How Bad Are The Chicago Bears?

[Tugg Speedman]

The bears suffered their first shutout since 2002.

Dating back to last year, the bears are on an eight game losing that ties a franchise record.  Next week they have to beat a now good Raiders team at home to not set a new mark.

The Bears ran only two plays in Seattle territory.

The Bears ran 10 offensive series and punted on all 10.  That is the first time since 1980 that an NFL team punted at the end of every offensive series.

Now if you’re still not sure the bears are the worst team in the draft and destine to get the first pick in the draft, the next story will seal it … the bears punter is now day-to-day with a sprained knee from overuse!  I kid you not, they actually overused their punter and he is now injured!

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/9/28/9409391/bears-punter-pat-odonnell-injury-sprained-knee
Bears punter punted so many times he sprained his knee
By Adam Stites @AdamBCC on Sep 28, 2015, 12:57p

Pat O'Donnell punted 10 times on Sunday and now he's day-to-day with a knee sprain.
Chicago Bears punter Pat O'Donnell was called on to punt after every single one of his team's drives on Sunday and now has a sprained knee, according to Rand Getlin of NFL Network.

O'Donnell is "day-to-day" with the knee injury after punting 10 times in a Week 3 game against the Seattle Seahawks. The Bears finished the game with seven first downs, but never scored in the 26-0 loss and instead punted on every drive.

While that means the Bears were able to avoid a turnover with Jimmy Clausen under center, it also means the team was never even close enough to warrant a field goal attempt or a shot at going for a fourth down conversion.

O'Donnell didn't approach the record for punts or punting yards in a game as a punter has been called on 11 or more times in 30 different instances. The record for punts is held by Leo Araguz of the Oakland Raiders, who was called on 16 times in a 7-6 victory over the San Diego Chargers in 1998, racking up 709 total yards of punting. The opposite punter in that game, Darren Bennett of the Chargers, punted 11 times for 522 yards.

In the first week of the season, O'Donnell was called on just once for the Bears in a 31-23 loss to the Green Bay Packers. In Week 2, he punted five times against the Arizona Cardinals.

[rocky_warrior]

I'm a Bears fan, and they're bad. 

Maybe you missed this article...
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/fire-sale-starting--chicago-bears-trade-jared-allen-to-the-carolina-panthers-204656381.html

I do have a bit of faith in (John) Fox, but Cutlers contract is the poison pill for the bears.  I don't see any way around them keeping him through the '17-18 season (to meet the $54MM guarantee).  Of course, with Fox being crafty, that might be a good year and they might keep him through the contract.  Otherwise,Fox and Cutler are gone with a new coach and new QB to build around again.  Too bad for Fox really....he'll make his money, and he'll build a decent team around Cutler, but I don't know if he'll be able to survive after that season with Cutler leading the charge.

[Tugg Speedman]

As I said above, they are on-track to have the first pick in the draft. 

Will they pick Connor Cook (MSU), Jared Goff (Cal) or whoever is the top QB this year, cut Cutler and start over.

While the circumstances are a bit different, the Packers had the courage to get rid of Favre for Rodgers.  The Colts had the courage to get rid of Manning for Luck.

Do the bears have the courage to get rid of Cutler for the best QB in college?

[jsglow]

As I said above, they are on-track to have the first pick in the draft. 

Will they pick Connor Cook (MSU), Jared Goff (Cal) or whoever is the top QB this year, cut Cutler and start over.

While the circumstances are a bit different, the Packers had the courage to get rid of Favre for Rodgers.  The Colts had the courage to get rid of Manning for Luck.

Do the bears have the courage to get rid of Cutler for the best QB in college?

The Packers situation was somewhat different.  Rodgers had been in the system for 3 years and was approaching the final year of his rookie contract.  Ted Thompson knew what he had (although the public hadn't seen much of it yet).  And he endured the wrath of the fans when Favre un-retired.

Funny.  The conversation has shifted around the NFL from 'Is Rodgers the best player in the league today to is Rodgers the best player in the league ever?'  I'm not ready to go there but I do think it's clear that he's on pace for his third MVP right now.  I also have a sense that the Packers know that the 'iron is hot'.  It's time to win another Superbowl.  Getting and staying healthy is the key.

Good luck to the Bears.  Seriously.  John Fox has them headed in the right direction.  But they're a bad team right now.  It'll take a few years.

[NavinRJohnson]

John Fox has them headed in the right direction.  But they're a bad team right now.  It'll take a few years.

That's the conclusion everyone, myself included, seems inclined to draw, but I have seen little actual evidence of that. Granted, the roster is a complete disaster, but all the excitement after week one, about how they looked like a real, professional football team, has been completely absent the past couple weeks. If I'm being honest, and granted it is only three games into year one, I see little from a personel or coaching standpoint that indicates they are headed in the right direction.

Really gonna come down to next year's number 1 pick/the choices they make at QB. If they get Goff, as an example, he HAS TO work out. If he doesn't, they're screwed all over again. They've just put themselves in a terrible position.

[MerrittsMustache]

The Bears ran 10 offensive series and punted on all 10.  That is the first time since 1980 that an NFL team punted at the end of every offensive series.

At least they didn't turn the ball over!

[rocket surgeon]

bad news...

whoever decided it was a good idea to re-sign cutler to $$$ extension-that put them back 3-5 years.  and that is providing they can find and train an adequate quarterback.  how many have they gone thru since the brett favre era began?  i know it's a lot, but...

[jsglow]

That's the conclusion everyone, myself included, seems inclined to draw, but I have seen little actual evidence of that. Granted, the roster is a complete disaster, but all the excitement after week one, about how they looked like a real, professional football team, has been completely absent the past couple weeks. If I'm being honest, and granted it is only three games into year one, I see little from a personel or coaching standpoint that indicates they are headed in the right direction.

Really gonna come down to next year's number 1 pick/the choices they make at QB. If they get Goff, as an example, he HAS TO work out. If he doesn't, they're screwed all over again. They've just put themselves in a terrible position.

I disagree.  And remember that I'm a Packer fan so I think I can be objective.  They played Seattle very solidly for the first half.  Remember, the Bears have NO QB at the moment and NO receivers because of injury.  They were not going to be able to move the ball whatsoever with the available personnel.  This is never about one player and it's not about a single 1st round pick next year.  You simply can't assume that next year's 1st is the next coming of ARodg.

Let me see if I can draw a comparison.  The 46th man on the Packers roster last night was LB Joe Thomas, an undrafted 2014 FA.  While he's 'our guy', we had to let him go in final cuts this year after stashing him on IR last year.  For reasons unknown (frustration?), he made the decision to head to the Dallas PS.  An injury to second string DL Boyd allowed Ted to make a call and all of a sudden Thomas is back, starting in the dime, and contributing effectively in his first game on MNF.  Right now the Bears have almost no players worth keeping.  And the Packers have effective players stashed on OTHER teams practice squads.  The Packers are literally 70 players deep while the Bears can count maybe 20.  No coach in the world can compensate for that.   

[jsglow]

bad news...

whoever decided it was a good idea to re-sign cutler to $$$ extension-that put them back 3-5 years.  and that is providing they can find and train an adequate quarterback.  how many have they gone thru since the brett favre era began?  i know it's a lot, but...

100% true.  But Jay isn't the only problem.  The Bears' cupboard is bare.

[Tugg Speedman]

Saying they should also trade Forte and Alshon Jeffrey too. 

With Jared Allen gone, Bears should listen to offers for Matt Forte

http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago-bears/post/_/id/4700153/with-jared-allen-trade-complete-bears-should-listen-to-offers-for-matt-forte-and-alshon-jeffery

LAKE FOREST, Ill. -- Jared Allen's sudden departure to Carolina is a sign the Chicago Bears are open for business.

With almost zero shot of making the playoffs, the Bears (0-3) need to be active in advance of the NFL's Nov. 3 trade deadline.

Don't expect a fire sale. That's not how it usually works in professional football. But the Bears have a pair of high-profile offensive players to shop: Matt Forte and Alshon Jeffery. Both are scheduled to be free agents after this season.

Forte, 29, became expendable the moment in January when general manager Ryan Pace rebuffed his request for a new contract. A two-time Pro Bowl selection, Forte is an effective, all-purpose back who can carry the load on offense. Forte would be a welcome addition to any contender that suffers a key injury at running back prior to the deadline.

Unless the Bears are secretly intent on re-signing Forte, they have to explore all trade options.

That line of thinking extends to Jeffery, who missed the past two weeks with a hamstring injury. Jeffery is different than Forte. The 25-year-old former Pro Bowl wide receiver is entering the prime of his career.

Why listen to trade offers for him? Because there's no guarantee Jeffery wants to re-sign with the Bears in the offseason. He probably wants to test the market. Imagine Jeffery and Brandon Marshall reuniting in New York. You never know. Besides, Jeffery probably isn't a guy to slap with the franchise tag just to keep him around for another year.

