This team would be better if big John Tate was still throwing blocks.

_________________
favrefan said:"Chris Coghlan isn't gonna pay your rent, Jimmy."

New sod? Baloney! That field looked awful in spots yesterday, and the time has come for the Chicago Park District & the Bears to remove the grass surface once and for all and install FieldTurf like several other NFL teams have done. It really took a pounding after the rain started falling in the second half. As for the game itself, Jay Cutler seemed more comfortable running the offense and bounced back from his 4 interception disaster of a week ago in Green Bay. I heard Zach Zaidman on the WBBM 780/Bears' Radio Network mention something in a sideline report that Johnny Knox could be like Eddie Royal was out there in Denver...Hopefully, Matt Forte has a big game on the ground next Sunday up in Seattle vs. a Seahawk defense that allowed over 200 yards from the 49ers' Frank Gore yesterday. Besides, if Matt Hasselbeck is out with the rib injury, I'd rather have Marcia Wallace than Seneca Wallace starting at QB for Seattle on Sunday...

something about last year not indicate that he is a workhorse...or his years in college for that matter

_________________
O judgment! Thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason.

The Bears didn't do much of anything against the Packers. I think yesterday's game demonstrated that the O is able to do things, at least in that passing game, that they didn't show evidence of in Game 1. So, I'm going to rule out game 1 as a measure of anything. It was a mess from beginning to end.

Additionally, I don't think anyone can effectively measure the competency of the running game against Pittsburgh. If they are unable to run next week, then I will be concerned.

But, I see no reason for the running game to not be able to exceed, at least on average, what they were able to do last year. With an actual threat of a passing game, they should be able to increase the yards per attempt a good .3 or .4 by year's end over last year. They should be in the 4.2-4.5 range. But, I'm not guaranteeing that or anything. It's just what I would anticipate given the additional offensive weapon(s) and what I think is an improved offensive line.

My main concern is Turner falling in love with the passing game which I think he has in the first two weeks. But, given the running game's ineffectiveness, it has been understood. However, I can easily see Turner giving up on the run way too early in games when he shouldn't.

_________________
You know me like that.

Now that the Bears FINALLY have a franchise QB in Mr. Cutler, will they become Air Lovie and get a lot more of their offense in the passing game?

Cutler threw for more passing yards against Green Bay than he did against Pittsburgh, so I don't agree that the offense "didn't do much of anything against the Packers." Turnovers were obviously a problem, but ball movement via the pass was not. Your theory is flawed.

_________________

Sorry. Forgot who I was talking to. I should have been more specific. They didn't do much of anything well.

47% completion and 4 interceptions is not an effective passing offense. Frequent turnovers do not allow for establishing any rhythm in the offense or require the defense to respect what you can do through the air. Everything about that game was a mess and until I see a repeat performance that is that bad, I don't (in my opinion) believe that much can be gathered on the offense's abilities from it.

I want to see what they do against Seattle. If they suck, then I will reassess how effective I believe the running game will be. But, so far, GB I discount and PITT I have low expectations in general. I was happy to see the passing game be effective against PITT but think things would have been different with Palomalu. If anything, I thought they could have run better with Polamalu out. Is that any kind of concession?

_________________
You know me like that.

I tend towards TMs opinion (if I'm reading him correctly) that Forte is good, but not great, and certainly not special. This is especially true as a runner. He's in that big group of RBs who will give you around 1200 yards if they get 320 or so carries. There's value in that, and he's a little better than your average back because of his blocking and receiving, but he's not a top-5 or even top-10 back.

_________________
Fire Phil Emery

How can you seriously say this? Didn't Forte have more all purpose yards than "All Day" last year? I'd call that special. He accounted for 38% of the Bears offense in 2008 and didn't miss a game last year.

I believe all this consternation is due to the fact that the offense has not gelled yet.

_________________
RFDC thinks I'm retarded.

Another aboard the gelling train!

