Week 16: Packers @ Bears, MNF on ESPN (7:30 CT)

[jersey cubs fan]

Wow. What a game! I thought the officials botched that first kick call. May I suggest NFL invest in some high def replay tv's? It sure looked like the ball touched the return man's foot to me.

 

Orton was really bad last night. I guess I'll blame it on the extreme cold, because I can't think of anything else to blame. He's certainly not a great QB, but I certainly expect more from a QB than the effort we watched last night.

 

The defense was actually pretty good last night. If it weren't for special teams, we certainly would be out of the playoff picture at this point.

 

I was happy to not see Rashied Davis drop any passes last night. Was he officially benched on offense? He did make one nice special teams play that helped the Bears recover a fumbled punt.

 

Really should have lost that game. I was actually impressed with how Rodgers could put the ball in a spot where only his receiver had a chance to catch the ball time and time again, but also in a spot where his receiver WOULD catch the ball. The Packers looked like a better team than the Bears in both games this year, which makes it a real head scratcher that the Bears have a better overall record.

 

On Rodgers and Orton:

Look at the difference in time they had to make their throws. When Rodgers was pressured by the occasional Manning blitz, he didn't look good. But on most throws he was able to drop back, set his feet, look around, wait for a receiver to come open and then throw. Orton was take 3-4 steps and throw or else you are dead because John Freaking Saint Clair is still the starting left tackle and you are lucky you weren't dead before the game started. The defense played well at times, but the 4-man line continued to be incompetent when rushing the passer. On one big play Alex Brown was playing pattycake with the tackle 8 yards away from Rodgers and the other end, I wasn't able to tell, got close to the sideline than the backfield.

 

Davis was benched officially, and Bennet was the official third receiver.

 

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

Edited December 23, 2008 by jersey cubs fan

[jersey cubs fan]

Lucky, lucky, lucky. We had no business winning that game. Complete robbery.

 

Flames24rulz is right about Orton, at least in the last few games. He's been bad. Although whoever was criticizing him for not throwing a catchable ball to Hester just wasn't watching the same game. Hester had 2-3 passes hit him in both hands, and with no defenders helping things out, Hester couldn't reel the ball in. Any #1 or #2 receiver should be able to pull in those catches. Greg Olsen sure didn't have any issues with Orton's passes. Olsen is really turning into a stud receiving TE.

 

1 of those was whistled behind his head while he was running fast in the opposite direction and another hit his hands only after he had to stop running and wait for the ball, giving the defenders time to also get their hands on the ball. If you expect Hester to be a jump ball phenom like Moss and Burress, you are being unrealistic. Hester is the type of receiver a QB has to lead or hit in stride. He's the only Bears receiver capable of getting consistent seperation, not counting the tight ends. Olsen didn't have problems with Orton's passes because they were lobbed into the flat. That type of pass does not require a ton of accuracy, they are easy to make, and easy to catch.

 

Do you remember a time when Hester made a semi-difficult catch? I'm not asking for him to make catches like the one handed blind catch that Booker made earlier this year, but the one that Orton shorted was still right in his hands, even though he had to slow up and turn around. If he's going to be a WR, I just want to see him make some medium difficulty catches.

 

Yes, he's made a few because Orton rarely hits him in stride. He's an inexperienced developing WR. His lack of fancy catches is much less of a problem than the QB's lack of an ability to throw him a good ball.

[Derwood]

bad QB + bad O-line + bad WR's + bad passing scheme = bad pass offense. it's no single player's fault

[rchap24]

Wow. What a game! I thought the officials botched that first kick call. May I suggest NFL invest in some high def replay tv's? It sure looked like the ball touched the return man's foot to me.

 

Orton was really bad last night. I guess I'll blame it on the extreme cold, because I can't think of anything else to blame. He's certainly not a great QB, but I certainly expect more from a QB than the effort we watched last night.

 

The defense was actually pretty good last night. If it weren't for special teams, we certainly would be out of the playoff picture at this point.

 

I was happy to not see Rashied Davis drop any passes last night. Was he officially benched on offense? He did make one nice special teams play that helped the Bears recover a fumbled punt.

 

Really should have lost that game. I was actually impressed with how Rodgers could put the ball in a spot where only his receiver had a chance to catch the ball time and time again, but also in a spot where his receiver WOULD catch the ball. The Packers looked like a better team than the Bears in both games this year, which makes it a real head scratcher that the Bears have a better overall record.

 

Yeah I forgot to mention about that punt replay...So for the first 10 replays they showed I thought it didn't touch him, but for some reason they decided to show another angle which they hadn't show yet. That was the only angle that showed it touching him...why didn't they show that until the last second!!!!!!!

 

I thought I saw every replay several times. You can just barely make out the football changing its momentum and spin after it passes his foot. There is no angle that CLEARLY showed it touching, but the ball did make that slight adjustment, which is how I could tell it touched him.

 

Yeah, but they kept showing the one from behind and then one from forward back and forth, but then right when the official was coming back from making the decision they showed ONCE from the side and the side angle was the clearest angle....Yeah I agree there was no CLEAR angle, but they kept showing the behind angle and the forward angle and that showed nothing

[kujay]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

I don't think so. If the ball was obviously going to go out at about the 2-yard line, why would the guy knock it back in unless he thought it was a live ball? I think they all thought it was.

 

So what was Jones to do? Unless there was an official making some sort of signal that he could look back and see to indicate the ball didn't touch the punt receiver, he was in a catch-22.

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah, but they kept showing the one from behind and then one from forward back and forth, but then right when the official was coming back from making the decision they showed ONCE from the side and the side angle was the clearest angle....Yeah I agree there was no CLEAR angle, but they kept showing the behind angle and the forward angle and that showed nothing

 

None of the angles showed anything. It was a bad challenge by Lovie because there was no way you were ever going to find conclusive visual evidence to overturn, and they had the entire commercial break to figure that out. Add that to the horrible use of of timeout the rest of the game and the absurd decision to punt in field goal territory and that ridiculous offensive strategy and this was one of the worse coached games they've had all year.

 

Lovie is a good coach for getting the most out of guys, but he's a very disappointing gameday coach.

[rchap24]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

I don't think so. If the ball was obviously going to go out at about the 2-yard line, why would the guy knock it back in unless he thought it was a live ball? I think they all thought it was.

 

So what was Jones to do? Unless there was an official making some sort of signal that he could look back and see to indicate the ball didn't touch the punt receiver, he was in a catch-22.

 

The most likely thought it hit him and were try to keep in in play for the touchdown. In that situation you want to score I don't really blame them.

[bukie]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it.

 

I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

I don't think so. If the ball was obviously going to go out at about the 2-yard line, why would the guy knock it back in unless he thought it was a live ball? I think they all thought it was.

 

So what was Jones to do? Unless there was an official making some sort of signal that he could look back and see to indicate the ball didn't touch the punt receiver, he was in a catch-22.

 

It was not a catch 22. You down it at the one. If it did touch the guy, worst thing is Bears ball on the Packers 1. The ball wasn't obviously going out on the 2. It was going toward the corner. It could have hit the pylon but the first man down tapped it backward to prevent that from happening. If an official thought it was a fumble he would have thrown the blue bag and that would have been in front of the players faces.

[bcl412]

I'm absolutely shocked that the Packers blew a game in the 4th qtr. That's the first time we've seen that all year..ugh.

 

Don't be surprised when the Lions get their first win next week.

[kujay]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

I don't think so. If the ball was obviously going to go out at about the 2-yard line, why would the guy knock it back in unless he thought it was a live ball? I think they all thought it was.

 

So what was Jones to do? Unless there was an official making some sort of signal that he could look back and see to indicate the ball didn't touch the punt receiver, he was in a catch-22.

 

It was not a catch 22. You down it at the one. If it did touch the guy, worst thing is Bears ball on the Packers 1. The ball wasn't obviously going out on the 2. It was going toward the corner. It could have hit the pylon but the first man down tapped it backward to prevent that from happening. If an official thought it was a fumble he would have thrown the blue bag and that would have been in front of the players faces.

 

And with the way Forte was running the ball at that point in the game, that one yard may as well have been 15. I know what you're saying, I just think that expects a bit much of these players to think like that. They thought it was a live ball, so they took it into the endzone.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it.

 

I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

 

It's stupid that you think that. Who cares what they honestly thought? The ball isn't downed when you touch it, you have to stop the ball. It counts as a touchback because they took the ball into the end zone, and it should count that way. Down the ball at the 1, it's either Bears ball at the 1 or Packers ball at the 1. The stupid thing is assuming it touched the playerl when nobody on the field made any sort of motion indicating that it did touch the player.

[jersey cubs fan]

And with the way Forte was running the ball at that point in the game, that one yard may as well have been 15. I know what you're saying, I just think that expects a bit much of these players to think like that. They thought it was a live ball, so they took it into the endzone.

 

It's something that really good special teams players would know to do. The Bears have had a lot of turnover there, and the problem was they had a former starting RB making that play.

[bukie]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it.

 

I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

 

It's stupid that you think that. Who cares what they honestly thought? The ball isn't downed when you touch it, you have to stop the ball. It counts as a touchback because they took the ball into the end zone, and it should count that way. Down the ball at the 1, it's either Bears ball at the 1 or Packers ball at the 1. The stupid thing is assuming it touched the playerl when nobody on the field made any sort of motion indicating that it did touch the player.

It's a dumb rule, because theoretically the defensive team can keep batting the ball forward until they decide to stop the ball at the 1, no?

[rchap24]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it.

 

I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

 

It's stupid that you think that. Who cares what they honestly thought? The ball isn't downed when you touch it, you have to stop the ball. It counts as a touchback because they took the ball into the end zone, and it should count that way. Down the ball at the 1, it's either Bears ball at the 1 or Packers ball at the 1. The stupid thing is assuming it touched the playerl when nobody on the field made any sort of motion indicating that it did touch the player.

 

When your running down the field and see it bounce awkwardly and think it might have hit the guy and it was flying toward the end zone....I think...no I know you would have thought it hit him to and have been a live ball...Don't act like it was dumb of the gunners to try to sweep the ball up for a score

[jersey cubs fan]

It's a dumb rule, because theoretically the defensive team can keep batting the ball forward until they decide to stop the ball at the 1, no?

 

No. If they bat if forward it's down where they first touched it or a touchback if it goes all the way in.

[jersey cubs fan]

When your running down the field and see it bounce awkwardly and think it might have hit the guy and it was flying toward the end zone....I think...no I know you would have thought it hit him to and have been a live ball...Don't act like it was dumb of the gunners to try to sweep the ball up for a score

 

I'm not acting like anything, it was dumb. You don't make plays based on what you thought might have happened. You make the right play. Down it at the 1 and it's either Bears ball on 1 or Packers ball on 1. There was no indication it was a live ball, no ref called the fumble (something they will do and players will notice) and there was no good reason to run that into the end zone.

[Banedon]

Lucky, lucky, lucky. We had no business winning that game. Complete robbery.

 

Flames24rulz is right about Orton, at least in the last few games. He's been bad. Although whoever was criticizing him for not throwing a catchable ball to Hester just wasn't watching the same game. Hester had 2-3 passes hit him in both hands, and with no defenders helping things out, Hester couldn't reel the ball in. Any #1 or #2 receiver should be able to pull in those catches. Greg Olsen sure didn't have any issues with Orton's passes. Olsen is really turning into a stud receiving TE.

 

1 of those was whistled behind his head while he was running fast in the opposite direction and another hit his hands only after he had to stop running and wait for the ball, giving the defenders time to also get their hands on the ball. If you expect Hester to be a jump ball phenom like Moss and Burress, you are being unrealistic. Hester is the type of receiver a QB has to lead or hit in stride. He's the only Bears receiver capable of getting consistent seperation, not counting the tight ends. Olsen didn't have problems with Orton's passes because they were lobbed into the flat. That type of pass does not require a ton of accuracy, they are easy to make, and easy to catch.

 

Do you remember a time when Hester made a semi-difficult catch? I'm not asking for him to make catches like the one handed blind catch that Booker made earlier this year, but the one that Orton shorted was still right in his hands, even though he had to slow up and turn around. If he's going to be a WR, I just want to see him make some medium difficulty catches.

 

Yes, he's made a few because Orton rarely hits him in stride. He's an inexperienced developing WR. His lack of fancy catches is much less of a problem than the QB's lack of an ability to throw him a good ball.

 

I'm not giving Orton a pass by any means, but I'm not giving Hester one either. He has yet to show me that he can be much more than a very "meh" WR.

[bukie]

The only things that really annoyed me from last night were the Bears punting from the Packer 33 yard line in the first quarter, and Lovie wasting yet another challenge on an obvious inconclusive play.

[rchap24]

When your running down the field and see it bounce awkwardly and think it might have hit the guy and it was flying toward the end zone....I think...no I know you would have thought it hit him to and have been a live ball...Don't act like it was dumb of the gunners to try to sweep the ball up for a score

 

I'm not acting like anything, it was dumb. You don't make plays based on what you thought might have happened. You make the right play. Down it at the 1 and it's either Bears ball on 1 or Packers ball on 1. There was no indication it was a live ball, no ref called the fumble (something they will do and players will notice) and there was no good reason to run that into the end zone.

 

You've obviously not played football then...because when people think there's a live ball they go for the ball. In that situation about 99% of players would have gone for the touchdown and not tried to score on it. When your sprinting down the field and there is a possible live ball your not going to look over to the ref and then back to the ball to make sure it's live

[BigbadB]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it.

 

I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

 

It's stupid that you think that. Who cares what they honestly thought? The ball isn't downed when you touch it, you have to stop the ball. It counts as a touchback because they took the ball into the end zone, and it should count that way. Down the ball at the 1, it's either Bears ball at the 1 or Packers ball at the 1. The stupid thing is assuming it touched the playerl when nobody on the field made any sort of motion indicating that it did touch the player.

 

I understand what you are saying here, Goony. But, we can't hear what the players are saying on the field. I'm guessing that the closest Bear to the Green Bay receiver was probably yelling "it touched him, it touched him", which could have inspired Jones to take the ball in. I agree that the best case scenario would have been to take possession and down it at the one, but Jones' momentum would have made that pretty difficult to do.

 

If it had touched him and the ball went out of bounds, the ball would have been placed at the 2 and it would have been Green Bay's ball. If that happened and the ball really did touch him, we'd be pissed that someone didn't take it into the endzone. The absolute perfect scenario would be to take possession and down it at the 1, but that's asking an awful lot.

[jersey cubs fan]

The only things that really annoyed me from last night were the Bears punting from the Packer 33 yard line in the first quarter, and Lovie wasting yet another challenge on an obvious inconclusive play.

 

What about the horrible waste of a timeout towad the end. They were indecicive about going for it, then tried to change personel, then had to take a timeout when the play clock ran out. It was a sign of a poorly coached team, which the Bears are.

[rchap24]

I don't think that ball hit the return man and I don't believe how stupid Kevin Jones was for running it into the end zone. The first guy was knocking it back to down it and Jones gives them the ball on the 20. The NFL has to have HD cameras set up on both sides of each goal line and a movable one at each first down marker.

 

Why would the first guy knock it back in to down it? It was going out of bounds at the 2? It was pretty obvious that both thought it was a live ball and were trying to score with it.

 

I personally think the ruling should be, if not a live ball, the ball is downed at the exact spot the first defensive player touches it. It's stupid that it counts as a touchback when the team honestly thought it was a live ball and was attempting to score.

 

It's stupid that you think that. Who cares what they honestly thought? The ball isn't downed when you touch it, you have to stop the ball. It counts as a touchback because they took the ball into the end zone, and it should count that way. Down the ball at the 1, it's either Bears ball at the 1 or Packers ball at the 1. The stupid thing is assuming it touched the playerl when nobody on the field made any sort of motion indicating that it did touch the player.

 

I understand what you are saying here, Goony. But, we can't hear what the players are saying on the field. I'm guessing that the closest Bear to the Green Bay receiver was probably yelling "it touched him, it touched him", which could have inspired Jones to take the ball in. I agree that the best case scenario would have been to take possession and down it at the one, but Jones' momentum would have made that pretty difficult to do.

 

If it had touched him and the ball went out of bounds, the ball would have been placed at the 2 and it would have been Green Bay's ball. If that happened and the ball really did touch him, we'd be pissed that someone didn't take it into the endzone. The absolute perfect scenario would be to take possession and down it at the 1, but that's asking an awful lot.

 

Obviously it's the smart play, but like I said 99% of players wouldn't have known if it was a live ball or not and would have gone for the touchdown over putting them down on the 1

[bukie]

The only things that really annoyed me from last night were the Bears punting from the Packer 33 yard line in the first quarter, and Lovie wasting yet another challenge on an obvious inconclusive play.

 

What about the horrible waste of a timeout towad the end. They were indecicive about going for it, then tried to change personel, then had to take a timeout when the play clock ran out. It was a sign of a poorly coached team, which the Bears are.

I thought that was a GB timeout before the FG at the end. Or am I thinking of a different play?

[BigbadB]

The only things that really annoyed me from last night were the Bears punting from the Packer 33 yard line in the first quarter, and Lovie wasting yet another challenge on an obvious inconclusive play.

 

What about the horrible waste of a timeout towad the end. They were indecicive about going for it, then tried to change personel, then had to take a timeout when the play clock ran out. It was a sign of a poorly coached team, which the Bears are.

 

I thought that entire drive wasted too much time. Very poor clock management. In my mind, they had to either score on 4 plays or pin the Packers back and force a punt, while still having enough time left on the clock to make one last effort to get in. They got lucky and got into the endzone (they just barely got the first down, although I think if it was short, replay would have still given the Bears a first down), but if they didn't, I'm not sure they would have had enough time to stop the Packers for 3 plays and still have enough time for one more drive.