defiantgiant

Hey, you'll get no argument from me about wanting Lovie gone, as long as Angelo goes with him. But I don't want to see a rebuilding year, and several of the coaching candidates out there could avoid one by hanging onto the Tampa scheme for a little while. I'm OK with that, if the alternative is blowing up the defense and watching the Bears struggle next year like they did in '07-'09. Actually, I can think of a lot of our players who would be awful fits in other defensive schemes: - Peanut in a 3-4 like the Jets' that uses corners in man coverage without safety help - Urlacher in any 3-4, or really any defense that asks him to take on o-linemen instead of dropping him into coverage - Tommie in any defense other than a 4-3 under front - Pisa in any defense other than a Tampa-2. The list goes on. I'm sure Peppers and Briggs could play in just about any system, but we've got a Tampa-2 roster for the most part, which is why I'd want a new coach to keep the scheme around, rather than shipping out a bunch of players I like.

Yeah, I have no idea how Lovie doesn't challenge that. He said himself that he doesn't challenge based on the likelihood of overturning the call on the field, he challenges based on how crucial the call would be if he wins. Whether you like that approach or dislike it, it's clear that he should have challenged the Cutler fumble. If he wins, it gets rid of a turnover and gives Chicago a hefty lead. Lovie always preaches turnover differential, and he had to know that his offense would struggle to get down there and score again. By his own rules, he should have thrown the challenge flag, regardless of what happened on the previous challenge. Huge coaching error, and it ended up costing Chicago the game.

Yeah. It's probably too broad a rule to say that you can't EVER reap a benefit from your own penalty, but they could just make procedural penalties declinable in cases where they erase a touchdown against the penalized team. There are always going to be penalties that teams take on purpose, because they're better than the alternative; taking a PI call to prevent giving up a touchdown, for example. But I think the difference is how MUCH better off the penalty makes you. With a PI call, you give up a massive amount of field position and a fresh set of downs to stop a potential touchdown. In the Bears-Skins case, Washington gave up a tiny, trivial amount of field position and, in return, negated a certain touchdown that ended up being more than the margin of victory for the game. If Washington plays by the rules, they lose; if they break the rules, they win. The league ought to take a long hard look at any rule that creates that kind of backward incentive.

Super Bowl Prediction: Steelers/Giants. Defense wins in the postseason. DROY: Ndamukong Suh. Came into the draft with a ton of hype and has the stats to back it up. 6.5 sacks through 7 games is INSANE for an interior lineman, plus the interception and the fumble recovery for a TD. Call this a makeup for him not getting the Heisman. OROY: Sam Bradford. No way he doesn't get it...the guy's playing like a 5-year vet. Comeback POY: Should be Vick, but I think there's no way they give him the award - it just doesn't look right if what you're coming back from is federal prison for killing dogs. With public image being a problem for Vick, I'm going to go with Big Mike Williams. He's basically the first receiver ever to come back from multiple years out of football and play at a high level. If he breaks 1000 yards, I think he gets CPOY. MVP: It'll probably be Peyton Manning for no reason. DPOY: This is a tough one, but I'd cast my vote for LaRon Landry. Dude has been playing just out of his mind this season - he's on pace for 152 tackles, which is obscene for a defensive back. For comparison, last season 152 stops would have tied him with Patrick Willis for #1 in the league, and he would have been the only player in the top 10 who wasn't a linebacker. And there's no stat for how many times a player knocks some guy's fillings loose, but if the NFL tracked that, Landry would be at the top by a mile.

Yeah, I'm with you guys: unless Moss can put on 150 pounds and play tackle, no thanks. Cutler needs a go-to receiver, but Moss isn't the right one. He's pretty much exclusively a deep-ball guy at this stage in his career, and the Bears can't pass-protect long enough for Cutler to air it out, so what's the use? On the other hand, I'm starting to wish they'd made a play for Vincent Jackson, if the price was right. This season, I think Cutler's showing how he needed Brandon Marshall around to bail him out sometimes. A big receiver who fights for the ball should be high on the shopping list in the next draft, right after some o-line help. Here's a thought - does anybody else think there's a chance Moss ends up in Detroit? Scott Linehan's his old coordinator and Nate Burleson's his old teammate. On top of that, they're pretty high up in the waiver order and Burleson has been just adequate as a #2 option when he's not hurt. Moss and Calvin Johnson on the same offense would be a nightmare for other teams' secondaries. Here's hoping he goes to St. Louis or somewhere.

Turner would have been nice and we could have picked DeSean Jackson with that 2nd, but after the way Forte put the 2008 offense on his back, I'd pick him every time. It's not a rational thing, it's just that he was about the only player who gave me some hope in the team that year. The same goes for Hester back in 2007. You could certainly argue that the offense might be better with Turner and Jackson, but I'm still a fan of Forte and Hester.

Why get away from it now that we finally have the personnel to run it? I mean, if you're saying it's frustrating to watch, I couldn't agree more. But it's pretty clear that it works when you have the right players. Here's where the Bears rank in every major defensive category: Run Yards/Game: 89.3 (6th) Pass Yards/Game: 216 (15th) Total Yards/Game: 305.3 (6th) First Downs/Game: 16.6 (4th) 3rd Down Conversion Rate: 30% (1st) ...and here's the big one: Points/Game: 16.3 (3rd) I don't think they've had a soft schedule, either - it's about league-average in terms of total yards and points. The game against Carolina is probably inflating their stats a little, but all in all, I think the Bears are what their rankings suggest - a legitimate top-10 defense. I'm definitely not a fan of the Tampa-2 per se, but I don't see any reason to get rid of it when it's working.

Here's my take: In hindsight, the Bears would be better off right now with Orton and the picks, PROVIDED that they had hit on all three picks. They could have taken Mike Oher, TJ Lang, and Anthony Davis. Orton could look pretty good behind a line of Oher-Lang-Kreutz-Garza-Davis. Then yeah, Chicago's offense would probably be good with Orton under center. But Angelo did a lot wrong after the trade had already gone down, too. The two 2nd-rounders he used on Gilbert/Melton (after trading down) and Gaines Adams could have been Phil Loadholt and Vlad Ducasse. If he hadn't wasted those two picks, Loadholt and Ducasse could beef up the o-line and we'd still have Cutler and Johnny Knox from the trade. It's totally possible that a competent GM could have used those picks to put a good supporting cast around Orton, and it's just as possible that a competent GM could have done the trade without sacrificing the o-line or setting Cutler up to fail. The bottom line is that Angelo isn't a competent GM, and he did what he always does, which is blow all his picks on d-line. If it were up to me, I'd still do the trade, and I still think it'll work out the best for Chicago in the long run, once there's a competent front office in place. If Angelo gets ousted, as I hope he will, the new regime is going to have some work ahead of them. They're going to have to shore up the o-line, go back to an offense that's a fit for Cutler's skillset, and draft a big receiver like AJ Green or Julio Jones or Michael Floyd. If they do that, I don't see any reason why he can't produce like he did in 2008, when he was a Pro Bowl quarterback. Cutler's mechanical problems don't seem to be as bad when the line keeps him clean and the offense allows him to leave the pocket more. His anticipation problems aren't as big of an issue in an offense that usually calls for him to throw to an open man, not a spot on the field. His tendency to force throws into coverage didn't kill as many drives when he had a big, powerful receiver who could beat most DBs for a jump ball. As much as I liked Orton back in 2008, and as well as he's played since then, Cutler was clearly the superior talent. Trading for him, picks and all, was a good move. The bad move was squandering the remaining draft picks that could have put him in a position to succeed, and I'm pretty convinced that Angelo would have done that even if he'd had 10 first-rounders.

Also, if Harbaugh's not available (and I'm sure there are going to be plenty of people interested in him,) there are a bunch of defensive coaches with Chicago ties who could be good candidates. Leslie Frazier and Ron Rivera have already been mentioned - I think both of them should be high up on the list of potential hires. Another guy I'll throw out there is Perry Fewell. The thing I like about Frazier, Rivera, and Fewell is that they're all familiar with the Tampa-2, and they've all run versions of it successfully. I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that if the Bears tank this season, the defense won't be the reason why; after a long drought, Lovie's scheme is finally working at a high level again. I don't think it's a coincidence that the drought started with Tommie Harris' dropoff and ended when Peppers arrived. All the good Tampa-2 teams have a blue chip pass rusher in the front 4, and usually another rusher who's at least above-average. Frazier has Jared Allen and Kevin Williams. Fewell has Justin Tuck and Osi Umenyiora. Rivera had Tommie pre-injury and Ogunleye. I'm starting to think that the Bears' problems on defense have had more to do with Angelo's terrible draft record and Lovie's history of giving poor players second chances, rather than some innate problem with the scheme. Given that it's working well with Peppers on board, I don't see any reason to get away from the Tampa scheme, at least not right away. This defense is top 10 in most meaningful categories, and there's no reason to blow up something that's working. So I'd like to see a head coach who can run a Tampa defense, at least at first. Frazier and Rivera both coached a different style of 4-3 under Jim Johnson in Philly, but they know Lovie's defense, too. So if they wanted to make the switch to a pressure-heavy defense like Philly's, they could do it gradually, without blowing up the defense or going through a rebuilding year. If Fewell got the nod, they'd probably stay a Tampa team permanently, but given the way he has the Giants' defense playing, I don't think anybody would argue with that.

Yeah, I totally agree with Harbaugh. The guy seems like he could really wipe out the culture of complacency that's grown around Lovie and Angelo since the Super Bowl. I'd be a little concerned about Cutler learning his third new offense in three years, but at least Harbaugh has had some experience with a Bill Walsh-style WCO (from Bill Callahan and Walsh himself.) That puts him in the same general family as Mike Shanahan's offense, so I'd hope that Harbaugh's offense would be at least a little more familiar to Cutler than Martz's is. Plus, Harbaugh can clearly work some magic with quarterbacks. I mean, the guy developed Andrew Luck and helped make a 36-year-old Rich Gannon into the league MVP.

Meanwhile, Favre is saying that he'd be willing to end his consecutive-starts streak if the elbow keeps him from being effective. Good call, Schefter.

There's no way Angelo didn't know that Lovie needed a better offensive line. The mistake was in thinking (whether it was Lovie, Angelo, or both) that Tice could do it all himself. Maybe if they had needed one starting lineman, but you can't ask your line coach to pull three of your five starters out of thin air. I suspect that it was a combination of Angelo being unwilling to devote resources to the o-line (see: the rest of his career in Chicago) and Lovie thinking too much of his coaching staff. Whoever was responsible, it's an inexcusable mistake.

Gallery's one of the better guards in the league. I'm sure Oakland fans are disappointed that he didn't end up being the once-in-a-decade stud LT he was billed as coming out of Iowa, but he is actually a very good interior lineman. Same goes for Leonard Davis, although he looks like he might be declining now at 32. Mike Williams...OK not so much. But as dumb as the article is, he's not wrong that there's precedent for players who struggle at tackle becoming successful guards. Hell, it's not unheard of for a guy to get switched to guard and then eventually go back to left tackle. Larry Allen did it in 1998 - that worked out pretty well for Dallas.

Yeah, you hit it right on the head - what exactly were the Bears supposed to do in training camp that was going to cure this group's lack of proven talent? The Bears were wrong to think that Tice's coaching could cover up their subpar players, but that's hindsight. The real mistake they made back in offseason/training camp was not bringing in another lineman. Rob Sims was available for a 5th and a 7th, but they went forward with Lance Louis and Johan Asiata instead. Jammal Brown was available for a conditional 3rd/4th, which would have given the team the flexibility to move Omiyale back inside and some insurance in case of injury, but they decided to go with Webb and Shaffer. Basically, they left themselves with zero depth behind Garza and no proven starter at the other guard spot. And that was before Williams got hurt. It's not the coaches' fault for failing to pull a starter and two start-worthy injury replacements out of a bunch of rookies and scrubs. That's asking too much of your o-line coach, no matter how good he is. It's the front office's fault for thinking they could get by with obviously subpar talent and little to no depth up front.

I'm not underestimating the value of an o-line, but we've seen what happens when you overrely on FA acquisitions like Jerry Angelo does: you end up with a big vacuum at the position 3 or 4 years down the road. When you draft a guard, you could get 8 or 9 years out of him if you have good evaluators and draft a winner. Getting a proven FA like Mankins is less risky, but there's also less value, since you're getting fewer years for your draft pick. Now, if they wanted to trade for Mankins AND draft a guy to develop behind him, I'd be OK with that. You really can't have too many good offensive linemen.

That's true, but the effect that all the uncertainty seems to be having on the trade market is that veterans are getting dealt for lower draft picks than normal. I mean, this offseason a 2nd-round pick (and a conditional 4th next year) gets you Donovan McNabb. That's a franchise quarterback. Rob Sims, meanwhile, got traded for a 5th and a 7th. Sims is no Mankins, but he's still a starting-caliber guard and he's a couple of years younger. I'm guessing that market-value compensation for Mankins would fall somewhere between McNabb and Sims, which is why I think a 3rd for him would be fair. If the Pats were willing to accept a 3rd and maybe a Day 3 pick, I think the Bears should jump on it.

It's been said elsewhere, but Williams played guard a fair amount in college before they moved him to tackle. So it's not totally foreign, the way it was for Omiyale. Tice said he thinks Williams is a better run-blocker than pass protector at this stage in his career. I'm inclined to believe him: last season, the Bears' average when running left improved immensely as soon as they benched Pace and moved Williams to LT. That said, I see your point - Williams gets a lot of crap for having short arms (actually they're average for a tackle) which has caused some people to say he's a better fit at guard. But his biggest assets coming out of college were his lateral range and footwork, and those don't matter nearly as much for a guard. That says to me that somewhere down the road they need to put him back at left tackle. For the time being, though, I don't care where he lines up as long as Cutler's not getting killed out there.

