Update: Waldron is bad again
Moderator: wab
- Rusty Trombagent
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7874
- Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
- Location: Maine!
- Has thanked: 705 times
- Been thanked: 1353 times
Interesting thread with Nate Tice chiming in
- malk
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
- Has thanked: 217 times
- Been thanked: 341 times
I don't know nearly enough to be sure but would definitely agree it matches what I'm seeing on the field.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
- Ditka’s dictaphone
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
- Has thanked: 1024 times
- Been thanked: 1046 times
Personally, I believe no matter who your OC is, if your Oline can’t block then the scheme is irrelevant.
Any scheme relies on the QB having time to throw, the RB having a seam to run through and the receivers having time to get open.
Any scheme relies on the QB having time to throw, the RB having a seam to run through and the receivers having time to get open.
(26/09/2023) Winner of the inaugural
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8839
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
- Has thanked: 630 times
- Been thanked: 738 times
I don't think its true eitherMoriarty wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2024 4:33 pmGenerally speaking, I very much agree with this. People knee-jerk react to results, without a coherent philosophy.malk wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2024 6:20 am I'm still salty after the loss last night so I get it but it's still a bit tiresome to read plays that come off = good and plays that don't come off = bad.
We beg for an OC that will be a little creative and then crucify him any time something that isn't the most obvious choice goes wrong.
However, if you take this philosophy to the extreme, you would say "there's no such thing as a bad play call - there's only ones that happened to work and those that happened not to" and I don't think that's at all true.
I have also yet to see a message board where its not pretty darn close to the truth though ....have you?
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7674
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 997 times
RichH55 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 30, 2024 11:05 pmI don't think its true eitherMoriarty wrote: ↑Mon Oct 28, 2024 4:33 pm
Generally speaking, I very much agree with this. People knee-jerk react to results, without a coherent philosophy.
However, if you take this philosophy to the extreme, you would say "there's no such thing as a bad play call - there's only ones that happened to work and those that happened not to" and I don't think that's at all true.
I have also yet to see a message board where its not pretty darn close to the truth though ....have you?
No, not at all.
All 3 of us agree - people mostly just go off results.
But, just to be clear - I am saying "that faulty reasoning aside, this play still actually deserved the criticism".
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)
Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)
Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
- malk
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
- Has thanked: 217 times
- Been thanked: 341 times
The fade was worse than the handoff to Kramer imo. But there is an argument not to get cute with anything until you're established, not because they're worse plays per se, but because the fallout of them not coming off is such a distraction it isn't worth it lol.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
- crueltyabc
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5213
- Joined: Mon May 04, 2009 7:36 pm
- Location: Dallas TX
- Has thanked: 101 times
- Been thanked: 256 times
I think Waldron made a few bad calls but I think this recent loss was more about Caleb in the first half and oline in the 3rd quarter. I remain hopeful that Waldron is a good hire.
xyt in the discord chats
-
- Player of the Month
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:54 pm
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 203 times
Jesus Christ. Guess I shouldn't be surprised - if the Head Coach won't take accountability (and doubles down on stupid) why shouldn't the OC?
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 30831
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 178 times
- Been thanked: 2493 times
I mean if it works no one cares. It's only stupid because the handoff was fucked.
-
- Player of the Month
- Posts: 374
- Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 3:54 pm
- Has thanked: 146 times
- Been thanked: 203 times
No, it was stupid because of the game situation. Yes winning allows you to overlook a lot but it still would have been a stupid call even if he hadn’t fumbled.
You give it to a fat kid when you’re running up the score and want to embarrass the other team, not when you’re trailing in the 4th quarter.
- wab
- Mod
- Posts: 30831
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
- Has thanked: 178 times
- Been thanked: 2493 times
So if it works and they score are there multiple message board pages about how stupid it was and endless tweets and podcasts about why it was a terrible call?Magilla_Gorilla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 4:28 pmNo, it was stupid because of the game situation. Yes winning allows you to overlook a lot but it still would have been a stupid call even if he hadn’t fumbled.
You give it to a fat kid when you’re running up the score and want to embarrass the other team, not when you’re trailing in the 4th quarter.
