It is currently Sun Nov 24, 2024 8:26 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 266 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:34 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38330
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Hussra wrote:
Brick wrote:
This is the most troubling Fields game though. They let him throw and he was a turnover machine.



why is Fields passing so much?


He has a separated shoulder and he was playing against the Packers.

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:39 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Bears defense has given up more than 3 points in the 4th quarter twice outside of today. One of those times came when the Bears offense turned the ball over and Washington needed less than 5 yards to score a touchdown. They've given up 3 points twice. The rest are 0's.

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8& ... IkE6Kxt83i


How MANY teams has the Bears Defense shut down this season?


Now you're moving the goal post by a mile.


For as much as the focus seems to be on Fields game after game, it seems evident that the Bears Defense sucks ass. And some of the reason that teams may not have scored in the 4th is because they had huge leads and didn't have to. In at least 2 games that I can think of the Bears win if the Defense simply holds the opposing team.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:45 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Bears defense has given up more than 3 points in the 4th quarter twice outside of today. One of those times came when the Bears offense turned the ball over and Washington needed less than 5 yards to score a touchdown. They've given up 3 points twice. The rest are 0's.

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8& ... IkE6Kxt83i


How MANY teams has the Bears Defense shut down this season?


Now you're moving the goal post by a mile.


For as much as the focus seems to be on Fields game after game, it seems evident that the Bears Defense sucks ass. And some of the reason that teams may not have scored in the 4th is because they had huge leads and didn't have to. In at least 2 games that I can think of the Bears win if the Defense simply holds the opposing team.


This tells me you haven't watched many Bears games this season. They've been in every game except for the Jets game. If you want to argue they weren't in the Cowboys game, I won't push back. Outside of that, the offense had a chance to win EVERY game in the 4th.

It's okay to want Fields to get better.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 4:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Bears defense has given up more than 3 points in the 4th quarter twice outside of today. One of those times came when the Bears offense turned the ball over and Washington needed less than 5 yards to score a touchdown. They've given up 3 points twice. The rest are 0's.

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8& ... IkE6Kxt83i


How MANY teams has the Bears Defense shut down this season?


Now you're moving the goal post by a mile.


For as much as the focus seems to be on Fields game after game, it seems evident that the Bears Defense sucks ass. And some of the reason that teams may not have scored in the 4th is because they had huge leads and didn't have to. In at least 2 games that I can think of the Bears win if the Defense simply holds the opposing team.


We know losing games isn't always on Fields. People want to see Fields progress as a QB independent of wins and losses. No one can elevate this roster into a respectable team, P Manning included.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:18 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
veganfan21 wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Bears defense has given up more than 3 points in the 4th quarter twice outside of today. One of those times came when the Bears offense turned the ball over and Washington needed less than 5 yards to score a touchdown. They've given up 3 points twice. The rest are 0's.

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8& ... IkE6Kxt83i


How MANY teams has the Bears Defense shut down this season?


Now you're moving the goal post by a mile.


For as much as the focus seems to be on Fields game after game, it seems evident that the Bears Defense sucks ass. And some of the reason that teams may not have scored in the 4th is because they had huge leads and didn't have to. In at least 2 games that I can think of the Bears win if the Defense simply holds the opposing team.


We know losing games isn't always on Fields. People want to see Fields progress as a QB independent of wins and losses
By most people accounts he has though. He has transformed himself into a legitimate NFL Quarterback right before our eyes and currently he really is the ONLY reason to watch the team.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Last edited by The Missing Link on Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Bears defense has given up more than 3 points in the 4th quarter twice outside of today. One of those times came when the Bears offense turned the ball over and Washington needed less than 5 yards to score a touchdown. They've given up 3 points twice. The rest are 0's.

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8& ... IkE6Kxt83i


How MANY teams has the Bears Defense shut down this season?


Now you're moving the goal post by a mile.


For as much as the focus seems to be on Fields game after game, it seems evident that the Bears Defense sucks ass. And some of the reason that teams may not have scored in the 4th is because they had huge leads and didn't have to. In at least 2 games that I can think of the Bears win if the Defense simply holds the opposing team.


