Bears/Panthers Game Thread

[Go Tribe]

Originally Posted by bigphesta

yeah, compare the 2001 bears to the 2005 and show your NFL knowlege. The 01 Team was the worse defense against the pass and could only stop the run and won 3 games that we probably shouldn't have on freakish last second plays.

Our "franchise" QB was Jim Miller and Shane Mathews heading into 02 and in 02, only ONE person who started in 01 played the entire season w/o injury and we set a record for most games missed by starters. Combine that with the WORSE coach in NFL history (Dick Jaron) and the worse offensive coordinator to boot, and 01 was a decent team with a fluke record. (should have been a wild card team).

The 06 Bears will be MUCH better next season. Grossman showed in the second half that he's worth the wait. He'll be JUST FINE next season with no injuries. THree RB's who can start anywhere else. A defense returning ALL the starters. Yeah, we'll be OK in 06.

The 2005 Bears beat two playoff teams - Tampa on a fluke missed FG that would have sent it to overtime and Carolina in a great defensive display. They lost to 4 playoff teams.

The 2001 Bears were first in the league in scoring defense - the 2005 Bears did the same. Who cares if they were near the bottom in pass defense if they never gave up pts.

The 2001 Bears featured an oft injured QB from the U of Florida - So did the 2005 Bears

The 2001 Bears lost at home after a first round bye - ditto the 2005 Bears

The 2001 Bears were #11 in scoring offense - the 2005 Bears 26th

The 2002 Bears played a first place schedule - The 2006 Bears will do the same. (2006 Bears play @ NYG, @ NE, host Seattle, host Tampa - the rest of their schedule is average to easy).

Who's to say the injuries that plagued the 2002 Bears won't happen in 2006?

I live in Chicago - the atmosphere surrounding the early exit in 2001 is EXACTLY the same as it is today - we have a great defense, this is a stepping stone to build on, blah blah blah

I kinda like the fact that my NFL knowledge is being ridiculed by someone that went 0-4 in picking the games this weekend. My two year old went 2-2 and he was picking by which helmet he liked best.

[jaxmagicman]

Originally Posted by Go Tribe

My two year old went 2-2 and he was picking by which helmet he liked best.

That is funny, my four-year old went 4-0 because he did the same thing.

His words were something like:

The Seahawks have a super hero helmet. (Don't ask me).
Wow I want the horse team to win. (Broncos)
The black helmet is cooler than the white one. (How he picked the Steelers)
Oh cool a Kitty Cat!

[JDOldSchool]

Originally Posted by cooper_gd

Maybe I'm wrong - but that sounds a whole lot like sour apples from a guy who didn't have the best weekend in regard to the teams he was rooting for.

I wanted Seattle and Pittsburgh to win. I didn't see much of the Seattle game so I can't comment on officials there, but there was definitely some bad officiating in the Pit/Indy game (specifically the INT).

Sour apples? Damn right it is. If my team or any other team is going to lose I'd prefer it not be because of a handful of obviously bad calls. What really annoys me is refs screwing up replay. Missing a call here and there is one thing, but when they botch replay as often as they do there's just no excuse.

Did Chicago or New England play perfect games? Far from it. They still deserved the wins. Especially New England. I'm not quite as upset about the Bears loss because I'm still trying to figure out why Rex Grossman threw the ball 41 times and why some guy named Thompson was playing man on Steve Smith.

[AnotherAlias]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

...why some guy named Thompson was playing man on Steve Smith.

Doh! I'm wondering why Nathan Vasher wasn't on him, doubling with Tillman.

After Tillman fell down on the first play, Coach Smith should have realized that doubling him would have been safer than leaving Peanut one-on-one.

The Bears play the Cover 2 and on one of the plays Tillman got burned on, they were in a Cover 3.

The problem with the Bears defense is that the secondary doesn't switch sides according to where the opposing talent lines up. In other words, if Steve Smith lines up on the strong side, Tillman's going to go man-to-man, no matter what. If Smith lines up on the weak side, then someone else has the responsibility.

I hope they've learned something from this.

[andymac]

Originally Posted by AnotherAlias

Doh! I'm wondering why Nathan Vasher wasn't on him, doubling with Tillman.

After Tillman fell down on the first play, Coach Smith should have realized that doubling him would have been safer than leaving Peanut one-on-one.

The Bears play the Cover 2 and on one of the plays Tillman got burned on, they were in a Cover 3.

The problem with the Bears defense is that the secondary doesn't switch sides according to where the opposing talent lines up. In other words, if Steve Smith lines up on the strong side, Tillman's going to go man-to-man, no matter what. If Smith lines up on the weak side, then someone else has the responsibility.

I hope they've learned something from this.

They were in cover 3 because they were blitzing. If the blitz gets there, there's no way Delhomme has time to get the ball to Smith on either play. Carolina's offensive line played a hell of a game and deserves some big time credit.

[matskralc]

Originally Posted by JDOldSchool

Did Chicago or New England play perfect games? Far from it. They still deserved the wins. Especially New England.

Can you explain to me how a team with a -4 turnover differential deserved to win? How a team that drives to the red zone then throws a pick returned 100 yards deserves to win? How a team that loses a fumble on a kickoff after a hit by the punter deserves to win?