jason

Call it what you want, but anyone who wants to draft a QB for the Bears this year, unless it's a late round pick, doesn't have a damn clue about football. QB is probably lower than 10th on the list of needs for the Bears. And spare me the tired "you should do it" argument. That's simply not feasible, and it's a weak non-excuse for the flaws that continually get displayed year after year after year under Lovie.

Wow. That series was ATROCIOUS! First play, Forte has nothing. Second play, WTF was Garza looking at? Third play, when the hell has the RB screen ever worked for the Bears?

Open your eyes man. This has happened many times during Lovie's tenure. A QB that's supposed to be subpar comes in and performs well because the Bears defense is known quantity that has been admitted many many times. Everyone knows what the Bears are running 95% of the time, and it's just a matter of the other team executing correctly. Hell, I remember a game when two Bears QBs that this board has absolutely TORCHED did pretty well against the Bears defense. Todd Collins lit this defense up! And in the same game, so did, guess who, Jason Campbell! Billy Volek did it years ago. Brian Griese did it. I'm sure there are others but I just can't think of them right now.

Wow. What is that strange slant play the Niners keep using with such great success? It's almost like I recall a certain team in green and yellow successfully using it against the Bears numerous times over the years.

How many times does this question have to be asked during the Lovie Smith tenure?

Sadly, I'm sure it's not. Same thing every year...distracted by the pretty, shiny things and the functional, dirty things get ignored.

This is less about the Niners O and more about the Bears D. The Bears, as always under Lovie, have been a defense that allows an opponent to move the ball fairly easily. Even when scrub QBs get in the game. Remember when Griese absolutely torched us?! This is nothing different. The defense has holes, and as long as the turnovers don't come in bundles it's very vulnerable. Actually, this game is a perfect example of what many on this board have talked about in terms of an attacking defense and a passive defense. The Bears have a passive, albeit opportunistic, defense. The Niners, on the other hand, have an aggressive, attacking offense. Witness the difference.

Horrible idea. And since you don't want me to tell you why, I'll leave the thread.

I don't remember seeing/reading that anywhere. No doubt Manning helps tremendously - he may be the best QB of all time - but their OL was pretty good with Tebow. It's just that their offensive scheme, and perhaps Tebow's style, said "if first read not available, take off running."

That defense just had the Jags explode on them. The Jags! They've been overrated, and the Bears should have done more against them.

Personally, I think the front office and the coaching staff should look at the concussion picture, realize Cutler is on the road to retirement, and start to protect the key piece in the offensive gameplan, the first franchise QB the Bears have had in 20 years. Maybe then he wouldn't constantly have the need to run, to scramble out of the pocket. Nobody accused Peyton Manning of getting outside the pocket very much. And I can't remember the last time Peyton was drilled. Matter of fact, I can't remember the last time any of the elite QBs (Manning, Manning, Brees, Brady, Rodgers) was drilled. It happens to Cutler fairly regularly. Protect Cutler and all this goes away. But they'll probably draft either DL or LB in the first next year.

Seeing as how: A-I've played football B-I've played football in the mud C-I understand the difference between offense and defense D-I understand how a slippery surface affects offense and defense I don't think it's all that asinine. The OL gets a tremendous advantage over the DL on a slippery field.

Hear me out... I was driving to work today thinking about how poor the production from every other WR has been. There is no doubt that Cutler has zeroed in on Marshall to the point of ignoring other WRs and forcing it into multi-player coverage on Marshall, but how has it really affected the other players who get significant receptions? Forte is significantly down (on pace for 38 rec). Sanz is significantly down (on pace for 2 rec. Hester is even (on pace for 26 rec). Davis is very slightly down (on pace for 19 rec). Bennett is slightly up (on pace for 29 rec). I know Knox's numbers last year and Alshon's early season production this year skew things somewhat, but it doesn't appear the others have changed much. Then you look at Marshall's numbers... He's on pace for a career year of 111 receptions, and I have no doubt 15-20 of those could/should go elsewhere. So the queston is, are the other receivers really playing that poorly? Are they receiving less because Marshall gets more? Or are they on pace to do what they have done? Seems closer to the last statement.

Try scrolling up. I posted: Run-blocking was very bad. Pass-blocking was good. But it sure as hell wasn't excellent. There were flaws. And there were advantages provided by the conditions. As for proving what would have happened on a dry field, sure, you can't. I've always backed up the "you can't prove a hypothetical"-stance because of how we all debate draft picks on this board. Having said that, you also can't ignore what positions typically have advantages on a sloppy field. This is something that has been corroborated in the entire football playing world. A sloppy field provides a distinct advantage to a slower, bigger OL when matched up against a smaller, quicker DL because the speed and change of direction is minimized.

So to extrapolate, in your world, if a DB falls on his face in the mud, and the WR runs by him for a TD, the WR is the guy who played great that day? I fully realize Foster's style. The 1-cut is still almost exclusively downhill, and doesn't rely upon drastic changes in direction. He runs towards a spot, looks for the color change, and goes towards whichever of the two primary options are there. If he hits one going full speed, big gains follow. Why Tice didn't realize this and put in Bush for a similar style of running is anyone's guess.

That's a huge coaching problem considering his draft purpose and the inadequacies of the current TEs.

FWIW, I'm enjoying this. Why is it hard to believe the conditions: A ) Allowed the OL to pass block better and B ) Hindered the RBs for making cutbacks and C ) Hindered the DLs from effectively rushing The last two require the ability to change direction, and the conditions didn't allow it. The first one takes advantage of the inability to change direction. It's the precise reason why the pass rush was bad for both teams. It's also a good reason why the Texans rushing game, which is primarily downhill, did much better than the Bears' rushing game, which is cutback oriented. What don't you understand about the concept of "slick field=difficulty changing directions"?

I bet Carimi can catch better than Davis.

Let's do a quick breakdown: Davis - Can't catch, can't run a route without being bumped off, is an average blocker Spaeth - Can't catch, is an above average blocker Rodriguez - Is supposed to have great catching ability, has shown average blocking Why is Rodriguez not in the game instead of Davis and Spaeth?! Everyone is talking about pass-catching TE this and that, like it needs to be drafted or addressed in the off-season, but somehow Rodriguez is forgotten. WTF was the draft pick for if it wasn't going to be a player who gets used? Oh, that's right, he's not even in the TE meetings; he's an H-Back. Whatever the hell that means in the Bears' offense. I suspect it's code for "Mostly fullback, not really tight end, player that Lovie and staff like less than Kellen Davis." Seriously, there is no reason why Rodriguez shouldn't be getting a serious increase in playing time. Normally with a young player the excuse "he would lessen the Bears ability to block adequately" is used. But that's not true since that's all Rodriguez has been asked to do. In fact, if he were brought in at TE/H-back, as the staff said they intended, then the Bears could have kept Clutts and had them both on the field at the same time. But instead, this move was premeditated, and Rodriguez is a H-back in name only. He's really just a replacement for Clutts, which is an indictment on Tice's inability to formulate an offensive gameplan that maximizes potential. Rodriguez needs to be in the game at this point. Period.

Now that I agree with. But it's again, a distraction. It's not the OL's ability or performance, nor is it the field's hindrance to play, it's the bloated Watt bandwagon finally blowing an axle.

How much of that was OL and how much was muddy, rainy, slippery surface? How many sacks did the Bears get? Oh, that's right, one.

Agreed. But it won't stop people from being distracted like at a magic show. They'll look at the hand showing you Cutler's injury, Campbell's poor preparation, Davis' fumble, Davis' missed catch, Jeffery's absence, Forte's "problem" with cutbacks, and never look at the hand holding the OL.

Ugh. It's sickening to think of for multiple reasons, the biggest being that if they actually cared about the marquee player on the team, the most important player on the field, they would have done more to protect him in free agency or the draft. Again, it's the type of short-sighted lack of coaching that has plagued the Bears since, well, forever it seems.

That's on Tice. The Bears drafted a pass-catching TE, and he's shown some decent ability to block, so it makes no sense to have either Davis or Spaeth in the game. Neither can catch a cold, and apparently Davis can't hold onto a ball or run a route without being easily bumped off of it.