Sanborn to get more reps

[dplank]

We have enough needs that BPA should be our approach. That said, when all things are relatively close on the draft board, lean into DL and OL. There's no such thing as a pure, true BPA - there's always at least some element of situational awareness that goes into selections.

Also, my cat's name is Ringo, so there's that.

[EricTighe]

Perhaps for you. But I have one hell of a track record when it comes to BPA.

I do suck at QB's though.

[wab]

That's Tampa 2. I don't remember us running Tampa 2 at all this year.

As deep as our safeties were playing, our CBs had to run quite a way with their guys regardless of our alignment.

Hill was in the slot, with the TE uncharacteristically a couple of yards away on his outside shoulder. Sanborn set up with inside leverage, just the way a cover 2 LB should in that situation. Both safeties and the CB who had the out-breaking TE were all within a couple of yards of Hill when he was tackled (Gordon looked to be a couple of feet away). All of that says cover 2, too.

They just called a nice, somewhat weird play, and it worked, kinda. We were down three and evidently wanted to prevent a touchdown at all costs. Instead, we gave up a first down. That's football sometimes.

I think you're right on the Tampa 2, but if we're running a standard Cover 2, we aren't doing it right, or at least, Gordon wasn't doing it right. It's my understanding that in a standard Cover 2, the linebackers are responsible for the underneath zones (if we aren't running a Tampa 2). In this case, Gordon as the nickel, is replacing the linebacker. His responsibility should be the short zone. It's worth noting that both Sanborn and Gordon were at the same depth at the start. He should have passed the TE off to the safety. If he had done that, he would have been in a position to stop Hill. Instead, he allowed the TE to draw him deep. So we end up with the TE double covered, and their best receiver (FUCKING TYREEK HILL) isolated against our linebacker.

Again, that should NEVER happen. I don't care what you're running. So either Gordon and Sanborn have to switch positions or Gordon has to cover that short zone (effectively doubling Hill). Or something. The Bear defense must have a response to this or Miami would have been running that all day long. You can't just say that mismatches happen. While that is true, you still must have a response to a particular formation that takes that mismatch away. You tell me what it is. Because from my position, if we're going to let Sanborn be isolated against Hill when we're in a Cover 2, we're fucked. And we're fucked with every team we play who has a speed receiver. And it doesn't matter if we have Sanborn, Roquan Smith, or Brian Urlacher, we'd still be fucked.

This all assumes you know what route Hill is going to run pre-snap.

[RichH55]

We have enough needs that BPA should be our approach. That said, when all things are relatively close on the draft board, lean into DL and OL. There's no such thing as a pure, true BPA - there's always at least some element of situational awareness that goes into selections.

Also, my cat's name is Ringo, so there's that.

Man I hope its because of Johnny Ringo and not the drummer

[RichH55]

That's Tampa 2. I don't remember us running Tampa 2 at all this year.

As deep as our safeties were playing, our CBs had to run quite a way with their guys regardless of our alignment.

Hill was in the slot, with the TE uncharacteristically a couple of yards away on his outside shoulder. Sanborn set up with inside leverage, just the way a cover 2 LB should in that situation. Both safeties and the CB who had the out-breaking TE were all within a couple of yards of Hill when he was tackled (Gordon looked to be a couple of feet away). All of that says cover 2, too.

They just called a nice, somewhat weird play, and it worked, kinda. We were down three and evidently wanted to prevent a touchdown at all costs. Instead, we gave up a first down. That's football sometimes.

Again, that should NEVER happen. I don't care what you're running.

Im very glad the explanations of the Cover 2 worked here.

Record Scratch - What? They didn't??!?!?

[RichH55]

I think you're right on the Tampa 2, but if we're running a standard Cover 2, we aren't doing it right, or at least, Gordon wasn't doing it right. It's my understanding that in a standard Cover 2, the linebackers are responsible for the underneath zones (if we aren't running a Tampa 2). In this case, Gordon as the nickel, is replacing the linebacker. His responsibility should be the short zone. It's worth noting that both Sanborn and Gordon were at the same depth at the start. He should have passed the TE off to the safety. If he had done that, he would have been in a position to stop Hill. Instead, he allowed the TE to draw him deep. So we end up with the TE double covered, and their best receiver (FUCKING TYREEK HILL) isolated against our linebacker.

Again, that should NEVER happen. I don't care what you're running. So either Gordon and Sanborn have to switch positions or Gordon has to cover that short zone (effectively doubling Hill). Or something. The Bear defense must have a response to this or Miami would have been running that all day long. You can't just say that mismatches happen. While that is true, you still must have a response to a particular formation that takes that mismatch away. You tell me what it is. Because from my position, if we're going to let Sanborn be isolated against Hill when we're in a Cover 2, we're fucked. And we're fucked with every team we play who has a speed receiver. And it doesn't matter if we have Sanborn, Roquan Smith, or Brian Urlacher, we'd still be fucked.

This all assumes you know what route Hill is going to run pre-snap.

Well if you are assuming there should literally "Never" be these types of mismatches

Why not just assume perfect knowledge in advance to? No one can argue that wouldn't help!

[karhu]

We have enough needs that BPA should be our approach. That said, when all things are relatively close on the draft board, lean into DL and OL. There's no such thing as a pure, true BPA - there's always at least some element of situational awareness that goes into selections.

Also, my cat's name is Ringo, so there's that.

Man I hope its because of Johnny Ringo and not the drummer

Why's that? I'm not a huge Beatles fan, but their rhythm section was one of the best there's ever been. Zeppelin, the Who, and the Descendents might be there, too, but Ringo's a damned fine drummer.

[RichH55]

Man I hope its because of Johnny Ringo and not the drummer

Why's that? I'm not a huge Beatles fan, but their rhythm section was one of the best there's ever been. Zeppelin, the Who, and the Descendents might be there, too, but Ringo's a damned fine drummer.

A) Big Tombstone fan
B) Think the Beatles are overrated

[bearsoldier]

I did not expect a big game from Sandborn and he was out of position on some plays... The Tyreek Hill play several have mentioned was a bad look and understand it was the weak spot of Cover 2 but rookie Gordon was a step behind as well.

I will be looking at Sandborn to make some plays Sunday against the Lions and expect he will be much improved overall in his 2nd game.

I would really like to see what Weatherford might have to offer at LB but he is behind Morrow on the depth chart and doubt he will see much time on the field besides ST.

I am expecting we draft the LB Flus has a preference for in 2023.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

A nice look at Sanborn from Bearlissimo here. He doesn't just focus on the plays where Sanborn made a tackle, but where he did the unsung work that enabled others to make the play.

The first 30 minutes is about Roquan Smith, some good, some bad, looking at his tendency to take missteps and shoot gaps, relying on his speed to make the big play rather than necessarily being where he should be.

From the 30-minute mark it's all about Sanborn for about 25 minutes.

There's also an interesting observation about how the LB group is poor at playing zone defense because they're too busy looking watching the QB and not being aware of the threats attacking their zone. This is leaving the defense particularly vulnerable to receivers getting in behind the LBs and exploiting the gap between them and the safeties. Bearlissimo contends that Sanborn is the one LB playing it well, identifying the threats and dropping deeper when none are underneath in his area.

It's good stuff, albeit on a small sample of plays.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Here's another short video from Bearlissimo on the Bears issues with zone coverage:

[Rusty Trombagent]

I like this argument about Sanborn covering Hill. It's a lot like when TE's have to block DE's one on one. All teams do it, and it works all the time, fans just dont generally notice it because 99% of them dont focus on line play. There's all kinds of situations where that can give an offense a huge advantage. But when a DE gets a sack in that situation fans (and announcers!) get all incredulous like it was some cardinal sin.

[Burl]

I dont miss Roquan one bit.

[wab]

Sanborn has impressive closing speed.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

Sanborn has impressive closing speed.

Did you see the graphic I posted on his Raw Athletic Score? His Shuttle and 3-Cone are off the charts. I like Sanborn a lot. He has a great nose for the ball.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

He did ok but our defense is dog shit right now so I have a hard time giving any of them credit

[Moriarty]

Roquan had 163 tackles last year and is on pace for 166 this year
In his 2 starts, Sanborn is on pace for 162 in a full season

So Sanborn, without any more improvement, is already an elite LB and should be paid 20M (or whatever the new highest is when his contract ends).




Or, he's playing well, but tackles aren't a very good stat and our terrible line play leaves a lot of tackles on the table for our LBs to clean up.
Whichever.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

Roquan had 163 tackles last year and is on pace for 166 this year
In his 2 starts, Sanborn is on pace for 162 in a full season

So Sanborn, without any more improvement, is already an elite LB and should be paid 20M (or whatever the new highest is when his contract ends).




Or, he's playing well, but tackles aren't a very good stat and our terrible line play leaves a lot of tackles on the table for our LBs to clean up.
Whichever.

[RichH55]

Roquan had 163 tackles last year and is on pace for 166 this year
In his 2 starts, Sanborn is on pace for 162 in a full season

So Sanborn, without any more improvement, is already an elite LB and should be paid 20M (or whatever the new highest is when his contract ends).




Or, he's playing well, but tackles aren't a very good stat and our terrible line play leaves a lot of tackles on the table for our LBs to clean up.
Whichever.

What about PD for our other LB? He has to be trending ahead of Roquon too

Almost like maybe we overrated Roquon some. Weird

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

Book it right now. Jack Sanborn, undrafted free agent out of University of Wisconsin will be the starting MLB for the Bears in 2023. And he will be good.

[o-pus #40 in B major]

Book it right now. Jack Sanborn, undrafted free agent out of University of Wisconsin will be the starting MLB for the Bears in 2023. And he will be good.

I follow this 100%.

[karhu]

Did you see the graphic I posted on his Raw Athletic Score? His Shuttle and 3-Cone are off the charts. I like Sanborn a lot. He has a great nose for the ball.

Years ago, I sat down and did my best to figure out the correlation between each combine event and long-term success at each position. Fooled myself into thinking that I'd come up with something useful, at least.

Not a whole lot of surprises, but some of the bigger ones were the positive correlation between weight and success for CBs and the negative correlation of 40 times and success for a few positions. If memory serves, the single biggest correlation involved three-cone times and LBs. Sanborn might just have been one of those guys all along who makes an even better pro than a college player.

[dave99]

[video][/video]

[The Marshall Plan]

Indy had a very highly ranked defense, Flus defense specifically which is a slight variant, and they did not have an Urlacher type playing MLB. IMO the key to this is having a dominant front 4. One that can get after the QB when rushing just 4 and be strong/stout against the run as well. That will open everything else up and is where I'd be focusing most of my attention this off season both via draft and FA.

Build the lines.

This.

All day long. Build from the ball outwards every time.

Especially when it comes to the Cover-2.

So now, let's say we have a top 5 pick and Carter is right there, but the phone is ringing off the hook with a mega trade so somebody can take a QB?

I don't know enough about Carter and where he ranks as a prospect relative to other highly touted DT prospects to have a meaningful opinion.

[dplank]

Indy had a very highly ranked defense, Flus defense specifically which is a slight variant, and they did not have an Urlacher type playing MLB. IMO the key to this is having a dominant front 4. One that can get after the QB when rushing just 4 and be strong/stout against the run as well. That will open everything else up and is where I'd be focusing most of my attention this off season both via draft and FA.

Build the lines.

This.

All day long. Build from the ball outwards every time.

Especially when it comes to the Cover-2.

So now, let's say we have a top 5 pick and Carter is right there, but the phone is ringing off the hook with a mega trade so somebody can take a QB?

I don't know enough about Carter and where he ranks as a prospect relative to other highly touted DT prospects to have a meaningful opinion.

I’d still trade down - Carter looks great and all but that pick would bring multiple starters to the DL and honestly we need 4 new starters. I don’t see a single starter in our current group, although we do have a number of quality depth guys (Jones, Gipson, Blackson, AQM). Maybe you can hide one of these guys as a starter, but 3 new ones minimum are needed IMO.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

Are we going to get 4 (DL) starters in the draft?

Seems ambitious.

It’s usually 2-3 starters per draft year. That would be success.

[dplank]

Are we going to get 4 (DL) starters in the draft?

Seems ambitious.

It’s usually 2-3 starters per draft year. That would be success.

No, but we also have FA and I don’t think the DL is a one year fix.

[wab]

This.

All day long. Build from the ball outwards every time.

Especially when it comes to the Cover-2.

So now, let's say we have a top 5 pick and Carter is right there, but the phone is ringing off the hook with a mega trade so somebody can take a QB?

I don't know enough about Carter and where he ranks as a prospect relative to other highly touted DT prospects to have a meaningful opinion.

I’d still trade down - Carter looks great and all but that pick would bring multiple starters to the DL and honestly we need 4 new starters. I don’t see a single starter in our current group, although we do have a number of quality depth guys (Jones, Gipson, Blackson, AQM). Maybe you can hide one of these guys as a starter, but 3 new ones minimum are needed IMO.

I think they get one starter from the draft and one from FA. Jones will still probably start at 1T and one of Robinson/Gipson will start.

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

[video][/video]

Nice find! Love Brett Kollmann. Just as the video said. Sanborn isn't going to be flashy or super athletic. What he is going to do is be in the right place at the right time, and have an insane burst to close on ball carriers. He is a workingman's linebacker, and he's exactly what this defense needs (talent on a rookie contract doesn't hurt either). I'm really excited to see how he develops the rest of the year.

[Arkansasbear]

We have enough needs that BPA should be our approach. That said, when all things are relatively close on the draft board, lean into DL and OL. There's no such thing as a pure, true BPA - there's always at least some element of situational awareness that goes into selections.

Also, my cat's name is Ringo, so there's that.

Man I hope its because of Johnny Ringo and not the drummer