Bear(ing) the News – A Chicago Bears Blog

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions:

“Depth seems to be a key issue for NFL teams in playoff contention every year.  Where do you see the biggest depth risk for the Bears?  Wide receiver, offensive line or linebacker? – Pat G., Ortonville, Mich.”

“Depth is a factor but from where I sit it’s overblown. Victories on Sundays are typically determined by elite players. One scout a long time ago told me it’s about which teams’ blues (elite players are called blues by scouts) have a better game. That will determine the outcome of most games because reality is when front-line players are lost, it’s difficult to compete, period. The Bears have plenty of bodies at linebacker right now but only one locked in starter. That is a position to keep an eye on. They made a move to shore up depth at cornerback in the first round of the draft. Safety is a great unknown and there isn’t a lot behind Martellus Bennett at tight end. But under the NFL’s salary cap and with some players on the roster commanding high pay, it’s going to be downright impossible to feel covered with veterans at every position.”

I’m going to simultaneously agree and mildly disagree with Biggs here.  I think depth is an issue in that you at least need players who can step in and not be liabilities when your blues go down.  Having quality backups is important but, as he points out, your ability to add depth is limited by things like the salary cap.  So the difference in how teams make up for injuries to stay in the hunt comes down to what you can do with what depth you can get.

When quarterback Jay Cutler went down last year, I’d like to think that Josh McCown’s excellent play in his place was the result of good coaching. I’ve thought for some years that the Bears needed a head coach that had a background in coaching quarterbacks and was overjoyed when they hired one in Marc Trestman after Lovie Smith’s departure. If that’s the case, then whoever the back up is this year – and I’m betting on Jordan Palmer – will play every bit as well as McCown did and we’ll know the Bears were more than just lucky last year.

You might also note that the Bears went out and got the best offensive line coach they could find and made him offensive coordinator. That isn’t a coincidence as the performance of the line affects every aspect of the offensive play.  By the same theory, this bodes well for the depth there. And the new coaches for the defense will also help in this respect to prevent the total collapse we saw in the front seven last year.

Having said that, if Alshon Jeffery or Brandon Marshall go down for any period of time, the offense is going to be in more trouble than most would under the same circumstances. No amount of coaching is going to overcome that loss. As Biggs points out, the depth at tightend is deplorable and its probably the most injured position in football. I’ve seen nothing from Michael Ford that makes me think he’ll be a decent starter and I’ve literally seen nothing of Ka’Deem Carey, period. So I’m not holding my breath on Matt Forte’s backups, either.

Bottom line, I wouldn’t get my hopes up that the offense won’t take at least a little bit of a fall this year when it is less healthy than last year (as is likely going to be the case).

• Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions:

“Right tackle seemed to me to be the weakest of the all the offensive starting positions in 2013. I believe an upgrade there would significantly improve the offense. Are they satisfied with Jordan Mills’ potential or is it possible they would look at Kyle Long or Eben Britton there with Brian de la Puente at right guard?  Mills looked OK to me for a late-round plug-in, but I didn’t see the long-term potential. – Jim G., from email”

“Mills, recovered from foot surgery just after the end of last season, lined up with the starters at Tuesday’s OTA open to media. Barring something unexpected, he’s going to be the player to beat out for that job. Coach Marc Trestman has said there are no plans to switch Long and Britton and de la Puente took turns running with the ones at left guard in place of Matt Slauson, who will be sidelined a little longer following surgery on his right shoulder.

“I think Mills has upside as a guy entering his second season. There are a couple things I like about him. For starters, he’s got some nasty to him. Watch him finish blocks, particularly in the running game. He’s also athletic and light on his feet for a right tackle and has long arms. Yes, he needs to get better and as a young players that starts with being more consistent. But in my opinion Mills has taken a bad rap for what to me was a surprisingly poor grade by Pro Football Focus. I’ve got a lot of respect for the work PFF does. Some of their analysis is certainly subjective. We’ve seen plenty of shoddy line play by the Bears in the not-too-distant-past. Remember Bernard Robertson and Qasim Mitchell? J’Marcus Webb never improved, at least on a consistent basis, after his rookie season. Webb got substantially higher grades from PFF than Mills did last year and I think most would agree Webb didn’t pass the eye test.”

