Bears vs Vikings Game Thread

For the entire game....they did their job.

For that one drive....they didn't. They let the Vikings march down the field and score. One area this defense continues to struggle is against the 2 minute offense. That's been a problem dating back to last season.

They didn't "hand the ball back" to the offense. You do that when you stop a team....not when you give up a touchdown.

Leno gave up pressures consistently....what the fuck are you smoking? Do you think he was good in pass protection?

Daniel was more efficient than Mitch against a much better defense.

I have no idea what your point is. If your point is being stupid....you fucking nailed it brother.

 

Leno wasn’t the only person pass protecting. The line as a whole held up better against the Vikings Pass rush than it did against the Redskins. If you watch both games and don’t see that I can’t help you.

80% completion percentage 3td’s 1 int 116.5 rating is more efficient than 73% 1td 0 int 101.4 rating. And always will be.

You could argue that Daniel was less efficient because of the level of competition but you cannot say he was more efficient.

 

Just had to quote this rather than repeat it myself. Daniel is not a long term answer he did what he had to and coming off the bench hats off to him. He needs to avoid another NYG game like last year.

Mitch is frustrating the hell out of me because the games not slowing down for him. It honesty looked like more of the playbook was there for Chase and that’s sad.

The silver lining here is hopefully Mitch can take this time to work on the mental part of the game and come back in a big way.

 

Just had to quote this rather than repeat it myself. Daniel is not a long term answer he did what he had to and coming off the bench hats off to him. He needs to avoid another NYG game like last year.

Mitch is frustrating the hell out of me because the games not slowing down for him. It honesty looked like more of the playbook was there for Chase and that’s sad.

The silver lining here is hopefully Mitch can take this time to work on the mental part of the game and come back in a big way.

 

I'd like that this is more scheme/coaching than players/personnel.

They built this team to attack.

Telling them to soften up, and "allow the underneath shit as long as it isn't to the sideline", isn't ATTACKING.

This team play best running forward. It's fucking dumb to ask them to back-peddle.

 

I can't ell you how many times yesterday I thought Chase was going to pull down the ball and roll out of the pocket.

Instead, he held in there, let the routes develop, and then threw an accurate pass. Whether is was underneath, in a crossing pattern, or even some deep balls. He read the defense and played the pocket.

Mitch hasn't learned how to do this yet. And I don't think he will. When his primary is gone, his feet get happy, and he runs. People like to say he's extending the play. I say he's bailing on the play that was called.

Go back and watch that deep sideline pass to Cohen that was called incomplete (I think he was bobbling it). Cohen hadn't even made his break yet and DEFINITELY wasn't the primary or secondary. Chase knew he'd be at a spot at a certain point and when his first reads were gone, he just threw to that spot. And had Cohen not juggled it a little, it's a perfect play.

 

No, I think the fact that Mitch played the Redskins, and Chase played the Vikings says it all. I wouldn't think it needed to be said.
His ability to move the chains against a better defense led to a higher TOP and kept the defense off the field, and that certainly didn't hurt his cause either.

 

After the first half I kept thinking man the second half we're going to see a strip-sack and change the game the way he was sitting in there.

I think the time of possession says it all. Does that 7% completion percentage on the stat line help that defense recover?

 

I don't need your help rob because you clearly have no clue what you're looking at.

The difference from the Redskins game to the Vikings game wasn't the play of the line....it was the patience and the play of the QB.

You could argue that....but it would make you wrong.

Bears dominated TOP with Daniel under center by nearly 9 minutes I believe....versus a TOP differential of 3 minutes against the Redskins.

No turnovers by Daniel....a redzone turnover by Trubisky the previous week.

Trubisky got the benefit of 5 turnovers in the Redskins game versus two for Daniel against the Vikings.

Not to mention Daniel faced a far superior defense. If you want to make comparisons....don't cherry pick...look at the entire picture.

 

I agree.

 

I am really starting to wonder where this "Trubisky's ceiling is higher" garbage is coming from. Sportswriters? Scouts? The Organization? What if it is not there?

Let's go back to 2016 for a second. I took a look at their game logs. There is not much there that says this guy is going to be a world beater. He had some good games. But he had some abysmal games as well. So, let's pretend for a second the scouts got this one really wrong. For whatever reason, they saw more than what was there. The first game they played was a decent team; Georgia. They are better now, but as you know that year was a good rebuilding year. (Oddly enough, Mel Tucker was the D coordinator.) That was a bad game and a loss for Trubs. (156yds and 3.9 yards per attempt...ouch!)

