Some comments supporting Turner

[DABEARSDABOMB]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...3.column?page=2

 

Great article and it basically is consistent with what I had told you guys I had heard from a long-time coach and a guy who does some consulting work for Belliceck now.

[azbearsfan]

Good find. Its great to see some stats to back things up.

 

Really supports what nfo and you have said.

[azbearsfan]

Good find. Its great to see some stats to back things up.

 

Really supports what nfo and you have said.

[jason]

The problem with Turner is in the first three sentences of the second page:

 

"What we believe is to out-execute them," Turner said. "Do enough things formation-wise, play-wise, to keep them off balance.

 

In other words: "I put in the plays, and I think they should work regardless of down and situation. If they don't, it's because the players didn't execute well enough. Doing a variety of things to keep the defense off balance is not what we do very much because the players should be able to succeed if they simply execute better."

 

In my mind, that's BS. Sure, execution is probably the most important thing out there on the field, but when you're competing in the NFL, there isn't much difference between bad and good. You NEED to do things to confuse the opponent and keep them off balance.

 

As for the "gripe" vs. "truth" section, it's fairly easy to come up with a very simple counter argument to each of the lines supporting Turner. If anything, the support for him in this article, at least the statistical portion, is mumbo-jumbo like the "almost interception." The supposed inside sources, however, can't be proven or refuted. But, honestly, what's the likelihood of an NFL scout, coach, or front office guy talking bad about another? Not very likely.

[azbearsfan]

The problem with Turner is in the first three sentences of the second page:

 

"What we believe is to out-execute them," Turner said. "Do enough things formation-wise, play-wise, to keep them off balance.

 

In other words: "I put in the plays, and I think they should work regardless of down and situation. If they don't, it's because the players didn't execute well enough. Doing a variety of things to keep the defense off balance is not what we do very much because the players should be able to succeed if they simply execute better."

 

In my mind, that's BS. Sure, execution is probably the most important thing out there on the field, but when you're competing in the NFL, there isn't much difference between bad and good. You NEED to do things to confuse the opponent and keep them off balance.

 

As for the "gripe" vs. "truth" section, it's fairly easy to come up with a very simple counter argument to each of the lines supporting Turner. If anything, the support for him in this article, at least the statistical portion, is mumbo-jumbo like the "almost interception." The supposed inside sources, however, can't be proven or refuted. But, honestly, what's the likelihood of an NFL scout, coach, or front office guy talking bad about another? Not very likely.

 

I think you are really taking liberties with his quotes. He is saying they try to do enough things to keep them off balance and the stats in the article back that up.

 

 

[madlithuanian]

...I'm all for the execution of our OC.

 

The problem with Turner is in the first three sentences of the second page:

 

"What we believe is to out-execute them," Turner said. "Do enough things formation-wise, play-wise, to keep them off balance.

 

In other words: "I put in the plays, and I think they should work regardless of down and situation. If they don't, it's because the players didn't execute well enough. Doing a variety of things to keep the defense off balance is not what we do very much because the players should be able to succeed if they simply execute better."

 

In my mind, that's BS. Sure, execution is probably the most important thing out there on the field, but when you're competing in the NFL, there isn't much difference between bad and good. You NEED to do things to confuse the opponent and keep them off balance.

 

As for the "gripe" vs. "truth" section, it's fairly easy to come up with a very simple counter argument to each of the lines supporting Turner. If anything, the support for him in this article, at least the statistical portion, is mumbo-jumbo like the "almost interception." The supposed inside sources, however, can't be proven or refuted. But, honestly, what's the likelihood of an NFL scout, coach, or front office guy talking bad about another? Not very likely.

 

[lemonej]

...I'm all for the execution of our OC.

LOL

 

The thing that I'm confused on is for some reason Dan Pompeii found a scout that says he plays to his players strengths. If thats so,why is Garrett Wolf running between the tackles instead of getting a few plays that allow him to get to the edge and utilize his quickness?Its because Turner is stubborn just like his brother Norv and refuses to change. The Bears are eunning the same running plays they did when Lewis Tillman and Raymont Harris were in the backfield and the same passing plays they ran when Jeff Graham and Curtis Conway were the WRs.Darren Sharper's comments add some validity to the article but the fact that he is obviously looking for a career in TV leads me to believe he says the right things depending on what media outlet sticks a microphone in his face. Remember his quotes leading up to the Saints-Giants game about wanting revenge because they didn't sign him? At his age and the salary he would command most teams would pass on him. IMO he wanted to be in that NY market to try and secure his future in TV.

