***2011 Chicago Bears Regular Season Thread*** (1 Viewer)

[The_Wolfman]

Glad to see someone is at least willing to attempt to be reasonable. from the other responses to me calling Cutler average so far, I was expecting that regardless of who I named I would be told that the player had a better line and wrs and thats why they looked better.As far as king of turds, the point is that the bear history at qb is irrelevant in measuring cutler. If we had drafted ryan leaf for 25 consecutive years then cutler would still be the exact same quality he is today. If we were the packers (favre, rodgers) or 49ers (montana, young) then cutler would still be the same quality he is today. So I'm not sure what the relevance is in comparing him to our past qbs.But for the record, McMahon and Kramer were both better in my eyes. If Miller could have stayed upright, I'd say he was at least as good if not better.You say we don't know where the problem lies. First, I'd say its all 4 of your list. As far as order I'd move your first one down to #3 and then its about right. The evidence is in our last QB. We thought he was the problem, so we brought in someone else. The offense hasn't scored more points, and has led the league in 3-and-outs since. Meanwhile our former QB put up some fine numbers because he has had a good line and receivers. So each did well with a good line/wrs/system and each did poorly with a bad line/wrs/system. I would call a 'great' qb, or a 'franchise' qb, someone who is going to do well regardless. If the requirement is a top 5 line and top 5 receiver, well then there are 20-25 other guys in the league who will also do well under those circumstances and thats why they are considered average.

Sorry I mean you say you want to have a reasonable discussion then you refer to Cutler as "the kind of turds"? What is it about those past QBs, specifically, you prefer over Cutler? Arm strength, pocket presence, toughness, accuracy, scrambling ability, leadership/intangibles? Something else? I'm open to hear what he lacks that guys like Jim Miller or Erik Kramer had.I mean, on some level, I get it. The guy has a lousy personality, he's always pouting on the sidelines making that stupid sour #### face, he's not really that likable. It makes him seem like not a good leader and doesn't endear him to the fans. That being said, his ability as a football player is NOT the issue with the Bears, in my opinion. He's not the best QB in the league, but I wouldn't take anyone else the Bears have had over him. If we could get him some help in some other key areas I think he'd be very successful. He's done more with less than a lot of QBs in the NFL.

 

[tenaka]

I don't see how calling the recent Bear history of QBs "turds" is unreasonable.

No, this isn't some stupid media flash in the pan argument about the look on his face. I don't care how much I would like to have a beer with the guy. But your list of qualities is very slanted in my eyes. You list a bunch of physical attributes and then 'everything else'. And therein lies the problem. I don't see 'everything else' as one of the ten pieces that make a QB, but it seems that all those who make excuses for every breath cutler takes do. If you want to talk athleticism, I 100% concede that Cutler is above average and the most athletic QB we have had. If you want to talk stats, I 100% concede that Cutler will when its all said and done have above average stats and possibly the best stats of any Bear QB. He has an above average arm, and a below average head. I'm talking leadership, presence, ability to read defenses, decision making, situational understanding, preparation, attention to detail, every single mental aspect of the game.

As for the best Bear QB ever, that's a huge slap in the face to Sid Luckman. Go read up on the man sometime. He's not just some guy who was kinda ok for a year.

 

[DoubleG]

I don't see how calling the recent Bear history of QBs "turds" is unreasonable.

No, this isn't some stupid media flash in the pan argument about the look on his face. I don't care how much I would like to have a beer with the guy. But your list of qualities is very slanted in my eyes. You list a bunch of physical attributes and then 'everything else'. And therein lies the problem. I don't see 'everything else' as one of the ten pieces that make a QB, but it seems that all those who make excuses for every breath cutler takes do. If you want to talk athleticism, I 100% concede that Cutler is above average and the most athletic QB we have had. If you want to talk stats, I 100% concede that Cutler will when its all said and done have above average stats and possibly the best stats of any Bear QB. He has an above average arm, and a below average head. I'm talking leadership, presence, ability to read defenses, decision making, situational understanding, preparation, attention to detail, every single mental aspect of the game.

As for the best Bear QB ever, that's a huge slap in the face to Sid Luckman. Go read up on the man sometime. He's not just some guy who was kinda ok for a year.

