nfoligno

I am not trying to bash you for coming up w/ something new here. I just look at the rankings and (1) really question how they come up w/ their rankings in the first place and (2) feel the way they factor "overall" is a joke. With that said, they do provide a nice sorting datebase w/ some usefull info. If you just look at stats provided, rather than rankings, I think it is more valuable. For example, on WRs, showing the % caught is an intersting category, as is the Ints when thrown to category.

Yea, I would love to know how they play with numbers to show: Idonije is the 4th best pass rushing DT in the NFL. Roach is the 6th best pass rushing/defending OLB in the NFL. Comparatively, Briggs gets negative scores in both pass and run, and ranks 37th overall. Wow. Kreutz is the 4th best pass blocking Center in the league. Just to name a couple.

Looking at the OL. OT Yea, both OTs look pretty dang bad. Their rankings give Williams the nod in both run and pass blocking (which I think most here would agree) but at the same time, it also painst Williams in a pretty poor light, with 9 penalties (much higher than any other), 6 sacks (Pace only had 1), 11 QB hits to Pace's 6, and 32 QB pressures to Pace's 37. All in all, our OTs look pretty bad. OG Garza rates out best, though these rankings say his run blocking is worst. I agree Beekman did better run blocking than pass, but I disagree w/ Omiyale's rankings. A positive 2.9 for run blocking? Huh? And while Williams and Pace are around double digit bad in pass protection, Omiyale only gets a -2.4? If Pace is -12.3 and Williams is -10.5 in pass protection, Omiyale should easily be -15. Further, if Pace gets an overall -26.3 and Williams a -18.9, then Omiyale should be in the negative 30s. Kreutz gets tagged for the penalties, but if we took those out, who would agree with Kreutz being: 4th best in the league in pass protection, 2nd best in the league in screen blocking and 18th best in the league in run blocking. Frankly, I would go even lower in terms of run blocking, and MUCH lower for the other two.

Among OLB they have Roach ranked 13th in the league and Lance Briggs is rated our worst LB. That does very little to offer credibility to this system of ranking. Key reason Roach is rated (by this site) so high is due to his pass defense, but what is their ranking based on? He has 1 sack w/ 5 pressures. He has only 1 pass defended and most damning is their final category. They look at the NFL QB rating for when QBs target their area, and Roach is 2nd to worst as QBs have a 116.2 rating when throwing into his zone. How does this translate to our best pass defending LB, and by a LARGE margin?

One thing I really question about these ranking is the importance they put on penalties. Looking just at the WRs, if a WRs has a couple penalties called against him, it has a dramatic effect on their overall ranking. Take Roddy White as an example. RW is a heck of a receiver, but due to a total of 6 penalties called against him this year, his overall ranking basically drops to zero. I understand penalties are important, but come on. 6 penalties over a season should not count so significantly. On a similar note, should blocking be counted so strong. As I can tell, they give a WR a grade for receiving, blocking and then penalties, and each is then counted as equal. Running is also counted, but few have a running score (pos or negative) worth talking about. So, if a player has an 8 for receiving, but a negative 4 for blocking and negative 4 (due to 4 penalties) for penalties, he would have an overall score of ZERO. Blocking and penalties are important, but sorry, they are not on the same level of importance as receiving, and should not be counting in scoring as equal.

