I Hope BA Reads PFT

[Flasteel]

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 couldn’t pass protect.

So they did what good coaches should do and they fit their scheme to their talent, rather than the other way around. Chicago’s 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 Martz’s 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.

It’s 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 wasn’t 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 team’s offensive line.

Add it all up, and this just doesn’t 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]

Was Martz ordered by ownership to show a more commitment to the running game?

[Flasteel]

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!

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

[Crash]

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]

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]

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]

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.]

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]

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]

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.