MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: GGGG on August 05, 2011, 08:59:44 PM
-
OK, so it starts with the Bears having to cancel "family night" at the last minute because the Soldier Field turf was so bad...in July...after all the rain Chicago has gotten...with the last event played on the turf about two weeks ago.
What a great organization...
-
OK, so it starts with the Bears having to cancel "family night" at the last minute because the Soldier Field turf was so bad...in July...after all the rain Chicago has gotten...with the last event played on the turf about two weeks ago.
What a great organization...
In the Bears defense, the Chicago Parks Department maintains the turf at Soldier Field, not the Bears. The Bears organization has no jurisdiction there.
-
The Bears should accept some of the blame, but 95% of the blame goes to the park district. Bears don't own or run Soldier Field, strictly tenants. Mayor and the park district taking ton of heat as they should. U2 was a month ago, Man U was 2 weeks ago. Total joke.
-
Not another NFC north thread... pretty soon we'll all have to see that guy yelling "SKOLL VIKINGS" in random intervals. Can't we just make a Pack/Bear/Lion thread and discuss the relevant teams?
-
Detroit's prize rookie had surgery on his foot and will miss most of training camp. The Lion's season depends on keeping Stafford. Of course, the North could be the toughest division in football so it will be well nigh impossible for them to break through.
-
The Bears should accept some of the blame, but 95% of the blame goes to the park district. Bears don't own or run Soldier Field, strictly tenants. Mayor and the park district taking ton of heat as they should. U2 was a month ago, Man U was 2 weeks ago. Total joke.
Yeah, I agree. However, the Bears keep coming out against the most obvious solution - the installation of fieldturf. (Mostly because they would likely have to pay for it.)
-
Two high schools within 10 miles of my house have Fieldturf fields. I can't see how the cost could be an issue for an NFL team. Being Chicago, I'm sure someone with the Bears "knows a guy" who could get them a great deal.
There must be a different reason that the Park District doesn't want to take out the mine field of turf clumps. No idea what it could be.
-
Yeah, I agree. However, the Bears keep coming out against the most obvious solution - the installation of fieldturf. (Mostly because they would likely have to pay for it.)
My thought on why the Bears keep shying away from field turf - they want to keep the game slow at home. Lets face it, the Bears offense isn't the prettiest thing (never has been) - if their field sucks, and is always in terrible shape, that favors the defense, aka the Bears style of play... keep the game slow, improves their home field advantage.
-
My thought on why the Bears keep shying away from field turf - they want to keep the game slow at home. Lets face it, the Bears offense isn't the prettiest thing (never has been) - if their field sucks, and is always in terrible shape, that favors the defense, aka the Bears style of play... keep the game slow, improves their home field advantage.
I get what you are saying, but in all honesty, the Cover 2 defense was really honed when Dungy was D coordinator for MN and Lovie himself used it in STL. Dungy also did well with it in IND.
So, I'm not sure that the slow play favors their defense, or even their update Martz style offense.
Actually, I'm really at a loss on why they don't do it. Is the groundskeeper union insanely influential in Chicago or something?
-
I get what you are saying, but in all honesty, the Cover 2 defense was really honed when Dungy was D coordinator for MN and Lovie himself used it in STL. Dungy also did well with it in IND.
So, I'm not sure that the slow play favors their defense, or even their update Martz style offense.
Actually, I'm really at a loss on why they don't do it. Is the groundskeeper union insanely influential in Chicago or something?
Too many skeletons to dig up at Soldier Field if they replace the turf...
-
If they would install Grassy Turf, the Chicago Parks District might lose some union jobs... Back then that wouldn't happen, but the ways things are going now with Rahm wanting to cut down on the unions, it's a possibility.
I don't understand why the CPD does what they do with Lambeau Field and use Growing Lights. It's used a lot in Europe and the UK (where the sun don't shine much). Lambeau is always in better shape than Soldier Field's in November and December.
http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-1/Lambeau-Experimenting-With-Growing-Lights/50c593c2-baff-4d7a-bcbe-58c752ddb3d1
-
I get what you are saying, but in all honesty, the Cover 2 defense was really honed when Dungy was D coordinator for MN and Lovie himself used it in STL. Dungy also did well with it in IND.
So, I'm not sure that the slow play favors their defense, or even their update Martz style offense.
Actually, I'm really at a loss on why they don't do it. Is the groundskeeper union insanely influential in Chicago or something?
I get what you mean when you break it down through styles of offense and defense, but what I am saying is most teams have better offenses then the Bears (when you look at just pure talent) - especially in the WR category (and no, a washed up Roy Williams doesn't help), slow the field down, makes top WR lose some of their worth
-
I get what you mean when you break it down through styles of offense and defense, but what I am saying is most teams have better offenses then the Bears (when you look at just pure talent) - especially in the WR category (and no, a washed up Roy Williams doesn't help), slow the field down, makes top WR lose some of their worth
On the other side of things, Fieldturf would make Urlacher, Briggs, Peppers and Hester that much quicker. Those are 4 of the Bears' 5 most important and most impactful players (Cutler being the fifth).
There's clearly something going on behind the scenes as to why the Bears and the city don't want to install turf. Perhaps it makes too much sense and that's confusing to both sides.
-
I get what you mean when you break it down through styles of offense and defense, but what I am saying is most teams have better offenses then the Bears (when you look at just pure talent) - especially in the WR category (and no, a washed up Roy Williams doesn't help), slow the field down, makes top WR lose some of their worth
Fair enough. The bears will never be confused for the greatest show on turf.
Still doesn't seem to make much sense to me, however. I like natural grass as much as the next guy, but if they are going to use Soldier field for multiple events per year (football, HS football, concerts, soccer, etc.) they should just put in field turf and be done with it. Far more durable and versatile.
High schools are putting it in instead of building multiple fields for soccer, football, la crosse, track, etc. You can play far more games per year on field turf without worrying about damage or safety conditions.
-
I heard George McCaskey on the radio this AM say that grass is still safer than turf, and they want to have a nice grass field. Can't blame them for that, but a crappy grass field is worse than a nice fieldturf field.
-
http://www.mlive.com/lions/index.ssf/2011/08/detroit_lions_rookie_running_b.html
Because, no matter who is in charge, the Lions will always be the Lions.........
That makes 2 of their top 3 draft picks out. Countdown until someone bumps into Stafford and he injures his shoulder......commencing......now.....
-
Fair enough. The bears will never be confused for the greatest show on turf.
Still doesn't seem to make much sense to me, however. I like natural grass as much as the next guy, but if they are going to use Soldier field for multiple events per year (football, HS football, concerts, soccer, etc.) they should just put in field turf and be done with it. Far more durable and versatile.
High schools are putting it in instead of building multiple fields for soccer, football, la crosse, track, etc. You can play far more games per year on field turf without worrying about damage or safety conditions.
I think it ends up coming down to $$ as it always is when the McCaskeys are concerned. And since they Bears don't own Soldier Field, it makes less financial sense for them to pay for something they don't even own.
Its like paying for a boob job for a girl you are only casually dating.
-
If they would install Grassy Turf, the Chicago Parks District might lose some union jobs... Back then that wouldn't happen, but the ways things are going now with Rahm wanting to cut down on the unions, it's a possibility.
I don't understand why the CPD does what they do with Lambeau Field and use Growing Lights. It's used a lot in Europe and the UK (where the sun don't shine much). Lambeau is always in better shape than Soldier Field's in November and December.
http://www.packers.com/news-and-events/article-1/Lambeau-Experimenting-With-Growing-Lights/50c593c2-baff-4d7a-bcbe-58c752ddb3d1
Growing lights, eh? I know a few people in madtown that are interested...
-
I think it ends up coming down to $$ as it always is when the McCaskeys are concerned. And since they Bears don't own Soldier Field, it makes less financial sense for them to pay for something they don't even own.
Its like paying for a boob job for a girl you are only casually dating.
Well, I would think that paying to lay the turf and never worrying about field condition again would be worth it.
I don't know what the stuff costs though... but I can't imagine it's so much that it's not worth it. I mean, pro teams should never really skimp on this kind of stuff. They have too much $$ invested in their product to have stupid issues with something like turf.
-
Well, according to WSCR this afternoon, the Park District will install whatever the Bears want, and would likely pay for it. And that has been the case for awhile. But it is the Bears that insist on the natural grass.
-
On the other side of things, Fieldturf would make Urlacher, Briggs, Peppers and Hester that much quicker. Those are 4 of the Bears' 5 most important and most impactful players (Cutler being the fifth).
There's clearly something going on behind the scenes as to why the Bears and the city don't want to install turf. Perhaps it makes too much sense and that's confusing to both sides.
Except this isn't 2009.
-
Figured with the season upon us, I'd get this thread back going.
Predictions for the North:
1. Pack Head and shoulders better than anyone in the division, top team in the NFL in my opinion. All the Philly talk is overblown, there's no better team in the NFC than Green Bay. Scary that they will (or rather are starting off) with a healthy/better roster than last season. No reason they shouldn't cruise to a North title.
2. Bears I think the Bears will be better than people think, which might sound odd since they hosted an NFC title game a season ago. I think they just miss the playoffs, but have a lot of 3 or 4 point losses. Tougher schedule this season, tougher than even the Pack (because they won the North last year).
3. Lions If the Lions were a stock, I'd be selling them right now. Will they be better? They should be. Playoffs? Not this year. I actually thought the LeShoure injury really hurt them. I think Best is a bust, as good as the rest of the offense can be. That secondary will be their downfall (even as good as Suh is).
4. Vikes I just don't see them doing much of anything. A very "meh" kinda team (outside of AP). They're not bad enough to be horrible, but not good enough to come close to making the playoffs. The 3 teams in front of them in the division are all better.
-
I don't know what to think about Green Bay. On the one hand, they went 10-6 and had to win their last two even to get into the playoffs. On the other, they were the first team since the AFL/NFL merger to never be down more than seven points in a game, and when they got their act together, strung along six victories in a row.
So it wouldn't surprise me to see them go 14-2 and repeat....and it wouldn't surprise me that they look at times like they did last year, and finish 10-6....I just don't know what to expect.
-
Detroit will be better, but will that be enough? Tough, tough division. If Stafford starts 16 games, they have a realistic chance to make the playoffs. If he goes down again, all bets are off. The secondary will be good enough. They will rarely have to cover more than 3 seconds anyway. 3 biggest concerns for Detroit: Running game, Stafford staying healthy, team depth.
-
Kyle Rudolph offensive rookie of the year.
Vikings make the playoffs and do damage. SKOL VIKINGS!
-
Kyle Rudolph offensive rookie of the year.
Vikings make the playoffs and do damage. SKOL VIKINGS!
I think you have been hitting the Skol a little hard here....
(http://www.bartonbrands.com/skolvodka/largeprodshot.jpg)
-
Kyle Rudolph offensive rookie of the year.
Vikings make the playoffs and do damage. SKOL VIKINGS!
I think you are by yourself in that corner, keep up the good fight!
-
Packers should win the division with relative ease. After that it may come down to the Bears' and Lions' respective O-lines. Whichever team does a better job keeping their QB on his feet will likely finish second, and have a good shot at the playoffs.
-
I think you are by yourself in that corner, keep up the good fight!
Hey, the offensive ROY is usually a TE, so he's not off there. Oh wait...
-
I don't know what to think about Green Bay. On the one hand, they went 10-6 and had to win their last two even to get into the playoffs. On the other, they were the first team since the AFL/NFL merger to never be down more than seven points in a game, and when they got their act together, strung along six victories in a row.
So it wouldn't surprise me to see them go 14-2 and repeat....and it wouldn't surprise me that they look at times like they did last year, and finish 10-6....I just don't know what to expect.
+1
The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.
Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10
-
+1
The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.
Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10
Have never and will never believe that argument. If they truly felt they had nothing to play for Cutler would not have ever thrown a pass, let alone been in long enough to get sacked SIX times (that number may be wrong, I'm too lazy to look it up right now). If they were just going to let the Packers win and show nothing, they would've sat the starters. Playing a "vanilla" gameplan (did the Bears ever have anything that wasn't vanilla? They are not a flashy team who does the same thing week in and week our) does not save players from injury, they are still on the field. They knew they may very well see the Packers again and did not want them getting into the playoffs, thus playing everyone all the way through. The fact of the matter is Packers vs. Bears games are ALWAYS ugly games for BOTH teams. They're rivals, it's always in cold weather, and they know each other better than they know anyone else. The NFC Championship game was just as ugly, and no Cutler in the 2nd half would not have been a difference maker. Heine played a better 2nd half than Cutler did.
10-6 is not dominating, no. But 6-0 to close put the year, going with wins AT Philli, Chi, and ATL, neutral against Pitt, and home against NYG and Chi is certainly dominating and proved they were the best team in the NFL. That's 5-0 against the 1, 2, and 3 seeds in the NFC and 2 seed in the AFC, and a win against the last team our of the NFC playoff. And oh, the Packers get 1 of the top 3 tight ends in the league back for the best QB/receiving core in the NFL and their feature tailback (although he won't be the feature back this year) to possibly give them SOME sort of running game. Not to mention Rogers missed 2 games with concussions.
And mediocre division? Are we talking about the NFC North? The 1 that had 2 teams in the NFC Championship game? The 1 that had it's 2nd place team win the Super Bowl? Interesting.
-
The Packers are easily the best team in the NFC. 12-4 or 13-3.
-
Have never and will never believe that argument. If they truly felt they had nothing to play for Cutler would not have ever thrown a pass, let alone been in long enough to get sacked SIX times (that number may be wrong, I'm too lazy to look it up right now). If they were just going to let the Packers win and show nothing, they would've sat the starters. Playing a "vanilla" gameplan (did the Bears ever have anything that wasn't vanilla? They are not a flashy team who does the same thing week in and week our) does not save players from injury, they are still on the field. They knew they may very well see the Packers again and did not want them getting into the playoffs, thus playing everyone all the way through. The fact of the matter is Packers vs. Bears games are ALWAYS ugly games for BOTH teams. They're rivals, it's always in cold weather, and they know each other better than they know anyone else. The NFC Championship game was just as ugly, and no Cutler in the 2nd half would not have been a difference maker. Heine played a better 2nd half than Cutler did.
10-6 is not dominating, no. But 6-0 to close put the year, going with wins AT Philli, Chi, and ATL, neutral against Pitt, and home against NYG and Chi is certainly dominating and proved they were the best team in the NFL. That's 5-0 against the 1, 2, and 3 seeds in the NFC and 2 seed in the AFC, and a win against the last team our of the NFC playoff. And oh, the Packers get 1 of the top 3 tight ends in the league back for the best QB/receiving core in the NFL and their feature tailback (although he won't be the feature back this year) to possibly give them SOME sort of running game. Not to mention Rogers missed 2 games with concussions.
And mediocre division? Are we talking about the NFC North? The 1 that had 2 teams in the NFC Championship game? The 1 that had it's 2nd place team win the Super Bowl? Interesting.
Sheesh. Is it tough to type with your tears all over the keyboard?
We've been over the Bears' gameplan thing before. I have my educated guess and you have your blindly loyal guess so we can just agree to disagree on that one and move on.
As for the division, Detroit and Minnesota both went 6-10 last season and IMO both will be about the same this season. Yes, the Bears went to the conference championship game last season (and would have won if Cutler was healthy), but I don't see them doing much better than .500 this season. Therefore, I believe the division is very mediocre. You're more than welcome to feel differently.
If wadesworld doesn't respond, we'll know his head exploded based on that sarcastic parenthetical.
-
The Packers are easily the best team in the NFC. 12-4 or 13-3.
They will be the #3 seed in the NFC behind Atlanta and Philly.
-
They will be the #3 seed in the NFC behind Atlanta and Philly.
I guess we just disagree.
-
+1
The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season.
More accurately, they got healthier/had a complete roster at the right time, and were without a doubt the best team by the end of the year. There were some questions during the regular season to be sure, but the only people who had those questions by the end of the year were probably living in Chicago. Now they bring that same team back plus they get to add the numerous parts they lost during the year, including one of the more dominant players in the league in Finley as well as Ryan Grant.
They should walk through that division.
-
Sheesh. Is it tough to type with your tears all over the keyboard?
We've been over the Bears' gameplan thing before. I have my educated guess and you have your blindly loyal guess so we can just agree to disagree on that one and move on.
As for the division, Detroit and Minnesota both went 6-10 last season and IMO both will be about the same this season. Yes, the Bears went to the conference championship game last season (and would have won if Cutler was healthy), but I don't see them doing much better than .500 this season. Therefore, I believe the division is very mediocre. You're more than welcome to feel differently.
If wadesworld doesn't respond, we'll know his head exploded based on that sarcastic parenthetical.
I'm just trying to bring some reasonable talk into the "The Packers were not a dominant team last year." Again, is 10-6 dominant? Absolutely not. But for all of the reasons I stated, it was clear that they were the best team in the NFL, even with 2 key starters missing from the offense, when it mattered. Glad you can respond to my reasoning with personal attacks (not that it's really insulting, just lack of a better way to put it).
How is yours opinion an "educated guess" while mine is "blindly loyal?" Here's a question for you, what happened in the NFC Championship game, when the Bears were no longer playing a "vanilla" game and had everything to lose (and were at home)? The exact same thing that happened in Week 17. You would think that by going from "vanilla" to all out, and playing at home as opposed to on the road, they would have more success. But it was a very ugly game that the Packers were able to pull out again. So are the Bears just somehow a team that can play "vanilla" and not try because they have "nothing to play for" and still have the exact same results when they have everything to play for?
Another question. I ask you to please give me some reasonable explanation for this. Jay Cutler was sacked SIX times in week 17 game. Why in the WORLD, if the Bears are not even trying win that game, is he in the game long enough to be sacked SIX times? You're really going to risk injury to your starting quarterback in a game that you supposedly are not even trying in during week 17, entering the playoffs? I guess I'm just "blindly loyal" and really any team who is locked into the 2nd spot in the playoffs and cannot move up or down would play their starting quarterback long enough to be sacked SIX times if they aren't trying to win the football game. Just explain to me with your "educated guess" how that one works. Is Lovie that much of an idiot? He's not trying, yet he's saying "Hey Jay, go out there, if you get sacked once, no big deal, twice, it's cool, 3 times, keep going, 4 times, alright, 5 times, you'll be OK, 6 times, let's finish this one out. If you happen to get hurt the 7th time you are sacked, we'll be OK with Heine being our starting quarterback going into the playoffs." I guess that must be the one.
My head must still be in tact, but clearly I'm just an idiot for questioning why you'd have your starting QB in a week 17 game long enough to be sacked 6 times in a game that you're not trying to win and that can't move you up or down in the playoff race.
-
+1
The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.
Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10
The thing that this comment glosses over is the massive number of injuries the Packers sustained last year to key contributors. When healthy (in the playoffs) they did dominate.
If bitten by the injury bug again this year, sure, they might end up 10-6 or at worst 9-7. This doesn't make the team mediocre, it means they have depth. I'd expect a healthy GB team to get at least 11 wins, with 12 a real possibility.
-
I guess we just disagree.
Yea, I thought we were just throwing out predictions.
Loser sends the winner a Fat Tire bomber.
-
I'm just trying to bring some reasonable talk into the "The Packers were not a dominant team last year." Again, is 10-6 dominant? Absolutely not. But for all of the reasons I stated, it was clear that they were the best team in the NFL, even with 2 key starters missing from the offense, when it mattered. Glad you can respond to my reasoning with personal attacks (not that it's really insulting, just lack of a better way to put it).
How is yours opinion an "educated guess" while mine is "blindly loyal?" Here's a question for you, what happened in the NFC Championship game, when the Bears were no longer playing a "vanilla" game and had everything to lose (and were at home)? The exact same thing that happened in Week 17. You would think that by going from "vanilla" to all out, and playing at home as opposed to on the road, they would have more success. But it was a very ugly game that the Packers were able to pull out again. So are the Bears just somehow a team that can play "vanilla" and not try because they have "nothing to play for" and still have the exact same results when they have everything to play for?
Another question. I ask you to please give me some reasonable explanation for this. Jay Cutler was sacked SIX times in week 17 game. Why in the WORLD, if the Bears are not even trying win that game, is he in the game long enough to be sacked SIX times? You're really going to risk injury to your starting quarterback in a game that you supposedly are not even trying in during week 17, entering the playoffs? I guess I'm just "blindly loyal" and really any team who is locked into the 2nd spot in the playoffs and cannot move up or down would play their starting quarterback long enough to be sacked SIX times if they aren't trying to win the football game. Just explain to me with your "educated guess" how that one works. Is Lovie that much of an idiot? He's not trying, yet he's saying "Hey Jay, go out there, if you get sacked once, no big deal, twice, it's cool, 3 times, keep going, 4 times, alright, 5 times, you'll be OK, 6 times, let's finish this one out. If you happen to get hurt the 7th time you are sacked, we'll be OK with Heine being our starting quarterback going into the playoffs." I guess that must be the one.
My head must still be in tact, but clearly I'm just an idiot for questioning why you'd have your starting QB in a week 17 game long enough to be sacked 6 times in a game that you're not trying to win and that can't move you up or down in the playoff race.
I stated that the Packers were not a dominant team in the regular season. They weren't. If the Giants didn't implode Week 15 vs. Philly, Packers fans would still be complaining about how Aaron Rodgers can't win big games and holds onto the ball too long. As it turned out, the Packers got hot late in the season and won the SB. You can claim that they didn't just "get hot" that they were getting healthy and would have been that dominant all season. We'll never know, but I can have my opinion and you can have yours. Personally, I think they're the class of an average division.
Having a vanilla gameplan and "not trying to win" are very different things. You didn't understand that in January and you still don't understand it now. I'm not going to waste my time explaining it to you again. That, along with the fact that you claim that the last game of the season and the NFC Championship game were exactly the same because they were both 7-point GB wins tells me all that I need to know about your football IQ.
-
Nice response. Enlighten me with your superior football IQ. I would love to hear it.
-
I think the Packers easily win the division, with the other 3 teams all finishing within one game of .500. The Pack tho, will lose in the playoffs to a team that exposes their thin secondary in a high scoring game.
-
Nice response. Enlighten me with your superior football IQ. I would love to hear it.
I don't claim to be a football expert, but I know enough to know when someone doesn't have a particularly strong grasp of the intricacies of football and football strategies. I don't mean that as an insult (though it may come across that way) because most fans are in this similar boat.
-
I don't claim to be a football expert, but I know enough to know when someone doesn't have a particularly strong grasp of the intricacies of football and football strategies. I don't mean that as an insult (though it may come across that way) because most fans are in this similar boat.
Then it should be pretty simple to answer what I would consider a pretty simple question: Why was Jay Cutler playing long enough to be sacked 6 times in a Week 17 game that had zero playoff implications for the Bears? If they were not doing everything they could to win that game and keep the Packers out of the playoffs, why were they doing anything that would risk their playoff success in playing all of their starters the entire game?
A more complex question is what is ever not "vanilla" about anything the Bears do?
-
The Pack tho, will lose in the playoffs to a team that exposes their thin secondary in a high scoring game.
What makes you say their secondary is thin? They have some rookies in supporting roles, but they have one HOF player (whom I expect to have a good year), and 2 pro bowl caliber guys in the starting 4 spots. The fourth is a bit of an unknown because of the injury last year. Question marks with some of the new guys? Sure. Thin? Not sure how you can say that. Add in the quality of their pass rush,and I am not terribly concerned about the secondary. All they did last year was lead the NFC in pass yds. allowed, YPA, opp. comp %, opp QB rating, and INTs (top 2 or 3 in every other category), but yeah, feel free to go with that if you think its a weakness.
-
+1
The Packers got hot at the right time and won the Super Bowl, but they were far from a dominant team throughout the regular season. People seem to overlook the fact that they snuck into the playoffs based on an ugly win against a Bears team that had nothing to play for (although I bet Lovie and crew are having second-thoughts about that vanilla gameplan given the way the postseason played out). That said, I still do expect the Packers to win this very mediocre division.
Prediction
Packers 10-6
Bears 8-8
Lions 7-9
Vikings 6-10
stop and think about that....they had new players having to step it up to replace the constant loss of starters due to injury so yes, there was some struggling taking place during that span, even Rodgers was out in 2 games due to his concussion yet Flynn came close to beating the Pats in NE
-
Freaking won the Super Bowl and still making excuses? Stop it! What happened is reality.
WHO DAT! SKOL VIKINGS! Green Bey loses at home tonight.. can't wait!
-
Freaking won the Super Bowl and still making excuses? Stop it! What happened is reality.
WHO DAT! SKOL VIKINGS! Green Bey loses at home tonight.. can't wait!
Anybody else picture Jay Bee as the Minnesota version of Bill Swerski's Superfans? Ole Swerskesson, eating his lefse and lutefisk and drinking liters of Grain Belt while yelling Skol Vikings all the time?
-
Anybody else picture Jay Bee as the Minnesota version of Bill Swerski's Superfans? Ole Swerskesson, eating his lefse and lutefisk and drinking liters of Grain Belt while yelling Skol Vikings all the time?
Wearing one of the cross dressing hats like this:
(http://o.aolcdn.com/photo-hub/5B47B90353DCE961408D7319555F7CB9CA62FD7F/vikings-fan-430nm090908.jpg)
-
Then it should be pretty simple to answer what I would consider a pretty simple question: Why was Jay Cutler playing long enough to be sacked 6 times in a Week 17 game that had zero playoff implications for the Bears? If they were not doing everything they could to win that game and keep the Packers out of the playoffs, why were they doing anything that would risk their playoff success in playing all of their starters the entire game?
A more complex question is what is ever not "vanilla" about anything the Bears do?
Lovie didn't want his starters to have 2 full weeks with no action prior to their first playoff game so he went into the final week of the season planning to play the starters for an indeterminate amount of time. Considering the Bears were keeping things basic, hoping to stay healthy and trying to get Johnny Knox 1,000 yards receiving, if the Packers, with their season on the line, got ahead by a couple scores, the Bears would pull the starters. If the game was close, as it was, the Bears would leave their starters out their and try to keep GB out of the playoffs. As it turned out, the Bears left their starters in the whole game but couldn't get the W.
Are you at all familiar with the Mike Martz offense? There's not much vanilla about it. It sure isn't the Ron Turner or John Schoop offense.
-
Lovie didn't want his starters to have 2 full weeks with no action prior to their first playoff game so he went into the final week of the season planning to play the starters for an indeterminate amount of time. Considering the Bears were keeping things basic, hoping to stay healthy and trying to get Johnny Knox 1,000 yards receiving, they assumed that the Packers, with their season on the line, would likely get ahead by a couple scores and the Bears would pull the starters.
That is a criminally stupid comment even for this board. There is not an NFL player or coach alive who goes into a game thinking that way.
-
Are you at all familiar with the Mike Martz offense? There's not much vanilla about it. It sure isn't the Ron Turner or John Schoop offense.
Mike Martz was not running his traditional offense by the end of the year. He reverted to a much more conservative style. This article is from January 15...before the NFCCG.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/sports/football/16bears.html
"After a late October bye week, the Bears regrouped to win five straight and seven of their last nine games. But by leaning more on running back Matt Forte, the Bears became one of the N.F.L.’s most-balanced offenses in the final nine weeks: 258 running plays and 276 passing."
After they lost the NFCCG, people for all over him for ditching this balanced approached for his more wide-open style.
-
That is a criminally stupid comment even for this board. There is not an NFL player or coach alive who goes into a game thinking that way.
I did word that poorly. It has been re-phrased.
-
Mike Martz was not running his traditional offense by the end of the year. He reverted to a much more conservative style. This article is from January 15...before the NFCCG.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/16/sports/football/16bears.html
"After a late October bye week, the Bears regrouped to win five straight and seven of their last nine games. But by leaning more on running back Matt Forte, the Bears became one of the N.F.L.’s most-balanced offenses in the final nine weeks: 258 running plays and 276 passing."
After they lost the NFCCG, people for all over him for ditching this balanced approached for his more wide-open style.
True, but balanced and conservative do not necessarily mean it's not complex.
-
Da Bears looking good early on. First observation from this game is the Falcons draft Julio Jones and are now going to try to get into shootouts with teams? Don't get me wrong, Matt Ryan is a good QB, but he is a possession QB, a QB who doesn't really make that many big, homerun type plays, but one who also doesn't turn the ball over. Their strength was in the running game and the possession game. They ran clock, kept other teams' defenses on the field for long periods of time, and made you earn the win by not turning the ball over. Now all of a sudden they're not only going no huddle, but it really is a hurry-up offense? As a Packers fan who thinks the Falcons are still a threat to them in the NFC, I love to see that. It's taking away from their strengths big time.
-
I thought the Bears would win a close one, surprised how much they are dominating. The Bears are giving up sacks (which they will a lot again this year), but they are in 100% control. It's 23-6 right now, could just as easily be 31-6.
-
I thought the Bears would win a close one, surprised how much they are dominating. The Bears are giving up sacks (which they will a lot again this year), but they are in 100% control. It's 23-6 right now, could just as easily be 31-6.
Yup. Although it is only 1 week and teams are surely effected by the shortened offseason due to the lockout, it looks as though this division may not be "very mediocre," as some here thought it would be. The Packers beat one of the top threats in the NFC in the Saints and the Bears beat one of the top teams in the NFC in the Falcons. The Lions are also on their way to a nice win over a team many consider to be the "other" up and coming team out of the NFC, the Bucs. Again, this is a division that had 2 teams playing for the NFC Championship last year. Will it happen again? Probably not, but it could.
-
TB still has a chance to pull off a miracle, but looks like NFC North>NFC South.
Some other quick observations...
Even with Peyton, I thought this was the beginning of the end (8-8 type season). Colts are going to be in the Andrew Luck sweepstakes at this rate.
Rams got beaten up literally today. I think literally half their offensive starters left that game due to injury.
I didn't think the Chiefs were going back to the playoffs, but shocked how bad Buffalo destroyed them.
-
Well, after week 1 the Vikings are right back where they were at the end of last year...in the basement of the NFC North. They will most likely remain there for the next 3+ years. Solid start to the McNabb era in Minnesota...a whopping 39 yards through the air today. This is 2011. THIRTY NINE YARDS. That is a bad quarter for NFL quarterbacks. Wow. And this is with the best running back in the game creating 8 men in the box. Did not expect them to be this awful. Wow.
-
Great job, Vikes. We've got them where we want them. Covered the spread, had a good chance to win in a game where everyone wrote us off. Played too conservatively on offense in the second half with the lead.
Get rid of some of the absolutely stupid penalties that hurt us bad on the last San Diego scoring drive (late hit, multiple offsides due to Rivers screaming like a girl) and that may have been enough. Defense played well for the most part - better than expected in most cases. Penalties (which were from the interior line guys, including Kevin Williams' fill in) and not attacking the check down passes well, but we did a lot of good things. Allen had great game... Greenway is a stud. Offensively, we'll be fine - AD is the man, Jenkins will help, McNabb will be fine, Percy is a delight.
Looking forward to the rest of the season. The NFC North is ours again! SKOL VIKINGS!!
-
Perhaps you mean LOL VIKINGS!
-
Looking forward to the rest of the season. The NFC North is ours again! SKOL VIKINGS!!
I tried to warn you guys on the first page...
Not another NFC north thread... pretty soon we'll all have to see that guy yelling "SKOLL VIKINGS" in random intervals. Can't we just make a Pack/Bear/Lion thread and discuss the relevant teams?
-
I thought the Bears would win a close one, surprised how much they are dominating. The Bears are giving up sacks (which they will a lot again this year), but they are in 100% control. It's 23-6 right now, could just as easily be 31-6.
Falcons are frauds - GB proved that last season in the playoffs. And Matt Ryan epitomizes the nickname "Captain Checkdown."
Bears looked pretty good.
-
SKOL VIKI...wait a minute...
-
Perhaps you mean LOL VIKINGS!
Just as appropriate 13 days later.
-
I *still* haven't seen that holding.
-
21 grabbed Bush's shoulder pad from behind on the run down the field before Knox even caught the ball. The back judge seemed like he had to reach all the way down his pants to get his flag for how long it took him to throw it.
-
This game shouldn't have even been within 20 points. Packers let the Bears back into that game with uncharacteristic turnovers. What an awful day for Starks. Grant played a nice game. Finley is as big of a matchup nightmare as there is in the NFL. He's scary good. Cutler, however, is not very good. Admittedly I haven't watched the first 2 Bears games, but the protection was good for him today. The sacks were all (with the exception of 1) on Cutler holding onto the ball too long.
Falcons and Eagles go to 1-2. That's nice.
Vikings could actually be a semi-decent team...if they only had to play 30 minutes of football. Old Man Donovan McNabb gets his 100 yards in the 1st half, gets tired, and calls it a day. They sure do love their old men as their quarterbacks there. They are an embarrassingly bad 2nd half team. Wow.
Denver comes into Lambeau next week. I like the chances of the Packers opening up 4-0.
-
21 grabbed Bush's shoulder pad from behind on the run down the field before Knox even caught the ball. The back judge seemed like he had to reach all the way down his pants to get his flag for how long it took him to throw it.
Thanks...and no one seems to be complaining.
-
21 grabbed Bush's shoulder pad from behind on the run down the field before Knox even caught the ball. The back judge seemed like he had to reach all the way down his pants to get his flag for how long it took him to throw it.
