jason

The intent may not be there, but I sure wish he were still on the Bears. He's a stud on the field. Fox is a strong enough leader to handle off-field nonsense appropriately.

Man I miss Joe D. I'm thinking just about anyone could do better than what's happening now. "Hey Robbie, kick it high so that it comes down around the 10 or so. I'd like to get the coverage guys down there. Also, make sure you kick it towards a corner. If it goes out of bounds, so be it, but I want the ball towards a corner." What's so hard about that?

This team will probably not win a game the rest of the year without Cutler. This team NEEDS Cutler. His big arm is the only thing keeping the defense honest. Clausen. LOL. Crazy how bad he looked.

I agree with Adam. The Bears have played competitively with three of the better teams in the NFL. Well, maybe not last week's second half, but otherwise yes.

What moron thought that defensive plan was a good idea when Seattle had 2 timeouts?

I'll just add one thing to this thread, which is adding on to DBDB's comments, and that is the fact, FACT, that Jay Cutler has never had a great OL while in Chicago. There have been good players here and there, but pretty much every year the majority of the OL has been subpar. 09-Pace, Omiyale, Kreutz, Garza, Williams - Pace and Omiyale were not good, and Williams was figuring things out post-move 10-Omiyale, Williams, Kreutz, Garza, Webb - BOTH OTs are horrible, Williams continues to get the run-around 11-Webb, Williams, Garza, Spencer, Louis - Yikes! And still the Williams dilemma, finding out he might not be a good OG. 12-Webb, Rachal, Garza, Louis, Carimi - Louis no good outside? Draft a rookie OT and move Louis inside, where he sucks. 13-Bushrod, Slauson, Garza, Long, Mills - This is the one year. The infamous Cutler vs McCown year we have talked about ad nauseum. I still contend that Cutler would have pounded the defenses McCown did, and would have gone for about 4000yds, 30TDs, 17INTs. BTW - Mills was good for a rookie, but he was still not that good. 14-Bushrod, Ola, Garza, Long, Mills - Ola started more games than Slauson, and there is serious debate about whether Bushrod was subpar and on the decline. 15 - It remains to be seen...

Steak cooked in a urine-soaked pan = Tastes horrible Steak burned by a moron chef = Tastes horrible Steak served with skunk au jus = Tastes horrible The constant, regardless of being constant, is not always to blame. Least? LEAST?! HAHA! C'mon man. You're killing me. Clauson for President.

Later comments are right...I don't like it. Can we just let the guy stick in one place, learn to dominate, and draft the other positions? Believe it or not, there are differences to RG, RT, and LT, and if we keep moving him around we risk his current excellence. Now, if it happens and he turns into an all-pro LT? Great. But why risk a currently known quantity? We know right now that if he stays at RG and avoids injury, he's probably a guy who dominates for 10+ years and goes to the HOF. BTW - If the Bears get the first pick overall, I would love nothing more than a trade down. I am not a fan of the #1 pick, nor am I in love with any of the QB crop.

I don't dismiss them. You're just blind and anything that doesn't say "CUTLER IS HORRIBLE" because it reads as "Cutler is great" in your eyes. Cutler has flaws, to be sure, but it's hard to truly blame him for many things until other problems are fixed. And his positives FAR outweigh his negatives. You ever think the 5 OC's is something that hinders Cutler and the rest of the offense? You seem to believe it's a positive for Cutler as a QB...which is far from the truth. You ever think that he's had multiple years of bad OLs and it's naturally shaped his mechanics some? Oh, BTW, he seems to have embraced the offense this year, and didn't force any throws. He ran instead. Your final statement is all anyone needs to know. It's ridiculous and shows your hatred. You'd rather see Cutler benched than see the Bears win.

Dude, your blind Cutler hate is ridiculous. You want him out so badly that you don't even watch objectively. The fact that you defend Clausen here is laughable. He had multiple throws that weren't remotely close to accurate, a few other weak ones, and a few others where he didn't even bother to look at the defense before throwing it as fast as he possibly could. It is an absolute fact that Clausen looked bad; there is no arguing it.

Excellent post. Nailed it from top to bottom.

You know I'm on board. I think it should be: OT x 2 DE x 1 DB x 2 QB x 1 Great OL = More time for QB in pocket & bigger holes for RB I don't think LB is that difficult to fill when you draft to fit scheme. Basically you just need one of those football guys with great football minds (i.e. Zach Thomas). One of those guys is available every year in the 4th/5th round.

I know there would be some here who would hate it, but the dude wins games. He'd be better than Clausen immediately. Even if he didn't know the playbook. I'd like the signing.

No. I think Long is the RG of the future. A HOFer at that position. And where he should play. The Bears need to draft a RT and move Long back to his dominant position.

I feel the same way. It's the point of my recently made thread. Waaaay too many holes to fill.

Cutler is probably done. Forte is on the back end of his career, but Langford is here. WR is obviously set. TE is set. RT is iffy at best. RG is good, for a few years. C looks good with Montgomery and Hronis. LG looks good if Long moves back there. LT is bad. So, that means on offense the Bears need: QB, RT, RG (future), LT. On defense, the Bears need 3-4 personnel, which means DEs and OLBs that fit, ILB's with range and intelligence, DBs who can cover, and Safeties who don't suck. So, that means on defense the Bears need (at least): 1 OLB, 1 DE, 1 ILB, 1-2 DBs, 1-2 Safeties Wow

Silver Lining: If the Bears actually suck this bad, and have this many holes, it will be like getting two first rounders next year when Kevin White is back. Hopefully.

Would it kill someone on the Bears defense to turn their head and look for the ball? Is that too much to ask? At this point the Bears have needs at nearly every position. It's sad.

Clausen is horrible. This team is in serious trouble. No respect, they'll dare us to throw, load up on run-defense, and watch Clausen lose the game.

1. The Bears won't have the #1 pick. 2. No

This offense with Clausen is in trouble because the Cardinals don't respect him at all. They are diving forward on pass plays like they are run plays.

JARED MF ALLEN!

I'm one of the biggest Cutler supporters on here, because I think the OL has been a mess for so long, and the OCs have been horrible. He's been set up for failure over and over and over. That INT was horrible, however, and it sucks that he hurt himself diving for a tackle. You'd think he would have learned from the play in Oakland. Having said all that, even if you hate Cutler, you can't want Clausen in there. He's horrible all the time.

Honestly, I don't know what to make of the Bears yet. In previous years, under previous defensive schemes, this would be one of those games for which we have high hope, but inevitably we'd encounter disappointment as Carson Palmer became the reincarnated Joe Montana. 5-15 yard passes over and over and over, and there would be nothing the Bears could do about it. I think this game, however, is an unknown. The Cards D vs the Bears O seems like a pretty even matchup. The Cards O vs the Bears D is something I don't feel great about. But as chitownhustla just said, Palmer is not Rogers, and those perfect passes that Rogers threw will have a little more air, or will be off by a yard one way or another. Those are the opportunities the Bears' D needs to grasp, and whether or not they do will be the difference in the game.

It's not the biggest issue, and he may have a good history, but man he looked slow. If he continues to look slow, I hope they just give someone fast a chance to return the ball. Great field position - we learned from Hester days - is a HUGE difference.