Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by Nakoma1, Aug 27, 2013.
I can't take the anxiety anymore ,....... GO Bears ! !
I am ashamed to admit it, but tonight (right now) I'm watching the pre-season game for the 3rd time because I can't believe what I saw in that game. Great blocking.
I'm still in shock over the great blocking in that game.
It's like I can't bring myself to REALLY believe a Bears team can block this well. Man, even the WR's were throwing wicked blocks (even B.Marsh was sacrificing his body to block guys). We've been raving about the rookie's on the right side, and they have been great, but how about Bushrod & Slauson? They looked like animals out there. Even Garza looked serviceable.
I'm pumped. Can't wait to watch this season unfold.
RUB it in have to to get a converter box for recording,.... went antenna back in June
I'm LIT ! !
I have a feeling were going to be seeing an offense where EVERYONe gets in the game and if I am not mistaken (correct me If I am wrong) THAT is the premise of the WCO ,.. SPread the ball around
Now the D They already needs a new cage,.... their current cage isn't Bearish enough any longer
This why Forte is so excited. He even said he hasn't seen the line push like this before they are actually pushing the line back which is a hallelujah moment for the Bears.
Whoa there, nelly.
Dont forget that part.
True, here it comes BUT when have the Bears looked this methodical when disposing of a bad team like this offensively wise?
Dont get me wrong, looking good is looking good. And you cant be good if you look bad to begin with.
Still, i caution to temper that enthusiasm with a reminder that it was the gawd-awful raiders that we tore up. In pre-season. They still have to prove themselves against stiffer competition when the season kicks off.
I hear you. But how many times did we see the Bears play against lousy teams and we didn't look very strong offensively this looks different.
We can't control who we played in preseason at this point. To be honest, I'm glad we had some warm ups for a new coach/scheme.
Personally, I think the switch to zone blocking is the exciting part. The improved players is a "jury still out" thing, but I'm encouraged there too. Zone blocking alone gets us an extra 3rd down conversion or two per game, and in my book, a goal line TD or two also. How many f'n FG's have we kicked from inside the opponents 10 yard line? How many games did we lose by less than 10 points? A couple more 3rd down conversions/game means the defense is on the field for 5 less minutes. An extra red zone TD or two means we lose a couple less games. Scheme alone could be the difference maker.
Zone blocking = reason for excitement alone.
ugh that stadium looks like shit for what they paid for it....
no we cannot control who we played, but we cannot control who we'll play in the reg season either, and it's MUCH tougher competition; that's why I'm worried.
I don't understand why everyone knocks that stadium. Keeping in mind (if you're not from Chicago) that the way this turned out had as much, or more to do with Mayor Daley than the Bears, I think it looks pretty cool (and I am no Daley fan). I know everyone always says "duhr...it looks like a space ship landed in Soldier Field." To that I can only say, "No, no it does not, it doesn't look anything like that". What it looks like is a large professional sports stadium using ultra modern architecture with historical elements surrounding it that would have been criminal to remove. Well, that's what I see anyway, knowing full well that Chicago is the type of city that will bitch about the old stadium and it's terrible seating and then bitch about the new building no matter what it looks like. It's just the way it is.
no 4da, it looks like a toiletbowl, or a space ship. The two designs do not blend well at all, and blame whoever you want, the reality is the team should have scrapped SF and built new, they could have done it cheaper and better from ground up; and don't give me the "they've always playd their it's history bs" they've been in SF since the 70's. There is no "history" there other then 1 sb season.
Agree to disagree my friend. I am well aware of the Bears history as well as the history behind Soldier Field and I could care less where the Bears played. In my opinion the sanctity of the history behind Soldier Field has little or nothing to do with the Bears. To suggest that it should have been scrapped all together just for another new stadium is simply wrong in my opinion. If they had not done what they did, then they should have gone to Schaumburg, and in fact, I would have applauded that over what they did, but I also understand economics play a role in what we do. I just simply don't think it looks nearly as bad as a lot of people say and while some genuinely feel (obviously like yourself) that it's a poor design, others simply bitch for the sake of bitching.
It's something that some fans hate and others are OK with. I really don't care one way or the other about the "addition" part. I still love the stadium. There is a rich history of Bears games in that stadium for me. Ric's right, the Bears played at Wrigley prior to the 70's. But for me personally, there has been so many wonderful games played at Soldier Field.
I always get through the gates there as soon as humanly possible, just so I can sit in that stadium and soak in the GREAT memories I have of games I've watched there.
I love the place.
But I realize half the people hate it. And that's cool. But I'm one of those who absolutely LOVES Soldier Field. Toilet bowl and all
Reminds me of convos about past Comiskey Park vs US Cellular Field. Love the new park but you can't compare it to being on the right field line at field level with Roberto Clemente out there as example. Same with Soldier Field/Wrigley where 1 day it'll be different, for some great & others a passing of memories.
One game at a time ,...grasshopper ,.. It's how Im going to be taking it
The Pack isn't going to sweep us ,.. is all I'm high on and believing and hoping in ,..... the the rest is gravy
Separate names with a comma.