Windy City Gridiron

NFL Heading to Federal Mediation Again

2012-05-27T17:00:40Z

Stop me if you've heard this before. The NFL is struggling with a union of people they employ, and to facilitate the process of striking a new collective bargaining agreement, despite how well it worked the previous year (fully intended sarcasm), they accept an offer of federal mediation.

This time, it's not the players - it's the referees union.

The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service announced Thursday that the NFL and the referees' association had accepted an offer for mediators to participate in their negotiation of a new labor agreement.

The current deal expires at the end of this month and the NFL has instructed its scouting department for officials to begin preparing for the possibility that replacement officials could be used during the upcoming season if a deal is not struck.

Both sides say they are intent on reaching a deal.

Again, stop me if you've heard this before.

The biggest difference seems to be money, though I wouldn't be surprised if there were additional discussion of replay expansion, as well as fines or other punishments should officials continue to trip over themselves, as was the case for almost the entirety of last season.

Either way, if said deal is not reached, they'll turn to college, semi-pro, and some "elite NCAA officials who have retired" to fill the void. Somehow, I'm not sure I can see that working out quite as well as they'd hope.

Forte's Longevity a Factor in Ongoing Contract Talks

2012-05-27T13:10:00Z

As if to showcase just how hard the stock of the running back position has fallen in the NFL, the Tribune reports that the Bears have "concerns" about Forte's knees. Is it a genuine issue for a player at his position aged just 26, or are the team merely playing hardball?

More news and thoughts after the jump.

David Haugh says that a source has claimed the reason the Bears haven't been able to agree to a multiyear contract with their lead back is due to concern over how long his knees will hold up, an issue that "drew the attention of several teams" before he was drafted out of Tulane in the 2008 draft.

From the article:

According to the source, given Forte's past the Bears cannot rule out arthritis setting in and becoming a chronic problem for the fifth-year running back with 1,237 career NFL touches who turns 27 in December. In the NFL, data show running backs start declining after age 28.

"What past?" you might ask. After all, his first missed game since being a starter from day 1 in the NFL was in week 13 in his fourth season, when he was taken off after being injured in a loss to the Chiefs (ugh). Well, as it turns out:

Forte has history with both knees. He tore the posterior cruciate ligament in his left knee in November 2006 at Tulane and that injury, combined with 833 carries in college primarily on artificial surfaces, caused a handful of teams to note worries over the length of his NFL career. He suffered a sprained medial collateral ligament in the same knee in 2009, his second year, and had postseason arthroscopic surgery.

I have to admit that I wasn't aware of this when he was drafted, and this is the first time I've seen his PCL tear in college mentioned.

And then there's the fact that, as Haugh put it:

The Bears all but announced this week they now think they are a passing team ... nothing about coordinator Mike Tice's newly installed Broncos-styled offense Cutler and Marshall described made anybody conclude it needs a marquee running back. It functioned at a high level in '08 with a running back committee.

If this is the case, and given the history of workhorse lead backs who have shone early in their careers only to decline at a precipitous rate when the carries take their toll (the likes of Shaun Alexander, Marshall Faulk, Clinton Portis and Deuce McAllister all had their final 1,000 yard rushing seasons aged no older than 28, and none were able to start a full 16-game season after that), does it alter your views on whether the Bears should "pay da man"?

Tip o' the hat to Silence_Dogood for the fanshot.

Video: Bears' Defense Versus Eagles, Week 9, 2011

2012-05-27T12:00:30Z

Because hey, remember that time when the Bears' defense was going to have trouble with the vaunted Eagles' offense?

2011 Chicago Bears Defense vs Eagles (HD 720p) (via ChicagoDefense)

Plumbing the NFC North Depths: Tight End

2012-05-27T00:00:05Z

Earlier today we looked at the wide receivers around the NFC North and tried to identify where the Bears matched up. This time, we'll take another segment of the passing game into account (as well as the running game) as we examine the tight ends - of which the NFC North has some really good ones.