[NAMEDSONPAYTON2]

LOL

 

The thing that I'm confused on is for some reason Dan Pompeii found a scout that says he plays to his players strengths. If thats so,why is Garrett Wolf running between the tackles instead of getting a few plays that allow him to get to the edge and utilize his quickness?Its because Turner is stubborn just like his brother Norv and refuses to change. The Bears are eunning the same running plays they did when Lewis Tillman and Raymont Harris were in the backfield and the same passing plays they ran when Jeff Graham and Curtis Conway were the WRs.Darren Sharper's comments add some validity to the article but the fact that he is obviously looking for a career in TV leads me to believe he says the right things depending on what media outlet sticks a microphone in his face. Remember his quotes leading up to the Saints-Giants game about wanting revenge because they didn't sign him? At his age and the salary he would command most teams would pass on him. IMO he wanted to be in that NY market to try and secure his future in TV.

 

The thing that I'm confused on is, why every sportstalk show,every tavern, every restroom at Soilder field and many here are in agreement. It's not that we don't use a variety of plays and formations etc.,he does not know when to call them TIMING. And that was just one person "Sharper"saying the Bears are not predictable. That's bull, most of us here sure do believe the Bears are predictable,we watch all 16 games every year. Sharper only watches 2 a year. I want to see some bootlegs by Cutler.

[lemonej]

The thing that I'm confused on is, why every sportstalk show,every tavern, every restroom at Soilder field and many here are in agreement. It's not that we don't use a variety of plays and formations etc.,he does not know when to call them TIMING. And that was just one person "Sharper"saying the Bears are not predictable. That's bull, most of us here sure do believe the Bears are predictable,we watch all 16 games every year. Sharper only watches 2 a year. I want to see some bootlegs by Cutler.

Agreed. When Garrett Wolfe is in the game on 3rd and long I'm almost certain a screen pass is coming and when AP is in the game in the same situation I would look for a draw play.The only play that is different from years past is Hester in the Bears' form of the "Wildcat". When Forte fumbled on 2 consecutive plays after only fumbling twice all of last year,you think that formation didn't tell Atlanta what was coming? Every time they play action on the goalline and throw to one of the TEs they have been wide open.

[butkusrules]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...3.column?page=2

 

Great article and it basically is consistent with what I had told you guys I had heard from a long-time coach and a guy who does some consulting work for Belliceck now.

 

 

People can justify his work any way they want. Bottom line is that the offense sucks and has sucked for his entire tenure here. This is a bottom line business and we deserve better results.

[madlithuanian]

If Sharper can't see it coming, then he's an idiot! Everyone else can!

 

The thing that I'm confused on is, why every sportstalk show,every tavern, every restroom at Soilder field and many here are in agreement. It's not that we don't use a variety of plays and formations etc.,he does not know when to call them TIMING. And that was just one person "Sharper"saying the Bears are not predictable. That's bull, most of us here sure do believe the Bears are predictable,we watch all 16 games every year. Sharper only watches 2 a year. I want to see some bootlegs by Cutler.

 

[madlithuanian]

I loved how the article referenced the wildcat, and correct me if I'm wrong, it was run once! And that's where he mentions Hester taking a snap, Cutler lining as a WR,etc. ...it's all just fluff to argue a point wih no legs.

 

I think you guys are summing it up well...

 

 

Agreed. When Garrett Wolfe is in the game on 3rd and long I'm almost certain a screen pass is coming and when AP is in the game in the same situation I would look for a draw play.The only play that is different from years past is Hester in the Bears' form of the "Wildcat". When Forte fumbled on 2 consecutive plays after only fumbling twice all of last year,you think that formation didn't tell Atlanta what was coming? Every time they play action on the goalline and throw to one of the TEs they have been wide open.

 

[madlithuanian]

Bingo!