Sid Luckman? Really? That's your ace in the hole? First off, that's impossible to discuss because any measuring stick you would use would be unfair to one or the other, as they played in entirely different eras."I'm talking leadership, presence, ability to read defenses, decision making, situational understanding, preparation, attention to detail, every single mental aspect of the game."

For starters, it is impossible to discuss the first 2 - his teammates say he's a good leader - he came in this season in great shape and also has (by many accounts) exhibited an even more vocal leadership role on the offense (with Kreutz gone). The two in bold are greatly affected by how much time he has to throw the ball. And how exactly do we judge those?? By number of INTs? Because Brees and P. Manning both threw more picks than Cutler did last year.

And how exactly can you comment on situational understanding and preparation? Most people associated with the Bears say that Jay is one of the first one's there and the last to leave. Obviously his physical preparation for this season was alread noted. The answer, of course is you can't - nor can I - none of knows how much time he puts in preparing for a game.

I find it convenient that you concede the points that are obvious and fall back on a number of points that none of us can actually judge as the basis for your argument. On the one hand you say how he looks/carries himself with the media doesn't matter, while then saying "presence".

Honestly I felt the same way you did his first season here - his red zone turn-overs, his spotty play - they were maddening. Last season he had to learn yet another offense (he's had a new one every season of his career - this season is the first time he is playing in the same offensive system 2 years in a row, BTW) - and even with all that, reduced his INTs from 26 to 16 (all while getting sacked a league-leading 50+ times) and take his team to the NFC title game.

So at this point, I am willing to give him a mulligan for 2009 and since he showed good improvement in 2010, give him the benefit of the doubt for 2011.

 

[tenaka]

Sid Luckman is hardly my "ace in the hole". Just a response to the statement, that after 2 seasons, Jay is already the best QB the Bears have ever had. Seriously?

Situational understanding - you already answered it. red zone interceptions. I am not willing to look at only 2010 no matter how much you want to. I look at his entire career, and he has always thrown a high % of his picks in the red zone.

Preparation. Little anecdote as an example from a game last year. They were talking about the football itself and how qbs can pick how they want the game ball. Other qbs spend time testing a lot of different types. Jays says, screw it, I don't want to spend time on that. Just give me any ball and I'll throw it. And no thats not my 'ace in the hole'. Its called an example.

Presence isn't about how he looks to the media. Nor how he looks to me. Its about how he inspires his teammates. Clearly he isn't inspiring the line or the receivers. You'll just tell me how a 5th rounder still being in the league as a backup is evidence he does, but if I bring up interceptions you'll tell me how that same player suddenly isn't great anymore and is the cause of all those picks. I'd add how he mentally checks out of games when things are going badly, but you'll tell me how I can't prove that too.

Yes, I concede he has a strong arm. Should i really list all the strong arm QBs who have flopped in the NFL? Sorry for not wasting everyone's time. I tire of saying the same thing to all the worshipers of the golden boy. You all say the same things. Its not fair, he has a bad line and bad receivers. Wait till he gets good ones, you can't judge him until then. But didn't his predecessors have the same bad line? The same bad receivers? No one had a problem with judging them...

 

[candymanvandyfan]

http://pfref.com/tiny/Jh3dd

That's pretty good.

 

[Wrigley]

Only one Bear QB has ever been selected to a Pro-Bowl(and he had Payton)

I blame the organization for his lack of success.

Why can't the Bears groom QB's?

 

[DoubleG]

Only one Bear QB has ever been selected to a Pro-Bowl(and he had Payton)I blame the organization for his lack of success. Why can't the Bears groom QB's?

They don't have good clippers?

 

[Power Monster]

Only one Bear QB has ever been selected to a Pro-Bowl(and he had Payton)I blame the organization for his lack of success. Why can't the Bears groom QB's?

They like to get off the bus runningThey like to win w defense/STs and running the ballThey like a never ending revolving door of offensive coordinators/offensive linemen and very average WRsThey don't know how to evaluate OL talent prior to their draftsThey don't know how to evaluate WR talent prior to their drafts

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Regarding Sid Luckman - he is clearly the Best QB the Bears have ever had to date - period.

He was an impact starter, played on 5 Championship teams under Papa Bear Halas in the legendary Chicago T formation (yes, as in the song we still sing at Bears games).

