I just do not understand the pessimism.....

[jason]

I expected more from this season.

 

1-I thought the Bears should beat GB, come close to Pitt, and hammer Seattle. 2 of the 3 didn't happen.

 

(a) you expedted to "hammer" seattle prior to the season, after after you saw all the injuries. If prior to the season, I would refer you to their track record at home. Many teams talk about a home advantage, but Seattle truly has one. As for expecting to beat GB, in GB, I wonder about that. Maybe that was your prediction, but GB was expected to be a good team, so I am not sure why you felt we "should" beat GB in GB.

 

I expected the Bears to win in GB, because I think they are overrated. And I expected the Bears to have a close game with Seattle...but when the injuries were reported, I expected to hammer Seattle.

 

2-I expected the Bears to have more fire and better motivation. This has sorta happened.

 

I think it has been there. Maybe w/ some more than others, but I have seen more attitude this season.

 

Agree to disagree.

 

3-I wanted the Bears to be better prepared, with better gameplans suited towards their opponent's weaknesses. This has not happened.

 

While I agree, I might also counter. IMHO, we have made adjustments better than in recent memory, both on offense and defense. I have thus far not been a big fan of our starts, but do credit our coaches for adjustments, which is something many of us have harped on for years. Also, on offense, I would add that it is pretty tough to "call a good game" when your OL is this bad and you can't run the ball.

 

Preparation is different than adjustment. I agree that the adjustments have been better, specifically on singular offensive plays, but the preparation has been bad.

 

5-I kept hearing about these double TE sets to maximize the potential of Clark, Olsen, and the new guy. We haven't really seen this that much.

 

Well, I think we saw plenty of double TE sets in the first game, but then Clark went down. Even in the 2nd game, i think there were a lot of double TE sets, as both Olsen and Davis were seen quite a lot. But I think this last game went away from that a bit, but I also think part of that reason is our WRs stepping up. Remember, a big reason we were using double TE formations was our 2nd TE was better than most any WR on our team. As our WRs step up, the need to use 2 TE formations goes down.

 

Maybe we did see them in the first game, but I really expected it to be more prevalent.

 

-The Defensive scheme seems to be focused on blitzing more and getting to the QB more, something missing from before.

 

We actually blitzed a ton under Babich, but what I have noticed is our mixing it up a lot more. Used to, about all I saw was inside, up the middle blitzes. Now, we blitz from every angle, which I think is great. Simply put, our blitzes are more often effective.

 

Perhaps it is effectiveness more than frequency. Now that I think about it, I haven't seen much of the stupid "bring the MLB up to the line, faking the blitz, and then see him back-up 30 yards to fill the middle in the cover-2" strategy.

 

I expected more from the offense to be quite honest.

 

I can understand expecting more from the OL and run game, but I am not sure why you even expected as much as we have gotten from our passing game. Run game has not been as good as expected, but I think the passing game has been better, thus the offense overall has lived up to expectations.

 

The reason I expected what our passing game has done, is that I'm one of the few people who have said for several years that the WRs were not that bad, and it was more a by-product of a weak combination of OC/QB/OL. I actually thought Bennet was good because A-You just don't rip up the SEC if you are not good, and B-He has great hands. Also, I thought Devin Hester would improve, and Davis isn't nearly as bad as most think. And, to be quite honest, I was optimistic about someone stepping up from the rest (we're lucky to have had Knox do so).

 

The defense is doing fairly well all things considered. The offense, however, specifically the play calling and the OL play, has left a lot to be desired.

 

I know you flat out dislike Turner, but I just don't know how great you can call a game when the OL is this bad. I have actually been impressed by his doing so many things to counter an aggressive defense against a weak OL. He has been using a lot of screens, both WR and RB. He has WRs running more slants. Like I said before, I have not been impressed w/ early play calling, but I also think much of that is simply due to our players inability to execute, and thus Turner having to adjust during the games, which he seems to be doing fairly well.

 

Agreed. The OL has not made it easy on Turner, but he has still made some questionable calls during games that have made me shake my head. Not to mention the fact that he's still fairly predictable (but I'm liking new wrinkles like the roll out to the TE on third-and-short.)

 

 

[BigDaddy]

If you read what you are writing you would swear that this Defense just sucks. That was last year remember 21st in the league(5th against the Run and 30th against the Pass and 22nd in sacks) This year we are 9th ranked D(12th against the pass, 13th against the rush and 4th in the league in sacks. I would say that this is a major improvement from last year.

 

Sure, but let me use your logic for a moment. after week 1 we were ranked 5th in the NFL defensively, we're now 9th. Another performance like last Sunday and we'll be 11th and headed south. At the risk of sounding like Biff Blache, stop putting so much emphasis on sacks, they can be dramatically overrated. By the way, we have been consistently slipping defensively since week 1 when we were the 5th ranked defense. I don't think either one of us wants to hazard a guess as to where they'll end up at seasons end if they continue as they are. I think what you are missing is, Tommie Harris keeps being wheeled out there every week and some hack writer is asked to do a fluff piece about him regaining his form but ANYONE who watches him each week can tell he IS NOT near there and alot of people believe he's done. If this team doesn't start tackling better, they are going to get shredded. It is only a matter of time until alot of teams do what Seattle did on Julius Jones TD against Tillman. Let's also look at all the 3rd and longs that are getting completed against this team. It all points to a underachieving or mediocre defense. Backs continuing to play soft from fear of getting burnt, gaping holes in the middle for God knows what reason.

 

All I'm trying to say is, don't drink the koolaide. This defense IS NOT playing to their potential and they could slide right back to where they were last year if something isn't done to increase front 4 pressure, tackle better and play tighter coverage.

[nfoligno]

Preparation is different than adjustment. I agree that the adjustments have been better, specifically on singular offensive plays, but the preparation has been bad.

 

No argument. The two are obviously different. The point was only to show that while we are not doing great in one area, I think a lot of credit must be shelled out for the other. Also, on the point of prep, just throwing this out there, but how much might be due to our coaches not realizing the level (positive or negative) of player execution heading into a game.

 

For example. Heading into Seattle, do you not think it understandable Turner wanted to establish the run? We had struggled ourselves, but we now facing a team that stinks against the run. So I think it very understandable we enter that game w/ a game plan to run the ball. Well, due to Seattle loading the box, our OL not blocking, our TE/WRs not blocking, our RB wearing cement shoes, we are not executing the plan. We don't throw it away after one series, and frankly, shouldn't. But then you find yourself beyond the 1st quarter, and the offense has done squat. You adjust, and suddently move the ball. The point here is, as much as we tend to blame Turner, it may not always be pre-game prep. It was totally understandable to believe we could run on Seattle. That isn't poor planning. That is simply poor execution.

 

Maybe we did see them in the first game, but I really expected it to be more prevalent.

 

This is regarding 2 TE packages. I think you are not allowing for changing circumstances.

 

(a) We lost Clark. As much as I, and so many, like Davis, he is not as experienced as Clark. It was our having Clark and Olsen that contributed to our using 2 TE packages. Once we lost Clark, we lost a key reason for running such a package.

 

( The other key reason we started using 2 TE packages last year was a lack of WRs. Simply put, our 2nd best TE was probably better than a #1 WR, and definitely better than our WR depth. Thus, in trying to get our best receivers on the field, that meant playing both TEs at the same time. But this year, we have had WRs stepping up. That means a huge reason to use 2 TEs is gone. Further, Knox is our 3rd WR, and has been on fire. If we use 2 TEs, that means Knox is taking a seat. So I think numerous circumstances have changed that you are not really taking into account. Personally, I think rather than knocking Turner for not using more 2 TE packages, you should give him credit for not sticking w/ the plan, regardless of circumstances, and planning on the fly ways to better utilize the WR talent that is emerging.

 

© I have seen us still use 2 TE packages, but they are not as noticable, as we are having to keep a TE back to block. It is more noticable when both TEs are running routes, but due to our weak OL, we are having to keep one (or two) Tes back to held protect.

 

The reason I expected what our passing game has done, is that I'm one of the few people who have said for several years that the WRs were not that bad, and it was more a by-product of a weak combination of OC/QB/OL. I actually thought Bennet was good because A-You just don't rip up the SEC if you are not good, and B-He has great hands. Also, I thought Devin Hester would improve, and Davis isn't nearly as bad as most think. And, to be quite honest, I was optimistic about someone stepping up from the rest (we're lucky to have had Knox do so).

 

I was among the group also that said, once we got Cutler, to pass on those veteran WRs. At the same time, I also thought it would take time. I did not expect Cutler to be moving the ball around to many different receivers so easily, so early. That is something I just don't think is often enough factored. Chemistry takes time, and when a QB/WR lack chemistry, they lack consistency. But Cutler is showing chemistry w/ several receivers much sooner than I think any would have expected. Not just Olsen, who he befriended in the offseason, but guys like Knox and Aromashadu. Bennett is obvious from college, but he is starting to really show something w/ Hester too.

 

Look. You and I in so many ways see eye-to-eye on offense, and in particular w/ regard to OL and QB. At the same time, I just question having such lofty expectations from game one. 3 new starters on OL. New QB. One new starting WR, who lacks much of any game experience, and yet is light years more experienced than his depth. New starting TE, who has experience, but comes w/ all time high expectations and a greater role. I really question any who expected this offense to instantly gel, and to look great from the start. Thus far, I think the passing game is ahead of where it should have been reasonably expected to be, while the run game is FAR behind.

 

Agreed. The OL has not made it easy on Turner, but he has still made some questionable calls during games that have made me shake my head. Not to mention the fact that he's still fairly predictable (but I'm liking new wrinkles like the roll out to the TE on third-and-short.)

 

Lets be honest. Every coach in the league makes questionable and/or predictable play calls. Funny, story, at least for me, while watching this last game. Remember the play, it was like 3rd and 5, and we threw deep to Knox down the left sideline. I think you would agree that was not predictable, and yet a friend was ripping Turner for going deep when we should have been looking to pickup a first. A series or two later, it is 3rd and short, and we try to run for a first down, and a fan at the bar complains that Turner never takes a shot deep on 3rd down. I waste no time to point out we just did that, but the point is, Turner can't win. If he goes for it on 3rd down, he gets ripped. If he tries to run for a 1st on 3rd and short, he gets ripped. The main reason though he is getting ripped is not the playcall, but the poor execution. I guarantee you, if Cutler hits Knox in stride, my friend never questions the call. If we picked up that later 3rd and short run, that call does not get questioned.

 

This year, we have run quite a few WR screens. It was not long ago that play was ridiculed by fans, but this year, it has been a pretty good play for us, usually good for at least 3 or 4 yards (equal to a run) and often going for quite a bit more. Thus, because it is working, fans no longer seem to mind the WR screen so much.

 

So sure, there are still plenty of times our playcalling can be questioned, but (a) I simply argue that is the case for every teams coaches and ( the real issue I think is the play not being executed more than the playcall itself.

 

Hey, at least we have not seen a quick handoff to the FB:)

 

[nfoligno]

We literally had to turn the volume down at the bar due to the crowd being so damn loud. All week long I read and heard about the home field advantage, but sort of dismissed it. That was a mistake. As injured as Seattle was, most of their injuries were on defense, and that stadium is hardest on our offense.

 

Like I said in the gamethread, I was at the game, and the 12th Man is no joke. Those motherf***ers can get the decibels up there.

 

[bowlingtwig]

Sure, but let me use your logic for a moment. after week 1 we were ranked 5th in the NFL defensively, we're now 9th. Another performance like last Sunday and we'll be 11th and headed south. At the risk of sounding like Biff Blache, stop putting so much emphasis on sacks, they can be dramatically overrated. By the way, we have been consistently slipping defensively since week 1 when we were the 5th ranked defense. I don't think either one of us wants to hazard a guess as to where they'll end up at seasons end if they continue as they are. I think what you are missing is, Tommie Harris keeps being wheeled out there every week and some hack writer is asked to do a fluff piece about him regaining his form but ANYONE who watches him each week can tell he IS NOT near there and alot of people believe he's done. If this team doesn't start tackling better, they are going to get shredded. It is only a matter of time until alot of teams do what Seattle did on Julius Jones TD against Tillman. Let's also look at all the 3rd and longs that are getting completed against this team. It all points to a underachieving or mediocre defense. Backs continuing to play soft from fear of getting burnt, gaping holes in the middle for God knows what reason.

 

All I'm trying to say is, don't drink the koolaide. This defense IS NOT playing to their potential and they could slide right back to where they were last year if something isn't done to increase front 4 pressure, tackle better and play tighter coverage.

