BearFan PHX

When they say we play a Tampa 2 or a Cover 2 they really arent talking about our coverages. THey really mean we are a ONE GAP defense, in other words, get into your gap and upfield. This means all three LBs and a safety have run gaps they are responsible for. In a system where you have big DTs eating space and LBs flowing, thats a TWO GAP defense, meaning the DL holds his position and plays the run on both sides of him (2 gaps). Warren Sapp was a one gapper, undersized and active. That's what they mean when they call us that, not the coverages we use.

Excellent post, I agree with everything you've said. One other point, after watching our QBs take so much abuse, we tend to focus on pass protection. I haven't seen any running lanes either.

We keep hearing how penetration from the DT position is the engine that makes Lovie's One Gap system work. Don't we need a Warren Sapp?

I think the biggest question, and no one is talking about it, is whether we have anything at the DT position.

Forte's deal is significantly below Adrian Foster and Sean McCoy's deal, and pretty much in line with Marshawn Lynch's deal. The Bears ended up with only a 7% increase on salary from their original offer, and a 20% increase on guaranteed money, keeping the 4 year deal they wanted. The deal represents less than he would have gotten had they franchised him all four years. To contrast, Forte was asking for a 33% increase in salary from the Bears' original offer, and a 33% increase in guaranteed money too. Mostly this was due to a 5 year deal instead of a 4 year deal. It seems like they really weren't that far apart, except for the length of the deal. Emery did well. Forte was treated fairly, and we don't need to be on the line for his contract after 4 years. Now to the real issue with this team that no one is talking about - do we have ANYTHING at DT?

True but I think the argument is that they don't have the need at DT that we do, and TH is a 4th DT at this point. Also, he has experience in our system and connections to the locker room. Maybe he's just not good enough, but there are reasons his value to us might be a little higher than to another team, so to simply say other teams passed isn't enough. If you think he just doesn't have it to beat out our other options at #4 DT, meager as they are, then that's a different story.

AH I get it TD. you calculate the odds green bay wins em all (.8 x .8 x .8 x .8) as 41% which leaves 59% that the Bears win at least one. Thanks for that!

Even in games that the Packers were heavy favorites, they did not receive an 80% chance of winning. So, the answers to the entirely hypothetical questions are: 1) The odds of winning each game are 20% or 1 in 5. To calculate the probability of the Bears winning all 4 hypothetical 20% upsets would be .2 x .2 x .2 x .2 = .0016 or 16 hundreths of one percent, also know as 1 in 625. 2) the odds that the bears win one of 4 of those hypothetical 20% upsets is 4 x .2 = .8 or 80%, also known as 4 in 5. Back in the real world, we had better odds than 20% each time, and we did indeed beat the Packers in Chicago on 9/27/10 by a score of 20-17. We lost the other three, and the NFC Championship game to them tho. Damn.

Best post ever.

Cutler, Forte, Marshall, Peppers, Urlachaer (does Marshall count?)

Glad to see that Emery is continuing his predecessor's habit of signing draft picks early. It's reported on the Official Chicago Bears page on facebook: "The Bears have agreed to terms on a 4-year contract with 1st round pick Shea McClellin. Hit 'LIKE' if you're happy that Shea is officially a Bear!"

OK if you put it that way i think we agree. Of course we all want the Bears to do well this year, and if this staff proves to be the magic formula, no one will want to break it up. Also I don't think Emery picked to sabotage Lovie in any way. This pick helps the team today too, again we agree. The only difference we may still have, and I agree it's a slight one, is whether Emery considered in his pick that he wouldn't be painting himself into a corner with this guy. i think that's a valid point and he considered it. That said, a pass rusher works for any scheme, which is sort of saying we're both right. Both that he helps us now, and that it doesn't hurt us if we change schemes next year. We probably agree.

As far as Emery being "all in on Smith" consider that he was hired at a time of crisis in the Bears organization. Removing Martz, promoting OL line coach from within and therefore requiring a Pass Co-ordinator is not normal. Do I hope it works? Sure I do. But you gotta admit that is not a very normal situation in the NFL. The NFL is unstable enough when it comes to security with coaching staffs, and Lovie is on the last year of his deal. Now consider the job of a REAL GM. It's to hire coaches, and get players. Any real GM will want the power to hire his own coach. Remember when this went down? We were all wondering whether Lovie might be fired too? We couldn't even get real OC candidates to interview? The professional coaches int he league saw the instability here. Most of us came to the idea that to get Emery, a professional who has been around for a while and understands this game, he was being told that Lovie had to stay this year and finish his contract, and after that the team would be his. You KNOW Emery has a plan. Whether it's a good one or a bad one, he has one. That's the whole reason he's here. It's his JOB to have a plan. And I think any GM wants to bring in one of his kind of guys at head coach. Now is it possible that Lovie will succeed and force a contract extension with a Championship game appearance or better? Maybe. There's a bunch of talent on this team. We saw how that worked for Jauron too. But you gotta think that Emery is looking to the future and hiring another coach, and from that standpoint, not picking a 1 gap DT type at #1 allows him the flexibility to deal with whatever next year brings. Had he drafted the next Tommie Harris, then I think you could say he's all in on Lovie. Right now, I don't think so.

I said this a few days ago in an earlier post. Emery doesn't have to be trying to get Lovie to fail with a bad pick, but taking someone versatile IS prudent given the unknown nature of Lovie, especially if Emery expects to go get his own coach next year. In other words he doesn't need to make him fail, just to be thinking about his next move. Im SURE Emery was told "you need to keep Lovie this season, after that do what you want"

It's astonishing to me how negative so many posters are being about McClellin. Here's a guy that Mel Kiper had rated 26th best player in the draft overall, and we took him at 19. He's a player most professionals had going in the first round to the Patriots or the Packers - both teams with excellent track records on drafting talent. Personally, the more I read about him, the better I like the pick. So yeah, there's no sure things in the draft, and a wait-and-see attitude is understandable, but the rampant negativity really just looks sophomoric and self important from where I'm standing. Stop making drama, GO BEARS! Sheesh how hard is that to understand?

AMAZING that the FIRST thing you;d think of is race. and this too "The fact of the matter is, when comparing against other players, ethnicity is the first thing people take note of, and whether they like it or not it immediately brings to mind other players of similar background. That is just how the brain works with association and that's all I've been trying to say." That's how YOUR brain works. YOU are a racist. And that makes you an ignorant fool. Now back to the draft please.

Two things. 1) Im not saying Emery did this to help Lovie out the door, just to not paint himself into a corner should that occur. 2) Bears4Ever: the race thing is so dumb it makes you look like a total idiot. You wanna tell me someone came from the projects so they're tough? Fine. But if all you've got is skin tone, then you must be a complete idiot.

What if Emery is smarter than you think? First off, he graded McClellin above other DE end options because "He showed us some natural things that the other ends did not show us to as high a level," Emery said. "His ability to bend, his pad level, to get from blocker to ball, to close the gap as quickly as possible … we felt was better than most of the rest of the class." SO straight up we liked this kid better than the others. It was said that GB and New England were looking at him too, so maybe Emery saw something. But there's more. Emery kept praising his versatility. In this article, Dan Pompei hints at it. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...,6839323.column Pompei says "There is a hidden advantage with McClellin. If the Bears change their defensive scheme, he will adapt." What if Emery isn't really planning on keeping Lovie around forever. What if he wasn't going to find a one gap DT and be stuck with a player that doesn't fit Bill Cowher's (or whomever's) scheme? McClellin is a player, and he can be moved around. He'll be a fine 4-3 DE. But he doesn't paint us into a box if Emery is planning something next year for Lovie, and a new defensive scheme. I think I like this Emery guy.

Kiper had McClellin as the 26th best player overall, just sayin.

Pix, as always the voice of reason.

I agree re: Wolfe, I was just saying, if things went REALLY poorly, he'd be the next DL down. I'm hoping for Cox or Brockers, myself. But if they think that one of the OLT is worthy, I'd be cool with that too.

OK, so we know the Bears are targeting 7 picks, and they pick 19th - that means 12 are out. You gotta feel really strongly that those 12 will be gone way before your pick, so I'm gonna say they identified 12 players that would be gone by pick #15 consensus. So first let's throw out those 12 players. I'm only able to find 11 for sure, so I'll make sure my target list is at least 8. Top QBs and RB are easy, cuz we're not looking for them, and they'll be gone early. 1 QB Andrew Luck 2 QB Robert Griffin 3 RB Trent Richardson 4 QB Ryan Tannehill Then there's 4 more guys we might like to have, but will be long gone. And hey, if we're wrong, and they're still there, it'd be an easy situation to be in. 5 OT Matt Kalil 6 DB Morris Claiborne 7 WR Justin Blackmon 8 DE Melvin Ingram So that's an easy 8 off the list of targets. I identified 3 more that will be gone by pick #15 and who don't fit our needs. 9 OG David DeCastro - we have plenty of interior OL 10 DT Dontari Poe - is a big space eater 2 gap style DT and not suited to our "Cover 2" one gap system 11 LB Courtney Upshaw - is a beast, and it wouldn't suck to have him fall to us, but he won;t and he's not a position of need. that would leave a list of at least 8 players we're targeting for the 19th pick. If any players not on these lists is picked before we do, assuring more than one of these players will be available a few slots lower, we might trade down. 1 OT Riley Reiff - a stud on OL will also be long gone 2 LB Luke Kuechly - Urlacher's replacement? He won't be there, maybe he's the 12th not targeted. If he fell it'd be interesting Here's where our likely picks start 3 DE Quinton Coples 4 WR Michael Floyd 5 S Mark Barron - maybe not a position of need, so he might be the 12th not targeted 6 DT Fletcher Cox 7 DT Michael Brockers 8 DE Whitney Mercilus It looks to me like Coples, Floyd, Cox, Brockers or Mercilus will be our pick so don;'t be surprised if its a DT instead of a DE. Remember Lovie always says it takes a DT to make the "cover 2" work. All this DE talk is possibly a smokescreen for Cox, and if things fall the right way, we could nab Floyd. So the big question is who do the Bears NOT covet and not target, Kuechly or Barron? Nightmare scenario: Tannehill slides, and we can't find a trade and take DT Derek Wolfe or one of the other CBs. Sleepers: OT Jonathan Martin, OT Mike Adams, DT Derek Wolfe

Well, if you had 50 cents, and then you had a dollar, that increase of 50 cents would be a 100% increase right? 50 + another 50. So from 13 to 23 is a 77% increase. If it went to 26, that'd be a 100% increase, cuz it was another 13! The truth is that yes, every 5 slots or so in the first round makes a huge difference in talent available. There are usually about 5 amazing players in each draft and 20 or so more really good ones. Maybe the talent at 15 is similar to the talent at 10, but at 10 you get a wider choice of positions. At 19 we are right on the cusp, so trading up for a specific player might make sense if oyu're one player away or have a glaring need that needs a starter right away. Emery has done a good job of addressing needs, now he can go get best player available, or even trade down. I suspect he will pick a DL or WR at 19 tho.

Great work, and interesting numbers. for the record 23 is a 77% improvement over 13.

I think we need a safety too.