Being a Bears fan, I didn't want to see the hold but it was pretty clear when I re-watched the live shot. The ref just took a long time to throw the flag. The hold, itself, was completely unnecessary especially given the play that was called. I still have no idea how Woodson wasn't called for PI on the deep pass to Hester. Likely wouldn't have mattered anyway, the Packers were clearly the better team and Cutler played really poorly - too many unforced errors.
-
I thought Woodson should have been called there. I think the referee thought they just got mixed up...but that should have been at least illegal contact right?
The Bears need some grown up receivers. I honestly don't think a single Bear WR or TE would even make the Packers' roster.
-
I thought Woodson should have been called there. I think the referee thought they just got mixed up...but that should have been at least illegal contact right?
The Bears need some grown up receivers. I honestly don't think a single Bear WR or TE would even make the Packers' roster.
No argument here...although Kellen Davis could be a dangerous red zone target if he were on a team that knew how to use an athletic 6'7" TE.
-
Pretty clear who the better team was, 10 point outcome didn't really show the true step up in class Green Bay was.
Atlanta clearly isn't as good right now, making that Bears Week 1 victory a bit of a mirage.
Lions secondary hasn't been the achilles I thought it would be (yet). Lions have great schedule coming up too. Thanksgiving Day could be a hell of a game.
-
I thought Woodson should have been called there. I think the referee thought they just got mixed up...but that should have been at least illegal contact right?
The Bears need some grown up receivers. I honestly don't think a single Bear WR or TE would even make the Packers' roster.
Greg Olsen.........
Still don't understand that trade. He had a big game against the Packers with the Panthers and it seems the Packers have a tough time covering the Tight End. I know Martz hates the TE in his offense, but he was a solid weapon for Cutler, especially if you are replacing him with Roy Williams.
-
The problem with Olsen is that he is a TE and as you said, they don't like TEs in this offense. You split him out wide in this offense, and the Packers would cover him with a corner or safety because none of the others would hurt you.
It's just the wrong offense for today's NFL. QB drops too deep...not enough short controlled passes... Martz has been living on his Ram success for almost a decade with nothing to show for it.
-
I loved the Olsen trade, still do. They got (or will get) a high 3rd round choice for that swap. The Bears don't win today with Olsen still on the team.
Bears offense is the island of misfit toys, both from a personnel and philosophical stand point. Their best receiver is a running back, their tough yardage back can't get on the field, their TE's are supposed to be good blockers, and can't block. Their "top" WR is a converted college CB. The O line, outside of Carimi (jury is still out on him) is a mess.
To think of what Martz is and has been, the Bears offense lacks any true identity, even at it's worse.
-
Lions secondary hasn't been the achilles I thought it would be (yet). Lions have great schedule coming up too. Thanksgiving Day could be a hell of a game.
The secondary is adequate but not great. The day will come when the d-line is neutralized and they have to make plays all day. We will see what happens then. The linebackers are better. The D-line has yet to truly dominate a game, but the other teams have been scheming to hold off the d-line, leaving others to make plays and limiting the time the secondary has to cover.
The larger concern is the offensive line and the running game. Stafford has not shown the ability to take a lot of hits.
-
Thanks...and no one seems to be complaining.
The unfortunate part was Fox' replay. They focused in 21 being all alone - yet the flag was already on the field - at the 20 and 21 was at the 10. So, if you listened to Fox, how could there have been a hold? I thought that Aikman and Buck did not have one of their better days. (BTW, I did not see the replay after that, so I have not seen if it was a hold or not either)
The return call was brilliant and executed to perfection - but for the hold. When I saw the replay, I could only say wow and tip my cap.
-
I thought Woodson should have been called there. I think the referee thought they just got mixed up...but that should have been at least illegal contact right?
The Bears need some grown up receivers. I honestly don't think a single Bear WR or TE would even make the Packers' roster.
Hester turned and ran into Woodson's back. Woodson was running down the field. To me, it was incidental contact and a good no calll. Woodson did not initiate the contact.
The previous series, Jennings was interfered with on 3rd down, no call. Bang bang play, tough for the officials to get them right all the time.
-
Sultan's comment about the Bears' WR not even making the Packers' roster got me thinking...If you combined the rosters of the two teams, Urlacher, Briggs, Peppers and Forte would be the only Bears players who would start. In other words, the Packers have better players in 18 of the 22 positions, including 10 of 11 on offense. It's tough to win a division, or even a game, against a team with that much more talent. That's really a testament to the Packers' ability to evaluate talent and while many Bears fans want him run out of town, I actually give Lovie some credit for what he has done with the Bears considering how poorly they draft.
-
Hester turned and ran into Woodson's back. Woodson was running down the field. To me, it was incidental contact and a good no calll. Woodson did not initiate the contact.
The previous series, Jennings was interfered with on 3rd down, no call. Bang bang play, tough for the officials to get them right all the time.
And when Hester got called for a personal foul, it should have been called on both players, not to mention Shields bumped Hester 20 yards downfield which was a clear penalty. Both sides could probably do this all day ;)
-
And when Hester got called for a personal foul, it should have been called on both players, not to mention Shields bumped Hester 20 yards downfield which was a clear penalty. Both sides could probably do this all day ;)
Completely disagree. Rather obvious to me that the ref wasn't even gonna throw a flag, until Hester threw a shot after the ref stepped in between them.
-
The unfortunate part was Fox' replay. They focused in 21 being all alone - yet the flag was already on the field - at the 20 and 21 was at the 10. So, if you listened to Fox, how could there have been a hold? I thought that Aikman and Buck did not have one of their better days. (BTW, I did not see the replay after that, so I have not seen if it was a hold or not either)
The return call was brilliant and executed to perfection - but for the hold. When I saw the replay, I could only say wow and tip my cap.
The flag comes out right as Know catches it and was thrown by the ref on the goal line. That's a very late flag and called by a ref almost 50 yards off of the play. Fox's replay combined with the spotter claiming the flag was on #29, who doesn't exist, made the whole thing really odd...Put me in the group with conspiracy theorists, i think this one was fixed.
-
The flag comes out right as Know catches it and was thrown by the ref on the goal line. That's a very late flag and called by a ref almost 50 yards off of the play. Fox's replay combined with the spotter claiming the flag was on #29, who doesn't exist, made the whole thing really odd...Put me in the group with conspiracy theorists, i think this one was fixed.
That TD would have covered the over (46), and the Bears would then most likely cover the -4 too...
-
That TD would have covered the over (46), and the Bears would then most likely cover the -4 too...
Exactly
-
The flag comes out right as Know catches it and was thrown by the ref on the goal line. That's a very late flag and called by a ref almost 50 yards off of the play. Fox's replay combined with the spotter claiming the flag was on #29, who doesn't exist, made the whole thing really odd...Put me in the group with conspiracy theorists, i think this one was fixed.
Admittedly a fishy situation, but in the wide angle you can see the ref digging in his pocket for a good 10 seconds before he found the flag. The penalty was for a jersey pull by 21 on Jarrett Bush about 10 yards past the line of scrimmage. Given how the play worked out, did it have an impact? Absolutely not. But at that point the official doesn't know the trick is on, additionally you have to put that on 21....he knew what the call was, there is NO reason to commit a penalty there.
Kudos to the Bears that was a brilliant call and scheme. Too bad they shot their wad for no satisfaction.
-
Graham was stunned.
"It's unfortunate that something we worked so hard on would be called back because of a play by me," he said. "It was maybe 30, 40 yards away from the play. It wasn't blatant but it was just a bad play by me. I should have just let him go, just don't even touch him. He had nothing to do with the play.
"It worked just the way we planned on it."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0926-bears-side-defense-special-teams--20110926,0,6025170.story
-
Fixed? GMAFB. The player admitted it and no one on the bears argued about the call.
-
Fixed? GMAFB. The player admitted it and no one on the bears argued about the call.
Also, we never landed on the moon.
-
Fixed? GMAFB. The player admitted it and no one on the bears argued about the call.
Graham is on it on too
-
Fixed? GMAFB. The player admitted it and no one on the bears argued about the call.
Also, +1 on the acronym
-
Ok...is this one of those "can't see teal on a mobile device" things? Or "I'm apparently half-witted" things?
-
And when Hester got called for a personal foul, it should have been called on both players, not to mention Shields bumped Hester 20 yards downfield which was a clear penalty. Both sides could probably do this all day ;)
Agreed, though, Hester was an idiot for taking the punch when he did. They let them push and were going to go without a call. Hester made a really boneheaded play, though, to punch Shields with the official right there. It was a no call until then. Hester lost his cool. I am guessing he gets a fine for that, as it was a punch to the facemask.
-
Ok...is this one of those "can't see teal on a mobile device" things? Or "I'm apparently half-witted" things?
I can't see teal on the PC either.
-
Admittedly a fishy situation, but in the wide angle you can see the ref digging in his pocket for a good 10 seconds before he found the flag. The penalty was for a jersey pull by 21 on Jarrett Bush about 10 yards past the line of scrimmage. Given how the play worked out, did it have an impact? Absolutely not. But at that point the official doesn't know the trick is on, additionally you have to put that on 21....he knew what the call was, there is NO reason to commit a penalty there.
Kudos to the Bears that was a brilliant call and scheme. Too bad they shot their wad for no satisfaction.
I just saw the replay. It was early on in the play. 21 does grab Bush's shoulder pad from behind. You see Bush jerk backwards as he is running. Really a foolish play by 21. That play deserved better, the way it was drawn up and executed by everyone else.
-
Here are a few photos of the hold by 21:
http://imgur.com/a/MLKx2 (http://imgur.com/a/MLKx2)
They do not conclusively show a holding penalty, but you can see what was happening.
-
The refs should have just picked up the flag as soon as they realized how awesome that play was.
(Yes, this is in teal)
-
so now besides using teal for sarcasm we have to indicate in text that we used teal for those checking in on the cellphones?
(not in teal)
-
so now besides using teal for sarcasm we have to indicate in text that we used teal for those checking in on the cellphones?
(not in teal)
Apparently.
It seems as though some people can't tell sarcasm without being told it's sarcasm.
-
so now besides using teal for sarcasm we have to indicate in text that we used teal for those checking in on the cellphones?
(not in teal)
LOL!! I am not a fan of teal anyway and refuse to use it. Ruins good/great sarcasm (which I am a huge fan of)!
-
The punt play design was brilliant, Toub is one of the best ST coaches in the league. I can't believe no one has thought of doing that before. Graham admitted he held the guy, ref threw the flag, so it's tough to argue it. Only stinks because it was such a brilliant play design and (almost) executed to perfection.
-
The punt play design was brilliant, Toub is one of the best ST coaches in the league. I can't believe no one has thought of doing that before. Graham admitted he held the guy, ref threw the flag, so it's tough to argue it. Only stinks because it was such a brilliant play design and (almost) executed to perfection.
You have to have a Devon Hester to be able to pull this one off. The Packers may have a threat in Cobb, but frankly besides Desmond Howard, they could have tried this at any time over the past 20 years and not have had any success. It was amazing to me to see how all the Packers, except for Bush, ran right with Hester. That is the Devin Hester factor.
Plus, the play design was brilliant, but the timing of it even moreso. The only chance the Bears had was to return the punt for a TD. That is why every Packer followed Hester.
Even so, the play Knox made to get down the field, field the ball, stay in bounds then turn and return it was an extremely athletic play.
-
You have to have a Devon Hester to be able to pull this one off. The Packers may have a threat in Cobb, but frankly besides Desmond Howard, they could have tried this at any time over the past 20 years and not have had any success. It was amazing to me to see how all the Packers, except for Bush, ran right with Hester. That is the Devin Hester factor.
Plus, the play design was brilliant, but the timing of it even moreso. The only chance the Bears had was to return the punt for a TD. That is why every Packer followed Hester.
Even so, the play Knox made to get down the field, field the ball, stay in bounds then turn and return it was an extremely athletic play.
The other part that was brilliant as part of the design was they had a blocker to account for the punter as presumably he would know where the punt went.
Now this will pay dividends because they can run head fakes off this that should open seams for Hester but not as much as it should have. Thank god for #21 :)
-
The other part that was brilliant as part of the design was they had a blocker to account for the punter as presumably he would know where the punt went.
Now this will pay dividends because they can run head fakes off this that should open seams for Hester but not as much as it should have. Thank god for #21 :)
I'm just shocked that no one knew that the ball was kicked to the complete other side of the field. Absolutely no one located the ball when it was in the air. I thought I saw in the replay that Mathstay almost gave a "WTF" kind of look when he saw all 10 guys go to the other side of the field. Crazy play. Glad my team caught a break on that one.
When they do the directional kicks, do the cover guys know what way it is planned on going?
-
Masthay said the play was called to kick left, so all the players should have been expecting the ball to be kicked left.
-
I'm just shocked that no one knew that the ball was kicked to the complete other side of the field. Absolutely no one located the ball when it was in the air. I thought I saw in the replay that Mathstay almost gave a "WTF" kind of look when he saw all 10 guys go to the other side of the field. Crazy play. Glad my team caught a break on that one.
When they do the directional kicks, do the cover guys know what way it is planned on going?
Yes, the coverage guys know which way the ball is supposed to go. I recall reading a quote from one of the Packers who said that he assumed the ball came off the punter's foot wrong. My favorite part of the play is when Hester looked like he was about to catch the ball but nothing happened and everyone just stood there for a second before realizing that Knox was streaking down the sidelines.
It would be nearly impossible for the coverage guys to locate the ball in the air. If those guys are running full speed while looking up, they'd get absolutely leveled.
While this play technically didn't work because of the hold, I wouldn't be surprised if it really opened things up for Hester in the future. If Know splits off from blocking the gunner like he did, he has to be accounted for whether it's a decoy or not. That's at least 1-2 fewer guys keying on Hester.
-
I was in London over the weekend and only caught part of the game, and watched the rest taped last night. Upon letting my rage simmer down, I came to see a hopeful silver lining. People are beginning to realize the king has no clothes in Chicago. I love the Bears and have defended many things, but I never defended Martz. The man lived the last decade of a team with a HOF QB, RB and LT, as well as two perennial Pro Bowl WR. His system had little to do with that team being an offensive monster. Jerry Angelo's ineptitude in the offseason was Mike Brown (Cincinnati)-esque and if you look at this OL breakdown like the Tribune did the other day, its beyond laughable, its infuriating. And while I like Lovie, this is all on his watch. He's let Martz run crazy, which is ironic cause he won't run the ball, and Angelo has made personnel moves based on a belief in Martz' supposed brilliance. Lovie has still done a great job with the D, no doubt, but he needs to exert more control. I hope this season doesn't get anymore painful and there is some serious housecleaning come January.
This isn't making excuses, the Packers are a fantastic team and were well constructed by Ted Thompson to be sure.
And as a Cutler apologist (I don't think he's a top 5 QB, i just think he's been put in a very difficult situation with unrealistic expectations), I worry we may never get him as a productive QB ever again. He had a pretty solid year last year despite being beaten down week to week that ended with controversy in the NFC Championship game. By all accounts, he came back this summer in the best shape he's been, with better footwork and a good attitude. And he was rewarded with no protection on the line and a scheme that allows for teams to sit back and wait for him to pass cause 1) there is no run blocking 2) they won't run anyways. You can tell he is pissed, and I don't blame him one bit this year.
-
While this play technically didn't work because of the hold, I wouldn't be surprised if it really opened things up for Hester in the future. If Know splits off from blocking the gunner like he did, he has to be accounted for whether it's a decoy or not. That's at least 1-2 fewer guys keying on Hester.
I admire your optimism, but the skunk is out of the box, and figuring out how to deal with it is not going to be difficult for NFL coaching staffs. There is a reason "trick plays' are rarely attempted, let alone work.
-
I admire your optimism, but the skunk is out of the box, and figuring out how to deal with it is not going to be difficult for NFL coaching staffs. There is a reason "trick plays' are rarely attempted, let alone work.
I'm curious...has Chicago specifically said that this was a planned trick play? I've seen a lot of return men fake a fair catch when the ball isn't close. This struck me more as a play where Knox just happened to notice where the ball was going and made a heads-up play and went and got it (and then ran like hell when he realized that nobody else pursued the ball). But I don't see nearly as much coverage about it here as you guys probably see in WI/IL.
-
I admire your optimism, but the skunk is out of the box, and figuring out how to deal with it is not going to be difficult for NFL coaching staffs. There is a reason "trick plays' are rarely attempted, let alone work.
Well, at least they waited until week 3...the Ravens won't be able to run that fake PAT/FG ever again after wasting it on a blowout game against Pitt in week 1.
-
I'm curious...has Chicago specifically said that this was a planned trick play? I've seen a lot of return men fake a fair catch when the ball isn't close. This struck me more as a play where Knox just happened to notice where the ball was going and made a heads-up play and went and got it (and then ran like hell when he realized that nobody else pursued the ball). But I don't see nearly as much coverage about it here as you guys probably see in WI/IL.
It was a planned play.
