our coaching staff is well below our old one.

[blh7068]

They were moving the ball at ease when they stopped us on that 3rd and 1 play as well. There is no wrong or right answer here really. Robbie missed a 47 yd fg. If I were a betting man I would have bet he would make that kick inside . Probably outside as well. Its all what ifs now and pure speculation regarding getting more yards or losing more yards. I remember that play in the Giants - Jets game. Not sure why they didn't take a knee and nobody thought they would fumble but it happened.

Then play the 2nd down, kick it on 3rd down.

Its a low risk move to get the ball closer. Shorter kicks tend to yield higher accuracy. This what my conclusion is based on.

 

[leomaz]

easier said then done

Then play the 2nd down, kick it on 3rd down.

Its a low risk move to get the ball closer. Shorter kicks tend to yield higher accuracy. This what my conclusion is based on.

And if the low risk move backfired....nobody would have said....at least he tried to get closer. Its easy to speculate after the fact. We all have an opinion on this and they are all correct. But to say it was a boneheaded call. I just don't agree with that. IMO.


:ss:

 

[Smart]

Simply put, "chance" relates to the likelyhood of a future event WITH NO HISTORY considered. "Odds", on the other hand, considers history. "Chance" is expressed as a percentage translation of the ratio of a particular outcome versus all possible outcomes.


"Odds" are expressed as a ratio WITHOUT a percentage translation. For example, if a (fair) coin is tossed 3 times and all three tosses land on heads, the PROBABILTY (odds) of the next toss coming up heads is only 1 of 16. The "CHANCE", on the other hand, never changes and is 50% on EVERY toss.

Richig you may be the smartest person on this board. The board seemed to be in a lull, tried to get a little debate going. Smetimes you got to put it out there and see who bites.The funniest part is some of these knuckleheads think they are genuises. I didnt think cali would fall for itthough.Oh well the jig is up. I still like the call and do not think it was a boneheaded call. It was the right call, wrong. I'm glad the coach doesn't do everything by the book. He is learning and will get better or he wont and they will get a new coach. This wasn't as good of a debate as the robbie gould one....that was freakin CLASSIC. Plus work has been shut down since news years because of weather. I am bored as hell

So when you admit you are sound clueless, your excuse is that you were trolling. But then, even in your admission, you say things that would make Karl Pilkington blush. Chance is not directly based on history (for the record, neither are odds), but of course they are correlated. Because making a field goal is nothing like flipping a coin, since it involves actual talent.

You aren't simply a troll. You are a flipping idiot who embraces a decision which cost the team you supposedly root for a playoff spot because you are too fucking stupid to understand the concept that kicking a field goal from 27 yards and 47 yards have different chances of going in, and that the VAST majority of the time, running the ball would have led to a much shorter field goal.

I don't even care that you are an idiot. But the combination of "Idiot+Troll+Fake Bears Fan" have you walking on thin ice. Hopefully, you can clean it up a bit and stay on here. Your idiocy is quite entertaining.

 

[Smart]

And if the low risk move backfired....nobody would have said....at least he tried to get closer. Its easy to speculate after the fact. We all have an opinion on this and they are all correct. But to say it was a boneheaded call. I just don't agree with that. IMO.

Yes, they would have. You know how I know? In the same fucking game, Leslie Frazier tried to get it in closer. It led to one penalty, which made the kick further. They then had the penalty on the first kick, and missed the second. And guess what? Nobody second-guessed Leslie Frazier anywhere.

For the third time, this isn't after-the-fact speculation. I (and just about everybody who can rub two brain cells together) thought it was stupid before he made the kick. This isn't a fucking coin flip. It's something that took us from a 12% chance of losing to a 30% chance of losing.

You are wrong. Trestman was wrong. And there's a pretty sizable chance that we missed the playoffs because of it.

For you to parade around on a Bears board and celebrate the decision which cost us the playoffs in a half-trolling, fully idiotic manner is a slap in the face to everyone who actually cares about this team.

