jason

When I watched the game against the Raiders I noted that Roy Williams looked faster than just about every other WR out of breaks in the pregame. And during the game he was open several times and just didn't see the ball. Why that happened is anyone's guess, but I'm 99% sure it's because he wasn't the first read and there wasn't enough time to get to the second read consistently. With Knox out, it appears that Williams is the #1 read and target...and was open. 6 catches for 81 yards could have easily been 7 for close to 100 if one other pass wasn't chucked at his feet. So it brings me to the question in the header, for those who have seen more games in person this year (particularly if you're a season-ticket holder), has Roy Williams been open?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see Rodgers go down with a non-career threatening, but otherwise massive injury. Put him on another team and I don't think that way. But I'm sick of seeing the packers have all the QB luck and the Bears having nearly none. There is no denying, however, that the dude is one of the top 2 QBs in the NFL.

Now, on all of this I agree. They won't quit on the OL. They should. The DL doesn't suck, it's just undercoached. I've been saying this ever since Lovie got into town. The way the defense is coached is not an attacking style beneficial to DLinemen. Unless there is a Tommie Harris type, the DL ends up being block-occupiers for LBs. This is not a problem when the DTs are Ted Washington and Keith Traylor. It is a problem otherwise. And, yes, I agree that if the Bears had a collection of good WRs the flaws on offense would be minimized somewhat. But I still think we'd have a glaring problem on OL that would minimally protect the QB and open occasional holes. We certainly wouldn't see the Bears' QB sitting in the pocket all day like Rodgers did last night. We'd still see a ton of pressure, but at least Cutler would be able to chuck some bail-out throws while under pressure.

I'm sickened by the clear officiating philosophy change in the NFL that basically allows defensive linemen to get molested by offensive linemen. And then that philosophy gets even worse when the NFL pushes down marching orders to protect one of their golden boys. I'm far from the typical person who blames officiating. But It's extremely frustrating to watch Peppers get put in a headlock on every other play and our DTs get hugged without seeing the flag come out. 29 passes and no penalties the entire game?! Give me a freaking break.

Yes, I did. But I'm not going to watch Lions games to do a play-by-play. A team that has thrown that many more times and has less sacks, regardless of how incomplete a stat that is, is not as bad as the Bears. No freaking way. If the Bears had that number of throws, they'd have to set up an ER room on the sideline for the ten QBs a year they'd eventually use.

Almost exactly my thoughts. Coaching, drafting, owning. And when talent does get selected, I don't have confidence in the coaches to turn that talent into on-field production.

Agreed.

This thread made me laugh a lot. Rodgers is one of the top two QBs in the NFL. Period. His WRs are significantly better than the Bears', but he has a VERY large part in that. Seriously. Who the F is Jordy Nelson without Rodgers? Same for Jones. Rodgers is ridiculously accurate, has a cannon, great footwork and mechanics, and has been in the same offense since he got in town.

Can we please quit with this ridiculous comparison? The Lions have given up less sacks and are only two QB hits different than the Bears and they've thrown 200 more passes. Add to that the fact that they have way more experience, no lineman drafted after the fourth round (2 first-rounders), and the comparison is even more offbase. The Lions OL is unequivocally better than the Bears OL. Just stop it.

Which I believe was happening when Cutler was playing really well and Martz adjusted the play-calling. It made the below average line look average at times, and gave everyone a false sense of hope.

