NFL Week 3 Thread

themont85

spiralism wrote: »

Thats debatable that the bears deserved to win tbf, pack had a blocked fg and 2 INTs on the game winning drive wiped out due to stupid penalties (of which there were 200 yards).... yet, despite a 200 yard handicap and repeated shooting of themselves in the foot, packers only lost to a last second fg, it's still clear as day who the team to beat in the NFC north is

So let me get this straight you are saying that they deserved to win because of a blocked FG. As I already said the Bears themselves left 10 points out there. But a blocked FG? That was an enforced error because of the brilliance of Peppers, this isn't a dropped catch or a shanked kick, it was a brilliant bit of play.

As for the two INTs wiped out, they should have been. Bennett was been wrestled and had no chance to compete for what was a poor throw and with Cutler it was a clear illegal hit.

The Pack may well beat them in Lambeau but the teams are very close to one another sorry despite what Pack fans and the media are saying. As Trent Dilfer said-the holding calls will not go away. Against elite pass rushers like Peppers they will go on. They can't run the ball either. That will prohibit them going forward.

Both those teams may well be top 3 in the NFC but they lag behind the Steelers and Colts as of now.

me-skywalker

themont85 wrote: »

The Pack may well beat them in Lambeau but the teams are very close to one another sorry despite what Pack fans and the media are saying. As Trent Dilfer said-the holding calls will not go away. Against elite pass rushers like Peppers they will go on. They can't run the ball either. That will prohibit them going forward.

Both those teams may well be top 3 in the NFC but they lag behind the Steelers and Colts as of now.

I dont think they are as close as that scoreline shows. An accuarate reflection of hwo clso e they are will be by with time and patience. I dont think its possible for the Packers to ever ahve such a mistake ridden game like that again and some of the calls where just unluck. Once a few penalties were given the ref's just decided to see mountains in molehills.

Agreed that the Steelers and Colts are way ahead of the Pack but there is plenty of season left to address the problems and try iron out the niggles.

Meanwhile Rodgers still looks very very good.

themont85

Holding, intentional grounding and pass interference aren't mistakes, they are done purposely to avoid sacks and touchdowns. That's why the Packers did them. There is a misconception that holding is a mistake and that it wipes big gains and TDs out needlessly. We heard the same when the Cowboy had a TD wiped with no time left versus the 'Skins, but if you look at it, there is no way Romo had the time in and out of the pocket to pass the ball. He held onto it with good coverage downfield and could wait for a guy to get open because of the holds. O linemen sometimes get beef for holding when the truth is the QB is holding onto it for too long and the wide outs aren't getting open.

The Bears destroyed the Packers on special teams and STs is an integral part of the game. Too many people discount it.

cooker3

Oatesy23 wrote: »

I'll take Cutler before Cade McNown, Rex Grossman, Kyle Orton, Brian Griese etc... His positives outweigh the negatives by far. Do you think any of the QB's I listed above could make some of those throws that Cutler did last night?. The guy is a warrior. He got smacked in the head, gets up and still shows no fear slinging the ball around the field going 3/4 on the rest of the drive.

Oh he is the best QB you have had in a while but I am comparing him to the best in the NFL. At the moment there are around 9 or 10 QB's I would have ahead of Cutler. Some of them he maybe more talented than but his inconsistency will cost you long term unless he learns to cut them out.
As for being a warrior, yeah he is but I think that's a way over-rated attribute. Give me a Brady or Manning who just get rid of the ball quicker over a "warrior" any day of the week.
Before you say it I agree Rodgers does commit similar mistakes but much less than he did. Cutler has been playing in NFL longer, he should be ahead of him in development and he isn't.

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Bears offense doesn't do as well against a great defense, que shock..

Like I said I thought you were having success with the run early on. You should stuck with it imo.
I also don't fancy us at CB. I think we are are liable to a deep threat which you never really offered. I fear what Brady and Moss will do with us..

