jason

I'm clearly giving the last TD to the D/ST. The offense had to go six yards. Seriously. Six yards.

I'm speaking in the realities of what actually happened. You are right, however, Orton should have had a monster game if not for the drops by Booker (who is on the offense).

Drive 1: Plain old marched down the field on the Queens. TD Drive 2: Blocked punt. TD Drive 3: Started the drive at the Bears' 48, got 34 yards (10 more via penalty). FG. Drive 4: 24 total yards. Punt. ST TD after muff. Drive 5: Started on the Queens' 26, and got 2 yards. Blocked FG. Drive 6: Started on the Bears' 41, got 23 yards (5 more via penalty). FG. Drive 7: Awesome drive by the offense. TD Drive 8: Total yards 12 - Punt Drive 9: Total yards 8 - Punt Drive 10: Started at the Bears' 37, got 51 yards on one play (BOOKER IS FAST!). TD Drive 11: Started at the Queens' 6. TD Drive 12: Total yards 9 - Punt Drive 13: Total yards 15 - Punt Drive 14: Doesn't count...clock killer So, by my count, that's 21 points for which the offense can take credit, and then 21 points for which the ST can take credit, and then 6 more points that is shared equally. Although, the fifth drive should have been at least 3 points, making it 9 shared points. The offense did very well today, and there can't be a person who is upset with all the points shoved down the Queens' throats, but let's not get too excited about the "offensive onslaught". The offense didn't get the Bears 48 points. The team got the Bears 48 points.

Bump for the prediction.

It seems that everyone knows how to exploit it. Everyone understands the gaps and holes. And, most importantly, when the Bears go to it exclusively, they get raped. Is it because it's a passive approach? OR Is it because the Bears don't have the personnel to run it any more? Either way, the Bears almost let a win go yet again. This "playing not to lose" crap has killed the Bears this year, and it appears that Lovie and crew haven't learned their lessons. Thank goodness the offense and ST put up so many points today, because those last ten points to the Vikings were way too easy.

Believe what you want about 6 year olds, bridges, and whatever. I merely put it in there because you didn't seem to understand it...and it seems that you still don't. Hell, you don't even get the analogy. If they were tugging the thing, pushing the thing, and trying lube to pull the thing out, then surely letting the air out of the tires would have done nothing the others wouldn't have. If anything there would have been less structural damage when letting the air out. But, thanks for playing. You can consider them engineers or whatever, but you've missed the point. There are thousands, maybe millions, of people who are supposed professionals doing their jobs. These people who claim to be professionals make drastic blunders on a daily basis. These people tend to get fired. The Bears coaching staff for the last 20 years has fallen into this group. This year's staff isn't incompetent enough to be fired, but they clearly aren't making progress. If we were comparing it to any other job, they'd be in the couseling phase before getting terminated. Or maybe even fired by now. To be a professional at anything there has to be improvement, and when mistakes are made they have to be remedied. This coaching staff has barely done either, if at all. I think the difference is truly in this paragraph. I happen to think they are one of the many people who claim to be a professional at something, but just aren't great at it. They're just average. You just automatically assume that they fall outside of that grouping because of the fact that there are so few coaches/GMs - while ignoring the fact that they get fired so often and criticized by their own so regularly. Maybe you're the kind of guy who blindly trusts someone who is in a position, or has a title, just because they are who they are. I, however, like to go into the details, and realize where that person is screwing up. I like to know what they know, and try to discuss why or how things can be improved. Perhaps you'd like to do some reading in your spare time about the work of some of these professionals you so admire: Bridge Engineers As for the what if statements you put in there...well, that just proves you don't understand what I'm saying. If those things happen, then you ADJUST. It's a difficult concept, I know, but perhaps you and our coaches could look it up and apply it more frequently, or at least as frequently as the design appears faulty. I know what the cover-2 is, I know how it is run, I know about the responsibilities. But when the slant is killing your team, you make an adjustment. Either you move the DBs up, which I advocate, or you spread the LBs out a little, so that they are there to crush the WR, which I think is the lesser of the two options. The same applies to the DE routes. You don't do it every time. You scheme. You adjust. Last but not least, you like to talk about my exaggeration, but you fail to mention yours. I didn't say that I could pick better than JA. I said that I have a better record of first round picks than JA, and whoever else made the first round picks for the Bears over the last ten years or so. I stand by it because it's true. I don't have nearly the resources to get into the lower rounds and find the gems at places like Hofstra, but I watch enough football to know where the big school studs are, and my first rounds would have had a much higher success percentage than that of the Bears. But, yeah, let's drop it. I'll continue to believe that in some circumstances, I, like many other fans with knowledge, could do better than our coaches and front office. And you can continue to believe that our front office and coaches are godly.

