View from the sideline

[jason]

I got a front row view of a lot of things today, a different perspective than ever before, and here are a few things I saw:

 

-That 5-yd cushion garbage evidently doesn't apply to Knox and Hester, because they Falcons DBs were on them the entire game

-Regarding the 5-yd cushion, the Line Judge took an ass chewing several times; it even looked like Lovie got fired up once

-Anthony Adams is a great dancer, too bad he doesn't seem to care about the game

-Greg Olsen mouthed several F-bombs when watching the defense play

-Greg Olsen is the only guy on the sideline who looks like he wants to win above anything else

-The entire OL is slow and blah in everything they do. They came back after each horrible performance and didn't seem too upset about it.

-The OL barely got coaching information the entire game.

-Andrea Kramer just looks like she doesn't have a friggin clue about what's going on. If she said something about Ogunleye's hip flexor injury, it's because I told her.

-Pisa looks like his right(?) knee was killing him. The doctor/trainer came over, did a few knee tests, and it was obvious that he was done. He probably tore something.

-Tillman has the look of someone without confidence. He has a glazed over look in his eyes like he just plain wants to quit.

-Ogunleye was standing behind the trainer's table and I yelled, "You know you hate the cover-2, Wale! Wale, you hate the cover-2!!" He nodded, twice.

-I'd love to see what the Bears' fans could pull off with a dome. It's such an advantage. It's a few hours after the game, and my ears are still ringing.

-Tackling is still horrendous, and it's easy to see the problems up close. Someone needs to let the guys know it's tackle THEN strip the ball.

And the most important thing I saw...

 

-The entire team seems apathetic. I don't know where it comes from, but I have a suspicious thought in the back of my head I know its source. They just don't have the fire, and several don't seem to even care. Hell, there were tons of times when most on the sideline weren't even watching the game - which doesn't say everything - but it just doesn't look like a cohesive group that cares all that much. And, the coup de grace, I have NEVER seen a team so happy immediately after a tough loss like this. And, speaking of happy, Omaliye was as happy as a fat kid in a cake factory. He obviously doesn't care about losing, care about sucking more than possibly anyone in the NFL, and he's evidently good friends with several guys on the Falcons. This team needs a spark, badly.

[azbearsfan]

I got a front row view of a lot of things today, a different perspective than ever before, and here are a few things I saw:

 

-That 5-yd cushion garbage evidently doesn't apply to Knox and Hester, because they Falcons DBs were on them the entire game

-Regarding the 5-yd cushion, the Line Judge took an ass chewing several times; it even looked like Lovie got fired up once

-Anthony Adams is a great dancer, too bad he doesn't seem to care about the game

-Greg Olsen mouthed several F-bombs when watching the defense play

-Greg Olsen is the only guy on the sideline who looks like he wants to win above anything else

-The entire OL is slow and blah in everything they do. They came back after each horrible performance and didn't seem too upset about it.

-The OL barely got coaching information the entire game.

-Andrea Kramer just looks like she doesn't have a friggin clue about what's going on. If she said something about Ogunleye's hip flexor injury, it's because I told her.

-Pisa looks like his right(?) knee was killing him. The doctor/trainer came over, did a few knee tests, and it was obvious that he was done. He probably tore something.

-Tillman has the look of someone without confidence. He has a glazed over look in his eyes like he just plain wants to quit.

-Ogunleye was standing behind the trainer's table and I yelled, "You know you hate the cover-2, Wale! Wale, you hate the cover-2!!" He nodded, twice.

-I'd love to see what the Bears' fans could pull off with a dome. It's such an advantage. It's a few hours after the game, and my ears are still ringing.

-Tackling is still horrendous, and it's easy to see the problems up close. Someone needs to let the guys know it's tackle THEN strip the ball.

And the most important thing I saw...

 

-The entire team seems apathetic. I don't know where it comes from, but I have a suspicious thought in the back of my head I know its source. They just don't have the fire, and several don't seem to even care. Hell, there were tons of times when most on the sideline weren't even watching the game - which doesn't say everything - but it just doesn't look like a cohesive group that cares all that much. And, the coup de grace, I have NEVER seen a team so happy immediately after a tough loss like this. And, speaking of happy, Omaliye was as happy as a fat kid in a cake factory. He obviously doesn't care about losing, care about sucking more than possibly anyone in the NFL, and he's evidently good friends with several guys on the Falcons. This team needs a spark, badly.

