Bears Week 2 at Texans: SNF on NBC

[Wilson A2000]

6 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

Woof

 

 

Swift is a good back, but this line is giving him no push no matter how many defenders are in the box

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm only halfway through but he's quite complementary of the OL and playcalling.

The money quote is 24:55:  "These are the ones that when you hit them, and you make them pay for heating you up, they stop heating you up."
 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Yeah, watching the film breakdown

1) The pass protection is better than people think when they're reacting to the game live.  But it's getting blown up badly a few times a game at inopportune times.

2) Williams is sometimes just not seeing chances to throw the ball down the field. He's either taking checkdowns or sacks because he's not confident enough to throw to leverage in close one-on-one situations.

3) When he does see chances to throw the ball deep, he's missing every. goddamn. throw.    There are big, game-winning plays to be made there, multiple times per game.  If you can't hit them, you can't be a good QB in the NFL.

4) Most of the pressure in the second half was due to him being completely unable to punish blitzes.  

[WrigleyField 22]

Bad news for CAR pick trackers !

https://x.com/TomPelissero/status/1835736746367005042?t=otGewvhq_YDZU3Ttm5xhXw&s=19

[Tim]

Just now, WrigleyField 22 said:

Bad news for CAR pick trackers !

https://x.com/TomPelissero/status/1835736746367005042?t=otGewvhq_YDZU3Ttm5xhXw&s=19

I've seen Andy Dalton play. He's not going to help them that much.

[WrigleyField 22]

1 minute ago, Tim said:

I've seen Andy Dalton play. He's not going to help them that much.

Andy Dalton might as well be a HOF compared to Bryce

[Brian707]

Starting Dalton might get them a worse #1 pick. 

 

Ooops you basically said that in the other thread. 

Edited September 16, 2024 by Brian707

[UMFan83]

I'm still really hung up on the idea that offensive coaching makes all the difference.  It can't be a fluke that the Packers put up almost 400 yards of offense yesterday with Willis at QB.  Yes the Packers have a better line and yes it was a very run heavy offense but is Jacobs that much better than Swift?  Are the Packers WR options even better than the Bears, even without Allen?  Caleb should be considerably better than Willis, but maybe being a rookie knocks him down a few pegs.  But overall, the Packers are not SO much better that they are getting more yards in one game with Willis at QB than the Bears have had in their first 2 games combined.  Right?

I'm willing to be proven wrong either in a typed response to this post, or via more game action next week and beyond.  But I'm really hung up on the idea that having a sharp offensive mind that knows how to maximize the talent he/she has is almost as important as having the right QB.  The Packers have Matt LaFleur, the Vikings have Kevin O'Connell. The Bears have Shane Waldron who did serve under McVey (though not as an OC) and managed to resurrect the career of Geno Smith and make the Seahawks a league average offense, but is he an offensive mastermind? I guess time will tell.

Edited September 16, 2024 by UMFan83

[Old Style]

Your opponent matters too. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The Vikings had Kevin O'Connell last season too, when they were 22nd in points per game

[raw]

2 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Yeah, watching the film breakdown

1) The pass protection is better than people think when they're reacting to the game live.  But it's getting blown up badly a few times a game at inopportune times.

2) Williams is sometimes just not seeing chances to throw the ball down the field. He's either taking checkdowns or sacks because he's not confident enough to throw to leverage in close one-on-one situations.

3) When he does see chances to throw the ball deep, he's missing every. goddamn. throw.    There are big, game-winning plays to be made there, multiple times per game.  If you can't hit them, you can't be a good QB in the NFL.

4) Most of the pressure in the second half was due to him being completely unable to punish blitzes.  

3rd and anything more than 4 was ugly. When everyone knew they were passing, they couldn't protect it.

[raw]

Any concern that Rome Odunze looks pretty terrible? I know he was not 100% last night, but he was last week and still was terrible. Just looks like he wasn't paying attention in camp at all

[jersey cubs fan]

2 minutes ago, raw said:

Any concern that Rome Odunze looks pretty terrible? I know he was not 100% last night, but he was last week and still was terrible. Just looks like he wasn't paying attention in camp at all

The only thing on this offense I’m not concerned with is DJ Moore. The rest either played poorly or didn’t participate much at all. I don’t know if it’s more Waldron or Fields, but they actively look for ways not to use Kmet. 

[minnesotacubsfan]

5 minutes ago, raw said:

Any concern that Rome Odunze looks pretty terrible? I know he was not 100% last night, but he was last week and still was terrible. Just looks like he wasn't paying attention in camp at all

yes, but I think its the coaching

[WrigleyField 22]

3 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

The only thing on this offense I’m not concerned with is DJ Moore. The rest either played poorly or didn’t participate much at all. I don’t know if it’s more Waldron or Fields, but they actively look for ways not to use Kmet. 

