I'm extremely bored at work so I figure with training camp starting up I'd start this thread. What is everyone's predictions for division records? Mine go like this:
Chicago Bears: 7-9 (Tough schedule, could legitimately lose 7 of last 8)
Detroit Lions: 4-12
Green Bay Packers 12-4
Minnesota Vikings 11-5
This is just a very rough sketch without any research, just looking at the schedules. It should be a very interesting season. Very tough schedule this season for all of the teams.
I see big things for the Packers as long as the OL improves.
Pretty excited, hope to get up to Lambeau for a game as the old man is a season ticket holder.
We need Bulaga to be the real deal.
Quote from: Stone Cold on July 31, 2010, 01:04:39 PM
I see big things for the Packers as long as the OL improves.
Pretty excited, hope to get up to Lambeau for a game as the old man is a season ticket holder.
We need Bulaga to be the real deal.
Agreed. I actually think the OL will be good. I think it's the secondary that we need to worry about. If they can be just good, they don't even have to be great, then I think we will have a great season.
The only thing that worries me is the schedule is TOUGH. At Philli, at Chicago, vs. Minn, at Jets, vs. Dallas, at Minn, at ATL, and at NE are all VERY losable games. At Washington, vs. Miami, vs. Giants, and vs. Chicago are also losable games but ones that I am less concerned about.
In my prediction I thought our losses would come at Philli, at Jets, at Minn, and at NE. My guess is we win one of those and lose one of the ones listed above.
I would not be SHOCKED to see anything from 8-8 to 12-4. I would be shocked to see anything above 12 wins and anything below 8. Way too much talent for less than 8 (we have so much talent that normally I'd say less than 10 would surprise me but again the schedule scares me), way too tough of a schedule for less than 4 losses, in my opinion.
if green bay doesn't make improvements we can definitely lose most of those games.
Getting pressure on the qb will be important for GB in helping the secondary. We were middle of the pack of the NFC in sacks in '09 and only knocked down Warner 3 times in our playoff game against the Cardinals.
We need a OLB on the opposite side of Matthews to step up and I really hope Brad Jones is ready to make that step after another year in the weight room.
Johnny Jolly loss is big, I think developed into a hell of a player, something I didn't expect after watching him at A&M. Time for Thompson's picks to step up and put up or shut up in Harrell and Raji.
Add to the list of "oughta win" two games against the Vikes. So long, Brent.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on August 03, 2010, 11:24:41 AM
Add to the list of "oughta win" two games against the Vikes. So long, Brent.
Haha yup. I thought we'd lose at the Vikings. Now I think we'll win that one, but I'll stick with my 12-4 prediction and we'll lose to one of the other teams I thought we COULD lose to.
QuoteI'm extremely bored at work so I figure with training camp starting up I'd start this thread. What is everyone's predictions for division records? Mine go like this:
Chicago Bears: 7-9 (Tough schedule, could legitimately lose 7 of last 8)
Detroit Lions: 4-12
Green Bay Packers 12-4
Minnesota Vikings 11-5
This is just a very rough sketch without any research, just looking at the schedules. It should be a very interesting season. Very tough schedule this season for all of the teams.
Chicago 9-7 Lovie is fired miss playoffs
Detroit 6-10
Green Bay 10-6
Minnesota 9-7
My prediction: Cutler gets knocked out of at least 2 games...Martz's scheme doesn't protect the QB
Martz got lucky with the talent he had at STL with his "greatest show on turf" but now, not so much.
Rams skill position players (while under Martz) >>>>>>> current skill position players for CHI
Also, he had Orlando Pace when he was the best LT in the game.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on August 04, 2010, 12:47:58 PM
Rams skill position players (while under Martz) >>>>>>> current skill position players for CHI
Who was the STL TE, Do the bears have an advantage at that position? Then again is a TE a skill position..
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on August 04, 2010, 12:47:58 PM
My prediction: Cutler gets knocked out of at least 2 games...Martz's scheme doesn't protect the QB
Martz got lucky with the talent he had at STL with his "greatest show on turf" but now, not so much.
Rams skill position players (while under Martz) >>>>>>> current skill position players for CHI
Also, he had Orlando Pace when he was the best LT in the game.
Yes, the Bears O-line is a major question mark, but Martz has statistically improved every unit he has joined. Last year, the Bears were brutal in the redzone, an improvement there could make a big difference.
No matter, I just don't see how any team in the division wins more than 10 games. The schedule is just brutal, having to play both the AFC and NFC East. That's 7 games (Buffalo sucks and should be win for all) against teams that have legit playoff chances.
Mike tice is coaching the o-line. Nothing to worry about.
Quote from: ZiggysFryBoy on August 04, 2010, 01:57:39 PM
Mike tice is coaching the o-line. Nothing to worry about.
Wanna bet?
QuoteRams skill position players (while under Martz) >>>>>>> current skill position players for CHI
While I agree that the Rams had better skill players, the Bears WR's are vastly underrated and I think they will prove a lot of people wrong this year. Additionally they have plenty of running back depth, something they haven't ever had. That being said its a crapshoot to pick records especially in the NFL.
Quote from: damuts222 on August 04, 2010, 02:28:07 PM
While I agree that the Rams had better skill players, the Bears WR's are vastly underrated and I think they will prove a lot of people wrong this year. Additionally they have plenty of running back depth, something they haven't ever had. That being said its a crapshoot to pick records especially in the NFL.
It is definitely a crap shoot. You just never know what's gonna happen. That said, the combination of a poor offensive line and weak receiving corps is gonna cause problems for the Bears.
Chester Taylor is a real nice addition and should help, but when you look at Martz with the Rams, he had HoF receivers (I would suggest that their 4th receiver (Ricky Prohl) may have been better than anyone on the Bears roster right now), a HoF running back, a HoF left tackle as part of an offensive line that missed a total of 6 games to injury in three years. The thought of Jay Cutler making a 7 step drop looking for Devin Hester, behind that O-line should cause most bear fans to wake up in a cold sweat.
The results (or lack thereof) with different groups of players should speak volumes to what he and his offense can do without top tier talent. Not much. Will the offense be better? Probably. Will it be good? Not really.
Detroit will win at least 6 games this year and may pull some surprise upsets.
Quote from: MUSF on August 07, 2010, 01:53:24 PM
Detroit will win at least 6 games this year and may pull some surprise upsets.
Immnot ready to say they'll win at least 6 games but I do agree they will be better. I could see anywhere from 4-6 wins for them, but they will look much better than they have the past few season.
While I hate Brett Favre and the Vikings you never want to see a player's life on the line. Hopefully Percey Harvin's okay. He should be a pretty nice player.
Quote from: wadesworld on August 19, 2010, 01:14:39 PM
While I hate Brett Favre and the Vikings you never want to see a player's life on the line. Hopefully Percey Harvin's okay. He should be a pretty nice player.
Off topic...there is talk that Justin Morneau may not play again this year.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on August 19, 2010, 01:19:50 PM
Off topic...there is talk that Justin Morneau may not play again this year.
Our record without Morneau last year and this year must be incredible.. gotta look that one up. Did you make it to either game the past two nights? Fun games to watch, but I'd imagine they were quite upsetting for you.
Poor Percy... hope he's alright and hope he can find a cure for the migraines.
Quote from: Jay Bee on August 19, 2010, 02:48:33 PM
Our record without Morneau last year and this year must be incredible.. gotta look that one up. Did you make it to either game the past two nights? Fun games to watch, but I'd imagine they were quite upsetting for you.
Poor Percy... hope he's alright and hope he can find a cure for the migraines.
Not there but very upsetting....going to be there tonight. Otherwise....
Full article......http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=jc-childressvikes081810
Childress was losing more ground with his team in the battle for respect. One of the biggest issues playing out behind the scenes in Minnesota is that many players, particularly on offense, have no respect for Childress. Among those players is Favre, who officially returned to the team Wednesday. According to multiple team sources, Favre's disdain for Childress is deep.
"Brett thinks Childress has no clue about offense," a Vikings player said.
Childress' presence, not Favre's ankle injury, was one of the biggest reasons Favre was hesitating about playing again, sources said. In early July, Favre had indicated to one player that he was likely to play. However, after Childress visited Favre on July 19, Favre's desire to return declined.
"Brett just doesn't trust him," a player said.
Favre is right.
Green Bay 11-5 - is indeed a tough schedule but they're all a year more improved (i hope). the offensive line is definitely better and should be able to deal with injuries when they occur (does anyone seriously think Clifton will start all 16? heck no!). loss of Jolly will hurt, but hopefully Raji is ready to step-up. linebacking corps should be better thru more experience. secondary...we shall see.
Minnesota 10-6 - i just don't think they'll be as good this year. at some point in time the old man is going down and i think it's this year. so Jackson is going to get some starts BUT that defense is good enough to keep them in every game. i love this crap with Childress, too.
Chicago 8-8 - and as someone else stated, they will miss the playoffs and Lovie will get canned. will definitely be interesting to see what Martz brings to the table. Taylor and Peppers were good pick-ups though.
Detroit 5-11 - will certainly be an improved team. they'll have some stat at the end of the year that they lost 5 games by a total of 11 points or something like that. Stafford should be better, i don't expect a sophomore slump out of him.
Something has to give. Brent is either going to have another MVP-caliber season and take the Vikes to the Super Bowl, or his season is going to end early (but not necessarily via injury)... I just have this strange feeling that there's no in-between for the guy this year; he's going to put it all on the line and it's either going to work, or he's going to go down in flames.
Quote from: MU B2002 on August 04, 2010, 12:58:32 PMWho was the STL TE, Do the bears have an advantage at that position? Then again is a TE a skill position..
In Martz's system, the tight end is usually just a sixth offensive lineman. None of the St. Louis tight ends ever put up big numbers under Martz, which doesn't bode well for Greg Olsen, but Chicago did sign Brandon Manumaleuna specifically to fill the role of blocking tight end, and I'd expect him to get most of the reps.
Quote from: damuts222 on August 04, 2010, 02:28:07 PMWhile I agree that the Rams had better skill players, the Bears WR's are vastly underrated and I think they will prove a lot of people wrong this year. Additionally they have plenty of running back depth, something they haven't ever had. That being said its a crapshoot to pick records especially in the NFL.
Under Martz, I think this is a great statement. The biggest question mark will be the offensive line. If the line can hold together, Chicago could really surprise some people. Martz always improves offenses. Devin Aromashodu looks like a legitimate starter in the NFL. Devin Hester has many similar attributes to Az Hakim. Johnny Knox could have a breakout sophomore season. Of course, all of those are question marks until it happens on the field, but what was St. Louis when Martz took over that offense? Remember, they came off a 4-12 season to win the Super Bowl. I'm absolutely not saying I expect the Bears to win a Super Bowl this year, but it's not like a Pro Bowl season and big numbers from Cutler and a couple of the as-yet unproven WRs are impossible if the O-line holds up.
Chicago's also got some questions on defense. Will Peppers live up to his contract? Can Urlacher rebound from injury? Will the safeties be up to the task? Is Tommie Harris finally back to his 2006 form? My expectation for the Bears is between 7-9 and 9-7 with Lovie fired if they don't make the playoffs. But in all honesty, I don't think I'd be really surprised by them going anywhere from 5-11 to 11-5. In the NFL, so much comes down to how well things break for you, who stays healthy, and the implementation of new schemes. If Martz's offense works, Cutler returns to Denver form, and the team stays healthy, there's no reason to think Chicago can't compete for the division.
nice to see urlacher last almost one whole series.
:-(
At least they signed Javon Walker!
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/101351219.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUo8cyaiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr
EDIT: Apparently he did have surgery and will miss half the season
I guess when multiple doctors told him months ago to have surgery he thought they meant to do so two weeks before the first game of the regular season.
At least Berrian is looking healthier this season.. but he is not the same receiver as Rice. Can't wait for Logan Payne to go for 100 and a score vs. the Packers
Quote from: Jay Bee on August 24, 2010, 10:03:47 PM
Can't wait for Logan Payne to go for 100 and a score vs. the Packers
So are you going to get that game of Madden in tonight yet, or will you wait for tomorrow?
Quote from: Jay Bee on August 24, 2010, 10:03:47 PM
At least Berrian is looking healthier this season.. but he is not the same receiver as Rice.
But Rice is not OchoCinco's right hand man on OchoCinco: The Ultimate Catch, so Berrian has that going for him. B Twice!
FWIW, Vikes traded for Greg Camarillo today.
As a huge Dolphins fan, I've seen a bunch of G-reg. He's exactly what he seems like. Incredibly reliable hands and good blocker/route runner - hence his coming out of the slot without a ton of speed. Was huge for Pennington (and his weak arm) in the playoff run with his willingness to do dirty work. He will be a nice outlet for Bart, but it doesn't seem to help the Harvin or Rice situations, they just do different things. Plus Benny Sapp was a lot to give up. If I remember right, he played really well for Minnesota down the stretch.
Saw just a little bit of the Packers last night, but that offense is real, and its spectacular. Gonna be a fun year.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on August 27, 2010, 08:20:46 AM
Saw just a little bit of the Packers last night, but that offense is real, and its spectacular. Gonna be a fun year.
A great barometer of regular season results is the result of a preseason game against the Colts. They are always very concerned with winning preseason games.
Quote from: MU B2002 on August 27, 2010, 08:48:37 AM
A great barometer of regular season results is the result of a preseason game against the Colts. They are always very concerned with winning preseason games.
Who said anything about a barometer? Did you see the game? Have you seen them this year? Did you see them last year for that matter? Are you aware of the weapons and depth they have on offense? If they aren't one of the top 3 or 4 offensive teams this year, I will be very surprised. Perhaps you disagree with that. If not, what's your point?
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on August 27, 2010, 08:58:58 AM
Who said anything about a barometer? Did you see the game? Have you seen them this year? Did you see them last year for that matter? Are you aware of the weapons and depth they have on offense? If they aren't one of the top 3 or 4 offensive teams this year, I will be very surprised. Perhaps you disagree with that. If not, what's your point?
Whoa. I was trying to poke a little fun at a rival fan. And yes, as a Bears fan, I am very aware of all that the Pack attack has going on. That's why I laid a little cash on them to go all the way.
Answers to your questions
1. Barometer: You alluded to regular season success after commenting about how good the offense looked last night. I took that to mean you were using the preseason as a measuring stick for expected results during the regular season.
2. Yes I watched the 1st team portion of the game.
3. I have seen them twice this year.
4. I saw them many times last season.
5. Yes I am aware of their weapons.
6. See info above.
I can tell we both are ready for a little football.
I checked the box score of that Pack game and didn't see anything for Jennings. I'm assuming he sat this one out?
Quote from: MUDish on August 27, 2010, 09:17:21 AM
I checked the box score of that Pack game and didn't see anything for Jennings. I'm assuming he sat this one out?
that is correct
Quote from: MUDish on August 27, 2010, 09:17:21 AM
I checked the box score of that Pack game and didn't see anything for Jennings. I'm assuming he sat this one out?
Back injury. Nothing major, just no need to have him out there. James Jones looked good filling in for him though.
The defense worries me (what's new) - not so much against the run but our susceptibility to the pass. Also, very poor open field tackling last night.
That said, and it was hard not to get excited about the Packers' chances this year (especially with the love-fest ESPN was giving them), I'll temper my expectations after another solid preseason showing.
We saw what domination in the preseason got us last year...
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on August 27, 2010, 08:58:58 AM
Who said anything about a barometer? Did you see the game? Have you seen them this year? Did you see them last year for that matter? Are you aware of the weapons and depth they have on offense? If they aren't one of the top 3 or 4 offensive teams this year, I will be very surprised. Perhaps you disagree with that. If not, what's your point?
I agree,
should have no problems scoring.
In 2008 the Detroit Lions looked good in the preseason and went 4-0.
In 1985 the Chicago Bears looked awful in the preseason and went 1-3.
Just saying.
I am ready for some football!
BTW, is anyone besides Jerry Jones and JayBee not predicting the Packers will be in the Super Bowl? I know they're going to be good, but I don't necessarily like them being the fashionable pick.
JayBoy has been pretty quiet...
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 09, 2010, 02:41:52 PM
I am ready for some football!
BTW, is anyone besides Jerry Jones and JayBee not predicting the Packers will be in the Super Bowl? I know they're going to be good, but I don't necessarily like them being the fashionable pick.
Does that mean the Vikings are no longer "Consensus?"
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 09, 2010, 02:41:52 PM
I am ready for some football!
BTW, is anyone besides Jerry Jones and JayBee not predicting the Packers will be in the Super Bowl? I know they're going to be good, but I don't necessarily like them being the fashionable pick.
Don't think the defensive backs are there to get to the Super Bowl. I would definitely not be surprised to see it happen, but I would put the Saints above us right now and the Cowboys just barely behind us right now.
Also everyone (including myself) was predicting a Super Bowl appearance for us last year after a dominant preseason as well and we know how that went.
If the defense can find a way to hold up I like our chances. If not I still think we win the division but it will still be close.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 09, 2010, 02:41:52 PM
I am ready for some football!
BTW, is anyone besides Jerry Jones and JayBee not predicting the Packers will be in the Super Bowl? I know they're going to be good, but I don't necessarily like them being the fashionable pick.
I'm predicting the Atlanta Falcons to win the NFC...and lose to Indy in the SB.
Keep in mind that I'm generally horrible with NFL predictions.
It certainly does look like a 3 horse race among GB, NO, and DAL, but this is the NFL, so you just never know. The only other teams that would seem to even have a shot though would likley be ATL and MIN.
wonder how Viking fans feel after last night?
I think the CONSENSUS Packers should lock up the NFC North easily.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on September 10, 2010, 06:35:31 AM
wonder how Viking fans feel after last night?
I think the CONSENSUS Packers should lock up the NFC North easily.
Eh.
I'm disappointed the Vikes didn't win. But, they played ok in a tough road game, and I never expected them to go undefeated.
Put it this way, if the Packers lost to N.O. in the superdome in week 1, how would "Packer Nation" feel?
The Vikes didn't look over-matched... they looked rusty. That might be an age issue because the entire team (especially the QB) is a year older... but it also could be similar to last season where they played ugly for a few weeks before they got on a roll.
I'm thinking they are a little too old and the schedule is a little too tough. 9-7, unless AP has some sort of historic rushing year. He's still the wild card.
EDIT: Spelling. Roll. Not "role".
Vikings were lucky to be that close. 2 missed FGs and 2 non-turnovers that very well could have gone NO's way (Harper's near INT and Berrian's fumble on the punt)
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on September 10, 2010, 06:35:31 AM
wonder how Viking fans feel after last night?
I think the CONSENSUS Packers should lock up the NFC North easily.
This Packer fan thought the Vikings looked fine for a first game on the road against a quality opponent. Favre's stats were actually worse in last years opener at the Browns...skipping all off season activities means he is going to take awhile to get caught up. Once he gets his timing back, they are going to be a very good team.
Of course, the Saints made the better halftime adjustments because they have a better coaching staff though...
His arm didn't look strong at all in the 4th quarter...is the Grizzled One finally showing his age?
I'm fine. We're fine - for now. Very tough schedule, would have been nice to steal that one.
Would like to see a little more of the Cornholio receiver guy from Miami... where is Berrian? Will he ever reveal himself, or has he in fact done so already?
I know lots of Green Bey fans were skeeting when Favre was picked (interference on VS during the play went uncalled, btw)... that was vintage Favre. But, then the TD pass later in the half was also. I'm OK with it.
I bet Minnesota +5.5 and came out victorious. The Back2Back Vikings are a force - let's get that secondary healthier, figure out what receiver(s) want to step up in Rice's absence, and do what we do - win the NFC North.
yeah after watching last nights game, the biggest thing that caught my attention is that the WR corps needs to get sorted out. not enough targets, not near enough completion. i think some of that can be attributed to Favre's timing, some to the injury chaos at WR, some to the Saints underrated pass defense.
I think Jay Bee is right about needing to involve Camarillo more, but hes only been on the team for a couple weeks. i think that as Favre gets frustrated with Berrian & Harvin (really they are very similar players and neither is a consistent wideout option) he will get into a groove with Camarillo. Guy runs good routs and has hands of glue. He isnt flashy and wont beat anyone deep, but as Favre showed with Shiancoe, at this point i think he just wants someone to catch the ball for 8 yds a pop.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 10, 2010, 09:37:01 AM
I bet Minnesota +5.5 and came out victorious. The Back2Back Vikings are a force - let's get that secondary healthier, figure out what receiver(s) want to step up in Rice's absence, and do what we do - win the NFC North and flame out in the playoffs.
I finished your sentence for you.
Personally, I didn't think the Saints looked all that great last night. Maybe Brees was the QB who had more rust on him, or maybe the Vikings secondary played extremely well. Personally, I thought both defenses looked mediocre and it was the lack of AP and the uncharacteristic "less-than-two-TD-performance" by Brees that defined the game last night. Either way, both teams looked like they weren't quite ready for the season.
The one bright spot for NO is that the offensive line effectively protected the QB for the first 45 minutes and cleared a path for the running game in the last 15 -- against what is believed to be one of the better defenses in the NFL.
New Orleans didn't deserve to win, but took advantage of a team that played like it was still the pre-season. At this point, I wouldn't judge either team based on this performance nor would I anoint the Packers as the team to beat in the NFC North, but the Vikings clearly have more work to do than the Saints, and that certainly plays to GB's advantage for the next 53 hours.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 10, 2010, 09:37:01 AM
I'm fine. We're fine - for now. Very tough schedule, would have been nice to steal that one.
Would like to see a little more of the Cornholio receiver guy from Miami... where is Berrian? Will he ever reveal himself, or has he in fact done so already?
I know lots of Green Bey fans were skeeting when Favre was picked (interference on VS during the play went uncalled, btw)... that was vintage Favre. But, then the TD pass later in the half was also. I'm OK with it.
I bet Minnesota +5.5 and came out victorious. The Back2Back Vikings are a force - let's get that secondary healthier, figure out what receiver(s) want to step up in Rice's absence, and do what we do - win the NFC North.
That was a great catch by Shiancoe...and if you saw the play again, Vilma bit on the underneath route (that was already double covered) to let Shiancoe get over the top of him and Favre put it in the only place that the Safety couldn't get to...great pass, but a mistake by Vilma.
I also think Vilma got away with illegal contact, it was a bad no call. (In the game's context, they called the push-off earlier, gotta keep it consistent).
EDIT - another thought on the Vilma no-call
Quote from: Benny B on September 10, 2010, 10:09:24 AM
Personally, I didn't think the Saints looked all that great last night.
I think a lot of offenses aren't going to look real good the first part of the season. The Packer's offense didn't last year, and they may not on Sunday. They don't play a lot during pre-season, especially against a defense that schemes against them.
What matters is that the Vikings got the L (if you are a Pack fan). Both teams looked rusty and neither were up to par. It was basically a coin flip last night and it went the Saints way.
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on September 10, 2010, 10:42:13 AM
What matters is that the Vikings got the L (if you are a Pack fan). Both teams looked rusty and neither were up to par. It was basically a coin flip last night and it went the Saints way.
I agree, but I'm actually torn on that. I could certainly be wrong, but I honestly don't expect the Vikings to be much of a factor. I am clearly putting the cart well before the horse, but I think the Saints are bigger threat, because its never too early to start thinking about home field advantage. The more games they lose, the better.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 11, 2010, 09:55:31 AM
I agree, but I'm actually torn on that. I could certainly be wrong, but I honestly don't expect the Vikings to be much of a factor. I am clearly putting the cart well before the horse, but I think the Saints are bigger threat, because its never too early to start thinking about home field advantage. The more games they lose, the better.
True on the home-field part, but I could see a few early losses causing the Vikings to spiral out of control. They didn't start well last year, but had the Browns and Lions early. They weren't under any real pressure since they were winning. It allowed Favre to get comfortable and could hand it off to AP. I don't know if they really started clicking until the Favre game-winning TD pass against the 49ers. Then we saw once they got rolling they were very good.
Maybe my view is skewed being a Packer fan, but I think if they lose a few early, the pressure will really be on and then the old Favre may come back. At the start of last season, he just didn't have to lose the games. He would dump it off if no one is open and make the safe plays, and they had a lot of success doing that. So he saw that it was successful and did that for the full year (only 7 Ints). However, if that doesn't work early on, then he may take it upon himself and try to win games and things could get ugly. However, if they would have beaten the Saints, I could see them getting rolling early and put together a great year. They may still have a great year and win the division, but I just think a few early losses to the Vikings help us more than the Saints.
Any rule that says that wasn't a game winning catch is flawed.
Quote from: tower912 on September 13, 2010, 12:45:34 PM
Any rule that says that wasn't a game winning catch is flawed.
Flawed as it may be, at least the officials got the call right based on the rule...as opposed to the botched replay reversal of the Don Majkowski play against the Bears.
I understand it was the right call by the rule. A running back diving, hitting the pylon with a ball that falls out of his hand = touchdown. Two feet, a knee, a hand and losing the ball as you push off the ground = incomplete. Correct call as the rule is written. Flawed rule.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 13, 2010, 12:59:40 PM
Flawed as it may be, at least the officials got the call right based on the rule...as opposed to the botched replay reversal of the Don Majkowski play against the Bears.
So here is the Lions play: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s_EPK9MtJE
Here is Mike Williams in Seattle's game reaching to score a touchdown: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81a78418
If Calvin Johnson's catch was indeed not a catch and therefore incomplete, how is Mike Williams reaching for the goal line and the ball popping out as it hits the ground not a fumble? In fact, Calvin Johnson was more down than Mike Williams was. Calvin gets 2 feet down, his butt hits the ground, his knee hits the ground, his left hand hits the ground, and THEN the ball finally pops out as it hits the ground. How is that not a complete pass?
Either way, none of the NFC North Division teams looked all that great in week 1. The Packers had a bad first half offensively, then looked great to start the 2nd half and looked like they were just going to blow the Eagles out, and then Vick went off. What is encouraging is that Rodgers is probably not going to have many worse games than that (not only did he throw 2 interceptions and take 3 sacks, but he missed on throws multiple times worse than I've ever seen him miss before) and we still came away with a win in Philly. Granted that Kolb sucks, but winning in Philly is never easy.
The Bears and Lions both looked awful. It was just a matter of which team would look less atrocious that would win, and even then a bad rule changed the result. Even my Bears fan roommate thinks the rule is terrible.
The Vikings did not look good at all, but Adrian Peterson looked like a man possessed at times, which could be scary. They were also playing at the defending Super Bowl Champion's home/season opener so that's not all that easy. Granted they didn't look good either, but I think the Vikings are a playoff team and will look really good in some games and maybe bad if Favre looks old in other games.
Also, I enjoy the fact that after a loss all Sciancoe can talk about is the Packers haven't won anything. They weren't even playing the Packers, where'd that come from? Also, this quote from him is somewhat (or entirely) ironic, "Everybody's jumping on their jock, like they've actually gone to the Super Bowl, and won it." So Shiancoe has won a couple then, right? HAHA. JayBee, is that you speaking or what? Sounds like it.
Last comment: Clay Matthews is a man among boys.
The Packers beat a decent team...on the road...with the quarterback playing like crap...to start the season...
I'm satisfied with that.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 13, 2010, 01:34:01 PM
The Packers beat a decent team...on the road...with the quarterback playing like crap...to start the season...
I'm satisfied with that.
Yep, works for me.
Buffalo next week. They are atrocious. Let Brandon Jackson carry the load at RB so he's ready for Week 3 @ Chicago.
Quote from: wadesworld on September 13, 2010, 01:21:17 PM
If Calvin Johnson's catch was indeed not a catch and therefore incomplete, how is Mike Williams reaching for the goal line and the ball popping out as it hits the ground not a fumble?
NOTE: IMHO, The rule was enforced correctly, but the rule itself may need some tinkering. Also, I'm a JETS fan so I have no bias on the call.
Having provided that disclaimer, let me try to answer your question.
Here is the rule in question:
"If a player goes to the ground in the act of catching a pass (with or without contact by an opponent), he must maintain control of the ball after he touches the ground, whether in the field of play or the end zone. If he loses control of the ball, and the ball touches the ground before he regains control, the pass is incomplete. If he regains control prior to the ball touching the ground, the pass is complete."
In the Williams scenario, he already had possession of the ball, therefore, once it crosses the goal line, it is a TD regardless of what happens to the ball after crossing the plane. In the Johnson scenario, he technically never possessed the ball because while going to the ground in the act of catching the pass he didn't hold the ball all the way through the play.
Quote from: wadesworld on September 13, 2010, 01:21:17 PM
So here is the Lions play: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4s_EPK9MtJE
Here is Mike Williams in Seattle's game reaching to score a touchdown: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/09000d5d81a78418
If Calvin Johnson's catch was indeed not a catch and therefore incomplete, how is Mike Williams reaching for the goal line and the ball popping out as it hits the ground not a fumble? In fact, Calvin Johnson was more down than Mike Williams was. Calvin gets 2 feet down, his butt hits the ground, his knee hits the ground, his left hand hits the ground, and THEN the ball finally pops out as it hits the ground. How is that not a complete pass?
The ground cannot cause a fumble, but it can cause an incompletion. Also, Williams had already made the catch so he was, at that point, a "runner" and no longer a "receiver." Once a runner breaks the plane of the goal line with the ball, it's a TD. Period. However, it's not a TD/completion for a receiver until he completes the process of making the catch.
With that being said, even as a Bears fan, it's impossible to watch that play and not think it's a TD. Like others have said, both his feet, his knee, his butt and his arm all hit the ground before the ball came out. That's possession if you ask me...but not if you ask the NFL rule book. Good call. Bad rule.
In my eyes, Johnson unnecessarily took his 2nd hand off the ball (read...hot dog). So, while I was mad that the Bears were able to get a cheap win, I always enjoy a hot dog being done in by himself.
Quote from: MUEng92 on September 13, 2010, 08:16:20 PM
In my eyes, Johnson unnecessarily took his 2nd hand off the ball (read...hot dog). So, while I was mad that the Bears were able to get a cheap win, I always enjoy a hot dog being done in by himself.
Oh brother...
Quote from: MUEng92 on September 13, 2010, 08:16:20 PM
In my eyes, Johnson unnecessarily took his 2nd hand off the ball (read...hot dog). So, while I was mad that the Bears were able to get a cheap win, I always enjoy a hot dog being done in by himself.
Weak weak weak.
Hot dogging is what DeSean Jackson did last year (possibly two years ago) when he dropped the ball before going into the endzone.
Megatron switched to one hand because A. he has massive hands and could use the other arm to brace for the fall to the ground and B. he was probably trying to ensure that the ball didn't hit out of bounds when he came down.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on September 14, 2010, 08:11:56 AM
Weak weak weak.
Hot dogging is what DeSean Jackson did last year (possibly two years ago) when he dropped the ball before going into the endzone.
Megatron switched to one hand because A. he has massive hands and could use the other arm to brace for the fall to the ground and B. he was probably trying to ensure that the ball didn't hit out of bounds when he came down.
I also think he was trying to balance himself to make sure he got two feet in. IMO, he was not hot dogging it one bit.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 14, 2010, 09:01:14 AM
I also think he was trying to balance himself to make sure he got two feet in. IMO, he was not hot dogging it one bit.
Not to mention that he was genuinely amped up because he just caught what he believed to be the game-winning TD.
Ryan Grant out for the year
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/14/ryan-grant-out-for-the-year/
Ryan Grant out for the year
Posted by Mike Florio on September 14, 2010 1:36 PM ET
And here's why those Super Bowl predictions often end up being meaningless.
Packers running back Ryan Grant's "significant ankle injury" from Sunday was sufficiently significant to end his season.
Jay Glazer of FOX reports that Grant will be placed on injured reserve with severe ankle and leg injuries.
Emerging as the starter in 2007 after a string of injuries, Grant rushed for 1,203 yards in 2008 and 1,253 in 2009.
In-house options to replace Grant are Brandon Jackson and John Kuhn. James Johnson is on the practice squad.
Available veterans include Willie Parker and . . . and . . . Shaun Alexander?
________________________
I wouldn't mind giving Willie Parker a look, but he's smoking crack if he thinks Shaun Alexander is a good fit.
This is still a pass-happy offense.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on September 14, 2010, 01:32:28 PM
Ryan Grant out for the year
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/09/14/ryan-grant-out-for-the-year/
Ryan Grant out for the year
Posted by Mike Florio on September 14, 2010 1:36 PM ET
And here's why those Super Bowl predictions often end up being meaningless.
Packers running back Ryan Grant's "significant ankle injury" from Sunday was sufficiently significant to end his season.
Jay Glazer of FOX reports that Grant will be placed on injured reserve with severe ankle and leg injuries.
Emerging as the starter in 2007 after a string of injuries, Grant rushed for 1,203 yards in 2008 and 1,253 in 2009.
In-house options to replace Grant are Brandon Jackson and John Kuhn. James Johnson is on the practice squad.
Available veterans include Willie Parker and . . . and . . . Shaun Alexander?
________________________
I wouldn't mind giving Willie Parker a look, but he's smoking crack if he thinks Shaun Alexander is a good fit.
This is still a pass-happy offense.
Jackson will probably fill-in and run for 1,200 yards and 10 TDs...and that's why I hate the Packers.
When a starter gets hurt for my beloved Bears, the fill-in is generally brutal...and that's why I hate the Bears.
Just read in SI a story about the UFL. Looks like Maurice Clarett is available.
I'm not terribly worried about missing Grant. I think with the type of running they emphasize...one cut, hit the hole, run downhill...you can find all sorts of backs that fit that well.
It certainly doesn't help. Any time you lose a guy who has rushed for 1,200 yards each of the past 2 years it is going to hurt you. I do think that some of his success was because of the success of the passing game, thus opening up the running game. He did not have a lot of success running before the injury on Sunday and it was because the passing game did not get going early on. When it did in the 3rd quarter, Jackson had a very good quarter. Once the passing failed, the running game did too. So I think Jackson will produce close to what Grant did, but the depth at the position is what scares me.
Quote from: MUEng92 on September 13, 2010, 08:16:20 PM
In my eyes, Johnson unnecessarily took his 2nd hand off the ball (read...hot dog). So, while I was mad that the Bears were able to get a cheap win, I always enjoy a hot dog being done in by himself.
+1
He had every opportunity to pull the ball into his body and fall on this back with two hands on the ball.
Instead of mustard on that HotDog he got egg on his face
Who'd have thought, 2-0 Bears vs 2-0 Packers next Monday night? Should be interesting, Monday night, in Chicago. I'd expect a Packer victory, but if the Bears are going to have a chance, it's going to be at home.
Nice game by Brent today. 225 yards, 0 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, 1 fumble.
The men are separating themselves from the boys early on this season. Looks like a sprint to the finish between the Packers and the Bears. 20 total points in the 2 games so far by the Vikings. Count me impressed. The consensus Vikings are...errr...SKOL VIKI...err...
With the Cowboys and Vikings both 0-2, it looks like the NFC will come down to the Packers (2-0) and the Saints (1-0).
In all honesty, the Packers are in a great position right now. My guess is next Monday's game is your typical Packers at Bears game. Sloppy game, a lot of turnovers, neither team playing well offensively, and the team who turns the ball over less wins.
Quote from: MUDish on September 19, 2010, 02:53:42 PM
Who'd have thought, 2-0 Bears vs 2-0 Packers next Monday night? Should be interesting, Monday night, in Chicago. I'd expect a Packer victory, but if the Bears are going to have a chance, it's going to be at home.
Can you imagine how many yards cutler could throw for if he didn't have to pick himself up off the ground on 50% of their pass plays?
Quote from: wadesworld on September 19, 2010, 02:59:46 PM
Nice game by Brent today. 225 yards, 0 touchdowns, 3 interceptions, 1 fumble.
The men are separating themselves from the boys early on this season. Looks like a sprint to the finish between the Packers and the Bears. 20 total points in the 2 games so far by the Vikings. Count me impressed. The consensus Vikings are...errr...SKOL VIKI...err...
With the Cowboys and Vikings both 0-2, it looks like the NFC will come down to the Packers (2-0) and the Saints (1-0).
Uh...there are 14 games to go. Plenty of times for other teams to step up, injuries to occur, etc.
The packers have beaten the bills and the eagles...they haven't played anyone yet.
We'll see how good Cutler is when he has Clay Matthews in his ass for 60 minutes next Monday night.
Quote from: muarmy81 on September 19, 2010, 04:02:26 PM
The packers have beaten the bills and the eagles...they haven't played anyone yet.
Could say the same of the Bears... Lions=Bills, Eagles=Cowboys... Bears had a great game against the Cowboys, but the Cowboys have shown nothing early on this year to justify their hype.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2010, 03:37:59 PM
Uh...there are 14 games to go. Plenty of times for other teams to step up, injuries to occur, etc.
Nice editing. That's why I added the last paragraph. I pulled a JayBee impression for the first 3/4 of the post.
Quote from: shiloh26 on September 19, 2010, 04:49:35 PM
Could say the same of the Bears... Lions=Bills, Eagles=Cowboys... Bears had a great game against the Cowboys, but the Cowboys have shown nothing early on this year to justify their hype.
Well put, but the Eagles are actually 1-1. The Boys are 0-2.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on September 19, 2010, 04:33:05 PM
We'll see how good Cutler is when he has Clay Matthews in his ass for 60 minutes next Monday night.
No offense, but DeMarcus Ware>Clay Matthews.
I agree...
CHI hasn't really been tested although I think DAL will get things turned around. I think GB is fortunate to have played Philly when they did. I don't think they would have beat a philly team if Vick had played the entire game last week. I'm hoping Kolb suits up when they play CHI.
Quote from: MU B2002 on September 19, 2010, 03:19:08 PM
Can you imagine how many yards cutler could throw for if he didn't have to pick himself up off the ground on 50% of their pass plays?
I am surprised he wasn't knocked out on his feet.....he was killed in the first and a half quarter. He can take a hit. Stereotypes be damned.
Quote from: MUDish on September 19, 2010, 06:02:08 PM
No offense, but DeMarcus Ware>Clay Matthews.
Maybe. But it's a lot closer than you think.
I'm not saying Clay Matthews isn't a great young player, but Ware is elite, knocked Cutler on his rear plenty of times today, and Cutler came out with huge numbers and a victory. Say what you will about Cutler, but he is one tough SOB.
It really is hard to compare the two. They are different types of players used in different ways.
Quote from: MU B2002 on September 19, 2010, 03:19:08 PM
Can you imagine how many yards cutler could throw for if he didn't have to pick himself up off the ground on 50% of their pass plays?
It is a characteristic of a Mike Martz offense. Maximum receivers running routes, minimum protection, QB has to get the ball out on time or get run over.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 19, 2010, 03:37:59 PM
Uh...there are 14 games to go. Plenty of times for other teams to step up, injuries to occur, etc.
True, but historically only ten percent of teams who start 0-2 make playoffs over the past ten years.
Quote from: tower912 on September 19, 2010, 08:02:04 PM
It is a characteristic of a Mike Martz offense. Maximum receivers running routes, minimum protection, QB has to get the ball out on time or get run over.
Yeah, and those routes aren't slants and outs, they're crosses and posts... the quarterback really has to be able to stand in the pocket for a long time in a Martz system. Kudos to Cutler, he's looked good this year in a tough system. Bears/Packers should be a good one, as it always is. Early divisional games are always important, especially when the other 2 teams in the division are 0-2.
Quote from: MUDish on September 19, 2010, 06:02:08 PM
No offense, but DeMarcus Ware>Clay Matthews.
disagree.
Maybe 2 years ago Ware > Matthews, but Matthews has been stellar so far.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on September 19, 2010, 09:44:01 PM
disagree.
Maybe 2 years ago Ware > Matthews, but Matthews has been stellar so far.
I'd take the guy who's been an All-Pro each of the last 3 seasons over the guy who has been "stellar so far" against a couple weaker teams.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 20, 2010, 09:10:25 AM
I'd take the guy who's been an All-Pro each of the last 3 seasons over the guy who has been "stellar so far" against a couple weaker teams.
I'd probably take DeMarcus Ware for this season as well, but it's not just these 1st 2 games of this season that Matthews was really good. He was a stud last year too. And long term I'd take Matthews 100% of the time.
Quote from: wadesworld on September 20, 2010, 09:58:03 AM
I'd probably take DeMarcus Ware for this season as well, but it's not just these 1st 2 games of this season that Matthews was really good. He was a stud last year too. And long term I'd take Matthews 100% of the time.
