Bleacher Report - Articles by Scott Ottersen

This Is Exactly What I Feel Like Doing To The Chicago Bears

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 12:59:05 -0500

Whether it be depantsing them myself and exposing their weak manhood or depantsing myself in front of their team bus, I feel like showing off my butt cheeks the same way Devin Hester did last night on NBC Sunday Night Football.

The only difference between him showing his butt and me showing mine is that mine would be funny.

At least, I would think so.

I will admit that the Bears played somewhat well in the game last night, going up against a good team in the Philadelphia Eagles.

They still can't run the ball, and the defense definitely needs help learning to cover wide receivers and how to make a correct form tackle.

But, when it came down to it, they had a chance to win the game. And, in today's NFL that is all you can really ask for with your favorite team.

But, the Jay Cutler saga continues, and for all intents and purposes, the Chicago Bears are now 4-6 because of his misjudgment.

I am not aware of what the gambling line was on last night's game, but the way Cutler missed three "easy" touchdown passes, it would almost seem as if the man had money on the game remaining close. And, in the end, he needed his team to lose, which meant missing a streaking Johnny Knox for an easy touchdown at the end of the game.

And, horribly missing Devin Hester at the end of the game for an easy first down.

Even worse were the two missed TD passes to Greg Olsen and Devin Hester on back-to-back passes.

No NFL quarterback should miss wide open receivers twenty yards down the field, and in the end zone.

Thus, it remains a fact...Jay Cutler is a horrible red zone quarterback.

Thus, it also remains a fact...the Chicago Bears suck.

50th Article, 50 Reasons Why NOT To Watch the Chicago Bears

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:25:46 -0500

1. They suck!

2. They have two of the fastest wide receivers in the NFL, but never throw the ball deep.

3. Ron Turner still has a job despite No. 2.

4. They're 4-5 after playing teams that are a combined 38-42.

5. The remainder of their opponents are 32-30 (helped out, greatly, by Minnesota). Still...if they can't beat bad teams, why on earth would they be able to beat halfway decent teams?

6. They are four games out of first in the NFC North.

7. There are eight teams with better records than them in the NFC, and two with the same. Only six teams make the playoffs and I can't make a legitimate argument that says they are better than any of those 10 teams.

8. Ron Turner still has the job as offensive coordinator.

9. Jay Cutler has thrown 17 interceptions through nine games. He's on pace for 30.

10. Matt Forte averages fewer than three yards per rush for an entire game almost as often as he averages more than three yards per rush (four games under 3.0, five over).

11. They lost their last game 10-6, which became the second most boring game this season, just narrowly beating out the 6-3 debacle that was the Cleveland Browns against the Buffalo Bills.

12. Wait, I think Jay Cutler just threw another interception.

13. Before the season started, the entire city was buzzing and the fans had such high hopes to have a winning team that might make its way back into the playoffs. Now, it looks as if we will be lucky to be a .500 team.

14. Every time I watch the games, I remind myself that the Bears don't have a first- or second-round draft pick next year to help fill all the holes they have on the team.

15. The Bears traded that second-round draft pick for Gaines Adams, a player who has played, sparingly, in only one of his five games with the Bears, accumulating two tackles.

16. The New England Patriots acquired Randy Moss for a fourth round draft pick a few years back. He is a Pro-Bowl wide receiver and a surefire Hall of Famer. Gaines Adams has 13.5 sacks in his two-plus year career. What does it say about their front office that they get suckered into giving away a second-round draft pick for a young guy who hasn't even proven himself to be a reliable pass rusher yet?

17. No matter what is going on in the game, I will always assume the Bears defense will give up a big play. And, they usually do.

18. I get pissed off whenever I see Jay Cutler on the sideline acting like nothing is going on in his life. I'm not sure I'll ever have complete faith in him.

19. Devin Hester is not returning kicks anymore. I can't imagine that him returning kicks would take away too much from him learning the receiver position.

20. Lovie Smith calling the defensive plays has been a mistake. Maybe you would want to call something that can get someone close to putting pressure on the quarterback?

21. I feel as if the Bears keep waiting for the weather to turn, as if that is going to be the turning point of their season. Yeah, because no other team is used to playing in cold weather at this point.

22. Take away our two 30-plus point games this season, and our offense is scoring 15.4 points per game.

23. Take away our two 10-or-less points scored against games, and our defense is giving up 26.4 points per game.

24. Neither of those numbers add up to a watchable team.

25. Did I mention that Ron Turner still is an NFL offensive coordinator?

26. Adewale Ogunleye has five sacks. Alex Brown has four. Nobody else on the team has more than one. If the offense wasn't so bad, I would say that, maybe, I would DVR the games and fast forward through the defensive series and watch the offensive, but that would be, well, offensive.

27. Danieal Manning is one tackle behind Lance Briggs for tops on the team. We all know what it means when a teams safety is (almost) leading the way in tackles.

28. None of our players are dating Hollywood celebrities, so we can't even get a cameo appearance by a sexy starlet the way some other teams do.

29. Not only that, but we don't even have cheerleaders. We can't even get the obligatory cheerleader cleavage shot going to and coming back from commercials.

30. Hold on a minute, I just picked off Jay Cutler and ran it back for a touchdown while he was just laying on the ground, sulking, with his face mask stuck in the grass. I need to catch my breath.

31. Our wide receivers have made strides in becoming an average NFL receiving corps, but they still have a long way to go. With all the playmaking abilities they should have, they sure don't make a lot of big plays. It's saying something when Jay Cutler was all world outside of the pocket the past couple years and then comes to Chicago and all of the sudden can't find an open receiver once he leaves the pocket (or when he stays in the pocket, for that matter). Devin Hester, Earl Bennett, and Johnny Knox are no Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal.

32. The most positive statement the media and fans can come up with regarding our team is that we still have seven games to go.

33. Too bad that statement can also be used as the most negative.

34. The Bears are minus-five in turnovers this season. I can't remember a time (without looking it up) when the Bears were on the other end of the turnover spectrum. That was the way they used to win games.

35. In the spirit of the number 50, the Bears just got beat by the team whose coach wore the most famous of 50s in Bears history, Mike Singletary.

36. It has been a pain to find something positive to write about, so if I didn't watch at all, maybe I wouldn't struggle so much.

37. I'd be able to sleep better at night not being so upset about my favorite team's inability to put together a full, four-quarter, well-thought-out game plan.

38. I'd also be able to sleep better next week and the Monday after Christmas, considering those are both night games, and I wouldn't have to stay up to watch them.

39. If only looking toward next week's game against Philadelphia, consider this a warning: Cutler's worst performances have all come in night games—Green Bay in Week One (four INTs), Atlanta in Week Six (two INTs), and San Francisco this past Thursday (five INTs). In case you haven't heard, it's Bears-Eagles, Sunday night football.

40. Our backup quarterback is Caleb Hanie. If things keep going the way they are, he could see playing time. Some people are looking forward to this. This is No. 40 on my list of reasons not to watch. If you cannot tell, I'm not looking forward to that happening.

41. I'm not a Kyle Orton fan, but it stings a little to see his team having success this season compared to the un-success the Bears are having.

42. I'm not sure what to make of this stat, but the Bears have four first-round draft picks and two second-round draft picks among their starting 11 on offense. And, one first-round draft pick and two second-round draft picks on the defensive side. For some reason, this fact angers me.

43. The Chicago Bears do not allow fans to stay in the parking lots during the game. With the team putting together such craptacular performances, they should be happy that fans show up at all and pay their overpriced ways into the stadium.

44. Sometimes I feel like I'm bad luck. Perhaps, if I stop watching, the Bears will start winning. If I decide not to watch, I will let you know how that goes for the Bears.

45. Ok, I know, I know, but I still can't believe Ron Turner has not been fired as offensive coordinator for the Chicago Bears.

46. The Bears executives are such tightwads that you know they are not willing to pay top dollar for pricey free agents, therefore making it impossible to better our team. And, seeing as how they can't draft properly, it might be a long while before the Chicago Bears return to winning ways.

47. Not only is Kyle Orton having success, but Cedric Benson has become legit once again. I was never keen on letting him go. If they could have let Tank Johnson slip and then come back, why not Benson? It is unsettling to see him have success.

48. Jay Cutler has thrown five interceptions in the red zone this season. That is an insanely high number, considering no quarterbacks even threw that many all of last season. Those are easy points taken off the board. There's nothing more frustrating than watching your favorite team march their way down the field only to watch the quarterback make a dumb decision and give the other team the ball back when your team is just about to put up some points.

49. So far, the best highlight of the Bears season was watching Jarron Gilbert jump out of a pool and land on his feet. I guess he doesn't have the athletic ability to even see playing time.

50. If any fan can come up with 50 reasons why not to watch your team play, you know you are doing something wrong. Stop sitting around and collecting money and do something about making the Bears a winning football team.

Taj Gibson Is Nice Edition To Chicago Bulls' Starting Lineup

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 08:27:37 -0500

The Chicago Bulls are struggling. There is no doubt about that.

I do not believe it has anything to do with Tyrus Thomas being out. I really don't think he makes the Bulls that much better. I'm not saying that he wouldn't help, but I just don't think it's hurting the Bulls as much to have him out.

What I do like about Thomas being out is that it is allowing Taj Gibson to get more playing time. I think he can develop into a great piece for the Bulls rotation and will provide the Bulls executives with enough to feel safe trading away Thomas.

Both Gibson and Thomas have the same skillsets. They are both long, lanky, undersized power forwards. Neither are a tremendous asset on the offensive end, but I believe the ceiling is higher for Gibson than it is for Thomas.

We have seen all we can get out of Thomas. He has shown that he can turn it on at any point, but just doesn't have it in him to turn it on every night. I'm not saying that Gibson does, but I think Gibson understands that he doesn't have the ability to take over offensively, so he plays within the team offense and earns his points, rather than trying to create them. This is something that will help the Bulls offense. What Thomas does on some nights is hurt the offense by struggling through a horrible shooting night.

Another way that Gibson helps more than Thomas is his defensive ability. Gibson is a much better on-the-ball defender than Thomas is. Thomas may get more elevation and may have more "sexy" blocks than Gibson, but both have the ability to block shots and gather rebounds in traffic.

I have liked what I have seen out of Gibson so far. I think that with more time in the starting lineup he will gel more with the rest of the starters and make the Bulls a better team. I'm not saying he will make them a winning team, but he will definitely make them better.

He shoots better than 50 percent from the field, which is saying something for a Chicago Bulls player.

He is averaging eight points and five rebounds per game in just under 24 minutes. Over a full game, that would average out to 16 points and 10 rebounds, about the numbers we could expect out of Thomas. The main difference is that Tyrus scores those points less efficiently.

I am excited about the beginning of the Taj Gibson era in Chicago. I still do not think he is the right man for the low-post positions, but he is what we have right now, so we have to do the best we can with it.

I posted an interview he did on my Web site. Check it out. He seems like a good guy who's mentally grounded. http://chicagosportsinterviews.com/

BREAKING NEWS: Ken Griffey Jr. Signing for One More Season

Scott Ottersen — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:16:59 -0500

"The Kid" will be back for one more season in 2010.

Reports are coming out of Seattle (and Chicago) that George Kenneth Griffey Jr. will be signing with the Seattle Mariners for the 2010 season.

I know that he is not the same player that he once was, and that he doesn't add much to the roster at this point, but for the class act that he is, he deserves to go out when he wants to.

He is my favorite player of all time. And, over all major sports, he is my second favorite athlete of all time behind the great Michael Jordan.

In all my years seeing Chicago sports games, I only got to see him play once, and he graced my visit with a home run against my hometown Cubs, when he was playing for the Cincinnati Reds.

His deal is for one season, with a base salary of $2 million. It can be raised up to $3.15 million with incentives.

I am hoping for a bounce-back season from Griffey, because I can't have him going out with a .214 average. At least bump it up to .270, Griff. Maybe knock out 31 HRs to pass the Say Hey Kid, and move into fourth all time on the home run hitting list.

If not, I won't be mad at you. Best of luck.

Let's Call a Spade a Spade: The Chicago Bears Stink

Scott Ottersen — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 11:18:13 -0500

I tried posting this article right after the first half of Sunday's game, but for some reason it didn't post.

It made a lot of sense at the time, and even after watching the second half "run" they made, it still rings true in my head.

The running game is non-existent. The offensive line might as well just lay down after each snap. The wide receivers can't get open downfield because no defense has to respect the Bears running game.

Besides, the Bears don't even run the ball enough for teams to even think they are going to run the ball, so all defenses do is prevent our deep passing threat, which is all our receivers really are.

And, the defense...well, the defense is pathetic. After having 14 sacks in their first four games, the Bears have mustered a mighty total of two in the past four games. Where has the pass rush gone?

