Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >

PS Game 3 Recap

Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 10:47 AM

PS Game 3 Recap 


I figured I would do something different and post my thoughts on last night's game now that I've had a chance to think about it a little bit.

Offense

Overall, I thought the offense looked pretty good, all things considered.  They moved the ball well through the air against a championship defense in a very hostile environment.  They failed to cash in on any of those drives due to some key drops and an egregious PI call on Marshall.  We didn't get to see much balance in their attack due to the lopsided early score courtesy of our defense.

Cutler looked pretty good overall.  Made some nice moves with his feet to keep plays alive.  Accuracy did look a little spotty, and he forced a few throws, including one that ended up being a red zone INT.  It seems like frustration got to him a bit as that was right after that horrid call by the officials that wiped out a TD.

As for the other two QBs, Palmer has really shown me nothing to be honest.  He looks tentative out there and generally pretty mediocre.  Clausen got the benefit of playing against inferior competition tonight, but taking that aside, it just seems like he's more poised, has more zip on his throws, and passes with a bit more commitment and conviction than Palmer.  Really can't see any way Palmer ends up with the backup job over Clausen.

We didn't get to see much of a running game thanks to being put in an early hole.  But some of what we did see leaves a little bit of concern.  It was once again annoying to see the Bears fail to pound the ball into the endzone in a goal to go situation, this time from the half yard line.   This pretty much confirms what we already know:  this offensive line pass blocks really well but is a bit weak in the run blocking department, with Garza being the weak link.  

I'm not too discouraged about that considering our offense seems to favor a potent passing attack, and protecting Cutler should be top priority.  However, it would be nice to see some improvement in the run blocking, and you absolutely need to be able to run the ball in goal line situations, no matter how potent your passing attack might be.

Receivers and TEs looked okay.  Some of our depth guys at WR made some good catches, and Santonio Holmes made a nice grab in his Bears debut.  Marshall and Jeffery didn't have their best (especially Jeffery), but I'll chalk that up to preseason.

Special Teams

I know the defense's poor performance will get a lot more air time among fans and commentators, but the special teams' continued struggles actually pisses me off more.  

Other than O'Donnell, not one aspect of this unit looked good last night.  Seattle got some big returns, one of which required O'Donnell to take the guy out.  Luckily for us we drafted a punter who also happens to be a great athlete.

Gould missed a FG from 47, but he'll be fine.

I understand the reasons for the team letting Hester walk (they wanted to allocate money elsewhere), but it seems to me they decided a bit too early that they were going to let him leave and never made a serious effort to bring him back or negotiate.  That's fine, but if you're going to let a possible HOF return man coming off a very good statistical season (one of the best of his career actually) go his separate ways, I would hope you'd have a good plan in place for who you want to replace him.  Nobody they've put back there looks remotely decent, though we haven't seen much of that Canadian speedster Williams yet.

Gap control and fundamentals look really bad.  This just looks like a poorly coached unit.  Which brings me to my next point:  why was Joe DeCamillis brought back?  I understand letting Mel Tucker return to give him a shot at coaching a healthy unit with some new pieces, but there's no such excuse for DeCamillis to use.  He took one of the best ST units in the league and turned it into a poor one.  It's early yet, and I'll wait to see some regular season games, but the ST unit looks very bad and really hasn't shown much improvement.

I was never enthused with the DeCamillis hire.  His units in Dallas were bad, and Cowboys fans were practically dancing in the streets when Dallas fired him.  He seems to have picked up right where left off after one year here in Chicago.

Defense


Despite the atrocious performance, I actually found a positive to take away from this game.  Our defensive line looks much better and seems to generate decent pressure, even without Allen on the field.  That is encouraging, as a decent pass rush can at least sometimes cover up for deficiencies elsewhere (of which we certainly have a few).

I think our CB group should be okay.  Fuller should be ready by regular season, and Jennings and Tillman are proven commodities.

Safety and linebacker continue to be positions of major concern.  Guys are losing matchups and getting fooled way too easily by misdirection plays (something we saw both in this game and against Philadelphia).  

Bostic is showing some improvement, but generally still looks lost, as does McClellin.  DJ Williams and Briggs will provide some veteran presence, but it will once again be a steep drop if either of those guys goes down.  

I know Briggs caught some flack last night for his stupid late hit and his failure to catch Wilson on his TD run.  The first one is certainly deserving of criticism, but missing the tackle on Wilson didn't bother me.  Not many guys are going to catch Russell Wilson in open space.  

Overall, this unit continues to have fundamental issues, especially at LB.  The Seahawks pounded away at those weaknesses last night with their offensive gameplan, and you can bet other good offenses will as well.

