Should Bears be worried about depth on offense

vincentvega

Active member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
741
Liked Posts:
455
I think the depth on the offensive side of the ball is OK (not great) but when is it ever really great for every position on one or both sides of the ball. That being said I tend to agree with what many people here have said numerous times that the TE position is the most concerning on the offensive side of the ball...



http://www.csnchicago.com/bears/should-bears-be-worried-about-depth-offense?p=ya5nbcs&ocid=yahoo

Phil Emery has, seemingly, fixed a lot the past two off-seasons, primarily reconstructing the trenches on both sides of the ball.

With just over two weeks until his third Bears team checks into Bourbonnais, it won’t be long until we find out whether the new-look defensive line will have as great a turnaround impact as the offensive line a year ago.

Still, there’s only so much money to go around, and he can’t necessarily fix every glaring need. There’s still some concern about quality at the safety position, as well as who can join Lance Briggs in making an impact at linebacker, provided Briggs can pick up where he left off, pre-shoulder injury.

For the first time in what seems forever, the Bears appear to be going into this season with fewer concerns on offense than on defense. I’m not quite sure the last time I can remember that being the case, if ever, during my time following this franchise. And it’s warranted. Yet the injury bug will bite, and teams have to hope that when it does, those bites are ones from which they can easily recover. But an innocent inquiry this week about the depth at a handful of offensive positions lingers.

The conversation has continued and the answers vary almost equally about players the offense can least afford to lose. While Jay Cutler’s season-long health seems most vital to putting up the kind of numbers it delivered last year, it depends on the kind of magic people believe Marc Trestman can do with the backups, and how the system and playbook can ultimately provide a Band-Aid at the most important position on the field. There’s a faction out there that believe Trestman, Aaron Kromer and Matt Cavanaugh can get the same things out of Jordan Palmer or Jimmy Clausen that they did with a previously-unpopular Josh McCown prior to his 2013 performance.

Others think, despite the drafting of Ka'Deem Carey in the fourth round and the production he provided at Arizona, a long-term injury to Matt Forte would be most crippling to this fall’s offensive fortunes.

Almost as many people I’ve asked that question say 'no' – not Forte (because of Carey), not Cutler (because of what Trestman can quickly develop), but if either Brandon Marshall or Alshon Jeffery were to go down, they’re not certain Marquess Wilson can make the kind of quick impact Jeffery did last year, and aren’t impressed with the depth behind Wilson, the projected third receiver.

I also had a couple of people tell me that if everyone else remains healthy, it’s one thing, but the depth behind Martellus Bennett - in what he gives as both a receiver and blocker wrapped up in one package - would greatly hinder the offensive balance if he were to go down. I even had someone tell me that while Jermon Bushrod may not necessarily be considered among the league’s elite at left tackle, his consistent blind-side protection of Cutler would create a domino effect along the line if they were forced to turn to his serviceable backup in Eben Britton. Objectors countered that Kromer would somehow find a way continue to make it work, as Trestman did with McCown a year ago.

It’s some interesting food for thought, even if it might cause some indigestion. Or it’s just senseless, doomsday concern – a bridge that doesn’t need to be crossed until necessary. I tend to agree. Most importantly, everyone just hopes it ends up, somehow, being a non-issue, during the brutal marathon of an NFL season.
 

DrGonzo

Gazpacho Police
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
9,245
Liked Posts:
5,708
Location:
Albuquerque, NM
This is Trestman's third Bears team?
 

gallagher

Nothing left to do but smile, smile, smile
Donator
Joined:
Sep 27, 2010
Posts:
6,389
Liked Posts:
5,635
Location:
Semi-Nomadic
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Michigan Wolverines
  2. Ohio Bobcats
Thing is, you are used to Bears offenses that only ever knew how to do one thing. When guys like Ron Turner, Mike Martz, and Terry Shea had to replace starters, the playcalling stayed the same. If that is your strategy, having high quality depth is of paramount importance.

Now we have Trestman and Kromer, who proved last year that when the most important position goes down, the offense still works. This is because the playcalling takes advantages of the strengths of the players on the field when Trestman is in charge. Having good depth is still important, dont get me wrong, but the playcalling will adapt to the strengths of the players he has at his disposal.

Now Bennett going down would be a problem because the guys behind him are neither good at blocking nor receiving, but we have a whole offseason to find talent to back him up. We are also left with question marks backing up Cutler, but what else is new with that. The rest of the offense has at least one player that can come off the bench and positively contribute, so I trust Trestman to use them to the best of their abilities.
 

Penny Traitor

バカでも才能は一つ
Staff member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
11,256
Liked Posts:
17,137
Location:
Chicago
Our starting OL had a great run of health last season...I worry we can't keep that kind of luck up. Injuries piling up there would be devastating.

