How about some optimism for the D

[nfoligno]

Okay, many here are ripping the defense, due in large part to their coaching. I am absolutely one myself. While I still think our coaching on the D is poor, here are some reasons why we may be able to get it done regardless. Not all agree Babich or Lovie are a problem as defensive coaches, but regardless, and for those who do, questionable coaching may not be enough to kill this defense.

 

A bit of optimism from a pessimist. This post is dedicated to Crackerdog

 

1. No, I don't think we have good coaching on the sidelines, but I do think we have a great coach on the field. Mike Brown may honestly be our best defensive coach on the team. He has shown in the past he knows how to inspire teamates when our coaches couldn't. Our defense has many "lead by example" leaders, but few vocal leaders, which I think is necessary. Mike Brown fills that role. Due to injuries, he has not always been on the field to do so, and I doubt he had the confidence to take that role when he was not able to be on the field and help his teamates. But now he is on the field, and once again, we have a good coach. Not only does he have the ability to change the attitude of players, but is a great manager in the secondary. I have watched him move around DBs, telling them what is coming or where to play. W/ Brown on the field, less experienced players play on a higher level.

 

2. Talent on DL can over come the scheme. I have had the argument before questioning why we don't stunt, or use more mis-direction and the like. I believe we handcuff our DL. That aside, the talent on our DL is such that they may yet be able to over-come such.

 

3. I have seen little from Brown or Wale, but I have seen Anderson mix up his pass rushing technique. I have talked about this before, but as a rookie, I watched Anderson utilize a host of moves rarely seen outside of seasoned veterans. Dent talked about this and praised the young players arsenal of moves. Last year, he seemed to forget all these moves, and simply employed an edge/speed rush move to the outside. In the 1st (or maybe 2nd) preseason game, I watched Anderson again using rip and swim moves to rush the inside. I watched him use his speed to get the OT off-balance to the outside, only to cut inside. The OT has to cheat to beat Anderson to the outside, thus making him a prime target for an inside move. We didn't see that last year from Anderson, but if the preseason is an indicator, we may see it again this year. Getting Anderson back to that pass rushing mode would be a big boost to this defense. Further, if we see such out of Anderson, it gives hope others will be allowed, or simply do, similar.

 

4. Tackling has been poor, and while that is sick to watch, at the same time, we have playmakers capable of making plays few others can. They may blow a few plays here and there they should make, but also make plays they shouldn't.

 

5. Veterans. The defense is loaded w/ veterans. We are not some young group still trying to learn, which would make us more reliant on coaching. W/ such a group of veterans, you have a greater chance of getting it done inspite of coaching.

 

6. Late last year, Urlacher went on a tear and looked like his old self. I have heard many possible reasons for the resugence, but one I always focused on surrounded some comments he made. Urlacher said Babich gave him the opportunity to free lance more. Babich allowed Urlacher to essentially play outside the scheme, and to go more off instincts. Maybe the problem is the scheme. Maybe the problem is Urlacher never felt comfortable working within the scheme. Either way, Babich allowing Urlacher to play different, and thus going outside the box, gives hope our staff isn't so stringent that they will not consider options beyond the pure cover two thinking.

 

7. We have playmakers. We may give up plays here and there, and not lead the league in yards allowed, but at the same time, we have playmakers that make stands and force turnovers. The D may allow long drives, but if that drive ends in a turnover, the D will still look pretty good. We did a lot of that in 2006, and may again. We may not have a "punch you in the mouth and not allow a yard" defense, and we may give up yards, but if we can force the turnovers, we can offset the yards given up. And w/ the number of playmakers we have, that is very possible.

[Pixote]

While I also question at times the coaching on defense, I sometimes get the feeling it is ultimately the fact that players need to execute the fundamentals of the defense they are assigned and it appears to me they are not doing so, as well as simple basics like taking proper angles and wrapping up a tackle. So as I said, maybe a little on the coaching, but a whole lot on the players execution. I have no doubt the players are skilled enough to execute, now they just need to do so and stop thinking about the fat checks they are depositing.

 

All that said, I think we will have a top 5 defense this year.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

The problem lies with the players and staff. They all think they are freakin great and rely on that so called greatness. I got news for you, great defenses dont' finish 28th in the league in the past year (injuries or not). And yes I realize injuries were a big problem but all I ever hear out of the players and coaches mouths are excuses for why they didn't do this and that...how about they go freakin out there and realize they haven't played right and actually fix things (instead of the stupid, oh were rusty bullshit).

