Packers at Bears, 9/27/10 game thread

[azbearsfan]

Yes. I actually think you are wrong. It worked this time, but it doesn't always work. And if you continue to pat yourself on the back when you get lucky, and fail to modify the things that are wrong (i.e. the same things Lovie has ignored for the past 3 or 4 years), then yes, the problems in this type of win DO matter.

 

Having said that, of course, I'd rather be lucky and win than perfect and lose.

 

 

Seriously, give it a rest. Nothing works all the time.

 

We get it, you hate Lovie, even when they win.

 

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if its Lovie, Ron Rivera, Mike Ditka, etc. If the players make plays, the Bears will win.

 

Today, the players made the plays.

[bowlingtwig]

Seriously, give it a rest. Nothing works all the time.

 

We get it, you hate Lovie, even when they win.

 

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if its Lovie, Ron Rivera, Mike Ditka, etc. If the players make plays, the Bears will win.

 

Today, the players made the plays.

Thank you. Great post. I don't dwell on the past. I look towards the future. Lucky or not. We won and that is the ONLY thing that matters at the end of the year. In the NFL you make playoffs based on your wins and losses and not based on how your team won or weather or not you got lucky. I don't care Lovie myself and every one here knows that but you can say 1 thing about him and that is his players never quit on him because they love the guy.

[GrizzlyBear]

Stats for yards never win games, Look at dallas, Detroit, Now Green Bay. Seems to me the Bears make them have penalties with the rush, recievers running thier routes and playing off defenders, Turn overs are a Lovie Pulpit stand. He been preaching it since he been here. Special teams got us to the superbowl in 06. So I guess Lovie and his coaches pretty much made this win. So your past is not our present. Maybe in your world we will have Cowher and run 3-4 defense , NO thank you!!!!

[bowlingtwig]

Stats for yards never win games, Look at dallas, Detroit, Now Green Bay. Seems to me the Bears make them have penalties with the rush, recievers running thier routes and playing off defenders, Turn overs are a Lovie Pulpit stand. He been preaching it since he been here. Special teams got us to the superbowl in 06. So I guess Lovie and his coaches pretty much made this win. So your past is not our present. Maybe in your world we will have Cowher and run 3-4 defense , NO thank you!!!!

I like the 3-4 defense but we can't run it and i think everyone knows it. We don't have a NT that commands a double team lol

[rockren]

Or the Packers to have more penalties then they had in any game in the last 50 years. So, I guess it "worked."

 

Attribute that to Peppers. They held him almost the entire game.

 

Also attribute a few of the pass interference penalties due to the Packer secondary not being able to run with the Bears WRs. (Hester was gone when he juked Woodson and Woodson had to yank him down). Anyone else think that "blow to the head PF" on Melton was BS? The Pack were looking at a 3rd and Goal from the 9 before that call and wound up scoring the go-ahead TD on that drive.

 

With those things being said- Cutler played poorly tonight and we indeed were very fortunate Collins didn't pick that throw over the middle on the game winning drive.

 

Regardless, I'm thrilled with the Bears being 3-0 and I KNOW they're for real.

[balta1701-A]

Yes, giving up nearly 400 yards "worked." But I hate to rely on a late forced fumble for the win. Or a dropped INT on the Packers side of the ball. Or the Packers to have more penalties then they had in any game in the last 50 years. So, I guess it "worked."

 

Listen to the postgame...nearly everyone will acknowledge that the Bears got beat in most aspects of the game but got lucky with a turnover and the penalties.

Causing a turnover or two and drawing a lot of penalties was probably quite literally items 1 and 2 on the game board of how they were going to win that game. The Packers played the exact game the Bears wanted.

 

You don't get "lucky" holding a team like the Packers to 17 points.

[jason]

Causing a turnover or two and drawing a lot of penalties was probably quite literally items 1 and 2 on the game board of how they were going to win that game. The Packers played the exact game the Bears wanted.

 

You don't get "lucky" holding a team like the Packers to 17 points.

 

You don't? Seems like the most fortunate game I can remember in a long time. The Bears got beat in nearly every aspect of the game, but still won. If that is not luck, then we'll have to call it fortune. PotAto, Potahto.

 

 

[jason]

Seriously, give it a rest. Nothing works all the time.

 

We get it, you hate Lovie, even when they win.

 

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter if its Lovie, Ron Rivera, Mike Ditka, etc. If the players make plays, the Bears will win.

 

Today, the players made the plays.

 

Yes, even when the Bears win, I usually hate Lovie. That's because most of the time he deserves the hate.

Yes, it all comes down to players making plays. And against the Packers the Bears' players made plays.

