Chicago Bears Offseason 2012

[minnesotacubsfan]

i actually like paea better than any other nose they've had, so the front seven are as good as ever, imo.

 

You're nuts. Harris was a beast and Tank Johnson was actually quite good for a year.

 

You are honestly the only person I've heard suggest anything other than Urlacher isn't as good as he was at his peak. The team doesn't even pretend that is the case.

 

Lovies system has played a bigger role in Urlachers perceived decline then his physical age. His physical decline is completely overblown

 

It's the same system he was in when he was at his best. Urlacher put up next to career 16-game season lows in tackles, passes defensed, and had no sacks. Urlacher was pretty consistent 125+ tackles, 5 sacks, 3 INT player in Lovie's system in his prime. He clearly does not have that ability anymore. His decline in range could be a reason the safety play has been so bad the last few years. Granted, Mike Brown was a beast too, but he was often out of the lineup without much dropoff as the last few years have had.

Where the hell did you get the average of 5 sacks thing? He hast averaged that since before the Lovie regime. And his ints have ticked up recently. His only real decline came in the tackles column, and that can be explained by teams running far less against the Bears ( see pass happy Detroit and GB)

 

He hasn't been the super-freak we saw fly all around the field since the pre-Lovie days. That's due to a scheme change

[Magnetic Curses]

he had 3 INT's last year, and he gets them because of his physical ability to cover the entire middle of the field.

 

How do you differentiate his physical ability from his ability to read a scheme and correctly guess/jump a route?

 

The key to me is pass deflections and safety results when it comes to pass coverage. Urlacher isn't getting deep enough anymore to knock deep passes into the air for his safeties to pick off and return (Briggs is actually doing a decent job of this). And the safeties have been a disaster since Urlacher's brilliant 2006 and 2007 seasons. The only year the safeties have played at an acceptable level since 2007 was 2010, when Urlacher had a really good comeback year after a year off with no wear-and-tear on his legs.

 

in 11 healthy years, urlacher has 105 PDs + INTs, that's 9.5 per year average. he had 10 last year.

 

he hasn't declined.

[Magnetic Curses]

 

all that tells me is that the team is anticipating decline in the years after the age of 35. there is no proof of immediate decline.

 

The first sentence could tell you that, but the rest are the stats you asked for that are declining. What else do you want? That's goony's point. Even if you think our reasoning is simply because he's 34....since when is that not a valid reason for assumption that a football player has lost a step?

 

are we not counting INTs as a stat and in his favor? i mean if you don't want him to catch the ball you can ask him to bat it up in the air to the safeties instead. i doubt you'll have much luck.

 

you can also scream that he's 34 til blue in the face, but if the decline isn't there, it isn't there. and this is secondary to previous point that the bears front 7 is as good as its ever been.

[rawaction]

i actually like paea better than any other nose they've had, so the front seven are as good as ever, imo.

 

You're nuts. Harris was a beast and Tank Johnson was actually quite good for a year.

 

You are honestly the only person I've heard suggest anything other than Urlacher isn't as good as he was at his peak. The team doesn't even pretend that is the case.

 

Lovies system has played a bigger role in Urlachers perceived decline then his physical age. His physical decline is completely overblown

 

It's the same system he was in when he was at his best. Urlacher put up next to career 16-game season lows in tackles, passes defensed, and had no sacks. Urlacher was pretty consistent 125+ tackles, 5 sacks, 3 INT player in Lovie's system in his prime. He clearly does not have that ability anymore. His decline in range could be a reason the safety play has been so bad the last few years. Granted, Mike Brown was a beast too, but he was often out of the lineup without much dropoff as the last few years have had.

Where the hell did you get the average of 5 sacks thing? He hast averaged that since before the Lovie regime. And his ints have ticked up recently. His only real decline came in the tackles column, and that can be explained by teams running far less against the Bears ( see pass happy Detroit and GB)

 

He hasn't been the super-freak we saw fly all around the field since the pre-Lovie days. That's due to a scheme change

 

I didn't say the word "average" I said he was consistent 5 sacks a year in his prime. The first 4 years under Lovie he had 5.5, 6, 5 sacks in years 1, 2, and 4. The 3rd year he had none but that was the SB year and the front 4 had 34 sacks between them and he wasn't needed to rush the passer.

[rawaction]

he had 3 INT's last year, and he gets them because of his physical ability to cover the entire middle of the field.

 

How do you differentiate his physical ability from his ability to read a scheme and correctly guess/jump a route?

 

The key to me is pass deflections and safety results when it comes to pass coverage. Urlacher isn't getting deep enough anymore to knock deep passes into the air for his safeties to pick off and return (Briggs is actually doing a decent job of this). And the safeties have been a disaster since Urlacher's brilliant 2006 and 2007 seasons. The only year the safeties have played at an acceptable level since 2007 was 2010, when Urlacher had a really good comeback year after a year off with no wear-and-tear on his legs.

 

in 11 healthy years, urlacher has 105 PDs + INTs, that's 9.5 per year average. he had 10 last year.

 

he hasn't declined.

 

Pro Football reference has him with 6 last year after 4 straight healthy years of at least 9.

[Magnetic Curses]

he had 3 INT's last year, and he gets them because of his physical ability to cover the entire middle of the field.

 

How do you differentiate his physical ability from his ability to read a scheme and correctly guess/jump a route?

 

The key to me is pass deflections and safety results when it comes to pass coverage. Urlacher isn't getting deep enough anymore to knock deep passes into the air for his safeties to pick off and return (Briggs is actually doing a decent job of this). And the safeties have been a disaster since Urlacher's brilliant 2006 and 2007 seasons. The only year the safeties have played at an acceptable level since 2007 was 2010, when Urlacher had a really good comeback year after a year off with no wear-and-tear on his legs.

 

in 11 healthy years, urlacher has 105 PDs + INTs, that's 9.5 per year average. he had 10 last year.

 

he hasn't declined.

 

Pro Football reference has him with 6 last year after 4 straight healthy years of at least 9.

 

i see him at 7 plus 3 INTs. that's 10 total compared to 11 the year before.

 

again, you can't mark him down for catching balls instead of batting them up in the air.

[minnesotacubsfan]

i actually like paea better than any other nose they've had, so the front seven are as good as ever, imo.

 

You're nuts. Harris was a beast and Tank Johnson was actually quite good for a year.

 

You are honestly the only person I've heard suggest anything other than Urlacher isn't as good as he was at his peak. The team doesn't even pretend that is the case.

 

Lovies system has played a bigger role in Urlachers perceived decline then his physical age. His physical decline is completely overblown

 

It's the same system he was in when he was at his best. Urlacher put up next to career 16-game season lows in tackles, passes defensed, and had no sacks. Urlacher was pretty consistent 125+ tackles, 5 sacks, 3 INT player in Lovie's system in his prime. He clearly does not have that ability anymore. His decline in range could be a reason the safety play has been so bad the last few years. Granted, Mike Brown was a beast too, but he was often out of the lineup without much dropoff as the last few years have had.

Where the hell did you get the average of 5 sacks thing? He hast averaged that since before the Lovie regime. And his ints have ticked up recently. His only real decline came in the tackles column, and that can be explained by teams running far less against the Bears ( see pass happy Detroit and GB)

 

He hasn't been the super-freak we saw fly all around the field since the pre-Lovie days. That's due to a scheme change

 

I didn't say the word "average" I said he was consistent 5 sacks a year in his prime. The first 4 years under Lovie he had 5.5, 6, 5 sacks in years 1, 2, and 4. The 3rd year he had none but that was the SB year and the front 4 had 34 sacks between them and he wasn't needed to rush the passer.

 

Right. That's my point really, those 0 years were either injury years or years he wasn't blitzing a whole lot. Case in point: last year when the Dline carried the vast number of sacks.

 

Scheme. Say it with me!

[jersey cubs fan]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

[UMFan83]

Melton's a much better pass rusher than run defender. I believe he was at or near the league lead with 7 sacks from the DT position last year. The key for the 3-technique is to be quick off the ball and kind of make himself "skinny" to get thru the gap and wreak havoc in the backfield.

 

I agree that someone will have to step up between Paea, Wootton, or McClellin in order to make the pass rush successful, but there's no reason Melton can't be a reliable part of it. He's shown plenty of signs.

 

Weird, I heard the opposite about him. Someone broke down his play last year (Hub?) and noted that he had 15 QB hits last year, which by itself is a rather mediocre number. Then you account for the fact that he had 7 QB hits in week 1 against Atlanta, and you get 8 QB hits the last 15 games of the season, slightly more than 1 every other game. Also he said all 7 of his sacks came in 4 games, but whatever, that doesn't matter as much to me. I think he is an inconsistent pass rusher at best, especially when you account for the lack of attention he gets rushing on the same line as Peppers.

[minnesotacubsfan]

I'm not as high on Melton as some are either. He's still growing into the position, and I think Paea will likely be better

[minnesotacubsfan]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

I don't think the 2005-6 DE's were nearly as good as Peppers and anyone. 54 & 55 were younger, but neither have had significant declines. Tommie was the best inside dl we have had, but tank was overly glorified. Melton, as much as I think he will be our second best inside guy, is better then Tank. I think it's certainly an interesting comparison.

 

The biggest difference? Mike Brown

[Magnetic Curses]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

[jersey cubs fan]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

[Banedon]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

 

Yeah, the pass defense in 05 and 06 was miles better than our pass D last year.

