Week 13: Bears (5-6) @ Lions (7-4) Thu 11:30 AM CT CBS

[WrigleyField 22]

Yeah. That's the problem it always comes to. People can say whatever they want about Cutler, but the alternatives are never any better.

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright.

 

At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jersey cubs fan]

 

Right but good QBs are never available. I don't think anyone is suggesting to get rid of Cutler and sign a FA to become our QB of the future.

Yea I guess I'm not replying to any post specifically in this thread, but there's a lot of lamenting here. The general meatball stance is what my post is more directed to.

 

 

what meatball stance?

[WrigleyField 22]

 

Right but good QBs are never available. I don't think anyone is suggesting to get rid of Cutler and sign a FA to become our QB of the future.

Yea I guess I'm not replying to any post specifically in this thread, but there's a lot of lamenting here. The general meatball stance is what my post is more directed to.

 

 

what meatball stance?

That Emery should have moved on from Cutler.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest]

Yeah. That's the problem it always comes to. People can say whatever they want about Cutler, but the alternatives are never any better.

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright.

 

At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know about this fictional "developmental" QB, if a QB is there that is an upgrade to Cutler you take him. If not, you dont.

[rawaction]

As great as it is that the Bears won this week, it hurts that the Cowboys, Eagles, 49ers and Seahawks all won this week. 3 of those 4 teams along with the Lions are likely the 4 teams we'd be competing with for 2 playoff spots. I'm think one of the West teams will get in and one won't, which means that'd we'd be hoping for a Eagles/Cowboys and Lions collapse to have a shot at the playoffs (if we win out which we won't)

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in.

 

ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left.

[UMFan83]

As great as it is that the Bears won this week, it hurts that the Cowboys, Eagles, 49ers and Seahawks all won this week. 3 of those 4 teams along with the Lions are likely the 4 teams we'd be competing with for 2 playoff spots. I'm think one of the West teams will get in and one won't, which means that'd we'd be hoping for a Eagles/Cowboys and Lions collapse to have a shot at the playoffs (if we win out which we won't)

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in.

 

ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left.

 

Wouldn't we want SF and Seattle to possibly split? Arizona is still the favorite to win the division, so either of them sweeping increases the odds of that team taking one of the 2 WC spots.

[WrigleyField 22]

As great as it is that the Bears won this week, it hurts that the Cowboys, Eagles, 49ers and Seahawks all won this week. 3 of those 4 teams along with the Lions are likely the 4 teams we'd be competing with for 2 playoff spots. I'm think one of the West teams will get in and one won't, which means that'd we'd be hoping for a Eagles/Cowboys and Lions collapse to have a shot at the playoffs (if we win out which we won't)

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in.

 

ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left.

Yea if teams split a lot of games is where we basically get two 11-5 WC teams and the Bears miss out even at 10-6. But even that requires a pretty specific split of games. Based on history two 11-5 WC is not common so I wouldn't count on that as an outcome.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rawaction]

As great as it is that the Bears won this week, it hurts that the Cowboys, Eagles, 49ers and Seahawks all won this week. 3 of those 4 teams along with the Lions are likely the 4 teams we'd be competing with for 2 playoff spots. I'm think one of the West teams will get in and one won't, which means that'd we'd be hoping for a Eagles/Cowboys and Lions collapse to have a shot at the playoffs (if we win out which we won't)

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in.

 

ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left.

 

Wouldn't we want SF and Seattle to possibly split? Arizona is still the favorite to win the division, so either of them sweeping increases the odds of that team taking one of the 2 WC spots.

 

1 of the 2 is better than 2 of the 2. If they split, the Bears still need both to lose again, even if the Bears win out.

[WrigleyField 22]

As great as it is that the Bears won this week, it hurts that the Cowboys, Eagles, 49ers and Seahawks all won this week. 3 of those 4 teams along with the Lions are likely the 4 teams we'd be competing with for 2 playoff spots. I'm think one of the West teams will get in and one won't, which means that'd we'd be hoping for a Eagles/Cowboys and Lions collapse to have a shot at the playoffs (if we win out which we won't)

If the Bears win out (they won't) it will be very hard for them to not get in as a 10-6. It would probably mean no 10-6 teams get in.

 

ETA- the Bears would have h2h against Dallas, Detroit, and San Fran. Philly, and Ari have conference heavy schedules so if they falter, Bears will get that tie breaker. Probably only concern is a 10-6 Seattle and 11-5 Dallas but I haven't been able to create that scenario yet, it keeps coming out with all 11-5 teams.

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

SF/Seattle and Dal/Philly play each other twice to end the year. One of them sweeping the other would be ideal. Ironically all 3 matchups (those 2 plus Lions/Bears) all play Thursday and all play in the next 3 weeks. Ideally, Seattle and Philly would sweep as the Bears would have tiebreakers over Detroit, Dallas and SF if they win the next 2 at least. But if Philly got swept by Dallas, they still play Seattle (at Philly) so that's potential for 3 NFC losses. Likewise, if SF sweeps Seattle, they still have to go to Philly and Arizona and they have been beatable on the road, so they could have 3 NFC losses left.

 

Wouldn't we want SF and Seattle to possibly split? Arizona is still the favorite to win the division, so either of them sweeping increases the odds of that team taking one of the 2 WC spots.

If they split and end at 10-6 that's good, but they could also split some games with Ari or other teams and end up 11-5, which is bad. Or if Phi loses only their two to Dallas and Dallas loses only to us and they each end up 11-5 or various other outcomes that create multiple 11 win non-division winners.

