Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
WindyCity

Why the Offense Lost the Game

Recommended Posts

To all the people saying we should have run the ball more against the Eagles, I agree, but it's not exactly easy to do that against the D-line.  The Saints struggled for most of that last night too until the 4th quarter.

Despite all that, and the poor first half from the offense, this Bears team was still in a position to win that game.  Just got unlucky.  This was a valuable learning experience for next time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

The Bears had their two best runners carry the ball, what, eleven times? And Trubisky did well in the passing game. Hard to call that "punked", as far as I'm concerned. 

I get that this thread and the "defense lost" thread are all about laying blame, and to the degree that lets us dissect and discuss the contest, and its results--that's fine. But the whole truth of the thing has to be viewed in the context of a young team with a first year head coach, and a nearly rookie quarterback, playing their first playoff game against a talented Super Bowl defending squad. The Rams lost in the wild card round last year, too. And this year may get to the Super Bowl. 

11 times was too many carries with how the OL was blocking the run.

The Eagles have a good to great DL, but the Bears OL was the worst unit on the team against the Eagles, hard to win when that is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

The Bears had their two best runners carry the ball, what, eleven times? And Trubisky did well in the passing game. Hard to call that "punked", as far as I'm concerned. 

I get that this thread and the "defense lost" thread are all about laying blame, and to the degree that lets us dissect and discuss the contest, and its results--that's fine. But the whole truth of the thing has to be viewed in the context of a young team with a first year head coach, and a nearly rookie quarterback, playing their first playoff game against a talented Super Bowl defending squad. The Rams lost in the wild card round last year, too. And this year may get to the Super Bowl. 

So nearly rookie describes a guy coming into a game with 26 starts. When's the nearly rookie phase end? 48 games?64 games including a playoff game?

It's really easy to interpret giving a QB with two seasons under his belt with a 'rookie' tag to sound like we need to be making excuses for the guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trubisky played really well.

There were so many mistakes happening around him that it is incredible he made the plays he did.

The 1st quarter he was hesitant, but after that he was throwing darts while getting killed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 51to54 said:

So nearly rookie describes a guy coming into a game with 26 starts. When's the nearly rookie phase end? 48 games?64 games including a playoff game?

It's really easy to interpret giving a QB with two seasons under his belt with a 'rookie' tag to sound like we need to be making excuses for the guy.

I was referring to him learning the new offense. Trubisky's play was easily the high point of the entire game. I wasn't making excuses for him either, merely pointing out inexperience in a playoff setting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

I was referring to him learning the new offense. Trubisky's play was easily the high point of the entire game. I wasn't making excuses for him either, merely pointing out inexperience in a playoff setting. 

Not so much excuses as expectations. While a rookie QB who is playing in his first playoff game is still technically in his rookie season, there should be a world of difference between a week 1-4 rookie and a week 13-16 rookie. Now throw in another 12 games or so from his real rookie season and Tru while not a seasoned, been there, done that QB, should not be a QB whose expectations on his play are based on any sort of 'rookie' connotation. Perhaps a playoff rookie is the middle ground we are looking at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 51to54 said:

Not so much excuses as expectations. While a rookie QB who is playing in his first playoff game is still technically in his rookie season, there should be a world of difference between a week 1-4 rookie and a week 13-16 rookie. Now throw in another 12 games or so from his real rookie season and Tru while not a seasoned, been there, done that QB, should not be a QB whose expectations on his play are based on any sort of 'rookie' connotation. Perhaps a playoff rookie is the middle ground we are looking at.

I suppose that terminology is fine. Trubisky was far from the reason the Bears lost the game, though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

I suppose that terminology is fine. Trubisky was far from the reason the Bears lost the game, though. 

I don't think that he lost it either, even taking into account as part of his performance was an easy pick he threw right to a defender who dropped it when it would likely be caught 19-20 times.

One interesting thing was that he only ran for 3 times for 9 yards. While I like that he did not panic and just take off running every other pass play. I don't like that if you are going to have a mobile QB run a bit more, a playoff game is the time to do it.

