Can this defense survive the bye week without giving up 400 yards?

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by Henry Burris, Oct 27, 2013.

?

Can they?

  1. Yes

    5 vote(s)
    25.0%
  2. No

    15 vote(s)
    75.0%
  1. Henry Burris

    Henry Burris Head Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    19,948
    Likes Received:
    2,507
    ßearz ßuckz:
    942ß
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    You are overlooking the difference an offensive turnover makes in a game.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  2. gramster10

    gramster10 Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2013
    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    Bigger question can they play football.All the hype of experts on difficulty is ok but passing,running,blocking,tackling, and pass coverage are a big part of the game. Cover 2 or whatever you label it breaks down to doing the job which is outplaying the person in front of you.Geez these are all college grads you aren't asked to do brain surgery just block and tackle you know that uniform you put on is a football outfit.Frankly if you win or lose just let the packers know that you are a football player and make the plays.Rodgers plays hard he isn't any greater than some but he makes the effort every play and that equals results like wins.He will be playing the big question here is will the Bears make the effort as a team as they look lost and in reality they aren't.
     
  3. MPbears68

    MPbears68 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,190
    Likes Received:
    1,658
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,251ß
    We all agree that the D was amazing on takeaways (and still is to a lesser extent). That's not the issue. Right now, it's just whitewashing problems to some extent and the only thing still holding this unit out of the basement.

    Can you imagine how terrible this defense would be statistically this year if it didn't have the takeaways it has had?
    Do you realize that we were (pre-bye, thru 7 games) only 16-total-points-allowed from falling behind Jacksonville for last place in the NFL?
    And that was with playing 4 of our first 7 games against teams whose offenses truly suck.
     
  4. Henry Burris

    Henry Burris Head Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    19,948
    Likes Received:
    2,507
    ßearz ßuckz:
    942ß

    Not playing the "what if" game. The fact is, our offense has turned the ball more than the defense could get a takeaway, themselves, and our offense hasn't been consistent with making anything of other team's turnovers.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. MPbears68

    MPbears68 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,190
    Likes Received:
    1,658
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,251ß
    This thread isn't about the offense. It is about the D and the astounding way it has collapsed so far and so fast. I know it is difficult to accept and tempting to make excuses for, so I hope Emery doesnt fall into that same trap.

    [Off topic: I fully agree that the offense, while much improved and improving over Martz/Tice-levels, is still a work in progress. It still disappears for whole quarters at a time, it still isn't controlling clock like it should, and it still has had too many ball security problems. All that is true.]
     
  6. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    24,428
    Likes Received:
    3,903
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,695ß
    MP, but see for Henry and I it's a interconnected thing, if the O would be better and more consistant, this colapse would be less of an issue.

    No one is defending the awfullness that is the Def, but how do you either fix it, or still win games w/it. This season is beyond help to fix, so now you have to hide it. And the only way to do that is to have the O be more stable.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. MPbears68

    MPbears68 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,190
    Likes Received:
    1,658
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,251ß
    Of course it's all inter-connected to some degree. Wouldn't the O's time of possession percentage look better if the damn D ever got off the field?

    The point is that when your O is clearly improved and in the top half of the league stats-wise, it's pretty hard to place too much blame there even if the unit definitely still has some work to do. When your D goes from top-5 to bottom-5 in a single year, gets scorched on big pass plays repeatedly, and makes pretty much every RB look like Jim Brown, ahhh....there's a major problem there.

    I too was pissed by Cutler's turnover-spasms and the offense's disappearing act during segments of the first 4-5 games. I didn't want to face what was (increasingly obvious) wrong with the D. But that last game in Washington, really tipped the balance for me. Completely pathetic. Even with our backup QB getting us the team the lead several times, the defense couldn't make one single stop against all second half against an opposing offense that should scare no one.
     
  8. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    24,428
    Likes Received:
    3,903
    ßearz ßuckz:
    3,695ß
    You could say the O ToP would look better if the D could get off the field; IF the O could actually stay on the field. Go back to my post w/all the drives over 50 yards. The bears in all but 3 games only could muster 3 drives a game over 50 yards. That's just not enough, and it's not for a lack of chances, many times they had more drives then the other team did.
     
  9. MPbears68

    MPbears68 Hall of Famer

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2011
    Messages:
    5,190
    Likes Received:
    1,658
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,251ß
    Ok, Ric, yeah the O has faltered at times, still has kinks to work out, and has been very inconsistent (sometimes kickass, sometimes 3 and out way too often). No kidding, all true.

    But when your D is so incompetent that it is surrendering 350+ yards regularly, getting run all over sometimes by nothing RBs, getting scorched left and right on big passing plays, can't get a flippin' sack to save their lives, and can barely hold anyone (even shit opposing O's) to under 25, then the lions share of your problems are on the defense.

    I know you hate Cutler--and he frustrates me too sometimes--but do really expect this offense to have to win shootouts every week? Are you going to blame McCown when we lose 38-13 to Green Bay in a week?

    In recent years, the the O in general sucked and especially the OL and receiving corps. It finally got attention under Emery, and that included player and coaching changes, and now that same mentality needs to be focused on the defense. No sacred cows and no excuses. Melton << Clay Matthews and GB's D has manned up despite injuries.

    This current Bears defensive unit blows big time and a (near total) clean sweep is needed. Geezus, outside of Briggs and Tillman, what is so sacrosanct here? Why did Tice get the axe (deservedly so) yet Tucker gets the injury excuse? As I recall, Tice and Martz both had injury issues and a lack of "horses" too to deal with. Clean house from the top down.
     
    #39 MPbears68, Oct 29, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2013
  10. Henry Burris

    Henry Burris Head Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    19,948
    Likes Received:
    2,507
    ßearz ßuckz:
    942ß
    Yeah, and a LOT of those early season meltdowns were after Jay and the offense was stuck on 3 and out mode. No matter how bad they are, for as many turnovers as they've created, the offense should have done a lot more with it, but they were too busy turning the ball over, themselves.
     

Share This Page