nfoligno

My point was simply seperating the past scheme arguments we have had, and looking at other aspects of the staff. So, what exactly is your position. You do not believe the cover two is a problem. Okay. I get that. But do you think the coaches in general are good? You say you don't think they are very good teaching technique, or in player development. From past arguments, again, sep from the overall scheme itself, I believe you question in-game playcalling. The coaches do not seem to be good motivators. How much is left? So, are you in favor of firing Lovie and/or Babich? Not necessarily today, or even this season, but after the season? Or do I misunderstand your position?

Lets not pretend anyone was a big supporter of Lovie, heard a press conference, and suddenly wants to fire him. Personally, I want him gone, and it has little to nothing to do w/ the press conference.

Sorry if I paraphrased. I didn't intend to change the meaning, but I still believe he was calling out the players. When Harris or Brown talked about how QBs were just taking 3 step drops, he flat out said they were wrong. IMHO, the entire tone of the conference was, scheme good, execution bad. You can say the coaches are included in the execution part, and I agree that in the past I have heard him say as much, but I don't recall him ever saying he or babich didn't execute. Maybe he didn't specifically call out the players, but that was sure what I took away from it. The whole tone about how the scheme is fine, but the execution is not speaks volumes to me.

There are ways to do it w/o drawing a flag. Finnigan was often in on run plays, and even blitzed and sacked Rex. W/o drawing a flag, we should have been able to get a blocker on him and lay him out.

They just aired Lovie's press conference, or at least part of it, on the Score. First thing to note was the tone. Lovie sounded very defensive. That isn't just my opinion, but the opinion of the guys on the Score as well. Anyway, some comments. One. First Q out of the box was questioning the scheme. Lovie was very quick to say the scheme is fine, and went on to say players must execute. So Lovie essentially stood up for his scheme and his coach, while throwing the players (as a whole) under the bus. Two. Q about players questioning the scheme and playcalling. Lovie "head in the clouds" Smith said no player is questioning the scheme, and quickly went to the next question. It was obvious he had no intention of going down this road, or acknowledging there even was a road here to go down. Three. One of the most sickening comments from Smith was, "We need to stay the course and things will get better". Ugh. Four. Asked about Harris/Brown's comments about how QBs are negating the pass rush w/ 3 step drops, Lovie said that isn't true. Said we see some, but we see plenty of play action and 5 step drops. Went on to talk about slants, which he said he is hearing a lot about. His response didn't really address anything. Basicallys said everyone has to deal w/ slants, and we are no different. Five. Asked about Hunter, he was very evasive. Made general comments about how we need to get Hunter healthy and back on the field, and would look at the situation then, but not before. IMHO, the fact that he didn't declare the job Hunter's when he returns says a lot. Six. Lovie said we do change things up (defense) a lot. Went on to say that even when we do change things up, players need to make plays. Thus, once again, saying coaching is fine and players are the problem. That was pretty much it. I'll say this. The more Lovie stand behind Babich and his scheme, while calling out the players for a lack of execution, the more I think we will hear players chirping about the opposite.

I just don't know what is up w/ this team. Are they really so soft and uninspired as to allow opponents to push them around? Sure looks that way watching the games. I know you are not in favor of ripping the coaches for their scheme, but how about for this? Does this not go back to the coaching staff? If the coaching staff treats the players w/ kid gloves, and is a "players coach" and you see players play soft, might there not be a connection?

Then again, if the players are able to force the coaches to make some changes, then maybe some good could come of it.

Does it really say anything more than what has already been said on this board? One. Bears offense missed Orton's leadership and Rex can't inspire the offense. Not sure that is breaking news. Two. The bears have no pass rush. Shock. No insight as to why, just a generic statement our DL can't rush the passer. Three. Lloyd has gone from surprise to disappointment. Again, not exactly a newsflash. No insight as to why Lloyd was yet again inactive. Four. he uses a quote mentioned on this board to show Mike Brown potentially questioning Babich and the coaching. Again, that is something well discussed on this board, and again, I question how much insight you got from this. Not trying to call you out, but you imply statements from this article could "help some arguments here", but all I read is re-stating much of what has already been discussed, but w/ less insight or analysis.

I see it from both sides. On one hand, I think our DL is a bit delusional if they think the QB never stands in the pocket "patting the ball" w/o a pass rush. While I agree QBs are shredding us w/ quick passes, we are also seeing more than enough snaps where the QB sits in the pocket w/ plenty of time, and still no pass rush. On the other hand, I think more than one DL is making a case they are doing what the staff is telling them to do, and it isn't working. I have seen it prior to this game, and it was in fact a discussion before the game at the bar, but have since heard on the Score and read in comments about our players saying they are instructed to rush some, then stop, stand and get their hands up in the passing lane. That was one of the comments either Harris or Brown made that has really been discussed, particularly on the Score. If they are told to stop their pass rush and try to standup and get in the passing lanes, then would you not agree there is a problem? It's sort of like back in the days of "Sacks are not that important" Greg Blache. Back then, players were told to stop the run first, stay in their lanes, and maintain control over simply taking off at the QB. If players did as they were told, and executed, the result was not likely to generate a ton of DL sacks. Are the players at fault? Understand. I think the players are partially at fault here, but I also think there is more to it than simple execution.

Dude. Do you not get that this is exactly why you continually get ripped around here. You feel Rex doesn't get a fair shake around here, and you defend him. Fine. Great. I have been on the minority side of many arguments on this board. But you don't just defend Rex. You feel the need to defend Rex by bashing Orton. You could have simply thrown out a post showing how well Rex has done over his career against GB, and made your point. But you have to take it another step and attack Orton. Enough man. Defend Rex all day and night. Rip Orton when he deserves it. But the need to tear down Orton in order to prop up Rex gets really old.

Yea, I would love to get the inside scoop on this too. In the offseason, he was declared as our #1 WR, and went from that declaration to being cut. We know about the injuries. I have read something about how he was pigeon holed at one WR position, which was going to be filled by Hester (I think) but I have never really read anything that would lead to his release. It wasn't the end of the world for me that he was cut. It doesn't shock me he is doing well elsewhere, but that doesn't mean it would have happened in Chicago. But like you, I just feel there is more to the story, and would love to one day here what it was.

Maybe the most unbelievable thing about this is, according to Vasher himself, we use our CBs to cover the outside. Vasher uses this to explain why WRs are so easily able to connect on slants, explaining that is part of the scheme. Per him, our CBs play the outside, and are supposed to (I guess) funnel the WRs inside, where the safety or LB is expected to play the slants. But if this is true, and he is excused (some) of WRs hitting on so many slants, this would at the same time all the more seem to highlight his play on those occasions you mention. If what Vasher says is true, we should not see a WR capable of those out patterns, especially when that is the only play the offense has. I liked Vasher when he was drafted, and felt he would become a very solid nickel. I never thought he would be a legit starter, and it appeared I was proven wrong. Now I wonder. W/ the play of Graham, I think it is time for a change. Graham should be starting, and Vasher moved back inside. Frankly, he was always an excellent nickel, and may regain his form there. At the same time, we may find a new solid (or better) starting CB in Graham. The question is, will the staff make this move, which field play screams for, or will the man w/ the fatter wallet continue to start?

Agreed, and that is my point. I saw pushing and shoving immediately after Finnigan would do something, but throughout the game, I expected to see one of our guys do something to retaliate. As you said, that doesn't mean immediately, when the refs are watching, but at some point. I wanted to see us run a sweep, where you know he would move up to stop the run, and see a FB or OG just waylay him.

It's just unbelievable how much hate Rex gets. The guy is trying. That's all you can ask. Sorry, but this is not pee wee football. Trying hard, or doing your best, is not enough. There are MANY players in the NFL, or not in the NFL, who may give it their all, but if their all is not enough, they do not often stick w/ the team, or even in the league.

Yea, you are right on your memory. Marinelli was his 1st choice, but among those who were actually available, Babich was the man. At least, that is what I meant. Marinelli as our next DC was brought up at the bar yesterday too. I think he would be an upgrade to Babich, but do not believe our D was be "that" much better. Personally, I think the players have lost faith in Lovie and his scheme, so even if you had a DC that called a better game, it would still be within the same scheme. So Marinelli would be an upgrade in my book, but at the same time, still be a wasted opportunity.

Okay, w/ all the negative criticism, I wanted to mention a few players I thought had a pretty good game. You know how I am a glass half full guy and can't stand all this pessimism Offense Forte - Lets start w/ the obvious. I thought this may have been his best game. Sure, he may have had others w/ better stats, but they were against cream puff defenses. Here, he faced an elite defense, and had a solid day rushing, and a great day receiving. That TD catch was a freaking thing of beauty. OL in general, but Beekman and Kreutz specific. Sure, Rex faced pressure, but there were many downs he seemed to have plenty of time. Add to that how we were able to run the ball fairly well against a great run defense, and I think the OL should get some credit. I felt Beekman was pretty solid. Kreutz has gotten a lot of flack this year, and deservedly so IMHO, but I felt he had a pretty good game. I did see him blow a block, but overall, felt he did a pretty solid job. He was helping both Garza and Beekman, especially on Haynesworth, and helping open some holes for Forte. And he is w/o question still the leader of this OL, and for the OL to play as well as it did against Tenn, I think the leader of the OL deserves some credit. Olsen - More than most, he really showed a lot of fight. When he made the catch, he really fought for the extra yards. A couple of his catches were on poor throws which he made solid catches on, then showed athleticism/balance getting some YAC, and really pushing hard for the 1st down. Defense As poorly as the D played v the pass, we did play well v the run, and a few players I felt stood out. Dusty - Starting on the DL, I was really impressed w/ Dusty yesterday. No, he did not get to the QB, but more than any other on the DL, I felt he was disruptive and penetrating in the pocket. Especially on run downs, he often got penetration, forcing the ball carrier to change direction, often into the waiting arms of Briggs or another. IMHO, Dusty's play inside was very noticable yesterday. Briggs - He showed a solid ability to fight and get off blocks and take the ball carrier down. I think he had a couple tackles for loss, and really showed a great motor yesterday. Mike Brown - It would be easy to say he played poorly as he is the FS, in a cover two scheme, and we were shredded through the air, but I don't think we played a lot of cover two yesterday, and think Brown spent most of the day in the box. I would have expected Payne to play in the box, but it was far more often Payne playing the one deep position, while Brown was run blitzing and playing in the box. Brown was a big reason we shut down their run game. Graham - He made some mistakes, but is looking like our best CB. It didn't seem like his man was often targetted in the air, and he made numerous plays v the run.

I don't think Hester slowed up, or at least not nearly as you are making out. They showed the replay numerous times, and he seemed to keep up his stride all the way through. It was simply a bad pass, plain and simple. Regarding the play w/ Booker, I felt the same thing until watching replays. My first reaction, like you, was the WR needs to become a DB and ensure the CB has no shot on the ball. Then it showed replays, and there was really little Booker could do. They were running down the sideline, and Booker was moving/breaking for the sideline, expecting the pass to be high and outside. He positioned his body for such while running in stride. The ball was short. Way short. Booker simply had not way of not only stopping, but totally turning his body in a way to affect the play. The pass simply took Booker completely out of the play on that one. It appeared they weren't getting open a lot of the time too, since Rex sometimes had plenty of pocket time yet couldn't find an open receiver, but I maybe that was just Rex. On the TV they don't show the secondary so it's hard to tell. Someone at the bar said the same thing, but then I and others pointed out how the same was said for years, then Orton starts, and suddenly our WRs are open. IMHO, more likely is our WRs were open, but Rex was unable to find them. I too used to believe the WRs were a big part of the problem, but now I think it was just Rex. I have a feeling that if Orton were under center, we would have seen open WRs. Maybe that is not fair, but Orton has seemed capable of finding open WRs thus far this year, so I just find it a bit hard to believe suddenly our WRs are blanketed, like the old days.

In 3+ seasons w/ the Bears, Bradley never had more than 18 catches in a season. I don't think he could even get active this year, and then we cut him. He picked up w/ KC, and has very quickly stepped in and stepped up. This past week, Bradley had 9 for 81 and a score. In the last three weeks, he has 18-188-2. Not bad for a guy who could not even get active for us.

One thing I haven't really seen mentioned is Tennessee cornerback Cortland Finnegan. This is a guy who has a bit of a rep as being an ass. I think his own teamates (including team leader Bulluck) has even gotten into fights w/ him. Anyway, front the get-go, Finnegan was in our players faces, pushing shoving, late hitting, etc. I saw very little from our guys. I realize the 2nd guy draws the flag, and some (maybe much) of his antics are likely intended to get into the minds of our players, but still. At some point, when a guy is simply pushing you around, do you not have to do something? Yea, we had a couple guys here and there push back, but in a game like football, I would think you could really get some payback w/ a player that is showing you up. This is a physical game, and Finnegan was throwing down a guantlet and picking fights w/ any wearing blue and orange. I simply saw very little response. It made me thing of years ago w/ Rudd show-boated his way for a score against us, and rather than make him pay for that, we essentially laid down. Throughout the game, I really expected to see Kreutz drill the dude on a block, or Clark pancake him, or Booker to knock the snot out of him. Nothing. Maybe I am making too much out of a little thing, but our team simply seems soft, and this is yet another example of such.

Couple points. First, regarding prep and motivation. I do think that is the DC, and would point out something Hampton said a week or two ago. A caller asked how much stock should fans put into the concept of a coach motivating players. Hampton said that coaches can do little to motivate player once the game begins, but that coaches should be working on this throughout the week. He talked about how Ditka/Buddy Ryan would begin on Wednesday motivating the players for the upcoming game. He talked about how coaches do little things all week to get the players hyped up for the game. He talked about how Rivera did a good job of this. He went on to talk about how Babich does not. W/ Babich, players just go through the motions throughout the week, and then expect to be able to just "turn it on" Sunday, but are unable. He really went off on Babich in the sense of motivation, but for his inability to do it throughout the week as opposed to on Sundays. Second, regarding a new DC. I agree that simply firing Babich and hiring another DC who will run Lovie's scheme does little to help. My hope is that we see Angelo step in, as he did w/ Jauron/Shoop, and insisnt on hiring a new assistant who has more autonomy. Angelo was not happy w/ Shoop, who was running an offense as Jauron wanted, and insisted on a change. That is what I am hoping happens again, as I do not see us firing Lovie. I would further point out the following. According to all sources, at least that I have read, Lovie originally wanted to hire Babich (I believe) to be the DC, but Angelo (among others) said no. They basically forced Lovie to hire Rivera. Rivera was not a Lovie guy, but our defense looked good running a combo of Lovie's scheme, buy w/ Rivera mixing it up better. Why not see that again.

Hey, I think its both. I think the players are not sold on Lovie's scheme, but also question Babich's playcalling. Watching the games, I do not see Lovie making play-by-play defensive calls. That still appears to be in Babich's control. So I think the players are questioning both the playcalling and scheme, and thus are questioning both. I am not intending to villify the wrong guy. I think both are a problem, and ultimately, I place the blame at Lovie's feet. It's his scheme, and he choose the DC. Worse, he let a successful DC goes, I believe, because he wanted to do things different from what Lovie wanted. If given the choice, I think many players would like to see Rivera return.

Reading the post-game quotes, it definitely sounds like our defensive players are "turning", but the question is, are they turning on each other or the staff, or maybe both. When asked about the pass rush, Tommie Harris provides us this, ''Do you understand football?'' tackle Tommie Harris said. ''How long was he in the pocket? How long did he hold the ball? Yeah, he was quick throwing the whole time, so something has to give. ''It has nothing to do with pressure. We're not Superman. If he drops back and he's patting the ball, then you talk to us about pressure. But we're doing our job.'' Alex Brown added, "When you give up 7-yard passes, 10-yard passes and guys are running free and unblocked ... we're just not getting there," defensive end Alex Brown said. "I'm going to stop here before I say something I regret." Also heard Alex Brown say in an interview (heard it on the Score) We did our job. We stood up when we were supposed to. So are Harris and Brown calling out our CBs, or the coaches who direct how the CBs are supposed to play? Also, regarding Brown's 2nd comment, I have noticed all year that our DL often seems to take X number of steps attacking the QB, then just stop and standup. I guess they are trying to get their hands into the passing lane, but at the same time, they quit on rushing the passer. Never understand that, but really question it after Brown's comment. Vasher seemed to absolutely point the finger at coaches, Vasher mentioned after the Lions game how the league knows how Bears cornerbacks take outside position in the red zone that invites the slant pass. Then Gage beat him on a slant pass for a TD on third down. Why not adjust the scheme if it's so well-known in those situations? "I can't get into that," Vasher said. "That's a coaching-staff decision into how we play and what we play. We just have to step up and make plays." He went on to also say, ''That's the defense,'' Vasher said. ''That's all I can say really.'' Thats the defense. To me, when he says defense, he is talking about the scheme as a whole, not just the personnel or defensive unit. Then you get Mike Brown. When asked about the lack of plays, "I don't know either," Mike Brown said. "I'm a player. I just go out there and play." Again, he is pointing out he is a player and just plays, which to me implies you have to look beyond the players to see the problem. On the other hand, Lovie seems to call out the players, often saying the scheme is fine and the players just have to better execute and make plays. IMHO, we are going to hear/read more and more. Vasher and Tillman are getting grilled in the press, and if they feel the problem is the system they have to work within, I doubt they are going to deal well w/ being made scape-goats. Similar, the more we read about our ineffective pass rush, the more I think we are going to see the DL speak out. This could get ugly real fast. IMHO, the players no longer buy into the system, and do not have faith in the coaches, and comments like the above support that believe. The more and more crap slung this week by the press, i think could cause more and more comments to slip from the players. Hang on. This could be one hell of an interesting ride.

I think you are confusing simple frustration and Rex bashing as a Rex v Kyle argument/debate. At this point, i think there is only one poster who still truly supports Rex. If anything, the only Rex debate at this point is whether he is even a valuable backup QB, which I think is a legit debate.

I have wondered for a while, and Vasher's comments seems to support, that our players have lost confidence in our staff/scheme. Thus both can be blamed. I do believe the scheme is a problem, but if the players do not buy into the scheme, the problem is only compounded. I don't think I have ever been a fan of Lovie's. Even when he took us to the SB, I honestly felt it was more in spite of Lovie than due to Lovie. And it has only gone down hill since. I do however put more fault w/ Babich than you. While I understand your point that Lovie should step in, the reality is Babich is our DC, and I think his playcalling is simply poor. I am not a fan of Lovie's scheme, which Babich runs, but I also think the greater issue is in-game playcalling. Too often is seems the opponents runs the perfect play to beat whatever defensive playcall we have for that down. Credit the OC, but I think you also have to knock the DC for the playcall. But, due in great part to our offense this year, we are likely to have a winning season, and maybe even playoffs, if not division title. Hard to see us firing Lovie after that. My only hope is that Angelo steps in, orders Lovie to fire Babich, and more importantly, to hire a DC that isn't simply a yes man for Lovie. We need a DC that has more of a free hand to run "his" scheme, vs having to try and do whatever Lovie tells him to do.

What the hell happened to our pass rush? IMHO, this is an even greater disappointment than Rex' performance, and that is due to expectations. Tenn has a very good OL, but come on. I am sure players are part of the problem, but... One. Maybe it is just me, but it seemed like we would blitz on 1st and 2nd down, but then back off and just rush 4 on 3rd downs. I'll never understand this. Those 3rd and long downs is when most teams decide to tee off on the QB. Two. Effectiveness of the blitz. Maybe someone can explain it to me, but why did our run blitz seem so effective while our pass blitz was so ineffective. The down where Urlacher and Brown blew up the run play was obvious, but a key in our stopping the run was how much penetration our run blitz got. But why, on passing downs, did our run blitz seem so ineffective. Three. One final thing I noticed that I thought was killing us, and also may help explain a tad why Urlacher is looking so weak this year. When the ball is snapped, Urlacher immediatly runs at the LOS. Basically, he is run blitzing the line. But if the QB keeps the ball, Urlacher stops and starts to backpeddle. Problem is, he is now in no-mans land. He is out of position to do anything vs the pass as he is too close to the LOS, and just trying to run backward into coverage area. I don't know if Urlacher is simply no longer capable of reading run plays, or if this is by design. As we were playing an elite run offense, I tend to think it was by design. My thing was, why not just have him continue on the blitz. He is out of position to be any help in coverage, so why not allow him to simply continue on at the QB.