Week 16 Official Game Thread - Against some team at some time on some date

[adam]

Here's the thread.

Prediction: Bears lose by 13.

[Stinger226]

Nice, I think we win this one, when we least expect it. Brown and Caleb will colaberate for a win.

[adam]

12 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Nice, I think we win this one, when we least expect it. Brown and Caleb will colaberate for a win.

The Bears should win, this is a good chunk of the Lions 2nd and 3rd stringers, but it's the Bears, they literally find a new way to lose every week. 

[Stinger226]

Someone put a spell on us, like you said , we lose in such strange ways.

[adam]

10 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

Someone put a spell on us, like you said , we lose in such strange ways.

If you really take a step back and just look at how the Bears have lost since the double doink, it is almost beyond belief.

The first game after the Double Doink is in the NFL's 100th Season Game against GB at home, the Bears lose 10-3. They lose because Trubisky throws an INT with 2 mins left in the end zone to Adrian Amos who the Bears did not resign that offseason. Then their next loss is in the UK by 3 to the Raiders where they literally cut Kyle Long out of the blue after one bad game. That was the Chase Daniel game where he also threw an INT with 1:22 left when the Bears had 2nd down at the OAK 47 and 2 timeouts, down by 3.

A few games later they lose to the Chargers by one after Pineiro misses a 41-yarder to win it. Then in the 2nd game against GB, the Bears had the ball inside the GB territory twice in the last 5 minutes of the game and didn't score a single point to lose by one score.

Even when they get lucky, something crazy happens. They lose the last game of the season, but still back into the playoffs at 8-8, then in the game, Trubisky has one of his best throws of all-time and Wims drops it in the end zone, then later punches a player and gets ejected the game. It was wild. 

[BearFan PHX]

3 minutes ago, adam said:

If you really take a step back and just look at how the Bears have lost since the double doink, it is almost beyond belief.

The first game after the Double Doink is in the NFL's 100th Season Game against GB at home, the Bears lose 10-3. They lose because Trubisky throws an INT with 2 mins left in the end zone to Adrian Amos who the Bears did not resign that offseason. Then their next loss is in the UK by 3 to the Raiders where they literally cut Kyle Long out of the blue after one bad game. That was the Chase Daniel game where he also threw an INT with 1:22 left when the Bears had 2nd down at the OAK 47 and 2 timeouts, down by 3.

A few games later they lose to the Chargers by one after Pineiro misses a 41-yarder to win it. Then in the 2nd game against GB, the Bears had the ball inside the GB territory twice in the last 5 minutes of the game and didn't score a single point to lose by one score.

Even when they get lucky, something crazy happens. They lose the last game of the season, but still back into the playoffs at 8-8, then in the game, Trubisky has one of his best throws of all-time and Wims drops it in the end zone, then later punches a player and gets ejected the game. It was wild. 

I think if you're a good team, you arent winning by such thin margins, and magical things dont cost you the win. I think as an NFL team you have to be aiming at winning by two scores to moderate the influence of turnovers and flukes. If your margin for victory is razor thin, then you look unlucky, when whatyou really are is bad, and little things are enough to cost you tenuous wins?

[DABEARSDABOMB]

26 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

I think if you're a good team, you arent winning by such thin margins, and magical things dont cost you the win. I think as an NFL team you have to be aiming at winning by two scores to moderate the influence of turnovers and flukes. If your margin for victory is razor thin, then you look unlucky, when whatyou really are is bad, and little things are enough to cost you tenuous wins?

I don't think that is true - margins are tight in the NFL. Look at the Chiefs.  I think the reality is - well coached and disciplined teams win a majority of those tight games. 

[Mongo3451]

1 hour ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I don't think that is true - margins are tight in the NFL. Look at the Chiefs.  I think the reality is - well coached and disciplined teams win a majority of those tight games. 

Agreed.  Parity is king in the NFL.  The difference between winning and losing are the little things like; penalties, turnovers, execution and coaching.  We are close on talent, but coaching is really lacking.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

6 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

Agreed.  Parity is king in the NFL.  The difference between winning and losing are the little things like; penalties, turnovers, execution and coaching.  We are close on talent, but coaching is really lacking.

I’d say lacking a strength in oline and more on dline also is a real issue cause that can really help prevent a sack/turnover that makes the difference and inversely the extra pressure or two can be the difference. 

[BearFan PHX]

2 hours ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I don't think that is true - margins are tight in the NFL. Look at the Chiefs.  I think the reality is - well coached and disciplined teams win a majority of those tight games. 

I dont think we disagree, maybe I didnt say it right.

Im saying that good teams have an edge on bad teams, so the chaos gets somewhat absorbed by their advantage. If the Chiefs are 8 points better, but the other team tries hard, a few things go their way, then they end up losing to the chiefs by 3. It's not like either team had an equal shot at being on the winning side of that 3 points. It's that the winning team was better than 3 points better, and so it absorbs the effort and chaos that flow through every game.

The good teams don't lose close chaotic outcomes as often as the win them. So I was just saying that the bears haven't been "unlucky", even when theyve seemed close at the end. Its that they werent already up 3 at that time that they didnt win. Sure in each case they had a shot, but it was a shot from behind that didnt pay off. Not because of luck, but because we are bad, and were behind LOL

[Stinger226]

I think good teams have less errors to contend with during a game. Bad teams make more so each one is critical to the outcome but good and bad teams both are affected in wins and loses with strange bounces. Goff had 5 ints in a game which would normally mean a loss but did enough good things to compesate.. If you bet on football you realize how random luck is involved in a game, hard to pin point a certain data point. 

