Biggs: Pace on shaky ground

[Madmike90]

8 hours ago, WindyCity said:

Personally, I would like to go 10-6 and actually beat some teams with a winning record.

The Bears are 8-8 off the back of bum slaying.

That is not extension worthy.

You can only beat what is in front of you so this argument is nonsense.

[beardown3231]

3 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

You can only beat what is in front of you so this argument is nonsense.

And they didn't beat "what's in front of you " when they played Green Bay, Indianapolis, LA, Tennessee, or New Orleans

What's your point?

[WindyCity]

5 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

You can only beat what is in front of you so this argument is nonsense.

And they only beat the bums put in front of them [outside of TB]

They lost to the good teams.

Nonsense is acting like that is impressive. 8-8 isn't something to be celebrated.

[WindyCity]

5 hours ago, Madmike90 said:

If it's that easy to just write things off then Trubisky is a superstar 😂...can't just rule things out that don't fit your point of view

I am not writing it off.

I am saying that is was not sustainable. Back to back 8-8 seasons pretty much confirm it. Because it was not sustainable it is a statistical outlier and should be viewed in that manner. If I hit 4 3 pointers in a basketball game and then do not hit another one for the rest of the season am I a good shooter? No, but those makes are still on my stat sheet.

[Superman(DH23)]

16 hours ago, WindyCity said:

Personally, I would like to go 10-6 and actually beat some teams with a winning record.

The Bears are 8-8 off the back of bum slaying.

That is not extension worthy.

And the Saints went 12-4 bum slaying, what's your point?  The Rams went 10-6 with some serious schedule favorbility playing against the NFCE.  The Cardinals went 8-8 going against the NFCE.  

Everyone is making a big deal of wins against teams with a winning record.  I'm curious, how many teams have more and how many more.  The Saints have 2 both against the Bucs, the same as the Bears.  The Pack has 2 I believe with wins against the Saints and the Titans.  The Rams have 1 against the Seahawks.  The Bucs have 1 against GB.  The Seahawks have 1 against the Rams.  So in the NFC the top 2 seeds each have 2 wins against winning teams, and we have people trying to act like the Bears are so much worse with just 1.

[Sugashane]

I understand what you'reall saying, but look at the record vs teams with winning records (basically every playoff team). By that regard we wouldn't be competitive. It's going to rely on the teams we are comparing against. Looking at our record vs GB we havent been competitive with them, we were -35 points against them this year. 

 

I have no issue with Pace making moves to get his guys or whatever and his first three years cant be held against him imo. He rebuilt the roster almost entirely. But now each season we need to look at wins and overall performance. Imo we aren't a top 10 team at all and we spent the about majority of the season struggling on offense. 

 

I'm fine with Pace staying but he needs help. He needs to have someone aid him in QB evaluation and his first round picks. He needs help picking coaches because we aren't elevating and developing players. I think @JAF-N72EX has pointed out a lot of his strong points and finding someone who does EVERYTHING well is going to be a major pain. Why not take advantage of what he does well and get a President/CEO to help with his weak points? That's why Rick Smith is my top priority. 

[abstract_thought]

39 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

I'm fine with Pace staying but he needs help. He needs to have someone aid him in QB evaluation and his first round picks. He needs help picking coaches because we aren't elevating and developing players. I think @JAF-N72EX has pointed out a lot of his strong points and finding someone who does EVERYTHING well is going to be a major pain. Why not take advantage of what he does well and get a President/CEO to help with his weak points? That's why Rick Smith is my top priority. 

I just don't think this makes sense. When has a team with an established GM hired an outsider to be his boss? It seems like a setup for an organizational power struggle.

[WindyCity]

54 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

And the Saints went 12-4 bum slaying, what's your point?  The Rams went 10-6 with some serious schedule favorbility playing against the NFCE.  The Cardinals went 8-8 going against the NFCE.  

Everyone is making a big deal of wins against teams with a winning record.  I'm curious, how many teams have more and how many more.  The Saints have 2 both against the Bucs, the same as the Bears.  The Pack has 2 I believe with wins against the Saints and the Titans.  The Rams have 1 against the Seahawks.  The Bucs have 1 against GB.  The Seahawks have 1 against the Rams.  So in the NFC the top 2 seeds each have 2 wins against winning teams, and we have people trying to act like the Bears are so much worse with just 1.

Most schedules are built beating bad/mediocre teams. Those teams also do not have as many loses against bad teams.

Do you think the Bears are capable of beating playoff level teams?

I do not. I think their offense only works against bums because the talent level sucks and the defense is no longer capable of even slowing down playoff level teams. I think this will be super clear when they get boat raced out of the Super Dome by Brees throwing under hand.

[WindyCity]

42 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

I understand what you'reall saying, but look at the record vs teams with winning records (basically every playoff team). By that regard we wouldn't be competitive. It's going to rely on the teams we are comparing against. Looking at our record vs GB we havent been competitive with them, we were -35 points against them this year. 

 

I have no issue with Pace making moves to get his guys or whatever and his first three years cant be held against him imo. He rebuilt the roster almost entirely. But now each season we need to look at wins and overall performance. Imo we aren't a top 10 team at all and we spent the about majority of the season struggling on offense. 

 

I'm fine with Pace staying but he needs help. He needs to have someone aid him in QB evaluation and his first round picks. He needs help picking coaches because we aren't elevating and developing players. I think @JAF-N72EX has pointed out a lot of his strong points and finding someone who does EVERYTHING well is going to be a major pain. Why not take advantage of what he does well and get a President/CEO to help with his weak points? That's why Rick Smith is my top priority. 

Who has control of the 53?

Who has final say on the QB?

