scarey

A run, or preferably a safer pass over the middle and/or in a only we can catch it spot. Basically nothing risky. You settle for the FG at that point and go into the half ecstatic. It was an idiotic play call and it's really stupid to pretend that it monday morning quarterbacking. It was exactly the type of thing I didn't want them doing at the time of the play, not the next day. Also, according to the video of this play the Bears had a timeout available. There was no need to spike it. But if they end up 1st and goal from the 4 there's still plenty of time to try and throw 2 relatively safe pass plays and then kick. You have to save the timeout for the absolute last seconds to ensure you can stop the clock to kick a field goal. They run the ball and call a timeout then get sacked trying to score, then no FG.

Ok, so I assume you were a person that was in favor of a run there? Assume they pick up 3 or 4 yards and 1st down. They have to spike the ball and there's about 25 seconds left on the clock and second down. At this point, everone knows the Bears have to try and throw it to try and score. You want a QB that was playing poorly and throwing the ball to the oposition to try and throw for a TD on the 8 yard line? Or do you want to try and sneak in an easy opportunity on a high percentage screen play? This video sucks, but this is exactly how that play is supposed to work... and it's Brandon freaking Manumaleuna doing it. Do you see how easy that is? I could have made that throw. Heck, Todd Collins could have even made that throw. You have to tip your cap to the Raiders for being in a good position, be disappointed in the lack of execution, and yes second guess the play call. Just don't forget the first two and totally emphasize the play call.

That doesn't matter though. If two people do their jobs correctly (Hanie throwing the ball on a line and Williams blocking the linebacker) then that play works. This is Monday morning QBing. The only reason the play call sucks is because it was not executed well. Your claim that you don't put your QB in that difficult position can be dispelled by the first Hanie TD. They are in an obvious blitzing down (3rd and 8 in the redzone) and the Bears go 4 WR. Forte is the only extra blocker left in to block for basically a rookie QB. If Hanie doesn't make the hot read and hits Knox for a TD, he likely gets sacked and everyone makes a big deal about how it was a bad play call and that Martz needs to put extra blockers in for Hanie. As it turned out, nobody mentions the play selection. Hanie was expected to perform and he did. Again, if Hanie and Williams execute that play well, Davis gets the ball with two blockers in front of him and a good chance to score. We wouldn't hear anything about the play call. Martz probably even gets credit for a good play call if they score. EDIT: Actually, I'm wrong, you do need to take into account that the Raiders were doing well against the screen when you make the play call. However, I'm not sure that was the case at this point in the game and also, the play is designed to misdirect the defense. And it did.

I was starting to think I was the only one with this opinion and thus, crazy. I'm glad that at the very least, I have one other crazy person to be crazy with.

If the throws it on a line it's a tackle for a loss. I think Davis may have had enough time to catch the ball and make a move, definitely not a certainty though. I get what you mean though, there was a linebacker sniffing out the play. Edwin Williams should have been on that. That doesn't mean it was an Earth-shatteringly horrible call. Again, I have no problems with people questioning the call. But calling Martz a complete moron and blaming him completely is just not fair. Martz has deserved plenty of blame for a lot of things that have gone wrong over the last two years. He deserves his share of the blame on that play. Making him the scapegoat for the whole game based on that one play doesn't make sense to me though. To me, execution by Hanie and Williams has more to do with why it unfolded as it did than Martz's play call. Yes, they are two players with limited playing time, but I know for a fact they ran that play in practice and made it part of the game plan. They are professional football players and they should be expected to make the play. I think people are reacting to the outcome of the play and playing a little bit of Monday morning QB. I don't see any other play from yesterday that people are claiming was too difficult to ask Hanie to do.

I disagree with your interpretation of his line of sight there. The play is designed to float it over to the guy, nobody throws lasers on a screen pass. It was a bad play call in deep. You run that at midfield, not the red zone. The Bears needed to get points there and try not to let Hanie screw up. Martz got cute and screwed the pooch. There's a clear sight line as Wimbley is stepping back, and I've seen many, MANY screen passes thrown on a line. Hell, Hanie threw one to Forte yesterday that was on a line. Hanie throws that directly to Davis and there's a great chance it's a TD.

http://i54.photobucket.com/albums/g109/scarey23/haniescreen.png If Hanie throws that right to Davis instead of floating it, I think he scores. There is a clear path right here with the second rusher on his heals trying to get back into position to guard against the screen. Hanie has an open throw. I know everyone is saying in hindsight that it was a stupid play call, but if it was executed correctly, I think it's a completely different game. Also, Edwin Williams needs to make the block on this play to allow Davis to make the catch. If you watch this highlight, he lets the guy go right by him to make the play on the ball.

