There isn't much to say about a ballgame it'd be redundant to call a must win. Redundant and wrong. The Bears are no longer in must win territory. The Bears have entered just win territory. This organization is entering the disaster zone. Steve Rosenbloom is writing about the complete lack of intelligence from the coaching staff, Mike Mulligan has outside scouts confirming what I've been writing about Brian Urlacher for weeks and today David Haugh has a cover story on the apparent lack of effort from the Bears defense. Not to mention the fans and loyals readers of this site seem more interested in how to acquire Donovan McNabb than how to stop him on Sunday. I'm not.
The Eagles offense is not very good but - then again - neither was Minnesota's. However the Vikings have the best left side of an offensive line in football and they dominated Sunday - allowing the Vikes to pound left, away from Lance Briggs. Don't expect the Eagles to mirror this while starting the worst left tackle in football and an offensive line that surrendered three sacks to a Jets defense that only had three total coming into the game. The Bears perimeter rushers should have a field day and dominate up front.
And I'll add this. I expect the Bears to play as pissed off Sunday as they've played in a long, long time. I expect this team to hit people before and after the whistle. If there's even a sense of lethargy from the defense Sunday, then the season is all-but-over. The Eagles can't block and they have a quarterback with severe accuracy issues underneath. If the Bears play angry they won't just win Sunday, they'll dominate. If the Bears play like they played at home against the Vikings, they'll find themselves 2-5 Monday morning.
And then I'm gonna be pissed off.
#2 mikebdot said . . .I dont know if the team gives a shit anymore. I dont know if they'll play angry. I think they need to win a couple in a row, maybe on a fluke or somehow just win them with mediocre play, which is possible against our next two opponents. Then after those couple wins, when maybe they can smell the postseason, then maybe they will play angry. But right now i just dont know. I cant put my finger on it.
October 17, 2007
#3 Bill said . . .Someone made a comment the other day about what the chances are randomly selecting teams to win the super bowl would result in all 32 teams having a championship. If you rolled a 32 sided die, chances are greater than 50% that after 123 years all the sides would come up at least once. That is 91 years after it would be possible at all. Mathematical masterbating is fun.
As for the game, if they don't start playing better, I might have to start watching NHL again, if I can find a bar that can get versus, or whatever the hell channel that's televised on now.
October 17, 2007
#4 Nicole is miserable in this blue city said . . .mikedbot - I made that reference. I actually wrote a program to run simulations to come with the numbers (easier than the mathematics); it's just that I lost all the numbers and the paper I wrote from a hard disk crash. But I recall similar numbers - I think it was something like a 30% chance it could take 200 years.
My point in the paper I wrote is that the league clearly knows this - and that's why it had no problem "giving in" to free agency. How coudl they ever keep 32 citites interested in their team unless it always seemed a Super Bowl was within reach in 5 years or so? The draft and free agency makes it almost random - unless the organization is inept. And even then, the potential is always there.
October 17, 2007
#5 Big Earl said . . .I wish the fans could hold a forum and address the players (prior to game day) to express the urgency of the W. I donno that it would make a difference but at least we would feel a sense of relief getting it off our chests. Who knows, maybe it would enthuse them.
October 17, 2007
#6 Pissed Off said . . .It can be argued that Brian Urlacher is distracted from the ceaseless stream of paternity suits, alimony and child custody battles. Urlacher needs to grow up off the football field. And take responsibility for the fact that he likes to fuck anything with two legs. Buy a condom Brian. Better still, be a man and own up to the fact that you need to be an active father to the children you've put on this planet.
October 17, 2007
#7 topherized said . . .Its so mind numbing talking Bears football with people who either arent fans or are FWFs that dont know shit. There are just so many things they dont know and what you say goes over their head. Ugh.
October 17, 2007
#8 FWF That Doesn't Know Shit said . . .Dear Defensive Front 7,
Brian Westbrook DOES NOT make it into the secondary one time this week. Old man McNabb spends the day picking himself off the ground, and you finally (FINALLY) get a pick/fumble returned for a TD.
Show 'em why they call this the black and blue division. We're the monsters of the midway, the most talented defense in football, and we should be pissed off. Time to climb out of the cellar and back to glory.
Love,
Your frustrated fans.PS. I'll be playing angry at the sports bar on sunday.
October 17, 2007
#9 Big Earl said . . .As Mark Schlereth and Mike Golic talked about on ESPN's NFL Live the other day, truth be told the Bears were/are an overrated football team. They both agreed with the statement made by Chris Mortenson that the Bears are a mediocre football team within a weaker than typical NFC. Schereth predicted 7 wins to begin the season, Golic predicted 9, Mortenson predicted 8.
The stunner has been the non-impressive defense. Everybody knew that Rex Grossman was worthless and that the offense was average at best.
October 17, 2007
#10 Pissed Off said . . .I think we win on Sunday. Youre right, this is not a "must win" game. This team is beyond that in what is a lost season.
October 17, 2007
#11 Al in WI said . . .Went back and read some of the archives, thats great stuff. I realized my first post here was during the first week of Nov 2006. Max appears to be the longest blogger who's still with us. Thank you Jeff for providing a place for me to tell everyone how I feel. This sucks right now, we need this team to start winning. We had such high expectation and now we're one of the worst team in the NFC.
October 17, 2007
#12 mikebdot said . . .I have to agree with Po'd. I don't know if this team cares anymore. I mean look at it right now, they quit against the Chargers in the 4th quarter, the Cowboys in the 4th quarter, and last sunday. That's garbage.
