Joh Jurkovic's grades

[nfoligno]

Everyone is giving our grades. I wanted to add this one because it comes from ESPN Chicago, and thus is a bit more knowledgable and indepth than most other national outlets.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/story?pa...portcard_091111

 

General manager D+

 

The offensive line is overrated, getting old and losing athleticism. The free-agent signing of Frank Omiyale was the big mistake of the season so far. He's proven himself to be unathletic and unable to play offensive guard. Let's hope he can be salvaged at one of the tackle positions moving forward. Defensive backs are in a state of disarray. Peanut Tillman isn't getting any younger; Nathan Vasher has been under-performing and the young rookies have yet to step up; and it looks like a lot of these guys are playing out of position. Wide receivers are still have playing two or three positions above where they need to be. That's all on Jerry Angelo's head.

 

While I obviously do not argue most of what was written, at the same time, I don't care for the fact that he didn't even touch on positives. For example, w/o starting another debate, I think we would be in a worse position, now and going forward, if not for the Cutler deal. That deal by itself should push his grade into the C range.

 

Coaching C-

 

There were lot of expectations for this team going in. Looks like the same mistakes are being made over and over, and that's on Lovie Smith's head. Discipline issues, guys not being able to control themselves on the field -- read: Tommie Harris -- ultimately falls on the head of head coach Lovie Smith.

 

He seems to really knock Lovie, but the grade doesn't reflect it as much, IMHO, because he seems to place much more of the blame on talent and Angelo. I personally just disagree. I think Lovie should shoulder a lot more of the responsibility. Jurko makes several comments against Angelo saying players seem to be out of position, but isn't that on the coach. Further, while I think talent is definitely a factor, I also think coaching has made the situation worse.

 

Quarterback B

 

Jay Cutler is the only bright spot on this unit. In his good games, he's really good. In some of the bad games, he's trying to force things and make things happen because of the money that's been paid and the things that were given up for him. Needed to be surrounded with some better talent, and that's the responsibility of general manager Jerry Angelo to make that happen

 

I basically agree here.

 

Running back I

 

To me, I judge it incomplete. How do you judge a running back when you look at the lack of blocking on the offensive line? So what I will judge is his blocking, his blitz pickup and for that I give him a C-. A C- for blitz pickup, blocking on passing and the ability to see and recognize what's happening in front of him.

 

Agree and disagree w/ this. As bad as the OL has been, Forte simply looked better last year, IMHO. And sorry, I would give a much lower grade if we were basing this purely on his blocking and blitz pickup, which I think has been about as week this year as the OL as a whole.

 

Tight ends B

 

I like the way the tight ends have been playing. You got a lot of productivity and production out of Greg Olsen. I thought we'd have more production out of him, but maybe the second half of the season will be better. Des Clark, I wish he'd catch more passes that end up hitting his hands, but for one reason or another, no. They block better than the offensive line but holes in the offensive line cause problems for the tight ends.

 

Huh? Olsen is on pace to equal last years production, outside of TDs. Clark is, by Jurko's comments, not playing consistent. And the blocking in general from this group has been down right awful. Seems to be Jurko is high on Olsen in general, and less prone to knock the grade down based on hope Olsen will improve in the 2nd half, even though the grade is supposed to reflect 1st half results.

 

Receivers C

 

I didn't expect much from the wide receiver position, so they're out-performing expectations. But that only puts them at a solid C. Devin Hester is better suited to play the slot position in three-wide receiver sets. Johnny Knox has been a pleasant surprise, but still will be maybe as high as a No. 2 receiver some day. Earl Bennett, still trying to figure out exactly what he's doing out there sometimes. He has no recognition when it comes to a scrambling quarterback, so times are tough for that wide receiving corps. We still need to upgrade the talent at that position.

 

As I recall, Jurko was very down on this group entering the season, and says as much to begin with, and IMHO simply refuses to give credit here when it is due. Maybe Hester is better suited for the slot, but I would argue that is all the more reason to give him credit for the job he has done to date. And while I agree Bennett still has work to do, he is young and that has to be expected. Still, Bennett has shown a solid amount of development and seems to be turning into a legit starting WR. IMHO, Jurko here simply can't let go of an old argument. He was never high on the WRs, and despite their solid play (solid, not spectacular) he just will not give them credit. It amazes me he gives Olsen a B while he gives the WRs a C.

 

Offensive line F

 

Absolutely miserable. And because of their pitiful play, it's tough to judge the wide receivers and the running back and the quarterback fairly in this regard. So it's unfortunate that the poor play of the offensive line is the F, and it will bring down the grade. The curve came down for the rest of the units in the offense.

 

Can anyone disagree here?

 

Defensive line D+

 

If it weren't for the defensive ends, this defensive line would get an F. Anthony Adams looks like he's lost sometimes. Marcus Harrison's still out of shape and unable to play a complete game. Tommie Harris has been an enigma. Alex Brown, Adewale Ogunleye and Mark Anderson are the only things that salvage this thing from being an absolute F.

