One question, among many, that is on the mind of many Bears fans on this Monday following the loss in Atlanta is what is wrong with Matt Forte? The running back, who was the workhorse for the Bears in the 2008 season, has seemingly been non-existent in the 2009 offense.

Through five games this season Matt Forte has 294 yards on 86 carries, a lowly 3.4 yards per carry. The only game in which Forte was able to top the 100 yard mark was last week against the Lions in which he ran for 121 yards, 61 of which came on one play. In the other four games Forte has totaled 55, 29, 66 and 23 yards. In the receiving game, where Forte was so dangerous in 2008, Forte has 18 catches for 129 yards.

What's odd when I look at these numbers is that there are very similar to his 2008 numbers through the same number of games.

Forte in 2008 would only run for over 100 yards twice in the final 11 games of the season, once against the Lions, for the second time in the season, and the other came against the Rams. In all he had just three 100 yard games.

So what are we really to expect here? Is there something about Forte's 2008 season that made him a dominant back? The numbers would say otherwise. Did he somehow put himselg among the elite while I wasn't paying attention?

2009 has been a struggle for Matt, that can not be denied. But it's not all Forte's fault. The issue is two fold here. One, the offensive line has been atrocious. Two, the expectations for this team's running game may have been way too high.

In 2008 the Bears ranked 27th in the NFL in yards per carry with a miserable 3.9 average. Their 104 ypg. was 24th in the NFL, making the Bears anything but a running team, despite Lovie's protestations. As of Monday the Bears are ranked 23rd in the league in yards per carry and they are averaging 89 yards per game, good for 27th in the NFL.

So I ask again: what are we to expect from Matt Forte? Is there another back in the NFL that could perform better with lead blockers that allow him to get hit behind the line of scrimmage more often that not and can not create a lane if they worked for the FHWA (ZING!)?

What about last night's opposing back, Michael Turner?

I think we can all agree that Turner is one of the league's elite backs, one who teams have to adjust their game plan for. Turner, who many thought would be one of the most dominant backs in 2009 is putting up very similar numbers to Forte, except when it comes to the endzone. Don't believe me, I have a graph to prove it.

If you assume the same average per carry for Forte through the same amount of carries that Turner has received, you would get numbers like this:

Eerily similar aren't they? And to no surprise they too are searching for answers. Thus far the only problem they can find is not in Turner, but in the offensive line.

What else do these two have in common? Workload in 2008. Something I will explore in the next installment of "What is wrong with Matt Forte?"

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (2)

...
written by Zoner , October 20, 2009

i think that your comparison shows 3 more tds an about 150-200 more yards of production. It's also how he looks while running.

...
written by Rex Jaybels , October 20, 2009

True, but give him 21 more carries at a 3.4 average and he would have about 365 yards, only a 18 yard difference in rushing. His receiving numbers were bound to drop with a QB like Cutler in there as well, so that is not all that surprising to me.

Write comment

Name

Email

Website

Comment

smaller | bigger

Subscribe via email (registered users only)

Add Comment