No. It would have been a fun play that got widely celebrated.
- thunderspirit
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4129
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
- Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
- Has thanked: 799 times
- Been thanked: 738 times
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd still call it dumb, because it's dumb to give the ball to the fat guy when you aren't holding a big lead.wab wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 5:37 pmSo if it works and they score are there multiple message board pages about how stupid it was and endless tweets and podcasts about why it was a terrible call?Magilla_Gorilla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 4:28 pm
No, it was stupid because of the game situation. Yes winning allows you to overlook a lot but it still would have been a stupid call even if he hadn’t fumbled.
You give it to a fat kid when you’re running up the score and want to embarrass the other team, not when you’re trailing in the 4th quarter.
No. It would have been a fun play that got widely celebrated.
KFFL refugee.
dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct
- Heinz D.
- MVP
- Posts: 1428
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
- Location: Tri-State area
- Has thanked: 1412 times
- Been thanked: 265 times
Yup. "Twas dumb.thunderspirit wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 5:53 pm I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd still call it dumb, because it's dumb to give the ball to the fat guy when you aren't holding a big lead.
I do think people are overly obsessing about the fine details of a game that was decided by a fluke play in the last seconds, though.
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7674
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 997 times
wab wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 5:37 pmSo if it works and they score are there multiple message board pages about how stupid it was and endless tweets and podcasts about why it was a terrible call?Magilla_Gorilla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 4:28 pm
No, it was stupid because of the game situation. Yes winning allows you to overlook a lot but it still would have been a stupid call even if he hadn’t fumbled.
You give it to a fat kid when you’re running up the score and want to embarrass the other team, not when you’re trailing in the 4th quarter.
No. It would have been a fun play that got widely celebrated.
Moriarty wrote: That's very true.
But it's also a serious knock on the average person's ability to evaluate, rather than a good reason to let <insert new name into a prior quote: Waldron> off the hook for his mistakes.
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)
Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)
Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
- HisRoyalSweetness
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
- Has thanked: 102 times
- Been thanked: 2816 times
That's a bit misleading from Lieser. This is what Waldron actually said when he fielded several questions about it:Magilla_Gorilla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 1:18 pm Jesus Christ. Guess I shouldn't be surprised - if the Head Coach won't take accountability (and doubles down on stupid) why shouldn't the OC?
So he basically expressed confidence in his players and stated that he always reflects on calls that don't work out.“Every play call that doesn’t work out, you go back and look at it and see ‘Was it the best call in that situation?’ What could I have done better as a play-caller? What situations could I have put those guys in?' But going back to the play, I have all the confidence in the world in our players. It’s something we’ve repped and worked on. It came up in the moment, as a third-and-one call. It didn’t work out.”
...
“Like I said, I felt confident in the moment in that call and it didn’t work out. When calls don’t work out, there’s gonna be criticism. I’ll always look inwardly first and then move on to the next one, and we’re on to Arizona.”
...
“I think there’s always valid criticism when things don’t work out. Like I said, we’ll work inwardly. We’ll wrap our arms around each other and work to look forward and execute better and call better plays the next situation that that arises.”
...
Asked if he would call the same play if he had the call to do over.
“In that moment? Yeah, I was confident. I had trust in it. And looking back at it, all the things that go into any call throughout the course of the game, whether it’s early calls that lead to stuff not working, or calls in the middle, calls in the end, critical calls — I always assess those and go forward.”
Arise Sir Walter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXdXRP6Hi-U
- Ditka’s dictaphone
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
- Has thanked: 1024 times
- Been thanked: 1046 times
It’s not that.Heinz D. wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 6:00 pmYup. "Twas dumb.thunderspirit wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 5:53 pm I can't speak for anyone else, but I'd still call it dumb, because it's dumb to give the ball to the fat guy when you aren't holding a big lead.
I do think people are overly obsessing about the fine details of a game that was decided by a fluke play in the last seconds, though.
It’s the 4th game in 2seasons when the Bears were projected to win by more than 90% deep in the 4th quarter and lost it.
It’s the failure to call a time out
It’s the failure to defend the 2nd from last play.
But moreover, it’s the lack of ownership by the head coach.
Poor leadership, poor game awareness and it’s clearly not the first time.
There’s no suggestion he’s learning and this is Y3
(26/09/2023) Winner of the inaugural
- Heinz D.
- MVP
- Posts: 1428
- Joined: Fri May 06, 2022 4:29 pm
- Location: Tri-State area
- Has thanked: 1412 times
- Been thanked: 265 times
It's EXACTLY "that".Ditka’s dictaphone wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:43 pm It’s not that.
It’s the 4th game in 2seasons when the Bears were projected to win by more than 90% deep in the 4th quarter and lost it.
It’s the failure to call a time out
It’s the failure to defend the 2nd from last play.
But moreover, it’s the lack of ownership by the head coach.
Poor leadership, poor game awareness and it’s clearly not the first time.
There’s no suggestion he’s learning and this is Y3
Now, will Eberflus survive the season? Maybe not. If he doesn't--will it be deserved? Probably.
What about Waldron? Well...I've made my disapproval of his comic hijinks well known.
I'm not of the mind set all is lost, though. And I firmly believe that, if not for a loss on a fluke play, many here would be with me on that,
My mother's love was inexplicably linked to kickball.
- o-pus #40 in B major
- Head Coach
- Posts: 2894
- Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2012 4:27 pm
- Location: Earth
- Has thanked: 2794 times
- Been thanked: 293 times
Dammit I accidentally thanked you HRS!HisRoyalSweetness wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:06 pmThat's a bit misleading from Lieser. This is what Waldron actually said when he fielded several questions about it:Magilla_Gorilla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 1:18 pm Jesus Christ. Guess I shouldn't be surprised - if the Head Coach won't take accountability (and doubles down on stupid) why shouldn't the OC?
So he basically expressed confidence in his players and stated that he always reflects on calls that don't work out.“Every play call that doesn’t work out, you go back and look at it and see ‘Was it the best call in that situation?’ What could I have done better as a play-caller? What situations could I have put those guys in?' But going back to the play, I have all the confidence in the world in our players. It’s something we’ve repped and worked on. It came up in the moment, as a third-and-one call. It didn’t work out.”
...
“Like I said, I felt confident in the moment in that call and it didn’t work out. When calls don’t work out, there’s gonna be criticism. I’ll always look inwardly first and then move on to the next one, and we’re on to Arizona.”
...
“I think there’s always valid criticism when things don’t work out. Like I said, we’ll work inwardly. We’ll wrap our arms around each other and work to look forward and execute better and call better plays the next situation that that arises.”
...
Asked if he would call the same play if he had the call to do over.
“In that moment? Yeah, I was confident. I had trust in it. And looking back at it, all the things that go into any call throughout the course of the game, whether it’s early calls that lead to stuff not working, or calls in the middle, calls in the end, critical calls — I always assess those and go forward.”
But thanks for pointing out his stonewalling via cliche - he should get into politics.
There is a GM named Poles
Who has a clear set of goals
He’s rebuilt his team
So Bears’ fans can dream
Of winning some more Super Bowls
- HRS
Who has a clear set of goals
He’s rebuilt his team
So Bears’ fans can dream
Of winning some more Super Bowls
- HRS
- HisRoyalSweetness
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8023
- Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2012 7:20 pm
- Has thanked: 102 times
- Been thanked: 2816 times
Sure it's cliched, but what more do people want?
He said:
The media frenzy has gone way over the top. They're dishonestly fanning the flames and fans are falling for it. Worst of all it's one massive distraction from what should really matter: the game against the Cardinals this Sunday and how the team is going to respond.
He said:
- He trusts his players.
(Showing loyalty to his players as a coach should. He knows Kramer in particular will be hurting.)
- In the moment he thought it was a good call.
(Being honest. He's hardly going to say he thought it was a bad play but he called it anyway.)
- It didn't work out so he excepts there will be criticism and that it's perfectly valid.
(Acknowledging the criticism and accepting it.)
- He'll self-analyse and look to call a better play in similar situations in future.
