Preview: Bears at Green Bay Packers
by Brandon on Sep 11, 2009 7:00 AM CDT
in Green Bay Packers Analysis
Email
PrintLet's start with the 2008 yardage rankings, according NFL.com:
| Teams | Run Offense | Pass Offense | Run Defense | Pass Defense |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Packers | 17 | 8 | 26 | 12 |
| Bears | 24 | 21 | 5 | 30 |
Although yardage rankings are not a perfect indicator of a team's offense or defense, it does give a general impression. A couple points to consider when looking at the numbers:
- The Packers pass defense was only 12th in yardage, but tied for 3rd with 22 INTs and held QBs to the 4th lowest QB rating of 71.9.
- The Bears pass offense was 21st in yardage, but Denver's pass offense was 3rd best in 2008.
- The Bears pass defense gave up a lot of yards because they led the league with well over 600 pass attempts against them. Opponents, for whatever reason, preferred to throw the ball. Their opponents QB rating was 77.2; 10th lowest in the league.
The key will be RB Matt Forte. QB Jay Cutler can't carry their offense through the air. Forte didn't have a big game rushing against the Packers either time they played last season, so this will be the first test to see whether the revamped offensive line and the respect afforded to Cutler as a passer will make Forte better. It's a big test for the Packers defensive front seven to see whether their new look 3-4 will be able to stop an elite running back.
After watching the Packers 1st team offense and defense dominate during the preseason, it's hard to believe they'd fall flat. But the Bears offense should still produce and their special teams will keep it close. Packers 27, Bears 16.
How the games went last season: Packers 37, Chicago 3 and Packers 17, Chicago 20.
- The giant win in Lambeau last season was a fluke game; everything went the Packers way. How can I call it a fluke?The victory happened in the middle of a streak when they lost 7 of 8 games.
- The loss in Chicago was a complete collapse by the special teams.
- One thing both games had in common was that Chicago couldn't get anything going on offense. Forte had 104 yards of offense in the 1st game, and 101 with a TD in the 2nd one, but QB Kyle Orton only managed 133 yards and 142 yards passing.
How the games will go in 2009.
In 2008, Denver's pass offense was 3rd in yardage and their run offense was 12th. The 2009 Bears won't be as good as the 2008 Broncos just because Cutler is in town, but he'll close the gap. I'd compare their new offense to the 2008 Cowboys. Dallas won in Lambeau last season, but that was due mostly to a bad game from the Packers offense. If DT B.J. Raji and LB Clay Matthews don't start, the Packers defensive personnel is the same as it was last season. The only big exception is the return of DE Cullen Jenkins who missed both games against the Bears in 2008. The big test will be whether the new 3-4 defense can do what it was brought in to do: improve the pass rush and improve the run defense.
On the other side of the field, when the Packers offense squares up against the Bears defense, both teams will be looking at nearly the exact same personnel running the exact same systems from last season. The Packers managed 427 yards and 325 yards of offense in the two games against Chicago last season, so there's no reason the offense won't be able to move the ball again in 2009.
Can Packers new special teams coach Shawn Slocum turn around a unit that was so bad against Chicago last season? That'll be something else to watch during the game.
47 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bears on Offense
I have hear rumours that the base package for Chicago is a 2 TE, 2 WR, 1 RB set, because of the flexibility Olsen gives them as a TE, WR, or halfback, and Desmond Clark as a TE, WR, or fullback. The plan is to line up in a standard i-set with Olsen at TE and Clark at FB in front of Forte, with Hester and Bennet at the WR spots.
If the Packers line up in their base 3-4, the Bears will go no huddle and split Olsen out wide with Hester as his underneath slot receiver – forcing Aaron Kampman, or whoever is playing OLB to that side of the field to have to go outside and defend Olsen, or stay underneath and get burned by Hester. If the Bears go to a spread offense out of this no huddle, and not allow the Packers to get their nickel or dime personnel on the field, this game could turn into a blowout. Any thoughts on defensive adjustments to counter this?
A Blowout?
The Bears blowing out the Packers because of their TE’s? There is absolutely no chance the Bears blow the Packers out unless Rodgers gets hurt and the D crumbles because of miscommunication. Could the Bears win? Of course, any team can win in a divsion game including the Lions, but if it is a blowout it will be from the Packers side because of their offensive firepower.