Don't get me wrong I am not saying that this Defense is great or is even playing great. I am just simply stating that this Defense is already better than last year. We are getting pressure on the QB, weather it is coming from a blitz or the Dline or the secondary it doesn't matter. I think you can agree that with Smith calling the plays we are better off and this Dline is getting more pressure on the QB than they did last year. The line hardly got any pressure on the QB last year at all. The Dline completely sucked which is why we were 30th against the pass last year because our defense is predicated on the fact that the Dline MUST get pressure on the QB. Another problem that we have had for several years now though is that we struggle against a scrambling style QB or a very athletic one like we saw from BIG Ben and from Seneca Wallace. Wallace maybe a backup but he is a very very athletic QB who can take off and run at any time, his problem is playing QB although he is much better than some people want to give him credit for. Big Ben on the other hand is an extremely difficult QB to take down. In the 1st game in GB we played Rodgers and he his althetism isn't like that of Big Ben and Seneca Wallace. That is one reason why we got tons of pressure on Rodgers and did get 4 sacks that game. I do agree that in some cases sacks are overrated.

[nfoligno]

I agree sacks are over-rated. Applying consistent pressure is a far greater issue, and I think our pressure (whether by the DL or blitz) has been far more consistent than last year, though that is not saying much.

 

In our first game, Cutler was sacked two times, but he seemed to be pressured nearly every snap. Those 2 sacks are nice, but I guarantee you the DC was far more happy about the constant pressure, which also led to numerous hurried throws and picks.

 

To me, I absolutely think our D is playing better. Sometimes execution, and tackling, is not there, but overall, I like several things I have seen this year I did not see last year.

 

Last year, we blitzed a ton, and have done so again this year, but the difference IMHO is our blitzes this year have been far more creative and effective. last year, it seemed like we blitzed up the gut every time. It was predictable and fairly easy to block. This year, we have blitzed from every angle, and it has been more effective.

 

Last year, our DE's nearly always took wide angles to the QB. When you only pass rush one way, you make it far easier to block. This year, I have seen more stunts and more inside moves. Wale used his early success on the outside to set up a sweet swim move inside to pressure the passer. That is the sort of thing you just didn't see last year.

 

Adjustments have been big for us this year as well, IMHO. Last year, we would get burned early, but made no adjustments and gave up the same sort of plays all day. This year, we seem to be making adjustments to avoid any early mistakes.

 

I personally am still not a fan of our defense, or at least not of our scheme. I simply do not like the cover two, or the zone defense we so often run. At the same time, while we do give up plays, we do not allow many big plays and tighten up near the red zone. The reality is, we held GB, and did so when our offense was coughing it up often. We held a very good Pitt team. We gave up more than I would have liked to Seattle, but at the same time, still not as much as we may have last year. I am not a big fan of our defense, but I think it is better than last year, and w/ our offense better, good enough to win.

 

Don't get me wrong I am not saying that this Defense is great or is even playing great. I am just simply stating that this Defense is already better than last year. We are getting pressure on the QB, weather it is coming from a blitz or the Dline or the secondary it doesn't matter. I think you can agree that with Smith calling the plays we are better off and this Dline is getting more pressure on the QB than they did last year. The line hardly got any pressure on the QB last year at all. The Dline completely sucked which is why we were 30th against the pass last year because our defense is predicated on the fact that the Dline MUST get pressure on the QB. Another problem that we have had for several years now though is that we struggle against a scrambling style QB or a very athletic one like we saw from BIG Ben and from Seneca Wallace. Wallace maybe a backup but he is a very very athletic QB who can take off and run at any time, his problem is playing QB although he is much better than some people want to give him credit for. Big Ben on the other hand is an extremely difficult QB to take down. In the 1st game in GB we played Rodgers and he his althetism isn't like that of Big Ben and Seneca Wallace. That is one reason why we got tons of pressure on Rodgers and did get 4 sacks that game. I do agree that in some cases sacks are overrated.

 

[BigDaddy]

I agree sacks are over-rated. Applying consistent pressure is a far greater issue, and I think our pressure (whether by the DL or blitz) has been far more consistent than last year, though that is not saying much.

 

In our first game, Cutler was sacked two times, but he seemed to be pressured nearly every snap. Those 2 sacks are nice, but I guarantee you the DC was far more happy about the constant pressure, which also led to numerous hurried throws and picks.

 

To me, I absolutely think our D is playing better. Sometimes execution, and tackling, is not there, but overall, I like several things I have seen this year I did not see last year.