That sounds like an organizational cluster F.

[beardown3231]

57 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

And the Saints went 12-4 bum slaying, what's your point?  The Rams went 10-6 with some serious schedule favorbility playing against the NFCE.  The Cardinals went 8-8 going against the NFCE.  

Everyone is making a big deal of wins against teams with a winning record.  I'm curious, how many teams have more and how many more.  The Saints have 2 both against the Bucs, the same as the Bears.  The Pack has 2 I believe with wins against the Saints and the Titans.  The Rams have 1 against the Seahawks.  The Bucs have 1 against GB.  The Seahawks have 1 against the Rams.  So in the NFC the top 2 seeds each have 2 wins against winning teams, and we have people trying to act like the Bears are so much worse with just 1.

The Saints were 3-2 vs playoff teams

The Rams were 4-1 vs playoff teams

The Bears were 1-6 vs playoff teams

[Superman(DH23)]

1 hour ago, beardown3231 said:

The Saints were 3-2 vs playoff teams

The Rams were 4-1 vs playoff teams

The Bears were 1-6 vs playoff teams

 

1 hour ago, beardown3231 said:

The Saints were 3-2 vs playoff teams

The Rams were 4-1 vs playoff teams

The Bears were 1-6 vs playoff teams

So now we move the goalpost.  Got ya.  The Saints have 2 wins against Bucs and beat the Bears.

The Rams have wins against the Seahawks, WFT, Bears.  Not sure where that 4th win comes from.  They beat the Seahawks once, played the NFCE and beat the WFT.  Played the AFCE and lost to the Bills. Beat the Bears as an intra conference opponent, what other playoff team did they beat.  It couldnt have been anybody from the AFCE.  

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

Most schedules are built beating bad/mediocre teams. Those teams also do not have as many loses against bad teams.

Do you think the Bears are capable of beating playoff level teams?

I do not. I think their offense only works against bums because the talent level sucks and the defense is no longer capable of even slowing down playoff level teams. I think this will be super clear when they get boat raced out of the Super Dome by Brees throwing under hand.

What bad teams did the Bears lose to?  Det and Minny.  1 each.  The Rams lost to the NYJ and NEP.  The Bears played 7 games against teams in the playoffs.  They played 9 against bad teams.  Won 7 of those nine.  The Saints lost to the Eagles.  We can keep going.  Just keep moving the goalpost.

We beat one of the playoff teams, took another to OT.  One score losses against 3 others.  One score games are generally considered 50/50. So yeah, I think this team is capable of beating playoff teams.  Doesnt mean they will, but they certainly can.

[beardown3231]

6 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

 

So now we move the goalpost.  Got ya.  The Saints have 2 wins against Bucs and beat the Bears.

The Rams have wins against the Seahawks, WFT, Bears.  Not sure where that 4th win comes from.  They beat the Seahawks once, played the NFCE and beat the WFT.  Played the AFCE and lost to the Bills. Beat the Bears as an intra conference opponent, what other playoff team did they beat.  It couldnt have been anybody from the AFCE.  

What bad teams did the Bears lose to?  Det and Minny.  1 each.  The Rams lost to the NYJ and NEP.  The Bears played 7 games against teams in the playoffs.  They played 9 against bad teams.  Won 7 of those nine.  The Saints lost to the Eagles.  We can keep going.  Just keep moving the goalpost.

We beat one of the playoff teams, took another to OT.  One score losses against 3 others.  One score games are generally considered 50/50. So yeah, I think this team is capable of beating playoff teams.  Doesnt mean they will, but they certainly can.

Oh wow so the Rams were 3-2 vs playoff teams, not 4-1. Well you win then!

[Superman(DH23)]

1 hour ago, beardown3231 said:

Oh wow so the Rams were 3-2 vs playoff teams, not 4-1. Well you win then!

3-2 beating a 7-9 wft, an 8-8 Bears team, and the seahawks.  Real impressive there.  We are also talking about a team that lost to the 2 win NYJ, who were 0-13 having just lost by 37 points to the seahawks the week prior.  Yeah forgive me for thinking they arent beatable.  If the schedules were reversed, what do you think the Rams record would be?  How about the Bears?  The initial point, the point that I and everyone else heard in the media, was that Bears only beat 1 team with a record above .500, turns out that's true of 6/7 teams in the NFC playoffs.  That's what I was refuting, you then tried to move the goalpost and I pointed how how ridiculous it was.  

[beardown3231]

1 hour ago, Superman(DH23) said:

3-2 beating a 7-9 wft, an 8-8 Bears team, and the seahawks.  Real impressive there.  We are also talking about a team that lost to the 2 win NYJ, who were 0-13 having just lost by 37 points to the seahawks the week prior.  Yeah forgive me for thinking they arent beatable.  If the schedules were reversed, what do you think the Rams record would be?  How about the Bears?  The initial point, the point that I and everyone else heard in the media, was that Bears only beat 1 team with a record above .500, turns out that's true of 6/7 teams in the NFC playoffs.  That's what I was refuting, you then tried to move the goalpost and I pointed how how ridiculous it was.  

Then why did the Rams stomp the Bears?

I'm not moving goalposts. "Moving goalposts" is becoming the new "u mad bro" nonsense. The Bears stink. Their roster is old. Their defense is getting worse. The offense is no better than it was 6 years ago. End of story

[Superman(DH23)]

See this is where I remain consistent.  Coaching.  The roster isnt old, its league avg.  If Nagy wasnt the problem, then why did the offense stink worse under Nick Foles?  Why did it get better when he gave up play calling.  The defense for all the cries about getting worse, was still a top 10 defense.  The offense stunk.