Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





View Poll Results: Who wins

Voters
6. You may not vote on this poll
  • Bears

    4 66.67%
  • Panthers

    2 33.33%
Page 3 of 32 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 475
  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    22,203
    Quote Originally Posted by debo View Post
    The point isn't that we would have gotten 0.27 more yards per play if we passed.

    The point is that you need to utilize your QB and RBs to open up the game for both facets of offense while playing to control TOP. We did none of those.
    I get that. But passing is not going to open up the run vs the 30th ranked run defense. How much more open can it be. And passing just probably isnt going to work vs the #5 pass d with a rok and 2 starting receivers hamdcuffing him who basically didnt make opening day rosters. rosters.

    I dont disagree with the idea of passing to open up the run. But u don't force passes in either. According to mitch they were playing schemes which check into runs. Its not as if the run game was not working. We were up for 90 % of the game and the defense was awsome so let them handle it.

    Once again im all for letting mitch pass more. But the logic behind a run heavy scheme vs a near worst in the league run defense and top 5 pass defense makes uber sensem. Im not sure how most of u can't understand that.

    And like pointed out with those stats. The pass game was not working. Mitch had 25 dropbacks. And only found targets 8 times. Nobody was creating seperation. Most of u just want to pass because "Mitch". U don't seem the want to consider the concept of matchup or our strengths vs theirs. U dont want to consider that our defense put up nearly more points than the ravens offense.

    U don't make things harder on yourself by forcing a rok QB in his 2nd start to air it out vs a top 5 pass defense with DII caliber Wrs who can't get open.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    22,203
    I think that the most telling stat from last night was this one

    Bears receivers snap %

    T Gentry - 76 (95%) -

    T McBride - 58 (72%)

    K Wright - 25 (31%)

    J Bellamy - 2 (2%) - 19

    Bears WRs receptions

    K Wright - 2



    I mean. It may just be me but didn't we all make a big deal about glennon not being able to create passes to WRs. Isn't it a little hypocritical.

    At the same time. Its a clear indication to me thst our starters (gentry and McBride) are not at all close to good enough to help mitch succede. I just keep listening to mitch in my head talk about getting through the first and 2nd read and them not being open. And that to me is because he just doesn't have the talent around him.

    We need to do something. Cause if not this is going to be a long and hard season for mitch.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    New Lenox
    Posts
    23,848
    Loggains and Fox have no idea what they're doing. That explains Wright's usage. I've been saying for weeks that he's a legitimate WR that needs the ball more. Didn't realize that he was on the field so little.

    Believe in Seth Rollins

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    383
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    I get that. But passing is not going to open up the run vs the 30th ranked run defense. How much more open can it be. And passing just probably isnt going to work vs the #5 pass d with a rok and 2 starting receivers hamdcuffing him who basically didnt make opening day rosters. rosters.

    I dont disagree with the idea of passing to open up the run. But u don't force passes in either. According to mitch they were playing schemes which check into runs. Its not as if the run game was not working. We were up for 90 % of the game and the defense was awsome so let them handle it.

    Once again im all for letting mitch pass more. But the logic behind a run heavy scheme vs a near worst in the league run defense and top 5 pass defense makes uber sensem. Im not sure how most of u can't understand that.

    And like pointed out with those stats. The pass game was not working. Mitch had 25 dropbacks. And only found targets 8 times. Nobody was creating seperation. Most of u just want to pass because "Mitch". U don't seem the want to consider the concept of matchup or our strengths vs theirs. U dont want to consider that our defense put up nearly more points than the ravens offense.

    U don't make things harder on yourself by forcing a rok QB in his 2nd start to air it out vs a top 5 pass defense with DII caliber Wrs who can't get open.
    You hated Loggains with Glennon.

    You like him with Mitch.


    Sorry....you just don't get football, man. Your hyperbolic ramblings ignore reality and substitute a view that misrepresents and skews the opinions of most of the football world.

    To Baltimore, you play run heavy. Nobody argues that. You don't run a 2:1 run: pass ratio in any situation because it hurts you all around. You will never get favorable pass matchup if you know with high cinfidence that the game plan is run, run, pass, punt. And you will not get good ground traction when you know to load 8, load 8, load 7 because WRs blow. (That's exaggerated - don't take that comment literally)
    2017 Chicago Bears Wide Receiver Corps


  5. #35
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Deep in the heart of Texas
    Posts
    480
    Quote Originally Posted by debo View Post
    You hated Loggains with Glennon.

    You like him with Mitch.


    Sorry....you just don't get football, man. Your hyperbolic ramblings ignore reality and substitute a view that misrepresents and skews the opinions of most of the football world.

    To Baltimore, you play run heavy. Nobody argues that. You don't run a 2:1 run: pass ratio in any situation because it hurts you all around. You will never get favorable pass matchup if you know with high cinfidence that the game plan is run, run, pass, punt. And you will not get good ground traction when you know to load 8, load 8, load 7 because WRs blow. (That's exaggerated - don't take that comment literally)
    Think this issue is at least a little exaggerated but some of the play calling had to be due to the fact that whitehair couldn't seem to get shotgun snaps out well enough and mitch needs to operate out of shotgun more at this point in his development. Poor shotgun snaps plus weak run D and strong pass D might be enough to consider over relying on the run. Wonder how much this would even be discussed if not for the special teams screw ups we had and if we won by two plus scores. That's the bigger issue needing attention in my mind. The fact that losing one special teams player can unravel coverage teams that badly. Not even to mention the penalties killing drives once again

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Northwest Arkansas
    Posts
    61,439
    https://twitter.com/ZachZaidman/stat...37971855847424

    Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

  7. #37
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    22,203
    Quote Originally Posted by debo View Post
    You hated Loggains with Glennon.

    You like him with Mitch.


    Sorry....you just don't get football, man. Your hyperbolic ramblings ignore reality and substitute a view that misrepresents and skews the opinions of most of the football world.

    To Baltimore, you play run heavy. Nobody argues that. You don't run a 2:1 run: pass ratio in any situation because it hurts you all around. You will never get favorable pass matchup if you know with high cinfidence that the game plan is run, run, pass, punt. And you will not get good ground traction when you know to load 8, load 8, load 7 because WRs blow. (That's exaggerated - don't take that comment literally)
    First off i could defend game manager Glennon. I cant defend game manager glennon who had 3 TO a game. Which was half his starts. When he managed games he was fine.

    2nd. I have beem very criticle of Loggains. But the run pass numbers vs a great pass d is not one. I hate how Loggains consistantly gets plays in late leaving us no time to make calls at the line and adjust. I have hated that they have made it so easy to defend Cohen by making him a 2 trick pony (its either outside run or pass to him ). I have my issies with with him. But this game plan is not one. Runnings havy vs a bad run defense is smart.

    As far as you final statement. The ratio does not matter. Take a listen to mitch post game and he states that they were giving them looks that check to runs. This idea that they packed 8 8 and 7 is just talk. We ran the ball because it was what the defense was lined up to allow consistently. Otherwise it would be checked into a pass.

    As far as your favorable pass I don't disagree. In most cases. But there are very few positive situations i can see where passing more against an elite pass d is a better game plan. Especially with 2 WRs who play nearly 75% of snaps who can't catch one ball. I mean. Tell me how many times u needed to see mitch go back scan the D and see nobody open B4 it would be clear we dont have the talent at receiver or an experienced enough QB to beat that team that way.

    I think what is also is hilarious is how we call it bad calling but we dominated them all game. And like Fox said even when He had Payton and the Broncos (who had a much better pass game and receivers than we currently have) they ended up going 49 and 20 run pass and won.

    When u coach a team u figure out how to exploit your opponent. If that's running heavy on a bad run defense or not passing on a seconday known for turnovers. I would call that good game planning. Not bad game awareness.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    22,203
    Quote Originally Posted by dikimbemutumbo View Post
    Think this issue is at least a little exaggerated but some of the play calling had to be due to the fact that whitehair couldn't seem to get shotgun snaps out well enough and mitch needs to operate out of shotgun more at this point in his development. Poor shotgun snaps plus weak run D and strong pass D might be enough to consider over relying on the run. Wonder how much this would even be discussed if not for the special teams screw ups we had and if we won by two plus scores. That's the bigger issue needing attention in my mind. The fact that losing one special teams player can unravel coverage teams that badly. Not even to mention the penalties killing drives once again
    I think most are more frustrated because they just want to see mitch and don't care at all if we win or loose at that cost. I think even without the special teams blunders we would have fans begging to Mitch to pass more than 16 times (or the more accurate 25 dropbacks) .despite the matchup nightmare for a rok QB on the road in his 2nd start with receivers that im not sure tom brady could accell with.

    As far as the special teams. I feel like u can half right off the forst one. (Cause it was an odd plau but needs to be adressed that u finish a play) and the 2nd we just didn't contain then runnee after the initial punt block attempt. Nobody contained the edge which i think has something to do with everyone was back blocking as well. Not to mention they missed a blatant block in the back on that return.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,117
    It was good to see the MNF game with two Offensive Game plans. I’d love to have the Colts play caller calling plays for Mitch. It was very creative play calling and giving defense multiple looks and formations with more options to throw to. Dowell’s game plans so boring.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    I mean. It may just be me but didn't we all make a big deal about glennon not being able to create passes to WRs. Isn't it a little hypocritical.

    At the same time. Its a clear indication to me thst our starters (gentry and McBride) are not at all close to good enough to help mitch succede. I just keep listening to mitch in my head talk about getting through the first and 2nd read and them not being open. And that to me is because he just doesn't have the talent around him.

    We need to do something. Cause if not this is going to be a long and hard season for mitch.
    Using the WR completion stat and comparing Glennon/Mitch is a little unfair.

    Glennon was 15/22 for 101 yds. He as even looking to push the ball downfield. He as simply dumping the ball off every time. He was even looking for his receivers. Glennon posted a 74.2 QB rating. CHI called 35 run plays (not including QB runs).

    Mitch was 8/16 for 113 yds. He was attempting to get the ball down the field, albeit unsuccessfully. Mitch posted a 94.0 QB rating. CHI also called 50 run plays (not including QB runs).

    Glennon was doing nothing but using the passing game as an extension of the run game. Cherry picking one stat (WR targets/completions) to try and prove a point is never a good idea. Trubisky was clearly trying to accomplish different things in the passing game than Glennon was. He attempted less passes & completed half the # of passes, but had more yards doing it.

    I do agree that this WR core is awful and could actually hurt Trubisky's development. If he learns to leave the pocket because he can't find open receivers, that would be a negative moving forward. I don't see any help coming, but I think it would be good if they got some. Maybe if CHI can beat CAR and MIN loses, CHI may think they could be competitive in the division with more help.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    I mean. It may just be me but didn't we all make a big deal about glennon not being able to create passes to WRs. Isn't it a little hypocritical.

    At the same time. Its a clear indication to me thst our starters (gentry and McBride) are not at all close to good enough to help mitch succede. I just keep listening to mitch in my head talk about getting through the first and 2nd read and them not being open. And that to me is because he just doesn't have the talent around him.

    We need to do something. Cause if not this is going to be a long and hard season for mitch.
    The real difference between Mitch and Glennon (at this point in Mitch's development) is Mitch's mobility. If you recall, there was a play this past weekend where Whitehair snapped the ball over Mitch's head; Mitch had to turn around, run to the ball, pick it up in the endzone, break a defender's tackle, bootleg right, and throw the ball away. If Glennon were in the same situation, I'm almost positive that play would have ended with a Ravens safety or TD.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coach100 View Post
    Using the WR completion stat and comparing Glennon/Mitch is a little unfair.

    Glennon was 15/22 for 101 yds. He as even looking to push the ball downfield. He as simply dumping the ball off every time. He was even looking for his receivers. Glennon posted a 74.2 QB rating. CHI called 35 run plays (not including QB runs).

    Mitch was 8/16 for 113 yds. He was attempting to get the ball down the field, albeit unsuccessfully. Mitch posted a 94.0 QB rating. CHI also called 50 run plays (not including QB runs).

