A Tale Of Two Halves, Bears Fall 21-16

by Adam T on Dec 2, 2007 6:50 PM CST

The Bears tried really hard to win this thing in the first half, then they tried really hard to lose it in the second. Unfortunately, they did the latter.

Today had a lot of promise, Grossman came out looking good and for the most part stayed that way. He did have some overthrows and still has no idea how to step up in the pocket, but again he didn't lose this game.

This game was about crappy offensive line play, missed opportunities and penalties.

In the first half the Bears walked away with three FGs, all three could have been TDs, had it not been for untimely sacks and all too often false starts and a horrible personal foul on Terrance Metcalf.

Grossman finished with 296, 1TD and 0INTs and made some big throws, including one that would have been a sure TD on a long pass that Devin Hester dropped.

Peterson seemed to mimic the results Benson was getting totaling 67 yards on the ground. I guess the difference is Peterson is a better receiver as Grossman and Peterson hooked up a few times to move the chains. Peterson led all receivers with 7 catches for 82 yards.

The defense played both fantastic at times bringing the turnover back to Chicago and awful at times allowing Derrick Ward to top 100 yards in the fist half. He finished with 154 and 1TD.

The Giants consistently kicked the ball out of bound and gave the ball to the Bears on the 40 though not on purpose, but the Bears did little to make them pay for it.

Again, the Bears are not mathematically out of it there is very little left the Bears can do. If they didn't need a ton of help before now they need pretty much a miracle to make the play offs.

Tweet Comment 31 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

fantastic?

I didn't see any fantastic defense. I saw some timely turnovers, which was nice to see, but definitely nothing fantastic.

They got ran all over by the giants' running game.

visit the mindful mission.

by big_lowitzki on Dec 2, 2007 6:53 PM CST reply actions

the turnovers

were the fantastic at times he was reffering to, other than that there wasn't shit positive about that defense this game.

by lopey986 on Dec 2, 2007 6:55 PM CST up reply actions

OK, D got rolled over ...

but it's a moot goddamn point if the offense gets a TD either time it had first and f'ing goal. Getting the ball consistently on our 40 or better and scoring a whopping 16 points total is inexcusable.

I'm upset about the D as well, but I don't think 21 points is an insurmountable total to overcome. Ron Turner (no-huddle for a TD, then going back to traditional huddle, WTF?) and the O-Line sucked. Again.

I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something. - Dick Butkus

by iowaBear on Dec 2, 2007 6:58 PM CST up reply actions

the eagles

i believe started the "give the bears the ball on the 40 and watch them not score" gameplan not sure why anyone has gone away from it since.

by mike b on Dec 2, 2007 7:02 PM CST up reply actions

the only problem

with the offense is the offensive line. if they could open up some holes for the running game things would be much different. u cant expect grossman to make 35 perfect throws a game when the coaches philosophy is a run first offense.

throw the bank at faneca in phase 1 of rebuild the o-line the same way the vikings did.

by Jbasic89 on Dec 2, 2007 7:02 PM CST up reply actions

Idea

why not have charles tillman come in at the end of the game at reciever he seems to be the only person on our team with some hops

by Jbasic89 on Dec 2, 2007 6:57 PM CST reply actions

"Indisputable"

I was just about ready to go nuclear over the referee deciding to re-define "indisputable". That call was probably a TD, but there was a reasonable way to interpret it as an incomplete pass... yet the ref overturned the call anyway...

At some point somebody needs to point out that the instant replay system has no clothes. They can't review egregrious mistakes but they slow-motion hairsplit things like that and then violate the rule to "get it right"....

Annoying...

And Joe Buck and Troy Aikman were just awful.

by dgribben on Dec 2, 2007 6:58 PM CST reply actions

Agreed

there is no consistency. There was no 'indisputable' evidence. That was probably a catch but I can't stand how replay is used.

by Chad @ Windy City Gridiron on Dec 2, 2007 7:47 PM CST up reply actions

Like I said in chat...

...I think he made the catch, but it wasn't indisputable. The ref thinks that's the same thing. I don't.

by tyger1147 on Dec 2, 2007 7:51 PM CST up reply actions

The first replay they showed us at the game

made it look like the ball bounced in. The ref in the end zone was right on top of the play and he called it incomplete, your right replay was suppose to be about 'indisputable' evidence.

by beardown on Dec 3, 2007 6:51 AM CST up reply actions

perhaps..

... both other angles clearly showed that his hands were under the ball.

It was the right call.

visit the mindful mission.

by big_lowitzki on Dec 3, 2007 7:02 AM CST up reply actions

We saw every angle

And there was no clear shot at it. I truly believe that the officials felt it was a blown call and reversed based on that alone. Maybe justice is served, but that is not how replay is supposed to be used.

by Chad @ Windy City Gridiron on Dec 3, 2007 12:50 PM CST up reply actions

Yeah.

There are a bunch of reasons we lost this game that are our fault, but that was still bullshit.

--d

by itsugly on Dec 2, 2007 7:51 PM CST up reply actions

I have no idea

how the Giants snuck out of Chicago w/a victory. But, we will take it. Looking back, if Devin Hester catches that pass the Bears win.

-- Ed
Big Blue View

by ETVal @ Windy City Gridiron on Dec 2, 2007 7:13 PM CST reply actions

Bad recievers

Too many drops today.

by Arbusto on Dec 2, 2007 7:54 PM CST reply actions

well

we lead the league in drops and missed tackles.

by lopey986 on Dec 2, 2007 8:25 PM CST up reply actions

I blame this loss once again on the coaching staff

We start out with the no huddle and we have success and we stop using it. We don't stop using it because the Giants forced us out of it we stop using it because our coaches suck.

Second half we are playing prevent defense with over 11 minutes to go in the game. Manning has shown when you pressure him he makes mistakes and we put no pressure on him in the second half.

Second half our offense gets 68 yards on 7 possecions, that shows how great our coaches are at halftime adjustments.

Now its time to see if Orton brings anything to the table but I know we are going to hear from this crap coaching staff how we are still mathematically in this thing.

by beardown on Dec 3, 2007 7:17 AM CST reply actions

The problem is ...

if you bring in Orton, what still remains is the shitty coaching staff, namely Ron Turner the Genius (tm), and receivers who can make plays but drop a ton of passes.

I wouldn't ever go out to hurt anybody deliberately - unless it was, you know, important, like a league game or something. - Dick Butkus

by iowaBear on Dec 3, 2007 7:23 AM CST up reply actions

I don't think we can call for Orton anymore

Isn't Grossman playing well? He isn't blowing it up or anything, but 296, 1 TD and 0INTs is pretty good. It isn't his fault that we couldn't score TDs instead of FGs, that falls mostly to our line.

by Adam T on Dec 3, 2007 8:28 AM CST up reply actions

Hurry Up

Yeah I can't figure out why we stopped with it... Maybe it's not the thing you do every single play, but we actually ran the ball effectively and passed well. More hurry up!

by tacologic on Dec 3, 2007 10:05 AM CST up reply actions

terrible pocket presence

When will Grossman finally learn to step up in the pocket when there's pressure from the outside ends? I counted at least three sacks that most QB's would have avoided after three years in the league, the guy cannot outrun the outside rush and then the team takes a 15+ yard loss on the sack. Ridiculous.

by Dmac on Dec 3, 2007 9:45 AM CST reply actions

a lot of the sacks

come when there is pressure coming from every direction, not just the outside ends. this line is horrible.

by lopey986 on Dec 3, 2007 10:59 AM CST up reply actions

ya

a lot of times if rex were to step up it would be into an unblocked blitzing linebacker...

by Jbasic89 on Dec 3, 2007 11:52 AM CST up reply actions

yeah

and few times it would be into a pocket and not result in a sack tacking us out of fild goal range or manageable third down.

by mike b on Dec 3, 2007 12:45 PM CST up reply actions

terrible oline

the reason grossman bails out and gets sacked for 15 yards rather than step up is he assumes that if there is pressure coming from the sides there will be pressure coming from the middle and he is usually right.

-leopoldjones

by leopoldjones on Dec 3, 2007 11:43 AM CST reply actions

well then he is a moron

because the two sacks he took that screwed us out of points there was no pressure up the middle, he should look instead of "assume."

in order to make a pocket a lot of tackles wll let a guy run and use his momentum to run him deep past the quarterback. that's when a non moron steps up and has a pocket.

by mike b on Dec 3, 2007 12:44 PM CST up reply actions

two sacks?

please.... tell me which two sacks screwed the bears out of points.

visit the mindful mission.

by big_lowitzki on Dec 3, 2007 1:43 PM CST up reply actions

Foggy memory

on my part probably but didn't Gould nail the FG's anyway?

The one at the goal line if he just fell down and they probably avoid the blocked punt which means they might have avoided a TD. I don't recall any other ones yesterday that cost us points.

Of course, if we're playing the what-if game, if Hester catches the ball the play before when he was WIDE FUCKING OPEN then Rex doesn't get sacked at the goal line.

Visit The Cub Reporter (mvn.com/mlb-cubs)

by thecubreporter on Dec 3, 2007 6:48 PM CST up reply actions

yep

my bad. i had to look it up but the drives those sacks occured ended in field goals, i was thinking those were punts and the other drives were field goals. although i will say again that if he steps up in the pocket you are buying your recievers 2-3 more seconds to get open and make something happen. nothing good can happen from running backwards.

by mike b on Dec 3, 2007 7:36 PM CST up reply actions

Well no doubt

that the running backwards resurfaced yesterday. He did seem to be a lot better about stepping into the pocket the few games before.

But man, did he nail some crazy accurate throws yesterday in coverage. Right on the hands, in stride, where only our receiver could catch it.

I'm all for upgrade next year at QB, just no idea where that upgrade could come from.

Visit The Cub Reporter (mvn.com/mlb-cubs)

by thecubreporter on Dec 3, 2007 7:56 PM CST up reply actions

i don't think there is an upgrade this year

and i think if you give him a good line and a running game he'll be alright (as most qb's would). but i don't know if his decision making is any better that last year.

by mike b on Dec 3, 2007 8:29 PM CST up reply actions