Awesome video

[jason]

I love the fact that the original Joniak calls are in there.

 

 

I swear, with a little offensive help last year, the Bears would have had a winning record. Even with all the injuries, they still would have been in contention. There is only the Dallas game out of all the losses that I felt the Bears were not in it. Every other game could have been the Bears' game with a little luck and a better offense.

[Connorbear]

I love the fact that the original Joniak calls are in there.

 

 

I swear, with a little offensive help last year, the Bears would have had a winning record. Even with all the injuries, they still would have been in contention. There is only the Dallas game out of all the losses that I felt the Bears were not in it. Every other game could have been the Bears' game with a little luck and a better offense.

Nice video - thanks.

 

Peanut is a stud!!! He won two games for us last yr (Green Bay with the strips and Denver with the blocked punt).

 

Peace

[madlithuanian]

Love it!

 

I'm fired up!

 

I love the fact that the original Joniak calls are in there.

 

 

I swear, with a little offensive help last year, the Bears would have had a winning record. Even with all the injuries, they still would have been in contention. There is only the Dallas game out of all the losses that I felt the Bears were not in it. Every other game could have been the Bears' game with a little luck and a better offense.

[nfoligno]

If if and buts were candy and nuts, it would be Christmas all year long.

 

Would a better offense have improved our record last year? Sure. Better luck? Sure. The only issue I have is you do not seem be believe the defense was a big part of the problem last year. You say if our offense were better, we would have won a few more games. Well, how about if our defense didn't suck?

 

Dallas - You mention this game, and it was ugly. Tied 3 all at halftime. We trade TDs in the 3rd, but then our defense falls apart. We give up another TD in the 3rd, and then 17 in the 4th. Yes, 1 TD was an int return, but we still gave up 24 second half points.

 

Det - Offense scored 27 points. Against Detroit, that should have been enough. We had the lead heading into the 4th, then gave up 5 TDs in the 4th quarter. Again, Griese the pick machine was a big part of this, but do no absolve the defense of responsibility. Griese's picks hurt, no question, but we still put up 27 points on the freaking Lions. No excuse for allowing them to score 37. You can place some blame on the O, but they are also why we were in the game.

 

Minny - AP's breakout party. In all, we gave up over 300 yards rushing to Minny, which would be sick if this were college, much less the NFL. The game was close, but that was due to offense and special teams, not defense. Defense is why we lost this game.

 

Sea - We scored 23. Rex had no picks and threw for 266. Benson was solid w/ 89 yards (on only 11 carries) and a score. But the defense allowed 337 and 2 scores for Hassel and a RB named Morris (who) had 87 and a score. Our defense made Hackett and Engram look all pro. Further, facing a team who had a lot of trouble protecting the QB, we were unable to mount much of a pass rush and allowed 30 points.

 

Wash - offense didn't score much, 16 points, but we allowed a bunch of backups kill us on the other side of the ball. Collins and Campbell looked like Farve. Names like Yoder, Sellers and Betts scored against us, while Cooley looked all pro. Yea, you can say the O should have done more, but the defense stunk against a weak team.

 

So I agree if we were better on offense, or in luck, we could have had a couple more wins, but let's be honest. The defense stunk last year, video aside, and was a big reason we lost games as well. As pointed out above, the offense scored enough points that I believe there should have been an expectation to win several games, but it was the defense that lost them. You can chalk it up to injuries, which was a factor, but I still maintain we had enough talent on defense to have faired far better. Take a look at where our defense ranked, and look at some of the defenses rated ahead of us. Even w/ the injuries, can you really say those defense had more talent? Anderson, Brown, Wale, Harris, Urlacher, Briggs, Hunter. That front 7, even w/ the injuries in the secondary, should have been able to do FAR more than they did.

[AZ54]

At first I thought I went to the Arizona Cardinals message board but nope, this is the Bears board. There are a lot of teams that drafted between 10 and 20 that can have the exact same thread. I only care about results although potential seems to be getting rookies some awfully nice money these days.

[azbearsfan]

All that for the 28th ranked defense.

 

Imagine the highlights if we get back to the top 5....

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Very cool. It really gets me ready for the 2008 season!

[jason]

If if and buts were candy and nuts, it would be Christmas all year long.

 

Would a better offense have improved our record last year? Sure. Better luck? Sure. The only issue I have is you do not seem be believe the defense was a big part of the problem last year. You say if our offense were better, we would have won a few more games. Well, how about if our defense didn't suck?

Agreed. The defense deserves some blame. But I give them a borderline pass because of injuries. Additionally, the Bears' inept offense leads to breakdowns by the defense, IMO. It's both physical exertion and mental exhaustion, knowing that your own team will probably not score over 20. Nonetheless, I'll assign them 25% of the blame. Offense gets a big fat 45%. Bad luck, 10%. Coaching, 20%.

 

Dallas - You mention this game, and it was ugly. Tied 3 all at halftime. We trade TDs in the 3rd, but then our defense falls apart. We give up another TD in the 3rd, and then 17 in the 4th. Yes, 1 TD was an int return, but we still gave up 24 second half points.

