Bears Interview TE Candidate

[nfoligno]

Unprecedented? No, not even close. Abnormal? Yes. Even the former NFL guys said hiring position coaches w/o the coordinator is definitely not the not. It isn't unheard of, and isn't necessarily the end of the world either.

 

But the explanation given why it isn't that great of an issue, IMHO, caters more to if Lovie were hiring a defensive position coach w/o a DC in place. The explanation had been about how the HC has his system and plan, and thus hiring a position coach before the coordinator isn't a big deal as it all fits within the plan.

 

IMHO, Lovie does not have a "plan" on offense. He will hire someone w/ a plan, but other than saying we get off the bus running (even when we pass far more) he has no plan. That is why I question making such moves.

 

You might not agree, but given that it is coming from NFL guys it at least shows that the Bears aren't doing something that would be considered abnormal or unprecedented.

 

[nfoligno]

In the case of the TE coach, Tice is probably going to have a better read on who is a good TE coach than our OC would.

 

Sorry, but I think this is an awful reason. Tice is not the OC. If we wanted him making hires, then we should have hired him to be our OC.

 

One. It is all-together possible whoever we end up hiring knows TEs as well. If we hire Chud, for example, I think he might offer even better TE insight then tice. Regardless, it is wrong to assume (though I realize you use the word propbably) Tice will know more about the TE position than our next OC.

 

Two. With the above aside, I don't care. If the OC wants Tice's opinion, great. But I think it very questionable practice to hire a position coach, then start using his feedback to make the rest of your choices.

 

This is a great reason why you hire starting at the top and moving your way down.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Unprecedented? No, not even close. Abnormal? Yes. Even the former NFL guys said hiring position coaches w/o the coordinator is definitely not the not. It isn't unheard of, and isn't necessarily the end of the world either.

 

But the explanation given why it isn't that great of an issue, IMHO, caters more to if Lovie were hiring a defensive position coach w/o a DC in place. The explanation had been about how the HC has his system and plan, and thus hiring a position coach before the coordinator isn't a big deal as it all fits within the plan.

 

IMHO, Lovie does not have a "plan" on offense. He will hire someone w/ a plan, but other than saying we get off the bus running (even when we pass far more) he has no plan. That is why I question making such moves.

While I don't think Lovie knows the full details of the intracices of the offense, I do believe he has an idea of what he wants his offense to look like and he'll hire a coach who will run an offensive theory he support.

 

Lovie wants a power-rushing attack to go with the vertical passing game and that is why he hired Tice (power-rushing guy). And you can bet your ass the OC he hires will support both ideas too and it is why I think Chud is a real good possibility.

[nfoligno]

And regarding hiring OL coach before OC; it is the way the HC most loud Bears fans want did it. Mike Singletary hired the 49ers OL coach before he hired an OC.

 

Who?

 

Jimmy Raye was hired Jan '09. Their Ol coach is Foerster, who was on the offense under previous OC (Martz). Foerster was a co-OL coach in '08, and the bio states he became the solo OL coach 8 games into that season.

 

Maybe his contract was extended, or maybe it was up and he was re-signed, but either way, he was on the team already and in the same role, so I would not say Singletary hired an OL coach before OC. This situation seems little different than how we are keeping Drake on w/o knowing who our OC will be.

[nfoligno]

So no WCO?

 

I am not saying Lovie is flat out ignorant of the offense. I am sure he does have an idea, very broad, what he wants, but at the same time, I would rather someone who knows offense more than passing provide input and advice as to who we hire for position coaches on offense.

 

It seems obvious relationships, and feeling comfortable w/ those you work with, is a huge part of coaching. Thus why he tries to surround himself w/ those he knows and trusts. Should our OC not have the same opportunity? I am not saying we hire chud, or whoever, and just hire then whoever he wants. But I do think you allow him some say.

 

We have hired our OL coach and are in the process of interviewing a TE coach. We have retained our RB coach and WR coach. Do we allow the OC input into the QB coach, or just stick w/ what we have been doing and leave him out of the process.

