Week 2 - Chicago Bears vs. Pittsburgh Steelers, 3:15 PM CBS

[ELCABALLO45]

The Bears are definitely a better team than Green Bay when healthy, but now that half the team is hurt, I'm not sure what to think. The nice thing is we lost the turnover battle 4-0 and still almost won. Hopefully Pisa and Clark are okay. Fortunuately Urlacher is not irreplacable anymore, but Hillenmeyer shouldn't be anywhere on the football field.

 

I don't agree with most of that, but I do agree with the Urlacher comment.

 

Well of course you don't agree with what I said about a healthy Bears team being better than Green Bay. What kind of fan would admit their favorite team is inferior to another? :roll:

 

I think it's pretty close. The Bears defense played great yesterday but give credit to McCarthy for calling one horrible game. Everyone knows the weakness of the Bears defense is their secondary and McCarthy stubbornly tried to get the ground game going for the better part of the first three quarters.

 

Urlacher was a big part in stopping the Packers run game yesterday. He looked pretty good last night. That loss will have some pretty big ramifications. He might be on the wrong side of his career, but he's still a pretty good LB.

 

I'm sure you guys will split with us, we'll split with Minnesota, and you'll split with Minnesota. That's the way this thing is going to take shape.

 

Not saying it isn't close, but we had the lead with just a few minutes remaining and all that was after Cutler had perhaps the worst game of his career, at least one of the worst. If he doesn't throw one of the first three picks, its probably enough to give us the win considering at least two of them either took away points from us or turned into points for you.

 

I hope we do sign Brooks. He can be our Jim Edmonds.

 

Some of Cutler playing so bad is because of our defense you realize that right?

[Flames24Rulz]

 

I think it's pretty close. The Bears defense played great yesterday but give credit to McCarthy for calling one horrible game. Everyone knows the weakness of the Bears defense is their secondary and McCarthy stubbornly tried to get the ground game going for the better part of the first three quarters.

.

 

Last year when the Packers ran all over the Bears at Lambeau because McCarthy tried to expose the Bears who were trying to shut down the passing game it was brilliant, but this time it was stubborn and horrible?

 

Yeah. We're a team that needs to pass to set up the run yet McCarthy always makes it a point of emphasis to get the ground game going. I know our RT looked horrible yesterday but our offensive line is much better at pass blocking than opening up holes for our running game too. Besides when you have Rodgers and the WR's and the pass-catching TE's that we have, why wouldn't you air it out more?

 

I think last year's game at Lambeau was an aberration of sorts because it always seems like you guys shut our running game down. Then again, run stopping for the Bears is hardly ever a problem as they're always easily in the top 10 in that category year in and year out.

[JonJayCutler]

I don't agree with most of that, but I do agree with the Urlacher comment.

 

Well of course you don't agree with what I said about a healthy Bears team being better than Green Bay. What kind of fan would admit their favorite team is inferior to another? :roll:

 

I think it's pretty close. The Bears defense played great yesterday but give credit to McCarthy for calling one horrible game. Everyone knows the weakness of the Bears defense is their secondary and McCarthy stubbornly tried to get the ground game going for the better part of the first three quarters.

 

Urlacher was a big part in stopping the Packers run game yesterday. He looked pretty good last night. That loss will have some pretty big ramifications. He might be on the wrong side of his career, but he's still a pretty good LB.

 

I'm sure you guys will split with us, we'll split with Minnesota, and you'll split with Minnesota. That's the way this thing is going to take shape.

 

Not saying it isn't close, but we had the lead with just a few minutes remaining and all that was after Cutler had perhaps the worst game of his career, at least one of the worst. If he doesn't throw one of the first three picks, its probably enough to give us the win considering at least two of them either took away points from us or turned into points for you.

 

I hope we do sign Brooks. He can be our Jim Edmonds.

 

Some of Cutler playing so bad is because of our defense you realize that right?

