Don't give D too much cred

[nfoligno]

For the record, the offense was terrible. I realize that. But I am getting tired of this D getting a pass, or some saying they played well. Maybe if we compare this game to the cincy or Az games, then sure, they played well. But only if we set the bar that low.

 

On the ground, this unit should be embarrassed. Yet another week where a RB puts up season best numbers. Hell, KC did a better job holding McCoy than we. I am sure Lovie will crow about holding McCoy under 100 yards since he only had 99. Oh yea. And a 5 ypc avg. And we gave up a total of 157 rushing yards on the day.

 

D.Jackson has not gone for 100 yards since week 3, but found little trouble against us.

 

Collinsworth talked about something last night that we have all talked about for years now. Seemingly, everytime we got them in 3rd and long, we would blitz, but also drop our DBs way back. Collins talked about how, when you are sending a blitz, you need to pump the WR and hinder his route. You can not simply give the WR a wide open space, thus giving the QB an easy bailout and negativing the blitz. I can't recall if it was Jackson or Maclin, but it was 3rd and long, and we blitzed, and Bowman was deeper than I had ever seen us use a DB, and that's pretty deep. Not only was the 3rd and long completed, but it was sad how wide open the WR was and how easy it looked.

 

We are one of the worst 3rd down defense units in the league, and last night was no exception as we allowed 7 of 15 3rd downs converted, many of which were 3rd and long.

 

Phily had 2 TDs, and 17 total points, going into the final quarter. There alone, i would not say our D played that great. But then our D allowed a 5:30 minutes, 65 yard, TD drive. That is the sort of series a good D makes a stop. An average D holds them to a FG. A bad D gives up the TD.

 

Next time D was on the field, they allowed a crucial 3rd down conversion, leaving minimal time and no timeouts for the offense.

 

Look. I am not excusing the O. They played like shit and everyone knows it. I also credit the D for some nice plays and some nice turnovers. But no way do they not share in the blame for this loss. You do not give up 24 points and say the D played well. This unit may be good enough to make some good plays here and there, but are not consistent enough to be considered good, or even average.

 

When a performance like this leads to many saying the D played well, or even pretty well, that tells me just how far our D has fallen.

[madlithuanian]

Couldn't agree more...

 

For the record, the offense was terrible. I realize that. But I am getting tired of this D getting a pass, or some saying they played well. Maybe if we compare this game to the cincy or Az games, then sure, they played well. But only if we set the bar that low.

 

On the ground, this unit should be embarrassed. Yet another week where a RB puts up season best numbers. Hell, KC did a better job holding McCoy than we. I am sure Lovie will crow about holding McCoy under 100 yards since he only had 99. Oh yea. And a 5 ypc avg. And we gave up a total of 157 rushing yards on the day.

 

D.Jackson has not gone for 100 yards since week 3, but found little trouble against us.

 

Collinsworth talked about something last night that we have all talked about for years now. Seemingly, everytime we got them in 3rd and long, we would blitz, but also drop our DBs way back. Collins talked about how, when you are sending a blitz, you need to pump the WR and hinder his route. You can not simply give the WR a wide open space, thus giving the QB an easy bailout and negativing the blitz. I can't recall if it was Jackson or Maclin, but it was 3rd and long, and we blitzed, and Bowman was deeper than I had ever seen us use a DB, and that's pretty deep. Not only was the 3rd and long completed, but it was sad how wide open the WR was and how easy it looked.

 

We are one of the worst 3rd down defense units in the league, and last night was no exception as we allowed 7 of 15 3rd downs converted, many of which were 3rd and long.

 

Phily had 2 TDs, and 17 total points, going into the final quarter. There alone, i would not say our D played that great. But then our D allowed a 5:30 minutes, 65 yard, TD drive. That is the sort of series a good D makes a stop. An average D holds them to a FG. A bad D gives up the TD.

 

Next time D was on the field, they allowed a crucial 3rd down conversion, leaving minimal time and no timeouts for the offense.

 

Look. I am not excusing the O. They played like shit and everyone knows it. I also credit the D for some nice plays and some nice turnovers. But no way do they not share in the blame for this loss. You do not give up 24 points and say the D played well. This unit may be good enough to make some good plays here and there, but are not consistent enough to be considered good, or even average.

 

When a performance like this leads to many saying the D played well, or even pretty well, that tells me just how far our D has fallen.