We should be patient, but if we get to four games into the regular season and this defense continues to look terrible, then the injury excuse won't be there for Tucker anymore, and the fire Tucker drumbeat will begin in earnest.  Like I said earlier, I understand why the Bears brought him back; they wanted to let him run the show with his own defense and see how he does with a healthier unit.  But there's no excuses this time around.

That said, while Tucker will be the focus of criticism over last night (and going forward should they continue to struggle), Emery should not be absolved either.  Fuller, in the brief time we've seen him, looks the part of a good NFL corner, and Ferguson and Sutton show some promise, but outside of that he hasn't been successful in drafting quality pieces for this defense.

All 3 LBs he's put his stamp on (Shea, Bostic, and Greene) honestly don't look very good at this point.  They have the potential to be serviceable players going forward, but I don't think anyone envisions any one of those 3 becoming a very good, impact type player at this point.


Anyways, just thought I'd rant a bit.

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. -Albert Einstein

Last edited 8/23/2014 10:52 AM by skepticalbear

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 11:01 AM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


Can't say I really disagree with any of this. I hope our young LBs step up (and soon) but they don't look too stellar at this point. The more I watch, the more I think our LBs might be a bigger concern than our Safetys this year. Even Conte looked halfway decent last night. I'd think our D should be a little better this year just because of the updated talent on the line but I seriously doubt we'll be top 15. Hope I'm wrong.

"If God had wanted man to play soccer, he wouldn't have given us arms." - Mike Ditka
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 11:18 AM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 



frontera wrote:

The more I watch, the more I think our LBs might be a bigger concern than our Safetys this year.


I'd argue that was the case last year too.
    -   -   -   -   -   -   -   Truth is treason in the empire of lies.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 11:26 AM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


+1.

I said that last season as well.

---------------------------------------------
--- njc41980 wrote:


frontera wrote:

The more I watch, the more I think our LBs might be a bigger concern than our Safetys this year.


I'd argue that was the case last year too.

---------------------------------------------
Reply | Quote
  • misky
  • All-Pro
  • 3064 posts this site

Posted: 8/23/2014 11:47 AM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


I for one am drafting R wilson as my QB in our draft tomorrow !!!!!!excited
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/23/2014 12:15 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


I disagree with the offensive assessment.

After the last few years if you would have asked me the 4 things that concerned me about the offense, it would have been:

1) Inability to generate a consistent 4-6 years per carry..  This is way different that 3 no gains/loss and then a 20 yard run. Consistent carries forces a defense to adjust.  A 1-off run does not.

2) Inability to punch the ball in from the 1.

3) Offensive penalties at really bad times

4) Red zone turnovers.

Bears get an F on all 4 concerns.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/23/2014 12:29 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


I agree, this offense didn't look like it's ready to carry the team with lackluster defense and ST's. 

rbmcgee wrote: I disagree with the offensive assessment.

After the last few years if you would have asked me the 4 things that concerned me about the offense, it would have been:

1) Inability to generate a consistent 4-6 years per carry..  This is way different that 3 no gains/loss and then a 20 yard run. Consistent carries forces a defense to adjust.  A 1-off run does not.

2) Inability to punch the ball in from the 1.

3) Offensive penalties at really bad times

4) Red zone turnovers.

Bears get an F on all 4 concerns.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 1:12 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


I think I am the only one that thinks Palmer is playing equally not slightly better than Clausen.  Also, I think Shea played decent yesterday. Easily the best of those 3.  I do agree though that none of them appear to be looking at all-pro careers.

 

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 1:20 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


Disagree.
rbmcgee wrote: I disagree with the offensive assessment.

After the last few years if you would have asked me the 4 things that concerned me about the offense, it would have been:

1) Inability to generate a consistent 4-6 years per carry..  This is way different that 3 no gains/loss and then a 20 yard run. Consistent carries forces a defense to adjust.  A 1-off run does not. Going to disagree here.  I am ok with with it as long as the 15+yard run happens multiple times a game. Which it does with Matt Forte. 

2) Inability to punch the ball in from the 1.   Agree on this one but last year we were much better at it than previous years.

3) Offensive penalties at really bad times  This wasn't as bad of problem the last few years as it had been.

4) Red zone turnovers. Again used to be an area of concern, but has gotten much better. We were one of the better NFL teams last year in the Red Zone.

Bears get an F on all 4 concerns.  While I may agree on getting an F for last nights effort. I am not going to read into it last night more than I should. Trestman and Cutler both during TC and this preseason have stated they are leaving a large portion out of the offense during preseason.  Understandably so. You want to have some surprises and catch things off guard. 

Basically I see it like this.  Last night was a reality check no doubt.  However, I think some people are probably taking last night way more serious than they should? Yes. In the end, no matter how you slice it, it was a preseason game.    The Bears just need to take a deep breath, work on some of the problem areas, and keep working on their game plan for week 1 of the NFL REGULAR season.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/23/2014 1:49 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 2:04 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 



marlon48 wrote: It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.

Actually it is a lot about what leave out. That actually has a drastic effect on execution.  For several reasons, and I am sure you know them.   That being said,  I stated the team as a whole probably deserved an F for last night.  So I definitely won't argue about not looking to good last night. In fact, I think saying the were "ok" would being to generous.

 

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 2:45 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 



rbmcgee wrote: I disagree with the offensive assessment.

After the last few years if you would have asked me the 4 things that concerned me about the offense, it would have been:

1) Inability to generate a consistent 4-6 years per carry..  This is way different that 3 no gains/loss and then a 20 yard run. Consistent carries forces a defense to adjust.  A 1-off run does not.

2) Inability to punch the ball in from the 1.

3) Offensive penalties at really bad times

4) Red zone turnovers.

Bears get an F on all 4 concerns.

I agree a bit on 1 and 2, but not 3 and 4.  The Bears were vastly improved last year in offensive penalties.  They had some penalties last night, but one was an absolutely terrible call by the official, a call that probably doesn't happen in the regular season, and remember what stadium they are playing in.  Bears aren't the first team to have problems with offensive penalties at Century Link and they certainly won't be the last.

Can't find a specific stat on red zone turnovers, though I admit my search was brief, but the Bears were 7th in red zone scoring percentage last season.

And keep in mind the defense they were playing.  This is the defense that absolutely humiliated the best offense in the NFL in the Super Bowl.  They really are that good; they were close to '85 Bears and '00 Ravens good last season

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. -Albert Einstein

Last edited 8/23/2014 2:48 PM by skepticalbear

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/23/2014 6:29 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


Neither team schemed for the other so what are you talking about??? 
outkasted2006 wrote:
marlon48 wrote: It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.

Actually it is a lot about what leave out. That actually has a drastic effect on execution.  For several reasons, and I am sure you know them.   That being said,  I stated the team as a whole probably deserved an F for last night.  So I definitely won't argue about not looking to good last night. In fact, I think saying the were "ok" would being to generous.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 8:52 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


Has nothing to do with Seattle or the Chicago schemed for the other. However, if you're doing an extremely dumbed down version of your offense(Which ISN'T what you practice) it's going to make executing a little harder.   Seattle executed their dumbed down offense and defense much better than the Bears did.  Already gave you that. I was simply saying(and still saying) it really didn't mean as much as people think.  Can't take as much from that game as you'd think.  If this game happens in the regular season. I am going to be calling out the entire team.  For now, it just was terrible execution of stripped down version of your team.  

That being said, I mostly worriedly about special teams and defensive 7...  That being said, I think Tillman and Jennings if they can stay healthy will hold their own.
marlon48 wrote: Neither team schemed for the other so what are you talking about??? 
outkasted2006 wrote:
marlon48 wrote: It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.

Actually it is a lot about what leave out. That actually has a drastic effect on execution.  For several reasons, and I am sure you know them.   That being said,  I stated the team as a whole probably deserved an F for last night.  So I definitely won't argue about not looking to good last night. In fact, I think saying the were "ok" would being to generous.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/23/2014 9:49 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


You're talking in circles, if the offense was ''dumbed down'', it should be easier to execute, not more difficult. Seattle's D wasn't showing anything exotic, they just whipped the Bears O.  And Seattle would definitely disagree about preseason games -- players said the tone for what they did last year was set in their preseason games including their trouncing of the Broncos -- that's why they had so much confidence going against them again in the SB. 

outkasted2006 wrote: Has nothing to do with Seattle or the Chicago schemed for the other. However, if you're doing an extremely dumbed down version of your offense(Which ISN'T what you practice) it's going to make executing a little harder.   Seattle executed their dumbed down offense and defense much better than the Bears did.  Already gave you that. I was simply saying(and still saying) it really didn't mean as much as people think.  Can't take as much from that game as you'd think.  If this game happens in the regular season. I am going to be calling out the entire team.  For now, it just was terrible execution of stripped down version of your team.   

That being said, I mostly worriedly about special teams and defensive 7...  That being said, I think Tillman and Jennings if they can stay healthy will hold their own.
marlon48 wrote: Neither team schemed for the other so what are you talking about??? 
outkasted2006 wrote:
marlon48 wrote: It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.

Actually it is a lot about what leave out. That actually has a drastic effect on execution.  For several reasons, and I am sure you know them.   That being said,  I stated the team as a whole probably deserved an F for last night.  So I definitely won't argue about not looking to good last night. In fact, I think saying the were "ok" would being to generous.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/23/2014 11:15 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


It will not be easier to execute against a really good defense like Seattle. You will not look good with a dumbed down offense against a really good defense. Sorry that's not talking in circles.
marlon48 wrote: You're talking in circles, if the offense was ''dumbed down'', it should be easier to execute, not more difficult. Seattle's D wasn't showing anything exotic, they just whipped the Bears O.  And Seattle would definitely disagree about preseason games -- players said the tone for what they did last year was set in their preseason games including their trouncing of the Broncos -- that's why they had so much confidence going against them again in the SB. 

outkasted2006 wrote: Has nothing to do with Seattle or the Chicago schemed for the other. However, if you're doing an extremely dumbed down version of your offense(Which ISN'T what you practice) it's going to make executing a little harder.   Seattle executed their dumbed down offense and defense much better than the Bears did.  Already gave you that. I was simply saying(and still saying) it really didn't mean as much as people think.  Can't take as much from that game as you'd think.  If this game happens in the regular season. I am going to be calling out the entire team.  For now, it just was terrible execution of stripped down version of your team.   

That being said, I mostly worriedly about special teams and defensive 7...  That being said, I think Tillman and Jennings if they can stay healthy will hold their own.
marlon48 wrote: Neither team schemed for the other so what are you talking about??? 
outkasted2006 wrote:
marlon48 wrote: It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.

Actually it is a lot about what leave out. That actually has a drastic effect on execution.  For several reasons, and I am sure you know them.   That being said,  I stated the team as a whole probably deserved an F for last night.  So I definitely won't argue about not looking to good last night. In fact, I think saying the were "ok" would being to generous.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/24/2014 11:42 AM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


Again, Seattle had their ''dumbed down" defense out there, you keep acting like the Bears were out schemed when they were  just outplayed in all 3 phases. 
outkasted2006 wrote: It will not be easier to execute against a really good defense like Seattle. You will not look good with a dumbed down offense against a really good defense. Sorry that's not talking in circles.
marlon48 wrote: You're talking in circles, if the offense was ''dumbed down'', it should be easier to execute, not more difficult. Seattle's D wasn't showing anything exotic, they just whipped the Bears O.  And Seattle would definitely disagree about preseason games -- players said the tone for what they did last year was set in their preseason games including their trouncing of the Broncos -- that's why they had so much confidence going against them again in the SB. 

outkasted2006 wrote: Has nothing to do with Seattle or the Chicago schemed for the other. However, if you're doing an extremely dumbed down version of your offense(Which ISN'T what you practice) it's going to make executing a little harder.   Seattle executed their dumbed down offense and defense much better than the Bears did.  Already gave you that. I was simply saying(and still saying) it really didn't mean as much as people think.  Can't take as much from that game as you'd think.  If this game happens in the regular season. I am going to be calling out the entire team.  For now, it just was terrible execution of stripped down version of your team.   

That being said, I mostly worriedly about special teams and defensive 7...  That being said, I think Tillman and Jennings if they can stay healthy will hold their own.
marlon48 wrote: Neither team schemed for the other so what are you talking about??? 
outkasted2006 wrote:
marlon48 wrote: It's NOT about what you leave out, it's about executing what you have in, and the O didn't look too good.

Actually it is a lot about what leave out. That actually has a drastic effect on execution.  For several reasons, and I am sure you know them.   That being said,  I stated the team as a whole probably deserved an F for last night.  So I definitely won't argue about not looking to good last night. In fact, I think saying the were "ok" would being to generous.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/24/2014 11:58 AM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


I don't think they were outplayed that badly on offense. Marshall and Jeffery were able to get open at times against Seattle's DBs, and the other wideouts made some nice catches. They had some problems with drops, and an inexcusable penalty by the officials cost them a TD.

Considering the defense put them in a big early hole and where/who they were playing, I thought they looked okay. The big deficit left them one dimensional, and they still managed to move the ball on the best defense in the NFL.

Pass protection didn't look bad either.

The only thing that looked really suspect was the run blocking, but that is a known problem with this offense.

No disagreement on the other two phases; they looked awful

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. -Albert Einstein

Reply | Quote

Posted: 8/24/2014 1:20 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


31-0 1st team vs 1st team at half, the offense had dropped passes, a red zone pick  and Cutler was sacked twice, nothing good came out of that performance except no injuries.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 8/24/2014 1:26 PM

Re: PS Game 3 Recap 


I acknowledged the drops and the red zone interception in my last post and original post. To say nothing good happened on offense is a bit extreme.

The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits. -Albert Einstein

Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 2  Next >