For What It's Worth In Postseason 2010
From NFL.com....Out of the TOP FIVE in post season play...
#1 Rushing...Chicago Bears
#2 Against the rush...Chicago Bears
#3 Total Offense...Chicago Bears
Who won the post season Big Game in 2010
#3 Passing...Green Bay Packers
#3 Total Defense...Green Bay Packers
#3 Against the rush...Green Bay Packers
#4 Total Offense...Green Bay Packers
G.B. beat us in passing and total defense in the post season.
We were not in the top five in those catagorys.
We beat them in rushing,against the rush,and total offense.
Not bad...but not good enough.
Forte is a top 5 back in this league. That's including blocking skills and catching out of the backfield.
Mike Martz will never hear of it, but this team has the potential to be a lot like the New York Jets and the Pittsburgh Steelers in terms of the running game. If Chester Taylor ever starts averaging about a yard more per carry than he did last season, watch out! We could lead the league in rushing yards.
I like the fact we beat G.B. in offense in the post season.
As good as they were in post season...we were better.
Although who got where in the end is telling.
Thats what we need to build on.
We got close enough to go all the way.
This kind of defeats all of the arguements about the Bears not being a very good team and just lucky to even be in the playoffs! Essentially the only area wher we don't quite match up is in the passing game and we all know that's mostly due to our Oline and we all know that an overhaul is in progress. A bigger go to guy at WR would also help and Martz needs to get his head out of his ass and start throwing more seam routes to Olsen. He dominates anyone who has to cover him on those routes.
As for total defense, I can't believe that were all that much different. The main reason behind that is that we give far to much of a cushion to WR's in Lovie's defense and give up a lot of yardage on passes into that coverage. We don't give up many scores on the long ball but we do give up the yardage between the 20's. When we played tighter coverage against Seattle all that changed.
Heard where the core of a team on offense is QB and LT...the rest builds around that.
On defense...CB and pass rush...the rest builds around that.
We have a QB and pass rusher...LT is up in the air and CB is what is needed.
Seems that at LT we have two that can rotate and although neither is great both are good...
which beats being bad.
We seem to be one CB away to solve the puzzle... in F.A. theres one guy it would be nice to get.
Currently on a team in Oakland.
Some of what the coaching staff chooses to do in terms of strategy baffles me, like what you said about not playing tighter coverage in Lovie's "Tampa Two" zone defense. Also, I feel like Greg Olsen is capable of being a Pro Bowl caliber player if he's ever appropriately used as such.
Originally Posted by soulman
We're one of the few teams that shuts down rodgers though. the guy had a 55 passer rating in the NFCC...
pretty impresive by ANY standards.
I don't fear the Packers. We played them close in all three games. Of the two we lost, we could have easily won them if a few things had gone our way and we didn't abandon the run. If we upgrade our CB situation where Tim Jennings is located, I think we can do some nice things against not just Rodgers, but the rest of the league.
High Fives / Like - 1 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
We play that damn backing the corners off the beginning of every game routine,
and if the team scores on us in a hurry it makes it near impossible to catch up.
G.B. was up by 21 before we started keeping the corners closer.