The worst team in the NFL in the month of December is playing on Championship Sunday. So are two six seeds. Arizona and Philadelphia won the same number of games this season as the Chicago Bears. What's it all mean? It means exactly what I've been arguing here throughout the 2008 season; an argument that has been inanely and repeatedly shot down by many readers. All you have to do is get into the tournament.
Say what you want about a struggling secondary, invisible pass rush and hobbled quarterback late in the year. The Bears were one win away from being in the tournament this year. A win that would have put Donovan McNabb on a bar stool at McGillin's for the wildcard round; nevermind a possible Super Bowl berth. You pick the win. Eleven seconds in Atlanta? Brian Griese down the stretch? Ten-point lead blows at Carolina and Houston?
The Bears don't need to rebuild this ballclub. They don't need to start over. They need to get one game better and give themselves a shot. One game better at corner. One game better in the pass rush. One game better at wide receiver. A nine-win team is going to represent the NFC in the Super Bowl and the reason is simple. They got in the tournament. The Bears didn't. Pick the game.
#2 jeremy34 said . . .Jeff, are you saying Lovie was right?
January 12, 2009
#3 Albert In Tucson said . . .That is why people here should give Lovie more credit, most people thought we couldn't win six games this year. We won more than we lost, and I am not a big fan of the should of/ could have/ would have...but as mentioned.....we should have won a couple more games.
January 12, 2009
#4 Urlacher FTW said . . ."The Bears were one win away..." Sorry, that sounds a lot like "If your Aunt had a pair she'd be your Uncle. C'mon folks, it's not like they pissed away ONE game that cost them. Tampa, Atlanta, Houston. Many would add the Carolina meltdown. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me four times and you are not a playoff team.
January 12, 2009
#5 DTB said . . .I don't know that I question Lovie's ability to coach, just get sick of listening to him. I understand the stoic leader thing and fully respect that part of it. But he goes over the top with his always aloof, 1 of 6 canned comments to answer every question, every week thing. There is a big difference between being stoic and having no personality. He is the latter.
Plus I will always consider the Atlanta loss in 11 seconds, and the Houston loss (Manning at FS) to both rest squarely on Lovie's shoulders, therefore missing the playoffs lies there as well.
January 12, 2009
#6 mikebdot said . . .I am really sick and tired of the Defense getting shit on for the teams overall performance in '08. The shit is rediculous. Our D is legitimate when you aren't asking them to win, sigle handedly week in week out. We point to Babich, we point to Lovie. All I gotta say is if you want to point a finger as to why our defense wasn't what it was supposed to be this year, go ahead and point the finger at Ron Turner. Our Offense possessed the ball on average, a shade over 28 minutes a game. That is unacceptable. Not to mention 28th in the league. It's a wonder how we won 9 games. I hope to god that we actually stick to the mantra of running the football in '09. If we want to be one game better than a year ago, commit to running the football. See Baltimore, see Pittsburgh. Both teams commit to possessing the ball. The sole reason they were ranked 1 and 2 in defense this year. We get Forte a big bodied compliment and use Wolfe situationally, the way we should be. Our defense gets the best upgrade we all could hope for, time to breath instead of sprinting back onto the field after another 3 and out.
January 12, 2009
#7 Bears Fanatic said . . .But, DTB, don't you know that giving the defense a break is a myth?
My biggest problem with the defense is even with the huge number of turnovers we generated we only had, I believe, a single defensive score? When was the last time you remember a pick six? Urlacher against GB in '07?
We need play makers on defense and we don't have them. Anyone know when the last time Tillman or Vasher scored a pick six?
That is the shit that wins playoff games single-handedly. You think Asante Samuel earned his money this year? Hell yeah he did, with a single play.
When I look at Corey Graham, I see that sort of potential. He could be a ball hawk. Anyone interested in Lito Shepphard (sp?)?
The game I wish we had: Carolina. I fucking hate the Panthers.
January 12, 2009
#8 DTB said . . .On the surface, that argument makes sense. It seems the Bears were really close this season to giving themselves a chance at going to another Super Bowl given how the NFC playoffs have turned out. The problem is, while the Bears were unlucky/not quite good enough in losing some really frustrating games, they also got extremely lucky in some wins, so it all evens out. We all know the games they "should have won" and didn't. But who really thinks they would have beaten Indy in the second half of the season like they did in the opener?The Colts were playing with three rookie offensive linemen and an injury-depleted Peyton Manning. They play in November or December and Manning shreds the Bears defense with 10-yard slants all day long. They had the fortune of playing Carolina without Steve Smith and still found a way to lose. They barely beat the Eagles on a heroic goal-line stand, but oh wait, it wasn't against Brian Westbrook, was it? Betcha he scores the game winner if he plays, but the game probably wouldn't have been that close anyway. They caught TB without Garcia but managed to let Griese light them up with ridiculous numbers. They should have lost to NO with KO's stupid run near the end but got lucky the Saints didn't tackle KO two seconds later than they did.
