Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 45
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,275

    The problem with the “Mike Martz leaving will improve the O-line” defense….

    ….Is that it has a poor track record for working in the past.

    Mike Martz left the Rams mid season in 2005. In 2004, the Rams surrendered 50 sacks. In 2005 (the year Martz was coach for half the year) the rams surrendered 46 sacks. In 2006, the first year after Martz was gone, the rams surrendered 49 sacks.

    Mike Martz left the Lions following the 2007 season. In 2007, the Lions surrendered 54 sacks. In 2008, the first year after Martz left, the Lions surrendered 52 sacks.

    Mike Martz left the 49ers following the 2008 season. In 2008, the 49ers surrendered 55 sacks. In 2009, the 49ers surrendered 40 sacks, a marked improvement. However, closer examination shows that 32 of those sacks came in the first 8 games of the season, when Martz rather stubbornly stuck with J.T. O’sullivan at Qb. For the second 8 games, the 49ers started 2009 starter Shaun Hill, who was sacked only 23 times. Averaged over a full season, he would have been sacked a total of 46 times.


    So, Martz has left three teams. Twice the difference in protection was negligible. The third time, it was debatable. In none of these instances did the team improve to anything that would be considered acceptable or even “average” (average sack rates hover around 29-30).


    Again, I’m not saying that there will be NO effect to getting rid of Martz. I am saying that the track record isn’t really there to support the claim that it is ALL we should have had to do……
    Tall, Dorky, and Ham-handed

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Valparaiso, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    15,762
    I hate you, Chewy.
    Wouldn't it be great if we booted the 200 lawyers from the House and Senate and replaced them with economists? That way, we'd stop harming our economy with laws that would apply to the politicians, too.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    Quote Originally Posted by chewtoy View Post
    Mike Martz left the 49ers following the 2008 season. In 2008, the 49ers surrendered 55 sacks. In 2009, the 49ers surrendered 40 sacks, a marked improvement. However, closer examination shows that 32 of those sacks came in the first 8 games of the season, when Martz rather stubbornly stuck with J.T. O’sullivan at Qb. For the second 8 games, the 49ers started 2009 starter Shaun Hill, who was sacked only 23 times. Averaged over a full season, he would have been sacked a total of 46 times.
    I'm fairly certain Martz was only OC for the first 8 weeks of that season. When Singletary replaced Nolan, he also gave Martz the boot which accounts for the difference between the splits.

    Go Bears!

    J
    Never bet on a Bears coaching decision.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,275
    Quote Originally Posted by steelcitysledge View Post
    I'm fairly certain Martz was only OC for the first 8 weeks of that season. When Singletary replaced Nolan, he also gave Martz the boot which accounts for the difference between the splits.

    Go Bears!

    J
    You could be right. The Wikipedia page wasn't really clear on that. They said Singletary was named Interm Head coach after 8 games, that the interm label was removed after the season, and that Nolan took over when "Singletary was named head coach". I took it to mean "when he was no longer interm coach" but upon re-reading it your explanation would make a lot of sense.

    If that is the case, we would have a 1/3 success rate. The J.T. O'sullivan factor could be conflating the issue slightly, though.
    Tall, Dorky, and Ham-handed

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,453
    All I know is both Backus and Staley had their worst seasons under Martz. Webb's arrow is still pointing up.

    Go Bears!

    J
    Never bet on a Bears coaching decision.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,275
    That can be true and his peak could still be well below average. He's been bad.

    I'm optimistic, but he hasn't performed well enough that I feel he should have made it to camp without any competition.....
    Tall, Dorky, and Ham-handed

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Barrington, IL
    Posts
    2,079
    I think there were major differences between those teams and the Bears. The 2006 Rams didn't change the formula ranking 3rd in passing with nearly 4000 yards and 592 passing attempts. Orlovsky was the Lions top QB with Kitna injured and Culpepper as the only other option. The 49ers gave up 18 sacks (of 40 total) in 6 starts to Shaun Hill.

    Sure, they gave up a bunch of sacks too, but for reasons that don't apply to this Bears team unless Cutler and Campbell both get injured. Tice won't be calling for an average of 37 pass attempts per game either.
    The meaning of Life : 101010

    "And in case of emergency, dial 0118 999 881 999 119 725 3"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    N of Canal, S of Lake
    Posts
    10,426
    I normally dig your "20/20 hindsight; look at the stats; don't account for any other factors" analysis because it can be entertaining.

    I disagree that you can simply say that after Martz left the Rams that their O line didn't improve. Orlando Pace was a shadow of his pro bowl self and couldn't even stay on the field; he only played 9 of the 32 game the two years after Mart left. And I remember many many people saying that he didn't play well enough to even earn that last pro bowl that he was voted in either.

    That is just one factor out of probably over a dozen or more that you simply are overlooking. And while you can ignore extenuating factors in many of your analytical endeavors (success rates of drafts picks from certain slots where talent can outshine poor coaching for example), the answer that you seek concerning the play of the O line is 100% subject to many factors including protection schemes, QB play, play calling, cohesiveness, individual ability, and injuries.
    Odd Facts:

    The human brain is incapable of producing a face. Any face you see when you dream is one that you have physically viewed at some point in your life.

    The Australian aborigine language has over 30 words for “dust.”

    Nearly three percent of the ice in Antarctic glaciers is penguin urine.

    When you see little white or clear dots floating in your vision, they are actually your own white blood cells.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,386
    A guy flips a coin and 9 times in a row it comes up heads. What are his chances that on the 10th flip it will come up heads again?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Barrington, IL
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by Lake Shore Drive View Post
    A guy flips a coin and 9 times in a row it comes up heads. What are his chances that on the 10th flip it will come up heads again?
    50/50
    The meaning of Life : 101010

    "And in case of emergency, dial 0118 999 881 999 119 725 3"

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,386
    Quote Originally Posted by LT2_3 View Post
    50/50
    Give that man a cigar!!

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Harrisburg, Pa
    Posts
    14,535
    Quote Originally Posted by Lake Shore Drive View Post
    A guy flips a coin and 9 times in a row it comes up heads. What are his chances that on the 10th flip it will come up heads again?
    http://www.stat.sc.edu/~west/javahtm...MakeaDeal.html

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,275
    Quote Originally Posted by janos_51 View Post
    I normally dig your "20/20 hindsight; look at the stats; don't account for any other factors" analysis because it can be entertaining.
    Thank you? I can't tell if you really like it or if you are intentionally giving a backhanded compliment. I'm choosing to think the best.

    I disagree that you can simply say that after Martz left the Rams that their O line didn't improve. Orlando Pace was a shadow of his pro bowl self and couldn't even stay on the field; he only played 9 of the 32 game the two years after Mart left. And I remember many many people saying that he didn't play well enough to even earn that last pro bowl that he was voted in either.

    That is just one factor out of probably over a dozen or more that you simply are overlooking. And while you can ignore extenuating factors in many of your analytical endeavors (success rates of drafts picks from certain slots where talent can outshine poor coaching for example), the answer that you seek concerning the play of the O line is 100% subject to many factors including protection schemes, QB play, play calling, cohesiveness, individual ability, and injuries.
    Believe it or not, this is exactly my point.

    There are a TON of factors in play that goes into the number of sacks allowed. Scheme, Qb play, talent level, etc. We are retaining the same talent, Qb, and almost every other factor constant. The only substantial change anyone has pointed to that may affect our O-line play is the scheme. So, is that a significant enough of a factor to actually consistently improve performance? I mean, if we are going to rely on it, we should have some confidence that tweaking that single variable actually will do SOMETHING, right?

    This extremely small sample says that in most cases, the scheme was overwhelmed by other variables. And in the one case it wasn't a change in Qb play may have be as big or bigger contributor to the number of sacks produced.

    What I was doing was looking for strength of correlation. The more often ditching Martz lead to a complete turnaround of the O-line, the more we should be certain that our O-line will improve because we ditched Martz. The less often it happened, the less certain we should be.

    It doesn't mean ditching Martz won't help. It DOES mean that if ditching Martz was a dominant factor, I would expect ditching Martz would more consistently lead to a better result.
    Tall, Dorky, and Ham-handed

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    5,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Lake Shore Drive View Post
    A guy flips a coin and 9 times in a row it comes up heads. What are his chances that on the 10th flip it will come up heads again?
    The impression I get is that people don't see this as a 50-50 endever. Everyone says "we improved the O-line when we got rid of Martz". Not "the o-line MAY improve because we got rid of Martz." Should we be that confident? Is there evidence to support that getting rid of Martz scheme has in the past and will in the future result in a better O-line? Were we right to bet on that fact and not change any other variables?

    I think it is a valid question. And yes, I am aware this doesn't PROVE anything. As always, that isn't my intention. My goal is to help you get a feel for how strongly you should hold your position, not to make you change your position. You are still welcome to think that getting rid of Martz will help (I still tend to feel that way.) The question I want you to ask is "How certain is that to be true," and "Given that level of certainty, am I comfortable with the fact that we have done nothing else?"
    Tall, Dorky, and Ham-handed

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,386
    Quote Originally Posted by chewtoy View Post
    The impression I get is that people don't see this as a 50-50 endever. Everyone says "we improved the O-line when we got rid of Martz". Not "the o-line MAY improve because we got rid of Martz." Should we be that confident? Is there evidence to support that getting rid of Martz scheme has in the past and will in the future result in a better O-line? Were we right to bet on that fact and not change any other variables?

    I think it is a valid question. And yes, I am aware this doesn't PROVE anything. As always, that isn't my intention. My goal is to help you get a feel for how strongly you should hold your position, not to make you change your position. You are still welcome to think that getting rid of Martz will help (I still tend to feel that way.) The question I want you to ask is "How certain is that to be true," and "Given that level of certainty, am I comfortable with the fact that we have done nothing else?"
    Notice I did not argue with all that you gave us regarding the success of the post-Martz OLs, nor am I going to - as always, extremely very researched by the research master of this board. But when we're talking statistical probabilities, we can only take the 50/50 coin flip approach here. Either the OL is going to do a better job of protecting Cutler this year or it won't. Boatloads of variables involved to be sure, but when we boil it down, it's going to be yea or nay. We can only hope and trust it will be yea.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  






Part of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.