Bears' 2008 O-line

[defiantgiant]

Found this on another forum - a list of starting offensive linemen around the league and the number of sacks they allowed. Linemen get assessed 0.5 either for allowing an assisted sack on a solo block or allowing a solo sack as half of a double-team block. They get assessed 0.25 for allowing an assisted sack as half of a double-team. 2008 Bears players are in bold. New players for 2009 are in italics, although Chris Williams and Frank Omiyale are omitted, since neither had enough starts in 2008 to make the list.

 

LT

1. Ryan Clady (Broncos) 0.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

2. Michael Roos (Titans) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

3. Tra Thomas (Eagles) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

3. Orlando Pace (Rams) 2.0 sacks allowed (14 starts)

5. Jake Long (Dolphins) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

6. Jordan Gross (Panthers) 3.0 sacks allowed (15 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

6. Jammal Brown (Saints) 3.0 sacks allowed (15 starts)

6. Jared Gaither (Ravens) 3.0 sacks allowed (15 starts)

6. Marcus McNeill (Chargers) 3.0 sacks allowed (14 starts)

6. Tony Ugoh (Colts) 3.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

6. Chris Samuels (Redskins) 3.0 sacks allowed (12 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

6. Todd Weiner (Falcons) 3.0 sacks allowed (11 starts)

13. Walter Jones (Seahawks) 3.5 sacks allowed (12 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

14. D’Brickashaw Ferguson (Jets) 4.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

14. Bryant McKinnie (Vikings) 4.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

14. Max Starks (Steelers) 4.0 sacks allowed (11 starts)

17. Joe Thomas (Browns) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

17. Branden Albert (Cheifs) 4.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

19. Levi Brown (Bengals) 5.5 sacks allowed (11 starts)

20. Mike Gandy (Cardinals) 6.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

21. David Diehl (Giants) 6.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

22. Flozell Adams (Cowboys) 7.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

23. Khalif Barnes (Jags) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

23. Matt Light (Pats) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

23. Chad Clifton (Packers) 7.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

23. Kwame Harris (Raiders) 7.5 sacks allowed (11 starts)

27. Joe Staley (49ers) 8.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

28. Donald Penn (Bucs) 8.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

29. Jeff Backus (Lions) 9.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

30. John St. Clair (Bears) 9.75 sacks allowed (16 starts)

31. Duane Brown (Texans) 11.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

31. Jason Peters (Bills) 11.5 sacks allowed (13 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

 

LG

1. Kris Dielman (Chargers) 0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

1. Charlie Johnson (Colts) 0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

1. David Baas (49ers) 0 sacks allowed (9 starts)

4. Carl Nicks (Saints) 0.5 sacks allowed (13 starts)

5. Todd Herremans (Eagles) 0.75 sacks allowed (15 starts)

6. Brian Waters (Chiefs) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

7. Josh Beekman (Bears) 1.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

8. Robert Gallery (Raiders) 1.75 sacks allowed (16 starts)

8. Reggie Wells (Cardinals) 1.75 sacks allowed (16 starts)

10. Eugene Amano (Titans) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

10. Chris Chester (Ravens) 2.0 sacks allowed (11 starts)

12. Chester Pitts (Texans) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

12. Ben Hamilton (Broncos) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

12. Travelle Wharton (Panthers) 2.5 sacks allowed (14 starts)

12. Jacob Bell (Rams) 2.5 sacks allowed (13 starts)

12. Jeff Smiley (Dolphins) 2.5 sacks allowed (12 starts)

17. Rich Seubert (Giants) 3.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

17. Pete Kendall (Redskins) 3.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

17. Justin Blalock (Falcons) 3.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

27. Eric Steinbach (Browns) 3.0 sacks allowed (14 starts)

21. Floyd Womack (Seahawks) 3.5 sacks allowed (14 starts)

22. Edwin Mulitalo (Lions) 4.25 sacks allowed (11 starts)

23. Arron Sears (Bucs) 4.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

23. Uche Nwaneri (Jags) 4.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

23. Cory Procter (Cowboys) 4.5 sacks allowed (11 starts)

26. Logan Mankins (Pats) 5.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

26. Andrew Whitworth (Bengals) 5.0 sacks allowed (10 starts)

28. Daryn Colledge (Packers) 6.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

29. Steve Hutchinson (Vikings) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

29. Alan Faneca (Jets) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

31. Chris Kemoeatu (Steelers) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

32. Derrick Dockery (Bills) 8.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

 