People think, for whatever reason, that the Bears defense is gonna go from being pretty bad the past two seasons to really good but it makes absolutely no sense. They have the same personnel and the same scheme. The only difference is more control for Lovie Smith and the d-line coach Marinelli, and if people think he will completely revamp that d-line, why was Detroit’s defense terrible? The Bears could have a solid defense, no question, but they don’t have the personnel or scheme to be great. They have one of the worst secondary’s in the league.
RE: A Blowout?
Not a blowout because of the TE’s – a blowout because Kampman is really a defensive lineman, and he may end up having to essentially play a nickel back if Bears go no-huddle and exploit this. Everyone knew the 3-4 takes time to adjust to, and any reasonable game plan will put guys in new roles in uncomfortable situations, and I am not sure how Kampman will hold up here.
Kampman playing nickel back? Are you serious? Based on all of your comments it seems like you know a little bit about football so honestly think about that comment. Capers is going to put Kampman in a position to succeed. If they go no-huddle, Kampman’s primary responsibility will be to rush the passer. Capers will only have him drop in coverage if he has safety or corner help over the top. His job won’t be much different than in the 4-3 except he will be standing up and drop into coverage a few times. Capers isn’t stupid. He helped make the 1999 Jaguars one of the best defenses ever in a hybrid type system.
Blow out
Thats how he discribed it, the D fails and its a blow out. Can’t you read?
How's it taste THOMPSON YOU MORON
by 4 where-ever on Sep 11, 2009 3:07 PM CDT up reply actions
And we haven’t even focused on how poor the Green Bay offensive line is going to be this year. I know the Bears secondary will give up some serious yards, but I also know that breakdowns along the Packer O-Line is going to give up sacks and turnovers. The Pack may have had a nice run in the preseason, but the team they are facing this weekend is not Cleveland, Buffalo, or Arizona. (all of which may struggle to win 5 games this year)
Seriously, Green Bay may be running on good vibes right now, but I think their fans are in for a huge disappointment this season. In a couple of years that defense may have a front seven that can play the 3-4 well, but by then the secondary will be retired. And the offensive line you guys are using this week is about as good as most teams 2nd unit. But either way, it’s going to be a heck of a football game!
by d$ on Sep 11, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions
How can you even comment on the O-Line. You probably haven’t seen them in action at all. You troll on the Packers board acting like Cutler is Montana, Forte is Payton, Olsen is Tony Gonzales, and Orlando Pace is in his prime. If you had football sense you would realize that the probability of the Bears blowing the Packers out is so minute and the Packers explosive offense actually has a better chance of a blowout.
You rip the offensive line when you don’t even know how they’re gonna be. You and the rest of the Bears fans think Jeremy Thompson is a starter because so many of the articles written by the educated Bear bloggers have him starting when he’s like 5th on the depth chart. The offensive line of the Packers is young and explosive. Could they fail? Yes. Could they become dominant? Yes. One thing I do know is any coach in the league would take Clifton over Pace at this point in their careers. Get A Clue
We can agree to disagree, but we’ll have some answers in about 48 hours!
by d$ on Sep 11, 2009 4:12 PM CDT up reply actions
I’ve seriously looked at both teams as unbiasedly as I could and I don’t think you’re doing the same thing. The Packers offensive line is a big ?. That means they could be good, they could be average, or they could be bad. They ripped it up during the pre-season (even though it doesn’t mean anything) and you come on here making claims that they are worse than most teams second units. If they came back with the same O-Line as the last couple seasons you could make that claim but they have three new players who all have a ton of upside.
The same can’t be said for the Bears secondary. You have the same group that has sucked the previous two seasons so unless something miraculous happens, your secondary will be at best below average. Your whole defense is predicated on Tommie Harris ripping up the middle. The Packers are more balanced overall and don’t rely on one or two players to keep the boat afloat. The Bears do.
I’ve heard a bunch of Bears fans say, why are they getting so much press, they’re only a 6-10 team. Well the year before with a healthy defense and a terrible O-Line, the Packers were 13-3 and a dumb Favre pass away from the Super Bowl. Nothing has changed except for the QB spot (I personally would take Rodgers over Favre 10 times out of 10) and they have a great 4th WR in Nelson, an up in coming TE in Finley, a great defensive coordinator and what looks to be a better O-Line.
We will agree to disagree but I hope to see you here on Monday no matter the outcome of the game. I think the Packers are good and the Bears are slightly above average, you think the Bears are great and the Packers are below average. You wanna make a prediction?
