We shouldn't pretend that the addition of Mike Brown and Tommie Harris will insert the 2007 Chicago Bears back into the Super Bowl. We shouldn't pretend that Peyton Manning's goalline to goalline dissection of the league's #2 defense was the product of shoddy Ron Rivera game-planning. Bob Babich (henceforth known on DaBlog as The Bich) has work to do and since I am so firmly in his camp and pro this hire, I'm taking it upon myself to lay out what will be expected of him in the coming year. It is a three-point stance.
MORE THAN FOUR
When the Bears have struggled in pass coverage it has been because of a near-arrogant reliance on their front four to get pressure. When the front four has struggled, they've refused to involve their fast and ferocious linebackers in the attack. This must change.
DEVELOP THE SAFETIES AGAINST THE RUSH
Mike Brown will be on IR by the first week in October so the Bears must concern themselves in this offseason with developing a player to fill that void. I think it can be Chris Harris - a big-time hitter - but he's been far too much a liability in the passing game.
RESTORE CONFIDENCE
Missing that many tackles on the biggest stage in sports can be humiliating for a group as proud as this Bears defense. In the parity-riddled NFL the Bears can't afford to start the season asleep at the wheel. Make them believe they're the best in the game because with Harris and Brown back, they are.
#2 jdawg said . . .Cameron Worrell. . . ok probably not but i can dream right??? Todd Johnson should also be back
February 21, 2007
#3 Bill said . . .Jeff -- If you think we're going to see more blitzing with Babs than Chico you're dreaming. Chico is from Johnson's Philly Blitzsteak school and Babs is all about the Lovie cover 2.
February 21, 2007
#4 jdawg said . . .Well, there was something in the Sun-Times today about Babs wanting to get more sacks for Urlacher - so I think he will include blitz packages in his defenses. The cover-2 does not preclude blitzing, but it does preclude safeties being in run support. That job falls to the corners.
There is nothing to say that the Bears will be in cover-2 100% of the time either. The difference I think (or hope?) is that Babs belieives in it and Chico reluctantly used it.
February 21, 2007
#5 Pissed off said . . .I didn't mean to infer that Babs won't blitz, I just don't see him blitzing more than Chico did in the 2nd half of the season.
I'm not sure I get what your saying regarding safeties and run support Bill. Are you saying safeties aren't there for run support in the cover 2?
February 21, 2007
#6 WindyCityPackerFan said . . .Lets keep in mind the "cover 2" is somewhat of a myth. Only about 25 percent of the time in a cover 2 is a true cover 2 being run. Tomlin, the former D Coordinator of the Vikes who is known for the "tomlin 2" said they were running a true cover 2 only about 25 percent of the time. Its pretty basic what it is but its not the case on every play. I assume everyone here knows what the cover 2 scheme actually is and what goes on at all positions in a true cover 2?
February 21, 2007
#7 jeff said . . .PO'd,
I know you are not asking, but since I am a football junkie, let me give my version of the cover 2.
Two deep safeties play 1/2 of the field each (hence the name, cover 2). Depending on the scheme, the corners may play press and stay with the flat, or within 5-7 yards on the line of scrimmage, releasing deep routes to the safeties. On an outside run play, they would be the primary force players.
On a 4 receiver set (2 on each side), the corner may read the inside receiver while covering the outside receiver; if both go deep, the corner will go deep as well, leaving the flat vulnerable to screen, swing, etc.
With a 4-3 front, the linebackers will play inside-out, bouncing plays to the outside and pursuing. This is what Urlacher and Briggs do great because of their speed. On a pass, Urlacher will drop to the middle shallow zone (7-15 yds.), and the other backers will drop to the numbers at the same depth.
Pass rushsers will maintain lanes, unless on a stunt.
Sorry, it's been a while since I've talked football like this, just got carried away.
Man schemes are different.
February 22, 2007
#8 WindyCityPackerFan said . . .WCPF, welcome aboard. feel free to say as much as possible. it's fun to even read about football.
February 22, 2007
#9 Bear Dn said . . .Jeff,
Thanks for the invite.
If I may, let me share some thoughts about the Bears 46 defense.
The reason (as all of you already know) that the defense was so successful for the 85 Bears was the outstanding personnel they had. Many teams have tried to copy that defense with not nearly the success of the 85 team.
In that defense, 3 of the interior linemen cover both guards and the center, in what is known as an 'eagle' front. They need to get a strong push up the inside. The other defensive lineman (an end) will line up outside the tackle on the split end side. To the tight end side, one of the outside backers will line up on the inside shoulder of the tight end (7 technique), while the strong safety lines up outside of the tight end (9 technique), giving 6 men on the line, as opposed to 4 in a standard 4-3 front. The inside backers will align a little wider, over the uncovered tackles. The corners are man to man on the outside receivers, while the free safety is the only deep cover guy.
What the Bears did so well, was to bring all of the inside players (8) on the snap of the ball. Verses a basic offensive set, offenses had 8 players to block, but more often or not, their TE and RB's couldn't handle the likes of Marshall, Singletary, etc.
I worked with a HS team that tried to run this front...VERY difficult to do, especially because the reads of the SS and OLB on the TE are pretty difficult.
Again, sorry for the long post...just got carried away. It's been a while since I've been able to talk football this way!
February 22, 2007
#10 Bears fan in CA said . . .I don't like what I just read on ESPN.com about Lovie's contract. Broken Off??? Free Agent??? Long ways apart??? Will Babs be the head coach next year???
February 22, 2007
#11 Dante Jordan said . . .Interesting take in the Tribune by Steve Rosenberg. Rivera played for Buddy Ryan, and then coached under Jim Johnson. Both were known for their love of the blitz, and had great success with it.
If there was a conflict between Lovie and Rivera, maybe this was it. Lovie's system requires pressure from the front 4 alone, while Rivera's instincts probably wanted to blitz. Urlacher can be a great blitzer, too.
I don't think the firing of Rivera was a mistake, because you can't have a head coach and his coordinator out of sync. But we need someone to figure out a creative way to get pressure on the QB, which we never had the 2nd half of the season. Maybe if Lovie's friend suggests more blitzing, he'll actually listen.
This whole contract impasse is ridiculous, by the way. There is NO salary cap for paying coaches, so you can give Lovie a contract in line with his performance without worrying about the long term implications! How soon the Bears ownership forgets the Jauron and Wannstedt years...
February 22, 2007
#12 jdawg said . . .Lovie Smith deserves more than 1.45 mil this year. Chicago management is a joke. I just read on ESPN that he was the lowest paid coach last year and this year will only be #32 on the pay charts. Superbowl losing coaches average 5 million per year. I hope this gets resolved. By the way I'm a Seahawks fan so I was rooting for you guys. Give Lovie what he deserves...And franchise Hester!
February 22, 2007
#13 Pissed off said . . .I don't think we should get our panties in a knot the first time Lovie's agent decides to go public. Unless upper management has some real doubts regarding Smith it would be crazy to unleash the shit-storm that would happen if they tried to low-ball Smith.
February 22, 2007
#14 Bill said . . .If offenses play 3 or 4 WR sets it pretty much knocks out the cover 2.
February 22, 2007
#15 WindyCityPackerFan said . . .I'm late in responding, but my 2nd favorite Packer fan answered it very well. The safeties are too deep to do run support. If the runner gets tothem, it's a big gain.
(BTW - my wife's brother is my favorite Packer fan. He got it from his Dad - my true favorite Packer fan, though he's been deceased for many years. He got it by being a Chicago Cardinals fan; when they left, he needed a team to root for, and being anti-Bear, it was obvious who it woudl be. That is the reason I beleive there are so many GB fans in Chiacgo - they stem somehow from old Cardinal fans. )
The Bear's management sickens me. This is where the 'mom and pop" aspect keeps coming in. I'm sure they will get this done, but why the hell can't they start with a number that isn't insulting?? They know they are going to pay at least 4 million - why not start at $3 million at the very least? Who the hell do they think they are - they have absolutely NO leverage.
I once bought a car after my old one died. I drove up to the car dealer in a rental and he knew it from the liscence plate. As we negotiated, I knew I had no leverage (my wife was with along with our 3 kids. I said to him bluntly "please go easy on me." That's what the Bears' shoufd be in effect doing. Saying "we want Lovie; we're going to pay; let's just keep this reasonable and not be influenced by all the outrageous deals for inexperienced coaches."
February 22, 2007
#16 WindyCityPackerFan said . . .Bill,
Thanks for the comment; I assume you were addressing me; if not, I feel like you did when you were in high school and you call that girl in your english class to ask her out, and her response is, "exactly who are you again?"
I digress.
PO'd,
You are right, in a 3+ receiver set, the cover 2 becomes vulnerable if all receivers run deep routes because of either; A) If the corner stays on the flat, the sideline routes are open due to the safety playing on the numbers (not to mention there is one deep to cover 2 WR) or B) if the corner sinks deep with the WR, the flat is vulnerable to the swing, screen, etc.
When a 3+ WR personnel grouping is put into the game, the defense will go to 'nickel' pulling a LB (Hunter Hillenmeyer) and replacing him with a DB. I know many of you know this already, but you will find it comical that Favre didn't know what a nickel defense was until his 3rd year in the league!
All defenses have strengths and weaknesses, obviously different levels of popularity. What makes a defensive scheme successful can be attributed to two things in this Packer fan's opinion. 1) A scheme that is can be effectively played by the personnel already in place (i.e. the 85 Bears and the 46 defense). 2) Most importantly, the coaches abililty to communicate and teach the scheme and get the players to buy into it.
Where am I going with this? The turnover of the coaching staff would be a concern for me. The Packers defense has sucked over the past 4 years because they have gone through 4 defensive coordinators in 4 years. Imagine if you had a different boss every year during your last 4 years at work.
Babich may be a better teacher and motivator than Rivera...the jury will be out probably until mid-October.
More conspiracy theory....after the day's Lovie news, I have heard many saying that's okay, we'll just bring Rivera back next year. Hold the phone a minute; if you were just fired (and screwed over) by your former employer and they asked you back, would you go back?
Tell you what....If all you Bears fans organized and pitched in, you could buy the team from the McCaskeys and do the thing right. Sounds crazy? We've got that in Green Bay! Yes, I am a shareholder.
February 23, 2007
Oh, forgot the rest of my conspiracy theory. The assumption is that Rivera would be the next head coach, but why would he come back to a team that just fired him?
My guess is that the management's choice will probably hire the other Ron (Turner) to coach the Bears. Didn't they just hire Luke Butkus who has more connections with Turner than with Lovie?
Just a thought.....
February 23, 2007
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.