 

Last year, we blitzed a ton, and have done so again this year, but the difference IMHO is our blitzes this year have been far more creative and effective. last year, it seemed like we blitzed up the gut every time. It was predictable and fairly easy to block. This year, we have blitzed from every angle, and it has been more effective.

 

Last year, our DE's nearly always took wide angles to the QB. When you only pass rush one way, you make it far easier to block. This year, I have seen more stunts and more inside moves. Wale used his early success on the outside to set up a sweet swim move inside to pressure the passer. That is the sort of thing you just didn't see last year.

 

Adjustments have been big for us this year as well, IMHO. Last year, we would get burned early, but made no adjustments and gave up the same sort of plays all day. This year, we seem to be making adjustments to avoid any early mistakes.

 

I personally am still not a fan of our defense, or at least not of our scheme. I simply do not like the cover two, or the zone defense we so often run. At the same time, while we do give up plays, we do not allow many big plays and tighten up near the red zone. The reality is, we held GB, and did so when our offense was coughing it up often. We held a very good Pitt team. We gave up more than I would have liked to Seattle, but at the same time, still not as much as we may have last year. I am not a big fan of our defense, but I think it is better than last year, and w/ our offense better, good enough to win.

 

 

I'll agree, we are playing better than last year in many respects. Our tackling is just as horrid if not worse, now it looks to have spread to our STs play. But Lovie is certainly doing a better job. I like some things about this defense aside from the fact it's cover 2, Tampa 2, whatever the hell you wanna call it. I would much prefer we scrap Harris and get another big guy in their with Adams. Hell, maybe Harrison could even fit the bill. I just hate the 3 technique DT. They really have gotten way too specific about the requirements for thatr guy. Just give me a couple of fat asses like Trayler and Washington and I'm happy. I do think that Payne, Afalava will be good ones as well as Manning. I am getting to like our CBs and I love our LBs even with Url out and contrary to popular belief, we don't need a rebuild. We just need an effective defensive scheme for our front 4.

[AZ54]

You've got McClover coming down the middle on special teams coverage and that's going to help, hopefully a lot. To me it seems like that's where we are having the most trouble with our lane discipline and giving up extra yards on KR.

[BigDaddy]

You've got McClover coming down the middle on special teams coverage and that's going to help, hopefully a lot. To me it seems like that's where we are having the most trouble with our lane discipline and giving up extra yards on KR.

 

 

I noticed that too. What do you suppose it is with this group that we just can't seem to play in the middle of the field? It's uncanny, we get burned alot over the middle on defense as well as STs.

[nfoligno]

I have to be honest. I look at our defense, and I wonder how many of these players will be here in the next couple years.

 

DL - Wale and Anderson are due to be UFAs after this season. Adams is solid, but not one our staff seems to care for. Harrison came w/ promise, but has yet to really show that much and his work ethic has been very much put into question. Harris is looking more and more like a joke. That leaves Brown. I hate to say it, but I can see a tremendous amount of turnover in the next couple seasons on our DL.

 

LB - Briggs is going no where. I would like to think Pisa is sticking for a while. Urlacher? No idea. Williams I think is a FA, and could look to move on for a team where he has a chance to play. Hunter may have worked his way out the door. While I am no fan, seems like Roach is doing something now. I think we will have some change here, and think our future starting MLB is not on the team.

 

S - Payne sucks. Sorry, but he does. He may be decent in the box, but he sucks in coverage. Afalava looks like a keeper. Whether DM is our long term answer at FS, I have no clue. Steltz may not even stick as depth.

 

CB - Vasher is likely gone after this season, if not before. Tillman, Bowman, Graham and Moore may all be around a couple years from now, but honestly, I am not impressed by this group. Tillman is a shell of his former self. Yea, he can create a turnover, but he was directly responsible for that TD after the blown tackle, and what does it say when Rothlisberger spends the day picking on Tillman rather than Bowman. Bowman can't stay healthy. Graham is one I like, but the coaches doesn't seem to share my opinion. Moore was a rookie I heard so much about, but did nothing in camp and is burried down the depth chart.

 

I'll be honest. Right now, this defense looks in need of a major overhaul. I don't see that many pieces to build around anymore. On offense, we need to build up the OL, but otherwise, we have pretty good looking, young, talent. On defense though, most of our talent is older, and the younger players simply have not shown enough to give that much hope.