This tells me you haven't watched many Bears games this season. They've been in every game except for the Jets game. If you want to argue they weren't in the Cowboys game, I won't push back. Outside of that, the offense had a chance to win EVERY game in the 4th.

It's okay to want Fields to get better.


The Bears defense is currently 27th in number of points allowed. In anyone's world that would be a terrible defense.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:25 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Bears defense has given up more than 3 points in the 4th quarter twice outside of today. One of those times came when the Bears offense turned the ball over and Washington needed less than 5 yards to score a touchdown. They've given up 3 points twice. The rest are 0's.

https://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8& ... IkE6Kxt83i


How MANY teams has the Bears Defense shut down this season?


Now you're moving the goal post by a mile.


For as much as the focus seems to be on Fields game after game, it seems evident that the Bears Defense sucks ass. And some of the reason that teams may not have scored in the 4th is because they had huge leads and didn't have to. In at least 2 games that I can think of the Bears win if the Defense simply holds the opposing team.


This tells me you haven't watched many Bears games this season. They've been in every game except for the Jets game. If you want to argue they weren't in the Cowboys game, I won't push back. Outside of that, the offense had a chance to win EVERY game in the 4th.

It's okay to want Fields to get better.


The Bears defense is currently 27th in number of points allowed. In anyone's world that would be a terrible defense.


Again, you're moving the goal post by a mile. You were wrong about the defense sucking in the 4th quarter, and you were wrong about the Bears not being in games in the 4th.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:31 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


He was objectively extremely bad this year before the Bears incorporated designed runs for the Pats game. I won't look it up but for year two QBs his stats at that time were in line with really bad QBs of years gone by. He's shown he is an elite runner at the QB position. Possibly the best in the league. That's solid. Now he has to show he's anything but an average passer. There's room for growth on the latter.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Last edited by veganfan21 on Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 9:17 pm
Posts: 8011
pizza_Place: Rosati's
Nas wrote:
Hussra wrote:
Brick wrote:
This is the most troubling Fields game though. They let him throw and he was a turnover machine.



why is Fields passing so much? 10 to 12 passes a game, max. Keep the defense somewhat honest. Otherwise run, run run and run again and again.


Overall, I thought he was better passing today. He was still late and inaccurate at times, but he made a few elite throws. I also thought the offensive line gave him time to pass.


Which is why it’s still too early for anyone to think that he sucks. He has a cannon for an arm, which was on display a couple of times today. If he can work on his accuracy and decision-making a bit and progress next season, with some O-line help I think he’ll be fine next season.

_________________
Not a mult.


Last edited by Minooka Meatball on Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:37 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
Again, you're moving the goal post by a mile. You were wrong about the defense sucking in the 4th quarter, and you were wrong about the Bears not being in games in the 4th.


The Bears defense is 27th in points allowed and has cost them at least 2 games in the 4th quarter.
And as far as "goalposts being moved" goes, it's obvious that the goalposts on Fields have been moved from "bust" let's draft a QB next year to must be a bust because he hasn't thrown a game winning touchdown to bailout our sorry ass defense yet.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:43 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


It is my argument. It's what I've been focused on. I believe I've been fair.

He was a bust. He couldn't pass the ball, and he wasn't running until after the Washington game. He still struggles passing the ball, but he's arguably the best running quarterback in the NFL. You can work with that. IMO, Fields becoming an above average passer puts him in the tier with Mahomes, Burrow, Allen.

I don't care what some borderline NFL player is doing on defense. I care what Fields does. The Bears need him to be a top 10 quarterback if they're going to consistently win in the future. I'm going to critique his game far more than I'm going to critique the game of Travis Gibson.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:44 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
veganfan21 wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


He was objectively extremely bad this year before the Bears incorporated designed runs for the Pats game. I won't look it up but for year two QBs his stats at that time were in line with really bad QBs of years gone by. He's shown he is an elite runner at the QB position. Possibly the best in the league. That's solid. Now he has to show he's anything but an average passer. There's room for growth on the latter.


