Chicago Bears @ Washington Redskins (1:00 PM ET, FOX, 10/17/13)

In Commentary And Analysis by myles34 Comments

The old format will return in 2 weeks. This week, I'm sick, so you get an abbreviated synopsis.

Last week, the Bears beat the Giants but looked every bit the mid-card, one-and-done-if-they-make-the-playoffs squad that they've been pretty much all year. RGIII looked better, health-wise, than he did previously. However, they are a bad team and lost to the Cowboys. 

On offense, the Bears will pretty much impose their will on the Redskins. They aren't good against the pass or the rush, and Brandon Marshall is primed for a huge game. On defense, RGIII is going to slash up our putrid defensive line, though the Bears are still reasonably good against actual RB. I expect a very high-scoring game.

Prediction

Normally, I take the home team in a close game, which this will be. However, I think that since the Bears are coming off a Thursday Night game, they will be unfairly well rested and prepared for this game. They also have a bye to look forward, which gives a psychological edge as well as a chance to focus 100% on the Washington Dan Snyder's Tiny Penises. I think the Bears win a high-scoring squeaker.

Myles: Bears 31, Dan Snyder's Tiny Penises 28
Myles' Brother: Bears 29, DSTP 13

 

(5-1 straight up, 3-2-1 ATS)

 

Share this Post

Comments

  2. Suburban kid

    Chicago Bears @ Washington Redskins (1:00 PM ET, FOX, 10/17/13)
    By Myles on October 20, 2013. Posted in Commentary And Analysis 1 Comment
    The old format will return in 2 weeks. This week, I’m sick, so you get an abbreviated synopsis.

    Last week, the Bears beat the Giants but looked every bit the mid-card, one-and-done-if-they-make-the-playoffs squad that they’ve been pretty much all year. RGIII looked better, health-wise, than he did previously. However, they are a bad team and lost to the Cowboys.

    On offense, the Bears will pretty much impose their will on the Redskins. They aren’t good against the pass or the rush, and Brandon Marshall is primed for a huge game. On defense, RGIII is going to slash up our putrid defensive line, though the Bears are still reasonably good against actual RB. I expect a very high-scoring game.

    Prediction
    Normally, I take the home team in a close game, which this will be. However, I think that since the Bears are coming off a Thursday Night game, they will be unfairly well rested and prepared for this game. They also have a bye to look forward, which gives a psychological edge as well as a chance to focus 100% on the Washington Dan Snyder’s Tiny Penises. I think the Bears win a high-scoring squeaker.

    Myles: Bears 31, Dan Snyder’s Tiny Penises 28
    Myles’ Brother: Bears 29, DSTP 13

    (5-1 straight up, 3-2-1 ATS)

    What about the Redinals vs. the Card Sox?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  4. Omar Little

    Bears fans shouldn’t be too upset about that game. Washington had a bad record, but that’s been a good offense this year.

    WAS is averaging more yards per play than NO and is fourth in the NFL in yards per game. They can move the ball, but they hadn’t converted those yards to points most of the season.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  6. Author
    Myles

    Omar Little wrote:

    Bears fans shouldn’t be too upset about that game. Washington had a bad record, but that’s been a good offense this year.
    WAS is averaging more yards per play than NO and is fourth in the NFL in yards per game. They can move the ball, but they hadn’t converted those yards to points most of the season.

    Well there’s also the “everyone is injured” thing

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  8. Edwin

    Depending on how the Bears turn out for the rest of the year (I’m guessing they wind up close to 6-10), is a there a 3 tech DT, or a DE the Bears can draft that would be able to make an impact next season? Or would it be smarter for the Bears to try and upgrade their secondary?

    What DE’s might be available for the Bears in the draft?

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  9. Omar Little

    @ Myles:

    Did they lose someone other than Cutler? I was flipping around and didn’t see the whole game.

    I don’t think the offense will lose much going from Cutler to McCown. McCown seemed to have a good grasp of the offense when he came in. He made good reads and his throws were accurate enough. That offense revolves around Forte and getting Marshall, Jeffery and Bennett with a full head of steam.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  10. Omar Little

    @ Edwin:

    I still think they win 8-9 games, but that doesn’t really matter here because this looks like a very weak draft for elite DL talent. There’s good depth, but no one who looks like they’ll step in immediately and save the team.

