lostfan Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 03:56 PM) How are they overachieving on offense, we had what an entire 48 yards of offense the first half. Besides the Detroit/Minny game our offense has been pretty brutal. There were 14 other games played this year. It's been the Matt Forte show. Without him we're talking about a historically bad offense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 03:04 PM) There were 14 other games played this year. It's been the Matt Forte show. Without him we're talking about a historically bad offense. You do know Forte is only avging 80 yards a game, this offense isnt over achieving in the least bit, unless you think being ranked towards the bottom in every offensive category is considered over-achieving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 04:11 PM) You do know Forte is only avging 80 yards a game, this offense isnt over achieving in the least bit, unless you think being ranked towards the bottom in every offensive category is considered over-achieving. "Only" 80 yards a game is comfortably over 1000 yards, over 1200 actually, so that's not really a good metric to use. Plus he also has 452 receiving yards. If you would've told me that this team would be anywhere near 16th in points scored at the start of the season I would've laughed in your face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 03:18 PM) "Only" 80 yards a game is comfortably over 1000 yards, over 1200 actually, so that's not really a good metric to use. Plus he also has 452 receiving yards. If you would've told me that this team would be anywhere near 16th in points scored at the start of the season I would've laughed in your face. And thats because of our defense and special teams. Defense puts the offense in good positions to score and Manning has been doing well in kick returns, gould is having a solid season again and maynard is constantly pinning the other team inside the 20. Also in a 16 game season having a 1000 yard season isnt that overly impressive anymore, you should at the very least expect that. This offense has not overpoerformed in the least bit besides 2 games. Im not saying Forte hasnt been good, he has been great no doubt, but to say this offense has overperformed is crazy talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Defense and special teams? For total defense, somehow they're ranked in the top 3rd, I'm not sure how, but this defense is a shell of its former self. And Hester has been non-existent on ST, Manning has been good, but not good enough to credit ST for the points. The offense is pathetic... they've managed to be mediocre, sometimes even average. Yes, that's overachieving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 Dont get me wrong, Im fed up with the WHOLE coaching staff, but it should say something that the fans basically want the HC, OC and DCs heads on a stick and yet we have 9 wins and are tied for the division lead with what appears to be a terrible offense, an unmotivated aging defense and only one return td which isnt from Hester. Looking at our sack totals, offensive numbers etc you would think the Bears would only have a couple wins at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (RockRaines @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 12:38 PM) I will say this, Craig Steltz looked alot better than I have given him credit for. I have to disagree with this statement. Steltz got ran the f*** over a couple times and generally looked awful last night I thought. I think he had 4 or 5 tackles, but I was underwhelmed with his performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:14 PM) I have to disagree with this statement. Steltz got ran the f*** over a couple times and generally looked awful last night I thought. I think he had 4 or 5 tackles, but I was underwhelmed with his performance. He got run over once on Grant's TD, and that was his 1st play on defense. Other than that, he played decently. Nothing great, but nothing terrible either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 04:20 PM) Dont get me wrong, Im fed up with the WHOLE coaching staff, but it should say something that the fans basically want the HC, OC and DCs heads on a stick and yet we have 9 wins and are tied for the division lead with what appears to be a terrible offense, an unmotivated aging defense and only one return td which isnt from Hester. Looking at our sack totals, offensive numbers etc you would think the Bears would only have a couple wins at this point. The Bears play in a terrible division with terrible overrated players. Urlacher is done and he should've never got that contract, Harris got paid and hasn't cared, Brown and Ogunleye are still decent, Mark Anderson hasn't been able to match his production from his rookie year, Tank Johnson is still being missed. Their secondary is atrocious. To expect Hester to continue being able to return TD's like it's nothing is unrealistic. Remember when DeAngelo Hall was all the rage? Where is he now? Excellent returners don't last. Hester is still dynamic and should still return kicks, but to say, "He only has one TD return" is being irresponsible as a fan of football. Hell didn't TB have a streak going where no one returned a kick for a TD? The Bears WR core is still pretty terrible. I see nothing but 3rd rate receivers. Hester should be a 3rd receiver, Booker a 4th, Olsen should be starting fulltime at TE with no splitting duties. Orton IMO is still not the answer, but he could be decent with good receivers around him. The problem is, the Bears offense isn't even interesting enough for top receivers. I still think firing Terry O'Shea was a mistake because those games Rex QB'd in that year, the offense was excellent and efficient. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 (edited) Tank Johnson wasn't an impact player, Marcus Harrison is pretty much whatever Tank Johnson was. Urlacher is not done, he's being held back by the awfulness of Babich. The inconsistency of the DTs in front of him hasn't really helped either. Hester's been a complete non-factor on ST this year. Edited December 23, 2008 by lostfan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:31 PM) The Bears play in a terrible division with terrible overrated players. Urlacher is done and he should've never got that contract, Harris got paid and hasn't cared, Brown and Ogunleye are still decent, Mark Anderson hasn't been able to match his production from his rookie year, Tank Johnson is still being missed. Their secondary is atrocious. To expect Hester to continue being able to return TD's like it's nothing is unrealistic. Remember when DeAngelo Hall was all the rage? Where is he now? Excellent returners don't last. Hester is still dynamic and should still return kicks, but to say, "He only has one TD return" is being irresponsible as a fan of football. Hell didn't TB have a streak going where no one returned a kick for a TD? The Bears WR core is still pretty terrible. I see nothing but 3rd rate receivers. Hester should be a 3rd receiver, Booker a 4th, Olsen should be starting fulltime at TE with no splitting duties. Orton IMO is still not the answer, but he could be decent with good receivers around him. The problem is, the Bears offense isn't even interesting enough for top receivers. I still think firing Terry O'Shea was a mistake because those games Rex QB'd in that year, the offense was excellent and efficient. Youre proving my point, after all that and theyre still tied for the lead in the division. Its not the worst division in football either, its not even the second worst. Those are out west. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:34 PM) Tank Johnson wasn't an impact player, Marcus Harrison is pretty much whatever Tank Johnson was. Urlacher is not done, he's being held back by the awfulness of Babich. The inconsistency of the DTs in front of him hasn't really helped either. Hester's been a complete non-factor on ST this year. Tank Johnson was good enough to clog the middle where the Bears didn't need to stack the box with their d-line, therefore allowing to hide the weaknesses of their secondary. All they had to concentrate was their zone. Rivera had a good scheme, but had excellent players. Urlacher is definitely done. He's been awful for the past two years. That's not on Babich, that's on him. Briggs still makes the plays, Urlacher does not. And Hester shouldn't be expected to even average more than 1TD per year on ST. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 The last time I looked at Hester's numbers he was waaaaaaaaay down in averages. Not even close to the top. Which Tank Johnson were you watching? Did you see the Super Bowl? Or the games in the second half of '06? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted December 23, 2008 Share Posted December 23, 2008 QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:36 PM) Youre proving my point, after all that and theyre still tied for the lead in the division. Its not the worst division in football either, its not even the second worst. Those are out west. Yes, it really is. Bears are not serious contenders, Packers blow, Vikings are alright at best. Don't even get me started on the Lions. The Cardinals have a chance with a pretty great offense. Both divisions stink, but the NFC North is a joke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:52 PM) Yes, it really is. Bears are not serious contenders, Packers blow, Vikings are alright at best. Don't even get me started on the Lions. The Cardinals have a chance with a pretty great offense. Both divisions stink, but the NFC North is a joke. You aren't really claiming the two western division are better than the NFC North are you? Because that's just silly, the NFC and AFC West this year are two of the worst divisions in the history of professional athletics. The NFC North is really bad, but it's not on the level of those two. Edited December 24, 2008 by whitesoxfan101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrunkBomber Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 QUOTE (whitesoxfan101 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 09:07 PM) You aren't really claiming the two western division are better than the NFC North are you? Because that's just silly, the NFC and AFC West this year are two of the worst divisions in the history of professional athletics. The NFC North is really bad, but it's not on the level of those two. I was hoping someone would chime in on this. I think the NFC West is the worst by far but I think the AFC West is pretty brutal as well. The NFC North looks worse because of the Lions but the Bears/Vikes and even Pack on occasions are all legitimate teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 09:12 PM) I was hoping someone would chime in on this. I think the NFC West is the worst by far but I think the AFC West is pretty brutal as well. The NFC North looks worse because of the Lions but the Bears/Vikes and even Pack on occasions are all legitimate teams. I still think the Pack is the most talented team in the North, but McCarthy is just a horrendous coach. His magic has aided in most of their losses (they have many close losses), and if you gave them even an adequate coach, they could very well be in first place right now. Their defense has had some major injuries though, I will admit that. Rogers has been a much better QB than Favre this year though, which makes the Packers fall even more baffling. Edited December 24, 2008 by whitesoxfan101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxbrian Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:31 PM) The Bears play in a terrible division with terrible overrated players. Urlacher is done and he should've never got that contract, Harris got paid and hasn't cared, Brown and Ogunleye are still decent, Mark Anderson hasn't been able to match his production from his rookie year, Tank Johnson is still being missed. Their secondary is atrocious. To expect Hester to continue being able to return TD's like it's nothing is unrealistic. Remember when DeAngelo Hall was all the rage? Where is he now? Excellent returners don't last. Hester is still dynamic and should still return kicks, but to say, "He only has one TD return" is being irresponsible as a fan of football. Hell didn't TB have a streak going where no one returned a kick for a TD? The Bears WR core is still pretty terrible. I see nothing but 3rd rate receivers. Hester should be a 3rd receiver, Booker a 4th, Olsen should be starting fulltime at TE with no splitting duties. Orton IMO is still not the answer, but he could be decent with good receivers around him. The problem is, the Bears offense isn't even interesting enough for top receivers. I still think firing Terry O'Shea was a mistake because those games Rex QB'd in that year, the offense was excellent and efficient. I expected it, and why not? The guy was a machine and had me breathless everytime he touched it. Last night, he did the same when he almost broke one. And that was Dante Hall, and D'Angelo Hall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
witesoxfan Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 05:52 PM) Yes, it really is. Bears are not serious contenders, Packers blow, Vikings are alright at best. Don't even get me started on the Lions. The Cardinals have a chance with a pretty great offense. Both divisions stink, but the NFC North is a joke. The Vikings are alright at best, yet absolutely destroyed the Cardinals, who have a pretty great offense, in Arizona a couple weeks back. I don't know about anybody else, but that makes perfect sense to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (witesoxfan @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 09:16 PM) The Vikings are alright at best, yet absolutely destroyed the Cardinals, who have a pretty great offense, in Arizona a couple weeks back. I don't know about anybody else, but that makes perfect sense to me. Well just because the Vikings destroyed Arizona at Arizona with their backup QB in for most of the game doesn't mean anything about the NFC North vs. NFC West "debate". What kind of logic would taking something out of a matchup like that be? Edited December 24, 2008 by whitesoxfan101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 Correct me if Im wrong, but the Bears were pretty close to beating Carolina, Tampa Bay and Atlanta. They have 2 bad losses (games outside of 1 TD) Vikings and Packers. The Vikings game they blew they could have taken a big lead but just massively messed it up. Packers flat out decimated them. All in all the Bears may not be great, but most other teams in the NFL arent that great either. If they make the playoffs who knows what happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 QUOTE (lostfan @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 03:33 PM) Defense and special teams? For total defense, somehow they're ranked in the top 3rd, I'm not sure how, but this defense is a shell of its former self. And Hester has been non-existent on ST, Manning has been good, but not good enough to credit ST for the points. The offense is pathetic... they've managed to be mediocre, sometimes even average. Yes, that's overachieving. Again how is being ranked close to last in just about every offensive statistic considered mediocre. Ill tell you what, if this offense truly was mediocre our defense would look a TON better, as it is like you said they ranked in top3. Im not going to argue anymore, I just dont understand how outside of two games, one vs an 0-15 team and the other we still turned the ball over a ton, you can consider the offense overachieving. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxbrian Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 09:27 PM) Correct me if Im wrong, but the Bears were pretty close to beating Carolina, Tampa Bay and Atlanta. They have 2 bad losses (games outside of 1 TD) Vikings and Packers. The Vikings game they blew they could have taken a big lead but just massively messed it up. Packers flat out decimated them. All in all the Bears may not be great, but most other teams in the NFL arent that great either. If they make the playoffs who knows what happens. Ding ding ding. You're the winner! Show him what he's won, Johnny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) If the Bears make the playoffs, there is a 99 percent chance they will lose within the first two rounds. However, the whole point of making it in a spot like this is that once in a lifetime run that sometimes comes out of nowhere. Edited December 24, 2008 by whitesoxfan101 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lostfan Posted December 24, 2008 Share Posted December 24, 2008 (edited) QUOTE (SoxFan101 @ Dec 23, 2008 -> 10:43 PM) Again how is being ranked close to last in just about every offensive statistic considered mediocre. Ill tell you what, if this offense truly was mediocre our defense would look a TON better, as it is like you said they ranked in top3. Im not going to argue anymore, I just dont understand how outside of two games, one vs an 0-15 team and the other we still turned the ball over a ton, you can consider the offense overachieving. Because you're nitpicking my choice of words, so it all sounds pretty ridiculous. Is it that important to argue about? Really? Edited December 24, 2008 by lostfan 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.