DABEARSDABOMB Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Wouldn't you think of all OC's, Turner would know the most how to utilize Garret Wolfe. His brother runs the show in San Diego and while Norv is a terrible coach he's done a ton with a similar scat back. Couldn't Ron have made a call pretty easily to figure out some better ways to utilize Garret? Now my guess is that Ron has and I personally think the Bears need to utilize Wolfe more, but before we get crazy on things, if you watch the Chargers, they don't just throw screen passes with Sproles. They run him inside, outside, use him as a decoy, etc. Bottom line, I want everyone to remember that for Wolfe to succeed the Bears will have to do the same and that means he will occasionally have to be used inside to essentially keep defenses honest. The Bears just need to be more committed to using Wolfe (which means we need to sustain longer drives and maybe take the ball out of Forte's hands a bit more...at least for the time being). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAMEDSONPAYTON2 Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 Wouldn't you think of all OC's, Turner would know the most how to utilize Garret Wolfe. His brother runs the show in San Diego and while Norv is a terrible coach he's done a ton with a similar scat back. Couldn't Ron have made a call pretty easily to figure out some better ways to utilize Garret? Now my guess is that Ron has and I personally think the Bears need to utilize Wolfe more, but before we get crazy on things, if you watch the Chargers, they don't just throw screen passes with Sproles. They run him inside, outside, use him as a decoy, etc. Bottom line, I want everyone to remember that for Wolfe to succeed the Bears will have to do the same and that means he will occasionally have to be used inside to essentially keep defenses honest. The Bears just need to be more committed to using Wolfe (which means we need to sustain longer drives and maybe take the ball out of Forte's hands a bit more...at least for the time being). I want more wolfe on offense and less lamb on defense. Lets blitz more. I am a big believer in giving the opposing qb less time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DABEARSDABOMB Posted October 21, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 I want more wolfe on offense and less lamb on defense. Lets blitz more. I am a big believer in giving the opposing qb less time. The biggest adjustment in this years Bears Defense has been the blitzing scheme Lovie has utilized. It has been pretty creative, very aggressive, and for the most part it has worked. I'm glad too, cause for a couple years all that happened when we blitzed was us getting burned. Now if only our oline could learn to protect, but before they protect a blitz they need to learn how to stop 3 man rushes from getting to our QB's (which they had a hell of a time doing during crunch time last week). How Cutler has done what he has this year is beyond me, but I'm so glad we got him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted October 21, 2009 Report Share Posted October 21, 2009 I want more wolfe on offense and less lamb on defense. Lets blitz more. I am a big believer in giving the opposing qb less time. We have been one of the heaviest blitzing teams in the league the last two years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Wouldn't you think of all OC's, Turner would know the most how to utilize Garret Wolfe. His brother runs the show in San Diego and while Norv is a terrible coach he's done a ton with a similar scat back. Couldn't Ron have made a call pretty easily to figure out some better ways to utilize Garret? Now my guess is that Ron has and I personally think the Bears need to utilize Wolfe more, but before we get crazy on things, if you watch the Chargers, they don't just throw screen passes with Sproles. They run him inside, outside, use him as a decoy, etc. Bottom line, I want everyone to remember that for Wolfe to succeed the Bears will have to do the same and that means he will occasionally have to be used inside to essentially keep defenses honest. The Bears just need to be more committed to using Wolfe (which means we need to sustain longer drives and maybe take the ball out of Forte's hands a bit more...at least for the time being). Agreed...as long as Wolfe isn't being used up the pipe when it's an obvious down and distance situation that calls for an up the pipe run (e.g. from the 1yd line going out). I'd LOVE to see more of Wolfe on the field. I've been saying it since he got drafted, and all I heard was, "He's too small!" and "He's not an every down back" from the majority of the board. This dude quietly went onto the ST and became a beast, making what seems like every single tackle. He's been proving doubters wrong his entire life, and I think he'll do the same if given the chance to carry the rock 10-20 times a game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 We have been one of the heaviest blitzing teams in the league the last two years. Agreed. But it appears that the entire league knows where the blitzes are coming from, and the blitzes are, more often than not, picked up with ease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Agreed...as long as Wolfe isn't being used up the pipe when it's an obvious down and distance situation that calls for an up the pipe run (e.g. from the 1yd line going out). I'd LOVE to see more of Wolfe on the field. I've been saying it since he got drafted, and all I heard was, "He's too small!" and "He's not an every down back" from the majority of the board. This dude quietly went onto the ST and became a beast, making what seems like every single tackle. He's been proving doubters wrong his entire life, and I think he'll do the same if given the chance to carry the rock 10-20 times a game. I agree he needs to be on the field more. I would say at least 10 touches a game. Right now, he is lucky to get 3. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azbearsfan Posted October 22, 2009 Report Share Posted October 22, 2009 Agreed. But it appears that the entire league knows where the blitzes are coming from, and the blitzes are, more often than not, picked up with ease. I am in agreement with nfo that we dont really have the talent to blitz a ton. You are right when you say its gets picked up alot. When it does get picked, up we just dont have the talent behind it to be successful. Since its getting picked up I think we are better off with those guys in coverage. Hopefully Gaines Adams can either light a fire under the DL or take this opportunity to elevate his game, because we really need to get pressure with the front four. I think if that happens then we can blitz less and when we do blitz it will be more effective. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I wish they'd just make Wolfe the starter already, he has looked 10 x better than Matt Forte in his limited amount of carries this season. With our crappy line we need a faster back. Forte is sneaky and elusive but he's not fast or quick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Maybe this has something to do with it... The offensive line has become an easy target for the lack of production in the running game, even though the numbers aren't appreciably different from those of last season. And the line has done a good job in pass protection. Through five games, the Bears have allowed 10 sacks this season, compared with 11 last season. And don't forget that pass protection isn't limited to the offensive line. According to research by Stats LLC, tight end Greg Olsen and running back Garrett Wolfe each have given up two sacks, meaning no more than six have been the fault of the line. http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...ully23.article# For the limited action Wolfe gets he's responsible for 20% of the sacks given up. Liability or not, Turner could have Wolfe chip and flair out into a pattern instead of relying on him to make a block.(turn a weakness into a strength) Then the D would maybe have to slow that blitzer down to keep Wolfe in check???? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brletich Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 For the limited action Wolfe gets he's responsible for 20% of the sacks given up. Liability or not, Turner could have Wolfe chip and flair out into a pattern instead of relying on him to make a block.(turn a weakness into a strength) Then the D would maybe have to slow that blitzer down to keep Wolfe in check???? Well I have to defend Wolfe a bit, because on one of those 2 sacks he gave up, the Pucker LB Chiller just made one hell of a play and hurdled him. I don't know that I can really fault Wolfe for that. I watched that one 3 times on the DVR because it was just freakish. And in the Falcons game Wolfe planted one of their LB's on a blitz. I don't see Wolfe as being a blitz pickup liability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Also in relation to the giving up of sacks...11 last year and 10 this year isn't an improvement. Cutler has Bruce Lee agility compared to Orton... The O Line sucks... Well I have to defend Wolfe a bit, because on one of those 2 sacks he gave up, the Pucker LB Chiller just made one hell of a play and hurdled him. I don't know that I can really fault Wolfe for that. I watched that one 3 times on the DVR because it was just freakish. And in the Falcons game Wolfe planted one of their LB's on a blitz. I don't see Wolfe as being a blitz pickup liability. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Also in relation to the giving up of sacks...11 last year and 10 this year isn't an improvement. Cutler has Bruce Lee agility compared to Orton... The O Line sucks... Realizing it would actually be much, much worse with Kyle in there. Yes, the o-line sucks. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Agreed. The sack total this year would probably be closer to 20 w/o Jay... Realizing it would actually be much, much worse with Kyle in there. Yes, the o-line sucks. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 I don't know if the sack total would be worse with Orton but I do know that we'd have a lot less intermediate completions (10-20yd) and a lot more checkdowns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 23, 2009 Report Share Posted October 23, 2009 Probably... And definitley no helicopter TD! I don't know if the sack total would be worse with Orton but I do know that we'd have a lot less intermediate completions (10-20yd) and a lot more checkdowns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BearFan2000 Posted October 25, 2009 Report Share Posted October 25, 2009 I am in agreement with nfo that we dont really have the talent to blitz a ton. You are right when you say its gets picked up alot. When it does get picked, up we just dont have the talent behind it to be successful. Since its getting picked up I think we are better off with those guys in coverage. Hopefully Gaines Adams can either light a fire under the DL or take this opportunity to elevate his game, because we really need to get pressure with the front four. I think if that happens then we can blitz less and when we do blitz it will be more effective. IMO the reason we are blitzing so much is because a of a lack of talent in the secondary. I think the hope is that we can get to the QB before we can get burned down field. Sadly though that hasn't worked and teams abilities to pick up our blitzes has allowed opposing QB's time to then pick us apart. A DB's job gets harder the longer the play goes even for good DB's when your DB's are mediocre at best continual failed blitzing is pure suicide. Blitzing for the sake of blitzing isn't a good strategy we need to be more creative and careful with our blitzing. We simply do not have the secondary to make up for failed blitzes down after down. IMO we are gambling on D and are loosing that gamble more often than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.