Housh not likely coming here

[nfoligno]

Okay, I'll bite and play a little devils advocate.

 

First, I do agree we need to figure out what is wrong. That is true for most positions after the year we just had (actually two years). But looking more detailed and specific.

 

- Moose - Why did he fail w/ the bears, yet do well w/ another team. I think there are many things here. For one thing, while Moose was awful in 2007, so was the entire offense. Do you realize though that Moose had numbers very similar in 2006 w/ us as he did this year w/ Carolian? In 2006, Moose had 60-860-5 w/ a 14.4 ypc avg compared to this year in Carolina when he had 65-923-5 and a 14.2 ypc avg. Those are very similar numbers. So while so many have talked about how great Moose was this year compared to w/ us, the difference is just not that great outside of his final year.

 

W/ that said, look at the offense Moose was in this past year. W/ us, Moose was starting opposite to a still developing Berrian. He had a lack of consistency at QB, and a average to below average OL. In Carolian, he played opposite Steve Smith, who this year had over 1,400 yards, a better QB situation, one of the best OLs and one of the top run games. The #2 WR in such an offense is bound to put up better numbers than in our system.

 

Much has been made about other WRs doing better elsewhere than w/ us, but at times, I think a bit much is made of that. There are three WRs typically mentioned. Bradley, Wade and Gage.

 

Bradley was a bust for us, but the biggest key was his inability to stay healthy. Take this past season for example. Yea, Lovie said he was set to enter camp as our #1 WR, but he then went down w/ injury AGAIN, which plagued him every year w/ us. Bradley went to KC, and immediately had "some" success, but shock, went down w/ injury and was really not that effective after.

 

Wade is also mentioned, but I think some forget the history w/ Wade. Wade was a decent enough WR for us, and really, I question how much better he has been since. I think some forget he was cut largely due to his fumble issues as a returner, combined w/ injuries his final year w/ us. He was deemed expendable. Since, he has become a decent WR, but nothing to write home about.

 

Gage is a player many talk about also, but I think many are forgetting history a bit. Gage was not cut, but simply not re-signed. In his 4th year (final contract year) he suffered an injury, and the team simply choose not to re-sign him. Some would point out his better numbers after leaving, but seriously, have so many forgetton the QB woes the years he was w/ us? The only year we had a legit starter was 2006, but that was also the year he suffered injuries and barely saw the field. Prior to that, shall I remind fans of who we played at QB. Is there really any wonder why a WR would fail w/ those QBs.

 

So while I am not going to argue the idea that we have not developed WRs, I think much of that also has to do w/ the QBs we trotted out there each year.

 

You say Hester was set to be our #1 this year, and that didn't happen. I would argue there was never the belief Hester would instantly turn into a legit #1 this past season, but the hope was he would develop, and eventually be a potential #1. Well, he more than doubled his catches and yards, and took some pretty big strides at the WR position this year, so I would argue he did meet expectations, but that some held unrealistic expectations.

 

IMHO, the biggest reasons we have failed at WR are (a) we have lacked surrounding talent. We have started the likes of Krenzel, Quinn, Hutchinson, Burris (the list goes on, but is sickening so I will stop. We have never stressed building up the OL, and even when it was good, it was old and short lived. Few WRs are going to excel when you have a mediocre OL and a bad QB. ( We have never had that legit #1 WR, which makes the life of the rest of the WRs harder. It is far easier to excel as a WR when you have another WR like Steve Smith on the other side of the field. for years, we have had #2s and #3s, and expected them to play like #1s. © So why have we not had a #1? Well, I think most #1s comes in the 1st round of the draft, and we have not spent a 1st on a WR under Angelo. We spent a #2 on Bradley, who was a very raw project coming out of college (never started a game in college) and two #3s, one of which was Berrian who did develop. The only big FA we added was an older veteran who had been inconsistent throughout his career, but we signed him off a career year. I said then it was a bad move. So I would argue our efforts to gain a #1 WR have been lacking. WR is a position that has a big bust %, but most teams try to offset that by drafting more WRs to hedge their bets. We didn't. We would draft one WR, after the 1st (often day two) and put all our eggs into one basket.

 

So I guess this is where I leave it w/. While I am not going to say we have done a good job developing WRs, at the same time, I question our committment to the position. In 7 years, we have drafted one project in the 2nd, two in the 3rd, and otherwise relied on a bunch of later round picks. Further, the FAs additions have been very few and far between. So while I question the development aspect, I even more question the overall committment to the position specifically, as well as the offense as a whole.

 

I certainly never would want to compare Moose to TJ however, before we do this again, we really NEED to understand what is happening with our passing game because you can't turn your back on the fact that Moose went back to Car and gets over 900 yds. You just can't. We need to know why these guys are having such a hard time in the passing game. We gotta stop guessing or we're just going to continue to waste money on WR talent that will never go anywhere. Now,are the routes different here than anywhere else? If they are, what are the differences and are THEY causing the decline? Is our offensive too complex? I've heard that thrown out there before that there is an awful lot to our playbook for an offense that basically stinks. Is it just that Orton or whoever is playing QB has to get rid of it too quickly and the receivers are just late in getting to their spots ? Whatever it is, we should know by now. There shouldn't be anymore guessing going on but it appears that now Angelo wants to hang it on the QB. Could it be he's covering his ass for such a shitty drafting of o linemen and our WR situation? Of course that's probably part of it but again I ask, why on earth couldn't a 3rd rd pick see the field at all? There is absolutely positively NO EXCUSE for that and I blame every coach on this offensive staff and Lovie Smith for that. It was Lovie who first declared Bradley as our #1 WR. Of course, that was before we released him but what on earth would possess a HC to make a statement like that without some kind of validation in terms of past performance or some tangible reason? Then it was Hester is on his way to being #1 WR. Well that obviously didn't happen. I don't know, maybe we just expect too much outta these coaches. Are we being unreasonable for wanting a WR corp who can run the route, shed the CB, catch the pass on a moderately consistent basis? It just seems to me that after about 25 yrs of crappy offenses, somebody, somewhere in this collective turd pool we call an NFL franchise would say enough is enough. We are going to know exactly why we're failing and By God, we're gonna fix it.

 

Look, all I know is, somebody has to get smart here. We cannot continue to fail offensively the way we have. There MUST be some improvement either in the scheme or the players performance

[Pixote]

I just noticed that the thread title is a bit messed up.

 

Can somebody change "liking" to "likely"?

 

 

Done!

[Connorbear]

Okay, I'll bite and play a little devils advocate.

 

First, I do agree we need to figure out what is wrong. That is true for most positions after the year we just had (actually two years). But looking more detailed and specific.

 

- Moose - Why did he fail w/ the bears, yet do well w/ another team. I think there are many things here. For one thing, while Moose was awful in 2007, so was the entire offense. Do you realize though that Moose had numbers very similar in 2006 w/ us as he did this year w/ Carolian? In 2006, Moose had 60-860-5 w/ a 14.4 ypc avg compared to this year in Carolina when he had 65-923-5 and a 14.2 ypc avg. Those are very similar numbers. So while so many have talked about how great Moose was this year compared to w/ us, the difference is just not that great outside of his final year.

 

W/ that said, look at the offense Moose was in this past year. W/ us, Moose was starting opposite to a still developing Berrian. He had a lack of consistency at QB, and a average to below average OL. In Carolian, he played opposite Steve Smith, who this year had over 1,400 yards, a better QB situation, one of the best OLs and one of the top run games. The #2 WR in such an offense is bound to put up better numbers than in our system.

 

Much has been made about other WRs doing better elsewhere than w/ us, but at times, I think a bit much is made of that. There are three WRs typically mentioned. Bradley, Wade and Gage.

 

Bradley was a bust for us, but the biggest key was his inability to stay healthy. Take this past season for example. Yea, Lovie said he was set to enter camp as our #1 WR, but he then went down w/ injury AGAIN, which plagued him every year w/ us. Bradley went to KC, and immediately had "some" success, but shock, went down w/ injury and was really not that effective after.

 

Wade is also mentioned, but I think some forget the history w/ Wade. Wade was a decent enough WR for us, and really, I question how much better he has been since. I think some forget he was cut largely due to his fumble issues as a returner, combined w/ injuries his final year w/ us. He was deemed expendable. Since, he has become a decent WR, but nothing to write home about.

