Originally posted by SkinBasket
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Post game chat with Cleft Crusty (Bears)
Collapse
X
-
Try bullets instead. it turned out well for cheech and chongOriginally posted by SkinBasketI've got a tampon in my nose. What could you possibly say that would be worse?Originally posted by Deputy NutzIf you have a buddy that keeps bleeding alot would you call him names and make fun of him?
and yes nuts, I would laugh at a buddy who has tampons shoved up his nose and bleeding. just don't let him sneeze on you.
Comment
-
Good comment. The completeness of your comparison depends on the relative strength of the Titans and the Bears. I think the Bears a re a pretty good team. You could argue that they significantly outplayed the Packers. The counter argument is that the Packers left a lot of points/plays on the field. Two good teams, really beating the tar out of each other. It was classic Black and Blue Packer-Bear football.Originally posted by denverYooperCleft, do you think we looked like Steelers west tonight? Our quarterback got hit alot and our O looked rough for 58 minutes but the defense kept us in the game until the O pulled it together for that last 2 minute drive.
Comment
-
Mr. Crusty,
Would you blame tonight's overall lack of offensive consistency on:
a) RT Allen Barbre's turnstile approach to pass blocking
b) Staunch effort by Bear defense
c) McCarthy's lack of commitment to the running game
d) all or none of the above
Signed,
Sleeping restfully after a victory in Minnesota"My problems with him are his vision and tendency to dance instead of pounding a hole." - Harvey Wallbangers
Comment
-
a, b and the fact that the Packers just didn't finish on some plays. They left 10 points on the field due to unforced errors. A bit rough out there to say the least.Originally posted by superfanMr. Crusty,
Would you blame tonight's overall lack of offensive consistency on:
a) RT Allen Barbre's turnstile approach to pass blocking
b) Staunch effort by Bear defense
c) McCarthy's lack of commitment to the running game
d) all or none of the above
Signed,
Sleeping restfully after a victory in Minnesota
Comment
-
Cleft is tired out, too many questions.Originally posted by Scott CampbellCleft, how do the Packers keep Brandon Chillar off the field?
Chillar gets thumped when blockers come his way, he does his best to run around them, but when a team sees both Barnett and Chillar on the field I have no idea why they don't just run power leads at them.
Chillar is a very good blitzer, athletic, but run stopper? No.
Hawk did a very good job against the run on Sunday night and his coverage in the middle of the field was pretty good.
Barnett was invisible most of the night, but that is to be expected. Chillar and Barnett played alot together right away in the first quarter. The Packers were in nickel. Mathews was also in right away. Hawk was in on the first play, and then was on the bench for the next 15 or so.
Hawk came in, and was then in pretty much the rest of the game, unless the Packers went straight nickel. Chillar and Barnett did most of the rotating in the second half. Mathews pretty much played the entire game, poppinga is worthless now that Mathews is healthy.
Like I said when Capers was hired, they will rotate all of these linebackers for their best combinations on any given play set.
Comment
-
Agree with your points, although I did not see Hawk as much as you did in second half. I probably missed him. He was stout in run D and have two good coverages I saw, one on Olsen in a double team, the other in a zone where his drop was deep enough to force an overthrow.Originally posted by Deputy NutzCleft is tired out, too many questions.Originally posted by Scott CampbellCleft, how do the Packers keep Brandon Chillar off the field?
Chillar gets thumped when blockers come his way, he does his best to run around them, but when a team sees both Barnett and Chillar on the field I have no idea why they don't just run power leads at them.
Chillar is a very good blitzer, athletic, but run stopper? No.
Hawk did a very good job against the run on Sunday night and his coverage in the middle of the field was pretty good.
Barnett was invisible most of the night, but that is to be expected. Chillar and Barnett played alot together right away in the first quarter. The Packers were in nickel. Mathews was also in right away. Hawk was in on the first play, and then was on the bench for the next 15 or so.
Hawk came in, and was then in pretty much the rest of the game, unless the Packers went straight nickel. Chillar and Barnett did most of the rotating in the second half. Mathews pretty much played the entire game, poppinga is worthless now that Mathews is healthy.
Like I said when Capers was hired, they will rotate all of these linebackers for their best combinations on any given play set.
Chillar looks like he will be a great sub in nickel. The only concern is the run you mentioned, straight up the gut when he is in there with only 2 D lineman.Bud Adams told me the franchise he admired the most was the Kansas City Chiefs. Then he asked for more hookers and blow.
Comment
-
I did not see Bishop in at LB, but my vision was a little blurry. It was either my pain meds or I was missing my glasses, though I have to admit I'm not sure whether I own glasses in the first place.
Chillar is an athletic guy, with wheels, but he is a little hesitant in his run fits. He was on his heels a few times watching when he should have stuck his nose in there.
Comment
-
[quote="Cleft Crusty"]You can't really determine pad level until they are in use. I will watch carefully next week to look at pad level once Barbre starts blocking.[/quote]Originally posted by pbmaxCleft, how was Barbre's pad level tonight? I've got to assume it was pretty terrible.
so Cleft, are you predicting that Barbe will actually start blocking next week?"The Devine era is actually worse than you remember if you go back and look at it."
KYPack
Comment

Comment