Let's hit the jump and get into it.

Bears:
2011: Kellen Davis, Matt Spaeth, Kyle Adams
Additions: Evan Rodriguez
As It Stands: Kellen Davis, Matt Spaeth, Evan Rodriguez

For purposes of this, I'll be including Tyler Clutts as a fullback. It's really difficult to pinhole where the Bears are with their tight end situation, just based on their pattern of usage over the last couple years. Davis led the team with five touchdown catches (on only eighteen receptions, nonetheless). Spaeth is a decent blocker, though I wouldn't ask him to take on a defensive end one-on-one. And Rodriguez appears to be a receiving threat with just enough blocking ability to be able to chip, but not really to sustain a block. The magic 8-ball at this point is saying "Check back later."

Vikings:
2011: Kyle Rudolph, Visanthe Shiancoe, Jim Kleinsasser
Subtractions: Kleinsasser (Retirement), Shiancoe
Additions: John Carlson
As It Stands: Kyle Rudolph, John Carlson

Shiancoe hasn't exactly been the same player he teased the Vikings that he was with his seven touchdown 2008 season and his 11 touchdown 2009 campaign, so probably just as well that he's no longer around. Instead, the void is filled with John Carlson, who had 31 receptions in 2010 with one touchdown and missed the entire 2011 season. Kyle Rudolph is okay, but while he showed some flashes, he really needs to get a few more looks from whatever gets trotted out at quarterback this season.

Lions:
2011: Brandon Pettigrew, Tony Scheffler, Will Heller
Changes: To this point, N/A

Scheffler was once-upon-a-time one of Jay Cutler's targets in Denver, so why haven't the Bears flipped a third-rounder to Detroit for him yet?! Sarcasm aside, this is a very solid unit, behind Pettigrew's 83 receptions and Scheffler's 6 touchdowns on 26 catches. Scheffler had the second-highest yards-per-reception in the offensive unit of any player with at least 10 receptions. Heller suffices as a blocker, but with two receiving threats like this, he doesn't calculate into the offense much.

Packers:
2011: Jermichael Finley, Tom Crabtree, Andrew Quarless, DJ Williams
Changes: To this point, N/A

Quarless is currently down with ACL/MCL surgery, which means he probably won't be back until midseason. But the unit overall is really not much beyond Jermichael Finley. Finley had 55 receptions with 8 touchdowns last year and a solid 13.9 yards-per-reception, which is pretty good for a tight end. Crabtree caught a touchdown, but he's more a blocker than he is a receiver, and DJ Williams should be looking to get a few more catches and take on a bigger role behind Finley.

As far as overall unit rankings are concerned, again, I'll have to go in pretty much the same order. The Vikings get the number four slot based on relying on Rudolph, high draft pick though he was, and losing Shiancoe to replace him and Kleinsasser with a guy who didn't play in 2010. The Bears unfortunately go at three, because we think the tight ends will get more use, but we don't know how they'll actually perform. Davis is a big target and catches solid numbers of touchdowns, but is he capable of a greater receiving load, or is he just a red zone target?

So again, I think it's between the dual threat of Pettigrew and Scheffler versus Finley, but this time, the Packers take the number two. Finley doesn't make or break the Packers offense, but he provides an excellent weapon - can DJ Williams fill in even half of Finley's role?

That pretty much leaves the Lions with the top tight end set - two very good receiving threats to go with a decent blocker in Heller.

What's your outlook on the Bears' tight ends compared to the rest of the division?

Urlacher: "The Talent ... Is Phenomenal"

2012-05-26T20:04:19Z

The offseason, OTAs and cap is probably when we, as fans, get to read all about how everybody's having an awesome camp, how the team's going to be so great in the coming year - basically, when optimism knows no bounds. Too bad they don't give out Super Bowls based on how much positive press a team gets.

