jason

The argument was that the Bears have had decent WRs over the past decade. You said otherwise. It doesn't have to "jump off the page" to be decent. Simply put, I proved you wrong. Nobody said the Bears had a team full of allstars at WR, but they have had a decent group of WRs who have been mismanaged and underutilized. You can argue semantics all you want, but the guys I mentioned, with the exception of Terrell, have gone on to success elsewhere in the NFL, and have collectively done better than when they were with the Bears. Kennison - Horribly underutilized on the Bears, did better before AND after. Wade - Did better when not on the Bears. Gage - Hell, he didn't even get PT when he was on the Bears, and now he's the Titans' #1 WR. Terrell - I don't know where you are getting this "plenty of places" crap, but it just didn't happen. And I still hold to the belief that he was underutilized, and stuck behind Dez "Stone Hands" White for no reason other than the apparent fact that the coaches at the time loved Dez White during practice, despite the absolute fact he sucked when in the game. Engram - Agreed, he was rock solid, and remains so. He's put up comparable numbers in Seattle, and had a huge year just two years ago. Booker - He remains the single WR of the group that goes against the grain. He was one of my favorites when on the Bears, but somehow he has aged in dog years since leaving Chicago. The point I'm making is, regardless of whether or not the stats are "similar," Berrian had a better year statistically with the Vikings. And, remember, you said the Vikings problems at WR were the only reason Wade got to start/play. They were THAT bad.

Where is all the uproar from just the other day saying how bad the WRs stunk up the joint?!?! I agree with your assessment, and I think they'll continue to progress.

One game is not very statistically significant. In four years with the Bears, Berrian had 2.6 RPG, 37.9 YPG, 14.6 YPC, and 13 TDs. In the two years he started, the stats were 3.9 RPG, 55.55 YPG, 14.3 YPC, and 11 TDs. In the one year he has started for Minnesota, he had 3.0 RPG, 60.3 YPG, 20.1 YPC, and 7 TDs. In all but Receptions Per Game he improved while on the Vikings, who are just as much a running team as the Bears, and have such bad WRs - as DBDB pointed out - that a castoff from the Bears (Wade) started for more than one game, let alone more than one year. Add to that is the QB comparison, in which the Bears might actually have an advantage during the last few years. Sorry, but Berrian's stats, which are admittedly only one year, only prove my point that the Bears don't utilize their WRs to their fullest potential...not the other way around.

Decent Star 2008: Hester, Olsen, Davis, Clark 2007: Berrian, MuhMuh, Olsen, Davis, Bradley, Clark 2006: Berrian, MuhMuh, Gage, Bradley, Davis, Clark 2005: Berrian, MuhMuh, Gage, Bradley, Wade, Clark 2004: Berrian, Terrell, Gage, Wade, Clark 2003: Booker, Terrell, Gage, Wade, Clark 2002: Booker, MRob, Terrell, White 2001: Booker, MRob, Terrell, White 2000: Booker, MRob, White, Kennison, Engram 1999: Booker, MRob, Engram, Conway I'd say that's better than decent, actually. Several were underused (MuhMuh, Clark, Olsen, Terrell, Gage). A few went on to have success after the Bears (Booker, MuhMuh, Wade, Gage, Kennison, Engram, Bradley), and in most cases improvements. It's nearly impossible to intelligently argue that the Bears haven't had opportunities to use players at the WR and TE position, yet have failed miserably to do so. Go look at each WRs careers, and their stats outside of the Bears, and I think you'll find a compelling argument that there has been talent; it has just been mismanaged. Every player on the list, other than Terrell, has done better in at least one way, when they were with another team other than the Bears. I'm nearly positive of this. The Bears haven't had Rice and Taylor by a long shot, but they also haven't had the dearth of talent you and many others like to pretend they have had. It's as I said before: HC, OC, QB, OL...one (or more) of the four ruined the opportunities the Bears have had to cultivate WRs and TEs.

I don't care about bringing in a vet at this point. You let the guys you have on the roster learn. Period. The Bears have had decent WRs over the last ten years or so, but the combination of bad/average QBs, bad/average OCs, bad/average OLs, and the reluctancy of the coaching staff to give the young guys playing time has resulted in a bunch of young WRs who have not met expectations. Hester, Bennett, Knox, and the two TEs should be sufficient.

Anyone blaming the D for losing this game, well, obviously didn't watch the game.

BINGO! Great gameplan on defense. Great play on defense. All ruined by a horrible defensive playcall that left Vasher on an island, and pulled in the safety for run support, when it should have never happened in the first place. The call was a bush-league call, something that is difficult to explain to anyone who understands football strategy.

I don't agree with the concept that the WRs/TEs were horrible, atrocious, or whatever. 1. Two INTs appeared to be the receivers' fault, but who is to say which adjustment is called for in those situations? I've also said that I trust Jay Cutler on those routes, but it's entirely possible that the receivers were correct, and Cutler was wrong. Afterall, Clark's been here a while; Cutler has not. 2. Where are all the "drops" you guys are talking about? I only saw a few legit "drops." Others were just misconnects between QB and WR/TE. If, as I suspect, you guys are giving drops to the receivers on many of the close plays, then you have to point at Cutler again, because the pass wasn't perfect. You can't always expect the receiver to reach behind him, or really low, or really high, or whatever else, when he's got defender mere feet away trying to dislodge the ball and head from the offensive player. It's a ridiculous expectation, and the onus is taken off of the QB, who, while moving, wasn't running full speed, and didn't have too many passes where he was literally being pushed, held, tackled, etc. Did Clark quit on a route that was probably a TD? Yes. Did Clark possibly screw up and lead to an INT? Yes. Did Knox possibly screw up and lead to an INT? Yes. Did McKie (surprise) drop an easy dump off? Yes. Where are all the other screw ups that made the receivers so horrible?

How can you NOT blame coaching for a part of the loss? At the very least, the most important play of the game was bad coaching. You do not, DO NOT, pull the safety for run support when you are nursing a lead with a minute left. You make the other team beat you by small chunks, eat the clock, and force them into the mistake when they HAVE to go deeper than they'd like. You don't open the window for the long play, especially when the support is provided from behind a DB whose coverage has been dubious at best over the last two years or so.

I wasn't clear enough in my original post. I didn't say it was coaching, just that it was a bad call. I meant, "bad call on Mannelly's part." It was completely boneheaded to get cute in that situation. The pinched in safety on the game-losing TD pass, however, looks like coaching.

Great job Noots! I couldn't agree more. Love the write ups.

Knox looked good in limited time. Wolfe looked good in limited time. Manning didn't look too bad on kick returns. Afalava looked alright. Wale looked pretty damn awesome. Bennett looked pretty good. Most of the defense looked good the entire game.

I don't care if there are 22 players on defense, you don't make that call in that situation. The Bears were up by two, had a slight edge in momentum, and basically gave a field goal away. To be quite honest, the Bears defense - minus one play - did a great job tonight. With one Cutler INT leading to what amounted to a two yard "TD drive" by the Packers, and the fake punt leading to a gimme field goal, it's a game the Bears should have won. They put in the requisite effort, but the offense shit the bed and is almost completely responsible for the loss. Not a great start, but there is definitely a silver lining to all of this. If the Bears' O, ST, and coaching doesn't completely blow it tonight, then Vasher is never in that situation. Speaking of which...where the hell was the safety support on that play? Oh right...up near the OL for some unknown reason (read: bad coaching). I'm not worried, guys. I think the team learns from this, comes back stronger, and does well the rest of the season.

#1 - It looked like Clark gave an inside juke when Cutler was rolling out, so Cutler threw it to lead for THAT route. Oops. Clark went the other way. #2 - That's just a great play by a packer DL. #3 - It looked like the WR (who?) gave an inside juke when Cutler was rolling out, so Cutler threw it to lead for THAT route. Oops. Clark went the other way. #4 - Forced throw by Cutler. He was trying to win the game by himself, and he shouldn't have thrown it. So, I'd say that's 2/4. Sure, we could take away the second INT because it was simply an unreal play by the defensive player, but we could also give Cutler one or two that the Packers dropped. Not a great start, but not nearly as bad as it looked.

This is the correct answer. If Tommie and the D-Line don't get pressure, Rogers will go for 300+, a couple TDs, and the Bears' O might not have the horses to keep up (yet).

I, too, loved this guy coming out of college. But it's like I've said before, this is all situtational. Leonard Pope - Goes to a team that hardly uses the TE because they have two all-pro WRs, and the next option is a good WR. Vernon Davis - Goes to an absolutely putrid team with a horrible QB situation. Add that to the fact the his new coach is a strict disciplinarian, and Davis is, evidently, mentall frail. Marcedes Lewis - Goes to a team that believes running is the best option on offense, and the second best option. With a pure game manager at QB, and average to bad WRs to protect the passing game, there is no reason to feel threatened by the tight end. Put any of those three guys on the Bears and they would have been used significantly more.

I usually view them as if they are from someone who hasn't seen the games, and only the highlights on Sportscenter. Cutler's good, but he isn't THAT good. The receivers on this team have been doing pretty well this preseason when Cutler has been in the game.

Remember boys and girls, it's below the waist, not below the knees. Here'sthe link to the rule on crackbacks. Ignoring that fact, it's chicken-shit for him to go low on a guy who is clearly not looking at him, and slowly drifting towards him. If Favre would have just dipped a shoulder he would have destroyed the defensive player and gotten all sorts of credit from ESPN...like Hines Ward does.

I'm sure he won't return them all like he did in the past. He'll split time with more than one other guy at punt return duties. They have to keep him semi-fresh at WR for the deep routes.

I don't know if we have a "great" #2 right now, but McCown is too close to "you know who" for me to feel comfortable about it.

1) This thread takes a stretch before it actually applies to the Bears. 2) This thread is venturing too far into the political arena. Gun laws? Federal vs. State law? C'mon. I vote that it gets moved to a different section or deleted entirely.

Since I don't know the play call, I can't say who is right. Hester did pause, but once again, I don't know what they were supposed to do. To say that Cutler threw the ball to the spot Hester "would" have been is conjecture at best.

See ya. Feel bad for him, but I'm sure everyone is tired of waiting around for his body to work. It's a real shame too, because I thought he looked pretty good versus the Giants.

But Tom Cruise revitalized his career with a hilarious performance in Tropic Thunder. COMPLETELY unexpected.