Thread: Bears Offense to have "New Personality"...............

Z... Y . It doesn't matter what the 'label' is . What matters is the kind of patterns certain guys run . When Hester was a wide-out, and they put him in motion, and had him cutting across the middle - he sucked. You let him line up wide ... and have him working the sidelines and the post, the outer 1/3rd ... he'll be better ( less traffic out there and he don't like the traffic ). As for the rest of them they're more interchangeable and can handle things better. Don't matter really ... just catch the ball when it's thrown to you. It'll refine itself as they go along. It'll be fine.

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

That's kind of where I'm at, but then you read about Marshall telling everyone how hester runs such great routes. Something does not add up or he put in a lot of time this off-season -- but he had that same opportunity for several seasons. I'm just going to sit back and watch. Regardless of how good or bad hester does, we've got a much better passing game than we did before. I just hate to see Bennet sidelined as a reward for having carried the team as far as WR. He is better than Hester and he should be played that way.

He'll get plenty of playing time. Unless a dude has a big baby ego, being the 'starter' at WR doesn't mean jack since they're all in and out so much.

I keep seeing that the offense should look like the 2008 Broncos and that Hester will be #2 so thought I'd look back at who the Broncos had at receiver and match them up with the Bears' equivalent for this year:

2008 Broncos/2012 Bears
WR Brandon Marshall/WR Brandon Marshall
WR Eddie Royal/WR Devin Hester
WR Brandon Stokely/WR Alshon Jeffery
WR Darrell Jackson/WR Earl Bennett
WR Nate Jackson/WR Eric Weems

From what I saw, the Broncos only had 5 receivers on the roster so I didn't include Thomas or Sanz as a sixth. Does this seem accurate from what we've all read in these articles?

Originally Posted by RochBear

Wright wrote: "Jeffery will play the “Z” receiver spot in the slot. " I thought the usual designation is Y as slot and Z as flanker. Perhaps the confusion comes from that. Both off the line, of course, and not so vulnerable to the bump. But the Z has to be able to flip to an X (split end, on line) if the TE shifts sides and then deal head on with the bump. Lovely having Marshall available to play the X most of the time. Playing bump and run with Brandon is probably in the Bears interest rather than the defense's.

You're right as far as the designations are concerned Roch so the question is Tice confusing the designation or where he plans to line him up. Jeffrey seemed to have a problem handling press coverage at the Senior Bowl so I'm guessing they'll want him lined up off the LOS at least to begin with. But that he could do at either Z or Y.

I beginning to think what he's getting at is that both Marshall and Jeffrey will be fixed at X (on the line L) and Z (off the line R but in the slot) and he'll shift Hester around as a Y playing him on the line, off the line, in motion and anyway he can to create confusion and mismatches. It makes a little more sense now when I think of it this way.

Bennett can play all three spots so he's the guy Tice will use to share snaps with the others. Jeffrey still has a lot to learn as far as running the route tree so Bennett may be a more crucial 3rd down guy as he's always been and Jeffrey is a better choice in the red zone because of his size advantage. Tice often leaves certain things unsaid and you have to read between the lines but looking at it this way it makes sense. It's a four receiver rotation with Hester becoming the moveable piece.

While the general fan base and most commentators use the generic term wide receiver for all such players, specific names exist for most receiver positions:

• Split end (X or SE): A receiver on the line of scrimmage, necessary to meet the rule requiring seven such players at snap. Where applicable, this receiver is on the opposite side of the tight end. The split end is farthest from center on his side of the field.^[5]
• Flanker (Z or FL): A receiver lining up behind the line of scrimmage. Frequently the team's featured receiver, the flanker uses the initial buffer between himself and a defender to avoid jamming, legal contact within five yards of the line of scrimmage. The flanker is generally on the same side of the formation as a tight end. As with the split end, this receiver is the farthest player from the center on his side of the field. The flanker is probably lined up just like a split end except that he is just behind the line of scrimmage, being in the backfield and not on the line.^[6]
• Slot receiver (Y or SL): A less-formal name given to receivers in addition to split ends and flankers (for example tight-ends who line up wide). These receivers line up between the split end/flanker and the linemen. If aligned with a flanker, the slot receiver is usually on the line of scrimmage, and if with a split end, off the line of scrimmage. As with the flanker position, a featured receiver often takes a slot position with a split end to avoid jamming.^[6]
• Slot back: A receiver lining up in the offensive back field. Canadian and arena football allow them to take a running start at the line. They are usually larger players as they need to make catches over the middle. In American football slot backs are typically used in flexbone or other triple option offenses while Canadian football uses them in almost all formations.

Originally Posted by RochBear

Yup. Basically sounds good to me. My only quibble would be with the idea that Tice got anything wrong. I suspect he lives this nomenclature and it is second nature to him. Wright (author of the piece) however, could glitch and get it wrong. The only question then would be which designation did Tice give. The intelligent one to give is the one journalists and fans are most familiar with, split end, slot, flanker. I would guess Hester will be used as a slot guy to keep him away from the jam (the flanker has to be prepared to move up to the line of scrimmage if the TE shifts away from his side or there is no tight end. I would think Bennett and even Jeffery would be better able to deal with the jam because of size. The slot guys or the flanker (when not moved up to the line) can do motion equally. (of course, not both at once :) But, I am just guessing there.

If Hester is so good at running routes, he should be good at going across the middle. That is the hardest area that a wide receiver has to venture to in a game because of all the linebackers and safeties located across the middle. I could see why they would put Hester at FL because he has 4.3 speed, but at the same time, his hands aren't that good on deep routes. Look no further than in the 2010 NFC Championship Game in the first quarter to see this for sure as he dropped a touchdown pass in the end zone from about twenty or thirty yards out.

Originally Posted by RochBear

Wright wrote: "Jeffery will play the “Z” receiver spot in the slot. " I thought the usual designation is Y as slot and Z as flanker. Perhaps the confusion comes from that. Both off the line, of course, and not so vulnerable to the bump. But the Z has to be able to flip to an X (split end, on line) if the TE shifts sides and then deal head on with the bump. Lovely having Marshall available to play the X most of the time. Playing bump and run with Brandon is probably in the Bears interest rather than the defense's.

Well just to further add to the confusion there's this.

Tice also noted he will not forget the speed of Hester, for whom a special package has been devised. He said as of now, Hester remains the starting flanker. Marshall will be the starting split end.

It is possible Jeffery will take over Hester's starting spot. In a perfect world, the Bears would like to have Hester taking offensive snaps only when he has a chance of making a play. Having him running 70 routes a game and catching only three passes takes away from his return ability.


So either Tice is mixed up or he's being misquoted when one article actually quotes him as saying Jeffrey will play in the slot as the "Z" (Flanker) and this article claims he said that Hester will start and "Z" with a chance that Jeffrey will eventually take over. I guess I can see the two of them sharing flanker if that's what he meant to say but I'm not sure where the "slot" things comes into play in his thinking.

The other thing that disturbs me is the lack of any mention of Earl Bennett who right now is the second best receiver on the team and probably the best 3rd down go to guy in the NFL. Is Tice getting way too enamored of this "size"/"speed" combo he has to work with and forgetting he has Bennett? He may not be as big or as fast as either Jeffrey or Hester but the guy is a 110%'er who can get open and catch a football and it would be nice to at least hear his name brought up.

Edit: Well who knows what was said since what's in print appears to say two different things. I would maintain that if you're gonna use Hester most effectively you limit his snaps, you move him around so he becomes harder to game plan for, and you also put him in motion which is usually what you do with a Flanker. Where his routes are designed to go is also important.

If all you do is having running routes outside the numbers you take away his major weapon which is his burst and elusiveness in space. When you pin him outside that sidelines become another tackler. There's also the issue of the need to make "tight rope" and "back shoulder" catches that he's never shown any skill at doing. He's far more dangerous when you get him the ball in the middle of the field and every team knows this because they do their level best not to kick to him there where he has room to maneuver.

His size, or lack thereof, isn't a major factor. The guy goes 190lbs and he's been running back kicks and punts against guys 30lbs-40lbs heavier than he is for years and he hasn't broken anything yet. Hester doesn't have a Bambi build like Johnny Knox and yet we had him running those routes. That was a mistake and now he's paying for that. In Hester's case it would not be. JMHO.