Luckman completed 51.8% of his passes for 14,686 yards and 137 touchdowns with 134 interceptions with a career touchdown rate (percentage of pass attempts that resulted in touchdowns) of 7.9%, easily the best in Bears history. In 1943, Luckman completed 110 of 202 passes for 2194 yards and 28 touchdowns. His 13.9% touchdown rate that year is the best ever in a single-season.

He was also a friend of the family. Which just makes him that much cooler.

 

[D.J.]

I've been out of this thread for a while, partially because of being busy, partially because the same things kept being said over and over without anything new. I haven't read all of the older posts, but before jumping on the line and tice too much, remember that with 2 guys getting hurt aleady, including probably the best lineman they have, realy screws up the continuity of an already below average line. It seems like continuity was their primary focus during preseason ( evidence by not inserting spencer right away).

Lets see how they fair this week, but I dont expect much from.the line before carimi gets back...

 

[flapgreen]

Good to see Lovie emphasizing a balanced offense like he said.

 

[RBM]

Horse#### performance on both sides of the field, and Martz doesnt help

 

[flapgreen]

Lowest rushing total since 1960. That's a lot of games.

 

[gigantor]

at least the fake punt return thing was interesting, had never seen that before.

:X to the rest of the game

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Cant win many games running the ball 9 times for 7 yds but I'm sure Bears fans know that.

 

[D.J.]

Good to see Lovie emphasizing a balanced offense like he said.

Did you watch the game or are you just commenting on stats? They ran the ball a decent amount in the first quarter and even in the 2nd. The run wasnt happening. Would you have prefered for them to continue to run for negative yardage and not even be in the game?Has it not been for 2 horrible pass interference non-calls, really bad ones, a key 3rd down drop by knox (he had a pretty bad game despite his stats, he dropped 2 easy passes in big situations)., and a completely bogus holding call to negate the knox punt return td, this is a different game. Even if just the holding call didn't happen, they only lose by 3. As many pointed out before the season, if the bears finish the first 3 games 1-2, they are in good shape. Their schedule gets much easier now. Don't blame martz for this loss. The players didn't execute. The line played very good, cutler threw bad passes, the recievers dropped a lot of passes (williams sucked, hester was the best wr on the field, IMO). The defense played ok, but gave up 27 points, not good enough.

 

[D.J.]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

 

[tenaka]

In hindsight, I wonder how no one thought of that return before. At least 9 men on the coverage team are sprinting at the returner with their backs to the ball. They have no way to know its on the other side of the field. The real shame isn't just that it was called back, but that now teams will look for it and it'll likely never work again (or at least not this season).

 

[flapgreen]

Cant win many games running the ball 9 times for 7 yds but I'm sure Bears fans know that.

No, they really don't.

 

[flapgreen]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

oh geez

 

[twistd]

The thing that bothers me is that I thought the receivers might look better in their second season in the Martz offense. They look more clueless than they were last year. Remember what Cutler looked like when he was throwing to Brandon Marshall? I think we forget what he looked like when he actually had NFL quality receivers.

This is what the Bears receiver coach Darryl Drake said this week, "We've got what we've got, and people need to embrace what we've got and stop (whining) about it. Things are not going to change, so why talk about them? If you're a true Bears fan why beat them up? They're ours. …

"Let's embrace them so they know we love them and they'll continue to play to the best of their abilities. … Complain about them at the end of the year. But right now, don't complain.''

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/rosenblog/chi-bears-wide-receivers-coach-drops-the-ball-20110922,0,5104545.column

So, in other words, "Embrace the suck". Good advice Coach Drake, we will pretend that the receivers don't stink. We will pretend that they don't drop balls. We will pretend that they get open. Maybe we could pretend that the Bears beat the Packers too.

 

[twistd]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

The Bears are 1-2. And the only team they have beaten turns out may not be as good as we thought they were, in the Falcons. The Bears haven't played very well for two weeks in a row now. The Bears have managed 63 yards rushing the last two weeks combined. They are two games behind both the Lions and the Packers in the division. You are right, we shouldn't be critical, they are awesome.

 

[Limp Ditka]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

There wasn't one second of this game that the Bears had a chance to win. From the flip to the final whistle, they were the lesser team on the field and it showed in every facet of the game.

 

[flapgreen]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

The Bears are 1-2. And the only team they have beaten turns out may not be as good as we thought they were, in the Falcons. The Bears haven't played very well for two weeks in a row now. The Bears have managed 63 yards rushing the last two weeks combined. They are two games behind both the Lions and the Packers in the division. You are right, we shouldn't be critical, they are awesome.