It is almost as if the Bears have become a completely different defensive team after the bye week. Or, maybe they just overachieved in their victory over the Steelers, and they are now showing everyone what their true colors are.

I do not know what to think of the Bears right now, but I do know that I am not looking at a good team.

They seem to be a team that will put together a good drive here and there, but never pull it together for all four quarters of a game.

And, without having a first- and second-round pick in next year's draft, and having owners that don't seem to be willing to land the big free agents, I'm not seeing a light at the end of the tunnel here for quite some time.

I will admit that Devin Hester has been a bright spot in his play, but he's definitely not the type of player who will lead a team to elite status. He needs an awful lot of help, and he's just not getting it right now.

They have holes at just about every position, and that type of patchwork takes time to work itself out. And, with the Vikings, Saints, Cowboys, Falcons, Eagles, Giants and Cardinals seemingly ahead of them on the talent level, I can't exactly say when the Bears will return to elite status in the NFC.

We all had high hopes for this season, but who doesn't in July and August? I'm sure the Tampa Bay, Detroit, and Oakland fans all saw "potential" in their teams' rosters.

But, with that hope dwindling down and reality settling in, where do we go from here?

I'm not giving up on the Bears, but with a less than favorable schedule coming up (SF, Philly, Green Bay, Minny twice, and Baltimore), I'm not even sure they can end the season above .500.

With the way they are playing now, I can see them losing to St. Louis.

Let's hope something kicks into gear in the coming weeks, otherwise it's going to get even harder to watch.

An Interview with BJ Armstrong

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:11:16 -0500

On Halloween, I was given the opportunity to interview Chicago Bulls great BJ Armstrong. It was, with great honor, that I accepted the opportunity.

He was at a Best Buy, promoting the launch of Windows 7, in partnership with the NBA, Microsoft, and HP. Before he moved on to his meet-and-greet portion, I, and another blogger (Ricky O’Donnell from TremendousUpsidePotential.com) were given fifteen minutes to throw any questions at him that we may have had.

I had sixteen questions lined up for him, but obviously knowing that I was only going to have fifteen minutes, I had to decide which ones would be best to ask. I wish I could have had more time, because I had some good ones that I wanted to ask, but may have come off a bit odd if I asked them as stand-alone questions.

But, I did my best. Ricky and I traded off questions, and this is what came of it:

Ricky : What are you doing with Windows?

BJ Armstrong : I’m here with Windows and HP promoting the new operating system, in conjunction with the NBA. They’re introducing new products and trying to get their product out to the consumer.

Scott : In your job description, it states that you are in charge of preparing all your clients for the [NBA] draft. What exactly does that entail and how is the process different from when you were drafted?

BJ Armstrong : Now, being a sports agent and working in that line [of work] is really preparing these young men for all the challenges they are going to face. It’s not only on the court, but off the court, as well. The players are getting younger and younger, and I’m helping them to understand the challenges they are about to face and some of the pitfalls along the way.

And, not that I know everything, but [I want] to share with them some of my experiences as an ex-athlete. But, more importantly, it’s to give them an opportunity to succeed and give them every chance. All the information that you can help give them to prepare them along the way will actually, for better or for worse, give them an opportunity to recognize some of the things that we can talk about, and answer some of the questions they have. It gives me the opportunity to spend a lot of time with these athletes, to bond with them, and to develop a special relationship prior to them getting to whatever team drafts them.

Scott : And, did you have anybody like that when you got drafted?

BJ Armstrong : I did not. It was a different time. You didn’t hear of athletes at the time going straight from high school to the NBA. You didn’t hear of players going to school for one year and then to the NBA. Most of the guys were, when I was coming up anyways, four-year players in college. Then, you’d have another two years to adjust in the NBA.

Now you’re seeing players going one year in college and they’re thrust right into the spotlight. It was a different time. For every LeBron James that jumps onto the scene, or every Derrick Rose that does really well in year one, you have a lot of others that take time to transition. Those guys are just brilliant in their own way, but a lot of other guys need a little help along the way.

Ricky : When you stopped playing, you worked for ESPN and the Bulls front office. How did you come to be an agent?

BJ Armstrong : In the back of my mind, I always knew I wanted to be in the sports representation business. Being an ex-player, I knew that those were the people I wanted to work with. I knew them and was most comfortable with them. I went to work in the front office with the idea that I wanted to learn the business. I wanted to learn how the business worked. I wanted to see how people got drafted, how players got traded, how they got picked up in free agency, how the salary cap worked, how do you manage an organization, how do you negotiate contracts.

The Bulls gave me an excellent opportunity to answer all the questions that I wanted to ask. All the people behind the scenes that make this run like a smooth operation. It’s a huge business. I played, but I never got a chance to see how the business worked. How the NBA offices and other teams worked. I learned that when I was an assistant General Manager for five years.

Then, I wanted to make one more stop. I wanted to see how the media works. I wanted to see how the game was produced. I wanted to see how the game, as content, was put out there. I wanted to see how the players were managed; how did players get to the interviews. You have so many partners that you work with that make this league what it is. And, once I felt comfortable, I said I have a pretty good grip.

I know the game. I experienced that aspect of it. The game is just one aspect of it. It is working on the off the court things that are just as important as on the court. That’s a part of the business you don’t see many athletes come to understand. This is a big business. The people off the court help the game look as smooth as the game you actually see. It was a great experience at ESPN. I learned a lot about the business, which was a big help for me.

Scott : Back when you were drafted, you were drafted with Stacey King. How often did you rag on him about that last-second shot when you beat his Sooners in the Tournament? [BJ went to Iowa, and in the 1987 Tournament, the Hawkeyes eliminated Stacey King and the Oklahoma Sooners on a last-second shot to make it to the Elite 8].

BJ Armstrong : Stacey is a good friend. We came in here together in ‘89. He was a terrific player. The thing about Stacey, though, is that you can’t out-talk Stacey. He is always going to have a comeback. I’m so happy that he is working with Bulls TV. That job was made for him.

He’s a great friend and he’s done well for himself. We used to always tell him that he needs to work in TV or radio. He was always a chatterbox. He was one of those guys that always made you laugh. That’s the one thing I always remember about Stacey. There was never a dull moment. He made the bus rides fun. He made the locker room fun. He’s just a fun guy. He always had something positive to say and I’m really happy for him.

[After his answer, we were given the dreaded “We’re going to have time for just one more question” line].

Scott : Growing up in Detroit, I’d presume you were a huge Pistons fan. I don’t know if it irked you when the Pistons walked off the court and didn’t shake your hands after the Conference Finals? I’m sure some of those guys were your idols growing up.

BJ Armstrong : I grew up in Detroit. I grew up a Pistons fan. I was a hometown guy across the board. You know, the Pistons, Tigers, Red Wings. But, during that time, for whatever reason, I kind of understood what they were trying to do. It just didn’t come off that way. Their intentions were to not concede that we had beat them during that particular series.

Back then sports was a little different, in the fact that you had a psychological game going on. Now, you see guys coming out being more of friends now because of technology, whether they’re e-mailing, [advancements] in cell phones. You have to remember, when we played, there was a game a week. We didn’t have ESPN and DirecTV. The communication with athletes was a little different.

So, what they were doing, they were trying to hold their psychological advantage over us, and it wasn’t by not acknowledging us, but you just never wanted to concede. But, it didn’t come off that way because of TV. TV saw something you never did.

Scott (kind of butting in) : I just didn’t know if it irked you.

BJ Armstrong : The players weren’t really bothered by it, but it didn’t look well to the fans. That was my moment in TV where I was glad I was on the other side.

Ricky : One last quick question. What did you think of MJ’s Hall of Fame speech?

BJ Armstrong : For all of us that knew him, and know him, that was him. That’s who he was. What I mean by that was Michael is a very, very competitive person. With him, I always respected that the light was always on. He never turned it off as a player. He always had something to play for. He always had a motivation. He always had a reason for what he was doing. He was never reckless with it. That’s who he was. I think what he was trying to do was give you a glimpse of what made him great.

Ricky : It seemed to be polarizing.

BJ Armstrong : The problem is that you saw it in a fifteen-minute speech, but you didn’t get the other 47 years or however old he is. You didn’t get that part. Michael was trying to give you a glimpse of why he was great. It wasn’t the fame, it wasn’t the money; it wasn’t to be the best player.

He just wanted to always be the best in that particular moment, right then, right there, right now. Those moments were moments for him to show you that it was you versus him. He tried to give you that in the speech. I understood what he was trying to do.

But, at the same time, to the people that were there, it came off a little…But, I will say this about him, that’s what made him great. I wouldn’t change anything about him. In an era now where you have so many distractions, the man was brilliant at always bringing his focus to the game. And, I think that’s the thing that I learned from him, and tried to take away.

Even in his speech, he was trying to give you key moments that brought him to that point. Whether it be in high school when he got cut, or in college when coach Smith didn’t put him on the cover [of a Sports Illustrated issue with other UNC players on the cover], or whatever happened in the NBA, he was always present in the moment.

[end]

BJ was an incredibly nice, genuine person. He was extremely personable, and made it easy to interview him. He mentioned something afterwards that rings true for him. He had said that he tells all of his players to respect the media. And, I don’t begin to pretend that I’m a part of the mainstream media, but BJ definitely treated me and Ricky as if we were writing for a major publication. It was a great moment in my life to interview someone that I had grown up watching, and rooting for.

And, of course, I mentioned to him that I’d love him to allow me the opportunity to interview Derrick Rose. You might as well try, right?

BJ went on to take pictures with the fans that were waiting for him, and to sign autographs for those that brought memorabilia for him to sign. I saw old pictures, sports cards, basketballs, hats, jerseys, and even some shoes (not sure what shoes they were having him sign, seeing as how he never had his own, but whatever works). It was a successful event, and I was happy to have been a part of it.

On a separate note, I have posted this article, with pictures, on my new website. chicagosportsinterviews.com . Visit the site and see (or post) any interviews that are going on with Chicago sports teams.

I Don't Think the Chicago Bears Offense Was Truly That Bad

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 13:58:21 -0500

With the Bears coming off a victory on Sunday against the lowly Cleveland Browns, all I have been hearing and reading about is how poor the offense was.

Was I watching the same game?

I'm not about to say that the offense was stellar and that they tore the Browns apart. But, at the same time, they did put up 23 points (offensively), ran for 170 yards, and put up 225 yards through the air.

Matt Forte got into the end zone twice, and at least looked semi-decent during stretches. He still could not break free as much as you would like, but at least all of his runs went for positive yards. His 3.5 yards per carry isn't what you would want it to be, but it's actually a step in the right direction for him. In his two other games with over 20 carries, he ran for 55 and 66 yards. At least he broke the 90 mark in this game.

And, with Devin Hester seemingly getting better and better each week, it's only a matter of time before Jay Cutler starts putting up 300-yard performances. The Bears' passing game actually made some big yardage plays in the game, with four pass plays for over 20 yards, and at least one other deep ball attempt.

Yes, all of this does not sound all that sexy when put in terms of the team they were playing, and how they should have destroyed them, but the fact of the matter is that the Bears offense is still a work in progress, and they should not have to be put down so quickly, especially after a victory.

I will admit that the offense looked terrible in the first quarter, and on some other ineffective drives during the game, but it's not like the best of the best score on every single possession they have.

Peyton Manning didn't throw a touchdown in the game on Sunday; do you hear pundits out and about saying that the Colts offense is sputtering, seeing how the 49ers are one of the worst defenses against the pass in the NFL? Peyton should have torched them for 450 yards and 4 TDs, right?

I think the city of Chicago and Bears fans alike need to take a deep breath, celebrate the victory, and understand that every step they are taking is a positive one right now.

I am not going to sit here and say that the Bears offense is one of the best in the NFL, because it's not. They are far from it.

But, if you look at the roster they have, and the number of games that these guys have played together, everyone should realize that they are playing at or above the level they should be playing at.

If Forte can get himself back on solid ground, pull his average yards per carry up above four, and Hester can continue his climb into No. 1 wide receiver status, the Bears playbook should, and will, open up more to big plays.

A lot of this does fall on the shoulders of Matt Forte, because if he continues to struggle with breaking runs into the open field, defenses are never going to respect the run game of the Bears, and are going to continue leaving five and six defensive backs in the secondary, making it harder and harder for Cutler and the Bears wide receivers and tight ends to break plays downfield.

But, let's all take a step back and just accept the fact that the Bears won on Sunday. Everything I see and hear makes it look and sound like we lost.

Can the Chicago Bears be Considered "Big Time" with the Offense Running Behind?

Scott Ottersen — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 08:53:18 -0400

Are the Bears ready to fulfill all the promise that the media was throwing on them this offseason?

I’m not sure yet.

At quick glance, it would appear that the offense is coming into its own, but I’m not a believer yet.