 

 

Good items.

 

And your last point is where the staff should be taken to task on. Not the playcalling but the motivation and accountability aspect. A player like Omaliye should get killed in films and lose his job. This is the part I am disappointed in Lovie in as I thought when he first got here that he was an accountability guy. Whether you agree or not with the offense play calls and the defensive scheme, this type of sloppy play is unacceptable.

[Mongo3451]

Thanks for update Jason. I have a few questions.

 

1) Did the recievers seem to get separation? I have been concerned about the lack of passing plays mid to deep and can't really out my finger on it from the TV view. Cutler seems to rarley pass in rhythm and seems to make plays when he sees a player open and just fires. Is it separation, OL, Cutler, play calling?

 

2) OL?? Do they suck that bad or is Turner/Cutler not able to make hot reads and adjustments? OL part II - Do they ever get any push? It has seemed non-existent.

 

3) Roach seems to be a stud against the run and liability in the passing game. Is he reacting late or just out of place in passing situations. Reacting late can be due to experience, but out of place is inexcusable.

 

IMO - we lost a very winnable game against a good football team in their house. I expected a different type of game from both teams, but definately expected more from our O coming off a bye week.

[selection7]

If we were that off our game, what does that say about the Falcons that we almost beat them? Sounds like both teams have a long way to go.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I don't see the Tillman hate. He's been playing very good this season. He shadowed and shut-down Roddy White all game and did the same to Calvin Johnson in the last game.

[jason]

Thanks for update Jason. I have a few questions.

 

1) Did the recievers seem to get separation? I have been concerned about the lack of passing plays mid to deep and can't really out my finger on it from the TV view. Cutler seems to rarley pass in rhythm and seems to make plays when he sees a player open and just fires. Is it separation, OL, Cutler, play calling?

 

I specifically looked for this in the game. The unequivocal answer is YES. They got separation. Knox especially was open several times when the ball was thrown away. Hester juked his guy more than once when the ball didn't go his way. I also share your concern for the lack of mid-range passing plays, because I believe they are there to be had. The WRs aren't open all game, make no mistake. But they were open numerous times when the OL didn't give enough time, Cutler didn't see the guy open - or that player was a late read, or the play calling dictated that the ball go another direction. I don't know where to place blame, but from what I saw, it was much less on the WRs than it was on the OL, the OC, and Cutler.

 

2) OL?? Do they suck that bad or is Turner/Cutler not able to make hot reads and adjustments? OL part II - Do they ever get any push? It has seemed non-existent.

 

OL Part 1, Do they suck that bad? Yes.

OL Part 2, Does the offense (i.e. Turner/Cutler) make reads/adjustments? I'm sure some are done, but it looks as if they are often locked into the "we'll beat you with our best play" mindset, regardless of how the defense adjusts. That stuff worked in the 50s, but I don't think it works as well now. A team must deceive the opponent AND execute, because great execution doesn't always work when the opponents also execute very well. In that respect, it goes to play calling.

OL Part 3, Does the OL get any push? If they did get push, I didn't see the play. The entire section of Bears fans around me absolutely loathe the OL and their inability. Regarding the apathy I spoke of in the beginning of this thread, they seem to be the worst. The only guy who looked like he wanted to pump the guys up is Schaffer, the guy who doesn't play. What's worse is after each failed possession in which they performed average AT BEST, they all came off the field and fist-bumped each other for a job well done. No fire whatsoever.

 

3) Roach seems to be a stud against the run and liability in the passing game. Is he reacting late or just out of place in passing situations. Reacting late can be due to experience, but out of place is inexcusable.

 

Roach seemed confused. I think it's a matter of being out of place AND reacting late. I just don't think the game has slowed down for him yet. Numerous times in the game I saw him on the field looking at others for a key, and he got instruction on the sideline a few times that I could see.

 

IMO - we lost a very winnable game against a good football team in their house. I expected a different type of game from both teams, but definately expected more from our O coming off a bye week.

 

Agreed. I expected much more, and feel the Bears should have won. It was a lackluster performance to say the least.