 

[adam]

I agree. If Tillman doesn't make those 2 strips, we lose by at least 14.

[ParkerBear7]

For the record, the offense was terrible. I realize that. But I am getting tired of this D getting a pass, or some saying they played well. Maybe if we compare this game to the cincy or Az games, then sure, they played well. But only if we set the bar that low.

 

On the ground, this unit should be embarrassed. Yet another week where a RB puts up season best numbers. Hell, KC did a better job holding McCoy than we. I am sure Lovie will crow about holding McCoy under 100 yards since he only had 99. Oh yea. And a 5 ypc avg. And we gave up a total of 157 rushing yards on the day.

 

D.Jackson has not gone for 100 yards since week 3, but found little trouble against us.

 

Collinsworth talked about something last night that we have all talked about for years now. Seemingly, everytime we got them in 3rd and long, we would blitz, but also drop our DBs way back. Collins talked about how, when you are sending a blitz, you need to pump the WR and hinder his route. You can not simply give the WR a wide open space, thus giving the QB an easy bailout and negativing the blitz. I can't recall if it was Jackson or Maclin, but it was 3rd and long, and we blitzed, and Bowman was deeper than I had ever seen us use a DB, and that's pretty deep. Not only was the 3rd and long completed, but it was sad how wide open the WR was and how easy it looked.

 

We are one of the worst 3rd down defense units in the league, and last night was no exception as we allowed 7 of 15 3rd downs converted, many of which were 3rd and long.

 

Phily had 2 TDs, and 17 total points, going into the final quarter. There alone, i would not say our D played that great. But then our D allowed a 5:30 minutes, 65 yard, TD drive. That is the sort of series a good D makes a stop. An average D holds them to a FG. A bad D gives up the TD.

 

Next time D was on the field, they allowed a crucial 3rd down conversion, leaving minimal time and no timeouts for the offense.

 

Look. I am not excusing the O. They played like shit and everyone knows it. I also credit the D for some nice plays and some nice turnovers. But no way do they not share in the blame for this loss. You do not give up 24 points and say the D played well. This unit may be good enough to make some good plays here and there, but are not consistent enough to be considered good, or even average.

 

When a performance like this leads to many saying the D played well, or even pretty well, that tells me just how far our D has fallen.

 

I was more pissed about the "D" giving up the 3rs and longs all night than the Culter not connecting a few possible TD passes.

[flea]

Did the D play great? No

 

But they forced 3 turnovers that the O got 3 points from, they played well enough to win the game if the O had taken advantages of it.

 

RME ya can say if Tillman doesn't cause the fumbles but he did. Hell if the Eagles didn't score touchdowns we'd have won. Hate tghe what if game.

[nfoligno]

At the end of the day, our D gave up 24 points. Sorry, but our standards have really been lowered for us to consider that solid play. The whole idea of the D playing well enough to win is questionable.

 

Absolutely we need to see more from the O, but at the same time, I think we also need to expect far more from the D. It really makes me sick how low we have dropped the bar that giving up 24 points, and allowing nearly 50% 3rd down conversions, is playing well enough.

 

Did the D play great? No

 

But they forced 3 turnovers that the O got 3 points from, they played well enough to win the game if the O had taken advantages of it.

 

RME ya can say if Tillman doesn't cause the fumbles but he did. Hell if the Eagles didn't score touchdowns we'd have won. Hate tghe what if game.

 

[ChileBear]

At the end of the day, our D gave up 24 points. Sorry, but our standards have really been lowered for us to consider that solid play. The whole idea of the D playing well enough to win is questionable.

 

Absolutely we need to see more from the O, but at the same time, I think we also need to expect far more from the D. It really makes me sick how low we have dropped the bar that giving up 24 points, and allowing nearly 50% 3rd down conversions, is playing well enough.

You got that right. It's just disgusting to watch the opposition march right down the field, picking up third and longs with impunty. Where's the attitude to stick it to the opposition on every down? Instead, we are "bend, don't break," which, IMdO, IS broken as a D philosophy.

Where have the Bears ds of the mid/late 80s gone?

[nfoligno]

Mid/late 80s? Hell. Where has the Bears D of a couple years ago gone?

 

It really is sickening watching how easily teams march down our throats to start games too. Does that not have to reflect directly on Lovie? I guess some will want to give him credit for our D making some adjustments, but why is it that with a week (or more) to prepare for a game, our D looks flat and lost out of the gate.

 

You got that right. It's just disgusting to watch the opposition march right down the field, picking up third and longs with impunty. Where's the attitude to stick it to the opposition on every down? Instead, we are "bend, don't break," which, IMdO, IS broken as a D philosophy.

Where have the Bears ds of the mid/late 80s gone?

 

[jason]

For the record, the offense was terrible. I realize that. But I am getting tired of this D getting a pass, or some saying they played well. Maybe if we compare this game to the cincy or Az games, then sure, they played well. But only if we set the bar that low...

 

I didn't even read your entire post, and I pretty much agree. I am DISGUSTED at the third and long defense. Can we PLEASE not go into a zone, rush four guys who get nearly no penetration, and continually let the QB wait until someone finds a hole in the defense!? Please!? Lovie? Are you there? This is effing ridiculous.

 

I was watching the game with my girlfriend and calling out the defense on third and long.

I said to her more than once, "Watch this, they'll send four guys after the QB, get no pressure, and after about 5 seconds a WR will be open for the first down."

She said, "Don't teams usually fail when it's 3rd down and more than ten?"

I angrily said, "Yes, but not against the Bears."

She astutely replied, "Well, why don't they change it up some? If you can tell, then surely the people who get paid to do this stuff can see what's coming."

 

I nodded silently.

[nfoligno]

There was a Sun Times article I posted a while back that showed how our defense does not use the Cover Two nearly as much as some believe, but also showed how we predominatly use the cover two on 3rd and long, and how badly we get beaten when we do such.

 

Back to your comments. Thing is, I have actually even seen us blitz at times, but it just doesn't matter because even when we do the right thing w/ one unit, we F it up in how we use another unit. As mentioned a billion times, I saw us on a couple 3rd and long plays blitz (once even w/ two blitzers) but at the same time, our DBs were playing deeper than ever. That is exactly what happened on one 3rd and long play where McNabb dropped back, it appears our blitz was going to be effective, but before any had time to get near McNabb, he got rid of the ball to (maybe Jackson) on the left side. Bowman had played so deep that he was not even in the picture, and the WR was past the first down marker (easily) before Bowman could get up to make the tackle.

 

Collisnworth spoke for some time about this, and how questionable it is to blitz the QB while doing nothing to impede the route of the WR. By giving the WR so much cushion, you flat out negate the blitz.

 

What so disgusts me is, I have seen us do so well on 1st and 2nd down. I have seen us actually move up and press the WRs some, or at minimum, not give them massive cushions. I have seen us blitz from multiple areas, and put pressure on McNabb. I have seen us play well on 1st and 2nd down, forcing the opponent into 3rd and long. That is the goal of any D, and puts in you a situation to pin your ears back and attack. That is when a D can really start to make plays. But that is also where we, under Lovie, throw out everything that worked well and put you into that solid situation. That is where you then shift back into the bend/break cover two scheme. That is when you see the CBs literally give the WRs 10 yards of cushion, only to immediately backpeddle on the snap, leading to even more cushion. That is when you see the safeties drop so far back they can not hope to be part of the play.

 

Someday. Someone will explain all this to me, as I am just a lowly fan. But I just do not understand getting away from what works so well, only to turn to what doesn't, and do so in the absolute worst times for such a move.

 

I didn't even read your entire post, and I pretty much agree. I am DISGUSTED at the third and long defense. Can we PLEASE not go into a zone, rush four guys who get nearly no penetration, and continually let the QB wait until someone finds a hole in the defense!? Please!? Lovie? Are you there? This is effing ridiculous.

 

I was watching the game with my girlfriend and calling out the defense on third and long.

I said to her more than once, "Watch this, they'll send four guys after the QB, get no pressure, and after about 5 seconds a WR will be open for the first down."

She said, "Don't teams usually fail when it's 3rd down and more than ten?"

I angrily said, "Yes, but not against the Bears."

She astutely replied, "Well, why don't they change it up some? If you can tell, then surely the people who get paid to do this stuff can see what's coming."

 

I nodded silently.

 

[adam]

Did the D play great? No

 

But they forced 3 turnovers that the O got 3 points from, they played well enough to win the game if the O had taken advantages of it.

 

RME ya can say if Tillman doesn't cause the fumbles but he did. Hell if the Eagles didn't score touchdowns we'd have won. Hate tghe what if game.

My point was the only highlight for the defense was Tillman's strips. That was the only way we stopped the Eagles.