11.12.2017 // Loss - Bears 16, Packers 23

For all things Chicago Bears

Moderator: wab

User avatar
staleystarch
Assistant Coach
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:08 pm

Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
beardownbilly wrote:Apologies if someone else has already posted this:

Waddle & Silvy talked about how the Bears had 57 offensive snaps in this game and on 22 of them had 10 yards to go or longer (that doesn't include 1st & 10).

3rd & 10 or longer on 9 of 14 3rd down plays, that sucks ass!

Talk about giving Mitch no chance from the outset.
It's been talked about ad nauseum, but your statistic really brings it into focus. This team came out of a bye week, against its #1 rival, in the division, and was not ready to play. John Fox had TWO WEEKS to get the team ready to play a reeling Green Bay team, and they come out and shit the bed. The longer Fox stays the head coach, the less credibility Ryan Pace will have.
I think it may be more accurate to say the coaches came into that game not ready to coach.
"We don’t know exactly what we’re doing” -- John Fox
Hematite
Player of the Month
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 10:05 pm

Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
beardownbilly wrote:Apologies if someone else has already posted this:

Waddle & Silvy talked about how the Bears had 57 offensive snaps in this game and on 22 of them had 10 yards to go or longer (that doesn't include 1st & 10).

3rd & 10 or longer on 9 of 14 3rd down plays, that sucks ass!

Talk about giving Mitch no chance from the outset.
It's been talked about ad nauseum, but your statistic really brings it into focus. This team came out of a bye week, against its #1 rival, in the division, and was not ready to play. John Fox had TWO WEEKS to get the team ready to play a reeling Green Bay team, and they come out and shit the bed. The longer Fox stays the head coach, the less credibility Ryan Pace will have.
Back to back division losses may seal the fate for the first ever firing of a Bears coach mid season. Can it really get any worse than losing to a Rodgersless Packers team, especially coming of the bye while they have a short week? That was an inexcusable shit show.

I've always been a continuity guy, but continuing this madness for the sake of continuity does nobody any good, not even Pace, who will be fighting for his job soon unless something changes for the good. Pace's survival instinct has already kicked in IMO, and he's calculating what actions give him the best chance of being rewarded with a new contract. I hope, just like he did with Trubisky, he swings for the fences with new coaching. He's shown in the past that he's an all in gambler.
User avatar
DaBearsGreenBay
Rookie
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 6:36 pm

These have been a painful few days for this fan. I️ live in Green Bay. My coworkers have been relentless with the insults. The worst part is, after that shit show, I️ can’t disagree with anything they’ve been saying!
User avatar
G08
Hall of Famer
Posts: 20560
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm
Location: Football Hell
Has thanked: 209 times
Been thanked: 758 times

Except for the TD to Bellamy and one 3rd-and-4 in the 3rd quarter, here were the #Bears 3rd-down distances on the final plays of their other 9 offensive drives vs. #Packers:

3rd and 14
3rd and 15
3rd and 12
3rd and 13
3rd and 16
3rd and 15
3rd and 18
3rd and 10
3rd and 10
9 PLAYOFF APPEARANCES IN THE PAST 35 SEASONS

Hematite
Player of the Month
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 10:05 pm

G08 wrote:
Except for the TD to Bellamy and one 3rd-and-4 in the 3rd quarter, here were the #Bears 3rd-down distances on the final plays of their other 9 offensive drives vs. #Packers:

3rd and 14
3rd and 15
3rd and 12
3rd and 13
3rd and 16
3rd and 15
3rd and 18
3rd and 10
3rd and 10
Unreal!
User avatar
o-pus #40 in B major
Head Coach
Posts: 2777
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:27 pm
Location: Earth
Has thanked: 2412 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Hematite wrote:
Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
beardownbilly wrote:Apologies if someone else has already posted this:

Waddle & Silvy talked about how the Bears had 57 offensive snaps in this game and on 22 of them had 10 yards to go or longer (that doesn't include 1st & 10).

3rd & 10 or longer on 9 of 14 3rd down plays, that sucks ass!

Talk about giving Mitch no chance from the outset.
It's been talked about ad nauseum, but your statistic really brings it into focus. This team came out of a bye week, against its #1 rival, in the division, and was not ready to play. John Fox had TWO WEEKS to get the team ready to play a reeling Green Bay team, and they come out and shit the bed. The longer Fox stays the head coach, the less credibility Ryan Pace will have.
Back to back division losses may seal the fate for the first ever firing of a Bears coach mid season. Can it really get any worse than losing to a Rodgersless Packers team, especially coming of the bye while they have a short week? That was an inexcusable shit show.

