OT Bears 2019/20 season and beyond

[dougthonus]

the bears defense has been on the field an average of 31:26 this season. gimme a break

and it's the DEFENSE that has been mostly responsible for that minor differential. last year opponent average drive was 2:30. this year it's 2:54. the offense is averaging 2:41 per drive (middle of the pack). 2:57 last year, which was excellent

the biggest problem is that last year the bears were intercepting 4.43% of opponent passes. this year it's 1.68%. which goes to show that much of the defensive improvement last year had nothing to do with khalil mack. it had to do with an opportunistic secondary

The Bears are 24th in plays per game this year. They were 14th last year which tells me their offense can't stay on the field and put drives together. The total plays they are allowing is 2 per game more than last year and the total plays per game they are running is 4 less than last year. This tells me time of possession in terms of wear on the defense is considerably worse this year than last year and the offenses ability to stay on the field sure looks like a big part of that.

I think time of possession is a red herring since an incomplete pass that takes 5 seconds off the clock puts as much wear and tear on the defense (probably more) than a running play that ends in 4 seconds and allows the clock to run for 30 seconds.

A big reason opponent drives are lasting longer in terms of time of possession is likely because the Bears are playing from behind so much and opponents are running out the clock on them more and throwing more running plays against us to close out the game. Though that's just a guess.

Either way, the reason the team looked likely to be far worse this year than last was that it was really good in close games, had a huge turnover disparity that seemed unsustainable even with a good defense, and that their QB looked like he had a decent season through smoke and mirrors similar to Tim Tebow rattling off some wins in Denver.

All three of those things have come back to bite them this year. The defense doesn't have an insane turnover rate, their QB has been totally exposed, and they aren't winning close games.

[Susan]

Bears cut Mike Davis today. Just gained a 4th rounder.

[MeloRoseNoah]

Pace and his scouting staff better be hitting the scouting trail hard right now looking for O-linemen. We need one fresh tackle and a guard as starters in order to rebuild our O-line.

[dice]

the bears defense has been on the field an average of 31:26 this season. gimme a break

and it's the DEFENSE that has been mostly responsible for that minor differential. last year opponent average drive was 2:30. this year it's 2:54. the offense is averaging 2:41 per drive (middle of the pack). 2:57 last year, which was excellent

the biggest problem is that last year the bears were intercepting 4.43% of opponent passes. this year it's 1.68%. which goes to show that much of the defensive improvement last year had nothing to do with khalil mack. it had to do with an opportunistic secondary

The Bears are 24th in plays per game this year. They were 14th last year which tells me their offense can't stay on the field and put drives together. The total plays they are allowing is 2 per game more than last year and the total plays per game they are running is 4 less than last year. This tells me time of possession in terms of wear on the defense is considerably worse this year than last year and the offenses ability to stay on the field sure looks like a big part of that.

I think time of possession is a red herring since an incomplete pass that takes 5 seconds off the clock puts as much wear and tear on the defense (probably more) than a running play that ends in 4 seconds and allows the clock to run for 30 seconds.

yeah, i was thinking about that after i posted. the truest indicator of how much time a defense spends on the field is not time of possession, nor plays per game, but plays per DRIVE

last year the bears offense was 18th in plays per drive (5.95). this year they are 23rd (5.78). not a big difference
last year the bears defense were 4th in opponent plays per drive (5.63). this year they are way down to 20th (6.21)

so yeah, the offense not being on the field for long is only a small part of the defense's decline

A big reason opponent drives are lasting longer in terms of time of possession is likely because the Bears are playing from behind so much and opponents are running out the clock on them more and throwing more running plays against us to close out the game. Though that's just a guess.

so the other team having more running plays at the ends of games (and the bears offense having more passing plays) is what accounts for much of the relatively small time of possession differential

Either way, the reason the team looked likely to be far worse this year than last was that it was really good in close games, had a huge turnover disparity that seemed unsustainable even with a good defense, and that their QB looked like he had a decent season through smoke and mirrors similar to Tim Tebow rattling off some wins in Denver.

bears were 6-4 last season in games decided by a touchdown or less (6-5 if you include the playoff game). which isn't REALLY good, but it sure beats this year's 1-3

All three of those things have come back to bite them this year. The defense doesn't have an insane turnover rate, their QB has been totally exposed, and they aren't winning close games.

yep

[dice]

Bears cut Mike Davis today. Just gained a 4th rounder.

increased their chances of the 4th rounder, anyway. the league's formula for compensatory picks is not made public for some reason

$3 million bucks for 47 yards of production. not bad. meanwhile jordan howard cost philly $2 mil for 600 yards and counting

[sco]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/rich-eisen-says-super-bowl-042628947.html

[chicagoballer]

1st quarter down.

Total yards: bears 19, lions 91

This might be last game I watch this season...

[MeloRoseNoah]

Trubisky is coming back to life with the O-line getting better and Cody WHitehair back at Center.

It's very obvious to me that Pace needs to turn the O-line into an elite unit if he wants to keep his job.

