2017-2018 NFL Thread

[ptatc]

All-22 Game film shows that they are getting open and Glennon isn’t seeing them. A lot

 

He locks on to his pre snap read and doesn’t go through his progressions

Doesn't mean this group will catch the passes.

[ptatc]

That's the point. Any QB can run an offense of dumpoffs. At least with Trubisky we'll get less sacks and some nice rollouts.

 

There have also been plenty of highlights of Glennon missing wide open receivers.

That's fine but I was referring to the point that bringing in Trubiskey will significantly change the offense. This group of WRs will not help him and there is still the issue if he will be able to find the open WR as well.

[ptatc]

Thursday night games suck. Both the Bears and GB played OT in really hot conditions. Thursday has sloppy written all over it.

Oh yeah. Which plays into the Bears less talented hands.

[Dick Allen]

Also the Bears have 1 full practice before Thursday's game. No way Trubisky starts.

 

I will concede their handling of the entire thing is baffling. Fox really is in a no win situation. They have to win for his job, yet their biggest asset over the offseason was used for a QB they don't want to play, yet, they make him the back up. I do think things can change after this game if Glennon is bad because of the extra practice time, but if they don't want to put Trubisky in on Monday night if Glennon craps the bed again, they have to go to Sanchez .

[Kyyle23]

Doesn't mean this group will catch the passes.

 

Also doesn’t mean you start the lesser Qb. You are arguing that the WRs might not catch a ball, when the QB only threw at actual WRs 4 times yesterday with one completion. It might’ve been nice to see a guy try and throw farther than 5 yards

[ptatc]

Also doesn’t mean you start the lesser Qb. You are arguing that the WRs might not catch a ball, when the QB only threw at actual WRs 4 times yesterday with one completion. It might’ve been nice to see a guy try and throw farther than 5 yards

My point is why do you think this will change with a different QB? The offensive coordinator knows the WR suck and his RBs and TEs are atleast decent. Who would you call plays for regardless of QB? It's fine to change QBs but the choice of QB won't change the game plan.

[Chisoxfn]

So I had my Echo on and listened to Hampton and OB after the game. I am really starting to believe they want the Bears to lose for the complaining. They have made their beds and now if they win, they are still pissed off. A caller mentioned that he had seen their entire careers and they had played on some real lousy teams, and they just tried to humiliate the guy.

 

Its funny for a while. They definitely are catering to the Superfan type of person. Ditka, sausage, Bears....

 

But from how they ripped everyone from Fox on down, you would have thought they lost 50-0 yesterday. We all know Cooper made one of the dumbest plays in history, but OB, that isn't Fox's fault. It isn't his position coach's fault. I get it, you think they suck, but it isn't their fault. Yeah, Fox tried to make a laugh out of it a bit at his press conference. What good does having an anuerism over it at that stage do?

Cooper, despite the awful play, also played some fantastic corner yesterday and has been good all year. I think I saw where 10 balls were thrown his way and only 1 catch with a few deflections. In general, our DB's have been much better then I expected (especially Fuller, who has legitimately been good). And the Bears have played some talented wideouts these first three weeks. The biggest thing was yesterday the defense got its hands on more balls than I can remember since the Lovie era. That should lead to more turnovers. Offense needs a QB, but we all know that, and until it gets it, the running game will have weeks where they just can't move (no matter how talented everyone is because there are just too many men in the box and a QB who just can't threaten downfield).

[Kyyle23]

My point is why do you think this will change with a different QB? The offensive coordinator knows the WR suck and his RBs and TEs are atleast decent. Who would you call plays for regardless of QB? It's fine to change QBs but the choice of QB won't change the game plan.

 

Because the Qb will be able to get them the ball, whereas this Qb is afraid to throw to anyone. You are right, the TEs are decent, and Glennon didn’t throw it to them either. Just dump offs to the RB

 

There is zero reason for Glennon to be in there if he cannot throw the ball 10 yards

[ptatc]

Because the Qb will be able to get them the ball, whereas this Qb is afraid to throw to anyone. You are right, the TEs are decent, and Glennon didn’t throw it to them either. Just dump offs to the RB

 

There is zero reason for Glennon to be in there if he cannot throw the ball 10 yards

This is the point I disagree with. I think it's more the coaches calling the plays and not calling plays for the WRs. Even when they do, Glennon has learned and Trubiskey will too that it is futile to throw to them and the RBs and TEs are the only viable targets.

 

I really don't care if they replace Glennon, if they think Trubiskey is ready, in fact i still think the change happens after the game this week. However, I also don't expect to see much difference in the play calling.

[Kyyle23]

This is the point I disagree with. I think it's more the coaches calling the plays and not calling plays for the WRs. Even when they do, Glennon has learned and Trubiskey will too that it is futile to throw to them and the RBs and TEs are the only viable targets.

 

I really don't care if they replace Glennon, if they think Trubiskey is ready, in fact i still think the change happens after the game this week. However, I also don't expect to see much difference in the play calling.

 

The playcalling for the first two games was 70 percent passes, so not sure which playcalling is right

[ptatc]

The playcalling for the first two games was 70 percent passes, so not sure which playcalling is right

Well considering the only game they won was the 3rd one, I'm going with that one. Even with the game being the weirdest game I've ever been to and I've worked probably 200 high school and small college games.

[LittleHurt05]

The playcalling for the first two games was 70 percent passes, so not sure which playcalling is right

 

The first game they were extremely run heavy in the first 3 quarters until they got into catch up mode. They were blown out quickly in game 2 so the play calling won't tell you much.