I’m going: Packers 30 Bears 20
Wow – you really sound unbiased based on that last comment, right? I think Bears win, our secondary is a weakness and will give up some points, but our pass rush will exploit your line, so these could end up cancelling each other out. The x-factor is your defense – when the Bears employ a game plan to get your guys out of position, they will get easy yards, and that ends up being the difference. Bears 27, Packers 17
by d$ on Sep 13, 2009 9:24 AM CDT up reply actions
What about the packers secondary?
That is an xfactor how many turnovers can they get.. All of them are proven to beable to take it to the house. Cutler has a strong arm but average accuracy. With some pressure in his face his balls could be all over.
It makes sense that the Bears will run a lot of 2 TE and would obviously like to match a TE against a guy like Kampman. But the Packers know how good Olsen and Clark are and will game plan accordingly, especially the idea that Olsen is versatile enough to play a split end.
I think the Packers will try to disguise their coverage and they will try to put a safety or even a corner on Olsen. If Kampman is matched up on Olsen in coverage, something probably went wrong.
The other side of the coin is that if Kampman lines up on the outside of a TE, the TE has to either block him (bad for the bears) or go out on a route and leave a running back to block him (also bad for the Bears).
I guess what I’m saying is that both teams know the strengths and weaknesses of the other and will exploit or shore up accordingly.
Good Point sorta but...
This is the same issue every team, 4-3 or 3-4, will face with the Bears. It is the same thing any offense or defense faces when the opposing team has good versatile players.
There are so many options with coverage and GB will try to mix it up some. They’ll try to stay in the 3-4 for run support but if the passing takes hold they could go nickel instead. I am not sure with the 3-4 how you play nickel. Do they go 3-3 nickel or do they switch to a traditional 4-2 nickel when they bring in the extra CB and put Kampman on the line.
In my opinion they’d be better off to play 4-2 nickel and 3-4 base for most plays depending on the situation and what is and isn’t working for the Bears.
3-4 Nickel
There are always different ways you can align for the nickel, especially in a 3-4, but if the Packers are in nickel because they feel like their opponent has a good chance to pass, their “base” nickel is a 2-4 with Pickett at NT going out. If Matthews evolves throughout the season (being the better pass rusher than Poppinga) the “base” nickel would be Raji and Jenkins inside, Kampman and Matthews at OLB, and Barnett and Chillar on the inside. Raji, Jenkins, Kampman and Matthews are probably the Packers top 4 pass rushers and Barnett and Chillar are both pretty good cover LB’s.
4-2 nickel
They’ll play in that formation a lot this season, but maybe not so much with Chicago. In the Arizona preseason game, the Packers played in the 4-2-5 a lot since the Cardinals go with 3 WRs so often. The Bears have been talking about a 2 TE set all offseason, so that’s no surprise. If they go 2 TE, 2 WR, the Packers might stay in the 3-4 more often, but I expect the coaches would be fine with CB Charles Woodson taking on TE Greg Olson on 3rd down.
...
And if fans want to make an argument that the Packers D is also all the same personnel so how are they expected to be any better. For one, their D got wiped out by the injury bug last season. Either guys were put on IR or trying to play with serious injuries. Secondly, Dom Capers has the D flying around. Even if the D isn’t elite this season they should be much improved from last season unless the injuries hit again.
Chicago has really nice TE’s but take a look at what the Packers are coming with. Desmond Clark and Donald Lee have similar production and both Olsen and Finley are going to be very good so it’s almost a scratch, Chicago will just use them more. I think the Packers will just play a lot of nickel from that Bears 2TE, 2WR formation and match Olsen up with Woodson or Tramon.
...
Will the Packers play nickel on first down? If so, Forte will run for 200 yards. My question is focused on the no-huddle offense. If the Bears have the flexibility to use the same 11 players, and go from a pro form with Olsen at TE and Clark at FB, then on the next play go 4 WR with Forte in the backfield, or even put him in motion to go 5 WR, how will the Packers defense adjust. I assume the Bears will lure the Pack into their base 3-4, then use the no-huddle to spread the field and force someone like Kampman to almost have to lineup as a DB if they split Olsen wide and have Hester lined up as a slot underneath. The fear has to be that this no-huddle offense will prevent the Packers from using their nickel package on passing downs, and I imagine their will be some serious mismatches for Chicago to exploit.