    My favorite 3-tech in this draft is Dominique Easley out of Florida. Before he tore his ACL, he was rocketing up the draft board. He’s a bit undersized, but lightning quick. He reminds me a lot of Geno Atkins when he came out of Georgia. Same size (at the time). Same game. Where he goes will depend on his medicals, but I’d say he’d be available to CHI in the first at best.

    DE is about the same. There’s Clowney, and everyone else. Beasley reminds me a lot of Bruce Irvin, who’s not cut out to be a DE. My (non-homer) favorite DE value is Jackson Jeffcoat. He’s not as athletically talented as some others, but he has great technique. His stock has dropped, and I think it’s because of the state of the program. When he’s pissed off and motivated, he’s a terror. He’s probably available in the late second round.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  11. Omar Little

    Edwin wrote:

    Or would it be smarter for the Bears to try and upgrade their secondary?

    It is my opinion that you build your defense with DL. Then LBs (especially in a Cover 2). Then DBs.

    Fixing a Cover 2 secondary is pretty easy. Grab a couple of big small-school CBs late and teach them to push WRs toward the hashes. A rangy S is important, though.

    I think CHI is set at LB, though it wouldn’t hurt to get some depth.

    To fix that defense (assuming Melton is gone), start with a guy like Easley who can move the LOS. Will Sutton (AzSU), Jernigan (FSU) and maybe Anthony Johnson (LSU) are a few other good 3T options. I really like Minnesota’s Hageman, but he looks like a monster 5T to me.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  13. Author
    Myles

    Omar Little wrote:

    @ Myles:
    Did they lose someone other than Cutler? I was flipping around and didn’t see the whole game.
    I don’t think the offense will lose much going from Cutler to McCown. McCown seemed to have a good grasp of the offense when he came in. He made good reads and his throws were accurate enough. That offense revolves around Forte and getting Marshall, Jeffery and Bennett with a full head of steam.

    Lance Briggs is out 4-6 weeks.
    Brandon Marshall is getting an MRI.
    Tillman injured his knee.
    Alshon Jeffery is also injured, but will probably not miss time due to the bye.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  14. Omar Little

    Myles wrote:

    Lance Briggs is out 4-6 weeks.

    So does that mean more Khaseem Greene? If so, I don’t think that’s much of a drop in production.

    Myles wrote:

    Brandon Marshall is getting an MRI.

    So…Earl Bennet? Who becomes the third WR? I bet he plays, though.

    Myles wrote:

    Tillman injured his knee.

    That will hurt against GB and DET, but you do have a bye coming up.

    btw, I haven’t seen much of Tillman lately, but isn’t most of his value tied to forcing turnovers? I don’t remember ever watching him and thinking he was much of a cover corner. Of course, he doesn’t really have to be in CHI’s defense.

    The injuries will hurt, but I still see 9 wins for the Bears (+/- 1).

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  15. Omar Little

    I still think DAL wins the east with 10. I still like GB to win the North with 12. I did like NO as a wild card team, but now they clearly own the South (12 wins). Seattle looks like they’ll coast to the 1 seed with 13-14 wins.

    That leaves PHI, DET, CHI, CAR and SF fighting for two playoff spots. I think it goes:

    DET – 11
    SF – 11
    CAR – 9
    CHI – 9
    PHI – 8

    Now I think CHI loses to DET Nov. 10. If CHI wins that game, I think both teams win 10. I think there’s a legit shot there. But then (in my projection), you’d go to GB in the first round.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  21. dmick89

    @ dmick89:
    Since it was brought it, I’ll add that I’m not sure this situation is black and white. Is redskins offensive? It doesn’t offend me, but neither does nigger. It’s very clear the latter offends a great proportion of blacks so I’m willing to defer to them. It’s offensive. It isn’t clear that “redskins” is offensive to a large proportion of Native Americans. It’s an issue that I haven’t paid great attention to, but in the last few weeks I’ve seen articles that quote polls that have it as low as 9% offended and articles that make it seem as though it’s much higher.