[jason]

I don't see the Tillman hate. He's been playing very good this season. He shadowed and shut-down Roddy White all game and did the same to Calvin Johnson in the last game.

 

I don't think Roddy White was shut down ALL game, and that's the problem. Not to mention the fact that he's slowly becoming RW McQuarters. On running plays and passing plays, his first movement is always to back peddle, even though he's already giving a ten yard cushion. I don't recall the play, but I believe it was late in the third quarter. The Falcons had a 3rd and about 6, but Tillman - probably by design of the cover-2, which is not his fault - was giving about a ten yard cushion. The play started, and he took his first few steps back. Just doesn't make sense, and neither does the defensive scheme that, ultimately, failed the Bears and played a large part in costing the game.

[jason]

Good items.

 

And your last point is where the staff should be taken to task on. Not the playcalling but the motivation and accountability aspect. A player like Omaliye should get killed in films and lose his job. This is the part I am disappointed in Lovie in as I thought when he first got here that he was an accountability guy. Whether you agree or not with the offense play calls and the defensive scheme, this type of sloppy play is unacceptable.

 

We ADAMANTLY disagree about the play-calling on offense - probably defense, too - but I'm telling you, the steam is out of this team. It is palpable. I've never seen a less fired up Bears team. I have no doubt that a great many players hardly care about winning, and are just in it for the next big pay check.

 

The note about Adams dancing was one that particularly bugged me. I think it was early third quarter, or maybe before the half, but dancing to a Michael Jackson song during the game is not what I expect from a team that is not handling their business on the field. Loose and fun is good when your are putting up 5 TDs in one quarter on the Titans; fine, dance away and have a good time. But when the game is tight and undecided, it's best to focus and think about how you as a player can do better, or help your team in another way.

 

On the other hand, at least he wasn't taking on the Zombie Lovie personality that so many seem to have adopted.

[madlithuanian]

Sepaking of back-pedaling...

 

What was your impression of the amount os space the DB's were giving ATL's WR's? Seemed to me, far too much that they were getting mad space. I recall the big FB getting like 7 yards when only 4 were needed for a first, and the first was easily achieved...

 

 

 

 

I don't think Roddy White was shut down ALL game, and that's the problem. Not to mention the fact that he's slowly becoming RW McQuarters. On running plays and passing plays, his first movement is always to back peddle, even though he's already giving a ten yard cushion. I don't recall the play, but I believe it was late in the third quarter. The Falcons had a 3rd and about 6, but Tillman - probably by design of the cover-2, which is not his fault - was giving about a ten yard cushion. The play started, and he took his first few steps back. Just doesn't make sense, and neither does the defensive scheme that, ultimately, failed the Bears and played a large part in costing the game.

 

[jason]

Sepaking of back-pedaling...

 

What was your impression of the amount os space the DB's were giving ATL's WR's? Seemed to me, far too much that they were getting mad space. I recall the big FB getting like 7 yards when only 4 were needed for a first, and the first was easily achieved...

 

I noticed this several times, MadLith. I also don't understand it. The cover-2 is teaching the Bears' players to be passive...and it sucks.

[madlithuanian]

Jason, thanks for confirming.

 

It is truly bewildering.

 

I noticed this several times, MadLith. I also don't understand it. The cover-2 is teaching the Bears' players to be passive...and it sucks.

 

[nfoligno]

Tillman didn't shut down White ALL game, but did a pretty dang good job on him. White was coming off a 200+ yard game, and was really limited by Tillman. That I recall, he only had one big play (the TD) which I think goes on the coaches as much as anything. Atlanta lined up 3 WRs on one side, and we only had two DBs out there in coverage. Tillman, I think, was sort of picked, and White broke free. But other than that play, Tillman did a very solid job on White.

 

Understand something. I can't stand out scheme and defense in general. They seem passive and give up too many easy completions. At the same time, we stuffed their run game and held their passing game to under 200 yards. White alone had more yards than that the previous game. So why our defense was ugly in so many ways, I think they overall did fairly well, particularly as poor of a position as the offense and special teams often put them in.

 

Again, I am not defending the scheme, but after that game, I am less likely to call out tillman or the defense as a whole when the offense and special teams were just so bad.

