Wild Card Round: #7 Bears @ #2 Saints, 3:40 CT on 1/10

[minnesotacubsfan]

It was probably the right game plan. But helps underscore his limitations and that the prior 3 game run was a mirage. I'm back down to maxing his guaranteed money on a new deal to like 10M tops (and I still feel awfully generous).

 

It's all you've got with Mitch, in what was, at the time, a must win game, what else could they do?

 

Against the Saints I see no reason not to go balls to the walls aggressive with Mitch, who cares if it results in multiple TO's and Saints a route? We know the short passes, runs eat the clock rely on the defense won't work, for one game, the dip horsefeathers could look competent. Plus, in recent years, the Saints have found all kinds of new and creative ways to lose in the playoffs, wouldn't losing to Bears with Mitch playing the game of life just be the cherry on top?

 

I'm confused why you think it was ok against the Packers but that they should go aggressive with the Saints who are a better pass defense. If the logic is to control TOP and slow the game down to offset a bad offense, I'd think that would be the same strategy against the Saints even if they potentially have a less explosive offense (though not dramatically with their playmakers)

 

you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat

[minnesotacubsfan]

.. Other than that, they didn't open up the field until the Bears were down 2 scores. Mitch threw the pick the first time they opened it up. ....

 

this is the point that I have such an issue with, honestly. When the D knows you have to throw deep to catch up, it's easier for them to sit on it. It's not an excuse for Mitch, he has to improve his deep ball if he wants to stay in the league, but the coaching staff set the game up this way. They could have given him one-read deep routes on 1st down early in the game, much like the Mooney deep ball.

 

but I digress

[gflore34]

 

It's all you've got with Mitch, in what was, at the time, a must win game, what else could they do?

 

Against the Saints I see no reason not to go balls to the walls aggressive with Mitch, who cares if it results in multiple TO's and Saints a route? We know the short passes, runs eat the clock rely on the defense won't work, for one game, the dip horsefeathers could look competent. Plus, in recent years, the Saints have found all kinds of new and creative ways to lose in the playoffs, wouldn't losing to Bears with Mitch playing the game of life just be the cherry on top?

 

I'm confused why you think it was ok against the Packers but that they should go aggressive with the Saints who are a better pass defense. If the logic is to control TOP and slow the game down to offset a bad offense, I'd think that would be the same strategy against the Saints even if they potentially have a less explosive offense (though not dramatically with their playmakers)

 

you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat

 

This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with?

[UMFan83]

 

It's all you've got with Mitch, in what was, at the time, a must win game, what else could they do?

 

Against the Saints I see no reason not to go balls to the walls aggressive with Mitch, who cares if it results in multiple TO's and Saints a route? We know the short passes, runs eat the clock rely on the defense won't work, for one game, the dip horsefeathers could look competent. Plus, in recent years, the Saints have found all kinds of new and creative ways to lose in the playoffs, wouldn't losing to Bears with Mitch playing the game of life just be the cherry on top?

 

I'm confused why you think it was ok against the Packers but that they should go aggressive with the Saints who are a better pass defense. If the logic is to control TOP and slow the game down to offset a bad offense, I'd think that would be the same strategy against the Saints even if they potentially have a less explosive offense (though not dramatically with their playmakers)

 

Odds are neither approach will work but, I'm of the mind the Saints are expecting a very conservative approach but, Bears go aggressive, it may surprise them and work. Also, it doesn't matter, this is one of those games where they can go out and have "fun" attempting this or that, they've nothing to lose. I'd like to see Mitch look like a franchise play making QB for one game, I think there's a higher probability of that happening with a chance taking aggressive game plan.

 

Yeah I guess my argument was that they had the same scenario in the Packers game. I guess the biggest difference is that they've made the playoffs now so they are playing with house money. Sad that 'house money' for the Bears is simply making the playoffs as an 8-8 7 seed but whatever. Also, it made sense to simply keep things close in the Packers game since they needed to keep the Rams motivated to play their way in.

[UMFan83]

 

I'm confused why you think it was ok against the Packers but that they should go aggressive with the Saints who are a better pass defense. If the logic is to control TOP and slow the game down to offset a bad offense, I'd think that would be the same strategy against the Saints even if they potentially have a less explosive offense (though not dramatically with their playmakers)

 

you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat

 

This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with?

 

Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off.

[WrigleyField 22]

 

you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat

 

This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with?

 

Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off.

So when you look at the explosive play rate, while GB and NO are similar overall, they're somewhat different in rush/pass.

 

https://www.sharpfootballstats.com/explosive-play-rankings--off-.html

 

NO is 13/19/15 run/pass/overall.

GB is 20/4/10

 

So yea, Kamara has potential to burn you, but Brees definitely isn't as likely to burn you as Rogers was. So I think that lends itself that you can be a little more agressive. I haven't given it tons of thought though. But I don't think it's dramatically different of a game plan.. Don't put the weight too much on Mitch, but they can probably withstand a short drive or two. Though if Smith is out perhaps the D can't. Hope we see like 80% nickel this game and probably better if it's more Woods than Trevathan if they drop a ILB for nickel/dime.

[OleMissCub]

They don't have to worry AT ALL about Brees torching them as Rodgers.

 

FIFY

 

It’s not hyperbole to say that Brees can’t throw the ball farther than 25 yards down the field anymore. His arm is completely dead.

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat

 

This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with?

 

Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off.

 

traditionally I think thats true, but I think this year with Brees aging, its been more Kamara.

 

btw; NO is a team that I could see signing Trubisky and being successful with because of what you are describing.

[UMFan83]

They don't have to worry AT ALL about Brees torching them as Rodgers.

 

FIFY

 

It’s not hyperbole to say that Brees can’t throw the ball farther than 25 yards down the field anymore. His arm is completely dead.

 

His final games are setting up to be very similar to Peyton's

[Derwood]

I refuse to invest in a team that won't throw the ball more than 7 yards down field. Get a new QB already

[CaliforniaRaisin]

Denver won't be the only one, apparently.

 

[raw]

After reflecting on Sunday's game, I feel much better about that game and potentially the prospects of this game. The Bears offense was really very similar to the offense that put up 30+ the previous 4 weeks. Probably should have gone to more intermediate and deep passing plays while the game was still competitive, but if they converted better in short yardage in the redzone, it's a completely different game and an acceptable offensive outcome. The Bears scored 1 TD in 5 trips to the redzone, granted one of those was at the end of the game where they ran out of tie, but they had 6th trip ended on 4th and 1 from the 25.

 

After the fumbled punt return, 3 and out from the 20. Was 3rd and 3 and they ran for 1 yard w/ Montgomery. Should have gone 4th and 2 from the 12.

 

The drive before the half, they did run out of time, but I thought they had time for 1 more shot at the end zone. 9 seconds were left on the near INT. Sucks because that play GB rushed 3 and Leno allowed 1 of the team's only 2 pressures on the day. Trubisky couldn't step into the throw and I think ARob makes a play if the QB is able to throw that with a clean pocket.

 

First drive in the 2nd half, they got the big Mooney play and then got conservative. Inside run to Montgomery, screen to Mooney, and that 3rd down play was just a mess. No Graham or Miller on the field. Wims was out there instead in trips. Mooney ran another 1/2 yard route, making him an easy cover for Amos. Robinson was doubled by the CB and safety. Wims was doubled by 2 LBs in the middle of the field. Only Robinson's route even took him in the endzone, and he was doubled. Kmet was the lone receiver on the other side. He was the primary read, but was covered by their best CB, Jaire Alexander because of the formation. Montgomery caught the checkdown out of the backfield and got to the 2....which the Bears should have gone for. I think on that 3rd down, you have to create a matchup advantage. Maybe Robinson in the slot vs the 2 LBs. Mooney running across the

endzone. Graham outside 1-on-1 with a CB or LB. Just bad coaching in general. Should have gone 4th and goal from the 2.

 

The drive at the end of the 3rd, wasn't quite in the redzone but obviously that 4th and 1 play didn't work.