Losing Marshall or Jeffrey would hurt, but not as bad as if we lost both.

Having three starting receivers that are giants really makes having a pass catching TE a luxury. Bennett would be missed, but the offense would survive with anyone that can block.

Casey does remind me of Forte and look what Forte did his rookie year. Not saying Forte is expendable...just that his loss may sting less now than in seasons past.

Finally....quarterback....

I had more faith in McCown going into last season than I do the nobodies behind Cutler this year. I know our coach's reputation, but this would be a great year for Cutler to stay out there while we see if Fales is worth grooming.

Depth worries for me...five least...one most worrisome....

5. RB
4. TE
3. WR
2. QB
1. OL
 

mattb78

My threads are FTO !
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
3,902
Liked Posts:
4,321
Location:
Orlando
I have never been big on backup QBs. Reason being, if your QB goes down for the season, you are not winning a superbowl. Only realistic situation that a good backup could get you home is when your 1st string QB misses a bunch of games to an early injury, but comes back with enough weeks left to win some games and establish rhythm. Keep in mind that even in this limited situation, if you have a superbowl team, even without your QB you should be able to play close to .500 ball anyway, so are the 2-3 extra wins your great backup may get going to make the difference between winning a superbowl or not, unlikely.

Anything can happen in the NFL. Maybe a team like Seattle could win it with a backup. But unless your team is built like Seattle or the early 2000 Bucs teams, you need a very good QB to win it all. That isn't how our current Bears are built, so I am not worried. If Cutler goes down, so does our season.

Great backup QBs make for a middle of the road season or a small playoff run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZAN

Tjodalv

Discoverer of Dragosaurs
CCS Hall of Fame '22
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
16,036
Liked Posts:
14,785
This is one of those issues that people tend to bring up without considering that it's a problem for every team. Absolutely no one has a 4th WR that will be capable of stepping in and filling the shoes of their X or Z without significant drop off (even if their starting 3 WRs aren't anything special).

As for the OL, most teams have one or two guys who are borderline starters that can fill a gap for a year if necessary (ours are Britton and BDP [assuming the latter doesn't unseat Garza]); and also have a bunch of "project" players waiting in the wings.

I can't decide if TE depth is much of an issue at this point or not. The coaching staff seem content with the fact that if Bennett goes down they'll simply remove the portion of the playbook that requires a receiving TE and focus more on plays in which the 3rd WR is the first read (rather than a 2nd TE, they marched Britton out in that spot quite a bit last season). I'm not insinuating that it isn't a concern, but Martellus going down is not something that would cripple the O.
 

Warrior Spirit

The Truth
Donator
Joined:
Sep 12, 2010
Posts:
41,588
Liked Posts:
13,612
I'd worry about the depth at the QB spot obviously. Jay is known to be soft and to go down faster than a whore on a Saturday night. Who is the next Josh McCown?
 

vincentvega

Active member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
741
Liked Posts:
455
I have never been big on backup QBs. Reason being, if your QB goes down for the season, you are not winning a superbowl. Only realistic situation that a good backup could get you home is when your 1st string QB misses a bunch of games to an early injury, but comes back with enough weeks left to win some games and establish rhythm. Keep in mind that even in this limited situation, if you have a superbowl team, even without your QB you should be able to play close to .500 ball anyway, so are the 2-3 extra wins your great backup may get going to make the difference between winning a superbowl or not, unlikely.

Anything can happen in the NFL. Maybe a team like Seattle could win it with a backup. But unless your team is built like Seattle or the early 2000 Bucs teams, you need a very good QB to win it all. That isn't how our current Bears are built, so I am not worried. If Cutler goes down, so does our season.

Great backup QBs make for a middle of the road season or a small playoff run.

This was exactly the reason I didn't mention qb. You are "almost" never going to have real success against top teir nfl competition if your qb goes down abd you are relying on your backup.

I am curious as to how many superbowls (or even nfc/afc championship games) were won with the starting qb being on the bench.

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk 2
 

vincentvega

Active member
Joined:
Aug 21, 2012
Posts:
741
Liked Posts:
455
This is one of those issues that people tend to bring up without considering that it's a problem for every team. Absolutely no one has a 4th WR that will be capable of stepping in and filling the shoes of their X or Z without significant drop off (even if their starting 3 WRs aren't anything special).

As for the OL, most teams have one or two guys who are borderline starters that can fill a gap for a year if necessary (ours are Britton and BDP [assuming the latter doesn't unseat Garza]); and also have a bunch of "project" players waiting in the wings.

I can't decide if TE depth is much of an issue at this point or not. The coaching staff seem content with the fact that if Bennett goes down they'll simply remove the portion of the playbook that requires a receiving TE and focus more on plays in which the 3rd WR is the first read (rather than a 2nd TE, they marched Britton out in that spot quite a bit last season). I'm not insinuating that it isn't a concern, but Martellus going down is not something that would cripple the O.

