balta1701-A Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 So lets say we start Webb again at LT, now instead of being rated 30th in OL play we move up to 28th. Webb goes from a -.08 rating to a +1.3 rating. What do we do now give him another chance the following year because he got better? It is quite simple, the line wasnt good enough, we need new players, and have options when people arent any good. The most important thing a guy like Webb is doing is...being paid very little. If he's able to give you ~average performance while still being on his rookie deal, that means he's significantly overplaying his contract. His rookie contract is what frees up the money to spend elsewhere on the line. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 The most important thing a guy like Webb is doing is...being paid very little. If he's able to give you ~average performance while still being on his rookie deal, that means he's significantly overplaying his contract. His rookie contract is what frees up the money to spend elsewhere on the line. I dont think because he is being paid less makes him better at blocking, I get your point. If we dont have the money, then he may be back there, but no matter how many people say he played better , he wasnt very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 3, 2013 Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 I dont think because he is being paid less makes him better at blocking, I get your point. If we dont have the money, then he may be back there, but no matter how many people say he played better , he wasnt very good. No, but adequate O-Line play is something the Bears have only gotten from a couple guys the last few years. Filling up the line with adequate play would be a major upgrade. Webb simply wasn't the problem last year. He wasn't a revelation, he wasn't good enough to carry the line on his own, and he wasn't good enough to overcome the situations he was being put in. So no, he wasn't "Very good", but he was definitely "Good enough". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 3, 2013 http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftrumormill.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftrumormill.php That means he might be gotten cheaper. If we can get him for 5 mill, much better for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Oh stop it jason, he wasn't that bad last year, the first 2 years yes but he wasn't bad last year. In a west coast offense where Jay gets the ball out quicker he'll look like a pro bowler ala Jermon Bushrod who is a bad pass protector as well. Dude...he was BELOW AVERAGE this year! Even by the stats you keep fellating. That, for the last three years is, horrible, atrocious, then below average. Average that out and it's really bad. And there is no way in hell he would have looked like a pro bowler in any system. I don't give a damn if they ran a Middle East or Midwest system. You gotta be related to the dude to believe that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Dude...he was BELOW AVERAGE this year! Even by the stats you keep fellating. That, for the last three years is, horrible, atrocious, then below average. Average that out and it's really bad. And there is no way in hell he would have looked like a pro bowler in any system. I don't give a damn if they ran a Middle East or Midwest system. You gotta be related to the dude to believe that. He improved this year, but he was still bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 No, but adequate O-Line play is something the Bears have only gotten from a couple guys the last few years. Filling up the line with adequate play would be a major upgrade. Webb simply wasn't the problem last year. He wasn't a revelation, he wasn't good enough to carry the line on his own, and he wasn't good enough to overcome the situations he was being put in. So no, he wasn't "Very good", but he was definitely "Good enough". No.he.was.not. Stop. He was below average at best. The only reason this sudden Webb love is gaining any traction are the OL ratings where he is supposed to be the best of the bad. Like the tallest midget. We as Bears fans are just so used to seeing horrible that below average is now turning subpar into good enough. This is the same kind of revisionist history BS that has gotten the Bears in the situation they face this year. I swear, this happens every damn year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 He improved this year, but he was still bad. Exactly. He improved. But he just went from horrible to not horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 The most important thing a guy like Webb is doing is...being paid very little. If he's able to give you ~average performance while still being on his rookie deal, that means he's significantly overplaying his contract. His rookie contract is what frees up the money to spend elsewhere on the line. It's definitely a good deal if he can play like last year and improve (with current salary), but like stinger said, it's still low pay for low performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 No.he.was.not. Stop. He was below average at best. The only reason this sudden Webb love is gaining any traction are the OL ratings where he is supposed to be the best of the bad. Like the tallest midget. We as Bears fans are just so used to seeing horrible that below average is now turning subpar into good enough. This is the same kind of revisionist history BS that has gotten the Bears in the situation they face this year. I swear, this happens every damn year. So we're replacing the whole line then? Why dump the strongest link, despite how weak he may or may no have been, and keep weaker links esp when said strongest link makes such little money? That sounds pretty dumb. If they wanna move him to RT fine but unless you're revamping the whole damn line then Webb stays. If he had some help against guys like Matthews and Smith he would be much higher rated. I saw every play of Matthews vs. Webb and he 90% of the