Possible Matchups
With Hester in the slot, I could see the Pack countering with Woodson covering him man to man, bringing Collins or Bigby up to cover Olson and dropping the other safety in a deep zone. This should prevent Kampman from getting either burned by Hester or split wide in coverage on Olson. The Bears will not dictate the tempo by going no huddle, as I’m sure that Capers already has multiple looks such as the man coverage I just described mixed with a lot of zone coverage and CB and LB blitzes. If the Bears try to go no huddle, I think it will be good for a first down or two; but I really think Capers has the D prepped for this. I wouldn’t worry about this situation at all.
Sounds good in theory
But a no-huddle is double edged. You force the defense to use the same personnel but you are stuck with your own personnel as well. To go from a 2 TE package to a 4 WR spread package requires a huddle, or at least allows the defense to make similar substitutions.
It must be a slow day in Lambeau today. The point is that because Olsen and Clark are lined up as TE and FB on first down, and can play WR roles on 2nd down without changing personnel, the Packer defense will be very susceptible to mismatches, because Olsen and Clark can both play wideout positions. And when that happens, the Packers will not be able to switch from their base 3-4 to a nickel. You can move Kampman to the line, but that still leaves Brady Poppinga or Jeremy Thompson as guys who will have to cover a TE or WR in open space. Unless you want to go man coverage with your 4 DBs against Hester, Bennett, Olsen, and Clark, but that never seems like a good idea in the NFL these days.
And it still begs my question – if the Bears are able to go from Double TE to 4 WR spread while going no-huddle, how will the GB defense respond to this? You can’t go nickel on first down, because the Bears will audible to a run, and you can’t expect the D Lineman to stay on the field every play, since they are conditioned to rotate, and it exposes someone in the front 7 to drop back for pass coverage. You can rely on the MLBs, but at that point, you’ve burned every benefit of the 3-4 Defense.
Any thoughts?
by d$ on Sep 11, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Dez Clark as wideout or full back?
I guess if you don’t have a REAL FB and your WRs suck then, by all means.
You have DEZ Clark, not Dallas Clark.
by Squatbulk on Sep 11, 2009 4:39 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Squatbulk
Talking about specific Bears players with a Bears fan is a dead end. I went to college in Chicago and they think Desmond Clark is as good as Dallas Clark. I had a couple of friends who were reasonable Bears fans and they were seriously embarrassed about how much their fellow fans overhyped their players. Remember when they thought Grossman was the next Favre? I even have one Bears friend currently who thinks Devin Hester could become a Randy Moss like deep threat and make the Pro Bowl as a WR this season.
preachin' to the chior
I live there, in the city, from ’90 – ’06.
Not only was Grossman the next Favre, while he was playing well…ur….while they were winning, but whenever they lost 2 or 3 games in a row, they were calling for Orton to start. They went from Super Bowl planning to Wild Card discussions to next years draft position hopes.
I truly do feel for them. They had to go through Enis, Salaam and Benson before an actual goob RB dropped to them in the 2nd round. Now they have an actual QB. They should be optimistic. But, when I heard one of the ESPN Chicago bozos (afternoon hosts) say the Cutler signing was more excting for him than the birth of his child……….. True story.
LMAO
about the ESPN Chicago host and that doesn’t even really surprise me. Like you stated, listening to Chicago sports radio is classic. They’re some of the most bipolar fans. If the Bears lose they need new players and a new coach and if they win well watch out Super Bowl.
They do have reason for optimism with Cutler, Forte and Olsen but a lot of them just aren’t realistic. They’re slamming the Packers O-Line which could be better than their O-Line this season. They think Orlando Pace is still 28 years old even though he got whooped in the pre-season.
Neil Hayes of the Sun Times said there is a difference between hope and false hope. Hope is the Bears having a top-15 defense and false hope is the Bears having a top-5 defense. If you look at things clearly, they’re probably gonna need a top-10 defense to win the division this season. Through my experiences, most Bears fans have false hope like d$ who thinks the Bears are gonna blow out the Packers with a TE and a converted kick returner shooting past the Packers loaded secondary.
The Packers actually played a ton of nickel against the Bears in both games last season, and yes on first down to combat Olsen and Clark. You must be a Bears fan cause based on the 200 yard comment Forte is the second coming of Payton. But actually last year Forte had 64 yards rushing with no TD’s in the first game and 73 yards rushing with 1 TD in the second game with the Packers playing mostly nickel. Far from 200 yards even combined.
