The bears need to trade for an offense. The packers arent playing that great on D. Maybe Mack for 1/2 a dozen competant players.
And here I actually convinced myself the Bears, coming off a 12-4 season, could win their home opener... Nope.
Trubisky and the whole offense looked rusty, sloppy, and plain bad. Yikes
EDIT- I know it's Game 1 and we didn't play but all in all tonight was a big win for the Vikings. Both teams have major issues to work out.
Wow that was an ugly kerplup for the grand opening of the season. Seems like these guys need more practice. Although they probably all do well at that.
Bears defense looks as stout as ever.....going to be a nightmare again for QBs. That D-line gave Rodgers fits. Trubisky looked rusty. Bears moved UP for him over Mahomes and Deshaun Watson.
Packer's D appears better. Its one game.
Yep.
Aaron Rodgers just said on NBC: "We got a defense!" Uh, Aaron, the opposing quarterback was MITCHELL TRUBISKY.
To me, all this does is prove: that the preseason DOES have a purpose. Neither offense (or, at least, neither QB) threw a single pass in the preseason. THIS game WAS their preseason. I expect that both will get better... but I don't think we can take anything from this game, other than neither team's offense was ready for the season to begin. I think the Bears' defense will continue to be good; so that was not a mirage. The Packers? I think their "defense" WAS a mirage. They went against a 2nd year QB who hadn't thrown an in-game pass since last January.
Quote: @"pumpf" said:
To me, all this does is prove: that the preseason DOES have a purpose. Neither offense (or, at least, neither QB) threw a single pass in the preseason. THIS game WAS their preseason. I expect that both will get better... but I don't think we can take anything from this game, other than neither team's offense was ready for the season to begin. I think the Bears' defense will continue to be good; so that was not a mirage. The Packers? I think their "defense" WAS a mirage. They went against a 2nd year QB who hadn't thrown an in-game pass since last January.
I disagree. Both teams played pretty much like last year, look at the stats. Playing preseason or not, its Game 1 where the bullets are live and the intensity is ratcheted up. The Bears will live or die with that defense and the Packers will live or die with Rodgers making plays when he can. It completely depends who opens on Thursday night each season and what the identity of those teams are: last night's game was the lowest scoring game in opening game history (of the foreseeable past anyway). Other opening night games included scores like: 42-27 two years ago, 21-20, 28-21, 36-16, 49-27, 42-34....and those were games just since 2011.
The better answer is Chicago is even better on defense....and although many here don't want to believe it, the Packers are probably better also on D. Nagy didn't do Trubisky any favors with his play calling in the 2nd half. New coaching staffs for both teams, also. It takes some time. A little rusty, sure.
Quote: @"StickyBun" said:
@"pumpf" said:
To me, all this does is prove: that the preseason DOES have a purpose. Neither offense (or, at least, neither QB) threw a single pass in the preseason. THIS game WAS their preseason. I expect that both will get better... but I don't think we can take anything from this game, other than neither team's offense was ready for the season to begin. I think the Bears' defense will continue to be good; so that was not a mirage. The Packers? I think their "defense" WAS a mirage. They went against a 2nd year QB who hadn't thrown an in-game pass since last January.
I disagree. Both teams played pretty much like last year, look at the stats. Playing preseason or not, its Game 1 where the bullets are live and the intensity is ratcheted up. The Bears will live or die with that defense and the Packers will live or die with Rodgers making plays when he can. It completely depends who opens on Thursday night each season and what the identity of those teams are: last night's game was the lowest scoring game in opening game history (of the foreseeable past anyway). Other opening night games included scores like: 42-27 two years ago, 21-20, 28-21, 36-16, 49-27, 42-34....and those were games just since 2011.
The better answer is Chicago is even better on defense....and although many here don't want to believe it, the Packers are probably better also on D. Nagy didn't do Trubisky any favors with his play calling in the 2nd half. New coaching staffs for both teams, also. It takes some time. A little rusty, sure.
That kinda bolsters Pumpf's point. Especially with GB. New coach, new offense, need to work on that in the preseason.
Quote: @"greediron" said:
@"StickyBun" said:
@"pumpf" said:
To me, all this does is prove: that the preseason DOES have a purpose. Neither offense (or, at least, neither QB) threw a single pass in the preseason. THIS game WAS their preseason. I expect that both will get better... but I don't think we can take anything from this game, other than neither team's offense was ready for the season to begin. I think the Bears' defense will continue to be good; so that was not a mirage. The Packers? I think their "defense" WAS a mirage. They went against a 2nd year QB who hadn't thrown an in-game pass since last January.
I disagree. Both teams played pretty much like last year, look at the stats. Playing preseason or not, its Game 1 where the bullets are live and the intensity is ratcheted up. The Bears will live or die with that defense and the Packers will live or die with Rodgers making plays when he can. It completely depends who opens on Thursday night each season and what the identity of those teams are: last night's game was the lowest scoring game in opening game history (of the foreseeable past anyway). Other opening night games included scores like: 42-27 two years ago, 21-20, 28-21, 36-16, 49-27, 42-34....and those were games just since 2011.
The better answer is Chicago is even better on defense....and although many here don't want to believe it, the Packers are probably better also on D. Nagy didn't do Trubisky any favors with his play calling in the 2nd half. New coaching staffs for both teams, also. It takes some time. A little rusty, sure.
That kinda bolsters Pumpf's point. Especially with GB. New coach, new offense, need to work on that in the preseason.
I'll just agree to disagree with you and pumpf: the point of not playing starters is not to get them injured as that is the massive downside compared to the little cohesion that could be gained from playing more in the preseason. New coaching regimes take time to gel and preseason isn't how it gets accomplished, real games with real intensity does. We just see it differently and that's cool. I totally get that the more you play, the better you play. Its not without merit for sure. Its more of a risk/reward percentage scenario IMO.
|
