Sports Truths

This website will enlighten you as to what really happens in sports events--how bad coaching and officiating determine the outcome of many games.

You are here: Home / Archives for Chicago bears

Eagles-bears Playoff Game

by

Most people are blaming Cody Parkey’s missed field-goal attempt for the bears losing the game. Yes, had he made the kick, the bears win. However, let’s look at all of the other plays that impacted the outcome and that should also be discussed.

  1. The bears punted into the endzone, which would have given the ball to the Eagles at their 20. The Eagles were offsides, resulting in a re-kick which went out of bounds at the 1, and resulted in a punt to the Eagle 48. No excuse for being offsides.
  2. The bears were going to punt, but an unnecessary roughness call when an Eagle player retaliated with a shove, gave the bears a first down and resulted in a field goal–3 gift points.
  3. All game, the Eagles ran up the middle for little or no gain, hurting their offensive production.
  4. With 13 seconds left in the half, an Eagle defensive back dropped an easy interception in the endzone, and the bears got a field goal. 3 more gift points, for a 6-3 bear halftime lead.
  5. With the lead at the end of the game, the Eagles kicked off to Tarik Cohen, an All-Pro returner, instead of deep or out of the endzone for a touchback. Cohen had a long return, setting up what would have been the game-winning field goal had the kick been good. Why open yourself to a big play, especially when there is little time left, when you don’t have to?

Packer-bear Game

by

The bears won the game at home by 7 points, and here are some relevant facts regarding the game and season:


1.  As Olin Kreutz said on the postgame show, the bears were relatively healthy and the Packers came in with 8 or 9 starters on IR.  These are the starters the Packers were missing:


Offense

Receiver–Geronimo Allison

Running Back–Aaron Jones, who I believe leads the league in yards/rush, got hurt in the first quarter and didn’t return.

Tight End–Jimmy Graham played, but played with a broken thumb.

Offensive Line–Missing Bulaga and another starter, and Taylor just returned from an injury.

Quarterback–Aaron Rodgers injured his groin toward the end of the first half.


Defense

Defensive Line–Missing Daniels, Clark, and Wilkerson, all excellent linemen.

Linebackers–Missing Perry and Ryan.  I believe Ryan was their leading tackler last year, and has missed the entire season.

Defensive Backs–King and House


So, a decimated team missing many starters played the bears in Chicago and lost by 7.


2.  Joe Philbin played a big part in giving the bears 10 points with terrible coaching decisions.


3.  I understand that this is just luck and the Packers might have benefited from this in the past, but for this year:


The Packers and Vikings played the Seahawks in Seattle, where they are very tough, and the bears played them in Chicago.


The Packers and Vikings played the Patriots and Rams on the road, and the bears played both at home.  The bears played the Rams in Chicago in December, and the Rams can’t play in cold weather.  They played poorly in their other game in cold weather.


4.  Here is an excerpt from an article a friend sent me after today’s game:
“The difference is most of what Trubisky does results from beautiful play design, giving him simple reads and open receivers.  Trubisky will make a handful of plays every game on his own, backbreaking because of how hard Nagy’s offense can be on its own.  Rodgers still makes those plays; it’s the rest of the time that has been like pulling teeth.  If the only way the offense can succeed is Rodgers making plays, that’s not sustainable over 16 games in 2018, not the way offenses exploded this season. 

 
As has been the case all season, the Packers’ urgency ramped up in the second half as they fought their way back.”


5.  Despite all of the above, the Packers and bears came into the game tied with 8-5 records and the Packers holding the tiebreaker.

bears’ 46 Defense–More Evidence

by

As many previous posts have detailed, I said since about 1983 how easy the 46 defense was to beat, and why teams’ offensive strategies against it were so wrong, guaranteed to fail, and made the bears’ defense looked dominant.  I continued to say this throughout the 1985 season.  I said that by putting 8 guys in the box, it was impossible to run against and the quarterback didn’t have time to sit in the pocket due to the rush, but what would work was quick, short passes, as the middle area of the defense was open due to 8 in the box.  The few times teams did run a play like this, it worked.  As we know, when Washington did it in the 1986-season playoffs, they beat the bears at home.  We also know that in 1985, in the game the bears lost to the Dolphins, Marino rolled out to avoid the blitz and threw quick, short passes.  We also know that about a year after the 1985 season, a number of national publications wrote about why no one played the 46 anymore, including Buddy Ryan who was coaching the Eagles, since teams figured out how to beat it.  We also know that Bobby Knight, when asked who would win the Super Bowl after the 1985 season, said New England would win, as they would very effectively hurt the bears with short passes.  We also know that Mike Ditka, the head coach of those teams, said about a year ago that opponents’ offensive strategies were all wrong, and had they not gone into max protect but spread out the receivers and done the other things I talked about, it would have been very effective and would have forced the bears to change their scheme.  He said teams should have attacked the defense, which is what I said.

I could never understand why something so blatantly obvious was unable to be seen by football coaches that have looked at film their entire careers.  These teams kept using strategy that had no chance of success and continued to fail, when the vulnerability of the defense was staring them in the face.  No other great defense continues to have people talk about its vulnerabilities as the bear 46 does.  The Super Bowl started with a quick, short pass to a wide-open tight end for a nice gain, but the tight end’s knee gave out and he couldn’t catch the ball.  The next play was a quick, short pass over the middle to a wide-open Stanley Morgan for what should have been a TD, but he dropped it.  The Patriots then started running the ball, and of course lost big.

Comcast aired a program about the 46 the other night, and more and more proof of what I’ve said all along was provided.  Marv Levy was interviewed, and he said that teams stopped playing the 46 because quick throws worked, “and the secondary was pretty much denuded because the line of scrimmage was so stacked and that finally became the way to attack the 46.”  Finally?!!!  I said this for years before other coaches figured this out, and this was blatantly obvious to anyone who understood football.  Levy continued, “and like everything else, it evolves in and it evolves out and something new comes up.”  Again, no one talks about vulnerabilities of the Ravens’ and Steelers’ defenses.

The Comcast program also talked about the Miami game, and spoke about Marino having success because he rolled out from the blitz and made quick throws to Nat Moore.  As the Dolphins went with 3 wide receivers and threw quickly to Moore, the bears could not cover this.  Moore was one-on-one, and could break plays since there were 8 defenders in the box.  Exactly what I said to do with the quick passes.  Did other teams learn from this?  Of course not.

bears’ 46 Defense

by

Previous posts cover what I’ve said since about 1983–how easy it was to beat the bears’ 46 defense due to its vulnerabilities.  These posts have also discussed the fact that Mike Ditka recently said this, and national publications talked about this after the 1986 or 1987 season.  It is how Jay Schroeder beat the bears in the first round of the 1986-season playoffs.  Here are two articles that discuss similar strategy to what I’ve always said.

The first article is by Kevin Clark, and was in the February 3, 2015 Wall Street Journal.  Please pay particular attention to why coaches don’t do smart things and to the last sentence, as these things are exactly what I’ve said.

Only Bill Belichick could look at a team that lost by 35 points and decide he has to steal their ideas.

A year ago, the Seattle Seahawks vaulted to the top of the football world by dismantling Peyton Manning’s Denver Broncos, 43-8, in Super Bowl XLVIII. The Seahawks did it by forcing virtually all of Manning’s throws to be short, harmless tosses. That was all that Seattle’s fortress of a defense would allow—little passes in front of them that went for negligible yardage.

So when Belichick and the New England Patriots needed a strategy for Sunday’s Super Bowl, he chose seemingly the most irrational one possible: an attack based on those short, seemingly harmless tosses.

It wasn’t the most brilliant game plan in history, but it may have been the most practical.

New England’s dinking and dunking down the field was the football equivalent of driving cross-country because you’re afraid to fly. It took the Patriots forever to get to their destination, but they got there. Although the interception Seattle threw at the goal line—an unforced error unlike any in sports history—gave New England the victory, it was the Patriots’ counterintuitive offensive approach that got them in position to win in the first place. That strategy enabled them to overcome a 10-point fourth-quarter deficit against one of the greatest defenses in NFL history.

In fact, Tom Brady , the game’s most valuable player and perhaps the greatest quarterback in history, was historically conservative Sunday night. There have been 88 quarterbacks to play in the Super Bowl. Only six of those had a worse mark than his 8.86 yards per completion. All of those quarterbacks lost—including Peyton Manning.

Given the many strengths of the Seattle defense, though, Belichick’s ploy made sense. What do you do when your opponent has built a defense that prevents you from throwing deep, eliminates the popular “back-shoulder” sideline throw” and basically walls off the outside of the field? You swear off huge chunks of a typical football game plan. Sunday’s Super Bowl was about a team admitting its limitations.

About three years ago, the Seahawks decided that big, physical cornerbacks, who were undervalued in the speed-obsessed NFL, were the way to stop the league’s best passers. Cornerback Richard Sherman became a star, and Seattle’s roster of 6 feet-and-over cornerbacks provided no room for wide receivers to operate.

But wide receiver Julian Edelman knew things would be different on Sunday. “You’re not going to run fades on them. I’m 5-10; they’re 6-2,” Edelman said. “Coach kept on saying, ‘You’ve got to use your quickness.’ ”

That is exactly what happened. Time after time, Brady would find receivers over the middle of the field for one of those short, quick passes that the Seahawks would allow. Then the receiver—Edelman, Brandon LaFell, Rob Gronkowski or Danny Amendola—would simply dive ahead and get a few yards where they could. It wasn’t particularly glamorous.

New England avoided throwing at Sherman, which could be considered an act of football cowardice. Counterpoint: The Patriots didn’t care. Edelman knew that such routes would work on the Seahawks’ big defensive backs, since they couldn’t move as quickly in tight spaces as the Patriots receivers.

So the question becomes: Why haven’t other teams successfully employed Belichick’s plan? That is complicated. NFL coaches can be stubborn, yes, but there is also the belief that if you are good at something, you shouldn’t abandon it, no matter the circumstances. So teams that rely on throwing outside and deep—common in today’s NFL—tend to do so despite the odds.

There were always whispers about how to beat the Seahawks. The San Francisco 49ers, for instance, knew that they could annoy the rival Seahawks by shifting to those sleek speedsters, but then that would complicate the 49ers’ blocking schemes. So they never really made much of an effort.

There were routes that coaches around the league privately knew could get those big cornerbacks gasping for air—double moves that require a few jukes—but the quarterbacks would need to hang in the pocket to deliver those passes, a tough task against the ferocious Seahawks pass defense. The Patriots decided it was best to get the ball out quickly Sunday night.

Of course, the lasting memory from this game will be Malcolm Butler’s game-saving interception for New England—or, rather, Seahawks coach Pete Carroll’s inexplicable decision to call for a pass from the goal line in the final minute instead of a run. But when NFL strategy aficionados study this game, they may see the end of an era.

Since the Seahawks burst onto the scene in 2012, every team was looking to get taller. Receivers who looked like power forwards became trendy, as did cornerbacks who were 6 feet and up. But on Sunday night, Belichick and Brady unveiled the blueprint: if a team is great at something, don’t give them a chance to execute it.

The second article was on the WEEI 93.7 FM website:

TOM BRADY’S NEAR PERFECTION WITH QUICK SNAP-TO-RELEASE TIMES LEADS PATRIOTS TO SUPER BOWL WIN, MVP

 02.05.15 at 9:51 pm ET
By Ryan Hannable

It’s no secret Tom Brady likes to get the ball out his hands quick, especially against good defenses.

That was exactly what the quarterback was facing in the Super Bowl and the Seahawks’ No. 1 pass ranked defense, and it was no surprise the game plan was to get the ball out quick, as Brady averaged 2.09 seconds by our count from snap-to-release Sunday in Super Bowl XLIX.

These numbers were similar to the divisional round game against the Ravens when Brady averaged 2.27 seconds from snap-to-throw.

“We were playing a great defense and they’€™re a great team,” Brady said after the game. “Took everything all the way to the last play. Just proud of our effort and our determination. We showed it all year. Every team has a journey and a lot of people lost faith in us early, but we held strong, we held together, and it’€™s a great feeling.”

As a reminder, these numbers need to take into consideration of plays such as quick receiver screens effecting the numbers a bit, but it was clear Brady and the Patriots offense wanted to get the ball out quick and keep the Seattle defense on its heels.

Overall for the season, Brady’s average times were around 2.4 seconds by our count, and he actually struggled when they were close to two seconds, as in Weeks 2-4 he took an average of 2.1 seconds, and struggled by his standards. Then in Week 16 against the Jets, in one of his worst statistical games of the year, Brady averaged 2.21 seconds.

In the postseason, Brady excelled when he got the ball out quick, and no more than he did Sunday against the Seahawks.

By our count, when taking less than two seconds from snap-to-release, Brady was 21-for-22 with 163 yards and three touchdowns. Even further, according to Pro Football Focus, when Brady took 2.5 seconds or less from snap-to-attempt he had a 127.9 passer rating, this compared to when he took more than 2.5 seconds, his passer rating was 42.4.

Overall in the postseason, also per Pro Football Focus, the Patriots quarterback completed 75 percent of his passes for a 115 passer rating when taking 2.5 seconds or less from snap-to-throw, and when taking more than 2.5 seconds he completed just 48.3 percent of his passes and had a passer rating of 46.3.

Averaging 2.09 seconds from snap-to-throw is absurd, as no quarterback in the league came close to that over the course of the regular season. According to Pro Football Focus, the two quarterbacks coming even close to Brady on average for the year were Andy Dalton (2.25 seconds) and Peyton Manning (2.22 seconds).

While many people have the belief of the more time a quarterback gets the better they are, Brady has proven this postseason the opposite — the quicker he gets the ball out to Julian Edelman, Rob Gronkowski and Danny Amendola, the better he is.

Officiating in the September Packer-bear Game

by

Let’s go back and review the officiating in the first Packer-bear game this year.

1.  On the bears’ opening drive, they had 3rd-and-4 from the Packer 31.  Cutler scrambled to the 19, and hands-to-the-face was called on Peppers, tacking on more yards and resulting in a bear TD.  Peppers never had his hands near Mills’ face, and it was actually Mills who grabbed Peppers in the face.  Instead of it being 3rd-and-14 after the hold, the bears took a 7-0 lead.

2.  When it was 7-7, Cutler ran for a first down at the Packer 20.  Unnecessary roughness was called on Shields, moving the ball to the 10.  This was another bad call (the announcers agreed both calls were bad), and the bears got a field goal.

3.  The Packers got a first down at the bear 38, and Mundy was called for a blow to the head.  This was a bad call, and the refs picked up the flag and said no penalty.  The TV announcers talked about it being a bad call, and never said the flag was picked up, resulting in bear fans thinking there was a bad call when there wasn’t.

4.  McCarthy argued he called timeout but the refs didn’t give it to him, resulting in a 12-men-on-the-field penalty.  This helped the bears get a first down at the Packer 15, and a TD.

5.  The Packers had a second-and-one at the bear 37.  Nelson was given the first down, but the Packers were short and it should have been third-and-one.

6.  In the third quarter, holding was called on the Packers.  The announcers said it looked like a bad call.  This resulted in a second-and-12, and resulted in a 53-yard field goal instead of a potential touchdown.

7.  Up 31-17 in the 4th quarter, the Packers were at the bear 5 and kicked a field goal, but a bad holding call against the bears gave the Packers a first down and eventual touchdown.

Let me quote Hub Arkush, the bears’ analyst, in the Chicago Sun-Times, who did say calls hurt both teams:  “The two most bizarre calls were a 5-yard illegal-use-of-hands call on Julius Peppers that should actually have been on Jordan Mills, who was trying to block him, and a 10-yard unnecessary-roughness call on Sam Shields against Jay Cutler.”

New England Gets It

by

I’ve said all year the bears’ back seven can’t cover anyone, and teams should continuously pass against them.  The Packers did this in Game 4, and scored every time they had the ball with the exception of a blocked short field goal.  The week before, Miami completed its first 14 passes.

New England threw a lot, and of course, had great success.  Brady was 13-14 at one point, and finished the half at 18-21 for 203 yards and 4 TDs.  The Patriots had 298 yards and 22 first downs.  He was 3-3 to start the second half, as they continued to be aggressive, and ended up 5-6 on the second-half opening drive, and they scored at TD.  They threw every play on this drive after having a 38-7 halftime lead.  It’s smart to put the game away, and not get conservative, giving the bears a chance to come back.  The second drive, he was 3-3, and he was 27-31 for 5 TDs at that point.  He was later 30-34 for 354 yards, and ended the game 30-35 for 354 yards and 32 first downs.  Of the 5 incompletions, 3 were dropped passes.

Dolphins’ Coach Doesn’t Get It Either

by

Although the Dolphins beat the bears, their coaching staff showed that they don’t understand some fundamental things.

Up 7-0, the Dolphins had the ball at the bear 28 with a chance to go up 14-0.  Receivers were wide open all game, as the bears’ opponent’s were the previous week, and the Dolphins were moving the ball through the air, but they decided to run on first and second down, which led to a sack and a missed field goal.  Miami was 14 of 14 passing with a minute to play in the half, so it was obvious to all the bears couldn’t stop the pass.  Tannehill had 176 yards and 2 TDs in the first half.  The bears only had 54 yards in the first half, so had the Dolphins been aggressive, they could have put the game away.

With 5 seconds left in the half, up 14-0, the Dolphins were at the bear 46.  Instead of throwing a Hail Mary, they punted.

Up 24-7 with about ten minutes left in the fourth quarter, the Dolphins had a first down at the bear 12.  A TD basically ends the game.  Instead of passing and ending the game, they ran on first and second down, then had a short field goal blocked.  The failure to put the game away and resulting change in momentum from the block resulted in the bears scoring a TD and a 24-14 score, which means it’s still anybody’s game.

 

McCarthy and Falcon Coach Still Don’t Understand

by

Mike McCarthy’s failure to see that running stops drives and passing on first down leads to scores continues to hurt the Packers.  Despite struggling in games when the run is emphasized, and dominating in games when they pass on first downs and often, McCarthy continues to not get this.  Recently, Rodgers came down on the gameplan, McCarthy let him pass a lot against the bears, and the Packers scored on basically every possession to win by a lot.  When the Packers run, the games are close, and can go either way.  Against Miami this week, the Packers passed on their first drive, scored a TD, then ran on their second drive and punted.  When I saw the conservative gameplan, I said the game would come down to the end and could go either way, and that’s exactly what happened.  The Packers were fortunate to win a game they should have won easily, but that’s been McCarthy’s gameplan for the majority of his time at Green Bay.  He has cost them many wins, and many of their wins were close when they didn’t have to be.

Atlanta’s coach also doesn’t get it.  Falcon receivers were wide open all game, but they continued to stall drives with runs.  In the third quarter, down 13-10, I said if the Falcons run on second down, they won’t get a first down on that series.  They ran, didn’t get a first down, and kicked a field goal to tie.  The bears then scored a TD to go up 20-13.  On the next drive, I said the same thing–if the Falcons run on second down, they won’t get a first down, and again, that’s what happened.  They punted, the bears scored a TD to go up by 14, and the game was over.  Coaches just don’t get this.  The bears’ top 4 linebackers were out, and the secondary was hurt by injuries.  Receivers were wide open, and they were running the ball.  Granted, the Falcons dropped 7 passes which hurt them badly, but to not keep passing when the receivers were so open was ridiculous.  Three starting offensive linemen were out for Atlanta, so why did they think they could run?

 

 

Refs, Opponents Get bears Off To A 2-1 Start

by

bears-BUFFALO

After Buffalo dropped a pass that would have given them a first down on their opening drive, they played press coverage with no safety help on Jeffery.  Cutler saw it, and I imagine he audibled to a bomb to Jeffery, which was good for 44 yards to the Buffalo 12, resulting in a TD and a 7-0 lead.  Why do defenders continue to play press coverage with no safety help, especially on good receivers?  Any watching of gamefilms of the bears last year would make this obvious.

In the third quarter with the score 17-10 Buffalo, the Bills played press coverage with no safety help on Marshall, resulting in a TD pass to him and a 17-17 score.

bears–49ERS

I have always said teams should be aggressive and try to put their opponents away early, as turnovers, fluke plays, injuries, etc. can turn a game.  Letting an opponent hang around when those things can happen makes no sense.  Here is a quote from the Chicago Sun-Times regarding this game:

“The 49ers should have had a much bigger halftime lead than the 17-7 advantage they took into their locker room.  They seemed to think they could toy with the bears.  But when the big plays started piling up against the Niners, it became apparent they had made a massive error in judgment.”

The statement above is true.  The 49ers could have put this game away early, and not allowed a bad call to turn the game and give it to the bears.  Hines Ward, one of the announcers, also talked about how the 49ers should have had a bigger lead.

The 49ers led 17-0 in the first half, and it could have been worse had they passed more.  With 1:03 left in the half, the bears would have had a second-and-15 at the 49er 40, when a pass rusher blatantly roughed Cutler, going headfirst into his chest after he threw.  In addition to the danger of the hit, which should be cause for suspension, the 15-yard penalty and first down resulted in the bears scoring a TD before the end of the half and getting some momentum.  In addition, I believe Cutler was 8 of 18 for 38 yards before the hit, and went 15 of 16 for 138 yards after it.  There were defensive holding and illegal contact penalties on this drive prior to the roughing-the-passer penalty, and the 49ers had 16 penalties for 118 yards for the game.  Al Michaels said the 49ers “were shooting themselves in the foot all night long.”

The score was 17-7 at half, S.F.  The 49ers had a chance to basically put the game away with the opening drive of the second half and regain momentum after giving the bears a TD at the end of the half.  They had first-and-5 from the bear 6.  I stated at the time that if the 49ers passed, the game would be over, but if they ran, the bears could win.  The 49ers ran 3 times for no yards and kicked a FG.  Terrible coaching.

The 49ers still had a chance to keep momentum, and had the bears third-and-9 from the bear 21.  A defensive lineman grabbed a bear lineman’s facemask, and instead of letting go, held it for a few seconds, guaranteeing a penalty and a continuation of the drive.  The 49ers held the bears on that play and the bears would have had to punt had the lineman let go.  I’ve seen this many times, and immediately said the bears would march the length of the field to get a TD and momentum, and that is exactly what happened.  That made the score 20-14 S.F.

It was critical for S.F. to get momentum back.  On the first play of the next drive, Fuller intercepted for the bears and returned it to the 6, making it first-and-goal from the 3 after a penalty.  This gave the bears a TD, giving them the lead, and the momentum change of now being down and losing in a game they had complete control of caused Kaepernick to throw an interception on the next drive, stopping a drive and resulting in a bear TD that gave the bears a 28-20 lead.  The problem with all of this is that Fuller interfered with Crabtree on the first interception, and the early bumping of Crabtree directly resulted in the ball going to Fuller.  Had the correct call been made, the 49ers get a first down and continue their drive, still leading 20-14.  This call gave the bears 14 points and the game.

The announcers and a former bear player who is now a sportsradio host talked about the bears loading the box to stop the run, and the 49ers didn’t take advantage of this.  The 49ers had open receivers and the bears are vulnerable to the pass, but the 49ers didn’t take advantage of this.

Had the bears lost this game, their record would be 0-2, and they would be reeling after a bad loss at home and losing game 2.  As a result of the bad call, the bears are 1-1 and have the confidence of a big upset win, impacting the rest of the season.

bears-JETS

Here is an excerpt from Dan Hanzus on nfl.com:

Suspect officiating haunted the Jets in the first half. A bad pass interference call on Darrin Walls set up the bears’ second touchdown of the game. Late in the second quarter, officials prematurely blew the whistle on a Demario Davis touchdown return of a Jay Cutler fumble. The Jets were rewarded the ball — but not the touchdown — upon review, and went three-and-out in their next possession.  Marty Mornhinweg did not have a great night. The Jets’ offensive coordinator — already a beleaguered figure in Gotham after his doomed time out call in Green Bay last week — got too cute in his playcalling, putting the Jets in bad situations. Mornhinweg’s nadir was a QB draw call on 3rd-and-goal late in the third quarter, a play that fooled no one and lost two yards. Said ESPN’s Jon Gruden: “For the life of me, I don’t understand that call.”

The radio sports-talkshow hosts said before the game that the Jets could not settle for field goals if they wanted to win–they had to go for TDs.  The Jets weren’t aggressive when in the red zone, and settled for FGs, costing them the game.  They were inside the bear 25 seven times, and were in the red zone 6 times.  I think they had one TD from this.

Here is what happened:

On the second offensive play, Geno Smith threw a pass right to a bear defender, for an interception return for a TD.  The Jets then muffed a punt, resulting in another bear TD and a 14-0 lead after about 5 minutes.  This TD was the result of a horrible pass-interference call on a long pass that gave the bears a first down at the Jet 7.  Two absolute gift TDs.  First-down runs then stalled redzone drives, resulting in Jet field goals.  With 1:34 left in the half, Cutler fumbled and the Jets returned it for a TD that would have given them a 20-17 lead, momentum from scoring at the end of the half, and momentum from overcoming an early 14-0 deficit.  However, the refs mistakenly blew the whistle, stopping the play.  The officials not only gave the bears their second TD, but stole this TD from the Jets.

The bears scored a TD on their first drive of the second half, helped by a 42-yard pass to Jeffery who got the gift of press coverage.  With 5:00 left in the third quarter, down 24-13, the Jets had a first down at the bear 18, and Smith threw a pass while up in the air, which was intercepted in the endzone.  Later in the third quarter, still down 24-13, the Jets had a first down on the bear 10.  They ran on first down for no gain and kicked a field goal.  Down 27-19 (a TD and 2-point conversion), the Jets had fourth-and-5 from the bear 9 with 1:04 left in the fourth quarter.  On the pass in the endzone, the receiver was blatantly interfered with, which should have given the Jets a first down at the bear 1.  Instead, the game was over.  Another TD taken from the Jets.

Had the bears been 0-3, which they would have been if not for the refs, their season would be over.  Instead, they are 2-1 and have some momentum and confidence.

 

Officiating at Packer-bear Game

by

I have heard a number of comments regarding the officiating at the Packer-bear game, so will address that here.  I will also address McCarthy’s decision not to go for two points early in the fourth quarter, which I agree with, but others don’t.

1.  The Packers kicked off to start the game, and after Hester’s big return, the refs called a personal-foul penalty on the Packers, allowing the bears to start their first possession in Packer territory.  As the kickoff return was ending, a bear player slapped a Packer player in the face in the open field, which should have been easy for the refs to see.  The Packer player retaliated, and of course the refs only called the penalty on the Packers.  The announcers talked about this, as it was obvious.  So, on the first play of the game, the refs were already making bad calls to hurt the Packers.  (Let’s not forget that the bears “beat” the Bengals by twice committing personal fouls, not being called for them, and the Bengals being called for retaliating.)

2.  The bears had to punt on that first drive, and the ball was downed just before the goal line.  The officials ruled a touchback, giving the ball to the Packers on the 20.  I don’t believe either bear player who touched the ball was on the goal line and the ball should have been inside the one, but the officials needed what they called conclusive proof to overturn the call, and did not feel they had it.  I do believe it was a bad call.  However, if not for the bad call in Point 1 above, this play never happens.  In addition, Rodgers took the Packers inside the bear 10, where he threw an interception, and the resulting momentum change allowed the bears to go on an 80-yard TD drive, their only points of the half.  So, the call never happens if the refs don’t blow the first call, and as it worked out, the bears got a TD out of this.

3.  McClellin was called for roughing Rodgers on a third-down sack to the bear 33.  Some questioned whether this was a good call, but the replay showed that it was.  Rodgers was clearly down, and McClellin then came in and hit him with some weight behind it.  Two ex-bears who have a postgame show on a Chicago sportstalk station were yelling about this after the game, talking about how stupid it was for McClellin to do this.  They never mentioned anything about it being a bad call, because it wasn’t.  For those who want to think it was, perhaps it was a delayed call (as hockey has) for the roughing that wasn’t called on McClellin injuring Rodgers in the first Packer-bear game.  The Packers got a field goal on this drive.  Had the penalty not been called, it would have been a 50-yard attempt with the wind, so it’s possible McCarthy might still have attempted it, although it’s obviously harder than a shorter attempt.

4.  Toward the end of the half, the Packers forward lateraled on a fumble recovery around the bear 40, which was not called and should have been.  However, I missed these same fans mentioning that the week before, the Steelers forward lateraled on a kickoff at their 7, and this no-call resulted in a Steeler TD and was the difference in the game, giving the Packers a loss.

5.  The Packers punted on their first possession of the second half, and Hester returned it 49 yards, setting up a bear TD and a 14-13 lead.  One of the reasons Hester had such a good return was that the punter, Masthay, was held, but there was no call.  This gave the bears, who had done nothing offensively with the exception of one drive, momentum, and they scored touchdowns on the next two drives, too.

