nfoligno

I mostly agree. I would however call Davis a "virtual lock". Frankly, regardless how Hester, Bennett, Iglesias or Knox look in camp, there is simply no chance we cut them (injury/IR doesn't count). If one of this groups really struggles in camp, that would threaten playing time but not their roster spot. W/ Davis, I feel the situation is a bit different. I think he enters camp w/ a job/roster spot, but also would say it is "possible" he could lose it. I think it is his to lose, but if he is dropping the ball and struggling in camp the way he did last year, I think he could be let go. That would also depend on the others, but if Rideau, Kinder or Aroma are doing well while Davis is struggling, I could see a change made. Assuming Davis keeps his job though, and further assuming we go w/ 6 WRs, I agree Rideau is the most likely candidate. He brings something to the table the others do no (size). At the end of the day though, if we do keep a 6th WR, it will likely come down to their special teams play as much as, if not more than, their WR play/potential.

If memory serves, last season the Bears actually averaged significantly higher YPC when running off the three middle linemen than when running off either tackle or running to left or right end. They also ran up the middle over 50% of the time. I'm not saying the middle did a GOOD job run-blocking (they were 15th in the league, according to Football Outsiders,) just that the tackles were even less effective. I'd be happy to see an upgrade in the interior line's run-blocking, but the tackles were our Achilles' heel in the run game last season, just like they were in the passing game. Hey, I think it all sucked, and I am absolutely not trying to defend the OTs. If I were to pin-point our (run game) weakest link, it would not be OTs, but simply the left side. When Forte ran to the left, statistically (and my memory) he was the least successful. 3.3 ypc left side and 3.7 left sideline. To the right, he actually had decent/good numbers. 4.0 right side and 4.2 right sideline. IMHO, Tait was not awful on run down. Not good, but not awful. On pass downs, the DEs were simply too fast for him. On run downs though, his lack of quickness/speed were less evident, and he was able to simply drive into the DE. Garza is a decent enough guy in terms of power. IMHO, here Garza truly fails is in stunts and knowledge overall, but in run blocking, where you simply drive into the guy in front of you, he did decent enough. It seemed like we could always pick up a couple yards going to the right. To the left? Not only was it a brick wall, but the wall actually moved into the backfield. If I were to grade our indiviaul OL last year... St. Clair - Pass Blocking D, Run Blocking D minus. Beekman - Pass Blocking C, Run Blocking D. Garza - Pass Blocking D plus, Run blocking C. Tait - Pass Blocking F, Run Blocking C minus. I don't bash St. Clair too much as he was never supposed to be our starting LT, and gets a bit of slack. Beekman did better than expected, but was still just not good enough. Garza was decent in a relative sense, but I wonder how he will look this year w/ better players. Tait got old fast, very fast. This year, I see Pace as a huge upgrade to St. Clair, both in run and pass blocking. Omiyale is a bit of a question, but I think he should be at least as good as Beekman in pass blocking (and likely better as he is more agile and will have a better veteran next to him) and should be an upgrade in run blocking due to his size/strength. Williams should be an improved pass blocker (which was the area he was expected to excel) but I have questions about his potential in run blocking. Garza? Who knows. My hope is that if our left side is good enough, Kreutz can focus on assisting the right side, and thus Garza/Williams may get some support, not to mention Clark on that side. My hope for an X factor is Gaines, who I hope we are looking to use more like a FB than a TE. I simply believe McKie sucks. I remember last year, late in the year, lining up Olsen as an in-line blocker. My hope we we use Gaines in such a way, which I think could really help our run blocking as well.

