Month: January 2011

Packers Show Bears’ Need to Improve Against the Blitz

The Bears have a lot to learn from coming out of yesterday’s game.  But perhaps nothing came out of the poor performance that was more important than what the Packers did to the Bears on the blitz.  Bears quarterback Jay Cutler explains via Dan Pompei at the Chicago Tribune:

“They kept us out of sync.  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 (hot routes), keeping us off-balance with some of the hots. They were delaying some of their blitzes and bringing those guys. I think there was a stretch where (Packers cornerback Charles) Woodson came about every snap toward the end of the game.”

Many fans and media are criticizing the Bears for not running the ball more – as well they should.  But the fact of the matter is that you are occasionally going to find yourself in situations where you have to pass.  Good teams come through in those situations.  The Bears didn’t yesterday.

The Packers did a superb job of pressuring Cutler with the blitz and, at the same time, taking away the Bears adjustments to it.  They anticipated the hot routes and covered the Bears receivers tightly so that Cutler had nowhere to go and when he did, the result was little to no gain.  Perhaps as important, the Packers defensive linemen all had their hands up, frequently batting the ball down as they made it difficult for Cutler to get the ball out.  To top it off, the screen play worked poorly against a defense that sees a Packer offense that runs it better than anyone in practice every day.

This has been a season which has been defined by offensive improvement for the Bears.  Olin Kreutz explains how that will continue (via Mark Potash at the Chicago Sun-Times):

‘‘’It was a playoff atmosphere,’ Kreutz said. ‘They were coming after us. From the start of the third quarter, they sent everything at us. All the credit goes to them for shutting us down on offense. And we’re going to look at this film and learn.’’’

As Cutler said, the Bears didn’t change much from the last game where the Jets run a very similar type of defense.  But they will certainly have to do so now if they want to make a serious playoff run.

Bears Offense Gets the Runs

Sean Jensen‘s game story for the Chicago Sun-Times had this interesting nugget:

But the Bears offense could only muster a field goal. They did get inside the Packers’ 5-yard line but couldn’t score the touchdown, settling for a 30-yard field goal after left tackle Frank Omiyale gave up a sack to linebacker Erik Walden.

Afterwards, Omiyale extended a hand to his befallen quarterback, but Cutler rolled and got up by himself.

It was unclear, though, if Cutler snubbed his lineman.

Either way, the Bears offense has had better days.

And they seemingly got worse throughout the game.

They certainly did.  If Cutler did snub Omiyale I don’t think there’s are many fans in Chicago that would condemn him though Cutler was far from perfect himself, throwing one horrible interception in the end zone.

But the offensive line struggled badly yesterday, especially in the second half.  And when you come right down to it that’s where the game is played.  Many will see Cutler’s reaction and look to the poor pass protection and they’d have a point.  But that wasn’t really the major problem.  The major problem really developed when the Bears becomes one dimensional when they stopped running.  Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune explains:

“The crowd noise had nothing to do with the play selection, though, and what’s surprising is Martz got away from what had been working well. The Bears trumpeted the fact they had been so balanced offensively, then they went pass crazy. Martz called 47 drop backs and 18 rushes despite the fact the game was never out of reach.”

The Bears came out running in the third quarter and got a reasonable start.  But generally speaking the second half was a waste land of sacks and long yardage after the first possession.  Once a team knows you are going to throw, they can come at your quarterback with everything they’ve got.

The pass protection wasn’t good and it needs work.  But for the Bears, it wasn’t so much the pass blocking that put Cutler on his back.  It was the lack of a running game that did the offensive line in when it counted.

Bears Defense Learns From Past Mistakes, Plays with Discipline

The Bears defense has been much maligned of late.  But they came through yesterday with a pretty good performance.  Lance Briggs explains via the Chicago Tribune:

“The last couple weeks, teams have been scoring a lot of points on us, so defensively it was important for the Packers to only get 10 points. We were effective and we did the things we needed to do. We were very disciplined, that’s really what it comes down to against a high-powered offense, to be as effective as we were.”

I couldn’t agree more.

Admittedly there were some minor picks.  Aaron Rogers was able to avoid the pass rush and got out of the pocket to extend the play a lot.  And, as reviewed by Vaughn McClure at the Chicago Tribune, the defensive backs made some errors that could have cost the Bears some big plays and, indeed, that did cost them at least two long completions one of which set up a touchdown.

But for the most part the Bears really cleaned things up yesterday.  They were rarely out of their gaps and played good solid defense.  That, combined with the Packers wide receivers dropping balls all over the field, made the game competitive on a night where the offensive performance left a lot to be desired.

Game Comments: Bears Vs. Packers, January 2, 2011

Defense

  1. The Bears defense came out with all of the starters and they apparently came to play.  For the most part they played fast and down hill.
  2. The defense came out mixing it up and blitzing early.  They did less blitzing as the game wore on.
  3. The Bear defense had a bit of a problem when the Packer offense played their 22 personnel (2 backs, 2 wide receivers).  They couldn’t stop the run out of this formation without an eighth guy in the box but they also didn’t like leaving their corners in single high man coverage.  Rogers was trying to audible into a favorable play depending upon what the safety did.  The Bears played a lot of it situationally depending upon whether the Packers were likely to need to pass but the intermediate downs and distances were a problem.
  4. The Bears had a hard time getting to Green Bay quarterback Aaron Rogers in the first quarter, even when they were blitzing.  They did better as the game progressed.
  5. The Bears pass coverage was pretty good.  Rogers was continually escaping pressure only to find that no one was open.
  6. The Bears defense did well today but the team was also fortunate in that Rogers and the Packer offense had an off day.  Rogers occasionally struggled with accuracy and the receivers were continually dropping balls.
  7. I thought generally speaking the Bear defense played with a lot more discipline this game.  To my eye they weren’t often caught out of their gaps.
  8. He wasn’t getting great protection but I am surprised that the Packers didn’t take more shots down field.
  9. Danieal Manning bit on an inside route on the long pass that set up the Packer touchdown in the fourth quarter.  That was tough to swallow.

Offense

  1. The Bears offense came out running and they were also mixing it up well.
  2. The Packers played a defense with two down linemen much of the time.  They did a lot of pre snap shifting trying to confuse the Bear defense and, like the Bear defense, they weren’t afraid to blitz.  Their defense was effective.
  3. The Bears offensive line did a poor job of protecting quarterback Jay Cutler.  The Packers did a good job of confusing them.
  4. Related to that, the Bears did a terrible job of handling the Packer blitz.  The Packers aggressively covered the Bears wide receivers as they made their adjustments and the Bears simply had no answer.  The Bears may have missed Earl Bennett a great deal more than most of us realized they would this game.  In his absence, the Bears tried to use Greg Olsen more in these situations, especially late.
  5. The Bears did have good success running against that two man line for big chunks of yards.
  6. B.J. Raji had a great game.  He was especially effective off of the Packer line stunts.
  7. The Packers did a good job of shutting down Johnny Knox by being very physical with him.  Indeed, the Packers seemed to be getting away with being a bit too physical at times.
  8. Indeed, related to that, the Bears receivers had a very difficult time getting away from the aggressive, tight man coverage that the Packers specialize in.

