jason

Want to disgust yourself? Play the game I'm playing... On every play I isolate, and completely focus on Omilaye. I watch him get destroyed when he doesn't get help from Kreutz. Then I remind myself he is making a ton of money to suck more at his job than I have ever even come close to sucking at ANY job.

I can't believe that was called when considering the nasty holds that were NOT called against the Bengals on their long runs.

What was the point of the last pass to Hester? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?

On EVERY play, both running and passing, the OL is letting someone get in Cutler's face, or at least getting a hand on him. NOW will people listen about this OL? It was the #1 need before the draft, and before the season, but all I heard was stuff about the WRs and other positions. This team succeeds and fails with the OL.

How in the hell is that not holding on the RT, AGAIN! Hunter had his jersey come out@!!!! What the f*#( is going on with these refs helping make this story?!

Wow. The play action, is KILLING the Bears. It's the PLAY ACTION! You know, the PLAY FRIGGIN ACTION...the thing that worked so well a few times for the Bears but seems to be something hated all of the sudden. This is ugly.

The Cover-2 just plain sucks ass, folks. Period. It's passive, lame, and has built in holes for the offense to exploit every time. I'd much rather have a defense that was at least a surprise from time to time.

FTFY

Did you see Lovie just now firing the team up?

Is Tillman wearing roller skates? Because, if he isn't, that is one of the worst examples of footwork by a DB in NFL history.

DING! DING! DING! We have a winner!

Someone break out the lube, because this rape is going to hurt.

Another big run, another big hold by the right side of their OL. This just in, when a defender has to spin to get away towards the tackle, it's more than likely a hold.

I didn't like the run up the gut multiple times, but I liked the screen call in that situation, but good grief was it horribly executed (like it has been for about 10+ years).

LOL @ the slo-mo instant replay of Frank Omilaye getting blown up by Tank

You're probably right, but average DBs - like the Bears' DBs - can't cover multiple routes. They are good for the first cut, which Bowman was on, but if the QB breaks containment, all bets are off.

And the result is, TD Bengals. Three things I noticed on the first drive: 1) The Bengals use the mid/deep cross or slant that I want the Bears to use. 2) The Bengals use the smashmouth blocking style that I want the Bears to use. 3) The Bears did a stunt with the LDE and LDT, which I love to see, but it was not enough to get to Palmer. And, as someone said in another thread, the Bears don't have the DBs to cover for a long time. Blitzes are necessary because the front four don't get enough pressure.

Benson's big run = nice hold by the RT. Chickenshit noncall by the LJ on that side.

Wow! First play...what was that!? It was sort of confusing how he faked the handoff to Benson, and then passed it.

AP is out...we should see more Wolfe.

Maybe I am taking liberties with his quotes, but that's how I interpret it when in reference to the Bears' offense. Like most others in this thread, I noticed that the "stats" in this article are horseshit. Some are misleading, some are stupid, and others are not good for Turner. With all that said, the stats DEFINITELY don't support Turner as a good offensive mind. The Bears haven't been a dangerous offense in his entire tenure, and even though he got Cutler this year, they are still mid-level at best. Let him produce an offense in the top ten a few years in a row and then I'll get off his back. Until then, I just can't deal with this predictability, lack of adjustment, and stubborn usage of players and plays without factoring in the type of player, down, and situation at the time.

The problem with Turner is in the first three sentences of the second page: "What we believe is to out-execute them," Turner said. "Do enough things formation-wise, play-wise, to keep them off balance. In other words: "I put in the plays, and I think they should work regardless of down and situation. If they don't, it's because the players didn't execute well enough. Doing a variety of things to keep the defense off balance is not what we do very much because the players should be able to succeed if they simply execute better." In my mind, that's BS. Sure, execution is probably the most important thing out there on the field, but when you're competing in the NFL, there isn't much difference between bad and good. You NEED to do things to confuse the opponent and keep them off balance. As for the "gripe" vs. "truth" section, it's fairly easy to come up with a very simple counter argument to each of the lines supporting Turner. If anything, the support for him in this article, at least the statistical portion, is mumbo-jumbo like the "almost interception." The supposed inside sources, however, can't be proven or refuted. But, honestly, what's the likelihood of an NFL scout, coach, or front office guy talking bad about another? Not very likely.

nfo, you completely misunderstood me. You have to read the post in its entirety. I think an aggressive defense with this group would give up big points at times, and have awesome games at times. Eventually they'd get better and have less of the former. If you read the next sentence, it says "I'd rather have," implying that the 21-30 is almost a guarantee with the passive defense the Bears play right now. That's where those arbitrary numbers come from. I don't mind the layup as long as it's consistently made. But if the layup is missed half the time, we may as well go for the three pointer. Overall I agree with this part. The one caveat, however, is that I believe an aggressive defense typically improves, and a passive defense gets complacent. Initially the 40 point games might be necessary, but in a short period of time they would be less necessary because the aggressive defense would get better and help the offense out. Winning is the name of the game, and I agree that this style could have growing pains. I am willing, however, to take a step back to take two forward. As it stands now, the Bears are on a treadmill.

Agreed. But it appears that the entire league knows where the blitzes are coming from, and the blitzes are, more often than not, picked up with ease.

Agreed...as long as Wolfe isn't being used up the pipe when it's an obvious down and distance situation that calls for an up the pipe run (e.g. from the 1yd line going out). I'd LOVE to see more of Wolfe on the field. I've been saying it since he got drafted, and all I heard was, "He's too small!" and "He's not an every down back" from the majority of the board. This dude quietly went onto the ST and became a beast, making what seems like every single tackle. He's been proving doubters wrong his entire life, and I think he'll do the same if given the chance to carry the rock 10-20 times a game.