The RB Screen

[jason]

I got to thinking about how excited everyone was about the RB screen. It was successful, looked great, and had my jaw on the floor the entire game. I'm sure that every Bears' fan was pumped to see this play, one that has NEVER worked, be so successful. Here's the problem: it's a sign of the Bears' failure.

 

Why does a RB screen usually succeed? The offensive gameplan is successful enough that the OL can almost toy with the DL. The DL rushes in, almost oblivious to their newfound success at getting to the QB. The RB and OL scoot through, set up things, and the RB screen is successful. Why is this a problem, you ask? The Niners' DL was so used to blasting through the Bears' OL that when the Bears' OL "let the Niners through," there was nearly no surprise at all. This allowed the Bears to set up the RB screen, and the rest is history. The Niners defense wasn't surprised; they were complacent.

 

Teams don't suddenly get good at the RB screen, and the Bears have been bad at it for a decade. This is a short-lived source of cheering for us, and it will be quickly sniffed out.

 

The real question is: Since it's obvious to EVERYONE who has watched the Bears this season that the OL is horrible, why hasn't Turner figured out a way to put in more RB screens and RB draws, plays that are typically called to slow down a rush?

[selection7]

Very interesting observation. Screens to combat an aggressive pash rush is conventional, but usually it's set up by the D selling out for the pass rush rather than the D getting consistent pressure regardless. But a "make them pay" attitude being put to use is a good thing.

[nfoligno]

I disagree.

 

Yea, we have gone many years w/o the ability to run the screen, but I think changes is personnel have effected our ability to make this play as much as just pointing to SF.

 

Cutler makes a difference. You can also see the difference he makes w/ the quick WR screen. That is a play that simply never worked before for us, but of late has actually worked. Also, we have a receiving back in Forte that can actually get it done.

 

Part of it is defenses simply thredding our OL all day, but lets be honest. This isn't the first time we have been in this situation. Even when our OL was decent, defenses still attacked the hell out of us due to Rex being our QB. To me, the biggest key here is simply Cutler, who is capabale of making the throw.

 

As for the 2nd part, I basically agree there. I don't agree as much on the draw plays. IMHO, w/ our OL as bad as it is, all the draw does is give the defense more time to get into the backfield. A draw play w/ this group would likely have the DT taking the would-be handoff.

 

The one thing I just do not understand is the lack of roll outs, which every writer seems to question as well. The roll out is a great way to off-set some of the pass rush. (a) It is easier to rush the passer when you know where he will be and ( it gets Cutler out in space and buys him time. Cutler was considered one of the best QBs in the NFL in this regard, but we just have not seen it. That is one of the most baffling plays, or lack of, for me.

 

I got to thinking about how excited everyone was about the RB screen. It was successful, looked great, and had my jaw on the floor the entire game. I'm sure that every Bears' fan was pumped to see this play, one that has NEVER worked, be so successful. Here's the problem: it's a sign of the Bears' failure.

 

Why does a RB screen usually succeed? The offensive gameplan is successful enough that the OL can almost toy with the DL. The DL rushes in, almost oblivious to their newfound success at getting to the QB. The RB and OL scoot through, set up things, and the RB screen is successful. Why is this a problem, you ask? The Niners' DL was so used to blasting through the Bears' OL that when the Bears' OL "let the Niners through," there was nearly no surprise at all. This allowed the Bears to set up the RB screen, and the rest is history. The Niners defense wasn't surprised; they were complacent.

 

Teams don't suddenly get good at the RB screen, and the Bears have been bad at it for a decade. This is a short-lived source of cheering for us, and it will be quickly sniffed out.

 

The real question is: Since it's obvious to EVERYONE who has watched the Bears this season that the OL is horrible, why hasn't Turner figured out a way to put in more RB screens and RB draws, plays that are typically called to slow down a rush?

 

[defiantgiant]

Teams don't suddenly get good at the RB screen, and the Bears have been bad at it for a decade. This is a short-lived source of cheering for us, and it will be quickly sniffed out.

I don't know why this would be true. What do the Bears of a decade ago have to do with our current team? Those guys didn't have Matt Forte, who's excellent catching the ball and picking up yards in space. They didn't have Chris Williams, who (despite his other shortcomings) has proven to be a nice downfield blocker on those screen plays. They didn't have Jay Cutler, who can hit the screen pass very effectively. None of those guys were on the roster even two years ago, so I'd say there's a pretty good reason that the Bears have suddenly gotten good at running back screens.

 

Now, I don't think that Forte's going to get 120 receiving yards every game if we make the screen a big part of the playbook. Obviously, defenses are going to adjust. But that's the real reason that we should be using the screen more: it forces opposing DEs and LBs to start playing outside contain. That would not only ease the pressure on Cutler, but it could also open up a little more room for inside runs, which have been a problem area. Our offense thus far has been totally one-dimensional, and defenses have been able to play us just as one-dimensionally: they sell out against the pass every single down, and their rushers just shoot right into their gaps. Mixing in a bunch of screens could give us some balance on offense and make defenses play us honestly.

