Bears / NFL Thread 2018-2019

Status
Not open for further replies.
#401      
Deleted member 645583
I thought I sawsome weird stuff during Illini game, but Parkey's kicking is a match. So far he has cost the bears 8 points.

Thought I saw a facemask against a Lion on the last Cohen run.
 
#403      
IlliniFaninHoosierLand
Bears win a divisional game for the first time since Halloween night 2016. Now at 6-3 and in 1st place in the NFC North heading into a HUGE game next Sunday night vs. the Vikings.
 
#404      
jrichisamazing
FiveStar said:
Anyone else think the Bears got totally screwed getting flexed into Sunday night and then playing thanksgiving afternoon?

Literally 2 recovery days before they travel
Click to expand...

It’s ridiculous. The NFL is trying to make the game safer but has no problem giving a team a shorter turnaround just for better ratings. What a joke.
 
#405      
champaignchris
I’m still not sure what to think of this Bears team. They’re improved, but I’m just not sure how improved.

They’re 6-3 against the easiest schedule in the NFL by opponent’s winning percentage. They haven’t beaten a team with a .500 or better record. The teams they’ve beaten are a combined 18-38 (.321). They’ve only played 1 team with an above .500 record.

Basically what I’m saying is that while they’re definitely an improved team, I’m not sure they’re a good team. Minnesota next week will be a good measuring stick.

They Bears have three more awful teams on their schedule - Lions, 9ers, Giants. They could go 9-7 without ever beating a team with more than 6 wins.
 
#406      
WhiteRhino
By definition, if you beat the bad teams, that makes you a good team.

Are they a great team? Probably not. But they appear to at least be a good team, which is a huge improvement over previous seasons.
 
#407      
champaignchris
If the Bears go 9-7 or 10-6 and don’t win a game against a winning team, I’d have a hard time calling them good. Above average playing an easy schedule.

As it is, there’s a very strong chance that the Bears will be playing Minnesota in the first round of the playoffs. Assuming the NFC North champ will be the #3 seed behind NO and LA, ahead of whatever mediocre team the NFC East spits out - and the second place team will be the second wild card behind Carolina.

I’ll revise my opinion of the Bears way up if they’re competitive with the Vikings.

I’m also not sure what to make of the Packers. They’ve been so inconsistent. Haven’t won a road game yet. I have a hard time seeing them win more than 8 games. Their game against Atlanta in a few weeks could be a wild card elimination game.
 
#408      
IlliniFaninHoosierLand
I'll admit that the Bears have been the beneficiary of playing a last placed schedule (though that only matters in that they face the Giants and Tampa whereas Minnesota has to play Philly and New Orleans), they can't control how bad the AFC East is aside from New England or how bad the NFC West is aside from Los Angeles.

We'll know a lot more about them after they face Minnesota and Los Angeles at home over the next few weeks.

That Green Bay-Atlanta game you mentioned. I'd argue it's only a wild card elimination game for Green Bay as Atlanta likely sealed any playoff chances they had losing at Cleveland yesterday.
 
#409      
champaignchris
I don’t want to overstate my reservations about the Bears though. Considering they looked rudderless as an organization just 10 months ago, to be where they are now is pretty remarkable.

They have an exciting young qb surrounded by a ton of skill position options and a decent o-line. They have a solid defense front to back anchored by a superstar OLB. And with Long out, they don’t have a single regular contributor over the age of 29.
 
#410      
KnoxIllini2
I'm not sure why there have been so many "Are the Bears even good?" posts. Who cares if we've only beat crap teams. It's a whole lot better than losing to crap teams and still being locked in that purgatory. I'll gladly take a battle for first place with the Vikings. Now if only it was on Sunday afternoon rather than Sunday night, but I digress.
 
