nfoligno

Not going to happen. Lovie will never agree to this. He wasn't even comfortable w/ Rivera being under him. No way he goes the route of a shared coaching position. Frankly, I wouldn't want this anyway. All you have to do is look at Washington. Your HC needs to be the ultimate authority. We need to improve, but I do not think such a change in organizational structure is the way to go.

I am not going to defend Turner at this point. I do think the problems go way beyond Turner. If Shannahan were here (offensive mind many have said they want) I think he would struggle to do much w/ an OL this bad. There are only so many plays you can draw up when your OL is not just playing poorly, but playing as poorly as ours. With that said, it just always seems like Tuner is a bit slow to make such changes. I recall yelling for the two TE sets two years ago. It wasn't until last year Turner tried it. It worked. Now, I am FAR from any football mind, and many others called for it too. Point is, it just takes our staff too long to install plays which seem pretty obvious as being necessary. A more current example is the bootleg. This is something Cutler did VERY well in Denver. This is something that would "help" offset the pass rush a bit as it puts Cutler on the move, gets him in space, and doesn't make it so predictable where he will be, thus making it harder for the DL to simply tee off and attack the pocket. This is not just something you hear fans question the lack of, but former coaches and players who are now in the media ask the same questions. Honestly, the best reason for me to get rid of Turner is that almost guaranteed, the OL coach he brought in would leave with him. As for the personnel and FB, it is really hard to say who makes those calls. You have to believe Turner has a say, but at the same time, Lovie also has his favorite players. Take AP for example. Remember when Lovie said that as long as he was the coach, AP would have a roster spot? I think McKie also plays special teams a lot, so his roster spot may not be solely at his discretion. This has been a sore spot for me for years too, and I really do believe it is Lovie. I remember years ago, it was Lovie, not Turner, talking about how he liked versatile FBs. He likes FBs that could pass block, run block, pass catch and even carry the ball. Lovie always has talked about how McKie can do all these things. He may be right, but unfortunately, McKie simply doesn't do anything well. I would much rather have a pure blocking FB.

Madman, You start out by saying you don't want to go Madden, but then you go in a direction that would make Dan Snyder blush. Hope for one big O signing and one big D signing. After those two, look for a bunch of 2nd and tier tier signings. Looking over your group, McNeil would likely be my favorite addition to the OL. Whether we like it our not, the team is not likely to give up yet on Omiyale completely. We have Beekman. And despite the drop, I don't see us releasing Kreutz. So I want to see us add an upper tier OT in FA, and draft OG by the 4th round in the draft. I would love a FB, but ain't gonna happen. McKie has pics of Lovies wife, and is going no where. WR ain't gonna happen, and especially not a Wr like VJ who is really breaking out and will be expensive. I know your feelings about the need at WR, but go back to Angelo's comment. "It's all about the QB" Build the OL and continue to develop the receivers. I think a better backup RB needs to be addressed. I love the Atogwe pick on D. Not going to be cheap, but necessary.

Honestly, I had never heard "Peterson is the next Payton". Honestly, I have very rarely ever heard any RB compared to Payton. Most RBs are compared so someone w/ a similar running style or skill set. Maybe this guy is similar to Jim Brown, or that guy is similar to Sayers, or whatever. Payton was different. He was simply great at everything. Rarely do you see a RB like this. Peterson is one hell of a RB. The only area I would say he is reminicent of Payton is that AP often lowers his shoulder and tries to punish the defender, rather than simply running out of bounds. But saying he has qualities similar to Payton is one thing. To say he is the next Payton is just a joke.

Sure, in a perfect world, we would go out and add WR, along w/ OL, DL, FS, CB, LB, FB and whatever else we need. In the real world, you have to prioritize your needs. I don't think anyone is saying our WR corp is made up of studs, or that an upgrade would be an awful thing. But the reality is, you can only upgrade at some many areas at once. We say OL, but it isn't just one spot. We need numerous OL addtions, and that doesn't even take into consideration our DL or defense as a whole. Fix the OL. If WRs like Knox, Hester, Bennett have not stepped up by then, fine. Go look for a stud WR. But do not even think about spending big to get a stud WR before you first fix the OL. If we were offered Boldin today (yes, I realize we are past the trade deadline) for a 3rd, I don't think I would do it. It isn't just the pick, but the money, as he is not going to be happy w/o a $10m/yr contract, and we simply can't afford to spend that at WR w/ our OL looking as bad as it is.

Yes, the inside was closed off, and yes, he bounced it outside for a good gain. Issue I have is, I have seen that opening many times, and last year I would argue Forte would have also seen that open outside and hit that area, but this year he just seems to run up the arce of his own OL blockers.

Just look at the number of posts on this board since the end of the game. Normally, if I don't get to the board until the following Monday morning, there are 20 threads which are either new, or show new posts. After the Cle game, I can count the number of new on one hand. Even the fans lack emotion after this game. Agreed on Cutler. He was getting flat out killed, but get getting up and pushing forward. Defense made some good plays, but I can't help but to think most about the lack of pass rush. Anderson is just awful. He was missing passes add day when he was not even pressured. While I credit our players for the turnovers, they just lose some meaning when they were not even forced. If we can't get a pass rush going in a game like that, when the hell can we? Harris was supposed to show up, but did he? I saw little pass rush from any of our OL. On offense, more of the same. This OL just sucks. I can somewhat understand Rodgers getting some pressure. He is a good, big DT, that gives many trouble, but worse for me was how many others pressured and hit Cutler. It wasn't just Rodgers getting in there. Our OTs were getting abused all day, and our ability to pickup the blitz was just dreadful.

It isn't that I disagree necessarily. It isn't that I look at our WRs and see that stud a defense has to respect any given down. But for me, that is simply a far lower need. Far lower. I don't care if we had Moss and Fitzgerald right now. Cutler would still get lit up. We need to protect Cuter #1. #2 for me is the run game. Sorry, but while last year gave Forte a bit some benefit of doubt, I think that benefit has run out. He looks like crap. Sure, he has a play here and there, but those good plays just seem isolated. His vision seems very qeustionable, and his blitz pickup (something he did well last year) looks flat out awful. I am not saying he sucks and needs to be replaced, but when looking at what is wrong with our OL, I would even put RB ahead of WR at this point.

My understanding is, this was the video seen at halftime, http://www.chicagobears.com/walterpayton.asp All I can say is, it was incredible to grow up watching Payton. You always hear your father talk about having watched this player or that player, but for me, when talking to my kids, there is no greater legacy to point to having seen Walter Payton.

Agreed on Forte. He is just not playing well. Yea, he had some yards today, but ypc avg sucked, and do did the D he was going up against. But really, it is the vision. When he is running the ball, I am getting a bit tired of him not seeing a hole, and just running up the arce of our OL. He finally did bounce one outside for a big gain, but frankly, I thought those were there all day. And his vision in the backfield? As said, he whiffed on a couple blocking assignments and got Cutler leveled. I know the OL sucks, but Forte is doing the OL and team no favors. Last year got Forte some leeway, but IMHO, that leeway and benefit of doubt has expired. Upright running and poor vision? Not the things great RBs are made of. Agreed on Cutler. That dude is getting drilled. And you know what. As often as our OL has hurt him, he still will stand in the pocket waiting for a WR to break open, w/ a LB bearing down on him. Agreed on dumpting the wildcat. I said that before. Great for Miami who has the players for it, but we don't. I didn't see you mention the receivers, but I think it has to be asked how well they are getting open. It just seemed like Cutler was looking all day for an open WR. And can I start the "start Clark" petition. Olsen just sucks in terms of blocking. At times, he doesn't even try. There was a play where Pace moves to block inside (it was obviously designed) while Olsen was on the DE. Olsen really didn't even try to block the DE, and just ran a route. The DE had a clear path and put a hit on Cutler. It was obvious, IMHO, that Olsen is expected to chip block before he runs his route, but simply didn't. As for the D, agree the DL stunk, and the secondary play improved as the game went on, but I just can not give them too much credit. Maybe that isn't fair, but Anderson is just that bad. There were times I saw receivers open, but Anderson's pass was just a joke. If we were getting a pass rush and forcing those throws, maybe, but the dude is so bad, he would be sitting comfortable in the pocket and his passes were still 15 yards off.

Question for you Connor, Watching the TV, it is nearly impossible to tell, but it was hard not to get the impression our WRs were never getting open. Whether Cutler had a little time or a lot, it usually seemed like he was looking forever for an open WR. So either Cutler isn't "seeing the field" very well or our WRs are just not getting open. What was really sad, IMHO, was we often seemed to have only two WRs. Olsen might also run a route, but we would have a 2nd TE and RB, or RB and FB back to help block. Somehow, w/ 7 to block, we still seemed incapable of protecting Cutler.

