I feel the same way. I happen to think the Jets coachng staff came up with an excellent gameplan yesterday, the only legitimate gripe I had was the onside kick. How can you blame Mangini for punting the ball on 4th and 12 when Pennington had been so God awful through out? The chances of Chad actually converting on that play were miniscule at best.
In the past two weeks it's been Seinfeldian with Sutton and Shotty trading lives like Elaine and George. I really don't see how anyone thinks on offense gameplan that put the team in the redzone only once was "excellent"
Hey, at least they go down trying! Yes, I think the on-sides kick was a mistake. Many of you like to say it's easy to second guess...but in this case it just wasn't a good call given the situation. I wanted the Bears to prove they could go all the way down the field. Both scores came off short fields. That said - if not for Chad's 2 interception day, the Jets should have won the game. Turnovers, 2 by us and none by Chicago - were the difference. Shaken - no, not hardly. The Jet Defense played hard all day, just one big mistake, and it was a mistake of aggression (the blitz) and a slip by the CB in single coverage. So goes it when you're playing to win the game! The O-Line blew holes in the Bear defense. If anything I'm dissapointed we ran anything outside...and at the slow developing runs. If we'd have stuck to quick hitters inside, I think the Jets would have pounded the Bear defense. So, a 10-0 loss to the best team in the NFC - after 2 interceptions from our QB. A winable game, and one we expected to lose. If anything, this performance strengthens my belief in our regime - and shows that as smart as Chad is, he has to play a perfect game for us to beat really good teams. Without the arm, we'll not reach the pinnacle. Not the regime, but the Quarterback - my confidence in our success under him is shaken.
Not many board members are questioning the decision to pass up the two field goal attempts of 50 and 52 yards. I'm extremely pissed about this. What the hell did we hire this guy for if not to put those 6 points on the board? Something really weird going on with Nugent and Mangini's lack of confidence in him. We drafted Nuge high out of Ohio State for his ability to kick the long field goal, now we play a team like the Bears and we don't try a 50 and 52-yarder? WTF? I was in the stands and there was no significant wind. The field was dry. There were no adverse conditions to cause us to not try them. I just don't get it. What the hell are we going to do if a game is on the line in the wind and sleet and we need a 50-yarder? I guess we're screwed.
Personally this was a no-brainer for me. Nugent making either one of the FG's was as statistically probable to me as Pennington coverting on that 4th and long. Which is to say he had little or no shot whatsoever. Then you have to take into account all of the different factors surrounding those decisions. Field position battle, Devin Hester taking one back last week against the Giants, plenty of game left to be played. Yes these decisions can be second guessed, but that does not necessarily make them the wrong one's.
I hear you and your point is well-taken. Still, we gave up a high draft pick for this kid for just this very purpose. If we hardly ever challenge Nugent this year to kick the 50-yarders in what I'd consider excellent field conditions, where the hell are we going with this kid next year? As far as Hester is concerned, his run-back on the Giants was partial trickery and our Special Teams would have been all over that act after having seen it on film from the week before, so I don't buy that we should have not kicked the FGs because of Hester's threat. I'm confident in our ST and Mangini could not have been thinking of Hester's threat either, there have to be other reasons. Okay, it was "a game of field postion." Fine. But you try an extremely risky, field postion risking, cockamamie as hell OSK to open the second half and you don't even give your supposed Ohio State field goal-kicking star in whom we vested a high draft pick to try a pair of 50 and 52-yarders? The conditions were excellent. Footing was not a problem. A light breeze... nothing more. Bone-dry field. Temps around 62 degrees. WTF is with this? Sorry, but I am pissed about this. We can "rebuild" to our heart's content, but you need a FG kicker who can at least get you 3 points out of two 50-yard attempts. We needed points, not "field position."
Yeah, I don' t think Mangini trusts Nugent either. I would not be surprised in the least if Nugent is cut lose in the offseason. He has had more than enough chances to prove himself in almost 2 full seasons now. I think this is one time that Westhoff was wrong on a player.
And another thing about Nugent, while I'm still pissed about this. This kid needs more "ass" on his kickoffs. I'm tired of seeing our field postion diminshed by 12 yards on average. When John Hall was in the stadium, it used to sound like a cannon going off when he would boot the ball into oblivion. Now we've invested an extraordinarily high pick on a supposed star who's balls make every kick-returner salivate because he can pick it up at the 15! Wanna talk about field postion?
I could respect you for you candid opinion but this thread is seriously a joke...you last all validity in the first few words of your post
Section 227 - There are a lot of Grossman/Bear haters out there, and that's fine. Our D and speical teams are playing at a high level. The offense has been mostly good, with some really bad games thrown in. Hell, even the Colts beat the Titans and Bills by 1 point, you're not going to light up everyone over a full season. But as Peter King said this morning, it's impressive to win back-to-back games against playoff contenders on the road, both by double digits. Grossman is learning, with only 16 starts to his name. He's a work in progress, but I do believe he can take the Bears to the SB, as long as he controls his turnovers. He did that yesterday, every week seems to be a new lesson for him. That aside, gotta comment on this talk about long FGs. In a low scoring defensive battle, isn't missing a long field goal almost as bad as failing the onside kick? Both give pretty good field position to the other side. There's a lot of armchair QBing going on here.
Yes but Mangini did not give up a high draft pick for him, Herm and Bradway did, and as far as I'm concerned that makes all the difference in the world. Secondly you have to remember Mangini has much more information on the kid than we do, so yeah I can sit here and quote a stat line that say Nugent is 0-3 in his career in attempts over 50 yards. But is such a small sample a good assessment on his true ability? Obviously not. I'm sure Mangini evaluates the guy in practice and before the game, and if he's not sending him out there it has to be for a good reason. And I'm not confident at all in our FG units ability to stop one of the NFL's most dangerous kick returners at all. Hell I was worried at how our coverage unit would perform, thankfully Graham was on point and of course we never scored... I'm as pissed off as the next guy, but you can't second guess every single coaching decision after a loss. Mistakes are going to be made in wins and losses. We had a few other solid opportunities to score and we failed to capitalize, Mangini didn't throw those 2 INT's but he did call for that bone headed onside kick. That and that alone in my mind was his one inexcusable call of the day.
Field position was not a factor on the last one. It was a two score game with 6 minutes remaining. Missing a FG would have had the same result as punting.. Game over.. but if he makes the FG, it is now a one score game with the crowd going crazy & the D energized, you don't know how it plays out from there. Bottom line is Jets need a kicker that the CS has faith in, the sooner the better.
I suppose we're all Monday morning, armchair QB's, no? But it IS fun! Just to clarify though, I'm certainly not Bears/Grossman hater, just trying to give you an honest evaluation of what I thought of the Bears yesterday. Beating our "playoff contender" Jets by "double digits" (10 points is just "bearly," pun intended...) is a convincing win? All I know is, the feeling in the stadium... the mood, if you will, yesterday, was one of being abole to beat you guys. And many sports writers are saying this morning that it was a game the Jets "should have won," so I'm not sure how resoundlingly optimistic that is for your Bears' chances going forward. Still... your record is 9-1, so that speaks for itself, I suppose. I'm just saying that they didn't look like an 8-1 team to me yesterday. I'm saying this is a team with a 9-1 record that doesn't necessarily look and play like 9-1.
I agree with most of what you said, except Graham being on point. He had bout 3 touchbacks right? Not that any of them lead to points, but dropping a few of them in the 10 would have been nice. While he did manage to place the ball inside the 10 a couple times, special teams didn't really have a shot to down any of them. He played ok, but there is room for improvement in that area.
That's two weeks in a row now that a NY team has basically thrown in the towel by punting late in the game. Last week, the Giants down by 18 at midfield with 8:00 to go, punted. I was amazed, and just wanted to go up to Coughlin and say "thanks for the game." Not quite the same thing this week, but close. Personally, I would have gone for the yardage instead of the FG. But punting would have been my last choice.
From the eyes of the deluded everything appears that way. The good news is, they have medication for that kind of stuff these days.
Keep telling us how our D looked like the '85 bears holding Chi to "only" 80 yds rushing int he 1st half:rofl:
Are you from Wah-labama? I'll keep telling you about our D if you keep telling me about your lonely level.
Good one I love to laugh, I can take a joke even if directed at me but please make it somewhat funny.