They are 13^th in scoring, 19^th in total yards, 16^th in passing yards, and 27^th in rushing yards. And, that is with a schedule that included a bad Seahawks team, and an even worse Lions team.

When the Bears traded for Jay Cutler, he was being hyped as the man who would change everything. He was the man who would jumpstart the up and coming offense in Chicago. With the speed they had at wide receiver, they were going to be throwing deep on everybody, while Greg Olsen dominated the middle of the field, and lanes started opening up for Matt Forte due to the newfound passing attack.

Well, through five games, Greg Olsen has not shown to be all that effective. Whether that be to his own fault for not getting open, or on Cutler for not finding him, or on the offensive strategies for purposely leaving him out of the plans. He has scored touchdowns in the last three games, but the Bears still need him to keep drives alive by getting open over the middle and down the sidelines, utilizing the mismatches he was supposed to provide with his size and speed.

Not that the offensive woes are all on Olsen. Where in the world is Matt Forte? I wrote an article on him a few weeks back, and everything still seems to ring true about what I said in that article. In the Bears game against Atlanta, there was a play where he, literally, dove into a pile of lineman when there was a gaping hole directly to the left of his body. I just don’t think he is seeing the holes.

I hate that the offensive line is getting blamed for his bad games. Yes, I will agree that the Bears line is not up to standards, but I do not believe they are the entire reason behind his faults. No matter how bad a line is, if an NFL running back gets 15 carries, he should not be outgained by his quarterback, who runs the ball three times for 34 yards. That is shameful.

So, until the Bears find a running game, and figure out how to sustain more drives and turn them into points, I cannot see this team going deep into the playoffs. Heck, I can’t even see them making the playoffs.

With a tougher schedule coming up, it is going to be inherently more difficult for the Bears to continue winning games with their ineffectiveness on offense.

They face off against the Cincinnati Bengals this week, who struggle against the pass, so this could be the week where Jay Cutler stakes his claim and finds ways to get all offensive weapons into the game.

I would still like to see the Bears throw the ball downfield more often. With Devin Hester and Johnny Knox being faster than just about every cornerback in the league, I think the Bears need to find out if any corner can stick with them.

I didn’t touch upon the defense, because they have been doing an above average job so far this season, but if the offense cannot come up to standards of an elite team, I do not believe this Bears team stands a chance to make a dominant run this season.

I believe the Vikings, Giants, and Saints are all better teams than the Bears. And, the Packers, Eagles, 49ers, Cardinals, and Eagles are somewhat on the same level, so it will be a tough go for the Bears to “surprise” teams this season and pull a 2008 Cardinals and fight their way through the playoffs and into the Super Bowl.

Stranger things have happened, but without the offense stepping up, I cannot see it happening.

How Life Can Get in the Way of Football

Scott Ottersen — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:52:00 -0400

First off, I want to apologize for not gracing you all with an article for the past few days. I have been meaning to write up a quarterly report on where the Bears stand, but life has gotten in the way of that.

I won't bore you with the details of my personal life, but let's just say that enough happened where my mind was nowhere near the pleasures of football, or was my body anywhere near a computer long enough to write up any such report.

With everything that went on, my wife persuaded me to agree to missing out on watching the games (live) this past Sunday. It is a Sunday ritual for me to lock myself away from everyone and just watch the football games by myself.

This allows me to get as happy as I want, and as mad as I want at the games, rather than being around friends who want to watch this game instead of the other, and get upset with you when you rag on their teams and whatnot. I have dealt with having to hold myself back, and it's just not as fun.

So, this Sunday I set off to NOT watch football (live). Thanks to DVR, I did tape some of the games I wanted to see, and would stay up late to watch them that night, but in all honesty, my wife made me realize that there is more to life than locking myself away every Sunday to watch football.

Now, did she know that my favorite team (Da Bears) had a bye that week and weren't playing...no. But, chances are even if they had been, I wouldn't have been against missing the games (live).

Will I ever do it again?

That is tough to say, but if the right proposal comes along, I might consider it.

I keep telling my wife that I'm only out of commission for about 20 days a year (regular season Sunday's and playoff weekends), so it is not the end of the world.

Plus, I remind her that in January, we have a baby coming into the world who will, probably, prevent me from watching a lot of football that I want to watch in the future. So, it is imperative that I get as much in now as possible.

With all that said, I will be back to my normal ways this coming Sunday, in front of a TV, watching the Bears take on the Falcons, in what should be a tightly matched game.

It's Jay Cutler vs. Matt Ryan.

Matt Forte vs. Michael Turner.

Roddy White vs. Well, we really don't have a stand out guy here.

Will the Bears' D be able to contain the passing attack that the Falcons unleashed last week against the 49ers?

Will the Bears offense take advantage of a Falcons D that allows a lot of yards, but contains the scoring aspect of the offenses they face?

All I know is that I will enjoy watching the game this Sunday, but will keep other aspects of life in mind, and try and remind myself that there is more to life than football.

But, right after that thought, I'm sure someone will make a big play and I'll be snapped back to reality!

Go Bears!

My Anger With The Bears' 2005 Draft May Be Unfounded Now

Scott Ottersen — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:27:56 -0400

I remember the 2005 NFL Draft like it was yesterday.

I remember it because it ticked me off to no end.

That was the Cedric Benson draft. Not that taking him with the fourth pick was what made me so angry. Well, yes, it kind of was. The Bears had gone out the year before and got Thomas Jones to be the main guy. And he responded with a near 1,000-yard performance, even with missing three games (technically he only missed two, but he was injured on his first carry of the third game, which was actually the first that he "missed").

At that point in time, the Bears' defense was the unmovable force that was the Monsters of the Midway. They didn’t need much help there, even though the likes of DeMarcus Ware, Shawne Merriman, Pacman Jones, Antrel Rolle, and Carlos Rogers were all available. I would have been happy with any of those picks.

But, mostly, I wanted the Bears to take a wide receiver. They had taken Bernard Berrian the year before in the third round, but he did not show much his rookie season. The best wide receiver on the team was Muhsin Muhammad, who was a possession receiver at best.

The other starter was Justin Gage. So, with a good running attack, a terrible quarterback, terrible wide receivers, and a great defense, you would assume they would go after a QB or WR, right?

Wrong.

They took Cedric Benson. I am not sure if they did that because Braylon Edwards was taken right before him, but they took him, even with the likes of Mike Williams (USC and also who I wanted them to take), Mark Clayton (Oklahoma), Roddy White (who was my second choice for them to take), and Reggie Brown (Georgia) available.

Now, most of those choices didn’t pan out where they were taken, and probably wouldn’t have with the Bears, but at the time, wide receiver is what they needed, so they should have went with one of them. Instead, the Bears chose Mark Bradley (Oklahoma’s No. 2 WR) in the second round.

We all know how that turned out.

But the Cedric Benson pick is what got me. The Bears didn’t need him, and yes he was talented in college, but they could have easily waited until the later rounds to pick up a running back (Frank Gore was taken in the third, Marion Barber and Brandon Jacobs in the fourth).

I’m digressing too much. My point is that with that pick, it set up the Kyle Orton selection in the fourth round.

The 2005 NFL draft was not QB-heavy. Alex Smith went first. Aaron Rodgers was the “next guy” on everyone’s boards, along with Jason Campbell, and then it was the likes of Charlie Frye, Andrew Walter, and Kyle Orton.

At the time, Orton seemed like a great value pick in the fourth round, and he was semi-spectacular at Purdue but never seemed to be the type of quarterback that was going to become an MVP-caliber player.

Fast forward four years to now, and that pick may have become an incredible value pick, because the Bears traded him for Jay Cutler. Along with Cutler, the Bears received a fifth-round draft pick, which turned into Johnny Knox, as well.

I’m not saying they are going to become the next Joe Montana-Jerry Rice combination, but Knox has fashioned himself a good return man, as well as a decent playmaker. And it’s only his rookie season, so who knows what his ceiling could be.

With someone like Cutler throwing the ball to him, he could outdo his own potential.

The 2010 draft will be short on talent at the wide receiver position (or so the scouts say), but the free agent pool will not be.

Vincent Jackson, Brandon Marshall, Steve Breaston, Lee Evans, Braylon Edwards, Antonio Bryant, and several other good wide receivers will be available at the end of this season for the Chicago Bears to entertain ideas of signing.

If the Bears could sign a Vincent Jackson or Brandon Marshall, I believe the team would be complete. They could use some upgrades on defense, but I believe the young players they have on the defensive end of the ball are going to step up in the coming years and be great players.

They may not get back to the Monsters of the Midway status, but if the offense becomes unstoppable with Jay Cutler throwing to Jackson/Marshall, Hester, Knox, and Olsen, with Forte running the ball, the defense could give up a few extra points each game without it hurting too much.

It is just a matter of if the Bears are serious about winning and will go out and spend the money it will take to sign one of those players.

For now, though, I take back all of my anger with the 2005 draft, because all of the picks fell into place for a reason. And that reason was for the Bears to make the 2006 Super Bowl, lose, realize they needed help at QB, and then three years later trade for a Pro-Bowl-caliber quarterback who was going to lead the Bears back to the promise land.

I am not saying the Bears are a Super Bowl team yet, but it seems they are taking steps in the right direction. Super Bowl teams aren’t made overnight (unless you are the Patriots and make unbelievably one-sided trades), so the future can still be bright for the Chicago Bears.

Besides, they are 3-1 going into the bye week, and only one game behind Minnesota for the division lead. They haven’t played stellar ball, but they are still growing together as a team. By the end of the season, with more cohesiveness, they could become a dangerous team.

Maybe the Bears management knew what they were doing all along when they screwed up the draft of 2005.

Bears-Lions: If You Are a Gambling Man, Bet on a Close One

Scott Ottersen — Fri, 02 Oct 2009 11:10:40 -0400

The "spread" for the Chicago Bears-Detroit Lions matchup this Sunday is listed at Bears -10.

For those of you who don't follow the ways of gambling, that means the Bears are favored to win the game by 10 points.

Seems fair enough against the paltry Lions, right?

Well, if history has a say in the game on Sunday, it would be wise to take the Lions at +10.

In the last seven games, the Bears are 1-6 against the spread when facing the Lions. And, the only win was the fluke 34-7 victory last season in Detroit. The only reason I call it a fluke is because the Bears just weren't the type of offense to put up 34 points, and in fact had a defensive touchdown in the game to boot.

Not to mention some fluke, long plays that the Bears were not known for.

But, that is in the past, and we need not worry about that. Or should we?

On the flip side, the Lions are 6-3 against the spread in the last nine games versus the Bears.

And, with the spread being 10 points, the past would have us think it is going to be a close game, with either the Bears winning by less than 10 points, or the Lions winning by any amount of points.

Everyone says that this is a new Bears team, so we are going to wipe the slate clean and see if Jay Cutler and Co. can buck the trend and put the Bears on the winning side in the world of gambling.

In examination of the two teams, one would wonder how exactly the game would be close, but all it takes is one missed assignment on defense and the opposing team will be celebrating in the end zone.

You can never be too sure about yourself in the world of sports, because the players you are going up against are still professionals and can make plays all the same.

With the news that Kevin Smith may play, and Calvin Johnson always being a threat to break a big play, a close game is not all that crazy of a thought.

The Bears have not shown any explosiveness on offense, outside of a play here and there, so this game does not have shoot out written all over it. If anything, we might be dink and dunked to death like the old days.

And with the Bears' running game still not up to speed, the Lions may actually be ready for the passing attack, which hasn't been anything to write home about, either.

So, will history repeat itself on Sunday and have the Chicago Bears losing against the spread? Or will the "new and improved" offense start playing the way they were touted as to play and blow the Lions out?

If I were a gambling man, I would go with history and say the Bears win the game, but not by more than 10.

In fact, I say they "push," and win the game 27-17.

But, hey, a win is a win, and I would love to see the Bears go into their bye week with a 3-1 record.

Go Bears.

Oh, and I hate to say it, but Go Packers. It hurts for that to come out of my "mouth," but I do not want to see the Vikings go to 4-0, with St. Louis to play next week.

I hope to exit Week Four in a tie for first place in the NFC North.

Again, Go Bears!

The Funniest Thing About the Bears-Lions Matchup on Sunday

Scott Ottersen — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 07:48:51 -0400

With the Chicago Bears facing the Detroit Lions this Sunday, Bears fans should be looking at a 3-1 start to the season. I don't want to overlook the Lions, but come on, BARELY winning against the Washington Redskins does not constitute them a good team.

I was going to do a traditional matchup piece for the game, but then I thought better...I mean, it's the Detroit Lions. And, they're most likely going to be without one of their main offensive threats in starting running back Kevin Smith.

And, that is where the hilarity ensues.

In his Monday press conference, Detroit Lions head coach Jim Schwartz actually said the following statement when asked about Kevin Smith's condition:

"We're not into giving competitive advantage to other people."

Uh, Jim, yes you are. You are the DETROIT LIONS, for God's sake. By stepping on the field against your team, your opponent has the competitive advantage.

Just tell the truth, Jim, the guy you are facing in fantasy this week has your boy Kevin Smith on his team, and you do not want him to know whether he is starting or not right up until the last minute, in hopes that he isn't paying attention at 11:00 on Sunday, and ends up starting one of his bench guys.

I understand where coach Schwartz is coming from, but either way it goes, the Bears are still going to prepare for the Detroit Lions running game.

Ok, I tried my best to get through that last sentence without laughing, but I couldn't do it. The Bears are probably going to take the week off, and just practice on Friday and Saturday, in preparation for the only thing the Lions can do, and that's throw the ball to Calvin Johnson.

Bryant Johnson had a good game against the Redskins, so he will be someone to look out for, as well. But if the Bears lose the game because they couldn't stop Bryant Johnson, then they would deserve to lose that game.

With all things said, the Lions are a better team than they were a year ago, so in all honesty, I'm only joking about how the Bears should take them lightly, but without a main piece like Kevin Smith, it should be an easy victory.

And, a 3-1 start to the season going into the bye week, and before two tough road games against Atlanta and a resurgent Cincinnati Bengals team, would be exactly what the Bears needed.

It is looking like the Bears, Packers, and Vikings are going to be in a dogfight all season long for the division title, so every victory, whether it be easy, ugly, or undeserved is welcome.

Go Bears!

The 5 Most Important Players In Sunday's Bears-Seahawks Matchup

Scott Ottersen — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 10:24:29 -0400

With the Bears pulling off an extremely momentous victory over the Champion Pittsburgh Steelers last week, they will be looking to take their record to 2-1 this Sunday, against the Seattle Seahawks. With an "easier" portion of their schedule on tap, the Bears need to keep the momentum moving in the positive direction by beating the teams that they should beat, and maybe pulling off an "upset" victory here and there. With that in mind, I thought I'd detail the five most important players in Sunday's game that will help determine whether or not the Bears can keep their winning ways alive.

Begin Slideshow

The Matt Forte Saga: Why Is He Struggling So Much?

Scott Ottersen — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 08:45:17 -0400

I am sure I will take some flak for saying this, but Matt Forte is not as good of a running back as everyone thinks.

He can be explosive. He can catch the ball. He can make plays after the catch. But, he is just not a complete running back.

I don’t believe his vision is all that great. And, in the history of the NFL, vision is what makes you a great running back. A running back has to be able to see the cutback before he commits to the run and he has to have the ability to make that cutback.

As of right now, Matt Forte is not seeing those cutbacks. It seems that if a gaping hole is not provided for him in the designed area of the running play, he is just going to be cut down in the backfield or bowl into the backs of his offensive lineman and take a gain of a yard or two.

I saw several plays in the first two weeks where he took the handoff and ran straight ahead into the pile of lineman when there was a hole opened up to the left or right of him.

In the NFL, those holes close up quickly. I would have liked to have seen him at least try to make the cut and try and get through that hole rather than just give up on the play and head into the trenches where he had to have known he wasn’t going to come out the other end.

He has looked jittery these first two weeks. I am not sure if we can contribute that to the fact that he has gone up against two 3-4 defenses (one being the best in the business in Pittsburgh), or if it’s a sophomore slump (which I don’t believe in), or if it is just him being exposed for what he really is.

Last season, he benefited from a good amount of big plays. He took several runs for big gains, which padded his stats a lot more than most Chicago fans want to admit.

He was never the running back who would take several carries for five to 10-yard gains. He was either breaking it long or getting tackled at the line of scrimmage and, unfortunately, it was more of the latter than the former.

Another reason for his standing out was the plays he made with his hands. He is a great pass catcher out of the backfield and I believe that his making some plays in that facet of the game helped shade his struggles when running the ball.

If you look into his game stats, you can see his struggles. If you take out his longest run from each game he played in, he averaged 3.1 yards per carry on the rest of his 300 carries last season. That is not a good number.

I understand that stats are deceiving and that most of the running backs who lead the league in rushing benefit from breaking big plays. However, they also are practitioners of the five to 10-yard gainers. They aren’t broke or bust only type backs.

If you look more into his rookie season, he had three 100-yard games and only three other games over 80 yards. Does that sound like an elite back to you?

All of this came with being fourth in the NFL in rushing attempts. So, he had ample opportunities to gain those yards, but he just always seemed to fall short.

This is not an article claiming that Matt Forte is done. I don’t believe that at all. But, I just feel that he needs to be knocked down a peg or two so that the expectations for him aren’t so lofty.

As of right now, Bears fans are expecting him to be Adrian Peterson (and not the Bears' Adrian Peterson) and Him he is not.

If the Bears are going to succeed this season and in the future, Matt Forte is going to have to develop better vision. I am not sure if it is his understanding of how to read defenses before the snap or if it is his focusing in on a point after he takes the handoff and not being able to release his eyes from that spot thereafter.

Whatever it is, he needs to work on that ability. Otherwise, he is going to have to wait for big holes to break open and in the NFL, that only happens once in a great while. And, you do not have a great while to become a great back. It is quite easy to lose your job in the NFL.

I think next week (against Seattle) will be a good test of where he stands. Green Bay has an underrated defense and in that game, they looked fierce. Also, we all know how great of a defense Pittsburgh has, so being fed to the lions the first two weeks of the season may have been the best thing for the rest of Matt Forte’s season.

He doesn’t face a 3-4 defense again until Week Eight when the Bears face off against Cleveland. Hopefully, he just struggles with the 3-4 and I am completely off in my assessment of him.

Seattle has definitely shown its struggles against the run so far this season. Both Steven Jackson and Frank Gore have gone over 100 yards against them, with Gore breaking out for over 200 yards.

This could be the exact matchup Matt Forte needs. But, he is going to have to show us something if he wants to be named on the same level as the Frank Gores and Steven Jacksons of the NFL.

The Bears have a fairly easy schedule in the coming weeks, but toward the end of the season they will start to see stronger based defenses (Philadelphia, Minnesota twice, Green Bay, and Baltimore), so if Matt Forte is going to get on track, he should think about doing so starting next week.

Because if he is not playing at a high level come Week 11, the weeks after that aren’t going to make it any easier on him—save the Week 17 game at Detroit.

With the improved passing attack the Bears have, Matt Forte should be running wild on defenses. I do not think we can blame his lack of production on the lack of talent the Bears have at wide receiver, but that could be some of the reasoning.

If the Bears' wide receivers continued to improve and safeties had to pay more attention to where they were on the field, defenses would have to stop focusing in on only where Matt Forte is each down.

Football is a team sport, and even though only one man has the ball in his hands at a given time, the rest of the team still plays a part in how well he does with the ball in his hands.

But, the rest of the team and coaches can only help so much. It is up to the ball carrier to be able to see what his team is doing to help him and take advantage of the openings they are providing.

Should I Have Woken up for Week One?

Scott Ottersen — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:58:11 -0400

Wow, what a way to start the season, huh?

And I thought watching preseason games was disappointing.

I have a buddy who lives in Denver, and after Jay Cutler threw his third interception of the first half, I texted him and said, "Can we have (Kyle) Orton back?"

Who would have thought any texts like that would have been sent out back when they announced the trade?

I hate to say it, but I think we would have won that game had Kyle Orton been our quarterback. The only throw that Orton might not have been able to make was the touchdown to Hester, but Hester was so wide open that I have to believe that Orton still might have made that play.

I know it's only one game and I'm not throwing in the towel yet. I believe that Green Bay is a fairly good team. I do not believe they are a Super Bowl contender like some "experts" are predicting, but they are definitely in the same class (maybe a tad bit higher) than this Bears team.

But it is a little frightening, with all the lead up to the start of the season—the new quarterback, the "underrated" receiving corps, Matt Forte's "emergence" as a star—that the Bears couldn't muster up anything better.

I liked the fact that the Bears threw the ball downfield, but did not like that it appeared that Cutler and his receivers were not anywhere near being on the same page.

I know these are wrinkles that we see during the early weeks, but they are not wrinkles that you tend to see from the better teams in the NFL. I am not saying they can't come back from this, but I'm just a little worried. That's all.

Now, with Pittsburgh coming to town, I really don't know what to think. Sure, it helps that Troy Polamalu is going to be out, but will it help enough? Doubtful. I was hoping the Bears would pull out a victory against the Packers in Week One, eliminating the pressure on the team to not fall to 0-2.

Now, they have to come out and execute their offensive plans perfectly in order to have a chance to get to .500. Starting off 0-2 is not a death sentence in the NFL, but if Minnesota and Green Bay start off 2-0 (Green bay gets Cincinnati and Minnesota has Kansas City), it could be a steep hill to climb getting back into the division race, especially with a tougher-than-thought third game at Seattle.

What I would like to see the Bears get back to (against Pittsburgh) is getting the ball in Matt Forte's hands on the outside. Throw some screen passes, get him some extended handoff passes (where the quarterback and running back are moving right at the snap, rolling out to one side and Cutler would throw it to Forte almost right away with blockers ahead of him). Doing that will open up Olsen a little more in the middle of the field and also allow them to run the play action and throw the ball deep.

From Cutler, I would like to see a little more fluidity in his decision making. In his defense, we can never truly know if those interceptions were more on him throwing to the wrong spot or the receivers running the wrong routes.

I still believe he should have seen that nobody was in the area, but who really knows what is going on during the plays? If he can get into a rhythm with his receivers, find Olsen a little more, and get the ball to Forte on the outside, the Bears could put up some points on the Steelers' defense.

With Polamalu out, Cutler should be able to take advantage of the middle of the field and also on some deep balls.

I liked how Knox looked on his two catches and think his and Hester's speed should be utilized on the field on the same plays. Let them both run go routes on each side of the field with Forte in the flat and Olsen hovering in the middle of the field about seven yards out—giving Cutler a decision to go deep to either Hester or Knox or check down to Olsen or Forte. Jay should feel a little more confident throwing the ball deep without the ballhawking of Polamalu.

It is going to be a tall task going up against the Super Bowl champions, but these are the games that we need to win to prove we are contenders and these games are the exact reason we brought in Jay Cutler. He needs to show the Chicago fans (and his teammates) that he is a true leader and winner.

The one thing I don't want to see from him is smiling on the sidelines after he throws his third interception of the first half. I did not take too well to that and believe that moment showed me everything I need to know about Cutler. I understand you can have confidence in your abilities, but he just doesn't show that the game truly matters to him yet. I hope he proves me wrong.

My prediction: Steelers 24, Bears 10.

Wake Me Up When Week One Starts

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 10:41:05 -0400

Can we cut it out with all this preseason crap already? I’m tired of people making a big deal of preseason games, stats, holdouts, mistakes, etc.

None of it matters.

The only thing that matters in the preseason is the position battles. And, if your team is having a battle for who will start at a certain position that isn’t determined until week three of the preseason, then chances are either person that wins that battle isn’t going to make that much of a difference on your team, anyways.

I do understand the importance of getting guys in shape for games, and getting them used to the pace of the game, but aren’t these guys professionals? Haven’t they played football their entire lives? Haven’t they just had three to four months off to relax their minds and bodies, and/or to get into shape for the upcoming season?

I tell you what, why don’t they have a training camp and preseason scenario in the business world, as well. I’d love to get a few months off in the winter/spring months, come back for a training camp atmosphere, where we ease our way back into work, only working three to four-hour shifts until we get used to the pace of a nine to five again.

We should also have some new guys/girls “trying out” for our job, as well, so that we have to prove our worth to the company. I don’t know why more companies don’t do this. It might help weed out the slackers.

But, I digress.

Everyone always makes the point that “it’s just preseason” or “these games don’t really matter,” yet they talk about them like it’s the Super Bowl. And because guys look good against the other team's third stringer/next-to-get-cut guys, they’re ready to appoint them the next big thing in the NFL.

As a man, I love watching football. That is a given. But, for some reason, I just can’t get down with preseason football. It’s not the game. It’s not the way they play. It’s just because I know it’s preseason and the games don’t matter.

Everyone is free to enjoy them on their own, but we all don’t want to hear about how this guy is going to be the next big deal, or how this team is going to have a great year because they went 4-0 in the preseason.

Can’t we agree just to let them play the preseason games and not talk about it so much until week one starts?

Nobody likes to watch games (or make a big deal about games) with the likes of Gibran Hamdan, Isaac Redman, Lynell Hamilton, and Marcus Mason leading the way. Do you get excited watching them have good games knowing they won’t see any playing time during the regular season?

What good does it do us to talk about games that involve players that won’t ever be mentioned again?

I know I will receive hate mail from those few people out there who still care about the preseason. All I will say to you is stop buying what the media is selling. They HAVE to care about preseason football. They are being paid to care about it.

You, however, have the option to change the channel or to skim over the box score the next day, rather than waste your time watching the game and making them believe people still care.

Let’s put an end to all this preseason football mania. Even the commissioner discussed shortening the preseason. Maybe he is one of us.

Preseason football is such a tease. And, nobody likes teases. Unless, of course it pays off in the end. And, preseason football does not pay off in the end.

What Brett Favre's Return Means for the Chicago Bears

Scott Ottersen — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 15:43:41 -0400

What does the return of Brett Favre mean for the chances of Bears fans celebrating an NFC North title this season?

Well, it probably means they won't be celebrating one.

Or will they?

I am a fan of Brett Favre. I respect his history, arm, records, grit, determination, and so on and so on.

But today's Brett Favre is not the young gunslinger we all used to know.

Is everyone forgetting the way he played down the stretch last season? I don't even need to post the stats, because everyone knows he was terrible. He took a surefire playoff team and blew it up into a disappointment. Sure, all was not to be blamed on him, but, as the quarterback, you are the man who takes the fall for the team's failings.

I believe he makes the Vikings better, on paper. And he will add more respect to the lineup, but respect doesn't win football games.

Not throwing interceptions wins football games. And that is something Brett is going to have to do (or, rather, not do) this year to keep his team at the top.

With Adrian Peterson and Chester Taylor running the ball, he has one of the best running attacks in football. With Bernard Berrian and Sidney Rice, and the new addition of Percy Harvin, he has some legitimate passing threats as well. But is he going to be able to keep his gunslinging under control and not put his defense in rough spots to get out of?

I think not. I see this acquisition as a good one for the Vikings, because you always want to make your team the most competitive it can be, but I think they would have gotten the same effort out of Sage Rosenfels. They could have spent this money elsewhere.

Of course, if Favre stays for longer than one season and still has something in the tank, he could lure some free agents Minnesota's way (anybody say Andre Johnson's name?), but that doesn't seem likely.

I do think, on paper, Favre makes this team the favorite to win the NFC North, but I believe his play, in real life, will keep them from doing so.

Of course, if the Bears decide to suck it up this year, they could run away with the North title with a 7-9 record.

I am interested, like the rest of the world, to see what Favre has left. And, if he were playing in any other division, I would want to see him do well and make the playoffs, but, since he went to Minnesota, I'm going to have to root against him. Sorry, Brett.

I think the Vikings stay stagnant at 9-7, possibly 10-6, with a good chance at a wild card spot in the NFC. I do believe Favre will make the playoffs this time around, but I don't know if he will add enough to the Vikings to make them a Super Bowl contender.

What are your thoughts?

Chicago Bears Mail Call: Another Installment

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:54:33 -0400

I didn't get as much of a response as I was hoping, so I thought I'd throw out my email again, because I REALLY do want people to email me about the Bears. I enjoy talking about the Bears, and love to hear your opinions about my writing, or about the Bears in general. So, email me your questions/concerns/comments and I will post them in my later editions of Bears Mail Call.

My email is ScottOttersen@yahoo.com. Or, just send me a private message on this site.

Thank you, and let's get to the few emails I did receive.

"Whats up Scott and Chicago nation!

Huge fan for 22yrs. I believe DA BEARS will win the North baring no injures. It will be tough with the vikes and pack looking pretty good, but the vikes don’t have that great of an offense other than AP and the pack’s D is their downfall even though they will be better this year. DA BEARS receivers are unproven but I think Bennett, Hester, and Olsen will all have 700 plus yards and that is hard for any D to cover. I am from Omaha , NE so I know what a stud Bowman is. Dude was once a projected 1^st rounder so lets hope he stays healthy. Our D line is deep and nasty so hopefully they can stay healthy and make the QB get out of the pocket. Then you add Forte to the mix with Kevin Jones who came into camp looking ready to try and compete for the starting position (even though it will never happen). DA BEARS do have a legitimate chance of going to the SB. Even though our receivers aren’t proven this might be one of the best BEARS team I have seen in a long time. I think week 2 vs steel-town will let the NFL no where DA BEARS stand. Man..I hope we start the season off 2-0.

Lets flood DA sites with BEARS talk. Let me know what you think of my take. email me at baileyXL23@hotmail.com

Predictions: DA BEARS 11-5 or 12-4"

-Adam B.

I am most happy to hear that Bear fandom is spreading across the nation! I agree that the Bears have a great chance at winning the North, but I wouldn't sleep on the Vikings offense that much. I think Sage Rosenfels is underrated as a starting quarterback, and Visanthe Shiancoe is a great TE that can control the middle of the field, and keep safeties honest enough to open the outside up for Berrian and Percy Harvin. And, with AP running the ball, you are always at risk to give up a touchdown. It is going to be a tough win this season, but if the Bears play up to potential, they are going to compete for the NFC North title, for sure.

"I think this is a sorry excuse for an article. Why don't you write about something more important or something that is going on with the actual team, rather than just posting other people's ideas and thoughts?"

-Mike

Well Mike, I thought this was a refreshing idea for an article, because with the amount of writers on Bleacher Report, it is hard to ever have an original idea come across in your articles. After I write every article, I always have someone post a comment or send me a message about how they JUST wrote about the same thing, or mentioned my same thoughts in a recent article. So, instead of writing about the same thing as everyone else, I thought I'd throw out something fresh to everyone. And, with this, I thought it would be a great way to spread the word about what everyone felt about the Bears, rather than just only reading my personal opinion time and time again. But, thanks for the comment/question, Mike. I do appreciate it. Keep them coming.

"Did you catch the game against the Bills? They looked horrible in the fourth quarter. Any chance that is the true Bears we saw?"

-Andrew V.

I never put any stock into anything that goes on in a preseason game. Yes, Cutler threw a pick. Yes, Basanez cemented his spot at the bottom of the pecking order. But, we played without Forte and Olsen, and our third and fourth stringers were out on the field most of the game. Some of the bad plays on offense were those plays that you just can't do anything about, like the one pick that Basanez threw that went through the receivers hands and bounced right into the hands of the Bills player. Those types of things happen throughout the season. I am not worried at all about the game. Yes, we lost. But, it was our first preseason game. It was not the true Bears that we saw out there. I would ask that everyone stop putting so much stock into the preseason. It's just like the NBA preseason where people like JJ Redick win the Summer League MVPs. It has no effect on the regular season, other than getting the players into game shape.

"Do you think Caleb Hanie is a better quarterback than Kyle Orton"

-Allison

Simple answer...yes.

Complex answer...yes. I don't think he is far and above a better quarterback, but I do think he is a better fit for being an NFL quarterback. I think he has a good arm, makes good decisions, and if given the opportunity, could be a playoff quarterback, as long as he had good options to throw to. I don't think he can carry an offense, but I do think he can make a good offense better, which is something Kyle Orton can't do. He is someone that will maintain the offense. Orton isn't going to be the type of player that makes a good receiver great. I'm not saying Caleb Hanie is that guy, but I think he has a better chance at becoming that guy, if he is ever given the chance. I don't see him getting that chance, but he is going to be a good career backup quarterback.

"Do you think we would have won that game (the Bears-Bills preseason game) had Forte played, and Lovie given Cutler a few more stabs at it?"

- Justin

I don't think so. You never do know, but for a first preseason game, Forte probably only would have played the first series, so it's unlikely he would have made too much of a difference. With Cutler playing on that first series with him, the Bears probably would have looked to establish Cutler's passing more than Forte's running, so I wouldn't imagine he would have broken off a nice run to help the Bears score. As for Cutler playing longer, like I said, it's the first preseason game, and most coaches just want to get their starters a little bit of playing time to let them get a taste of the action. The coaches don't want to overdo it right now. They are still getting into condition for a full game, so there is no reason to burn a guy out in his debut for a new team. I don't think Cutler looked all that great while he was in, so it was the right time to take him out when he did come out. It would have been nice to let him go for a TD, but it's just a preseason game. These games don't count, and I look forward to him being able to prove himself in the regular season, when the games truly matter.

That is all I have for you guys this time around. I am hoping that more people write to me, so that I can start doing this every week with around 10-15 questions/comments/concerns. I look forward to reading what you have to say, whether it be good or bad.

The Chicago Bears Season Lies in the Hands (Literally) of Greg Olsen

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:03:42 -0400

I’m going to say it…

Greg Olsen is, flat out, the Bears' “X-factor” this season.

If he plays at, or above his potential, the Bears could be in for a good ride this season.

If he plays below his potential, the Bears could have offensive troubles like they did last year, even with the upgrade at quarterback.

In camp, so far, Cutler and Olsen have been clicking together, and seem to be heading for a Manning-Clark or Romo-Witten like relationship, which can only be good news for Bears fans.

Coming into the NFL, Olsen was seen as a hybrid TE, like his Miami predecessor Kellen Winslow. He had speed (for a TE), good hands, good route running ability, and size. He was going to be the next big thing in Chicago.

Thirty-nine catches later (and a few drops), he was on the verge of becoming a bust.

He followed up his paltry rookie season with a 54-catch, 574 yard disappointing second season, where the drops and rookie-esque mistakes continued. But, the people of Chicago were still sticking behind him, and blaming it more on the routes he was being asked to run, and the quarterback who the team couldn’t design breakout plays behind.

Going into this season, he has a Pro Bowl quarterback behind the line, no star wide receiver to take catches away from him, and a coaching staff that is ready to turn him into an elite tight end in the NFL.

Through only a couple weeks of practice, it would seem that Olsen is going to be the main target this year, with the rest of the receiving corps a question mark. He is being lined up wide, which is something I think they should have been doing from day one with him. He has the ability to be a matchup disaster when lined up wide.

And, when he runs through the middle of the field, linebackers and safeties will have to keep their eye on him, which in turn will leave the outside open for Hester and the rest of the Bears wide receivers. And, with Cutler having a beautiful deep ball, that extra step the Bears receivers will have on the safeties could mean pay dirt in the end.

I’m not ready to say that Olsen is going to be the best tight end in the NFL, but now that he has a good quarterback, and a (seemingly) better passing offensive system, he could be in line to be mentioned with the Clarks and Wittens of the league.

If Cutler can make Tony Scheffler look like a good tight end, then I have to believe he will work wonders with Greg Olsen. Coaches and quarterbacks always say that a good running game and a good tight end are their best friends, so Cutler should be the happiest quarterback in the NFL with the situation he has landed himself in.

What are your thoughts on Olsen this upcoming season?

My First Bears Mail Call

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:28:32 -0400

I decided that I want to hear what other Bears fans think about the upcoming season, what's going on in training camp, and anything else they might have to say about the Bears.

With that, I decided that once a week or once a month I wanted to do an article where I post questions/comments from other fans that I have talked to, so that we can have a wider perspective on what the fans are thinking, rather than always just hearing from me.

So, if you have an comment or question you'd like to throw my way, you can send me a message on this site, or you can email me at ScottOttersen@yahoo.com. I'm always willing to talk sports.

On to the first mail call...

"The Bears are a good wide receiver away from the NFC Championship game."

"With the acquisition of Jay Cutler, the NFC North just became Bears Central."

"Rod Marinelli brings experience and good coaching to a D-Line that needed it more than anything else."

-Charles J.

I got those three beauties from my friend Charles, who also writes on this site (focusing mostly on NASCAR). I agree that if Cutler plays up to his potential, the NFC North should be a breeze for the Bears. And, I feel as if they may not even need that "good receiver" to make it to the NFC Championship game. We will see.

"I am holding out hope on this season as of right now. Sure, Matt Forte had a good rookie season, but there have been plenty of backs that have bad good starts to their careers and then fallen off the map. Our receivers aren't polished enough to handle a Pro Bowl quarterback, our defense is aging and battered, and we lost our best asset on special teams. Everyone forgets about how much of a loss it is to not have Hester returning kicks."

-James M.

I see where James is coming from about Forte. I think I saw enough from him in his rookie season to believe he's not going to "fall off." Although, you never do know. I don't agree with the strategy the Bears have of limiting his carries, but keeping him healthy is very important to our season.

And I made the argument about losing Hester as our return man being a big reason why we struggled so much last season. He supplied us with great field position besides taking back a few kicks for touchdowns in previous seasons.

Winning the field position battle week in and week out is a main reason why we were so successful in years past. We need to overcome that hurdle if we are going to get back to that level of success.

"Hey Scott, I know you said you would never go to another Bears game in mid-December, but come on we got Cutler, Forte, and it's Bears-Packers. I'm going to buy the tickets, and you're going to freeze your (expletive deleted) off with me. Remember, the feeling in your toes comes back on the ride home."

-Mike P.

Yes, that's a good friend of mine who emailed me when the schedule came out a while back. I went to a Bears-Packers game a few years back, on Dec. 18. I tailgated before the game, and before the game even started, I couldn't feel anything on my body.

Yes, I was drinking and having a good time, but I knew I would have been more comfortable sitting on my warm couch, in my heated house, not sitting in the way upper deck, and not having to wait 20 minutes just to stand extremely close to two other guys peeing into a urinal.

If it were September or October, I'd say yes, but I'm not a fan of the cold weather. Sorry. I'm just not.

"Scott, if you could have your choice of which positions coach you would want to be (for the Bears), which one would you choose, and why?"

-Ted C.

That's actually a pretty good question. I haven't been asked that one before. In all honesty, I think I'd go for the wide receivers. I like a challenge. And, I would like to work with a group that is doubted, and overlooked, so that I could mold them into what I needed them to be, and then take all the credit for their successes.

And if they failed, then I would have proved that I'm not worth to be a coach in the NFL. I'm not a fan of coaches who get credited for being great coaches when they have 10 Pro-Bowlers on their team, and win 10+ games each year. It can't be that tough to tell someone like Peyton Manning to go out there and do his job.

I understand it has its moments, but if you put some of these so-called "great" coaches in the same position as the Bengals head coaches or Lions head coaches, I don't think they'd be winning too much.

Yes, I do believe winning in sports has a lot to do with the system the coaches install, but at the same time it helps to have great players. Ask Phil Jackson, John Wooden, and Red Auerbach how many titles they would have won without the likes of Michael Jordan, Lew Alcindor (as he was known at UCLA), and Bill Russell.

"Bears suck. And so do you."

-Anonymous

This person actually created a YouSuck@.... email address just to let me know that I suck. Thank you, but next time please leave me your name, so I can shout you out on my blog.

I take all criticism thrown my way, and try to make myself better. From now on, I'm going to change up my style so I don't suck. Thanks. I owe you whatever career I turn this into.

"I wish that people would stop calling our schedule a walk in the park. We have some tough games to play. We have two against Green Bay, and no matter what people say about them, they are our heated rivals, and everything gets thrown out the window for a rivalry game. We play Pittsburgh, an offensively improved Seattle team, Atlanta, the offensive juggernaut Arizona, Philadelphia, and Baltimore. And, you can even throw in Minnesota, if you'd like."

-Barry S.

For a minute, I thought that this might be Barry Sanders emailing me, and purposely taking a shot at the Lions, seeing as how they are just about the only team he didn't mention that we played.

But then I remembered that Barry Sanders is one of the greatest football players ever to play the game, and there is no way he is emailing a writer on Bleacher Report.

A Bears writer, at that. But, he did make some decent points. We have the weakest schedule when they take into play last years records. I can understand why people think that, but I do believe our schedule is tougher than most may think.

That is why they always say "that is why they play the games." You never know what's going to happen on the field when the game starts. I still see us winning 10 or 11 games, so easy schedule or not, I'm not scared of anybody.

Well, that is all I have for this Mail Call. Please feel free to leave responses in the comments, or to send me an email. I would love to do this every week, with 20-30 posts, but if I have to wait for every other week, I can live with that, as well.

It's the start of training camp, and not all that much is going on, so I need to keep discussing possible scenarios with other fans to get me through this "dawn period" before the start of the season.

I hope to hear from you, good or bad. If you think I suck, tell me so. But, just tell me why, please. Thanks.

Late add...

"Well, as excited as I am about the addition of Pro Bowl QB Jay Cutler, I have to admit I do have some concerns about the Bears defense. Brian Urlacher's production has fallen off drastically over the last couple of seasons and I don't really see any reason why that won't continue. Ray Lewis he is not so if you have him anchoring your defense that has to be a concern. Urlacher has been the kind of guy who leads by example and he hasn't been giving very strong examples for guys to follow lately. In other words, the bar has been lowered w/ him continuing as your defensive captain. And he really doesn't make up for the lack of production w/ any real spirit or passion so how affective is he at this point? And who else do have left on defense that is a proven play makers. Only one that comes to mind is Lance Briggs.

I see shades of 1995 when Erik Kramer set the Bears single-season records for passing yards (3,838) and touchdowns (29) but the defense sucked so the team went 9-7 and missed the playoffs. Kramer at least had two playmakers in Curtis Conway and Jeff Graham to throw to that year. Jay Cutler doesn't have that now so I'd be surprised if he matches Kramer's '95 totals but if he had a shot at anything this year it would be total passing yards.

Very rarely do the Bears have both the defense AND the offense playing well at the same time. Hell, very rarely do they have an offense at all!! With the addition of a Pro Bowl Quarterback, the continuing maturation of a raw talent in Devin Hester and the promise of a solid running attack w/ Matt Forte, the bears could have a decent offensive season. But on the defensive side I see problems that will dictate that they will probably end up 9-7 and miss the playoffs.

The day after the Bears acquired Jay Cutler I said they would be 11-5 this year, win the division and win one playoff game.

Rather than settle on the previously stated 9-7 I will be the Bears optimist that I usually am and compromise and say they'll end up 10-6, NOT win the division and lose in the first round of the layoffs."

-Rob C.

The Chicago Bears' Defense: Is the Secondary That Bad?

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 08:24:03 -0400

In today’s world of statistics and fantasy sports, the Bears' secondary has caught a bad rap.

I’m not going to say that the secondary is made up of world class cornerbacks and safeties, but I will defend them and say that they are a victim of circumstance.

When people look at the “main” statistic, they are going to see that the Bears were 30th in passing yards against, with an average of 241 yards per game they allowed through the air.

Now, with people getting too caught up in the stats, they are going to see that and think the Bears secondary was horrible at its job.

And, I will admit that there were some blown coverages, and some bad decisions made on their part, but the whole story needs to be viewed before everyone decides to jump down their throats and call them the third worst secondary in the NFL.

The Bears’ defense ranked fifth in rush defense, giving up only 93.5 yards per game, making opponents retreat from game plans revolving around the run. And, if you aren’t going to develop a game plan involving the run, that means you are left with one option, and that is the pass.

Since teams knew they couldn’t run on the Bears, they had to design more pass plays against them, which meant that the Bears’ secondary had to face more passing plays than most other teams.

In fact, the Bears’ defense saw the most pass plays against them out of the entire NFL. There were 622 passing plays against them, which came out to an average of 39 per game. Second place was San Diego, with 605.

They were the only two teams with more than 600 passing plays against them. So, with the Bears only ending up in 30th for passing yards allowed per game, I would say that is quite an accomplishment.

I will throw some other statistics at you that might shock you to know about last years secondary. They only gave up 21 passing touchdowns, which put them right in the middle of the league.

They were third in the NFL in interceptions, behind only Baltimore and Cleveland. And they led the league in pass deflections, with 105. But after seeing 622 passes, I would hope that you led the league in pass deflections.

For those who said they gave up too many big plays. They were, again, in the middle of the league, with allowing only 40 passing plays of 20 yards or more. And they were tied for second on the league, only allowing three passing plays of 40 yards or more. In comparison, Jacksonville allowed 17 passing plays of 40 yards or more.

And they did all this with one of the league’s worst pass rushes, which allowed the opposing quarterbacks ample amount of time to find open receivers.

Before you want to chastise the likes of Peanut Tillman, Nathan Vasher, Danieal Manning, Corey Graham, Craig Steltz, Kevin Payne, and whoever else may play in the Bears’ secondary this year, I advise you to learn the whole story. Statistics tell one story, but actual play tells another.

Even though I have spouted off all of these statistics, I still understand that the secondary is a major issue with the Bears. The 2009 season is one of the most hyped seasons I can remember in my short tenure on this Earth, and that is mostly to do with Jay Cutler coming over via trade.

And, rightfully so, Bears fans should be enthused about what he brings to the team, because in past years our quarterback play has been subpar. But, the offense can only do so much.

It is up to the defense to stop the other team from beating us. Jay Cutler knows all too well what a potent offense does for a team when the defense can’t stop anyone.

I think that the Bears’ secondary is a lot better than what people give them credit for, and I believe they are going to surprise a few teams this year with their play. I liked what I saw out of Kevin Payne last year, and think with that full season of experience under his belt, he is going to come up big at strong safety this year.

As of right now, I think Manning is the right choice to start next to him, at free safety, but believe Steltz is more than serviceable as his backup. Both of them are athletic and have decent speed, but they just need to find their rhythm inside the defensive schemes and everything will fall into place.

With Tillman being injured, we do have to worry about his conditioning for the start of the season, seeing as how he’s going to miss most of training camp, and part of the preseason.

But if he can come back healthy, and Vasher can stay healthy, as well, and revert back to his 2006 form, the Bears might have a chance at becoming one of the most feared defenses in the NFL again.

The biggest issue is health. Our depth at cornerback is an issue, with our backups not having much game experience in them. So, Bears fans just need to hope that the gods of football are going to shine down upon the team this season and keep everyone safe for the entire season.

What are your concerns about the secondary this upcoming season?

The Chicago Bears' Defense: Can They Apply Any Pressure?

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 09:12:02 -0400

Many people blame the Chicago Bears woes on Kyle Orton’s anemic arm. Whereas they have a reasonable argument, I would argue in his defense that he wasn’t the one calling the plays to run the ball on every 2nd-and-10, and to throw a pass in the flat on 3rd-and-7 or longer.

But that argument is for another day.

The biggest issue that the Bears face, in my opinion, is the pressure they can’t seem to apply on the opposing teams quarterback. And, the fact that the secondary couldn’t seem to stop any teams passing offense.

But first, we will deal with the front seven on defense.

Last year, they averaged less than two sacks per game, totaling only 28 on the season. That was good enough for 24th in the NFL.

This year, they are going to have to do better. They aren’t the same Monsters of the Midway they used to be, and they are going to need as much help as they can get to stop teams from throwing the ball all over the field on them.

With the addition of Rod Marinelli, the Bears are hoping to turn back the clocks, at least to 2006, when they had 40 sacks, and were constantly hounding the opposing teams quarterback. But that season was more about the turnovers the Bears caused than the pressure the line got on the quarterback. But, I digress.

With Marinelli’s track record of building attacks that net outstanding sack numbers (during his six seasons with Tampa Bay, the Bucs led the NFL in sacks), Bears fans can expect to see a much higher number than 28 this season. And the Bears are going to need to put up a higher number than that to be successful.

I do not believe the Bears need to lead the league in sacks to get back to the Super Bowl, but they just need to put pressure on the offense, and force them into more turnovers, which was the staple of the Bears defense in the past, under Lovie Smith.

Most people believe turnovers are more luck than anything, which can be true, but you aren’t near or at the top every year by dumb luck.

The one thing the Bears did so well in 2006 was force fumbles on the quarterback. They had 20 fumble recoveries that season, compared to only 10 last season.

Now, I understand that all of that difference can’t be put on the pressure the line gets, but anyone that watched that 2006 season can attest to what seemed like one quarterback strip per game. And 10 extra possessions in a season can turn into an extra win or two.

In this day and age of statistics, it is easy to overanalyze. But Bears fans do not need to see the numbers to understand that the defensive line and linebackers were, simply, not getting the job done last season.

An interesting statistic I saw was the one for total QB hits per pass. That is how many times a Bears defender hit the QB on a passing play. In 2006, the Bears' percentage was 14.8 percent. Last year, it was 12.4 percent. That is a big difference when you are talking some 300-400 plays.

If the Bears can creep back up to that 14 percent marker, I think that they will work their way back into causing more turnovers, and also causing more three and outs, and help them win the field position battle, which was another factor in some of the games they lost last season.

There are a ton of factors that go into winning a football game, and putting pressure on the quarterback to make a hurried pass, or to throw the ball away can be the start of it all.

Going into this season, the Bears have added more depth to their defense, with the draft picks of Jarron Gilbert and Henry Melton, and the free agent signing of Pisa Tinoisamoa.

The play of the line is most important, seeing as how it was the line that allowed the linebacking corps to play more free and open in previous seasons, which allowed them to make more plays on the ball.

Last season, Alex Brown led the team with six sacks. Adewale Ogunleye and Tommie Harris both had five, and Mark Anderson was disappointing with only one. In hurries, Ogunleye led the team with 16, Brown had 11, Harris had 7, and Anderson had 6. Those numbers aren’t going to cut it.

If Marinelli can get the line to get more hurries on the quarterback, the sack numbers will come along with them.

But more than just the sacks, the turnovers will come, as well. Not only will the line be able to get their hands on more balls, but they will force the quarterbacks into making rushed decisions, and allow the linebackers and secondary to intercept passes.

It all sounds so easy when you say it out loud, or write it on paper, but it really is as simple as the Bears lineman getting to the quarterback before he throws the ball. And I believe that Rod Marinelli will rework his Tampa Bay magic on the Bears line, and the Bears will be a better defensive team than they were last season.

And they proved that they didn’t need a standout offense to make it to the Super Bowl. As long as they can stop teams from scoring, they can win.

Bears Allow Sponsor on Jerseys, But At What Price

Scott Ottersen — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 10:07:08 -0400

The Chicago Bears have reached an agreement with NorthShore University HealthSystem to sponsor their practice jerseys.

Because nothing says NFL football like NorthShore University HealthSystem, right?

What's next?

I understand that the NFL is just a business and that team owners want to do everything possible to make money, but where is this going to end?

We already watch games at US Cellular Field, FedEx Field, University of Phoenix Stadium, and Bank of America Stadium just to name a few.

Now, we are giving away rights to jerseys? So the Chicago Bears practice jerseys are brought to you by NorthShore University HealthSystem. What do they stand to gain from this?

I would be interested to find out the corollary between a 3.5 inch by 4.5 inch patch being placed on a NFL team practice jersey and profits produced by it. I cannot see it being worth that much to their company. But, again, what do I know?

I'm just worried that this is going to lead to teams allowing corporate logos on their game jerseys. All it would take is Reebok to get a cut of the money, and I'm sure it will happen.

And, if that happens, what is next?

Are the cities going to sell the rights to the team name, so that we will be watching the Brookfield Zoo Bears play the Betty Crocker Broncos?

I am not upset by this news, and don't think that it is a majorly bad move by the NFL, or any other sport, but I think that some people will take issue with the fact that pro sports teams are selling off all the rights to their teams, stadiums, vendor services, etc., and while they are making more profits, the price of going to a game continues to rise for the fans.

Why not use the money they make off of licensing deals such as these to help make it more affordable for fans to enjoy a game at the stadium/park/field/whatever?

And, I don't care about the reports that say average ticket prices have gone down, because those reports are doctored by the fact that the nosebleed seats have gone down in price.

None of the seats that people truly want to sit in have gone down in price. And, if they have, maybe they went down from $105 to $100 or so, just so they can release statements saying they have lowered ticket prices. But, little do the fans know that the price of beer, or a hot dog, or parking have been raised a little to offset the loss of that $5.

Yes, sports has become big business. But, it is still the fans that make it a big business. It's not the big corporations of the world that make the NFL what it is. It is the fans who sit through three hours of a Bears-Packers game in the middle of December, in minus-20 degree weather, with only a t-shirt and jeans on.

It's the fans that you no longer allow to tailgate finding new parking lots to park in six hours before the game to cook up some dogs and brats, play bags, and wait 20 minutes in line to go to the bathroom at the two port-o-potties at the nearby stations. hose are the people that make your league what it is.

Let's allow some of those fans to have patches on your practice jerseys. Or let those fans pay you a certain amount to have the stadium named after them for a week, so that they can hear the announcers say, "Coming to you from Scott Ottersen Stadium, it's the Bears-Vikings on Fox."

No Bears fan cares that the practice jersey is sponsored by NorthShore University HealthSystem. I doubt 90 percent of the Bears fans even know about it. And maybe that is the reason they agreed to this deal, but I still find it an odd pairing.

That's all I have to say about that. Let me know what you think.

Is Donald Driver Right About the Chicago Bears Wide Receivers?

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:21:15 -0400

Much has been made of the Chicago Bears wide receiver corps.

Do they have quality receivers?

Can they win with the receivers they have?

Is the acquisition of Jay Cutler nullified by the fact that they don’t have a wideout to match his skills at quarterback?

And then, last week, Donald Driver, an 11-year veteran of the Green Bay Packers, went on record with saying that Chicago “[doesn’t] have the receiver group…you’re going to need receivers to make plays down the field, and they don’t have that right now.”

Is he just the latest to jump on the obvious train? Or, is he speaking too soon about the young receivers that the Bears have on the roster?

It is hard to make a point about how receiving corps are “bad,” considering the low amount of games they have been able to show their skillset in. Devin Hester and Rashied Davis are the only two receivers on the team that have played in enough games to where a scouting report could even be written up on them. They are also the only two receivers with more than seven receptions total in their career.

Juaguin Iglesias, Johnny Knox, Derek Kinder, and Eric Peterman are all rookies. And, for all intents and purposes, Earl Bennett could be considered a rookie with the lack of playing time he has received at wide receiver.

So, he may have been right if he called our receivers inexperienced, but how can he know that none of them can make plays down the field?

With the addition of Jay Cutler, a quarterback who can make the throws downfield, the Bears may be able to open up the playbook and call plays that involve the receivers to run further than five yards before the ball is coming their way. Therefore, all the receivers need to do is run into an opening and be able to catch a ball perfectly thrown to them. All receivers can run, right?

I have always respected Donald Driver. I think he is/was a good route runner, has/had great hands, and was a decent playmaker. His judge of talent may be good and it may not be, but I think he was overstepping his boundaries with this last statement.

Had he spoken along the lines of the past Bears receivers, I could see him making a comment like that, but not with a completely revamped wide receiver corps. In today’s world of fantasy sports and what I like to call "paper-matchup-ing," he was making a comment about something that not anybody can know anything about. It’s why they say “that’s why they play the games.” Until the start of the season, we will know nothing about how the Bears receivers do, or if they can make plays down the field. Perhaps one of the rookies will turn into this years Matt Forte of the wide receiver world.

If I had it my way, of course I would prefer the Bears had some experienced All-Pro wide receivers on their roster. But, that is just not the case. We have what we have, and we need to make the best of it. It is up to the coaches to work with our young guys, and get them to understand the routes they are running, the blocking schemes they are a part of, and the differences between being a college receiver and an NFL receiver. After that, it is on the shoulders of the players to have good instincts, good improvisational skills, and with hands to match.

What do you feel about Donald Driver’s comments?

Playing the Chicago Bulls General Manager and Making Them a Championship Team

Scott Ottersen — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 10:21:51 -0400

Hi, my name is Scott Ottersen, and I am the new Chicago Bulls GM.

I have been hired to turn the Bulls into a championship team, something that John Paxson could not come close to doing, and something that Gar Forman will most likely not be able to do.

I am going to outline the moves I am going to make this offseason that will turn our beloved franchise into championship contenders next season. No more hoping and dreaming for next year.

Now, since I was hired after the draft, I am stuck with the draft picks we made. I'm not saying they are bad players, just throwing that jab in there in case they don't pan out.

First things first, I will not be re-signing Ben Gordon.

I am calling the Pistons bluff and will let them go ahead and be dumb enough to sign him for $11 million each season. Have fun with that. I will enjoy playing against his 5-for-22 shooting nights four times per year.

Instead, I am going to extend a contract offer to Marquis Daniels, who was not offered a contract from his Indiana Pacers team. I figure I can sign him for three years, $18 million. If not, I will give him an extra year, but with the intentions of signing him for $6 million per year.

At the same time, I am going to offer a contract to Charlie Villanueva for three years and $24 million.

Again, if he wants another year, I can throw a fourth year in there. We have needed someone who can score from the power forward position ever since we, stupidly, traded away Elton Brand, who could definitely score.

I am a bit scared about his penchant for the jump shot and his lack of rebound tenacity, but I believe we can turn him into a low post threat, which in turn will up his rebound numbers.

I don't believe he is the exact answer we need, but I don't think I can pry away Carlos Boozer from the Jazz. And, even if I could, he would cost too much money.

Now, don't think I'm done with those free agent signings. I believe our roster needs a complete makeover.

If Portland wants Kirk Hinrich, I am going to give him to them.

I am going to send Kirk's remaining $26.5 million over three years contract, along with Anthony Roberson and Linton Johnson, for Steve Blake's expiring deal and Joel Przybilla.

Inside that deal, we clear a little over $1 million in cap space, as well as receiving minimal guaranteed money to spend in the future, with only Przybilla signed for the 2010-11 season, a player option year.

Another deal I have in the works is with Houston. I am going to send them Luol Deng's outrageous contract, Brad Miller's expiring deal, and Tyrus Thomas.

In return, we are going to receive Tracy McGrady's expiring contract. I figure with Yao Ming going down, they will want an offensive center to replace what they are losing, as well as an athletic swingman that might actually be happy to play for them.

In addition, if Deng gets hurt like we know he will, they will be used to that since McGrady can't stay healthy, either.

Now, that leaves us with a starting lineup of Derrick Rose at the point, Tracy McGrady at the two-guard (finally, we have a big shooting guard), John Salmons at the small forward, Charlie Villanueva at power forward, and Joakim Noah at center.

Off the bench, we have Steve Blake playing seven to 10 minutes per night, giving Rose a breather. Marquis Daniels will be our sixth man, being able to cover for T-Mac or John Salmons, seeing as how he is 6'6" and very athletic.

At the small forward position, we can use James Johnson to spare Salmons some minutes, if Daniels isn't already. At the power forward position, we have James Johnson, Taj Gibson, and Tim Thomas available to play. Joel Przybilla can split time with Joakim Noah at the center position.

Are you not excited about these ideas? Please let me know. I am taking your suggestions as a Chicago Bulls fan. I happen to think we can be a championship contender with this team.

Yes, we have an injury risk with McGrady, but if he stays healthy, he gives us a legitimate go-to guy every night. If he doesn't stay healthy, we have an insurance policy in Marquis Daniels to take over for him.

Defensively, I don't think we become a better team, but I think we would be good enough to hold our own with any team in the NBA, especially with our extensive depth down low and at the swing positions.

If we can't get out of the Jerome James contract, I understand that this puts us at a level of salary that we don't want to be, but as your beloved Bulls GM, I understand that winning is more important.

Besides, we will have seven contracts coming off the books after the season is over, and we will then have money to spend for the great 2010 free-agent pool.

Not to mention, we will have the money available to re-sign Derrick Rose.

Thank you for spending your valuable time with me this morning. I look forward to bringing the city of Chicago many championships in the coming years.

Why Can't I Hate Kobe?

Scott Ottersen — Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:51:44 -0400

Look, I'm not going to spend an entire article bashing the man.

I respect his game.

No way any true basketball fan can't.

But, there is just something about him that I don't like.

I'm not going to get into the whole MJ vs. Kobe argument. In my eyes, there is no argument. And, there never should be, simply because it's impossible to compare two individuals who played a team sport.

I'm not going to bring up his legal issues. I don't care. Hell, I have been arrested a few times in my life, and done some things I am not proud of, so who am I to judge?

What I am going to bring up is the fact that, isn't it my God-given right to be able to have my own opinion about someone? Even if you don't like it?

I'm not telling anybody that they can't like the guy. He's just not for me. Simple as that.

Why is it that everyone seems to run to his defense, and to try and tell everyone in America that they need to love and cherish this man? If I don't want to, why are you telling me that I have to? Who are the media, and other Kobe lovers, to tell us Kobe haters to stop hating?

We live in a free world, where people are allowed to share their opinion about whatever it is they have an opinion about, whether that opinion be informed or idiotic, we still have the right to share it.

Yes, I can see that some people want to write puff pieces about athletes so that people can get to know the "true" person behind the scenes, but it should stop at the point where facts fade into feelings. Besides, not all of us hate him as a person, we just hate him as an athlete. We don't care about his charity work and what not. Great for him. That's not going to get me to enjoy watching him play any more.

And, before I get hated on for this article (which I know I will), I just want to say that I understand that writers are allowed to share their opinion as well, but there is a point where their opinion starts to cross the line towards being more of a proposition, in the sense where they are trying to sell you on their opinion, rather than allowing you to form your own.

I will end on this note. I hate Kobe Bryant. In a sports sense. Not in a sense where if I saw him out in the streets I'd want to punch him. No, I'd still ask for an autograph.

I love watching him play, but hate watching him play, if you know what I mean.

Isn't it my (sports) right to feel that way?

Should the Cleveland Cavaliers Trade LeBron James?

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:35:46 -0400

I realize that it would be the dumbest basketball move to make, but haven't we been saying all these years that sports is a business?

Wouldn't it be the best business move to trade someone who has publicly said he wants to test the free-agent market?

I realize his talent is beyond measurable, but how is his loyalty?

If I were the Cavs' brass, I would offer him a max extension this offseason and even offer him part ownership, and if he didn't take it, I would have to start looking elsewhere, wouldn't I?

Is it smart for the Cavs to put all their hopes and dreams into LeBron's decision to stay with them after next season is over, when every team in the NBA is going to offer him mayorship over their city?

I say it's not smart. I say you put him on the trade block. Can you imagine the types of offers they would get from teams?