I've always been a continuity guy, but continuing this madness for the sake of continuity does nobody any good, not even Pace, who will be fighting for his job soon unless something changes for the good. Pace's survival instinct has already kicked in IMO, and he's calculating what actions give him the best chance of being rewarded with a new contract. I hope, just like he did with Trubisky, he swings for the fences with new coaching. He's shown in the past that he's an all in gambler.
So the Bears oligarchy is going to allow Ryan Pace to fire John Fox in mid-season?
Hematite
Player of the Month
Posts: 399
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2016 10:05 pm

pus wrote:
Hematite wrote:
Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
beardownbilly wrote:Apologies if someone else has already posted this:

Waddle & Silvy talked about how the Bears had 57 offensive snaps in this game and on 22 of them had 10 yards to go or longer (that doesn't include 1st & 10).

3rd & 10 or longer on 9 of 14 3rd down plays, that sucks ass!

Talk about giving Mitch no chance from the outset.
It's been talked about ad nauseum, but your statistic really brings it into focus. This team came out of a bye week, against its #1 rival, in the division, and was not ready to play. John Fox had TWO WEEKS to get the team ready to play a reeling Green Bay team, and they come out and shit the bed. The longer Fox stays the head coach, the less credibility Ryan Pace will have.
Back to back division losses may seal the fate for the first ever firing of a Bears coach mid season. Can it really get any worse than losing to a Rodgersless Packers team, especially coming of the bye while they have a short week? That was an inexcusable shit show.

I've always been a continuity guy, but continuing this madness for the sake of continuity does nobody any good, not even Pace, who will be fighting for his job soon unless something changes for the good. Pace's survival instinct has already kicked in IMO, and he's calculating what actions give him the best chance of being rewarded with a new contract. I hope, just like he did with Trubisky, he swings for the fences with new coaching. He's shown in the past that he's an all in gambler.
So the Bears oligarchy is going to allow Ryan Pace to fire John Fox in mid-season?
Probably not, but some of us can hope!
User avatar
Mikefive
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5189
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:33 pm
Location: Valparaiso, IN, USA
Has thanked: 340 times
Been thanked: 278 times

Hematite wrote:
Bears Whiskey Nut wrote:
beardownbilly wrote:Apologies if someone else has already posted this:

Waddle & Silvy talked about how the Bears had 57 offensive snaps in this game and on 22 of them had 10 yards to go or longer (that doesn't include 1st & 10).

3rd & 10 or longer on 9 of 14 3rd down plays, that sucks ass!

Talk about giving Mitch no chance from the outset.
It's been talked about ad nauseum, but your statistic really brings it into focus. This team came out of a bye week, against its #1 rival, in the division, and was not ready to play. John Fox had TWO WEEKS to get the team ready to play a reeling Green Bay team, and they come out and shit the bed. The longer Fox stays the head coach, the less credibility Ryan Pace will have.
Back to back division losses may seal the fate for the first ever firing of a Bears coach mid season. Can it really get any worse than losing to a Rodgersless Packers team, especially coming of the bye while they have a short week? That was an inexcusable shit show.

I've always been a continuity guy, but continuing this madness for the sake of continuity does nobody any good, not even Pace, who will be fighting for his job soon unless something changes for the good. Pace's survival instinct has already kicked in IMO, and he's calculating what actions give him the best chance of being rewarded with a new contract. I hope, just like he did with Trubisky, he swings for the fences with new coaching. He's shown in the past that he's an all in gambler.
I'm with you 100% on this.

Right now anyway. There is almost half a season left, though.
Mikefive's theory: The only time you KNOW that a sports team player, coach or management member is being 100% honest is when they're NOT reciting "the company line".

Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
User avatar
HisRoyalSweetness
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5901
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
Has thanked: 61 times
Been thanked: 1716 times

On a day where there was little to be happy about, at least there was one great thing that happened at Soldier Field on Sunday:

https://twitter.com/ChicagoBears/status ... 1263298561
User avatar
Funkster
MVP
Posts: 1851
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:35 pm

G08 wrote:
Except for the TD to Bellamy and one 3rd-and-4 in the 3rd quarter, here were the #Bears 3rd-down distances on the final plays of their other 9 offensive drives vs. #Packers:

3rd and 14
3rd and 15
3rd and 12
3rd and 13
3rd and 16
3rd and 15
3rd and 18
3rd and 10
3rd and 10
Wow, that's mind boggling. 1st down has to be better to put this offense in a more manageable 3rd down situations. If the Bears would show the willingness to throw on some first downs, it would open up damn near the entire playbook. Howard is one of the better backs in the league, with a minor switch to the pistol or gun, I feel this would loosen up the box and he could easily get 3-4 yards on 1st down.
“Protect this fucking house, go all out, leave that shit out on the field, let’s have some fun, makes some plays baby ” Mitch Trubisky #believethesleeve
Richie
MVP
Posts: 1912
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:37 pm
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 17 times

BR0D1E86 wrote:Also, that rule needs to change. You fumble it two inches earlier, it's first and goal. You fumble it two inches later it's a turnover? Hate that rule.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've never seen that rule come into play so many times in a season before. I think there's been 3 or 4 of those fumbles at the pylon in the NFL this year.
User avatar
Mikefive
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5189
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 9:33 pm
Location: Valparaiso, IN, USA
Has thanked: 340 times
Been thanked: 278 times

The rule essentially makes sense. You lose control of the ball and it goes out the back of the end zone. Where do you spot the ball then? That's essentially the same thing as hitting the pylon. It's wildly unfortunate. But it makes sense on some level.

Having situational rules to overcomplicate things really takes away from the game. Players are trying to play at full speed. Fans are trying to understand everything that happens really fast. And officials have to apply the rules. Making rules more complicated is a detriment to all of those things. From this perspective, soccer is so much superior of a game than football. Simple has a lot of value.
Mikefive's theory: The only time you KNOW that a sports team player, coach or management member is being 100% honest is when they're NOT reciting "the company line".

Go back to leather helmets, NFL.
User avatar
DaBearsGreenBay
Rookie
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 6:36 pm

This game saved me $150 on bears merchandise. I’m glad to have waited to pull the trigger on that.

It might also free up my Sunday’s for the rest of the year.
User avatar
Boris13c
Hall of Famer
Posts: 15958
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 11:30 am
Location: The Bear Nebula
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 103 times

Mikefive wrote:The rule essentially makes sense. You lose control of the ball and it goes out the back of the end zone. Where do you spot the ball then? That's essentially the same thing as hitting the pylon. It's wildly unfortunate. But it makes sense on some level.
I don't see anything wrong with the rule ... it penalizes a ball carrier who can't hang onto the ball to complete the play, and that's the way it should be

so this involves better coaching and better player discipline ... if you cannot maintain control of the football when you are stretching or diving, then don't fucking do it ... keep the ball tucked and secured and deal with the result

Mikefive wrote:Having situational rules to overcomplicate things really takes away from the game. Players are trying to play at full speed. Fans are trying to understand everything that happens really fast. And officials have to apply the rules. Making rules more complicated is a detriment to all of those things. From this perspective, soccer is so much superior of a game than football. Simple has a lot of value.
it's not necessarily applicable to this particular rule, but you do have a very valid point ... there are many other situations where the rules interpretations do not match visual evidence (like the Tuck Rule - I still to this day say Brady fumbled that damn ball)

and it certainly does not help that the NFL apparently has the 3 blind mice in charge of their review process in New York ... because many things in many games spewing from New York this year do not match what we see happening on the field ... the Zach Miller fiasco still sticks in my craw, where the replay doofus explaining it isn't even pointing to the fucking ball as he declares the ball is on the ground so it is incomplete
"Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things."
George Carlin
BR0D1E86
MVP
Posts: 1833
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2017 10:50 am

Mikefive wrote:The rule essentially makes sense. You lose control of the ball and it goes out the back of the end zone. Where do you spot the ball then? That's essentially the same thing as hitting the pylon. It's wildly unfortunate. But it makes sense on some level.

Having situational rules to overcomplicate things really takes away from the game. Players are trying to play at full speed. Fans are trying to understand everything that happens really fast. And officials have to apply the rules. Making rules more complicated is a detriment to all of those things. From this perspective, soccer is so much superior of a game than football. Simple has a lot of value.
It makes sense, I just don't like it. He fumbles that ball six inches sooner it's first and goal. It's such a massive change.

I know the end zone in general has different rules all around. I just think it's overly punishing to fumble the ball there as opposed to six inches earlier. Move the ball back to the 1 or whatever. I get the concept, I just don't really care for it.
Post Reply