+1. Matthews was a pro-bowler last season, and will be again this season barring an injury.
Quote from: wadesworld on September 20, 2010, 09:58:03 AM
I'd probably take DeMarcus Ware for this season as well, but it's not just these 1st 2 games of this season that Matthews was really good. He was a stud last year too. And long term I'd take Matthews 100% of the time.
I doubt you'd make that same statement if Matthews wasn't on the Packers...but I guess that's part of what makes sports great. My guys are always better than your guys.
Quote from: Rollout-the-Barrel on September 19, 2010, 08:32:47 PM
True, but historically only ten percent of teams who start 0-2 make playoffs over the past ten years.
It's an overrated stat. Many of those 0-2 teams are 0-2 because they are truly bad teams. Thus, they don't make the playoffs. Great teams/franchises such as Minnesota that go 0-2 can certainly still make the playoffs (as we did in 2008). Not having Sidney is hurting us... but, we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK... 0-0 in divisional games thus far.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 20, 2010, 10:41:47 AM
It's an overrated stat. Many of those 0-2 teams are 0-2 because they are truly bad teams. Thus, they don't make the playoffs. Great teams/franchises such as Minnesota that go 0-2 can certainly still make the playoffs (as we did in 2008). Not having Sidney is hurting us... but, we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK... 0-0 in divisional games thus far.
I think it is a little early to call any team a great team 2 this early in the season. To be a great franchise I think you should probably have a super bowl win, or else the term great is being used pretty loosely.
I think next week is the make or break game for the Vikings. They could come out and have a good performance that gets them back into their rhythm and 1-2 isn't awful and going into the bye they can build on that and continue to get on the same page. However, the Lions aren't as bad as they usually have been. They nearly beat the Eagles and depending on your views should have beaten the Bears. If the Vikings lose that game then I would call their season done. 0-3 with someone in the division being 3-0 will be tough. The only thing that they have to be optimistic about is that the NFC East doesn't seem as good as advertised. I just feel an 0-3 start with a loss to the Lions will break that locker room apart, especially with a bye week to let it fester and their schedule after the bye.
I just hope for Packer fans that Matthews holds up. When you read about all the weight he put on during college, if memory serves it was something like 30lbs before his junior or senior year, you have to wonder if that frame is going to start to wear down.
Quote from: MUBurrow on September 20, 2010, 11:43:37 AM
I just hope for Packer fans that Matthews holds up. When you read about all the weight he put on during college, if memory serves it was something like 30lbs before his junior or senior year, you have to wonder if that frame is going to start to wear down.
I'd look at lineage more than anything. He comes from good bloodlines. Dad and Uncle both were 18 year NFL vets. If I were a Packers fan, I wouldn't be worried. The kid is the real deal.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 20, 2010, 10:41:47 AM
It's an overrated stat. Many of those 0-2 teams are 0-2 because they are truly bad teams. Thus, they don't make the playoffs. Great teams/franchises such as Minnesota that go 0-2 can certainly still make the playoffs (as we did in 2008). Not having Sidney is hurting us... but, we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK... 0-0 in divisional games thus far.
HA.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 20, 2010, 10:41:47 AM
It's an overrated stat. Many of those 0-2 teams are 0-2 because they are truly bad teams. Thus, they don't make the playoffs. Great teams/franchises such as Minnesota that go 0-2 can certainly still make the playoffs (as we did in 2008). Not having Sidney is hurting us... but, we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK... 0-0 in divisional games thus far.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvLmG5Ls-kw
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 20, 2010, 10:41:47 AM
It's an overrated stat. Many of those 0-2 teams are 0-2 because they are truly bad teams. Thus, they don't make the playoffs. Great teams/franchises such as Minnesota that go 0-2 can certainly still make the playoffs (as we did in 2008). Not having Sidney is hurting us... but, we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK... 0-0 in divisional games thus far.
Ha, I almost spit out my coffee reading these two sentences.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 20, 2010, 10:40:54 AM
I doubt you'd make that same statement if Matthews wasn't on the Packers...but I guess that's part of what makes sports great. My guys are always better than your guys.
Really? I'd absolutely take the 24 year old, 2nd year Matthews who will continue to improve over the 28 year old, 6th year Ware who has probably peaked or is probably now at his peak for the long term. That has nothing to do with me being a Packers fan, just the fact that Matthews is 4 years younger and is one of the most explosive linebackers in the NFL.
Last year Ware had 45 solo tackles, 12 tackle assists, 6 pass deflections, 11 sacks, and 5 forced fumbles.
Last year Matthews had 37 solo tackles, 14 tackle assists, 7 pass deflections, 10 sacks, and 1 forced fumble.
Obviously the numbers go towards Ware, but considering he's widely considered the best linebacker in the NFL, and that it was Matthews's rookie season, those numbers are pretty close. Give me Matthews long term every day of the week.
So far Ware has 9 solo tackles, 1 pass deflection, and one sack. Matthews has 12 solo tackles, 1 pass deflection, 6 sacks, 1 forced fumble, and 2 starting quarterbacks knocked out of the game.
Pass coverage already goes to Matthews.
Vikes haven't looked good.
But...
The defense has looked good, so maybe Brent and the receivers can figure it out over the next 2 weeks (Lions + bye week).
They have only lost 1 game that they "should have won", so we'll see if/when that comes back to bite them.
The Minnesota Vikings have just launched a new integrated marketing campaign to celebrate their "50 Seasons of Greatness".
This has been the slogan for this year....I guess in MN losing 4 Super Bowls makes 50 seasons of greatness.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on September 20, 2010, 03:19:54 PM
The Minnesota Vikings have just launched a new integrated marketing campaign to celebrate their "50 Seasons of Greatness".
This has been the slogan for this year....I guess in MN losing 4 Super Bowls makes 50 seasons of greatness.
and in an interview, Tarkenton sounds kinda miffed that they didn't invite the older players back for a pre-game ceremony or anything
QuoteWhy not have those players back to represent 50 years? Plus the game was one of the greatest upsets in the history of the league and there's nothing. Would that happen in New York with the Yankees? Or, in Boston? That was the foundation of this franchise. That was where we built the fabric in the first five years. If they had something, I wouldn't go back. (The Vikings have not finalized plans for celebrating their 50th-season anniversary, other than the release of a DVD on Sept. 14 that will cover the franchise's first half-century.) On that day, I'll have a moment of silence and remember it probably the whole day. http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_15829418
Quote from: muarmy81 on September 19, 2010, 06:03:02 PM
I agree...
CHI hasn't really been tested although I think DAL will get things turned around. I think GB is fortunate to have played Philly when they did. I don't think they would have beat a philly team if Vick had played the entire game last week. I'm hoping Kolb suits up when they play CHI.
As a Cowboys fan, I could not disagree more. Same train wreck it's been for the last 3 or 4 years. No discipline, poor coaching, terrible GM (unfortunately he's the GM).
That's why I told you guys last year I would trade McCarthy for Wade in a heartbeat and I actually had a lot of people here saying they would take that trade. Funny, I don't think they would now.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on September 20, 2010, 08:11:01 PM
As a Cowboys fan, I could not disagree more. Same train wreck it's been for the last 3 or 4 years. No discipline, poor coaching, terrible GM (unfortunately he's the GM).
That's why I told you guys last year I would trade McCarthy for Wade in a heartbeat and I actually had a lot of people here saying they would take that trade. Funny, I don't think they would now.
That was probably me. I would definitely not take that trade anymore. I still wish McCarthy would open it up more earlier in the games. We always start out slow and then start looking like one of the better teams in the NFL when we open it up in the 2nd half.
I'd be interested to hear what your take is on Ware vs. Matthews and who you'd rather have long term.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on September 20, 2010, 08:11:01 PM
As a Cowboys fan, I could not disagree more. Same train wreck it's been for the last 3 or 4 years. No discipline, poor coaching, terrible GM (unfortunately he's the GM).
That's why I told you guys last year I would trade McCarthy for Wade in a heartbeat and I actually had a lot of people here saying they would take that trade. Funny, I don't think they would now.
Who on God's green Earth would take Wade Phillips as a coach over anyone else? I'd hire Herm Edwards as GM before I took Wade Phillips as a head coach. Out of everyone on the Cowboys sideline, I'd say that Wade consistently looks the most confused.
I get the same feeling about the Cowboys... I'm a Packers fan and was pretty surprised about all the Super Bowl talk to begin the season considering how we ended last season and now have the exact same team, but I was even more surprised about how excited people were about the Cowboys. They've done nothing in the last 4 years to show they are a contending team. Romo just doesn't quite have seem to it, and they keep finding new ways to muck up games (what did you guys trade for Roy Williams? First Rounder?). Sure, they'll go off for good stretch of the season, but they'll flicker just like they always do.
McCarthy seems like a good coach, and you can't really be too upset with the results so far... but his playcalling gets downright confusing sometimes. I remember the Bucs game last year when he simply refused to get Rodgers into a groove with short slants and seams, but just keep calling vertical routes for incomplete passes. It was infuriating considering how well we move the ball on shorter routes, and then strike deep 2-3 times a game. While it gets frustrating at times, he consciously tries to mix it up in his approach to each game, which probably makes it harder to game plan against.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 20, 2010, 10:41:47 AM
It's an overrated stat. Many of those 0-2 teams are 0-2 because they are truly bad teams. Thus, they don't make the playoffs. Great teams/franchises such as Minnesota that go 0-2 can certainly still make the playoffs (as we did in 2008). Not having Sidney is hurting us... but, we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK... 0-0 in divisional games thus far.
Ok. 90% of 0-2 teams are "truly bad teams" and 10% are "incredibly great" and "will be ok". I still don't like those odds if I'm a Viking fan.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on September 20, 2010, 12:54:58 PM
Vikes haven't looked good.
But...
The defense has looked good, so maybe Brent and the receivers can figure it out over the next 2 weeks (Lions + bye week).
They have only lost 1 game that they "should have won", so we'll see if/when that comes back to bite them.
Who's Brent?
(http://gaspedal.com/wp-content/uploads/never-forget-you-brent.jpg)
Quote from: Homebrew101 on September 21, 2010, 03:18:04 PM
(http://gaspedal.com/wp-content/uploads/never-forget-you-brent.jpg)
It is clearly evident by this picture that Packer fans will never get over Brett Favre.
Isn't it "BrINT," as in Brett being an Interception waiting to happen?
Quote from: shiloh26 on September 21, 2010, 08:17:21 AM
Who on God's green Earth would take Wade Phillips as a coach over anyone else? I'd hire Herm Edwards as GM before I took Wade Phillips as a head coach. Out of everyone on the Cowboys sideline, I'd say that Wade consistently looks the most confused.
Go back and read the threads here from two years ago when the Packers were down, Favre was the greatest, Ted Thompson was a jerk for not signing him, Aaron Rodgers would never be anything and McCarthy was a joke. That pretty much summed up the posts here from Packers fans. It was entertaining to say the least. And a bunch of them were saying how great Phillips was because Dallas had gone 13-3 the year prior.
Looks like there's a new consensus in town.
(http://i51.tinypic.com/2i6eutj.png)
Quote from: Moonboots on September 21, 2010, 11:31:23 PM
Looks like there's a new consensus in town.
(http://i51.tinypic.com/2i6eutj.png)
Absolutely, the Vikings are the Consensus 3rd best team in the NFC North.
Quote from: Moonboots on September 21, 2010, 11:31:23 PM
Looks like there's a new consensus in town.
Must be a misprint. The Vikings are poised to follow the lead of the Minnesota Twins and win yet another division championship.
With Hank and Kendra... coming to town, things are looking up. Our schedule does blow, though. We flat out need to win divisional games. If we had a new stadium we'd be 2-0.
Did the lighting of the Metrodome make Brett fumble in the end zone or something? Plus one game was on the road.
I never want to count out the Vikings because last year I thought Brett was done, (even after the first game last year I thought he looked old) and I got proven very wrong. However, I'm more scared of the Bears (partially coz we play them next), but the only reason we beat them last year was Cutler's turnovers, and he looks better this year.
Just wait until Clay Matthews, the destroyer of QB's, gets a hold of him.
Hopefully Matthews has a better system for masking his steroid use than his boy Cushing did.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on September 21, 2010, 08:59:57 PM
Go back and read the threads here from two years ago when the Packers were down, Favre was the greatest, Ted Thompson was a jerk for not signing him, Aaron Rodgers would never be anything and McCarthy was a joke. That pretty much summed up the posts here from Packers fans. It was entertaining to say the least. And a bunch of them were saying how great Phillips was because Dallas had gone 13-3 the year prior.
I don't think too many people here were down on the Packers for letting Favre go and turning to Rodgers, at least not that I can find, but maybe I missed a thread that had more discussion.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=9723.0 (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=9723.0)
Fans will always want to get rid of the gm/coach when times are tough and love them when times are good, that's how it usually works in sports.
Quote from: Stringer Bell on September 22, 2010, 02:12:40 PM
Hopefully Matthews has a better system for masking his steroid use than his boy Cushing did.
Ha! I actually heard a couple guys talking about this on the radio yesterday afternoon.
Quote from: Stringer Bell on September 22, 2010, 02:12:40 PM
Hopefully Matthews has a better system for masking his steroid use than his boy Cushing did.
You know who else was saying that?
The Bills fans at Lambeau.
And the Eagles fans when he knocked out Kolb and started the QB controversy in Philly.
And on Monday, Bears fans will be saying it too.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on September 22, 2010, 02:31:01 PM
You know who else was saying that?
The Bills fans at Lambeau.
And the Eagles fans when he knocked out Kolb and started the QB controversy in Philly.
And on Monday, Bears fans will be saying it too.
Kolb had never been really hit before as a starting QB and had one of his starting linemen go down to injury leading to him getting lit up.
The Bills just suck.
Matthews is fantastic, but lets not make him out to be some ridiculous machine the likes of with the NFL has never seen. Cutler was blasted plenty of times by Ware and Anthony Spencer and was just fine. I don't see him suddenly crumbling when Matthews gets to him a few times.
Quote from: JWags85 on September 22, 2010, 02:41:32 PM
Kolb had never been really hit before as a starting QB and had one of his starting linemen go down to injury leading to him getting lit up.
The Bills just suck.
Matthews is fantastic, but lets not make him out to be some ridiculous machine the likes of with the NFL has never seen. Cutler was blasted plenty of times by Ware and Anthony Spencer and was just fine. I don't see him suddenly crumbling when Matthews gets to him a few times.
I know. Hyperbole went into overload once the steroid accusations come flying. The dude could just be a late bloomer, you know, since his dad and uncle were both massive as well during their 18 years in the NFL, respectively.
Quote from: jmayer1 on September 22, 2010, 02:16:05 PM
I don't think too many people here were down on the Packers for letting Favre go and turning to Rodgers, at least not that I can find, but maybe I missed a thread that had more discussion.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=9723.0 (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=9723.0)
Fans will always want to get rid of the gm/coach when times are tough and love them when times are good, that's how it usually works in sports.
Sounds like Chicos is having 'selective memory' problems again ;)
Things look to be going well in Viqueen land:
Brett Favre:
"I'm not really sure who I'm throwing to on particular plays."
"If I sat here and told you that I knew exactly what we're doing right now I'd be lying."
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/16802/favrewatch-feigning-fiasco
Are the Pack wearing throwbacks this Monday night too? Anybody know?
Is there any chance the Lions can pull the upset this week? It would be truly awesome to see the Vikings season collapse in on itself in Week 3.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on September 22, 2010, 02:31:01 PM
You know who else was saying that?
The Bills fans at Lambeau.
And the Eagles fans when he knocked out Kolb and started the QB controversy in Philly.
And on Monday, Bears fans will be saying it too.
Did people also say that about Peppers and Strahan and Ware and every other player who racked up a high sack number?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 24, 2010, 08:58:48 AM
Did people also say that about Peppers and Strahan and Ware and every other player who racked up a high sack number?
Did those guys have a large growth spurt?
Quote from: GOMU1104 on September 23, 2010, 04:11:11 PM
Things look to be going well in Viqueen land:
Brett Favre:
"I'm not really sure who I'm throwing to on particular plays."
"If I sat here and told you that I knew exactly what we're doing right now I'd be lying."
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/16802/favrewatch-feigning-fiasco
The problem is that Brett seems to have burned up all of his goodwill credits, and everything that comes out of his mouth is met with a heavy dose of skepticism. (rightfully so)
It's actually too bad because his quotes are pretty refreshing compared to what most QB's spit out.
He appears to be honest here, but I guess we can never know for sure.
Quote from: MUDish on September 23, 2010, 08:38:52 PM
Are the Pack wearing throwbacks this Monday night too? Anybody know?
Apparently not, but this article is from July so maybe they've changed their minds since then. The Bears are wearing throwbacks for the game, correct?
http://www.totalpackers.com/2010/07/16/packers-will-wear-throwback-uniforms-dec-5/ (http://www.totalpackers.com/2010/07/16/packers-will-wear-throwback-uniforms-dec-5/)
Correct, Bears are wearing these Monday night: http://www.bearsgab.com/2010/09/21/bears-to-unleash-new-throwback-unis-against-packers/
I remembered hearing over the summer that the Pack was going to wear throwbacks at some point this year, wasn't sure if it was coordinated with the Bears or not.
Quote from: MUDish on September 24, 2010, 12:07:05 PM
Correct, Bears are wearing these Monday night: http://www.bearsgab.com/2010/09/21/bears-to-unleash-new-throwback-unis-against-packers/
I remembered hearing over the summer that the Pack was going to wear throwbacks at some point this year, wasn't sure if it was coordinated with the Bears or not.
Yeah, the Packers are definitely wearing them this year sometime, I just haven't seen the dates anywhere besides the article I posted. I'm not sure why they wouldn't coordinate it so both teams are wearing them, seems to make a lot of sense.
Quote from: jmayer1 on September 24, 2010, 12:46:19 PM
Yeah, the Packers are definitely wearing them this year sometime, I just haven't seen the dates anywhere besides the article I posted. I'm not sure why they wouldn't coordinate it so both teams are wearing them, seems to make a lot of sense.
Teams generally like to wear their throwback jerseys for home games so more of their fans can see them in action (and purchase them for just $200 in the stadium gift shop).
Should be an interesting game tonight, whichever team wins will really be in the drivers seat and the lone unbeaten in the NFC. Both teams have easy schedules coming up after this week as well.
Thing I'm most interested in seeing is if the loss of Ryan Grant will have an effect tonight. Grant typically has played well against the Bears, moreso in Soldier Field. Not sure how the Bears can cover Finley, Driver, and Jennings tonight. Bears need to get pressure early and often.
I expect big games from Cutler and Forte tonight. In the end though, I think Pack's talent wins out.
Pack 30, Bears 24
I have no idea what to expect from the Bears tonight. They looked awful in the preseason, slightly better than awful against Detroit and very solid in Dallas. Martz knows what he's doing on offense, which is a new concept for the Bears, but that o-line is still a big question mark. I think this game will come down to putting pressure on the QBs. If Peppers and co. can get to Rodgers then the Bears will win. If not, it could get ugly given the Bears' weak secondary. Therefore, I'm covering all my bases and making two predictions. Either...
Bears 28, Packers 23
OR
Packers 47, Bears 6
Packers -3 and the under of 46.5.
Pack: 24
Bears: 17
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 27, 2010, 09:12:37 AM
I have no idea what to expect from the Bears tonight. They looked awful in the preseason, slightly better than awful against Detroit and very solid in Dallas. Martz knows what he's doing on offense, which is a new concept for the Bears, but that o-line is still a big question mark. I think this game will come down to putting pressure on the QBs. If Peppers and co. can get to Rodgers then the Bears will win. If not, it could get ugly given the Bears' weak secondary. Therefore, I'm covering all my bases and making two predictions. Either...
Bears 28, Packers 23
OR
Packers 47, Bears 6
C'mon man, you sound like Chicos ;). There's no way you can be wrong here. Hard to say "Either we'll win, or we'll lose." Which 1 will it be?
I'm going to say it's an ugly game with a lot of turnovers. It always is between these two teams, just like last year's game. I think the Packers win 24-17 with less turnovers than the Bears.
Bears 97
Green Bay 2
Quote from: wadesworld on September 27, 2010, 11:10:39 AM
C'mon man, you sound like Chicos ;). There's no way you can be wrong here. Hard to say "Either we'll win, or we'll lose." Which 1 will it be?
I'm going to say it's an ugly game with a lot of turnovers. It always is between these two teams, just like last year's game. I think the Packers win 24-17 with less turnovers than the Bears.
I could be wrong if the Bears win big or the Packers win a close one :)
Fine! I'll go with the Bears 28-23!
Packers 34
Bears 21
Bears lose again next week @NYG before righting the ship and winning 3 of 4 (@CAR, SEA, WAS, @BUF) and sit 5-3 halfway through the season. Then they collapse in the tougher half of the schedule and miss the playoffs.
Packers start 7-0 before losing @NYJ. Go 12-4 and win the division. Brian Bulaga makes Jared Allen look like a mere Pro Bowler rather than greatest d-lineman ever as he seemed last year against us.
Vikings.......eh who cares?
Mark my words. Unless I'm wrong.
I will be only slightly surprised if the Bears win. Its just awfully hard to know what's going to happen this early. If this were opening weekend, I am guessing a prediction in the 31-14 would probably be the norm. I'm not sure things have really changed that much in two weeks. While it doesn't necessarily mean they'll win, the Packers certainly still appear to be the better team, so I will say they win it 31-20.
As a Packer fan, I am getting that sick feeling in my stomach that the Bears are going to have another one of those seasons they seem to have every few years where every bounce, tipped pass, etc, drops right in their hands and all of the players on the other team simultaneously trip and fall over allowing the Bear player to waltz into the endzone.
At least it seems like that what happens. I swear it seemed like there were a couple of years that wherever Mike Brown was standing the ball miraculously fell from the sky into his hands and there was no one between him and the other endzone.
Man, I hope I am wrong. Maybe it is just something I ate.
Quote from: MUEng92 on September 27, 2010, 04:44:08 PM
where every bounce, tipped pass, etc, drops right in their hands and all of the players on the other team simultaneously trip and fall over allowing the Bear player to waltz into the endzone.
there were a couple of years that wherever Mike Brown was standing the ball miraculously fell from the sky into his hands and there was no one between him and the other endzone.
It is called practice and blocking by the defense on turnovers.....As a Bears fan it is one of the very few things I like about Lovie.
I'm looking forward to this one. It is the battle for 2nd place... one of these teams should take 2nd in the NFC North.. and the other, 3rd.
Peckers 31, Bears 21
Funny how JayBoy only shows up after the Queens finally win a game.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on September 27, 2010, 06:30:19 PM
Funny how JayBoy only shows up after the Queens finally win a game.
Actually, I posted last Monday morning, the day after we fell to 0-2, saying, "we're still an incredibly great team and will be OK..." It's on page 5 of this thread... but, don't let facts get in the way...
In reality, I don't feel overly confident, but the fact of the matter is that later tonight we'll be one game behind either Green Bey or Chacago and only two behind the other of those two... and we have 2 games remaining against each of those teams. The schedule does get a bit brutal for us, though.
Dish, is Tommie done in Chicago? Sad if the case, but hasn't been the same since the bad injury in 07 or 08 (hamstring IIRC).
enjoyed watching the Packers implode. Bears will end the night undefeated
How many people would have expected the Bears to be the only undefeated team in the NFC after 3 games, two of them against GBP and Dallas? Not many.
I think they've been outplayed in every one of their games and yet there they are, 3-0.
I feel much better about the Vikings after watching that.
Every time Erin ran the ball he did some little jag off move.. first the touchdown, he did the 'get deez' move to what appeared to be someone in stands... then on their last drive, just before the turnover, he runs for a nice gain, then does the little first down signal. What a stroke.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 27, 2010, 11:00:43 PM
I feel much better about the Vikings after watching that.
Every time Erin ran the ball he did some little jag off move.. first the touchdown, he did the 'get deez' move to what appeared to be someone in stands... then on their last drive, just before the turnover, he runs for a nice gain, then does the little first down signal. What a stroke.
You do? Why?
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 27, 2010, 11:00:43 PM
I feel much better about the Vikings after watching that.
Every time Erin ran the ball he did some little jag off move.. first the touchdown, he did the 'get deez' move to what appeared to be someone in stands... then on their last drive, just before the turnover, he runs for a nice gain, then does the little first down signal. What a stroke.
Says the guy whose best defensive player ropes an imaginary bull every time he makes a play.
Anyways...yes the Bears won. Good for them, congratulations. Packers gave it to them via the penalties.
However...this validates nothing about them or Jay Cutler, specifically. 2 INTs dropped and 2 more called back. Nothing has changed. He's still garbage.
Quote from: ATWizJr on September 27, 2010, 11:07:19 PM
You do? Why?
Because 4 of the games on our schedule are against those two teams.
Rodgers is good, but there is no running game and the amount of penalties was bizarre. I was glad to see Jermichael Finley come back.. as much as I dislike the Pickers, that guy is a treat to watch.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 27, 2010, 11:00:43 PM
I feel much better about the Vikings after watching that.
Every time Erin ran the ball he did some little jag off move.. first the touchdown, he did the 'get deez' move to what appeared to be someone in stands...
I think he is now the people's champ since Freddie Mitchell retired.
I don't care if Cutler is garbage and had a few shoulda/coulda/woulda ints. He still got the job done in the end. Would I rather have A.R.? Sure, 27/32 teams in the NFL probably would at this point. But for now I will just have to settle for garbage, and a week to savor a victory over GB.
And I thought Jared Allen was "stirring the pot" everytime he makes a play??
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 27, 2010, 11:13:27 PM
Because 4 of the games on our schedule are against those two teams.
Rodgers is good, but there is no running game and the amount of penalties was bizarre. I was glad to see Jermichael Finley come back.. as much as I dislike the Pickers, that guy is a treat to watch.
Agreed on that. A Super Bowl team does not commit 17 penalties in a game. Bad weak? Sure. But this is a Mike McCarthy team. He preaches and preaches about improving special teams and decreasing penalties, but it's the same song and dance every year. Special teams kills us, penalties kill us. The offensive line is still weak. And we need Marshawn Lynch...badly.
Also, can somebody please take over the red flag for McCarthy? I don't think the guy could be worse at challenging calls.
Just got back from Soldier Field, hard to believe the Bears are 3-0.
Julius Peppers was a STUD tonight and really completely changed this game. As poor as the Bears offensive line is, the Packers....ugh. Maybe it was just Peppers wrecking havoc, but that was not a pretty offensive line game for either team.
Packers are still a better overall team, they just killed themselves tonight, and Bears (to their credit) took advantage. Huge win for the Bears, not just 3-0, but three conference wins, two division wins, and a very reasonable schedule coming up. Be interesting to see how far they can go.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 27, 2010, 11:13:27 PM
Because 4 of the games on our schedule are against those two teams.
Rodgers is good, but there is no running game and the amount of penalties was bizarre. I was glad to see Jermichael Finley come back.. as much as I dislike the Pickers, that guy is a treat to watch.
The vikes will go at best 2-2 against those 4 teams.
Quote from: MUDish on September 28, 2010, 12:28:03 AM
Packers are still a better overall team, they just killed themselves tonight, and Bears (to their credit) took advantage. Huge win for the Bears, not just 3-0, but three conference wins, two division wins, and a very reasonable schedule coming up. Be interesting to see how far they can go.
I think you are dead on. That was huge for the Bears to get that one. Playoffs seem highly likely at this point. As for the Packers, I think you're right, they clearly look like the superior team, but if they don't cut down on the mistakes and mental errors, none of it matters. I suspect this game could end up helping them in the end, because clearly every player on the team knows they were better, and knows they did it to themselves. Admitting you have a problem is the first step toward recovery. Can they correct it? we'll see.
Quote from: wadesworld on September 27, 2010, 11:32:35 PM
Agreed on that. A Super Bowl team does not commit 17 penalties in a game. Bad weak? Sure. But this is a Mike McCarthy team. He preaches and preaches about improving special teams and decreasing penalties, but it's the same song and dance every year. Special teams kills us, penalties kill us. The offensive line is still weak. And we need Marshawn Lynch...badly.
Also, can somebody please take over the red flag for McCarthy? I don't think the guy could be worse at challenging calls.
+17 penalties
We need to have someone other than Clifton and Tauscher's corpses at the T position...
And damn you James Jones, finish the stupid play...
PATHETIC
Quote from: wadesworld on September 27, 2010, 11:32:35 PM
Agreed on that. A Super Bowl team does not commit 17 penalties in a game. Bad weak? Sure. But this is a Mike McCarthy team. He preaches and preaches about improving special teams and decreasing penalties, but it's the same song and dance every year. Special teams kills us, penalties kill us. The offensive line is still weak. And we need Marshawn Lynch...badly.
Also, can somebody please take over the red flag for McCarthy? I don't think the guy could be worse at challenging calls.
I don't think a different back is going to help this run game. The Bears are a hard team to judge anyway since they are so good at stopping the run...to the Packer's credit, they just ran some short passes for Jackson that were basically ball control type passes anyway.
And that challenge by McCarthy was ridiculously dumb. I saw him mouth something like "I had to do it" to the ref. No...no you didn't. If you would have kept it in your pocket, they would have had about 45 second to do something at the end of the game. Bettter than the stupid kick return you did instead.
Would have liked to have watched, but the Dish Network Satellite feed at the fire station went out from 5:30-10:30, so by the time we actually COULD watch, I didn't care anymore.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on September 27, 2010, 11:10:13 PM
Anyways...yes the Bears won. Good for them, congratulations. Packers gave it to them via the penalties.
However...this validates nothing about them or Jay Cutler, specifically. 2 INTs dropped and 2 more called back. Nothing has changed. He's still garbage.
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.
FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.
Make all the excuses you want, at the end of the day, the Bears are still 3-0.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.
:D :D :D
It was hard to see him since he spent the whole game "in Cutler's ass".
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.
FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.
No excuses here. Obvious penalties on both INTs...the dropped one by Woodson (Collins?) on the last drive was a killer.
And Matthews had a very good game. You don't have to get the sacks to affect the passing game.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 28, 2010, 09:07:25 AM
And Matthews had a very good game. You don't have to get the sacks to affect the passing game.
Agree, I kept waiting for him to actually get a hit on Cutler, but I thought the OL did a pretty good job on him. This is one of the first games that I have paid attention to him, and I guess I never knew he was that quick. But damn kid, get a haircut.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.
FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.
Make all the excuses you want, at the end of the day, the Bears are still 3-0.
I don't think anyone would say it wasn't a big deal... the Packers had that game, and blew it time after time after time. That is a very big deal. And I don't think anyone is making excuses... no one here has, or even has a case, to argue with those pass interference penalties, or the roughing the passer, or the intentional grounding, or the called back touchdown.
The point is that the Packers played probably the most undisciplined game I've ever seen and they were still just 3 points away. Take away just one of any of about 10 mistakes and that game goes the other way. Given that, I think some of the postgame reaction (ahem Kevin Seifert) was a little premature (The Packers Fall from grace? Seriously?) in destroying the Packers and elevating the Bears.
Everyone has their own take on a big loss. While it was a terrible loss, I don't think it has the ramifications that everyone seems to think it will. Congrats to the Bears, enjoy 3-0, but hopefully we've reinstated the Cutler that the rest of the division knows and loves.
Quote from: MU B2002 on September 28, 2010, 09:19:11 AM
Agree, I kept waiting for him to actually get a hit on Cutler, but I thought the OL did a pretty good job on him. This is one of the first games that I have paid attention to him, and I guess I never knew he was that quick. But damn kid, get a haircut.
Peppers didn't have any sacks either but he was probably the Bears' MVP last night. He pressured Rodgers several times, caused a ton penalties (holds, false starts) and blocked a FG. His stat line shows 2 tackles, but that doesn't even remotely show how well he played.
Matthews, on the other hand, played a decent game, nothing spectacular. My comment was directed at the Packer fans who spouted off about how Matthews would single-handedly win the game for GB. Oh, and I assume he's growing his hair that long in an attempt to cover his steroid-related backne.
Quote from: tower912 on September 28, 2010, 08:17:39 AM
Would have liked to have watched, but the Dish Network Satellite feed at the fire station went out from 5:30-10:30, so by the time we actually COULD watch, I didn't care anymore.
California not paying the bills...budget cuts?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 09:32:42 AM
Matthews, on the other hand, played a decent game, nothing spectacular. My comment was directed at the Packer fans who spouted off about how Matthews would single-handedly win the game for GB. Oh, and I assume he's growing his hair that long in an attempt to cover his steroid-related backne.
Already made my comments on the game so I'll leave those parts alone. But you are right, Matthews is definitely on steroids. I mean, the only way a man is that strong with that much speed is by taking steroids. It has nothing to do with playing football for his whole life and being on diet and weight lifting programs for the last 6 years of his life. Also, the only way somebody gets that fast, big, and strong is through genetics, so the guy would have to have had a dad and an uncle who played in the NFL and have a younger brother who will soon follow suit and be in the NFL...wait a minute...
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.
FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.
Make all the excuses you want, at the end of the day, the Bears are still 3-0.
Not making excuses. Excuses would be blaming the officials, which I dont do.
The first INT was the result of pressure from Frank Zombo...Cutler got rushed and got picked off. Had Zombo hit him a little lower...no penalty and the pick still would have been thrown. It was the right call. It was definitely an illegal hit.
The pass interference on Burnett was also the right call...but that doesn't change the fact that Cutler lobbed it into double coverage, nowhere near the WR, and got bailed out.
Quote from: wadesworld on September 28, 2010, 10:10:42 AM
Already made my comments on the game so I'll leave those parts alone. But you are right, Matthews is definitely on steroids. I mean, the only way a man is that strong with that much speed is by taking steroids. It has nothing to do with playing football for his whole life and being on diet and weight lifting programs for the last 6 years of his life. Also, the only way somebody gets that fast, big, and strong is through genetics, so the guy would have to have had a dad and an uncle who played in the NFL and have a younger brother who will soon follow suit and be in the NFL...wait a minute...
According to several sources and at least one NFL team, he failed a drug test at the combine (though this has been disputed). He wasn't a starter in HS, walked-on at USC and gained something like 70+ pounds of muscle, while gaining athleticism. He's close with, and was college teammates with Brian Cushing who was busted for PEDs and had been linked to them for quite some time. Plus, he had the pressure of living up to his father and uncle as a football player despite being small and not very good as a teen. There are plenty of red flags. I'm not just making this up...and I think it's funny to tease Packer fans about it too.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 10:24:57 AM
According to several sources and at least one NFL team, he failed a drug test at the combine (though this has been disputed). He wasn't a starter in HS, walked-on at USC and gained something like 70+ pounds of muscle, while gaining athleticism. He's close with, and was college teammates with Brian Cushing who was busted for PEDs and had been linked to them for quite some time. Plus, he had the pressure of living up to his father and uncle as a football player despite being small and not very good as a teen. There are plenty of red flags. I'm not just making this up...and I think it's funny to tease Packer fans about it too.
What does that even mean? Did you watch him in HS or as a freshman at USC so that you could make that statement? About the only thing you've said there that is actually substantiated is a friendship with Cushing (maybe Sanchize is roiding up too?... please, everyone in profressional sports in the last 15 years has probably had a relationship with someone who has taken steroids), and his growth in college (I think we all know guys who got bigger in their 20's, and I'll bet that they were not the son of an NFL linebacker and the nephew of an NFL offensive lineman).
And your little story about living up to his father's expectations... As a couple of old school players, I think its at least as likely that Dad and Uncle would have kicked is ass handily for even looking at PED's.
Has this really devolved into a discussion of an NFL player taking PEDs? Lets put it this way...if he did, do you really think he is the only one? Of course he isn't, and I can assure you the list will also include a handful of your Chicago Bear heroes.
I realize it is a position that is impossible to reconcile, but for some reason I do feel differently about PEDs where football and baseball are concerned. I unfortunately see it as just pat of the game in football, but not for baseball. Stupid, I know.
As a Bears fan who got a semi amount of sleep and reflecting on what this game meant, it's most important to me that they are 3-0 in the conference (and would own a tiebreaker with Dallas). I'd be shocked in Green Bay didn't win this division. Bears need to take advantage of this schedule coming up (hard not think they have a let down at NYG this Sunday night). But with Carolina, Seattle (in Chicago, different Seahawks team on the road), Washington, Buffalo coming up, Bears "should" be no worse than 6-2. They have a killer end of season schedule, so they have to put money in the bank now. One advantage the Bears have schedule wise over the Pack is the Bears get both the Jets and Pats in Chicago, and Pack goes on the road to both.
Quote from: shiloh26 on September 28, 2010, 10:38:43 AM
What does that even mean? Did you watch him in HS or as a freshman at USC so that you could make that statement? About the only thing you've said there that is actually substantiated is a friendship with Cushing (maybe Sanchize is roiding up too?... please, everyone in profressional sports in the last 15 years has probably had a relationship with someone who has taken steroids), and his growth in college (I think we all know guys who got bigger in their 20's, and I'll bet that they were not the son of an NFL linebacker and the nephew of an NFL offensive lineman).
And your little story about living up to his father's expectations... As a couple of old school players, I think its at least as likely that Dad and Uncle would have kicked is ass handily for even looking at PED's.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 28, 2010, 10:45:43 AM
Has this really devolved into a discussion of an NFL player taking PEDs? Lets put it this way...if he did, do you really think he is the only one? Of course he isn't, and I can assure you the list will also include a handful of your Chicago Bear heroes.
I realize it is a position that is impossible to reconcile, but for some reason I do feel differently about PEDs where football and baseball are concerned. I unfortunately see it as just pat of the game in football, but not for baseball. Stupid, I know.
I'm not saying Matthews is the only NFL player suspected of using PEDs. He's just a specific case that has a lot of red flags, whether you are willing to acknowledge them or not. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe.
Something that is indisputable: The Bears are 3-0 and in first place after beating the Packers last night.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on September 28, 2010, 09:42:14 AM
California not paying the bills...budget cuts?
Nah, the firefighters pay the bills at each station for the cable/dish. It just cuts out for no apparent reason for a few hours every month or so. Last night was just the night.
Quote from: tower912 on September 28, 2010, 11:31:45 AM
Nah, the firefighters pay the bills at each station for the cable/dish. It just cuts out for no apparent reason for a few hours every month or so. Last night was just the night.
You guys should ask them to do a service call and get that fixed. I'm not as familiar with their technology, but that flat out shouldn't be happening.
Quote from: tower912 on September 28, 2010, 11:31:45 AM
Nah, the firefighters pay the bills at each station for the cable/dish.
I would hope the friendly dish companies would give a Fire house some sort of discount off the normal rates, if not free! (I am a son of a firefigher, so I may be a little biased)
Nope. AAMOF, we are with Dish Network because Comcast changed their policy and wanted to charge fire stations the same rate as they charge sportsbars, i.e. the commercial rate, which was roughly the same rate per month as I pay at home for my cable/internet/phone bundle. Grrrrrr. Ah, well, how about those Lions? Improved, but not good enough to overcome the loss of Stafford and Best, as well as stupid mistakes. The Bears are 3-0 and should be happy, but not too happy. The Vikings need to feed AP the ball until either his legs fall off or Favre wakes up. The Pack can still be the best team in the division, but they need to tighten up.
Who'd have thought the Lions are giving the Pack everything they can handle? If Stafford was playing in this one, Lions might be leading this one. Pack up 2 with 12 mins left currently
It's comical hearing Mike McCarthy talking about getting better on special teams every single week since the start of last year and all through the summer. 2 fumbles lost on special teams today. It's a joke.
At least we don't have 17+ penalties this week.
Also am I crazy or do the Packers need to make a move for a running back? Jackson with 33 yards rushing, Kuhn with 28 yards rushing. Other than that Rodgers has 21. You simply need more than that out of your running backs if you're truly playing for the Super Bowl. We have 2 running backs on the entire roster, and one is a fullback. There needs to be some balance. And about 60% of those rushing yards have been on this last drive. There is literally 0% chance the Packers can win the NFC Championship with this running back group.
Quote from: MUDish on October 03, 2010, 02:39:00 PM
Who'd have thought the Lions are giving the Pack everything they can handle? If Stafford was playing in this one, Lions might be leading this one. Pack up 2 with 12 mins left currently
I don't think so. Hill played pretty damn good.