#411      
ChiefIllini
KnoxIllini2 said:
I'm not sure why there have been so many "Are the Bears even good?" posts. Who cares if we've only beat crap teams. It's a whole lot better than losing to crap teams and still being locked in that purgatory. I'll gladly take a battle for first place with the Vikings. Now if only it was on Sunday afternoon rather than Sunday night, but I digress.
Click to expand...
As a big Falcons fan, this is exactly what people need to understand. Sure, maybe your team isn't the top talent based team overall, but as long as you're winning game, who the heck cares??? A lot of the time in sports, luck is more likely to determine who wins rather than skill, especially at the professional level. How often does the team with the best record in the league win the super bowl? Parity and luck is what makes sports fun and exciting to watch, as long as you win the games, why complain?
 
#412      
champaignchris
KnoxIllini2 said:
I'm not sure why there have been so many "Are the Bears even good?" posts. Who cares if we've only beat crap teams. It's a whole lot better than losing to crap teams and still being locked in that purgatory. I'll gladly take a battle for first place with the Vikings. Now if only it was on Sunday afternoon rather than Sunday night, but I digress.
Click to expand...
Mainly it’s because they’ve traded away a lot of draft picks to get the team that have now. So the guys they have are the guys they’re going to have to try to win with over the next two or three years.

So, if they’re not good now, they don’t have a lot of resources to try to get better.
 
#413      
FlyNavy
Bears now have more wins than last season (6), as well as more NFC North wins than last season (1)!

All joking aside, I think all that matters is their trajectory. The offense has been steadily improving throughout the year, and combined with a steady D they should be able to at least make a game of it against Minny and LA (both at home). The schedule does get harder, but they definitely have a shot at 10 wins if they keep improving (this would be a 4-3 finish).

And if the trajectory continues to improve, next year could be VERY interesting...
 
#414      
KnoxIllini2
champaignchris said:
Mainly it’s because they’ve traded away a lot of draft picks to get the team that have now. So the guys they have are the guys they’re going to have to try to win with over the next two or three years.

So, if they’re not good now, they don’t have a lot of resources to try to get better.
Click to expand...

That is very true, and coming into the season the big question was, "What will Trubisky do?" And then the trade for Mack happened and then it became very apparent we were in a "win now" mode. That thought, in and of itself at the time was crazy: First year coach? young QB? young defense? A lot of question marks. After Week 3 though, I think a lot of those questions were becoming answered.

Mitch has shown growth. He has shown to be more than competent and one could argue he's approaching decent quarterback status, possible star potential? Nagy doesn't appear to be stubborn and is willing to adapt to the strengths of the players. Now if only Howard could run for more than 3 yards a carry, we'd all be happier. The defense with Mack is other worldly. The defense without Mack is still a Top 10 unit.

The Bears have a Top 5 offense and Top 5 defense based on points per game. They're the only team in the NFL that can claim that. So sure, the teams on the early part of the schedule may have sucked, but damn they've looked good while taking care of them.

As mentioned, Minnesota will be a great test as they're Top 15 across the board.
 
#415      
champaignchris
I know I’ve beaten this dead horse before, but since being released by the Bears, Robbie Gould is 67 out of 70 on field goals, including 5 for 5 beyond 50. The only kicker in the history of the NFL with a higher percentage of fgs made in at least as many attempts is Gostkowski.

The arguments concerning cutting him due to cost kind of fall apart when Parkey is making the exact same amount as the contract Gould was cut from and about a million and a half more than Gould ended up signing for with the 9ers.

Pace has made worse moves with more long term effects than cutting Gould, but it still sticks out to me since it seemed like such a no-brainer to keep him on.
 
#416      
KBLEE
champaignchris said:
I know I’ve beaten this dead horse before, but since being released by the Bears, Robbie Gould is 67 out of 70 on field goals, including 5 for 5 beyond 50. The only kicker in the history of the NFL with a higher percentage of fgs made in at least as many attempts is Gostkowski.

The arguments concerning cutting him due to cost kind of fall apart when Parkey is making the exact same amount as the contract Gould was cut from and about a million and a half more than Gould ended up signing for with the 9ers.