6.  With under 4:00 to play in the third quarter, Quarless caught a pass that would have given the Packers a first down at the bear 43, for a 19-yard gain.  The first official called it a catch, and another overruled him.  The replays were not 100% conclusive, but it appeared that Quarless did catch the pass.  However, as with the downing of the punt, the refs didn’t feel they had conclusive evidence.  The Packers had to punt, stopping a momentum change and resulting in a bear TD to go up 28-20.  Had this been called a catch on the field, it would have remained a catch, but one ref overruled the other.

7.  On the Packers’ winning-touchdown drive, Lacy ran the ball on third-and-one, and it appeared he got the first down.  The announcers also felt he did.  The ball was spotted inches short, forcing the Packers to have to convert on fourth down.  This was very close, as was the downing of the punt and the Quarless play.

8.  On the winning-touchdown-pass play, which was a fourth-down play, Jordy Nelson was blatantly leveled by Major Wright, which should have been illegal contact and a first down.  The Packers scored a touchdown, but had they not, since there was no flag despite the blatant penalty in the open field, they would have lost.

Now, let’s talk about McCarthy’s decision to go for one and not two with the score 28-26 bears, with 11:38 left in the fourth quarter.  This was absolutely the right decision, and going for 2 at the same point of the Viking game earlier this year cost the Packers a win in a game they tied as a result.  Others feel that if McCarthy had gone for two and made it, the game would have been tied while the Packers were driving at the end, rather than them being down 1.  Here are the reasons that is bad strategy, keeping in mind the strategy can only be evaluated at the time, and not after the rest of the game has been played.  The Packers, I believe, were 0 for 4 on 2-point conversions this year, and missed one later in the game.  However, that doesn’t enter into my thinking.  The thinking is this.  I believe you have to look at a worst-case scenario when you decide to go for 2, in case you don’t make it.  In this instance, had the Packers gone for 2 and not made it, they would have been down by 2 points, 28-26.  This means a bear TD puts the bears up 9 points in the fourth quarter, which is 2 scores.  By kicking the extra point, you keep it to one score (with a 2-point conversion) if you give up a TD.  As it turned out, they nearly did give up a TD, as Jeffery nearly caught a long pass deep in Packer territory.  Hindsight is easy, but all scenarios have to be considered when making the decision.  I said it was the right decision at the time, just as I said it was wrong when they went for 2 in the Viking game.

Packer Coaching Tries To Give Division-Deciding Game To bears

by

The Packer-bear game the last week of the season would decide the division winner/playoff team and the team that would not make the playoffs.  McCarthy and his staff continued to make the same mistakes that have cost the Packers all year.  Since the Packers went into the game with many injuries, smart coaching was extremely important.  Rick Telander of the Chicago Sun-Times said “the Packers have so many guys on injured reserve, it’s silly.”  They have 15 players on I.R., and that does not include key players who missed the game such as Clay Matthews and Brad Jones, and other hurt players, such as Eddie Lacy.

Let’s look at the coaching decisions the Packers made:

  1. They kicked deep to Hester on the opening kickoff, and he returned it 39 yards to the bear 40.  Why teams continue to kick deep to Hester (or anyone) surprises me.  After the bad-call personal-foul penalty on the Packers on the play, the bears started the opening drive in Packer territory.
  2. With no score in the first quarter, the bears had second-and-eight from the Packer 45.  Shields was in press coverage on Marshall with no safety help.  Prior to the play, I mentioned that, implying they would throw a bomb to Marshall, which they did.  Of course, Shields, being in press coverage, couldn’t react well and Marshall caught the ball at the 13, and was tackled at the 8.  The bears scored a TD to go up 7-0, and this was due to the ridiculous press coverage with no safety help, which continues to burn the Packers and other teams.  You can see the QBs see this, and change the play to go to these receivers.  This TD was a gift.
  3. The Packers were up 13-7, and on their first possession of the second half, threw a pass that was not high-percentage on third-and-one from their 29, resulting in a punt.  This not only stopped a Packer drive, but the Packers punted to Hester allowing a return, and he returned it 49 yards to the Packer 31.  The coaches stopped a drive and then decided to kick to Hester again.  The bears scored a TD as a result, to go up 14-13.  Another gift TD from the Packer coaches.
  4. With about 6:00 left in the third quarter and the Packers up 20-14, the bears had a third-and-four from their 31.  Just prior to the snap, Shields started moving forward into press coverage, again with no safety help.  In addition to the bad strategy of playing press coverage, he was moving forward while Jeffery started running a fly pattern, and he caught a 67-yard pass to just short of the goal line.  This resulted in a bear TD, and another gift from bad coaching.  The bears were now up 21-20, and all three TDs were the result of bad strategies that I have been talking about for years.  This allowed the bears to stay in the game and almost win.
  5. With 6:38 left in the fourth quarter, the bears had a third-and-seventeen at the Packer 45, leading 28-27.  A touchdown here would have made it difficult for the Packers.  They again had Shields in press coverage on Jeffery with no safety help, and Jeffery could have caught the ball at the Packer 11, as it hit him in the hands.  The Packer strategy again put them in a position that could have cost them a TD.
It’s obvious that even though I said prior to Hester’s first game that no one should kick to him, that NFL coaches will not get this.  It’s also obvious that no matter how many times teams get burned by press coverage with no safety help, they will keep doing this.  Marshall and Jeffery, who are both excellent receivers and tall, continue to benefit from this as teams play press coverage on them with no safety help, and the DBs can’t react to the ball.

Vikings/Refs Try To Give bears A Victory

by

The Vikings and refs did what they could to try to give the bears a victory that would have helped the bears’ chances of making the playoffs, but were unsuccessful.  We’ll start with the refs, and then go to the Vikings.

Refs:

1.  With the Vikings up 7-3 with 6:43 to go in the second quarter, the bears had a third-and-8 from their own 22.  If the Vikings would have stopped them, they would have had good field position.  Jeffery ran at the defensive back, gave him a hard straight-arm to the face, pushing him out of the way, then slanted over the middle to catch a pass before being tackled for a first down at the bear 42.  This was an obvious blatant foul in the open field that was almost impossible for an official to miss, as he not only hit the DB in the face, but pushed him backward to get separation.

2.  With 0:28 to play in the fourth quarter and the bears leading 20-17, the Vikings at the bear 12-yardline threw a potential game-winning TD pass into the endzone, which the receiver dropped.  The receiver was interfered with, but there was no call, so the Vikings had to kick a tying field goal and go into overtime.  Had this call been made, the Vikings would have had first-and-goal from the one, with a very good chance of scoring the winning touchdown.

Vikings:

1.  With 11:09 left in the first quarter, a Viking defender dropped an easy interception at the bear 28, which the announcers said would probably have been returned for a touchdown.

2.  The Vikings intercepted at their own 30 with about 4:00 left in the first quarter, but they were offsides, nullifying the interception and resulting in a bear field goal.

3.  With 4:40 left in the fourth quarter and the Vikings down 20-17, the Vikings were at the bear 6-yardline and threw a pass that should easily have been caught for a TD to put the Vikings ahead, but the receiver let the ball bounce off of him to a bear player, and it was returned to midfield.  Not only did this cost the Vikings a key TD and the lead, but it gave the bears good field position.

4.  When the Vikings got the ball at their own 9 (due to a fair catch) for the final drive in regulation, they fumbled the shotgun snap on the first play, but recovered.

5.  The Vikings dropped a potential winning-TD pass with 0:28 left in the fourth quarter, although the receiver was interfered with.

6.  This point is absolutely ridiculous!  After the Vikings kicked the tying field goal with 0:20 left in the fourth quarter, they kicked deep to Hester instead of deep squib kicking or kicking high and short!  The only thing that could hurt the Vikings in that situation was a big play by the bears, and they put themselves into a position for that to happen!  Hester returned the ball to midfield, and with 0:14 left, the bears had a chance to get into winning-FG position.  Unbelievable.

7.  The Vikings kicked what would have been the winning field goal in overtime, but it was called back due to a facemask penalty and the kicker missed the much-longer kick!

McCarthy Costs Packers Key Game Against Vikings/bears Get More Gifts

by

Mike McCarthy cost the Packers an important victory, settling for a tie with the Vikings.  A victory would have moved the Packers into a three-way tie for first place, despite the fact that Aaron Rodgers has missed the last 4 games.  With 11:42 to play in the 4th quarter, the Packers scored a touchdown to cut the Viking lead to 23-13.  Instead of kicking the extra point to make the score 23-14, he went for two and they failed.  The Packers later scored a TD to pull within 3, then kicked a field goal to tie the game with 0:46 left in the 4th quarter.  Had McCarthy gone for the extra point, which he should have done with so much time left, the field goal at the end would have won the game, not tied it.  Not getting a victory hurts the Packers, since the division race is so close.

The bears, although they lost to St. Louis, got a number of gifts from the opposing player, coach, and refs.  Here are a few:

1.  The Rams were up 21-7 midway through the second quarter, and were moving the ball easily.  The bears had a third-and-22 from their own 32, and the Rams intercepted.  Another Ram touchdown, and the game would have been basically over.  However, a defensive back that lined up deep hit a bear receiver for no reason 10 yards off the line of scrimmage (hits are allowed in the first 5 yards).  This receiver wasn’t involved in the play and the DB had no reason to hit him, but did.  This not only nullified the interception, but gave the bears a first down, and they went on to score a TD, pulling to within 7.  The odds of converting a third-and-22 are low, and for this DB to hit the receiver for no reason was ridiculous.

2.  Early in the 4th quarter, up 27-14, the Rams punted to Hester.  He returned it for a TD, which would have cut the lead to 6, except that the Rams got lucky that it was called back for holding.  What will it take until teams learn not to punt or kick to him?  This could have cost them the game.

3.  With about 10 minutes to play in the 4th quarter, the bears had third-and-six from the St. Louis 20.  The Rams blitzed a lot of players, which is fine, but the bears had Earl Bennett lined up wide right and since the Rams were blitzing, the cornerback was one-on-one with Bennett, with no safety help.  That’s also okay, except that the cornerback was playing press coverage!  Time and time again cornerbacks get burned by this, as has been mentioned on Sportstruths frequently, because they can’t react and don’t know where the ball is.  Many times quarterbacks see this and audible to that receiver, knowing the huge advantage the receiver has.  All a DB has to do is back off another yard or two and they would be in position to make a play, but for some reason, coaches don’t get this.  What happened on this play?  The cornerback had to interfere with Bennett in the endzone since he was beaten and didn’t know where the ball was, which frequently happens, and the bears got a first down at the 1 as a result.  They scored a TD to pull within 6.  The refs actually gave the bears this TD, as on third-and-one, McCown was sacked for a 9-yard loss, but a terrible roughing-the-passer penalty was called, giving the bears a first down at the 1 and eventual TD, vs. the field goal they should have had.  It would have been a 10-point game (2 scores) at that point, vs. the 6-point game it was.

 

McCarthy, Refs Cost Packers Key Division Game Against bears

by

Let’s forget for a moment that the refs stole both Packer “losses” this year going into last night’s game with the bears, and that the refs gave the bears the “win” against Cincinnati.  It is obvious that if the bears lost last night, their season would be in big trouble, and if the Packers won, they would control the division and be in great shape for the rest of the year.  The bears also knew they had no chance of winning if Aaron Rodgers played.  So, let’s see what happened.

How did McCarthy coach this very important game?

1.  The Packers easily moved downfield on the opening drive, got to the 11, and then ran on first down.  That not only stalled the drive, resulting in a FG, but resulted in the sack that hurt Rodgers.  So, again, a first-down run hurt the team.  The lost 4 points turned out to be very important, as it was a 4-point game until the end.
2.  The bears got the winning TD as a result of punting to Hester, who returned it into Packer territory.  I said prior to Hester’s first game that anyone who kicks or punts to him is foolish, and teams continue to do so.  The only reason the bears beat a bad Vikings team was because they kept kicking and punting to Hester.  McCarthy will not learn.
3.  With about 4:30 left in the half, the Packers completed a 15-yard pass on third down for a first down at the bear 25, but the refs blew the call and called it incomplete.  It was bad enough the call was blown, but McCarthy had plenty of time to challenge because the refs were discussing it, and didn’t.  This not only cost the Packers at least 3 more points, and possibly 7, but gave the ball and momentum to the bears, who got  a FG on the last play of the half.  This was a critical call in the game, and was the fault of both the refs and McCarthy.
4.  Failure to prepare a backup QB adequately.  I won’t put this on McCarthy alone, as every other coach probably does the same thing, but I’ve said for years that backup QBs have to get reps and be ready.  McCarthy obviously didn’t prepare Wallace, and that is his fault.  There is no excuse in the NFL for a backup QB not to get enough reps to be prepared, even if the league limits reps.  Wallace wasn’t even with the team in the preseason, so obviously needed the practice work.
The bears had two weeks to prepare their backup QB for this game, since of course they had a bye before the Packer game.  McCown got all the reps for two weeks.
Now, let’s talk about another bad call.  McClellin drove Rodgers into the turf, which is illegal and should have been penalized.  The bears knew their season was in trouble if they lost this game, and the Packers would have control of the division, so McClellin drove him into the turf.  We’ll see if the league reviews this, but Rodgers’ injury obviously determined the outcome of the game, and even bear writers and broadcasters admit that.  Some players all but admitted it.  The Packers “lost” by only 7, and played basically the entire game without a passing attack.
By the way, despite all of the injuries the Packers had coming into the game, here is what a very respected ESPN analyst said after the game regarding the impact of Aaron Rodgers’ shoulder injury:  “This was a team on the verge of dominating the league,” Steve Young said.

This Week’s Packer and bear Games

by

Random thoughts on the Packer and bear games:

Washington-bear game:  I’ve repeatedly said I would punt high forcing a fair catch, or out of bounds, and would not subject myself to a big return.  I would also kick out of the endzone, squib kick, or kick high and short, minimizing the chances for a return.  I’ve also always said I’d never kick to Hester.  With 6:15 to go in the first half, the bear offense was going nowhere.  Their touchdown was after an interception return to the Washington 10.  They had 47 yards total offense, and finished the half with 17 plays for 46 yards.  Cutler was hurt and out of the game, so the offense wasn’t a threat at that point.  Washington punts to Hester, and he returns it 81 yards for a touchdown, tying the game at 17.  What could Washington’s coaches possibly be thinking?

Packer-Cleveland game:

The Packers threw on all 4 plays on their first drive, and scored an easy TD.  They scored on three of their four first-half possessions, because they passed a lot.  The drive that ended in a field goal was stalled by a first-down run.

With 0:03 left in the half and the Packers up 17-3, McCarthy kicked deep, not understanding the risk of a kickoff return for a TD.  He should have squibbed the kick.  The returner had a nice return earlier in the game, and this was a risk McCarthy didn’t have to take.

On the first possession of the second half, they passed on the first three first downs, and got first downs each time, moving into FG range.  They then ran on first down for no gain, and later had a sack that resulted in a missed 52-yard FG attempt.  Again, the first-down run stalled the drive and resulted in a longer FG attempt.

A first-down run on the next drive resulted in a punt.

The Packers scored a TD two drives later, and all but 3 yards were from passing, including the TD.

With about 8:30 to go in the 4th quarter, Cleveland’s offense had gone nowhere, and the Packers led 24-6.  The only thing that could have hurt the Packers at that point was a big play.  What does McCarthy do?  He kicks deep, the returner returns it 86 yards to the Packer 20, and the Browns got a touchdown as a result, making the score 24-13 with over 6 minutes left.  McCarthy continues to keep games close, letting the opponents stay in games that should not be close.

Up 31-13 late in the game, McCarthy kicked deep again, and the returner returned it 56 yards to the Packer 47.

Notes On Yesterday’s bear Loss

by

A few observations on yesterday’s bear loss to the Lions, 40-32.

I have continued to say that when teams put a defensive back in press coverage on a receiver who is split wide, with no safety help, it is an almost guaranteed disaster.  The defensive back can’t react because he is turned around, and the receiver can easily beat this coverage.  I’ve gone to games and predicted plays when I’ve seen this coverage, because I know the QB can also see it and will go to that receiver.  Why coaches don’t have the DB back off another yard or two is beyond me.  It would give them much more ability to defend.  If the play is a called slant and the DB is trying to take that away, I would assume the QB would audible to a longer route once they saw the coverage.  It is almost impossible to cover a receiver when put in that position.

The bears, down 40-16 with 4:05 left, get a touchdown on a fourth-down pass to Jeffery.  On third down, Jeffery lined up wide right, the cornerback played press coverage, and there was no safety help.  I immediately said he would go long for a TD, and he did.  He was wide open, and dropped the pass in the endzone.  On the next play, the Lions lined up the same way (!), and I said the same thing prior to the play.  Jeffery again ran into the endzone and caught a TD pass because the DB couldn’t adjust.

I will never understand why defenses put themselves in positions to fail.  Can’t they see on gamefilm that QBs see this and audible to that receiver?

The other point I will mention is the officiating.  During the entire game, the bears’ offensive line was blatantly holding, and these holds were very visible and out in the open.  I was incredulous that this wasn’t called, and commented on this during the entire game.  The bears got a number of big plays as a consequence.  In today’s Chicago Sun-Times, this is what was written:

“I can’t believe we didn’t get about a hundred holding penalties against them,” Lions coach Jim Schwartz said.  Suh agreed.  “Every single play in this game there was some sort of holding,” he said.  “The great players learn how to play through it.”

Refs, Bengals Give bears Opening Game

by

Well, the NFL season is one week old, and already the refs have given the bears a game and stolen a game from the Packers (see separate post).

We’ll look at these plays/calls in order:

1.  A blatant illegal motion penalty was not called on the bears’ first TD drive.  The penalty might or might not have been accepted, but the fact that it wasn’t called was ridiculous.

2.  Down 7-0, Anderson committed blatant interference on the Cincinnati receiver, having his arm draped around him for a long time.  Instead of a first down, the Bengals had to punt and committed a facemask penalty on the punt.

3.  On second-and-goal from the bear 2, Tillman interfered with the receiver in the endzone, but it wasn’t called.  The Bengals did score a TD.

4.  The Bengals single covered Marshall on third and long, allowing him to catch a first-down pass.  This happened a number of times, and is terrible coaching.

5.  Green dropped a pass at the bear 17 or 18, giving away an almost-sure score (TD or FG), and the pass was intercepted off the deflection.

6.  Cincinnati had a second-and-14 from their 8 with 0:59 left in the half, and the bears with only 1 timeout.  The smart thing to do at that point was to run the clock down to almost zero and go into halftime with a 14-7 lead.  The Bengals threw short on second down, and the incomplete pass stopped the clock, which gave the bears enough time to kick a 58-yard FG.  This was coaching idiocy.

7.  On the punt in Point 6, the Bengals were called for a personal foul, and that gave the bears 15 yards, which allowed them to try the field goal.  On the play, Weems of the bears clearly pushed the Bengal player in the back, which is why the player retaliated and which should have been a penalty.  Had they called the penalties properly, the bears don’t get the 15 yards and don’t get the field goal, which was the difference in the game.  It also gave the bears some momentum going into halftime.

8.  The Bengals fumbled in the 4th quarter at the bear 17, when up 21-17.  This was the second time they fumbled in the game, and the player didn’t protect the ball.  It’s been obvious to everyone in the NFL for years that the bears try to strip the ball and coaches have to stress protecting it all week, but twice in this game, the Bengals did not protect it.  This cost them the game.  This fumble not only prevented a Bengal score, but led to the “winning” touchdown by Marshall, who again was single covered.  I talked about the single coverage on Marshall throughout the game, and on this “winning” touchdown, here is what Marshall said after the game:  “I didn’t understand it.  Fourth quarter, put a safety on me one-on-one.  You can only dream about that.”  I said this during the game, but the Bengals couldn’t figure this out?

9.  In addition to single covering Marshall on third downs, they put the defensive back in press coverage on him on a third-down play, which of course meant the DB couldn’t react, and Marshall got another important first down and big gain.

10. The Bengals used all of their second-half timeouts with 8:06 left, the last two due to having 10 men on the field and 12 men on the field.  The failure to save these timeouts cost them at the end of the game.  I’ve always said it’s usually better to take the penalty than to waste a timeout, unless the situation is important.  This was another of a long line of gifts the Bengals gave the bears all game.  Even without the timeouts, the Bengals stopped the bears with 1:06 left and would have had the ball, but a stupid unnecessary roughness penalty on Cincinnati on the third-down play that failed to get the first down gave the bears a first down and the win.  Gift after gift after gift.

This “win” now gives the bears some momentum and confidence to start the season, and a properly reffed game could have changed the outcome.  To quote a Bengals writer, Geoff Hobson:  Frustration boiled over in the aftermath of the Bengals’ 24-21 Opening Day loss that had head coach Marvin Lewis seething over his team’s lack of composure and the way some of the calls came down… “We had a lot of guys lose their composure today.  We can’t do that.  Their guy is blocking them after the whistle.  You think it would be offsetting fouls.  But today we didn’t get any offsets,” Lewis said.

On the play at the end of the half, Hobson continues:  “He hit our guy out of bounds late on our sideline,” Lewis said.  “We can’t retaliate.  That’s not what our team does.  Unfortunately today we let them get under our skin.  We did it twice today.  We can’t do that.”

Hobson later goes on to quote linebacker Vontaze Burfict:  “We’re at their home, they get that.  I feel like the refs were with them the whole game…They were talking a whole lot.  They’re at their home and some guys just didn’t ignore it.  The second guy always gets caught.”

In addition to the bad calls that impacted the outcome of the game, and the terrible plays mentioned above, the Bengals tried to run the ball even though the bears showed no ability to stop the pass, and were 21 for 63, a 3-yard/carry average.  Their featured back was 14 for 25, which is less than 1.8 yards/carry.  These were wasted plays, especially since Green and the tight ends were open and catching passes.

Lions Coach Gives bears The Game

by

Detroit’s gameplan gave the bears the game, keeping their playoff hopes alive.  Detroit, despite 4 turnovers inside their own 25 that resulted in 16 bear points, lost by 2 points because they made no effort to score for a large portion of the game.  Detroit made no effort to score for the first 26 minutes of the first half, because they kept running on first down.

Lions’ first drive:  Run on first down for no gain, run on second down, punt.

Lions’ second drive:  Threw on first down for 28 yards.  Threw on first down for 18 yards.  Started running on first down, drive stalled, kicked a field goal.

I’ve always said that when a team holds the opponent to a field goal, the momentum shifts, and they frequently score.  Not only did the Lions not try to score a TD, but since they kicked a field goal, the bears scored a TD on the next drive.

The momentum change contributed to the Lions fumbling the kickoff, giving the bears another 3 points.

Next Lions drive:  Run on first down for 1, but pass for first down.  Run on first down for 10.  Run on first down for a loss of 2, and punt.  Another drive stalled by a first-down run.

The bears start slowly and it’s important for a team to get a big early lead, but the Lions were making no attempt to score.

Lions next drive:  Run on first down for a loss of 1, punt.

Down 17-3, the Lions run on first down, then throw an interception, giving the ball to the bears on the Lion 23 and giving them another field goal.  Another first-down run stalled a drive and resulted in a turnover.

With 1:49 to play in the half, down 20-3, the Lions got the ball at their own 20.  The bears knew they had to pass on every play.  With the exception of one running play for 1 yard on third-and-one, the Lions threw on every down and easily moved downfield and scored a touchdown.  They could have been doing this all half, but wanted to run on first downs.

The Lions scored a touchdown to cut the lead to 20-17 largely through passing.

The Lions, starting from their own 8, ran on first down for 4, and then fumbled on second down at their own 13.  Another turnover and drive stalled by a first-down run.  This gave the bears a field goal, and a 23-17 lead.

Down 26-17, the Lions got the ball at their own 20 with 10:47 to play in the 4th quarter.  With the exception of one run for a loss of 2, every play was a passing play and they easily scored a touchdown to make the score 26-24 bears, the way the game ended.

Since the Lions lost by only 2 points, it’s obvious that even changing one of these possessions from runs to passes would have won the game.  It is incredible that teams watch gamefilms and don’t get this, and then try it during games, have it not work, and keep doing it.

Refs/Seattle Coaches Try To Give Game To bears

by

Let’s look at what happened in this game:

Seattle fumbled on the opening drive of the game, with the ball being stripped on a first-down run.  Not only did a first-down run stall a drive, but the bears continue to strip the ball and players don’t seem to prepare for this.

As a result of the fumble and momentum change, the bears scored a touchdown to take a 7-0 lead.  They completed a 23-yard pass to Brandon Marshall on 3rd-and-12, when Marshall should have been triple-teamed all game since he is their only real weapon.

Up 7-0 midway through the first quarter, the bears fumbled a punt at their 12, and Seattle came away with the ball.  The refs gave the ball to the bears, which both announcers questioned.  This could have cost the Seahawks a touchdown.

A first-down run stalled another Seattle drive.

Midway through the second quarter, on a bear punt, a bear player pulled a Seahawk player down by the facemask, but the refs called a low-block penalty on the Seattle player, forcing Seattle to start from their own 6.

With 9 seconds to go in the half, tied at 7, Seattle threw a touchdown pass, but the touchdown was overruled on review, so Seattle had to kick a field goal.  It is extremely questionable if there was conclusive evidence, and Pete Carroll, prior to heading off the field, was angry and asked the refs how they could determine the receiver’s hands weren’t under the ball.

In the first half, Marshall caught 7 passes for 94 yards, and the announcers questioned a number of times why the Seahawks weren’t double-teaming him more.  I would have triple-teamed him.

The bears scored a TD in the third quarter to take a 14-10 lead.  They were stopped at their own 9, but a hands-to-the-face penalty gave them a first down.  Later in the drive, a Seahawk roughed Cutler after he slid, giving the bears another 15 yards.  This was a gift TD.

With 20 seconds left in regulation, the bears at their own 14, and the Seahawks up 17-14, Marshall caught a 56-yard pass that allowed the bears to kick the tying field goal at the end of regulation.  All game I said he should be triple-teamed, and the announcers said again how they were shocked that the Seahawks didn’t double- or triple-team Marshall.  Jeffery, Hester, and Bennett were all hurt, so their other receivers were all backups, yet they still didn’t cover Marshall properly.

Refs And Coaches Help bears Beat Vikings

by

The Vikings ran on first down, and the fumble at their own 33 led to a bear TD, allowing them to take a 7-3 lead.  Another first-down run that backfired.  When the bears made it 10-3, the Vikings then passed, so of course moved downfield to the bear 16.  Then, as most coaches do when they get deep in the opponent’s territory, they ran on first down, which of course stalled the drive.  They set up for a short, 30-yard field goal.  As I’ve pointed out for years, when kicking short field goals against the bears, a kicker needs to just chip the ball to get height, as you don’t need distance and the bears lead the league in blocking field goals over the past few years (especially with Peppers).  So, what happens?  The bears block the field-goal attempt.  Instead of it being a tie game without a first-down run, the Vikings came away with no points, and the block gave momentum to the bears.

What did the bears do with this momentum?  They drove downfield to the Viking 25.  On Cutler’s pass in the endzone to Marshall, Marshall held the defender off with his arm for a few seconds, then pushed him away as the ball got there.  It was offensive pass interference, but the refs called defensive pass interference, which gave the bears the ball at the one-yardline, where they scored a TD and the 2-point conversion.  As the bears now had an 18-3 “lead,” Ponder, in an effort to cut the gap, forced a pass that was intercepted and returned to the Viking 13, and the bears scored a touchdown.  So, the bad call gave the bears 15 points making the score 25-3, and effectively ended the game.

People said after the game that the Vikings should have run Adrian Peterson more, especially since Percy Harvin missed the game.  Here was my response:

These are the typical writers who don’t understand the game, the same way coaches don’t.  Last year the bears passed a lot in the beginning of the season and were winning a lot of games.  They then lost a game or two, and everyone said they were passing too much and had to start running.  It was fine when they won all those games.  That’s what writers do.  They look at the losing team and say they should have done something different.  If the team passed and lost, they say they should have run.  If they ran and lost, they say they should have passed.

Last week, the bears came out to stop Gore, and Kaepernick passed early and was aggressive and they scored easily.  Had the 49ers run Gore instead of passed, with the bears set up to play the run, the game might have been different (perhaps not a lopsided win).
So, let’s look at this game to see if the writers are correct.  First of all, in typical bear luck, Peterson missed the team bus and had to take a cab to the game.  Leslie Frazier, their coach, was not happy about this, and I believe it was a distraction.  Did it lead to the two fumbles on Peterson running plays?  We’ll never know, but it could have.  The bears admitted after the game they came out in a defense to stop Peterson, so the Vikings should run into a stacked defense?  Had the Vikings had Percy Harvin, this game would have been completely different, as he is their most important player and changes everything.  However, they knew they didn’t have him going in, but still should have passed.  Had they not dropped an easy third-down pass on the first or second drive, they probably score a TD there and the game is different.  They also dropped many more passes, which cost them.  But, let’s look at Peterson’s performance in the first half, which is when the game was on the line before the first-down-run fumble gave the bears a TD and the refs gave the bears 2 TDs, effectively ending the game.
First drive:  Run for 1.
Second drive:  Run for 6.
Third drive:  Run for 1 on first down, fumble, bears eventually get a TD.
Fourth drive:  No carries.
Fifth drive:  Run for 5, 8, and 4. The last run was a first-down run from the bear 16, which stalled the drive and led to a blocked FG attempt.  As I always say, you might get a first down or so by running on first down, but the drive will eventually stall.
Sixth drive:  Run for no gain.
Seventh drive:  1:48 left in half, so the Vikings passed.
At halftime, Peterson had 7 carries for 25 yards, which is less than 3.6 yards/carry.
On the first drive of the second half, when the Vikings were trying to get back in the game, he carried 3 times for 1, 5, and 4.  This meant he now had 10 carries for 35 yards, or an average of 3.5.
So, here is a runner that is distracted by missing the team bus, angering the team, and is averaging 3.5 yards/carry against a team stacked to try to stop him, but the writers feel they should have kept running the ball.  Had the Vikings not dropped many passes, it would have been obvious how much more effective the passing game was, even without Harvin, than the running game.  And, let’s not forget, the Vikings fumbled on two Peterson running plays!

 

McCarthy Almost Costs Packers The Lions Game/49ers-bears

by

Mike McCarthy’s philosophy of not trying to score early and often to get a big lead, reduce the pressure on your team, put pressure on the other team, and avoid the scenario where in a close game, a turnover, a fluke play, or an injury can decide the outcome, continues to result in close games that can go either way.  The Packer-Lion game was a perfect example of this, and it nearly cost the Packers the game.  It is amazing that even though this happens game after game, he can’t see this.  He also made other questionable decisions, all of which will be described below.

Before I get to the specifics, I will say that the Lions could have won this game by lining up or jumping offsides when on defense on every first down.  Being offsides results in a first-and-five, and that is almost a guarantee that McCarthy will run, which dramatically increases the probability the Packers will punt.  This happened twice in the game, and both times the Packers ran on first and second down and stalled drives.

These are the Packer possessions:

First half:

Throw on first down and get a first down.  Run on first down and punt.

Run on first down and get a first down.  Throw on first down, have two holding penalties, and throw a low-percentage pass on 4th-and-4 which is incomplete.

Throw on first down and get a first down.  Run on first and second down for 3rd-and-9 and get first down via a pass.  Run on first and second down and get first down via a pass.  Throw on first down for touchdown.

Throw on first down and get a first down.  Run on first down but Lions offside so 1st-and-5.  Run on first and second down and punt.

Run on first down, throw interception on second down.  The interception followed a first-down run.

With 0:59 left in the half and the Lions knowing the Packers had to pass, they passed for 7, passed for 11, and were sacked for a loss of 8.  There were 30 seconds left in the half and the Packers were facing a 50-yard field-goal attempt.  Mason Crosby has been struggling, having missed 5 of his last 10, and McCarthy earlier passed up a 49-yard attempt.  Does McCarthy use the 30 seconds to try to get closer?  No, he lets the clock wind down and Crosby misses a 50-yard attempt.  They could have run a number of plays to get closer and out of bounds or a touchdown.

The first half ended with the Lions up 10-7.  The Packers wasted a great opportunity to take a big lead and get control of the game, and were not only not leading, but losing.  The Lions have a great defensive line and a bad secondary.  The Packers have a great passing game and a terrible running game.  What does McCarthy do?  He runs a lot in the first half.  In addition, Troy Aikman and Joe Buck said a number of times the Packers have to pass to the middle of the field, because the Lions were taking away the deep ball and sidelines.  They couldn’t understand why they were not doing this, and said this again later in the game.  The Packers finally did throw a pass in this area for a nice gain later in the game, and the announcers commented on that, too.

Second half:

The Packers needed to come out aggressively to take the lead and get momentum.  Here is the first drive.  Run on first down for 3, pass for first down.  Run on first down for 2, get sacked for a loss of 5, get sacked and fumble at own 11 but recover.  Punt.  Not only did the Packers not come out aggressively to try to take the lead, but the first-down runs almost resulted in a turnover deep in Packer territory, which would have allowed the Lions to extend their lead.

McCarthy allowed a defensive formation that had Williams covering Calvin Johnson one-on-one in press coverage (no safety help), which is an almost guaranteed touchdown, but Stafford overthrew the pass to an open Johnson.  When will McCarthy learn that press coverage in single coverage is a terrible strategy, giving the defender almost no chance as he has to play with his back to the QB?  In addition, in press coverage, the defender has a much harder time reacting to a receiver’s moves.

Run on first down and get a first down.  Throw on first down over the middle for 20 yards, prompting Aikman to again talk about the middle being open all game and wondering why the Packers weren’t attacking that.  Run on first down for a loss of 1 and punt.  This was a key drive, and again was stopped by a first-down run.

Throw on first down for first down.  Run on first down for no gain.  The announcers said at that point that McCarthy has called a very balanced game, and a conservative game.  They again said he has to go after the middle of the field.  This balanced and conservative game resulted in 7 offensive points until there was 4:55 left in the game when McCarthy finally passed, of course resulting in a touchdown with just under 2:00 left.  To continue the drive:  Pass incomplete, but defensive holding so first down.  Deep pass incomplete to a wide-open Cobb, but Detroit lined up offsides, making it 1st-and-5 at the Lion 23.  The Packers needed a touchdown here, as Crosby continued to struggle and had missed 6 of his last 11 field-goal attempts.  Although it only counts as one miss, he missed both attempts at the field goal at the end of the half.  What does McCarthy do?  He runs on first down for 1, runs on second down for 2, basically giving them one shot at a first down and not trying to get a TD since runs stall drives.  Crosby missed a 38-yard FG-attempt.

The Packers, down 20-14, get the ball at their own 18, with 4:19 left.  Run for 11.  Pass incomplete.  Pass for 40.  Pass for 6, run for 3, pass for 22-yard TD and a 21-20 lead.  Since the Packers were aggressive on this possession, they scored a touchdown.

As I said, once again, McCarthy’s conservative gameplan kept a game close against a team that the Packers are better than, and almost cost them the game.  This strategy has cost them many games in the past.

Regarding the 49er-bear game, one of the reasons the 49ers came out and dominated was because they came out passing and were aggressive on offense.  However, despite that, their 3 drives that ended in field goals were all stopped by running plays.  These drives could have resulted in touchdowns with aggressive playcalling.

Tennessee Gifts Give Game To bears

by

Fans of the bears look at the final score of 51-20 bears, and say the game was a rout and the Titans had no chance.  Instead of just looking at results, I prefer to look at how the result came about.  I think the reason why is always extremely important, because if you know the reason why, you have a much better understanding of what happened and a chance to make changes in the future.  Of course NFL coaches and players will never realize these reasons why, but it is still important to point this out.

Before getting to specifics, let me point out that before every game since the 2007 season, I have stated that teams that play the bears have to protect the ball since the bears try to strip it.  I have also said that you have to be very conscious of protecting the ball when Charles Tillman is around the play, as he tries to strip it all the time and is very effective at this.  So, players have to focus on this.  Did the Titans watch a bear gamefilm from the last 5 years?  Not only have I been saying this for 5 years, but others are also saying it.  Here are two postgame comments.  Laurence Holmes of The Score (Chicago talk-radio), who is the bears beat writer, said something to the effect that teams will have to figure out that Tillman will try to strip the ball, implying it’s ridiculous they don’t plan for this.  Doug Buffone, a former bear player and sports-radio announcer, said “You would think your opponent would start to understand this.”  It’s been obvious to anyone who has watched a bear game over the last 5 years that Tillman does this, but players continue to not protect the ball adequately.

So, now let’s get to the details to see why the game ended up being a rout and why it didn’t have to be.  As I have pointed out, the bears start slowly, so getting an early lead on them can be very effective in setting the tone of the game, keeping them frustrated, and possibly changing their gameplan.

1.  After the opening kickoff, the Titans threw on first down.  Of course the receiver was wide open and for a big gain.  As he was running with the ball after a 23-yard gain, he let Tillman strip it and the bears recovered at the Titan 46.  Not protecting the ball could have cost the Titans a TD and early 7-0 lead, because if they were willing to continue to throw on first down, they probably would have scored.

2.  On their second possession, the Titans passed on first down for 9 yards, then ran on second down for no gain, then ran on third down for no gain.  They were trying to run against the number-one rushing defense in the league, and as I always point out, the bears can stop the run and can’t stop the pass.  This running resulted in a punt, instead of a potential early score.

3.  The Titans dropped an interception, again preventing a potential score.  As I pointed out, the bears start slowly, so it’s important to get an early lead.

4.  On their third possession, the Titans passed on first down and got a first down on a second-down run, but the play was called back for an illegal formation.  Another unforced errror and gift that stopped a drive and potential score.  The Titans then had another illegal formation penalty on the next play!  Unforced error/gift.  This backed them up, and when they punted, the punt was blocked and the bears got a TD on the play.  So, instead of potentially being up by a few scores with the bear offense doing nothing, the Titans were down 7-0.  The Titans then got a safety, again because the bear offense was doing nothing, so the score was 7-2 bears.

5.  Game after game has turned on punts to Devin Hester, and as I’ve always pointed out, it is idiotic to punt to him and this changes the momentum.  This especially holds true in games where the bear offense is doing nothing, because you put yourself at risk of a big play.  As I stated, the bears have won many games over the years due to opponents punting to Hester.  What does Tennessee do?  They punt to Hester, he returns it 44 yards to the Titan 8, and the bears get a TD to go up 14-2.  This completely turned the game around.

6.  Since the momentum had shifted greatly after the return and TD, Hasselbeck threw the ball right to Urlacher, who returned it for a TD and a 21-2 lead.

7.  On Tennessee’s next possession, they let Tillman punch the ball out again, and the fumble was recovered at the Tennessee 16.  This led to a bear TD.

So, after one quarter, it was 28-2 and the game was basically over.  The bears had 4 TDs in less than half a quarter even though the bear offense had gone nowhere.  They scored on drives of 8 and 16 yards due to gifts, and the other two TDs were due to gifts as a result of bad strategy.  I think it’s obvious that the Titan strategy and lack of protecting the ball resulted in an insurmountable lead for the bears in the first quarter, when the Titans could have had the lead instead had they protected the ball and not punted to Hester.  This is my point when I tell people that you can’t look at the final result and say the other team had no chance.  You have to look at how the final result was arrived at.  The Titans gave the bears a big lead by what they did and prevented themselves from scoring by what they did.  Oh, and by the way, Tillman forced two more fumbles during the game, and one of them was returned to the Tennessee 2, resulting in a bear TD.  The Titans fumbled another time at the bear 20, stopping another scoring drive.

In addition, I have already pointed out that a blatant hold by J’Marcus Webb that was not called gave the bears last week’s game.  In this game, the bears had some big plays that were successful only because blatant Webb holds were not called.  He tries to block the right defensive end, the end quickly gets around him and has a path to the QB, and Webb grabs him around the neck or upper chest.  It’s blatant, in the open field and not hidden by the line, and close to the QB, all of which makes it very easy for a referee to see.  I would ask the readers of this post to watch for this next game and see how often he blatantly holds with no call.  These non-calls also led to scores, again helping give the appearance of a rout.

Please note these comments from Bud Adams, Titans owner, after the game:

“In my 50 years of owning an NFL franchise, I am at a loss to recall a regular season home game that was such a disappointment for myself, and the fans of the Titans,” Adams, 89, told The Tennessean. “We were grossly out-coached and out-played from start to finish today. At this time, all aspects of the organization will be closely evaluated, including front office, coaches, and players over the next seven games. If performance and competitiveness does not improve, I will look at all alternatives to get back to having the Titans become a playoff and championship football team.”

Notice the first part of the comment: “We were grossly out-coached.”  That led to a lot of the “out-played” part.  I’m glad that someone else noticed that the terrible coaching led to so much of this.

 

Refs/Carolina Coaches and Players Give bears Key Game

by

Let’s start with the officiating, then get to the coaching and other unforced errors.  Not only have the refs stolen 3 games from the Packers this year, but have now given the bears a critical game.  This game gives them momentum and a big “win” as they go into the tougher part of their schedule, and could allow them to make the playoffs.  Losing to a 1-5 team at home with the tough part of the schedule coming up and knowing the Packers are really 8-0 is a much different scenario.  So, to the calls:

Midway through the third quarter, the Panthers led 13-7.  They had a first down at the bear 9, so a TD would have put them up 20-7, kept the momentum, and given them 4 more points than a field goal would have.  On third and goal, there was an incomplete pass to Steve Smith in the endzone.  He was blatantly held for a long period of time in the open field, which prevented him from catching the ball.  Had the holding been called, it would be first-and-goal from the bear 1, and they would have scored a touchdown.  That was 4 points and momentum, since they did get a field goal.

The Panthers led 22-20, and the bears had the ball at their own 34, with just under 2:00 left.  They needed a field goal to win.  Cutler passed 12 yards for a first down, but on the play, Webb blatantly held a pass rusher who was about to get Cutler.  It was blatant, in the open field, and right near Cutler, all of which made it easy to see.  This wasn’t called, the bears got the result of the play, and went on to kick the “winning” field goal.  Had this been called, it would have been first-and-20 from their own 24, making it much more difficult to drive for the winning field goal.  In addition, it’s possible that the hit would have caused Cutler to fumble, which would have ended the game.  (Cutler did fumble twice earlier in the game.)  Not calling that penalty was ridiculous.

Two terrible, blatant, and obvious calls were not made, either one of which gave the bears the game.

Before we get to the coaching, let’s look at the unforced errors that also gave the bears the game.  The Jaguars led 19-7 in the fourth quarter and the bears hadn’t scored since the first quarter.  The Jaguars were forced to punt after unsuccessful runs, and the punter punted only SIX YARDS to his own 38, so the bears went on to get a touchdown as a result.  An unforced error/gift.  On the next possession, Steve Smith slips, allowing the pass to be intercepted for a TD.  Another unforced error/gift.  In addition, on the last play of the first half, the Panthers could have tried a 50-yard field goal (their kicker was great all day) to put them up 16-7, but instead threw a Hail Mary pass OUT OF THE ENDZONE.  More unforced errors and gifts.

Now, to the typical terrible coaching the bears benefit from week after week.  Knowing the bears are very good against the run (and first-down runs stall drives), and knowing they are weak against the pass, let’s look at the running stats:

Stewart: 17 for 42, less than 2.5/carry.  Williams: 11 for 33, 3/carry.  Tolbert: 3 for 7, less than 2.5/carry.  So, they ran 31 times for about 2.6 yards/carry.  Wasted play after wasted play, stalling drive after drive.  As you will see, the Panthers could have put this game away early if they threw on first downs and other downs instead of being conservative.  The bears had 7 offensive points midway through the fourth quarter, so they weren’t going to score.  (The same happened last week, when they only scored 13 all game, but the Lions didn’t try to score.)  Let’s look at some of the results of this, drive by drive:

Run for 2, incomplete pass, pass for 18/pass incomplete, run for loss of 1, pass for 10, punt.  Runs stalled the drive.

From own 5:  run for 0, run for 2, pass for 9.  Run for 4, incomplete pass, sack for loss of 6, punt.  The first-down run not only stalled the drive, but gave the bears great field position at the Panther 49, and they went on to score a TD and take a 7-3 lead.

Pass on first down for 62 yards to the bear 18.  Run on first down for 1, but hold, so first-and-20 from bear 28.  Pass for 5, missed wide-open Steve Smith for a TD, passed for 7, kicked field goal.  The first-down run stalled the drive, and resulted in a field goal instead of a potential touchdown.

From bear 16:  Run for 7, pass incomplete, scramble and fumble, but recover in the endzone for a TD.  Teams continue to not protect the ball, knowing the bears go after it, even after all the fumbles the Lions had last week.  The Panthers were lucky to recover, and the first-down run almost cost them this TD.

Run for loss of 2, pass for 9, pass for 8/pass incomplete, run for 1, pass incomplete but defensive penalty resulting in first down/pass incomplete, run for 9, run for less than 1 (Stewart was 7 for 11 before that play, and was now 8 for 11), sneak for 2/run for 1 (Stewart now 9 for 12), pass for 15/pass incomplete, pass for 10 to the bear 13/run for 3, run for loss of 3, incomplete pass, kick field goal.  The first-down run stalled the drive, and resulted in a field goal instead of a potential touchdown.

From own 15: pass incomplete after bobbled snap, run for 2, pass incomplete but offsides, pass for 14/sack for loss of 11, run for 13, pass for 18/scramble for 4, with 47 seconds left in half at bear 40, throw interception on pass that should have been thrown away.

8 seconds left in half:  Pass for 6.  Instead of attempting a 50-yard field goal by a kicker who was great all day, threw a Hail Mary pass out of the endzone!

Second half:  From own 6:  Pass for 18/run for loss of 1, pass for 25/run for loss of 1, run for 1, pass for 15/run for 17 to bear 20/run for 1, pass incomplete but penalty results in first down at bear 9/run for 5, pass incomplete, pass incomplete, kick field goal.  Again, a first-down run stalled a drive and resulted in a field goal instead of a potential touchdown.

From own 12: Run for 6, pass for 3, QB-draw for 7/pass for 47 to bear 25/run for 0, pass incomplete, pass incomplete.  Once again, a first-down run stalled a drive and resulted in a field goal instead of a potential touchdown.  Since it was a 1-point “win,” each one of these terrible coaching decisions by itself also cost the Panthers the game.

Leading 19-7 with 12:09 left:  Pass for 8, run for 1 (Stewart was 15 for 38 at the time), run for 0, punt.  Runs once again stalled an important drive.  They needed to make this more than a 2-score game in the fourth quarter, but got conservative and thus didn’t score.  They then punted 6 yards to their own 38, and the bears scored a TD to pull within 5, then scored on a turnover to take a one-point lead.  This is the danger of continuing to be conservative by running against the bears who are good against the run and not against the pass, as it allows teams to hang around and let fluke plays (6-yard punt), turnovers (interception for a TD), etc. impact the outcome.

Down 20-19 with 6:44 to play, the Panthers needed to score to regain the lead and momentum.  This means being aggressive by passing and passing on first downs.  Let’s look at the drive:  Run for 1, pass incomplete but roughing penalty gives first down.  Again, a key drive might have stalled due to a first-down run, but they were fortunate there was a penalty./pass for 7, run for 2, scramble for first down/run for 8, run for loss of 1, run for first down/run for 2, Steve Smith drops a TD pass that he could have caught, pass incomplete, kick field goal.  Once again, and again I say once again, a first-down run turned a potential touchdown into a field goal or stalled drive.  All this in a game the bears “won” by 1 point.

 

Lions Give Game To bears

by

In a big game for both teams, the Lions handed the bears the victory.  It was so bad that Jon Gruden, the TV announcer, repeatedly said the Lions “self-destructed” and talked about their “red-zone self-destruction.”  Self-destruction means you do this to yourself, not that the other team is beating you.

The bears were playing their safeties 20-25 yards off the line of scrimmage, which helps to take away the deep ball, but leaves the middle wide open.  The Lions have a great receiver, Calvin Johnson, who could have capitalized on this, as well as the other receivers and tight ends who could have.  I made the statement in the first few minutes that the Lions had to attack this, but they didn’t.  On sports radio a day or so after the game, an NFL expert (Matt Bowen) and the Chicago announcers also said the middle was wide open.

On the first Lion drive, the Lions did go after this area, and Calvin Johnson dropped a pass right to him with no one near him, which might have gone not only for a big-gainer and first down, but for a touchdown.  The NFL expert and announcers correctly pointed out that there was a good chance Johnson would have split the safeties for a TD, and as they said, this “would have made it a completely different game.”  This drop was a completely unforced error, as no defenders were near him.  The bears then scored a touchdown, and the momentum change could have contributed to this.

Bowen said the Lions were “undisciplined and poorly coached.”

The bears got a field goal to go up 10-0 largely due to a roughing penalty on the Lions where a Lion blocked a bear in the back well away from the play and with no need to do so.  Another gift.

The Lions missed a wide-open receiver at the bear 20, down 10-0, for another gift.

On a later drive, the Lions dropped another third-down pass that would have been a first down, prompting Gruden to talk about the “two big drops on third down.”  Another gift.

The Lions got to the bear 18 in the last two minutes of the half, ran on first down, and fumbled.  Another first-down run that backfired.  This kept the score 10-0 bears at half.

The Lions fumbled a punt at their own 27 on a fair catch, resulting in a bear field goal to go up 13-0.  Another unforced error and gift.

The Lions, down 13-0, had a first down at the bear 1, trying to cut the lead to 6.  I made the following statement at that point: “The Lions will run the ball here and fumble.”  This is exactly what happened, and again, was a gift.  The runner was short of the goal line, but reached the ball out even though he was too far to reach the goal line, and lost possession.  A complete gift.  Another reason this was such a bad play is that I have always said teams need to focus on protecting the ball since the bears always try to strip it and don’t hide this fact.  Many games have been decided because teams don’t prepare for this.  The Lions had already fumbled numerous times this game (they didn’t lose all of them) as a result, but still didn’t focus on protecting the ball at this critical point of the game.  This is after already having fumbled numerous times!

Cutler got hurt in the first half, and it was obvious the bears weren’t going to be able to score points as a result since he was being protected, so the Lions had this game there for the taking.  However, they kept self-destructing.  In addition, Calvin Johnson had no catches in the first half because the Lions didn’t work the middle which was open.

The Lions missed a wide-open Calvin Johnson at the bear 32, which resulted in a punt.

With 3:25 left, the Lions had a first down at the bear 6 and didn’t score.

The Lions did score a touchdown in the last minute, to lose 13-7.  Any one of the unforced errors above, if not made, would have resulted in a different outcome, as the bears were not going to score with Cutler hurt.  Bowen and the Chicago announcers also talked about a hold on Webb that wasn’t called, which I think was a big play, a Marshall pushoff for a completion, and how Tillman had his hands around Johnson’s waist on plays, which I commented on during the game.

Singletary

by

As pointed out on previous posts, I said all during Mike Singletary’s career (and after) that he was a great leader and very good against the run, but very overrated as a player.  I said he wasn’t very fast and couldn’t cover.  I said the only reason he was considered great was that Dan Hampton played in front of him, and once Hampton retired, he wouldn’t be anywhere near as good.  That is what happened.  I was told all along and to this day by bear fans that I’m wrong.  I’ve also pointed out that Singletary himself, maybe 15 years after he retired, said he watched films of the games he played in, realized he owed all his success to Hampton, called Hampton to tell him this, and Hampton responded by saying something to the effect of “you’re just realizing that?”  A few days ago, the hosts on ESPN radio in Chicago were talking about those bear teams and Singletary.  The three hosts, who are bear fans, were saying he was the sixth or seventh best player on that defense, and I believe it was John Jurkovic, who played in the NFL, who said he was seventh.  Jurkovic went on to say (this is almost a direct quote) “no one benefited more by having great players around him than Singletary. No one.  You put the other stars on other teams with lesser players, they’d still be great.  You put Singletary on a team with lesser players….trouble.”  I’ve said this all along, Singletary himself and Hampton said it, and now a former player also said it, with the agreement of the other two show hosts.  However, I’m sure bear fans will still say I’m wrong.

Jaguars’ Gameplan Gives Game To bears

by

I continue to say the tone of NFL games is frequently set in the first half or three quarters of the game.  When teams throw on first down against the bears, they get first downs, but when they run, drives stall.  The bears are in a run-prevent defense on first downs.  If a bear opponent runs on first downs, they are making no attempt to score, which allows the bears to hang around, get confidence, and take advantage of turnovers, injuries, etc.  Cutler tends to start slowly anyway, so being aggressive offensively and getting a lead on the bears makes the game completely different.

Let’s look at the Jaguars’ gameplan.  I know they are not a great passing team, but their only chance to beat the bears was to pass on first down and most downs.  Their receivers were open.  Here is their gameplan:

First possession:  Run on first down for no gain, run on second down for 4, punt.

Second possession:  Throw on first down (receiver open, pass dropped), run on second down for 1, throw on third down (receiver open, pass dropped), punt.

Third possession:  Run on first down for a loss of 3, get first down on a pass.  Run for 20 on first down.  Pass incomplete on first down, run on second for a loss of 4, pass for first down.  Pass incomplete on first down, run on second down for 2, pass on third down for a first down at the 12.  Run on first down and false start, so first and 15.  Two incomplete passes and a short pass, then kick a field goal.

Fourth possession:  Start from own 3.  Run on first down for 1, punt.

Fifth possession:  Run on first down for 1, throw on second down for 8, run for first down.  Throw on first down for 19, but called back for holding, so first and 20.  Run on first down for 2, pass on second down for 11, pass for 10 on third down for a first down.  Run for 1 on first down, pass for 34 on second down.  Run for a loss of 1 on first down, fumble on a sack at the bear 22.

At halftime, the score was 3-3, and it’s obvious that had the Jaguars thrown on first downs, they would have scored a lot more.

Down 6-3, this is the Jaguars’ next possession, which was their first possession of the second half:

Run on first down for 1, but hold, so now first and 20.  Next play was an interception returned for a touchdown, effectively ending the game.

First-down runs led to the two turnovers on the last two possessions, one costing the Jaguars a score, and one giving the bears a touchdown.  Will coaches ever learn?

Cowboys’ Gameplan Gives Game To Bears

by

What happened in the Cowboy-bear game tonight is exactly what I always say will happen when teams come out with idiotic offensive gameplans against the bears.  The Cowboy coaches turned what could have been a Dallas rout into a bear rout.  Of course all the Cowboy dropped passes and missed open receivers, and running the wrong pattern, greatly affected the outcome, but these would not have factored into the outcome had Dallas had a smart gameplan.  Despite all this, it was only 10-7 bears at half, and the bears’ TD was due to a receiver running a wrong pattern, resulting in an interception return.

As I’ve said for decades, if you run on first down against the bears, your drives will stall, and instead of jumping out to a nice lead and putting pressure on the bears, you won’t score and will allow them to hang around and get confidence, and put yourself in a position where mistakes or injuries can help decide the game.  Dallas had receivers open all game, but their playcalling made this a nonfactor.

Let’s look at Dallas’ gameplan, which clearly illustrates the above point I continue to make:

First possession:  Drive stalls due to a first-down run.  Dallas punts.

Second possession:  Drive stalls due to a first-down run.  Dallas punts.

Third possession:  Drive stalls due to a first down run.  Dallas punts.  Dallas punted from the bear 38 on fourth-and-four!  That is four-down territory, and if you get passive and punt, that increases the likelihood of the other team scoring.  One team getting passive helps the opponent get more aggressive.  The bears did drive for a field goal, and their first points.

Fourth possession:  Dallas threw on first down, and the receiver ran the wrong route, resulting in an interception return for a touchdown.

Fifth possession:  Since the Cowboys were now down 10-0 late in the half, they had to pass.  They passed on all five first downs and moved easily down the field for a touchdown, even though the bears knew they would have to pass.

To recap the first half, when as I always say, the tone of games can be set (as well as in the third quarter), instead of being aggressive by passing on first down and passing a lot and probably having a big lead since receivers were open and the bears weren’t able to stop the pass, Dallas stalled their drives by running and not attempting to score until they were down by more than 7.  They threw on first down 8 times and got a first down 7 times.

In the second half, the bears, again with the confidence of being in the game due to the bad Cowboy gameplan, scored a touchdown on their first drive, to go up 17-7.  Since the Cowboys were down more than 7 again, they decided to pass.  They easily marched to the bear 16-yardline, trying to cut the score to 17-14.  The drive started at the Dallas 20, and every yard Dallas gained except one was from passing.  At the bear 16, with a critical touchdown a possibility and having easily moved the ball through the air, the Cowboys ran on first down for a loss of 2.  That resulted in an interception on second down when the receiver let an easy pass bounce off him to the bears, costing Dallas a probable touchdown.  Another first-down run backfired.  At this point, which was almost midway through the third quarter, again when the tone of a game is set, the Cowboys had thrown on 10 first downs and got a first down 9 times.  It is incredible that coaches never get this.

On the ESPN postgame show, Steve Young said the Cowboys didn’t play smart offensively, and then said “their first-down rushing game is nothing.  There’s nothing there.”  That’s because, as I always say, the bears’ defense is designed to stop first-down runs, but they can’t stop a team when it throws on first down.  Had Dallas come out throwing on first down and most downs, they probably would have scored early and often, since the bears were unable to stop these plays, making this a completely different game.  This proves once again that gameplans often decide outcomes, and even when one team wins by a large margin, the game could have gone the other way by a large margin.

 

Rams/Refs Give bears Game

by

The Rams and the refs gave the bears a game that was very winnable for the Rams.  Let’s see what happened:

1.  The Rams stopped the bears on their first drive, but roughed the punter well after he punted, resulting in a gift bear field goal.

2.  A first-down run stalled the Rams’ first drive.

3.  The Rams dropped an easy interception, but did intercept later on the drive.

4.  The Rams dropped a pass at the bear 8, resulting in a punt.

5.  The Rams hit Cutler well after he threw the ball, and the roughing penalty gave the bears a first down at the Ram 30 and a gift touchdown, making all 10 points gifts.

6.  The Rams spiked the ball on first down with 36 seconds left in the half while they had two timeouts, costing them a play and resulting in the Rams having to kick a field goal.  They could have called two plays prior to the play that got them the first down.

7.  The Rams, down 10-3 at halftime and needing to get momentum to start the second half, threw on first down and got a first down, then ran on first down and turned the ball over on downs.

8.  A first-down run stalled another Ram drive.

9.  The Rams, via their offensive gameplan and other mistakes, let the bears hang around even though the bear offense was doing nothing.  A smart offensive gameplan, and not giving the bears 10 of their 13 points on gifts, would have made this a much different game.

10. The bears “intercepted” and returned it for a touchdown, turning a one-score game at 13-6 into a two-score game at 20-6.  However, on the play, the defender hit the receiver with his shoulder prior to the ball reaching the receiver, and the ball went off the receiver’s hands to another defender.  If pass interference was correctly called, this would have sustained the Ram drive to try to tie the game, instead of basically ending the game.

11. With 7:50 left, the Rams had a third-and-two, ran for a loss, and punted.

12. With 2:18 left, the bears kicked off.  The Rams were down 3 scores and had a little over 2 minutes left in the game, so they needed big plays.  You have to run the kick back and not down it in the endzone as your only chance is to score quickly, but the Rams downed the ball.

McCarthy Keeps bear Game Close

by

I’ll start by saying that every sports announcer I’ve heard and article I’ve read talked about how the Packer offense hasn’t been dominating this year, and how the 49er and bear defenses held them somewhat in check.  This shows the complete lack of understanding of what really happened.  The previous post showed the details in the 49er game and this post will discuss the bear game.  I told many people before the bear game, as I always do, that if the Packers throw on first downs and throw on most plays, they will have a high-powered offense and win easily, but if they run on first downs and run a lot, they will struggle and the game will be close.  This has held true from the beginning of the Favre era, but Packer coaches never get this.  Previous posts show this is the case every week.  I also said that McCarthy gets conservative against good defenses like the 49ers, Giants, and bears, which is the worst thing you can do.

Just as an aside, the Falcons have had a good team the last few years but never did anything in the playoffs.  This year, people are talking about them as a Super Bowl contender.  Here is what Sports Illustrated had to say this week:  “After four years of a ground-based attack that was methodical at best and plodding at worst, Atlanta unveiled an up-tempo, quick-passing game under new coordinator Dirk Koetter that produced points on each of the first eight possessions.  Fifth-year quarterback Matt Ryan, playing with an enthusiasm and a focus previously unseen, completed 23 of 31 passes for 299 yards, three touchdowns and no picks for a 136.4 rating.”  This is exactly what I have been saying.  If you let quarterbacks throw on early downs, they will feel comfortable and enthusiastic, it keeps the passing rhythm going, and it results in leads where QBs don’t have to feel they have to force things and make things happen.

Now, to the Packer-bear game.  The bears have a good offense and had come off a great offensive performance against the Colts, so it would be important for the Packers to come out aggressively on offense and score points.  What does McCarthy do?  He runs on first and second down on the first drive, and punts.  First-down runs also stopped the second drive, including a run on first-and-twenty.  As I continually say, this lets the other team stay in the game, gives them confidence, and puts you in a situation where anything can happen.  The Packers made no attempt to score offensively in the first half, letting the bears hang around.  McCarthy also played for a field goal at the end of the half, instead of taking a shot at a touchdown before kicking the field goal.  In the second half, after the bears cut the lead to 13-3, the Packers needed to regain momentum.  McCarthy ran on second and third downs, resulting in a punt.  The Packers ran on another third-and-one later, and thus had to kick a field goal.  The Packer passing game was out of synch because of the run emphasis.  Greg Jennings missed the game, which was another reason to pass and get the passing game in synch since it would be harder to pass without your best receiver if you were out of synch and had to pass.

In addition, on a key play that could have put the game away for the Packers, Tillman stripped the ball from a Packer receiver and the bears recovered.  I say before every Packer-bear game that Tillman does this and the Packers have to protect the ball.  Tillman has done this to the Packers many times, costing them at least two games, but the coaching staff either isn’t emphasizing this or the players just don’t get it.

One more point about the Colt-bear game last week.  I pointed out that the bears were lucky to face Luck in his first game before he got experience.  Additional luck:  The Colts had a lot of pressure on Cutler early and the bear offense was going nowhere.  This is what the Packers did to the bears all game.  However, after the early drives, there wasn’t much pressure and the bear offense was able to move the ball well.  I subsequently found out that Dwight Freeney went out in the first quarter, and that, of course, significantly removed the pressure put on by him and Robert Mathis that was stopping the bears.

Colts Give bears The Opener

by

Of course the bears were very lucky to face Andrew Luck in his first NFL game, before he had the chance to gain a few games’ experience.

On the Colts’ first drive, with no score, they passed for 8 yards on first down.  When they lined up for the second-down play, my son said to me (we were at the game), “the bears have stacked the line.”  We could both easily see they were playing everyone up to stop the run.  Did the Colts audible out of a run?  Of course not.  They ran for a loss of 2.  It was so obvious in the stands what the bears were doing, yet the Colts played right into it.  On third down, the receiver was wide open in the flat for an easy first down, but Luck well overthrew him.

When it was 7-7 in the first quarter, the Colts passed on first down and got a first down, then ran on first down for a loss of 4 and punted.  On this first-down play, they lined up with 2 running backs, so I said it was obvious to the bears they would run.  They did and lost the 4 yards.  On third down, the receiver was again wide open in the flat for an easy first down, but again, Luck well overthrew him.  On the next possession, they ran on first down for 1 yard and punted.  On third down, the receiver dropped an easy short pass that would have gotten the first down easily and possibly a lot more.

Down 14-7 in the second quarter, the Colts passed for a first down.  They then threw a bomb on the next first down.  The receiver had beaten the defender, but Luck underthrew it, and the bears intercepted.  The bears were offsides on the play, which replay clearly showed, but the refs didn’t call it.  This not only stopped a Colt drive, but the bears scored a field goal after the turnover.  This bad call had a big effect, as the bears were up 10 at half, which this call contributed to.  The Colts cut the lead to 17-14 after this call, so this call made a big difference.

The Colts got the ball back with 0:44 left in the half and passed so moved the ball easily, but missed an easy 37-yard field goal.

So, in the first half, when the tone of a game can be set as I always point out, the Colts stopped themselves on three drives by missing wide-open receivers and dropping an easy short pass, the refs stopped a Colt drive which also resulted in a bear field goal, and the Colts missed a short field goal.  Despite all these gifts from the Colts and refs, it was only a 10-point lead at halftime.  During the first half, the Colts scored a touchdown on one possession, and the other five were stopped by themselves or the refs, having nothing to do with the bears!  This could have been a completely different game if the Colts had sustained drives by making easy third-down conversions and if the refs hadn’t stopped the Colt drive and given the bears a field goal.

I said the Colts needed to come out aggressively offensively in the second half to score, cut the deficit, and get momentum.  What do they do?  On their first drive, they run on first down for 1 yard and punt.  They punted to Hester (which is ridiculous), who had a nice return, setting up a bear touchdown.  The Colts then fumbled the kickoff, giving the bears a field goal.  Again, a first-down run backfired.  The bears now led 34-14, basically ending the game since the Colts have a rookie quarterback and aren’t a very good team.

A terrible gameplan, multiple missed easy third-down conversions stopping rather than sustaining drives, a bad call, a missed easy field goal, etc., all gave the bears this game.

 

Jay Cutler

by

This is a response to a friend:

I knew you’d respond to my comment that the bears got Cutler for nothing.  When there were first discussions regarding the bears getting Cutler, I said that if they got Cutler, other great free agents would come to the bears to play with him, since the bears always have a good defense and now they’d have a good offense.  Other great players would see the potential for winning.  I was proven right on this with Peppers and Marshall (who wanted to play with Cutler), and others, such as Chester Taylor (who didn’t work out) were interested since they saw the potential.  I said I’d give up 5 first-round draft choices in a minute for Cutler, because the other great players who would sign would take their place.  Plus, the bears have a relatively bad record with first-round draft choices anyway.  So, let’s just take Peppers.  I don’t believe he comes to the bears if Cutler isn’t here.  So, let’s see, would you rather have Cutler and Peppers or two first-round draft picks and a third round pick?  Anyone who even has to think about this doesn’t understand football.  Cutler was 25 years old and had just thrown for 4500 yards.  He was obviously going to be an elite QB for the next 10 years, and any team he went to would be able to contend if they surrounded him with players.  Are you going to actually tell me that Kyle Orton was a loss when you can get Cutler?  Getting Cutler made the bears an instant contender when they wouldn’t have been with Orton or others.  So, getting Cutler and the ability to contend for the next 10 years wasn’t worth FAR MORE than those picks and Orton?  Everything I said would happen if the bears got Cutler before they even got him has come true.  They gave up far less than they should have, they became an instant contender, other great players want to come to the bears, etc.  I said it before and I’ll say it again.  Five first-round picks would have still been a steal for the bears.  Elite QBs are very difficult to get, and the money you would spend on first-round picks can be spent on proven great veterans who can compete immediately and who want to come to the team.  You need an elite QB to compete in the current NFL.  The bears weren’t serious contenders before Cutler got there, and wouldn’t be now if they still had Orton.  You sound like all the other writers, etc. who were saying the bears gave up a lot to get Cutler!  Again, do you want Cutler and Peppers, or those draft picks?  I’m not even adding Marshall to the equation, or Bush, the running back, or the others that will also sign because Cutler made the bears a contender.  Once again, I was proven right on what I said would happen.  And, as I told you, thanks to Ted Thompson, Cutler is on the bears instead of the Browns.  The Broncos wanted Brady Quinn, not Orton, but Cutler’s agent wouldn’t let him play for Mangini since he saw what Mangini did to Favre (his client) with his ridiculous conservative offense.

1985 bears’ 46 Defense/Singletary

by

I just watched the entire “Inside Look: Mike Ditka” on Comcast.  He was asked questions about his life and career, and was reflecting on many things.  He said two things that I said all along and bear fans debated with me, and Ditka is now saying EXACTLY the same things I said.  One of the key points he made was that opponents “didn’t understand” the 46 defense, which is exactly what I’ve said since about 1983.  I talked about how easy it was to beat the defense, where it was very vulnerable, and how you couldn’t sit in the pocket.  Within a year or two of 1985, no one played it anymore, including Buddy Ryan, because they did figure it out.

Regarding the bears’ 46 defense in 1985, this is a quote from Ditka on the program:  The key to that defense was Buddy Ryan.  He was ahead of his time.  What he taught, what he created, what he had those guys believing in worked.  Can you run that same defense as effectively today?  No.  They would spread you out and they would attack you and too many vulnerable spots.  But people didn’t understand it and they thought to attack that defense, you had to protect first.  No, you had to spread people out and attack.  You could never sit back and wait because you weren’t going to have time.  And he was far ahead of his time when it came to that.  And he had those guys all believing in it, and they, you know, loved Buddy, and he did a great job.

The other point was about Dan Hampton.  Previous posts covered the fact that I said throughout his career that Mike Singletary was overrated, and owed a large part of his success to having Dan Hampton in front of him.  I said he was a very good leader and good against the run (thanks in part to tremendous help from the line), but was weak against the pass.  bear fans argued with me, and then Singletary himself said, years after he retired, that he watched gamefilms and called Hampton to tell him that he owed his success to him.  Hampton’s response was something like: “You’re just realizing that?”  On this program, Ditka said that Singletary was injured and missed a game, so they had to play Ron Rivera at middle linebacker.  He said Rivera had 24 tackles that game, and Rivera said after the game that no one got to him due to the defensive line.  This was during a discussion on Dan Hampton.

These points were all obvious at the time, and I was vocal about them, but it’s taken years for bear fans to hear the truth from the players and coaches.

Well, Well, Well–The 1985 bears 46 Defense

by

I have pointed out since about 1983, that the bears’ defense was easy to beat by quick, short passes, including quick passes to the tight end.  The few times teams did do this, it worked.  I also said running on first down into that defense would result in punts or fumbles.  I also pointed out that about a year after the 1985 Super Bowl season, there were a number of articles in national publications saying that no one, not even Buddy Ryan, head coach of the Eagles, played the 46 anymore since it was so easy to beat.

Tonight I watched “Inside Look:  Mike Ditka” on Comcast.  Among other things, the host discussed the 1985 season with him.  Ditka gave Buddy Ryan tremendous credit, saying Ryan was ahead of his time.  He gave him a lot of credit for creating that defense.  Not as a slam on Ryan as he was very complimentary, but as a reflection on this, Ditka then went on to say that you couldn’t run that defense today, because teams would spread out and attack it.  He said the defense had “too many vulnerabilities” and spots where it could be attacked.  He said people didn’t know it then, and thought they had to protect instead of attack.  He said it could be attacked.  This is another example of something I realized years before coaches, and something that was so obvious it was ridiculous no one figured this out and understood this.  It was great to see the national publications admit this after the fact, and it’s now great that Ditka is doing the same.  Yes, the bears had great personnel, but the way they lined up left so many vulnerabilities as Ditka put it and as I have always said.  This was obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of football, but apparently not to any of the head coaches in the NFL.

Packer-bear Game

by

Yesterday’s Packer-bear game confirmed what I’ve said the last few years regarding Packer-bear games.  Fans of the bears said the bears play Rodgers well, which is why the Packers don’t score a lot and the games are close.  I pointed out that in some games, the Packers came out passing, scored on the first two drives, then got conservative and ran which meant they wouldn’t score, the bears would be allowed to hang around and gain confidence instead of being down by a lot, and the games would come down to the end.  In Week 17 last year, the Packers were conservative all game, which again, kept the game close.  Let’s look at yesterday’s game:
The Packers threw on 8 of 9 plays on the opening drive, and of course drove to an easy TD.
Second drive:  The Packers threw on first down (the first play), and Finley was wide open, of course, and dropped an easy pass for a nice gain and first down.
From that point on, the Packers did not throw downfield on first or second down until there was 1:50 left in the half.  The Packers didn’t score again to that point as a result, and were fortunate to be leading 7-3.
I was at the game, and with 1:50 left in the half, I told those around me that now McCarthy would have to pass since there wasn’t much time left, and the Packers would score a TD as a result.  What happened?  The Packers threw on 6 of 7 plays (the other play was a scramble, so this might have been a pass play) and scored an easy TD.  This again shows how predictable this is.  Whenever the Packers throw on first down and throw downfield, they easily score against the bears.
In the second half, they let Rodgers throw on first down and throw downfield, and the Packers marched.  He ended up with 5 TD passes, and this was after wasting most of the first half not trying to score and being pulled midway through the fourth quarter.  If you take away the 17 minutes in the first half they did not try to score (between Finley’s drop and with 1:50 to go in the half) and the 8 minutes he didn’t play at the end, that means Rodgers threw 5 TD passes in 35 minutes, which is just more than half the game!  Looks to me like he would have thrown 8 or 9 TD passes had they been aggressive all game.
This further confirms my statements that the Packers stop themselves when playing the bears by being conservative, as no matter what point of the game, when the Packers throw on first down and throw downfield, they score easily.

bear Defense/Seahawks-bears/Broncos-bears

by

The ’76 Steeler defense had no weakness–none.  They were dominant almost every game.  There was no way to attack them.  They were great against the run and the pass.  The 1985 bear defense, on the other hand, was great against the run and great against the pass when QBs would sit in the pocket due to the rush, but was very vulnerable to the quick, short pass and passes to tight ends.  The few times during the year teams would do this, it would work.  Just because teams didn’t exploit this weakness doesn’t mean it wasn’t there.  The Steelers, as I said, had no weakness.  Many articles came out around 1987 showing why no one played the 46 anymore, including Buddy Ryan, as coaches had figured out it was vulnerable to these plays.  I’ve never seen any articles showing how the Steeler or Raven defense could be attacked.  And, as I said before, the Raven defense played in a more high-scoring, wide-open-offense era, and they played with Trent Dilfer at QB, meaning they could never ease up.

The Seahawks had one lengthy drive in the second half.  The fact it that they stopped themselves on some drives by running on first down, but EVERY time they threw on first down, they got a first down.  So, it wasn’t the bears stopping them, it was the Seahawks running on first down.  If they passed on the first downs they ran on, they would have had more lengthy drives.  And, my point really is, had they done this all game, they would have had lengthy scoring drives in the first half and put the game away then.
It was said the Seahawks started passing in the second half after the bears lost their starting safety.  When the Seahawks threw on first down in the first half, they also got first downs.  It had nothing to do with either safety, as first-down passes worked all game, as they always do against the bears.  The fact of the matter is that Seattle realized that running on first downs got them nowhere in the first half, so they immediately adjusted to start the second half, throwing on first downs, and marched to an easy TD.  It wasn’t the safety change, it was the adjustment away from a very unsuccessful strategy.
It was said the altitude, time of game (at the end), lack of offense, etc. all contributed to the bears losing the game at Denver.  It’s funny that all these factors just happened to affect the bears at exactly the point in the game the Broncos started throwing!  The altitude, lack of an offense, etc. didn’t seem to stop the defense at all for the first 55-1/2 minutes.  It was just at the exact point the Broncos started throwing that all these factors started affecting them.  It doesn’t matter what time of game teams throw on first down against the bears–it works every time.  The Packers always throw on the first two drives, score on both drives, then run and get shut down.  Seattle ran in the first half, got shut down, threw starting the second half,  and scored.  Denver ran for 55-1/2 minutes and didn’t score, then passed on 3 series and scored on each one.  So, whether a team throws early in the game (Packers), in the middle of the game (Seahawks), or at the end of the game (Denver), they score on the bears, and when they run at any point in the game, they don’t.

Bronco-bear Game

by

Once again, incredibly stupid coaching kept the bears in a game that was critical to their playoff hopes, and would have given the bears the win had they not also beaten themselves.  Let’s take our weekly look at what opposing coaches continue to do in bear games.
1. The Broncos had 6 first downs in the first quarter, and ran on all 6.  They also ran on the first 4 first downs of the second quarter.  As I point out week after week, running on first down will stall drives and prevent scoring.  The Broncos only threw 16 times the first 3 quarters.  The emphasis on the run and on first-down runs resulted in the Broncos being shut out for the first 58 minutes.  The tone of a game is set early, but the Broncos made no attempt to score due to their emphasis on running.
2.  The Broncos got the ball with 4:34 to play in the fourth quarter, down 10.  At that point, even someone who has never coached before knows you have to pass.  The Broncos threw on all 7 plays, and scored a touchdown.  They then got the ball back at their own 20 with 56 seconds left.  They passed on their first 5 plays, then scrambled, then kicked the tying FG.  They then got the ball in overtime.  They threw on their first 3 plays, got sacked on the fourth play (I’m not sure if it was a pass play), passed on the next play, then ran twice because they felt they were in winning field-goal range.  So, they didn’t pass much the first 55-1/2 minutes and didn’t score, and then passed on their last 3 drives WHEN THE bears KNEW THEY HAD TO PASS, and with a quarterback who isn’t a good passer, and marched downfield to 3 scores.  I think it’s obvious once again that had they passed all game, they would have scored a lot more.  Tebow was 13 of 17 on the last three drives.
3.  The bear offense was going nowhere.  They had 76 passing yards in regulation!  Midway through the third quarter in a scoreless game, the Broncos punted to Hester, who returned it 26 yards to the Bronco 42, which resulted in a touchdown.  The bears continue to win game after game year after year due to the idiocy of kicking/punting to Hester, but these coaches continue to do it!  Last week, the bears’ only 3 points in a 10-3 loss were a result of kicking to Hester.  Again, that kept them in the game, as their offense was going nowhere.  What will it take until coaches get this?!  With three seconds left in regulation, they again kicked to Hester (!) which could have cost them the game, but did tackle him.
4.  In a scoreless game midway through the second quarter, the Broncos tried a 28-yard field goal.  I’ve said for years that when kicking short field goals against the bears, you need to just chip the ball and get height, rather than kicking it normally, because the bears are good at blocking these.  Did the coach have the kicker do this?  Of course not.  He kicked it as he would a longer field goal, and the bears blocked it.  Again, does anyone watch films?  You just need to chip it over.  Since Toub took over special teams for the bears in 2004, they lead the NFL in blocked field goals!  Do you think you might want to be aware of that and gameplan for it?!
In summary, I think it’s idiotic to run against the bears. I understand the Broncos are a run-first team since Tebow isn’t very good as a passer at this point, so I realize they are going to start the game with what they consider their strength (even though I knew it wouldn’t work).  It took them 55-1/2 minutes to adjust and start passing. Sports Illustrated put it this way. “The Broncos had failed to score on their first 12 possessions, seven of which were three-and-outs and three others of which lasted 5 plays or fewer.” So, you can see 10 OF THE 12 POSSESSIONS were basically three and out, and they kept doing it!!!  How long does it take to figure out what you’re doing isn’t working? If the bears don’t give the game away at the end, they lose due to this idiotic strategy. I know the bears were in a prevent at the end, but were they also in a prevent in overtime when the Broncos easily drove into field-goal range? The bottom line is they were going nowhere offensively for basically all of regulation, and never changed the gameplan! Every team that runs against the bears ends up losing or barely winning, when they could have done much better by passing.

Raiders-bears

by

The bears were starting a backup quarterback who had never started an NFL game.  You would think the opposing coach would want to get a quick lead to force the inexperienced backup QB into passing situations.  The best way to get a quick lead against the bears, as we all know, is to pass on first down.  Let’s see what happened in the beginning of the game when the goal should have been to get a nice lead.
Raiders’ first possession:  Throw on first down and complete the pass for 19 yards.  Throw on first down and complete the pass for 24 yards.  Run on first down, the drive stalls, and kick a field goal.
Raiders’ second possession:  Run on first down for 3.  Run on second down for 1.  Punt.
Raiders’ third possession:  Throw on first down and get first down.  Run on first for 2, the drive stalls, kick a field goal.
Had the Raiders not run on first down, it would have been at least 14-0 instead of 6-0, and it’s very possible they would have also scored on their second possession.
Later in the game, the Raiders ran on first down from the bear 11 and the bear 9, stalling both drives and resulting in field goals.  First-down runs also hurt other drives.
There are numerous bad calls I could discuss, which gave the bears 10 points and cost the Raiders a TD, but the only thing I will mention is that at the end of the half, the Raider player with the ball was laying on the ground out of bounds at the bear 1 with 8 seconds showing on the clock.  While the player was on the ground out of bounds, the clock continued to run and stopped at 5 seconds.  This caused the Raiders to go for the field goal instead of having one more play to try to get the touchdown.

Chargers-bears

by

I was at the Charger-bear game today, and let’s see what happened compared to what I said prior to the game.  I’ll summarize before I get into details.
1.  I said the Chargers should punt 35-40 yards and high, forcing a fair catch, so the bears couldn’t return any punts.  I said if they can’t kick it out of the endzone, they should deep squib kick.  What happened?  The Chargers kicked and punted to the bears all game without doing what I suggested, and got burned by long returns over and over, even though some were called back by penalty.  Both bear TDs in the first half (14 of the 17 points the bears scored to lead 17-10) were the result of long punt and kickoff returns.  This set the tone for the game.  The bears got 2 first-half scores the previous week by kicking to Hester, but I guess coaches will never get this.
2.  I said the Chargers needed to throw to Gates (tight end) a lot, and also to Vincent Jackson, including going deep to Jackson to stretch the defense.  The Chargers did not do this until late in the second quarter, which of course they scored a TD on.  They wasted the entire first half, when the tone of the game is set, not doing this, and thus not scoring.  They did this on the opening drive of the second half, and scored their other TD.  It was obvious the bears couldn’t defend this, which was obvious before the game, but the Chargers rarely did this.
3.  I said the Chargers should rarely run, and never on first down.  Runs killed drive after drive, and it was a first-down run that produced the fumble, resulting in a 14-point bear lead instead of San Diego driving for a tying TD.
4.  I said ballcarriers have to protect the ball against strips, as the bears constantly try for strips (especially Tillman), but the ballcarrier didn’t do this and fumbled (Tillman stripped him), preventing a potential tying TD and allowing the bears to score a TD to go up 14 in the second half.
San Diego could have had a nice first-half lead if they didn’t punt and kick for returns, refuse to throw to Gates and Jackson and stretch the field, and call running plays.
Some specifics:
1.  When it was 3-3, the Chargers ran on first down and punted.
2.  Hester had a big return on a punt after a drive was stopped due to a run for minus-5.
3.  The Chargers had the ball at their own 3, and ran on first down for 1 yard, and punted.
4.  The first offensive play of the second half was a first-down run by the Chargers for minus-1.  They then threw a bomb to Jackson for 47 yards.  They then ran on first down for minus-2.  They then threw a bomb and got a pass-interference call.  They had a first down at the bear 11, and ran on first down for 2.
5.  Other drives were hurt by runs for no or almost no gain.
6.  Other coaching idiocies:  With 20 seconds left in the half and the bears up 17-10, the bears kicked deep instead of deep squib kicking, risking a return.  With 1:59 to go and the bears up 31-20, they faked a punt and had a receiver wide open.  The receiver kept running and the passer had to lead him.  All the receiver had to do was stop, turn around, and wait for an easy short pass.  The bears didn’t need a TD, because if they had just completed the pass and the receiver went down, the game was over and the bears could have taken a knee a few times (the Chargers were out of timeouts).  This gave the Chargers time to come back.  The San Diego coach had to challenge a call in order to stay in the game as there was 3:11 left, so instead of challenging, he called timeout, had the play reviewed by his coaches upstairs, then challenged.  When he lost the challenge, he lost his last timeout.  This cost him 2 timeouts instead of the 1 it should have cost if he had just challenged immediately.  With 3:11 left and all challenges having to come from the booth with 2:00 left, this made no sense as he wouldn’t have needed to save a challenge.  That last timeout could have been critical.

Lions-bears

by

Since the refs kept the bears’ playoff hopes and confidence alive by giving them the Eagle game last week, let’s look at what happened in today’s Lion game.  This was a critical game, because if the bears lost, they would be two games behind the Lions, but in effect 3 games, since they would have lost the tiebreaker.  A loss would have severely hurt the bears’ playoff hopes. 
Detroit’s coach should have been fired at halftime.  Here are the reasons:
The bears led 20-6 at halftime.  Let’s look at how the bears got their 20 points.  10 points were due to receivers fumbling the ball.  I’ve been saying for years (even before the James Jones game a number of years ago) that the bears strip the ball and receivers have to protect it.  Obviously, the coach doesn’t get this and work on it all week.  The other 10 points were a result of kicking to Hester.  As I keep mentioning, I said prior to Hester’s first NFL game that any coach who kicks to him is an idiot.
The Lions still had a chance to win in the second half, so let’s see how the bears got the next 2 TDs to put the game away.  Both TDs were on interception returns, and both followed first-down runs, as did the first fumble the Lions had.  First-down runs were killing the Lions all day, as they do to any bear opponent, but the Lion coaching staff doesn’t get this.
It was 34-6, and the 34 points were due to receiver fumbles (preventable if you know those defensive plays are coming), kicking to Hester, and running on first down, all of which I’ve pointed out for years lead to losses.
As with almost all bear opponents, the Lions refused to attack downfield.  They threw almost no deep passes during the first 3 quarters.  The bears can’t cover deep, and doing this stretches the defense, not allowing the bears to have all 11 players “close” to the line of scrimmage.  This contributed to the 2 interception returns in the third quarter, because there was no threat of the Lions throwing deep and the bear defenders could play short passes.  This is another point I constantly make, and during games this year, the announcers also have questioned this.  In the second and third quarters, the announcers ask why the opponent isn’t taking shots downfield and explain why the bear defense is vulnerable to those plays.  Today, Brian Billick asked it in the second and third quarters, and said it would be vulnerable due to the single high safety and press coverage the bears were playing.
I understand Detroit’s QB had a broken finger and bad ankle and played with a glove on his throwing hand, and I understand the Lions dropped 4 TD passes (2 were on one drive), so they hurt themselves, but this would have been an entirely different game had the Lions had a smart gameplan.  The Lions set the tone for the first 3 quarters by continuing to have idiotic strategy.

