Week 10: Bears at NY Giants - Sunday, Nov 12, 8:15 pm EST

[goonys evil twin]

Giants fans seem to be split between those who are deathly afraid of an angry Bears team going insane on the wounded Giants, and those who think the Bears aren't good and will get hammered.

I'm still personally split on this as well. I still think the real Bears are the team we've seen 6 of the 8 games, but being that the two worst games have come in the last three weeks, I'm a little concerned.

 

I think the real Bears are the Bears we've seen in 8 of the 8 games. That is, they are an incredibly dangerous and potent team, but they are prone to mistakes. I don't think it's a Jekyl/Hyde thing. It's more of a case of playing on a fine line of a risk taking team. The defense is all about attack attack attack, and relies heavily on speed. There is nothing methodical about this team.

 

They might be able to rein in the risk taking on offense, by focusing more on running the ball. But I think part of the goal over the first half of the season was seeing what they were capable of at their best. They had a new car and wanted to see how it handled the open highway. The question is whether or not they are willing to drive that car in traffic at reasonable speeds.

[soapy]

Giants fans seem to be split between those who are deathly afraid of an angry Bears team going insane on the wounded Giants, and those who think the Bears aren't good and will get hammered.

I'm still personally split on this as well. I still think the real Bears are the team we've seen 6 of the 8 games, but being that the two worst games have come in the last three weeks, I'm a little concerned.

 

I think the real Bears are the Bears we've seen in 8 of the 8 games. That is, they are an incredibly dangerous and potent team, but they are prone to mistakes. I don't think it's a Jekyl/Hyde thing. It's more of a case of playing on a fine line of a risk taking team. The defense is all about attack attack attack, and relies heavily on speed. There is nothing methodical about this team.

 

They might be able to rein in the risk taking on offense, by focusing more on running the ball. But I think part of the goal over the first half of the season was seeing what they were capable of at their best. They had a new car and wanted to see how it handled the open highway. The question is whether or not they are willing to drive that car in traffic at reasonable speeds.

Part of their inconsistancy on offense also comes from Grossman being young (playing time wise). He is still learning and is prone to several mistakes. I think he's also a risk-taking kind of quarterback. I hate to make Favre comparisons, but Rex may be of that "mold".

[Jon]

Giants fans seem to be split between those who are deathly afraid of an angry Bears team going insane on the wounded Giants, and those who think the Bears aren't good and will get hammered.

I'm still personally split on this as well. I still think the real Bears are the team we've seen 6 of the 8 games, but being that the two worst games have come in the last three weeks, I'm a little concerned.

 

I think the real Bears are the Bears we've seen in 8 of the 8 games. That is, they are an incredibly dangerous and potent team, but they are prone to mistakes. I don't think it's a Jekyl/Hyde thing. It's more of a case of playing on a fine line of a risk taking team. The defense is all about attack attack attack, and relies heavily on speed. There is nothing methodical about this team.

 

They might be able to rein in the risk taking on offense, by focusing more on running the ball. But I think part of the goal over the first half of the season was seeing what they were capable of at their best. They had a new car and wanted to see how it handled the open highway. The question is whether or not they are willing to drive that car in traffic at reasonable speeds.

Maybe overall, but the pass protection and running game have been incredibly inconsistent.

[goonys evil twin]

Here are some other games to circle on the calendar in the second half of the season.

 

1. Chicago Bears at New England Patriots (Nov. 26): This is the best of the remaining interconference games. If you think the Cardinals and Dolphins can come up with great schemes for Grossman, imagine what Bill Belichick can do. By the end of this game, the league and the Bears will know how Grossman stacks up as a playoff quarterback. It's a great learning tool for him and Bears offensive coordinator Ron Turner. This could be the defining moment of the season for the Patriots. They've lost to Denver and Indianapolis at home, so they certainly aren't invincible. A team that lost Deion Branch, David Givens, Adam Vinatieri, Willie McGinest and others covered up for their losses with great coaching. If the Patriots beat the Jets this weekend, they will have the AFC East pretty much wrapped up. The Bears will be coming off the Giants game and could be trying to avoid a three-game losing streak. This should be a dandy.

 

Come on, how do they make this mistake? The Bears play the Jets between the Giants and Pats game. They might be trying to avoid a 4-game losing streak, but a 3-gamer would be impossible at that point.

Edited November 9, 2006 by goony's evil twin

[Banedon]

Here are some other games to circle on the calendar in the second half of the season.

 

1. Chicago Bears at New England Patriots (Nov. 26): This is the best of the remaining interconference games. If you think the Cardinals and Dolphins can come up with great schemes for Grossman, imagine what Bill Belichick can do. By the end of this game, the league and the Bears will know how Grossman stacks up as a playoff quarterback. It's a great learning tool for him and Bears offensive coordinator Ron Turner. This could be the defining moment of the season for the Patriots. They've lost to Denver and Indianapolis at home, so they certainly aren't invincible. A team that lost Deion Branch, David Givens, Adam Vinatieri, Willie McGinest and others covered up for their losses with great coaching. If the Patriots beat the Jets this weekend, they will have the AFC East pretty much wrapped up. The Bears will be coming off the Giants game and could be trying to avoid a three-game losing streak. This should be a dandy.

 

Come on, how do they make this mistake? The Bears play the Jets between the Giants and Pats game. They might be trying to avoid a 4-game winning streak, but a 3-gamer would be impossible at that point.

 

If the Bears lost to the Giants and Jets, that would mean playing the Patriots would be trying to avoid a 3 game losing streak. It is poorly written though. They won't be coming directly off of the Giants game.

Edited November 9, 2006 by Banedon

[Chocolate Milk]

NY media in general is very dismissive of the Bears, especially their offense. They don't seem to think the Bears have a chance of scoring unless the defense does the work.

 

Seriously? By my count, the Giants are going to be missing 5 defensive starters (Osi, Strahan, Arrington, Madison, Short). Also backups Tuck and Emmons are questionable. I don't understand how they could be so confident with so many injuries. They don't have good depth.

[goonys evil twin]

Here are some other games to circle on the calendar in the second half of the season.

 

1. Chicago Bears at New England Patriots (Nov. 26): This is the best of the remaining interconference games. If you think the Cardinals and Dolphins can come up with great schemes for Grossman, imagine what Bill Belichick can do. By the end of this game, the league and the Bears will know how Grossman stacks up as a playoff quarterback. It's a great learning tool for him and Bears offensive coordinator Ron Turner. This could be the defining moment of the season for the Patriots. They've lost to Denver and Indianapolis at home, so they certainly aren't invincible. A team that lost Deion Branch, David Givens, Adam Vinatieri, Willie McGinest and others covered up for their losses with great coaching. If the Patriots beat the Jets this weekend, they will have the AFC East pretty much wrapped up. The Bears will be coming off the Giants game and could be trying to avoid a three-game losing streak. This should be a dandy.

 

Come on, how do they make this mistake? The Bears play the Jets between the Giants and Pats game. They might be trying to avoid a 4-game winning streak, but a 3-gamer would be impossible at that point.

 

If the Bears lost to the Giants and Jets, that would mean playing the Patriots would be trying to avoid a 3 game losing streak. It is poorly written though. They won't be coming directly off of the Giants game.

 

No, that would mean trying to avoid a 4 game losing streak.

[Banedon]

Here are some other games to circle on the calendar in the second half of the season.

 

1. Chicago Bears at New England Patriots (Nov. 26): This is the best of the remaining interconference games. If you think the Cardinals and Dolphins can come up with great schemes for Grossman, imagine what Bill Belichick can do. By the end of this game, the league and the Bears will know how Grossman stacks up as a playoff quarterback. It's a great learning tool for him and Bears offensive coordinator Ron Turner. This could be the defining moment of the season for the Patriots. They've lost to Denver and Indianapolis at home, so they certainly aren't invincible. A team that lost Deion Branch, David Givens, Adam Vinatieri, Willie McGinest and others covered up for their losses with great coaching. If the Patriots beat the Jets this weekend, they will have the AFC East pretty much wrapped up. The Bears will be coming off the Giants game and could be trying to avoid a three-game losing streak. This should be a dandy.

 

Come on, how do they make this mistake? The Bears play the Jets between the Giants and Pats game. They might be trying to avoid a 4-game winning streak, but a 3-gamer would be impossible at that point.

 

If the Bears lost to the Giants and Jets, that would mean playing the Patriots would be trying to avoid a 3 game losing streak. It is poorly written though. They won't be coming directly off of the Giants game.

 

No, that would mean trying to avoid a 4 game losing streak.

 

#-o

 

I'd repressed the memorys of last week.

[jmajew]

NY media in general is very dismissive of the Bears, especially their offense. They don't seem to think the Bears have a chance of scoring unless the defense does the work.

 

Seriously? By my count, the Giants are going to be missing 5 defensive starters (Osi, Strahan, Arrington, Madison, Short). Also backups Tuck and Emmons are questionable. I don't understand how they could be so confident with so many injuries. They don't have good depth.

 

Well we can't forget Toomer is out for the year and that Plaxico is still battling back spasms. So their offense will be just Eli, Tiki, and Shockey. We can basically keep 8 men in the box if Plaxico isn't 100%, and that should hold down Tiki pretty well.

[Banedon]

Plaxico Burress is trash talking:

 

"I don't think they're the best corners I've played against or we've played against this year. By far, no," Burress said. "Those guys make plays (on) the balls that are thrown straight to them, but they're not just covering guys straight up and just shutting them down. I haven't seen any of that.

 

"They're very beatable."

 

When pressed on which group of defensive backs ranks as the toughest to play against, all Burress said was, "Definitely not them. If they want to come out there and play cover-1, bump-and-run, be (my) guest. I, for one, love it.

 

"They want to come out there, bump and play press one-on-one? Let's get go out there and have fun. Let's get it."

 

"They fly around, they're physical guys, they get after it, they blitz, they hit gaps," Burress said. "They're up in there trying to create havoc. And that's why their defensive backs make plays because they create so much pressure up front."

[UMFan83]

Plaxico Burress is trash talking:

 

"I don't think they're the best corners I've played against or we've played against this year. By far, no," Burress said. "Those guys make plays (on) the balls that are thrown straight to them, but they're not just covering guys straight up and just shutting them down. I haven't seen any of that.

 

"They're very beatable."

 

When pressed on which group of defensive backs ranks as the toughest to play against, all Burress said was, "Definitely not them. If they want to come out there and play cover-1, bump-and-run, be (my) guest. I, for one, love it.

 

"They want to come out there, bump and play press one-on-one? Let's get go out there and have fun. Let's get it."

 

"They fly around, they're physical guys, they get after it, they blitz, they hit gaps," Burress said. "They're up in there trying to create havoc. And that's why their defensive backs make plays because they create so much pressure up front."

 

I mean he's not totally wrong, but these comments week in and week out are getting annoying. Why motivate a team to set yourself up to look like a fool.

[UMFan83]

Also does he realize that the corners will very rarely give the receivers single coverage? Does he even know the defense that the Bears run? He'd better get on that.

[Banedon]

Also does he realize that the corners will very rarely give the receivers single coverage? Does he even know the defense that the Bears run? He'd better get on that.

 

That's what I was thinking too. He probably shouldn't expect a lot of Cover-1 bump and run. Most of the comments are ok, it's just funny how these guys do this every week, and really only Boldin and Taylor have been able to back it up at all.

[Careless]

Also does he realize that the corners will very rarely give the receivers single coverage? Does he even know the defense that the Bears run? He'd better get on that.

 

That's what I was thinking too. He probably shouldn't expect a lot of Cover-1 bump and run. Most of the comments are ok, it's just funny how these guys do this every week, and really only Boldin and Taylor have been able to back it up at all.

Yeah, only Steve Smith should expect that from the bears

:(

[Chocolate Milk]

Also does he realize that the corners will very rarely give the receivers single coverage? Does he even know the defense that the Bears run? He'd better get on that.

 

That's what I was thinking too. He probably shouldn't expect a lot of Cover-1 bump and run. Most of the comments are ok, it's just funny how these guys do this every week, and really only Boldin and Taylor have been able to back it up at all.

 

He probably should. I think the Beloved will load up to stop Barber.

[Banedon]

Also does he realize that the corners will very rarely give the receivers single coverage? Does he even know the defense that the Bears run? He'd better get on that.

 

That's what I was thinking too. He probably shouldn't expect a lot of Cover-1 bump and run. Most of the comments are ok, it's just funny how these guys do this every week, and really only Boldin and Taylor have been able to back it up at all.

 

He probably should. I think the Beloved will load up to stop Barber.

 

You're probably right given the WR situation on the Giants.

[CubmanPi]

BEARS 14

GIANTS 23

[Shavo]

NY media in general is very dismissive of the Bears, especially their offense. They don't seem to think the Bears have a chance of scoring unless the defense does the work.

 

Seriously? By my count, the Giants are going to be missing 5 defensive starters (Osi, Strahan, Arrington, Madison, Short). Also backups Tuck and Emmons are questionable. I don't understand how they could be so confident with so many injuries. They don't have good depth.

 

:shock: ... Actually, the Giants have pretty darn good depth ... good enough to hold two teams to 10 or less points with alot of starters out the last two weeks ...

 

Have you watched the Giants at all?

[rawaction]

NY media in general is very dismissive of the Bears, especially their offense. They don't seem to think the Bears have a chance of scoring unless the defense does the work.

 

Seriously? By my count, the Giants are going to be missing 5 defensive starters (Osi, Strahan, Arrington, Madison, Short). Also backups Tuck and Emmons are questionable. I don't understand how they could be so confident with so many injuries. They don't have good depth.

 

:shock: ... Actually, the Giants have pretty darn good depth ... good enough to hold two teams to 10 or less points with alot of starters out the last two weeks ...

 

Have you watched the Giants at all?

 

The Giants do have good depth. Of course, that all goes out the window when your "depth" is forced into the first string.

[Shavo]

NY media in general is very dismissive of the Bears, especially their offense. They don't seem to think the Bears have a chance of scoring unless the defense does the work.

 

Seriously? By my count, the Giants are going to be missing 5 defensive starters (Osi, Strahan, Arrington, Madison, Short). Also backups Tuck and Emmons are questionable. I don't understand how they could be so confident with so many injuries. They don't have good depth.

 

:shock: ... Actually, the Giants have pretty darn good depth ... good enough to hold two teams to 10 or less points with alot of starters out the last two weeks ...

 

Have you watched the Giants at all?

 

The Giants do have good depth. Of course, that all goes out the window when your "depth" is forced into the first string.

 

I agree, but to state the Giants don't have good depth is plain wrong.

[UMFan83]

The early picks are all Giants from the online gurus. Damn it actually feels good to be under respected again.

[Chocolate Milk]

NY media in general is very dismissive of the Bears, especially their offense. They don't seem to think the Bears have a chance of scoring unless the defense does the work.

 

Seriously? By my count, the Giants are going to be missing 5 defensive starters (Osi, Strahan, Arrington, Madison, Short). Also backups Tuck and Emmons are questionable. I don't understand how they could be so confident with so many injuries. They don't have good depth.

 

:shock: ... Actually, the Giants have pretty darn good depth ... good enough to hold two teams to 10 or less points with alot of starters out the last two weeks ...

 

Have you watched the Giants at all?

 

The Giants do have good depth. Of course, that all goes out the window when your "depth" is forced into the first string.

 

I agree, but to state the Giants don't have good depth is plain wrong.

 

I was refering specifically to this game where they have some backups who are also banged up. They started a DE off the practice squad last week. Normally they have great DE depth, but not for this game. With so many defensive players hurt, if someone gets hurt in this game they could be in big trouble. Sorry for the confusion.

 

The Giants are the team I follow the most other than the Bears.

 

Edit: Let's be honest about the last two games, as well. One game was played in a hurricane against the 2nd worst offensive team in football and the other was played against the Texans, the 6th worst offensive team in football.

[Soul]

I'm a massive Bear fan, but the thing about Plaxico's comments----they aren't that far off. Even I don't think our corners are the greatest.

 

And I fear Burress can destroy cover 2 easily---especially since we have a junk safety in Todd Johnson and and a rook in Manning who will be providing the "2" aspect.

 

Oh yes I said it: Johnson is junk. He's been terrible since he joined the league, and as Ronnie Brown was pasting our run defense all day last week, I couldn't help but wonder how many of his 10+ yard runs would have been limited if Mike Brown had been there. My strong suspicion? ALL of them. Johnson's a concern, and if the Giants are smart, they will exploit it. As for Manning, I'm not seeing the strong nose for the ball and the hard hitting that I need from my safeties.....yet. Hopefully he develops that. He's certainly got more than enough athletic skills.

 

I'd rather play Harris/Manning than Johnson/Manning but I'm not sure if Harris can go, and to be honest he's not all that great either.

 

But I think the point is-----and it's a valid one-----out of this great defense has emerged some very sudden and serious concerns about the DBs in general. Plax may be talking trash, but he's not lying.

[Chocolate Milk]

You are right about one thing: Todd Johnson sucks. Manning has been a dissapointment thus far, as well.

 

Chris Harris is off the injury report. What's his story? He should be on the field over Johnson, IMO.

 

It looks like Bradley is going to see a lot of action.

[Chocolate Milk]

Bears head coach Lovie Smith says Bernard Berrian (doubtful, ribs) could return to practice on Friday.

 

Original estimates had him out up to a month, but he's reportedly been walking comfortably, says his condition has improved, and considers himself "day-to-day." It would still be a surprise if Berrian plays Sunday. Nov. 10 - 12:02 am et

 

:?: