Jump to content

Bears versus Packers game thread


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:04 AM)
Considering how bad the Bears looked in the preseson, overall it was good year. Never would have thought they would win the division and host the NFC Champ. game. I don't know how much longer the defense will be this good, they really need to get some help on that offense ASAP. They tend to draft on the defensive side more, and the talent disparity shows. Obviously they need some lineman, but a receiver or two is a must. They need a big #1 who can fight for a ball. Hester is just not a top receiver, Knox is small and not aggressive enough. I like Bennett, but he's more of a possession guy.

I guess the debate now is whether these guys will become better and more useful targets if you can keep Cutler upright for longer, or whether it'd be better to have a top flight safety blanket for Cutler that he can throw the ball to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 03:00 PM)
You're crediting the fact that Hanie came in and had a good attitude for the fact that the Bears could suddenly move the ball, and not the fact that they were actually moving the ball?

 

I'd be moping too if Todd Collins was in at QB.

 

This is such a contradictory statement it's not even worth bothering with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:16 AM)
This is such a contradictory statement it's not even worth bothering with.

I think observers in the NFL put way too much emphasis on people's mental states, whether they're moping, etc.

 

The Bears wouldn't have moved the ball with Todd Collins in there because Todd Collins is terrible. They could have been the happiest, most energetic people in the world, and they wouldn't have moved the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 08:07 AM)
I guess the debate now is whether these guys will become better and more useful targets if you can keep Cutler upright for longer, or whether it'd be better to have a top flight safety blanket for Cutler that he can throw the ball to.

 

Well if you can't keep him upright, then it won't matter how good his receivers are. Even the top QBs occassionally need their receivers to make plays for them, and it just seems like no one on the Bears can do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:18 AM)
Well if you can't keep him upright, then it won't matter how good his receivers are. Even the top QBs occassionally need their receivers to make plays for them, and it just seems like no one on the Bears can do that.

But the contradiction is built into your post. None of the Bears receivers make plays for Cutler, but they never really get the chance to do so because the QB isn't protected.

 

It'd be great to fix both, but if you can't...which one do you do? I don't know the answer to that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 08:25 AM)
But the contradiction is built into your post. None of the Bears receivers make plays for Cutler, but they never really get the chance to do so because the QB isn't protected.

 

It'd be great to fix both, but if you can't...which one do you do? I don't know the answer to that.

 

That's true. I guess that from what I've seen, I dont think these receivers are good enough to make plays for him given the chance, like a Jennings or Holmes type WR would.

 

I think you fix the O-Line first. Bad receivers can get open and catch the ball given time. But if your QB is running for his life, a stud WR can only help so much. Plus, the improved line can also have a positive effect on your running game.

Edited by LittleHurt05
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:25 AM)
But the contradiction is built into your post. None of the Bears receivers make plays for Cutler, but they never really get the chance to do so because the QB isn't protected.

 

It'd be great to fix both, but if you can't...which one do you do? I don't know the answer to that.

I think you have to fix the line first. Any more time a QB has to see the field and how plays are developing makes him and the receivers more effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:33 AM)
That's true. I guess that from what I've seen, I dont think these receivers are good enough to make plays for him given the chance, like a Jennings or Holmes type WR would.

 

I think you fix the O-Line first. Bad receivers can get open and catch the ball given time. But if your QB is running for his life, a stud WR can only help so much. Plus, the improved line can also have a positive effect on your running game.

I actually believe you, but to play devil's advocate...if you have say, Vincent Jackson, suddenly those safety blitzes that hit Cutler don't exist any more, because no one's bringing up a safety to blitz when they know Jackson will just blow past them. And if the O-line does start to collapse, your QB can just whip the ball in their #1 receiver's direction and still have a good chance of a first down by letting the receiver do his job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 08:38 AM)
I actually believe you, but to play devil's advocate...if you have say, Vincent Jackson, suddenly those safety blitzes that hit Cutler don't exist any more, because no one's bringing up a safety to blitz when they know Jackson will just blow past them. And if the O-line does start to collapse, your QB can just whip the ball in their #1 receiver's direction and still have a good chance of a first down by letting the receiver do his job.

 

In that situation, you are correct. But if your O-line can't handle a simple 4-man rush or one LB blitzing, theres only so many times you can chuck up to him. The defense then starts double teaming him and you will be in trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:47 AM)
In that situation, you are correct. But if your O-line can't handle a simple 4-man rush or one LB blitzing, theres only so many times you can chuck up to him. The defense then starts double teaming him and you will be in trouble.

A true, legit #1 WR, of the level that there are probably only 5-10 in the NFL, it doesn't matter if they're double teamed.

 

I'm not sure if Jackson is in that class, but he's potentially close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 08:49 AM)
A true, legit #1 WR, of the level that there are probably only 5-10 in the NFL, it doesn't matter if they're double teamed.

 

I'm not sure if Jackson is in that class, but he's potentially close.

 

You can only depend on that so much, I think, you can't throw it up for grabs to him on nearly every passing play. That's gonna lead to trouble eventually

 

I'm not sure if VJax is up there with Fitzgerald or AJ. I think he might be on the next tier, but it is close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Thunderbolt @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 07:48 AM)
Does everyone whose accusing Jay of willingly sitting out this game understand the actual implications of what they’re suggesting? Does anyone actually believe that Jay Cutler wanted to lose this game? To be put under scrutiny in like this? To throw a kid like Hanie into the fire on this kind of stage? I refuse to believe that Cutler is the kind of man that would come within a game of the Super Bowl, get a minor injury, and blow it out of proportion. I don’t think any competitor, any NFL Quarterback, would pull the kind of s*** that Cutler is being accused of. I think the entire discussion is disturbing on many levels.

Sadly, Many dumb@#$$es do believe he just lied down and quit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:08 AM)
The thing I hate about being a Bears fan is that they're basically the Cubs of the NFL. A "storied" franchise with just one Super Bowl to their name, the last one being over a quarter century ago. Where the Cubs are "loveable," the Bears are "tough."

 

That is a poor comparison. The Cubs have one WS title in their history. The Bears have won multiple championships albeit in the 40's and before. At least the Bears earned their reputation at one point in their history. The Cubs never did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ptatc @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 10:19 AM)
That is a poor comparison. The Cubs have one WS title in their history. The Bears have won multiple championships albeit in the 40's and before. At least the Bears earned their reputation at one point in their history. The Cubs never did.

 

My point is that they have an historic reputation as a storied franchise despite not having much to show for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 23, 2011 -> 11:47 PM)
Very true, and as much as a lot of us are pissed at Cutler, the MRI this week is important because a torn ACL could really hurt next year also.

 

If this is the case they better fire the Tim Bream and the Northwestern physicians. They sure didn't care of him like he had an ACL tear or any other significant injury.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (kev211 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 01:29 AM)

@ochocinco - Turned on Espn and reading the tweets current/former players have sent out based on Cutlers injury.what if he's really hurt bad :( I'm sad

 

Finally someone with a brain...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still love Jay Cutler. Dude is the best we've ever had.

 

We had some tough luck here, the way that defense played in the 2nd half and how we had a few chances to tie the game on drives... if Cutler is healthy we win that game.

 

I feel the worst for Brian Urlacher. This was his best chance to win a Super Bowl ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:26 AM)
My point is that they have an historic reputation as a storied franchise despite not having much to show for it.

 

And I disagree that they don't have much to show for it. They have more NFL championships than all but a couple of teams. They were a long time ago but they historically are one of the best teams in the NFL as far as the number of championship is concerned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Leonard Zelig @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 10:35 AM)
8 championships, good for second most, I believe.

 

And all but two happened in the 1940's or earlier. Everyone is satisfied with 1985, though. Perhaps they're more like the Pittsburgh Pirates or the San Francisco Giants (before this year) of the NFL.

 

My point remains. They've hardly done anything in over 50 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:44 AM)
And all but two happened in the 1940's or earlier. Everyone is satisfied with 1985, though. Perhaps they're more like the Pittsburgh Pirates or the San Francisco Giants (before this year) of the NFL.

 

My point remains. They've hardly done anything in over 50 years.

Having been born in 1983, I am not satisfied with 1985. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 23, 2011 -> 03:26 PM)
I don't think Cutler has any idea about the crap he's about to catch in this city.

City, National Media too.

 

It is horrible. The one thing about Jay that I find it hard to question (or at least did up until yesterday) was his toughness. Guy has gotten blasted and just gets up and keeps playing. Guy plays through diabetes and never uses it as an excuse.

 

So I have a hard time, when one time something happens, to really go out and question his toughness. Unfortunately I have to hear a million NFL players tweet what a p**** he is cause he's the most hated player in the NFL for some reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:32 AM)
if Cutler is healthy we win that game.

 

 

And you base this on what? His stellar first half performance prior to getting hurt?

 

If Cutler was healthy, I'm pretty sure the Packers D wouldn't haven't taken it easy like they did, and continued to dominate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (HeGone33 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 09:51 AM)
And you base this on what? His stellar first half performance prior to getting hurt?

 

If Cutler was healthy, I'm pretty sure the Packers D wouldn't haven't taken it easy like they did, and continued to dominate.

 

Agreed. The Packers' play calling seemed to get much more conservative once Culter was out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...