I put the blame on that to Lovie Smith. It's his job to motivate the team, and it isn't happening. It's time to chew ass, and I mean on the sideline during the game. Not a week later. I say again, would Ditka or Parcells tolerate this shit?October 17, 2007
#13 mikebdot said . . .PO'd: Who are you venting about?
Bill: According to my program (because I didn't want to calculate 32^31 power by hand, as well as the multitude of other crap that went into it, so I used a program too) there is only a 1.8% chance it would take 200 years. But I'm not sure on the logic I used. I'm pretty sure though as I means tested 4, 5, and 6 teams and the program matched my chickenscratches.
Regardless, Maple is one of the coolest pieces of software I've ever messed around with and I love any chance to mess with it. For 30% chance I got 143 years.
October 17, 2007
#14 Bill said . . .Jeff: what does A.N.G.R.Y. stand for? Or is that sort of a "cheer"?
October 17, 2007
#15 randomName said . . .mikedbot - I believe your numbers. I simply don't remember anymore and I wish I had the paper I wrote. I intended to send it to a statistician/football fan prof at Iowa State (I had an email correspondence with him going several years ago.)
I need to Gooogle Maple and see what you're talking about. Sorry for the off-topic.
October 17, 2007
#16 mikebdot said . . .just throw the ball to Hester. have him run zig zag patterns that no one can catch him in. throw the long ball every play.
In all seriousness Cedric is what we got to work with so have him RUN dont take him out when he FINALLY shows up to play, wth?
well nuff said,
later folksOctober 17, 2007
#17 Pissed Off said . . .Bill: I used it in college. It was very handy in statics class when you have 20 equations and 20 unknowns. That's all kinds of suck.
I used version 5.1. They're up to 11 already. Damn, am I THAT old? They're a Canadian company. If you listen to the Maple 11 Demo you can tell. It looks like it syncs up with Matlab now. Man, that would have been nice. Oh well.
Yeah, that was off topic, but talking about math kills the Bears related pain for a short time...
October 17, 2007
#18 BRIANsong said . . .Not venting about anyone in particular Mikeb, but you know if you're in conversation with someone who's not a Bears fan, like a friend, and the conversation moves to Bears talk. You can pretty much talk over their head by throwing out stats, names, particular plays or games etc. You'll know you've lost them when their eyes are glazed over. This site is the only place I can talk Bears football in depth and though I love you all I do wish I could have a conversation with some poeple in person occassionally about the Bears.
October 17, 2007
#19 mikebdot said . . .Stink and Golic both claimed the Saints were going rout the Bears in the NFC Championship game. Bears win Sunday and they'll both be saying they're a team on the rise. 9 wins will put them in the playoffs.
October 17, 2007
#20 Phil from SATX said . . .PO'd: In that case, I know EXACTLY what you mean.
October 17, 2007
#21 Nicole is miserable in this blue city said . . .Hey, math talk is cool! Jeff, I am trying not to succumb to the scarily convincing arguments that this team is being bad-coached into oblivion - beware, optimistic Bear fans, of clicking on those links above. And particularly with respect to Babich. And 4 new position coaches with 5 years of combined NFL experience. Hopefully they're quick studies if nothing else.
Regarding those 3 media guys who said the Bears are overrated and picked lousy seasons which appears to be coming true, I believe that their assessment was primarily based on Rex Grossman, who, let's face it, by the end of last year no national media guy believed in. If anything it was the last game deciding the projection of the next year, since the defense didn't live up to their billing in the SB either.
So they put the two together, said 1) we don't believe in their quarterback or backups; and 2) this defense must be overrated, look at the yards they gave up against a good QB. The reality of this year is the coaches made a QB change when they were forced to, and the defense was riddled by injuries early.
Bottom line - never give any credit to national guys even if they happen to predict correctly - they know far less about this team than any random blogger on this site. Our local guys, I'll listen to and give credence to (one glaring exception, of course), but national guys know NOTHING. I'm hoping our local guys are jumping to early conclusions about the coaching too. I will say that a comparison of this year's defensive stats with the first six games of last year is completely unfair due to the injuries - I think instead you should look at our D after we lost MB and TH and Vash/Tillman (I think both those guys were out at different times last year) and then you'll have a comparison. My recollection is we started giving up LOTS of yards last year when that happened, and that was under Rivera.
It's easy to take one number or result and compare it to last year and draw a bunch of conclusions but the reality is much more complicated than that. The reality is there's been way more critical injuries this year and the huge adjustment required after 3 games to a new QB. Coaching maybe hasn't helped as much as it should, but I doubt it has been a major contributor to the results to date.
October 17, 2007
#22 NGB said . . .PO'd I hear ya about being a real fan and having to stomach the masses who have jumped on the bandwagon for whatever team is winning.
Living in Indy during the Superbowl was horrific. Girls donned in blue that haven't watched a game all season were everywhere posing to be a fan. I would bet most of them were in the bathroom when Hester ran back to start the game and came out asking "What happened?"
The most glorious moment of my life is what just happened and you were in the can.October 17, 2007
#23 Mike said . . .Did you see that Archuleta says our D has no identity? Way to motivate the troops. Does he not realize he is a big contributer to that being the case. What happened to him being good agenst the run? He certainly didn't show it last week.
Babich said he didn't understand what Arculeta's comment meant. Real vote of confidence!
Our D is in a sad state right now and I really hope they pick it up vs the eagles.October 17, 2007
#24 B.A. Baracus said . . .This will never happen with Virginia McCasket and Sweaty Teddy Phillips at the helm, but....