 

Look, I don't want to make this a huge deal. I didn't have an issue w/ hiring Tice. But to me, that is an exception, and not the rule. While I would never say we have to strictly follow the norm, I do however question looking to hire an offensive staff before hiring an OC.

 

While I don't think Lovie knows the full details of the intracices of the offense, I do believe he has an idea of what he wants his offense to look like and he'll hire a coach who will run an offensive theory he support.

 

Lovie wants a power-rushing attack to go with the vertical passing game and that is why he hired Tice (power-rushing guy). And you can bet your ass the OC he hires will support both ideas too and it is why I think Chud is a real good possibility.

 

[clnr]

Who?

 

Jimmy Raye was hired Jan '09. Their Ol coach is Foerster, who was on the offense under previous OC (Martz). Foerster was a co-OL coach in '08, and the bio states he became the solo OL coach 8 games into that season.

 

Maybe his contract was extended, or maybe it was up and he was re-signed, but either way, he was on the team already and in the same role, so I would not say Singletary hired an OL coach before OC. This situation seems little different than how we are keeping Drake on w/o knowing who our OC will be.

Read it somewhere, can't remember where though. But you are probably right.

[Pixote]

I can't believe we are still dissing Lovie over his hiring of some position coaches before his coordinators.

 

It is not unprecedented. It is not that big a deal, IMO. Fun to diss Lovie I guess?

 

Gee, did everyone know Lovie is right handed but when he dresses he ties his left shoe first and and and it is reported by some of the "Beat=off" writers who dig deep for info to smear Lovie with that he he he wipes his ass with his left hand? Guess this proves Lovie is a schizo and can not be trusted.

 

 

[madlithuanian]

Fun, no.

 

Easy? Yes.

 

Fun to diss Lovie I guess?

 

[nfoligno]

Pix,

 

I get all the humor and fun, but IMHO there is a bit more to this.

 

No, none of this is unprecedented. At the same time, it is also far from the norm. We, as an organization, are not exactly known for our great decision making over the years. In fact, I think many would consider it closer to bumbling than not. Perception is a big deal as few want to join an organization w/ a bad reputation.

 

I am saying doing something like hiring Tice before the OC is hires is or was wrong? Nope. In fact, I had wanted to hire Alex Gibbs prior to our hiring our OC (an idea I was actually criticized for as we didn't have an OC in place). But now we read we are interviewing a TE coach too. I could understand Tice. He was someone likely in demand. But I have not heard this TE coach's name a ton. While not wait and allow the new OC to at least sit in on the interviews and offer an opinion.

 

Look, if either the bears or Lovie had a great track record, I don't think anyone would think twice about this. But Lovie has not exactly done a great job in hiring staff, and I think it very fair to not only question his decision making, but in particuarly his decision making for our offense.

 

I can't believe we are still dissing Lovie over his hiring of some position coaches before his coordinators.

 

It is not unprecedented. It is not that big a deal, IMO. Fun to diss Lovie I guess?

 

Gee, did everyone know Lovie is right handed but when he dresses he ties his left shoe first and and and it is reported by some of the "Beat=off" writers who dig deep for info to smear Lovie with that he he he wipes his ass with his left hand? Guess this proves Lovie is a schizo and can not be trusted.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Pix,

 

I get all the humor and fun, but IMHO there is a bit more to this.

 

No, none of this is unprecedented. At the same time, it is also far from the norm. We, as an organization, are not exactly known for our great decision making over the years. In fact, I think many would consider it closer to bumbling than not. Perception is a big deal as few want to join an organization w/ a bad reputation.

 

I am saying doing something like hiring Tice before the OC is hires is or was wrong? Nope. In fact, I had wanted to hire Alex Gibbs prior to our hiring our OC (an idea I was actually criticized for as we didn't have an OC in place). But now we read we are interviewing a TE coach too. I could understand Tice. He was someone likely in demand. But I have not heard this TE coach's name a ton. While not wait and allow the new OC to at least sit in on the interviews and offer an opinion.

 

Look, if either the bears or Lovie had a great track record, I don't think anyone would think twice about this. But Lovie has not exactly done a great job in hiring staff, and I think it very fair to not only question his decision making, but in particuarly his decision making for our offense.

The Bears haven't offered him a contract though. Maybe they want to do the early homework so they can offer up a list of suggestions to the OC that they hire? We don't know what the plan is.

 

Lets say the Bears interview him, like him, and tell him well we need to see who our OC is just to get the take too. That might have been done.

 

None of us are privy to the talks but I'm not upset when I hear our team is interviewing all kinds of different guys and considering a whole range of options. It tells me we aren't just looking for a retread, we are really doing our homework.

[madlithuanian]

I kind of see it as the glass half empty/full...

 

You and Pix are seeming to give the powers that be the benefit of the doubt. nfo and I seem to not be cutting them any slack.

 

I think that's all...

 

The Bears haven't offered him a contract though. Maybe they want to do the early homework so they can offer up a list of suggestions to the OC that they hire? We don't know what the plan is.

 

Lets say the Bears interview him, like him, and tell him well we need to see who our OC is just to get the take too. That might have been done.

 

None of us are privy to the talks but I'm not upset when I hear our team is interviewing all kinds of different guys and considering a whole range of options. It tells me we aren't just looking for a retread, we are really doing our homework.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

I kind of see it as the glass half empty/full...

 

You and Pix are seeming to give the powers that be the benefit of the doubt. nfo and I seem to not be cutting them any slack.

 

I think that's all...

Oh ya, I know I'm one of the bigger optimists on here but I see your guys points. I try to go with the fact that I believe the org tries to win and wants what is best. Whether it works out who knows, but at least I think there is a rationale for most of the things we do.

 

I also tend to believe that Rivera was over-rated and our defense was so dominant because Harris was a freakin animal at that time. Once we lost Harris we unfortunately weren't able to adjust and create alternative game-plans to help force pressure. This is why I want to see us get a DC with a Cover 2 background but also a bit of a Rex Ryan/Former Eagles DC perspective with the disguised blitz packages, etc to help.

 

Harris was the MVP of the league prior to getting hurt in my eyes. The guy was so freaking good it was ridiculous. It really is sad how much of a shell of his former self that he is.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Also, I think it is interesting to point out that 3 of the 4 remaining teams in the post-season have Cover 2 defenses. Although I realize the Colts and Saints haven't made it where they have because of there defense as a whole.

 

Still, I think it is unfair to see the Cover-2 defenses are a thing of the past. I just think our pourous dline play is what makes our defense so shitty (Cover 2 or not) and we need to seriously upgrade the Dline, FS, and Oline if we want to jump into being a playoff team and a superbowl contender.

[nfoligno]

First, regarding previous post, if all we are doing is prep work for the eventual OC, fine. But what if we hire a TE coach first? I bet that will not change your opinion.

 

As for the Rivera comments below, I am sorry, but how in the world can you even make that argument.

 

Harris was a hell of a player that year, but I think you are making him out to be a bit more than he was. Hell, I think Harris was actually better the following year, or at least, the early part of it. Harris was damn good in our SB season. But our defense went from top 5 to bottom 5. Harris was not that good.

 

Understand, I don't personally think Rivera is some Defensive genius. We had a pretty damn good group of players on that D. But I absolutely do give Rivera a lot of credit. He did a better job managing games and playcalling. After he left, our defense didn't just begin to go downhill, it totally tanked. Suddenly, most all those pro bowl or upper tier players looked like duds. They often looked lost on defense and just seemed out of position.

 

Part of that was Rivera, though I think a big part of that was also going from a good DC in Rivera to an awful DC in Babich. By the time Lovie took over, the talent was diminished, and frankly, his playcalling didn't help either.

 

I would also point out after the SB season, we let our DL coach walk, and our DL has been between below average and just plain bad since.

 

Rivera has done well since leaving the bears, which I think helps his case. SD has suffered their share of injuries, like we and everyone, but SD often points to adjustments Rivera has made to compensate as being a main factor why their defense has continued to do well.

 

I can undestand if you want to argue Rivera is not some defensive genius, but I don't see an argument that he was not a huge reason why our D was so good then. Harris was great, but not nearly what I think you are making him out to be, and definitely not so great as to be the difference between a top 5 and bottom 5 defense.

 

Oh ya, I know I'm one of the bigger optimists on here but I see your guys points. I try to go with the fact that I believe the org tries to win and wants what is best. Whether it works out who knows, but at least I think there is a rationale for most of the things we do.

 

I also tend to believe that Rivera was over-rated and our defense was so dominant because Harris was a freakin animal at that time. Once we lost Harris we unfortunately weren't able to adjust and create alternative game-plans to help force pressure. This is why I want to see us get a DC with a Cover 2 background but also a bit of a Rex Ryan/Former Eagles DC perspective with the disguised blitz packages, etc to help.

 

Harris was the MVP of the league prior to getting hurt in my eyes. The guy was so freaking good it was ridiculous. It really is sad how much of a shell of his former self that he is.

 

[nfoligno]

Indy isn't really a cover two anymore. I have read numerous articles talking about the changes they have made. They may be somewhat of a cover two, but the articles I have read went into lengthy discussion how much they have altered their defense. Similar can be said of most cover two defenses out there. Few today run a scheme that closely resembles what TB did back in the day. That scheme has been figured out for the most part, and teams have adapted. Lovie hasn't.

 

I don't know what the teams in the playoffs call their schemes, but when I watch them, I don't see them run anything close to what I see in Chicago.

 

Further, and I have said this before, it is a bit of a falsehood to simply say we run the cover two. Most all reports state we are in the cover two only, maybe, 35% of the time. The key is more when we shift into the cover two (3rd and long) and the overall playcalling. That, IMHO, is where both Babich and Lovie failed so miserably.

 

Also, I think it is interesting to point out that 3 of the 4 remaining teams in the post-season have Cover 2 defenses. Although I realize the Colts and Saints haven't made it where they have because of there defense as a whole.

 

Still, I think it is unfair to see the Cover-2 defenses are a thing of the past. I just think our pourous dline play is what makes our defense so shitty (Cover 2 or not) and we need to seriously upgrade the Dline, FS, and Oline if we want to jump into being a playoff team and a superbowl contender.

 

[madlithuanian]

Do these 4 playoff teams play their DB's 10 yds off the LOS when it's 3rd and 4?

 

They definitley don't play the Smith version of the cover-2...

 

Indy isn't really a cover two anymore. I have read numerous articles talking about the changes they have made. They may be somewhat of a cover two, but the articles I have read went into lengthy discussion how much they have altered their defense. Similar can be said of most cover two defenses out there. Few today run a scheme that closely resembles what TB did back in the day. That scheme has been figured out for the most part, and teams have adapted. Lovie hasn't.

 

I don't know what the teams in the playoffs call their schemes, but when I watch them, I don't see them run anything close to what I see in Chicago.

 

Further, and I have said this before, it is a bit of a falsehood to simply say we run the cover two. Most all reports state we are in the cover two only, maybe, 35% of the time. The key is more when we shift into the cover two (3rd and long) and the overall playcalling. That, IMHO, is where both Babich and Lovie failed so miserably.

 

[nfoligno]

Actually, I am not even sure which defenses in the playoffs run the cover two.

 

Colts - The most obvious cover two defense, but this is not your daddy's (or Lovie's) cover two.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mulligan/19...mully23.article

 

Dungy and Meeks had begun tweaking elements of the defense last season, when the Bears were faking the inside blitz with Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs and getting beaten in the middle of the field.....Coyer, who was a coach at Iowa when Colts coach Jim Caldwell was a defensive-backs assistant there, has done more than simply tweak the cover-2; he has turned it into an aggressive, attacking scheme and abandoned it completely at times. The Colts are as likely to bring a safety into the box and play more man coverage on the outside or use more selective blitzing to keep opponents off-balance. There are still struggles on third down, but at least the Colts are in attack mode instead of sitting back in cover-2 and hoping to prevent big plays.

 

Minny - Will use the cover two, but also do more, much much more.

 

The defensive scheme the Vikings try to deploy consists of a hybrid of the base 4-3/cover-2 defense. You will occasionally see a nickel package on third downs if it is 3rd and short. Ted Cotrell, the defensive coordinator, has a much more agressive style than the DCs of the past. That's why you see more sacks this year than last, and I will only assume they get better as they mature and work together.

 

Similar comments have been made about Minny as with Indy. While the background of their D is the cover two, they have simply done so much more to adapt this scheme, and like w/ Indy, they have created a hybrid using a very aggressive back 7 w/ LBs attacking and CBs stacking.

 

NO - Greg Williams took over the D, and once again, you find an aggressive, attack minded scheme. Not sure this is even considered a cover two.

 

NYJ - Far from the cover two under Mr. Ryan.

 

When you read about the current defenses that are linked to the cover two, the key word I always read is "aggressive". That doesn't just mean you expect the DL to penetrate and drop everyone else back, but you blitz, and mix up your blitzes. You press your coverage. These defenses may at times be called a cover two, but they are far removed from the version we run. They are runnings Windows 7 while Lovie is still stuck on Windows 3.

 

What is the feeling most get w/ our scheme. Bend and Break. We actually mix it up some, but seemingly w/o fail, when we get a team into 3rd and long situations, we drop everyone back into that traditional cover two, and are torn apart, thus why we were among the league leaders in giving up 3rd and long downs. Hell, it may not even be so bad if we "sometimes" played like that on 3rd and long, but because we always do, offenses knew what to expect and knew how to attack.

 

 

 

 

 

Do these 4 playoff teams play their DB's 10 yds off the LOS when it's 3rd and 4?

 

They definitley don't play the Smith version of the cover-2...

 

[madlithuanian]

Thanks for the breakdown...

 

Yeah. It's kills me watching our D on 3rd and long. I literally scream at the tv set to watch out for the exact thing that will happen. A first down completion via loose coverage.

 

Actually, I am not even sure which defenses in the playoffs run the cover two.

 

Colts - The most obvious cover two defense, but this is not your daddy's (or Lovie's) cover two.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mulligan/19...mully23.article

 

Dungy and Meeks had begun tweaking elements of the defense last season, when the Bears were faking the inside blitz with Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs and getting beaten in the middle of the field.....Coyer, who was a coach at Iowa when Colts coach Jim Caldwell was a defensive-backs assistant there, has done more than simply tweak the cover-2; he has turned it into an aggressive, attacking scheme and abandoned it completely at times. The Colts are as likely to bring a safety into the box and play more man coverage on the outside or use more selective blitzing to keep opponents off-balance. There are still struggles on third down, but at least the Colts are in attack mode instead of sitting back in cover-2 and hoping to prevent big plays.

 

Minny - Will use the cover two, but also do more, much much more.

 

The defensive scheme the Vikings try to deploy consists of a hybrid of the base 4-3/cover-2 defense. You will occasionally see a nickel package on third downs if it is 3rd and short. Ted Cotrell, the defensive coordinator, has a much more agressive style than the DCs of the past. That's why you see more sacks this year than last, and I will only assume they get better as they mature and work together.

 

Similar comments have been made about Minny as with Indy. While the background of their D is the cover two, they have simply done so much more to adapt this scheme, and like w/ Indy, they have created a hybrid using a very aggressive back 7 w/ LBs attacking and CBs stacking.

 

NO - Greg Williams took over the D, and once again, you find an aggressive, attack minded scheme. Not sure this is even considered a cover two.

 

NYJ - Far from the cover two under Mr. Ryan.

 

When you read about the current defenses that are linked to the cover two, the key word I always read is "aggressive". That doesn't just mean you expect the DL to penetrate and drop everyone else back, but you blitz, and mix up your blitzes. You press your coverage. These defenses may at times be called a cover two, but they are far removed from the version we run. They are runnings Windows 7 while Lovie is still stuck on Windows 3.

