If the Oline is so bad then….

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
20,976
Liked Posts:
11,990
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
The pass pro can be good at times. But Fields isn't doing them any favors
 

BearClaw55

SELL THE TEAM
Donator
Joined:
Aug 13, 2010
Posts:
1,790
Liked Posts:
1,417
This sounds kind of BSish.

If everyone is saying how horrible the Bears Pass Pro is, there should be lots of examples of every single offensive lineman messing up. Now, if there are so few pass plays, just one pressure or sack allowed would become a large percentage of total plays so the rating would plummet with any single mistake, dropping a players Pass Pro rating immediately. The more Pass Pro plays, the more towards average the rating would be.

If the Bears are so bad at pass protection, why aren't the numbers WAY below average right now, with less plays than other offensive linemen?

Funny how some Bears offensive linemen can be AWFUL at Pass Pro while being rated top 10 in Pass Pro rating.

This isn't like golf where I could get my Gold Master's championship green jacket because I had less strokes than any other player with my 50 strokes because I quit after completing the first hole, taking 50 strokes to complete it. That would be awful golf by me, yet I would end up with a top 10 (first place) score, since I quit before I took another 50 strokes to complete hole #2.

Alex Brown just said on the Kap & Hood show that the Oline can’t protect so the Bears try not to pass the ball as much. That kind of goes along with my theory. If the Bears pass the ball like a normal NFL team, those numbers go way down. Again Fields looks bad, no excuses there but this Oline is not a good pass blocking Oline.
 
Last edited:

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
20,976
Liked Posts:
11,990
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild

Gustavus Adolphus

Roquaids
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
40,622
Liked Posts:
33,280
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Montreal Canadiens
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
Most offensive linemen will tell you it is FAR easier to run pro than pass pro. FAR FAR EASIER. Run Pro they just have to identify their one man and fire off the ball. Pass pro is more nuanced and can involve passing defenders down the line, etc - in short, pass pro is a LOT more complex.

Most O-linemen prefer run pro because its easier for them to handle - in terms of mental load, assignments, and how they approach the block.

If you don't even know THAT much, you aren't qualified to talk about the line.
Mr. Inside Information over here.
 

BaBaBlacksheep

Just a kid from the burbs...
CCS Hall of Fame '21
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
29,169
Liked Posts:
37,217
Alex Brown just said on the Kap & Hood show that the Oline can’t protect so the Bears try not to pass the ball as much. That kind of goes along with my theory. If the Bears pass the ball like a normal NFL those numbers go way down. Again Fields looks bad, no excuses there but this Oline is not a pass blocking Oline.
Well I’ll trust Alex way more than my eval or CCS’s.
 

Gustavus Adolphus

Roquaids
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
40,622
Liked Posts:
33,280
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Montreal Canadiens
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
It's also a very poor explanation of the zone blocking scheme the Bear use where you're not assigned a specific man to block. Just a bad post on many counts.
@Mighty Joe Young has admitted on multiple occasions that he does not watch the games.
 

Gustavus Adolphus

Roquaids
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Jun 15, 2010
Posts:
40,622
Liked Posts:
33,280
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Montreal Canadiens
  1. Nebraska Cornhuskers
  2. Villanova Wildcats
No doubt but it should prevent you from understanding the difference zone and man run pro.
I disagree with you. Not watching the games would definitely prevent you from knowing the difference. The problem is trying to pass off that you have any idea of what you're talking about, and doing it in such a smug manner.
 

Bears Backer 54

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 5, 2012
Posts:
672
Liked Posts:
549
I thought the offensive line had a pretty good game yesterday. I saw more missed blocks by the TEs and WRs that cost us yards than on the line. If Fields had simply connected on a few more plays and had a stat line of 200 yards with 0 tds and 0 ints, I think everyone would be a lot happier today and giving kudos to the line for the crazy rushing production yesterday. The poor QB performance and turnovers made this a tougher win to enjoy because the team had to overcome Fields poor play and you have some of the strongest Fields supporters trying to avoid the obvious that Fields had a really bad performance yesterday.
 
Joined:
Sep 20, 2022
Posts:
37
Liked Posts:
28
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Wake Forest Demon Deacons
Think that (1) the O-line being appreciably worse at pass blocking than run blocking, and (2) Fields holding onto the ball too long are connected and not mutually exclusive.

