BearFan2000

Any chance someone could burn a copy of the game on DVD? I'll pay for shipping, materials and your time. What a game.

I'm tired of having to look back for the glory days I hope that we will see that 85 season become a memory when we bask in the glow of a shiny new Lambardi Trophy!!!! Go Bears!!!

And that is why it was ruled in complete. Johnson and the Lions may be ticked at that outcome but it's his own fault. He had control of the ball and all he had to do was hold it up. I think t's also the way it came out. He landed and ball touched the ground then left his hand. I believe he did have control but chose to let go of the ball. Should it have been a TD? Yes, but not because the official blew it but but because Johnson blew it. They all know the rules that you must maintain possession all the way through the catch and come up with the ball. Had he done like Forte did and held the ball up where there's no doubt he had possession and control it would have been ruled a TD. The bigger story is it should never have come down to that play. Turnovers absolutely killed us every time we got some momentum we coughed it up.

One would think the next logical step would be for our DBs to use press coverage, seems silly to practice it simply to benefit the Offense and then on game day not to use it. This logic seems like it should be both ways, helping the WRs learn to beat jams and press coverage but also helping the DBs get better at jamming and pressing. But there I go thinking logically, this is Lovie's passive defense. I'm tired of the whole passive bend but don't break and watching opposing offenses bend our D over backwards. It's about time we started taking the fight to someone else rather than them taking the fight to us.

Why doesn't he just admit that he doesn't want to go through training camp? That's right, honesty and decisiveness aren't really part of his MO.

I'd love to see them add the clip of Metallica For Whom The Bell Tolls that they play when the Bears score. Probably will never happen but Always thought that would be a cool touch. Bear Down being added is cool though.

I've been trying to reserve judgment till I see how it goes. I've felt since we got Martz it's either going to work and succeed or it's going to fail miserably I see little middle ground. But again won't know really till we see it in action.

But the more they raise the prices the more difficult it is for true fans to afford to go. The stadium will still be packed but will be more of the rich executive types who can actually plunk down that kind of money to go or to treat clients. What little I make at my job makes it prohibitive to go as it is. The timing isn't the best either as the team has sucked big time the last three seasons. So they're going to raise the prices to go see an inferior product..... good plan.

Exactly, and having your DB's line up 10 yards off the LOS on short yardage downs giving the other team a free first down with little effort. You could call it jelly coverage cause we don't believe in jam. Having your LBs up at the line of scrimmage every down only to make them backpedal into coverage and wonder why they are not in position to make a play. No one is falling for this clever trick. Plenty of examples on offense as well. Bring in a mobile QB with rocket arm and pretend he's statuesque Kyle Orton when the line can't pass protect. 14 weeks into a season you discover that he's dangerous when you use his mobility and roll him out. Moving the launch point so the opposing defense can't just rush to a known spot for an easy sack or a cheap shot on your prized QB. No creativity in the run game or the offense at all.. The average fan, or idiot on the street could predict the play calls. Yes execution does play a role but when coaching puts players in a position to fail how can you fully blame the players? This is basically company line. There's plenty of blame to go around.

Congrats, that is awesome wishing you the best of luck and keep up the work.

Think you mean Bulger and Warner but this is my biggest concern about bringing in Martz. Our Line has had trouble protecting for a 2 or 3 step drop. Martz like complex deep routes. He could get Jay killed. The other thing is the complexity of his system when we have much inexperience at the WR position. Bennet will be effectively a second year WR, Knox will be a 2nd year guy, Hester is still learning the position, Iglacias will be like a rookie, DA while showed great promise doesn't have a lot of experience. In the dumbed down repetitive Turner system we had WRs running incorrect routes and making other fundamental errors what reason do I have to think they can handle a much more complex system like Martz runs. Martz hasn't shown much flexibility to taylor his system to the talent but force the players into his system. I've seen that movie before. Martz has a rep for ignoring the TE, and the run game, using the RB as another wr. Martz is the last guy I wanted but... But Lovie gets what he wants and hires his buddies.

Yes and even when you step back and look at this mess, we're now 3 weeks or so from the embarassment.... I mean announcement that Lovie will stay. Bringing in Tice was the only logical move the Bears have made since the contradictory, flip flopping, insulting, brain cell killing press conference. Could use the expression even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while. The Tice hire was good but one good move doesn't make up for the host of bad ones and the apparent lack of direction. Just like the Bears on the field the management looks totally unprepared to get the job done.

PLEASE GOD NO!!!!!!!!