Let that sink in. He couldn't beat Mel Tucker's Defense. (I am only referencing this game because we know how god awful his defense's are.)

Now, he had some good games against, then some ranked teams, but still lost to Stanford in the Bowl game. So, he doesn't even have "big game" pedigree. His best games were against Nobody except maybe that game against Florida State.

I will only go against scouts because I don't care what sportswriters or the organization says. But many of us on here have looked at game film. College and pros. What the hell scouts do we have the said this guy was worthy of a #2 pick? Let alone a first round pick!

Fast forward to not much happening between the ears. He cannot grasp this offense; again. Happy Feet. Has no pocket presence. Mechanics are off. Gives up on plays easily. Lacks mid and long range accuracy?

What does he do well? Run? Because it seems everything we are told is just the opposite on the field. And please don't bring up Denver. It was Denver. We should have never been in that position to begin with.


Trubs was awful against Green Bay. Minnesota has a better Defense. What makes anyone think he would have been any better against a better Defense? Confidence? Because if all we have is confidence and not skill, talent or experience, we are in deep shit.

Even more perplexing is that everything we see says we would be better off with a game manager over him. Yet, that doesn't hold up for some reason. Even I think we have a better shot with him under center. But why? Is it because of what we were told? It certainly isn't what we see.

Someone please explain this to me.

 

Well as far as where he was ranked pre draft, I've got nothing for you. I don't know whether its all the people you listed constantly hearing the echoes from other people in the chamber and eventually they all wind up at broadly the same place, but there is def an element of group think re this. I mean look at Kevin White, its the same thing.

In Trubisky's defence he did have some seriously good games last season. They may feel like distant memories, hell in football terms they are, but he showed clearly imo that his ceiling is in fact higher than Daniel's. And the rest is just hope probably. Im cutting him more slack than most, something I did with Cutler too, at least in those first 3seasons or so. But like Cutler it could wind up being false hope.

 

As far as these ceilings go with no body of work to support that perception, how many of these high ceiling guys actually panned out in reality? You see GM's all the time fascinated with the perception of that glorious ceiling but shouldn't that be automatically dismissed in the first two rounds perhaps not entirely for the QB, but at #2 wtf.

 

Yep. Adam Shaheen would be another example too.

 

You got to love any comment that ends with the phrase WTF

 

Offense isn’t the only factor in TOP. The Redskins had 21 first downs and were 8/13 on third down. The Vikings had 15 first downs and were 5/13 on third down. The Redskins punted 1 time and the Vikings 5.

The TOP difference had more to do with the defense doing a better job of getting off the field than the offense sustaining drives. Let’s not forget the pick six robbed the offense of an entire possession.

I understand that you feel that Daniel played better than Trubisky would have. Unfortunately unless you can go back in time and play the game again without Mitch leaving your not going to be able to prove that. Just like you can’t say that Daniel would have played better against the Redskins.

You can say that Mitch had a better game against the Redskins than Daniel had against the Vikings.

 

And I can also say the opposite based on all factors involved.

 

He played one full season and holds the record for single season passing yards and td’s. You can’t argue that Trubisky had one hell of a season in 2016.

Mel Tucker’s defenses at Georgia ranked 35th 6th and 15th in the nation. Saying Tucker was a good NFL DC would be just as wrong as saying he was a bad college DC.

For what it’s worth the team that drafted Mahomes would have drafted Trubisky if he was available. Your asking questions that nobody has the answer to. At least our FO knows how to build one hell of a defense.

I would argue that Trubisky’s ability to avoid pressure and make plays on the run is a big strength. Daniel makes a couple of nice throws from the pocket and all of a sudden Trubisky never stands in the pocket and gives up on plays all the time? Not buying it.

Why is it so hard to accept that putting the team in position to win, late in the game when it really matters, is a good thing?

The Packers have a better Pass D than the Vikings but I get your point here. IMO the confidence comes from the talent and skills we do see from Mitch. Only not consistently enough. Getting knocked out of the game is worst case scenario because he doesn’t get the experience.

Off the subject the fact that the Packers run D has been shit pisses me off even more that we didn’t even try to run it on them in the opener.

 

If you believe this why do you prefer Trubisky over Daniel as the starting QB?

 

Daniel performing better in 1 game doesn't equal Daniel being the better option moving forward.

When you look at everything.....age, athleticism, potential, arm strength, and so on.....Trubisky is obviously the best option the Bears currently have. Daniel is a career backup that has barely played for a reason.

But the things Daniel can do well with limited ability....patience in the pocket, progressions, and accuracy on his throws....are exactly the areas Trubisky needs to improve in.