 

I'll agree, we are playing better than last year in many respects. Our tackling is just as horrid if not worse, now it looks to have spread to our STs play. But Lovie is certainly doing a better job. I like some things about this defense aside from the fact it's cover 2, Tampa 2, whatever the hell you wanna call it. I would much prefer we scrap Harris and get another big guy in their with Adams. Hell, maybe Harrison could even fit the bill. I just hate the 3 technique DT. They really have gotten way too specific about the requirements for thatr guy. Just give me a couple of fat asses like Trayler and Washington and I'm happy. I do think that Payne, Afalava will be good ones as well as Manning. I am getting to like our CBs and I love our LBs even with Url out and contrary to popular belief, we don't need a rebuild. We just need an effective defensive scheme for our front 4.

 

[jason]

I'll agree, we are playing better than last year in many respects. Our tackling is just as horrid if not worse, now it looks to have spread to our STs play. But Lovie is certainly doing a better job. I like some things about this defense aside from the fact it's cover 2, Tampa 2, whatever the hell you wanna call it. I would much prefer we scrap Harris and get another big guy in their with Adams. Hell, maybe Harrison could even fit the bill. I just hate the 3 technique DT. They really have gotten way too specific about the requirements for thatr guy. Just give me a couple of fat asses like Trayler and Washington and I'm happy. I do think that Payne, Afalava will be good ones as well as Manning. I am getting to like our CBs and I love our LBs even with Url out and contrary to popular belief, we don't need a rebuild. We just need an effective defensive scheme for our front 4.

 

Completely agreed. I hate the scheme the Bears presently run. It's all predicated on having a destructive DT in the middle, and it caught on because Tampa Bay just happened to have a freak of nature in Warren Sapp.

 

This team and this talent is much better suited for the 2001 approach: bring in two monolithic DTs, rush the edges with the DEs, blitz from time to time, and just let the LBs cause havoc.

 

Unlike nfo, I think that the overhaul is not all that necessary. I believe this team can win with this talent, and some of the younger players just need the opportunity.

[nfoligno]

Hey, it isn't that I want an overhaul on defense necessarily, but when I look at our players on defense, I just see few players who will be on the team in two years time. You always have turnover, but I see VERY FEW players here today that will be in just two seasons.

 

DL - Other than maybe Brown (who will be 32 in 2 years) and Gilbert, who do you see as a keeper. Wale and Anderson are FAs after this year. Harris looks done now. Staff never seemed to like Adams.

 

LB - Briggs obviously. Pisa has yet to play, and as much as I like him, a lot to prove. Williams will be a FA and Hunter should be gone.

 

CB - Tillman just doesn't look that good anymore and Bowman is just so injury prone. Staff doesn't seem to care much for Graham, which I just don't get. Moore has not shown jack. Vasher is w/o question gone.

 

S - Afalava looks like a keeper. DM maybe. Payne and Steltz are likely gone.

 

2 years is just not that long, but in 2 years, I just don't see many players on the roster today still playing then.

 

Completely agreed. I hate the scheme the Bears presently run. It's all predicated on having a destructive DT in the middle, and it caught on because Tampa Bay just happened to have a freak of nature in Warren Sapp.

 

This team and this talent is much better suited for the 2001 approach: bring in two monolithic DTs, rush the edges with the DEs, blitz from time to time, and just let the LBs cause havoc.

 

Unlike nfo, I think that the overhaul is not all that necessary. I believe this team can win with this talent, and some of the younger players just need the opportunity.

 

[azbearsfan]

Hey, it isn't that I want an overhaul on defense necessarily, but when I look at our players on defense, I just see few players who will be on the team in two years time. You always have turnover, but I see VERY FEW players here today that will be in just two seasons.

 

DL - Other than maybe Brown (who will be 32 in 2 years) and Gilbert, who do you see as a keeper. Wale and Anderson are FAs after this year. Harris looks done now. Staff never seemed to like Adams.

 

LB - Briggs obviously. Pisa has yet to play, and as much as I like him, a lot to prove. Williams will be a FA and Hunter should be gone.

 

CB - Tillman just doesn't look that good anymore and Bowman is just so injury prone. Staff doesn't seem to care much for Graham, which I just don't get. Moore has not shown jack. Vasher is w/o question gone.

 

S - Afalava looks like a keeper. DM maybe. Payne and Steltz are likely gone.

 

2 years is just not that long, but in 2 years, I just don't see many players on the roster today still playing then.

 

 

I have to agree. These guys are getting real old, real quick. And the Payne's and Steltz of the world need to step up or they are gone.

 

Hopefully we start to see some above average play from Afalava, Roach, Williams, Moore, DM, etc.

 

 

[Mongo3451]

name='nfoligno' date='Sep 30 2009, 02:27 PM' post='70061']

Hey, it isn't that I want an overhaul on defense necessarily, but when I look at our players on defense, I just see few players who will be on the team in two years time. You always have turnover, but I see VERY FEW players here today that will be in just two seasons.

No overhaul needed, but there will be a large turnover in the next couple of years. We have been blessed to have the core of the D for as long as we have. On the flipside, success can also be a curse if you are not proactive in replenishing talent.

 

DL - Other than maybe Brown (who will be 32 in 2 years) and Gilbert, who do you see as a keeper. Wale and Anderson are FAs after this year. Harris looks done now. Staff never seemed to like Adams.

Agreed on your keepers and add Anderson, Harrison and Adams. IMO - Adams has forced the staff to like him.

 

LB - Briggs obviously. Pisa has yet to play, and as much as I like him, a lot to prove. Williams will be a FA and Hunter should be gone.

Briggs, Williams, Pisa and Roach should be here. Url may also have a couple years left, but I see a need to draft a replacement this year.

 

CB - Tillman just doesn't look that good anymore and Bowman is just so injury prone. Staff doesn't seem to care much for Graham, which I just don't get. Moore has not shown jack. Vasher is w/o question gone

Tillman to FS anyone? I like Graham and Bowman as starters and Manning as nickel. Jury is still out on Moore.

 

S - Afalava looks like a keeper. DM maybe. Payne and Steltz are likely gone.

Afalava is a keeper. I also see a place for Payne and DM. Although I do not like DM's instincts as a starter. I do love his athleticism. I guess we keep drafting until get it right. (or see Tillman comment)

 

2 years is just not that long, but in 2 years, I just don't see many players on the roster today still playing then.

I see this as a normal, "Circle of Life" type situation.

 

 

[nfoligno]

Agreed on your keepers and add Anderson, Harrison and Adams. IMO - Adams has forced the staff to like him.

 

Adams - I have always liked him, but I just question how much the staff does. If Dusty didn't go down w/ injury, and Harrison didn't show up to camp out of shape, would Adams even be starting? Even if the staff has come to appreciate him more, how much will be tested before the 2 year period I mentioned as we will have to re-sign him. I am just not confident the staff will want to re-sign him. They simply do not care for DTs that can't rush the passer.

 

Harrison may well still be around, but I see that as far from a lock. He showed "something" on a few occasions last year, but didn't exactly break out. This year, he showed up to camp over weight and out of shape, and his work ethic came into question, prompting the staff to sit him until he got his weight down. Thus far, through only three games I realize, he has shown nothing. There is still time, but I just am not so confident he sticks long term.

 

Anderson - He is a FA after this season, and (a) needs to show a lot for us to even think about re-signing him and ( even if he does show something, he could then position himself for a nice paycheck. Will we pay him?

 

Briggs, Williams, Pisa and Roach should be here. Url may also have a couple years left, but I see a need to draft a replacement this year.

 

Briggs w/o question. The rest?

 

Williams is a FA after this season, and I frankly would be surprised if he re-signed. He has been stuck behind Briggs, and not until this season did we even give him an opportunity, short as it was, at a position other than WLB. Even now, w/ the injuries to Urlacher and Pisa, Williams seems like an after thought. I can easily see him looking to move on to a team where he may believe he has a better chance to play.

 

Pisa - Could very well happen, but lets be honest for a moment. As great as he looked in camp, he has yet to do jack in the regular season. Before we declare him a long term starter, he needs to start a regular season game.

 

Raoch - He may well be here, but I simply am not a big fan.

 

Tillman to FS anyone? I like Graham and Bowman as starters and Manning as nickel. Jury is still out on Moore.

 

Tillman to FS has always been a message board topic, and fans seem to love the idea, but the staff has never gone for it.