Now I know people will say I'm not a true fan because of this post, but being a true fan doesn't mean you have to be delusional and drink the blue and orange koolaid all the time. Sometimes it means telling it how it is so maybe people will see this team is not a game away from anything except more maddening mediocrity. They could have gone 10-6 and lost in the first round of the playoffs (a la Vikings), or they could have gone 6-10 and not even come close. Until they fix the pass defense and get anything close to consistency on offense, we will see the frustrating ups and downs.January 12, 2009
#9 The Ghost of Halas said . . .Not a myth. You saw Baltimore get run up and down the field on Saturday right? The only thing that saved that D was sloppiness on Tennessee's behalf in the red zone. A myth? A myth my ass. Defense is not supposed to score points, the offense is. Anything you get from the D is an added bonus and something that we all got used to over the years. Reality is that we did lead the league in takeaways. In all likelihood that alone should have benifited our TOP throughout the season. But what did the D get from creating turnovers? A two minute rest as the offense proceeded to go three and out. If an offense cannot sustain drives our defense is going to pay for it. Check out this little nugget from the one and only Kordell Stewart. His assessment of the Bears over the past few years.
Allow the defense to have an offense that they can respect so they don't have to say, `Oh my goodness, here we go again. We gotta play offense on defense to get this thing done because we don't know what we want to do at the quarterback position.
That right there is the mentality of a defense with no confidence in their O. Do you honestly think that possessing the ball less than the opposition on a weekly basis is good for our D? Learn to run the ball, sustain drives and then you will see how good our D really is, kind of like '06. Jones and Benson accumulated nearly 1800 yards and you saw how sick our D was, week in and week out.
January 12, 2009
#10 Willie from Chicago said . . .Ayanbadejo has some interesting things to say about the Chicago Bears.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/fullcourtpress/2009/01/former_bear_ayanbadejo_praises.html#more
January 12, 2009
#11 Urlacher FTW said . . .Guys, say what you want about Lovie but in his 5 years here he has posted a record of 45-35. Before he took over, the bears were the marshmallows of the midway with a 5 year record of 35-45 and only 1 winning season. Lovie has changed the outlook of our beloved franchise. We went from praying for an above .500 record to expecting a playoff berth every year. Thats a damn good turnaround if you ask me. This years problems are not on Lovie, they are on the players. Blame them, not the coach.
BEAR DOWN IN 09...
January 12, 2009
#12 DTB said . . .A.) Part of the reason our offense didn't have the ball was because of many 3rd downs our D allowed, even when we pinned them deep our D would allow them to come out and either score or pin us deep. The only thing that made our D look decent was the turnovers. It wasn't like we were turning the ball over all the time on O like in 06, KO threw what 12 picks, one of which hit Forte in the chest but he drops it and it gets picked, and yah it'd be great to run the ball or hell even not get the QB sacked for taking longer than 2 seconds, but you kind of need an Offensive Line for that. Again, the numbers will tell you that we are a lopsided payroll to the defense and it doesn't show up on Sundays period.
B.) All the games he mentioned we didn't need the D to score points just not let them score any, and yes that is their job, Atlanta they couldn't hold for 11 secs, Carolina they couldn't hold a 17 point lead in the fourth quarter , Houston they forgot to cover the best receiver in football, Tampa Tillman single handedly blew the game being stupid. None of that was the Offense.January 12, 2009
#13 jdawg said . . .Amazing! Look at the box score of every game we lost this year.
HOU - 22:26 1 turnover
MIN - 25:56 TOP 4 turnovers
GB - 22:32 TOP 1 turnover
TEN- 26:44 1 turnover
ATL - 29:10 1 turnover
TB - 31:22 (tb 39:17) 2 turnovers
CAR - 28:15 2 turnoversBetter yet, we know the offense is bad with 36% coversion rate on third down. You know what the D's rate was? 34%.
If that doesn't tell the story that the Bears need to improve on the offensive side of the ball, I dont know what does. The defense is the '09 Rex bandwagon. Get over it. The D is legit, they just need help from a highly inconsistant offense.
January 12, 2009
#14 shonbear said . . .I say we don't have to pick one or the other, its both!
January 12, 2009
#15 jdawg said . . .Jdawg is correct, Ghost makes a major post with those feelings from Ayanbadejo.
Most important statement talks about maybe Chicago played too cool.
