endzoneview wrote:Kind of crazy but the Bears defense is actually allowing less points per game this year than last year (17.4 vs 17.7) Allowing only 22 yards more compared to last year. If Turbisky didn’t have such an astronomical fall from grace and was at least just competent we’d be having a different Mack conversation
It doesn't suit their narrative and interrupts their back patting.
Yep - I hesitate making assumptions, but I struggle not doing that when the knee-jerk is Mack. The formula to beat the Bears isn't difficult - run the ball, don't make mistakes, and force their offense to beat you. Only two teams have scored more than 20 points on this team and both of them were still done via conservative game plans. The Bears run defense is not good, but that was at least partly by design. They expected to be effective offensively and built the defense with that in mind - better vs. the pass than the run. The Hicks injury then compounded the problem. Their miscalculation all comes back to the offense, which has neutralized the impact that Mack can have.
All that requires to think and talk football and not nonsense though. It isn't fair to lump every Raiders fan in that pile, but there's good reason so many of their threads spiral out of control in here and it has more to do with them than those that then poke fun at them for their web of hyperbolic garbage. You complain about everyone else beating the Mack dead horse...then you are the ones to bring him up again. Twice. Stop talking out of both sides of you mouth. You're winning. You have a GM in place that sure makes it seem like this right track is sustainable. Maybe even enough to save Gruden from himself. Enjoy it. And you'd be even better right now if you still had Mack.