I will admit, I am biased. Even when many felt our OL was doing "decent" last year, I didn't. I thought a QB w/ some sense of pocket presence, a solid RB and some other factors made them look better than they were. Beyond the "sacks given up", some things I consider (other than simply what I saw on the field). One. Turner's comment. Sometimes you have to go beyond the stats. After the season, but before Cutler, many were questioning Orton's arm, and saying Orton didn't have the arm to go deep. Turner disputed this, and said the reason we didn't often throw downfield was not due to Orton's arm, but due to our OL and protection. Turner flat out said that, because we needed to keep Orton upright, we had to run a scheme based on 3 step drops, which simply does not allow for many downfield opportunities/looks. While he didn't call out the OL by name, simply saying 3 steps was all the time Orton had to get rid of the ball was pretty indicative of the pass protection of our OL. Many felt our OL was better last year in pass protection than run blocking. I felt both sucked. In terms of pass protection, our OL simply didn't look as bad as it was due to Turner utilizing a quick release system that limited the pass rush potential of other teams. Two. Forte is awesome. I think we all agree on this point. So often Forte had solid runs, but how many were due to the OL opening holes? Often I saw Forte either (a) squeeze through a tiny hole or ( get big yards on borken plays where he used re-direction (ala Thomas Jones). Not often did I see Forte gain big chunks of yards running through legit holes. To me, that is further supported when looking at the numbers. (a) When a team needs that extra yard or two, how often did we convert? Well, on 3rd and short, Forte had 25 carries for 48 yards. That is not even 2 yards per carry. Heck, if you take away the one he broke off for 18 yards, and he would be left w/ 24 carries for 30 yards, just over 1 yard per carry. That is pathetic, and IMHO, mostly due to our OL (interior especially) simply not being strong/powerful enough to get that forward push. ( 4th down was just as bad, w/ 7 carries for 12 yards. Take away the long carry of 8, and you have 6 carries for 4 yards. Ouch! Simply put, our OL was pushed back far more often on these short yardage situations. I simply think our OL stunk last year, despite what the sack stats may say. St. Clair was just flat out awful. His pass protection was pathetic, and his run blocking weak. Beekman was better than expected in pass protection IMHO. Most of the times he had trouble were dealing w/ stunts/blitzes/mis-direction, which is somewhat to be expected of a younger OG. But his run blocking was weak. Forte had a 3.3 ypc avg running to the left. Garza didn't look awful last year, but IMHO, that was far more relative. Tait was more than a step slow in pass protection, but servicable in run blocking. Forte had a 4 ypc avg running to the right, and that is also where it simply seemed (eye test) where Forte would do his most damage. Then again, that is aided by the addition of Clark, who usually lined up on the right side. Kreutz? Who knows. At times I think he is trying to help the OGs too much, and in turn looking bad. Other times I fear he has simply lost it. This year will tell us a lot. The good is, I think we have significantly upgraded our run blocking w/ Pace and Omiyale. I am not sure Williams will be an upgrade in run blocking, but do believe he is a significant upgrade in pass protection. Throw in having a QB w/ far greater escape ability and an arm that makes defenses play honest, and I think our OL could end up looking very good this year.

Honestly, I am not sure this is an end-all-be-all stat. It may be telling, but there is more to the story. If you go by these numbers, you would get the impressions that (a) Kreutz is still a stud, but how many here believe that has been the case, ( our interior was damn good, but that simply does not seem to mesh w/ what I saw in the games and ( we didn't give up that many sacks overall. OTs were a major weak link in terms of pass protection. No question. But I also felt our interior gave up plenty of pressure. One key difference I would point out is pass rush through the interior is more easily seen by the QB, and thus the QB can better throw it away. It may not go down as a sack, but that doesn't mean the OL did its job. The other aspect I think must be considered, and a key IMHO to our upgrades, comes in run blocking. Simply put, our interior was weak in terms of run blocking, and that is best seen in Forte's weak YPC in short yardage situation where the interior OL simply didn't get much push. I think key to upgrading Beekman was his very sub-par run blocking. Omiyale is bigger, and the believe is he will add size/power to our interior run blocking.

Honestly, I just am not so sure the staff is that high on McBride. We went w/ him his rookie season out of need. Even then, I didn't feel the staff we sold on him, as most reports I recall continued to talk about Graham, who the staff simply seemed far higher on, and we now know w/ good reason. Last year, McBride really seemed to fall on the depth chart, and I just am not sure the staff is so high on him. I am not trying to take away from Bowman, and if he enters the year as our primary backup CB, he gets credit for that. Personally, I think Moore stands a very good chance to over-take Bowman before the season begins. Also, if Tillman or Vasher go down early, and assuming Graham is not our starting FS, it would not surprise me to see him moved back.

