jason

I usually rip Lovie when people bring his name up with revisionist history. Same with Shoop.

Well, he looked horrible in the actual game. He looks like he must have been on a serious dose of xanax or something like that, because there is no way his 5.0+ speed should be returning the football in the NFL.

I didn't count them, but does anyone care to watch a replay and count the drops? The one I remember the most is Forte, for the sure-fire TD.

Agreed. It was disappointing. I've said several times I'd rather be blown out than beaten at the end. It's easier to take (and yields higher draft picks). That's why Lovie's M.O. of 8-8, 7-9, etc. always pissed me off. So, yeah, the INT was very disappointing, but he didn't exactly make a horrible throw, or one into double coverage, or the typical throws people have ragged him over in the past. He made a throw to a player who was definitely open, and one of the best LBs in the NFL made an incredible play on the ball.

Quit talking about the past. The game yesterday had one mistake and it was more Matthews doing great than Cutler doing poorly. Should we ignore the dropped, sure-fire TD pass? Or the fact that it was OBVIOUS the coaching staff went into the game with a very conservative approach intended to limit Cutler's production? He looked a lot different yesterday, period.

Long story short, Rogers made a few incredible plays, two pin-point accurate passes that were virtually indefensible. Take away the fact that he's one of the top couple QBs in the NFL, and the Bears likely win that game. It doesn't help when the Bears have a turnover on downs near the GL, and get nearly no pressure on the opposing QB.

Seriously...it's not even worth looking up this bums name. Who the hell is he? Why is he starting? And why did he look slower than Jamarcus Russell, post-weight gain, running on the beach? No way in hell that guy should be the starting return man. All joking aside, I think there is a good chance several people on this board is faster than he is.

This whole thread is bullshit. Did he throw an INT at a costly time? Yes. But was it a bad pass? A horrible pass? Absolutely not. It was a SUPERB play by one of the best LBs in the NFL, a guy with incredible range, good hands, and atrocious hair. The Bears lost the game because, as MadLithuanian said, the red zone calls were bad, and the defense couldn't stop Rogers from throwing anything downfield at all. What I don't understand is how Rogers stands in the pocket all day, and when he is pressured he is able to simply step forward into a gaping hole. Meanwhile, that virtually never happens for Jay Cutler. When HE is rushed, there rarely appears to be an avenue for him to step into or escape.

Pretty much. I'd don't care how tall, fast, strong, etc., some one is...I want WRs who get open. Wes Welker gets open.

I don't see why there can't be offensive alignments with two "slot" receivers. X______XXXXX_______X __X______X______X _________X or X______XXXXXX __X______X______X _________X Having two little pin-ball receivers who have great hands, precise routes, and seemingly are always open, is very hard to defend.

Smart decision by Jay not to force the issue on that sack. You could see from the EZ view that he worked through three or four progressions before the internal clock was set off and he tucked to run.

No doubt. Tucker has to be one of the most incompetent DC's in modern NFL history.

Lots of max protect lineups to start the game. Run-heavy, short/easy passes. Cutler with a roll-out pass (and smart decision to throw it away). I know it's early, but I like this style for the Bears.

Agree * 10000. I said it during the offseason. Even without the injuries I'd like to see Welker on the team. He's a stud slot WR. Virtually uncoverable on the underneath routes. A perfect compliment to White and Alshon.

You can count on them sucking.

Good. Maybe this means they recognize the faults of the OL have historically plagued the Bears for far too long, and they'll focus on drafting OL over and over until the OL is fixed. I like the idea of 2016's draft starting out something like: 1.Ronnie Stanley, OT, Notre Dame 2.Reggie Ragland, ILB, Alabama

scs787, your vine clip showed more potential in one play than Cinnabon ever had while in Chicago.

Mills was bad last year. Everyone knew it. All the prospects were garbage at best, hot garbage at worst. And several pointed to Bushrod's deficiencies last year. Picking a fourth rounder, particularly one of those I mentioned, all have great potential, would have been an insurance policy. One that is needed right now.

Preach.

No. RGIII is not a potential starter.

TJ Clemmings, Tre Jackson, Arie Kuoandijo...any one of these guys should have been drafted in the fourth round instead of a RB we didn't need. And any one of those three would have been great replacements at this current juncture.

It is funny how often people on this board talk about backup TEs and third string RB depth, but almost never address backup OL. What did I say? If Cutler and the offense fail, it will be because of the OTs.

I don't care how it happens, but the packers deserve some negative karma for the two-QB streak to have lasted as long as it has. Meanwhile, the Bears have at 392 QBs during that same stretch.

80% truth 20% beer Cutler looked really sharp, had great command, awesome accuracy, good progression, good decision making. Basically, he showed he's able to be the QB most believe he can be.

Foster should be a starter. Acho should be a starter. Cutler looks really good ( DID Y'ALL SEE HIM ROLL OUT?!?!) RBs are real deep, which is why we really didn't need to draft Langford. Need RT help pretty badly. By the time we get a new one, we will probably need a LT. And so on. Hopefully Mills turns it around and doesn't destroy the offense, or Cutler.