I disagree with Navin, not to say this play will work 100% again, but now that it is on film, it needs to be accounted for. The success you may see out of this is if both Hester and Knox line up on the punt return team, gunners now need to account for both of them, as they'll most likely be split out on opposite sides of the field. As mentioned, the Packers had planned to kick this left, and had all eyes focused on Hester. Give Hester all the credit here, the Packers were so focused on him, they abandoned their responsibilities and lanes.
One of two things happens now going forward. Gunners have to possibly stop and look up where the ball is (which is an absolute disaster waiting to happen) or you'll see gunners a little bit more spread out, opening up more lanes for the punt returner. Just because a punt is supposed to be kicked left/right/middle, doesn't always work out that way.
-
I admire your optimism, but the skunk is out of the box, and figuring out how to deal with it is not going to be difficult for NFL coaching staffs. There is a reason "trick plays' are rarely attempted, let alone work.
I'm not saying they're going to run this play again, but opposing teams now have to account for it. It's the same general concept as a play-action pass, if you can get just 1 guy to take even a half-step in the wrong direction, that can really open things up. For a returner like Hester, a gunner taking a half-step out of his lane could be all he needs to break a big return.
-
I'm curious...has Chicago specifically said that this was a planned trick play? I've seen a lot of return men fake a fair catch when the ball isn't close. This struck me more as a play where Knox just happened to notice where the ball was going and made a heads-up play and went and got it (and then ran like hell when he realized that nobody else pursued the ball). But I don't see nearly as much coverage about it here as you guys probably see in WI/IL.
If it wasn't a planned play, Venable would not have been out in front of Knox to account for the punter.
-
Hope the Bears aren't out of the playoff race by the time they get this play to work.
-
If it wasn't a planned play, Venable would not have been out in front of Knox to account for the punter.
Unless, of course, he saw the play developing. If it was not planned (and I'm not saying it wasn't), Knox had time to run from the line of scrimmage to where the ball landed (hell, he obviously had time for this even if it was planned). Venable certainly would have had time to get in position to block the punter. Especially since the punter actually was on the side of the field that everyone else was, and came across to where Knox was. He was just far enough down field that he was able to get over before Knox blew by.
I ask again: have the Bears come out and stated that this was a planned play?
-
Unless, of course, he saw the play developing. If it was not planned (and I'm not saying it wasn't), Knox had time to run from the line of scrimmage to where the ball landed (hell, he obviously had time for this even if it was planned). Venable certainly would have had time to get in position to block the punter. Especially since the punter actually was on the side of the field that everyone else was, and came across to where Knox was. He was just far enough down field that he was able to get over before Knox blew by.
I ask again: have the Bears come out and stated that this was a planned play?
The Bears have not come out and specifically stated it was planned...because they didn't have to.
-
The Bears have not come out and specifically stated it was planned...because they didn't have to.
My parents told me Rodgers said post game that it was one of the best drawn up plays he'd ever seen and they were completely fooled. Those guys have seen/played more football than any of us ever will, so if they don't think its a fluke, I am positive it was drawn up.
-
My parents told me Rodgers said post game that it was one of the best drawn up plays he'd ever seen and they were completely fooled. Those guys have seen/played more football than any of us ever will, so if they don't think its a fluke, I am positive it was drawn up.
I heard a little bit ago on the radio, that apparently, a couple Packers, including McCarthy said that they picked up this play, or at least aspects of it on film and earlier in the game (I believe the punt Bush downed on the 1 yard line), so there's no question it was designed, and they got a perfect punt/situation on which to execute it. What are they doing? Getting it out there in hopes that teams won't punt toward the sideline to keep the ball away from Hester, and or limit his returns by cutting the field in half. As I said, it is a nice gimmik/attempt, but with the element of surprise gone, it will take about 5 minutes for teams to take it away.
-
The Bears have not come out and specifically stated it was planned...because they didn't have to.
Agreed. There is no way that Knock did this on his own. If he had, what accounts for Hester? What accounts for the lone blocker upfield (for the Punter).
Watch Hester springing upfield after the fake (almost beat Knox to the endzone).
This was definitely designed, well designed.
-
Agreed. There is no way that Knock did this on his own. If he had, what accounts for Hester? What accounts for the lone blocker upfield (for the Punter).
Watch Hester springing upfield after the fake (almost beat Knox to the endzone).
This was definitely designed, well designed.
Meant to point that out, watch Hester on this play. It's ridiculous how fast he gets down field, and he almost does beat Knox, not to mention he ran nearly 40 yards wide across the field as well. Just insane.
-
I heard a little bit ago on the radio, that apparently, a couple Packers, including McCarthy said that they picked up this play, or at least aspects of it on film and earlier in the game (I believe the punt Bush downed on the 1 yard line), so there's no question it was designed, and they got a perfect punt/situation on which to execute it. What are they doing? Getting it out there in hopes that teams won't punt toward the sideline to keep the ball away from Hester, and or limit his returns by cutting the field in half. As I said, it is a nice gimmik/attempt, but with the element of surprise gone, it will take about 5 minutes for teams to take it away.
You're not getting it. As MUdish and I both stated, the play might not be run again but it WILL need to be accounted for. It's the same reason why teams run fake end-arounds, for example, early in games: they want their opponent to be aware that that play is an option and they want to see how the D responds. Having this play out there means the coverage team will have more to worry about than just bringing down the best return man in NFL history. They need to be aware of where the ball is and where other players are on the field. They can't simply run in their lanes to Hester and assume the ball is going to come down to him. If Knox is blocking a gunner but leaves him and goes to the opposite side of the field as Hester, someone, likely that gunner, is going to have to go with him. Immediately, that opens up a lane for Hester. It may not seem like much, but giving Hester any advantage at all could result in a quick TD for the Bears.
-
You're not getting it.
I totally get what you're saying. I just think you are drastically overstating the importance of it. If Knox disengages, do they really have to account for him, or do they let him go and have one less blacker to worry about? It depends I suppose. To suggest that this will appreciably impact how teams scheme for Hester (any more than they already do), is a bit silly. They will call their coverages consistent with the situation the same as they do now.
If his return stats are appreciably better than they have been in past years, you can claim credit later.
-
Here is a pretty good break down, with still shots, of the play.
Slocum stinks as a special teams coach, in my opinion.
http://espnmilwaukee.com/page.php?page_id=278
-
Here is a pretty good break down, with still shots, of the play.
Slocum stinks as a special teams coach, in my opinion.
http://espnmilwaukee.com/page.php?page_id=278
Thanks for posting that. I had only seen the video of the play once and had only seen stills of the hold, but not the others showing how the play developed.
-
Is Dom Capers a living defensive legend?
I think he is and underappreciated among the general public. Before Dom, Packers were nothing, he and McCarthy are a DYNAMITE combo.
Hope Ernest Dominic Capers works a long time in GB.
-
I totally get what you're saying. I just think you are drastically overstating the importance of it. If Knox disengages, do they really have to account for him, or do they let him go and have one less blacker to worry about? It depends I suppose. To suggest that this will appreciably impact how teams scheme for Hester (any more than they already do), is a bit silly. They will call their coverages consistent with the situation the same as they do now.
If his return stats are appreciably better than they have been in past years, you can claim credit later.
Fair enough...but I still don't think you get it.
-
Here is a pretty good break down, with still shots, of the play.
Slocum stinks as a special teams coach, in my opinion.
http://espnmilwaukee.com/page.php?page_id=278
He must have some serious dirt on McCarthy.
Slocum shouldn't be coaching pros, and I've said this for years.
-
Why did Masthay drift over to the right hashmark with everyone else? He is the only Packer who knew the punt actually went left. Did he expect a cross-field lateral? Did he need 10 extra yards to get a better tackling angle going back the other way--figuring he was faster than Hester or Knox to make up that ground? Talk about stupid.
-
Why did Masthay drift over to the right hashmark with everyone else? He is the only Packer who knew the punt actually went left. Did he expect a cross-field lateral? Did he need 10 extra yards to get a better tackling angle going back the other way--figuring he was faster than Hester or Knox to make up that ground? Talk about stupid.
Not sure it really mattered. Knox, with a blocker, scores on the Punter - no matter where they were, lined up or came from. Plenty of green space to Knox' left.
In response to your question, though, I am guessing Masthay thought the punt was going out of bounds. I doubt he saw Knox going to field the ball.
Of all the idiots, the punter is the last one I would criticize.
-
Why did Masthay drift over to the right hashmark with everyone else? He is the only Packer who knew the punt actually went left. Did he expect a cross-field lateral? Did he need 10 extra yards to get a better tackling angle going back the other way--figuring he was faster than Hester or Knox to make up that ground? Talk about stupid.
From the link (http://espnmilwaukee.com/page.php?page_id=278) Sir Lawrence provided:
5. Bush is now inside the Chicago 10, while Knox is about to catch the ball at the 11. All the other players on the field are in the middle or toward the opposite hash marks except Masthay, who is standing at the Packers’ 45-yard line. As he said after the game, he thought the play had been whistled dead given where his coverage team was compared to where the ball was.
To tell you the truth, I'm not even entirely sure what he means. He thought the play was whistled dead because his entire team ran the wrong way?
-
In response to your question, though, I am guessing Masthay thought the punt was going out of bounds. I doubt he saw Knox going to field the ball.
So he was then jogging to the wrong sideline after he thought he kicked it out of bounds? :D
You are right, there was a whole lot of stupid going on, including the hold.
-
Here is a pretty good break down, with still shots, of the play.
Slocum stinks as a special teams coach, in my opinion.
http://espnmilwaukee.com/page.php?page_id=278
I just looked at this again. Picture six is great. By that time seven of the Bears are in position to seal off the play.
-
Looking at that break down (admittedly at only a handful of still shots without the benefit of the video), I would submit that hold was more key to the play than people have been giving it credit for. As stated, Bush had the guy beat, and based on those pictures, he seemed to be the only guy headed exactly where the ball was to be kicked. With the benefit of the hold, the blocker was able to stay engaged and force him inside, away from the ball, and prevent him from locating the ball. If he is able to get down the field without being held, I suspect all the talk about this play could be a bit different (if it was even being talked about at all).
-
So he was then jogging to the wrong sideline after he thought he kicked it out of bounds? :D
You are right, there was a whole lot of stupid going on, including the hold.
You must have a view that I do not. He kicked from the right hash and ended up a few yards to right of the right hash. If there is a view that shows him jogging to the wrong sideline, I would be interested in seeing it.
-
Looking at that break down (admittedly at only a handful of still shots without the benefit of the video), I would submit that hold was more key to the play than people have been giving it credit for. As stated, Bush had the guy beat, and based on those pictures, he seemed to be the only guy headed exactly where the ball was to be kicked. With the benefit of the hold, the blocker was able to stay engaged and force him inside, away from the ball, and prevent him from locating the ball. If he is able to get down the field without being held, I suspect all the talk about this play could be a bit different (if it was even being talked about at all).
I had this same thought when I first saw the hold. Bush would have been down and in postion to pick up the ball without the hold much sooner. Additionally, it took Bush away from Knox who was running toward the sidelines.
The one question I have had on this was whether or not the Bears did the same on the gunner on the other side? If not, they either guessed right or the Packers they knew how the Packers would directional punt at that time (or it was telegraphed).
-
You must have a view that I do not. He kicked from the right hash and ended up a few yards to right of the right hash. If there is a view that shows him jogging to the wrong sideline, I would be interested in seeing it.
See frame 5 where he is 5 yards towards the Bears bench well outside that right hashmark and well after kicking it to the sideline--Knox is about to catch the ball. He kicked it about 3-4 years to the left of the right hashmark. So he is 8-9 yards in the wrong direction after the hang time. You said previously: "I am guessing Masthay thought the punt was going out of bounds"...if he thought that, he sure is headed to the wrong sideline (thus the smart arse icon).
Fact is, his role is to be the guardian angel there, whether he could tackle him or to slow him down--and to be the communication quarterback on the play alerting his team that he did indeed kick it left as planned and that is was a dupe. He failed on two critical aspects of it when he was the only one on his team who actually knew that he punted it left. MAJOR FAIL.
-
See frame 5 where he is 5 yards towards the Bears bench well outside that right hashmark and well after kicking it to the sideline--Knox is about to catch the ball. He kicked it about 3-4 years to the left of the right hashmark. So he is 8-9 yards in the wrong direction after the hang time. You said previously: "I am guessing Masthay thought the punt was going out of bounds"...if he thought that, he sure is headed to the wrong sideline (thus the smart arse icon).
Fact is, his role is to be the guardian angel there, whether he could tackle him or to slow him down--and to be the communication quarterback on the play alerting his team that he did indeed kick it left as planned and that is was a dupe. He failed on two critical aspects of it when he was the only one on his team who actually knew that he punted it left. MAJOR FAIL.
Far from "jogging to the wrong sideline". It appears your wise arse icon was misplaced.
He is the safety valve. Perhaps, rather than the rudimentary analysis to describe him as an idiot, he thought that there was a pass back set up? Who knows, but as I said before, it did not matter. They had a blocker to account for him and he actually made a decent attempt (for a punter) to make the tackle.
If you also look at the picture frame, he is following the flight of the ball. He is facing that direction, even though he is on the other side of the right hash. But, let's assume he was on the left side of the left hash. What difference would it have made?
It was a well designed play by the Bears to fool the Packers. Does not mean the punter was an idiot. To each their own, I guess.
-
Far from "jogging to the wrong sideline". It appears your wise arse icon was misplaced.
He is the safety valve. Perhaps, rather than the rudimentary analysis to describe him as an idiot, he thought that there was a pass back set up? Who knows, but as I said before, it did not matter. They had a blocker to account for him and he actually made a decent attempt (for a punter) to make the tackle.
If you also look at the picture frame, he is following the flight of the ball. He is facing that direction, even though he is on the other side of the right hash. But, let's assume he was on the left side of the left hash. What difference would it have made?
It was a well designed play by the Bears to fool the Packers. Does not mean the punter was an idiot. To each their own, I guess.
It is funny the lengths you describe a guy clearly out of position by any reasonable standard. First you say: "I am guessing Masthay thought the punt was going out of bounds"...so explain why he is floating toward the Bear sideline? "Misplaced" is where he is on the field if the called play design was to punt it left which is where he actually punted it. The difference is he needs to be in position to play that safety role, and not follow the lemmings. He, like the other players, did NOT stay in their lanes and broke responsibility--that is as "rudimentary" as it gets. Worse, he knew he punted it left, but still floated way right--which in my book makes him an "idiot".
I await your next excuse theory. ;)
-
The secondary is adequate but not great. The day will come when the d-line is neutralized and they have to make plays all day. We will see what happens then. The linebackers are better. The D-line has yet to truly dominate a game, but the other teams have been scheming to hold off the d-line, leaving others to make plays and limiting the time the secondary has to cover.
The larger concern is the offensive line and the running game. Stafford has not shown the ability to take a lot of hits.
Feeling pretty good about this comment through the first half of the Dallas game. Secondary is not making plays when they need to, Stafford is showing happy feet, no running game.
-
Feeling pretty good about this comment through the first half of the Dallas game. Secondary is not making plays when they need to, Stafford is showing happy feet, no running game.
Well they made the plays and Calvin Johnson is probably the best player in NFL. Winning away games is a big plus for them. Packers will plummel the Broncos today, Bears just got by, so good competition in the North.
-
The only thing that I think is a sure bet within this division right now is that the Vikings will end up in last place, for the second consecutive year. They are embarrassingly bad. Otherwise it's very hard to say what will happen based on who's beat who, because everyone is beating everyone in the NFL.
- Bears at 2-2. Lost to the Packers and Saints, but so will a lot of teams. Beat what was supposed to be an improved Atlanta team that was the 1 seed going into the playoffs last year, but now they're 1-2 now and struggling to put away the Seahawks in the 4th quarter right now, so who knows about them. Squeeked by Carolina, just like everyone is doing against Carolina.
- Lions at 4-0. Beat an up-and-coming Tampa team who is now 2-1 and should be 3-1 after this weekend. Then beat 2 terrible (Vikings and Chiefs) teams and 1 pretty bad team (Cowboys) and had to come back against all of them. Does show they will not back down no matter what the deficit.
- Packers at 4-0. Beat maybe the 2nd best team in the NFL in the Saints, but it was the first game since winning the Super Bowl, emotionally charged game, and took a goal line stand to win the game. Barely beat the Panthers and killed an awful Broncos team. Best thing they have going right now is a road win against one of the contenders in the division in the Bears.
Will be interesting to see when the Lions and Packers play each other and play some of their tougher games.
-
Ecstatic about the comeback, irked that it was necessary. The secondary turned it around in the second half, but Romo certainly made it easy.