Dallas was just a better team. Period.

 

Det - Offense scored 27 points. Against Detroit, that should have been enough. We had the lead heading into the 4th, then gave up 5 TDs in the 4th quarter. Again, Griese the pick machine was a big part of this, but do no absolve the defense of responsibility. Griese's picks hurt, no question, but we still put up 27 points on the freaking Lions. No excuse for allowing them to score 37. You can place some blame on the O, but they are also why we were in the game.

 

C'mon man. You can't pin as much of it on the D as you try to. First of all, the initial touchdown only happend in the fourth because the Lions were on the doorstep when the 3rd ended (1). Griese gives up 7 (2). Then Devin Hester returns the kick for a touchdown. That gives the D no time to rest. Then Detroit marches for 7 (3). Next, wouldn't you know it, the Bears' O is three and out (no time to rest for the D). Detroit marches again (4). Then, thankfully, the Bears do something on offense and get a touchdown back. Of course, they are too far behind and have to kick the onside kick, which gets returned for a touchdown (5). So, sure, they didn't play well on D, but there were only two TD drives given up in the fourth.

 

Minny - AP's breakout party. In all, we gave up over 300 yards rushing to Minny, which would be sick if this were college, much less the NFL. The game was close, but that was due to offense and special teams, not defense. Defense is why we lost this game.

Not much to say about this other than the fact that I, and I'm sure many on this board, were screaming at the TV while watching this game. This was a defensive breakdown, but I put more of the blame on the coach than anything. How the hell someone doesn't stack the box against a one-dimensional team is beyond me. The Bears should have been playing with 9 in the box the entire second half. The cover-2 and the coaching got exposed.

 

Sea - We scored 23. Rex had no picks and threw for 266. Benson was solid w/ 89 yards (on only 11 carries) and a score. But the defense allowed 337 and 2 scores for Hassel and a RB named Morris (who) had 87 and a score. Our defense made Hackett and Engram look all pro. Further, facing a team who had a lot of trouble protecting the QB, we were unable to mount much of a pass rush and allowed 30 points.

The Bears D while in the cover 2 has always had problems against the shifty type RBs and WRs. It just so happens that Morris is one of those RBs and Engram is one of those WRs. Furthermore, for some reason the cover-2, or our coaches, don't believe in bump-and-run coverage, even when the WR is slow as hell (i.e. Engram). This was also the game in which Holmgren infamously outcoached the Bears' coaches in every single way, punctuating it with the 4th down play that made the Bears look stupid. They should have done better, but Seattle is a good team and unless the Bears' coaching has an equal game, the injuries on D will be exposed. And they were.

 

Wash - offense didn't score much, 16 points, but we allowed a bunch of backups kill us on the other side of the ball. Collins and Campbell looked like Farve. Names like Yoder, Sellers and Betts scored against us, while Cooley looked all pro. Yea, you can say the O should have done more, but the defense stunk against a weak team.

I agree that the D has to play better against backups. However, the first Washington TD was a direct result of a gimme INT by Griese. And this is the game in which the Bears' coaches or QB (Griese) simply refused to go down field and exploit any kind of possible explosive offense. It was a dink and dunk game that should have had the Bears with many more points. I think one of the announcers, maybe a commentator afterwards, said something to the effect of, "The Bears played cowardly on offense today. The simply wouldn't take a chance."

 

So I agree if we were better on offense, or in luck, we could have had a couple more wins, but let's be honest. The defense stunk last year, video aside, and was a big reason we lost games as well. As pointed out above, the offense scored enough points that I believe there should have been an expectation to win several games, but it was the defense that lost them. You can chalk it up to injuries, which was a factor, but I still maintain we had enough talent on defense to have faired far better. Take a look at where our defense ranked, and look at some of the defenses rated ahead of us. Even w/ the injuries, can you really say those defense had more talent? Anderson, Brown, Wale, Harris, Urlacher, Briggs, Hunter. That front 7, even w/ the injuries in the secondary, should have been able to do FAR more than they did.

Agreed.

[nfoligno]

Agreed. The defense deserves some blame. But I give them a borderline pass because of injuries. Additionally, the Bears' inept offense leads to breakdowns by the defense, IMO. It's both physical exertion and mental exhaustion, knowing that your own team will probably not score over 20. Nonetheless, I'll assign them 25% of the blame. Offense gets a big fat 45%. Bad luck, 10%. Coaching, 20%.

 

I give the defense a greater share of the blame. For me, it comes down to expectations. While some drank the coolaid, I just never had high expectations for the offense. I did think our OL and run game would be better, but just never felt the offense would be that good. So while they were worse than expected, the defense was FAR worse than expected. In numerous games, while some points were scored by special teams, the point is points were scored. If heading into the season you were told the defense would be given a 16, 20 or 27 point cussion, I think you would have expected more wins.

 

And yes, I know we had injuries, and while I know that hurt, it still comes back to talent on the field. We ranked 28th in total defense. Consider some of the defenses ahead of us: Cincy, NO, Houston, SF, Mia, Den, StL, NYJ. Even w/ our injuries, are you telling me we had less talent on the field than those teams, not to mention others? Even w/ all our injuries, we still had more talent that a lot of teams who played far better. Now consider offense. Take a look at the players we had on offense, and compare them against other teams. Talent wise, our offense deserved to rank around the bottom of the league.

 

That is the difference to me. Our talent was never that good on offense. Fans drank the koolaid, but few outside the fan base felt the talent was there. On defense?

 

C'mon man. You can't pin as much of it on the D as you try to. First of all, the initial touchdown only happend in the fourth because the Lions were on the doorstep when the 3rd ended (1). Griese gives up 7 (2). Then Devin Hester returns the kick for a touchdown. That gives the D no time to rest. Then Detroit marches for 7 (3). Next, wouldn't you know it, the Bears' O is three and out (no time to rest for the D). Detroit marches again (4). Then, thankfully, the Bears do something on offense and get a touchdown back. Of course, they are too far behind and have to kick the onside kick, which gets returned for a touchdown (5). So, sure, they didn't play well on D, but there were only two TD drives given up in the fourth.

 

Did you know we actually won TOP in that game?

 

I guess I see the game a bit different:

 

(1) Back and forth in the 3rd quarter, but then we have consecutative drives finished off w/ FGs to take a 13 to 3 lead.

(2) Then Det gets the ball the 30, and goes 70 for a TD to put themselves w/ 3.

(3) After picking up a 1st down, Griese tosses a pick/6, but then Hester takes the kickoff for 6. Defense has a couple minutes, not to mention several TV timeouts due to multiple scores, to rest on the sideline.

(4) Rest or no rest, it doesn't matter. Defense gives up an 80 yard drive for a TD.

(5) Bears go three and out, and D takes the field, only to give up another TD, but to me, that is not excuse. Until the 4th, we were winning the TOP by quite a bit. Also, the reason the D was tired was because THEY could not get off the field as they were allowing long drives.

 

Look, I am not saying the offense was w/o fault here, but the OFFENSE score 20, which should have been enough against this team.

 

Not much to say about this other than the fact that I, and I'm sure many on this board, were screaming at the TV while watching this game. This was a defensive breakdown, but I put more of the blame on the coach than anything. How the hell someone doesn't stack the box against a one-dimensional team is beyond me. The Bears should have been playing with 9 in the box the entire second half. The cover-2 and the coaching got exposed.

 

No argument, but understand. When I criticize the defense, it isn't necessarily a simple criticism of the players. To me, Babich was about as key in our losing season as any one other person. When I criticize the defense, I am in large part criticizing Babich.

 

The Bears D while in the cover 2 has always had problems against the shifty type RBs and WRs. It just so happens that Morris is one of those RBs and Engram is one of those WRs. Furthermore, for some reason the cover-2, or our coaches, don't believe in bump-and-run coverage, even when the WR is slow as hell (i.e. Engram). This was also the game in which Holmgren infamously outcoached the Bears' coaches in every single way, punctuating it with the 4th down play that made the Bears look stupid. They should have done better, but Seattle is a good team and unless the Bears' coaching has an equal game, the injuries on D will be exposed. And they were.

 

I am not sure how good of a team seattle was, particularly at this point w/ numerous injuries. I agree w/ the issues for the cover two, but that is part of my point. In the prior season, I think Chico mixes up our defense, and we play this team better, as we would have Minny. Ripping the D is as much about scheme and coaching as the players. Actually, more so.

 

I agree that the D has to play better against backups. However, the first Washington TD was a direct result of a gimme INT by Griese. And this is the game in which the Bears' coaches or QB (Griese) simply refused to go down field and exploit any kind of possible explosive offense. It was a dink and dunk game that should have had the Bears with many more points. I think one of the announcers, maybe a commentator afterwards, said something to the effect of, "The Bears played cowardly on offense today. The simply wouldn't take a chance."

 

I will not argue the Bears O didn't take risk, but as said at the start, the bears offense was far from loaded w/ quality. I think expecting too much from the bears O is a bit off. Even then, w/ that conservative O: (a) we won TOP by 31-29, so the D had time to rest (2) the D allowed to weak-A QBs in Collins and Campbell to throw for 25 of 36 for 314, 2 TDs and no picks. Look again and the names and stats, © down 17-13 in the 4th, we needed a stop, and yet the D allowed a 70 yard, 4 minuted drive for a TD that all but sinched it.

 

Simply put, the D went to sleep in this one.

 

I am not "just" ripping the D. O sucked plenty. But I just question expectations for the O being high going into the season, while the expectations for the D were sky high. All the defensive injuries would explain the D going from elite to average, but not elite to bottom 4.

 

You said to start this that if the O was better, we would have won a few more games. My argument is that if the players on D played to expectations, we would have won more games. If that front 7 that looked so great played just good, we would have won more.