And Olsen and Clark combined for 49 yards and no TD’s in the first game and 86 yards and 1 TD in the second game, once again against mostly nickel. Bears fans are making it sound like Olsen and Clark are gonna have 160 yards and 2 TD’s if the Packers play base and if they go to nickel Forte will have 200 yards and 2 TD’s. Well if you look at last season with a lesser Packers D, that will not be the case.
I think you are ignoring the difference in QB play the Bears will get this year.
by d$ on Sep 11, 2009 3:37 PM CDT up reply actions
I completely understand the significance of Cutler. He makes the Bears better and more explosive on offense. With that said, you stated that Forte would run for 200 yards if the Packers played nickel. I showed you the stats of 3 players who are supposedly going to kill the Packers. The Packers played more nickel than anything else both games last season and Forte averaged 68 yards and a half a TD against a Packers D that was dreadful last season due to a bad scheme and a myriad of injuries.
There is absolutely no way the Packers D doesn’t dramatically improve this season. If the Bears couldn’t explode on the Packers dreadful D last season, what makes you think they will this season going up against a better D? Oh yeah Jesus Cutler. Cutler’s a very good QB but he won’t be your savior. You can blame it on the Vandy or Bronco teams he was on but Cutler has a losing record in college and the pros. The one thing scouts said from the AFC West was the he doesn’t have that winning drive like other great QB’s have had. Don’t expect him to carry your team to multiple super bowls.
If winning multiple Super Bowls is the barometer of a great QB, I guess we can all agree that Favre never belonged on that list, right? If Cutler is the 2nd coming of anything, it really is a young Favre before his prime. But no one in Chicago thinks that adding Cutler will guarantee anything, but we do think that over the next 10 years, he gives us a better chance than anyone else in the last 2 decades.
Anyway, where do you make up stats like “The Packers played more nickel than anything else both games last season”. Did they do that because Kyle Orton was such a great QB, and they had to respect the pass? If you guys played the nickel against the Bears last season, you would have been the only one. Every team the bears played last season used some form of the cover 3, with the SS lined up next to the linebackers to stop the run. So comparing this year’s offense to last year’s is comparing apples with hand grenades.
by d$ on Sep 11, 2009 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions
In regards to your Favre comment; do you see my name lol? I think Favre is overatted because he owns all these records but he throws picks for losses in the playoffs every season. The Packers had a great defense for about 5 seasons and Favre only got them 1 super bowl ring. I think Cutler is a poor man’s Favre which is why I think you have a good but not great QB.
Get a hold of the Packers coaches or players smart guy. Call into Leroy Butler on sportsradio1250. The Packers had Tramon Williams guard Olsen a chunk of the games and they were in nickel a lot. Forte had average to below average games in each of those contests against a nickel. I’m not making stuff up, it’s the facts. You can even watch both games online. A lot of nickel.
Even if Cutler has another year under his belt, Forte and Olsen are not Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal. I absolutely believe that Cutler makes the Bears passing offense better. That said, I just don’t see our defense being unable to handle him when he airs it out. Now, Cutler in the pocket will force us to respect the passing offense and not just sit on the line waiting for short passes to Olsen and handoffs to Forte. I expect we’ll get beaten a time or two, but giving up yards doesn’t necessarily lead to giving up points (see the Arizona preseason game).
I DO worry about the soft middle of the defense once a play has gone on a few seconds, but I’m betting that Capers has plans to shore that up as well. At least, I certainly hope so, since I can see the Bears exploiting that 10-15 times a game.
I’m really looking forward to seeing improvements on special teams (not least because I have Mason Crosby on two of my fantasy teams). Of all the units on the team, I think Slocum had the most work to do in terms of pulling things up to snuff. Kapinos looked great in preseason, and if he can carry that over, poor field position and the task of building momentum over 90 yards instead of 50 can help our defense a lot.
Homers
Bear homers vs. Packer homers. What’s the point?
