So Bears fans

[Peter Gozintite]

Ok, you guys have officially beaten the dead horse into dog food. pat yourselves on the back, and get over it.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Did it just twitch it's tail? I swear i think I just saw it moving. There...look see? Did anyone else see that? Quick let's order some nasal strips, I'm going to start punching it again.

 

[blh7068]

It was just an example of how the whole year went. I guess you're used to bad safety play. I expect much better from pro's . There are numerous safeties in the league , who wouldn't have made us look that bad.
Unfortunately they are playing for other teams.
I understand the D-line injuries. I don't understand the poor safety play ,that I have witnessed.

Its hard to decipher what is actually bad safety play when they are often pulled out of position by coming up in run support.

Other safeties? Yeah, they played on teams that didnt give up a distant last 161 rush yards per game. I will say this...youre mighty good at ignoring the elephant in the room...:rollseyes:

 

[blh7068]

Ok, you guys have officially beaten the dead horse into dog food. pat yourselves on the back, and get over it.

Hey now...we dont use no fillers in this dog food...

 

[Peter Gozintite]

 

[63bears40]

One game? Cmon. Body of work is more telling. 161 rush yards/game that was good for a distant last in the league. That tells me exactly where the core problem is. When a team cant stop the run, the secondary, especially the safeties are going to get caught out of position. They react to what theyre used to seeing- coming up in run support when the ball carrier has reached the 2nd level. That is a recipe for getting torched on play action- it looks like its poor safety play but really isnt, its a reaction to what they have been used to seeing.

I'll respond to the elephant. Yes I know our front 7 wasn't very good. Which was the main problem of all our D woes, run or pass.
But it (injuries to the front 7) just exposed our safeties for what they were. Pretty bad.
Both were guilty of taking bad angles in run support. And both were guilty of falling for ball fakes or just sleeping on a play, when a CB was expecting deep help on a play.

I've acknowledged our front 7 deficiencies numerous times on this board. Sorry you missed or ignored them .
:rollseyes:

 

[63bears40]

Butchers tenderize meat by pounding it . Just think if I going eat horse it should be beaten .

 

[leomaz]

I'll respond to the elephant. Yes I know our front 7 wasn't very good. Which was the main problem of all our D woes, run or pass.
But it (injuries to the front 7) just exposed our safeties for what they were. Pretty bad.
Both were guilty of taking bad angles in run support. And both were guilty of falling for ball fakes or just sleeping on a play, when a CB was expecting deep help on a play.

I've acknowledged our front 7 deficiencies numerous times on this board. Sorry you missed or ignored them .
:rollseyes:

Just think this person thinks every safety plays perect football on every play. Its obvious that the weak link to our team from the get go was the d-line and its lack of depth.

Just think its not the safeties fault 100%. Of course they missed pays but also made plays.

Just think that any safety would have had a difficult season on my Bears.

 

[63bears40]

Ok, so since it is slow today right now, and it is the offseason, and we have nothing better to talk about, I am going to keep going with this whole subject because I think there's a lot you can learn from this season-ending play. I think this is what bothers me about the whole "Chris Conte fucked it all up" so much, because it is typical of the mis-understanding about how NFL defenses work.

So let's consider a few things. Number one, the Bears defensive playcall. It's 48 seconds left in a game at home on a crappy Soldier Field surface. The Bears lead by 1. In almost any universe, your number one worry is that the Packers convert this play for short yardage, and make one or two more quick plays and get within field goal range. Right? Tell me where I go off base here. So the Bears obviously decided to call a gang blitz. No nickel corners. The Packers of course know what personnel group the Bears have, and as Rodgers - not exactly an idiot - walks up to the line, he sees the Bears in a gang blitz alignment consistent with the personnel they brought in.

I don't know, but I'd say it is about a 90% probability that Rodgers audibled the playcall at the line based on the defense. Why do I say this? The way the Packers pass blocked (with the defensive shift moving right, which pushes the Bears rush momentum right, and Peppers the lone left side container to be dealt with by Kuhn), and the fact that the routes are four verticals. If Rodgers wants to "take out" a Bears linebacker who is just faking the blitz from the coverage scheme, four verticals do that. No way Lane Briggs or any other defender can run backwards fast enough from a fake blitz to rejoin the coverage as long as all the routes go deep. No LB in the league is that fast. Deep routes, it is all one on one, and Rodgers knows this.

So prior to the snap, what is the Bears secondary thinking? The of course know the gang blitz play call, and their job is to assume the pass rush will force Rodgers to make a quick throw for the first down with the season on the line. Yes. That's their job. Else, why bother even DOING a gang blitz? Does anyone fault them for thinking so?

Ball in snapped. In no particular sequential order, the following things happen. One, even though the Bears have one more blitzer (7 against the 5 Packer O linemen and John Kuhn..no tight ends stayed home), the Packer line wipes out most of the Bears pass rush with the rightward momentum. Clever.

Two, Julius Peppers comes blaring in, and forgets that he's the leftside containment that might have collared Rodgers in a pocket collapsing under a gang blitz, and comes right at Rodgers and gets chip blocked by Kuhn. Not only is he now out of the play, but the entire Bears pass rush is totally wasted. Ooops! And bad. I loved Julius Peppers. He made many, many, many awesome plays as a Chicago Bear. But he totally fucked this play up. Funny thing, I don't remember a single Chicago sportswriter saying Julius Peppers fucked up that play. But if there is one Bear that caused that play to happen, and blew our postseason chances away, it was Julius Peppers. Yes, a team effort. But Peppers totally blew the whole premise of the play (make the gang blitz work and force Rodgers to throw fast). If there's one guy to blame, it is him.

Now to the secondary. So the play starts, they are of course assuming with an extra rusher someone gets home, and Rodgers (with 48 seconds on clock) just wants to keep drive alive. They need to cover the 8-15 yard zone. If the Bears pass rush works, and Rodgers throws fast and completes to an open mid-range receiver, Chicago fans and media will go apeshit. So that's what they are doing. Tucker decides that since Bowman sucks ass so much in physical matchups that he has to play Bowman in outside leverage, and that this strategy didn't work just a few plays ago when the season was on the line and the Packers converted another fourth down by throwing to the WR Bowman was covering, that he wants the coverage to switch things up and have Bowman come to the inside and play fast (one of Bowman's...umm..."strengths") and cover the slot. Conte is supposed to cover the outside after the snap.

This is exactly what we see on the replay. The one thing that is a little bit off-putting is that Bowman...while he clearly DOES make the switch and cover Cobb...he hesitates. He isn't sure. But at no point does he stay home on the outside WR. If he did, and Conte essentially covers the flat inside of the outside WR to prevent the play that happened on the previous first down, that might indict Tucker for playing a gamble, but that isn't what Tucker called...and you can tell, because Bowman DOES open his hips, turn, and sort of move towards Cobb as the switch occurs. Look at it. It's not ambiguous. It may seem so because he hesitates and does a half-assed job, but that's why he is on the New York Giants right now. Good riddance!

So of course Chicago media leaps onto the easiest, dumbest explanation for why the play happened, but the explanation is just fundamentally wrong. Chicago sports media don't exactly inspire me as NFL analysts. Sorry. Can't help it. My next door neighbor is a better football analyst than most Chicago sports media are. But he's a lawyer, making three times what they make, so that's how it goes. Natural selection at work.

So, Chris Conte gets a bad rap. Now, don't get me wrong, he's pretty mediocre. If his tenure as a Bear is done, fine, next man up please. But do not try to tell me Chris Conte blew that play, because he simply did not. If you are going to blame someone, blame Peppers, or Bowman, or Mel Tucker, or the whole team, but blaming Chris Conte for that play is just football ignorance at it's finest, I don't care what Michael Wright or Moon Mullin say.

Hoge?s Offseason Notebook No. 12: Ranking The Bears? Moves « CBS Chicago
A good article in whole.
But you'll have to scroll down to the twitter ?.
Somebody agrees w/me.

 

[leomaz]

whiney assed needy crybaby drunk.

Hoge?s Offseason Notebook No. 12: Ranking The Bears? Moves « CBS Chicago
A good article in whole.
But you'll have to scroll down to the twitter ?.
Somebody agrees w/me.

Just think that all that matters is that someone agrees with me......wether wrong or right.


Get over it man. Peppers screwed up on the play first which lead directly to the TD pass being thrown........