Think about it, in 2005, 2006 our guys were in their prime, we upgraded the RB via free agency, our D was lights out, we picked up Moose in free agency, we went out and picked up Tait and Ruben, we had convinced Kreuts to stay for 2 mil less vice going to Miami. All they had to do was get over the hump of a first playoff win, when that happened all their dreams came to fruition, they knew they were better than anybody thought, they proved it until they got starry eyed during the Super Bowl and play calling and execution went down hill and the were over taken by the Colts.
Then they figured they would just coast in the following year, they already proved to the world they were one of the "elite" teams, but you add some lame choices by the staff along with the attitude that it will be automatic along with some injuries and you see what happened.
These guys need to dig deep and see that it is coaching, it is heart, it is attitude, this requirement to have the "us against the world" mentality in order to win is no good, how about just show us some consistency, show us on the field with your play and not with your mouth to the media, do away with the arrogance and get it done.
Let's see some inspiration from someone please.
January 13, 2009
#16 Al In WI said . . .from what I've read at least the d line will have a fire lit under their asses.
January 13, 2009
#17 jeff said . . .Jeff, the problem with that arguement is that for every game the Bears "should have won," there is a game that they "should have lost."
For example the Saints win, and the Packers win were games where the Bears got lucky.
The bottom line is that they had three big games. The first packer game, the second viking game, and the texans game to get into the playoffs or win the division. In two of those games they were destroyed. In the third they blew a 10-0 lead and laid down. Two of those games took place versus non-playoff teams.
It's simply fools gold to believe this team can stand pat and make a Super Bowl run.
Philly, and Arizona have Hall of Fame quarterbacks. The Bears do not. Philly has a great defense, and Arizona has a great offense. The Bears have neither.
January 13, 2009
#18 Shady said . . .al, both those teams you talk about won the same number of games as the bears. that's my argument. if we beat the texans - that philly hall of fame quarterback doesn't make the playoffs.
January 13, 2009
#19 Duff Diggler said . . .We said the same thing when it happened in CAR, TB and ATL, everyone knew those losses were going to come back and haunt the Bears. The point is, they DIDN'T win those games and actually found a way to LOSE them in the most gut wrenching ways. It wasn't meant to be last year, it just wasn't.
You're right when you say the Bears have to get better, namely at QB and WR. The talent is there on defense, maybe they'll figure out how to get the hunger back. After these cats got paid, everybody took a year off except my boy Alex Brown. Maybe they can find a way to win despite the coaching (still not cool with Hot Rod) and figure out a way to pressure the QB. Watching Marinelli last year I thought to myself, wow, this guy is the white version of Lovie Smith, Mr. Positive, a complete bullshitter. I just don't understand how you hire the head coach of the 1st ever 0-16 ballclub the following year? Why associate yourself with complete failure? How does Rod fit in with Bob? Who has authority over the defense? Lovie or the rest of his circle jerk of friends? Sorry be being so cynical but I'm growing tired of this half assed bullshit when the window of opportunity is closing on this defense. Trade up for a playmaker like Bradford or Crabtree. A RB combo with Forte? Offensive lineman perhaps? Something, anything, just make it work.
Very interesting Ayanbadejo article, I understood where he was coming from in the first part about comparing the head coaches, but then he went into comparing Ray Lewis and Brian Urlacher and pretty much said Ray Ray was a better teammate and player. Hmmmm very interesting. I like Ayanbadejo. Brendon and Devin were like peanut better and jelly.
January 13, 2009
#20 Al In WI said . . .Maybe two games better at corner and the pass rush......
January 13, 2009
#21 brian in Sec 430 Row 25 said . . .Jeff, I see what you're saying, I guess my responce would be that we simply would have gotten housed by the Vikings again.
Everytime this team had an opportunity to go out and take control of their situation they flat out choked or just blew it. Not to mention the fact that everytime we played even a decent team down the stretch we lost.
I mean if you break it down we only beat 3 teams with winning records all year long. And 2 of those wins took place in September.January 13, 2009
#22 animal said . . .Jeff...getting in the tournament is one thing...getting to the NFC championship is one thing....getting to the super bowl is one thing....BUT winning the Super Bowl is what this city deserves!