C

1. Olin Kreutz (Bears) 0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

1. Todd McClure (Falcons) 0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

1. Chris Myers (Texans) 0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

1. Kevin Mawae (Titans) 0 sacks allowed (15 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

1. Ryan Kalil (Panthers) 0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

6. Brad Meester (Jags) 0.25 sacks allowed (10 starts)

7. Lyle Sendlein (Cardinals) 0.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

8. Duke Preston (Bills) 0.75 sacks allowed (11 starts)

9. Casey Wiegmann (Broncos) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

9. Jeff Faine (Bucs) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

9. Jonathan Goodwin (Saints) 1.0 sacks allowed (13 starts)

12. Nick Mangold (Jets) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

12. Andre Gurode (Cowboys) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

12. Shaun O’Hara (Giants) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

12. Matt Birk (Vikings) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

12. Jeff Saturday (Colts) 2.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

12. Dominic Raiola (Lions) 2.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

12. Nick Leckey (Rams) 2.0 sacks allowed (10 starts)

19. Jason Brown (Ravens) 2.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

19. Jamaal Jackson (Eagles) 2.25 sacks allowed (16 starts)

21. Hank Fraley (Browns) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

21. Nick Hardwick (Chargers) 2.5 sacks allowed (13 starts)

21. Jake Grove (Raiders) 2.5 sacks allowed (12 starts)

21. Chris Spencer (Seahawks) 2.5 sacks allowed (11 starts)

25. Rudy Niswanger (Chiefs) 3.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

25. Scott Wells (Packers) 3.5 sacks allowed (13 starts)

27. Eric Heitmann (49ers) 4.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

27. Eric Ghaiciuc (Bengals) 4.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

29. Samson Satele (Dolphins) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

29. Dan Koppen (Pats) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

31. Casey Rabach (Redskins) 5.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

32. Justin Harwig (Steelers) 6.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

 

RG

1. Chris Kuper (Broncos) 0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

2. Jake Scott (Titans) 0.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

2. Max Jean-Gilles (Eagles) 0.5 sacks allowed (10 starts)

4. Chris Snee (Giants) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)*PRO-BOWL*

4. Harvey Dahl (Falcons) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

4. Jason Spitz (Packers) 1.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

4. Ikechuku Ndukwe (Dolphins) 1.0 sacks allowed (15 starts)

4. Brad Butler (Bills) 1.0 sacks allowed (13 starts)

4. Davin Joseph (Bucs) 1.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

4. Adrian Jones (Chiefs) 1.0 sacks allowed (10 starts)

11. Rex Hadnot (Browns) 1.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

12. Deuce Lutui (Cardinals) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

12. Brandon Moore (Jets) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

12. Mike Brisiel (Texans) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) …ERFA

12. Jahri Evans (Saints) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts) …RFA

12. Mike Pollak (Colts) 2.0 sacks allowed (13 starts)

12. Stephen Neal (Pats) 2.0 sacks allowed (9 starts)

18. Roberto Garza (Bears) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

19. Randy Thomas (Redskins) 4.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

19. Robbie Williams (Bengals) 4.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

19. Cooper Carlisle (Raiders) 4.0 sacks allowed (15 starts)

19. Stephen Peterman (Lions) 4.0 sacks allowed (14 starts)

19. Tony Wragge (49ers) 4.0 sacks allowed (10 starts) …RFA

24. Leonard Davis (Cowboys) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts) *PRO-BOWL*

24. Mike Goff (Chargers) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

26. Darnell Stapleton (Steelers) 5.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

27. Ben Grubbs (Ravens) 6.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

27. Richie Incognito (Rams) 6.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

29. Dennis Norman (Jags) 7.25 sacks allowed (14 starts)

30. Anthony Herrera (Vikings) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

 

RT

1. Ryan Diem (Colts) 1.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

1. Jon Stinchcomb (Saints) 1.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

1. Ray Willis (Seahawks) 1.5 sacks allowed (10 starts)

4. David Stewart (Titans) 2.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

4. Mark Tauscher (Packers) 2.0 sacks allowed (13 starts)

6. Ryan Harris (Broncos) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

6. Tyson Clabo (Falcons) 2.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

8. Langston Walker (Bills) 3.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

8. Nick Kaczur (Pats) 3.0 sacks allowed (14 starts)

10. Willie Anderson (Ravens) 3.5 sacks allowed (11 starts)

11. Kareem McKenzie (Giants) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

11. Vernon Carey (Dolphins) 4.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

11. Kevin Shaffer (Browns) 4.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

14. Jeff Otah (Panthers) 5.0 sacks allowed (12 starts)

15. Tony Pashos (Jags) 5.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

15. Marc Colombo (Cowboys) 5.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

17. Willie Colon (Steelers) 5.75 sacks allowed (16 starts) …RFA

18. John Tait (Bears) 6.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

18. Jeremy Trueblood (Bucs) 6.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

18. Ryan Cook (Vikings) 6.0 sacks allowed (14 starts)

18. Gosder Cherilus (Lions) 6.0 sacks allowed (13 starts)

22. Damien Woody (Jets) 6.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

22. Jeromey Clary (Chargers) 6.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

22. Jon Jansen (Redskins) 6.5 sacks allowed (11 starts)

25. Jon Runyan (Eagles) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

25. Damion McIntosh (Chiefs) 7.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

27. Cornell Green (Raiders) 7.5 sacks allowed (16 starts)

27. Alex Barron (Rams) 7.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

29. Eric Winston (Texans) 8.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

30. Stacy Andrews (Bengals) 9.5 sacks allowed (15 starts)

31. Adam Snyder (49ers) 9.5 sacks allowed (13 starts)

32. Levi Brown (Cardinals) 11.0 sacks allowed (16 starts)

 

What do you guys think? I think it's fair to say we significantly upgraded the two worst spots on the line, even if you don't factor in Chris Williams.

[madlithuanian]

Interesting...

 

I really would have thought Garza would have more. But I think I'm recalling false starts more!

 

 

[defiantgiant]

Interesting...

 

I really would have thought Garza would have more. But I think I'm recalling false starts more!

 

Yeah, the whole interior of the Bears' line did very well. I don't know how much of that was due to the obvious liabilities at tackle, though. I mean, why try to test Olin Kreutz when you can just run around Tait or shove St. Clair out of the way?

 

Looking at Beekman's numbers, though, I don't know why they're trying to replace him. It seems like our best line, with the pieces we have now, would be Pace-Beekman-Kreutz-Omiyale/Garza-Williams/Shaffer. I guess Omiyale might offer better run-blocking than Beekman, who never really bulldozed anybody last season. Still, it seems like the answer would be to get the two of them on the field at the same time.

[nfoligno]

Honestly, I am not sure this is an end-all-be-all stat. It may be telling, but there is more to the story.

 

If you go by these numbers, you would get the impressions that

 

(a) Kreutz is still a stud, but how many here believe that has been the case,

( our interior was damn good, but that simply does not seem to mesh w/ what I saw in the games and

( we didn't give up that many sacks overall.

 

OTs were a major weak link in terms of pass protection. No question. But I also felt our interior gave up plenty of pressure. One key difference I would point out is pass rush through the interior is more easily seen by the QB, and thus the QB can better throw it away. It may not go down as a sack, but that doesn't mean the OL did its job.

 

The other aspect I think must be considered, and a key IMHO to our upgrades, comes in run blocking. Simply put, our interior was weak in terms of run blocking, and that is best seen in Forte's weak YPC in short yardage situation where the interior OL simply didn't get much push. I think key to upgrading Beekman was his very sub-par run blocking. Omiyale is bigger, and the believe is he will add size/power to our interior run blocking.

 

Yeah, the whole interior of the Bears' line did very well. I don't know how much of that was due to the obvious liabilities at tackle, though. I mean, why try to test Olin Kreutz when you can just run around Tait or shove St. Clair out of the way?

 

Looking at Beekman's numbers, though, I don't know why they're trying to replace him. It seems like our best line, with the pieces we have now, would be Pace-Beekman-Kreutz-Omiyale/Garza-Williams/Shaffer. I guess Omiyale might offer better run-blocking than Beekman, who never really bulldozed anybody last season. Still, it seems like the answer would be to get the two of them on the field at the same time.

 

[azbearsfan]

Honestly, I am not sure this is an end-all-be-all stat. It may be telling, but there is more to the story.

 

If you go by these numbers, you would get the impressions that

 

(a) Kreutz is still a stud, but how many here believe that has been the case,

( our interior was damn good, but that simply does not seem to mesh w/ what I saw in the games and

( we didn't give up that many sacks overall.

 

OTs were a major weak link in terms of pass protection. No question. But I also felt our interior gave up plenty of pressure. One key difference I would point out is pass rush through the interior is more easily seen by the QB, and thus the QB can better throw it away. It may not go down as a sack, but that doesn't mean the OL did its job.

 

The other aspect I think must be considered, and a key IMHO to our upgrades, comes in run blocking. Simply put, our interior was weak in terms of run blocking, and that is best seen in Forte's weak YPC in short yardage situation where the interior OL simply didn't get much push. I think key to upgrading Beekman was his very sub-par run blocking. Omiyale is bigger, and the believe is he will add size/power to our interior run blocking.

 

 

Its a good look at the line to be sure. Another thing I dont think it includes is a missed assignment and someone coming free and hitting the qb. Like if Kruetz helped Beekman with a block but let a blitzing LB come through. Stuff like that. So like you said, its a good look but not the end all be all.

[nfoligno]

I will admit, I am biased. Even when many felt our OL was doing "decent" last year, I didn't. I thought a QB w/ some sense of pocket presence, a solid RB and some other factors made them look better than they were. Beyond the "sacks given up", some things I consider (other than simply what I saw on the field).

