-
01-18-2013, 07:23 PM #111
yeah. I completely agree. I QB changes how they play when they are always under seige. After a while they can't seem to go back. I think Grossman (and Carr also) were better QBs than they ended up being because they changed how they played. I don't know if playing scared is the right term, but maybe preoccupied with pressure is better. They make bad throws even when they have time because that internal timer has gotten a lot shorter.
I am hoping that he can get back to being a better QB with protection and trust in that protection.
Originally Posted by
yttocs 
AGREE, JC needed to do better , at the times he had protection. But, I think as a whole game, JC didn't/ couldn't believe he had time. IF he is give protection ( not MAX) and still fails, its time to cut the cord. I just BELIEVE if give protection most of the time, and had faith, he would be a much better QB. Lets all hope thats the case, Protection improved and JC's play.
-
High Fives / Like - 1 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
-
-
01-18-2013, 07:31 PM #112
On Grossman: before his three consecutive leg injuries, he was viewed as a scrambling qb.
-
01-18-2013, 07:50 PM #113
Henry:
I remember there was one game (can't remember who it was, but it was ONLY one game) where I thought he was the second coming of Joe Montana. He was hitting virtually every throw. Long ones, short ones, running.... everything you could want a QB to do. I thought we finally had our QB. Well, that didn't last long. He definitely had the ability, and at one point he had the potential. Then he started to go good Rex, bad Rex. We all wanted consistency and we finally got what we wanted. Consistency -- unfortunately, it was consistently bad. I just hope that Cutler gets back to what we all know he can do.
Originally Posted by
Henry Burris On Grossman: before his three consecutive leg injuries, he was viewed as a scrambling qb.
-
01-19-2013, 11:56 AM #114
Junior Member
Originally Posted by
yttocs AGREE, JC needed to do better , at the times he had protection. But, I think as a whole game, JC didn't/ couldn't believe he had time. IF he is give protection ( not MAX) and still fails, its time to cut the cord. I just BELIEVE if give protection most of the time, and had faith, he would be a much better QB. Lets all hope thats the case, Protection improved and JC's play.
Judging by some of the negative comments about the receiving corps, perhaps that's where the real protection issues lie. If the receivers can't read coverages well and don't make the little adjustments needed to get open, run poor routes, whatever, then the OL and the QB end up taking the heat. They start getting gun shy and the whole thing goes from bad to worse. Has there been lot of turnover in the receiving corps? Lack of chemistry between the QB and the receivers can make everyone look bad. That takes stability and time to improve.
Trestman had a lot of offensive success in Montreal, in no small part due to the stability in the receiving corps: Richardson - 5 yrs., London - 3 yrs., Green - 6 yrs., Deslauriers 6 yrs. etc., Bratton - 6 yrs plus the two retired stars, Watkins and Cahoon who were there forever. And Popp always made sure there was a promising rookie or two waiting in the wings.
-
01-19-2013, 10:01 PM #115
The more I read from our Canadian friends about Marc Trestman, the more optimistic I grow. I think we finally have the coach who will take us to that next level. He certainly seems to know greatness, and that's something we haven't known anything about since the days of Mike Ditka, or if you really want to get cute, George Halas.
My goal for the Chicago Bears under Marc Trestman is for the franchise to learn what it takes to be great. The Bears haven't been a consistent force in the NFL since span of years ranging from 1984-1991, when the Bears were in the playoffs in every season but 1989. More to the point, the Bears haven't seriously been a dominant franchise in the NFL since the Halas era, an era which saw the Bears win a then-record eight NFL Championships between 1921 and 1963. Since then, the Packers, the Bears' sworn rivals, have overcome the Bears in terms of the number of championships won, but not in total wins. Since George Halas retired in 1967, the Bears have been largely mediocre with the exception of that span of about eight years during the 1980s/early 1990s. This franchise for far too long has settled for less than excellent results. It once was on par with being as dominant as the New York Yankees in the NFL.
There is NO reason, with all the resources at Phil Emery's disposal and with George McCaskey's full support and cooperation, that this franchise can't get back to experiencing that level of excellence on an annual basis. If Trestman is as thorough with his practice schedules as our Canadian friends have said, and if he is as good of an adjudicator of talent as what we've read, I have no reason to believe the Bears can't become the second coming of the New England Patriots or San Francisco 49ers of the 1980s/early-to-mid 1990s.
From the very day GM Phil Emery spoke at his introductory press conference, his goal has been simple: to do whatever it takes for the Chicago Bears to win championships. The first he did was pick up a few pieces last season via trade or free agency he thought would be useful for the team, and he made draft pics based on both best player available as well as filling the positions we most needed. The result was the Bears finishing 10-6 in his first year. However, it wasn't good enough to make the playoffs, and this didn't satisfy Emery, so he fired our long-time head coach who knew little else about football other than accepting the status quo that has plagued this franchise for the past 50 years and replaced him with a man who, in North America's other major football league, achieved dominance in his league for a period of several years.
The city of Chicago has a rich sports history, but also has a history of mediocre sports teams mixed with teams who have experienced heartbreaking "near misses" in their quest for championship glory. The Cubs haven't been to the World Series since 1945 and haven't won one since 1908; the White Sox have only appeared in two World Series since 1917, and only one of those appearances resulted in winning a World Championship; the Bulls started out as an also-ran, but when Michael Jordan was drafted, the franchise's fortunes changed for the next 15 years and out of that, the team emerged with six NBA Championships in eight years -- they have since had intermittent periods of success; and the Blackhawks appeared in the NHL Stanley Cup Playoffs for 27 consecutive seasons, yet failed to win a single Cup title, and experienced a twelve year period of unprecedented futility under the direction of owner Bill Wirtz until he died and his took over. Now, the Blackhawks are among the very best franchises in the NHL, winning a Stanley Cup in 2010. And then there's the Bears, who have won nine NFL Championships, including Super Bowl XX. The Bears are the most popular team in the city of Chicago, and its history of blue-collar play -- a stifling, bone-crushing defense couple with an offense that runs right at opposing defenses -- are perhaps the very qualities with which most Chicagoans like to identify themselves and their world-class city. However, the roar that once permeated throughout the city in terms of championship glory and annual title contention has died down due to poor front office management, bad ownership, and just as mediocre the quality of coaches who have held the reins once controlled by such coaching legends as Halas and Ditka. Teams don't come to Chicago anymore fearing the Bears, and that was something I was always critical toward Lovie Smith about in recent years because he believed that football was a "gentleman's game," not a bloodsport. With Trestman, I think all of that is about to change. We have a GM and a head coach now who are aggressive and believe that nothing less than excellence is acceptable for the Chicago Bears.
And after all, isn't that what we all want?
-
01-20-2013, 08:45 AM #116
Junior Member
Originally Posted by
soulman The others chipped with some answers mada but I'll just add that Forte is a one cut/cut back style runner with a long stride and the need for some room in the open field to do his thing. He can make people miss and he has some power once he gets going but he's a terrible short yardage back because he runs too upright. Michael Bush is the guy who's here to take those carries but Bush is a lot better back than just that and I hope Trestman makes better use of both of them than Tice did.
In the CFL you dont usually see the second RB unless there's an injury but that's mostly because there's a lot fewer running plays called in the CFL because there's one less down. If Bush is as good as you say he is it would not surprise me if Trestman has a few plays in mind where he has both of them on the field where he uses Forte as a decoy and either hands off or gives a screen pass to Bush or vice versa if teams start recognizing that formation. If a player shows he has a useful skillset for the team Trestman will make a package of plays to use him well as a example we had a rookie on our team who was supposed to be a fullback but turned out to have very good hands for someone whos supposed to be a runner so Trestman started lining him up as a TE, a position you dont usually see in the cfl, and designed some plays that were meant to get him open and even tried lining him up at different receiver positions to confuse opposing defences so if he sees what you see in Bush then Id expect Trestman to design some plays to take advantage of him.
As for the discipline thing Trestman doesn't scratch guys for an entire game as a disciplinary measure but if he sees a player that looks like he is losing his temper on the field he will pull the guy off the field for a few plays and let him calm down and get his on straight before sending him back out there. Also it should be noted Emery, the player that was mentioned as having particular discipline problems, is the alouettes middle linebacker a position that you need to play on the edge to play well and despite that he was the runner up for the devensive player of the year award this year
-
01-20-2013, 09:36 AM #117
Junior Member
Last edited by billatter; 01-20-2013 at 09:47 AM.
-
01-20-2013, 12:45 PM #118
I just hope Trestman wont be like that..
-
01-20-2013, 03:03 PM #119 By Sean Jensen on January 20, 2013 10:43 AM
LINK to the article Brian Billick says Marc Trestman was a "brilliant choice" for Bears Former Super Bowl champion head coach Brian Billick has an illustrious offensive background, and he even was in play on the coaching carousel this offseason.
But the NFL Network analyst was glowing in his assessment of the Bears to hire Marc Trestman.
"Marc Trestman was a brilliant choice by the Chicago Bears," Billick said on NFL Network's "First on the Field." "Trestman has a certain intellect about him in the way that he coaches and the way he relates to players. That will resonate with Jay Cutler, and he will find a kindred spirit with Trestman."
Billick was the offensive coordinator of one of the great unit's in NFL history, the 1998 Minnesota Vikings. He then had a successful tenure as the Baltimore Ravens head coach, leading them to Super Bowl XXXV.
A colorful and outspoken analyst, Billick was interviewed for the Philadelphia Eagles vacancy, which eventually went to Oregon's Chip Kelly.
Last edited by JustAnotherBearsFan99; 01-20-2013 at 03:12 PM.
Trestman - Kromer - Tucker - DeCamillis
I'm looking forward to seeing these guys coach. Hope they're good.
-
01-20-2013, 03:22 PM #120 Adam Schefter @AdamSchefter Bears QB Jay Cutler played a small part in Chicago's HC interview process, meeting with Marc Trestman before he ultimately was hired.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
