Chicago Bears: Bad Offense, Mistake-Prone Defense Expose Need for Change

Historically, the Chicago Bears have relied on stingy, sometimes vaunted defense and run-heavy offense to win games.

The last two opponents, the New Orleans Saints and Green Bay Packers, exposed those two cornerstones.  It's time to adapt, Chicago.

We'll start with the problem that everyone agrees on: offensive line.

It seems obvious, even to casual football fans, that the Bears offensive line is plagued by the simplest of plagues: they're not good. If they were an immune system, Jay Cutler would be dead.

Bears offensive line coach, Mike Tice, though, has maintained a firm, borderline-fantasy belief that the team has the right guys.

Here are the facts, Sir Tice: through three games, Jay Cutler has been sacked a league-leading 14 times (not to mention the the 91 total given up the two previous seasons) and the Bears totaled 161 rushing yards (53.7 per game), good enough for 31st in the league behind the Tennessee Titans.

They should be in last place, but Chris Johnson is apparently too busy counting his money.

Refusing to address the problem in free agency is inexcusable. Rookie right tackle Gabe Carimi has been the only bright spot, and he's having knee problems.

I'm normally not an advocate for Lovie Smith and his coaching staff, but no coach in the world could squeeze any more talent out of this line. There's an infinite list of insults that I can continue to dish out at this offensive line (and they wouldn't block those, either), but I rest my case. The Bears need to clean house at that position if progress isn't made against the Carolina Panthers.

On to the defense. It's not as advertised, folks.

It's not bad. But it's not good, either.

Unlike every other defense in the league, the Bears believe there is no need to confuse the offense. Even my foreign mom knows their play on defense.  They drop two safeties deep on every pass play, the corners play underneath, and the linebackers secure the middle of the field, with the front four rushing the quarterback.

In theory, this defense eliminates the 'big play' when it's executed right.

Here are the facts: the team is in the middle of the pack in terms of yards allowed, points-per-game allowed, as well as sacks (five of the eight came in the first game). On paper, the stats are decent.

This is where the problem lies: the defense has allowed its opponents to convert 40 percent of their third downs (seventh worst in the league). What that means, particularly for the last two games, the opposing offenses are sustaining long drives that keep the defense on the field, which, in turn, results in fatigue, and fatigue increases the chance of blowing an assignment.

It doesn't help that the Bears offense, again due to the inability to run the ball or protect the quarterback effectively, is 27th in the league in total first downs and 29th in third-down conversion percentage. That's bad. Like, really bad.

I have a simple question: would it hurt to switch it up a little? Maybe have a more diverse selection of blitzes to dial up? The Bears have arguably two of the most versatile defensive play-makers of the past decade in Brian Urlacher and Julius Peppers, but their talents are rarely maximized.

When has a quarterback ever called an audible at the line when the Bears are showing an all-out blitz? Never. Because they know they're all dropping back in coverage.

The only time Aaron Rodgers was even remotely bothered on Sunday was when the Briggs came on a blitz. Know what happened that play? Interception.

The Bears have to find an identity because it's no longer about scary defense and a strong running game. Or maybe it's just a case of reinventing that Chicago-style culture of football.

Neither of those can happen unless the team, from management all the way down to the players, decides to adapt.