Game 15: Packers @ Bears - Saturday, Dec. 20th @ 7:20 PM

[yourout]

26 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

LaFleur certainly didn't lose this game. 

He certainly has an innate ability to pick the worst possible option at the worst possible time in the red zone

[OldSchoolSnapper]

13 minutes ago, ReverendBrewmeister said:

Not sure if that’s completely true. Some questionable play calling in the red zone is on him, since he’s the one calling the game. What percentage that might be of the total blame is hard to quantify. But it’s something.

That said, the continuous special teams issues has to be addressed. The onside kick and fumbling the ball deep inside the five yard line are the two big plays that cost the game. 

The Packers:

Fumbled inside the 5

Failed to recover an onside kick

Botched a snap/handoff whatever that final play was

Immediately surrendered 3 scores on their final 3 defensive possessions with almost no resistance 

Were ahead 16-6 with the Bears facing a 3rd and 20 on which they were sacked

Any bad playcall doesn't even scratch the surface as to why this game was lost. 

This team is straight ass. Worst of all, it's in their DNA. It doesn't matter who the coach is or who the QB is. They will find a way. 

[HarryDoyle]

At least this is the type of game that Ed Policy says "Enough is enough."

[Jopal78]

29 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

If the playoffs hadn’t expanded to 7 teams from 6, we’d be missing the playoffs for the 4th straight year. 
 

But that Matt Lafleur, hE’s oNe oF tHe bEST”!! 🤣

It’s not LaFleur’‘s fault they lost.  yeah they should’ve kicked the field goal early in the game. Nonetheless, LaFleur had a game plan to put points on board and did so with his back up QB even. Defense and ST let them down. Jacobs and Doubs fumbles were the difference in the game 

The 2025 Packers are just not as talented as the hype machines would have you believe

[OldSchoolSnapper]

There was nothing wrong with them not kicking the FG early. You can't just tack 3 points onto the score and say see, they would have won!

The whole benefit of those calls is that even if you don't convert you force a long drive with more plays and increase the odds of it stalling it or a mistake like the high snap that happened. 

I don't like LaFleur. I'm totally fine if he's canned. But this game isn't the example for that. 

[adambr2]

[adambr2]

4 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

It’s not LaFleur’‘s fault they lost.  yeah they should’ve kicked the field goal early in the game. Nonetheless, LaFleur had a game plan to put points on board and did so with his back up QB even. Defense and ST let them down. Jacobs and Doubs fumbles were the difference in the game 

and they’re just not as talented as the hype machines would have you believe

If they’d not talented enough to be one of the top 6 seeds in the conference for 4 straight years, Gute should be fired.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

1 minute ago, adambr2 said:

And like I alluded to, this somehow transcends who is in the front office or in the field. This has 100% become their identity. 

[OldSchoolSnapper]

0-5 in the red zone. Incredible. 

[HarveysWBs]

LaFleur’s saving grace is his high floor. First, he is money with QBs, and this is indisputable. Matt Ryan, Rodgers, and now Love and even Malik Willis have been the best versions of themselves under his tutelage. Knowing every year you will get maximized QB play from QB1 and even QB2 is worth its weight in gold, because the opposite of that is the fastest way to become the Jets or the Browns.

He never seems to lose the locker room, and the message doesn’t seem to get stale. But he’s being tested on that now. And his in-game foibles have been hashed enough and I won’t deny them.

The question is, does Policy have anyone who he knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that can come in and either reset practically the entire coaching staff amidst a title window for the next two years and get a better shot with Love and Parsons than MLF gives you? Or, can you trust Hafley to captain this ship and find a wunderkind OC to continue Love’s maturation? If Policy isn’t absolutely certain about either prospect, pulling the ripcord on LaFleur now is basically malpractice.

I don’t love this situation, but it is the reality. And I think you can still say he’s definitely a top 10 HC overall, and probably top 5 on his best day. Can he be that guy at least one time when it counts? Who knows. Not even Kyle Shanahan can claim as much for all the plaudits he gets.

[Jopal78]

12 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

If they’d not talented enough to be one of the top 6 seeds in the conference for 4 straight years, Gute should be fired.

I don’t disagree. That’s why he went out and got Parsons— job preservation. 
 

LaFleur is a good coach, has schemes to move the ball and score against almost everyone with mediocre talent on offense (how many first round picks does he have on offense? 3?)

Gutekunst is a competent GM, would be a gamble assuming you can get someone even better. Then there’s the question if you fire Gutekunst, you likely have to fire LaFleur as well, as a new GM will want his own coaching hire

[adambr2]

3 minutes ago, HarveysWBs said:

LaFleur’s saving grace is his high floor. First, he is money with QBs, and this is indisputable. Matt Ryan, Rodgers, and now Love and even Malik Willis have been the best versions of themselves under his tutelage. Knowing every year you will get maximized QB play from QB1 and even QB2 is worth its weight in gold, because the opposite of that is the fastest way to become the Jets or the Browns.

