Griese starts...
Oh dear....
3 interceptions, 2 in the redzone and one run back for a TD, that's a minimum of 13 points against you...... Although the offense had its moments where it looked like it was in sync, there is no obvious improvement in sight.
All this really demonstrates though is that it's not just the quarter back that's the problem, I really dislike the play calling. The Bears just haven't attempted to stretch the field all season, I wonder if the misfiring offense is causing Ron Turner to make more conservative calls in an attempt to curb the turnovers. The result however seems to be the opposite, the short field means teams can stack the line.
The defense also collapsed in the 4th quarter, they had a lot of injuries, but I think this really comes down to the same issue we've seen all season, teams seem to make better adjustments at half time than the Bears do. They may be the victim of there own success early in the game here, why adjust what your doing when it's working, the problem is opponents are adjusting and the Bears aren't reacting and making the adjustments during the 2nd half.
I think Griese can improve but I don't think it'll be a dramatic improvement next week at Green Bay. Ron Turner needs to be much more aggressive play calling on offense, but the way the team is currently executing it might not matter.
There are still 12 games left so the season isn't over yet, but the Bears have dug themselves a pretty deep hole thus far, a loss to Green Bay next week will make it a lot deeper.
Tuesday, September 25, 2007
Dallas 34 Chicago 10
Ow!
Bears looked horrible across the board here, the defense played well in the first half, but that's about the only positive thing that can be said. Other than the blocked field goal even special teams stank.
The Bears are now 1 and 2 and Green Bay 3 and 0, and worse the Bears had a slew of defensive injuries.
The question now is how to star producing on offense in the short term?
Maybe that does require radical changes in the starting line up, I'm still in two minds on the Grossman thing, I still don't see Griese or Orton being long term solutions, but if your looking to change to try and jump start the offense maybe that's what's needed. I can't see what else you can do to radically change the line up. Maybe start Petersen at running back, swap around the wide receivers, but that's all pretty much cosmetic.
I really haven't liked the Bears play calling in the first few weeks either, it seems excessively conservative at times, leading to 3rd and long on a regular basis. I'm as big a fan of the running game as the next Bears fan, but with a few exceptions we haven't been successful in running on running downs. I don't know if that's Benson, the O-Line or just opposing defenses lack of respect for the Bears passing game.
Since were heading into 2 divisional games and the Bye week is still a ways off, something needs to happen, I'm still not sure replacing Grossman is the right decision longer term but in the short term, things might look desperate enough to give it a try.
Ow!
Bears looked horrible across the board here, the defense played well in the first half, but that's about the only positive thing that can be said. Other than the blocked field goal even special teams stank.
The Bears are now 1 and 2 and Green Bay 3 and 0, and worse the Bears had a slew of defensive injuries.
The question now is how to star producing on offense in the short term?
Maybe that does require radical changes in the starting line up, I'm still in two minds on the Grossman thing, I still don't see Griese or Orton being long term solutions, but if your looking to change to try and jump start the offense maybe that's what's needed. I can't see what else you can do to radically change the line up. Maybe start Petersen at running back, swap around the wide receivers, but that's all pretty much cosmetic.
I really haven't liked the Bears play calling in the first few weeks either, it seems excessively conservative at times, leading to 3rd and long on a regular basis. I'm as big a fan of the running game as the next Bears fan, but with a few exceptions we haven't been successful in running on running downs. I don't know if that's Benson, the O-Line or just opposing defenses lack of respect for the Bears passing game.
Since were heading into 2 divisional games and the Bye week is still a ways off, something needs to happen, I'm still not sure replacing Grossman is the right decision longer term but in the short term, things might look desperate enough to give it a try.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Rex Grossman
OK so I'm English and I'm a Bears fan, started watching football when I still lived in the UK circa 1983 or so, and I've been a Bears fan ever since.
Given I live on the West coast Bears information has been limited to ESPN, the NFL site and the official Bears site. But recently I've been using the power of the Internet to read local Chicago news columns. I'm stunned at the amount of flak Grossman is taking.
Not that some criticism isn't warranted, but they seem to want to blame Chicago's offensive woes exclusively on Grossman. Sure he's making mistakes, but watching the games I'm just not seeing lots of open receivers for him to throw to, and I am seeing unblocked blitzers coming off the edge and levelling the guy. That's not all on Grossman.
Some of that probably comes from his past poor performances under pressure, defenses don't respect his ability to hurt them when they rush. And they are likely to keep sending the pass rush until the Bears offense starts to make it hurt.
Ignoring the stats for the moment, if anything this year Grossman looks improved, for the most part he has shown better awareness in the pocket, albeit he needs to show more. But the whole offense has just looked out of Sync.
I understand other Bear fans frustrations. We have a stellar defense, great special teams, a veteran offensive line so the consensus is we should be winning superbowls now. But what are you going to do at Quarterback if it's not Grossman?
It's not like the Bears have a lot of options at quarterback, I don't think Griese is the answer nor do I think Kyle Orton is. I'd rather ride out Grossmans inconsistencies to see if he does become something more in the short term. And I'm pretty sure Booing and pooh poohing him continuously in the press really doesn't improve his chances.
We could draft another quarter back and wait the 4 years or so for him to mature, but realistically Bears fans just don't have the patience for that. Our past attempts to pick up experienced veterans to manage the game at that position haven't exactly panned out either.
I think if the Bears are going to win a Superbowl this year or in the next 3 or 4 years, the difference is going to have to be a maturing Grossman and stability at quarter back. I really hope it can happen that way, because I think the alternative is a steadily aging team as the Bears rotate through quarterbacks as they have in the not too distant past.
OK so I'm English and I'm a Bears fan, started watching football when I still lived in the UK circa 1983 or so, and I've been a Bears fan ever since.
Given I live on the West coast Bears information has been limited to ESPN, the NFL site and the official Bears site. But recently I've been using the power of the Internet to read local Chicago news columns. I'm stunned at the amount of flak Grossman is taking.
Not that some criticism isn't warranted, but they seem to want to blame Chicago's offensive woes exclusively on Grossman. Sure he's making mistakes, but watching the games I'm just not seeing lots of open receivers for him to throw to, and I am seeing unblocked blitzers coming off the edge and levelling the guy. That's not all on Grossman.
Some of that probably comes from his past poor performances under pressure, defenses don't respect his ability to hurt them when they rush. And they are likely to keep sending the pass rush until the Bears offense starts to make it hurt.
Ignoring the stats for the moment, if anything this year Grossman looks improved, for the most part he has shown better awareness in the pocket, albeit he needs to show more. But the whole offense has just looked out of Sync.
I understand other Bear fans frustrations. We have a stellar defense, great special teams, a veteran offensive line so the consensus is we should be winning superbowls now. But what are you going to do at Quarterback if it's not Grossman?
It's not like the Bears have a lot of options at quarterback, I don't think Griese is the answer nor do I think Kyle Orton is. I'd rather ride out Grossmans inconsistencies to see if he does become something more in the short term. And I'm pretty sure Booing and pooh poohing him continuously in the press really doesn't improve his chances.
We could draft another quarter back and wait the 4 years or so for him to mature, but realistically Bears fans just don't have the patience for that. Our past attempts to pick up experienced veterans to manage the game at that position haven't exactly panned out either.
I think if the Bears are going to win a Superbowl this year or in the next 3 or 4 years, the difference is going to have to be a maturing Grossman and stability at quarter back. I really hope it can happen that way, because I think the alternative is a steadily aging team as the Bears rotate through quarterbacks as they have in the not too distant past.
Saturday, September 08, 2007
New Car
The lease on my Acura TL finally expired, not that I disliked the car, but it was deliberately conservative because of my somewhat excessive commute at the time I bought it. Having changed offices, reducing my commute to something more manageable I was looking forwards to going back to less practical vehicles.
Over the years I've owned a lot of impractical cars, among them an Fd RX7, a 3000GT-VR4, a Dodge Viper and an E46 M3. Of those the M3 was by far the most practical and the RX7 probably the least (at least the Viper had a usable trunk). Having said that if my RX7 had been reliable it might have been my favorite.
I've always loved the Z4, I'm not a big fan of Bangles design work at BMW, but the Z4 to me is the exception, the problem is that I really dislike convertibles. BMW finally released a coupe version, and M variants...... So there is now shiny new BMW Z4M Coupe sitting in my driveway. It's reminiscent of my FD RX7, the ride is brutal, and it feels smaller and lighter than it is, and there is no 3/4 or rear visibility to speak of. The engine sounds great, better than the E46 M3 which had the same engine, and I love the seats and the interior as a whole. I'm still trundling through the break in period on the engine, but even with the breakin imposed 5Krpm redline power is more than adequate.
Most reviewers prefer the 3.0 none M version of the coupe and I can see why that is. It's a lot more civil and has plenty of power for any on road use, but that's exactly why I love the M version.
The lease on my Acura TL finally expired, not that I disliked the car, but it was deliberately conservative because of my somewhat excessive commute at the time I bought it. Having changed offices, reducing my commute to something more manageable I was looking forwards to going back to less practical vehicles.
Over the years I've owned a lot of impractical cars, among them an Fd RX7, a 3000GT-VR4, a Dodge Viper and an E46 M3. Of those the M3 was by far the most practical and the RX7 probably the least (at least the Viper had a usable trunk). Having said that if my RX7 had been reliable it might have been my favorite.
I've always loved the Z4, I'm not a big fan of Bangles design work at BMW, but the Z4 to me is the exception, the problem is that I really dislike convertibles. BMW finally released a coupe version, and M variants...... So there is now shiny new BMW Z4M Coupe sitting in my driveway. It's reminiscent of my FD RX7, the ride is brutal, and it feels smaller and lighter than it is, and there is no 3/4 or rear visibility to speak of. The engine sounds great, better than the E46 M3 which had the same engine, and I love the seats and the interior as a whole. I'm still trundling through the break in period on the engine, but even with the breakin imposed 5Krpm redline power is more than adequate.
Most reviewers prefer the 3.0 none M version of the coupe and I can see why that is. It's a lot more civil and has plenty of power for any on road use, but that's exactly why I love the M version.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)