Bears vs. Packers
So who you like tonight? I think the Packers are much better this year and I'd love to see them lose, but I really don't want them heading into their home opener 0-1. It's hard enough winning on the road. It's even harder winning your opponent's home opener. And if they're facing 0-2? No thanks.
I heard the yellow team is going with their 3rd string MLB tonight so look for a lot of Tarik Cohen trying to take advantage of that. I think the Packers take this as the Bears feel the sting of losing Fangio's notorious blitz packages. Pagano is good too, but not as good as Fangio. The beauty is that one team will be 0-1 tonight.
Packers 23
Bears 20
“A gentleman is someone who can play the accordion, but doesn't." - Tom Waits
@"StickyBun" said:@"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.I agree Sticky. It's one thing if in preseason games teams went all out but the vanilla play calling and the one or two series the #1's see isn't enough to shake off the rust. Preseason games allow the coaching staffs to see what they bought in free agency and the draft. 5 to 10+ year veterans dealing with new coaches/philosophies need legit competition to get the kinks out. Last night's debacle of a offensive game...with it's 178 penalties and review delays...was more disruptive, IMHO.
@"AGRforever" said:Hmmmm...10 points allowed, 5 sacks, and Rodgers held to a net around 160?@"BarrNone55" said: Looking a bit like 1985 out there... just say no lol. bears will be hard to beat if the packers OL isnt $hit
Texting my buddy during the game---told him just watch trib is good for one or two floaters over the top a game
End of 4th quarter he texts back---nailed it
Edit Post (mod action — author will see a notice)
Warn Poster
Suspend User (3 days)
The user will be suspended for 3 days and will receive an email with the reason and information about how to appeal.