-
Ecstatic about the comeback, irked that it was necessary. The secondary turned it around in the second half, but Romo certainly made it easy.
wow, as a lions fan, only took a couple of weeks to become this entitled, eh? ;)
-
No. I actually have not drank the kool-aid and think we should be 2-2. I just don't think Dallas is that good. Neither is Minnesota. And we were 20 pts down to each. I did not like the body language in the first half, either from Stafford, the o-line, or the entire defense. They didn't compete and I flashed back to every other Lion team in my lifetime. So I turned off the game at half time and played Wii with my 4 year old for an hour. Big stage next week against the Bears on MNF. I will not be surprised if the Lions can't handle success and lay a huge egg.
-
I'm not going to say the Bears dominated today, but I wouldn't say they squeaked by. If you are saying that based on just the final score, it's not accurate. Carolina scored a garbage TD with seconds left to cut it to less than a TD.
-
I'm not going to say the Bears dominated today, but I wouldn't say they squeaked by. If you are saying that based on just the final score, it's not accurate. Carolina scored a garbage TD with seconds left to cut it to less than a TD.
Chicago also scored a garbage TD with just over a minute left. In addition, the Bears scored a special teams TD, a defensive TD and blocked a FG. Carolina outgained Chigago about 550 to 350 yards (most yards by the Panthers in their history?). Bottom line, I'm a Bear fan but they were very lucky to win today.
-
I'm not going to say the Bears dominated today, but I wouldn't say they squeaked by. If you are saying that based on just the final score, it's not accurate. Carolina scored a garbage TD with seconds left to cut it to less than a TD.
Didn't watch any of the 2nd half but had it on ESPN's Gamecast on my computer. I think the Gamecast was freaking out, but at one point in the 3rd quarter (it was a 3 point game at the time I believe) it said Carolina had first and goal at the 1 and did not come away with any points. Shortly after it said 1st and goal from the 43 then, so I knew it was freaking out at that point, but I thought maybe they actually did have first and goal at the 1 and didn't score. Looking at that and then the final score it seemed like they squeeked by. If that was wrong then they may not have squeeked by.
-
Chicago also scored a garbage TD with just over a minute left. In addition, the Bears scored a special teams TD, a defensive TD and blocked a FG. Carolina outgained Chigago about 550 to 350 yards (most yards by the Panthers in their history?). Bottom line, I'm a Bear fan but they were very lucky to win today.
You mean the game-sealing TD? That counts as a "garbage" TD to you?
The fact is, the Bears didn't play very well but they made more bigs play and fewer bad plays. As far as the yardage, the return TDs gave the Panthers 2 extra possessions and they ended up running 23 more plays than the Bears (Carolina actually had 13 possessions to the Bears' 10 because of a Cutler pick). They also had a 77-yard scoring drive against a prevent D when the outcome was no longer in doubt.
Offensively, the Bears actually decided to play to their strengths and give Forte the ball. The D was very unimpressive in the first half, giving up big chunks of yardage. They buckled down in the second half and held Carolina to just 3 points prior to the late score. It definitely wasn't the Bears' best day but they did enough to win.
-
Really setting up to be quite a story this year - from 0-4 to 12-4 and the Super Bowl? SKOL VIKINGS!
The amazing thing is that the Vikings aren't even close to being as bad as the University of Minnesota's football team.
I'll be cheering for the Lions to win the division.
-
Really setting up to be quite a story this year - from 0-4 to 12-4 and the Super Bowl? SKOL VIKINGS!
The amazing thing is that the Vikings aren't even close to being as bad as the University of Minnesota's football team.
I'll be cheering for the Lions to win the division.
You can't spell SKOL VIKINGS without O and four.
Detroit's lucky they don't play the Pack until Thanksgiving, it'll give them hope they have a chance at the division for another month.
-
Really setting up to be quite a story this year - from 0-4 to 12-4 and the Super Bowl? SKOL VIKINGS!
The amazing thing is that the Vikings aren't even close to being as bad as the University of Minnesota's football team.
I'll be cheering for the Lions to win the division.
I'll be cheering for your stadium to not implode.
-
You can't spell SKOL VIKINGS without O and four.
Detroit's lucky they don't play the Pack until Thanksgiving, it'll give them hope they have a chance at the division for another month.
Let's hope the Packers have this same mentality when they travel to Ford Field. It'll be week 14 of last year all over again if they aren't playing at their peak.
-
You mean the game-sealing TD? That counts as a "garbage" TD to you?
Yes. They broke a 40 yard run as they were running out the clock.
Look, I'm a Bear fan. I'm not saying they didn't deserve to win the game. But when you're leading by 4 and the other team has the ball near midfield with 2 minutes left, I don't see it as winning comfortably. Especially when you're outgained 543 to 317 and 14 of your points are scored by your defense/special teams. I think they won a squeeker. Guess we were watching different games.
-
All thats matters is the W. Who cares how it was accoplished (unless you have Forte on your fantasy team, damn I'm smart)
-
Yes. They broke a 40 yard run as they were running out the clock.
Look, I'm a Bear fan. I'm not saying they didn't deserve to win the game. But when you're leading by 4 and the other team has the ball near midfield with 2 minutes left, I don't see it as winning comfortably. Especially when you're outgained 543 to 317 and 14 of your points are scored by your defense/special teams. I think they won a squeeker. Guess we were watching different games.
I never said that they won comfortably. I said that they didn't play their best but they did enough to win. As I stated earlier, part of the reason that they were outgained so badly was the 2 return TDs (something that you seemingly consider a negative), not to mention Hester's 73 yard KO return - that's 162 yards right there. One of the Bears' keys to success if forcing TOs and winning the field position battle. They cashed in on the only TO forced and won the FP battle. It wasn't pretty (especially the D in the 1st half) but they got the job done.
Should be a good one in Detroit next week!
-
Let's hope the Packers have this same mentality when they travel to Ford Field. It'll be week 14 of last year all over again if they aren't playing at their peak.
I'll take that and a Superbowl Win every year.
I don't think the Packers need or want to Peak on Thanksgiving Day. Perhaps that is the Lions goal, but the Packers have larger sights than that.
-
I'll take that and a Superbowl Win every year.
I don't think the Packers need or want to Peak on Thanksgiving Day. Perhaps that is the Lions goal, but the Packers have larger sights than that.
"We won the super bowl, na na na na boo boo!"
"Peaking at the right time" is a great spin for the Pack almost missing the playoffs last year. Green Bay is lucky to not even be half as cocky as their fans.
-
"We won the super bowl, na na na na boo boo!"
"Peaking at the right time" is a great spin for the Pack almost missing the playoffs last year. Green Bay is lucky to not even be half as cocky as their fans.
We won the Super Bowl, na na na boo boo!
-
"Peaking at the right time" is a great spin for the Pack almost missing the playoffs last year. Green Bay is lucky to not even be half as cocky as their fans.
Who needs to spin anything when you win the whole thing? I'd take barely sneaking in and the trophy every year over being the #1 seed and losing the first game. Not sure what the point of your comment was at all.
-
"We won the super bowl, na na na na boo boo!"
"Peaking at the right time" is a great spin for the Pack almost missing the playoffs last year. Green Bay is lucky to not even be half as cocky as their fans.
Clay Matthews, Jermichael Finley, Woodson, Rodgers...I think the Packers are plenty cocky and I say that as a fan of the team.
And they may have snuck into the playoffs, but then they dominated their opponents.
I don't think there's anybody out there who thinks that Detroit is anywhere near the same plane as Green Bay right now, record notwithstanding.
-
Most of the Lions fans I have spoken too today are ecstatic but waiting for the collapse. One guy joked that we have been so bad for so long and found so many creative ways to lose games that nobody else has even thought of, that with an 18-0 record and up 28-0 going into the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl, many Lions fans would still be trying to figure out how they were going to blow that lead. 2007, 6-2 start, 1-7 finish. I think this team is better, but I still expect them to find ways to lose.
-
Lions are a top 3 team in the NFC right now. It's both a credit to what the Lions have done so far, and a dis-credit to the rest of the conference. Outside of Green Bay and New Orleans, there's no better team (even close if you ask me) to Detroit. Lions/Saints will actually be a really interesting game and a good measuring stick for the 2 seed.
-
I meant 2nd best team, not 2 seed, my mistake.
-
Who needs to spin anything when you win the whole thing? I'd take barely sneaking in and the trophy every year over being the #1 seed and losing the first game. Not sure what the point of your comment was at all.
Do we need to go over the ridiculous amount of dominoes that needed to fall for the Packers to make the playoffs?
-
Do we need to go over the ridiculous amount of dominoes that needed to fall for the Packers to make the playoffs?
They fell. The Pack won. You didn't. They are the Champs. Get over it.
-
They fell. The Pack won. You didn't. They are the Champs. Get over it.
Whats a pissing match without the piss? I'd rather rile up all the holier than thou pack fans like you.
-
Whats a pissing match without the piss? I'd rather rile up all the holier than thou pack fans like you.
Not holier than you, just a fan of the team with 13 world championships and a non-imploding stadium. Wait, maybe I AM holier than you!
-
Do we need to go over the ridiculous amount of dominoes that needed to fall for the Packers to make the playoffs?
Yeah, and like I said, who cares? In the end they hoisted the trophy and 31 other teams (your's included) didn't. I don't care how much you want to diminish that, you simply can't. I'm not holier that thou, that's just the way it is.
-
(http://sportscribes.files.wordpress.com/2011/09/aaron-rodgers-belt-cele.jpg)
-
Whats a pissing match without the piss? I'd rather rile up all the holier than thou pack fans like you.
Haven't you noticed that if you say anything less than positive (doesn't even have to be negative) about GB, Packer fans will get out their torches and pitchforks?
Sure, the Packers got a slew of lucky breaks just to get into the playoffs and sure, they only beat the Bears because they faced their 3rd-string QB in the conference title game and sure, any above average QB could have won the Super Bowl for the Packers last season given all their weapons on offense, but don't tell that to any Packers fans.
-
Haven't you noticed that if you say anything less than positive (doesn't even have to be negative) about GB, Packer fans will get out their torches and pitchforks?
Sure, the Packers got a slew of lucky breaks just to get into the playoffs and sure, they only beat the Bears because they faced their 3rd-string QB in the conference title game and sure, any above average QB could have won the Super Bowl for the Packers last season given all their weapons on offense, but don't tell that to any Packers fans.
Waaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!
-
Haven't you noticed that if you say anything less than positive (doesn't even have to be negative) about GB, Packer fans will get out their torches and pitchforks?
Sure, the Packers got a slew of lucky breaks just to get into the playoffs and sure, they only beat the Bears because they faced their 3rd-string QB in the conference title game, any above average QB could have won the Super Bowl for the Packers last season given all their weapons on offense, but don't tell that to any Packers fans.
You can't seriously believe that.
-
Haven't you noticed that if you say anything less than positive (doesn't even have to be negative) about GB, Packer fans will get out their torches and pitchforks?
Sure, the Packers got a slew of lucky breaks just to get into the playoffs and sure, they only beat the Bears because they faced their 3rd-string QB in the conference title game and sure, any above average QB could have won the Super Bowl for the Packers last season given all their weapons on offense, but don't tell that to any Packers fans.
Delusional.
-
;D
-
See how easy that was? Even blatantly sarcastic comments get reactions.
The fact of matter is that the Packers got a gift playoff berth and took full advantage of it. Tip o' the cap to them.
-
See how easy that was? Even blatantly sarcastic comments get reactions.
That was well executed. I was going to say something, but it was too entertaining :)
And I'm a Packer's fan. :p
-
See how easy that was? Even blatantly sarcastic comments get reactions.
We bow to ye, O wizard of provoking the internet message board.... with such grace you manage so difficult a task...
-
"We won the super bowl, na na na na boo boo!"
"Peaking at the right time" is a great spin for the Pack almost missing the playoffs last year. Green Bay is lucky to not even be half as cocky as their fans.
I guess when you haven't had a sniff at a playoff since 1999, any teams fan base may appear cocky. Yet, your initial comment, to which I responded, was not intended as cocky?
Continuing with the cocky theme, the Packers have lost more superbowls (1) than the Lions have been to (0). The Lions are one of four teams with that distinction.
-
Anybody know of a fan website ostensibly devoted to MU basketball?
-
... and sure, any above average QB could have won the Super Bowl for the Packers last season given all their weapons on offense, but don't tell that to any Packers fans.
Even Favre agrees with you, so you can't be wrong...
08:06 AM ET 10.05 | Welcome back, Brett Favre. [In a radio interview, Favre] was asked if he was surprised that Rodgers had already won a Super Bowl -- which matches the number Favre won in his 16-year tenure with the Pack -- even though this is only Rodgers' fourth year as the starting quarterback. "I'm going to be honest, I was not surprised," answered Favre. "The biggest surprise to me would be that he didn't do it sooner." ... Favre talked more about Rodgers in the interview, but walked a fine line between praising him and saying he's the beneficiary of the star players around him. "He's got tremendous talent, he's very bright and he got a chance to watch and see successful teams do it right," Favre said of his former understudy. "And so he just kind of fell into a good situation. On top of that, he's a good player. I don't think there's any pressure on him now, the talent around him is even better than when I was there."
Read more: http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/310072-favre-rodgers-fell-into-a-good-situation?sct=hp_bf2_a5&eref=sihp#ixzz1ZuswiE9G
-
Anybody know of a fan website ostensibly devoted to MU basketball?
I am guessing you do not understand the purpose of the Superbar ... ::)
-
We're back! SKOL VIKINGS! 12-4
Go Lions! Go Hotlanta!
-
Go Lions! Go Hotlanta!
Aww that's cute. The little guys who never win anything can join hands and hope that the big boys don't bully them.
5-0.
Oh, and 1-0 NLCS lead. Sucks to be from anywhere outside of Wisconsin.
-
Oh, and 1-0 NLCS lead. Sucks to be from anywhere outside of Wisconsin.
Whatever, bro. Like you won't be jealous when I'm at the Lynx parade on Tuesday!
-
Aww that's cute. The little guys who never win anything can join hands and hope that the big boys don't bully them.
5-0.
Oh, and 1-0 NLCS lead. Sucks to be from anywhere outside of Wisconsin.
if women are not high on your list of priorities then this might be true ::)
-
Aww that's cute. The little guys who never win anything can join hands and hope that the big boys don't bully them.
5-0.
Oh, and 1-0 NLCS lead. Sucks to be from anywhere outside of Wisconsin.
I bet basketball and baseball fans in DFW are pretty happy right now. The Cowboys and Bucks offset each other ;)
-
if women are not high on your list of priorities then this might be true ::)
Most of the uggos I knew that went to MU were from the Chicago area.
Additionally, I believe that UW had a pretty high ranking this year for 'hot girls'
-
I bet basketball and baseball fans in DFW are pretty happy right now. The Cowboys and Bucks offset each other ;)
That's why I'm praying for no NBA season!
-
They will be the #3 seed in the NFC behind Atlanta and Philly.
Hards,
I would like to officially admit I was wrong. Very wrong. Packers look unstoppable, and in route to a NFC #1 seed.
Please tell me where to ship your delicious beer.
-
Hards,
I would like to officially admit I was wrong. Very wrong. Packers look unstoppable, and in route to a NFC #1 seed.
Please tell me where to ship your delicious beer.
A tad early to concede isn't it?
-
I'm not sure what to think of Matt Ryan and the Falcons. It seems to me that the Packers have had trouble with the big play this year, but they never seemed interested in attacking the Packers at all. Everything was short, but I don't know if that was by design or Ryan just being careful.
-
A tad early to concede isn't it?
Is there anything you have seen from the Eagles / Falcons that lead you to believe they will not only right the ship (which will likely happen), but also be able to overtake GB?
-
I'm not sure what to think of Matt Ryan and the Falcons. It seems to me that the Packers have had trouble with the big play this year, but they never seemed interested in attacking the Packers at all. Everything was short, but I don't know if that was by design or Ryan just being careful.
There is a reason Matt Ryan and Mark Sanchez are called Captain Checkdowns. Matt Ryan is so beyond overrated it's laughable.
-
A tad early to concede isn't it?
MU B2002 isn't typically one to get ahead of himself. I mean, just check out his avatar.
-
There is a reason Matt Ryan and Mark Sanchez are called Captain Checkdowns. Matt Ryan is so beyond overrated it's laughable.
THIS
-
MU B2002 isn't typically one to get ahead of himself. I mean, just check out his avatar.
Well played.
I am still waiting to get her acceptance letter in the mail. I am not sure what the holdup is.
-
I bet basketball and baseball fans in DFW are pretty happy right now. The Cowboys and Bucks offset each other ;)
Well then lets move to major college sports. Wisconsin - 2 Sweet Sixteen teams, plus a top 5 CFB team... Dallas? (TCU for football... but no basketball)
-
Whilst on the topic... does anyone know if the winners of the World Series, BCS "Championship," Super Bowl and NCAA Tournament in a given six-month period (October - March) have ever hailed from the same state?
-
In 1972, the As won the World Series, USC won the AP National Championship, and UCLA won the basketball championship.