One. Not getting into the cheap ownership route. You and I have been there before, numerous times, and I don't feel like that discussion today. Two. I actually agree w/ the idea of hiring a big boy, but that means letting both Angelo and Lovie go, as you are not as likely to lure the big boys if they don't get power too. While I think there may well be a legit chance we fire Lovie, despite his $11m due, I am not as confident we will fire Angelo. I don't think that has anything to do w/ money. If you are going to eat $11m, what is a couple mill more. But regardless, I am not as sold we will fire Angelo, as much as I would love for that to happen. So, while I would absolutely be in favor of firing both JA and Lovie (which I have actually wanted for years), at the same time, I don't think that happens, and thus in talking about someone like Grimm, I am factoring in a situation where we have to add a HC who will answer to JA. That likely takes Shanny, Cowher, etc off the table. Three. As for whether a new HC is going to want to add his own, I would say the HC absolutely has a say, but not the ultimate decision. When Lovie was hired, it was still JA who made the calls. In fact, I just read an article that said the only coaching hire Lovie was originally really allowed was Shea, and that didn't turn out to well. Rivera was forced on Lovie, and that did workout. When Lovie got his new deal, he also got full power over his staff, and things went straight downhill. Now, I am sure you are going to argue that is not a good way to go about it, but I bet you many new HCs are not simply given full power over their staffs when they report to a GM. So while I would absolutely want the input from my new HC, at the same time, that does not mean he has absolute authority in the matter. As for the salary aspect, unless you factor the wacked out salary structure of Washington, I think even your top end OCs and DCs make less then your low end HCs. Their salaries are likely closer, but no, I don't think a veteran OC (for example) makes more than a new HC. Again, I would love to fire JA and Lovie, and add Cowher. I would have really loved to get Fisher before Tenn started to turn things around. But if we are in fact only firing Lovie, then I am looking at what is realistic from that standpoint. We can talk about lofty dreams all we want, but that is just what those are, dreams. Hey, how about Virginia sells the team to a new owner? Nice to think about, but a bit of a waste of time. If JA remains, we have to consider who is going to come to the team working under a GM. There are many candidates, but that would likely leave out the big boy names you mention as they all would want dual roles. So, a guy like Grimm is discusses in a realistic manner. For the record, those big names are big names for a reason, but not necessarily the best route either. Here in Dallas, Jerry went out and defied all odds by adding Big Bill Parcells. Not only did that not lead to a SB, it didn't even lead to a single playoff victory. Just because someone had success elsewhere doesn't mean he is the best option moving forward. When I look around the league, it seems like many (manybe most) of the top teams are ones who did not go out and add the big name new HC when they last were looking. In fact, many of the top teams are run by HCs who were recently promoted to their spots.

I like Grimm, but even with him, I think we have to be careful. I do not believe it is a mistake adding a HC who has not been a HC before. Look around the league. It is not just something cheap teams do. It is something many do, and often w/ very good results. But if you are going to add a new HC who does not have prior HC experience, I think it is important to surround him w/ experienced assistants. Think about when Lovie came in. His OC (Shea) was new, as was his DC (Rivera). Though Rivera did work out, I still think it a mistake to have inexperience support inexperience. Further, if you look down the list of position coaches, most of them too were newly promoted to their jobs. If we did add someone like Grimm, I would like to see us go out and add some legit experience to support him.

The ironic part is, back in the Wanny days, I don't think the team even received the profits from the concessions. I believe that went to the Park District, or whoever. That was one of the top pulicized victories of the new deal Phillips got. We received profits from concessions, as well as some other stadium related areas which (a) we did not get before and ( are not part of the public sharing option. At the end of the day, I think everyone believe fans have to make a financial "stand" against ownership, but I personally don't think that is necessary. When you saw tons of empty seats in the stadium, it became embarassing. When the losses racked up, it was embarassing. When every news source blasted the team and ownership, it was embarassing. IMHO, it is that embarassment that leads to ownership action more than just the financial aspect fans so often talk about.

Disagree on a couple points. One. You said you do not fault JA. Why? You mention his adding Pace, and say that while it didn't turn out well, was seen as an improvement. I disagree. My own opinions aside, I don't recall many (outside of fans) thinking much of this move. We were the only team in the league that looked at Pace and felt he could still play LT. Balt thought he could still play, but at RT. As for the rest of the OL, just because he did "something" doesn't mean we should not hold him accountable when those moves do not work. Look over his drafts. The players just are not there. He has drafted too many players that didn't workout, and made it worse by poor FA signings. I too have wondered in the past whether the problem was the GM not adding talent for the coach to work w/, or the coach not utilizing the talent the GM added. I think it is a combo of both, but don't think either has done well enough to escape blame here. Two, You said the family does not have the money to eat the contracts AND hire a big name. I disagree again. Now, they may not do it, but I think they do have the money if they want to. It was one thing before the new stadium deal, but thanks to Phillip's, the ownership does have the money to play on the same level as the rest of the big boys. That doesn't mean they will, but I question saying they don't have the money to do it. As for your list, with regard to Jason Garret, HELL NO! He was set to take over in Dallas, but his star has fallen, and he has simply not done a whole lot. I would be sick if we added him. Neither Capers, nor LeBeau seemed to do well as HCs. Both thrive as DCs, but isn't that the problem we have w/ Lovie? I don't want another DC who has already been given a shot as a HC and not run with it. I like Grimm. Honestly, I am still hoping for a total shakeup. I have no love for Lovie, but IMHO, Angelo has been just as bad. He has done a poor job of bringing talent to this team, both in the draft and FA. Lovie has done little to nothing to develop what Angelo did bring in, but in my eyes, what JA has added has simply been too little. This team sucks, and frankly, is not even close. I think we need a total overhaul. That means GM, scouts, coaches, and numerous players as well.

