Olin Kreutz Just Delivered a Blistering Takedown of Matt Nagy By Erik Lambert - May 28, 2020
Olin Kreutz is a diehard lover of the Chicago Bears. That shouldn’t be a surprise. He gave his heart and soul to the franchise for over a decade as one of their best-ever centers. So it clearly pains him when watching the offense struggle as it did quite often in 2019. Nothing pained him more it seems than watching them run the ball so miserably.
That should not happen. Running the ball is a staple of Bears football. It’s supposed to be in their offensive DNA. Finishing 27th in the NFL on the ground is unacceptable. While people have tried to point fingers in different directions like the backs or the offensive line, Kreutz thinks the problem go higher.
I don't know if I'd call that a "blistering take down"...not even sure I'd call it scathing. I also think we know that Nagy does not want to be an I formation running team...all that does is take away things the defense has to think about pre-snap, and takes away a threat on the offense.
Nagy seemed unfocused with his scheme last year and the article points out that Nagy has admitted the O had no identity. The season on O seemed to be that Nagy would just throw crap at the wall to see if something stuck... and it was different crap each week. Really it was bizarre to watch how disjointed the unit looked lurching from game to game and not being able to score. 3-point games in the NFL is something to be ashamed of. You're getting whipped bigtime.
I've said it in other threads. It's okay if we are not a bigtime run team amassing big yardage that way... but at least be able to run effectively as needed. That takes a commitment to the run game to work. If you present zero threat running the ball in games then the opposing D has an easier job. In hindsight you can see why we had the horrific scoring. What was Nagy thinking? It was so disappointing. The offense was painful to watch on gamedays. Embarrassing.
Depends on the source and how reliable it has been in the past. You can be a past player and have good takes or have bad takes.
ALL TONGUE IN CHEEK FOLLOWS:
So if what the former players says confirms our own views we approve, but if he doesn't we don't approve?
THE ABOVE WAS POSTED TO BE FUNNY. IT IS NOT MEANT TO HE MEAN TO ANYONE.
It's funny, but no. What happens if 2 players have contradicting opinions, do I have to agree with both? Or maybe listen to the one that tends to be better at giving takes that hold true over time?
I'm confused...Do we believe what former players say or not? Can we get a ruling here?
I'm not saying I don't believe what Kreutz is saying. Its his opinion after all. But Nagy did in many ways confirm what Kreutz is saying. I just don't think it was this big take down of Nagy and his coaching ability.
I'm confused...Do we believe what former players say or not? Can we get a ruling here?
I'm not saying I don't believe what Kreutz is saying. Its his opinion after all. But Nagy did in many ways confirm what Kreutz is saying. I just don't think it was this big take down of Nagy and his coaching ability.
I don't read Lambert on principle so I really don't know. I'm just more amused by the constant back and forth between listening to former players and not listening to what they have to say.
There is also a Twitter thread about how the Bear's ran better out of non-I-formation last season. I'll look for it when I have time.