I'm with you DBDB I see no reason getting excited about anyone anymore. We may as well post an add in the paper or go door to door finding people to interview.... no experience, intelligence, or common sense required, only a pulse is required. While I can't bring myself to want the Bears to lose games I don't think I would be upset with it if it brought us closer to getting someone real coaching and management in here. Honestly I just want it to be over just pick someone already. My hometown HS team's head coach may soon be looking for work they won a few games this last season. We all know that once they settle on some desperate sod to coach the offense/defense Lovie will say "We got the guy we wanted all along" which was only slightly believable the first time around. I'm tired of listening to the company lines..... "we have a detailed plan" "I have no doubt we'll hire the right guy" "Candidates will be busting down the doors to get a chance to coach this team" As if their stupidity, lack of skill, and lies are the NFL's best kept secret. Good candidates that come here know that this isn't where they want to be and aren't truely interested in coaching for a Lame Duck and the quacks leading this mess.

Till I hear it announced in an official press conference, I will not even wast time getting my hopes up. I'm not going to be like Charlie Brown and have Lucie pull the ball away so I can land on my back.... Every time I get even slightly excited about candidates whether it be OC, DC, or HC the news comes out that he goes somewhere else or drops out of the running. Once a mistake, twice a coincidence, three times a pattern. The pattern is getting old. As names continue to pop up and we get excited when there's a guy that we like when just days prior we were excited about the last guy who ended up going somewhere else. Just as our search for OC/DC goes so it is with the HC position. We were hoping to see the Bears clean house, I know I'm not the only one who would have danced around like an idiot if we'd have done so and brought in Cowher. But Lovie's still here and we just filter candidate after candidate through our interview process and onto their new job somewhere else or back with their current job. I imagine the candidates are more like the person who drives by a Garage sale and pops out to look to see if anything interests them but realize it's just garbage gets back in the car and goes on. We've heard rumors about Cowher supposedly interested in the Bears, supposedly we reached out to him, supposedly there was a chance he'd be here as the 2010 coach. Point is right now all we have is speculation, I'm holding out for something more tangible.

The Saints second half stats were absolutely atrocious and that game winning drive didn't exactly exude confidence. dropped passes, bobbled balls, the last pass was likely upheld mostly due to it being ruled a catch on the field. Sure he had his hand under it but the ball was moving and the ground helped him make the catch. The vaunted Saints offense looked mostly inept. Without the turnovers its no contest. A lot of those turnovers came at very inopportune times when the Vikings were threatening. Two of them inside the Saints 10 IIRC. They fumbled 5 times and lost three of them and had two interceptions. The first pick, Brett got plastered the second was just dumb.

Or Chad Hutchinson, Dave Kreig, PT Willis, Steve Stenstrom, Will Furrer, Chandler

Our defense could use a refresher course on laying the wood. He would bring an aggressiveness that is so lacking with our passive D. I don't know much about Plank's qualifications as DC. I like that he wants to come home to coach the Bears and he was a lethal weapon on the field but beyond that I know little about his coaching experience.

I was thrilled that the Vikings lost as well, not that I have a lot of love for the Saints but on any given Sunday my fav team is the Bears and my second fav is anyone playing the Vikings. Can't stand the Vikings, there was a time when I respected Favre but I've outgrown that as well and over the past several years have grown to outright despise him.... you put two things that I despise together and I can root for any team against them even the friggin Pukers To me the highight of the game was Brett's last INT. That interception cost them the game and it was a mistake that they teach you at all levels not to ever do... throw back across your body to the middle of the field late in the play. You are asking for trouble. Favre has gotten away with things like that all through his career, but I laughed when it bit him in the arse. One thing I did not want to see this season was Brett Favre getting another ring, and I'm glad that won't happen. At the end of the day that small satisfaction I got from Favre's and the Viking's failure tonight. Doesn't make up for the fact that my Bears are in disarray, but only takes my mind off it for a moment. That said I see no way the Saints win against the Colts. When you have a 5-1 advantage in the turnover battle and have to win the game in over time.... 1. you didn't capitalize on the Vikings mistakes. 2. were it not for the turnovers you would have lost that game 3. you were dominated for most of the game but benefited from really bad ball security by your opponent. 4. you also benefited from some favorable calls and reviews. (the Brees fumbled exchange challenge was dumb you were never going to win that one) Now if your the Saints... ask yourself this what are the odds that the Colts self destruct 5 times, you get breaks from the officiating, and that the Colts will give you multiple opportunities to capitalize on mistakes. Don't expect the Colts to make a ton of mistakes. The Turnover ratio could have been even worse for the Vikings if they'd lost the ball every time the put it on the ground. You will face a much more disciplined and formidable opponent in Miami than you faced today. While it may not always be pretty the Colts simply get it done.

some interesting points if he were to take a job as OC with hopes to become HC and the Bears don't turn it around there's a chance that he along with Lovie would be swept out, if a turnaround happens and Lovie stays he would have to look else where for HC opportunities. Now that to me means the Bears would make no promises that he would be retained if the Bears have another bad season. Which to me doesn't make sense he's very good at what he does why not make it clear that even if there is a house cleaning that he could be one of the few survivors along with toub. If he has any interest in the Bears HC job he should stay put and wait for the inevitable to happen and then step in. Thought the comment about Chico was interesting, the thought hadn't really crossed my mind. But he is a guy who's looking for a HC spot, has proved his medal as DC, now again he isn't a guy who is an established HC or has any experience but neither would Chud. I still like the thought of Cower but I don't think there's enough Kool-aid left in the city of Chicago to make me believe that will happen. Now I didn't think we'd actually trade for Cutler either. To go along with his point about being thrown out with the garbage or stuck if Lovie is retained, that same thing likely hangs over anyone that interviews. Anyone who is looking at that spot as a stepping stone with HC aspirations in the near future may see it as a lose lose situation. That I think will play at least a slight role in the search. and why I feel we will settle for the first guy on our list that actually shows real interest or if we get desperate enough elevate Tice to OC. I'd like to be wrong but I just don't see us getting a top or even level two tier OC. I have a feeling we'll do what the bears have done for the last couple decades and settle for anyone with a pulse and some connection to Lovie.

What a classy guy and a damn good kicker. Without his leg our record would likely be more dismal than 7-9. It's hard to find kickers that are as consistent as Gould and he's not only great on the field but also off the field. It's awesome to see him step up and without hesitation pick up the tab for the kids and their families.

the more I read about Chud and the more he's talked about in these boards I really like the thought of him being here. When I first read Cleveland Browns I gaged a bit but realized that it was only 2 years ago that they were good and he was their Coordinator. I like that he's got experience with TE's and their success seems to follow him wherever he goes that bodes well. It would be nice to see the guy we envisioned when we drafted Gregg. Along with our other TE's Davis and Clarke (who is nearing the end of his career). I like that he has experience with more than one system and is very intelligent in how he calls plays and understands how to take advantage of mismatches. He seems like the guy who would tailor a system to the talent we have, rather than the square peg in a round hole. I would be very happy with him as OC and feel like on the offensive side of the ball we will have greatly improved the coaching. Like many here I too am concerned about the defense, both in coaching and talent. This unit has slipped a lot since it was last a dominant force. Lack of consistent pass rush, poor coverage, poorly timed play calling, and poor fundamentals. I could see the 2010 Bears become a team that will need to outscore it's opponents to win but will not with any consistency depend on it's defense to come through. The question becomes will we be able to do enough on D to help the offense...... did I just say that??? Now if we do happen to bring in coaching that can get the best out of the talent who can still walk on defense then we could be surprised but at this point put me in the wait and see/I'll believe it when I see it camp. As for contract lengths, stability and what not. We know this much it will be a weird couple seasons. I really hope that they get something worked out and we will have football in 2011. But the reality is that there is a shadow hanging over any decisions involving contracts over the next two seasons. It really muddies what would otherwise simply be a stability situation in Chicago, where you'd have to be living under a rock to believe that there is stability here in Chicago (implied or otherwise). The candidates aren't dumb they know this as well. So selling the impression of stability is a tough sell. The unknown that teams, players, coaches, etc are bracing for. Makes a bad situation an even worse one. But I think that the Bears are trying to make the best of it by focusing more short term (2010) and see where that goes. If there is no football in 2011, which would be Lovies final year of his contract, firing him following the 2010 season would change nothing. Either way he's be paid for 2011. I do have a question about 2011. If there is no football does that simply mean no games, or does that also include football related actives like contract negotiations, player signings, coaching interviews etc. Does the league effectively come to a halt other than CBA negotiations? Or would it be like an extended offseason. Lovie currently isn't under contract in 2012. If we do so so and the decision is to clean house can that process proceed between the end of 2010 and the start of 2011. Could we potentially be looking at filling a vacancy at HC in 2012 (should football return) after letting Lovies contract expire and in turn have to hire a coach in what would normally be the offseason between 2011/2012 or could that process begin at the end of the 2010 season. I can see this going one of two ways. If we have a good/great season in 2010 Lovie may (as illogical is it may seem) get an extension to say 2013 or 2014 or whatever. So when football returns in 2012 we'll have our staff in place. The other way is if we have another bad season they can fire him after 2010 but either way will still pay him in 2011 and the decision becomes do we fire him and then hire a new coach long term or bide our time and let his contract expire after 2011 and start the search for his replacement then. In a way our situation isn't as bleak as it may seem. On one hand a successful season could very well see a Smith extension (with the right staff I might be ok with this). On the other hand a lockout in 2011 would present the option after 2010 to see who could be potential candidates and can decide at that point to cut Lovie lose and pursue a new HC for for a long term contract and if no one excites us we simply stay put let Lovies contract expire and look at the HC between 2011 and 2012. However, at that point we would have to find someone, though another option would be to give a one year extension if the options don't look promising.

I feel that a big part of his "decision making" problems are rooted in the lack of protection, bad play calling, and lack of threat running the ball. No one feared the run so they played coverage and were getting pressure on Jay with little effort. I know the saying is cliche but you give Jay time to scan the field he can pick you apart. But when you get the ball and as soon as you drop back you are under duress makes it difficult to go through your reads and you rush the decision making. That isn't to say that some of his picks came at times when he had time but made a bad read. Find me a QB who never ever makes a bad read and I've got some ocean front property in Nevada I'd like to sell you. The last two games the play calling was much better, the line gave him time and he was able to get into a rhythm, and we had enough of a running game to stay balanced. In those two games Jay looked nothing like the turnover machine many were making him out to be, but, more like the QB we gave up so much to get. Jay will be fine once the line stabilizes. No way do we ship off Cutler but rather he's a talent to build around. Campbell isn't the worst QB but he's not that great either. I would not get the point in downgrading a position where it is so difficult to get a talent like Cutler. IMHO someone would have to offer what we offered Denver before I even think about it. Even what we gave up I still make that trade to get Jay. As it's been pointed out we've blown 2 first rounders on QB's, one of which isn't in the league anymore and the other is barely in the league. We've also shown a track record of wasting high draft picks. We've had an endless parade of QB's who are average to below average and have had a difficult time to find a franchise QB to say the least. We finally have one who can lead us to superbowls you don't give that up, you build around him.

sorry but, in an economy where many are jobless, many are taking pay cuts to keep their jobs and many are in a salary freeze barely making it paycheck to paycheck. You have pro athletes who will balk at salary decreases that will still make them vastly higher paid than most real world people. I've been working at the same place for 11 years and am well below average in salary partly because my employer is cheap and more recently due to the economy. I barely make enough to keep the bills and mortgage paid up and have a little to set aside for emergencies. If I had half the salary of the average player it would be a lot more than I make now. Yet these guys will refuse to take a pay cut when the fans that work hard to fork over their hard earned cash to support them are barely making ends meet. Doesn't seem right.

I kinda doubt even Harry Heistad knew the details of what we were trying to do. Sure didn't look organized to me.. I like this hire and agree with BrianBear and others that if we'd have hired him as OC that would have been a bad move but I'm happy to have him as O-Line coach where he's been effective in the past. We need a guy who will bring some aggression to our line they have been soft and it's gotten old watching them get pushed around not giving Jay time or Forte running room. Definite upgrade. It is interesting that the OL coach is hired before the OC. Not sure if that means the have zero'd in on who they want for OC and this is a signing with him in mind or it is that they see the need for a significant upgrade at OL Coach and went after a guy that they feel is a significant upgrade. Usually the OC has in mind who he'd like to bring in. 1. Is this method going to limit or hinder our search for an OC if they don't get to pick their own position coaches? Will it help as Tice does have a good reputation and solid resume. That may show candidates that we are serious about improvement. 2. Not fully knowing how big a deal it is for the line coach to be brought in first since it's likely they have in mind the style of offense they would like to employ. Which I would think would still be run oriented but also be balanced in utilizing Cutler's mobility and arm. For that type of offense our line will need to be aggressive and that is more Tice's style. 3. Is this a recognition that the game starts and stops in the trenches, lose the line of scrimmage and you will have a tough time winning the game. Perhaps a sign that it was high on the priority list was to bring in someone who they feel can turn the line play around. To that end I think Tice is a good choice. I've said it before and I'll say it again, fix the line and you fix a lot of the issues. We saw what quality line play did for us in the Minny game and the Detroit game. When Jay has time to throw he's a dangerous QB, When Forte and Bell have had holes and room to run they have done well. Throughout much of the previous 14 games the lack of protection and lack of run blocking gave way to a stagnated offense that couldn't seem to get out of its own way. 4. Is this going to be the way the new look staff will be assembled each individual piece separately? If so can a patchwork staff like this work? Jerry knows he's on the hot seat and I have to think Lovie does too. It's in their best interest to piece together a staff that can turn the team around. While no one at Halas Hall will cop to it it's win or else. They've been given one more shot to make it work. Ok now, going out on a limb here but let's say for arguments sake that the Bears do put together a decent staff offensively and defensively and the Bears do turn things around in 2010... then what? Does that success have any long term potential ie the staff? Is there a possibility that given the right mix of position coaches that it would be acceptable to retain Jerry and Lovie beyond 2010? Could be the remnants of kool-aid dried to the bottom of my glass or the remaining evidence of a silver lining, but at this point this move is a good sign that they are looking to get quality coaching here. Even though Tice's head coaching stint wasn't that great it does give him a broader perspective. I like this hire.