- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,894
- Liked Posts:
- 25,793
Doesn't a football team need 2 tackles?
Doesn't a football team need 2 tackles?
- Joined:
- Aug 17, 2011
- Posts:
- 42,679
- Liked Posts:
- 22,233
- Location:
- Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
Beam me off, Scotty!
Gravis
Bears/Bulls/Hawks by 400
- Joined:
- Jan 24, 2011
- Posts:
- 2,493
- Liked Posts:
- 1,691
- Location:
- Oklahoma
I think one of the big problems in that equation comes down to poor play design (using a lot of only 2 WR sets) and a lack of most of his WR's/TE's not being able to get open (Tice not utilizing Forte didn't help either). It doesn't mean he didn't make bad or forced decisions, but rather that Lovie, Tice, and his receiving corp (sans Marshall) honestly didn't do him any favors in putting him into the position to make decent or better decisions; at least on a consistent basis anyway. Combined with the below average o-line play there's really little for Cutler to do, but force plays and screw up his mechanics when he's either scrambling or holding onto the ball too long and can't step up to make a proper throw.
So regardless of how many hurries Bushrod gives up this year, as long as it's outside and gives Cutler a chance to step up, combined with what Emery has done to field a proper offense, then I don't see what the alarm is here. I'm still more worried about this team's guards and Garza's declining ability than one 2-time pro-bowl LT that has playoff and Superbowl experience.
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 9,943
- Liked Posts:
- 3,897
So in conclusion, pro football focus is wrong and all should be good?
Gravis
Bears/Bulls/Hawks by 400
- Joined:
- Jan 24, 2011
- Posts:
- 2,493
- Liked Posts:
- 1,691
- Location:
- Oklahoma
Did I say that they were? I suppose I was saying, however, that statistics can be used to say whatever a person wants to believe, and that we shouldn't hyperventilate over what statements they do make. That and how we should be optimistic that--at the very least--the 2013-14 offense will be put in better positions (partially thanks to Bushrod's experience obviously) to play at the level we know they should have been playing at last year. Derp?
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 9,943
- Liked Posts:
- 3,897
I wasn't implying just you, it's more of a sentiment of this thread.
Pro football focus has outstanding stats and break downs. Their Oline rankings are not an exception, but also not the rule. It's the closest thing we as fans get to see and digest about individuals. But as soon as it brings a Bears player down .... The usual crowd shows up to shit on whomever dares talk about actuall football and stuff.
Bear Pride
Bears Gonna Shock the World!
- Joined:
- Aug 28, 2012
- Posts:
- 10,616
- Liked Posts:
- 3,092
I think the thread is a good example of how stats do not tell the entire story as well. I'm surprised that no one commented on my point at all. The single most reason Bushrod was signed was his familiarity of Kromer's scheme, imo. Bushrod isn't the greatest LT out there, but he is a system T big time, imo, and he fits Kromer's system!
It's a little absurd to be in a debate between Webb and Bushrod. Bushrod will win because he know's the scheme, period! Kromer knows he has one solid veteran at the very important LT spot that knows the lingo and his scheme. And yes, Webb played pretty good last year, and moving him back to RT could be a good thing for Webb.
Webb lining up on the strong side should help him. Bennett should be next to Webb a lot. Meanwhile, Kromer has faith, that in HIS scheme, Bushrod can be left on an island more times then not. My guess is that if he can get Jay getting rid of the ball quicker as well, it will help BOTH T's.
My biggest question here is .... why are we stringing up a new Bears player before he's ever played a down for the Bears?
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 9,943
- Liked Posts:
- 3,897
Many mentioned Kromer ... I just like to see the difference in his play with and without Carl Nicks besides him. It's fairly drastic and important IMO. Ends up he graded fairly similar to our guy. Now I'm not saying Webb is better or anything, but he wasnt our biggest issue neither.
So take the stats with a grain of salt, but don't be surprised when Bushrod pushes his guy outside and Jay has no pocket to step up ... Sack!
So take the stats with a grain of salt, but don't be surprised when Bushrod pushes his guy outside and Jay has no pocket to step up ... Sack!
Bear Pride
Bears Gonna Shock the World!
- Joined:
- Aug 28, 2012
- Posts:
- 10,616
- Liked Posts:
- 3,092
Slausen's best at pass blocking, right? I'd be more worried about Garza giving up the Bull rush then Slausen. Maybe Long comes into play, I don't know. Now we're gonna run a hurry up with real quick routes. I'm expecting a lot better OL this year. But to freak out about prior to putting the pads on?
And Nicks played with Tampa last year, btw.
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 9,943
- Liked Posts:
- 3,897
ie Nicks, seriously dude, did you read what I wrote?
Slausen was not re-signed from one of the worse teams in the league and signed here for little, how good do you think he is?
Yes, the middle is a concern, AGAIN/STILL. I like the Long pick and am fairly excited to watch him play, but I won't be surprised if he struggles early.
