Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

The latest Bears news and talk

Moderators: wab, RING4CHI, Pagan

User avatar
Moriarty
MVP
Posts: 1689
Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon May 25, 2020 3:33 pm

Richie wrote:
Sun May 24, 2020 10:29 am
Moriarty wrote:
Sun May 24, 2020 10:16 am


They were also in the bottom half of rushing plays, too. They just didn't have many plays, period, because they sucked that much on offense.

You should measure in ratios, not raw numbers.
Found it by searching passing play percentage instead of "ratio".

22nd in passing percentage in 2010. 55-45 ratio

https://www.footballdb.com/stats/teamst ... rt=passatt

26th in 2011. 53-47 ratio

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/p ... 2012-02-05

This makes Mike Martz one of the most run heavy play callers in the NFL during his stint with the Chicago Bears.
That's interesting, although maybe it shouldn't be so surprising. Even though people usually only remember one, the two things his system was based on were:

1) Deep drops/deep throws
2) Fuck throwing to the TE, I want 6 linemen

Going long doesn't generate many plays, like throwing short does. Whether you succeed or fail, your drive ends faster.
And the second thing is all about pounding when you aren't going long.
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)

Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
Player of the Month
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon May 25, 2020 4:41 pm

Richie wrote:
Mon May 25, 2020 11:25 am
Yogi da Bear wrote:
Sun May 24, 2020 4:04 pm
Yeah, Martz's problem really wasn't running the ball (although Forte's carries under Martz were the lowest of his career until the very end) so much as it was his insistence on the five step drop and NOT using the TE. That's why Cutler had 52 sacks in 2010 and Hanie, McCown, and Cutler had 49 in 2011! And Olsen was stupidly traded.
He only tried to go with his big drops at the beginning of each season, though. He did adjust. All in all, he was the best OC we've had, IMO. The 2nd half of 2010 and 2011 pre Cutler injury was the most consistent our offense ever was.

And I don't really understand your posts then. You just sort of moved the goal posts. "Okay, he did run... but it was the 7 step drops!". The line was also brutal in pass pro. Cutler also held the ball a lot.
Those are some hellacious sack counts Richie.

I'm not going to waste my time doing it, but if you want to you can go back and see the pendulum swings in run/pass ratios for the Bears from 2000 on. They're pretty drastic.
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon May 25, 2020 6:03 pm

Again - You do understand the Year 2000 stuff is absolutely meaningless right?
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
Player of the Month
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue May 26, 2020 2:08 pm

Not when you're looking at historical swings in franchise philosophy between the run and pass game. The Bears have been reactionary in how they approach their offensive game plan since 2000 as to what didn't work with the regime before them. The run/pass ratio has been swinging back and forth like a pendulum since 2000. In fact, in 1999, the Bears under Crowton threw even more than Trestman did in his most pass happy year (684 to 609).
User avatar
Richie
MVP
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:37 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue May 26, 2020 7:10 pm

HisRoyalSweetness wrote:
Mon May 25, 2020 2:03 pm
Richie wrote:
Mon May 25, 2020 11:42 am


It's hard to dress up 6th highest run ratio as being "Oh, well... it was just all of the scrambles". Mitch also rarely scrambled last year.
Which of course is not what I suggested. I was just posing the question about how the stats re. pass/rush are calculated and whether they factor in details such as sacks and scrambles or not. I don’t know the answer. Do you?


As we have seen unfold in this thread. Conjecture often falls on its face. Facts/data go a long way. Can you back this claim up?
Here are a few whole game examples:

Wildcard Game 2019 vs the Eagles
Jordan Howard had finished the season strongly. In the last 5 games he averaged 17.5 carries and 80 rushing yards a game at 4.5 ypc and he scored 4 TDs. He finished the regular season with his best game of the year, a 109 yard, 5.3 ypc, 2 TD effort against the Vikings. The following week in a close, low scoring game against the Eagles he got just 10 carries despite half of them gaining 5 yards or more.

Week 1 2019 vs the Packers
The Bears only ran the ball 15 times (including a Trubisky scramble) and 11 of those carries came in the first quarter. Every one gained yardage with 7 of them gaining at least 4 yards. Yet in a game that finished 10 - 3 they only ran 4 more times the rest of the game.

Week 7 2019 vs the Saints
The Bears only ran the ball 7 times in the whole game, which was Trubisky's first back from injury and following their bye-week. The score was 12 - 10 at half time.


I know you sort of touched on this... but it's a classic conflating of correlation/causation. A huge reason nothing opens up in the run game is because defense's have ZERO respect for our passing attack. That list is also a whole lot of name power, but not much else. Rivers and Brady are on their last legs and played poorly. Their passing games were bad too. Goff has been largely exposed going back to mid-late 2018.