If Shaun Hill (Vikings signee) can look that good against Green Bey, I can't wait to see Brett again this year... unfortunately, when Allen gets a million sacks like he did last year against the Packirs, he may not be doing the calf roping:
"The Vikings were informed by Vice President of Officiating Carl Johnson that Jared Allen's demonstration, in which he goes to the ground on one knee, is unsportsmanlike conduct as defined by NFL rules. Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1 (d) of the NFL Rule Book states: "Players are prohibited from engaging in any celebrations while on the ground." Demonstrations of this kind by any player will result in an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (loss of 15 yards) and are subject to potential fines."
Quote from: wadesworld on October 03, 2010, 02:51:20 PM
It's comical hearing Mike McCarthy talking about getting better on special teams every single week since the start of last year and all through the summer. 2 fumbles lost on special teams today. It's a joke.
At least we don't have 17+ penalties this week.
You're not really blaming the entire special teams unit for 2 weak fumbles by Jordy Nelson, are you?
Quote from: wadesworld on October 03, 2010, 03:02:24 PM
Also am I crazy or do the Packers need to make a move for a running back? Jackson with 33 yards rushing, Kuhn with 28 yards rushing. Other than that Rodgers has 21. You simply need more than that out of your running backs if you're truly playing for the Super Bowl. We have 2 running backs on the entire roster, and one is a fullback. There needs to be some balance. And about 60% of those rushing yards have been on this last drive. There is literally 0% chance the Packers can win the NFC Championship with this running back group.
I didn't think so when Grant got hurt, but Jackson is too tentative for the zone blocking scheme. Screw the future...they need to set themselves up to win now.
Quote from: IAmMarquette on October 03, 2010, 03:15:29 PM
You're not really blaming the entire special teams unit for 2 weak fumbles by Jordy Nelson, are you?
Not the entire unit, no, but we simply can't lose 2 fumbles on special teams. And that follows a week in which we give up a punt return touchdown that ended up being the deciding touchdown in the game and another punt return inside 2 minutes that set up a touchdown to end the 1st half. Our special teams are atrocious, and McCarthy loves to point out that it's a point of emphasis...yet it seemingly only gets worse.
Lions have played all 3 of you guys on your field. AP is the most potent weapon in the NFCN, followed by Aaron. None of you are as good as you think you are, unless the Lions are actually not bad but shoot themselves in the foot too often. GB won, and they should take the win, but just like Chicago in week 1, they can't pretend they are pleased and they know deep down that they were very fortunate.
Quote from: tower912 on October 03, 2010, 04:11:54 PM
Lions have played all 3 of you guys on your field. AP is the most potent weapon in the NFCN, followed by Aaron. None of you are as good as you think you are, unless the Lions are actually not bad but shoot themselves in the foot too often. GB won, and they should take the win, but just like Chicago in week 1, they can't pretend they are pleased and they know deep down that they were very fortunate.
K
I thought Detroit wasn't terrible. Calvin Johnson is a beast...Best is a nice back...their secondary sucks though.
The NFL did them no favors with three road division games the first four weeks.
I think Jay Cutler might be dead.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on October 03, 2010, 09:32:08 PM
I think Jay Cutler might be dead.
Collinsworth: I have no idea what Cutler is watching...
Wow - it was like watching Aaron Rodgers last year, holding the ball for way too long.
By the way, Canty's "taser" celebration was the best of the year so far.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on October 04, 2010, 09:26:57 AM
Collinsworth: I have no idea what Cutler is watching...
Wow - it was like watching Aaron Rodgers last year, holding the ball for way too long.
By the way, Canty's "taser" celebration was the best of the year so far.
You can't completely fault him for holding the ball too long when he was absolutely bullrushed on every single play, I mean, he would three step drop and have someone's hand on his shoulder already, I've never seen an O-line play that bad.
Also, congrats Jerry Angelo, Todd Collins' corpse was an excellent pick up. He is terrible and always has been. He has never been an NFL starter and when you need a good QB for Martz' offense, what makes you think a 40 year old has-been, excuse me, never-was a good backup? At least Lefevour was young and semi-mobile before he was jettisoned...
Morgan Burnett out for the year. He wasn't an All-Pro, but was starting to look good. Next man up...
Quote from: GOMU1104 on October 04, 2010, 12:00:29 PM
Morgan Burnett out for the year. He wasn't an All-Pro, but was starting to look good. Next man up...
Bigby will be coming off the pup list after week 6. Not sure if he will be able to play right away. Until then, it will be Martin with Bush and Woodson next in line. Not a good situation in the secondary.
Quote from: tower912 on October 03, 2010, 04:11:54 PM
Lions have played all 3 of you guys on your field. AP is the most potent weapon in the NFCN, followed by Aaron. None of you are as good as you think you are, unless the Lions are actually not bad but shoot themselves in the foot too often. GB won, and they should take the win, but just like Chicago in week 1, they can't pretend they are pleased and they know deep down that they were very fortunate.
With a couple breaks, the Lions could be 3-1. They played Philly about even, a bad rule cost them against the Bears and the fact that Charles Woodson got away with blatant interference on back-to-back plays late in the game cost them against GB. They look like the type of team that will go a better-than-it-looks 5-11 this season but could actually be a playoff contender next season.
My nephew went to change out of his Cutler jersey after the game last night, but Justin Tuck sacked him before he could get it over his head.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on October 04, 2010, 01:26:05 PM
With a couple breaks, the Lions could be 3-1. They played Philly about even, a bad rule cost them against the Bears and the fact that Charles Woodson got away with blatant interference on back-to-back plays late in the game cost them against GB. They look like the type of team that will go a better-than-it-looks 5-11 this season but could actually be a playoff contender next season.
My nephew went to change out of his Cutler jersey after the game last night, but Justin Tuck sacked him before he could get it over his head.
Yep, and with one of any of a number of breaks last week the Pack would be 4-0, that's how sports work.
Please tell me where the "blatant interference" is on this play:
http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Big-Play-Charles-Woodson-TD/941bb737-626e-432d-ac2e-f0e8a4194c9d (http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Big-Play-Charles-Woodson-TD/941bb737-626e-432d-ac2e-f0e8a4194c9d)
To me it looks like a pretty clean play. Johnson engages Woodson, then turns the opposite way Hill thought he was going to, and CW was there to capitalize.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on October 04, 2010, 01:26:05 PM
With a couple breaks, the Lions could be 3-1. They played Philly about even, a bad rule cost them against the Bears and the fact that Charles Woodson got away with blatant interference on back-to-back plays late in the game cost them against GB. They look like the type of team that will go a better-than-it-looks 5-11 this season but could actually be a playoff contender next season.
Sounds like you are making excuses. You should listen to your own advice, and don't make excuses.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.
FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.
Make all the excuses you want, at the end of the day, the Bears are still 3-0.
Quote from: jmayer1 on October 04, 2010, 01:36:52 PM
Yep, and with one of any of a number of breaks last week the Pack would be 4-0, that's how sports work.
Please tell me where the "blatant interference" is on this play:
http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Big-Play-Charles-Woodson-TD/941bb737-626e-432d-ac2e-f0e8a4194c9d (http://www.packers.com/media-center/videos/Big-Play-Charles-Woodson-TD/941bb737-626e-432d-ac2e-f0e8a4194c9d)
To me it looks like a pretty clean play. Johnson engages Woodson, then turns the opposite way Hill thought he was going to, and CW was there to capitalize.
It wasn't on that play. It was on the Lions' last drive. On back-to-back plays (before the Lions' last FG, I believe), Woodson mugged the WR. Even Billick mentioned that Woodson got away with interference on those plays. Does that mean the Lions definitely would have scored a TD and/or won the game? No, but things might have gone differently if a flag is thrown. We'll never know. Much like the Bears game and the Eagles game, if a break goes the other way, the results might have been different. That's all I was saying. Sheesh. You Packer fans are defensive.
Quote from: reinko on October 04, 2010, 01:59:38 PM
Sounds like you are making excuses. You should listen to your own advice, and don't make excuses.
What if I say that the Bears are a couple plays away from being 1-3 or that the Packers are a couple plays away from being 4-0 or even 2-2? Is that making excuses or is that simply stating facts?
So Moss to the Vikings...talk about your all or nothing trade. He either is the piece that makes that offense very potent, or he continues to be a douche, and he and Favre completely destroy that team. Looking at the depleted secondaries of both the Bears and Packers, it seems like a good move (Although Al Harris and Atari Bigby are likley due back soon). I don't know though, the thought of trading for Bill Belichick's garbage in mid-season would make me a bit nervous. It could work out great, and if you're going to go down, you might as well go down in flames.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on October 06, 2010, 07:55:42 AM
So Moss to the Vikings...talk about your all or nothing trade. He either is the piece that makes that offense very potent, or he continues to be a douche, and he and Favre completely destroy that team. Looking at the depleted secondaries of both the Bears and Packers, it seems like a good move (Although Al Harris and Atari Bigby are likley due back soon). I don't know though, the thought of trading for Bill Belichick's garbage in mid-season would make me a bit nervous.
Living out here in NE, and from Wisconsin, I have been waiting for Moss to blow up and act like a douche for almost 3 years now...dude has been a model citizen and player. He did come out and say stuff a few weeks ago about his contract, but that is the only thing he did to ruffle a single feather out here, and he apologized for it too. NE mgmt is notorious, and after they threw $ at Brady, Wilfork, and other vets, Moss thought he got a raw deal, and he probably did.
Pats fans are not happy with this. They can just double Welker on every possession now.
Quote from: reinko on October 06, 2010, 08:00:56 AM
Living out here in NE, and from Wisconsin, I have been waiting for Moss to blow up and act like a douche for almost 3 years now...dude has been a model citizen and player. He did come out and say stuff a few weeks ago about his contract, but that is the only thing he did to ruffle a single feather out here,
That you know of. They aren't trading him because they want a third round draft pick, he's being jettisoned. That could work out well for the Vikings as he should certainly have some new found motivation.
Chilly will find a way to screw this up.
Good morning, Gentlemen!
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 06, 2010, 08:43:38 AM
Good morning, Gentlemen!
Enjoy it now because karma has a way of biting people in the ass. I think this is the year the old man implodes, Moss or no Moss.
Just read this on boston.com comment section, spot on.
For Brandon Marhall- Two 2's.
For Vincent Jackson- Vikings offered a 2 and a conditional 4
For Moss if he leaves via free agency- a late 3
The math doesn't add up.
What we usually do to Oakland, Minn just did to us.
Quote from: reinko on October 06, 2010, 08:54:49 AM
Just read this on boston.com comment section, spot on.
For Brandon Marhall- Two 2's.
For Vincent Jackson- Vikings offered a 2 and a conditional 4
For Moss if he leaves via free agency- a late 3
The math doesn't add up.
What we usually do to Oakland, Minn just did to us.
But keep in mind New England got Moss for a 4th round pick. So they used him 3 years of his career, got some good return on investment, and then sold him for more than they paid for him.....I'd love to do that with my car. I think Minny overreacted....Moss is a front runner and he can't right the ship by himself and the schedule doesn't get easier.
Quote from: mu03eng on October 06, 2010, 11:01:04 AM
Moss is a front runner and he can't right the ship by himself and the schedule doesn't get easier.
The schedule is key...if they don't go at least 2-2 in the brutal 4 game stretch they have coming up, they're screwed. They could conceivably still make the playoffs, but are they going to be good enough to go on the road in the playoffs and win? I don't see how.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 06, 2010, 08:43:38 AM
Good morning, Gentlemen!
Brad Childress and Darrell Bevell are still your coaches
C'mon, can't we just all admit Brett Favre is really the Player-Head Coach. I can't picture Chilly even speaking up in a meeting much less instructing Favre or Moss what that need to do at any given point.
If Berrian wasn't a vested vet, my guess is the Vikes would have cut him after the Moss trade. Still can't believe he got six years, $42 mil, $16 of that guaranteed. Hasn't clicked with Favre at all.
Nick Barnett is most likely out for the year with wrist surgery. 3rd starter lost for the year, to go along with Jolly who is suspended for the year. Well, here's to hoping for the NFC North's 2nd Wild Card spot...
Quote from: wadesworld on October 06, 2010, 08:50:17 PM
Nick Barnett is most likely out for the year with wrist surgery. 3rd starter lost for the year, to go along with Jolly who is suspended for the year. Well, here's to hoping for the NFC North's 2nd Wild Card spot...
Ouch! That's the one sad reality that kind sucks about the NFL...injuries can (and usually do) play such a huge role and can quickly suck the life right out of a season.
And it will only get worse when they go to 18 games.
With the Moss trade, does that mean that Rice isn't progressing as well as they initially thought he would with regards to his return?
Really sucks about Barnett too...Desmond Bishop come on down? Hawk in pass coverage scares me.
Desmond Bishop isnt very good in pass coverage either. Chillar is probably the best of the bunch, and it looks like he will also be out for a good amount of time.
Awesome.
Quote from: MU B2002 on October 07, 2010, 08:38:50 AM
And it will only get worse when they go to 18 games.
Is the NFL PA going to scream about Randy Moss playing 17 games this year? The horror.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 07, 2010, 09:40:18 AM
Is the NFL PA going to scream about Randy Moss playing 17 games this year? The horror.
No since he takes so many plays off it actually works out to about 14.2 games.
Quote from: MU B2002 on October 07, 2010, 09:54:58 AM
No since he takes so many plays off it actually works out to about 14.2 games.
Good point
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on October 07, 2010, 09:13:43 AM
With the Moss trade, does that mean that Rice isn't progressing as well as they initially thought he would with regards to his return?
No - it results from us having no receivers doing much of anything and the absence of a guy who can stretch the field for us. We were going hard after Jackson.. picked up Kendra's dude...
If Sidney gets back in several weeks.. look out. Rice, Moss and Percy... not to mention Shank... that'll work.
The upcoming schedule for us is a bit brutal though... could go a lot of different ways, but regardless it's exciting to have the super freak back... you always hear the 'blah blah take plays off' b.s.,.. but the reality is he's a joy to watch on the field just run routes even when the ball isn't going to him.
I do think Favre may have been thinking, 'crap.. probably should have stayed home this year...', but this will get him rejuvinated big time.
SKOL VIKINGS!!!
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 07, 2010, 11:30:19 AM
No - it results from us having no receivers doing much of anything and the absence of a guy who can stretch the field for us. We were going hard after Jackson.. picked up Kendra's dude...
If Sidney gets back in several weeks.. look out. Rice, Moss and Percy... not to mention Shank... that'll work.
The upcoming schedule for us is a bit brutal though... could go a lot of different ways, but regardless it's exciting to have the super freak back... you always hear the 'blah blah take plays off' b.s.,.. but the reality is he's a joy to watch on the field just run routes even when the ball isn't going to him.
I do think Favre may have been thinking, 'crap.. probably should have stayed home this year...', but this will get him rejuvinated big time.
SKOL VIKINGS!!!
Apparently the Vikings just need to hire some sideline trim to keep the old dongslinger* happy.
http://deadspin.com/5658206/brett-favres-cellphone-seduction-of-jenn-sterger
*Thanks Jason Whitlock for the dongslinger nickname.
SKOL VIKINGS.. crown us after tomorrow night, fellas
That was hard to watch. Packers are running their scout team defense now.
In overtime AJ Hawk was the only starting LB active. Woodson and Collins were the only first team secondary players, and Jenkins was the only first string D Lineman
We have the damn talent we just need some finishing ability and less penalties/injuries.
Go JETS! J E T S. I have their defense, would love nothing more than to intercept the dongslinger a few times and take one back to the house.
This division is UP...FOR...GRABS...
Yeah, unless most of the injuries from today somehow turn out to be relatively minor, you can probably stick a fork in the Packers. Not sure doing so wasn't already possible before today's rash anyway.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 10, 2010, 03:54:45 PM
would love nothing more than to intercept the dongslinger a few times and take one back to the house.
First thing you've ever said that I believe... when does that ESPN Full Court schedule come out?
Bears really need to take advantage of this schedule coming up. Seahawks, Redskins, @ Buffalo (Toronto). I didn't realize how brutal of a stretch the Pack and Vikes both have coming up. No reason the Bears shouldn't be 7-1 at the halfway point. Just a guess, but Pack would be lucky to be 5-3 at the half way mark, Vikes would be lucky to be 4-4. Schedule evens out for the Bears last half of the year, so they must cushion whatever lead they can going into the second half. They're not talented enough to have a one/two game pad.
At the end of the year, people might question why Peppers is a Pro Bowler based on his stats, but that guy has been worth every cent paid to him. What a beast out there, man among boys.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on October 10, 2010, 04:36:46 PM
Yeah, unless most of the injuries from today somehow turn out to be relatively minor, you can probably stick a fork in the Packers. Not sure doing so wasn't already possible before today's rash anyway.
It all depends on Matthews and Finley.
If those two are out for an extended period of time then we're through. Marquette basketball season starts early for me.
Quote from: MUDish on October 10, 2010, 07:15:55 PM
No reason the Bears shouldn't be 7-1 at the halfway point.
Maybe. If we have Cutler for those games. I mean we had a QB who went 6-16 with 4 INTs. I simply don't understand how Collins was in the game that long. We would have been better off running a Wildcat offense.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2010, 04:58:12 PM
First thing you've ever said that I believe... when does that ESPN Full Court schedule come out?
You don't believe other things I've said? ?-(
Agreed Dish.
Do you think collins is gone?
Quote from: NumenFlumenque on October 10, 2010, 09:23:11 PM
Maybe. If we have Cutler for those games. I mean we had a QB who went 6-16 with 4 INTs. I simply don't understand how Collins was in the game that long. We would have been better off running a Wildcat offense.
What I don't understand is that the reason they played Collins over Hanie is supposedly because a vetran QB is supposed to manage the game better and not turn the ball over. But seriously, Hanie could not have been worse.
Quote from: SacWarrior on October 10, 2010, 07:18:45 PM
It all depends on Matthews and Finley.
If those two are out for an extended period of time then we're through. Marquette basketball season starts early for me.
Yep. To bad because the NFC is terrible this year. Honestly, I would bet Falcons and Vikings in the NFCCG.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on October 11, 2010, 08:12:43 AM
What I don't understand is that the reason they played Collins over Hanie is supposedly because a vetran QB is supposed to manage the game better and not turn the ball over. But seriously, Hanie could not have been worse.
Don't forget he also got the start because he played "so well" against Cleveland in the final preseason game. Awesome, he threw for 130 yards against the Browns 3rd string in a meaningless game. Oh well a win is a win.
As for Moss... Supposedly he got in an argument with Brady on the team charter over the fact that Tom's hair makes him look like a women. Randy is both funny and correct.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on October 11, 2010, 08:12:43 AM
What I don't understand is that the reason they played Collins over Hanie is supposedly because a vetran QB is supposed to manage the game better and not turn the ball over. But seriously, Hanie could not have been worse.
I'm still trying to figure out why the Bears signed Collins in the first place, especially after drafting LeFevour in the 5th. You don't draft someone, and then cut him before the season starts to sign a decrepit has-been. Heaven forbid the Bears actually try to develop a QB in a backup role. Cause Hanie and Old Man River aren't cutting it.
Martz wanted Collins because he didn't think Hanie could grasp his system. Collins isn't long to stay on the roster from what it appears. Rumblings still about Jeff Garcia, but he's not a Martz guy either.
Bottom line for the Bears is if Cutler misses a prolonged period of time, you can stick a fork in their season.
Be interesting to see if Rodgers is ok after his concussion. Hopefully he is, like to see both qb's back on the field.
Quote from: MUDish on October 10, 2010, 07:15:55 PM
Bears really need to take advantage of this schedule coming up. Seahawks, Redskins, @ Buffalo (Toronto). I didn't realize how brutal of a stretch the Pack and Vikes both have coming up. No reason the Bears shouldn't be 7-1 at the halfway point.
I am a Bears fan and would love to see that. The Bears will find a way to blow one of those games and be 6-2 which is better than I would have predicted in August.
I think 9-7 can make the playoffs in the NFC this year, so the Bears would be in a nice spot to go 3-5 and still squeeze in. Atlanta and New Orleans will likely make the playoffs out of the South, one winner from the east, one winner from the west, and then 2 teams from the North (and call me crazy, but I would not completely discount Detroit yet, though they are least likely). No reason the Bears cannot be one of them.
I hope the Bears can make one last run with Urlacher. I am enjoying this year's Urlacher renaissance as the year off seems to have helped his mobility, and hopefully he can give three more seasons. I am not expecting the o-line to be good enough to win in the playoffs. Get some playoffs experience this year, develop the line, learn Martz's offense, get a few more young players, and make runs in 2011 and 2012 (just like Marquette).
Viking Fans: Please don't share your nude photos of Farve. Keep them to yourselves
Quote from: HoopsMalone on October 11, 2010, 10:27:51 AM
I am a Bears fan and would love to see that. The Bears will find a way to blow one of those games and be 6-2 which is better than I would have predicted in August.
I think 9-7 can make the playoffs in the NFC this year, so the Bears would be in a nice spot to go 3-5 and still squeeze in. Atlanta and New Orleans will likely make the playoffs out of the South, one winner from the east, one winner from the west, and then 2 teams from the North (and call me crazy, but I would not completely discount Detroit yet, though they are least likely). No reason the Bears cannot be one of them.
I hope the Bears can make one last run with Urlacher. I am enjoying this year's Urlacher renaissance as the year off seems to have helped his mobility, and hopefully he can give three more seasons. I am not expecting the o-line to be good enough to win in the playoffs. Get some playoffs experience this year, develop the line, learn Martz's offense, get a few more young players, and make runs in 2011 and 2012 (just like Marquette).
This worries me, cause despite success, the Angelo/Lovie braintrust needs to be shown the door, and a playoff berth I feel will delay that move.
Quote from: JWags85 on October 11, 2010, 02:10:08 PM
This worries me, cause despite success, the Angelo/Lovie braintrust needs to be shown the door, and a playoff berth I feel will delay that move.
This may be a thing. If the Packers injury woes derail their season as it appears they could, and the Childress/Favre led Vikings collapse upon themselves, this could truly be a case of the Bears being the tallest midget (same could probably be said about the entire NFC this year). I don't know anyone who thinks the Bears are good, or that they are young and full of potential. I think it would take double digit losses for the Bears to make changes after this year, but a playoff appearance could potentially delay it even longer.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on October 11, 2010, 04:16:32 PM
I don't know anyone who thinks the Bears are good, or that they are young and full of potential.
First place in the NFC, at the top tier of power rankings. Cutler is a good young player, they have some good safeties, a good running back combo, etc. They have plenty to look forward to actually. That defense is solid again and should be for some time to come.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on October 11, 2010, 04:30:08 PM
First place in the NFC, at the top tier of power rankings. Cutler is a good young player, they have some good safeties, a good running back combo, etc. They have plenty to look forward to actually. That defense is solid again and should be for some time to come.
So are you saying you think the Bears are good? I'm aware what the standings say, but are they a good team?
Is Cutler a good young player? He seems like he should be, at least it looks that way to me, but the reality is he is in his 5th season, and the jury is still very much out. He has all the tools, but he sucks as often as he's good.
I see little to look forward to on either side of the ball. Who are these good safeties? Cornerbacks are bad. Urlacher is certainly on the backside of his career. Julius Peppers probably has some good years left, but he is not a young man.The O-line is a complete joke. WR corps is among the worst in the league. Forte is an average RB, and Chester Taylor is in his 9th year...To suggest any sort of bright future for this team as currently constructed is questionable at best. They have way more questions than answers.
I'm not saying the Bears are good by any stretch of the imagination, but they are not as bad as you make them out to be.
The wide receivers you say are "among the worst in the league" are not nearly as bad as you make them out to be. Johnny Knox and Hester fit very well in a Mike Martz offense, in my opinion.
I would Knox and Hester and better than
Buffalo (Lee Evans, Steve Johnson)
Cleveland (Massaquoi and Stuckey)
Jacksonville (Sims-Walker and Mike Thomas)
KC (Dwayne Bowe and Chris Chambers)
Oakland (Murphy, Heyward-Bey)
Seattle (Branch, Mike Williams)
SF (Crabtree, Josh Morgan)
STL (Mark Clayton, Laurent Robinson)
TB (Mike Williams, Sammie Stroughter)
Ten (Kenny Britt, Justin Gage)
Maybe you don't agree with me on all of these, but thats 10 teams that have worse WR than the Bears, and theres a couple of teams that are about on par with the Bears.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on October 11, 2010, 05:32:41 PM
So are you saying you think the Bears are good? I'm aware what the standings say, but are they a good team?
Is Cutler a good young player? He seems like he should be, at least it looks that way to me, but the reality is he is in his 5th season, and the jury is still very much out. He has all the tools, but he sucks as often as he's good.
I see little to look forward to on either side of the ball. Who are these good safeties? Cornerbacks are bad. Urlacher is certainly on the backside of his career. Julius Peppers probably has some good years left, but he is not a young man.The O-line is a complete joke. WR corps is among the worst in the league. Forte is an average RB, and Chester Taylor is in his 9th year...To suggest any sort of bright future for this team as currently constructed is questionable at best. They have way more questions than answers.
The point is, there is not much to support Love Smith and Jerry Angelo keeping their jobs. Neither the present, nor the future are particularly promising.
No matter what happens to the Bears this season, the greatest reason for job security for Lovie/Angelo is the threat of a lockout.
As far as how good/bad they have been this year, their defense has been very good thus far. The LB corp is among the best group in football, and they've gotten surprisingly good play out of their secondary. Peppers is playing at an elite level, and if Idonije can benefit playing the opposite end of Peppers like he did against Carolina, then their front 7 is excellent.
Cutler overthinks at times and subsequently gets himself in more trouble than he should. He still has one of the best arms in football. If he could get a halfway decent line in front of him, it'd be interesting to see him put his talent together. They can get by with their WR's, as Forte/Taylor are combo wise good.
Tough to say what they are long term. Their defense is in "must win now" mode, and youth is much more on the offensive side of the ball.
Who knows what is going on in the NFC this season. Vikings/Cowboys can't beat anybody, Pack is not as good as we thought and beat up now, Saints can't outscore people, NFC West is a laughingstock. Best position to be in might be the Wild Card that gets the NFC West "champ" in the Wild Card round.
I think the Vikes would be better off with Tjax at this point. Favre just seems uninterested/lost/old/etc.
Note
*This comment was made at about the 10min mark of the 3rd quarter, and until then applied perfectly. The final 20 min are somewhat of a different story.
Quote from: MU B2002 on October 11, 2010, 09:19:31 PM
I think the Vikes would be better off with Tjax at this point. Favre just seems uninterested/lost/old/etc.
Note
*This comment was made at about the 10min mark of the 3rd quarter, and until then applied perfectly. The final 20 min are somewhat of a different story.
Complete with the patented game-icing INT
Favre to Moss! Favre to Harvin!! Favre to Lowrie for a game ending Pic-6!!!!
As probably noted elsewhere, even his text messages are being intercepted.
Has any player in recent memory gone from revered superstar to punchline as quickly as That guy, Brett Favre? Tiger Woods certainly comes to mind, but seems like he is still young enough to recover. Granted, much of it is related to his behavior and drama off the field, but man has he turned himself into a joke.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 10, 2010, 03:39:45 PM
SKOL VIKINGS.. crown us after tomorrow night, fellas
Just wanted to quote this for effect.
Quote from: ATWizJr on October 12, 2010, 09:08:28 AM
Favre to Moss! Favre to Harvin!! Favre to Lowrie for a game ending Pic-6!!!!
As probably noted elsewhere, even his text messages are being intercepted.
actually, it's more like a pick-4.25....
Quote from: JWags85 on October 12, 2010, 10:46:06 AM
Just wanted to quote this for effect.
Where is Jayboy?
that still leaves the Bears receiving corps well in the bottom half of the league ;D
Quote from: spartan3186 on October 11, 2010, 06:13:01 PM
I'm not saying the Bears are good by any stretch of the imagination, but they are not as bad as you make them out to be.
The wide receivers you say are "among the worst in the league" are not nearly as bad as you make them out to be. Johnny Knox and Hester fit very well in a Mike Martz offense, in my opinion.
I would Knox and Hester and better than
Buffalo (Lee Evans, Steve Johnson)
Cleveland (Massaquoi and Stuckey)
Jacksonville (Sims-Walker and Mike Thomas)
KC (Dwayne Bowe and Chris Chambers)
Oakland (Murphy, Heyward-Bey)
Seattle (Branch, Mike Williams)
SF (Crabtree, Josh Morgan)
STL (Mark Clayton, Laurent Robinson)
TB (Mike Williams, Sammie Stroughter)
Ten (Kenny Britt, Justin Gage)
Maybe you don't agree with me on all of these, but thats 10 teams that have worse WR than the Bears, and theres a couple of teams that are about on par with the Bears.
I noticed they had the banner up on ESPN that said 500th TD pass.
Didn't see a similar banner when he set the all-time fumbles list and then broke the all-time interceptions list in the same game.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 12, 2010, 01:20:55 PM
I noticed they had the banner up on ESPN that said 500th TD pass.
Didn't see a similar banner when he set the all-time fumbles list and then broke the all-time interceptions list in the same game.
he's had that record for years now, the NFL just records it in pencil until he finally retires for good
Quote from: Homebrew101 on October 12, 2010, 02:04:28 PM
he's had that record for years now, the NFL just records it in pencil until he finally retires for good
Exactly....which means every time he throws one they should put up that banner that he just broke the record...again....and again....and again
Classic play on words
(http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/11/2010/10/500x_screen_shot_2010-10-12_at_11.05.02_am.jpg)
Picture looks like a midget is banging him.
Beating the Cowgirls will be very important... at 2-3, with 4 combined games left against Green Bey and Checago, we'll be in an OK-enough position.
I don't know how long our stud QB is going to hold up, though. Certainly a far different look from a physical-health perspective this year compared to 2009.
Randy is a pleasure to watch. Great to have him back. We'll be fine. SKOL VIKINGS!!!
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 13, 2010, 06:33:37 PM
Picture looks like a midget is banging him.
Beating the Cowgirls will be very important... at 2-3, with 4 combined games left against Green Bey and Checago, we'll be in an OK-enough position.
I don't know how long our stud QB is going to hold up, though. Certainly a far different look from a physical-health perspective this year compared to 2009.
Randy is a pleasure to watch. Great to have him back. We'll be fine. SKOL VIKINGS!!!
If you can't beat my Cowboys, you have huge issues. Talk about a team devoid of intelligence, heart, intelligence, intelligence, discipline, intelligence, etc....
Losing Finley for the year is a huge blow. Few teams had a LB or Safety that could cover him.
Quote from: MUDish on October 13, 2010, 07:03:26 PM
Losing Finley for the year is a huge blow. Few teams had a LB or Safety that could cover him.
Certainly starting to look like this thing may be the Bears' to lose.
And did I see that the Vikes lost Griffin for the year?
Quote from: MU B2002 on October 14, 2010, 07:52:32 AM
And did I see that the Vikes lost Griffin for the year?
Yes. He's done. Another ACL, this time on the right. Cook looks like a nice young CB, but he's hurt again as well. We just signed another ex-Packer.. Frank Walker. And brought back Marcus Sherels to the practice squad.. he might wind up getting a chance due to the injuries.. nice kid, played at the U of Minn...
as a life-long Packer fan I was glad when they let Brett walk away as I was tired of his melodramas and game ending INTs
glad to see Vikings fans are now enduring the good with the bad, watch out what you wish for
Quote from: Homebrew101 on October 14, 2010, 01:19:23 PM
as a life-long Packer fan I was glad when they let Brett walk away as I was tired of his melodramas and game ending INTs
glad to see Vikings fans are now enduring the good with the bad, watch out what you wish for
I agree, but I still can't believe the level he is playing at today. Lots of mistakes obviously this year, but he still has an incredible arm. Scary guy to play against.
LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS-k_v1zIes&feature=player_embedded
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 14, 2010, 07:17:17 PM
LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS-k_v1zIes&feature=player_embedded
I like how no one gives 2 shits about the fact that good ole #4 is collapsing on the ground. He could have had been having a gripper but #14 is still doing his drill. ;D
Quote from: martyconlonontherun on October 14, 2010, 04:55:49 PM
I agree, but I still can't believe the level he is playing at today. Lots of mistakes obviously this year, but he still has an incredible arm. Scary guy to play against.
Funny how during that game his elbow hurt every time something went wrong, but he had no trouble fist-pumping like a Jersey shore character when he had some success.
Going to be interesting to see what sort of positioning Brett does next week in advance of the Packer game. I would imagine we are going to be hearing about just how painful that elbow and everything else is, how he may not be able to play, etc. I expect that there is going to be a whole lot of expectation lowering going into that one.
He is already starting... Saying he might be out this week if his elbow gets any worse. Cmon #4, just pop a few vicadin (sic) and lace'm up.
Quote from: MU B2002 on October 15, 2010, 11:28:42 AM
He is already starting... Saying he might be out this week if his elbow gets any worse. Cmon #4, just pop a few vicadin (sic) and lace'm up.
As a Vikes fan, you really want him to play? I'd roll the dice with T-Jack...kid can't be that bad.
How is everyone feeling this week? Vikings are right back in it.. a big win this coming Sunday would do wonders for us. The Fins are decent, but Seattle?!?! Horrible.
RIP Eyedea
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 18, 2010, 08:40:31 PM
How is everyone feeling this week? Vikings are right back in it.. a big win this coming Sunday would do wonders for us. The Fins are decent, but Seattle?!?! Horrible.
RIP Eyedea
Nice to see you back after a week MIA. Must be convenient to show up only after weeks in which you win...
Anyhow, I definitely think the Vikings win next week...Poppinga now out for the season...when does it stop? Have we had a single week this year that somebody has not had a season ending injury? It's extremely disappointing.
It's honestly shaping up to be the Vikings division. Packers are WAY, WAY too injured (and will be for the long run), and the Bears I truly do not think are that good at all. The NFC North is almost as bad as the West.
Quote from: wadesworld on October 18, 2010, 09:08:44 PM
Nice to see you back after a week MIA. Must be convenient to show up only after weeks in which you win...
It's honestly shaping up to be the Vikings division. Packers are WAY, WAY too injured (and will be for the long run), and the Bears I truly do not think are that good at all. The NFC North is almost as bad as the West.
Why do people keep accusing me of only showing up after a win? It's just false - look back to 10/13, after we fell to 1-3. I posted saying that we'll be OK.
9/27, 10/3, 10/6, 10/7, 10/10, 10/13 and now 10/18.. your accusation is false.
However, you are dead on correct about one thing -- we are back to being... THE CONSENSUS!!! It's been pretty ugly thus far and it appears that the brutality of play at times is going to continue throughout this season by all the teams in our division. Hopefully the Vikings can come up on top... need the old man to push through (as he's done every year)... get Sidney back.. get Chris Cook back.. still, the secondary scares me... not sure why Dallas didn't attack our corners constantly, but I thank them for their poor play calling.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 18, 2010, 08:40:31 PM
How is everyone feeling this week? Vikings are right back in it.. a big win this coming Sunday would do wonders for us. The Fins are decent, but Seattle?!?! Horrible.
RIP Eyedea
They suck. The Cowboys are horrible and pretty much dominated the game before doing their typical blow. That being said, the NFC is an absolute disaster
None of it matters. The NFC sucks, and the NFC North definitely sucks. As bad as the NFC appears, which of these teams is going to go into Atlanta, NO, Philadelphia, NY, in the playoffs and win?
Quote from: reinko on October 15, 2010, 11:32:42 AM
As a Vikes fan, you really want him to play? I'd roll the dice with T-Jack...kid can't be that bad.
I am not a Vikes fan, and I want them to start the guy that is going to throw the most pics, and fumble a bunch. And they are.
Right now, being the best team in the NFC north is like being the tallest midget, the cutest fat girl, etc. The combination of Martz and Cutler is going to end up with Cutler getting killed. Green Bay can't get through a series without losing someone for the season. Detroit has been so bad for so long that when the other team isn't beating them, they find ways to beat themselves. The Vikings are a bad soap opera that may be the 9-7 team that gets out of the division. Ooooooooooooh.
Outside of one individual who still seems to think the Vikings are good, it seems we are all united in out football misery. I can already hear the basketballs bouncing off the BC floor.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on October 19, 2010, 10:28:52 AM
Outside of one individual who still seems to think the Vikings are good, it seems we are all united in out football misery. I can already hear the basketballs bouncing off the BC floor.
On this, we agree.
BUT... I will bring up 1 scenario:
The Vikings have a higher ceiling than most teams in the NFC. IF the dominoes fall correctly, that team could be rolling and dangerous in the playoffs, even if they only end up 9-7 or 10-6.
Now, that's a big IF, but I don't think they are as bad as their record indicates right now. (cliche of a losing team, I know).
They have to stay healthy, and get Sydney healthy, then we'll see if they are any good in the last eight games. All of those games are "winnable", so a 6-2 second half isn't crazy... getting to 4-4 is probably a bigger challenge right now.
Like every team, injuries and momentum are the great unknown factors.
Had the Packers beaten the Dolphins and then beaten the Vikes, they would've been in great shape. Losing that game to the Dolphins put them back into a dog fight with MN and CHI and makes this week's game HUGE.
new t-shirts hit the stores
(http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=82878&d=1287522110)
This is a huge game Sunday night for the Pack and Vikes. If Minny loses this week, they probably lose next week at NE, get the Cards at home, then have a real tricky 3 game slate where they are probably staring at 1-2 (@ Chi, GB, @ Was). That win against Dallas, while a win, was hardly impressive. If the Bears lose this Sunday (which my guess now is they will) and GB wins at home, this division is GB's to lose.
Although I really don't care for this team, I have to admit that this is hilarious (from PFT):
After the Vikings were shown a league-mandated video on the "devastating hits" they had some fun making their own interpretation:
http://twitter.com/ChrisWarcraft/status/28035469695
Make sure you go into the picture he links to.
Is Erin's record truly that bad? Keep hearing that dude is 1-10 or 1-11 in games decided by 4 or less. Where is the law of averages on this one?
Smart money is on THE CONSENSUS once again, baby!!!!
SKOL VIKINGS!!!!
Looks like Matthews, Pickett and Chillar will be able to play. That is huge for the Packers.
Wow CHI...that was absolutely terrible.
That bears/redskins game was just awful. Fumbles and interceptions galore. Was at least entertaining in a comical sort of way. Looks like bear coaching staff and maybe gm will be on there way out.
Just went to the Bears game. They are terrible. Their fans are halarious.
Quote from: Rollout-the-Barrel on October 24, 2010, 04:47:00 PM
That bears/redskins game was just awful. Fumbles and interceptions galore. Was at least entertaining in a comical sort of way. Looks like bear coaching staff and maybe gm will be on there way out.
That's the only positive of this whole debacle is that Lovie will finally get the hook. As a bears fan I can't stand watching any of their games...they seem to enjoy finding a way to loose, despite their defense being pretty respectable.
Honestly, I don't get them.
The Bears - Lions game earlier in the year.
The Dolphins game today.
Honestly, tonight's Packers game with the TD called back on the Vikings. I'm with Al Michels and Collinsworth, I don't see how that is not a touchdown, let alone reversed since it was called on on the field. Don't get me wrong, I was happy to see the Packers win the game, I just don't understand some of these calls. I've been watching football for more than 3 decades and there are calls this year that seem to be in direct contradiction to everything I've seen for 30+ years watching this game.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 25, 2010, 01:13:45 AM
Honestly, I don't get them.
The Bears - Lions game earlier in the year.
The Dolphins game today.
Honestly, tonight's Packers game with the TD called back on the Vikings. I'm with Al Michels and Collinsworth, I don't see how that is not a touchdown, let alone reversed since it was called on on the field. Don't get me wrong, I was happy to see the Packers win the game, I just don't understand some of these calls. I've been watching football for more than 3 decades and there are calls this year that seem to be in direct contradiction to everything I've seen for 30+ years watching this game.
I agree, the officiating was especially bad last night. So many blown calls.
The same way the ground cannot cause a fumble...You cant use the ground to aid in catching the ball. That, I believe, is the rule. That is what happened. The ball was not securely in Shaincoe's possession until the ball hit the ground, allowing him to secure it.
The worse call was the "late hit" on Collins...wow.
I am willing to bet the Backjudge flat out guessed on the two plays in the back of the endzone (Quarless and Harvin). Too bad Chilly is too stupid to challenge the Quarless play...
Between the 2 teams though, only 8 penalties for 60 yards. While the officiating may have been bad, I'm glad they werent calling ticky tack stuff and let them play.