[Mongo3451]

17 hours ago, DABEARSDABOMB said:

I’d say lacking a strength in oline and more on dline also is a real issue cause that can really help prevent a sack/turnover that makes the difference and inversely the extra pressure or two can be the difference. 

Absolutely, but good coaching can bring some of that up.

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, Mongo3451 said:

Absolutely, but good coaching can bring some of that up.

for sure - we see how bad coaching makes decent players awful in a unit. A bunch of Bears OL castaways are starting on other teams, and not looking like they did when they were here.

Daniels, Patrick, Leno, there are one or two others I'm forgetting too.

They look like absolute losers for us, and then go on to be serviceable for someone else.

WRs too.

[Bears4Ever_34]

For their own sanity, I just hope they can win one of these next 3 games so we don't go into next season wondering if they're going to break their previous record of 14 straight losses. 

Detroit's defense is banged up. This will be Caleb's best chance to play well among the 3 teams. He needs to take advantage of it, if for no other reason than to impress his future HC (Ben Johnson) and solidify it in his mind that this is the job he covets the most.

[AZ54]

2 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

for sure - we see how bad coaching makes decent players awful in a unit. A bunch of Bears OL castaways are starting on other teams, and not looking like they did when they were here.

Daniels, Patrick, Leno, there are one or two others I'm forgetting too.

They look like absolute losers for us, and then go on to be serviceable for someone else.

WRs too.

We watch 17 games of the Bears and then do film study afterward.  I doubt anyone puts that scrutiny on other teams players.   I see a few things:

1st:  Sometimes these millionaires get complacent and don't put in the work until they get cut.  I can think of two where that was clear IMO:  Leno and Gould.  

2nd:  Fit.   If you have a limited LT like Leno (just using an example) but a solid RT opposite him it is easier to help the LT during plays.  This is coaching but also GMs and how they build a roster.  You can't get Pro Bowl players everywhere.  

3rd:  Coaching scheme.   Fit what you're doing to the talent you've got.  Of course that can only go so far you still need some elite players to have a good team. 

4th:  Position coaching for technique to fit with what they play caller wants to do.   

[Stinger226]

Last year we were 2nd in the league in rushing and didnt have as many sacks with was considered a worst OL. This year, Braxton would probably grade out the same but didnt get better. Jenkins our best O lineman, still continues as an injury risk. Bates was brought in to start at center and have only played 11% of snaps at OG because of the failure of Davis and injuries. He cant be graded do to lack of playing time. Shelton  started slow but has been decent overall, definitly has earned being resigned as intern starter for a rookie or as a backup. Wright played bad to start the year but his last few games has been good. Matt Pryor is a decent backup but you dont want him as a starter. Bill Murray actual looked good but injury killed his chance. Kiran didnt have a good debut but still has upside. Kramer shouldnt be playing at all.

Signed for next yr is Nate Davis, already gone, Braxton,Bates, Kiran , and Wright. I think they decide to bring back Shelton or Bates but probsbly not both. When you have a weak line you have to bring back Jenkins on a games played incentive contract. I think they bring back Bill Murray for upside and cheap, and Matt Pryor for depth. 

At LT Jones will be penciled in but hopefully a 1st round OT beats him out to start.

I think Kiran may be moved to LG and compete with Jenkins to start. 

At center if Shelton is back, I suspect he starts , the only high rated FA is Dave Dalman/ATL(probably stays there) , so they probaby have Bates compete or a rookie. There isnt any high rated OCs in the draft so I doubt if they find one that could start his first year. One intriging option is Wyatt Milum, a OT that has played every spot on the line. He is a rated as a high 2nd round pick that would drfinitely be in our range . If we drafted him, he could literally be put in at any spot on the line and is projected to be a first year starter.

We simply need to go after Trey Smith/RG in FA. KC is against the cap and Poles was there when they drafted him. He will be between 18-24 mil a yr. If we want to fix the OL we have to start there.

Wright seems to be back on the path of high upside and can bring back Pryor as a backup. 

New players would be Trey Smith in FA, draft a OT and Wyatt Mium and let it play out.

[Mongo3451]

3 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

At center if Shelton is back, I suspect he starts , the only high rated FA is Dave Dalman/ATL(probably stays there) , so they probaby have Bates compete or a rookie. There isnt any high rated OCs in the draft so I doubt if they find one that could start his first year. One intriging option is Wyatt Milum, a OT that has played every spot on the line. He is a rated as a high 2nd round pick that would drfinitely be in our range . If we drafted him, he could literally be put in at any spot on the line and is projected to be a first year starter.

Other than left tackle, center is a crucial upgrade.  It's too early to look at draft sites for centers.  Some of the smaller schools have their best player at left tackle.  Most of the time that player will not translate to NFL left tackle, but will have all the mental and athletic traits to play the interior.  The tackle you mentioned is a perfect example.  I believe he played center, early in college, and moved out due to talent.  If we can find a guy like that, with a HS wrestling background, we can strike gold.

I would definitely sign Tevin, unless he hates living in Chicago, he won't be overly demanding.  He's rated as the eighth best free agent interior player.  Someone will want him.