 

[leomaz]

you are a jealous fuckibg idiot....

Yes, they would have. You know how I know? In the same fucking game, Leslie Frazier tried to get it in closer. It led to one penalty, which made the kick further. They then had the penalty on the first kick, and missed the second. And guess what? Nobody second-guessed Leslie Frazier anywhere.

For the third time, this isn't after-the-fact speculation. I (and just about everybody who can rub two brain cells together) thought it was stupid before he made the kick. This isn't a fucking coin flip. It's something that took us from a 12% chance of losing to a 30% chance of losing.

You are wrong. Trestman was wrong. And there's a pretty sizable chance that we missed the playoffs because of it.

For you to parade around on a Bears board and celebrate the decision which cost us the playoffs in a half-trolling, fully idiotic manner is a slap in the face to everyone who actually cares about this team.

HOOK, LINE AND SINKER. NOTHING YOU SAY MEANS ANYTHING TO ME. YOU CAN CALL ME ALL THE NAMES YOU WANT.IT MEANS NOTHING. I KNOW WHAT TYPE OF BEARS FAN I AM AND I WILL STAY ON THESE BOARDS AS LONG AS I WANT AND THERE IS NOT A DAMN THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT. Now go find a screen name worthy of you lack of intelligence.

 

[Smart]

You already made a post admitting you trolled me. That's probably enough for a tempban. If you really want to be here forever (and i'm serious in that I want you to stay and find you funny), you should quit doing stuff like that. In case you haven't noticed, this place was created specifically to get away from trolls.

 

[leomaz]

what are you fuckibg 12

You already made a post admitting you trolled me. That's probably enough for a tempban. If you really want to be here forever (and i'm serious in that I want you to stay and find you funny), you should quit doing stuff like that. In case you haven't noticed, this place was created specifically to get away from trolls.

OH MY GOD....are you are freaking moron!!!! I didn't troll anybody. I just kept a moron going on a moronic subject. Nobody told you to keep replying. I had fun . You felt insecure .MOVE THE FUCK ON JUNIOR. Mr "im the biggest Bears fan"... Lol. Get a freaking life and use this little lesson to further your understanding of life.

 

[leomaz]

Im making Eggs Benedict now so just shush.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Simply put, "chance" relates to the likelyhood of a future event WITH NO HISTORY considered. "Odds", on the other hand, considers history. "Chance" is expressed as a percentage translation of the ratio of a particular outcome versus all possible outcomes.


"Odds" are expressed as a ratio WITHOUT a percentage translation. For example, if a (fair) coin is tossed 3 times and all three tosses land on heads, the PROBABILTY (odds) of the next toss coming up heads is only 1 of 16. The "CHANCE", on the other hand, never changes and is 50% on EVERY toss.

Again, this is incorrect. Individual coin flips are not affected by their prior history. The probability/odds of a next coin flip coming up heads is ALWAYS 50%. It is not 1 in 16. It would if it was a dependent variable, but it isn't. Coin flips are independent. If you were right, it would be easy to make money on roulette. But, fortunately for casinos, you are totally wrong.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Another thing that was bad with Lovie's defense was QBs were figuring out how to beat it. When we went up against premier QBs, they were able to move the chains and score some points. Without a competent playcaller on offense, we weren't able to keep up. Atleast with Trestman we can score with other elite offensive football teams. I also think it is MUCH easier to find a good Defensive Coordinator than it is to find a good Offensive Coordinator.

I agree with much of your analysis, but think you are wrong here. Actually, Lovie's teams were pretty good at shutting down even elite QBs, even at the end. We usually lost to GB but it wasn't because Rodgers was lighting us up. Yes there are exceptions (like that Patriots game in the snow), but the old Bears defense was pretty good most of the time against strong QBs.

I'm also not sure I agree with you about finding good D coordinators. If D coordinators were doing so great in their jobs, how does that square with the explosion of offense in the last few years. Sure, rules have something to do with that, but I wouldn't call the league right now limited by enough firepower and brains on the offensive side. It is the defenses that are struggling, and it's no coincidence that most of the surviving teams right now all have better than average to great defenses.

