adam

Did Hester switching to WR prevent us from getting a true #1 WR though? If the team believed he could develop into one, that might be why they didn't pursue any legit WR's. If that was the case, I think it was a bad idea, because like you said, Hester is best suited as a #2/#3 WR.

It is sort of interesting to see where both of these players are a couple years after they both dominated the return game in 2007. Since then, Hester has been converted to a full time WR and has 0 return TD's and is near the bottom in Punt Returns (8.1 AVG). Receiving-wise, Hester has scored 6 Receiving TDs since 2007 with over 1,300 yards in two seasons (49th in receiving yards in 2008 and currently 43rd in 2009). Cribbs has 6 Return TDs since 2007, and is still a league leader in both Punts and Kickoffs. At this point, has this been the wrong decision? Based on the numbers, Hester is scoring less as a WR than as a Returner, and based on number of snaps, etc, it should be the other way around. I understand the team is underachieving, but this just seems like one area that was a huge mistake.

I said probably because I don't know all the inner workings or constraints put on the job. I just think Angelo got cute in the draft going for those value and sleeper picks. You can only go to the well so often.

The Passer Ratings were hilarious (Cutler - 7.9, Hanie - 8.3). This team packed it in weeks ago. The players are forcing a change, it is pretty clear at this point.

Greaaatttt:

per Rotoworld.

Yeah, this has been pretty bad. I would say calls in general have not gone the Bears way this year. Holding, blocks in the back, pass interference. All non-calls against Bears opponents.

Another management blunder. Hester is not the next Steve Smith. He could've been the best returner of all time, now that is a faint memory.

At this point I have to believe he knows he is getting fired.

At least we are completely eliminated and no one can say the "if we win out" BS anymore. This team is bad.

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/1051697...g-Week-14-games

The Pack is only favored by 3, so it is not that big of an upset considering we are playing at home.

I just took a look at some of the receivers stats from the Broncos and Bears from 2008 to 2009. I was surprised at the huge dropoff from Royal (down 58 receptions and over 660 yards from a year ago). Now I know there are still 4 games to play, but that is a huge dropoff. Marshall and Scheffler are both down as well. There is a good chance that Marshall will be the only Bronco with more than 500 yards receiving. Compare that to Hester and Olsen, who both will surpass their 2008 totals (Hester already has). Even Forte is on tap to beat his 2008 totals for receiving. We will also more than likely have 5 receivers (including Forte), break 500 yards receiving. Player - 2008 / 2009 (4 games remaining) Marshall -104-1265 / 65-808 Scheffler - 40-645 / 28-342 Royal - 91-980 / 33-314 Total - 235-2890 / 126-1464 Player - 2008 / 2009 (4 games remaining) Hester - 51-665 / 54-682 Olsen - 54-574 / 49-449 Total - 105-1239 / 103-1131 Now I know this is a lost season, and we have some huge changes to make, but at least on the surface it looks like Cutler is making the receivers better.

I actually believe it will be Packers 38-17. However, we are 4-2 at home, barely lost to GB in GB, GB is on a short week, and we are due for at least one good game this season. EDIT - It looks like Hester may be out for this game (http://twitter.com/vxmcclure23)

You are correct, and most good teams could play any scheme and be succesful. The Cover-2 is just one of those that requires certain players on the field to have unique abilities that are not required in other schemes. You can actually hide some weaknesses in other schemes, but in the Cover-2, those weaknesses get exploited. One thing I've noticed about the Bears this year is that they are completely jacking up their pressures with their coverage. The blitz with a 10 yard cushion on the outside is the best example of that. I can't tell you how many times an opponent has thrown to the hot route on a 3rd and Long when we do that.

Bears 24-20, somehow.

The Cover-2 is player dependent more than any other scheme, and if you don't have the necessary pieces, it just doesn't work. With the right personnel it is really effective, but the drop-off is huge with the wrong personnel. Right now we don't have the assets to play the Cover-2. I don't mind the Cover-2 when used in the right situations, but we go to it too often and get picked apart.

That would be a pretty significant change, and something I would applaud. Just replacing Turner will go a long way towards turning this thing around. If we can do that AND get a new DC who is not a Cover-2 only guy, that is icing on the cake. Essentially that takes the major components of the game plan out of Lovie's hands and puts him back in the standard HC role.

I fear that they are going to give everyone a pass on this season. What a nightmare.

Watch, we actually show up, win, and extend the agony.

Going for two in a row? Teams seem to be going in opposite directions. Bears like to be underdogs, current line is Bears +3.

So you're saying there's a chance. http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=Ajr4...o&type=lgns

Wow, his expressions are the same as the team's performance.

Here we go.

There are 4 teams this year with a losing record that ended last year with a winning record: TEN 13-3, 5-7 CAR 12-4, 5-7 TB 9-7, 1-11 CHI 9-7, 5-7 There are only 3 teams with a winning record that had a losing record last year. CIN 4-11-1, 9-3 JAX 5-11, 7-5 GB 6-10, 7-4 There are also 8 teams that currently have a losing record and finished last year with one (STL, SEA, SF, DET, KC, OAK, CLE, and BUF). So if we end this year with a losing record, the odds are against us to rebound next year.