[johnnyvann840]

Mitch looking great

[PaKii94]

Mitch looking great

Not watching the game. Are you being sarcastic?

[MeloRoseNoah]

Mitch looking great

Not watching the game. Are you being sarcastic?

He actually does very well with time. Both of our tackles are really bad. That will need to be addressed. But the guards and the C are doing a solid job, giving him some time and some open lanes for David Montgomery.

[dice]

2nd effort by montgomery on that 4th and 1 at the end of the first half might have saved nagy's job. terrible gamble when you don't have much of a running game

[transplant]

Bears win. That's good.

I've been a Nagy supporter. I'm wavering. They have running plays that work, but Nagy seems to hate running out of the I. He seems to be stubborn to his team's own detriment.

Mitch played well and this is a big deal. Just about everyone figured that he was deader than Julius Caesar, and he showed signs of life. Good on you, Mitch.

[Mbrahv0528]

Mitch looking great

He definitely did not look great by any stretch of the imagination. Serviceable? Sure. Passable? Yeah. Great? Hellll no.

Sent from my SM-N975U using RealGM mobile app

[dougthonus]

Mitch played well and this is a big deal. Just about everyone figured that he was deader than Julius Caesar, and he showed signs of life. Good on you, Mitch.

Agree that Mitch had a nice game and showed signs of life. I don't think "this is a big deal" though. It wasn't a great game or amazing game. He only had two long drives and both had a bit of luck (4th down conversion on one and a 22 yard questionable pass interference penalty on a ball that wouldn't have been catchable anyway).

Watching this game doesn't make me think Mitch was a good QB though. It was a decent to good game against a lousy defense. Bears still had 7 three and outs and punted on 9 of 12 possessions for 25% scoring percentage which would put them 30th in the NFL and one of those drives started in FG range.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

I think their season comes down to next week against the Rams. They’ll be heavy underdogs, but the Rams have looked beatable at times.

If they win that, they have the Giants and Lions after. Could be 7-5 after thanksgiving going into a tough final 4 games. But at least the final 4 games will matter at that point.

Of course, it wouldn’t surprise me if they lose the next 3 games.

Mitch looked ok today. An abysmal 1st and 4th were saved by good 2nd and 3rd quarters. Hopefully he can build off of it...I’m not holding my breath though.

[dougthonus]

I think their season comes down to next week against the Rams. They’ll be heavy underdogs, but the Rams have looked beatable at times.

If they win that, they have the Giants and Lions after. Could be 7-5 after thanksgiving going into a tough final 4 games. But at least the final 4 games will matter at that point.

Of course, it wouldn’t surprise me if they lose the next 3 games.

Mitch looked ok today. An abysmal 1st and 4th were saved by good 2nd and 3rd quarters. Hopefully he can build off of it...I’m not holding my breath though.

Bold of you to assume the season isn't over and still comes down to a game that hasn't been played. Bears probably need to win out to make the playoffs. In that sense, their season probably comes down to every single game left, and well, it's pretty unlikely that fantasy will go on much longer.

[Chicago-Bull-E]

I think their season comes down to next week against the Rams. They’ll be heavy underdogs, but the Rams have looked beatable at times.

If they win that, they have the Giants and Lions after. Could be 7-5 after thanksgiving going into a tough final 4 games. But at least the final 4 games will matter at that point.

Of course, it wouldn’t surprise me if they lose the next 3 games.

Mitch looked ok today. An abysmal 1st and 4th were saved by good 2nd and 3rd quarters. Hopefully he can build off of it...I’m not holding my breath though.

Bold of you to assume the season isn't over and still comes down to a game that hasn't been played. Bears probably need to win out to make the playoffs. In that sense, their season probably comes down to every single game left, and well, it's pretty unlikely that fantasy will go on much longer.

It more or less essentially is barring a miracle string of wins from a team that’s tried its best to avoid winning.

But it certainly technically isn’t. 10-6 most of the time gets you in the playoffs. Seattle will take one of the wild card spots, and the other is up for grabs by the group of Minnesota/Philly/Carolina. Bears can play their way into that group by doing the ridiculously difficult task of winning out November. But after the Rams, that task gets quite a bit easier.

[Susan]

Got a win, cut Mike Davis this week and we face the Rams with a QB who's JUST as shaky as ours but has a MASSIVE contract to boot.

Just keep on winning games, ugly or not.

[transplant]

Mitch played well and this is a big deal. Just about everyone figured that he was deader than Julius Caesar, and he showed signs of life. Good on you, Mitch.

Agree that Mitch had a nice game and showed signs of life. I don't think "this is a big deal" though. It wasn't a great game or amazing game. He only had two long drives and both had a bit of luck (4th down conversion on one and a 22 yard questionable pass interference penalty on a ball that wouldn't have been catchable anyway).

Watching this game doesn't make me think Mitch was a good QB though. It was a decent to good game against a lousy defense. Bears still had 7 three and outs and punted on 9 of 12 possessions for 25% scoring percentage which would put them 30th in the NFL and one of those drives started in FG range.

When you have a QB who has been left for dead by 90+% of the fandom, any sign of life is a big deal.