But when Brian Urlacher, a guy who's been in Chicago his entire career, is asked if this is the best collection of talent since his arrival, and this is his response...

"Not even close," Urlacher said Friday on ESPN 1000's "Waddle and Silvy Show." "The talent we have on this team is phenomenal."
Urlacher pointed to a healthy Jay Cutler, the addition of three-time Pro Bowl receiver Brandon Marshall and a strong draft class led by top picks Shea McClellin, Alshon Jeffery and Brandon Hardin.

It still has to make a Bears fan feel pretty good.

In particular, Urlacher's been excited by the receivers so far in OTAs.

"[Brandon Marshall's] size, that's impressive just right there," Urlacher said. "He hovers above everybody. He's physically impressive, but he works his butt off [too]. He's out there catching balls every day from Jay, from all the quarterbacks. He's using the JUGS machine, catching extra passes.

"And he's a good guy. He's been great since he's been here. I think he fits in very well."

And it's nice to know Jeffery takes his craft seriously too.

"Alshon Jeffery had six unbelievable catches [Thursday] in practice and just jogged back to the huddle. We're all going crazy because it was an awesome catch and he just jogs back to the huddle like it was meant to happen."

Plumbing the NFC North Depths: Wide Receivers

2012-05-26T16:00:46Z

Way back when in January, when the Bears unceremoniously told Jerry Angelo to walk out the door (and later, Mike Martz showed himself out), much ado was made of "bridging the talent gap," a phrase I looked at as kind of a summary of how much work the Bears had to do this offseason to make up the difference between themselves and a division that hosted the number one seed overall as well as the first wild-card.

Now that free agency and the draft is over, I'd like to take a step back and break down the division teams and compare them to the Bears, and see just where things stack up currently. We'll start with a very high profile position that the Bears obviously marked as a top priority - the receiving corps.

Bears:
2011: Johnny Knox, Roy Williams, Sam Hurd, Earl Bennett, Devin Hester, Dane Sanzenbacher
Add: Brandon Marshall, Alshon Jeffery, Eric Weems, Devin Thomas
Subtract: Roy Williams, Sam Hurd (Johnny Knox?)
As It Stands: Brandon Marshall, Alshon Jeffery, Earl Bennett, Devin Hester, Eric Weems, Devin Thomas, Dane Sanzenbacher

The reason Johnny Knox is marked with a question mark is, well, the only one that knows is Johnny himself, and it doesn't look too good. But the Bears clearly took a step forward here. Spinning Williams and Hurd out and replacing them with Marshall and one of the draft's top receivers (often projected as a first-round pick) is a really good way to go about it, and filling the Knox return void with Weems as a solid veteran option helps. Overall, it's most certainly a stronger unit, but for now, I hesitate to mark it as a top 5 receiving corps when it might not be the top-2 in their own division.

Packers:
2011: Greg Jennings, Jordy Nelson, James Jones, Randall Cobb, Donald Driver, Brandon Saine
Add/Subtract: N/A

The Packers are pretty much bringing back the same receiving group as last year. If Driver doesn't get cut, he might take a step down, but he's continued to produce year after year somehow. And Jennings, Nelson and Jones aren't exactly the big names that intimidate fans, but Nelson put up an excellent 68 reception, 1,263 yard, 15 TD campaign (with a great 18.6 yards-per-reception). The Packers still have enough tools to be dangerous here, and if you're willing to count Jermichael Finley as a receiver (which for purposes of this, I'm not), arguably the most devastating aerial attack in the NFL.

Lions:
2011: Calvin Johnson, Nate Burleson, Titus Young, Rashied Davis, Stefan Logan
Add: Ryan Broyles
Subtract: Rashied Davis
As It Stands: Calvin Johnson, Nate Burleson, Titus Young, Ryan Broyles, Stefan Logan

For some reason, Rotoworld lists Logan as a running back, but whatever. Johnson is arguably the best receiver in the game currently, and behind him sits the moderately okay Nate Burleson and some promising young talent. Young turned in a fairly solid rookie campaign with 48 catches and six touchdowns, and Broyles is just about certain to be an upgrade over Rashied Davis. Logan isn't really as much of an offensive contributor, but will make some appearances in special packages.

Vikings:
2011: Percy Harvin, Michael Jenkins, Devin Aromashodu, Greg Camarillo, Bernard Berrian
Add: Greg Childs, Jarius Wright, Jerome Simpson
Subtract: Greg Camarillo, Bernard Berrian
As It Stands: Percy Harvin, Michael Jenkins, Jerome Simpson, Devin Aromashodu, Greg Childs, Jarius Wright

Last year, the Vikings receivers were pretty much Percy Harvin and... well, it wasn't pretty. Jenkins added 38 catches to pair with Harvin's 87, but beyond that, the Vikings had no passing attack out of the receivers whatsoever. So their additions consisted of two fourth-round picks - Wright and Childs both have potential, Wright more so on the inside and Childs on the outside. Simpson comes over from Cincinnati (with an arrest for having reefer mailed to his house, nonetheless) and has some ability (50 catches, 725 yards, 4 TD in 2011), but whether he can contribute to the Vikings' pedestrian passing attack remains to be seen.

Stacking up the units, I'd say it's a clear choice for the Vikings at 4 - it's got some youth that might pan out into solid talent, but needs to show more than Percy Harvin to rank any higher divisionally. Third... At this point I have to put the Bears, and not because I'm not a Marshall believer - I am. The problem is I'm just not sure exactly how deep the Bears are (it's the same problem as the Lions, and they have freaking Megatron, hence why they're second). Marshall adds the number one the Bears have needed in their passing attack, and we think Jeffery is going to be a pretty good number two, if not a number one himself, but between him being a rookie, between the absence of Johnny Knox, and between Bennett and Hester, I'm just not sure where the sustained depth of the team has a significant advantage. The Lions have a similar problem - Megatron, then Burleson's near-guaranteed 700 yards, and plenty of unprovens. The Packers retain their corps from last year, as deep as ever.

Where do you have the Bears' receiving corps ranked? Do you think it could be a top-5 NFC corps by season's end?

Picks to Improve: J'Marcus Webb

2012-05-26T12:01:05Z

I should probably say right out front, when I started doing this little miniseries last week, it kind of took on a different pall than I had intended it to - I'd intended to look at a few pre-2011 draft picks that stand to gain the most from the 2012 season, but it's been taking a slightly different turn from that. With this post, I'll try to bring the series back, and what better way to do it than with a player that has a lot to lose... but a lot to gain.

Struggled at right tackle in 2010? Yes. Struggled at left tackle in 2011? Hell yes. But the third year could be when the founder of "J-Webb Nation" claims his turf.

I don't think too many people would stand up and admit to thinking J'Marcus Webb has been anything but a liability at tackle throughout his short tenure, so when we say "Picks to Improve" it smacks a little of "There's nowhere to go but up." But while I'll admit Webb had a horrible season and that he shouldn't be handed the starter's spot, I think we often forget there's been a lot out of the line's - and particularly his own - favor.

We've been over the myriad of reasons that he's struggled over his two seasons in the league - his young age, his seventh-round draft status, prototypical size but lack of technique, last season switching sides amidst a shortened offseason, scheme that practically requires All-Pro-level tackle play to be run as designed - and often pointed to them as signs that he can't possibly be as bad as he was. For all those factors, and for the occasional flashes he has shown, the one overarching fact that can't be ignored is that he was bad.

Ideally, no team would want a seventh-round draft pick as "prototypical" as Webb is starting anywhere on the line immediately. A team might see "prototypical" and read "outstanding measurables for his position," but while that's true, if he had the necessary technique and skill, he'd already have been drafted long before that point - the two aren't mutually exclusive, but when the "prototypical" word is around in the seventh, there's a reason for it. And that's what the Bears got with Webb - seventh round production out of a seventh-round pick.