I am not saying I would not be sitting in my own shit if the Bears were about to host the NFC championship game because I would be... but I am not sure I want to be the #6 seed with 9 wins who gets hot and wins a Super Bowl. You know what was soooo great about 1985? Not just that we won it all but that we fucking dominated! The 1985 Chicago Bears will ALWAYS be remembered as one of the greatest teams ever. Shit, even in 2006 we won 13 games and had one of the best defenses in the league....that team would have never had to apologize for being world champs. I am not sure I want to settle for the 2 week buzz and the frenzy of t-shit buying that comes with winning the superbowl if it does not come with some place in history. I know this sounds really dumb and greedy, but I still get a kick out of having the highest margin of victory in a championship game ever (73-0) even though I was not alive...I still get a kick of some random broadcaster saying out of nowhere "well, it"s not like they are the 85 bears"...I WANT IT ALL! I WANT A CHAMPIONSHIP AND ANOTHER PLACE IN HISTORY! I don't want some bullshit 9 win team who won the superbowl the rest of the country will forget...I want people to say 20 years from now...."you should have seen the 2009 bears, those bastards would kick you in the teeth on the wat to the endzone and kick you in the balls on the way back to the sideline" yes, I am drinking but I stand behind my statment.BEAR DOWN AND KICK ASS IN A MEMORABLE WAY IN 2009!
January 13, 2009
#23 shonbear said . . .I agree and say the same thing often Jeff. All the bullshit being spewed here aside, if we had won one more game we would have been in and could maybe have made a run. I do think the Houston game showed we didn't deserve it though- win it and you are in.
On an even more basic level, playoffs mean at least one more Bears game. We only get 16 a year guaranteed, and we live for those things. A wild card game would have been sweet.January 13, 2009
#24 Z said . . .I agree and disagree with the idea of kicking ass so well that you are a team that will be remembered forever, but those days are mostly gone. Thanks to free agency and real parody that is in the league. It truly is a league that is full of teams that can fail to make the playoffs this year, go to the SB and not even break 500 the following year. It's even possible now to get an 11-5 record and not make the playoffs, unbelievable. What the Giants did last year was go on a road game run (we helped them too) and made a trip to the playoffs and shocked the world in ending New Englands win streak all on one catch velcroed to a helmet and 8 sacks of future hall of famer Tom Brady.
We went on a 3 game win streak for like the first time in over 2 years, making it 4 by beating Houston, going to the playoffs and beating Minnesota to show them the truth of our division would have been extremely satisfying, at that point it's highly likely/possible that the Bears could have rode that wave into the SB.
This would have been exciting and would have washed away a major roller coaster season.
The good news in the loss is that now Lovie and company can't just say "no changes necessary". They have to face the facts and start to do something, it may not be exactly what we want, but it is something. I will take action over inaction any day. Another bad season, or season of the same type of adrenalin ride into failure will likely result in some firings of some or all of our "favorite" top three.
January 13, 2009
#25 San Diego down 3 games with 3 to go is the ultimate never give up story said . . .I feel like part of what Jeff was saying was that the Arizona and Philadelphia examples show that you should never be talking about giving up on a season if you still have a chance at making the playoffs. Any team can truly get hot on any given Sunday and win a game.
I'll take any Bears win and any Bears playoff game and any Bears chance to have one more game and beat some other team that I don't like. Doesn't look like there will be any history changing Super Bowl winner this year, might as well have been us.
As fortunate as we were in a couple games, one play in at least two games would have gotten us in and who knows what would have happened. No one. Who picked Arizona to destroy Carolina. Kurt Warner's mom maybe? I picked them to get in under the 9.5 Grand Canyon of a spread they had (and the under [that dropped 2 pt conversion was glorious]) but i never thought they would win. ANY GIVEN SUNDAY.
And the arguement that if we made the playoffs then management wouldn't make the big changes necessary to the team, how's that working out for you. Oh we wouldn't have had the big JA announcement that QB is the #1 priority (#6 on my list) and we wouldn't have fired a few position coaches and might not have Marinelli. You would probably still be able to sleep at night.
I will always take any Bears playoff game and especially a Super Bowl. We would have been loving getting ready for a playoff game, begging the team to do the right things all week and the intensity of game day. If not for the players, at least for us. Just making the playoffs, all would have been forgiven while we were there and we would have had a chance at some redemption. And a win would have been glorious. We would still have gone back to the critiquing after any playoff loss like we do and should (even after SB losses).
So always cheer for the win. You give up on the season when you are elimninated and never before. One more day to Bear Down is always a good day!
January 13, 2009
#26 And Marinelli said . . .And one of those teams- Philadelphia/Arizona will be in the SB
January 13, 2009
#27 CA BEAR FAN said . . .Tampa Bay ranked in the top 10 in total defense in each of Marinelli’s last nine seasons with the team. In 2002, the Buccaneers won the Super Bowl behind a defense that allowed the fewest points and yards in the league and helped to transform defensive tackle Warren Sapp and defensive end Simeon Rice into Pro Bowlers.
And he fought in Vietnam and looks like he made it through ok so you know he is a tough S.O.B.
