PDA

View Full Version : My (First of '07) Week 1 Thoughts


Shiver
09-11-2007, 01:44 AM
I'm back with another year of post-weekend analysis. So without further ado I present my writeup.


My Truths: the good….

Mario Williams lived up to his billing and made his presence felt. Sure it was against the Chiefs, whose O-Line is hardly their strength; however every defensive end in the NFL pads their stats against inferior opponents whether it’s Julius Peppers, Jason Taylor or Dwight Freeney. Mario Williams was already a top flight run defender, now if he can become a force as a pass rusher I think my prediction about him being one of, if not the best DE in football will be right.

Tom Brady as an MVP candidate is a so far, so good for me. With all the weapons he has he should put up the best stats he’s ever put up. Randy Moss is seemingly back and motivated again. If he can stay healthy, his biggest issue the past three years, he will help take Brady to that next level.

Jay Cutler took his first step towards justifying my prediction of his ascension into the upper echelon of NFL Quarterbacks. He accumulated 300 yards, hooked up with Javon Walker and Brandon Marshall. The stats, in and of themselves, was not as impressive as the intangibles he displayed. He used his arm strength, athleticism and intelligence on that final rally to win the game. He converted not one, but two 4th and 2 situations to give Elam a chance to win the game for them. He should only continue to improve as he gathers more experience.

The Jets were a shaky 10-6 team and would regress. They still have defensive issues and an iffy QB situation. Sure they weren’t expected to win, but it’s not good to be blown out in your own building to a division rival. I think their record will better reflect the talent of the team, i.e. mediocre at best.

Larry Johnson didn’t have a good game. The Chiefs were so bad offensively they couldn’t establish Johnson, the O-Line is weak, the passing game is a disaster and the defense is mediocre. Will he get better? He probably will have more impressive performances, especially as the season progresses and he gets into game shape. Will he still be considered an elite RB? I don’t think so.

The Bengals also looked very good. The defense, in particular, looked vastly improved from last year. Leon Hall had a solid game in pass coverage, Landon Johnson and Ahmad Brooks were making plays, the D-Line was getting steady pressure. Albeit the Ravens had a sloppy game, the Bengals were swarming to the ball. It all culminated in not one, but two goal-line stands to preserve victory. The offense will carry the load, so if they can keep up this level of play on the defensive side of the ball then the Bengals will be a very dangerous team.

The Lions won. Sure it was only against the Raiders, but it was still a road game and it was still a good start for them. The defense had a lapse that allowed the Raiders to get back into the game, but they really clamped down to finish them off. Dewayne White was spectacular at the end of the game. In an NFC that is a complete crapshoot at this point (I’ll get to that later on), why not the Lions? They certainly have the offense and if the defense can make plays in crucial situations like they did today then they should be able to get up to the .500 record, which would be a miracle for this franchise.

Me – 1 (Lions)
BBD – 0 (Raiders)

My Truths: the bad…

The Redskins and Jason Campbell, despite the win, did not justify my pick of them in the NFC East. The Dolphins have a tough defense, so I will give Campbell a break. That being said I think the Dolphins are a bad football team and Washington was at home. Jon Jansen’s injury is a big loss and will hurt the offense. The one bright spot is the defense played solidly and Clinton Portis looked like he was back. I’m going to stick to my guns, but I expect more from Campbell next week against the Eagles.

Vernon Davis didn’t have a big game. Then again, the 49ers struggled for the vast majority of that ugly, ugly game. Was it Davis’ fault? Was it Smith’s fault? Was it just great defense? It’s too hard to say. That being said I certainly expected more. He has fifteen more games, so I still think he’ll do just fine going forward.

My Truths: the ugly…

Do the Colts read my stuff? I swear they do and use it as BB material in their locker room. It’s the only explanation. They destroyed the Saints across the board. Freddy Keiaho is a much better player than Cato June and I’ve only seen one game, it’s already that evident. Still I think it’s too early to tell if their defense will play at this level for the entire season. Next week, on the road, against the Titans’ incredible rushing attack will be a litmus test for the legitimacy of the Colts’ defense.

What’s worse is the Jaguars looked lousy. Dirk Koetter called an awful game, throwing the ball thirty times with Garrard and virtually ignoring the running game. They were also torn up by the Titans’ rushing attack. My only hope is that the Texans continue to play as well as they did, or Vince Young can pass better, otherwise it looks like the Colts will continue to reign in the AFC South.

Are there actually any good teams in the NFC?

I really don’t know what to make of this entire conference. The two teams everyone imagined to be good both lost on Sunday. The Bears’ offense looks pathetic and Cedric Benson looks like a bust to me and the defense just lost two starters. The Saints’ defense looked pathetic and will teams start stealing the Colts’ game plan against Payton’s offense? The NFC East looks wide open with all of the teams were devastated by injuries this weekend, it was unbelievable. Seattle looked unimpressive against the Bucs at home. The Cardinals/49ers game was a horrific display, to put it nicely. The only team that actually looked good was the Carolina Panthers, who won on the road and played well on both sides of the ball. Could they do the same thing they did in ’03? This is a quagmire and I want to see if any team can actually step up and take what is a very winnable conference.

The more things change….

Often times we will hear a lot of nonsense during the off-season. Here are a lot of things that many were saying had changed, yet sure enough, one week into the season nothing really changed.
Roy Willams still stinks in coverage and should not be a pro-bowl player.
Mike Brown and Cadillac Williams are both hurt, again.
Joey Harrington is horrible, despite what he did in the pre-season.
Adam Carriker comes in and the Rams still cannot stop the run.
Jamal Lewis, despite off-season fluff pieces, is still not the “Jamal of old.”
The Steelers still have one of the best defenses in football.
Mike McCarthy claimed that the Packers would show more commitment to the run, yeah right.
Eric Mangini’s 3-4 scheme still does not mesh with his personnel.
The Broncos can still run the ball with the best of them.
The Raiders’ and Browns’ O-Line are still poor.
Steve McNair is even worse than he was last year, so much for “getting comfortable” in the offense. He’s washed up, period.The rookies are already making their presence felt.

Adrian Peterson, Marshawn Lynch and Calvin Johnson were all players who were the clear favorites to be the top candidates for the OROTY award. In week 1 all of them played well, even better than expected.

Peterson was electric out there and he definitely looked like he was in Oklahoma. He is the best RB I have ever seen coming out of college, I’ve known that he was going to be a star even since I saw him as a Freshman. As long as he doesn’t get hurt he will be an elite RB.

Lynch looked very good, as well. He shook off the pre-season struggles and looked very good as a dual threat. I still think Peterson was, is and will be the better player. I think the Bills got a very good player. Now it’s up to the passing game to figure things out, because that facet of the offense was a disaster. Lynch carried that unit yesterday.

Calvin Johnson is a once in a lifetime talent. In that offense, facing against inferior corners while Roy takes on the Nnamdi Asomugha’s of the league, will only allow him to make an instant impact. I expect an Andre Johnson-type rookie season (976 yards) at worst.

Patrick Willis certainly looks like the favorite for the DROTY honors. Linebackers always have the edge in this award, much like ‘Backs dominate the offensive award. Willis was all over the field making tackles. If there was one impressive thing about the 49ers/Cardinals game it was Patrick Willis’ play.

Quick Takes:

Things I noticed, but weren't worthy of entire paragraphs.
The Titans have one of the elite O-Lines in all of football. Hence why next weeks 'something has to give' match-up with the Colts is so exciting.
The Giants team is in shambles after several major injuries incurred during last night’s game; Coughlin’s reign is nearing its end. Osi is out, Eli is reportedly out, Jacobs is out, and the defense is weak as is.
If anyone’s missed my mock post-draft press conference, check out the NFC South forum. Welcome to Atlanta Brian Brohm, were glad to have you as the QB of the future.
Cleveland needs to bite the bullet and put Brady Quinn in.
JP Losman took a step back in my mind.
Ben Roethlisberger looks completely different than he did last year when he looked very tentative.
Minnesota’s defense is vastly improved with the additions of Brian Robison and the de facto addition of Chad Greenway.
The reason I didn’t like the move of Mattias Kiwanuka is he wouldn’t be able to match up with an athletic TE in pass coverage, evidently Jason Garrett thought the same thing and they went to Witten over and over again.

litlharsh
09-11-2007, 01:48 AM
I'd venture to say the Vikings looked alright. No they won't compete for the NFC title, but to say the Panthers were the only team that looked good is kind of a stretch.

But that's nit-picking, the rest is money.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 01:49 AM
The Vikings were playing the Falcons, temper your expectations.

litlharsh
09-11-2007, 01:50 AM
Regardless of who we're playing, we looked good. I don't expect us to reach even .500, but this week we looked pretty good.

soybean
09-11-2007, 01:56 AM
Jay cutler didn't look that impressive to me. He had a lot of yards but... what else? I see him as marc bulger v2.0 will put up decent stats but won't really win games for you.

p.s. buffalo should have won that game.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-11-2007, 01:57 AM
The Vikings were playing the Falcons, temper your expectations.

You could say the same thing about the Rams to be honest. They pretty much just stopped caring as soon as Pace went down. Don't get me wrong, there were other keys to the game (the Panthers making in game adjustments for the first time in 2 years, Richard Marshall running down Dante Hall on a kick return, Jenkins levelling Bulger, the running game, Jake not doing anything dumb) but the Panthers were behind the Rams after the first half.

I actually liked the Vikings coming into the year. Their defense is stout (run defense at least) and while they have no QB and their OLine is overrated they picked up Adrian Peterson. In the NFC that might be enough to stumble to an 8-8 or 9-7 record. Looks like the Packers could be the team that steps up in the North, too, though

Also you forgot one major point

All Alex Smith does is win football games

Windy
09-11-2007, 02:00 AM
a couple weeks ago in one of those standings predictions threads, i predicted the lions would come in 2nd in their division. i got a lot of negative rep from packers fans but i'm still sticking to that prediction.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 02:02 AM
Jay cutler didn't look that impressive to me. He had a lot of yards but... what else? I see him as marc bulger v2.0 will put up decent stats but won't really win games for you.

p.s. buffalo should have won that game.


You have to be kidding me. On the final drive to win the game he went 4/5 for 51 yards, even adding in a seven yard run on 4th-2 to give them a chance. He was making stick throws to Walker, into tight windows. He did everything you could want from a QB.

thule
09-11-2007, 02:03 AM
Great writeup as always shiver

SchizophrenicBatman
09-11-2007, 02:04 AM
a couple weeks ago in one of those standings predictions threads, i predicted the lions would come in 2nd in their division. i got a lot of negative rep from packers fans but i'm still sticking to that prediction.

I dont know how many W's theyll end up with but Kitna is going to have quite a season statistically. As long as you ignore the INT category

BlindSite
09-11-2007, 02:08 AM
Jay cutler didn't look that impressive to me. He had a lot of yards but... what else? I see him as marc bulger v2.0 will put up decent stats but won't really win games for you.

p.s. buffalo should have won that game.

Since december last year I've been saying he could be Denver's next Elway with his intangibles and I actually predicted pre-trade offs he'd be traded for by Shannahan. The kid simply has "it" that same "it" that Tom Brady, Brett Favre, Peyton Manning and Carson Palmer have. He's on his way to being special.

As for the NFC I think you're right about the Panthers, the division won't be all that tough and after seeing the Jags, and Tenn's lack lustre effort I'm not exactly nervous about the cross AFC match ups.

The ZBS with Power at times running system worked beautifully against a team that's not exactly poor in the front seven.

The rest of the schedule:
Houston
Atlanta
Tampa Bay
New Orleans
Arizona
Indianapolis
Tennessee
Atlanta
Green Bay
New Orleans
San Francisco
Jacksonville
Seattle
Dallas
Tampa Bay

The hardest teams will be Greenbay, Indianapolis, Seattle and New Orleans,

Two of which we get to play at home, particularly Indianapolis.

Very weak schedule coupled with a top 10 defense (based on last year) and an improving running game sounds good.

I know its very, very, very early days and the above is homeristic but the future looks pretty bright.

soybean
09-11-2007, 02:10 AM
maybe im just skeptical, we'll see as the season unfolds.

i just feel that if you're gonna throw for 300+ yards you'd have at least more than 1 td.

Dam8610
09-11-2007, 02:11 AM
Jay cutler didn't look that impressive to me. He had a lot of yards but... what else?

What else? I take it you didn't take notice of the final drive of that game?

Shiver
09-11-2007, 02:13 AM
What else? I take it you didn't take notice of the final drive of that game?

I know, that's exactly what I thought as well.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-11-2007, 02:14 AM
The ZBS with Power at times running system worked beautifully against a team that's not exactly poor in the front seven.

What? Theyre a pretty awful run defense. We did a good job of keeping Little in check on the pass rush and the LBs should have been better on the pass D too but I wouldnt say this was any more impressive than running all over the Giants or Falcons ever is. And their secondary sucks

As for the rest of the season, I'm optomistic. Don't want to get my hopes up too much, but so far so good through Week 1. I'll start believing if we don't have one of our trademark look past Houston and lose/almost lose games.

BlindSite
09-11-2007, 02:18 AM
What? Theyre a pretty awful run defense. We did a good job of keeping Little in check on the pass rush and the LBs should have been better on the pass D too but I wouldnt say this was any more impressive than running all over the Giants or Falcons ever is. And their secondary sucks

As for the rest of the season, I'm optomistic. Don't want to get my hopes up too much, but so far so good through Week 1. I'll start believing if we don't have one of our trademark look past Houston and lose/almost lose games.

91 Leonard Little
97 La'Roi Glover
90 Adam Carriker
96 James Hall

Leonard Little is a top 10 DE and La Roi Glover is a multiple Probowler, They got absolutely mauled at times. Their best lineman looked like Carriker and for him to shine playing with those two guys says something.

Besides Greenbay, Indianapolis and Jacksonville, we don't play anyone with a better defensive line than St Louis.

SchizophrenicBatman
09-11-2007, 02:21 AM
Yea but that's misleading. It'd be like if we ran for 200 yds on Indy and said it was impressive. Like I said, good job to keep them in check on the pass plays but I'm still on a wait and see approach when it comes to the running game

soybean
09-11-2007, 02:22 AM
I know, that's exactly what I thought as well.

well im just not ready to annoint him as the "next great thing," as the rest of you guys are, when he throws for 300 1 td 1 pick and eeks out a win against the bills.

If you want to judge him by his final drive, go ahead, but I can just as well say that alex smith had a much more impressive final drive and he is far from an elite qb.

BlindSite
09-11-2007, 02:24 AM
Houston will be the measuring stick as far as running game goes, they were top 10 last year and that'll be the gauge, but you have to admit, the line absolutely schooled the Rams on Sunday

Shiver
09-11-2007, 02:25 AM
Wait, you actually think St Louis' front seven is good? :eek:

...


I don't know what to say really. They are one of the bottom three or four defenses in the entire league. The only additions they've made is a very mediocre James Hall and a DE playing as a NT in Adam Carriker. They were t-19th in sacks, 31st in rushing yards allowed, 31st in rushing YPC given up, last year.

Dam8610
09-11-2007, 02:27 AM
well im just not ready to annoint him as the "next great thing," as the rest of you guys are, when he throws for 300 1 td 1 pick and eeks out a win against the bills.

If you want to judge him by his final drive, go ahead, but I can just as well say that alex smith had a much more impressive final drive and he is far from an elite qb.

Does he have to put up 2+ TDs and 0 INTs every week? He played a scheme designed to take away the aerial game and put up those numbers on a Broncos team that is traditionally bad to open the season, and he basically willed them to a win at the end. For a 2nd year QB, I'd say he did a fine job. He was a lot better than Vince Young for sure, and a lot of people seem to want to anoint Young as the next great thing right now.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 02:31 AM
Speaking of Cutler vs Young vs Leinart, I meant to write something about the '06 QB class but I forgot to do it and it's too late as is. Suffice to say Cutler was the only one of the bunch that played well.

soybean
09-11-2007, 02:33 AM
Does he have to put up 2+ TDs and 0 INTs every week? He played a scheme designed to take away the aerial game and put up those numbers on a Broncos team that is traditionally bad to open the season, and he basically willed them to a win at the end. For a 2nd year QB, I'd say he did a fine job. He was a lot better than Vince Young for sure, and a lot of people seem to want to anoint Young as the next great thing right now.

i think jay cutler will be a very good denver qb, i just think that the measuring stick for his success can come from other examples. It's very possible he could be the best qb in the league in a few years, I just don't think he's there yet. Solid performance but not jaw dropping.

Same thing goes for Mario Williams. Very good performance sunday, but Im not ready to say he's gonna be the "best" DE just yet.

BlindSite
09-11-2007, 02:58 AM
Wait, you actually think St Louis' front seven is good? :eek:

...


I don't know what to say really. They are one of the bottom three or four defenses in the entire league. The only additions they've made is a very mediocre James Hall and a DE playing as a NT in Adam Carriker. They were t-19th in sacks, 31st in rushing yards allowed, 31st in rushing YPC given up, last year.

I said, "not exactly poor" which I don't believe them to be. Leonard Little, Glover, Will Witherspoon, Pisa Tinoisamoa not exactly a pathetic group.

fenikz
09-11-2007, 03:31 AM
I said, "not exactly poor" which I don't believe them to be. Leonard Little, Glover, Will Witherspoon, Pisa Tinoisamoa not exactly a pathetic group.

they have the worst d in the nfc west, and that is saying something

d34ng3l021
09-11-2007, 03:44 AM
I dont agree with your assesment of Harrington. I think he had a decent first game, and both those interceptions were lucky, and though he deserves some of the blame, more blame/props go to Jenkins and Williams (respectively).

Harringon did a good job being efficient, even with so much pressure on him throughout the game. He wasnt making any big plays though, which was a dissapointment, but its his first game.

We need a QB, and Brohm would be excellent, but going as far as calling Harrington terrible yesterday...eh. I wouldnt do that.

wogitalia
09-11-2007, 04:07 AM
# Joey Harrington is horrible, despite what he did in the pre-season.

Don't agree here. Joey played pretty well. Didn't force things, took his time. His receivers were horrible. One of the picks was an almost perfect throw that Jenkins bobbled into Winfields arms, like a gift wrapped pick. Joey was a bit slow getting the ball out, but other than that he played well.

Great write up though.

The Unseen
09-11-2007, 05:47 AM
Whatís worse is the Jaguars looked lousy. Dirk Koetter called an awful game, throwing the ball thirty times with Garrard and virtually ignoring the running game. They were also torn up by the Titansí rushing attack. My only hope is that the Texans continue to play as well as they did, or Vince Young can pass better, otherwise it looks like the Colts will continue to reign in the AFC South.

I disagree about Koetter calling an "awful game." I wish we could've had more rushing attempts, but the Titans' time of possession combined with a stellar performance by the Titans D-line made the running game a necessary after-thought as the game went on.

bigbluedefense
09-11-2007, 09:30 AM
Shiv, 2 things.

1. Cover 2 defenses ALWAYS look REAL good in the beginning of the season. Theyre fresh then. They take their dip in the 2nd half. All those gang tackles, and high speed collisions takes a toll over the course of the season, so thats why they tend to dip at the end of the season heading into the playoffs. Unless they have killer depth, which is so hard to achieve in today's game.

So Id expect the Colts D to continue to play well. Its too early for them to play poorly, theyll fly to the ball and make plays.

Not to mention, they will have zero respect for Young and the pass game. Theyll have 8 in the box all game. And they have the speed to counter Young's scrambling. Cover 2 teams always do well against scrambling quarterbacks.

2. Im not sure about Ben. Yes, he threw 4 TDs, but he only threw 52%. And in the preseason, he didn't make great decisions either, he's lucky Philly didn't pick him off 3 times. I would be a little worried if I were a Steelers fan if Ben can only throw for 52% against the Browns.

Oh, and while the Raiders didn't look great, I think the offense looked better than I hoped for. So if the defense can get back to form, maybe I have a chance :). But they can't lose anymore out of division games. Thats where they gotta rack up the wins.

Mr. Stiller
09-11-2007, 09:53 AM
Shiv, 2 things.

1. Cover 2 defenses ALWAYS look REAL good in the beginning of the season. Theyre fresh then. They take their dip in the 2nd half. All those gang tackles, and high speed collisions takes a toll over the course of the season, so thats why they tend to dip at the end of the season heading into the playoffs. Unless they have killer depth, which is so hard to achieve in today's game.

So Id expect the Colts D to continue to play well. Its too early for them to play poorly, theyll fly to the ball and make plays.

Not to mention, they will have zero respect for Young and the pass game. Theyll have 8 in the box all game. And they have the speed to counter Young's scrambling. Cover 2 teams always do well against scrambling quarterbacks.

2. Im not sure about Ben. Yes, he threw 4 TDs, but he only threw 52%. And in the preseason, he didn't make great decisions either, he's lucky Philly didn't pick him off 3 times. I would be a little worried if I were a Steelers fan if Ben can only throw for 52% against the Browns.

Oh, and while the Raiders didn't look great, I think the offense looked better than I hoped for. So if the defense can get back to form, maybe I have a chance :). But they can't lose anymore out of division games. Thats where they gotta rack up the wins.

Like I said in the other thread.

There were 4 dropped passes. Now yeah that counts against him, but i'll take that statline every game. He made smart plays. No throwing into double or triple coverage. Knowing when to throw the ball away. He's progressing in this new offensive scheme, very well.

If you get a chance, watch the game. You'll see the 4 drops, the smart decisions he made, knowing when to hold to ball, when to throw it away, and when there's a blown play to make the best decision. Not to mention he's not holding on to the ball nearly as long as he used to.

bigbluedefense
09-11-2007, 10:01 AM
Like I said in the other thread.

There were 4 dropped passes. Now yeah that counts against him, but i'll take that statline every game. He made smart plays. No throwing into double or triple coverage. Knowing when to throw the ball away. He's progressing in this new offensive scheme, very well.

If you get a chance, watch the game. You'll see the 4 drops, the smart decisions he made, knowing when to hold to ball, when to throw it away, and when there's a blown play to make the best decision. Not to mention he's not holding on to the ball nearly as long as he used to.

If thats the case, I stand corrected. I gotta see the film. How was the line lookin? Was the protection there?

PalmerToCJ
09-11-2007, 10:23 AM
I think the Raiders defense got shown for what they are which is not great. I'm not saying they're bad but people act like it's a top 10 D which I'm just not sold on. When you're losing the entire game it's easy to predict the other teams offensive style.... RUN! That makes their numbers look good.

Trust me, I've seen it before. When the Bengals had some of our 4-5 win seasons our defense looked studly because our offense was so bad it was easy to tell what the other team would do. Then once we finally scored some points and pressure was on the defense they would fold.

Geo
09-11-2007, 10:25 AM
You have to be kidding me. On the final drive to win the game he went 4/5 for 51 yards, even adding in a seven yard run on 4th-2 to give them a chance. He was making stick throws to Walker, into tight windows. He did everything you could want from a QB.
If you saw the whole game (and I'm guessing no), Cutler didn't look that great. His TD pass to Marshall was a great throw, though. The Broncos' OL did a very good job of providing him protection, better than I thought they would going in.

Javon Walker was/is better than anyone on the Bills' secondary, he and Travis Henry carried the Denver offense. Walker abused the Bills all game with the slant, it was ridiculous.

Mr. Stiller
09-11-2007, 10:39 AM
If thats the case, I stand corrected. I gotta see the film. How was the line lookin? Was the protection there?

The line is looking alright. I'd say better than the Ravens and Browns, but worse than Cincy's division wise.

Peek and Wimbley were in the backfield quite a bit. A lot of times they were pretty far away from Ben.

But he did make 2-3 passes while being sacked.

There were 4 drops (2 by Washington, 1 by Tuman and 1 by Miller). The other incompletion's were 4 balls thrown away because of pressure and no WR's open and 1 was the browns sniffed out our screen play to Parker and Ben just threw it at his feet instead of trying to get the play off (It would've been an Int because Washington and Wimbley were right there waiting for him to throw it.).

so 4 Incompletions were dropped, 4 thrown away and 1 thrown away on a screen. so really he only had 3 bad passes all game. I'll take that.

But I give credit to the Browns LB's... they pretty much stopped Willie and the OLB's were in the backfield.. a lot. If the browns Offense/ST's weren't completely inept it would've been a much closer game.

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 10:44 AM
I don't understand the call for Benson as a bust after 19 carries against one of the best defenses in the NFL.

He's going into his third season, he did rather well the first two as a guy off the bench. Does he have a lot to proove? Sure. But I think that, a long with a lot of your write up quite frankly, belongs in the overreaction thread I created elsewhere.

SuperMcGee
09-11-2007, 11:59 AM
Outside of the one bonehead play that Young (I think it was him) bailed him out of, Cutler led a great last drive. He was throwing against Youboty, so that helped, but it was still impressive. McGee had 1-2 decent chances at balls and the Leonhard pick was bad, but it was a good game for the most part for him.

Geo
09-11-2007, 12:04 PM
He did a good job for a young quarterback, in a hostile environment and in his first season opener. I don't think that's in debate.

I just thought Shiver exaggerated it a bit more than it was.

And I still think the Bills defense has a tough year ahead of it, unfortunately. Especially with all of the injuries suffered in only Week 1.

SuperMcGee
09-11-2007, 12:19 PM
And I still think the Bills defense has a tough year ahead of it, unfortunately. Especially with all of the injuries suffered in only Week 1.

It is indeed unfortunate, but pretty much a consensus thought. Our D is nothing to be scared of.

Geo
09-11-2007, 12:20 PM
Can't blame them for drafting Lynch with the 12nd overall, he's a stud.

Packers fans certainly wish the Bills didn't, however.

Freddy G
09-11-2007, 12:36 PM
Just want to say, don't jump to conclusions on the Browns' OL. They gave both QBs PLENTY of time to throw. 5 of the 6 sacks were on Charlie Frye and his inability (lack of confidence really) to just get rid of the ball. He just stood back there and took it. This is evident as only one sack was given when Anderson was in the game (he actually threw the ball...if you want to call it that).

Shiver
09-11-2007, 12:54 PM
I dont agree with your assesment of Harrington. I think he had a decent first game, and both those interceptions were lucky, and though he deserves some of the blame, more blame/props go to Jenkins and Williams (respectively).

Harringon did a good job being efficient, even with so much pressure on him throughout the game. He wasnt making any big plays though, which was a dissapointment, but its his first game.

We need a QB, and Brohm would be excellent, but going as far as calling Harrington terrible yesterday...eh. I wouldnt do that.

If by "very efficient" you mean never moving the team into the red-zone, throwing a horrible pass to Kevin Williams. Sure the one INT was Jenkins' fault, but at that time the game was already over because the offense didn't do anything. He did a lot of the same things in Miami and in Detroit before that. Joey Harrington should be a career back-up QB. Which, as a starter for a team for an entire season, makes him horrible.


I don't understand the call for Benson as a bust after 19 carries against one of the best defenses in the NFL.

He's going into his third season, he did rather well the first two as a guy off the bench. Does he have a lot to proove? Sure. But I think that, a long with a lot of your write up quite frankly, belongs in the overreaction thread I created elsewhere.


I've never been impressed with Benson. I personally don't think he has the explosion, vision or elusive capabilities to be an effective starter. Maybe I'm wrong, but I'll stick by my instincts for now.

DMWSackMachine
09-11-2007, 01:02 PM
One main thing that I want to add.

Sloppy play was at an all-time high. League wide. You'll notice that, for the most part, the teams that actually did real well were the ones that have been together as a team for a long time.

The Pats and the Colts were the only teams that truly looked great all-around. The Chargers were downright ugly on offense--sure, the Bears are a good D, but there was some legitimately bad play all around, starting with LT and Rivers and going all the way through that side of the ball--as were the Bears.

New Orleans looked awful in all phases.

Denver was all over the place. Sure Cutler looked good--throwing the exact same route 4 consecutive times, btw--on that final drive, but he was erratic during the game, and was surely helped by playing against a highly suspect defense.

The Steelers looked pretty good also, but there was a dropped pick, and a lack of capitalization on quite a few of the Browns mistakes, along with all the dropped passes. I think Cleveland has a strong chance to be the worst team in the league this year, but even so, Pitt looked very solid.

That San Fran and Arizona game was basically unwatchable. I had Fitzgerald in my FF league, and it was like being racked and quartered having to sit through that slopfest. With the possible exception of Lawson, Willis and Wilson, there was not a single player out there that looked ready to play this season. Just dreadful.

I could go on all day, but suffice it to say that the sloppiness was at an all time high. Its normal for week 1 to have plenty of that, but I've never seen it that prevalent before.

Right now, I think most of what can be gleaned is that we aren't in for a major shift in power in the AFC, and that the NFC will likely be wide open yet again. Beyond that, I don't really think that there is much you can draw from this week.

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 01:04 PM
Benson is much more explosive than Jones. Muuuuuuuch more. Benson is actually pretty fast, he just looks slow cause he's shaped like a hedgehog.

The vision and elusive capabilities are still very much in the air I agree. I've got real problems with Benson's vision, and his character in general, but I'm nowhere close to saying he'll bust. He's already shown that he can at least be adequate at the very least.

Geo
09-11-2007, 01:04 PM
A very recent artice from Charles Robinson, a very good writer at Yahoo Sports: (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=AqE2iZj78TRgdrqLBdShxkhDubYF?slug=cr-benson090907&prov=yhoo&type=lgns)

When the news broke in early March that the Chicago Bears had dealt Thomas Jones to the New York Jets, the opposing coaching staff of one NFC North team burned up the phone lines and exhausted inter-office email accounts in celebration.

As a coach on that staff opined over the summer, the Bears had taken an offense with one significant problem Ė the mercurial play of quarterback Rex Grossman Ė and created another.

"That was one of our best days of the offseason," the coach recalled of the Jones trade. "He was a tough S.O.B. Losing him will really hurt them, because Cedric Benson is soft. He's just another one of those (University of) Texas guys, which is strange, because I saw him in college a lot and I loved him. He was a beast. I thought he was going to be a great NFL player."
Personally, I still like Benson. The Bears should keep the faith in him and keep feeding him the ball, I think.

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 01:14 PM
I don't get the Benson is soft rep. He ******* rams into people when he plays. Again..if anything it's a lack of vision...as he usually just runs into a pile and tries to drag people with him rather than waiting for things to develop.

We'll see...of the three runningbacks (Brown, Benson, Caddy) none of them has really proved much. Come to think of it, the top end of that draft (Alex Smith, Braylon Edwards, Pac-Man, Troy Williamson, Mike Williams) have all been pretty sorry. That could go down as one of the worst drafts in recent memory.

Mr. Stiller
09-11-2007, 01:17 PM
Just want to say, don't jump to conclusions on the Browns' OL. They gave both QBs PLENTY of time to throw. 5 of the 6 sacks were on Charlie Frye and his inability (lack of confidence really) to just get rid of the ball. He just stood back there and took it. This is evident as only one sack was given when Anderson was in the game (he actually threw the ball...if you want to call it that).

And the fact we were bringing only 3-4 guys.

In the 2nd half LeBeau called off the dogs. There wasn't nearly as many blitzes.

CC.SD
09-11-2007, 01:36 PM
One main thing that I want to add.

Sloppy play was at an all-time high. League wide. You'll notice that, for the most part, the teams that actually did real well were the ones that have been together as a team for a long time.

The Pats and the Colts were the only teams that truly looked great all-around. The Chargers were downright ugly on offense--sure, the Bears are a good D, but there was some legitimately bad play all around, starting with LT and Rivers and going all the way through that side of the ball--as were the Bears.


The Chargers started slow, but there are a couple things:

That forced fumble on 2nd and goal from the 4 inch line, when Tommy Harris was clearly hanging out in the neutral zone, robbed us of a guaranteed touchdown.

And then at the end of the game with Michael Turner destroying a tired defense, Rivers took a knee at the 8 yard line.

Plus a blocked kick.

I don't normally like to play the imagination game, but those are pretty legitimate "points taken off the board" scenarios that didn't really have anything to do with bad decisions or play. Tally those together and you get a final score of 31-3, and against the bears defense? I'll take that as an "ugly" day.


I agree with most of Shiver's points; I said a while back (right around Kitna's 10 win conference) that I thought the Lions had a real shot this year at a playoff berth, and it was nice to see them slap around the silver and black.

21ST
09-11-2007, 01:56 PM
The Redskins and Jason Campbell, despite the win, did not justify my pick of them in the NFC East. The Dolphins have a tough defense, so I will give Campbell a break. That being said I think the Dolphins are a bad football team and Washington was at home. Jon Jansenís injury is a big loss and will hurt the offense. The one bright spot is the defense played solidly and Clinton Portis looked like he was back. Iím going to stick to my guns, but I expect more from Campbell next week against the Eagles.


Well Jansen was the weak link on our o-line and i love him to death but he sucks now and looks to be done. The offense did a whole lot better when jansen was injured and we actually have a pretty good tackle in Todd Wade to fill his spot as soon as he is healthy. Also i wouldn't expect a whole lot from Campbell against the eagles cause he threw about 4 or 5 horrible passes including 2 ints that were both his fault against an average dolphins secondary. i just hope they hand the ball off every play

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 02:02 PM
The Chargers started slow, but there are a couple things:

That forced fumble on 2nd and goal from the 4 inch line, when Tommy Harris was clearly hanging out in the neutral zone, robbed us of a guaranteed touchdown.

And then at the end of the game with Michael Turner destroying a tired defense, Rivers took a knee at the 8 yard line.

Plus a blocked kick.

I don't normally like to play the imagination game, but those are pretty legitimate "points taken off the board" scenarios that didn't really have anything to do with bad decisions or play. Tally those together and you get a final score of 31-3, and against the bears defense? I'll take that as an "ugly" day.
No...clearly not. *rolls eyes*

I love how you just assume that you would have scored two more touchdowns. Or that somehow not being able to block on field goals isn't indicative of bad play.

How about the fact that we turned the ball over 4 ******* times. One time when the punt shanked off of a TV wire and hit one of our guys? Is that a display of how your offense "destroyed" our defense?

Gimme a break. You won because our offense sucks. Your offense didn't do a damn thing till we kept turning the ball over in our own territory.

JK17
09-11-2007, 02:06 PM
The Chargers started slow, but there are a couple things:

That forced fumble on 2nd and goal from the 4 inch line, when Tommy Harris was clearly hanging out in the neutral zone, robbed us of a guaranteed touchdown.

And then at the end of the game with Michael Turner destroying a tired defense, Rivers took a knee at the 8 yard line.

Plus a blocked kick.

I don't normally like to play the imagination game, but those are pretty legitimate "points taken off the board" scenarios that didn't really have anything to do with bad decisions or play. Tally those together and you get a final score of 31-3, and against the bears defense? I'll take that as an "ugly" day.


I agree with most of Shiver's points; I said a while back (right around Kitna's 10 win conference) that I thought the Lions had a real shot this year at a playoff berth, and it was nice to see them slap around the silver and black.

Yeah but your also assuming a lot of things with that.

What if Berrian doesn't quit on his route early in the game, Maybe that turns into a TD. Now the Bears are up 10-0, what if they carry that momentum and continue to shut us down.

What if we do score that TD on the goalline, and then the Bears respond with a huge Hester return that takes us emotionally out of the game.

We can't just assume all those things would go different, but the Bears would be uneffected. What if their RBs don't fumble. What if we don't get that shanked punt. There are so many what ifs, its not worth counting them.

I'm not embarassed or disapointed at all in our offense, but asking for more points then we got serves no purpose.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-11-2007, 02:29 PM
You have to be kidding me. On the final drive to win the game he went 4/5 for 51 yards, even adding in a seven yard run on 4th-2 to give them a chance. He was making stick throws to Walker, into tight windows. He did everything you could want from a QB.


For everyone who thinks I'm a blind homer, read the following post:

All in all, I thought Jay was pretty good. He showed great poise and ability in that game winning drive. He showed the same stuff at the end of the first half (before throwing the pick, anyway). But he also made some head scratchers. I think it was on the game winning drive when he threw it backwards. That was a really, really stupid play. That was beyond even Rex Grossman, and only a few steps above throwing it with his left hand. Also, he tried going deep to Walker in double coverage when Marshall was open on a crossing route past the first down marker. He should have thrown to him. The good thing with this is though, he's willing to go for the big play, and you can teach someone when doing that is appropriate. What you can't do, however, is teach someone to look deep when they just wanna take the easy dumpoffs.

My contribution to the thread:

Week 1 Cutler Watch:

Doing better than Young or Leinart. Threw for more yards than the two of them combined.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-11-2007, 02:32 PM
well im just not ready to annoint him as the "next great thing," as the rest of you guys are, when he throws for 300 1 td 1 pick and eeks out a win against the bills.

If you want to judge him by his final drive, go ahead, but I can just as well say that alex smith had a much more impressive final drive and he is far from an elite qb.


He willed the ball through the uprights off of Elam's foot.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 02:37 PM
Leinart looked awful last night. He needs a pocket to even throw the ball down the field, his mobility is exactly what he all knew it was, his arm "strength" (or lack thereof) is pathetic. I said it in '06, I will say it again, I don't know if Leinart has the physical skills to succeed in the NFL, or at least be an above average starter. I remember a lot of NFL coaches and GMs didn't even think he was worth a 1st round grade when he came out. It figures that the Cardinals under Denny Green, who were obsessed with collegiate success, were the team to take him. Am I the only person who couldn't buy that Anquan Boldin and Larry Fitzgerald weren't getting separation? That's ridiculous. I would say that it's because Leinart cannot make the prerequisite NFL 'stick' throws.

Vince Young had a tough game, but against the Jaguars he actually improved upon what he accomplished against them last year. How he plays against Indianapolis will be a litmus test for him. If he has a big game expect the hype machine to go full steam because of the extra attention he'll get because of his opponent.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 02:56 PM
Shiv, 2 things.

1. Cover 2 defenses ALWAYS look REAL good in the beginning of the season. Theyre fresh then. They take their dip in the 2nd half. All those gang tackles, and high speed collisions takes a toll over the course of the season, so thats why they tend to dip at the end of the season heading into the playoffs. Unless they have killer depth, which is so hard to achieve in today's game.

So Id expect the Colts D to continue to play well. Its too early for them to play poorly, theyll fly to the ball and make plays.

Not to mention, they will have zero respect for Young and the pass game. Theyll have 8 in the box all game. And they have the speed to counter Young's scrambling. Cover 2 teams always do well against scrambling quarterbacks.

The Titans' O-Line is much, much better than the Saints' O-Line. On grass, without the dome advantage and the artificial noise they pump into that thing, against that O-Line will show whether their run defense is legitimate. Kevin Mawae vs a rookie UDFA NT? You would imagine that the Titans would have the edge there, that's why I'm holding out that I was right and the Colts just had a lone impressive performance.

I think the Raiders defense got shown for what they are which is not great. I'm not saying they're bad but people act like it's a top 10 D which I'm just not sold on. When you're losing the entire game it's easy to predict the other teams offensive style.... RUN! That makes their numbers look good.

Trust me, I've seen it before. When the Bengals had some of our 4-5 win seasons our defense looked studly because our offense was so bad it was easy to tell what the other team would do. Then once we finally scored some points and pressure was on the defense they would fold.

The Raiders' defense was overrated last year. Their secondary is not as good as the stats would indicate; Nnamdi Asomugha was and is the only one who is a standout. The front seven still has issues against the run. The Lions had no trouble running the ball against them and they have much more fear inspiring rushing attacks on the horizon.


If you saw the whole game (and I'm guessing no), Cutler didn't look that great. His TD pass to Marshall was a great throw, though. The Broncos' OL did a very good job of providing him protection, better than I thought they would going in.

Javon Walker was/is better than anyone on the Bills' secondary, he and Travis Henry carried the Denver offense. Walker abused the Bills all game with the slant, it was ridiculous.

His stats, as I said, were not the impressive thing Cutler displayed. Sure they look good now. The most impressive thing was his intangibles he displayed on that final drive. That cool, courage under pressure is something his other peers in the '06 draft class have not shown. Surely it was a promising first start and as the season progresses he should only get better.

SFbear
09-11-2007, 03:14 PM
No...clearly not. *rolls eyes*

I love how you just assume that you would have scored two more touchdowns. Or that somehow not being able to block on field goals isn't indicative of bad play.

How about the fact that we turned the ball over 4 ******* times. One time when the punt shanked off of a TV wire and hit one of our guys? Is that a display of how your offense "destroyed" our defense?

Gimme a break. You won because our offense sucks. Your offense didn't do a damn thing till we kept turning the ball over in our own territory.

Or how about Lorenzo Neal not horse collar tackling Mike Brown and ending his football career. Not calling it malicious or anything, but if were going to play the imagination game, thats one play I'd like to have back.

d34ng3l021
09-11-2007, 03:27 PM
By very efficient I meant efficient by Harrington's standards. He is gonna suck, I know that, but thats whats expected of him. I think he did better then people had thought. It was his first game as a Falcon, so I am cutting him some slack.

Vikes99ej
09-11-2007, 03:28 PM
What impressed me more than the Vikings defense was that Tarvaris was able to make some throws under the pressure of Jamaal Anderson and John Abraham.

gpngc
09-11-2007, 04:26 PM
Are there actually any good teams in the NFC?

I really donít know what to make of this entire conference. The two teams everyone imagined to be good both lost on Sunday. The Bearsí offense looks pathetic and Cedric Benson looks like a bust to me and the defense just lost two starters. The Saintsí defense looked pathetic and will teams start stealing the Coltsí game plan against Paytonís offense? The NFC East looks wide open with all of the teams were devastated by injuries this weekend, it was unbelievable. Seattle looked unimpressive against the Bucs at home. The Cardinals/49ers game was a horrific display, to put it nicely. The only team that actually looked good was the Carolina Panthers, who won on the road and played well on both sides of the ball. Could they do the same thing they did in í03? This is a quagmire and I want to see if any team can actually step up and take what is a very winnable conference.

-The Saints looked pretty bad but it was one game against the best team in the league on the road. They'll probably struggle a bit against TB (who has a decent defense) and people will overreact and think they're done.

-I watched the Chargers game, and I actually came away impressed with the Bears. The losses of Mike Brown (expected) and Dusty D hurt, but Tommie Harris was impressive as ever and the run defense looked stout against the best runner in the league. I'm not making excuses, but you just can't expect to fumble in your own territory that many times in one game. The offense, statistically, was pathetic, but Benson went up against the best run defense in the league (Jamal Williams is a beast) and Rex Grossman threw his only pick (I think) when his WR quit on a route (Berrian had a good game aside from that play- what the hell was he doing????). Putting the loss in perspective, the Bears went on the road and played in a dogfight against the most talented team in football, holding the best player in the league to 17 carries and 25 yards rushing (I think those were his stats). The fumbles were a problem, but I just don't see an NFL team turning the ball over that much in their own territory again. Benson will be better, Rex will have his up-and-downs, and the defense and special teams will be like last year. This team could easily go to the Super Bowl again.

-Here comes the Panthers media love-fest... Let's see them do it against a defense that isn't the Rams... I did not catch this game, but did Dwayne Jarrett get any burn?

"Seahawks looked unimpressive against the Bucs at home."

Now, I know NO ONE was talking about this game after week one. It was the last highlight on ESPN, no one had great stats, there weren't many big plays or highlights, and Seattle is apparently located in Egypt. By looking at the box score and watching the highlights, you COULD say "Seattle WAS unimpressive against the Bucs at home." That would be an acceptable statement. But instead you said "looked", which implies that you actually watched the game... Did you? Because if you had, I think you would have had a different opinion on this team. I watched the game, and Seattle looks like the class of the NFC. Granted, it was against the Bucs (who are not that bad btw), but a win is a win and there was a lot to like about Seattle in week one, especially on the defensive side of the football.

We all know Seattle's defense has been the problem the last few years. Stopping the run, stopping the pass, everything has been an issue from time to time. Seattle was NEVER an intimidating team physically. Part of that is because they are undersized, and part of that is just the lack of aggressiveness and big-time hitters. Wistrom was always overrated, the CB's are tiny (but good tacklers), and the whole defense was held back by shaky safety play which did not allow the front seven to play with any confidence. IF you watched this game, you saw a DIFFERENT team on Sunday. Deon Grant and Brian Russell make a HUGE difference on this team, and the defense as a WHOLE looked VERY impressive. The Bucs don't have the greatest offensive line, but Seattle continuously rushed 4 or 5 and got consistent pressure on Jeff Garcia. Patrick Kerney was an absolute monster. JP did what JP does and Lofa Tatupu had a huge game. The bottom line was- they were hitting- something we haven't seen from Seattle under Holmgren (Cadillac was injured, Garcia was injured, and Garcia took an even worse-looking hit by Kerney before he was knocked out a series later). I think the addition of Jim Mora Jr. is already starting to pay dividends, and while I am VERY high on this defense right now, I do see them susceptible to the big play, as Jennings and Trufant have struggled to play the ball well against the deep pass. That doesn't bode well for the games against Torry Holt and Larry Fitzgerald, but we'll see.

As for the offense, it was pretty pedestrian, but Hasselbeck made all the right decisions and Alexander (somehow) ended up with a decent game (He still runs like a girl). The offensive line was good (Bucs d-line isn't great, though), and Marcus Pollard looks like a key addition. The WR's were pretty bad, but Tampa has a good pass defense and keyed on Branch (who was held to 0 catches- alarming, to say the least).

There is still a lot of work to be done, but if you're looking for a top team in the NFC, I think we've found them.

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 04:29 PM
You thought Seattle was the best team before last week, you're a Seahawks fan, no offense but I question a win over the Bucs as much validation of that.

As for Jarrett, he was inactive.

soybean
09-11-2007, 04:32 PM
His stats, as I said, were not the impressive thing Cutler displayed. Sure they look good now. The most impressive thing was his intangibles he displayed on that final drive. That cool, courage under pressure is something his other peers in the '06 draft class have not shown. Surely it was a promising first start and as the season progresses he should only get better.

well...vince young...

Shiver
09-11-2007, 04:36 PM
I actually watched most of the Seahawks/Bucs game (that's the problem with fantasy football, you'll watch lousy games), so don't tell me that I'm just going off the box scores.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 04:38 PM
who's sure shown an ability to hang in the pocket and deliver key throws.


I think Young had one game like that, against the Giants last, actually. So I should have phrased that line about Cutler differently. He's shown a comfort level in the pocket that the other two guys have not shown.

smittyjs
09-11-2007, 04:39 PM
Jags try to run the ball, but it just wasn't going to happen, or run defense played a great game that game, maybe we can regain the run defense we had during are playoff season back a few season's ago.
And i agree on what you said on Cutler, on a side note Leinart really didn't impress me last night.

bearfan
09-11-2007, 04:42 PM
Alright, this has been bothering me since we lost. Our offense played one of the best defenses in the league, and because we couldnt do anything Benson is automatically a bust. The Chargers had one of the best run stopping defenses last year, and their personel didnt change that much to make it that much different. Grossman though didnt do anything to win us the game, he had time, but didnt do anything spectacular. Back on Benson, I also jumped after sunday, saying how badly he played, but looking at it now, we played a top 5 defense.

And does anyone look at the fact that our defense held LT under 30yrds rushing? He did have 7rec for 51 yards, but we held the best RB in the league under 75yards. We held Philip Rivers under 200yards passing. He didnt have a touchdown, neither did Grossman. Has the media ripped on Rivers for having less passing TDs than LT? No.

The point is that the Bears played one of the best teams in the league, and played very very very well against them. We held one of the best offenses scoreless after 3 quarters. I think thats pretty damn good

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 04:42 PM
Shiv just admit it, you have a man-crush on Cutler. And who can blame you, everyone has their favorite dreamy QB. No? That's ***? Really? Huh....

Ravens1991
09-11-2007, 04:45 PM
About McNair my theory was since he had the groin injury he didnt want to plant on his leg so it would cause pain thus leading him to throw high a lot.

smittyjs
09-11-2007, 04:48 PM
I think Young had one game like that, against the Giants last, actually. So I should have phrased that line about Cutler differently. He's shown a comfort level in the pocket that the other two guys have not shown.
Giants and the Colts games were his best interms of standing in the pocket while under pressure, Cutler i will also agree is ahead in that department, while if he wasn't i would be surprise since that is what we know him for at Vandy for standing in the pocket and taking the hit, overall he looked good, did have a few bad Decisions, but looked pretty good overall.
Young has shown the abilty to stand in the pocket and take hit and deliver the pass, but the real ? is can he do it series after series, while it really isn't a main focus point at this time, because he can still use his legs to make plays.

smittyjs
09-11-2007, 04:49 PM
Shiv just admit it, you have a man-crush on Cutler. And who can blame you, everyone has their favorite dreamy QB. No? That's ***? Really? Huh....I do.......

CC.SD
09-11-2007, 05:01 PM
No...clearly not. *rolls eyes*

I love how you just assume that you would have scored two more touchdowns. Or that somehow not being able to block on field goals isn't indicative of bad play.

How about the fact that we turned the ball over 4 ******* times. One time when the punt shanked off of a TV wire and hit one of our guys? Is that a display of how your offense "destroyed" our defense?

Gimme a break. You won because our offense sucks. Your offense didn't do a damn thing till we kept turning the ball over in our own territory.

Wow, touchy much? Lighten up, don't be that guy frothing at the mouth and pounding on your keyboard, it's football, not star trek! You're right, our defense won the game for us. They forced fumbles and ate the qb alive. A tactic the bears have been using for 30 years now at least.

and come on, you can't seriously complain about the punt: look what happened 2 minutes earlier, the refs missed a game changing call that anyone could have made, and it wasn't reviewable. Oh life is so unfair.

But still...
It's not a stretch to say we would have scored on that horrible missed call: it was 2nd and goal with 2 yards to go, that's a guarantee for LT.

And then we shut down the engine at the end of the game.

That's two touchdowns left on the field. If the score had been 28-3, I don't think as many people would be teetering on the bandwagon, or having doubts or whatever.

Legitimate football question: when do the bears start worrying about the dichotomy between their O and D? The same thing lost them the Superbowl, and their answer was to trade their best offensive player? It seems like some chemistry issues might be coming up.


edit: btw I don't know who you're quoting when you say our offense 'destroyed' your defense, but it's not me, and I'm pretty sure it's no one in this thread.

edit 2: ok, i did say destroy, but you took it way out of context: i was explicitly referring to Michael Turner on the last drive, when he not only couldn't be stopped, he looked like he was hitting the defense harder than they were hitting him. I'll leave my original edit up, because I've got no shame anyway.

Shiver
09-11-2007, 05:03 PM
Shiv just admit it, you have a man-crush on Cutler. And who can blame you, everyone has their favorite dreamy QB. No? That's ***? Really? Huh....

At least this QB doesn't have herpes....

SFbear
09-11-2007, 05:35 PM
At least this QB doesn't have herpes....

Leave Rex Grossman out of this...

DMWSackMachine
09-11-2007, 08:11 PM
uh, the Bears were legitimately winning that first half. Just watching the game, you could feel that they were playing better. Rivers was looking extremely shaky (continuing his poor play from the last part of 2006, even though no one cared to point it out in their haste to do the same for Tony Romo), LT couldn't get ANYTHING going--remember, he needed a garbage run late in the half to get back to positive yardage--and their WR corps looked worse than even the most outspoken critic ever could have imagined.

It was TOs that turned this game, really. Between Grossman, Peterson and Benson, they pretty much handed the game away.

Both Ds looked good, but I would say that the Bears defense actually impressed me a whole lot more. They were stopping the run much, much better through the first 3 quarters, and they did more to actually force the TOs then the Chargers team did.

That said, I still think that the Chargers have the most talented team in the league, and if they don't get decimated by injuries or torpedoed by coaching, I expect them to be in the hunt 'til the end. But to suggest that the Chargers were just *this close* to blowing that game open is not only a misrepresentation of the facts, its just plain lying.

JK17
09-11-2007, 08:24 PM
uh, the Bears were legitimately winning that first half. Just watching the game, you could feel that they were playing better. Rivers was looking extremely shaky (continuing his poor play from the last part of 2006, even though no one cared to point it out in their haste to do the same for Tony Romo), LT couldn't get ANYTHING going--remember, he needed a garbage run late in the half to get back to positive yardage--and their WR corps looked worse than even the most outspoken critic ever could have imagined.

It was TOs that turned this game, really. Between Grossman, Peterson and Benson, they pretty much handed the game away.

Both Ds looked good, but I would say that the Bears defense actually impressed me a whole lot more. They were stopping the run much, much better through the first 3 quarters, and they did more to actually force the TOs then the Chargers team did.

That said, I still think that the Chargers have the most talented team in the league, and if they don't get decimated by injuries or torpedoed by coaching, I expect them to be in the hunt 'til the end. But to suggest that the Chargers were just *this close* to blowing that game open is not only a misrepresentation of the facts, its just plain lying.

Extremely shaky is a huge overstatement. He played the best defense in the leauge, and had nothing in the backfield to help him out. He made a couple bad throws, mainly the INT. That's about it, otherwise he made a lot of good throws to Gates, and a great throw that VJ dropped. The WR's didnt "Play worse then the harshest crtiic" could criticize. Vincent Jackson dropped a pass. Gates dropped 1 or 2. The rest of the WR played okay, they just didn't have as much of an advantage as Gates did, or LT did coming out of the backfield.

And how did the Bears "do more" to force their turnovers? They got an overthrow from Philip Rivers, and they recovered a fumble by jumping offsides. Stephen Cooper stripped either Benson or Peterson, We stripped the ball from Grossman on a sack we didnt recover, Jamal Williams and Jaques Cesaire both forced fumbles. I don't get how they did more to get turnovers then us.

Of course the Bears D was overall more impressive, they are a better defensive, but its not like our defensive performance wasn't right up there with them. We lets up less through the air, a whopping 3 more yards through the ground. And less points.

Now, as I've said in all my other posts about the game, thats not to say it shoudl have been a blowout, or we should have scored more points...but a lot of the things you just suggested are either not true or exagerated.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-11-2007, 08:43 PM
I do.......

Me too. And DG. He is definitely the most "man-crushed" young QB here, and 2nd overall to Favre. The most "woman-crushed" QB is Tom Brady, followed by Kyle Orton.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
09-11-2007, 08:47 PM
Personally, the game between the Bears and the Chargers didn't change my opinion on either of them at all. I still think the Bears are the class of the NFC, and the Chargers, the most talented team, period. I'm not too worried aboout the Bears O, since this was the Chargers D they went up against. I'm not worried about Rivers or LT either, since this was the Bears D they were against.

PalmerToCJ
09-11-2007, 09:05 PM
Personally, the game between the Bears and the Chargers didn't change my opinion on either of them at all. I still think the Bears are the class of the NFC, and the Chargers, the most talented team, period. I'm not too worried aboout the Bears O, since this was the Chargers D they went up against. I'm not worried about Rivers or LT either, since this was the Bears D they were against.

Yeah pretty much the way I look at it as well.

I must say the Bengals D got love last year when we had that successful stretch but I never bought into them being changed... After last night I think there's a definete change in defensive philosphy, they were aggressive and fast. I hope that style is a sign of things to come because it really plays to our strengths.

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 10:58 PM
Personally, the game between the Bears and the Chargers didn't change my opinion on either of them at all. I still think the Bears are the class of the NFC, and the Chargers, the most talented team, period. I'm not too worried aboout the Bears O, since this was the Chargers D they went up against. I'm not worried about Rivers or LT either, since this was the Bears D they were against.
I wouldn't say I'm 'worried' about our offense, but we've got a lot of ground to cover before we can seriously be considered a Superbowl contender, as do all but 3 teams in the NFL.

duckseason
09-11-2007, 11:23 PM
I wouldn't say I'm 'worried' about our offense, but we've got a lot of ground to cover before we can seriously be considered a Superbowl contender, as do all but 3 teams in the NFL.

Well, one way to cover that ground would be to use Fedex ground. Just fill a box with canon gear and stamp Soldier Field on it. Bam, your Bears are right up there with the best of 'em.

bearsfan_51
09-11-2007, 11:28 PM
I'm so confused right now.......

yodabear
09-11-2007, 11:28 PM
You could say the same thing about the Rams to be honest. They pretty much just stopped caring as soon as Pace went down. Don't get me wrong, there were other keys to the game (the Panthers making in game adjustments for the first time in 2 years, Richard Marshall running down Dante Hall on a kick return, Jenkins levelling Bulger, the running game, Jake not doing anything dumb) but the Panthers were behind the Rams after the first half.

I actually liked the Vikings coming into the year. Their defense is stout (run defense at least) and while they have no QB and their OLine is overrated they picked up Adrian Peterson. In the NFC that might be enough to stumble to an 8-8 or 9-7 record. Looks like the Packers could be the team that steps up in the North, too, though

Also you forgot one major point

All Alex Smith does is win football games

Did u just compare the Rams to the Falcons? I declare u a doo,doo brain. Go ahead deduct my rep points or whatever, suspend me, I don't care. I don't react kindly to doo,doo brained statements.

duckseason
09-11-2007, 11:32 PM
I'm so confused right now.......

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/3857/canonxha1vanityjp2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
+
http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/2216/11682642762143dt4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
=
http://img395.imageshack.us/img395/2222/superbpa4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Xenos
09-12-2007, 01:57 AM
uh, the Bears were legitimately winning that first half. Just watching the game, you could feel that they were playing better. Rivers was looking extremely shaky (continuing his poor play from the last part of 2006, even though no one cared to point it out in their haste to do the same for Tony Romo), LT couldn't get ANYTHING going--remember, he needed a garbage run late in the half to get back to positive yardage--and their WR corps looked worse than even the most outspoken critic ever could have imagined.

It was TOs that turned this game, really. Between Grossman, Peterson and Benson, they pretty much handed the game away.

Both Ds looked good, but I would say that the Bears defense actually impressed me a whole lot more. They were stopping the run much, much better through the first 3 quarters, and they did more to actually force the TOs then the Chargers team did.

That said, I still think that the Chargers have the most talented team in the league, and if they don't get decimated by injuries or torpedoed by coaching, I expect them to be in the hunt 'til the end. But to suggest that the Chargers were just *this close* to blowing that game open is not only a misrepresentation of the facts, its just plain lying.

Maybe it's because he didn't do as bad as people keep saying. He had two terrible games against Oakland and the Chiefs. I suppose you could say the Patriots game as well but that was more his receivers fault than anything else.
Plus, Rivers was clutch when it counted the most. The only time that didn't happen late in the season was in the playoff game.

Oh and QB rating in the Bears game:
1st Qtr - 41.2
2nd Qtr - 56.3
3rd Qtr - 96.7
4th Qtr - 112.5

1st Half - 44.7
2nd Half - 101.2

Average is about 73

Caddy
09-12-2007, 02:32 AM
Love your write-ups Shiv, but grouping Caddy with Mike Brown is a little rough. It isn't like Caddy's injury is a recurrence of his lower back pain from last season, just a few bruised ribs courtesy of Lofa Tatupu's helmet.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 02:48 AM
True, I should have reserved that grouping for Dan Morgan when (not if) he gets hurt.

Ward
09-12-2007, 02:54 AM
Not enough Cowboys.

yourfavestoner
09-12-2007, 02:56 AM
Some random, jumbled, and unorganized week one observations:

- Deuce McAllister looks like he's fully recovered from him ACL tear. He looks much more explosive through the hole than he did last season
- Same can be said about Edge. He looked much better last night than he did last season, where he looked slow and sluggish
- Without Terrence Newman, the Cowboys defense will be atrocious, as nobody else in that secondary can cover worth a ****. Wade just needs to start throwing the kitchen sink at opposing offenses on every play, because if they don't get immediate pressure on the quarterback, they're going to get toasted.
- I give all the props to in the world to the Tennessee Titans. They won in classic, old school, hit em in the mouth fashion. All of the injuries to the Jaguars defense (especially to the d line) has me incredibly concerned.
- Ed Reed is incredible
- Darrell Jackson still can't catch
- Shiver, I completely agree on your Matt Leinart assessment. I was having a conversation with my roommate about it during the game actually (he's a huge Leinart/USC fan). His passes have no zip on them. I said it before the draft, and I still say it now, but Matt Leinart is a Chad Pennington clone. He'll be an efficient caretaker at best, but simply doesn't have the physical tools to challenge defenses.
- Mario Williams has more touchdowns than Reggie Bush
- If Roger Goodell determines that the Pats did, in fact, violate league rules, their punishment should be a forfeit instead of a loss of draft picks

Shiver
09-12-2007, 02:57 AM
What's to say? The offense is awesome, the defense stinks (outside of Demarcus Ware that is).

Shiver
09-12-2007, 03:01 AM
Shiver, I completely agree on your Matt Leinart assessment. I was having a conversation with my roommate about it during the game actually (he's a huge Leinart/USC fan). His passes have no zip on them. I said it before the draft, and I still say it now, but Matt Leinart is a Chad Pennington clone. He'll be an efficient caretaker at best, but simply doesn't have the physical tools to challenge defenses.

When Leinart didn't make that throw on the flea flicker to an open Larry Fitzgerald, at the corner, all the announcers wondered why. I don't think he can make that throw and I think he knew that he couldn't as well. What does he do well? He isn't the most mobile, he isn't the most accurate, he cannot make 15-20 yard NFL throws. I never liked him as a prospect, as anyone who dates back to the pre-'06 draft forum can attest.

yourfavestoner
09-12-2007, 03:09 AM
When Leinart didn't make that throw on the flea flicker to an open Larry Fitzgerald, at the corner, all the announcers wondered why. I don't think he can make that throw and I think he knew that he couldn't as well. What does he do well? He isn't the most mobile, he isn't the most accurate, he cannot make 15-20 yard NFL throws. I never liked him as a prospect, as anyone who dates back to the pre-'06 draft forum can attest.

Yup, I remember. I remember that you and I shared pretty much the same opinions on most of the prospects in that class (Mario Williams, Leinart, Cutler, Bush).

Leinart is ENTIRELY the product of playing around a bunch of stars at USC. Is there honestly a whole hell of a lot of difference between Matt Leinart and Ken Dorsey? Not really.

BlindSite
09-12-2007, 03:25 AM
True, I should have reserved that grouping for Dan Morgan when (not if) he gets hurt.

Difference is though, Dan Morgan has contributed when healthy the last few years, unlike Caddy.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 03:47 AM
No I was talking about Dan Morgan and Mike Brown being similar. Great when healthy, but that's the problem.

bigbluedefense
09-12-2007, 09:00 AM
Leinart needs to work on his footwork badly. Its horrible. And he has happy feet in the pocket. I think he isn't as bad as we're painting him to be right now, but he does have his limitations.

