Thread: Bears roundtable: 'They're going to run the ball like crazy'

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

I think that ever since my son was a LT, I got "hooked" on watching the oline. I learned from him, just how complex a great oline is, and how dependent each player is on the others. He teases me all the time because now I watch the oline MUCH more than I focus on the skill players. One of my wife's best friends has three sons who played for years as offensive linemen in the NFL after great college careers. Anyway, I'm all about the oline.

Even when the Bears oline stinks, I still like to watch and try to understand the facts of what's going on. The "talking heads" really don't always report accurately. And a lot of fans are clueless parrots repeating the erroneous information (player "A" sucks, is read in an article, and automatically, in THEIR mind player "A" always sucks). It's sad because fans can "brand" a player as a loser, and not recognize that players DO improve. Especially oline guys in their first 3 years.

I don't claim to know anything more or less than the next fan. So I don't take offense if folks disagree with me on this oline thing. That's fine. Maybe they're right and I'm wrong. BTW, I'm usually a "glass half full" guy on stuff.

The way I've always liked watching offenses was when teams used to run the ball 2/3 of the plays. Ever since I've watched Ohio State football, which goes back to high school, I will watch old games from the 1960s and 1970s and see how Woody Hayes ran his offense. "Three yards and a cloud of dust," wear the defensive front seven down, and by the fourth quarter, BAM! The Buckeyes would run off plays of 10, 15, 20 yards or more depending on how tired the defense was. The Bears used to do that under Mike Ditka when they would slam Walter Payton and Neal Anderson into the opposing defense. Trouble is, we don't have the offensive line that those great Bears' teams in the 1980s and early 1990s had, and until we do, we will have to mix it up some.

Teams can still win with a powerful running game. How do you think the Ravens, Texans, and 49ers won big last year? It was with a power running game mixed with timely passes. None of those quarterbacks are really game changers except for maybe Matt Schaub, and we have to remember that he missed a good chunk of the year on IR, and then his backup Matt Leinart went down. I can't think of the third string quarterback who took Leinart's place, but he did what he had to do to manage the game while the ground game ruled the day.

I'm all for having a strong running game coupled with a strong passing game. Throw in a solid defense and ST's too. I'm all about having as many weapons as possible.

Originally Posted by JustAnotherBearsFan99

I'm all for having a strong running game coupled with a strong passing game. Throw in a solid defense and ST's too. I'm all about having as many weapons as possible.

Well, the coaching staff may have sabotaged all that again with the personnel of the piss poor O-line.

Originally Posted by Dagan81

Well, the coaching staff may have sabotaged all that again with the personnel of the piss poor O-line.

I'm going to watch and see what happens over the next few weeks before I judge this year's line. I'll be honest, I'm concerned like everyone else. But I keep thinking that this isn't the finished product. It may not even be the finished roster for oline. So, hopefully the oline will be OK this year. As some others have mentioned, we don't have to have a great oline this year, but it has to be good. There is a difference. But "good" will be fine if they can achieve that level.

One preseason game is pretty meaningless - especially with the purposeful vanilla plays. Having said that, however, 'They're going to run the ball like crazy' turned into "they're crazy to think they can run the ball."

I genuinely think it will be different this Sat. I hope I'm not wrong.

Originally Posted by bearsinhouston

One preseason game is pretty meaningless - especially with the purposeful vanilla plays. Having said that, however, 'They're going to run the ball like crazy' turned into "their crazy to think they can run the ball."

I genuinely think it will be different this Sat. I hope I'm not wrong.

I agree, and also, it will take the entire pre-season to get to where we need to be. And it's not at all unusual for an offensive line to continue to improve timing/chemistry throughout the season. Even veteran lines who have worked together intact for a few years benefit from real "game reps" of the "real" season.

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

JABF, I didn't say he was going to ignore the run, or not have a balanced attack; that's actually what I've been saying..but compared to what many fans think they are going to see...that's going to be running the ball like crazy.

Many fans think we are going to be putting up NO's/GB passing #'s, and we're not.

+1. I totally agree. We run the ball well because this line of ours run blocks well. We pass poorly (at times) because the line doesn't pass block well. So you want to win games what do you do? You go with your strengths and minimize your weaknesses.

My guess is that we won't be going down field as much as Tice did when he coached the Vikes. We don't have Randy Moss. Marshall and Jeffery aren't exactly snails but they aren't the types to just blow the doors off NFL corners either. That's never been the strength of Marshall's game and it won't be Jeffery's either. Marshall's career average is right at 12.6 ypc. He's not a big downfield threat but he's damn near unstoppable on those 10-15 yard routes. I think we'll see much the same from Jeffery. Hester can be a deep threat but I still believe their plan for him is to get him the ball of shorter throws where he has room around him to run and let him make the big gainer that way. The very best deep threat we have, Knox, isn't playing this year.

If I'm right the plan is to force teams to cover Marshall and Jeffery and take that extra guy out of the box. That will open up better running lanes and we have the the backs to take advantage of that. By alternating them some to keep both fresh we can punish teams with Bush and Forte all game long and keep the defense better rested. Both are pass catching threats too along with the fact that Tice puts the TE's back in the passing game again.

The reality is that the line isn't gonna be asked to hold off rushers long enough for a deep passing game to develop because they won't be able to do that any better now than they did last year. Carimi is still little more than a rookie and LT is still a mess so forget about throwing deep much except off play fakes on early downs or taking some surprise shots on 3rd and short trying to catch the other guys cheating the run and leaving single coverage on the wideouts.

Matt Bowen is a very football smart guy and I don't think he's that far wrong. We'll pass to loosen up defenses and open up the first 10-15 yards past the LOS but we'll still be a running team. Based on the talent we have that's still a strong point and the type of WRs we picked up in combination with the TEs can help accomplish that. Cutler should have the best year of his career but 5000+ yds passing? No.

Good point about the passing game opening up the running lanes (they can't stack the box). I hope we keep teams off-balance with a varied attack. If a team tries to take out one aspect of our offense, then the other can inflict major damage. A "pick your poison" kind of thing.

I'm not saying we should have "such and such" run/pass ratio. Just that we (IMHO) shouldn't be a passing team OR running team. But rather a team that is going to bring multiple weapons to every game. Great weapons. Passing, running, defense, special teams - a well rounded team that is multidimensional.

And I do believe it is vital to be able to run effectively as needed. It doesn't matter so much how many plays you call the run - it matters most that you CAN inflict damage when you DO choose to run. If you do that, then teams have to respect your run game and can't cheat. You are then a tough team to defend against.

Bowen being the exception - wish they'd stop referring to some of these guys as 'experts'. Uhhhh ... they ain't.