time he got no help which is stupid. I saw a good LT, Joe Staley, get burned twice against Matthews. Furthermore... Jarred Allen got blanked in 2 games against Webb. Cliff Avril who someone on here wanted got 1 sack in 2 games. I Know you said sacks don't matter but you'd think 2 of the top 20 sack artists in the NFL would have a field day on Webb with how "awful" he is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted February 4, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 So we're replacing the whole line then? Why dump the strongest link, despite how weak he may or may no have been, and keep weaker links esp when said strongest link makes such little money? That sounds pretty dumb. If they wanna move him to RT fine but unless you're revamping the whole damn line then Webb stays. If he had some help against guys like Matthews and Smith he would be much higher rated. I saw every play of Matthews vs. Webb and he 90% of the time he got no help which is stupid. I saw a good LT, Joe Staley, get burned twice against Matthews. Furthermore... Jarred Allen got blanked in 2 games against Webb. Cliff Avril who someone on here wanted got 1 sack in 2 games. I Know you said sacks don't matter but you'd think 2 of the top 20 sack artists in the NFL would have a field day on Webb with how "awful" he is. Webb is not the best player on that OL. Garza is average and Louis is solid. That's it. Webb is below average and Carimi sucks. Scott had the best year but I'm not sure I trust him fully to play RT in 2013 and on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Once I again, I'm basing the statement of Webb being our best lineman off the ratings that our GM uses to get an unbiased opinion on our players. In that I'm doing the same thing he's doing, putting an unbiased statement out there that Webb was our best OLman. It's easy to look at the games against GB and say he's god awful because yes, Clay Matthews makes him look god awful 1 on 1. Clay Matthews makes a lot of good LTs look pretty bad 1 on 1. You can't leave him out there on an island against a guy as explosive as Clay or Aldon Smith, it's as simple as that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AZ54 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 http://walterfootball.com/nfldraftrumormill.php If this is the Saints philosophy -- focus on getting above average OG/C to protect the middle of the pocket and worry less about the edge rushers so the QB can step up if need be, or slide protection to the outside via TE/RB -- then I have to think this comes to Chicago along with Kromer. Add to this the interview comments from Anthony Calvillo about how Trestman fixed their blocking scheme: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/...o-bears-offense ------------------------------------------------------------- So what did he do? "There's a standard practice in our league on how to block certain blitzes, popping out offensive linemen to block linebackers and leaving the middle pocket vulnerable to one-on-one battles with guys you don't want to block one-on-one. "So he had them protect from the inside out, with as many double-teams inside as possible. Our protections changed week in and week out, but the base was inside-out." No other team in the CFL was blocking like this, Calvillo said. But it worked. -------------------------------------------------------------- Despite all the chatter on here about bad Oline protection our biggest issues were with the middle of the line when considering both run blocking and pass protection. There are many concerns across the board on the Oline but this discussion is largely focused on LT and perhaps the Bears will be more focused on OG/C. With Louis coming off a serious knee injury there is literally nothing in the hopper at OG right now. Between the philosophy and need If past is prologue then I'd say we're more likely to invest in a FA OG to shore up the inside. Since they are cheaper than OTs that should also leave more cash for signing Melton. We might grab another OG in Rd 1 or 2 depending how the first round goes down. If one of the top 3 LTs are there for us then I think we're taking him, otherwise we go with the same 4 we finished with and that includes James Brown. Or will the new coaches consider Brown as a OG? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stinger226 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 If this is the Saints philosophy -- focus on getting above average OG/C to protect the middle of the pocket and worry less about the edge rushers so the QB can step up if need be, or slide protection to the outside via TE/RB -- then I have to think this comes to Chicago along with Kromer. Add to this the interview comments from Anthony Calvillo about how Trestman fixed their blocking scheme: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/...o-bears-offense ------------------------------------------------------------- So what did he do? "There's a standard practice in our league on how to block certain blitzes, popping out offensive linemen to block linebackers and leaving the middle pocket vulnerable to one-on-one battles with guys you don't want to block one-on-one. "So he had them protect from the inside out, with as many double-teams inside as possible. Our protections changed week in and week out, but the base was inside-out." No other team in the CFL was blocking like this, Calvillo said. But it worked. -------------------------------------------------------------- Despite all the chatter on here about bad Oline protection our biggest issues were with the middle of the line when considering both run blocking and pass protection. There are many concerns across the board on the Oline but this discussion is largely focused on LT and perhaps the Bears will be more focused on OG/C. With Louis coming off a serious knee injury there is literally nothing in the hopper at OG right now. Between the philosophy and need If past is prologue then I'd say we're more likely to invest in a FA OG to shore up the inside. Since they are cheaper than OTs that should also leave more cash for signing Melton. We might grab another OG in Rd 1 or 2 depending how the first round goes down. If one of the top 3 LTs are there for us then I think we're taking him, otherwise we go with the same 4 we finished with and that includes James Brown. Or will the new coaches consider Brown as a OG? You may be right, we need new people everywhere. I think we cant wait for the draft and HOPE will get one of the top 3, no guarantee, one will be there and the drop off is great from that point on. I think if Louis recover quickly we bring him back, and resign Scott. We draft a OG and pick up a LT in FAgency. Webb may be back by default, but no matter how we paint it, it wasnt that good. Not being horrible is not a compliment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Webb may be back by default, but no matter how we paint it, it wasnt that good. Not being horrible is not a compliment. You can keep saying this all you want, but "An average O-Lineman in the best football league in the world" really is one heckuva compliment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 If this is the Saints philosophy -- focus on getting above average OG/C to protect the middle of the pocket and worry less about the edge rushers so the QB can step up if need be, or slide protection to the outside via TE/RB -- then I have to think this comes to Chicago along with Kromer. Add to this the interview comments from Anthony Calvillo about how Trestman fixed their blocking scheme: http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/...o-bears-offense ------------------------------------------------------------- So what did he do? "There's a standard practice in our league on how to block certain blitzes, popping out offensive linemen to block linebackers and leaving the middle pocket vulnerable to one-on-one battles with guys you don't want to block one-on-one. "So he had them protect from the inside out, with as many double-teams inside as possible. Our protections changed week in and week out, but the base was inside-out." No other team in the CFL was blocking like this, Calvillo said. But it worked. -------------------------------------------------------------- Despite all the chatter on here about bad Oline protection our biggest issues were with the middle of the line when considering both run blocking and pass protection. There are many concerns across the board on the Oline but this discussion is largely focused on LT and perhaps the Bears will be more focused on OG/C. With Louis coming off a serious knee injury there is literally nothing in the hopper at OG right now. Between the philosophy and need If past is prologue then I'd say we're more likely to invest in a FA OG to shore up the inside. Since they are cheaper than OTs that should also leave more cash for signing Melton. We might grab another OG in Rd 1 or 2 depending how the first round goes down. If one of the top 3 LTs are there for us then I think we're taking him, otherwise we go with the same 4 we finished with and that includes James Brown. Or will the new coaches consider Brown as a OG? I was thinking the exact same thing when I read this article yesterday. I'll add that it makes Barrett Jones higher on my radar than ever. Garza is no spring chicken and grooming his replacement is a pretty big deal. So, I'm thinking sign a solid young OG and trade down and pick up Jones. Nice post AZ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 I was thinking the exact same thing when I read this article yesterday. I'll add that it makes Barrett Jones higher on my radar than ever. Garza is no spring chicken and grooming his replacement is a pretty big deal. So, I'm thinking sign a solid young OG and trade down and pick up Jones. Nice post AZ... After checking around, i've got Andy Levitre from the Bills and Louis Vazquez from the Charges coming up as the first names on the list for "Free agent guards under 30". Brandon Moore of the Jets appears as well but he's ~33 I think. Any other obvious names at the guard position? Those couple slots were intriguing to me...since both of them are coming from places where I'd say the teams have some weak O-Lines already. Not sure what that means about their overall effectiveness. One guy from a solid O-line who isn't under contract is 30 year old Kevin Booth from the NY GIants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 So we're replacing the whole line then? Why dump the strongest link, despite how weak he may or may no have been, and keep weaker links esp when said strongest link makes such little money? That sounds pretty dumb. If they wanna move him to RT fine but unless you're revamping the whole damn line then Webb stays. If he had some help against guys like Matthews and Smith he would be much higher rated. I saw every play of Matthews vs. Webb and he 90% of the time he got no help which is stupid. I saw a good LT, Joe Staley, get burned twice against Matthews. Furthermore... Jarred Allen got blanked in 2 games against Webb. Cliff Avril who someone on here wanted got 1 sack in 2 games. I Know you said sacks don't matter but you'd think 2 of the top 20 sack artists in the NFL would have a field day on Webb with how "awful" he is. Two quickies on this: 1) I don't believe he was the strongest link. That's one of the major contentions I have with the OL stats being used. 2) I don't want the Bears to get rid of him. I think he's a valuable sub or swing-lineman. As for the sack comment, it's not about two plays in one game and two in another. Staley isn't perfect, but I'm quite sure he had a better overall game against Matthews than Webb did. Also, I can't recall the games exactly, but I'm pretty damn sure Matthews had multiple sacks against the Bears in each of the last two games they played. Whether or not they were against Webb I can't say for sure. I mean, if you're going to compare both Staley and Webb against Matthews that is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 You can keep saying this all you want, but "An average O-Lineman in the best football league in the world" really is one heckuva compliment. Well, now you're just being silly. Even though he was not average - he was below average - a guy who sucks in the NFL is still a pretty big compliment in terms of his athletic ability. I've played flag football against some high level college guys and guys who barely missed the cut in the NFL, and it's baffling to me they didn't make the NFL. They are leaps and bounds better than everything everyone else does. But, unfortunately for Webb, the Bears' OL is not measured against how well you or I could do in the NFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Despite all the chatter on here about bad Oline protection our biggest issues were with the middle of the line when considering both run blocking and pass protection. There are many concerns across the board on the Oline but this discussion is largely focused on LT and perhaps the Bears will be more focused on OG/C. With Louis coming off a serious knee injury there is literally nothing in the hopper at OG right now. Between the philosophy and need If past is prologue then I'd say we're more likely to invest in a FA OG to shore up the inside. Since they are cheaper than OTs that should also leave more cash for signing Melton. We might grab another OG in Rd 1 or 2 depending how the first round goes down. If one of the top 3 LTs are there for us then I think we're taking him, otherwise we go with the same 4 we finished with and that includes James Brown. Or will the new coaches consider Brown as a OG? Agreed completely. I've long said the Bears need help in multiple positions. And with the injury concerns you mention, it's even more pressing. There is not a single person on the OL who doesn't need an immediate replacement or a replacement in the next couple years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 After checking around, i've got Andy Levitre from the Bills and Louis Vazquez from the Charges coming up as the first names on the list for "Free agent guards under 30". Brandon Moore of the Jets appears as well but he's ~33 I think. Any other obvious names at the guard position? Those couple slots were intriguing to me...since both of them are coming from places where I'd say the teams have some weak O-Lines already. Not sure what that means about their overall effectiveness. One guy from a solid O-line who isn't under contract is 30 year old Kevin Booth from the NY GIants. Good point. There doesn't appear to be great OG talent out there in FA. WHICH IS WHY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED THIS PAST PRESEASON WHEN IT WAS POSSIBLE. Not only were Grubbs and Nicks FAs (regardless of the price tag), but the Bears passed on David DeCastro and Kevin Zeitler in the draft! I freaking hate Lovie Smith and Jerry Angelo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Good point. There doesn't appear to be great OG talent out there in FA. WHICH IS WHY IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED THIS PAST PRESEASON WHEN IT WAS POSSIBLE. Not only were Grubbs and Nicks FAs (regardless of the price tag), but the Bears passed on David DeCastro and Kevin Zeitler in the draft! I freaking hate Lovie Smith and Jerry Angelo. I'll be the first to admit that I don't pay much attention to the contractual implications and cap space issues but how would the acquisition of Marshall played into this. Had the team looked at either of the two players mentioned would they have still had enough to get Marshall? Of course hindsight being what it is, as I watch Joe Flacco emerge as the next elite QB, I ask 'what could have been'. In the 2008 draft the Ravens picked Flacco a few picks after the Bears made theirs. And im sure most remember who that was...I know you do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scs787 Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Two quickies on this: 1) I don't believe he was the strongest link. That's one of the major contentions I have with the OL stats being used. 2) I don't want the Bears to get rid of him. I think he's a valuable sub or swing-lineman. As for the sack comment, it's not about two plays in one game and two in another. Staley isn't perfect, but I'm quite sure he had a better overall game against Matthews than Webb did. Also, I can't recall the games exactly, but I'm pretty damn sure Matthews had multiple sacks against the Bears in each of the last two games they played Whether or not they were against Webb I can't say for sure. I mean, if you're going to compare both Staley and Webb against Matthews that is. Did ya read my whole post? I did compare the 2 against Clay. I said Webb struggles going 1 on 1 vs. Clay Matthews and then I pointed out that so did Staley going 1 on 1. You can't go 1 on 1 coverage against that guy. Esp. in an offense that rarely has a safety valve underneath. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted February 4, 2013 Report Share Posted February 4, 2013 Well, now you're just being silly. Even though he was not average - he was below average - a guy who sucks in the NFL is still a pretty big compliment in terms of his athletic ability. I've played flag football against some high level college guys and guys who barely missed the cut in the NFL, and it's baffling to me they didn't make the NFL. They are leaps and bounds better than everything everyone else does. But, unfortunately for Webb, the Bears' OL is not measured against how well you or I could do in the NFL. I disagree. I think Webb was pretty darn close to average. He was just put in crappy positions, with very little help when it should have been given, and literally crap on the rest of the line. I don't think a HOF caliber O-lineman would have had much success with as little help as the Bears gave Webb...and he had a number of games where he was legitimately solid but people didn't pay attention because the right side or up the middle of the Bears line was collapsing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.