Just wanted to put it in other words: Hell, it's the entire premise behind the show "Are you Smarter Than a 5th Grader". We are Joe Fan. We may know a lot, some more than others, but we don't know as much as the coaches. That's almost given most of the time. What some of us do know, however, is football. We understand basic X's and O's, basic strategy. We understand it because we have played, coached, or officiated (I happen to have done all three). And while I don't know all the cool lingo, all the 600 page play books, I know football. The width of our knowledge is a mile wide and an inch deep; the coaches is an inch-wide and a mile deep (the same as the TV show - which is why nobody knows what a cumulus cloud is). I know what I have done and what I have seen, and when I watch the Bears, I apply that knowledge. I imagine it's the same as just about anyone here. So, just because we aren't in the league doesn't mean it's not possible that we may have a better idea or could do better than any one of those guys for a few plays or a few situations; hell, maybe quite a bit more than that with some coaches. I'd say it's a pretty safe bet. Give us a full game? We'd probably screw it up. But give us a few plays (maybe a drive or two), and there is a much better chance of success. I just think that you write off the fan too much, and I think we know a lot more about football than you give us all credit for. I know a few things for sure: I would have our DBs up closer to the WRs, and I wouldn't run the FB dive. In other words, I'd learn from my mistakes - something this coaching staff hasn't done. After all, if these guys are so good at their jobs, they wouldn't be getting fired left and right, and they wouldn't be constantly questioned by former players, coaches, and GMs for doing stupid things.

1a) I think Turner has done slightly above average. He has not done well. 1b) I'm sorry, but the FB dive to McKie is a bad play 99.9% of the time. If he busts it loose, he gets max 3 yards. If he fails, he gets stuffed for -3 yards. There just isn't room for error, and most of the time he doesn't have enough speed or running ability to get the positive yards. It's a horrible play in nearly every situation. 1c) I know the "quit calling the FB dive play"-threads are getting old...but not nearly as friggin old as watching the play unfold, destined to fail, and Turner keeps calling them. Besides, that's the point of the message board - to discuss the finer points of Bears football. 1d) You clearly don't understand what I'm talking about, and you don't read the whole posts. The 4th and 1 play is not nearly the same as the 3rd and 1 play. One third down, there is a much better chance of play action pass, so the defense has to respect that. Hence, greater success from the RB (not the FB). On fourth down, everyone in the building knows it's going to be a run up the pipe. If you don't see the fundamental difference between play-calling on third and fourth down in the NFL, then I am giving you too much credit. When it's third and less than 3, nearly every play call should involve giving the ball to Forte (or Jones), or running a play-action-fake off of that same play. 2) Honestly, I had no care one way or the other. At the time it seemed like a good play, to squib it, but I didn't like the distance on the squib. It looked like Gould slowed up. Since then, however, I've heard some very good breakdowns about why it's a near guarantee that kicking it deep would have been a better call...and it's hard to disagree. 3) Actually, dude, I don't get angry about it. I just find that you're more ignorant about this discussion than the people you think are ignorant. Hell, you all but agreed with me in a recent post when you questioned the defensive strategies employed by the Bears. The way I see it, you have no right to question any play call by any coach, any draft selection, or any decision in management...because they are right by your standards. I happen to think that many guys in the pros out-think themselves. It's the same in any profession. People that have been doing things so long lose focus on the basics, and they try to be too smart instead of just doing what works, or taking advantage of what the defense gives you. For instance, the way our DBs CONSTANTLY get burned by the slant. How the hell does Babich not see this and adjust? I know you agree with this. And since you do, surely you can see the logic in the fact that while all of us agree we couldn't do a better job overall than the guys doing it, we can still see flaws in their game plan, or draft selections. Actually, it reminds me of a story... A truck slammed into a bridge and there was a huge accident. The truck got wedged under the bridge so tight that no matter the pull or push applied, it just wouldn't move. It was possible that someone was stuck in there still, and they had to move it. Police and firemen brought in machines, lubrication, and every sort of pulley one could think of. Nothing budged. By this time the traffic had backed up. A young father and his 6-year old walked up to see what was going on, and to see if there was any way they could help. The father asked a firefighter about the problem, about how horrible the situation was, and the father shocked to hear all the details. Just then the little kid spoke up, "Why not let the air out of the tires?"

1) I've given credit and ripped. This is the first time I have seen you admit to the fact that the FB dive play is a stupid play in that scenario. I have, however, seen you say it was a good play somewhere else on this board. Keep in mind that the praise being delivered is still being given to an offense that had 13 whole points with less than a minute to go - so it's not like they're tearing it up. And as for "taking it down the field" in the last minute, that was almost a no-brainer. It's hard to give credit to someone calling plays when they have no real choice. You give credit to the players in that situation. To give Turner credit for the last minute drive, a drive in which the play-calls were a given, is like giving credit to someone when they choose to drink water instead of bleach - when the choice is blatantly clear, it's really hard to screw up. On that same note, if the players screw up in that situation, it's all on them. 2) Like I said multiple times, I didn't have a problem with the squib kick at the time. I also don't think I would have been troubled by a long kick. If the guy returns it, he returns it. There is only one player in the NFL that warrants kicking away, and that player is Devin Hester...and he doesn't deserve it this year. 3) So, what you are saying is, it's possible, however slightly you may think the percentages are, that we fans may be able to see things and make calls, at times, the coaches can't? Are you telling me that it's possible the high-and-mighty coaches in the NFL are not absolutely infallible? Or is it just the defensive coach that can be questioned? Careful, your slip is showing.

