The Zoner has moved!

If you are not redirected automatically within a few seconds then click the link!



Let's get to it:

Kyle Orton: I thought his performance was very good, when you take into consideration the O-Line play and lack of run game. Took some shots in double coverage several times, and was lucky those did not get picked. Also, too many balls batted at the line, but then again, why were the D-Linemen so close? Because the O-Line played lousy.

O-Line: So if the O-Line is "one of the best in the league", why couldn't they create holes for the RBs? A couple readers pointed out the Broncos and how they used to create room for all of their no-name backs. And if you watched the Falcons play last night, you saw a great example of how lines are supposed to create holes. Big, gaping ones that Warrick Dunn ran through all night long. At the line and then downfield against the linebackers. The Eagles, like the Skins are an excellent defensive team. But the Falcons line got it done; the Bears did not. Maybe the Bears O-Line is "The Worst Money Can Buy". In the Orlando Sentinel's preseason rankings of NFL O-Lines, they had the Bears dead last. That's definitely a stretch but maybe they are not as good as we think. I like Kreutz but last year he was not great and had some costly penalties that could be avoided. Tait is solid but not the be-all, end-all he's sometimes hyped to be. Ruben Brown looks tired and I have a sawbuck that says he is missing games by week 7. Fred Miller looks a little lost and basically bad. Maybe next week they will come off the ball and blow people up and Jones and Benson will go for 150 combined. But at this point that would be a surprise.

The D: I could not care less that the Bears gave up 121 yards to Clinton Portis. 9 points--there it is. If the Bears had won 21-9, people would be throwing kudos all over the place. But with a close loss the microscope focuses in on every possible failure. You can't have perfection--especially when your offense is not sustaining drives. I thought they were great. They created havoc, turnovers and excitement. 3 sacks, 3 forced fumbles--one in the red zone and they sent Patrick Ramsay to the sideline. Vasher had one pick and another nullified due to penalty.

It's no great sin to let Portis--who has had the Bears' number before--to rack up yardage. He's one of the premier backs in the game and one of the fastest. 3rd down was also somewhat problematic, but the bottom line is on the road in the opening game of the year they allowed only 9 points. Now if Kevin Jones gains 121 yards on Sunday we can have cause for concern. But until then give the D a break. They did enough; they did their jobs.

1 comment:

BigD said...

I could not agree with you more on the Bears D. 9 points is 9 points. Portis gets 121 and still can't get into the endzone. I think they will only get better.

I also agree about Orton. He didn't look lost out there, which is in sharp contrast to a long list of recent Bear quarterbacks. Also, and probably because of those recent Bear quartebacks, I was excited to see him connect with his second or even third options. Hell, I was happy to see him acknowledge a second or third option.

The O-line. Oh, my! Hard to compare the Bears running game with Atlanta's, though. Vick changes everything the defense does. Until Orton can (and I think he will) stretch the D, the running game have to fight for every yard. This line is not good enough to overpower a good defense like the 'Skins. I think we will see marked improvement against the Lions.