 

One. Turner's comment. Sometimes you have to go beyond the stats. After the season, but before Cutler, many were questioning Orton's arm, and saying Orton didn't have the arm to go deep. Turner disputed this, and said the reason we didn't often throw downfield was not due to Orton's arm, but due to our OL and protection. Turner flat out said that, because we needed to keep Orton upright, we had to run a scheme based on 3 step drops, which simply does not allow for many downfield opportunities/looks. While he didn't call out the OL by name, simply saying 3 steps was all the time Orton had to get rid of the ball was pretty indicative of the pass protection of our OL.

 

Many felt our OL was better last year in pass protection than run blocking. I felt both sucked. In terms of pass protection, our OL simply didn't look as bad as it was due to Turner utilizing a quick release system that limited the pass rush potential of other teams.

 

Two. Forte is awesome. I think we all agree on this point. So often Forte had solid runs, but how many were due to the OL opening holes? Often I saw Forte either (a) squeeze through a tiny hole or ( get big yards on borken plays where he used re-direction (ala Thomas Jones). Not often did I see Forte gain big chunks of yards running through legit holes. To me, that is further supported when looking at the numbers.

 

(a) When a team needs that extra yard or two, how often did we convert? Well, on 3rd and short, Forte had 25 carries for 48 yards. That is not even 2 yards per carry. Heck, if you take away the one he broke off for 18 yards, and he would be left w/ 24 carries for 30 yards, just over 1 yard per carry. That is pathetic, and IMHO, mostly due to our OL (interior especially) simply not being strong/powerful enough to get that forward push.

 

( 4th down was just as bad, w/ 7 carries for 12 yards. Take away the long carry of 8, and you have 6 carries for 4 yards. Ouch!

 

Simply put, our OL was pushed back far more often on these short yardage situations.

 

I simply think our OL stunk last year, despite what the sack stats may say.

 

St. Clair was just flat out awful. His pass protection was pathetic, and his run blocking weak. Beekman was better than expected in pass protection IMHO. Most of the times he had trouble were dealing w/ stunts/blitzes/mis-direction, which is somewhat to be expected of a younger OG. But his run blocking was weak. Forte had a 3.3 ypc avg running to the left.

 

Garza didn't look awful last year, but IMHO, that was far more relative. Tait was more than a step slow in pass protection, but servicable in run blocking. Forte had a 4 ypc avg running to the right, and that is also where it simply seemed (eye test) where Forte would do his most damage. Then again, that is aided by the addition of Clark, who usually lined up on the right side.

 

Kreutz? Who knows. At times I think he is trying to help the OGs too much, and in turn looking bad. Other times I fear he has simply lost it. This year will tell us a lot.

 

The good is, I think we have significantly upgraded our run blocking w/ Pace and Omiyale. I am not sure Williams will be an upgrade in run blocking, but do believe he is a significant upgrade in pass protection. Throw in having a QB w/ far greater escape ability and an arm that makes defenses play honest, and I think our OL could end up looking very good this year.

 

Its a good look at the line to be sure. Another thing I dont think it includes is a missed assignment and someone coming free and hitting the qb. Like if Kruetz helped Beekman with a block but let a blitzing LB come through. Stuff like that. So like you said, its a good look but not the end all be all.

 

[defiantgiant]

OTs were a major weak link in terms of pass protection. No question. But I also felt our interior gave up plenty of pressure. One key difference I would point out is pass rush through the interior is more easily seen by the QB, and thus the QB can better throw it away. It may not go down as a sack, but that doesn't mean the OL did its job.

 

That's an interesting point. I hadn't considered that having the rusher in the QB's field of vision would make for fewer sacks and more hits/pressures. It makes sense intuitively, and I bet it's true. It's a shame that the list doesn't include pressures and hits off failed blocks. Still, I'm glad that replacing our tackles was a high priority this offseason.

 

The other aspect I think must be considered, and a key IMHO to our upgrades, comes in run blocking. Simply put, our interior was weak in terms of run blocking, and that is best seen in Forte's weak YPC in short yardage situation where the interior OL simply didn't get much push. I think key to upgrading Beekman was his very sub-par run blocking. Omiyale is bigger, and the believe is he will add size/power to our interior run blocking.

 

If memory serves, last season the Bears actually averaged significantly higher YPC when running off the three middle linemen than when running off either tackle or running to left or right end. They also ran up the middle over 50% of the time. I'm not saying the middle did a GOOD job run-blocking (they were 15th in the league, according to Football Outsiders,) just that the tackles were even less effective. I'd be happy to see an upgrade in the interior line's run-blocking, but the tackles were our Achilles' heel in the run game last season, just like they were in the passing game.