That game was refed like a playoff game as far as penalties go, which made it high quality stuff. Childress going off on the officials afterwards made him sound like a loon...his going off on Favre isn't going to help things in that locker room. I know the Vikings can bounce back against the Patriots (but I doubt they will), and the division is horrifically bad, but they look done to me.
I mean, I thought their game plan was exactly what I thought the Vikings should be doing for years. Give the ball to AP a ton. As bad as Favre was, they really should have won that game.
Quote from: Rollout-the-Barrel on October 24, 2010, 04:47:00 PM
Looks like bear coaching staff and maybe gm will be on there way out.
That is the plan.
JayBee.....calling JayBee.....calling Mr. JayBee
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 23, 2010, 12:29:33 AM
Is Erin's record truly that bad? Keep hearing that dude is 1-10 or 1-11 in games decided by 4 or less. Where is the law of averages on this one?
Smart money is on THE CONSENSUS once again, baby!!!!
SKOL VIKINGS!!!!
Yes, it's Aaron Rodgers fault for terrible defense/special teams and other things he has total control over.
It was fun walking out of Lambeau with all the dejected Vikings fans last night.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on October 25, 2010, 09:41:42 AM
That is the plan.
Lovie's game management is awful. His reasoning and overall lack of challenge on the Cutler sneak just further proves it. And I understand he is a defensive-minded coach, but he needs to control Martz who is calling plays like a damn fool. They are seriously play-calling like when I play Madden and try to pat my QB's stats, the balance is non-existent.
Tough loss. Disappointing. Favre looks dead. A number of crappy calls, but going both ways.
The division is looking pitiful.. need to get on a roll here. There is still time.
Percy is incredible. Minnesota will prevail.
Hah!
Harvin is an incredible athlete. Has a ways to go in his route running. Once he figures out how do that, he will be fantastic.
People that keep complaining about the Shaincoe call dont understand the rule. It was the right call.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 25, 2010, 11:39:15 AM
Percy is incredible.
About once every five years I get a migrane headache that makes me wonder if the moment before death could really hurt much worse, so I would not wish a migrane on anyone.
That said, I was starting to contemplate wishing one on Harvin last night because that was about the only thing that would stop him. Thank God the NFL doesn't use the Candian Football League sized end zones!
That was a huge win for the Pack last night, essentially giving them a two and a half game lead on the Vikes for the division. I keep forgetting how sneaky tough the rest of the Pack's schedule is. My assumption is the Vikes drop to 2-5 after visiting NE this weekend, and they're just not a good football team. They're sked is easier than the Pack, but still includes the Skins, Pack, Giants, Eagles and the Bears twice (as bad as they are, they'll be up for the Vikes).
I woudln't be surprised if the Bears only win one more game, wheels have totally fallen off that wagon.
Quote from: MUDish on October 25, 2010, 12:23:20 PM
That was a huge win for the Pack last night, essentially giving them a two and a half game lead on the Vikes for the division. I keep forgetting how sneaky tough the rest of the Pack's schedule is. My assumption is the Vikes drop to 2-5 after visiting NE this weekend, and they're just not a good football team. They're sked is easier than the Pack, but still includes the Skins, Pack, Giants, Eagles and the Bears twice (as bad as they are, they'll be up for the Vikes).
I woudln't be surprised if the Bears only win one more game, wheels have totally fallen off that wagon.
hey, the bears are still in first place. ::)
Quote from: GOMU1104 on October 25, 2010, 09:04:58 AM
The same way the ground cannot cause a fumble...You cant use the ground to aid in catching the ball. That, I believe, is the rule. That is what happened. The ball was not securely in Shaincoe's possession until the ball hit the ground, allowing him to secure it.
The worse call was the "late hit" on Collins...wow.
I am willing to bet the Backjudge flat out guessed on the two plays in the back of the endzone (Quarless and Harvin). Too bad Chilly is too stupid to challenge the Quarless play...
Between the 2 teams though, only 8 penalties for 60 yards. While the officiating may have been bad, I'm glad they werent calling ticky tack stuff and let them play.
I guess I just don't see how he didn't secure it. I guess Michels, Collinsworth (an all-pro receiver..he could be bias) and I see things different. I get that the ball moves but he never loses control at all. The ball moves as does his hands.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 25, 2010, 12:55:23 PM
I guess I just don't see how he didn't secure it. I guess Michels, Collinsworth (an all-pro receiver..he could be bias) and I see things different. I get that the ball moves but he never loses control at all. The ball moves as does his hands.
As he falls to the ground, the ball (while he may have some control) hits the ground and allows him to secure the ball in his stomach.
Again, you cant use the ground to aid in the catching of a pass.
http://deadspin.com/5672552/brett-favre-is-a-bitch
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 23, 2010, 12:29:33 AM
Is Erin's record truly that bad? Keep hearing that dude is 1-10 or 1-11 in games decided by 4 or less. Where is the law of averages on this one?
theres nowhere to go but up!
Somewhat unrelated, but needs to be said: Collinsworth blows. He is absolutely awful. On the Collins pick, watching him try to criticize Harvin was probably one of the worst instances of a) pandering to the star player or b) a commentator simply not knowing what he's talking about. Harvin, on a mid range slant, cuts into the defense, and slows to settle into a hole in the zone to the right of the MLB and just in front of Collins. Collinsworth, seeing this, blasts Harvin for "not deciding whether to run is route hard or stop it on a dime" Clearly Collinsworth has never tried to find a hole in a zone or he would know about Harvin slowing to quietly call attention the hole he had found while not becoming a stationary target. The play was clear as day to any armchair qb watching it on TV, and Collinsworth missing it is inexcusable.
Quote from: MUBurrow on October 25, 2010, 01:29:18 PM
Somewhat unrelated, but needs to be said: Collinsworth blows. He is absolutely awful.
I completely disagree. For me he is second only to Troy Aikman, on the analysts rankings, and I think the drop after those guys is severe (Although I find Brian Billick to be pretty good as well. Haven't heard a lot of him however, so I could be wrong.).
Ha, apparently the NFL told Chilly the following, according to Judd Zulgad:
"Childress told by NFL today that Shiancoe TD should have stood and not been overturned."
"Childress also told if he had challenged Packers TD it would have been overturned."
I guess I was mistaken. Oh well. Sucks for them.
The Score is reporting Favre fractured his ankle.
Two fractures.
"Childress also said the NFL has told him Visanthe Shiancoe's touchdown last night should not have been overruled, and that if he had challenged the second Packers touchdown, it would have been overruled."
CHEATERS!!!!
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 25, 2010, 03:03:55 PM
Two fractures.
and that if he had challenged the second Packers touchdown, it would have been overruled."
CHEATERS!!!!
Lovie didn't challenge a call that was a TD by Cutler that turned into a fumble.....could be we just both have very dumb coaches.
Quote from: marqptm on October 25, 2010, 02:58:00 PM
The Score is reporting Favre fractured his ankle.
I wonder if he's done for the season. Does that mean I can already begin looking forward to the annual "will he or won't he" next summer?
Quote from: StillAWarrior on October 25, 2010, 03:09:45 PM
I wonder if he's done for the season. Does that mean I can already begin looking forward to the annual "will he or won't he" next summer?
Word is this doesn't require surgery. He is in boot and may still be a go for Sunday's game. I can't imagine him being back another year - he is on his death bed right now.
@SPWarrior - the claim that Minnesota has a dumb coach is not one I could argue with.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 25, 2010, 03:14:34 PM
@SPWarrior - the claim that Minnesota has a dumb coach is not one I could argue with.
And Lovie being an idiot is more and more a reality as each week passes. Except next week because he has the week off.
At this point saying Chicago has a dumb coach is unfair to dumb people around the world. How do you not challenge that call?!
Seriously, given his level of play and this recent injury, if I were the Vikings I would consider sticking him on IR to get rid of the distractions. Honestly, I don't think Jackson could be much worse at this point.
Quote from: MU B2002 on October 25, 2010, 03:21:28 PM
At this point saying Chicago has a dumb coach is unfair to dumb people around the world. How do you not challenge that call?!
Good point...but the thing I think that was going through his mind at the time was that he made a terrible challenge the play before and lost and had cold feet or something....pretty unexplainable.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on October 25, 2010, 02:24:28 PM
I completely disagree. For me he is second only to Troy Aikman, on the analysts rankings, and I think the drop after those guys is severe (Although I find Brian Billick to be pretty good as well. Haven't heard a lot of him however, so I could be wrong.).
Collinsworth's problem is that he is so damn smug and arrogant, or so I get the vibe. That ruins his quality for me.
Quote from: JWags85 on October 25, 2010, 03:41:12 PM
Collinsworth's problem is that he is so damn smug and arrogant, or so I get the vibe. That ruins his quality for me.
He should stick to interviewing bobsledders and pole vaulters for the Olympics and stay far away from football.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on October 25, 2010, 03:52:01 PM
He should stick to interviewing bobsledders and pole vaulters for the Olympics and stay far away from football.
You realize that he was an all-pro NFL receiver right?
Quote from: ZiggysFryBoy on October 25, 2010, 12:32:26 PM
hey, the bears are still in first place. ::)
"We're in first place in the frickin' idiot league."
Quote from: GOMU1104 on October 25, 2010, 02:52:26 PM
Ha, apparently the NFL told Chilly the following, according to Judd Zulgad:
"Childress told by NFL today that Shiancoe TD should have stood and not been overturned."
"Childress also told if he had challenged Packers TD it would have been overturned."
I guess I was mistaken. Oh well. Sucks for them.
If true, I feel better because I honestly don't see how the Shiancoe TD wasn't a TD but I've seen so many odd calls via replay this year, I'm not sure anymore.
Childress is an idiot for not challenging the other one, but that's on him, not on the NFL.
Favre sprained his ankle. An avulsion fracture is when the ligament is so strong that instead of tearing itself, it pulls a little piece of bone off. It's actually pretty common with a sprained ankle. So when every commentator says he's a warrior, etc., realize he's only playing on a badly sprained ankle, not a broken leg.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on October 25, 2010, 03:30:39 PM
Good point...but the thing I think that was going through his mind at the time was that he made a terrible challenge the play before and lost and had cold feet or something....pretty unexplainable.
Lovie took the fall for it, but it's the coaches in the booth who relay to him whether or not to challenge a play. They deserve more of the blame. Not challenging that play was likely the difference between 5-2 and 4-3. That being said, Lovie hired those bumbling fools so I guess it still comes back to him. Hopefully he finds a nice position as a D coordinator next season. Based on tonight's game, Dallas could be looking for one soon.
Quote from: MUDPT on October 25, 2010, 08:42:07 PM
Favre sprained his ankle. An avulsion fracture is when the ligament is so strong that instead of tearing itself, it pulls a little piece of bone off. It's actually pretty common with a sprained ankle. So when every commentator says he's a warrior, etc., realize he's only playing on a badly sprained ankle, not a broken leg.
But will he make sure to pass on pictures of it showing us all how black and blue it is?
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on October 25, 2010, 03:55:13 PM
You realize that he was an all-pro NFL receiver right?
Of course I do, but in my opinion he is not a very good announcer....comes off as pretty fake.....my point is that I think he is a very good interviewer.
Quote from: MUDPT on October 25, 2010, 08:42:07 PM
Favre sprained his ankle. An avulsion fracture is when the ligament is so strong that instead of tearing itself, it pulls a little piece of bone off. It's actually pretty common with a sprained ankle. So when every commentator says he's a warrior, etc., realize he's only playing on a badly sprained ankle, not a broken leg.
Yup, I had it happen my senior year of high school. It's definitely not a break, but if he plays next week that's pretty impressive. I was out for 2 weeks because the doctor said I had to be, but there's no way I would've been back in just 1 week. And I never got back to 100% the rest of the season.
I was also playing volleyball and not football. My guess is it'd be worse in football. You're cutting more and it gets into more awkward positions more often, which are the 2 times where it's most painful. Volleyball you're doing a lot of jumping but you aren't turning on it as much.
Although I thought his injury was on his heel (some doctor was explaining it on ESPN yesterday) rather than the ankle, which would probably give it more pain every time it hits the ground but less when it gets turned over and what not
Quote from: wadesworld on October 26, 2010, 11:26:51 AM
Yup, I had it happen my senior year of high school. It's definitely not a break, but if he plays next week that's pretty impressive. I was out for 2 weeks because the doctor said I had to be, but there's no way I would've been back in just 1 week. And I never got back to 100% the rest of the season.
Vicodin can do wonders
Quote from: wadesworld on October 26, 2010, 11:26:51 AM
Yup, I had it happen my senior year of high school. It's definitely not a break, but if he plays next week that's pretty impressive. I was out for 2 weeks because the doctor said I had to be, but there's no way I would've been back in just 1 week. And I never got back to 100% the rest of the season.
I was also playing volleyball and not football. My guess is it'd be worse in football. You're cutting more and it gets into more awkward positions more often, which are the 2 times where it's most painful. Volleyball you're doing a lot of jumping but you aren't turning on it as much.
This volleyball thing you speak of... this is a guy's sport?
Favre cannot possibly 'win' in any way in the minds of some of the people in this thread... if he plays at New England, and someone in the crowd shoots him, he is spurting blood but stays in the game... the next day we'll hear, "well it was only a .22..."... ".. it didn't even hit a major artery.. he's not that tough"...
Jay Bee, there isn't a single person on this board that wouldn't call Favre tough. That would be silly. He clearly is the toughest quarterback to ever play the game.
I just think his time has run out. I think he knew that he hadn't recovered enough to play this year, but his friends talked him into it, and this is the result.
When Favre left the field Sunday, I wish the fans would have given him a standing ovation. For as much as I was pissed at him for screwing over the Packers two years ago, and as much as I would have booed him to start the game, he deserved cheers by the end.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 26, 2010, 01:24:28 PM
This volleyball thing you speak of... this is a guy's sport?
Favre cannot possibly 'win' in any way in the minds of some of the people in this thread... if he plays at New England, and someone in the crowd shoots him, he is spurting blood but stays in the game... the next day we'll hear, "well it was only a .22..."... ".. it didn't even hit a major artery.. he's not that tough"...
Yes it is a guy's sport. I actually won a national championship coaching in it this summer.
Anyway, I was pointing out that if he plays this week that's pretty crazy because it's an injury that takes more than one week to heal up, and that it's probably more painful in football than it is in volleyball. I'm not sure how that's putting down Brent, but if you would like to spin it that way please feel free.
Quote from: wadesworld on October 26, 2010, 02:17:53 PM
Yes it is a guy's sport. I actually won a national championship coaching in it this summer.
Anyway, I was pointing out that if he plays this week that's pretty crazy because it's an injury that takes more than one week to heal up, and that it's probably more painful in football than it is in volleyball. I'm not sure how that's putting down Brent, but if you would like to spin it that way please feel free.
I know, bahdee... my response was partly to take a shot at volleyball in general, so I quoted you, but also to comment on the Favre-hate, which was more in response to MUDPT.
I think Sultan's comments are fair - last year everyone kept telling me how he was going to run out of gas and be horrible a few weeks into the season.. and it never happened. I feel like it already has this year - he looks done.
But, he still might give us a great shot in some circumstances. The conversations here would be quite a bit different if Percy came down with two feet in the endzone... ('wow, what a sh1tty performance by Favre, he looks dead, but he still got it done in Gren Beay'). If we can win yet another NFC North championship this year with Favre behind center, it will be impressive and a nice way for him to end his playing career (although the comments will be about how bad the division was this year; how he needed the Moss trade, AD is the best RB in football so how could we not win it, etc)...
The poor sportsmanship exhibited by the fans at Limbeau was disgraceful.
Collinsworth always seems like such a dink when he speaks. So does Chilly
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 26, 2010, 02:47:19 PM
(although the comments will be about how bad the division was this year; how he needed the Moss trade, AD is the best RB in football so how could we not win it, etc)...
The poor sportsmanship exhibited by the fans at Limbeau was disgraceful.
And all of those things would be true.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 26, 2010, 02:47:19 PM
The poor sportsmanship exhibited by the fans at Limbeau was disgraceful.
Is this a serious comment? Poor sportsmanship? By fans? Seriously? Who the hell cares?
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on October 26, 2010, 10:20:43 AM
But will he make sure to pass on pictures of it showing us all how black and blue it is?
I hope you are talking about his ankle.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 26, 2010, 02:47:19 PM
The poor sportsmanship exhibited by the fans at Limbeau was disgraceful.
Favre is on a another team that happens to be a fierce division rival. There is a time to thank him for his achievements as Packer, but that time is in the future when he comes back to have his jersey retired; not before, during, or after a game when he is still playing against the home team in a game that might determine the division title.
What is truly disgraceful is for not enough fans to even show up to sell out your crappy stadium, forcing a local corporation to have to shell out for some tickets to keep the game from being blacked out. Are the Vikings in Minneapolis or Jacksonville?
Quote from: jmayer1 on October 26, 2010, 03:54:29 PM
Are the Vikings in Minneapolis or Jacksonville?
Or in St. Pete disguising themselves as a Tampa Bay team?
Did I miss something? They booed Favre, big deal. There looked to be plenty of Favre jerseys in the crowd and certainly a number of signs thanking him. I'm sure there were fans that were letting him have it as well, but exactly what was disgraceful?
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 26, 2010, 01:24:28 PM
This volleyball thing you speak of... this is a guy's sport?
Favre cannot possibly 'win' in any way in the minds of some of the people in this thread... if he plays at New England, and someone in the crowd shoots him, he is spurting blood but stays in the game... the next day we'll hear, "well it was only a .22..."... ".. it didn't even hit a major artery.. he's not that tough"...
It's only because ESPN has an 'expert' come on and say it would take a 'miracle' for him to play. Really? A miracle? Funny how SI is reporting that most QBs would play on it if it was a playoff game.
I know it isn't always Favre's fault but it is never clear cut with him. He won't say whether or not he will play til Sunday? Do you see any kind of pattern here?
It's more of the media over hyping him than us bringing him down. We are bringing the media's coverage down. Play or don't play. Just don't be on ESPN 24/7, it's not like you are doing any better than your backup would.
According to this website for the top 10 d-bags in the NFL Cutler is #2 and Favre is #3.
http://thepigskindoctors.com/2010/10/top-ten-nfl-douchebags/
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 26, 2010, 04:14:06 PM
There looked to be plenty of Favre jerseys in the crowd and certainly a number of signs thanking him.
I noticed there were two signs and only two signs they kept showing on the NBC broadcast and both were supportive of Favre. Each time they showed them I kept thinking there were probably 10x as many signs that were, let's say, less than supportive of Favre. I spoke to a coworker who was at the game and she confirmed that there were many more signs against than pro-Favre. Once again, don't always believe what you see on TV.
Granted, most of the anti-Favre signs could probably only have been shown on pay TV, but I would hope there were a few "clean" signs they could have shown to be "fair and balanced". Wait, wrong network.
Quote from: MUEng92 on October 26, 2010, 09:09:54 PM
I noticed there were two signs and only two signs they kept showing on the NBC broadcast and both were supportive of Favre. Each time they showed them I kept thinking there were probably 10x as many signs that were, let's say, less than supportive of Favre. I spoke to a coworker who was at the game and she confirmed that there were many more signs against than pro-Favre. Once again, don't always believe what you see on TV.
Granted, most of the anti-Favre signs could probably only have been shown on pay TV, but I would hope there were a few "clean" signs they could have shown to be "fair and balanced". Wait, wrong network.
Fair enough, but I'm wondering if Jay Bee was in the crowd to see those or was he just saying it to say it?
For anyone around the league or around the Packers for the last 2 decades, we all know that the city, team, etc put up with a lot of nonsense from Favre. I'll right out and say the word COVERUP in many cases. His behavior of late is consistent with what he's done for decades. GB fans probably finally said enough. Enough of covering for this guy left and right especially when he jilted them at the altar. If Packer fans are disrespectful or whatever....well, they're entitled to be.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on October 26, 2010, 11:46:53 PM
I'll right out and say the word COVERUP in many cases. His behavior of late is consistent with what he's done for decades. GB fans probably finally said enough. Enough of covering for this guy left and right especially when he jilted them at the altar. If Packer fans are disrespectful or whatever....well, they're entitled to be.
#1 I agree that Favre has been a big-egoed maniac for most of his life. It's part of his DNA, and quite frankly, it's part of what allows him to be great at football.
#2 I agree that he was provided a lot of leeway by the local authorities and fans. Let's just say I've heard a lot of Water St. stories, and while I'm sure not all are factual, it's not that hard to believe.
#3 (this is where we disagree) I don't think Packer fans are suddenly taking some moral stance against #4's behavior. I think he wears a different jersey now, so it's a lot easier to be critical of the guy. When he was doing painkillers, cheating on his wife and winning superbowls, he was St. Brett. When he was throwing 30 TDs for the Vikes, he was public enemy #1.
Same guy. Same attitude. Different jersey.
I don't mean this as a shot at GB fans, but let's not applaud them too much for doing what comes natural, hating a rival player.
I was at the game, some examples of the signs:
Quite a few with "It's a game of inches" used in some way
"We'd rather see a Clay Matthews sack"
"Hey Favre, Keep the Wranglers on"
Purple jerseys with the name "Pevre" on the back
"Hey Favre, we already knew you were crazy, but now we see your nuts!"
One sign went through all his accomplishments/accolades and then said he is now the only NFL player to "record his own sack"
As far as poor sportsmanship, our section saw 4 Vikings fans (and 1 Packer fan) escorted from the game for unruly behavior. The Vikings opted to be introduced as a team as well so Favre wasn't singled out to the rain of boos like last year. Once again, Jay Bee...you don't seem to know what you're talking about.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 08:51:55 AM
#3 (this is where we disagree) I don't think Packer fans are suddenly taking some moral stance against #4's behavior. I think he wears a different jersey now, so it's a lot easier to be critical of the guy. When he was doing painkillers, cheating on his wife and winning superbowls, he was St. Brett. When he was throwing 30 TDs for the Vikes, he was public enemy #1.
I don't think you're disagreeing with Chicos.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on October 27, 2010, 09:09:11 AM
As far as poor sportsmanship, our section saw 4 Vikings fans (and 1 Packer fan) escorted from the game for unruly behavior. The Vikings opted to be introduced as a team as well so Favre wasn't singled out to the rain of boos like last year. Once again, Jay Bee...you don't seem to know what you're talking about.
Why didn't they just introduce the defense? Looks like Chilly bungled another one! ;)
Quote from: dsfire on October 27, 2010, 09:21:35 AM
I don't think you're disagreeing with Chicos.
Well, specifically, I disagree with the idea that Packer fans have just said "enough" with Brett's behavior and now don't like him.
They don't like him because he's a viking. His behavior doesn't have that much to do with it... if it did, people would have been hating him for the past 20 years.
I know a lot of GB fans will claim it's Favre's whole "act" over the last 3 years that has driven them away... but let's just be honest, when he plays for your own team, you overlook a lot of stuff.
Now that he wears purple, it's easy to hate him.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 09:34:21 AM
Well, specifically, I disagree with the idea that Packer fans have just said "enough" with Brett's behavior and now don't like him.
They don't like him because he's a viking. His behavior doesn't have that much to do with it... if it did, people would have been hating him for the past 20 years.
I know a lot of GB fans will claim it's Favre's whole "act" over the last 3 years that has driven them away... but let's just be honest, when he plays for your own team, you overlook a lot of stuff.
Now that he wears purple, it's easy to hate him.
Exactly. But I think it goes deeper than that. Brett was our own, almost part of the family. He was human. He made mistakes just like a family member would and we overlooked them just like we would a family member. He said in so many words that he was a packer for life and couldn't see himself in any other uniform. I remember him saying that when the packers didn't want him anymore, that he was done. Then he orchastrates the whole retire, unretire episode to ultimately play in Minnesota and then said he felt appreciated there. I think that is when most fans turned on him like an ex wife who hooked up with your best friend.
As far as booing being disrepectful and unclassy, give me a break. He is a freaking viking. I am guessing there are plenty of viking fans that have booed packers.
Quote from: hairyworthen on October 27, 2010, 09:46:42 AM
Exactly. But I think it goes deeper than that. Brett was our own, almost part of the family. He was human. He made mistakes just like a family member would and we overlooked them just like we would a family member. He said in so many words that he was a packer for life and couldn't see himself in any other uniform. I remember him saying that when the packers didn't want him anymore, that he was done. Then he orchastrates the whole retire, unretire episode to ultimately play in Minnesota and then said he felt appreciated there. I think that is when most fans turned on him like an ex wife who hooked up with your best friend.
As far as booing being disrepectful and unclassy, give me a break. He is a freaking viking. I am guessing there are plenty of viking fans that have booed packers.
Agree 100%.
That's why some of the "Well, now we realize he's a douche" attitude from some Packer fans is a bit hypocritical.
He was always a douche, but when he wore Green and Gold, he was YOUR douche.
ESPN has always loved Brett and over-promoted him. You guys are just noticing it now.
I loved and backed Favre for the 16 years he was in Green Bay. When he went to the Jets, I hoped he did well, still rooted for him. But when he went to the Vikings, I decided to suspend those thoughts until he finally retired. Because he went to the team I hate the most, and is now playing in front of the fans that I hate the most...I wish him nothing but bad things on the field.
Once he retires, I will look back at his career, and he will go down as my favorite athlete to watch of all time. Until then...F em.
Great video just dug up from his days as a 23 year old.
http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/blogs/drew.php
Nothing wrong with it at all. Just funny.
Agree totally. He was always a prima donna, but he was our prima donna. After all the jerking around of Packer mgmt. that he did, he's now dead to me. F 'em in spades.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on October 27, 2010, 10:15:30 AM
I loved and backed Favre for the 16 years he was in Green Bay. When he went to the Jets, I hoped he did well, still rooted for him. But when he went to the Vikings, I decided to suspend those thoughts until he finally retired. Because he went to the team I hate the most, and is now playing in front of the fans that I hate the most...I wish him nothing but bad things on the field.
Once he retires, I will look back at his career, and he will go down as my favorite athlete to watch of all time. Until then...F em.
Great video just dug up from his days as a 23 year old.
http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/blogs/drew.php
Nothing wrong with it at all. Just funny.
Awesome video.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 09:34:21 AM
Well, specifically, I disagree with the idea that Packer fans have just said "enough" with Brett's behavior and now don't like him.
They don't like him because he's a viking. His behavior doesn't have that much to do with it... if it did, people would have been hating him for the past 20 years.
I know a lot of GB fans will claim it's Favre's whole "act" over the last 3 years that has driven them away... but let's just be honest, when he plays for your own team, you overlook a lot of stuff.
Now that he wears purple, it's easy to hate him.
My point was, I think Chicos was saying the same thing. He even mentioned "Enough of covering for this guy left and right especially when he jilted them at the altar." I doubt many people would believe there's some sort of moral line being drawn in the sand here.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 10:26:58 AM
Awesome video.
I still cant get over him taking a pull from the bottle of vodka, and not having any reaction. Like it was water...
Quote from: dsfire on October 27, 2010, 10:41:41 AM
My point was, I think Chicos was saying the same thing. He even mentioned "Enough of covering for this guy left and right especially when he jilted them at the altar." I doubt many people would believe there's some sort of moral line being drawn in the sand here.
Yea, maybe I'm just reading it wrong.
My point is: I don't think Packer fans are making some conscious decision that Brett's act is old and now they dislike him. I think he plays for another team, so it's easy to be critical of him now.
I only bring this up because I talked with some GB fans who insisted that it was because Brett was just a bad guy now and that's why they really don't like him anymore (plus media over-hype) It didn't have to do with his jersey, it was because he was just a bad person, so they liked to take shots at him, and Brett deserved it because he was "bad".
I just don't think those people are being honest with themselves.
Brett was always "bad", so don't climb some moral ground now that he's wearing purple.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on October 27, 2010, 10:15:30 AM
I loved and backed Favre for the 16 years he was in Green Bay. When he went to the Jets, I hoped he did well, still rooted for him. But when he went to the Vikings, I decided to suspend those thoughts until he finally retired. Because he went to the team I hate the most, and is now playing in front of the fans that I hate the most...I wish him nothing but bad things on the field.
Once he retires, I will look back at his career, and he will go down as my favorite athlete to watch of all time. Until then...F em.
Great video just dug up from his days as a 23 year old.
http://www.espnmilwaukee.com/blogs/drew.php
Nothing wrong with it at all. Just funny.
Agree 100%
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on October 27, 2010, 09:09:11 AM
I was at the game, some examples of the signs:
Thanks alot. I'm having a relaxing lunch at work and now I have to track down a rag to wipe the turkey sandwich remnants off my monitor screen! ;D
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 09:34:21 AM
Well, specifically, I disagree with the idea that Packer fans have just said "enough" with Brett's behavior and now don't like him.
They don't like him because he's a viking. His behavior doesn't have that much to do with it... if it did, people would have been hating him for the past 20 years.
I know a lot of GB fans will claim it's Favre's whole "act" over the last 3 years that has driven them away... but let's just be honest, when he plays for your own team, you overlook a lot of stuff.
Now that he wears purple, it's easy to hate him.
That about sums it up.
Do you folks boo opponents at basketball games? I think the last time I did was several years ago when Fordham was in Milwaukee and they were taking physical cheap shots and trying to injure our guys.
I realize many of you gazed at the Favre poster taped above your bed every night for many years and are now heartbroken. But to boo your hero is disgraceful. Especially when you want him to retire with that ugly Packers jersey on. I'm not a fan of booing -- there are a few select circumstances when I'm OK / understanding of it, but those circumstances certainly don't include being a whiney little group of hypocrites who d***ed over their hero and are now mad he had a great year with the enemy/Consensus.
Go check the tape of McNabb's return to Philly.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 27, 2010, 01:17:42 PM
Do you folks boo opponents at basketball games? I think the last time I did was several years ago when Fordham was in Milwaukee and they were taking physical cheap shots and trying to injure our guys.
I realize many of you gazed at the Favre poster taped above your bed every night for many years and are now heartbroken. But to boo your hero is disgraceful. Especially when you want him to retire with that ugly Packers jersey on. I'm not a fan of booing -- there are a few select circumstances when I'm OK / understanding of it, but those circumstances certainly don't include being a whiney little group of hypocrites who d***ed over their hero and are now mad he had a great year with the enemy/Consensus.
Go check the tape of McNabb's return to Philly.
McNabb returning to Philly is a little different than Favre returning to Green Bay.
Life long packer fan here and true to green and gold to this day.
I never want to see favre in lambeau again. no jersey retirement, no formal induction to the ring, nothing. and if for some reason they do, i will boo him during that too. As i am sure many other will as well.
what he did in the last 3 years killed anything he did to make me love him the 16 before it.
I will boo him anytime i see him until the day I die.
Quote from: DJO's Pump Fake on October 27, 2010, 01:34:46 PM
Life long packer fan here and true to green and gold to this day.
I never want to see favre in lambeau again. no jersey retirement, no formal induction to the ring, nothing. and if for some reason they do, i will boo him during that too. As i am sure many other will as well.
what he did in the last 3 years killed anything he did to make me love him the 16 before it.
I will boo him anytime i see him until the day I die.
I want to believe that opinions can never be wrong. But you sir, are wrong.
JayBoy, I think its time you retire from this discussion. The experiment failed. I hope you enjoyed it...even though it didnt bring you anything...except a contract extension for Chilly.
Quote from: Jay Bee on October 27, 2010, 01:17:42 PM
I'm not a fan of booing -- there are a few select circumstances when I'm OK / understanding of it, but those circumstances certainly don't include being a whiney little group of hypocrites who d***ed over their hero and are now mad he had a great year with the enemy/Consensus.
Its really cute how you still call the Vikings the "Consensus" when you are 2-4 and you probably lose 3, maybe 4, out of the next 5, especially if Old Man River is banged up and you trot out TJ in his stead.
forgiveness is a funny thing - you can choose to grant it whenever you wish, but no past event is precedent in requiring you to give it again. as a packer fan, you could choose to forgive the prior transgressions for whatever reason you wish - even if its just because seeing him in that jersey made you happy.
so then when he came back and sent a picture of his weiner to a girl half his age + 7, you don't have to forgive him. most havent. for anyone to say that the people of GB owe it to Brett to forgive him because they always did in the past is stupid. its not up to the bad guy to say when he should be forgiven.
Quote from: MUBurrow on October 27, 2010, 01:45:47 PM
forgiveness is a funny thing - you can choose to grant it whenever you wish, but no past event is precedent in requiring you to give it again. as a packer fan, you could choose to forgive the prior transgressions for whatever reason you wish - even if its just because seeing him in that jersey made you happy.
so then when he came back and sent a picture of his weiner to a girl half his age + 7, you don't have to forgive him. most havent. for anyone to say that the people of GB owe it to Brett to forgive him because they always did in the past is stupid. its not up to the bad guy to say when he should be forgiven.
Clearly, you're a man of principle. ::)
"half his age + 7"? Nice spin.
The experiment didn't fail - as was discussed last year, never did I believe that anything short of a Super Bowl victory would be a failure... in fact, last year was a great success and Favre impressed. I'm glad the Hall of Famer had such a great time with us last year.
Quote from: DJO's Pump Fake on October 27, 2010, 01:34:46 PM
Life long packer fan here and true to green and gold to this day.
I never want to see favre in lambeau again. no jersey retirement, no formal induction to the ring, nothing. and if for some reason they do, i will boo him during that too. As i am sure many other will as well.
what he did in the last 3 years killed anything he did to make me love him the 16 before it.
I will boo him anytime i see him until the day I die.
See, now this is insane to me.
The guy was a cheating scumbag for years, and you cheered for him, which I can understand.
Then the guy changes jerseys, and for this, you excommunicate him from the franchise?
Let's have some perspective, people.
As somebody who has been through a fallen hero scenario (Kirby Puckett), I can tell you that you will get over it and you will realize that you really enjoyed watching him play, and are proud he was on your team.
If the Packers go back to their 70's and 80's form, you will long for the days when #4 was on the field.
it's not like MN has the best fans in sportsdom, heck, I lived there for a few years and remember the North Stars moving just a year or 2 after making the Stanley Cup, bought tickets to a Vikings playoff game to see the Saints because it wasn't sold out - I would classify a large portion of MN fans as definite band wagon fans
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
the only thing that could've been a worse transgression for Brent would have been to become a Bear
I particularly resent the manner in which he wanted to only be a Viking vs. any team not in our division, it would have been like Babe Ruth leaving the Yankees to become a member of the Red Sox (again)at the end of his career. Favre retired, GB had drafted Rodgers who was close to the end of his first contract, what can TT do? trade Rodgers and bring back BF for a year only to see him retire again in the middle of July (and after the draft like he was prone to doing) and then we had no back-up QB at all?
I've been a Packer fan since the Lombardi days and will admit I hated Starr at the end of his coaching career, couldn't wait for him to be fired, I see Bart and Cherry every year now and love them to death so I realize some day BF will be welcomed back even by myself, until then I'd boo him just like I did at last years game
(http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=83073&d=1288030189)
(http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=83074&d=1288030189)
(http://www.thetradersden.org/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=83072&d=1288030189)
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 02:10:08 PM
See, now this is insane to me.
The guy was a cheating scumbag for years, and you cheered for him, which I can understand.
Then the guy changes jerseys, and for this, you excommunicate him from the franchise?
Let's have some perspective, people.
As somebody who has been through a fallen hero scenario (Kirby Puckett), I can tell you that you will get over it and you will realize that you really enjoyed watching him play, and are proud he was on your team.
If the Packers go back to their 70's and 80's form, you will long for the days when #4 was on the field.
Nobody is saying they didn't enjoy when Brent was on the Packers and leading us to victories. We put up with his crap when he was a Packer because he was a Packer. We get your point, and nobody's arguing with it. You've made the same claim in your last 4 posts.
The reason we don't like him anymore is because he plays for a division rival, and because the drama is now more ridiculous than ever. He literally retired so that he could play for the Vikings, just to get "revenge" on the Packers. And we're supposed to cheer for that? That's a joke. So he can turn his back on the Packers organization, but our fanbase should stay loyal to him and cheer for him on a division rival while he is playing against our team? That makes absolutely no sense to me. As has been said on here, I hoped the best for him when he was on the Jets. The Packers made their decision to move on so we didn't have a place for him anymore. If he wanted to continue playing, good for him. If his only motive was to play for a Super Bowl I'm pretty sure he was in a darn good position with the Jets. They are one of the 2 best teams in the NFL. If he just wanted to play football and not stick it to the Packers (which he had said in the past) then he should have stayed in New York and won there, and the Packers fans would still love him and everything would be good. But all he wanted to do was stick it to the Packers. So he went to our biggest rival and we play them twice a year, and their success means that we may not make the playoffs. Why would we chear for that? Very silly if you ask me.
Quote from: wadesworld on October 27, 2010, 02:26:11 PM
Nobody is saying they didn't enjoy when Brent was on the Packers and leading us to victories. We put up with his crap when he was a Packer because he was a Packer. We get your point, and nobody's arguing with it. You've made the same claim in your last 4 posts.
The reason we don't like him anymore is because he plays for a division rival, and because the drama is now more ridiculous than ever. He literally retired so that he could play for the Vikings, just to get "revenge" on the Packers. And we're supposed to cheer for that? That's a joke. So he can turn his back on the Packers organization, but our fanbase should stay loyal to him and cheer for him on a division rival while he is playing against our team? That makes absolutely no sense to me. As has been said on here, I hoped the best for him when he was on the Jets. The Packers made their decision to move on so we didn't have a place for him anymore. If he wanted to continue playing, good for him. If his only motive was to play for a Super Bowl I'm pretty sure he was in a darn good position with the Jets. They are one of the 2 best teams in the NFL. If he just wanted to play football and not stick it to the Packers (which he had said in the past) then he should have stayed in New York and won there, and the Packers fans would still love him and everything would be good. But all he wanted to do was stick it to the Packers. So he went to our biggest rival and we play them twice a year, and their success means that we may not make the playoffs. Why would we chear for that? Very silly if you ask me.
I think there is something lost in translation here.
I would never claim that a Packer fan should cheer for Brett when he plays for the Vikes.
What I've claimed is the following:
1. You can't suddenly dislike the guy for being a scumbag if you cheered for him all of those years. He's always been a scumbag.
2. You can cheer against him because he plays for an opposing team. Seems perfectly logical. I get that.
3. You shouldn't write the guy out of the Packers history and never want to see him involved with the Packers again. That's stupid, and reactionary.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on October 27, 2010, 02:34:47 PM
I think there is something lost in translation here.
I would never claim that a Packer fan should cheer for Brett when he plays for the Vikes.
What I've claimed is the following:
1. You can't suddenly dislike the guy for being a scumbag if you cheered for him all of those years. He's always been a scumbag.
2. You can cheer against him because he plays for an opposing team. Seems perfectly logical. I get that.
3. You shouldn't write the guy out of the Packers history and never want to see him involved with the Packers again. That's stupid, and reactionary.
Alright I guess I misunderstood your posts (or mixed it up with JayBee's complaining about booing). I agree that he has always been a scumbag, and as such that is not my reason for disliking him. I also understand that what he did as a Packer was some unbelievable stuff and without him the Packers would not have their 3rd Super Bowl and would not be nearly where they are now, so I obviously appreciate what he did for the organization, but once he decided to turn his back on us I don't want him back as a Packer. He can go down in our history books for sure, but I will never again be a fan of his. He became a traitor when he went to the Vikings. I understand that they were a good team in need of a quarterback, but again, so were the Jets, who he had just played for, so he very well could have stayed there rather than burning bridges with the Packers organization and their fans by going to a division and hated rival.
As far as JayBee's post on booing, is it seriously that big of a sin to boo someone? Is boing that painful? I have definitely booed opposing players/teams at Marquette basketball games. Every time we play Notre Dame and Louisville I surely do. Every times Reece Gains and Jerry Smith came back to the Bradley Center I booed them. I can't stand either of those teams or either of those players. It's not like I'm yelling insults, insulting their mom, cussing at them, making racist remarks, etc. I'm booing...not a big deal, and not all that painful. And this is coming from the guy who questioned whether volleyball was a guy's sport...boos hurt your feelings that much?
Also, yes the Philli fans cheered McNabb when he was introduced before the game, but McNabb did not go into and out of retirement over and over again just to get on a division rival team like Brent did. If the Eagles wanted McNabb back, he would be under center for the Eagles. And the Philli fans then booed him very loudly when he came onto the field for his first play from scrimmage. So they also booed him. What terrible, awful, immoral fans they have :o
I now simply hope that Favre retires, just so he doesn't end up dead.