I could also arbitrarily cut this off at "teams who average less than 100 YPG on the ground" and boom... KC/Mahomes appears.

One of those 7 teams was also TB. Who passed at a fantastic clip and possessed the #1 overall passing offense. Winston's issues with his rating stems from his turnovers. However, there was zero issue moving the ball.
Brady and Goff led their teams to the Super Bowl earlier in the year, Brady's third in a row, and Ryan was only a couple of years removed from doing the same whilst winning league MVP. Rivers had taken the Chargers to the playoffs in 2018 too. All but Brady had passer ratings of over 100 in 2018 and his wasn’t far short at 97.7. Targets of the calibre of Julio Jones, Keenan Allen and Austin Hooper can't be ignored either.

Atlanta Falcons - Matt Ryan
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 4.5/3.8
Quarterback Passer Rating: 108.1/92.1
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 15%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 17%

Los Angeles Chargers - Philip Rivers
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 4.7/4.0
Quarterback Passer Rating: 105.5/88.5
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 15%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 16%

Los Angeles Rams - Jared Goff
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 4.9/3.7
Quarterback Passer Rating: 101.1/86.5
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 24%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 14%

New England Patriots - Tom Brady
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 4.3/3.8
Quarterback Passer Rating: 97.7/88.0
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 12%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 10%

Chicago Bears - Mitch Trubisky
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 4.1/3.7
Quarterback Passer Rating: 95.4/83.0
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 10%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 13%

Tampa Bay Buccanneers - Jameis Winston
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 3.9/3.7
Quarterback Passer Rating: 90.2/84.3
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 7%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 5%

Cincinatti Bengals - Andy Dalton
2018/2019
Team Rushing Average (ypc): 4.7/3.9
Quarterback Passer Rating: 89.6/78.3
Team Rushing Average (ypc): Down 17%
Quarterback Passer Rating: Down 13%

I find hard it hard to conclude that all these QBs’ passer ratings and their teams’ rushing averages fell so substantially from one year to the next simply because their personal play did, especially those who were amongst the best in the league just a season before. Winston was the QB whose rating was least impacted by the fall in ypc which was relatively small.

Teams that run effectively, as indicated by a good ypc, open up their offense to be successful by staying ahead of the chains, whether that is by continuing to run like the Ravens and Titans last year or via passing like the Chiefs. Whether you apportion the blame to the QBs for a poor ypc or not, this notion doesn’t alter.


I agree that the run game needs to improve. I think a lot of it has to do with Nagy adjusting his scheme.

I just don't agree that we need to have more of a commitment to it.
I agree with you to a large degree. The running game just has to be effective and Nagy has to keep mixing in runs to keep the defense honest. It doesn’t need to dominate his play calling.
I was just posing the question about how the stats re. pass/rush are calculated and whether they factor in details such as sacks and scrambles or not. I don’t know the answer. Do you?
Sacks count as passing plays. Scrambles count as rushing. Mitch also had a good amount of called rushing plays in 2018. I don't know how many were scrambles (called pass plays) vs runs (called run plays). You also would then have to ask the same question about the rest of the league's teams and their ratios (scrambles vs called runs).
Wildcard Game 2019 vs the Eagles
Jordan Howard had finished the season strongly. In the last 5 games he averaged 17.5 carries and 80 rushing yards a game at 4.5 ypc and he scored 4 TDs. He finished the regular season with his best game of the year, a 109 yard, 5.3 ypc, 2 TD effort against the Vikings. The following week in a close, low scoring game against the Eagles he got just 10 carries despite half of them gaining 5 yards or more.

Week 1 2019 vs the Packers
The Bears only ran the ball 15 times (including a Trubisky scramble) and 11 of those carries came in the first quarter. Every one gained yardage with 7 of them gaining at least 4 yards. Yet in a game that finished 10 - 3 they only ran 4 more times the rest of the game.

Week 7 2019 vs the Saints
The Bears only ran the ball 7 times in the whole game, which was Trubisky's first back from injury and following their bye-week. The score was 12 - 10 at half time.
I can't help but feel like you're dressing up the run game production in the Philly and GB games with "half of the carries gained 5 yards or more". As opposed to "they averaged 3.0 yards per carry vs GB" or "they averaged 3.5 yards per carry vs PHI". The run game was not effective in either instance. I didn't have a problem with how much they threw vs Philly. I never even thought twice, to be honest. They could have made more of an attempt vs GB... but it really just didn't impact the outcome, IMO.

The New Orleans game was so weird. I defended how much we threw then and I can't really back away now. We ran the first two possessions on 1st and/or 2nd downs. Had a fumble, had long down/distances... then... we had a kick return for a TD. Didn't have the ball on offense until it was two minute drill time. Barely ran any offensive plays. Then, in the 2nd half, you're down by 2-3 scores with time becoming more of a factor each time you possess the ball. I think you need context with this stuff.

This is also just 3 games of 33 in Nagy's tenure.
Brady and Goff led their teams to the Super Bowl earlier in the year, Brady's third in a row, and Ryan was only a couple of years removed from doing the same whilst winning league MVP. Rivers had taken the Chargers to the playoffs in 2018 too. All but Brady had passer ratings of over 100 in 2018 and his wasn’t far short at 97.7. Targets of the calibre of Julio Jones, Keenan Allen and Austin Hooper can't be ignored either.
Yes, Brady won a SB where his leading rusher had the same amount of yardage and they averaged 0.5 more YPC. The final score of that SB was also 13-3. Not to mention, the Rams had very little business being in the Super Bowl. They had been flailing since late November. They drew a cozy matchup vs Dallas and then got a miracle vs NO. Goff hasn't been worth a damn since mid 2018. The numbers reflect this. He'll be very lucky to see the end of his contract there.

I don't really understand your sentiments about Rivers or Brady either. Yeah, they were pretty good one year and not the next. That's how getting old in sports works. Could they both be better with a better team? Sure. Was their circumstance ideal in 2019? NO... but this is not the elite Brady/Rivers of old. They were also hurt by having weapons go down (or having very little to work with) and poor Oline performance.

Again, I just think it's just conflating correlation and causation. Bad line play hurts the run game... also hurts the passing game. Your conclusion = "The run game was bad and it made the passing game bad.". It's not that simple. There's many different factors. It could also be "what made the run game bad also contributed to making the passing game bad". It could also be "Those QB's got old". It could be "The passing game declining hurt the run game".

Bad offense is bad offense. Those offenses weren't good. It wasn't like it was just the running game and every single failure fed off of that. This is all outside of TB's.... which was actually a good offense whose QB just threw the ball to the other team a ton.

Ryan's MVP is a ways back now and I didn't include him. That team was just kind of a mess. I don't think he played bad and he probably did get hurt by what was going on.
I find hard it hard to conclude that all these QBs’ passer ratings and their teams’ rushing averages fell so substantially from one year to the next simply because their personal play did,
Wait... hold on. Dalton hasn't been good for a while. Jameis didn't decline from anything. Most of his numbers shot up sky high. Only Rivers really saw a noticeable dip. Brady to a lesser extent. Again, Goff started bottoming out in 2018. (Again, I agree that Ryan was hurt by what was going on and don't dispute that).

Two of these QB's are old as dirt. It's not this big of an eye brow raiser.

I am also not saying that the run game failing didn't hurt. I just think that the entire offense failed for those teams. For a variety of reasons. You're choosing to focus only on the rushing production. There's other issues with those teams and the passing game in 2019. Some of those were with the QB. Some were with the line.
Teams that run effectively, as indicated by a good ypc, open up their offense to be successful by staying ahead of the chains, whether that is by continuing to run like the Ravens and Titans last year or via passing like the Chiefs. Whether you apportion the blame to the QBs for a poor ypc or not, this notion doesn’t alter.
I agree to an extent. I also think that the run game is born out of a successful passing game in this day and age, though. More so than the other way around.

As a devout saber metric and analytics follower... I think teams should run less than they do. Probably every team in the NFL should. It doesn't mean you don't need a decent run game. I just think that the problem is overstated with Nagy and the Bears. I think Nagy is way more balanced than given credit for.

I think the problem is our inefficiency with running/passing. Not the amount of plays called in each category.
Year 3 Starting (updated yearly)

Brees (11-4): 65.5% (7th) 7.9 Y/A (7th) 27 TD (7th) 6.8 TD% (4th) 7 INT 1.8 INT% (3rd) 104 Rating (3rd)

Trubisky (8-7): 63.2% (18th) 6.1 Y/A (32nd) 17 TD (27th) 3.3 TD% (30th) 10 INT 1.9 INT% (15th) 83 Rating (28th)
User avatar
Richie
MVP
Posts: 1661
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:37 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue May 26, 2020 7:27 pm

Yogi da Bear wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 2:08 pm
Not when you're looking at historical swings in franchise philosophy between the run and pass game. The Bears have been reactionary in how they approach their offensive game plan since 2000 as to what didn't work with the regime before them. The run/pass ratio has been swinging back and forth like a pendulum since 2000. In fact, in 1999, the Bears under Crowton threw even more than Trestman did in his most pass happy year (684 to 609).
It's already been demonstrated in this thread that you're wrong about the ratios.

What has not been demonstrated is why the hell it matters what Crowton did in 1999.
Year 3 Starting (updated yearly)

Brees (11-4): 65.5% (7th) 7.9 Y/A (7th) 27 TD (7th) 6.8 TD% (4th) 7 INT 1.8 INT% (3rd) 104 Rating (3rd)

Trubisky (8-7): 63.2% (18th) 6.1 Y/A (32nd) 17 TD (27th) 3.3 TD% (30th) 10 INT 1.9 INT% (15th) 83 Rating (28th)
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue May 26, 2020 10:25 pm

Yogi da Bear wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 2:08 pm
Not when you're looking at historical swings in franchise philosophy between the run and pass game. The Bears have been reactionary in how they approach their offensive game plan since 2000 as to what didn't work with the regime before them. The run/pass ratio has been swinging back and forth like a pendulum since 2000. In fact, in 1999, the Bears under Crowton threw even more than Trestman did in his most pass happy year (684 to 609).


Let me make Richie's post easier to read:

"So F'ing what?"
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
Player of the Month
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Wed May 27, 2020 3:01 pm

Because it shows the tendency for this franchise to fluctuate between wide open passing offenses and ultra conservative run offenses. It's happened with each change of offensive mindsets from Crowton on.

Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And I really don't want to see yet another nuclear shift to an ultra conservative run offense like Fox's, which is what I fear will happen if Nagy is let go.

Instead, I want Nagy to learn how to effectively incorporate the run game within his offense. I want him to stick with it when it's working (and not pull out a RB who has two straight successful runs) and to not completely abandon it when it's not.
User avatar
HisRoyalSweetness
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Wed May 27, 2020 6:41 pm

Richie wrote:
Tue May 26, 2020 7:10 pm
Again, I just think it's just conflating correlation and causation. Bad line play hurts the run game... also hurts the passing game. Your conclusion = "The run game was bad and it made the passing game bad."
No, I observed that a range of different calibre QBs at different points of their careers all saw a significant fall in their passer rating when their team’s ypc fell to four or below last year.

My conclusion is that bad offensive line play (which is what this thread is about) and the resulting lack of an effective run game has an affect on how successful the QB is. I gave a statistical demonstration, but it’s simple common sense. An offense is not going to complete every pass they attempt on first and/or second down so if a team can’t pick up yards on the ground then they will inevitably fall behind the chains more frequently and put themselves in a higher number of obvious passing situations where the defense knows a pass is coming and can come after the QB. The more yardage there is to gain, the longer the QB has to hold the ball giving the defense more time to put him under pressure. The further the QB has to throw the ball the lower his completion percentage.

If Nagy cannot find a way to pick up decent yardage running the ball on a consistent basis the less effective his passing game is going to be.

If he doesn’t at least try to keep the defense honest by continuing to run the ball even if it is not working well in a game then he makes his offense one-dimensional and predictable, renders any play action completely ineffective and again reduces the chances of the QB/passing game succeeding.

Everything starts up front with the offensive line. They have to be markedly better this year or this team is going to go nowhere regardless of who is at QB.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 20735
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Thu May 28, 2020 9:42 am

I can't wait for the season to start so there will be a whole host of new topics for these needless arguments
User avatar
G08
Hall of Famer
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
Posts: 15753
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Fri May 29, 2020 4:52 pm

HisRoyalSweetness wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 6:41 pm
Everything starts up front with the offensive line. They have to be markedly better this year or this team is going to go nowhere regardless of who is at QB.
Bingo.
Image

First 41 starts:

Drew Brees: 61.2% | 8261 yards | 52 TDs | 37 INTs | 6.60 YPA | 82.2

Mitch Trubisky: 63.4% | 8554 yards | 48 TDs | 29 INTs | 6.7 YPA | 85.8
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Fri May 29, 2020 5:03 pm

G08 wrote:
Fri May 29, 2020 4:52 pm
HisRoyalSweetness wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 6:41 pm
Everything starts up front with the offensive line. They have to be markedly better this year or this team is going to go nowhere regardless of who is at QB.
Bingo.
If you guys believe this, then why did it seem like I was screaming into the wind as FA started that I wanted to get after our OL? If you really, really believe that we are going nowhere without markedly better play from our OL, wouldn't the next logical step in your brain say, "Let's go sign some real talent then, even if it bloats our cap spend at the position for 1 year"?

All I kept hearing was either a) we can't afford any high priced free agents - that was clearly false (Quinn). Or b) we have too much sunk cost into our OT's.

Seems to me that if you really, truly believe we aren't going anywhere without significant OL improvement, that overspending at that position for 1 friggin season might not be a worthwhile objection.

:frustrated:
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.
User avatar
G08
Hall of Famer
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
Posts: 15753
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Fri May 29, 2020 6:05 pm

dplank wrote:
Fri May 29, 2020 5:03 pm
G08 wrote:
Fri May 29, 2020 4:52 pm


Bingo.
If you guys believe this, then why did it seem like I was screaming into the wind as FA started that I wanted to get after our OL? If you really, really believe that we are going nowhere without markedly better play from our OL, wouldn't the next logical step in your brain say, "Let's go sign some real talent then, even if it bloats our cap spend at the position for 1 year"?

All I kept hearing was either a) we can't afford any high priced free agents - that was clearly false (Quinn). Or b) we have too much sunk cost into our OT's.

Seems to me that if you really, truly believe we aren't going anywhere without significant OL improvement, that overspending at that position for 1 friggin season might not be a worthwhile objection.

:frustrated:
I don't think Trent Williams was a realistic option, and as much as some will bemoan this point we are stuck with Leno and Massie for at least another season.

Juan Castillo has made a career out of taking UDFAs or players who haven't performed well elsewhere (Rick Wagner, Jeremy Zuttah, etc) and turning them into serviceable, if not quality offensive linemen. That is not guaranteed to happen here, but you see what he can do with the talent up front. If Massie sucks, he's likely gone in 2021.
Image

First 41 starts:

Drew Brees: 61.2% | 8261 yards | 52 TDs | 37 INTs | 6.60 YPA | 82.2

Mitch Trubisky: 63.4% | 8554 yards | 48 TDs | 29 INTs | 6.7 YPA | 85.8
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Fri May 29, 2020 7:40 pm

Why was Trent Williams not an option? His salary is less than we spent on Quinn, so it's not a money issue. The trade comp was a 5th in this years draft and a 3rd in next years draft, that's a pittance for a HOF LT. Williams was ABSOLUTELY an option for us, we just chose to pass.

I guess my issue is with the thought "let's see how a new coach can do with marginal talent" vs "this team goes nowhere without significant improvement with the OL"...you're betting the entire season on a new OL coach turning around a group of misfits? Sorry man but I prefer to get some genuine talent up front. Williams at LT would have changed our entire line, one guy can do that (like how Mack changed our entire defense).

We are where we are though, so at this point I just hope you're right.
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.
User avatar
HisRoyalSweetness
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 817
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sat May 30, 2020 10:41 am

To be fair dplank, I don't think any of us would have objected to a talent upgrade on the o-line. Many of us just felt that Pace was unlikely to do so given the contract situation with the two starting tackles. The one open spot was really RG after Long's decline and retirement and we'll have to see how the competition for that plays out.

I for one also feel that there were more issues with the line than just talent last season.

Whitehair and Daniels are both good young players, but the position switch proved to be a disaster which I don't think any of us saw coming. It made all the sense in the world to put the college center, considered the best at his position in his draft class, at center and the guy who hadn't ever played center until the Bears shunted him over just a week before his rookie season started to move back to guard. When they switched back the play of both improved. PFF noted that after the switch Daniels’ 73.9 overall grade at left guard ranked fifth among all qualifiers at the position. I remain confident they can both be quality starters for some years to come.

The rest of the line I don't have much faith in and I was particularly surprised that they gave Massie an extension, but the tackles have played better in previous years. Leno in particular went from being a Pro Bowl alternate to sucking big time. In the last 5 years his PFF grade has been consistently solid, 71.5, 70.1, 78.7, 75.8 but then it plummeted to 58.6 last year. His lack of effort on some plays was extraordinary to see and a couple of occasions where he got trucked by a DB were flat out embarrassing. Someone needs to light a fire under him this season.

But the biggest issue for me was how ill-disciplined, ill-prepared and down-right confused the whole group seemed to be a lot of the time. To my eye they seemed to play too high, got no push in the running game as a result and got driven back into the QB far too often. They couldn't sustain blocks let alone execute combo-blocks and get to the second level. I was genuinely shocked by what I saw given Hiestand's reputation as one of the best offensive line coaches in the business. Something was seriously wrong but at least Nagy has made coaching changes to try and fix it. I just hope they work.
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sat May 30, 2020 12:10 pm

I think Dplank's critique as to Recent stuff is more than Fair

There were both legitimate OL in the draft (passed over). AND He IS naming names - specifically Trent Williams - So it's not like the normal just get a Pro Bowler and call it a day where said Player doesn't exist. We know the cost on Trent Williams (not a pittance mind you - that's not a really great take) - but certainly not something that was excessive either - Though we would certainly have had to beat the 49ers offer too

Dplank - one question for you as to feasibility here - There was a decent amount of Smoke that Williams kind of scuttled trade talks with the Vikings. - And that one of the 49ers Main draws was his Relationship to the Coaching Staff

Might have that mattered some in terms of how viable it was for him to come here (


Though when people are trying to invoke the Year 2000 to mean anything to these discussions - it remains very Foolhardy
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sat May 30, 2020 4:55 pm

RichH55 wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 12:10 pm
I think Dplank's critique as to Recent stuff is more than Fair

There were both legitimate OL in the draft (passed over). AND He IS naming names - specifically Trent Williams - So it's not like the normal just get a Pro Bowler and call it a day where said Player doesn't exist. We know the cost on Trent Williams (not a pittance mind you - that's not a really great take) - but certainly not something that was excessive either - Though we would certainly have had to beat the 49ers offer too

Dplank - one question for you as to feasibility here - There was a decent amount of Smoke that Williams kind of scuttled trade talks with the Vikings. - And that one of the 49ers Main draws was his Relationship to the Coaching Staff

Might have that mattered some in terms of how viable it was for him to come here (


Though when people are trying to invoke the Year 2000 to mean anything to these discussions - it remains very Foolhardy
Yea I think that's fair Rich, but I don't get the sense that we even tried. Maybe they knew he wasn't going to come here, we don't get the inside scoop. But it's also not just on Williams, I didn't hear anything about any of the big FA OL that were available, and as you mentioned we declined to go that route in the draft as well. And it's not like it wasn't an obvious need, everyone who follows football knows we were terrible up front last year. But there just wasn't any smoke at all.

Like I said, at this point I just hope that the folks who are counting on Castillo to turn this around are right. I have my doubts.
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sat May 30, 2020 6:15 pm

Also @hrh

I said this before, but I’m not comfortable with the present narrative that Whitehair/Daniels are as good as every here seems to think. I get it’s contrary to popular opinion, but I just haven’t been that impressed by either guys ability to move a defensive lineman off of their spot. They do ok in pass pro, I’ll grant that. But we were at or near bottom in short yardage again, we all agree that primarily indicates a problem up front, and specifically interior. So why are we all so confident that 2/3 of that interior is so good? Doesn’t seem to line up with performance, specifically in the run game. RG can’t be the whole problem there.
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sun May 31, 2020 9:44 am

dplank wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 6:15 pm
Also @hrh

I said this before, but I’m not comfortable with the present narrative that Whitehair/Daniels are as good as every here seems to think. I get it’s contrary to popular opinion, but I just haven’t been that impressed by either guys ability to move a defensive lineman off of their spot. They do ok in pass pro, I’ll grant that. But we were at or near bottom in short yardage again, we all agree that primarily indicates a problem up front, and specifically interior. So why are we all so confident that 2/3 of that interior is so good? Doesn’t seem to line up with performance, specifically in the run game. RG can’t be the whole problem there.
I question Daniels more than Whitehair

I think the Coaching change will probably make a difference though

I didn't see much in the way of FA I would have targeted - though fair enough on your Trent Williams point overall (as noted previous)

Though Trent really targets LT - Dplank - does it change your mindset some IF (and it is only IF here sadly) Leno's play comes back to a level that it was previous to 2019?

(I dont think Leno or Williams are moving inside - I actually think Massie could but Im in the minority there)
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sun May 31, 2020 12:19 pm

Not a whole lot...Leno at his best was a decent pass pro guy but a weak run blocker, more a finesse player. Williams is the whole package. My thinking there was that you could have a pretty good left side of your line, Daniels would benefit from having a HOF talent next to him and a solid Whitehair on the other side. If the left side is on lock down, we could scheme help on the right side with TE's and RB chips and such. My plan was to get Williams and plug him in at LT, then let Leno/Massie compete for RT. And I agree with you, I wanted to see Massie give RG a shot - he's never done it so he likely fails but he's so powerful I thought it would be worth a try. And to top it off, my plan called for drafting a RG in Rd 2. So we'd be heading into 2020 with a line of:

Trent WIlliams/Daniels/WHitehair/Rd. 2 Draft Pick/Massie or Leno - I think that line would be pretty darn good. As is, the line has no anchor point. Daniels and Whitehair are OK I guess, but they aren't guys who can anchor your whole line scheme around. Williams would have given us that. But Pace just doesn't value the position as much as he values OLB.
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Sun May 31, 2020 9:41 pm

I'm not sure I agree with you re: Leno - but fair enough overall

I just think that pre 2019 Leno is a pretty solid player
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 6454
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:49 pm

Just still sittin' here praying for an NFL season. And wondering about something that perhaps you more knowledgeable Oline dudes might be able to clear up for me.

