gflore34

Its lack of effort, plain and simple, out rebounded by a shorter team, you're not trying that hard. The potential is there but, they allow themselves to pushed around, out hustled, don't know what it'll take to light a fire under their asses. I'm certain Underwood has tried all sorts of methods, must drive him crazy to sit there and give credit to the other team, strength of Big Ten, etc. when it's obvious his team really isn't putting forth its best effort.

Agreed doesn't hurt they're playing Bears extra, extra D, same terrible offense, with a crappy when healthy QB who is hurt.

I've said this before but people have to realize why the Bears haven't had that luck. It's not that they are the Bears and it will never work, but it's that for the majority of their history they have purposefully been a defense first and run the ball a very close 2nd. They spent a high first on Trubisky, but they also made the mistake of having a first time GM making that pick without any input from the head coach, or anybody with an inkling of NFL offensive smarts. The Bears need a real focus on offense, not Canadian offense, NFL offense. There is a chance Nagy is that guy. Maybe he can help pick out the right draft pick. We know Pace can't. Also, everybody comments about the Packers but it's 2 times. They found a QB twice. It's not like they've found a QB every 5 years or something. They found two QBs who lasted a long time each. Prior to that the Packers were joke. They sucked for a very long time. They hired an absolutely Grade A offensive head coach and it changed the trajectory of the organization. Yes, I slighty exaggerated and I believe you're correct regarding the hire of a Grade A offensive coach.

yeah, biggs was on the score this morning saying he has no idea what's going on...said that the bears could have easily scheduled end of season pressers for pace and nagy with firm date/time and they haven't (just an open ended TBA), so as to suggest that it may mean something. Why does anything need to happen? They've a horsefeathers-ton of excuses to retain the status quo besides the customary we tried real hard, made the playoffs, excuses for being terrible end of season press conference what more is necessary?

Hell, I'd even take an offense that could overcome a negative play, so tried of knowing a false start means a punt in four plays. Over the last few years the Bears must be last or next to last in teams being able to overcome a negative play to get a first down, its uncanny and pathetic.

I don't like this line of thinking. The goal shouldn't be average anywhere. People have suggested getting rid of Fuller and Hicks, trading whoever you can on D to built the offense, but that's not how you build a team. If you have good players, keep them. Offense, defense, special teams. If you have to build the Rams, build the Rams rather than chasing a pipe dream of mirroring KCs talent. Obviously if the choice is a potentially great edge rusher vs a potentially great QB, you go with offense but you can't ignore the defense or you end up with Trestman's Bears. Sent from my SM-A115AZ using Tapatalk Yeah, there's no fool proof plan, just don't think teams like the Rams and Bears have had much of a chance this year.

Option 1. Luck into a superstar QB, never let him go, and build a well rounded team every year. Option 2. Cycle through rookie scale QBs and alternate recurring cycles of elite Ds with strong offense supporting casts with the occasional blow up/reset offseason. So basically pursue option 2, but it you get supremely lucky, divert plans to option 1. Given have Bears never lucked into a superstar QB, makes it feel as if it's nearly impossible for them, I know the overall chances of lucking into that QB are slim. Just seems especially improbable when considering the Bears and, of course, the Packers will just pull another franchise QB out their asses once Rodgers retires. Be it Love or whatever, other QB they draft in the twenties, Love was 26th.

Putting my beliefs about ownership aside, wouldn't you think the approach has to be build an overwhelming or super good offense with an average defense? With all the built in advantages an offense has in today' NFL, the great defense, TOP offense has little chance of succeeding. Sure the Ram defense has been fantastic and, I despise the Packers, however, is there any doubt the Rams will lose by double digits next week? They've got about as much a chance as the Bears had yesterday. It's got to be offense, offense, offense, starting with the OL, thinking the Bears should go OL in the first round.

Tough is right. It's tough to lose when you out-shoot, out-rebound, out-assist and out-steal the opponent. Just one of those games where Maryland made just enough contested jumpers to keep close enough and beat Illinois at the free throw line. Tough loss, but that kind of thing can happen in a relentless conference schedule. I don't know, this Illini team can go from world beaters to losing to a not so good Maryland team in the blink of an eye. Prime candidates for a 2, 3 seed - 15, 14 seed upset or Final Four run, Underwood' got to kick them in the ass to get effort from them, must drive him crazy.

how much of it is Eddie and how much of it is Paganos use of Eddie? I asked the same about Mack yesterday. But Jackson looked like trash out there this season. My oversized gut says that's more on him than the idiot DC. I think its more on Jackson, Mack was being double teamed, horse collared, chopped etc. thought he did about as well as he could. I've been down on Mack since he's basically disappeared but, a good portion of his ineffectiveness has to attributed to the fact no one else can get to the QB, he's doubled teamed, held and Pagano' use of him is made him invisible.

Can he take Eddie Jackson with him?

It was him getting chewed out by the coach for falling for the think they specifically talked about not falling for, and Miller dismissed him. That's on Miller. That makes sense. Couldn't remember when in the game that happened. Completely on Miller beyond stupid he was so gullible, I'm certain there's more we don't see off camera. No doubt, who ever that horsefeathers #22 is, he's doing more than trash talking, cheap shot here or there, when the play' over, etc. nevertheless, maintain cool, let the officiating take care of him.

Nagy will hold them back on offense and Mitch is the perfect QB to do that. Mitch was playing QB for a contract yesterday and couldn't even try for a 1st down on a 4th down scramble. The only thing that they could've kept Nagy was they did play hard for him but now with an issue with the culture of this team, he's done. A poor in-game coach with a poor offensive scheme who can't call games who brings in a DC who can't scheme against a broken QB who elderly and can't throw for more than 5 yards and you play off coverage. They make up for it by having a GM who can't draft. How did that 1st and 2nd Rd combo of Trubisky and Miller do? All trash. horsefeathers em all. My same thought, burn it all down, the approach on defense may have been worse than Nagy' offensive approach. You know the excuse for not being aggressive on D is all personal missing due to injuries. Sometime in these playoffs a team is going to realize Brees is limited and they'll use it to kick the horsefeathers of them.

I can't see the McCaskey' not using every excuse to go with the status quo, they've a plethora of excuses at their disposal - pandemic, made the playoffs, etc. I still maintain we may never see a seriously good Bears team, organization until ownership changes.

Saints defense is good and all that, blah, blah, blah, didn't hurt they were facing a team with a "offensive" HC who's scared of his own shadow. If there's was ever an opportunity to go for broke, yesterday was it, yet, being the dick less coward he is, Nagy attempted his TOP garbage. Before the game announcers suggested Nagy open it up, be aggressive, halftime they suggested he do so again, Romo suggested the same at least, four times. Doesn't fill me with confidence that should a miracle occur and Nagy end up with a competent QB his play calling won't hold them back.

53-13 second half makes up for the sleepwalking through the first half, but this is just unreal the difference. I was pretty down on them after their less than stellar efforts against Missouri and rightly so. What we saw tonight is a glimpse of what this team is capable of, it's there, they just have to want it enough. Guess 'Wood did not immediately enter the locker room at halftime, apparently, they were pissed and getting on each other about lack of effort. This pattern of 'Wood having to play mind games to get effort out of these guys doesn't sit very well, sometimes it doesn't work.

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.

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.

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?

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?

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.

Exactly, they've nothing to lose, all the pressure to succeed is on the Saints don't know if that makes a difference with professional athletes but, hell, why not?

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 not worried about that. Why would he take that job to be Pace's underling when there's several open gigs and he could be the unquestioned leader of a football ops? At the same time, if they did promote Pace and hire Borgonzi as a GM, the fact that he took that job would tell me he's comfortable with the level of control he'd have over the roster and other decisions going forward, so go for it. 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.

Thinking it'll be closer maybe, 35-28 or so, some non-starter Bear is going to play out of his ass. Despite the loss, said player will give Bears fans and Pace the impression they've found something only to have that player disappear into the mist of next season.