Quit overreacting.

 

[Tony Jabroni]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

There wasn't one second of this game that the Bears had a chance to win. From the flip to the final whistle, they were the lesser team on the field and it showed in every facet of the game.

This game was not nearly as close as you Windy City fans think. You did not even come close and when you sniffed a chance, it was quickly snuffed out. The Packers are clearly a superior team.I'd fire everyone.

 

[flapgreen]

14 sacks through 3 games, tied with Seattle for most in the league. 6 more than what they had after 3 games last season. Is that better or worse? 31st in the league in rushing. That's definitely improved too. Spine away.

 

[flapgreen]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

There wasn't one second of this game that the Bears had a chance to win. From the flip to the final whistle, they were the lesser team on the field and it showed in every facet of the game.

This game was not nearly as close as you Windy City fans think. You did not even come close and when you sniffed a chance, it was quickly snuffed out. The Packers are clearly a superior team.

I'd fire everyone.

Only a couple of Bears fans think that. Most of us are aware of what happened.

 

[Tony Jabroni]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

There wasn't one second of this game that the Bears had a chance to win. From the flip to the final whistle, they were the lesser team on the field and it showed in every facet of the game.

This game was not nearly as close as you Windy City fans think. You did not even come close and when you sniffed a chance, it was quickly snuffed out. The Packers are clearly a superior team.

I'd fire everyone.

Only a couple of Bears fans think that. Most of us are aware of what happened.

Fair enough.Can we agree Chicago is not very good, then?*

*Cutler is going to get killed this season, but, he stands in there and makes a couple jaw-dropping throws a week. Hats off to him. He does have cajones. And this is a die hard Pack fan.

 

[D.J.]

14 sacks through 3 games, tied with Seattle for most in the league. 6 more than what they had after 3 games last season. Is that better or worse? 31st in the league in rushing. That's definitely improved too. Spine away.

3 sacks yesterday. 1 was squarely on cutler for holding the ball too long, 1 cutler held on too long but protection broke down pretty quick, the 3rd was on the line (williams) completely.Cutler was only touched twice in the first half.

 

[D.J.]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

There wasn't one second of this game that the Bears had a chance to win. From the flip to the final whistle, they were the lesser team on the field and it showed in every facet of the game.

This game was not nearly as close as you Windy City fans think. You did not even come close and when you sniffed a chance, it was quickly snuffed out. The Packers are clearly a superior team.

I'd fire everyone.

Only a couple of Bears fans think that. Most of us are aware of what happened.

Fair enough.Can we agree Chicago is not very good, then?*

*Cutler is going to get killed this season, but, he stands in there and makes a couple jaw-dropping throws a week. Hats off to him. He does have cajones. And this is a die hard Pack fan.

They played arguably the best 3 teams in the division 3 weeks in a row, I havent seen anyone argue that the bears are the best team in the.nfc. I have sat pretty squarely on 9 or 10 wins for this year. So, I'm not coming out a saying the bears are awesome or that they are going to win the super bowl, but they are.not."not very good."They lost to the saints and the packers, they beat the falcons. Most analysts picked all 3 to be playoff teams and compete for the nfc championship. losing 2 out of 3 games against good.teams doesnt make you a bad team, just not elite.

To say the bears were never in the game isnt accurate. They looked decent in the first half and were only.down by a touchdown at halftime. They came.out flat in the 3rd and didnt wake up until midway through the 4th, when the defense started playing a lot better and forced turnovers. they may not have.ever been in the drivers seat, but they were in the car and had a chance.

 

[sho nuff]

Has it not been for 2 horrible pass interference non-calls, really bad ones, a key 3rd down drop by knox (he had a pretty bad game despite his stats, he dropped 2 easy passes in big situations)., and a completely bogus holding call to negate the knox punt return td, this is a different game. Even if just the holding call didn't happen, they only lose by 3.

One of the missed PI calls was bad (Woodson), the other was identical to the missed call on Jennings earlier in the game.Bogus holding call because you believe Aikman? Watch the play again...Jarrett Bush #24 is getting held down the field...calling for the flag and the guy on the sideline throws it early in the play.

