balta1701-A

The Bears D isn't likely to force more than 1 or two 3 and outs all day, IMO. They want the defense off the field? The offense needs to match the Packers drives. It's really that simple.

Mike Pereira ‏@MikePereira 2h i didn't think that was enough for a foul in CHI -- didn't lead with shoulder, helmet

That's impressive work if that's autocorrect.

Same old Rodgers. Wait..

‏@LaurenceWHolmes 52s OUT for the game. RT @pkaragianis: @LaurenceWHolmes @ZachZaidman any word on nature/severity of Mills injury?

Man, a 15 yard net punt after a 4th and 3. That's a place where it would seem sensible to go for it if you had any confidence in your offense.

Can anyone recommend a website that will likely be streaming this game?

Which is why I generally think the 3-4 is a bad idea unless you have a good plan for how to get one.

Paea is pretty darn small for a 3-4 DT as well, and frankly his record of health doesn't inspire confidence as the key guy in the middle of that defense.

I don't think Johnson seems like a big enough guy to play a 3-4 DT slot, and honestly, even the best 3-4 DT's don't get after the quarterback much. That's not what you want from a DT in that scheme...in that scheme, the DT's job is to "Not be moved" so that the defense can't run right up the middle. Guys like Vince Wilfork in that scheme get 2-3 sacks per season and still make the pro bowl, because "getting after the QB" isn't the job of a 3-4 DT. This is why I don't think that the 3-4 is a good strategy...it's so hard to find one of those really good, run-stopping DT's. You literally can't use a 4-3 DT in that scheme, you get eaten alive on the ground. I don't know who else is available but if you want to make that switch...Raji is a free agent this offseason. Johnson seems like a good pick for the Bears but as a 4-3 DT actually.

Link that makes this tougher.

Until I'm given a reason to say something else, I'll quote the Packers defensive players in saying "Same old Jay". I'll await being proven otherwise.

How is Lacey?

What the team does with Peppers might well be the biggest decision of the offseason (QB included). Cutting him leaves something like $7.5 million in dead cap space to pay out his bonus, keeping him costs even more than that. I'd have to guess they'll do something to restructure him again to try to bring both numbers down, but maybe without moving as much into the future. Who knows though.

Wasn't that the game that the Packers secondary players were quoted saying "Same old Jay" after beating him?

My apologies...I was in San Francisco all last week so I couldn't make the thread!

Win out and youre in.

Well, the Bears are more than on the ropes and they get a division-leading team Monday night.

There's a chance the bears could have (gasp) actual defensive tackles active in this game!

Say hi to the rest of the Long family. Bears have to win this game to stay in the playoff hunt.

They're pretty much all big games now aren't they?

Welcome back Jay.

Yeah, this would be a big game for the beaten-up Bears.

GB is nearly as banged-up as Chicago, the only difference is they haven't lost their QB.

Depends on the strength of schedule over that time period and what your team thought it was beforehand. A playoff-caliber team facing a weaker portion of its schedule might hope to go 4-0 over a stretch. With a backup QB you might drop that to 3-1. A playoff-caliber team facing a stronger portion of its schedule might have hoped to go 2-2 over a stretch, with the backup QB you're talking 1-3 or hopefully not 0-4. A borderline playoff team/borderline playoff missing team might have hoped to go 3-1 over a stretch unless they're playing really good or bad teams. A backup QB might drop that to 2-2 if they do an adequate job. The Hanie debacle went from a situation where the Bears might have won 3 of their next 4 games to a 4 game losing streak. That was clearly unacceptable. Way too many teams have guys on their roster who can step in and do better than that.