He needs to be in a WCO offense. That will fit him better. If he works on his footwork, and they design an offense around him, he has potential to be a good qb. Not better than Cutler or Young (if he ever learns how to play qb), but he won't be a bust either.

He has more zip than Chad does. Not alot, but more than Chad. He will struggle against zone defenses, he doesn't have the zip right now to throw into windows, but i think that can be fixed a little bit if he learns how to plant his feet better and throw with his legs.

soybean
09-12-2007, 10:19 AM
lol, shiver hates all SC players. leinart, bush, jarrett...etc.

soybean
09-12-2007, 10:22 AM
he hates them as prospects, when they produce, there's really not much someone can say.

comahan
09-12-2007, 10:32 AM
I hate all USC players, too. Good god I hate USC and its players. But when they leave USC, I stop hating them. Unless of course, they are unreasonably hyped.

But I cant, for the life of me, think of an unreasonably hyped Trojan. Damn.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 11:18 AM
lol, shiver hates all SC players. leinart, bush, jarrett...etc.
Since when do I hate Jarrett? I actually thought he was a great value for Carolina.
Leinart and Bush, granted, I think they were both overrated as prospects.
On the other hand I think Winston Justice will be a player for the Eagles when he gets his chance. Though I haven't a lot about him lately.
Carson Palmer, Troy Polamalu, Lofa Tatupu, Ryan Kalil, 'nuff said.
I am a huge fan of Sam Baker, Rey Maluaga and Keith Rivers.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 11:24 AM
I hate all USC players, too. Good god I hate USC and its players. But when they leave USC, I stop hating them. Unless of course, they are unreasonably hyped.

But I cant, for the life of me, think of an unreasonably hyped Trojan. Damn.


None come to mind. None at all.

CC.SD
09-12-2007, 12:30 PM
None come to mind. None at all.

Justin Fargas! What kind of expert are you?

Shiver
09-12-2007, 12:32 PM
The USC Trojans may be an example of how important the O-Line really is. They had Winston Justice, Sam Baker, Ryan Kalil, Deuce Lutui dominating the trenches in '05; thus making Matt Leinart, Reggie Bush and LenDale White look like superstars.

bsaza2358
09-12-2007, 12:40 PM
To be fair, I think Leinart and Bush were superstars to begin with. Leinart dominated college for 3 seasons, including a time when most of those guys were freshmen/sophomores . Bush was electric dating back to his Pop Warner days.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 12:41 PM
I'm just saying having that O-Line accentuated their success and therefore made them higher draft picks.

bsaza2358
09-12-2007, 12:46 PM
The weird thing is that none of the OLinemen was a first round pick, but the skill players got a lot more hype and money. I think Bush would have ended up as a top 5 pick no matter where he went to school. Leinart got a lot more press from his USC success. Without that credibility, he might have fallen to Round 3 or 4.

bored of education
09-12-2007, 01:05 PM
the chiefs will have a rough year. thats my only thought

and Marshawn Lynch will rush for 1300 yrds

Mr. Stiller
09-12-2007, 01:42 PM
the chiefs will have a rough year. thats my only thought

and Marshawn Lynch will rush for 1300 yrds

He probably won't get over 70 next week.

Mr. Stiller
09-12-2007, 01:43 PM
The USC Trojans may be an example of how important the O-Line really is. They had Winston Justice, Sam Baker, Ryan Kalil, Deuce Lutui dominating the trenches in '05; thus making Matt Leinart, Reggie Bush and LenDale White look like superstars.

Don't forget Fred Matua, or Drew Radovich.

soybean
09-12-2007, 01:44 PM
the usc offense will make believers out of you guys this year.

Im not ready to write off matt leinart this year just yet, you guys are right about his feet and that he doesn't put any zip on the ball but at least he admitted he himself had a horrible game, rather than blaming it on his receivers not getting separation etc. or even crediting the 9er defense.

Also, yeah his arm is weak, but he did take a lot of shots down field last year, they weren't 60 yard bombs but at least you can say is... ballsy? for a qb with a below average arm.

Auron
09-12-2007, 02:05 PM
I'd say Leinart is more of a Touch passer, who needs to put some air under his throws with good anticipation to get the football in tight spots. It's also important for a QB like him to be on the same page as his WRs so he can throw it in synchronized timing with their routes. (as their coming out of their breaks)

Seeing as it was Week 1, maybe he hasn't had as much time to develop that kind of QB to WR repertoire quite yet. They've had the Off-season to work together, but you really have to get into some live fire situations to realize in-game speed is so much different than in practice. and also maybe him and the WRs are still adjusting to Whisenhunt's system.

Ward
09-12-2007, 02:24 PM
What's to say? The offense is awesome, the defense stinks (outside of Demarcus Ware that is).

I really think our offense is being underrated, and the offensive line is now incredible.

duckseason
09-12-2007, 02:52 PM
I really think our offense is being underrated, and the offensive line is now incredible.

I remember how everybody laughed when we spent big money on Big Davis.

bored of education
09-12-2007, 02:54 PM
Davis is beastly. Marten and Free!!!

thule
09-12-2007, 02:56 PM
It's crazy when 500 points is something your team has a shot at.

thule
09-12-2007, 02:57 PM
Davis is beastly. Marten and Free!!!

Marten has been a joke so far. Free had a good offseason but that injury left us with little to see in game situations. If they had a chance to go back and redraft Marten I don't think they would do it.

bored of education
09-12-2007, 02:59 PM
yeah, I always liked the guy.

btw, I'm ordering a custom made Long Chiefs jersey.

LonghornsLegend
09-12-2007, 03:15 PM
thats one of my points this year, i think our o line will be a top 5 unit at the end of the year, davis is creating gaping holes to run through

DMWSackMachine
09-12-2007, 03:32 PM
Extremely shaky is a huge overstatement. He played the best defense in the leauge, and had nothing in the backfield to help him out. He made a couple bad throws, mainly the INT. That's about it, otherwise he made a lot of good throws to Gates, and a great throw that VJ dropped. The WR's didnt "Play worse then the harshest crtiic" could criticize. Vincent Jackson dropped a pass. Gates dropped 1 or 2. The rest of the WR played okay, they just didn't have as much of an advantage as Gates did, or LT did coming out of the backfield.

And how did the Bears "do more" to force their turnovers? They got an overthrow from Philip Rivers, and they recovered a fumble by jumping offsides. Stephen Cooper stripped either Benson or Peterson, We stripped the ball from Grossman on a sack we didnt recover, Jamal Williams and Jaques Cesaire both forced fumbles. I don't get how they did more to get turnovers then us.

Of course the Bears D was overall more impressive, they are a better defensive, but its not like our defensive performance wasn't right up there with them. We lets up less through the air, a whopping 3 more yards through the ground. And less points.

Now, as I've said in all my other posts about the game, thats not to say it shoudl have been a blowout, or we should have scored more points...but a lot of the things you just suggested are either not true or exagerated.

Maybe you need to go back and do some reading. I said in the first half. And yes, he was EXTREMELY shaky in the first half. I know you worship him, but try to have a little bit of objectivity here. He was trash, and everyone knows it.

The guy could only complete dumpoffs. How do you think he got just 190 yards out of 31 freaking attempts? And it would have been worse if he wasn't dumping off to LT.

Anyway, they were legitimately bad, and there was no exaggerating about it. Sure, the Bears have a very good defense, but to say that they are the best in the league is without basis or common sense. For all the press they get, they have had major late season letdowns each of the last two years, and they really get rich off of bad teams with, especially, bad QBs. Extremely good? Yeah. Best in the league? A little on the ridiculous side.

The Bears did more because they were all over your QB with their pass rush, which played a key role in River's Int, and Tommie Harris was dominating your interior line. That's how. As opposed to your TOs which were more of a case of inept play by the Bears' offense. For example, the dogged route that Berrian ran which resulted in an easy pick off. Or the fact that both Benson's and Peterson's fumbles were just bad ball security. Neither one was the result of a particularly vicious hit, or the defender reaching in and stripping. They just got hit and dropped the ball. I'm not trying to take away from how good the Charger's defense played, because they were very good as well, but its just homerism to think that those three plays had anything to do in particular with the way you played.

My point is to say that, especially in the first half, one got the impression that the Bears were the better team on the field. They were able to move the ball better, they were shutting down your offense more and they just looked a little sharper. The game turned when Berrian quit on a route, when Benson didn't secure the ball, and when your punter (I suppose calculatingly, eh?) hit a wire that made the ball drop onto a Bear's ST player and gave you the ball deep in their territory. After all that happened, the damn broke, and Turner got a bunch of junk run yards, and Rivers was finally able to hit his stride.

There is no reason to get your panties in a bunch over this. But for someone who come in and says "I don't generally like to play the what if game", you have done a crap load of what ifs.

And this is coming from someone who loves the Chargers, btw. So there is no prejudice against them going on here. Just trying to bring you down to reality. Your team is too good to be playing those types of games.

CC.SD
09-12-2007, 03:50 PM
Maybe you need to go back and do some reading. I said in the first half. And yes, he was EXTREMELY shaky in the first half. I know you worship him, but try to have a little bit of objectivity here. He was trash, and everyone knows it.

The guy could only complete dumpoffs. How do you think he got just 190 yards out of 31 freaking attempts? And it would have been worse if he wasn't dumping off to LT.

Anyway, they were legitimately bad, and there was no exaggerating about it. Sure, the Bears have a very good defense, but to say that they are the best in the league is without basis or common sense. For all the press they get, they have had major late season letdowns each of the last two years, and they really get rich off of bad teams with, especially, bad QBs. Extremely good? Yeah. Best in the league? A little on the ridiculous side.

The Bears did more because they were all over your QB with their pass rush, which played a key role in River's Int, and Tommie Harris was dominating your interior line. That's how. As opposed to your TOs which were more of a case of inept play by the Bears' offense. For example, the dogged route that Berrian ran which resulted in an easy pick off. Or the fact that both Benson's and Peterson's fumbles were just bad ball security. Neither one was the result of a particularly vicious hit, or the defender reaching in and stripping. They just got hit and dropped the ball. I'm not trying to take away from how good the Charger's defense played, because they were very good as well, but its just homerism to think that those three plays had anything to do in particular with the way you played.

My point is to say that, especially in the first half, one got the impression that the Bears were the better team on the field. They were able to move the ball better, they were shutting down your offense more and they just looked a little sharper. The game turned when Berrian quit on a route, when Benson didn't secure the ball, and when your punter (I suppose calculatingly, eh?) hit a wire that made the ball drop onto a Bear's ST player and gave you the ball deep in their territory. After all that happened, the damn broke, and Turner got a bunch of junk run yards, and Rivers was finally able to hit his stride.

There is no reason to get your panties in a bunch over this. But for someone who come in and says "I don't generally like to play the what if game", you have done a crap load of what ifs.

And this is coming from someone who loves the Chargers, btw. So there is no prejudice against them going on here. Just trying to bring you down to reality. Your team is too good to be playing those types of games.


Hey, you can have the most talented team in the league, and everything is not going to go right all the time. Every great team has to win some gut check type games. it's unrealistic to think otherwise.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 04:15 PM
The weird thing is that none of the OLinemen was a first round pick, but the skill players got a lot more hype and money. I think Bush would have ended up as a top 5 pick no matter where he went to school. Leinart got a lot more press from his USC success. Without that credibility, he might have fallen to Round 3 or 4.

Sam Baker will be and Justice and Kalil arguably had 1st round talent but extenuating circumstances (character and position respectively) pushed them down into the 2nd.

smittyjs
09-12-2007, 04:54 PM
When Leinart didn't make that throw on the flea flicker to an open Larry Fitzgerald, at the corner, all the announcers wondered why. I don't think he can make that throw and I think he knew that he couldn't as well. What does he do well? He isn't the most mobile, he isn't the most accurate, he cannot make 15-20 yard NFL throws. I never liked him as a prospect, as anyone who dates back to the pre-'06 draft forum can attest.
As did i Leinart was always my #3 QB coming into that draft.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 04:56 PM
I really want to see how Kellen Clemens does. I think he will be very good in the NFL and would make the Jets a better team than with Pennington. Baltimore is a tough test, regardless of Ray Lewis being hurt and Adalius Thomas being gone.

smittyjs
09-12-2007, 05:01 PM
I really want to see how Kellen Clemens does. I think he will be very good in the NFL and would make the Jets a better team than with Pennington. Baltimore is a tough test, regardless of Ray Lewis being hurt and Adalius Thomas being gone.
Shiver who did you have rank higher as a prospect coming out, Alex Smith, Matt Leinart, and Brandy Quinn??

JK17
09-12-2007, 05:12 PM
Maybe you need to go back and do some reading. I said in the first half. And yes, he was EXTREMELY shaky in the first half. I know you worship him, but try to have a little bit of objectivity here. He was trash, and everyone knows it.

Right. Have some objectivity, as if I haven't shown enough of that on this forum. Get a clue, don't tell me to go back and do some reading. You said the Bears one the first half, which they did. Then you said, Watching the game, you can tell Rivers was shaky. I love to worship him? Except in every single review I've talked about of the game I said he has to play better. Trash? He played bad in the first half. But thats not what you imply by saying "By watching the game.

The guy could only complete dumpoffs. How do you think he got just 190 yards out of 31 freaking attempts? And it would have been worse if he wasn't dumping off to LT.

See, now I question how much you are being "objective". LT's biggest gain of the day, his screen, didn't come until the third quarter. So are you talking about the whole game or just the first half. Not to mention Antonio Gates had 9 catches for over 100 yards. All those weren't screens. His TD pass he should have thrown to VJ, that he dropped, was as good a pass as you'll see. I'm not saying he played amazing, but extremely shaky? My ass. 190 Yards on 31 attempts? Couldn't be because he was playing the Bears D could it?

Anyway, they were legitimately bad, and there was no exaggerating about it. Sure, the Bears have a very good defense, but to say that they are the best in the league is without basis or common sense. For all the press they get, they have had major late season letdowns each of the last two years, and they really get rich off of bad teams with, especially, bad QBs. Extremely good? Yeah. Best in the league? A little on the ridiculous side.

Legitimately bad. Right. They didn't play great. Never did I say that, so keep trying to paint me like a homer, most people know thats not true. But legitimately bad? Again, maybe in the first half. But when you say "having watched the game" , like you did, it encompasses the whole game.

Wait, saying the Bears have the Best defense in the league is ridiculous? Hardly! They've been one of the best for the past few years, and they played amazing. Again, did you even watch the game? They flocked to the ball every play. Major Season letdowns had nothing to do with the defense playing bad, get a clue. If they aren't the best in the league, tell me who is...Baltimore? They didn't look that good either. And even if you can name a team, name a couple. Becaus even a top five defense is nothing too shabby, but they aren't. They are the best, or second best, so don't play it off like they aren't an elite defensive team.

The Bears did more because they were all over your QB with their pass rush, which played a key role in River's Int, and Tommie Harris was dominating your interior line. That's how. As opposed to your TOs which were more of a case of inept play by the Bears' offense. For example, the dogged route that Berrian ran which resulted in an easy pick off. Or the fact that both Benson's and Peterson's fumbles were just bad ball security. Neither one was the result of a particularly vicious hit, or the defender reaching in and stripping. They just got hit and dropped the ball. I'm not trying to take away from how good the Charger's defense played, because they were very good as well, but its just homerism to think that those three plays had anything to do in particular with the way you played.

What are you talking about again? The Bears get credit for Rivers throwing them a ball and committing a penalty, but the Chargers don't for forcing two turnovers, getting lucky on a punt, and intercepting the same time of pass that they did against us? Our TOs were more then Bears ineptness to carry the ball. That's ridiculous, the players stripped it out, and they certainly didn't do any less to get the turnovers then the Bears did. And then you talk about neither being the result of a vicious hit or a strip. A) That's not even true, Cooper ripped it right out, and B) Show me one of the Bears turnovers that was the result of that!. Right though, they just got hit and dropped the ball..and what did the Bears do? Oh right they got pressure...and SD didn't? Both teams had 3 sacks, San Diego's for two more yards, and we were in the backfield just as often... The run defense was shut down every time, so what are you talking about, that our TOs weren't warranted? I just want it explained how a bad throw and a penalty are any more deserving?

But your right, its just homerism to think that we were responsible for turvoers.

My point is to say that, especially in the first half, one got the impression that the Bears were the better team on the field. They were able to move the ball better, they were shutting down your offense more and they just looked a little sharper. The game turned when Berrian quit on a route, when Benson didn't secure the ball, and when your punter (I suppose calculatingly, eh?) hit a wire that made the ball drop onto a Bear's ST player and gave you the ball deep in their territory. After all that happened, the damn broke, and Turner got a bunch of junk run yards, and Rivers was finally able to hit his stride.

Neither team was moving the ball better so please explain to me how they were so clear cut moving it better then us. All those breaks you just named, are stretches or things I could name going the other way. But either way, I'd love to see you explain to me how they were more deserving of turnovers. Not to mention a game is longer then just a half. You've minimized everything we did. And its not like I'm claiming we lit the world on fire, but apparently everything we did was a fluke, when the Bears earned everythign? Spare me.

There is no reason to get your panties in a bunch over this. But for someone who come in and says "I don't generally like to play the what if game", you have done a crap load of what ifs.

Here's the problem. I never said any of that. Quote me on taht please I'd love to see it. Actually what I said was, we can't count those what ifs. So good call, again. Maybe I shouldn't be the one going back to read.

And this is coming from someone who loves the Chargers, btw. So there is no prejudice against them going on here. Just trying to bring you down to reality. Your team is too good to be playing those types of games.

Bring me back down to reality. Find me a review of the game I gave that wasn't reality. Every one says, the defense played great, the offense has a lot to work on it. But everything you've said was an overstatement.

I'm just a homer though, so it doesn't matter.

DMWSackMachine
09-12-2007, 06:13 PM
Lol, calm down. You do have your panties in a bunch, btw.

Part of the problem is that I am combining what you and Charger Cohen said. I thought you were the same person as I was responding to it. He's the one that said the line about "not liking to play the imagination game".....and then immediately went on to play the imagination game! I got confused because I saw your sig and assumed that it was him I was reading. That's my bad.

However, the whole point here is to keep things in the middle. Most of what I said, that you mis-responded to, was about the FIRST HALF, like I already said. It was a fairly even game, from a quality-of-play perspective, but the game changed with TOs. Here are my points:

1) The Bears looked like the better team in the 1st half. It was enough of a difference to actually say "wow, the Bears look like the better team here." i.e., not just a marginal thing.

2) If the Bears had not made the inexcusable mistakes that they made--the bad route by Berrian resulting in the pick, and the soft Benson fumble--then this might just have continued. We'll never know.

3) Rivers was horrible IN THE FIRST HALF. He got better as the game wore on, and looked overall pretty fair in the second half. Just to give you an idea, he was 10/16 for 74 yds 0Td 1Int in the first half. That is 4.6 YPA, and 7.4 YPC. For reference, think that Drew Brees was in the low-mid 6s in yards per completion on Thursday night, which would have been a record if not for a late completion that boosted it up (min. 20 completions). That's pretty horrible. When I said that he was dumping it off, I was right. Of his 10 completions, 3 were to LT, one to Neal and 4 to Gates. That's 8 of 10, and all but one of those was in the flat. Still want to argue? But, yes, he was better in the 2nd half.

Oh, and not only that, but his throw was an inaccurate pass that was a result partly a result of pressure from the Chicago D. Grossman's pick was a pass that would have been either complete (best case) or incomplete (worst case) if Berrian had simply run his route properly. It wasn't an overthrow at all. That isn't forcing a TO.

4) Lastly, the TOs forced were less a result of dynamic defensive play, and more a result of coincidence/luck/fortune/ineptitude (by da Bears). This is pretty obvious. Usually a fumble occurs from a vicious hit, hitting someone (often viciously) when prone or unaware, getting to the ball before it has a chance to be secured by the ball carrier, or from a defender having the wherewithal/intelligence/instincts to get his hands on the ball and rip it out. None of those things occurred on either of the two fumbles. That, to me, indicates that it was more of Chicago not holding onto the ball and less of SD forcing it free. That would seem like a reasonable conclusion to me. If it doesn't to you, then explain.

Shiver
09-12-2007, 06:16 PM
Shiver who did you have rank higher as a prospect coming out, Alex Smith, Matt Leinart, and Brandy Quinn??


Man that's hard to remember. Last year I came out with a big '05/'06/'07 joint QB Ranking. I remember my top-3 and that's it:

1. Jay Cutler
2. Jamarcus Russell
3. Vince Young
9999. Aaron Rodgers

Everything else is hazy.

derza222
09-12-2007, 06:22 PM
I really want to see how Kellen Clemens does. I think he will be very good in the NFL and would make the Jets a better team than with Pennington. Baltimore is a tough test, regardless of Ray Lewis being hurt and Adalius Thomas being gone.

I agree on a lot of your points. First of all, I'm very interested to see how Clemens does. But given it's his first career start against as you said a very talented Baltimore defense (behind a shaky offensive line), I don't know how much weight I'm going to put into the results. I like the fact that he gives us a downfield element. Pennington is very good at the short passing game and had some nice drives against the Patriots, but it's too easy to stack the box against him and he can't get the ball downfield. All of that said, I don't expect a great game from Clemens this weekend, but I think he will show flashes of potential and start to open things up for us a bit on offense. And I wish Pennington all the best, unless Clemens has a fantastic game I think Pennington keeps the starting job the rest of the year (not sure Mangini is ready to pull the plug on him). He's a tough competitor and I gained a ton of respect for him last week.

JeffSamardzijaIRISH
09-12-2007, 06:46 PM
The Titans' O-Line is much, much better than the Saints' O-Line. On grass, without the dome advantage and the artificial noise they pump into that thing, against that O-Line will show whether their run defense is legitimate. Kevin Mawae vs a rookie UDFA NT? You would imagine that the Titans would have the edge there, that's why I'm holding out that I was right and the Colts just had a lone impressive performance.



The Raiders' defense was overrated last year. Their secondary is not as good as the stats would indicate; Nnamdi Asomugha was and is the only one who is a standout. The front seven still has issues against the run. The Lions had no trouble running the ball against them and they have much more fear inspiring rushing attacks on the horizon.




His stats, as I said, were not the impressive thing Cutler displayed. Sure they look good now. The most impressive thing was his intangibles he displayed on that final drive. That cool, courage under pressure is something his other peers in the '06 draft class have not shown. Surely it was a promising first start and as the season progresses he should only get better.

Edit: didn't finish reading page

Also, I totally agree with ur Matt Leinart assessment. I had him ranked 9th or 10th out of the 05 and 06 QB's(maybe 04 too), and people blasted me like crazy.

JK17
09-12-2007, 06:59 PM
Lol, calm down. You do have your panties in a bunch, btw.

Part of the problem is that I am combining what you and Charger Cohen said. I thought you were the same person as I was responding to it. He's the one that said the line about "not liking to play the imagination game".....and then immediately went on to play the imagination game! I got confused because I saw your sig and assumed that it was him I was reading. That's my bad.

Actually, I'm just fine about it. But thanks, I'll calm down.

However, the whole point here is to keep things in the middle. Most of what I said, that you mis-responded to, was about the FIRST HALF, like I already said. It was a fairly even game, from a quality-of-play perspective, but the game changed with TOs. Here are my points:

You should not have said then, judging by the game then, because all that indicates is that you are referncing the game. If you meant otherwise say, Having watched the first half.

1) The Bears looked like the better team in the 1st half. It was enough of a difference to actually say "wow, the Bears look like the better team here." i.e., not just a marginal thing.

They did not "blow us away" in the first half. That's ridiculous if you think so, and I doubt many people would agree with you that it was not just a marginal thing. You're entitled to your belief, but neither team played well enough to separate itself.

2) If the Bears had not made the inexcusable mistakes that they made--the bad route by Berrian resulting in the pick, and the soft Benson fumble--then this might just have continued. We'll never know.

Oh please, now whose the one using what ifs?! And if Rivers had not thrown the bad pass, and if the refs blew the whistle on the offsides...etc. etc. C'mon you can't be so criticial of someone using what ifs when your doing it yourself.

3) Rivers was horrible IN THE FIRST HALF. He got better as the game wore on, and looked overall pretty fair in the second half. Just to give you an idea, he was 10/16 for 74 yds 0Td 1Int in the first half. That is 4.6 YPA, and 7.4 YPC. For reference, think that Drew Brees was in the low-mid 6s in yards per completion on Thursday night, which would have been a record if not for a late completion that boosted it up (min. 20 completions). That's pretty horrible. When I said that he was dumping it off, I was right. Of his 10 completions, 3 were to LT, one to Neal and 4 to Gates. That's 8 of 10, and all but one of those was in the flat. Still want to argue? But, yes, he was better in the 2nd half.

I know he was plenty bad in the first half. He was like that last year too, so it wasn't a shock to me. Now thats not to say he played an amazing second half, he still has stuff to work out. I agree he was bad in the first half, not one offesnive player on either side was. But what you said originally was "Having watched the game" or something along the lines, which is something I objected too, as he was not EXTREMELY shaky, looking at his whole game performance. A game is also more then a half, but if we're looking solely at that first one, then yes he obviously was shaky.