January 13, 2009
#28 DR J said . . .Honestly: I hope the Bears sign Bryon Leftwich...He has a cannon for a arm and he was doing good in Jacksonville until he got that ankle injury....
January 13, 2009
#29 jdawg said . . .Guys I pick the Atlanta game squib-gate thats was some first grade football
January 13, 2009
#30 bfos7215 said . . .sheesh.
In my opinion it all starts in the trenches. We ran a D based on the line creating a pass rush and wound up blitzing more than any other team in the league.
#1 Fix the D line
We ranked 28th in the league in ToP and were ranked near the top in run stuffing.
#2 Fix the O line
#1 may well be fixed as a result of Rod M and either a FA or draft aquisition, unless Izzy can play DE and we dump Ogun.
#2 is a harder nut to crack. The left side should be better with Williams in there. What about St. Clair to RG? I think we'll part ways with Tait unless he takes a pay cut.
I dream of Haynesworth next to Tommie. Maybe Rusty gets Adams an efficiency apt. at Ditkas restaurant.
January 13, 2009
#31 Rancid said . . .It's almost that simple.
There are good to very good teams that made the playoffs. There are good to very good teams that just missed out on the playoffs. There are mediocre teams that made the playoffs. And, finally there are mediocre teams that missed the playoffs.
The Bears were a very mediocre team this year. The only reason they could breath the playoffs was because SOMEONE from this sorry division had to make it. It's not because they are on the same level as ARZ or PHI at this point in the season.
You are right that even a mediocre team could make a playoff run. But, that doesn't mean this team isn't mediocre or that it doesn't have a large number of holes.
January 13, 2009
#32 bfos7215 said . . .Re: #30
Your statement about us only having a shot at the playoffs due to being in the crappy NFC North is erroneous. If we win our last game, we take the wild card spot instead of Philly. 2 teams from the North would have gone.
January 13, 2009
#33 Anonymous said . . .@31: Point taken. But, we still benefited from playing 6 games in a awful division. While PHI had 6 games in a great division. The Bears are not on par with PHI.
January 13, 2009
#34 Urlacher FTW said . . .We've beatten Philly the last 3 times we've played them.
January 13, 2009
#35 Joseph said . . .jdawg you can't really credit our Dline with the run stuffing, look where all the tackles are, safetys, corners, linebackers. We stuffed the run because we put 8 men in the box, hell 6 on the line of scrimmage most of the time; we blitzed more than anyone in the NFL, some ended up being run stuffers, yah when 3/4 of the team is on the line of scrimmage you should stop the run but it doesn't lend much credibility to the Dline.
I think were pretty decent in the secondary we just need our front four to generate pressure period. You could put champ bailey and asante samuel at corners, ed reed at fs and polamula at ss and if the front four dont get pressure and the QB has 6 seconds in the pocket, someone will free up. There are way too many rules slanted towards the offense in passing situations for them to maintain coverage that long.January 13, 2009
#36 Albert in Tucson said . . .The Chicago Bears announced today that they have hired former Houston Texans assistant Jon Hoke as their new secondary coach, replacing Steve Wilks.
January 13, 2009
#37 Albert In Tucson said . . .That sounds a bit hokey to me.
January 13, 2009
#38 Urlacher FTW said . . .On a more serious note...Leftwich, CA Bear Fan? "That's all the Bears need — a leader so focused on his team's postseason run that he's trying to improve his own career minutes. At one time Leftwich would have been a great idea for the Bears, but that was about 36 MRIs" - David Haugh, 01/13/09
January 13, 2009
#39 DTB said . . .Also looking at the points scored/allowed, 3 of the 4 teams left in the playoffs were in the top 4 teams reg season for defense (points allowed). Balt, Pit, and Philly. Baltimore is pretty much build like us, their offensive numbers? Awful, 20th in points scored well behind us at 14th offensively.
So we choose to pay talent to have a Defense that can allow 17 points or less every game. They did not do the job period. They were awful, some of the worst in the league and it had pretty much zilch to do with the O. Our O averaged 23 points a game. With 20 we should win every game, that is Bears football.
Our special teams had us spoiled too, this year was not a great year for them to drop to average (one KR TD all season) but that hurt also.January 13, 2009
#40 Pankster in Da Carolina's said . . .Hey there Albert. I would fully embrace Leftwich being brought to Chicago. David Haugh is a fucking idiot. A reporter asks a question in regards to a players future, gets an answer and then spins it to his liking. If you have yet to pick up on that, you're in the same boat as Haugh.
Leftwich was injured. 2 years ago. Reality is that this guy is healthy, hungry and wants to be here. His arm supremely stronger than Orton's and his game is more well rounded. Sign him and don't be afraid to let him compete with Orton. There is nothing about Kyle Orton that makes me say that he is the undoubted starter in '09. Someone explain it to me, was it his whopping 15 TD's or was it his dynamite completion percentage?
I don't get it. We need a QB that can make plays not just take plays that are given to him. Angelo is right, it is the QB.
January 13, 2009
#41 jdawg said . . .Bring on Leftwich has anyone seen this guy at all this year play/have and it is a upgrade from what we have go get him JA!
I Am so fucking happy those Panthers lost!!! a lot of disfunctional fuckers here and I love it Bear Down America!!!!January 13, 2009
#42 Urlacher FTW said . . .when I mentioned run stuffing I meant that our O-line gets stuffed a lot on run plays, not that our D-line was stuffing the other team's runs.
January 13, 2009
#43 Rancid said . . .Orton had 18 TDs. 19 really, Dez dropped a 36 yrd TD at the one which Davis recovered for the TD, so he had one taken away literally.
Leftwich is a joke, he is pretty much a fat, black, injury prone Orton. Yah lets go get a guy on his fourth team, who gets hurt every year, is past his prime, and in his prime never threw more than 15 TDs in a season. But our overpaid D that can't hold a lead for 11 seconds, they are just fine, and our lack of run blocking on the Oline, nah screw that; we gotta fix the QB. What a dunce, DTB.. please at least read about the Bears before you post, I'd really prefer you actually watch a game or so but at the very least you should look up stats before you post, silly troll.January 13, 2009
#44 bfos7215 said . . .I'm actually a little interested by Leftwich, but not ready to totally endorse it right now. But my challenge to those who attack anyone's suggestion for a QB is this: Right now we have KO, Rex, and Hanie. We are all assuming that Rex will leave. So if you don't like Byron Leftwich, who do you like for our number two? It really shouldn't be a another rookie, we need a vet of some sort, so if you don't like someone else's suggestion for KO's backup, who do you like? You shouldn't trash theirs unless you have a better solution. That's why I'm not trashing Leftwich right now. I 've never really liked him much, but I can't really find a better option on the market.
January 13, 2009
#45 Bears Fanatic said . . .I've generally liked David Haugh. But, if he is going to make an argument like that against Leftwich, he is an idiot.
The guy was poring over photos on the sideline this week, doing everything he could as a backup to help his team. In fact, in his comments he said he's focused on his team right now, not finding a new one.
That's not bad reporting from Haugh, it's completely dishonest. Haugh should be worrying about his own career, because he's performing like shit right now.
January 13, 2009
#46 Bears Fanatic said . . .I like Orton, but we definitely need serious competition at QB. I would love to see Orton develop into a consistent starter, but I'm not sure he's there yet. It's hard to say what his ceiling is without a quality line in front of him.
One thing I do know is that the teams who win consistently over a longer period of time have great QBs. The Colts have consistently won 12 games a season and a SB (damnit) over the past few years. The Pats have won multiple SBs. The Eagles were consistent contenders for several years in a row and are back now (thank injuries and a brutal division for them only having 9 wins...they are much better than that, unlike the Bears). Bottom line is, Manning, Brady, McNabb are all great QBs. Not average, not caretakers, not just dependable starters. They're game changers. If we're seriously trying to build a winning team for more than a year or two, draft a first-round QB from somewhere other than Florida, or buy one in FA (who?). Orton is better than what we've had, but that's not exactly a distinguished list.January 13, 2009
#47 Urlacher FTW said . . .Not sure I'm excited to see Lovie plans to take a more hands-on approach to the D. Guess he finally saw the tape from the 08 season and determined the D needs work. Too bad he couldn't make that decision in the first quarter of games when the QBs were completing easy passes. He might still be coaching right now instead of hiring new assistants.
January 13, 2009
#48 DTB said . . .Rancid, it depends on what they put around the QB and what you want. If you want a one year pass to get you through you go get someone like Collins or Garcia for thier experience to both mold Orton and backup. If you want a different long term option, then you go get Simms or Carr not because they are great but they were really only given one shot and either got hurt or pulled, I wouldn't recommend anyone out there FA-wise to be long term. Orton is as good or better than anyone out there under 35.
My point against Lefty is that your not doing anything, your essentially bringin in Orton to compete with Orton except hes older and has less experience in the system.
They need to concentrate on getting an O-line put together that can run and pass block, and get a receiver or two that can create seperation and actually catch the balls that hit them in the hands. Then they can actually gauge whether or not Orton or anybody else back there is any good. Until then it's just going to be the next guy out of the clown car.
Whoever wrote that stuff about Brady was spot on, his numbers without Moss and Welker were just average 23-24 TDs 2-3k yards then they go get WRs and he throws 50 TDs and 4k yards.