 

And I love the reference to his great OC year of 1995! That was 14 years ago! That game has cahnged some... And the results now aren't what those were anyway!

 

People can justify his work any way they want. Bottom line is that the offense sucks and has sucked for his entire tenure here. This is a bottom line business and we deserve better results.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

The problem with Turner is in the first three sentences of the second page:

 

"What we believe is to out-execute them," Turner said. "Do enough things formation-wise, play-wise, to keep them off balance.

 

In other words: "I put in the plays, and I think they should work regardless of down and situation. If they don't, it's because the players didn't execute well enough. Doing a variety of things to keep the defense off balance is not what we do very much because the players should be able to succeed if they simply execute better."

 

In my mind, that's BS. Sure, execution is probably the most important thing out there on the field, but when you're competing in the NFL, there isn't much difference between bad and good. You NEED to do things to confuse the opponent and keep them off balance.

 

As for the "gripe" vs. "truth" section, it's fairly easy to come up with a very simple counter argument to each of the lines supporting Turner. If anything, the support for him in this article, at least the statistical portion, is mumbo-jumbo like the "almost interception." The supposed inside sources, however, can't be proven or refuted. But, honestly, what's the likelihood of an NFL scout, coach, or front office guy talking bad about another? Not very likely.

The reporter indicates that the sources he talked to have been known to give him honest opinions, whether good or bad, so I'd say that puts validity into there comments.

 

In addition, I've reported on other sports (not NFL), specifically MLB, and you'd be amazed at the bad things people will say. In fact, when you talk to scouts, etc, they usually first talk about the holes in guys games or at least thats been my experience when interviewing various individuals, albeit I did it free-lance as a hobby during college, but I've still interviewed a good chunk of MLB scouts and current and former MLB players.

 

And in terms of executing, I think if you have the talent and execute appropriately you'll get the play right and the more convulated and complex you get things the harder it is to actually execute properly and you ultimately end up with more bad than good.

 

A lot of the great offenses in the NFL didn't work because they were so fancy and complex, they worked because they had the right players executing and there is no reason an offense that has good plays and puts its players in position to excel (which is what the article insinuates based upon its discussion with NFL Experts) is an offense that is doing its job.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

The thing that I'm confused on is, why every sportstalk show,every tavern, every restroom at Soilder field and many here are in agreement. It's not that we don't use a variety of plays and formations etc.,he does not know when to call them TIMING. And that was just one person "Sharper"saying the Bears are not predictable. That's bull, most of us here sure do believe the Bears are predictable,we watch all 16 games every year. Sharper only watches 2 a year. I want to see some bootlegs by Cutler.

Football is also the easiest sport for a fan to rip on because when any one play goes wrong they think its a dumb decision, this and that. But ultimately there is a lot of strategy to every play.

 

You never run Wolfe inside and all of a sudden teams can pretty much read everything you do. Sometimes a failed play ultimately ends up setting a big play later in the game and a lot of fans fail to grasp that concept (not saying anyone here does or doesn't, just saying in general).

 

Not to mention, most of the time I listen to Chicago Sports talk on something I have a vast knowledge on (Baseball), I'm usually pretty embarassed and ashamed at what the callers suggest and it becomes pretty obvious about the complete ignorance most people that call sports talk have.

 

There are good callers, but ultimately those are few and far between compared to the dumbasses that hyperventilate and go super high with the high's and mega low with the low's.

[madlithuanian]

I heard Dan Hampton the other day say, Turner is playing checkers while the others are playing chess.

 

I honestly feel that way too. I put a lot of credence in what Danimal says...

[madlithuanian]

Unless he gives me his source, I see it as a fluff piece looking to get into the luxery box and baiting fans into disagreeing with him.

 

This article is pure trash to just get fans riled up or placate those who just believe what they read...

 

His stats are very out of context, and some straight up laughable. What was his % of plays we run instead of pass on 3rd and long? Like that's a good thing! It's good once in a while...but the % he gave was far too high!

 

It's the whole running Wolfe up the middle thing. It's not that he did it. It's when he did it. It's good to run up the gut w/ a scat back, even when you're being stopped. Just not on your 5 or the opponent's 5!

 

Can I spell out our first series this Sunday?

 

1st - long pass , gain 8 yrds.