They incorporated an offense which plays to his strengths and once they did he began to play much better. While I don't like all of the running either, it's great that he does have it in his bag of tricks. Particularly given the Bears offensive line.

He does have to become a better pocket oasser but you really won't know what type of pocket passer that he is until he is allowed to comfortably throw from the picket on a regular. You also will not know until he gets a better set of receivers as well. Right I'm comfortable with where he is as a QB and believe that they are on the right track for believing in him.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:46 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
Again, you're moving the goal post by a mile. You were wrong about the defense sucking in the 4th quarter, and you were wrong about the Bears not being in games in the 4th.


The Bears defense is 27th in points allowed and has cost them at least 2 games in the 4th quarter.
And as far as "goalposts being moved" goes, it's obvious that the goalposts on Fields have been moved from "bust" let's draft a QB next year to must be a bust because he hasn't thrown a game winning touchdown to bailout our sorry ass defense yet.


Literally no one is saying this. You were wrong about the defense. It happens. Move on. It's a bad look to continue flailing and trying to justify your moving of the goal posts.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:48 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
Minooka Meatball wrote:
Nas wrote:
Hussra wrote:
Brick wrote:
This is the most troubling Fields game though. They let him throw and he was a turnover machine.



why is Fields passing so much? 10 to 12 passes a game, max. Keep the defense somewhat honest. Otherwise run, run run and run again and again.


Overall, I thought he was better passing today. He was still late and inaccurate at times, but he made a few elite throws. I also thought the offensive line gave him time to pass.


Which is why it’s still too early for anyone to think that he sucks. He has a cannon for an arm, which was on display a couple of times today. If he can work on his accuracy and decision-making a bit and progress next season, with some O-line help I think he’ll be fine next season.


I agree. With his elite running ability, we're talking about a top 5 quarterback IF he can make these improvements.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


It is my argument. It's what I've been focused on. I believe I've been fair.

He was a bust. He couldn't pass the ball, and he wasn't running until after the Washington game..


Somehow and rather majestically, he stopped being considered a "bust" the second the OC and Head Coach incorporated a system which played to his strengths. As most football gurus predicted that he would.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:56 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


It is my argument. It's what I've been focused on. I believe I've been fair.

He was a bust. He couldn't pass the ball, and he wasn't running until after the Washington game..


Somehow and rather majestically, he stopped being considered a "bust" the second the OC and Head Coach incorporated a system which played to his strengths. As most football gurus predicted that he would.


That's fair. The next step in his growth is passing.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 5:59 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
Again, you're moving the goal post by a mile. You were wrong about the defense sucking in the 4th quarter, and you were wrong about the Bears not being in games in the 4th.


The Bears defense is 27th in points allowed and has cost them at least 2 games in the 4th quarter.
And as far as "goalposts being moved" goes, it's obvious that the goalposts on Fields have been moved from "bust" let's draft a QB next year to must be a bust because he hasn't thrown a game winning touchdown to bailout our sorry ass defense yet.


Literally no one is saying this. You were wrong about the defense. It happens. Move on. It's a bad look to continue flailing and trying to justify your moving of the goal posts.


Wrong about what? Them sucking? They do suck and they have blown 4th Quarter leads. You can quibble about the number that they havep blown if you like.

I'm not at this point. When I look at the problems on this team, I'd have to search far and wide before I ever get to Justin Fields,. This yet week after week the argument seemingly is about Justin Fields and his lack of "development". Even as it is obvious to anyone other than those that never liked him in the first place, that he is "developing"

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Last edited by The Missing Link on Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:01 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2015 1:15 pm
Posts: 41377
Location: Small Fringe Minority
pizza_Place: John's
The problem is coaching. The Bears have one of the worst coaching staffs in football

They are becoming experts in Eberlosing


Last edited by Caller Bob on Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:02 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


It is my argument. It's what I've been focused on. I believe I've been fair.

