Taylor's presence eased wear-and-tear on Fort

Taylor's presence eased wear-and-tear on Forte

By Brad Biggs

In the rush by some to run Chester Taylor out of town, they forgot the words of Jerry Angelo when the Chicago Bears general manager assessed the season the day after the loss in the NFC Championship Game.

Asked about Taylor, Angelo said the mere presence of the free-agent acquisition had made Matt Forte a better running back. Taylor signed a $12.5 million, four-year contract in free agency last year, and statistically, the season was a disaster for him. He became the first back since the AFL-NFL merger in 1970 with a minimum of 100 carries to average less than 2.4 yards per carry.

But the Bears believe having a proven pro like Taylor around made the position stronger, and certainly something contributed to what was easily the best season of Forte's three-year career. Having someone the coaches trusted to take Forte off the field was the key. He was fresher in 2010 and it showed as he was better in the second half of the season. Forte was on the field for more snaps in 2008 and 2009 combined than any other back in the NFL.

With Taylor to spell him, Forte's playing time didn't dip dramatically, but it dropped enough to keep him strong. Forte was on the field for 688 of 980 offensive plays in 2010, according to statistics provided to the Tribune, putting him at 70.2 percent. In contract, he was on the field 82.4 percent of the time in 2009 when offensive coordinator Ron Turner didn't trust anyone to take his place. That season, Kahlil Bell, Adrian Peterson and Garrett Wolfe pieced together 177 snaps to spell Forte. Taylor was on the field for 302 snaps, giving him 30.8 percent. There were a handful of plays when they were used in combination in the backfield. Here is a look at the playing time for 2010:

Matt Forte: 688 snaps, 70.2 percent

Chester Taylor: 302, 30.8

Garrett Wolfe: 4, 0.4

Kahlil Bell: 0, 0.0

Wolfe is an unrestricted free agent and Bell and Harvey Unga figure to compete for roster spots. But it's not like there is necessarily going to be playing time in the backfield unless there is an injury. It's also worth noting fullback Jason McKie had 359 snaps in 2009, playing time that disappeared for the position under offensive coordinator Mike Martz. We'll take a closer look at that when we break down the tight ends, which is where most of that playing time went.

We've already posted playing-time breakdowns on the defensive line, wide receiver and linebacker positions. Check back throughout the day as we analyze playing time at every position.

I take medication to ease the wear and tear on my knee joint but it didn't cost me $12.5 mil. (as he roles his eyes)

Nothing will ever convince me that it was a good investment either. In the past year we spent close to $15 mil on contracts for vets coaches could trust. Now how about we try doing it with younger, cheaper, less trustworthy, but far more productive guys.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

I take medication to ease the wear and tear on my knee joint but it didn't cost me $12.5 mil. (as he roles his eyes)

Nothing will ever convince me that it was a good investment either. In the past year we spent close to $15 mil on contracts for vets coaches could trust. Now how about we try doing it with younger, cheaper, less trustworthy, but far more productive guys.

---

We will never agree about taylor , soul, but think you can at least agree money spent in 2010 when no cap "irrelevant" NOW and going forward if like talyor the cap numbers real low in 2011 and forward.. it wasnt mine or your $$$ spent in 2010 and didn't cost the team any players or space as no Cap as usually the 'downside to overspending in the NFL"... and since all it did was cut down on mccaskey bottom line profits to the heir's, i'm sure that doesn't make you shed a tear : ) and as done after the season ticket pricing done, didn't hurt the STh either

Honestly, it's an "in hindsight" look at it, that we didn't need Taylor, but it didn't take hindsight to say that Bell at least needed to be tried here or there. No excuses this year if Taylor fails again and Bell and Unga waste away..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Burris

Honestly, it's an "in hindsight" look at it, that we didn't need Taylor, but it didn't take hindsight to say that Bell at least needed to be tried here or there. No excuses this year if Taylor fails again and Bell and Unga waste away..

---

Unga is the One hoping can get carries and be the short yardage guy, THAT is the only problem we had in the running game( we can go in circles on oline/rb for the cause also).. Forte a top 3 back in receiving out of the backfield so no problems there or in the reg run game.. It is just the short yardage that hurt us in 2010

A better o-line, a actual fullback, and TE's that can block would also reduce the wear and tear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dabears54

We will never agree about taylor , soul, but think you can at least agree money spent in 2010 when no cap "irrelevant" NOW and going forward if like talyor the cap numbers real low in 2011 and forward.. it wasnt mine or your $$$ spent in 2010 and didn't cost the team any players or space as no Cap as usually the 'downside to overspending in the NFL"... and since all it did was cut down on mccaskey bottom line profits to the heir's, i'm sure that doesn't make you shed a tear : ) and as done after the season ticket pricing done, didn't hurt the STh either

---

Cap, or lack thereof, aside I just don't think it was a good move. Yeah, now he's cheap but is he worth even that much based on last years effort? He did make a few better runs towards the end of the season but that can't make up for almost an entire year of under productive play.

As the Bears coach, would you keep a guy on the squad who rushed for only 2.4 ypc behind the same line that your workhorse back rushed for 4.5 ypc? Actually you might and that's why we'll always be in disagreement about Taylor. No big deal, it's just an opinion.

You say Tomatoe and I say Tomato, you say Taylor and I say Bell, so let's call the whole thing off. :rofl2:
:guinness:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

Cap, or lack thereof, aside I just don't think it was a good move. Yeah, now he's cheap but is he worth even that much based on last years effort? He did make a few better runs towards the end of the season but that can't make up for almost an entire year of under productive play.

As the Bears coach, would you keep a guy on the squad who rushed for only 2.4 ypc behind the same line that your workhorse back rushed for 4.5 ypc? Actually you might and that's why we'll always be in disagreement about Taylor. No big deal, it's just an opinion.

You say Tomatoe and I say Tomato, you say Taylor and I say Bell, so let's call the whole thing off. :rofl2:
:guinness:

---

Soul it's stunning how little you think the OL had to do w/a 3rd down back that's primarily being run up the said OL. Did he have a bad year...yes. Did he push Forte to get better, seems like it. Did he take some of the weight of Forte, seems like it. Did we steal him from the team that won the division that really needed him to be their 3rd down back, yes absolutely. Did we overpay for him; sure, but in an upcapped year I could care less about overpaying someone. As the OL improved so did his play; we fix the OL, I think his #'s take a huge jump; and then yes, he is worth what we are paying him from here on out.

What does Kal-el Bell do? Is he a QB? DT? OL? CB?

If you are not going to use him as a RB what is he on the team for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

Soul it's stunning how little you think the OL had to do w/a 3rd down back that's primarily being run up the said OL. Did he have a bad year...yes. Did he push Forte to get better, seems like it. Did he take some of the weight of Forte, seems like it. Did we steal him from the team that won the division that really needed him to be their 3rd down back, yes absolutely. Did we overpay for him; sure, but in an upcapped year I could care less about overpaying someone. As the OL improved so did his play; we fix the OL, I think his #'s take a huge jump; and then yes, he is worth what we are paying him from here on out.

---

I do think the line had something to do with his lack of success and I did admit before that he had some nice runs later in the season when the run blocking improved. But Bell also had greater success the previous season running up the middle with the same or a worse line in 2009 than in 2010.

If I'm wrong he'll have this year to prove it since he won't be going anywhere for at least one more season. Forte, Taylor, Bell and Unga should form a good backfield and since they tendered him it looks like they want to keep Bell around.