How can you win with dink & dunk passes???

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnor...field-reticence

I don't know, ask all the QBs who have done it.

A football team wins by scoring points and stopping the other team from scoring points. Nothing in that equation requires throwing 40 yard passes.

It's called ball control and winning the time of possesion battle.  High percentage throws mixed in with a ground and pound running game.  Usually equals low scoring games with a stong defensive battle.  We've won many games that way.  If we need to do it again until Cutler is back I'm all for it.  Like the late Al Davis said...."Just win baby."   Don't care how it gets done....just as long as it does.

If that's the case why isn't Campbell the starting QB on a team (or Orton for that matter)?  Dink and dunk only works when you can score consistently and we've seen in Chicago that whole approach gets us nowhere.  Certainly not against the 49ers.  They will stack the box, kill the run game and dare him to throw it long.

You have to be able to stretch the field and IMO Campbell won't be able to consistently.  I hope to all that's good Cutler can play this week... This is a big time game and needs a QB that can make big time throws.

DaKnuckles wrote: If that's the case why isn't Campbell the starting QB on a team (or Orton for that matter)?  Dink and dunk only works when you can score consistently and we've seen in Chicago that whole approach gets us nowhere.  Certainly not against the 49ers.  They will stack the box, kill the run game and dare him to throw it long.

You have to be able to stretch the field and IMO Campbell won't be able to consistently.  I hope to all that's good Cutler can play this week... This is a big time game and needs a QB that can make big time throws.

I agree with everything you said...but if Cutler can't go we might have to dink and dunk a little bit more.  Cambell did have a nice deep pass to Marhsall last week and if SF stacks the box there will be some chances to go down field.  We just have to make them count.

I would start McCown over Campell.  That's how much faith I have in Campbell.  At least McCown isn't afraid to throw a pass.

DaKnuckles wrote: I would start McCown over Campell.  That's how much faith I have in Campbell.  At least McCown isn't afraid to throw a pass.

I agree. I thought McCown would have made a better back-up than Campbell. Cutler's style and McCown's style are similar, not much a of a change for the rest of the team.

because downfield throws made us such a successful passing offense....

Anytime23 wrote: because downfield throws made us such a successful passing offense....

3rd and 4th quarter this year they've been good but 1-2 no.  Just with Cutler in there and Marshall teams have to respect the long pass.

DaKnuckles wrote:

Anytime23 wrote: because downfield throws made us such a successful passing offense....

3rd and 4th quarter this year they've been good but 1-2 no.  Just with Cutler in there and Marshall teams have to respect the long pass.

The thing is, theyve also been leading when theyve been their most successful, outside of CAR. I want to see this offense be productive when in a tight game.

Now obviously, id rather have Cutler over Cambell but im just saying, our passing offense has been **** for the most part. Earlier in the game last week they were taking too many big shots when i wish they would have tried to go short to intermediate. Then late in the game when we needed to move the ball, 1 yard dump off to Forte...

Anytime23 wrote:

DaKnuckles wrote:

Anytime23 wrote: because downfield throws made us such a successful passing offense....

3rd and 4th quarter this year they've been good but 1-2 no.  Just with Cutler in there and Marshall teams have to respect the long pass.

The thing is, theyve also been leading when theyve been their most successful, outside of CAR. I want to see this offense be productive when in a tight game.

Now obviously, id rather have Cutler over Cambell but im just saying, our passing offense has been **** for the most part. Earlier in the game last week they were taking too many big shots when i wish they would have tried to go short to intermediate. Then late in the game when we needed to move the ball, 1 yard dump off to Forte...

True... It seems like they've been game planning backwards lol.  That last drive Sunday just pissed me off and watching our O start slow every game this year has been a bummer to.  Way too many 3 and outs early.

Anytime23 wrote: because downfield throws made us such a successful passing offense....

HECK YEAH!!!  28th out of 32 teams in passing this season.  For the Bears, that's an upgrade!  LOL. 

I don't give a damn about styles or any of that nonsense, right now.  Just win the damn game, because Green Bay is hot right now and we can't afford to give those sons of bitches anymore ground if we want to win the NFC North.

I thought Campbell played well last week.  Did he need to push the ball downfield a bit more?  Absolutely.  Did our "franchise" RB need to do a better job of getting past the line of scrimmage?  HELL YEAH!  Did our starting TE need to catch the damn ball?  YES!  Did our stud WR need to hold onto that pass in the endzone?  Sh*t yes!  Did our offense need to figure out that you can't turn the damn ball over 3 times in a quarter and 4 times in a half?  DEFINATELY!!  Would it have been nice to see our offense NOT sputter out of the gate and look so out of sync, like they have done consistently over the last, oh, 7 or 8 year now?  DAMN SKIPPY!!!   