[ptatc]

The first game they were extremely run heavy in the first 3 quarters until they got into catch up mode. They were blown out quickly in game 2 so the play calling won't tell you much.

Very true. i've blocked that one from my memory.

[Kyyle23]

The first game they were extremely run heavy in the first 3 quarters until they got into catch up mode. They were blown out quickly in game 2 so the play calling won't tell you much.

 

No, they actually didn’t go to the run until midway through the second quarter. After 3 quarters they were 19 run 19 pass and then aired it out in the 4th quarter.

 

And in the second game they abandoned the run game immediately and went to the air which led to the interceptions. In both of those games they tried to throw before they tried to run, by design. Only when they figured out that Glennon can’t throw that they went heavy run game.

 

This is who Loggains is. Last year he did the same s*** with Barkley, he likes to have a heavy passing game

 

Very true. i've blocked that one from my memory.

 

It goes into the bin with the b2b 50 point losses in the Trestman era. The bin is labeled “Do not speak of these games”

[ptatc]

No, they actually didn’t go to the run until midway through the second quarter. After 3 quarters they were 19 run 19 pass and then aired it out in the 4th quarter.

 

And in the second game they abandoned the run game immediately and went to the air which led to the interceptions. In both of those games they tried to throw before they tried to run, by design. Only when they figured out that Glennon can’t throw that they went heavy run game.

 

This is who Loggains is. Last year he did the same s*** with Barkley, he likes to have a heavy passing game

 

 

 

It goes into the bin with the b2b 50 point losses in the Trestman era. The bin is labeled “Do not speak of these games”

(face starts an involuntary tic) Do not mention he who must not be named!!

Edited September 26, 2017 by ptatc

[Kyyle23]

(face starts an involuntary tic) Do not mention he who must not be named!!

 

IM SORRY!

[GoSox05]

Tony Romo is awesome calling games. Was really surprised at how good he was.

 

I think he is calling the Bears vs Packers game Thursday night.

[bmags]

Tony Romo is awesome calling games. Was really surprised at how good he was.

 

I think he is calling the Bears vs Packers game Thursday night.

 

Totally agree

[Dick Allen]

Not disagreeing, but how would the scenario you're suggesting affect the owner's profit margin?

Another national broadcast. CBS and NBC pay a combined $450 million a year for it.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Dick Allen

[StrangeSox]

They start TNF on week 1 now and run it through week 15. There aren't enough bye weeks to structure it that way, so they'd have to give up a handful of the TNF games in order to make that work.

[Kyyle23]

Yea I’m not sure how it affects the owners profit margins. They still get 8 home, 8 away games no matter how it’s scheduled. Scheduling so teams get a bye leading into TNF would be good for teams overall health you would think. And their health impacts the pocketbook more than anything

[StrangeSox]

Yea I’m not sure how it affects the owners profit margins. They still get 8 home, 8 away games no matter how it’s scheduled. Scheduling so teams get a bye leading into TNF would be good for teams overall health you would think. And their health impacts the pocketbook more than anything

 

TV broadcast deals are a big chunk of the league's $$$, right?

 

 

there are only 7 bye weeks, so you'd have seven TNF games at most. I guess you can start adding more bye weeks, but teams might complain about having a bye week at either the start of the season (not needed, more wear and less rest later on) or the end of the season (could mess up playoff races).

Edited September 26, 2017 by StrangeSox

[Dick Allen]

TV broadcast deals are a big chunk of the league's $$$, right?

 

 

there are only 7 bye weeks, so you'd have seven TNF games at most. I guess you can start adding more bye weeks, but teams might complain about having a bye week at either the start of the season (not needed, more wear and less rest later on) or the end of the season (could mess up playoff races).

Yes, when teams got their bye week would be a huge issue. I get it for Thanksgiving, but every damn week? These guys need some recovery time. The games aren't going to be of the finest quality.

 

Both the Bears and GB went to OT, and on top of that, GB had the late game, another 3 hours less to recover.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Dick Allen

[Chisoxfn]

Yes, when teams got their bye week would be a huge issue. I get it for Thanksgiving, but every damn week? These guys need some recovery time. The games aren't going to be of the finest quality.

 

Both the Bears and GB went to OT, and on top of that, GB had the late game, another 3 hours less to recover.

Week 1 you can easily have it...then you skip weeks 2, 3 and 4 and then week 5 start. To do this right, you should start teams bye weeks at week 4 (vs. week 3). This would minimize how many TNF games you need to reduce (in reality, all you are losing is 3 games in this proposal, but enhancing the quality of play). You could make it almost seamless if you extend the season one week, increase teams bye-weeks to 2 total. You increase overall revenue (by adding a week to the season), create more bye weeks to enable plenty of opportunities for TNF. In general, it should be a win-win-win...albeit it has to be collectively bargained.

[Chisoxfn]

Yes, when teams got their bye week would be a huge issue. I get it for Thanksgiving, but every damn week? These guys need some recovery time. The games aren't going to be of the finest quality.

 

Both the Bears and GB went to OT, and on top of that, GB had the late game, another 3 hours less to recover.

With the injury problem going on, the league absolutely needs to extend the season a week (while not adding any additional games played), it adds an additional week of regular season TV games. It creates the ability to provide 2 bye weeks for players, allowing for player safety and you could largely argue it also creates an increase in overall revenues that would enable the league to reduce the preseason by 1-2 games (since regular season TV revenues should easily outweigh preseason revenues).

 

Extra rest should enhance the overall quality of play. Just too many injuries going on now, which dilutes the quality of game and in reality can widely impact whether your best teams are in the playoffs or not. Just seems like a no-brainer, albeit, there are so many contenious points between players/owners that it will take a while to happen.