Jump to content

Week 17 v Green Bay


50england50
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Alaskan Grizzly said:

Other than the Kmet (questionable) fumble and Triubiskys near miss at the end of the game, the offense is doing well.  They were playing smart Bears-type ball-control offense.  But with GB being able to do as they please on offense, won’t matter how good the Bears O plays.  
 

Weird to have to be worried about the D playing well.  

Just milking the clock is not enough. I thought they were playing OK, not well. Playing well would be exploiting GB weaknesses and getting large chunks here and there. Playing well is not grinding it out and going for it on fourth down 5 times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cardinals lost so we are in. Didn’t want it this way but we are in. 
 

Fingers crossed we get Roquan, Jaylon and Buster back next week. 
 

Until the last couple of drives it was close and we could have picked off Rogers twice. 
 

I’m a glass half full person so I’m proud of how we played today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jason said:

Just milking the clock is not enough. I thought they were playing OK, not well. Playing well would be exploiting GB weaknesses and getting large chunks here and there. Playing well is not grinding it out and going for it on fourth down 5 times.

Relatively speaking yes, what you’re talking about is for an offense that is explosive and can stretch the field. That is not this offense.  For this current type of offense to work with the current players in place you have to play smart and control the clock WITH a complimentary defense that can keep the opponent’s offense out of the end zone.  
 

You see what happens when they get desperate on offense and they can’t control what the other teams offense is doing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

I saw what I needed to see.  Trubisky doesn't cut it.  Pagano needs to be fired...

Im confused.  I thought you wanted to sign Trubisky for two more years.  What did you see that was not already shown for the last two years?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Bill said:

Im confused.  I thought you wanted to sign Trubisky for two more years.  What did you see that was not already shown for the last two years?

It's the price point.  If he's signed for two years as a placeholder, fine.  Nothing else has changed.  I said all along this would be judgement day.  Rodgers, as great as he is, has only one title.  It wasn't close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

It's the price point.  If he's signed for two years as a placeholder, fine.  Nothing else has changed.  I said all along this would be judgement day.  Rodgers, as great as he is, has only one title.  It wasn't close.

I appreciate your opinion and find it valid lots of time.  But at what placeholder.  Mediocrity?  So sign him and two years later were 8-8.  And we're still stuck with Foles over that time.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            I just don't have enough time left on this earth to do the Mitch thing for another two years just to be back where we are now.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Bill said:

I appreciate your opinion and find it valid lots of time.  But at what placeholder.  Mediocrity?  So sign him and two years later were 8-8.  And we're still stuck with Foles over that time.                                                                                  I just don't have enough time left on this earth to do the Mitch thing for another two years just to be back where we are now.   

I get it.  I'm simply tired of the rinse and repeat.  Yes, I want a new QB, but I want OL before we draft him.  Show me a better short term replacement for Mitch and I'll take it.  Now, tell me how you are going to make that happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...