 

I think he may be giving our DEs a tad too much credit, as I think they have been a legit part of the problem, but overall agree. This unit simply has not produced as expected, and it starts at the DT position which has been flat all year.

 

Linebackers C+

 

Tough to judge this unit because of the injuries that have happened here with Brian Urlacher and Pisa Tinoisamoa. This unit looked to be one of the stronger units going into the season, but because of the injuries the depth has been forced to go ahead and step up and act like the pros. Briggs has played well for most of the season, but he can't be a one-man show. He's got to be careful not to try to do somebody else's job, because ultimately, you end up doing no jobs, so you have to be careful in that regard.

 

Agree this is a hard one to grade w/ 2 of 3 starters out most of the season. Still, if we simply base the grade on the players on the field, I think it would have to be lower. We have been flat out weak in the middle, and as big of holes as our DL has allowed, the LBs simply have not done much either. Also, I see us blitz our LBs all the time, yet see minimal positive results from it.

 

Secondary C

 

Peanut Tillman is your best corner, but he's not a shut-down corner. Trying to figure this unit out. These guys are all playing a mish mash of positions. Al Afalava, for a rookie, has played well at times, but you can't expect this guy to perform miracles when the defensive line is playing poorly. He comes up to fill a hole and it's ten-yards wide. Even the great Ronnie Lott wouldn't be able to fill that type of hole.

 

Maybe the hardest for me to grade. As much as I want to put on the DBs, I have a hard time due to (a) scheme and ( lack of pass rush. They have not played well, but at the same time, I am simply not sure the fault should be squared on their shoulders.

 

Special teams B+

 

Special teams is the only bright spot. Patrick Mannelly, except for the stupid decision he made against the Green Bay Packers that cost them the game, I give him a B. Robbie Gould gets an A, one of the most consistent kickers and adds a 50-yarder this year. Brad Maynard, I'm going to give a B-. He's had a couple struggles this year in some games, and of the three special-teamers, he performed the most inconsistent so he gets a B-.

 

Key reason I disagree w/ this grade is there is no mention of the coverage units, which have really been poor this year. Still, credit has to go out to the other units which have done well. We inserted Knox as a returner, and he has replaced DM fairly well. Hester looks better returning punts this year than last. Maynard has had some poor kicks, but I think has been good overall. And credit has to go out to Gould.

 

 

[Daventry]

Seems a fairly good analysis IMO, although I would have to give the coaching a much lower grade due to the lack of discipline and motivation. This is a team that doesn't seem to care....and if that does not come down to coaching, what does?

[madlithuanian]

Agreed.

 

At least we're starting to get some press on how bad it is here. Teddy Bear and the rest of the enablers can complain all they want that the media's being "Negative Nancies"...it's obviously well deserved.

 

WAKE UP OWNERSHIP. This franchise is falling apart...

 

Seems a fairly good analysis IMO, although I would have to give the coaching a much lower grade due to the lack of discipline and motivation. This is a team that doesn't seem to care....and if that does not come down to coaching, what does?

 

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

I love Jurko. I try to stay away from what he says when on 1000 they started talking baseball, basketball, or even football when the offense is being talked about. But when he gets into the defense, I can listen to him all day. He's very knowledgable being a former DT.

 

BTW- he had the same leg injury that Tommie Harris had, and a year ago, Jurk said this- I doubt he'll ever be the same. It's such a tough injury to come back from.

 

So far, he's been spot on there.

[Mongo3451]

Everyone is giving our grades. I wanted to add this one because it comes from ESPN Chicago, and thus is a bit more knowledgable and indepth than most other national outlets.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/story?pa...portcard_091111

 

General manager D+

 

The offensive line is overrated, getting old and losing athleticism. The free-agent signing of Frank Omiyale was the big mistake of the season so far. He's proven himself to be unathletic and unable to play offensive guard. Let's hope he can be salvaged at one of the tackle positions moving forward. Defensive backs are in a state of disarray. Peanut Tillman isn't getting any younger; Nathan Vasher has been under-performing and the young rookies have yet to step up; and it looks like a lot of these guys are playing out of position. Wide receivers are still have playing two or three positions above where they need to be. That's all on Jerry Angelo's head.

 

While I obviously do not argue most of what was written, at the same time, I don't care for the fact that he didn't even touch on positives. For example, w/o starting another debate, I think we would be in a worse position, now and going forward, if not for the Cutler deal. That deal by itself should push his grade into the C range.

 

Coaching C-

 

There were lot of expectations for this team going in. Looks like the same mistakes are being made over and over, and that's on Lovie Smith's head. Discipline issues, guys not being able to control themselves on the field -- read: Tommie Harris -- ultimately falls on the head of head coach Lovie Smith.

 

He seems to really knock Lovie, but the grade doesn't reflect it as much, IMHO, because he seems to place much more of the blame on talent and Angelo. I personally just disagree. I think Lovie should shoulder a lot more of the responsibility. Jurko makes several comments against Angelo saying players seem to be out of position, but isn't that on the coach. Further, while I think talent is definitely a factor, I also think coaching has made the situation worse.

 

Receivers C

 

I didn't expect much from the wide receiver position, so they're out-performing expectations. But that only puts them at a solid C. Devin Hester is better suited to play the slot position in three-wide receiver sets. Johnny Knox has been a pleasant surprise, but still will be maybe as high as a No. 2 receiver some day. Earl Bennett, still trying to figure out exactly what he's doing out there sometimes. He has no recognition when it comes to a scrambling quarterback, so times are tough for that wide receiving corps. We still need to upgrade the talent at that position.

 

As I recall, Jurko was very down on this group entering the season, and says as much to begin with, and IMHO simply refuses to give credit here when it is due. Maybe Hester is better suited for the slot, but I would argue that is all the more reason to give him credit for the job he has done to date. And while I agree Bennett still has work to do, he is young and that has to be expected. Still, Bennett has shown a solid amount of development and seems to be turning into a legit starting WR. IMHO, Jurko here simply can't let go of an old argument. He was never high on the WRs, and despite their solid play (solid, not spectacular) he just will not give them credit. It amazes me he gives Olsen a B while he gives the WRs a C.

I'm going to primarily agree with Jurko and you. I will disagree with both of you on two key points.

 

1st - I disagree with Jurko on coaching. I am giving coaching an F. The days of "trust me" are over with me. Lovie has admitted failure to get the team ready one too many times. The fact that th D doesn't look much different than when Babich was at the helm does not bode well. Turner has failed to utilize the talent we have properly and has also failed to find a way to keep the D off the field with game planning and execution. Lastly, we are miserable in the red-zone. Hiestand either is horrible or completely hand tied by talent and/or Turner or higher. Marinelli - was supposed to be a huge acquisition and rejuvenate our DL - nuf said. F

 

2nd - I disagree with your assessment of our WR's, while agreeing with Jurko. I see the primary success of the recievers a result of Cutler hitting with quick strikes. I have yet to see good timing plays that would be the 1st sign of WR's being in time with the QB.

[nfoligno]

2nd - I disagree with your assessment of our WR's, while agreeing with Jurko. I see the primary success of the recievers a result of Cutler hitting with quick strikes. I have yet to see good timing plays that would be the 1st sign of WR's being in time with the QB.

 

Understand. I am not saying our WRs are great. In fact, while others have been trying to give our WRs A grades, I have pushed that back toward a B grade. To me, there is zero question that our WRs have a long ways to go in terms of development. Against Az, there was a play where Cutler was under pressure, and in replay they showed Knox simply running his route downfield and never looking back. If Cutler threw Knox a perfect strike, it would have hit him in the back. On another play, Cutler was scrambling to his right. Bennett had settled in near the middle of the field, but had a DB near him. As Cutler rolled (and the TV guys talked about this) Bennett should have mirrored him and tried to get away from the DB. Instead, he basically just stood there.

 

With all that said however, I think there is no question our WRs have taken big leaps in terms of development. Further, when you talk about what his holding back our offense, can you really say the WRs? Give Cutler tons of credit, I know I do, but don't do so w/o giving at least some credit to the WRs. Every week I read more and more people (as well as listen to the announcers) talk about how much more he is looking like a WR, rather than a return specialist trying to play WR. Another thing Hester has not gotten enough credit for IMHO is his concentration. In the past, he seemed to drop quite a few easy passes due to a lack of concentration, but I have not seen that this year. His route running is getting a lot of praise, and simply put, he is developing nicely into a WR. Does that mean he will be Steve Smith? No. But he doesn't have to be. Bennett has a long way to go in terms of development, but this is also his first year on the field and he is looking pretty solid IMHO. Ditto Knox.

 

At the end of the day, WR was perceived as a huge weakness entering the season. Most felt Olsen and/or Forte would still lead the team in receptions. You can credit Cutler, which is deserved, but I just don't think you can totally take away credit to our WRs. No way anyone would have predicted our top three reception leaders would all be WRs. While you can argue our WRs are not great, I just don't think you can say they are holding us back either. And further, I don't think anyone can say they have not surpassed expectations.

 

 

Back specifically to Jurko, IMHO he simply is showing bias and an inability to admit he may have been wrong. Not only is he refusing to give the WRs much credit, at the same time, he is making excuses for Olsen while giving him a B grade. Especially when you factor expectations, how in the hell can you even argue Olsen and the TEs get a B grade while the WRs get a C. Olsen was expected to be the top weapon on our offense, and has not come close to that. Further, while he is not only failing to step up as a receiver, he is failing miserably as a blocker.

 

As for coaching, like you, I disagree w/ Jurko, but there, at least I understand his argument. He believes we simply lack talent, and thus why he puts all the focus on Angelo. I also think you can question the talent, but at the same time, agree with you that a far greater problem is in the coaching.