The offensive line played better than expected last year. I still can't explain it. Olsen (I think) helped St Clair out a lot. I expect Pace and Williams will settle in at somepoint, maybe game 6ish and 10ish respectively. I'm not seeing it out of Omiyale and I think they need to put Beekman there.

You are exaggerating the passing game's incompetence vs. the Packers to mask the deficiencies of the running game. While Cutler threw some horrible passes against Green Bay, he also showed flashes of brilliance. The running game hasn't even shown flashes of mediocrity yet this year.

It's telling that you discount the running attack's performance against Pittsburgh and the Pack but consider an injury-plagued Seattle defense the true measuring stick. If the Bears were to run up 500 yards against Evanston Township, would you be touting their backs as the best in the NFL?

_________________

I don't have a beef with him. Rather, I simply think that he is good-but-not-great player who needs to be used correctly for his talents to be maximized.

_________________

Probably. I'm kind of a meatball.

They should run well this week. They ran poorly against a team (GB) that you might think they could run against. The O-line didn't pass protect or run block very well. As a sample size of 1 game, I tend not to make a definitive conclusion based on it.

The pass protection was better against Pittsburgh but the run blocking was still bad. However, I would expect the run blocking to be bad against Pittsburgh so I, again, would find it difficult to draw a conclusion given the expectation being low.

What critical number can I place as significant if I expect them to get 50 yards on the ground and they get 43? Is it significant at a 10 yard deficit or 20%? If Forte lucks out and breaks one run of 18 yards can I say they are excellent now because they got 60 yards and did 20% better than I thought?

I'm not going to make a determination yet as I don't feel I have enough evidence. You can. I won't stop you as you seem to have it all figured out. You tend to be more decisive in these situations than I. Patience is a virtue, young Midget.

_________________
You know me like that.

No Doc, I don't have it all figured out. I'm just pessimistic about our geriatric offensive line and am a little concerned about Forte's lack of explosiveness at the line so far this year. Peterson was hitting the line much harder than Forte was on Sunday. That scares me a little. But then again I don't think of Forte as a particularly quick accelerator anyway. We'll see.

_________________

B&B were asking why do people care how it is getting done. I disagree with that. I don't think they need to run it as much as they have in past but I would like to see a better balance and take what the other team is giving you.

Don't worry about the running game. Forte is good - not great. He'll end up being that 1200/3.9 avg. RB like he was last year. I knew he wouldn't be elite out of college. Elite RBs are 1600+ and 4.5+avg. He'll never be that. He's a top 10 back. Probaby some where between 8-10. That's good enough when you have Cutler.

Look for him to have 150 yards and 2 TDs against the Seahawks. I just see a big game for him.

I agree 100%. You need to get the running game at least operational, which will happen when teams focus more on the passing game and the O-line steps it up, and Beekman in put in. I look at the Saints, GREAT passing game, but it they hit the playoffs and (Bear)weather makes passing game rough, they are fucked.
As the line gels and defenses back off, Forte will get it going.
"We'll be fine"

_________________

Lot of talk about the Bears offense. I seem to remember the last visit to Seatlle had that bald QB throwing a ton of quick in patterns that burned the Bears. Also,the crowd noise makes it tough.

My prediction: Seahawks 20 Bears 13

_________________
favrefan said:"Chris Coghlan isn't gonna pay your rent, Jimmy."

i like the bears chances with hasselbeck on the sidelines. wallace isnt a great passer his biggest asset is his scrambling ability so the bears will have be chasing him around

I fail to see what scares people about the Seahawks, beyond the noise. Im not sure what to think about this game, but it isnt because the Seahawks inherently scare me.

And yes, like I was telling Laurence before the GB game, I dont think teams GP with Forte in mind. They plan against the run, but it is no different because he is back there. I think they absolutely take him into account in the flat, but not as a runner. I'm a fan of the guy, I think he is a terrific all around RB, but not a terribly talented runner.

And in this league, it is pretty rare that a team gets burnt that bad two weeks in a row. So I see them solving that.

_________________
"Mattress technology has come a long way"

- Dan Bernstein, 2016