 

- I am a big fan of Graham, but is the staff? Even when both Tillman and Bowman were hurt in preseason, the staff went w/ McBride, who was cut, over Graham. Graham is a mystery to me. He did pretty darn well last year, but the entire offseason, the staff simply has not seemed inclined to get him on the field. When Bowman was knocked out of the game for a short bit, it was Vasher who came in. That is the same Vasher who has stunk, and who has little future w/ the team. If Graham is in the plans at all, you sure could have fooled me.

 

Afalava is a keeper. I also see a place for Payne and DM. Although I do not like DM's instincts as a starter. I do love his athleticism. I guess we keep drafting until get it right. (or see Tillman comment)

 

I just don't see the place for Payne.

 

I see this as a normal, "Circle of Life" type situation.

 

You always see turnover. But as I look at the roster, I see far more than just some turnover. I see a total overhaul. Often you see a couple players per unit change over the period of a couple years, but I see the opposite. I see only a couple remaining over the next two years, and if that is the case, it would be an overhaul, not a tweak.

[Mongo3451]

Adams - I have always liked him, but I just question how much the staff does. If Dusty didn't go down w/ injury, and Harrison didn't show up to camp out of shape, would Adams even be starting? Even if the staff has come to appreciate him more, how much will be tested before the 2 year period I mentioned as we will have to re-sign him. I am just not confident the staff will want to re-sign him. They simply do not care for DTs that can't rush the passer.

I really see no need to let him walk, unless through normal attrition.

 

Harrison may well still be around, but I see that as far from a lock. He showed "something" on a few occasions last year, but didn't exactly break out. This year, he showed up to camp over weight and out of shape, and his work ethic came into question, prompting the staff to sit him until he got his weight down. Thus far, through only three games I realize, he has shown nothing. There is still time, but I just am not so confident he sticks long term.

You are going on pure speculation that he will not grow up and be a professional.

 

Anderson - He is a FA after this season, and (a) needs to show a lot for us to even think about re-signing him and ( even if he does show something, he could then position himself for a nice paycheck. Will we pay him?

We should pay him if he’s a capable DE. They simply don’t grow on trees and we can’t get rid of this many players and replace them via the draft.

 

Briggs w/o question. The rest?

Yes, to most of them. We can’t afford to lose most of them over the next 2 years. The loss of depth alone would be disastrous.

 

Williams is a FA after this season, and I frankly would be surprised if he re-signed. He has been stuck behind Briggs, and not until this season did we even give him an opportunity, short as it was, at a position other than WLB. Even now, w/ the injuries to Urlacher and Pisa, Williams seems like an after thought. I can easily see him looking to move on to a team where he may believe he has a better chance to play.

If someone leaves to be a starter, I’m good with that. Otherwise, keep Williams.

 

Pisa - Could very well happen, but lets be honest for a moment. As great as he looked in camp, he has yet to do jack in the regular season. Before we declare him a long term starter, he needs to start a regular season game.

He has been a good player for several years. I think he has a place for a few more.

 

Raoch - He may well be here, but I simply am not a big fan.

Roach actually impressed me with good instincts at MLB. I like the guy.

 

Tillman to FS has always been a message board topic, and fans seem to love the idea, but the staff has never gone for it.

That still doesn’t mean it shouldn’t happen or that it’s not a feasible idea. The argument is that he is our best CB. I see him getting beat like a drum, then making up for it with sure tackling and stripping. That sounds more like a FS than a CB.

 

I am a big fan of Graham, but is the staff? Even when both Tillman and Bowman were hurt in preseason, the staff went w/ McBride, who was cut, over Graham. Graham is a mystery to me. He did pretty darn well last year, but the entire offseason, the staff simply has not seemed inclined to get him on the field. When Bowman was knocked out of the game for a short bit, it was Vasher who came in. That is the same Vasher who has stunk, and who has little future w/ the team. If Graham is in the plans at all, you sure could have fooled me.

Maybe Graham is in the doghouse. I like him as well. He’s gotta be in the plans.

 

You always see turnover. But as I look at the roster, I see far more than just some turnover. I see a total overhaul. Often you see a couple players per unit change over the period of a couple years, but I see the opposite. I see only a couple remaining over the next two years, and if that is the case, it would be an overhaul, not a tweak.

You do realize that we already have 4 new starters on D this year? Two more years of that trend and nobody is left. Changes happen all the time. Like I said earlier, we were really blessed to have our core stay together for as long as they have. Trust me, this is all normal and the staff is fully aware that it needs to be handled.