Jump to content

R-E-L-A-X


Stinger226

Recommended Posts

For all the fans that the sky is falling, get your thumb out of your mouth and be real. The fact is were not a good team or a bad team. I thought from the beginning of the season we would be 7-9 to 9-7 and looking bad against the Packers havent changed that . Injuries have already affected us.

Brandon Marshall is the catalyst to this offense, and until he is healthy we will sputter.

Two OL out, the others have filled in well.

Two DL out which has caused a lack of pass rush which put our DBs in jeopardy.

We have filled Peanuts role but where the problem now is the nickelback spot .

 

Our offense will give us victories and defense will take some away.

 

If we can get healthier, we still could go 10-6, but not likely.

 

We will go down to the wire, on a playoff spot, and hopefully we grab one.

 

Relax

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

 

We are somewhere between the team that beat SF and NYJ and the team that lost to BUF and GB. What is crazy is that BUF loss is almost worse seeing how Manuel is not even starting anymore. We all knew this was going to be a tough schedule before the bye, and even going 4-4 would give us a chance in the 2nd half. If we can somehow go 5-3 into the bye, we have a great shot at 10-11 wins. If we go 4-4, 9-10 wins is more likely.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TerraTor
For all the fans that the sky is falling, get your thumb out of your mouth and be real. The fact is were not a good team or a bad team. I thought from the beginning of the season we would be 7-9 to 9-7 and looking bad against the Packers havent changed that . Injuries have already affected us.

Brandon Marshall is the catalyst to this offense, and until he is healthy we will sputter.

Two OL out, the others have filled in well.

Two DL out which has caused a lack of pass rush which put our DBs in jeopardy.

We have filled Peanuts role but where the problem now is the nickelback spot .

 

Our offense will give us victories and defense will take some away.

 

If we can get healthier, we still could go 10-6, but not likely.

 

We will go down to the wire, on a playoff spot, and hopefully we grab one.

 

Relax

 

 

I think the defense is just horrendous. First GOOD offense Just Destroy Them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For all the fans that the sky is falling, get your thumb out of your mouth and be real. The fact is were not a good team or a bad team.

 

The word you're looking for is mediocre . Similar to Cutler. Similar to the D run by Tucker .

 

The catalyst for O is not BM (Bennett anyone? Having a better year). The catalyst for O is definitely Cutler.

 

For D .. Again it's Tucker.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also looking forward the schedule will very interesting

 

Carolina: No greg hardy (wife beater) and just lost another defender to 10 game ban. No real WR and a QB who still has a bum ankle. And a team that has lost two in a row. Winable

 

Atlanta: a lot like the bears. Heavy offense and a defense that can't stop anything. Again winable.

 

Miami: This is the one that at the start of the season, we would win. But given we are 0-2 at home I will say it's a loss, ironically.

 

New England: They look beatable but so did Buffalo.

 

Green Bay: loss. No evidence to believe the contrary.

 

Minnesota 2x: Optimism. 2-0

 

Detroit 2X: 1-1

 

Tamps Bay: If we lose this one I am setting fire to my obviously unlucky bears socks

 

Dallas: The only win I care about

 

New Orleans: I hope they continue to suck.

 

So by my wyoming math we CAN go 10-2. If I split the "winable" games 8-4. But if we don't get healthy we can be much worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The word you're looking for is mediocre . Similar to Cutler. Similar to the D run by Tucker .

 

The catalyst for O is not BM (Bennett anyone? Having a better year). The catalyst for O is definitely Cutler.

 

For D .. Again it's Tucker.

Yes that word works too. My point about BM is that with him not being healthy, the flow of the offense is disrupted. He is Cutlers safety net , when he doesnt get open, and other teams dont double him, it takes Culter out of his comfort zone. Bennett is having a better year but only because of the injury to Marshall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest TerraTor
Also looking forward the schedule will very interesting

 

Carolina: No greg hardy (wife beater) and just lost another defender to 10 game ban. No real WR and a QB who still has a bum ankle. And a team that has lost two in a row. Winable

 

Atlanta: a lot like the bears. Heavy offense and a defense that can't stop anything. Again winable.

 

Miami: This is the one that at the start of the season, we would win. But given we are 0-2 at home I will say it's a loss, ironically.

 

New England: They look beatable but so did Buffalo.

 

Green Bay: loss. No evidence to believe the contrary.

 

Minnesota 2x: Optimism. 2-0

 

Detroit 2X: 1-1

 

Tamps Bay: If we lose this one I am setting fire to my obviously unlucky bears socks

 

Dallas: The only win I care about

 

New Orleans: I hope they continue to suck.

 

So by my wyoming math we CAN go 10-2. If I split the "winable" games 8-4. But if we don't get healthy we can be much worse.

