nfoligno

I think that's right. However, if they can't get Tillman off the PUP list by September 5th, he'll have to miss the first six weeks of the season regardless of recovery time. That'll be pretty bad. The Falcons, Seahawks, and Packers could give us a lot of trouble without Peanut. Even the Lions could be a problem: who're we going to put on Calvin Johnson? Corey Graham isn't the cover corner that Tillman is; meanwhile, Vasher's 7 inches shorter and 60 pounds lighter than Johnson. Last year, didn't we carry Williams on the roster, even though he couldn't play? I think it a near lock Tillman does not go on the PUP list, but when he will actually be able to play is another story. I like all of our young corners, but losing Tillman sucks. This secondary was already a problem, and now literally every position is a question mark. Vasher needs to return to form and stay healthy, Kevin Payne needs to learn to tackle and stay healthy, and both Graham and Steltz need to prove that they're starting-caliber players. I'm not saying our guys can't do it, because I think they have a lot of potential. I'm just saying that we don't have a single known quantity in the secondary. That makes me nervous. No argument. I will say though, IMHO, it is still all about the DL. If the DL can create havoc and pressure the QB, the job of the secondary is simply so much easier. If the DL can't get it done, it may not matter whether Tillman is healthy or not.

Hey, I am not arguing about Det's interior DL. It is pretty bad, to say the least. But no matter how bad they are, that doesn't mean they would be willing to give up squat for Dusty. Lets be honest for just a moment. We as fans know Dusty is on the bubble. Even the GM in Det could figure that out as well. If they wanted him, good chance they could just wait. And frankly, they could get a comparable player off the scrap heap anyway. Sorry, but while I agree they have a need, I think you are sipping a little too much kool-aid to think Dusty is worth jack shit. Harrison would likely not warrant more than a 4th. Adams would not likely net more than a 6th. Dusty? Conditional 7th, if that.

I think it was a 6-12 week recovery, but the report didn't come out until 2 weeks after, thus 4-10 week recovery from now.

That tells me it was not previously known, not outside of Halas Hall, at least. Well, from what I just read, Tillman actually had his surgury 2 weeks ago. That means for the last two weeks, the team has known about how long Tillman would be out, and yet were able to keep that in-house. I think it very possible they knew there were potential issues w/ his back, but everyone (Tillman and team) were likely hoping it would be okay w/o surgury, but "after it flared up" realized surgury was going to be necessary.

Sounds like it, and I think that is what the Sun Times is saying, though they are more than likely speculating themselves. Honestly, I have to say I am a bit surprised w/ regard to Bullocks. Though he struggled in NO after they changed schemes, when we signed him, I thought it was the sort of deal where we are adding a veteran w/ upside on the cheap. He seemed to me sort of like a Thomas Jones signing. Yet since we signed him, he seems like a near after-thought. Whenever you read about the FS position, it always seemed to talk the most about Steltz and Graham. Bullocks seemed to be little more than an after-thought/ depth chart guy. I don't know if he simply hasn't looked good in practices, or if the staff really just never felt he was a potential starter. It looks right now like the job is Steltz' to lose, which IMHO, is going to put more pressure on the corners. Frankly, it still comes down to the pass rush. If Marinelli can work magic and get our DL to pressure the QB, it may not matter nearly as much who our FS is. If our DL struggles again, it still may not matter who our FS is, but for a very different reason.

Drunkbomber, As I said before, you can count me for 2 in the $20 league. Are there still openings for that? I know you created 3 leagues thus far, but those are the free leagues, right? Has a pay-league been set up yet? W/ regard to time, the later the better for me. W/ regard to scoring, i tend to prefer PPC leagues, if that is still an option. I also like individual defensive player leagues, but team defense is fine too. Finally, for me, the more "flex positions" the better. If you have already set up the pay-league, and I have missed it, let me know.

