2012 NFL Week Seven Game Thread

RIPskaterdude · Post #221 » by **RIPskaterdude** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:59 am

That's what I get with picking the over for this game.

Post #222 » by **Icness** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:00 am

Very happy for Ryan Broyles getting his first career catch and later his first career TD. Could quickly spell the end of Nate Burleson in Detroit even if he's not broken.

And I love Charles Tillman, fantastic football player. He and Lance Briggs have been criminally overshadowed by Urlacher, both are worthy of HOF discussion as much as #54.

TSE · Post #223 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:38 am

The game was clearly lost by Stafford, Linehan, Shwartz, and Mayhew. That's it, 4 bums in the most important 4 positions of the entire team. End of story. I'll post more notes in the Lions forum later. Well I guess Logan was pretty bad too, he fumbled one ball and the balls he didn't fumble he couldn't even catch the right way, so I guess he deserves some blame too (god this guy's hands are for crap), and KV Bosch had another terrible game, despite exclaiming like he saved the world on the one play he made that was arbitrary because the player already hit the ground prior to him arriving, he's really awful and such a bad example for this team. Not to mention his failed contain and not even knowing how to stick his arms up when he's out of the play and in the line of a pass. And nice shout out to Alphonso Smith for making a number of plays under tough circumstances with everybody in the world but me against him. Ok I'm done. Oh wait I forgot even our punter sucks, and there's 2 Free Agent punters on the market that are better than ours. And last edit, yes Ryan Broyles was terrific, he made at least 3 good plays that I remember, not bad for him. He doesn't show much upside but he does have a lot of basic talent.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #224 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:42 am

^^^^^Shouldn't the Bears get most of the credit for causing those things to happen :dontknow:

.

TSE · Post #225 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:44 am

BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:^^^^^Shouldn't the Bears get most of the credit for causing those things to happen .

No credit needed really, the Bears were awful and played an awful game. The only credit I give is to Culter, but it's not really much credit because he was insane for playing with what seemed to be near life threatening injuries. He has no brains and too much heart, and I think the Bears were stupid for letting him continue with some of the severe punishment he took at a few points. Briggs was pretty freakin' solid tonight, and Urlacher made some good plays but can't give him much credit since it didn't look like he had to sweat much to make those plays, he just kind of stood around there and had and easy day because the Lions didn't challenge him. And Tillman was a veteran presence that did a good job tonight too. Gruden was calling him Peanuts late because calling his name so often got so boring.

Gruden was the MOST impressive performer by far. Lions don't get that type of commentary quality very often, and anybody that doesn't like either team should watch a replay just to see how sharp he is at pointing stuff out. He did an A+ professional job with his insight and observations.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #226 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:47 am

TSE wrote:
BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:^^^^^Shouldn't the Bears get most of the credit for causing those things to happen .

No credit, the Bears were awful and played an awful game. The only credit I give is to Culter, but it's not really much credit because he was insane for playing with what seemed to be near life threatening injuries. He has no brains and too much heart, and I think the Bears were stupid for letting him continue with some of the severe punishment he took at a few points. Briggs was pretty freakin' solid tonight, and Urlacher made some good plays but can't give him much credit since it didn't look like he had to sweat much to make those plays, he just kind of stood around there and had and easy day because the Lions didn't challenge him.

Well, I'm too sleepy to debate this, but you're being disingenuous by saying the Bears are awful.

.........................................................................................................

On an unrelated note. I'm not trying to pour salt in the wound, but Nate Burleson is out for the year with a broken leg.

TSE · Post #227 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:49 am

^
They were awful, I'm super drunk and can't believe I can type coherently and I still edited my post before I saw this with some slightly changed language and edits, but yes the Bears were AWFUL and absolutely should have lost this game, they did less to deserve to win than we did to deserve to lose, ABSOLUTELY for sure.

Susan · Post #228 » by **Susan** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:07 am

Well, the Bears are 5-1 and 1st in the division. It took the Lions 59 minutes and 30 seconds to score a touchdown.

Post #229 » by **CBS7** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:35 am

Bears D is phenomenal. Offense is too inconsistent, but if they can hit their stride late in the year, look out.

If anything, Credit the bears D, but don't credit the O. The Bears did not play awful as a whole. Wish they got the shutout, though.

This looks like the best Bears D since 2005 or early 2006 when Mike Brown (and the rest of the D) was healthy.

Allowing a league low 13 points per game.

Panthers at home and Titans on the road coming up, looks like Bears might get off to a 7-1 start. The 2nd half of their schedule is brutal, though. Minnesota twice, SF, Houston, GB, Seattle, Arizona, and Detroit on the road.

NFC North looks like it might send 3 teams to the playoffs.

TSE · Post #230 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:47 am

Susan wrote:Well, the Bears are 5-1 and 1st in the division. It took the Lions 59 minutes and 30 seconds to score a touchdown.

Is this a rebuttal to my comments though is what I want to know? First of all, we don't play well unless there is 5 minutes left, that's our chosen style apparently. And the first 4 wins had nothing to do with the Lions, so if you did well in those wins then fine, but the Bears lost this game and it was handed to them on a silver platter by a completely inept Lions team that was lead by a terrible QB, a terrible HC, a terrible OC, and even worse, a terrible GM that brought this circus to town.

We are NOT a serious football team that knows how to play this game! And the Bears deserve no credit for a win this week! Despite Briggs and Tillman and Urlacher playing a decent game like they should, why shoudn't they, they are good football players.

Dr Positivity · Post #231 » by **Dr Positivity** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 7:46 am

Glad the DET/CHI game (where I would've taken CHI -6.5) wasn't included in the contest lines, that was the biggest douche backdoor cover of the year by the Lions

trwi7 · Post #232 » by **trwi7** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:48 am

Susan wrote:Well, the Bears are 5-1 and 1st in the division. It took the Lions 59 minutes and 30 seconds to score a touchdown.

The Bears have beaten the Colts, Jaguars, Rams, Cowboys and Lions. Combined record, 12-19. Those teams are also 19th, 23rd, 24th, 26th and 32nd in points per game and 26th, 24th, 22nd, 14th and 10th in points per game allowed.

Let's see what happens when they have to play the 49ers, Texans and hell, even the Seahawks and Vikings.

Fact is the Bears couldn't have gotten an easier schedule to start the year. Congrats to them for taking advantage of it. We'll see if it lasts.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #233 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:18 pm

trwi7 wrote:
Susan wrote:Well, the Bears are 5-1 and 1st in the division. It took the Lions 59 minutes and 30 seconds to score a touchdown.

The Bears have beaten the Colts, Jaguars, Rams, Cowboys and Lions. Combined record, 12-19. Those teams are also 19th, 23rd, 24th, 26th and 32nd in points per game and 26th, 24th, 22nd, 14th and 10th in points per game allowed.

I hate when this argument is used against winning teams. It seems to always happen when the Bears are on top :wink:

.

Using your logic, those same teams would have a combined record of 17-14 if the Bears would have lost those games, so basically your argument doesn't hold water. Regarding the PPG rankings, the Bears have a ton to do with the fact that those teams are ranked where they are.

Every single team that you mentioned above have quality wins over other quality NFL teams.

-The Lions have beaten the Rams & Eagles.

-The Cowboys have beaten the Giants, Bucs, & Panthers.

-The Rams have beaten the Redskins, Seahawks, & Cardinals.

-The Colts have beaten the Packers, Vikings, & Browns.

-The Jaguars have beaten the Colts and have lost in OT to the Vikings & Raiders.

Post #234 » by **Icness** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:01 pm

I hate when this argument is used against winning teams. It seems to always happen when the Bears are on top .

Using your logic, those same teams would have a combined record of 17-14 if the Bears would have lost those games, so basically your argument doesn't hold water.

Agree 100% with this statement. And it usually comes from fans of teams that have an ugly loss to a crappy team. It's a sour grapes position. Houston has to deal with it all the time but it's not their fault their opponents haven't been very good this year.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #235 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:09 pm

Icness wrote:
I hate when this argument is used against winning teams. It seems to always happen when the Bears are on top .

Using your logic, those same teams would have a combined record of 17-14 if the Bears would have lost those games, so basically your argument doesn't hold water.

Agree 100% with this statement. And it usually comes from fans of teams that have an ugly loss to a crappy team. It's a sour grapes position. Houston has to deal with it all the time but it's not their fault their opponents haven't been very good this year.

I truly believe in the saying "Any given Sunday" & that the NFL is "A game of inches".

Anyone can beat anyone in the NFL. That's why I absolutely LOVE this game.

Higga · Post #236 » by **Higga** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:17 pm

You play who you play, you don't control your schedule. The NFL is very week to week. The Bears are doing what they're supposed to, dominating inferior opposition. I believe all their wins have been by double digits except last night's, which was until 30 seconds left.

High 5 · Post #237 » by **High 5** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:06 pm

The Falcons have had probably an easier schedule, but they haven't looked as good as the Bears. Dominating NFL teams is a difficult task no matter how weak they seem to be.

Post #238 » by **Maritimer** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 4:19 pm

I don't understand why the Lions refuse to lean on Leshoure. He was running well against a really tough run D. Instead, the moment he takes a first down hand off for a yard or two, they go immediately away from him and telegraph pass on 2nd and long, then 3rd and long. It's especially inexcusable at the goal line. It was painful to watch Bell fumble the dive attempt from 2 yards out, and I'm not even a Lions fan. It's pretty damning on the coaching staff if you can't have your team in a position to get 2 yards in three tries (especially when you're ignoring the one guy on the roster built to do it).

TSE · Post #239 » by **TSE** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 6:06 pm

^
Well our problems are for more complicated than not relying on Leshoure enough, there's really no easy to answer that. However we did have a completely ineffective play by running the ball on a 2nd and 1 when generally that's a great opportunity to throw a deep pass. There's not really a more statistically pass friendly down and distance situation to pass the ball than 2nd and 1, and we ran it and it didn't work and we missed an opportunity for a big play there. Although that's just one of the things that didn't work out yesterday amongst a gazillion things that didn't work.

Post #240 » by **Maritimer** » Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:14 pm

Your point is well taken. My point is simply that many problems offensively could be solved by having a more balanced attack. They lead the league in passing attempts, and are 2nd in terms of percentage of snaps that are passing plays (over 66%; New Orleans is first with an ungodly 70%). Usually the argument for an imbalance like this is the lack of a viable running game (i.e. Green Bay last year), but Leshoure has shown he's good enough to carry a reasonably heavy load. If teams actually felt that they had to put men in the box, things would open up for the screen game, play action, etc, etc (I'm stating the obvious, I know).