Not giving Beekman a pass, but I thought the bulk of the pressure was coming off the edges. Pace and Williams were getting simply abused. Also have to say, I am getting real tired of our backs and TEs not being able to block. I tried to watch, and really noticed how bad Forte was back there. A couple times Forte flat out blocked the wrong man. He would move to help out Pace, but in doing so allowed a blitzer untouched. Forte needs to be (a) recognizing the blizer and ( blocking the blitzer before helping Pace. And can someone please teach Olsen that you chip block before you run your route. A couple times I watched Olsen run right past a DE when the OT was blocking inside. Thus it was pretty obvious Olsen was expected to chip block that DE to give Cutler a bit of time for a quick play, yet he didn't even try, and the DE had an easy path to the QB. I am not saying our interior OL was good. I saw them make mistakes. But the majority of the pressure I saw was from the outside, and much of the inside was off blitzes.

Yes, I often said how bad out OL was last year. Does anyone even question this? However, there are so many levels of bad, and any fan who said last year "it can't get worse" has been proven wrong this year. Our OL is far worse than last year. I would say Pace is as bad, or worse than St.Clair. Omiyale FAR worse than Beekman. Kreutz/Garza wash. Williams is equal to Tait in pass protection (which means bad) but also far less in run blocking. Honestly, I think you tried to get a tad cut in your post, and as BigDaddy said, kinda sounded more like you had a couple watching the game, then posted. To me it is pretty simple. Orton had more pocket presence than Rex, and while not a big threat to take off running, was capable of slipping around in the pocket to avoid a rusher. However, lets not pretend that he was some nimble QB who had great ability in this regard. If Orton felt had to deal w/ the pressure Cutler has had to, I think Orton would have crumbled. That's not really an insult on Orton either. Cutler is known as one of the top escape artists in the NFL, and yet he is getting caught (and forced into bad throws) far too often. I OL simply sucks.

While I agree overall, I do have to say, Orton was pretty good moving around in the pocket. No, he wasn't worth a shit running the ball, but that is different. Simply put, Orton had a good sense of pocket presence. Some of that may have been relative after watching Rex for years, who was about as poor inside the pocket as any, but that should not take away from Orton. Orton was good at the following IMHO. He had that awareness. Almost 6th sense. Every good starting QB must have it. you have to be able to feel the pressure. Rex would not feel the pressure when the DT was on top of him. orton was also good at simply taking a step up in the pocket, or two steps to the side. He would move a step or two in a direction to avoid the rush. May not seem like a big thing, but it is what often buys a QB that extra second or two. BUT, this year, that simply would not be enough. It isn't just that some DE is forcing the QB to take a step forward. It isn't that a DT gets penetration from inside. It isn't that a blitzing DB slips through a hole or a LB runs over the RB. Cutler has dealt w/ several at the same time. Cutler often gets inside and outside pressure at the same time. Orton had nice pocket presence, but behind this OL, that would not be enough.

Okay, I will agree (and I think most do) that Cutler has to share responsibiity. Just because someone questions the OL, WRs, playcalling, or whatever, doesn't mean they are trying to absolve Cutler of anything. Ditto whem comments are made of Orton. One. The OL this year if FAR worse than last year, and I can not even believe anyone would argue this point. Beekman was never great, but was light years better than Omiyale has been. Even if you call the OT positions a wash, which I would argue against, we downgraded at LG so much that it has had an affect throughout. As bad as St. Clair was, I think Pace has been just as bad. And while I might say Williams and Tait were about equal in pass protection, Tait was far better in run blocking. As bad as our OL was last year, this year has been significantly worse. Two. Orton was decent moving around in the pocket to avoid pressure, but lets not get carried away. We had one of the worse in the league (Rex) and pocket presence was a big reason why for years I called for Orton to start ahead of Rex. But just because Orton was better than Rex doesn't mean he is great. Cutler is considered one of the best in the league in this area. Saying Orton is not as good as Cutler, in this regard, is just not an insult to Orton. If someone said Orton didn't have as strong of an arm as Cutler, would you take that as an attack on Orton? It is just the way it is. Orton did a pretty good job last year playing behind a bad OL. This year though, (a) the OL is even worse and ( we have no run game to fall back on. I always liked Orton, and frankly, was among the few who wanted him to start ahead of Rex when everyone was telling me to give Rex a chance. I still like Orton, but lets just be honest for a moment. Cutler and Orton are different QBs. Orton is looking damn good, but he is in a situation which is simply ideal for him. Orton is such a QB that, when in the right situation, he can not play well, but damn well. Cutler is a QB such that he does not have to be in the perfect situation. He can help compensate for a poor OL, or a poor run game, or less than stellar WR. He is in a pretty bad situation right now, but has still been able to move the ball and score. Yea, he is turning it over also, but I would say you have a choice w/ an OL and run game like ours. Take chances, score points but also turn it over, or you can avoid turnovers but watch the offense do little more than go 3 and out. If Orton was the QB of the Bears this year, he would be getting killed. While better in the pocket than Rex, he would get killed w/ this OL and lack of run support. I am not saying this to prop up Cutler. Just the way I see it.

you mean like a game where we enter w/ one of the top rushing offenses, yet a weak pass offense, and we play a team that has one of the worst run defense, and best passing offenses, and yet we come out throwing thinking we will catch them by surprise. Unfortunately, this actually happened.

I think the chance for Lovie to go is better than most think, but at the same time, simply missing the playoffs will not be enough, IMHO. Lovie put his neck on the line by taking over the defense. Thus far, I would say he has gotten nicked on the neck, but the question is, will he have his head totally cut off? If our team goes downhill further, and the D is a key reason, it would not surprise me if changes were made. At minimum, I think Lovie would try to force a DC on Lovie, much as he did when Lovie was first hired and not allowed to hire the DC he wanted, but instead given Rivera. How Lovie accepts this may factor in whether he keeps his job. To me though, the biggest key to whether or not we eat the salary and cut ties w/ Lovie may come down to the players. In the last game, it really appeared the players (a) were not prepared for the game and ( tuned Lovie out. If the players turn a deaf ear to their coach, then I think a change is possible. I do not expect Lovie to be fired, and I think it would essentially take a total collapse for it to happen, but I do think it possible. While we are invested in Lovie, we are far more invested in the players, and if Lovie is not seen as a coach who can get the most out of the players, then he simply is not good for our top investments.

I remember when Tillman was "excused" from practices, and all that was reported was he had family issues. I think it later came out there was something going on w/ his daughter, but I personally do not recall ever reading the story. As a father, w/ a young daughter, reading this story really hit home. I seriously can not even imagine, and don't want to, what it had to be like. http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/columns/...&id=4603424

Aside from last week the defense has played good enough for the Bears to win so I think Millen has a point over the whole season. What's good enough to win? In our 3 losses, our D gave up 21, 21 and 45. I am not sure giving up 21 points is doing that good. Sure, I would hope our offense can score that many, but anytime your D gives up 21 points, I just don't think they are doing that well. We had another game where we won (Det) but our D gave up 21 in the first half. Only gave up 19 to Seattle, but that was also an offense decimated by injury, so I am not sure how much credit goes our D's way. Honestly, the only game I think our D has played that well was Pitt. Now, that isn't to say I think our offense has played well, but accepting 21 or more against our D shows how far we have fallen. Our offensive line has been abysmal and the team has been a one man show (Cutler and the WR's). We've had zero blocking, zero rushing, etc.

Couple tid bits from a Mulligan article in the Sun Times, http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...mully30.article Payne was benched for not being able to defend the pass, but, lo and behold, he's now used as a deep safety in nickel downs because the player starting ahead of him, Danieal Manning, moves down into the box in passing situations. In other words, Payne, who isn't good against the pass, is only used in passing situations. Does that make sense? Man, I have been saying that since camp when the staff said this was their plan. It just never made sense to me. Payne was removed from the FS position in favor of DM, mainly due to his lack of ability to cover, especially downfield. Yet our "plan" has our moving him back to FS in situations where (a) you basically know they are going to pass and ( often are going to be looking downfield. If we are in a nickel situation, wouldn't it make the most sense to put your best cover guys onto the field. I understand the idea of DM to nickel, but only if you have a solid cover guy who can play FS. When we go to the nickel, I would rather see either Graham or Vasher or FS. Better yet, why not just use Graham or Vasher at nickel DB and keep DM at FS. Point is, you want cover guys out there on passing downs. Article then went on to discuss a play where Olsen was basically lined up against a DE. As the article says, Olsen isn't a very good blocker in the first place, so expecting him to solo block a DE is very questionable. Turner claims he can't just rotate Clark in on such situations, as it would tip the play. I would rather tip the play than expose our players like this. Even if the play is "tipped," if the right personnel is on the field, I think you still have a better chance of success. Continuing, Part of the problem is that teams have gone to five defensive backs and covered him with a cornerback when the Bears go to two-tight-end sets. Turner said the Bears would rather go with Johnny Knox as a third receiver than simply split Olsen out wide. Huh? Olsen was very effective split out last year. This is a big reason why I want to move Clark back into a starting role. Olsen just can't block, and his starting is simply hurting more than helping. We can still get Olsen plenty of snaps by using 2 TE sets, or simply playing Olsen as a WR. Frankly, I see no reason not to use more 4 receiver sets, w/ Olsen being one of the 3. He also throws this out there: Moving Hunter Hillenmeyer back to middle linebacker in a swap of the strong-side linebacker spot to Nick Roach might help get the plays called faster and clearer, but if you think Hillenmeyer is going to do a better job of lining people up, consider the fact Hillenmeyer could've done that from strong safety last week. First thing that came to mind for me was, does our staff allow the SLB to call plays? Urlacher, our MLB, has been our playcaller on D. When he went down, that role fell to Hunter, who replaced Urlacher in the middle. When he went down, that duty fell to Roach, again, in the middle. The other week, we had Roach in-between two experienced veterans in Briggs and Pisa, and yet it was Roach in the leadership role calling plays? It seems like the staff simply has pinpointed a position rather than a player to make the play calls, and this seems like a joke to me. Playcalling responsibility should fall on the person most capable of doing it, rather than whoever is playing a position. We talk about this stuff in general often enough. A key function of the coach(s) is to put players in the best position to make plays. From there, it is on the players to get it done, but if the players are put into weaker positions from the start, it is much harder to look good and play well, and IMHO, that is the case for us.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/bears/2009/10/om...nch_having.html Per the stats, our OL has only given up 11 sacks, which ranks right at the middle of the league. Everyone has talked about how solid Denver's OL is, and yet Orton has been sacked only two fewer times than Cutler. So that must mean our OL is average in pass protection, right? Further, that stats show Omiyale has only given up a 1/2 sack this season. That sounds pretty dang good. Omiyale must be an upper tier OG, right? Kind of cracks me up. One stat I would be curious about is how many QB pressures and QB hits each OL has given up.

Couple points. One. How does this affect offense? Turner doesn't have many fans, and I would argue some of our other assistants could be viewed even worse. I am a big time, and have been, critic of our OL coach. Our RB coach failed to develop a #4 pick that now leads the league w/ another team. Our WR coach has never looked that good, though I have even argued that could be more the QB than not. But that is another coach. Our QB coach failed to develop Rex, and Orton sure looks better elsewhere. Yes, I realize those players are in better/different situations, but at the same time, I still think our position coaches can very much be questioned, and as said, most question our OC. While offense isn't Lovie's specialty, as the HC, he is responsible just the same. Two. Lovie was forced to hire Rivera when he came on. He was never for the move, and by all accounts, the relationship between the two was never very good. As soon as he could, he got rid of Rivera and promoted Babich, which didn't work. Then he choose to do the job himself, which doesn't seem to be working either. And that doesn't even factor the position coaches. A big part of the job of the HC is to bring in assistants, and the simple of it is, Lovie's choices have not been very good, and the only one who did look good, was the guy he didn't want and who he got rid of as soon as possible. Three. You can say we hire someone else, but (a) I think you have a problem when you have an established coach who is forced to hire someone he doesn't want and make no mistake, any DC that isn't a facebook friend is going to be someone he doesn't want and ( any DC Angelo theoretically was to hire would likely be pushed by Lovie to run Lovie's scheme. Beyond the assistants, I think there are other arguments against Lovie as a HC. There have been too many times, especially of late, players just do not look prepared and come out flat. That falls on the HC as much as anyone. And how about Lovie's record of challenges, which is talked about nearly every game. Lovie falls near, or at, the bottom of the league when it comes to winning challenges. We won a few years back, but I do think it a valid question to ask whether we won due to or in spite of Lovie. Rivera was a key to the success, and Lovie got rid of him. In the last 2 1/2 seasons, we have seen "Lovie's team" and it has simply not been very good.

Not sure if the LOL was for the whole thing or the paper bag, but if the bag, I think you are giving Beekman a bit too much credit. This isn't like when we were set to face Seattle, and it wasn't known early on whether Walter Jones would start or not. We are talking about a backup OG that, in the eyes of the rest of the league, didn't even win the starting job in camp. The guy that sucks, again, in the eyes of the league, beat out Beekman in camp. So I just question whether Cle is going to game plan any different for one OG or the other.

LOL. I could not believe how much press something like that got. I bet the guy running couldn't either.

Understand, I threw out there an opinion/belief of mine, which may well be a reach. But my opinion is Angelo is pissed because he is being formed to make changes (by Angelo) that he would otherwise not want to make. Just my opinion. Overall, I have no issue w/ Lovie showing some emotion. really, my only issue w/ his press conference was the whole crap of not declaring the starting LG, and saying he doesn't want to give the opponent an advantage. Lovie is really delusional if he thinks the opponent knowing who will start at LG gives them an advantage.