Miscellaneous

  1. Joe Buck and Troy Aikman did a good job today.  In fact, Aikman mentioned most of the points I made above during the broadcast.  The only pick I have is that they didn’t mention when Matt Forte went over 1000 yards.
  2. Brad Biggs tweet of the game:  “Jay Cutler yelling at Chester Taylor as he leaves field. Does he know Taylor fights teammates?”
  3. Someone better talk to the Bears about getting some proper spikes.  I’m tiered of seeing them slip to the ground on footing that the other team seems to be handling well.
  4. Some of the Bear drops were tough to take – there were certainly too many.  But if you are a Packer fan you are going crazy with the poor performance by your wide receivers in this respect.
  5. There were too many penalties on both sides.
  6. Nice job by D.J. Moore stripping the ball from Donald Driver in the first quarter.
  7. Cutler threw a terrible interception in the third quarter in the end zone.  He was off balance and threw it short.  What’s worse, the Bears were in field goal position in  a tight game.  I know that to some extent you have to accept these things from Cutler but that just shouldn’t ever happen.
  8. Brad Maynard and Packer punter Tim Masthay did an excellent job today.
  9. The Devin Hester we saw today looked a lot like the one from last year.  Masthay did a good job of pinning him against the sideline.  The error of letting the Packers punt bounce at the twelve to be downed at the three in the fourth quarter came at a critical time.
  10. I’m not too sure about the Lovie Smith decision to go for it on fourth down on the Packer 40 yard line up by only 3 points.  I know that it worked out with Charles Tillman intercepting the ball on the following Packer possession.  Never the less I think playing field position and continued offensive patience was called for in that situation.
  11. The officiating in this game was generally poor.  On the Bears side, the missed pass interference on Knox and the bogus roughing the passer call on Julius Peppers comes to mind.  Certainly a good argument could be made that the ball hit the ground on Tillman’s interception.
  12. This was a generally sloppy game but well worthwhile.  Though many would question the wisdom of doing it, the Bears were well rewarded by playing this game all the way like it counted.  The Packers exposed a number of offensive weaknesses, most notably the reappearance of the offensive line problems, the problems that the Bear receivers had getting away from the Packers coverage, the problems handling Greg Jennings on deep routes against cornerback Tim Jennings as the safeties were late getting over the top, and the problems handling the blitz.  The Bears will now have two weeks to work on correcting those issues.

Do the Bears Need a “Big-name” Wide Receiver? And Other News

Bears

“‘[Johnny Knox is] really learning how to set guys up,’ Drake said. ‘Just using his head and his eyes and not breaking stride.

“‘Body language tells everything from a receiver running routes. When you can control that body and not allow that guy to read where you’re going … the biggest thing in young receivers is they have a tendency to look where they’re going, look down at the ground. Now, these guys are playing with their eyes up. When that DB sees you looking at the ground, he’s sitting on steps. That’s something these guys have done a tremendous job of learning.”’

“They obviously don’t have one big-name receiver. But do they need one? I think they work pretty well together.”

I do, too.  Though this might be a topic better left to closer to the draft, I think you can, in fact, make the case that the Bears don’t need one.  For instance, in this video former Patriot linebacker Tedy Bruschi makes the point that the Patriots might actually be better without Randy Moss for reasons other than simply the loss of his attitude in the locker room:

Elsewhere

“The move raises obvious questions regarding the relationship between Weis and head coach Todd Haley, a coach of the year candidate regarded by some as a first-class pain in the rear.  The potential for a lockout that would reduce dramatically the salaries of NFL assistant coaches also may have been a factor, although Weis presumably is getting the bulk of his compensation from his Notre Dame buyout.”

“Mara declined interview requests last week. But he will not fire Coughlin, win or lose Sunday, unless the Giants’ performance is so unfathomably embarrassing that it would prompt Mara to rethink Coughlin’s future.”

“The Giants simply do not do knee-jerk. They do not fire 9-win — or perhaps 10-win — coaches. They do not issue statements of support, only to retract them a few hours later, as happened with the Denver Broncos this season. They do not operate a coaching carousel, as they do in Washington, with the circus music on a loop. And most critical to the current crisis, they do not conflate what happened to them last year with what is happening now.”

  • I have to say that I’m becoming a Battista fan.  Here the Times writer does a really well-thought out article on the growth of the passing game in the NFL.  The article ends with this debatable point by Hall of Fame quarterback Troy Aikman:

“I still hear people say, ‘We’ve got to run the ball and stop the run,’ ” Aikman said. “No, you don’t. I don’t know when that cliché is going to die. If you’re playing the Giants or Steelers, that’s pretty important. When you’re playing the other teams, you can stop the run all you want and they’ll still score 40 on you. If I had my choice, I’d rather be able to stop the pass.”

One Final Thought

Former All Pro linebacker Carl Banks gives a classy response as he concentrates what’s important when commenting on not being included in the Giants’ Ring of Honor.  Via Joe Brescia at The New York Times:

“I didn’t spend much time on it. The Giants have a legacy of great players. I know without a doubt that my contributions have always been greatly appreciated by the organization. In due time, if there’s another opportunity, I’m sure they’ll consider it. But I didn’t feel slighted. If it doesn’t happen, I know the organization appreciates my contribution to its success.”

Ownership the Problem as the Vikings Get Serious About Retaining Frazier

With the word yesterday that talks are becoming serious about removing the “interim” tag from former Bear player and current Vikings head coach Leslie Frazier‘s title, I’m left with the question of what is holding things up?

Frazier has a lot going for him.  For one thing, the team is playing better.  For another, there is a possible work stoppage on the horizon and no owner wants to pay two coaching staffs not to work.

Not surprisingly, Todd Archer at ESPNDallas.com is reporting that Jerry Jones is leaning toward leaving interim head coach Jason Garrett permanently in charge, as well.  Indeed, Clarence E. Hill, Jr. at the Fort Worth Star-Telegram is reporting this morning that Jones is likely to retain Garrett according to a “high-ranking team source”.

One answer to the Vikings problem is likely control over personnel.  Judd Zulgad and Chip Scoggins at the Minneapolis Star Tribune explain the current situation:

“When owner Zygi Wilf overhauled things after his first season in 2005, he implemented a triangle of authority that divided power between [former head coach Brad] Childress and vice presidents Rob Brzezinski and Fran Foley, who would quickly be replaced by Rick Spielman.”

“Wilf and the rest of the decision-makers could look at what happened with Childress and realize giving a coach so much power wasn’t a good idea in the first place — especially, when that never seemed to be the original intent.”

The situation highlights a problem with the Vikings organizational structure.  Because the owner in Minnesota is very active in managing the organization, whoever has his ear is more or less in charge. That can lead to decisions which aren’t always the best for the organization.

Right now the highest ranking official in Minnesota, and the one with the most direct access to Wilf, is vice president of player personnel, Speilman, who would undoubtedly like to be general manager.  He wouldn’t want Wilf hiring a new head coach or, worse, another general manager who would demand complete personnel control.  That means its in his best interests to see that Frazier remains in place and he’s undoubtedly whispering into Wilf’s ear about the advantages of such an arrangement.

Is that what’s best for the Vikings?  I have my doubts.  Spielman has been a GM before for the Dolphins and I saw nothing at the time that indicated that he’s particularly good at it.  Other than spending Wilf’s money, I don’t see that the Viking personnel department has done anything worth more notice than usual.  Indeed, the irony is that Frazier may be thinking the same thing as he considers how much control of personnel he can or should wield.  As the likely hot minority candidate, he has some leverage and that may be the sticking point.

Admittedly there’s a bit of speculation in the above scenario.  Maybe quite a bit.  But the bottom line still remains.  We are fortunate right now in Chicago to have ownership which has taken a step back from making football decisions for the organization.  When that’s not the case, internal politics can take priority over doing what’s best.

What Does It Mean to “Rest the Starters”? It All Depends.

I’ve been saying for days that we won’t see the Bears starters the whole game today.  And certainly that will probably be true, especially for any player who is nursing an injury.  But that doesn’t mean that they’ll just roll out the “second string” at 22 positions on offense and defense.  Brad Biggs, writing for the Chicago Tribune, makes the point:

“The idea of resting players against the Packers really isn’t realistic. Yes, players with any minor injuries will sit, but with a 53-man roster that turns into 46 (counting the third quarterback on game day), it’s not like [Bears head coach] Lovie Smith is going to be able to sit starters across the board.”

and then there’s this fact to consider as well:

“Running back Matt Forte and wide receiver Johnny Knox have some statistical milestones in mind. Forte needs 22 yards to reach 1,000 and Knox is 40 shy of that figure.”

