Studs & Duds in Chicago

[OldSchool101]

This is getting Offensive! Talk about sticking it to him !

 

[Firethorn1001]

I don't remember them using Kraft at all.

Wasn't on Kraft. Obviously on the interception he was open and overthrown. On the long pass to Watson down to the 7, IMHO Kraft was the better option since I believe he was wide open around the 37. My guess is a completion to him gets it to around the 25. Those were the 2 that stuck out. Love just seemed to be looking way more down field rather than shorter for Kraft it seems.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

 

[Calebs Revenge]

Imagine if Da Bears had done the smart thing! Instead of running the clock down, they ran a few more plays and got closer! Had they done that, the kick would have been good, despite the excellent block!

nahhh...Bears gotta be Da Bears.

Cry harder, you're starting to sound like a Viking fan.

You must be logged in to see this image or video!

not sour grapes. It's been established that LVN admitted to pushing/lifting the guy that blocked it. It's illegal.
My coach couldn't successfully h.ump a football with a handful of via.gra and a pocket full of rubbers.
His coaching deficiencies have nothing to do with winning on an illegal play.

 

[Calebs Revenge]

Zero leverage was applied.
Total fabricated Story

NOW I know what’s wrong with the Bears organization. They play Victim mentality and blame everyone and anything other than themselves for their Woes. It’s a pretty pathetic low point for the Chicago Bears.

What’s worse is their schedule. The Chicago Bears got through the easy part. They are about to get brutalized.

8-2 Vikings
9-1 Lions
5-5 49ers at SF
8-2 Vikings
9-1 Lions
5-5 Seahawks
7-3 Packers at Lambeau

Good luck with that!

Oh no a top 5 pick AND Ben Johnson. Cool

 

[rmontro]

Gee, outside that one pick I thought he played pretty well.

You have a point. Even with the pick, he finished with a passer rating of 113 (Williams had a 95). Interestingly, Williams had a better QBR (83.3 to 80.7), with his 70 yards rushing. I don't usually pay attention to that stat though, being an ESPN invention. But it seemed like the Packers couldn't stay on the field too long (their TOP of only 23:39). They couldn't convert their 3rd downs like the Bears were (1-5 compared to 9-16. Plus GB was 0 for 1 on 4th downs).

Anyway, this season I've gone from being concerned about Love (I feel better now that he's healthy) to being concerned that our defense has taken a huge step backwards.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Studs: Watson, Jacobs, 11 straight wins
Dud: MLF - KICK THE DAMM FG!

I'm all in a a coach who "plays to win", and some would call that what MLF did on 4th and goal from the 6 yard line. But there's a difference when the likelihood of success is so low. What made it worse is that they didn't need 7 there. Taking 3 meant another 3 would win the game.

That was a weird call. And kudos to the new OC for the Bears for a game plan featuring CW running. They had the Packers d on their heels all day.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Studs - Brooks, Watson

Duds - LaFleur, Hafley, Doubs

Pike I'm curious. Why Doubs. I guess it could be because he was invisible all day.

That win came down to two people, Watson and Brooks. I don't like saying it but the Bears should have won that game. But MLF is right about one thing, never apologize for a win. Sounds like Bisaccia had them prepped for a block based on game tape.

 

[Heyjoe4]

2nd and 1 was inside the 10, they chose to pass, ended up with an extended play and got called for a 5 yd penalty on OL downfield. Then they tried the hand off to Reed for another 5 yd loss. On 3rd down Love threw the INT.

That was an awful series. And why pass on 2nd and 1 that close to the goal line? OK if they score a TD it's genius but looking to go up by 11, that close to the end zone, take the easy first down, burn some clock and keep going. Actually I'm surprised it didn't work cause pass is just not the right call. The Bears' D deserves the credit for that one. And another unforced error by Love on the pic.

How TF did they win that game?