That is, our line is awesome at run blocking. Our line is not awesome at pass blocking. And going back to college, Fields has always held onto the ball to long. This is not a great combination and probably results in our calling even fewer pass plays than if we were dealing with only one or the other.
 

JoJoBoxer

Well-known member
Joined:
Aug 14, 2010
Posts:
8,644
Liked Posts:
6,063
Alex Brown just said on the Kap & Hood show that the Oline can’t protect so the Bears try not to pass the ball as much. That kind of goes along with my theory. If the Bears pass the ball like a normal NFL team, those numbers go way down. Again Fields looks bad, no excuses there but this Oline is not a good pass blocking Oline.
so the Bears try not to pass the ball as much
To begin with, the Bears do not have a top 10 pass-pro offensive line.

But since the Bears still have some pass plays called, they either show that they are bad in those plays or are given the benefit of the doubt and are given some more pass attempts.

If they show that they are bad in the few pass plays that happen, they never have good numbers because they gave up pressure, hurries or sacks in the few passes that happened.

If the Bears do not give up pressures, sacks or hurries in the few pass attempts, then they never show that they are bad on the field because they never gave up any of those stuff.

This is not an argument with you, but more of this not making any sense.

  1. "They are bad"
  2. "How do you know, seeing that the tackles had pretty good Pass Pro ratings?"
  3. "Well, they hardly ever passed"
  4. "If they have pretty good Pass Pro ratings, they must not have done too badly when they were in Pass Pro, though it was limited. Why are you complaining?"
  5. "Because they hardly ever passed. The numbers would have dropped if there were more passes"
  6. "How do you know this, seeing that in limited passes, they showed that they were not that bad?"
  7. "Because they are bad"
 

BearClaw55

SELL THE TEAM
Donator
Joined:
Aug 13, 2010
Posts:
1,790
Liked Posts:
1,417
To begin with, the Bears do not have a top 10 pass-pro offensive line.

But since the Bears still have some pass plays called, they either show that they are bad in those plays or are given the benefit of the doubt and are given some more pass attempts.

If they show that they are bad in the few pass plays that happen, they never have good numbers because they gave up pressure, hurries or sacks in the few passes that happened.

If the Bears do not give up pressures, sacks or hurries in the few pass attempts, then they never show that they are bad on the field because they never gave up any of those stuff.

This is not an argument with you, but more of this not making any sense.

  1. "They are bad"
  2. "How do you know, seeing that the tackles had pretty good Pass Pro ratings?"
  3. "Well, they hardly ever passed"
  4. "If they have pretty good Pass Pro ratings, they must not have done too badly when they were in Pass Pro, though it was limited. Why are you complaining?"
  5. "Because they hardly ever passed. The numbers would have dropped if there were more passes"
  6. "How do you know this, seeing that in limited passes, they showed that they were not that bad?"
  7. "Because they are bad"

Go back and watch Sunday’s game and the Packers game. Then watch an NFL team that passes the ball for about 250+ yds. The eye test not only tells us Fields is bad but also that the Oline’s pass blocking is bad.
 
Joined:
Sep 20, 2022
Posts:
37
Liked Posts:
28
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Wake Forest Demon Deacons
Saw on Twitter that per ProFootballFocus, our offensive line is currently ranked 2nd in run blocking and 22nd in pass blocking. 22nd is bad (obviously), but let's not act like it's solely to blame for what we're watching.
 

Sparks500

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 28, 2014
Posts:
2,225
Liked Posts:
1,939
Saw on Twitter that per ProFootballFocus, our offensive line is currently ranked 2nd in run blocking and 22nd in pass blocking. 22nd is bad (obviously), but let's not act like it's solely to blame for what we're watching.
It’s a team effort to look that bad…..
 

Mighty Joe Young

Living in Troll's Heads Rent-Free for Decades
Joined:
Feb 8, 2021
Posts:
6,203
Liked Posts:
5,411
Well I’ll trust Alex way more than my eval or CCS’s.


At least you'll believe someone.

Some of those CCS's were telling you the same thing Alex Brown or Coach Flus did in the presser today - maybe start paying attention to those guys on CCS - they may know what they are talking about ;)
 

Top