Official 2018-19 NFL Thread

[soxfan49]

57 minutes ago, GoSox05 said:

Two weeks in a row with really bad calls and it's not just his.  Kendricks got called on one against Rodgers that was similar.

I would just love for an official to explain in that situation what he could have done differently.   Should he have just run up to Smith and pushed him down?  Maybe he should have just picked him up in like a bear hug and held him until the whistle is blown.

There is also a lack of consistency, Payne picked up Rodgers and slammed him to the ground and landed on him with all his body weight and no call.  I don't think that was roughing the passer either, but if you call the one on Matthews, you have to call the other one.

The problem is, they aren't "bad calls." The rule is bad- very very bad- but it's a rule. By definition, those were good calls according to the rule.

[GoSox05]

7 minutes ago, soxfan49 said:

The problem is, they aren't "bad calls." The rule is bad- very very bad- but it's a rule. By definition, those were good calls according to the rule.

Yes, this is correct.  Officials are still being inconsistent with the bad rule.

[bmags]

8 minutes ago, soxfan49 said:

The problem is, they aren't "bad calls." The rule is bad- very very bad- but it's a rule. By definition, those were good calls according to the rule.

I don't know, I get what they were trying to get rid of, but they made it overly broad. Seems like they could have said "pile driving" and had a better execution so far.

[GoSox05]

https://twitter.com/CameronWolfe/status/1044247864682172417

 

[Wanne]

13 hours ago, soxfan49 said:

I was at the game. It was 75% Bears fans EASY.

Not sure it was 75...I'd say 50-50...but there sure were a lot of Bear fans there.  I know people want to keep Harping on Trubisky...and I don't know about most of you but some of these plays, sets and formations...what in the hell?  Very high-schoolish.  Sure Trubisky needs a more touch on his throws...but I just don't see these plays that are being called.  What's the big head scratcher to me is the lack of throws to Burton.  Good lord...the middle on intermediate route is wide open....all the time usually.  Does he miss Shaheen that much?  Bears carried 5 TEs out of camp...but rarely throw to them (with Sims and his skillet hands you can see why).  I get it's a work in progress...but still...some of the play calls are just mind-boggling.

On the QB hits too...one play in the 1st half...Trubisky hands the ball off and gets absolutely drilled by a Cardinal...well after the hand off and right in front of the referee.  Was completely unnecessary...and no call. 

[Kyyle23]

https://deadspin.com/khalil-mack-is-pass-rushing-perfection-1829269809

 

Quote

the key to Mack’s success is that he is a strong motherfucker who whips ass

 

[Jack Parkman]

2 hours ago, soxfan49 said:

Besides the Rams, maybe the Saints, maybe the Eagles, who else is that good in the NFC so far for the NFC to still be considered "loaded?"

No one is laughing at the Bears. They're a 7, 8 or 9 win team this year, and assuming more growth from Jackson, Howard, Floyd, Fuller, Amos, Leno, Miller, Shaheen, Whitehair, and most importantly Trubisky, they're a playoff team in 2019.

Falcons are good. Panthers are good. Idk what to think of the remainder of the NFCN but they all could be decent too. Both the NFCN and NFCS are gauntlets, especially with Tampa coming out of nowhere to be decent. The NFCW has the Rams and not much else with the Garoppalo injury. Washington might be ok besides the Eagles in the NFCE. Out of all of the teams other than the Bears on the NFC, the only truly bad teams are Dallas, the Giants, San Francisco and Arizona. 

Edited September 24, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[soxfan49]

2 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Falcons are good. Panthers are good. Idk what to think of the remainder of the NFCN but they all could be decent too. Both the NFCN and NFCS are gauntlets, especially with Tampa coming out of nowhere to be decent. The NFCW has the Rams and not much else with the Garoppalo injury. Washington might be ok besides the Eagles in the NFCE. Out of all of the teams other than the Bears on the NFC, the only truly bad teams are Dallas, the Giants, San Francisco and Arizona. 

Seattle and Detroit might stink, too.