 

[Heyjoe4]

You have a point. Even with the pick, he finished with a passer rating of 113 (Williams had a 95). Interestingly, Williams had a better QBR (83.3 to 80.7), with his 70 yards rushing. I don't usually pay attention to that stat though, being an ESPN invention. But it seemed like the Packers couldn't stay on the field too long (their TOP of only 23:39). They couldn't convert their 3rd downs like the Bears were (1-5 compared to 9-16. Plus GB was 0 for 1 on 4th downs).

Anyway, this season I've gone from being concerned about Love (I feel better now that he's healthy) to being concerned that our defense has taken a huge step backwards.

There are plenty of dud candidates in that game. Hafley and the D get top honor on my list. The Bears' OC had a brilliant game plan - who knew CW could run? But there were no adjustments made. Guys were way out of position. It's a miracle they won that game. Then again, it's the Bears. If a team is going to grab loss from the jaws of victory, it'll be the Bears.

 

[Pugger]

There are plenty of dud candidates in that game. Hafley and the D get top honor on my list. The Bears' OC had a brilliant game plan - who knew CW could run? But there were no adjustments made. Guys were way out of position. It's a miracle they won that game. Then again, it's the Bears. If a team is going to grab loss from the jaws of victory, it'll be the Bears.

Our D isn't playing as well as we had hoped but against Chicago with a new OC they were an entirely different unit than they were all season. I wasn't surprised to see Williams play well. He was the #1 player taken in that draft for a reason.

I hope the guys are still adapting to Hatley and losing Jaire yet again isn't helping. Our guys should be pressuring the QB a lot better too. Disappointing to say the least.

 

[PikeBadger]

Favre did that a lot and Rodgers did it repeatedly between 2015 and 2019.

 

[PikeBadger]

Pike I'm curious. Why Doubs. I guess it could be because he was invisible all day.

That win came down to two people, Watson and Brooks. I don't like saying it but the Bears should have won that game. But MLF is right about one thing, never apologize for a win. Sounds like Bisaccia had them prepped for a block based on game tape.

Dropped pass. I couldn't think of hardly any others that stood out. Yeah he was invisible and we have the 2nd worst dropped passes in the league. It's really annoying me. That and the penalties have derailed so many drives this year and put Love in too many bad situations.

 

[Thirteen Below]

I only partially disagree. Because I think you mean this as a compliment though, from a reverse viewpoint. Let me show you why this game was not usual if I may?

In games that Watson has been targeted (8 contests in ‘24) he averaged 3.85 targets per game. Yesterday he had 4 targets, so, in fact, he was not targeted more than normal. However he caught 4/4 and it’s only the 2nd game in 2024 (Tennessee 2/2) where Watson was 100% reception rate. Here it was on a bigger sample though as maybe you suggested. So this is his best performance in 2024 by a mile.

Here's another interesting stat for you, that I came across this afternoon. I know that these days, there's a stat for everything, and a lot of them are trivial and meaningless. But I think this one's interesting.

Christian Watson has played in 32 games for Green Bay. In 10 of those games, Watson has caught 4 or more passes, and Green Bay has won 7 of those 10. In the 22 games in which he caught 3 or fewer, Green Bay is 10-12.

If Watson catches at least 4 passes, we're .700. Fewer than 4 catches, .455.

This supports the argument that just having Watson on the field is not (in and of itself) a significant game-changer for the team - but having him actively involved does have a substantial impact. 3 years in, we have enough history to say that when he's consistently making a fuss, both teams play differently.

The opposing defense has to make enough significant changes to account for him that they don't have any choice but to give other playmakers more space to work with; and because of that, our offense plays better when he's catching footballs - the coaches have more options in the plays they call, and other offensive weapons have more space to work with.

When he is an active part of the game plan, it's almost as if the field is basically 5 yards wider and 5 yards longer - because like a black hole, his very presence warps space.

Lafleur has to get Watson more footballs. It's just irresponsible not to. I know that I was one of those saying last year that Green Bay has so many talented WRs that we really don't need a true #1 receiver, but I don't know if I can agree with that position anymore. I think we need to accept that we do need a #1 wideout, and thankfully we already have a damned good one on our roster.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Our D isn't playing as well as we had hoped but against Chicago with a new OC they were an entirely different unit than they were all season. I wasn't surprised to see Williams play well. He was the #1 player taken in that draft for a reason.

I hope the guys are still adapting to Hatley and losing Jaire yet again isn't helping. Our guys should be pressuring the QB a lot better too. Disappointing to say the least.

Yeah Williams looks like he was worthy of the #1 overall pick. He's playing very well for a rookie QB, and we learned on Sunday that he can run as well.

Maybe the players are still adapting to Hafley's 4-3 defense. The decrease in production from Gary is the most obvious example that it may not be working, or that the guys are still learning. Even so, I would expect them to be pretty well acquainted with his system by now. Didn't look that way on Sunday.

Is it harder to generate a solid pass rush with four down linemen rather than three? I don't know. The Packers seem to have the talent. Part of the problem imo is the lack of consistent production from Walker and LVN. Walker compensates somewhat by being great in coverage. LVN is starting to look like a miss. He can't bend at the waist/hips the way the best DEs can. He is routinely pushed around and behind the QB by the OT.

The CB group is gonna need an overhaul in the off season, much like the S group last year. JA is very good when he can play. The rest of them are JAGs, nothing special from Nixon, Stokes, Ballentine, Valentine, et al. Too late to fix now - but Gluten will surely make it a priority next season.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Here's another interesting stat for you, that I came across this afternoon. I know that these days, there's a stat for everything, and a lot of them are trivial and meaningless. But I think this one's interesting.

Christian Watson has played in 32 games for Green Bay. In 10 of those games, Watson has caught 4 or more passes, and Green Bay has won 7 of those 10. In the 22 games in which he caught 3 or fewer, Green Bay is 10-12.

If Watson catches at least 4 passes, we're .700. Fewer than 4 catches, .455.

This supports the argument that just having Watson on the field is not (in and of itself) a significant game-changer for the team - but having him actively involved does have a substantial impact. 3 years in, we have enough history to say that when he's consistently making a fuss, both teams play differently.

The opposing defense has to make enough significant changes to account for him that they don't have any choice but to give other playmakers more space to work with; and because of that, our offense plays better when he's catching footballs - the coaches have more options in the plays they call, and other offensive weapons have more space to work with.

When he is an active part of the game plan, it's almost as if the field is basically 5 yards wider and 5 yards longer - because like a black hole, his very presence warps space.

Lafleur has to get Watson more footballs. It's just irresponsible not to. I know that I was one of those saying last year that Green Bay has so many talented WRs that we really don't need a true #1 receiver, but I don't know if I can agree with that position anymore. I think we need to accept that we do need a #1 wideout, and thankfully we already have a damned good one on our roster.

Good points 13. I don't think Watson has risen to #1 WR status yet, but there is a good case that he should be that guy. He has dramatically improved his catching, even turning it to a strength. There's that phrase that a fast WR can "take the top off a defense" - and Watson has that ability. Love can be confident that "my guy can beat your guy" when he throws long and into about a five yard window. Hurts does this a lot with AJ Brown.

So I agree Watson should be getting more targets. That unlocks the talent of Doubs, Reed, Wicks and the rest of the very good WRs on the team - and really stresses a DC.

 

[Heyjoe4]

Dropped pass. I couldn't think of hardly any others that stood out. Yeah he was invisible and we have the 2nd worst dropped passes in the league. It's really annoying me. That and the penalties have derailed so many drives this year and put Love in too many bad situations.

Thanks Pike and good points. Wicks has been the worst (or best) at dropping the ball. Doubs usually has reliable hands, but he was just invisible Sunday. I get that Watson had a big day, but that doesn't mean the rest of the WRs should be given the day off. MLF is usually an excellent play caller. Almost none of that was evident Sunday.

And penalties....... Seemed like that got cleaned up a bit in the Bears game. About time.

We'll see just how good this D is on Sunday against the Niners. I think they have McCaffrey back. Either way, Hafley has to get his guys ready to play, or hopes for a deep post season run will fade away.

