19 days to Camp

[Wesson44]

19 days to Camp: Football Outsiders projects Bears to win NFC

By Brad Biggson July 12, 2009 7:22 AM | Permalink | Comments (37) | TrackBacks (0)

 

The game of baseball lends itself to endless statistical analysis. You could just talk numbers from now until Tuesday's all-star game about the struggles of the Cubs without even mentioning the sideshows that have dominated the season to this point on the North Side. There is a statistical explanation or trend for everything.

 

Football isn't broken down in quite the same way, or at least it has not been in the mainstream. But the good folks at Football Outsiders are doing all they can to introduce some new tools for examining the game. Just this past week they released the Football Outsiders Almanac in PDF format. The actual book should be available in a few weeks on Amazon.com. This is the same publication that previously was Pro Football Prospectus.

 

If you put stock in their work you can call your travel agent. Football Outsiders projects the Bears to win the NFC this season. That's right, they have the Bears returning to Miami three years after losing Super Bowl XLI there.

 

"We have them with the highest projected record of any team in the NFC,'' managing editor Bill Barnwell said. "Thanks to improvements along the offensive line and a defense that we expect to be much healthier."

 

The addition of Jay Cutler has a little bit to do with their forecast as well. We've done a little light reading through the 517-page book and it's loaded with some very interesting analysis, some of which we will touch on right here and more of which we'll get into later this week and as we get closer to training camp. The PDF version of the book is available on their Web site here if you want to check it out yourself.

 

The statistic at the center of almost everything Football Outsiders does is DVOA--Defense Adjusted Value Over Average. It's not quite as simple as yards per carry or even the often misleading passer rating. What DVOA does is put yardage gained into better perspective. An eight-yard pass on third-and-10 isn't very helpful. It's going to lead to a punt. But a one-yard run on third-and-one is effective, right? A one-yard one on third-and-one vs. the Williams Wall or the Pittsburgh Steelers is more impressive, too, than say an identical outcome vs. Detroit. DVOA evaluates every single play during the NFL season and strips out plays such as Hail Mary passes, kneel downs, spikes, and every play is studied after adjusting for down, distance, situation on the field and the quality of the opponent. So every third-and-one play across the entire league is analyzed. Every third-and-12 is studied. Every snap for all 32 teams goes under the microscope. The DVOA is the percentage vs. the league average. So a 10 percent DVOA is pretty good. A running back with a 10 percent DVOA is doing 10 percent better than the league average. On defense, a negative DVOA means a team is allowing fewer yards than the league average.

 

So where do the Bears stack up? Well, it's been since 1995 that they had a positive DVOA on offense. Erik Kramer's big season when he passed for 3,838 yards and 29 touchdowns hasn't been replicated since. In fact, no Bears' passer has come close. According to Football Outsiders, the Bears had a 17.7 percent DVOA that year as an offense, which is tremendous production. Last year, they were minus-4.3 percent, similar to the minus-4.2 percent they registered during the Super Bowl season of 2006. The worst during their 14-year stretch in which they had just the one positive season (1995) came during the Terry Shea Experiment of 2004 when the Bears were at minus-36.5 percent, worst in the league.

 

Defensively, the Bears fared much better last season than their total defense ranking of 21st, which measures just yards allowed. When Lovie Smith says there is more to defense than yards allowed, perhaps he has his DVOA in mind. The Bears' DVOA on defense in 2008 was minus-6.8 percent, which ranked seventh. That was one spot better than where they were in 2007. Football Outsiders' system had the Bears as the second-ranked defense in the league in 2006 at minus-19.7 percent and tops in 2005 when they were minus-21.5 percent. The lowest they have finished under Smith was ninth in 2004. We'll get into a few reasons why the DVOA was solid last season a little later on.

 

First, let's look at a few things on offense.

 

*** Running back Matt Forte had a minus-7.1 percent DVOA last season. His yards per carry average of 3.9 was a culprit and remember the Bears were not very successful in third- and fourth-and-short situations. Barnwell says with modest improvements by Forte this season he should post an improved DVOA.

 

*** The Bears' best wide receiver last year according to DVOA was Brandon Lloyd at minus-6.0 percent. Devin Hester was minus-9.5 percent.

 

*** Tight end Greg Olsen had a DVOA of 0.0 meaning he was right in line with league average.

 

"Even though the stats are league average I think realistically some of the ridiculous one-handed catches he made and the stuff he did on the field, that probably undersells him a little bit,'' Barnwell said. "But relative to the defenses he was playing and where he was catching the ball, he was right at league average. I think the biggest reason why was he wasn't getting too far down the field. His average was right about 10 yards. When those 10-yard patterns become 12-yard patterns, and if they can keep Cutler up a little bit longer, Olsen's DVOA will improve."

 

Football Outsiders projects big things for the Bears, though, and that means improvement all around. We'll get into the offensive line, which Barnwell touched on, later in the week. He acknowledged the team needs a vertical threat.

 

"We would see Hester [being that player],'' Barnwell said. "You look at the offense. They're going to have Earl Bennett, most likely, as a possession guy and Olsen can also be a possession guy. Then you have Hester as the vertical threat. Certainly he has the athleticism. Watching him on film last year, you could really see improvement in his routes. More than one person who watches the Bears for us actually mentioned he was doing a lot better. We have a pretty high projection for Hester this year.''

 

Just how do they project Hester? 62 receptions, 858 yards (13.8 avg.) and 5 touchdowns. It adds up to a 2.7 percent DVOA.

 

Olsen? 61 receptions, 738 yards, 7 touchdowns, 17.0 percent DVOA

 

Matt Forte? 322 rushes, 1,272 yards, 4.0 average, 68 receptions, 417 yards, 14 touchdowns, 2 touchdowns, 8.4 percent DVOA (as a rusher)

 

And Cutler? 301 completions, 493 attempts, 61.2 percent, 3,409 yards, 20 touchdowns, 12 interceptions, 3.0 percent DVOA. Cutler had a 22.0 percent DVOA in Denver last season meaning he was 22 percent more productive than the league average at quarterback. The drop they're projecting has to be an indication of what it will be like for him without Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal. Make no mistake, Football Outsiders likes the trade for the Bears, "The Bears paid for an elite quarterback and they're getting one."

 

More on the offense later in the week.

 

A couple real interesting defensive nuggets:

 

*** The Bears were first in the league in rushing the passer with seven defenders and fourth in rushing the passer with six defenders. There's plenty to get into on their pass rush, or lack of a pass rush, as we move forward.

 

*** The Bears were No. 1 in the league in yards after the catch, allowing just 3.9 yards per reception. However, that doesn't mean Football Outsiders was kind to any of the defensive backs with the exception of the departed Mike Brown.

 

*** The Bears were second in the league in DVOA when they hurried the quarterback, just behind Pittsburgh.

 

*** One more note, the Bears ranked fifth in the league on special teams in DVOA after being No. 1 in 2006 and 2007.

 

There is a lot to chew on here and our hope is we introduced some statistical analysis in a manner in which it's easy to understand. We had the benefit of a nice chat with Barnwell. The Football Outsiders Web site is stocked with great information. We'll try to share a little more here in the coming days.

 

 

[adam]

The Bears have a great shot to win the NFC. There is really no elite team in the NFC. Only 4 teams had 10 or more wins last year (NYG, CAR, ATL, and MIN). None of those teams are really dominant.

[defiantgiant]

The Bears have a great shot to win the NFC. There is really no elite team in the NFC. Only 4 teams had 10 or more wins last year (NYG, CAR, ATL, and MIN). None of those teams are really dominant.

 

I might have characterized the Giants as a dominant team before the thing with Plaxico went down. Even with Plax gone, I can't think of a team that's better on both lines than the Giants; if your o-line and d-line are as good as the Giants', you're pretty close to dominant in my book. If Nicks and Manningham can step up at WR, I think the Giants will be a very, very hard team to beat.

 

Personally, I think the Bears have a very good chance to make the playoffs, either as NFC North champs or as a wildcard, but I'd be surprised to see us win the NFC title this year. The Giants, Eagles, and Panthers are looking VERY tough this year: if the Bears make it to the conference championship and get knocked out by one of those three, I'll still be very happy with the improvements we've made. We're just not as complete a team as New York, Philly, or Carolina yet. One more offseason like the one Jerry put together this year, though, and I think the Bears will be the team to beat in the NFC.

[Wesson44]

I might have characterized the Giants as a dominant team before the thing with Plaxico went down. Even with Plax gone, I can't think of a team that's better on both lines than the Giants; if your o-line and d-line are as good as the Giants', you're pretty close to dominant in my book. If Nicks and Manningham can step up at WR, I think the Giants will be a very, very hard team to beat.

 

Personally, I think the Bears have a very good chance to make the playoffs, either as NFC North champs or as a wildcard, but I'd be surprised to see us win the NFC title this year. The Giants, Eagles, and Panthers are looking VERY tough this year: if the Bears make it to the conference championship and get knocked out by one of those three, I'll still be very happy with the improvements we've made. We're just not as complete a team as New York, Philly, or Carolina yet. One more offseason like the one Jerry put together this year, though, and I think the Bears will be the team to beat in the NFC.

 

IMHO I think that we are a better them than the three you listed. We beat Philly last year, had Carolina beat and we had Orton at QB We didn't play the Giants. Plax gone hurts the G-Men who now will need the other WR to step up and lost a few players. Philly is stop Westbrook. And the Panthers have Stop Smith and contain the RB and you win. So we have a good QB, Hester /Manning on the punts and kicks Olsen & co at TE, Forte/Jones at RB the Defense is going to be back to form....Hey we can beat anyone!!!

[nfoligno]

No love for the defending NFC champion? Teams I see as being in/around the tops.

 

NFC West

 

Az - Good enough to get to the SB last year. Frankly, they have been one of those teams that was expected to make the jump for years, but never did. Until last year. I can't think of any big losses. On offense, they not only kept Warner/Boldin and Fitz, but added a solid RB in the draft. They have a pretty good defense, and IMHO, solid coaching now. I think they are going to be very tough again.

 

SF could be improved, but while they "may" contend for a wildcard, I don't see them being much more. Seattle could be an interesting team w/ the return of their QB and the addition of Houshie, but I don't see them on the upper tier.

 

NFC South

 

This is a pretty dang good division. The good thing is, they will hopefully beat each other up:)

 

Carolina is the team you mentioned, but honestly, I am just not a huge believer in Delhomme. On the other hand, as you said, they have great talent along both lines, thus they should be solid again. I simply question if they will dominate again this year as I see their division being so good.

 

Atlanta is a team I think could move past Carolina to be honest. Their offense did so much last year, and both QB and RB were in their 1st years w/ the team. Throw in Tony G, and I think this could be a very good offense again, and their defense could be better.

 

TB - They were good last year, but I just don't see them being much better as they still have too many issues on offense. Wildcard esq team.

 

NO - They have the offense, which could be even better w/ a healthy Colston, but still not the D to be more than a likely wild card team.

 

NFC East.

 

No question in my mind NY is the team to beat. While they have questions at receiver, they have a QB to makeup for some of that, not to mention a great OL and run game to further help offset. And that defense was great, and will only be better w/ the return of Osi, who missed last year.

 

Phily - Honestly, I see them being good, but not great.

 

Dallas - Just too many questions w/ the loss of their top play maker on offense, still a questionable OL, and an inconsistent defense.

 

NFC North

 

GB - I think their defense will struggle some making the switch to a 3-4. They should have a sollid offense though, but will they be able to compensate for a shaky D?

 

Minny - Still the team I worry about. QB issues aside, this team doesn't rely on the QB as much w/ elite OL and run game, as well as DL.

 

Det - Year right.

 

I think Minny, NYG, Atlanta and Az are the teams I would be looking at the most (and I think we will be in the tier) w/ Phily, Carolina and GB in the next tier.

 

I might have characterized the Giants as a dominant team before the thing with Plaxico went down. Even with Plax gone, I can't think of a team that's better on both lines than the Giants; if your o-line and d-line are as good as the Giants', you're pretty close to dominant in my book. If Nicks and Manningham can step up at WR, I think the Giants will be a very, very hard team to beat.

 

Personally, I think the Bears have a very good chance to make the playoffs, either as NFC North champs or as a wildcard, but I'd be surprised to see us win the NFC title this year. The Giants, Eagles, and Panthers are looking VERY tough this year: if the Bears make it to the conference championship and get knocked out by one of those three, I'll still be very happy with the improvements we've made. We're just not as complete a team as New York, Philly, or Carolina yet. One more offseason like the one Jerry put together this year, though, and I think the Bears will be the team to beat in the NFC.

 

[defiantgiant]

IMHO I think that we are a better them than the three you listed. We beat Philly last year, had Carolina beat and we had Orton at QB We didn't play the Giants. Plax gone hurts the G-Men who now will need the other WR to step up and lost a few players. Philly is stop Westbrook. And the Panthers have Stop Smith and contain the RB and you win. So we have a good QB, Hester /Manning on the punts and kicks Olsen & co at TE, Forte/Jones at RB the Defense is going to be back to form....Hey we can beat anyone!!!

 

I don't know...we beat Philly last year, but they've improved a HUGE amount this offseason. They should have one of the best offensive lines in the league with the additions of Jason Peters and Stacy Andrews, plus Shawn Andrews sliding out to his college position at RT. They added another extremely talented receiver, Jeremy Maclin, to go with Jackson/Curtis/Avant, who were all very effective last season. They fixed their running game, too: they added LeSean McCoy to back up Westbrook, and Weaver can handle short-yardage carries. Our big problem last season was defending the pass, and every single Eagles wideout would be the #1 receiver on the Bears right now. I look at how much better that team has gotten and I just don't see how we'd beat them again in 2009, absent an injury to McNabb.

 

Also, with the Panthers: stopping Steve Smith and their running game is easier said than done. Smith is one of the best receivers playing and DeAngelo Williams/Jonathan Stewart might be THE best 2-back tandem in the league. I'm not saying we can't beat them, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

 

As for the Giants, they've actually improved the d-line from last season, which is scary to think about. I mean, I like our d-line talent a lot, but they've got Umeniyora and Justin Tuck on the outside with Kiwanuka as a nickel rusher, plus Chris Canty/Fred Robbins/Rocky Bernard/Barry Cofield all rotating inside. That's insane - literally every one of those seven guys is starting-caliber on most 4-3 teams in the league. I agree with you about the Giants' receivers, but their pass rush is going to be a big, big problem for every team they play this season.

[ChileBear]

No love for the defending NFC champion? Teams I see as being in/around the tops.

 

 

GB - I think their defense will struggle some making the switch to a 3-4. They should have a sollid offense though, but will they be able to compensate for a shaky D?

 

Minny - Still the team I worry about. QB issues aside, this team doesn't rely on the QB as much w/ elite OL and run game, as well as DL.

 

Det - Year right.

 

I think Minny, NYG, Atlanta and Az are the teams I would be looking at the most (and I think we will be in the tier) w/ Phily, Carolina and GB in the next tier.

If Lovie has the D working we will be a beast. IF. I do believe, though, that the team is hungry to get back and finish off the big dance this season.

[madlithuanian]

I'm calling curse! Something bad always seems to happen to Super Bowl losing teams in recent history (...um, 2006 bears anyone?). AZ is locked and loaded for such...

 

1. Aging Warner

2. Over-acheiving last year

3. Boldin not happy...and hurt maybe?

 

I'm just having touble seeing lightning strike again for them...

 

NFC West

 

Az - Good enough to get to the SB last year. Frankly, they have been one of those teams that was expected to make the jump for years, but never did. Until last year. I can't think of any big losses. On offense, they not only kept Warner/Boldin and Fitz, but added a solid RB in the draft. They have a pretty good defense, and IMHO, solid coaching now. I think they are going to be very tough again.

 

[Bears4Ever_34]

With Cutler here, anything is possible. We went to the super bowl with Rex Grossman for God sake. If our defense is 3/4 as good as it was that year we can win it because Jay and Forte will pick up the offense.

[Wesson44]

I don't know...we beat Philly last year, but they've improved a HUGE amount this offseason. They should have one of the best offensive lines in the league with the additions of Jason Peters and Stacy Andrews, plus Shawn Andrews sliding out to his college position at RT. They added another extremely talented receiver, Jeremy Maclin, to go with Jackson/Curtis/Avant, who were all very effective last season. They fixed their running game, too: they added LeSean McCoy to back up Westbrook, and Weaver can handle short-yardage carries. Our big problem last season was defending the pass, and every single Eagles wideout would be the #1 receiver on the Bears right now. I look at how much better that team has gotten and I just don't see how we'd beat them again in 2009, absent an injury to McNabb.

 

Also, with the Panthers: stopping Steve Smith and their running game is easier said than done. Smith is one of the best receivers playing and DeAngelo Williams/Jonathan Stewart might be THE best 2-back tandem in the league. I'm not saying we can't beat them, but I wouldn't count on it by any means.

 

As for the Giants, they've actually improved the d-line from last season, which is scary to think about. I mean, I like our d-line talent a lot, but they've got Umeniyora and Justin Tuck on the outside with Kiwanuka as a nickel rusher, plus Chris Canty/Fred Robbins/Rocky Bernard/Barry Cofield all rotating inside. That's insane - literally every one of those seven guys is starting-caliber on most 4-3 teams in the league. I agree with you about the Giants' receivers, but their pass rush is going to be a big, big problem for every team they play this season.

 

Yes i feel what you are saying about Philly but I don't think their line is as good as you might think. Peters I think gave up the league best at sacks last year and one of the Andrews brother is living with a knee injury and their WR'S Jackson/Curtis/Avant don't really scare anyone. With our cover two we can control that. McCoy is no Westbrook so i say its even with them.

 

As for the panthers we can do both stop the run and Smith since they don't have a Top fight WR on the other side of Smith he can be doubled teamed and with our Dline better we can shut down the run.

 

Now the G-men are a good D-line team but you can only play a few at a time not all of them then there is a drop off in the back seven which Cutler can carver up with a little time and yhe way he can move in the pocket. I don't think Rocky Bernard/Barry Cofield are that good anyqay one on one

[nfoligno]

Yes i feel what you are saying about Philly but I don't think their line is as good as you might think. Peters I think gave up the league best at sacks last year and one of the Andrews brother is living with a knee injury and their WR'S Jackson/Curtis/Avant don't really scare anyone. With our cover two we can control that. McCoy is no Westbrook so i say its even with them.

 

I agreed. I know they have added a lot, but at the same time, something just doesn't scream out for me. While they added Peters and Andrews, look at who those two are replacing. It isn't like they were replacing a couple garbage OTs. They were replacing a pair of OTs who have been formed the bookends for years, and provided a massive level of leadership on that OL. Not only did they lose that leadership, but one of the replacements (Andrews) is considered so mentally soft they had to surround him w/ familiar faces in hopes he doesn't break down, that is if he is even healthy.

 

They have a nice crop of WRs, but (as has been the argument for us for some time) no #1.