Well, let's take this with a grain of salt - what other options do they have at left guard? Garza's getting his knee scoped, Louis has a knee injury as well, and when they gave Shaffer a shot at guard before the season, he sucked. So that leaves either Williams or one of the current starters. Mike Tice came out and said that he doesn't want to shuffle the line any more than he has to - I think he's just making this move to get Williams on the field without changing up two or three positions on the o-line. Given how discombobulated the line has been thus far, I'm totally OK with that. I still think they should be looking at him as a left tackle, long-term, but I'm fine with moving him to guard in the short term if it means we can lock in 5 starters and start getting them some reps. If he can't beat out Omiyale in the long term, then I think it's time to call him a bad draft pick.

Oh yeah, I'd totally forgotten about that. He's kind of notorious for always wanting the starting job, isn't he? That might be OK in Cleveland or Buffalo right now, but the Bears ought to be looking for a guy who's all right with holding Cutler's clipboard.

You think it's very possible for Mankins to play until he's 36 or 38? It's pretty unusual for an offensive lineman to play that long and still be any good. John Tait, Ruben Brown, and Fred Miller were all out of football by 35 or 36. Tait's last year as a starter he was 33; Miller's last season was age-34; Brown's was age-35. None of them was effective in his last season starting; a quick look at the 2007 and 2008 offensive lines makes that pretty clear. So their last seasons as effective starters, they were all between 32 and 34. And those guys all had exceptionally long careers, Brown especially. A guy who's still in the league, still starting, and still good at 36 or 38 is a REALLY rare case. Orlando Pace didn't make it that long. Neither did Walter Jones or Jonathan Ogden. I think you're closer with 5 years barring injury, although even that isn't always guaranteed. Look at Garza. We got him 5 years ago when he was 27, now at 31 he's not that effective even when he's healthy. He's still an OK starter when he isn't hurt, but I don't know how much longer that'll last. All this is just a long way of saying that a 2nd rounder is a ridiculous amount of value to give up for a guy who could only have 2 or 3 good years left, 5 at the outside. I think interior linemen are way undervalued, and Mankins is a good player, but I'd wouldn't give up a 2nd-rounder for a 3-to-5-year rental on the o-line unless it was a left tackle. If the Pats were willing to give up Mankins for a 3rd, then maybe.

Yeah, that would be cool. Also, I'm excited that New Era got the hat contract. The Reebok hats are just crap - the only Bears hat I own is one of the throwback Mitchell & Ness ones. It'd be cool to see the regular hats look as good as the New Era MLB caps.

I hope they don't try to pull any ridiculous styling changes like they did with Oregon's jerseys. Might work for a newer franchise like the Panthers or Jaguars, but I'd rather not see the NFC North's uniform designs "updated" - they're just fine the way they are. If they wanted to rework some of the technology, though, that'd be pretty cool, especially considering all the problems with players getting heatstroke the past several years.

It sure seems like he will. I was telling my brother (who's a big Packers fan and hates Favre) this before the season - Favre doesn't have to implode for the Vikings to be in deep trouble. He just has to have a normal Brett Favre season. Statistically, 2009 was a ridiculous outlier when you look at his whole body of work - it wouldn't matter if he were 31 rather than 41, the odds aren't good that he repeats that performance for a second straight year. There's just no way he's throwing 4000+ yards, 30+ TDs and single-digit interceptions twice in a row. And if he regresses toward the mean and has an average-for-Favre season (which looks like it's happening already) that team is a LOT worse than they were last year. Through four games, he's on pace for a very Favre-like 3400 yards, 20 TDs, and 28 picks. In other words, a season like the one he had with Green Bay in 2005, or with the Jets in 2008. In OTHER other words, a season where the Vikings get 13 fewer scores and 21 more turnovers from their quarterback position. And I think TerraTor's right: if Favre legitimately struggles this season, I think he quits on his team. Especially if he knows that the tendinitis in his throwing arm is going to keep hampering his effectiveness. I mean, it took the promise of a new team, playing under his old coach in his old offense, AND a shot at revenge on the Packers to bring him back after 2008. And then he nearly retired again, after the best season of his career and a playoff run. Minnesota already went out and got him the wide receiver he's always wanted to play with - what more can they offer him to keep him in the game if the Vikings are 3-5 or 2-6 at the halfway point? If it starts to look like they're a long shot for the playoffs, I think Favre shuts it down.

I'd rather go with Hanie as the #2 rather than Garcia. Garcia's had some success in the NFL, but the guy's got a weird clock in his head when it comes to the pass rush. He turns a perfectly good pocket into a busted play all the time - it's like he sees some phantom unblocked blitzer on every other snap. He's a good improviser and has some mobility, and so a lot of the time he can turn those unnecessary scrambles into completions, but it means that he never keeps an offense on schedule. Combine that with his noodle arm and he's exactly the wrong fit for a Martz offense, where quarterbacks need to stand in the pocket, get the ball out exactly on time, and be able to drive it down the field. I could see him being adequate in a WCO with a reliable possession receiver to bail him out, but he'd be a disaster for Chicago. Maybe not as big a disaster as Collins, but certainly not worth picking up.