This article pretty much sums up the Giants game

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BradMustersGhost, Oct 11, 2013.

  1. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    13,530
    Likes Received:
    4,309
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,646ß
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    Okay, I was interpreting it the other way. I do see your point if you interpret it the other way. The general point I think, is that the Giants are a really bad team.
     
  2. Ski-Whiz

    Ski-Whiz
    Expand Collapse
    George Halas
    Staff Member SuperFan

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1996
    Messages:
    37,509
    Likes Received:
    966
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,427ß
    This season yes. But Historically to me means "years past".. Like the past ten years etc... Not this year.

    "Historically bad over the last six games" just doesn't sound right.

    I liked the article, I just thought he mis-spoke on some key notes.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    13,530
    Likes Received:
    4,309
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,646ß
    I think a lot of us fans (me included) underestimated the level of gutting the team underwent, going from Angelo (this really began with JA's ouster)/Lovie/relatively stable roster, playbooks, schemes, coaches -- to Emery/Trestman/new playbooks, schemes, players, coaching staff.

    I think fans (me included) thought this was the equivalent of painting a few rooms over a weekend in our house and it's just a matter of doing a bit of cleanup and enjoy the nice new looking walls by Monday morning. But in reality we ripped out the walls, floors, roof, appliances, carpet and other than some key pieces on on offense and defense we gutted the house. It's gonna be awhile before we can settle in to a basically new/rebuilt home. The end result will be real nice. But it's not a quick weekend project.
     
  4. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,227ß
    I agree. I also thought it was going to be a pretty serious redo of the O, but that the D was going to stay. Now I can see that Emery had planned a total gut job from the beginning. When you look back, the writing was on the wall. All those one year contracts were for a reason. We were all just adding 2 + 2 and getting 6. Emery was the only one that knew that the problem involved a hidden 2 in there somewhere.

    I really didn't think we needed a total gut job, but hey.... what do I know. They didn't ask me and it doesn't matter. It's already happening.
     
  5. MrDynamite32

    MrDynamite32
    Expand Collapse
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Messages:
    421
    Likes Received:
    194
    ßearz ßuckz:
    329ß
    I, too, didn't see this as a full-scale rebuild seeing as though most of the main pieces were still in place on both sides of the ball. Instead of ripping it up all at once, I see now that Emery was taking this one step at a time.
     
  6. a_miljan

    a_miljan
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,429
    Likes Received:
    489
    ßearz ßuckz:
    887ß
    everybody are saying that we look much better than last year, and i would have to disagree, our offense is better and our defense is worse, in pretty much same amount. maybe we do have a brighter future than a year ago but were def. not better at this moment.
    beware, if we 'lose' cutler next year this is all in vein, marsh would get angry, e bennet maybe gone... again, new offense, and our D is a total riddle, we dont have ANY good D players on contract next year, yet, none!
    so, i am a little bit worried, but like always hoping for the best
    (not to mention gould was also pissed at new staff)
     
  7. Ski-Whiz

    Ski-Whiz
    Expand Collapse
    George Halas
    Staff Member SuperFan

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 1996
    Messages:
    37,509
    Likes Received:
    966
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,427ß
    I think we all saw this when Emery got hired.

    We all saw the huge changed. I think we underestimated the impact.

    Lets face it our defense is aged! It's going to look more like strainer than a bowl. Trestman is moving toward an offensive minded team. I'm ok with that. Our problem is scoring points. It's been a problem since I've been a fan of the Bears.

    We are a pass team. Our defense has had a solid core since Urlacher got here. That is changing.

    I like the changes because I HATE 3 and outs!

    I like what Emery is thinking/doing. He's turning us into an NFL team that can compete. I think the Trestman/Emery combo is awesome for Chicago.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. jbunch14

    jbunch14
    Expand Collapse
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2013
    Messages:
    464
    Likes Received:
    197
    ßearz ßuckz:
    250ß
    I think the really great thing is we seem to have completely re-built the offense in a matter of two years. We now have so many good, young players both in the trenches as well at all of the skill positions, it is smile-inducing! The other great part of this is they will be able to expend maximum effort on the D overhaul this offseason. It will be sad to see some of our D stalwarts leave the team, but it is absolutely necessary in order to build a strong team for now and the future. My prediction is we see Pep, Melton, DJ Williams, and maybe even Jennings gone from this D next year. We re-sign Wootton, Wright, Bowman, Peanut, and Hayden and begin the rebuilding from there. I imagine a draft that lands us at least 5 D players in the first 6 rounds, as well as possibly a DT from FA, if they are young enough. We know Emery wants to build through the draft, and I suspect this year the D will see a total gut job, like JAFB alluded to. I hope the D keeps it together for a playoff run this year, as that will likely cement Jay as our long-term answer at QB, as well as the coaches and the schemes they employ. The team next year is going to look very different again from this team. Exciting stuff!!
     
  9. Bearsinhouston

    Bearsinhouston
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    10,909
    Likes Received:
    2,860
    ßearz ßuckz:
    5,227ß
    I agree. What is bothering me about all of this, however is do we have the expertise to get the good D players? I think the answer is a qualified yes. For the O, I think Emery and Trestman have worked together to pick the targeted players. A few of our Canadian members have given me the feeling that Trestman may not be as adept at picking D talent (please correct me if I am off track on that). So that may fall more to a group decision with Emery, Trestman and Tucker. I may be way off base on him, but as of right now, I don't have a warm fuzzy on Tucker. (if I wet myself in the middle of the night, that may change).

    So, on D, I think most of the choice might be made by Emery (I hope). If that is the case, I like what I have seen him do with the LBs, so we may be good. I really wish we have a real stud DC though.
     
  10. BradMustersGhost

    BradMustersGhost
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    321
    ßearz ßuckz:
    447ß
    I concur BIH. I understand that: 1-it is still early and 2-the DL is decimated. With those observations in mind, I don't think any of us were "enthralled" with the hiring of Tucker. Emery? Yes. Trestman? Yes. Kromer as OC/OL coach? Tucker....not so much. I really, really hope he establishes himself as a top-flight DC in this league, but right now I have my doubts. Personally, I don't think he is being NEARLY AGGRESSIVE enough right now, considering the fact that our pass rush is so pathetic. We are routinely giving up 80+ yard TD drives, so what would be the harm in blitzing a heck of a lot more? Send them as often as possible from every direction. IT's not like dropping 7 into coverage is doing us a damn bit of good as it is. If you can't generate a pass rush, you can drop 100 guys into coverage, and it won't make a damn bit a difference. Given enough time, even an average QB will be able to spot an open receiver and complete a pass down field, regardless of how many guys a defense has in coverage.
     

Share This Page