 

I don't know. They should be good, but I just don't see them as being the elite team some are saying.

 

As for the panthers we can do both stop the run and Smith since they don't have a Top fight WR on the other side of Smith he can be doubled teamed and with our Dline better we can shut down the run.

 

As said before, it is much easier to say you only have to shut down the run and Smith, and another to do it. The combo of their OL and RBs forces teams to stack the box to stop the run, which takes away from your ability to double Smith, and lets face it, Smith has the ability to even beat double teams. I personally am not a big fan of Delhomme, but this is a dang good team due to their lines. I also think, until proven otherwise, this is not a great matchup for us. We were able to stop the run, but only by selling out the pass. You can't do that w/ Steve Smith running go routes. Further, neither of our CBs possess elite speed, and FS is one of our biggest concerns heading into the season. Frankly, this is an offense I just don't think we matchup very well with, unless our front group proves capable of shutting down the run this year w/o the need to stack the box.

 

Now the G-men are a good D-line team but you can only play a few at a time not all of them then there is a drop off in the back seven which Cutler can carver up with a little time and yhe way he can move in the pocket. I don't think Rocky Bernard/Barry Cofield are that good anyway one on one

 

This is a great DL, and make no mistake, they would give the best OLs problems. While I believe our OL is very much upgraded, Williams will have a tough matchup against this group.

[adam]

I like the NYG defense, but their offense was all run. 2x 1,000 yard rushers and one is gone. Not a single receiver with over 600 yards receiving. Also, they lost Spagnuolo who was the architect behind that defense. They are due to regress. They went 1-4 (including playoff loss) in their last 5 games in 2008 (all without Plax).

[BearSox]

I still think we are sleeping on Green Bay. If they can get that defense going, they are gonna be a tough team. They had a really good draft as well with BJ Raji and Clay Matthews. Plus, our team isn't used to the 3-4. I know we didn't face a single 3-4 team in the regular season last year, and I'm not even sure if we faced a 3-4 team in 07.

[balta1701-A]

I still think we are sleeping on Green Bay. If they can get that defense going, they are gonna be a tough team. They had a really good draft as well with BJ Raji and Clay Matthews. Plus, our team isn't used to the 3-4. I know we didn't face a single 3-4 team in the regular season last year, and I'm not even sure if we faced a 3-4 team in 07.

Green Bay...it's all about their running game and O-Line. Are you convinced that they improved that?

[BearSox]

Green Bay...it's all about their running game and O-Line. Are you convinced that they improved that?

 

With Aaron Rodgers solidifying himself as legit threat at QB last year, as well as some other pieces they have brought in, I'd say so. I think last year, a lot of defensive game plans around the packers revolved around stopping the run and making Rodgers beat them, and I think Rodgers, along with Jennings and Driver, has shown he can beat a D through the air. With this being known now, defenses won't be stacking the box as much as they did last year to prevent Green Bay's running.

 

Plus, I love the ZBS. They have brought in a couple guys in TJ Lang and Jamon Meredith through the draft who I really like and both were born to play in the ZBS, or something very similar. They both should add more competition and what the Packers would hope, light a fire under some of the stagnat starters.

 

At RB, Brandon Jennings has been becoming more of a threat, and Grant is solid. The one dract pick that I really love of their's is FB Quinn Johnson. He has the potential to be the next Lorenzo Neal, Tony Richardson, etc. He's a former linebacker who loves to run people over and is just a great lead blocker who clears holes for the RB. It'll be interesting to see how he does, and it looks like he will be the starting FB.

 

I think the Packers will be fine on offense, probably better than fine. It's their D that will make or break them. Dom Capers has a great defensive mind and is a great defensive coach. If anyone can teach a team a completely new defensive scheme in one offseason, it's him.

[defiantgiant]

With Aaron Rodgers solidifying himself as legit threat at QB last year, as well as some other pieces they have brought in, I'd say so. I think last year, a lot of defensive game plans around the packers revolved around stopping the run and making Rodgers beat them, and I think Rodgers, along with Jennings and Driver, has shown he can beat a D through the air. With this being known now, defenses won't be stacking the box as much as they did last year to prevent Green Bay's running.

 

I'll agree with this. Rodgers has to prove that he can close out games and that he can stay healthy, but he was extremely impressive last year. Opposing defenses are going to have to respect Green Bay's passing game this year.

 

Plus, I love the ZBS. They have brought in a couple guys in TJ Lang and Jamon Meredith through the draft who I really like and both were born to play in the ZBS, or something very similar. They both should add more competition and what the Packers would hope, light a fire under some of the stagnat starters.

 

This is the only point where I disagree with you. The ZBS is a very effective blocking system, and the Packers' rookie o-linemen are well-suited for it, but they're still rookies. The Packers' o-line was not effective last season, and you could argue that it took a step backward this offseason with the loss of Tauscher. They're relying heavily on one or more of their young guys stepping up, which could easily cause a problem.

 

At RB, Brandon Jennings has been becoming more of a threat, and Grant is solid. The one dract pick that I really love of their's is FB Quinn Johnson. He has the potential to be the next Lorenzo Neal, Tony Richardson, etc. He's a former linebacker who loves to run people over and is just a great lead blocker who clears holes for the RB. It'll be interesting to see how he does, and it looks like he will be the starting FB.

 

The Packers have talented backs, but again, if their o-line looks like it did last season, their running game isn't going to be stellar.

 

I think the Packers will be fine on offense, probably better than fine. It's their D that will make or break them. Dom Capers has a great defensive mind and is a great defensive coach. If anyone can teach a team a completely new defensive scheme in one offseason, it's him.

 

I couldn't agree more. I'm worried about Capers, just because he has SUCH a solid track record when it comes to turning 4-3 teams into 3-4s. All of his conversion projects have done extremely well in their first year, and the Packers have all the right pieces to run a very good 3-4 defense. The Chiefs and the Broncos are probably going to struggle badly with the 3-4 switch, but the Packers have the talent, the depth, and the right guy to run the show.

 

The one thing that reassures me somewhat is that Cutler has faced a lot of 3-4 defenses in his former division, which isn't really the case for the other QBs in the NFC North. Hopefully we'll be a little better equipped to face Green Bay than the Vikings or Lions will be.

[nfoligno]

I don't get the Dom Caper's respect here. Why is everyone under the impression Capers has such a great track record? "All his conversion projects have done extremely well" Huh?

 

Lets see, he coaches the expansion Panthers more than a decade ago. As I recall, he had one great year w/ them, followed by a couple dreadful years, and was canned.