Point being, Campbell's dink and dunk type of play last week, was the least of my worries.  Our schedule doesn't really get much easier the rest of the way, with games against the 49ers, Vikings (x2), Seahawks, Packers, Cardinals and Lions to close out the season (4 on the road and 3 at home).  And our offense STILL continues to disappoint.  Aside from Marshall, I've been pretty underwhelmed with the rest of the unit.

marlon48 wrote: How can you win with dink & dunk passes???

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnor...field-reticence

Those shorter throws might actually move some chains if your golden boy could start gaining more than 1-2 yards on first and second downs.

skepticalbear wrote:

marlon48 wrote: How can you win with dink & dunk passes???

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnor...field-reticence

Those shorter throws might actually move some chains if your golden boy could start gaining more than 1-2 yards on first and second downs.

Too bad you don't have a pause button fella, my golden boy might gain more than 2 yards if the QB had a passer rating north of 20!!

marlon48 wrote: Too bad you don't have a pause button fella, my golden boy might gain more than 2 yards if the QB had a passer rating north of 20!!

Why do you always call people "fella"?  Just curious. 

Please let me know when it's okay for me to hold him accountable for mediocrity.  I wouldn't want to criticize him without your okay.

skepticalbear wrote:

marlon48 wrote: Too bad you don't have a pause button fella, my golden boy might gain more than 2 yards if the QB had a passer rating north of 20!!

Why do you always call people "fella"?  Just curious. 

Please let me know when it's okay for me to hold him accountable for mediocrity.  I wouldn't want to criticize him without your okay.

Equally as curious, do you take your Forte whine into work or leave it in the car??

marlon48 wrote: Equally as curious, do you take your Forte whine into work or leave it in the car??

This statement is indicative of your bias on this topic.  You equate legitimate criticisms someone has about a player as "Forte whine."  Is it normal for you to take other people's statements and reduce (distort) them to the least common denominator? 

I don't whine about him all the time, far from it.  I just feel that he deserves some criticism for underperforming.  Hope that's okay with you.  If it isn't, then too f cking bad. 

But your first response in the other thread was to say everyone's criticisms were a joke. Not exactly a great way to start a healthy, legitimate debate with others on a topic.

And in your other reply you said I think he's "washed up", which I never said and don't believe.  He's a good player, just not as good as he could be right now IMO.  He's getting a lot of money and is just as open to criticism as any other player.

skepticalbear wrote:

marlon48 wrote: Equally as curious, do you take your Forte whine into work or leave it in the car??

This statement is indicative of your bias on this topic.  You equate legitimate criticisms someone has about a player as "Forte whine."  Is it normal for you to take other people's statements and reduce (distort) them to the least common denominator? 

I don't whine about him all the time, far from it.  I just feel that he deserves some criticism for underperforming.  Hope that's okay with you.  If it isn't, then too f cking bad. 

But your first response in the other thread was to say everyone's criticisms were a joke. Not exactly a great way to start a healthy, legitimate debate with others on a topic.

And in your other reply you said I think he's "washed up", which I never said and don't believe.  He's a good player, just not as good as he could be right now IMO.  He's getting a lot of money and is just as open to criticism as any other player.

First of all, why are you bringing this same sh&t over to another thread when you never answered on the other??  Coop's comments, I get, I don't agree with them 100% but I get them, you however act like Forte's 2 yard average in ONE game was the reason they lost when the obvious escapes you, teams game plan to stop Forte, they don't do that for anyone else!!  That coupled with the team turned the ball over 4 times, Marshall had his hands on an end zone pass and the team didn't score a TD.  You can be critical of whomever you want, hell blame Lovie because they didn't shut the Texans out, but at least make your criticism plausible;  again where were the holes that Forte wasn't hitting??

Teams don't game plan for Brandon Marshall?????.....I think you should revisit that argument.

gcoop33 wrote: Teams don't game plan for Brandon Marshall?????.....I think you should revisit that argument.

No, that's why he was so wide open against the Texans; teams like the Packers chose to double him and that was it, but every team that plays the Bears knows its first priority is to stop the run (Forte) and make the Bears beat them thru the air.