jason

Exactly. 1. Let's get Bennett in the game and see what he can do before we start throwing #1 picks at other WRs. Otherwise, we might lose another WR who seems to be productive the second he takes off the Bears' uniform. Besides, I think Maclin and Crabtree are better. 2. I still say the first round needs to be OL. The Bears need at least an OT and an OG. Until the line is shored up, nobody will really know how good the offensive weapons already drafted (Orton, Forte, Bennett, Olsen) really are.

This is what pisses me off. Every year the stupid Lions and the Cowboys get the Thanksgiving day game, like they are something special. It's time to break tradition and give another team the game. Bill Cowher has it right, and this game is total BS, a perfect exactly of what's wrong with this stupid tradition.

With the Wolfe comment, I disagree. How the heck do we know if he's capable of being a competent backup? We don't. Give him a chance, and see what he does. He sure has proven himself on special teams, a place where a "little guy" is not supposed to make such a massive contribution. The simple fact is, the guy has the "it factor"...why not let him get the carries when Forte is tired? It's not as if AP, who I think we all love as a hard-working contributor, is going to dazzle us with his play. Wolfe has that chance.

1. Why was Jones inactive? 2. Why did AP receive carries so early in the game (2nd & 3rd QTR)? 3. What were Wolfe's run-plays? The play-by-play never really tells the whole story of sweep versus off-tackle. Thanks

I'm far from a fan of this coaching staff, and I think Babich might be retarded, I have to agree with your initial comments. It comes down to bad coaching in my opinion; it's that stupid circle blitz. Outside, outside, outside. I noticed through the highlights on NFL.com that the Bears did a stunt of some kind, and Adawale Ogunleye came through COMPLETELY UNTOUCHED for a huge sack. Hmmm...maybe the coaching staff might see that and realize how ignorant and stubborn they've been with their system.

I didn't get to watch the game, but I did listen to ESPN radio. It seemed like every guy who had anything to say about the game had the same opinion. Later I listened to someone on 670 - for the 10 minutes or so I had reception - and it was the same. So my question is... Did the Bears look that good, or did the Rams look that bad? For instance, pretty much everyone was saying that Ogunleye's sacks were not because he had some sort of exemplary effort, but instead because he had a clean run at the QB. It also seems that most were saying that the Bears offense didn't really look that great; instead, it seems that they were indicating that the Rams' defense looked atrocious. So which is it?

So, that makes me wonder... Are they admitting that they screwed up the forward lateral? Are they admitting that they screwed up the administration of the scoring play? To be honest, I don't see how they can say they screwed up when the rule reads so clearly. As it reads, it seems like they applied the rule correctly. Got me baffled.

My thoughts: I'll be there I'll be shirtless I'll be inebriated I'll be painted up I'll be boo'ing the coaches I'll be rooting for the revenge win I'll be hoping for a spark for next year

If the Bears do not address the OL before the 3rd round, I'll be furious. At that point the talent is diminished with this year's draft class (according to the "experts"). Not to mention the fact I consider it the #1 weakness. As for your last statement...are my guesses accurate? solid OG(Beekman?), a medicore OG (Garza?), a good OT(Tait?), a solid OT(St. Clair?), and an aging OC(Kreutz) I'd say: Beekman = Solid (#3 OL priority) Garza = Below average (#1 OL priority) Tait = Solid (#4 OL priority) St. Clair = Average (#2 OL priority) Kreutz = Solid (#5 OL priority)

The key to your question is the "key thing". I don't know if the OL is the "key thing" that turns the Bears around. I don't think it's that simple. The QB, RB, WR, and TE depend on the OL. None of the offensive players are blowing my socks off right now, despite the fact that Forte is having a nice rookie season. No matter which is upgraded, there is a decent chance there won't be a significant improvement because the OL is still going to be bad. IF I had to choose ONE position, then I'd say you always start with the QB. In the Bears case this is particularly true. But the key "things" that would help the Bears right now is fixing the OL, IMHO.

Sorry guys...this is no conspiracy theory, and the refs got it completely right. Look at the first lateral. Look where the ball is released and where it is received. To me - and I watched three different videos about 20 times - it's a forward lateral. You have to ignore the player's momentum, and look at where the ball is released and caught. As such, it's a penalty on the offense on the last play of the game in regulation. When that happens, the play is nullified. NFL Rule in question Releases the ball at the 25 (8 second mark), and the other player CLEARLY catches the ball in advance of that line. The refs got this one right. If you want to talk about the Pitt./Sea. SB on the other hand, then you may have a point.

Basically, yeah...agreed. Adding a stud LG is like adding three players, because it'll make the transition to Williams easier, and make him better, as well as symbiotic relationship which would be built between the rookie and Olin (rook learns, Olin gets reinvigorated). With that said (and it's completely dependent upon where the Bears draft): Duke Robinson sounds like a great Bear name.

Of course, I'd amend that to read: 1) Lovie - for requesting/keeping Babich 2) Babich - for having no clue 3) DEs - bad, but coached to "circle the wagons" 4) CBs - bad, but coached to give the cushion and the slant 5) DTs - bad, but having a difficult time when the rest of the D is not doing their job

That's pretty much my philosophy as well. Position > BPA > Position 1. Address the position if all things are equal. You need a OL more than LB, and both are available, and both are ranked the same = draft OL 2. You need an OL more than a LB, but the seven teams in front of you drafted OL and left you with a non-viable OLineman who is really ranked as a late 2nd rounder = draft LB 3. You need an OL more than a LB, and both are drafted relatively heavily, but a player like a TE drops to you, as long as there is not a disparity of 3 or 4 rounds in talent evaluation = draft OL (if there is that disparity = look for the next need to see if the disparity is palatable) What I know is this: Football is won in the trenches. The Bears' OL is not good. The Bears' offense is not good. I believe the offensive failures to be primarily a result of a poor OL, and not the other way around. My signature is my philosophy, and I believe that Emmitt Smith was barely above average, but had a knack for staying healthy. But when he was paired with the best OL in football history, he turned into a stud. The same could hold true for the Bears players...if the OL wasn't garbage.

To me that wouldn't be sufficient. Essentially you are improving one position on the line, when, realistically, maybe 4 of the positions need to be addressed. The only one I'm ignoring for now is Williams (and I am crossing my fingers on that one). As for a weak class, I don't know for sure. However, I do know that there are four or five bonafide studs coming out, which is why I would love to see a trade up to get another of the guys - perhaps one that slips into the late first/early second.

Just for clarification... We don't disagree, and I think the D has the talent to still do very well, but I am including Zombie Smith into the picture. In THIS scheme, the window has closed on this set of players. New scheme? Jim Johnson? I think the Bears are back in as one of the top 5 Defenses in the NFL.

Well, it makes sense when you really think about it. Warner is immobile and needs protection. This OL now would put him in the infirmary. This OL now is not good. This passing game now is not good. This running game now is not good. The OL is where all of the problems reside, or at least where attention needs to be focused on offense. Until the Bears can protect the QB, the WRs and TEs cannot be properly evaluated because the pass plays don't get time to develop, and the offensive playbook doesn't get expanded. Also, the run blocking has been atrocious. I know it's not realistic, I'm just sick of never having an offense that scares the other team. I'd love to have an offense that could bust for 30-35 at any time. With that line, Orton and the skill players the Bears currently have would be studly. Hell, I'd say that with that OL, Warner would easily go for 4000 yards and 30 TDs, easily. And Forte would approach 1500 yards, if not surpass it. The window on this defense appears to have closed; it's time for another approach. And since Lovie isn't going anywhere, the Bears need to be able to score a lot of points to make up for his garbage ass offense.

For what it's worth...my dream Before Draft 1) Sign two Offensive Linemen in FA 1a) Sign Warner to a two or three year deal 1b) Move Orton to the bench 2) Fire Babich Draft 3) Draft an OT in the first (Michael Oher, Andre Smith, Eugene Monroe, - in that order) 4) If Duke Robinson is there near the end of the first, trade back into the first and get him. 5) Fill other positions as needed (in the following order) 5a) DB 5b) DE 5c) QB (One every single year for development purposes) 5d) S 5e) WR

Your last statement is insane. The offense has not been bailing the defense out all year. The offense is average at best, and it definitely doesn't scare any opposing defenses. The passing game is only remotely threatening, and the running game seems to be average as well. And we won't even get into the run blocking or the inconsistent play from the WR/TE corp. The D may have been playing poorly, especially bad last game, but this is far from an offensive juggernaut. Go back and look at the game logs, and the drive charts. While you're doing so, count the 3-and-outs and the drives of less than 20 yards. I think you'll change your mind about the offense "bailing out" the defense.

It's a discussion point because Jauron the Moron was a bad coach with the Bears who elicited nearly no supporting emotion from his players. He also just happened to be bad at game changes and adjustments. Not only that, but he basically lost his job because he stubbornly held onto an assistant coach who was borderline retarded. All of those points sound quite a bit like Zombie Smith, and it's just a reminder that while Zombie Smith may have delivered the team an NFC Championship, he has been considerably worse since that season. It's also a reminder that the Bears are, IMHO, still probably searching for the right guy for the job.

It should be a signal that a lot of changes are needed. The offense needs changes. The defense needs changes. The special teams need(s) changes. Most of all, however... The coaching staff needs changes. This should be the sign to all that Lovie, Babich, and Turner need to get the axe. Babich ESPECIALLY needs to be fired. The game was a travesty, and there is no way a team that played this poorly can be the result of good coaching.

Guess?

Ho-hum...nothing new. The Bears' scheme continues to make average QBs look awesome.

I have to COMPLETELY disagree. In fact, I'd say it's borderline insane. Until the Bears have a competent, dangerous, consistent offense - especially a running game - the Bears need to draft offense. The Defense hasn't been doing great recently, but it has a lot to do with the discontent caused by a horrible scheme, not to mention the scheme itself. Aside from that, if the offense didn't continually hang the defense out to dry, there's a good chance the defense wouldn't look as bad. SIDE NOTE: I'd be fairly happy with the all Oklahoma draft. Starting with... 1. Duke Robinson G OK 2. Austin English DE OK 3. Nic Harris SS OK 3b (comp) Phil Loadholdt OT OK ...would be an absolutely great start.

But they're NFL coaches and they know everything, right? Right? How many former players, former coaches, former scouts, former front office guys, and announcers have to rip this team before changes are made? I can see how people would ignore a "simple fan posting on a message board"...but to deny those who have "been there" is just ignorant. On a side note, I obviously don't disregard the fans on message boards because I think they understand football on a basic level that coaches often ignore in favor of complicated verbage and buzzwords. I was watching the Titans game and kept saying, "Good job stuffing the run, but they'll soon begin to pass and look like the Colts in the SB." Then the Titans turned into the Colts in the SB. I then said, "We need to change something up or the Titans will just continue to do this (as several other teams have this year), and march down the field for a score." The Titans then proceeded to march down the field for a score. It's not rocket science folks. When something works, you stay with it. When it doesn't, you change things up. I think our coaches have the former perfected. The latter? Not so much.