StrangeSox Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 08:34 AM) I am glad it was the day for the kids to trick or treat out at the in-laws instead of watching the trainwreck of a Bears game. Wow. Yeah, I was debating going out to the drag strip with some friends or sticking around to watch the Bears game. I guess we made the right choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (DBAHO @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 09:48 AM) That's got more to do with injuries than anything else I'd argue. They rely so much on Jamal Williams, and he's out for the season, while Merriman's a shadow of what he used to be. You lose that kind of production in your front seven, it's going to hurt your whole defense obviously. They're pretty much the same as the Bears defensively this season though FWIW. Same thing that happened in Chicago. My point being that he had probably the best D-line in the NFL at the time, an All-Pro MLB and WLB, and a decent secondary with one of the best safeties in the NFL. Anybody could look good running that scheme with those players, and the players made him look good. When he lost those players (Harris hurting his knee/hamstring, Urlacher's play declining because of the back/neck, Brown having the worst luck ever) he made no adjustments worth mentioning. Babich was not any good obviously, but he inherited the same problems. Rivera benefited from good fortune and his success wasn't from his "genius" at game-planning either (see Carolina in the playoffs 2005, see Super Bowl 41). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Has the Bears' line ever been this bad? I can't recall it being worse than this during this decade or even for the s*** teams in the 90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 11:33 AM) Has the Bears' line ever been this bad? I can't recall it being worse than this during this decade or even for the s*** teams in the 90s. The lines have been at least decent for as long as I can remember. This is just terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 12:35 PM) The lines have been at least decent for as long as I can remember. This is just terrible. I don't think the defensive line is anywhere near as bad as the offensive line though. This is probably the worst it's ever been since I've been a Bears fan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (lostfan @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 11:37 AM) I don't think the defensive line is anywhere near as bad as the offensive line though. This is probably the worst it's ever been since I've been a Bears fan. The Bears have always traditionally been built from the lines out. The defensive line is having injury issues, but the offensive line is exactly that... offensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Oct 25, 2009 -> 01:41 PM) The Bears defense really blows right now. Hillenmeyer and Roach are huge downgrades from Urlacher and Tinoisamoa and we don't have any impact players at DT. Add in a bad secondary and you have a bad defense. Also on offense, f*** running the ball. Let Cutler just throw on basically every play. The Bears defense is really bad. Briggs is the only above average player on the team. We have an aging Dline and the only reasons to be excited on the Dline are Gilbert, Melton, Adams, Harrison and I guess Mark Anderson (because he's young). We better hope those young guys figure it out because Harris is probably gonna get cut at seasons end, Ogunleye is average to a little above average (and not deserving of the funds he gets) and Brown is solid but not an impact DE and quite frankly for the Bears to have any sort of a D with the lack of secondary they have they need to have a plus plus pass rush. Than there are the LB's, where you have to hope Roach/Williams live up to there hype because Hunter is what he is and Briggs is well the stud of the D. In the secondary, you have to hope Manning/Aflava/Moore/Bowman figure it out because Payne isn't any good, Vasher is gonna be gone, and Tillman is solid (not great anymore) and getting older. The scary part is we have no picks to fix this problem next season so we have to really hope those guys I mentioned that are younger develop. On the offensive side, you should get excited about our WR's (Bennett, Hester, Knox plus our TE Olsen), our QB, and well I think we should still be excited for Forte (even though he's sucked this year) but than there is our oline. Pace is done, Kreutz is an average C at this point in his career, Omilaye has been awful...Garza is mediocre. Basically on the oline we have to hope Williams figures it out, Omilaye somehow does something, and that Beekman can be a starter at C cause we got nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 On another note, could Tommie Harris be better than I give him credit for? I've ripped on him, but he was out of todays game and our Dline was absolutely horrendous. I've also bashed and bashed Urlacher, but I think it is worth mentioning that a huge chunk of Cincy's completions occurred in the zone of the cover 2 that is ultimately the MLB's responsibility and you can tell Roach just isn't even close to what Url was on coverage. Basically put, I really think the Bears need a new coach because the cover 2 is getting absolutely exposded and the Bears don't have the great players who can make the soft-spot's of the cover 2 very minimal, instead, the holes are massive. Thats what having poor cover safeties and poor cover MLB's does. It is only one game, but my god, what a train-wreck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 I was at the game yesterday (holy hell is the Bengals facility bad), and it was mind boggling how awful Nick Roach is. He was out of position every other play it seemed. Truly an awful experience yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (fathom @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 10:11 AM) I was at the game yesterday (holy hell is the Bengals facility bad), and it was mind boggling how awful Nick Roach is. He was out of position every other play it seemed. Truly an awful experience yesterday. I was probably one of Urlacher's biggest haters, but Roach was completely exploited this week. Albeit there were plenty of other things wrong with the game, ie, how unprepared the squad was, the horrenodus oline, etc, but Roach was one of the biggest issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Haha, Larry Johnson likes to tweet http://deadspin.com/5390152/larry-johnson-...ted-this-season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MHizzle85 Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 01:52 PM) Haha, Larry Johnson likes to tweet http://deadspin.com/5390152/larry-johnson-...ted-this-season I saw this on the NFL network last night, good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxbrian Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 Bears coach Lovie Smith said defensive tackle Tommie Harris is fine, physically, and that the decision to sit him against the Bengals had to do with rest. Smith expects Harris to be ready to go against the Browns this week. ' 'No, there isn't anything wrong with Tommie,'' Smith said. ``Tommie didn't play this week. It was more of a coach's decision as much as anything. ``He has had some (knee) soreness. He didn't practice all week. I thought we had better options. All player decisions on who's going to dress is a game-day decision: who gives us the best opportunity to play. Could Tommie have played if I wanted him to? Yes. But I thought