Oh, and not only that, but his throw was an inaccurate pass that was a result partly a result of pressure from the Chicago D. Grossman's pick was a pass that would have been either complete (best case) or incomplete (worst case) if Berrian had simply run his route properly. It wasn't an overthrow at all. That isn't forcing a TO.

Again, thats all what ifs when your talking about Berrian's route. The defender was right there, would he have had an easy a time picking it off? No, but who are you to say he wouldn't have. And I never said that play was forcing a TO.

4) Lastly, the TOs forced were less a result of dynamic defensive play, and more a result of coincidence/luck/fortune/ineptitude (by da Bears). This is pretty obvious. Usually a fumble occurs from a vicious hit, hitting someone (often viciously) when prone or unaware, getting to the ball before it has a chance to be secured by the ball carrier, or from a defender having the wherewithal/intelligence/instincts to get his hands on the ball and rip it out. None of those things occurred on either of the two fumbles. That, to me, indicates that it was more of Chicago not holding onto the ball and less of SD forcing it free. That would seem like a reasonable conclusion to me. If it doesn't to you, then explain.

A fumble does not alwasy "usually occur from a vicious hit" or anything like that. But your wrong when you say none of those two thigns occured. I can't remember perfectly the one fumble, but I know for a fact Cooper ripped the ball out. So that was a "dynamic play". Not to mention you've still failed to explain how Chicagos turnovers were more deserved.

I'll use your explanations anyway. The play where Harris was offsides, was not so much a forced turnover as Rivers being unable to hold onto the ball. Not to mention it should have been a penalty, but I'll let that go.

The Interception was a poor throw, and was in no way different, for the defense then Grossman's. Both times the defense had the ball thrown right to them. And if you're going to say that Chicago "forced" it, because they had pressure don't. Or I'll say both fumbles were forced because San Diego flocked to the ball and gang tackled, and now you lose 2-1 right away on turnovers.

DMWSackMachine
09-12-2007, 07:51 PM
*sigh*

Whatever you say then. You're clearly not interested in seeing reason. My points have been made, though.

bearfan
09-12-2007, 08:09 PM
You guys won, it was a good game. I think my only problem is how the media, and everyone else views it afterwards. "LT throws more TDs than Grossman" "Benson should be benched" "Bears not that good". That sort of stuff. When you play hard football like both teams did, it should be viewed as that. Both teams played extremly well on the defensive side, and the offenses suffered b/c of that. IMO there was no bad game, it was just an amazing defensive battle, and one that was decided by turnovers.

I will even go to say that the teams are pretty evenly matched w/ San Diego just a little above us b/c of a better offense

JK17
09-12-2007, 08:15 PM
*sigh*

Whatever you say then. You're clearly not interested in seeing reason. My points have been made, though.

Right. I can't see reason. Your points are ridiculous, you think an offsides penalty and a gift INT, are more rewardable then two forced fumbles, a gift iNT, and a gift FR. So no, there's no logic there. But whatever, I'm done wasting my time with you, I'm just a Chargers homer, right?

You guys won, it was a good game. I think my only problem is how the media, and everyone else views it afterwards. "LT throws more TDs than Grossman" "Benson should be benched" "Bears not that good". That sort of stuff. When you play hard football like both teams did, it should be viewed as that. Both teams played extremly well on the defensive side, and the offenses suffered b/c of that. IMO there was no bad game, it was just an amazing defensive battle, and one that was decided by turnovers.

I'd be furious if I was you to be honest. The Bears played great, mostly on defense, and I thought the reason they didn't win was becuase they took Grossman out of the game. We were giving up more in the pass game in the run game. So yeah, I think there was a lot of overreaction in the media about the Bears performance. Because, to be honest, like I've said numerous times, they were right there with us, for about 3 quarters. So things like "the Bears are done" are such overstatements, I agree.

And then, after absolutely shutting down LT, you turn on the news, and you hear "LT carries his team through the air, even though he was shut down on the ground." LT didn't have a great game, the media doesn't have to glorify everything he does, I agree.

On the other hand, would you say the Chargers didn't "force their turnovers" as much as the "Bears" forced theres, or that Rivers was "extremely shaky". I know they weren't good, but those are both overstatements as well.

bearfan
09-12-2007, 08:40 PM
Yeah, I was pretty pissed until today. But the only unforced TO was the punt, but I see TO's as TO's. I really dont care in the end how it happens, just that it did.

Haha, and the LT "domination" was rediculous. If you read any of fox sports, they were all about LT being the difference maker (granted he did have the only 2 TDs), but he was shut down through the whole game.

And also, Benson had the most yards rushing in the game I believe, I just thought that was funny. If he was an established back like LT, he would not be ripped on I think.

But hey, the games over, it was a great game, and good luck to you guys the rest of the season. See you in the superbowl ;)

CC.SD
09-12-2007, 09:22 PM
*sigh*

Whatever you say then. You're clearly not interested in seeing reason. My points have been made, though.

Just take a step back and consider the fact that you may in fact be the one not seeing reason, brosef. You are arguing that the Charger defense shouldn't be getting credit for forcing fumbles because "the runner got hit and dropped the ball." Hey, that's what forcing a fumble is. The bears offense got torn apart all game, the chargers offense got shut down for 3 quarters, and then turned it on and won the game. You tell me who looked better.

You can say all you want about the Bears winning the first half, or Rivers looking bad in the 1st half. It's a sixty minute game! The Bengals and Broncos won the first half against us last year too, but they didn't look too happy when the final gun sounded.

I did say I don't like to play the imagination game, and I said it knowing I was about to: because the "game" I was playing simply involved imagining what the game would have been like if not for an absolutely FREAK occurence like Tommy Harris clearly committing a penalty during a game changing play. If you want to string me up for it, go ahead, it's the internet. But it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate point. The line judge must have been staring at the cheerleaders or eating a carne asada burrito or something, cause my blind grandmother could have made that offsides call.

Either way, it's over and down with, the Bears are 0-1, the Chargers are 1-0, and the Patriots are cheaters. Can't we all just got along? :D

Mr. Stiller
09-13-2007, 01:23 AM
I watched that Tommie Harris play over and over.. even in slo-mo that was an absolutely impossible call to make..

If you watch it again, he jumps into the neutral zone as Hardwick starts his snapping.

Between the speed of that jump and the fact that it was right at the snap made it extremely difficult. I tried figuring the right call for 10 minutes and it could have very well gone either way.

CC.SD
09-13-2007, 01:54 AM
I watched that Tommie Harris play over and over.. even in slo-mo that was an absolutely impossible call to make..

If you watch it again, he jumps into the neutral zone as Hardwick starts his snapping.

Between the speed of that jump and the fact that it was right at the snap made it extremely difficult. I tried figuring the right call for 10 minutes and it could have very well gone either way.

Neutral Zone...

BlindSite
09-13-2007, 02:09 AM
I hate all USC players, too. Good god I hate USC and its players. But when they leave USC, I stop hating them. Unless of course, they are unreasonably hyped.

But I cant, for the life of me, think of an unreasonably hyped Trojan. Damn.

Except you know, Matt Leinart, who thus far has been brilliant considering the mess he walked into and Reggie Bush and Ryan Kalil.

DMWSackMachine
09-13-2007, 10:28 AM
Just take a step back and consider the fact that you may in fact be the one not seeing reason, brosef. You are arguing that the Charger defense shouldn't be getting credit for forcing fumbles because "the runner got hit and dropped the ball." Hey, that's what forcing a fumble is. The bears offense got torn apart all game, the chargers offense got shut down for 3 quarters, and then turned it on and won the game. You tell me who looked better.

You can say all you want about the Bears winning the first half, or Rivers looking bad in the 1st half. It's a sixty minute game! The Bengals and Broncos won the first half against us last year too, but they didn't look too happy when the final gun sounded.

I did say I don't like to play the imagination game, and I said it knowing I was about to: because the "game" I was playing simply involved imagining what the game would have been like if not for an absolutely FREAK occurence like Tommy Harris clearly committing a penalty during a game changing play. If you want to string me up for it, go ahead, it's the internet. But it seems to me to be a perfectly legitimate point. The line judge must have been staring at the cheerleaders or eating a carne asada burrito or something, cause my blind grandmother could have made that offsides call.

Either way, it's over and down with, the Bears are 0-1, the Chargers are 1-0, and the Patriots are cheaters. Can't we all just got along? :D

Let me tell you what's happening here. I came in and made some statements that were suggesting that the product we saw on the field was a little more sloppiness than defensive skill, and it really pissed your friend off there. Of course, he acts like he's fine and there is no problem, but you can clearly tell by his tone and manner that he's either pissed off, or he's just an overly emo person in the first place.

That call on Tommie Harris looked much worse from the regular camera angle than it did on slo-mo. Harris just barely beat the ball. At regular speed, it would be nearly indecipherable. It was definitely offsides, but you can't blame the ref for missing it. And, even though it was just a fraction late, it was still an amazing play by Harris.

Still, my original point was that the game was very sloppy, and that the lack of scoring had as much to do with that as the excellent defensive play. I'm not trying to take everything away from what the Ds did. I am trying to make a common sense point, which is that any fumble where the ball carrier is simply wrapped up, and he just drops the ball, is much more of sloppy ball security issue than bad-ass defensive play. Is that really such a stretch?

Also, I'm not trying to say that the Bears were the better team, or that they played the better game. What I'm saying is that it was clear in the first half that the Bears were doing significantly better, and that the game may have continued that way had those horrific TOs not occurred. Again, that is more imagination stuff, and we'll never know. I'm cool with that, but to suggest that "wow, those defenses were out of this world!" is going too far. Both defenses were very good. They were aided quite a bit by sloppy and inept play from the offense.

Mr. Stiller
09-13-2007, 10:30 AM
Neutral Zone...

I know, but Like I said, the ball was being snapped literally at the same time he jumped into the neutral zone.

I'm not going to get into an argument.. I just watched the play about 50 times and it was a hard one to call.

JK17
09-13-2007, 11:30 AM
Let me tell you what's happening here. I came in and made some statements that were suggesting that the product we saw on the field was a little more sloppiness than defensive skill, and it really pissed your friend off there. Of course, he acts like he's fine and there is no problem, but you can clearly tell by his tone and manner that he's either pissed off, or he's just an overly emo person in the first place.

That call on Tommie Harris looked much worse from the regular camera angle than it did on slo-mo. Harris just barely beat the ball. At regular speed, it would be nearly indecipherable. It was definitely offsides, but you can't blame the ref for missing it. And, even though it was just a fraction late, it was still an amazing play by Harris.

Still, my original point was that the game was very sloppy, and that the lack of scoring had as much to do with that as the excellent defensive play. I'm not trying to take everything away from what the Ds did. I am trying to make a common sense point, which is that any fumble where the ball carrier is simply wrapped up, and he just drops the ball, is much more of sloppy ball security issue than bad-ass defensive play. Is that really such a stretch?

Also, I'm not trying to say that the Bears were the better team, or that they played the better game. What I'm saying is that it was clear in the first half that the Bears were doing significantly better, and that the game may have continued that way had those horrific TOs not occurred. Again, that is more imagination stuff, and we'll never know. I'm cool with that, but to suggest that "wow, those defenses were out of this world!" is going too far. Both defenses were very good. They were aided quite a bit by sloppy and inept play from the offense.

Your right, I'm probably just overly emo...that would explain it.

Not only is your "logic" ridiculous, but you still can't prove that the Bears turnovers, like you keep insisting, were any more deserved then the Chargers. So that alone is ridiculous. You've also toned down your entire point, from saying that the Chargers offense was, horrible and extemely shaky over the game, then to just saying the first half, and now, since you realize your arguments are all based on, like you said you hate, speculation, you've changed it to just sloppy.

Just please, explain to me why the Bears turnovers were more warranted. Becuase last time I checked, the Chargers forced fumbles. You keep saying they dropped the ball? They didn't it was ripped out. Stop minimizing that, just becuase it proves you wrong. A turnover is a turnovers, but asides from an offsides penalty and a gift INT, how do you say there's are more warranted. Explain it rather then just saying I can't see reason. And thats not me taking away from the Bears D. I mean go ahead and call me a homer again, but its clear that I'm not, and its clear I've given more then enough credit to the Bears. But since that was such a good argument for you before, I'd stick with it.

Obviously the game was sloppy. If you've just gotten into such an argument and debate over whether or not this game was sloppy, then you've wasted your time. Find me one passage or quote from not just me, but any Bears or Chargers fan that says this game wasn't sloppy. Can't do it? Then why bother arguing it, when everyone agrees.

Oh, and by the way, I'm completely fine. When I prove your argumnet is ridiculous, don't resort to saying I'm pissed off or too emo. That's just dumb.

bored of education
09-13-2007, 12:43 PM
5 bucks KC wins this week? any takers