So, yes, Webb was bad, and Webb was thrust into a starting role well before his maturation date. Which is why throwing him into a competition for left tackle is best for him right now. If Webb wins, he's almost assuredly a better player for it. If not, he'll be allowed to develop without exposing Jay Cutler to a furious defensive end with each growing-pains-mistake made, and should Chris Williams falter, maybe Webb can surprise with a resurgent latter-part-of-the-season performance.

The J'Marcus Webb we see in 2012 will be a better tackle. How much better remains to be seen.

In Defense of Lovie Smith

2012-05-25T20:00:02Z

The other day there were some articles and videos in the Den, followed by Dave Gilbert's excellent article wondering if a playoff-less 2012 season would be Lovie's last in Chicago. Now the poll results at last check were 65% "yes" and 34% "no" but I wanted to write about just how good Lovie is exactly. Lovie is only the 13th head coach in team history and his time in Chicago has been quite good. Perhaps it would be time to part ways with him after a disappointing '12 but I would like to make an argument that it's not.

As I said, Smith is the 13th head coach in Bears history. Entering 2012 he will build on his standing of third on list of consecutive seasons coaching the team at eight. Following last season he became the third-longest tenured coach at 8 seasons, behind George Halas and Mike Ditka.

So that right there tells you Lovie is at least worth a damn. But why is it, among Bears fans, that it's blasphemous to even use Lovie's name in the same breath as Ditka or Halas? Because he hasn't won a championship? Because he's only made the playoffs three out of eight seasons?

Sure that may be a good point. During Ditka's tenure with the team the Bears had a winning record seven times, out of his 11 seasons. This is how the rest of the division did during his tenure: the Vikings had 5 winning seasons, the Packers had 3, the Lions had 2 and the Buccaneers had 1.

In Lovie's stay in Chicago, the Packers have had 5 winning seasons, the Vikings 3 and the Lions one. Plus, with the four-team divisions it is more difficult to make the playoffs, because generally only two teams will make it from one division, it is unusual for a division to have three playoff teams. In any given season, Ditka had one formidable divisional opponent, where as Lovie has had 1 and an eighth but really that's more like having two other teams competing for playoff spots versus your own team and one other.

Furthermore, Lovie and Ditka share the same playoff winning record: .500. Lovie's teams have finished an average of 2.3 in the division, only slightly worse than Ditka's 2.0 in a four-team division.

If Lovie finishes out his current contract he will tie Halas' four-time 10 consecutive seasons coaching the Bears. In order for Lovie to lose his winning record, the team would have to go 1-15, if the team finished 4-12 he'd have a .500 record but would still be third behind Ditka and Halas in wins (yeah the coaching history of this team is two-deep). Other coaches with winning records are Halas fill-ins Ralph Jones, Hunk Anderson/Luke Johnos (co-coaches) and Paddy Driscoll, none of whom held the reins for more than four seasons.

Sure, Lovie is stoic and that bothers Bears fans who remember the fire and brimstone of Iron Mike and the few WCGers old enough to remember Papa Bear himself, but the man gets results. Having a firey personality doesn't always get results, for evidence look no further than Abe Gibron and his 11-30-1 record.

Maybe none of this will convince you but I know that there are any number of circumstances that would result in it being OK for Lovie to miss the playoffs this year and keep his job.

Lovie has made the playoffs three of eight seasons and made two conference title games. Ditka made three title games. Of his three playoff appearances Lovie has only bowed out after one game once, where Ditka did that three times. Sure, Lovie might have to win two or three Super Bowls before he got the respect of a Ditka or a Halas but I think he's the man to do it.

Lovie is better than people think and I believe he should lead the Bears for at least the remainder of his current contract. Stay the course, it's the better way to win in the NFL. Well as long as it's not Jack Del Rio or Marvin Lewis...