madlithuanian Posted June 11, 2015 Report Share Posted June 11, 2015 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/...se-evan-mathis/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 11, 2015 Report Share Posted June 11, 2015 http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/...se-evan-mathis/ On the one hand does the question of whether Chip Kelly is losing his mind have validity? Whereas on the other one would ask 'who is this Mathis guy' and should we be interested in him? I have to admit since the article didn't say I had to look up elsewhere to find out he was an OG. So...that being said and he not finding any suitors in trade then I'd be ok if Pace wanted to give him a '1 year prove it deal'. Why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted June 11, 2015 Author Report Share Posted June 11, 2015 ...right there with you. And could move Long to Tackle On the one hand does the question of whether Chip Kelly is losing his mind have validity? Whereas on the other one would ask 'who is this Mathis guy' and should we be interested in him? I have to admit since the article didn't say I had to look up elsewhere to find out he was an OG. So...that being said and he not finding any suitors in trade then I'd be ok if Pace wanted to give him a '1 year prove it deal'. Why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted June 11, 2015 Report Share Posted June 11, 2015 On the one hand does the question of whether Chip Kelly is losing his mind have validity? Whereas on the other one would ask 'who is this Mathis guy' and should we be interested in him? I have to admit since the article didn't say I had to look up elsewhere to find out he was an OG. So...that being said and he not finding any suitors in trade then I'd be ok if Pace wanted to give him a '1 year prove it deal'. Why not? You don't know who Mathis is? Back to back Pro Bowls and an All-Pro in 2013. John Fox was his coach in Carolina (where he was drafted), so there is that. He is going to have a lot of suitors. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 You don't know who Mathis is? Back to back Pro Bowls and an All-Pro in 2013. John Fox was his coach in Carolina (where he was drafted), so there is that. He is going to have a lot of suitors. I'll admit I don't follow the OLinemen nearly as much as some do (Jason) but can't say his name rang a bell when I saw it. Nor could the fact that he's "been there done that" will gurantee any suitors either. (Just look at our own Brian Urlacher when he became a free agent or Lance Briggs - they too had multiple pro bowl appearances and pfft...nothing). I'd think if the Eagles were actively shopping him and for a trade and got nothing. And now the fact he's a free agent doesn't mean he will be snapped up for a multi-year deal. But given that he WAS good at his job at one time means I'd be good to see him at least try out for a spot on the Bears. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I'll admit I don't follow the OLinemen nearly as much as some do (Jason) but can't say his name rang a bell when I saw it. Nor could the fact that he's "been there done that" will gurantee any suitors either. (Just look at our own Brian Urlacher when he became a free agent or Lance Briggs - they too had multiple pro bowl appearances and pfft...nothing). I'd think if the Eagles were actively shopping him and for a trade and got nothing. And now the fact he's a free agent doesn't mean he will be snapped up for a multi-year deal. But given that he WAS good at his job at one time means I'd be good to see him at least try out for a spot on the Bears. If we dont have someone to fill the spot out of the younger guys on the roster, then it wouldnt hurt, but since were not winning anything anyways this year would prefer to have someone grow in the position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 The FA I'm more interested in is DT Red Bryant. He's just a run stopper but he could be in a rotation and provide solid depth with Goldman at NT. That would free up guys like Ratliff and Ego Ferguson to just focus on DE. The fact his former Seahawks DC, and now Jaguars HC, let him go after just one year on a $31million contract is concerning. Judging by his stats he didn't play very well last year. I expect Bryant was looking for some big money initially after being cut in March but pretty soon he's going to start wanting a job, any job in the NFL. Your value as a player never goes up if you sit out a year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 The FA I'm more interested in is DT Red Bryant. He's just a run stopper but he could be in a rotation and provide solid depth with Goldman at NT. That would free up guys like Ratliff and Ego Ferguson to just focus on DE. The fact his former Seahawks DC, and now Jaguars HC, let him go after just one year on a $31million contract is concerning. Judging by his