[nfoligno]

If memory serves, last season the Bears actually averaged significantly higher YPC when running off the three middle linemen than when running off either tackle or running to left or right end. They also ran up the middle over 50% of the time. I'm not saying the middle did a GOOD job run-blocking (they were 15th in the league, according to Football Outsiders,) just that the tackles were even less effective. I'd be happy to see an upgrade in the interior line's run-blocking, but the tackles were our Achilles' heel in the run game last season, just like they were in the passing game.

 

Hey, I think it all sucked, and I am absolutely not trying to defend the OTs.

 

If I were to pin-point our (run game) weakest link, it would not be OTs, but simply the left side. When Forte ran to the left, statistically (and my memory) he was the least successful. 3.3 ypc left side and 3.7 left sideline. To the right, he actually had decent/good numbers. 4.0 right side and 4.2 right sideline.

 

IMHO, Tait was not awful on run down. Not good, but not awful. On pass downs, the DEs were simply too fast for him. On run downs though, his lack of quickness/speed were less evident, and he was able to simply drive into the DE. Garza is a decent enough guy in terms of power. IMHO, here Garza truly fails is in stunts and knowledge overall, but in run blocking, where you simply drive into the guy in front of you, he did decent enough. It seemed like we could always pick up a couple yards going to the right. To the left? Not only was it a brick wall, but the wall actually moved into the backfield.

 

If I were to grade our indiviaul OL last year...

 

St. Clair - Pass Blocking D, Run Blocking D minus.

Beekman - Pass Blocking C, Run Blocking D.

Garza - Pass Blocking D plus, Run blocking C.

Tait - Pass Blocking F, Run Blocking C minus.

 

I don't bash St. Clair too much as he was never supposed to be our starting LT, and gets a bit of slack. Beekman did better than expected, but was still just not good enough. Garza was decent in a relative sense, but I wonder how he will look this year w/ better players. Tait got old fast, very fast.

 

This year, I see Pace as a huge upgrade to St. Clair, both in run and pass blocking. Omiyale is a bit of a question, but I think he should be at least as good as Beekman in pass blocking (and likely better as he is more agile and will have a better veteran next to him) and should be an upgrade in run blocking due to his size/strength. Williams should be an improved pass blocker (which was the area he was expected to excel) but I have questions about his potential in run blocking. Garza? Who knows. My hope is that if our left side is good enough, Kreutz can focus on assisting the right side, and thus Garza/Williams may get some support, not to mention Clark on that side.

 

My hope for an X factor is Gaines, who I hope we are looking to use more like a FB than a TE. I simply believe McKie sucks. I remember last year, late in the year, lining up Olsen as an in-line blocker. My hope we we use Gaines in such a way, which I think could really help our run blocking as well.

[GrizzlyBear]

Well when camp hits there will be competition on the right side I am sure. , Kevin Shaffer will push Williams and Buenning will push Garza, At least I hope. The result is that the Bears have significantly upgraded thier talent in the O line and something we have not seen since the 80's. I know Thayer is totaly Geeked over the upgrades and thinks if they Gel like expected it will be a awsome year for the line. Even with injury it appears we have enough talent now to weather any storm.

[AZ54]

I forgot all about Gaines. I'll be very interested to see how they are lining him up in training camp.

[defiantgiant]

I forgot all about Gaines. I'll be very interested to see how they are lining him up in training camp.

 

Honestly, I just hope he can fill the 3rd TE role. We haven't had a good pure blocking TE since John Gilmore left. Clark is a pretty good blocker, but he's not a bulldozer, and Olsen is just adequate. If Gaines can perform like Gilmore did in that role, I'll be happy with the acquisition.

[Stinger226]

If memory serves, last season the Bears actually averaged significantly higher YPC when running off the three middle linemen than when running off either tackle or running to left or right end. They also ran up the middle over 50% of the time. I'm not saying the middle did a GOOD job run-blocking (they were 15th in the league, according to Football Outsiders,) just that the tackles were even less effective. I'd be happy to see an upgrade in the interior line's run-blocking, but the tackles were our Achilles' heel in the run game last season, just like they were in the passing game.

 

Hey, I think it all sucked, and I am absolutely not trying to defend the OTs.

 

If I were to pin-point our (run game) weakest link, it would not be OTs, but simply the left side. When Forte ran to the left, statistically (and my memory) he was the least successful. 3.3 ypc left side and 3.7 left sideline. To the right, he actually had decent/good numbers. 4.0 right side and 4.2 right sideline.

 

IMHO, Tait was not awful on run down. Not good, but not awful. On pass downs, the DEs were simply too fast for him. On run downs though, his lack of quickness/speed were less evident, and he was able to simply drive into the DE. Garza is a decent enough guy in terms of power. IMHO, here Garza truly fails is in stunts and knowledge overall, but in run blocking, where you simply drive into the guy in front of you, he did decent enough. It seemed like we could always pick up a couple yards going to the right. To the left? Not only was it a brick wall, but the wall actually moved into the backfield.

 

If I were to grade our indiviaul OL last year...

 

St. Clair - Pass Blocking D, Run Blocking D minus.

Beekman - Pass Blocking C, Run Blocking D.

Garza - Pass Blocking D plus, Run blocking C.

Tait - Pass Blocking F, Run Blocking C minus.

 

I don't bash St. Clair too much as he was never supposed to be our starting LT, and gets a bit of slack. Beekman did better than expected, but was still just not good enough. Garza was decent in a relative sense, but I wonder how he will look this year w/ better players. Tait got old fast, very fast.

 

This year, I see Pace as a huge upgrade to St. Clair, both in run and pass blocking. Omiyale is a bit of a question, but I think he should be at least as good as Beekman in pass blocking (and likely better as he is more agile and will have a better veteran next to him) and should be an upgrade in run blocking due to his size/strength. Williams should be an improved pass blocker (which was the area he was expected to excel) but I have questions about his potential in run blocking. Garza? Who knows. My hope is that if our left side is good enough, Kreutz can focus on assisting the right side, and thus Garza/Williams may get some support, not to mention Clark on that side.

 

My hope for an X factor is Gaines, who I hope we are looking to use more like a FB than a TE. I simply believe McKie sucks. I remember last year, late in the year, lining up Olsen as an in-line blocker. My hope we we use Gaines in such a way, which I think could really help our run blocking as well.

I think with the new pieces we added, it upgrades the starters from last year that will start. I think with a better RBlocking O lineman we will look better on the pass blocking just to due to the change in our offensive strategy being we have a total upgrade of the QB position. If we run the ball well, that would be in so much of a pass rushing mode and if we pass first to set up a run, the confusion will slow down the pass rush.

[Pixote]

Honestly, I just hope he can fill the 3rd TE role. We haven't had a good pure blocking TE since John Gilmore left. Clark is a pretty good blocker, but he's not a bulldozer, and Olsen is just adequate. If Gaines can perform like Gilmore did in that role, I'll be happy with the acquisition.

 

The thing I worry about is I love the prospect of K Davis. I think he could be a monster TE for us. When Clark hangs it up I would love to see Olsen & Davis in our 2 TE package. How do we carry 4 TEs?

[selection7]

I think your admitted bias is affecting your grades a little. As Ray Lewis once said (something like) "Those other guys get paid to win too". We had the 13th rated TD scoring offense (tied with the Broncos) and were 15th rated overall in scoring (includes FGs and defensive/ST TDs)...which was one slot ahead, yes ahead, of the Denver Broncos. Somehow I'm skeptical it was all the work of our best players Hester/Olson, Orton, and rookie Forte...the line was part of that. ...unless you think Turner is underrated.

 

By the way, the rest of your reply was convincing, nevertheless.

 

St. Clair - Pass Blocking D, Run Blocking D minus.

Beekman - Pass Blocking C, Run Blocking D.

Garza - Pass Blocking D plus, Run blocking C.

Tait - Pass Blocking F, Run Blocking C minus.

 

[nfoligno]

First, I have actually defended Turner, particularly last year. For example, I gave Turner credit for moving around Olsen so much. I thought he was very creative in how used Olsen. Everyone ripped him for Bennett, but I think he gets serious credit for Olsen. Also, I think he did a good job overall w/ scheme, and give him a big credit for keeping Orton upright.

 

Far from perfect, and I myself could come up w/ plenty of reasons to bash him, as any fan could for any coach. But I do think he deserves credit for how well our offense did overall last year considering our limitations.

 

Second, as for our offense, while we did score, you really think our offense was good or effective?

 

We ranked 25th in 3rd down conversion %

 

We ranked 26th in 4th down conversion %

 

I don't know where to find the stats, but it sure didn't seem like our red zone TD % was very good.

 

All I know is, what I saw was a weak OL. They did not pass protect well, and that was a key reason Turner kept Orton throwing short passes on quick 3 step drops. Our run blocking was not good, and that can be seen as much as anything through Forte's ypc average. Beyond the stats, and just going off the eye ball test, Forte just didn't have the holes to run through.

 

Finally, if our OL was better than I am making out, why all the changes? Why the big push to upgrade more than half of our OL?

 

I think your admitted bias is affecting your grades a little. As Ray Lewis once said (something like) "Those other guys get paid to win too". We had the 13th rated TD scoring offense (tied with the Broncos) and were 15th rated overall in scoring (includes FGs and defensive/ST TDs)...which was one slot ahead, yes ahead, of the Denver Broncos. Somehow I'm skeptical it was all the work of our best players Hester/Olson, Orton, and rookie Forte...the line was part of that. ...unless you think Turner is underrated.