He never seems to lose the locker room, and the message doesn’t seem to get stale. But he’s being tested on that now. And his in-game foibles have been hashed enough and I won’t deny them.

The question is, does Policy have anyone who he knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that can come in and either reset practically the entire coaching staff amidst a title window for the next two years and get a better shot with Love and Parsons than MLF gives you? Or, can you trust Hafley to captain this ship and find a wunderkind OC to continue Love’s maturation? If Policy isn’t absolutely certain about either prospect, pulling the ripcord on LaFleur now is basically malpractice.

I don’t love this situation, but it is the reality. And I think you can still say he’s definitely a top 10 HC overall, and probably top 5 on his best day. Can he be that guy at least one time when it counts? Who knows. Not even Kyle Shanahan can claim as much for all the plaudits he gets.

He’s the Phillip Rivers of head coaches. Solid floor, will give you a nice regular season record, not your guy if you want to finish your season in confetti.

[Jopal78]

7 minutes ago, HarveysWBs said:

LaFleur’s saving grace is his high floor. First, he is money with QBs, and this is indisputable. Matt Ryan, Rodgers, and now Love and even Malik Willis have been the best versions of themselves under his tutelage. Knowing every year you will get maximized QB play from QB1 and even QB2 is worth its weight in gold, because the opposite of that is the fastest way to become the Jets or the Browns.

He never seems to lose the locker room, and the message doesn’t seem to get stale. But he’s being tested on that now. And his in-game foibles have been hashed enough and I won’t deny them.

The question is, does Policy have anyone who he knows beyond a shadow of a doubt that can come in and either reset practically the entire coaching staff amidst a title window for the next two years and get a better shot with Love and Parsons than MLF gives you? Or, can you trust Hafley to captain this ship and find a wunderkind OC to continue Love’s maturation? If Policy isn’t absolutely certain about either prospect, pulling the ripcord on LaFleur now is basically malpractice.

I don’t love this situation, but it is the reality. And I think you can still say he’s definitely a top 10 HC overall, and probably top 5 on his best day. Can he be that guy at least one time when it counts? Who knows. Not even Kyle Shanahan can claim as much for all the plaudits he gets.

LaFleur and Gutekunst likely both get extensions because they won’t allow them to be lame ducks, and while you can justify firing Gutekunst it’s too big a gamble you could both a better coach and GM, or  even find a better GM who would agree to work with LaFleur 

[Jopal78]

25 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

There was nothing wrong with them not kicking the FG early. You can't just tack 3 points onto the score and say see, they would have won!

The whole benefit of those calls is that even if you don't convert you force a long drive with more plays and increase the odds of it stalling it or a mistake like the high snap that happened. 

I don't like LaFleur. I'm totally fine if he's canned. But this game isn't the example for that. 

It’s philosophical. The other side is you don’t leave trips to the red zone empty handed. 

[adambr2]

7 minutes ago, Jopal78 said:

LaFleur and Gutekunst likely both get extensions because they won’t allow them to be lame ducks, and while you can justify firing Gutekunst it’s too big a gamble you could both a better coach and GM, or  even find a better GM who would agree to work with LaFleur 

The whole “who we gonna get if we fire him and how do we know he’ll be better” is an age old argument. 

I don’t know. We’ll conduct interviews and find someone. No one was saying “Matt Lafleur” when we asked this question 8 years ago.

The fear of the unknown is why we held onto Dom Capers about 3-4 years too long.

[HarveysWBs]

3 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

He’s the Phillip Rivers of head coaches. Solid floor, will give you a nice regular season record, not your guy if you want to finish your season in confetti.

I fear you may be right. But this is football and the variance is insanely high. Flipping Tom Coughlin got two rings out of Eli Manning and a dump truck full of horseshoes. Brian Billick got one for crying out loud. LaFleur can clear that bar. But the breaks are beating the boys, and so far, he’s never overcome the breaks.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

2 minutes ago, adambr2 said:

The whole “who we gonna get if we fire him and how do we know he’ll be better” is an age old argument. 

I don’t know. We’ll conduct interviews and find someone. No one was saying “Matt Lafleur” when we asked this question 8 years ago.

The fear of the unknown is why we held onto Dom Capers about 3-4 years too long.

I personally think LaFleur is a really good OC who just doesn't make the leap to HC. There are guys like that all over the league and he was lucky enough to have Aaron who made it virtually impossible for a new coach to get fired. 

Bigger issue is that I truly don't think it matters anymore. I think we could have Tom Landry, Bill Parcells and Bill Walsh calling the shots here and we would choke because it's just our thing. 

 

[adambr2]

5 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I personally think LaFleur is a really good OC who just doesn't make the leap to HC. There are guys like that all over the league and he was lucky enough to have Aaron who made it virtually impossible for a new coach to get fired. 