He was a bust. He couldn't pass the ball, and he wasn't running until after the Washington game..


Somehow and rather majestically, he stopped being considered a "bust" the second the OC and Head Coach incorporated a system which played to his strengths. As most football gurus predicted that he would.


That's fair. The next step in his growth is passing.


At some point today he was 20-24 passing the football. Seems like "growth" is already taking place.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 20, 2013 3:50 pm
Posts: 16078
pizza_Place: Malnati's
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
Again, you're moving the goal post by a mile. You were wrong about the defense sucking in the 4th quarter, and you were wrong about the Bears not being in games in the 4th.


The Bears defense is 27th in points allowed and has cost them at least 2 games in the 4th quarter.
And as far as "goalposts being moved" goes, it's obvious that the goalposts on Fields have been moved from "bust" let's draft a QB next year to must be a bust because he hasn't thrown a game winning touchdown to bailout our sorry ass defense yet.


Literally no one is saying this. You were wrong about the defense. It happens. Move on. It's a bad look to continue flailing and trying to justify your moving of the goal posts.


Wrong about what? Them sucking? They do suck and they have blown 4th Quarter leads. You can quibble about the number that they blown if you like.

I'm not at this point. When I look at the problems on this team, I'd have to search far and wide before I ever get to Justin Fields,. This yet week after week the argument seemingly is about Justin Fields and his lack of "development". Even as it is obvious to anyone other than those that never liked him that he is "developing"


Like Nas said, there's very little to care about outside of Fields. The season is gone - the focus is on 2023, not 2022. Think of the Cavs in 2003 - no one cares about if Larry Hughes is playing D or not, or if Donyell Marshall has anything left in the tank, etc. The focus was all on James and his development.

_________________
Successful calls:

Kyrie Irving will never win anything as a team's alpha: check
T.rubisky is a bust: check
Ben Simmons is a liability: check
The Fields Cult is dumb: double check

2013 CSFMB ROY


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
veganfan21 wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
Again, you're moving the goal post by a mile. You were wrong about the defense sucking in the 4th quarter, and you were wrong about the Bears not being in games in the 4th.


The Bears defense is 27th in points allowed and has cost them at least 2 games in the 4th quarter.
And as far as "goalposts being moved" goes, it's obvious that the goalposts on Fields have been moved from "bust" let's draft a QB next year to must be a bust because he hasn't thrown a game winning touchdown to bailout our sorry ass defense yet.


Literally no one is saying this. You were wrong about the defense. It happens. Move on. It's a bad look to continue flailing and trying to justify your moving of the goal posts.


Wrong about what? Them sucking? They do suck and they have blown 4th Quarter leads. You can quibble about the number that they blown if you like.

I'm not at this point. When I look at the problems on this team, I'd have to search far and wide before I ever get to Justin Fields,. This yet week after week the argument seemingly is about Justin Fields and his lack of "development". Even as it is obvious to anyone other than those that never liked him that he is "developing"


Like Nas said, there's very little to care about outside of Fields. The season is gone - the focus is on 2023, not 2022. Think of the Cavs in 2003 - no one cares about if Larry Hughes is playing D or not, or if Donyell Marshall has anything left in the tank, etc. The focus was all on James and his development.

Like I'm saying the drumbeat each and every week seems to be that the worry and not necessarily "care" is about Justin Fields. There isn't much to worry about with him at this point imo

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:12 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
Eberflus and Fields both strongly implied that St. Brown was to blame for the first interception.

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:45 am
Posts: 16823
pizza_Place: Salerno's


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:16 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


It is my argument. It's what I've been focused on. I believe I've been fair.

He was a bust. He couldn't pass the ball, and he wasn't running until after the Washington game..


Somehow and rather majestically, he stopped being considered a "bust" the second the OC and Head Coach incorporated a system which played to his strengths. As most football gurus predicted that he would.


That's fair. The next step in his growth is passing.


At some point today he was 20-24 passing the football. Seems like "growth" is already taking place.


I acknowledged that he looked better today. He still had the same accuracy and gun shy problems. If you want to call one mediocre passing game growth, you can.

If he throws 20 interceptions, but he trusts what he's seeing, and he's throwing with anticipation, I'll be thrilled. There are some mechanical issues, but his biggest problem is in his head. He doesn't trust his eyes.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 92044
Location: To the left of my post
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
[
It's okay to want Fields to get better.


But this really isn't your argument is it? Just Asking A Question. Or mine for that matter. I'm not saying that you can get his Hall of Fame bust ready right now or that he is a Pro Bowler (moment of silence for that game I believe) but what I am saying is that the kid isn't a bust either. Which is what MANY, including you seemingly were arguing in the beginning of the season. He is obviously a keeper at this point contrary to what I read on here week after week.


It is my argument. It's what I've been focused on. I believe I've been fair.

He was a bust. He couldn't pass the ball, and he wasn't running until after the Washington game..


Somehow and rather majestically, he stopped being considered a "bust" the second the OC and Head Coach incorporated a system which played to his strengths. As most football gurus predicted that he would.


That's fair. The next step in his growth is passing.


At some point today he was 20-24 passing the football. Seems like "growth" is already taking place.

The whole game counts though.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Nas wrote:
I acknowledged that he looked better today. He still had the same accuracy and gun shy problems. If you want to call one mediocre passing game growth, you can.

If he throws 20 interceptions, but he trusts what he's seeing, and he's throwing with anticipation, I'll be thrilled. There are some mechanical issues, but his biggest problem is in his head. He doesn't trust his eyes.


Who's "moving the goalposts" now? He hardly played a "mediocre" game unless you had bias against him in the first place. It's OK to say the kid played or has been playing well by the way.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Last edited by The Missing Link on Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:25 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2021 5:29 am
Posts: 15235
pizza_Place: Eduardo's
Brick wrote:
The whole game counts though.


But obviously him going 20-24 does not apparently.

_________________
pittmike wrote:
Technically I was drunk (big surprise) and asked her if she liked a tongue up her ass.


Frank Coztansa wrote:
Again, your comprehension needs work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:28 pm 
Offline
100000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 8:06 pm
Posts: 81466
pizza_Place: 773-684-2222
The Missing Link wrote:
Nas wrote:
I acknowledged that he looked better today. He still had the same accuracy and gun shy problems. If you want to call one mediocre passing game growth, you can.

If he throws 20 interceptions, but he trusts what he's seeing, and he's throwing with anticipation, I'll be thrilled. There are some mechanical issues, but his biggest problem is in his head. He doesn't trust his eyes.


Who's "moving the goalposts" now? He hardly played a "mediocre" game unless you had bias against him the first place. It's OK to say the kid played or has been playing well by the way.



You should make an effort to read my posts. I didn't move a goal post.

Minooka Meatball wrote:
Nas wrote:
Hussra wrote:
Brick wrote:
This is the most troubling Fields game though. They let him throw and he was a turnover machine.



why is Fields passing so much? 10 to 12 passes a game, max. Keep the defense somewhat honest. Otherwise run, run run and run again and again.


Overall, I thought he was better passing today. He was still late and inaccurate at times, but he made a few elite throws. I also thought the offensive line gave him time to pass.


Which is why it’s still too early for anyone to think that he sucks. He has a cannon for an arm, which was on display a couple of times today. If he can work on his accuracy and decision-making a bit and progress next season, with some O-line help I think he’ll be fine next season.

_________________
Be well

GO BEARS!!!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Packers @ Bears
PostPosted: Sun Dec 04, 2022 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:40 pm
Posts: 16474
pizza_Place: Boni Vino
Officially eliminated from the playoffs before their bye, lol. Might be a first in NFL history.

Also lost their title of most wins in NFL history, now owned by Packers.

_________________
To IkeSouth, bigfan wrote:
Are you stoned or pissed off, or both, when you create these postings?


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 266 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group