 

59 minutes ago, Wanne said:

Not sure it was 75...I'd say 50-50...but there sure were a lot of Bear fans there.  I know people want to keep Harping on Trubisky...and I don't know about most of you but some of these plays, sets and formations...what in the hell?  Very high-schoolish.  Sure Trubisky needs a more touch on his throws...but I just don't see these plays that are being called.  What's the big head scratcher to me is the lack of throws to Burton.  Good lord...the middle on intermediate route is wide open....all the time usually.  Does he miss Shaheen that much?  Bears carried 5 TEs out of camp...but rarely throw to them (with Sims and his skillet hands you can see why).  I get it's a work in progress...but still...some of the play calls are just mind-boggling.

On the QB hits too...one play in the 1st half...Trubisky hands the ball off and gets absolutely drilled by a Cardinal...well after the hand off and right in front of the referee.  Was completely unnecessary...and no call. 

I've been to some road games- Carolina 2010, Tennessee 2012- where it was a lot of Bears fans. I've never seen anything like yesterday. Usually the home team can drown out the "Let's go Bears" chants, but they couldn't. The Cardinals got booed as they were introduced.

[Chisoxfn]

3 hours ago, bmags said:

I don't know, I'm not happy with how Trubisky has played, but I also feel like they are only a few adjustments away.

The good that I like is their average time of possession is eye-popping. The defense can stay dominant when they limit the amount of possessions for the opponent.

Last year bears would go 3 and out or fizzle out between the 40s. Now they are fizzling out in the opponents 10-40 yard line. I think they'll find the plays that start to convert.

But the offense will get "unlocked" as soon as trubisky hits some deep balls. I'm just gonna say I don't think he can't, I think though if we are staring at a situation where he's both not good at it and apprehensive about them that's bad. But the screens are a product of the lack of vertical passing.

It's frustrating but also I don't remember the last game the bears came from behind to win. Last year all the effort to keep games close just kept us an arms length away. They did it. Cards are probably a bad team but they punched bears in mouth and bears grinded back. It was nice to see.

The TOP has been a huge component on the season and allows the Bears defense to play as aggressive as it is. And I have to give the Bears offense credit for that. They have chewed up the clock and while they have left points on the field and not been as efficient as I'd like, it isn't as if they haven't gotten first downs.  They have...but they've left some big chunk yardage out there and not been as good as we'd all like.  I think the fact that they are getting TOP despite those issues is a good sign towards the future...but we'll see.  

[Jose Abreu]

I don't know how anyone can say this is a 5-7 win team. I know the schedule gets tougher but barring major injuries, I have a really hard time seeing the Bears any worse than 8-8. With development from Trubisky they could even be a 10 win team this year. 

[Brian]

Most of the time there are a few questionable areas but Pace has put, almost, a loaded squad on the field in one year, but the success is on Mitch's shoulders.

The O-line could be a little better but the defense from line to safety has been solid. RB and WRs. Parkey missed one but he's reliable.

Mitch doesn't even have to be great, just be better than average and they'll win games.

[southsider2k5]

 

[southsider2k5]

 

[Chisoxfn]

So any more news on Miller. I've heard various things including the fact that he dislocated it twice and at some point will need surgery...if he has surgery, done for the year? None of those are from legitimate sources.  

[oneofthemikes]

8 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

So any more news on Miller. I've heard various things including the fact that he dislocated it twice and at some point will need surgery...if he has surgery, done for the year? None of those are from legitimate sources.  

I'm really surprised that they sent him back out there as soon as they did. I dislocated my shoulder a few times several years back and told my wife as soon as Miller went down that I was fairly certain of what happened. As soon as the shoulder is put back into place the relief is immense, but the ball of the shoulder slipping past the labrum still causes some degree of structural damage and makes it much more likely to occur again.

[Wanne]

15 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

So any more news on Miller. I've heard various things including the fact that he dislocated it twice and at some point will need surgery...if he has surgery, done for the year? None of those are from legitimate sources.  

he should just have it now then.  I'm honestly surprised they left him back on the field if he dislocated it earlier in the game. Our 2nd round draft pick for next year gone like a fart in the wind. I read if he has surgery it's like a 6 month rehab.  If he keeps playing on it...it'll just make it worse.

[Jack Parkman]

In my mind, the success or failure of the Mack trade hinges on the difference between the 2020 Bears 1st rounder and the Raiders 2020 2nd rounder. If the Bears are picking 21 or lower in the 1st  and the Raiders are in the 33-40 range, the Bears are easily just fine. If the Bears are picking top 15 then it is a loss. The 2019 1st is a wash because the Bears were using it on an edge rusher anyway. If the Raiders end up middle of the league and are picking in the 50s in the 2nd that year then it depends on if the Bears made the playoffs. If so, it is an even trade at that point. 

Edited September 24, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[Chicago White Sox]

12 hours ago, Jack Parkman said:

I thought they were a 4-6 win team and the Mack acquisition took them up to the 5-7 range. Mitch had to take a major step forward in order for them to be anything more. He hasn't. The NFC is loaded and anyone expecting them to make the playoffs or even finish .500 is going to be really disappointed.

I have mixed feelings about the Mack trade. He is an awesome player, but the acquisition cost was too much for the Bears to give at this point in their development. If they can make the playoffs in 2019, and make an NFCCG appearance it would be worth it, because they were probably spending the 2019 1st on an edge rusher anyway. But if they pick in the top 15 in 2020, that is where the acquisition becomes asinine because what good does it do to trade 2 1st round picks for a great player on a bad team? This is why I think Gruden is laughing at Pace. If any team other than the Bears in the mix offered 2 1sts, I dont think they would have made that deal. They think the Bears are bad and will still be bad next year so they think they're getting 2 top 12 picks for him. Idk if anyone would make that trade. 

100% disagree with this post.  The Bears had a pretty complete roster short of a proven edge rusher.  With Mack they have what could be a top 5 defense.  Offensively they have a ton of weapons that could ultimately make it dangerous, but it’s going to take some time for all the parts to gel.  Acquiring Mack made a ton of sense once we plugged our other major holes with high prices free agents.

The biggest single question mark is obviously Trubisky.  I can openly say he hasn’t looked great so far this year, but as I’ve said repeatedly in this thread no one should expect him to at this point.  The Bears did him no favors last year and really curbed his development by giving him no receivers and forcing him to spend a year learning a terribly poor & conservative offense.  He needs more than three weeks before we start jumping to conclusions.

Regardless, this team is much better than you’re giving them credit for.  The defense alone gives them a pretty solid floor.  And it’s not unfathomable that Mitch makes some major strides over the next few months as he gets more reps and that the offense starts to click in the second half.  Clearly Pace believes in Trubisky or he wouldn’t have paid the price he did for Mack.  And guess what, if he’s wrong and Mitch doesn’t develop into a quality QB, the lost draft picks won’t really matter that much in the grand scheme of things as Trubisky is getting at least the next two years to prove himself.  Failure at that point means the beginning of another rebuild & regime or AKA bigger fish to fry than a pick swap in the 2020 draft.

[Middle Buffalo]

Chris Conte just made another team's highlight film again. Not sorry he's not running around aimlessly for the Bears anymore.

Also, not sure how the stiff arm he was on the receiving end of isn't a "hands to the face" penalty.

[Jack Parkman]

25 minutes ago, Chicago White Sox said:

100% disagree with this post.  The Bears had a pretty complete roster short of a proven edge rusher.  With Mack they have what could be a top 5 defense.  Offensively they have a ton of weapons that could ultimately make it dangerous, but it’s going to take some time for all the parts to gel.  Acquiring Mack made a ton of sense once we plugged our other major holes with high prices free agents.

The biggest single question mark is obviously Trubisky.  I can openly say he hasn’t looked great so far this year, but as I’ve said repeatedly in this thread no one should expect him to at this point.  The Bears did him no favors last year and really curbed his development by giving him no receivers and forcing him to spend a year learning a terribly poor & conservative offense.  He needs more than three weeks before we start jumping to conclusions.

Regardless, this team is much better than you’re giving them credit for.  The defense alone gives them a pretty solid floor.  And it’s not unfathomable that Mitch makes some major strides over the next few months as he gets more reps and that the offense starts to click in the second half.  Clearly Pace believes in Trubisky or he wouldn’t have paid the price he did for Mack.  And guess what, if he’s wrong and Mitch doesn’t develop into a quality QB, the lost draft picks won’t really matter that much in the grand scheme of things as Trubisky is getting at least the next two years to prove himself.  Failure at that point means the beginning of another rebuild & regime or AKA bigger fish to fry than a pick swap in the 2020 draft.