I was about to respond in a similar way as you regarding Dusty. Effort was never his problem. He has a non-stop motor, but was effectively running in place, or against a brick way. Now, maybe Marinelli can work w/ him and get more out of him. Who knows. But I don't agree w/ the idea that "Marinelli will get in his face" as a way of pushing him. Not sure I see the trade potential you mention. Dusty was a 3rd round pick that has been basically a bust. He has been injured every year, and when he was healthy, didn't look good at all. Further, he is in his contract season (I believe). Thus I just do not see much trade value for him, especially not a 3rd/4th. I realize you are using 3rd/4th based on PT and such, but I don't think another team would even offer that. I think Dusty "might" warrant a 7th, but honestly, even that is uncertain.

Damn, I swear I say Scott when I mean Adams so dang often. Oh well. One thing that really settled it for me was an interview w/ Warren Sapp. Sapp was being interviewed on the Score, and apparantly he watches film and reviews for NFL.com. Anyway, he really went to town on Dusty. He pointed out plays where Dusty was so bad that he would actually get blocked into Harris, thus nulifying both of our DTs. He went on to give many more examples. This was something I had thought myself, but Sapp talking about it only validated it in my eyes. Understand, I am not saying Dusty was the only problem. Harris' injury are too well known. Further, I agree also that Harris' head may have created an issue as well. But I also believe Dusty was a huge part of our problem last year. Not only do I believe he hurt Harris, but (as Sapp talked about too) Dusty's poor play was also really limiting Urlacher. While we do not emply the wide body DTs to "block" for Urlacher, I have also heard Lovie talk about how he believes that in our system, the DTs are expected to force double teams, thus keeping bodies off Urlacher, but in a different way. So while I do agree Harris was part of his own problem, I also simply believe Dusty was a huge part of the problem too.

Just curious, but why throw Santana Moss into this? Moss was once a downfield threat, but his ypc over the last three years has been going down. Moss is more a slant and run, slashing WR than a downfield threat. His is a 30 year old veterans that has been in the league nearly a decade. I am just not sure of your reason for using him as a comparison. I think Lee Evans is a much more similar comparison (as you point out). While they are similar in body type, they are also similar in how each plays. I do agree though that if he puts up 900-1,000 yards, I will be pretty happy. That would see his 3 year development go from 300 to 650 to 950 (using avg between 900 and 1,000). That is about 300 yards improvement each year, which looks pretty good on paper, and would set up nicely for the following year. Especially when you consider his 1st season (300 yards) was really not much more than a gimick year, and it could be argued this last season was really his first as a WR. Thus, 2010 would mark his 3rd year. The year many WRs breakout. As for the Gennings potential, I think he has the potential to match Gennings in terms of playmaking potential, but he has a ways to go on the consistency from IMHO. However, if he puts up 900+ yards this year, I would argue he is on a similar pace that Gennings took. Gennings had 600 his rookie year (which I would argue this past year was for Hester as a WR) and 920 his 2nd year. It was his 3rd season when he truly broke out w/ 1,200 (which shows that 300 yards per year bump we have been talking about for Hester too).

Agreed. One of the biggest questions surrounding Tommie when he was in the draft was whether or not he could be a full time player. At Oklahoma, he was part of a rotation. But that seemed only to create a nice fit for us, as we use a rotation ourselves. Personally, I think we were forced to use Harris more than the staff would have liked. Its hard to spell the guy as often as you would like when your 2nd starter sucks, much less the rest of your depth. I honestly think Tommie is going to have a very good year. I have said it before, but IMHO, a huge reason he looked bad last year was Dusty. After Dusty left the rotation, and Scott/Harrison stepped in, Harris began to look considerably better (so did Urlacher for that matter). Scott and Harrison were far from great, but Dusty was just so bad that he really hurt those around him.

Just to point out, he is FAR from the first player to complain about his Madden numbers, which just cracks me up to think about. WRs are all the time complaining about their numbers, and in particular, their speed rating, which I think is what he is complaining about here. TJ has said he was forced into a possession receiver position in Cincy due to CJ being opposite him, but that he is much more than that. I say great. Prove it and your Madden ratings will likely reflect that.