How much does a QB's decision-making and performance on RPOs impact the Oline's performance?
Run the Damn Ball
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
Player of the Month
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon Jun 01, 2020 5:35 pm

IE wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:49 pm
Just still sittin' here praying for an NFL season. And wondering about something that perhaps you more knowledgeable Oline dudes might be able to clear up for me.

How much does a QB's decision-making and performance on RPOs impact the Oline's performance?
I would think a lot, particularly if the QB keeps on choosing the pass option, something that Pace explained was a problem in some of the games were we didn't run much. But if that's the case, Pace needs to take that decision out the QB's hands if he keeps doing it.
RichH55 wrote:
dplank wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 6:15 pm
Also @hrh

I said this before, but I’m not comfortable with the present narrative that Whitehair/Daniels are as good as every here seems to think. I get it’s contrary to popular opinion, but I just haven’t been that impressed by either guys ability to move a defensive lineman off of their spot. They do ok in pass pro, I’ll grant that. But we were at or near bottom in short yardage again, we all agree that primarily indicates a problem up front, and specifically interior. So why are we all so confident that 2/3 of that interior is so good? Doesn’t seem to line up with performance, specifically in the run game. RG can’t be the whole problem there.
I question Daniels more than Whitehair

I think the Coaching change will probably make a difference though

I didn't see much in the way of FA I would have targeted - though fair enough on your Trent Williams point overall (as noted previous)

Though Trent really targets LT - Dplank - does it change your mindset some IF (and it is only IF here sadly) Leno's play comes back to a level that it was previous to 2019?

(I dont think Leno or Williams are moving inside - I actually think Massie could but Im in the minority there)


Personally, I think that if Daniels isn't made a center, he's not going to be a successful draft pick. He was drafted to play center. He was the number one center in the draft. And Whitehair's best position is really OG. If Daniels can't play center, I think he might go the way of Grasu.
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon Jun 01, 2020 7:32 pm

I think the Grasu comp is Overkill there.

Daniels never looked like he didn't belong in the league.

I tend to agree that him not being able to stick as Center hurts a bit of the value of the Pick - But I don't think it's binary like that (Center or Bust)
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
Player of the Month
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Mon Jun 01, 2020 9:31 pm

Put it this way, if he doesn't earn the starting center position, I don't think that we resign him after his rookie deal is up. And it wouldn't surprise me if one of our Seventh Round picks or that guy from Yale eventually beat him out at guard.

I'm really hoping he can make the move to center at some point. What's weird is the biggest critique of him playing center last year was how soft-spoken he was. But coming out it didn't seem that way. It really seemed like he had command of the line. Can't really figure it out.
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue Jun 02, 2020 9:19 am

IE wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 4:49 pm
Just still sittin' here praying for an NFL season. And wondering about something that perhaps you more knowledgeable Oline dudes might be able to clear up for me.

How much does a QB's decision-making and performance on RPOs impact the Oline's performance?
I played a lot of OT, but never did any RPO stuff. We were low level HS football, we ran the ball like 80% of the time and it was almost always man up power running stuff. When I got to Maryland, our coach was Joe Krivak, who played OL himself and was in the "Bobby Ross" mold (i.e., he ran a power scheme for the most part)...but Maryland was also "QB U" there for a while, sending lots of QB's to the pro's. Guys like Boomer Esiason, Neil O'Donnell, and Frank Reich all rolled through there. Anyhow, I sucked and didn't make the team. I just meant to give a little background on my opinion since you asked as I played a lot and pretty seriously.

That said, in my opinion, the QB decision on an RPO should have little to no impact on the blockers up front on that particular play. They are blocking their assignment once that ball is snapped, they aren't / can't be thinking about what the QB is doing, there's another very large man trying to rag doll them the moment that ball is snapped, and that's pretty much all you can think about. Then again, maybe that's why I sucked at it lol. The QB decision would have a major effect on the success/failure of the play itself and may make the line look worse than it is actually performing, and that would tie to the stats that go with that over time. Mitch tended to make the wrong decision a lot, held the ball too much when there were lanes to run. That makes the run game look worse than the blocking might have otherwise dictated, and yes that can really frustrate the guys up front. On the other hand, Mitch bailed out that OL frequently with missed assignments in pass pro, as he'd get himself out of potential sacks by being such a superior athlete - the line love that shit as they don't get dinged for the sack.

But as for their actual blocking on the single RPO play? I don't think it should impact them at all.
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.
User avatar
Yogi da Bear
Player of the Month
Posts: 338
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 4:43 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:50 am

I think you're right DP. RPOs don't affect OL play itself. Offensive linemen are too concerned about the player across from them to be focused at all in what's happening behind them. What it does affect though is the APPEARANCE of the effectiveness of that line play.