Time to start building for the future, Vikes. Play Jackson. End the streak. Do what is good for the team, not Brett's narcissism.
If Brett would have taken the Vikes to the promised land, then he could have had the opportunity to wear his Packer jersey to the White House.
I'll be in the stands this weekend at Lambeau watching the Packers destroy the Cowboys. My son's first trip to Lambeau, he's a huge Packers fan. Should be fun. I'll be cheering for the Packers as well. Finally, after 3 years of bitching about Phillips, I finally get to see him run out of town and if I can help with my voice and cheers, I'm glad to chip in.
QuoteI want to believe that opinions can never be wrong. But you sir, are wrong.
I am not wrong, Sir.
Holding my dear franchise hostage and subsequently coming back just to stick it to us is enough for me to burn the bridges with him.
I loved him when he was at his best, but once you try to be bigger than the organization, hold the organization hostage, or compete for the sole purpose of sticking it to your former organization, you become dead to me (and most packer fans)
This is why he gets booed so loudly when he steps foot on Lambeau.
It's like finding out your wife had an affair and you get divorced. Are you gonna welcome her back in your home to remember the honeymoon and the first few years together? Probably not.
Anyway, I too will be in Lambeau Sunday night, and I do believe the Packers are wearing the old school throwbacks this week?
Quote from: DJO's Pump Fake on November 01, 2010, 09:56:09 AM
I am not wrong, Sir.
Holding my dear franchise hostage and subsequently coming back just to stick it to us is enough for me to burn the bridges with him.
I loved him when he was at his best, but once you try to be bigger than the organization, hold the organization hostage, or compete for the sole purpose of sticking it to your former organization, you become dead to me (and most packer fans)
This is why he gets booed so loudly when he steps foot on Lambeau.
It's like finding out your wife had an affair and you get divorced. Are you gonna welcome her back in your home to remember the honeymoon and the first few years together? Probably not.
Anyway, I too will be in Lambeau Sunday night, and I do believe the Packers are wearing the old school throwbacks this week?
I'm pretty sure they are wearing them on the 5th against the 49ers.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 01, 2010, 01:08:34 AM
I'll be in the stands this weekend at Lambeau watching the Packers destroy the Cowboys. My son's first trip to Lambeau, he's a huge Packers fan. Should be fun. I'll be cheering for the Packers as well. Finally, after 3 years of bitching about Phillips, I finally get to see him run out of town and if I can help with my voice and cheers, I'm glad to chip in.
A true fan never cheers against his own team. No matter how badly I'd like to see Lovie and Angelo ousted, I'm still going to root
for the Bears every week.
Quote from: marqptm on November 01, 2010, 10:12:35 AM
I'm pretty sure they are wearing them on the 5th against the 49ers.
This is correct.
I haven't seen a defensive effort like that from a Packers team in a long, long time. Consider that the defense performed this way without six starters and a bunch of depth behind it, and guys like Howard Green playing 30 snaps after having ONE practice in Green Bay.
I still don't know what the ceiling is for this team, but the NFC is wide open. The Packers have yet to trail in ANY game by more than seven points. Just have to figure out how to win close games.
They've lost three games by a FG each. They are good enough defensively to take advantage of a one-dimensional team...and that's what the Jets are. That's what the Cowboys have become with Kitna at QB too.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 01, 2010, 10:45:55 AM
A true fan never cheers against his own team. No matter how badly I'd like to see Lovie and Angelo ousted, I'm still going to root for the Bears every week.
I disagree. I've wanted change for 3 years and if it finally gets into Jerry's head by having fans cheer against his team, he will finally make the move. Cheering for ineptness only leads to more ineptness....at least in pro sports. I'll never be accused of being anything but a true fan of that team.
If this was college, it would be a different story.
Cowboys fans are going to stage a walkout at one of the games coming up. Not only does Phillips need to go, but the GM needs to be fired...problem is that the GM is the owner.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 01, 2010, 11:14:37 AM
I disagree. I've wanted change for 3 years and if it finally gets into Jerry's head by having fans cheer against his team, he will finally make the move. Cheering for ineptness only leads to more ineptness....at least in pro sports. I'll never be accused of being anything but a true fan of that team.
If this was college, it would be a different story.
Cowboys fans are going to stage a walkout at one of the games coming up. Not only does Phillips need to go, but the GM needs to be fired...problem is that the GM is the owner.
A walk-out?!? Seriously, when has that ever worked? A vast majority of fans aren't going to pay the price of a ticket simply to walk out of the game. The front office doesn't care if the fans boo or if there's a walk-out and you're insanely naive if you think those types of tactics work. The only way to send a message to ownership is to stop spending money on their product but, as we all should know, if you and me don't buy the tickets to games, some other fan will.
2-5 is OK. At least we're not in last place (have the tie breaker vs. Detroit!)
This sets up for a memorable awful-start, then to-the-Super-Bowl journey for the Purple.
Ugh... onto the basketball season. Actually looking very forward to going to the Gophers / Northeastern State game tomorrow evening. Trevor will be coming off the bench for the Maroon & Gold.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 01, 2010, 11:51:26 AM
2-5 is OK. At least we're not in last place (have the tie breaker vs. Detroit! FOR NOW)
This sets up for a memorable awful-start, then to-the-Super-Bowl journey for the Purple.
Ugh... onto the basketball season. Actually looking very forward to going to the Gophers / Northeastern State game tomorrow evening. Trevor will be coming off the bench for the Maroon & Gold.
Fixed.
Chico's, instead of a walk-out why don't 70,000 fans just ignore what's going on the field and watch it on a giant TV instead.
Wait...erp
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 01, 2010, 11:27:28 AM
A walk-out?!? Seriously, when has that ever worked? A vast majority of fans aren't going to pay the price of a ticket simply to walk out of the game. The front office doesn't care if the fans boo or if there's a walk-out and you're insanely naive if you think those types of tactics work. The only way to send a message to ownership is to stop spending money on their product but, as we all should know, if you and me don't buy the tickets to games, some other fan will.
The season is already sold out, the tickets are already purchased. So it isn't a revenue impact, it's an impact for the following years. Because the Cowboys are talked about so much, if you saw half the stadium leaving in the middle of a quarter, that would make every sports news cast in the country and damn sure would hit Jerry hard in the ego. This isn't about pocketbook, this is about checking his ego, something that never has been questioned.
It has nothing to do with the tickets since they are already sold out
Vikings waive Moss.
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/106461848.html?elr=KArksi8cyaiUo8cyaiUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aULPQL7PQLanchO7DiUr
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on November 01, 2010, 02:12:39 PM
Vikings reportedly waive Moss.
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/106461848.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU1yDEmP:QMDCinchO7DU
That is odd.
Those comments are funny. Nothing better than Viking angst to put a smile on my face.
and now the Vikes waived Moss.
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5752939 (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5752939)
Is it possible that the Vikings just passed the Vikings as the biggest joke in the NFL?
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on November 01, 2010, 02:46:13 PM
Is it possible that the Vikings just passed the Vikings as the biggest joke in the NFL?
Well played.
A 3rd round pick...only to waive him a month later.
Consensus, indeed.
Jerry Jones would like to thank the Vikings for taking the attention away from his team.
oops. that was supposed to say Cowboys, but it probably works either way.
Tedi Bruschi (sp?) just said that if you are a team with a full grown man as your head coach and your players play hard every play than you want Moss on your team. Nice rip on Childress.
Maybe he can finally live his youthful dream and go play basketball in Turkey with Iverson.
I think it would be hilarious if he went backwards through waivers and no one claimed him until the Patriots pick. Patriots grab him off waivers and finish the season with Moss and a 3rd round pick. But I think the Dolphins, Raiders and/or Seahawks claim him first.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on November 01, 2010, 03:01:54 PM
Tedi Bruschi (sp?) just said that if you are a team with a full grown man as your head coach and your players play hard every play than you want Moss on your team. Nice rip on Childress.
Also said Favre was in control in Minnesota and Jerry Jones in Dallas, not the coaches. Thats why they are losers.
Quote from: nyg on November 01, 2010, 04:41:48 PM
Also said Favre was in control in Minnesota and Jerry Jones in Dallas, not the coaches. Thats why they are losers.
Absolutely agree on both counts.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 01, 2010, 04:43:05 PM
Absolutely agree on both counts.
Same. There's no question at all about that. Bruschi's just speaking the truth.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 01, 2010, 11:27:28 AM
A walk-out?!? Seriously, when has that ever worked? A vast majority of fans aren't going to pay the price of a ticket simply to walk out of the game. The front office doesn't care if the fans boo or if there's a walk-out and you're insanely naive if you think those types of tactics work. The only way to send a message to ownership is to stop spending money on their product but, as we all should know, if you and me don't buy the tickets to games, some other fan will.
Bucks fans did a bag night revolt. Not a ton of people, but I would say 2 dozen.
It didn't force the firing of both the GM and Head Coach, which did happen very soon after, but it at least got the attention of the Senator.
(http://media.photobucket.com/image/kohl%20bag%20night/nowak008/revolt.jpg)
ETA: Right click and view image in new tab. The senator's look is priceless
The CONSENSUS joke of the NFL is at it again...
This is fun. Couldn't happen to a more deserving organization, coaching staff, fanbase.
Packers set to go into the bye at 6-3...things are starting to come together nicely.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on November 01, 2010, 07:30:33 PM
This is fun. Couldn't happen to a more deserving organization, coaching staff, fanbase.
Packers set to go into the bye at 6-3...things are starting to come together nicely.
Let's hope so. I keep thinking that this could be a major letdown week. Coming out of a huge win at New York I keep thinking we could overlook Dallas this week and take this as a 2 week long bye and somehow get beat at home by a Romo-less Dallas team. I mean, Dallas still has quite a bit of talent on their roster. And Romo is one of the most overrated players in the NFL. They're bound to get hot for one game this year. This is a team that was projected to go to the Super Bowl at the start of the year. I will be happy only if the clock reads 0:00 and the Packers have won. It could be ugly or it could be pretty, 9-0 or 28-7, I don't care...just get to 6-3 and get to the bye. Rest up the defensive players who have been overworking completely due to all of the injuries.
Quote from: wadesworld on November 01, 2010, 07:39:20 PM
Let's hope so. I keep thinking that this could be a major letdown week. Coming out of a huge win at New York I keep thinking we could overlook Dallas this week and take this as a 2 week long bye and somehow get beat at home by a Romo-less Dallas team. I mean, Dallas still has quite a bit of talent on their roster. And Romo is one of the most overrated players in the NFL. They're bound to get hot for one game this year. This is a team that was projected to go to the Super Bowl at the start of the year. I will be happy only if the clock reads 0:00 and the Packers have won. It could be ugly or it could be pretty, 9-0 or 28-7, I don't care...just get to 6-3 and get to the bye. Rest up the defensive players who have been overworking completely due to all of the injuries.
Trust me, you have NOTHING to lose. Talent or not, this team is devoid of anything remotely representative of a football team. No pride, no discipline, and lack of talent in the secondary means a HUGE Packers win.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 01, 2010, 07:51:07 PM
Trust me, you have NOTHING to lose. Talent or not, this team is devoid of anything remotely representative of a football team. No pride, no discipline, and lack of talent in the secondary means a HUGE Packers win.
Good to see, I guess, ... that Marquette isn't the only team of Chicos' that he/she totally sh1ts on.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 01, 2010, 07:51:07 PM
Trust me, you have NOTHING to lose. Talent or not, this team is devoid of anything remotely representative of a football team. No pride, no discipline, and lack of talent in the secondary means a HUGE Packers win.
This.
The Cowboys are in rough shape. The "talent" that everyone drools about is overrated. Jon Freaking Kitna is their QB. The last time Kitna won as a starter in the NFL...2007 as a member of the Detroit Lions, a week 16 triumph over the then woeful Kansas City Chiefs.
I am not someone who is going to sit here and say "oooooo beware of the letdown, trap game, blah blah blah." They Cowboys are terrible. This should be a boat race.
the Vikings. Fleeced by the Patriots with an assist to....themselves. Laughingstocks in purple socks.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 01, 2010, 09:21:37 PM
Good to see, I guess, ... that Marquette isn't the only team of Chicos' that he/she totally sh1ts on.
I don't sh1t on Marquette, Jay Bee, some people just can't understand objective criticism now and again. By the way, where have your Purple and Gold glasses gotten you this year?
Peace.
what were the terms of Chilly's new deal this past offseason?
Quote from: MUBurrow on November 02, 2010, 12:40:59 PM
what were the terms of Chilly's new deal this past offseason?
Actually he was extended on Nov 19, 2009 after they started the season 8-1.
The Minnesota Vikings signed Brad Childress to a contract extension that will keep the coach with the team through the 2013 season, a source told ESPN.com Thursday.
Financial terms weren't immediately available but the deal is believed to be between $4 million and $5 million a year, the source said.
Now its reported his rant about food in Winter Park led to release. As if it wasn't a strange enough week. Guess he misses his crabcakes and chowder.
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 02, 2010, 01:11:59 PM
As if it wasn't a strange enough week.
This is as odd of a week (season?) as I can remember in the NFL. Between the Moss thing, Favre drama, the Cowboys' debacle, and the absolutely incomprehensible Mike Shanahan/Rex Grossman thing, its all just very strange.
Yes I about fell out of my chair when I saw Mcnabb gotten pulled for Grossman due to Rex's effectiveness in the two minute drill. Shanahan needs to go back and look at the tape again. All those short drives Rex ran with Chicago were three and outs.
Lions fans (both of us) thanked Shanahan from the bottom of our hearts for his creative and innovative time and personnel management. From other Redskins games, is their O-line that bad or were the Lions just in a perfect scheme for them? Donovan looked like he was doing his Jay Cutler imitation back there, watching half of the game from his back.
Quote from: tower912 on November 02, 2010, 04:18:22 PM
Lions fans (both of us) thanked Shanahan from the bottom of our hearts for his creative and innovative time and personnel management. From other Redskins games, is their O-line that bad or were the Lions just in a perfect scheme for them? Donovan looked like he was doing his Jay Cutler imitation back there, watching half of the game from his back.
Spent the weekend in Detroit, visiting a classmate. Hard to comprehend the devastation on the east side of the Motor City.
Good news for me: Lions needed to sell 10,000 seats to avoid the black out. Didn't happen. As a result? Saw the Packers game. Sure didn't expect that to happen. Lions have a good product. Might take a season or two to get the fans back into the seats.
I never get sick of Hitler spoofs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2pcuLOk6Wc
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 02, 2010, 01:11:59 PM
Now its reported his rant about food in Winter Park led to release. As if it wasn't a strange enough week. Guess he misses his crabcakes and chowder.
Gus explained what happened last Friday.
"[Moss] came walking up," Tinucci said. "There were a couple of guys that were in line. I knew Brett [Favre] put his helmet down. I met him carving. I was carving some meat for a guy and all of a sudden I heard all this screaming and I was like, 'Are you kidding me?' I knew who it was immediately. I looked up and there he was. [Moss said], 'I wouldn't feed this [expletive] to my [expletive] dog.' I was in shock. I couldn't believe it. It was quiet in there."
Tinucci said one player told Moss to shut up. He also said two Vikings employees approached him and apologized.
Tinucci said his buffet included ribs, chicken, a round of beef carving station, pasta, vegetables and dessert.
"It looked good, like we always do," he said. "I don't know if he was starving for attention or what. But nobody laughed I can guarantee you that."
"He just slammed us," Tinucci added. "It wasn't us personally because he doesn't know us from Adam."
Moss claimed by the Titans.
Gus Tinucci (tin-OO'-chee) was catering lunch at the Vikings' practice facility last Friday when Moss entered the locker room. He says Moss demanded to know who ordered the food and said he wouldn't feed it to his dog.
Tinucci says he got an apology from the Wilf family, which owns the Vikings. And on Friday, Tinucci's will offer free lunches to the first 50 people who come to turn in their Moss jerseys. For everyone else, the lunch buffet will be marked down to $8.40, a takeoff on the receiver's No. 84 jersey.
The Moss jerseys and cash will be donated to Boys & Girls Clubs. Moss is now playing for Tennessee, his third team this season.
Minnesota Vikings headed for a nuclear meltdown.
I couldn't be happier.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on November 07, 2010, 10:09:06 AM
Minnesota Vikings headed for a nuclear meltdown.
I couldn't be happier.
What you were referencing?? ;D
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5776770
How soon after this upcoming Vikings loss against the Cards will Childress be fired? 5 mins? 10 mins?
I'm not watching the game or anything, but can anyone who is explain to me why as of almost the end of the 3rd, Brett has thrown 25 times and AP has carried 10?
Quote from: MUBurrow on November 07, 2010, 02:08:49 PM
I'm not watching the game or anything, but can anyone who is explain to me why as of almost the end of the 3rd, Brett has thrown 25 times and AP has carried 10?
(http://www.shamasportsheadliners.com/images/CHILDRESS_Brad.JPG)
Gotta love it. Brett is at a standing 8 count. I'm waiting for the Tavaris towel!
How do you have AP and the ball on the 4 and not run it twice with arguably the best RB in the league? AZ is not a good run defense.
Would Viking fans rather have lost that game to get rid of Chilly sooner rather than later? Nice comeback by the Vikes, but an ugly game.
Quote from: MUBurrow on November 07, 2010, 02:08:49 PM
I'm not watching the game or anything, but can anyone who is explain to me why as of almost the end of the 3rd, Brett has thrown 25 times and AP has carried 10?
Yeah, because the Vikes are down and need to get points.
Quote from: wadesworld on November 01, 2010, 07:39:20 PM
Let's hope so. I keep thinking that this could be a major letdown week. Coming out of a huge win at New York I keep thinking we could overlook Dallas this week and take this as a 2 week long bye and somehow get beat at home by a Romo-less Dallas team. I mean, Dallas still has quite a bit of talent on their roster. And Romo is one of the most overrated players in the NFL. They're bound to get hot for one game this year. This is a team that was projected to go to the Super Bowl at the start of the year. I will be happy only if the clock reads 0:00 and the Packers have won. It could be ugly or it could be pretty, 9-0 or 28-7, I don't care...just get to 6-3 and get to the bye. Rest up the defensive players who have been overworking completely due to all of the injuries.
Wow, I couldn't have been more wrong. The Cowboys are an embarrassment.
I enjoyed every second of the beat down. I've been a loyal Cowboys fan for 35+ years but it was therapeutic to watch. Not that I expected anything less, but it was fun and my son had a blast. I just hope and pray that Jerrah fires himself as GM.
1-15 here we come and maybe we can get Cowher as coach
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 07, 2010, 11:29:39 PM
I enjoyed every second of the beat down. I've been a loyal Cowboys fan for 35+ years but it was therapeutic to watch. Not that I expected anything less, but it was fun and my son had a blast. I just hope and pray that Jerrah fires himself as GM.
1-15 here we come and maybe we can get Cowher as coach
I'm always curious, unless you are from Texas what made you become a Dallas fan?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 07, 2010, 11:29:39 PM
I enjoyed every second of the beat down. I've been a loyal Cowboys fan for 35+ years but it was therapeutic to watch. Not that I expected anything less, but it was fun and my son had a blast. I just hope and pray that Jerrah fires himself as GM.
1-15 here we come and maybe we can get Cowher as coach
Cowher is from Raleigh, NC. I say he goes to Panthers and maybe Gruden to Cowboys.
I heard this earlier this year on some NFL show...
Cowher's alligiance to Raleigh isn't permanent. When he retired, his wife and he moved down there to be closer to their daughter who was a scholarship basketball (?) player at NC State. His wife passed away, and his daughter graduated and moved out of the area. There are no geographic reasons for him to stay in NC.
Packers waiving Al Harris?
Boy that could be a move that bites them in the butt. I don't like that at all.
Quote from: Uff da on November 07, 2010, 11:48:37 PM
I'm always curious, unless you are from Texas what made you become a Dallas fan?
Born in Texas
The Cowboys training camp was in my hometown in California for 29 years so I grew up going to their practices in grade school and high school. My Sophomore year of college Jerrah bought the team, fired Landry and moved the team training camp. I've never forgiven him for either move.
Quote from: nyg on November 08, 2010, 07:39:36 AM
Cowher is from Raleigh, NC. I say he goes to Panthers and maybe Gruden to Cowboys.
Cowher to the Bears. The 7-9 record they seem to be heading towards should cement Lovie, Martz, and Angelo being shown the door.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on November 07, 2010, 02:48:36 PM
Gotta love it. Brett is at a standing 8 count. I'm waiting for the Tavaris towel!
The Vikes are dysfunctional, that much we know.
In the next 2 weeks, we will find out if they are any good at football.
In pro sports, winning solves a lot of "issues".
The Vikes wouldn't be having drama IF they pick up a 4th down again Miami, and if they managed to finish off the Packers.
I don't say this as a justification, I say this to illustrate that success in the NFL is a game of inches, and those inches don't just lead to losses, but also to dysfunction and drama in the locker room.
The next 2 weeks will decided the Vikes fate. They really need to go 2-0 to have a legit shot. 1-1 probably won't do it.
The Silver Fox, baby!!! The Bills did us no favors, but we can address Chicago in a week. SKOL VIKINGS!!!
Berrian actually looked decent yesterday... I was thinking Harvin's ankle would mean a quiet day or no PT at all... but Percy came through. Shank with the great TD... what a finish... can't wait for a Purple #4 to go into the HOF...
3-5, BABY!
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 08, 2010, 10:49:24 AM
The Silver Fox, baby!!! The Bills did us no favors, but we can address Chicago in a week. SKOL VIKINGS!!!
Berrian actually looked decent yesterday... I was thinking Harvin's ankle would mean a quiet day or no PT at all... but Percy came through. Shank with the great TD... what a finish... can't wait for a Purple #4 to go into the HOF...
Right. Because players go into the Pro Football HOF as a member of a specific team. Oh wait, this is Canton, not Cooperstown.
Brett brought back some of that old magic against that an awful Cardinals team. At home. I hope he gave some of that huge paycheck to Camarillo for saving that game for Favre, and the Vikings' season (for another week at least).
If the Bears don't take care of it for us next week, I'm looking forward to sticking a fork in the Vikings' season in two weeks.
All is right in the universe; the Lions found a new way to lose AND proved their $72 million franchise saving QB is a china doll.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 08, 2010, 10:49:24 AM
can't wait for a Purple #4 to go into the HOF...
Quote from: Moonboots on November 08, 2010, 12:17:57 PM
Right. Because players go into the Pro Football HOF as a member of a specific team. Oh wait, this is Canton, not Cooperstown.
I think he was referring to Favre texting another picture of his junk, this time to David Hasselhoff.
Wade fired. Proud to say I was there to see his last game. Now one more move Jerrah...fire yourself as GM
Brett Favre song at the CMA awards
http://tv.gawker.com/5686939/carrie-underwoods-cma-awards-infidelity-song-for-brett-favre-and-tiger-woods
Didn't click on the link, but from reading it looks like Carrie Underwood did it?
She is one homely chick. Every now and then she looks almost decent, but most of the time looks like a dog. Supposedly a lot of dudes think she's hot? Strange.
Anyway, Vikings at the Bears... oddsmakers have the Vikings, who have been terrible on the road, as the favorites. Even at 3-5, it does make sense... after all, we are the best team in the NFC North.
I hope to be chatting with some Scoopers on Sunday during the Marquette game. We can enjoy a Warriors win and a Vikings win at the same time!
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 11, 2010, 10:31:37 AM
She is one homely chick. Every now and then she looks almost decent, but most of the time looks like a dog. Supposedly a lot of dudes think she's hot? Strange.
(http://i.cdn.turner.com/si/.element/img/4.0/global/swapper/201011/101111.03.jpg)
Yeah, pretty homely.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 11, 2010, 10:31:37 AM
Anyway, Vikings at the Bears... oddsmakers have the Vikings, who have been terrible on the road, as the favorites. Even at 3-5, it does make sense... after all, we are the best team in the NFC North.
Yes the Vikings are better than the 5-3 Bears and the Lions. It's just a shame the Packers are also in the NFC North.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 11, 2010, 10:31:37 AM
Didn't click on the link, but from reading it looks like Carrie Underwood did it?
She is one homely chick. Every now and then she looks almost decent, but most of the time looks like a dog. Supposedly a lot of dudes think she's hot? Strange.
Anyway, Vikings at the Bears... oddsmakers have the Vikings, who have been terrible on the road, as the favorites. Even at 3-5, it does make sense... after all, we are the best team in the NFC North.
I hope to be chatting with some Scoopers on Sunday during the Marquette game. We can enjoy a Warriors win and a Vikings win at the same time!
I'd be interested to see what your dream girl looks like Jay Bee. Carrie Underwood is unbelievably hot.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on November 11, 2010, 02:39:13 PM
I'd be interested to see what your dream girl looks like Jay Bee. Carrie Underwood is unbelievably hot.
Brett Favre in a mini-skirt?
Nothing better than complete disarray for the Vikings.....and it comes from a very reliable source....the ex-Vikings beat writer now working for the Sun Times. Granted they won last week despite this...you have to give them a little credit for that.
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/jensen/2881654,CST-SPT-sean10.article
Vikings fans: your Packer envy is so obvious and will not be rewarded. No matter how much you wish you were us, you will never be us. You can plot to hire our quarterback and diminish his legacy, hire our kicker, sign our safety, hire WI former quarterbacks and coaches, but it only emphasizes your inadequacy. No combination of trying to appropriate our talent will make you us. You will never be us but keep trying. Your pathetic attempts at imitation have failed. And, it's not going to end well for you, Favre, Childress and Bevell.
Yeesh... I guess beauty is truly in the eye of the beholder. That picture... total dog. Not at all sexy, and looks half man / half alien. Not a pretty girl, borderline ugly. The only decent thing is the ends of her hair.. which is the only thing about her that looks girly. You could fit another set of mouth/nose/eyes on her forehead. Nice roots up top, too. Figure of a 10 year old boy, maybe that's what you guys are diggin
BTW, I'm obese, single and hardly literate, but that doesn't mean Carrie Underwood isn't a woofer.
I'm pretty sure Carrie goes down as attractive to 99% of the men out there. You're the exception Jay-Bee
(http://www.countrymusicislove.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/Carrie-Underwood-CountryMusicIsLove.jpg)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 11, 2010, 07:51:36 PM
I'm pretty sure Carrie goes down as attractive to 99% of the men out there. You're the exception Jay-Bee
Let me take this moment to introduce MUScoop to an invention from my group of friends.
After numerous arguments on 'She's hot. No, she's not." One day we started out to establish a breakdown of attractive women and dogs. We developed the following:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wEjGlVXvdBM/TBlP0SRCf3I/AAAAAAAAAPA/XzJ0GsNpQMI/s1600/MauraTierney1.jpg)
The Maura Tierney Line
After lengthy debate and discussion, we decided that the pictured above Maura Tierney straddles the line between ugly and hot. From that point forward, we would take a democratic vote if a celebrity is above or below the Maura Tierney line. If the celebrity falls below the line, she would be considered ugly. Likewise, if the celebrity is above the line she is attractive.
Feel free to develop your own line, it really ends pointless arguments and helps you find out which friends have poor taste in women.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 11, 2010, 10:31:37 AM
I hope to be chatting with some Scoopers on Sunday during the Marquette game. We can enjoy a Warriors win and a Vikings win at the same time!
good luck, MN has lost 8 straight road games and something like 8 of 9 to the Bears
Quote from: ATWizJr on November 11, 2010, 02:43:06 PM
Brett Favre in a mini-skirt?
thanks for the coffee that shot out of my nose, oh the burn ;D
Well, the vikes season is officially over.
Defensive line was terrible today. Bears did way too much damage on 3rd down.
Vikes offense wasn't good. 2 or 3 drops and a missed FG cost them.
Oh well.
and then there were two.
A satisfying win for the Carrie Underwood fan club
Brett's last pass in Chicago. Caught by a Bear. No surprise there.
Skol Bears.
As great as Favre was to start his career at Soldier Field, a rough ending for him. Lost three in a row, four out of his last five in Chicago. Overall, Bears are 8-3 in their last 11 games vs the old man.
Quote from: MUDish on November 14, 2010, 08:10:19 PM
As great as Favre was to start his career at Soldier Field, a rough ending for him. Lost three in a row, four out of his last five in Chicago. Overall, Bears are 8-3 in their last 11 games vs the old man.
I don't remember the exact numbers but there was a recent stretch of 3-4 games where vs Chicago, Favre threw more TDs to the Bears than to his own team. He has really fallen quickly from an icon to a punchline.
Even as a Bears fan, I'm still not totally convinced that the Bears are any good. However, I am pretty convinced that the Vikings' sexboat has sailed for this season. If Chilly really wants to prove he's in charge of that team, he'd bench Favre.
Its too late for Chilly. He's toast anyway.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 15, 2010, 08:33:32 AM
I don't remember the exact numbers but there was a recent stretch of 3-4 games where vs Chicago, Favre threw more TDs to the Bears than to his own team. He has really fallen quickly from an icon to a punchline.
And it's funny how he limps around until he throws a TD and then he is running and doing flying chest bumps on the sideline.
Vikings would be twice as good at this point with Tjax. Might as well see what the kid has, I mean Chilly picked him up to mold him into McNabb 2.0.
Why doesn't JB appear after Viking disasters?
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 15, 2010, 09:28:39 AM
And it's funny how he limps around until he throws a TD and then he is running and doing flying chest bumps on the sideline.
Vikings would be twice as good at this point with Tjax. Might as well see what the kid has, I mean Chilly picked him up to mold him into McNabb 2.0.
I'm not sure they would be any better with Tavaris.
Truth is, it's easy (and fun) to blame #4, but he doesn't deserve that much blame for yesterday.
Tavaris can't make the receivers catch the ball (3 drops) and he can't prevent receivers from falling down (happened on both picks).
I'm not a Favre apologist, but let's be fair about his performance. The Vikes defensive line was the primary culprit yesterday. They got 0 pressure on Cutler, and it made him look pretty good.
With this said, Brett hasn't been very good, and the season is over for the Vikes. It's time for a change in the coaching staff and leadership.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on November 15, 2010, 09:59:49 AM
Truth is, it's easy (and fun) to blame #4, but he doesn't deserve that much blame for yesterday.
I agree with you, and I am not putting the blame on Brett, but as you said this season is over. Favre is done, so why not see what you have in Tavaris. There is no reason to play at this point for Brett except to pad his stats (TDs and Ints). If Travaris does well, plan on him being the guy next year, if not start scouting 1st round QBs.
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 15, 2010, 10:06:26 AM
I agree with you, and I am not putting the blame on Brett, but as you said this season is over. Favre is done, so why not see what you have in Tavaris. There is no reason to play at this point for Brett except to pad his stats (TDs and Ints). If Travaris does well, plan on him being the guy next year, if not start scouting 1st round QBs.
On this, we agree.
I don't think it will happen though. Brett will be given a chance to start every game, and Tavaris might get some shots in the 2nd half. I guess I can live with that.
Quote from: 2002MUalum on November 15, 2010, 09:59:49 AM
I'm not sure they would be any better with Tavaris.
Truth is, it's easy (and fun) to blame #4, but he doesn't deserve that much blame for yesterday.
Tavaris can't make the receivers catch the ball (3 drops) and he can't prevent receivers from falling down (happened on both picks).
I'm not a Favre apologist, but let's be fair about his performance. The Vikes defensive line was the primary culprit yesterday. They got 0 pressure on Cutler, and it made him look pretty good.
With this said, Brett hasn't been very good, and the season is over for the Vikes. It's time for a change in the coaching staff and leadership.
Agree with you on the drops, but the receivers fell down a few times because the passes were thrown behind them (including Shiancoe on the third pick) and the turf was bad. The fumble was the type of play that should never happen to a QB with more than 2-3 years of playing experience, let alone 20. Favre obviously wasn't the main reason they lost, but he didn't do much to help them win either.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 15, 2010, 10:53:11 AM
Agree with you on the drops, but the receivers fell down a few times because the passes were thrown behind them (including Shiancoe on the third pick) and the turf was bad. The fumble was the type of play that should never happen to a QB with more than 2-3 years of playing experience, let alone 20. Favre obviously wasn't the main reason they lost, but he didn't do much to help them win either.
The fumble was certainly on him. He needed to chuck it sooner and be more conservative. He was trying too hard to extend the play. He has to know the situation there and be smarter.
The shancoe pick was because it was thrown a little behind him, that wasn't a great throw. The AP pick wasn't thrown behind him, it was right at him, but he was already on the ground, and then it was picked. I really don't know who you blame there. I guess AP because he slipped, but that's just one of those things. What do you say to a guy? Don't slip!
Again, I don't say these things to make Brett look better, I'm just trying to be fair because the easy gut reaction is just to say "Favre blew it" because sports fans love to pin victories and losses on QBs.
Truthfully, Favre was average. Cutler was above average, and made some great throws on 3rd down, which I think was the key to the game.
I only watched about five minutes of the game but I am pretty sure it was 100% Favre's fault ;D
Calling Jay Bee, Jay Bee..... Calling JayBee....Jay Bee
15 yards for taunting.......
Nice win for the Bears last night. Boring as hell, but a nice win. I'm a Packers fan, so take that for what it's worth, but I just can't seem to be impressed by Chicago. Every win they have has been rather pedestrian looking. But they do keep on winning......
Edit: Congratulations on franchise win #700. Gotta love the "old guard" of the NFL.
I was at the game last night, couldn't believe the Bears turnout. I would say 60-40 Bears fans. But that was a HORRIBLE game by the fins. No adjustments, no spark.
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on November 19, 2010, 03:12:18 PM
Nice win for the Bears last night. Boring as hell, but a nice win. I'm a Packers fan, so take that for what it's worth, but I just can't seem to be impressed by Chicago. Every win they have has been rather pedestrian looking. But they do keep on winning......
Edit: Congratulations on franchise win #700. Gotta love the "old guard" of the NFL.
Definite congrats to the Bears on 700. Huge respect for that franchise.
But I do agree with your point. They aren't winning games pretty, but they're winning them. It's a good formula for them right now. Looking at it objectively, their schedule has been pretty cake, and their only real quality win came against Green Bay. None of that matters, because they're confident now going into a stretch of more difficult games (Eagles, Patriots, Jets, Packers) and the front 7 is playing lights out ball.
That being said, I'm not sure the "suffocate bad offenses and watch Cutler flounder his way to FGs" strategy is the ideal way to win once the playoffs roll around. A lot can happen before then. I like that suspense that the stretch run is bringing in this division. Especially after the Pack puts the Vikes down into the basement with the Lions tomorrow.
The Bears definitely have the toughest part of their schedule ahead of them and I'm worried that the Seattle or Washington loss is going to come back to bite them. I can't see them beating NE or the Jets but they should beat Minnesota and Detroit (getting them 9 wins). Their key games are going to be against Philly and GB. If they can win either one of those, they should be in the Playoffs. Historically they've done well against Vick, especially in Chicago in the cold weather, on the horrible turf. Needless to say, I'll be rooting for cold weather in Chicago next Sunday!
Been waiting for the easy part of our schedule for a long time.. it's finally here! After today, we're still in a tough spot at 4-6, but it will be fun beating up on Grean Bay today. SKOL VIKINGS!
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 21, 2010, 11:54:18 AM
Been waiting for the easy part of our schedule for a long time.. it's finally here! After today, we're still in a tough spot at 4-6, but it will be fun beating up on Grean Bay today. SKOL VIKINGS!
What the hell does skol mean? I used to think you were a tobacco dipper, but I heard someone else say it.
I am guessing it is something like Go Pack, but in a Scandanavian dialect.
Isn't it a toast like CHEERS or SLAINTE'
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 21, 2010, 11:54:18 AM
Been waiting for the easy part of our schedule for a long time.. it's finally here! After today, we're still in a tough spot at 4-6, but it will be fun beating up on Grean Bay today. SKOL VIKINGS!
Hehehe...
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 21, 2010, 11:54:18 AM
Been waiting for the easy part of our schedule for a long time.. it's finally here! After today, we're still in a tough spot at 4-6, but it will be fun beating up on Grean Bay today. SKOL VIKINGS!
Another Favre turnover. Will the NFL dump all the Stenger stuff this week (like they would on every player in the NFL not named Favre) or will they continue to hide it until the end of the season?
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 21, 2010, 11:54:18 AM
Been waiting for the easy part of our schedule for a long time.. it's finally here! After today, we're still in a tough spot at 4-6, but it will be fun beating up on Grean Bay today. SKOL VIKINGS!
When you say easy you must mean because giving up is easier than even trying. Enjoy your turkey.
Quote from: ATWizJr on November 11, 2010, 06:35:17 PM
Vikings fans: your Packer envy is so obvious and will not be rewarded. No matter how much you wish you were us, you will never be us. You can plot to hire our quarterback and diminish his legacy, hire our kicker, sign our safety, hire WI former quarterbacks and coaches, but it only emphasizes your inadequacy to equal us. No combination of trying to appropriate our talent will make you us. You will never be us but keep trying. Your pathetic attempts at imitation have failed. And, it's not going to end well for you, Favre, Childress and Bevell.
:ll
I honestly have to wonder why they even keep Brett around at this point. He was incredibly bad today. Clearly either too hurt, too old, or both. He wouldn't make a good back-up and you may as well see what you have in Tavaris.
On another note, I would also fire Chilly and see what Leslie Frazier can do.
From one of the writers of the Daily Norseman, a Vikings blog, after the Bears game:
"After the Bears game, I chose Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald, a haunting tune by Gordon Lightfoot which chronicles the demise of a Great Lakes cargo ship. The good news is that it was the pride of the Great Lakes fleet. The bad news is that it was lost in a storm without a trace, killing all 29 crewmembers. Then, I drove to the airport, called a TSA agent a fascist gorilla, set my nuts on fire, and dared him to touch my junk. So, that's my feeling towards 2010 nine weeks into it. Oh, and a wounded baby seal surrounded by Killer Whales fresh out of Fat Camp has more hope of not being turned into killer whale poop than Viking fans do of the Purple and Gold making the playoffs. Just bash my nuts in with a baseball bat. I hate this season."
At least he has a sense of humor. Then. Hope he's OK this evening.
Welp, time to eat sh1t.
I think the only person I had a bet with this season was Moonboots.. I forget if he/she has to get their team in... if not, I am ready to pay.
Looking forward to this Minnesota / West Virginia championship game... it's all I have today. Childress must go. He is traditional. Leslie is not. Word to Chicas.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 21, 2010, 06:23:45 PM
Welp, time to eat sh1t.
I think the only person I had a bet with this season was Moonboots.. I forget if he/she has to get their team in... if not, I am ready to pay.
Looking forward to this Minnesota / West Virginia championship game... it's all I have today. Childress must go. He is traditional. Leslie is not. Word to Chicas.
It will help...already the Cowboys look like a real team since Wade was fired, of course we still have Jerrah as the GM so we're screwed.
Los Angeles Vikings? My son hopes so, the Packers will come to town once per year.
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 21, 2010, 06:23:45 PM
Welp, time to eat sh1t.
I think the only person I had a bet with this season was Moonboots.. I forget if he/she has to get their team in... if not, I am ready to pay.
Looking forward to this Minnesota / West Virginia championship game... it's all I have today. Childress must go. He is traditional. Leslie is not. Word to Chicas.
We had a bet, I'll look for the post sometime tonight to confirm the terms.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 21, 2010, 07:03:56 PM
Los Angeles Vikings? My son hopes so, the Packers will come to town once per year.
1. I hope that never comes to pass. I don't like the Vikings, but I love the rivalry.
2. They'd probably move the Vikings to the west and the Rams to the north so your son would be SOL anyway.
Wouldn't make much sense to have the LA Vikings. They will definitely change the name.
Quote from: Uff da on November 21, 2010, 08:19:27 PM
Wouldn't make much sense to have the LA Vikings. They will definitely change the name.
Maybe. Doesn't make sense to have the Lakers, either....but that stuck when they came over from Minneapolis. Or Dodgers (a term from Brooklyn), or Clippers (came from San Diego).
In fact, all of the L.A. teams came from another city and kept their original names. The exceptions are the Angels, who started as a LA franchise and was named after the city of Angels, the Kings, and the Ducks (formerly Mighty Ducks).
