Promising Numbers

[adam]

Offense:

Plays from scrimmage - 71 (3rd)

Yards - 402 (5th)

Yards/Play - 5.7 (6th)

1st/G - 25 (2nd)

3rd Down Made - 11 (1st)

3rd Down % - 65% (1st)

4th Down Made - 2 (1st)

TOP - 31:52 (10th)

Rush Att - 33 (5th)

Rushing Yards - 189 (1st)

YPC - 5.7 (1st)

 

Defense:

Yards - 322 (6th)

 

So by the numbers, it really wasn't a bad game. The goal line turnover on downs was the turning point for me. The Packers just had a 10 minute drive for a TD, and then we drive down 78 yards in 3 minutes looking to tie the game and we don't score. We were so good on the ground that it is hard to believe we would pass 3 consecutive times from the 2.

 

For next game, we need some more pressure by our front-7, better coverage on kicks, and some better play from our receivers. We dropped a bunch of passes.

[Bears4Ever_34]

The difference in the game was this:

 

Bears: 1/3 in the redzone (33%)

Packers: 4/5 in the redzone (80%)

 

The Bears offense missed on some key opportunities that could have turned the game around, but our defense put up no resistance vs the Packer's offense. It was waaaaay too easy. The yardage stats don't tell the whole story. Yuu have to take time of possession into account, and the overall efficiency of GB. They had a lot of explosive plays and didn't need as many plays to score as Chicago did.

 

For the eternal optimists, this is the gameplan the Cowboys ran with all of last season, and they got pants'd by SF in game 1 before winning 6 in a row. I highly doubt that will be the case here, but if the Bears can continue to run the ball like this, they are going to be in close games all year.

[madlithuanian]

Good analysis.

 

We kept getting close, but no cigar.

 

The difference in the game was this:

 

Bears: 1/3 in the redzone (33%)

Packers: 4/5 in the redzone (80%)

 

The Bears offense missed on some key opportunities that could have turned the game around, but our defense put up no resistance vs the Packer's offense. It was waaaaay too easy. The yardage stats don't tell the whole story. Yuu have to take time of possession into account, and the overall efficiency of GB. They had a lot of explosive plays and didn't need as many plays to score as Chicago did.

 

For the eternal optimists, this is the gameplan the Cowboys ran with all of last season, and they got pants'd by SF in game 1 before winning 6 in a row. I highly doubt that will be the case here, but if the Bears can continue to run the ball like this, they are going to be in close games all year.