 

Why? The Packers' defense was horrible last year. But even if the Packers have a top defense, Cutler has succeeded in the past against teams who run the 3-4, and teams who have a good defense. I contribute most of his struggles Sunday to getting fimiliar with a new team, a couple bad decisions, and some blown routes by receivers. Not saying the Packers didn't play good defense, but other than the Jolly interception I didn't see any spectacular defensive plays.

[Banedon]

Apparently the NFL is supposed to decide today what they are going to do about the Saints players in the Starcaps case. Speculation seems to be that they will put any action on hold until the Williamses litigation is complete. Which means no 2009 suspension.

 

In that case...if there's no suspension, would the Bears be interested in Deuce Mcallister to complement Forte? I don't know what, if anything, he's got left. But surely he's better than Wolfe/Peterson.

[YearofDaCubs]

Apparently the NFL is supposed to decide today what they are going to do about the Saints players in the Starcaps case. Speculation seems to be that they will put any action on hold until the Williamses litigation is complete. Which means no 2009 suspension.

 

In that case...if there's no suspension, would the Bears be interested in Deuce Mcallister to complement Forte? I don't know what, if anything, he's got left. But surely he's better than Wolfe/Peterson.

He's got nothing left in the tank. I was surprised he stuck around with the Saints as long as he did.

[Banedon]

Apparently the NFL is supposed to decide today what they are going to do about the Saints players in the Starcaps case. Speculation seems to be that they will put any action on hold until the Williamses litigation is complete. Which means no 2009 suspension.

 

In that case...if there's no suspension, would the Bears be interested in Deuce Mcallister to complement Forte? I don't know what, if anything, he's got left. But surely he's better than Wolfe/Peterson.

He's got nothing left in the tank. I was surprised he stuck around with the Saints as long as he did.

 

Hmmm...his 2008 numbers don't look terrible if used as a backup. 3.9 yds/carry. No fumbles. I don't think he played the whole season, but still. I think it's better than what we currently have.

[jersey cubs fan]

Apparently the NFL is supposed to decide today what they are going to do about the Saints players in the Starcaps case. Speculation seems to be that they will put any action on hold until the Williamses litigation is complete. Which means no 2009 suspension.

 

In that case...if there's no suspension, would the Bears be interested in Deuce Mcallister to complement Forte? I don't know what, if anything, he's got left. But surely he's better than Wolfe/Peterson.

He's got nothing left in the tank. I was surprised he stuck around with the Saints as long as he did.

 

Hmmm...his 2008 numbers don't look terrible if used as a backup. 3.9 yds/carry. No fumbles. I don't think he played the whole season, but still. I think it's better than what we currently have.

 

If he does have anything left in the tank it probably helps that he's barely touched the ball the past 4 years. He's been essentially a backup during that time, but he's been paid more like a starter, or co-starter. Would he take actual backup money to run behind Forte right now? I think the bigger question might be how well has he kept himself in shape knowing that a suspension was pending?

[Banedon]

Yeah....not sure if he's ready to be a backup. I was really looking at it more from a Bears standpoint. I think it'd at least be worth bringing him in for a workout.

 

Of course it's a moot point if the decision doesn't come down. He can't play till week 5 if suspended.

[Soul]

I get these visions of Hunter getting beat all over the place and Bear fans sitting in silence, and Lovie on the sidelines showing no emotion......announcers declaring we're in deep trouble.

 

I'm pretty concerned about this whole "Hunter is good and will pick up for Urlacher" bit. I'll believe it when I see it. Sure, Brian wasn't even as good as Briggs, but that doesn't mean much. One of the strengths of the D was the linebacker play, and most especially Urlacher's albeit fading ability to get back in the zone to cover up the gaping cover-2 holes that are characteristic of that defense.

 

And Lovie said they won't change a thing, too?

 

Oh yea, I'm *VERY* concerned about this. I think you should be, too.

[Banedon]

And Lovie said they won't change a thing, too?

 

Oh yea, I'm *VERY* concerned about this. I think you should be, too.

 

NFL Fan rule #1: Never, ever, under any circumstances (but especially in dire circumstances) believe what an NFL head coach says.

[Soul]

And Lovie said they won't change a thing, too?

 

Oh yea, I'm *VERY* concerned about this. I think you should be, too.

 

NFL Fan rule #1: Never, ever, under any circumstances (but especially in dire circumstances) believe what an NFL head coach says.

 

He's married to that D though.

[jersey cubs fan]

And Lovie said they won't change a thing, too?

 

Oh yea, I'm *VERY* concerned about this. I think you should be, too.

 

NFL Fan rule #1: Never, ever, under any circumstances (but especially in dire circumstances) believe what an NFL head coach says.

 

He's married to that D though.

 

They've varied off the base defense. It didn't start out as very blitz heavy but has been at times one of the most aggressive blitzing teams in the league.

[Wilson A2000]

Is this game going to be broadcast nationally?

[ELCABALLO45]

Is this game going to be broadcast nationally?

 

http://the506.com/nflmaps/2009/02-CBS-L.html

[Wilson A2000]

Is this game going to be broadcast nationally?

 

http://the506.com/nflmaps/2009/02-CBS-L.html

 

Thanks. I'm in Atlanta and I should get this game.

[SpongeWorthy]

It's not a bad thought but its one of those plays where you better make damn sure that you're going to get it in on time. Hawk was well off the field by the time of the snap.

 

Not a bad thought? It most certainly is a bad thought. The long snapper has no business counting bodies on the field. His job is to snap the ball to the kicker. Period.

 

Any coach that gives a long snapper the power of decision making like a fake punt on their own 26 yard line should be fired immediately.

 

And I'd still be pissed about that call even if there were 12 people on the field. The stunned look of our defensive players after that stupid play said all their really needed to be said about it. Here they are busting a hump to keep the team in the game even though the offense has turned the ball over 3 times, and you are giving the other team possession of the ball at the 30 yard line?

 

You're right. It's not a bad thought. It's a horrendously horrible thought. I'd rather see WR's lining up offsides (Bennett) than watch long snappers trying their best to act like the special teams coach.

 

Hmm, I think your conviction has swayed me on this topic. It was a dumb thought, especially in that situation. I guess I was thinking that Mannelly has seen literally thousands of punt formations in his career and knows almost implicitly when there are too many men on the field (kind of like the math genius who can look at a group of objects and know how many there are without counting).

 

I would qualify what I said and say it's not a bad thought all of the time. If it worked in a 4th and less than 5 situation at a better position on the field we'd all be saying what a great move by Mannelly it was.

[Illini Iceman]

Can someone tell Rick Morrissey to shut up? Every day I check the Tribune the front page is him complaining about Cutler.

 

Some TV analysts were annoyed by Cutler's attitude in the press conference after the Bears' 21-15 loss to the Packers. OMG!!! Not TV analysts!! What's next? Sportswriters being annoyed? Release him now!!!

[SpongeWorthy]

I was complaining about Cutler too. He blew.

[Banedon]

I was complaining about Cutler too. He blew.

 

Yeah, but Morissey has been on this for a while now.

[hawkeyecub]

Some TV analysts were annoyed by Cutler's attitude in the press conference after the Bears' 21-15 loss to the Packers. OMG!!! Not TV analysts!! What's next? Sportswriters being annoyed? Release him now!!!

 

On that new NFL network show I saw Mora, Mariucci and Martz talking about how unprofessional he looked and how he doesn't "get it."

 

He comes across as a douche quite a bit compared to other NFL quarterbacks. Both him and Rivers. Delhomme is a douche on the field but fairly professional in front of the media.

 

If he were on my team and playing well I wouldn't care very much. Just like Bears fans will downplay it and say it doesn't matter but if he were doing some of the same things on the Vikings or Packers he would be called a grade-A douche on here.

[Banedon]

Des Clark has a cracked rib.

 

http://blogs.suntimes.com/bears/2009/09/desmond_clark_suffered_a_crack.html

[Derwood]

Is this game going to be broadcast nationally?

 

http://the506.com/nflmaps/2009/02-CBS-L.html

 

FML

[Soul]

Some TV analysts were annoyed by Cutler's attitude in the press conference after the Bears' 21-15 loss to the Packers. OMG!!! Not TV analysts!! What's next? Sportswriters being annoyed? Release him now!!!

 

On that new NFL network show I saw Mora, Mariucci and Martz talking about how unprofessional he looked and how he doesn't "get it."

 

He comes across as a douche quite a bit compared to other NFL quarterbacks. Both him and Rivers. Delhomme is a douche on the field but fairly professional in front of the media.

 

If he were on my team and playing well I wouldn't care very much. Just like Bears fans will downplay it and say it doesn't matter but if he were doing some of the same things on the Vikings or Packers he would be called a grade-A douche on here.

 

I just don't get it. I watched that entire post game press conference with him, and I didn't see anything at all to make me think he's some petulant child or anything like that.

 

I just completely and totally disagree. People are seeing what they want to see. They're creating drama where none exists, IMO.

[Guest]

It's not a bad thought but its one of those plays where you better make damn sure that you're going to get it in on time. Hawk was well off the field by the time of the snap.

 

Not a bad thought? It most certainly is a bad thought. The long snapper has no business counting bodies on the field. His job is to snap the ball to the kicker. Period.

 

Any coach that gives a long snapper the power of decision making like a fake punt on their own 26 yard line should be fired immediately.

 

And I'd still be pissed about that call even if there were 12 people on the field. The stunned look of our defensive players after that stupid play said all their really needed to be said about it. Here they are busting a hump to keep the team in the game even though the offense has turned the ball over 3 times, and you are giving the other team possession of the ball at the 30 yard line?

 

You're right. It's not a bad thought. It's a horrendously horrible thought. I'd rather see WR's lining up offsides (Bennett) than watch long snappers trying their best to act like the special teams coach.

 

Hmm, I think your conviction has swayed me on this topic. It was a dumb thought, especially in that situation. I guess I was thinking that Mannelly has seen literally thousands of punt formations in his career and knows almost implicitly when there are too many men on the field (kind of like the math genius who can look at a group of objects and know how many there are without counting).

 

I would qualify what I said and say it's not a bad thought all of the time. If it worked in a 4th and less than 5 situation at a better position on the field we'd all be saying what a great move by Mannelly it was.

 

Talking about that particular play, let me ask you a question.

 

Who is in a better position to see the whole field, Mannelly or say, maybe Garrett Wolfe?

Put yourself in a crouch to hike a long snap to the punter. Remember also, that you need to be looking back several times at your target. Ask yourself that first question again, now. Nevermind that there are 300 lb. linemen standing right in front of you.

 

Even if it's 4th and inches, you can still hike the ball to the punter and win a too many men on the field penalty, whether the official calls it or Lovie has it reviewed.

 

Personally, wasting your final review on whether or not there are 12 men on the field seems like a horrible waste of the few reviews you get each game. You are gambling that the officials are going to call a penalty for too many men on the field and considering the field position, it's a horrible gamble.

 

Just kick the ball away and let the officials do their jobs, even though we all know they don't do them very well. In fact, all the more reason to kick it away. You can control the kick. You cannot control penalty calls.

 

If Garrett Wolfe really counts 12 men on the field, I would not be opposed to having him inform Mannelly to hike the ball sooner than originally planned to try to draw the penalty, but I'd still have him hike it to the punter.

[SouthSideRyan]

Even if it's 4th and inches, you can still hike the ball to the punter and win a too many men on the field penalty, whether the official calls it or Lovie has it reviewed.

 

That wasn't the point. He thought it was a free play, so he audibled to go for the first down. Snapping to the punter does nothing for you, just moves you up 5 yards to punt the ball.