Starts up front

[Controlled Chaos]

You can only go as far as your offensive line will take you. This organization continues to ignore it. A great O-Line will make an average QB and average RB good. A shit O-line will make a great QB and great RB look below average. It's just the way it is now. Gone are the days when the O-line were just anonymous bludgeoners. They are VITAL to offensive success. That's why most of us in here were clamoring for Faneca regardless of his price tag. It's that big of a deal. When I hear Thayer and Hampton talk about certain players lack of knowledge with hand positioning or leverage. I'm dumbfounded. These are supposed to be elite players playing at their highest level. They still need to be taught where to put their hands or whether to have their weight on their toes or heels?? WTF??

 

Just look how bad Forte looks. Cutler is now getting sacked 1 in every 19 attempts. Last year he was sacked 1 every 56. Combine that with the fact he had two quality NFL receivers in Denver compared to 0 in Chicago and there's your difference in his play.

 

 

[DaBearSox]

Which is why I would say it starts up top...

 

Do they just not notice how much Frank Omiyale sucks or has lovie become his friend?

[Lucky Luciano]

Which is why I would say it starts up top...

 

Do they just not notice how much Frank Omiyale sucks or has lovie become his friend?

 

this is one of lovie's worst traits. his loyalty to his players even when this hurts the team as a whole is a serious downfall. another is i am not really sure how much lovie really KNOWS about offenses and what to do about correcting problems.

[nfoligno]

Omiyale sucks, but that is only a small piece of the problem. Omiyale was given a sizable deal, so it isn't that shocking Lovie is playing him.

 

The bigger problem is the belief the OL is something that can be thrown together w/ spare part FAs and late round draft picks.

 

This isn't a recent problem. It is one we have had for years, and no wonder. While many teams really focus on the OL in the draft, we often don't look at OL until late, if at all. While many go after upper tier veterans in FA, we wait and see what is left over. Even when we do find a servicable player, he is little more than a bandaid, and we only give ourselves a year or two of breather room before the problem comes up again.

 

I gave Angelo loads of credit for the Cutler deal, but his handling of the OL is an area I have bashed him for some time. He always says we take the best player available. The problem is, IMHO, we have the likes of Angelo grading players, and they simply do not value OL as highly, and thus a middle of the road DL is going to have a superior grade compared to a good or better OL.

 

Which is why I would say it starts up top...

 

Do they just not notice how much Frank Omiyale sucks or has lovie become his friend?

 

[ChileBear]

Omiyale sucks, but that is only a small piece of the problem. Omiyale was given a sizable deal, so it isn't that shocking Lovie is playing him.

 

The bigger problem is the belief the OL is something that can be thrown together w/ spare part FAs and late round draft picks.

 

This isn't a recent problem. It is one we have had for years, and no wonder. While many teams really focus on the OL in the draft, we often don't look at OL until late, if at all. While many go after upper tier veterans in FA, we wait and see what is left over. Even when we do find a servicable player, he is little more than a bandaid, and we only give ourselves a year or two of breather room before the problem comes up again.

 

I gave Angelo loads of credit for the Cutler deal, but his handling of the OL is an area I have bashed him for some time. He always says we take the best player available. The problem is, IMHO, we have the likes of Angelo grading players, and they simply do not value OL as highly, and thus a middle of the road DL is going to have a superior grade compared to a good or better OL.

Agreed. And it's all coming around to bite us in the arse now. Both DL and OL are pathetic, with no light at the end of this tunnel, just a fast moving freight train.

[jason]

You can only go as far as your offensive line will take you. This organization continues to ignore it. A great O-Line will make an average QB and average RB good. A shit O-line will make a great QB and great RB look below average. It's just the way it is now. Gone are the days when the O-line were just anonymous bludgeoners. They are VITAL to offensive success. That's why most of us in here were clamoring for Faneca regardless of his price tag. It's that big of a deal. When I hear Thayer and Hampton talk about certain players lack of knowledge with hand positioning or leverage. I'm dumbfounded. These are supposed to be elite players playing at their highest level. They still need to be taught where to put their hands or whether to have their weight on their toes or heels?? WTF??

 

Just look how bad Forte looks. Cutler is now getting sacked 1 in every 19 attempts. Last year he was sacked 1 every 56. Combine that with the fact he had two quality NFL receivers in Denver compared to 0 in Chicago and there's your difference in his play.

 

Sounds familiar.

 

I'd say that it isn't just a recent development like you assert. I still claim that Emmitt Smith was a slightly above average RB who just happened to have the best OL in history for the better part of his career.

[jason]

Omiyale sucks, but that is only a small piece of the problem. Omiyale was given a sizable deal, so it isn't that shocking Lovie is playing him.

 

The bigger problem is the belief the OL is something that can be thrown together w/ spare part FAs and late round draft picks.

 

This isn't a recent problem. It is one we have had for years, and no wonder. While many teams really focus on the OL in the draft, we often don't look at OL until late, if at all. While many go after upper tier veterans in FA, we wait and see what is left over. Even when we do find a servicable player, he is little more than a bandaid, and we only give ourselves a year or two of breather room before the problem comes up again.

 

I gave Angelo loads of credit for the Cutler deal, but his handling of the OL is an area I have bashed him for some time. He always says we take the best player available. The problem is, IMHO, we have the likes of Angelo grading players, and they simply do not value OL as highly, and thus a middle of the road DL is going to have a superior grade compared to a good or better OL.

 

AMEN! Just look at last year's draft, pick by pick, and tell me that's not the case. The Bears passed on several good OL prospects in favor of guys who probably rated lower overall, but higher in Angelo's philosophy of drafting.

 

[nfoligno]

While i would give Emmitt Smith more credit than that, even most Dallas fans here would agree Smith was not the best RB ever, despite holding the record.

 

Smith was a very, very good RB though. I won't take away from him. OL or no, he was very good. He was very durable, and over a long period of time. He was also a tremendous blocker and all around player, not to mention being a key leader for that team.

 

Top 5. Hell no. Top 10? I think some arguments can begin to be made.

 

Anyway, we agree on OL and agree Smith benefitted from a great OL, but I just would not agree he was only "slightly more than average".

 

Sounds familiar.

 

I'd say that it isn't just a recent development like you assert. I still claim that Emmitt Smith was a slightly above average RB who just happened to have the best OL in history for the better part of his career.

 

[nfoligno]

Problem is, I don't see this as changing. If my theory/comments are correct, then the problem is worse than simply Angelo and Co not recognizing OL as our top need. If I am right, then it means OL will simply never be considered best available. That means pretty much the only time we will draft OL is when it is a need pick, like Columbo and Williams.

 

Just look at the history.

 

1st round - 2 - Would anyone argue Columbo and Williams were need picks.

2nd round - 0 - Never taken any OL in the 2nd round.

3rd round - 1 - Drafted Metcalf back in 2002, and I would argue Mecalf was viewed as a need pick.

4th round - 1 - Beekman. Frankly, I don't even understand this one. Beekman was taken w/ the 2nd to last pick of the 4th round, yet was still one of the higher OL picks in Angelo's tenure, and yet just seems to get zero respect from the staff.

5th round - 0 - Never taken OL in the 5th round.

6th round - 1

7th round - 5

 

Since his first draft in 2002, Angelo has only once (Williams) taken an OL day one (I still consider round 3 a first day pick). He has taken more 7th round OL than 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th combined.

 

Anyone who wants to know why our OL always sucks, just look at this. Even if our OL does look good for a year, it is short lived because we are building our OL through FA w/ older veterans, while doing little to nothing to add youth to develop.

 

AMEN! Just look at last year's draft, pick by pick, and tell me that's not the case. The Bears passed on several good OL prospects in favor of guys who probably rated lower overall, but higher in Angelo's philosophy of drafting.

 

[madlithuanian]

I'm with you both on this....

 

Look at our SB run in 1985...

 

That great line was set up by a few drafts before our SB year. Before that Sweetness was pretty much running behind hodge-podge lines... Low and behold...it get a SB win! We need to take that philosophy again. We cannot whif on picks. As much good as JA's done, it may appear he's done as much damage...

 

While i would give Emmitt Smith more credit than that, even most Dallas fans here would agree Smith was not the best RB ever, despite holding the record.

 

Smith was a very, very good RB though. I won't take away from him. OL or no, he was very good. He was very durable, and over a long period of time. He was also a tremendous blocker and all around player, not to mention being a key leader for that team.

 

Top 5. Hell no. Top 10? I think some arguments can begin to be made.

 

Anyway, we agree on OL and agree Smith benefitted from a great OL, but I just would not agree he was only "slightly more than average".