 

I don't think Roddy White was shut down ALL game, and that's the problem. Not to mention the fact that he's slowly becoming RW McQuarters. On running plays and passing plays, his first movement is always to back peddle, even though he's already giving a ten yard cushion. I don't recall the play, but I believe it was late in the third quarter. The Falcons had a 3rd and about 6, but Tillman - probably by design of the cover-2, which is not his fault - was giving about a ten yard cushion. The play started, and he took his first few steps back. Just doesn't make sense, and neither does the defensive scheme that, ultimately, failed the Bears and played a large part in costing the game.

 

[madlithuanian]

I'm not so sure the stats speak the whole story. Is it great to hold them rushing, yet give up a big run in the red zone for a score? To hold White all day, except one big TD reception where the D was clearly not ready for a no-huddle? To let a HoF'er TE run free in the end zone for an easy TD?

 

It's supposed to be the bend, don't break...but it almost appears opposite. We hold, then fold...

 

For some reason, this D cannot be good when it really needs to be.

 

Similar happened in virtually all our games this year.

 

I think it's the system and coaching. I really fear this team will be nothing but a tease until a new, and hopefully better regime comes in. It could get worse mind you. But, nothing ventured, nothing gained. The status quo is not working well enough I feel.

 

 

Tillman didn't shut down White ALL game, but did a pretty dang good job on him. White was coming off a 200+ yard game, and was really limited by Tillman. That I recall, he only had one big play (the TD) which I think goes on the coaches as much as anything. Atlanta lined up 3 WRs on one side, and we only had two DBs out there in coverage. Tillman, I think, was sort of picked, and White broke free. But other than that play, Tillman did a very solid job on White.

 

Understand something. I can't stand out scheme and defense in general. They seem passive and give up too many easy completions. At the same time, we stuffed their run game and held their passing game to under 200 yards. White alone had more yards than that the previous game. So why our defense was ugly in so many ways, I think they overall did fairly well, particularly as poor of a position as the offense and special teams often put them in.

 

Again, I am not defending the scheme, but after that game, I am less likely to call out tillman or the defense as a whole when the offense and special teams were just so bad.

[Daventry]

I'm not so sure the stats speak the whole story. Is it great to hold them rushing, yet give up a big run in the red zone for a score? To hold White all day, except one big TD reception where the D was clearlynot ready for a no-huddle? To let a HoF'er TE run free in the end zone for an easy TD?

 

It' supposed to be the bend, don't break...but it almost appears opposite. We hold, then fold...

 

For some reason, this D connot be good when it really needs to be.

 

Similar happened in virtually all our games this year.

 

I think it's the system and coaching. I really fear this team will be nothing but a tease until a new, and hopefully better regime comes in. It could get worse mind you. But, nothing ventured, nothing gained. The status quo is not working well enough I feel.

 

I agree wholeheartedly in relation to the Cover 2 style defense we have. Whether we win none or all of the rest of the games this season, I am certain that the team would be better with a different system and that the system itself is flawed, not to mention boring. I am not sure what to think of Lovie overall, but I am sure what I think of the Cover 2....stinko.

[madlithuanian]

It appears Smith is the only fan of the cover 2! Unfortunatley, he appears to be the only one with a say!

 

I agree wholeheartedly in relation to the Cover 2 style defense we have. Whether we win none or all of the rest of the games this season, I am certain that the team would be better with a different system and that the system itself is flawed, not to mention boring. I am not sure what to think of Lovie overall, but I am sure what I think of the Cover 2....stinko.

 

[nfoligno]

Understand madman, I have been a vocal and harsh critic of our system, even when it appeared to work and we went to the SB. I felt then, as good as our defense might have played, the scheme still held us back. I felt we had the talent that year to be a punch you in the mouth, dominating defense, rather than a bend, don't break, rely on turnovers unit.

 

With that said, i would make a couple points.

 

One. While I do not love, or even like, our system, at the end of the day, our defense is not really the problem. With the exception of 1/2 of a game against Detroit, our defense simply has not given up a ton of points. We gave up 21 to GB, but that is the lowest point total they have been held to this season. We held Pitt to 14, and they have not been held to less than 20 since. Atlanta scored 21, but had just put up 45 on a good SF defense, and I think was a top 10 (maybe top 5) scoring offense entering their game against us. We are ranked 15th in defense (scoring) and that is after losing our defensive captain, and pretty much losing a LB each game.

