The Myth of the "Myth of the Great Bears Defense" and Things of a Footbally Nature.

Welcome to the Another NFC Norris Division Blog.

Though unrivaled lardass Chris Berman came up with the NFC Norris moniker, it's a catchy name and it's stuck so we're going to stick with it too. We mainly focus conversation on the actual NFL teams in the NFC North (Bears, Packers, and Vikings), but anything NFL related or really anything at all you want to talk about is fine. We/I also will talk about the 49ers because we fucking well feel like it (dying laughing). There's going to be a statistical slant to this site so make sure you know the difference between facts and opinions =P. Swear, get angry, whatever, but keep it in good taste and try to stay sane.



Anyways onto the post.

Over the off-season I've been hearing differing thoughts on the Bears defense. There's been no actual clash with regards to these arguments, but two different sides seem to exist. There are many at ESPN/NBC/CBS/etc. that just fall back on the Bears having a good defense without any support. Then there are those who claim the Bears have a bad defense based on unweighted statistics or just subjective analysis. Like here, here, here, and some of the opinions here.

The issue with the majority on each side is the lack of objectivity and context in their analysis. The Bears defense is not a dominant defense, nor a below average defense. It is an above average defense. Here's why.

Secondary:
If you look at the Bears much maligned secondary using Football Outsiders data, you see the secondary wasn't that big of a problem. Looking at unweighted statistics, concluding the bears secondary sucked is very reasonable. They were 30th in the NFL allowing 241 passing yards per game. The unadjusted rate statistics and weighted statistics tell a different story.
From Shawn Goldman on Windy City Gridiron

Now, if you look at the numbers they had against different types of receivers, they actually did quite well. They did better than average against #1 WR's, #2 WR's, "other WR's" (i.e. 3/4/5), and TE's. They only were worse than average against RB's (where they were pretty bad). This may lead you to ask how they were below average against the pass, if they were good against everything but RB's, who don't get many passes thrown their way. The answer is simple, and right on the page those numbers come from: DVOA of defense against receivers does not include sacks or passes with no intended receiver listed. To put it another way, the problem was the Bears simply allowed too many passing plays to turn into pass attempts; they didn't get enough sacks. The numbers also bear this out as the Bears were horrendous at rushing the passer. They had a sack rate of, 5%, which was 6th worst rate in the league. This was the case despite the Bears high blitz rate. This blitzing was also probably part of the reason the RB was successful catching passes out of the backfield, as it was often the OLB's blitzing, who would otherwise be responsible for wrapping up the RB after the catch.

The 2008 Chicago Bears were 8th in Yrds/Att with a 6.6 yrd/att and 10th in Passing defensive DVOA (Defense-adjusted value over average) with 1.6% value over average (for defense, the more negative the DVOA the better). So while they weren't the greatest against the pass, they weren't bad. Why weren't they better? The pass rush sucked hard, not the secondary.

If Tillman and Bowman are healthy they'll be good at the corners. Losing brown sucks, but he was pretty much done anyways. Brown was a sure tackler and excellent against the run, but he didn't have the coverage skills he used to have. Nonetheless he still could prevent the deepball. Kevin Payne, Al Afalava, and Craig Steltz provide great depth and upside at SS, but their is nothing and I mean nothing at FS. They have Daniel Manning and that's it. The last good FS the Bears had was Mike Green and even he wasn't that great.

The Linebackers:
No one is disputing this is a good group of linebackers. Lance Briggs, Brian Urlacher, and Pisa Tinoisamoa are a good group. I don't have access to the linebacking statistics, but Urlacher and Briggs have made this linebacking core one of the elite since they started playing together. The addition of Tinoisamoa only makes this better. He's going to be worse against the run than Hillenmeyer, but probably much better against the pass and that's where they need to make their improvement (I don't know how good he'll be on the blitz).

The Line:
This line was great at stopping the run and they were the best in the league in stuffs. The Bears had a 28% stuff rate and a 3.28 Adj. Line Yards (2nd in the league). Harris, Adams, Idonije, and co were stout up the middle and Anderson, Ogunleye, Brown, Idonije, etc were fantastic on the outside (#1 on runs to the ends on both sides) though this is likely due in part to the great linebacking core. This team (as Shawn mentioned) was 6th worst in sack rate at 5%. They just did not get to the QB and it would be nice if that would change.


Overall this defense was 7th best in league in 2008. The defense, returning most of the starters with improvement at some spots, should be a top ten defense at worst and a top 5 defense at best. With the improvement from the offense, I share the general sense of optimism regarding the 2009 Chicago Bears.

So to Rick Morrisey, Chill the fuck out!