Bears4Ever_34

If we were to switch receiving cores with each other for a season, Cutler would be leading the MVP voting right now.

Not really. It's actually the greatest measuring stick to success. What's the worst two things that can happen to you as an offensive lineman? Allowing a sack or committing a penalty. You can ignore the sacks allowed if you want but the proof is in the pudding. Webb has allowed 11 sacks and has committed 12 penalties, while Lance Louis has allowed 8.5 sacks and committed 3 penalties. In the three games the great Frank Omiyale played in, he manage to give up 4 sacks and committed 6 penalties. The rest of the guys you mentioned, have only allowed 1.5 sacks and have only committed 7 penalties (4 from Spencer). Would you not agree that those 3 have played better than Lance Louis and Jamarcus Webb? Those are plays that don't have statistics attached to them. If you are going off of the eye test then that isn't a very good tactic to use in a debate. Just saying. I never got a chance to see any of the Seahawks game so I can't contend against your analysis of that game. But as I've said in the past, I really would be hesitant to use the games that Cutler/Forte never played in as good evaluators for the line. I'm not saying you CANT do it but I don't see the point. There's a reason why the line's play has drastically declined over the past several weeks and his name is Caleb Haine. The Garza assessment caught my eye the most. I just wanted to make a point that some of those guys you said that were playing bad, really weren't.

I'm not sure where you get off by saying Roberto Garza is average. He's been borderline elite for most of the season with only 2 penalties and 1 sack allowed. How is that average? Edwin Williams has not given up a sack in his 5 games as a starter, and Chris Spencer has only allowed 0.5 sack on the year. Jamarcus Webb, and Lance Louis (Post Jay Cutler) have been by far the worst performers on this line, giving up a combined 20 sacks. The other guys have not been as bad as you claim. My turn.. Roy Williams: 27 rec 366 only 1 TD. Beyond bad- Won't be on a roster next season. Devin Hester: 25 rec 355 only 1 TD. Not a WR Johnny Knox: 37 rec 727 yards only 2 TD's. Slight step up from beyond bad Dan Sanzenbacher: 21 rec 198 yards 3 TD's. Beyond Bad- won't be on the roster next season Sam Hurd- 40 years in prison Here's the kicker. Matt Forte- 52 rec 490 yards 1 TD in 12 games. It should go without saying that if our RB is tallying up more yards and targets than our starting WR's, and has been for a number of years, it's time to get a new group of receivers. With Cutler back under center, and Carimi and Williams back healthy this line is not terrible and they are not bad. Keep in mind we will be running a system without Mr. 7 step drop next year which will only make it easier for the offensive line to block more consistently throughout a game. Hopefully we'll have someone that will allow Cutler to audible which would then give him even more freedom to dictate the type of blocking he wants from his line-- something he's unable to do with this offense.

I don't know about anybody else but I think Khalil Bell is a pretty damn good football player. He's a horrible pass protector but he can do just about everything else. He's alot quicker and faster than Forte.

I'm not even sure If I'll watch this one. I'm all in on the Bulls now and I miss my NBA basketball. This one will be over by the 2nd quarter.

I think only one starter on the offensive line gets replaced whether that is because of a draftee or a signing via free agency. The line isn't getting any help now thanks to the scheme and without two of their only offensive weapons. Knox is gone, Williams is gone, Hester gets restricted to only special teams, Sanzenbacher is probably either gone or just doesn't play, and Earl Bennett is the only guy that should remain with us as a starter at WR. That means we will need atleast two receivers (a #1 and a #2) to come from either the draft or free agency. I'd like to get Carl Nicks and or Vincent Jackson but its likely that both will either be resigned or franchised again. If that's the case, the man to get in free agency is Mario Williams; keep our defense competitive for another few seasons before Urlacher has to retire and then we'll be looking for his replacement in another year or two. The receiving position should be #1 on the Bears list because of all the guys that won't be here next year (And its not like they were that good anyways). I don't know how it will play out but if we can come away with 2 quality receivers along with atleast one or two talented offensive lineman, a ball hawking FS, and a young CB I'll be a happy man.

In this defense, a All Pro FS is a MUST. Mike Brown was one of the best ball hawking safeties of his time. It was unfortunate that he couldn't stay healthy. We probably win the Superbowl with him and Tommie Harris healthy for the postseason.

