Tucker out coaching Tman.

[noonthirtyjoe]

Wow. Still not sold on Mel, but right now he is calling a better game then Tresman. Why is there no balance. We have a good run game. Right now we should be leaning on it while the WRs are getting healthy. I like Tman but I am disappointed so far with what I am seeing on the play calling. Also putting Wilson on IR pisses me off. Right now Tucker is getting more out of that def then any of us thought he could. And their only going to get better as the season goes. Mel has a real risk free style of calling the D. He plays the odds without personal emotion getting in his way. He is safe. But this Def is hustling and making plays. This Def is better then the rankings suggest. Our strategy will give up yards, that does not mean we are playing bad def. Right now Tman C+ Mel A-. Give me yours.

 

[DaSuperfan]

Wow. Still not sold on Mel, but right now he is calling a better game then Tresman. Why is there no balance. We have a good run game. Right now we should be leaning on it while the WRs are getting healthy. I like Tman but I am disappointed so far with what I am seeing on the play calling. Also putting Wilson on IR pisses me off. Right now Tucker is getting more out of that def then any of us thought he could. And their only going to get better as the season goes. Mel has a real risk free style of calling the D. He plays the odds without personal emotion getting in his way. He is safe. But this Def is hustling and making plays. This Def is better then the rankings suggest. Our strategy will give up yards, that does not mean we are playing bad def. Right now Tman C+ Mel A-. Give me yours.

In fact, quite the opposite IMO. I feel like Trestman's game plan the past two games has been terrific. Two stout defenses against the run and average secondaries. We have arguably the best WR tandem in the league along with a very competent TE....why continually run straight into the opposing team's strength? Why not exploit their weaknesses? I think we did a fairly good job of that. Trestman is doing what most great coaches do....devise game plans around attacking an opponents weakness and do whatever is necessary to win games. This week they might deem that a more run heavy approach is more conducive to beating the Packers and Forte gets a dose.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

Wow. Still not sold on Mel, but right now he is calling a better game then Tresman. Why is there no balance. We have a good run game. Right now we should be leaning on it while the WRs are getting healthy. I like Tman but I am disappointed so far with what I am seeing on the play calling. Also putting Wilson on IR pisses me off. Right now Tucker is getting more out of that def then any of us thought he could. And their only going to get better as the season goes. Mel has a real risk free style of calling the D. He plays the odds without personal emotion getting in his way. He is safe. But this Def is hustling and making plays. This Def is better then the rankings suggest. Our strategy will give up yards, that does not mean we are playing bad def. Right now Tman C+ Mel A-. Give me yours.

Kromer commented on the balance of play calling this week- And I completely agree... he said, "Game-plan-wise, in the last two games, we’ve chosen and gone into them thinking, 'We’re not going to hand the ball to the halfback in the backfield very often,'" Kromer said. "We didn't feel it was advantageous towards winning the game, so you can see we limited the opportunities that Matt had, and we thought we had to throw the football to win but run enough to keep them honest."

Isn't that the objective? To win the game? Which they did the past two... and the offense has looked decent without Marshall for almost a whole game and only as a redzone target in another. I could care less if they run the ball 40 times or 5 times- I think the "keep them honest" part is important, but if it gets you the win, what's the difference?
Also note- they did run it more against the Bills and lost...I'm not saying that's the reason they lost...just the game plan dictated they could run more against them and not so much against the 9ers or Jet's

Also- Both the teams they beat- had weaker secondaries...doesn't it stand to reason to attack the weakest part of the defense? Or "gameplan" for it. If the game plan didn't work, I could see your argument for the grade you gave Trestman.

I would also like to point out the OLine looked really good against the Jets- DLP making calls and adjustments to that odd pressure was really pretty good. The times they did get beat, it was physical and not the mental mistakes we have seen in other systems.

Wilson on IR was the right move- Experts have said it was a 10-12 week injury before he could take contact... putting him on pace for week 7 or 8. The IR DTR label fit and freed up a much needed roster spot. Looking back now with all the other injuries, we couldn't go into a season with one less roster spot, cause Wilson was never going to play until week 7 or 8 anyway.

I'm not taking anything away from Mel- I've been kinda shocked they have played so well, after what we saw in week one- we all were concerned that we would see the same script as last year. The fact that we have so many rookies contributing, and some in grand style, is a testament to coaching. Mel's a part of that (though I'm looking more at the new LB and DL coaches they brought in this year)

Is it the tough defenses? in Bills, 49ers, Jets- On top of injuries to 5 offensive starters that have limited the offense?

Is it the young QB's and poor read-option schemes that has elevated the defense?

Both good questions.

It seems in Chicago we always want to do the thing were we have to pick apart one side of the ball- For years it was the offense. Then last year it was the defense... I see two units that are starting to gel as a team.
Now if only we can get the Damn Special Teams on board! :rollseyes:

 

[thunderspirit]

In fact, quite the opposite IMO. I feel like Trestman's game plan the past two games has been terrific. Two stout defenses against the run and average secondaries. We have arguably the best WR tandem in the league along with a very competent TE....why continually run straight into the opposing team's strength? Why not exploit their weaknesses? I think we did a fairly good job of that. Trestman is doing what most great coaches do....devise game plans around attacking an opponents weakness and do whatever is necessary to win games. This week they might deem that a more run heavy approach is more conducive to beating the Packers and Forte gets a dose.

Pretty much this on Trestman.

Although I do think Tucker has done a pretty good job the last couple of weeks. It'll be interesting to see if that's a fluke or if he's actually got some ability to coach I hadn't previously seen.

 

[Beengay fudgepackers]

Noon, I feel like we disagree on everything dealing with the bears...

 

[Dirk]

So, if we had just banged our heads against the wall and just increased the number of three and outs on offense wouldn't that have just put the D out there more often? I would agree with you if we ran into bottom of the league rushing D's the past 3 weeks and just abandoned the run. I don't care what play we run, pass:run ratio, as long as it's working.

Sure the D is playing decent right now, but I'd still rather have them on the sidelines.

Quite weird though, our offense suffers injuries and it declines in production(compared to last years output) as you would expect, but our D suffers injuries and seems to be getting better production.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

Noon, I feel like we disagree on everything dealing with the bears...

That's cool, at least you are trying.

 

[noonthirtyjoe]

While I agree we should have had a pass heavy game plan, I disagree that we needed to abandon the run altogether. Especially with the injury's at WR. I still think balance is the key. I hope we move towards that.

 

[anotheridiot]

MAtt Forte made some pretty important comments about the running game. He said there have been far more run calls from trestman, but the defensive alignment had Jay audibling to a pass. He said they are trying too hard to keep it simple for two replacement linemen. The more DLP and Ola play, the more they might stick to the run play and trust they do their job.

Slausen had a great season last year, he is missed more than Garza, but there is the same no trust factor that Jay has in the line as he does with third, fourth and fifth receivers and would rather throw the ball.

I am pretty sure if you knew the Trestman call you would see more balance. When you see tucker blowing his top on the sideline is it because the D changed the call or someone missed an assignment of what he called.

Does anyone know how long the coaches are able to talk to their captains on the field? Can Tucker actually be telling Briggs to switch out, or Trestman tell Cutler to change the play or is there a limit to the time?

 

[JoeyTourettes]

Does anyone know how long the coaches are able to talk to their captains on the field? Can Tucker actually be telling Briggs to switch out, or Trestman tell Cutler to change the play or is there a limit to the time?

Last I heard it was cut off with 15 seconds left on the play clock- but that was before defensive capt. got the mic too... I don't think it's changed though.

 

[NCChiFan]

I read what Forte had to say, and it was sound. Run play called, SF or Jets line up with 8 in the box, Jay audibles to a pass, got it. There is a theory, you take what the D gives you.


The difference to me in Mel this year, has been the health of the D and the depth. Particularly, the Depth. Tillman goes out last year, no one to back him up. DT's go out last year, no one to back them up (well back up went out too). There is talk Jared Allen is out for Sunday's game, the Bears get Scott back, he can now back up W. Young and Houston at the End position. We still have Paea, Ego and Sutton at DT with Ratliff out (must have really gotten his bell rung). It looks like our 1st rounder is a productive hit!!! First time that's happened since Long and then you have to go back a looong time to find another productive first rounder. Color me impressed with Vareen and Dixon. I actually thought the Bears should have drafted Dixon, but he went earlier in the draft... So, yea last ditch last week 2 rookies, but they went un noticed so that's a huge positive.


When have we had this kind of depth on D? or the Offense? DLP is a match for Garza, Ola is holding his own, but he isn't a Slauson yet, at least in the Run and a bit in pass protection, but really he's an NFL rookie, he's playing darn well for being an NFL rook.


Lets hope the injuries and in Allen's case the sickness issues cease.


I give Trestman a B and Mel a B at this point. What keeps Trestman out of A category is the Bills game, really think he did a bad job in that game. Mel's B is not so much for the scheme as it is in getting guys, particularly depth guys to play at a higher level.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

NCChiFan- good post... Just want to point this out:

"with Ratliff out (must have really gotten his bell rung)

Still using this misnomer isn't right... I know the stigma of concussions is..."shake it off" I know you didn't say that, and not putting words in your mouth. but this is a real and serious injury.

I've had two that I know about in my playing career and the second one was awful- being the 90's my coaches didn't think much of it, thought I was just "sick" the following week at practice. Was told to get more rest and drink more fluids. For the first 2 days after the game. I couldn't sleep, constant headache, couldn't keep food down. I thought I was sick too. When I ran, I got dizzy. Still played the following week and didn't feel quite right the whole game. After getting hit a couple times many of the symptoms that had abated over the week came back. Didn't feel normal until about 10 days after initial concussion.

I know without a sling, cast, splint, crutches, limp... many people don't think it's real. And guys just need to suck it up...or say that the guy is just loafing and "not a team player"

Some might think the new protocol is a little over kill, but for him to be out for 2 weeks tells me it was more then just a "ding" I hope he comes back fully healthy next week and can be as productive.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

While I agree we should have had a pass heavy game plan, I disagree that we needed to abandon the run altogether. Especially with the injury's at WR. I still think balance is the key. I hope we move towards that.

I don't understand this. Green bays run defense is 30th in the league right now and their 3-4 front sounds like they are a mess. I'd overload them on runs.

 

[cubzzzfanincali]

Oops sorry too much spanish wine. I see you meant in past games. Flying back to states at 6 am, stoked for a ton of game rewind soon!

 

[Mikefive]

I don't understand this. Green bays run defense is 30th in the league right now and their 3-4 front sounds like they are a mess. I'd overload them on runs.

You do make a valid point though. The teams we've played all had good DLs and were good against the run.

But that's just the good news. The bad news is that the same is true for GB who has also struggled to tun the ball. And we're not a powerhouse run defense by any means. I think you're going to see both teams run the ball better and more often than they have been.

As far as grading the coaches goes... It's tough to grade Trestman. He made some squirrelly calls in the Buffalo game, but he's had one arm behind his back with 2 Pro Bowlers hobbling and down 2 OL guys. He's got to get at least a B.

And so does Tucker with Ratliff and all the safety turmoil. He was very fortunate that Fuller and Bostic came off the bench and played better than the starters ahead of them. Not to mention injury PT for the rookie DTs who have held up their end as well as the Brock Vereen playing CB and S passably. Honestly, I wonder where the exotic defenses are that we heard about. Some of our techniques are different, but we're just rushing a base 4 quite a lot. But in light of the injuries, the turnovers we've produced has overcome other deficits. In short, what Tucker's done has worked. We're an above average scoring defense, even with Jared Allen getting 0 sacks in the first 3 games. That alone earns you a good grade.

 

[JoeyTourettes]

Um... how's this thread title now? grrrr

 

[nomoreshoop]

it would be nice if the Chicago Bear members in here would rip apart the classless posters from other teams with the same fervor they have roasted each other.
just saying...

 

[toooverbearing]

it would be nice if the Chicago Bear members in here would rip apart the classless posters from other teams with the same fervor they have roasted each other.
just saying...

Either you want thoughtful football talk or you want a trash talk pissing contest. One of the best forums I know of (for basketball... sucks for football though) is ******. Trolls get suspended. If you troll multiple times you get banned. You'd be surprised how it elevates the traffic on those boards and how strong the conversation gets.

Trust me... you're better off not being a douche bag. The season will have some ups and downs... the SF game was an up and this one was a down. A victory would have been great, but the defense was terrible today and a defense cannot afford to be terrible against the Packers. Actually, the run defense wasn't that bad... but the pass defense was non existent. In the second half, Jay thought he had to do everything himself and when he gets into that mode he starts playing outside himself and makes mistakes.

Positives... we ran the ball VERY well. Martellus Bennett is continuing to put together a great season. The run defense is stringing together some good games.

The Packers are a dragon this team will have to eventually slay... but it wasn't going to happen today. The refs and injuries are no excuse either... we just didn't have what it takes to force a punt. And on that note... neither punter had a punt attempt (although in our case, we had two drives end in turnovers, a drive end with the half ending and another on downs... so some of those weren't a case of our offense being unstoppable). How many NFL games have ended without either team punting?

 

[toooverbearing]

Either you want thoughtful football talk or you want a trash talk pissing contest. One of the best forums I know of (for basketball... sucks for football though) is ******. Trolls get suspended. If you troll multiple times you get banned. You'd be surprised how it elevates the traffic on those boards and how strong the conversation gets.

Trust me... you're better off not being a douche bag. The season will have some ups and downs... the SF game was an up and this one was a down. A victory would have been great, but the defense was terrible today and a defense cannot afford to be terrible against the Packers. Actually, the run defense wasn't that bad... but the pass defense was non existent. In the second half, Jay thought he had to do everything himself and when he gets into that mode he starts playing outside himself and makes mistakes.

Positives... we ran the ball VERY well. Martellus Bennett is continuing to put together a great season. The run defense is stringing together some good games.

The Packers are a dragon this team will have to eventually slay... but it wasn't going to happen today. The refs and injuries are no excuse either... we just didn't have what it takes to force a punt. And on that note... neither punter had a punt attempt (although in our case, we had two drives end in turnovers, a drive end with the half ending and another on downs... so some of those weren't a case of our offense being unstoppable). How many NFL games have ended without either team punting?

I am still getting used to this forum... but it is hysterical that the name of the other forum got starred out but "douche bag" didn't. Sorry in advance if I broke any rules.

 

[nomoreshoop]

I rest my case, I don't like you toover.
you aint gonna lecture me like a gd dm father, grow up toover.