Valid point as far as Hester goes. Most teams wouldn't be comfortable going into the season with a #1 guy who only caught 51 passes for 665 yards the year prior. However, there's reason to believe Hester will be much better this year, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him hit 900 yards. Bennett can't be judged by his zero receptions, since he only got targeted on one pass. The main thing, though, is the way the offense is going to be structured. Trent Green was on ESPN talking about the Bears, and he basically said he thought Greg Olsen was going to be their real #1 receiver. He compared the situation in Chicago to his old teams in Kansas City, and said Tony Gonzalez was the centerpiece of their passing game, and their receivers were all just complementary pieces. I think he's right that the Bears will follow a similar formula, at least for this year. At the end of the day, I think Turner will be able to cover for Hester and Bennett just fine until they come into their own. Exactly. That is what I have been saying too. To further your/Green's point, Gonzalez was the #1 target, and I would say Priest Holmes was their #2. Not only do we have a TE who is likely a #1 option, but I would point out we have a 2nd TE who will often be high on the list too, not to mention a top tier receiving RB. That's been my point all along. For a team like Az, which focuses on the WRs, our group would be devastating to an offense (in a bad way) but other systems (like KC or SD) simply do not focus so much on the WR, and thus their importance is not as great. Another valid point. Corey Graham's transition to safety hasn't gone that smoothly so far, and he hasn't gotten as many reps at the position as you'd like, since he was filling in for Manning at nickel and Tillman at corner. Bullocks is a rebuilding project, and Payne has his weaknesses (poor angles, wrapping up) even when he's not hurt. Steltz looked good last season, but he seems like he'd be stretched at FS, due to his lack of range. From an ability standpoint, the best bet for the Bears might be Graham/Steltz at FS/SS, but that's counting on a big step up from both guys. I really wonder what the teams 2009 expectations are for Graham. If they expected him to start this year, does it make sense to practice him (for any amount of time) at nickel? To me, that sounds more like they think he may be the 2010 starter at FS, and will be the primary backup nickel this year. Honestly, I am not as concerned about FS as some. I agree it is a hole, but for me, it is all about the pass rush. If the pass rush is solid, I think whoever is playing FS will look good enough. If the pass rush is not there, then I would argue FS is the least of our problems. Calling Dusty a starting tackle is ridiculous. He lost his job to Anthony Adams last season, and judging from Adams' play as a starter, there's no reason to think Dusty can win it back. With the way Marinelli's been talking up Marcus Harrison, Dusty's looking like a third-string tackle at best. I'm thinking that our rotation is likely to be Adams/Harrison and Harris/Gilbert with Idonije rotating inside sometimes; I don't think you can characterize that group as "brittle." Exactly! Dusty is more likely on the bubble this year than a starter w/ high expectations. Questioning Harris' health is legit, but making out like Dusty is a starter who we are relying on is weak. This is a legitimate problem. Both our starting corners have had major injury problems, and Tampa 2 corners get exposed to a lot more contact than most. Our #3 corner, according to the reports from OTAs, is Zack Bowman, who's had a string of season-ending injuries going back to junior college. Our nickel back, Danieal Manning, was dinged up and had to sit out OTAs. Corey Graham was both physical and pretty durable, but he's been moved to safety, leaving DJ Moore and Trumaine McBride as the only corners without some kind of injury problems. We've got a ton of talent at corner, but we'll be relying on at least some of them staying healthy. Yea, health is a concern, but isn't it for most teams. I think the alternative point is that we "seem" to have greater depth than in the past. Our protection will be an upgrade over last year's. Period. It will probably not be as good as Cutler's was in Denver, but it won't be the train wreck we saw last year, when we had an soon-to-be-retired John Tait playing right tackle and a career backup protecting Orton's blind side. Even if Williams struggles badly, Shaffer would be an upgrade over Tait's performance from last year, and Pace is a HUGE upgrade from St. Clair. Our o-line may not be elite, but it will be more than serviceable. Agreed. I question this as being a legit point. While I would agree w/ a statement that our OL is not proven, the reality is, it is an upgrade from last year, and we have also improved our depth. Beekman, a starter last year will be the #1 backup OG this year, and Shaffer, a starting caliber OT, will also be a backup. I just do not see the OL as a weak link this year. This has been said in a million places, but almost every team in the NFL is screwed if their starting QB goes down. Would I be more comfortable if we had a veteran backup? Sure. But suppose we ditch Basanez and bring back Brian Griese or somebody...if Cutler goes down, we're still up a creek. The teams that can handle losing a starting QB are the very few that have two guys capable of starting, like the Patriots from last season. And like we saw with Cassel this offseason, starting-quality backups don't stay backups for very long. Exactly. If we had a Vinny Testerverde or Chandler veteran backup, would our situation really be so much better? This is a weak point IMHO, as it applies to pretty much every team w/ a stud starting QB.