I just don't see a whole lot of talent in this years draft from the offensive line, outside of the Khalil kid. Whereas the WR position is going to be filled with talent. I guess you could use that as a reason why you should get a OL early as opposed to late but I still believe if one of those three guys are there by the time the Bears pick, you have to take one. That kind of talent would be too hard to pass up IMO.

This is one of the reasons I don't trust Jerry drafting offensive lineman. Our last three 1st round OL picks have all had a hard time staying on the field.

If either one of those guys are available by the time we pick (Blackmon, Jeffery, or Floyd) it would be idiotic to not take one of those receivers. We need a serious upgrade at our skill positions, and in a league where every high powered offense has a play making TE and 1 or 2 really really good receivers, we have Kellen Davis, Roy Williams, Devin Hester, and Johnny Knox.. We desperately need a couple of WR's. One can come from the draft, one can come from free agency, I don't care, just as long as we draft one in the 1st round providing atleast one of those three players I just mentioned are available. With Martz gone, and a few of our own lineman coming back, the line should improve just on it's own by virtue of those two things. Obviously we still need an upgrade there, and like I said, Carl Nicks would be the #1 guy I would target to come here via free agency if New Orleans doesn't franchise him again. If he does get franchised, there is also the possibility of a guy like Mario Williams.

If we came away from next offseason with one of Blackmon, Jeffery, Floyd along with Carl Nicks I would be a very happy man.

Right now they would have the 18th pick in the draft. We could possibly get all the way to the 10th pick if we kept losing and all the other teams below us keep winning. Realistically, we will probably end up somewhere in the middle, like 14th-15th. That's the way I'm looking at this season now. Position ourselves for a better draft spot.

Didn't get to catch the game but everyone was telling me about it so I had to watch it on youtube. Wow, he was lucky he didn't die on that hit because of the way he fell on him. I hope his surgery goes well and if he can come back for next season I would be stunned. However, that still doesn't change the fact that I still want him gone after this season. He and Roy Williams are bad at receiving, and Hester needs to be restricted to just returning punts/kickoffs while the new draftees and or signees can begin our new receiving core.

I never understood why a guy like Corey Graham can't get a shot at starting as a CB next to Tillman. He has excellent ball skills and with DJ Moore being the premiere nickelback you need to get the most out of your talent and Corey Graham is a more talented player than Tim Jennings.

Fair enough. I think it's time we put this one to bed

No. I'd rather sacrifice that for a couple of extra slots in the draft. We couldn't beat a team with Tyler Palko and Tim Tebow as quarterbacks, how in gods name can we beat the N.O Saints or the NY Giants without Cutler?

So you wanted them to throw the ball with Caleb Haine at quarterback? Who's to say he doesn't have another Oakland like play on a screen that goes for 60 yards in the other direction for a touchdown? With a quarterback as bad as Haine, you have no choice other than to try to minimize his mistakes throwing the ball and letting Barber and Bell carry the offense. It's not uncommon for a team to try and run the clock out with a lead late in the 4th quarter, ESPECIALLY when you are going up against an offense that has a hard time scoring. If the Bears had Cutler I guarantee you things would have been run differently but you can't fault the Bears for running out with a conservative gameplan with the garbage they have for a QB. Even if they were to mix a pass in here and there in those final drives, there is probably just as good of a chance it's incomplete as it is them picking up a first down running the ball. Lol well I would say the Bears offense shut down when Jay Cutler and Matt Forte went out with injuries. Does TOP have in their how bad the teams quarterback is? Is that in there somewhere? I'll say it again. The Bears stuck with running the football more so than they did with the pass (38 rush attempts to 19 pass attempts). They only converted on 2/15 3rd downs and you can't tell me all those were in the 4th quarter. They are a bad offense for a reason. Without your two most productive players out there, you have no other choice but to become rush heavy if you want to win games. So a coach can affect a player from missing a throw or fumbling the football or missing a tackle? A coach does a lot of things but making plays on the field is not one of them. Going off of that logic, there would never be a turnover created ever in the NFL if the coaches had an affect on all negative plays.

I wonder if New Orleans will franchise Carl Nicks again or if they'll use it on Colston? Whoever doesn't get the franchise tag should be the guy the Bears target in FA imo.

Supposedly they have some dirt on more than 10 NFL players that have bought said drugs from Sam Hurd. This is going to become a huge story throughout the week as they find more information about it.

