Been playing around with the heat map charting functionality that I just built so I thought this would be a useful exercise. There seems to be a perception that Detroit really fell off a cliff. When you get into the nitty gritty what does the data say. For ease of digestion/understanding I made everything leage wide rank.
Detroit had too many busted run plays. Youth and lack of cohesion caused missed assignments which cascaded into less ideal 3rd down circumstances than we were accustomed to. Probably caused sack rate to tick up a bit as well due to more obvious passing situations. Become more consistent running the football moderately well play in and play out and we should return to the elite of the elite on offense.
Minnesota is the class of the defense but we weren’t as bad as we perceived. I imagine the numbers tailed off quite a bit. I need to add the by week scrubber to teams and then I can look into that. I also should look into year over year run defense. Need to figure out the least confusing way to load up multiple years on the same chart and have it make sense to the viewer/user. Run defense rebounding to 2023 levels could really allow our D to surprise. Stops early downs, 3rd and long and lean on the DL. That should be the MO. Oh and Flores is a witch!
Another reason for optimisim and a I prime reason to expect Chicago regression. TOs are fluky. variance should be expected. Though losing Kerby no doubt hurt(s) as well. We were 9th in Takeaway rank in 2024.
The old timey analysis. Given the unpredictability of TOs the only real correction i once again the run game. And I think the brain trust gets that. That sure did seem to be the primary focus both in terms of coordinator selection and our resource allocation in the offseason.
To me it sure looks like when you peel away layers of the onion the 2025 Detroit Lions were clearly the class of the division. We were just profoundly sloppy and lacking in an area (run game dominance) in which we had probably become overly reliant on in terms of strategy and tactics to win football games. Either we have to get better in that facet or at new ways to solve high leverage problems. Preferably both.
I tend to agree, but there does seem to be something in the water in Chicagoland… they’ve had a number of teams in the last 25 years that were successful by dominating the TO battle, especially on the defensive side.
Intellectually, I agree that this should regress to the norm. Emotionally, it feels like the Bears as an org have some mojo there. If it means they remain cursed with shit quarterbacking, I’m fine with that.
This is why I keep saying the OL scares me the most. Our entire team is built off of controlling the LOS on offense. Our defense I believe will be better, but it’s not the 2000 Ravens defense. They need the offense to score points. The offense can’t score points and control the clock without a run game. Even as good as Gibbs is, the guy needs blocking. Goff needs blocking to get the ball out to the WR’s. Interior pressure is the worst kind of pressure you can have, and right now we’ve got some real concerns with C-LG. We saw what those concerns turned into last year.
I don’t really think that’s it. It’s more so don’t blow assignments and call and scheme the run game better. The first is more up in the air but I’m pretty confident that Drew addresses that latter.
That’s what everyone thought after Nagy’s first year too, remember. I think Ben is a far better coach, but their defense is really, really bad, and as injured as ours in the secondary. And Swift is still their best RB now that Monangai is hurt. It just feels to me like their personnel gives them a ceiling they won’t overcome without a lot of fluky breaks again.
We absolutely need to run the ball well to win. The last 6 games last year Gibbs averaged 3 yards per carry. No surprise we lost 4 of those 6 games. The run game sets everything up. And Goff is deadly off play action.
Gibbs rushed for 80 or more yards 6 times, 3 times over 100. We won all 6 of those games. If he didn’t hit 80 yards rushing we were 3 and 8.
I don’t think it’s this simple but it’s not a bad thing that we are going from starting the year with a non-intellectual OC to a Middlebury grad that coached at both Harvard and Yale. There is of course not a direct correlation between book smarts and coordinating proficiency but it can’t hurt.
It’s also why we saw such wild swings as Gibbs going off for 200, and then rushing for less than 50. If your defense could pressure our interior, it was game over on offense.
I get this angle. One thing about intellectuals, they look for ways to solve problems. It feeds them. For Morton, he never acknowledged his offensive gameplan wasn’t working. Worse than that, he blamed the players and said it was their fault for not executing. The rumors and whispers were that the offensive guys were basically ready to revolt before Campbell stepped in and took over.
I think Dan likes the way that Ben before, and now Petzing, look through problems and identify different ways to attack things. I think that’s what Dan is referring to when he said that Petzing found creative ways to do a lot with a little. Now he wants to give him a lot, and see what happens next.
My biggest confidence comes from how notoriously excellent and, according to defenses, difficult to play against the running game was at Arizona with worse players than we have. I mean their center was Frojoldt who arrived as a cast-off and got turned into a top ten center in the league. Sure Klayton Adams had a lot to do with that, but even he says it was Petzing’s system, and it was still good after Adams left. Not AS good but that could be down to injuries and terrible game scripts as much as anything else.
You can definitely coach to get more or lose less turnovers.
Over-simplified, it’s like home run vs contact swings in baseball. If you are a less risk adverse coach, you’ll coach sure contact over power swings. Team will hit more but you’ll have less home runs.
Football is the same. Sure tackles versus punchout risks. Known WR separation versus tight-window throws and fighting for extra yards instead of tucking and going down.
I actually like that Dan seems to be really good at coaching both styles on offense and defense!
The ideal scenario is to protect the football and get the sure tackles in the early part of the game and field.
Then get more aggressive in the red zone and when the game is on the line late. If gives you multiple ways to attack and the players can be smart about when to push it. Fundamental early. Explosive late.
Petzing’s success running the ball in Zona was the main reason I was optimistic about the hire.
James Connor for example had back to back career years in 23 and 24 with Petzing calling plays. Averaged 5 yards per carry in 23 and 4.7 in 24. Then was injured last year.
But, then you look at turnover numbers throughout history and it’s pretty clear they’re not very sticky year over year. I think what coaching this way gets you is the spike years, but it doesn’t mitigate for when the breaks don’t go your way very well either.
Agreed. When he first hit there he was all the rage for the complexity and creativity of their run game. Now a lot of that shine has been shifted on to Klayton Adams, but I’m just not sure that’s deserved. Not to current levels anyway.
One thing about 2025 AZ to 2024 AZ aside from Adams is the impact Kyler has on defending the power run. It’s one reason why Mason might be in for a big year. You can’t cheat bc he may pull it. Therefore inside zone and the interior gap stuff becomes a bish to defend. Brissett doesn’t bring that.
