Bears Week 5 @ Vikings, Noon FOX

[Tim]

Going for 2 was absolutely the right call. The play may have even been decent - the DB made a do or die play and nailed it.

[gflore34]

Heard something on the score about Gordon coming very to a pick six on the Vikings winning TD drive? Anyone watching is that correct? Given all of his, thus far, terrible play that would have been awesome.

 

Also, why does Pettis continue to be targeted? It's probably because there's no one else however, how many catchable balls does this clown have to drop before he convinces the Bears he's useless? Smith-Marsette certain deserves to cut, Pettis should follow him out the door.

[Thurman Merman]

Heard something on the score about Gordon coming very to a pick six on the Vikings winning TD drive? Anyone watching is that correct? Given all of his, thus far, terrible play that would have been awesome.

 

Also, why does Pettis continue to be targeted? It's probably because there's no one else however, how many catchable balls does this clown have to drop before he convinces the Bears he's useless? Smith-Marsette certain deserves to cut, Pettis should follow him out the door.

He read the play perfect to be in position but cousins lofted a good throw over his outstretched hand. Less a realistic chance at a pick six and more encouraging that Gordon made a good read.

[champaignchris]

The ideal remainder of the season would look a whole bunch like this game.

 

The best scenario is the Bears going into the off-season knowing Fields is the guy and having a top 5 pick to start building a team around him.

 

Yesterday was quite easily Fields’ best game as a Bear. He was also quite easily the best player in a Bears uniform.

[mul21]

Going for 2 was absolutely the right call. The play may have even been decent - the DB made a do or die play and nailed it.

 

I hate, hate, hate going for 2 that early in the game because there are so many permutations where it ends up costing you in the end, just like it did yesterday. They kick the extra point and everything else goes as it did, the Vikings only go for 1 and are up 28-23 and a TD in the last 2 minutes wins the game instead of tying it or putting you in a position where you have to go for 2 to win. Statistically it may well be the right call but I just don't like it in that spot at all.

[UMFan83]

 

[minnesotacubsfan]

Going for 2 was absolutely the right call. The play may have even been decent - the DB made a do or die play and nailed it.

 

I hate, hate, hate going for 2 that early in the game because there are so many permutations where it ends up costing you in the end, just like it did yesterday. They kick the extra point and everything else goes as it did, the Vikings only go for 1 and are up 28-23 and a TD in the last 2 minutes wins the game instead of tying it or putting you in a position where you have to go for 2 to win. Statistically it may well be the right call but I just don't like it in that spot at all.

 

 

if the Bears kick the xp there, the Vikings likely go for 2 after their TD as well. Given they have Cook and we have a flour sieve of a Defense, going for 2 made sense because we needed all the points we could get

[gflore34]

The ideal remainder of the season would look a whole bunch like this game.

 

The best scenario is the Bears going into the off-season knowing Fields is the guy and having a top 5 pick to start building a team around him.

 

Yesterday was quite easily Fields’ best game as a Bear. He was also quite easily the best player in a Bears uniform.

 

Going for two, on-side kick, trying repeated shots down the field maybe, finally, the Bears have decided to be balls to walls aggressive. Why not try to make the opponent execute on defense by putting pressure on them? It's sure a horsefeathers quite a bit more fun to watch and, I'm guessing, more fun to play in such a manner.

[raw]

Going for 2 was absolutely the right call. The play may have even been decent - the DB made a do or die play and nailed it.

 

I hate, hate, hate going for 2 that early in the game because there are so many permutations where it ends up costing you in the end, just like it did yesterday. They kick the extra point and everything else goes as it did, the Vikings only go for 1 and are up 28-23 and a TD in the last 2 minutes wins the game instead of tying it or putting you in a position where you have to go for 2 to win. Statistically it may well be the right call but I just don't like it in that spot at all.

 

I know, when you cut the lead to 5 you're supposed to go for 2, but I honestly think you have to figure more points will be scored when you're at the start of the 3rd quarter against a team that already has 3 TD drives against you. There's having faith in your defense, then there's being realistic. And realistically, there were going to be more points, whether it was 3 or 7, you get the point while you can and chase the 2 only if you absolutely have to at the end.

 

That being said, I don't hate any move where the ultraconservative Eberflus is aggressive. The onsides kick, the 2pt try, F it, this is a bad team in a no-lose situation. Winning is always good, but losing isn't a huge deal since this isn't a playoff team.

[gflore34]

Going for 2 was absolutely the right call. The play may have even been decent - the DB made a do or die play and nailed it.

 

I hate, hate, hate going for 2 that early in the game because there are so many permutations where it ends up costing you in the end, just like it did yesterday. They kick the extra point and everything else goes as it did, the Vikings only go for 1 and are up 28-23 and a TD in the last 2 minutes wins the game instead of tying it or putting you in a position where you have to go for 2 to win. Statistically it may well be the right call but I just don't like it in that spot at all.

 

I know, when you cut the lead to 5 you're supposed to go for 2, but I honestly think you have to figure more points will be scored when you're at the start of the 3rd quarter against a team that already has 3 TD drives against you. There's having faith in your defense, then there's being realistic. And realistically, there were going to be more points, whether it was 3 or 7, you get the point while you can and chase the 2 only if you absolutely have to at the end.

 

That being said, I don't hate any move where the ultraconservative Eberflus is aggressive. The onsides kick, the 2pt try, F it, this is a bad team in a no-lose situation. Winning is always good, but losing isn't a huge deal since this isn't a playoff team.

 

 

Damn straight, especially late in the season when facing those teams that are in playoff contention in need of win. If the Bears aren't making the playoffs, next best thing is playing fast and loose, having fun, forcing the other teams to execute or go home.

[WrigleyField 22]

I think teams should probably be going for two way more regardless of the exact point differentials early in the game.

 

Probably especially so if you're a bad O that ends of settling for many FGs.

 

So I don't really care even what the models say, if Eberflus feels compelled to go for some 2pat, I'm not going to complain

[raw]

I think teams should probably be going for two way more regardless of the exact point differentials early in the game.

 

Probably especially so if you're a bad O that ends of settling for many FGs.

 

So I don't really care even what the models say, if Eberflus feels compelled to go for some 2pat, I'm not going to complain

 

If I were an NFL coach, I'd have a pretty straightforward philosophy about going for 2.

 

- After a defensive or special teams score, go for 2

- After a long scoring play, go for 2

 

I'd use those 2pt conversions as practice for short yardage situations going forward. There's no reason a good NFL offense shouldn't be able to pick up 3 yards at least 3/4 of the time it needs to. I'd spend a ton of practice time on short yardage conversions and I'd never punt on 3rd and less than 4 beyond my own 45. I'd never kick a sub 30 yard FG, unless time dictates otherwise either way.

[WrigleyField 22]

I think teams should probably be going for two way more regardless of the exact point differentials early in the game.

 

Probably especially so if you're a bad O that ends of settling for many FGs.

 

So I don't really care even what the models say, if Eberflus feels compelled to go for some 2pat, I'm not going to complain

 

If I were an NFL coach, I'd have a pretty straightforward philosophy about going for 2.

 

- After a defensive or special teams score, go for 2

- After a long scoring play, go for 2

 

I'd use those 2pt conversions as practice for short yardage situations going forward. There's no reason a good NFL offense shouldn't be able to pick up 3 yards at least 3/4 of the time it needs to. I'd spend a ton of practice time on short yardage conversions and I'd never punt on 3rd and less than 4 beyond my own 45. I'd never kick a sub 30 yard FG, unless time dictates otherwise either way.

I'd probably add a first drive score to the list myself.

 

But about the only justification I could see for not going for two a lot more is you have a limited set of 2 yard and out plays and you want some element of surprise for when you really need them. But I'm not even sure that's actually a good argument or just one that makes us feel good.