22 minutes ago, soxfan49 said:

Yeah, the INT was a great play by Harris and I feel like if that throw is made to someone like Robinson or Shaheen (someone who isn't 5'9), the odds of it being completed are greater. Either way, that throw has to be perfect for it not to be intercepted.

This. Gabriel is actually listed at 5'8, and 5'8 dudes do not win jump balls against NFL defenders, especially into double or triple coverage. If you do throw it, you're basically banking on making a perfect pass, not a risk we should take. I hope Mitch learns from it and it's the last of those attempts he makes.

24 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

I hope we pick up a legit deep threat this off season or that Miller becomes one. We should NEVER throw deep to Gabriel unless he clearly has his man beat in single cover.

On a side note, do we have any stats of Bears offense in the 4th quarter this season? I think more often than not, we've been playing not to lose than playing to put the other team away, which resulted into quick 3 and outs and more opportunities to the other teams to take shots at our defense. Maybe that's just part of winning football after years of trying to come from behind in the 4th?

Re: fourth quarter.

What i've seen from twitter reactions:

- When we ran three straight times against dolphins we should have passed

- When we passed three straight times against Packers we should have ran

- When we mixed it up against vikings, we were being too conservative still

It just comes down to execution, I thought we were calling similar stuff to earlier, it just didn't work because vikes are good at d. But the criticism I've seen mostly comes down to "why don't you call the successful play?"

4 minutes ago, bmags said:

Re: fourth quarter.

What i've seen from twitter reactions:

- When we ran three straight times against dolphins we should have passed

- When we passed three straight times against Packers we should have ran

- When we mixed it up against vikings, we were being too conservative still

It just comes down to execution, I thought we were calling similar stuff to earlier, it just didn't work because vikes are good at d. But the criticism I've seen mostly comes down to "why don't you call the successful play?"

I don't have the stats, but from the eye test we're a better team in 1st 3 Q than 4th. More than the play calling, it's a matter of why aren't we executing in the 4th compared to the 1st 3 quarters and find a way to address those issues. Is it because teams toughed up their D and we couldn't score, is it because we aren't as focused as before, is it because players are tired? It may not be something we could address this year itself, but I think it's what separates great teams from being an elite team.

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

 

He has 4 more td's than Kevin White.

10 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

 

The main reason the league moved PATs back is because they were so automatic that it made them pointless, so this is an outcome the league was probably expecting or hoping for. Now that kickers are actually missing PATs once in a while it changes the math. It used to be "take your guaranteed 1" or "attempt 2 only in specific situations where It doesn't change anything because you're less likely to convert" but modern analytics suggests it makes more sense to go for 2 earlier even if you fail.

26 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

I don't have the stats, but from the eye test we're a better team in 1st 3 Q than 4th. More than the play calling, it's a matter of why aren't we executing in the 4th compared to the 1st 3 quarters and find a way to address those issues. Is it because teams toughed up their D and we couldn't score, is it because we aren't as focused as before, is it because players are tired? It may not be something we could address this year itself, but I think it's what separates great teams from being an elite team.

Honestly I don't think there was any special reason the offense faded in the 4th. Minnesota played sound D all game, played tight coverage, then assigned a spy to Trubisky so that he stopped breaking their coverage down. Trubisky and by extension Nagy didn't have an immediate answer for it.

1 hour ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

This. Gabriel is actually listed at 5'8, and 5'8 dudes do not win jump balls against NFL defenders, especially into double or triple coverage. If you do throw it, you're basically banking on making a perfect pass, not a risk we should take. I hope Mitch learns from it and it's the last of those attempts he makes.

Gabriel has been an effective deep threat, but you just got to be cognizant of the match-up.  He is the guy you throw to in single coverage, not when he's double / triple covered. Technically in double coverage, you also throw to him when he is already over the top of the D.  Also it should be pointed, going deep to him has worked plenty this season and it also opens up the more underneath stuff for him as well (as the opposition has to respect his ability to get over the top).  It was just a bad throw.  No way around it.  

2 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

Gabriel has been an effective deep threat, but you just got to be cognizant of the match-up.  He is the guy you throw to in single coverage, not when he's double / triple covered. Technically in double coverage, you also throw to him when he is already over the top of the D.  Also it should be pointed, going deep to him has worked plenty this season and it also opens up the more underneath stuff for him as well (as the opposition has to respect his ability to get over the top).  It was just a bad throw.  No way around it.  

It was a good throw.  It was a bad decision

Right shoulder injury for Trubisky. Not serious, but supposedly happened after the late Smith hit (he did favor it a bit afterwards).  Hopefully it won't effect his throwing too much. 

 

Edited November 20, 20187 yr by SoxAce

This is not good and that was a late hit.  It is the one thing that worries me with Mitch (the fact that he is such a great runner...is both great but bad at the same time).  

No way it happened on the penalty. I just watched the replay 3 times. He got hit on the left shoulder. It may have happened on the Cohen fumble.

I always get worried about things like this. Remember when the Bears were about to play Tannehill...there were reports at the beginning of the week he had a sore shoulder...next thing you know he missed that game and then went on to miss quite a few games. Hopefully whatever it is, is extremely minor and Mitch bounces back quickly!  

This KC-Rams game is as good as advertised so far.

If KC wins, assuming Bears win their next two games, that Bears-Rams game could be interesting considering 1st round bye implications the rest of the way if Bears can beat them.

Edited November 20, 20187 yr by SoxAce

Ebukam having a night

 

This game is insane. 

Yikes Mahomes. That was a horrible decision. 

5 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

This is not good and that was a late hit.  It is the one thing that worries me with Mitch (the fact that he is such a great runner...is both great but bad at the same time).  

 

4 hours ago, soxfan49 said:

No way it happened on the penalty. I just watched the replay 3 times. He got hit on the left shoulder. It may have happened on the Cohen fumble.

Might have happened here 

 

Holy fucking scoring. This Rams defense better get their shit together soon, but it's nice to know that Todd Gurley can be completely excluded from the game plan, and this offense can still score 50+ points.

Rams-Saints NFC Championship game is gonna be something.

Was there a football game last night or something?  

I was hyped to watch but I was so tired from being at the Bears game late then working in the morning that I crashed last night.  Sounded fun, although 5 turnovers from Mahomes isn't pretty.

 

It's a bummer that the Rams won, it all but guarantees the Bears won't get a top 2 seed and a bye.

That game was wild.  I would say it lacked defense, but there was like 3 defensive td.  

I wanted overtime.