I understand the concern with the play call but you still expect the guy to know the situation he's in and not make that mental error. I mean, that's pop warner stuff. He just had a brain fart and cost the Bears a win.

No, they really didn't play prevent defense. Prevent defense is what you do with a last second hail mary where everyone goes back to the goal line with the exception of the 3 or 4 down lineman. That wasn't the case against Tebow. It was Cover 2 that they played terribly and allowed the free check downs and then forgot how to tackle. The way the Bears played it made it look like they were playing prevent but after watching those drives again, they were always in the Cover 2 alignment. Well I'm sorry you feel that way but I don't think I trust you in determining the credibility of that number. Oh really?? Is that so? Well if you say it, it must be true. Ignoring what? They were running with pretty much the same gameplan as the Denver Broncos for the entire game. They didn't shut anything down. They stuck with the run from the 1st quarter all the way to the 4th quarter. It's not like they were throwing the ball all over the field for 3 quarters and then reverted to running the clock out. So your stats don't really do anything on the offensive side of the ball. However on defense, they do make sense. Even though they still weren't playing prevent defense, they were playing the cover 2 softer than what they should have been. But I would agree that they should have stayed with what was working instead of changing things up. I'm only saying that the Bears have ALWAYS played cover 2 in these late game situations with a lead and it is the defense to play because you want to make the offense drive the length of the field while chewing up the clock without giving up the big play. And again, they executed that in almost the worst way they could. Huh? You're the one throwing out random variables of if and buts when I've been saying all along that if you are going to do that then you must bring up the same variables for Denver, which you didn't. But at the same time why waste time throwing out hypotheticals? Stick to reality, and the reality was, like I've been trying to get through to you, we had a lead with 2 min to go and that one play from Barber literally cost us the football game. Of course if things happened a certain way we could have made things easier on us to secure the win but you can't just say that. You don't analyze a football game like that because there are too many variables that could change the course of the game for both teams. I'm working with reality and reality tells me that the Bears were in perfect position to finish the game off if Marion barber falls down before he reaches the sideline. Avg drive length is what it is. It's nothing more than an indicator in how successful you are at maintaining possession of the ball. But again, the Bears were doing the right thing on offense by trying to take the game out of Haine's hands and eliminating his errors. If this was happening with Jay Cutler, then I would be pissed. The best way for them to win that game was to do what they did on offense. Defensively, again, they were awful late in the 4th quarter because they got soft. Yeah but you won't say that Barber's play actually lost us the football game when in fact it did due to the fact that time would have been heavily on our side by the time Den got the ball back. You are halfway there. Well of course, but isn't that the most ideal scenario every team would like to be in? Things don't always work out that easily. Sometimes you have to win ugly.

It is without question, the most important part for sustained success. Look no further than the Green Bay Packers.

It is, but we are still on the outside looking in where the two teams ahead of us have a very favorable schedule. It'll be interesting to see how the Chargers and Lions game turns out, but their last game against the Packers is probably a win for them since GB would have no reason anymore to play their starters. If we lose Sunday then none of it will matter anyways but we are obviously going to need some help to get in now.

Yeah, that's what the Bears wanted but that still doesn't explain why Marion Barber didn't just fall down, because that negated them being able to run out the clock.

First of all, the Bears didn't play prevent defense. What they ran was their base Cover 2 which is the perfect defense to run in that situation. It's the same thing they did to the Philadelphia Eagles and San Diego Chargers to finish them off at the end of games. They just executed horribly. Secondly, I didn't make that number up. It was shown on ESPN where they used a formula designated to show you the % of how likely it was for Denver to win throughout all of the Tebow comebacks and the number was 3% for the Bears (The lowest out of all the Tebow comebacks). You are really nitpicking at random things. How about the perfectly thrown ball by Tebow early in the 3rd quarter that should have gone for a touchdown to Demaryius Thomas? What about their 6 drops that might have allowed them to sustain drives? What if the blocked FG doesn't happen? How about the missed throw by Haine to Barber that would have gone for atleast 50 if not a touchdown in the 2nd half. You are throwing way too many variables into the situation but only on one side of the equation. You can nitpick at every little thing if you want but to what end? Things happen, and some things don't and the reality is the Bears still had the game in hand with a 10-7 lead and 2 min to go where one play by Barber literally lost the game for the Bears. What part of that do you not comprehend?