Bear(ing) the News – A Chicago Bears Blog

Vaughn McClure at the Chicago Tribune writes about Brian Urlacher‘s objection to Julius Pepper‘s roughing the passer penalty last Sunday.  Urlacher makes the following two contradictory statements literally in the same breath:

“The ref said to Pep, ‘You didn’t have to hit him.’ Well, [Green Bay quarterback Aaron] Rodgers didn’t have to sprint out, either.  He didn’t have to take the snap.

“Pep didn’t hit him in the head. It was a good hit. It wasn’t late. I don’t understand the rules, but they’re going to do what they want to do. But the penalty could have cost us.”

Urlacher simply can’t wrap his head around the fact that the NFL is changing and he has to change with it.  The statement “You didn’t have to hit him” when you are talking about a quarterback in today’s NFL means the hit was late.

There’s nothing to “not understand” about this rule.  I personally didn’t agree with the call because I don’t think Peppers could have pulled up.  But the referee did and that’s the point.

Defensive coordinator Rod Marinelli has stressed the need to adjust to the new way that the game is being officiated on defense:

“We had to adjust, because those are the rules.  The team that adjusts the quickest and fastest will continue to play hard and fast.”

Anyone with any common sense must agree.  And yet here is Brian Urlacher’s statement:

“Heck no, I’m not going to change [the way I play].  I miss enough tackles without second-guessing. It’s a physical game. I’m not going to not take a shot because I’m afraid of getting fined.”

Then the Bears are doomed.  It is, in fact, amazing that they haven’t been fined more by the NFL already, a fact which McClure points out.

Let’s put it this way.  If Bears center Olin Kreutz were to make the following statement, how would Urlacher, indeed the rest of the league, react:  “Heck no, I’m not going to change.  I miss enough blocks without second-guessing. It’s a physical game. I’m not going to not block a guy in the back.”

Urlacher has to realize his statement is no less ridiculous.  Tackling on defense from now, particularly tackling quarterbacks, isn’t any different than blocking on offense.  If Urlacher wants to call it “second guessing” so be it.   He’s going to have to play with his head as well as his body.  He’s going to have to exert control over his emotions or the game will pass him by and the Bears with him.

Bears

• Neil Hayes at the Chicago Sun-Times points to the wealth of playoff experience on defense and the lack on offense.  Vaughn McClure wrote a similar article for the Chicago Tribune and got, perhaps, the best quote from Olin Kreutz on the playoff atmosphere Sunday:

‘‘”The great thing about the Green Bay game was that we don’t have to give anybody a speech about the playoffs because we were in one.  If anybody wondered what defenses do to you in the playoffs, (Packers defensive coordinator) Dom Capers showed us. They’re fighting for their playoffs lives, so you’re going to see everything they have in their playbook.’’

The difference in this kind of experience may be one reason why the defense preformed so much better.

• I thought Johnny Knox, in particular, wilted under the pressure and the relentless physical nature of the game Sunday.  Here’s hoping he responds better in the playoffs.  However, the game may have been an indication that the Bear wide receivers aren’t as good as many people thought.  offensive coordinator Mike Martz may be having similar thoughts (via McClure, again):

“We had eight opportunities in the passing game to make really big plays, and we didn’t make one of them, which is not like us. Very disappointed.”

• McClure also points out that the Bears had to offer Levi Horn more money to keep him from leaving the Bear practice squad to join the Dolphins 53 man roster.  The Bears lost Juaquin Iglesias to the Vikings last week.  An glass half full kind of person might condor other teams trying to raid the Bears practice squad as a good sign.

• Sean Jensen, also at the Sun-Times, writes a nice article which provides some insight into the duties of the running back as a pass protector in Martz’s offense:

“Under former Bears coordinator Ron Turner, running backs might have been responsible for a part of the field. Under Martz, they have to ‘scan’ the entire field to identify a blitzer. If none comes, the running back may have to quickly find space to provide an option for the quarterback and become the ‘hot read.'”

• Fred Mitchell at the Chicago Tribune gets an interesting nugget from kicker Robbie Gould on the new overtime rules that kick in for the playoffs:

“You might see a couple of extra onside kicks.”

• Dan Pompei at the Chicago Tribune tries to convince us that GM Jerry Angelo has been doing a good job.  He makes some good points and its clear that Angelo does some things well.  But in the the most important thing, drafting difference-making play makers at the top of the draft at the three most important positions on the field, there’s no getting around the fact that Angelo has failed miserably.

• When the Bears played the eagles in week 12, the Eagles didn’t have Asante Samuel.  Jeff Dickerson at ESPNChicago thinks his presence could make a difference in the Bears see them in the playoffs.

One Final Thought

Jensen again, quoting former Ram running back Marshall Faulk on Matt Forte in Martz’s scheme:

‘‘Once he gets that confidence in this system, you’ll see him stop thinking.  There are times he’s thinking and not playing. I’ve watched him grow into this offense.’’

