Jump to content

The Bears are who we thought they were, so we put them on a hook! Week 1 post game (1-0)


ThatJerkDave

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Brat&Beer said:

When Wyatt did replace Lowry last year, run defense did improve by about 50 YPG and 1 YPC. So there may be something to the argument that he should have gotten more playing time earlier last year. Of course, it's also possible he wasn't showing enough in practice to cause the coaches to want to make a switch. 

Last week, everybody told me practice doesn't matter? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ragnarok said:

Reports from camp were that he made a huge leap.  He may have just developed.

There were a good amount of people calling for more reps when you saw the few a game he was getting.  Think it was just out of loyalty to dean, who was maybe more consistent, but the peaks weren't there.

Whatever it was I'm happy to see Wyatt going beast mode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, HighCalebR said:

Just gotta remember this feeling if the season hits a rough patch.  Yesterday was good.

The season is going to hit some tough patches. They always do. Yesterday was validation of what this team can be. It may not happen this year, but Jordan Love can play and we have a whole lot of young, really talented players on this roster. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, HighCalebR said:

Random? It was the game. The whole game. The only game. Lol. David's gonna be fine.

Random sample is a statistics term. Your sample size was not large enough and against enough opponents to be able to tell. The fact that, 'he was fine' is really only part of the equation. How will the line as a unit perform as he is a link in the chain. Will there be more communication breakdowns? So many other factors. 

Yesterday was a success by any measurement. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mazrimiv said:

Yeah, I'm kind of expecting Doubs and Reed to be the receivers Love leans on the most, while Watson becomes a more dangerous version of MVS.  I don't really have a strong opinion on Musgrave yet, but the early signs are promising.

Two other rookie tight ends had catches in their NFL debut this year. Sam Laporta and Andrew Ogletree. Ogletree had one catch on 2 targets. Sam Laporta had 5 catches for 39 yards and 7.8 yards per reception.

Musgrave might've made a big mistake on that first missed wide open. He also stumbled on that second one. But the fact that he was wide open for two would be touchdowns... That doesn't happen. If it did, Kyle Pitts wouldn't be a joke and he'd have had like 20 touchdowns for how much the Falcons wanted to show him off in his rookie year.

I don't know why it's so hard for people to see the reality behind tight ends. They don't just show up. Great receiving tight ends don't grow on trees.

Travis Kelce isn't some Davante Adams of tight ends. Travis Kelce is the Jerry Rice of tight ends.

Tony Gonzalez is the all-time leader in receiving yards by a tight end. He had 4 seasons of 1,000 yards. Travis Kelce has 7. In a row.

He was first in yardage last season. By 400 yards. The difference between first place and second place is the same as the difference between 2nd place and 14th place.

How is it so difficult for people to comprehend that difference?

People need to get over their TE obsession. Musgrave is on pace for what would have put him in the top 4 of receiving yards for a tight end last season. He's going to be fine.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

Random sample is a statistics term. Your sample size was not large enough and against enough opponents to be able to tell. The fact that, 'he was fine' is really only part of the equation. How will the line as a unit perform as he is a link in the chain. Will there be more communication breakdowns? So many other factors. 

Yesterday was a success by any measurement. 

I award you no points. We are all dumber having listened to this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

Random sample is a statistics term. Your sample size was not large enough and against enough opponents to be able to tell. The fact that, 'he was fine' is really only part of the equation. How will the line as a unit perform as he is a link in the chain. Will there be more communication breakdowns? So many other factors. 

Yesterday was a success by any measurement. 

We will see

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Old Guy said:

Random sample is a statistics term. Your sample size was not large enough and against enough opponents to be able to tell. The fact that, 'he was fine' is really only part of the equation. How will the line as a unit perform as he is a link in the chain. Will there be more communication breakdowns? So many other factors. 

Yesterday was a success by any measurement. 

How about last year? When Bakh came back and was dominant again without practice. It's going to be OK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...