jason

Ex-friggin-actly. If Lovie were to play Connect 4, he'd start trying to counter moves after his competitor already had three lined up with empty spots on each side.

For the sake of argument, I'll let everyone know that I didn't see much of Briggs, Ogunleye, Brown, or Cutler on the sideline where I was at. They were mostly about 20 yards or more away, and I couldn't judge much from their character. Tillman, however, I saw numerous times...and there is no denying his demeanor; he looked defeated and distracted.

We simply disagree. The first down play may be as predictable, but not the second down play. If you fail with a first down pass, there is a much higher likelihood that you'll run on second. It's one of those, "I took a chance and it failed, now it's time to go back to the basics"-philosophies. If the run happens on first, and is unsuccessful, then the second down play is much more unpredictable. It's not the play, it's the order of plays. I believe I explained it in the reply above. If the Bears went run then pass, and the D was stacked on second down, it's an easy TD. Keep in mind one minor detail, however: I think that if the play action pass on first down was to a TE, it would have been a much better play, and because of the superior size/talent of the Bears' TEs, would have had a much more likely chance at success. I agree that the OL sucked on those plays, but still contend that the order in which the plays were called didn't help. First down play action to a FB, unless it's a good TE known for pass catching abilities, is a bad call. The run up the pipe on second is immediately predictable when following that first down play.

Bears O vs. Bengals D The Bengals defense is not good. The Bears should be able to put up good rushing yards, as well as some big plays on offense. I predict, however, that the Bears will put up about 21-24, which is about 10-14 less than what they should get. Why? Because suddenly the Bengals defensive line will be, according to the announcers anyway, "rejuvinated," or "playing very well without Odom." When we all know that the Bears OL just stinks like a dead skunk on the highway. Bears D vs. Bengals O I think the Bears will have a problem with Benson, and he'll want to show them they were wrong. That spells more men in the box, and wider spaces for OchoCinco to roam. Could be bad news. Bears 24-Bengals 21. Yet another Lovie-style close victory that could very well have been a blowout.

If Farv were pushing himself out of a 3 foot pool of piss, I'd climb in waist deep just to kick out his arms. Yes, I hated him LONG before the retirement nonsense.

It was me. And I'm not sure all care. I'm nearly positive that Omaliye doesn't. Others probably care, but it's not high on the priority list. A few desperately care, and they want to win above all else. I got the final impression from Olsen. I'm positive he hates losing.

I'd say other things matter, like, oh I don't know, field position. A defense that bends but doesn't break has a bad habit of allowing another team to eat up long-ish drives, gaining field position, and setting themselves up for future weakness when we all know the offense is susceptible to quick 3-and-Out possessions. The bolded question? The answer is, yes. The problem is, however, that it never allows the latter of the two to have big games. Sure, with the abundance of talent, the big games will come as a result of great turnover numbers, and the bad games will simply be good performances. With lesser talent, however, there is never the potential to have a great game. Most of the games will be unimpressive and resulting in giving up something like 21-30 points. I'd rather have a defense that has the potential AT ALL TIMES of destroying the opposing QB...even if it means we get beaten badly from time to time. While the current cover-2 teaches a defense to be passive, and causes them to be increasingly passive, the opposite scenario allows a defense to bristle with pent up anger or emotion, a desire to go Ray Lewis on an opponent. And with that, the bad performances against opposing offenses become less and less. Whether or not this team has the talent is undetermined to be quite honest. How will we ever know if the chance is never taken? You fail to hit a home run EVERY time you don't swing. And whether or not we have talent makes me wonder...did the Philly or Pittsburgh defenses that caused havoc for a decade straight just have that much talent? I don't know if they did, because many of those guys went elsewhere and didn't play as well. I don't think the Bears have the best talent on D, but I think they have enough to do more than they are currently doing.

I was just doing some quick browsing, and I found this link. Angelo should set it as his home page. Which one (two?) of the guys on the list do you think the Bears should target in FA? I would love to see the Bears nab two of these guys, and then draft a guy early.

Thanks for the link. I agree with most, but the last one is stupid...has nothing to do with the Bears now. I think the author just wanted a nice, round number in 10.