Biggs points out one of my pet peeves when it comes to the analysis of performance of any player – the over-reliance on statistics.  As a research investigator at a university in Chicago, I can tell you that to a large extent – especially in situations like this – you can often bias the statistics to show what you want them to.

My Ph.D. advisor used to tell me that if you need statistics to tell you that your results are significant, he wasn’t interested in them.  Similar to the situation here, they need to pass the eye test first.

• Biggs gets a similar question but makes a different point:

“Hoping you might put a question to Phil Emery at some point. In light of his talent and athleticism, any thoughts on moving Kyle Long to the tackle position, specifically left tackle? My thinking is he is too talented for guard especially after reading a quote from Gil Brandt where he said “guards are a dime a dozen.” I agree and think Long could excel at left tackle. Jermon Bushrod could move to right tackle and Jordan Mills could compete with James Brown at right guard. The O-line would be improved without adding anyone new. — Robert J., Pompano Beach, Fla.”

“I certainly think Long is athletic enough to play anywhere on the offensive line. One of the first questions I posed to coach Marc Trestman back in March at the owners meeting was about Long and where the team planned to play him this season. He said then the plan was to keep him at right guard and nothing has changed to this point. The only difference on the offensive line through OTAs has been Eben Britton and Brian de la Puente lining up at left guard in the absence of Matt Slauson, who is recovering from shoulder surgery. Guards have long been considered one of the non-premium positions on offense and certainly exploring data of contracts by positions would support that. But I can tell you offensive coordinator Aaron Kromer feels very differently about interior offensive linemen. Kromer came from New Orleans where the Saints put an emphasis on their play from guard to guard on the offensive line. The idea is to ensure there is a secure pocket for the quarterback to step up into and deliver the ball.”

After watching the Bears offensive line over a number of years, I also tend to agree with this philosophy and although they still aren’t at the salary level of the tackle position, to my eye there has been a rise in demand for good guards over the last decade.  Giving up sacks from the outside is bad.  But allowing pressure up the middle to consistently get into a quarterback’s face is absolutely devastating, not to mention the effect of weak guard play on the run game.  I’ll go with strength up the middle every time.

• Here’s another good question for Biggs that I hadn’t thought of:

“Why do teams keep a dedicated long snapper rather than just having a backup guard/center be the long snapper? — @jackbearmiller from Twitter”

“This question has popped in a few times and I think it is important to emphasize that long snapping is a true specialty and needed skill. It’s a precision exercise involving hundredths of a second and pinpoint accuracy. The average long snapper will have the ball in the hands of the punter in 0.75 seconds. Snappers with fastballs can come close to 0.6 seconds and you don’t want the snapper to be slower than 0.8 seconds. It requires good zip on the snap but it’s also imperative to hit the punter in the same spot every time. Accuracy becomes a real issue with backup snappers and one bad snap can swing a game. When special teams coaches evaluate the snap for field goals and extra points, they’re timing the entire operation from the snap to the time the ball leaves the kicker’s foot. A smooth operation should take 1.25 seconds or less. Some operations will take 1.15 seconds but a snap that is off line for the holder can ruin a kick and require an extra half-second. Rule changes preventing a double push by linemen have put an emphasis on edge rushers on field goals. The fastest edge rushers can be unblocked and still not get their hands on a kick that is executed in a clean operation of 1.25 seconds or less. This isn’t a task that a reserve offensive lineman could master and it would be foolish for a team to try to go through a season with anything less than a full-time specialist. A bad snap can cost you 50 or even 60 yards of field position on a punt. A bad snap can cost you three points on a field goal.”

One Final Thought

Biggs takes another question that I’ve heard allot:

“With Kyle Fuller doing well against players like Eric Ebron in college were you surprised to see him on the outside in nickel package? — @rayllis from Twitter”

“No. The nickel position is one of the most challenging positions to play on defense. Usually the most successful cornerbacks in the slot are veterans and introducing Fuller to the NFL on the outside probably makes sense. The nickel is a hybrid player as he replaces the strong-side linebacker, so you need someone capable of fitting in the run game. Fuller is considered a physical corner but Tim Jennings has been successful as a run defender. He’s got the short-area quickness and savvy to be productive on the inside. The move makes a lot of sense to me.”