While I am not saying Harris' health isn't a factor, I think it is more about our simply taking DL pretty much every year. The entire D revolves around the DL, and in particular the DT. After the inability of our DL to rush the passer, combined w/ some contracts ending, I think we would have been drafting DL regardless of Harris' health.

I think that statements simply has more to do w/ the type of practice they have had to this point. Playing in shorts, couple times a month, or working out in the weight room, Harris may well look fine. I think the reserved aspect of his statement likely has more to do w/ the fact that it is the offseason and a players health often looks different in shorts than it does after a week of playing in pads. The other thing I would throw out there for shits and giggles. Sometimes the "way" a statement is made doesn't carry over to print. Play w/ it in your head for a moment, but I can easily put into my head a tone which makes the "seems pretty healthy" statement come out such that it nearly makes fun of those questioning his health. To often, people make comments which, in the interview, sound one way, and yet after people read it in print, it comes out sounding totally different.

Okay, so 16 rather than 17. Still, I just think his ypc bump will end up more than 1 point. I don't see him in Calvin Johnson's tier, but I do think he can be in the Greg Jennings/ Lee Evans range. Honestly, I would go lower on catches before I drop my ypc prediction. I just can't see the logic in not bumping his ypc more. Everything simply points to his ypc taking a serious jump. Already mentioned Cutler vs Orton effect, leading to more deep completions and more RAC. I would also point out: (a) W/ an improved OL, Hester will have more time to work downfield. ( Due to the OL/run game, Hester will have more freedom. © W/ Olson, Bennett and Forte, Hester will be able to work downfield more. (d) W/ a QB who can avoid the buy time in the pocket, while still looking downfield, Hester will have more freedom. See the pattern? I get it when you show the stats of other players. At the same time, let me ask you this. Leading into Hester's rookie season, if someone predicted what he would do (or even close) you would likely have thrown out the stats of what other return men had done to show how, what he did end up doing, wasn't possible. Further, he was even better the next year. Point is, Hester has already defied the odds when it comes to stats. I am not saying Hester will ever be a 100 catch, 1,700 yard, 15 TD WR. I do not think he will ever have the consistency in his game to be "that" sort of receiver. However, when talking about ypc average? I think his potential is ridiculous. Just think about his putting up 13 ypc w/ the situation he was in this past season. W/ so many changes, to me, I just feel his jumping to 15, 16 or yes, even 17 ypc is as likely, if not more, than any other prediction thrown out there. I think it more likely he ends up w/ only 50 catches, but for 17+ ypc (ala Vincent Jackson) rather than his having 70-80 catches but for only 14 ypc. The thing to remember is that among receivers with significant playing time, YPC is very tightly grouped. A 14 is pretty high, a 12 is just OK, and a 10 is pretty low. As such, a one-yard bump is very significant. For example, among players with at least 30 receptions in 2008, Hester's 13.0 YPC put him at 43rd in the league. If he'd had a one-yard increase up to 14.0, that would have moved him all the way up to 29th, right around where Reggie Wayne was. If Hester had a YPC of 16-17, that's another story entirely. Only 11 guys in the NFL managed a 16.0 or better on at least 30 catches. A YPC of 17.0 would put Hester right under Calvin Johnson, and significantly above guys like Marques Colston, Greg Jennings, and Lee Evans. That's a lot to expect from Hester, even if you think (as I do) that he's due for a big step forward. Even a 16 would put Hester above legitimate deep-threat receivers like Roddy White, Braylon Edwards, and Nate Washington. Larry Fitz, Randy Moss, and Santonio Holmes are all pretty serious big-play threats, and none of them even got to 15.0 YPC last season. So while I agree that Hester's going to be a lot better, I just don't see him having a YPC that high. I'm thinking he'll be closer to Reggie-Wayne-good than to Calvin-Johnson-good.

As for my predictions, here we go: Pass Attempts: Jay Cutler, 540 Completions: Jay Cutler, 345 Passing Yards: Jay Cutler, 3940 Passing TDs: Jay Cutler, 24 Passing INTs: Jay Cutler, 14 Passer Rating: Jay Cutler, 89.4 I agree these are both possible, and very good looking stats. Receptions: Greg Olsen, 78 Receiving Yards: Devin Hester, 1008 Receiving TDs: Greg Olsen, 7 Agreed on Olsen leading the team in receiving, and give or take a couple, 80 is about right. I think Hester will have more yards, and will discuss below. I think Olsen has more scores. He had 5 last year, but I think will have considerably more this year due to: (a) He will have more catches. I think he has 20 or more catches this year. ( He will have more red zone catches, an area I think Orton was only so-so last year. © He will have more plays downfield, and area very limited w/ Orton, but where Olsen could emerge as a big play TE. Carries: Matt Forte, 305 Rushing Yards: Matt Forte, 1312 Rushing TDs: Matt Forte, 10 I would hope for a few more scores, but otherwise like the numbers. Tackles: Lance Briggs, 135 Sacks: Alex Brown, 11 Interceptions: Charles Tillman, 5 Forced Fumbles: Charles Tillman, 4 No arguments, except I am not sure Brown gets 11, but will discuss below. Some thoughts: - Part of my calculation for Hester is that I don't think he'll get thrown at more than 120 times or so. I'm predicting significant, but not huge, increases in both his catch rate and yards-per-catch. I'm thinking 60% and 14 YPC, respectively (that's up from 55% and 13 YPC in 2008.) So his stat line would look something like 72 catches, 1008 yards, 5 TDs. Key reason I think Hester has more yards is I believe his ypc will be greater. He had 13 ypc last year, w/ a QB that (a) struggled to "lead" the WR, even when the catch was made and ( was not good w/ the deep ball. This year, I think Hester will see a considerable bump, not just a one yard average, to his ypc. I think he will have a ypc between 16 and 17. Thus, if he catches 70 or so, I think his yards will be around 1,100-1,200. - On that same note, I think Cutler will go to Earl Bennett around 85 times (not very scientific - I just took the ratio of Cutler's throws to Marshall:Royal, which is about 1.41:1, then applied that to Hester:Bennett.) Hopefully, that'll make Bennett's stat line something like 55 receptions for 665 yards and 5 TDs. I'd be very happy with that stat line in his first year as a starter. Agreed. I think Hester and Olsen are the primary targets, and one more (Bennett the most likely) will see the vast majority of the rest of the attempts. - I think Urlacher's going to rebound, just not all the way to 2006 levels. That was a ridiculous year for him, even by his own standards. I think he should end up with 120-130 tackles on the season. I think Urlacher rebounds, but agree Briggs leads in tackles. I think our system is such that the WLB plays the run as the MLB does in many/most other systems. The WLB faces less opposition to the ballcarrier, and the play is often funneled to him. At the same time, I think Urlacher will be 2nd in tackles, and more important, we see his playmaking stats go up again as he plays downhill, rather than back-peddling as he did w/ Babich. I think 5 ints/5 sacks will be in his sights. - Same goes for Ogunleye: I see him bouncing back to 7-8 sacks or so, but not back to his 10 from 2005. For one thing, he'll lose too much playing time to Idonije, who's moving to LE full-time. I think those two could be in a 60/40 or even 50/50 rotation. Gilbert could steal some reps, too. Alex Brown, on the other hand, should benefit just as much from Marinelli and won't lose as many snaps to Mark Anderson/Henry Melton. Given how many non-sack QB hits he had last season (when all the QBs we played were taking 3-step drops,) I think he's the best candidate for double digits. I really disagree here. I just do not see Idonije getting so much time, either outside or inside. Unless Wale doesn't play well, I think Idonije will be limited to depper depth on the DL and special teams. I just have always felt he was over-rated in terms of DL. He is nice depth, but not much more. I think Wale will see the most snaps among the DEs. Brown is the one I think will more often sub w/ Anderson, who I think (as it appears you do) will get his pass rushing form again. I think both Anderson and Brown will be in the 6-8 sack range, while Wale will be a couple better. - Lastly, I just don't believe that Vasher will step up. Tillman, sure: if his shoulders are fixed, I think he'll play better than last season. But post-2005, Vasher has looked bad even when he was healthy enough to play. I think he might play just well enough to hold off Zack Bowman, but I think this could be Vasher's last season as a Bear. Again, I simply disagree here. Many point to Vasher's play going downhill after signing his new deal. I point to the change in DC. More than most, though far from alone, Vasher complained about the scheme and how he was used. As I have often pointed out, a key complain of Vashers was, per the scheme, he was expected to take away the outside and funnel WRs inside, where help was expected to step in. But due to our playing the LBs on top of the LOS, that inside help was simply not there. Thus, Vasher would do as he was supposed to do, but in doing so, all he ended up doing was pushing the WR into an even greater hole in our defense. I am not saying none of the fault was Vasher's, but I do believe, like w/ Urlacher, the coaching seriously degraded his play. Its sort of like when they are in a zone defense, and the CB releases the WR to the safetey, as they are supposed to do, but the safety is late to cover. The WR makes the catch and the CB gets the blame, even though he did what he was supposed to do. IMHO, similar was seen w/ Vasher. He often did as he was supposed to do, but in doing so, a hole in the scheme was exposed. As fans watching the game, we simply saw Vasher chasing behind a WR who made a catch over the middle, but I would argue our LBs were supposed to be there protecting the middle, but were inable to get into position due to how they were told to lineup on the LOS. Make sense? Injuries are a key concern w/ Vasher, no argument there, but I honestly believe he, as much as maybe only urlacher, is in line for a big return in performance due to no other reason than our change in coaching.

It might not even be Cutler who's responsible for Marshall and Royal's success, to be honest. I think we'll find out this season whether Jay elevates his receivers' play or vice versa. I really hope it's the former. Regardless of how it turns out, though, I think Marshall and Royal owe their success more to Shanahan calling a million passes per game, such that they each got an overwhelming number of passes going their way. Hell, Shanahan called Eddie Royal's number 129 times last year. That's more than a lot of teams' #1s, and totally ridiculous for a rookie #2 receiver. Regarding the number of passes Shanny called for, don't forget a key reason why they called for so many passes. Their defense was god-awful. Further, while I realize their end-of-year rushing stats were decent/good, they didn't have a single RB they could rely on. 1,800 team rushing yards on the year, but no single RB w/ even 400. That is incredible. So Cutler bombed away, but there was a huge reason for this. All that said, I'll be happy with Cutler if he can do two things, neither of which is related to Marshall or Denver: 1.) Hit Devin Hester on all those deep passes Kyle Orton underthrew/overthrew/otherwise missed last year. As much as everyone is excited for this, there is a Cutler/Hester "thing" I am even more excited about. I think most would agree Hester has mad skills w/ the ball in his hands, yet I never felt he got the RAC he should have. A major reason for that, IMHO, is that while Orton may have been able to hit him (not talking about deep patterns), his passes were not such that really led the WR. Thus, often times WRs had to slow their stride or make the catch behind him. One thing Cutler is known for is his ability to lead WRs. He doesn't just put the ball where the WR can catch it, but leads the WR, thus the WR makes the catch in stride and is able to cause damage after the catch. The reality is, there are only going to be so many deep bombs Cutler/Hester complete. When we see them, they are exciting as hell. They are like hitting a homerun in baseball. But in a baseball game (most at least) you might have a homerun here and there, but you have far more runs based on singles, doubles, baserunning, etc. I am really excited to see Hester's potential maximized by having a QB that can hit him in stride, and watching Hester take an 8 yard catch for 20 or 30 yards. That is more likely to happen more often, and I think could be an even bigger part of our offense than simply the deep bombs. 2.) Get Earl Bennett to put up numbers anywhere close to what he did at Vanderbilt. I would love to see Bennett put up decent to nice #2 numbers. At the same time, I am also really excited about the potential our rookies bring. I am not predicting either will match Royal's numbers, but I think each has big upsdie. I love the potential Engram, er, I mean Iglesais brings. I was super high on him leading up to the draft, and was thrilled we got him. And then there is Knox, who could really surprise many. IMHO, Knox has borderline 1st round talent, but coming from a small school really knocked down his draft value. The believe was it would take him longer to develop, but he looked well ahead of the curve in camp. I am not predicting a huge number of catches for him, but truly believe he can have a Devery Henderson impact for us, w/ fewer catches but for big yards. Finally, as much as I am excited about the potential of our WRs, it is the Cutler/Olsen connection that really gets me going. I look at Witten in Dallas (81-950) and really see that potential for Olsen. If Olsen can become an elite TE (which I think very possible) it could really open things up for our WRs.

Great points. While I think Marshall is a damn good WR, at the same time, there is little question IMHO that he benefited from having a great QB. We always hear about how Cutler was so much more successful in Denver than he is expected to be in Chicago due to the WRs he had in Denver, but I have wondered for some time how much of that "great level of WR talent in Denver" was due more to Cutler. Royal was a rookie WR, and while he played great, was he truly an all-pro WR, or was he a good WR who benefited from a pro bowl QB? If he were a rookie this year, and Orton was his QB, does anyone believe Royal would have the same numbers? Despite what so many have talked about, I can't help but to wonder, if Cutler could do for the Denver receivers what he did, what can he do for ours?

Agreed all around. On coaching, I actually think Babich did try to mix some things up. His playing the LOS close to the LOS is an example. Problem is, he was too slow to adapt as opponents adapted. In the first game, the way we used our LBs was new and frankly, it worked. But very quickly teams adapted, and Babich was simply WAY to slow to adapt to their change. A game is like a chess match. You start out w/ a plan, but once your opponents figures out your plan, you have to adapt. Babich proved incapable of such. Also agree that while Lovie will be calling plays, Marinelli will have a huge role w/in the pass rush. Further, w/ the chemistry/trust between he and Lovie, I think he will give Marinelli a lot more freedom. Finally, you touch on how lining up Urlacher and Briggs off the LOS will help the DBs. 100% agree. I just never understood this. Even our CBs talked about it. The system is based on their taking away the outside, and funneling the WR into the middle of the field, where the LBs are expected to help out. But due to how we used our LBs, the middle of the field was wide open. Thus, even when the CB did his job, the WR would still have a wide open catch w/ room to run. One one point on this I never understood. A few years ago, Lovie talked about how Urlacher was best when running downhill. He talked about devising the scheme to ensure Urlacher (and others) were always moving downhill, and how that was the way you make plays. But Babich did the exact opposide. By forcing Urlacher to play on top of the LOS, he put Urlacher in a position to always be backpeddling, which is exactly what Lovie previously said was what we didn't want to do, as it takes Urlacher out of "his game". More than ever before, I felt last year our D failed due far more to coaching than to talent. Maybe this year will prove me wrong on this, but I honestly believe our D will look very good, and scheme/playcalling changes will have a dramatic effect on this.