Again, if an offensive line is opening holes and the QB is consistently making the wrong read and trying to throw, the OL will probably look ineffective. Conversely, if the OL has the defense pretty well managed but the defense is completely sold out to the run and there's no room, but the QB chooses to give the ball up rather than keep the ball and hit the open slant or out or even deep ball that's wide open, well, again the OL will look pretty ineffective.
RichH55
Assistant Coach
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:16 pm

Yogi da Bear wrote:
Mon Jun 01, 2020 9:31 pm
Put it this way, if he doesn't earn the starting center position, I don't think that we resign him after his rookie deal is up. And it wouldn't surprise me if one of our Seventh Round picks or that guy from Yale eventually beat him out at guard.

I'm really hoping he can make the move to center at some point. What's weird is the biggest critique of him playing center last year was how soft-spoken he was. But coming out it didn't seem that way. It really seemed like he had command of the line. Can't really figure it out.
I'd be shocked if he was flat out beat out
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 6454
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Tue Jun 02, 2020 8:42 pm

Thanks guys. That answers my question, and exactly where I was intending to go with it. I'm not disagreeing that the Oline performance was bad last year. I guess what I'm looking for are "reasons" that could be corrected this year with the same guys mostly. I do believe it will help if the RG can be a bit of a road grader....

I know a lot of this is kind of obvious. But I consider these to be some key potential reasons the Oline looked worse than they actually are. Part questions, and part comments:

- If the defensive coordinator knows the QB is struggling to read defenses and the DC understands the RPO concepts being used, couldn't the coordinator really screw with the QB by calling a defense against the run but having the one key read in "pass D" with a fair amount of confidence that they can fool the QB into a really wrong decision? That offense would struggle to be successful. There are complicating factors, such as obvious short yardage situations - why would a D be in pass defense? BUT.... if the QB is shaken and struggling he could still conceivably be suckered into it thinking he sees something that really isn't there.

- The Oline received a lot of criticism in analysis about being on the wrong side of a block, or looking confused... couldn't that be a function of the defense knowing they were baiting them into doing the wrong thing, and accordingly know where the offense wanted them to be (and not being there)?

- I had a lot of anger at Nagy over the lack of running at times. But maybe a lot of it was driven by the defensive looks. And what would you do as a Defensive coordinator? I'd do everything I could to fool Mitch Trubisky into passing every down because according to the playbook rules, that's what he should do based on the defensive reads. And boy, would an Oline look foolish if the defense is actually dictating the option call.

- It would be interesting so see the Oline and run game performance stats broken down by who *really* made the run/pass decision. What % do we think the Bears ran RPO? Also I'd like to see stats by formation. We know they had some success running in I formation but Nagy decided purity was more important than winning (my opinion) on occasion.
Last edited by IE on Thu Jun 04, 2020 4:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Run the Damn Ball
User avatar
dplank
Crafty Veteran
Posts: 984
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am

Re: Revisiting the "Bears don't value OL" discussion

Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:23 am

Good post IE.

To me this was the ultimate indictment of Mitch Trubisky. Teams said "If we make Mitch play QB instead of RB, we will beat him". The said it out loud so all could hear it, and subsequently backed up that talk with actual play on the field. Meaning, they played the run primarily and played 'contain' on the QB, which can be discipline pass rush lanes as well as more zone defenses so that the DB's/LB's are facing the QB instead of having their backs turned which is when you get long scrambles. They dared us to pass the ball, and we're a pass first offense under Nagy! That's a blatant slap in the face IMO, and a crushing indictment of Mitch as a passer. They knew he couldn't read defenses at a high level or make progressions at even a grade school level, and they made us very one dimensional in the process. Nagy kept trying to keep them honest, but with a subpar line and a defense playing run first, it wasn't happening. So he had little choice but to pass all the time if he wanted to run 'his offense'. In the instances where Mitch made the right read, he was frequently inaccurate with the football. It was just a disaster. I don't believe it is a coincidence that the best attribute that Nick Foles has is his ability to read coverages and progress through his reads at a high level.

Where I fault Nagy is that he didn't adjust 'his offense'. When he did for short stretches, like the Chargers game, it worked! We lined up and played POWER RUN FOOTBALL, and we dominated that game. If not for a major fail sequence by Mitch late in that game, where he blatantly blew the game for us, followed by a missed FG, we win that going away. We dominated up front on both sides of the ball, maybe the only game all year we did that. But Nagy didn't stick with what was working, he seemed stubborn to me in that moment.
Chuck Pagano's defensive rankings in 6 years with Indy: 26th, 20th, 11th, 26th, 30th, and 30th.

Return to “Halas Hall”