My beef is that I want to be talking about games he is winning for us and not that he did not lose the game. I really liked Orton who did not lose games, but he was not a second overall pick that involved a draft pick to move up to get him. Do I get bonus points for working Orton into the conversation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 51to54 said:

Do I get bonus points for working Orton into the conversation?

Yes, plus Orton's "come hither" face. 

 

drunk-kyle-orton-cowboys.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 51to54 said:

My beef is that I want to be talking about games he is winning for us and not that he did not lose the game. I really liked Orton who did not lose games, but he was not a second overall pick that involved a draft pick to move up to get him. Do I get bonus points for working Orton into the conversation?

Yes. +5 for any pertinent Orton reference. :D

As to Trubisky, I understand that you're frustrated our guys still aren't playing, but it was Mitch's first year in a real offense, with real weapons. You folks need to have some perspective. If they turn around and win two SBs in a row, all of this frustration will be forgotten...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 9:01 AM, 51to54 said:

 Do I get bonus points for working Orton into the conversation?

I forgot all about old neck beard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2019 at 9:01 AM, 51to54 said:

I don't think that he lost it either, even taking into account as part of his performance was an easy pick he threw right to a defender who dropped it when it would likely be caught 19-20 times.

One interesting thing was that he only ran for 3 times for 9 yards. While I like that he did not panic and just take off running every other pass play. I don't like that if you are going to have a mobile QB run a bit more, a playoff game is the time to do it.

My beef is that I want to be talking about games he is winning for us and not that he did not lose the game. I really liked Orton who did not lose games, but he was not a second overall pick that involved a draft pick to move up to get him. Do I get bonus points for working Orton into the conversation?

Honestly if Cody Parkey makes that FG we are talking about Mitch winning that game more than the defense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Superman(DH23) said:

Honestly if Cody Parkey makes that FG we are talking about Mitch winning that game more than the defense.

Yeah I rewatched that game while sitting at a mind-numbing trade show, and thought that the first half was hamstrung by Nagy not adjusting to the Eagles plan on D, and the second half seemed much more natural for Nagy.  Mitch looked great on an individual basis in 2nd half, looked bound up in first.  The two biggest observations I had that made me annoyed were:

-Pretty heavy amount of uncalled holding on Hicks, Goldman, Mack et al.  I've tried to be objective, and watch other teams play with an eye on this, and I think the internet mythology about the Bears getting held is actually true, and it's annoying.  I swear it seems like the refs just assume that Mack is going to get home anyway and let a lot of bad form blocking ride.

-Our OL is not as good as I thought.  Going into the season I thought Leno was above average, Whitehair was really good, Daniels/Kush were question marks, Long was good and mean and Massie was acceptable... Honestly they are not at all consistent in effort and that leads to a lot of plays being dead before inception.  Given the bona fides of Harry Hiestand, I thought this would be an area of strength.  I love the teams attitude in general, but the OL needs a kick. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said:

Yeah I rewatched that game while sitting at a mind-numbing trade show, and thought that the first half was hamstrung by Nagy not adjusting to the Eagles plan on D, and the second half seemed much more natural for Nagy.  Mitch looked great on an individual basis in 2nd half, looked bound up in first.  The two biggest observations I had that made me annoyed were:

-Pretty heavy amount of uncalled holding on Hicks, Goldman, Mack et al.  I've tried to be objective, and watch other teams play with an eye on this, and I think the internet mythology about the Bears getting held is actually true, and it's annoying.  I swear it seems like the refs just assume that Mack is going to get home anyway and let a lot of bad form blocking ride.

-Our OL is not as good as I thought.  Going into the season I thought Leno was above average, Whitehair was really good, Daniels/Kush were question marks, Long was good and mean and Massie was acceptable... Honestly they are not at all consistent in effort and that leads to a lot of plays being dead before inception.  Given the bona fides of Harry Hiestand, I thought this would be an area of strength.  I love the teams attitude in general, but the OL needs a kick. 

Yes.

Bears have to be most uncalled held team in history of football in 2018.  Some games were just insane, but it happened in every game.

And a lot of holds prevented for sure sacks.  And they were blatant.  

Agree 100% on OL too.  But in that case a lot of NFL teams had same or worse problem.  NFL has an O line problem.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×