[CBFF] Game Comments - Seattle 10/1/06

[Phil DeNomme]

I'm pretty sure Davis had one pass throw to him.  I believe it was high and
just out of his reach to catch.  There might have been one other time that
the got looked at.  

But how nice is it to actually have a verity of weapons??!!

-----Original Message-----
From: cbff-bounces at chicagobearsfanforum.com
[mailto:cbff-bounces at chicagobearsfanforum.com] On Behalf Of Victor Waldron
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2006 1:15 PM
To: post at chicagobearsfanforum.com
Subject: Re: [CBFF] Game Comments - Seattle 10/1/06


> 3)  The Seahawks obviously were committed to stopping the run, just
like the
> last three opponents.  They were regularly throwing 8 in the box from the
> get go.  This is leaving the passing game wide open and leaving opponents
> more than usually susceptible to play action.  Eventually, opponents are
> going to have to respect the pass and that's when Jones will really break
> out for some very big games.

It seemed to me that Jones's best runs were when he was in a single back
set and the Bears sporting 3 WRs. When McKie was in the game it seemed
like: "we know we're going to run, they know we're going to run, so
we're running." That's fine if you have a good "north-south" runner but
Jones has been trying to do too much "east-west" crap. If you have 8 in
the box (or 9 as Seattle sometimes had) you have to hit the D running
forward. Perhaps Benson is better in this capacity. The single back set
with the D more spread out suits Jones much better.
 
>
> 5)  Nice job by the receivers but there were some drops that may
eventually
> cost them if they continue.
> 

Rasheed Davis had 0 catches and 0 balls thrown to him that I am aware
of. From my 300-level perch I can tell you that he was open on nearly
every play, sometimes being covered initially by a LB. That said, Moose,
Berrian, and Clark did such a great job of getting open themselves that
Grossman never checked down to Davis. We have three solid WRs right now.


> 1) The Seahawks were regularly going for that soft spot behind the CB
along
> the sideline before the safety can get over.  They did it with some
success
> and would have scored a TD on it if the receiver hadn't dropped the pass.

The game was nearly out of reach by that point so the TD wouldn't have
matter much. I think as good as Tillman is most of the time he's going
to always give up a big play on occasion (re: Carolina, Cincy, and
Cleveland last season). Overall I think he's a fairly solid corner but
the safety is going to have to roll to his side of the field more often.



> 4)  Anyone hear Nate Burleson's name tonight?  This is what happens
when you
> go after a FA for revenge.
> 

How about Nathan Vasher??  I didn't hear his name either. The reasons
are different of course. Vasher is having a quiet season because QBs are
staying away from him. I would too.

> 5)  The Seahawks simply didn't make plays tonight.  They didn't take
> advantage of what opportunities they got, dropping passes at crucial times
> and doing stupid things.  Not a good game for them.

No, but don't you think our D had something to do with it? Our DL was
causing havoc all game long and Hassleback had to make decisions very
quickly, trying to find receivers who were not getting open easily.
Playing poorly is one thing, but it's not like Seattle continually shot
themselves in the foot.

> Miscellaneous
> 1)  Devin Hester is a time bomb.  There are times when he just seems
to lose
> his mind out there.  Its bad enough when you're returning punts but
what if
> he has to play CB?

He won't play CB, at least not anytime soon. I think his difficulty
initially was trying to catch the ball running forward at full speed,
then on subsequent punts the little voice in his head was saying "don't
drop it, don't drop it." The coaches will work with him and he'll be
fine. I really don't want Vasher fielding punts if it can be avoided.

> 2)  I watched this game expecting the Bears to have been very
dominant.  But
> the truth is that it was the stupid turnovers that made the difference.
> Thos 10 points were the difference between 10-3 and 20-3 at half.  Add the
> first TD drive in the second half and the Seahawks were in trouble too
deep
> to get out of.  I have to think that this Seattle loss was largely
their own
> doing.

Again, I don't see it that way. Good teams can make other good teams
make mistakes. I don't think we're 37-6 better than Seattle, but the way
our offense moved and the way or DL caused havoc I can't see Seattle
winning even if they had Alexander.

> 3)  The Bears had some dumb penatlies tonight at crucial times.  That
was th
> ecase last week, too.  It has to stop.

Agreed.


> 6)  I'll tell you what really bothered me about this game.  Seattle
reminds
> me way too much of the Carolina Panthers last year.  Hasselback
reminds me a
> lot of Delhomme.  The Bears beat Carolina, a very good team, the first
time
> during the season and Carolina didn't play particuly well.  They then came
> back to beat them in the playoffs.

You must be a Cubs fan as well, always waiting for the other shoe to
drop. There's no doubt the Bears can't think they'll win by 31 points
the next time but I'll give you one good reason why your scenario above
is flawed: experience. I think because of last year's Carolina debacle
the same won't happen again. Anyone can beat anyone in the playoffs so
I'm not guaranteeing victory but there's a reason why the "experts" cite
playoff experience as a key factor. Just ask the Steelers.

V

_______________________________________________
Check out the CBFF Blog:
blog.chicagobearsfanforum.com
CBFF Homepage:
www.chicagobearsfanforum.com