Backing Biggs’ opinion up, Dan Wiederer at the Chicago Tribune addesses the issue with Jennings:

“It’s an underrated skill and a different feel as a cornerback to slide from the outside into the interior. And while Jennings played inside in his early days in the league with the Colts, since arriving in Chicago he’s been an outside corner exclusively with guys like D.J. Moore, Kelvin Hayden and Isaiah Frey handling the slot duties.

“So now comes a different approach. Jennings insisted this week that he has no issues with the push to slide him inside in nickel and dime packages and that he should be adapted to the new role in no time. But again, the responsibilities are different, the vision required is different, the instincts needed are different.

“‘You have to be able to see a lot more things,’ Jennings said. ‘You’ve got to be able to see a lot more backfield sets. It’s a lot more reads. There are a lot more keys that you have to get. I’ve got to get used to seeing different people, different formations with my eyes and being able to see different things with my keys. …It’s kind of two-way, run-pass keys. It’s another linebacker position. But you’re just a cornerback so now you’re kind of matched up with the third wide receiver. Yet in certain situations, with certain keys, you’ve got to be able to fit the run like a linebacker.’”

I can’t emphasize enough that the Bears are under-going is a complete change in philosophy on the defensive side of the ball when contrasted to the last decade or more. In the past players have been expected to learn one position and play it well. Now they’re being asked to learn more than one position in different situations and to be able to play them all well. That’s much harder. You run the risk of being a jack of all trades and master of none.

Remember the Chris Conte mistake that ended the season last year. Although that was more of a miscommunication, don’t be surprised if you see more of those kinds of mistakes, especially earlier in the season.

The Bears are taking a huge risk.

• Dan Pompei at the Bleacher Report provides us with a little more insight into wide receiver Brandon Marshall’s role with the team.

“What is less known [than his prowess as a receiver] is Marshall has been a positive influence on others, including tight end Martellus Bennett. Last season when Bennett wasn’t seeing a lot of passes thrown his way, it was Marshall who got in his ear and helped him deal with his frustration and stay focused.”

If you had told me when the Bears traded for Marshall that he would not only put his troubled past behind him but actually emerge as an incredible team leader, I’d have never believed it.

• Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune adds one of his usual insightful comments to an article highlighting the position battle at safety:

“[Brock] Vereen should get with defensive quality control coach Chris Harris. Harris was a rookie in 2005 when then-coach Lovie Smith promoted him to the starting lineup at halftime of the season opener at Washington. Why? For one thing, his safety partner, Mike Brown, said Harris had the defense down cold before the offseason program was complete. Vereen needs to get busy to accomplish the same feat.”

• I had a bit of a problem with this part of an article from Adam L. Jahns at the Chicago Sun-Times:

“[D.J.] Williams, [Jonathan] Bostic and [Shea] McClellin may actually be competing for one spot when it comes to frequent playing time. Rookie cornerback Kyle Fuller is expected to have an important role, especially in today’s pass-happy NFL.”

These guys are actually competing for two spots. Admittedly this may depend on the definition of “frequent” as they’ll probably spend about half the time in nickel.

“Some of the linemen, including veteran Israel Idonije and 2012 sixth-round pick Cornelius Washington, are squarely on the bubble with OTAs opening.”

I’ve heard this sentiment frequently but I don’t think Idonije is on the bubble as much as most people think. Yes, age is not on Idoinije’s side.  But he’s a veteran presence amongst young defensive linemen trying to learn how to play  in the NFL.  He’s also exactly what the Bears are looking for in terms of versatility in that he can play both end and defensive tackle.

• Former NFL safety Matt Bowen on the move  of Tim Jennings to nickel back:

“Jennings is a physical player who can fill versus the run front and pressure off the edge, and he has the short-area change-of-direction speed to match an inside or outside release against a slot wide receiver.

“I do believe first-round pick Kyle Fuller can play nickel, but given the demands and responsibility inside the numbers, aligning the rookie cornerback on the outside, where he can use the sideline as his help, allows the Bears to monitor his development this spring while maximizing Jennings’ talent.”