Damnit Fields!

[jersey cubs fan]

2 minutes ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

Damnit Fields!

Force of habit 

[UMFan83]

34 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

The Vikings had Kevin O'Connell last season too, when they were 22nd in points per game

Fair point and I can't point out that Cousins and Jefferson missed half the season because my whole argument is that elite offensive coaching can overcome that.  Obviously there are no absolutes, but I do think coaching competency does play a bigger role in how successful an offense is than people give it credit for.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

32 minutes ago, raw said:

Any concern that Rome Odunze looks pretty terrible? I know he was not 100% last night, but he was last week and still was terrible. Just looks like he wasn't paying attention in camp at all

Not yet because rookie but he truly has looked like butt

[UMFan83]

30 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Not yet because rookie but he truly has looked like butt

Yeah I'm not legitimately concerned but I also havent seen anything particularly impressive so far either.  The injury muddies the evaluation that much more, though he wasn't particularly dominating in the preseason/week 1 either.

The offense just feels broken right now (shocker right?) and until we figure out how to fix it everyone is going to look terrible.

[Sosa21MVP]

The OL makes me sad. I did not watch the entire game, only the 4th quarter after getting back from California. The pressure numbers Houston had is insane. 36 hurries and 48% pressure rate?

The Colts defense has been getting gutted by the running game through two games, so if the Bears are going to get the run game going, this has to be the week.

[Soul]

4 hours ago, UMFan83 said:

Yeah I'm not legitimately concerned but I also havent seen anything particularly impressive so far either.  The injury muddies the evaluation that much more, though he wasn't particularly dominating in the preseason/week 1 either.

The offense just feels broken right now (shocker right?) and until we figure out how to fix it everyone is going to look terrible.

It was never put together in the first place.  It’s an offense that has yet to show us anything of substance.

[Proven Veteran]

Man, if Williams sucks I might just be done. The accuracy has been terrible downfield. It's basically been worst case scenario so far for the offense.

[cwood218]

On 9/15/2024 at 10:22 AM, WrigleyField 22 said:

"Team x got late round value from a RB"

My view is not based on just one team getting value just one time.

 

On 9/15/2024 at 10:22 AM, WrigleyField 22 said:

shouldn't logically preclude drafting a RB higher.

I'm saying never draft them in the first round. I'm fine with rounds 3-7. Really nervous about Round 2 but not ruling it out.

 

On 9/15/2024 at 10:22 AM, WrigleyField 22 said:

Having valuable run game was still ultimately really beneficial to those teams.

I wasn't claiming otherwise. I was pointing out the asset management they used to get that run game production.

 

On 9/15/2024 at 10:22 AM, WrigleyField 22 said:

It's hard to find good value at most spots of draft.

Absolutely, but it's much easier to consistently "Moneyball" that value out of a stable of RB's in a rotation then it is at the more critical positions.

 

On 9/15/2024 at 10:22 AM, WrigleyField 22 said:

So if you can get a valuable RB early... That can be a good thing!

If you used a first round pick on said RB then you have shot yourself in the foot without knowing it. One of the many more important factors in the value a team gets out of the running game is their OL. In fact "who" you have at running back is at or near of the bottom of that list of factors. The difference, if there is one, of the "who" is small enough that it is never worth using a first round pick on the RB position group. Also, you absolutely never over spend on your cap space for one. The running back you draft after the first round, or sign as a UDFA gets used for up to 4 years. If they are cheap enough you could resign them. Otherwise let them walk.

 

[Derwood]

Did Colts fans melt down this much when Peyton Manning sucked his rookie year?

[WrigleyField 22]

2 hours ago, cwood218 said:

My view is not based on just one team getting value just one time.

 

I'm saying never draft them in the first round. I'm fine with rounds 3-7. Really nervous about Round 2 but not ruling it out.

 

I wasn't claiming otherwise. I was pointing out the asset management they used to get that run game production.

 

Absolutely, but it's much easier to consistently "Moneyball" that value out of a stable of RB's in a rotation then it is at the more critical positions.

 

If you used a first round pick on said RB then you have shot yourself in the foot without knowing it. One of the many more important factors in the value a team gets out of the running game is their OL. In fact "who" you have at running back is at or near of the bottom of that list of factors. The difference, if there is one, of the "who" is small enough that it is never worth using a first round pick on the RB position group. Also, you absolutely never over spend on your cap space for one. The running back you draft after the first round, or sign as a UDFA gets used for up to 4 years. If they are cheap enough you could resign them. Otherwise let them walk.

 

This is the exact RB absolutism that should be avoided.  None of it isn't based in some solid empirical evidence, but to say never is just wrong.  Again, things like OL play being highly correlated to running game doesn't preclude the RB talent from mattering a whole heck of a lot.