 

Ya i have a now unlucky bears hat. . And yes if we lose to Lovie and his stupid gaze it will b tossed in the fireplace

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the defense is just horrendous. First GOOD offense Just Destroy Them

 

 

Trent Dilfer made a good point about the Bears D when on espn 1000. Against GB the two best D line man were out. As well as Tillman.

 

There are a lot of new guys playing, when you have injuries and new personnel playing you are going to have games like the GB game.

 

The unit is not going to be a great D, but if they play together and start to gell they will be good enough to win games with the offense the Bears have.

 

 

I hate agreeing with Dilfer but I will on this point. Our D played well enough to beat the 49ers...... I had picked us to lose that game with Alshon and BM hurt and expected to not play.

 

The Bears D had an off day against GB...... The D can get some guys back and get back on track.

 

 

Go Bears!!!

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes that word works too. My point about BM is that with him not being healthy, the flow of the offense is disrupted. He is Cutlers safety net , when he doesnt get open, and other teams dont double him, it takes Culter out of his comfort zone. Bennett is having a better year but only because of the injury to Marshall.

 

 

Nice avatar man!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trent Dilfer made a good point about the Bears D when on espn 1000. Against GB the two best D line man were out. As well as Tillman.

 

There are a lot of new guys playing, when you have injuries and new personnel playing you are going to have games like the GB game.

 

The unit is not going to be a great D, but if they play together and start to gell they will be good enough to win games with the offense the Bears have.

 

 

I hate agreeing with Dilfer but I will on this point. Our D played well enough to beat the 49ers...... I had picked us to lose that game with Alshon and BM hurt and expected to not play.

 

The Bears D had an off day against GB...... The D can get some guys back and get back on track.

 

 

Go Bears!!!

 

 

Our D was not all bad against Green Bay. We shutdown the run, Lacy had nowhere to go. We typically had good (not to be confused with great) zone coverage on their passing downs for the first few seconds. What we didn't have is a pass rush and you can see on plays where guys don't know what to do or where to go in coverage after the initial route was run. More than once I saw Fuller look at the safety or LB inside of him with his hands up (as if asking is he your man or mine?) as a guy broke inside on a makeshift route. None of them knew, they all just stood at their landmarks like they had cement shoes on.

 

Rodgers and most QBs in the NFL are going to pick apart any team that plays a zone scheme with no pass rush. Find two Dlineman that can get pressure on Rodgers and the game becomes more manageable. Not that we'd shut them out but enough stops would have happened for the offense to keep pace in the scoring column.

 

I lay the blame more at the feet of the coaches than the players because I think it was the scheme that led to consistent long drives being given up. I would have liked to see us play more man coverage on occasion, at least on the outside. It also appears going into the game the main focus was on stopping Lacy because he ran all over us last year. We were so obsessed with stopping Lacy that we forgot they have one of the best QBs in the league. Why we didn't adjust what we were doing on D I have no idea. Maybe in part because we have so many young players out there, including Bostic playing a new spot that they felt better sticking with what they practiced all week. We'll see if we change up in the next game.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our D was not all bad against Green Bay. We shutdown the run, Lacy had nowhere to go. We typically had good (not to be confused with great) zone coverage on their passing downs for the first few seconds. What we didn't have is a pass rush and you can see on plays where guys don't know what to do or where to go in coverage after the initial route was run. More than once I saw Fuller look at the safety or LB inside of him with his hands up (as if asking is he your man or mine?) as a guy broke inside on a makeshift route. None of them knew, they all just stood at their landmarks like they had cement shoes on.

 

Rodgers and most QBs in the NFL are going to pick apart any team that plays a zone scheme with no pass rush. Find two Dlineman that can get pressure on Rodgers and the game becomes more manageable. Not that we'd shut them out but enough stops would have happened for the offense to keep pace in the scoring column.

 

I lay the blame more at the feet of the coaches than the players because I think it was the scheme that led to consistent long drives being given up. I would have liked to see us play more man coverage on occasion, at least on the outside. It also appears going into the game the main focus was on stopping Lacy because he ran all over us last year. We were so obsessed with stopping Lacy that we forgot they have one of the best QBs in the league. Why we didn't adjust what we were doing on D I have no idea. Maybe in part because we have so many young players out there, including Bostic playing a new spot that they felt better sticking with what they practiced all week. We'll see if we change up in the next game.

 

Like in an earlier post, I read that Briggs was frustrated by the lack of blitzing calls. He knew what we saw. You're probably right that they (Tucker) didn't want to dedicate someone to blitzing knowing that one person out of position would allow Lacy a field day. Look at what happened to Minny the other night. They rushed Rodgers more than the Bears did and Lacy did much better . There had got to be a balance.

 

I say with all these mobile QBs (yes I consider Rodgers to be one) you need a spy back to watch the QB and the QB only. Unfortunately the only one whose really been effective in doing this, SMC, is out. May not be as much an issue this week as Newton is hobbled but still a concern. Maybe Bostic could cover the spot? We know he can hit. I'm just not sure he's able to dissect plays very well .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...