I can understand that you were caught off guard with the Garza analysis. I think that it's just a matter of someone looking competent around incompetency. But we Bears fans have gotten so used to shit on the OL that we see average as much more than what it is. As for the sack thing, we'll just agree to disagree. It's only part of the picture. And the entire reason I decided to evaluate the OL in the Seahawks game was to avoid the whole "eye test" and try to quantify what they were actually doing. Analyzing those plays, all plays, actually is a good way to debate. It's much more complete than simply using sacks. It's not my problem the statistics for OL aren't as wide-spread and posted everywhere. If someone gives up 0 sacks but opens zero running lanes, then I don't see that as a good game. But the sack stat sure would paint that picture. Also what I did post earlier is on NFL.com (i.e. sacks, QB hits, negative rushing plays) and clearly display they have been bad this year. Maybe you're right about the effort of tracking plays and analyzing the OL. Maybe it is pointless in the grand scheme of things. But since there is nothing else out there that I've seen that gives a more complete idea of what the OL has done as a whole, then I thought it was worth it. Regardless of what QB is in there, if the QB gets rocked on a 3-step drop, you can quantify that. And it has nearly nothing to do with the QB. The same goes for running holes and defensive players in the backfield. Having bad offensive players in the game may affect how the D plays, but it shouldn't have too much affect on whether or not the OL can hold a block for 2 seconds. No matter which QB is in there, if a block isn't held for 2 seconds on a passing play, then you can count that as an OL failure.

Regarding the OL, the sack statistic is completely unreliable as a single measure of success. So much more goes into it, and you know it. For instance, suppose an LG doesn't give up a sack but every pass play is a three-step drop and a quick pass to the right? Does that say whether or not the OG got blown up but the DT just didn't have time to get to the QB? Of course it doesn't. There are countless scenarios that make OL success a difficult measurement. Four sacks in 60+ offensive possessions versus the Seahawks. That's not terrible. But the OL definitely sucked last game, and that underscores the problem with using simply sacks as a measurement of the OL. That's why I attempted play-by-play analysis last game. It's also why I challenge anyone else to do so on a play-by-play basis. There appears to be a lot of revisionist history in regards to their performance at the end of the game. Also, you're ignoring where I said I could completely understand, while disagreeing, that the WR position is as big a need as OL. Both are big needs, but I just happen to believe a superior OL would maximize WR potential because it would give the QB tons of time to throw (see: Hanie to Bell last week). The initial response was entirely because DBDB pretended the OL was "not that bad," which is utterly ridiculous. Just straight up wrong. I don't mind the OL/WR disagreement. Actually, I kind of enjoy it. But anyone acting like the Bears OL isn't bad is either lying to themself or not watching the games.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to the Bears nation!

That's absurd. I don't see how you guys can continue to peddle this nonsense with a straight face. Webb is bad. Edwin Williams is bad. Garza is average. Spencer is bad. Louis is below average. When and if Carimi and Chris Williams come back, the OL goes from bad to below average. 8th most negative rushing plays to the left side. 1st most negative rushing plays to the right side. 3rd most negative rushing plays overall. 5th most sacks. 8th most QB hits. Countless hurries Pressure in the backfield every other play. Tons of ridiculous, undisciplined penalties. Virtually zero depth. If that's "not bad" then I don't know what the hell bad is. I can buy someone thinking the WR position is a bigger priority than the OL, even though I disagree, but quit with this nonsense about the OL being anything other than bad. Because that's what they are. They are bad.

It's only because I'm sick of watching the Bears fail because of the same reason year after year after year, only to see little done to address it. Meanwhile, the D gets focus every single year. As for what everyone wants, you're probably right. But I think there are many who think WR is a need far above OL, rather than the other way around. Further, I still contend upgrading the OL could do more for the overall offense, particularly the WRs, than the other way around. FWIW - I recall the Carimi as a RT talk, but don't remember a thing about knee problems.

You're right about him being projected by most to be a RT (I was trying to make the best scenario possible), but what's confusing to me is: 1. Carimi is the best OL talent the Bears have 2. The Bears OL is not good 3. Webb is probably the worst starter on the OL 4. Webb is playing at LT 5. A weak LT is one of the most terrifying ideas for an already shaken, and apparently injury-prone QB 6. Virtually nobody wants to move Carimi to LT 7. The top level LTs in the NFL right now are almost exclusively drafted in the first round, and the ones who aren't are almost all from the second round (Jason Peters excluded) 8. The WR talent pool this year is deep (5-6 1st round talents), and the LT talent pool (3 LTs by my count are 1st rounders) this year is shallow Yet so many want to draft a WR in the first round. It just doesn't add up.

I also wish they'd just throw Enderle to the wolves and see what he has. Putting in a stop-gap only makes sense if the gap gets stopped and there isn't enough water pouring through to make it worthwhile. Unfortunately for the Bears, the water is gushing through, there is no chance to stop the leak, and McCown won't lead the team to a miraculous wildcard.

I got to thinking about the draft today, and what the team needs. I figured, the starters have to be determined, don't they? Obvious starters at their current positions are Cutler and Forte. After that, is there one?! The mere fact the question is feasible is serious cause for concern. FWIW, this is how I hope it plays out: LT - Gabe Carimi (comes back from injury and proves he is a stud) LG - Carl Nicks (a massive FA addition for the Bears) C - Roberto Garza (has to do it for one more year) RG - Lance Louis (gets rewarded for effort, moved back to where he is better suited and showed more promise) RT - Chris Williams (finally stays healthy - remember that he was doing well before having to cover for Pace's ass on the left side) WR1 - Vincent Jackson (JA is allegedly going to spend, right?) WR2 - 2nd round draft choice (plenty available - whoever is most ready) WR3 - Bennett (surest hands on the team) WR4 - Knox (assuming he recovers) TE - Davis (could have a breakout year with this supporting cast) FB - Clutts (I like the kid) Backup QB - Kyle Orton (seriously) Backup RB - Barber (just for the short distances and GL carries) That offense leads the Bears to the Super Bowl. Period. The OL would give Jay a ton of time to throw, open holes for Forte (particularly on the left), and the WR combo would be very good.

If that's the case, then I hope it's Tyson Clabo at RT and/or Nicks at LG.

But we had one serious injury when it most mattered. Either way it ends the season.

RD1 - That would pose a great dilemma, but the Bears staff would probably get Coples. Which would piss off 99% of the fans. RD2 - Yuck. Let's hope it plays out better than that. RD3a - Zeitler RD3b - McNutt

Yes, I think that's an even bigger reason to go OL earlier. Hell, guys like McNutt and Toon will be there in the 2nd round. That WR talent is better than the 2nd round OL talent that will be available. But I could understand if Floyd or Jeffery is there (Blackmon will not be) and the Bears wanted to jump on it.

100% Disagree. Just look at the one play Hanie had loads of time this past week: Intermediate TD to Bell. Even a subpar, potentially shouldn't be in the NFL QB like Hanie can throw a TD in the NFL if you give him enough time. And that was to a backup RB improvising. Give someone like Cutler that time and he's be surgical. My preference, in order, for the first three rounds: OT, WR, OG, FS.

Yet somehow many other teams are turning nobodies and lesser knowns into viable offensive weapons. Why is that? Some of the time it's because the QB is just ridiculous. Some of the times it's because the surrounding talent is too deep to fail. And some of the times, it's just a matter of giving a decent QB all day to throw behind a stud OL. Regardless of FA, I think the Bears absolutely have to go LT/WR or WR/LT in the first two rounds. Depending on how the draft goes, I could see Floyd available when the Bears pick...and maybe Jeffery. No way Blackmon is there. On the other hand, I could also see Riley Reiff (OT, Iowa) slipping to the Bears. If it's between Reiff or Floyd/Jeffery, I wouldn't be really upset either way, but it would make more sense to go LT/WR than WR/LT because there just isn't a lot of 2nd round LT talent available. My ideal draft goes: 1 - Riley Reiff, LT, Iowa 2 - Nick Toon, WR, Wisconsin - or - Marvin McNutt, WR, Iowa 3a - BPA FS 3b - Kevin Zeitler, G, Wisconsin - or - Senio Kelemete, G, Washington

WTF - Why do the football gods hate the Bears so much? Other teams have injuries as well, but I'm sick of seeing the people who do well have injuries. Notice that none of the really bad players seem to be injured. I would gladly put Omiyale on IR in place of anyone else.