Fire Jerry Angelo and Lovie Smith and hire Bill Cowher. Give him Bill Belichick like control of things and hire a top flight Player Personnel Director to handle scouting, the college draft, player acquisition. Cowher and his demeanor would be a wonderful fit in Chicago.
October 17, 2007
#25 Mike said . . .The reality for the Bears' defense is that they have not played that well since week 12 of last season. After Tommie Harris went down, the defense has been gashed more often than not - even in the SuperBowl - by both the run and pass. Due to the constant downward trend, it is understandable why national pundits have picked the Bears to only win 7 to 9 games and have labeled them as "overrated."
The best take that I have heard on the Bears' defense over the last 2 to 3 seasons - and an opinion with which I agree - is that the sub-par offense's constant reliance on the stout defense has finally taken its toll. Case and point - Brian Urlacher sat out of all of training camp this year and only practices on Fridays. His age, coupled with the beating he has taken over the last couple of years may be starting to take its toll.
I am perfectly aware that all teams must deal with injuries. However, at the current time, there is no way to overlook the fact that the Bears have not been able to overcome the injuries to their defense based, in part, on them being on the field the majority of the last 15 regualr and post-seaons games. When your defense starters - including pro-bowlers - start dropping like flies over 15 games, sooner or later you are gonna get snake bitten.
October 17, 2007
#26 mikebdot said . . .Adam Archueleta sure has an identity -- HE SUCKS !!! He is the most wretched safety this team has had in years.
October 17, 2007
#27 Rancid said . . .I know they weren't safeties, but my least favorite Bears DBs are Jeremy Lincoln and Walt Harris. I hope Archuleta doesn't end up on that list.
October 17, 2007
#28 Phil from SATX said . . .Hey, I think I just figured Mike out. In # 25 he was bashing SAFETY AA and it just clicked. I think Mike is Mike Green! That's why he says he loves the Bears, but hates everyone who is a Bear. He's pissed he's stuck living in Seattle. Screw you Mike Green, you sucked!
October 17, 2007
#29 mikebdot said . . .BA, I think you're mostly right. However, you would expect injuries to pile up at the end of the season if that were occurring - we've had injuries this year at the beginning, when they shouldn't be worn out at all. I think it's bad luck mostly. However, without a doubt, if our offense can't get back to controlling TOP, games will continue to be lost and injuries on D will continue to occur.
October 17, 2007
#30 Embarrased said . . .In that Mike Mulligan article he mentions Mark Anderson sucking pretty bad. It seems like our ends just aren't big enough. They're great against the pass, but suck against the run. Anyone notice us playing better if Anderson was resting and Brown was in?
October 17, 2007
#31 Pissed Off said . . .Is it permissable to start wearing a bag on my head on Sundays. If so at what point should that begin, one more loss?
October 17, 2007
#32 Phil from SATX said . . .What would it take for you to get pumped about this team again? What sort of immediate change (the trade deadline is past us so that doesnt help) or move would get you back on the playoff bandwagon? Or have you not yet given up hope yet on the playoffs and this team?
After the Dallas game and then after the Lions game it still wasnt a big deal but now its gettting late people, week 7 of the season is upon us and its now or never. One more loss out of the next two weeks pretty much puts a dagger in the season and makes it just about impossible to climb out of the trenches for a playoff spot. If we have even 5 losses going into the bye you can put a fork in it. Or is the fork already firmly embedded?
October 17, 2007
#33 Fuckball Joe said . . .Mikeb, it might not be a size factor, it might be a skills/experience factor for Anderson. It's one thing to have a freakish first step and great moves to get past the more immobile blocker on a pass rush - it's another to be engaged by a run blocker and have to have the skills/technique/strength to shed that block and make the tackle. He may simply be a guy who's great at one aspect and not great at the other (especially possible given his age/experience). But I like your idea of subbing to Brown when it's a probable run play. And unfortunately for him, that may mean losing his starting position and going back to being inserted on obvious passing downs. In fact I think they should do precisely that. Good point!
October 17, 2007
#34 Mike said . . .Fuck the losses, mother fuckers. You gotta stand strong behind your team.
And stand proud if they win or lose.
You put a bag over your head if they lose again, and you're just lower than low. Get up off your own fat ass and go out on to that field and get the job done if you need to put a bag over your head.
My guy may never win an important tournament again. "He's not as strong as everyone else." "He doesn't hit the ball as hard as the "young guns.""
Well fuck it. He's the dude I enjoy rooting for cause no matter what I know he wants to win.
That's enough for me fuckers.
Ya'll need to quite your whining and bitching and just support the hairy mother fuckers.
October 17, 2007
#35 B.A. Baracus said . . .Mark Anderson hasn't been nearly the impact player he was last season. It probably has to do with Lovie playing him on more downs. What's wrong with Anderson simply being a very good situational defensive end? I say nothing. The real weakness at DE is Adewale Ogunleye. This guy somehow converted one good year in Miami into a lifetime of immunity from criticism in Chicago. Ogunleye has done jack shit in a Bear uniform. His pass rushing ability is very overrated and he gets steam rolled by running attacks. But Lovie maintains infatuation with the guy because he's athletic and runs well.
Maybe the Bears really do miss Dusty Dvoracek??
October 17, 2007
#36 Fuckvagina Jane said . . .Phil - True as to when you would expect injuries, but if you recall, Tillman and Vasher had injuries that held them out of games at the end of last year (although those games did not really matter). I think the injuries have slowly been accruing over time.
