Sun-Times: Bears' plan is Borom at LT, Jenkins at RT. Hopefully one of them sticks for 2023.

gallagher

Ave Atque Vale
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
7,609
Liked Posts:
6,737
Location:
Of Semi-Fixed Address
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
Plays that practically encourage very little YAC. Thanks Nagy.
To add to that, how do we know if any of our players were worth a damn in such an uncoordinated offense?

I dread how the teams WR and OL group will look this season, but at the same time I am just as intrigued by the possibility that some of the guys from last year's offense actually don't suck.
 

iueyedoc

Variant Also Negotiates
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
21,232
Liked Posts:
26,230
Location:
Mountains to Sea
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Indiana Hoosiers
I heard that the Bears are planning on designing zero plays where 3 WR converge to a single point next season, zero plays where the smallest guy on the team runs a goalline dive on third and 3 at the 50, and zero plays with silly catchy names, like "Santa's little fired for raging incompetence helpers."

So there is that.
 
Last edited:

gallagher

Ave Atque Vale
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
7,609
Liked Posts:
6,737
Location:
Of Semi-Fixed Address
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
So this. Value was easily there if he becomes a perennial starter.
Plenty of interior linemen have been taken in the first round. If Jenkins can destroy at RG, then we got great value for the low low price of a second and third rounder. If he is merely good at RG and doesn't get a second contract here, I still would not be upset, because we used our picks on a goddamn starting lineman.
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
43,301
Liked Posts:
23,551
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
Plenty of interior linemen have been taken in the first round. If Jenkins can destroy at RG, then we got great value for the low low price of a second and third rounder. If he is merely good at RG and doesn't get a second contract here, I still would not be upset, because we used our picks on a goddamn starting lineman.
I think a 2nd contract unless he gets priced out due to good play is the bar here.

I suspect they put Jenkins at RT because they don't want too many moving pert and are very comfortable with him there. Borom has VG feet. If he can do a bit better with his arms/hands and gained some strength, I could see it working out and if not, Jones is a great prospect for where drafted though potential is a lot different than play. I suspect he makes the 53 as our swing T.
 
Last edited:

mattb78

My threads are FTO !
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
3,932
Liked Posts:
4,395
Location:
Orlando
Jenkins was projected as a RT. He is a guy you can run behind and is better suited at RT.

Borom is more agile than projected and was supposed to be the guard to replace Daniels.
 

mattb78

My threads are FTO !
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
3,932
Liked Posts:
4,395
Location:
Orlando
I suspect they put Jenkins at RT because they don't want too many moving pert and are very comfortable with him there.
It was the concern when drafted that he didn't have the foot speed to play LT, and that is why he dropped out of the first. I think RT is his natural pro position.
 

bamainatlanta

You wake him up, you keep him up
Staff member
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Aug 10, 2013
Posts:
37,233
Liked Posts:
34,404
Location:
Cumming
To add to that, how do we know if any of our players were worth a damn in such an uncoordinated offense?

I dread how the teams WR and OL group will look this season, but at the same time I am just as intrigued by the possibility that some of the guys from last year's offense actually don't suck.

How many times did we see 2 or more Bears receivers in the same 3yd vicinity of one another?
 

Mighty Joe Young

Living in Troll's Heads Rent-Free for Decades
Joined:
Feb 8, 2021
Posts:
10,349
Liked Posts:
9,026
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Bears
I don't see any reason to doubt the plan being put forward.

Fields had one of the highest completion percentages in the league on roll outs - so what did Nagy do? Only rolled him out 19 times all year.

If I were to be designing an offense around my quarterback's strengths, that seems to be a pretty damn good strength to build around.

I also somewhat get the point that we won't know until the opposing team stops what the Bears are doing on offense - but only to a point.

Yes, we've typically seen, be it with Nagy or Gary Crowton, etc an offense that is only good until the NFL catches up and the defense adjusts, and then you really only then find out if you have a real QB/OC because the real ones know how to counter punch and adjust back.

But we are talking about a roll out here. How many times do we see roll outs and designed roll outs in the NFL week by week? If a roll out could "just be stopped" then we wouldn't still be seeing it, so the very premise of stopping roll outs on a whole for an entire game seems dumb. Sure, you can stop some roll outs, but in the type of offense that is being run, you can't stop all of them.

And given the state of the team right now, I actually DO expect the Bears to be very run-heavy. I think this is going to be a very vanilla offense to start - think the Shannahan offense in Denver, when pick-a-running back would feast on yards, which then would open up the designed roll outs etc.

Is it innovative? No. But it works, and is fundamentally NFL-tested and sound.

I think at this point, its a trial year for everyone, so they are just going to use 2023 as an extended scouting year anyway. The cap favors the Bears in 2023 to begin to make the real wholesale adjustments they might feel they need to.
 

rawdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 28, 2013
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
6,460
My googleator says you're wrong

Like was said, "pass attempts" don't include sacks where a pass was intended to be thrown but wasn't. It also doesn't include pass plays where the QB scrambled, which would actually add a run instead of a pass attempt.

Your previous comment about audibles makes no sense, so please don't rehash that.
 

greg23

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
9,597
Liked Posts:
5,355
Like was said, "pass attempts" don't include sacks where a pass was intended to be thrown but wasn't. It also doesn't include pass plays where the QB scrambled, which would actually add a run instead of a pass attempt.

Your previous comment about audibles makes no sense, so please don't rehash that.
That's quite a bit of inferring; guessing and assuming.

Its simple......runs vs passes...... in 2021; 10% of nfl teams had more running plays than passing plays

End of story
 

HeHateMe

He/Himz/Hiz
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
58,626
Liked Posts:
51,499
I don't see any reason to doubt the plan being put forward.

Fields had one of the highest completion percentages in the league on roll outs - so what did Nagy do? Only rolled him out 19 times all year.

If I were to be designing an offense around my quarterback's strengths, that seems to be a pretty damn good strength to build around.

I also somewhat get the point that we won't know until the opposing team stops what the Bears are doing on offense - but only to a point.

Yes, we've typically seen, be it with Nagy or Gary Crowton, etc an offense that is only good until the NFL catches up and the defense adjusts, and then you really only then find out if you have a real QB/OC because the real ones know how to counter punch and adjust back.

But we are talking about a roll out here. How many times do we see roll outs and designed roll outs in the NFL week by week? If a roll out could "just be stopped" then we wouldn't still be seeing it, so the very premise of stopping roll outs on a whole for an entire game seems dumb. Sure, you can stop some roll outs, but in the type of offense that is being run, you can't stop all of them.

And given the state of the team right now, I actually DO expect the Bears to be very run-heavy. I think this is going to be a very vanilla offense to start - think the Shannahan offense in Denver, when pick-a-running back would feast on yards, which then would open up the designed roll outs etc.

Is it innovative? No. But it works, and is fundamentally NFL-tested and sound.

I think at this point, its a trial year for everyone, so they are just going to use 2023 as an extended scouting year anyway. The cap favors the Bears in 2023 to begin to make the real wholesale adjustments they might feel they need to.
where did you steal this from?
 

rawdawg

Well-known member
Joined:
Apr 28, 2013
Posts:
8,013
Liked Posts:
6,460
That's quite a bit of inferring; guessing and assuming.

Its simple......runs vs passes...... in 2021; 10% of nfl teams had more running plays than passing plays

End of story
Yeah, but it's not. Even if you just look at sacks, which are counted and easily quantified as a drop back to distinguish between a pass play call and a designed QB run which would be a TFL, that only leaves the Eagles as a team that ran more than passed.

And saying, "running plays vs. passing plays" makes you more wrong that if you said rushes vs. pass attempts.
 

greg23

Well-known member
Joined:
Sep 28, 2014
Posts:
9,597
Liked Posts:
5,355
Yeah, but it's not. Even if you just look at sacks, which are counted and easily quantified as a drop back to distinguish between a pass play call and a designed QB run which would be a TFL, that only leaves the Eagles as a team that ran more than passed.

And saying, "running plays vs. passing plays" makes you more wrong that if you said rushes vs. pass attempts.
"Literally 0 teams ran more than the passed last year."


3 teams ran more than they passed; literally.

You can make up excuses for sacks, qb scrambles, tfl; audibles; etc......the official stats show that 3 teams had more rush attempts than pass attempts......literally.
 

Top