W/ DA, it is a numbers game, but at the same time, I also question the numbers a bit. I think many forget that DA was set to be a game 1 contributor. It was DA who won out in camp, and was set to be our #3 WR behind Hester and Bennett, but then he got hurt, and Knox had to step in, and did he ever. Knox did well enough early that DA simply missed his window. With that said, I am not sure I agree w/ the idea of keeping only 3 WRs active on game days. Davis is the 4th, but he was really relagated to special teams this year, and not considered much of a WR. I just always felt we could have kept one more WR active. As for Williams, I think he is a unique situation. He is simply stuck behind our only solid defender (Briggs). If he played just about any other position on this team, I think we would have seen much more of him, but he was stuck behind Briggs. I think the team has at times tried to look at him at SLB or even MLB, but for whatever reason, it never stuck. While I am not sure how easy something like this is, I think we would have been better off telling Briggs to shut it down for the year. You see it w/ other teams when they are done for the year. It isn't like Briggs has to worry about job security, or that he is looking for a payday. He already has both. He could have shut it down for the final 3 meaningless games, while the team could finally get a chance to see what Williams can do.

I could be wrong, but I don't think the QB simply "waved" that player over. I think it was part of the plan, and the player was going into motion. But your right. All he did was motion toward the area of the field that was already a cluster-fudge. A couple days later, that play still blows my mind. Heard a funny on the radio. Radio guy said he has seen the play before. Keanu Reeves ran it in The Replacements , only they actually ran it better. Ouch!

I honestly see no difference in Briggs and Urlacher in terms of leadership. Urlacher calls plays, but we have learned that is more position based than player. I have a feeling that if Briggs were allowed to call plays, he would be viewed as just as much a leader as Urlacher.

Urlacher has nothing to do w/ this. Few on this board consider Urlacher a leader. When you have 5 wins at this point in the yera, saying the team stinks is not showing leadership. It just shows you can state the obvious. Briggs has thrown himself on the sword, and that is well and good, but a leader needs to hold those on his team accountable, and I have not seen Briggs do that. In fact, saying it is all his fault is a nice gesture, but it also allows those truly at fault to escape responsibility. Briggs is one hell of a player. No one is saying otherwise. But he is not a leader. No, Urlacher isn't either, but that is besie the point.

There were a lot of problems with this pick. As much as with anything though, I hated this pick because I didn't like the fit w/ our team. Bradley was a very raw player. He was never a starter at Oklahoma, and had minimal experience. He was one of those players who have loads of pure athletic ability, but was very raw and in need of a lot of coaching and development. But what did we have to offer in Chicago. Bad coaching, both at WR and OC, not to mention weak overall scheme. We did not have a QB who could help a WR's development, nor other veteran WRs who were good in that role. Simply put, we were not a good location for a raw WR to develop. His injuries only furthered the problem. He was a player in need of so much development, and yet due to injuries, had little opportunity to do that.

My point about a better WR opposite Hester has to do w/ who covers him. Right now, opponents #1 CB will matchup w/ Hester. That is a tough draw for a WR trying to develop. Few rookie WRs are matched up w/ opponents best CBs, much less WRs as raw as Hester. I realize Hester is not a rookie, but the point is still having to due with point of development. I personally would argue many WRs who have 3 or 4 years of WR experience in college are more developed then Hester was at the beginning of this year, if not even now. That doesn't mean I am saying we need Boldin or whoever. Maybe Knox in fact can develop into that opposite WR. I don't know. But my point was only that Hester, IMHO, would be far better if removed from the #1 spot, and put into a position where he was not facing elite CBs. That is one reason why I love the idea of Hester in the slot, as I think he could flat out destroy nickel DBs.

The only point on Grimm I disagree is that he is no longer on the hot list. Most talk goes to the bigs (Shanny, Cowher, Gruden, etc) but when talking about coordinators, I often hear Grimms name. I liked him years ago when we were looking at HCs, and feel now like he would be a solid addition.

I guess my point though is, the move to WR was not a mistake. The mistake was more likely in their belief he could be a #1, and do so pretty quickly. I personally like Hester at WR. I believe most (not all) who feel Hester at WR is a bust are the ones who felt he would become a Steve Smith player. I remember well the massive posts of fans comparing him to Steve Smith. Hester was never a full time WR at Miami. He was moved all over, playing both offense and defense, never really developing at any one position. His first year w/ us, he was a DB/ returner. His 2nd year w/ us, he was a returner who got a couple plays at WR, but I would not even say then he was truly being developed at WR. It wasn't until his 3rd year w/ the team he was actually moved to WR and developed as a WR. In his first year at WR, he had 51 catches for 665 yards and 3 scores. He did that on a bad offense w/o a quality #2 WR to take pressure away. This year, he projects to have 62 for 780 yards. No, that isn't what many expected, but at the same time does reflect upward movement in stats. Further, while he is still far from developed, I do believe he has shown a lot of developement at WR. He seems to understand the offense better, and runs better routes than in the past. His hands also seem to have improved, which shows an improvement in concentration. I don't think he will ever be Steve Smith, but I never thought that was realistic. I do think he could be a good WR for us though, and would love to see what he could do if (a) we had an OL that could protect our QB, and thus allow Hester time to run route and ( add better quality opposite him, taking pressure away.

First, when most who talk about getting rid of Harris, I think they mean trade him, or at least try to trade him. Second, with that said, I don't think Harris has much of a market at this point. In Harris, you have a player who has dealt with injury. Not only that, but the injury issue seems to be one he may have to always deal with. His play has simply gone down hill since the SB year, as has his attitude. I am sure we could get something for Harris, but I doubt that something would even be a 3rd round pick.

I don't know. As much as I blast Harris, at the same time, in the two games we were w/o Harris, our DL looked so much worse it wasn't even funny. That forced me to really wonder. As poor as he has played, he still seems like the best, by a considerable margin, at DT. If any of our other players were stepping up, it may give us more room to think about what to do w/ Harris, but frankly, our group of DTs is between average to flat out sucks. Adams and Idonije are nice rotation guys, but heading into the season w/ either set to start and play a large role would be equal (IMHO) to when we felt St. Clair could become an everydown starter. Harrison was supposed to be this 1st round value that fell due to some red flags, but he looks more like a 7th round value to me. Gilbert can leap out of a pool, and looks great doing it, but this is a 3rd round rookie that can't even show the coaches enough to be given a 2nd thought. Who else is there. Toenia, or however you spell it. Fan favorite after a game or two where he showed a flash here and there, but few of those fan favs ever turn out to be more than just that, a flash that quickly burns out and moves on to another team. Here are the problems as I see them. (a) This team has a bevy of holes, w/ little by way of draft picks and a very uncertain FA coming up due to the CBA. ( We already have one hole at DT, as not a single one of our DTs have stepped up to show they are capable of starting. © As poorly as Harris has played, at the end of the day, he is still our best DT, and by a large margin. If we get rid of him also, we now have not only one, but two holes to fill at DT. I am not a Harris fan, but I would not cut him. If another team offered up a nice package, that is another story, but I don't see that happening. No, I would work on other holes first, and hope that another year (and hopefully new coaching) will see a change in Harris. If not, we may be able to get rid of him in another year, after some holes are filled and we have more draft picks to fill further holes with.

I have never understood this either. Even if you want to say Briggs isn't good at it, then explain why Roach was calling plays when he was at MLB and Hunter was at SLB. I have never understood this idea on our team that only the MLB can call plays. Many things we see and read about are disagreeable, but for most, I can at least see the logic the staff use. I often disagree w/ that logic, but I see it. In this regard though, I just do not even see the logic. It flat out makes zero sense to me. Whoever (a) knows the defense best and ( best reads the offense should be calling out plays.

I have never been the fan of Briggs many others are. I think he is a damn good, even great, LB, but I don't think he is a difference maker. Further, I don't think he is a leader. With that said, I do not fault him either for his lack of leadership, nor for his comments here. This is not about Briggs "saving face". Briggs is one of the very few players on this team that does not have to worry about saving face as he is one of the very few who is still looked at very highly. He has no reason to come out and talk like this, but he did. As for not blaming him for not showing leadership earlier in the season, well, I personally believe you can not force a person to be a leader. Either they are or they are not. Briggs is simply not a leader. He is a danm good/great player, but not a leader. Fine. Not all players are leaders. In fact, relatively few are. Just for the record, I do not believe Urlacher is a leader either. Maybe more so than Briggs, but not a field general. Urlacher, as the MLB, calls the plays for the unit, but do not confuse that w/ being a leader. Mike Brown was one of our very few leaders. He not only played the field general role, but also help players accountable, both on the field and in the locker room. Urlacher doesn't do that sort of thing. Urlacher and Briggs both lead by example, but they are not leaders. Leadership is something this defense has truly lacked for years.

Did the team view Hester as a #1 (Steve Smith) WR all along, or did they refer to Hester as their #1 Wr simply because they had no other option? Who knows. Either way, I don't think the move to WR was bad in and of itself. I think the problem was going to the extreme of not only expecting him to learn and develop at WR, but expecting him to so quickly become a #1 WR.

I was watching a replay and one thing that stuck out to me was, despite most of the team shifting far to the left, only one or two players actually went downfield to make a play. I crap you not. Watch the replay. It shows one or two players running upfield, while 6 or so players are just standing about where the lined up. For the life of me, I could not understand what the point was. If they are not going to do anything, why not keep them in front of your kicker/QB. The way the play was run, it was essentially a QB w/ maybe 2 receiving options, and that is it. It was basically 3 guys going against 11. What might have been interesting would have been if it was a screen pass. NY still had 3 or 4 guys to attack the "QB". They also had a couple players lined up in the middle of the field in a sort of zone. That left only 4 or maybe 5 players lined up against the bulk of the grouped Wash players on the far left. I wonder what would have been the result if you threw a quick screen pass (which would have done a better job of getting the ball out of the "QBs" hands quickly. At the point, a guy has the ball w/ around 8 blockers in front of him, going up against only 4, 5, maybe 6 at the most, defenders. Either way, it would have been a laughable play, but I think a screen would have looked a hell of a lot better in that situation than what was little more than a hail mary.

I am still shocked at that play. What is even more incredible is, the play initially caused NY to call a timeout. But after NY had a chance to tell the players what to do to counter the play, Wash came back from the timeout and ran it again. Wow.

One of the first thoughts I have is the way Allen abused Pace the last time we played, and regardless how often that happened, we continued to play Pace man-to-man against Allen, w/o giving him any help. Well, we now have Williams on the left side, and I just hope we do not make the same mistake. Every team that faces Minny uses a 2nd blocker on Allen. Allen will crush Williams if we don't give him help, and that could end up being the sort of game that shatters a young mans confidence, not to mention Cutlers neck. We need to really focus on Allen and give Williams plenty of help. With Wale out, I wonder who gets his snaps. Adams? Anderson? Idonije? Frankly, Idonije may be the best job, but I think we should simply give Gaines Adams the spot. Anderson is a FA, and not likely to return. We know what Idonije is. May as well throw Adams in there for the final two games and just get some tape on him. One other thing I just do not understand. In the last game, I saw, I noticed R. Davis get a catch, not to mention a few other passes his way. What the heck he is even doing on the field playing WR? I get Hester is hurting, but seriously. In no way shape or form does it make sense to play R. Davis at this point. If we can't find our senses and activate Iglesias, then move Olsen outside on plays you might consider R. Davis and use Kellen Davis at TE.