The Chicago Bears Preseason Thread

[Magnetic Curses]

Here is how I see things shaking out so far...

 

1. Packers 10-6

2. Vikings 8-8

3. Lions 6-10

4. Bears 6-10

 

switch the vikings with the packers, along with the records, and you've got it.

 

oh, and the bears will never finish 6-10, that's way too optimistic. 4-12, i think.

[UK1679666180]

Here is how I see things shaking out so far...

 

1. Packers 10-6

2. Vikings 8-8

3. Lions 6-10

4. Bears 6-10

 

switch the vikings with the packers, along with the records, and you've got it.

 

oh, and the bears will never finish 6-10, that's way too optimistic. 4-12, i think.

 

Agreed, I see the Vikings taking this division.

[Magnetic Curses]

How much rope does Angelo get after '06?

 

He would've likely been fired had the Bears not been to the SB, how long does that last?

 

the bears have a great core of players. what sucks is that none of them are offensive players, unless you count hester.

 

Their time has passed though. This one was once a great core on the defensive side, now it's a declining core of players.

 

i would argue that only urlacher is declining, 2 if you count brown. the others are in their prime.

 

Harris hasn't been the same either and very shortly both DEs will start to regress.

 

to be fair, i wasn't counting either de as a core player.

 

this team's core consists of harris, urlacher, briggs, tillman, vasher, and hester. possibly brown, he's getting older, but his injuries have actually saved some wear-and-tear on his body the past few years.

 

the others players should be interchangeable. with that group, the de's and safeties should be able to have a measure of success.

[cubweiser03]

Holy crap the defense was crap last night. They played really soft and the quick passing plays worked well against them. Mike Brown got beat bad on that TD. I didnt see anything upfront.

Special teams is ridiculousy good. The Bears block punts and FGs like a college team. This is the NFL, blocked punts and FGs just dont happen very often.

Orton and the oline did pretty good. Davis should of had 3 tds but him and Orton connected well.

Oh i hope i dont see that red zone screen to Hester, that play sucked the big ones.

[UK1679666180]

Hester is at his best on the deep fly pattern, the screens don't work for him on offense.

[Flames24Rulz]

Here is how I see things shaking out so far...

 

1. Packers 10-6

2. Vikings 8-8

3. Lions 6-10

4. Bears 6-10

 

switch the vikings with the packers, along with the records, and you've got it.

 

oh, and the bears will never finish 6-10, that's way too optimistic. 4-12, i think.

 

I think both the Vikes and Packers will finish 10-6.

[UMFan83]

Gotta keep telling myself preseason is meaningless. Not THAT worried about the defense yet.

[Banedon]

If the O wasn't a mirage, and the D was just a preseason fluke, the Bears might be ok this season.

 

I was glad to see how mad each of the D players was after the game.

[ELCABALLO45]

Here is how I see things shaking out so far...

 

1. Packers 10-6

2. Vikings 8-8

3. Lions 6-10

4. Bears 6-10

 

What are you basing the Vikings prediction on? The Tavaris injury? I heard it wasn't really that serious. Though I admit I haven't really been following them all that closely.

 

Im basing it on the Vikings being overhyped. Peterson IS a special player behind a great line, but I don't belive Jackson is good enough.

 

Also, the Vikings pass defense is getting older and was not good to begin with, I see Winfield and Sharper taking a step back and the rookie Johnson? struggling a bit. Allen should help rushing the quarterback but he really does not look to good stopping the run (even tho he does not have to). I just don't buy into the Vikings.

[Magnetic Curses]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

[ELCABALLO45]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

[CubColtPacer]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

[Jon]

Rod Wilson's injury Thursday night turned out to be a broken right forearm. Nick Roach had been suffering from a minor concussion, but I believe he was expected to be fine. Mark Andersen is expected to have a quick recovery from the thumb surgery he had last week.

 

Anyone know how Clark is doing?

[ELCABALLO45]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

 

Like who?

[CubbieBum]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

 

Like who?

 

Colts

Pats

Arizona

Cinci

 

After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now).

[ELCABALLO45]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

 

Like who?

 

Colts

Pats

Arizona

Cinci

 

After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now).

 

Indy? Probably

Pats? No

Arizona? haha no

Cinci? No

 

Arizona? Seriously? Yes they have Boldin and Fitz but after that? Come on now

 

New England has Moss and Welker but Gaffney and co. would be battling it out with Ruvell Martin for the 5th WR spot on the Packers rosters.

 

Cinci? Johnson and TJ are both elite but Chris Henry is.. well blah. He has talent but he cant stay on the field to prove that. And Chatman wouldnt make the Packers roster.

 

The Packers 1-5 have the arguably most talent and depth in the NFL at the WR position. The Colts are probably the closest however. Gonzalez would probably start over Jones but after that... And Wayne and Harrison are obviously elite but after that it would be Nelson and Martin over Hall and whoever else they have. So I would probably give you the Colts.

[Magnetic Curses]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

haha, who buys this crap? one player? indeed. what rhetorical bs.

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

their line ain't no prized pig. favre knew how to avoid the pass rush, rodgers has shown thus far in the pre-season that he definitely does not.

 

face it, the offense is a big question mark without favre, the springfield mystery spot, if you will.

 

there's no way that i'd predict a 10-6 season for them at this point. is it possible? sure. is it probable? not in my opinion.

[Magnetic Curses]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

 

Like who?

 

Colts

Pats

Arizona

Cinci

 

After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now).

 

Indy? Probably

Pats? No

Arizona? haha no

Cinci? No

 

Arizona? Seriously? Yes they have Boldin and Fitz but after that? Come on now

 

New England has Moss and Welker but Gaffney and co. would be battling it out with Ruvell Martin for the 5th WR spot on the Packers rosters.

 

Cinci? Johnson and TJ are both elite but Chris Henry is.. well blah. He has talent but he cant stay on the field to prove that. And Chatman wouldnt make the Packers roster.

 

The Packers 1-5 have the arguably most talent and depth in the NFL at the WR position. The Colts are probably the closest however. Gonzalez would probably start over Jones but after that... And Wayne and Harrison are obviously elite but after that it would be Nelson and Martin over Hall and whoever else they have. So I would probably give you the Colts.

 

please take your unconscionable homerism to the packers unconditional love thread, if you want to start one.

 

if you want to say that the packers are deep at wide receiver, go ahead. but it's a complete joke to compare a solid receiver corp filled with competent receivers to teams with 2 great receivers.

 

geez, try to be at least a little objective here, i know that being from wisconsin makes it hard, but still.

[CubColtPacer]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

 

Like who?

 

Colts

Pats

Arizona

Cinci

 

After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now).

 

Indy? Probably

Pats? No

Arizona? haha no

Cinci? No

 

Arizona? Seriously? Yes they have Boldin and Fitz but after that? Come on now

 

New England has Moss and Welker but Gaffney and co. would be battling it out with Ruvell Martin for the 5th WR spot on the Packers rosters.

 

Cinci? Johnson and TJ are both elite but Chris Henry is.. well blah. He has talent but he cant stay on the field to prove that. And Chatman wouldnt make the Packers roster.

 

The Packers 1-5 have the arguably most talent and depth in the NFL at the WR position. The Colts are probably the closest however. Gonzalez would probably start over Jones but after that... And Wayne and Harrison are obviously elite but after that it would be Nelson and Martin over Hall and whoever else they have. So I would probably give you the Colts.

 

I think a WR core has to be weighted according to projected playing time. You're right IMO on one thing: the Packers fifth wide receiver has proved more than pretty much any other team's 5th wide receiver. However, that isn't much benefit. Your 5th wide receiver only gets a small amount of playing time. So when looking at receiving cores, having a better 1st and 2nd wideouts are the most important thing. Then, having a good 3rd becomes important as they are on the field a lot. 4th and 5th are really not all that necessary most of the time (many teams don't even use a lot of 4 WR sets).

 

So I would agree with the Colts, Pats, Arizona, and Cincy. They all have 2 receivers who are gamechangers. Those are a lot more dangerous than 5 good receivers who are interchangable like the Packers have (2 of the receivers probably being classified as very good). If you look deeper into those teams, most of them have 3rd and 4th string guys who have enough talent to beat 1 on 1 coverage, which is all you need when having those top 2 guys. I know the Colts and Pats do.

 

I would then put the Packers on the next tier. Good WR cores that can burn you, but aren't the entire focus of a defense. Other teams on this tier include the Steelers (Ward/Homes/Washington/Sweed), Browns (Edwards/Stallworth/Jurevicius), Cowboys (Owens/Crayton), Saints (Colston/Henderson/Patten), and Lions (Williams/Johnson/Furrey).

 

I considered teams like the Giants, Rams, and Seahawks for the 2nd tier, but ultimately decided they were all 3rd tier.

[CuseCubFan69]

I think how well the Vikes and Packers do will depend on how good or bad the Bears and Lions are. I think the Pack's D is underrated while the Vikes might be a little overrated.

[UMFan83]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

Horrible argument. You act like you lost a starting left guard or something.

 

I seriously think Packers fans believe deep inside that Rodgers is going to step in and pick up where Favre left off with only a small drop off in performance. The thing is, the Packers fans have no idea what bad QB play feels like and how it effects the entire offense.

[Magnetic Curses]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

Horrible argument. You act like you lost a starting left guard or something.

 

I seriously think Packers fans believe deep inside that Rodgers is going to step in and pick up where Favre left off with only a small drop off in performance. The thing is, the Packers fans have no idea what bad QB play feels like and how it effects the entire offense.

 

my take on rodgers is like louis ck's take on babies.

[Soul]

I think how well the Vikes and Packers do will depend on how good or bad the Bears and Lions are. I think the Pack's D is underrated while the Vikes might be a little overrated.

Yeah, it's 4 games out of each team's schedule and that can mean the difference between a good season and a great season.

[Soul]

the packers offense is about as unknown as it gets. the vikings have a great player and a great line. jackson just needs to not blow it, and i don't think the staff will let him.

 

Huh? They lost one player on offense. Yes it was a big player they lost but besides Rodgers how is it a unknown?

 

Grant? I could see. They have one of if not the best WR group in the NFL. A improving line, and Donald Lee is starting to come into his own as a TE.

 

I'm not sure I'd lavish that high of praise on them. They're one of the better WR cores, but they still are really 2nd tier. I can think of several teams off the top of my head that have better.

 

Like who?

 

Colts

Pats

Arizona

Cinci

 

After that there are a couple of teams that can be argued either way (Detriot, New Orleans, maybe one other that I can't think of right now).

 

Indy? Probably

Pats? No

Arizona? haha no

Cinci? No

 

Arizona? Seriously? Yes they have Boldin and Fitz but after that? Come on now

 

New England has Moss and Welker but Gaffney and co. would be battling it out with Ruvell Martin for the 5th WR spot on the Packers rosters.

 

Cinci? Johnson and TJ are both elite but Chris Henry is.. well blah. He has talent but he cant stay on the field to prove that. And Chatman wouldnt make the Packers roster.

 

The Packers 1-5 have the arguably most talent and depth in the NFL at the WR position. The Colts are probably the closest however. Gonzalez would probably start over Jones but after that... And Wayne and Harrison are obviously elite but after that it would be Nelson and Martin over Hall and whoever else they have. So I would probably give you the Colts.

 

I think a WR core has to be weighted according to projected playing time. You're right IMO on one thing: the Packers fifth wide receiver has proved more than pretty much any other team's 5th wide receiver. However, that isn't much benefit. Your 5th wide receiver only gets a small amount of playing time. So when looking at receiving cores, having a better 1st and 2nd wideouts are the most important thing. Then, having a good 3rd becomes important as they are on the field a lot. 4th and 5th are really not all that necessary most of the time (many teams don't even use a lot of 4 WR sets).

 

So I would agree with the Colts, Pats, Arizona, and Cincy. They all have 2 receivers who are gamechangers. Those are a lot more dangerous than 5 good receivers who are interchangable like the Packers have (2 of the receivers probably being classified as very good). If you look deeper into those teams, most of them have 3rd and 4th string guys who have enough talent to beat 1 on 1 coverage, which is all you need when having those top 2 guys. I know the Colts and Pats do.

 

I would then put the Packers on the next tier. Good WR cores that can burn you, but aren't the entire focus of a defense. Other teams on this tier include the Steelers (Ward/Homes/Washington/Sweed), Browns (Edwards/Stallworth/Jurevicius), Cowboys (Owens/Crayton), Saints (Colston/Henderson/Patten), and Lions (Williams/Johnson/Furrey).

 

I considered teams like the Giants, Rams, and Seahawks for the 2nd tier, but ultimately decided they were all 3rd tier.

 

I would agree, the weighted benefit is strongly on the side of the 1's and 2's, and those teams have better ones.

I still think the Packers will be pretty good though. I don't what they'll be getting from Rodgers yet, and won't until the regular season starts. But the D is pretty good and they should be able to pick up from the last part of '07 and run the football reasonably well. Rodgers has some other pieces to rely on, which is good (or bad if you're a Vikes fan).

[CuseCubFan69]

I think how well the Vikes and Packers do will depend on how good or bad the Bears and Lions are. I think the Pack's D is underrated while the Vikes might be a little overrated.

Yeah, it's 4 games out of each team's schedule and that can mean the difference between a good season and a great season.

 

Yep...a split and you're 8-8 or 9-7 and a sweep you're 10-6 or 11-5.