Who would have thought that if the Bear allowed only 9 points that they would lose? Who would have thought that Dick Stockton would call Mark Brunell 'Scott' more times than the Bears had points? What is up with Dick Stockton? This is supposedly one of Fox' best teams. I didn't think so.Besides the numerous references to 'Scott Brunell', Stockton's call of the game was disjointed and uneven. He seemed a play behind and at some points, especially early on it was almost unlistenable. And if I was producing that game, I would have been yelling at him--in his ear and during the break--that it is Mark Brunell. Perhaps Dick was thinking about former Bull Scott Burrell. Nothing is more insulting to fans than getting the names wrong.
Siragusa and Moose have some nice banter between them and did provide solid insight. The Goose has pretty much revolutionized the sideline job. He puts the viewer on the field and he gives us more than the usual inanities we normally get from week to week. If they had a more capable play by play man--and I can't believe I'm writing that about the legendary Stockton--that certainly would be one of Fox' best teams.
Even Moose offered up something I thought was stupid. He said that the fans don't realize that being loud affects the defense too. He said they are trying to get their calls in. Stockton added that it was a 'good point'. I thought that to be garbage. The defensive call comes early in the huddle, quickly after the ball is set from the previous play. On offense, the QB has to hear the call in his helmet (something that was difficult for Orton yesterday), as well as hear audibles and snap counts, etc. It does affect the defense--it helps them. You might make the case that had the Bears not had 3 consecutive false starts while driving down the field, they would have at least got a FG out of it and possibly won the game. And during those penalties, the crowd was as loud as I heard all game.
More on the actual game later, but chew on this--the Bears offensive line is overrated, even without all the penalties. I understand Washington has a good defense. So do we and they ran well against us. Bears longest run was 8 yards. I did not see any huge holes. If this is one of the best lines in the league, as some have stated, then where were at least a few long runs? Sorry, even if I'm at RB, one of the best offensive lines has to produce better than 8 yards for a long gain of the day. Desmond Clark is a solid receiver, but I don't think he likes to block too much and from what I saw yesterday he's just not that good at it.
So it's 0-1 with the Lions coming to town after beating the Packers and holding them to only 3 points. Is it uh-oh time already?
4 comments:
The worst part of the early part of a bad broadcast was when they called a roughing the passer on Tank Johnson in the 1st quarter that gave the Skins a 1st down when it appeared they were going to have to punt. Not only were they babbling about something else when the flag was thrown and explained by the ref, when they came back it was 1st down already and they didn't give a good explanation, and after the next play they replayed the hit on Ramsay but without even then definitively commenting on it because they weren't sure what had happened--the viewer was left to intuit that it was roughing since the replay focused on the hit; if they would have been paying attention they would have ripped it as one of the worst calls you'll see.
And then later Moose talked about all that "Commisioner Roselle" had done for Katrina victims. From the grave, apparently.
Agreed on the offensive line, who had more penalties than holes created. And speaking of penalties, it's the too-often-ignored bugaboo of the entire Lovie Era, and really is unacceptable. What is the hallmark of a bad team more than penalties? What causes penalties: lack of discipline and the NEED to hold and do other things coz you're not as good as the other guys.
That being said, I ain't worried about the Lions that much, at least not based on them holding the Pack down. GB never wins or plays well in Det (though they usually do put up some points). But I fully expect the Bears to win next week--there it is, out on the WWW for everyone to read and make fun of me for saying it next Sunday if they get embarrassed again.
This is so true: penalties are indeed the too-often-ignored bugaboo of the entire Lovie Era.
And you nailed it on the roughing call. That was the biggie I was referring to. But it started as early as the player intro w/ graphics. He seemed as if he just picked up a roster 10 minutes before the game. Strange because Stockton is known to be meticulous in his preparation.
I was watching the game yesterday with alot of background noise, so I did not get to hear all of the commentary. I was happy about that. Siragusa drives me nuts. He offers little as far as X and O's, and tries to force the emotions of playing the game down our throats. Don't care.
As far as the line...the Orlando Sentinel was running a series on the NFL and did a ranking of offensive lines. The Bears came in dead last.
On the game...I don't think the Bears did as bad as I've been reading. Yes, they looked pretty inept on offense, but they are starting a rookie quarterback, have a revamped line, a new coordinator and little receiver depth (they go 1 deep). One game on the road is not the season. Give these guys a couple of games to put it together. I thought the defense at times looked stellar. They did give up only 9 points, on the road. No Td's.
Bears 27
Lions 13
The Bears O-Line ranks last according to the Sentinel? That's just nuts. I'll have to find that.
But there were definitley a lot of pluses yesterday. And Orton did very well considering they couldn't run the ball at all and the line wasn't very good.
Post a Comment