    Is 9% enough to make the term itself offensive? I don’t think so. Is that 9% accurate? I also don’t think it is. I would wager it is higher (though not a lot higher) and I would also concede that the easiest, safest and most respectable thing to do is just change the fucking name. Then again, The Redskins are getting more press than I’ve seen them get in my entire life right now and, as they say, there’s no such thing as bad press.

    I’m not saying it has to be offensive to a large proportion or even a proportion of Indians and I don’t know what that percentage would be.

    All that said, the Redskins owner is a dickwad. Appealing to their long history is not in any way sufficient to keep the name. The bottom line is whether it offends a great many Indians. If it does, it should absolutely be changed. If it doesn’t, I’m fine with the name remaining as it is. To be safe, I’d change it if I owned the team.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  25. GW

    @ dmick89:

    Yeah, I don’t care. I dislike the name, but I really dislike public speech codes. That said, I find it interesting how relatively trivial issues such as this rise to front and center of the public’s attention from time to time.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  26. dmick89

    @ GW:
    Exactly. I was reading through a couple recent threads about this on Tango’s site and I began to write a very similar comment. There are dozens of issues that are more important than this one, but it’s eating up press time like it’s one of the top ten issues of the day.

    I also think it’s on those who want the name changed to prove that it should be and they’re doing a miserable job at it. I loved The Onion article 424 linked to. I think their owner is an idiot and I think he should be more sensitive about this issue than he has been. He’s basically saying “Fuck you” to all those writing about it and that’s only going to make it worse (for him). Those writing about it won’t do a better job than they did before and will probably do an even worse job.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  27. Recalcitrant Blogger Nate

    I’m a redskins fan. I guess I think they should change the name, but there are thousands more things more important. I mean fuck, it’s pretty insane that everybody is all worked up about using the Redskins name because “it’s racist and offensive” when many american indians frequently live in destitute poverty on shitty reservations of some sort (I know they’re not the same as they used to be, but they still suck). Kinda the same as almost no one says “nigger” anymore, but almost no one also seems to care that we put african american men in prison in devastating numbers, and every major city in the US has a really poor ghetto full of african americans. Its more about people’s egos, political correctness, and doing the minimal amount to be “not a racist”.

    All that said, even tho I’ve been a fan since I was a kid, sure change the name. Plenty of people will still call them the washington redskins anyway (dying laughing).

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  28. dmick89

    Great comment, Nate. Couldn’t agree more.

    Changing the name won’t really do anything. Every fan will still call them the Redskins. It’s why changing the name of Wrigley to something like Pepsi Park at Wrigley Field wouldn’t do anything other than create revenue. Everybody will still call it Wrigley Field. Everybody.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  29. Andrew

    http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9689220/redskins-name-change-not-easy-sounds

    I found this article to be an interesting counterpoint to the name change. Apparently a decent amount of high schools on reservations with over 90% of the students being native american use the redskins name. I think thats somewhat different considering that im guessing the NFL Redskins have about 0.0% native americans on their team or FO. It’s the same reason I don’t find the fighting Irish to be offensive, because nowadays, and traditionally, a large portion of notre dame and its fans are of irish descent.

    One argument that really bugs me is when people are like “if you change the redskins, then you have to change the braves/indians/chiefs/etc.” Well, YES those are all stupid names/mascots to keep too who cares if they get changed. Look at us, we dress up like people that were massacred many years ago by our ancestors woohoo!

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0
  30. dmick89

    @ Andrew:
    That is a good article. I agree it’s somewhat different, but at the same time it’s the Native Americans who get to decide whether this is an offensive term and not the whiteys. If it’s not an offensive term to them then it shouldn’t be to us.

    This doesn’t appear to be anything like how some African Americans will use the word “nigger” amongst themselves while still taking offense if others use it toward them. From what I can gather, “redskins” just isn’t offensive to a large population of Indians. It really does seem as though it’s become the whites taking up the battle for them and I don’t care. It’s not for them to decide.

    Like I said, they’ve done a very poor job at showing why it’s offensive and must be changed.

      Quote  Reply

    0

    0

Leave a Comment