Chicago this years SD

[nfoligno]

Looked at this comparison in another thead, and just love the comparison. Looking at our roster compared to SDs (offense) I think this is a team we could use as a measuring stick.

 

Rivers - 4,000 yards and 34 TDs. I see no reason to believe Cutler isn't just as good as Rivers, and has shown the ability to put up similar numbers.

 

Gates - Their top receiver is not a WR, but a TE. I am not saying Olsen will be equal to Gates overall, but Gates numbers last year (60-700-8) are not on a level I think out of Olsen's reach. 5 more catches. 125 more yards and 3 more TDs. I think that is reasonable.

 

Vincent Jackson - Easily their #1 WR, putting up 59-1,100-7. Entering the season, Jackson's best numbers were 41-620-3. Hmmm. Hester had 51-665-3. Seems to me Hester is primed for a similar jump as VJ saw.

 

LT - It may sound out there to compare Forte w/ LT, but LT last year was not the LT so many have come to expect. I'll get to his rushing in a moment, but receiving, he actually had fewer stats than Forte.

 

Malcom Floyd/ Chris Chambers - Each of these receivers had around 30 catches for 460 yards. Sorry, that is not super impressive, and something I think plenty possible for Bennett/Iglesias. If you don't like factoring both Bennett and Iglesias here, throw in D.Clark, as SD doesn't have a #2 TE equal to us.

 

Sproles - 29-340. That is something I think KJ can easily match.

 

After this group, you have 5 guys low on the depth chart at either RB, FB, TE or WR, each of which had 15 or fewer catches . I'll see that group and match Knox, Davis, AP, Wolfe, and whoever our FB is.

 

They also got 1,100 yards rushing from LT and 330 from Sproles. I think Forte and TJ can match that rushing total.

 

SD had a very solid offense last year, but when I look at their roster, I fail to see why we should not expect similar. We have a QB to match theirs. We have a RB (duo) to match their RB (duo). We have a TE to match theirs. We have a WR to match their top WR. We have a group of WRs to match their group of WRs (after the #1). I would further add that we have an OL this year that can matchup to theirs. Sure, I realize some players like Gates and LT were below the norm, but the point is still that we have players entering this season who very well could match the numbers their guys had last year.

[madlithuanian]

Interesting...

 

I hope we fare far better than they have as of late!

 

Looked at this comparison in another thead, and just love the comparison. Looking at our roster compared to SDs (offense) I think this is a team we could use as a measuring stick.

 

Rivers - 4,000 yards and 34 TDs. I see no reason to believe Cutler isn't just as good as Rivers, and has shown the ability to put up similar numbers.

 

Gates - Their top receiver is not a WR, but a TE. I am not saying Olsen will be equal to Gates overall, but Gates numbers last year (60-700-8) are not on a level I think out of Olsen's reach. 5 more catches. 125 more yards and 3 more TDs. I think that is reasonable.

 

Vincent Jackson - Easily their #1 WR, putting up 59-1,100-7. Entering the season, Jackson's best numbers were 41-620-3. Hmmm. Hester had 51-665-3. Seems to me Hester is primed for a similar jump as VJ saw.

 

LT - It may sound out there to compare Forte w/ LT, but LT last year was not the LT so many have come to expect. I'll get to his rushing in a moment, but receiving, he actually had fewer stats than Forte.

 

Malcom Floyd/ Chris Chambers - Each of these receivers had around 30 catches for 460 yards. Sorry, that is not super impressive, and something I think plenty possible for Bennett/Iglesias. If you don't like factoring both Bennett and Iglesias here, throw in D.Clark, as SD doesn't have a #2 TE equal to us.

 

Sproles - 29-340. That is something I think KJ can easily match.

 

After this group, you have 5 guys low on the depth chart at either RB, FB, TE or WR, each of which had 15 or fewer catches . I'll see that group and match Knox, Davis, AP, Wolfe, and whoever our FB is.

 

They also got 1,100 yards rushing from LT and 330 from Sproles. I think Forte and TJ can match that rushing total.

 

SD had a very solid offense last year, but when I look at their roster, I fail to see why we should not expect similar. We have a QB to match theirs. We have a RB (duo) to match their RB (duo). We have a TE to match theirs. We have a WR to match their top WR. We have a group of WRs to match their group of WRs (after the #1). I would further add that we have an OL this year that can matchup to theirs. Sure, I realize some players like Gates and LT were below the norm, but the point is still that we have players entering this season who very well could match the numbers their guys had last year.

[nfoligno]

Well, that is more about their defense as their offense ranked 11th in the league, and scored 27 ppg. They actually ranked 7th in passing.

 

Their 25th defensive ranking sort of killed the team though.

 

Interesting...

 

I hope we fare far better than they have as of late!

[madlithuanian]

Gotcha.

 

Yeah, defensively, we look about the same! Seem to have the personnell, but it's not happening. It'll be interesting to see what both teams pull off this coming season.

 

Offensively, I' nost sure we get to 7th (at least in passing), but I imagine we'll be SIGNIFICANTLY better!

 

 

Well, that is more about their defense as their offense ranked 11th in the league, and scored 27 ppg. They actually ranked 7th in passing.

 

Their 25th defensive ranking sort of killed the team though.

[GrizzlyBear]

Well If Jamie Dukes has his way, We will be in super bowl. He said that a few weeks back.

[defiantgiant]

The major categories where I don't see the Bears being equal to San Diego are the following:

 

QB - Passing Yards: In a vacuum, Cutler certainly has the ability to beat Rivers' 4,000 yard mark - he broke 4,500 yards with the Broncos last season. But the Broncos were running a wide-open passing offense, and San Diego's offense is closer to Denver's than it is to Chicago's. It remains to be seen whether Turner will stick to a conservative, run-based attack or not. If he does, I don't see Cutler quite making it to 4,000 yards passing.

 

QB - Touchdowns: Sorry, but Cutler's not going to throw for 34 scores. The Bears' red-zone receiving package is not going to look ANYTHING like the Chargers'. San Diego gets down near the goal line and they get to put Antonio Gates, probably the second-best receiving TE in the NFL, on the field with Vincent Jackson (6'5" 240 lbs) and Malcom Floyd (6'5" 226 lbs.) All three guys are massive jump-ball threats. They throw the ball very successfully in the red zone as a result. The Bears, Cutler or no, are still going to punch it in on the ground when they get close to the end zone. We've got Greg Olsen and very little else in the way of red-zone targets.

 

WR1 - Receiving yards: Jackson took a GIANT leap forward between 2007 and 2008. Do I think it's possible that Hester could do the same? Yes, definitely. Do I think we should be expecting Hester to take that kind of a jump? Nope.

 

Between those two years, Jackson's catch rate went from 51.3% to 58.4% and his yards-per-catch went from 15.1 to 18.6. Proportionally, that's a very large increase in both catching ability and per-catch production. Compared to the rest of the league, Jackson started with a low catch rate and a pretty high YPC, higher than most NFL receivers have. In 2008, he improved that to an average catch rate and a genuinely elite YPC. Of all the receivers in the league with at least 20 catches last year, only 3 guys had a higher YPC than Vincent Jackson.

 

Meanwhile, Hester finished 2008 with a 55.4% catch rate and a YPC of 13: he actually caught a lot more of the passes thrown his way than Jackson did back in 2007, but he did significantly less with those receptions. Basically, Hester's starting with a slightly below-average catch rate and a fairly average YPC.

 

So to make a jump proportionally equal to Jackson's, 2009-Hester would have to catch over 63% of passes thrown to him and would need to improve his YPC to over 16. That would make him a very reliable target by NFL standards, as well as a pretty good big-play threat. If he made that big of an improvement, he'd be able to hit 1100 yards receiving in about 110 targets, not that many more than the 101 that Jackson got in 2008. His stat line would look something like: 69 receptions for 1,110 yards and 6 TDs.

 

I'm not saying Hester's not capable, but that's a lot to hope for.

[madlithuanian]

I say go Burger King on him, and let the man have it his way!

 

SB here we come!

 

Well If Jamie Dukes has his way, We will be in super bowl. He said that a few weeks back.

 

[balta1701-A]

Well, that is more about their defense as their offense ranked 11th in the league, and scored 27 ppg. They actually ranked 7th in passing.

 

Their 25th defensive ranking sort of killed the team though.

Don't forget though that they also lost one of the best juiced-up linebackers in the game to injury last year in training camp.

[adam]

Looked at this comparison in another thead, and just love the comparison. Looking at our roster compared to SDs (offense) I think this is a team we could use as a measuring stick.

 

Rivers - 4,000 yards and 34 TDs. I see no reason to believe Cutler isn't just as good as Rivers, and has shown the ability to put up similar numbers.

 

Gates - Their top receiver is not a WR, but a TE. I am not saying Olsen will be equal to Gates overall, but Gates numbers last year (60-700-8) are not on a level I think out of Olsen's reach. 5 more catches. 125 more yards and 3 more TDs. I think that is reasonable.

 

Vincent Jackson - Easily their #1 WR, putting up 59-1,100-7. Entering the season, Jackson's best numbers were 41-620-3. Hmmm. Hester had 51-665-3. Seems to me Hester is primed for a similar jump as VJ saw.

 

LT - It may sound out there to compare Forte w/ LT, but LT last year was not the LT so many have come to expect. I'll get to his rushing in a moment, but receiving, he actually had fewer stats than Forte.

 

Malcom Floyd/ Chris Chambers - Each of these receivers had around 30 catches for 460 yards. Sorry, that is not super impressive, and something I think plenty possible for Bennett/Iglesias. If you don't like factoring both Bennett and Iglesias here, throw in D.Clark, as SD doesn't have a #2 TE equal to us.

 

Sproles - 29-340. That is something I think KJ can easily match.

 

After this group, you have 5 guys low on the depth chart at either RB, FB, TE or WR, each of which had 15 or fewer catches . I'll see that group and match Knox, Davis, AP, Wolfe, and whoever our FB is.

 

They also got 1,100 yards rushing from LT and 330 from Sproles. I think Forte and TJ can match that rushing total.

 

SD had a very solid offense last year, but when I look at their roster, I fail to see why we should not expect similar. We have a QB to match theirs. We have a RB (duo) to match their RB (duo). We have a TE to match theirs. We have a WR to match their top WR. We have a group of WRs to match their group of WRs (after the #1). I would further add that we have an OL this year that can matchup to theirs. Sure, I realize some players like Gates and LT were below the norm, but the point is still that we have players entering this season who very well could match the numbers their guys had last year.

 

I think that is one of the best comparisons you can make across the board on offense. With that offensive production, we probably would've went 11-5 or 12-4 last year since we lost 3 games by 3 pts or less.

[Mongo3451]

I think the talents of each team are very different. You may be able to pull out stats, but don't think they tell the most important part of the story.

 

Let's start with experience. SD's experience at QB, RB, TE, WR and OL is greater than ours. Our OL may be older, but it transitions into my second point.

 

Continuity. Though I feel Cutler is an elite talent, he is the 1st year of a system. Add to that, he is with all new players. The WR's are also looking at a potential 66% turnover in positions 1-3. RB and TE are set. But, OL is looking at a 60% change from last year. I am not so worried about the OL gelling because of the talent infusion it underwent. We could have had all the continuity in the world last year and our OL would have been below average. Pace alone significantly makes our OL better than last year.

 

Lastly, I finish with individual talent. This is the part that makes each O look completely different.

 

Cutler VS Rivers: You have the mobile cannon in Cutler vs the lightning realease of Rivers. Both are supremely talented in their own right, but Rivers has more tenure with his system and team mates. 2009 goes to Rivers.

 

Forte VS LT: We've seen their individual talents; one is a sure fire Hall of Famer nd the other an up and coming stud. Forte is on the up and LT the down. 2009 goes to Forte.

 

Sproles VS Jones: Sproles kills KJ. 2009 goes to Sproles

 

Bears WR's VS Chargers WR's: Call Hester and Jackson a wash. Although Chambers had a down year last year, he is better than any #2 we have. (BTW - I think he had some injuries last year) Bears are on the upside, but we have nothing proven beyond Hester. 2009 goes to San Diego

 

Bears TE's VS Chargers TE's: We have Olsen, which is widely considered the most up and coming TE in the game this year VS. Gates which is regarded as the best TE in football. Here's the rub, Gates has been hampered with foot injuries the last two seasons. Can he return to form? As of now I call Olsen V Gates a wash. Clark swings it for me. 2009 goes to Bears.

 

OL goes to Chargers. (Tired of typing and I don't think anyone would argue the point)

 

The Bears have an opportunity to have SD's stats this year, but I think it's unrealistic to expect us to catch or surpass them this year based on experience, continuity and availible talent. Our arrow is pointing more upward than theirs is though. I expect our O will be around 12th in the NFL this year, which is not bad at all.

[adam]

I think the talents of each team are very different. You may be able to pull out stats, but don't think they tell the most important part of the story.

 

Let's start with experience. SD's experience at QB, RB, TE, WR and OL is greater than ours. Our OL may be older, but it transitions into my second point.

 

Continuity. Though I feel Cutler is an elite talent, he is the 1st year of a system. Add to that, he is with all new players. The WR's are also looking at a potential 66% turnover in positions 1-3. RB and TE are set. But, OL is looking at a 60% change from last year. I am not so worried about the OL gelling because of the talent infusion it underwent. We could have had all the continuity in the world last year and our OL would have been below average. Pace alone significantly makes our OL better than last year.

 

Lastly, I finish with individual talent. This is the part that makes each O look completely different.

 

Cutler VS Rivers: You have the mobile cannon in Cutler vs the lightning realease of Rivers. Both are supremely talented in their own right, but Rivers has more tenure with his system and team mates. 2009 goes to Rivers.

 

Forte VS LT: We've seen their individual talents; one is a sure fire Hall of Famer nd the other an up and coming stud. Forte is on the up and LT the down. 2009 goes to Forte.

 

Sproles VS Jones: Sproles kills KJ. 2009 goes to Sproles

 

Bears WR's VS Chargers WR's: Call Hester and Jackson a wash. Although Chambers had a down year last year, he is better than any #2 we have. (BTW - I think he had some injuries last year) Bears are on the upside, but we have nothing proven beyond Hester. 2009 goes to San Diego

 

Bears TE's VS Chargers TE's: We have Olsen, which is widely considered the most up and coming TE in the game this year VS. Gates which is regarded as the best TE in football. Here's the rub, Gates has been hampered with foot injuries the last two seasons. Can he return to form? As of now I call Olsen V Gates a wash. Clark swings it for me. 2009 goes to Bears.

 

OL goes to Chargers. (Tired of typing and I don't think anyone would argue the point)

 

The Bears have an opportunity to have SD's stats this year, but I think it's unrealistic to expect us to catch or surpass them this year based on experience, continuity and availible talent. Our arrow is pointing more upward than theirs is though. I expect our O will be around 12th in the NFL this year, which is not bad at all.

Mongo, it was more of comparing the 2008 SD offensive production with the 2009 Chicago offensive production.

[Mongo3451]

Mongo, it was more of comparing the 2008 SD offensive production with the 2009 Chicago offensive production.

I got that. I'm just not a huge stat guy and don't think the teams compare well. Plus, SD's offense did not just emerge last year. With Cutler, Forte and Olsen there is hope. I just think it will take a little time. Maybe later in the season, we can start putting up those kind of numbers.

 

I'll be happy with our offense if we can score 21 pts/gm and simply win the "Time of Possession" battle on a consistent basis. That will allow the D to remain fresh.

[adam]

I got that. I'm just not a huge stat guy and don't think the teams compare well. Plus, SD's offense did not just emerge last year. With Cutler, Forte and Olsen there is hope. I just think it will take a little time. Maybe later in the season, we can start putting up those kind of numbers.

 

I'll be happy with our offense if we can score 21 pts/gm and simply win the "Time of Possession" battle on a consistent basis. That will allow the D to remain fresh.

I think you are over-rating playing together. If that was the case, Atlanta's offense should've sucked last year. They had a rookie QB, a new RB who was not even a starter on his former team (Turner) with no real threat at TE and a brand new HC to boot.

 

So using your logic, Atlanta should've finished 6-10?

[defiantgiant]

I think the talents of each team are very different. You may be able to pull out stats, but don't think they tell the most important part of the story.

 

Let's start with experience. SD's experience at QB, RB, TE, WR and OL is greater than ours. Our OL may be older, but it transitions into my second point.

 

Continuity. Though I feel Cutler is an elite talent, he is the 1st year of a system. Add to that, he is with all new players. The WR's are also looking at a potential 66% turnover in positions 1-3. RB and TE are set. But, OL is looking at a 60% change from last year. I am not so worried about the OL gelling because of the talent infusion it underwent. We could have had all the continuity in the world last year and our OL would have been below average. Pace alone significantly makes our OL better than last year.

 

Lastly, I finish with individual talent. This is the part that makes each O look completely different.

 

Cutler VS Rivers: You have the mobile cannon in Cutler vs the lightning realease of Rivers. Both are supremely talented in their own right, but Rivers has more tenure with his system and team mates. 2009 goes to Rivers.

 

Forte VS LT: We've seen their individual talents; one is a sure fire Hall of Famer nd the other an up and coming stud. Forte is on the up and LT the down. 2009 goes to Forte.

 

Sproles VS Jones: Sproles kills KJ. 2009 goes to Sproles

 

Bears WR's VS Chargers WR's: Call Hester and Jackson a wash. Although Chambers had a down year last year, he is better than any #2 we have. (BTW - I think he had some injuries last year) Bears are on the upside, but we have nothing proven beyond Hester. 2009 goes to San Diego

 

Bears TE's VS Chargers TE's: We have Olsen, which is widely considered the most up and coming TE in the game this year VS. Gates which is regarded as the best TE in football. Here's the rub, Gates has been hampered with foot injuries the last two seasons. Can he return to form? As of now I call Olsen V Gates a wash. Clark swings it for me. 2009 goes to Bears.

 

OL goes to Chargers. (Tired of typing and I don't think anyone would argue the point)

 

The Bears have an opportunity to have SD's stats this year, but I think it's unrealistic to expect us to catch or surpass them this year based on experience, continuity and availible talent. Our arrow is pointing more upward than theirs is though. I expect our O will be around 12th in the NFL this year, which is not bad at all.

 

I agree with basically all of this, except for one point: Hester and Jackson are not a wash by any means. Jackson is a better receiver until Hester proves otherwise, and I'm not sure that will happen. Remember that Jackson is an extremely young, up-and-coming player in his own right. If he makes even a small improvement on 2008, it'll be very hard for Hester to touch his production even in a best-case scenario.

 

Other than that, though, I agree with you on pretty much every count. O-line, receivers, and QB play all go to San Diego. RB and TEs go to Chicago; Forte will have a slightly better year than LdT, and I think Olsen and Clark can combine to barely edge out Gates in receiving yards. San Diego's second TE, Manumaleuna, is basically an extra offensive tackle. He's not really a receiving threat at all.

 

Still, I don't think the Bears' offense needs to be as productive as San Diego's. If we can put up 21 a game reliably and the defense can bounce back to '05-'06 form, we should win a lot of games.

[Mongo3451]

I got that. I'm just not a huge stat guy and don't think the teams compare well. Plus, SD's offense did not just emerge last year. With Cutler, Forte and Olsen there is hope. I just think it will take a little time. Maybe later in the season, we can start putting up those kind of numbers.

 

I'll be happy with our offense if we can score 21 pts/gm and simply win the "Time of Possession" battle on a consistent basis. That will allow the D to remain fresh.

 

I think you are over-rating playing together. If that was the case, Atlanta's offense should've sucked last year. They had a rookie QB, a new RB who was not even a starter on his former team (Turner) with no real threat at TE and a brand new HC to boot.

 

So using your logic, Atlanta should've finished 6-10?

 

Disagree with over-rating playing together. Great teams just don't happen overnight. You use Atlanta as a measuring stick, so I'll stay with that. One area they were solid in previous years was OL play and the running game. Take into consideration that running back is the fastest position to develop in the NFL. Given that Michael Turner was not a rookie, he came out of the box blazin'. The Falcons subsequently were 2nd in the NFL in rushing. That almost always gets you in the playoffs. So they at least had cohesion in one main area, OL.

 

BTW - Atlanta could have easily been 6-10 and nobody would have thought differently. Remember, I'm not glooming and dooming. I really think we'll be improved. Just not parallel to SD.

[nfoligno]

Just for the record, I had type a brilliant response to this some days back, but when I tried to add the reply, the server I guess was down, and I lost everything. This is my first time back since. I am going to reply again, but just wanted to let you know that my lost reply explained perfectly why you are wrong

 

The major categories where I don't see the Bears being equal to San Diego are the following:

 

QB - Passing Yards: In a vacuum, Cutler certainly has the ability to beat Rivers' 4,000 yard mark - he broke 4,500 yards with the Broncos last season. But the Broncos were running a wide-open passing offense, and San Diego's offense is closer to Denver's than it is to Chicago's. It remains to be seen whether Turner will stick to a conservative, run-based attack or not. If he does, I don't see Cutler quite making it to 4,000 yards passing.

 

One. I don't think Turner is nearly as conservative as many make him out to be. I think a combo of (a) Lovie hammering home the 'get of the bus running' comment and ( our passing game not being as downfield agressive last year give the impression Turner is conservative. I just disagree.

 

Last year, we ran the ball 434 times, compared to 528 passes. Should also factor 24 of those runs were Orton, nearly all of which started w/ an intended pass play. Point is, we were far more of a passing team than Lovie wants you to believe.

 

Two. Last year, we had a joke of an OL, and Turner compensated for that w/ 3 step drops, thus our offense was not wide open, but I would argue that was due to personnel, rather than scheme. Hell, look at our SB season w/ Rex under center. While we ran more, I would argue Rex was looking downfield far more. That year, our 2 QBs combined for 3,400 yards, and that was with a very pedestrian 55% completion percentage. Assuming Cutler brings a higher completion percentage, I see no reason not to believe he can't add another 600 yards to what Rex and Griese did a few years ago.

 

QB - Touchdowns: Sorry, but Cutler's not going to throw for 34 scores. The Bears' red-zone receiving package is not going to look ANYTHING like the Chargers'. San Diego gets down near the goal line and they get to put Antonio Gates, probably the second-best receiving TE in the NFL, on the field with Vincent Jackson (6'5" 240 lbs) and Malcom Floyd (6'5" 226 lbs.) All three guys are massive jump-ball threats. They throw the ball very successfully in the red zone as a result. The Bears, Cutler or no, are still going to punch it in on the ground when they get close to the end zone. We've got Greg Olsen and very little else in the way of red-zone targets.

 

One. Prior to this last season, Rivers had 22 and 21 TD seasons. I think few expected him to throw 34.

 

Two. While I agree they have more red zone targets, and further agree we may be more likely to punch more in on the ground, at the same time, I believe (a) Cutler will have solid TD numbers, and ( while his total TDs may be fewer than Rivers, that may also be offset by more ground game scores, thus keeping the overall picture w/ SD intact.

 

Three. While they have more weapons w/ size for the red zone, (a) we have some targets w/ size also, w/ Olsen (6'5) and Clark (6'3), ( further, they are more ways to score than simply with height in the red zone. I think we may have more potential for more long play scores w/ Cutler to Olsen and/or Hester. Further, if Olsen can score 18 TDs w/ last years receivers, I see no reason Cutler should add a considerable number to that total.

 

WR1 - Receiving yards: Jackson took a GIANT leap forward between 2007 and 2008. Do I think it's possible that Hester could do the same? Yes, definitely. Do I think we should be expecting Hester to take that kind of a jump? Nope.

 

Between those two years, Jackson's catch rate went from 51.3% to 58.4% and his yards-per-catch went from 15.1 to 18.6. Proportionally, that's a very large increase in both catching ability and per-catch production. Compared to the rest of the league, Jackson started with a low catch rate and a pretty high YPC, higher than most NFL receivers have. In 2008, he improved that to an average catch rate and a genuinely elite YPC. Of all the receivers in the league with at least 20 catches last year, only 3 guys had a higher YPC than Vincent Jackson.

 

Meanwhile, Hester finished 2008 with a 55.4% catch rate and a YPC of 13: he actually caught a lot more of the passes thrown his way than Jackson did back in 2007, but he did significantly less with those receptions. Basically, Hester's starting with a slightly below-average catch rate and a fairly average YPC.

 

So to make a jump proportionally equal to Jackson's, 2009-Hester would have to catch over 63% of passes thrown to him and would need to improve his YPC to over 16. That would make him a very reliable target by NFL standards, as well as a pretty good big-play threat. If he made that big of an improvement, he'd be able to hit 1100 yards receiving in about 110 targets, not that many more than the 101 that Jackson got in 2008. His stat line would look something like: 69 receptions for 1,110 yards and 6 TDs.

 

The key problem I have w/ your math is, you assume everything remains the same for Hester. I would argue there is a realistic expectation that (a) Hester see's more passes his way and ( Hester gets more legit opportunities downfield. You say Hester would need to catch 65% of the passes thrown his way, but that is assuming the same number of passes are thrown to him. I would argue there is the expectation more passes are thrown his way, and thus he would not need to catch 63% to equal VJ's jump in production. Further, I would argue that w/ an improved OL and a QB that can not only throw the ball downfield, but do so more on target than Orton, his likelihood of YPC rises also increases.

 

The reality is, w/ our personnel last year, we were forced to play a short passing game. Our OL simply could not hold their blocks long enough, and even when they could, we didn't have a QB very good going downfield. We have significantly upgraded in both areas, and I think it very reasonable to believe we will see more shots deep for Hester.

 

Further, I believe that (a) Cutler will improve our offense in terms of 3rd down conversion and total 1st downs (two areas we were among the worst in the league) and thus we will have more snaps, thus more passes and ( Cutler is a more accurate passer, and thus w/ a greater completion %, you see similar rises in the WRs production.

 

I believe 70 catches is a reasonable expectation for Hester. Further, due to the above arguments, I think 15 ypc is reasonable. That would be 1,050 yards, which is just shy of VJ's total production.

[nfoligno]

Continuity. Though I feel Cutler is an elite talent, he is the 1st year of a system. Add to that, he is with all new players. The WR's are also looking at a potential 66% turnover in positions 1-3. RB and TE are set. But, OL is looking at a 60% change from last year. I am not so worried about the OL gelling because of the talent infusion it underwent. We could have had all the continuity in the world last year and our OL would have been below average. Pace alone significantly makes our OL better than last year.

 

I do agree continuity is a key area. I have always said as much myself. At the same time, I think how significant the upgrade is also compensates for the continuity factor. You seem to argue the same in terms of the OL. More than any other area on a football team, I believe chemisty plays a huge part on the OL, and yet you even say that is compensated by the level of upgrade seen. I would argue similar w/ Cutler vs Orton.

 

Cutler VS Rivers: You have the mobile cannon in Cutler vs the lightning realease of Rivers. Both are supremely talented in their own right, but Rivers has more tenure with his system and team mates. 2009 goes to Rivers.

 

No argument that Rivers has more tenure w/ his team. Further, I would agree our O is likely to finish the year stronger than it starts. At the same time, I still think there is considerable comparison here. I would argue that the level of upgrade from Orton to Cutler washes most of, if not all, tenure argument here. Further, I think the two QBs are fairly comparable. Maybe Rivers has a quicker release. I honestly do not know. But that would seem to be offset, as Cutler is considered among the elite in terms of escaping pressure and throwing on the run. Further, like Rivers, Cutler is a solid completion % QB. I get the chemisty argument, but at the same time (like w/ the OL) feel it is offset by the level of upgrade.

 

Forte VS LT: We've seen their individual talents; one is a sure fire Hall of Famer nd the other an up and coming stud. Forte is on the up and LT the down. 2009 goes to Forte.

 

I am really not considering SD in 2009, but comparing the SD we saw in 2008 w/ our potential for 2009. The simple of it is, Forte was, and should be, better than the 2008 version of LT.

 

Sproles VS Jones: Sproles kills KJ. 2009 goes to Sproles

 

Again, you are talking about SD in 2009, but I am not. Last year, Sproles produced 330 yards. I think KJ will actually do better than that.

 

Bears WR's VS Chargers WR's: Call Hester and Jackson a wash. Although Chambers had a down year last year, he is better than any #2 we have. (BTW - I think he had some injuries last year) Bears are on the upside, but we have nothing proven beyond Hester. 2009 goes to San Diego

 

Again, I am talking about what SD did last year, and their WRs (outside VJ) simply did not do much. Outside of VJ, the only two WRs that gave any level of production was Floyd (27 catches) and Chambers (33). Neither of those two WRs have a great deal of chemistry w/ Rivers, and neither produced much. While our WRs are very young, I am not sure we should expect less production from ours.

 

Bears TE's VS Chargers TE's: We have Olsen, which is widely considered the most up and coming TE in the game this year VS. Gates which is regarded as the best TE in football. Here's the rub, Gates has been hampered with foot injuries the last two seasons. Can he return to form? As of now I call Olsen V Gates a wash. Clark swings it for me. 2009 goes to Bears.

 

Here is the key for me. Last year When you look at their passing production, you see 1 WR (59-1,100), 1 TE (60-704) 1 RB (52-426) and then a smaller level of production from a group of others, only one of which was over 30, and that was w/ 33. Well, I would argue in Hester, Olsen and Forte, we can match catch-yards production, and after that, we too have a group of players who the ball can be spread around to.

 

OL goes to Chargers. (Tired of typing and I don't think anyone would argue the point)

 

Their OL was solid last year, I also think our OL this year could be as good. Chemistry is a factor, agreed, but the level of upgrade must also be factored.

 

The Bears have an opportunity to have SD's stats this year, but I think it's unrealistic to expect us to catch or surpass them this year based on experience, continuity and availible talent. Our arrow is pointing more upward than theirs is though. I expect our O will be around 12th in the NFL this year, which is not bad at all.

 

At the end of the day, I still believe the offenses could be similar. You look at River's 4,000 yard production, and that is great. But then you look at how he got those yards, and that is where I see a huge similarity. SD didn't utilize a group of WRs, much less did they have one elite WR w/ huge numbers. SD was an offense (passing) based around one standout TE, one standout RB, one good WR and a host of others who contributed at much smaller levels. I believe we could be very similar.

[adam]

Two. Last year, we had a joke of an OL, and Turner compensated for that w/ 3 step drops, thus our offense was not wide open, but I would argue that was due to personnel, rather than scheme. Hell, look at our SB season w/ Rex under center. While we ran more, I would argue Rex was looking downfield far more. That year, our 2 QBs combined for 3,400 yards, and that was with a very pedestrian 55% completion percentage. Assuming Cutler brings a higher completion percentage, I see no reason not to believe he can't add another 600 yards to what Rex and Griese did a few years ago.

Yeah, 600 yards is not much over a course of a full season. If he passed for 10 more yards per quarter over 16 games that would be 640 yards overall. I don't think 4,000 yards is out of reason for Cutler.

 

For Hester, I think he can be better than Jackson. Look at Jackson's numbers a little deeper:

 

- 2008 was his 4th year in the league and first with over 1,000 yards. (2008 was Hester's 2nd year at WR) - So Hester is still technically less developed as a WR than Jackson.

- Jackson had a 3.6 YAC in 2008 and career is 3.2 (Hester had a 4.2 in 2008 and has a career 5.0 YAC)

- His Avg was 18.6 in 2008 (compared to Hester's 13.0)

 

So those numbers tell me that Jackson was getting the ball deeper down the field (about 6 yards deeper than Hester) every reception and actually doing less after the catch than Hester. So he basically benefited from the scheme by about (59*6) 354 yards. If you subtract those yards from Jackson he is looking at 59-744 compared to Hester's 51-665. Also, looking at 1st Down catches, Jackson blew Hester away 52-29, again telling me he was catching the ball near or beyond the 1st Down marker everytime whereas Hester was getting these little dink and dunks.

[defiantgiant]

Nfo, I think we're closer to agreement on the first two points than you think, but I should clarify my third point a little.

 

The major categories where I don't see the Bears being equal to San Diego are the following:

 

QB - Passing Yards: In a vacuum, Cutler certainly has the ability to beat Rivers' 4,000 yard mark - he broke 4,500 yards with the Broncos last season. But the Broncos were running a wide-open passing offense, and San Diego's offense is closer to Denver's than it is to Chicago's. It remains to be seen whether Turner will stick to a conservative, run-based attack or not. If he does, I don't see Cutler quite making it to 4,000 yards passing.

 

I agree that Cutler will be a significant improvement over previous years, and I guess this is splitting hairs, but I just don't see him quite making it to 4,000. I think 3,800-3,900 yards is about the best I'd expect. With a year in the offense under his belt and some better-developed receivers, I think he should break 4k yards in 2010.

 

QB - Touchdowns: Sorry, but Cutler's not going to throw for 34 scores. The Bears' red-zone receiving package is not going to look ANYTHING like the Chargers'. San Diego gets down near the goal line and they get to put Antonio Gates, probably the second-best receiving TE in the NFL, on the field with Vincent Jackson (6'5" 240 lbs) and Malcom Floyd (6'5" 226 lbs.) All three guys are massive jump-ball threats. They throw the ball very successfully in the red zone as a result. The Bears, Cutler or no, are still going to punch it in on the ground when they get close to the end zone. We've got Greg Olsen and very little else in the way of red-zone targets.

 

Rivers did make the jump from 22 TDs to 34, but I don't know of any reason why we'd expect Cutler to do the same without a comparable surrounding cast. My main point was that Rivers' primary option in the red zone, thanks to his receivers, was to throw the ball. I believe the Bears' primary option will still be to run it in with Forte, which will limit Cutler's passing TDs.

 

I'm going to have to quote you here, because I think we're in agreement. You said, "I believe (a) Cutler will have solid TD numbers, and ( while his total TDs may be fewer than Rivers, that may also be offset by more ground game scores, thus keeping the overall picture w/ SD intact."

 

I agree with this entirely. I think the Bears' offense as a WHOLE should score as much as San Diego's did last year. I just don't think Cutler will account for as many of our TDs as Rivers did of San Diego's. I see the Bears' offense scoring far less than 34 times through the air, but making it up on the ground.

 

WR1 - Receiving yards: Jackson took a GIANT leap forward between 2007 and 2008. Do I think it's possible that Hester could do the same? Yes, definitely. Do I think we should be expecting Hester to take that kind of a jump? Nope.

 

Between those two years, Jackson's catch rate went from 51.3% to 58.4% and his yards-per-catch went from 15.1 to 18.6. Proportionally, that's a very large increase in both catching ability and per-catch production. Compared to the rest of the league, Jackson started with a low catch rate and a pretty high YPC, higher than most NFL receivers have. In 2008, he improved that to an average catch rate and a genuinely elite YPC. Of all the receivers in the league with at least 20 catches last year, only 3 guys had a higher YPC than Vincent Jackson.

 

Meanwhile, Hester finished 2008 with a 55.4% catch rate and a YPC of 13: he actually caught a lot more of the passes thrown his way than Jackson did back in 2007, but he did significantly less with those receptions. Basically, Hester's starting with a slightly below-average catch rate and a fairly average YPC.

 

So to make a jump proportionally equal to Jackson's, 2009-Hester would have to catch over 63% of passes thrown to him and would need to improve his YPC to over 16. That would make him a very reliable target by NFL standards, as well as a pretty good big-play threat. If he made that big of an improvement, he'd be able to hit 1100 yards receiving in about 110 targets, not that many more than the 101 that Jackson got in 2008. His stat line would look something like: 69 receptions for 1,110 yards and 6 TDs.

 

 

As far as my math, what I did was find the proportional increase in per-target production between Jackson's 2007 and Jackson's 2008, then apply that to Hester's 2008. So when I say Hester would need to catch over 63% of the passes thrown to him, that's not in order to hit Jackson's 2008 yardage totals on a fixed number of targets, that's just to make proportionally as big of an improvement as Jackson did. Same thing goes for YPC: to have a proportional one-year increase from 2008-2009 like Jackson did from 2007-2008, Hester's YPC would have to go up by more than 3 yards, since 15.1:18.6 is the same ratio as 13.0:16.1 - they both divide out to a 1:1.23 ratio. If Hester's YPC increases by less than 23% of his 2008 number, then he's not improving as much as Jackson did.

 

So I'm actually not assuming that "everything remains the same for Hester" in terms of targets. In fact, I pointed out that Hester would need an increase in targets (up from 92 to 110 or so) to get close to Jackson's production. Basically, what I'm trying to say is "is it likely that Hester improves proportionally as much in 2009 as Jackson did in 2008?"

 

I think the answer to that question is no. I don't think that 70 catches is unreasonable at all, what I'm wondering is how many times Cutler is going to have to throw it to Hester to get him to 70. The same thing is true of yardage: of course Hester can break 1,000 yards, but the question is how many plays it'll take him to do it. The more plays it takes, the less effective he is as a player.

 

Without any proportional improvement at all, Hester could have gotten 70 catches in 2008; the problem is that he would have needed 126-127 targets to do it, and when you're getting thrown to that much, 70 catches is not a remarkable number to have. Likewise, he could have gotten 1,050 yards in 2008, but it would have taken him 81 catches (which, in turn, would have required that he be targeted on a whopping 146 passes.) He'd have the numbers, but 1,050 yards is not great production for a guy who gets thrown to 146 times.

 

I'm not trying to argue that Hester won't improve. I'm saying that it's unlikely that he'll see as dramatic an improvement as Vincent Jackson did between 2007 and 2008. I'm not saying he won't catch 70 passes or break 1000 yards - what I AM saying is that I doubt he'll be as effective on a per-target basis as Jackson was in 2008. He could beat Jackson's total numbers, but he will probably need a lot more passes going his way than the 101 that Jackson saw in 2008.

[adam]

As far as my math, what I did was find the proportional increase in per-target production between Jackson's 2007 and Jackson's 2008, then apply that to Hester's 2008. So when I say Hester would need to catch over 63% of the passes thrown to him, that's not in order to hit Jackson's 2008 yardage totals on a fixed number of targets, that's just to make proportionally as big of an improvement as Jackson did. Same thing goes for YPC: to have a proportional one-year increase from 2008-2009 like Jackson did from 2007-2008, Hester's YPC would have to go up by more than 3 yards, since 15.1:18.6 is the same ratio as 13.0:16.1 - they both divide out to a 1:1.23 ratio. If Hester's YPC increases by less than 23% of his 2008 number, then he's not improving as much as Jackson did.

 

So I'm actually not assuming that "everything remains the same for Hester" in terms of targets. In fact, I pointed out that Hester would need an increase in targets (up from 92 to 110 or so) to get close to Jackson's production. Basically, what I'm trying to say is "is it likely that Hester improves proportionally as much in 2009 as Jackson did in 2008?"

 

I think the answer to that question is no. I don't think that 70 catches is unreasonable at all, what I'm wondering is how many times Cutler is going to have to throw it to Hester to get him to 70. The same thing is true of yardage: of course Hester can break 1,000 yards, but the question is how many plays it'll take him to do it. The more plays it takes, the less effective he is as a player.

 

Without any proportional improvement at all, Hester could have gotten 70 catches in 2008; the problem is that he would have needed 126-127 targets to do it, and when you're getting thrown to that much, 70 catches is not a remarkable number to have. Likewise, he could have gotten 1,050 yards in 2008, but it would have taken him 81 catches (which, in turn, would have required that he be targeted on a whopping 146 passes.) He'd have the numbers, but 1,050 yards is not great production for a guy who gets thrown to 146 times.

 

I'm not trying to argue that Hester won't improve. I'm saying that it's unlikely that he'll see as dramatic an improvement as Vincent Jackson did between 2007 and 2008. I'm not saying he won't catch 70 passes or break 1000 yards - what I AM saying is that I doubt he'll be as effective on a per-target basis as Jackson was in 2008. He could beat Jackson's total numbers, but he will probably need a lot more passes going his way than the 101 that Jackson saw in 2008.

DG,

One huge factor to consider is Hester was catching passes from Orton and Jackson was catching passes from Rivers. Also, the Bears conservative offense gave him his 13 YPC. Also, how many of those chances that Hester got were actually decent? He did have his share of drops, but there were a lot of bad passes thrown his way as well. I don't like YPC compared to YAC which Hester actually beat Jackson 4.2 to 3.6. Can Hester really control when he actually gets the ball (8 yards down the field compared to 15 yards down the field)?

[defiantgiant]

DG,

One huge factor to consider is Hester was catching passes from Orton and Jackson was catching passes from Rivers. Also, the Bears conservative offense gave him his 13 YPC. Also, how many of those chances that Hester got were actually decent? He did have his share of drops, but there were a lot of bad passes thrown his way as well. I don't like YPC compared to YAC which Hester actually beat Jackson 4.2 to 3.6. Can Hester really control when he actually gets the ball (8 yards down the field compared to 15 yards down the field)?

 

I'm not trying to argue that Hester being a less effective receiver than Jackson is Hester's fault. Whether it's in his control (yards after the catch) or out of his control (yards through the air, to some extent) is beyond the scope of my argument. All I'm trying to say is that I think it's unlikely that he'll improve as much in one year as Jackson did.

 

Now, the issue of Cutler/Orton as compared to Rivers is interesting. It's true that Hester's going to be working with a better QB than he was last year, and I definitely believe that'll help him improve statistically. But I doubt that improvement in QB play will net Hester a proportional improvement like Vincent Jackson's, and I think there's good reason for that doubt: Jackson saw a larger improvement in Rivers' performance than Hester is likely to see going from Orton to Cutler.

 

Jackson's statistical jump in 2008 coincided with a HUGE step forward for Philip Rivers. Let's compare 2007 Rivers to 2008 Orton and 2008 Rivers to a ballpark estimate of what Cutler can do in 2009 (provided that Cutler's performance stays more or less the same per-attempt as it has been throughout his career.) Some people think Jay will take a step backward with Turner and the Bears WRs, but for the purposes of this argument, I'm assuming he won't. So first let's look at 2007 Rivers and 2008 Orton:

 

2007 Rivers: 277/460 (60.2%) for 3152 yards (6.9 YPA), 21 TD, 15 Interceptions, 82.4 QB rating

2008 Orton: 272/465 (58.5%) for 2972 yards (6.4 YPA) 18 TD, 12 Interceptions, 79.6 QB rating

 

Philip Rivers' performance in 2007 is surprisingly similar to Orton's in 2008. Their completions/attempts numbers were nearly identical. Orton threw for slightly fewer yards, TDs, and interceptions, all of which you'd expect from a relatively safe QB who doesn't have a great deep ball. All in all, though, Rivers' 2007 is VERY comparable to Orton's 2008. Rivers really turned a corner in 2008, however:

 

2008 Rivers: 312/478 (65.3%) for 4009 yards (8.4 YPA), 34 TD, 11 Interceptions, 105.5 QB rating

 

Since Orton and pre-improvement Rivers are pretty comparable, all we have to ask now is whether Cutler in 2009 will be as good as Rivers in 2008. To get my Cutler projection, I assumed that the Bears will throw the same number of times with Cutler in 2009 (527 attempts) as they did with Orton/Grossman in 2008. My reasoning is that Cutler's a better QB than Turner's had in the past (which should increase the number of passing attempts,) but the Bears as a whole will be better and won't be playing from behind as often (which should lead to fewer passing attempts) so the two factors should cancel each other out.

 

Then I applied Cutler's career completion percentage and per-attempt performance (yards, TDs, and interceptions per attempt) to those 527 attempts. It's mainly just a rough estimate to reflect how Cutler has performed thus far in his career. So let's compare 2008 Rivers to my hypothetical 2009 Cutler:

 

2008 Rivers: 312/478 (65.3%) for 4009 yards (8.4 YPA), 34 TD, 11 Interceptions, 105.5 QB rating

2009 Cutler: 329/527 (62.5%) for 3899 yards (7.4 YPA), 23 TD, 15 Interceptions, 87.6 QB rating

 

While I think that Cutler will be a big upgrade over Orton, his career numbers are not anywhere close to Rivers' performance in 2008. To match Rivers' 2008 on a per-attempt basis, Cutler would need to hit a career-high completion percentage, bump up his YPA by an entire yard, and have a career-low interception total. If you're predicting that Cutler will help Hester to a Vincent Jackson-like improvement, you've got to be predicting a HUGE career season from Cutler in his first year under Ron Turner.

 

Yes, Cutler could easily top Orton by nearly 1,000 yards (which would put him 670 yards over Orton/Grossman combined) and that will help Hester. But I don't see Cutler having the best season of his career in his first year in Chicago, just like I don't see Hester breaking out to the extent that Jackson did. Will Hester improve? Yes. Will Cutler be an upgrade? Yes. But I just don't think we can bank on either of them blowing up like Rivers/Jackson did in 2008. That kind of thing just doesn't happen that often.

[nfoligno]

I agree that Cutler will be a significant improvement over previous years, and I guess this is splitting hairs, but I just don't see him quite making it to 4,000. I think 3,800-3,900 yards is about the best I'd expect. With a year in the offense under his belt and some better-developed receivers, I think he should break 4k yards in 2010.

 

Not significant argument here. If you are saying 3,800-3,900 yards, while I am saying 4,000, I don't think the difference is worth arguing over.

 

Rivers did make the jump from 22 TDs to 34, but I don't know of any reason why we'd expect Cutler to do the same without a comparable surrounding cast. My main point was that Rivers' primary option in the red zone, thanks to his receivers, was to throw the ball. I believe the Bears' primary option will still be to run it in with Forte, which will limit Cutler's passing TDs.

 

I'm going to have to quote you here, because I think we're in agreement. You said, "I believe (a) Cutler will have solid TD numbers, and ( while his total TDs may be fewer than Rivers, that may also be offset by more ground game scores, thus keeping the overall picture w/ SD intact."

 

I agree with this entirely. I think the Bears' offense as a WHOLE should score as much as San Diego's did last year. I just don't think Cutler will account for as many of our TDs as Rivers did of San Diego's. I see the Bears' offense scoring far less than 34 times through the air, but making it up on the ground.

 

Gotta take a step back. I was not saying that each and every individual would specifically matchup w/ SD, but that we could have a similar offense, and "overall" be comparable. While I agree Cutler may fall short by a few (yards/scores) of Rivers last year, at the same time, I think Forte could makeup the difference over what SD saw on the ground. So while that stats may not matchup perfect, I think they will end up pretty close.

 

Regarding Hester, I fully understand your logic and reasoning. By two main points still exist though.

 

One. I understand your math in terms of % of passes thrown to Hester caught last year. My point is, I believe there is legit reason to expect a greater number of passes thrown his way this year. (a) Hester has another year of development, which likely means better development of route running, thus getting open more ( while Orton was a look under first QB, Cutler is more like Rex is first looking to throw deep and © with an improved OL, it leads to more time for the QB to wait for that downfield route runner to get open. All this sets up for a solid situation for Hester to see more opportunities.

 

So the first part of this argument is that Hester is set up to see more balls thrown his way w/ a QB like Cutler, and an improved OL, than he did last year w/ Orton and a very weak OL.

 

Two. While I do not expect Hester to jump to 20 ypc or whatever VJ had, at the same time, I think (for the above reasons) he is likely to see an increase in YPC average. Simply put, Hester is a downfield threat who didn't have a downfiled passer last year, but does this year in Cutler. I think it on the conservative side to predict a 2 ypc increase.

 

So when you combine the two points, I do believe it sets up for Hester to see a similar increase is production as VJ did. No, I am not saying it will be exact, and further, I am not saying he will end up w/ his numbers the exact same way VJ did. In fact, honestly, if Hester ended up w/ only 55 catches (even if the YPC were ridiculously high) I would be disappointed. So while Hester may not have the huge YPC, I think he will regardless be of a similar mold. Exact? No. But similar enough for the big picture comparison.

 

Again, I think you need to take a step back and look at the big picture piece of the argument. You want to debate whether the individual trees are identical, while I am saying the forest overall is very similar.

 

SD had a solid offense. They did not have one, much less multiple elite WRs. They did not have an elite run game (at least not last year). What they had was:

 

A very good QB - check - Cutler may not be identical to Rivers, but is a very solid QB, capable of similar play.

 

A good, but far from great WR - check - Hester is similar to VJ. Maybe their stats do not end up identical, but each serves a similar purpose for their offense. Both are downfield threats who are more big play than consistent.

 

A very good TE - check - Gates is elite, but he was not last year. He was not elite last year. Olsen is already on the border of what Gates did last year, and I think there is plenty reason to believe he equals, if not surpasses, what Gates did last year.

 

A solid or better ground game - check - Forte actually did better than LT last year, and did so in similar fashion, being a multiple threat runner/receiver. We can debate how good KJ is, but when you look at SD's #2 RB, I think it fair enough to expect similar from KJ.

 

So, while many teams around the league play at a high level w/ more or even multiple top tier WRs as their top threats, SD was an effective passing team utilizing a WR, TE and RB. I see similar for us.

[defiantgiant]

Again, I think you need to take a step back and look at the big picture piece of the argument. You want to debate whether the individual trees are identical, while I am saying the forest overall is very similar.

 

SD had a solid offense. They did not have one, much less multiple elite WRs. They did not have an elite run game (at least not last year). What they had was:

 

A very good QB - check - Cutler may not be identical to Rivers, but is a very solid QB, capable of similar play.

 

A good, but far from great WR - check - Hester is similar to VJ. Maybe their stats do not end up identical, but each serves a similar purpose for their offense. Both are downfield threats who are more big play than consistent.

 

A very good TE - check - Gates is elite, but he was not last year. He was not elite last year. Olsen is already on the border of what Gates did last year, and I think there is plenty reason to believe he equals, if not surpasses, what Gates did last year.

 

A solid or better ground game - check - Forte actually did better than LT last year, and did so in similar fashion, being a multiple threat runner/receiver. We can debate how good KJ is, but when you look at SD's #2 RB, I think it fair enough to expect similar from KJ.

 

So, while many teams around the league play at a high level w/ more or even multiple top tier WRs as their top threats, SD was an effective passing team utilizing a WR, TE and RB. I see similar for us.

 

As far as the big picture being similar, I'll agree with that. The Bears have a very good QB, have a top-10 running back who can catch, will (probably) use a TE as their #1 receiving target, and (hopefully) will have their leading wideout pull in 900-1000 yards receiving. I even think you can extend the parallel a little further: I see no reason why Earl couldn't perform like Chris Chambers has been for the past few years (roughly 35 catches-500 yards-4 TDs or so.)

 

All the nit-picking about effectiveness aside, I think you're right. The Bears' 2009 offense might not perform quite up to the elite level that San Diego's did in 2008 (when they were 11th in the league in total offense, 7th in passing yards, and 2nd in offensive scoring,) but it's going to be set up in a very similar way, and it should be productive.

 

EDIT: Also, I definitely think the Bears will have a better ground game than the Chargers. As good as they were in every other category, San Diego was 20th in the league in rushing last year, and I think 2009 might finally be the year where LdT breaks down for real. Meanwhile, Forte's on his way up and won't be seeing 9 guys in the box any more.

[nfoligno]

EDIT: Also, I definitely think the Bears will have a better ground game than the Chargers. As good as they were in every other category, San Diego was 20th in the league in rushing last year, and I think 2009 might finally be the year where LdT breaks down for real. Meanwhile, Forte's on his way up and won't be seeing 9 guys in the box any more.

 

I actually think SD could see a jump in their run game this year. I don't think Lt is finished, though I don't think he will ever again be elite. But the big factor here is Sproles. I think SD works him into the system more, which will also benefit LT.

 

Back to the bears, I do agree this is an area we could see the 2009 Bears surpass the 2008 Chargers. As you said, Forte is a top 10 RB, and on the way up. Further, I think Jones could play a signifant role.

 

Further, our RBs have done what they did behind weak OLs, and no passing game, thus stacked boxes. I have a hard time seeing defenses stack the box nearly so much w/ Cutler under center, and I think our OL would do a much better job opening holes than it did last year. As excited as I am about our potential in the passing game w/ Cutler, I am equally excited to see what our run game will be like w/ defenses forced to play honest and a legit OL.

 

When was the last time we had such a combination? There were years where we had a solid OL, but our QBs was such that defenses stacked the box. Even w/ Rex, a QB who liked to throw deep, defenses stacked the box because the rap on him was, pressure him and he would fold. So for years, our RBs have dealt w/ stacked boxes, and in only a couple of those years, we could at least help w/ a good OL. But I can't remember the last time we had both a solid OL and a solid QB.

[defiantgiant]

Yeah, our 05-06 line was a very good run-blocking group, but they still were going against 8 in the box constantly. Rex wasn't really a threat because he was too inconsistent, and Kyle didn't have the long ball to open things up.

 

When I think back on it, it's a testament to that line and Thomas Jones that we had as much success as we did running the ball. If there's one thing I'm legitimately mad at Angelo for, it's trading Jones. Imagine if they had kept him after '06...TJ/Forte (or Forte/TJ) would be an AWESOME backfield.

 

But I think Forte and The Other Jones should do just fine this year. Teams won't be able to stack the line of scrimmage like they have in the past. Hester's got a long way to go as a receiver, but he's already shown that he can beat single-coverage, and you have to believe that Cutler will get him the ball if he's open. I think our running backs are going to see a lot of five- and six-man fronts this year.