Worst. Ending. Ever.

wtf autocorrect?

Block it. Now. And kill Lockyer while you do

Caleb Manning.

Why have opposing teams been allowed to stand over Hester and jaw?

Can't believe that was called a catch on the field.

We'd still be losing 10-12... Better than 7-15, but I personally don't mind gambling on that play if the potential is 14-12 lead. That's my point. No you could be winning 14-12. Do you not think the Bears could manage to get 10 yards on 3-4 plays using conservative playcalling (aka running the ball or high percentage throws? Screen pass is a high percentage throw. I'm done with this conversation. Sorry, it's gone on too long.

We'd still be losing 10-12... Better than 7-15, but I personally don't mind gambling on that play if the potential is 14-12 lead. That's my point.

Exactly....execution wasn't good. That's a difficult pass to make. Not one you ask your inexperienced backup QB to make in the red zone when you are in a position to take the lead before halftime. The Raiders played it well. What can you do? The play is supposed to set up so the TE is isolated. If that happens, there's a great chance to score. What you can do is run a less risky play for your inexperieced backup QB. You are just about guaranteed 3 points. The way this offense is going, you are probably only going to get 2-3 chances to score all game, and you just wasted one of them by making your QB make a difficult throw instead of running it for a 1st down inside the 10. Isn't the fact that they are struggling to score an argument FOR trying to score a TD?

Exactly....execution wasn't good. That's a difficult pass to make. Not one you ask your inexperienced backup QB to make in the red zone when you are in a position to take the lead before halftime. The Raiders played it well. What can you do? The play is supposed to set up so the TE is isolated. If that happens, there's a great chance to score.

Does every one forgetting that there was 33 seconds and only 1 TO? It's not like they were going to pound it into the endzone..

Personally, I had no problem with the call. I wanted a TD there and it was going to be tough to push it in. On the road with a struggling offense, you take your shots. The execution was not good.

Every Janikowski FG looks like a miss. Also, my autocorrect just changed Janikowski to unanimously.

Of course, the first post made in reply to this nugget being posted on SOSH is: "So Theo should be worth more."

Watching those highlights, it's so weird to see Rodgers look so uncomfortable. It feels like the Bears were blown out in that game, but it really was a fairly thrilling NFCC.

Now, I can see Jerry Jones throwing away 2.5 million in this instance, but I would have been floored if Green Bay threw that money away. I know they're an NFL franchise, but 2.5 million dollars a lot of cheddar (pun intended).

Please list the players that have been "Creaned." Next, list the players that have been "Painted." I don't have much insight on the Crean "list", but I'm pretty sure Capobianco is one of those guys. I may be mistaken though. As for the Painter "list", here's the guys that have left the team since Painter became head honcho. Nate Minnoy - Left the team inexplicably after being the only freshman to start every game in 2005 leading up to a knee injury. Averaged 10.2 ppg and 5.1 rpg. Left the team in September 2006, so they did not get the benefit of adding another scholarship for the year. Chris Lutz - Easily Purdue's best shooter at the time. I believe percentage-wise, he was the best shooter in the conference when he left the team. There's no way he was forced off the team. He likely was unhappy about his reduced minutes, but he still had a large role. Jonathan Uchendu - Left the team at the same time Lutz did. His leaving left the 2007 Boilermakers with only two guys 6'10 or taller. He was going to serve a role as a reserve big man behind Johnson and Calasan. He got in some legal troubles in his freshman year which was likely a contributor to leaving Purdue. Scott Martin - I don't think I need to explain this one. Patrick Bade - This is the one I could see people questioning. After rigorously cutting weight after his freshman year, Bade did not get the benefit of increased minutes. This last off season, he decided to drop his scholarship for the basketball team and pick one up with the football team. He was actually more highly recruited as a tight end in high school than he was as a basketball player. The one reason I don't see this one being suspicious either was the low playing time and the fact that again, Purdue lost out on a scholarship as they were not able to fill it before the season started. So, which of these guys was "Painted"?

He's been worse than Tarvaris Jackson, Donovan McNabb and Kerry Collins this year. And I don't see anybody scrambling to sign Collins. He's barely been better than Tim Tebow, for Theo's sake. You would really take Jackson over Orton?