The extent to which Smith should or will accommodate Forte and Knox is a debatable question but the guess here is that he’ll give them each a fair shot at reaching their respective milestones.  How long does that mean you leave them in?  If the Bears are playing well, you’re probably talking about roughly a half.  If they’re not, it means you leave them in until the game is obviously lost.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, it is doubtful that Smith will pull anyone on the offensive line with the possible exception of veteran Olin Kreutz.  They’re playing better but the problems on the offensive line still exist, in part because they’ve only been together half a season.

I was listening to an local football commentator on WSCR one morning this week.  Callers had been trying to make the point that the Bears should play the Packers game all out because more game experience would be good for a Bear offense that has only recently begun to perform well.  The expert sarcastically asked how much better the players are going to get as a unit with only one more game. When you are an offensive line that has been together as a unit for only 8 games, and one that has yet to play well in the first half of any of them, the answer is a lot better.

Statistically there’s only a 2% chance that the Bears will have anything to play for as a team today.  In that case, they won’t play their “starters” much.  But when the word is framed in terms of who you leave in and who you leave out, the definition is going to vary.

Slot Receiver the One to Watch in Packer Offense

Matt Bowen, writing for the Chicago Tribune, provides his always insightful look into the Xs and Os for the average fan.  He looks at how the Packers will use Greg Jennings to target Brian Urlacher in the cover-2.  The graphic that comes with the article, shows how a typical red zone play develops.  The X receiver in the graphs carries the free safety away from the middle of the field while the strong safety worries about possible vertical routes from the three receivers from on that side of the field.  Urlacher has the slot receiver, Jennings, in the middle:

“This is a tough play for any Mike linebacker. Brian Urlacher is responsible for covering the Z vertically up the field. He will open his hips to the passing strength (closed side) and carry Jennings on the post to the middle of the end zone. Safeties Major Wright and Chris Harris will break to overlap Jennings on the throw from Aaron Rodgers, but the play initially has to be made by Urlacher. That’s a tough assignment versus the speed of Jennings.”

But it won’t be just Jennings who will be challenging Urlacher today.  The play reminds me of an article I read an article last week from Bob McGinn of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.  McGinn points out that the slot was always the position that Donald Driver occupied but that now, with age catching up to Driver, its falling more to James Jones and Jennings:

“Sunday against the Giants, coach Mike McCarthy sent out three wides on 17 snaps. Nine times Driver was in the slot, but on the other eight he was either by himself outside or outside the slot receiver.

“Because the slot receiver has an easier two-way go against the defender and often is covered by the No. 3 cornerback, slot has been the money position.”

“Jennings, a classic X (split end) receiver in his first four years, has played the slot more than ever before. Jones, who generally lined up wide right in three-wide sets, also has worked extensively inside. [Jordy] Nelson can go anywhere now, too.”

I used to think that the safeties had the toughest assignment in the cover 2 defense.  But gradually I’m starting to realize that if they’ve got it the worst, middle linebacker Brian Urlacher‘s job can’t be far behind.  Many will remember that it was Wes Welker, lining up all over the field but most often in the slot where he got a free release and could go in any direction, who did the most to ruin the Bears when they played the Patriots.  Its obviously going to be an important position to keep an eye on today as well no matter who lines up there.

Current Bears Linemen Long-Term Answers? And Other News

Bears

  • While answering a fan’s question, Neil Hayes at the Chicago Sun-Times surprised me with this revelation:

“As for offensive line prospects, it’s too early in the process for me to give you an educated answer. I did think it was interesting that a veteran scout whose sole job is evaluating offensive linemen told me that he thinks Frank Omiyale, Chris Williams and J’Marcus Webb can be long-term answers.”

That’s not going to make some of the fans who think the line needs a major overhaul in the draft very happy.

“‘He has a lot more left,’ Toub said. ‘He probably didn’t have the kind of year he would love to have, that’s for sure, but you have to consider his value.'”

  • I’ve raved about how gutsy the Packers have been this year as they’ve fought through injuries.  But there is still some doubt about whether they know how to win.  Rob Reischel, writing for the Chicago Tribune, notes that the Packers are 2-6 in games decided by four points or less and 2-14 since 2008:

“‘When I look at the Packers in the fourth quarter, it is awful,’ ESPN analyst Trent Dilfer said earlier this season. ‘You can’t be a good team and choke in the biggest moments.'”

Elsewhere

    • Jack Betcha at the National Football Post gives an inside look at how misleading agents can be when trying to recruit rookie clients.  I’m not sure there’s a dirtier legal business outside of politics.
    • We are led to believe that its best for Bears players to be held out of a “meaningless” game in order to stay healthy.  But the Patriots’ Wes Welker, injured in a similar situation, tells Ian Rapaport at the Boston Globe that he wouldn’t have had it any other way.
    • For those outside of St. Louis and Seattle who are looking for a reason to watch Sunday night, Matt Bowen at The National Football Post suggests you take a good look at Rams quarterback Sam Bradford and how he handles the situation.  I was on the record as saying that I thought Jimmy Clausen was the better pick.  Certainly for this year it looks like the scouts were right and I was wrong.
    • Judd Zulgad at the Minneapolis Star Tribune is reporting that the Vikings are in serious negotiations with Leslie Frazier which will result in the removal of the “interim” tag from his head coach title.  Stay tuned.
    • Am I the only one who still thinks that Jets ticket holders have a legal case against the Patriots for Spy-Gate?

      One Final Thought

        R.J. Bell at pregame.com computes the chance that the Bears will obtain the number one seed in the NFC playoffs Sunday from the Vegas odds (via Joe Fortenbaugh at The National Football Post):  “Scenario: Bears win (21%) AND both Falcons and Saints lose (2%)”.  The bottom line?  There is a 98% chance the Bears will have nothing to play for against the Packers and there is a 0.5% chance that they will actually have home field throughout the playoffs.

        Don’t expect to see a lot of the Bears starters Sunday.

        Weis Likely to Leave Chiefs, Difficult Haley

        There have been persistent rumors, most often coming from ESPN’s Chris Mortenson, that Kansas City Chiefs offensive coordinator, Charlie Weis, will be moving on to become the offensive coordinator for the Florida Gators.

        There’s an open question as to why Weis would want to levee the playoff-bound Chiefs to go to a parallel position in college.  Gregg Rosenthal at profootballtalk.com speculates:

        “If there was an offensive coordinator of the year award, we’d vote for Charlie Weis of the Chiefs. Matt Cassel has played mistake-free football, Jamaal Charles might win the rushing title, and a long-struggling offensive line has turned things around.”

        “The only logical explanation of a Weis-Todd Haley break would be something personal.  (Weis wanting a lighter work schedule or to return to college?  Personality conflict?)”

        We’ll probably never know for sure.  But having said that, my guess would be the last.

        Its fairly obvious that Haley can be a difficult guy.  That was probably never so evident as when he was with the Bears.  When Haley took over as head coach of the Chiefs, Brad Biggs, then working for the Chicago Sun-Times, wrote an interesting article on Haley (which is no longer on the Sun-Times web site):

        “To think, in that last season with the Bears, offensive coordinator John Shoop tried to get Haley barred from offensive meetings, a power play that [former Bears head coach Dick] Jauron blocked.”

        Heaven knows no one is going to get criticism from me for giving Shoop a hard time.  He was in way over his head.  But nevertheless the quote demonstrates how tough Haley was to work with.  Given that Weis is apparently preparing to leave after such a wonderful season, I think the odds are good that Haley hasn’t changed.