(Pointing out what coaches do and acknowledging the need for self improvement.)
- As an offense they'll work at executing better.
(Pointing out the obvious, that the execution was flawed and the players need to do a better job too, and he'll work with them on that.)
- He'd call the same play again if he got a chance to do it over.
The media frenzy has gone way over the top. They're dishonestly fanning the flames and fans are falling for it. Worst of all it's one massive distraction from what should really matter: the game against the Cardinals this Sunday and how the team is going to respond.
Arise Sir Walter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXdXRP6Hi-U
- docc
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4006
- Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:33 pm
- Location: Outpost of Reality S.E. Arizona
- Has thanked: 1302 times
- Been thanked: 239 times
Waldum would use Kramer again..\?HisRoyalSweetness wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 7:06 pmThat's a bit misleading from Lieser. This is what Waldron actually said when he fielded several questions about it:Magilla_Gorilla wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 1:18 pm Jesus Christ. Guess I shouldn't be surprised - if the Head Coach won't take accountability (and doubles down on stupid) why shouldn't the OC?
So he basically expressed confidence in his players and stated that he always reflects on calls that don't work out.“Every play call that doesn’t work out, you go back and look at it and see ‘Was it the best call in that situation?’ What could I have done better as a play-caller? What situations could I have put those guys in?' But going back to the play, I have all the confidence in the world in our players. It’s something we’ve repped and worked on. It came up in the moment, as a third-and-one call. It didn’t work out.”
...
“Like I said, I felt confident in the moment in that call and it didn’t work out. When calls don’t work out, there’s gonna be criticism. I’ll always look inwardly first and then move on to the next one, and we’re on to Arizona.”
...
“I think there’s always valid criticism when things don’t work out. Like I said, we’ll work inwardly. We’ll wrap our arms around each other and work to look forward and execute better and call better plays the next situation that that arises.”
...
Asked if he would call the same play if he had the call to do over.
“In that moment? Yeah, I was confident. I had trust in it. And looking back at it, all the things that go into any call throughout the course of the game, whether it’s early calls that lead to stuff not working, or calls in the middle, calls in the end, critical calls — I always assess those and go forward.”
So he'd suck like a fat girl on Prom night
- malk
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
- Has thanked: 217 times
- Been thanked: 341 times
Princess Bride meme but for media/fan understanding of "accountability".HisRoyalSweetness wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 9:53 pm Sure it's cliched, but what more do people want?
He said:
- He trusts his players.
(Showing loyalty to his players as a coach should. He knows Kramer in particular will be hurting.)
- In the moment he thought it was a good call.
(Being honest. He's hardly going to say he thought it was a bad play but he called it anyway.)
- It didn't work out so he excepts there will be criticism and that it's perfectly valid.
(Acknowledging the criticism and accepting it.)
- He'll self-analyse and look to call a better play in similar situations in future.
(Pointing out what coaches do and acknowledging the need for self improvement.)What he didn't say:
- As an offense they'll work at executing better.
(Pointing out the obvious, that the execution was flawed and the players need to do a better job too, and he'll work with them on that.)I'm not defending either the way he prepared his players coming off a bye week or his play calling during the game, but I am pushing back against a mistruth being put out there by an experienced beat reporter who should know better than to spread a false narrative around what was said at a presser.
- He'd call the same play again if he got a chance to do it over.
The media frenzy has gone way over the top. They're dishonestly fanning the flames and fans are falling for it. Worst of all it's one massive distraction from what should really matter: the game against the Cardinals this Sunday and how the team is going to respond.
And even on the call itself, if your offensive line is goosed by injuries you might, reasonably, think to go a bit of a trick play. I didn't like the fade on 1st down (slight caveat that putting a throw on tape could have benefits down the line but that's me being incredibly generous!) but if it was so easy and obvious to score with a "normal" run why did we fail on 2nd down?
Somewhat separately, I think there's something funky going on with the win % projections people are quoting, I'm getting a whiff of mathfuckery to be honest (if anyone has reqd a piece on them please link it!). E.g. what was the Commanders win percentages before Swift's score? In the sense that if theirs was really high then, were they about to throw away a 90% chance of winning before we threw away a 98% chance? Now thar might be true but my gut tells me that something essential isn't being captured. I might ask some maths buddies to give me a sense check tbh...