 

By the way, the rest of your reply was convincing, nevertheless.

 

[nfoligno]

Not saying it is going to happen, and I don't think it will, but I would not mind at all if we just did away w/ McKie. I think we could use Gaines as a FB, and even saw Olsen used as such. I just do not think McKie brings anything to table, and thus would just as soon go w/ 4 TEs and loose the FB.

 

The thing I worry about is I love the prospect of K Davis. I think he could be a monster TE for us. When Clark hangs it up I would love to see Olsen & Davis in our 2 TE package. How do we carry 4 TEs?

 

[selection7]

First, I have actually defended Turner, particularly last year.

 

Second, as for our offense, while we did score, you really think our offense was good or effective?

 

All I know is, what I saw was a weak OL.

 

Finally, if our OL was better than I am making out, why all the changes? Why the big push to upgrade more than half of our OL?

My overall point is somebody's got to get the credit for the O being more "effective" than half the league, even with a "weak" line. And, really, an O-line can be both of those words since "weak" is better than "terrible" and "effective" can be worse than "good". I suppose you get to say Turner was partially responsible for the O's successes since you aren't a Turner basher...that's why I brought it up. Of course you could also give Kyle some credit, I do, though not much of that goes on anymore. But it has to be someone. Brian Urlacher didn't put those points up.

 

But you can't argue with raw points scored by the offense, especially considering the field position wasnt' great like it was the year before and save for our TE, we had no marquee offensive skill players. I think if you had watched every game for every team last year you'd be talking like you've been about almost half of them ...even though you're basically describing one of the few worst OLs in football. That's all my point is. I'm not asking anyone to call them "good". It's not like I'm beating my chest about them ultimately being uninspiring/mediocre. It's just that as it turns out we had bigger problems at WR and on the D.

 

Why would our GM only want to upgrade his OL if they were terrible? Tait's not getting any younger. Anyway, that's not the more interesting argument.

[nfoligno]

From a personnel standpoint, I do not believe any position (unit) was as great of a problem as the OL. Not WR. Not D as a whole. Not QB. We had numerous issues heading into the offseason, but I would argue none were greater than the OL.

 

Defense would be the argument of many. I said all along our top need on defense was coaching. I felt we had talent, but poor coaching was making it impossible for that talent to play at a high level. That isn't to say we were loaded w/ pro bowlers on defense. Only to say that with better coaching, the talent we had could be solid.

 

You mention WR. No argument WR was a need. But when your OL is so weak that, per Turner, we could only use 3 step drop sets, your WRs are not likely to do much anyway.

 

Back to the credit department. As you said, I give Turner a lot of credit. Frankly, based purely on personnel, I think we should have likely been a bottom 5 offense, and to have finished where we did, well, Turner gets credit.

 

I give Orton a ton of credit. I like Orton, and have called for him for a while. While he may lack that special quality I think Cutler has, there was also a lot to like about Orton. IMHO, Rex was a QB that made OLs look worse than they were due to his total lack of pocket presence. Orton is the opposite. Orton had a solid pocket presence, IMHO, and was able to make the OL look better than it was at times.

 

Ditto w/ Forte. The OL was just not doing Forte many favors.

 

So I would give Turner, Orton and Forte a ton of credit. The OL? Not so much.

 

My overall point is somebody's got to get the credit for the O being more "effective" than half the league, even with a "weak" line. And, really, an O-line can be both of those words since "weak" is better than "terrible" and "effective" can be worse than "good". I suppose you get to say Turner was partially responsible for the O's successes since you aren't a Turner basher...that's why I brought it up. Of course you could also give Kyle some credit, I do, though not much of that goes on anymore. But it has to be someone. Brian Urlacher didn't put those points up.

 

But you can't argue with raw points scored by the offense, especially considering the field position wasnt' great like it was the year before and save for our TE, we had no marquee offensive skill players. I think if you had watched every game for every team last year you'd be talking like you've been about almost half of them ...even though you're basically describing one of the few worst OLs in football. That's all my point is. I'm not asking anyone to call them "good". It's not like I'm beating my chest about them ultimately being uninspiring/mediocre. It's just that as it turns out we had bigger problems at WR and on the D.

 

Why would our GM only want to upgrade his OL if they were terrible? Tait's not getting any younger. Anyway, that's not the more interesting argument.

 

[defiantgiant]

Back to the credit department. As you said, I give Turner a lot of credit. Frankly, based purely on personnel, I think we should have likely been a bottom 5 offense, and to have finished where we did, well, Turner gets credit.

 

Couldn't agree with you more. Turner, Orton, and Forte all made an offensive unit that should have been in the NFL basement into one that performed respectably. I was VERY down on Turner before last season, but he really impressed me. He adjusted his playbook to camouflage the glaring holes in the roster, he got the best possible performance out of the pieces he had, and the offense did surprisingly well as a result. Lovie might be on the hot seat this season, but I think Turner proved that he deserves to stay back in 2008.

[nfoligno]

Yea, I think many fans just think about those FB dives, and are too quick to discount the greater body.

 

When you are talking about coaching, one of the most simplistic ways to look at the coach is to evaluate whether a team/unit under-performed or over-performed based on talent. When I look at our defense, I see a lot more talent than our play/stats reflected. On the other hand, on offense, I see a talent level that would expectations around bottom five territory.

 

Our offense was not great, but did FAR better than I believe realistic expectations should have been placed. Thus I think you have to give credit to the coach. On defense, I think we did FAR WORSE than expected based on talent, and thus the coach has to take the fall.

 

Honestly, I do not think an offseason took place that so aligned w/ my own impressions.

 

I felt the D had talent, but coaching sucked and pulled them down. Angelo made a couple (minor mostly) additions/changes on defense, but the biggest changes were in the coaches, where all key position coaches were canned, and replacements were of a higher level, w/ highly respected veteran coaches taking over every area.

 

On offense, it starts w/ the OL, and while I might have gone through the draft, Angelo likes to add OL in FA, and at the end of the day, we added 3 veterans (including a future HOF'er), not to mention getting our 1st round pick back. 3 new starters and improved depth.

 

Everyone knew our passing game has issues. We went after and got (to my still today shock) a franchise QB, with the philosophy that a QB makes WRs more than the other way around.

 

We didn't get that stud WR, but did continue to add young WRs. But unlike in the past, we have a QB (and OL) to help develop that young WR talent. Imagine if last year, Denver signed a veteran to pair w/ Marhsall. Would Royal have developed?

 

Honestly, I am still just in shock. Over the years, Angelo has made a move here or a move there I wanted/agreed with, but never has the entire offseason strategy seemed to be so in line w/ my own.

 

If we bomb this year, I am sure Angelo will get ripped, but I figure I likely will as well. One thing for sure. If we bomb this year, you won't hear me say a negative word about Angelo.

 

Couldn't agree with you more. Turner, Orton, and Forte all made an offensive unit that should have been in the NFL basement into one that performed respectably. I was VERY down on Turner before last season, but he really impressed me. He adjusted his playbook to camouflage the glaring holes in the roster, he got the best possible performance out of the pieces he had, and the offense did surprisingly well as a result. Lovie might be on the hot seat this season, but I think Turner proved that he deserves to stay back in 2008.

 

[Mongo3451]

Yea, I think many fans just think about those FB dives, and are too quick to discount the greater body.

 

When you are talking about coaching, one of the most simplistic ways to look at the coach is to evaluate whether a team/unit under-performed or over-performed based on talent. When I look at our defense, I see a lot more talent than our play/stats reflected. On the other hand, on offense, I see a talent level that would expectations around bottom five territory.

 

Our offense was not great, but did FAR better than I believe realistic expectations should have been placed. Thus I think you have to give credit to the coach. On defense, I think we did FAR WORSE than expected based on talent, and thus the coach has to take the fall.

 

Honestly, I do not think an offseason took place that so aligned w/ my own impressions.

 

I felt the D had talent, but coaching sucked and pulled them down. Angelo made a couple (minor mostly) additions/changes on defense, but the biggest changes were in the coaches, where all key position coaches were canned, and replacements were of a higher level, w/ highly respected veteran coaches taking over every area.

 

On offense, it starts w/ the OL, and while I might have gone through the draft, Angelo likes to add OL in FA, and at the end of the day, we added 3 veterans (including a future HOF'er), not to mention getting our 1st round pick back. 3 new starters and improved depth.

 

Everyone knew our passing game has issues. We went after and got (to my still today shock) a franchise QB, with the philosophy that a QB makes WRs more than the other way around.

 

We didn't get that stud WR, but did continue to add young WRs. But unlike in the past, we have a QB (and OL) to help develop that young WR talent. Imagine if last year, Denver signed a veteran to pair w/ Marhsall. Would Royal have developed?

 

Honestly, I am still just in shock. Over the years, Angelo has made a move here or a move there I wanted/agreed with, but never has the entire offseason strategy seemed to be so in line w/ my own.

 

If we bomb this year, I am sure Angelo will get ripped, but I figure I likely will as well. One thing for sure. If we bomb this year, you won't hear me say a negative word about Angelo.

Count me in too... I really loved this off-season. Torry Holt would have been the cherry on top.