stats he didn't play very well last year. I expect Bryant was looking for some big money initially after being cut in March but pretty soon he's going to start wanting a job, any job in the NFL. Your value as a player never goes up if you sit out a year. I have looked at that name before, but I think the UDFA Dan Williams could give you backup minutes at NT. He appears to be a better player than your usually UDFA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted June 12, 2015 Report Share Posted June 12, 2015 I have looked at that name before, but I think the UDFA Dan Williams could give you backup minutes at NT. He appears to be a better player than your usually UDFA I think you are referring to Terry Williams? Dan Williams was the FA from the Cards who I think signed with the Raiders. I agree there is some potential with Terry Williams but he's 6' tall and isn't likely to have the leverage to get off blocks in the NFL and he isn't quick. He comes with some character concerns too. If Bryant's price is getting closer to vet min I'd take him in heartbeat. He'll give us nothing more than a stout run defense across the 3-man front but you just don't find pass rushers this late in FA. At least if we can stop the run on defense we'll be 50% better than we were last season. We also have UDFA Olsen Pierre on the roster. He's a taller run stuffer (6'5) more in the DE style of the 3-4 we're going to but seems like a project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHKUM BEAR Posted June 13, 2015 Report Share Posted June 13, 2015 If we dont have someone to fill the spot out of the younger guys on the roster, then it wouldnt hurt, but since were not winning anything anyways this year would prefer to have someone grow in the position. I agree, players do not develop on the bench. Let's see how Leno, Groy, and Fabalu(sp?) can do. It seems this has always been a Bear problem at developing. They hold on to these picks but sign vet FA over them and all we see is a practice squad player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted June 13, 2015 Report Share Posted June 13, 2015 I agree, players do not develop on the bench. Let's see how Leno, Groy, and Fabalu(sp?) can do. It seems this has always been a Bear problem at developing. They hold on to these picks but sign vet FA over them and all we see is a practice squad player. I think the development has to do with assets the players have too. If some one isnt any good any coach wont get much out of him. I think we now have coaches in place that have a past of actually able to do that . With our last regime , we can say they didnt do a very good job at it, so the future is brighter. Hopefully some of these guys have some talent to work with, but hard to judge over the past couple of years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted June 14, 2015 Report Share Posted June 14, 2015 I agree, players do not develop on the bench. Let's see how Leno, Groy, and Fabalu(sp?) can do. It seems this has always been a Bear problem at developing. They hold on to these picks but sign vet FA over them and all we see is a practice squad player. I guess it depends on whether this team thinks they can win, or if they think they can contend. If it's the former, then, sure, let some scrubs battle it out and try to develop some homegrown talent. But if it's the latter, then I don't care about player development at the sacrifice of the team, and also Cutler. The team, and Cutler, have sacrificed for far too long because of sub-par to atrocious OLs. If it means investing more money on the OL to protect the guy who is the focal point of the team, regardless of who that is, then you should do it. It's baffling to me how long this must go on for people to realize the OL is the one spot besides QB you don't want to have major issues. And if you have major issues at QB (hopefully it's a rookie and not just a scrub like Moses Moreno), then you sure as hell should have a dominant OL to protect. The Bears have had good offensive production only one year of the past several, and it's the one year where the OL played well. I don't care how many 1st round WRs the Bears get. If the QB is under pressure, it won't matter. Long story short...yes...bring Mathis in for a look. If it was all contract related like some of the reports are saying, then putting him at RG and Long at RT would create a monster OL for the Bears, and would virtually guarantee a top 10 offense this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted June 15, 2015 Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 The last coaching staff was not all bad. On offense everyone in skill positions improved. Forte, Bennett,Jeffrey and Marshall had a resurgence. Long has played 2 years and been a Pro Bowler both years under the last staff. Someone also had Mills ready in his rookie year to start whether he was good or bad and Last