AZ54

Not sure at all on what coverage GB ran in that second game. I want to say Woodson was moved around and covered different WR, perhaps even Olsen.

You have something of a false premise (if i'm using that term correctly) in that you assume if we are pass heavy we will have more 3-and-outs. I've seen plenty of running teams call 2 running plays and then a 3rd down pass and still go 3-and-out. I think the Bears under Jauron proved that quite well. Again, to me it's not about how you get the first downs rather it's just about getting the first downs. I really don't care how you do it as long as you do it. You just have to be successful. I'm not necessarily defending Martz' system just that I think it's wrong to assume pass oriented offenses can't be very successful. I gave what I felt were two solid examples in New Orleans and Indy and you can even go back to teams like the 49ers with Montana. OTOH the Vikings put up lots of points with a run-first mentality this past season. While I disagree with the premise that too much passing means too many 3-and-outs I definitely agree with the questions about whether Martz knows the right time to run the ball. An offense doesn't have to be perfectly balanced to be effective, one side can be stronger than the other (pass vs. run) but you must be able to do both if they take away one aspect from you. No offense will be successful in the NFL if it's effective in just one-dimension. As far as our defense I don't feel it's designed to be a true bend-but-don't-break scheme because our players are too small for that. I think that was clear in Herm Edwards comments the other day when he said in Tampa they never wanted the D on the field for more than 800 plays in a season. That article stated that we've averaged over 1000 in each of the last 3 seasons. I think our D is much more predicated on generating turnovers and big plays for losses (i.e. sacks, TFL). Those plays give you enough breathing room so the "break" part of the D doesn't give up a first down. We're just not very good at all in sacks and TFL unless we overcommit players to it. Naturally that leaves too many openings in the "bend" part of the D. Without the TFL the soft nature of the D makes it too susceptible to 3rd and short. What's so bad for us is that we even gave up 3rd and 10-15 all year long.

I guess it depends on what you considered the question to be. For me with both of these guys it was simply did they even belong in the NFL and could they make plays. Both proved they belong and IMO have shown enough to be potential starters. If the question was are they legit starting WR then no they haven't proven that yet. I think they showed enough potential to deserve a legitimate opportunity to earn those roles. That means lots of practice reps with the first team. Lovie is simply too short-sighted to know what's best for his future. If Iglesias was showing up in practice he should have had playing time late in the year. If special teams was an issue for any of these guys (it was a legit concern) then how were they going to learn to cover kicks if you don't get them on the field to do it?

Now you have: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_...?urn=nfl,135311 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Not content to just have a screaming match with the offensive coordinator on the sidelines (which landed him on our list of five least valuable people of Championship Sunday), Anquan Boldin carried his hissy-fit to the Arizona Cardinals postgame celebration, too. While most of the other Cardinals were still on the field being showered in confetti and picking up their NFC Championship trophy, Boldin had already bolted out of the locker room. The behavior prompted CBS's Mike Freeman to call him a naughty word. He tried to ruin the Super Bowl celebration with his childishness. In the game, Boldin got into a heated argument with offensive coordinator Todd Haley. After the game, instead of celebrating with his team, Boldin abruptly left the field, then abruptly left the locker room. It was awful behavior. [...] I have to say in nearly 20 years of doing this, I've never seen a player more concerned about his arguing with a coach over making a Super Bowl. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 seasons....3 Pro Bowls which by the way is pretty damn good but it doesn't change my opinion of the fact that he's slowing down and isn't the same WR he was a few years ago. I'd be more than happy to have you show up out here and visit with some of my friends and coworkers who are die-hard Cardinal fans so you can hear it from them too but that's not practical. The Cardinals still have 3 (if not 4) quality WR or next year including Boldin but out here with Warner gone everyone seems to be saying they'll be a run first team next year because Leinart is a lot closer to Orton than Warner in what he can do on the field. Boldin's trade value will not be nearly as high next year as it is right now. Did Boldin put up good numbers last year? Yes, but so did the other WRs in the Cards offense. Boldin had more yards than Breaston but Breaston, Boldin, and Doucet all averaged over 12yd/catch. (Boldin 12.2, Breaston 12.9, and Doucet 12.6). Boldin is a very good WR and yes he'd make our WR corps better but not nearly enough to offset the cost of his contract and the loss of a 3rd or even 4th Rd draft pick. I still think the Cards would like to keep Boldin around if they could get him at the right price (perhaps $7mil/yr?) but I don't see them breaking the bank for him. Boldin is no dummy, he knows his numbers are likely to go down next year with Leinart so he will push his leverage this year as far as he can. Yet if the situation starts to stagnate you will hear him open his mouth and start demanding more money. Before you criticize the Cards for being cheap with him keep in mind they have twice torn up his contract and given him more money (after 2 yr on his rookie deal, and again just two years later in 2006). That's very generous for any organization yet still Boldin has continued to whine about his money.