Bigger issue is that I truly don't think it matters anymore. I think we could have Tom Landry, Bill Parcells and Bill Walsh calling the shots here and we would choke because it's just our thing. 

 

When they got the onside kick they were still down 7 and everyone here knew the game was over. There was 2 minutes left and they hadn’t gotten in the endzone the first 58 minutes and everyone still knew the game was over. The only surprise about it was that they elected to kick the XP and then we lost in OT. Probably because Ben Johnson knew we’d choke it away in OT anyway and there was no need to chance the random variance of one single 2 point play.

[yourout]

13 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

I personally think LaFleur is a really good OC who just doesn't make the leap to HC. There are guys like that all over the league and he was lucky enough to have Aaron who made it virtually impossible for a new coach to get fired. 

Bigger issue is that I truly don't think it matters anymore. I think we could have Tom Landry, Bill Parcells and Bill Walsh calling the shots here and we would choke because it's just our thing. 

 

At some point it really does become your identity and you come to expect it. 

And it's a really difficult one to shed. 

Just ask the Buffalo bills.

[adambr2]

55 minutes ago, OldSchoolSnapper said:

There was nothing wrong with them not kicking the FG early. You can't just tack 3 points onto the score and say see, they would have won!

The whole benefit of those calls is that even if you don't convert you force a long drive with more plays and increase the odds of it stalling it or a mistake like the high snap that happened. 

I don't like LaFleur. I'm totally fine if he's canned. But this game isn't the example for that. 

I mean he ran a good 3-4 of his stupid little WR end arounds tonight. You could argue he didn’t manage the clock well on the Bears last Q4 drive. Definitely not a “MLF’s fault” game, but he wasn’t blameless.

[homer]

congrats to the Bears on beating the Packers JV team

[yourout]

Looking back over the last 10 years how many games have the special teams had a hand in the loss versus a reason they won?

I bet it's 10 to 1: against.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

5 minutes ago, yourout said:

Looking back over the last 10 years how many games have the special teams had a hand in the loss versus a reason they won?

I bet it's 10 to 1: against.

How many have they lost after their in-game probability moves past 90%? I would legitimately say more than anyone in the league. I hope they lose the final 2 and miss the playoffs, I really do. That would spare another playoff choke, likely in Chicago, I'm absolutely sick of this team and its transcendent ability to pull off these kinds of pathetic, humiliating losses. 

Of their 5.5 losses this season, Cleveland, Chicago, Carolina and Dallas were catastrophic failures that never should have happened. This team should have cleared the 1 seed by at least 2 games. That's not bias, nobody loses like they do with such incredible consistency. 

[HarryDoyle]

There's no doubt in my mind this team is better than the Bears, as I think they are a fraudulent team like they were in 2001 and 2010 and will be one and done in the playoffs, but the difference in why these two teams are in the positions they are in is the Bears find ways to win and the Packers find ways to lose, and it's just so infuriating. This team is capable of more than what they're showing, and they just can't help themselves and just can't get out of their own way. Changes need to be made because all we're doing now is running in place, not being able to take the next step. I think Policy sees this and will take the necessary steps to get where this team can go.

And on a side note, why is Doubs even on the hands team with his concussion history? He looked like he didn't want to have anything to do with the collision that comes with the territory of recovering an onside kick.

[OldSchoolSnapper]

45 minutes ago, HarryDoyle said:

There's no doubt in my mind this team is better than the Bears, as I think they are a fraudulent team like they were in 2001 and 2010 and will be one and done in the playoffs, but the difference in why these two teams are in the positions they are in is the Bears find ways to win and the Packers find ways to lose, and it's just so infuriating. This team is capable of more than what they're showing, and they just can't help themselves and just can't get out of their own way. Changes need to be made because all we're doing now is running in place, not being able to take the next step. I think Policy sees this and will take the necessary steps to get where this team can go.

And on a side note, why is Doubs even on the hands team with his concussion history? He looked like he didn't want to have anything to do with the collision that comes with the territory of recovering an onside kick.

This feels more like 2006 when the field is weak and the Bears very well could have a run, even if their 06 team was better than this one, which it absolutely was, Grossman not withstanding. 

Don't really see a team the Bears can't beat, I think the 1 seed on the road will be difficult for them, but 3-7 are all going to be teams that can succumb to them, especially getting the Rams at home, which makes them a lot more susceptible. 

Hat tip to the Bears, who have been very consistent in their miraculous wins even if the Packers are an embarrassing laughing stock. I don't want anything to do with the playoffs. I am genuinely hoping for a merciful skid to end the year and let Detroit have a go at it. 

GB had their chances and tripped over their feet last night, in Dallas, in Cleveland, and at home against the Panthers. Not exactly losing to the league's finest. They are a crappy team and deserve to be 7th or 8th.