The 49ers lost in the NFC Championship Game.
-
Is there anything you have seen from the Eagles / Falcons that lead you to believe they will not only right the ship (which will likely happen), but also be able to overtake GB?
Nope. How about this. I go to the store and get myself something good, and you keep the Fat Tire and choke it down, yourself. :)
-
Additionally, I believe that UW had a pretty high ranking this year for 'hot girls'
I know my drives through campus during warmer weather are slower than normal and I am always on the lookout for, ahem, pedestrians. ;)
-
I'm not sure what to think of Matt Ryan and the Falcons. It seems to me that the Packers have had trouble with the big play this year, but they never seemed interested in attacking the Packers at all. Everything was short, but I don't know if that was by design or Ryan just being careful.
I think that was the plan, get Gonzalez and the big WR's short against the Packers zone. When the Packers went to tight man to man coverage, the Falcons never adjusted. Although, the loss of two interior linemen may have been a factor. They may have been concerned with Raji.
-
Last nights game was painful to watch, and here's the best argument why
http://deadspin.com/5848755/the-craptiest-seven-minutes-of-the-nfl-season-condensed-to-one-crapty-minute (http://deadspin.com/5848755/the-craptiest-seven-minutes-of-the-nfl-season-condensed-to-one-crapty-minute)
-
I thought Cutler was the best player on the field for the Bears. I think Martz's system and his O-line is going to get him killed. If Cutler doesn't make so many plays with his feet avoided the rush as well as humanly possible behind that line, the game would have been far more one-sided. I am happy about being 5-0, but I have seen far too many things go wrong with the Lions over the years to not temper it with wondering when the crippling injury is going to happen.
-
+1 Tower. There's a reason every teams highlight reel has a lot of Detroit. Still, CJ is finally looking what everyone feared. Tramon better spend the next 5 weeks working on his vertical.
-
We can now stop the talk about how great Detroit is. Stafford channeled his inner Joey Harrington with happy feet and bad reads, the defensive line was neutralized if not exposed, and SF was just plain tougher. I am still thrilled to be 5-1, but this team is nowhere near great.
-
And wtf is with Schwartz's reaction and hissy fit after the game.
-
We can now stop the talk about how great Detroit is. Stafford channeled his inner Joey Harrington with happy feet and bad reads, the defensive line was neutralized if not exposed, and SF was just plain tougher. I am still thrilled to be 5-1, but this team is nowhere near great.
Not great, but still good.
-
Harbaugh didn't have the decency to stop and shake hands and show a little respect. Instead was doing the "drive by" handshake (looked a little too familiar).
But yeah, Swartz reacted wrong.
-
Harbaugh didn't have the decency to stop and shake hands and show a little respect. Instead was doing the "drive by" handshake (looked a little too familiar).
But yeah, Swartz reacted wrong.
Yeah... a little too familiar.
-
Not great, but still good.
Not very good, but improved.
-
And wtf is with Schwartz's reaction and hissy fit after the game.
Have you watched his reactions after close wins? Dude gets pumped up like he's playing.
*edit*: I just watched the video, having turned off the game immediately after the last play and missing the pushing match live. Schwartz gets wound tight. Harbaugh must have said something that rubbed him wrong. As a coach and leader, you need to control yourself better than that. Unacceptable.
Edit part deux: http://www.freep.com/article/20111016/SPORTS01/111016021/Video-Jim-Schwartz-Jim-Harbaugh-get-into-scuffle-after-final-whistle
Apparently, Schwartz did not appreciate a shove and an obscenity. Go figure.
-
Harbaugh didn't have the decency to stop and shake hands and show a little respect. Instead was doing the "drive by" handshake (looked a little too familiar).
But yeah, Swartz reacted wrong.
It wasn't the "drive by" as much as the emotion that Harbaugh gave with the handshake. A little too much for a losing coach - in a tough game. The initial reaction by Swartz is one thing, but when he followed Harbaugh, chest bumped him and escalated it, that was well over the line. I expect he will be fined for that reaction.
-
Will Ponder start against Green Bay next week?
Because that will be a massacre.
-
Will Ponder start against Green Bay next week?
Because that will be a massacre.
No more of a massacre than sending Mcnabb out there. Dude is washed up, and the sooner the Vikings realize that the sooner they might be competitive in a game or two.
-
Other than the safety where his lady parts stuck out of his skirt a little bit and the shove sack by Peppers, did McNabb really play that poorly? The first 2 drives were killed by straight drops on 3rd down by Shiancoe(sic) and B twice.
-
The reason Schwartz reacted the way he did was because when Harbaugh shook his hand he said to Shwartz "Same old Lions" and that pissed him off.
-
Then Schwarts would have swung at me, too, because that is what I said.
-
The reason Schwartz reacted the way he did was because when Harbaugh shook his hand he said to Shwartz "Same old Lions" and that pissed him off.
If this is what happened, Harbaugh is every bit the dick he is reputed to be.
If this should heve been in teal, but I was to thick to catch it, great shot at Harbaugh.
-
Other than the safety where his lady parts stuck out of his skirt a little bit and the shove sack by Peppers, did McNabb really play that poorly? The first 2 drives were killed by straight drops on 3rd down by Shiancoe(sic) and B twice.
I almost feel sorry for McNabb every time the other team gets pressure on him. His escapability simply isn't what it used to be, no matter how much he/everyone else wants. I thought Ponder was able to avoid the rush fairly well last night. I don't think the Vikings are gaining all that much by having McNabb out there over Ponder.
-
ringout teal was not supposed to be used, thats what happened. I am originally from Detroit and still have many friends there and they were the ones who told me what was said.
-
Then Schwarts would have swung at me, too, because that is what I said.
If that is the case and all it took to get under his skin, he will be hearing that from every team and every player. Weak sauce to let that get to him.
Keep it and use it when they meet again - which could be the Playoffs. But to chase him down the field, continually bump him, exchange words ...
Sorry, this makes me think less of him than I did before I heard your version.
-
There is a story on Yahoo that Schwartz was mocking Harbaugh early in the game as well. (In regards to the penalty for an illegal challenge." Schwartz, it appears, shouts "know the rules Harbaugh."
-
i'm a bears fan...
and i hate mike martz. good 4th quarter playcalling... we should have won that game by 20+.
-
God Thompson has fugged up the Packs D.
let our one good pass rushing d lineman go.
-
God Thompson has fugged up the Packs D.
let our one good pass rushing d lineman go.
And that did what?
-
no pressure, our secondary is getting shredded. 31st in pass defense.
-
no pressure, our secondary is getting shredded. 31st in pass defense.
Oh, and they are 6-0. Yeah, all TT's fault.
-
Oh, and they are 6-0. Yeah, all TT's fault.
Rodgers and the O are awesome, no doubt. But we keep playing this terrible of pass d we'll get some losses.
-
Yeah, if the Pack had better D, they'd be EVEN MORE undefeated, defending SB champs. Yeesh, relax a little.
-
nothing wrong with pointing out the bad aspects of this team. It may not be popular cause we're on a roll on O but TT still makes unwise off season decisions which has decreased our effectiveness on D this year.
-
nothing wrong with pointing out the bad aspects of this team. It may not be popular cause we're on a roll on O but TT still makes unwise off season decisions which has decreased our effectiveness on D this year.
His unwise decision was not knowing that Jenkins would not bet the huge contract. He needed the cap space for Finley, used some on Lang and he had Neal waiting in the wings. I guess it was TT's fault Neal got hurt.
The bigger problem is the injuries to the DB's. Specifically Williams. His injury has affected the game plan/play calling. Now Shields is out because of his boneheaded play last week. Plus, losing Collins has had a huge impact.
-
Neal was unproven at best, not sure how you could bank on him.
Jenkins would be leading our team in sacks, he's still got juice.
To me, giving big $$$ to a kicker makes you scratch your head. Lang is a dime a dozen player.
-
Neal was unproven at best, not sure how you could bank on him.
Jenkins would be leading our team in sacks, he's still got juice.
To me, giving big $$$ to a kicker makes you scratch your head. Lang is a dime a dozen player.
Well, I can state unequivocally, that I trust the coaches opinions far more than yours. Neal, they believe, is the real deal. I see what they see. You don't, but you also do not give TT and the organization any credit for making a decision - it's all bad in your eyes.
Sit back and enjoy the games. Man you are a debbie downer.
-
foolish to count on neal with his injury history dating all the way back to college.
-
foolish to count on neal with his injury history dating all the way back to college.
Yeah, you're right. FIRE TED THOMPSON. :o
Enjoy the game. Through with this foolishness of attempting to have a meaningful discussion with you. ::)
-
you need to calm down.
didn't say to fire thompson but i would appreciate it if he wouldn't dismantle our d.
Lets just hope we don't keep making this rookie look like John Elway in the second half.
-
Every game this year the team has adjusted well and out played their opponents in the second half, and that includes the defense. I'm sure Capers will come up with the right adjustments to marginalize a QB who he had NO pro tape on.
-
Not great, but still good.
No, not really. Lucky to not be 3-4. Poor offensive line play and lack of a running game has turned Stafford into Joey Harrington. The vaunted defensive line has yet to really dominate a game. 3 step drops and play action neutralize them. Improved, and I will be giddy if they turn it around, but I don't see them winning their second playoff game of my lifetime this season.
-
Every game this year the team has adjusted well and out played their opponents in the second half, and that includes the defense. I'm sure Capers will come up with the right adjustments to marginalize a QB who he had NO pro tape on.
I don't know how to figure out the stat, but I would bet even money that GB has the best +/- for PF/PA in the 2nd half this year.
-
Capers is damn good. I'll fpr sure give TT props in that he hired the best OC/DC combo in the league.
-
Don't hang your heads, Packer fans. Yes, it was another close call, but the Vikings are almost 7-0. You beat an excellent team today. Good job.
-
Don't hang your heads, Packer fans. Yes, it was another close call, but the Vikings are almost 7-0. You beat an excellent team today. Good job.
Haha. How's "Erin" looking? My guess is you'd bone him if given the opportunity. Weird, considering you wouldn't do the same to Carrie Underwood.
Is there any question who the NFL MVP is?
-
Rogers, by a smidge over Brees.
-
Rogers, by a smidge over Brees.
Even after tonight's ridiculously embarrassing 62-7 win where Brees got 5 touchdowns, I'd still say it's Rodgers by a pretty wide margin. So far:
Rodgers: 2,037 yards with a 70.3% completion % and a 9.75 yards per attempt with 17 touchdowns to just 3 interceptions and a 122.4 QB rating. 2 rushing touchdowns. 7-0 record. 1-0 against the Saints.
Brees: 2,152 yards with a 68.6% completion % and an 8.15 yards per attempt with 13 touchdowns to 8 interceptions and a 97.0 QB rating. 0 rushing touchdowns. 5-2 record. 0-1 against the Packers.
To me, it's not even close. The only person who could make an argument at this point, in my opinion, is Peyton Manning. Just say "Look at what we've done over the last decade up until this year with me behind center, and now look at our team without me behind center. You don't think the Packers could win at least 1 game with Matt Flynn behind center?" Obviously I'm not serious, but in some ways...
-
Neal was unproven at best, not sure how you could bank on him.
Jenkins would be leading our team in sacks, he's still got juice.
To me, giving big $$$ to a kicker makes you scratch your head. Lang is a dime a dozen player.
I think you mean they gave an extension to Sitton - not Lang. Lang I believe is still on his rookie deal. Sitton is real good.
But I essentially agree with you that they miss Jenkins. The question is whether or not it would have been worth tying up big money on him while they felt that they had a viable alternative in Neal. But since the Packers run a 2-4-5 quite often, I think the real problem is the pass rush on the other side of Matthews. We simply have not had production from the other OLB slot.
-
Haha. How's "Erin" looking? My guess is you'd bone him if given the opportunity. Weird, considering you wouldn't do the same to Carrie Underwood.
Is there any question who the NFL MVP is?
Can an entire offense win the MVP award? Rodgers is a very good QB, no doubt, but he gets a ton of time and always seems to be throwing to a wide open receiver. As a Bears fan, maybe I'm just bitter that my talented QB gets no time and has a RB as his only consistent weapon ;)
-
As a Bears fan, maybe I'm just bitter that my talented QB gets no time and has a RB as his only consistent weapon ;)
And don't forget the "big name WR" they added this offseason has yet to catch a ball cleanly.
-
MVP of the league is clearly Peyton Manning. Apparently, he really WAS a one man team.
-
I think you mean they gave an extension to Sitton - not Lang. Lang I believe is still on his rookie deal. Sitton is real good.
But I essentially agree with you that they miss Jenkins. The question is whether or not it would have been worth tying up big money on him while they felt that they had a viable alternative in Neal. But since the Packers run a 2-4-5 quite often, I think the real problem is the pass rush on the other side of Matthews. We simply have not had production from the other OLB slot.
Until Walden can start to consistently win his 1 on 1 matchups, Clay will get doubled or at the very least chipped by the RB or TE. I think Matthews has been phenomenal this year although he doesn't have the sack numbers. If only Walden could be the player he was at the end of last year...will Zombo be back any time soon?
-
I think you mean they gave an extension to Sitton - not Lang. Lang I believe is still on his rookie deal. Sitton is real good.
But I essentially agree with you that they miss Jenkins. The question is whether or not it would have been worth tying up big money on him while they felt that they had a viable alternative in Neal. But since the Packers run a 2-4-5 quite often, I think the real problem is the pass rush on the other side of Matthews. We simply have not had production from the other OLB slot.
That was my fault and you are correct, I meant Sitton, not Lang. Thanks for catching that.
-
Don't hang your heads, Packer fans. Yes, it was another close call, but the Vikings are almost 7-0. You beat an excellent team today. Good job.
Now you sound like Lindy Infante when he was fired by Ron Wolf.
-
Until Walden can start to consistently win his 1 on 1 matchups, Clay will get doubled or at the very least chipped by the RB or TE. I think Matthews has been phenomenal this year although he doesn't have the sack numbers. If only Walden could be the player he was at the end of last year...will Zombo be back any time soon?
Zombo was back practicing, then hurt his knee against the Rams. The Packers believe he will be back after the bye. The bye could not have come at a better time. It will will help the Packers heal. Hopefully Burnett will be able to play without the cast on his hand against San Diego. Williams should be fully recovered.
-
Zombo was back practicing, then hurt his knee against the Rams. The Packers believe he will be back after the bye. The bye could not have come at a better time. It will will help the Packers heal. Hopefully Burnett will be able to play without the cast on his hand against San Diego. Williams should be fully recovered.
Plus Jennings' hand should be better.
-
Plus Jennings' hand should be better.
Sam Shields should be back from his concussion.
-
Sam Shields should be back from his concussion.
Sheilds was cleared yesterday.
-
Nice game the Bears had last night. O-line way better than I expected. Cutler using what he has-- horrible mechanics, incredible arm.
Packers: two picks in the first quarter. Seemingly embarking on a romp. 4 sacks on Rodgers. Weird game, but they have won 14 straight and have not trailed in the fourth quarter in any of those games. Getting awfully spoiled.
-
Bears are back in it. Big game next week. With Detroit's schedule, this week could be the difference between making the playoffs and missing.
-
Nice game the Bears had last night. O-line way better than I expected. Cutler using what he has-- horrible mechanics, incredible arm.
Packers: two picks in the first quarter. Seemingly embarking on a romp. 4 sacks on Rodgers. Weird game, but they have won 14 straight and have not trailed in the fourth quarter in any of those games. Getting awfully spoiled.
Recover the on-side kick and it likely would have been a romp. I think, on a short field, the Packers extend it to 21 again. Game over. Poor play by Taylor. He is the best ST player, IMHO, on the Packers squad, but did not play his position on that play. Almost killed the Packers. Gave the Chargers life.
-
Just a general comment to those obsessed with the Pack being undefeated.
I could care less if the Pack goes undefeated.
Packers goal is to win the SuperBowl. It isn't to go undefeated.
What team would you rather play for? 2007 Giants or 2007 Patriots?
-
ejecting Moore but not Stafford? thats fracking pathetic. especially considering how much protection QBs get the rest of the game, to go and pull a guy down by the head as a QB is bullsh*t. I'm not even a Bears fan by any means, but have a little self respect ref.
-
ejecting Moore but not Stafford? thats fracking pathetic. especially considering how much protection QBs get the rest of the game, to go and pull a guy down by the head as a QB is bullsh*t. I'm not even a Bears fan by any means, but have a little self respect ref.
I wonder if Stafford get's fined for that. Maybe he should worry more about the interceptions he is throwing than throwing a cheap shot. This was my first time watching Detroit play this year. Very cheap and dirty team. Makes Atlanta look like choirboys. Suh is the worst kind of football player. What a cheapshot artist. Getting their a$$e$ handed to them again. I guess Harbaugh was right. Same old Detroit.
-
ejecting Moore but not Stafford? thats fracking pathetic. especially considering how much protection QBs get the rest of the game, to go and pull a guy down by the head as a QB is bullsh*t. I'm not even a Bears fan by any means, but have a little self respect ref.
I totally agree, just like the million other personal foul calls where both parties objectively deserve to be penalized, but the only the last one to retaliate is penalized. I don't know if they just didn't see Stafford or what.
-
Lion fan here who has been saying all year that we aren't as good as everybody thinks. The activities are nothing new (OK, Stafford throwing a tantrum like a 2 year old is). I see 2007 redux, 6-2 first half, 1-7 second half. No running game, QB channeling his inner Joey Harrington, defense making bush league plays. Suh hasn't even been dirty today. Fairley drilled Cutler. Briggs evened that right up. Stafford throwing a tantrum and the DB to the ground.... I wish I was surprised.
Edit: 3-5 second half. We beat Carolina and Minnesota at home, probably Oakland on the road. . Lose today, lose twice to GB, lose to NO, lose to SD,
-
Lion fan here who has been saying all year that we aren't as good as everybody thinks. The activities are nothing new (OK, Stafford throwing a tantrum like a 2 year old is). I see 2007 redux, 6-2 first half, 1-7 second half. No running game, QB channeling is inner Joey Harrington, defense making bush league plays. Suh hasn't even been dirty today. Fairley drilled Cutler. Briggs evened that right up. Stafford throwing a tantrum and the DB to the ground.... I wish I was surprised.
As a Packer fan, I never thought I'd be rooting for the Bears from a non-strategic standpoint. The Lions are just handling themselves poorly. Stafford's little fit right after Fairley's very late hit on Cutler... you're right, its very bush league.
-
Lion fan here who has been saying all year that we aren't as good as everybody thinks. The activities are nothing new (OK, Stafford throwing a tantrum like a 2 year old is). I see 2007 redux, 6-2 first half, 1-7 second half. No running game, QB channeling his inner Joey Harrington, defense making bush league plays. Suh hasn't even been dirty today. Fairley drilled Cutler. Briggs evened that right up. Stafford throwing a tantrum and the DB to the ground.... I wish I was surprised.
My bad on Suh. It was Fairley. Just used to it being Suh.
This game is going to have a pretty high number of fines. I would suspect Briggs get's fined for his hit.
Add Riola to the players who will be fined. He really is a dirty player. I don't like him at all. That play is typical of the crap he pulls.
-
Stafford played with a broken finger on his throwing hand. I put that on Schwarz. When your started is clearly ineffective AND has a broken finger, you bring in the back up with the proven track record.
-
My bad on Suh. It was Fairley. Just used to it being Suh.
This game is going to have a pretty high number of fines. I would suspect Briggs get's fined for his hit.
Add Riola to the players who will be fined. He really is a dirty player. I don't like him at all. That play is typical of the crap he pulls.
Briggs led with his shoulder and hit Johnson in the chest. Shouldn't have even been a penalty unless the ruling was that he left the ground and launched himself - certainly wasn't helmet to helmet. Honestly though, it's reached the point where every big hit results in a flag.
The worst part about the Stafford play was that the refs reviewed the play and somehow only ejected Moore. What Fairley did to Cutler was worse than what Moore did to Stafford.
-
Briggs led with his shoulder and hit Johnson in the chest. Shouldn't have even been a penalty unless the ruling was that he left the ground and launched himself - certainly wasn't helmet to helmet. Honestly though, it's reached the point where every big hit results in a flag.
The worst part about the Stafford play was that the refs reviewed the play and somehow only ejected Moore. What Fairley did to Cutler was worse than what Moore did to Stafford.
Briggs launching himself is what drew the penalty and may possibly draw a fine.
As for Stafford, they cannot use the review to call a penalty on the play. They only reviewed to see if he was down by contact. The flag was already on the ground before the review. Had Detroit not asked for a review, the only outcome would have been the penalty and ejection of Moore with Chicago receiving the ball where the player went out of bounds. Moore was appropriately ejected for fighting. The play was over and he went after Stafford. Whether he had a reason or not is immaterial. He should have been ejected. Stafford should have had a penalty called on him - nothing more. Now, I also believe the Detroit player should have been called for a late pick as the Bear player was clearly out of bounds.
-
My bad on Suh. It was Fairley. Just used to it being Suh.
You may be wrong on Suh in this instance, but a couple drives before Fairley hit Culter in the end zone, Suh pushed Culter to the ground about 2-3 seconds after the ball was gone, while another defender was around Cutler's feet. Bush league about sums up that team though. And I'm not a fan of any team in the NFC North.
-
Briggs launching himself is what drew the penalty and may possibly draw a fine.
As for Stafford, they cannot use the review to call a penalty on the play. They only reviewed to see if he was down by contact. The flag was already on the ground before the review. Had Detroit not asked for a review, the only outcome would have been the penalty and ejection of Moore with Chicago receiving the ball where the player went out of bounds. Moore was appropriately ejected for fighting. The play was over and he went after Stafford. Whether he had a reason or not is immaterial. He should have been ejected. Stafford should have had a penalty called on him - nothing more. Now, I also believe the Detroit player should have been called for a late pick as the Bear player was clearly out of bounds.
Not true. The officials reviewed down by contact (which was blatantly obvious and should have been called on the field) and, in a separate review, they looked at the skirmish and decided to eject Moore for going after Stafford. That decision makes little sense considering Stafford was clearly the instigator. Also, as someone on WSCR claimed this morning, the whistle hadn't actually blown when Moore hit Stafford so, technically, the play was still going on. I haven't seen a replay since I heard that though so I can't confirm. Either way, I still claim that if Moore's actions deserved an ejection, so did Fairley's when he drove Cutler into the turf well after the ball left his hand.
-
You may be wrong on Suh in this instance, but a couple drives before Fairley hit Culter in the end zone, Suh pushed Culter to the ground about 2-3 seconds after the ball was gone, while another defender was around Cutler's feet. Bush league about sums up that team though. And I'm not a fan of any team in the NFC North.
There was also a play where Cutler scrambled out of bounds with Suh in pursuit and as Cutler was stepping out of bounds, Suh dove at his knees and fortunately didn't get much of him. Suh is far too talented a player to engage so much questionable play.
-
Conversely, last year Suh got fined for a play that was legal in a two-hand touch game; pushing Cutler down from behind in the middle of the field. Two hands, between the shoulder blades, push, $$$$$. BTW, Stafford was pulling Moore down as the play went out of bounds. Moore came back after the runner was out of bounds. I agree with Moore getting tossed and can't even dispute that Stafford should have gotten run, too.
-
the vikings are not good. at all.
-
Also, you can't score enough points to beat the Packers. No one can.
-
Not true. The officials reviewed down by contact (which was blatantly obvious and should have been called on the field) and, in a separate review, they looked at the skirmish and decided to eject Moore for going after Stafford. That decision makes little sense considering Stafford was clearly the instigator. Also, as someone on WSCR claimed this morning, the whistle hadn't actually blown when Moore hit Stafford so, technically, the play was still going on. I haven't seen a replay since I heard that though so I can't confirm. Either way, I still claim that if Moore's actions deserved an ejection, so did Fairley's when he drove Cutler into the turf well after the ball left his hand.
Your initial comment about Stafford is WRONG. It continues to be wrong. No if's, and's or but's. You cannot review for a penalty. That is the rule. But the penalty was ALREADY called. Check the replay's. The flag is on the field. Check the rulebook. It is clear. Further, it does not matter if the whistle blew or not. It was a flagrant foul and deserving of a penalty, ejection, fine and suspension. Deal with it!
As for your claim that they reviewed the fight to determine an ejection, I am not taking your word for that. It does not fall within the uses of the Instant Replay within the NFL Rule Book. I am not sure your interpretation is accurate.
As for the play by Fairley, it is deserving of a penalty and fine. Not worthy of an ejection. Take your Bear glasses off and get real.
-
Also, you can't score enough points to beat the Packers. No one can.
I was at the game. I don't know if they showed it on TV, but the stadium was unbelievable during the National Anthem. All fans had placards to hold up. On one side it said "Thank You Military" On the other side "Thank You Veterans". Both End Zones looked like flags waving. Really an unbelievable sight.
But, being at the game I did not hear the Packer Broadcast. Any truth to the rumor that Larivee called the dagger on Cobb's return? ;D
-
Hey, what team has now lost 9 straight to divisional opponents?
-
Your initial comment about Stafford is WRONG. It continues to be wrong. No if's, and's or but's. You cannot review for a penalty. That is the rule. But the penalty was ALREADY called. Check the replay's. The flag is on the field. Check the rulebook. It is clear. Further, it does not matter if the whistle blew or not. It was a flagrant foul and deserving of a penalty, ejection, fine and suspension. Deal with it!
As for your claim that they reviewed the fight to determine an ejection, I am not taking your word for that. It does not fall within the uses of the Instant Replay within the NFL Rule Book. I am not sure your interpretation is accurate.
As for the play by Fairley, it is deserving of a penalty and fine. Not worthy of an ejection. Take your Bear glasses off and get real.
I never said that they reviewed the play to call a penalty. No ifs and or buts about that. I said that they reviewed the fight, which is allowable and is exactly what they did. It doesn't fall into the realm of "replay review." Even if Detroit had not challenged the ruling, the officials still would have reviewed the fight to see how it started and to see who did what and to see if there should be any ejections. They chose to only eject the player who retaliated which, in my opinion, was unjust. You either eject both guys or neither guy. As far as the whistle being blown after Moore jacked Stafford, whoever said that on the radio was completely off base.
My point about Fairley is that what he did to Cutler was worse than what Moore did to Stafford. Therefore, it Moore's actions were considered an "ejectable offense" then Fairley's should have been as well.
Reading comprehension is a lost art...so is apostrophe usage apparently.
-
I'd just like to point out that "Erin" and the mighty PACK officially eliminated the dreadful vikes from the NFC North division race last night.
-
I'd just like to point out that "Erin" and the mighty PACK officially eliminated the dreadful vikes from the NFC North division race last night.
Kind of sad that the Packers have the 2 best quarterbacks in the division on their team. And I'm not even kidding.
-
Kind of sad that the Packers have the 2 best quarterbacks in the division on their team. And I'm not even kidding.
Seriously? You don't think Cutler could come in during garbage time and toss to those receivers as well as Flynn? The only Bears receiver who would get time for the Packers is maybe Earl Bennett when he is playing well.
I understand being excited cause the Packers are playing the best football in the league but their is no reason to be asinine.
-
I never said that they reviewed the play to call a penalty. No ifs and or buts about that. I said that they reviewed the fight, which is allowable and is exactly what they did. It doesn't fall into the realm of "replay review." Even if Detroit had not challenged the ruling, the officials still would have reviewed the fight to see how it started and to see who did what and to see if there should be any ejections. They chose to only eject the player who retaliated which, in my opinion, was unjust. You either eject both guys or neither guy. As far as the whistle being blown after Moore jacked Stafford, whoever said that on the radio was completely off base.
My point about Fairley is that what he did to Cutler was worse than what Moore did to Stafford. Therefore, it Moore's actions were considered an "ejectable offense" then Fairley's should have been as well.
Reading comprehension is a lost art...so is apostrophe usage apparently.
Save your cute little personal attacks. You are better than that, aren't you? Well, apparently not. I suggest, though, before you get too cute, you may want to read the NFL Rules. Your interpretation of them is, lacking, to be kind. I have read the rules, know the rules fairly well and it is obvious neither of those apply to you.
Again, what Stafford did was not an “ejectable offense”. I agree it was worthy of a penalty, but not an ejection. Further, I do not find it the travesty that you apparently do, that he was not penalized. Many times it is the retaliator that get’s the penalty. Get over it.
According to the rules in the NFL Rulebook, Moore was guilty of a “flagrant unnecessary roughness penalty”, which, by rule, is an ejectable offense. Stafford was guilty of a horse collar or unnecessary roughness penalty. Not flagrant. The official did not see it during the play and did not call it. THUS, it cannot be called during a review – simple as that. If they reviewed the fight, there were other Lions that joined in and would have been ejected if that were the case. Please understand the rules before arguing your points!
Give me proof that reviewing a fight is acceptable. I do not take your word on it, because quite frankly, you are not showing a genuine knowledge of the NFL rules. It is not in the rule book and I have never seen it done before. As I read the NFL Rules, the only mention of a disqualification is in the “Penalty” portions of the Rules. By the way, an ejection is considered a penalty in the NFL Rulebook. The Replay rules are quite clear on this matter. It states, and this is right from the NFL Rulebook, “Non-reviewable plays include but are not limited to: … 3. Penalty administration” So yes, it would be reviewing for penalty administration – which includes both the 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty that would need to be called AS WELL AS the disqualification of Stafford. And you chastised me for comprehension. Jeez!
I understand your point about Fairley. It is merely inaccurate and wrong interpretation of the rules. It is a judgment of the official, but that has NEVER been viewed as an “ejectable offense”. Just because it happened to Cutler does not make it one now. He received a penalty and will be fined. Same as Julius Peppers cheap shot against Rodgers in the Championship Game. In both instances, the rules were appropriately applied. They were not deemed guilty of a “flagrant” penalty, as both were during the course of the play. Moore’s was not during the course of the play. He got up and hit Stafford, who was on his knees. Big difference.
-
Hey, what team has now lost 9 straight to divisional opponents?
SKOL!! ;D
-
Sorry but Matt Flynn is not better than Cutler and Stafford. Garbage TDs against the Vikes don't prove anything. Show me a QB that has done more with less than Cutler. Time to take off the cheese glasses.
-
Seriously? You don't think Cutler could come in during garbage time and toss to those receivers as well as Flynn? The only Bears receiver who would get time for the Packers is maybe Earl Bennett when he is playing well.
I understand being excited cause the Packers are playing the best football in the league but their is no reason to be asinine.
Cutler is finally being properly managed/coached by Martz. He is a fine QB when you don't treat him as a gunslinger. IMHO, he is the 2nd best QB in the Division. He is playing awfully well right now, managing the game and running the offense. He is more accurate when he is not always taking a 7 step drop, waiting to get hit!
-
Save your cute little personal attacks. You are better than that, aren't you? Well, apparently not. I suggest, though, before you get too cute, you may want to read the NFL Rules. Your interpretation of them is, lacking, to be kind. I have read the rules, know the rules fairly well and it is obvious neither of those apply to you.
Again, what Stafford did was not an “ejectable offense”. I agree it was worthy of a penalty, but not an ejection. Further, I do not find it the travesty that you apparently do, that he was not penalized. Many times it is the retaliator that get’s the penalty. Get over it.
According to the rules in the NFL Rulebook, Moore was guilty of a “flagrant unnecessary roughness penalty”, which, by rule, is an ejectable offense. Stafford was guilty of a horse collar or unnecessary roughness penalty. Not flagrant. The official did not see it during the play and did not call it. THUS, it cannot be called during a review – simple as that. If they reviewed the fight, there were other Lions that joined in and would have been ejected if that were the case. Please understand the rules before arguing your points!
Give me proof that reviewing a fight is acceptable. I do not take your word on it, because quite frankly, you are not showing a genuine knowledge of the NFL rules. It is not in the rule book and I have never seen it done before. As I read the NFL Rules, the only mention of a disqualification is in the “Penalty” portions of the Rules. By the way, an ejection is considered a penalty in the NFL Rulebook. The Replay rules are quite clear on this matter. It states, and this is right from the NFL Rulebook, “Non-reviewable plays include but are not limited to: … 3. Penalty administration” So yes, it would be reviewing for penalty administration – which includes both the 15 yard unsportsmanlike penalty that would need to be called AS WELL AS the disqualification of Stafford. Any you chastised me for comprehension. Jeez!
I understand your point about Fairley. It is merely inaccurate and wrong interpretation of the rules. It is a judgment of the official, but that has NEVER been viewed as an “ejectable offense”. Just because it happened to Cutler does not make it one now. He received a penalty and will be fined. Same as Julius Peppers cheap shot against Rodgers in the Championship Game. In both instances, the rules were appropriately applied. They were not deemed guilty of a “flagrant” penalty, as both were during the course of the play. Moore’s was not during the course of the play. He got up and hit Stafford, who was on his knees. Big difference.
Where did I mention anything about it being a travesty that Stafford wasn't penalized? I'll save you the time, I didn't. Yet for some reason, you keep bringing that up. I don't get it. What I said is that, IMO, both players or neither player in the fight should have been ejected. You claim that's technically a penalty and can't be reviewed but according to The Chicago Tribune, the officials reviewed the fight. I'd take their word over yours: "Moore said his ejection was more frustrating after the officials reviewed the play and saw that Stafford initiated the melee." The refs were reviewing a down by contact call 50 yards away from the end of the play so it's not like they would have just happened to see it and then eject Moore. They looked specifically at the fight and, ESPN more clearly states, "Officials review all plays involving potential violations whether penalized or not."