I think it is unfortunate that the defense is taking so much heat this year. Granted, the unit has not played well. But, in light of the yeomen effort they have displayed over the last 2 years, you would think they would be cut some slack. In today's sport world, it is always about what you have done for me lately - and I guess I am no exception.
I think the bigger indictment should go to the coaching staff and mainly Lovie. Despite suspect play calling and clock management, I do not like the Tampa 2 defense. Of the top ten teams in the NFL this year, only one team - Indy - runs the Tampa 2 as its base defense (even though the scheme is probably only called 1/3 of the time). Indy happens to be blessed with a great QB and a good offense.
My biggest complaint with the Tampa 2 is not the scheme itself, but the personnel it demands. The overall reliance on undersized and fast players can be a detriment in many situations - especially in run stopping.
Lovie and Bob Ba-Bee-ahtch better bring the blitz this weekend or the defense, along with the Bears, will be sucking high on teet come the end of the game.
October 17, 2007
#37 Bill said . . .Why so angry fuckball Jim?
October 17, 2007
#38 Pissed Off said . . .Bear fans DO NOT wear bags. We've had much worse teams than this (though this may be the worst in terms of failing to live up to expectations.)
I'll never be embarrased to say or shwo I'm a Bear fan, no matter how disappointing they may be. It's in my blood, and I'm happy to know it's in my two sons' blood also.
October 17, 2007
#39 Phil from SATX said . . .My dream scenario:
1) This team wins enough games to get into the playoffs, I dont care how.
2) We gain momentum as the season ends, with a nice winning streak, and we get healthy as we do so. WRs magically catch passes, Benson puts down the peace pipe and runs with passion looking like a #4 pick going into the playoffs.
3) Rex gets in due to lack of performance from Griese or injury and looks like early 2006 Rex going into the playoffs and the team rallies around him. We could be the team no one wants to play. The D is stepping up, the Offense keeps them off the field so they can actually stop teams when they're out there.
I'll take my chances from there. It is only a DREAM though.
October 17, 2007
#40 NGB said . . .PO'd I have far from given up on this year's team. But talk to me in two games. We've GOT to win the next two (which would disgustingly be our first win streak of the season). If we don't win the next two, then it's time to talk about next year, get the QB talk going, go to Orton to get much-needed R&D about your moves next year, even go back to Rex to see if benching and lack of pressure help him. Lovie, since you still get a pass no matter what happens this year, you'd have to seriously evaluate your position coaches. Perhaps new coaches all around? I'm sure ready for a change in O coordinator almost no matter what happens this year. Plenty to talk about.
But today, this week, this Sunday, I'm a believer. BIG TIME.
Go Bears!
October 17, 2007
#41 Fuckball Joe said . . .If we would have pulled out that win last week everyone would be on the playoff bandwagon. It really came down to one bad coaching decision. Kicking off to Peterson killed us and now has left everyone including players and coaches having no faith in this team. Can we really let that one decision dictate so much?
October 17, 2007
#42 mikebdot said . . .Cause I read this blog and all I read " is poor me and poor us and if our team losses one more game our season's over blah blah blah."
You can debate all you want about who should throw what and run where and blitz when.
But in the end - win/lose - there's not a fuckin' thing you can do about it but drink a beer and enjoy the football game you're able to watch on that comfy chair or bar stool.
The Chicago Bears will march on year after year.
October 17, 2007
#43 mikebdot said . . .Getting Vasher back will be a huge help. I'm guessing that isn't happening this week though as he was DNP at practice. So was Tommie Harris. Ruben Brown and Darwin Walker were LT.
October 17, 2007
#44 Rancid said . . .Getting Vasher back will be a huge help. I'm guessing that isn't happening this week though as he was DNP at practice. So was Tommie Harris. Ruben Brown and Darwin Walker were LP.
October 17, 2007
#45 Bill said . . .Hey great news! Berrian just switched to Rosenhaus for an agent. I hate that shithead. I swear everyone on the Bears has him for a freaking agent. He's gonna need all the help he can get signing a decent contract if he doesn't start catching the damn ball when he's open.
October 17, 2007
#46 Al in WI said . . .Berrian will be gone next year. He's not good enough to put up with Rosenhaus, especially if they decide to get Briggs. Oh wait - another Rosenhaus client. But they managed to get Olsen signed quickly even though the Briggs drama was going on.
Anyway - I don't see anything in Berrian to make it worth the hassle.
October 17, 2007
#47 Al in WI said . . .My Dream Senario:
1) Moose pulls a hammy and is out for a few games allowing Bradley and Hester more chances on the outside.
2) Grossman comes back at halftime of Eagles game to spark sputtering offense. Realizing this is his last shot he plays agressive and our Offense is dynamic.
3) The defense gets healthy and better as the season wheres on. And finally snaps out of their funk.
4) While the Bears get on a roll, the bullshit packers stop getting games handed to them and go into a slump. Bears take tie-breaker and division.
5) Steelers get on another roll and knock of the colts agains after the colts knock off NE. The Super Bowl is Chicago-Pittsburgh.
That's not too much to ask is it?October 17, 2007
#48 Mike said . . .Bill, I was a Berrian fan coming into the season, but I have to second your opinion. Looking back, no player on the Bears has had a more negative effect on the season so far. His lack of effort and dropped passes directly lead to Grossman's benching and losses to the Chargers and Cowboys.
October 17, 2007
#49 Pissed Off said . . .Bernard Berrian is as good as gone after this season. There is no way the Bears pony up a multi-year contract after they way he has played. At best, he is a 3rd or 4th receiver type in this league. You might as well stick a fork in Mushin Muhammed because he's done. With Mark Bradley being a bust, that leaves our receiving corps down to Rashied Davis and the ocassional appearance of Devin Hester.