 

What is the feeling most get w/ our scheme. Bend and Break. We actually mix it up some, but seemingly w/o fail, when we get a team into 3rd and long situations, we drop everyone back into that traditional cover two, and are torn apart, thus why we were among the league leaders in giving up 3rd and long downs. Hell, it may not even be so bad if we "sometimes" played like that on 3rd and long, but because we always do, offenses knew what to expect and knew how to attack.

 

[lemonej]

Actually, I am not even sure which defenses in the playoffs run the cover two.

 

Colts - The most obvious cover two defense, but this is not your daddy's (or Lovie's) cover two.

 

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/mulligan/19...mully23.article

 

Dungy and Meeks had begun tweaking elements of the defense last season, when the Bears were faking the inside blitz with Brian Urlacher and Lance Briggs and getting beaten in the middle of the field.....Coyer, who was a coach at Iowa when Colts coach Jim Caldwell was a defensive-backs assistant there, has done more than simply tweak the cover-2; he has turned it into an aggressive, attacking scheme and abandoned it completely at times. The Colts are as likely to bring a safety into the box and play more man coverage on the outside or use more selective blitzing to keep opponents off-balance. There are still struggles on third down, but at least the Colts are in attack mode instead of sitting back in cover-2 and hoping to prevent big plays.

 

Minny - Will use the cover two, but also do more, much much more.

 

The defensive scheme the Vikings try to deploy consists of a hybrid of the base 4-3/cover-2 defense. You will occasionally see a nickel package on third downs if it is 3rd and short. Ted Cotrell, the defensive coordinator, has a much more agressive style than the DCs of the past. That's why you see more sacks this year than last, and I will only assume they get better as they mature and work together.

 

Similar comments have been made about Minny as with Indy. While the background of their D is the cover two, they have simply done so much more to adapt this scheme, and like w/ Indy, they have created a hybrid using a very aggressive back 7 w/ LBs attacking and CBs stacking.

 

NO - Greg Williams took over the D, and once again, you find an aggressive, attack minded scheme. Not sure this is even considered a cover two.

 

NYJ - Far from the cover two under Mr. Ryan.

 

When you read about the current defenses that are linked to the cover two, the key word I always read is "aggressive". That doesn't just mean you expect the DL to penetrate and drop everyone else back, but you blitz, and mix up your blitzes. You press your coverage. These defenses may at times be called a cover two, but they are far removed from the version we run. They are runnings Windows 7 while Lovie is still stuck on Windows 3.

 

What is the feeling most get w/ our scheme. Bend and Break. We actually mix it up some, but seemingly w/o fail, when we get a team into 3rd and long situations, we drop everyone back into that traditional cover two, and are torn apart, thus why we were among the league leaders in giving up 3rd and long downs. Hell, it may not even be so bad if we "sometimes" played like that on 3rd and long, but because we always do, offenses knew what to expect and knew how to attack.

Les Frazier is Minny's DC not Ted Cotrell who was one of the DCs of Minny's past.

[AZ54]

I thought we settled this once and for all: Lovie runs a cover-0

[nfoligno]

Also known as the Bend AND Break defense.

 

I thought we settled this once and for all: Lovie runs a cover-0

 

[madlithuanian]

Or sh!t.

 

Also known as the Bend AND Break defense.

 

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Thanks for the breakdown...

 

Yeah. It's kills me watching our D on 3rd and long. I literally scream at the tv set to watch out for the exact thing that will happen. A first down completion via loose coverage.

Prior to this season I believe we were one of the better defenses at stopping the 3rd and long. Now I realize we absolutely sucked at it this year but one of the strengths of the cover 2 is the ability to shut-down and prevent teams from getting big-yardage.

 

This season we unfortunately just didn't have the personnel or the right play-calling in 3rd down (Urlacher not being there hurt a lot cause none of our other LB's are as good as he is in pass-coverage).

 

But that is why Lovie is no longer calling the plays. I do think people would be surprise to see how little we use the Cover 2 the problem is we just didn't get a pass rush and had mediocre players to be honest.

 

The Cover 2 still works, you just have to be creative with it and have good personnel.

[nfoligno]

The Cover 2 still works, you just have to be creative with it and have good personnel.