 

[Voyageur]

Watson had a great game. Doubs didn't. Something was wrong there. Can't pin point it. The drop seemed to end his being targeted. Josh Jacobs is the real deal, like I said he would be. He's not a cutesy running back, he's a blue collar, hard-nosed, run them over type of back, who has some moves, and can sting you when you hit him. He's durable, whereas Jones never was. You need the dependability Josh has if you're going to identify yourself as a running team in this league. We have the horses behind him as well, who can spell him. A real luxury if we get the 4th out on the field, and he measures up.

Cox showed some good things, and he showed he needs to pay attention to protecting that corner a little better. I think it will come, because he's a pretty good defender. We failed to contain Williams. He was free to scamper everywhere on broken plays. His legs are his major weapon, and he can throw very well on the run. But, still, our coverage was enough to keep them from racking up too many points.

Whelan did a good job of keeping the Bears in check on returns with his punting. He's definitely the right guy for the job.

We got lucky, and then again, it was good play. Had the kick not been low, and had we not had interior defensive linemen who were insistent on penetrating that line, that block would have never happened. It was the 3 interior rushers who disrupted the blocking so much that they were able to get enough penetration that the block could be made.

That's 3 games that we've won, out of the last 4 played, where we won because of the kicking game. Twice because our kicks were good, and once because the opposition missed one.

As for Le Fleur's coaching for this game? It did not measure up. The players and assistants won this game in spite of Matt's bad game management. Too many plays that were predictable, and that's gotten to a point where when you're watching the games, you know exactly what's coming next.

 

[OldSchool101]

Oh no a top 5 pick AND Ben Johnson. Cool

I don’t know. I live the draft and having Capital, but I’d rather qualify as a lowly #7 seed. The whole reason you draft is to make the Playoffs, when it becomes more exciting to draft high? You’ve lost the vision needed. Fans deserve better than to draft high every season

Personally I’d rather finish strong with winning 4 of my last 6 and pick #18 in the draft

 

[Heyjoe4]

Watson had a great game. Doubs didn't. Something was wrong there. Can't pin point it. The drop seemed to end his being targeted. Josh Jacobs is the real deal, like I said he would be. He's not a cutesy running back, he's a blue collar, hard-nosed, run them over type of back, who has some moves, and can sting you when you hit him. He's durable, whereas Jones never was. You need the dependability Josh has if you're going to identify yourself as a running team in this league. We have the horses behind him as well, who can spell him. A real luxury if we get the 4th out on the field, and he measures up.

Cox showed some good things, and he showed he needs to pay attention to protecting that corner a little better. I think it will come, because he's a pretty good defender. We failed to contain Williams. He was free to scamper everywhere on broken plays. His legs are his major weapon, and he can throw very well on the run. But, still, our coverage was enough to keep them from racking up too many points.

Whelan did a good job of keeping the Bears in check on returns with his punting. He's definitely the right guy for the job.

We got lucky, and then again, it was good play. Had the kick not been low, and had we not had interior defensive linemen who were insistent on penetrating that line, that block would have never happened. It was the 3 interior rushers who disrupted the blocking so much that they were able to get enough penetration that the block could be made.

That's 3 games that we've won, out of the last 4 played, where we won because of the kicking game. Twice because our kicks were good, and once because the opposition missed one.

As for Le Fleur's coaching for this game? It did not measure up. The players and assistants won this game in spite of Matt's bad game management. Too many plays that were predictable, and that's gotten to a point where when you're watching the games, you know exactly what's coming next.

Yeah I hope the bad play calling Sunday was an outlier. MLF is a good play caller, but even good play callers get stopped when they become predictable. One example - I'd be fine with no more end arounds to Reed this year. You can see it coming a mile away. Just one example. Having good plays is fine as long as they surprise the D.

And Jacobs is the real deal. Nothing flashy until you look at the stat line and see he's routinely contributing 100-150 yards in total offense.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

It's been established that LVN admitted to pushing/lifting the guy that blocked it. It's illegal.

"lifting"? Show me where "it's been established" that LVN lifted Brooks. LVN simply said he got behind Brooks and pushed him. The rule is that you can't gain leverage from another player.