2nd - long pass - gain yds, first down

1st - gut run, 2 yard gain

2nd - gut run, no gain

3rd - long pass, incomplete

4th - punt

 

That's how predictable Turner is most the time. Let's see how off I am on Monday... I truly hope I'm really off!

 

 

The reporter indicates that the sources he talked to have been known to give him honest opinions, whether good or bad, so I'd say that puts validity into there comments.

 

In addition, I've reported on other sports (not NFL), specifically MLB, and you'd be amazed at the bad things people will say. In fact, when you talk to scouts, etc, they usually first talk about the holes in guys games or at least thats been my experience when interviewing various individuals, albeit I did it free-lance as a hobby during college, but I've still interviewed a good chunk of MLB scouts and current and former MLB players.

 

And in terms of executing, I think if you have the talent and execute appropriately you'll get the play right and the more convulated and complex you get things the harder it is to actually execute properly and you ultimately end up with more bad than good.

 

A lot of the great offenses in the NFL didn't work because they were so fancy and complex, they worked because they had the right players executing and there is no reason an offense that has good plays and puts its players in position to excel (which is what the article insinuates based upon its discussion with NFL Experts) is an offense that is doing its job.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Unless he gives me his source, I see it as a fluff piece looking to get into the luxery box and baiting fans into disagreeing with him.

 

This article is pure trash to just get fans riled up or placate those who just believe what they read...

 

His stats are very out of context, and some straight up laughable. What was his % of plays we run instead of pass on 3rd and long? Like that's a good thing! It's good once in a while...but the % he gave was far too high!

 

It's the whole running Wolfe up the middle thing. It's not that he did it. It's when he did it. It's good to run up the gut w/ a scat back, even when you're being stopped. Just not on your 5 or the opponent's 5!

 

Can I spell out our first series this Sunday?

 

1st - long pass , gain 8 yrds.

2nd - long pass - gain yds, first down

1st - gut run, 2 yard gain

2nd - gut run, no gain

3rd - long pass, incomplete

4th - punt

 

That's how predictable Turner is most the time. Let's see how off I am on Monday... I truly hope I'm really off!

Isn't Pompei one of the more widely respected Football Writers though? I've always thought pretty highly of him.

[madlithuanian]

He is. Was? That's why I'm so disappointed in this article... It doesn't appear very well researched. In most writing, you want to present your case, and also shoot down the opposite. He didn't appear to take on much detractors from his stats. He set all the stats up very one sided... It's kind of lousy journalism by omission. At least, that how I see it.

 

He not really trolling I believe, like a Mariotti. I just feel he didn't do enough legwork on the article before sending it to print. I also place place on the editor for running it as is... It's really lacking. It reminds me of a political speech. Very one sided w/ no real mention of any negatives besides listing out the gripes. He may think that's enough, but it really isn't.

 

It just reminds me of something I'd see in a high school or college paper, or maybe even some very rural press...but not for a major city.

 

I usually like his stuff, and that's why I'm so annoyed by it.

 

 

 

Isn't Pompei one of the more widely respected Football Writers though? I've always thought pretty highly of him.

 

[adam]

I think his play calling for the most part is decent between the 20s. However, he seems brutally predictable inside the Red Zone. We are currently tied for 18th in RZ scoring.

 

A great stat site for those unique stats: http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stats/

 

Cool stat - Only 1 team with a positive turnover ratio has a losing record (KC). We are currently at -0.2.

[jason]

I think you are really taking liberties with his quotes. He is saying they try to do enough things to keep them off balance and the stats in the article back that up.

 

Maybe I am taking liberties with his quotes, but that's how I interpret it when in reference to the Bears' offense. Like most others in this thread, I noticed that the "stats" in this article are horseshit. Some are misleading, some are stupid, and others are not good for Turner.

 

With all that said, the stats DEFINITELY don't support Turner as a good offensive mind. The Bears haven't been a dangerous offense in his entire tenure, and even though he got Cutler this year, they are still mid-level at best. Let him produce an offense in the top ten a few years in a row and then I'll get off his back. Until then, I just can't deal with this predictability, lack of adjustment, and stubborn usage of players and plays without factoring in the type of player, down, and situation at the time.