Connorbear Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Yep. Stafford got nearly 150 yars on the last two drives when he barely got 100 on all previous drives. We won. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Thanks for your input. He is still almost virtually a rookie... Average the game out and he had several good plays, several average plays, several subpar plays, and a few horrible plays. People remember just the horrible. On one play it looked like he was standing on a frozen lake. Overall game was probably a C+ or close to it, but I didn't break down plays one-by-one. He doesn't suck, but he's not an all-star. He's decent right now. It's not like Wisconsin is known for producing pass-blocking geniuses. They produce road-graders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Just one of many things Gruden mad errors on... Did anyone catch Gruden calling Urlacher 35? He won't be 35 until almost next summer. I know I've brought this up before but it's just a pet peeve of mine...especially since people do it so consistenty with Urlacher. I don't get it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 We won. Peace Yes, but it should have been by a lot more. Maybe you're impressed or satisfied by underperformance, but I am not. That same game against the Packers, Broncos, Patriots, Giants, or just about any other team with a more explosive offense, and the Bears probably lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Not to horn in on the conversation (but I guess I am!).... I'm happy with a win no matter what. Some I'm happier with than others. This was a stressful game that probably shouldn't have been. There's lots of room for improvement. There were lots to like and few to not like... I think we all know that we are playing lights out D. We all know that the turnovers may stop. The dropped passes may stop. And we will need O or ST to do something spectacular. Which, they can. So, I think I leave a game like this thinking: 1. This was a game we should have won, and we did. 2. This was a game we could have played better, and hopefully will. 3. Detroit is probably better than their record and mistakes show. Beating them was good. Not great, but good. We are on track for getting into the playoffs. And if we can continue to grow on O, we could be peaking at the best time. If not, at least our D will scare people. Yes, but it should have been by a lot more. Maybe you're impressed or satisfied by underperformance, but I am not. That same game against the Packers, Broncos, Patriots, Giants, or just about any other team with a more explosive offense, and the Bears probably lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 I too am concerned with that. jason, thoughts? Tice says he's a hard worker. Looks to me like he's working hard at finding ways to f#*k up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Tice says he's a hard worker. Looks to me like he's working hard at finding ways to f#*k up! Yeah, but how does he hit a blocking sled!?!? That seems to be an important consideration. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connorbear Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Yes, but it should have been by a lot more. Maybe you're impressed or satisfied by underperformance, but I am not. That same game against the Packers, Broncos, Patriots, Giants, or just about any other team with a more explosive offense, and the Bears probably lose. Never said I was impressed or satisfied by underperformance. All I said was we won. Peace Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Cutler only had 1 or 2 ill-advised passes all game, which is nice to see. Stafford on the other hand had a few interceptions dropped (Conte and Wright for sure). The Bears abandoned the run a few times that I thought was odd because Forte and Bush were looking good. Also, the threat of the running game would've taken some more pressure off of Cutler, so I am surprised they kept dropping him back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Yeah, not driving his head into the ground. What was I thinking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Really the biggest playcalling blunder was simply not running Bush 3 times near the goal line... Cutler only had 1 or 2 ill-advised passes all game, which is nice to see. Stafford on the other hand had a few interceptions dropped (Conte and Wright for sure). The Bears abandoned the run a few times that I thought was odd because Forte and Bush were looking good. Also, the threat of the running game would've taken some more pressure off of Cutler, so I am surprised they kept dropping him back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears4Ever_34 Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Really the biggest playcalling blunder was simply not running Bush 3 times near the goal line... I agree, although on Cutler's weekly radio show, he said out of those 3 plays, 2 of them Tice gave him run/pass options. I guess he thought he had better looks with the pass, based on how the defense was lining up. Still, you'd like to see a hand off or two to Michael Bush.. I mean, that is why you brought him here in the first place. He converts on those opportunities more times than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madlithuanian Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Yeah, agreed. I see only 2 yards to paydirt and I simply feed the beat 3 times... You can't get it, you don't deserve it. I agree, although on Cutler's weekly radio show, he said out of those 3 plays, 2 of them Tice gave him run/pass options. I guess he thought he had better looks with the pass, based on how the defense was lining up. Still, you'd like to see a hand off or two to Michael Bush.. I mean, that is why you brought him here in the first place. He converts on those opportunities more times than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChileBear Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Yeah, agreed. I see only 2 yards to paydirt and I simply feed the beat 3 times... You can't get it, you don't deserve it. Thought the same. Bush could have gotten it behind Chilo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Yes, but it should have been by a lot more. Maybe you're impressed or satisfied by underperformance, but I am not. That same game against the Packers, Broncos, Patriots, Giants, or just about any other team with a more explosive offense, and the Bears probably lose. The Bears probably could have lost the 5 games they won but they didn't. To be honest, I was concerned about this game as much as I was about the Dallas game. In both cases the Bears did fine...for the day and for the team they played. Sure the Bears did better in the game against Dallas (comparing the two). But there were other factors to consider here. One of which was our QB was nearly crushed to death and no matter how you slice it that affected the overall tempo to the game. Our team was also without Jeffery and the team itself had been off for two weeks. All these things played into what was the end result. A win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I agree, although on Cutler's weekly radio show, he said out of those 3 plays, 2 of them Tice gave him run/pass options. I guess he thought he had better looks with the pass, based on how the defense was lining up. Still, you'd like to see a hand off or two to Michael Bush.. I mean, that is why you brought him here in the first place. He converts on those opportunities more times than not. And besides that, and perhaps more importantly, Bush is on my fantasy team. Can't get a lot of points if he's not running it into the endzone. This does me no good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Thought the same. Bush could have gotten it behind Chilo. Speaking of Chilo, couldn't help but notice his "exuberance" during the game the other night. It appeared he and one of the Lion's LBs were getting ready to get into a 'knock down, drag out' until Cutler finally intervened. Stuff like this, displayed by Rachal, only impresses me. That paired with what I heard in regards to a description of Lance Louis as: "a player that will eat glass" tells me that the team has right now two of the best Guards in football. At least in my book. "Calm down big fella, its not like Suh is trying to kill me or anything". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Speaking of Chilo, couldn't help but notice his "exuberance" during the game the other night. It appeared he and one of the Lion's LBs were getting ready to get into a 'knock down, drag out' until Cutler finally intervened. Stuff like this, displayed by Rachal, only impresses me. That paired with what I heard in regards to a description of Lance Louis as: "a player that will eat glass" tells me that the team has right now two of the best Guards in football. At least in my book. "Calm down big fella, its not like Suh is trying to kill me or anything". HAHAHAHA. C'mon man. Two of the best guards in football? That's nonsense. Rachal was dropped like a bad habit by the Niners before this year. That is not a trait of one of the best OGs in the league. Nicks, Snee, Dahl, Scott, Mankins, Grubbs, Mathis, Iupati, Waters, Evans, Yanda...c'mon man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 HAHAHAHA. C'mon man. Two of the best guards in football? That's nonsense. Rachal was dropped like a bad habit by the Niners before this year. That is not a trait of one of the best OGs in the league. Nicks, Snee, Dahl, Scott, Mankins, Grubbs, Mathis, Iupati, Waters, Evans, Yanda...c'mon man. Wasn't Marco Columbo "dropped like a bad habit" by our team a few years ago only to flourish in Dallas? My thoughts were more of how the two worked together, not so much individually. And to qualify my statement I did say "Two of the best".....not "the best two". They could simply be two of the best 10 guards in football. And I also further qualified that with, "at least in my book". By the by, one of my favorite segments in morning football shows is the "c'mon man" that ESPN does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Wasn't Marco Columbo "dropped like a bad habit" by our team a few years ago only to flourish in Dallas? My thoughts were more of how the two worked together, not so much individually. And to qualify my statement I did say "Two of the best".....not "the best two". They could simply be two of the best 10 guards in football. And I also further qualified that with, "at least in my book". By the by, one of my favorite segments in morning football shows is the "c'mon man" that ESPN does. In general, more people leave the Bears and improve then come to the Bears and improve I read "two of the best" as "two of the best." They are not two of the best ten guards in football. Louis might be in the top 20. Maybe. The "at least in my book"-part is your saving grace. Virtually nobody in the world will agree with the comment, but it is your book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mongo3451 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 In general, more people leave the Bears and improve then come to the Bears and improve I read "two of the best" as "two of the best." They are not two of the best ten guards in football. Louis might be in the top 20. Maybe. The "at least in my book"-part is your saving grace. Virtually nobody in the world will agree with the comment, but it is your book. Agree with this. Louis may crack the top ten RG's if his progress continues. No way Rachal cracks the top 20 at any position. Garza is probably 12-15. Carimi and Webb are 25+ currently. No where to go but UP! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskan Grizzly Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 In general, more people leave the Bears and improve then come to the Bears and improve I read "two of the best" as "two of the best." They are not two of the best ten guards in football. Louis might be in the top 20. Maybe. The "at least in my book"-part is your saving grace. Virtually nobody in the world will agree with the comment, but it is your book. Ah ... here we go again. Say what you will but since there are only 32 pairs of guards to choose from I still feel safe to say the Bears' pair is "one of the best". When it comes to tenacity and apparent drive they are up there. If you take each guard singularly then things filter out but I'm not sure the balance on the other 31 teams is equal all the way across. But what the heck ever right? As long as the team is winning. I used to be the only one that thought Lovie was the right fit at Head Coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 Ah ... here we go again. Say what you will but since there are only 32 pairs of guards to choose from I still feel safe to say the Bears' pair is "one of the best". When it comes to tenacity and apparent drive they are up there. If you take each guard singularly then things filter out but I'm not sure the balance on the other 31 teams is equal all the way across. But what the heck ever right? As long as the team is winning. I used to be the only one that thought Lovie was the right fit at Head Coach. I understood the first time, and still disagree. They might not even be one of the best tandems in the NFC. Below is the list of starging OGs in the NFC. The bolded tandems are almost certainly better than the combo of Rachal and Louis. LG RG DAL Livings Bernadeau NYG Boothe Snee PHI Mathis Watkins WAS Lichtensteiger Chester ARI Colledge Snyder SF Iupati Boone SEA Carpenter McQuistan STL Smith Dahl DET Sims Peterman GB Lang Sitton MIN Johnson Fusco ATL Blalock Reynolds CAR Silatolu Williams NO Grubbs Evans TB Nicks Larsen I think Rachal and Louis have been playing way better than expected. I'm happy about that. But they are not a top ten tandem, no way. There are easily a conservative 5 other tandems in the AFC that are better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lemonej Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 I understood the first time, and still disagree. They might not even be one of the best tandems in the NFC. Below is the list of starging OGs in the NFC. The bolded tandems are almost certainly better than the combo of Rachal and Louis. LG RG DAL Livings Bernadeau NYG Boothe Snee PHI Mathis Watkins WAS Lichtensteiger Chester ARI Colledge Snyder SF Iupati Boone SEA Carpenter McQuistan STL Smith Dahl DET Sims Peterman GB Lang Sitton MIN Johnson Fusco ATL Blalock Reynolds CAR Silatolu Williams NO Grubbs Evans TB Nicks Larsen I think Rachal and Louis have been playing way better than expected. I'm happy about that. But they are not a top ten tandem, no way. There are easily a conservative 5 other tandems in the AFC that are better. Jason I'm not sure what criteria you used to come up with your rankings but of the teams you highlighted in bold as being better than the current Bears' OG tandem,I looked at 2 pretty telling stats that generally can be used to rate a whole OL.Sacks given up and average rush yards per attempt: Team Sacks Avg Rush Yds Per Att NYG 6 4.5 Phi 17 4.1 Ari 35 3.8 SF 20 5.9 Stl 21 4.2 Atl 13 3.7 NO 12 3.7 TB 11 4.1 Bears 19 4.3 The reason why I chose these 2 stats because they show IMO the strength of the OL and in most cases the cohesion(chemistry) of the unit. Since most teams run between the tackles the rush yards show how well the interior OL may be playing.The only problem in the case of Rachal and Louis is they have only played a couple of games together and if you take at least the last 2 games where the Bears have given up minimal sacks and have rushed for 172 and 200+ this tandem is starting to gel. Also lets factor in that the Bears average margin of victory is 14 points so a lot of the Bears runs have come when they have been trying to close out games late with 8 in the box. Only SF averages more rush yards per game of the teams you highlighted than the Bears and with NYG giving up only 6 sacks all season and averaging 4.5 per rush they clearly are tops in my eyes. SF averaging almost 6 yards per rush is very impressive after those 2 its open to debate in the NFC. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Hochuli 3:16 Posted October 27, 2012 Report Share Posted October 27, 2012 Wait until the media gets ahold of that clip. "First Webb, now Rachal. Cutler is a bully to his OL." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.