Last edited:
Bear Pride
Bears Gonna Shock the World!
- Joined:
- Aug 28, 2012
- Posts:
- 10,616
- Liked Posts:
- 3,092
These are all reasons I like the fact that Kromer brought in the LT that has played in his system for years. Our OL has a ton of changes, and Kromer has a lot of developing to do, so Bushrod providing a solid veteran presence at LT is huge for the Bears!
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 21,090
- Liked Posts:
- 25,553
- Location:
- Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
Here is a perfect example of how you have no idea how to interpret stats.
These are your numbers for same years. In 2010, you list 57 disruptions for Bushrod and 61 for Webb.
And in 2011 you have JB for 53 and JW with 48. And you claim that Jb gives up a lot of pressures even in "good years".
Yet you fail to realize is NO threw the ball almost 50% more than the Bears. Almost 200 more pass plays per year.
On top of that NO in 2010 had 2 WR with over 95 targets and 7 different receivers with at least 45 targets while the Bears had only 1 in the 90's and only 4 above 25 targets and in 2011 NO top 3 WR had 149, 107, and 73 targets, while Chicago had ZERO with 70 targets. This all means JB had a significantly higher PBE, all while blocking in an offense which ran more 3 and 4 Wide versus Chicago's typical 2 WR max protect packages.
Attention, this analysis was performed without assistance of the ALL-22 video,
These are your numbers for same years. In 2010, you list 57 disruptions for Bushrod and 61 for Webb.
And in 2011 you have JB for 53 and JW with 48. And you claim that Jb gives up a lot of pressures even in "good years".
Yet you fail to realize is NO threw the ball almost 50% more than the Bears. Almost 200 more pass plays per year.
On top of that NO in 2010 had 2 WR with over 95 targets and 7 different receivers with at least 45 targets while the Bears had only 1 in the 90's and only 4 above 25 targets and in 2011 NO top 3 WR had 149, 107, and 73 targets, while Chicago had ZERO with 70 targets. This all means JB had a significantly higher PBE, all while blocking in an offense which ran more 3 and 4 Wide versus Chicago's typical 2 WR max protect packages.
Attention, this analysis was performed without assistance of the ALL-22 video,
- Joined:
- Apr 28, 2011
- Posts:
- 7,276
- Liked Posts:
- 4,663
My favorite teams
Yeah, but what was the YPA through the air?
- Joined:
- Mar 27, 2011
- Posts:
- 5,224
- Liked Posts:
- 1,865
Just out of curiousity, eye doctor, I've noticed that you've been around all day, yet haven't responded to the criticism of your posts in the "Troll" thread.
http://www.chicitysports.com/forum/showthread.php/36739-Trolls/page6
Those last 4 posts in that thread blatantly reference your posts. Or are you just cherry picking on the weaker targets?
http://www.chicitysports.com/forum/showthread.php/36739-Trolls/page6
Those last 4 posts in that thread blatantly reference your posts. Or are you just cherry picking on the weaker targets?
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 21,090
- Liked Posts:
- 25,553
- Location:
- Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
Not sure I have that data, but I think that since JC has a rocket arm, he can throw a 20 yard pass on a rope , but if you factor in the arc required for the 5'4" Brees to clear his lineman, it probably takes about 30 yrds of travel to go the linear 20 yrd distance. My numbers may be off a little.
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,894
- Liked Posts:
- 25,793
Didn't the Bears get new guards too?
- Joined:
- Jun 19, 2011
- Posts:
- 32,894
- Liked Posts:
- 25,793
Keep your horseshit in the thread where its relevant please.
- Joined:
- Mar 27, 2011
- Posts:
- 5,224
- Liked Posts:
- 1,865
Go fuck yourself, I wasn't talking to you, pig.
- Joined:
- Aug 21, 2012
- Posts:
- 21,090
- Liked Posts:
- 25,553
- Location:
- Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
I havent been in that thread all day, but looking at those, they all say about the same thing. The Bears being worse than the Pack clearly is more frustrating. I don't disagree that the Bears have not performed at a very good level many times over the last 20 years, but my post was in response to your assertion that you have been happy with the overall results over the modern glory years of GB. As I said, as a Bear fan, looking back over the last 30 years, there was a lot of suck years, but right now, I would say I am more frustrated at the lost opportunities of the mid 80's then the crappy Wanny years. There is a type of frustration from your favorite team sucking, and a different type for your favorite team choking or lost opportunities. If I was a Packer fan,(beside gouging my eyes out) I would feel as though my team had left a few out there that they should have one. That was the point of that post. It would take reading a little further back to get my point. And as we know, some people don't necessarily want to reply to the proper context of the post but rather the words in that snippet of thought.
Bear Pride
Bears Gonna Shock the World!
- Joined:
- Aug 28, 2012
- Posts:
- 10,616
- Liked Posts:
- 3,092