 

I don't like watching our defense, but at the end of the day, they are pretty much doing their job, and putting our offense is a good position to win the game.

 

Two. Lets be honest for just a moment. Our defense is simply not that talented. Our DL is average at best, and I would even question that. W/ Harris a shell of his former self, we have no one on the DL that worries offenses. Briggs is great, but w/ the injuries at LB, that unit is average at best, and the only reason it is average is Briggs slides the curve. Our secondary is below average, w/ very questionable S play and while Tillman is solid, he is little more, and we have essentially a rookie on the other side.

 

As much as fans like to think more of our players, our defense simply does not have that much talent. Frankly, if you just go off our talent, I think we should be ranked much lower than we are. So while I truly dislike our scheme, at the same time, I wonder if it isn't masking some of our defeciencies. If we tried to be more aggressive w/ this group of talent, maybe we are more exciting, but at the same time, maybe we start giving up 30+ points per game.

 

I'm not so sure the stats speak the whole story. Is it great to hold them rushing, yet give up a big run in the red zone for a score? To hold White all day, except one big TD reception where the D was clearly not ready for a no-huddle? To let a HoF'er TE run free in the end zone for an easy TD?

 

It's supposed to be the bend, don't break...but it almost appears opposite. We hold, then fold...

 

For some reason, this D cannot be good when it really needs to be.

 

Similar happened in virtually all our games this year.

 

I think it's the system and coaching. I really fear this team will be nothing but a tease until a new, and hopefully better regime comes in. It could get worse mind you. But, nothing ventured, nothing gained. The status quo is not working well enough I feel.

 

[madlithuanian]

I do see that the points against are not bad. I also see that our D is a shel of what it used to be. Besides the fact that we agree that we don't like the scheme, I still think errors are being made by Smith. Jason, you and I all are puzzled by the constant yards given up by DB's before numerous snaps. Sometimes it makes sense, but far too often it doesn't.

 

I think Marinelli is doing a good job with what he has. It's just that at crucial parts of games, our D folds. That happens to bad teams. I fear, defensively, we are maybe not bad. But certainly, not good.

 

It could be that I just simply need to get used to the fact that a Chicago Bears team does not have a good D...

 

Understand madman, I have been a vocal and harsh critic of our system, even when it appeared to work and we went to the SB. I felt then, as good as our defense might have played, the scheme still held us back. I felt we had the talent that year to be a punch you in the mouth, dominating defense, rather than a bend, don't break, rely on turnovers unit.

 

With that said, i would make a couple points.

 

One. While I do not love, or even like, our system, at the end of the day, our defense is not really the problem. With the exception of 1/2 of a game against Detroit, our defense simply has not given up a ton of points. We gave up 21 to GB, but that is the lowest point total they have been held to this season. We held Pitt to 14, and they have not been held to less than 20 since. Atlanta scored 21, but had just put up 45 on a good SF defense, and I think was a top 10 (maybe top 5) scoring offense entering their game against us. We are ranked 15th in defense (scoring) and that is after losing our defensive captain, and pretty much losing a LB each game.

 

I don't like watching our defense, but at the end of the day, they are pretty much doing their job, and putting our offense is a good position to win the game.

 

Two. Lets be honest for just a moment. Our defense is simply not that talented. Our DL is average at best, and I would even question that. W/ Harris a shell of his former self, we have no one on the DL that worries offenses. Briggs is great, but w/ the injuries at LB, that unit is average at best, and the only reason it is average is Briggs slides the curve. Our secondary is below average, w/ very questionable S play and while Tillman is solid, he is little more, and we have essentially a rookie on the other side.

 

As much as fans like to think more of our players, our defense simply does not have that much talent. Frankly, if you just go off our talent, I think we should be ranked much lower than we are. So while I truly dislike our scheme, at the same time, I wonder if it isn't masking some of our defeciencies. If we tried to be more aggressive w/ this group of talent, maybe we are more exciting, but at the same time, maybe we start giving up 30+ points per game.