I think Vegas has it about right. Packers by 3.5 – 4. I’m not going to bet this game, but if i had to, i’d go with the Bears just because the crappiness of Mason Crosby and the excellence of the Bears ST give the Bears a slight chance of making it closer.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 11, 2009 8:13 PM CDT reply actions
It’s funny how the Bears fans are… Just by adding Cutler to the offense, they think that the Bears are a whole different team. I am glad to hear that they finally have a QB. Other than the no huddle offense and Cutler, it’s the same thing as last year. You look at last year, the Packers offense did thier job pretty well. The injured riddled defense failed. Now healthy, with a new scheme, and signs of a big improvement, things should change. Last year’s Bears’ win over the Packers was only by 3 points. 7 of the loses by the were by 4 or less points; 5 were by 3 or less. 2 of the games were decided in OT, including the Bears. Even with the terrible defense, the Packers held till OT. The Bears fans make it sound like the Bears smacked the Packers in that win, when it was only by 3 points. Do any of the Bears want to talk about the smack down that the Packers did in week 11 to the Bears (37-3), which can’t even be wrote off as "it was the start of the season. The Packers defense was already crumbling.
As for this year, could what we seen in preseason be a fluke, with the Packers defense? Maybe, though doubtful. Does the Packers offense suck? Nope! Are the Packers going to beat the Bears? Hopefully, but ask me at about 11:00-11:30 pm (eastern time). I think the Packers have a good chance at doing almost the same thing as week 11 of last year; but who knows, it could be like week 16 of last year, especially if the preseason was a fluke.
I live in Ohio (in AFC hell, with the Browns, Steelers, and the Bengals), I am just glad to be able to see the Packers play. I’ll be up in Cleveland Stadium October 25th. I doubt that I will be sitting in the “Dog Pound” like I did in the 90’s. Yes, I was in full Packers gear, Including hat, jacket, Favre jersey, pants, and even socks.
You say Cutler, I say Capers. Cutler! Capers! Let's call the whole thing off!
Cutler doesn’t make a difference but Capers does? That’s hard to believe. It’s possible to follow the Packers — even like them — and still allow that the other guys have some players. With Cutler, the Bears should be a bit stronger on offense this year.
I saw the preseason games, and i will say that it proved a couple things: Packer 2nd & 3rd string suck and that the Browns and Bills are terrible. I wasn’t that impressed with the 1st stringers in the Arizona game. They could not stop the Cards on 3rd down. I don’t put any stock in turnovers. They got a lot of turnovers last year, too, and all yall are saying that the 2008 Packer defense was terrible. I think the Packer defense will be about where it was last year. Yep, even with the mighty Dom Capers. And if Dom makes that much of a difference, wouldn’t Lovie & Rod make a difference, too? You can’t have it both ways, people.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 12, 2009 12:06 AM CDT reply actions
Read up on the comments a little bit, wont you...
nobody is saying that Cutler isn’t a big addition. He will defintely make the Bears better no question. But the problem with your post is that you say Lovie and Rod make as much of a difference as Capers. WOW. Lovie is running the same system they have run for years and Rod is a position coach.
Could Rod make the d-line more productive? I’m sure he will but it’s not like he’s the DC with a new scheme and play calling duties like Capers. The entire defense is different for the Packers this season. Capers has taken three teams in his first season as a DC that were terrible defenses and made them top-5 defenses. He’s done that 3 times. I guess that’s not a big deal.
The biggest thing I have with Bears fans is they think that a D that was in the 20’s the last couple of seasons can be a top-5 D based on nothing. Same players, and outside of Marinelli’s angle coaching on the d-line, same scheme. Just like Neil Hayes of the Sun Times said, a top-15 D for the Bears is hope, a top-5 D for the Bears is false hope.
And the reason the Packers 2nd and 3rd string D didn’t look that great in the pre-season isn’t because the Packers don’t have depth, they have very good depth, it’s because they had a ton of secondary players and LB’s hurt so the 2nd string guys were playing the other teams starters and the 3rd stringers, who don’t even make the 53, were playing against the other teams backups.
Harris and Woodson didn’t even play at all in two games so right off the bat the Packers second string corners were in and they still handled the other teams starters. And if were gonna talk about pre-season, you say that it proved the Bills sucked. Well the Packers destroyed the Bills and your Bears got beat by those sucky Bills so what does that tell you when Trent Edwards and that terrible offense goes 10-10 passing on you.
Why so defensive and rude?
I can read just fine. Maybe you shouldn’t assume i was writing about you. But now that you mention it FS, i think you’ve been conceding that Cutler is good, but then follow those concessions with dismissals of whatever threat he poses. You write that “He’s a poor man’s Favre”, and i have this funny feeling that you don’t think much of Favre. Concessive clauses or not, you don’t really take Cutler seriously.
As for Capers he’s done some good things but he is not the miracle worker you make him out to be. He was also the loser of the Bush Bowl, the guy who led his team to successive 2-14 finishes and the guy who has been canned a bunch of times. I believe he lost to the mighty combo of Shermie and Slowik back in ’04. That counts too, right?
I have a hard time believing that Capers and the 3-4 are going to help Hawk get off blockers or help Kampman and Poppinga cover. Jarret Bush is still Jarret Bush. And yes the same goes for Woodson and Harris. They’re going to make their plays. I’m open to arguments about how the 3-4 or Capers version of it fit the Packers defensive personnel better, but someone has to make it. So far it’s been “Capers!”
I see the same sort of psychology in sports fans all over the country. “Bob Slowik is really going to turn this Denver defense around”, “In Dusty we Trusty” etc. etc. After a while they start complaining and the Next Saviour becomes The Scapegoat. “Fire Turner!” “Slowik is an idiot” “Can Dusty!” “Dump Shermie”. And the cycle begins anew. If it hadn’t been Capers, Packer fans would be talking up some other DC now.
by uglyfatpimplynerd on Sep 12, 2009 8:40 PM CDT up reply actions
It's almost like
there’s a real fan rivalry here again!
"Brandon Jennings needs a nickname before he gives himself one. Oh wait, Young Money, he already did."
by Mitchell Maurer on Sep 12, 2009 10:11 AM CDT reply actions
It never has or will go away.
Forget the Vikings. I stopped taking them seriously after they moved indoors. Things went downhill after that. The silly viking horn blowing, the amplified crowd noise, the Culpepper fist punching, the love boat incident, Dennis Green’s affair, the 1st round draft blunder. How can anyone take them seriously with all the clowns that filter through that place.
*Exhibit A – http://www.everyjoe.com/emqb/files/2008/11/john-randle_nc.jpg
*Exhibit B – http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/2000/nfldraft/news/2000/04/15/vikings_draft_ap/t1_hovan_ap_01.jpg
*Exhibit C – http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2005/scorecard/01/18/truth.rumors.nfl/p1_moss_getty.jpg
Luckily for that organization there’s Al Davis and the Bengals to overshadow all the folly that goes on up there. Hate them if you like. I just pity them.
The Bears on the other hand are the Packer’s biggest rivals. Period. It is a fact not open to debate. Sure, some years the Vikings’ or Lions’ games have been more meaningful, but every year the Bears and Packers play for blood. Hopefully Dom Capers and Kevin Greene can instill some redass that our defense has lacked by comparison.
The Cutler Era is upon us. Embrace your inner hellchild.
Packers 34-13
Hard to imagine
Pack scoring less than 30
Bears more than 20
http://www.PackerHaiku.com
Clark Osborn - PackerHaiku.com | FavreHaiku.com | BadgerHaiku.com
hi packerland
semi-unbiased bears fan here. obviously looking forward to tomorrow night. just wanted to add that while yes chicago seems to have its fair share and then some of bonehead bipolar fans, a lot of us aren’t quite as ridiculous as the radio guy who put the cutler signing over the birth of their kid. i personally am excited by having a real qb for the first time in forever not because i think we are going to run the table, but simply because it gives us at least a chance to win a lot of games that we would otherwise get trounced in. seeing as there were only a couple of games the bears lost last year that weren’t even close (i.e. the godawful beatdown in lambeau last year), it stands to reason that da bears have a shot at getting to 10 wins this year. it isn’t a huge stretch to hope that an improved offense can hide some of the issues the defense still has. our o line is probably going to get exposed tomorrow but again improved mobility at qb could hopefully help keep plays alive and the chains moving downfield. here’s to hoping cutler keeps the int count down and forte starts off the year strong! regardless of who wins does anyone else think the o/u of 44.5 is an easy over pick as well? my humble prediction:
bears 31 packers 27
above all else hope no significant injuries to either side tomorrow.
oh and f the vikings, they are a fluke. squatbulk already outlined several reasons as to why. i fully expect the nfc north to be a 2 horse race this year.
by reefermadness3 on Sep 12, 2009 11:50 PM CDT reply actions
poor Ryan Grant
Grant has a bad year with 312 attempts for 1,203 yards while Forte had 316 attempts for 1238 yards and he’s a top 5 fantasy back. Forte’s receiving yards are very nice, but Grant isn’t needed in that area on the Packers.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