 

Gage is a player many talk about also, but I think many are forgetting history a bit. Gage was not cut, but simply not re-signed. In his 4th year (final contract year) he suffered an injury, and the team simply choose not to re-sign him. Some would point out his better numbers after leaving, but seriously, have so many forgetton the QB woes the years he was w/ us? The only year we had a legit starter was 2006, but that was also the year he suffered injuries and barely saw the field. Prior to that, shall I remind fans of who we played at QB. Is there really any wonder why a WR would fail w/ those QBs.

 

So while I am not going to argue the idea that we have not developed WRs, I think much of that also has to do w/ the QBs we trotted out there each year.

 

You say Hester was set to be our #1 this year, and that didn't happen. I would argue there was never the belief Hester would instantly turn into a legit #1 this past season, but the hope was he would develop, and eventually be a potential #1. Well, he more than doubled his catches and yards, and took some pretty big strides at the WR position this year, so I would argue he did meet expectations, but that some held unrealistic expectations.

 

IMHO, the biggest reasons we have failed at WR are (a) we have lacked surrounding talent. We have started the likes of Krenzel, Quinn, Hutchinson, Burris (the list goes on, but is sickening so I will stop. We have never stressed building up the OL, and even when it was good, it was old and short lived. Few WRs are going to excel when you have a mediocre OL and a bad QB. ( We have never had that legit #1 WR, which makes the life of the rest of the WRs harder. It is far easier to excel as a WR when you have another WR like Steve Smith on the other side of the field. for years, we have had #2s and #3s, and expected them to play like #1s. © So why have we not had a #1? Well, I think most #1s comes in the 1st round of the draft, and we have not spent a 1st on a WR under Angelo. We spent a #2 on Bradley, who was a very raw project coming out of college (never started a game in college) and two #3s, one of which was Berrian who did develop. The only big FA we added was an older veteran who had been inconsistent throughout his career, but we signed him off a career year. I said then it was a bad move. So I would argue our efforts to gain a #1 WR have been lacking. WR is a position that has a big bust %, but most teams try to offset that by drafting more WRs to hedge their bets. We didn't. We would draft one WR, after the 1st (often day two) and put all our eggs into one basket.

 

So I guess this is where I leave it w/. While I am not going to say we have done a good job developing WRs, at the same time, I question our committment to the position. In 7 years, we have drafted one project in the 2nd, two in the 3rd, and otherwise relied on a bunch of later round picks. Further, the FAs additions have been very few and far between. So while I question the development aspect, I even more question the overall committment to the position specifically, as well as the offense as a whole.

Outstanding post - thank you.

 

Peace

[AZ54]

I agree there have been some extenuating circumstances affecting the WR position but nonetheless the success of a guy like Gage after he leaves has to make us wonder. He didn't sign a huge deal with the Titans after he left the Bears. Was that a deal we couldn't match? It didn't really bother me when Gage left so I'm not trying act as if I knew something nobody else did. It didn't bother me when we cut Wade either. However, our coaching staff is right there with these guys day after day, they watch film of these guys they have to know a guy can or is developing and will get better with another year or two.

 

Better yet, why is their development taking so long? Now we are once again in the same spot with Bennett. He was drafted in part because he was smart, studious, and hard working yet he couldn't get on the field because he didn't know the plays. To top it off, our WR corps was horrendous last year. I can't believe it was that hard to break though among that group. If Bennett truly was that bad we should have just cut our losses and brought in someone else, or given Rideau or Hass a shot to see if they could take his place. It's this trend that makes me wonder what is going on with our coaching staff.

[madlithuanian]

Well said...

 

I agree there have been some extenuating circumstances affecting the WR position but nonetheless the success of a guy like Gage after he leaves has to make us wonder. He didn't sign a huge deal with the Titans after he left the Bears. Was that a deal we couldn't match? It didn't really bother me when Gage left so I'm not trying act as if I knew something nobody else did. It didn't bother me when we cut Wade either. However, our coaching staff is right there with these guys day after day, they watch film of these guys they have to know a guy can or is developing and will get better with another year or two.

 

Better yet, why is their development taking so long? Now we are once again in the same spot with Bennett. He was drafted in part because he was smart, studious, and hard working yet he couldn't get on the field because he didn't know the plays. To top it off, our WR corps was horrendous last year. I can't believe it was that hard to break though among that group. If Bennett truly was that bad we should have just cut our losses and brought in someone else, or given Rideau or Hass a shot to see if they could take his place. It's this trend that makes me wonder what is going on with our coaching staff.

[bradjock]

I agree there have been some extenuating circumstances affecting the WR position but nonetheless the success of a guy like Gage after he leaves has to make us wonder. He didn't sign a huge deal with the Titans after he left the Bears. Was that a deal we couldn't match? It didn't really bother me when Gage left so I'm not trying act as if I knew something nobody else did. It didn't bother me when we cut Wade either. However, our coaching staff is right there with these guys day after day, they watch film of these guys they have to know a guy can or is developing and will get better with another year or two.

 

Better yet, why is their development taking so long? Now we are once again in the same spot with Bennett. He was drafted in part because he was smart, studious, and hard working yet he couldn't get on the field because he didn't know the plays. To top it off, our WR corps was horrendous last year. I can't believe it was that hard to break though among that group. If Bennett truly was that bad we should have just cut our losses and brought in someone else, or given Rideau or Hass a shot to see if they could take his place. It's this trend that makes me wonder what is going on with our coaching staff.

 

You're ignoring the obvious: How do Wade, Gage, or Bradley look for the Bears if they joined the team right now?

1. Mark Bradley had a couple big games for a horrendous Kansas City team that was often playing from behind. In 10 games only finished with 380 yards receiving. Then he was hurt for 3 games. Do you really want him back?

2. Bobby & Gage put up over 600 yards with Minny, but is he any better then Lloyd, Booker, Rashied Davis, or anybody else we have?

 

You think we gave up on Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald. These are 3 very mediocre receivers, that we replaced with mediocre receivers.

 

As for Bennett, this coaching staff seems to hate playing rookies. (Forte being the exception.) I fully expect Bennett to be our starting #2 next season. Don't forget that we did the same to Beekman, and he started 16 games this year.

[nfoligno]

Why does it take so long to develolp our WRs, well, consider this. In Gage and Wade, we are talking about two late round picks. What were they, late 5th or 6th round picks? As for Bradley, he may have been taken in the 2nd, but he was considered a major developmental project. He had never started a game in college, and while he was considered to have loads of talent, he was also considered very raw.

 

Not enough. How about Mr. Hester, who didn't have a full time position in college, was drafted by us to play DB, and then converted to WR his 2nd year, though was primarily a return specialist. Still not enough. How about Davis, who I think was a former arena league player and defense at that.

 

Point here is, when looking at our WRs over the years, how many are the sort you would expect to develop quickly? When your WRs are from later rounds, or lacked much college experience, you are simply not going to get immediate results.

 

Now, Bennett? I have no clue on that one.

 

I agree there have been some extenuating circumstances affecting the WR position but nonetheless the success of a guy like Gage after he leaves has to make us wonder. He didn't sign a huge deal with the Titans after he left the Bears. Was that a deal we couldn't match? It didn't really bother me when Gage left so I'm not trying act as if I knew something nobody else did. It didn't bother me when we cut Wade either. However, our coaching staff is right there with these guys day after day, they watch film of these guys they have to know a guy can or is developing and will get better with another year or two.

 

Better yet, why is their development taking so long? Now we are once again in the same spot with Bennett. He was drafted in part because he was smart, studious, and hard working yet he couldn't get on the field because he didn't know the plays. To top it off, our WR corps was horrendous last year. I can't believe it was that hard to break though among that group. If Bennett truly was that bad we should have just cut our losses and brought in someone else, or given Rideau or Hass a shot to see if they could take his place. It's this trend that makes me wonder what is going on with our coaching staff.

[nfoligno]

I agree many are trying to make our former WRs greater then they really are. I don't think Wade is really anything more than Davis. Bradley? Just don't think he was ever nearly what fans wanted, and his injuries always kept him on the sidelines.

 

I do think Gage would done well in our system. I never liked our letting him go so easily, but at the same time, I think fans memory gets shaky. He was never a great WR for us, and was injured most of his final season, so it just isn't shocking that we didn't make a big push to keep him after his contract was up.

 

While I am not going to say our staff likes playing rookies, I do have to throw out there, I don't think Beekman is a good example. He didn't play as a rookie because he was a 2nd day pick who was expected to be a backup center. Even this past offseason, the staff was VERY hesitant to look at him at OG because they didn't feel he had the size to play inside. They viewed him as a pure center, but due to injuries, were forced to give him an opportunity, and he ran w/ it. So, point is, while I think it is fair to question our staff's evaluation of Beekman, I don't think it is correct to use him as an example for Lovie not playing rookies.

 

You're ignoring the obvious: How do Wade, Gage, or Bradley look for the Bears if they joined the team right now?

1. Mark Bradley had a couple big games for a horrendous Kansas City team that was often playing from behind. In 10 games only finished with 380 yards receiving. Then he was hurt for 3 games. Do you really want him back?

2. Bobby & Gage put up over 600 yards with Minny, but is he any better then Lloyd, Booker, Rashied Davis, or anybody else we have?

 

You think we gave up on Andre Johnson or Larry Fitzgerald. These are 3 very mediocre receivers, that we replaced with mediocre receivers.

 

As for Bennett, this coaching staff seems to hate playing rookies. (Forte being the exception.) I fully expect Bennett to be our starting #2 next season. Don't forget that we did the same to Beekman, and he started 16 games this year.

[bradjock]

I do think Gage would done well in our system. I never liked our letting him go so easily, but at the same time, I think fans memory gets shaky. He was never a great WR for us, and was injured most of his final season, so it just isn't shocking that we didn't make a big push to keep him after his contract was up.

 

Do you mean Gage would do well with Kyle, or does that include Rex? Rex was never good with the short stuff that is ideal with Gage. But Gage would help Orton a lot. Meanwhile Berrian was never quite as good when Orton was QB'ing.

 

While I am not going to say our staff likes playing rookies, I do have to throw out there, I don't think Beekman is a good example. He didn't play as a rookie because he was a 2nd day pick who was expected to be a backup center. Even this past offseason, the staff was VERY hesitant to look at him at OG because they didn't feel he had the size to play inside. They viewed him as a pure center, but due to injuries, were forced to give him an opportunity, and he ran w/ it. So, point is, while I think it is fair to question our staff's evaluation of Beekman, I don't think it is correct to use him as an example for Lovie not playing rookies.

 

Maybe not Beekman, but name one rookie that we didn't "ease into it" unless out of necessity? Hell, there's little doubt in my mind that Cedric starts last season as the starting RB if he hadn't been arrested. Bennett did see action in one or two games last season, and Orton did throw to him once on a ball that was badly over-thrown.

[nfoligno]

Do you mean Gage would do well with Kyle, or does that include Rex? Rex was never good with the short stuff that is ideal with Gage. But Gage would help Orton a lot. Meanwhile Berrian was never quite as good when Orton was QB'ing.

 

I meant Orton. I do think he may have helped Rex, but no, I was mainly talking about Orton. Again, I understand our letting him walk. Everyone wants to make a big deal about it, but (a) he was far from a star for us and ( he was injured nearly the entire final year of his deal, and we simply moved on.

 

Maybe not Beekman, but name one rookie that we didn't "ease into it" unless out of necessity? Hell, there's little doubt in my mind that Cedric starts last season as the starting RB if he hadn't been arrested. Bennett did see action in one or two games last season, and Orton did throw to him once on a ball that was badly over-thrown.

 

I am not arguing the point. I agree Lovie doesn't seem inclined to start rookies. It happens, but only when (a) we are desperate for a starter and ( they look so good, they win the job. I think a rookie can start for us, but feel like they have a greater hurdle to leap than most veterans. What we do not seem to do is throw a rookie in there to develop them. Bennett is a great example. Even if he wasn't looking good in practice, how is he supposed to develop if he can't get any reps. If we had solid starters in front of him, I can better understand holding him back, but w/ what we had, there was simply no reason to keep him on the bench.