Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BSBEARS, Apr 8, 2014.
Someone agrees with you. Now all he wants to know is "Where are coooooooooookies?
And add, "We'll go with that". LOL
Maybe the Cubbies decided to reverse it this year and do their swoon in April or May and then come on strong in September. Try something a little different ya' know.
You're right,...the cookie wasn't broken...it was smashed to friggen pieces!!! Seriously? Not broken?
Who was his stud rushers in Jacksonville and Cleveland?
more like dropped into the milk and disintegrated
This is really where we disagree. I think some people (most people in fact) are saying that keeping the old scheme was a mistake. I think it was one of the only good decisions they made on defense. What would people have said had they taken a working top 5 defense and completely taken it apart and had these results. Emery and Trestman are not stupid. They knew the best bet was to take a working system with people that knew that system and run with it. The parts were all there. It never should have performed as poorly as it did.
All the ingredients were on the shelf. They were just mixed wrong. Again, just my opinion. I think we are confusing the end results with everything being blown up. I really don't think everything was blown up. In fact, other than the injuries, everything was still there. I can't argue that the results sucked.
But hell, we rehash this all the time. It's just different views and weighting the effects of injuries. I don't think the injuries should have affected the team to the extent that it did and still think there was more to it. We really want to do all this again? :-)
I'll probably get hung in effigy for saying it again but...............
No not stupid, but shortsighted yes. Taking Urlacher out of the defensive equation at a critical transition point without an adequate defensive QB to replace him was no different than taking Cutler away from the offense under the same circumstances. Luckily we had McCown well prepared to assume those QB duties but we lacked the same on defense. DWill didn't really know that system that well and Briggs never had to learn it because he always had Urlacher there to do it. So what we ended up with as far as defensive leadership on the field was the equivalent of Caleb Hanie when he was trying to run the offense under Martz and totally unprepared for it.
To a degree I'm relieving Tucker of at least some of the responsibility for this because I'm not sure just how much input he had into the final decisions about Urlacher but it did leave him without a competent field captain to run the defense and when the injuries mounted in combination with that it buried him. Urlacher's presence wouldn't have turned the Bears into Seattle or SF but we may have won a couple more games where we fell completely apart at the end because of total chaos and confusion. That may have gotten us to 10-6 and a spot in the playoffs but in the end the results wouldn't have changed. We'd still have been one and done.
I'm not stoking the fires of another debate here just stating some simple opinions based on logic and common sense. IMHO the difference would have been relatively small but there still would have been a difference worth enough to add a game or two to the win column. So to me this is another issue Tucker must deal with this year. He needs a good defensive field captain and I'm not sure Briggs is the right guy for he job. He's a great player but not exactly a student of the game. I think we need a smarter more intuitive guy calling signals.
Well Soul, I may be the only one on this board that agrees that letting Urlacher go when they did was a mistake. I am not saying that Urlacher would have been a stud, and hindsight is always 20/20, but it became apparent that the LB corps needed leadership out there. I never liked the way they parted ways there, and I do believe that was Emery. But to be fair, it is always tricky to let go of a popular guy like Urlacher, and although I did not like the way it went - or agree that they even should let him go -, it was still done better than I have seen. Finding a way to get rid of a popular player can really make the team take some pr hits. He avoided that almost completely.
But yeah, I agree. Urlacher was throwing a bitch tantrum and just starting to understand that his value was not what he thought. I think they could have worked it out if they gave him more time to get used to it, but I think the goal was to move on and they grabbed the opportunity to do so. Those guys looked lost out there. It can be debated if Urlacher would have helped. I think he would have also, but how do you prove it, and at this point, does it matter?
The other problem with the whole Lach thing was there was no understudy.....no 1 who was properly trained to step in. But if Lach didn't freak out we really didn't have a young guy to learn to ropes...yahoo for depth!!! At least Emery it seems is working that out too hopefully....this draft a stud MLB,DT,FS, and a future starter CB, and QB please....that is not too much to ask right?
It's all working itself out. Even if Urlacher would have been here last year, I seriously doubt if his performance would have merited yet another extension. And the silver lining is that if Urlacher would have returned and the D would have been ok, we would not have been prepared for what it was like without him in terms of people being able to get into position, etc. Better we figured it out last year so we can have it fixed for this year.
They weren't mixed wrong...most of them fell off the shelf and broke! And most of the main ingredients to the cookie were lost for good. Why is that so hard to get? 3 pro bowlers and multiple starters gone for a majority of the season!!! How well should that defense have performed?
I disagree. D-Will was playing well and the defense was playing well before he went down. I think the urlacher thing is over blown. The mistake was running that scheme because that scheme is dependent on a big mike linebacker who can disrupt the middle of the field so your safeties can play 1/3's not 1/2's of the field.
There is a difference between getting it and agreeing with it. Why can't YOU understand THAT? Or is anyone that doesn't see it your way just unable to keep up with your all knowing intellect?
No brother it's ancient history and needs to stay that way which is why I was hesitant to bring it up and only did in the context of one more reason why Tucker gets a semi-pass for last season. That whole issue was disturbing but even more so was continued misuse of McClellin, the failure of the younger players to progress, and the regression of some of the vets. It was complete cluster fuck and for that Tucker does bear quite a bit of the responsibility.
So we've made both coaching and personnel changes that should almost guarantee that it won't happen that way again but at the bottom of it is still his schemes and whether his players understand their roles in those well enough to carry them out. To me that was the core problem last year that led to so much confusion and chaos. That and the on field leadership and play calling which is the part of the iceberg the Conte hater's don't see in why they failed to keep Cobb covered on "that play".
It's Tucker's baby now and within limits his to do with or screw with as he sees fit. Let's hope the results are far different.
You're correct....there is quite the difference apparently. It's not like I'm out here spouting opinions...like "I think mel tucker mixed the ingredients wrong". I'm stating facts. You seem to just want to dismiss the FACT that this defense lost 3 pro bowlers and 5 starters to injury for the majority of the season and also had injuries to key depth players. That's not something you just sweep under the rug. You seem to think that despite losing all that talent they still should have been a top 10 defense...and that's just simply ridiculous. Again, what would this offense look like without Marshall, Jefferey, and Forte, along with injuries to Bushrod and Garza? You think they would have been very good?
All good things come to pass for a reason and so it was with this. I can more easily accept it now that it exposed just how fragile and dependent that defense had become on it's fearless leader and architect, his general, and the captain that led them into battle. So despite the bump in the road the transition is now complete. This is no longer Lovie's defense. All that remain are a few old war horses nearing the end of their careers as well and the replacements are beginning to arrive slowly but surely. Time waits for no one.
You can't educate someone who refuses to see it through any other filters than the ones he chooses to use brother. Virtually every comment he makes is just one more example of how little he understands the schemes themselves and how it all works. It was getting to be a complete waste of time to even engage in a debate with these types any longer so I just stick them on ignore and move on. Keeps the peace don't ya' know.
I've been divorced from my former; "don't confuse me with facts, mind is made up", for almost 20 years now and I have no desire to debate THAT type of personality again. Drunks and the terminally uninformed and stubborn won't change. Their entire personality is tied to their belief that they aren't wrong. They're the ones who would have failed to call for a life vest as the Titanic went down claiming that it was only a small leak and just bring them a bucket to bail water with instead.
Lovie and the "Angler" left the cupboard BARE.
That is all !
You are a piece of work buddy. You see only what you want to see to justify your position. Yes, losing three pro bowlers is a fact. At that point, it becomes opinion on how much that loss counts or should have counted. You act like it a fact that is the only reason they played badly. Where is that fact? No fact can and will support that. My opinion is that while there would be a drop off, it can not be quantified. I feel that the new people brought in should have been able to pick up part of the slack. Especially as the year went on. I feel (are you getting the idea yet that this is all how I feel), that did not happen. I therefore do not put all the blame on the loss of players. You do. I have no issue with that. Why can't you seem to accept that I just don't agree with you? You can't sleep unless you get everyone to agree with you or what? Just give it up.
See what I mean. They're like the Black Knight in that Monty Python sketch in the Holy Grail. "Come back coward it's only flesh wound". LOL