Thread: BEARS/GIANTS Game review and Grades..

Originally Posted by go4bears

For some reason band aid comes to mind. Sure JA did get O-linemen. but, how good were they, really? The Bears o-line has been decent at best, not even considered good enough. Decent is not working anymore. Espeacially when QBs are starting to get concusions. NO excuse for going through two qbs in one game.

in 2005/2006 it was a very good line- kreutz/brown made the probowl and tait should have, so when have 3 players playing at a probowl level, YES that is a good line.

I NEVER want to see any qb's getting hurt nor actually any player ever getting hurt, but in football that just isn't realistic.. and if we just drafted olineman for 3-4 years you would then be here complaing how bad the "D" is and how who cares we protect the Qb when giving up 40+ a game and can never stop the run.. different situation, same complaining

Originally Posted by go4bears

Superbowl year 05-06 and that line even had problems. I will give you the Pro bowlers, but as a unit they were decent. Now I will lay blame on the Grossman melt down for that year's problems. Also those guys had 8+ yrs in The NFL. Then 06-07 comes along and age caught up to all but maybe Kreutz and it has been that way for the past three years. The o-line never had depth. Defense has depth every year. instead of wasting draft picks on more defense depth that they end up cutting before the regular season ends. Keep what we got on d and get depth for the o-line who is not getting younger or better.

Again no arument for NOW being a problem, just explaing the WHY and wasn't a problem in 2003-2006.. and the "D' didn't have depth in 2002-2004 at all!.. we addressed it and now do.. and now they 'tried" the F/A/ route for the oline and this time FAILED.. Again not excusing it failing, but just find wrong pretending it wasn't addressed or acknoweldged with pace/omiyale/shaffer/williams etc

and we are giving you the reasons why they fail and that is cause the offense takes a back seat to the defense always. If they were interested in the oline then they would treat it like they do the dline. It stems back to drafting right after the superbowl till now. And it will continue that away until a philosophy change by the gm. He isnt going to be able to get by with snickle fritz crap from FA anymore.

Originally Posted by motownbear

and we are giving you the reasons why they fail and that is cause the offense takes a back seat to the defense always. If they were interested in the oline then they would treat it like they do the dline. It stems back to drafting right after the superbowl till now. And it will continue that away until a philosophy change by the gm. He isnt going to be able to get by with snickle fritz crap from FA anymore.

Diagree the "O" takes a back seat, has to do with needs..

2010 draft:3 D players , 2 O.. * top picks for "O" player cutler

2009- 4 O players, 4 d players( split evenly at top)* top pick for "O" player Cutler

2008- top 3 O, and 7 o players and 5 d players

So the last 3 year has hardly been "D" heavy at all.. perception is NOT reality is my point

2008-

Originally Posted by go4bears

How many were o-line, not just o players.

the question was "O" players so showed it has NOT been"D" bias..

and now with WR's, Qb's already here, the "O' players left ARE the oline which si why expect 2 of the top 3 picks in 2011 to be O-lineman because that is the need now