Jerry Angelo will need to pull a rabbit out of his asshole to have a successful offseason. Because the Bears have PRESSING NEEDS at a multitude of positions.
October 17, 2007
#50 Big Earl said . . .Agreed, I've said before if Berrian doesnt drop the TD pass in the Dallas game Rex is still the starter at least for the Lions game wand he wouldnt have lost it for single handedly like the other guy did. There is no point in keeping Berrian if he cant catch passes. We have Hester we can use for the deep speed guy route so if Berrian wants to be on this team he needs to find another role.
October 17, 2007
#51 Mike Litisore said . . .Get rid of Bernard Berrian? Put down the fucking crack pipe fellas. If not Berrian, then who the fuck do we have at wide receiver. Grandpa Simpson could play better than Mushmouth Mahumid. Bears need to pay Berrian the big bucks and he'll be just fine. Also need to draft a couple wide receivers in the 1st and 2nd round next April.
October 17, 2007
#52 Kobe Bryant said . . .Who is this jerk off Mike and who invited him to the party? Say, have any of you guys tried Madden 2008 yet? I'm thinking about buying it.
October 17, 2007
#53 Max said . . .HEY MAN,
Put me in at WR. You know I can out-leap anybody in this league and my route-running ability is underrated. You can put me in on special teams for punt block, dammit, just get me the hell outta L.A.
October 17, 2007
#54 Decatur Staleys #7 said . . .My dream scenario
1) Bears win 10 straight regular season games, make the playoffs as a wild card and then win 4 more in a row in the playoffs to win the Super Bowl.
. . . questions?
October 18, 2007
#55 Rancid said . . .Wow...With the week to week games.I've seen about close to half the team cut going into next year,An about 22 draft picks needed to replace those same players cut.An also we need about 1/2 a billion dollars to sign them.
I Like to see the O line addressed 1st.
Where's Metcalf?
Is Josh Beekman hurt?John Tait exp 9yrs
Josh Beekman exp R
Ruben Brown exp 13 yrs
Roberto Garza exp 7yrs
Terrence Metcalf 6 yrs
Fred Miller exp 12 yrs
John St Clair exp 8 yrs
Olin Kreutz exp 10 yrs
Pat Mannelly exp 10 yrsWho would you keep?
An for god sake don't talk Fred Miller out retiring again next year.
Maybe Brown an Miller can do a re make of that D.Glover an J.Pesci movie
"Gone Fishin'"We've already gotten younger on the D line,I think JA should address the O line 1st.
It makes you wonder when the Dolts' draft a rookie in the 2nd rd an starts,
What were the Bears thinking drafting DE Dan Bazuin, with the current miles on this O line.
An then going for Wolfe in the 3rd when he would have been there in the 4-5th rd.I might even say the 5th to 7thHow you like JA an his scouts now?
October 18, 2007
#56 Phil from SATX said . . .Decatur: For starters you can remove Mannely from your list. He doesn't actually play line, he's the long snapper and will likely hold down a roster spot as long as he wants to, I can't remember him ever missing a snap.
I'm hoping we lose Miller and Brown to retirement. Kind of ironic that that they likely stayed an extra year for a chance at a ring and they're one of the main reason we probably won't get it.
October 18, 2007
#57 Phil from SATX said . . .Wow it's quiet here this morning. I get it - not much to say until we see a WIN.
I watched much of the game again last night, mostly from the second half on. Several comments on what I watched:
Defense started strong out of the locker room with two 3 and outs. In the meantime, we moved the ball well on our possessions but had drives stall at the 50 or even further. Ced killed one with a dropped pass, Griese was inaccurate on another.
The 3rd series for the defense was another AP breakaway - that was the one McGowan whiffed on (but plenty of others were responsible as well, including Briggs).
After that the defense started crumbling until the end of the game - Bobby Wade kept a drive alive on a 3rd and long, and Chester was gashing them. There was a long pass to the good receiver which could be been a touchdown but was still well defended by Trumaine McBride.
Ogunleye had a huge whiff on the shorter TD run by Peterson, had him in his arms and did nothing. (That was the one D. Manning tried to strip rather than pushing out of bounds).
I'm going to say two opposite things about Griese. He made lots of good plays, throughout the game, including lots of big gains, mostly to tight ends. He also made more than a few terrible throws. Both picks were terrible, with the first more excusable (running to the right, trying to make a play) than the second, which was just a horribly inaccurate throw that sailed over Muhammed's head into a group of 3 Vikings. PLUS there was a 3rd throw, also horrible, that should have easily been intercepted.
He is not particularly "safe" with the ball (at least with throwing it, he seems very safe with the ability to hold on to it when getting sacked). HOWEVER, his big plus is the picks don't bother him - he comes right back and makes positive plays after his picks.
If Rex had been this way, he would still be playing. Also, Griese is GREAT in the dink n dunk game, and great at getting the ball out quickly when the play calls for it. Those kind of plays look like guaranteed yardage, netting a minimum of 5 yards per, usually more. It really was a nicely called game by RT, EXCEPT
CB had a great game (aside from drops) but was SHELLED nearly every time he went left. In fact, it seemed like they may have been tipping the play because almost every time he carried left they brought a blitz from that side and he would run right into it. The runs right, especially the pitches, were nearly always good gains. Maybe they lined up their best against our best? (right side rushers vs. left side line?)