[jason]

I don't know why this would be true. What do the Bears of a decade ago have to do with our current team? Those guys didn't have Matt Forte, who's excellent catching the ball and picking up yards in space. They didn't have Chris Williams, who (despite his other shortcomings) has proven to be a nice downfield blocker on those screen plays. They didn't have Jay Cutler, who can hit the screen pass very effectively. None of those guys were on the roster even two years ago, so I'd say there's a pretty good reason that the Bears have suddenly gotten good at running back screens.

 

Now, I don't think that Forte's going to get 120 receiving yards every game if we make the screen a big part of the playbook. Obviously, defenses are going to adjust. But that's the real reason that we should be using the screen more: it forces opposing DEs and LBs to start playing outside contain. That would not only ease the pressure on Cutler, but it could also open up a little more room for inside runs, which have been a problem area. Our offense thus far has been totally one-dimensional, and defenses have been able to play us just as one-dimensionally: they sell out against the pass every single down, and their rushers just shoot right into their gaps. Mixing in a bunch of screens could give us some balance on offense and make defenses play us honestly.

 

The "decade" talk it hyperbole on my part. But, suffice to say, the Bears haven't been good at a screen pass in a long time. The only real change is Cutler, and I refuse to believe he's simply that much better at throwing a floater for ten yards to set up the screen.

[nfoligno]

I think you can look at a few things, and yes, Cuterl is a big part of it. There is more to it than just sitting there and floating a 10 yarder.

 

For one thing, the QB has to be able to move. Often, the QB is back-peddling and "selling" the pressure. Another part of this is, the QB is often throwing off his backfoot. Rarely do you see a QB set and step into his "floater" on a RB screen. Usually, the QB is moving backward and tosses the ball before the rushers get to him. Mobility and throwing off their backfoot were not strengths of our past QBs.

 

Also, there is a mental toughness element in there too. To really make it work, the QB needs to hold the ball until the last second. If he throws it too soon, the rushers have not gone deep enough into the backfield, and could still make a play. The QB has to hold the ball until it appears the rushers are on top of him, then get rid of it.

 

And while you talk about it just being a 10 yard floater, I think it is a touch harder than that. You are throwing w/ loft, as you are having to get it over the heads of numerous rushers who are on top of you. And the pass has to be solid. If the RB has to come back to the ball, or adjust much to the pass, it takes him off course and will take him away from his blockers.

 

So, yes, I do believe having a QB like Cutler does absolutely help here, but there are also some other factors.

 

one is Forte. We saw last year what he could do as a receiver.

 

And I think our OL works well for this. When running the screen, your OL will often act like they have been beaten. Well, that isn't difficult for our OL to fake.

 

At the end of the day, much depends on a very aggressive defense. It worked so well against SF because they were attacking so hard against us. No question if we continue to use this play, opponents will adjust, but that is the point. You adjust to a play like this by playing off more. By making the opponents believe this is a legit option, they simply can not attack as aggressively, and that will benefit the team as well.

 

The "decade" talk it hyperbole on my part. But, suffice to say, the Bears haven't been good at a screen pass in a long time. The only real change is Cutler, and I refuse to believe he's simply that much better at throwing a floater for ten yards to set up the screen.

 

[NAMEDSONPAYTON2]

I got to thinking about how excited everyone was about the RB screen. It was successful, looked great, and had my jaw on the floor the entire game. I'm sure that every Bears' fan was pumped to see this play, one that has NEVER worked, be so successful. Here's the problem: it's a sign of the Bears' failure.

 

Why does a RB screen usually succeed? The offensive gameplan is successful enough that the OL can almost toy with the DL. The DL rushes in, almost oblivious to their newfound success at getting to the QB. The RB and OL scoot through, set up things, and the RB screen is successful. Why is this a problem, you ask? The Niners' DL was so used to blasting through the Bears' OL that when the Bears' OL "let the Niners through," there was nearly no surprise at all. This allowed the Bears to set up the RB screen, and the rest is history. The Niners defense wasn't surprised; they were complacent.

 

Teams don't suddenly get good at the RB screen, and the Bears have been bad at it for a decade. This is a short-lived source of cheering for us, and it will be quickly sniffed out.

 

The real question is: Since it's obvious to EVERYONE who has watched the Bears this season that the OL is horrible, why hasn't Turner figured out a way to put in more RB screens and RB draws, plays that are typically called to slow down a rush?

Maybe we are great at using the screen. The only reason we have not used it is because Lovie feels the opponent might figure it out,after great success. We call plays because the mentality is we're not going to run plays that work,because then the other team starts knowing what's coming.????????????

[jason]

I think you can look at a few things, and yes, Cuterl is a big part of it. There is more to it than just sitting there and floating a 10 yarder.

 

For one thing, the QB has to be able to move. Often, the QB is back-peddling and "selling" the pressure. Another part of this is, the QB is often throwing off his backfoot. Rarely do you see a QB set and step into his "floater" on a RB screen. Usually, the QB is moving backward and tosses the ball before the rushers get to him. Mobility and throwing off their backfoot were not strengths of our past QBs.

 

Also, there is a mental toughness element in there too. To really make it work, the QB needs to hold the ball until the last second. If he throws it too soon, the rushers have not gone deep enough into the backfield, and could still make a play. The QB has to hold the ball until it appears the rushers are on top of him, then get rid of it.

 

And while you talk about it just being a 10 yard floater, I think it is a touch harder than that. You are throwing w/ loft, as you are having to get it over the heads of numerous rushers who are on top of you. And the pass has to be solid. If the RB has to come back to the ball, or adjust much to the pass, it takes him off course and will take him away from his blockers.

 

So, yes, I do believe having a QB like Cutler does absolutely help here, but there are also some other factors.

 

one is Forte. We saw last year what he could do as a receiver.

 

And I think our OL works well for this. When running the screen, your OL will often act like they have been beaten. Well, that isn't difficult for our OL to fake.

 

At the end of the day, much depends on a very aggressive defense. It worked so well against SF because they were attacking so hard against us. No question if we continue to use this play, opponents will adjust, but that is the point. You adjust to a play like this by playing off more. By making the opponents believe this is a legit option, they simply can not attack as aggressively, and that will benefit the team as well.

 

 

My point exactly. It has less to do with Cutler and Forte with this year's sudden improvement in the RB screen. It has more to do with the fact that the DL is fooled so easily because the Bears' OL lets them through on every play.

[nfoligno]

So I write a lenthy post explaining how much Cutler and Forte factor into the change, and you highlight one line I use? Come on man. Last year's OL was absolutely awful. You and I have both talked about how that OL was so much worse than perception due to Orton being an upgrade over Rex and limiting Orton to 3 step drops. But that OL, especially in pass protection, was simply dreadful. I doubt DLs any less surprised beating our current OL than they were last year.

 

As with this year, I think last year DLs were licking their chops for their game against us. Further, as aggressive as defenses have been against us this year, I don't think it was any less last year. While we had a better run game last year, we had no downfield passing game, and thus teams were able to stack the box and attack us.

 

I saw us try the run screens last year, and just like every year before that, it didn't work. So while some of what you said is a factor, I am not sure that it is different from last year, and thus does not explain why we can run it this year but could not last. So what else has changed?

 

At the end of the day, the single most logical explanation is Cutler. The change is not 100% due to him, but I would say he represents the largest share of the reasoning here.

 

My point exactly. It has less to do with Cutler and Forte with this year's sudden improvement in the RB screen. It has more to do with the fact that the DL is fooled so easily because the Bears' OL lets them through on every play.

 

[defiantgiant]

Nfo summed it up better than I can: Cutler's mobile and can throw on the run, Forte's a great receiver, and our o-line appears to block effectively on screens, if only there and nowhere else. It's pretty easy to see why screen passes have been working.

[jason]

So I write a lenthy post explaining how much Cutler and Forte factor into the change, and you highlight one line I use? Come on man. Last year's OL was absolutely awful. You and I have both talked about how that OL was so much worse than perception due to Orton being an upgrade over Rex and limiting Orton to 3 step drops. But that OL, especially in pass protection, was simply dreadful. I doubt DLs any less surprised beating our current OL than they were last year.

 

As with this year, I think last year DLs were licking their chops for their game against us. Further, as aggressive as defenses have been against us this year, I don't think it was any less last year. While we had a better run game last year, we had no downfield passing game, and thus teams were able to stack the box and attack us.

 

I saw us try the run screens last year, and just like every year before that, it didn't work. So while some of what you said is a factor, I am not sure that it is different from last year, and thus does not explain why we can run it this year but could not last. So what else has changed?

 

At the end of the day, the single most logical explanation is Cutler. The change is not 100% due to him, but I would say he represents the largest share of the reasoning here.

 

I agree that Cutler is the only apparent change, but not the only logical change. There simply has to be more to it, because he's not doing so much more on screen passes than Orton/Grossman...and the RB screen NEVER worked when they were here. Maybe it has to do with the defense showing more respect to Cutler, or perhaps it has to deal with the speed of the Bears' WRs occupying the opposing DBs more. I just don't know. But I refuse to believe that it's so much of Cutler vs. other QBs thing, because there isn't much of a visual difference between how he executes the screens and how the others did.

[lemonej]

I might be mistaken but last season Forte had 60 plus receptions but,I don't remember many of them being from screens.OTOH when Garrett Wolfe was in the backfield last year they threw a lot of screens his way with limited success.AP also seemed to be used in this capacity as well as on draws last season. I think the reason that the screens worked so well last week was the fact that they were run with Forte in the game and the formation the Bears used with 3 WRs and a TE. The fact that the niners were attacking the Bears help the play succeed and Ron Turner not calling it more is typical of his style of play calling. Most successful teams will run a play until you stop it.