Eagles-bears

by

Although it’s obvious the officials gave the bears the Eagles game by giving them the “TD” at the end of the half, which ESPN showed on their highlight show as an example of a bad call (keeping the bears in the playoff race instead of really hurting their chances), let me point out a few other things that happened during the game:
On the Eagles’ first drive, down 7-0, they passed on first down and got a first down, then ran on first down and punted.  They needed to come right back with a score, but made no attempt to score since they ran on first down.
The Eagles had blown a 24-17 lead, and the bears had just taken the lead at 27-24 in the 4th quarter.  The Eagles needed to score to regain momentum.  This was the Eagles’ drive:  Throw on first down for a first down.  Throw on first down for a first down.  Throw on first down for a first down.  Run on first down (from bear 46) and punt (the fake punt).
Down 30-24, the Eagles had the ball with a chance to score the winning TD in the last few minutes.  They moved downfield to the bear 39 by passing, then ran on first down for no gain and turned the ball over on downs.

Packer And bear Games

by

I’ll start with the Packer game.  The Packers went up 21-3 against the Broncos in the second quarter.  As soon as they scored the TD to make it 21-3, I told the people around me (I was at the game) that McCarthy would then run on first down, and it would help Denver get back in the game that the Packers had under control.  The Broncos scored to make it 21-10, McCarthy ran on first down for 1 yard, second down was an 8-yard sack, the Packers punted, and the Broncos scored to make it 21-17.  Just as I predicted.  From that point on, McCarthy did pass, and the Packers won in a rout, 49-23 (the Broncos scored a TD at the end).
Since McCarthy did keep passing this game (finally!), the Packers easily won and the game didn’t come down to the end as previous games did when they got conservative.  In the third quarter, with the Packers continuing to pass and drive downfield, Phill Simms, who was doing the game, said, and this is a direct quote:  “Keeping the pace going.  I think one complaint that Aaron Rodgers kind of had about the Green Bay Packer offense, he goes, I think we cool off too quick.  In other words, once we get rolling, let’s go.  Don’t tell me we’re going to manage the game the last quarter and a half.  Let’s keep going, pressuring the defense.  Didn’t do that last week in Chicago.”  I’ve said this about Packer coaches since the Favre years began, and I know he complained about it.  Now Rodgers has, too, and since McCarthy did listen, they won in a rout.  With 2:00 to go in the third quarter, Rodgers was 24 of 30 for 375 yards.  In the fourth quarter, as a result of continuously passing, the Packers were up 5 scores, and it would have been 7 had they not run on that first down.  This makes a lot more sense than getting conservative, blowing a comfortable lead, letting the other team hang around, and having to hold on or lose.
Now, to the Carolina-bear game.  Carolina proved, like every other team in the NFL, that they don’t understand strategy.  The papers had the score at 34-29 bears, but Carolina did win the game since the refs took away a Jeremy Shockey TD pass by calling offensive pass interference, which was clearly a terrible call.  Without that bad call, Carolina probably wins, as this would have given them the lead and they kept moving the ball.  However, let’s ignore that for the moment and look at various plays by Carolina, each of which on its own cost them the game:
1.  Carolina ran on first down deep in its territory, which resulted in an interception return for a TD.  This play alone cost them the game.
2.  Carolina punted to Devin Hester allowing a return instead of punting high for a fair catch or punting out of bounds, and he returned it for a TD.  This was right after he returned a kick 73 yards.  This play alone cost them the game.
3.  Carolina had a short field-goal attempt blocked.  I’ve always said the bears are good at blocking field goals, and when the kick is short, the kicker needs to take a short run-up and chip the ball instead of kicking low.  This play contributed to the loss.
4.  Carolina got to the bear 17 and ran on first down, resulting in a field goal.  This play alone cost them the game.
5.  In a tie game, they kicked off to Hester, who returned it 73 yards, resulting in an eventual TD.  I didn’t see this play, so if they did deep-squib kick it, this point can be removed.  However, if they did kick it to him so he could return it, this play alone cost them the game.
6.  The Panthers had a first down at the bear 25, ran on first down, and kicked a field goal.  This play alone cost them the game.
7.  With 6:41 left in the game, down 27-23, the Panthers ran on first down for 2 yards and punted.  This play alone cost them the game.
All of these plays were plays I’ve always said you DON’T do, yet the Panthers, like every other bear opponent, just don’t get it.  People talk about the bear defense tightening up, but it’s because teams get deep in their territory and run on first down when they have 7 guys in the box playing the run.  I don’t know how much more evidence is necessary for opposing teams to get this.  I said walking into the opening game in Lambeau Field in 2006, BEFORE HESTER’S FIRST GAME, that anyone who kicked or punted to him is an idiot.  They did punt to him that game, and he returned one for a TD.  Here we are 6 years later, and teams are still losing games because they kicked and/or punted to him.

Packer-bear Game

by

In typical Mike McCarthy fashion, the Packers took a game that could have been over early and allowed the bears to hang around and have a chance to win.  McCarthy escaped in weeks 1 and 2 when he got conservative offensively and let the other teams come back and almost win, and he did it again this week.  I stated before the game that if the Packers threw on first downs, they would win in a rout, and if they ran on first downs, the bears had a chance to win.  I also said the Packers needed to throw downfield and attack and stretch the bear defense.  The bears are in a run defense on first down, with their front 7 playing the run.  They play the run very well, but can’t play pass defense.  In this game, the bears were playing with 2 backup safeties, which is even more reason to pass.  McCarthy did this in all three bear games last year, costing them the first game and keeping the other games close when they could have been routs.  So, let’s see what happened in this game.
First drive:  The Packers threw on first downs and on 7 of 8 plays, and easily scored a touchdown.  They only had second down twice.
Second drive:  The Packers threw 2 passes and got a first down.  They then ran on first-and-fifteen and on second-and-twelve, resulting in a punt.
Third drive:  The Packers ran on first and second down, and also on third-and-seven, resulting in a punt.
Fourth drive:  The Packers scored a touchdown on the drive, giving them a 14-0 lead.
Since the game could have been 28-0 at this point (the Packers scored at will against the Saints when they kept throwing early) since the bears can’t stop the pass, but was only 14-0 since McCarthy was allowing them to hang around, the bears felt they were in the game and scored a TD, making it 14-7.
The bears kicked a field goal in the last minute of the half to make it 17-10, putting them within a touchdown.  This made it important for the Packers to come out in the second half and build momentum.  What does McCarthy do?  He runs on first down on their first drive, for a loss, which results in a punt.
The Packers continued to run and throw short, and not attack downfield to stretch the defense and take advantage of their strengths.
The Packers got to the bear 12.  They ran on first down for no gain, ran on second down for 1 yard, and ended up kicking a field goal.  Time after time, McCarthy gives up opportunities for touchdowns by running when he gets deep in the opponent’s territory.
Up 20-10, the Packers had a first down at the bear 11 after passing on the first 3 plays and completing them all.  On first down, they ran for no gain.  On second down, they ran for 1 yard. They did throw for a TD on third-and-nine.
The Packers intercepted at their 30, up 17 in the 4th quarter.  Had they been aggressive offensively, they could have ended the game.  What does McCarthy do?  He runs on first down, they fumble, the bears recover, and the bear offense, which had been going nowhere, scored a TD on the first play due to the momentum change from the first-down-run fumble.
The Packers later threw on first down and got a first down.  They then ran on first down (first-and-fifteen) for no gain and punted, again not trying to score and put the game away.
With 2:15 left, the Packers ran on first down for no gain, ran on third-and-seven, and punted.
With 1:09 to play, the Packers had to punt, up 27-17.  Before the play, I made the statement to people in the stands that the only thing that could hurt the Packers would be a big-play punt return, because that would put the bears within 3, and if they got the onside kick, they would have about a minute to try to tie or win.  Therefore, I said the punter had to punt out of bounds and not allow a return.  I am not sure whether McCarthy told the punter to do this and the punter made a mistake or whether he didn’t tell him to do this, but the punter punted inbounds, and the bears returned it for a touchdown.  The Packers were very fortunate that holding was called, nullifying the touchdown.  How ridiculous is it to punt inbounds in that situation?  It’s the only thing that can hurt you, aside from not having 4-5 deep safeties when the bears got the ball after the punt and allowing a big play that way.

Falcons-bears

by

I told people before today’s Falcon-bear game that if Atlanta came out throwing, they’d win in a rout, but if they came out running, the bears could win.  Of course they came out running, and that let the bears get confidence.  I said in the first quarter that the Falcons were doing exactly what the bears hoped they would do.  In the second quarter, the announcers wondered why the Falcons weren’t attacking and were conservative, and in the third quarter, they said almost word for word what I said–that the Falcons’ gameplan was exactly what the bears hoped for–“that’s exactly what the bear defense wants–they want you to run and throw short passes–it plays right into their hands.”  Just before this, they said, “At some point, I’d like to see the Falcon offense challenge the bear defense.”  It’s great to see that coaches still don’t get this, as it took years for them to get the 46.

Charles Martin/Richard Dent

by

I read something interesting that I thought I would share.  I’ve already discussed how what Dent did to Dickey was far more dangerous than what Martin did to McMahon.  Even though most people didn’t see this, I do have a bear-fan witness to this and it doesn’t change the fact that it happened.  I’ve also told you that the bears did a number of things the game before the Martin play, including the Dent play, to start this, and the Packers after the game publicly said they would retaliate.  Everyone might not have seen the Dent play, but the Packers publicly talked about what the bears did.  I’ve also said that what Peppers did to Rodgers in the NFC Championship Game, which was intentional, was also far more dangerous than what Martin did.
So, let’s recap the Martin play.  He wrapped up McMahon and threw him down on his shoulder.  Inexcusable and worthy of a suspension, but not dangerous as defined a certain way.  Let me now quote something from the Sun-Times shortly after Dave Duerson died.  This is Emery Moorehead talking.
“When he was a rookie and we were playing against Detroit, Eddie Murray kicked a long field goal and was jumping up and down.  Ditka was (ticked) he was doing that and told Double D to get him.  He beelined it right toward Eddie Murray and knocked him out.  At that point, he became one of the guys.”
I think we would all agree this is not only a dirty play, but very dangerous with a potential long-term negative impact on Murray’s health.  This is the type of thing the bears did, but all they talk about in Chicago is Forrest Gregg.  Gregg was retaliating, and what Ditka had his team do was far worse.  If Martin should have been suspended for a year, what should Duerson have gotten?

Peppers Hit On Rodgers

by

Please see the link: http://www.nfl.com/videos/green-bay-packers/09000d5d81dddc35/Rodgers-takes-a-hard-shot

I would normally hesitate to say a hit was intentional as it’s usually tough to really tell, but in this case, you could see Peppers zero in on Rodgers, lower his head, and slam it into Rodgers’ head while his arms were out.  It looked like he aimed this very carefully and deliberately.  I agree Peppers is usually a classy player, but this was intentional in my opinion, and he should have been kicked out of the game.  I’m very consistent about this.  I saw Nick Collins, Packer safety, who I also think has been a classy player, do the same thing in the Dallas game this year, and I said he should be suspended.

Packer-bear NFC Championship Game

by

I said before the game, if McCarthy comes out passing, they’ll be fine, and if he comes out running, it will be a close game that can go either way.  He passed on the first drive, and they scored a TD.  They were up 14-0 at half, which could have been 21-0 or 28-0, but they ran on first downs.  In the second half, they were run-first, and did not score offensively.  Their TD was an interception return.  This is typical McCarthy, making no attempt to score in the second half and trying to hold on.  They were able to hold on against the bears in the last game of the season, the Eagles, and today, but could have lost any of those games due to this strategy.  All were games that could have been convincing wins with an aggressive gameplan.  They had this gameplan against the Falcons the first 2-1/2 quarters, and built a big lead.  When will he ever get it?  In addition, the bears are great against the run and can’t stop the pass, and the Packers can’t run and are great passing!  McCarthy cost them all 6 losses this year with this idiotic strategy, and nearly cost them those other games.

People think the bear defense stopped the Packer offense.  It was McCarthy.  He didn’t try to score for the last 2-3/4 of the game, playing into the bears’ strength by running the ball.  He did throw some bombs, but went away from the 15- to 20-yd passes that the bears couldn’t stop.  His first-down runs led to the Urlacher interception vs. the game-clinching score and many other stalled drives.  It’s funny how the Packers didn’t score by running in Week 17 against the bears, scored and moved at will the first half against Philly–then stalled in the second half when they ran, scored at will against Atlanta by passing on almost 75% of their plays the first 2-1/2 quarters, then scored easily against the bears when playing pass-first early but then stalled by running after that.  The common denominator is not a defense stopping them, but McCarthy’s idiotic gameplans stopping them.  Running means you won’t score, and the Packers are not good at running!  They score at will when they pass, but he doesn’t get this.  This is why Rodgers’ rating was so poor.  You could see how effective he was when they were in a pass-first offense early.  He, Favre, and bear opponents will always look great in a pass-first offense and can look bad in a run-first.  You’d think coaches would get this after 25 years!!  I heard some stat after the bear game that I believe said Rodgers’ QB rating in the playoffs this year when he throws the ball at least 15 yards is a league-leading 128 or something like that.  Those are the passes that were killing the bears.

Further proof that running the ball against the bears, which cost them the first game and nearly cost them the next two, is a bad gameplan, came from bear linebacker, Pisa Tinoisamoa, after the NFC championship game, when he said about the Packers’ opening gameplan:  “When you’re familiar with an opponent, you know how to attack them after a while.  They knew what we were going to do.  We come downhill and play hard defensively.  So when we were doing that they were throwing the ball over our heads.”  The Packers threw on most plays and scored an easy touchdown on the opening drive.

Half the Packer starters are on I.R. and the bears haven’t had an injury all year except for Hunter Hillenmeyer.  This game, with all the injuries, on the road, against a completely healthy team, could have been a rout if McCarthy had a clue.  I repeat–the bears didn’t stop the Packers, the Packers stopped themselves.

Seahawks-bears Playoff Game

by

Pete Carroll cost them the game.  The first-down runs on the first and third possessions led to punts and the bears’ first 2 TDs, then he did it again to open the second half, they punted, and the bears scored a TD.  Not to mention the dropped interception giving the bears a TD, the dropped pass on the second drive preventing a score, and all the other dropped passes.  If Mike Williams didn’t want to play, why didn’t he stay home?  Cutler had 10 seconds on every pass.  They got no pressure rushing 4 against a terrible offensive line.  Either blitz or rush 2 and drop 9, but giving him all day was ridiculous.

Packer-bear Game

by

I did see Jennings get blatantly interfered with, with no call.  I saw Hester commit offensive interference the (I believe) play before the interception at the end, with no call, which could have been disastrous.  The holding call that negated the long pass to Jennings was a bad call.  The reason the Packers didn’t put the game away in the first half was McCarthy’s idiotic first-down runs.  Didn’t he see the first-down passes were working and first-down runs were stalling drives?  Did he not watch the Pats and Jets pass at will against the bears?  With 7:02 left and the Packers up 10-3, all they needed was a FG to make it a two-possession game, and they started the drive at the bear 46.  What does McCarthy do?  He runs on first and second down, so of course punts, and the bears drive down to try to tie or win.  I said early in the fourth quarter that if the game plays out where the bears would be down a TD and scored at the end, they might go for 2.  So, McCarthy not only let the bears hang around by not trying to score in the first half, but didn’t try to score on that possession, which could have cost them the game.  The Packers finally did do some smart things.  They kept their safeties deep and backed the DBs off the receivers, taking away the bomb TDs.  I hope other teams see this, as it’s what I’ve said should be done and what the Jets didn’t do.  They mostly also punted and kicked off the way I suggested, which prevented big returns.

bears-Jets/Packers-Giants/Favre-bears

by

The bears are only winning because they are healthy, other teams aren’t, and the opposing coaches don’t have a clue.  The bears would have lost the majority of the games they won had the other teams not been decimated by injuries the week before.  And I think we can now all agree that what I’ve said about passing against the bears is and always has been true.  The Jets came into the game with ONE offensive touchdown in the last 30 QUARTERS and a QB with a hurt throwing shoulder.  On the first possession, they threw twice on first downs, getting first downs, and ran on three first downs, resulting in two fumbles (one recovered) and a holding penalty.  They then threw and moved at will.  Sanchez was 9-9 at one point and 13-15 for the half.  Had they not run on so many plays stalling drives, including when they were trying to tie the score at 38 at the beginning of the fourth quarter and ran on second down after having a first down at the bear 20, the Jets score a lot more points.  Here’s an offense that went nowhere for over 7 games and had a hurt QB who has done nothing for a long time, and they passed at will the first three quarters.  The problem, as usual, was that they gave up a lot of points by not continuing to pass, letting the bears stay in the game.  Of course we know the idiocy of Ryan faking the punt while leaving Sanchez and others in the game cost the Jets the game, as well as the brilliance of kicking to Hester a few minutes later, resulting in a 38-yard return and subsequent TD.  The fake was so obvious, the bears were yelling fake on the sidelines!  Ryan cost them the game by basically announcing they’d fake the punt, punting to Hester when they were successful earlier not kicking to him, and running and thus stalling drives.  And, not to be prepared for the bears going for it all after a big turnover like the fake punt?  Has Ryan ever watched a bear gamefilm?  The bears have won 3-4 games because teams kicked to Hester, which isn’t even worth talking much about anymore since it’s obvious NFL coaches will never get this.  I don’t know what the guy has to do before teams learn.  I said it was idiotic to kick to him prior to his FIRST game.  This is 5 years later, and they still do it!!!
The Patriots would have scored a lot more points on the bears if they didn’t stall drives relatively deep in bear territory by running on first down.  They showed, too, that the bears can’t stop the pass, but teams will continue to run on them even though they are great against the run, especially on first down.
In the Packer-Giant game, McCarthy again showed he doesn’t get it.  Despite the fact that the Giants couldn’t stop the pass, he ran Brandon Jackson 18 times for 39 yards.  And, how stupid is this?  With a 14-0 lead and control of the game at that point, they had Woodson in press coverage on the receiver split right with no safety help.  As they lined up, I said out loud so people could hear, “What is Woodson doing?”  This was BEFORE the snap.  Manning saw this, and threw a TD pass to the receiver.  This changed the momentum, and it was soon 14-14.  Did McCarthy not learn from the NFC championship game?  All Woodson had to do was back off a yard of two, knowing he didn’t have safety help, and the TD doesn’t happen and momentum doesn’t change.  This could have cost them the playoffs.
Favre made another amazing recovery, and wanted to play against the bears on Monday Night Football.  It just happened that all of a sudden he could throw a few hours before the game.  Why wouldn’t you play the guy who gives you the best chance to win?  The Vikings has no chance with Webb.  The real idiocy was Leslie Frazier.  If I’m coaching the Vikings that game, I say to myself, the only chance we have to beat the bears is if Favre plays.  If we have to go to our third-stringer, we lose.  I also know that his hurt shoulder and somewhat-numb hand won’t allow him to throw deep, and that his shoulder and hand might not hold up the entire game, and he could get hurt since he’s not as mobile with the fractured heel and ankle and the very-hard turf, so I have to maximize the time he is in there, score as much as possible, and try to hold on.  What does Frazier do?  He lets him throw a little on the first drive, and they take a 7-0 lead.  He then keeps running the ball, going nowhere and not trying to score, and then Favre gets hurt.  Terrible strategy.  He should have had Favre throwing 8- to 15-yard passes as long as possible to score as many points as possible.  Then, of course, he kicks to Hester twice early in the second half, effectively ending the game.

Lions-bears

by

The bears “prevailed” because the Lions ran on first down deep in bear territory, so only got a FG, and deep in their territory, so punted from their endzone, which might have led to a bear score (I don’t remember).  I didn’t watch closely, but saw some bad coaching at key points.  It still took a horrible call to guarantee them the winning TD.  Whether or not they would have scored a TD anyway is something we’ll never know, thanks to the refs.  The bears have had redzone issues this year.  They also played a third-string QB.  From 13:17 left in the second qtr, which is almost the last 3 qtrs of the game, the Lions ran 16 times for 72 yards.  If you take away the 45-yd run in the last minute of the half, they were 15 for 27, which is 1.8 yds/carry.  Aside from one big play, they wasted 15 plays by running for nothing, which hurt drives.  When will teams understand the bears are very good against the run, can be beaten by the pass, and are VERY vulnerable to first-down passes since the bears are in a run defense on first down?

Dolphin-bear Game

by

Fans think the Dolphin injuries made it insurmountable.  I think it made it very difficult, but not insurmountable.  I heard all the announcers talking about how the Dolphins rarely ran and how stupid they thought that was.  If you take away a 20-yard run (on the first drive I believe), Adrian Peterson was 16-31, less than 2 yds/carry, the week before.  If he can’t run on the bears, what makes anyone think the Dolphins can, especially with their offensive line out and the bears keying on the run since they didn’t consider Thigpen a threat?  What the announcers should have been saying is, why didn’t they run the wildcat more with some trickery.  It’s very interesting that EVERY time they threw on first down in the first 3 qtrs, without a QB or line, they got a first down (one was called back due to an illegal block, and I don’t know if the penalty affected the play), and EVERY time but one when they ran on first down, they punted.  The one was a third-and-eight pass when the bears knew they had to pass.  So, since even with no QB or line, my strategy worked almost every time in the first 3 quarters when the tone of a game is set (see Vikings game when they could have been up 28 in first half but lost because they ran and kept the bears in the game), this is great proof of my credibility in saying how effective this is against the bears.  If it was so insurmountable, why was it only 6-0 at half, with the Dolphins stopping their own drives by running, and with what I heard was the Dolphins dropping some interceptions?  PLEASE SEE THE FOLLOWING STORY: The “Wojciechowski: Fortunate Bears” story is located at http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/columns/story?page=wojciechowski/101119&sportCat=nfl

It is from ESPN, and this is what it said:

Grisly truth: Bears are lucky (if not good)

Chicago’s painful-to-watch shutout of Miami latest win for Lovie’s ‘opportunists’

Originally Published: November 19, 2010

By Gene Wojciechowski | ESPN.com

MIAMI — No matter what happens between now and Sunday night, the Chicago Bears are going to be tied for the first- or second-most number of wins in the NFC.

I repeat, the Bears.

Not only that, but at the very least, they’re going to be tied for the division lead and need maybe two, possibly three more wins to lock down a playoff spot.

But why stop there? The way things are going for the Bears, I can see them running the table on their schedule, capturing Osama bin Laden and brokering an airport pat-down compromise. A Super Bowl is a given. Bears fans, buy your plane tickets to JerryWorld now — non-refundable.

If you want to win Lotto, hang out with the Bears. If you want to find gold doubloons at the bottom of Lake Michigan, hang out with the Bears. They have become the official NFL sponsor of rabbits’ feet, four-leaf clovers and rainbows.

The Bears won their seventh game of the season Thursday night. Beat the Miami Dolphins 16-0. It wasn’t so much a game as it was a three-plus-hour colonoscopy.

“We’re winning games,” Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher said. “That’s all that matters to me.”

I don’t want to say the Bears are lucky, but — wait; yes, I do want to say they’re lucky. And guess what? There’s nothing wrong with that. There’s nothing wrong with being halfway to the holy grail of sports combos: lucky and good.

Of course, the Bears are a teensy-weensy sensitive about the subject. They’re easily the most criticized seven-win team in the NFL — deservedly so, at times. Then again, they have experience with getting ripped.

“We know we’re 7-3,” Bears center Olin Kreutz said. “What people are saying — people are always going to say that. We went through ’06, where we were 15-3 and every game we played … we sucked the whole year. So we ended up in the Super Bowl. We ended up NFC champs. For some reason, sometimes it’s like that.”

The Bears are really, really OK, but they’re not elite. Not yet. They have those seven precious victories, but I still can’t put them on the same bookshelf as the NFC’s New York Giants, Philadelphia Eagles, Green Bay Packers, Atlanta Falcons or New Orleans Saints.

But if there’s a break to be had, the Bears have gotten it. And more important, they’ve taken advantage of it. Every single one.

On Thursday evening at Sun Life Stadium, they took advantage of a Dolphins team that featured an emergency third-string center (Richie Incognito) snapping the ball to a third-string quarterback (Tyler Thigpen). The Dolphins’ Pro Bowl wide receiver (Brandon Marshall) missed the entire second half with a hamstring injury. The Dolphins’ Pro Bowl offensive tackle (Jake Long) played with a shoulder harness apparently borrowed from farm oxen.

So the Bears did what they were supposed to do: They showed zero mercy. Thigpen spent much of the evening running for his life or peeling himself from the turf. The Bears recorded their first shutout in four seasons.

It was painful to watch, but the W sure looked drop-dead gorgeous to the Bears. Where you see acne, the Bears see Clearasil.

“Seven wins — as far as respect — you can get respect when you have seven wins,” Bears coach Lovie Smith said. “A lot of people had a chance to see us tonight, but people’s opinions don’t really matter an awful lot.”

First of all, a lot of people watched … until they fell asleep out of boredom. Second, don’t believe the Lovie Doctrine on people’s opinions. He notices who says what. And he’ll make sure his team knows, too. I would.

The Bears have become grinders. Opportunists. Bottom-feeders. They aren’t interested in style points. If they were, they would have done a catch-and-release on the undermanned and overmatched Dolphins.

“It’s important to take advantage of any team, whether it’s Peyton Manning or whether it’s Tyler Thigpen,” Bears linebacker Lance Briggs said.

Thigpen wasn’t Manning. He wasn’t even Olivia Manning. The Bears’ defense made him look terrible, but seriously, how do you judge the performance against a Miami offense decimated by injuries? It got so bad, I thought the Dolphins were going to ask Hall of Fame center Dwight Stephenson, who was part of a pregame and halftime ceremony, to suit up

Jay Cutler was sacked three times, was intercepted once (and it could have been more) and threw for only 156 yards. But he did just enough. Everybody did.

The Bears are blessed. They beat the Detroit Lions in the season opener, but needed a Matthew Stafford injury and a bizarre, last-second nullified touchdown to do it.

They beat the spectacularly underachieving Dallas Cowboys on the road for their second win. On the week they lost Cutler to a concussion, the schedule gods gave them the Carolina Panthers — and a win. Carolina is 1-8 this season.

Their fifth victory came against the then-winless Buffalo Bills. And they didn’t even have to play the Bills in Buffalo. Instead, they faced them in Toronto.

They got Win No. 6 against a Minnesota Vikings team that can’t stand its coach and is without its best wide receiver.

And then they threw a shutout against the Dolphins, who converted just one third down, had the ball nearly 16 fewer minutes than the Bears and saw Ronnie Brown and Ricky Williams rush for a combined 11 yards.

The Bears have six games remaining, supposedly the toughest stretch of their schedule: Philadelphia Eagles, at Detroit, New England Patriots, at Minnesota, New York Jets and at Green Bay. I’m not buying it.

The way things are going for the Bears, Michael Vick will quit football to write his best-selling autobiography, the Lions will forfeit, Tom Brady will skip the Bears game so he can compete in a hair-off with Troy Polamalu, the Vikings will stage an anti-Chilly boycott, Rex Ryan will suffer an M&Ms overdose and Aaron Rodgers will injure himself while doing the Lambeau Leap.

Anything is possible with the Bears, including another visit to Dallas, this one in February.

“That’s what we’re saying,” Kreutz said. “That’s what we’re saying now: ‘Why not us?’.”

You know what? Why not?

Gene Wojciechowski is the senior national columnist for ESPN.com.

