WHarris1 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:34 PM) Why not? Peyton Manning certainly did. He was a 100% pocket passer when he came into the NFL. How many plays did he make out of the pocket last night. Especially the throw across his body to Dallas Clark. Because Rex Grossman might lose a footrace to John Tait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:34 PM) Why not? Peyton Manning certainly did. He was a 100% pocket passer when he came into the NFL. How many plays did he make out of the pocket last night. Especially the throw across his body to Dallas Clark. Peyton Manning hasn't improved his mobility for s***. He has the ability to throw on the run with accuracy, something Rex Grossman doesn't have, and something he may quite frankly never have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:34 PM) Why not? Peyton Manning certainly did. He was a 100% pocket passer when he came into the NFL. How many plays did he make out of the pocket last night. Especially the throw across his body to Dallas Clark. By the time he was 26 he was escaping the pocket a bit so he could throw on the run and learned how to secure the ball, he also has a huge build so it's easier for him to escape the grasp of defenders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(Kalapse @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:35 PM) 27 games in and he hasn't shown any improvement on anything I listed in that post and he'll be 27 the next time he takes the field. Like I said, 27 games means nothing. Injuries haulted any progress he was making. He can still get better at his pocket presence and in his abilities to get away from the rush. QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:35 PM) Because Rex Grossman might lose a footrace to John Tait. He doesn't need to be fast. Take a few stops outside the pocket, or step up into the pocket. Anything to buy some more time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:38 PM) He doesn't need to be fast. Take a few stops outside the pocket, or step up into the pocket. Anything to buy some more time. It's really really hard to avoid a rush when you are not only slow as s*** but you are small as all hell. Peyton Manning is not fast, but he can avoid the rush because he is a GIANT. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:38 PM) Like I said, 27 games means nothing. Injuries haulted any progress he was making. He can still get better at his pocket presence and in his abilities to get away from the rush. He doesn't need to be fast. Take a few stops outside the pocket, or step up into the pocket. Anything to buy some more time. And why wasn't he doing any of these things after starting 19 games this season? QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:39 PM) It's really really hard to avoid a rush when you are not only slow as s*** but you are small as all hell. Peyton Manning is not fast, but he can avoid the rush because he is a GIANT. Too true. When you're 6'5" 230 you're going to have a bit of an advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greasywheels121 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 I love how people are going to know Manning's measurements for life now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 Question for Kalapse and Willie, where was all this pre-superbowl? I'm not saying you guys acted as if Rex was the perfect qb, or even a very good one. But why now are you acting as if Rex is a lost cause and will never get better? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2007 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:43 PM) Question for Kalapse and Willie, where was all this pre-superbowl? I'm not saying you guys acted as if Rex was the perfect qb, or even a very good one. But why now are you acting as if Rex is a lost cause and will never get better? I didn't make many football posts this year, I waited 19 games hoping for Rex to show me some improvement. I backed Rex basically his entire career up until this season when he didn't make the strides I thought he should have after his first full season as a starter. Like most have said, it's not really fair to make judgments on a player until after their first full season as a starter. And I never said he was a lost cause just that as of now I don't think he's going to be able to overcome his many shortcomings, most of which he has yet to improve upon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(Jordan4life_2007 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:43 PM) Question for Kalapse and Willie, where was all this pre-superbowl? I'm not saying you guys acted as if Rex was the perfect qb, or even a very good one. But why now are you acting as if Rex is a lost cause and will never get better? This is also curious to me as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rowand44 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(WHarris1 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 10:34 PM) How can a QB be so careless in the f***ing Super Bowl? Does that not tell you something about a player. Everything you need to know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(Rowand44 @ Feb 5, 2007 -> 11:40 PM) Everything you need to know. Who asked you? Your QB is Joey Harrington. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 To be fair Grossman was 20 for 28, and that one interception had a lot more to do with weather than it did with him. Grossman wasnt what Id call pretty by any means but I spread the blame to a lot more others on the team than just him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kalapse Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(SoxFan101 @ Feb 6, 2007 -> 09:39 AM) To be fair Grossman was 20 for 28, and that one interception had a lot more to do with weather than it did with him. Grossman wasnt what Id call pretty by any means but I spread the blame to a lot more others on the team than just him. He picked up a great portion of his completions and yards in garbage time, he fumbled twice (lost one) and threw 2 picks (he had no business tossing up either of those passes, weather or not they were both terrible). He had a horrible game, he wasn't the only one to be pathetic out there but as the most important player on the field he can't just go 3 quarters being insignificant and then give away the game in the 4th. 3 turnovers is totally unacceptable. As for the 2 interceptions, the one to Moose was just terrible, I don't know what the hell he was doing there and the one he threw to Bob Sanders was especially said considering he had Berrian open but just put too much air under the ball, your QB needs to step up in those situations, not make stupid mistakes resulting in turnovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 This was a solid, all around, everyone's to blame loss. Aside from Devin Hester, ya can't blame him! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 QUOTE(Steve9347 @ Feb 6, 2007 -> 12:50 PM) This was a solid, all around, everyone's to blame loss. Aside from Devin Hester, ya can't blame him! If Rex Grossman can complete a pass 10 yards down the field on a consistent basis for first downs, the running game opens up, and the defense isnt on the field 40 minutes. Rex Grossman and the entire QB group (Turner for his play calls...whatever) in general is largely to blame for the loss, I don't care what the stats suggest otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 I think the loss falls on the OC and whoever decided to put Benson in the game for the fumble and then the injury. Colts defense is a pursuit defense, therefore cutback lanes are generally the best weapon. TJ is a cut rb, Benson is not. TJ should have been used exclusively early and they needed to stop that silly running TJ to the wr position. I dont think the Bears have ever thrown to the RB in that sitaution, so your fooling no one. If Turner is fired I wont mind, cause its clear that the offensive game plan is so hit or miss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 The running game was working - not as it should but at that point it was the ONLY thing working - so I still don't get why after Benson got hurt they completely tossed it out the window. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesox61382 Posted February 6, 2007 Share Posted February 6, 2007 The Bears lost for a couple of reasons. 1) The Colts are simply the better team. Can the Bears beat the Colts? Of course, but more times than not the Colts are going to beat the Bears. They dominated the game in every facet except special teams. The Bears were lucky that they only lost by 12 points. It could have easily been 20+ win if it wasn't for special teams(Hester's TD return, Colts missing a PAT and short FG) or the Colts settling(3 sub-30 yard FG and not attempting a FG in the 4th). I am sorry, but when a team gets dominated like the Bears did you simple can't chalk it up to a bad game by the Bears(you guys know all the stats by this point). Give credit where credit it due, the Colts are simple the better team. 2) Bears defense. I know that a lot of you guys are defending the Bears defense, but they did not play that good, especially considering all the hype they receive. Yes, they did a decent job of bending and not breaking(holding the Colts to 3 sub-30 yard FG) and holding the Colts offense to 22 points, but that number is deceiving(considering the fact that the Colts missed a PAT, a short FG, and decided not to kick a FG in the 4th - all factors the Bears D has no control over). Any time you allow a team to have 24 1st downs, 430 total yards, 191 rushing yards, 80+ plays, and 38+ minutes of poss. you did not play a good game defensively. Yes, they were on the field for a long time in part due to the offense, but shouldn't the Bears D take some responsibility for not getting the Colts offense off the field? The Colts had 13 series(not including the Addai fumble on the 1st play) and only 2 were 3 and outs(not a good ratio). Finally, anyone who watched the game saw the Bears routinely miss tackles as well. Overall, it was not an impressive performance by the Bears D any way that you slice it. 3) Play calling/game plan. Anyone who has watched the Colts at all, knows that the Colts offense struggles against teams that blitz and have a lot of movement pre-snap to confuse Mannings reads. Yet, the Bears D rarely blitzed and rarely moved when the Colts were set pre-snap. Manning picked up on this and exploited it by mixing in runs and short passes, while the Bears made no adjustments. The Bears offense fell into the same trap. The Colts defense is very similar to the Bears defense in regards to game plan/style of D, yet the Bears rarely attempted the same short passes that were effective against the Bears D(especially given the weather conditions). 4) Rex. Throwing 2 bad INTs and fumbling twice(one lost and one resulting in a big loss) is going to cause you to loss a lot of games no matter who you play(with the exception of AZ maybe). With the Bears D and running game, I think they would be much better off with a QB that can manage a game and doesn't make many turnovers that cost them the game(I know I am preaching to the choir). The Bears are still in good shape though. They play in a very weak division and conference, and have the talent to reach the SB a few more times over the next couple of years, so stay positive Bears fans. 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.