Edit: to clarify on the win % thing, that doesn't take away from the need to close games out.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
- Ditka’s dictaphone
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
- Has thanked: 1024 times
- Been thanked: 1046 times
Theirs was high before swift scored, I remember checking it at some point in the 4th and it was 90.1%. That was a good 10 mins before the end, a lot can happen.
The bears had a 98% chance of victory with 6 seconds left. Should have been 1 play, they gave them 2
But it’s “shoulda coulda woulda”. Good team close games out.
The bears had a 98% chance of victory with 6 seconds left. Should have been 1 play, they gave them 2
But it’s “shoulda coulda woulda”. Good team close games out.
(26/09/2023) Winner of the inaugural
- Ditka’s dictaphone
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4503
- Joined: Sun Apr 04, 2021 12:33 pm
- Has thanked: 1024 times
- Been thanked: 1046 times
It’s the comment about the second to last play that has done for Flus.HisRoyalSweetness wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 9:53 pm Sure it's cliched, but what more do people want?
He said:
- He trusts his players.
(Showing loyalty to his players as a coach should. He knows Kramer in particular will be hurting.)
- In the moment he thought it was a good call.
(Being honest. He's hardly going to say he thought it was a bad play but he called it anyway.)
- It didn't work out so he excepts there will be criticism and that it's perfectly valid.
(Acknowledging the criticism and accepting it.)
- He'll self-analyse and look to call a better play in similar situations in future.
(Pointing out what coaches do and acknowledging the need for self improvement.)What he didn't say:
- As an offense they'll work at executing better.
(Pointing out the obvious, that the execution was flawed and the players need to do a better job too, and he'll work with them on that.)I'm not defending either the way he prepared his players coming off a bye week or his play calling during the game, but I am pushing back against a mistruth being put out there by an experienced beat reporter who should know better than to spread a false narrative around what was said at a presser.
- He'd call the same play again if he got a chance to do it over.
The media frenzy has gone way over the top. They're dishonestly fanning the flames and fans are falling for it. Worst of all it's one massive distraction from what should really matter: the game against the Cardinals this Sunday and how the team is going to respond.
That was the game. Defend the sidelines and it’s game over. Let them out of bounds and they get another play.
It was a gross error by a defensive genius which most of the players saw. Even Caleb saw it.
So he should own it, not “I’m not concerned about that”.
That’s a glaring error a complete misjudgement. We all do it. Just accept it. To not be concerned about it means he’s happy for the same thing to happen again.
(26/09/2023) Winner of the inaugural
-
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 8839
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
- Has thanked: 630 times
- Been thanked: 738 times
The Steelers and later Jerome Bettis might disagree:)thunderspirit wrote: ↑Thu Oct 31, 2024 5:53 pmI can't speak for anyone else, but I'd still call it dumb, because it's dumb to give the ball to the fat guy when you aren't holding a big lead.
- Arkansasbear
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 5672
- Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2020 10:41 am
- Has thanked: 584 times
- Been thanked: 950 times
Not only does no one care everyone is talking about how awesome the play was.
I don’t think it was the best play but not crucifying him over that call. CW was missing a ton of throws in the first. That’s a bigger issue to me.
- thunderspirit
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4129
- Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2016 12:51 pm
- Location: Greater Chicagoland, IL
- Has thanked: 799 times
- Been thanked: 738 times
Williams did not have a good game for three and a half quarters, and that is indeed a bigger overall issue than the Kramer fumble play.Arkansasbear wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2024 9:05 amNot only does no one care everyone is talking about how awesome the play was.
I don’t think it was the best play but not crucifying him over that call. CW was missing a ton of throws in the first. That’s a bigger issue to me.
But that doesn't make the Kramer handoff a good play. You use that when you're up by 14 with four minutes left in the 4th, not when you're trying to take the lead.
KFFL refugee.
dplank wrote:I agree with Rich here
RichH55 wrote: Dplank is correct
- Grizzled
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 6121
- Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2019 3:55 pm
- Has thanked: 698 times
- Been thanked: 646 times
It's more concerning that the team, which had a bye week to prepare, was so incredibly flat for 3-1/2 quarters. Waldron's game plan strategy wasn't working at all but he chose to not adjust for a long time in the game. Caleb was also off and no allowances were made to shorten up routes and get him, the WRs, and the TEs/RBs in sync passing. The Bears had Mr. Money short-yardage back (RoJo, #1 in the NFL inside the 5 yard line) but chose to get cutsie and it bit them. Then Waldron eventually got around to blaming Caleb for the hand-off. He won't be winning people over in Chicago.
- malk
- Head Coach
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:10 am
- Has thanked: 217 times
- Been thanked: 341 times
Don't most teams, players, coaches etc. dislike the bye and see it as a disadvantage?Grizzled wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2024 11:40 am It's more concerning that the team, which had a bye week to prepare, was so incredibly flat for 3-1/2 quarters. Waldron's game plan strategy wasn't working at all but he chose to not adjust for a long time in the game. Caleb was also off and no allowances were made to shorten up routes and get him, the WRs, and the TEs/RBs in sync passing. The Bears had Mr. Money short-yardage back (RoJo, #1 in the NFL inside the 5 yard line) but chose to get cutsie and it bit them. Then Waldron eventually got around to blaming Caleb for the hand-off. He won't be winning people over in Chicago.
"I wouldn't take him for a conditional 7th. His next contract will pay him more than he could possibly contribute.".
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
Noted Brain Genius Malk, Summer 2018.
(2020 update, wait, was I right...)
- Moriarty
- Hall of Famer
- Posts: 7674
- Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2016 1:22 pm
- Has thanked: 526 times
- Been thanked: 997 times
I don't think that's true at all.malk wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2024 11:51 amDon't most teams, players, coaches etc. dislike the bye and see it as a disadvantage?Grizzled wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2024 11:40 am It's more concerning that the team, which had a bye week to prepare, was so incredibly flat for 3-1/2 quarters. Waldron's game plan strategy wasn't working at all but he chose to not adjust for a long time in the game. Caleb was also off and no allowances were made to shorten up routes and get him, the WRs, and the TEs/RBs in sync passing. The Bears had Mr. Money short-yardage back (RoJo, #1 in the NFL inside the 5 yard line) but chose to get cutsie and it bit them. Then Waldron eventually got around to blaming Caleb for the hand-off. He won't be winning people over in Chicago.
Don't see anything newer right now, but
Teams win 54% coming off a bye (vs 50% of the time, overall)From 2008 - 2012 season:
Winning % After a Bye Week: .541 (85-72-3)
1999-2002: Mouth Off Sports Forum (RIP)
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)
Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
2002-2014: KFFL (RIP)
2014-2016: USAToday Fantasy Sports Forum (RIP)
Hello, my name is Moriarty. I have come to kill your website, prepare to die.
-
- MVP
- Posts: 1231
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 1:13 pm
- Has thanked: 16 times
- Been thanked: 66 times
Waldron wasn't bad at all.
Second guess the the FB dive all you want. Caleb never got him the ball.
Caleb couldn't hit the broad side of the barn Sunday. He is a rookie so we are to expect games like these.
The fact we were even that game and should have won. Stevenson is to blame. The coaches are a close second not to see him not paying attention and not calling one of those timeouts we didn't use.
We should have been blown out of that game instead we should have won. Not to sure how to come to sense of that one. I am definitely not burning down the house because of it. The team that played better won the game Sunday. That definitely wasn't us.
Second guess the the FB dive all you want. Caleb never got him the ball.
Caleb couldn't hit the broad side of the barn Sunday. He is a rookie so we are to expect games like these.
The fact we were even that game and should have won. Stevenson is to blame. The coaches are a close second not to see him not paying attention and not calling one of those timeouts we didn't use.
We should have been blown out of that game instead we should have won. Not to sure how to come to sense of that one. I am definitely not burning down the house because of it. The team that played better won the game Sunday. That definitely wasn't us.