The reason the Oline looked so good was how fast Grease was getting rid of the ball. Then the few times he took a little time to get it off, it was like the rush expected a quick throw and didn't go all out to get to him.
The D never gave up, brought it hard in the end despite Vikings' refusal to go conservative, gave us a chance to win. It was the ill-fated kick to AP (who by the way had just brought one back about 35 yards, the one he bobbled) that ultimately resulted in the loss.
News from today is D. Manning will stay at safety (good) and still considering starting T. McBride at corner with R. Manning staying at slot. It may be that R. Manning is simply not that fast, I mentioned that McBride did a nice job in running with a really fast receiver, it may be an athleticism issue. I still think that where there's fast receivers they need single coverage - this Cover 2 does NOT work well with streaking receivers. We have corners who can stay with them. Maybe some hybrid scheme? I don't want my safeties on any fast receivers, at any time, except for support. I guess in the upcoming game we're talking about Kevin Curtis, who burned the Jets with a 75 yard TD play.
Hope we win, so hope can stay alive.
October 18, 2007
#58 Phil from SATX said . . .meant to say, we DON'T have safeties who can stay with or pick up streaking receivers.
October 18, 2007
#59 Bill said . . .So did you know Brian Westbrook stole $3MM from the Eagles? I hadn't heard about this - in an accounting error, he got paid a double $3MM signing bonus, back in '05! Did he say anything?
No! Of course not!
So now they figured it out and are withholding his weekly paychecks until they can work out how to get it back.
THAT's character for you!
Learned that from the Philly Inquirer, where they also have a nice headline: "Muppets of the Midway." Referring to the plummeting rep of the defense. The article mostly talked about how incredibly pissed off Brian Urlacher is.
I still think that's going to be very good for the Bears on Sunday - I still believe in him ALL THE WAY. I have faith in #54.
October 18, 2007
#60 jeff said . . .I thought there would be some comments about Hough's column today - where a few of the Bears (Tommie Harris and Wale I think) saying they lost the hunger after losing in the SB.
Pretty gutsy admission, and given the millions these guys get paid, you woudl expect a backlash from fans. Deservedly so, I'd add.
BUT - it makes sense. It fits. Sometimes the best answer is the simplest one. And the only way to fix a problem is to acknowledge it in the first place.
October 18, 2007
#61 Pissed Off said . . .i read it this morning and to be honest...i don't wanna talk about it.
October 18, 2007
#62 Phil from SATX said . . .Phil your kidding about Rex right. Just cuz no one is posting today doesnt mean they arent reading. If Rex played like Griese is now he still would have been benched. He got benched because the team was losing and if he had lost to the Lions and Vikings (two horrible teams) like BG in addition to the Bolts and Cowboys (two good teams) he would have been out a long time ago, probably after the Lions game. What I'm saying is if the team is winning Rex plays. There is no way Lovie would have kept him in for more than one more loss (lions game had he played) because even though the problems go way beyond the QB, rex would have been the primary guy blamed all along anyway and Lovie would have had to pull him.
October 18, 2007
#63 Bill said . . .I think that talk is stupid and meaningless. Guys are just spouting off and making themselves look dumb - TH has done that before. Guarantee that later these guys will retract it. Are you going to tell me they're not playing hard? Because they went to the SB last year? I'm not buying that for a second. They're just casting around, brainstorming reasons to explain strange results. However that was a bad one that I'm certain Lovie is none too happy about.
I much prefer Brian U. - check this out:
Linebacker Brian Urlacher won't be coming to town until this weekend, but you could practically see him clenching his teeth.
And you could almost hear the steam coming from his ears when he was asked what happened to the great defense that led the Chicago Bears to the Super Bowl last season.What factor have injuries played in its decline?
"None," Urlacher said.
What impact have his back problems had on his performance?
"None," Urlacher said.
The defending NFC champion Bears will play the Eagles on Sunday at Lincoln Financial Field, and Urlacher, one of the game's most feared linebackers, is already in a bad mood.
In other words, words are meaningless. Only results matter.
Still putting my money on #54.
October 18, 2007
#64 Phil from SATX said . . .Phil - I want you to be right. But complancency is a very real emotion; and the horse-shit performance by the defense on Sunday certainly smacke d of that. Winning in GB gave them a swagger they hadn't earned. Facing a team they shoudl have beaten made them lose focus. Those things seemed evident.
And like you said, words are meaningless. So if Urlacher wants to sound macho and say injuries and his own back problems are nto a factor - well, those are just words too. I can try all I want but I'm too old to beat me boys in driveway basketball anymore. If Urlacher is hurt and can't get off blocks, then his play will suffer. He's still better than most LBs in the league, but not the superstar we saw last year.
Still, I hope the fight goes back into the players on defense. I'd rather see them lose hitting and gang-tackling than what we saw last week.
October 18, 2007
#65 JL said . . .Bill, if there was an emotion at play last week that contributed to the overall poor play of the defense, it wasn't lack of caring - it very well may have been overconfidence initially like you refer to, which I think gave way to shock and confusion. However, the defense made a bunch of good plays last week, especially in the second half - that's what I saw when I rewatched the game. However, when they weren't in the right position, AP punished them harshly. I didn't see lack of effort, I saw mistakes and poor tackling. There's not that many other RBs around who can take it to the house like we saw in AP. There were NOT many sustained drives in the second half, just enough mistakes to allow 2 scores.