The reason why I made that post, was because however complete the Bears roster is otherwise, if the QB isn't ready to win, the team is not ready to win. I think the Bears are doing whoever gets Trubisky next a huge favor by developing him because it is going to take roughly  4-6 seasons before he reaches the level everyone wants him to, and they'll run him out of town before he gets there. Mitch had 1st round talent, but not 1st round experience. I hope this is a valuable lesson for NFL teams and players with 1 season as a starter start getting graded accordingly. Maybe my standards are too high, but if a QB isn't a future HOF, he's not good enough. Future HOF QBs win roughly 70% of all Super Bowls. I don't think that is going to change any time soon. If you want to bet on that 30%, be my guest but I'll take the 70%. Yes, I believe my QB has to be Brady, Rodgers or Brees so if he isn't, he's not good enough in my eyes. Sorry, but until the tide turns and it gets closer to 50-50 I'll continue to believe this. My $0.02

Teams without a QB who will go to Canton, shouldn't trade 1st round picks under any circumstances. 

Edited September 25, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[Wanne]

what the hell does Khalil Mack have to do with Trubisky?  If you EVER get a chance to land one  of the top...if not THE top defensive player in the league for a couple of 1st rounders (who very well may end up being pretty meh and mediocre at best)...it's pretty much a no-brainer.  I can't believe anybody is unhappy with this deal still given what Mack's brought to the table already and how he's escalated the level of play on the D.  Good lord....

Edited September 25, 2018 by Wanne

[Wanne]

15 minutes ago, Middle Buffalo said:

Chris Conte just made another team's highlight film again. Not sorry he's not running around aimlessly for the Bears anymore.

Also, not sure how the stiff arm he was on the receiving end of isn't a "hands to the face" penalty.

LOL....yeah...that was comical.  He left the game.  Hopefully he's better by next week.

[Jack Parkman]

9 minutes ago, Wanne said:

what the hell does Khalil Mack have to do with Trubisky?  If you EVER get a chance to land one  of the top...if not THE top defensive player in the league for a couple of 1st rounders (who very well may end up being pretty meh and mediocre at best)...it's pretty much a no-brainer.  I can't believe anybody is unhappy with this deal still given what Mack's brought to the table already and how he's escalated the level of play on the D.  Good lord....

Everything. You don't make that trade unless you know you have a keeper at QB. In my mind, you don't  have one unless you're winning because of who is under center.  QB play is very black and white to me. Either you're winning because of who you have at QB, or you're winning in spite of who you have at QB. There is no gray area there. Either you have one, you know it, or you don't and you should be looking. Most GMs are only allowed to pick 1 QB. Either they pick the next HOF guy or they lose their job. It is getting to the point that even a great defense can't overcome shoddy QB play. 

Edited September 25, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[Jack Parkman]

12 minutes ago, Tony said:

So by your logic, three teams should have traded for a generational talent in Mack, and that’s it. Because only three teams have Brady-Rodgers-Brees. Everyone else mine as wel pack it in (pssst, don’t tell the Eagles) 

Have you ever thought your opinion may be off when EVERYONE ALWAYS disagrees with you? It’s the only thing your consistent about. 

Maybe the Rams, Maybe the Eagles, maybe the Panthers, those guys that have young-ish QBs that have proven they're at least good with the potential to be great. Those teams I wouldn't have complained about. Those teams are pretty sure they have that guy. 

No, I actually think that so called "common and accepted knowledge" is actually incorrect. I think that everyone is wrong. I've been trying to convince people otherwise. I think that the majority are actually falling victim to group think and aren't using their critical thinking skills. 

I ask you this. If only 2 teams have won multiple SBs without a HOF QB while having the same guy under center, shouldn't that be the definitive proof? You don't need a HOF QB to win A Super Bowl, but you almost definitely need one to win MULTIPLE Super Bowls. The goal should never be one and done. 

Edited September 25, 2018 by Jack Parkman

[ptatc]

11 hours ago, GoSox05 said:

To sack a QB now you must first put down a pillow and gently take him to the ground. 

Yep.