Bears general manager Phil Emery spoke sparingly to reporters during the season, but he provided a lot of clarity on a number of issues Tuesday during his press conference.
But one area he certainly wanted to expound upon was the offensive line. 
And expound he did... to the tune of 2,234 words.
Given the position and Emery's willingness to really delve into the topic, here's a full transcript of his comments on the beleaguered unit.
"Offensive line, obviously a lot of press. A lot of different thoughts behind that. As a general manager, I have to look at these things, I've got to remove myself from it a little bit. I've got to take the emotion out of it. I'm a fan too. I want to win, just like everybody in this building and everybody on our team. I have to push myself back and try to look at it with an unbiased eye. I don't know if that's always possible. The toughest evaluation that you have, as a general manager and as a scout, is of your own team, because there are emotions involve. I thought of all the available tools. How can we look at this in an objective way?
"Yes we're going to pay attention to the coach's grades. Yes we're going to pay attention to our internal scouting grades. But let's look at this another way. I went to STATS Inc., went through all the numbers. Went to Pro Football Focus, did all the numbers. I'm familiar with STATS Inc. We're one of their contracted teams. Spent quite a bit of time with their people, not only their programmers but went to their offices, watched how they grade tape, how they triple check all their facts. So I trust all their data, that's it's unbiased, that it doesn't have my hands in it, that it doesn't have our coach's or scout's hands in it, or anybody else in the league. They are simply reporting fact. Some ways to look at it is in a very Money Ball way, crunching the numbers.
So where did the Chicago Bears at the end of this process, looking at them, I wanted to know how did we rank, in terms of the most visible thing with offensive linemen is pass protection. Run blocking, ideally you're all coming off, there are all kinds of combinations, it's very difficult for a non-scout to really grade a player for run blocking. But there are statistical ways in terms of hurries, hits and sacks on the quarterback, once you have a criteria for what those are, marking a score. So I took their data. We finished 26th, which tells me we've got to get better. We've got to get better. I look at that from the perspective: how does that impact winning? Our disruption pressures were in the 33-percent range in terms of for every pass play. It's a quotient of total number of disruptions into every pass that you've thrown. What impact does that actually have on winning? Does that just mean that we've got to get better as an offensive line or does that have a huge impact on winning? The six teams below, three of them were in the playoffs, three of them weren't. The team at 25th, that was within .10 difference, was the San Francisco 49ers, one of the best teams in the league. So I can't absolutely say it's on the offensive line that's going to determine out success or not.
"So I looked at different areas. I looked at percentage of dropped passes. How does that look from a league perspective? We were 22nd percentage-wise. We've got to get better. The O-line has got to get better. We've got to push that level up. We can't be in the back end of the 20s or in the 20s if we're going be a championship contending team on a consistent basis. In that, below us was six playoff teams, so I don't know from a fan perspective - and again, I'm a fan - that sacks and drops, are they a factor? Yes, but I would say that it doesn't look like they are the ultimate determining factor. I still think it comes down to: how many playmakers do you have opposed to the team that you're playing? And are they making plays that are at game-changing instances at the moment of truth moving forward.
"To follow up on your question, because I know a lot has been talked about it so I'm just going to jump ahead for you. A lot has been talked about, in terms of our offensive line: did we provide enough talent and depth and competition for it. I'm going to take you all the way back to the process. We came in, we evaluated our team. We had team meetings and as I spoke when I got here: the number one need was to build our around our quarterback. Build weapons for our quarterback. We also needed a complementary pass rusher. Did we need to get better on the offensive line? Yes we did.
"Now, it's a matter of taking the UFA market and the draft into determining if those resources are there so that you can actually accomplish all your goals. In terms of building weapons, the first thing was met with Brandon Marshall. I think Brandon has had a very dynamic season. He's a Pro Bowler and he deserves it.
"Now, UFA market, offensive tackles: How do I look at that objectively? Number one, did we go after some free agent offensive tackles? Absolutely. The three best didn't play ball this year. They all retired. Two of them were medical and one decided not to play. Was I disappointed in that? Yes I was disappointed but I was disappointed in who we ended up with, with Jonathan Scott, who started six games for us, who gave zero sacks for the year. I felt very good that, when I looked at the UFA market and I took all the guys that played, had starts, played at least 33 percent of the reps, a third of the reps, out of the UFA market that did not sign back with their original team. It's very difficult for team to give up on an offensive lineman if they've got one. And really in this past market, franchise left tackles that were in the market didn't exist. So I looked at the ones that were out there. Again, we had three that go out of football. Where did Jonathan Scott rate? He was the second best. Zero sacks. Sean Locklear from the Giants, who ended the season on IR, ended up the best in that respect for those stats. He was one; Jonathan was two. So do I feel like Jon added to our team? Yes I do. That was the UFA market.
"Now I've got to go into the draft. We didn't meet our needs. The UFA part of this solution, the market was small in terms of who was available. Going into the draft, we had decisions to make. We decided to go with Shea [McClellin] to meet our needs at defensive end. I feel good about Shea. In the second round, there were a number of offensive linemen in that round but we still had not our need for a second receiver that can complement the first, that's a big, dynamic target. That was our interest in Alshon Jeffery. Now I've got to weigh that, as a general manager, against what's left in the second round with offensive linemen. Kelechi Osemele, Mike Adams, some of the third round guys that were taken. So when we were picking [in the first round], [Matt] Kalil, who went to Minnesota, was the third pick in the draft. He wasn't in our mix. We're not going to go from 19 to three without giving up the rest of the team. The only other person that was drafted in front of us at right tackle was [Mitchell] Schwartz, that went to Cleveland with the 37th pick. Those guys were off the board when we came to decision time to make a trade to move up a little from our spot to get Alshon. That meant we were going to leave a few guys on the board.
"My though process was, before we went into the draft, to analyze with our coaches and with our staff, we've got two tackles and we had determined that was our greatest need. We felt good about our guard, our interior play. We felt good about Roberto Garza going into the season and looking at the STATS Inc. stuff, the guy had a solid season. We felt good about Lance Louis. He had a solid season before he got hurt. We felt that for the left guard, we had a number of candidates. We had a bunch of guys that had a number of starts. We certainly had enough in reserve, between starters and backups, for the interior play. So for us, it was a tackle question. What's the age of the two guys that we have? 24. Is there a young tackle in this draft that, at the end of this fall, is going to clearly be better than the two young 24-year-old tackles that we have? That's the question I had to ask myself.
"The end results - and again, taking bias out of it, just going to the STATS Inc. information in terms of total disruptions - there were no left tackles taken during that time that came out better than J'Marcus Webb, in terms of total disruptions. There was only one right tackle that came out better than Gabe, and that was tackle from Baltimore. Gabe [Carimi] gave up 31.5 disruptions; he gave up 30. Gabe gave up 6.5; he gave up 7.5. His percentage was lower because they threw the ball more. His percentage came out better. His ranking was higher. But in reality, we're looking at the same guy. So, in my eyes, the decision was: do we go for the playmaker or do we go for the offensive lineman knowing we've already got two 24-year-olds - those two guys are 23 - that are part of our mix. I made the decision to go with the playmaker. I don't regret that decision. I know it's going to be criticized. I feel good about it. I feel good about it moving forward because we have, what, we have another draft. We have another UFA market."
Thank you for the transcript of the press conference. Though I listened I found myself having a little trouble following what Phil Emery was saying. Reading it I'm convinced that his citing of cleverly couched statistics as non-answers enabled him a pass at his New Year's Day press conference. To grade the right tackle as the second best at his position at the start of the season, and to have him benched by the end of the season suggests that either the stats cited are meaningless or his play was worse than anyone could imagine, or statistically chart.
The point was that his rationale during the draft last year was that there were two young tackles with potential already on the roster. What would drafting a lineman in the second round do to improve the line if he'd just be a similar project? The end result was that Carimi was second in his position out of a pool that included himself and the guys they considered. Doesn't mean that he was good, just that he wasn't far off from the best option they had. That's why tackle's still a need, according to Emery. It's simply a response to the criticism of the Alshon pick.
Phil-
Do not try and justify your shocking ignorance on the O line.
Just draft O line.
And when you feel like giving us an insulting argument as to why you blew it on the O line in 12, sit down until the feeling goes away.
Shut up and draft O line.
Stop pissing off smart football fans.
Jack, I think you need to listen better...or read better. Emery answered and addressed the thought process that went into the decisions he made on the oline very clearly. You accuse of shading facts..Cite how Emery is not being truthful with respect to stats he mentions. I think if you look at ProFootball Focus stats you will see what Emery is talking about. Note, I think Emery uses Stats Inc because PFF has given Scott one sack..but aside from that meaningless blemish I thought what Emery said was spot on and I enjoyed his candor at his press conference. Go Bears!
Take the under...you are pretty irrational there...Emery is telling you the reality of the trying to solve the issue in one off season and you are stomping your feet like the guy is suppose conjure up left and right tackles like they are sea monkeys or something. Grow up, calm down and think things through..aka act like the smart football fan you profess yourself to be. Everything Emery said made sense, happy we have uncheck an open gm. Go Bears!
He just thoroughly explained why he didnt draft oline...did you even read what Phil Emery said?
His excuse was BS which was already broken down on this board and yes I read and listened to the Press confrence. Butthat is not what is bugging me right now. Anyone notice a change in the Bears offense the last two weeks? It's a slight change but it may have exposed a much larger problem. 2 weeks ago the Bears had Marshall and Jeffery switch positons. Notice how Marshalls play fell off the last couple of weeks and him and Cutler seemed to struggle with their timing while Jeffery had some bad calls against himself two weeks ago he played well against the Lions. In fact Jay struggled throwing right all year, this may go deeper. Knox and Marshall played the left side for the most part and played much better there. Hester and Jeffrey played the right side for the most part and both struggle there. In fact all his recievers tend to struggle there the last couple of years. When they go on the left side they tend to play much better.
So either the Bears recievers don't play well at the Z, flanker, or 2 spot which ever you want to call it. Maybe playing off the line screws up the timing with Jay. Or Jay struggles throwing right. I am starting to wonder if he can throw right. Either that or they just don't have a guy who knows how to play off the line. Either they need a true flanker or they are in real trouble with Cutler. It may just be the position, Marshall has struggled over there before in other offenses. The problem seems to have started 2 years ago after his knee injury. I mean it could be a lot of things but the Bears can't go to the right side effectively. Could be the play calling, could be the recievers, but they are right side weak in the passing game and Marshall didn't help it, Hester looks worse and Jeffery struggled over there. Olsen played both sides with decent sucess. It may be a timing issue, but something is going on on the right side. That's why they moved Marshall to try and improve the right side passing attack and make it easier on Jeffery. If forced teams to play the right side more honestly and spread them out more.
That's why Marshall was mad they moved him out of position during the losing streak to try and improve the passing attack but his play suffered because of it and the offense continued to struggle. I was wondering why he was mad after a win. It didn't help that much and actually may have made things worse in terms of production, Marshall becomes less of a threat but the opposing defenses have to spread out more.
I can't say it helped against detroit much because their secondary is so bad, and they were playing like they wanted to go home, totally half hearted. They used it against the Cards and Lions in the last two games
After a little checking he had some problems in Denver going right. All QB's play one side better than another, and Royal had his best year by far with Jay, but it was clearly a problem at times and seems to have gotten much worse the last two years. Like Rodgers is not as good going right either, at least not this year. But Nelson is his flanker and you saw what he could do last year. Manning is the same way, much better let but a good receiver improves the problem. Looks like they need a number two not sure why it got so bad the last two years for Cutler though. Jeffery may not be able to play the 2 or off the line. Like Cruz can play on the line but really struggles off of it, while Nicks can play wither side just fine.
Looks like the Bears may have two split ends and nobody to play the right side. Will see, either that or Cutler has become like Vick. But Bears play to the right side is clearly a major problem with the offense.
Anonymous: is that you, Creighton? Glad you're back. Why not just post under your real name?
Yes Don it is me good for you for recognizing your King. IWHy havent I used my name you ask its simple. Two many f*** like Brando and Kevin AArmestead keep picking on me and making fun of me whenver I do post. I am SICK OF THAT S***. Do you no I had to go thru THERAPY? It f****** sucked. I just completed 4 months of that ****. My therapist gave me some pills to help with my anger and emotional issues. He told me I should get out more too. WHatever. So anywaay theres your answer.
Welcome back, Creighton. And let me say that I enjoy the discourse and dialogue on here. We can disagree, but let's limit the name-calling and profanities. Hope you're all having a blessed 2013 so far!
ironic what you said about pissing off smart football fans, seeing as you're clearly an idiot who didn't listen to a word emery was saying. you think the draft is a magic hat that you can just automoatically pull starters out of just because you're using a early round pick?
HE JUST EXPLAINED CLEAR AS DAY THERE WAS NO BETTER OR WORTHWHILE OPTION IN BOTH UFA OR THE DRAFT LAST YEAR, DRAFTING AN O-LINEMAN LAST YEAR WOULD HAVE DONE NOTHING TO HELP THIS LINE AND IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ONE LESS PICK SPENT ON PLAYMAKERS THAT CHANGE THE OUTCOME OF GAMES, AKA ALSHON JEFFERY. HE ALSO SAID NO FREE AGENT LAST YEAR HAD A BETTER YEAR THAN THE ONES ON OUR TEAM, MEANING ONCE AGAIN IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A WASTE OF ROSTER SPACE BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE CHANGED NOTHING ABOUT THE LINE'S OVERALL PERFORMANCE.
he then went on to explain why the statistical data backed that claim up, and how drops, sacks, disruptions, and every other thing meatballs like you have been obnoxiously shouting about as if you deserve a commentator's segment on ESPN, are a CORRELATION and not a CAUSATION, and how individual players, WRs/RBs/QBs, can be "playmakers" aka guys who have the ability to change the course of a game in a given play.
If a tackle, guard or center falls into our lap during the draft, OF COURSE emery will take him, thats a given. reaching JUST because you see the offensive line as a problem is STUPID and the type of thing a moron like you would be doing. The same for free agency, if he finds a UFA worth signing, he's going to go after the guy. he's not just going to sign anybody simply because HURR DURR OUR LINE IS BAD. please educate yourself before claiming to be a "smart fan," until then i will thank god almighty every day you aren't the GM of the chicago bears.
Sean, I am sure Creighton is very happy to be welcomed back ! But the profanity and name calling in the post on Jan. 3, 5:14PM is NOT the REAL Creighton.
The name is highlighted in Blue and the REAL Creighton does not do that.
I would imagine the real Creighton has now realized that he does not own this blog or "rule" over it.
While he was gone, it was interesting to see many newcomers start to post. Showing that life goes on with or without his commentary.
It was funny some people didn't know he was gone.
But his posts are much better now that he sticks to what the Bears are doing instead of what other bloggers are doing or his "showboating".
One lesson to be learned is that in general, IDEAS can be criticized all day long but there is no need or reason to call people names or make personal attacks.
Just provide your own ideas, opinions,feelings and arguments and maybe some "evidence" to back up what you believe. No one is "right" all the time, so you can't speak in absolutes unless you want to look stupid or foolish when a person is eventually wrong.
Creighton said the Bears would never get Jay Cutler and that he'd wear pink panties to a Bears game if he was wrong. I've yet to see a picture of him doing that!
However, I do agree with much of his analysis and he saves me the effort of posting to make the same point "SENSE" ;-) he's already done it!
So, Creighton, do you have a choice for HC? I'd go Holmgen or Billick on Offense and Cowher on Defense. Those are the safest bets, but it'll be expensive.
But I wish somebody would explain what happened with Bates and Mike Tice. I thought they were going to work as a team but it seems that didn't happen. And Cutler and Marshall both praised Jeremy Bates at the end of the season. I expected Bates to be the new OC.
Bates success in Denver with Cutler and Marshall speaks for itself and SENSE the 2 best players on Offense want Bates so much, why can't the Bears just go with Bates as HC? I'd have kept Lovie so as to not rock the boat and promote Bates to OC.
But now, for a cheap and easy answer I'd make Bates HC right now on a 3-4 year deal. He's already familiar with what the Bears can do and Cutler loves him. Bates even worked with Jon Gruden for all those who want Gruden.
AND Cutler would not need to learn a new system! Bates even knew to hire one of the best O-line coaches when he started out in Seattle but the coach retired right away. Seahawk Coach Pete Carroll and all his hyperness may have had something to do with that.
But Bates knew to value the O-line and who to hire!
GO BEARS!
I know you're asking Creighton this, but I'm going to give you my answer anyways.
Why would the Bears take Billick or Cowher?
I don't see them as great candidates - and Billick would change the offense, while Cowher would change the defense.
The Bears need Jon Gruden, Jay Gruden, Steve Mariucci (probably not interested), Mike Holmgren (too old), or Mike McCoy - maybe even Brendan Shannahan. Those guys are more likely to work with the existing defense and staff, as well as run an offense that Cutler, Marshall, and Forte could be successful in.
Hiring Billick or Cowher could blow up the roster and coaching staff and force rebuilding, IMO. They are ego-maniacs that were almost fired due to their inflexibility, and I don't think their resumes as impressive as they appear on paper. In other words, they had great assistants and personnel that helped them be successful - personnel and assistants that were installed or intact when they arrived.
Suffice to say, I don't think it's time to blow up the Bears. I know their are some folks on here that would like to see that, but I don't agree ... at least not yet.
If Chicago's going to change the offense AGAIN, they need to migrate to a West Coast-style that their key skill guys are familiar with.
My .02
No question that too many bloggers need anger managemet therapy. I even think you might profit from it, Sean. If that was really you in the response to take the under.I thought all journalists had to "sufer fools gladly" as part of their job description. If they do not do so, they should not expect players like Cutler to do so when confronted with inane questions or ones strictly designed to foment contoversy. i did rather like Emery's somewhat long-winded press conference and though his explanations pretty good fo the most part. He was a little vague in places, but at this stage of the new coach search, he has to be.
Not true, he eliminated certain names from the list. Cordy Glenn and Mitchell Schwartz both had far betteryears than Webb and Carimi. He even mentions Schwartz. He actually eliminated the guys who had better years, then wnet into his whole talk about stats. He also mentioned Pro football focus, far and away the most accurate stat sight on the Webb and far and away the best at grading offensive lines. He says he went to PFF, but then you will notice he does not use their stats. Because their stats don't concure with what he wanted to say. Eric Winston did not have a better year than Carimi or Webb? Really?
He stated they werenot going to look at run blocking, which eliminates half of what a linmen does, he then says he will ignore the interior of the line. He forgot to mention Carimi was benched twice and that when he was comparing Carimi, he was comparing his 10 games at tackle to guys who played 16 games in real offenses. He forgot to say Rachel who he signed walked out and that Spencer had been benched. He tried to talk up Garza who is as bad as a center as there is.
He did not give a statistical break down of the line he just talked about pressures. And even then he ignored hits and sacks. He also ignored penalties. He did not mention drops, 3 step, 5 step or 7 step, how about qucik drops, or shotgun. Each of those change how you view sacks and pressures. Extra protection? He never mentioned that. He didn't mention the reason they run a limited offense is because they can't block all the deep drops, and they need a lot of extra help just to do a 3 step against a good defense.
Basically Emery said if you ignore the limited drops, the extra blocking, the simple scheme, the penalties, the sacks, the hits, run blocking, Cutlers ability to avoid pressure, the amount of starts by a given player, the benchings, the guy who walked out, the interior line, throw pro football focuses name out their but not actually use their stats and only use limited stats from stats inc. That by doing all that, then you can compare the Bears line to others. Oh if he did use PFF stats then why would he say the 49ers lines was as bad as the Bears? Why even throw PFF's name out there? I'll tell you why, because everyone knows when it comes to line play and football stats, they are the best. Everyone including Emery knows you can't use pure Metric stat on football. It's to many veriables, that's why PFF and nfl teams combine metric stats with grades. The 49ers are top 10 in pass blocking and number 1 in run blocking at PFF. Most people around the league think it's the best line in football.
You know why he wanted you to ignore the interior of the line, even though LG is playing musical chairs? Because he can't cover up names like Carl Nicks, Evan Mathis, oh wait he also wanted you to ignore players who resigned with their teams, even though he didn't make a play for them so you don't know if you could of gotten them. Because you can't cover up the difference between Nicks, Mathis, Ben Grubbs, Zeitler, etc.
Take Jon Scott, notice when he was talking about Scott who he signed, he stopped talking about pressures and started talking about sacks. Why the sudden switch. Also notice he comapred Scotts to other players he compared a guy with 189 pass blocking snaps to guys with 600 pass blocking snaps. He was wrong when he said Scott did not give up a sack, he did against the Vikings. He also failed to mention that at his current pace had Scott played a full season he would have led the team in hits and pressures by a wide margin. Pit didn't want him for a reaason.
Without question Emery was being misleading. He did everything he could to shed a good light on himself and decieved fans about line play, saying he used sites he didn't use, giving misleading incomplete stats, ignoring actual facts, changing statistical numbers. His entire press confrence was nothing more than a well contrived, well thought out, deception.
He never even said why he went with Shea over O-Line. He said he made the call, but what he did not say is why. He admitted the line was the greatest need, then ignored it for Shea. Why? Listen to what he says about Shea, he talks about how he thinks Shea is an End and then lists the reasons why "He drops into coverage well, plays pursuit well, spies the QB well, bird dogs well, has sideline to sideline speed" I am sorry but it sounds like he is talking about a LB, those are all LB traits. Nothing about hands, pass rush, pass rush moves, point of attack, first step, body line, ability to penatrait. Pursuit and Coverage? Listen to how puts the linmen into a catagory for hte draft, he never even considered a guy in the first round. He only actually talks about 3rd round linmen, excuse me not even that, OT available after their second round pick.
He was actually very clever with all the double talk, this was much better BS than the stuff Jerry used to throw out there. He must have been thinking about this stuff for awhile.
He didn't say that, he said he ended up playing statistically better than any right tackle available in the draft at that point, which is a fact.
To estevenj:
"Without question Emery was being misleading. He did everything he could to shed a good light on himself and deceived fans about line play, saying he used sites he didn't use, giving misleading incomplete stats, ignoring actual facts, changing statistical numbers. His entire press conference was nothing more than a well contrived, well thought out, deception."---- Anonymous aka "Cray-ton"
The above statement pretty much says it all. That's what you're dealing with here.
The way I heard it, Emery is a glorified scout. It sounded like all he's been doing is traveling & scouting. Only at the end of the season was he called in to maybe watch a few games on video & then ask his bosses what he should do & they said do what you feel like. So he did.
The Bears front office & Emery admitted in the press conference they can't evaluate talent or develop it, and they don't have a philosophy on what they want the team to be. They don't know what to do or how to do it when it comes to running the Bears.
They think they want "excellence" and "synergy", what ever those things are, because they don't really know themselves, but it sounds good.
They see the hot trends & wish they had S.F. HC Jim Harbaugh or Seattle's Pete Carroll. That's what they want to imitate & described wanting without mentioning names.
Emery said the new Head Coach needs to know the collective bargaining agreement, work 24/7, decide what the team philosophically needs to be, and so on etc. He wants the HC to BE THE GENERAL MANAGER!!!
You go with Holmgren, Billick, or Cowher because out of all the possible choices, they have the best track records of coaching in the NFL. They know how to win and what people to bring in to help them do it.
Cutler's 29 and may play until 38. So you have 9 years to build a team around him to win. John Elway didn't win a Superbowl until late in his career and until he did, people questioned his greatness, like they did Peyton Manning. People keep criticizing Cutler just like they did Elway and Manning no matter that he's got talent. Cutler can't win it all by himself and neither could Elway or Manning.
I'm not a Lovie fan but the Bears needed to make Jeremy Bates OC and not rock the boat by firing Smith because the Bears Defense was NOT the big problem.
Somehow I think the Bears think a new HC will not change the Defense. And they think Lovie can leave but none of his coaches will want to follow him. Yeah, they are under contract but so what? So was Lovie, They might just coast this year with a half hearted effort.
If you tell a new Head Coach he can't change the Defense or bring in his own people on Defense, now you are severely limiting who you can hire!
I don't think the Bears realized that to get the best HC they may HAVE TO "blow up this team"! How could they possibly think a new HC won't want to bring in HIS OWN PEOPLE to fit his vision? Especially since the Bears DON"T HAVE A VISION!!!
Since the Bears don't know what they want to be (the new HC has to tell them in his interview!) the SAFEST BET, in order to NOT WASTE the little time Jay Cutler has to play, is to go with the PROVEN NFL winners! How you win? Who cares as long as you do! "Synergy"! "Excellence"!
GO BEARS!