Bears OL.

Deleted
Deleted Member

Posts: 0
Likes:

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 9:47:20 GMT -6

Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2017 9:47:20 GMT -6

Jan 4, 2017 9:45:05 GMT -6 shark86 said:

Jan 3, 2017 21:35:06 GMT -6 riczaj01 said:

Leno had 6 false starts in 16 games and 100+ snaps. Your eyes can lie also, watch brain games some time, an entire show about how the eye and mind trick us constantly.

Your first mistake was thinking they would be bad, there was no reason to think that. They are better then you thought b/c your eyes originally lied to you; and apparently still are. Leno and Massie played pretty damn well all season long. The Bears OL when Cutler wasn't under Center gave up a sack .12% per pass attempt, that ranked #1 in the NFL. Sure stats lie, but they don't lie that much. I didn't know this, but listening to 670 today, the left side was actually the more successful power rush this year, that's not normal for an OL, but it makes since considering that Long was out most of the year.

I'd like to see better also, luckily they are both fairly young and could well get better. But there isn't a huge step that needs to be made either, at that point you are talking pro bowl caliber; and that normally requires name recognition more then game play.

My opinions are mistakes and your opinions are inarguably correct. Got it. Even though you agreed you'd like to see better...Word for word what I said.... And you cherry pick stats to prove that mediocrity equals greatness and awesome trying to force me to argue they're horrible. I don't play those games. My opinion is my opinion, yours is yours. I said mine and that's that. Go ahead and keep digging up stats. It won't change my opinion the next time massie gets manhandled and I throw popcorn at the TV.

You know popcorn won't hurt your tv. Unless it's unpopped and you throw really hard....

Quote

riczaj01
Administrator

Posts: 11,460

Likes: 10,242

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 10:06:18 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 10:06:18 GMT -6

Jan 4, 2017 9:45:05 GMT -6 shark86 said:

Jan 3, 2017 21:35:06 GMT -6 riczaj01 said:

Leno had 6 false starts in 16 games and 100+ snaps. Your eyes can lie also, watch brain games some time, an entire show about how the eye and mind trick us constantly.

Your first mistake was thinking they would be bad, there was no reason to think that. They are better then you thought b/c your eyes originally lied to you; and apparently still are. Leno and Massie played pretty damn well all season long. The Bears OL when Cutler wasn't under Center gave up a sack .12% per pass attempt, that ranked #1 in the NFL. Sure stats lie, but they don't lie that much. I didn't know this, but listening to 670 today, the left side was actually the more successful power rush this year, that's not normal for an OL, but it makes since considering that Long was out most of the year.

I'd like to see better also, luckily they are both fairly young and could well get better. But there isn't a huge step that needs to be made either, at that point you are talking pro bowl caliber; and that normally requires name recognition more then game play.

My opinions are mistakes and your opinions are inarguably correct. Got it. Even though you agreed you'd like to see better...Word for word what I said.... And you cherry pick stats to prove that mediocrity equals greatness and awesome trying to force me to argue they're horrible. I don't play those games. My opinion is my opinion, yours is yours. I said mine and that's that. Go ahead and keep digging up stats. It won't change my opinion the next time massie gets manhandled and I throw popcorn at the TV.

There's the difference right there, you think they are mediocre, and they aren't. COULD they get better sure. THEY COULD get better at ILB, they don't need to, and it's not b/c the ilb's are mediocre.

There's the difference right there, you think they are mediocre, and they aren't. COULD they get better sure. THEY COULD get better at ILB, they don't need to, and it's not b/c the ilb's are mediocre.

I'm not cherry picking anything. You are over playing how bad the OL was, specifically the OT's, and i'm calling you out on it.

Quote

brasilbear
Hall of Famer

Posts: 5,836

Likes: 6,643

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 10:32:32 GMT -6

Post by brasilbear on Jan 4, 2017 10:32:32 GMT -6

The OL played well and opened some amazing holes for Howard. No doubt about it. I would however like to see the OL not be neglected. I believe that an OL (an to a lesser degree the DL) act as force multipliers for the RB and QB. Look at the impact the Dallas OL had on EE and Dak. How much better would Howard be running behind a Dallas level OL? How much more confident would we as fans be about a rookie QB if we had Dallas OL? If Long/Sitton can come back healthy and 100%, with continued improvement from Leno/Massie/Whitehair AND a genuine prospect (not some 7th round OT) for depth and/or future starter, the Bears should have a better OL next season.

Back in the heyday of the Saints, Brees thrived behind an OL that was strong up the middle, I think the Bears are headed in that direction. Brees was forever stepping up into a secure pocket made by Evans (RG-- 4 time AP, 6 time PB), Goodwin (C-1 PB) and Nicks (LG--2 PB, 1 AP). Didn't hurt that the RT made a PB and they had a in=his=prime Bushrod at LT (2x PB).