Pace has made worse moves with more long term effects than cutting Gould, but it still sticks out to me since it seemed like such a no-brainer to keep him on.
Click to expand...

Hindsight is always 20/20. Gould had a rough end to the season right before the Bears were set to resign him. Kickers can and do "lose it" very quickly. I'm guessing they thought his better days were behind him. Obviously, that was an incorrect assumption. But, based upon his trajectory, it was a reasonable one.

FYI - he missed twice as many FGs in his final year with the Bears as he has missed in the last 3 years combined.
 
Last edited:
#417      
ChiefIllini
Kicking is hugely mental. Icing a kicker is more than just a cheap trick. It takes a special guy to come back right away after missing 3/4/5 FG's/XP and perform at a high level (i.e. Crosby). Really gotta believe in your kicking talents through and through.
 
#418      
Deleted member 645583
To be fair, Parkey broke Kevin Butler's rookie scoring record, as far as I can tell. Poor guy, he must feel really fine today. I feel for him after Sunday's game, even if he's making multi-millions. But you can't give up eight points in the kicking game and, as a team, expect to beat the best in the NFL. That 2-poimt conversion was a signal.

Cody: practice like crazy!
 
#419      
jrichisamazing
champaignchris said:
I know I’ve beaten this dead horse before, but since being released by the Bears, Robbie Gould is 67 out of 70 on field goals, including 5 for 5 beyond 50. The only kicker in the history of the NFL with a higher percentage of fgs made in at least as many attempts is Gostkowski.

The arguments concerning cutting him due to cost kind of fall apart when Parkey is making the exact same amount as the contract Gould was cut from and about a million and a half more than Gould ended up signing for with the 9ers.

Pace has made worse moves with more long term effects than cutting Gould, but it still sticks out to me since it seemed like such a no-brainer to keep him on.
Click to expand...

It wasn’t a no brainer. Gould didn’t look like the kicker he used to be when we cut him.
 
#420      
jrichisamazing
champaignchris said:
I’m still not sure what to think of this Bears team. They’re improved, but I’m just not sure how improved.

They’re 6-3 against the easiest schedule in the NFL by opponent’s winning percentage. They haven’t beaten a team with a .500 or better record. The teams they’ve beaten are a combined 18-38 (.321). They’ve only played 1 team with an above .500 record.

Basically what I’m saying is that while they’re definitely an improved team, I’m not sure they’re a good team. Minnesota next week will be a good measuring stick.

They Bears have three more awful teams on their schedule - Lions, 9ers, Giants. They could go 9-7 without ever beating a team with more than 6 wins.
Click to expand...

I think every NFL win is a good win. There are big upsets every single week. Lions and Titans beat the Pats. Bills beat the Vikings. Bucs beat the Saints. I could go on forever.

If you go 10-6 you’re a good team no matter what. That being said, some 10-6 teams are better than others obviously.
 
#421      
jrichisamazing
champaignchris said:
Mainly it’s because they’ve traded away a lot of draft picks to get the team that have now. So the guys they have are the guys they’re going to have to try to win with over the next two or three years.

So, if they’re not good now, they don’t have a lot of resources to try to get better.
Click to expand...

If we have a good front office then this isn’t true. They need to figure out how to sell high and buy low. Trade away Taylor Gabriel after the season of his life because Anthony Miller is waiting in the wings. Trade Jordan Howard in his prime if somebody is desperate for a RB. And most importantly try not to let guys walk out as free agents. The Packers got rid of Clinton-Dix because they didn’t think they could resign him when his contract was up. That’s a short term loss that will help in the long term.
 
#422      
IlliniFaninHoosierLand
Bears have activated Adam Shaheen from IR, enabling him to potentially play this weekend vs. the Vikings.

In a corresponding move, the Bears placed Dion Sims on IR with a concussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back