got Christian Jones and Trevathan at ILB - yikes.

Average QBs will be able to pick apart that pass D.

You obviously haven't heard or seen the tape of the next Chicago Bears defensive great, Caleb Johnson, out of Houston Baptist

 

[Nelly]

The thing about depth is that you often don't know you have it until you need it. We don't have a lot of proven commodities at corner but it's not out of the realm of possibility that we suffer an injury or two at corner which paves the way for Thomas Graham to come in and do really well, for example. No team has proven commodities on every level of the depth chart at every position. This is why drafting well is so damn important.

As an aside, I feel pretty comfortable with Deon Bush at safety in the event Jackson or Gipson goes down. Pretty much every team is screwed if they have a superstar like Mack or Roquan go down.

 

[hyatt151]

we are thin on the OL , secondary and Line backer, and one injury short at WR as well, so, no we are not a deep team

 

[Nuremberg Bear]

we are thin on the OL , secondary and Line backer, and one injury short at WR as well, so, no we are not a deep team

Tell me the deepest team of the league, please. I will check there weaknes and compare it to yours.

 

[dabears70]

we are thin on the OL , secondary and Line backer, and one injury short at WR as well, so, no we are not a deep team

Tell me the deepest team of the league, please. I will check there weaknes and compare it to yours.

 

[WindyCity]

Very Thin at CB

Thin at OL, TE

 

[dabears70]

Very Thin at CB

Thin at OL, TE

So do you think most teams have starting level talent as their backups at OL and TE? I don't know this answer because never had a reason to look that far into it but i'd guess that most, if not every, team doesn't and has the same kind of talent we have as their backups. We actually have players who could start and play good enough to get by with as our backups.

 

[KittiesKorner]

derrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

+1

 

[Pegger]

If 'depth' just means having a warm body to throw in there, then I guess they are deep.

For me 'depth' means having either a known commodity (career backup) or young guy looking for a starting spot behind the starters. For anyone drafted outside of the first 2 rounds you really can't count on them for being depth. They are just college players trying to figure out if they can make the jump to the NFL. Training camp might tell a different story, but at this time you haven't even seen the kids in pads, so what type of analysis can be completed on the teams 'depth'?

 

[MikeDitkaPolishSausage]

If 'depth' just means having a warm body to throw in there, then I guess they are deep.

For me 'depth' means having either a known commodity (career backup) or young guy looking for a starting spot behind the starters. For anyone drafted outside of the first 2 rounds you really can't count on them for being depth. They are just college players trying to figure out if they can make the jump to the NFL. Training camp might tell a different story, but at this time you haven't even seen the kids in pads, so what type of analysis can be completed on the teams 'depth'?

I do agree with the bolded part of your statement, but the rest of it isn't accurate. It doesn’t matter what round someone is drafted, they all have to earn their place in the NFL. There are more than enough examples out there that show where a player is drafted doesn’t determine their success. I think their are plenty of 3rd or later round draft picks that can and will be counted on for depth, if not starters.

 

[Pegger]

I do agree with the bolded part of your statement, but the rest of it isn't accurate. It doesn’t matter what round someone is drafted, they all have to earn their place in the NFL. There are more than enough examples out there that show where a player is drafted doesn’t determine their success. I think their are plenty of 3rd or later round draft picks that can and will be counted on for depth, if not starters.

I'm not disagreeing with your point, but rather saying if the player has no snaps in the NFL and limited practice opportunities, then what else do you have to go on? Here's a good article from 2015 about this. All it did was measure if an OL ended up starting 1/2 the games they played in throughout their careers. Pretty wide margin of 'success', but it's still useful data because if an OL was drafted, but wasn't good enough to start then they would be considered a bust. Specifically when looking at OL:

• Of the 421 players drafted, 147 wound up as starters for at least half their career.
• The first round has an 83% success rate. The second round is almost as good with 70%. Even the third and fourth aren't too shabby in comparison to success rates of other positions in the same rounds. (3rd - 40%, 4th - 29%).
• The later round success rates hold up well (5th and 6th - 16%, 7th - 9%) but the numbers are driven down due to the higher numbers selected later.
• On average, 5 linemen are drafted in the first round. The first and second rounds, on average, draft the fewest offensive linemen.
• If you were ranking rounds by the numbers drafted it would run 7th, 6th, 5th, 4th, 3rd, 1st, 2nd

Again, I'm using draft capital for the completely unknown guys that are being marked as 'depth'. Of course there's a chance that those late round guys not only start, but play very well. History has shown us you have a lower percentage chance of getting a 'starter caliber' players in the later rounds. I'm not trashing any specific selections. Just looking at the history and trying to draw conclusions of how reliable that depth really is.