 

[flapgreen]

Classic overeaction from the bears fans in this forum. They played pretty bad against the anointed repeat super bowl champions and ultimately blew the game in the 4th, but had a legitimate chance to win. If the bears had played that game against probably 28 of the other teams in the league, they probably would have won.

There wasn't one second of this game that the Bears had a chance to win. From the flip to the final whistle, they were the lesser team on the field and it showed in every facet of the game.

This game was not nearly as close as you Windy City fans think. You did not even come close and when you sniffed a chance, it was quickly snuffed out. The Packers are clearly a superior team.

I'd fire everyone.

Only a couple of Bears fans think that. Most of us are aware of what happened.

Fair enough.Can we agree Chicago is not very good, then?*

*Cutler is going to get killed this season, but, he stands in there and makes a couple jaw-dropping throws a week. Hats off to him. He does have cajones. And this is a die hard Pack fan.

No. I can't agree to that yet. Coming out if those three games at 1-2 isn't the end if the world. It will be a few weeks before I agree that they aren't very good.

 

[D.J.]

Has it not been for 2 horrible pass interference non-calls, really bad ones, a key 3rd down drop by knox (he had a pretty bad game despite his stats, he dropped 2 easy passes in big situations)., and a completely bogus holding call to negate the knox punt return td, this is a different game. Even if just the holding call didn't happen, they only lose by 3.

One of the missed PI calls was bad (Woodson), the other was identical to the missed call on Jennings earlier in the game.Bogus holding call because you believe Aikman? Watch the play again...Jarrett Bush #24 is getting held down the field...calling for the flag and the guy on the sideline throws it early in the play.

I'm not complaining about the officials, I'm just saying that the game would have been a lot closer had it not been for those calls.The guy that they called the hold on was no where near anyone, from what I hear, they just called it on the wrong guy but there was a hold, so I was wrong (though what a stupid.penalty considering it was no where near where the play actually was). I'm really just pointing out that the game wasnt a blowout and that the bears arent as bad as most here thinkThe bears have certainly been on the winning side of.poor officiating their fair share.

 

[D.J.]

On another note, anyone else think sanzenbacher is good enough to start for the bears? I think.sanzenbacher, bennett, and knox would be the best wr core the bears can field with hester rotating in.

 

[sho nuff]

Has it not been for 2 horrible pass interference non-calls, really bad ones, a key 3rd down drop by knox (he had a pretty bad game despite his stats, he dropped 2 easy passes in big situations)., and a completely bogus holding call to negate the knox punt return td, this is a different game. Even if just the holding call didn't happen, they only lose by 3.

One of the missed PI calls was bad (Woodson), the other was identical to the missed call on Jennings earlier in the game.Bogus holding call because you believe Aikman? Watch the play again...Jarrett Bush #24 is getting held down the field...calling for the flag and the guy on the sideline throws it early in the play.

I'm not complaining about the officials, I'm just saying that the game would have been a lot closer had it not been for those calls.The guy that they called the hold on was no where near anyone, from what I hear, they just called it on the wrong guy but there was a hold, so I was wrong (though what a stupid.penalty considering it was no where near where the play actually was). I'm really just pointing out that the game wasnt a blowout and that the bears arent as bad as most here thinkThe bears have certainly been on the winning side of.poor officiating their fair share.

And the game would have been a lot further away had Eric Walden not put his shoulder up near Cutler's head on the INT.You are complaining about the officials whether you want to admit it or not.I don't think it was a blowout...but GB generally controlled the game from start to finish.I don't think they are a bad team...but I don't think they are a contender either.

 

[Statcruncher]

I never felt Chicago had a chance to take control of the game. Much like the NFC Championship game last year the Packers would get a lead and seemingly coast until the Bears scored. Then GB would score again and coast. I'm a pessimist by nature but in neither game did I ever feel the Packers were in danger of losing their lead.

Green Bay is skilled enough they seem to be able to score points at will in the face of adversity. If the Pack is down 20 points in the 3rd I never get the feeling they are out of the game. Chicago on the other hand has some talent too, but not quite enough. They have little margin for error and must play mistake free football in order to pull out wins against good teams. With their current offensive line, mediocre WR's, and sometimes careless QB they will seldom play mistake free for 60 minutes.