I get it, but my point is he at times seems to offer half-truths. How about this. The premise. Bears will have trouble this year. A reason why. They lost their starting QB. Nothing incorrect there, but I would argue it fails to mention a small something, wouldn't you say? He points to the OL has being a "reason why the Bears won't win the SB" but does a fairly weak job in really looking at the OL. And yes, I still have issue w/ the reciver issue. He says we have no WRs, and the implication is no one for Cutler to throw to, but that isn't the whole truth.

I know the initial thought of most is to simply dismiss anything Hub has to say. W/o giving Hub any cred, I thought I would respond anyway. Slow time and all I — Who’s going to catch Cutler’s passes? Bears head coach Lovie Smith continues to say with a straight face that Hester is a “legitimate No. 1 receiver,” but the consensus among daily team observers is that Hester remains a major work in progress. Although he did make some legitimate strides down the stretch last season, Hester’s continuing development could be hindered by a mostly unproven supporting cast, led by second-year pro Earl Bennett. Bennett looks a lot better, but his inability as a third-round rookie to make any kind of an impact at the team’s weakest position last season remains cause for concern. Rookies Juaquin Iglesias and Johnny Knox and veteran Rashied Davis complete a unit that could be keeping Angelo awake well into the night, as he seriously ponders the possibility of adding ex-Giant Plaxico Burress and his impressive 15.5 yards-per-catch career to the mix, the obvious risks nothwithstanding. I love how he does not even mention that we have a pair of TEs, each of which are considered solid weapons, as well as one of the best receiving backs in the league. While I understand Hubs point, which is far from original, at least most others supplement their comments by pointing out the Bears do have a few non-Wrs weapons which are more proven. Honestly, I find it almost a tad amusing. It just was not long ago that so many writers/fans spoke out about how QBs can make WRs. I remember reading so many articles saying our group of WRs would not look so bad, but in combo w/ Orton, it was ugly. Well, we upgraded w/ a pro bowl QB, and suddenly everyone forgets the prior arguments that a great QB makes the WRs so much better. Back to the original point. I get it. We all do. While many would say we have talent at WR, the group as a whole is very unproven. I just think it weak to talk not even mention that we do have two solid TEs and a solid pass catching RB. If we lacked the TEs, and our RB was a pure runner (non receiving threat) the argument about the WR position would mean so much more, but that simply is not the case. II — Safety issues hard to ignore. Start with the fact that the Bears’ most experienced safety by a wide margin is newcomer Josh Bullocks, who lost his starting roie in New Orleans last season and was so shaky that he showed up on a YouTube clip demonstrating how not to play the position. The Bears are hoping Corey Graham can make a successful conversion from cornerback to free safety, where his physical style could be well-suited for the position, but such experimentation hardly creates a comfort zone. It’s also worth noting that ’08 starting SS Kevin Payne is coming off shoulder surgery. But perhaps the biggest concern is the leadership at the position, which will be seriously diminished by the departure of Mike Brown, who has moved on to Kansas City. Yes, Brown had big problems staying healthy, but he was almost always effective when he was able to play. Not too much of an argument here. Safety was one of the very few positions of need which were not seriously addressed in the offseason. Still, if the other pieces fall into place, and I realize that is an "if" statement, I am not sure the FS position will be such a deciding factor. III — D-line brittle in the middle. Even Rod Marinelli, the undisputed dean of D-line coaches, could be challenged to the max by a pair of injury-plagued starting tackles — Tommie Harris and Dusty Dvoracek — who are being counted on to exert a great deal more interior pressure up front than they did last season, when the Bears ranked 29th in QB sack percentage. A free-flowing rotation inside, including underrated Anthony Adams, promising second-year pro Marcus Harrison and rookie Jarron Gilbert, could help preserve Harris, whose left knee hasn’t been right since he suffered a grade-2 MCL sprain in his left knee in Week Three two seasons ago, and Dvoracek, who has been sidelined with injuries more often than not in his three years at