How many times this year did balls bounce off of Hester's hands, DavJanuary 13, 2009
#49 Urlacher FTW said . . .15, 18, 19 whatever. Reality is that KO has a weak arm and very little accuracy. I find if funny that the only impression a fan such as yourself can muster is one that is driven home by a columnist that has no idea what he is talking about. Reality is that Leftwich is 29 years old, was thrown into the fire as a rookie and has since recovered the problems that have plagued him as a young QB in the NFL. My point was to sign him and let him compete. You missed that one.
Also, if you look back on this thread you will see an awfully profound indictment of our offense, that was led by Kyle Orton. See #12. Byron Leftwich is head and shoulders better than any of the other quarterbacks available. I think it is rediculous that you see Orton's performance to be despite the rest of the offense. It was our weak Offensive line managed to land 13th in the league in sacks allowed as well as a whole yard less rushing per game than Pittsburgh.
I think that you all have a hard time realizing that a solid offense that not only puts points on the board but also controlls the clock is the remedy for the defense. Better yet, if the Bears make the playoffs are we still having this discussion? Let's just say that the problem lies with the defense for argumentative purposes. Was is a blown assignment by D. Manning or M. Hamilton that justifys your statement. Or was it Peanut being thrown to the turf while breaking up a fight. Which one of these three plays points to the Defense being vastly overpaid and underachieving?
January 13, 2009
#50 Urlacher FTW said . . .1. Leftwich has never thrown more than 15 TDs in asingle season.
2. Orton threw more than that this season.
3. Accuracy doesn't matter when your receivers can't catch footballs.
4. Leftwich threw 2 tds in the whole season.. so he um is about as good as Grossman.
5. Pittsburg ranked 20th in the league on points, why are they in the playoffs??? DEFENSE RANKED #1 in POINTS
6. We pay our defense more money than Pitt and we pay our Offense less, I'm glad you brought them up it further reinforces my points.
7. Yes on D. Manning
8. Yes on Marcus who the F is that Hamilton
9. Peanut wasn't flagged for pulling someone off the pile, he was flagged for throwing a punch as he was walking off the field and everything was over, including the stop, so Yes.
January 13, 2009
#51 DTB said . . .In the last 2 seasons Leftwich is 53/94 - 56% for 582 yards 3 TD 2 INT
Thats throwing to Hines Ward and Roddy White, and getting benched for Chris Redman
Orton this season was 272/465 - 59% for 2972 yards 18TD 12 INT
Thats more yardage and more TDs than Lefty has ever thrown for in any season of his career. Plus Lefty is on the decline and injury prone. Orton has gotten better in every QB stat every year and showed toughness in playing through an injury because we have no plan B. How is this loser even a reasonably good idea? I'd rather resign Grossman and I hate Grossman.
January 13, 2009
#52 DTB said . . .Let me make this clear. Our offense ranked bottom 5 in the NFL in time of possesion. If that is not an indictment of our quarterback then I don't know what is. My point is that there is nothing about KO's 18 touchdown passes that warrant not bringing in competition. Hear this, even competing with someone that hasn't thrown more than 15 at any point in his career. With your logic Rex should undoubtedly be the starter, given that he has thrown more than 20 touchdowns in a single season.
January 13, 2009
#53 Urlacher FTW said . . .Dude, that's like comparing Leftwich's last two years with Orton's '06 and '07. What point are you trying to make?
January 13, 2009
#54 Urlacher FTW said . . .No my argument is against bringing in people who are in decline. Grossman started hot and then proved he was a flash in the pan by continuing to go downhill performance-wise. Orton is on the way up with virtually no weapons. Leftwich is on the way down, Grossman on the way down. I would rather see them see what Hanie has than bring in someone who is going the opposite direction.
Part of the reason the Offense had the lowest 5 TOP was also due to the fact that the sorry D would let any QB in the league covert 3rd and longs and march them down the field on 6 minute, 10 play + drives. If you want lower Defensive TOP, try making the other team punt once in a while. And yes the O had 3 and outs and at times needed more sustained drives but I can count more times of a receiver dropping a pass or not laying out to make a catch than KO just plain blowing it.January 13, 2009
#55 Urlacher FTW said . . .We also had one of the highest scoring opening possesion Offenses in the league. Which nut do you think Baltimore would have given for that stat.
January 13, 2009
#56 Urlacher FTW said . . .And yah Offensive TOP is all about the QB. Im sure dropped passes, not making it on 3rd and short runs, the FB dive for 0 yards, I'm sure none of that plays into having to punt, it's all about the QB. Damn I guess if we had Lefty hand that thing off, the practice squad FB scores in Minnahsodah, wow I guess we should go get him.