Eberflus is actually trying to say that the Packers “were on our long snapper”. The rules state that you can't line-up in front of the LS during a FG or XP attempt. The Packers did not. There is no rule, that I am aware of, preventing the defense from rushing through the LS once the ball is snapped, which is what they did. Was LVN's **** push enough to warrant a "leverage" penalty? I have watched that play over and over, and I think LVN is trying to take way too much credit for what he did.

"Leverage" in my book isn't being pushed in the butt, leverage would be using a teammates back, shoulders, to elevate yourself.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

Our guys should be pressuring the QB a lot better too.

No doubt that the front 7 for the Packers needs to get more pressure on QB's. On that last Bear drive, Hatley fell into the same trap that we saw our previous DC's fall into. He dials up the pressures with blitzes, gets 2 sacks in a row and then goes soft on 3rd and long. I just don't get it. Aggressive play was what made it 3rd and long and now you are going to just let the QB sit back, eventually find a lane to run to a first down or an open receiver.

Covering receivers isn't as easy as everyone thinks. Even shut down corners will have a hard time covering a good receiver for more than 4 or 5 seconds. I absolutely hate playing "prevent defense" to try and hold a 1 score lead and time on the clock. I have watched a few Chiefs games this season, as well as a few other good teams. The good ones don't do this. They blitz, they stunt, they do whatever it takes to hurry that QB, especially a rookie one. Packers did very little of that ALL day Sunday. That is on the DC. Yes, the Packer front 7 needs to improve, but calling plays that rely on that instant improvement? That is on the DC.

 

[OldSchool101]

"lifting"? Show me where "it's been established" that LVN lifted Brooks. LVN simply said he got behind Brooks and pushed him. The rule is that you can't gain leverage from another player.

Eberflus is actually trying to say that the Packers “were on our long snapper”. The rules state that you can't line-up in front of the LS during a FG or XP attempt. The Packers did not. There is no rule, that I am aware of, preventing the defense from rushing through the LS once the ball is snapped, which is what they did. Was LVN's **** push enough to warrant a "leverage" penalty? I have watched that play over and over, and I think LVN is trying to take way too much credit for what he did.

"Leverage" in my book isn't being pushed in the butt, leverage would be using a teammates back, shoulders, to elevate yourself.

LVN pushed against Wyatt more than he did Karl. I seriously would bet if you eliminated LVN on that play it’s still blocked. LVN had 0% effect and if he’s taking credit he’s an idiot! Sorry but Id say that to his face. and then run!

 

[Magooch]

"Leverage" in my book isn't being pushed in the butt, leverage would be using a teammates back, shoulders, to elevate yourself.

This is the way it has always been called as well: leverage is something you do yourself, not something that is done to you, if that makes sense.
Vaulting off a player's shoulder pads is leverage. Pushing off a fellow defender's shoulder pads to elevate *yourself* is leverage. Being pushed in the back/butt is *not*.

I'm sounding like a broken record now (and I suspect it is falling on deaf ears, at least when it comes to the ones who need to hear it), but the rule only states that you can be called for unsportsmanlike conduct for "Picking up a teammate to block or attempt to block an opponent’s kick or apparent kick" (12.3.1q)

And I think we all understand that there is a big difference between "picking up" your teammate vs pushing their back and continuing to push them as they elevate *themselves* by jumping. Even using the absolute most generous interpretation of "picking up" you'd have a hard time to justify a foul there.

 

[Pokerbrat2000]

LVN pushed against Wyatt more than he did Karl. I seriously would bet if you eliminated LVN on that play it’s still blocked. LVN had 0% effect and if he’s taking credit he’s an idiot! Sorry but Id say that to his face. and then run!

Honestly, the more I dive into the rules and as @Magooch points out, what LVN did wasn't a penalty.

What I did miss is this and it is what Eberflus is trying to argue. The defense isn't allowed to line up over the LS, the Packers didn't. However, the defense is also not allow to contact the LS until 1 second after the snap.

I hope Eberflus had his stop watch out!