Best of all? Only one of them was taken higher than the 4th round. If some OL falls, and ends up in the 4th or 5th, don't neglect the OL.

I'd also spend late round picks on an ILB if one was available.

HOWEVER and BUT

I still want to see a 3-4 DE, a backup NT, a TE (and not some 400 lb blocking TE either), and multiple DBs added to the roster next season. SO.....take it for wha its worth.

Quote

Last Edit: Jan 4, 2017 10:33:39 GMT -6 by brasilbear

riczaj01
Administrator

Posts: 11,460

Likes: 10,242

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 10:38:42 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 10:38:42 GMT -6

Not that much better really, FO had Dallas's O rated 5th overall vs the rush, again you are buying into talking points put out by the media. Dallas OL is amazing look at all the 1st round picks.

Meanwhile Chicago's OL has 1 first round draft pick Long so they must suck, but reality is they weren't far behind Dallas's OL, and they were beat up most of the year so imagine if the Sitton and Long had stayed healthy for 16 games, how much better they would have been? Ya they need depth, and depth that can eventually push the starters; EVERY position needs that though. It shouldn't be ignored but that doesn't mean it's a high priority NEED.

Quote

butkus3595
Hall of Famer

Posts: 6,805

Likes: 8,885

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 10:49:38 GMT -6 riczaj01, britishbearfan, and 1 more like this

Post by butkus3595 on Jan 4, 2017 10:49:38 GMT -6

Dallas's line ranked 5th in run blocking according to Football Outsiders, the Bears ranked 8th. They also had the Bears line ranked 1st in power run success. Pretty interesting stuff. There was a pretty big difference when it comes to second level rankings, and to me a lot of that is on the back as well...setting up blocks for the line. In pass pro the Bears line actually ranked much higher than the Cowboys 7th compared to 13th. Perhaps Ric is right...o-line just really isn't as much of a need as we think it is. That doesn't mean we should ignore it, but perhaps it's not the top thing on the list to address.

Quote

Last Edit: Jan 4, 2017 10:50:03 GMT -6 by butkus3595

brasilbear
Hall of Famer

Posts: 5,836

Likes: 6,643

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 10:59:00 GMT -6 shark86, britishbearfan, and 1 more like this

Post by brasilbear on Jan 4, 2017 10:59:00 GMT -6

I of all people don't buy into the media myths. My biggest frustration with this board is all the posters who do (Cutler isn't a good teammate because he doesn't smile, running 30 times a game = a win, etc, etc) Can't pin than one on me. In fact, what you responded with/to isn't even the point of my post.

Yes I believe Dallas' OL is better and that Howard would have done better behind the Dallas OL. Even marginally better might have lead to better in game results. Dallas' OL isn't amazing because of all the first round picks. Dallas' OL is amazing because its an amazing OL. Of course I also pointed out how another good/great OL was built around 4/5/6th round picks but somehow that got missed.

Would I spend a 1st or even a second on the OL? Nope. Would I spend a third? He would have to have dropped tremendously AND be the higtest rated player on the Bers board that at point by a factor of 5 or more. Would I spend a 4/5/6/7th? Yep. How many? 1. Would I sign a FA OL? Can I get J.Thomas in his prime? Maybe a young Ferguson? If not than no, there are too many other holes.

All I'm saying, is don't neglect the OL. Yes, its a solid above average unit, but if late in the draft there is a chance to make it better, don't reject that pick out of hand.

Quote

Last Edit: Jan 4, 2017 15:09:53 GMT -6 by brasilbear

GrizzlyBear Hall of Famer United We Stand, Divided We Fall. Posts: 5,763 Likes: 5,838	Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 11:02:34 GMT -6 weneedmorelinemen likes this Post by GrizzlyBear on Jan 4, 2017 11:02:34 GMT -6 Jan 3, 2017 17:57:31 GMT -6 JABF said: Dave Magazu is my hero. Hope he stays. LOL sorry to disappoint you, buddy. Quote Select Post Deselect Post Link to Post Back to Top

riczaj01
Administrator

Posts: 11,460

Likes: 10,242

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 11:08:08 GMT -6 butkus3595 and britishbearfan like this

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 11:08:08 GMT -6

Jan 4, 2017 10:49:38 GMT -6 butkus3595 said:

Dallas's line ranked 5th in run blocking according to Football Outsiders, the Bears ranked 8th. They also had the Bears line ranked 1st in power run success. Pretty interesting stuff. There was a pretty big difference when it comes to second level rankings, and to me a lot of that is on the back as well...setting up blocks for the line. In pass pro the Bears line actually ranked much higher than the Cowboys 7th compared to 13th. Perhaps Ric is right...o-line just really isn't as much of a need as we think it is. That doesn't mean we should ignore it, but perhaps it's not the top thing on the list to address.

Listen, again, COULD they be upgraded, sure what position couldn't? But this was a team beat up along the OL that never had a shot to play together and they ALL played very well for most of the year. .12 sacks given up per pass attempt when Hoyer/Barkley were under center, that led the league. Cutler was the worst at .34, but that was 5 games and imo those have a lot to do w/the QB's themselves.

The OL does not have one mediocre player on it. They are all good to really good players Sitton and Long are likely great; and Whitehair has the promise to become great. Leno is 24 and is in his 2nd or 3rd year starting, he's still has some room to grow. Massie likely is what he is, but that's more then good enough no OL, DL or otherwise is going to win every battle especially against pro bowl talent.

Sure draft a few guys in the mid rounds that might have some upside or provide depth but right now that OL is a strength not a weakness. RB is a strength, 2/3rds of the DL is a strenght, LB is a strength. Everything else has serious needs, starting w/QB.

Quote

shark86
All-Pro

Suffering from Bears FHDD

Posts: 3,963

Member is Online
Likes: 5,248

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 11:17:19 GMT -6

Post by shark86 on Jan 4, 2017 11:17:19 GMT -6

Jan 4, 2017 10:06:18 GMT -6 riczaj01 said:

Jan 4, 2017 9:45:05 GMT -6 shark86 said:

My opinions are mistakes and your opinions are inarguably correct. Got it. Even though you agreed you'd like to see better...Word for word what I said.... And you cherry pick stats to prove that mediocrity equals greatness and awesome trying to force me to argue they're horrible. I don't play those games. My opinion is my opinion, yours is yours. I said mine and that's that. Go ahead and keep digging up stats. It won't change my opinion the next time massie gets manhandled and I throw popcorn at the TV.

There's the difference right there, you think they are mediocre, and they aren't. COULD they get better sure. THEY COULD get better at ILB, they don't need to, and it's not b/c the ilb's are mediocre.

There's the difference right there, you think they are mediocre, and they aren't. COULD they get better sure. THEY COULD get better at ILB, they don't need to, and it's not b/c the ilb's are mediocre.

I'm not cherry picking anything. You are over playing how bad the OL was, specifically the OT's, and i'm calling you out on it.

No, I said I'd like the O-line to be better. My opinion. I never said they were horrible. And you said I was wrong and made a mistake. I'm calling you out on putting words in my mouth that weren't there, stretching the truth, hyperbole, nit-picking and then beating it to death. My opinion vs your opinion, although they are basically similar. Like other posters have said, the o-line should not be neglected in this draft. It could be better. End of story, I'm not going to continue arguing opinions with you.

Quote

Don't take Schist for Granite.
People say I'm Gneiss, Tuff, and a little Wacke.
Bears FHDD = Frustration, Heartache, Disgust and Despair Syndrome

riczaj01
Administrator

Posts: 11,460

Likes: 10,242

Bears OL. Jan 4, 2017 11:23:36 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 11:23:36 GMT -6

Jan 4, 2017 11:17:19 GMT -6 shark86 said:

Jan 4, 2017 10:06:18 GMT -6 riczaj01 said:

There's the difference right there, you think they are mediocre, and they aren't. COULD they get better sure. THEY COULD get better at ILB, they don't need to, and it's not b/c the ilb's are mediocre.

There's the difference right there, you think they are mediocre, and they aren't. COULD they get better sure. THEY COULD get better at ILB, they don't need to, and it's not b/c the ilb's are mediocre.

I'm not cherry picking anything. You are over playing how bad the OL was, specifically the OT's, and i'm calling you out on it.

No, I said I'd like the O-line to be better. My opinion. I never said they were horrible. And you said I was wrong and made a mistake. I'm calling you out on putting words in my mouth that weren't there, stretching the truth, hyperbole, nit-picking and then beating it to death. My opinion vs your opinion, although they are basically similar. Like other posters have said, the o-line should not be neglected in this draft. It could be better. End of story, I'm not going to continue arguing opinions with you.

"And you cherry pick stats to prove that mediocrity equals greatness..."

You stated medicority ie mediocre. They aren't. And when the OL ranks Top 10, then ya they could get better, but it's not a need and they aren't mediocre.

And nothing I have ever said suggested the OL should be neglected.

Quote

Last Edit: Jan 4, 2017 11:24:01 GMT -6 by riczaj01

Remembering Dick Butkus

Countdown Clock

Bears 2024 Schedule

Chitown Bears Affiliates

Announcements

Recent Threads

Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2017 9:47:20 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 10:06:18 GMT -6

Post by brasilbear on Jan 4, 2017 10:32:32 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 10:38:42 GMT -6

Post by butkus3595 on Jan 4, 2017 10:49:38 GMT -6

Post by brasilbear on Jan 4, 2017 10:59:00 GMT -6

Post by GrizzlyBear on Jan 4, 2017 11:02:34 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 11:08:08 GMT -6

Post by shark86 on Jan 4, 2017 11:17:19 GMT -6

Post by riczaj01 on Jan 4, 2017 11:23:36 GMT -6