PFF article on Bears roster

[mmmc_35]

I think this is deserving of its own thread. Plenty of roster talk in like 5 threads not specifically about the roster. Maybe this will bring it all to one.

espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-team

Bears are 24th. Click on the Bears for a breakdown.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

OK. I get the point of the article. However I have a couple of issues.

1. I think that they have a couple of the wrong players in the wrong spots. I understand what the numbers say, but the eye test also has to factor into it. Fuller is not bad. Maybe the numbers say that, but he was a rookie, being asked to take on the top receivers in the league, with no pass rush.

2. The coaching was so very bad last year, how many of these average players would be good? Would Sutton and Fuller have gone from bad to average?

[SC Bear]

The question is how close are the Bears evaluations to the PFF evaluations? After looking at them I thought they were pretty good for a 5-11 team. The trend recently has been to question the overall talent on the Bears so I felt better about that after reading the article. Whiskey Nut hit the nail on the head.

[Boilerbuzz]

Like him or not, he's a Bear. So I'm not going to spit on the guy and all the great years he gave us. But, I agree. No! Time to move on.

[mmmc_35]

Things like PFF are not answers or definite. How ever it does put some perspective out there. It does help people quantify and not homersize what they saw.

[FireBrand]

The offense was such a mess last year, everyone is going to be ranked lower than they really should be. We know that Marshall, Jeffrey and Bennet are not average players, we know Forte isn't bad.

On defense, I don't have as much faith. I understand that our coaching was bad, but I just don't see any special talent on defense. We have some guys that could develop into good players, but Fuller is the only future possible pro bowler I see at this point. The defense needs a huge upgrade in talent.

[wab]

You don't need a defense full of pro bowl players. You need a defense full of contributors that understand what is being asked of them and can play together as a cohesive unit. Surprisingly, if you do that long enough you will find your roster eventually littered with pro bowl players. Not one person looked at Richard Sherman, Bobby Wagner, or Cam Chancellor in their 1st or 2nd years and thought "pro bowl".

[Magnum_Ursus]

Interesting that they rated Peyton Manning as an Average player...

[Boris13c]

I think this is deserving of its own thread. Plenty of roster talk in like 5 threads not specifically about the roster. Maybe this will bring it all to one.

nice thought

but, it talks about the roster, which includes QB's which means this thread, like all others, will sinky into the abyss of a Cutler argument

[Boris13c]

OK. I get the point of the article. However I have a couple of issues.

1. I think that they have a couple of the wrong players in the wrong spots. I understand what the numbers say, but the eye test also has to factor into it. Fuller is not bad. Maybe the numbers say that, but he was a rookie, being asked to take on the top receivers in the league, with no pass rush.

I have issues with their stuff for precisely that

maybe Fuller's numbers do not reflect his value, but there is no doubt in my mind he was one of the better defenders, and took on some huge responsibilities as a rookie

2. The coaching was so very bad last year, how many of these average players would be good? Would Sutton and Fuller have gone from bad to average?

I wonder how many of PFF's plays they attributed to failures by Fuller (nearest Bear in the vicinity?) when many times the defense was not all playing the same call? how many games did we hear the DB's were playing a different defense than everyone else? that the calls were not clear or consistent?

PFF doesn't lay those failures on the coaches as it should be, but instead just guesses the nearest player had to be at fault

plus there was at least 1 game (I think 3 total) where Long got minus points in a game when he was clearly the best lineman on the day

so screw them

it is nice to read what they put out but I in no way equate them with any sort of expert on the value of actual players

[FireBrand]

You don't need a defense full of pro bowl players. You need a defense full of contributors that understand what is being asked of them and can play together as a cohesive unit. Surprisingly, if you do that long enough you will find your roster eventually littered with pro bowl players. Not one person looked at Richard Sherman, Bobby Wagner, or Cam Chancellor in their 1st or 2nd years and thought "pro bowl".

I have no doubt that Fangio can cook a better dinner with these ingredients than Tucker did, but I'm looking at how far away we are talent-wise from being a defense that can contend. Given the players we have today, I think our ceiling is "average."

We have good people in place now, so I expect that to change. I'm just not willing to put all of our failures on the coaches, we've got some players that need to go, and again, I expect that that will happen.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

You don't need a defense full of pro bowl players. You need a defense full of contributors that understand what is being asked of them and can play together as a cohesive unit. Surprisingly, if you do that long enough you will find your roster eventually littered with pro bowl players. Not one person looked at Richard Sherman, Bobby Wagner, or Cam Chancellor in their 1st or 2nd years and thought "pro bowl".

I have no doubt that Fangio can cook a better dinner with these ingredients than Tucker did, but I'm looking at how far away we are talent-wise from being a defense that can contend. Given the players we have today, I think our ceiling is "average."