 

Even taking out the drive before the half, they were 2 yards, 3 yards, and 2 yards again from potential TDs. Instead of 21 points, they got 6. That puts the game at 35-31 (more likely 30 or 32, as they would have gone for 2 at some point), with the final drive ending with time running out at the 1.

 

If they play the same vs. New Orleans, with albeit a better defense, and clean up the short yardage stuff....they can score enough points to win this game. I don't think NO scores 5 TDs. So, if the Bears can somehow get to 30 again, I think they win. Easier said than done obviously, but I dont feel like it's an impossible task like I did even a few hours ago.

[NOLA]

 

you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat

 

This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with?

 

Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off.

Pretty much. Something to consider, though, is that this week will be the first game since Week 1 that the Saints will have a their receiving corps healthy and on the field with Brees. Mike Thomas is 100% for the game.

 

Oddly enough, Drew has been throwing the ball downfield more since returning from the broken ribs. I'm not sure if that has something to do with the practice squad receivers he's been throwing to, but some of these throws weren't happening early in the season.

[OleMissCub]

 

This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with?

 

Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off.

Pretty much. Something to consider, though, is that this week will be the first game since Week 1 that the Saints will have a their receiving corps healthy and on the field with Brees. Mike Thomas is 100% for the game.

 

Oddly enough, Drew has been throwing the ball downfield more since returning from the broken ribs. I'm not sure if that has something to do with the practice squad receivers he's been throwing to, but some of these throws weren't happening early in the season.

 

“Downfield” is still a relative term. But he’s certainly throwing more in the 15-20 yard range than he had been.

 

Looking at his pass chart this season, he’s only completed 10 passes over 20 yards and just 1 over 30.

 

To be fair to the old man though, you can look at other QB pass charts and they hardly ever throw past 20 yards either. Mahomes, for example, only has 16 completions past 20 yards this season.

Edited January 6, 2021 by OleMissCub

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off.

Pretty much. Something to consider, though, is that this week will be the first game since Week 1 that the Saints will have a their receiving corps healthy and on the field with Brees. Mike Thomas is 100% for the game.

 

Oddly enough, Drew has been throwing the ball downfield more since returning from the broken ribs. I'm not sure if that has something to do with the practice squad receivers he's been throwing to, but some of these throws weren't happening early in the season.

 

“Downfield” is still a relative term. But he’s certainly throwing more in the 15-20 yard range than he had been.

 

Looking at his pass chart this season, he’s only completed 10 passes over 20 yards and just 1 over 30.

 

that would be sea-change compared to how often the Bears go downfield

[OleMissCub]

Pretty much. Something to consider, though, is that this week will be the first game since Week 1 that the Saints will have a their receiving corps healthy and on the field with Brees. Mike Thomas is 100% for the game.

 

Oddly enough, Drew has been throwing the ball downfield more since returning from the broken ribs. I'm not sure if that has something to do with the practice squad receivers he's been throwing to, but some of these throws weren't happening early in the season.

 

“Downfield” is still a relative term. But he’s certainly throwing more in the 15-20 yard range than he had been.

 

Looking at his pass chart this season, he’s only completed 10 passes over 20 yards and just 1 over 30.

 

that would be sea-change compared to how often the Bears go downfield

 

Maybe just with Mitch at QB. Looking at your pass charts, I’ve got Trubisky only completing 3 20+ yarders this season, including what looks to be a Hail Mary from last week. But Foles has 17 completions past that range.

[raw]

 

“Downfield” is still a relative term. But he’s certainly throwing more in the 15-20 yard range than he had been.

 

Looking at his pass chart this season, he’s only completed 10 passes over 20 yards and just 1 over 30.

 

that would be sea-change compared to how often the Bears go downfield

 

Maybe just with Mitch at QB. Looking at your pass charts, I’ve got Trubisky only completing 3 20+ yarders this season, including what looks to be a Hail Mary from last week. But Foles has 17 completions past that range.

 

To be fair, like 14 of those 17 from Foles were against Atlanta in the 2nd half.