The Rams, Raiders, Dodgers, Lakers, and Clippers all kep their name despite not necessarily fitting the geographic area.
only mildly related, but does anyone have a good sports news site beyond the worldwide leader, cnnsi.com and sportsline.com? that has been my holy trinity to check for news and analysis, particularly on sunday nights and mondays when i can never get enough football. but I just can't bring myself to go to sportsline anymore. the writers are so horrendous and insufferable that I feel guilty every time i support that site by giving them a hit. but then again as a habit, i need three sites to cross against each other. anyone have any suggestions to break my football dependence on Doyel, Prisco, Freeman, et al?
Quote from: MUBurrow on November 21, 2010, 08:44:06 PM
only mildly related, but does anyone have a good sports news site beyond the worldwide leader, cnnsi.com and sportsline.com? that has been my holy trinity to check for news and analysis, particularly on sunday nights and mondays when i can never get enough football. but I just can't bring myself to go to sportsline anymore. the writers are so horrendous and insufferable that I feel guilty every time i support that site by giving them a hit. but then again as a habit, i need three sites to cross against each other. anyone have any suggestions to break my football dependence on Doyel, Prisco, Freeman, et al?
Best for football: www.nationalfootballpost.com (far and away #1), www.profootballweekly.com, www.footballoutsiders.com, www.coldhardfootballfacts.com, www.profootballfocus.com
Per espn, Chilly is history and was just fired.
Bye bye, Br0ad. The firing of Childress all but guarantees we will again win the NFC North next season!
Quote from: Jay Bee on November 22, 2010, 11:47:50 AM
Bye bye, Br0ad. The firing of Childress all but guarantees we will again win the NFC North next season!
Really? With Jackson at QB? You would have had a better chance if they kept the coach and dumped Brent.
I applaud the blind loyalty. Andrew Luck?
Packers have claimed two head coach scalps. Its not out of the realm of possibility they can get 1 more in Lovie week 17. Usually, I'm satisfied after a Pack W. I'm fine with getting a little greedy.
I think ESPN has a poll for the third time in a week or so on whether Chilly should (have been) fired now, fired at the end of the year, or kept indefinitely. Just my two cents on the whole thing, but I think that the right answer is that Chilly should be gone when Favre is done. If you are going to sit Favre this week, I think its time for Chilly to go. If you're going to let him play out the year, I think you let Chilly do the same. Especially considering how attractive Frazier is as a permanent replacement, I don't think you can ask him to step into a team that is more distraction than not.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on November 22, 2010, 12:21:42 PM
Packers have claimed two head coach scalps. Its not out of the realm of possibility they can get 1 more in Lovie week 17. Usually, I'm satisfied after a Pack W. I'm fine with getting a little greedy.
I really can't see Lovie losing his job this year.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on November 22, 2010, 12:21:42 PM
Packers have claimed two head coach scalps. Its not out of the realm of possibility they can get 1 more in Lovie week 17. Usually, I'm satisfied after a Pack W. I'm fine with getting a little greedy.
Don't forget Singletary in Week 13 and Schwartz in Week 14. I don't think either will happen, but it's possible.
Firing schwartz after two years would be ridiculous. It will take far longer to fix the damage inflicted by Millen. I think he deserves five. They are putting together some decent young talent.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on November 22, 2010, 12:21:42 PM
Packers have claimed two head coach scalps. Its not out of the realm of possibility they can get 1 more in Lovie week 17. Usually, I'm satisfied after a Pack W. I'm fine with getting a little greedy.
Both were going to get fired anyway...in the long run, I think Packer fans would have rather seen Chlly and Wade stay with their organizations.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 22, 2010, 02:57:35 PM
Both were going to get fired anyway...in the long run, I think Packer fans would have rather seen Chlly and Wade stay with their organizations.
Agreed.
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 22, 2010, 02:34:59 PM
Firing schwartz after two years would be ridiculous. It will take far longer to fix the damage inflicted by Millen. I think he deserves five. They are putting together some decent young talent.
Agreed.
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 22, 2010, 02:34:59 PM
Firing schwartz after two years would be ridiculous. It will take far longer to fix the damage inflicted by Millen. I think he deserves five. They are putting together some decent young talent.
I absolutely agree. I think they are definitely headed in the right direction, not to mention that they've had a handful of losses that almost went the other way. Like I said, I don't think it will happen. It's just that if they hit 2-11, there is a slight chance of it.
Love a Bears win against Vick. Offense/Cutler played VERY well. Falcons, Saints, Bears, Packers... should be a fun ride the last few weeks.
Quote from: socrplar125 on November 28, 2010, 07:24:06 PM
Love a Bears win against Vick. Offense/Cutler played VERY well. Falcons, Saints, Bears, Packers... should be a fun ride the last few weeks.
Hey pal - where is Minnesota on that list? Didn't you see we won a road game today?
Should be a fun ride down the stretch, I can't believe the Bears are playing as well as they are right now, really tough to believe after losing to Seattle/Washington at home. From what I hear, it's almost a lock either Jets/Bears or Giants/Packers will be flexed to Sunday night in Week 16.
Next week both teams "should" win (Bears/Pack), especially the Pack with the 49ers coming off a short week. Bears will have their hands full at Detroit next week.
Bears then host the Pats, while GB goes to Detroit. Then Bears @ Vikes, Pack @ Pats. No gimmies down the stretch, I'd guess both teams will have the same record going into Week 17.
I still think the Pack are the better team, tough loss for them today.
Not NFC north related, but anyone see the fisticuffs between Finnegan and Andre Johnson? I know the thoughts on Finnegan is that he can be dirty at times, but just wondered what set the scuffle oFf.
Quote from: MUDish on November 28, 2010, 08:59:19 PM
Should be a fun ride down the stretch, I can't believe the Bears are playing as well as they are right now, really tough to believe after losing to Seattle/Washington at home. From what I hear, it's almost a lock either Jets/Bears or Giants/Packers will be flexed to Sunday night in Week 16.
Next week both teams "should" win (Bears/Pack), especially the Pack with the 49ers coming off a short week. Bears will have their hands full at Detroit next week.
Bears then host the Pats, while GB goes to Detroit. Then Bears @ Vikes, Pack @ Pats. No gimmies down the stretch, I'd guess both teams will have the same record going into Week 17.
I still think the Pack are the better team, tough loss for them today.
Dish, GB is scheduled to play the previous Sunday night @ NE, can teams play back to back Sunday night games?
Packers could appear back to back on Sunday Night, no restriction there. Packers are going to either have that game vs the Giants or the game vs the Bears moved to Sunday night. Packers are currently at 5 primetime games, NFL will allow 6 in a year.
It's more likely the Jets/Bears will be that Sunday night game. NFL doesn't allow the Jets and Giants to both play at the same time, and with the Giants/Pack already at 3:15 that day, makes most sense for the Jets/Bears to move to night. This would then allow Bears/Pack to meet the flex requirements for Week 17. That would then mean back to back Sunday night games for the Bears in Weeks 16/17.
Quote from: MUDish on November 29, 2010, 10:32:41 AM
Packers could appear back to back on Sunday Night, no restriction there. Packers are going to either have that game vs the Giants or the game vs the Bears moved to Sunday night. Packers are currently at 5 primetime games, NFL will allow 6 in a year.
It's more likely the Jets/Bears will be that Sunday night game. NFL doesn't allow the Jets and Giants to both play at the same time, and with the Giants/Pack already at 3:15 that day, makes most sense for the Jets/Bears to move to night. This would then allow Bears/Pack to meet the flex requirements for Week 17. That would then mean back to back Sunday night games for the Bears in Weeks 16/17.
Thanks.
Quote from: MU B2002 on November 28, 2010, 10:45:44 PM
Not NFC north related, but anyone see the fisticuffs between Finnegan and Andre Johnson? I know the thoughts on Finnegan is that he can be dirty at times, but just wondered what set the scuffle oFf.
First of all they had some previous history with each other. In 2009 there was a play where Finnegan tried to defend a pass by jumping on Johnson's back (literally looked like he was going in for a piggy back ride) and grabbed Johnson's facemask to pull him down. They exchanged words on the way back to the line of scrimmage and Finnegan got into a shoving match with essentially the entire Texans team on the sideline.
Then yesterday Johnson was blocking Finnegan and they were pushing back and forth, with Johnson getting in a push maybe slightly after the whistle blew the play dead. The next play at the snap of the ball Finnegan just went after Johnson's head (it was a running play but Finnegan clearly didn't care, he was just going after Johnson). They then just started tackling each other, knocking each other's helmets off, and Johnson got Finnegan below him and 2 punches in on Finnegan before they were separated.
Finnegan has already been fined a few times this season, while as far as I know Johnson has no history (besides the 2009 altercation also with Finnegan). Obviously Johnson should not have reacted as he did, but he clearly just had enough of the guy. Finnegan seems like a punk.
Finnegan appeared to be on the receiving end of a beating he has long deserved.
Quote from: wadesworld on November 29, 2010, 11:34:44 AM
First of all they had some previous history with each other. In 2009 there was a play where Finnegan tried to defend a pass by jumping on Johnson's back (literally looked like he was going in for a piggy back ride) and grabbed Johnson's facemask to pull him down. They exchanged words on the way back to the line of scrimmage and Finnegan got into a shoving match with essentially the entire Texans team on the sideline.
Then yesterday Johnson was blocking Finnegan and they were pushing back and forth, with Johnson getting in a push maybe slightly after the whistle blew the play dead. The next play at the snap of the ball Finnegan just went after Johnson's head (it was a running play but Finnegan clearly didn't care, he was just going after Johnson). They then just started tackling each other, knocking each other's helmets off, and Johnson got Finnegan below him and 2 punches in on Finnegan before they were separated.
Finnegan has already been fined a few times this season, while as far as I know Johnson has no history (besides the 2009 altercation also with Finnegan). Obviously Johnson should not have reacted as he did, but he clearly just had enough of the guy. Finnegan seems like a punk.
It also appears that Finnegan was going after him on purpose...
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/29/cortland-finnegan-told-texans-andre-johnson-hit-was-coming/
A moment before Titans cornerback Cortland Finnegan and Texans receiver Andre Johnson fought on the field Sunday, Finnegan told the Texans' sideline to get ready.
According to Richard Justice of the Houston Chronicle, Finnegan looked toward the Texans' sideline and yelled, "Watch this," right before the ball was snapped, and then proceeded to smack Johnson at the start of the play.
Although Johnson was the one who was really landing punches in the ensuing fight, Finnegan's reputation as a dirty player precedes him, while Johnson's reputation as a good player and good guy will probably earn him some points.
And the news that Finnegan told the Texans something was coming before the fight indicates that Finnegan knew exactly what he was starting. Which means Finnegan may be the one who gets hit harder by the league office, even though Johnson was hitting harder on the field.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on November 29, 2010, 11:42:46 AM
It also appears that Finnegan was going after him on purpose...
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/11/29/cortland-finnegan-told-texans-andre-johnson-hit-was-coming/
A moment before Titans cornerback Cortland Finnegan and Texans receiver Andre Johnson fought on the field Sunday, Finnegan told the Texans' sideline to get ready.
According to Richard Justice of the Houston Chronicle, Finnegan looked toward the Texans' sideline and yelled, "Watch this," right before the ball was snapped, and then proceeded to smack Johnson at the start of the play.
Although Johnson was the one who was really landing punches in the ensuing fight, Finnegan's reputation as a dirty player precedes him, while Johnson's reputation as a good player and good guy will probably earn him some points.
And the news that Finnegan told the Texans something was coming before the fight indicates that Finnegan knew exactly what he was starting. Which means Finnegan may be the one who gets hit harder by the league office, even though Johnson was hitting harder on the field.
Oh yeah, he was definitely trying to get something started. Definitely a dirty move by Finnegan.
Finnegan, eh? Can't fault a young Irishman for fighting now can ye?
Again not NFC Norris related but the Bills Steve Johnson seems to blame God for dropping a game winning pass in OT in the endzone.
"I PRAISE YOU 24/7!!!!!! AND THIS HOW YOU DO ME!!!!! YOU EXPECT ME TO LEARN FROM THIS??? HOW???!!! ILL NEVER FORGET THIS!! EVER!!! THX THO..."
My favorite part..."Thx tho"
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on November 29, 2010, 03:28:54 PM
Again not NFC Norris related but the Bills Steve Johnson seems to blame God for dropping a game winning pass in OT in the endzone.
"I PRAISE YOU 24/7!!!!!! AND THIS HOW YOU DO ME!!!!! YOU EXPECT ME TO LEARN FROM THIS??? HOW???!!! ILL NEVER FORGET THIS!! EVER!!! THX THO..."
What can we do to silence these Christian athletes who thank Jesus whenever they win and never mention his name when they lose? Never a word. You never hear them say, "Jesus made me drop the ball," or "The Good Lord tripped me up behind the line of scrimmage." According to these guys, Jesus is undefeated; meanwhile, these assholes are in last place. Must be another one of those "miracles." --George Carlin, RIP.
Quote from: MUDish on November 29, 2010, 10:32:41 AM
Packers could appear back to back on Sunday Night, no restriction there. Packers are going to either have that game vs the Giants or the game vs the Bears moved to Sunday night. Packers are currently at 5 primetime games, NFL will allow 6 in a year.
It's more likely the Jets/Bears will be that Sunday night game. NFL doesn't allow the Jets and Giants to both play at the same time, and with the Giants/Pack already at 3:15 that day, makes most sense for the Jets/Bears to move to night. This would then allow Bears/Pack to meet the flex requirements for Week 17. That would then mean back to back Sunday night games for the Bears in Weeks 16/17.
According to The Trib...
Bears-Pats on Dec. 12 has been moved to 3:15 kickoff.
Bears-Jets on Dec. 26 has been locked in at noon.
Bears-Packers on Jan. 2 could still potentially be moved to Sunday night
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on November 30, 2010, 02:30:06 PM
According to The Trib...
Bears-Pats on Dec. 12 has been moved to 3:15 kickoff.
Bears-Jets on Dec. 26 has been locked in at noon.
Bears-Packers on Jan. 2 could still potentially be moved to Sunday night
And if it has division implications by week 17, I don't think there's any doubt that it will be.
Drew Stanton will start at QB for the Lions this weekend. Absolutely no reason for the Bears not be 9-3 by this time on Sunday.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 01, 2010, 03:13:09 PM
Drew Stanton will start at QB for the Lions this weekend. Absolutely no reason for the Bears not be 9-3 by this time on Sunday.
Except they got flexed into the 3:15 slot, right?
Quote from: marqptm on December 01, 2010, 03:39:20 PM
Except they got flexed into the 3:15 slot, right?
I'm expecting the Lions to forfeit after seeing the Bears warm-up.
Actually, the December 12 game vs NE got flexed to 3:15.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 01, 2010, 03:43:49 PM
I'm expecting the Lions to forfeit after seeing the Bears warm-up.
Actually, the December 12 game vs NE got flexed to 3:15.
My bad then.
I think the Trib is right, I heard CBS used two of it's five protected games as Pats/Bears and Jets/Bears. If true, Jets/Bears will stay an noon, unless Giants/Pack gets moved to Sunday night, then Jets/Bears would be 3:15.
Did favre finally get benched?
Got knocked with a wrist injury.
I was at the Packers game so I didn't see the Bears/Lions but on the SNF game lines during halftime it says the Bears "were helped by another controversial call..."
What was that about?
Suh was flagged for unneccessary roughness on a Cutler scramble. He appeared to hit Cutler in the back of the helmet with his forearms, which by the rules is illegal. Questionable on whether he hit the helmet or the shoulder pads or what.
Following the foul, Bears had first and goal from the 7 and scored the next play.
I'm not sure it made all that much difference - if the flag wasn't thrown it was 2nd and 2 from the 14. Not like the flag bailed out a 4th down.
Quote from: socrplar125 on December 06, 2010, 08:24:04 AM
Suh was flagged for unneccessary roughness on a Cutler scramble. He appeared to hit Cutler in the back of the helmet with his forearms, which by the rules is illegal. Questionable on whether he hit the helmet or the shoulder pads or what.
Following the foul, Bears had first and goal from the 7 and scored the next play.
I'm not sure it made all that much difference - if the flag wasn't thrown it was 2nd and 2 from the 22. Not like the flag bailed out a 4th down.
Thanks.
At least they applied the hit-to-the-head on QB rule...Rodgers seems to take a hit to the head every game but never is it called. Tommy Brady gets those calls, but that's because he's pounding the ground like 2-year old.
They missed one last night against Ben Rape-lessberger as well. He was definitely a mouth-breather after that one...although, he probably always was.
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on December 06, 2010, 08:29:14 AM
Thanks.
At least they applied the hit-to-the-head on QB rule...Rodgers seems to take a hit to the head every game but never is it called. Tommy Brady gets those calls, but that's because he's pounding the ground like 2-year old.
They missed one last night against Ben Rape-lessberger as well. He was definitely a mouth-breather after that one...although, he probably always was.
It was a BS call because Cutler was running the ball, like any other RB or WR. He wasn't dropped back to pass, and therefore shouldn't have been protected.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 08:44:50 AM
It was a BS call because Cutler was running the ball, like any other RB or WR. He wasn't dropped back to pass, and therefore shouldn't have been protected.
I'm pretty sure about this... but according to the rule, it doesn't matter if it's a QB, RB, WR, TE, whoever. A shot to the head like Suh's is illegal no matter the runner.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 08:44:50 AM
It was a BS call because Cutler was running the ball, like any other RB or WR. He wasn't dropped back to pass, and therefore shouldn't have been protected.
socrplar125 is correct. You can't throw a forearm into the head of a ballcarrier. It had nothing to do with Cutler being the QB. I can't remember the exact phrasing but Hochuli stated that the penalty was for a non-football action or something like that.
Either way, the media is trying to build it up as a controversial call but it really didn't effect the outcome at all.
Outcome would have been the same, but I didn't think it was a forearm. Happened fast in realtime so I can see why ref thought it was illegal.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 06, 2010, 08:53:30 AM
socrplar125 is correct. You can't throw a forearm into the head of a ballcarrier. It had nothing to do with Cutler being the QB. I can't remember the exact phrasing but Hochuli stated that the penalty was for a non-football action or something like that.
Either way, the media is trying to build it up as a controversial call but it really didn't effect the outcome at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw6vxVVXWUM
looked like he pushed him in the shoulder pads. Was it violent? Yes. Is that football? Yes. Should the refs have erred on the side of no penalty? Yes. Cutler didnt seem to think it was illegal by the way he got up. Did it really affect the games outcome? We will never know. 15 yards is a long way.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 09:04:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw6vxVVXWUM
looked like he pushed him in the shoulder pads. Was it violent? Yes. Is that football? Yes. Should the refs have erred on the side of no penalty? Yes. Cutler didnt seem to think it was illegal by the way he got up. Did it really affect the games outcome? We will never know. 15 yards is a long way.
+1
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 09:04:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw6vxVVXWUM
looked like he pushed him in the shoulder pads. Was it violent? Yes. Is that football? Yes. Should the refs have erred on the side of no penalty? Yes. Cutler didnt seem to think it was illegal by the way he got up. Did it really affect the games outcome? We will never know. 15 yards is a long way.
I think that penalty was a bad call.
I'm also a Packers fan.
Speaking of bad calls, how about the refs whistling the play dead for offsides on the 49ers, which took away Jones' big play...pretty sure they did that at least twice.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 09:04:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw6vxVVXWUM
looked like he pushed him in the shoulder pads. Was it violent? Yes. Is that football? Yes. Should the refs have erred on the side of no penalty? Yes. Cutler didnt seem to think it was illegal by the way he got up. Did it really affect the games outcome? We will never know. 15 yards is a long way.
i agree here. Cutler even didn't think it was a penalty - he got up and started yelling about being down before the ball popped out. that being said, as a ref, seeing the play live, full speed, it probably did look questionable. and especially with the new rule changes/caution regarding violent plays, the refs sure are going to call that more than not.
also, it wasn't 15 yards. it happened on the 14, so it was half the distance to the goal - 7 yards.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 09:04:23 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kw6vxVVXWUM
looked like he pushed him in the shoulder pads. Was it violent? Yes. Is that football? Yes. Should the refs have erred on the side of no penalty? Yes. Cutler didnt seem to think it was illegal by the way he got up. Did it really affect the games outcome? We will never know. 15 yards is a long way.
I guess if a player doesn't act like it's an illegal play, a penalty should never be called.
In realtime it looked very much like a forearm to the head and that is what the officials called. The replay shows it was a smack to the head, which may have drawn a flag anyway. Regardless, instead of 2nd and 2 from the 14, the penalty made it 1st and Goal from the 7. Hardly a game-changing call, especially with 9 minutes left to play.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on December 06, 2010, 09:40:44 AM
I guess if a player doesn't act like it's an illegal play, a penalty should never be called.
In realtime it looked very much like a forearm to the head and that is what the officials called. The replay shows it was a smack to the head, which may have drawn a flag anyway. Regardless, instead of 2nd and 2 from the 14, the penalty made it 1st and Goal from the 7. Hardly a game-changing call, especially with 9 minutes left to play.
You know as well as I do that most players complain when they know there is a penalty.
The replay looks like Suh hit the shoulder pads 100%, and since I don't really have a dog in the fight... I guess we will see how the NFL feels about the hit by whether or not they fine Suh.
I will agree that maybe it wasn't a game changing call, but thats the thing, you never know. It would have been 3rd and 2... It would have at least been interesting.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 06, 2010, 09:45:11 AM
I will agree that maybe it wasn't a game changing call, but thats the thing, you never know. It would have been 3rd and 2... It would have at least been interesting.
False. Cutler's scramble occurred on 1st and 10 from the Lions' 22. He ran for 8 yards. Without the penalty, it would have been 2nd and 2 at the Lions' 14.
Quote from: socrplar125 on December 06, 2010, 09:50:53 AM
False. Cutler's scramble occurred on 1st and 10 from the Lions' 22. He ran for 8 yards. Without the penalty, it would have been 2nd and 2 at the Lions' 14.
Fair enough, I was looking at the down and distance after the replay. Why that is, I do not know. I stand corrected.
As a football fan I hate the penalty, too much protection in the league for the pretty boys.
The Suh hit on Cutler wasn't going to change the outcome of that game. If it would have been 2nd and 2, it wasn't going to change too much, especially the momentum swinging the Bears way as it was. I don't think it should have been a penalty, but even if it wasn't called, I can't see the outcome changing.
Lions not converting on 4th and 1 is what really killed them.
Quote from: MUDish on December 06, 2010, 02:40:32 PM
Lions not converting on 4th and 1 is what really killed them.
The Lions sucking is what really killed them.
Too bad the season isn't 18 games... Minnesota would almost assuredly have the division on lock. Sidney Rice is phenomenal.
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 06, 2010, 03:02:30 PM
The Lions sucking is what really killed them.
Too bad the season isn't 18 games... Minnesota would almost assuredly have the division on lock. Sidney Rice is phenomenal.
What's worse to you:
Packers fans booing Favre during his first return to Lambeau
Or
Vikings fans cheering when Favre got hurt yesterday
/I didn't watch the game, but it's what I heard
Quote from: MUDish on December 06, 2010, 02:40:32 PM
The Suh hit on Cutler wasn't going to change the outcome of that game.
Suh was fined $15,000 for a "non-football act".
Giants/Vikes moved to Monday "night".
One may ask "why not 3:15 on Sunday?" (which is what you'll hear 99% of people say).
Simple reason why not 3:15...
Dolphins @ Jets is at 3:15 Sunday.
Giants and Jets are not allowed to play at the same time. Be interesting to see what the NFL does with the Giants game on Monday. Precedent dictates the rest of the country (outside of the home markets) will not see this game, but you have both Favre (I'm assuming) and the Giants (semi national following due to their market). Fox has to be absolutely pissed about this. Fox had Buck/Aikman working this game, and with the Bears/Eagles/Cowboys all playing on other networks, they're only nationwide viewership draw game is Bucs/Skins (not an ideal national game for Fox).
How will the LA fans see their next years team?
In a weird twist, this will be the first time in NFL history that a team will play back to back Monday night games. Vikings play the Bears next Monday night.
Hearing that ESPN wants no part of having Giants/Vikes go up against Ravens/Texans (no surprise there).
As I was writing this, just got a text from my Bears guy "Minny game MNF on Fox, 7 kick".
That can mean only New York and Minny will get that live broadcast, as there is ZERO chance that game will be shown up against ESPN's Ravens/Texans game. ESPN now has to be livid.
Quote from: MUDish on December 11, 2010, 10:28:47 PM
In a weird twist, this will be the first time in NFL history that a team will play back to back Monday night games. Vikings play the Bears next Monday night.
Hearing that ESPN wants no part of having Giants/Vikes go up against Ravens/Texans (no surprise there).
As I was writing this, just got a text from my Bears guy "Minny game MNF on Fox, 7 kick".
That can mean only New York and Minny will get that live broadcast, as there is ZERO chance that game will be shown up against ESPN's Ravens/Texans game. ESPN now has to be livid.
nfl.com
"The game will be played at 8 p.m. ET and be aired on television by Fox in local markets"
With the roof collapsing at the Metrodome I guess you really will need a new stadium.
Hint: Don't hire an architecture firm from Florida this time.
CBB, will I get this new Monday night game with NFL Sunday ticket??
Quote from: ATWizJr on December 12, 2010, 08:01:31 AM
With the roof collapsing at the Metrodome I guess you really will need a new stadium.
Hint: Don't hire an architecture firm from Florida this time.
Ha Ha, the entire roof is gone. I thought they just said it was leaking.
Game most likely can't be played at U of Minny's stadium, Giants brought no outdoor gear, and Fox doesn't have enough time to prepare that stadium. Hearing most likely scenario is game will be played at Ford Field Tuesday night. Union would have to agree to it though, and Vikes would need to be compensated.
Reason Ford Field is most viable is it's close enough, both teams have gear with them, and Fox has a game at Ford Field today, with proper equipment also in place.
MUDish (or anyone else for that matter)...this game obviously has to be played, so do you have any idea of when it will be played? Obviously if it's this week it won't be in Minneapolis. Do you think it will be played this week and just moved to a different city?
Any help before noon would be greatly appreciated. This is playing a big role in setting my fantasy football lineups :D. I have Sidney Rice starting and Hines Ward sitting on my bench...
It'll be played Monday or Tuesday at the latest. A lot of hoops to jump through still, Vikes/Giants have to sign off, Fox has to sign off, DirecTV is involved, ESPN is being consulted with, Ford Field, tons of logistical issues to work out. League wants to get something finalized asap, especially if game will be played in Detroit, so Minny and the Giants can fly to Detroit asap.
Quote from: MUDish on December 12, 2010, 09:45:19 AM
It'll be played Monday or Tuesday at the latest. A lot of hoops to jump through still, Vikes/Giants have to sign off, Fox has to sign off, DirecTV is involved, ESPN is being consulted with, Ford Field, tons of logistical issues to work out. League wants to get something finalized asap, especially if game will be played in Detroit, so Minny and the Giants can fly to Detroit asap.
Thanks for the help
Quote from: reinko on December 12, 2010, 08:08:21 AM
CBB, will I get this new Monday night game with NFL Sunday ticket??
Yes....it's likely that everyone will get it. This happened to us once before in the last 5 years.
Man, will mother nature go to great lengths to preserve Brent's streak.
Well, this should certainly change things...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foV2E3rnMg4 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foV2E3rnMg4)
It's official, game in Detroit, Monday night, 6:20 pm CST kick.
Fox has a video of the collapse.
It was awesome.
Quote from: reinko on December 12, 2010, 11:23:19 AM
Fox has a video of the collapse.
It was awesome.
http://blogs.citypages.com/blotter/2010/12/metrodome_colla.php
Be interesting to see if they can get the Rollerdome ready for next Monday's tilt with the Bears.
Quote from: MUDish on December 12, 2010, 12:15:04 PM
Be interesting to see if they can get the Rollerdome ready for next Monday's tilt with the Bears.
Local news here just said that they are calling in experts from around the country to see what they can do to fix the roof.....In your opinion, any chance they play in Chicago or would it have to be a neutral site if the game cannot be played next Monday night?
My guess is University of Minnesota stadium.
Awesome.. the postponed game means the packers are on TV instead. :)
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 12, 2010, 12:39:39 PM
My guess is University of Minnesota stadium.
TCF Bank Stadium is shut down for the winter but could be ready in two to three days....only problem is how you fit 65,000 ticket holders into a stadium that only holds 50,000. Would love to play the vikings outdoors....I would finally go to a Bears game for the first time since I have lived here.
Problem with TCF stadium:
-Capacity
-Hash marks are set up for college
-Goal posts are college (NFL uses higher goal posts)
Goal post issue could probably get figured out, I don't recall the surface up there and if it's grass or not. I can't imagine it'd get moved to Chicago, no way. Most likely St. Louis or Detroit (again).
Packers are in some trouble, A-Rod just left with a concussion. NFL rules state he can't come back today.
Hope people had the under in the Pack/Lions game. Lions with zero passing yds (five mins to go in 3rd). Flynn just threw a pick into triple coverage in the end zone (throw wasn't even close to Driver either).
Yeah this is an AWFUL game. I think Mike McCarthy is the worst first half play caller in the NFL. He refuses to open up the offense until we're tied or down in the 3rd quarter, at which point we start to dominate games. I don't understand his purpose of sticking to the ground when you get stuffed every time despite the fact that they aren't even stacking the box. When defenses know they can stop your run rushing just 4 you aren't opening anything up for the pass. They send 4 regardless of whether it's a run or a pass because they know the can get to the quarterback and they know the can stuff the run. The 1st half playcalling is atrocious. Run on 1st, get 2...run on 2nd, lose 4...run a bubble screen/dump down, gain 5 (tops). Punt. Repeat.
He is also the most predictable playcaller in the NFL. I'm literally sitting on my couch and calling every play we're going to run as they're approaching the line. The major problem with this is that I have never been a part of competitive, organized football in any way in my life. Not even Pop Warner football. And yet I am still able to do this. It's unbelievable.
When you are going up against one of the worst passing defenses in the NFL, you have one of the best QBs in the NFL, arguably THE best receiving corp in the NFL, and your running game is arguably (or maybe not even arguably) the worst in the NFL, maybe you want to open up the run by passing, not the other way around.
This is embarrassing.
What's funny with all the talk about weather today in the NFL, this Pack/Lions game is in a dome in perfect conditions. If this game was going on in Lambeau today, I'd expect these turnovers, dropped balls, bad QB decisions. Give credit to both defenses, but the offense of both teams has been ugly.
Blitzing 4 and getting as much pressure as you could ask 4 every play. It's an absolute embarrassment.
Play calling is not the problem. Quarless fumble and Jennings dropped pass are. Now we have a crappy second string quarterback in and have no chance.
With the Pack losing, a Bears win today just about wraps up the North. It'd be a 2 game lead (really a 2.5 game lead) with 3 to play. Should be an interesting contest in the blizzard going on here today.
That was an absolutely awful football game, no matter who you cheer for (Packer fan here). Just awful.
Cheering for the Patriots today and the Vikings tomorrow, although after today's display I'm not sure the Packers deserve a spot in the playoffs. Wow.
Thanks New England.
Quote from: reinko on December 12, 2010, 05:01:40 PM
Thanks New England.
Now if only Philly and the Giants can sh*t the bed in similar fashion...
Anyone see the leg injury suffered by Seattle's Deon Grant Butler? Legs aren't supposed to bend in that many places. Hope he can walk normally someday after that.
Edit: My bad.
You mean Butler? Deon Grant is a Giants safety.
Big week in the NFC North next week. Packers travel to New England. My guess is that they figure out a way to get A-Rod on the field despite his second consussion on the season. Bears on the road somewhere playing the Vikings. A game the Bears should win but with the way they played today, who knows?
Quote from: reinko on December 12, 2010, 11:23:19 AM
Fox has a video of the collapse.
It was awesome.
Awesome indeed! Looks like it's straight out of an end-of-days movie.
Pats are nearly unstoppable right now. Bears had no chance of stopping Brady & Co, and my guess is the Pack get roughed up by the Pats next Sunday night as well. Best news was that the Bears lost to an AFC opponent and the Packers lost to a divisional opponent. A Bears win next week and Pack loss would just about still seal the North.
Quote from: MUDish on December 12, 2010, 09:17:58 PM
Pats are nearly unstoppable right now. Bears had no chance of stopping Brady & Co, and my guess is the Pack get roughed up by the Pats next Sunday night as well. Best news was that the Bears lost to an AFC opponent and the Packers lost to a divisional opponent. A Bears win next week and Pack loss would just about still seal the North.
Actually, a Bears win and Packers loss next week would lock up the North 100%. The Bears are now firmly in the driver's seat, something that would have been reversed if the Packers didn't take a collective dump today. Only one guy on the offense came to play, and he left the game with a concussion. Not much you can do when you hit TEs for big gains that turn into fumbles, and WRs on would-be TDs that turn into INTs. Still trying to figure out what Greg Jennings did there.
As it stands, even with a loss next week, the Packers could right back in the hunt if MN can knock of CHI. If that happens, the Packers winning their final 2 results in a division championship, regardless of what happens in NE-GB or CHI-NYJ. Next Monday night is huge.
Really crazy how huge that Bears at Vikings game is likely to be. From the looks of things, it will be played outdoors on Monday night in Minneapolis. That sounds pretty awful. A strange set of circumstances for what is a huge game for the Bears. They are firmly in the drivers seat, but if they lose that one, the Packers seemingly take over that seat, although both teams would still control their destiny.
Bill Cowher on Sunday said he thought the Bears would lose the rest of their games. I'm not sure about that, but it is a bit hard to believe that the Bears could lock up a spot/division title with a win Monday, but miss the playoffs all together if they lose to the Vikings and the Packers (assumes that the Packers beat the Giants. Not necessarily a safe assumption). As far as I can tell, GB is in if they beat the Giants and Bears. At this point, assuming ARod is able to come back and play, I'm thinking both teams make it, and may end up playing one another two weeks in a row.
Pretty much dead on the money, it is funny that the Bears could essentially go from winning the division, being a #3 seed, to being out of the playoffs altogether if things shake out that way.
Monday night's upcoming game has just a weird vibe to it already. College campus, outdoors, night game, first Viking home outdoor game in like 30 years (I think), Vikes have zero healthy QB's, you could have Favre, Jackson, Webb, or Patrick Ramsey (or someone else off the street) playing QB, both teams coming off bad "home" losses. If the Bears lose that game, they'll have serious problems, even if GB losses to NE Sunday night.
The Vikings last outdoor game will be 29 years ago to the day when they take the field Monday night.
I expect to see JayBee on the local news through the weekend doing his fair share of shoveling.
"Vikings fans are being asked to help dig out the University of Minnesota campus stadium in time for Monday night's Vikings game with the Bears.
Workers are scrambling to remove snow from bleachers, concourses and the field at TCF Bank Stadium. The university will host the NFL game because the snow-damaged Metrodome roof won't be fixed in time.
The problem is that snow is piled up at the stadium in five-foot drifts in some areas.
The university says it will take shoveling volunteers every day from Thursday through Sunday. The school will even provide the shovels if necessary."
Funny, my sister is flying in to MN from Arizona for the Vikings' game (was planned months ago.)
Any news on how they will re-ticket the season ticket holders?
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on December 15, 2010, 01:42:09 PM
Funny, my sister is flying in to MN from Arizona for the Vikings' game (was planned months ago.)
Any news on how they will re-ticket the season ticket holders?
Around noon today, I heard on ESPN 1000 that they aren't telling people how the re-ticketing will work just yet because they have 63,000 tickets and a 50,000-seat stadium. They are also not announcing where the game will be played if it turns out that the field cannot be ready in time.
I don't know if that actually qualifies as "news" since the report I heard was a lot of nothing, but I guess that's the latest.
No news yet...they are talking about setting up temporary seats for some of the overflow...I was looking to buy tickets today but have no idea where seats will be on Monday night....probably just wait till Monday and see how it shakes out and find a scalper....it is supposed to be -15 to -25 degree wind chills on Monday night.
I knew last season was a total fluke by Judas Favre and the Vikings but I never expected them to go down in flames as much as they have this year. Even if GB doesn't make the playoffs, and I'm not convinced they deserve to, this season was still fantastic because of the soap opera MN has been!
Quote from: Homebrew101 on December 15, 2010, 02:12:59 PM
I knew last season was a total fluke by Judas Favre and the Vikings but I never expected them to go down in flames as much as they have this year. Even if GB doesn't make the playoffs, and I'm not convinced they deserve to, this season was still fantastic because of the soap opera MN has been!
I keep telling myself we don't deserve to, but given the combined record of the teams that Tampa Bay and New York (Giants) have beaten, they're a lot worse off than we are. We have some quality wins under our belt with a bunch of starters (and three key ones, at that) gone from early in the season.
Quote from: Moonboots on December 15, 2010, 02:47:08 PM
I keep telling myself we don't deserve to, but given the combined record of the teams that Tampa Bay and New York (Giants) have beaten, they're a lot worse off than we are. We have some quality wins under our belt with a bunch of starters (and three key ones, at that) gone from early in the season.
With the remaining schedule being what it is with games remaining against their two closest competitors for the remaining spots, whether the Packers get to the playoffs or not, they most assuredly will get what they deserve. Same can really be said of the Bears. With teh schedule they have remaining, if they don't make it, they have no business being there. If they do, that will mean they took care if business and earned their spot. The Packers certainly are not going to back into the playoffs, although I suppose the Bears could.
I'm going to go ahead and predict right now that in the NFC at least, both wild card teams will win on the road on wild card weekend. Guessing wildcards are Saints and Giants/Eagles divisional loser. Saints would go to NFC West winner and Giants/Eagles to NFC North winner (assuming here).
Question for Bears fans...are you at all concerned about their state of mind going into this game? Seems to me they have spent most of the week bitching and moaning about the playing conditions. Not saying it is not justified, but at some point don't you need to just shut up and play? I'm assuming the Vikings feel the same way, and granted I listen primarily to Chicago radio, but I would be rather worried (and as a Packer fan, encouraged) about whether or not they are gonna show up. Not to mention, that defense has demonstrated on more than one occasion that they are not particularly effective in the conditions they are expecting. Obviously Tom brady will not be lining up against them, but who the heck knows? This game is about as big as it gets, because if they lose, there is a very real possibility they completely miss the playoffs.
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on December 20, 2010, 09:47:19 AM
Question for Bears fans...are you at all concerned about their state of mind going into this game? Seems to me they have spent most of the week bitching and moaning about the playing conditions. Not saying it is not justified, but at some point don't you need to just shut up and play? I'm assuming the Vikings feel the same way, and granted I listen primarily to Chicago radio, but I would be rather worried (and as a Packer fan, encouraged) about whether or not they are gonna show up. Not to mention, that defense has demonstrated on more than one occasion that they are not particularly effective in the conditions they are expecting. Obviously Tom brady will not be lining up against them, but who the heck knows? This game is about as big as it gets, because if they lose, there is a very real possibility they completely miss the playoffs.
It concerns me somewhat that the field condition have been a distraction. However, I'm more concerned with the fact that the Bears, particularly the D, have been no-shows in the first half of their last 2 games. A slow start plus overthinking the field conditions could be trouble.
Having said that, if the Bears lose a game with a playoff spot on the line against a team who mailed it in last week and is playing a QB who was so bad that they considered moving to WR, they don't deserve to make the Playoffs.
Bears 20-16
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on December 20, 2010, 09:47:19 AM
Question for Bears fans...are you at all concerned about their state of mind going into this game?
I don't think the Bears players are the only ones thinking about the field, if Chris Kluwe's twitter posts are any indication.
That being said, as a Bears fan I am always concerned with the state of mind. But even if they lose, I think they are not completely screwed with the NYG loss yesterday and the fact that GB and NYG play next week (meaning one team will lose).
Quote from: MU B2002 on December 20, 2010, 09:58:51 AM
But even if they lose, I think they are not completely screwed with the NYG loss yesterday and the fact that GB and NYG play next week (meaning one team will lose).
That's true, but if that one team is the Giants, the Bears would appear to be in deep, deep trouble.
Why deep deep trouble? Nevermind.. H2H would be first tie breaker for CHI and NYG.
It was not supposed to start snowing here until about 1pm.....well as usual the weather talking heads are wrong again and it started snowing at 9am and is going to continue through the day/night until tomorrow. Should be interesting to see what this so called tarp with the heaters on the field will do with it snowing all day. Melt the snow all day and when they pull the tarp off there is a layer of water that turns to ice and then is covered by snow as the game goes on?