We have good people in place now, so I expect that to change. I'm just not willing to put all of our failures on the coaches, we've got some players that need to go, and again, I expect that that will happen.

But WAB's point is a very good one. To a degree, its not the individual talent of the individual players that define a defense's success, but rather how those individuals leverage what talent they have for the benefit of the entire unit. Ryan Mundy may have sucked as a safety in a Mel Tucker defense, but in a Vic Fangio defense, he may be put in a much better position to utilize his skills. And if all the players are put in positions where they have the best chance to succeed, and everyone knows their own responsibilities, you end up with average players playing at a pro-bowl level.

[wab]

I have no doubt that Fangio can cook a better dinner with these ingredients than Tucker did, but I'm looking at how far away we are talent-wise from being a defense that can contend. Given the players we have today, I think our ceiling is "average."

We have good people in place now, so I expect that to change. I'm just not willing to put all of our failures on the coaches, we've got some players that need to go, and again, I expect that that will happen.

But WAB's point is a very good one. To a degree, its not the individual talent of the individual players that define a defense's success, but rather how those individuals leverage what talent they have for the benefit of the entire unit. Ryan Mundy may have sucked as a safety in a Mel Tucker defense, but in a Vic Fangio defense, he may be put in a much better position to utilize his skills. And if all the players are put in positions where they have the best chance to succeed, and everyone knows their own responsibilities, you end up with average players playing at a pro-bowl level.

[FireBrand]

I have no doubt that Fangio can cook a better dinner with these ingredients than Tucker did, but I'm looking at how far away we are talent-wise from being a defense that can contend. Given the players we have today, I think our ceiling is "average."

We have good people in place now, so I expect that to change. I'm just not willing to put all of our failures on the coaches, we've got some players that need to go, and again, I expect that that will happen.

But WAB's point is a very good one. To a degree, its not the individual talent of the individual players that define a defense's success, but rather how those individuals leverage what talent they have for the benefit of the entire unit. Ryan Mundy may have sucked as a safety in a Mel Tucker defense, but in a Vic Fangio defense, he may be put in a much better position to utilize his skills. And if all the players are put in positions where they have the best chance to succeed, and everyone knows their own responsibilities, you end up with average players playing at a pro-bowl level.

I agree that good coaching can make average players look better than they are when you have a great system and everyone buys in. But to compete at the championship level, you need superior talent.

Fangio is a great defensive coach, but his defense isn't #1 if his LB's were Jon Bostic and Shea McClellan.

[wab]

But WAB's point is a very good one. To a degree, its not the individual talent of the individual players that define a defense's success, but rather how those individuals leverage what talent they have for the benefit of the entire unit. Ryan Mundy may have sucked as a safety in a Mel Tucker defense, but in a Vic Fangio defense, he may be put in a much better position to utilize his skills. And if all the players are put in positions where they have the best chance to succeed, and everyone knows their own responsibilities, you end up with average players playing at a pro-bowl level.

I agree that good coaching can make average players look better than they are when you have a great system and everyone buys in. But to compete at the championship level, you need superior talent.

Fangio is a great defensive coach, but his defense isn't #1 if his LB's were Jon Bostic and Shea McClellan.

For the large part of 2014 his LB's were Michael Wilhoite, Nick Moody, and Dan Skuta.

[FireBrand]

I agree that good coaching can make average players look better than they are when you have a great system and everyone buys in. But to compete at the championship level, you need superior talent.

Fangio is a great defensive coach, but his defense isn't #1 if his LB's were Jon Bostic and Shea McClellan.

For the large part of 2014 his LB's were Michael Wilhoite, Nick Moody, and Dan Skuta.

And 2014 was the worst defense since Harbaugh/Fangio took over. Did Fangio become a worse coach last year?

[wab]

I'll take 10th in points and 5th in yards as the "worst defense" any day.

[FireBrand]

I'll take 10th in points and 5th in yards as the "worst defense" any day.

I'd take 20th, given what we've been through.

My point is that talent makes a difference, and bad coaching aside, I don't see a lot of it on our defense. I don't think good coaching can turn this shitty defense into a good one, it could make it average at best.

Again, I do expect us to be a better defense in 2015, because I think we have people in place that will get rid of the crap we have and bring in better players.

[wab]

I'll take 10th in points and 5th in yards as the "worst defense" any day.

I'd take 20th, given what we've been through.

My point is that talent makes a difference, and bad coaching aside, I don't see a lot of it on our defense. I don't think good coaching can turn this shitty defense into a good one, it could make it average at best.

Again, I do expect us to be a better defense in 2015, because I think we have people in place that will get rid of the crap we have and bring in better players.

They went from 20th under Singletary one year to 2nd the next under Fangio. With the same players.

[FireBrand]

I'd take 20th, given what we've been through.

My point is that talent makes a difference, and bad coaching aside, I don't see a lot of it on our defense. I don't think good coaching can turn this shitty defense into a good one, it could make it average at best.