Various

by

A response to a friend:
I want to make a few comments to show you that what I said would happen regarding the bears did happen.  When the bears got Cutler, I told you how Ted Thompson not only cost the Packers two Super Bowl wins by forcing out Favre, but he also was responsible for Cutler going to the bears and not the Browns.  I also said that since Cutler was now on the bears, they would be able to attract good free agents, since others would want to play with him.  Peppers, Taylor, and the Charger tight end are examples of this.  So is Mike Martz.  People didn’t factor this in when they talked about how much the bears gave up for Cutler, while I said they gave up almost nothing compared to what they got.  I also said that giving up the draft picks was extremely smart, and I would have given 5 first-rounders for Cutler.  I said the bears could take the money that would have been devoted to those picks and sign very-good free agents that are proven, vs. drafting someone, paying them a lot, and hoping they are good (even ignoring the bears’ terrible track record here).  Again, this is exactly what happened.  Would you rather have Cutler, Peppers, Taylor, Martz, etc., or two first-round  (and I think a third-round) picks?  It’s not even close!!!  Ted Thompson strikes again!  Again, nobody ever talked about these points, but they were obvious to me from day one.  As I said, I do agree with most things Thompson has done and he is doing a great job of building a good team, but he cost them the two championships with Favre.
You “accuse” me of inventing momentum to provide reasons, so I will “accuse” you of ignoring reasons and just looking at final scores (details below).  In addition, it doesn’t matter to you that one team beats another on the field, but can’t overcome terrible calls (such as the Vikings-Saints,  details below).
Did the Sox do some great things in 2005?  Of course.  That doesn’t change the fact that the umps made terrible call after terrible call to give the Sox game- and series-changing games and momentum.  Borderline calls?  That’s a laugh.  The catcher’s interference in the Angel game was blatant.  Running inside the baseline was blatant.  I could go on and on.  Yes, you can say the Josh Paul call and the Damon call were borderline, but an opposing manager with nothing on the line said Paul did the right thing because he caught the ball and the Sun-Times sports editor said  Damon didn’t swing.  The point is that all the calls WERE BAD, and they all went for the Sox, borderline or not, giving them games, confidence, and momentum, as well as frustrating the opponents.  Yes, the Sox got a bad call in the Astro series, but it was far too late in the playoffs to matter after the damage had been done.  Yes, the Astros made the World Series, but that doesn’t make them the best NL team.  In addition, the Astro players outplayed the Sox players, and only lost because of Garner’s idiotic  moves.  So, you can legitimately say the Sox beat the Astros, as the  manager is part of the team, but to say they are a better team isn’t correct.  I have all those games on tape, and if we watched them, I’d point out all the things I said IN ADVANCE (with witnesses) that Garner should do, but wouldn’t, and it would backfire.  I watched Game 1 at a friend’s house, who is a Sox fan, and he had a lot of Sox fans there.  They were “amazed” that I was saying these things in advance and they all played out the way I said they would.  It’s common sense, but Garner didn’t have it, and that’s why the Sox won.  If Phil Jackson holds out Michael Jordan in a Game 7 of the playoffs and the other team wins, they did win legitimately, but they only won because the Bulls’ coach had terrible strategy.  That’s the same situation here.
If you don’t think momentum plays a big part in sports, then we’ll always disagree.  You know that if the Josh Paul call wasn’t made, it’s 50/50 the Sox go to California for 3 games, down 2-0.  The Sox had scored one run to that point, and it was in the first inning on a one-hopper back to the pitcher, who threw it over the first-baseman’s head into the stands.  If they go to  California down 2-0, the series is over.  I didn’t call the Sox’ 11-1 playoff run a fluke, I called it ump-aided.  If they make the right call on the Damon non-swing, that series is completely changed and so is the 11-1 playoff record you talk about.
The Bartman play was the correct call in that situation and was borderline?  I now see what you call borderline, so that explains why you think the calls for the Sox were borderline.  The call was blatantly wrong, as every picture of the play and video clearly shows.  So, when a bad call is made  FOR your team, it’s the correct call in that situation?  The fact is this.  The rule is that if a fan reaches over the metal railing to touch a ball, it is fan interference.  Pictures clearly show Bartman well over the railing when he touched the ball.  Alou was there with his glove straight up, where the ball was coming down.  I sat in the Bartman seat and looked at the wall, and when the ball is inside the railing where Bartman touched it, it is definitely playable.  Does it matter if Florida fans are upset because a Cub fan touched the ball and they called it an out?  It would have been an out if not for that, and the correct call was fan interference.  If I go to a Packer-bear game and wear a bear jersey so it looks like I’m a bear fan, and I run on the field and tackle a bear player running for a TD, should the refs not call it a TD because I’m supposedly a bear fan and Packer fans would  be upset?
The bears were the best NFC team in 2006?  That’s also a laugh.  Seattle beats them in Chicago if Shaun Alexander doesn’t run into his own guy on 4th-and-1, if Seattle watched a gamefilm and realized that Grossman throws bombs on first down, etc.  And, the Saints did beat the bears in Chicago the next  week.  The refs blatantly stole that game, which was I believe a 5-point game in the 4th quarter, and I would be happy to watch the tape with you and show you all the bad calls.  In the meantime, Favre won his 9th Super Bowl this year, and you clearly saw how the refs stole it from him.  The  fact that you say Tarvaris Jackson could have had the success Favre had is  beyond ridiculous!  He quarterbacked the team the previous years and they went nowhere, despite having a healthy Antoine Winfield and E.J. Henderson (2 All-Pro defenders and keys to the defense), which Favre didn’t have.  Favre was the league MVP until Childress decided to run for 4 games, and had the highest QB rating (finishing second).  So, please explain how Jackson, who was terrible and never took the team anywhere, becomes the league MVP.
Favre has a history of making bad plays at the end of games dozens of times?  I talked about 4 situations and explained them in detail, so I’d  like to know about the others.  Favre has won far more games at the end than he’s lost.  As I said, I can point out playoff games where Brady had  three interceptions, Manning had 4, etc., but everyone comes down on Favre.  And you say the media is biased for him!  He said the other night that he wasn’t even sure he could have run, as both of his legs were  killing him.  Despite that, in the 4th quarter, he engineered 3 drives–the first to the Saints’ 10, where Berrian fumbled/the second for a TD/the third into possible winning-FG range, before a stupid penalty moved them back.  Who is talking about this great play under pressure while injured THE ENTIRE FOURTH QUARTER?  Favre also played better throughout the playoffs than every other playoff quarterback.  Favre outplayed Brees the entire game–where’s the criticism of Brees?  You ignore all the great things Favre did to win the game all game, but was sabotaged by others’ mistakes.  You also ignore the fact that the refs blatantly stole the game from the Vikings.  You ignore the fact that the Vikings threw on first downs their first two drives, scored TDs both times, and then ran on first and second down on the third drive and punted.  That’s Favre’s fault?  Why are people blaming Favre and not the fumblers (all game), the coaches (all game), etc.  They ignore Favre’s great game, look at one play, and say it’s his fault.  Another instance of you looking at the result in the newspaper instead of what happened during the game.
Here’s another example of you looking at the final result only, which I’ve told you before.  You say Buehrle’s game was more dominant than Wood’s, because Wood gave up a debatable infield hit and Buehrle didn’t give up any hits.  My response to you is that if the centerfielder doesn’t make that  great catch and Buehrle gives up a homerun, you probably say Wood’s game was more dominant since they both gave up a hit.  However, although you will probably change who you say is more dominant, neither of them pitched any differently!  How can you determine who was more dominant based on a defensive play?  The pitching is the pitching.  That’s why I look at what happened, and not just the result in the papers.
Here’s an example of someone else doing this!  After the U.S. beat the Canadians 5-3 in the early rounds of Olympic Hockey, one of the commentators said that the U.S. really came to play.  He obviously didn’t watch the  game, and just looked at the result, seeing the U.S. victory.  Came to  play?  The U.S. was outshot 45-23, the majority of the game was played in the U.S. zone, and it looked for most of the game that the Canadians were on the power play even though they weren’t.  It was great goaltending that allowed the U.S. to win (really 4-3, as the 5th goal was empty-net), not that the U.S. “came to play.”  The U.S. was thoroughly dominated.
Further response:
I agree injuries are part of the game and don’t change who wins, as a bad call would.  However, it does taint the victory.  If Favre would have been injured early in the Saints game and the Saints won, it would have been a legitimate win, but no one would have known who would have won had he been healthy (assuming other injuries on both sides balanced out).  Bad managing is  also part of the team and doesn’t change who wins.  However, that doesn’t mean you can’t debate things.  I can say the Vikings deserved to lose 2 of the 3 losses when they lost 3 of 4 at the end of the season (the bear game was stolen) because Childress had terrible gameplans, but that doesn’t change the fact they would have won those games had he not tried to run.  You say the 1996 Patriots were not deserving, but ignore the fact that there were about 3 AFC teams far superior to the 1986 Patriots.  Yes, Lovie is not a good strategic coach, but Seattle had a better team that year, and would have won if not for Holmgren’s bad gameplan and Shaun Alexander’s 4th-and-1.  The bears might have  been better with another coach, but Seattle was better.  Regarding the New Orleans game, again, all you’re looking at is the final score.  You refuse to consider what led up to it.  The fact of the matter is that it was a 5-point game in the 4th quarter, and there were a number of major, game-changing, key terrible calls prior to that that prevented the Saints from having a nice lead.  I have the tape of this game, too, and would be happy to show you.  It was blatant!  If the Saints had a nice lead in the  4th quarter, do you really think the Grossman-led bears would have been able to come back?  The Saints’ offense would also have been playing with more confidence, as they would have been scoring.
How many pictures of Bartman reaching over the piping would you like me to send you?  That is the rule.  You can also see Alou’s glove up and in the field of play, and although he could have reached closer to the wall, he didn’t, as the ball was coming down where his glove was.  It was clear fan interference by the rules, and it wasn’t called.  It doesn’t matter whether the fan was a Cub fan or any other fan, a rule is a rule.  And for you to say that had they made the call, the Marlins would have had a “beef-for-the-ages” when the call can clearly be shown to be correct, but the Cubs don’t have a “beef-for-the-ages” when the call can clearly be shown to be wrong is amazing.  You also point out logic that I’ve always disliked about sports, which is that calls should change at the end of the game when the game is on the line.  In other words, pass interference or holding might be  called in the first quarter, but the same thing won’t be called at the end of the game.  I have always been against this, as a penalty is a penalty, regardless of when it was committed.  People forget that games can be won and lost in the first quarter or first inning, too.  If the rules were to be changed due to the Jeffrey Maier play, then the league should announce that fan interference will no longer be called in the playoffs when it happens against the home team.  Let’s be honest upfront if we want to make bad calls a part of the game.

Jeff Fisher Proves He Doesn’t Get It Either

by

Jeff Fisher, who is a good coach, failed to understand some basic things that make me question whether he, like other coaches, really watches gamefilm.  Prior to today’s Titan-bear game, I said the bears would play a 7- or 8-man front to stop the run and dare Kerry Collins to beat them.  I also said a horrible QB could beat the bears if he threw on first down.  So, what does Fisher do?  He runs on most first downs for nothing or losses.  The few first-down passes he threw were wide open, as were passes on other downs.  It got so bad that the TV announcer said midway or late in the second quarter that if he was the offensive coordinator, he’d stop running on first down and start throwing.  He then pointed out that the first down runs that gained NOTHING were the best plays, as most were losing yardage.  The Titans had -5 yards rushing in the first half.  Yes, they finally did start throwing on first down when the second half started and marched downfield for two TDs, but that’s still no excuse.  The gameplan Tampa Bay, Atlanta, and Carolina had of not throwing on first down in the first half let the bears hang around and almost win.  When those teams finally did throw, they marched.  Why would Jeff Fisher throw away an entire half as these other teams did, instead of building up a 3- to 4-touchdown lead?  The bears almost did come back in this game.  It’s not only mystifying why coaches don’t learn from gamefilms, but I will state two other reasons.  One, even if a coach didn’t watch previous games, he can obviously see that every first-down run failed, and every first-down pass succeeded.  What is he waiting for?  Two, you’d have to have no clue not to know the bears would come out with 7-8 men in the box.  If you knew that, why would you keep running against it, let alone the fact that every run failed?!!!  The Titans ran 29 times for 20 yards!  This means they ran on over 40% of their plays, and did this despite knowing they would gain nothing or lose yardage.  Even if they for some reason didn’t know the bears would come out with 7-8 men in the box and/or even if they thought they could run the ball, it very quickly became apparent they couldn’t.  So, why did they keep doing it?

The fumble at the goal line was typical of the bears’ luck, as in the Viking game where the punter dropped the snap for a bear TD, a coverage guy let the punt hit him for a TD, etc.  The Titans had a first down at the bear 6″-line and fumbled without being hit!  Then, they want to kick a FG at the end of the half to take the lead, and have 2 false starts so the kick is short!

Atlanta-bear Game/Favre

by

A response to a friend:

I completely disagree with you and everyone else regarding the squib kick against Atlanta.  Here is my take on this:  In a situation like that, I always want my team squib kicking.  Squib kicks are never returned very far.  Kicking deep opens you to the big return, and on the previous kick, Atlanta returned it to around the bear 20.  The problem was that the kick didn’t go very far.  It has to go deep, so I blame Gould.  Had Gould kicked it deep, they would have been fine.  Had they kicked off normally and the Falcons returned it, Lovie would have been skewered.  After the kick, the real issue was the bear defense.  I’ve always said in situations like that, here’s how you line up.  You   have your 4 defensive linemen and 7 defensive backs (no linebackers).  4 defensive backs line up about 12-15 yards downfield, and stretch from sideline to sideline.  This keeps the play in front of them and takes away the sidelines.  You then have 3 defensive backs about 20 yards downfield, so   the play is ahead of them and they aren’t chasing.  By the way, let’s not forget the idiocy of Atlanta on the bear TD.  18 seconds left, no timeouts for the bears, and they let the receiver get behind them???!!!
Now, let’s talk about Favre.  I’ve already pointed out that his interception percentage is right in line with all the other great QBs.    For a 10-year span, I heard the Packers had the best winning percentage of any team in the 4 major sports.  So, if the feeling is that Favre cost the Packers game after game with bad decisions, you and others must feel that they should have been close to undefeated for 10 years.  What more do you want him to do?  The Jets are concerned Favre’s interceptions will cost them games?  At the halfway point, they’ve already won more games than they did ALL of last year.  The article said 6 of his 11 interceptions came on third down.  I’d love to find out how many of those series started with a first-down run.  I agree Favre should not be reckless, but he’s trying to win and obviously wins much more often than he loses.  Many of his   aggressive plays win them games, but some cost them.  If he has the same interception percentage as others but far more wins, sounds like he’s doing something right.  And, he’s doing this with idiotic offensive coaching for most of his career.  Other QBs play it safe and go down meekly, but   Favre wants to win so badly he will take some chances.  Most work, and some don’t.  Sometimes a steal in baseball works, sometimes it doesn’t.  That’s sports.  If Favre didn’t have such a great winning percentage and if he didn’t have the Jets so far ahead of last year it’s ridiculous, I might feel a little differently.  He’s played entire seasons with injuries others wouldn’t play with.  A national reporter interviewed him one year and saw his injured thumb, and questioned how he could even hold a football.  This was a major problem for a QB, but he played through it and never said a word.

Atlanta Falcons Coach Shows He Has Never Watched A Gamefilm

by

Mike Smith, Atlanta Falcons head coach, showed very clearly that he, like most other coaches, either doesn’t watch gamefilm or doesn’t understand what he is seeing.  I will provide a little background prior to my comments on todays Falcon-bear game to clearly illustrate this point.  Here is a brief recap of the bears’ previous games, which will provide the background for the comments on today’s game.

Game 1:  The bears played the Colts, when Manning hadn’t played all preseason, they had a new offensive line, and their tight end went out in the first half.  The Colts had a first-and-goal from the 6 early in the game, ran on first down for minus-4 yards, and had to kick a FG.  Reggie Wayne then dropped a TD pass, and the Colts dropped an interception, resulting in a bear FG.  Tillman then stripped the receiver, and Briggs ran it in for a TD.  Tillman continues to strip receivers after the catch, and teams don’t adjust to this.  Down 9 in the 4th quarter, the Colts run up the middle on 4th-and-1, resulting in a bear TD.  The Colts played conservatively.  The next time the Colts had a first-and-goal from the 6 or 7, they threw on first down and eventually got the TD.  How did Dungy not know running on first down doesn’t work against the bears?  Did he watch any gamefilms over the last 25 years?  The bears won.

Game 2:  Steve Smith was out due to a team suspension, and he destroys the bears.  Carolina ran on first down on the opening drive, had to punt, and had the punt blocked for a bear TD.  The bears blocked many kicks last year, but teams fail to adjust.  Carolina continued to run on first down the entire first half, essentially making no attempt to score and keeping the bears in the game.  I guess their coach also doesn’t watch gamefilm.  With 4:24 left in the half, they finally threw on first down for a big gain, but it was called back due to illegal procedure.  On the resulting 3rd-and-15, they ran for a loss at midfield.  With 0:55 left in the half, on 3rd-and-3 from the bear 17, Carolina ran for minus-three.  In the first half, Carolina had 15 passing yards and 32 rushing yards.  The first-down-run gameplan resulted in the offense going nowhere, as again, the Panthers made no attempt to score in the first half.  The first half of a game can set the tone.  In the second half, they finally threw on first down for 35 yards.  Down 17-3, Carolina got the ball and ran on first down for 2 yards.  They then passed for a first down.   They then threw on first down for a TD, but it was called back due to a hold that didn’t affect the play.  On 2nd-and-20, they ran for 3 yards.  With 6:00 left, down 17-13, Carolina threw first-down passes and easily marched for a TD to take a 20-17 lead and win.  The pattern of running vs. passing on first down is obvious.

Game 3:  Tampa Bay ran on most first downs in the first half, and went nowhere.  I guess they didn’t watch gamefilm, either.  They made no attempt to score, again keeping the bears in the game.  Tillman stripped another receiver, additional evidence teams don’t watch film.  Earnest Graham, Tampa Bay’s running back, was 12 for 16, slightly more than one yard per carry.  Finally, Tampa Bay got it, stopped running, and threw on every play.  Griese threw 67 passes for 407 yards, and Tampa Bay won.  Joey Galloway, their top receiver, was hurt and didn’t play.  Here are 3 quotes from the Chicago Sun-Times:  Griese “shredded a bear defense that stopped the run and did nothing else.”  “Stacking the line of scrimmage with linebackers, the bears were susceptible to quick slants and crossing routes all game.”  “The short passing game served to wear down the bears, too.”

Game 4:  Brian Westbrook didn’t play for the Eagles, and he is the key guy on their offense.  McNabb also played hurt and hadn’t practiced.  This was the first game Westbrook missed this year, so the Eagles hadn’t had time to adjust.  The Eagles could have won the game on a 4th-and-goal from the foot-line toward the end of the game if they had run a QB sneak with their 6′2″, 240-lb. QB (McNabb), but instead, continued to hand the ball off to a back in the I formation, starting 10 yards deep and giving the defensive end time to make the play.  Even Dusty Dvoracek, bear defensive lineman, said they thought McNabb would sneak.  The bear announcers on the postgame show said a sneak would have worked easily, as the middle of the Eagle offensive line got a good initial push.  The bears won.

Game 5:  Detroit is a very bad team, and of course came out and ran on first down.  When it was 3-0 bears, the Lions stopped the bears for a big loss on third down which would have resulted in a fourth-and-long, but since they lined up offsides, the bears got the first down and then a TD, making it 10-0 and changing the momentum.  A gift momentum-changer.  Although the game was over by this point, when it was 24-0 bears, the Lion DB dropped an easy interception in the endzone on a 5-yard pass prior to the bears getting another TD.

Game 6:  Well, we finally get to today’s Atlanta game.  Keeping in mind the above and the games of the last 25 years, you would think a coach would get it.  So, let’s review what happened.  Atlanta ran on almost every first down for almost no yardage.  With 8:30 to go in the second quarter, the television announcer said Atlanta needed to start throwing on first downs as their runs were going nowhere.  The announcers also said this much earlier in the game.  Up 6-0, Atlanta had a TD pass called back due to an ineligible receiver downfield.  It was obvious Atlanta was making no attempt to score in the first half by running on first downs, as Carolina and Tampa Bay did, and the announcers pointed out that it could easily be 21-0 instead of 9-0.  As previously pointed out, this gameplan of not trying to score in the first half allows the bears to stay in the game.  Atlanta had 39 yards rushing in the first half, and 23 were on one play.  They came in with the league’s leading rusher in Michael Turner, but of course, runs don’t work.  Mike Smith, Atlanta’s coach, said at halftime they needed to score TDs, not FGs.  This was a funny comment when you consider his offensive gameplan.  In the second half, Atlanta got another FG after another first-down run lost yardage.   Since Atlanta let the bears hang around, the bears got a TD and cut the lead to 12-10.  Atlanta got the kick, ran on first down for 1 yard, then ran on second down for minus-one yard.  This, despite moving the ball through the air whenever they did decide to pass.  In the 4th quarter, up 12-10, Atlanta got a first down by passing, then ran on first down for minus-one at the bear 17.  They passed for a first down at the 5, then ran on first down for 2 yards.  They then threw for a TD.  Does anyone see a pattern yet?  Atlanta then stopped a bear drive at midfield forcing a punt, but a cornerback (!) lined up offsides, allowing the bears to eventually get a first down at the Atlanta 35.  Since Orton was flagged for intentional grounding on the play, the bears would have punted on fourth and long.  The bears got this same line-up-offsides gift twice last week against the Lions.  Although the bears were stopped at the goal line, the resulting bad field position gave the bears a FG, cutting the Atlanta lead to 6 at 19-13 and making it a one-score game.  After stopping the bears and getting the ball at their own 5 due to a bear penalty, they ran on first and second down for a few yards, then threw a 3rd-down pass short of the first down.  The bears got the ball at their own 45 due to the field position, and got the FG as previously discussed with 4:00 left.  Atlanta ran the kickoff to the bear 17.  On first down, they ran for minus-two.  On second down, they ran for 2, leaving a 3rd-and-10.  On third down, they ran for almost nothing.  With 2:46 left, Jason Elam missed a 33-yard chip-shot FG, his first miss of the year.  This would have made it a two-score game, and just about ended the game.  It should be pointed out again that not trying to score in the first half let the bears hang around.    With 18 seconds to go and the bears out of timeouts, the Falcon DBs let a bear receiver get behind them for a TD to put the bears up by one with 11 seconds left.  How can you let a receiver get behind you with that little time left and the other team out of timeouts?  Even if the bears complete a pass in the field of play, the game will end.  Incredibly bad coaching if they didn’t tell their players this, and if they did, the defensive players have a major problem.  The announcers kept saying how unbelievable it was that the bears would probably win after having been dominated.  This was a huge game for the bears’ confidence and in the standings, and winning this would have had a positive-momentum effect.  Elam did make a long FG to win the game on the last play, but it should never have come to this.  For the record, Michael Turner was 25 for 54, and if you take away his first-half 23-yard run, he was 24 for 31, less than 1.3 yards/carry.  Yet, they kept running him, and on first down!!

So, the question is, will future bear-opponent head coaches ever get it?

Greg Olsen

by

All season long I talked about how Greg Olsen, tight end for the Chicago bears, pushes off. He pushed off on the crucial ”TD” he “scored” in the first Packer-bear game, and on other occasions. bear fans, as usual, told me I was being biased. Once again, here is objective proof. In a rating of players in the NFC North, Olsen was rated the best number 2 tight end. Here is what the article said, and is exactly what I have said all year:

Olsen is regarded as a terrible blocker but was a major threat downfield. “He’s got the art of pushing off down to a T,” one scout said. “He nudges guys right at the end.”

Moss/Packer-bear Game

by

Response to a friend:
You think the Packers were smart to turn down the Moss trade?  I said all summer that the Packers would be the favorites with Moss, and Favre would have 50-60 TD passes.  I think everyone would now agree that the Packers would be the undefeated team, and Favre would be the QB with the 60, not 50, TD  passes.  As I told you, Brady’s previous high was 28, and Favre has 8 seasons of 30 or more.  Moss wanted to come to Green Bay, and he would have been great.  Don’t forget the Packers lost Ahman Green, so it appeared they would have no running game, making Moss even more important.  The way to keep Moss and T.O. happy is to throw to them a lot.  They become selfish  when they aren’t thrown to, because they know what they can do and the frustration gets to them.  Favre would have kept him happy.
My comments on the ’06 Packer-bear opener are not relevant only in hindsight.  This was foresight.  You say McCarthy had no reason to center a gameplan around Favre passing after his bad 2005 season.  I knew all along that he was still great, and there’s a difference between losing it  and playing poorly.  It was very obvious to me, and I said it constantly over the last 4 years, that Favre was still great and would be great with a smart gameplan.  You also said McCarthy had no reason to punt differently to a rookie Hester making his NFL debut.  This again goes back to things  that are obvious to me.  Hester looked great during the preseason, and it was obvious the bear offense wasn’t that good.  Why would you let a return beat you?  You said if McCarthy had done these things and they had lost, he’d have been in trouble.  The way I look at it is that all NFL  coaches would have done what you said, which is why the Packers lost.  A smart coach would have known what I knew, and would have had a chance to win.  McCarthy lost something like 26-0, and it’s great that he could say he was running the ball and kicking to a rookie.  This is my  frustration with coaching strategy.  You couldn’t run against that bear defense, but that was McCarthy’s plan (to run).  Even when EVERY pass was working and every run was failing, he kept running.

Singletary/Running Backs/Pippen

by

A response to comments on a recent post:
I’m not  punishing Singletary for not doing what he’s not required to do.  Yes, the way teams attacked the bears, he looked great.  No argument there.  I’m just saying that if teams threw short over the middle, he would have looked bad.  You can’t punish him since teams didn’t do this, but at the same time, people should recognize that he would have been a weak link if teams did do this.  Teams did not need the personnel to do this.  It looks that way because only Miami did it in 1985, and Miami had a very good team.  Washington was the only team to do it the next year, and they were a playoff team.  Was Jay Schroeder the right personnel?  I watched all those games in 1985, and whenever a team did this, and granted they didn’t do it a lot, it worked.  Regardless of what team did it.  Don’t forget the Patriots did it on the first two plays of the Super Bowl, and Stanley Morgan was wide open behind Singletary and dropped the touchdown pass.  Any receiver could get open behind Singletary.
Let me give you an analogy.  Before the hashmarks were moved in, very few runners ran for 1000 yards.  I believe it was something like 14 in history, and the first year the hashmarks were moved in (1972), 11 guys did it.  Something like that.  Guys like O.J. Simpson and Dave Hampton, who had done nothing, became stars overnight.  I don’t think O.J. did much his first three years in the league, they moved in the hashmarks, and he becomes an immediate star.  Now, does anyone recognize that if the hashmarks weren’t moved in, these guys wouldn’t have been nearly as good?  You’re right, you can’t punish them for playing under the new rules, but you still need to look deeper.  Have you ever heard anyone talk about the fact that O.J. was not a star until the hashmarks were moved in?  Again, I’m looking deeper than just how the games went.
We agree that based on how the games went, Singletary should be in the HOF.  That doesn’t mean he was one of the greatest players, it just means he played great based on the way teams attacked them and based on the guys in front of him.
Scottie Pippen is on the list of the 50 greatest basketball players.  Here’s my take on him.  Scottie was one of the best defensive players ever.  I don’t undervalue this at all.  Offensively, he wasn’t a  leader, and when the 4th quarter came around and teams tightened their defense,  he didn’t score a lot.  Watch game tapes when he would get the ball at the end of a quarter on a last possession, and he would dribble it off his foot out of bounds, throw up a bad shot, etc. every time.  Yes, based on his career, playing with Jordan and the others, and just looking at the games, you could say he belongs in the top 50.  I look deeper and realize what truly happened, and don’t rank him quite that high.  I remember watching a Bulls game with a friend one of the years Jordan was playing baseball.  The Bulls were going to take the ball out with under 24 seconds to play, and I told her, “Watch Pippen.  He’ll get the ball, dribble down the right sideline, and dribble the ball off his foot.”  That’s exactly what happened, and she just looked at me.  My first impression when I saw Pippen wasn’t on the floor for the end of that Knick  game (1.8 seconds) was, “Great.  Now Kukoc will take the last shot instead of Pippen, who would definitely miss.”  I then thought Pippen should at least be out there as a decoy.  This is before we learned what happened.  My point is, people don’t realize the deeper aspects of his  game, which in my opinion, ranks him lower than he is ranked.  Again, I do think he was great defensively.  Should he be punished for playing with Jordan?  Of course not.  But at the same time, we need to consider that when talking about his overall play.
So, to recap, if you want to say Singletary was a great leader and very good against the run, we agree.  If you want to say that he was all-around one of the best middle linebackers ever, we will disagree.  He could easily be beaten on passes over the middle, and as soon as he didn’t have Hampton in front of him, his play dropped tremendously.  This, along with the fact that we already discussed, that many years after he retired (a few years ago), he looked at the films, called up Hampton, and told him “I used to think it was me.  After watching these films, I now realize it was you.”  Hampton, as I said, responded with, “You’re only realizing that now?”  This is exactly what I said during Singletary’s entire career, and even he admitted it many years later, with Hampton also saying it.

1985 bears/Later Packer Teams/Singletary/Urlacher

by

Another response to a friend:
You are 100% correct.  99.99% think the ’85 bears were one of the greatest teams ever, and were completely dominant.  And, you know what, I agree with this if you decide you are only going to look  at what happened.  For example, I could play you one-on-one in basketball, you shoot nothing but half-court shots, I win by a lot, and everyone will say I dominated.  If you played a smart game, you’d destroy me, but no one would ever know that.
The reason the bears looked so dominant to 99.99% of the people is that 99.99% of the NFL opposing coaches had terrible gameplans.  That was during the era of “you have to establish the run,” and everyone ran on first and second down.  Of course the bears are going to look dominant when you play to their strengths.  As I pointed out, almost every time a team threw a quick pass or to the tight end during the season, it worked.  The only problem was, teams rarely did it.  Marino got out of the pocket, and they scored a lot of points.  Even the first two plays in the Super Bowl were wide open, but then Raymond Berry decided to run like all the other coaches, and that  turned the game into a disaster.
10 years after the Super Bowl, I read John Feinstein’s book on Bobby Knight.  In the book, someone asked Knight who would win, and his response was, “New England.  They’ll kill the bears with short passes.”  As I  pointed out, Buddy Ryan understood this, so when he played the bears, he had  Cunningham throw on every play.  The Eagles marched through the bear defense, rarely punted, and showed how easy it was to beat.  Within 2 years, many articles came out saying no one plays the 46 anymore since coaches figured out how easy it was to beat with quick, short passes.  Since I said this at least since 1983, it’s not hindsight, and other coaches should have understood this.  You can’t run against a defense with 8 great athletes in the box, and you can’t sit in the pocket.  Since they are all on the line of scrimmage, the middle area is wide open.  Seems simple to me.  If other teams played the bears smartly, the bears would have looked far less dominant.
It’s great that after 40 years of trying to get people to understand the importance of the pass, that some teams finally get it.  Don’t forget the two undefeated teams this year (Packers, Patriots) pass all the time.   The Packers had NO RUNNING GAME for the first quarter or third of the season, yet still won.  The ’85 bears played in that ridiculous “establish the run” era.  As I also told you, a high-school friend told me during the height of the Bill Walsh era that I had been telling everyone to run that offense for many years prior to him becoming a head coach.
Let’s revisit the postseason.  If the Giants don’t drop the easy TD pass and whiff on a punt, the 21-0 game is vastly different.  Perhaps the bears still win, but it’s not dominating, as those plays resulted in a 14-point turnaround, not to mention changing the momentum.  The Rams with Dieter Brock weren’t going to score, and everyone knew it.  If you can’t pass, you can’t beat the bears, and he can’t pass.  You can look at a 46-10 Super Bowl score and see domination like the 99.99% you refer to.  I see two things–one is that the quick short passes worked and N.E. stopped doing them after their first series and ran, and two, the refs gave the bears about 35 points, which the tape will show.  So, I look at these things, which means I’m looking deeper than most people.
The Patriots were not the best AFC team at the end of that season.   The Raiders and Dolphins were a lot better, regardless of the records (who knows who played who), and it was obvious before the playoffs those teams had a great chance to beat the bears.  Perhaps the Jets did, too, as I thought there was a third team.  Even if they don’t beat the bears (I say they do), the game is a lot closer, and no one talks domination.  The bears did not “destroy” N.E. if you take away the points scored on bad calls.
Let’s look at 1996.  The Packers were far superior to Denver in both 1996 and 1997.  In 1997, when they did play, the Packers were prohibitive favorites.  It’s only the 30-point differential the refs made to get Elway his title that makes people think the Packers lost.  If  you saw the tape, you’d agree with me without question, as another bear fan did that I showed the tape to.  The Packers led the NFL in points scored and fewest allowed, and I don’t think they gave up a TD pass after the first few games.  If not for the refs, they would have completely dominated and people would be talking about that.
99.99% of the people don’t think the Packers dominated the 90s (even though they had the best record of any team in the 4 major sports for a decade) because the refs prevented them from winning 8 more Super Bowls.  That’s why 99.99% of the people don’t understand how great Brett Favre is.  With 9 Super Bowl wins, they’d know.  99.99% of the people don’t realize that Brett had his hands tied for years with idiotic gameplans, or he’d have double the stats he has now.  All people look at is the surface–I don’t.
Only one NFL team has ever won 3 straight championships, and that is the Packers.  They did it in the 30s, they did it in the 60s, and they did it in the 90s.  I hope I don’t have to wait another 30 years for 3 straight!
Once again, let’s discuss the Charles Martin play.  As I previously mentioned, I would have been fine if he had been suspended for a year.  However, again, people just look at that, while I look deeper.  That’s why I’ll never be one of the 99.99%.  Here are the facts, and  friend was with me at this game and is my witness even though he’s a huge bear fan.  The game before, which was the second game of the previous year, the bears started this.  After a Lynn Dickey interception, well after the play, on the sidelines, Dent picked up Dickey, turned him over, and slammed him down.  It was horrible, but so far after the play, no one saw it.  My friend and I did.  When I went home and checked the tape, as they were going to commercial, you could hear, O.J., I believe, say, “Did you see what Dent did to Dickey?”  After the game, the Packers said the bears started things, and they intended to respond and finish them.  Thus, the next game.  As bad as Martin’s play was, it paled in  comparison and danger to what Dent did to Dickey.  And, the Packers claimed the bears did a lot of other things.  That’s what started that stuff under Forrest Gregg.  So again, I look deeper than just the Martin play as to why things are the way they are–I don’t just look at what  is.
Let me give you two more examples of why I’ll never be in the 99.99%,  and why the 99.99% is frequently wrong.

Mike Singletary:  I said throughout his entire career, and constantly debated this with bear fans, that he was completely overrated and that if he didn’t have Dan Hampton in front of him, he’d be far less effective.  Everyone responded (and the masses believed) that he’s one of the best middle  linebackers in history.  I always pointed out he couldn’t start at the beginning of his career because he was too slow, among other things, and he couldn’t cover receivers.  I did say he was a great team leader and very good against the run, but that was it.  For years, I said to people, watch what happens when Hampton retires.  Hampton did retire and Singletary had a bad year (the falloff was great), but because it was toward the end of his career, it was attributed to that.  Again, one of those things I can’t prove (like what would have happened had teams attacked the ’85 bears  intelligently), because it was at the end of his career.  However, I maintain that it would have happened earlier had Hampton retired then, and always said so during Singletary’s career.
So, how am I proven right?  A few years ago, the bears had a reunion or something, and Singetary decided to watch tape of those bear teams.  He was shocked at what he saw, and he called up Hampton and said that for his entire career, he thought his success was due to himself and his ability, and he was shocked to see these tapes and realize it was largely due to Hampton.  You know what Hampton told him?  Hampton said to Singletary, “You mean you’re just realizing that now?”  Singletary basically said he owed his success to Hampton, which I said during his ENTIRE career.  Again, ask 99.99% of the people, and they think Singletary was great on his own, and all my friends argued this with me his entire career.  As I said, I look  deeper.  It wasn’t me talking badly about a bear, because at the same time, I was saying that Dan Hampton might be one of the most underrated guys ever, despite the honors he was getting.  Hampton was incredible.
Brian Urlacher:  During Urlacher’s first few years, everyone talked about how great he was and how he was at Ray Lewis’ level or above.  I told everyone during those years that he was very overrated.  When he’d make an interception, the tight end would be wide open behind him, but the ball was  underthrown.  He wasn’t in Ray Lewis’ class at that point.  However, I always said this doesn’t mean Urlacher wouldn’t be great–I was just saying he wasn’t great then.  It turned out he did become great up until this  year when he got hurt and when the tackle play in front of him wasn’t what it  was.  During that early time, a poll came out calling him the most overrated player in the league, and people acknowledged that I had been saying that all along.  To be clear, this was before he did become a great  player.
These are two more examples of the 99.99% who look at things one way, but they are wrong.  I was proven right over time, and I believe the fact that the 46 was so quickly abandoned proves me right in that case.  If we could get the game tapes of 1985, you’d see the few times teams did throw quick passes and to the tight end, it worked.
People argued with me about how effective Randy Moss would be this year, and I said during the summer he’s still probably one of the two best receivers in history.  People argued with me and said Favre should retire 4 years ago, and I said he hadn’t lost any ability–he was just not playing as well as  he could due to idiotic gameplans.  It’s great when a debate can be proven right or wrong, but unfortunately, with the ’85 bears, there is no way to replay the games with smart gameplans.  As I’ve told you, though, the next year the Redskins had Jay Schroeder throw quick passes, and they beat a 14-2, I  believe, bear team in the bears’ first playoff game, in Chicago.   Interesting that finally using a smart gameplan beat a defense that was statistically better than the ’85 bears.  Had I told you quick short passes would beat the bears that day, I imagine you would have debated this with me, as my other friends did.  I had no doubts.

1985 bears And Later

by

The bears only looked dominant in 1985 because of how teams attacked  them.  In 1985, when teams would  throw quick short passes, pass to the tight end, etc., those plays worked.   The first two plays in the Super Bowl were these plays–a wide-open TE Lin Dawson dropped the first pass because his knee buckled (needed surgery) and Stanley Morgan dropped a TD pass on a slant over the middle on the second  play.  Don’t forget Tampa Bay led the opener 28-17 in Chicago, and then  didn’t come out for the second half.  Minnesota beats them in the night  game if they don’t blitz (opening themselves to big plays against a veteran QB) when they had the game under control.  The Packers did beat them, and I  have the tapes to show this.  The Giants could have won if not for the 2 plays above, no one would have lost to Dieter Brock, and Miami and Oakland would  have beaten them in the Super Bowl.  Funny how the next year, the bears lose 2 games, but then lose their first playoff game at home when Jay Schroeder  throws quick passes.  Everyone now understands how easy it is to beat the 46 by doing what I said should be done since about 1983, but no one yet  understands that if you don’t attack it that way, you make the other team look dominant.  So, it’s not just a losing strategy to run against it or sit in  the pocket, it’s a strategy to get destroyed.
Here’s an analogy.  A basketball team has 5 guys who are 7′ 4″, and  they put them all under the basket on defense.  If the offensive team’s  gameplan is to drive, they will get killed–not just lose.  However, if the  other team’s gameplan is to take short, wide-open shots, they have a good chance  to win.  This is what happens when you put 8 guys on the line of scrimmage (all good athletes on the bear 85 defense), and teams try to run against it or sit in the pocket.  It is incredible to me that coaches could never figure this out, especially since these running plays and pocket plays failed EVERY  time.
Let’s also talk about luck when the bears played the Eagles in the playoffs.  Buddy Ryan understood, so he had Randall Cunningham pass on every play.  The Eagles had a ton of first downs, rarely punted, and moved the ball at will.  It’s only because Keith Jackson continued to drop easy  TD passes that the bears won.  The Eagles dominated, and if they had come out running, the bears would have dominated.

Football Luck

by

Response to a friend talking about luck:

I agree that dumb coaching,  dumb general managing, etc. are part of the team.  However, refs are not,  and when refs steal games, as they did to the Packers in the bear and Cowboy  games, I will reverse those outcomes.  Those are things that can be  corrected with replay, yet aren’t due to the flaws and incompleteness of the  replay system.  Dumb things a team brings on itself, they deserve, but in a  game, one team shouldn’t have to overcome the officiating.

Regarding lucky plays in the Packer games, you look at one play at the  end and say it’s lucky.  What about other things that happened during the  game?  What if a Packer receiver dropped a key third-down pass that would  have kept alive a drive that would have resulted in a TD?  Is that any  different than fumbling a punt?  It might be lucky that the Eagle returner  made a mistake and fumbled, but it’s still lucky for them that McCarthy was  trying to establish the run.  What’s the difference if a coach makes a dumb  move or a player makes a bad play?
Look at the Packer-Ram game Sunday.  Twice early in the game, the  Packers threw long on third and one and third and three, instead of a  high-percentage pass to get the first down.  The game was 14-14 early, so  these were key plays.  It wouldn’t have been 14-14 had the Packers run  smart plays on third and short.  Had the Packers lost, would you say the  Rams were lucky that instead of the Packers putting the game away early, they  made stupid coaching decisions to keep the Rams in the game?
Now, let’s talk about last year, since you brought this up.  I’ll tell  you the difference between the Packers and the bears.  The Packers, which  you say had essentially the same team, had a completely new defense and  offensive line last year, and it took the rookies almost 3/4 of the season to  get the experience they needed.  They didn’t play well in the beginning,  but then turned it around.  The Packers missed the playoffs on a  tiebreaker, and the game they lost before winning their last 4 was against  Buffalo, when they outgained them 500 yards to 100, dominated the game, but  lost.  So, they could easily have made the playoffs.  In addition,  they didn’t have as aggressive a passing gameplan as they do this year, so that  also hurt them.  In summary, the experience the young guys got (they are  the second youngest team in the league), plus the passing gameplan this year are  why the Packers have won 18 in a row.  I’m sure if they still had Ahman  Green, they would have been running much more early and this would have hurt  them.
Now, to the bears.  Yes, the bears have been decimated by injuries and  this has affected their record a lot.  I heard a stat that of the 10 most  injured teams, of which the bears are one, only Indy will make the  playoffs.  Of the 10 least injured teams, 8 will make the playoffs, and 6  will win their division.  However, let’s look beyond this.  As I  pointed out prior to the Miami game last year, when Miami had just been badly  beaten by a poor Packer team the week before in Miami, and when Miami was coming  to Soldier Field with a horrible record to play an undefeated bear team that won  every home game by 30 points, if Miami would pressure Grossman, throw on first  down, and not kick to Hester, they would destroy the bears.  I was laughed  at prior to the game, Miami did do this, and it was 31-13 Miami.  If  Arizona doesn’t kick to Hester, if other teams don’t kick to Hester, if teams  pressured Grossman, if teams knew, as Indy did, that Grossman liked to throw  deep on first down, if teams threw on first down, etc., the bears would not have  been 13-3, but probably 8-8 to 9-7.  Seattle would have beaten them in the  playoff game if they didn’t allow the first-down-bomb TD to Berrian, OR if  Alexander and Hasselbeck didn’t mess up an exchange on 4th and 1, if they had  thrown more on first down, etc.  New Orleans did beat the bears, in a  game that was obviously fixed.  I’ll review the tape with you any  time.  Don’t forget, despite the bad calls, it was a 4-point game in the  4th quarter.  The bears were not that good last year–other teams made them  look good.  Now that some coaches have figured out not to kick to Hester,  some figured out to pressure the bear QB, etc., they don’t look that good.   So, you can blame the coaching staff, and they do deserve a lot of blame, but  5-9 isn’t that far from the record the bears should have had last year and makes sense considering their injuries this year.
In 1985, the bears played the Giants in their first playoff game and won  21-0.  I believe a Giant receiver (tight end?) dropped a wide-open  touchdown pass in the endzone when it was 0-0, and then shortly after that, Sean  Landeta whiffed on a punt, giving the bears a TD.  This is a 14-point  turnaround in a 21-point game, so these LUCKY plays were huge.

Coughlin’s Other Mistake/Passing Vs. Running – #3

by

An astute reader of Sportstruths pointed out another horrible coaching decision by Giants coach Tom Coughlin at the end of the game.  We previously covered the fact that he could have let the clock run down and kicked a very short field goal to win the game on the last play, but chose to give the bears an opportunity to win, which they almost did.  Once Coughlin did decide to go for and get the touchdown, that put the Giants up 20-16.  Coughlin then had them kick the extra point, putting the Giants up 5 (21-16).  As the reader pointed out, the only play in this situation is to go for the two-point conversion, which if successful would put you up 6.  Being up 4 or 5 doesn’t matter, as the bears would still need a touchdown, but if you go up 6 and the bears score a touchdown, you have the chance, although very small, that the bears will not make the extra point.  Another example of a coach not thinking.

All week the Chicago newspapers and sportstalk radio have discussed how bad the bears are against the run.  They talk about the fact that the Giants ran for 175 yards, which is a large amount.  The discussion was that this cost the bears the game.  As I have continuously pointed out, running prevents a team from scoring, as you pass to score.  Game after game teams run for a lot of yardage, but don’t score.  This game was a perfect example.  The Giants had almost all of their rushing yards in the first 3+ quarters because they rarely passed, and they had 7 points.  So, although they were running through the bears, they were trailing 16-7.  It was only when the Giants passed on their last two drives that they scored touchdowns, and won 21-16.  Further proof that you pass to score, and running prevents you from scoring.

Coughlin Tries To Outdo Shanahan, Who Tried To Outdo McCarthy

by

Tom Coughlin, the Giants’ coach, made such a stupid coaching decision at the end of today’s game that you have to wonder if he didn’t want the bears to win.  More on that below.

As previously discussed, each time the bears are in a must-win game, the refs do everything possible to keep their playoff hopes alive.  The Packer, Eagle, and Raider games were all must-win games for the bears, and were blatantly given to the bears by the refs.  The calls in today’s game were an effort to do the same.

  1. Down 7-0, the Giants scored a touchdown on first down, but the refs disallowed it because Lovie Smith had thrown the challenge flag.  The only problem was the flag was in the air after the ball was snapped.  Can the opposing coach throw his flag and ask for a review to see if the other coach’s flag was thrown in time?!!  This was ridiculous, and almost cost the Giants a touchdown (they did score on third down).
  2. Down 16-7 at the end of the third quarter, the Giants had the ball deep in bear territory (I believe inside the 5).  Manning threw a pass to Burress in the endzone.  Charles Tillman held Burress’ jersey at the chest for a few seconds to hinder Burress, then broke away and intercepted the pass.  Instead of it being first and goal due to the obvious penalty that was in the open field with an excellent chance to pull within 2 points, the bears got the ball and the Giants were still down 2 scores.

Tom Coughlin made no attempt to score in the first half, which is why the Giants only had 7 points.  Manning only threw 9 passes in the first half.  Yes, the Giants ran well, but as we know, running does not produce points and lets the other team stay in the game.  The Giants even ran on third and longs.  Jeremy Shockey’s first catch was a dumpoff pass with 10:00 left in the third quarter, and he didn’t have a downfield catch until less than 2:00 to play in the third quarter.  Again, this shows no attempt to score.  Finally, in the 4th quarter, Coughlin called slants and higher-percentage passes, and the Giants scored two touchdowns.  They could have done this all game.

All 16 bear points were the result of turnovers.  We’ve discussed how you can’t let the bear defense and special teams beat you and must make the offense beat you, but Coughlin doesn’t seem to understand this.

On the bears’ last drive, on 4th and 15, Coughlin rushed 4 and put no pressure on Grossman, allowing him time to complete a 20-yard pass.

Now, for Coughlin’s crowning moment!  With 1:33 left, the Giants, down 2, had a first-and-goal from the bear 2.  The bears only had one timeout left.  Coughlin should have been thinking that if he scored quickly, he would give the bears a minute-and-a-half to try to win the game and he’d have to kickoff to Hester and risk the runback or kick short or out of bounds and give the bears field position.  He would also be putting the game in the hands of his defense, which is extremely risky and frequently backfires in this situation.

The ONLY thing to do is have Manning take a knee, moving the ball to the middle of the field, and forcing the bears to take their last timeout.  On second down, he should take a knee again, and the clock would continue to run.  On third down, you take a knee again and call timeout with 3 seconds left to kick the winning FG (which is from extra-point distance) on the last play of the game.

Coughlin had complete control of the game, and could have prevented the bears from getting the ball.  He could have kicked a very short FG on the last play.  Instead, he had his running back score on first down, giving the bears a minute-and-a-half to try to win.  It’s possible the bears let the runner score, knowing this was their only chance.  The bears nearly scored on their first play, and got the ball inside the Giant 30.  It never should have come to this.

Shanahan Tries To Outdo McCarthy

by

Mike Shanahan, the Denver Bronco coach, did everything he could today to try to outdo Mike McCarthy’s performance in the second half of this season’s Packer-bear game, which was recognized nationally as perhaps the worst coaching performance in the history of the NFL.  As I will point out, Shanahan came close, and must be given credit for this monumental effort.  Let me count the ways:

  1. Denver made almost no attempt to score in the first half.  Their gameplan was very conservative, and most formations included only one wide receiver.  Running against the bears when you can pass at will is bad enough, but when you have formations with only one receiver, that allows the defense to have even more guys playing the run.  When Denver realized this would be a game after Hester’s runbacks, they then started to pass, put more receivers into the game, and moved the ball at will through the air.  They averaged 9.4 yards/pass play, which is great.  Why they didn’t pass in the first half and put the game away then is a mystery.  The receivers were wide open in the first half.
  2. Denver ran on most first downs, unsuccessfully.  First-down passes were successful, but Denver decided to run.  Again, when they started throwing on first downs in the second half, it worked.
  3. The bear offense, as usual, was going nowhere.  With about 6-1/2 minutes to go, the bear offense had 3 points.  The bears had 20 points, but 14 were on Hester’s returns and 3 were due to a turnover where the offense lost 10 yards before kicking a field goal.  So, with the bears’ offense going nowhere as usual, the Broncos kept kicking/punting to Hester, and he returned 2 for TDs.  As discussed for two years, any coach who kicks to Hester is an idiot.  The bear offense had done nothing, and as also discussed, you can’t let the bears’ special teams and defense beat you.  You have to make the offense beat you, because they can’t.  Why, after more than a year-and-a-half, do coaches still kick to Hester?  As with the Kansas City game, if the Broncos don’t kick to Hester, they beat the bears badly.  What will it take until teams stop kicking to him?  Even when the bears got the ball at midfield on the squib kicks, they did nothing with the field position.
  4. On the first offensive play in overtime, Grossman completed a bomb to Clark that got the bears close to winning-FG position.  As discussed numerous times, Grossman’s main offense is the first-down bomb, and teams still haven’t figured this out.  What will it take?  The Colts figured this out last year and said after the game that they knew Grossman liked to go deep on first down, so they played their safeties accordingly.  This is almost a year later, and Shanahan still doesn’t get it.
  5. Three times the Broncos had a first down inside the bear 5, and three times they ran it on first down.  The first two times, they were stuffed for losses, so what did Shanahan do the third time?  Run it unsuccessfully.  How many times do I have to point out the bears are in a run defense on first down?
  6. The Broncos decided to stop pressuring Grossman, and we all know how he responds to pressure.

Despite all this idiocy, with about 6-1/2 minutes left in the game, the Broncos were up 14 points and punted to the bear 10.  The bear offense had 3 points to that point.  However, the Broncos got called for an illegal formation on the punt, had to punt again, it was blocked, returned deep in Bronco territory, and resulted in a TD that put the bears in the game.  If not for the illegal formation penalty, the game is over.  How can you line up in an illegal formation on a punt?  They had been punting all day!

Garza Hold On Sapp

by

I was listening to The Score on the radio.   The Chicago sports-talkshow  host, who is a bear fan, was talking about how  blatant the hold on Sapp was and how ridiculous it was that it wasn’t  called.  He said Sapp would have easily sacked Grossman.  (They  didn’t say this, but perhaps Grossman would have fumbled.)  He went on and  on regarding how bad a call (non-call) this was.  This is Chicago talking,  not Oakland.
Now, having been enlightened as to how these calls balance out by bear fans, I  decided to keep listening to the show, as I was sure he would then talk about  the bad calls in the game that went against the bears.  I  listened and listened, but he never did.  I don’t understand this.
This is the bottom line:  The holding call to take away Westbrook’s  game-clinching first down in the Eagle game, followed by the admitted blatant  hold on the “winning TD” pass, and the blatant Garza hold on Sapp are all so  flagrant and so obvious and so in-the-open-field-and-thus-visible, that you have to ask why.  I firmly believe it is impossible  to miss the Sapp hold without a reason.  It was too obvious, too flagrant,  right near the QB, and too long in duration for it not be called without a  reason.

Lane Kiffin Doesn’t Have A Clue

by

Lane Kiffin, coach of the Oakland Raiders, proved once again that NFL coaches either don’t watch gamefilm, or if they do, obviously do not have a clue as to strategy.  Let’s look at some of his decisions:

  1. Despite knowing he is playing a bear team with no offense, he declared early in the week that he would kick to Hester.  Knowing the bears offense could not move the ball or beat them, he decided to give the bears’ special teams a chance to beat them.  Late in the game, with the score tied 3-3 and the bears obviously doing nothing offensively, he kicked to Hester again, who returned it over 60 yards.  Fortunately, a penalty wiped out the return, but what could Kiffin possibly have been thinking?  The bears had 3 points and were not an offensive threat, but Hester is always a threat.
  2. With Oakland leading 6-3 with about 3:30 left, Grossman completed a 59-yard bomb to Berrian to give the bears the lead and the game.  I said all last year and all this year that Grossman likes to go deep on first down, almost always to Berrian.  If coaches watched gamefilm, they would understand this.  This play was largely responsible for the bears’ win over Seattle in last year’s playoffs.  The only team to ever understand this was the Colts in the Super Bowl.  This quote from Sports Illustrated shortly after the Super Bowl is exactly what I’ve been saying all along:  “He likes to go deep on first down, ” Indy defensive coordinator Ron Meeks said, “so we let him throw into our Cover Two, sometimes even a three deep with the corners back and a safety in the middle.  That…made it very rough for him.”  With the game basically won, Kiffin did not understand this, and played a defense that allowed Grossman to complete the fly pattern to Berrian.  How many times does this have to happen on first down until coaches realize this, especially in a case like today where it was late in the game and the game was on the line.

Refs Give bears Third Win This Year

by

Three times the bears faced must-win situations this year in order to keep their playoff hopes alive, slim as they might be.  All three times the refs gave the bears “victories” they would not have had if not for the horrible calls.  Previous posts discuss the Packer and Eagle games.  This post will address yesterday’s Oakland game.

On the bomb to Berrian with a few minutes left that turned a 6-3 Oakland lead into a 10-6 bear “lead,” Warren Sapp was close to sacking Grossman, so he was blatantly held by the bear offensive lineman.  This was in the open field and an easy penalty to call, but of course, there was no call.  The bears’ play-by-play radio announcer, Jeff Joniak, said immediately after the play that it was holding and a penalty should have been called.  Sounds very familiar, as the same thing happened in the Eagle game on the “winning” touchdown pass.  Let me quote today’s Chicago Sun-Times:

By the time he reached the locker room after the game, Warren Sapp had cooled off.  He was as angry as the mob of crazy Raider fans after Rex Grossman’s 59-yard touchdown pass to Bernard Berrian, adamant he had been derailed by a hold on the part of right guard Roberto Garza.  Grossman had just enough time to let Berrian put a slight stutter in his route and blow past inexperienced cornerback Chris Carr.  “I turned to [referee] Mike [Carey] and said, ‘C’mon, Mike,’ and Mike [shrugged].  It’s one of those deals.  If it’s on the other side, you can see it.  You miss those calls sometimes.”  Garza tried to hook Sapp, but was all smiles afterward.  “They didn’t call it.  So that’s all that matters,” Garza said with a chuckle.  “Rex made a hell of a play.  I had outside help and luckily he got rid of the ball.  They didn’t call [holding], so I guess it wasn’t.”

The bears continue to “win” games on bad calls, the Packers “lost” a game on bad calls, but as many readers of this site continue to tell me, these calls balance out.  I’m still waiting.

Will They Ever Learn?

by

The bears and Detroit played a game today that was very important for both teams’ playoff chances.  Midway through the 3rd quarter, the Lions led 13-0 and the bear offense had gone nowhere.  What do the Lions do?  After saying they would not kick to Hester, they punted to him and he almost broke it, returning it 40 yards to the Lion 26, resulting in a bear TD that made the score 13-7.  What will it take until coaches REFUSE to kick to him?  The bear offense had done nothing, and as I’ve previously said, you cannot allow the bear special teams and defense to beat you.  You must make their offense beat you.  So, they punt to Hester and put the bears back in the game.  I will also repeat that I stated prior to the first game of Hester’s rookie year, that anyone who punts or kicks to him is a fool.  Even if you give good field position to the bears as a result of this, they can’t do anything with it.  The only bear win this year (Kansas City) was a result of kicking to Hester.

In addition, I have stated a number of times that on 3rd-and-1, you have to put a blocker on Lance Briggs, as he shoots the gap and continues to stuff the run on these plays.  Detroit obviously never watched a gamefilm, because on a crucial third-and-one with less than 3:00 left that would have wrapped up the game, they let Briggs through to tackle the runner for a loss.  How many times does this have to happen until teams put a blocker on him in this situation?

bears’ Season Over Again? Refs Intervene Again.

by

The NFL referees, for the second time in 3 weeks, gave the bears a “victory” when a loss would have all but ended their playoff hopes.  Let’s briefly review the last two weeks, and then review yesterday’s game.

Two weeks ago, had the bears lost to the Packers, they would have been 4 games out and no team in NFL history has ever overcome a 4-game deficit.  The refs made a number of bad calls to give the bears the game, including the illegal formation call that gave the bears their first “TD.”  This call and the bear “touchdown” was called a gift by the announcers and was so bad that Packer coach Mike McCarthy showed a picture of the play to the refs during the game and said he might send it to the league office.  Chicago radio announcers also talked about what a horrible call it was.

Last week, in an effort to keep the bears close, the refs stole 2 TDs from the Packers, both of which were acknowledged by a CNN writer and one of which was admitted by the league, which nearly cost the Packers the Washington game.

Now, for this week.  A loss puts the bears at 2-5 in the newspapers (1-6 in reality), and basically ends their playoff hopes.  With 2:24 left in the game and the bears out of timeouts, Westbrook ran for 10 yards on third-and-eight.  This first down effectively ended the game, as all the Eagles would have had to do from that point was kneel down a few times and the game was over.  However, the ref called holding on the Eagles’ Todd Herremans against Lance Briggs, nullifying the first down, and subsequently forcing the Eagles to punt with 2:00 left, giving the ball back to the bears for the “winning” TD drive.  The replay clearly showed that not only was it not a hold, but the two players involved weren’t even physically engaged.  The announcers talked about what a bad call it was.  Last year, the refs were instructed to not call holding unless they actually saw it, and there is no way anyone could possibly perceive this as a hold based on the position of the players.  It was an invented call, and prevented the game from being over.

On the “winning” TD pass with 0:09 left, a sack would have ended the game with an Eagle victory.  Let me quote the Chicago Sun-Times, which is quoting a bear player:

“…until the decisive play in the bears’ 19-16 victory Sunday.  Right tackle Fred Miller saw it right away when reserve edge rusher Juqua Thomas fired out of his stance.  Thomas had turned the corner and was headed toward Griese with less than 15 seconds to play and no timeouts.  A sack likely would have ended the game.  “I gave a veteran hold,” Miller said smiling.  “I gave a little tug, and he fell down.  That’s the way it goes.  I looked around to make sure there were no flags and started celebrating.”  The key, Miller explained, is to act as if it’s business as usual.  “Normally, if it’s a hold like that right at tackle, you’ll see [the flag] at your feet somewhere,” he said.”

So, first we have a blatant non-hold called a hold to prevent the game from being over with a bear loss, then we have a blatant hold (which is very visible because it was around end and not in the center of the line) called a non-hold to prevent the game from being over with a bear loss and to preserve a bear “win.”

I guess these calls the last 3 weeks are just coincidences, as have been the calls for the last 25 years that I have the tapes of.  AGAIN, THE bears’ SEASON WOULD BE OVER IF ANY ONE OF THESE TWO GAMES WAS OFFICIATED FAIRLY.  NOW,THEY BELIEVE THEY HAVE A SHOT AT THE PLAYOFFS.

Let’s also talk about one coaching strategy the Eagles employed, and there were others that were ridiculous.  This is Bucky Brooks of CNN:

“The bears’ winning 97-yard drive was aided by Eagles defensive coordinator Jim Johnson’s decision to sit in zone coverage after using a high-pressure approach to slow the bears for most of the game.  By sitting in a mixture of two-deep and quarters’ coverage, the Eagles allowed Brian Griese to find open receivers over the middle of the field on his three biggest competions on the drive.  And the winning touchdown to Muhsin Muhammad came against a combination zone coverage that left an overmatched Sean Considine isolated over the middle.  Johnson’s decision to scale back his aggressive approach cost the Eagles a victory.”

How many games are going to be lost by not putting at least a normal rush on the quarterback before coaches figure this out?  As one of the regular readers pointed out, I have been saying for years how terrible this strategy is, but coaches never learn.

bears Super Bowl

by

Not that Griese’s great, but he is experienced.  In the middle of the season last year, I said they should tell  Grossman and Griese that Griese will be starting the last 6 games and the  playoffs, since Grossman was too inexperienced.  Grossman would be the  starter coming into camp this year, and if he was ready, would play the entire  season, but for last year, Griese’s experience was needed.  Another  bad coaching decision by Lovie not to do this.  You have the best special  teams in the league and one of the best defenses, and you’re going to go with an  inexperienced QB that had a number of horrible games when it’s one-and-out? The  only reason they beat Seattle was horrible coaching on Holmgren’s part.  If  Seattle realized they threw deep to Berrian on first down, which I said all year, the bears would have  hardly scored.  N.O. did beat the bears (many bad calls costing the Saints  the game), and the bear offense went nowhere until the 4th quarter.   Grossman wasn’t ready for the Super Bowl.

Packers-bears/Favre/bear Super Bowl/Charles Martin

by

This is a response to a friend:

1.  The Packers did not kick to Hester, but they did punt to him,  which was idiotic.  The Packers did not lose to the bears, but beat  them.  However, if you ignore the bad calls (which I don’t), the Packers  had 341 yards in the first half, and as two national broadcasters said, should  have been up 31-7 at half.  Therefore, you can’t say not kicking to Hester  cost them the game.  The bad calls did.  The Packers would still have  won handily even with the bad calls if McCarthy doesn’t have a moronic gameplan  in the second half, which local and national writers/broadcasters also  said.  I’ve always said not to kick to Hester since the bear offense goes  nowhere, despite the improved field position the bears would get.  In the Packer game, the bears got a FG on the fumbled punt.  They got a “TD” after  the interception.  I don’t remember offhand how the other TD was  scored in regulation, but I don’t believe it was due to field position based on  kicking away from Hester.  K.C. lost only because they kicked to him.   Until the bear offense shows they can sustain a drive, it is much wiser to give  up the field position than to kick to him.
2.  You continue to talk about Favre’s interceptions.  I keep  maintaining that they are the result of not having good players around him,  making him think he has to do too much, or a stupid gameplan that goes  nowhere, making him again think he has to make things happen.  This is  what a competitor does.  Most QBs just passively take the loss, and  Favre will never do that.  As I mentioned, you look at the last game and  see 2 interceptions.  I see 2 TDs that were stolen, and know he wouldn’t  have thrown any interceptions if not for those horrible calls.  By the way,  for a 10-year period, the Packers had the best record in the NFL and I believe  the best winning percentage of any team in the 4 major sports.  You don’t  achieve this without a tremendous competitor at QB.  Would you rather have  a shortstop that never makes an error because he refuses to dive for balls or  attempt great throws, or a competitor who tries to make as many plays as  possible?  I’m not saying Favre shouldn’t do some of the things he does,  but many of them do result in TDs instead of interceptions.  Favre’s  interceptions might look worse than those of some other QBs, but that’s because  he makes a lot of great plays in those situations, while some do become  interceptions.
3. Yes, the bear victory in the Super Bowl looked dominant.   Why?  Because N.E. ran on first downs early, letting the game get out of  hand.  I guarantee you it would not have been a dominant win if they threw quick short passes on first down.  I agree with you that even without the  bad calls, the bears win because N.E.’s gameplan was so idiotic.  Let me  repeat a perfect example from last year.  Miami comes to Soldier Field with  few wins, and the week after having lost at home to a not-so-good Packer  team.  The bears are 9-0 and have won every home game by 30 points.   BEFORE THE GAME, I tell people that if Miami pressures Grossman, throws on first  down, and doesn’t kick to Hester, they kill the bears.  Everyone laughs at  me, but what happens?  Miami follows this gameplan and wins something like  31-13.  Now, if Miami had come out running the ball and not pressuring  Grossman, I believe the bears would have won by at least 3 TDs.  In that  scenario, I’m telling you the Dolphins would have won if they had a good  gameplan, and you’re telling me I’m crazy since the bears dominated the  game.  The same holds for the bear-N.E. Super Bowl, and the first quarter  proved my point.  First series they do what I said and dropped two  easy wide-open passes, the second one for a TD.  They then ran and got  killed.
5.  Let me clarify my comments on the Charles Martin play.  I  said he should have been suspended longer.  That having been said, what  Dent did to Dickey was far more dangerous than the Martin play.  Dent’s was  about 10 seconds after the play was over, and the risk of injury was far more  significant than the Martin play.  I’m not even sure that was the play the  Packers were talking about when they said the bears started this garbage and  they would finish it next year.  I think the bears did a number of things  that were out of hand that game, and the Packers said two could play at that  game.  It’s like when Ken Stills hit Matt Suhey.  All of Chicago went  nuts.  However, at the end of the half of the N.E. Super Bowl, Keith Van  Horne ran at Fred Marion (I believe) and slammed him in the neck.  Similar  plays, except where the players were hit.  This was a far more dangerous  play than Stills’, and even the bear players said what Stills did could not have hurt anyone.

1985 bear Defense/Charles Martin

by

The bears were only dominating in  1985 because of the opposing coaches’ idiocy.  I was saying SINCE AT  LEAST 1983 that the 46 was so easy to beat that it was ridiculous.   You can’t run against the bears’ 46 since they had 8 great athletes up in the  box, which is the same reason you can’t sit in the pocket against it.   However, quick short passes would destroy it because 8 guys were close to the  line of scrimmage, Singletary couldn’t cover anyone, and this area was wide  open.  It was so obvious, but no one understood this.  Every one of  these plays worked, but coaches rarely did it.  Before the Super Bowl, I  wrote Raymond Berry about this (he wrote me back after the game), explaining the  successful plays during the season were these plays and giving him examples, and  told him to pass on first down, throw quick short passes, pass to the tight ends  (which kill the bears), etc.  The first play of the game was a first-down  pass to a wide-open Lin Dawson, tight end, at the bear 15.  He was about to  catch the ball when his knee buckled and he went down (needing surgery).   As a result, he didn’t catch it, but he was wide open.  Next play was a  quick slant over the middle to a wide-open Stanley Morgan for a TD, and he  dropped it.  They kicked the FG.  Next few possessions were first-down  runs, and despite the refs giving the bears 20-30 points (I have the tape), the  game was over since these first-down runs produced losses and led to sacks and  fumbles.  Everyone argued with me for all these years that the bears were  so dominant defensively that they couldn’t be stopped.  How did Miami beat  them that year?  Marino rolled out of the pocket to buy time.  How did  Washington beat them in the first round the next year?  Jay Schroeder threw  quick passes.  And, to ultimately prove my point, about 2 years later I  sent many friends a copy of many articles in national  publications saying NO ONE, NOT EVEN BUDDY RYAN WHO WAS COACHING PHILADELPHIA,  plays the 46 anymore because teams figured out how easy it was to beat with  quick short passes.  So, yes the bears looked dominant, but it was due to  idiotic coaching.  And, Miami and Oakland would both have beaten the bears  in 1985, but both blew leads to blow their games  and put a bad N.E. team in the playoffs.  Many years later, I read a  book on Bobby Knight (Feinstein’s?), and they asked him who would win. He said  New England would beat the bears because they would kill them with quick, short  passes!  I guess I wasn’t the only one who figured this out at the  time.

Now, let’s talk about Charles Martin.  Yes, Martin should have been  suspended for a long time for what he did.  However, everyone in  Chicago forgot how this started.  The second Packer-bear game the year  before (in Chicago), and this was before all the cheap shots in the Forrest  Gregg/Mike Ditka era, Richard Dent picked up Lynn Dickey after an interception  and well after the play was over, turned him upside down, and slammed him  down.  I was at the game with a bear-fan friend, and the two of us were  amazed.  He still remembers it, and although he is a bear fan, he’s a witness and we still talk about it.  I went home and  watched the tape, and it was so late after the play, that as the broadcast was  going to commercial, you could hear O.J., I believe, say, “Did you see what Dent  just did to Dickey?” and then it was cut off as they went to commercial.   After the game, the Packers said the bears started it, and they intended to  finish it.  That’s what really happened and what caused the ridiculousness  on both sides after that.

Brad Childress Tries To Outdo Mike McCarthy

by

A week after Packer coach Mike McCarthy’s second-half gameplan against the bears was called “the worst ever seen,” Vikings coach Brad Childress did his best to eclipse McCarthy’s stupidity in Sunday’s game against the bears.

Some examples of Childress’ coaching genius:

  1. He punted to Devin Hester in a scoreless first quarter, and Hester ran it back to give the bears a 7-0 lead and some momentum.  What will it take until coaches learn to not allow the bears’ special teams and defense to beat them (since their offense goes nowhere), and how many returns will Hester have before teams stop kicking to him?  The bear offense had not sustained a drive up to that point.  Yes, Lovie Smith was just as stupid to kick to Adrian Peterson after the bears tied it late.
  2. After the Vikings tied the game at 7, the bears completed a first-down bomb to Berrian for a TD.  I’ve talked about this play since early last year and the fact that other teams don’t seem to get it, and the fact that it’s almost always to Berrian.  This is what turned the Seahawks playoff game around last year, and finally, after the Super Bowl, Colts defensive coordinator Ron Meeks said of Grossman, “He likes to go deep on first down, so we let him throw into our Cover Two, sometimes even a three deep with the corners back and a safety in the middle.  That made it very rough for him.”  I realize Griese was the quarterback, but the offensive coordinator is the same.  This put the bears back in the lead, 14-7.
  3. The bears were down by 14 points with about 2:50 to play (instead of about 28 points due to the punt to Hester), so the only thing that could have hurt the Vikings was quick-score big plays.  If you don’t give up the big play and play defense accordingly, you force the bears to use a lot of clock even if they score.  So, what do the Vikings do?  They allow a long pass play for a touchdown to pull the bears within 7 points, and then allow an 81-yard bomb for a TD to tie the game in the last minute-and-a-half!  Against any team, you have to defense the big play in this situation, and especially against the bears, who don’t have an offense capable of sustaining a long drive.  This coaching decision was inexcusable, and to do it twice!
  4. At the end of the game, when the Vikings were driving for the winning field goal, they threw a pass on second-and-five, when they were already in field goal range and they have a quarterback who can’t pass and hadn’t played in a while.  How can you jeopardize the winning field goal?  The pass was nearly intercepted, which could have cost them the game.

A few comments on how the Viking players tried to give the bears the game:

  1. With the Vikings up by two touchdowns and about 2:45 left, Griese threw a pass right to a Viking defender with no one near him.  If he catches it, game over.  He dropped it, and the bears scored two touchdowns to tie the game.
  2. The Viking receivers dropped a number of passes, some of which could have gone a long way.
  3. With 3:08 left and the Vikings up by two touchdowns, the Viking running back ran out of bounds on 3rd and 8, stopping the clock.

Media Comments On Packers-bears

by

Here are some comments from the media on the Packer-bear game that verify what I said and have been saying all along:

Hub Arkush, publisher of Pro Football Weekly, a former bear announcer, and a football analyst on Chicago sports-talk radio:  “The only reason the bears won the game was because of Mike McCarthy.”  What he did in the second half “was the worst coaching I have ever seen.  Who takes the ball out of Brett Favre’s hands?”  He later called the Packers’ second-half gameplan “the worst gameplan I have ever seen.”  When asked if Favre’s interception contributed to the loss, he said, “I don’t blame Brett for that.  He was frustrated based on those 3 straight runs before that.”  He was referring to the plays in the red zone, but it was actually 5 straight running plays before that.  Someone asked him if the bears going to a Cover 2 defense in the second half helped stop the Packers, and his response was, “The Cover 2 and the bear defense did not stop the Packers.  Mike McCarthy stopped the Packers.”  Further proof of this is that on the first play of the second half, before the 5 straight runs, the Packers threw for 13 yards down to the bear 20.  So, the Cover 2 didn’t seem to make a difference.

Paul Zimmerman  (Dr. Z) of Sports Illustrated said:  The Packers lost because of their “coach’s cowardice.”  He went on to say, “This was another one that flew out the window after they had it nailed.  During the intermission, you’re supposed to make adjustments.  OK, they’re gonna stop the run now, so here’s what we’ll do.  What the Packers did in the second half was run the ball into the heart of the defense, like mindless idiots, and then throw a short checkdown on third down.  They got one first down on their first possession (the first play of the half, which was a 13-yard pass), on a screen pass.  And between that time and their last possession, with 1:58 left in the game, after the bears had fought back and taken the lead, they didn’t have any.  Five straight series of three and out.  Five series of garbage plays.”

Refs Steal Another bear Game From Packers/McCarthy Gets Game Ball From bears

by

The refs stole another bear game from the Packers at Lambeau, which has become the norm over the years.  The Packers were dominating the game early, when the bears kicked a field goal.  The refs called an illegal formation penalty on the Packers, allowing the bears to go for and get the touchdown.  The announcers said a number of times that this was a bad call and called it a “gift” for the bears.  Getting a touchdown changed the momentum and gave the bears new life.  These 4 points should never have been on the board, so the game should not have been tied toward the end.  I realize everything changes, but I also think it’s obvious this “gift” benefited the bears greatly.

Late in the first half, the bears were penalized for having 12 men on the field.  The officials decided to review this call, and decided, despite clear evidence of 12 men (NBC put numbers 1-12 on each man), that the bears had 11 men on the field and eliminated the penalty.   These calls were ridiculous, the announcers acknowledged this, and there was clear replay evidence that the calls were terrible.

Let’s not forget Greg Olsen’s little pushoff on the defender to get separation on the “touchdown” pass the first play after Favre’s interception, which of course was not called, pulling the bears within 20-17.  And let’s not forget that Brad Maynard did not have possession of the ball when he landed out of bounds on the fumble recovery on the punt, resulting in the bears’ tying “field goal,” instead of the Packers maintaining possession.

THE OTHER RESULT OF THIS IS THAT IT KEEPS THE bears’ PLAYOFF HOPES ALIVE.  NO TEAM IN NFL HISTORY HAS EVER MADE THE PLAYOFFS ONCE THEY WERE 4 GAMES BEHIND, WHICH IS WHAT THE bears WOULD BE IF THEY WERE 1-4.  THEIR SEASON WOULD HAVE BASICALLY BEEN OVER AND THE PACKERS WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A GREAT POSITION AT 5-0.  THAT IS WHY INSTANT REPLAY MUST BE USED MORE AND MORE, AS THIS CALL AFFECTS BOTH THE PACKERS’ AND bears’ PLAYOFF HOPES, HOMEFIELD ADVANTAGE, OTHER TEAMS TRYING TO MAKE THE PLAYOFFS, ETC.  LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE, NOT THE REFS.

For those of you who have debated strategy with me for the last 25-30 years, I think this game was just another example that what I’ve said all along is right.

1.  I’ve always said you have to throw against the bear defense, especially on first down, as they are great against the run and are in a run defense on first down, and first-down passes hurt them.  Let’s look at what happened in this game:

  • The Packers came out throwing in the first half, and moved the ball at will.  Favre was 19 of 20 (if you ignore his two spikes) in the first half, for 243 yards.  They had 341 yards of offense in the first half, to 122 for the bears.  Cris Collinsworth said the first-half score could have been 31-7.  This game showed, as do all games teams throw against the bears, how easy their defense is to beat when you pass against it.
  • In the second half, the Packers decided to run, never moved the ball, and had 1 second-half first down with 1:30 to play in the half.
  • The Packers, up 17-10, had the ball inside the bear 20, ran three times (making no attempt to score a TD), including on third down when they didn’t have receivers in the game and everyone was bunched up in the middle, and were happy to settle for a field goal.
  • Favre’s interception deep in Packer territory late in the third quarter was set up by runs on first and second down on that series, and this interception resulted in a bear touchdown.  Had they thrown on first down, it would have been different.
  • The bear TD as a result of the interception made it 20-17 Packers, and the Packers ran on all three downs, including 3rd and 6, on their next possession, again having to punt.
  • Instead of continuing to move the ball at will and build up a bigger lead, the Packers decided to run the ball to protect the lead, despite the fact that they have admitted all year they can’t run and were 4-0 by continuing to pass.
  • In the 4th quarter, the Packers continued to run the ball, especially on first down, resulting in punts.
  • Here are a few John Madden quotes, which are exactly what I’ve been saying for years and said all during the game:
    • The Packers have been very conservative in the second half.
    • The bear defense is staying up to stop the run and the passes at the line of scrimmage, because they know the Packers are no longer throwing downfield.  (This, despite the fact Packer receivers were open all during the first half.)
    • You have to wonder if the Packers are shutting themselves down.
    • The Packers should never run on another play.  Every play should be a pass.
    • The Packers, for some reason, in the second half just shut it down.
    • (After the game): When you can’t run the ball, you should keep doing what you do best.  Don’t try to force some mathematical balance (between running and passing plays).

2.  I’ve always said that when you are doing something that works, you don’t change until the other team stops you.  You make them adjust–you don’t adjust while what you are doing is working.

  • The Packers had 341 yards and 15 first downs in the first half by emphasizing the pass.  Total offense in the first quarter was Packers 189-bears 20.  In the second half, when the Packers continued to run, they had 1 first down with 1:30 to play.
  • With 9 minutes left in the second half, the Packers had 40 yards of second-half offense (compared to 341 in the first half) because of all the running plays.  At this point, the bears had about 85 yards of offense in the second half, so all the Packers had to do was keep passing and building up a bigger lead.
  • The entire momentum of the game changed when the Packers stopped passing and ran on every play.

3.  I’ve said the last few years that you have to make the bear offense beat you (because it can’t), and you can’t let the bear special teams and defense beat you.

  • The Packers kept punting to Hester, and although they got lucky he didn’t return any, this was a ridiculous strategy.  At least they didn’t kickoff to him.   Knowing the bear offense can’t score, you can’t let their special teams beat you.
  • The Packers fumbled 3 times by not protecting the ball, once at the bear 9 when they could have gone up 14-0, once at the bear 38 when they could have gone up 14-0 again, and once on a punt.  Knowing the bear offense can’t score, you must protect the ball and not let the defense and special teams beat you.  Every team in the league knows the bears try to strip the ball, so you have to protect it.  You’ve got to make their offense beat you.

The Packers could have won this game in a rout, despite the bad call giving the bears a touchdown (and the other calls), but Mike McCarthy decided to change a gameplan that worked on every play in the first half (Favre 19 of 20) to a running offense, allowing the bears to hang around and allowing for the situation for turnovers to have an effect on the game.  Had the Packers continued to pass in the second half, I don’t think anyone would disagree that they would have won handily despite the bad calls.  Even the announcers repeatedly implied this most of the second half, and after the game.

bears-Lions Game

by

Let’s review the idiocy of the Lions’ gameplan.  Regular readers are aware of what I’ve been saying for years–pass on first down against the bears, don’t kick to Hester, and make the bear offense beat you.  I’ll add another bit of wisdom below, again adjusting to what is happening in games.  Here’s what Detroit did yesterday:

Despite the fact that the bears had all four defensive-backfield starters out with injury and were playing with rookies making their first starts, and despite the fact the Lions came into the game with the league’s number-one ranked passing offense, the Lions came out running.  The Bears lead the league in first-down run defense, but get hurt by first-down passing (by the admission of their play-by-play announcer).  The reason the Lions only had three points after three quarters is due to this ridiculous gameplan.  The Lions did pass in the 4th quarter, and scored 34 points.  What will it take for coaches to understand this?  The bears are always in a run defense on first down making them susceptible to the pass, and these runs are never successful.  By running early, you keep the bears in the game and set the tone of the game.  Passing early and getting a big lead would force the bears out of their gameplan and give the Lions momentum.  The Lions could have put this game away early.

I’ve also said for years that you have to make the bear offense beat you, as their special teams are very good and their defense can be great (unless passed against).  Walking into the first game LAST YEAR (Hester’s rookie year), I made the statement that anyone who kicks to Hester is a fool.

The bear offense goes nowhere, so why would you allow Hester to beat you?  Teams didn’t get this last year, and the bears won a number of games as a result.  What happened yesterday?  The bears were playing with a QB that hadn’t started a game in years so he’d be rusty, so the offense wasn’t going to be a major threat, yet the Lions continually kicked to Hester.  After taking the lead in the 4th quarter, they kicked to Hester and he ran it back, giving the bears the lead.  What could they have been thinking?  The bears had just thrown three interceptions, were going nowhere offensively, and they let Hester beat them.  I’ve always said, punt it 35-40 yards high, forcing a fair catch, and squib kick or kick it out of bounds on kickoffs.  The Colts learned this after Hester returned the opening kickoff of the Super Bowl (why they kicked to him then amazed me), and then never kicked to him again.  Let me quote today’s Chicago Sun-Times:

“Why in the name of Ford Motor Co. does anybody on any team anywhere ever punt or kick the ball to Bears returner Devin Hester.  That’s funny.  Lions coach Rod Marinelli has 20 assistants, according to the media guide, and not one of those clowns could say to him, “Uh, Rod, this Hester dude is pretty sweet, so how about we have Nick Harris pooch it out of bounds and Jason Hanson squib to somebody else?”  Thank Chicago’s lucky stars the Lions never figured that out until Hester had lit them up like an arsonist.  His 95 yards on 5 punt returns and 219 yards on 7 kickoff returns, including a stunning 95-yard masterpiece for a 4th-quarter touchdown, were gifts from perhaps the greatest return man in NFL history.  It may not be fair, right or sporting to kick the ball away from a talent like Hester, BUT NOT TO DO IT IS INSANE (emphasis mine).”

Let me quote the Sun-Times after the bears beat the Chiefs (the bears’ lone victory):  “Why kick or punt the ball to Hester?  As bad as the Chiefs played, they might have won the game if the head coach had told his team to keep the ball away from Hester.  You seem like a fairly smart man, Herm (Chiefs coach Herm Edwards).  What prompts you to keep kicking to Hester after he repeatedly burns you?  Isn’t that coaching suicide?”

Again, I said this prior to Hester’s FIRST game last year.  Any coach who ever watched a gamefilm could see the bears’ offense can’t beat you, but Hester can.  I heard Hester’s return yards yesterday were the second-most in NFL history.

I used to continually point out that if you pressure Grossman, he’ll be horrible, but if you give him time, he’ll look good.  How many times did teams not pressure Grossman and let him look good?

Two weeks ago, I made the statement that when teams play the bears, they need to have their field-goal and extra-point holder line up a yard further back.  The bears block field goals every game, and the kicking teams need to adust.  They have an entire week to practice this.  So, what did the Lions do?  They had a field goal and extra-point blocked, both in crucial situations, because they did not do this.  How many kicks do the bears have to block before teams will start to adjust?  This could have cost the Lions the game.  Again, you can’t let special teams beat you when you play the bears; you have to make their offense beat you.

The fact that the Lions won the game will make people not focus on these points.  This was one of the worst coaching performances I have ever seen, although there are a lot that are close!

Here’s the beginning of an e-mail I got yesterday after a few minutes of the bear game:  I am tracking my fantasy football team and I see the Lions run the first two downs and then kick to Hester!  They deserve to lose.  The bears have no secondary and they run?

bears-Colts Preseason Game

by

I don’t care about preseason games (other than injuries), but thought I’d watch the first half of the Colt-bear game to see if anything had changed.  Those of you on the previous e-mail list know that for many years I’ve been saying teams that throw on first down get first downs, and teams that run on first down stall drives.  I’ve also said for years that this is particularly true against the bears, because the bears are in a run defense on first down. As you also know, prior to the first game last year, I said you never punt or kick to Hester, but punt high so he has to fair catch, and squib kick, because even though you’ll give up some field position, the bear offense will go nowhere.

I also said you can’t let the bears’ special teams beat you, which they can.  You need to make the bear offense beat you, which they almost never can.

So, having brought everyone up to speed, let’s review the first half of the Colt-bear game tonight.  These stats are for the entire half, and hold true regardless of whether the starters or subs were in.

These are the Colts’ offensive series in the first half:

1.  Throw for 20 yards and a first down.

2.  Run and subsequently punt.

3.  Throw for 11 yards and a first down.

4.  Run and turn the ball over on downs.

5.  Throw–got first down.

6.  Throw for 17 yards and a first down.

7.  Throw–got a touchdown.

8.  Run and subsequently punt.

9.  Throw–got first down.

10. Throw–got first down.

11. Run–threw for a touchdown.

12. Throw–got first down.

13. Throw for about 15 yards and a first down.

14. Throw–didn’t try to get a first down as time was running out.  Just tried to get into easier FG range, which they did.

If you don’t count the last series when they just wanted to get the ball into easier FG range, here is the summary:

Throws on first down: 9 times, ALL of which resulted in a first down on that series.

Runs on first down: 4 times, 3 of which resulted in turning the ball over to the bears–1 where they scored a TD by throwing.

DOES ANYONE FINALLY SEE A PATTERN HERE?

Now, let’s look at my statement about not letting the bear special teams beat you, and making their offense try to beat you.  The game was 17-17 at half.  Let’s look at the bears’ 17 points:

1.  First FG was a result of a long kickoff return.

2.  First TD was a result of a long Devin Hester punt return.

3.  Second TD was a result of the Colts fumbling the kickoff.

I ask again, why would a team put themselves into a position where the bears’ special teams could beat them?  This happened over and over last year, but it seems no one takes notice.

Instead of spending millions on scouting and game films, why doesn’t each team assign one person to watch all of the games of one of their opponents for that year and realize these things?