I think this is a smart move as long as Jennings can handle the work. As he told Biggs not long ago, playing two positions will require at least twice as much study and the ability to shift gears mentally depending on what package the Bears are in.

• Michael C. Wright at ESPN.com had this interesting observation from OTAs:

“During breaks in practice, receivers Alshon Jeffery, Marquess Wilson, Josh Morgan and Eric Weems stood on the side catching tennis balls in both hands in rapid succession from offensive quality control coach Carson Walch. Interestingly, there weren’t many dropped balls during Tuesday’s practice.”

One Final Thought

Jahns quotes linebacker Lance Briggs on “the bite” of new linebackers coach Reggie Herring:

“I love the guy.  He’s intense. He’s kind of a throwback, [a] kind of coach that I always remember growing up [with]. So that part of the whole deal is in a weird way kind of comforting.”

• Here’s an excellent question for Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune:

“If the draft is how you build a franchise, then why is there not more coverage of a teams’ scouts? I don’t mean fluff or assassination jobs, just journalism 101. How many current Bears scouts gave Jerry Angelo advice? How does the Bears’ scouting department stack up with the rest of the NFL and NFC North? – Kirk, Chicago”

“Most teams make their scouts off-limits to media so spending time with them to pick their brains about the draft, the prospects, their role in it and the big picture is difficult.”

I remember attending one Bears Convention back when they still had them and being fascinated by a question and answer session with then Director of College Scouting for the Bears, Greg Gabriel.  It was easily the best session I ever attended.

I don’t understand why scouts should be off limits to the media.  Are NFL teams afraid that they’ll reveal valuable information?  Or are they afraid that too much time spent with the media will mean less time scouting?

• Biggs can safely consider this question to be a dead issue as far as I’m concerned:

“With all the versatile front seven players the Bears have could they be leaning toward a 3-4 going forward? — @huskysize from Twitter

“I thought we buried this question when the Bears publicly announced they were playing a 4-3 front. Jared Allen would not be at his best in a 3-4 scheme and he was the biggest defensive acquisition of the offseason. I don’t know that Jeremiah Ratliff is still cut out to be a 3-4 nose tackle. I don’t think Lance Briggs would be at his best in a 3-4 scheme and really Shea McClellin is the only linebacker ideally suited for that scheme with the exception of perhaps undrafted free agent Christian Jones. The 3-4 isn’t happening.”

I couldn’t agree more.  The Bears are likely to play multiple fronts and a three man line might occasionally pop up.  But I wouldn’t expect it with any regularity.

• Michael C. Wright at ESPN.com and I don’t always see eye-to-eye but I couldn’t agree more with this part of his assessment of the Bears offseason moves:

“Best move: Bringing aboard experienced veteran coaches on defense. Chicago was mostly a veteran group on defense in 2013, with the majority knowing the system so well they needed little guidance. When injuries hit, several young players were forced to play significant minutes, and some of the coaches on the staff at that time weren’t capable of properly teaching the inexperienced players. With the roster currently featuring so many young players on defense, it was important to hire experienced teachers/coaches, which is what Chicago got in Paul Pasqualoni, Reggie Herring and Clint Hurtt, who all have extensive backgrounds in multiple schemes.”

These new coaches are going to make a huge difference for the Bears defense this year.

One Final Thought

One more question for Biggs:

“ I really don’t think I’m being overly optimistic here when I say I think the Bears really have made the leap to a Super Bowl contender. When you think about how good the offense was last season, if the Bears had just an average defense, wouldn’t they have been one of the best teams in the league? It seems like they have improved the defense to the point that it might even be above average, and we should expect the offense to be better than last year with no significant losses and everyone having another year under the system. What do you think? – Dan, Skokie”

“The Bears should expect to be a playoff contender this season, as they have every year since appearing in Super Bowl XLI. Unfortunately, the Bears have underperformed and made just one postseason appearance in the last seven years. It’s going to be a challenge for the Bears to remain as potent on offense this season but they certainly have the personnel to do so and a coach with a vision that transformed things quickly on that side of the ball. Keep in mind the offense remained relatively injury-free in 2013 with the exception of quarterback Jay Cutler. The defense is more of a wild card and unknown.”

