BearFan PHX

and if you have a dominant OL, any OC can use play action of course.

OK, but a 2 gap scheme doesnt get as much fast pressure on the QB, and in the modern passing league, it's out of style for that reason. Now you can certainly have one monster playing NT, like Billings did. That's a very good thing to have, and clogs up the middle. But teams play a 3T on the other side of the interior who is a one gapper penetrating type player more these days. And in a 3-4 front, there is always a monster NT, and then the other guy is a DE even, so not a second NT.

Good analysis. I just hope the Bears dont overthink themselves into a corner.

I would like to hear that they have interviewed two black candidates early too, so the Rooney rule would be satisfied and they could jump on anyone if the time was right. And that said, i think Aaron Glenn will make an excellent head coach for someone.

I think this is all correct. I dont really see a problem with the process so far. Some of the interviews are fact finding, some are favors, like Kafka, who isnt getting hired, but it increases his perceived value by getting the interview. Doing favors and playing that social game can help us down the road too, so i dont begrudge it - especially since it's slow right now, and you cant meet a lot of the leading candidates face to face until the 20th. I mean, yes, if you want Vrabel, then just grab him before someone else does - but if they want to go through the process, or do due diligence on johnson for example, then this is all OK. All that really matters is getting the right guy at the end.

We were playing a 2 gap front with those two, and now we play a one gap style, and a hybrid style, where the NT may be a 2 gapper, but the 3T isnt. That 2 gap style that leaves the LBers free to roam was popular n the early 2000s, and the Ravens were the best at it. i think modern offensive fronts, zone blocking schemes and fast release style offenses have made the 2 gap front archaic right now. of course everything comes back in fashion at some point, but i dunno if now is the right time for a 2 gap front?

Even great coordinators, if they come up with a new scheme, eventually get defeated by other coordinators. Even McVey had the NFL on the run for like 12 weeks until Fangio showed the league how to beat him with cover 2. Of course McVey remains a great coach, and adapts as well, but he's never dominated again like he did that year. It mostly comes down to the players, and the culture of the team. Sure if you have inept coordinators it can kill you, but it's really about the QB, the roster and the culture. Would Ben Johnson dominate without his incredible offensive line? Would another coordinator look great with the Lions' OL? This post brought to you by Mike Vrabel for head coach And yes, he would need a good OC to develop Caleb too. I'll bet there are a lot of good offensive coaches who would love to work with Caleb...

lol Scottie! On the flip side, Belichick was famous for laying into brady in front of everyone, and that does have a great effect on your team, as long as your QB has thick skin. it wouldnt work with Kyler Murray for example. But I like what ive seen of Caleb taking responsibility, and covering for the OL even. Hes a real leader.

I hope we get some competent leadership and they in turn bring in competent position coaches. I do think our DBs coach, whoever he is, is doing a pretty good job, but with most of these guys, we can just start over, especially on offense. Id also like to say that if we get more production out of our DL, like fixing the DT situation and maybe signing a guy like Chase Young, our LBs might start to look a lot better. Theyve been asked to clean up run game problems that really start on the DL, and that makes the late in coverage, and makes the opposing QB comfortable in the pocket, which makes everyone look bad in coverage.

without Favre and Rodgers, the Packers are just another football team. with Caleb Williams and the proper coaching, the Bears are an up and coming threat to be a long term contender. I'll believe it when I see it on the field, but on paper, that's what it is.

I'd trade Chris Morgan for a 2035 6th rounder LOL seriously though, sooner or later we are going to get that 3rd round comp for Cunningham, and it isn't far fetched to think it will be this year.

and I know Harbaugh is polarizing, so i get it - but for me, if it came down to who can help this franchise more, Harbaugh or Warren, it's an easy call to dump Warren LOL

well said. thats really where we are and what that was.

A freakin Men

yes, it's just smart to do your due diligence even if you know that's not gonna be your guy. thats why we should at least have TALKED to Harbaugh. Wouldnt we have wanted to know what his plan would have been? i mean hes only the 5th highest winning percentage of all time or something like that.

This is a good point - you get your OC interviews done at the same time, and get some free consulting in the process.

This all day. A head coach is a lot more than a coordinator or a scheme. We need a head coach desperately. I cant say that Ben Johnson doesnt have those skills, but I just dont know. I know Vrabel does, but then you have to find the right coordinator to develop Caleb and hope he sticks around. So either way there are unknowns. This is not an easy decision in my eyes.

I understand that logic, but there are some scenarios, like what if they really want a coach like Johnson, and he says he will only take the job if you bring in his guy? Then i think Poles could be let go. ANd since you dont know which coach you want yet, and which Gm they might want, they could be keeping Poles around until they know those things, and cut him loose after that. So while I agree if they were going to fire him for his performance in and of itself, they might have done it already, or in the next week, if they fire him to make room for a new guy, they might still hold on to him until the new guy is chosen and we hear who he wants?

Here's an interesting article that recounts some quotes from Kevin Byard's interview with Dan Weiderer about head coaches. Byard played for Vrabel in Tenessee, and Eberflus in Chicago. https://www.sportsmockery.com/chicago-bears/kevin-byard-went-all-in-on-why-matt-eberflus-was-a-terrible-head-coach/

it's because i worry that it will be more than a few games, and whoever we have to fill in, being not starter caliber, will get Caleb killed. We totally agree that Jenkins is a good player when he's healthy. The question is what do you really have when he isn't playing, and what future cohesion can you really create? And what players do you pass over because you have Jenkins penciled in there? It's not a big disagreement, more one of strategy than analysis of how he is as a player. I think we agree on that. I just think we are better off getting a replacement for him that we can count on, and moving forward. Like I said, if you can get a rookie behind him that's an eventual starter level talent, then I am a lot less nervous about it. But I would be OK playing rookies if they are good enough too. They'll make mistakes, but they'll learn too. Like Wright his first year. Also, if we get a better OL coach, that will hopefully make all of this look better no matter who is in there (within reason of course!)

Ok, so a reporter asked our OC about that play, and he confirmed that Odunze should not have throttled down, and it wasn't Caleb's fault. Also on the all 22, you can see Odunze stop running at the exact moment Caleb releases the ball, so no way Caleb could have seen he was going to do that ahead of time. Our OC confirms that Odunze should have worked up to the second window, and Caleb read it the way he was supposed to. And you can see that had Odunze kept running full speed, he would have been deeper and the ball would have been lower (since it has a ballistic path) and not as far out in front of Odunze - it would have been a dime. Now Im not mad at Odunze either - this is advanced stuff, and he and Caleb need to build rhythm together, but the fault was on Odunze, not Caleb as per our OC himself. But the way I saw it at the time is confirmed here.

we have so many holes that salary cap space is gonna get eaten up pretty fast - I see some thoughts we might sign Chase Young for example. And we need 4 players on the OL (in my opinion) or at least 3?

yes to both.

well if we have a high draft pick at LG, and the idea is for him to push Jenkins and take his job, that's totally cool. The only problem is then you have to pay Jenkins, because Im pretty sure someone will. And I dont want to pay Jenkins if Im hoping he will be depth by week 5? I dont question Jenkins ability when hes on the field. It's his availability that I worry about of course.

for sure, and if you have a LG that is starter quality, then you dont pay Jenkins except as depth. Thats why I say Jenkins should be a backup. Someone else will pay him start money though, and it shouldnt be us. So I agree that a half price Jenkins is a bargain in the abstract, in practice I think you either think of him as a starter, which is a mistake, or you pay him like a backup, which Im fine with, as long as you have a different starter at LG? If the bargain Jenkins seduces us into not having a pedigreed starter at LG, or at least a high pick rookie, then I think its a mistake and you end up with a hole at LG for half the season.