year Ola and Groy were coached up on short notice to fill in during the season. On defense someone coached up Fuller and Jones to the point that we think Fuller is a lock at his position and Jones is in high regard. The problem with the last staff was discipline and adjusting to opponents from week to week and during games. They weren't as bad at teaching the game as we may have been led to believe. As for bringing in Mathis.Why? Ducasse was signed you have Groy, Ola and Slausson. Right now with Long you have 5 OGs. If anything we need to look for depth at OT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted June 15, 2015 Report Share Posted June 15, 2015 The last coaching staff was not all bad. On offense everyone in skill positions improved. Forte, Bennett,Jeffrey and Marshall had a resurgence. Long has played 2 years and been a Pro Bowler both years under the last staff. Someone also had Mills ready in his rookie year to start whether he was good or bad and Last year Ola and Groy were coached up on short notice to fill in during the season. On defense someone coached up Fuller and Jones to the point that we think Fuller is a lock at his position and Jones is in high regard. The problem with the last staff was discipline and adjusting to opponents from week to week and during games. They weren't as bad at teaching the game as we may have been led to believe. As for bringing in Mathis.Why? Ducasse was signed you have Groy, Ola and Slausson. Right now with Long you have 5 OGs. If anything we need to look for depth at OT. Mainly for an upgrade at the position. Ducasse was just a depth move, Ola played some at the OT position last year. So he adds depth there. Like Jason stated, if we think we can win now go for Mathis, in not, develop Ola or Groy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 Had to come back here to see why people would pass on him.....just wanted to point out that he asked to be released after wanting to be the highest paid OG in the league. He's said to be looking for 5.5M. Depending on how many years he's looking for I would do that all day (Assuming Long looked good at OT). 3/15 is the highest Id go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 Had to come back here to see why people would pass on him.....just wanted to point out that he asked to be released after wanting to be the highest paid OG in the league. He's said to be looking for 5.5M. Depending on how many years he's looking for I would do that all day (Assuming Long looked good at OT). 3/15 is the highest Id go. Since you asked me in the other string about it I'll answer here. Admittedly I'm vacillating on this but still don't think I'm sold on paying for his services. I suppose that's the biggest reason. Similar to what Lemon said in we have players in development that we should concentrate on. You have veteran presence already in Bushrod, Slauson, Montgomery and now Long (and to some degree Ducasse). So we aren't lacking in experienced players along the line. And speaking on the Guard spot itself we technically have more depth in that either Montgomery or Grasu can play the position if I recall correctly. Lastly, why is it that Mathis is still available? He's been on the market now awhile, makes one ask. Is it the money, age or something else? Or the combination? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 ...And the more I read the more I'm inclined to say 'pass'. http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/13059629...ard-evan-mathis At this point it looks like he could be along the lines of a character issue. The last thing the team needs is someone who is unhappy with his contract. If he's unhappy at the prospect of getting $5 mil this year and $6 mil next year (from the Eagles and holding out from OTA's) then what can the Bears offer him without using up all the reserve? A guy who's 33 and 'used to be good', I'll say...no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 I guess it depends on whether this team thinks they can win, or if they think they can contend. If it's the former, then, sure, let some scrubs battle it out and try to develop some homegrown talent. But if it's the latter, then I don't care about player development at the sacrifice of the team, and also Cutler. The team, and Cutler, have sacrificed for far too long because of sub-par to atrocious OLs. If it means investing more money on the OL to protect the guy who is the focal point of the team, regardless of who that is, then you should do it. It's baffling to me how long this must go on for people to realize the OL is the one spot besides QB you don't want to have major issues. And if you have major issues at QB (hopefully it's a rookie and not just a scrub like Moses Moreno), then you sure as hell should have a dominant OL to protect. The Bears have had good offensive production only one year of the past several, and it's the one year where the OL played well. I don't care how many 1st round WRs the Bears get. If the QB is under pressure, it won't matter. Long story short...yes...bring Mathis in for a look. If it was all contract related like some of the reports are saying, then putting him at RG and Long at RT would create a monster OL for the Bears, and would virtually guarantee a top 10 offense this year. One word to rebut all of what you wrote: Cutler. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 One word to rebut all of what you wrote: Cutler. Yes, Cutler. Exactly why you want this PRO BOWL OG on our team. Cutler has shown that when he has time and is not running for his life he can be a good QB. He can be a good QB with flashes of greatness if he has time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 Since you asked me in the other string about it I'll answer here. Admittedly I'm vacillating on this but still don't think I'm sold on paying for his services. I suppose that's the biggest reason. Similar to what Lemon said in we have players in development that we should concentrate on. You have veteran presence already in Bushrod, Slauson, Montgomery and now Long (and to some degree Ducasse). So we aren't lacking in experienced players along the line. And speaking on the Guard spot itself we technically have more depth in that either Montgomery or Grasu can play the position if I recall correctly. Lastly, why is it that Mathis is still available? He's been on the market now awhile, makes one ask. Is it the money, age or something else? Or the combination? I understand wanting to develop players but who are we really talking about developing here. Ducasse who was cut for being bad at football? One of the past 2 late round draft picks Leno and Fabulaja (or whatever his name is)? An undrafted Ryan Groy? If we're talking about signing Mathis to play over a 1-4th round pick then ya, I'd be SLIGHTY disappointed, but when we're talking about not signing an all pro player because we wanna see bad/late round guys develop I really don't see the problem. From all I've read he has quite a few teams looking at him. Couple that with his agent being Drew Rousenhaus and I'm sure there's a bidding war going on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 Yes, Cutler. Exactly why you want this PRO BOWL OG on our team. Cutler has shown that when he has time and is not running for his life he can be a good QB. He can be a good QB with flashes of greatness if he has time. In looking at this I asked myself the question; 'how good is he when he has time to throw?' and found some info at ProFootballFocus.com The first stats are regarding his accuracy based on pressure. This is from last season. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/...under-pressure/ In this you'll see Cutler was rated #5 of the top ten 'under pressure/accuracy' QBs. Interestingly enough he was rushed 30.9% of the time. Second less (of this group) only to Ben Rothlesburger at 27.3%. Allegedly, Cutler was rushed more last year than the previous due to injuries along the Oline. I might add that in 2014 his overall completion rate was 66.1% vs 63.1% the year prior. In this sample of information and in relation to being rushed he committed 5 INTs. Another question to ask in relation to the stats at the above link. How do you account for the rest of the turnovers for last year? Which totaled 18 INTs and 9 Fumbles. Did he have time and hold the ball too long or ??? That brings me to my next sliver of information. Again from PFF.com. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/...-time-to-throw/ This was based on stats from 2012 (the last year with Lovie and assumedly one of his worse production years). On the first chart you'll see of the 33 QBs rated he was 13th with his 'time to throw' at 2.74 seconds (vs Tom Brady who had 2.49). Then in the next box you'll see he was rated #4 in "time to sack" or how long he had protection with 4.01 seconds. Compare that to Ben Rothlesberger (2.55 secs), Petyon Manning (2.5 secs) or Philip Rivers (2.43 secs). When compared to others who are able to get rid of the ball within 2.5 secs or faster, Cutler rates #11 where he is able to complete those passes 63.4% of the time and only sacked 2 times. Whereas when he's given the opportunity (or holds the ball) for longer than 2.5 seconds he's rated #23 with 54.2% in his completions and 27 sacks. So I guess the question really is, is he given enough time to make mistakes or show "flashes of greatness"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 In looking at this I asked myself the question; 'how good is he when he has time to throw?' and found some info at ProFootballFocus.com The first stats are regarding his accuracy based on pressure. This is from last season. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2015/...under-pressure/ In this you'll see Cutler was rated #5 of the top ten 'under pressure/accuracy' QBs. Interestingly enough he was rushed 30.9% of the time. Second less (of this group) only to Ben Rothlesburger at 27.3%. Allegedly, Cutler was rushed more last year than the previous due to injuries along the Oline. I might add that in 2014 his overall completion rate was 66.1% vs 63.1% the year prior. Anyhow, another question to ask in relation to the stats at the above link. How do you account for the rest of the turnovers for last year? Which totaled 18 INTs and 9 Fumbles. Did he have time and hold the ball too long or ??? That brings me to my next sliver of information. Again from PFF.com. https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2012/...-time-to-throw/ This was based on stats from 2012 (the last year with Lovie and assumedly one of his worse production years). On the first chart you'll see of the 33 QBs rated he was 13th with his 'time to throw' at 2.74 seconds (vs Tom Brady who had 2.49). Then in the next box you'll see he was rated #4 in "time to sack" or how long he had protection with 4.01 seconds. Compare that to Ben Rothlesberger (2.55 secs), Petyon Manning (2.5 secs) or Philip Rivers (2.43 secs). When compared to others who are able to get rid of the ball within 2.5 secs or faster, Cutler rates #11 where he is able to complete those passes 63.4% of the time and only sacked 2 times. Whereas when he's given the opportunity (or holds the ball) for longer than 2.5 seconds he's rated #23 with 54.2% in his completions and 27 sacks. So I guess the question really is, is he given enough time to make mistakes or show "flashes of greatness"? The answer to your question is that PFF stats are borderline worthless pieces or nuggets of data that do not tell even remotely close to a complete picture. But the biggest piece of this puzzle that simply can't be quantified is, how does the QB who constantly gets pressured react when there is no pressure, but he thinks there is, or will be? Cutler has been beaten and battered here, and it's pretty obvious over the past two or three years that he feels like there is going to be pressure on damn near every play. Is that a flaw? Sure. But you don't fix that flaw by doing anything other than protecting him, which, coincidentally, would improve if Evan Mathis were signed to play OG next to Kyle Long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted June 25, 2015 Report Share Posted June 25, 2015 The answer to your question is that PFF stats are borderline worthless pieces or nuggets of data that do not tell even remotely close to a complete picture. But the biggest piece of this puzzle that simply can't be quantified is, how does the QB who constantly gets pressured react when there is no pressure, but he thinks there is, or will be? Cutler has been beaten and battered here, and it's pretty obvious over the past two or three years that he feels like there is going to be pressure on damn near every play. Is that a flaw? Sure. But you don't fix that flaw by doing anything other than protecting him, which, coincidentally, would improve if Evan Mathis were signed to play OG next to Kyle Long. I think you could really only quantify it as truly "worthless pieces or nuggets of data" if it were untrue. Or came from Fox News. In answering your second question, maybe the answer is you ask...nee...demand your QB do less decision making (at least in this instance) and follow the script. Based on the 'nuggets' of data I found, he appears to actually do better if he DOESN'T hold onto the ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chitownhustla Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 I think you could really only quantify it as truly "worthless pieces or nuggets of data" if it were untrue. Or came from Fox News. In answering your second question, maybe the answer is you ask...nee...demand your QB do less decision making (at least in this instance) and follow the script. Based on the 'nuggets' of data I found, he appears to actually do better if he DOESN'T hold onto the ball. I have seen breakdown of film on NFL Network or espn of Cutler missing a route or throwing too late. He has things he can get better at, I hope for our sake he does get better and i Hope this system puts him in the best situation possible. Adding a Pro Bowl OG will make the entire oline better which makes the whole offense better which makes the whole team better. For me this is not just about Cutler but improving the entire team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted June 26, 2015 Report Share Posted June 26, 2015 From all I've read he has quite a few teams looking at him. Couple that with his agent being Drew Rousenhaus and I'm sure there's a bidding war going on. Funny statement there because anyone who has Rosenhaus as his agent always (reportedly) "has quite a few teams looking at him." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.