The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

SkinsJock wrote:In my opinion the Bears defense lost the game NOT the QB

No way. That defense was on the field all day because the Bears offense couldn't manage to maintain any kind of drive. Any defense will break down if your offense cannot hold the ball more than mustering a 3 and out.

Grossman, imho, was quite responsible for a lot of it. On one of the Bear's promising drives, it was 2nd and 1. For some idiotic reason, the Bears decided that was the perfect time to throw it. Grossman drops back, and falls over his own feet. Sack. Then he drops back on 3rd...without the ball, having fumbled the snap. Sack.

Throwing those Interceptions were killers as well...both of them were just horrible decisions. Anytime a QB throws 2 Interceptions (one for a touchdown!), and fumbles twice, he's to blame for a lot. Yes, his stats turned out 20/28 for 165, but he only had like 50 yards passing by the 3rd quarter, and got the bulk of his yards in the 4th playing against a prevent defense.

Grossman was the real MVP of that SuperBowl.

PulpExposure wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:In my opinion the Bears defense lost the game NOT the QB

No way. That defense was on the field all day because the Bears offense couldn't manage to maintain any kind of drive. Any defense will break down if your offense cannot hold the ball more than mustering a 3 and out.

The Bears were very clear before the game - all their defense had to do was not allow the Colts offense to hold the ball for extended periods of time. That did not happen or it sure looked like it to me at one stage the Colts had 24 minutes of offense to the Bears 10.

Grossman, imho, was quite responsible for a lot of it. On one of the Bear's promising drives, it was 2nd and 1. For some idiotic reason, the Bears decided that was the perfect time to throw it. Grossman drops back, and falls over his own feet. Sack. Then he drops back on 3rd...without the ball, having fumbled the snap. Sack.

Throwing those Interceptions were killers as well...both of them were just horrible decisions. Anytime a QB throws 2 Interceptions (one for a touchdown!), and fumbles twice, he's to blame for a lot. Yes, his stats turned out 20/28 for 165, but he only had like 50 yards passing by the 3rd quarter, and got the bulk of his yards in the 4th playing against a prevent defense.

I think it was perfectly clear that the offense did not need to score when the Bears were in the lead - this was the scenario that the Bears could only dream about. All they needed their top ranked defense to do was get the Colts offense off the field!

The Bears defense was supposed to perform and did not. The Bears offense was not expected to be a factor and they were not BUT the biggest disapointment was not the QB it was the Bears defense. Sure they got tired but that was at the end when they had been on the field all day it seemed. They had said that they could keep Manning oiff the field and they did not - I never heard them say they expected or even hoped that Grossman could win the game for them - they sure did expect a lot more than they got from their defense is all I'm saying.

I agree that the Bears offense was meant to play better against the Colts defense and it did not but that really meant little because Manning could do whatever he wanted against that D.

SkinsJock wrote:I agree that the Bears offense was meant to play better against the Colts defense and it did not but that really meant little because Manning could do whatever he wanted against that D.

There are a few things to this.

First the Tampa 2 defense is supposed to frustrate a QB into doing something stupid. Manning is not stupid...so he was more than content to pick that defense to pieces and take what they gave him.

That being said, the Bears brain trust did the defense no help by not running the ball a lot more. Their run game was pretty productive (15 runs for 115 yards from Thomas Jones iirc). The way they could have beat the Colts was to own the clock by running the ball a lot. Instead, they chose wierd opportunities to throw the ball and put the ball in Rex's hands.

Who is an awful quarterback. It was a terrible decision by the Bears.

I'm not defending Grossman - I thought he had a terrible game - he also had 2 stats that are very misleading - he led the NFL in # of games with a rating over 100 and he led the NFL in # of games with the lowest rating. At the end of the season when it really counts he did not look like the QB you would want to have in a SB. Chicago felt that their QB would not win or lose the SB playing as he had been which was not good - IMO they made that decision based on what they thought their defense could accomplish against Manning. That is why I think the Bears' defense cost them the game.

The Bears got a brilliant start but the game is 60 minutes long and before the end of the 1st 15 minutes I was still convinced that the Colts would win by over 2 TDs because Manning would figure out the D and this was not Bellichick's D he was playing against.

That being said I think that the QB situation in Chicago will be interesting but, after Smith supporting his QB at the end it would be surprising to me if Grossman is not given the job again next season and it will be up to Griese and whoever to take it away. I just think that is how it will play out because it certainly seemed like if they thought Griese could be better they had a lot of opportunity towards the end of the regular season to look at him and didn't.

Grossman looked like he might be the winning QB in this game, and then Benson got hurt.


Smith recognizes that this is a team game and a QB is only as good or as bad as the rest of his cast - putting it all on a QB is just making excuses for other parts of your offense not being effective. Not to say he is not the key but he is not the only problem on an offense that is not executing.

If the Bears were smart they'd send there 1st rd pick to Philly with a Defensive starter and take McNabb.