And Brian can say "injuries don't matter" and I like his attitude about it but the fact is injuries did matter in that game. More changes on the line, D Manning playing a position he's currently not real good at, a rookie in T. McBride playing, a newly-playing McGowan, it all makes a difference. I think Babich knee-jerked AA out of there, punishing him for a missed tackle and blown coverage on the long pass play. I appreciate the fact that changes, any changes, were made at half time but that was the wrong one. Chicago has had 9 different starters in the secondary, most in the league. It's going to take a toll. I just don't buy that these guys didn't care.
I still think we witnessed history being made in AP's coming out party. And I have to admit to hoping that our division rival is going to beat the Cowboys on Sunday. (I know that sounds stupid but you know I hate them Cowboys). I'm also not going to be rooting for losses in our division, unless they come at our hands. The rest of the division is meaningless to us right now - what is meaningful is BEATING THE EAGLES.
October 18, 2007
#66 Phil from SATX said . . .You know what? I read the Haugh article and it pisses me off. Here's Tommie Harris' quote:
"It's one thing to go to a Super Bowl and win and it's another to go there and lose and I think it's more difficult," Harris continued. "When you win it, you get to stand up like, 'We're keeping this trophy, this is ours.' But it really takes a lot out of you if you get that far [and lose]."
Oh really, Tommie Harris? Did it really take a lot out of you to sit on the sideline and cheer for your team? Oh, I'm sorry...I thought you might be even hungrier to get to the Superbowl because YOU DIDN'T PLAY IN LAST YEAR'S! Do you know why you "think" it's more difficult? Because you don't KNOW because you didn't PLAY.
Bullshit. If they want to throw lame excuses like that as the reason they're flailing on D they might as well pack it in. You're only as good as your last outing bitches. Give me a fuckin' break. I understand injuries and personal motivations get in the way - but don't tell me about an emotional letdown impacting the next season. You get paid millions and we pay thousands to watch you do your job. Pathetic.
October 18, 2007
#67 Phil from SATX said . . .PO'd missed your comment about Rex, you may be right but it was just impossible to get on his bandwagon this year because there were no positives to be seen - no TDs to make up for picks. I can tell you I would have supported him if I still saw that the fireworks were in there. I already went on record that I was prepared to deal with Rex picks as long as I also got Rex fireworks - for whatever reason this year we didn't get fireworks, we didn't even get a packet of snakes and a lit punk.
Knowing now that Griese isn't going to be a mistake free QB, I would swap that for a Rex who threw both picks and TDs. But I don't think we'll ever see that again this year barring injury. Anyway, that's what I meant.
October 18, 2007
#68 Al in WI said . . .Tommie may be a great player but he talks too much and says stupid things. I'll tell Tommie something - he needs to pick up his level of play a whole lot if he wants to be considered a Pro Bowl player. Sunday's performance was the least effective I've ever seen him on the field.
Stop your pontificating and get to playing, aiight?
October 18, 2007
#69 Phil from SATX said . . .Phil, I apreciate your honesty in assesing Griese, it seems to me that most of the people who backed the change have been unwilling to admit his failings. That near pick you mentioned would have changed everything. It would have wiped out the comeback that everyone got hung up on and meant at a 31-17 loss at home with 1 Griese td, and 3 picks. I think Lovie would have had to make another switch at that point.
You are right that Griese doesn't seem to be as effected by his mistakes as Rex did. He also is more patient when the team falls behind by 10 pts plus. But on the other hand as Po'd correctly pointed out, he doesn't face the scrutiny that Grossman does either.
I would also add in defense of Grossman that part of the reason you didn't see the fireworks, was because of the poor play of the wideouts as well as playcalling in those early games. As Po'd and I mentioned yesterday there were several plays that if had been made would have drastically altered the results of the San Diego and Cowboy games. Both for the team and for Rex. And those plays were on Moose, and Berrian. By my count they would have added at least two more tds, and taken away at least 3 ints from his total.October 18, 2007
#70 Phil from SATX said . . .As much of a perpetual optimist as I am, I have to see I'm seeing signs of an out-of-control locker room here. Let me count the ways:
1) Tommie Harris and Ogunleye saying to actual reporters that being in the Super Bowl took the hunger out of them.
2) Tommie also reportedly saying about the same "it was too big of an emotional letdown." (Huh? Which is it Tommie?)
3) Ricky Manning Jr. saying that the coaches need to figure out a place to stick D. Manning and keep him there.
4) Cedric Benson saying that he doesn't understand why he was sitting so much after getting good yards.
5) AA saying basically he didn't agree with his half time benching.
How much latitude is Lovie giving these guys? Do they have no fear of retribution from the coach no matter what they say? It seems very loosey goosey and out of control to me. Makes me very concerned about the apparent lack of respect shown to the coach, and concerned about whether coach is in charge of the team.
October 18, 2007
#71 Al in WI said . . .Al, you may be right - a few plays different, a few details different in those games, maybe we still have Rex playing. The reason the coaches had to make the switch was not 100% media/fan storm, though, it was because of Rex's demeanor back there during those games. He just gave absolutely no sense of being ready to take control of the team, despite the bad things happening to them. The coaches could see nothing in his face or demeanor to suggest that rolling him out again wouldn't have exactly the same result. Change had to be made. And you need to blame Rex for that - not for the dropped passes which weren't his fault but because he didn't grab his offense by the throat and demand better play. It's not in him yet. When it gets there, I think he can be a good, even great, quarterback.
The offensive players are playing better now - I think it's because of Griese - whether he motivates them, demands better or they just have more confidence in him - they're playing better.