 

[leomaz]

I dont think Mel Tucker will ever be as good a DC as Lovie. But the question is can he be a good DC? Is the defense totally his fault? Not really. Does his coaches need to be held accountable? Absolutely. Does Mel deserve another chance? In my opinion no. It seemed to me the players didn't take to him. That loose ball in the playoffs...no NFL player needs to be coached to go after that ball and it makes me wonder why the Bear players did not . Didn't Andersen have it at one point? That play "cost" us the playoffs in my mind. Although there are many plays in a season that change the game and the season. That one is stuck in my mind as the one.

 

[blh7068]

And if the low risk move backfired....nobody would have said....at least he tried to get closer. Its easy to speculate after the fact. We all have an opinion on this and they are all correct. But to say it was a boneheaded call. I just don't agree with that. IMO.
/>

Agreeing with yourself through your fabricated point of contention is convenient, isnt it? Unless its a chip shot, I dont agree with kicking a FG on 2nd down.

Look, I dont care whether you agree or not, but if youre going to argue, then argue my points. Not this " but if it fails, nobody would have said..." nonsense. We have already established there isnt a guarantee of anything. I specifically said attempting to move the ball to get closer is low risk. A closer attempt yields higher accuracy. So, if that in any way is false, then tell me, because that is what you need to argue against.

 

[leomaz]

its a simple a pi

Agreeing with yourself through your fabricated point of contention is convenient, isnt it? Unless its a chip shot, I dont agree with kicking a FG on 2nd down.

Look, I dont care whether you agree or not, but if youre going to argue, then argue my points. Not this " but if it fails, nobody would have said..." nonsense. We have already established there isnt a guarantee of anything. I specifically said attempting to move the ball to get closer is low risk. A closer attempt yields higher accuracy. So, if that in any way is false, then tell me, because that is what you need to argue against.

Of course attempting to move it closer is a risk........nobody is disagreeing that the closer you are the easier the attempt. The only point im arguing is that it isn't a boneheaded call. It may not be the classic choice or safe choice but it was far from being boneheaded. If they attempt the same fg after an attempt on 2nd down that results in the kick being the same, really what is the difference? Robbie didn't miss the fg because it was 2nd down..he just kicked it bad. The circumstances during the game added to the coach's decision also. A lot of plays changed the outcome of this single game but the fact that he choose to attempt a kick on 2nd down doesn't change how Robbie kicks the ball. He just missed it. plain and simple. Never expected Robbie to miss that kick........he has made far more difficult kicks then that In far dire situations. Yes a lot of people questioned the call before he kicked it but not because they thought he would miss it! Not sured If anybody thought he would miss that kick.

 

[blh7068]

The only point im arguing is that it isn't a boneheaded call. It may not be the classic choice or safe choice but it was far from being boneheaded. If they attempt the same fg after an attempt on 2nd down that results in the kick being the same, really what is the difference? Robbie didn't miss the fg because it was 2nd down..he just kicked it bad. The circumstances during the game added to the coach's decision also. A lot of plays changed the outcome of this single game but the fact that he choose to attempt a kick on 2nd down doesn't change how Robbie kicks the ball. He just missed it. plain and simple. Never expected Robbie to miss that kick........he has made far more difficult kicks then that In far dire situations. Yes a lot of people questioned the call before he kicked it but not because they thought he would miss it! Not sured If anybody thought he would miss that kick.

The underlined has zero to do with what I said.

 

[leomaz]

Nothing you said blh7068 has been disagreed with..I can agree with everything you stated.

 

[NCChiFan]

Jumping on the thread late, sorry. Noon, you sound disheartened and responding as such, which is too bad. Coaching staff wise the Offense is better, much better and it isn't just talent, you don't go from 29th in the league to 2nd in the league on talent alone, especially when you figure in losing your starting QB for 4-5 games. The system has to be right, the players have to be right and it has to all come together rather quickly.

On the Defensive side of the ball, why do you think they haven't canned Mel Tucker? It is because the report card is incomplete. If you look at the Bears first three games with mostly a full compliment it was a different Bear D. Aggressive, ball swiping Defense. It wasn't until the injuries started to pile up and up and up, did the D fall apart. If you seriously doubt this, just look at last years "amazing" D coordinator, Rod Marinelli, and what he managed to do with the Cowboys, possibly the only worse Defense than ours this season. Again, even in the Dallas case it was due to injury.

So Mel gets a pass and Trestman's O is leaps and bounds better.

Special teams wise... Didn't see much of a difference last year to this.

While everyone is welcome to their opinion, I do not share yours and am very optimistic for Emery and next season. Now you want to argue Emery didn't help Lovie enough, fine. Emery in my opinion, has every right to outright fire a HC and get one in he likes, that is every GM's belief when they take a job. If Emery did it back handedly, though when Lovie jumped out to what.. 7-1 last year, he had to be worried, then so be it right or wrong.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Jumping on the thread late, sorry. Noon, you sound disheartened and responding as such, which is too bad. Coaching staff wise the Offense is better, much better and it isn't just talent, you don't go from 29th in the league to 2nd in the league on talent alone, especially when you figure in losing your starting QB for 4-5 games. The system has to be right, the players have to be right and it has to all come together rather quickly.

On the Defensive side of the ball, why do you think they haven't canned Mel Tucker? It is because the report card is incomplete. If you look at the Bears first three games with mostly a full compliment it was a different Bear D. Aggressive, ball swiping Defense. It wasn't until the injuries started to pile up and up and up, did the D fall apart. If you seriously doubt this, just look at last years "amazing" D coordinator, Rod Marinelli, and what he managed to do with the Cowboys, possibly the only worse Defense than ours this season. Again, even in the Dallas case it was due to injury.

So Mel gets a pass and Trestman's O is leaps and bounds better.

Special teams wise... Didn't see much of a difference last year to this.

While everyone is welcome to their opinion, I do not share yours and am very optimistic for Emery and next season. Now you want to argue Emery didn't help Lovie enough, fine. Emery in my opinion, has every right to outright fire a HC and get one in he likes, that is every GM's belief when they take a job. If Emery did it back handedly, though when Lovie jumped out to what.. 7-1 last year, he had to be worried, then so be it right or wrong.

I have no problem with Emory or Trestman. I don't like the rest of the staff. Tucker has never been good. STs is far from special. Injury coach? That guy was good. Can the rest.

 

[leomaz]

its like we are cousins......but not

I have no problem with Emory or Trestman. I don't like the rest of the staff. Tucker has never been good. STs is far from special. Injury coach? That guy was good. Can the rest.

LOL.....CAN YOU NAME ANY OF THEM.??? The only coaches on Lovie's staff worth their weight in salt were Taub and Rod. And Rod is showing signs of decline. Our STs haven't been lights out in a few years........but this is where we are...and I am all in
with whatever this organization does......to a certain extent.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

I'm all in on Sundays and a few Mondays plus the occasional Thursday. But the rest is me time.

 

[richig07]

I have no problem with Emory or Trestman. I don't like the rest of the staff. Tucker has never been good. STs is far from special. Injury coach? That guy was good. Can the rest.

Kromer and Mike Groh (WR's coach) have absolutely played a HUGE part in the development of this offense. Kromer has been great with the offensive line, and all Marshall and Jeffery have done is give praise upon praise to Mike Groh. It's not a coincidence that Jeffery made huge leaps this year when he showed up.

The defense, sure... it would seem that, on the surface it had its problems this year. But obviously Trestman and Emery feel this was more due to personnel issues rather than inept coaching. Tucker's job is definitely on the line now. It'll be interesting to see how this defense responds in the upcoming 2014 season.

It'll be here before you know it, BTW. It always is.