I am not totally discounting stats. I just question the idea of going w/ stats over what the eyes tell you. You use OPS, but is that really a good comparison to what we are talking about? OPS is based on hard data. There is no arguing whether a player reached base, or whether he hit a single double or whatever. Joyner's run blocking metric is based on soft data. Whether or not a player won at the POA is a subjective answer. One person may feel holding your position is winning. Another may feel the need to actually see a whole. I just question what he based his data on. How is a "win" measured. As I said before, I can easily see him basing the stat based on whether or not an OL's key blocking assingment makes the tackle. For example, if the DT Garza is matching up w/ doesn't make the tackle, he "wins at the point of attack". But if this is the case, is that a true measure? How about when your center helps double team? Should Garza (and I am just using him as an exmaple here) get the credit for the "win". How about when your FB or TE has to help out? How about when the block doesn't create a hole, and the RB is forced to bounce outside. In that scenario, which we saw plenty often, the OG's key assignment is not likely to make the tackle, yet at the same time I would not say he won at the POA as he didn't create a hole and forced the RB to alter his direction. Point is, I simply question this stat in general, and further, question the idea that Garza was among the best in the league in run blocking when our eyes simply saw something different. I have actually said in the past that Garza is not an awful run blocker, and for me, his pass protection is his greater area of weakness. In particular, I think Garza struggles most when the assignment doesn't simply call for him to block the man in front of him. When opponents stunt or use mis-direction, that is when it seems to me Garza is the most lost and the least effective. But while I would admit he wasn't as bad of a run blocker as pass protector, to say he was among the best in the league?

Among the most mind-boggling for me was when he said he would take the stats over what scouts said. Just think about that for a moment. While I am not saying scouts are perfect by anymeans, I would much rather take the opinion of someone who actually watched a player, rather than someone crunching numbers.

I agree it will take time for the OL to form chemistry. I would add further that not only do they need to form chemistry with each other, but they have to get on the same page as their RB and QB, learn tendencies and such. I remember years ago listening to an OT talk about how they had to adjust to different QBs because as each QB began to feel pressure, they would do different things. One QB may simply take a few steps up in the pocket. Another is running backward. Another is scrambling to his left, while yet another to his right. Point is, the OL can't just look behind them to see what their QB is doing. They have a clock in their head, and if the QB still has the ball after X number of mental ticks, they have to begin blocking a different way. Anyway, all this will take time. No argument there. However, while I would agree 100% our OL will not have great chemistry on day one, I would also point out a few things which IMHO, sort of off-set. (1) On an individual basis, there is a significant upgrade. Pace and Omiyale may need time to develop next to each other, but that doesn't mean Pace will not be a significant upgrade on day one over St. Clair. Ditto elsewhere. Chemistry is one thing, but our OL was simply so bad last year, that our upgrades should prove better from an individual standpoint from day one. It may take time to see the great pulling blocks, for example, but should not take time for Pace to simply flatten his man. (2) I think Pace and Kreutz will offer a lot in helping this OL come together sooner. As much as I would like to see Williams on the left, at the same time, it would worry the hell out of me (short term) for Williams to pair w/ Omiyale, who has not played OG, and frankly has limited experience at OT. But next to Pace, you gotta think Omiyale's chances or more quickly developing and adapting are much improved. While not immediatly next to him, I also think Kreutz and Pace will greatly benefit Williams. So while the OL may need time to form chemistry, I think having a pair of pro bowlers on the OL will help push that along. (3) New QB, but I think stability at the center position will go a long way in more rapidly pushing that chemistry along. I would agree our OL is likely to get better as the year goes along, but at the same time, I would argue that on day one, they will be an upgade over last season.

