CanOfCorn Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) That's blasphemy. He's not exactly been a star, but you try developing under Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton. I think they utilize him incorrectly. Additionally, he was basically the first weapon opposing defenses tried to take away in the passing game this year, as opposed to Clark or Witten, who are the second or third weapon a defense tries to contain. Perhaps he will be utilized better under the new OC and we will see him develop even further. This is right on! With the receiving corps going into the season, every single DC tried to take Olsen out of the gameplan first. The only thing Olsen needs to do is work on his hands a bit more. He dropped some easy ones this year. But if Aromashadu can develop and the Bears can get another weapon, Olsen can be one of the top 5 TE in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 That's also one of the reasons Cutler had so many red zone INTs, the fact that Olsen was the first and last option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 06:30 AM) Didnt the Bears just reach out to the OC at USC? Yeah Jeremy Bates from USC, was at Denver when Cutler was there. And that's the guy the Bears should target not Martz IMO. Why, because I believe Cutler's at his best as a QB when he's out of the pocket and on the run, and that's basically what Bates / Denver's offense was in the Shanahan days. And that's where Cutler has had the most success, not as a pocket passer, but as a mobile QB. Maybe he'd introduce the zone blocking scheme that the likes of Houston and I'm sure Washington will use now also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 03:11 PM) That's blasphemy. He's not exactly been a star, but you try developing under Rex Grossman and Kyle Orton. I think they utilize him incorrectly. Additionally, he was basically the first weapon opposing defenses tried to take away in the passing game this year, as opposed to Clark or Witten, who are the second or third weapon a defense tries to contain. Perhaps he will be utilized better under the new OC and we will see him develop even further. QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 03:13 PM) His numbers have improved each year he's been there. I hear what you're saying, but the numbers say he's slowly getting better. He wasn't expected to be a decent TE. He has all of the ability to be a star in this league. Especially with a real QB coming into Chicago, big things were expected from G-reg, and he didn't even come close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (DBAHO @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 06:47 PM) Yeah Jeremy Bates from USC, was at Denver when Cutler was there. And that's the guy the Bears should target not Martz IMO. Why, because I believe Cutler's at his best as a QB when he's out of the pocket and on the run, and that's basically what Bates / Denver's offense was in the Shanahan days. And that's where Cutler has had the most success, not as a pocket passer, but as a mobile QB. Maybe he'd introduce the zone blocking scheme that the likes of Houston and I'm sure Washington will use now also. I think letting a QB handpick his own OC is a recipe for disaster, and seeing how Pete Carroll basically wants Bates gone and also noting USC's fall from offensive grace, I am not enthralled with Bates becoming the OC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 07:56 PM) He wasn't expected to be a decent TE. He has all of the ability to be a star in this league. Especially with a real QB coming into Chicago, big things were expected from G-reg, and he didn't even come close. He didn't come close? Didn't he have 7 TDs? What would "close" be? 12 TDs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 07:00 PM) He didn't come close? Didn't he have 7 TDs? What would "close" be? 12 TDs? Obviously numbers don't tell the whole story. Its been a pretty common theme all year long that Olsen's development has been a huge disappointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 12:58 AM) I think letting a QB handpick his own OC is a recipe for disaster, and seeing how Pete Carroll basically wants Bates gone and also noting USC's fall from offensive grace, I am not enthralled with Bates becoming the OC. there's also a difference from college and pro offenses. I'd rather take a guy with success on offense in the pros than that of one with success in college when looking at an offensive coordinator. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 07:01 PM) Obviously numbers don't tell the whole story. Its been a pretty common theme all year long that Olsen's development has been a huge disappointment. Hmm, I guess I didn't see it that way. I saw him as more one of our lone bright spots... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DBAHO Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 11:58 AM) I think letting a QB handpick his own OC is a recipe for disaster, and seeing how Pete Carroll basically wants Bates gone and also noting USC's fall from offensive grace, I am not enthralled with Bates becoming the OC. Well this is basically Jay Cutler's team now, like it or not. So you want an OC that knows Cutler's strengths and was around him when Cutler had the most success. Was Bates around at USC when Mark Sanchez was there FWIW (I can't remember off the top of my head). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 07:00 PM) He didn't come close? Didn't he have 7 TDs? What would "close" be? 12 TDs? I think Olsens problem has been consistency. 3 of those 7 touchdowns came in 1 game(week 9 vs AZ) and he disappeared for a 6 game stretch. He had flashes of what we think we drafted, but then he has had some maddening drops and invisible stretches. True, teams take him out of the game because he is the only threat the bears really had, but at the same time you always remember great tight ends like Tony Gonzalez because even when they were the only option they still were making all of the catches. Greg also has some problems with his blocking assignments, and thats part of the reason Cutler was getting killed back there. I think he can still be a star TE, but I also feel he does have a ways to go Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (DBAHO @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 07:07 PM) Well this is basically Jay Cutler's team now, like it or not. So you want an OC that knows Cutler's strengths and was around him when Cutler had the most success. Was Bates around at USC when Mark Sanchez was there FWIW (I can't remember off the top of my head). No, just this year. Sarkesian(sp?) was the OC for Sanchez I believe. Bates was in Denver in 08 with Cutler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chisoxfn Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 05:01 PM) Obviously numbers don't tell the whole story. Its been a pretty common theme all year long that Olsen's development has been a huge disappointment. He isn't a bust though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Yeah, calling Olsen a disappointment relative to what he's capable of is fair, but calling him a bust is pretty harsh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Olsen reminds me of Shockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zenryan Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 08:01 PM) Obviously numbers don't tell the whole story. Its been a pretty common theme all year long that Olsen's development has been a huge disappointment. Olsen is a combine freak. He's got everything you'd want in a TE. He underachieved big time at Miami and its not surprising people are considering him a disappointment now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (zenryan @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 11:33 PM) Olsen is a combine freak. He's got everything you'd want in a TE. So does Vernon Davis. In fact... I thought he would be a mega star by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsideirish71 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 With either Bates or Martz, this offense will got on attack. The next step is to get that green painted mudd replaced with Field Turf. Field Turf is an important step in the offseason. Having a speed attack type offense when your receivers are going to fall down, slip due to green painted mudd or planting sod in December is not going to work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 01:26 AM) With either Bates or Martz, this offense will got on attack. The next step is to get that green painted mudd replaced with Field Turf. Field Turf is an important step in the offseason. Having a speed attack type offense when your receivers are going to fall down, slip due to green painted mudd or planting sod in December is not going to work. I'm not sold on Bates. He's been an OC for one year and that was a USC team with 9 returning starters. According to most, the offense underachieved. Just because Cutler's buddy shouldn't be a reason to give him this huge responsibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamshack Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (SoxAce @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 12:54 AM) So does Vernon Davis. In fact... I thought he would be a mega star by now. Notice the common denominator here....bad quarterbacks throwing to under-developed TE's... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 08:55 AM) Notice the common denominator here....bad quarterbacks throwing to under-developed TE's... I don't think that's the common denominator at all here. I think the common denominator is people here ignoring the actual numbers of these TE's in order to bash them. Vernon Davis is being bashed now? Seriously? Come on people, I understand not realizing how good Olsen's end of season numbers actually looked, but come on, don't do it to Davis also. 78 catches, 965 yards, 13 TD. 5th in the league in Receiving yards for a TE, 5th in the league in receptions for a TE, tied with Shiancoe, Moss, and Fitzgerald for most receiving touchdowns in the league for any position. If he was playing for the Saints, Giants, Cowboys, whatever, you'd hear his name every week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 Mangini stays in Cleveland, for at least another year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RockRaines Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (southsideirish71 @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 01:26 AM) With either Bates or Martz, this offense will got on attack. The next step is to get that green painted mudd replaced with Field Turf. Field Turf is an important step in the offseason. Having a speed attack type offense when your receivers are going to fall down, slip due to green painted mudd or planting sod in December is not going to work. Problem is that it is funded by the park district, which would never front the money for field turf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 05:09 PM) Problem is that it is funded by the park district, which would never front the money for field turf. Yep, the Bears would have to pay for it if they wanted it which they never ever will because they're the Bears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 7, 2010 Share Posted January 7, 2010 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jan 7, 2010 -> 05:09 PM) Problem is that it is funded by the park district, which would never front the money for field turf. Field turf isn't very expensive in relativity. Michigan City had a great product put in for $750,000. THat sounds like a lot, but when you factor in how many turf changes and field redo's happen in a year, they probably would save money instantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts