Expanded roles: Ron Turner vowed Wednesday to get receiver Devin Hester and rookie running back Garrett Wolfe more involved in Sunday’s game against the Chiefs. Hester was on the field for one snap and Wolfe didn't play at all versus the Chargers.
“It was kind of the way the game was going,” said the Bears offensive coordinator. “We never got into any kind of a rhythm offensively. When you get some first downs and you get moving, there are some things you want to do—some things you set up—[and] we were never able to do that.
“We will get both of those guys involved this week. We definitely have a plan. We will definitely get Devin involved early and hopefully Garrett as well.”
http://www.chicagobears.com/news/NewsSto...ry_id=3815
i dont understand what opportunity is better to get garrett in than on 3rd and long, which the bears had a lot of.
although i heard the same thing on the radio this morning so hopefully they add some potential explosiveness to the offense besides berrian
and why (not us, but Turner) transmit this info to the KC chiefs so they can at least account for these players in the gameplan? just keep it hush hush!
I heard an interview with Daniel Manning on the radio yesterday. Wolfe has been LT and LJ in practice the last two weeks.
cause ron and norv turner both suck
dynovinyl Wrote:I heard an interview with Daniel Manning on the radio yesterday. Wolfe has been LT and LJ in practice the last two weeks.
he definitely makes for a good LT clone...but LJ? I don't see GW running over and high stepping through people very often haha
huskiealum03 Wrote:and why (not us, but Turner) transmit this info to the KC chiefs so they can at least account for these players in the gameplan? just keep it hush hush!
+1
They better use them as decoys a little at first because now they are gonig to be keying on them when they enter the game. How about a WR screen to Hester and then he hits Berrian on the post deep.
tubaguy21 Wrote:huskiealum03 Wrote:and why (not us, but Turner) transmit this info to the KC chiefs so they can at least account for these players in the gameplan? just keep it hush hush!
+1
They better use them as decoys a little at first because now they are gonig to be keying on them when they enter the game. How about a WR screen to Hester and then he hits Berrian on the post deep.
Chances are, it'll be pretty obvious a WR screen would be pretty predictable when Hester enters the game. I really doubt that he'd have enough time to be able to throw the ball to Berrian. And can Hester even throw a football?
And yeah, Ron Turner is an idiot.
huskiealum03 Wrote:and why (not us, but Turner) transmit this info to the KC chiefs so they can at least account for these players in the gameplan? just keep it hush hush!
NFL coaching staffs aren't stupid. With the amount of time put into scouting, and the plethora of readily available information via a variety of different sources, it's virtually impossible to surprise an NFL team anymore.
The only reason an NFL team puts either Garrett Wolfe or Devin Hester on the field is to get the ball in their hands. They're not out there to block or look pretty. I know that. You know that. The Bears know that. The rest of the NFL knows that.
Wolfe and Hester were accounted for in the Chiefs defensive gameplan (probably on a small scale) a long time ago. It's not as if saying "Hey, these guys will actually play this week" is divulging information, IMO, that in any way will aid the Chiefs in their ability to gameplan or make play calls on defense.
If Turner had said how he planned to use them, ok, but he basically simply said that they'd both play more than they did last week. That's really not saying much, considering they were on the field for 1 play between the 2 of them.
UIHuskie Wrote:NFL coaching staffs aren't stupid. With the amount of time put into scouting, and the plethora of readily available information via a variety of different sources, it's virtually impossible to surprise an NFL team anymore.
The only reason an NFL team puts either Garrett Wolfe or Devin Hester on the field is to get the ball in their hands. They're not out there to block or look pretty. I know that. You know that. The Bears know that. The rest of the NFL knows that.
Wolfe and Hester were accounted for in the Chiefs defensive gameplan (probably on a small scale) a long time ago. It's not as if saying "Hey, these guys will actually play this week" is divulging information, IMO, that in any way will aid the Chiefs in their ability to gameplan or make play calls on defense.
If Turner had said how he planned to use them, ok, but he basically simply said that they'd both play more than they did last week. That's really not saying much, considering they were on the field for 1 play between the 2 of them.
sadly, ron turner is still an idiot
armour248 Wrote:UIHuskie Wrote:NFL coaching staffs aren't stupid. With the amount of time put into scouting, and the plethora of readily available information via a variety of different sources, it's virtually impossible to surprise an NFL team anymore.
The only reason an NFL team puts either Garrett Wolfe or Devin Hester on the field is to get the ball in their hands. They're not out there to block or look pretty. I know that. You know that. The Bears know that. The rest of the NFL knows that.
Wolfe and Hester were accounted for in the Chiefs defensive gameplan (probably on a small scale) a long time ago. It's not as if saying "Hey, these guys will actually play this week" is divulging information, IMO, that in any way will aid the Chiefs in their ability to gameplan or make play calls on defense.
If Turner had said how he planned to use them, ok, but he basically simply said that they'd both play more than they did last week. That's really not saying much, considering they were on the field for 1 play between the 2 of them.
sadly, ron turner is still an idiot
We'll agree to disagree.
armour248 Wrote:i dont understand what opportunity is better to get garrett in than on 3rd and long, which the bears had a lot of.
although i heard the same thing on the radio this morning so hopefully they add some potential explosiveness to the offense besides berrian
+1
It was obvious that pounding the ball up the middle wasn't working and you needed to get the ball past the line of scrimmage with a short dump off pass, or a play to the sidelines with a guy that can beat the defender 1-on-1 to pick up some yards and maybe a first down, which they had very few of. So yeah, that was a perfect opportunity for Wolfe, and they blew it. Also, Wolfe is probably more capable of getting a big gain out of it, and that's the only chance the Bears had of getting in field goal range even, since they were unable to march the ball down the field methodically.
Ron Turner (born December 5, 1953 in Martinez, California) has had two separate stints as the offensive coordinator of the Chicago Bears, the first from 1993-1996, and the current one beginning in 2005.
In the interim, Turner spent eight years as head coach at the University of Illinois. His overall record at Illinois was 35 wins and 57 losses, for a winning percentage of .380
Now, Chicago Bears offensive stats under Ron Turner...
1993 - 28th of 28 in YPG at 232. 14.6 PPG.
1994 - 23/28 at 292.4 YPG. 16.9 PPG
1995 - 9/28 at 354.6 YPG. 24.5 PPG
1996 - 21/30 at 306.6 YPG. 17.7 PPG
2005 - 29/32 at 256.3 YPG. 16.2 PPG
Take it for what it's worth I guess...I just don't see much success besides 1995.
Wolfe quote in the Trib
Quote:Wolfe: "I didn't ask them the reason why. Everybody goes through it. I don't take it personally. It was a close game. That's just the way things go some times. I don't ask, I just do what I'm asked to do and go from there."
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/...-headlines
armour248 Wrote:Ron Turner (born December 5, 1953 in Martinez, California) has had two separate stints as the offensive coordinator of the Chicago Bears, the first from 1993-1996, and the current one beginning in 2005.
In the interim, Turner spent eight years as head coach at the University of Illinois. His overall record at Illinois was 35 wins and 57 losses, for a winning percentage of .380
Now, Chicago Bears offensive stats under Ron Turner...
1993 - 28th of 28 in YPG at 232. 14.6 PPG.
1994 - 23/28 at 292.4 YPG. 16.9 PPG
1995 - 9/28 at 354.6 YPG. 24.5 PPG
1996 - 21/30 at 306.6 YPG. 17.7 PPG
2005 - 29/32 at 256.3 YPG. 16.2 PPG
Take it for what it's worth I guess...I just don't see much success besides 1995.
I wasn't trying to imply that he's a terrific OC or a genius, but given the fact that people in the NFL who know a lot more about football than anybody on this board seem to think highly of Turner, I would assume he's not an idiot. He's worked in the NFL in positions other than OC and been successful, so he does have a strong NFL background. His college offenses (when he had talent), were very good.
I checked 2006 numbers and the Bears, with a schizo at QB, finished in the middle of the pack in yardage and 2nd in points scored. Keep in mind, his time as an OC with the Bears hasn't exactly been blessed with elite QBs.
Are there better OC's? Yeah, sure. Are there worse? Of course.
I guess I just haven't seen anything that would lead me to believe he's an idiot in the football sense. He's made thousands and thousands of playcalls at various levels, chances are at this point in his career there are quite a few that he would like to take back.
im sure he's not an idiot but he doesn't seem like a genius at OC.
he's more of an idiot in the way I call the president an idiot...wait, he is an idiot...um, more like the way i say kobe bryant sucks
I like Ron Turner as the Bears OC. When he left Illinois, I was hoping he'd come back to the Bears.
If you're calling Turner an idiot, I'd hate to hear what you have to say about John Shoop.
Ummm, please don't refer to our commander in cheif as an idiot. He's doing something better than you.