Let's be clear: The Bears are rebuilding the roster. Under no circumstances can teams in the middle of a rebuild afford to overpay for a player in free agency. That throws the whole plan out of whack.

In theory, 2015 first-round pick Kevin White has the physical skills to play Jeffery's role next year. At tailback, the club invested a fourth-round pick in Jeremy Langford to replace Forte in the future. The Bears have protected themselves at both positions -- just as long as White can successfully recover from the stress fracture in his ankle.

The Bears should also gauge interest in Jay Cutler and Martellus Bennett. Remember, the Bears engaged in trade talks with the Tennessee Titans regarding Cutler prior to the draft. The discussions went nowhere, reportedly because of Cutler's hefty contract, but he is definitely not untouchable. The same holds true with Bennett, who missed the offseason program due to a contract dispute. Bennett still wants new money from someone next year.

[MerrittsMustache]

I disagree.  And remember that I'm a Packer fan so I think I can be objective.  They played Seattle very solidly for the first half.  Remember, the Bears have NO QB at the moment and NO receivers because of injury.  They were not going to be able to move the ball whatsoever with the available personnel.  This is never about one player and it's not about a single 1st round pick next year.  You simply can't assume that next year's 1st is the next coming of ARodg.

Agreed. The Bears' current coaching staff is significantly better than the last couple of seasons. Last year, there was mass confusion on both sides of the ball, TOs being wasted to open possessions, defenders playing different defenses on the same play, opposing DBs stating postgame that they knew what plays were coming, etc. This season, Gase understands that ball control needs to be a priority and they're doing a decent job of that. Defensively, players are at least in the right position - they just don't have anyone who can make plays. Gone are the massive blown coverages and huge holes in the D-line. Unfortunately, coaching can't make up for an immense lack of talent. Most of the Bears' defensive starters should be special teamers/back-ups, while most of the special teamers should be on practice squads somewhere. The lack of talent filters down throughout the entire roster.

Let me see if I can draw a comparison.  The 46th man on the Packers roster last night was LB Joe Thomas, an undrafted 2014 FA.  While he's 'our guy', we had to let him go in final cuts this year after stashing him on IR last year.  For reasons unknown (frustration?), he made the decision to head to the Dallas PS.  An injury to second string DL Boyd allowed Ted to make a call and all of a sudden Thomas is back, starting in the dime, and contributing effectively in his first game on MNF.  Right now the Bears have almost no players worth keeping.  And the Packers have effective players stashed on OTHER teams practice squads.  The Packers are literally 70 players deep while the Bears can count maybe 20.  No coach in the world can compensate for that.

One major advantage that GB has over most NFL teams is consistency. Quite a few teams would have bailed on McCarthy after the 6-10 season but TT didn't and it's paid off. The Packers have basically run the same offensive system since 2006 and the same defensive system since 2009. The coaches and FO know the systems in and out, they know who can fit into the systems, who knows the systems and they can confidently plug them in. In addition, they draft well and they draft players who fit with their overall scheme. They've built enough depth that, like you point out, they cut players who have the ability to be contributors. For all we know, Joe Thomas could be the best LB on the Bears's roster, but he was a cast-off for a team with depth.

Over the course of 4 seasons, the Bears have had 3 different GMs and have gone from Lovie's Cover-2 defense to Tucker's WTF defense to Fangio's 3-4 defense. Those are all very different systems. In 7 seasons, they've also gone from Ron Turner to Mike Martz to Mike Tice to Marc Trestman to Adam Gase, all of whom ran vastly different systems. There's been no consistency. Under Lovie, the Bears drafted poorly but, defensively, they had veteran players who'd been in the system long enough and knew it well enough to still be very effective players. There's a reason why the Bears are bringing in veterans like Eddie Royal, Tracy Porter and Mitch Unrein - they know the systems. Players still have to make plays but having multiple years' experience in a system is a HUGE and underrated benefit.

[GGGG]

Also the stat that was presented last on MNF.  Of the Packers 53 players, only three of them have been on another team's regular season roster.  (And the Packers drafted and developed one of those guys - James Jones.)  That is really an incredible statistic.  It shows how good they are at identifying and coaching up talent.  And yes the scheme consistency matters.

[brandx]

As I said above, they are on-track to have the first pick in the draft. 

Will they pick Connor Cook (MSU), Jared Goff (Cal) or whoever is the top QB this year, cut Cutler and start over.

While the circumstances are a bit different, the Packers had the courage to get rid of Favre for Rodgers.  The Colts had the courage to get rid of Manning for Luck.

Do the bears have the courage to get rid of Cutler for the best QB in college?

Unless Cutler is out for a long time, they will not get the 1st pick. They just played the 3 best teams in the NFC.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Unless Cutler is out for a long time, they will not get the 1st pick. They just played the 3 best teams in the NFC.

but what effect will these trades have on locker room morale?

[MerrittsMustache]

but what effect will these trades have on locker room morale?

None.

If they trade Forte or Jeffrey, it might have an effect. Trading a past-his-prime DE who was playing out of position and a back-up LB will have none.

[GOO]

If the bears are in the top 5, they probably should and probably will take a QB.  However, the last thing they should do is throw a rookie QB into the fire on a poor team.  Let him learn for a year.  That ties an unreasonable amount up at the QB stop for one or two years, but maybe worth it.

Cutler isn't great, but he isn't terrible either.  If he was surrounded by a solid team, on defense and offense, he could be serviceable.  Was McMahon better?  I'd say no, but he had a stellar D and just had to manage the game.   If you put a rookie QB in place of Cutler on this team, the rookie would probably have worse results and then you'd have to worry about injury and stunted long term development. 

Maybe I'm way off, and I'm sure there are a lot of studies that I'm not aware of, but it seems to me that too may rookie QB's are thrown to the wolves on less than solid teams and either sink or swim.  Some may excel, but the risk is permanently stunting the development of a QB that would excel if gradually brought into the mix.  I can't imagine being a rookie QB, with the game moving too fast, not having a full grasp of the offense, and being on a bad team with limited weapons and a poor O line.  Recipe for post traumatic stress and potential stunted development/low confidence.

A rookie QB that can pull the ball in and run, seems like the type that most likely can excel in that first year.  Just the ability to run if they feel pressure and don't know the offense well enough or it it moves to fast to check down for open receivers.  If they don't get hurt doing so.  The guys that develop into true QB's with the patience and ability to check down to that 3rd and 4th receiver, without just tucking and running, is probably the type of QB that you want to develop for the long term.

As an old time Packer fan, look what happened to Lynn Dickey when he was forced to drop back and pass, and get hit over and over... a shell of a QB at the end.  And he was a veteran. 

[Tugg Speedman]

Unless Cutler is out for a long time, they will not get the 1st pick. They just played the 3 best teams in the NFC.

Not quite but close enough ...

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings

They played #2, #3 and #7 so far.

BUT ... the bears are dead last in this week's power rankings.

[Tugg Speedman]

Regarding Cutler ...

Is he better or worse than Romo (who I think is the closest comparison to him)?

[Tugg Speedman]

If the bears are in the top 5, they probably should and probably will take a QB.  However, the last thing they should do is throw a rookie QB into the fire on a poor team.  Let him learn for a year.  That ties an unreasonable amount up at the QB stop for one or two years, but maybe worth it.

Cutler isn't great, but he isn't terrible either.  If he was surrounded by a solid team, on defense and offense, he could be serviceable.  Was McMahon better?  I'd say no, but he had a stellar D and just had to manage the game.   If you put a rookie QB in place of Cutler on this team, the rookie would probably have worse results and then you'd have to worry about injury and stunted long term development. 

Maybe I'm way off, and I'm sure there are a lot of studies that I'm not aware of, but it seems to me that too may rookie QB's are thrown to the wolves on less than solid teams and either sink or swim.  Some may excel, but the risk is permanently stunting the development of a QB that would excel if gradually brought into the mix.  I can't imagine being a rookie QB, with the game moving too fast, not having a full grasp of the offense, and being on a bad team with limited weapons and a poor O line.  Recipe for post traumatic stress and potential stunted development/low confidence.

You mean like RG III who thought he was as invincible as his glowing media adulation, so he thought he was bullet proof and put his head down to get first downs and then spent the next two years hurt?

If he learned the nuisances of the game, like sliding and avoiding the hit, he might still be playing.

[rocket surgeon]

If the bears are in the top 5, they probably should and probably will take a QB.  However, the last thing they should do is throw a rookie QB into the fire on a poor team.  Let him learn for a year.  That ties an unreasonable amount up at the QB stop for one or two years, but maybe worth it.

Cutler isn't great, but he isn't terrible either.  If he was surrounded by a solid team, on defense and offense, he could be serviceable.  Was McMahon better?  I'd say no, but he had a stellar D and just had to manage the game.   If you put a rookie QB in place of Cutler on this team, the rookie would probably have worse results and then you'd have to worry about injury and stunted long term development. 

Maybe I'm way off, and I'm sure there are a lot of studies that I'm not aware of, but it seems to me that too may rookie QB's are thrown to the wolves on less than solid teams and either sink or swim.  Some may excel, but the risk is permanently stunting the development of a QB that would excel if gradually brought into the mix.  I can't imagine being a rookie QB, with the game moving too fast, not having a full grasp of the offense, and being on a bad team with limited weapons and a poor O line.  Recipe for post traumatic stress and potential stunted development/low confidence.

A rookie QB that can pull the ball in and run, seems like the type that most likely can excel in that first year.  Just the ability to run if they feel pressure and don't know the offense well enough or it it moves to fast to check down for open receivers.  If they don't get hurt doing so.  The guys that develop into true QB's with the patience and ability to check down to that 3rd and 4th receiver, without just tucking and running, is probably the type of QB that you want to develop for the long term.

As an old time Packer fan, look what happened to Lynn Dickey when he was forced to drop back and pass, and get hit over and over... a shell of a QB at the end.  And he was a veteran.

right on GOO-
both favre and rodgers did their share of clipboard holding and that turned out pretty good

as for paying cutler so much-i'll tell ya, when cutler was down 2 years ago, josh mccown filled in pretty good and he actually scared me more than cutler.  mccown threw a ball very similar to rodgers, soft lasers that the players seemed to adapt well to.  i know, mccown went on to have a bad year at tampa and now is ?? but i think he was more comfortable with the bears offense and coaches??  oh well...

hopefully cutler has a few years left in him as a bear for our sake anyway

[chapman]

Sun Dec. 6   San Francisco @ Chicago  may be for the first pick in the draft.

Thanks, Jed York.   

[brandx]

Not quite but close enough ...

http://espn.go.com/nfl/powerrankings

They played #2, #3 and #7 so far.

BUT ... the bears are dead last in this week's power rankings.

Read my post - I said the 3 best teams in the NFC - not the NFL.

[brandx]

Regarding Cutler ...

Is he better or worse than Romo (who I think is the closest comparison to him)?

Really - no comparison at all.

Romo is top 10. Jay may be top 20.

[Tugg Speedman]

Read my post - I said the 3 best teams in the NFC - not the NFL.

The have to Raiders at home this weekend.

#21 on the power rankings.

Lose this and they are getting the #1 pick.

[jsglow]

Agreed. The Bears' current coaching staff is significantly better than the last couple of seasons. Last year, there was mass confusion on both sides of the ball, TOs being wasted to open possessions, defenders playing different defenses on the same play, opposing DBs stating postgame that they knew what plays were coming, etc. This season, Gase understands that ball control needs to be a priority and they're doing a decent job of that. Defensively, players are at least in the right position - they just don't have anyone who can make plays. Gone are the massive blown coverages and huge holes in the D-line. Unfortunately, coaching can't make up for an immense lack of talent. Most of the Bears' defensive starters should be special teamers/back-ups, while most of the special teamers should be on practice squads somewhere. The lack of talent filters down throughout the entire roster.


One major advantage that GB has over most NFL teams is consistency. Quite a few teams would have bailed on McCarthy after the 6-10 season but TT didn't and it's paid off. The Packers have basically run the same offensive system since 2006 and the same defensive system since 2009. The coaches and FO know the systems in and out, they know who can fit into the systems, who knows the systems and they can confidently plug them in. In addition, they draft well and they draft players who fit with their overall scheme. They've built enough depth that, like you point out, they cut players who have the ability to be contributors. For all we know, Joe Thomas could be the best LB on the Bears's roster, but he was a cast-off for a team with depth.

Over the course of 4 seasons, the Bears have had 3 different GMs and have gone from Lovie's Cover-2 defense to Tucker's WTF defense to Fangio's 3-4 defense. Those are all very different systems. In 7 seasons, they've also gone from Ron Turner to Mike Martz to Mike Tice to Marc Trestman to Adam Gase, all of whom ran vastly different systems. There's been no consistency. Under Lovie, the Bears drafted poorly but, defensively, they had veteran players who'd been in the system long enough and knew it well enough to still be very effective players. There's a reason why the Bears are bringing in veterans like Eddie Royal, Tracy Porter and Mitch Unrein - they know the systems. Players still have to make plays but having multiple years' experience in a system is a HUGE and underrated benefit.

Absolutely correct. Great analysis.