Couldn't they offer LeBron to the T-Wolves and get back Corey Brewer, Randy Foye, Mike Miller, the 6th, 18th, 28th, 45th, and 47th pick? I'm sure the Wolves would even throw in some 2010, 2011, and 2015 picks if they asked.

Brewer, Foye, and Miller all have expiring contracts, which come off the books after the season, allowing the Cavs to either resign them or go after other big-name 2010 free agents.

Wouldn't the Wolves give up their entire farm system for a chance to team LeBron with Kevin Love, Al Jefferson, and Ryan Gomes, even if for only one year? Wouldn't they give up anyone, other than Jefferson, to get him?

Yes, I know that the teams would be hesitant to take on LeBron and give up so much just for one season of LeBron. But isn't that what the Cavs are doing, anyway?

I understand that most teams won't have the cap space to sign him after the season is over, but isn't today's sports all about winning now?

Wouldn't the T-Wolves sell out every game, jersey, hat, shirt, sandals, bookbag, and whatever else they could produce with LeBron's picture on it? Wouldn't they make hundreds of millions of dollars in just one season?

Couldn't the Bulls re-sign Ben Gordon, ship him to Cleveland along with John Salmons and Tyrus Thomas, the 16th pick, 26th pick, and some 2010 and 2011 draft picks?

I understand that you are giving up someone who has the opportunity to become one of the greats of the game, but is it worth taking the risk that he leaves and you get nothing in return?

What would the Cavs team be if LeBron James left in free agency? They would become the absolute worst team in the history of the NBA with the lack of talent on that roster.

I am not advocating the Cavs trading LeBron James, but how come it is that we haven't heard anyone talk about this option yet? Are they afraid to broach the topic? Are they afraid that if they talk about trading him, and can't find any offers, that he would spurn them, for sure, after next season?

Look, the man has already told you, and America, that he is going to look at other offers. Why aren't you, as his owner, allowed to do the same?

I know there isn't a package in the world that would get you dollar-for-dollar for LeBron (unless we're talking Kobe; perhaps a LeBron-Mo Williams for Kobe), but don't you owe it to your team, fans, and yourself to try and get something for him before he could end up leaving in free agency, where you end up going dollar-for-nothing?

Once again, I realize it would be the dumbest thing in the world to trade LeBron, but don't the Cavs have to, at least, entertain some trade offers?

Come on, you know you've thought about it.

What Does Winning the NBA Finals Have To Do with Legendary Status?

Scott Ottersen — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 09:00:12 -0400

I have been reading a lot of "expert" opinions the past few years about how if Kobe Bryant wins another title, he will move into the top five, top 10, or even top two players of all time in NBA history.

I ask, what does it matter if he wins another Championship or not?

Look, I'm not a Kobe Bryant fan. I will always respect his game, and consider him one of the greats of the game, but this article is not in his defense. But, since he is the one being mentioned in these "experts" articles, I am using him as a reference. But, I will make my argument with other players, as well.

Before it is all said and done, Kobe will be in the top 10 all time in scoring, possibly top three if he plays into, or near, his 40s, like most NBA greats have.

He will have won, at least, one NBA MVP award, with others arguably being taken away from him and given to others.

He will have been named to, at least, four All-NBA First Teams, one All-NBA Second Team, and two All-NBA Third Teams, along with six times being award All-NBA Defensive 1st Team.

He will move his career scoring average over 26.0 ppg before his time is up, with more of a chance of increasing it over 27.0 ppg for his career. He is being held back by his first four seasons, where he hadn't quite reached Kobe-status yet.

He has helped lead his team into the playoffs nearly every single year of his career, and into the NBA Finals six times now, with possibly more coming.

I am not saying all of this qualifies him to be one of the top players in NBA history, because stats are useless in that regard. But, to hear all these columnists talking about how if he wins just this one more Championship, he will cosy up next to MJ as one of the greatest players ever to play the game.

They said this last year, as well.

He lost last year.

Shouldn't that disqualify him from moving up there? If not, then we should not even have this conversation until his career is over and done with, so that we do not have to go back and forth in this discussion.

Basketball is not an individual sport. Every great NBA player needs help winning a title. Bill Russell didn't win 11 titles on his own. The only sports where greatness can be measured by titles are ping-pong, boxing, MMA, and golf. Those are individual sports.

But, even measuring fighters and golfers can be trivial, due to other factors like opponents, eras, and other weathering factors that occur from time to time.

In basketball, greatness cannot be changed due just to winning a title. If we were going to measure greatness based on winning titles, than the top players of all time list would look something like this:

Bill Russell, Sam Jones, Tom Heinsohn, KC Jones, Tom Sanders, John Havlicek, Jim Loscutoff, Frank Ramsey, Robert Horry, Bob Cousy, Kareem, MJ, Scottie, George Mikan, Vern Mikkelsen, Jim Pollard, Slater Martin, Larry Siegfried, Don Nelson, Michael Cooper, Magic, Dennis Rodman, Ron Harper, and Steve Kerr.

There is a list of players who have won five or more Championships. There are nine names on that "greatest" list that belong there. The rest have all been lucky enough to be on great teams at the right times.

Saying that Kobe is only deserving of a top 10 greatest of all time distinction if he wins another title trivializes everything he has done in his career. But, it also makes the argument that players who have performed well in one playoff series deserve the right to be called "great" players.

If Kobe hasn't played well enough in his already 170 playoff games to deserve that distinction, and needs only one more good series to earn that right, then what do we say about the Jerome James' of the NBA, who have played out of their minds in one playoff series, turned it into big money, and then done nothing after it.

Do we move Jerome James into the top 150 players of all time because he had that great series? Or, do we count all of his craptastic regular season games and not even consider him in the greatest of all time debate?

Of course we don't consider him. He had one good series of games in one NBA playoff run. That is nothing.

So, why does it matter how Kobe performs in this NBA Finals?

Let's translate this into other sports greatest debates:

Barry Sanders never won a Super Bowl, Jim Brown won only one NFL Championship (retired before Super Bowl started), Walter Payton only won one Super Bowl.

Emmitt Smith won three. And, was named MVP in one of the wins. So, by the deduction that titles make a player great (in TEAM sports), Emmitt Smith is greater than the three backs listed above him, that are usually named as greater players in any debate, without even thinking about it that long.

So, again, why does Kobe need to win this title?

If you think it was dumb to make a football analogy, I will make a basketball one.

John Stockton never won an NBA title, Oscar Robertson only won one, Isiah won two.

Tony Parker has won three. Derek Fisher has won three. Hell, Steve Kerr has won five.

So, based on this ridiculous theory that helping your team win the title makes your status in the pantheon of legends, Parker, Fisher, and Steve Kerr are all better point guards then Stockton (way better since he won none), the Big O, and Isiah.

And, what happens if Kobe has a halfway decent-to-bad Finals, where he averages 21 points, 3 rebounds, 3 assists, but his team still wins in seven games? Do we still catapult him because his team won the title? The "experts" would have to after all this talk, right?

I could go on for hours with my argument, but I will just end by saying that to be great, you need to be great over your entire career. It should matter that you are a Champion, but only to an extent. Winning titles in team sports does not make an individual greater than another who has not had the fortune of being on good enough teams to win titles. There is only so much one great player can do.

I will say one last thing. Kobe Bryant is a great player, but his status is already cemented. His playoff failures have cost him more than his playoff successes in my book. All I needed to see was his no-show, give-up game seven against the Suns back in 2006.

The Lakers should have won that series in six, even with the better team being the Suns. No "second greatest player" would ever allow that to happen, especially when "experts" say an individual can do so much to help his team win.

Let's leave the greatest of all time talk for after players careers are over, please.

One Thing Orlando Magic Needs To Do To Win The NBA Title

Scott Ottersen — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 10:10:30 -0400

Let Kobe shoot the ball.

Watching the NBA is frustrating. And, that is because I do not believe NBA coaches watch film or follow stat sheets.

You hear about the intricate stat sheets that baseball managers carry around to each game, letting their pitchers and players know where every hitter hits the ball, likes his pitches, what gum he chews, etc.

In the NBA, I watch games, and it just becomes obvious that the coaches have no idea what they are doing.

But, that's beyond the point. Let me get back to how the Orlando Magic can beat the Lakers in the NBA Finals.

Once again, let Kobe Bryant shoot the ball.

Don't live by the "code" where they tell you to let the men around him beat you. No need to double team him, or triple team him, because when you do that, you are leaving a man wide open, and more often than not that man is open as he's cutting to the hoop, or as he's standing 5-10 feet from the hoop when he catches the ball, which makes it inherently easier to score a basket, or get fouled.

Watching the Magic play the Cavs, I have to believe Stan Van Gundy did his homework, and realized that if he plays LeBron man-to-man, and just keeps Howard down low as a help defender, it will slow down the entire Cavs offense, and not just LeBron James. So, hopefully, he follows his same recipe there, and plays Kobe the same.

Let me give you some stats:

During the regular season, the LA Lakers were 56-7 in games where Kobe Bryant took 24 shots or less.

And, three of those losses came in the final seconds, with two being buzzer beaters.

In the Playoffs, they are 9-3 when he takes 24 shots or less.

Now, for the flip side, during the regular season, the Lakers were 9-10 when Kobe took 25 shots or more.

In the Playoffs, they are 3-3 when he shoots 25 shots or more.

So, let Kobe take shots. He thinks he is unstoppable (and, for the most part is...with the help of the refs), so play him one-on-one and let him handle the scoring for his team, instead of allowing him to get everyone else involved.

What happens when Kobe takes over the offense for the Lakers is that the rest of the team becomes stagnant. If you watch Lakers games, you can see the difference in the offense when Kobe is chucking up shots and when Kobe is dishing the ball to teammates.

If Kobe puts his head down and starts to dribble against Pietrus (who should start and guard Kobe), you can see the body language in the rest of the team settle in for the 'show.'

Now, I do understand that stats are not the end-all-be-all of how a game plays out, but this statistic is not lying. The Lakers offense is incredibly different when Kobe is taking the majority of the shots, and when he is passing the ball and allowing his teammates to help win the game.

In basketball, offense is (or should be) all about ball movement and player movement without the ball.

When Kobe puts the ball in motion, passing around the top of the key, or playing an inside-out game with Gasol, there will be cutters going through the lane, rather than three guys standing at the three-point line and the other standing outside the lane, on the baseline watching him either hoist a jumper, or drive to the lane to get fouled.

The old Kobe was able to dominate more games, more often, with driving into the lane, making his layups, and getting fouled, as well. But, now, he has become more of a jump shooter, which means that it becomes more difficult for him to find open men when he's just standing still, dribbling, and his teammates are standing still watching him dribble, which means they aren't open, anyways.

Even if his shots are falling, and he puts in 35-45 points, how many times have NBA teams lost a game 45-41 or so? You can allow him to score on you, but unless he goes 30-35 from the field, most likely, he's not going to beat you on his own.

He is a 46 percent shooter, and 35 percent from three-point land, which is good, but not somebody that is scaring me into allowing him to take shots whenever he wants. If I were defending him, I would play off of him, and let him think he has an open shot whenever he wants to take it.

The games when the Lakers are at their best is when Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom have the lane dominated, and Trevor Ariza and Derek Fisher are hitting their open shots from Kobe or Pau sucking the defense away from them, leaving them open. And, then, they have Kobe to ice the game down when they already have the lead.

If they allow Kobe to find open guys, or to play inside-out basketball with Gasol, Bynum, or Odom, instead of trying to win games himself, they will be in trouble.

Obviously, this isn't the only factor in winning the title, but it is a great starting point. Play man-to-man defense, because they are big enough down low to handle the Lakers big men.

Keep within your offense and don't try and step out of your rhythm to play the Lakers style. And, definitely, keep Dwight Howard out of foul trouble. With him out of the game, it becomes a whole different series.

My prediction is the Lakers in 7, but only because I'm never right about these things.

The Magic were 2-0 against the Lakers this season, and they won those games using my theory. In the first game, they won 106-103, with Kobe shooting 14-31 from the field, dropping 41 on them.

The second game, they won 109-103, with Kobe going 10-26 from the field, and putting a triple double on them. Like I said, let Kobe get his, and keeping thinking he can get his, because as soon as the rest of the Lakers are out of the game, and out of the flow of the offense, that is when the Magic can take over the game.

Ten Hollywood Females Who Should Follow in Eva Longoria's Footsteps

Scott Ottersen — Fri, 29 May 2009 10:01:28 -0400

Ever watch a boring Spurs game and hope that they just pan the camera into the seats to show Eva Longoria cheering on Tony Parker? Well, I do. And, I'm giving you the list of 10 Hollywood starlets that need to follow in her footsteps, start dating an NBA star, go to every game, and have the camera show them off during every timeout. For purposes of not losing some of the hottest females, all Hollywood females are up for grabs, whether they are single or not. Let's get it on...

Begin Slideshow