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

that would be sea-change compared to how often the Bears go downfield

 

Maybe just with Mitch at QB. Looking at your pass charts, I’ve got Trubisky only completing 3 20+ yarders this season, including what looks to be a Hail Mary from last week. But Foles has 17 completions past that range.

 

To be fair, like 14 of those 17 from Foles were against Atlanta in the 2nd half.

 

and it wasnt a Hail Mary. but, yea

[gflore34]

 

“Downfield” is still a relative term. But he’s certainly throwing more in the 15-20 yard range than he had been.

 

Looking at his pass chart this season, he’s only completed 10 passes over 20 yards and just 1 over 30.

 

that would be sea-change compared to how often the Bears go downfield

 

Maybe just with Mitch at QB. Looking at your pass charts, I’ve got Trubisky only completing 3 20+ yarders this season, including what looks to be a Hail Mary from last week. But Foles has 17 completions past that range.

 

 

Just pathetic, his only avenue to success is the TOP game which oftentimes requires precise execution to work. I know having Mitch as your QB makes it easier on opposing defenses but, not being completely knowledgeable just how. Have we any coaches here who might spell it out for me? I think I understand since the deep ball is not a realistic threat there's no need to have anyone drop back from allow for defending a downfield shot? That is, opposing defenses can double cover the short to immediate routes since there's no need to commit a safety to the deep threat?

[UMFan83]

 

Maybe just with Mitch at QB. Looking at your pass charts, I’ve got Trubisky only completing 3 20+ yarders this season, including what looks to be a Hail Mary from last week. But Foles has 17 completions past that range.

 

To be fair, like 14 of those 17 from Foles were against Atlanta in the 2nd half.

 

and it wasnt a Hail Mary. but, yea

 

For reference, this was the play:

 

 

I love how deep Trubisky completions are so rare the only logical explanation is that it must have been a hail mary.

[champaignchris]

Why not give a try? Of course, success with the Chiefs doesn't translate into success elsewhere, hitting on Maholmes like they did, while a product of good scouting, there's still an element of luck or an uncontrollable variable that broke in their favor, something that cannot be replicated. I'm all for keeping Pace, if he has to be retained, and bringing a new GM , along with keeping Pace as far away from remedying the QB as possible. Later rounds of the draft, fine, QB and first round pick? No, hard pass on Pace calling the shots.

 

The Chiefs were pretty darn good before Mahomes got there. They had five straight winning seasons and went to the playoffs 4 times before Mahomes became their full time starter.

[OleMissCub]

 

To be fair, like 14 of those 17 from Foles were against Atlanta in the 2nd half.

 

and it wasnt a Hail Mary. but, yea

 

For reference, this was the play:

 

 

I love how deep Trubisky completions are so rare the only logical explanation is that it must have been a hail mary.

 

Yep, that was such a complete outlier on his charts that I just assumed it had to have been a total desperation heave.

[minnesotacubsfan]

nah, it was a designed play

[gflore34]

Why not give a try? Of course, success with the Chiefs doesn't translate into success elsewhere, hitting on Maholmes like they did, while a product of good scouting, there's still an element of luck or an uncontrollable variable that broke in their favor, something that cannot be replicated. I'm all for keeping Pace, if he has to be retained, and bringing a new GM , along with keeping Pace as far away from remedying the QB as possible. Later rounds of the draft, fine, QB and first round pick? No, hard pass on Pace calling the shots.

 

The Chiefs were pretty darn good before Mahomes got there. They had five straight winning seasons and went to the playoffs 4 times before Mahomes became their full time starter.

 

 

I know that but, it is the Bears so, you can understand my reservations, most everything has blown up in their faces.

[gflore34]

 

To be fair, like 14 of those 17 from Foles were against Atlanta in the 2nd half.

 

and it wasnt a Hail Mary. but, yea

 

For reference, this was the play:

 

 

I love how deep Trubisky completions are so rare the only logical explanation is that it must have been a hail mary.

 

Even appears with a just a fraction of second to complete stepping into the throw that's a TD. Just sucks how close the Bears were to winning, everyone's trying to paint it as if they no chance what so ever, [expletive], there were plenty of chances to win.