nfoligno

They run a vanilla defense in the preseason. I will wait until the regular season to pass judgement. That is all well and good, but too much of what I saw last night mirrored what I saw last year, thus I am not sure it is a simple matter of playing vanilla in preseason.

1.) Got a very good look at Beekman yesterday. His pass blocking is pretty good , his run was not that bad. he was never really dominated yesterday, thats a good sign. Agreed. At the same time, I think we also saw at least once why staff are concerns over his size (6'2). He can use leverage, but due to his size, DTs remain tall and hurt passing lanes. One pass was batted down, and I am pretty sure it was the DT he was blocking. When you have a bigger OG, the DTs are more likely lower to the ground, or getting blocked down and away, thus making it more difficult for them to bat a pass down. W/ a 6'2 OG, it simply creates a higher wall to have to throw over, which is made worse if we have a 6'1 QB. 2.) Hass is a Tom Waddle reincarnate. Hands from here to heaven, wish a littlelfaster. It may have been only one catch, but it had plenty of wow factor. 3.) Forte is gonna be exactly what we want in a back. Good debute!! He reminded me so much of TJ in the way he was cutting. His initial cuts were so sharp, and he showed burst out of the cut. Just have to hope he has holes to run through. 4.) Hanie will be our starting QB in 2 years. The kid has moxie. Agree he showed a lot of moxie, and I liked so much of what I saw, but lets not jump the gun here. 5.) Wolf is going to be a great 3rd down back. he will carry a role much like Dennis Gentry with better running skills. Agreed. After last night, I am inclinded to say jason may have been more right than wrong. This kid may even be more than a 3rd down back. Still not ready to say he can be a starter like Dunn, but could be more than just a 3rd down back. 6.) Babitch will be asked to find another job. Rivera should still be here. He knows how create pressure. Babitch is Not a NFL coord. AGREED! I have said many times I felt our D did poorly last year, and that injuries were not the only issues. Other defenses had less talent and still did more. Even w/ the injuries we suffered last year, we still had quite a bit of talent, and yet regardless underperformed. But Babich is truly Lovie's boy. Lovie wanted Babich over Rivera years ago, per reports, yet was forced to hire Rivera and thus made Babich a position coach. Then he ran Rivera out of town and promoted his boy. Even if Babich stinks, I have a feeling we could see a Jauron/Shoop issue brewing.

All that talk we read about players knowing they didn't tackle well last year, and have been working hard in camp on technique and such for just that problem.....well.... you have to wonder what techniques they are practicing. I know its the first preseason game, but for me, that doesn't explain off so easily why veterans still look slopping in tackles. One good thing I did see. On one down, I noticed Anderson juke outside off the snap, only to cut inside. Another blocker tried to pick him up, but was late and Anderson ripped past him to pressure the QB. Getting old now, and can't recall if the QB threw it away or was taken down, but the point is the move and not the result. Two years ago, Anderson looked incredible. I specifically recall Dent talking about how Anderson was using moves which you often see in veterans, but not rookies. He was a speed/edge rusher who often used his speed to get the OT off-balance outside, and use a swim or rip move inside. Sometimes he would simply use his speed to get the OT on his backfeet, and bull rush through him as if the OT didn't have 50+lbs on him. Then last year, Anderson was the starter, used one move. He always rushed outside on the snap. You no longer saw the "moves", much less his taking an inside approach. Did he suddenly forget, or did the staff "coach" him to rush a certain way. I think it likely the later and not the former. So his move inside makes me think it more likely we could see the rookie Anderson, and not just the Anderson who gets knocked out of the play w/ predictable outside moves.

Actually 3rd and long is an excellent time to play zone. there is a lot of ground underneath that you can give up, and then multiple tacklers converge before the first down. If guys didn't execute, then fine (I didn't see the game) but three deep zone is exactly the right call for 3rd and 15. Disagree. While you likely will see your secondary drop back and keep the receiver in front, I think if you watch other games around the league, you will see that most teams bring extra pressure on 3rd and long. I sure saw KC do it against us last night. I get keeping the receiver in front. I also get that Lovie looks at 3rd and long as a potential turnover down more than simply forcing a punt. I disagree though. Give me the punt. I have said this before, and will again. Even the worst QB we face is an NFL QB. If you sit back and give him, and the WRs time, they will win that matchup EVERY DAY. There is not a defense in the league that can defend forever. If you let the QB sit back, whether it is 3rd and 10 or 3rd and 30, the odds go up he will get the 1st down the longer he can sit back in the pocket. Also, you have to understand that whatever coverage we're running, our defense is predicated on the D line getting penetration. Than in itself is the problem some of us have. Few DLs (ever) are so good they pressure the QB w/o help. Especially ours, who don't stunt or anything like that. Further, when the offense keeps extra blockers back, it makes it all the less likely your front four will get it done on their own. This is training camp - guys have no legs and so the 1 gap defense we play will look bad while the guys are tired. That's why depth on our DL is so important to us in the season too, btw, and why guys like Bauzin or whomever are more valuable on our team than they would be on a 2 gap team. Hence, JA's attention to the DL on draft day. That's all well and good, but we are talking about the first drive of the game. If players were winded already, we have more problems than we realize. Also, even on that drive, I saw us rotating quite a bit, as Anderson was seeing a lot of action. Relax, or if you need to worry - do it about the OL - THAT is a problem! That is a problem, and a big one, but that doesn't mean the only one. I think few expect great things out of our offense, so if they are not very good, well, that is expected. On the other hand, if the defense isn't very good, we could be in line for the top pick in the draft.

I think the best thing we could do is Sign Lecharles Bently and put him at left guard, Move St. Clair to right tackle and bring tait back left. Instant huge improvement. For insurance sign Brown as well. In all honesty, I am not sure Tait is a better LT at this point than St. Clair. SC has looked good (supposedly) thus far at LT. Last year, I am not sure I recall Tait being injured, but he flat out sucked at LT. I am not saying that he simply wasn't great, but that he sucked. IMHO, the only reason he didn't get more attention was because we were even worse at LG, and that gained more spotlight. I am all for getting Brown, or maybe Bently (though I would want to know how healthy each are), but at this point, I might keep SC at LT and Tait at RT.

One thing that REALLY upset me was seeing some of the same garbage that upset me in the past. When it is 3rd and long, most coaches consider that a pass rushing situation. That is when you send the house to attack the QB, forcing him into a quick decision and not allow routes to develop. You don't have to fear the run, and if the QB has time enough only for a dink pass, it isn't likely to convert a 1st down. Instead, we did as we have under Babich. We backed off, rushed 4, and dropped everyone else back. We give the QB time in the pocket, and WRs time to develop routes. Result FAR too often is 1st down. It may have only been the first series of the 1st preseason game, but seeing some of the same BS is very disheartening.

Add to that we were facing what may be one of the worst DLs in the NFL. They traded away their best (only?) DL, and their 1st round stud DL is injured. So if our starting OL looked good against what is the equivalent of a 2nd string DL, I am not sure we should get overly hyped on their play.

Why not Wolfe? I was under the impression one of the reasons we drafted him was for return ability, and to protect Hester.

Hey man. Don't ever apologize for ranting or venting. IMHO, that is a key function of the board. At least, I have used it as such:) One thing you touch on which I have been blasted for in the past. You talk about our signing our own, which you applaud, but question the cost. For years I hear about how Angelo is among the best salary cap managers in the league. I have always had a problem w/ that. Do we stay under the cap? Yes. But is that really the sign of good cap management? If you are spending your money to re-sign your own players, who formed a losing team, are you really doing a good job managing the cap. I like many of our players, but what we have isn't getting it done. Now if we went into the season and found a way to keep our own, while also adding a solid veteran FA (like maybe Faneca), then I would be more prone to giving Angelo credit. Then he is keeping in-house talent, while adding to the team. But simply keeping your own players at the expense of adding players who could help improve your team is not what I call great cap management.

As I recall, we were flat out ridiculed for that belief. Is it a tag line we slap at the bottom of our posts? I recall throwing down my mock draft, and I think 90% of my picks were OL. It was an exaggeration, but not by much. We see eye to eye on this one. We potentially have some good WRs. We potentially have a couple good RBs. We potentially have very good TEs. How the hell are we to find out though, much less develop that young talent, w/o an OL.

Not to be a nay-sayers, but there was even an article in the Trib to be careful reading too much into the OL's performance prior to the game. Take a look at KC's DL. They traded away their best player, and their top pick is out w/ injury. Our OL did a pretty good job against what could be one of the worst DLs in the league this year.

Someone mentioned that we haven't placed him on IR. But we will tomorrow. Hell, if Kreutz was placed on IR, Williams has got to be. Remember the IR for pre-season is not the same as the IR for regular season. I think there is a difference, as Kreutz was dealing w/ pre-camp injuries, whereas Williams was supposedly not injured prior to camp, and went down the first day. I believe pre-camp injuries have totally different rules compared to players who go down in camp. I think if a player suffers an injury in camp and are placed on IR or the PUP, it is not removable.

LUCK HAS NOTHING TO DO W/ THIS! When you draft a player other teams took off their board due to injury/back concerns, and that player has to go on IR for a back injury after a couple snaps in the first practice, you do not chalk it up to luck. This is the point. He never missed a practice or game in college. We would not have drafted him unless he was cleared by the medical staff. I cannot believe how awful our luck is. UGH!!!!!

They were just talking about him during the game. They were saying it was not serious. I could be wrong, but when the sideline guy was talking about this during the game, wasn't he going off what the staff told him? As Lovie has never been exactly truthful in discussing players health, I am not sure how much stock we should put in his comment. Not to mention that Lovie is the one who, from day one, has said this injury is no big deal. You have to start questioning the staff who say "day to day injury" after a couple weeks. That there were reports of a back problem before the draft but he was healthy when drafted and Williams never missed one practice or game with any injury his 3 years as a starter at LOT in college. But the point is there were reports of a back injury, and what is it we are seeing now?

Sorry, this isn't luck. As the story says, many teams knew about the injury pre-draft and took him off their boards. If a kid has a trouble making history in college, you draft him, and he gets into trouble, do you say, "just our luck". No. Luck is what you make it.

Can you explain that one. The /popcorn post seemed a response to a previous post of mine, and I have no clue what it is supposed to reference. Wolfe may not have been playing against 1st string, but (a) he also had an OL blocking for him which could be out of the NFL sooner rather than later and ( regardless who it was against, the kid looked incredible. I figured he should be very good taking a swing pass or running to the outside, but he was actually able to run between the tackles last night too, and that was impressive. No one is saying he should be given the starting job, but the 1st pre-season game is about making impressions, and I think there should be little argument he made one last night.

For the record, I thought about you when Wolfe was looking so damn good last night. Agreed on Hass.

Issue I have is, look at those years. Look at the QBs and offenses he played in. Okay, maybe he simply sucked for us. At the same time, could it not also be possible we (a) didn't have surrounding talent (like an NFL QB) and ( a staff very good at developing talent?

Then again, could NE suffer the SB loser jinx? An injury to Mr. Brady could be more than enough to see that happen.

Not dissing Buf, but I would be shocked if 8 or 9 wins was good enough for a WC spot. Cle won 10 games last year and was on the outside looking in at the end of the season.

There is an article on the Trib, maybe from yesterday, talking about Hass and how good he has looked. It talks about how he has been catching everything thrown, even when not on target. The writer talks about how much he likes Hass, and how he has won over most all, except the staff who seems to simply focus on his lack of speed. I understand the desire for speed, but I have always been of the believe that if you have a "chain mover", you give WRs w/ speed more opportunities due to more downs.

I have watched the videos youtube and from what I have seen its exactly the same concerns for orton that I have had in general. Passes are not accurate, deep balls are underthown, short routes are not thrown on time so defensive players are able to make plays. I have seen Rex hitting players in stride and the deep balls look like the ones that got Berrian his mega deal. Overall Rex has looked better and that is simply my analysis and I'm sure will be dismissed as being from the biggest Rex homer alive . Hate to say it, but your right. Your analysis, even if accurate, is most likely to be dismissed based on bias. I would also point one other thing out, and why it may be difficult to accept your analysis as detached from stated bias. We all read the papers from reporters who are at camp, and not simply watching pieces from a video clip. By and large, the reports seem fairly similar. I will read about how Rex had a good practice on the Trib, and read similar in the Sun Times. Next day, they will talk about Orton looking good and Rex not. Point is, it is more than just one writer or one paper, who too may have a bias. Further point is, if we go off your comments, it would seem Orton is 100 times worse than Hutchinson, Krenzel or Quinn. I mean, you basically write that everythink he does is crap, and there is nothing good. So (a) your writing seems extreme enough to make it questionable and ( other sources who are actually at camp seem to contradict your opinion. I am NOT calling you a liar, but meerly that you may be seeing what you want to see. Another thing that is odd is that Rex has been trashed for fumbled snaps even though its been reported that Orton has had more. That has actually been pretty well talked about, and has spawned a couple threads of its own. While there has been a ton of talk, in general I would say history and perception of the past cause discussions today. Orton had his share of fumbles, but I do not recall his having issues w/ botched snaps. Rex? That's another story. So if Orton is having issues in that regard now, it may raise an eye-brow, but would not create the reaction equal to Rex. Imagine if Benson were still in camp, and putting the ball on the ground. As he has been maligned in the past for such, it would create FAR more discussion than if Forte put it on the ground a few times. Well maybe its not a knock on Rex so much as Orton is finally improving. Wait a minute. Go back and read your own analysis of Orton. Not only is he not improving, but he is getting worse. In fact, his play thus far makes Chad Hutchinson look like a franchise QB. How can you provide the analysis of his play as you have, and turn around and say he is improving? One thing that raised a flag for me is an article this offseason that said the rookie quarterbacks and Rex would stay after practice with Pep and work on fundamentals and technique. I really couldn't believe that Kyle wouldn't partake is getting better especially when his accuracy was a question to me. I dont know if he thought he didn't need it or what. As I recall, that extra practice was for footwork specifically. This is an area Rex has been weak w/ since college. I am not saying Orton is perfect in all regards, but if footwork is not one of the areas he needs help w/, why would he be there. How do you know he wasn't in the film room watching this or that because the staff wanted him working on a different part of his game which was considered a weakness. You have two students. One sucks at math, but is good at science. The other sucks at science, but is good at math. If a teacher offers to stay after school to help kids in math, why would both kids be there? This would be one thing if we read Orton was the last to show and the first to leave, or that he was not taking the opportunity seriously, but I have read nothing to make me believe that. I have read the staff say nothing but positive things regarding his approach to this competition. I thought then, and now, this is an issue for Orton bashers and nothing more. It is too easy to make this story sound bad against him, so long as you take no more than a superficial look at it. And as far as pressure goes, Orton didn't install some high degree of confidence with his handling of pressure either. People will say "He steps into the pocket". Yeah he also stepped into the pocket when the pressure was in the middle. The pressure thing for me is more a blocking issue. Its tough for any quarterback to do well when you are constitantly on your back. You LOVE stats. In 7 games last year, Rex was sacked 25 times. That is an average of 3.5 per game. Last year, behind the same OL, Orton was sacked 2 times in 3 games. And before you try, he wasn't just handing it off. In one game, he had 38 pass attempts, and was sacked just once. Even in his rookie year, he was only dropped 2 times per game (average). Some of that you can say is style, but part of that is also simply on the QB. Now, no one here is saying Orton is freaking Steve Young when it comes to avoiding the rush. But in his limited time, Orton has seemed to exhibit more pocket poise than Rex. I would agree that Rex has looked like a SUPERIOR QB w/o the pressure, but Orton has simply seemed to feel the pocket better, and move around better to avoid the rush. The problem that I really have with this is that if you are honest the worst thing you can say about Rex is that he is inconsistant. You bring up that he played better at the end of last year but such examples are usually cast aside and the worst of Rex is talked about. If you came to this board new you would think Rex is as bad a quarterback as Jon Quinn and that is not the case at all. guilty as charged. I am among Rex' bashers. But I would disagree the worst thing you can say is he is inconsistent. I believe he doesn't have it upstairs. I don't believe he can read the field well/quickly. This issue is exacebrated when he is rushed. I don't believe he has pocket presence. Not sure if that should be categorized as upstairs or not, but it'll serve. When Rex can sit back in the pocket w/ time, he can be a great QB. Problem is, few QBs in the NFL have such a luxury. Most QBs, even behind the best OLs, will deal w/ pressure. I would argue this is the single greatest reason for his inconsistency. IMHO, most games you see Rex having solid numbers are the games he faced the least pressure. When teams can pressure him, that is when you see "bad Rex". So no, I would not agree the worst thing you can say about him is he is inconsistent. I think that is a by-product of what I believe his worst trait is. Just not having it upstairs. All of that being said, hopefully I will see someone tonight that is able to produce good offensive numbers and not just be a game manager. I just haven't seen that yet. We agree on this point. With Orton, there is hope (at least for some) but there is not legit knowledge that Orton can actually be a good QB. He needs to prove that in a game situation. If I see nothing but a bunch of dinks and dunks, watch how fast I turn on Orton. While I do not believe it is absolutely necessary to throw bombs downfield, you have to throw the ball more than 5 yards too. Orton has A LOT to prove, and it begins tonight.

He isn't fast enough. This staff doesn't want big WRs unless they have speed. Moose was the exception due to the massive numbers he put up the season before we signed him. This staff wants all home run threats. Gage is not that. I disagree w/ the staff, and thus why I really like WRs like Booker, Hass, and the like. But if given the choice between Bradley and Engram, I swear this staff today would still take Bradley.

I may not go so far as to put them w/ NE, but I would go so far as to say this made a mediocre team upper tier. For me, the key is the OL NY went out and built this year. This is an OL that can protect Farve. Further, watch the holes this unit opens for TJ. Coles is dancing in the streets right now. Receivers may not be great, but isn't that was Farve does? Improves the level of play of unknown WRs? They may not be NE, but how many teams would we say that about anyway? They did put themselves on a much higher level though, and I would say that while they still have much to prove, should be far more competitive w/ NE than before.

Again, if the Bears had a quarterback that was better than Rex I'd be on board, but to this point Kyle aint it. One. You have said many times that through out camp, Rex has looked better, but IMHO, that is very much in question. From what I have read, it has gone back and forth throughout camp. One day, Orton looks very good w/ Rex is mediocre, and the next day they flip flop. I am not saying Orton has looked better. I am only saying that it doesn't seem like either QB has done enough to flat out pull away from the other QB. Two. IMHO, and you will disagree, but to me this is actually a knock on Rex. I said prior to camp that I expected Rex to pull well ahead of Orton in camp, because camp doesn't provide the situation where Rex usually struggles. While we may work on our pass rush in practice, the QBs have a red jersey and do not have any legit concern of getting hit. W/o pressure, Rex has usually looked solid, or even great at times. The problem is, when there is pressure, too often Rex struggles. I find it curious Rex has not been able to truly pull away from Orton when he is in a situation that doesn't really have chance to expose the holes in his game. Three. While there may be a few, I really don't think that many fans that "so" much of Orton. Yes, many fans are VERY down on Rex, but simply talking about Orton, I don't think many here simply feel he is a lock pro bowler or anything. For most fans, it is more a matter of simply wanting a legit QB competition. I have screamed for such for years. We are finally getting that. If Rex truly won the job, fine. If Orton wins the job, fine. Point is, most simply felt Orton deserved the shot he is finally getting. No more, no less.