Interesting article on the Bears offense

[Outlaw Josey Cutler]

ridiculously (rhetorically?)

Not even mutually exclusive from my view

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Not even mutually exclusive from my view

Its just a weird concept to me. People ask for links when someone makes an actual news item posting...an injury, a trade, a comment from an opposing player, etc...and the dubious nature of the news itself makes you want to be sure it's true.

I don't understand how someone giving their opinion on a player requires you to ask for a link. What would they be "linking" to, exactly? Its like people on CCS can't make their own judgments on players...it has to be "linked" to mimic what some idiot at FanSided said in the media. That is why we have so many people vehemently arguing that Pace is handling the kicker situation correctly even though they have no idea what is going on...they are simply echoing what people in the media are saying and not using their own minds.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

I saw this article this morning that talks about the Bears 2018 offense. I really liked the graphs that showed how they produced in each zone of rushing and passing and then how they rated relative to the rest of the league.

https://dabearsblog.com/2019/self-scouting-chicagos-2018-offense

Do you ever have any original thoughts or are you just another article bot?

 

[Pegger]

Couple quick thoughts:

Middle runs - I'd like to see comparable data to other teams. I'd argue most teams have a lower YPC when going right into the middle of a defense. Often you are only looking for 2-3 yards, whereas outside runs are predicated on running away from the defense.

Eagles Run Game - I think pigeon holing them into one scheme is wrong and I'd add saying a scheme change will fix things is an overly simplistic way of looking at things. Many concepts are built off of a specific scheme, so they are all inter-related. They run a combination of inside zone, outside zone, power, stretch and counter concepts. In short their OL has to know how to block man, zone and gap concepts. I think all teams do this to a certain extent, but when the Eagles are really winning in the trenches it's interesting to slow it down and see how often they jump between the different concepts. I should add it's not like they are sooooooo good that they can run whatever they want. Often it's frustrating when they are trying to figure out a specific scheme and keep running plays that get blown up.

 

[Starion]

Please post a link, stats, or something. Sounds a bit pessimistic and baseless otherwise.
Great? NO. Terrible? No.

I believed we were talking about whether the OL & Harry was to blame (Dweebs claim) or play calling or bad fit/predictability of Howard?

The OP article author did NOT give any stats specific to separating out these things, and even clearly said he wasn't sure:

they were consistently among the least efficient teams in the NFL at those carries in terms of yards/carry. I’m not sure if this is due to the offensive line or Jordan Howard.

Points for his use of the android "Data" from Star Trek TNG btw.

My reaction to dweebs calling the OL & Harry terrible was to ask "show us why you think OL & Harry is THE problem".
Aside from some questionable PFF blocking stats asking for "OL sucks" data may have been a ridiculous request by me.

I see now I should've been better & more clear.


You Rory, just assumed I didn't even click on the OP link & gave me a hard time without even asking "What are you talking about?" That woulda been perfectly reasonable. But you went snark, assuming me an idiot.

Its just a weird concept to me. People ask for links when someone makes an actual news item posting...an injury, a trade, a comment from an opposing player, etc...and the dubious nature of the news itself makes you want to be sure it's true.

I don't understand how someone giving their opinion on a player requires you to ask for a link. What would they be "linking" to, exactly? Its like people on CCS can't make their own judgments on players...it has to be "linked" to mimic what some idiot at FanSided said in the media. That is why we have so many people vehemently arguing that Pace is handling the kicker situation correctly even though they have no idea what is going on...they are simply echoing what people in the media are saying and not using their own minds.

Agreed. Not every opinion requires proof, but I do tend to like to take a discussion beyond opinions & assholes, yes.

If you want to trash a player, coach, OL, is not okay to ask that person to back it up? They don't have to, but I'm not in the wrong to ask why he thinks so?

I also agree that an article from a media guy is far from proof or gospel. Good data is hard to find & that one was better than 95% of articles. Specific data is gold, and equally harder to find yet.
Without it we argue on here with opinions, which is fine.
Things aren't always as simple as "Parkey sucks & Pace needs to fix it" which we all agree.

I post regularly against overly optimistic opinions also. It's not all sunshine & rainbows.

Please, at any time, just ask "what the hell"? Be specific. I'm happy to clarify if I come across the wrong way dude.

 

[The Big Grabowski]

I'm surprised by the lack of perspective when evaluating last year's offense. Average was a massive improvement from 2017. We got the year 2 leap we needed out of Trubisky. The team is brimming with confidence going into Nagy's second year. The rest will sort itself out.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

My reaction to dweebs calling the OL & Harry terrible was to ask "show us why you think OL & Harry is THE problem".
Aside from some questionable PFF blocking stats asking for "OL sucks" data may have been a ridiculous request by me.

This is completely asinine. Not sure why you are choosing this CCS hill to die upon. You didn't ask "show us why", you asked for a link. Duh. I thought this had already been established.

The second part of your post is even more lunacy. You allow that PFF blocking stats WERE PROVIDED in this thread, but you "slyly" describe them as "questionable". So on one hand you disregard the basic team offense statistics, you question the next-gen OL statistics....yet on the other hand you chide a poster for not providing some type of statistical holy grail that would somehow specifically statistically separate (your term) the performance of OL coach Harvey Hiestand!!!!

I don't think I've ever seen such a high "burden of proof" on CCS. Thank the lord you weren't more active on this board when I was saying bad things about Dowell Loggains...I can only imagine what stats/links you would have asked for me to provide.

 

[Bearly]

So you agree that no one lied? They were mistaken as to his capabilities in one year, yes? Cool, not sure how that negated my post but good.

Now when you say people thinking "he would even get them to perform better was wishful thinking", yes exactly. (which is different from lying which was what was claimed by who I was replying to)

I am willing to give him a failing (or maybe low passing) grade for year 1 while also willing to see what he does with the O-line in year 2. I will take your word that some here calling him a "miracle worker" based on the fact that this IS CCS after all, no surprise there, but I don't get the sense that those same posters are defending him irrationally now and making excuses for him, and I think that is PROGRESS in CCS ... unless those posters are just not here, that could be true too.

Don't really know what an OL coach can do in a preseason of work. His value comes in the offseason and prospect development. It's the most unlikely coaching position to offer immediate gratification. What you hope for is that as guys like Long and Massie get older and/or less effective, you can replace them with low cost backups without losing a beat. That's a real value of a great OL coach. Saving cap space for premier positions. OL can be developed but it's generally takes a bit of time.