Here's a Familiar Story................

Another familiar story; ecspecially in Souls area; apparently Tebow is still struggling w/that whole throwing thing. Guess he doesn't think it's imporant for being a starting qb in the nfl.

Sanchez and Hill Hook Up in Jets OTAs While Holmes Is Away and Tebow Struggles | Bleacher Report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by little bear

Yes, #1 thanks to Aaron Rodgers. Just imagine how Jennings' and Driver's numbers would look like without Rodgers throwing the ball. GB's receiving corp isn't that good. You guys are just lucky to have one of the best quarterbacks in the league.

---

The same can be said for any WR in the league. No receiver looks amazing with a shitty QB throwing them the ball. Our receivers are one of the best in the NFL statistically based on production per catch. Jordy Nelson was actually #1 in the NFL last season based on value per play and he isn't even our #1 option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BearStuff

The 70's and 80's???? Long time ago, yes, but I can still remember.

---

Born in 85 thus I can't remember a time when we didn't have one. :lol-027:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

Another familiar story; ecspecially in Souls area; apparently Tebow is still struggling w/that whole throwing thing. Guess he doesn't think it's imporant for being a starting qb in the nfl.

Sanchez and Hill Hook Up in Jets OTAs While Holmes Is Away and Tebow Struggles | Bleacher Report

---

Yet people will still love him and proclaim him the greatest ever despite being horrible.

But he's a "winner" and a decent human being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Riczaj01

But he's a "winner" and a decent human being.

---

His defense and run game are what win games for him. The rest is just blind luck. It's painfully obvious he has no idea how to read defenses when you watch him play. Sure he can bomb one to a receiver that's so wide open even I could probably hit him. He's just nowhere near good enough to deserve the amount of hype he receives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evernight

I'm sorry sir, but you lost me at "and Hester". :lol-032::lol-032::lol-032::lol-032::lol-032:

Every year it's "Hester will be good this year" and it ends with "yeah..........he did alright......he.........caught a pass......."

A tad early to label Marshall the end all be all when he has yet to take a snap in a game for the Bears, don't you think? You do have a long history of having OCs that have no fucking clue what they're doing after all. :smile: Granted he can't possibly be worse than Hester, but still.

---

He's an All Pro top 5 WR and he's been productive everywhere he's been even with QB's of far less talent than Cutler. I watched what they could do when they played in Denver and neither was anywhere near as good then as they have become since then. We also brought in Jeremy Bates who was Cutler's QB coach and OC in Denver. He's knows Cutler's game very well and he'll most likely do at least some of the play calling. Tice's offenses in Minny weren't too bad. You should remember that era.

Hester is effective when used sparingly and he's not effective when you try to make an everyday WR out of him which is what they've been trying to do ever since he got here. So instead of playing 60 snaps a game you play him 20 with plays designed to isolate him with guys who'll struggle with coverage. He'll burn teams with his speed if he's not well covered. You gotta decide who that Safety is gonna cover over the top when you have the others out there as well. Those guys can catch.

I'll be looking forward to the Packer games this year when we show up and they say ooops, they've got an offense now too. I'm not at all concerned about what the guys we have can do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Evernight

Sorry, one player isn't going to put Chicago on par with Green Bay's offense, especially with that offensive line. The only position you have that's superior is halfback, and that's not worth a whole lot in this day and age.

---

But it isn't just one player. It's several. And I wouldn't be bragging on that line of yours too much either. That's a weak spot for the Packers as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

He's an All Pro top 5 WR and he's been productive everywhere he's been even with QB's of far less talent than Cutler. I watched what they could do when they played in Denver and neither was anywhere near as good then as they have become since then. We also brought in Jeremy Bates who was Cutler's QB coach and OC in Denver. He's knows Cutler's game very well and he'll most likely do at least some of the play calling. Tice's offenses in Minny weren't too bad. You should remember that era.

Hester is effective when used sparingly and he's not effective when you try to make an everyday WR out of him which is what they've been trying to do ever since he got here. So instead of playing 60 snaps a game you play him 20 with plays designed to isolate him with guys who'll struggle with coverage. He'll burn teams with his speed if he's not well covered. You gotta decide who that Safety is gonna cover over the top when you have the others out there as well. Those guys can catch.

I'll be looking forward to the Packer games this year when we show up and they say ooops, they've got an offense now too. I'm not at all concerned about what the guys we have can do.

---

I have no concern about our offense either. It's the defense I'm concerned about. We shouldn't HAVE to put up 30+ points a game to win (though we seldom have problems doing so) if the defense is doing their job. If our heavy investment in defensive draft picks pans out, the only direction this defense can go is up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by soulman

But it isn't just one player. It's several. And I wouldn't be bragging on that line of yours too much either. That's a weak spot for the Packers as well.

---

2012 Offensive Line Rankings - Matchups - Rotoworld.com

Overall we aren't #1, but our line provides good pass protection. Our weak spot is our run game, which doesn't matter a whole lot because we don't run that often (or need to).