Lovie dovie.... - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Chicago Bears

Lovie dovie....

Moderator: Football Moderators

Lovie dovie....

Postby lmcjaho » Mon Sep 26, 2005 1:06 am

Okay - I have been talking up Blake since the Bears signed him, so this question shouldn't surprise anyone, but WTF was Lovie thinking when he left Orton in there after the first 2 or 3 or 4 INTs?!??!? If for no other reason than to not totally destroy the kid's confidence he should have pulled him before it got Harrington-esque out there...

With a bye week to get over it I (as a Muhammad owner as well as Bears D owner) have to hope that they can work some things out for week 5 but really, Lovie dropped the ball on this one leaving the kid in that long...
Image
Sig courtesy of Soty - muchos gracias amigo!
lmcjaho
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerEagle Eye
Posts: 3441
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Montreal

Postby Goatwhacker » Mon Sep 26, 2005 7:54 pm

After the game Lovie said he left Orton out there since the Bears were committed to him as their #1 QB bad times and good. Reading between the lines I think Lovie felt it was a "trial by fire" situation and Orton would ultimately benefit from it. Orton did play better in the second half (not that he could have played much worse).

Overall I had mixed feelings, I thought too that they could have put Blake in but overall am not to unhappy with Lovie's decision.

The decision that ticked me off was not playing Benson at all.
Goatwhacker
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3010
Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Flyover Country

Postby Sixxgunn » Tue Sep 27, 2005 8:37 am

Goatwhacker wrote:After the game Lovie said he left Orton out there since the Bears were committed to him as their #1 QB bad times and good. Reading between the lines I think Lovie felt it was a "trial by fire" situation and Orton would ultimately benefit from it. Orton did play better in the second half (not that he could have played much worse).

Overall I had mixed feelings, I thought too that they could have put Blake in but overall am not to unhappy with Lovie's decision.

The decision that ticked me off was not playing Benson at all.


No reason whatsoever to play either Blake or Benson. Neither one of these guys have gotten nearly enough 1st team reps, and that played heavily on Lovie's decision not to play them. That is going to change during this bye week though. Besides, you can't really take away from Jones when he is playing as well as or better than any RB in the league right now. Benson would hurt rather than help this team if they tried to inject him into this offense right now.
[url=http://imageshack.us][img]http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/1065/sixgunn7ao0rc.jpg[/img][/url]
Sixxgunn
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 4887
(Past Year: 3)
Joined: 20 Jul 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Who?

Postby Goatwhacker » Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:09 am

Sixxgunn wrote:No reason whatsoever to play either Blake or Benson. Neither one of these guys have gotten nearly enough 1st team reps, and that played heavily on Lovie's decision not to play them. That is going to change during this bye week though. Besides, you can't really take away from Jones when he is playing as well as or better than any RB in the league right now. Benson would hurt rather than help this team if they tried to inject him into this offense right now.


I have to disagree with you on this, Sixxgunn. Jones had a good day but was hardly a dominant runner. In general the O-line was opening up some nice holes and Jones was doing a good job getting through them. A lot of Jones yards were on draw plays when the Bears got behind and the Bengals were playing pass.

In several series though, Jones wasn't running that hot, getting 2 or 3 yards at a crack and leaving the Bears with 3rd and long on multiple occasions. I have no idea whether Benson could have done better but I don't think Jones was the answer at that point in the game.

The bottom line is that the Bears will be better with two good backs than one, and Lovie may as well start moving towards that goal.
Goatwhacker
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 3010
Joined: 25 Sep 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Flyover Country

Postby lmcjaho » Tue Sep 27, 2005 9:33 pm

Sixxgunn wrote:No reason whatsoever to play either Blake or Benson. Neither one of these guys have gotten nearly enough 1st team reps, and that played heavily on Lovie's decision not to play them. That is going to change during this bye week though. Besides, you can't really take away from Jones when he is playing as well as or better than any RB in the league right now. Benson would hurt rather than help this team if they tried to inject him into this offense right now.


I disagree - two reasons to play Blake:

1- To keep Orton from getting shell-shocked - some of those picks looked absolutely horrendous, like he was totally out of it and was just throwing it up there hoping to hit a WR instead of a DB but not really knowing which it would be.

2- To give the defense a chance - these guys played a hell of a game to keep it close despite a bunch of piss-poor QB play - once it was obvious that this just wasn't Orton's day they should have brought in Blake while the game was still at a point that he might be able to pull it off instead of leaving Orton in to kill all the effort put forth by the D...

Benson deserved to play some once the game was a done deal - until that point keep his ass on the bench since TJones was playing well...
Image
Sig courtesy of Soty - muchos gracias amigo!
lmcjaho
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerEagle Eye
Posts: 3441
Joined: 27 Jun 2005
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Montreal


Return to Chicago Bears

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 15:58 hours
(and 37 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact