nfoligno

Good way to look at it. When looking back at the best teams, or best SB winners, it may then matter. Otherwise, not so much. Injuries are part of the game. Every teams suffers them. Often they say the team that wins the SB is the team that was either (a) healthiest and/or ( best able to compensate for their injuries.

Regarding TB, right now, they are looking easily like one of the worst teams in the league, and could be in contention for the top pick in the draft. They were able to run the ball in week one, but since, their leading rushers notched 32 and 15 yards, and that 15 yarder was their QB. Leftwhich has been replaced, and they are now in full rebuild mode w/ Josh Johnson under center. I am not sure I have seen futility like their last game, w/ 58 yards passing and 28 total yards rushing, again, 15 of that by the QB. 86 total yards of offense. Wow! They have also given up 34, 33 and 24 points. Luckily for them, they get Wash and Carolina (2), but otherwise, I am not sure I see a win. TB should easily be a top 5 pick, and could be the #1. Det is not as bad as some think, IMHO. They lost to two very good teams, and then beat Wash. They have a good (though rookie) QB, very solid RB and one of the top WRs in the NFL. Their OL and defense suck, but w/ the QB-RB-WR combo they have, they are dangerous enough to put points on the board IMHO.

I agree sacks are over-rated. Applying consistent pressure is a far greater issue, and I think our pressure (whether by the DL or blitz) has been far more consistent than last year, though that is not saying much. In our first game, Cutler was sacked two times, but he seemed to be pressured nearly every snap. Those 2 sacks are nice, but I guarantee you the DC was far more happy about the constant pressure, which also led to numerous hurried throws and picks. To me, I absolutely think our D is playing better. Sometimes execution, and tackling, is not there, but overall, I like several things I have seen this year I did not see last year. Last year, we blitzed a ton, and have done so again this year, but the difference IMHO is our blitzes this year have been far more creative and effective. last year, it seemed like we blitzed up the gut every time. It was predictable and fairly easy to block. This year, we have blitzed from every angle, and it has been more effective. Last year, our DE's nearly always took wide angles to the QB. When you only pass rush one way, you make it far easier to block. This year, I have seen more stunts and more inside moves. Wale used his early success on the outside to set up a sweet swim move inside to pressure the passer. That is the sort of thing you just didn't see last year. Adjustments have been big for us this year as well, IMHO. Last year, we would get burned early, but made no adjustments and gave up the same sort of plays all day. This year, we seem to be making adjustments to avoid any early mistakes. I personally am still not a fan of our defense, or at least not of our scheme. I simply do not like the cover two, or the zone defense we so often run. At the same time, while we do give up plays, we do not allow many big plays and tighten up near the red zone. The reality is, we held GB, and did so when our offense was coughing it up often. We held a very good Pitt team. We gave up more than I would have liked to Seattle, but at the same time, still not as much as we may have last year. I am not a big fan of our defense, but I think it is better than last year, and w/ our offense better, good enough to win.

Sorry, I just don't see it. When we were in the SB the other year, if it turned out that Payton Manning was injured, and we won the game against Indy's backup QB, I doubt seriously you would complain. There would not be an asterick in the record books. The parade would still run through chicago, and the fans would still be very proud of having won the SB. Beating an injured team may not be a true representation of a team, but so what. When we beat Pitt, did you dismiss the win as they were w/o their star defensive player? When we lose our next game, will our opponent feel it was less meaningful as they beat us w/o Urlacher? All those years we had lost our starting QB, did teams think less of their victory? No. If we beat an injured team, it may not reflect a true representation of our team, but at the same time, it does chalk up another victory, and sorry, but that is what matters.

I don't know how much they dropped back in '05 to play the run. IMHO, the key difference after teams were able to see Rex on tape was, they began to attack him. In the first month, they stacked the box to play the run. After that, they still stacked the box, but instead of run blitzes, they were pass blitzing. Rex simply was not able to deal w/ the pressure. W/ Cutler, frankly, I am surprised by how teams are attacking us. I think it has more to do w/ the receivers than Cutler though. I think the stacked boxes are more a slap in the face of our receivers than Cutler.

I agree about Beekman, I don't know what the coaching staff's problem with him is. Maybe they've got Omiyale on a long leash because of his contract and his physical potential, but if he keeps playing like he has been, they need to get Beekman back in there by midseason at the latest. Beekman's not spectacular, but he looked perfectly fine last season, and he's much, much more consistent than Omiyale has been so far. I remember last offseason, prior to some injuries, the coaches said Beekman was too small to play OG, and felt he fit best as a center. He is 6'2, but I think it has more to do w/ body type and such, rather than just what the roster may show. Anyway, they were forced to start him due to injuries, but I never felt they liked him at OG, and through this past offseason, it seemed like they were on a mission to replace him. Omiyale is getting the long leash treatment due to his contract, but also because I just don't think the staff liked Beekman at OG. I agree that Forte has looked a little slower than last season. I hope that the hamstring from preseason isn't still bothering him. That said, from what I've seen this season, he's had much worse blocking than he did last year. Honestly, I sort of hope it is the hammy. At least then we could point to a legit reason for his lack of quickness and power, and further would have reason to believe it will turn around. My fear is he isn't injured. I mean, we've got a right tackle with a back injury and marginal upper-body strength, whose main technique problems coming out of college were his hand punch and use of leverage. We have a 6'7" left tackle who's admitted that he's struggling to get low enough into his stance due to age/knee injuries. From what I've seen thus far, both Pace and Williams are MUCH better when they can stand up and deflect pass rushers out wide than they are when they have to get low and push a guy backward. On top of that, we've got a left guard who's still learning the position. Last year's line was awful in pass protection (although maybe Cutler could have made them look better) but they were cohesive and they were strong enough to do an adequate job in the running game. IMHO, you are arguing in theory more than reality. In theory, no question there is reason to believe Pace and Williams would do a better job pass protecting then run blocking. But that just isn't what I have seen. Pace simply looks too slow getting out of his stance, and is basically getting beaten off the snap. On the other side, Williams really isn't fairing much better. I think part of Williams problem may still be power and strength. I think opponents are using speed to get him on his backfeet and offbalance, and thus are more easily able to beat him. My point was never to say these two are run blocking better than pass blocking, but only to say they have sucked at both. You also say our OL adequate in run blocking, but awful in pass protection. Honestly, I think our OL pass protected last year better than what I have seen thus far. Maybe that is not fair, as this OL should improve (key word there is should) but based simply on what I have seen this year, I think this unit pass protects worse than last year. Considerably worse. If Orton had to face the immediate pressure Cutler is, he may not have lasted past a couple games. In terms of run blocking, I agree it was better, but that is also a tad relative. Tait was actually a pretty good and effective run blocker for us last year. He simply was awful in pass protection. If I were to go position by position: LT - Pace is better run blocker. About equal in pass protection, which was really bad. LG - Beekman was better at both, though less so in pass protection. C - Still Kreutz LG - I actually think Garza is the one player looking better. Frankly, on quite a few plays he has been flat out impressive. LT - Both stink w/ the pass, but Tait was a decent enough run blocker. So yes, we did run block better last year, but lets not pretend we did well. That is a relative compliment. So many of Forte's runs were runs he created when the hole wasn't there. Well, the holes still isn't there, but he hasn't been capable of creating like he did last year. And it does still bother me to see AP burst through the line looking so much better than Forte. Maybe Forte could be doing better, but he looks like he's struggling to adjust to the changes in the o-line. The play against Seattle where he actually had to shove Chris Williams out of his way really spoke volumes: Forte was expecting a downfield block, Williams got stonewalled, and Forte ended up running into the back of his blocker. As much as I hated St. Clair and Tait in pass protection last season, there's no question in my mind that either of them makes that block and springs Forte. First, I would agree Tait makes the block. Not so sure about St. Clair. Second, I would counter that last year Forte doesn't run up the back of his blocker, but makes a cut into the space.

While there is no question our OL has been bad, I do not think that is the entire problem. Forte just doesn't look good this year. Lets not pretend our OL was good last year. Forte made them look better than he was. So often last year, there were no holes, but Forte through vision and burst, bounced away from the wall and found a hole. This year, he just looks slow, and isn't able to bounce away like he did. Did you notice, in both the last game as well as against Pitt, when AP came in, he immediately had a solid run. He burst through the OL and picked up solid yardage, and looked considerably faster than Forte in doing so. There is no question our OL has been bad, but I also think Forte is struggling regardless. I disagree where you say our OL is better in pass protection this year. I think that is simply the Cutler factor. Cutler is on the move nearly every snap due to pressure, but is better able to keep plays alive w/ his feet. The fact that pressure is getting to Cutler damn near immediate shows our OL is not pass protecting, but due to his ability to scramble and throw on the run, it is not as obvious as it would be w/ a less mobile QB like orton. I was never a fan of Williams move to RT, but I didn't expect it to be this bad. I expected him to struggle in run blocking some, and w/ power DEs. Strength and run blocking were draft day concerns on him. He was considered/called by many a finese OT. What is really concerned though for me is, he has struggled agaisnt speed rushers as much as w/ power guys. As for Shaffer, he was getting killed in preseason, and when you consider he was facing 2nd and 3rd string DEs, that is really scary. On Omiyale, I don't know if it is technique, or maybe he simply isn't good. Remember, he wasn't exactly a starter prior to joining the bears. I just hope we don't waste the season trying to find out, and make the move to Beekman sooner, rather than later. Beekman may not be great, but I think he is significantly better than Omiyale.

I get the impression Pisa could play this week, but I think we hold him out until after the bye to make sure he is 100%, and not risk making the injury worse. I just disagree on Roach. There is no question he is faster and more athletic than Hunter, but I think he is slower to read plays. Thus, while he may be faster, he is breaking on the ball later and his greater speed is a wash. Also, I think he has struggles even more than Hunter to get off his blocks. At the end of the day, neither are a great option, but looking forward, I do not see Roach as our future. Remember, he was given the SLB job last year, but didn't do well, and the staff even said so. His play last year prompted us to go out and add a FS. The player I would like to see us try and develop more is Williams, who is never going to get a shot if we continues to sit behind Briggs.

One, regarding our LB situation, I think a big part of our problem is our being down not one, but two LBs. I think once Pisa returns, our MLB will look better. Two, I have always ripped DM, but feel he is actually playing pretty decent, and significantly better than our alternatives. What plays are you thinking of where DM has blown it? Against the Steelers, there was the short TD it looked like he blew, but even the coaches said that was not on him. I believe it was Roach who had the assignment of the TE, but bit on the run fake. DM was not responsible, but recognized it (a hair to late) and tried to make the play. In doing so, he was in the picture and looked at fault, but was really not. To me, DM has shown a greater level of awareness this year. He is breaking on the ball a heck of a lot faster than Payne ever did, and broken up a couple passes that our other FS options just don't have the speed to make. He has also been pretty good in run support, and I love watching him blitz. I am not saying he is a great FS, and maybe not even a good one at this point, but I would argue he has shown significant improvement since the last time he played FS, and further, has been significantly better than our other options. To me, many plays you might try to pin on DM are far more about our scheme and QB/WR simply picking us apart while we are in a zone.

Because all that matters at the end of the day is winning the game, and any and all advantages a team can get is a good thing. If we are playing Minny in Chicago, I am hoping for horrible weather and field conditions so AP slips on his arce all day. It isn't that I fear Kevin Smith so much as his being out helps the bears, and regardless whether we need it or not, I cheer for anything that helps the bears. For this specific case, we are missing two LBs, and are working to adjust, especially in the middle. If we don't have to face a very good RB right now, that is a good thing. I hope that after the bye, we will have things better in place, but while we work on that, I have no problem facing an easier challenge.

We literally had to turn the volume down at the bar due to the crowd being so damn loud. All week long I read and heard about the home field advantage, but sort of dismissed it. That was a mistake. As injured as Seattle was, most of their injuries were on defense, and that stadium is hardest on our offense.

Preparation is different than adjustment. I agree that the adjustments have been better, specifically on singular offensive plays, but the preparation has been bad. No argument. The two are obviously different. The point was only to show that while we are not doing great in one area, I think a lot of credit must be shelled out for the other. Also, on the point of prep, just throwing this out there, but how much might be due to our coaches not realizing the level (positive or negative) of player execution heading into a game. For example. Heading into Seattle, do you not think it understandable Turner wanted to establish the run? We had struggled ourselves, but we now facing a team that stinks against the run. So I think it very understandable we enter that game w/ a game plan to run the ball. Well, due to Seattle loading the box, our OL not blocking, our TE/WRs not blocking, our RB wearing cement shoes, we are not executing the plan. We don't throw it away after one series, and frankly, shouldn't. But then you find yourself beyond the 1st quarter, and the offense has done squat. You adjust, and suddently move the ball. The point here is, as much as we tend to blame Turner, it may not always be pre-game prep. It was totally understandable to believe we could run on Seattle. That isn't poor planning. That is simply poor execution. Maybe we did see them in the first game, but I really expected it to be more prevalent. This is regarding 2 TE packages. I think you are not allowing for changing circumstances. (a) We lost Clark. As much as I, and so many, like Davis, he is not as experienced as Clark. It was our having Clark and Olsen that contributed to our using 2 TE packages. Once we lost Clark, we lost a key reason for running such a package. ( The other key reason we started using 2 TE packages last year was a lack of WRs. Simply put, our 2nd best TE was probably better than a #1 WR, and definitely better than our WR depth. Thus, in trying to get our best receivers on the field, that meant playing both TEs at the same time. But this year, we have had WRs stepping up. That means a huge reason to use 2 TEs is gone. Further, Knox is our 3rd WR, and has been on fire. If we use 2 TEs, that means Knox is taking a seat. So I think numerous circumstances have changed that you are not really taking into account. Personally, I think rather than knocking Turner for not using more 2 TE packages, you should give him credit for not sticking w/ the plan, regardless of circumstances, and planning on the fly ways to better utilize the WR talent that is emerging. © I have seen us still use 2 TE packages, but they are not as noticable, as we are having to keep a TE back to block. It is more noticable when both TEs are running routes, but due to our weak OL, we are having to keep one (or two) Tes back to held protect. The reason I expected what our passing game has done, is that I'm one of the few people who have said for several years that the WRs were not that bad, and it was more a by-product of a weak combination of OC/QB/OL. I actually thought Bennet was good because A-You just don't rip up the SEC if you are not good, and B-He has great hands. Also, I thought Devin Hester would improve, and Davis isn't nearly as bad as most think. And, to be quite honest, I was optimistic about someone stepping up from the rest (we're lucky to have had Knox do so). I was among the group also that said, once we got Cutler, to pass on those veteran WRs. At the same time, I also thought it would take time. I did not expect Cutler to be moving the ball around to many different receivers so easily, so early. That is something I just don't think is often enough factored. Chemistry takes time, and when a QB/WR lack chemistry, they lack consistency. But Cutler is showing chemistry w/ several receivers much sooner than I think any would have expected. Not just Olsen, who he befriended in the offseason, but guys like Knox and Aromashadu. Bennett is obvious from college, but he is starting to really show something w/ Hester too. Look. You and I in so many ways see eye-to-eye on offense, and in particular w/ regard to OL and QB. At the same time, I just question having such lofty expectations from game one. 3 new starters on OL. New QB. One new starting WR, who lacks much of any game experience, and yet is light years more experienced than his depth. New starting TE, who has experience, but comes w/ all time high expectations and a greater role. I really question any who expected this offense to instantly gel, and to look great from the start. Thus far, I think the passing game is ahead of where it should have been reasonably expected to be, while the run game is FAR behind. Agreed. The OL has not made it easy on Turner, but he has still made some questionable calls during games that have made me shake my head. Not to mention the fact that he's still fairly predictable (but I'm liking new wrinkles like the roll out to the TE on third-and-short.) Lets be honest. Every coach in the league makes questionable and/or predictable play calls. Funny, story, at least for me, while watching this last game. Remember the play, it was like 3rd and 5, and we threw deep to Knox down the left sideline. I think you would agree that was not predictable, and yet a friend was ripping Turner for going deep when we should have been looking to pickup a first. A series or two later, it is 3rd and short, and we try to run for a first down, and a fan at the bar complains that Turner never takes a shot deep on 3rd down. I waste no time to point out we just did that, but the point is, Turner can't win. If he goes for it on 3rd down, he gets ripped. If he tries to run for a 1st on 3rd and short, he gets ripped. The main reason though he is getting ripped is not the playcall, but the poor execution. I guarantee you, if Cutler hits Knox in stride, my friend never questions the call. If we picked up that later 3rd and short run, that call does not get questioned. This year, we have run quite a few WR screens. It was not long ago that play was ridiculed by fans, but this year, it has been a pretty good play for us, usually good for at least 3 or 4 yards (equal to a run) and often going for quite a bit more. Thus, because it is working, fans no longer seem to mind the WR screen so much. So sure, there are still plenty of times our playcalling can be questioned, but (a) I simply argue that is the case for every teams coaches and ( the real issue I think is the play not being executed more than the playcall itself. Hey, at least we have not seen a quick handoff to the FB:)

