RealGM

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"


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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.