Does Ben Watson's signing with the Browns become a possible trade for the Bears?
by Bears Fan Chad on Mar 12, 2010 3:27 PM CST
Email
Print
After hearing that Ben Watson is through in New England, and that he has signed with the Browns, I got to wondering....Would this be an opportune time to try and shop Greg Olsen to New England for a nice draft pick? New England only has two TEs listed on their roster currently. Neither of them have taken an NFL snap. I would say New England has a need, and some say Greg Olsen is expendable in Mike Martz's offense. It could work. I'm interested in hearing what WCG thinks about this. Is it worth it? Could it happen? Would it help us?
109 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If Martz is only here a year
cause the coaching staff gets cleared out if we don’t play up to expectations, then we just lost a good maybe one day great TE. Trading Olsen would be one of the dumber things the Bears management has done…and they have done a lot of dumb things.
I'm not that impressed with Olsen.
As a blocking TE, he’s a non-entity. As a receiver, I feel he drops the ball after taking a hit too much, which is gonna happen a lot for a TE.
------ TheRiot Squad ------
by RightFieldSucks on Mar 12, 2010 4:39 PM CST up reply actions
Not to mention
that he can not hardly break tackles to get the extra yardage that other TEs get (well except for the last 2 games last year)….Plus he seems to struggle getting open period….
Did you know that Olsen was targeted 108 times….
"In an infinite universe where reality is interpreted through our continuously fluctuating perception, providing absolute definitive proof of anything becomes a little more than speculation based on random data....."
- Jerry Angelo on how he prepares for the NFL draft
by CloudyFuture on Mar 12, 2010 5:03 PM CST up reply actions
I hope the patriots realize
The skills Olson have would go a long way in covering up the void left by Wes Welker being injured for a long time, and without Ben Watkins I can’t imagine the need becoming less.
Because he had so many options?
A common play ran for Olsen was a 3 yard out which doesn’t give him too much opportunity to do anything after the catch. I don’t want to blame the coachs entirely but Olsen was very poorly utilized and he didn’t get the match ups they were expecting. And then you say “except for the last 2 games”. Everyone is proclaiming DA to be the next Jerry Rice after the last 2 games so why don’t we consider how Olsen ended the season too?
RightFieldSucks – do you have stats on his drops? I am willing to bet his drops are consistent with the league average for his position.
So play calling and double coverage that.....
typically would have went to a receiver, but instead ended up on Olsen had nothing to do with that? Seriously?
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 2:51 PM CST up reply actions
He had two drops last year
with over 100 targets. Someone here posted it a few weeks ago.
''I'm really not a Facebook or Twitter guy. I'm a prime rib and baked potato guy.'' - Sweet Lou
Posted it repeatedly....
Really sick of the short sightedness when it comes to Olsen. People are ignoring the double coverage that he had to deal with, and the fact that Ron Turner was the OC.
I find it funny that people want to disclaim Forte’s poor running by throwing Ron Turner up (a fact that cannot be argued. Ron Turner’s presence hurt everyone, to include Forte and I completely expect Forte to take a huge step forward under a much more competent OC like Martz), but then completely disregard Turner where Olsen is concerned.
Olsen had the Best drop percentage on the team. Period. So the argument that he drops the ball too much is just ludicrous. As are most of the arguments against Olsen.
As far as YAC goes, Olsen was not getting the ball in space, he was getting it in double coverage. That limits YAC. It’s pretty simple, actually.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 2:56 PM CST up reply actions
I knew it was you
but couldn’t remember your username. You seem to do all the “legwork” for my arguments, so very thankful cause I’m naturally a lazy person. It’s T-time!
''I'm really not a Facebook or Twitter guy. I'm a prime rib and baked potato guy.'' - Sweet Lou
rakman
made the post with olsen stats i beleive and t train has every state enclosed in his studious mind
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 15, 2010 2:50 PM CDT up reply actions
lol...
Or at my nimble fingertips :D
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Two points
1. Olsen is not as good as some of you think, he certainly has not played like a #1 draft choice to date.
2. It is possible the player they draft with the pick they would get for Olsen might be a better player than Olsen, regardless of who is coaching the Bears in 2011.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 13, 2010 9:32 AM CST up reply actions
Possible, but not likely.
If they can get the Pats 1st 2nd rounder and a 5th or something, I’d do it if I were JA. Then they could address FS, G, and RT with their first three picks.
''I'm really not a Facebook or Twitter guy. I'm a prime rib and baked potato guy.'' - Sweet Lou
Hold your horses, pal.
Let’s kill the talk about the pats giving up their first round pick for G.O. when they can simply draft Jermaine Gresham.
You can't see California without Marlon Brando's eyes.
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 13, 2010 10:45 AM CST up reply actions
Umm...
Pats 1st 2nd rounder
They don’t have a first rounder this year.
''I'm really not a Facebook or Twitter guy. I'm a prime rib and baked potato guy.'' - Sweet Lou
OH ok, I understand what you meant
Don’t they have the 22nd pick?
You can't see California without Marlon Brando's eyes.
by ifuwannacrownem on Mar 13, 2010 11:51 AM CST up reply actions
You are correct
For some reason I thought they were without a 1st round pick. Probably cause they have 3-2nd rounders I suppose.
''I'm really not a Facebook or Twitter guy. I'm a prime rib and baked potato guy.'' - Sweet Lou
Can we please stop ....
…. with all the trade Greg Olsen stuff !? Martz has said on a few occasions that he’ll find a way to get the most talented players on the field and Olsen is on of those guys . What your suggesting is we trade one of our most talented offensive weapons , which we have very little of to begin with , and trade him away for what , a pick ? A pick that may or may not pan out ? It’s lunacy . Olsen is oneof the most gifted TE’s around and short of a round one pick or a proven , young offensive talent why get rid of him ?
Heres one insiders view that is senseable …….. Get rid of the older player whos skills are deminishing , Dez Clark .
And as numerous folks have said what if its a one and done for Martz ? Great in that instance we’ve just got rid of a monster of an offensive weapon .
by MidWayMonster54 on Mar 12, 2010 4:11 PM CST reply actions
Doesnt it feel like we do this every day?Midway?
why wouldnt new england draft grobnowski or gresham or aaron hernandez with one of those picks instead?
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 12, 2010 9:51 PM CST up reply actions
Everyday , every hour .....
…. it just seems like its Ground Hog Day !
by MidWayMonster54 on Mar 12, 2010 10:09 PM CST up reply actions
Agreed
They’ll shop Dez until the last possible moment (draft day) and then release him if they must. As someone said earlier, because its an uncapped year, the roster bonus they paid him has no real negative effects.
Whoa, Whoa
Hey, I’m not saying that we SHOULD trade Greg Olsen. All I was saying was the Pats have a need. Some say Olsen is expendable. It seemed like a trade could be possible. I didn’t say let’s do it, only curious to see what others thought. You are obviously in the “what the hell are you thinking, you can’t trade Olsen club.” I appreciate your opinion, but I did not say we should trade him, only there seems like a possibility for a trade looking at it from both sides.
by Bears Fan Chad on Mar 15, 2010 7:17 AM CDT up reply actions
EXACTLY!!!!!! Our history ...
…. of bad draft picks screams don’t trade Olsen for picks . He too talented to trade for the likes of Dan Bazuin type of reach player .
by MidWayMonster54 on Mar 12, 2010 4:38 PM CST up reply actions
Hey the Buzzsaw
is a Midway LEGEND…..
"In an infinite universe where reality is interpreted through our continuously fluctuating perception, providing absolute definitive proof of anything becomes a little more than speculation based on random data....."
- Jerry Angelo on how he prepares for the NFL draft
by CloudyFuture on Mar 12, 2010 5:04 PM CST up reply actions
if you draft somone
what makes u think he will start this year or ever..
Few things
Hub thinks that the Bears would be lucky to get a 4th round pick for Olsen….From the insiders he has talked to they think Olsen is only worth a 5th round or later pick….
B&B seems to think that Olsen is done and that the Bears will unload him by the end of the draft no matter what….
However All other Bear beat writers say other wise and that they are not shopping Olsen BUT if someone were to offer the Bears a “sweet deal” they would “listen”….
Other Beat writers (Clayton, Zaidman, Dickerson, and Biggs) have mentioned that it is Clark that is the “odd man” out and that it is Clark that is being shopped “for a late round pick”….
"In an infinite universe where reality is interpreted through our continuously fluctuating perception, providing absolute definitive proof of anything becomes a little more than speculation based on random data....."
- Jerry Angelo on how he prepares for the NFL draft
To me...
It would make sense that Dez is the odd man out. He’s older than the other two that are now on the roster. He’s not as good as a blocking TE as Manu, and not as good as a receiving TE as Olsen. If you’re only likely to keep two, why not keep the best options to fill each need? Now, you’ve got your best blocker and your best receiver. When they have to fill the other role, they simply have to do an acceptable job. Manu must be an acceptable receiver, and Olsen an acceptable blockery.
