Chicago Bears: Long Year in Store

Not a very substantive headline, not a very substantive post. I am a Chicago Bears fan, looking forward to another season as usual. And I hope for the best. There is always hope when your team is 0-0.

I had hope in 1997, great hope in 2000, so much hope in other seasons that turned out abysmal. While I love the team and will enjoy watching Chicago Bears football, what I’m seeing from this offense indicates a season with far below a winning record.

An old friend just commented that this could be a worse offense than the one piloted by Jonathan Quinn. I can’t argue.

Neither can Rick Telander.

5 Responses to “Chicago Bears: Long Year in Store”

  1. Im 1997, I said this is the worst team I’ve ever seen during the preseason. They didn’t disappoint me there.

    In 2000, I had some hopes considering they were a FG kicker away from making the playoffs in 1999. Well, at least I got to watch Urlacher and Mike Brown play.

    This season, I have no idea what to think. I had some hopes with an improved OL, but it looks like it will be worse than last years. If that’s the case, forget it. Every team in the division has issues. It may take only 9-10 wins to take it. The popular choice is to think they will be really bad, but who knows. It’s the NFL.

  2. I didn’t get to see it, but if it is as bad as everyone who has reported on it makes it out to be, we are in some serious trouble. I was all for Rex, but Orton is better in pressure situations. Start Orton. That being said, if Orton starts, the whole reason we turned Devin Hester into a full time reciever will be completely pointless.

  3. Higgins,

    Orton showed he improved his accuracy last season. He’s capable of getting it down field. It’s just a matter of hitting a receiver. The problem is, when your QB has no time to throw, it’s moot. The Bears will be doing lots of three step quick outs this season.

  4. jdm,
    I never questioned Kyle Orton’s accuracy. No, he isn’t capable of getting downfield. The point of getting it down field is hitting the reciever, if you can’t hit the reciever, then you can’t get it down field. I didn’t bring up any confidence in our line in any way what-so-ever, actually, my comment was quite the opposite. My comment was actually based off of the fact that Orton is better at finding his quick outs and getting it to them when being blitzed(pressure situations).

  5. I agree Orton has a much better chance of success with this offense than does Rex. He’s more mobile and more accurate in the short passing game. Better under pressure, as Higgins says. So long as the game plan doesn’t call for a 4 yard pass on 3rd and 6–which seems a play the Bears have been calling now for years–Kyle just might move the chains enough to give the D a rest and allow RG to kick a field goal or two.

Leave a Reply