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on December 20, 2010, 10:16:10 AM
Melt the snow all day and when they pull the tarp off there is a layer of water that turns to ice and then is covered by snow as the game goes on?
Couldn't happen to two nicer teams. ;D Is there any chance this game still ends up getting canceled? I can't imagine what a mess that would create trying to get it re-scheduled, playoff implications, etc.
The Vikings wanted this game at home because they are honoring the organizations 50 greatest players of the last 50 years. What is kind of funny is that a guy, Jared Allen, who had only two full years as a Viking when the team was announced is considered one of the 50 best Vikings ever.
Oh boy... Favre has been upgraded from out to questionable. If he plays, we are guaranteed victory.
The snow is falling like no other right now. Actually not that bad, but it's coming down pretty good. I hope there are more than 30k people that show up tonight. Although I won't be one of them - this weather calls for the couch and a couple of brews.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on December 20, 2010, 10:45:16 AM
The Vikings wanted this game at home because they are honoring the organizations 50 greatest players of the last 50 years. What is kind of funny is that a guy, Jared Allen, who had only two full years as a Viking when the team was announced is considered one of the 50 best Vikings ever.
And Allen this year is stinking it up!!!!
I just think someone is going to get hurt really badly tonight.
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 20, 2010, 01:10:49 PM
Oh boy... Favre has been upgraded from out to questionable. If he plays, we are guaranteed victory.
I smell Favre's greatest game coming.
The game should be fun to watch. A third string QB starting--who has been mostly working out as a WR; Favre standing on the sidelines with his white stubble blending in with the snow; Vikings fans not being able to find their season ticket seats; an unprepared field; Cutler having a field day against the weak Viking secondary; many players freezing their asses off; close shots of the Viking cheerleaders with their cold nipples; and Jenn Sterger waiting for the outcome of her sexual harrassment claim against Favre while reminding all her fans that she has removed her breast implants (true), and letting everybody know that she is an artist because she posed nude for Playboy and Maxim (prior to Jets hiring her--what the hell were they thinking of?)
Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow!
Quote from: willie warrior on December 20, 2010, 01:25:05 PM
Vikings fans not being able to find their season ticket seats;
Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow!
It is general admission seating in the lower and upper level depending on your tickets.
Not sure I buy this exactly, but the Favre thing certainly does add yet another strange twist to an already extremely strange game.
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/12/20/is-favre-ducking-a-meeting-with-goodell/ (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2010/12/20/is-favre-ducking-a-meeting-with-goodell/)
Favre active and starting
Adrian Peterson inactive
Makes sense...
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on December 20, 2010, 05:55:55 PM
Not sure I buy this exactly, but the Favre thing certainly does add yet another strange twist to an already extremely strange game.
Definitely don't buy that one.
I'm very interested to see the crowd. The folks that are there will be loud... but, there could be a crap load of empty seats with this weather. The roads are bad right now (probably due to FIBs on our roads tonight). Apparently U of Minn students will get free entrance at some point tonight...
PS - today, they used a shotgun to shoot a roof panel at the Metrodome... there are many people that would like their chance to shoot the Dome
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 20, 2010, 06:09:19 PM(probably due to FIBs on our roads tonight).
That's always a huge problem.
Congratulations to the Chicago Bears for winning the 2010 NFC North Division Title.
Lucky SOBs.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on December 20, 2010, 08:54:42 PM
Congratulations to the Chicago Bears for winning the 2010 NFC North Division Title.
Lucky SOBs.
This.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good though.
I think its safe to say they are a little bit of both. Their luck certainly does seem to be much more good than bad this year, and they have been remarkably healthy (which is usually the key to a successful season in the NFL), but they have also improved, and played pretty well at times.
It continues to look to me like the Packers and Bears will meet one another on January 2 in GB and do it again on January 8/9 in Chicago (guessing that Arod will be back this week).
Quote from: NavinRJohnson on December 20, 2010, 10:28:40 PM
I think its safe to say they are a little bit of both. Their luck certainly does seem to be much more good than bad this year, and they have been remarkably healthy (which is usually the key to a successful season in the NFL), but they have also improved, and played pretty well at times.
It continues to look to me like the Packers and Bears will meet one another on January 2 in GB and do it again on January 8/9 in Chicago (guessing that Arod will be back this week).
Who knows, but if Bears can "steal" one against the Jets and get the Eagles to lose once, they may find them selves #2 with a bye. But of course that would mean a second round match up with NOL.
Quote from: Moonboots on December 20, 2010, 10:09:55 PM
This.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good though.
1) When people post 'this' .. I don't know where that is from, but it's questionable.. but
2) more importantly, like I said earlier, I think you were the only guy I made a bet with, mid-summer.. and I really don't recall what it was.. did you ever track it down? If I owe you I should pay up... but you might have had the Packers... just don't recall the bet... let me know if I need to hit you with fifty
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 20, 2010, 10:41:37 PM
1) When people post 'this' .. I don't know where that is from, but it's questionable.. but
2) more importantly, like I said earlier, I think you were the only guy I made a bet with, mid-summer.. and I really don't recall what it was.. did you ever track it down? If I owe you I should pay up... but you might have had the Packers... just don't recall the bet... let me know if I need to hit you with fifty
I did some searching, and though I remember making the bet, I can't find it for the life of me. If I'm being honest, I can't picture myself making the bet purely Packers vs. Vikings. I think my pride (read: homerism) would lead me to bet on a division championship. I'll give it one more look tonight, but otherwise we'll just call it square.
Didn't someone bet the Twins, Vikings, and Gophers would all win their division/conference?
Quote from: MU B2002 on December 20, 2010, 10:40:04 PM
Who knows, but if Bears can "steal" one against the Jets and get the Eagles to lose once, they may find them selves #2 with a bye. But of course that would mean a second round match up with NOL.
Wouldn't a game against the Saints be in Chicago though? I might have to take my chances with the Bears against the Saints in January in Chicago.
there is something so sweet about brett's last pass at soldier being an interception, and the last play of his career being a sack/injury (possible fumble?) to the bears. love it
Jaybee, we bet a fifty spot that the bears would win the division over the queens and the fudge. Pay up fool.
Quote from: Moonboots on December 20, 2010, 10:09:55 PM
This.
Sometimes it's better to be lucky than good though.
It also helps to stay relatively healthy.
I'm a huge Bears fans but even I know that we aren't a great team but it doesn't mean I won't enjoy this.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on December 20, 2010, 08:54:42 PM
Congratulations to the Chicago Bears for winning the 2010 NFC North Division Title.
Lucky SOBs.
They're lucky in that they are an incredibly healthy team.
But hand it to their offensive coaching staff for making adjustments mid-season. They have protected Cutler better and ran the ball more.
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 20, 2010, 06:09:19 PM
The roads are bad right now (probably due to FIBs on our roads tonight).
That is what you get for driving around North Minneapolis.
Still can't wait for the GB game. Love to watch football in cold weather
Julius Peppers: "Yeah, I talked to [Favre] after the game. I told him it was an honor to play against him. He said, 'Likewise. ... Go beat the Packers in a couple of weeks.'"
Apparently #4 is not all bad ;D
(http://sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc4/hs1389.snc4/164112_112773215463145_100001914000408_112315_1285087_n.jpg)
;D
Congrats to the Bears.. Well earned! Hope they represent in the playoffs (until they meet the Pack for the third time of course). 8-)
(http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/multimedia/photo_gallery/0809/mlb.yankee.stadium.moments/images/00.001074864Finalfinal.jpg)(http://a323.yahoofs.com/ymg/ept_sports_nfl_experts__29/ept_sports_nfl_experts-688370967-1292945479.jpg?ymIxlRED.eutN8O6)
Quote from: muarmy81 on December 21, 2010, 07:21:01 AM
It also helps to stay relatively healthy.
I'm a huge Bears fans but even I know that we aren't a great team but it doesn't mean I won't enjoy this.
Oh, I wouldn't suggest for a minute that you shouldn't enjoy it. You can't "luck" your way to a division title, but you can "luck" your way through most of it. See: Lions game week 1, three third string QBs in four weeks. And the health factor. But beyond that, after stealing a few early and mid season, Martz and Cutler have really gelled. Combine that with a solid front seven and top notch special teams, and you have a division title.
The problem will be when playoff defenses force Cutler into interception mode. We'll see if Martz can avoid that. I'll say this - I'm not intimidated by the prospect of playing the Bears week 17 and again Wild Card weekend. In fact, I couldn't imagine a more fun scenario for the rivalry. I hope it plays out that way.
Quote from: Moonboots on December 21, 2010, 01:17:44 PM
Oh, I wouldn't suggest for a minute that you shouldn't enjoy it. You can't "luck" your way to a division title, but you can "luck" your way through most of it.
I don't know about that....see NFC West division title winner, whomever that shall end up being
The fiance of Corey Wooton (guy who sacked Favre) plays basketball at DePaul.
http://www.depaulbluedemons.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/chester_felicia00.html (http://www.depaulbluedemons.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/chester_felicia00.html)
Quote from: Moonboots on December 21, 2010, 01:17:44 PM
I'm not intimidated by the prospect of playing the Bears week 17 and again Wild Card weekend. In fact, I couldn't imagine a more fun scenario for the rivalry. I hope it plays out that way.
As a bears fan, the last thing I would want to see is the Packers for a third time this year!
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 22, 2010, 12:15:12 PM
The fiance of Corey Wooton (guy who sacked Favre) plays basketball at DePaul.
http://www.depaulbluedemons.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/chester_felicia00.html (http://www.depaulbluedemons.com/sports/w-baskbl/mtt/chester_felicia00.html)
Looks she like could MLB for the Bears. Yumma Humma, those are some broad shoulders.
Quote from: reinko on December 22, 2010, 01:19:16 PM
Looks she like could MLB for the Bears. Yumma Humma, those are some broad shoulders.
Huh? Looks she like could MLB for the Bears? Wow.
Anyhow, I find it interesting that McCarthy called his best game of the year when we were on the road at the best team in the NFL without our starting quarterback. Typically his playcalling is a HB dive on first down that gets nothing, a bubble screen that loses 4 on 2nd down, and a draw to get back to the original line of scrimmage on 3rd down to bring out the punting unit. When McCarthy did call passing plays it would be some homerun play that very rarely worked.
Against the Patriots I loved the playcalling for Flynn. Slants and short out routes on 1st down to set up the draw which was wide open. If he can call games like that for the next 2 and then the playoffs and Rodgers is healthy I feel very optimistic that we can see the Patriots again. If he goes back to his old playcalling we'll lose our last 2 and be a .500 team. With all the injuries we've faced that will be enough to give McCarthy the last year in his contract to prove himself, but really, even with all of the injuries, we have way too much talent to be missing the playoffs. It will be an interesting 2 weeks.
Quote from: reinko on December 22, 2010, 01:19:16 PM
Looks she like could MLB for the Bears. Yumma Humma, those are some broad shoulders.
I think it might just be the picture. Sorta like the Cubes picture a few years ago....
(http://wiki.muscoop.com/lib/exe/fetch.php/men_s_basketball/cubillan_david.jpg?cache=)
(http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/depa/sports/w-baskbl/auto_headshot/5465345.jpeg)
(http://lh5.ggpht.com/_2tIQhWVpdck/S2a2I-hnjEI/AAAAAAAAAg0/KEtlSqq-jzg/s576/20100131_036_DS7_1475.JPG)
By the way, I have 2 obvious problems with the playcalls in the Patriots game. 1st of all what are we doing squib kicking the ball with 2:17 left in the half? Does Tom Brady really need the extra 20 yards (that 31 out of the 32 NFL teams would give up on a squib kick, anyway) with that much time left? Is there any doubt that he would shred us for a touchdown before halftime starting from the 40 (again, assuming we had the special teams play of any of the other 31 NFL teams). And then we can't even tackle a RIGHT GUARD?! That's right, our special teams let's an OFFENSIVE LINEMAN return the ball 70 yards. We should've fired our special teams coach right then and there and picked some random person wearing a cheesehead in Gilette Stadium. No way anybody could possibly do worse than this guy.
And my second problem is obviously the last 24 seconds of the game. You can see Flynn had to point out to McCarthy, talking into his headset, that it was FOURTH DOWN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJuLWFY2Irw watch his hand signal to the sideline, putting up 4 fingers). McCarthy was telling him to spike it on 4th down. What a joke. How in the world, after you take your final timeout with 38 seconds left (following the 1st sack) do you only have TWO plays called?! You know you have no timeouts, and you know you're probably not going to get 40 yards in those two called plays. Why is a 3rd play not ready to be called for that exact situation?! 20 seconds ran off between snaps! Unbelievable.
Other than those 2 calls, I was genuinely happy with the playcalling against NE.
So everyone liked the 3 pass plays with about 9 min left in the 4th that led to a 3 and out when the running game was rolling?
Quote from: TallTitan34 on December 22, 2010, 02:12:24 PM
I think it might just be the picture. Sorta like the Cubes picture a few years ago....
(http://wiki.muscoop.com/lib/exe/fetch.php/men_s_basketball/cubillan_david.jpg?cache=)
(http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/depa/sports/w-baskbl/auto_headshot/5465345.jpeg)
I stand by my orginal comment.
Quote from: wadesworld on December 22, 2010, 02:21:15 PM
And my second problem is obviously the last 24 seconds of the game. You can see Flynn had to point out to McCarthy, talking into his headset, that it was FOURTH DOWN (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJuLWFY2Irw watch his hand signal to the sideline, putting up 4 fingers). McCarthy was telling him to spike it on 4th down. What a joke.
I agree with your first point, but this is just untrue. They don't have the convenience of that nice yellow line we get to see on TV, and McCarthy was simply asking whether Driver had reached a 1st or not (he was about a yard short). And he had actually asked for a ref measurement but for whatever reason it was not given to him.
So does it help or hurt the Bears chances on Sunday that the Sanchize may be out. He would be replaced by Mark Brunell. (Who I didn't even realize was still in the league.)
Quote from: Josey Wales on December 22, 2010, 03:44:26 PM
I agree with your first point, but this is just untrue. They don't have the convenience of that nice yellow line we get to see on TV, and McCarthy was simply asking whether Driver had reached a 1st or not (he was about a yard short). And he had actually asked for a ref measurement but for whatever reason it was not given to him.
He didn't get the measurement because Driver wasn't all that close to the first down and the officials weren't going to give a team an extra "timeout" in that situation.
Quote from: MU B2002 on December 23, 2010, 03:16:43 PM
So does it help or hurt the Bears chances on Sunday that the Sanchize may be out. He would be replaced by Mark Brunell. (Who I didn't even realize was still in the league.)
Sanchez will be starting. There's no doubt in my mind.
The fact that Favre was able to go from 'out' to 'questionable' to starting in about 4-5 hours is definitely something that coaches around the league noticed and will use to their full advantage when it comes to injuries.
Alright, just heard he had something torn in his shoulder. But I don't think its their passing game "we" (the Bears) need to worry about.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180094/index.htm
can't wait to bring this up as often as possible.
Quote from: robmufan on December 22, 2010, 01:18:34 PM
As a bears fan, the last thing I would want to see is the Packers for a third time this year!
As a Packers fan, this is about the first thing I want (provided, of course, the Pack takes care of business the next 2 weeks). I'd much rather play the Bears again than the Eagles.
Congrats Hards. I am guessing Milwaukee is up there for least knowledgeable. ;-)
Quote from: Josey Wales on December 22, 2010, 03:44:26 PM
I agree with your first point, but this is just untrue. They don't have the convenience of that nice yellow line we get to see on TV, and McCarthy was simply asking whether Driver had reached a 1st or not (he was about a yard short). And he had actually asked for a ref measurement but for whatever reason it was not given to him.
"We thought it was a first down," Flynn said. "Driver thought it was, I thought it was, the sideline was telling me to clock it. Once I realized that it wasn't, I looked over and it was like, 'Ah, can't do this.' And then the refs were taking a couple seconds (to spot the ball) and I was like, 'All right, we've got to go, we've got to get this play off.'"
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on December 23, 2010, 04:42:51 PM
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1180094/index.htm
can't wait to bring this up as often as possible.
Not surprising...what else is there in Green Bay. I don't mean that as a slam, just stating the obvious. It's religion in Green Bay with absolutely nothing else in life going on. They should be knowledgeable.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 23, 2010, 11:45:33 PM
Not surprising...what else is there in Green Bay. I don't mean that as a slam, just stating the obvious. It's religion in Green Bay with absolutely nothing else in life going on. They should be knowledgeable.
1. Deer hunting
2. Muskie Fishing
3. Ice fishing
4. Sturgeon spearing
5. 4 wheeling
6. Snowmobiling
7. Turkey hunting
8. Duck hunting
9. Bear hunting
10. Bitching about the DNR
11. Building new deer stand
12. Shopping at Fleet Farm
13. Shopping at Farm & Fleet
14. Shopping at Gander Mountain
15. Bus ride to Ho Chunk
16. Bitching about FIBS
17. Bitching about Milwaukee
18. Fish Fry at the Church Hall
19. Field Party
20. Merry Christmas!
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on December 25, 2010, 12:31:44 AM
1. Deer hunting
2. Muskie Fishing
3. Ice fishing
4. Sturgeon spearing
5. 4 wheeling
6. Snowmobiling
7. Turkey hunting
8. Duck hunting
9. Bear hunting
10. Bitching about the DNR
11. Building new deer stand
12. Shopping at Fleet Farm
13. Shopping at Farm & Fleet
14. Shopping at Gander Mountain
15. Bus ride to Ho Chunk
16. Bitching about FIBS
17. Bitching about Milwaukee
18. Fish Fry at the Church Hall
19. Field Party
20. Merry Christmas!
Maybe it's my imagination, but drinking isn't on there. Maybe it's implied.
Merry Christmas, MUScoopers!
I am pretty sure evry item on that list involves drinking. :-)
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on December 25, 2010, 12:31:44 AM
1. Deer hunting
2. Muskie Fishing
3. Ice fishing
4. Sturgeon spearing
5. 4 wheeling
6. Snowmobiling
7. Turkey hunting
8. Duck hunting
9. Bear hunting
10. Bitching about the DNR
11. Building new deer stand
12. Shopping at Fleet Farm
13. Shopping at Farm & Fleet
14. Shopping at Gander Mountain
15. Bus ride to Ho Chunk
16. Bitching about FIBS
17. Bitching about Milwaukee
18. Fish Fry at the Church Hall
19. Field Party
20. Merry Christmas!
C'mon man. We've got a Cabelas!
Quote from: wadesworld on December 23, 2010, 11:40:10 PM
"We thought it was a first down," Flynn said. "Driver thought it was, I thought it was, the sideline was telling me to clock it. Once I realized that it wasn't, I looked over and it was like, 'Ah, can't do this.' And then the refs were taking a couple seconds (to spot the ball) and I was like, 'All right, we've got to go, we've got to get this play off.'"
Yup, exactly. He was thinking it was maybe first down. He didn't just lose track of downs as I thought you were saying before.
Bears win. Love it.
Quote from: MU B2002 on December 26, 2010, 04:06:34 PM
Bears win. Love it.
+1
One of the few times i'm ever a Vikings and Packers fan...would love the #2 seed.
Next week should be A LOT of fun.
Quote from: Moonboots on December 26, 2010, 06:34:15 PM
Next week should be A LOT of fun.
I don't think the Bears will be much into the game.
I hope next week means nothing for Chicago. :-). Cmon Jay Bee need some help from the Vikes.
Quote from: marqptm on December 26, 2010, 06:38:39 PM
I don't think the Bears will be much into the game.
So when Philly beats Minnesota Tuesday night, you're telling me the Bears WON'T care about winning, locking up a first round bye, and knocking the Packers out of the playoffs? Or should that have been in teal?
Quote from: Moonboots on December 26, 2010, 06:44:50 PM
So when Philly beats Minnesota Tuesday night, you're telling me the Bears WON'T care about winning, locking up a first round bye, and knocking the Packers out of the playoffs? Or should that have been in teal?
Nope. They'll be happy to leave GB healthy.
No, they'll be playing for 2nd seed. Packer fans should actually root for the Vikings.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on December 26, 2010, 06:58:12 PM
No, they'll be playing for 2nd seed. Packer fans should actually root for the Vikings.
I'm sick of doing that. Once this year was enough.
I would rather play the Bears (than the Eagles) in the #3 vs. #6 playoff game.
Perfect scenario would be the Packers sneaking up to the #5 seed and facing the Rams. Need the Saints to lose out, I believe.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on December 26, 2010, 09:16:46 PM
I'm sick of doing that. Once this year was enough.
I would rather play the Bears (than the Eagles) in the #3 vs. #6 playoff game.
Perfect scenario would be the Packers sneaking up to the #5 seed and facing the Rams. Need the Saints to lose out, I believe.
Absolutely best scenario is for Pack to sneak into the #5 seed.
That probably wont happen so I agree would rather play Bears than the Eagles in the first round. Or I should say I would rather face Cutler than Vick any day of the week.
Anyone know if the Bear Pack game can be moved to Sunday night still or is it set in stone for 3:15?
Quote from: chren21 on December 27, 2010, 12:05:19 AM
Anyone know if the Bear Pack game can be moved to Sunday night still or is it set in stone for 3:15?
In stone. STL-SEA is the SNF game because it's the only game that they can guarantee playoff implications in as the last regular season game.
Quote from: Moonboots on December 26, 2010, 06:44:50 PM
So when Philly beats Minnesota Tuesday night, you're telling me the Bears WON'T care about winning, locking up a first round bye, and knocking the Packers out of the playoffs? Or should that have been in teal?
The Bears are already in the Playoffs and potentially playing a 1st Round opponent. I expect their gameplan to be even more vanilla than the one used against the Jets.
I think Lovie will be motivated to get the team to beat the Packers. Lovie's had good success (8-5) against the Pack since becoming head coach, and stated his first goal each year was to beat Green Bay. I think he'll play everyone and see how things go in the first half. If the Bears are down something like 20-3 at half, I think you'll see Todd Collins and a load of back ups for the 2nd half.
I think the Bears are in a good spot here. If they lose this weekend, and get the Pack in Soldier Field wild card weekend, I like the Bears chances. It'd be very tough to beat a team back to back weeks, with the second week being a playoff game on the road.
Sidenote: It'll be interesting to me to see how the Wild Card weekend tv schedule plays out, especially for Fox. CBS (assuming these matchups stay as is) will get either Manning (Colts/Ravens) or the Jets (Jets/Chiefs), with NBC getting the other tilt. Fox and NBC would be left to fight over not getting Rams/Saints, especially with two potential monster rating games in either Bears/Pack or Eagles/Giants.
Quote from: chren21 on December 26, 2010, 10:53:41 PM
Absolutely best scenario is for Pack to sneak into the #5 seed.
That probably wont happen so I agree would rather play Bears than the Eagles in the first round. Or I should say I would rather face Cutler than Vick any day of the week.
Who was the packer fan that had earlier touted beating Vick and the Eagles earlier this year? Surely, they would prefer to face Vick... ;)
Quote from: muarmy81 on December 28, 2010, 03:01:15 PM
Who was the packer fan that had earlier touted beating Vick and the Eagles earlier this year? Surely, they would prefer to face Vick... ;)
Did I? I do not believe Vick was playing when the pack beat them... right? I have vick on my fantasy and was touting that. Is that what you are referring to?
I have been disconnected without a computer, only have a BlackBerry, and limited cable access. As a Packers fan, am I cheering for Vikes? Or is this game fairly meaningless?
Quote from: reinko on December 28, 2010, 08:55:01 PM
I have been disconnected without a computer, only have a BlackBerry, and limited cable access. As a Packers fan, am I cheering for Vikes? Or is this game fairly meaningless?
Vikes, so the bears lay down next week for us. The Atl game is at Noon so they will know going in if they have the 2 seed locked up. (if Minn wins and Atl wins.)
Quote from: chren21 on December 28, 2010, 09:02:08 PM
Vikes, so the bears lay down next week for us. The Atl game is at Noon so they will know going in if they have the 2 seed locked up. (if Minn wins and Atl wins.)
Bears need Tampa to beat New Orleans as well, but that's an early game, too.
Bears secure the #2 seed. Wow. Everything is falling in the Bears lap...
Incredible, Bears are the 2 seed. Still a hail mary of a chance of getting the 1 seed, absolutely incredible. Never ever thought in a million years I'd be writing that this season.
If you're a Pack fan, you have to like how bad the Eagles looked tonight, at home especially. Setting up for Pack/Eagles wild card weekend, if that game was played this weekend, you'd have to like the Pack's chances.
Eagles will have to play 3 games in 11 days.
Quote from: MUDish on December 28, 2010, 10:26:58 PM
Incredible, Bears are the 2 seed. Still a hail mary of a chance of getting the 1 seed, absolutely incredible. Never ever thought in a million years I'd be writing that this season.
If you're a Pack fan, you have to like how bad the Eagles looked tonight, at home especially. Setting up for Pack/Eagles wild card weekend, if that game was played this weekend, you'd have to like the Pack's chances.
Vick kills the Packers. They can't beat a team with a running QB. The Bears were a much better matchup.
Got to give Chicago a ton of credit. While the Packers were throwing away winnable games vs Miami, Wash and Det, the Bears were taking care of business.
Philly is the worst possible first round game for GB.
Potentially 3 games in 12 days, if the NFL made them play the Saturday of wild card weekend. My guess is Pack/Eagles will be the late game on Sunday afternoon on wild card weekend.
Quote from: GOMU1104 on December 28, 2010, 10:23:55 PM
Bears secure the #2 seed. Wow. Everything is falling in the Bears lap...
And all Lovie was saying on the news the other night is how they're playing this Sunday like they would any other week and that they're gunning to beat the Packers.
Bullcrap... With a first-round bye locked up and likely nothing to gain (assuming that ATL will have already won), Cutler is in the locker room before the 2nd quarter. In other words, if you think the Bears are going to pass up the opportunity to knock GB out of the playoffs and simply lay down on Sunday, you'd be exactly right.
Quote from: Benny B on December 28, 2010, 10:32:32 PM
And all Lovie was saying on the news the other night is how they're playing this Sunday like they would any other week and that they're gunning to beat the Packers.
Bullcrap... With a first-round bye locked up and likely nothing to gain (assuming that ATL will have already won), Cutler is in the locker room before the 2nd quarter. In other words, if you think the Bears are going to pass up the opportunity to knock GB out of the playoffs and simply lay down on Sunday, you'd be exactly right.
Did I not say this on Monday? PTMstadamus.
I also knew that Chicos and Company would be jerking each other around for two straight days after Reggie transferred.
I think the Eagles are very vulnerable right now. They were getting destroyed in New York a week ago, came out tonight with everything to gain, extra rest, and the Vikings embarassed them. If I'm a Pack fan, I'd like my chances against the Eagles right now.
I don't doubt Cutler, Urlacher, etc come out and start on Sunday. I think they'll play enough to make a difference, and the way the game is going will probably dictate how much they're out there.
If you would have told me they'd have the 2 seed locked up after week 16, after they lost back to back home games against Seattle and Washington, I'd have been more likely to think Warriors was our nickname again.
SKOL, VIKINGS, LET'S GO!
You punks are lucky the regular season isn't 20 games.
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 28, 2010, 10:43:53 PM
SKOL, VIKINGS, LET'S GO!
You punks are lucky the regular season isn't 20 games.
No kidding...with a 20 game season the NFL might even have the balls to finally suspend Favre as they wouldn't be able to drag it on that long.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 28, 2010, 10:47:46 PM
No kidding...with a 20 game season the NFL might even have the balls to finally suspend Favre as they wouldn't be able to drag it on that long.
Whatever.. Sterger is just like that kid at Southern Miss.. LIAR!
Quote from: Jay Bee on December 28, 2010, 10:43:53 PM
SKOL, VIKINGS, LET'S GO!
You punks are lucky the regular season isn't 20 games.
Yeah, then we'd get 3 wins over the queens. Punks?
Quote from: nomorebuycks on December 28, 2010, 10:31:42 PM
Vick kills the Packers. They can't beat a team with a running QB. The Bears were a much better matchup.
Got to give Chicago a ton of credit. While the Packers were throwing away winnable games vs Miami, Wash and Det, the Bears were taking care of business.
Philly is the worst possible first round game for GB.
Are you referring to the Packers' previous issues with Vick? Like, back when Ed Donatell was coordinator?
Quite frankly, I'm not worried about facing any team in the NFC at this point. I'd rather face the Bears than the Eagles in the first round, but if we're peaking and Vick and co. are starting to go downhill, I don't see why we can't beat them in the Linc. again.
Playoff football, with a few notable exceptions (2006 Bears among them), comes down to quarterback play. I'll take my chances with Rodgers in the NFC.
This game is hilarious to watch. Watching Mike McCarthy try to "attack" a Cover 2 is like watching a Tom Creen coached team attack a zone. It's absolutely comical. He has no idea how to do it.
Hey Mike, if you'd take your eyes off of your play sheet for about 3 plays you MAY notice that they HAVE NOT GOTTEN OUT OF THE COVER 2 ONCE THIS GAME! He wants balance in his offense, and then when we COULD run the ball he hands it to BRANDON JACKSON every time. That man is the worst player in the NFL, and he's our starting halfback. It's hilarious. We gave Starks one game to prove himself and he provides the best running game out of anyone on the Packers this whole season, and then we go right back to Brandon Jackson for his 13 yards in the first half. Really smart.
Anyhow, how are the Bears good? Their offensive line is absolutely terrible. They have a good running back, a good tight end, and a very good defense, but not good wideouts and an average at best quarterback. I have a hard time seeing either of these teams winning in the playoffs, especially once other teams see the video of this game and see how to stop the Packers offense if they get in (sit in a Cover 2...don't worry about the running game at all, there is absolutely none...you'll stop it with your 3 man pass rush, so play every down like it's 3rd and 9).
Quote from: wadesworld on January 02, 2011, 04:44:32 PM
This game is hilarious to watch. Watching Mike McCarthy try to "attack" a Cover 2 is like watching a Tom Creen coached team attack a zone. It's absolutely comical. He has no idea how to do it.
By my count, McCarthy does better with the Cover 2 than Martz does the 3-4.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 02, 2011, 06:15:08 PM
By my count, McCarthy does better with the Cover 2 than Martz does the 3-4.
Very true. As I said, that O line for the bears STINKS
Quote from: wadesworld on January 02, 2011, 04:44:32 PM
This game is hilarious to watch. Watching Mike McCarthy try to "attack" a Cover 2 is like watching a Tom Creen coached team attack a zone. It's absolutely comical. He has no idea how to do it.
Hey Mike, if you'd take your eyes off of your play sheet for about 3 plays you MAY notice that they HAVE NOT GOTTEN OUT OF THE COVER 2 ONCE THIS GAME! He wants balance in his offense, and then when we COULD run the ball he hands it to BRANDON JACKSON every time. That man is the worst player in the NFL, and he's our starting halfback. It's hilarious. We gave Starks one game to prove himself and he provides the best running game out of anyone on the Packers this whole season, and then we go right back to Brandon Jackson for his 13 yards in the first half. Really smart.
Anyhow, how are the Bears good? Their offensive line is absolutely terrible. They have a good running back, a good tight end, and a very good defense, but not good wideouts and an average at best quarterback. I have a hard time seeing either of these teams winning in the playoffs, especially once other teams see the video of this game and see how to stop the Packers offense if they get in (sit in a Cover 2...don't worry about the running game at all, there is absolutely none...you'll stop it with your 3 man pass rush, so play every down like it's 3rd and 9).
The Bears O-line was at its worst in weeks. I do not think it reflected past performance of at least the second half of the season at all. That being said, we have to hope for the NFC North's respect that both teams find a way to run the ball in the next week or two.
(O-line is still only average when playing at its very best though)
Quote from: ZaLiN on January 02, 2011, 06:18:22 PM
The Bears O-line was at its worst in weeks. I do not think it reflected past performance of at least the second half of the season at all. That being said, we have to hope for the NFC North's respect that both teams find a way to run the ball in the next week or two.
Fair enough. I'll admit that I haven't watched the Bears much recently, but my roommate is from Chicago and says they stink too.
Forte is really good. He'll be fine running the ball and catching it out of the backfield. The problem is that the wideouts are not good either. I remember only 1 catch from any of the wideouts for the Bears today. 81 (can't remember his name, but I know he was a backup in for a guy resting his ankle) did a nice job but I think he was a tight end? Otherwise the offense was all Forte, both out of the backfield and on the receiving end.
What gives the Bears a chance to win in the playoffs is their special teams are the best in the NFL and they have a really good defense. If they can keep games close with their defense and Hester can break one they can sneak a game out, but I STILL don't think they're very good (you are what your record shows though, so apparently they are good).
Quote from: wadesworld on January 02, 2011, 06:22:08 PM
Fair enough. I'll admit that I haven't watched the Bears much recently, but my roommate is from Chicago and says they stink too.
Forte is really good. He'll be fine running the ball and catching it out of the backfield. The problem is that the wideouts are not good either. I remember only 1 catch from any of the wideouts for the Bears today. 81 (can't remember his name, but I know he was a backup in for a guy resting his ankle) did a nice job but I think he was a tight end? Otherwise the offense was all Forte, both out of the backfield and on the receiving end.
What gives the Bears a chance to win in the playoffs is their special teams are the best in the NFL and they have a really good defense. If they can keep games close with their defense and Hester can break one they can sneak a game out, but I STILL don't think they're very good (you are what your record shows though, so apparently they are good).
There are a variety of synonyms that one can use to describe the bear's O line but I prefer to view it as the difference from the beginning of the season which is a source of delusional comfort I guess. On the bright side, championships are won with a strong defense. The display by both teams today gives me at least a tiny shred of hope for Chicago if Cutler regains his ability to see in color. As with Green Bay, Woodson looked unstoppable (see Definition: blocking ineptitude, not to take away any credit) and the secondary shut down the fast bears wide receivers. Both teams should not be discounted.
Interesting game today, leads me to believe if these teams meet up again, I'd love the Bears chances at Soldier Field in an NFC title game. Both defenses owned this game today, more impressive effort by the Bears than anything else, considering how explosive the Pack offense consistently can be.
Good luck to the Pack next week, I still think that's a game they have to like their chances with. Would be a tough road for them to get to the Super Bowl, having to win @ Philly, @ Atlanta, and then either @ Chicago or @ New Orleans.
MUDish, were you not sort of surprised Cutler played the entire game? The way he was getting beaten up, I don't understand the risk vs. reward analysis.
Dish,
Sorry, another question. Will playoff schedules for next weekend be annouced tonight, or tomorrow? Thanks!
Tonight
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/2010/news/story?id=5981573
Talk about sweating bullets. Not sure about the wisdom of leaving the starters in the entire game, but I respect Lovie for keeping his word. At the very least, the Packers can say they actually beat the Bears, and not some disinterested group of second and third stringers.
For as much hell as I've given the Bears this year, they're playing good football at this point. May have been given a few gift wins earlier in the year, but that doesn't matter, it's how you're playing in January.
My issues with McCarthy's play calling in this game are strictly based on the few drives where he went to the big five and dialed up way too many passes. There's no issue with calling running plays, just issues with executing them. And as far as throwing deep on 3rd and 2... the Bears cover 2 scheme plays the inside shoulder of Jennings and won't allow inside breaking routes, so the adjustment is to head down the sidelines. It's on Rodgers to be disciplined enough to not take the low percentage option on 3rd and short, and look to the other side of the field. Luckily, he hit Jennings on the same adjustment to get to the 1 right before the TD. The Bears' defense matches up very, very well with our current offense. With Finley? Maybe not so much. But that's not the case right now.
As far as the Packers' chances... I feel more confident than I did last year. We probably saw the two best defenses in the NFC today, and I'd even go so far as to give the Packers the edge.
Most impressive thing from today, and the second half of this season? The ability of Capers to plug and play in the 3-4, so long as Woodson, Matthews and Tramon Williams (and in the last 4 weeks, BJ Raji) are always in the lineup. Getting contributions from Shields, Peprah and Erik Walden? Who would have thought. I'm just glad to be in the tournament.
Congrats to the Packers. I would hate to play you guys in the playoffs. Dangerous dangerous team.
Quote from: Moonboots on January 02, 2011, 09:04:46 PM
Talk about sweating bullets. Not sure about the wisdom of leaving the starters in the entire game, but I respect Lovie for keeping his word. At the very least, the Packers can say they actually beat the Bears, and not some disinterested group of second and third stringers.
Lovie proved a few years ago on NYE that he really doesn't care all that much about beating GB once his team is in the playoffs. That's just something he said when hired to appease the meathead fans.
Honestly, I don't think that Lovie expected to play the starters the entire game. I think he was expecting to run a simplistic gameplan so as to not show too much to future opponets and once they fell behind by a couple scores to a fired-up Packers squad who was playing for their playoff lives, he'd pull the plug. Instead, the Bears dominated defensively and probably should have won the game (unfortunately "Bad Jay" made a couple appearances which isn't very reassuring for the playoffs).
Oh well. It always sucks to lose to the Packers but at least it cost the Bears nothing. Kudos to GB for doing what they had to do...and Go Eagles!
The best thing that the Packers and Bears have going for them is that all of the other NFC playoff teams look just as bad.
BTW, if the Bears scored a TD at the end there, I am pretty sure they would have gone for two. How nerve-wracking would that have been?
I think the Falcons have looked good lately, but yea everybody else looks rough. And you gotta love the 7-9 NFC West Champ Seahawks.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 03, 2011, 07:48:39 AM
BTW, if the Bears scored a TD at the end there, I am pretty sure they would have gone for two. How nerve-wracking would that have been?
I was REALLY hoping for that. What an amazing way to potentially end a team's season!
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 03, 2011, 07:48:39 AM
BTW, if the Bears scored a TD at the end there, I am pretty sure they would have gone for two. How nerve-wracking would that have been?
I'm sure they would have. They didn't need the win, and they wouldn't want to put their guys out there for any additional time in OT. I was terrified of this.
Thank God the Packers' D was awesome.
Quote from: drewm88 on January 03, 2011, 09:17:46 AM
I'm sure they would have. They didn't need the win, and they wouldn't want to put their guys out there for any additional time in OT. I was terrified of this.
Thank God the Packers' D was awesome.
They absolutely would have went for 2 had they scored, that would have been an incredible moment.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 02, 2011, 09:58:26 PM
(unfortunately "Bad Jay" made a couple appearances which isn't very reassuring for the playoffs).
In Cutler's defense, Lovie's gameplan basically had him handing off and doing alot of nothing all game, so by the time that potential game tying drive went around, you needed 100% of Cutler when he wasn't in any sort of rhythm. I have no clue what the hell Lovie was doing.
Quote from: JWags85 on January 03, 2011, 01:10:16 PM
In Cutler's defense, Lovie's gameplan basically had him handing off and doing alot of nothing all game, so by the time that potential game tying drive went around, you needed 100% of Cutler when he wasn't in any sort of rhythm. I have no clue what the hell Lovie was doing.
The Bears had a vanilla gameplan because they didn't want to show too much to their future playoff opponents. That's what Lovie was doing.
They also called 18 running plays and 47 pass plays so I'd hardly say that Cutler was doing a lot of handing off. If anything, I would have like to see the Bears run the ball more considering Forte averaged over 6 yards per carry.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 03, 2011, 01:25:18 PM
The Bears had a vanilla gameplan because they didn't want to show too much to their future playoff opponents. That's what Lovie was doing.
They also called 18 running plays and 47 pass plays so I'd hardly say that Cutler was doing a lot of handing off. If anything, I would have like to see the Bears run the ball more considering Forte averaged over 6 yards per carry.
Seriously, we are 16 games into the NFL season. That is 16 games of scouting that every coach has on every team.
You can't be serious when you say they had a vanilla gameplan because they didn't want to 'show too much'. What a joke.
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on January 03, 2011, 02:23:04 PM
Seriously, we are 16 games into the NFL season. That is 16 games of scouting that every coach has on every team.
You can't be serious when you say they had a vanilla gameplan because they didn't want to 'show too much'. What a joke.
Jay Cutler only pretended to overthrow or underthrow either other ball. You know, he didn't want to show everyone the magic. Also the OL purposely let the Packers sack Cutler, you know, not wanting to show off too many blocking schemes.
If you guys truly think that the Bears pulled out everything that they had and gameplanned for this game the same as they would have if it were played when it mattered to them, you're kidding yourselves. That doesn't mean they weren't trying to win the game. It means that they went with their basic schemes, kept it simple and still hoped to come out with a W. That's not earth-shattering stuff or a conspiracy theory or anything. That's what teams do when they wrap up a playoff spot early.
Quote from: reinko on January 03, 2011, 02:42:56 PM
Jay Cutler only pretended to overthrow or underthrow either other ball. You know, he didn't want to show everyone the magic. Also the OL purposely let the Packers sack Cutler, you know, not wanting to show off too many blocking schemes.
Don't forget to mention that Cutler deliberately threw two interceptions to keep the game close. Either that or he must have had the Green Bay DST.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 03, 2011, 03:16:27 PM
If you guys truly think that the Bears pulled out everything that they had and gameplanned for this game the same as they would have if it were played when it mattered to them, you're kidding yourselves. That doesn't mean they weren't trying to win the game. It means that they went with their basic schemes, kept it simple and still hoped to come out with a W. That's not earth-shattering stuff or a conspiracy theory or anything. That's what teams do when they wrap up a playoff spot early.
No, what teams do when they wrap up a playoff spot early is to rest their starters and pull most of them after 1/4 to 1/2 of the game (see Belicheck, Bill). Ergo, the game was very meaningful to the Bears, and losing it is a bitter defeat to a divisional rival who now has the psychological advantage. You're whistling past the graveyard, pal. Keep trying to put lipstick on that pig, though.
Quote from: ATWizJr on January 03, 2011, 03:50:05 PM
No, what teams do when they wrap up a playoff spot early is to rest their starters and pull most of them after 1/4 to 1/2 of the game (see Belicheck, Bill). Ergo, the game was very meaningful to the Bears, and losing it is a bitter defeat to a divisional rival who now has the psychological advantage. You're whistling past the graveyard, pal. Keep trying to put lipstick on that pig, though.
Typical delusional cheesehead. I'm curious as to just how exactly that game was "very meaningful" to the Bears? Considering in reality that the game actually was "very meaningful" to the Packers, it wasn't all that impressive. A psychological advantage? Sure bud. It was a home game that was essentially a playoff game and the Pack barely scraped it out. Everyone knows Cutler and the line suck it up every couple of weeks, so this isn't anything new and it rarely happens in back to back performances. In fact, the psychological advantage should go to the bears offense, because last time they played that poorly, the Patriots laid a beating on them at home. They lost by a team on the road by 7 that had absolutely everything to lose. The reason the Packers won this game was their weenie punter. Bears had crap field position all game because that guy kept the ball out of Hester's hands and instead of starting at midfield they were backed up against their own goal all second half.
Hopefully they meet again, but before that happens the Pack will have to get past Vick. Vick clowned the Pack once (Bears are one of the only teams to stop him). You could get away with blitzing every down against the useless Bears line, especially when they're hottest receiver (Bennet) is out, but good luck doing that against Vick. He'll be running thirty yards up the middle of the field while Woodson and every linebacker are blitzing off the edge. If that isn't the case, it will be D Jax running down the sideline wide open for Vick's bomb TD passes or Macklin catching wide open slants over the middle while Woodson and Canseco, I mean Matthews are whiffing on Vick. Not to mention the Pack's problem's running the ball and stopping the run. It should be interesting.
Quote from: Stringer Bell on January 03, 2011, 05:05:12 PM
Typical delusional cheesehead. I'm curious as to just how exactly that game was "very meaningful" to the Bears? Considering in reality that the game actually was "very meaningful" to the Packers, it wasn't all that impressive. A psychological advantage? Sure bud. It was a home game that was essentially a playoff game and the Pack barely scraped it out. Everyone knows Cutler and the line suck it up every couple of weeks, so this isn't anything new and it rarely happens in back to back performances. In fact, the psychological advantage should go to the bears offense, because last time they played that poorly, the Patriots laid a beating on them at home. They lost by a team on the road by 7 that had absolutely everything to lose. The reason the Packers won this game was their weenie punter. Bears had crap field position all game because that guy kept the ball out of Hester's hands and instead of starting at midfield they were backed up against their own goal all second half.
Hopefully they meet again, but before that happens the Pack will have to get past Vick. Vick clowned the Pack once (Bears are one of the only teams to stop him). You could get away with blitzing every down against the useless Bears line, especially when they're hottest receiver (Bennet) is out, but good luck doing that against Vick. He'll be running thirty yards up the middle of the field while Woodson and every linebacker are blitzing off the edge. If that isn't the case, it will be D Jax running down the sideline wide open for Vick's bomb TD passes or Macklin catching wide open slants over the middle while Woodson and Canseco, I mean Matthews are whiffing on Vick. Not to mention the Pack's problem's running the ball and stopping the run. It should be interesting.
This guy. You lost, buddy. You won the division, nobody's saying you are bad. But you lost on Sunday. If they were playing not to show other teams anything they would've sat Cutler after his 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or even 5th sack.
"Vick clowned the Packers once (Bears are one of the only teams to stop him)" Packers record vs. the Eagles this season: 1-0. Weird. The Eagles lost their last 2 games and their last win was a miraculous breakdown by the Giants. Without that, the Eagles are sitting at home watching the game. And the game before that they squeeked out vs. the Cowboys. I'm not saying the Packers will win this game, but wow...I'm curious as to what your prediction is for this game...sounds like 45-0 Eagles. Funny stuff considering the Packers haven't lost a game by more than 4 points this year.
We have lost road games to the 1st and 2nd seeds in the NFC and the 1st seed (and by far best team in the NFL...who happened to beat Da Bears by THIRTY on the ROAD) by a combined 10 points. Again, I'm not saying we will win this game, but we have proven that we can go anywhere and hang with anybody. It will be an interesting game.
Edit: And by the way, Earl Bennett is your hottest receiver? Really? In the 3 games leading up to the Packers game he had a total of 7 catches for 104 yards and 0 touchdowns. Again, the THREE games leading up to the Packers game (when he was healthy). That is a "hot" receiver? Dang, that's sad. He has had 2 good games all season. 1 when he had 7 catches for 104 yards and 0 touchdowns in the 1 game itself and the other simply because he caught 2 touchdown passes. He is averaging 37.4 ypg (excluding the Packers game, so in the 15 games he played in) with a total of 3 touchdowns. His backup (Rasheed Davis) had 7 catches for 63 yards against the Packers. That would be the 3rd most productive game if it was Bennett. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have gotten much more production from Earl Bennett, and chances are they would've gotten worse production. But don't let the facts get in the way of a good story!
Wadesworld, where did I say they weren't playing to show anything? That's right I didn't. I said it was a completely meaningless game. Someone suggested that this was "very meaningful" to the Bears, and the fact is that it was not. If you care to explain how this was a meaningful game for the Bears feel free. A tune-up doesn't equal "very meaningful" in my book. Just because they played their starters doesn't mean it was meaningful, though you leap to that conclusion without any logical explanation how playing starters = meaningful. Maybe if the Packers would have put the game out of reach, Cutler would've been yanked. But the facts are, despite a dismal performance by the Bears offense, the game was never out of reach. Cleveland played their starters too, did that make it a meaningful game?
As for Vick clowning the Pack, maybe that's a little too bold, but rushing for over one hundred yards and posting a passer rating over 100 is a pretty good performance. I apologize, I actually know that game went down to the wire, but for some reason I thought the Pack lost. I should've know that though, how can I forget that the Bears gave the Packers their first loss of the season? Look we can go all day back and forth about who beat who, and who lost to who. Both teams lost to a crappy Washington team and a very good Patriots team. The Packer's lost to the Dolphins and Lions (2 very bad teams), and what if the Pack had not "squeeked" by the Bears? They'd be sitting at home too. What if your mom never met your dad? What if the queen had a dick?
45-0 prediction? I reread my post and seemed to miss where I said that? Once again you are putting words in my mouth. Just like I never said the Bears were trying not to show anything, I never made a prediction about the outcome of the Eagles game. I simply said I hope they meet again, and for that to happen they'll have to stop the Eagles. I acknowledge the Bears deficiencies and the fact that if you blitz your linebackers and cornerback on every single down against their rag-tag line and a rattled Cutler, you can have success. However, I don't think you can get away with that against Vick, which was evidenced by his 100 yards rushing and 100 qb rating the last time they met; though I didn't look at the stats, I just recalled Vick gave them the kind of problems Cutler and the Bears can't.
As for Bennet, the fact is that if you actually watched Bears games, you would know that Bennet developed into Cutlers go to receiver when he was under pressure. At no point did I suggest the Bears had some high powered receiving corp. Each week a different WR ends up with the touchdowns and most yards. There's really no rhyme or reason to how it works. But when Cutler is under pressure, like he was all day against the Packers, he tends to find earl Bennet as a safety blanket. I think that he would've been better served to have Bennet there than the former arena league corner Resheid Davis.
WadesWorld, you seem to be the one having problems with the facts, or should I say making up your own facts as you go along; try replying to what I actually said. The purpose of my post was to say that it's asinine to claim that the Packers will now have some sort of psychological edge should the teams meet again, especially considering that it was a seven point game on the road. The Bears crap line allowed Forte to average over 6 yards a carry, the Bears D shut down the mighty Packer offense, the Bears were playing a meaningless game, the Packers had everything to play for; looking at the totality of the circumstances I'm just not ready to crown the Pack like some. Additionally, I never said the Bears would win anything, simply that it will be interesting.
You can put these words in my mouth though: Clay Matthews is on steroids.
Quote from: ATWizJr on January 03, 2011, 03:50:05 PM
No, what teams do when they wrap up a playoff spot early is to rest their starters and pull most of them after 1/4 to 1/2 of the game (see Belicheck, Bill). Ergo, the game was very meaningful to the Bears, and losing it is a bitter defeat to a divisional rival who now has the psychological advantage. You're whistling past the graveyard, pal. Keep trying to put lipstick on that pig, though.
Tom Brady left the Pats game in the 2nd quarter with the Pats up 14-0, and then
came back into the game and played until the Pats were up 31-0. If the Bears-GB game was 31-0 in favor of either team, do you think the Bears would have had their starters in? (Hint: No)
The psychological advantage? In other words, if the Packers come to Soldier Field for the NFC Championship Game, the Bears will somehow be intimidated by the fact that the Packers beat them in a meaningless game? Hey, whatever helps you sleep at night.
Bears hate packers.
packers hate Bears. cheeseheads vs FIBS. I love this time of year.
If Stringer Bell's head would get any bigger over this Bears team, he'd be bordering on a Jay Cutler-sized dome. Let's get a few things straight. The game held no playoff implications for the Bears, but to call it meaningless would suggest you didn't even watch it. Schematically, the Bears did nothing differently from what they had done over the previous 5 weeks. Their play calling wasn't vanilla. They didn't favor the run (which was actually a mistake on Martz's part). You think it was all for sh*ts and giggles that they let Cutler get planted in the turf 6 times yesterday?
As far as the "dismal performance" by the Bears' offense, I don't know.. maybe you ran into the best defense in the NFC? You might want to check the figures on that. I'm just saying.
Are the Bears good? Sure. Are they overrated? Absolutely. Your little "what if your mom never met your dad, what if the queen had a dick?" thing was sort of cute, but we can play, too. Ready? What if the Bears didn't get a gift win against the Lions week 1? What if the Bears didn't play three 3rd string QBs in 4 weeks? What if the Packers didn't have 9 of 22 opening day starters on IR, or had 193 missed starts due to injury this season?
Beyond that, playoff football stems back to QB play and defense, and I'll take my chances with the Packers rather than the Bears in that case. It will just take one "bad Jay" appearance to end the Bears playoff hopes.
As far as Earl Bennett (please notice the bolded second "t". Sorry. Just a pet peeve.) is concerned, I'm going to refuse to think he's anything of a difference maker. I understand they played in college together, and that he's a fine middle of the road possession receiver, but he struggles to gain separation or get vertical. Maybe Cutler would have been "better served" (your words) with Bennett instead of Davis, but I'm pretty sure Rodgers would have been better served with Finley and Grant in there, too. Good luck getting any sympathy from Packer fans for having a starter not playing.
I'm all about talking football, but if we're going to speak in extremes like the Packers "blitzing their linebackers and corners every play" against Vick, there's going to be a fundamental breakdown in our ability to keep this conversation intelligent. With a week to prepare for Vick (which we didn't have last time) expect Capers to shadow the line of scrimmage and bring pressure from Vick's strong side, forcing him to roll right. It'll be a mirror of the nickel blitz package the Packers usually run with Woodson and Matthews stunting. It's going to come down to a 75% healthy Vick (according to his interview today) beating the Packers with his arm. Given that we have the best pass defense in football, I'll take my chances.
Quote from: reinko on January 03, 2011, 02:42:56 PM
Jay Cutler only pretended to overthrow or underthrow either other ball. You know, he didn't want to show everyone the magic. Also the OL purposely let the Packers sack Cutler, you know, not wanting to show off too many blocking schemes.
I missed this the first time, and just saw it. I laughed out loud. Nice work.
Quote from: Moonboots on January 03, 2011, 09:40:10 PM
If Stringer Bell's head would get any bigger over this Bears team, he'd be bordering on a Jay Cutler-sized dome. Let's get a few things straight. The game held no playoff implications for the Bears, but to call it meaningless would suggest you didn't even watch it. Schematically, the Bears did nothing differently from what they had done over the previous 5 weeks. Their play calling wasn't vanilla. They didn't favor the run (which was actually a mistake on Martz's part).
While agree that Stringer is a little nuts, I stopped reading your post after the bolded part because it's not only dead wrong, but it's contradictory.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 03, 2011, 10:40:42 PM
While agree that Stringer is a little nuts, I stopped reading your post after the bolded part because it's not only dead wrong, but it's contradictory.
@ GB - 45 pass plays called, 20 run plays. (+25)
vs. NYJ - 31 pass, 23 run (+8)
@ MN - 25 pass, 33 run (-8 in a blowout win)
vs. NE - 30 pass, 12 run (+18 in a blowout loss)
@ Det - 35 pass, 22 run. (+13)
Something also of note, how they played the Pack the first time..
vs. GB 33 pass, 15 run (+18) from GB game week 3.
The play calling is consistent with how Martz calls games when they're close, and he actually ended up opening it up more than usual rather than scaling anything back. We still saw the same pre-snap motion, the same combination routes, and the same designed back hip throws that gave the Jets fits in week 16, though they didn't have the same success rate against GB.
With the success Forte was having, being just a shade more balanced like he was against the Jets probably would have worked in their favor.
Obviously the pass/run numbers will never match up exactly, but it's clear that whatever Martz wanted to throw out there on Sunday was far from conservative (read: vanilla) and he had every intention of trying to move the ball with his starting offensive unit on the field.
I'm interested to hear how I am wrong or contradictory, and willing to hear you out. Maybe I'm missing something.
First off, I was only lured on here to respond to the idea that the Packers rather unimpressive 10-3 home win with their season on the line so badly demoralized the Bears, that in the case the two teams would meet again at Soldier Field, the Bears would have this PTSD as result; thus giving the Packers a psychological advantage. Then it was suggested that a Bears fan was "walking on his grave" as a result. This just seemed a little ridiculous to me. Additionally, and I say this at the risk of sounding political, seeing the term "lipstick on a pig" and the Bears in the same sentence just bothers me.
Quote from: Moonboots on January 03, 2011, 09:40:10 PM
The game held no playoff implications for the Bears, but to call it meaningless would suggest you didn't even watch it. Schematically, the Bears did nothing differently from what they had done over the previous 5 weeks. Their play calling wasn't vanilla. They didn't favor the run (which was actually a mistake on Martz's part). You think it was all for sh*ts and giggles that they let Cutler get planted in the turf 6 times yesterday?
I guess the way I see it is by looking at the final ramifications of a loss when discussing "meaningless." For the Bears, if they lost, they would live another day. A loss for the Pack meant they would go home. I would think there's a huge difference in what's going on in the back of a player's head, and that perhaps the Packers had a huge advantage in the "sense of urgency department."
Schematically speaking, I feel like Martz typically makes adjustments that are evident even to an average fan after half time, and I just didn't see anything any different from the first half. Perhaps this was just because of the Packers Defense being very highly ranked; but I think it's not completely unreasonable to think that the Bears could have held back, even if just a little. You are absolutely correct about not running the ball more, schematically I was hoping that if there's a next time, the Bears would be running a hell of a lot more. Plus, the running and passing have been much more balanced. So in my mind, I guess that qualifies as doing something that you haven't done schematically the last 5 weeks.
As for Cutler getting beat down, like I said, I really don't think it was part of the plan. Contrary to what you all might assume, I actually fully expected the Packers to whip the Bears. I would think Lovie figured that they'd play the starters till they get down by a few scores, but that never came. I'm thinking something similar to when the Giants played the Patriots tough in that final game, then beat them when something actually mattered a few weeks later; it was a good opportunity to play in hostile environment and in a play-off type atmosphere. (I'm not suggesting the Bears will have the same result as the Giants either.) Was it a risk playing the starters? Sure, but no one got hurt and Cutler's got 2 weeks off.
Quote from: Moonboots on January 03, 2011, 09:40:10 PM
Are the Bears good? Sure. Are they overrated? Absolutely. Your little "what if your mom never met your dad, what if the queen had a dick?" thing was sort of cute, but we can play, too. Ready? What if the Bears didn't get a gift win against the Lions week 1? What if the Bears didn't play three 3rd string QBs in 4 weeks? What if the Packers didn't have 9 of 22 opening day starters on IR, or had 193 missed starts due to injury this season?
Part of the reason why I asked about the consequences about your mom not meeting your dad and the queen having a dick is because I hoped to make a preemptive strike against these types of arguments. (I think my earl bennetT comment was lost in translation.) Most criticism I hear about the Bears is always is one of these WHAT IF'S. WHAT IF the Megatron catch was a td in the first game? Well, had there been some sort of meeting in which the NFL got together and decided to change that particular rule in the summer of 2010, maybe it would have been. But a rule's a rule.
WHAT IF the Bears didn't face a bunch of back up QB's? Well the Bears were responsible for knocking out Stafford and Favre to begin with.
WHAT IF Lovie challenged that td against the Redskins. That's right he didn't, so I'm not gonna bring it up because it's bs.
None of it matters now, and none of it is legitimate criticism in my book. As far as losing to crap teams, everyone, even the Pats have done it. So have the Packers. But feel free to bash the Bear's offensive line, front office decisions, the size of Cutler's melon, not getting a big name receiver. I won't argue with you. Where you think the Bears are overrated, I get the sense that they are underrated based on some of the ridiculous rhetoric that I was responding to initially. We both seem to think they are good, but not great. Personally, I feel this way about the entire NFC, including the Pack. I feel this way because if the Bears and Packers are 1-1. If the Bears are simply good, and the Bears beat the Packers once at home in a close game, and the Packers beat the Bears at home in a close game, does mean that it's possible that the Packers are simply good and not great? Or at least not great enough to warrant talk of psychological demoralization at the mere thought of them playing again.
Quote from: Moonboots on January 03, 2011, 09:40:10 PM
As far as Earl Bennett (please notice the bolded second "t". Sorry. Just a pet peeve.) is concerned, I'm going to refuse to think he's anything of a difference maker. I understand they played in college together, and that he's a fine middle of the road possession receiver, but he struggles to gain separation or get vertical. Maybe Cutler would have been "better served" (your words) with Bennett instead of Davis, but I'm pretty sure Rodgers would have been better served with Finley and Grant in there, too. Good luck getting any sympathy from Packer fans for having a starter not playing.
Perhaps people are assuming I'm some Bears homer who thinks they're going to the promised land, and I can see how people can mistakenly think that given that I made an Earl BennetT reference. Look, there are certain things about the Bears that piss me off more than you'd ever know. I know they've got a bunch of bargain barrel receivers and linemen, and I didn't mean to suggest that EB is some hero. I simply felt that there would've been a few 5 yard slants or outs that he might've found, then gotten tackled immediately, that Davis didn't. He just helps Cutler avoid getting killed now and again. I used the "better served" language to defend the idea against WadesWorld that I claimed the Bears had sweet WR's. The only reason I brought BennetT up in the first place was to point to an obvious deficiency in the Bears offense when they are getting blitzed, and this was more of a reference to the difference between the Eagles.
Obviously the Packers are gonna scheme differently, but I suppose half of my post could've been slightly veiled in a light shade of teal. The point is, the Bears have certain useless aspects of their offense that allow the Packers to look dominant. I just feel that the Eagles are the type of team that don't match up well for the Packers. The Packers seem to be at their best when they are blitzing and applying pressure, especially off the edge. I just feel like Vick's gonna beat someone shadowing him at some point, if not someone else will be left unaccounted for, or perhaps the middle of the field. Where as the Bears rush 3 and sit everyone back in a preventish defense, they've had success. I don't know if the Packers ever play like that? It's the same way the Bears dropped over 40 on a good Jet's D, and the Packer's put up a couple field goals; perhap's it's match-ups? I never said who would win one way or another, simply that it will be interesting.
As an impartial observer, I'd much rather play the Bears in the playoffs then the Packers. Both teams are flawed, but the Bears have more of them this season.
However, I also agree that the Bears did not play as if that game was a must win game. I don't think they made it vanilla, but they certainly didn't have the emotion they would have if the playoffs were on the line for them as well. It's human nature, you just won't give it all when you're already in.
Playoffs should be fun. Philly is going to have their hands full, but with Vick as the wildcard, they could also make life hell for the Packers, too.
Stringer Bell, good post.
I didn't even address the psychological advantage thing, and actually missed it entirely. In this case, I don't think the Packers gain any sort of real advantage over the Bears from this victory. I think both teams know it's entirely possible that the Packers could win in Soldier if these teams meet again in three weeks, but I don't think Sunday's game really swayed the doubts of beliefs of either team one way or the other. It was played exactly as most tough divisional games should be, and when push came to shove, we obviously needed this win a lot more than you did, and executed as such in the late 3rd and 4th quarter.
I see where you're coming from in calling the game meaningless. You can game plan all you want, but you can't artificially create urgency, and that's why you finally saw the Pack get it done late on Sunday.
In my mind, Vick is sort of a wild card in this game. I watch a TON of NFL football (and re-watch.. and watch again after that. Thanks NFL Game Rewind for taking up so much of my free time). Vick obviously presents a skill set unlike any other QB in the game. I'm still of the belief that to succeed in the playoffs, you will ultimately need a QB who can drop back, plant and deliver the ball accurately under pressure. There's been a few successful playoff teams that didn't have that, but it required other wordly contributions from other parts of the team (think 06 Bears, 00 Ravens, 02 Bucs). I don't see Philly being that special in other units, and I don't see Vick being able to lead with his arm. I think as long as the Packers win the turnover battle, they win the game.
The thing about the Bears is that Cutler is a complete enigma. He possesses the arm to be a dominant playoff QB, but his footwork is goofy, and he'll struggle with accuracy in some games. If he's on point, the Bears can live up to their seed as the second best team in the NFC behind Atlanta. If he's off? You can kiss them good bye.
As far as me calling the Bears overrated... I still mean it in a sense. I don't think they're consistent enough to be considered the 2nd best team in the NFC. You look at games like the Philly game, and they were scary good there. They also played well offensively against a good Jets team. But there's a lot of duds in there, too. At the same time, admittedly, there's a certain level of sour grapes from me as a Packers fan. You can only play the team they put in front of you every Sunday and take care of business. Mike Holmgren used to say sometimes it's better to be lucky than good, and it's best of all to be both. Bears were lucky early on, and have really started to figure that offense out since midseason. They're incomplete, but they can be a force.
And your last paragraph is spot on, especially the second to last sentence. The NFL is all about matchups, every week. Creating mismatches in both scheme and personnel is the only way to win in the NFL. It's also the reason that Finley is easily the biggest loss the Packers had this year. He forced defenses to make wholesale changes to how they could play the Packers.
As far as scheme match ups to Vick, I'm interested to see what Capers has up his sleeve. Our week 1 game plan was for Kolb, and maybe 5 plays of Vick at Wildcat. Capers said as much after the game. Now, with an entire week to game plan for him in a playoff situation, I wouldn't be surprised to see him unveil something we haven't seen all year. He's been known to have formations that he saves for specific teams. Last year, we saw "Big Okie" (linebacker in for a safety in the nickel) against the hapless Rams whose only weapon was Steven Jackson. We saw "Corner Okie" (Cover 2 shell with Woodson as a free rover in blitz and run support) against the Cowboys in a must-win in '09. And they unveiled the Psycho (1-5-5) package that gets used on occasion to confuse QBs as well.
Of course, if an athletic freak like Vick is entirely on his game, there could be nothing we can do. Here's to hoping we can rattle him early and often and force him to play from behind. This is one of my favorite weekends of football the entire year. I'm looking forward to it.
Favre masseuse video. LOL
http://deadspin.com/5725878/newest-favre-allegations-get-the-taiwanese-animation-treatment
could Vince Young be the next Viking QB?
Quote from: Homebrew101 on January 06, 2011, 09:56:40 AM
could Vince Young be the next Viking QB?
As a Bears fan, I can only hope.
However, I think he ends up in Miami and McNabb ends up with the Vikings.
QUestion:
Bears and Packers can't play round 2 correct? Wouldn't the Pack automatically play Atlanta regardless of the outcome of the other game, as 6 seed?
Quote from: MU B2002 on January 07, 2011, 10:43:32 AM
QUestion:
Bears and Packers can't play round 2 correct? Wouldn't the Pack automatically play Atlanta regardless of the outcome of the other game, as 6 seed?
That is correct. The Falcons get the lowest (worst) seed, so if the Pack won they would obviously have to be the lowest seed.
Quote from: Stringer Bell on January 03, 2011, 05:05:12 PM
Typical delusional cheesehead.
Hopefully they meet again, but before that happens the Pack will have to get past Vick. Vick clowned the Pack once (Bears are one of the only teams to stop him). You could get away with blitzing every down against the useless Bears line, especially when they're hottest receiver (Bennet) is out, but good luck doing that against Vick. He'll be running thirty yards up the middle of the field while Woodson and every linebacker are blitzing off the edge. If that isn't the case, it will be D Jax running down the sideline wide open for Vick's bomb TD passes or Macklin catching wide open slants over the middle while Woodson and Canseco, I mean Matthews are whiffing on Vick. Not to mention the Pack's problem's running the ball and stopping the run. It should be interesting.
Yup.
Quote from: Sir Lawrence on January 09, 2011, 08:17:26 PM
Yup.
As in the show, Stringer was shot down. Was Starks also Brother Muzone?
What's the mood among Packer fans for the tilt with the Dirty Birds this Saturday night?
The secondary ticket market is blowing up at the potential of Packers/Bears here in Chicago. Should it happen, Packers/Bears will get the highest ratings for a conference title game in history.
Quote from: MUDish on January 12, 2011, 08:29:27 PM
What's the mood among Packer fans for the tilt with the Dirty Birds this Saturday night?
The secondary ticket market is blowing up at the potential of Packers/Bears here in Chicago. Should it happen, Packers/Bears will get the highest ratings for a conference title game in history.
Winnable game. Two very good teams who played a very close game in the regular season. Two very good QBs.
Atlanta is really good at home...but playing in a dome plays to Green Bay's greatest strength...throwing the ball. I wouldnt be surprised if they throw 40 times on Saturday.
Hoping Starks can continue to be this good.
It's hard not to get excited about a potential Packers/Bears NFC Championship game. Hopefully the Bears dont screw it up for everyone. ;D
Side note...The weather situation down here is ridiculous. The whole city has been shut down this week, and it doesnt really look to be getting any better until early next week. A couple of Atlanta players have gotten in accidents/missed practice altogether because of the condition of the roads. It could effect the crowd on Saturday.
v
Quote from: MUDish on January 12, 2011, 08:29:27 PM
What's the mood among Packer fans for the tilt with the Dirty Birds this Saturday night?
The secondary ticket market is blowing up at the potential of Packers/Bears here in Chicago. Should it happen, Packers/Bears will get the highest ratings for a conference title game in history.
I am 50/50 on the Packers chances. After the two played during the season I came away feeling they were very evenly matched. However, I do think the Packers have improved and gotten into a little more of a rhythm the past several weeks, where ATL has been consistent all season long. I think being at home is huge, though as pointed out above, playing indoors is an advantage for the Packers. If this game were being played in GB, I'd probably lean toward ATL with Turner and Gonzalez. Really tough to call.
As much as I will probably find myself pulling for Seattle once Sunday rolls around, I think everyone in the world outside of Atlanta and Seattle want to see the Packers and Bears win (although some Bear fans have told me they have no interest in that game). Pretty sure the Bears will hold up their end. The Packers obviously have a little tougher assignment in order to hold up their's.
Agree, winnable game indeed. Atlanta has been surprisingly average in run offense this year (12th), so Turner doesn't scare me a ton, and Roddy White is the only legitimate down field threat, so again if Capers can get to Ryan, and the big men up front contain (less than 100) Turner (who primarily runs in between the tackles), I like Rodgers and the WR's to tear into ATL's, 22nd rank passing defense.
Would like to see the offense come out in some no huddle for the first drive or two.
Pack: 34
ATL: 24
On a semi-related note, do Rex Ryan and Antonio Cromartie think that all this crap talk about Tom Brady is going to have any sort of effect other than them getting their collective asses kicked? There are guys you might be able to get to with that noise, but Tom Brady (and Bill Belichick) is certainly not one of them. Brady and the Patriots are going to go out and do what they do. The only difference is they're going to keep doing what they do through the whole game, even after they're ahead 45-7.
I hope the Pats win by 60 and Welker celebrates a TD by having Brady pretend to take picture of his feet. That would be worth the fine
Quote from: MU B2002 on January 13, 2011, 08:21:37 AM
I hope the Pats win by 60 and Welker celebrates a TD by having Brady pretend to take picture of his feet. That would be worth the fine
nice!
Good luck tonight Pack fans, hope it takes away from one of the worst MU regular season losses I can ever remember.
I'm going to say a Crosby walk off field goal takes it, 27-24.
Great...another game that is going to cause me to want to kick a baby.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 15, 2011, 07:58:12 PM
Great...another game that is going to cause me to want to kick a baby.
Feeling a little better?
My goodness. I'm still trying to catch by breath after that.
If MU, I mean the packers play like this for the first 3/4 of a game they can beat anyone in the nation, I mean the nfl
Ball game.
Slocum is the worst special team's coach. Spec. teams continues to suck for the pack.
Other than that the Pack are a well oiled machine.
As a Bears fan, that's all I could ask for out of the Pack tonight. Bears win tomorrow gets home field next week, really tough to think the Pack could do that next week in Chicago where they've already lost this season and with nothing to play for 2 weeks ago, the Bears nearly knocked off a Pack team with everything to play for.
First things first, beating the Seahawks, but I like how things set up for a potential conference title game match up.
The Bears should lay down because whoever the Pack play are going to get fu$k up!!!
Quote from: jmayer1 on January 16, 2011, 01:08:54 AM
The Bears should lay down because whoever the Pack play are going to get fu$k up!!!
+1
21-0 Bears right now. See you guys at Soldier Field next Sunday.
The Packers - Bears matchup is gonna hinge on the differential b/t Rodgers QB play and the Special Teams battle. Can Rodgers overcome the inevitable screw ups by GB's special teams play, or will the Bears superiority in this aspect negate all other parts of an outstanding Packers team?
I surely hope the Pack does lose that game on account of a Hester TD return...
Ptm, maybe the 9 drinks I have had today so far has confused me, or my sarcasm radar is off...but you are a Cubs fan, and a Packers fan????
Well, this sucks. Congrats, guys. I hope next week is an awful, ugly game where Chicago wins 2-0, then gets rolled in the Super Bowl.
SKOL VIKINGS! 2011 NFC North Champions
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 16, 2011, 01:26:19 PM
Well, this sucks. Congrats, guys. I hope next week is an awful, ugly game where Chicago wins 2-0, then gets rolled in the Super Bowl.
SKOL VIKINGS! 2011 NFC North Champions
And Joe Webb is gonna compete with Cutler, Rodgers, and Stafford how?
But next week's game might be the most epic matchup in the most epic rivalry in all of sport.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 16, 2011, 01:26:19 PM
Well, this sucks. Congrats, guys. I hope next week is an awful, ugly game where Chicago wins 2-0, then gets rolled in the Super Bowl.
SKOL VIKINGS! 2011 NFC North Champions
JB I love the optimism, and the Vikes will definitely be better next year vs. this year, but they just don't have the talent to compete for the NFC North without a lot of breaks going their way. QB will be a retread veteran or an unproven rookie, still nobody to throw to consistently (Harvin is injured too much to get them to 10+ wins). Maybe Frazier will be smart enough to do what Brad wasn't in handing off to Purple Jesus every down, but barring that the Vikes are at best third on the list in the North.
Regardless of next week's results the Pack will be the team to beat in 2011-12. Chicago is old and getting older on the defensive side, and the poor drafting will finally catch up with them. GB is the youngest team in the league and will return pretty much everyone, plus get 14+ starters back who spent the season on IR.
Detroit will, well, Detroit is the worst team in the North until they win regularly, no matter what somebody says about their potential.
This is awesome!
Quote from: jmayer1 on January 16, 2011, 01:08:54 AM
The Bears should lay down because whoever the Pack play are going to get fu$k up!!!
You stay Classy Packer Fans!
I must be the only Packer fan who believes this but...
I don't really mind the Bears one bit. I have a lot of friends who are Bears fans. If the Packers lose on Sunday, I will be rooting for the Bears in the Super Bowl.
I would never root for the Vikings though.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on January 16, 2011, 04:39:51 PM
I must be the only Packer fan who believes this but...
I don't really mind the Bears one bit. I have a lot of friends who are Bears fans. If the Packers lose on Sunday, I will be rooting for the Bears in the Super Bowl.
I would never root for the Vikings though.
I wouldn't go this far... but I will say that I genuinely enjoy the bears rivalry, while on the other hand I hate the Vikings and hope they move to LA.
As an adult, I can, for the most part choose who I hang out with. So, I can say that I have not come across any arrogant Bear fans (outside every single caller to every single Chicago sports radio call in program). Every Bear fan I come across in person has their head on right and isn't a jerk.
However, I grew up in Illinois as a Packer fan and was a sophomore in HS during the Bears one Super Bowl year. It was beyond painful. I can't adequately describe how much I despised that team and their fans.
I am sure there are Bear fans who grew up in WI around 1997 who could repeat the same story from the other point of view.
That said, I warned my wife not to be surprised if, without notice, I throw up at some point this week.
Quote from: MUEng92 on January 16, 2011, 05:12:15 PM
I am sure there are Bear fans who grew up in WI around 1997 who could repeat the same story from the other point of view.
We didn't care. It was nice to see Favre play a full game without giving up a game-losing INT.
Now if only he could keep his dick texts from being intercepted...
Mike Singletary to the Vikings... I dig it. Linebackers coach and Assistant Head Coach. This locks us in as the Consensus pick to win the 2011 NFC North regular season. SKOL VIKINGS!
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 18, 2011, 02:20:55 PM
Mike Singletary to the Vikings... I dig it. Linebackers coach and Assistant Head Coach. This locks us in as the Consensus pick to win the 2011 NFC North regular season. SKOL VIKINGS!
Great idea! Can't beat those Vikes for personnel moves!!
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 18, 2011, 02:20:55 PM
Mike Singletary to the Vikings... I dig it. Linebackers coach and Assistant Head Coach. This locks us in as the questionable pick to win the 2011 NFC North regular season. SKOL VIKINGS!
by the way, how does it feel to have your two hated rivals playing for the chance to go to the super bowl.
Quote from: Jay Bee on January 18, 2011, 02:20:55 PM
Mike Singletary to the Vikings... I dig it. Linebackers coach and Assistant Head Coach. This locks us in as the questionable pick to win the 2011 NFC North regular season. SKOL VIKINGS!
Until the Vikes find somebody to pass the ball, and more than one guy to pass it to, they won't finish better than third in the NFC North. The Lions (with a losing record) will finish ahead of the Vikes next year.
Before you go trying to sell me on Joe Webb being the QB of the future, remember that he was drafted in the sixth round as a WIDE RECEIVER!
Quote from: mugrad2006 on January 19, 2011, 10:45:57 AM
Until the Vikes find somebody to pass the ball, and more than one guy to pass it to, they won't finish better than third in the NFC North. The Lions (with a losing record) will finish ahead of the Vikes next year.
The Lions (with a losing record) already DID finish higher than the Vikes did THIS year. The Lions and Vikings both finished 6-10 overall and split their 2 games with each other, so the Lions finished in 3rd place as a result of their 2-4 division record (other win against the Packers) as opposed to the Vikings 1-5 division record.
Must be embarrassing, Jay.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 19, 2011, 01:28:48 PM
The Lions (with a losing record) already DID finish higher than the Vikes did THIS year. The Lions and Vikings both finished 6-10 overall and split their 2 games with each other, so the Lions finished in 3rd place as a result of their 2-4 division record (other win against the Packers) as opposed to the Vikings 1-5 division record.
Must be embarrassing, Jay.
Ahh.. now I know why the Pack lost that game to the Lions.. I think I like it as I (and probably most Packer fans) hate the queens more than the lines. The world makes sense again.
Quote from: muarmy81 on January 16, 2011, 04:34:25 PM
You stay Classy Packer Fans!
I think your request is a bit of a stretch :D
SKOL VIKINGS! McNabb should be official soon! CONSENSUS 2011 NFC NORTH CHAMPS - YOUR MINNESOTA VIKINGS!!
McNabb should be a good pickup for MN especially if Ponder isn't good to go right out of the gate - too bad Rice will probably sign with Seattle and you still need to restructure/extend AP to make cap room
Quote from: Jay Bee on July 27, 2011, 02:04:50 PM
SKOL VIKINGS! McNabb should be official soon! CONSENSUS 2011 NFC NORTH CHAMPS - YOUR MINNESOTA VIKINGS!!
The Vikes will have the worst qb in the division for the 2nd straight year. Consensus NFC North cellar dwellers, congrats!!
Pack look to be in good positon for a SB Title defense.
Quote from: Homebrew101 on July 27, 2011, 02:13:19 PM
McNabb should be a good pickup for MN especially if Ponder isn't good to go right out of the gate -Quotetoo bad Rice will probably sign with Seattle
and you still need to restructure/extend AP to make cap room
Is it just me or do the Vikings and Seahawks swap players every offseason. I started with Steve Hutchingson, then Burrleson went to Seattle, and I know there have been more. I have noticed this for the past couple years and found it kinda odd, maybe the GM's are friends or something.
Also I think we might need to start a new thread for the 2011-2012 season
My bad on the wack A$$ quote job in that last post
Quote from: Jay Bee on July 27, 2011, 02:04:50 PM
SKOL VIKINGS! McNabb should be official soon! CONSENSUS 2011 NFC NORTH CHAMPS - YOUR MINNESOTA VIKINGS!!
So now the Vikes have to get the mold off their stadium surface and their QB?
Hey, Jay Bee is nothing if not consistent. Now that consistency is delusion, but still
Picking up McNabb is a great move for the Vikings....
...if it were still 2006.
Pretty funny that McNabb is crying about the Vikings looking at Tyler Thigpen as a free agent while/before they were negotiating a trade with the Redskins.
Quote from: SaintPaulWarrior on July 27, 2011, 04:33:57 PM
Pretty funny that McNabb is crying about the Vikings looking at Tyler Thigpen as a free agent while/before they were negotiating a trade with the Redskins.
He should be worried about Tyler Thigpen, the guys a baller. If Thigpen were ever given the reigns for a training camp and full season, I think he could be a really good player. Of course, he won't find that stability in MN or anywhere else this season anyway.
Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on July 27, 2011, 04:26:59 PM
Picking up McNabb is a great move for the Vikings....
...if it were still 2006.
He's going to look like Grimace once he dons that purple uni...
Quote from: cbowe3 on July 27, 2011, 02:59:53 PM
and you still need to restructure/extend AP to make cap room
Is it just me or do the Vikings and Seahawks swap players every offseason. I started with Steve Hutchingson, then Burrleson went to Seattle, and I know there have been more. I have noticed this for the past couple years and found it kinda odd, maybe the GM's are friends or something.
Also I think we might need to start a new thread for the 2011-2012 season
this year's changes have to do with Darrel Bevell moving to Seattle
;D nice to read the comments AP has about losing Rice and especially the MN fans reaction to AP's comments at this page:
http://www.startribune.com/sports/vikings/blogs/126302538.html