Game 10: Packers @ Bears - Sunday, Nov 17th at 12:00PM

[adambr2]

2 minutes ago, homer said:

I believe I saw that it was a coin flip 

In the moment I thought they should kick for sure. Upon reflection today I can see either side. Part of the missing “context” for me is that the Bears have a really tough red zone defense.

Unfortunately we just don’t seem to have great red zone weapons to give us a solid chance of converting those one shot plays.

[CheezWizHed]

5 hours ago, adambr2 said:

In the moment I thought they should kick for sure. Upon reflection today I can see either side. Part of the missing “context” for me is that the Bears have a really tough red zone defense.

Unfortunately we just don’t seem to have great red zone weapons to give us a solid chance of converting those one shot plays.

I realize Jacobs was running well and he ran one in for a TD, but I still don't like running the ball 2x on 1st and 2nd down with 10 yards to the goal line. And I was also one (before the play) to want the FG. All metrics aside, it just felt like the better choice given our TD options (few) and Chicago's red zone D and the flow the game. 

I like the metrics, but at some point you have to know when to go against them. 

[HarryDoyle]

Too funny.

 

[OldHeidelberg]

23 hours ago, adambr2 said:

MLF for some bizarre reason called his 3rd timeout after the completion to KA with 35 seconds left. Chicago had the timeout in their pocket and a 1st and 10 at the 30. They had the whole field to use, could run or pass the ball, and another 10 or 15 yards basically ices it.

Look at it from the point of view of the Packers defense, they are staring down a likely loss where the ball was, 76% according to google, I would have guessed more like 80. Probably the best thing they could hope for is the Bears actually dropping back and throwing a pass as the Packers D would be gambling heavily to make a play if they did. The Falcons/NE SB comes to mind, Falcons had ball at the 30 and FG wins but the dropped back and got sacked and punted. The rest is history.    

[Jimbo]

The Bears did the same thing to the Packers, soon after Walter's death.

 

[HarveysWBs]

1 hour ago, Jimbo said:

The Bears did the same thing to the Packers, soon after Walter's death.

 

I had that exact game in mind yesterday. I remember it well. Growing up in Illinois, nearly all my classmates were Bear fans. That week, we had current event reports to present to the class and one student just went on and on about how the ghost of Walter Payton blocked the field goal that would have made the Packers winners, looking my way half the time. Chicago fans are insufferable. Only a decade of baseball dominance and three decades of football ownership have finally started to cow them in my neck of the woods. About dang time, too.

[BrewerFan]

21 hours ago, homer said:

I think they miss Jones on O. more because of his versatility. Jacobs has been better than I thought he'd be but he's more or less a between the tackles guy. Jones could run more of a route tree and get outside. I think the defense had to pay more attention to him which maybe opened things up for other guys.

That makes sense. I wasn't a fan of that move(mostly the Jones half of it), but as good as Jacobs has been, it's been a little bit different schematically. 

Could be they wanted Lloyd to fill that role. They were just talking about the bad luck/timing of the appendectomy for Lloyd, praising his role in the passing game, and what he adds to the run game. 

I still think even with that aspect missing from the offense, the offense will get going and even this past Sunday was a very good start. We played a solid defense and they were good. Just didn't quite finish it off. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

Jones was fully available for about 6 games. That ends the Jacobs debate right there. They absolutely made the correct decision. 

[CheezWizHed]

Jones is the better receiver, but Jacobs is clearly the better runner.  I wonder if the last game will change how they use Jacobs as a receiver too?

[OldHeidelberg]

18 hours ago, HarryDoyle said:

Too funny.

 

I watched that play a few times now and the snapper didn't even attempt to lift his head up, like they were hoping for a penalty if something went wrong.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

The "controversy" is that the Bears got called for a leverage penalty or whatever on a FG recently. If you compare the two plays, they are not even remotely similar.