 

[flapgreen]

On another note, anyone else think sanzenbacher is good enough to start for the bears? I think.sanzenbacher, bennett, and knox would be the best wr core the bears can field with hester rotating in.

I think so.

 

[twistd]

I never felt Chicago had a chance to take control of the game. Much like the NFC Championship game last year the Packers would get a lead and seemingly coast until the Bears scored. Then GB would score again and coast. I'm a pessimist by nature but in neither game did I ever feel the Packers were in danger of losing their lead.Green Bay is skilled enough they seem to be able to score points at will in the face of adversity. If the Pack is down 20 points in the 3rd I never get the feeling they are out of the game. Chicago on the other hand has some talent too, but not quite enough. They have little margin for error and must play mistake free football in order to pull out wins against good teams. With their current offensive line, mediocre WR's, and sometimes careless QB they will seldom play mistake free for 60 minutes.

Actually I thought the Bears had more of a chance to win the NFC Championship game than they did this game yesterday. I agree, the Packers are certainly the best team in the NFC at this time, maybe the best team in the league. I think the Bears probably are the toughest match up for the Packers in the NFC. They have a really tough time with the Bears. But, I, like you, never felt the Packers were in danger of losing the game yesterday. You assessment is right on, the Bears have to get turnovers and play mistake-free football to win against a team of that caliber. It just felt like the Bears couldn't get it done yesterday. I thought their line pass protected pretty well, but couldn't get any push to run the ball. The receivers follow a good play with a drop. And Cutler throws a beautiful pass, and then throws off his back foot, or sails one. There just seemed to be no consistency to the offense. The defense kept them dinking and dunking, but I was just waiting for someone to slip or make a mistake and the Packers break a big play.

 

[tenaka]

On another note, anyone else think sanzenbacher is good enough to start for the bears? I think.sanzenbacher, bennett, and knox would be the best wr core the bears can field with hester rotating in.

I think so.

I agree as well, except I'm not big on Bennett. I just don't believe that being a college teammate gives him a leg up on anyone after a few years of NFL play. With Sazenbacher and Knox we've got a possession guy and a slot guy... now we just need an actual #1.

 

[tenaka]

I wasn't totally paying attention so I didn't get all the details but apparently Roy Williams lost his starting job. I would have to assume Knox is starting this week then but I didn't hear exactly what they said (local fox bears pregame show).

The official team depth chart on their website still has Williams starting.

 

[Limp Ditka]

D was awful today. Lovie Smith must own Steve Smith in a dynasty league because, yet again he simply refused to double him. And they gave up 6.5 YPC to a team that hasn't been able to run the ball all year.

Cam Newton - impressive and fun to watch. Looked poised all afternoon. He moved great in the pocket, effortlessly avoided the little bit of heat the Bears front 4 was able to put on him and was clearly the best athlete on the field. The kid's going to be special

 

[The Tick]

D was awful today. Lovie Smith must own Steve Smith in a dynasty league because, yet again he simply refused to double him. And they gave up 6.5 YPC to a team that hasn't been able to run the ball all year. Cam Newton - impressive and fun to watch. Looked poised all afternoon. He moved great in the pocket, effortlessly avoided the little bit of heat the Bears front 4 was able to put on him and was clearly the best athlete on the field. The kid's going to be special

Seriously, how many times do we have to get beat by that guy to figure out we may want to cover him.I actually thought pressure on Cam wasn't too bad, he probably slipped out of 4 sacks at least that most qb's would be caught by.We escaped that one. Next week could be ugly, and i don't want to see it... Message to Lovie, that number 81 guy, better find a way to cover him, not that I think we have anyone that actually can.

 

[Statcruncher]

Next week could be ugly, and i don't want to see it... Message to Lovie, that number 81 guy, better find a way to cover him, not that I think we have anyone that actually can.

No one on the Chicago roster can cover #81. I sure hope the Bears have a blitz scheme that they haven't unveiled yet, because the only way to stop Calvin is to put his QB on the ground before the pass.

 

[geoff8695]

Next week could be ugly, and i don't want to see it... Message to Lovie, that number 81 guy, better find a way to cover him, not that I think we have anyone that actually can.

No one on the Chicago roster in the NFL can cover #81. I sure hope the Bears have a blitz scheme that they haven't unveiled yet, because the only way to stop Calvin is to put his QB on the ground before the pass.

