-
BEARS: Confident in Steltz - Tough guy. Good leader. Good communicator
We do have solid depth at safety.
LINK to the article
Bears confident in safety Steltz Secondary coach believes backup is solid fill-in while Conte's shoulder heals 
Craig Steltz during training camp.
By
Brad Biggs, Chicago Tribune reporter 7:08 p.m. CDT, August 22, 2012
The coaching staff repeatedly raved about improvements second-year safety Chris Conte made during training camp.
But with the starter out for Friday night's game against the Giants, Craig Steltz will slide into the starting lineup at MetLife Stadium. He fared well starting the final four games of 2011 and also has been impressive in camp.
"Craig has had good camps since I have been here," defensive backs coach Jon Hoke said. "He's just consistent. He's in position where he is supposed to be in position and his anticipation is a little bit better than it has been. He has a better understanding of concepts and understands offenses a little better now. He's a tough guy. Good leader. Good communicator."
Nevertheless, the plan now is for Conte to return for the start of the regular season.
What Steltz lacks is the athletic ability and range of Conte and Major Wright. But the way the Bears go through players at the position, it would be a surprise if Steltz doesn't play a key role this season.
The question now is how the depth chart unfolds behind him. The status of rookie Brandon Hardin remains unknown. His absence is providing Anthony Walters, who spent a month on the 53-man roster last season as an undrafted free agent, another opportunity to make the team.
"He has matured a lot and he handles himself well," Hoke said.
Walters also has become smarter when it comes to the scheme, proving he continued to advance while on injured reserve during the second half of the season with a pulled hamstring.
Last edited by JustAnotherBearsFan99; 08-22-2012 at 08:41 PM.
Trestman - Kromer - Tucker - DeCamillis
I'm looking forward to seeing these guys coach. Hope they're good.
-
-
Steltz hasn't got the speed you'd like to see but he has good ball skills and great intuition so he's always around the ball. You won't see him giving up big plays. I'd be more comfortable with him at SS but as the Bears like to point out in this defense they're pretty much interchangeable. I trust him to play well.
I'm getting to that age where a lifetime warranty just doesn't mean as much to me anymore as an afternoon nap. 
Honey Badger Don't Care. Honey Badger Don't Give a Shit.
-
High Fives / Like - 2 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
I always liked him. Solid, smart player who won't get caught out of position. In Lovies' system SS & FS are so similar that our players can be successful in either spot.
-
Member
Originally Posted by
omc1969 
I always liked him. Solid, smart player who won't get caught out of position. In Lovies' system SS & FS are so similar that our players can be successful in either spot.
i totally agree here
-
I'm glad that he's going to be a key contributor to the secondary. I've always heard that the knock on him was his lack of speed, but sometimes that can be abated. I wouldn't be shocked if someday he wins the starting spot at either SS or FS. He's a hardcore player.
-
I dunno, he just slows guys down until someone who can actually tackle gets there. He looked like a waste of a roster spot against the Giants.
-
Originally Posted by
vmx12 I dunno, he just slows guys down until someone who can actually tackle gets there. He looked like a waste of a roster spot against the Giants.
That late hit out of bounds looked shitty, I'll say that. But otherwise, I didn't see anything out of our safeties that looked like we had just God awful glaring weaknesses.
-
Originally Posted by
Dagan81 Originally Posted by
vmx12 I dunno, he just slows guys down until someone who can actually tackle gets there. He looked like a waste of a roster spot against the Giants.
That late hit out of bounds looked shitty, I'll say that. But otherwise, I didn't see anything out of our safeties that looked like we had just God awful glaring weaknesses.
That was a BULLSHIT CALL by the refs (one of several highly questionable penalties). Means nothing. These refs are gone in 2 weeks...there has to be a deal in the works with the real refs given how completely unprepared the replacements have shown themselves to be all PS. I can't see the NFL risking their "brand" like that come for reals time,
-
Originally Posted by
MPBears68 That was a BULLSHIT CALL by the refs (one of several highly questionable penalties). Means nothing. These refs are gone in 2 weeks...there has to be a deal in the works with the real refs given how completely unprepared the replacements have shown themselves to be all PS. I can't see the NFL risking their "brand" like that come for reals time,
That was actually one of the few good calls last night by the refs, MP. I saw the replay, and it clearly showed that Steltz hit whichever receiver it was out of bounds when he should have pulled up and let the play go.
-
I disagree.
Actually Steltz "hit" the Bears DB not Wilson and he barely ran into him. It was a bullshit over-call by refs looking to personal foul ANY contact out of bounds. Like the PI call on Peanut last week. Not a huge deal--we held them to 3 anyway--but it might be in RS. Not All contact out of bounds is a "late hit" PF. You can certainly see how these replacement refs might be incentivized to over-call stuff in the name of "safety".
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