Again, I do expect us to be a better defense in 2015, because I think we have people in place that will get rid of the crap we have and bring in better players.

They went from 20th under Singletary one year to 2nd the next under Fangio. With the same players.

I don't doubt your numbers, but I seem to remember them being a good defense under Singletary. Also, wasn't Harbaugh's first year, the year they got Aldon Smith?

Regardless, none of that changes the fact that we are in need of a talent upgrade. We may have had the worst back 7 in the league.

[Rusty Trombagent]

They went from 20th under Singletary one year to 2nd the next under Fangio. With the same players.

I don't doubt your numbers, but I seem to remember them being a good defense under Singletary. Also, wasn't Harbaugh's first year, the year they got Aldon Smith?

Regardless, none of that changes the fact that we are in need of a talent upgrade. We may have had the worst back 7 in the league.

i think though, iirc, that jump in defensive standing was due a large part to the offense finally getting their shit together under harbaugh. it was very similar to dennis allan's defense being ranked like 20th when he was with the broncos... having tebow as your QB will do that to you.

[o-pus #40 in B major]

I think the PFF thing was pure crap.

[ysleblanc]

I think this is deserving of its own thread. Plenty of roster talk in like 5 threads not specifically about the roster. Maybe this will bring it all to one.

espn.go.com/espn/feature/story/_/id/12179331/how-many-players-away-super-bowl-team

Bears are 24th. Click on the Bears for a breakdown.

I think the evaluation is fine with no context.

I think when you look at...

-the terrible play calling on offense AND defense, very plain and predicatble on both sides
-the lack of a running game, or at least no willingness to have one(this affects the QB and the defense directly)
-some of the shenanigans off the field that were allowed by Trestman(Briggs, Marshall, Kromer etc)
-the lack of action from the front office/coaching staff after the back to back 50 point losses

Those things among others will directly affect how a player looks. The Bears don't have a great roster, a lot of holes especially on defense, but on talent alone they should be at least mid pack.

[ysleblanc]

You don't need a defense full of pro bowl players. You need a defense full of contributors that understand what is being asked of them and can play together as a cohesive unit. Surprisingly, if you do that long enough you will find your roster eventually littered with pro bowl players. Not one person looked at Richard Sherman, Bobby Wagner, or Cam Chancellor in their 1st or 2nd years and thought "pro bowl".

I have no doubt that Fangio can cook a better dinner with these ingredients than Tucker did, but I'm looking at how far away we are talent-wise from being a defense that can contend. Given the players we have today, I think our ceiling is "average."

We have good people in place now, so I expect that to change. I'm just not willing to put all of our failures on the coaches, we've got some players that need to go, and again, I expect that that will happen.

The good news is with the #7 overall pick and some cap space, hopefully we can add some good defensive talent and be an above average defense. Average talent + top notch coaching/play calling=above average D.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

The #1 thing to watch in the next six weeks is what effect having Foxy and Fangio does to the free agent market. Denver has a lot of key defensive free agents this year. How many want to stick around in Denver with Kubiak, how many want to go play for these two? I'm not saying they are taking a discount or anything crazy like that, but players can be loyal to their coaches, i.e. Lovie Smith. How many of those FA's, given equal money would prefer to continue playing under Fox, or want the opportunity to play under Fangio. It may not have a huge impact, but it could be enough to sway some key FA's to look at the Bears.

[wab]

The #1 thing to watch in the next six weeks is what effect having Foxy and Fangio does to the free agent market. Denver has a lot of key defensive free agents this year. How many want to stick around in Denver with Kubiak, how many want to go play for these two? I'm not saying they are taking a discount or anything crazy like that, but players can be loyal to their coaches, i.e. Lovie Smith. How many of those FA's, given equal money would prefer to continue playing under Fox, or want the opportunity to play under Fangio. It may not have a huge impact, but it could be enough to sway some key FA's to look at the Bears.

Other than Chris Harris and Rahim Moore, none of their FA's really do much for me. Terrence Knighton would be ok I guess.

[crueltyabc]

I actually love Terrence Knighton and was assuming he would be too expensive.

[wab]

I actually love Terrence Knighton and was assuming he would be too expensive.

I think we've got a similar prospect in Ego though.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

What about Brandon Marshall? He was a solid OLB last year, and we are woefully short on those. Quinton Carter?

[crueltyabc]

I actually love Terrence Knighton and was assuming he would be too expensive.

I think we've got a similar prospect in Ego though.

Yeah right now we have 2 starters, one of whom is coming off a major surgery, and a prospect. I would like to have at least one more guy who can start for us here. I'd be much more comfortable using Ego as a rotational guy while he develops. Ratliff - Knighton - Houston is a scary starting trio that frees us to draft OLB, Safety, QB, RT.