The issue of the day at ESPN was apparently whether quarterback Jay Cutler can lead the Bears in to playoff success.

Former Bear Tom Waddle answers the question essentially as “Yes.  As long as they don’t have to ask him to actually do anything”:

Jeff Dickerson at ESPNChicago essentially agrees:

and finally Michael Wilbon at the mothership gets closer to the real point:

and what is the real point?

If Cutler tries to do too much, as he is definitely apt to do, the Bears are in trouble.  He’ll hold the ball forever and try to make plays that aren’t there.  If, however, Cutler plays within himself and lets the offense work, he’ll be fine and things will go well.

It seems clear that everyone agrees that if the Bears fall behind and they have to pass, there’s probably a playoff loss on the horizon.  Therefore the defense will have to play at least as well as they did Sunday against the Packers and the special teams will have to play considerably better than they did.

Joseph Heller, author of the famous book Catch 22, describes the essence of the no win situation that the books title has come to represent.  He does it in terms of the psychology of a bomber pilot, Orr, during World War II:

“There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind. Orr was crazy and could be grounded. All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions. Orr would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he were sane he had to fly them. If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to.”

In a related way, the Chicago Tribune‘s David Haugh‘s does his own psychoanalysis of Bears quarterback Jay Cutler today.

“I didn’t address Cutler berating Chester Taylor at Lambeau Field after Taylor lined up in the wrong spot and cost the Bears a timeout because the very public outburst didn’t affect Sunday’s game. But the tantrum revealed Cutler’s impulsiveness that could hurt a Bears offense that needs more prudence than passion from its quarterback.

“One minute he’s losing his cool with a teammate, the next he’s letting the ball sail over an open receiver into the arms of a safety. I want to believe Cutler’s hair-trigger emotion and his execution are unrelated. I also want to believe there’s no connection between a half-hour on the treadmill and chronic knee pain but I would be kidding myself about that too.”

I’m not as inclined as I used to be to judge Cutler’s mental state on the field based upon his body language.  Yes, he was a bit mercurial last week but his emotions have been showing through the cracks in that armor of disinterest he shows the world more and more over the last six seeks even as his performance behind center has improved.

I’m really not sure that these outbursts are a bad thing.  Cutler is showing some leadership qualities that he failed to demonstrate last year and, though the form sometimes shows his immaturity, I’d rather he was being more demonstrative than less.

But admittedly its a delicate balance and in many ways it demonstrates the Catch 22 bind that Cutler is in.  Like most of us, Cutler has to deal with a mass of contradictions.   He’s got to show some emotional leadership but if he does that he’s not cool and collected.  He’s got to be competitive and want to make plays but if he does that he’s holding the ball too long.

So what do you do?  Most of us dance in the middle, trying to please everyone and in the process pleasing no one.  You can’t win – no one can.

It’s a simple question of moderation.  But there are no simple answers.  No one knows that better than Jay Cutler.

And Neil Hayes at the Chicago Sun-Times, makes a point that might turn out to be over-blown:

“Worse yet, the Packers’ approach will likely serve as a blueprint for the Bears’ first playoff opponent. [offensive coordinator Mike] Martz can expect the Eagles, Seahawks or Saints to attack similarly.”

You hear this kind of thing a lot after a bad offensive performance and I admit that it also crossed my mind.  Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune apparently has similar thoughts:

“The fear moving forward has to be that a talented secondary can throw a net over these receivers and really limit Cutler’s options. The Packers have mugged the Bears’ receivers in Lambeau Field before and Charles Woodson and Tramon Williams are a talented duo. Darryl Drake’s position group must improve.”

Its possible that the Packers did provide a blueprint for beating the Bears but I don’t think its as relevant in this case as it might be otherwise.

First, the New York Jets play a very similar style of defense.  They play very aggressive man-to-man coverage with a lot of blitzes from many different angles.  Indeed, they do it with arguably better personnel than the Packers have.  But the Bears offense was well prepared and handled them reasonably well.  They’ll be a tougher out if the Bears have to play them again in the Super Bowl but I think the game demonstrates that they are capable of handling that kind of defensive game plan.

Second, and more importantly, very few defenses play that style as well as the Packers do.  They just don’t come any better than defensive coordinator Dom Capers and the Packers have been playing that style of coverage for considerably longer than he’s been there.  And the Packers know the Bears better than probably anyone else in the league.  More Biggs:

“[Bears quarterback Jay] Cutler explained that one reason the passing game struggled was because the Bears had not changed their hot reads from the first meeting with the Packers in September. They used the same adjustments as they did for that game, and the Packers were on to them this time.

“‘They kept us out of sync,’ Cutler said. ‘We didn’t change a lot from last game to this game and I think they did a really good job of taking away some of our hots, keeping us off balance with some of the hots.'”

I would expect some changes over the bye week.

Bottom line if the Seahawks and the Saints, in particular, want to try to duplicate what the Packers did without their personnel and without their coaching staff, the Bears should welcome them to try.