 

[Pixote]

On Sunday night, Ryan completed 19 of 33 passes for 185 yards with 2 touchdowns, 2 interceptions and a 68.4 passer rating. In last year’s contest, the young quarterback connected on 22 of 30 passes for 301 yards with 1 TD, no interceptions and a 116.1 passer rating.

 

M Turner was held to 30 yds on 13 carries - 2.3 yds per carry

 

We are starting our 3rd MLB, we have been playing musical chairs with Pisa being injured at LB.

 

We are rated # 6 against the run, # 14 against the pass, and # 13 in total defense.

 

We have had a pretty tough schedule compared to many other teams.

 

I think the defense is not as bad as many think.

[madlithuanian]

I think I need a glass of your Kool-Aid... I drank all mine up last weekend!

 

 

 

M Turner was held to 30 yds on 13 carries - 2.3 yds per carry

 

We are starting our 3rd MLB, we have been playing musical chairs with Pisa being injured at LB.

 

We are rated # 6 against the run, # 14 against the pass, and # 13 in total defense.

 

We have had a pretty tough schedule compared to many other teams.

 

I think the defense is not as bad as many think.

 

[Lucky Luciano]

One. While I do not love, or even like, our system, at the end of the day, our defense is not really the problem. With the exception of 1/2 of a game against Detroit, our defense simply has not given up a ton of points. We gave up 21 to GB, but that is the lowest point total they have been held to this season. We held Pitt to 14, and they have not been held to less than 20 since. Atlanta scored 21, but had just put up 45 on a good SF defense, and I think was a top 10 (maybe top 5) scoring offense entering their game against us. We are ranked 15th in defense (scoring) and that is after losing our defensive captain, and pretty much losing a LB each game.

 

I don't like watching our defense, but at the end of the day, they are pretty much doing their job, and putting our offense is a good position to win the game.

 

i disagree. the defense is certainly a problem and has been for years. this is one of those instances where statistics and rankings are so misleading that many people can't see the forest for the trees.

 

if you want to really judge how this defense (or scheme if you will) compares to really GOOD defenses you have to look at whether it can or CAN'T shut down an opponents offense and specifically a passing attack when the game is on the line. to me it matters little if we hold a team to a total of a hundred yards total offense if they still beat us by a single point in the final 3 seconds of a game. we can't "finish" a game because we can't even get mediocre pass offenses off the field in clutch situations.

 

Two. Lets be honest for just a moment. Our defense is simply not that talented. Our DL is average at best, and I would even question that. W/ Harris a shell of his former self, we have no one on the DL that worries offenses. Briggs is great, but w/ the injuries at LB, that unit is average at best, and the only reason it is average is Briggs slides the curve. Our secondary is below average, w/ very questionable S play and while Tillman is solid, he is little more, and we have essentially a rookie on the other side.

 

As much as fans like to think more of our players, our defense simply does not have that much talent. Frankly, if you just go off our talent, I think we should be ranked much lower than we are. So while I truly dislike our scheme, at the same time, I wonder if it isn't masking some of our defeciencies. If we tried to be more aggressive w/ this group of talent, maybe we are more exciting, but at the same time, maybe we start giving up 30+ points per game.

 

again i don't agree. oh don't get me wrong, i don't believe we are bristling with talent in 2009 (thanks angelo) but 3-4 years ago we had numerous pro-bowl talent and players on this squad yet we STILL could not CONSISTENTLY stop opposing offenses when it counted the most running this type of defense!! if we had the dead guy from philly in chicago the last 4 years where would our defense be ranked even with what we are fielding now? doesn't coaching players count for something also? who have we coached that has excelled since lovie came here or is it angelo just dumping his draft garbage on smith?

 

this i can tell you and i am going to throw this into the face of lovie smith, if you HAVE to rely on turnovers by your defense to win, you will more often than not LOSE the big games against very good teams.

[jason]

who have we coached that has excelled since lovie came here or is it angelo just dumping his draft garbage on smith?

 

Good question. I can't think of one player, aside from Briggs, who has turned into a breakout defensive guy since coming to the Bears. If anything, just about every player - once again, aside from Briggs - has probably gotten worse under the regime of Lovie Smith and his passive defense.

 

As for all the stat talk above, I, too, think it's misleading; and to be quite honest, even if it is accurate, I don't want my team playing like to "keep it close." I want a team that goes for the throat...something a Lovie Smith team almost never does unless the opponent just flat falls apart.

[Daventry]

Understand madman, I have been a vocal and harsh critic of our system, even when it appeared to work and we went to the SB. I felt then, as good as our defense might have played, the scheme still held us back. I felt we had the talent that year to be a punch you in the mouth, dominating defense, rather than a bend, don't break, rely on turnovers unit.

 

With that said, i would make a couple points.

 

One. While I do not love, or even like, our system, at the end of the day, our defense is not really the problem. With the exception of 1/2 of a game against Detroit, our defense simply has not given up a ton of points. We gave up 21 to GB, but that is the lowest point total they have been held to this season. We held Pitt to 14, and they have not been held to less than 20 since. Atlanta scored 21, but had just put up 45 on a good SF defense, and I think was a top 10 (maybe top 5) scoring offense entering their game against us. We are ranked 15th in defense (scoring) and that is after losing our defensive captain, and pretty much losing a LB each game.

 

I don't like watching our defense, but at the end of the day, they are pretty much doing their job, and putting our offense is a good position to win the game.

 

Two. Lets be honest for just a moment. Our defense is simply not that talented. Our DL is average at best, and I would even question that. W/ Harris a shell of his former self, we have no one on the DL that worries offenses. Briggs is great, but w/ the injuries at LB, that unit is average at best, and the only reason it is average is Briggs slides the curve. Our secondary is below average, w/ very questionable S play and while Tillman is solid, he is little more, and we have essentially a rookie on the other side.

 

As much as fans like to think more of our players, our defense simply does not have that much talent. Frankly, if you just go off our talent, I think we should be ranked much lower than we are. So while I truly dislike our scheme, at the same time, I wonder if it isn't masking some of our defeciencies. If we tried to be more aggressive w/ this group of talent, maybe we are more exciting, but at the same time, maybe we start giving up 30+ points per game.

 

I, too, disagree. Since when is a 15th ranked defense not a problem? No, it may not be our only problem, but the real question is, does this scheme the make the players the best that they can be?

 

Our DLine is not the best, but with names like Brown, Ogunleye, and even Anderson to some degree we have good DE's, and although Harris is hardly dominant he is still decent and along with Adams and Harris ok. The linebackers are solid if not great, and losing Url has hardly hurt as he has basically sucked for the last year or two at least. Secondary is fairly decent in my mind, not great, but not terrible. I think we have the personnel to be a top 5 defense, but not with this scheme...

[nfoligno]

I think you are misunderstanding some of my points.

 

1. You compare us to a good defense, and talk about how we can't do this or that, which a good defense does. I never said we were a good defense. I simply said that, when I look at our talent, I see a bottom tier defense. Maybe not Cle or Det bad, but a defense that would likely hover around the 25 ranking, give or take a couple spots. We currently rank 15th in scoring defense (all that really matters) and my point is, when I look at our talent base, that is a better ranking than I would expect.

 

That isn't to say I think we are a good defense, and definitely not one to be compared to a "really good" defense, which you did in your argument. Far from that. My point is we are an average defense, but even that may have to credit the coaching to some extent as I think we are below average in terms of talent.

 

2. You agree we are not "bristling w/ talent in '09" but talk about 3-4 years ago. If you go back through my comments, I believe I said that even in our SB season, when most talked highly of our defense, I felt coaching held it back. Then, we had talent, and I felt we had the potential to be a punch you in the mouth, shut down defense. Not just one that on the stat sheet looks good, but one that makes opponents take a lot of rolaids the week leading up to our game. That was then, this is now.

 

What I wonder is whether Lovie scheme is one that benefits defenses that lack talent, while holding back a defense that has talent. Does that makes sense. In StL, when he was the DC, he had a couple good players, but overall, he did not have an over abundance of talent, and his scheme actually may have been okay for the talent he had. Earlier on in Chicago, we had talent, and then I argued he held our talent back, but now, when I look at the players we have, I just can't help but to wonder if we would not be worse if we tried to be more aggressive, as we as fans want to see.

 

i disagree. the defense is certainly a problem and has been for years. this is one of those instances where statistics and rankings are so misleading that many people can't see the forest for the trees.

 

if you want to really judge how this defense (or scheme if you will) compares to really GOOD defenses you have to look at whether it can or CAN'T shut down an opponents offense and specifically a passing attack when the game is on the line. to me it matters little if we hold a team to a total of a hundred yards total offense if they still beat us by a single point in the final 3 seconds of a game. we can't "finish" a game because we can't even get mediocre pass offenses off the field in clutch situations.

 

again i don't agree. oh don't get me wrong, i don't believe we are bristling with talent in 2009 (thanks angelo) but 3-4 years ago we had numerous pro-bowl talent and players on this squad yet we STILL could not CONSISTENTLY stop opposing offenses when it counted the most running this type of defense!! if we had the dead guy from philly in chicago the last 4 years where would our defense be ranked even with what we are fielding now? doesn't coaching players count for something

 

also? who have we coached that has excelled since lovie came here or is it angelo just dumping his draft garbage on smith?

 

this i can tell you and i am going to throw this into the face of lovie smith, if you HAVE to rely on turnovers by your defense to win, you will more often than not LOSE the big games against very good teams.

 

[nfoligno]

As for all the stat talk above, I, too, think it's misleading; and to be quite honest, even if it is accurate, I don't want my team playing like to "keep it close." I want a team that goes for the throat...something a Lovie Smith team almost never does unless the opponent just flat falls apart.

 

But what I question is whether we have the talent to be such a defense. Sorry, but those great and aggressive defenses you talk about simply have more talent than we. Look at our defense, and tell me what players are just above average. Our DL is very average. Our DEs are good against the run, but average in terms of pass rush. Right now, I would say our DTs are below average. At LB, Briggs is a stud, but our other two LB positions are between average and below average w/ the loss of both Urlacher and Pisa. Tillman may be somewhere between average and above average, but Bowman has been between average and below, and our safeties are average on their better days.

 

Understand, I think this scheme held us back when we were loaded w/ talent on defense. There was a time when Tillman and Vasher were both very good, and Mike Brown was just below stud status. Urlacher and Briggs formed such a duo that it didn't matter who the 3rd LB was. Harris was a stud, Tank was very good and at the time, our DEs were at minimum, above average (not to mention Anderson being explosive that first year). Then, I believe this scheme held our talent back. But now? We are a defense considerably lacking in talent, and I just wonder how bad we might look if we tried to be as aggressive as we all long to see.

[nfoligno]

I think you are not only drinking kool-aid, but think it must be spikes w/ some really good stuff.

 

Brown and Wale are simply average. Sorry, but that is the truth. Brown's best season saw what, 6 1/2 or 7 sacks, and he is more often a 5 sack guy, and most of those come in 2 or 3 games, while he disappears in the rest. Both are good vs the run, but simply average pass rushers. Harris is a name, but that is about all, and you can't blame the scheme, as it was in this scheme he once dominated, but injuries have made him very average, and likely below average. Adams is a run stuffer, and nothing more, and Harrison has simply been nothing.

 

Solid if not great at LB? Are you kidding? After Briggs, we are starting a bunch of backups, none of which have proven to be much. And you can talk crap about Urlacher, but even after losing a step, he was considerably better than what we have now. Secondary is not even decent. Tillman has been fine, but Bowman has been getting targetted and torched. In fact, part of me wonders if Tillman's play has not been more a matter of Bowman playing so poorly in coverage that QBs are simply targetting his side more often. We still do not have a FS on the team, and as much as we may like afalava, he is still young and inconstent.

 

This is simply a below average defense in terms of talent, and to think we could be a top 5 defense is, IMHO, really drinking some major koolaid.

 

I, too, disagree. Since when is a 15th ranked defense not a problem? No, it may not be our only problem, but the real question is, does this scheme the make the players the best that they can be?

 

Our DLine is not the best, but with names like Brown, Ogunleye, and even Anderson to some degree we have good DE's, and although Harris is hardly dominant he is still decent and along with Adams and Harris ok. The linebackers are solid if not great, and losing Url has hardly hurt as he has basically sucked for the last year or two at least. Secondary is fairly decent in my mind, not great, but not terrible. I think we have the personnel to be a top 5 defense, but not with this scheme...