January 13, 2009
#57 DTB said . . .Changing the subject, I don't recall who on here was first proposing making AP a FB type lead blocker, after watching SD use Jacob Hester in that way successfully I am convinced he could do it.
January 13, 2009
#58 jdawg said . . .I cant grasp why it is that you accept mediocrit on the offensive side of the ball. My point throughout all of this was, if you improve the offense the defense will improve. If you bring in a QB that is hungry and eager to play in Chicago why not create competition. Was Warner on the decline when he went to ARI? Yes. Was Collins on his way down when he went to TEN? Yes. Was Garcia on his way down after leving DET? Yes. There are tons of examples of which bringing in a vet makes sense. Why not do it now? In regards to the QB on third down. Do you honestly think that we would have run 4 times in MIN if the staff had enough confidence in Orton to make a play?
January 13, 2009
#59 Albert In Tucson said . . .well, we have a new defensive coodinator.
Ladies and gentlemen I give you: Lovie Smith.
Smith will take over the definsive play calling next season.
I consider this good news.
January 13, 2009
#60 DTB said . . .Atlanta, Baltimore and Pittsburgh all got less TDs and as many or more INTs with their QBs than the Bears did with KO. The Ravens and Steelers have (vastly) better defenses and they all had running games that had more than 1 NFL caliber running back. Bringing in the immobile, brittle Leftwich addresses none of the Bears' real needs. And... whatever you think about the Cardinals getting this, know this: Ken Whisenhunt seems to have made MAJOR adjustments to his team's "scheme" over the last month. He apparently didn't think his "scheme" was good when he saw his team underachieving so he DID SOMETHING about it! NOW! ON THE EVE OF THE PLAYOFFS! As opposed to Lovie "Our scheme is good, and we don't need to make any changes" Smith. Somewhere I hear Pete Seeger singing "Waste deep in the big muddy, and the big fool said to push on".
January 13, 2009
#61 jdawg said . . .I say fuck it then let's roll with Orton, Hanie and an undrafted QB in '09. We all saw how well Rex played in '07 with no competition.
January 13, 2009
#62 Da Bearz said . . .Orton is not one of the top 10 QBs in the league that started last year, but he's pretty green and finally got a chance to play and this is what we saw:
hard worker
decent pocket precense
good touch on short and medium passes
iffy on the long ball
throws a great screen pass
started out making iffy changes at the line (think Car. game) but got a lot better
ran the no huddle well so he's got a head on his shouldersNow, what makes him a bit of a puzzle is his ankle. I head Jim Miller on espn1000 right after the Detroit game and he thought it would affect Kyle for the rest of the season. He would lose accuracy on his long balls -- they would sail, and he would lose some zip.
So, what have we here in Orton? Who knows? We never really saw him at 100% after his injury. And, next to his throwing arm, a QBs wheels are most important.
We know he's a hard worker.
My opinion is that you get him better protection and a #1 WR.
January 13, 2009
#63 jdawg said . . .Orton was touted as the front runner for the Heisman Trophy, until he received multiple injuries in consecutive games against Michigan and Northwestern that forced him out of his starting position for a month. Please for God sake give the guy a break, hes not the problem. He doesnt turn the ball over with protection. The problem with the Bears is we never give them a chance. The defense goes to pot, we have one legitimate receiver, we play cover two without a set of safeties to cover, we lose three games with less than one minute to go, and we want to run Orton out of town. Draft a safety, get another big o lineman and d lineman, a reciever and we are in.
January 13, 2009
#64 The Ghost of Halas said . . .you speak the truth, although I'm all for keeping Mike Brown for another year or two. The guy is a football player and may be the most passionate guy on our defense.
If you fix the lines the rest will follow. (although someone needs to tell Payne that, yes, he does have two arms. Those things help you tackle).
January 14, 2009
#65 Rancid said . . .Brad Biggs of the Sun Times: Lovie Smith to call defensive plays in 2009 yet Bob Babich is to remain as Defensive Coordinator.
Bob Babich must give FANTASTIC head.January 14, 2009
#66 Nick said . . .So what exactly is Babich going to do now? This is just nuts.
January 14, 2009
#67 CA BEAR FAN said . . .After reading several articles it sounds to me like Babich is being demote back to LB coach and Lovie will pretty much be coordinating the defense. Babich will still be titled "defensive coordinator" but Lovie will be the one making the decisions.
January 14, 2009
Lovie will call defensive plays....Babich will be Linebacker coach......the bears signed a defensive back coach today..some guy from the texans.....check this out! Ron Rivera might be the new coach for the LIONS!
January 14, 2009
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.