Bears can't lose to Rams! Uh ... they can't, right?

Both groups of gallant warriors last won on Nov. 1, when the Rams slayed the ferocious Lions and the Bears bested the mighty Browns. Since then ...

The Bears have gone 0-4, getting outscored 111-57 (an average margin of 13.5 points) by the Cardinals, 49ers, Eagles and Vikings.

The Rams have gone 0-3 with a bye, getting outscored 76-53 (a 7.7-point average) by the Saints, Cardinals and Seahawks.

Hmmm.

Playing at home will be a good thing for the Bears only if they get off to a decent start. If not, the fans will be booing at full force and it will be worse than a road game.

Can't you already hear it? Ca-leb! Ha-nie! (clap clap, clap clap clap) Ca-leb! Ha-nie! (clap clap, clap clap clap)

The List

Fun with stats:

1. One would think Jay Cutler finally will play well, but statistically the Rams play better pass defense than the 49ers, who picked him off five times and held the Bears to two field goals.

2. The Rams have allowed 556 rushing yards the last three weeks, so maybe this will be Matt Forte's breakout week. Forte is averaging 3.3 yards per carry, the lowest among all runners with at least 500 yards, and has but 135 yards during the four-game losing streak. He did gain 139 yards against the Rams last season. This year, the Bears have only 275 rushing yards on first-and-10 plays - 168 fewer than the league's next-lowest total.

3. With a rating of 74.4, Cutler is ranked behind not one but two San Francisco quarterbacks. Yikes! But Bears Savior J.C. is ahead of both Rams QBs: injured Marc Bulger and his replacement, Kyle Boller. For what it's worth - not much, I suspect - Boller, like Cutler, once was considered a sure-fire NFL star. Bulger has two Pro Bowl appearances, twice as many as Cutler.

4. Rams tailback Steven Jackson leads the NFC in rushing and in total yards from scrimmage. Though Jackson is fighting back spasms, he probably could gain 100 yards against the Bears even if he removed his spine right before kickoff. The Bears rank 12th of 16 NFC teams in run defense and are expected to be without Lance Briggs, just about the only guy on the team capable of tackling anybody.

5. Boller has 7 turnovers in his 4 games. Peanut Tillman is the NFL's best at forcing fumbles. Cutler leads the league with 20 interceptions. The Rams picked off Drew Brees twice in their near-upset of the Saints. And with chilly temps having followed a stretch of unseasonably mild weather, the Soldier Field sod figures to be softer than Tiger Woods' alibis. In other words: Expect turnovers aplenty.

THE BALDEST TRUTH

Two predictions:

A. Bears 24, Rams 22.

B. The Bears then will proclaim that they are still playoff contenders.

Getting Offensive About The Line

Long-time reader Drew Stout of Cary sent this along and I thought it was interesting. Enjoy.

For grins - and to keep me interested in the game - I decided to chart the passing plays for both the Bears and Vikings. I wanted to see if there was any truth to my hunch that the Bears can't call passing plays longer than 5 yards. I came up with some interesting statistics.

1. Of the attempted pass plays (not including sacks), only 35% passes were longer than five yards for the Bears compared to 62% for the Vikings. Keep in mind that this does not include yards after the catch (YAC). This is only addressing a distance to target of more than 5 yards beyond the line of scrimmage. In other words, two in three pass attempts were to receivers within 5 yards of the line. Pathetic, compared to one in three for the Vikings.

2. On pass plays where the YAC was less than 5 yards, the average distance to the target was 3.8 yards for the Bears and 8.7 yards for the Vikings. In short, when the Vikings threw to a receiver who was covered, they made sure the receiver was far enough away from the line of scrimmage to make it worth the immediate tackle. Who cares if your receiver only manages a couple yards after the catch when he catches it 8 yards out? That's enough for a first down on one play. The Vikings did this, the Bears didn't.

3. On pass plays where the initial distance to target was less than 5 yards, the Bears' YAC was 5.2 yards while the Vikings' was 7.4 yards. On the short throws, the Bears couldn't run once they caught the ball.

4. 56% of the Vikings' completions resulted in at least 10 yards, compared to 28% for the Bears.

5. The Bears only attempted 4 throws of 10 yards or longer. That's 17% of all pass attempts.  The Vikings tried 17. That's 36%.

What does all this mean, apart from the Bears being more sleep-inducing than statistical analysis? As much as I'd like to blame Ron Turner and Jay Cutler for being terrible, I have to wonder if the play calling so heavily favors short throws because they know how horrible the line is. I know it sounds like an excuse, but it does make sense. Think about it. If you were an offensive coordinator, and you knew that your line was not going to provide much protection at all (which it didn't), wouldn't you opt for short, quick passes? I know I'd make them a staple of my arsenal. Even the best arm in the business would be worthless if you couldn't protect him long enough to let longer pass plays develop.

I know Turner catches a lot of crap as a coordinator. But is there any type of offense that could be successful with such a porous line? Even worse, I think opposing defenses know that Cutler isn't going to have much time in the pocket. So if they're smart, they're going to crowd the Bears receivers, knowing full well that Hester, Bennett, Olsen and the like aren't going to be running long routes most of the time. If you know your opponent is limited to dinky throws, there's no sense in playing off them 5 yards or more. This is the professional level. When a team loses an entire dimension to its offense, it is going to be at a crippling disadvantage.

I noticed that the Vikings receivers usually got at least 2-3 gimme yards after the catch because the Bears corners were playing so far off them. With good protection for Favre, they had to. They'd have gotten even more embarrassed if they'd tried to crowd the Vikings receivers at the line. But the Bears receivers? They got nothin'. There was almost always a defender no more than 2 yards back. The Vikings CBs knew that those passes were going to come early. So they played accordingly.

I think by this point Ron Turner has demonstrated that he lacks the ability to adjust during the game. He tends to favor plans that aren't working and abandon those that are. But at the same time, I can't ignore the fact that he just doesn't have the horses on the offensive line to let him run the game he'd like to run. Same with Cutler. He still has to prove himself. But I just can't bring myself to condemn him yet. In my gradebook, Cutler is going to receive an incomplete until I see him behind a halfway decent line. There is just no way to know what he is capable of when he's not running for his life. And that's too bad, because in this fast-paced world of instant sports gratification, Cutler isn't going to get a fair shake. I just hope the Bears' choice to provide a substandard line isn't going to taint Cutler's long-term production. I'd really hate to see him sour on the Bears and start pouting like he did in Denver.

I did like that Cutler took some sacks this game. That he didn't try to throw when there wasn't something there was a great sign. The underthrown ball in the end zone was disappointing.  That was on him. And while it's true that on his other interception his receiver got bumped before the ball arrived, that's the kind of stuff you expect to happen when you throw the majority of your passes so close to the line. It's like in basketball when you take the charge too close to the basket. You simply aren't going to get those calls as often as you would away from the commotion. It's not fair, but it's what we have to expect as long as the Bears are playing this type of game.