PG: Bears/Vikings- Offensive woes continue.

Post #1 » by **emperorjones** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:12 pm

Frustrating loss. Defense gives up 7 points on the road & the game isn't close

Post #2 » by **CBS7** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:13 pm

Playcalling.

We compiled 438 total yards. Allowed 248. Gave up 2 sacks. Averaged 6.6 yards a carry on the ground.

The game pretty much comes out to that pass play on the 3rd and 1. Bad throw, terrible playcall.

burlydee · Post #3 » by **burlydee** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:16 pm

CBS7 wrote:Playcalling.

We compiled 438 total yards. Allowed 248. Gave up 2 sacks. Averaged 6.6 yards a carry on the ground.

The game pretty much comes out to that pass play on the 3rd and 1. Bad throw, terrible playcall.

Cutler's 2 turnovers were the difference. That gave them 14 points.

Post #4 » by **CBS7** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:16 pm

Playoffs are not a guarantee. Need to go 2-1 to lock up a spot. 1-2 might get us in, but that would be pretty ****. To end up 9-7 when we started 7-1.

Post #5 » by **CBS7** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:17 pm

burlydee wrote:
CBS7 wrote:Playcalling.

We compiled 438 total yards. Allowed 248. Gave up 2 sacks. Averaged 6.6 yards a carry on the ground.

The game pretty much comes out to that pass play on the 3rd and 1. Bad throw, terrible playcall.

Cutler's 2 turnovers were the difference. That gave them 14 points.

The first wasn't on him, Jeffrey slipped.
The 2nd one was the play I was referring to. Terrible through, but he never should have threw that ball.

burlydee · Post #6 » by **burlydee** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:18 pm

there is a chance the Bears can go 10-6 and miss the playoffs. After playing with the NFL playoff machine (thanks emperorjones) I think its likely to happen if Tampa keeps winning. The Bears are well on their way to a 2nd half collapse.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #7 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:20 pm

CBS7 wrote:Playcalling.

We compiled 438 total yards. Allowed 248. Gave up 2 sacks. Averaged 6.6 yards a carry on the ground.

The game pretty much comes out to that pass play on the 3rd and 1. Bad throw, terrible playcall.

This.

As I mentioned in the game thread, we gave them a head start with their first TD drive & the first pick 6, but we were on our way to winning in the second half until that 3rd and 1 play that CBS7 mentioned in the game thread & this thread.

burlydee · Post #8 » by **burlydee** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:23 pm

burlydee wrote:there is a chance the Bears can go 10-6 and miss the playoffs. After playing with the NFL playoff machine (thanks emperorjones) I think its likely to happen if Tampa keeps winning. The Bears are well on their way to a 2nd half collapse.

I amend this statement. Tampa Bay doesn't matter. A host of factors could cause the Bears to lose out on the playoffs at 10-6.

Chaomino · Post #9 » by **Chaomino** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:28 pm

burlydee wrote:

Cutler's 2 turnovers were the difference. That gave them 14 points.

Well. Maybe our drops too.

Alhson's and Hester's drop took 14 from us.

patryk7754 · Post #10 » by **patryk7754** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:30 pm

We're going to beat the Cards for sure. 10-6 will definitely put us in the playoffs.

SportsWorld · Post #11 » by **SportsWorld** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:30 pm

This team is done. Enough said.

JDRochholz · Post #12 » by **JDRochholz** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:33 pm

SportsWorld wrote:This team is done. Enough said.

Post #13 » by **chitownsports4ever** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 9:54 pm

This offense is worse than it was 4 years ago and I dont even understand how thats possible .

We need a TE and two receivers to compliment Brandon and Alshon . Alshon and Brandon should not be the end but the beginning of the reshaping of the offense .

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #14 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 10:20 pm

FROM GAME THREAD:

chitownsports4ever wrote:
BIGGIEsmalls 23 wrote:
chitownsports4ever wrote:and when I mentioned picking up a veteran wideout in the offseason because I didnt trust Bennett or Hester people actually believed these clowns would be enough. Neither Hester nor Bennett would get run on any team that wants a legit passing attack .

A veteran was not the answer, IMO.

We have two starters for the next 4 years, at least. Alshon had an inconsistent game today (slip on first pick 6 & dropped TD pass) & injuries this season, but he's gonna be a beast. Of course, I shouldn't even have to mention our stud #1 in Marshall. We need a TE & Bennet is capable as a third WR.

The focus of the FO this offseason should be on 3 things: O-Line, Middle LB, & Tillman's eventual replacement at CB.

A veteran was the answer considering we have no receiving TE .There is not one viable passing attack in the league that has only two receivers as weapons .

Bennett and Hester are garbage we are the only team that would be trying to feature them at all. We have no TE .

Alshon is gonna be solid but its ridiculous to head into a season in a situation in which one injury and you are right back to featuring Hester and Bennett.

Now weve basically wasted another year and now we need everything you mention in addition to a TE and two more receivers .

I respect your position as a Mod, but it would be nice if you debate in a fair manner. Since I don't have the Mod powers to post in a thread that's already been locked like you just did, I got creative & figured out a way to bring your "last word" on the subject to this thread. It's only fair that I'm allowed to respond :wink:

.

Again, I disagree with the idea of a veteran WR. On top of that, what veteran was available & for how much money?

This is what we were locked into spending at the WR position this season:

Brandon Marshall: $9.3 Million

Devin Hester: $1.65 million

Johnny Knox: $1.26 Million

Earl Bennett: $1 Million

Alshon Jeffrey: $390K

Then when you throw in the salaries of Eric Weens & practice squad WRs, I simply don't see any available money for the position. We can't dedicate a ton of money at the WR position, when we have MUCH MORE pressing needs. Most notably, the O-Line.

Post #15 » by **Jake0890** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 10:23 pm

patryk7754 wrote:We're going to beat the Cards for sure. 10-6 will definitely put us in the playoffs.

You should really stop saying that. The last two games should have been easy wins, according to you, but we lost both. Nothing is guarenteed.

Chaomino · Post #16 » by **Chaomino** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 11:31 pm

What a catch by FASANO. Our TE couldn't made it even in his better dreams.

BIGGIEsmalls 23 · Post #17 » by **BIGGIEsmalls 23** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 11:44 pm

burlydee wrote:
burlydee wrote:there is a chance the Bears can go 10-6 and miss the playoffs. After playing with the NFL playoff machine (thanks emperorjones) I think its likely to happen if Tampa keeps winning. The Bears are well on their way to a 2nd half collapse.

I amend this statement. Tampa Bay doesn't matter. A host of factors could cause the Bears to lose out on the playoffs at 10-6.

Exactly. The Bears have to win out to go 11-5 & get in or they will need help to get in at 10-6.

Bulls69 · Post #18 » by **Bulls69** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 11:50 pm

Put the fork in the Bears and maybe Lovie this team does not has the heart to get off the mat the Packs are going to work us next week.

Bulls69 · Post #19 » by **Bulls69** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 11:50 pm

Put the fork in the Bears and maybe Lovie this team does not has the heart to get off the mat the Packs are going to work us next week.

Bulls69 · Post #20 » by **Bulls69** » Sun Dec 9, 2012 11:50 pm

Put the fork in the Bears and maybe Lovie this team does not has the heart to get off the mat the Packs are going to work us next week.