But it sure would be nice to have the complete package. A team with players who make plays as well as coaches who actually coach, instead of just crossing their fingers and hoping for the plays to be made.

[balta1701-A]

You don't? Seems like the most fortunate game I can remember in a long time. The Bears got beat in nearly every aspect of the game, but still won. If that is not luck, then we'll have to call it fortune. PotAto, Potahto.

I would bet you that game went almost to the letter how the Bears game-plan went.

 

1. Stop the run, put the ball in the air 50+ times.

2. No long completions

3. No big special teams plays

4. If the ball is in the air 50 times on short passes, they're going to connect on a lot of them. Tackle them when they do. No long runs after catch

5. If the Packers throw the ball that often, this defense is going to generate a couple of turnovers. That's just a numbers and coaching game. TO's were going to happen; that wasn't luck, that was number of plays.

6. Get pressure on the QB. Either the Packers have to hold on every play or Rogers is going to get a few sacks. The Packers chose to hold on every play.

7. Don't turn the ball over. The only legit INT Cutler had was the overthrow in the end zone in the first half. The others wouldn't have been on video without the penalties.

 

The only thing that didn't go to plan at all was the damn goal line offense.

[jason]

I would bet you that game went almost to the letter how the Bears game-plan went.

 

1. Stop the run, put the ball in the air 50+ times.

2. No long completions

3. No big special teams plays

4. If the ball is in the air 50 times on short passes, they're going to connect on a lot of them. Tackle them when they do. No long runs after catch

5. If the Packers throw the ball that often, this defense is going to generate a couple of turnovers. That's just a numbers and coaching game. TO's were going to happen; that wasn't luck, that was number of plays.

6. Get pressure on the QB. Either the Packers have to hold on every play or Rogers is going to get a few sacks. The Packers chose to hold on every play.

7. Don't turn the ball over. The only legit INT Cutler had was the overthrow in the end zone in the first half. The others wouldn't have been on video without the penalties.

 

The only thing that didn't go to plan at all was the damn goal line offense.

 

You may be right, but if that's the gameplan, it's passive as hell and will eventually get the Bears beat by a team that doesn't make mistakes (i.e. #5) or doesn't get as many holding penalties called against them (i.e. #6).

[bowlingtwig]

You may be right, but if that's the gameplan, it's passive as hell and will eventually get the Bears beat by a team that doesn't make mistakes (i.e. #5) or doesn't get as many holding penalties called against them (i.e. #6).

Name me 1 team that has the COMPLETE package this year. I bet you can't find it. How many expected the Chiefs to be 3-0 and that is offense is not good. The Steelers are 3-0. Both of these teams have had mediocre had to bad schedules so far. Chiefs play good defense and have a few playmakers on offense and special teams combine that with playing an easing schedule so far. The Steelers have the complete package...on Defense. The offense is very mediocre at least until Big Ben returns and then we shall see what happens.

[balta1701-A]

You may be right, but if that's the gameplan, it's passive as hell and will eventually get the Bears beat by a team that doesn't make mistakes (i.e. #5) or doesn't get as many holding penalties called against them (i.e. #6).

You're missing the counterpoint there though. If the Packers didn't get as many holding penalties called against them last night...you know what happens? Aaron Rogers would have been sacked 5 times and probably fumbled once or thrown a pressure INT. That would have changed the game just as much as the penalties.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

That was a bad pass by Cutler. Either way, that's the SECOND DAMN TIME the Bears should have gone for a FG on 4th and 1 this season.

 

KICK THE DAMN FIELD GOAL AND GET SOME POINTS!!!

When your that close, you go for 7. Packers have one of the best, if not the best, offenses in the league. A field goal wasn't going to be enough and in that situation, you have the perfect shot at a score.

 

Jay should have made a better pass, but the ball was catchable. It was a great call and it worked beautifully, Dez just dropped a medicore Cutler throw.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

Yes, giving up nearly 400 yards "worked." But I hate to rely on a late forced fumble for the win. Or a dropped INT on the Packers side of the ball. Or the Packers to have more penalties then they had in any game in the last 50 years. So, I guess it "worked."

 

Listen to the postgame...nearly everyone will acknowledge that the Bears got beat in most aspects of the game but got lucky with a turnover and the penalties.

We beat what I believe was the best team in football. Sure we played sloppy and they played sloppy, but we won. Lovie and our coaching staff has done a stellar job thus far this year.

 

And your better than that. A large chunk of those penalties were because Peppers was freaking everywhere. On top of that, the Packers are the most penalized team in football over the past couple years. That is who they are.

[Controlled Chaos]

How about that horrible call that Kuhn didn't touch the ground? That made the Bears waste their last challenge. If that Ref would have ruled Jennings foot was out of bounds on that fumble. The Bears wouldn't have had a challenge. Man that would have stung.

 

 

[balta1701-A]

How about that horrible call that Kuhn didn't touch the ground? That made the Bears waste their last challenge. If that Ref would have ruled Jennings foot was out of bounds on that fumble. The Bears wouldn't have had a challenge. Man that would have stung.

That's why you don't waste your challenges on plays that you're obviously not going to win, like that catch at the 1 yard line. The video booth should have told Lovie after 1 viewing that it's somewhat close but it's not going to go the Bears way from anything on video.

[DABEARSDABOMB]

That's why you don't waste your challenges on plays that you're obviously not going to win, like that catch at the 1 yard line. The video booth should have told Lovie after 1 viewing that it's somewhat close but it's not going to go the Bears way from anything on video.

I thought the Bears ended up challenging it because they were going to have to burn a time-out anyway. So they figured it was close enough and a big enough play that it was worthy of a challenge?

[Controlled Chaos]

That's why you don't waste your challenges on plays that you're obviously not going to win, like that catch at the 1 yard line. The video booth should have told Lovie after 1 viewing that it's somewhat close but it's not going to go the Bears way from anything on video.

Speaking of video booths telling coaches what to do. I couldn't believe McCarthy challenged the fumble recovery. GB could have used that time out and there was no question on the replay that everything happened in bounds. That was Loviesque right there.

[jason]

When your that close, you go for 7. Packers have one of the best, if not the best, offenses in the league. A field goal wasn't going to be enough and in that situation, you have the perfect shot at a score.

 

Jay should have made a better pass, but the ball was catchable. It was a great call and it worked beautifully, Dez just dropped a medicore Cutler throw.

 

We simply disagree on your entire post. When you get stuffed on short yardage time and time again, you go for the FG when it's a gimme. Points are points. Three is better than zero. And, evidently, it WAS enough.

 

Catchable? Sure, I can buy that. But it was a really bad pass. Great call, agreed, but I'd say it was worse than mediocre, and I'm far from a Clark supporter when it comes to him or Cutler.

[Pixote]

The play selection was a good call, Clark was open and should have caught the damn ball. If he had caught the ball for a TD would this discussion of Lovie's 4th down attempt at the goal line even exist?

 

We failed, and the Packers took over on their one (or less). They were pinned way back and eventually had to punt from their 5 yard line. Hester finally breaks one for a TD. Not a bad outcome. Would this have happened if they had gotten good field position after a FG by CHI? We will never know.

 

If we kicked the field goal and we kick off to GB, with the success Rogers had, and almost a full quarter with probably MUCH BETTER field position, do you think they would have a good chance to march down the field again?

 

It is fun to 2nd guess Lovie now-a-days. But was it really that bad a call? I do not think so in this case. The call in Detroit, yes I will play armchair HC and question that one. This one, I think was a good call.

 

[bowlingtwig]

The play selection was a good call, Clark was open and should have caught the damn ball. If he had caught the ball for a TD would this discussion of Lovie's 4th down attempt at the goal line even exist?

 

We failed, and the Packers took over on their one (or less). They were pinned way back and eventually had to punt from their 5 yard line. Hester finally breaks one for a TD. Not a bad outcome. Would this have happened if they had gotten good field position after a FG by CHI? We will never know.

 

If we kicked the field goal and we kick off to GB, with the success Rogers had, and almost a full quarter with probably MUCH BETTER field position, do you think they would have a good chance to march down the field again?

 

It is fun to 2nd guess Lovie now-a-days. But was it really that bad a call? I do not think so in this case. The call in Detroit, yes I will play armchair HC and question that one. This one, I think was a good call.

Your right. Also look at the different scenarios. With the Detroit game it was getting late in the 4th quarter and in this game it was just the 3rd quarter. If this had been late in the 4th quarter I kick the FG every time.

[flea]

The play selection was a good call, Clark was open and should have caught the damn ball. If he had caught the ball for a TD would this discussion of Lovie's 4th down attempt at the goal line even exist?

 

I think yes Pix. Is he gonna go for it everytime we get in that situation just to prove his point from after the Lions game?

[bowlingtwig]

I think yes Pix. Is he gonna go for it everytime we get in that situation just to prove his point from after the Lions game?

Lets hope not. I don't have a big problem with going for it early in the game or even in the 3rd. But when it gets crunch time in the 4th and we trailing by 3 I am sorry I kick the FG everytime.

[madlithuanian]

Agreed.

 

Lets hope not. I don't have a big problem with going for it early in the game or even in the 3rd. But when it gets crunch time in the 4th and we trailing by 3 I am sorry I kick the FG everytime.