TD Receptions: Hester (9) - If he catches just one or two more bombs than last year, things will open up. And considering the improvement in arm strength from Orton to Cutler, this is not hard to see. I'll go w/ Olsen here. While I think Hester will catch his share of bombs, I don't see him as enough of a red zone threat to expect him to be our top TD man. I think Olsen has double digit scores for us. Not only do I think he steps up as a red zone target, but I think he (like Hester) proves capable of working downfield more. Receptions: Hester (85) - He develops into the #1 WR. Going with Olsen again. Like some others, I think the Cutler/Olsen hook-up will be similar to Romo/Witten. I too think low to mid 80's will lead the team, but give it to Olsen. Recieving Yards: Hester (1200) - I'll just make it a round number and keep the koolaid flowing. Agreed here. I think Hester leads the team in receiving, and becomes a big play threat. I think he will have around 70 catches for around 1,100 yards (about 16 ypc avg.) Tackles: Urlacher (135) - Urlacher has a revitalization, Briggs comes in a very close second. I think Briggs continues to lead the team in tackles, but agree Urlacher has a revitalized season. I think that Briggs will continue to lead in tackles, but Urlacher will be a close 2nd, and further, see him being a playmaker again, putting up 5 & 5 (sacks/picks) Sacks: Alex Brown (8) - Until the defensive style changes, this is a flaw in the system. The "always rush around the end" strategy is not made for sacks. While I agree w/ the statement about running wide and outside, I would make the point that we have a DL coach who coached a pretty damn successful DL, thus, whether the system is altered, tweaked or whatever, the system may not hold us back so much as it has in the past. I think Wale will lead the team in sacks w/ 8 or 9. I would love to predict double digit, but I just don't think that will happen. I do think we could have 3 DL (Wale, Brown, Harris) in the 8 sack range, w/ a few more players like Anderson and Urlacher in the 5 to 6 sack range. Interceptionss: Vasher (8) - The Interceptor is back! I'll take Urlacher here too, though it may be a tie. Forced Fumbles: Tillman (5) - He's still the best at the swipe-tackle. About as good of a prediction as any.

That is probably the exact way I would rank last years OL in terms of pass blocking. That isn't how I would rank our OL last year in terms of run blocking though. For run blockings, worst to not quite worst: St. Clair, Beekman, Kreutz, Garza, Tait. Tait got a lot of crap last year, deservedly so, but he was not as bad as some make out in terms of run blocking. Understand, I am not saying he was good, but not as bad as the rest of the crap ass bunch. Regarding Pace, I too hope he has something left, and that he can stay healthy. I know he is saying he is as healthy as he has been....but I wonder how many players (including Pace himself) have said that in the past.

Agreed. You look at Atlanta and Baltimore, each starting rookies, and you find a direct opposite situation to what Cassel had. Each had strong OLs and a strong ground game. In such a situation, a lot of pressure is taken off the QB. Those two QBs didn't have the elite targets to work w/, but also faced less pass rush and had more time in the pocket. Cassel on the other hand had more weapons, but regardless, had to make quicker decisions and did so w/ a lot more weight on his shoulders. I swear, when talking about this, it remeinds me of our teams some years ago. Minny had Culpepper starting his first season (though I think it was actually his 2nd NFL season). That year, Minny often went w/ a max protetion and pounded the ball. Culpepper had great targets, but even w/ that, Minny knew the key was protecting the QB and allowing the young QB time to make his reads/decisions and get rid of the ball. The result was a very successful season for Culpepper and their offense. In contrast, look how we used Cade McNown when he was still very green. Understand, I am not saying Cade was better than he showed, or that he could have ever been a good NFL QB. But it still hacks me off today when I think about how we used him. Under Crowton, we put Cade in what I would consider an impossible situation for a young QB. We spread it out, often even going w/ an empty backfield. We relied heavily on the pass, rather than running the ball more often to take pressure off the QB. Cade may have had weapons to work w/, but what he didn't have was time. W/o the protection, defenses simply tee'd off on Cade and he proved incapable of making the quick decisions. Again, I am not trying to defend Cade, but at the same time, I believe we went w/ about as bad of a scheme as possible considering the youth and inexperience of our QB.

Good point on the types of blocks argument. I still want to understand how Joyner defines "winning". When he says Garza won at the point of attack (POA) X% of the time, how does he define winning? That is really key for me. If it is no more than your man didn't make the tackle, that doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot to me. With regard to Beekman, I really don't think anyone is truly anti-beekman. Few would argue he did better than expected, and some would argue far better. I simply do not agree he was that good in terms of run blocking. While I realize he was next to St. Clair, Forte running inside/left was about as bad as it got last year. It seemed like every time he tried to run to the left, he was met w/ a stone wall. Beekman did better than expected, but expectations were incredibly low. I like him for depth, but was happy we choose to upgrade.