I’ve written already about the Bears luck with injuries last year on offense.  I’d also like to point out that the NFC North was miserable last year and that had an impact on the Bears success as well.  The Packers losing Aaron Rogers with much more serious consequences than the Bears had with Cutler’s loss.  The Lions and Vikings both have new coaches this year.

I know that this is the time of the year for hope but I would urge Bears fans to temper their expectations for this year.  Otherwise they might well be setting themselves up for serious disappointment.

Patrick Finley at the Chicago Sun-Times quotes head coach Marc Trestman on the entrance of cornerback Kyle Fuller into the locker room:

“Fuller said he’s looking forward to meeting the team’s veterans in the coming weeks. He had heard from [Tim] Jennings but not [Charles] Tillman.

“’I think we have a very welcoming locker room,’ coach Marc Trestman said. ‘The guys in our locker room know that we won’t be the same team tomorrow…”

“’I’m sure the guys who have been in our locker room will be very welcoming to the guys and get them in a position and show them the way, show them how we do things here.’”

I’m not so sure how “welcoming” Tillman is going to be.  Everyone else might consider it to be a foregone conclusion that Fuller will eventually replace him on the roster but I doubt very much that he sees the Bears having locker room in 2015 without him.  Nickel back or not I’m sure he sees Fuller as the competition and he’s not going to fade into retirement without a fight.

Apparently the Bears have cut the media loose on the coaching staff during their weekend rookie camp after a long vacation away.  Both head coach Mark Trestman and offensive coordinator Aaron Kromer were questioned closely about Kromer’s title change (he’s now just the offensive coordinator and Pat Meyer is the offensive line coach):

Both coaches emphasized the growth as coaches of both Kromer and Meyer as being the reason for the change.  I’ve little doubt there’s some truth to that.  But something tells me the change was hastened by the fact that Trestman feels the need to spend more time with the defense this season.  That means both Kromer and Meyer have to take on more responsibility.  How well they handle that responsibility will be yet another big factor in how successful the Bears are this year.

Bears defensive coordinator Mel Tucker did a far ranging interview with Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune on a wide variety of subjects.  Much of the focus was on a few tantalizing details about some of the schematic changes the defense is headed for.  Included amongst the questions was a particularly good one about the possibility that the Bears might show some wide-9.  I really should have thought of that.  Defensive end Jared Allen would be particularly suited to it.

In any case, if I tried to provide all of the relevant quotes I’d end up re-publishing the article which everyone interested should really read in full.  However, even as Tucker left the door wide open to almost everything including the kitchen sink, its worth noting this interview that the Tribune did with linebackers coach Reggie Herring:

Note at about the 2:25 mark where Herring seems to say that the defense really isn’t changing much:

“And scheme-wise were doing what we’ve always done. That’s really a Mel Tucker question but at the end of the day we haven’t changed anything. We’re just trying to get the right peices of the puzzle together. We’re in the early process and we like the guys we’ve got right now. We’re going in the right direction.”

Indeed, if you read Tucker’s words in the Tribune article carefully, even he puts the brakes on, if ever so slightly:

“[Q:] With all the additions you have on the defensive line, will there be greater variations in terms of the front?

“[A:] We’ll have some alternative fronts. How much or how little we use them is to be determined…”

What will determine how much they use them?  The guess here is that it will all depend upon the players.  Its evident that they feel they have the talent to do what they want.  But, as Tucker points out, its fundamentals and consistency that supersedes everything else:

“[Q:] Was the team as a whole in a tough spot trying to use a defense put into place by the former coaching staff?

“[A:] I don’t think so. I didn’t really see it that way. The X’s and O’s are one thing. It’s really the execution that makes a difference. Technique, fundamentals and being able to win one-on-one and having players who can compete and win on a consistent basis, that is what really makes the schemes come alive and allows you to be able to win and beat good teams.

“At times, that was probably our biggest challenge as the season went along. Not having continuity and trying to find consistent play at all three levels of our defense. That probably superseded scheme, those types of challenges.”

I think that the Bears do, indeed, have big plans for the defense.  But what Herring is trying to get across is that those changes won’t be instantaneous.  The Bears will probably start with the base 4-3 defense they’ve always played, make sure they can play it well, then move on to complicating the players roles.

What the Bears do with the defense is going to be fascinating to watch.  But there can be little doubt that all of this talk of schematic change is over-rated in the end.  What might be most interesting of all won’t be what they do but how quickly they do it.  In the end, how fast the players can digest their new varied and complex roles while avoiding individual breakdowns and giving up the big play will determine how good this defense really will be.

Dan Pompei at Sports on Earth describes how the Minnesota Vikings found comfort with drafting quarterback Teddy Bridgewater:

“Physical skills are necessary to play quarterback, but through the years [offensive coordinator Norv] Turner has come to value the mental aspects of the game — learning, communicating and especially visualizing. That’s visualizing where a pass will end up, how a receiver will run a route and what a defensive adjustment will do to a play.

“After the 2007 season, Turner coached the AFC team in the Pro Bowl. One of his quarterbacks was Peyton Manning. As Turner watched a play develop from the sideline, he thought Manning had no chance to make a throw. Wide receiver T.J. Houshmandzadeh was running a seam route, and the coverage was as good as it could have been. Manning was not going to throw the pass, he said to himself. But he did. And he completed it for a 16-yard touchdown.

“Manning knew the exact spot to throw the ball, and the precise speed with which to throw it, so the defender could not get it and the receiver had a chance. The window in that coverage also was a window into Manning’s greatness. Manning, Turner learned, could feel holes opening on the field. And from that point on, Turner would look for that ability whenever he evaluated quarterbacks.

“As Turner watched the tape of Bridgewater this spring, he did not quite see what he saw that day from Manning, arguably the most accomplished passer in history. But he saw intuitive throws, and a feel for how plays would develop.”

I’ve made no secret of the fact that I have a man crush on Bridgewater.  He’s got mobility inside and outside the pocket, a quick release and he can hit a dime at 30 yards on the run.   And above all he plays extremely smart.  The only problems I ever gave any credence to were his average arm strength and slight stature, both over blown in my opinion.

Bridgewater was the consensus opt quarterback coming out of the college football season.  He fell partly because of a bad pro day but it was a lot more than that.  Right about January when the NFL season ends is when coaches start to get involved in the draft process.  Smart ones like Turner value Bridgewater’s assets as things you can’t teach.  But far more often coaches will look at the physical assets of a Blake Bortles and the improvisation of a Johnny Manziel and become enamored with thoughts of what could be instead of what is.

I love Bridgewater and I hate the fact that he ended up in the NFC North.  I watch what he did in a pro-style offense at Louisville and I think I see the potential for greatness.  Evidently Turner did, too.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions:

“Out of the eight draft picks and nine undrafted rookie free agents, the Bears came away with only one safety. Are they set at safety? — @rodegu from Twitter

“The Bears feel better about their collection of players at safety than their fans do, but let’s wait and see how this plays out. There are three ways in which more players could become available. First, we’re already seeing teams make cuts, shedding veterans that became expendable following the draft. Second, we’ll see more cuts in June with some possibly being for cap reasons and others because veterans have been pushed aside by younger players. Third, there will be an even larger group of players hitting the street in August and the first few days of September when roster cuts happen. Don’t overlook the fact the Bears will be looking at every name that comes across the waiver wire. I would pay particular attention to safeties, tight ends and maybe even a veteran running back or veteran quarterback.”

Two points in support of Biggs, here:

1. Yes, Chris Conte had a bad, bad year last year. But let’s not forget that he did very well at safety the year before. The Bears haven’t given up on him and neither should the fans.
2. I heard relentless criticism of the Bears for not taking a safety right up until the Brock Vereen pick. Most asked, “if the draft was going according to plan, why didn’t the Bears sign a safety in free agency?” The answer, as Biggs points out, is that free agency isn’t over yet. Many of those teams that reached for safeties in the draft will be releasing veterans soon. In addition, there may also have already been some out there that the Bears like but they wanted to see who fell to them on the draft first before signing them. Bottom line the Bears aren’t finished over hauling their roster yet.