we could get a better Tommie if we let him rest this past week and get ready for this week.'' Harris, who has been battling left knee issues since 2007, approached the Bears last Friday and said he was ready to play. Marcus Harrison started in Harris' place against the Bengals. Tribune Is this season the last for Tommie Harris as a Bear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 11:47 AM) The Bears have always traditionally been built from the lines out. The defensive line is having injury issues, but the offensive line is exactly that... offensive. The secondary is easily one of the worst I've seen in many years. When Tillman is considered your shut down corner, you know you have an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 QUOTE (whitesoxbrian @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 02:37 PM) Tribune Is this season the last for Tommie Harris as a Bear? It absolutely is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 The secondary is easily one of the worst I've seen in many years. When Tillman is considered your shut down corner, you know you have an issue. This was the first bad game I can remember Tillman having in a long time. The guy's pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 On another note, could Tommie Harris be better than I give him credit for? I've ripped on him, but he was out of todays game and our Dline was absolutely horrendous. I've also bashed and bashed Urlacher, but I think it is worth mentioning that a huge chunk of Cincy's completions occurred in the zone of the cover 2 that is ultimately the MLB's responsibility and you can tell Roach just isn't even close to what Url was on coverage. Basically put, I really think the Bears need a new coach because the cover 2 is getting absolutely exposded and the Bears don't have the great players who can make the soft-spot's of the cover 2 very minimal, instead, the holes are massive. Thats what having poor cover safeties and poor cover MLB's does. It is only one game, but my god, what a train-wreck. Not many good teams still use the cover 2, hell even the bad teams dont. The league has figured that defense out, wont stop Lovie from using it over and over and over and over regardless of personnel but hey, that's why you lose 46-10 right? Urlacher has been able to cover up how flawed we are defensively because he's athletic enough to stretch his zone out and terrify QB's. Now that he's done for the year this scheme is not going to work the way Lovie insists it can. Lovie will be gone soon though, they'll fire him in the offseason out of respect but he's worn out his good will from 2006. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 No disrespect to anyone posting in this thread, but I am not sure any of us have anywhere near the expertise required to accurately claim whether the Tampa 2 or Cover 2 defense has been solved by opposing offenses. The NFL is such a competitive league. The most minor of advantages or adjustments can create such mismatches or make a scheme look absolutely horrible when in fact only minor adjustments are necessary. I know enough to tell that having Urlacher would help a lot, but what I don't know (and seriously doubt any of us can know) is whether this style of defense has run its course in the NFL or not. I suspect it has not. I happen to believe our issue is personnel related, especially considering the injuries we have in our linebacking corps as well as our currently weak line play. But that's just me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 26, 2009 -> 07:30 PM) No disrespect to anyone posting in this thread, but I am not sure any of us have anywhere near the expertise required to accurately claim whether the Tampa 2 or Cover 2 defense has been solved by opposing offenses. The NFL is such a competitive league. The most minor of advantages or adjustments can create such mismatches or make a scheme look absolutely horrible when in fact only minor adjustments are necessary. I know enough to tell that having Urlacher would help a lot, but what I don't know (and seriously doubt any of us can know) is whether this style of defense has run its course in the NFL or not. I suspect it has not. I happen to believe our issue is personnel related, especially considering the injuries we have in our linebacking corps as well as our currently weak line play. But that's just me. I dont think it has AT ALL. Its just the bears dont have the key players to make it successful. They have terrible db's, inexperienced safeties and an awful linebacking core. You cant run a good cover 2 with a good dline and ONE good LB, you just cant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 The Bills Cover 2 has been decent this year, and they've been dealing with all kinds of injuries on defense. I don't think there is any chance the Cover 2 has been figured out, and I actually think it's going to be making a bit of a comeback in the next 5-10 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukeNukeEm Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 No disrespect to anyone posting in this thread, but I am not sure any of us have anywhere near the expertise required to accurately claim whether the Tampa 2 or Cover 2 defense has been solved by opposing offenses. The NFL is such a competitive league. The most minor of advantages or adjustments can create such mismatches or make a scheme look absolutely horrible when in fact only minor adjustments are necessary. I know enough to tell that having Urlacher would help a lot, but what I don't know (and seriously doubt any of us can know) is whether this style of defense has run its course in the NFL or not. I suspect it has not. I happen to believe our issue is personnel related, especially considering the injuries we have in our linebacking corps as well as our currently weak line play. But that's just me. I'm not using much expertise at all, just league trends. Even the Colts are going away from the Tampa 2 this year and it's paying pretty big dividends for them. If it's the players and not the scheme, well then nothing really changes. Either the Bears are suffering from a terrible gameplan or players who are woefully out of position on every single play, both of those are things are a coaches responsibility. Let's not even talk about the offense either, which may be one of the biggest wastes of talent I've ever seen by a coaching staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleHurt05 Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 The Bengals were running the cover 2 most of Sunday, and it seemed to work pretty well. Bottom line, if you dont get a pass rush, the cover 2 is worthless. When you are pressuring the QB a lot, it works great Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Oct 27, 2009 -> 12:47 PM) The Bengals were running the cover 2 most of Sunday, and it seemed to work pretty well. Bottom line, if you dont get a pass rush, the cover 2 is worthless. When you are pressuring the QB a lot, it works great true for any scheme ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxbrian Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Cincinnati was putting another OT in the game in the TE's spot and making him elgible. Roach was too slow on the calls therefore they would run that side where the Bears would have 1 less tackler then they had a blocker. That's not a good formula. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 The Bears are only in their base defense like 1/3 of the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts