Week 8: Bears (3-4) @ Patriots (5-2) Noon Fox/780

[UMFan83]

Regarding firing the DC, I think it would be nice to hold someone accountable for, well, anything. But I guess just saying everything is awesome is working pretty well too so maybe we should just stick with that.

 

Exactly. I don't know if it will work, but could it get worse than it is right now? In 25% of their games this year, the opponent has punted 1 time or less. That's inexcusable, injuries or not.

[Banedon]

Regarding firing the DC, I think it would be nice to hold someone accountable for, well, anything. But I guess just saying everything is awesome is working pretty well too so maybe we should just stick with that.

 

The defense is what we thought it'd be. I'm not defending Tucker, he's bad. Just doesn't seem like there's much gain in letting him go now. The offense has been the underachieving part of this team, and seems like that's where the "consequences" should be.

[rawaction]

Man, I am just not liking the Cutler contract every time he has a game like this. I know there are no alternatives but this feels so much like Soriano's deal.

 

I love the dude, he's statistically the best QB I have ever seen in a Bears jersey. But after 3 years there is the possibility of cutting him with a pretty negligible cap hit, right?

 

Someone make me feel better about Cutler stat!

 

Are you really basing this off a PFF score? He was fine yesterday. The throws over 20 yards were the Hail Mary, at least 2 non-called DPIs, 1 throw away, and the great Bennett catch, which actually was called DPI too.

 

Oh Hell no, but the fumble was all on him and he again he didn't look that great. He is getting paid like a top QB, he needs to cut down on the turnovers and make better decisions. "Fine" isn't going to get the Bears in the playoff hunt this year or next. He needs to take the next step with his turnovers and get that fixed. Once that is done I think he has a chance to be great and in turn the Bears will be great.

 

The fumble was stupid. There was no reason for him to drop that ball. He has a couple of those this year, but I don't think that particular fumble happens in a close game.

 

And I agree that "fine" isn't good enough in most cases, but if games like yesterday make you hate the contract, you were going to hate it regardless. His team was down big before he really had a chance.

[Chocolate Milk]

Oh, a couple of gems:

 

@AdamHoge: Trestman objects to idea that #Bears gave Gronkowski a free release all day. Says they had tight coverage.

That's fantastic. They eventually did eventually manage to shut him down as he became so dehydrated from scoring so many touchdowns that he eventually had to leave the game.

[apete6]

Man, I am just not liking the Cutler contract every time he has a game like this. I know there are no alternatives but this feels so much like Soriano's deal.

 

I love the dude, he's statistically the best QB I have ever seen in a Bears jersey. But after 3 years there is the possibility of cutting him with a pretty negligible cap hit, right?

 

Someone make me feel better about Cutler stat!

 

Are you really basing this off a PFF score? He was fine yesterday. The throws over 20 yards were the Hail Mary, at least 2 non-called DPIs, 1 throw away, and the great Bennett catch, which actually was called DPI too.

 

Oh Hell no, but the fumble was all on him and he again he didn't look that great. He is getting paid like a top QB, he needs to cut down on the turnovers and make better decisions. "Fine" isn't going to get the Bears in the playoff hunt this year or next. He needs to take the next step with his turnovers and get that fixed. Once that is done I think he has a chance to be great and in turn the Bears will be great.

 

Jay is not going to change in year 10. He's turnover prone and his mechanics are questionable. He is who he is at 31 years of age.

 

I still don't know why they didn't just franchise him. By paying him so much up front anyway, it would have been a fine option to get another year of analysis on him. Oh well, 2 more years and then another decision and will probably line up with Emery/Trestman either getting extensions or getting fired.

[Guest]

Oh, a couple of gems:

 

@AdamHoge: Trestman objects to idea that #Bears gave Gronkowski a free release all day. Says they had tight coverage.

That's fantastic. They eventually did eventually manage to shut him down as he became so dehydrated from scoring so many touchdowns that he eventually had to leave the game.

 

Heh, he was probably hung over (and still burning the defense).

[Flames24Rulz]

It's okay, the Bears are primed for a 7-1 second half to make a run to the NFC North title.

 

I actually spent 20 minutes this morning trying to figure out if the Bears had any shot of making the playoffs at 9-7 (requiring a 6-2 finish).

 

The answer is probably not, but we do have 2 feathers in our cap:

 

1) Hold the tiebreaker over San Francisco

2) Only 2 conference losses

 

Basically the teams fighting for the 2 WC spots are East loser (between 6-1 Dallas and 5-2 Philly), North loser (between 6-2 Detroit and 5-3 GB), and West losers (Between 7-1 Arizona, 4-3 Seattle and 4-3 San Francisco)

 

The only way I see a shot is if 1) Detroit has their annual second half collapse and is swept by Chicago, 2) San Francisco's year from hell continues and they finish 9-7, 3) Dallas comes back to earth starting tonight and loses to Chicago head to head

 

9 wins isn't making the playoffs in the NFC. Hell, 10 wins might not this year.

[Chocolate Milk]

Regarding firing the DC, I think it would be nice to hold someone accountable for, well, anything. But I guess just saying everything is awesome is working pretty well too so maybe we should just stick with that.

 

The defense is what we thought it'd be. I'm not defending Tucker, he's bad. Just doesn't seem like there's much gain in letting him go now. The offense has been the underachieving part of this team, and seems like that's where the "consequences" should be.

I don't disagree. I don't think firing him will really do much of anything this year. But it's par for the course for this team. They don't hold anyone accountable for anything.

[rawaction]

Gotta remember, the Bears have a former NFL DC among the assistants in Paul Pasqualoni.

[rawaction]

It's okay, the Bears are primed for a 7-1 second half to make a run to the NFC North title.

 

I actually spent 20 minutes this morning trying to figure out if the Bears had any shot of making the playoffs at 9-7 (requiring a 6-2 finish).

 

The answer is probably not, but we do have 2 feathers in our cap:

 

1) Hold the tiebreaker over San Francisco

2) Only 2 conference losses

 

Basically the teams fighting for the 2 WC spots are East loser (between 6-1 Dallas and 5-2 Philly), North loser (between 6-2 Detroit and 5-3 GB), and West losers (Between 7-1 Arizona, 4-3 Seattle and 4-3 San Francisco)

 

The only way I see a shot is if 1) Detroit has their annual second half collapse and is swept by Chicago, 2) San Francisco's year from hell continues and they finish 9-7, 3) Dallas comes back to earth starting tonight and loses to Chicago head to head

 

9 wins isn't making the playoffs in the NFC. Hell, 10 wins might not this year.

 

I think Philly is the most likely team to collapse of the top teams right now. Foles has been pretty shaky all year. Run game inconsistent. They've scored a bunch of defensive TDs.

 

I also wouldn't count on Detroit fading. 6-2 and they get Calvin back after the bye. Granted, they've been fortunate to have teams flat out collapse for them. But as of right now, the Bears are going to probably have to sweep them. I wouldn't be surprised if 1 9-win team gets in. Still a lot of football left.

[sneakypower]

Man, I am just not liking the Cutler contract every time he has a game like this. I know there are no alternatives but this feels so much like Soriano's deal.

 

I love the dude, he's statistically the best QB I have ever seen in a Bears jersey. But after 3 years there is the possibility of cutting him with a pretty negligible cap hit, right?

 

Someone make me feel better about Cutler stat!

 

Are you really basing this off a PFF score? He was fine yesterday. The throws over 20 yards were the Hail Mary, at least 2 non-called DPIs, 1 throw away, and the great Bennett catch, which actually was called DPI too.

 

Oh Hell no, but the fumble was all on him and he again he didn't look that great. He is getting paid like a top QB, he needs to cut down on the turnovers and make better decisions. "Fine" isn't going to get the Bears in the playoff hunt this year or next. He needs to take the next step with his turnovers and get that fixed. Once that is done I think he has a chance to be great and in turn the Bears will be great.

seasonal QB ranks | http://www.advancedfootballanalytics.com/index.php/home/stats/offensive-players/quarterbacks

WPA: 22nd

WPA/G: 24th

EPA: 20th

EPA/P: 23rd

AYPA: 27th

[Billy_Buck]

This was the steamrolling that the 49ers game was shaping up to be. But for the late hit, some helpful SF play calls, and Colin Kaepernick, the Bears could easily be sitting on 2-6.

 

A couple of bad Cutler INTs against Buffalo and Carolina and the Bears are 5-3

 

Yeah, playing the "what if" game is actually a positive for the Bears. They really should be 5-3 or even 4-4 if you want to give the 49ers that win.

Meh. On the whole I think a 3-5 record is a pretty fair reflection of what they've accomplished thus far, good and bad. My "what if" was to imagine the angst among Bears fandom if that game had finished like it started -- say 32-7 or 49-7 again -- going 0-2 en route to 2-6. They avoided that fate, thankfully, but as this season's best outcomes narrow to running to running the table or a near-miss on the playoffs, perhaps it would have been better had the reckoning come sooner.

 

All that said, I don't think they're truly as bad as they were yesterday, or as in the first 28 minutes @SF. They are, however, giving ample reason to think they're not as good as expected.

[Flames24Rulz]

It's okay, the Bears are primed for a 7-1 second half to make a run to the NFC North title.

 

I actually spent 20 minutes this morning trying to figure out if the Bears had any shot of making the playoffs at 9-7 (requiring a 6-2 finish).

 

The answer is probably not, but we do have 2 feathers in our cap:

 

1) Hold the tiebreaker over San Francisco

2) Only 2 conference losses

 

Basically the teams fighting for the 2 WC spots are East loser (between 6-1 Dallas and 5-2 Philly), North loser (between 6-2 Detroit and 5-3 GB), and West losers (Between 7-1 Arizona, 4-3 Seattle and 4-3 San Francisco)

 

The only way I see a shot is if 1) Detroit has their annual second half collapse and is swept by Chicago, 2) San Francisco's year from hell continues and they finish 9-7, 3) Dallas comes back to earth starting tonight and loses to Chicago head to head

 

9 wins isn't making the playoffs in the NFC. Hell, 10 wins might not this year.

 

I think Philly is the most likely team to collapse of the top teams right now. Foles has been pretty shaky all year. Run game inconsistent. They've scored a bunch of defensive TDs.

 

I also wouldn't count on Detroit fading. 6-2 and they get Calvin back after the bye. Granted, they've been fortunate to have teams flat out collapse for them. But as of right now, the Bears are going to probably have to sweep them. I wouldn't be surprised if 1 9-win team gets in. Still a lot of football left.

 

Arizona, Philadelphia and Detroit's schedules get pretty tough here the next month or so. You could be right but I think the only team that'll get in with 9 wins or fewer will be the South winner.

[UMFan83]

PFF grades if anyone cares:

 

http://i.imgur.com/cEHQO3X.png

http://i.imgur.com/BakqxuL.png

http://i.imgur.com/2geNBxd.png

[Guest]

How likely is it for Thompson to be converted to safety? Less than 230 lbs is pretty lean for a linebacker.

 

He has the room to add bulk to get to 230, while not losing speed. I actually think the benefits are greater with him at LB over SS. At LB, he's potentially a special player with more speed than most LBs in the league. At S, he could still be really good, but is just bigger than most safeties, which has some benefits (see Chancellor) but isn't a necessity. I think if you can find a legit SS and play him at LB, that makes your pass D even better as you now have a LB that can cover TEs, leaving an extra guy in the back 4 in the base defense.

 

To add: even if you play him at SS in the base defense, he's going to be a LB in the nickel anyway or at least play underneath kinda like Chancellor is for Seattle. Also, I've seen Thompson listed as 231 in a few places. He's a lot like Shazier who went 15th to Pittsburgh this year and Shazier plays inside in a 3-4. I think Thompson could play SLB or WLB in the 4-3 or weak side ILB or OLB in a 3-4 if he had to.

 

Not sure if you caught Saturday's ASU-Washington game but Shaq had only 1 snap on defense and played nearly exclusively at running back. It seems like this might continue. :(

[Guest]

Regarding firing the DC, I think it would be nice to hold someone accountable for, well, anything. But I guess just saying everything is awesome is working pretty well too so maybe we should just stick with that.

 

The defense is what we thought it'd be. I'm not defending Tucker, he's bad. Just doesn't seem like there's much gain in letting him go now. The offense has been the underachieving part of this team, and seems like that's where the "consequences" should be.

 

i think it's much easier to replace tucker with something better at this stage in the game than it is anyone on the offensive staff

 

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

[Banedon]

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

 

Think of a coach as an player?

[Banedon]

http://i.imgur.com/g06dTVc.jpg

[Guest]

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

 

Think of a coach as an player?

 

analogies, how do they work?

 

the point is that he is so bad at his job that his mere presence makes the defense worse and there's a chance that almost any qualified replacement might be an improvement.

[Banedon]

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

 

Think of a coach as an player?

 

analogies, how do they work?

 

the point is that he is so bad at his job that his mere presence makes the defense worse and there's a chance that almost any qualified replacement might be an improvement.

 

Analogies don't work by comparing apples to oranges. Comparing the impact of a coordinator in football to an end of the bench baseball player is pretty far from a good analogy.

 

What's a new DC going to do midseason? Even with a bye week, he's not going to implement new defensive schemes...he's not going to magically be able to make the linebackers be able to actually be good at pass coverage. As someone said, maybe a new voice gets them a little more interested, but I don't think the defensive issues have much to do with interest...instead they have everything to do with lack of talent.

 

Again, I'm not defending Tucker. He needs to go. I just think the knee jerk "Can his ass now!" reaction to a couple of real, real bad games isn't very valuable.

[Guest]

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

 

Think of a coach as an player?

 

analogies, how do they work?

 

the point is that he is so bad at his job that his mere presence makes the defense worse and there's a chance that almost any qualified replacement might be an improvement.

 

Analogies don't work by comparing apples to oranges. Comparing the impact of a coordinator in football to an end of the bench baseball player is pretty far from a good analogy.

 

What's a new DC going to do midseason? Even with a bye week, he's not going to implement new defensive schemes...he's not going to magically be able to make the linebackers be able to actually be good at pass coverage. As someone said, maybe a new voice gets them a little more interested, but I don't think the defensive issues have much to do with interest...instead they have everything to do with lack of talent.

 

Again, I'm not defending Tucker. He needs to go. I just think the knee jerk "Can his ass now!" reaction to a couple of real, real bad games isn't very valuable.

 

analogies do not require that the elements of the analogy be comparable in any way. just the relationship between the elements. in this case, the relationship in question is "these things are very bad and removing them and replacing them with just about anything would be helpful"

 

nevertheless, it was a tongue in cheek remark that we're already going way too deeply into.

 

if tucker is a horrid DC, there is no reason for him to retain his job. there is also a decent chance that whoever replaces him will do a better job, even at this stage in the season, because he's so bad at it that it's hard to be worse. and one place an immediate impact can possibly be felt is in gameplanning and playcalling.

 

either way, i'm not even sure what you're arguing. you think he needs to go but you don't think he needs to go now?

[JonJayCutler]

Wish the Lions and Packers fan trolls would stay the [expletive] out of Bears threads.

 

Also, take your advanced analytics and shove 'em. I'll still take Cutler over Stafford any [expletive] day of the week.

[jersey cubs fan]

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

 

Think of a coach as an player?

 

analogies, how do they work?

 

the point is that he is so bad at his job that his mere presence makes the defense worse and there's a chance that almost any qualified replacement might be an improvement.

Sorry but that is a pour analogy. Tucker is a bad DC but it's not like some league average DC is available to slide into his spot and that will result in easy to quantify improvement in production.

 

The fact is the defense is what it is. The depth has been tested and it is non-existent. Going forward it will require a new DC, but at present, this team has suffered as much by an offense that has been much worse than it should as the bad defense. If the offensive minded head coach fires the DC while the offense has been underperforming, it will create a credibility issue. I don't think you can really scheme this defense into becoming something better, given the lack of talent on that side of the ball. I doubt a different coordinator makes any difference this year. And just look at the garbage coaches that Trestman/Emery have been bringing on board. They had a bunch of CFL nobodies and their idea of replacements were obsolete 75 year old position coaches with mediocre careers that probably should have ended a decade ago.

 

I would put the failings on this team on Trestman and Emery over Tucker.

[Guest]

think of tucker as one of our crappy -WAR outfielders

 

Think of a coach as an player?

 

analogies, how do they work?

 

the point is that he is so bad at his job that his mere presence makes the defense worse and there's a chance that almost any qualified replacement might be an improvement.

Sorry but that is a pour analogy. Tucker is a bad DC but it's not like some league average DC is available to slide into his spot and that will result in easy to quantify improvement in production.

 

The fact is the defense is what it is. The depth has been tested and it is non-existent. Going forward it will require a new DC, but at present, this team has suffered as much by an offense that has been much worse than it should as the bad defense. If the offensive minded head coach fires the DC while the offense has been underperforming, it will create a credibility issue. I don't think you can really scheme this defense into becoming something better, given the lack of talent on that side of the ball. I doubt a different coordinator makes any difference this year. And just look at the garbage coaches that Trestman/Emery have been bringing on board. They had a bunch of CFL nobodies and their idea of replacements were obsolete 75 year old position coaches with mediocre careers that probably should have ended a decade ago.

 

I would put the failings on this team on Trestman and Emery over Tucker.

 

even a replacement level DC should be an improvement. throw pasqualoni in charge and see what happens. tucker is horrible at everything. how can it possibly hurt?

[jersey cubs fan]

either way, i'm not even sure what you're arguing. you think he needs to go but you don't think he needs to go now?

 

I think the argument boils down to this:

 

Nothing they have done to date suggests they will find a better more qualified coordinator.

Firing the DC is a cop-out shifting blame away from the awful job that Trestman has done.