1) Agreed - same thing I've said. It's common football knowledge. 2) Meh. The more I think about this, the more I think your position is right. But at the time, I didn't think it was a bad idea. 3) Agreed - same thing I've said. It's common football knowledge. Cue azbear to swing on Turner's nuts and tell you that you don't know what you are talking about because you aren't an NFL coach.

Why is everyone so quick to throw the defense under the bus? They weren't great, but the blame is shared on this one. Or, maybe you all think that 20 points against a mediocre defense is good? Not to mention the fact that without a last gasp, holy Sh#@ throw with a few seconds left, it was really 13. Through three quarters, and almost the entire fourth quarter, the Bears offense scored 13 points. And it's all the defense's fault? Keep in mind that if the Bears actually score on the goal-line sequence, the Bears pretty much win.

I don't have a problem with the squib kick, but it could have been harder. I do have a problem with the defense on that last play, however. The Falcons had a long way to go to get into FG range, and one T.O. The natural place to attack the cover 2 is right behind the DBs on the sideline, and in front of the Safeties. That's painfully obvious, and anyone who knows anything about the cover 2 will agree. It's passive, and it has holes. Instead it would have been better to blitz two LBs, force the Falcons into a quick play, the DBs playing bump-and-run, and gang up on the tackle. The safeties playing cautiously for the lob of course, but they'd be aware that they were responsible for jarring something loose over the deep middle.

That's unreal. How are you not ready for the deep out? That's the play they HAD TO RUN.

Really? I hadn't heard that.

Steltz and the hair got him!

Bingo.

HAHAHAAHA!!! CLASSIC!! Orton made some huge throws in that drive. Davis made a very tough catch as well. Great drive.

With a 3rd-and-1 on the goal-line, the best possible option is to make a play that involves your main, #1 RB. He can either take the hole, cutback, or try to make something happen. If you want to do something other than that to be tricky, then you run a play-action rollout off of that. The Titans did it for years and years with McNair to Wycheck. It's not that difficult to understand. But you go on thinking that the McKie FB dive is a good call.

Why should I? You've been too stupid to get it thus far, I doubt you'll catch on now.

I don't see how you guys can so blindly say that the defense lost the game. Look at the drives in the first half: Chicago had four, Atlanta had four (five). Chicago came up with 3 points. Atlanta came up with 9 points. Look at the second half (until this point - at the ATL missed FG): It's been fairly even, but you have to put a lot of blame on the offense, and more specifically Turner, for not coming through at the ATL goal-line. With that touchdown, it's a completely different game, and the Bears are winning 20-19 going into the 2:00 warning, not trailing 13-19. I'd say this could easily be split down the middle if anything, but the offense didn't exactly do a lot to win the game. Hell, Detroit had given up 21 points or over to every opponent except the horrible Chiefs team this year.

But NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO....how can you question Ron Turner?! He's been doing this for years and years professionally! You should just be quiet because you clearly don't have a clue. Ron Turner is a great OC, and by sheer virtue that he is in the NFL means that you couldn't possibly make a decision that is remotely close to his brilliance. Sarcasm aside, anyone who thinks that McKie FB dive play is good, is completely effing retarded, knows nothing about football, and doesn't deserve any sort of reply regarding strategy. Simply put, on third and short, you have to give it to your main guy, Forte. If not, there needs to be deception like a play-action call involving that same player.

But is that a knock on Bradley, Lovie (and OC), or both? Considering the fact that the Bears' WRs haven't been tearing up the league, I'd have to say that it is at the very least a shared fault. Of course, I was a fan of Bradley's (when not injured) for some time, and felt all he really needed was a chance to shine. Because, let's be honest, when the dude was on the field and the ball made it his way, he looked fast, strong, and big. But when you only see one or two balls thrown your way a game, it's tough to get out of a doghouse that doesn't exactly have a wide door for success.

Looks like we're going to go ahead and scratch this idea. He acted like a baby the entire game versus the Bears, had drops, threw fits, and isn't nearly as talented as someone like TO or Randy Moss (who barely make it tolerable). Roy Williams - pass

WOW! Hester is too fast for any of the Detroit DBs. TD.

I like the fact that Turner and Orton are opening it up some this game. More than one intermediate to long passes.