First down, the play action was to McKie, not a TE. Which is why there was no separation. I don't like the play action to the FB, especially when it's McKie, a guy who is essentially on the team for the same reasons that Omaliye is still starting. Second down, the run up the middle was too predictable. Multiple people beside me, as well as me, were calling it before the snap. When Turner tries something even remotely outside of the box and it doesn't work, he crawls back into the shell. The run up the pipe on second down was the easiest call all game. He may as well have put Forte in a different colored jersey to let everyone know who was getting the ball. Third down, I liked this call. It was different, and gave Forte a chance to find his own hole. I think it comes down to when each play is called. And that is where Turner's biggest failing occurs. By running the play action on first, it significantly lessens the likelihood of seeing a play action call on second. If he had called that play again, I'm sure it would have worked because the Falcons were loaded for the middle. Turner would have been better suited to slam it into the middle on first down, then line up with the exact same formation on second. Then the defense wonders more about the likelihood of either the same run, which is common to run twice in a row from the one, or the play action, which is common, or even the QB sneak. I just think that Turner runs from a script, and he's far too easy to predict. I'm sure that if I made a point to study gamefilm I could find some serious patterns and situational statistics. When a player hits your curveball a mile, but it goes foul...it's not always best to switch up to the fastball. Sometimes you have to throw two curveballs in a row, and vice versa. It's situational, and I think Turner would be better suited if he had a catcher giving him the signals.

GREAT IDEA! Toub's special teams have consistently been the most productive part of the Bears, the best coached of the three aspects of the game, and he's lost arguably more of his "key players" than either the O or the D. With that said, I'd rather see an offensive minded coach come into Chicago for a change. Many here may have hated him, but Crowton was the last person to make the Bears offense dangerous, and I still think that the Bears should have made a play at Martz when he was available.

The Patriots sure looked good this past weekend ripping the Titans a new A-Hole and setting scoring marks unseen for nearly 60 years, and they just about ignore the run...as do the Saints. What I'm trying to say is, if the offensive scheme is sound, and the players productive, then it can work regardless of the weather. If anything, an atypical approach is better because the other teams aren't used to it. Think about how much more difficult it is to play against a 3-4 as opposed to a 4-3, or a left handed pitcher as opposed to a right handed pitcher. All that said, I don't want to see the Wildcat here a lot, because Devin Hester, Johnny Knox, and Garrett Wolfe are not the same as Ronnie Brown and Ricky Williams.

Good question. I can't think of one player, aside from Briggs, who has turned into a breakout defensive guy since coming to the Bears. If anything, just about every player - once again, aside from Briggs - has probably gotten worse under the regime of Lovie Smith and his passive defense. As for all the stat talk above, I, too, think it's misleading; and to be quite honest, even if it is accurate, I don't want my team playing like to "keep it close." I want a team that goes for the throat...something a Lovie Smith team almost never does unless the opponent just flat falls apart.

I forgot to tell you guys something from the game... During Half Time they had the silent drill team from the Marines. A bunch of guys with rifles, bayonets, and some razor-sharp movements. They were tossing weapons back and forth with perfect movements. It was a pretty impressive site. Well, near the end of their routine, Maynard starts to take warmup kicks. He's bombing 50 yarders from his 25 to the opposite 25, trying to put them near the sideline. Over and over he's drilling them to the same spot. And then when the Marines begin marching off the field, while still towards the middle, Maynard shanks a kick. You hear the groans. You hear the "uh-ohs." The ball barely misses the formation as the march perfectly off the field. Unfortunately, however, the ball bounces straight into the right arm of a young Marine marching in lock-step. The man never even flinches. Left, right, left... Maynard heard boos that were as loud as when the Bears team emerged from the tunnel. ================================================================= In all seriousness, Maynard may be the team MVP at this point...but that was not his greatest moment.

I think that you will find me and nfo calming agreeing with this idea...for almost two years now.

Nodding my head in agreement.

Weak article to say the least. He needs to quit tap-dancing around the issue and just come out and say it: The OL in Chicago SUCKS.

I noticed this several times, MadLith. I also don't understand it. The cover-2 is teaching the Bears' players to be passive...and it sucks.

I seem to recall saying this before this year's draft. I knew our WRs were going to be OK...they just needed help. Of course, they still need help from the OL, but at least the rocket arm can make up for the minimal time.

Two words: Ron Turner. That's why it won't happen. It's far too outside of his comfort zone. It's beyond his vanilla style. He's far too regimented into the old-school way of offensive coaching philosophies that dictate on 1st and 10 you do this, and 2nd and 5 you do that. Which, of course, is why he's so predictable. And in large part it's a reason why the Bears offense hasn't been worth a damn whilie he's been the OC.

To be honest, I think it comes down to Turner just not wanting to do things out of his comfort zone. I think it's unimaginative, boring, and probably buys his wife the same gift every year for Christmas...you know, because she liked it the first year. The no huddle is not going to happen in large doses while he's here. Period. I damn near shat myself when the Bears got into the Wildcat last night. I barely had time to register what was happening before Hester was going around edge. Everyone in my section was shocked.

Both are inexusable. It's like peewee league. I don't see the big improvement either. Of course, I didn't really buy in and drink the Marinelli as a godly DL coach koolaid either. It's the same cover-2, with the same massive holes, with the same inability to do anything when one of the DTs isn't destroying the middle. Without the TB version of Warren Sapp, the cover-2 is a flawed system. There is no debating this. It's a bend but don't break, passive system that is guaranteed to give up points to ANY offense, and the coaching staff just hopes that it's not too many for the Bears offense to overcome. I'm not making excuses, but that place is the loudest stadium I've ever heard. Completely drowns out your senses. It's 5 times louder than in Green Bay or Tennessee in the NFL, easily louder than any Soldier Field game I've been to, louder than any NBA arena I've been to, completely dwarfs absolutely any of the tons of baseball games I've attended all over the country, and even louder than some big time college games I've been to (i.e. Auburn at UT, Kentucky at Alabama). My ears are sorta ringing today, almost 15 hours after the game. It's tough to operate when you are without your hearing the entire game. I have to hand it to the Atlanta fans; they were pumped almost the entire game. I've even been to a Seahawks game in Seattle, and the Georgia Dome was louder.

We ADAMANTLY disagree about the play-calling on offense - probably defense, too - but I'm telling you, the steam is out of this team. It is palpable. I've never seen a less fired up Bears team. I have no doubt that a great many players hardly care about winning, and are just in it for the next big pay check. The note about Adams dancing was one that particularly bugged me. I think it was early third quarter, or maybe before the half, but dancing to a Michael Jackson song during the game is not what I expect from a team that is not handling their business on the field. Loose and fun is good when your are putting up 5 TDs in one quarter on the Titans; fine, dance away and have a good time. But when the game is tight and undecided, it's best to focus and think about how you as a player can do better, or help your team in another way. On the other hand, at least he wasn't taking on the Zombie Lovie personality that so many seem to have adopted.

I don't think Roddy White was shut down ALL game, and that's the problem. Not to mention the fact that he's slowly becoming RW McQuarters. On running plays and passing plays, his first movement is always to back peddle, even though he's already giving a ten yard cushion. I don't recall the play, but I believe it was late in the third quarter. The Falcons had a 3rd and about 6, but Tillman - probably by design of the cover-2, which is not his fault - was giving about a ten yard cushion. The play started, and he took his first few steps back. Just doesn't make sense, and neither does the defensive scheme that, ultimately, failed the Bears and played a large part in costing the game.

I specifically looked for this in the game. The unequivocal answer is YES. They got separation. Knox especially was open several times when the ball was thrown away. Hester juked his guy more than once when the ball didn't go his way. I also share your concern for the lack of mid-range passing plays, because I believe they are there to be had. The WRs aren't open all game, make no mistake. But they were open numerous times when the OL didn't give enough time, Cutler didn't see the guy open - or that player was a late read, or the play calling dictated that the ball go another direction. I don't know where to place blame, but from what I saw, it was much less on the WRs than it was on the OL, the OC, and Cutler. OL Part 1, Do they suck that bad? Yes. OL Part 2, Does the offense (i.e. Turner/Cutler) make reads/adjustments? I'm sure some are done, but it looks as if they are often locked into the "we'll beat you with our best play" mindset, regardless of how the defense adjusts. That stuff worked in the 50s, but I don't think it works as well now. A team must deceive the opponent AND execute, because great execution doesn't always work when the opponents also execute very well. In that respect, it goes to play calling. OL Part 3, Does the OL get any push? If they did get push, I didn't see the play. The entire section of Bears fans around me absolutely loathe the OL and their inability. Regarding the apathy I spoke of in the beginning of this thread, they seem to be the worst. The only guy who looked like he wanted to pump the guys up is Schaffer, the guy who doesn't play. What's worse is after each failed possession in which they performed average AT BEST, they all came off the field and fist-bumped each other for a job well done. No fire whatsoever. Roach seemed confused. I think it's a matter of being out of place AND reacting late. I just don't think the game has slowed down for him yet. Numerous times in the game I saw him on the field looking at others for a key, and he got instruction on the sideline a few times that I could see. Agreed. I expected much more, and feel the Bears should have won. It was a lackluster performance to say the least.