I can understand that argument. Just seems to be the only position that we dont really even have a servicable backup. If bennett went down (god forbid) as you stated, we would just have to alter plays and how we do things... With most other positions we could plug someone in there as a stop gap.

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk 2
 

Slacker

New member
Joined:
Sep 19, 2012
Posts:
555
Liked Posts:
354
Lol, decades have been spent lamenting the holes in the starting line-up and now people are worried about depth. It's a good time to be a Bears fan.
 

Pegger

President Stoopid
Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
Posts:
7,621
Liked Posts:
5,873
Location:
Communist Canada
Depth at OL, TE and QB are spots of concern. The truth is almost every team has depth issues, so this isn't anything crazy.

Personally I think the OL is still a bit of a question mark. Granted they were far better than last year, but they have some young players on that group (Mills and Long), regressed a touch as the year wore on and they were virtually healthy all season long, which is rare.

Add in that with the OL playing so much better Cutler still ended up working through two separate injuries (groin and ankle). I think the group is about middle of the pack, which is light years away from the previous coach/GM, but still has a ways to go before it's a true area of strength.
 

DC

Minister of Archaic Titillations
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
11,104
Liked Posts:
9,066
Location:
Colorado
Sign Earl Bennett and the #4 WR issue is solved.
 

coachsrant

New member
Joined:
Jul 9, 2014
Posts:
8
Liked Posts:
3
If either Brandon Marshall or Alshon Jeffery go down the Bears are screwed. They definitely need someone better than Marquess Wilson and Josh Morgan.
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,872
Liked Posts:
26,846
When you have a player with pro bowl potential at every skill position, then yeah. There is a drop off if they go down. Thats not a comment on lack of depth though.

Further, the article warns bout depth behind a stud HB, LT, and TE. OK, for TE he has a point. Plenty of teams have a quality 2nd TE and the Bears are lacking there. But LT and HB? cmon, there aren't even enough quality starters in the league at those spots, let alone backups.
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,872
Liked Posts:
26,846
Depth at OL, TE and QB are spots of concern. The truth is almost every team has depth issues, so this isn't anything crazy.

Personally I think the OL is still a bit of a question mark. Granted they were far better than last year, but they have some young players on that group (Mills and Long), regressed a touch as the year wore on and they were virtually healthy all season long, which is rare.

Add in that with the OL playing so much better Cutler still ended up working through two separate injuries (groin and ankle). I think the group is about middle of the pack, which is light years away from the previous coach/GM, but still has a ways to go before it's a true area of strength.

Depth on OL is fine with DLP and Britton. Both are at least average. Sure, bears are in trouble if their LT goes down, but that is true of about every team in the league.

Also, I think Clausen can be a quality Orton type backup QB. With Cutler signed as a franchise QB, bears can't spend on backup with starter potential. It just is what it is. Its a good problem to have.

TE depth is a problem. But with all the focus on restocking the D this offseason, there just wasn't the cap to go around. Its possible the bears may still add a late offseason cut though.
 

AHSIllini32

New member
Joined:
Nov 5, 2012
Posts:
3,196
Liked Posts:
1,548
Our starting OL had a great run of health last season...I worry we can't keep that kind of luck up. Injuries piling up there would be devastating.

Losing Marshall or Jeffrey would hurt, but not as bad as if we lost both.

Having three starting receivers that are giants really makes having a pass catching TE a luxury. Bennett would be missed, but the offense would survive with anyone that can block.

Casey does remind me of Forte and look what Forte did his rookie year. Not saying Forte is expendable...just that his loss may sting less now than in seasons past.

Finally....quarterback....

I had more faith in McCown going into last season than I do the nobodies behind Cutler this year. I know our coach's reputation, but this would be a great year for Cutler to stay out there while we see if Fales is worth grooming.

Depth worries for me...five least...one most worrisome....

5. RB
4. TE
3. WR
2. QB
1. OL

McCown was a nobody before last year too so to say you had more faith in him than the current "nobodies" is revisionist history.
 

xer0h0ur

HS Referee HoF
Donator
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
22,260
Liked Posts:
17,824
Location:
Chicago, IL.
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
If either Brandon Marshall or Alshon Jeffery go down the Bears are screwed. They definitely need someone better than Marquess Wilson and Josh Morgan.

And if Megatron goes down the Lions are fucked. If Julio Jones goes down the Falcons are fucked (White isn't what he used to be). If Dez Bryant goes down the Cowboys are fucked. If AJ Green goes down the Bengals are fucked. You see the pattern? Be happy we have two legitimate studs because its not even common to have two much less a third guy who can fill in for an injured starter at a high level.
 

Top