Bears studs n duds

[melvin dangerr]

Not mean at all. Dante's question about expecting a discussion was more of a rhetorical question meaning he wasn't really looking for an answer. I love the TV show MASH and what I quoted was from a scene in one of the shows. If you know me at all you will find that I love obscure TV references and I use them quite a bit. I agree with you about giving an X then not saying why but some people on here are famous for it.

I don’t know you, only on key clicks, but I appreciate you clearing this up for me

 

[GBowner]

When you have a 31 point lead after 3 quarters, there shouldn't be a possibility of it becoming a one score game late . this team needs to be like the Patriots of a few years ago. If you have a 21-point lead, make it 28. If you have a 28 point lead make it 35, and so on .

I completely agree. They have no killer instinct. Tackling is horrible. I’d like to see a total domination for 60 minutes sometime.

The offense was the stud in that game. I love how Jenkins took over center and didn’t miss a beat.

 

[GBowner]

If you want to hand out a Dud in this game, it clearly belongs to the defense.

Yes, they scored a touchdown, and you can't take that from them.

And yes, they intercepted Trubisky, and that's worth noting.

However, they continue to play poor fundamental defense, and the interceptions were just as much a result of a terrible QB throwing into double/triple coverage when other options were open to him.

David Montgomery averaged 8.9 yards per touch during a season in which he's averaging 4.7.

The Bears only punted twice. When Trubisky wasn't totally stupid, they were able to move the ball. Their offense is averaging 4.7 yards per play on the season, and were running at a 5.4 yard per play clip last night.

25 points is also the most they've scored since week 3.

The Packers are not sound in playing their gaps and they don't tackle. That's going to really, really hurt them if they don't clean it up.

You nailed it.

 

[GBowner]

I’ll give a stud to Nagy for refusing to run the ball. They broke a 50+ yard run early and went away from it? Thanks coach.
Another stud to Rodgers and the O line. They played near perfect ball against a good D.

Dud: D helped turn a blowout into a game. I don’t see the Bears putting up 25 against many teams in this league.

 

[jon]

A stud off the field?

Tony Dungy. He was the best analyst/commentator I've heard all year.

 

[Poppa San]

Upon further review I'm going to have to give Lazard a DUD. After getting flipped in the air, he needs to stick the landing and not take a seat with room to run in front of him.

 

[Pugger]

This was a complete game for the Pack....4th quarter 'prevent' defense was a little shaky, and Mason missed an extra point, but those are quibbles. This was a solid effort against a divisional rival after an OT loss the week before - That's encouraging.

That said, let's not kid ourselves - The Bears are a hot mess right now. Green Bay should beat them handily, and they did.

Interesting to see what the Eagles look like tonight....

The Eagles' OL made the seachicken's D look like the 85 Bears.

 

[Pugger]

A stud off the field?

Tony Dungy. He was the best analyst/commentator I've heard all year.

Dungy is better than I thought he'd be but there are better analysts/commentators out there.

 

[PackerDNA]

The Eagles' OL made the seachicken's D look like the 85 Bears.

True. Which means it wouldn't surprise me if the Packers made them look like the 90s Cowboys offensive line.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

The Eagles' OL made the seachicken's D look like the 85 Bears.

The final score, however, was only a six-point differential. I expect the Eagles, with their many flaws, to make a similar effort against the Pack....If Green Bay makes the mistake of thinking they can simply roll out the helmets and get an easy win, like they did against Jacksonville, they may be in for a long afternoon.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

True. Which means it wouldn't surprise me if the Packers made them look like the 90s Cowboys offensive line.

Sadly, as I watched that game last night, I couldn't help but think of the same things "next week the Packer defense could allow this Eagles offense to look like a top 5 offense".

I think the Packer-Eagle game will be very similar to the last game against the Bears, in that we will be facing a very good defense and a crappy offense. However, our defense can make a bad offense look good.

Hopefully the Packer offense will continue to roll and the defense can get a few turnovers to help keep the Eagles from scoring too many points.

 

[tynimiller]

Yup, if our defense doesn't have those turnovers against the Bears, I literally think that is a one score win probably.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Yup, if our defense doesn't have those turnovers against the Bears, I literally think that is a one score win probably.

Agreed. Seems like a lot of people thought it was a one sided blowout, which the score makes it appear too be, the stats tell a different story. I agree with you, those turnovers were huge in a lot of ways, points, momentum, confidence, etc. I have a lot of confidence in our offense, but our defense probably is going to live or die off of turnovers.

 

[Mondio]

last year our defense was kind of the same. Gives up yards, but would hold when the field got short. Try and set up an offense to their strength. Big plays, turnovers, or sacrafice yards and hold to 3. We haven't been getting those big plays as much and holding to 3 has become trading TD's

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Yup, if our defense doesn't have those turnovers against the Bears, I literally think that is a one score win probably.

I agree.

Fortunately for the Pack, there was Mitchell Trubisky. Hopefully, Carson Wentz will be as generous.

 

[tynimiller]

Agreed. Seems like a lot of people thought it was a one sided blowout, which the score makes it appear too be, the stats tell a different story. I agree with you, those turnovers were huge in a lot of ways, points, momentum, confidence, etc. I have a lot of confidence in our offense, but our defense probably is going to live or die off of turnovers.

I'd put it this way this year, if you gave this year's offense last year's defense we AT WORST I think have one loss - and would be one of the most complete teams in the league, not just our conference.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

I'd put it this way this year, if you gave this year's offense last year's defense we AT WORST I think have one loss - and would be one of the most complete teams in the league, not just our conference.

I'm not so sure that our defense was all that much better last year, but they did have more turnovers I think. I can't find where we were at after 11 games last season, but we finished 2019 with getting 25 turnovers and to date, we only have 12. Also, the differential in 2019 was +12, currently we are at +3.

 

[tynimiller]

They were much better at pressures, sacks and turnovers. They still its true weren't elite though.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

I'm not so sure that our defense was all that much better last year, but they did have more turnovers I think. I can't find where we were at after 11 games last season, but we finished 2019 with getting 25 turnovers and to date, we only have 12. Also, the differential in 2019 was +12, currently we are at +3.

Turnovers are one of those things you can't count on....You can do certain things to help force turnovers, but ultimately, the opposing team has to cooperate.

A lot of capital has been spent on this defense, and for whatever reason, it simply has not been very good. If I'm Matt LeFleur or Brian Gutekunst, that would be something I'd want to address this off-season.

 

[tynimiller]

A lot of capital has been spent on this defense, and for whatever reason, it simply has not been very good. If I'm Matt LeFleur or Brian Gutekunst, that would be something I'd want to address this off-season.

AMEN, it is either Pettine, the players or some of both. I lean to some of both.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

AMEN, it is either Pettine, the players or some of both. I lean to some of both.

Pettine and his staff have done very little with quite a bit. Meaning, they have been given quite a lot of draft and Free agent talent and yet here we are. Who has Pettine and his staff developed into a much better player than they were before coming to Green Bay? Jaire? Even with him, I would argue he was a pretty damn good player when he was drafted.

Capers wasn't really given a whole lot of free agent talent after Woodson, but given a ton of draft talent and he faltered in his final years too.

I expect coaches to develop players more, as well as get them to play on a consistent level and most importantly, as a consistent unit. I see quite a bit of individual talent on the Packer defense, but for whatever reason, the sum of the parts are not equaling the whole and I put that on coaching.

 

[Pugger]

Sadly, as I watched that game last night, I couldn't help but think of the same things "next week the Packer defense could allow this Eagles offense to look like a top 5 offense".

I think the Packer-Eagle game will be very similar to the last game against the Bears, in that we will be facing a very good defense and a crappy offense. However, our defense can make a bad offense look good.

Hopefully the Packer offense will continue to roll and the defense can get a few turnovers to help keep the Eagles from scoring too many points.

Our defense is better than Seattle's.

 

[Curly Calhoun]

Pettine and his staff have done very little with quite a bit. Meaning, they have been given quite a lot of draft and Free agent talent and yet here we are. Who has Pettine and his staff developed into a much better player than they were before coming to Green Bay? Jaire? Even with him, I would argue he was a pretty damn good player when he was drafted.

Capers wasn't really given a whole lot of free agent talent after Woodson, but given a ton of draft talent and he faltered in his final years too.

I expect coaches to develop players more, as well as get them to play on a consistent level and most importantly, as a consistent unit. I see quite a bit of individual talent on the Packer defense, but for whatever reason, the sum of the parts are not equaling the whole and I put that on coaching.

Alexander, Clark, Savage, Gary - all first round picks.

King and Jackson - high second round picks.

M. Adams, a third round pick

Z. Smith, P. Smith, Amos and Kirksey - all added as free agent signings. All starters.

And yet, the defense is underwhelming, and downright bad at times.

There has to be a reason.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Alexander, Clark, Savage, Gary - all first round picks.

King and Jackson - high second round picks.

M. Adams, a third round pick

Z. Smith, P. Smith, Amos and Kirksey - all added as free agent signings. All starters.

And yet, the defense is underwhelming, and downright bad at times.

There has to be a reason.

Exactly and thanks for doing the "grunt work" of listing them all. You even forgot recent picks of Burks (3rd round) and Josh Jones (2nd Rd.).

Frustrating as hell to see all of the draft and free agent capital as well as the salaries being spent on the defense, yet we have a marginal one at best. So either Gute (and TT before 2018) don't know squat about drafting defensive talent or Pettine and his staff kind of suck at coaching it up.

 

[Fredrik87]

Studs

Aaron Rodgers

Davante Adams

the entire OL but especially Jenkins and Turner.

Tonyan and Lewis

Lazard

Zadarius

Savage

Kevin King

Preston Smith

Matt Lafleur.

Duds.

Injuries to Corey Linsley and Savage.