Fixed

 

[Power Monster]

Fool's gold type of win. The shocking part in all of this is the defense. This defense is going to give up a ton of yards and make the big plays but when this unit goes up against seasoned QBs they will be in trouble. 2-2 is not that bad when you consider the teams that they have played but I just do not see that many more cream puffs on the schedule outside of KC and Minny.

The glaring holes in the offense will spell doom. Matt Forte is essentially the offense but when they fall behind it will get ugly. Have to take them one game at a time but you have to think that this next game @ Detroit is going to be a mountain to climb.

 

[Statcruncher]

Fool's gold type of win. The shocking part in all of this is the defense. This defense is going to give up a ton of yards and make the big plays but when this unit goes up against seasoned QBs they will be in trouble. 2-2 is not that bad when you consider the teams that they have played but I just do not see that many more cream puffs on the schedule outside of KC and Minny.

The glaring holes in the offense will spell doom. Matt Forte is essentially the offense but when they fall behind it will get ugly. Have to take them one game at a time but you have to think that this next game @ Detroit is going to be a mountain to climb.

I believe you're correct, the win looks good on paper, but doesn't give me confidence in the team at all. What's worse IMO, the Bears have a pyrite schedule from here out:@ Lions

VIKINGS

@ Buccaneers (London)

@ Eagles (after bye)

LIONS

CHARGERS

@ Raiders

CHIEFS

@ Broncos

SEAHAWKS

@ Packers

@ Vikings

I can see them getting 6 - 7 more wins (the ones in green and maybe the Raiders), which would put them around 8-8 or 9-7 on season. I'm afraid anything other than a losing record will allow mangagement to again gloss over existing chronic problems and fail to improve the fatal flaws. Wins are nice, but taking steps backward by not adressing issues in the offseason will probably make this season a complete failure IMO.

 

[gdg76]

What have the Lions really done so far?

beat TB - good win, but it was week one

Decimated KC - big deal

barely beat the Vikings - again, big deal and they should have never been down so much

barely beat the hobbled Cowboys - again, big deal (see Vikings)

Bears have lost to Green Bay and New Orleans, two teams I think would beat the Lions.

I could easily see this being a split for the season.

Bears should be pretty much even with Detroit, Oakland, Chargers, Bucs. They should beat the Broncos, Vikings Chiefs and Seahawks. Packers will win again.

Therefore, 7 should be their floor, and I could see 9 or 10 possible. Probably not going to get it done for a wildcard spot this year.

 

[Power Monster]

Fool's gold type of win. The shocking part in all of this is the defense. This defense is going to give up a ton of yards and make the big plays but when this unit goes up against seasoned QBs they will be in trouble. 2-2 is not that bad when you consider the teams that they have played but I just do not see that many more cream puffs on the schedule outside of KC and Minny.

The glaring holes in the offense will spell doom. Matt Forte is essentially the offense but when they fall behind it will get ugly. Have to take them one game at a time but you have to think that this next game @ Detroit is going to be a mountain to climb.

I believe you're correct, the win looks good on paper, but doesn't give me confidence in the team at all. What's worse IMO, the Bears have a pyrite schedule from here out:@ Lions

VIKINGS

@ Buccaneers (London)

@ Eagles (after bye)

LIONS

CHARGERS

@ Raiders

CHIEFS

@ Broncos

SEAHAWKS

@ Packers

@ Vikings

I can see them getting 6 - 7 more wins (the ones in green and maybe the Raiders), which would put them around 8-8 or 9-7 on season. I'm afraid anything other than a losing record will allow mangagement to again gloss over existing chronic problems and fail to improve the fatal flaws. Wins are nice, but taking steps backward by not adressing issues in the offseason will probably make this season a complete failure IMO.

I can see them grabbing 5 more wins. They can push it to 7 with a win over TB. Their last 5 games appear to be a favorable run outside of the Pack. The Raiders and the Chargers are tough M/Us

 

[tenaka]

I'm curious if anyone knows when the last time a team ran for over 200 yards and still managed to lose the time of possession battle. I tried looking for this information but its not exactly condusive to a google search.

 

[Statcruncher]

If I remember correctly the last time a team ran for over 200 yards and still managed to lose the time of possession battle was October 2nd, 2011 when the Chicago Bears did it to the Carolina Panthers. You'll have to look the others up yourself. Glad I could help.