the pro level. To me, the entire argument drops a peg or two when it makes out like Dusty is (a) the starter and ( so heavily counted on. Dusty lost his starting job BEFORE his season ending injury last year, and yet Hub makes out like he is an integral piece and a starter. Questioning Harris' health? Fine. But let's not make Dusty out to be more than he is. Dusty is more likely a bubble player than an integral piece. IV — Potential chaos on the corners. The Bears are guaranteed to be nothing more than a passing fancy in ’09 if their pass defense performs as sloppily as it did last season, when it routinely gave up inside position on slant patterns and kept leaving a ridiculous amount of cushion for opposing receivers at the worst possible times. Former Pro Bowler Nate Vasher has greatly underachieved since signing a five-year, $28 million deal before the ’07 season, playing in only 12 of 32 games and intercepting only two passes. He says he’s feeling much healthier, but that remains to be seen. Same goes for fellow starting CB Charles Tillman, who was plagued by injuries to both shoulders last season and was responsible for perhaps the ’08 defense’s low point, when he allowed Bernard Berrian’s 99-yard TD reception in a 34-14 prime-time loss to the Vikings. Yes, both starting corners are coming off injury, and that is a concern. But not one mention of improved depth? V — Perilous protection. Cutler’s excellent escapability — he was sacked only 11 times last season — will make him much less of a sack target than Kyle Orton, but the starting tackles in front of him come equipped with noteworthy issues. Granted, OLT Orlando Pace is a distinguished seven-time Pro Bowler who sticks out like the Sears Tower. But he’s also 33 years old and has missed 25 games over the past three seasons due to assorted injuries. At right tackle, former first-round draft pick Chris Williams remains an unproven commodity, having seen limited action in his rookie campaign after suffering a back injury on the second day of training camp that eventually required surgery. Yes, Pace had issues, but most would agree he is a significant upgrade to St. Clair. And while Williams is unproven, he is also a 1st round pick and many teams rely on unproven, 1st round OTs. Finally, how about mentioning that we also upgraded by adding another starting OG and improved our depth. While I get that the point is to throw out questions, I think it weak to do so w/o evening mentioning all aspects of the unit. There may be questions on the OL, but the OL will also see a significant infuse of upgrades, both starting and in depth. VI — Show me the backups. Smith is going to have to pray for the same kind of good luck enjoyed by his good buddy Dungy, who never was forced to get by without Peyton Manning for an extended period of time. Is Smith really serious when he says he would be comfortable with either Brett Basanez or Caleb Hanie taking over under center if, God forbid, Cutler got cut down even for a few games? Those guys make the Cubs’ bullpen look worthy of Cooperstown. Maybe the weakest argument of all. How many teams w/ an elite pro bowl QB enter the season w/ a great backup? To question the bears on this point is to question most every team in the league. Few teams have a backup plan at QB such that little dropoff would be expected. Further, not even a mention about Cutler's record of health? Come on Hub. At the end of the day, are there questions surrounding the bears heading into the season? Sure. But the same is true of EVERY TEAM in the NFL. Hub takes a glass half empty view and looks at the problems in a worst case scenario, and barely touches on, if at all, the potential offsets to such situations.

you ...aren't a troll. Mind telling my wife that?

Ouch! Remind me never to get on Pix' wrong side

I hope the best w/ Bowman, but I am not sure we should read too much into this. Leap frogging Hamilton doesn't mean much. Leaping McBride seemed a bigger deal a year ago (for Graham) than it does today. Both McBride and Hamilton are bubble players at this point. Then there's DJ Moore, but I don't think he has been really factored as of yet. Its great that he is looking good, but honestly, saying he is our #3 CB right now is a tad deceptive due to (a) the rookie w/ high expectations not yet having really been factored and ( that depth ranking does not factor our nickel DB.

Bomber, Sunday is fine for me, and as thrown out there before, evening/nights are best to work around w/ kids. When do you think we will know for sure who is in what league. Just checking to see if there were two open slots for my friends and I to join the $20 league.

One more in the agreement box. I think Goodell was planning to have the issue resolved by the season, one way or another, but didn't expect the games being played. As there seems to be no other reason for the delays but to (a) play this season and ( avoid the legal issues until next year, Goodell is stepping (or may be) and basically saying, the courts and DAs may wait, but I will not.

Let me start by agreeing w/ you on one point. Here is something Lovie said which backs up your argument that our scheme is more based on the gap rather than coverage. "Added Smith: "It's like the teams that are from that system only play cover-two every down, and that's the furthest thing from the truth. Cover-two is just a base part of what we do. Every defense for the most part is pretty much the same. It's gap-control defense."" As for the other part, here is something I found in an old discussion of mine, ""Pressure on the quarterback," said Urlacher, adding that it's a misconception that Tampa Two teams always play cover-two defense (putting two safeties deep to thwart downfield passes). "Yeah, we don't do that. We play more man-to-man (coverage) and cover-three this year and blitz so much more. We probably play cover-two about 25 to 30 percent " Yes, he mentions playing more man-to-man (which I never disputed) but also points to cover-three as something we run, and distinctive from cover two. I would agree we played more man last year than in the past. At the same time, I think we play a majority of zone coverage, and mix it up w/ man.

Gotta agree. I might have been fine enough w/ the more general question about athletes speaking out, and the value of their opinion. It is a slow enough point in the year something like this should be fine. But when you ask, "Also should the USA be the big brother to all countries?" That goes way beyond sports and into a pure political discussion that really doesn't have any place on this board.

Disagree we play zone 30-40% of the time. Where did you get that figure anyway? I believe you are going off when Lovie (or whoever it was) said we are in the cover two only 30-40% of the time, but we are not only in zone coverage when we are in the cover 2. The cover 2 is only one scheme which utilizes zone coverage. We might be in cover 1, and still playing zone. Or cover 3, and still in zone. We might be playing a nickel or dime package, and playing a zone coverage. Point is, we play zone coverage much more often than simply when we are in the pure cover two form, which I agree, our staff has said we run only 30-40% of the time. IMHO, buy a considerable majority, we play zone coverage. I am not saying we don't ever plan man coverage, but I think it far more in the minority.

Cutler breaks his hand. I'm jumping up and down hooting and hollering. Awesome. I'm thinking your reaction to that play this year would be a bit different

Hey, assuming we are in the same league, I didn't want to come out firing too big. I figured I would start out w/ a jockstrap comment, and work my way up to jock-ass I have played both types of leagues too. To me, the best is a live money league w/ an in-person live draft. I have won as much as $1,200, and lost as much (over an entire season) as $650. That was before the kids started getting so expensive though, and I had to shift to more moderately priced leagues. I agree w/ your sentiment though. Whether free or pay, any league w/ fellow posters (bears/football adicts) is going to be a good one.

Nice write up. Nice discussion of the gaps. Couple little things. One. The writer says it is a big pet peeve when someone says the DL is supposed to keep blockers off Urlacher. He goes own to discuss the difference between our cover two and, for example, our scheme when we had Washington and Traylor. I would point out that while the two systems are different, each are "supposed to" keep the MLB free, but each does so in a different manner. Lovie himself has talked about this when asked whether Urlacher would be better off in a system like the one w/ the big boy DTs. Lovie talked about how, in his system, Urlacher should be free too. His point was, if the system is working correct, your DL is getting penetration, and thus forcing double teams. When that happens, Urlacher is free. But then you have a year like last, when the DL does not penetrate, and an offense can single block the four DL. When this happens, bodies get to Urlacher. So the point I would make, and the point Lovie made, is that even in a tampa 2, the MLB should be free, but only when it works correctly. Two. Regarding the WLB role. I agree the WLB in our system is most likely to be freed up of blockers. At the same time, I think our system is tweaked from Tampas in that I think we have essentially swapped roles for the MLB and WLB in many ways. Normally, your MLB is your key against the run, and your WLB is your big play guy. That is how it was w/ Tamba as Brooks went after the QB and was the LB most often in the backfield. We do it a bit different though. Urlacher, far more often than Briggs, is the one attacking the QB.