I expected more from this season. 1-I thought the Bears should beat GB, come close to Pitt, and hammer Seattle. 2 of the 3 didn't happen. (a) you expedted to "hammer" seattle prior to the season, after after you saw all the injuries. If prior to the season, I would refer you to their track record at home. Many teams talk about a home advantage, but Seattle truly has one. As for expecting to beat GB, in GB, I wonder about that. Maybe that was your prediction, but GB was expected to be a good team, so I am not sure why you felt we "should" beat GB in GB. 2-I expected the Bears to have more fire and better motivation. This has sorta happened. I think it has been there. Maybe w/ some more than others, but I have seen more attitude this season. 3-I wanted the Bears to be better prepared, with better gameplans suited towards their opponent's weaknesses. This has not happened. While I agree, I might also counter. IMHO, we have made adjustments better than in recent memory, both on offense and defense. I have thus far not been a big fan of our starts, but do credit our coaches for adjustments, which is something many of us have harped on for years. Also, on offense, I would add that it is pretty tough to "call a good game" when your OL is this bad and you can't run the ball. 4-I hoped for an OL that would improve from last year when it was below average at best, and I screamed all year for an upgrade. The OL seemingly got patched together, but obviously didn't get upgraded. This has, yet again, been the offenses biggest deficiency. With better OL play, this team would have a near prolific offense. You can me both. If it wasn't for Cutler, due to this OL, we would be a joke on offense. Not only does this OL not look upgraded from last year, but it actually looks worse. 5-I kept hearing about these double TE sets to maximize the potential of Clark, Olsen, and the new guy. We haven't really seen this that much. Well, I think we saw plenty of double TE sets in the first game, but then Clark went down. Even in the 2nd game, i think there were a lot of double TE sets, as both Olsen and Davis were seen quite a lot. But I think this last game went away from that a bit, but I also think part of that reason is our WRs stepping up. Remember, a big reason we were using double TE formations was our 2nd TE was better than most any WR on our team. As our WRs step up, the need to use 2 TE formations goes down. The positives to this season are: -Hester is doing well in his progression. Agreed. May not be a true #1 WR, but at least he looks like a legit WR, as opposed to a return man we are trying to play at WR. -Cutler is the stud we all wanted. Hell yes. -The other WRs are coming along well, with Knox and Bennett proving themselves on the field. Freaking amazing what a different a QB can make. Does anyone think our WRs would look this good w/ Orton behind center? -The Defensive scheme seems to be focused on blitzing more and getting to the QB more, something missing from before. We actually blitzed a ton under Babich, but what I have noticed is our mixing it up a lot more. Used to, about all I saw was inside, up the middle blitzes. Now, we blitz from every angle, which I think is great. Simply put, our blitzes are more often effective. -Afalava has been a great addition. Besides afalava on defense, I have also been impressed by DM. He has been a whipping boy for some time, but while still a far cry from a healthy Mike Brown, I think he has held his own and made some good plays. I expected more from the offense to be quite honest. I can understand expecting more from the OL and run game, but I am not sure why you even expected as much as we have gotten from our passing game. Run game has not been as good as expected, but I think the passing game has been better, thus the offense overall has lived up to expectations. The defense is doing fairly well all things considered. The offense, however, specifically the play calling and the OL play, has left a lot to be desired. I know you flat out dislike Turner, but I just don't know how great you can call a game when the OL is this bad. I have actually been impressed by his doing so many things to counter an aggressive defense against a weak OL. He has been using a lot of screens, both WR and RB. He has WRs running more slants. Like I said before, I have not been impressed w/ early play calling, but I also think much of that is simply due to our players inability to execute, and thus Turner having to adjust during the games, which he seems to be doing fairly well.

My take. 1) While Cutler is looking like the strong armed QB we hoped, the OL and run game are far worse than feared. The OL worked on in the offseason, but thus far, two additions (Pace, Omiyale) have been awful, and our 1st round pick now at RT has not been much better. And Forte, who as you said entered the season w/ huge expectations, has been pretty flat. So as good as our offense may have been overall, questions of our OL and lack of run game put many in fear how long we can continue to win w/ a one dimensional offense. 2) The defense is an enigma. Watching the game, you just feel like we are getting owned. It feels like opponents move the ball at will. Wrs are wide open and RBs find big holes. Then you look up at the score board and the defense simply has not given up the point is feels like, but that feeling of a weak defense is hard to dismiss, despite the score board. 3) That first game is just hard to get passed. You mentioned this yourself. Before the season, if someone said 2-1 after 3, most would have agreed. Few would have predicted a 3-0 record w/ games @ GB, against the superbowl defending champs and in Seattle, maybe the toughest house to play in. Nothing wrong w/ a 2-1 record, but the manner in which we lost that first game is hard to get out of minds. IMHO, at the end of the day, the biggest reason is a feeling we lack individual parts, despite the team as a whole winning. When you watch the defense, few individuals stand out, but as a whole, we just do not allow many points. On offense, the OL and RB have been so weak, that even the excitement of our passing game can cary only so far. We have won two games, but when you go through and grade individual areas, it just seems like you end up w/ a lot of below average grades. So the individual parts just do no seem strong, but the whole ends up stronger. Its just hard to get past the perception of those individual units.

I am not so sure we win that first game if Orton is the QB. Yes, I get the reasoning. Cutler turned it over, while Orton would have avoided such. But.... One. Cutler was under incredible pressure in that game. Most every snap, Cutler was running for his life. While you might argue Orton could have avoided the picks, I would counter that by arguing he was not have moved the offense either. Cutler threw of 277 and a TD. As much as he killed the offense on some drives, his arm also did move the offense on others. I was a fairly big Orton fan, but Orton just didn't have the scramble ability Jay does, thus he would have been taking sacks or throwing it away (to avoid those picks) and thus he would not have been able to move the ball. Part of we lost was Cutler, but at the same time, part of why we were in the game was Cutler. If Orton were under center, I am not sure we get so much as a FG. Two. Everyone assumed Orton would have avoided the turnovers, but are we so sure? That was the worst OL performance I think I have ever witnessed. We had no run game, which Orton had the benefit of last year. Also, while Orton was always considered to better protect the ball, I think fans forget that last year, he had 5 games w/ 2 or more picks. So if Orton were under center (a) I think he may well have had a couple picks himself and ( I question whether he would have been able to move the ball, allowing us to score at all. As much as Cutler hurt us, he also did manage several drives, which I just question whether Orton would have been capable of doing.

One. I think the Bush comment was most likely a joke. You know. Washington team and everyone in Washington (run now by democrats) blames everything on Bush. Two. At least here in Dallas, I heard quite a few call this one. Washington simply is a poorly run team, from top to bottom, and is ripe for a big loss like this. Three. They have a ways to go, but Detroit is not as bad as some think. They were hanging w/ Minny, a FAR superior team, well into that game. They have a solid, young looking QB in Stafford. They have one of the games best WRs in Johnon. Kevin Smith had nearly 1,000 yards (over 4 ypc avg) on a dreadful team last year, as a rookie. As I said, they are going to need a couple more years, but they (IMHO) have some pieces in place today to get a couple wins.

Can that be argued? Brown and Wale have been solid, but few would confuse them w/ Rice. Harris may once have been a star, but that star has faded to the point where I question his even being worthy of a starting job.

I don't know what he expected from Anderson, but I actually thought Anderson had been playing pretty decent. Not as great as his rookie year, but far better than the last two. He has been active and getting into the backfield. I think both Brown and Wale have been far more active as well. IMHO, the issue is the interior. If he is negative about our DTs, and Harris specific, and our OL, can anyone really argue?

Denver's OL was a mess? When? Denver had one of the best young LTs in the NFL in Claddy. While the unit as a whole may not have been as great as in past year, it was far from a mess. Last year, basically anyone that tried to play RB went down w/ injury, and yet every scrub who ran the ball did so w/ success. That does not happen w/o solid play from the OL. Further, while Cutler helps an OL, no question, just take a look at the number of pass plays he had. No way you can play as well as Cutler did, taking as many snaps as he took, w/o decent play from the OL. I agree OL is difficult to build, and further agree it takes time to gel. At the same time, it doesn't matter how much time crap has to gel. It's still crap. Last year, we hoped we could get a bit more out of Tait by playing him at RT. We were wrong. This year, we hoped Pace had a bit left. While I am not saying we were wrong, early results are not good. I think it also worth pointing out that the only other team that showed interest in Pace was Baltimire, who only wanted to look at him as a RT, as they did not feel he could play LT anymore. So far, I am not sure he can. Omiyale looks just horrible. We all hope Beekman gets inserted, but when a big contract is at play, you just never know. Williams is young, but look just poor IMHO. I have been hard on Kreutz in the past, but I actually think he and Garza have been playing pretty well. It may not always show, but I think that is more due to the play of the other three. I do believe it should be pointed out our issues are not just the OL. Frankly, our RBs and TEs have been bad in pass protection and blitz pickups too. And that included Forte, who looked so good last year, but his year just has not looked nearly as strong. Also, while the OL is a big issue in our run game, IMHO Forte is also part of the problem. I am no fan of AP, but when he entered the game, he burst through the OL w/ quickness I have not yet seen from Forte. To me, Forte just looks slow. He isn't hitting the hole, when it is there, w/ quickness or power. As much as the OL is making him look bad, I think he is also making the OL look bad as well.

Simply not what I have seen. Entering the season, I expected him to struggle run blocking. Frankly, that was a knock coming out of college, and it wasn't likely to be helped moving to the strong (right) side. But I expected him to look pretty good in pass protection. That simply is not what I saw. Yes, when a DE takes an edge rush attack, Williams is expected to push DE wide outside. We have all see this w/ our own DEs often enough. But IMHO, he is not doing this. It is not simply the interior allowing penetration. IMHO, Williams is simply getting beat and not pushing his man outside. In fact, I think Williams is making our interior look worse. Further, Williams is getting beat rather quickly. I am not just pointing out Williams. Pace is playing just as bad on the other side, and Omiyale is about as bad of an OL as I have seen. But that does not mean Williams isn't playing poorly. IMHO, Williams is very much part of the problem. He is young, and there is FAR more reason for hope w/ him than Pace or Omiyale, but just based on current play, I just think he has played like crap.

What exactly is he ripping?

I think suspensions are a possibility, but only after multiple infractions. A player is not slapped w/ a suspension for doing it one time, but if he is nailed on multiple occasions, he does get nailed w/ a suspension.

But who are you hearing this stuff from. No one deserved to win this game. I would agree if the statement was that neither team looked great, but didn't deserve to win? Late drive for a TD to take the lead. Defense that held on the final drive. There were many ugly aspects of the game, but in the end, one team stood up to win it and the other didn't. Reed & Omare both missed 2 FGs and we should be 0-3. I would say we were lucky in these kickers missing FGs. I would disagree that if they make their FGs we lose. That changes the score but not the outcome. Who is to say we don't play different if the score was different? We probably do not win at SEA if they did not have so many injuries. And maybe our defense destroys them if we had Urlacher and Pisa healthy. So what. Heck, I might argue we would have faired better against Hassel. Wallace is far more mobil than Hassel, and was on the run plenty yesterday. If Hassel was healthy, maybe we have more sacks and their offense actually is worse. As well as many others questioning the Bears and not believing we are legit. Again, I just ask who? Fans are always hardest on the team. Honestly, yesterday's game gave me things to be very excited about (QB and receivers) while some things to really worry about (OL and RB). But when I read the media, while most are still not picking us to win the division, many are saying we are legit. Those who are not are most likely the same who bashed Cutler and simply refuse to admit they may have been wrong. I personally am excited about this team. Me too. And yes, I agree, if anything, I am concerned about our OL but hope as they "gel" they get better. Williams is basically a rookie and we may wind up replacing our LG with Beekman. We will see how it progresses. If it does not improve by bye week I expect to see changes coming in week 5. Honestly, I sort of hope our OL doesn't look great against Det, as I appear it would have more to do w/ Detroit and less to do w/ our OL. I really think our OL issues need to be addressed, and hope we use the bye week to do this. Beekman needs to start in favor of Omiyale. Not much we can do about Pace, but hopefully getting Omiyale out of there will improve that side. Williams has looked flat out awful IMHO, regardless of experience. What I want to see is our giving him more help on that side.

For me, this is coaching more than anything. I realize the intensity aspect you mention, but at the same time, I think what you view as a lack of intensity is more simply our plays not working. On offense, you always read about how most teams begin a game w/ scripted plays. After you get through the script, you have a sense of what is working and what isn't. You have a sense for how the defense is reacting to various plays, and can then begin to change things up and attack specific areas. IMHO, this is one of our problems. The script simply isn't very good, and it is not until we get away from the script that we can start to play effectively.

Really? I thought roach looked like crap. I am not saying Hunter looked good, but right now, I have not been impressed w/ our LB depth. After the bye, we get back Pisa, and hopefully that will make a big difference, but Hunter, Roach and Williams have all been fairly un-impressive IMHO.