October 18, 2007
#72 JL said . . .I disagree that the players are playing that much better for Griese. I think Griese has been given a much better chance to succede that Rex did. He's had Olsen for all three starts, he's gotten to see Hester more, and he's gotten to use the shotgun more than Grossman did.
Having said that, the results aren't that much different. Most of Griese's stats have come in the final two mins of games where the Bears have been way behind, and playing prevent defenses. At least 3 touchdowns as a matter of fact. I think think that inflates his stats, and makes it look better then it is.October 18, 2007
#73 Phil from SATX said . . .You're right, Al. Griese at his best gets us a decent chance to win. Grossman at his best gets us a chance to dominate but hey, it's also a relic at this point. That the stats for our 2 QBs this season just underscores the point that we somehow keep on needing to rehash - that our QBs suck and even at their best our offense is pretty putrid.
October 18, 2007
#74 Smelly Butt Hair said . . .Griese:
20 1st downs 458 yards 31 points
16 1st downs 285 yards 27 points
22 1st downs 303 yards 27 pointsRex:
16 1st downs 239 yards 10 points
18 1st downs 239 yards 20 points
11 1st downs 202 yards 3 pointsRex had to come back from being down in his two losses too. It didn't happen. And Griese's gotten far worse defensive support in his two losses than Rex did in his. Griese would have won the San Diego game. Maybe not Cowboys, but I bet he'd have put up more than 10 points. It's true that the offensive coordinator didn't do Rex any favors, but there were still plays to be made.
October 18, 2007
#75 Older Man said . . .Fed put a beat-down on the Can-ass.
What's new?
October 18, 2007
#76 Al in WI said . . .Does Bono want to suck on the biddy?
October 18, 2007
#77 Al in WI said . . .You can spin numbers anyway you want. As I said Rex's don't reflect the way he played in those games. Another thing not reflected in those stats is the fact that Grossman faced tougher defenses then Griese did. Losing to the Lions and Viking at home is a disgrace, while at least the viking game isn't all on Griese, you can't say either the charger or cowboy games were on Rex either.
As I said Griese is better at taking what the defense gives him when the team gets down by 10pts plus. I'm not sure that is a compliment though, because you are down by 10 and we haven't won those games.October 18, 2007
#78 Bill said . . .Either way, the Bears are staring into the abyss right now. A loss in the next two weeks, and the season is over. This is it, and I have no idea what to expect...........
October 18, 2007
#79 beardown1982 said . . .I've said it more than once - but the fact that we're debating who is better, Grossman or Griese, just goes to show how bad the QB situation really is.
October 18, 2007
#80 Guy Bagely said . . .Grossman or Griese?
If this team turns it around, it will have far more to do with the defense and running game than either of those two...
October 18, 2007
#81 Chi-Town Joe said . . .Who's fatter?
You or your mom?
October 18, 2007
#82 Navy Blue said . . .I honestly have stopped giving a shit. I just want us to get through week by week and stop worrying about the bigger picture. And we might not be even close to as good as we were in 06, but too fucking bad. We just gotta deal with the day-by-day...
October 18, 2007
#83 Coxy said . . .This is not a team that wants to win. We have a QB who is trying not to lose, receivers who are averse to catching, RBs who want their stats more than winning.. and a defense that is reading last year's press clippings.
No decent defensive team should allow 10 yard APC.. must less 20 ! . This is not indicative of a team that wants to win.
Anyone really believe they can beat the Eagles playing like this? I don't.
October 19, 2007
#84 Pissed Off said . . .Why is it Grossman or Griese argument? Griese put up 31 points against a team that everybody in the world thought would not be able to put up 17 against the Bears. Last minute scores, who cares - he still threaded the needle to Moose and hit Hester in stride. I think the last minute scores count more because they know we are going to be passing yet he was still successful.
Grossman at his best was over a year ago and alot of those were against bad teams. San Fran, Bills, etc. Until Griese has some Grossmanlike disgusting games, then I will have this debate again.
Our D failed us last game. It hasnt been the same Bears D. Thats the problem, not QB.
October 19, 2007
#85 Pissed Off said . . .Griese's games have all been "bad rexlike" until the final minutes, which is why we are getting our fucking ass kicked in the first place all game. Not to mention the entire Lions game was horrbile, I dont think even a bad rex day would single handedly lose a game to the Lions. BTW coxy what happened to your support of Rex? Why are you flip flopping like other(s) have. Rex lost to the Boys and Bolts, two really good teams, when other parts of the team werent doing their share. Griese lost to the Vikes at home and the Lions, two of the worst teams in the NFL. I dont see the mystery here. You dont have to be status quo, I suppose when Rex gets back in everyone will be back on his bandwagon? You guys cant have it both ways. You can support whoever is in there but dont bash one when you're eventually going to have to praise him.
October 19, 2007
#86 Rancid said . . .I will say that last game was mostly on the D but the stupid Griese pick didnt help our chances, in fact had he not thrown it we probably would HAVE WON, so who's it on now? Not to mention the pass he threw at 3 defenders and by the grace of God that Viking dropped it when it hit him in the numbers. You all would be singing a differerent tune had the guy held onto the INT. S0 his play was not good Sunday to say the least.
Also we were down by 2 scores when Griese was passing against a PREVENT defense, its no feat to throw for big gains on a prevent defense, even if they know its coming.
October 19, 2007
Darexblog.com?
October 19, 2007
Here at DaBearsBlog, you are free to kill us or the Bears as you so wish. You are not free, however, to be an asshole. So if you spew racism or ill-meaning foul language (cursing about football is just fine) or anything of that ilk, your comments ain't gonna last long, jerk.