Image Image Image Image

If thats how they're gonna use Hester - count me out

Moderator: chitownsports4ever

User avatar
emperorjones
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 4,591
And1: 133
Joined: Jun 16, 2006

If thats how they're gonna use Hester - count me out 

Post#1 » by emperorjones » Tue Sep 11, 2007 4:24 pm

OK, sorry guys but it takes me about 5 days to get over a Bears loss. Right now I'm in the "its just a game I don't know why I even care mode"
:nonono:

Of course I've been like this after every loss for 32 years. By Friday we're back in the Super Bowl chase! :clap:

So, I try not to talk/post while I'm in a negative mood but hell - what was up with the lack of Hester on offense? Is he just going to be some sort of decoy? If so, don't even trot him out there and risk injury. I thought our game plan was very conservative. I hope it was a great Chargers D and not our offensive philosophy.
NLK
Head Coach
Posts: 6,093
And1: 9
Joined: Mar 12, 2006
Location: CHICAGO is a big market with many Rings! Eat S#%T New York!

 

Post#2 » by NLK » Tue Sep 11, 2007 5:20 pm

Its ok EJ. I'm still pretty angry, but now my anger has turned to Lorenzo Neal, and hoping serious misfortunes toward him. Hearing Mike Brown's comments yesterday, definitely shows what kind of guy he is. I hope we do make it back to the SB, and we face the Chargers, and we just exterminate them on the field.
-NLK: Offending Djiboutians since November 2007
"You don't truly know someone, until you fight them."
"To deny our own impulses, is to deny the very essence that makes us human."
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,230
And1: 18,470
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#3 » by dougthonus » Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:26 pm

I think we probably were playing very conservative on offense due to how well the defense was doing and the type of game being played. We didn't really run even that many 3 WR sets, and I don't recall any 4 WR sets off the top of my head which is why I suspect we didn't see more of Hester. I don't remember even seeing Bradley get on the field.

It's somewhat ironic that our conservative nature of running the ball actually forced us into more turnovers than we would have gotten had we just played aggressively. YOu are normally running and playing ball control to avoid costly mistakes and instead we generate dmore mistakes that way than had we just played with a wide open passing game.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
User avatar
HINrichPolice
General Manager
Posts: 8,664
And1: 1,729
Joined: Jul 09, 2003
Location: sometimes on your television

 

Post#4 » by HINrichPolice » Tue Sep 11, 2007 6:51 pm

dougthonus wrote:I think we probably were playing very conservative on offense due to how well the defense was doing and the type of game being played. We didn't really run even that many 3 WR sets, and I don't recall any 4 WR sets off the top of my head which is why I suspect we didn't see more of Hester. I don't remember even seeing Bradley get on the field.

It's somewhat ironic that our conservative nature of running the ball actually forced us into more turnovers than we would have gotten had we just played aggressively. YOu are normally running and playing ball control to avoid costly mistakes and instead we generate dmore mistakes that way than had we just played with a wide open passing game.


That's just speculation. Who knows how many more interceptions would have been thrown if Rex passed more? I agree that we played a more conservative offensive game, but I don't think that necessarily resulted in more turnovers than we'd potentially have with a more aggressive game.

EJ, I don't think we should hope that it was the Chargers D instead of our offensive philosophy because if it did, then that would mean that there's no hope for our offense to overcome the Chargers' D.
CONTENDERS FIND A WAY
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,230
And1: 18,470
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#5 » by dougthonus » Tue Sep 11, 2007 7:03 pm

That's just speculation. Who knows how many more interceptions would have been thrown if Rex passed more? I agree that we played a more conservative offensive game, but I don't think that necessarily resulted in more turnovers than we'd potentially have with a more aggressive game.


That's true, it's speculation. So I'll rephrase, more times than not, getting 3 turnovers while playing ultra conservative (we'll leave out the punt as it's not related to the offense) is a heck of a lot.
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
User avatar
emperorjones
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 4,591
And1: 133
Joined: Jun 16, 2006

 

Post#6 » by emperorjones » Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:12 pm

HINrichPolice wrote:-= original quote snipped =-


EJ, I don't think we should hope that it was the Chargers D instead of our offensive philosophy because if it did, then that would mean that there's no hope for our offense to overcome the Chargers' D.


we won't play them again unless its in the SB and if we get to the SB, then our offense will most certainly be clicking at full speed given the 2 devastating injuries the defense just suffered.

Can someone please explain to me why Bears losses bother me so much. Especially injuries - I just hate seeing our guys get hurt. Maybe I should just watch ballroom dancing.
:nonono:
User avatar
dougthonus
Senior Mod - Bulls
Senior Mod - Bulls
Posts: 58,230
And1: 18,470
Joined: Dec 22, 2004
Contact:
 

 

Post#7 » by dougthonus » Tue Sep 11, 2007 8:15 pm

Can someone please explain to me why Bears losses bother me so much. Especially injuries - I just hate seeing our guys get hurt. Maybe I should just watch ballroom dancing.


I feel that bad after most Bulls losses and hte Bulls play 82 games a year, so it could be worse ;)
http://linktr.ee/bullsbeat - links to the bullsbeat podcast
@doug_thonus on twitter
CBS7
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 26,564
And1: 4,191
Joined: Jan 21, 2005
Location: Dallas

 

Post#8 » by CBS7 » Tue Sep 11, 2007 11:21 pm

We didn't get a chance to get into a rhythm on offense either. Everytime we looked like we had something going, Grossman making a couple nice passes in a row or a nice run, we turned it over.
User avatar
emperorjones
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 4,591
And1: 133
Joined: Jun 16, 2006

 

Post#9 » by emperorjones » Wed Sep 12, 2007 5:10 am

dougthonus wrote:
Can someone please explain to me why Bears losses bother me so much. Especially injuries - I just hate seeing our guys get hurt. Maybe I should just watch ballroom dancing.


I feel that bad after most Bulls losses and hte Bulls play 82 games a year, so it could be worse ;)


same here, but I think its the 82 games and the frequency that keeps me going. If the Bulls played once a week I might die after a Ben Gordan turnover with 2 seconds left. :lol:

Return to Chicago Bears