 

Seriously the Yahoo link posted in last weeks thread is great for understanding the remaining schedule and impacts.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WrigleyField 22]

Looks like at 10 wins Chicago would also win the tie breaker to Seattle, Ari, and Philly. Basically only GB of possible* 10 win teams gets us on the tie breaker

 

*Possible being used here very generously

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rawaction]

Looks like at 10 wins Chicago would also win the tie breaker to Seattle, Ari, and Philly. Basically only GB of possible* 10 win teams gets us on the tie breaker

 

*Possible being used here very generously

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I figured as much, but didn't run thru the scenarios. I believe all the AFC/NFC games are over for all the contenders other than this week's GB/NE Superbowl preview (according to media). And the Bears lost 3 AFC games, which means if they win out they would only finish with 3 NFC losses, which is most years is good enough to win most tiebreakers.

[WrigleyField 22]

Looks like at 10 wins Chicago would also win the tie breaker to Seattle, Ari, and Philly. Basically only GB of possible* 10 win teams gets us on the tie breaker

 

*Possible being used here very generously

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I figured as much, but didn't run thru the scenarios. I believe all the AFC/NFC games are over for all the contenders other than this week's GB/NE Superbowl preview (according to media). And the Bears lost 3 AFC games, which means if they win out they would only finish with 3 NFC losses, which is most years is good enough to win most tiebreakers.

It's really weird- with so many intra-division and infra-conference games left among the NFC WC race, you don't even have to try out every scenario to figure out the WC possibilities.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[minnesotacubsfan]

Jesus Christ you guys DONT LET JAY CUTLER BREAK US UP

 

 

nsbb4life

[WrigleyField 22]

Yeah. That's the problem it always comes to. People can say whatever they want about Cutler, but the alternatives are never any better.

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright.

 

At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know about this fictional "developmental" QB, if a QB is there that is an upgrade to Cutler you take him. If not, you dont.

Well there won't be a QB guaranteed to be better. In the mid rounds it will be even harder. But we should definitely try. If it doesn't work out well have tons of "option years" on Cutler.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jersey cubs fan]

Yeah. That's the problem it always comes to. People can say whatever they want about Cutler, but the alternatives are never any better.

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright.

 

At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know about this fictional "developmental" QB, if a QB is there that is an upgrade to Cutler you take him. If not, you dont.

Well there won't be a QB guaranteed to be better. In the mid rounds it will be even harder. But we should definitely try. If it doesn't work out well have tons of "option years" on Cutler.

 

I agree, unless you can draft another punter.

[WrigleyField 22]

Yeah. That's the problem it always comes to. People can say whatever they want about Cutler, but the alternatives are never any better.

I'm cringing at the fact that meatballs do love pointing to Orton and he's only slightly behind Cutler statistically. But for every Orton backer there is a McCown backer so it evens out alright.

 

At the end of the day, so much still falls on this staff. Get a new staff. Draft them a developmental QB. Give the current offensive core two more years while continuing to replenish our youth with picks and mid-range FA signings... Things really don't look bad if Emery is ready to move on from Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know about this fictional "developmental" QB, if a QB is there that is an upgrade to Cutler you take him. If not, you dont.

Well there won't be a QB guaranteed to be better. In the mid rounds it will be even harder. But we should definitely try. If it doesn't work out well have tons of "option years" on Cutler.

 

I agree, unless you can draft another punter.

Gotta run those two punter sets to keep the ST guessing.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WrigleyField 22]

I still kinda wish we would have lost yesterday so that we'd unravel against Detroit and put us at 8 losses ahead of a long week - the perfect opportunity to let go of Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Guest]

Man, I'm not even sure they'll let Trestman go if the Bears end up at 5-11.

[UMFan83]

I still kinda wish we would have lost yesterday so that we'd unravel against Detroit and put us at 8 losses ahead of a long week - the perfect opportunity to let go of Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

1) wouldnt be a long week, the Bears play on back to back thursdays so only 7 days in between games

2) At this point there's no point in firing Trestman during the season unless you believe someone on the current staff is a possibility for your next head coach and you want to make them interim for the rest of the year. If anything you want Trestman to finish the year to complete the downward spiral.

[Brian707]

I still kinda wish we would have lost yesterday so that we'd unravel against Detroit and put us at 8 losses ahead of a long week - the perfect opportunity to let go of Trestman.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

 

Its not a long week when playing Dallas the following Thursday.

[WrigleyField 22]

Oh that's weird didn't realize we have b2b Thursdays.

 

Regarding firing Trestman mid-season, its mainly about securing it early on so I don't have to worry until January about them keeping him. I'd agree there's no practical point in mid season firing.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jersey cubs fan]

Oh that's weird didn't realize we have b2b Thursdays.

 

I didn't realize it either until I kept hearing the commercial in the background on NFL Network.

 

They also follow that one up with a Monday Night game vs New Orleans. No Sunday football until the weekend before Christmas.

[WrigleyField 22]

Well a Thanksgiving firing would still have been fun so we could watch the media melt down about the Bears being classless or w/e.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[UMFan83]

Well a Thanksgiving firing would still have been fun so we could watch the media melt down about the Bears being classless or w/e.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Haha, I remember the backlash when the Bulls fired Scott Skiles on Xmas eve

[WrigleyField 22]

Well a Thanksgiving firing would still have been fun so we could watch the media melt down about the Bears being classless or w/e.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Haha, I remember the backlash when the Bulls fired Scott Skiles on Xmas eve

They fired another coach around the holidays too, I can remember if it was Del Negro or Cartwright or someone earlier, but I remember it happening twice.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk