We Haven't Played Anybody!

**BearStuff** · 10-08-2012, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by XxMidwayMonstersxX

I certainly would not be as upset as if we played our current schedule and were 1-4. So yes I guess I would be rationalizing with the level of competition.

Also, the greater concern here is that the offense cant seem to score without the defense showing them how first. We are going to come accross an opponent that can score on our defense at some point, then what do we do? Certainly cant rely on O to get the job done.

Bottom line is that with the talent we have this year there are no excuses. I personally believe Martz would be having a field day with these guys.

Well, we have been starting slow on offense, but I take huge issue with the idea that Martz would be having a field day with these guys for two basic reasons:
1) 7 step drops and our oline.
2) We would have never signed/drafted these offensive weapons if he were here, and we wouldn't be using TE's in the passing game (which has been effective when done). We'd have a squad filled with smurfs and TE's who don't run patterns.

**4th and 26** · 10-08-2012, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by BearStuff

We can only play the teams the the league puts on our schedule, when they tell us to play them. If a team isn't at good as others, it should provide us with good practice and a chance to develop depth.

But I've got a question for you - What if we had played the top 5 teams in the league already and we were 1-4, would you be rationalizing the record w/ the level of competition?

If not, then your whole thread premise is kinda destroyed, no?

I would be ok if that win was against the packers. lol

**XxMidwayMonstersxX** · 10-08-2012, 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by 4DaBERS

I'm not going to argue with this point at all. The only thing I really take issue with is the argument for Martz over Tice, but I will not disagree with your original premise.

In 2006, our beloved Bears went to the Superbowl with a guy named Rex Grossman at QB. How does that happen? You get fat winning against bad teams. Until we got into the playoffs, we played a total of 4 teams with records of 9-7 or better. On my old board, one of the guys took a lot of time to go back and look at Lovie Smiths win-loss record against good teams. This was his argument AGAINST Lovie to those that claimed we should extend him because he is the third winningest coach we've ever had. However, his attractive win loss record has been padded by the fact that our Division was so weak for so long. Regardless, Lovie has a record of only .318 (or something like that) against teams with a 9-7 record or better. The weak schedule we've had so far plays into that. We are often good enough to beat the bad teams, but seldom good enough to beat the good ones. We'll see how this season plays out.

If you look at our schedule, it's possible with the way things are playing out this year, that we could make it to 10-6 or even 11-5 without winning a single game against a winning team.

I think our ideas are beginning to converge here. That is another good point. We are always good enough to rip on the poorer teams in the league but not good when it comes to strong opponents (in general).

I believe this is because we are a one sided team with the focus obviously being defense. How can you win a championship with no offense at all? You can't, it at least has to be middle of the road. In 06 we made it to the superbowl and got crushed by a well rounded team that played all 3 phases well. My mindset is superbowl or bust this year. Chicago needs a major sports championship and the Bears are due. (screw the sox and hockey doesn't count)

Right now we have a team that is playing 2/3 phases well and an offense with crazy talent. Its just so frustrating being tied with the Jags at half. We can't have that. It makes us look pathetic to the rest of the league. Yes we ended up beating them badly and putting up silly numbers, but we never really imposed our will on them like we should have. Not until garbage time when the D had given up. This is the same thing I said about the Cowboys game, the offense didnt start to pile on stats until the game was well out of hand. Keep your garbage time yards and TD's, I see them for what they are... garbage.

On Martz, I am one of the few people (call me crazy) that thinks Martz wasn't that bad. I'm not saying he was perfect, but he was pretty good In my opinion. Look at our skill position players last year, we had nobody! We were 7-3 and the defense frankly wasn't playing that well. Our offense was able to go BLOW FOR BLOW with other teams when the pressure was on, when it mattered most. Then the injuries happened, can't blame Martz for that. OC doesnt make personel decisions by himself.

Remeber the KC game last year? Where Barber dropped that TD? When Williams dropped another TD? both unbelievable calls by Martz, putting our guys in the position to win... and they shit the bed on him. Thats not his fault but he gets the blame for it. Thats just the first example that comes to my head where he called the right shot and the offense blew it, OC doesnt catch the ball or throw it, he calls the plays.

I know I know, your going to tell me that those were his guys he brought in from Dallas right? Wrong, its not his call to make personel decisions, he has input yes, but ultimately its the GM and Lovie making those type calls.

Bottom line he was the whipping boy for the offenses frustrations. We'd be better off with him than without. Get rid of him in a few years when the defense is in total rebuild mode sure, but for the forseeable future I think getting rid of him was a mistake. Just my opinion though.

**XxMidwayMonstersxX** · 10-08-2012, 04:15 PM

Originally Posted by BearStuff

Well, we have been starting slow on offense, but I take huge issue with the idea that Martz would be having a field day with these guys for two basic reasons:
1) 7 step drops and our oline.
2) We would have never signed/drafted these offensive weapons if he were here, and we wouldn't be using TE's in the passing game (which has been effective when done). We'd have a squad filled with smurfs and TE's who don't run patterns.

LOL SMURFS!

Dude Kellen Davis has caught like 6 passes in 5 games, we arent using TE's now. I agree 7 step drops were a problem, but thats something you could take out of the playbook in the off season. I maintain that our OL isnt that bad besides Webb, who is obviously a gonner next year, Carimi had a bad game at JAX i know.

Yes we absolutely would have made the same moves, It was time for angelo to go, the man hadnt hit in the draft in years. Our backups were garbage, Hanie couldnt play and shouldnt be in the league.

**4DaBERS** · 10-08-2012, 04:22 PM

Originally Posted by BearStuff

Well, I hear what you are saying, but there are far too many factors to make the stat meaningful. Who was injured when we played them, for either team? Was that teams that were 9-7 in the 16 games before we met or the season we met them in? Who was their competition for either span? What was the weather like in the games? Were they playing at night or day? How many games were in domes? Were there replacement refs officiating? Who were the coordinators for each phase? Were any of the wins/loses in overtime? Who did the teams played gain/lose in free agency or the draft?

In general, I'd argue that strength of schedule is a meaningless stat. Proof positive is a current year opponent - The Packers. They were 15-1 last year, or 14-2 in the 16 games leading up to this year, they are 2-3 this year, they have had significant turnover on the oline from last year, they have G.Jennings (probowl WR from last year) that has been injured most of the year, I think they drafted really well, Urlacher was still recovering, Peppers has been battling Plantar Fascitis. What do you make of a team like that from a "strength of schedule" standpoint? Is your arguement still valid if they suddenly start winning the majority of games? What about if they continue to slide a bit?

Bottom line, you play who is printed on your schedule, with the folks that are available to play. The only fair measurement is the score on the scoreboard at the end of the game. The rest is messageboard fodder that can't be measured for accuracy.

Can't argue with any of this stuff Stuff. Frankly, I hope I didn't imply an argument or point that I wasn't trying to make. This stuff is meaningless unless you are using it to support a subjective opinion. It's useful in the OP's opinion that we should temper our enthusiasm lest we start thinking we are much better than we are; but even if we do...so what? It's useful if you are thinking about replacing a coach with another that may be becoming available. Perhaps looking at a similar W-L record to determine if one is really better than the other based on playing tougher opponents routinely, etc. But again, as you say, there are many variables that can only be overcome by a large sample size, and even that is fallable.

I really didn't intend to bring this up for any other reason than say, we've been down this road before, but as everyone always says, you can only play the teams on your schedule. You just can't really judge how good you are without a larger sample (ie, playing some good teams), and even then, You wont be able to judge THEM until later in the season.

**willynowei** · 10-08-2012, 04:27 PM

hi, migrated from the team website forums, didn't decide to sign up and post till now.

Just wanted to add in my 2 cents that the game was really well called and planned by Lovie and Tice. I say this because i have watched many teams underperform in the Jacksonville heat. You could tell jacksonville's gameplan was to come out and wear down the defense with repeated runs. You could see the exhaustion set in almost immediately, our best players were sluggish and struggling to be explosive. Chicago players practice in a cold weather environment, they aren't used to 90 degree weather in 50lb + pads as much as a team that lives down in Jacksonville doing double sessions in the summer.

The heat neutralized the talent difference early much like snow would in a January game in Greenbay/New England.

Our offense was focused on two things: no turnovers, and drawing out the drive with lots of runs and short plays to give the defense rest.

As soon as the sun went down in the second half you could see the Bears players out perform the jaguars players, particularly our receiving core and defensive line. The offense opened up and we came out with a blowout victory, playing starters for only 3 quarters and avoiding injuries or turnovers.

I frankly thought this was one of the better gameplans by the Chicago coaching department.

As for our performance in previous weeks, particularly week 2 in Greenbay, I agree in part with the OP's blame on Tice, but there were specific players that underperformed that game.

The O-line of course was having serious trouble, Cutler made bad decisions, but he was put in a horrible position by the blocking, not just by the O-line, but particularly by the tightends and runningbacks (Davis and Bush made key blocking mistakes). And somehow, Matt Forte lost his matchup w/ the greenbay linebackers more often than he won them.

Forte repeatedly got jammed vs. the greenbay interior linebackers, and it took away Jay's main underneath option with the safeties covering deep. I think Tice deserves some blame for that game, because looking at the plays you're just begging for Tice to sprint forte out into the flat or motion him out of the box so that the Packers can't get away with jamming a premier RB with a slow linebacker.

But I'm seeing improvement IMO from Tice's playcalling and defintiely from the O-line that he's putting trust into. Things are just going better and better. Come January, my biggest concern is going to be how this offense responds to defenses that give it serious problems, will Cutler be patient enough and spectacular enough to win the next time a defense seems to have them figured out? Will Tice adjust?

For now i'm not so concerned about who they've played, because for the most part the defenses we've played, particularly Greenbay in week 2 and Jacksonville in the first half of this week have played much better than their rankings suggest.

**The Benjamin** · 10-08-2012, 04:27 PM

welcome aboard!

**BearStuff** · 10-08-2012, 04:35 PM

Oh, no arguments. We are all doing what messageboards are made for. The strength of schedule thing is a big bone of contention for me. Those that have been on the board for years will tell you that at least once a year someone steps into my trap and I do my best to see that they don't escape, lol.

I think everyone has good points to consider, but the bottom line to the whole premise of the thread is in another thread.....slow starts offensively. I'm just gonna remain hopeful that the bye week will allow for the right sort of self reflection and coaching to solve that issue. Lovie & his various staffs have a good history of doing just that. Then we need healthy players and the playoffs should be in the forecast.

**willynowei** · 10-08-2012, 04:40 PM

thanks for welcoming me on board, glad to be here!

**XxMidwayMonstersxX** · 10-08-2012, 05:08 PM

Welcome aboard and ditto for my story. Came here recently after being a long time poster and contributer to the CBMB....RIP CBMB.

Please note that this is its own post and in no way is comparable to the thread about slow offensive starts. This is a post about the bears season so far, see OP. Thus far we have discussed Tice, Offense, and other things.

Great game analysis and great post in general. Disagree with you about Tice calling a great game and the heat. Lived in florida for 6 years... its hotter in Illinois during the summer and I thought Tice shit the bed, agian. Sometimes you have to use strategy, I feel like he asks his players to just go out there and "man up" just go "beat 'em."

Man if it were that easy everyone would do it.

Thread: We Haven't Played Anybody!

LinkBack

Thread Tools

Posting Permissions