[rawaction]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

 

Yeah, the pass defense in 05 and 06 was miles better than our pass D last year.

 

He's also wrong that the Bears were the #1 run D. They were 5th in yards per game, 20 yards from the top. They were 10th in yards per carry allowed, 1/2 yard behind SF who led in both. SF was significantly better than everyone else in the league against the run last year.

[Magnetic Curses]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

 

they have made teams one dimensional, and they weren't particularly bad at defending the pass last year if you believe football outsiders. they're ranked 8th, making them 4th in total defense. considering their inexperience in the secondary, and the fact that they were significantly worse there than in 2005-2006, an overall defensive ranking of 4 is excellent. that's fueled by their front 7.

[minnesotacubsfan]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

 

Welp, I'm convinced: your either drunk or just out to argue

 

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

[Magnetic Curses]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

 

Yeah, the pass defense in 05 and 06 was miles better than our pass D last year.

 

He's also wrong that the Bears were the #1 run D. They were 5th in yards per game, 20 yards from the top. They were 10th in yards per carry allowed, 1/2 yard behind SF who led in both. SF was significantly better than everyone else in the league against the run last year.

 

http://footballoutsiders.com/stats/teamdef

[minnesotacubsfan]

how the hell is this a discussion. the 2005 and 2006 defensive front was the best around, the current bears defensive front is not. It's not even debatable that they are as good as they've ever been.

 

are you ignoring the part where the bears were the best team against the run last season?

 

In a word, yes. Because it's not that important. It's not a running league. It's a sack the quarterback league. The Bears defensive front has done a poor job of this and as a result they haven't been good enough against the pass.

 

they have made teams one dimensional, and they weren't particularly bad at defending the pass last year if you believe football outsiders. they're ranked 8th, making them 4th in total defense. considering their inexperience in the secondary, and the fact that they were significantly worse there than in 2005-2006, an overall defensive ranking of 4 is excellent. that's fueled by their front 7.

 

Weighted defense had them 1st

[Magnetic Curses]

but they're not as good as ever. #1 is definitely not as good as ever. they could have done better.

[rawaction]

I guess I don't understand weighted stats then. The Bears D was on the field more plays that the Niners, which I guess would have something to do with it. But both teams equally made teams 1 dimensional. Both teams had 62/38 splits pass/run agaisnt them. The Niners have a slight edge if you include sacks 63.7% pass plays vs. 63.3% for Bears (but QB scrambles not taken into account). And the Niners were so much better at stopping the run that I wouldn't think any differences would be significant. Plus, a quick naked eye look appears that the Niners played a tougher run offense schedule.

[Guest]

If this offense is good as I think it will be, it's going to be a lot of fun to watch us make teams one dimensional and just tee the hell off with big leads.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Weighted tends to take away the significance of games played earlier in the season. So, as a season progresses, the team playing the better D near the end of the season gets ranked higher.

[Magnetic Curses]

I guess I don't understand weighted stats then. The Bears D was on the field more plays that the Niners, which I guess would have something to do with it. But both teams equally made teams 1 dimensional. Both teams had 62/38 splits pass/run agaisnt them. The Niners have a slight edge if you include sacks 63.7% pass plays vs. 63.3% for Bears (but QB scrambles not taken into account). And the Niners were so much better at stopping the run that I wouldn't think any differences would be significant. Plus, a quick naked eye look appears that the Niners played a tougher run offense schedule.

 

they simply take into account every single variable imaginable.

 

they rate the bears slightly ahead of the niners in rush defense in terms of dvoa, which is explained everywhere you look on the site.

[Guest]

Brad Biggs ‏@BradBiggs

Big practice for DE Shea McClellin. He made a host of plays. Easily his best session of camp.

 

Chicago Bears ‏@ChicagoBears

LM: #Bears rookie DE Shea McClellin shows his athleticism, leaping high to intercept a Jason Campbell screen pass.

 

Bears Talk ‏@BearsTalkCSN

1st rd. draft pick @SheaMcClellin just intercepted a tipped pass and showed off that famous athleticism #BearsTalk

 

Zach Zaidman ‏@ZachZaidman

Shea McClellin getting applause from crowd after Jason Campbell pick at line of scrimmage.

 

Brad Biggs ‏@BradBiggs

McClellin with pick today and big bull rush on James Brown just now

 

Michael C. Wright ‏@mikecwright

Good rush by McClellin right there. Blew past J-Webb.

 

 

Michael C. Wright ‏@mikecwright

Keepin it 100 here. Bears going live now and McClellin is ballin. All over the place.

 

 

Matt Bowen ‏@MattBowen41

Thought Rookie DE Shea McClellin had his best practice of camp. Active, around the ball, some speed and technique off the edge. #Bears

Edited August 2, 2012 by David