Official 2010-11 NFL Thread

[GoSox05]

Thats how it supposed to work, but can the Bears run the ball with that o-line. That is the question.

 

On another note. Dallas coaching is just awful. Wade Phillips is about done.

[Balta1701]

Wade Phillips is about done.

Still made the single worst football decision I've ever seen. Starting Rob Johnson over Doug Flutie against the Titans. I will never stop holding that decision against him; literally broke a franchise for a decade.

[Kyyle23]

Still made the single worst football decision I've ever seen. Starting Rob Johnson over Doug Flutie against the Titans. I will never stop holding that decision against him; literally broke a franchise for a decade.

 

The Curse of Flutie

[Balta1701]

The Curse of Flutie

Bah, if that's a curse then every team in the majors in every sport has a curse.

 

That was just horrible decision making that led to a series of increasingly bad personnel decisions.

[jenksycat]

How did they "luck" into INT's? Dont you have to be in position, to have coverage, to rush the QB? There are alot of factors into forcing an INT.

 

The run game may be somewhat suspect, but then again, short passes to your RB are running plays in the Martz system. Forte has been very good. We also have a ridiculous passing attack right now with emphasis on spreading the ball around to WR's TE's and RB's. The Bears are hard to defend even with swiss cheese as the O-line.

 

You luck into an INT buy an all-pro receiver not securing a ball and by another one stupidly tipping a ball he had no change catching. I wouldn't call either of those INT's a result of our magnificent D but just random right-place right-time events. The fumble was all D/Tillman, the INTs weren't.

 

It's like some of Cutlert's INT's last year. Would you call an INT made because an average receiver fell down or didn't know his route a masterful defensive play? I wouldn't.

 

And that passing attack will diminish once teams realize you can rush with the Punter and still have a very high chance at a sack.

[Balta1701]

You luck into an INT buy an all-pro receiver not securing a ball and by another one stupidly tipping a ball he had no change catching. I wouldn't call either of those INT's a result of our magnificent D but just random right-place right-time events. The fumble was all D/Tillman, the INTs weren't.

 

It's like some of Cutlert's INT's last year. Would you call an INT made because an average receiver fell down or didn't know his route a masterful defensive play? I wouldn't.

 

And that passing attack will diminish once teams realize you can rush with the Punter and still have a very high chance at a sack.

I'd say that even the best QB with the best WR's in the league winds up throwing 5-10 Lucky INT's every year. There was a great example of that in the Jets/Patriots game yesterday...Brady put a ball where only Moss could get it, along the sidelines and Moss had to jump to get his hands on it, Moss only tipped it though, it then bounced off the CB's hands and then another DB managed to grab the ball and plant his feet before falling out of bounds.

 

I think each D gets 5-10 of those per year, depending on how good they are at making tips, and each O probably gets 5-10 of them per year, with some exceptions for guys who's mechanics are such that they throw the ball a little low.

[RockRaines]

You luck into an INT buy an all-pro receiver not securing a ball and by another one stupidly tipping a ball he had no change catching. I wouldn't call either of those INT's a result of our magnificent D but just random right-place right-time events. The fumble was all D/Tillman, the INTs weren't.

 

It's like some of Cutlert's INT's last year. Would you call an INT made because an average receiver fell down or didn't know his route a masterful defensive play? I wouldn't.

 

And that passing attack will diminish once teams realize you can rush with the Punter and still have a very high chance at a sack.

Or by having a DB knock the ball out of a receivers hands for one and having a TE so afraid of a hit that he gator armed a ball he could have caught if he squared up to the ball. I dont see those as lucky at all. We were in the position not only to make a hit, but to make the pick.

 

A WR falling down, or not running the right route is something that may be lucky if the QB threw it right to the guys, but these picks were because of contact or fear or contact, and thats all on the D.

[ChWRoCk2]

Another thing to note is this Dallas defense shutdown a Redskins offense that dominated today.

Redskins don't exactly have a great O-Line and McNabb's ankle was far worse in week 1. I wasn't impressed at all with the Cowboys, they can get to the QB but their coverage sucked. Why they continued to blitz 4-6 players is beyond me when Ware only was doing the job.

 

Edit: Maybe not sucked but the receivers had too much of a cushion.

 

Yea! We get to hear peopel complain about the icing the kicker timeouts.

I have 0 problems with coaches calling a timeout prior to a game winning kick, solid strategic move.

 

Like a dummy (so I thought), I benched Cutler versus Dallas. Then, the guy I started (McNabb) gets me the same amount of points. Whew.

Try this on for size, week 1 I lost by 79, my optimal lineup would have made up 70 points, week 2 I lost by 50, optimal lineup would have gotten me 90 more. Safe to say I'm playing the wrong people.

Edited September 20, 2010 by ChWRoCk2

[ChWRoCk2]

That's a strategy that ought to open up the running game though.

Lol, the Bears & Packers have a running game? However, I bet the running game will be the difference week 3.

[jenksycat]

Or by having a DB knock the ball out of a receivers hands for one and having a TE so afraid of a hit that he gator armed a ball he could have caught if he squared up to the ball. I dont see those as lucky at all. We were in the position not only to make a hit, but to make the pick.

 

A WR falling down, or not running the right route is something that may be lucky if the QB threw it right to the guys, but these picks were because of contact or fear or contact, and thats all on the D.

 

I guess if you want to talk yourself into those being "skill" INT's rather than just luck, go for it. I'll believe if they can be competitive against Greenbay, which I doubt they will be.

[GoSox05]

I guess if you want to talk yourself into those being "skill" INT's rather than just luck, go for it. I'll believe if they can be competitive against Greenbay, which I doubt they will be.

 

 

The Bears could 0-15 and the Packers 15-0 and it would be a competitive game. Other way around too.

[LittleHurt05]

The Bears could 0-15 and the Packers 15-0 and it would be a competitive game. Other way around too.

 

4 of their last 8 meetings have been 19 point or higher blowouts

[Steve9347]

4 of their last 8 meetings have been 19 point or higher blowouts

God damn stats always mess with the actual truth.

[knightni]

God damn stats always mess with the actual truth.

I am sooo stealing that.

[GoSox05]

I don't think 8 games should reflect two teams that have been playing each other since 1456.

[LittleHurt05]

I don't think 8 games should reflect two teams that have been playing each other since 1456.

 

How long have they have been playing each other has nothing to do with anything. You said that Bears/Packers games are always competitive no matter what their records are. I call bulls*** and tried to show you that 50% of their meetings in the last 4 years have not been competitive. Do you remember the New Years Eve night game in 2006? That was the least competitive piece of s*** football game I have ever seen. The Bears were prepping for the playoffs and wanted nothing to do with playing that game. There have been past scores in the rivalry of 61-7, 49-0, 40-3, 45-7 among others. Many of their games have been close and competitive but there have been several occurences where one team just wasn't on the same level as the other and gets run off the field. It's possible the Packers do it on Monday. I hope not but to say it never happens in the series is a stretch.

 

 

[Steve9347]

How long have they have been playing each other has nothing to do with anything. You said that Bears/Packers games are always competitive no matter what their records are. I call bulls*** and tried to show you that 50% of their meetings in the last 4 years have not been competitive. Do you remember the New Years Eve night game in 2006? That was the least competitive piece of s*** football game I have ever seen. The Bears were prepping for the playoffs and wanted nothing to do with playing that game. There have been past scores in the rivalry of 61-7, 49-0, 40-3, 45-7 among others. Many of their games have been close and competitive but there have been several occurences where one team just wasn't on the same level as the other and gets run off the field. It's possible the Packers do it on Monday. I hope not but to say it never happens in the series is a stretch.

Damn son, take it easy.

[Kyyle23]

http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/conversation?gameId=300919006

 

 

 

Dallas fan abe3232, "you are all just jealous, however Jerry and Wade are all at fault here"

 

All right, here it is,......

 

All you who love to point and laugh at us when we lose and wonder why we thought we were going to be good this year need to look at this thing objectively for a moment.

 

When you look at our roster it's one that many GMs and Fans would be jealous of. You can laugh and deny that if you want but you know it's true.

 

Romo had his best year ever in 2009, threw less Ints than he ever has, and FINALLY won a playoff game.

 

The defense was #2 last year in points allowed which, is the most important defensive stat out there considering that's how you win, not letting the other team score.

 

So, when you point and laugh because we Dallas fans were soooo excited coming into the year,.............. let's be honest

 

If any of you had the same roster, and the year we had last year down the stretch,......

 

You would have been just as excited.

 

This is Jerry's fault,... this team has had no discipline since the Tuna left. They've had the talent to compete for Superbowls (PLURAL) since Wade got here.

 

Fat Wade walked into a roster that won 13 games and ran away with the division, then let them relax/ destroy their edge by turning them loose to go where ever they wanted for the week(Cabo???)

 

Matt Millan could have coached that roster to a playoff birth the year before and they missed entirely.

 

Winning a playoff game last year was the worst thing that could have happened because it kept Wade and Garrett here for another year.

 

lol

[GoSox05]

How long have they have been playing each other has nothing to do with anything. You said that Bears/Packers games are always competitive no matter what their records are. I call bulls*** and tried to show you that 50% of their meetings in the last 4 years have not been competitive. Do you remember the New Years Eve night game in 2006? That was the least competitive piece of s*** football game I have ever seen. The Bears were prepping for the playoffs and wanted nothing to do with playing that game. There have been past scores in the rivalry of 61-7, 49-0, 40-3, 45-7 among others. Many of their games have been close and competitive but there have been several occurences where one team just wasn't on the same level as the other and gets run off the field. It's possible the Packers do it on Monday. I hope not but to say it never happens in the series is a stretch.

 

OK. You got me.

[lostfan]

He was slightly banged up from the week before, but he said he figured he would be used less this week. Which is weird. WTF would he figure that?? I'm guessing the real deal was he is hurt and they just don't want anyone to know where. He is way ahead of Hester and should be starting oppo Knox. Hester should be exactly what Martz pegged him as when he first arrived, Az-Hakim.

I'm thinking he didn't play because Martz wanted more speed to run the slants and post routes to stop Dallas from blitzing.

[nitetrain8601]

The big question for the Bears is going to be, can they play fast paced in the frozen tundra of Lord Soldier's Field.

[MurcieOne]

I'm thinking he didn't play because Martz wanted more speed to run the slants and post routes to stop Dallas from blitzing.

 

I think Aromashadou is still faster than Bennett. But Bennett is probably a more competent blocker and has the best hands of any receiver on our team. So maybe the combination of those two things led him to taking DA's snaps.

[Kyyle23]

I think Aromashadou is still faster than Bennett. But Bennett is probably a more competent blocker and has the best hands of any receiver on our team. So maybe the combination of those two things led him to taking DA's snaps.

 

I really think the 3 drops had more to do with it than anything. I get the feeling they really like Aromashadu, and they want him to be better than that. A kick in the ass, if you will

[RockRaines]

I think he was hurt.

[Brian]

I think he was hurt.

 

That is what Lovie said in post game.