 

Can that not be said of any scheme? But there in lies the problem. We did not have the right personnel (as you said) and yet didn't alter what we did. We continued to get killed on 3rd and long, and yet continued to do the same thing.

 

You say the cover 2 still works but you have to be (a) creative and ( have the right personnel.

 

Going w/ "b" first. Even if Urlacher did not go down w/ injury, do we have the right personnel? Don't most cover two schemes have great pass rushing DLs? Indy has Freeney, not to mention Mathis. Minny has Allen. What do we have. But beyond the DL, do we have the secondary? In particular, don't most cover two D's have a very good FS? I don't think, even if healthy, we have the personnel to play the cover two, and to me, that means we should be adapting our scheme more to fit the personnel.

 

As for point "a" this is a huge issue of mine, and a key reason why I feel our D has tanked since Rivera. Say what you will about him, but he simply did more in terms of creativity. He would mix it up more between man coverage and zone. He was more creative in blitzes, rather than simply always seeming to send Urlacher up the gut. I think overall, our D was simply less predictable. Compare that to last year when we always seemed to do the same damn thing based on situations, which just made the job of the offense easier.

 

I agree a change in coaching can help point A, but I am not sure we are close to having the right personnel to satisify point B. We do not have an elite pass rusher. Even if Harris returns to his old form, which I think is highly doubtful, has Brown ever proven capable of taking advantage? We don't even know who our LDE will be, but I am not sure how optimistic we should be that we will have a great pass rusher from that side. And next to Harris, what great pass rusher do you see. We simply don't have a great pass rushing DL, and that is the first problem, and a big one. In the secondary, we lack a FS. It is a nice thought to believe we will find one in the offseason, but w/o a high draft pick and a very limited FA, not to mention in Angelo's 8 years, he has never found one, how optimistic should we be?

 

Overall, I do believe talk of cover two is widely over-rated, as we just don't play it that much. At least, not nearly as much as so many talk about. But to me, it is more about the general scheme rather than specifically saying cover two. We play mostly zone defense, but most reports I recall on Bowman considered him best as a man coverage guy. I think the same could be true of tillman. Further, while there is more risk involved, playing zone (especially starting way off the LOS) only exasperates an ineffective pass rush as QBs find quick, easy targets. If you play more man and press coverage, you take away the quick stuff and force the QB to hold the ball longer, which could lead to more pressures.

 

 

Prior to this season I believe we were one of the better defenses at stopping the 3rd and long. Now I realize we absolutely sucked at it this year but one of the strengths of the cover 2 is the ability to shut-down and prevent teams from getting big-yardage.

 

This season we unfortunately just didn't have the personnel or the right play-calling in 3rd down (Urlacher not being there hurt a lot cause none of our other LB's are as good as he is in pass-coverage).

 

But that is why Lovie is no longer calling the plays. I do think people would be surprise to see how little we use the Cover 2 the problem is we just didn't get a pass rush and had mediocre players to be honest.

 

The Cover 2 still works, you just have to be creative with it and have good personnel.

 

[madlithuanian]

My recollection was that we were quite bad on 3rd downs the Orton year as well. I don't recall the year before that? But, I don't recall good. We basically do seem to be playing some kind of "prevent". It may prevent the 90 yard bomb, but we were picked apart like a victim from Hellraiser.

 

Virtually any defensive scheme works if you use it right with the right personnell. We've not been doing that.

 

Prior to this season I believe we were one of the better defenses at stopping the 3rd and long. Now I realize we absolutely sucked at it this year but one of the strengths of the cover 2 is the ability to shut-down and prevent teams from getting big-yardage.

 

This season we unfortunately just didn't have the personnel or the right play-calling in 3rd down (Urlacher not being there hurt a lot cause none of our other LB's are as good as he is in pass-coverage).

 

But that is why Lovie is no longer calling the plays. I do think people would be surprise to see how little we use the Cover 2 the problem is we just didn't get a pass rush and had mediocre players to be honest.

 

The Cover 2 still works, you just have to be creative with it and have good personnel.