    Glennon was doing nothing but using the passing game as an extension of the run game. Cherry picking one stat (WR targets/completions) to try and prove a point is never a good idea. Trubisky was clearly trying to accomplish different things in the passing game than Glennon was. He attempted less passes & completed half the # of passes, but had more yards doing it.
    I agree with your main point about cherry picking stats, but the pedant in me can't help but point out that Mitch's TD pass to Dion Sims was a successful downfield attempt (he hasn't had many passing attempts to begin with, but downfield attempts have been a significant percentage of his total attempted passes). And I'm not sure if you meant "was" or "wasn't" when discussing Glennon's passing proclivities, but he most certainly was not looking to pass downfield unless he absolutely had to and he heavily favored passing to RBs over WRs.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    In a house in a Coldesac in Lake in the Hills, Il
    Posts
    22,203
    Quote Originally Posted by Full-Size Ditka View Post
    The real difference between Mitch and Glennon (at this point in Mitch's development) is Mitch's mobility. If you recall, there was a play this past weekend where Whitehair snapped the ball over Mitch's head; Mitch had to turn around, run to the ball, pick it up in the endzone, break a defender's tackle, bootleg right, and throw the ball away. If Glennon were in the same situation, I'm almost positive that play would have ended with a Ravens safety or TD.
    I was not at all trying to question if mitch is better than glennon. I am just stating how despite mitch being clearly better, its also really clear that these receivers are holding him back. how many times last game did he have time. scramble out or even sit in the back of the pocket for about 5-6 seconds. and just end up chucking it away because nobody can create any type of separation

    im not saying anything to the point of Mitch vs Glennon. Glennon was a game manager who was not managing games because he was turning the ball over way to much and thusley he was benched deservedly. Mitch is clearly better, but i dont think its fair that we dont give him similar criticism that we do Glennon. despite the fact that i put most of that on these receivers who came out of teams practice squads.

    I really think we need to do something to get him help. even if it cost us draft picks, sending him through a whole season where he struggles to find anyone open is not good for development. and could really hurt his confidence if it causes him to struggle.


    ‎"If your going to be thinking anyway, you might as well think big"

    -Rem Koolhaas

  13. #43
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    7,943
    I don't think the kids confidence is going to get hurt. He knows, better than any of us do what he is working with. This year is about learning and getting experience. Having said that, absolutely get him any help you can, but not at the expense of the R1 or R2 pick next year, R3 is already gone so it's a 4 at best.
    1985 Bears
    2005 White Sox
    2010 Blackhawks
    1991 Bulls

    1981 Sting

  14. #44
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,706
    Quote Originally Posted by Kyben36 View Post
    I was not at all trying to question if mitch is better than glennon. I am just stating how despite mitch being clearly better, its also really clear that these receivers are holding him back. how many times last game did he have time. scramble out or even sit in the back of the pocket for about 5-6 seconds. and just end up chucking it away because nobody can create any type of separation

    im not saying anything to the point of Mitch vs Glennon. Glennon was a game manager who was not managing games because he was turning the ball over way to much and thusley he was benched deservedly. Mitch is clearly better, but i dont think its fair that we dont give him similar criticism that we do Glennon. despite the fact that i put most of that on these receivers who came out of teams practice squads.

    I really think we need to do something to get him help. even if it cost us draft picks, sending him through a whole season where he struggles to find anyone open is not good for development. and could really hurt his confidence if it causes him to struggle.
    I see. I was pointing out that my primary criticism of Glennon is that he is a statue in the pocket; Mitch clearly is not. That was the problem with Glennon that I belabored for the first four weeks of the season. I agree that both QBs have not had much help from WRs, which absolutely needs to be addressed via 2018 free agency and draft. I'd like to see a WR in the 2nd and at least one solid WR FA (like Landry) and a couple more sprinkled in for depth. Next year, our WRs could look like: Landry (or other FA), Cam, Wright, Draft Pick, depth. I would happily take that WR corps.

  15. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    4,453
    Quote Originally Posted by Full-Size Ditka View Post
    The real difference between Mitch and Glennon (at this point in Mitch's development) is Mitch's mobility. If you recall, there was a play this past weekend where Whitehair snapped the ball over Mitch's head; Mitch had to turn around, run to the ball, pick it up in the endzone, break a defender's tackle, bootleg right, and throw the ball away. If Glennon were in the same situation, I'm almost positive that play would have ended with a Ravens safety or TD.



    I agree with your main point about cherry picking stats, but the pedant in me can't help but point out that Mitch's TD pass to Dion Sims was a successful downfield attempt (he hasn't had many passing attempts to begin with, but downfield attempts have been a significant percentage of his total attempted passes). And I'm not sure if you meant "was" or "wasn't" when discussing Glennon's passing proclivities, but he most certainly was not looking to pass downfield unless he absolutely had to and he heavily favored passing to RBs over WRs.
    I meant Glennon *wasn't* trying to push the ball downfield at all.

    And I agree Trubisky had some success pushing the ball fownfield. Obviously he did - he had 130+ yds on 8 completions.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Page 3 of 32 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •