Would Burress or Moss be a better fit in Chicago?
The NFL.com analysts answer the question. Which wide receiver -- Moss or Burress -- would be a better fit for coordinator Mike Martz's offense?
Email
PrintComments
Moss seems to be the ...
…. better fit system wise and Martz wise , but Burress seems to be a Cutler fit . So only time will tell which way this goes . Me I’d take either .
" Everyone has a plan 'till they get punched in the mouth. " ~
Mike Tyson
by MidWayMonster54 on Jul 13, 2011 3:10 PM CDT reply actions
100% agree
I would like Santonio Holmes, though he seems unlikely.
"Welcome to the place where I lazily threaten people and then everyone laughs."
- Kev H
by chicago030 on Jul 13, 2011 3:13 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
I would like Sidney Rice over either of them
But Santana Moss would be the better fit as opposed to Burress.
As long as we get a new veteran option into our WR corps not named T.O. or Randy Moss then I’m game.
Jay Cutler is our QB, and I for one am proud of that
by Erik Christopher Duerrwaechter on Jul 13, 2011 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions
I know you like Rice, but...
I would prefer someone with a little more of a history to go off of.
2008: 15 rec. for 141 yards and 4 TD’s
2009: 83 rec. for 1312 yards and 8 TD’s
2010: 17 rec. for 280 yards and 2 TD’s.
Yes, he was injured in 2010. But I would rather someone with a more reliable background.
by I Have Bearsititis on Jul 13, 2011 4:13 PM CDT up reply actions
But also consider the following
Before 2009 he didn’t have a reliable QB then when a QB who could give him the opportunities to make plays arrived then he showed everyone exactly what he can do.
Jay Cutler is our QB, and I for one am proud of that
by Erik Christopher Duerrwaechter on Jul 13, 2011 6:39 PM CDT up reply actions
i don't even think burress is an option whatsoever.
they didn’t want him the last 3 years, they won’t want him now
I'll roll up
C. Moss is teh better fit
But I rather have Holmes, or Rice, or V Jax
"I see PRIDE, I see POWER, I see a BADASS MOTHA WHO WON'T TAKE NO CRAP OFF NOBODY!"
I grow tired of the "fit for the system" argument.
If there is a great player out there that is not a good fit for your system, alter your flippin’ system a little to accentuate that player’s skill set.
Note: I’m not saying Burress is or will be great, but the same “not a good fit” issue has been said about Asomaghu and our defense scheme.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
I totally agree
with the “fit the system” thing. You’d think true players can fit any system. Maybe you can use that argument with qbs.
I totally disagree
If your entire system revolves around having a certain type of player at specific positions, then it’s a waste of money chasing players who do well in other systems to put into yours when you won’t know how to use them effectively. When you think about it, the entire point of a system is to get more out of the sum of the parts, and often it allows you to not need All-Pro caliber talent in some positions and still be very effective.
This is the same reason Chicago shouldn’t waste money on shutdown corners, but grant mega-contracts to middle linebackers and defensive linemen that are essential to making the system work. That’s why I had no complaints whatsoever with the cash dump on Peppers.
Thank you
Sorry to the statement makers but a great player will play great in most any system. Anyone willing to turn down Asomugha, Fitzgerald, et al due to “system fit” is just ridiculous.
I understand HeroPsycho’s ideaology about overpaying but any coach who cannot effectively use top tier talent to improve their system or tweek it has some serious problems. Anyone seriously think Asomugha wouldn’t be a beast in the Bears system? Shut down one side of the field and the Cover 2 base becomes scary. Granted, should they go pay record breaking contract prices for this option? Probably not but the argument still is not valid on the “system” alone.
Let me turn the tables on you
But great talent at CB in coverage alone isn’t what the Bears need at CB. If the CB in question can’t tackle, I don’t care how well he covers one on one – CBs in Cover 2 must tackle well. The system itself doesn’t require a great coverage man, but it does require a good tackler.
That’s why I don’t want them signing a Cromartie, I don’t care how well he covers.
Same thing in this case about WRs. Martzfence is timing based. How do you think it’s gonna work to get a WR who is big, physical, etc. who doesn’t run precise routes due to how he plays with a QB in the system that’s getting drilled to let the ball go, throw to a particular spot, when the defense reacts a particular way systemically? If the receiver doesn’t go to that spot because they’re adjusting to the defender to use their size and what as an advantage, that’s not gonna work. Cutler or any other QB in that system can’t flip the switch off to play catch with a big WR when Martz is screaming at him day in and out to do otherwise.
You need good route runners who get to specific spots first and foremost. If we can find a big physical receiver who can still do that, I’m all for it, but those kinds of guys be definition don’t typically make plays by running flawless routes. When do you ever remember a successful Martz offense with a WR like a Braylon Edwards, who never was known to be precise with his routes.
There are in fact good or even great players who won’t be even good in a system that doesn’t fit. Let me know how good Warren Sapp or Tommie Harris in his prime would have been as defensive ends or NT in a 3-4. They’re smaller, faster DTs that disrupt, but 3-4 dlinemen who try to disrupt by often over-aggressive penetration will likely do more harm than good. Bad fit.
by HeroPsycho on Jul 14, 2011 2:31 AM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Just a great post.
Explained so well why the nfl is all about finding the right talent for the system, and I totally agree. Most fans have difficulty seeing the difference in offensive systems, but there is no denying the difference between a 3-4 and a 4-3 defense. You think Vince Wilfork could do what would be asked of him in a 4-3 look and penetrate the gap? Nope.
by ChiLobo#23 on Jul 14, 2011 9:01 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Actually
Wilfork was a good penetrater coming out of college. There was a debate on what DT the Bears would pick in the ’04 draft.
"Our ideas held no water but we used them like a dam" - Modest Mouse
Like I've said
Burress would have been a great fit for us if we still had Ron Turner as our OC with his west coast offense. Thats not anywhere close to being the case anymore.
Well done
Jay Cutler is our QB, and I for one am proud of that
by Erik Christopher Duerrwaechter on Jul 14, 2011 9:37 AM CDT up reply actions
While true to a point,
it’s not an either/or situation.
Asomaghu and Cromartie may be “shut down” corners, but that doesn’t mean that neither lack the ability to tackle. And in fact, the Bears have played more C3 than they have C2 in recent years. Having a dominant corner in those zone coverages would be a huge advantage.
The same logic applies to Burress. His ability to out jump defenders does not mean that he has never been able to run a good route. If utilized correctly, he can still be quite effective in our system.
And the Burress situation =/= Sapp/Harris one. A 4-3 to 3-4 is more than a scheme switch for a DT, it’s a completely new position. In the Martzfense, Burress will still be a WR, running routes, catching the ball.
No one’s asking Martz to trash his system. However, coaches can alter their systems slightly to help the personal that they do have succeed. If a dominating player comes available, you cannot blanket the response with “he doesn’t fit the system”.
Hell, I’m not even sure I want Plaxico on the team. I just don’t believe that he would be completely unsuccessful in our system, especially if it were altered slightly to fit his strengths.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
by David Taylor on Jul 14, 2011 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don't fit the system
but WCG has managed to adjust nicely.
Above all; keep 'em guessing, never let them lose their sense of confusion.
by Just Dave on Jul 14, 2011 11:57 AM CDT up reply actions 4 recs
I'm right there with you.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
by David Taylor on Jul 14, 2011 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions
And a rec for you
Jay Cutler is our QB, and I for one am proud of that
by Erik Christopher Duerrwaechter on Jul 14, 2011 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions
Okay, I snickered.
You get your green.
Weekend contributor at Windy City Gridiron
by Steven Schweickert on Jul 14, 2011 2:14 PM CDT up reply actions
You write for free.
Believe me. You fit the system.
"More cowbell" - Bruce Dickinson; "More bell cow" - Lovie Smith
F*** the System!
(/System of a Down)
Weekend contributor at Windy City Gridiron
by Steven Schweickert on Jul 14, 2011 3:11 PM CDT up reply actions
F*** TRENT DILFER!
;)
Jay Cutler is our QB, and I for one am proud of that
by Erik Christopher Duerrwaechter on Jul 14, 2011 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
So this meme gets rec'd again
but a classic SOAD reference gets nothing? Not even a golf clap?
Weekend contributor at Windy City Gridiron
by Steven Schweickert on Jul 15, 2011 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions
Ditka?!?
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
by David Taylor on Jul 15, 2011 3:19 PM CDT up reply actions
system fitter
If you go in the bathroom, turn off the lights, and say "Da Coach" 5 times while facing the mirror... Ditka will appear and slap the wussy right out of you.
by Lester A. Wiltfong Jr. on Jul 14, 2011 4:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Here's what Martz is on record saying about WRs...
"Size doesn’t make any difference," Martz told the Associated Press. "It makes absolutely no difference. With Matt [Forte] as a runner and our ability to run the ball, we get a lot of one-on-one coverage, and you have to have receivers that can beat corners one on one. And generally, the guys that can change direction and run fast – those are the kinds of guys that you’re looking for. If he’s a big guy that can do all that, that’s a rare find. A lot of times, those guys are more 5-10 guys."
That doesn’t rule out Burress, but he certainly doesn’t seem to be describing a Burress, either. ‘m saying it’s a waste of time to pursue him if you’re the Bears. Go get Santonio Holmes, Santana Moss, Steve Smith, etc.
And one last point – I’d even understand if a player like Burress is already on the team. Totally understand figuring out how to use a player like Olsen. But why go pursue a player who doesn’t fit your system at all. Go get a player that may cost less who does fit your system. Chances are they’d perform better anyway for your team because you don’t need to waste time figuring out how to use them.
by HeroPsycho on Jul 14, 2011 10:27 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I get what you and Martz are trying to portray, I guess.
However, tall receivers have consistently beaten defenders 1v1 throughout the history of the NFL. Watch some of Plaxico’s highlights and you will see some excellently timed routes. Quicks are no the only skill set that allows for that end result.
Concerning Santana Moss… I always find it odd when a player has a “career year,” the season prior to heading into negotiations (see: Haynesworth, Albert).
And do you really believe that Burress, two years removed from the NFL, will cost more than any of the three players you mentioned?
I don’t feel that I’m over simplifying anything. A wide receiver transitioning from Gilbride’s convoluted offensive system to Martz’s offensive system is not going to have as difficult of a time as a 4-3 defensive end standing up and moving off the line in a 3-4 defensive scheme. It’s a completely different position where you change everything about the way you play.
I concede to you that Burress may not be the “perfect” fit for the Martzfense, as is. However, if he is as good as he previously was, it would not be a waste of the Bears’ time to pursue, sign and find a use for him.
Bottom line, we have burners and guys that can cut in Hester and Knox. Is it such a bad thing to go after a little versatility? Sure, a receiver doesn’t have to be tall to fit Martz’s system, but why should he be an automatic “bad fit” if he is?
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
by David Taylor on Jul 15, 2011 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions
You're changing skill sets of the receiver
If a receiver has played pretty much his entire career in the NFL in a system that doesn’t require timing, and they have free range to ad lib, use their body to shield, etc. for position, and then make a play, it’s going to be a difficult position to go to the Martzfence, with a good possibility they may never adjust. It’s not as easy as you’re making it sound.
Again, why take the risk. Get a WR that can do what you need them to do already.
As for Santana Moss, I live in Redskin territory. I assure you he didn’t have a career year this year because he was lazy in others, and now he tried. He’s a good football player, a class act, and would be a good pickup as far as that kind of thing goes. I hate the Redskins, but I like Moss. With that said, he’s likely to resign with them because he’s a class act, wants to stay with the same team.
As to your bottom line, as I mentioned before, I have no problem getting a big receiver so long as he runs good routes and get to the spots on time that the offense necessitates. If you can find a big guy who can, by all means. But as Martz said, “that’s a rare find”, and you’re not gonna find him in free agency. That’s a guy you’d likely have to draft in the first round, or trade a bunch of picks/players to get him. IMO, unless you find him in the draft, it’s not worth all that. Martz will do well enough with our current WR’s on the roster plus a vet like Santana Moss. And Burress ain’t it. Yes, he can run a good route from time to time, but he’s not a diligent worker, is wildly inconsistent with technical aspects of the game, has throughout his career won on physical superiority and ad libs instead of playing technically sound, the dude just screams bad fit. I don’t mean to knock his game, he’s been a very good receiver because he’s been so good at those other things, but he’s a bad fit for us. I simply don’t see any WR in FA that’s got the “diversity” you’re looking for that fits our offense at the same time.
there's the disconnect.
I don’t have as many concerns about Burress fitting this scheme as you do, especially directly coming from where he was last. It’s not as if he’s coming from the Earhardt-Perkins offensive system.
I’m also not as sold on Moss being a “class act” as you are. But then again, I’m on the side of the guy that shoots himself in the leg, so…
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
by David Taylor on Jul 15, 2011 3:15 PM CDT up reply actions
You make excellent points
I think the idea like David said, is to offer a change of pace or different look for defenses. Don’t you think Burress would demand some serious attention from DC every week? I can with almost all certainty say DCs would design their game plan around stopping a guy like Burress. With the exception being Forte, and to a lesser extent Olsen.
Plax has the ability, without the speed that Martz refers to, to make big plays down the field. He’d be an asset in the RZ and on third down.
With that said, I’d rather have Holmes, Vjax, or Rice over him. Just my two cents!
"Our ideas held no water but we used them like a dam" - Modest Mouse
Sorry it takes me so long to post.
I don’t get on as often as I’d like to right meow.
-------
cheekymonkeyart.com | follow me on facebook, twitter and tumblr
by David Taylor on Jul 15, 2011 2:10 PM CDT up reply actions
That's okay
I think your timing was purrfect…
One last point
“And the Burress situation =/= Sapp/Harris one. A 4-3 to 3-4 is more than a scheme switch for a DT, it’s a completely new position. In the Martzfense, Burress will still be a WR, running routes, catching the ball.”
First, I was using an extreme example to illustrate my point, but with that said, you’re oversimplifying the WR position relative to a dlinemen anyway. Different WR’s have different skill sets, just like DE’s have different skill sets. Even in a 4-3, both ends don’t necessarily overpursue a QB or running back, and you often have one DE that’s the pass rusher, and the other more a run stopper/gap plugger, very similar to a DE in a 3-4. Same thing in our defense with the DTs. Adams is a gap plugger, where T. Harris was the 3T that disrupts and penetrates.
But I could oversimplify the whole thing and say “any DT should do well in our scheme, they still will be a dlinemen, who plug gaps and tackle/rush the passer and penetrate”. But we all know there’s more to it than that.
I admire you and the points you bring to this argument. However...
And one last point – I’d even understand if a player like Burress is already on the team.
And then you begin your next post with
One last pointsorta negates the second point completely. Otherwise it would have been your entire point to begin with. Last points are generally just that. The last point. ;)
Above all; keep 'em guessing, never let them lose their sense of confusion.
Moss hands down
Although when Lovie had Tony Dungy visit for a day I wouldn’t be suprised if he asked Tony for his opinion on Burres.
by IndyBearsFan88 on Jul 13, 2011 4:33 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
Would be happy with either, but i prefer Burress.
Moss would be an ideal fit and would most likely make an immediate impact, but I just can’t ignore Plax height at 6-5. He would give this team a whole new element in the passing game.
by Dominique Blanton on Jul 13, 2011 4:50 PM CDT via mobile reply actions
I'd rather have Burress than either Moss
Not playing for two years gives him so serious upside over that competition.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent - Salvor Hardin
Tall is good
I think Burress should be looked at, because he’s tall. Knox and Hester have small and explosive covered, and at a better price. We sorely need more red zone and 3rd down options. That said, I would prefer Sidney Rice to any of these guys (or Braylon if he’s can be had for like 5 mil a season). If we bring in another guy who’s going to be making far more than our other receivers, he needs to be a game-changer. If we can’t bring in that type of receiver, then a bargain who adds a new dimension makes sense. And we can dump silly amounts on fixing our o line.
by Sound_Automatic on Jul 13, 2011 6:23 PM CDT reply actions
I think Burress should be looked at, because he’s tall. … We sorely need more red zone and 3rd down options.
Olsen’s 6’5" and Kellen Davis is 6’7". Martz doesn’t seem to want to use them as part of a red zone package.
Cosmis: JESUS LORD IN HEAVEN DANIEAL MANNING JUST KILLED A MAN
Olsen is always in the red zone package
by Sound_Automatic on Jul 13, 2011 8:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Pleaseeeee no Braylon
He cant catch and hes an idiot. I’ll pass.
"Welcome to the place where I lazily threaten people and then everyone laughs."
- Kev H
by chicago030 on Jul 13, 2011 11:43 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions
Knox and Hester may have small/explosive
…covered, but they aren’t great route runners yet. How many times did we see Knox get knocked off his route last year, especially on quick slants? You just knew Jay would be frustrated cuz he threw to the right spot and Knox got funneled elsewhere by the coverage. I remember 2 picks in particular that happened just this way.
by ChiLobo#23 on Jul 14, 2011 8:33 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
For this reason, I'd love to get a Santana
Moss. Guy’s speedy and a FANTASTIC route runner. Jay’s already gonna have his “go up and get it” guys in Olsen and Bennett.
by ChiLobo#23 on Jul 14, 2011 8:40 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions
In particular order
Rice
Holmes
Vjax
S. Moss
Burress
TO
R. Moss
"Our ideas held no water but we used them like a dam" - Modest Mouse
No Smith South on there?
I’d rather have him than Plax, TO, or Moss. And I’d bump Sid down a few spots until he shows consistency.
Is he unrestricted now?
Based on recent developments he may be a full-fledged FA, but I thought he was under contract still.
"Our ideas held no water but we used them like a dam" - Modest Mouse
Moss I would rather have for many reasons, including how he fits the system
But I wouldn’t be upset if the Bears landed Burress.
Both players would help this team. I feel Moss would be a little sharper, more football ready. Plus coming off a career year, he may be getting a better with age.
If you haven’t taken time to read the thread on this post, that starts with David Tayler (smudgers) saying, I grow tired of the “fit for the system” argument.. It’s a really good read all the way through.
For me, it still doesn’t get better than S. Holmes or a Steve Smith trade.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on Windy City Gridiron
Related FanShots on Windy City Gridiron
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