Yea, we used a lot of 2 TE formations last year. Also, we moved Olsen around quite a bit, which I was really happy to see. I liked how much he was moved around, put into motion, playing multiple WR positions. Heck, he even lined up as a FB toward the end of the year. You mention how, despite our use of such a formation, we were still limited in that we had to still use at least one TE as a blocker, thus reducing the mismatch potential. No argument, but I would add one more limitation, still due to the OL. When did you see Olsen run deep routes? It is on deeper patterns where Olsen creates the true mismatch. Even when we played against cover two schemes (a scheme where most all realize the weakness is in the deep middle) we were inable to utilize him such. Our OL simply could not sustain their blocks long enough for our weapons to run deep patterns, and even when they could, we lacked a QB w/ the arm strenght/accuracy to hit him downfield. This is why I think we could see a big breakout year for Olsen. I really liked how Turner tried to use Olsen last year, but due to our QB/OL, we were simply not able to utilize him in ways that would match talent expectations. This year, I think we will see Olsen become a downfield threat much more, which could really take his play to another level.

1. Stellar QB - Big Ben, Brady, Manning, etc...these guys have moxie and skill. You need it to win it. Cutler is that guy. For me, this is A#1. After Baltimore won in 2000, everyone started to believe you can win w/ great defense and an average QB, but that team was an exception, not the rule. Whether Cutler delivers this year or not, I think we are in a better position than we have been in a very, very long time. 2. Good rushing attack - Willie Parker, Bettis, Dillon, etc... You don't need an AP, but you need a quailty attack. Forte is that guy. Agreed. Its great if your RB is great, but you really just need to have a "good" running back. I would add that often, when you have a great QB, your RB is capable of more due to not facing stacked boxes. 3. Great line - the Steelers, Giants and Pats all had super solid O lines. I'm not sure we do...but we might. We will need to see how well our new additions work. But there certainly is a legit potential of "very good". I'm a trenches guy. Even when our OL was good, it wasn't great. I don't expect it to be great this year. What I expect it for it to at least be a considerable upgrade from last year and potentially a good unit. I think they will finish the year stronger than they begin. 4. Good receivers - Look at who's won these SB's recently...It was usually not a lot of sheer heroics from one WR diva. Usually a brilliant catch by one... Moss last year, Tyree, etc. Who's to say that Hester can't pull a lucky grab n' go or Olsen with a leap in the end zone? We don't need stats. We need TD's. I think our corps, if they progess as we've been hearing, can be that. Agreed. Having a Fitz/Boldin combo is awesome, but not what you need to win a SB. 5. Good game-calling. Ok, here we are in trouble! Unfortunately, that's no joke. My hope is that (on offense) the issues have been more about personnel than coaching, and Turner will show this year that he is actually a very good OC.

If there's one thing I'm legitimately mad at Angelo for, it's trading Jones. Imagine if they had kept him after '06...TJ/Forte (or Forte/TJ) would be an AWESOME backfield. Hold up here. Don't be talking bad about my BFF Seriously though, that was far more about bad circumstances than it was Angelo making a bad move trading TJ. And lets not pretend TJ wasn't a big part of that problem. It was TJ who cried about his deal until Angelo promised to trade him the following season. Angelo simply followed through on his promise. You can criticize Angelo for (a) caving into TJ's whining and making the promise and/or ( getting as little as he did in return, but as for actually making the trade, I think he basically had to follow through on his promise. And while it is nice to think about TJ and Forte on the team, I honestly don't know how well it would work. TJ would not be content w/ a committee role, as he wasn't then. And Forte has shown too much to take off the field, not to mention the two are of too similar style to really use as a dual role. But I think Forte and The Other Jones should do just fine this year. Teams won't be able to stack the line of scrimmage like they have in the past. Hester's got a long way to go as a receiver, but he's already shown that he can beat single-coverage, and you have to believe that Cutler will get him the ball if he's open. I think our running backs are going to see a lot of five- and six-man fronts this year. This is what has me so excited, and partially why I worry less about our WRs after Hester. In the passing game, the D will have to respect Hester (likely w/ double coverage) and Olsen, also maybe having to slide an extra DB to backside protection as LBs will struggle to cover him downfield. At the same time, a D is going to have to respect the run. So at the end of the day, our young WRs are going to likely have more room, and time, than our 2nd and 3rd WRs have faced in some time.

I was all for adding Harrison, but at some point, don't we have to ask why no one has shown Harrison interest. I mean, it isn't just that he is still available, but I don't recall anyone really even showing interest. It was hard to tell whether he was a FA or if he retired. For me, it is sort of like the Simeon Rice thing. Rice talks about playing, and is such a name that many fans immediatly talk about adding him to the team. But someones a name is just that, and the play you associate w/ the name is simply gone.

EDIT: Also, I definitely think the Bears will have a better ground game than the Chargers. As good as they were in every other category, San Diego was 20th in the league in rushing last year, and I think 2009 might finally be the year where LdT breaks down for real. Meanwhile, Forte's on his way up and won't be seeing 9 guys in the box any more. I actually think SD could see a jump in their run game this year. I don't think Lt is finished, though I don't think he will ever again be elite. But the big factor here is Sproles. I think SD works him into the system more, which will also benefit LT. Back to the bears, I do agree this is an area we could see the 2009 Bears surpass the 2008 Chargers. As you said, Forte is a top 10 RB, and on the way up. Further, I think Jones could play a signifant role. Further, our RBs have done what they did behind weak OLs, and no passing game, thus stacked boxes. I have a hard time seeing defenses stack the box nearly so much w/ Cutler under center, and I think our OL would do a much better job opening holes than it did last year. As excited as I am about our potential in the passing game w/ Cutler, I am equally excited to see what our run game will be like w/ defenses forced to play honest and a legit OL. When was the last time we had such a combination? There were years where we had a solid OL, but our QBs was such that defenses stacked the box. Even w/ Rex, a QB who liked to throw deep, defenses stacked the box because the rap on him was, pressure him and he would fold. So for years, our RBs have dealt w/ stacked boxes, and in only a couple of those years, we could at least help w/ a good OL. But I can't remember the last time we had both a solid OL and a solid QB.

I agree, but other than Hester, we have no WR's I have confidence in. Remember this post is about WR's. I understand we have other weapons, but they are not part of any original argument. Said before, but I just do not believe it is right to look at one w/o the other. As I said in another post, if we were an offense like Az, which doesn't utilize the TE or RB in the passing game, it would be far more accurate to look solely at the WR position in a vacuum, but our TE and RBs accounted for more than 1/2 of our catches, yards and scores. The reality is, we have 2 TEs which play like WRs, and 1 RB who (I think) led the league in catches for a RB, and had catch totals more in line w/ a #2 WR. Thus, I just don't think it right to look at our WRs in a vacuum, as our TE and RB positions are such a great factor of our passing game. Again, WR's only. The pattern is that the only way to make an argument for our WR's is to enhance them with the other skill positions. Point is our WR's will have a hard tim standing on their own merit. Wasn't that a key point in upgrading both the QB and OL? If we didn't upgrade those two positions, I would see your point. But many believe a franchise tier QB makes the WRs. You have to factor Cutler into the equation. I don't think anyone on this board is overlooking that we have a very good set of TE's and good recieving RB. They were never part of the debate though. We are not talking about TE's because we know we are set there. I am not fearful that our offense will not be productive. The addition of Pace and Cutler are huge. I am simply defending Terra Tor's right to say he has no confidence in our WR's. Anyone has the right. The point I would make though is, due to our TEs and RBs, the need for a bunch of proven WRs is less so than for another team, like Az. If Olsen, Clark, Forte and Hester all produce, we will have a solid passing game. Do we need the kids to play? Yes. But if none "break out" ala Royal, we are still in a good situation due to the rest. I don't think so. All players mentioned are uniquely different. (even Cutler and Rivers) I actually think there is no team like us. Our WR's just need to grow up quickly or have a veteren talent infusion. The former makes for growing pains, anticipation and excitement. An upgrade like Plax, makes us a contender from the offensive standpoint. I have said I believe we are similar to SD, which utilizes 1 WR, 1 TE and 1 RBs in the passing game, w/ minimal contribution from the rest. Further, I would argue we are in a great position to be a "contender from the offensive standpoint" now, w/ what we have.