Last I checked neither of those guys were demanding $9mil/yr, even after earning $5mil/yr. We haven't made the playoffs but none of the three you mention pissed off their teammates by being a locker room cancer during the playoffs. Again, I'll state my position that I like Boldin, he's a good NFL WR, but our 3rd Rd pick and an extra $9mil in FA directed somewhere besides WR will make our team better overall. Last year I'd have been willing to give up a 3rd Rd pick for him but after watching him this last year and seeing our WR I don't see him helping us that much.

I'll take that challenge. First let me start by asking why would a team get rid of a player of the caliber you believe him to be for just a 3rd Rd pick? Why would they do it for just a 2nd Rd pick? Last year the Cardinals wanted a 1st Rd pick for Boldin but in large part that was because they weren't confident in Early Doucet. This past season when Boldin was hurt (again I might add because he's only had 1 full season in his career) Doucet stepped up in a big way in the playoffs and he was pretty good. That's two years in a row he couldn't play in the playoffs. If we trade for Boldin you will get a player who plays the game the right way but also one whose body is feeling the effects of that. He is nowhere near as fast as any of our current WR and he has trouble getting separation from DBs. He could still catch passes from Kurt Warner because they are so accurate but I also watched him drop quite a few. I like the guy but he's only going to add an underneath WR to the roster and we don't need that. Breaston and Fitz typically ran the deeper routes for the Cards. I see no reason to trade for Boldin at all when Greg Olsen can do most of what he does on the field and we've already got him for a lot cheaper. Did I mention Boldin wants $9,000,000/yr? I'll keep the combination of Greg Olsen, 3rd Rd pick, plus $9 mil in FA and come out way ahead of any trade for Boldin.

You may be beating the drum daily but I too like Iglesias and was happy when he fell to us. I would have been happy if we'd taken him in Rd 2. He played against first rate competition and was consistently productive in college. While his physical traits don't jump out at you (more quick than fast) he is very efficient on the field. I think he'll end up the same type WR for us. I was asking for DA to get on the field late in the year but I'd have liked to have seen Iglesias out there in the last two games too even if it meant Knox was inactive. We figured it would have been Knox we'd be wondering about this offseason but overall I'm glad the way things have worked out because the biggest question marks in our WR corps were answered last year (DA, Knox).

Interesting how Olsen improve later in the season as our WR improved. In the first game the Packers often lined up Charles Woodson over Olsen and he eventually went on to win Defensive Player of the Year. In their mind he was our most dangerous WR at that time. I think in the second game late in the year they played us differently. Olsen didn't live up to our hype last year but there were a lot of obstacles thrown in the way too from Forte's injury, poor Oline blocking especially early in the year, rookie WR having to play early (Knox).

What is most bothersome about our blitzes is that we don't attempt to exploit the opponent's weakness. We do the same stuff week and week. It's easy to game plan for and as stated above, we often tip our hand early before the snap. I think our best blitzes are the nickel blitz where he (usually DManning) lines up over the receiver and then just blitzes from the edge. Even if we don't get to the QB we often force him to move around the pocket enough to upset the play. I'm not buying this whole TOP issue. In my mind the offensive goal is to score points. The defenses goal is to not give them up. IMO the problem arises when your D can't get off the field on 3rd down and that's their responsibility. If they don't do that they can't turn around and complain about the offense going 3 and out. Certainly the offense can't go multiple 3 and out but if you are scoring in 2 or 3 min drives that's fine by me. Consider Indy. Most teams dread giving Manning another possession after a 3 and out because they know he can score on them so quickly. In fact, when you play Indy there's a feeling that you better score a lot of points if you want a shot at winning the game. It doesn't always play out that way for them as in the Superbowl but what caused Indy's short TOP in the second quarter? It was New Orleans defense forcing them to a 3 and out. New Orleans wasn't countering that by running the ball, they kept throwing and by doing that they ended up forcing Indy to play catch-up, something Manning didn't do very well.

I actually feel totally different with Martz on board. You know in the past few years I've felt the same way about Lovie giving veterans far too much respect and playing time when it wasn't earned. Heck, I wanted to cut Booker before that season started. Martz is a bit different though because I think he realizes he has little time to get this right and he needs to invest that in the players that will provide the best performance in the second half of the season. I certainly can see him thinking he'd have more success early with Holt but that will only be very limited because he just doesn't have the speed Martz covets. I think Martz knows he has to find the best athletes and the best roles for each one and get them in that role NOW and study up. This is why we are seeing him be so public so quickly about role changes for Hester, Olsen, Knox and even creating higher expectations for the Oline. With Cutler it's a bit different in that he has talked him up but has yet to create expectations other than saying he likely won't be as good as Warner. I see that as a challenge to Cutler.

I suppose all those things are possible but it would still be nice to hear something from Marinelli about what we need to change to get better. I know all he'll say is we just need to get to work because that's his style. Look at all the hype Martz generated in one day.

Riddle me this: If this is such a great hire as DC why is everyone so quiet about it? On the Bears website they have lots of video showing Martz talking about being the new OC, Smith on Martz, JA on Martz. yet there's just one article going over the Marinelli promotion and that article has just a single quote (it's not even an interview) from Marinelli: http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsStory.asp?story_id=6534 “I’m very excited,” Marinelli said. “The defensive staff has all worked together, so it’s just a chance to keep going and build on the subtleties of our system. We’ve all been in it together and I think the familiarity will help.” Why isn't there more info on this promotion? I know Marinelli not the type to seek publicity but you'd think the Bears would be doing more to hype this change. So far we have very little outside of Lovie saying this is the guy he wanted as DC in the first place. I haven't even heard of player coming forward saying they were glad to see Rod get promoted. I know it's the offseason and yada yada but don't you think some reporters ran into our players down at the Superbowl last week? This wasn't what I was looking for as our new DC but it would be nice to see something positive about this somewhere.

I watched Dmitri Nance all season long and I saw nothing to make me feel we need him. He has no burst or quickness to speak of and won't be very effective in the NFL. For his size he doesn't run with a lot of power but is capable of moving defenders backwards at times. In his defense ASU had zero passing game so he faced a lot of defenders on every running play but even when he had some space to run he can't get past a defender. We have Bell on the roster and I see no need to waste even a late round pick on Nance, perhaps as UDFA just to see what he's got.

You may be the only NIU football player with fans in Arizona. Best of luck but I have a feeling with your work ethic you won't need luck. Keep us updated.

If he replaces Rahied Davis on the bench I'd take him. If he's coming in to take reps away from the young guys who actually know how to play WR (i.e. not Davis) then I don't want him.

I was hoping to get a new perspective leading our D. I'm on board with Martz simply because I think he was the best available and didn't want a rookie OC learning on the job. With Martz it's boom or bust. With Marinelli, I have no clue what to expect. What bothers me most is that last year he stated clearly this was job he didn't want. Now this year he gets the job but without really being considered in the mix. It's one thing if he changed his mind and clearly wanted to take on this challenge but if he's just doing this because nobody else wants to that's not a good feeling for fans or the players. As always I'll wish for the best and criticize the rest.

WR or not I don't think Hester is the same return guy he was his first two years. For whatever reason he is just not as quick and explosive as he was and he also runs scared too often. Was the loss of quickness the result of him bulking up to handle WR duties, perhaps? So if we reduce his role at WR and he changes his workouts I'll assume he gets that back. What about running scared? If he continues to "play it safe" on returns and not hit the hole like he used to you won't see those big breakaways. I feel he's better served being our slot WR and handling more return duties but I don't expect we'll see the same Hester returning kicks we saw in his first year.

Adapt and conquer. Some people do it others fall into the trash bin of history. Lovie's been falling for 3 years can he reverse course?

I welcome differing opinions but I'm curious how you came to hear the "consensus" was a lack of talent since I don't recall that being reported. Of course the facts work in your favor since we kept the Oline coach and added new pieces in Pace, Omiyale, Shaffer. However, I'll also use that fact to further prove my point that Harry couldn't coach up anyone on that line because no matter who we put in things didn't get better. I use the Cardinals as my point of reference since they've made it to the Superbowl and again to the playoffs with Bears castoff Mike Gandy as their LT, and really don't have anyone on their Oline who stands out. Some will point out Levi Brown but he's not very good in pass protection yet they still made it work. The Cards also had Kurt "statue" Warner behind center versus our mobile QB. I'm not looking to get into Cards offense vs. Bears offense debate I'm just pointing out that other teams Oline can play well enough even when they have average talent.

That's what I'm hoping to see too because for run blocking I think it will benefit guys like Shaffer, Omiyale, and Kreutz. I wish it were all Tice's decision because his past shows he knows how to coach successful Oline players but the reason I asked is because Martz is running the show. Is what he wants going to mesh with what Tice wants to do?

Turner essentially had free reign over the offense so while he didn't have authority to fire/hire I'm pretty sure he could have gone to Lovie and said I need better help coaching the Oline and a change would have been made. IMO if Turner asked for that it would have fit in with all the changes after the bad 2008 season and the poor Oline play and I can't imagine Lovie refusing the request. If he did we should have fired Lovie back then. We're going to get a chance to see if it's talent or coaching/system when we see what Tice does with these guys because I can't see any significant changes coming to the Oline via FA or draft. I don't consider a 3rd Rd OG a significant talent although that's likely the best pick we can make.

Anyone know what kind of run blocking scheme we'll be using with Martz system?

I can see the logic but Harry had to go and I think those two were tied at the hip. I felt Lovie should have been gone but he's not so he gets the chance to get it right one last time. If Lovie felt Turner was his best chance to succeed he should have kept him. Otherwise this puts Lovie squarely on the hot seat and that's where he belongs. However, you are correct in that we've framed a very bad situation with a HC on the hot seat in search of new coordinators.

I agree Olsen's blocking leaves a lot to be desired but I still think Martz will line him up like this from time to time. How often he'll be called to block from this role, I hope it's less than what Turner tried to do. Despite thinking this is what we'll see I still prefer to get a real FB who can block, catch, and run. I know it doesn't fit into what Martz does but it's something I think we need in the redzone and short yardage situations if nothing else.

Yesterday I was telling my son (said Martz won't run enough) about how the 49ers used to pass as often as Martz does with his offense. Walsh used to hear about it but then they started scoring and nobody could stop them and suddenly everyone converted to saying the 49ers replace the run with their short swing routes to the RBs. All you have to do is be successful and the naysayers go away. Even though I wanted him as our OC I'm not saying Martz will be successful, much less wildly successful just that I'll grade him on his results when the games begin. After all what was the point of Turner running Garrett Wolfe up the middle against the Vikings? Offense's goal is to score points. Defense's goal is to stop the opponent from scoring.