Dez seems to be the choice to move, IMHO.
Everyone dies. It is the only true and lasting justice in life.
whoa!
I’m sorry dude but that is way wrong! Dez may not be as physically talented as olsen (he is way older) but he is better at catching the ball and taking a hit, blocking, also he breaks tackles and at least gets more than 3 yards. I like Olsen and his upside but he is soft and lets everyone run through him. I’m not opposed to the thinking that he’s the odd one out but is because of age and/or money, not playing style. Olsen should get tape of Gonzalez and learn how to play TE the tough way with that kind ability.
Pof, Pof, Pasa! Watch out for the monsters!
If someone offers you a 2nd round pick for Olsen
Take it and run!
He’s a very replaceable player. I don’t know why everyone around here is in love with him…. maybe it’s because we haven’t had a legitimate TE since Ditka (the player who revolutionized the position).
He’s not even the best TE in his own division for crying out loud. He’s 3rd or 4th on that list.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Division nonsense
So the fact that he isn’t the best TE in our division is a con? Or is it just that NFC North has beastily TEs? He’d be the best TE in the AFC East – so what?
Replaceable with who? Manu isn’t going to be running a whole ton of routes. He will be blocking and occassionally releasing off the block for a short dump off. Clark doesn’t have a whole lot of time left in him and Kellen Davis is not as good as Olsen.
People’s expectations for Olsen were huge and just because he didn’t meet expectations people want to trade him. NEWSFLASH: Was there any Bear that met expectations last year? Should we just trade everyone?
Ridiculous....
Name the three that are better, and why……
Shiancoe? Well, he drops the ball a lot (by comparison to Olsen, who you claim drops the ball too much) About the same YAC and Y/R while not dealing with the double coverage because he has Harvins, Rice, Berrian, Peterson and Taylor on the field with him. He might be the 5th best receiver on his team….might. And he’s a lower ranked blocker…..oh, and Olsen broke more tackles…
Finley? Has a higher Y/R and YAC, but again, drops the ball more and is a lower ranked blocker and isn’t getting the double coverage since teams instead find it more important to double Driver and Jennings…..But he broke 2 more tackles than Olsen.
Pettigrew? Seriously? Sure, he has a higher Y/R and YAC, but that would be because he dropped more than 10% of the balls thrown his way and because teams are far more worried about Calvin Johnson. He was a non-factor in the Lions offense. He can block, though. And he broke the same number of tackles as Olsen…..
Shiancoe is really the only reasonable comparison, and again, judging by the complaints against Olsen, drops, blocking, and breaking tackles, Shiancoe falls short. Olsen beats him in all three categories…….
So who were you talking about? Because you made it sound like you had some definitive way of judging this. I’m interested….
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
Ridiculous?
Olsen (612 yards and 8 TDs) was targeted 108 times last year, and caught 60 passes (55%). And you guys are magically telling everyone around here that he only dropped 5 of the 48 passes he didn’t catch? LOL. I don’t know who’s re-writing that history, but it sure makes for a great laugh.
Jermichael Finley (676 yards and 5 TDs) was targeted just 71 times, and caught 55 passes (77%). So, Olsen was targeted 36 more times than Finley, but he only caught 5 more passes than him? LOL.
Schiancoe (566 yards and 11 TDs) was targeted just 78 times, and caught 56 passes (72%). Again… look at the massive difference in % of balls caught.
Pettigrew (356 yards, 11.5 avg and 2 TDs) was targeted 54 times, and caught 30 passes (55%) in just 11 games. That’s better than Olsen’s rookie year (14 games, 39 catches, 10.0 avg, 2 TDs) …. and Pettigrew knows how to block.
There’s a reason that local football reporters like Hub Arkush, Don Pierson and Brad Biggs are saying that Olsen would likely fitch a 4th round pick at best. Get over it. He’s not a special football player. He can be easily replaced by any TE in our division.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Nope....
The official statistic are that he dropped two, not 5, of the 58 he didn’t catch. The rest were not within his grasp, either due to errant throws, coverage, pressure on the quarterback or any combination of the three. Pretty simple, actually. I’m surprised that this concept escapes you. But then, context does matter. Maybe you didn’t watch the games, or the highlights. Lucky for you, they’re all available on the internet! That or you clearly don’t understand that there are more than two ways that a pass ends.
The fact that you refuse to understand that a player in double coverage has a significantly more difficult time getting a clear shot at the ball, that the playcalling matters, qb pressure matters and coverage matters tells me that you don’t want to consider Olsen’s merits and flaws rationally, but would instead like to be one of the sheople who like to find something to bash and will stick to it without even bothering to consider the context or circumstance. And that makes arguing with you further pointless………..
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 14, 2010 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions
correction....dropped 2, not 5, of the 48 passes he didn't catch.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 14, 2010 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Sack
I realize you’re just making the case because you were asked to, but look at those three other teams WRs that had to be accounted for on any given play… Megatron, Jennings, and anyone Favre decided to throw to, so double team percentages on Olsen would go up, less attention is required to our WR rather than our Tight End.
it was no secret our Oline was faulty and Cutler had to look for the dumpout, and “targetted” doesn’t always tell the truth, was it over thrown, intercepted, thrown “in the direction of” or what?
Shiancoe saw his stock dramatically rise with the arrival of Favre, as did Finley with Rodgers. i dont know enough about Pettigrew to speak on him.
"If I were a food critic being asked to write about the meal and experience at Waffle House, I would provide a drawing of two happy fat people giving each other a high five."
by BearNecessities on Mar 15, 2010 5:25 AM CDT up reply actions
Calvin Johnson...goes by Megatron
"If I were a food critic being asked to write about the meal and experience at Waffle House, I would provide a drawing of two happy fat people giving each other a high five."
by BearNecessities on Mar 15, 2010 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Bullshhhhhhh
Olsen is not as good as
Pettigrew?
Shiancoe?
Finley?
Get out of here
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 15, 2010 2:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Think about it !!
Everyone is trying to figure out Olsens place in Martz’s offence. Try this—- All of Martz’s rcvrs, and this includes those in the backfield, have a high percentage of YAC. and Olsen does a pretty good job in that respect. Olsen comes out of the backfield to either side and you have Aromoshudu or Bennet going out and scattering the defence ( i’m dreaming ).
I guess the point that i’m getting at is 3 two hundred plus pounders with dam good hands and after catch abilities could create a lot of uneasiness in anyones backfield. Unless your lucky you won’t score on every drive but you sure could eat up some yardage. Use Olsen as a very good possesion wrcvr. That takes care of the wr problem. It just might work.
You mean the great Greg Olsen
and his whole 2.7 YAC? If they can get a solid 2nd rounder (or maybe even Olsen + 4th for Patriot’s 1st) then I think they should really consider it. Last year he was among the top 3 receiving option on a decidedly average Bears offense, and therefore he is replaceable.
"One time I went to a social gathering, I brought a bottle of Tanqueray and a shotgun and showed those motherf&#@ers the best time they ever had!"- Kenny Powers (Eastbound and Down)
"Why give 100% when 35 can still get you paid and laid."- Kenny Powers
by gridiron_assassin on Mar 12, 2010 7:11 PM CST up reply actions
You must not be referring to Greg Olsen because he is not good after the catch
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 13, 2010 9:35 AM CST up reply actions
Because...
you haven’t taken context into account. Players rarely get high YAC out of double coverage. Silly notion. Stats need context.
And, as I stated above, It amazes me how quickly people with throw Ron Turner’s name into the mix to defend Matt Forte, but then ignore his influence (which is just as great, if not greater) on Olsen’s performance. Play calling has a lot to do with that, and Turner wasn’t exactly doing a good job of getting ANY of the receivers the ball in open space. To that, I’m interested in seeing what happens when Martz calls plays that actually get Hester, Olsen, Forte, Taylor, and Knox the ball in open space with a chance to move.
But you have to remember that all those catches that Olsen made into double coverage shorted his YAC considerably. Can anyone please name for me another TE who drew similar double coverage? I can just hear all these fans in two years. Complaining because Angelo was stupid enough to trade away Olsen for a draft pick that didn’t pan out.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 3:05 PM CST up reply actions
"you haven’t taken context into account. Players rarely get high YAC out of double coverage. Silly notion. Stats need context."
same could be said for Forte’s run stats, wouldn’t you say?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 14, 2010 9:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Absolutely.....
I’m interested in seeing how Forte’s stats change given that he actually has an offensive coordinator with a history of playcalling and scheming around a players strengths.
Forte’s YPC and his receptions should both increase this year.
I’ve never claimed that Forte’s problems were all his doing. Far from it. I may not be sold on him as a runner, but he wasn’t calling the absolute garbage that was passing for play-calling during the Turner 2.0 era, either. Where a halfway decent OC in place, Forte might have ranked much higher as a runner.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 14, 2010 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions
i'd be for it
if they got say at least a 2nd round pick and some other collateral that would only happen in madden anyway. like most bears players of any current renown, his trade value is low at best and the bears are better off trying to polish the turds they do have instead of dumping them for more late picks.
does anyone think lance briggs is worth a 1st round pick this year? i wouldn’t mind seeing the bears get that done if at all possible.
by reefermadness3 on Mar 13, 2010 12:52 AM CST reply actions
I'm torn on this but here's the reality:
We’re paying Brandon M. $6M this year to be our blocking TE. Martz doe NOT run two TE sets, period. How much time do you think Olsen is going to get in this offense? Yes, he was good in the Red Zone but DA can fill that void as can Kellen Davis.
Olsen has two years left on his contract. I do NOT expect him to have much of an impact this season the way that the Bears offense is being designed. Not when you have Bennett, DA, Hester and Knox all available and Manumaleuna as your primary starter.
Olsen will be less valuable at the end of this season. He has value now— and if that value is a 43rd or 47th pick, where we could immediately pick up a starting OG/OT then you HAVE to consider it. As for Clark, he has almost 0 value right now. You might get a 6th rounder for him but that would be a real stretch.
If you believe the Bears have a shot at making a playoff run this season then you should be for getting rid of Olsen because if the Bears succeed, Martz, Lovie and crew will be back and Olsen will spend his last season playing back up again.
If you believe this is a one and done season no matter what for the Bears then I can understand why you wouldn’t want to let Olsen go for a pick in the 40’s.
It doesn't have to be two TE sets
Olsen has the speed to run WR routes if he lines up wide
He can also line up in the back field and get LB coverage which he can beat
Dear Lord.
Olsen gets gobbled up by DBs in coverage, and can’t separate. The only mismatch he poses is when he’s covered by a LB.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
So...
why don’t we get him the match-ups that he clearly can take advantage of? Lets not forget how bad last year’s offense was. Last year was the first year Greg Olsen was a starting TE. Why don’t we see how he does in a legitimate offense? Because right know everyone is passing judgment on a sample size that is really unfair to the player.
Absolute hyperbole....
He was making catches all season through double coverage…..
I’ll tell you what. You go ahead and post all those videos of Olsen getting eaten up in coverage by DBs. I have posted repeatedly with a bunch of video of Olsen making great catches through double coverage.
Back up your hyperbole with some video.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 3:08 PM CST up reply actions
Yep...
And to listen to the detractors, that doesn’t matter because we got blown out. But his first TD tied the game, and his second and third TDs brought the Bears back into the game, closing the gap to 13 points with 9 minutes left.
1st TD through double coverage, beat two DBs to tie the game at 7. Doesn’t count though because the Bears got blown out……
2nd TD came in the 4th where Olsen beat SS Adrien Wilson (2 time pro bowl SS:2006 and 2008) for the second time for his second TD.
3rd TD that doesn’t count because Olsen only beat Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie and took a hit from Bryant McFadden to pull the Bears to within 13 points with 9 minutes left in the game.
But, of course, Olsen isn’t any good, so these don’t count.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 4:02 PM CST up reply actions
correct.....
sarcasm doesn’t always express itself well on a keyboard……..my apologies.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions
I tip my hat to you t train
wonderful clips i need to get the clips from the falcons and steelers game up
Falcons game at 3:09 mins
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81385f31/Falcons-21-Bears-14
Olsen makes a nice a catch while two dbs attempt to rip the ball out but they fail because olsen never fumbled this past season and he also scores a td on the next play.
Steelers- olsen takes another shot over the middle and holds on to the ball at 3:20
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81385f31/Falcons-21-Bears-14
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 15, 2010 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions
also at 4:24
While the bears were marching for the go ahead field goal matt forte fumble on the screen pass and who recovered it? yea G-REG
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 15, 2010 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions
Nope....
Couldn’t be Olsen who recovered. He’s to scared of contact…………. ;)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions
Damn i guess the legendary Kellen Davis
must have been the one to do it
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 15, 2010 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions
LOL
the “legendary” Kellen Davis
"If I were a food critic being asked to write about the meal and experience at Waffle House, I would provide a drawing of two happy fat people giving each other a high five."
by BearNecessities on Mar 16, 2010 5:31 AM CDT up reply actions
I tried to find that clip, but it escaped me.......
thanks, bro…..
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 3:06 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh my god... how blind are you?
He’s getting doubled and swallowed in coverage, because he’s not a special player. He can’t get separation from the coverage. He’s NOT GETTING OPEN!> The ball was being forced to him in coverage by Cutler, and he caught 55% of them. Yay.
Do you guys only watch Chicago Bear football, and no other team? Have you ever seen Antoino Gates, or Dallas Clark, or Jason Witten play football for more than 2 minutes? These guys are getting doubled all the time, and still getting wide open and making huge plays and racking up huge yards with the same amount of targets (over 100 targets a year) as Olsen had last year (108).
Antonio Gates (79 catches, 114 targets, 1157 yards, 8 TDs) had 453 YAC! He produced 74% of Olsen’s total yardage… after the friggin catch! And he’s getting doubled every game.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Gates also wasn't the primary receiving threat....
Are you blind? Why is it that all 13 DCs the Bears faced this year felt that Olsen was the player on the team that warranted double coverage, but you somehow see Olsen as inadaquate? Was Gates the primary receiving threat on his team? Was there no other respected receivers? Oh, wait. Vincent Jackson plays there, doesn’t he? So DCs had to account for a respected receiver? Meanwhile, Gates still dropped more passes than Olsen (7 to Olsen’s 2, or 3.5 times the drops), not to mention ranked 15 spots below Olsen in run blocking. Your also ignoring the differences between Norv and Ron’s playcalling, and SD and Chicago’s offensive lines.
And again, I already posted video endlessly of Olsen beating double coverage while scoring his 8 TDs and setting up other scores. You arguments are ludicrous, shortsighted and full of hyperbole. In other words, you don’t want to debate, you want to argue. I’m not up for that, so I’m done……
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 14, 2010 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions
Additionally, nobody here is claiming that Olsen is in the same league as Antonio Gates...
Nobody in the game is in the same league with AG. But claiming that we should trade a player because he’s not as good as AG means that 31 Teams in the NFL share the same problem…….
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 14, 2010 11:54 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm trying to illustrate that Greg Olsen isn;t a special player
And therefore… nobody around here should have sort of special attachment to him.
Gates was the Chargers leading receiver for 4 consecutive years… they didn’t have any other reliable receiving options, yet he killed double teams every week en route to his ProBowls. Well… Olsen’s getting doubled in Chicago last year for a similar reason: lack of receiving options. But, he didn’t accomplish anything on par with what special players do. He’s a league average TE, which means he’s very replaceable.
"You win because of the quarterback. We have to get that position stabilized. We're fixated on that." -- Jerry Angelo (12.30.2008)
Jerry Angelo trades for Jay Cutler! (4.2.2009)
.
Except that one guy who name escapes me...
Oh yeah Ladainian Tomlinson
Adrian Pedestrian!! Now that's funny Mr. Bayless...
Gates didn't have any pther reliable receiving options on his team? Really....
Because I think that Vincent Jackson, who actually led the Chargers (the leagues top offense) in receiving yardage, would disagree. I think that Malcolm Floyd, who had more receiving yardage than anyone on our squad, would probably also disagree. You wouldn’t trade Hester and Bennett for Vincent and Floyd?
Olsen was top 10 in the league, Led is team in receptions, TDs, had 0 lost fumbles, had only 2 drops, drew double coverage that allowed the young receivers to get open, improved in his blocking and was the best offensive weapon on the team….
Again I will note that Olsen was receiving the ball in a Ron Turner, not a Norv Turner, offense. And you don’t seem to understand the difference……
Name one other player on the Chicago offense that was in the top 10 players for his position. Just one…….
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions
UMMMM...
He’s getting doubled and swallowed in coverage, because he’s not a special player.
No, hes getting doubled and swallowed because no one else on the bears is a legitamate enough threat to be double covered as well. Olsen always draw the double because he’s the most prolific passing threat on the offense, and that speaks volumes to how bad our recieving corps is. If we had a true #1 reciever Olsen would probably have less targets but his reception rate would SKYROCKET because the doubles wouldnt be comming his way as often. He’d be much more useful in an offense with a true threat on the outside.
JoeFlah
Hmmm
Doesnt Gates have Vincent Jackson?
Doesnt Dallas Clark have Reggie Wayne?
Doesnt Witten have Miles Austin?
Doesnt T-Gonz have Roddy White?
you catch my drift?
by Bear Lovin 21 on Mar 15, 2010 3:05 PM CDT up reply actions
too soft
if they get a good deal on him buh bye.. plays soft if you ask me.. cant block and cant gain years or shed tacklers after the catch..
Don't forget that he eats puppies.....
If the Bears trade Olsen to the Patriots, you can look back here in two years to see all of these detractors claiming that Angelo was an idiot for trading a weapon like Olsen away…….
Olsen being soft……
Against Detroit, exposing his body to catch a TD…..so soft…..
And against Pittsburgh, holding on, knowing the big hit is coming……incredibly soft……
People start saying these things as if they are fact, and then others start to follow. It’s silly, really. Is Olsen the best in the game? Not yet. But if you listen to the sheople, he is absolutely without worth. But he stacks up well against almost every TE in the game, and that’s stats alone, which completely ignores the fact that much of what Olsen does is through double coverage.
If the Bears trade Olsen, Those young receivers are going to see a lot more doubles, and those who paid no attention will suddenly wonder why the DA of ’09 was missing in ’10, or why Hester can never get open, and what happened to Knox. Ignoring all that Olsen brings to the table is short-sighted and will leave all these detractors scrambling to say that they knew trading Olsen was a bad idea.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 13, 2010 8:40 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Maybe Olsen thrives in Martz's system, or
maybe he does not. To date Olsen has shown flashes of 1st round ability but he has not been so good that he is untradeable. I am not saying dump him, but if they get a good offer for him, they should consider it.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 14, 2010 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions
You and I see eye to eye, here....
NOBODY is untradeable, IMHO. If a good offer came up, I’m all for it. But I don’t believe that Olsen will garner a pick that actually stands a good chance of giving the Bears equal value.
Olsen is a young talent that is a known quantity. Like him or not, he was a top ten TE in the league last year, and the Beas most productive receiver. Will Chicago get a player out of the late second or later that will translate into a top 10 at his position and be the teams top producer? Not likely. Add to that the fact that it’s Jerry Angelo making the pick, and your chances drop further.
Combining that thought with the idea that Martz is very good at utilizing the weapons that he is given, and I’d rather stick with Olsen this year than taking the chance that the newest member of Jerry’s Kids outperforms recent history.
That being said, If a team, say the Patriots, wanted to offer up a ridiculous offer, like a first round pick, I wouldn’t hesitate. Maybe even that nifty little 44th overall in the second if someone really good dropped that far and the offer was on the table. I just don’t want to see Olsen traded for the sake of trading for picks. In case anyone has forgotten, Jerry’s Kids haven’t been anything to brag about in quite a while. And that is to include Olsen, who I was furious about when the Bears took him with a first round pick. TE in the first round who’s not named Antonio Gates? What the hell were they thinking?!
But I digress. All of that was a long winded explanation of why I agree with you. I really need to learn how to type shorter replies, lol :)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 14, 2010 11:50 AM CDT up reply actions
No, we don't actually
IMO you overate Olsen, quite a bit actually.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 14, 2010 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Led the team in.....
Receptions and TDs while being double covered. Was the only offensive bear rated in the top 10 of his position.
IMO you under-rate Olsen, quite a bit, actually. Yet you jump to the defense of the leagues bottom rated rusher. What a joke. I think you just like to argue with me.
The point you made was that Olsen wasn’t untradeable. I agreed. Did it both you that we agreed? :)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions
What a joke. I think you just like to argue with me.
Sorry to inform you Train, but I don’t care enough about what you post most of the time to even bother responding.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 15, 2010 1:18 PM CDT up reply actions
yet you continue to do so.....
There’s the real joke, hero.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
hmmm
You are the stat geek, so do tell, what percentage of your posts do I respond to? You will find I do not respond to most of them because I don’t care enough about what you post to respond to it. Them’s the facts.
The real question is why are you so insecure, Train. You are one of the better posters here, yet you get apoplectic when someone disagrees with you. Get a grip.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 15, 2010 3:49 PM CDT up reply actions
Says the guy who doesn't care enough to respond.....
yet continues to respond. lol.
Look. Why is it that if you disagree the other guy is wrong, but if the other guy disagrees, the other guy is wrong? And I have the security problem? You couldn’t even take me agreeing with you, lmao. I am gripping firmly. But me thinks yours has slipped.
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 4:00 PM CDT up reply actions
LOL
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 15, 2010 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Nah.....
We’re just having a little fun with each other…..
Look below, and you’ll see it. ‘red and I argue, but it’s the way brothers bicker. In the end, we’ll bothbe cheering at our screens on sundays, assuming the bears are winning, or throwing beer bottles at our screens and cursing Lovie Smith’s mother for birthing him if they lose. ‘red is fun. I’d take ‘im to Lambeau with me any day. Back to back. we’d tear them cheeseheads up ;)
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 6:52 PM CDT up reply actions
People are ignorning the reality:
We just signed a new #1 Tight End to a contract that is paying him $6M in 2010. When we go with a TE, he will be the most frequent starter.
We also just signed a second running back to a hefy $7M guranteed contract. His role, when not running the ball, will be as an outlet receiver, primary receiver and blocker. This is what Martz does with his running backs—they take the place of the Receiving Tight Ends.
Martz will be running 3 WR sets most of the time and 4 wide receiver sets some of the time. In all of those sets and with our relatively weak O line and either Forte or Taylor in the backfield, you can expect our new $6M Tight End to get most of the action.
All of this means that whether Olsen is really good (he’s not “elite,” let’s agree on that) or not, is kind of irrelevant because he simply won’t be getting that much action.
And if the Bears have success with this offense you can expect more of the same in 2011. After that Olsen will be gone.
So, the issue is not whether Olsen is really good or not. The issue is do you believe the Bears will fail and clean house next season because then and only then does it make sense to keep him around.
And remember:
This thread is about us trading Olsen for one of the Pats 2nd round picks. They have 3 between 43 and 50 IIRC so that is is the debate right now.
Gaines Adams trade
What did we learn from the Gaines Adams trade about how Jerry Angelo works? Gaines Adams, former first round pick, was traded for a 2nd round pick. Why? Because he was still a young player with 1st round ability that the Bears’ thought he could reach potential. I don’t think JA is going to give up on Olsen, also a 1st round pick, in return for a 3rd or 4th for the same reasons.
Also, the Patriots are not desperate enough for a TE to give up any 2nd round pick.
If they do trade Olsen for a pick and he becomes a top 5 or 3 Tightend in the NFL.
And we are still average I will be pissed and I know a lot of fans will be pissed as well, even the haters.
The haters will be running to the board to claim that they knew it was the wrong choice all along.......
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions
and if he does not amount to anything
do you also predict Olsen-apologists like you will claim they knew he was overrated all along?
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 15, 2010 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions
I knew you were...
a closet hater. You tried pretending differently.
Hey, wait. I thought you weren’t responding to me? Silly Forte apologist…..
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions
See? You do care ♥♥♥♥♥
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Kind of funny how often you respond to your own posts
kind of sad, too.
I always turn to the sports section first. The sports page records people's accomplishments; the front page has nothing but man's failures.
~Earl Warren
by lookingdeadred on Mar 15, 2010 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions
♪♫♪♫Can you feel the ♥ tonight?♫♪♫♪
Kinda sad how you keep posting this kind of silly deflection. Never works though. Admit it. You ♥ me……
com’on now ♪♫♪Kumbaya, my Lord, kumbaya♪♫♪…..everybody……♫♪♫oh Lord, kumbaya♪♫♪
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Angelo's toys
I don’t see the situation arising – Pats are too smart to unload a 2nd rounder for Olsen, and Lovie/Martz/Angelo need a playoff berth this season or else. Doesn’t make sense to trade a guy that may be a square peg in Martz’s madness when their butts are on the line for this season. Even if the Pats were willing, Bears should keep Olsen for this year to see if things can work out. We shouldn’t trade quality pieces ‘til we’re really starting over.
Joe the Boss
well...
i wish we could snag Eric Berry i compared him to Taylor Mays. Berry is more of a ballhawk and reminds me of a younger Mike Brown.
don't we all.........
in•san•i•ty \in-ˈsa-nə-tē\ noun
1 : The act of doing the same thing over and over again while expecting different results.
by Timothy Hockemeyer on Mar 15, 2010 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions
I'd love to have either of 'em on our team
"If I were a food critic being asked to write about the meal and experience at Waffle House, I would provide a drawing of two happy fat people giving each other a high five."
by BearNecessities on Mar 15, 2010 12:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on Windy City Gridiron
Related FanShots on Windy City Gridiron
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Brandon Jacobs tells Gisele Bundchen to ‘shut up’
- Most disliked athlete? America still hasn’t forgiven Michael Vick
- Is Eli a Hall-of-Famer? Not according to Kurt Warner, he isn’t
- Tiquan Underwood, cut on Super Bowl eve, is a Patriot again
- Woman at Giants Super Bowl parade can’t wait to see Mark Sanchez (video)
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