Oatesy23 wrote: »

This is our biggest problem, the slants and anything underneath was always there because we NEVER EVER press the WR's.

Yeah, we caught you out a lot between the lines.

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Don't get it twisted. Rodgers was never hit because your line held on most plays. Peppers would have had 2+ sacks easily if they didn't. It depends which way you want to look at it, you can praise Rodgers for making a play and blame the line for holding or you can be honest and say if they didn't hold Rodgers wouldn't have made some of those plays.

You wont because you don't play a DE like Peppers every week.

We didn't hold on most plays. While we gave away some holding penalties at bad times for the most part we were in control. Peppers deserves praise, without a doubt, but in the return fixture if we give away even half the amount of penalties that we did last night than I will be very surprised. Last night was a freak match, in that sense, imo

Oatesy23 wrote: »

No shocks here, it doesn't change anything. The divison is still the Packers to lose.

Nobody is saying we are a great football team(other than the team, of course) but we have won our 3 games so far. Cutler could throw a bomb to Knox or could die on a play, that's the way the team is. Only thing for certain on this team is that Lance Briggs and Brian Urlacher have a serious chance of going back to the pro bowl and playing beside each other.

What I think is hilarious is the amount of Packer fans on other forums I use who keep saying ''we dominated in every stat and you were lucky''. These are the same people who 2 weeks ago were saying to us ''stats don't matter if you don't win'' mid way through the Lions game. Some people need to get their head out of their ass, fact is the Packers f**ked up.

I generally agree. We did mess up badly but 99 times out of 100 we don't screw up as many times as we did. Despite all penalties and mistakes with 4 minutes to go we are looking good for a win.
The problems we had last night are easier to resolve than the problems you have. You can't keep relying on winning games the way you did last night.

tallaghtoutlaws

themont85 wrote: »

Holding, intentional grounding and pass interference aren't mistakes, they are done purposely to avoid sacks and touchdowns. That's why the Packers did them. There is a misconception that holding is a mistake and that it wipes big gains and TDs out needlessly. We heard the same when the Cowboy had a TD wiped with no time left versus the 'Skins, but if you look at it, there is no way Romo had the time in and out of the pocket to pass the ball. He held onto it with good coverage downfield and could wait for a guy to get open because of the holds. O linemen sometimes get beef for holding when the truth is the QB is holding onto it for too long and the wide outs aren't getting open.

The Bears destroyed the Packers on special teams and STs is an integral part of the game. Too many people discount it.

This exactly. Some of the greatest linemen if you had a camera on them all game you would see they mastered holding and rarely got caught. You will hear Linemen coaches tell their players if you get caught holding you are bad at it or doing it wrong.

cooker3

themont85 wrote: »

Holding, intentional grounding and pass interference aren't mistakes, they are done purposely to avoid sacks and touchdowns. That's why the Packers did them. There is a misconception that holding is a mistake and that it wipes big gains and TDs out needlessly. We heard the same when the Cowboy had a TD wiped with no time left versus the 'Skins, but if you look at it, there is no way Romo had the time in and out of the pocket to pass the ball. He held onto it with good coverage downfield and could wait for a guy to get open because of the holds. O linemen sometimes get beef for holding when the truth is the QB is holding onto it for too long and the wide outs aren't getting open.

The Bears destroyed the Packers on special teams and STs is an integral part of the game. Too many people discount it.

Kicking the ball out of play from kick-off, doing a retarded late spear tackle. Going head first into the QB, illegal start formations, delay of games are all mistakes of our all making and nothing to do with the Bears.
They were the majority of our penalties. Without them we win the game.

I totally agree about special teams though. They crushed us there.

themont85

cooker3 wrote: »

Kicking the ball out of play from kick-off, doing a retarded late spear tackle. Going head first into the QB, illegal start formations, delay of games are all mistakes of our all making and nothing to do with the Bears.
They were the majority of our penalties. Without them we win the game.

I totally agree about special teams though. They crushed us there.

The Bears had a penalty for going head into the QB and iirc a couple of false starts too. The spear tackle and kicking it out on the kick off were bad but didn't lose the game. Those are mistakes, just like Clark droping a TD or Gould missing a FG which is very kickable by his calibre. The truth is the Bears made more plays than the Packers. The Bears dominated on Special Teams and that won the game, both offences weren't great but played 2 top defences who contrast in style. The Packers got short gains because the Bears defend deep downfield and look to extend drives which is unusual. The Bears got a couple of big plays because the Packers are more aggresive but ultimately couldn't punch it in.

As for the two Qbs. I do prefer Rodgers, he is unreal in the red zone. But both have pros and cons, AR holds onto the ball too long, he is a great player though. Cutler is clutch, that pass to Olsen was amazing given the pressure. He is awful though in the red zone and won't be top tier until he irons that out (if he can).

Cutler has been a starter for longer but Rodgers has been in the league longer and crucially in the same system. We heard it yesterday from the comms, whilst this was just his 5th Bear game, he has prepared for them 11 times now. Cutler is in his 3rd offensive system since arriving in the League.

cooker3

themont85 wrote: »

The Bears had a penalty for going head into the QB and iirc a couple of false starts too. The spear tackle and kicking it out on the kick off were bad but didn't lose the game. Those are mistakes, just like Clark droping a TD or Gould missing a FG which is very kickable by his calibre. The truth is the Bears made more plays than the Packers. The Bears dominated on Special Teams and that won the game, both offences weren't great but played 2 top defences who contrast in style. The Packers got short gains because the Bears defend deep downfield and look to extend drives which is unusual. The Bears got a couple of big plays because the Packers are more aggresive but ultimately couldn't punch it in.

As for the two Qbs. I do prefer Rodgers, he is unreal in the red zone. But both have pros and cons, AR holds onto the ball too long, he is a great player though. Cutler is clutch, that pass to Olsen was amazing given the pressure. He is awful though in the red zone and won't be top tier until he irons that out (if he can).

Cutler has been a starter for longer but Rodgers has been in the league longer and crucially in the same system. We heard it yesterday from the comms, whilst this was just his 5th Bear game, he has prepared for them 11 times now. Cutler is in his 3rd offensive system since arriving in the League.

Yeah the Bears made some mistakes but what you seemed to be suggesting above is the Bears won the game because they forced us into all or most of our mistakes. On that I disagree. No doubt they contributed to some of our errors and penalties but the majority of them are of our on doing and totally self inflicted. If we don't commit them we win the game imo. I look at this game as 1 we lost more than the Bears won.
Hell if Jones holds the ball properly I think we win the game although I don't want to take away from the awesome play of Urlacher there.

As for Cutler, if he was good enough then he would have stayed under the same system as he would have never been traded to begin with. He does make some excellent throws and has the talent but he doesn't do it enough imo. I think he is capable of being a true elite QB but whether he can do it is something I really question.

cooker3

Oatesy23 wrote: »

Poor Devin Aromashodou, he's in the famous Lovie doghouse. Many a player got caught in there and never returned. Had high hopes for him .

Tommie Harris dropped too...finally..

What happened with Aromashodou?
I had him in my fantasy team week 1 and he delivered a pretty healthy points tally. I would have thought the Bears need all the wr talent they can get as it's something they are lacking in.

themont85

cooker3 wrote: »

Yeah the Bears made some mistakes but what you seemed to be suggesting above is the Bears won the game because they forced us into all or most of our mistakes. On that I disagree. No doubt they contributed to some of our errors and penalties but the majority of them are of our on doing and totally self inflicted. If we don't commit them we win the game imo. I look at this game as 1 we lost more than the Bears won.
Hell if Jones holds the ball properly I think we win the game although I don't want to take away from the awesome play of Urlacher there.

As for Cutler, if he was good enough then he would have stayed under the same system as he would have never been traded to begin with. He does make some excellent throws and has the talent but he doesn't do it enough imo. I think he is capable of being a true elite QB but whether he can do it is something I really question.

Shanahan was fired and McDaniels was in, there was no way the system remains the same.

As I said above; holding, intentional grounding, pass interference and some false starts (obviousely some are due to crowd noise, the ones on the goal line was due to pressure from the Bears line) aren't mistakes and as for the actual 'mistakes', the Bears can point to some of their own too-dropping TD catch, an Int and a missed field goal. The Bears made more plays fact, blocked FG, forcing a fumble and scoring more points. The Packers didn't make enough plays.

davyjose

I'm getting a pain in my hole with the Packers, tbh. I've been off-line for the past few days, but a quick scan of the last few threads and it's all excuses. All summer long we're hearing about how great Green Bay are, how they've topped the "experts" rankings, and are almost unanimous picks for the super bowl. I'm still unconvinced.

Green Bay have been OK so far this season. But they have in no way seperated themselves from the (ahem...) pack. The NFL season is too short to make allowances for form. They may yet win it all, but right now, they are NOT the best team in the NFC North -- credit where it's due; that team is Chicago.

I think a lot of people read too much into their flawless preseason performances too. Preseason means nothing, lads: some teams try, some teams don't.

davyjose

cooker3 wrote: »

Yeah the Bears made some mistakes but what you seemed to be suggesting above is the Bears won the game because they forced us into all or most of our mistakes. On that I disagree. No doubt they contributed to some of our errors and penalties but the majority of them are of our on doing and totally self inflicted. If we don't commit them we win the game imo. I look at this game as 1 we lost more than the Bears won.
Hell if Jones holds the ball properly I think we win the game although I don't want to take away from the awesome play of Urlacher there.

As for Cutler, if he was good enough then he would have stayed under the same system as he would have never been traded to begin with. He does make some excellent throws and has the talent but he doesn't do it enough imo. I think he is capable of being a true elite QB but whether he can do it is something I really question.

Two questions: if green Bay threw it away rather than being beaten, is that not a more frightening prospect? For me that would suggest some serious flaws still haven't been Ironed out. Being the second best team is no shame; being the best team, and incapable of winning, is very problematic.

Second Question: are you even remotely aware of the circumstances under which cutler was traded? Cutler doesn't have the luxury of stepping into an elite Offense like Rodgers did.

cooker3

themont85 wrote: »

Shanahan was fired and McDaniels was in, there was no way the system remains the same.

As I said above; holding, intentional grounding, pass interference and some false starts (obviousely some are due to crowd noise, the ones on the goal line was due to pressure from the Bears line) aren't mistakes and as for the actual 'mistakes', the Bears can point to some of their own too-dropping TD catch, an Int and a missed field goal. The Bears made more plays fact, blocked FG, forcing a fumble and scoring more points. The Packers didn't make enough plays.

Small points, false start is a mistake. This mistake on the goal-line don't bother me at all; there is no incentive not to try and react as quick as you can there as we can't actually lose yardage so it's worth committing false start penalties if you can nail it.

I think we are going in circles now. I think we just fundamentally weight the respective mistakes differently. I weight our self inflicted mistakes higher and think they cost us the game. You weight the mistakes the Bears induced more and think they cost us the game.

themont85

cooker3 wrote: »

Small points, false start is a mistake. This mistake on the goal-line don't bother me at all; there is no incentive not to try and react as quick as you can there as we can't actually lose yardage so it's worth committing false start penalties if you can nail it.

I think we are going in circles now. I think we just fundamentally weight the respective mistakes differently. I weight our self inflicted mistakes higher and think they cost us the game. You weight the mistakes the Bears induced more and think they cost us the game.

There is an incentive, you want to get a head start on the DE. It wasn't a conscious one obviousely but the anticipation of the pressure causes a lot of it, what was there, 3 penalties in that sequence.

We're going in circles alright but they weren't 'mistakes'. They were induced flags. As for actual mistakes I just believe both made a similar number.

themont85

cooker3 wrote: »

What happened with Aromashodou?
I had him in my fantasy team week 1 and he delivered a pretty healthy points tally. I would have thought the Bears need all the wr talent they can get as it's something they are lacking in.

Read somewhere that Cutler, Martz and Co weren't pleased with some of what he said on the sideline. Basically implied that he wimped out of catches over the middle where you want your receiver to make plays. Probably internet BS though.

eagle eye

themont85 wrote: »

Read somewhere that Cutler, Martz and Co weren't pleased with some of what he said on the sideline. Basically implied that he wimped out of catches over the middle where you want your receiver to make plays. Probably internet BS though.

I remember reading yesterday that he said he doesn't want to play the slot and he dropped a couple of passes. The wimping out was never mentioned.

If you tell your head coach that you don't want to play the slot then you are in the doghouse and thats not only in Chicago. And especially after you just dropped a couple of balls.

FreeOSCAR

How do people rate the Chiefs chances of reaching the playoffs?

Dohnny Jepp

FreeOSCAR wrote: »

How do people rate the Chiefs chances of reaching the playoffs?

I love the chiefs, always have. I also love what they did in the offseason with the coachs.

However, I'd be surprised if they do make the playoffs. I'd love them to, but I tihnk they'll run out of steam.

It'll be interesting to see how they do against some of the better teams, even though they played san diego in their opneing game, san deigo have shown themselves to be mehtastic

Hulk Hands

spiralism wrote: »

Thats debatable that the bears deserved to win tbf, pack had a blocked fg and 2 INTs on the game winning drive wiped out due to stupid penalties (of which there were 200 yards).... yet, despite a 200 yard handicap and repeated shooting of themselves in the foot, packers only lost to a last second fg, it's still clear as day who the team to beat in the NFC north is

Yep spot on, once the Vikings get their WR situation sorted out during the bye week you will see something close to the team that dominated the division last year

Oat23

Hulk Hands wrote: »

Yep spot on, once the Vikings get their WR situation sorted out during the bye week you will see something close to the team that dominated the division last year

40 million dollar Bernard not getting it done? What a shame. Still hasn't had a 1000 yard season either.

Our front office did something right there telling him where to go when he asked for $40m.

Prefab Sprouter

FreeOSCAR wrote: »

How do people rate the Chiefs chances of reaching the playoffs?

Its a weak division, probably the weakest in the NFL. And they already have beaten San Diego. I'm hoping they'll be runing out of steam by the time the Raiders play 'em!!

But joking aside, I wont be surprised to see em in the playoffs and fair play to them if so.

spiralism

Prefab Sprouter wrote: »

Its a weak division, probably the weakest in the NFL. And they already have beaten San Diego. I'm hoping they'll be runing out of steam by the time the Raiders play 'em!!

But joking aside, I wont be surprised to see em in the playoffs and fair play to them if so.

NFC West is the weakest, by a mile, Seattle will probably win that now and we tonked them the sunday before last, says it all..

Actually think Oakland will break the losing streak to SD in the Black Hole in week 5, and i hope they do tbh, lesser of two evils and all that.

theres just something a bit... off about the Chargers this year... they've looked bad at the start every year up to now but I have a sneaking suspicion this year that they might not get away with it as easily this time, don't ask me why

KC have a bit of a look of last years Broncos to me tbh, i dont know how well this will hold out for them... however, this season is almost certainly going to end as a huge improvement for them, whatever way you look at it..

Actually have the feeling that KC will do the same thing as my Broncos did last year and collapse after building an early divisional lead, while SD have their traditional late season revival...but this time along with Denver, who go toe to toe with the Chargers in the Final weeks of the reg. season. Call it a hunch...