 

He was w/ Jax for a couple years, but I don't think he was even a coordinator, was he. Either way, Jax wasn't exactly a dominant team those seasons.

 

He was the HC for Houston for 3 or 4 years, and it was from that period I heard/learned the most about him. Man, this guy did jack. Houston's defense was dreadful, and that was w/ a loaded group of draft picks going to defense. Few players ever seemed to develop under Capers, and he just never got that defense to an average point, much less being good. That is a team that began to look MUCH better after letting Capers go.

 

Then he was the DC for Miami for a couple years, and because the team sucked, he was fired (along w/ the rest of the staff). While Miami had some good aspects to their defense (they should w/ numerous pro bowl caliber players) what exactly did Capers do? Miami already had a pretty decent/solid defense prior to Capers taking over in 2006. In 2006, their defense did not improve, and then was just flat out awful in 2007, leading to Capers (and everyones) release. The first season after Capers is gone, that defense is once again very solid.

 

DB coach for a year in NE, and now w/ GB.

 

So I just do not get the reasons for the respect Capers is getting around here. When did he do jack? His most recent, significant experience, was Houston and Miami. In Houston, his defenses were simply never good. In Miami, he took over a good defense, it tanked, he was fired, and the first year after he was gone the defense was once again solid.

 

IMHO, Capers being in charge of GB's defense is actually a reason I don't pay GB a ton of respect. I think their defense is going to really struggle this year.

 

They have a sack machine in Kampman who is going to have to basically learn a new position, and reports are, he isn't to thrilled about it, and from what I read, he isn't the only one not thrilled w/ the switch, which begs the question. How much are players buying into the new scheme, and if the answer isn't 100%, then you have to wonder how that will affect the performance.

 

Besides Kampman, I have read many questioning how well Jenkings, Barnett and Hawk will transition.

 

And they also are going to rely pretty heavily on a pair of rookie, each of which also are new to the 3-4 (Raji/Mathews).

 

So at the end of the day, I question (a) the track record of Capers and ( how well their players will transition to the 3-4.

 

IMHO, their defense is going to be a very weak area for them this year. I think their run defense will be as bad, if not worse, than last year, which will force them to stack the box, thus putting more pressure on their secondary. Offense will likely be very solid, but can it be good enough to compensate?

 

I couldn't agree more. I'm worried about Capers, just because he has SUCH a solid track record when it comes to turning 4-3 teams into 3-4s. All of his conversion projects have done extremely well in their first year, and the Packers have all the right pieces to run a very good 3-4 defense. The Chiefs and the Broncos are probably going to struggle badly with the 3-4 switch, but the Packers have the talent, the depth, and the right guy to run the show.

 

The one thing that reassures me somewhat is that Cutler has faced a lot of 3-4 defenses in his former division, which isn't really the case for the other QBs in the NFC North. Hopefully we'll be a little better equipped to face Green Bay than the Vikings or Lions will be.

 

[defiantgiant]

Nfo, here's where I'm getting my figures from. It's a discussion of a number of teams that have switched from a 4-3 or 4-3 hybrid base to a 3-4 base under a number of different coaches: Mike Nolan, Bill Parcells, Bill Belichick, and Dom Capers, among others. Specifically, I'm looking at the two teams (Jacksonville in 1999 and Miami in 2006) where Capers was brought on as a defensive coordinator and charged with switching to a 3-4, since that's his role in Green Bay. I'm excluding the Panthers and the Texans, since those situations were very dissimilar to what he's doing with the Packers: in both cases, Capers was a head coach, not a DC, and both teams were in their first year as an expansion team when he came on.

 

So when I say "all his conversion projects have done extremely well," I'm referring to established, non-expansion 4-3 teams that brought Capers in to install a 3-4 defense. Let me give you some numbers*:

 

Miami 2005 Performance (9-7): 19.8 PPG (15th), 3.7 YPC (7th), 6.7 YPP (13th), 82.4 PRA (22nd), 40% 3D (23rd), 49 sk (2nd), 14 int (23rd), 105 pen (7th)

 

Miami 2006 Performance (6-10): 17.7 PPG (5th), 3.5 YPC (3rd), 6.6 YPP (9th), 84.4 PRA (21st), 38% 3D (17th), 47 sk (3rd), 8 int (31st), 91 pen (13th)

 

So while the Dolphins didn't have a great season, their defense was exceedingly good. They allowed the 5th-fewest points in the league, had the 3rd-ranked rushing defense, and stayed at a very high level pressuring opposing QBs. If you're wondering why they went 6-10, remember that they were starting Daunte Culpepper and Joey Harrington at QB that year.

 

Jacksonville 1998 Performance (11-5): 21.1 PPG (17th), 4.4 YPC (26th), 6.5 YPP (8th), 80.1 PRA (19th), 36% 3D (11th), 30 sk (27th), 13 int (21st), 109 pen (13th)

 

Jacksonville 1999 Performance (14-2): 13.6 PPG (1st), 3.9 YPC (13th), 6.3 YPP (4th), 71.0 PRA (11th), 34% 3D (9th), 57 sk (1st), 19 int (12th), 93 pen (8th)

 

Contrary to what you said, the Jaguars were a fairly dominant team in the first year that Capers was their DC. They allowed the fewest points in the league, sacked opposing QBs 57 times (most in the league,) and, most importantly, they went 14-2 and made it to the AFC Championship.

 

Those are the two times when Capers has been in the position he's in with Green Bay and has been asked to do what the Packers are asking him to do. In both cases, he was very successful. Furthermore, I think you could argue that the '99 Jaguars are a closer parallel to the '09 Packers in terms of the situation, since in Miami he was taking over a D that had already started to incorporate some 3-4 looks. If the Packers' improvement is anything close to the Jaguars', we'll be facing a very, very tough defense.

 

*Abbreviations used: PPG = Points per game (scoring defense), YPC = Yards per carry (run defense), YPP = Yards per pass (pass defense), PRA = Passer rating against (Pass defense), 3D = 3rd down % (sub package defense), Sk = Sacks, Int = Interceptions, Pen = Penalties

[nfoligno]

First, Jax.

 

I agree Jax would point to a success story situation. At the same time, and while not taking away from what he did as a coach, they also had some considerable talent in place to work with, two players in which really developed in the 3-4 system (Brackens and Hardy).

 

Besides the development of these two stars, they added some players in that offseason which had huge impacts on their team. Gary Walker was brought in to be the NT, and was tremendous, posting 10 sacks. A veteran leader Carnell Lake was added to the secondary, and was considered key in turning it around. And they struck paydirt w/ the drafting of CB Fernando Bryant. What has GB added? A couple rookies? Those rookies may be good, but that is asking a lot.

 

Jax was a great storybook year for him, but I am not sure the situation then is equal to now. Several players then were average joes in a 4-3 that become pro bowl in a 3-4. GB is in a situation where they are having to tray and make pro bowl 4-3 players into 3-4 guys, and those players are not thrilled about it. Further, Jax went out and spent money to fix various areas, while GB is expecting their rookie class to fill similar holes.

 

Even if I gave Jax, I just think that is about it for Capers.

 

You point to Miami, but if your stat comparison shows anything, it shows the defense he took over was already a good one, as the numbers didn't change much, if at all, in most areas. In contrast, he is taking over a GB defense which was average v the pass and near the bottom against the run.

 

I also think you have to consider Houston. I used to live in Houston, and my parents still do, thus I still follow them quite a bit. While he was the HC, and not the DC, there was no question in Houston the defense was his, and their scheme was once he built. Simply put, it bombed. At several points, like Lovie is planning, Capers took over the defensive playcalling, but there was no change.

 

I am not saying he has never done well, but the best example of where he took over a defense and really improved it was more than a decade ago, and even then, I would say a big chunk of that also had to do w/ offseason acquisitions which I do not believe GB has made.

 

I simply do not see GB having a good defense. Several leaders on their defense have been noticably upset about the switch, including their top pass rusher. He is taking over an awful run defense, and I see little reason to expect some huge turnaround. I have no doubt they will have a solid, or even better, offense. While I am not 100% confident in their OL, they are solid at the skill positions, and while the OL may hold them back from being elite, they have enough at the skill positions to compensate. On defense though, I just don't see it happening.

 

Nfo, here's where I'm getting my figures from. It's a discussion of a number of teams that have switched from a 4-3 or 4-3 hybrid base to a 3-4 base under a number of different coaches: Mike Nolan, Bill Parcells, Bill Belichick, and Dom Capers, among others. Specifically, I'm looking at the two teams (Jacksonville in 1999 and Miami in 2006) where Capers was brought on as a defensive coordinator and charged with switching to a 3-4, since that's his role in Green Bay. I'm excluding the Panthers and the Texans, since those situations were very dissimilar to what he's doing with the Packers: in both cases, Capers was a head coach, not a DC, and both teams were in their first year as an expansion team when he came on.

 

So when I say "all his conversion projects have done extremely well," I'm referring to established, non-expansion 4-3 teams that brought Capers in to install a 3-4 defense. Let me give you some numbers*:

 

Miami 2005 Performance (9-7): 19.8 PPG (15th), 3.7 YPC (7th), 6.7 YPP (13th), 82.4 PRA (22nd), 40% 3D (23rd), 49 sk (2nd), 14 int (23rd), 105 pen (7th)

 

Miami 2006 Performance (6-10): 17.7 PPG (5th), 3.5 YPC (3rd), 6.6 YPP (9th), 84.4 PRA (21st), 38% 3D (17th), 47 sk (3rd), 8 int (31st), 91 pen (13th)

 

So while the Dolphins didn't have a great season, their defense was exceedingly good. They allowed the 5th-fewest points in the league, had the 3rd-ranked rushing defense, and stayed at a very high level pressuring opposing QBs. If you're wondering why they went 6-10, remember that they were starting Daunte Culpepper and Joey Harrington at QB that year.

 

Jacksonville 1998 Performance (11-5): 21.1 PPG (17th), 4.4 YPC (26th), 6.5 YPP (8th), 80.1 PRA (19th), 36% 3D (11th), 30 sk (27th), 13 int (21st), 109 pen (13th)

 

Jacksonville 1999 Performance (14-2): 13.6 PPG (1st), 3.9 YPC (13th), 6.3 YPP (4th), 71.0 PRA (11th), 34% 3D (9th), 57 sk (1st), 19 int (12th), 93 pen (8th)

 

Contrary to what you said, the Jaguars were a fairly dominant team in the first year that Capers was their DC. They allowed the fewest points in the league, sacked opposing QBs 57 times (most in the league,) and, most importantly, they went 14-2 and made it to the AFC Championship.

 

Those are the two times when Capers has been in the position he's in with Green Bay and has been asked to do what the Packers are asking him to do. In both cases, he was very successful. Furthermore, I think you could argue that the '99 Jaguars are a closer parallel to the '09 Packers in terms of the situation, since in Miami he was taking over a D that had already started to incorporate some 3-4 looks. If the Packers' improvement is anything close to the Jaguars', we'll be facing a very, very tough defense.

 

*Abbreviations used: PPG = Points per game (scoring defense), YPC = Yards per carry (run defense), YPP = Yards per pass (pass defense), PRA = Passer rating against (Pass defense), 3D = 3rd down % (sub package defense), Sk = Sacks, Int = Interceptions, Pen = Penalties

 

[defiantgiant]

You point to Miami, but if your stat comparison shows anything, it shows the defense he took over was already a good one, as the numbers didn't change much, if at all, in most areas.

Well, I'll agree that the transformation wasn't as dramatic, but the first three statistics are the most important: points allowed, yards per carry, and yards per pass. Miami improved in every one of those areas. Miami went from a mid-pack scoring and passing defense to a top-10 unit in both categories. They were already a top-10 run defense, but moving up to 3rd in the league is significant.

 

I also think you have to consider Houston. I used to live in Houston, and my parents still do, thus I still follow them quite a bit. While he was the HC, and not the DC, there was no question in Houston the defense was his, and their scheme was once he built. Simply put, it bombed. At several points, like Lovie is planning, Capers took over the defensive playcalling, but there was no change.

 

I disagree: you don't have to consider Houston. It's one thing to say that "the defense was his" but Capers is just not as good a head coach as he is a coordinator. It's a common phenomenon: look at what happened with Cam Cameron. The Dolphins' offense was "his" when he was their head coach, and not only did the team suck, but the offense sucked. The very next season, he went back to a coordinator job in Baltimore and his offense was very successful. Some guys just can't make the leap from assistant coach/coordinator to head coach, even when it comes to their area of expertise. Closer to home, look at Rod Marinelli. I think we can all agree that his previous success as a defensive line coach didn't translate to success for Detroit's defensive line when he was head coach.

 

The reason I'm not considering Houston is that Capers isn't going to be Green Bay's head coach. If they had hired him as HC, I'd be a lot less worried than I am.

 

I am not saying he has never done well, but the best example of where he took over a defense and really improved it was more than a decade ago, and even then, I would say a big chunk of that also had to do w/ offseason acquisitions which I do not believe GB has made.

 

I simply do not see GB having a good defense. Several leaders on their defense have been noticably upset about the switch, including their top pass rusher. He is taking over an awful run defense, and I see little reason to expect some huge turnaround. I have no doubt they will have a solid, or even better, offense. While I am not 100% confident in their OL, they are solid at the skill positions, and while the OL may hold them back from being elite, they have enough at the skill positions to compensate. On defense though, I just don't see it happening.

 

The argument about personnel is interesting. I definitely agree that it seems weird to take a guy like Kampman and switch his position. He's been exceedingly successful for a long time in his role as a 4-3 end, and to make the switch when he's nearing the end of his career is a little strange. If it were me, I'd probably try to trade him for a player experienced in the 3-4, rather than convert him to a linebacker.

 

I think a lot will hinge on whether Johnny Jolly gets suspended and whether Justin Harrell is still hurt. If those two are out, they're going to have real problems on the d-line. If they have Jolly and Harrell, though, they've got:

 

DE: Justin Harrell, Cullen Jenkins, Johnny Jolly, Michael Montgomery,

NT: Ryan Pickett, BJ Raji

OLB: Aaron Kampman, Brady Poppinga, Clay Matthews, Jeremy Thompson

ILB: Nick Barnett, Brandon Chillar, AJ Hawk

 

At each position, they've got room for one guy (or even two, at DE and OLB) to struggle with the switch. Kampman and the two rookies could all take time to adjust to a 3-4 scheme, and the Packers would still have a good starting group. Depth is a concern, especially if Jolly/Harrell can't go, but I think the Packers are in WAY better shape than any of the other teams switching to a 3-4.

 

I'm not saying it'll be a seamless transition, but I think we can definitely expect their defense to be improved significantly over last year's squad. Combine that with (as you said) a very talented offense at the skill positions, and the Packers could be tough this year.

[nfoligno]

Well, I'll agree that the transformation wasn't as dramatic, but the first three statistics are the most important: points allowed, yards per carry, and yards per pass. Miami improved in every one of those areas. Miami went from a mid-pack scoring and passing defense to a top-10 unit in both categories. They were already a top-10 run defense, but moving up to 3rd in the league is significant.

 

Sorry, still not biting. Consider 2 of the 3 stats you find the most important.

 

ypc - Went from 3.7 to 3.5. I would argue (a) this is not a huge change and ( 3.7 is pretty solid to begin w/, thus again showing he had a solid defense to start from. Its one thing to take a good/solid defense and improve on it, but another to take an awful defense.

 

ypp - Went from 6.7 to 6.6. Um. See above.

 

 

Again, I am not saying they were not a good defense that first year under Capers. I am just saying they were already good. His 2006 defense gave up ONE less passing TD and THREE fewer rushing, though it may also be worth mentioning that defense also had 6 fewer picks (only 8). I just don't see Miami as a good comparison, as he took over a good defense, which is simply not the case in GB.

 

I disagree: you don't have to consider Houston. It's one thing to say that "the defense was his" but Capers is just not as good a head coach as he is a coordinator. It's a common phenomenon: look at what happened with Cam Cameron. The Dolphins' offense was "his" when he was their head coach, and not only did the team suck, but the offense sucked. The very next season, he went back to a coordinator job in Baltimore and his offense was very successful. Some guys just can't make the leap from assistant coach/coordinator to head coach, even when it comes to their area of expertise. Closer to home, look at Rod Marinelli. I think we can all agree that his previous success as a defensive line coach didn't translate to success for Detroit's defensive line when he was head coach.

 

We simply disagree here. I agree a coach may do well on one level, and not so well at a higher level, but I would argue that points to wins/losses more so than what that coach specialized in. If you have an offensive oriented coach who becomes head coach and installs his system, I think there is absolutely an expectation that unit does well. Caper immediatly altered Houston's defense into his scheme. Though he was the HC, he was very involved in the defense, and it simply never was any good. I do think he should be held accountable to that.

 

The reason I'm not considering Houston is that Capers isn't going to be Green Bay's head coach. If they had hired him as HC, I'd be a lot less worried than I am.

 

I get what you are saying, but I still think Houston is looked at when looking at the whole picture.

 

The argument about personnel is interesting. I definitely agree that it seems weird to take a guy like Kampman and switch his position. He's been exceedingly successful for a long time in his role as a 4-3 end, and to make the switch when he's nearing the end of his career is a little strange. If it were me, I'd probably try to trade him for a player experienced in the 3-4, rather than convert him to a linebacker.

 

I don't know if he is nearing the end of his career, but would agree it is questionable to take a player who was really emerging as one of the league's premier pass rushers, and to move him. Kampman has had 37 sacks in the last 3 years and has been the lone consistent pass rusher on the team. He has never played standing up, and I think it very questionable to expect great things from him. Thus far in camp, he has really struggled.

 

I think a lot will hinge on whether Johnny Jolly gets suspended and whether Justin Harrell is still hurt. If those two are out, they're going to have real problems on the d-line. If they have Jolly and Harrell, though, they've got:

 

How great do those two really factor though. Below, you list each as a DE, but even in a 3-4, are they really suited to play DE? Both are over 320lbs, and neither has ever shown much of any capability as a pass rusher. I realize the DE in a 3-4 doesn't attack the passer as much as in a 4-3, but that doesn't mean you want DEs who lack that potential. In Pitt, you have Aaron Smith on the outside. In NE, you have Seymour. While a 3-4 DE may not be a premier pass rusher, at the same time, I am not sure they are usually just wide bodies either.

 

DE: Justin Harrell, Cullen Jenkins, Johnny Jolly, Michael Montgomery,

 

This group just does not impress me.

 

NT: Ryan Pickett, BJ Raji

 

Everything I have read says they are really relying on Raji, a rookie, to win the job and really improve the play. While Raji was a high pick, that may regardless be asking a lot of a rookie.

 

OLB: Aaron Kampman, Brady Poppinga, Clay Matthews, Jeremy Thompson

 

There is a solid amount of talent here, but especially when the DL looks so weak in terms of pass rush, they are going to need huge pass pressure to come from their LB corp, and I just question if it is there. Kampman was a great pass rusher from a down position, but will now be standing up, and I think there is more than enough reason to question how this will workout. Mathews is a nice prospect, but was known more for his motor and character than pure athleticism. Is he going to bring that pass rush? Poppinga has shown minimal pass rush ability, and is not even expected to prevent Mathews from starting. I still simply don't see where the pass pressure is going to come from. In a 3-4, you usually have pass rush coming from (a) your OLBs, which I question if you have here ( at least one of the two DEs, neither of which seem like much more than wide bodies and © an athletic, big boy DT, which is a rookie.

 

ILB: Nick Barnett, Brandon Chillar, AJ Hawk

 

Barnett is a good, speedy LB, but does he have the size to play ILB in a 3-4? And again, where is the pass rush. Hawk is a solid all around LB, and frankly, one of the few thus far discusses who I think could excel in a 3-4.

 

By putting two wide body DTs outside at DE, and moving Kampman to OLB, I see the potential for their run defense to improve, but at the same time, I think their pass rush could get even worse. I just don't feel they have the players (on the DL) to play a 3-4, and really question how Kampman will transition. If Orton were still our QB, I would give them more credit (in a matchup) but I think solid or better QBs are going to carve this defense up as I just don't see reason to believe they will have a pass rush. I think their run defense may improve some, but also think their pass defense will actually get worse.

 

At each position, they've got room for one guy (or even two, at DE and OLB) to struggle with the switch. Kampman and the two rookies could all take time to adjust to a 3-4 scheme, and the Packers would still have a good starting group. Depth is a concern, especially if Jolly/Harrell can't go, but I think the Packers are in WAY better shape than any of the other teams switching to a 3-4.

 

I'm not saying it'll be a seamless transition, but I think we can definitely expect their defense to be improved significantly over last year's squad. Combine that with (as you said) a very talented offense at the skill positions, and the Packers could be tough this year.

 

As said, I just do not believe this will be a good defense. In both Jax and Miami, they either already had solid 3-4 potential talent, or they added it in the offseason. I have not seen such moves made by GB. IMHO, they are hurting their best pass rusher w/ the move, and don't have others who I think will play well in a 3-4. Mark my words. DE will be a top priority for them next year.

[bowlingtwig]

I'm calling curse! Something bad always seems to happen to Super Bowl losing teams in recent history (...um, 2006 bears anyone?). AZ is locked and loaded for such...

 

1. Aging Warner

2. Over-acheiving last year

3. Boldin not happy...and hurt maybe?

 

I'm just having touble seeing lightning strike again for them...

I completely agree about Arizona. Soemthing just tells me that they won't come close to duplicating what they did last year. 1 thing to remember about Warner is that he is VERY prone to mistakes if you force him to make throws. As much as I like Benny Wells the rookie RB we have to remember that he is just a rookie AND his biggest question mark is injury. I live in the midwest so I hear enough about him. He has amazing talent and believe that Arizona got a steal get him late in the 1st round but he had a very very difficult time staying healthy at the college level and you know D coordinator will keep that in mind when playing against him. If you knock him out they become 1 dimensional(very scary passing attack)but easier to beat.

[madlithuanian]

I hear ya!

 

Not every rook can be Forte!

 

I completely agree about Arizona. Soemthing just tells me that they won't come close to duplicating what they did last year. 1 thing to remember about Warner is that he is VERY prone to mistakes if you force him to make throws. As much as I like Benny Wells the rookie RB we have to remember that he is just a rookie AND his biggest question mark is injury. I live in the midwest so I hear enough about him. He has amazing talent and believe that Arizona got a steal get him late in the 1st round but he had a very very difficult time staying healthy at the college level and you know D coordinator will keep that in mind when playing against him. If you knock him out they become 1 dimensional(very scary passing attack)but easier to beat.

 

[nfoligno]

Az may have trouble getting back to the SB, or even the playoffs, but IMHO, it won't be due to their collapsing so much as simply finding an improved division.

 

Last year, Seattle bombed, but so much of that was due to the loss of their QB, who is again healthy, and w/ more surrounding talent. Seattle is a team that could really jump back up the standings. SF finished a game under .500, but also went 5-2 under Samauri. They showed a lot of improvement, and added pieces in the offseason.

 

Remember, Az only won 9 games last year, but made the playoffs due to a weak division. This year, I think the division could be considerably improved, and thus Az will have a more difficult time getting back to the playoffs, much less the SB.

 

W/ that said, I would argue there is plenty of reason to expect Az to be damn good again.

 

One thing that has hurt Az over the years has been their OL, but under the direction of Russ Grimm, that changed.

 

You can question Warner, but I don't see why. He is behind a good OL, and has maybe the best WR group in the league. Fitz is considered by most the best WR in the league. It is simply scary how easy he often makes it. Boldin may or may not be elite if moved out of Az, but in Az, he is flat out awesome. And they you also have to deal w/ Breaston? This is an offense that doesn't seem to lose a stride when a WR goes down, any WR.

 

You question Well. Okay, fine. But I think even you would have to admit he enters an ideal situation. He will be running behind a solid OL, and I may never see a stacked box. There may be questions, but I think few would argue that they upgraded.

 

For me, the question for Az will again be their defense, which was simply inconsistent, as well as how much better the division may be, and how that affects Az. I don't expect Az to make it back to the SB, and they may not even make it back to the playoffs, but I don't expect a huge fall for them. Remember, they only won 9 games last year. I think 8-10 is likely this year, but will that be enough to make the post-season?

 

I completely agree about Arizona. Soemthing just tells me that they won't come close to duplicating what they did last year. 1 thing to remember about Warner is that he is VERY prone to mistakes if you force him to make throws. As much as I like Benny Wells the rookie RB we have to remember that he is just a rookie AND his biggest question mark is injury. I live in the midwest so I hear enough about him. He has amazing talent and believe that Arizona got a steal get him late in the 1st round but he had a very very difficult time staying healthy at the college level and you know D coordinator will keep that in mind when playing against him. If you knock him out they become 1 dimensional(very scary passing attack)but easier to beat.

 

[balta1701-A]

The other side of the token with Arizona is that if Warner does stay healthy...the kind of confidence they picked up with that playoff run is the kind of thing that can carry a team for much of the season. The Giants in 2008 rode a huge emotional high from their super bowl run, for example. Suddenly that team believes it can beat whoever its playing. That's something Arizona hasn't felt in my lifetime as far as I can remember.