Alex Brown

[madlithuanian]

100% agreed.

 

Our scheme is so piss poor, that unless we get the superb rush from the front 4, I'm convinced we will be picked apart just like the past few seasons...

 

Honestly, I am still not for the move. Look, I have no argument on how weak our FS position is. At the same time, I simply question how any of our DBs are going to look if we can not get a damn pass rush going.

 

[defiantgiant]

For me, and maybe this is too simplistic, but I just can not understand the idea of upgrading by downgrading. Why can't we simply upgrade our FS position w/o having to first downgrade the DE position. Why can't we upgrade with the addition of Peppers, w/o at the same time downgrading elsewhere along the DL.

In a normal offseason, I'd agree with you, but this year I don't think we can upgrade at free safety without downgrading somewhere else. It's the smallest FA pool I can remember, and we don't pick until Day 3 of the draft. I'd feel differently if there were any good UFA free safeties available or if we had a draft pick high enough to get a surefire starter (probably a 2nd-rounder in this year's draft) but there aren't, and we don't. So there might not be a ton of options to upgrade that position, and it's a massive hole.

 

Without a trade, we need to get a Day 1 starter in the draft. Angelo and company could cross their fingers and hope Morgan Burnett falls to them in the 3rd, but he could easily be gone in the 2nd, and he's the last free safety on the board who I'd call a sure thing, at least for a team that needs an immediate starter. If we don't trade and everybody good is gone by #75, then we'll be banking on some late-round rookie stepping up in a huge way. If we don't luck out and find a diamond in the rough, then we're stuck with the same carousel of blown assignments, inadequate range in coverage, and crappy ball skills that we've seen for the last couple of seasons. Teams will keep burning us on third and long because the safeties can't get there in time. No amount of pass rush is going to keep a QB from hitting a skinny post on a 3-step drop, not when he knows there's going to be a hole in the coverage every single time.

 

I mean, ideally we wouldn't have to choose between starting Idonije and starting Danieal Manning, but if we do, I'm picking Idonije every single time. I like Brown, I think he's a quality starter even if he doesn't make lots of big plays, but the dropoff between him and Idonije/Anderson is peanuts compared to the difference between any of our current free safeties and a remotely capable starter.

[nfoligno]

No amount of pass rush is going to keep a QB from hitting a skinny post on a 3-step drop, not when he knows there's going to be a hole in the coverage every single time.

 

but how much does the FS effect this play? I agree where you say w/o a FS upgrade, we are vulnerable on 3rd and long, though I would say a good pass rush helps against that. But I am not sure how much a FS upgrade effects those quick 3 step drops.

 

I mean, ideally we wouldn't have to choose between starting Idonije and starting Danieal Manning, but if we do, I'm picking Idonije every single time. I like Brown, I think he's a quality starter even if he doesn't make lots of big plays, but the dropoff between him and Idonije/Anderson is peanuts compared to the difference between any of our current free safeties and a remotely capable starter.

 

I agree Idonije/Anderson could prove more capable at DE than whoever (Afalava/Steltz/Bullocks/Payne) at FS. At the same time, I consider DE a far more important position.

 

DE is simply a far more important position overall than FS, IMHO. If you have a weak DE but a strong FS, I think you are in more trouble than if you have a good DE and a weak FS. I don't care how good your FS is, if you can not generate a pass rush, he will be exposed. On the other hand, I am not sure the same is true in the opposite. If we have a good pass rush, I just do not think the pains we have felt at FS would be nearly as great. As poor as our FS play has been, also key has been the lack of a pass rush.

 

Look, I want to upgrade at FS, but downgrading our pass rush is simply too much for me.

 

 

[madlithuanian]

Am I wrong, but can't we just throw money at Atogwe? The Rams can match, but at a certian point, I imagine they'll bow out. It may be costly, but I htnk we're still in a good financial spot regardless.

 

In a normal offseason, I'd agree with you, but this year I don't think we can upgrade at free safety without downgrading somewhere else. It's the smallest FA pool I can remember, and we don't pick until Day 3 of the draft. I'd feel differently if there were any good UFA free safeties available or if we had a draft pick high enough to get a surefire starter (probably a 2nd-rounder in this year's draft) but there aren't, and we don't. So there might not be a ton of options to upgrade that position, and it's a massive hole.

 

Without a trade, we need to get a Day 1 starter in the draft. Angelo and company could cross their fingers and hope Morgan Burnett falls to them in the 3rd, but he could easily be gone in the 2nd, and he's the last free safety on the board who I'd call a sure thing, at least for a team that needs an immediate starter. If we don't trade and everybody good is gone by #75, then we'll be banking on some late-round rookie stepping up in a huge way. If we don't luck out and find a diamond in the rough, then we're stuck with the same carousel of blown assignments, inadequate range in coverage, and crappy ball skills that we've seen for the last couple of seasons. Teams will keep burning us on third and long because the safeties can't get there in time. No amount of pass rush is going to keep a QB from hitting a skinny post on a 3-step drop, not when he knows there's going to be a hole in the coverage every single time.

 

I mean, ideally we wouldn't have to choose between starting Idonije and starting Danieal Manning, but if we do, I'm picking Idonije every single time. I like Brown, I think he's a quality starter even if he doesn't make lots of big plays, but the dropoff between him and Idonije/Anderson is peanuts compared to the difference between any of our current free safeties and a remotely capable starter.

 

[chwtom]

1. Alex Brown isn't cheap. He's making over 5 mil each of the next 2 seasons.

 

2. Alex Brown is not big or strong enough to play left end well. He's barely starter-worthy at RE, but we now have one of the top 3 REs in football playing there.

 

3. It would not be wise to move one of the top 3 REs in football to LE where he'll be rushing into the face of the qb, beign blocked by a tackle and a TE.

 

4. There will be a mediocre DE across from Peppers whichever side he plays (either Brown or the Izzy/Anderson combo), so I'd rather have him at RE where he can rush the blind side.

 

5. Maybe some of Brown's salary gets reinvested.

 

6. I like Brown and his energy, but he's not very good at his position, and he plays a premiere position. It's time to let him go.

 

7. There is no way we get more than a 5th rounder for him, and I'd be suprised if we got that. Teams don't want veterans going into a potential lockout year. They want picks.

[Connorbear]

I see no reason to get rid of Brown at the time. We do not have anyone on the team who can play opposite of Peppers as well as he can. I would much rather move Olsen.

 

Peace

[bradjock]

1. Alex Brown isn't cheap. He's making over 5 mil each of the next 2 seasons.

 

That's it in a nutshell. I'd ask why this hasn't happened sooner, but the obvious answer is that we're trying to trade him. Which hasn't happened . . . everyone speculated JA got his ass handed to him in the Gaines Adams deal. That looks way worse now. I'm guessing one bad trade makes it difficult.

 

2. Alex Brown is not big or strong enough to play left end well. He's barely starter-worthy at RE, but we now have one of the top 3 REs in football playing there.

 

He plays it well, but very average. Not worth 5 million per year.

 

5. Maybe some of Brown's salary gets reinvested.

I hope so and that was my immediate thought. But I'm guessing we planned on chucking his salary once we signed Peppers.

 

6. I like Brown and his energy, but he's not very good at his position, and he plays a premiere position. It's time to let him go.

 

He's a locker room leader and a solid player. He's just not great and he's not good at getting to the QB.

 

7. There is no way we get more than a 5th rounder for him, and I'd be suprised if we got that. Teams don't want veterans going into a potential lockout year. They want picks.

 

Agreed.

[AZ54]

Despite all the rumors this tells me that Peppers is our new RDE and the team felt that Brown wasn't going to make the transition and be effective at LDE. Izzy and Anderson have already lined up at LDE and been somewhat effective on pass rush, no worse that what Brown is likely to do as LDE. Add in that Anderson was the swing DE last year so he will likely be looked at for that role again with Izzy the starting LDE. We use a 3 man rotation so we'd be paying a backup player $5 mil to sit on the bench. I'm guessing the team feels Melton can sit on the bench as well as Brown except the dropoff is huge if Melton gets on the field.

 

If I'm wrong and Peppers is our LDE then cutting Brown loose makes no sense to me at all.

 

 

As far as the trade rumors I don't think it's such a big deal the word is out. Why would a team trade for him --- because they feel his current contract is cheaper and a better deal for them (no bonus) than what they'd have to pay up front in bonus/salary to get him. Plus if you make a trade you know you have him on your team. If you wait for FA then you can lose out even if you offer more money because he might not want to play for a team like Oakland if New England is offering him a job. Brown isn't worth much in the trade market and I doubt there'd be a lot of interest. I'd be happy if we got a 5th Rd pick for him but doubt we get a pick that high. Still that's a pick that might help our secondary. The 5th round is where we pick CBs right?

 

 

[Daventry]

I will hate to see Alex Brown go, he was not a star but he was solid, a team guy, good character, and an all around good guy. I hope that the team is right in their thinking on trading him.

[Mongo3451]

[qname=AZ54' date='Mar 27 2010, 12:23 AM' post='79482]

As far as the trade rumors I don't think it's such a big deal the word is out. Why would a team trade for him --- because they feel his current contract is cheaper and a better deal for them (no bonus) than what they'd have to pay up front in bonus/salary to get him. Plus if you make a trade you know you have him on your team. If you wait for FA then you can lose out even if you offer more money because he might not want to play for a team like Oakland if New England is offering him a job. Brown isn't worth much in the trade market and I doubt there'd be a lot of interest. I'd be happy if we got a 5th Rd pick for him but doubt we get a pick that high. Still that's a pick that might help our secondary. The 5th round is where we pick CBs right?

Agree that it's not a big deal the trade is out. Disagree somewhat on his trade value.

 

If we trade for a pick, we lose his contract and get a mid-late pick. So, if we invest the money on an OG or FS - great. The draft pick is a plus. If we trade for a player, we lose his contract and hopefully get a servicable OG or FS. Either way, the team gets better and the money is a wash.

 

Where we get hurt is trading him for a pick and not using the extra money to improve elsewhere. Also, cutting him, we get nothing.

 

I do think there is trade value for him with other teams as well. He's due to make 5 mil, with Kampman ans Vandenbosch making 7 mil. Some team in need of a solid DE may call that a fair deal.

 

All told, if I can't get a decent trade, no way do I cut him loose quickly. There are many things that can happen between now and TC that can help his stock. I know we owe it to him to have an opportunity to find a team, but he's made good money and it's dog eat dog with our team right now.

[defiantgiant]

Am I wrong, but can't we just throw money at Atogwe? The Rams can match, but at a certian point, I imagine they'll bow out. It may be costly, but I htnk we're still in a good financial spot regardless.

If I'm understanding it right, it's not that simple. The Rams have the right to match any offer until April 15, and after that his rights revert back to the Rams, meaning it would probably take a high draft pick to get him away from St. Louis. After April 15, he's no longer a free agent. The Rams then have his rights until June 1, at which point they have to either give him the one-year $7 million tender, get him to sign a long-term deal, or release him.

 

Basically, if the Bears make a remotely reasonable offer to Atogwe before April 15 and he signs it, the Rams are almost sure to match it. And as long as the Bears' offer works out to less than $7 million for one season, the Rams are saving money by matching it. So if Angelo wanted to be sure that the Rams wouldn't match, the Bears would have to give Atogwe a deal like what Antrel Rolle's getting, something higher than Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu's deals. That's a ton of coin, especially after all the spending they've done already.

 

Assuming that Atogwe wants out of St. Louis, he'd be wary of an offer sheet from the Bears: if he signs any reasonable offer sheet before April 15 he's basically re-signing with the Rams. His best bet is not to sign anything, let his rights revert to the Rams, and then ask for a trade. St. Louis can basically play Atogwe's interests against the teams that are trying to sign him, wait until April 16th, and then demand draft picks. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but getting the Rams to bow out would be either take significant draft picks or a VERY expensive contract.

[defiantgiant]

No amount of pass rush is going to keep a QB from hitting a skinny post on a 3-step drop, not when he knows there's going to be a hole in the coverage every single time.

 

but how much does the FS effect this play? I agree where you say w/o a FS upgrade, we are vulnerable on 3rd and long, though I would say a good pass rush helps against that. But I am not sure how much a FS upgrade effects those quick 3 step drops.

Well, I remember after the Buccaneers game where Griese torched us, somebody on the d-line (I want to say it was Brown) basically said that no pass rush could get there fast enough to disrupt the QB when he could take a short drop and get the ball out immediately. What he was politely leaving unsaid was that Griese could throw immediately because he always had a guy open in the seams between the coverage zones (either between the CB and the safety or between the two safeties.) Those seams are effectively bigger when the safeties are too slow to the ball or run themselves out of the play. It might not be as big a deal if we didn't play our CBs in zone so much, but a poor safety in the Tampa-2 means that the receiver is open as soon as he leaves the CB's zone. That's what keeps happening to us on third and long when we go into the Tampa shell: the quarterback can get the ball out before the rush gets there, because there's always a guy uncovered after the CB passes him off and before the safety can pick him up.

 

In that Tampa-2 four-man rush that we use on 3rd and long, there might be one rusher who can disrupt a quick pass pattern without help from the secondary, but it's not a DE. It's Tommie Harris. The under tackle's got the shortest path to the quarterback, and 2006 Edition Tommie Harris could definitely get into the backfield in a hurry. Even if the under tackle doesn't get to the QB, as long as he can collapse the middle and force the QB to sidestep or leave the pocket, that buys some more time for the edge rush even when the coverage can't. But the DEs in the Tampa-2 line up wide and run a big wide arc: they've just got a longer path to the QB, unless he's being flushed out to them. In the Tampa-2 on third downs, the DEs depend on the under tackle or the secondary forcing the QB to hold onto the ball - Alex Brown isn't as important in that situation as interior pass rush and solid coverage.

 

Look, I totally agree that the pass rush and the coverage are interrelated and depend on each other to be effective, but it goes both ways. That's why you have things like coverage sacks forced by the secondary and picks forced by the pass rush. Unless Harris hops in a time machine back to 2005, the Bears are going to have to rely on the coverage to force the QB to hold onto the ball for just a second or two. The best edge rush in the world still takes a few seconds to get to the QB - that's why the West Coast offense was such an effective answer to the 46.

 

I don't like the idea of getting rid of Brown, but the defense could be better off with no Brown and competent coverage from the safety position, especially in the kinds of situations that have been keeping our defense on the field for the last few seasons.

[azbearsfan]

Plus, I dont know how much money they are willing to throw around any more.

 

I think at this point we will be looking for deals not overpaying guys.

[Lucky Luciano]

It might not be as big a deal if we didn't play our CBs in zone so much, but a poor safety in the Tampa-2 means that the receiver is open as soon as he leaves the CB's zone. That's what keeps happening to us on third and long when we go into the Tampa shell: the quarterback can get the ball out before the rush gets there, because there's always a guy uncovered after the CB passes him off and before the safety can pick him up.

 

the problem with this scenario is that most/many of our problems are related to our CB's abilities to play up in bump and run coverage even in this tampa zone system which requires it (within their zone). what has happened in the past is our corners are playing off the WR by 5 yards at the snap and then backpeddling another 3-5+ yards. this gives every receiver nearly a ten yard free zone that they can just push the bubble back and curl for an easy untouched reception time and time again with a quick 1-3 step drop and fire by opposing qb's. this bubble also leads to the many slants we have seen for easy 5-10 yard receptions as the corner is always trailing the receiver a step or two by the time he reacts and many times our middle linebacker has been cleared out up the middle covering a deep zone.

 

last season we did play our corners up more but usually with the same results as they never got the chuck off the LOS and/or the coverage was so soft and our corners so slow to react (due to quality?) that all receivers remained untouched after 5 yds to run whatever route they wanted. having poor safeties compounded this disadvantage especially when our FS's were playing centerfield so deep trying to contain the long ball before they committed.

 

in my opinion this failure falls directly on our coaches who never figured a counter for this and kept running their defensive schemes the same way year in and year out. we had to be nearly the easiest team in the entire nfl to game plan for.

 

that said, i believe that us getting rid of alex brown to save a buck, if that is their purpose, is flat out ridiculous. although he is not a very good RDE, in my opinion he is our best DE with ogy gone to compliment pepper man ESPECIALLY if he can covert to LDE. it makes no sense to me to weaken further what you have in an already weak defense to pay for the only improvement you made on defense this offseason. also i'm not so sure that with bad corners an 'average' free safety aquisition really make as much of a difference in this lovie scheme as alex brown would at this particular time. it seems to me that it sets the stage for a lot of running plays and rollouts to whatever side pepper is not lining up on.

 

 

 

[bradjock]

Despite all the rumors this tells me that Peppers is our new RDE and the team felt that Brown wasn't going to make the transition and be effective at LDE. Izzy and Anderson have already lined up at LDE and been somewhat effective on pass rush, no worse that what Brown is likely to do as LDE. Add in that Anderson was the swing DE last year so he will likely be looked at for that role again with Izzy the starting LDE. We use a 3 man rotation so we'd be paying a backup player $5 mil to sit on the bench.

 

Why do we have to assign positions? Peppers, Anderson & Idonije have all played both sides extensively. Why not move them around? You have to figure teams will be far more likely to run at Mark Anderson. So why make it a given of where he'll line up?

 

I'm guessing the team feels Melton can sit on the bench as well as Brown except the dropoff is huge if Melton gets on the field.

 

Prediction: Melton will be one of those off-season stories of how a guy has gotten stronger and better and he's ready to make an impact. Isn't he athletic enough to be a 3rd down pass-rusher like Mark Anderson was his rookie year?

 

If I'm wrong and Peppers is our LDE then cutting Brown loose makes no sense to me at all.

 

Lets say this was strictly about money. Would you rather have Peppers & Anderson or Wale & Brown? I'd take Peppers & Anderson.

 

As far as the trade rumors I don't think it's such a big deal the word is out. Why would a team trade for him --- because they feel his current contract is cheaper and a better deal for them (no bonus) than what they'd have to pay up front in bonus/salary to get him.

 

I'm guessing this is out because we've been trying to trade him and failed.

 

I'd be happy if we got a 5th Rd pick for him but doubt we get a pick that high. Still that's a pick that might help our secondary. The 5th round is where we pick CBs right?

 

Agreed. Although with Brown saying we'll cut him, why would a team give us anything?

[nfoligno]

Well, I remember after the Buccaneers game where Griese torched us, somebody on the d-line (I want to say it was Brown) basically said that no pass rush could get there fast enough to disrupt the QB when he could take a short drop and get the ball out immediately. What he was politely leaving unsaid was that Griese could throw immediately because he always had a guy open in the seams between the coverage zones (either between the CB and the safety or between the two safeties.) Those seams are effectively bigger when the safeties are too slow to the ball or run themselves out of the play. It might not be as big a deal if we didn't play our CBs in zone so much, but a poor safety in the Tampa-2 means that the receiver is open as soon as he leaves the CB's zone. That's what keeps happening to us on third and long when we go into the Tampa shell: the quarterback can get the ball out before the rush gets there, because there's always a guy uncovered after the CB passes him off and before the safety can pick him up.

 

I remember that game and Brown's comments, but I am not sure the FS was so much the issue. Our CBs were playing way off, and that was a key problem. WRs would run short patterns for easy gimmie completions. Also, they would run a ton of slants, but we are talking 3 and yard drag routes. Unless the FS was playing in the box, he would not be part of this.

 

In that Tampa-2 four-man rush that we use on 3rd and long, there might be one rusher who can disrupt a quick pass pattern without help from the secondary, but it's not a DE. It's Tommie Harris. The under tackle's got the shortest path to the quarterback, and 2006 Edition Tommie Harris could definitely get into the backfield in a hurry. Even if the under tackle doesn't get to the QB, as long as he can collapse the middle and force the QB to sidestep or leave the pocket, that buys some more time for the edge rush even when the coverage can't. But the DEs in the Tampa-2 line up wide and run a big wide arc: they've just got a longer path to the QB, unless he's being flushed out to them. In the Tampa-2 on third downs, the DEs depend on the under tackle or the secondary forcing the QB to hold onto the ball - Alex Brown isn't as important in that situation as interior pass rush and solid coverage.

 

One, I am a tad confused. You talk about 3rd and long, but also talk about quick pass patterns. While those can break for bigger, the issue on 3rd and long is not usually those quick pass patterns.

 

Two, I would say the DE is a key part of the pass rush. The idea is basically for the DE to rush to the outside, and push the QB inside, where, theoretically, you have a DT that has penetrated and cleans up.

 

Look, I totally agree that the pass rush and the coverage are interrelated and depend on each other to be effective, but it goes both ways. That's why you have things like coverage sacks forced by the secondary and picks forced by the pass rush. Unless Harris hops in a time machine back to 2005, the Bears are going to have to rely on the coverage to force the QB to hold onto the ball for just a second or two. The best edge rush in the world still takes a few seconds to get to the QB - that's why the West Coast offense was such an effective answer to the 46.

 

Just disagree in theory I guess. If you have the best DBs in the league, and no pass rush, I will bet you the QB can still find a way to complete the play eventually. I remember a game we were playing GB. Our secondary we doing very good and covering the WRs, but Farve had all day. I mean, the announcers showed the play over and over again and jokes about how long he had. Anyway, he finally found a WR (I think Driver) downfield. On the flip side, if you have a weak secondary but a great pass rush, I think you win more than you lose. Yes, they are all related, but I think if you ask all 32 coaches, every one will tell you pass rush is the key.

 

I don't like the idea of getting rid of Brown, but the defense could be better off with no Brown and competent coverage from the safety position, especially in the kinds of situations that have been keeping our defense on the field for the last few seasons.

 

Personally, i would argue our CBs playing 10 yards off the LOS is a bigger cause than the FS.

 

Look, I have argued for years we need a FS. I have argued for years Brown is average and over-rated. But w/ all that said, this move still just does not make sense to me. All we ever hear from Lovie is how pass rush is the most important thing. We finally go out and get a pass rusher, but following that up by getting rid of our next best DL just doesn't make sense to me. If Anderson had shown more fine. If Adams were still alive. Fine. Hell, if Harris were still a stud, fine. But I would absolutely argue Brown is our 2nd best DL right now.

 

One more point I have to make. If this move is all about money, that to me make our siging a one dimensional TE for what we did that much more suspect.

[madlithuanian]

Thanks for the info.

 

Although it does kind of sound like if we want him baddlly enough, he can be had.

 

If I'm understanding it right, it's not that simple. The Rams have the right to match any offer until April 15, and after that his rights revert back to the Rams, meaning it would probably take a high draft pick to get him away from St. Louis. After April 15, he's no longer a free agent. The Rams then have his rights until June 1, at which point they have to either give him the one-year $7 million tender, get him to sign a long-term deal, or release him.

 

Basically, if the Bears make a remotely reasonable offer to Atogwe before April 15 and he signs it, the Rams are almost sure to match it. And as long as the Bears' offer works out to less than $7 million for one season, the Rams are saving money by matching it. So if Angelo wanted to be sure that the Rams wouldn't match, the Bears would have to give Atogwe a deal like what Antrel Rolle's getting, something higher than Ed Reed and Troy Polamalu's deals. That's a ton of coin, especially after all the spending they've done already.

 

Assuming that Atogwe wants out of St. Louis, he'd be wary of an offer sheet from the Bears: if he signs any reasonable offer sheet before April 15 he's basically re-signing with the Rams. His best bet is not to sign anything, let his rights revert to the Rams, and then ask for a trade. St. Louis can basically play Atogwe's interests against the teams that are trying to sign him, wait until April 16th, and then demand draft picks. I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but getting the Rams to bow out would be either take significant draft picks or a VERY expensive contract.

 

[defiantgiant]

Thanks for the info.

 

Although it does kind of sound like if we want him baddlly enough, he can be had.

Yeah, but "badly enough" translates to "more than seven million dollars a year" at this stage in the game. That's a massive amount of money - close to a market-setting deal for a free safety. Don't get me wrong, I'd be fine with overpaying for him given the need, but I don't think the front office is going to do it.

[madlithuanian]

Not saying we should sepnd it, just saying we could. Apparently, we don't want to. At least not yet.

 

Seems to me they should.

 

Everything they are doing is screaming "now".

 

Peppers is "now".

Asking for a vet back-up to Cutler is "now"

Getting a cometent RB is "now".

Getting a blocking TE is "now".

 

Waiting to draft OL, S, etc in the 3rd, 4th, etc...is the future. Zombie and Bungelo can't afford to wait. They need to hit the post-season this year, or they hopefully will be fired.

 

 

 

[balta1701-A]

Brown reportedly going to the Saints.