[madlithuanian]

I feel like this years' D is a real crap shoot. I think it could go anywhere top or bottom.

 

1. Brown I think can get it done and make us very competitive despite any bad coaching. However, I feel like if the coaching is bad, Brown won't make it known until about week 4 when he's "had enough"...like he did when we lost to CLE all those years ago. It'll have to get bad before it gets good...

 

2. the DL is darn good... Maybe Tommie And DUsty can get enough pressure that allow the ends to go outside...

 

3. I do like Anderson coming in for pass situations much better!

 

4. I just don't get the bad tackling. Is there an on/off switch?

 

5. Vets should make a difference...but are they jaded?

 

6. I'm just hoping for the best from Urlacher. He brings it when he plays, and that's all I expect. He may have lost a step, but a step-shy Urlacher is still better than a vast majority of other MLB's.

 

7. We need to see a lot of big plays on D, no doubt!

[CrackerDog]

This post is dedicated to Crackerdog

 

I feel honored. If I weren't swamped right now in the office I'd probably debate a few of your points. Maybe later...

[Mongo3451]

I still think it lies within the players. They are proven a high commodity. Players need to motivate thenselves, if they do not, that's when the coach puts a boot in their ass. We have the talent to run this scheme, but the scheme will not work without pressure from the front four. It all starts up front. I look forward to it improving.

[AZ54]

I'll tack on a few thoughts after reviewing the first half. It took a few days to have the strength to do this and I went through things pretty quickly but it was enough to change my impression of the D for the better.

 

The bad:

Our D had too many mental errors causing penalties in the first half. I think we had 3 offsides and thus gave the 49ers some easier to achieve first downs.

 

Tackling was poor on a few plays in particular early in the game but that improved as the game went on. Still not where I'd want it to be but there was marked improvement.

 

Mike Brown was running away from Gore on his long cutback run. With no blocker in front of him I have no idea why. Not what I want to see from our safety.

 

Some blown deep coverages. Again the safeties get lost on a few plays, or is it just McGowan?

 

We went up against a Mike Martz offense and I don't think we were prepared in anyway for them to open up in a 2 TE set with all the OG/OT pulling that they did. They used that a lot including the play where JT threw a pass over Hillenmeyer for a big gain to Davis. I could be wrong but this isn't the offense I remember Martz running in StL or Detroit. You can look at this as bad or good but I'd say once we get some film on this we can handle it better.

 

The Good

We had quite a few negative plays on the 49ers.

 

At times they couldn't run the ball. The D got tough inside the 20 and had a good goal line stand. At this point we were winning 10-6.

 

Pass rush...if Alex Brown isn't tackled on one play I don't think they get a first down.

 

We blitzed a CB off the corner...so Peanut underestimated JT's speed and ended up flopping on the ground the fact is this blitz worked and it's one of the things I've been asking for Babich to do. I'm not sure it was Mike Brown who blew the coverage deep, I think it was McGowan. McGowan has been around long enough to know his assignments and I'm wondering if he's going to remain the starter.

 

I think I saw a stunt. (gotta walk before you run)

 

Wolfe gave the 49ers a short field at a time when the D needed a break. We almost held them there until Bruce tried to come back through Tillman. Tillman has to turn his head and he knows that but he was right there in coverage. The pass by JT was terribly short.

 

These guys were stung badly by the points the 49ers put up. While I too was extremely disappointed in the result at least it showed to me there is some sense of pride and heart. That should bode well for working to improve.

Overall it was still a bad effort but there were quite a few positive plays the D made.

[azbearsfan]

I still think it lies within the players. They are proven a high commodity. Players need to motivate thenselves, if they do not, that's when the coach puts a boot in their ass. We have the talent to run this scheme, but the scheme will not work without pressure from the front four. It all starts up front. I look forward to it improving.

 

 

I agree here. Its not the coaching when vets like Url, BRiggs, and Tillman suddenly can't tackle correctly and start using bad angles. Those guys know what they are supposed to do. They just looked really uninterested.

[Pixote]

I agree here. Its not the coaching when vets like Url, BRiggs, and Tillman suddenly can't tackle correctly and start using bad angles. Those guys know what they are supposed to do. They just looked really uninterested.

 

Bowen: Don't worry about the Bear's D - yet

 

Good article from the Sun-Times that puts things into proper perspective.