PDA

View Full Version : I Hope BA Reads PFT



Flasteel
12-01-2010, 06:56 PM
I'm not suggesting that our line is as bad as Chicago's was, but the message is still the same.

Mike Martz changes his stripes
Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on December 1, 2010, 4:54 PM EST

The Bears coaching staff entered their bye week at 4-3, faced with one inescapable fact: The team simply couldnít pass protect.

So they did what good coaches should do and they fit their scheme to their talent, rather than the other way around. Chicagoís offense since the bye has gone from wildly pass-heavy to run-heavy. Their passing game has focused more on quick throws than offensive coordinator Mike Martzís preferred bombs down the field.

John Mullin of Comcast Sportsnet Chicago breaks down the numbers. In November, the Bears 136 rushes and 121 pass attempts. Only the Chargers ran on a higher percentage of plays in November.

Itís easy to say the Bears won all four games, which leads to more rushing attempts. That certainly helps, but Chicago has been very balanced in the first half of games, and they stuck with the run against the Vikings and Bills even when it wasnít paying great dividends early.

Mullin also points out that the Bears were third in the league in third down conversions in November, after a truly abysmal start of the year. They have used a lot more quick passes instead of seven step drops, which protects the teamís offensive line.

Add it all up, and this just doesnít look like a normal Mike Martz offense. Martz and Lovie Smith deserve credit for adjusting, because we think Chicago has played its best three games of the year in succession

Crash
12-01-2010, 07:30 PM
Was Martz ordered by ownership to show a more commitment to the running game?

Flasteel
12-01-2010, 08:22 PM
Was Martz ordered by ownership to show a more commitment to the running game?

No, I'm pretty sure he figured that one out on his own. I know that you can't shake the whole "commitment to run" philosophy Crash, but that's not necessarily the point being made here. Leaning more on run blocking, screens, draws, 3-step drops, and rolling pockets are all things an OC can do to compensate for an injured or ineffective line.

BA has been slow to adopt any of these tactics throughout his career. He even stated in 2007 that he would not incorporate a 3-step drop into his offense. He relented on the 1st drive of the Jags playoff game, and the next year brought it to his offense with a little more regularity via the bunch formation.

That's been about it.

How often do we see any other adjustments, to include the no-huddle? Ben LOVES the no-huddle, and it's easily our most effective weapon on offense. I think I've seen it twice this year.

All I'm trying to say is adapt BA. Adapt to your talent. Adapt to your injuries. Adapt to your opponents strengths and weaknesses. For God's sake...ADAPT!

__ :Boobs
/l ,[____],
l---L -OlllllllO-
()_) ()_)-o-)_)

Crash
12-01-2010, 08:41 PM
He did adapt.

He put his offense on the back of his $100 million QB.

That wasn't good enough. We had to play "Stiller Football".

SteelCrazy
12-01-2010, 09:49 PM
Ben is good, but sad to say, he can't do it himself. He does require some help. We scored 19 on the Bills. 19 and that took a miracle and 5 quarters. BA is one of the most stubborn coaches I have ever seen and that makes him weak. Ben should be putting up a lot more points, but he is not getting help from our injury ridden OL or our OC.

papillon
12-01-2010, 11:13 PM
Just as an FYI, I'm not sure if it was Mike and Mike or Gottlieb in the afternoon, but one of those shows mentioned that Lovie Smith had some input into changing the Bears offense to fit the skill of the players.

Pappy

Djfan
12-01-2010, 11:58 PM
Just as an FYI, I'm not sure if it was Mike and Mike or Gottlieb in the afternoon, but one of those shows mentioned that Lovie Smith had some input into changing the Bears offense to fit the skill of the players.

Pappy


This is the hard part for me to understand. Tomlin give all the indications of a good or great leader, but these same problems persist. I just cant get past idea that he needs to step up with the leadership and tell BA (and to a much lesser extent Dick Lebeau) what the story is. It truly appears as a bad leadership approach by Tomlin.

I just don't get this.

steeler_fan_in_t.o.
12-02-2010, 12:10 AM
Here is the unfortunate conundrum of this situation:

We can decide to adapt to the fact that our OL sucks. We can call more short and intermediate routes, we can do the three step drop and fire, we can put them in the position that when they are asked to pass protect then they are not forced to hold the fort for more than a few seconds.......

But that takes away the greatest strength of our best player. What is it that makes Ben special? The fact that he can prolong a play on his own and turn it into a huge, game changing kind of play. Brady can do that, Montana was the master of that, but that is not Ben's game...and neither Brady nor Montana could do the things that make Ben special.

Force Ben into that quick rhythm timing offense and he is not wearing two SB rings today - and neither is anyone else in B&G.

pepsyman1
12-02-2010, 04:10 AM
He did adapt.

He put his offense on the back of his $100 million QB.

That wasn't good enough. We had to play "Stiller Football".

And running that pass at all costs offense got our QB sacked 50 times and didn't even get us into the top 10 in points scored....and isn't scoring points the purpose of the offense? Cowher's 2005 Superbowl team scored more points than we did last year...and Ben was on the short leash.

I have no problem with us using more pass or run as long as we are able to effectively do either and we adjust to what's actually working against a given opponent. Generally, BA has been fairly poor at adjusting. (The Cleveland loss last year being the highlight of a stubborn attitude) If a team is 7-8 in the box on us, by all means please send Wallace deep and let Ben light them up...because THAT would be the appropriate adjustment and we have the talent to do either.

AngryAsian
12-02-2010, 07:20 AM
Was Martz ordered by ownership to show a more commitment to the running game?

No, I'm pretty sure he figured that one out on his own. I know that you can't shake the whole "commitment to run" philosophy Crash, but that's not necessarily the point being made here. Leaning more on run blocking, screens, draws, 3-step drops, and rolling pockets are all things an OC can do to compensate for an injured or ineffective line.

BA has been slow to adopt any of these tactics throughout his career. He even stated in 2007 that he would not incorporate a 3-step drop into his offense. He relented on the 1st drive of the Jags playoff game, and the next year brought it to his offense with a little more regularity via the bunch formation.

That's been about it.

How often do we see any other adjustments, to include the no-huddle? Ben LOVES the no-huddle, and it's easily our most effective weapon on offense. I think I've seen it twice this year.

All I'm trying to say is adapt BA. Adapt to your talent. Adapt to your injuries. Adapt to your opponents strengths and weaknesses. For God's sake...ADAPT![/quote]


Logic in excess... but history dictates that he doesn't have the ability to do so.




He did adapt.

He put his offense on the back of his $100 million QB.

That wasn't good enough. We had to play "Stiller Football".

Bro, though your football knowledge truly adds to our board collective, this and the Ward gong you keep banging is beyond redundant.

SidSmythe
12-02-2010, 08:17 AM
adapting can be a hard thing. probably b/c we are people resistant to change.
but failure to change when necessary leads to failure.

As funny as this sounds. I suck at Madden b/c I refuse to do what works. Instead I just wanna run 2 backs and run on 1st down. I dont wanna change therefor I will always suck at Madden. :Beer :HeadBanger :Binky :Beer :HeadBanger

BURGH86STEEL
12-02-2010, 08:28 AM
Here is the unfortunate conundrum of this situation:

We can decide to adapt to the fact that our OL sucks. We can call more short and intermediate routes, we can do the three step drop and fire, we can put them in the position that when they are asked to pass protect then they are not forced to hold the fort for more than a few seconds.......

But that takes away the greatest strength of our best player. What is it that makes Ben special? The fact that he can prolong a play on his own and turn it into a huge, game changing kind of play. Brady can do that, Montana was the master of that, but that is not Ben's game...and neither Brady nor Montana could do the things that make Ben special.

Force Ben into that quick rhythm timing offense and he is not wearing two SB rings today - and neither is anyone else in B&G.

Ben showed the ability to make quick decisions. There were times when the shorter options were open and Ben looked to the deeper WR that was covered. The consistency is what appears to be missing. It will help Ben if the WR's can do their jobs and hang onto the football.

msp26505
12-02-2010, 09:12 AM
He did adapt.

He put his offense on the back of his $100 million QB.

That wasn't good enough. We had to play "Stiller Football".

I've been reading Crash's posts for at least the last six or seven years.

The great irony of this post is that it demonstrates that Crash has nearly the same dysfunction as Arians...a complete and utter inability or willingness to accept when he is just plain wrong, and to change his approach for the better.

It should come as no surprise that Crash doesn't think that Arians should have to adapt.

Hell, I might even quote myself in my signature to emphasize my point. No one would think that's narcissistic or strange. :?

BradshawsHairdresser
12-02-2010, 10:13 AM
When has this offense played the best?

For one game, I'd like to see the offense go no-huddle, let Ben make all the calls, and see what happens.

feltdizz
12-02-2010, 10:53 AM
When has this offense played the best?

For one game, I'd like to see the offense go no-huddle, let Ben make all the calls, and see what happens.

Not me... I don't think we are set up to go no huddle all game.

Ben gets too much credit from the fans for calling "his plays" because they never link him to the negative plays. Ben could never call a play that didn't work.. that is all BA. :roll:

BradshawsHairdresser
12-02-2010, 12:26 PM
When has this offense played the best?

For one game, I'd like to see the offense go no-huddle, let Ben make all the calls, and see what happens.

Not me... I don't think we are set up to go no huddle all game.

Ben gets too much credit from the fans for calling "his plays" because they never link him to the negative plays. Ben could never call a play that didn't work.. that is all BA. :roll:

Ben does call some plays that don't work. But the percentage of plays he calls that don't work is a lot smaller than the percentage of plays BA calls that don't work.

Why couldn't we go no-huddle all game? Just because it's never been done before?
Just because nobody else is doing it?

feltdizz
12-02-2010, 01:08 PM
When has this offense played the best?

For one game, I'd like to see the offense go no-huddle, let Ben make all the calls, and see what happens.

Not me... I don't think we are set up to go no huddle all game.

Ben gets too much credit from the fans for calling "his plays" because they never link him to the negative plays. Ben could never call a play that didn't work.. that is all BA. :roll:

Ben does call some plays that don't work. But the percentage of plays he calls that don't work is a lot smaller than the percentage of plays BA calls that don't work.

Why couldn't we go no-huddle all game? Just because it's never been done before?
Just because nobody else is doing it?

I don't think anyone has stats on the % of plays that work for each. I think fans just give players all the credit and reserve the blame for the coaches.

I also think our OL isn't built for 60 minutes of no huddle, Kemo and Hotel would have penalties galore. Pats did it before... so did the Colts... Pats OL was small IMO and when blitzed repeatedly they were exposed.

pittpete
12-02-2010, 01:22 PM
I constantly hear announcers say Bens numbers are stellar when he is on the move and out of the pocket. With my own eyes and in my own opinion I agree that Ben is better when he is moving. The whole world knows this.
When was the last time you've seen Ben roll out on a designed play,waddle or play action bootleg?

Mister Pittsburgh
12-02-2010, 01:28 PM
We don't need to run more. We do however have to cut out the 5 and 7 step drops and put Ben in shotgun and have more of a short passing game.

See the Pats gameplan every time they play us. Throw short, throw short, throw short, pump fake, throw deep.

Wallace runs the CB off to stop on a dime and catch a timed throw, Wallace runs the CB off to stop on a dime and catch a timed throw, Wallace runs the CB off to fake a stop then keep on rolling down the field as Ben pump fakes and throws a bomb. No need to run-run-play action.

feltdizz
12-02-2010, 01:58 PM
I constantly hear announcers say Bens numbers are stellar when he is on the move and out of the pocket. With my own eyes and in my own opinion I agree that Ben is better when he is moving. The whole world knows this.
When was the last time you've seen Ben roll out on a designed play,waddle or play action bootleg?

I wouldn't mind a bootleg or 2.. but Ben is best when he breaks the pocket not when they play is designed for him to move the pocket.

Even if we called more roll outs I bet you would see Ben roll out, pump, run against the grain waving his hands before throwing a dart.

I think moving Ben would limit the extension of some plays...