In terms of the Fairley play, if you consult that NFL rule book that you seemingly carry around with you, you'll see that there's a section under penalties titled, "15 Yards (and disqualification if flagrant)" and under that heading you'll see, "Roughing passer." In other words, roughing the passer can be an ejectable offense, which is odd because you are the know-all source of NFL rules yet you claimed that roughing the pass "has NEVER been viewed as an 'ejectable offense.'" I'm not saying that Fairley should have been ejected for his bodyslam of Cutler. As stated previously, I'm saying that what he did to Cutler was worse than what Moore did to Stafford.
-
The reason that Fairley was penalized and not ejected is this; he was already in contact with Cutler when Cutler threw, then he carried the tackle out and needlessly slammed Cutler into the ground. Right call. Penalty, no ejection. If Fairly had made contact with Cutler after the ball was gone and then did what he did, that is possible grounds for ejection. And fines and suspension for all I care.
-
Kind of sad that the Packers have the 2 best quarterbacks in the division on their team. And I'm not even kidding.
If you mean that Rodgers and Flynn are the top two of all QB's in the NFC North, I think it's an uphill battle to win that argument. Right now, I'd take Cutler or Stafford over Flynn. But talk to me next year after Flynn has a starting job somewhere, and I'll probably tell you something else.
If you mean that Rodgers is the best starting QB and Flynn is the best backup QB in the division, you're still wrong. They are probably the best starting and backup QB's in the entire league.
-
According to the rules in the NFL Rulebook, Moore was guilty of a “flagrant unnecessary roughness penalty”, which, by rule, is an ejectable offense. Stafford was guilty of a horse collar or unnecessary roughness penalty. Not flagrant. The official did not see it during the play and did not call it. THUS, it cannot be called during a review – simple as that. If they reviewed the fight, there were other Lions that joined in and would have been ejected if that were the case.
In both instances, the rules were appropriately applied. They were not deemed guilty of a “flagrant” penalty, as both were during the course of the play. Moore’s was not during the course of the play. He got up and hit Stafford, who was on his knees. Big difference.
Is it true that the definition of flagrant according to the NFL is the time at which the foul occurred? It seems like you're saying that during the play does not equal flagrant whereas after the play is flagrant. To me, thats not an intuitive reading given the standard usage of flagrant, but I honestly don't know how that word is interpreted in the NFL rulebook.
-
Wasn't the NFL trade deadline last month? I must have missed the Cutler to the Packers trade.
I mean really on the Matt Flynn Kool Aid? He's a fine back up, but I mean come on. Cutler has at least been to a Pro Bowl and the playoffs.
-
Got a question for you Dish...
Has Roy Williams ever caught a ball clean? Game, practice, backyard with his kids? I swear he juggles every single ball thrown his way.
-
Where did I mention anything about it being a travesty that Stafford wasn't penalized? I'll save you the time, I didn't. Yet for some reason, you keep bringing that up. I don't get it. What I said is that, IMO, both players or neither player in the fight should have been ejected. You claim that's technically a penalty and can't be reviewed but according to The Chicago Tribune, the officials reviewed the fight. I'd take their word over yours: "Moore said his ejection was more frustrating after the officials reviewed the play and saw that Stafford initiated the melee." The refs were reviewing a down by contact call 50 yards away from the end of the play so it's not like they would have just happened to see it and then eject Moore. They looked specifically at the fight and, ESPN more clearly states, "Officials review all plays involving potential violations whether penalized or not."
In terms of the Fairley play, if you consult that NFL rule book that you seemingly carry around with you, you'll see that there's a section under penalties titled, "15 Yards (and disqualification if flagrant)" and under that heading you'll see, "Roughing passer." In other words, roughing the passer can be an ejectable offense, which is odd because you are the know-all source of NFL rules yet you claimed that roughing the pass "has NEVER been viewed as an 'ejectable offense.'" I'm not saying that Fairley should have been ejected for his bodyslam of Cutler. As stated previously, I'm saying that what he did to Cutler was worse than what Moore did to Stafford.
My god you really love to be condescending, don't you? Well, we learned a great deal about you. You argue positions without knowledge of facts and love to be condescending. ::)
EDIT: Missed a "?" and don't want the punctuation police, aka MerrittsMustache, to get their panties in a snit.
-
Is it true that the definition of flagrant according to the NFL is the time at which the foul occurred? It seems like you're saying that during the play does not equal flagrant whereas after the play is flagrant. To me, thats not an intuitive reading given the standard usage of flagrant, but I honestly don't know how that word is interpreted in the NFL rulebook.
No, I may not have worded it properly. the definition of flagrant is subjective. My comment about during the play and after is that during the play, you will get the benefit of the doubt. After, you lose that benefit. In the case of Fairley, he hit Cutler high, hard (and cheap), but during the play. Moore got up and took a running start to hit him. That is the difference in the officials eyes.
-
The reason that Fairley was penalized and not ejected is this; he was already in contact with Cutler when Cutler threw, then he carried the tackle out and needlessly slammed Cutler into the ground. Right call. Penalty, no ejection. If Fairly had made contact with Cutler after the ball was gone and then did what he did, that is possible grounds for ejection. And fines and suspension for all I care.
Correct. That is what I meant by during the play. It was still a football move, albeit a cheap and dirty one. Moore's was not a football move.
-
No, I may not have worded it properly. the definition of flagrant is subjective. My comment about during the play and after is that during the play, you will get the benefit of the doubt. After, you lose that benefit. In the case of Fairley, he hit Cutler high, hard (and cheap), but during the play. Moore got up and took a running start to hit him. That is the difference in the officials eyes.
I don't necessarily agree with the fact that the refs make this distinction, but I do agree that this is the functional difference between the two calls, like them or not. I am more upset about Moore being ejected while Stafford was not, rather than Fairly not getting ejected. I felt like Fairly's play was a true case of roughing the passer, like what DLineman needed to do in order to get called 4-5 years ago, but not ejectable. Stafford just ripped a guy down by his helmet; there is certainly no colorable football reason for what he did. By consistently penalizing (and now ejecting) the last to retaliate, the NFL won't fix the problem of players instigating, they just keep nailing the guys who push back.
-
Correct. That is what I meant by during the play. It was still a football move, albeit a cheap and dirty one. Moore's was not a football move.
Was what Stafford did to Moore a football move?
-
Got a question for you Dish...
Has Roy Williams ever caught a ball clean? Game, practice, backyard with his kids? I swear he juggles every single ball thrown his way.
I'm not Dish, but I don't think so. Williams fit perfectly in the Bears' off-season rehabilitation of complete busts which to this point has yielded only a mildly serviceable Amobi Okoye. Martz arrogantly thought cause he had him in Detroit, he could cure his terrible hands and laziness. Considering he has less catches and TDs than considerably less gifted Dane Sanzenbacher and has only 2 more catches than Earl Bennett in twice as many games, I think I'm about done with ol' Roy.
-
I don't necessarily agree with the fact that the refs make this distinction, but I do agree that this is the functional difference between the two calls, like them or not. I am more upset about Moore being ejected while Stafford was not, rather than Fairly not getting ejected. I felt like Fairly's play was a true case of roughing the passer, like what DLineman needed to do in order to get called 4-5 years ago, but not ejectable. Stafford just ripped a guy down by his helmet; there is certainly no colorable football reason for what he did. By consistently penalizing (and now ejecting) the last to retaliate, the NFL won't fix the problem of players instigating, they just keep nailing the guys who push back.
With the Stafford play, some things to keep in mind. One, Stafford was engaged with Moore when he threw him down. Two, not sure whether the official was even watching that part of the action, as it was close to the tackle. I can see where they would not have seen Stafford grab by the helmet, only the end result of Moore on the ground. Three, the fact that Moore was on the ground, got up and took off (several steps) to hit Stafford is also a factor. If they were lying next to each other and he jumps on top of him - likely result is a penalty, no ejection. Intent is factored in with their decisions - believe it or not. That is why something during the heat of the action or play is viewed differently. Lastly, the fact that Stafford was kneeling on the ground, defenseless, is also a factor. If he were standing and Moore pushed him - likely a penalty, no ejection. He launched himself into a defenseless player. That played a big role in the outcome.
Another way to think about it. A player hitting someone late when they are out of bounds is viewed differently by where it occurred. Still in or close to the chalk (or end of the play) - a 15 yard penalty. Closer to the bench, a likely ejection in addition to the penalty.
The Packers had two plays that come to mind that sow this. The first when Brian Robinson kicked T J Lang in the groin. A 15 yarder, no ejection. The 2nd when Charles Woodson punched a Saints player during the play at Lambeau. Again, an instantaneous action like those will draw a flag, not necessarily a penalty.
-
Was what Stafford did to Moore a football move?
Frankly, I am really tired of discussions with you. You are certainly not worth any effort to engage in any further discussion.
-
Wasn't the NFL trade deadline last month? I must have missed the Cutler to the Packers trade.
I mean really on the Matt Flynn Kool Aid? He's a fine back up, but I mean come on. Cutler has at least been to a Pro Bowl and the playoffs.
At this point, they are both probably best when they are game managers and not asked to make a ton of plays; so that you can limit their mistakes. In Cutler's defense, the Bear's wide receivers are just terrible, they never do him any favors, but he isn't a markedly different quarterback than he was in Denver with a better set of wide receivers. Flynn is obviously unproven and has no track record, so you have to say that Cutler is much, much better QB at this point.
However, regardless of Sunday's stinker, I'd rather have Stafford for the next 5-7 years than Cutler, with the huge caveat that he must stay healthy.
-
Was what Stafford did to Moore a football move?
It was a PO'd qb throwing a tantrum football move. Moore had locked up with him and Stafford shed the block. ;D I am sure that all over the league, other qbs are cheering the play when they see it on film.
-
speaking of Robison, did anyone else catch him shoving a referee last night? I thought I did during the game, so was glad to find a youtube video of it. I don't mean to sound ejection happy, since I hate players getting kicked out, but how does this not get you an early shower?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCbvbYF64EI&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCbvbYF64EI&feature=player_embedded)
I know the ref puts his hands on Robison first, but thats how breaking up potential fights works - especially given that its pretty clear that Robison has no purpose being around the crowd of players other than to look for trouble.
-
speaking of Robison, did anyone else catch him shoving a referee last night? I thought I did during the game, so was glad to find a youtube video of it. I don't mean to sound ejection happy, since I hate players getting kicked out, but how does this not get you an early shower?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCbvbYF64EI&feature=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCbvbYF64EI&feature=player_embedded)
I know the ref puts his hands on Robison first, but thats how breaking up potential fights works - especially given that its pretty clear that Robison has no purpose being around the crowd of players other than to look for trouble.
Wow, that is surprising he was not, at the least, penalized for that. I don't think it was ejection worthy, but sure could have been a penalty.
On another Robinson note, after the Packers first extra point, Robinson walked up to Lang, put his arm around him and they talked for a bit. Looked like he was apolotizing for the foot to the groin last month.
-
Frankly, I am really tired of discussions with you. You are certainly not worth any effort to engage in any further discussion.
Fair enough. I guess if someone had just crushed my points and made me look a fool, I'd avoid discussions with that person too ;)
-
Fair enough. I guess if someone had just crushed my points and made me look a fool, I'd avoid discussions with that person too ;)
Not in the slightest. It's just the more your argue with an idiot, no one can tell who the idiot is. So, I stopped arguing with you to avoid being confused for the idiot. I will let you play that role by yourself.
Still sticking with your replay argument? :D :D :D
-
Not in the slightest. It's just the more your argue with an idiot, no one can tell who the idiot is. So, I stopped arguing with you to avoid being confused for the idiot. I will let you play that role by yourself.
Still sticking with your replay argument? :D :D :D
So I'm the idiot for supporting my statements with facts? If that's your take, so be it.
Cheers!
-
Got a question for you Dish...
Has Roy Williams ever caught a ball clean? Game, practice, backyard with his kids? I swear he juggles every single ball thrown his way.
I think you answered your own question, but forthe deal they gave him, he was worth the risk. I can't imagine him being back next season.
Flynn is a fine backup, but both Cutler and Stafford have two of the premiere arms in the league (better than Rodgers even).
-
So I'm the idiot for supporting my statements with facts? If that's your take, so be it.
Cheers!
No, your the idiot for continuing to argue the rules without a sound knowledge of those very rules. You made some incorrect interpretations in both the rules and use of replay. I corrected you. From that point on, as I cited the rules, all I got was condescending jerkiness in return.
You don't understand the rules, I get that. Many don't. They are confusing. I do understand the rules. I am an admitted Football Rules geek. But when I pointed those out, you became, well, yourself. Your flaw was trying to apply replay standards of other sports to the NFL. They handle things differently.
So for that is how you earned your idiocy. That is why this is the last response I will have to you in any post. As I stated earlier, you are not worth the effort. Abstinent and condescending are not always quality attributes.
-
Cutler and Stafford have two of the premiere arms in the league (better than Rodgers even).
Disagree fiercely on this point. Defined by what? Pure ability to throw the ball X yards down the field? Maybe, but I don't think that's much of a consideration at all when you talk about "premier" arms. I'd take Rodgers in terms of ability to make the precision throw, on-time, any place on the field--short, middle, deep.
-
Both Cutler and Stafford have two of the premiere arms in the league (better than Rodgers even).
Wait, according to MNF, Rodgers has the arm of Elway, the release of Marino, the poise of Montana, the mind of Manning, blah blah blah. (vomit). And I'm a diehard Packers fan. I can't stand that kind of puffery. ESPN has the creativity of Jeff George.
Maybe Cutler and Stafford do, maybe they don't, all I know is that Rodgers makes throws that neither of them can. The rocket to Jennings in the first quarter for a touchdown passed about 6 inches over the linebacker's outstretched arm, and hit Jennings a few feet before a safety would have had a play. Any lower, and its a deflection, loftier and its probably incomplete or risking getting Jennings blown up. And he's been doing that all year. When he sees man coverage, he can throw deep or place it back shoulder. He's absolutely tearing apart whatever secondaries are trying to do. Wherever the advanced metrics on his arm rank, he's playing as if he has the best arm.
Don't get me wrong, I think Stafford, and Cutler especially are very good quarterbacks. Cutler probably has every ounce of ability that Rodgers does, but very few guys ever put it all together like Rodgers has right now.
-
No, your the idiot for continuing to argue the rules without a sound knowledge of those very rules. You made some incorrect interpretations in both the rules and use of replay. I corrected you. From that point on, as I cited the rules, all I got was condescending jerkiness in return.
You don't understand the rules, I get that. Many don't. They are confusing. I do understand the rules. I am an admitted Football Rules geek. But when I pointed those out, you became, well, yourself. Your flaw was trying to apply replay standards of other sports to the NFL. They handle things differently.
So for that is how you earned your idiocy. That is why this is the last response I will have to you in any post. As I stated earlier, you are not worth the effort. Abstinent and condescending are not always quality attributes.
Actually, what you got were posts that included sources backing up my statement that NFL officials review fights and that roughing the passer could be an ejectable offense. Instead of eating your crow, you chose to attack me personally, ignore the facts presented and pretend like you were right.
-
Wait, according to MNF, Rodgers has the arm of Elway, the release of Marino, the poise of Montana, the mind of Manning, blah blah blah. (vomit). And I'm a diehard Packers fan. I can't stand that kind of puffery. ESPN has the creativity of Jeff George.
John Gruden has never seen a player that wasn't the best at something.
Jared Allen in fact invented the word sack.
-
John Gruden has never seen a player that wasn't the best at something.
Jared Allen in fact invented the word sack.
I actually enjoy Gruden on MNF because he's so laughably ridiculous. I'd love to see him and Buck Laughlin call a game...or a dog show.
-
I actually enjoy Gruden on MNF because he's so laughably ridiculous. I'd love to see him and Buck Laughlin call a game...or a dog show.
You know what they should do, they should get that dog a little hat and a pipe, like Sherlock Holmes. Do they ever do that, put costumes on the dogs?
/Man do I love Fred Willard, just watched that this week with the wife and she just stared at me at the like "what the heck was that"
-
I think you answered your own question, but forthe deal they gave him, he was worth the risk. I can't imagine him being back next season.
Flynn is a fine backup, but both Cutler and Stafford have two of the premiere arms in the league (better than Rodgers even).
I am curious by this statement, by premier arms do you mean they can throw a football further? If so, I agree, but in every other skill that is needed to be a QB in the NFL, Rodgers has them beat. Footwork, speed, checkdowns, reading defenses, accuracy, avoiding sacks, decision making, touchdown dances ;D
-
I am curious by this statement, by premier arms do you mean they can throw a football further? If so, I agree, but in every other skill that is needed to be a QB in the NFL, Rodgers has them beat. Footwork, speed, checkdowns, reading defenses, accuracy, avoiding sacks, decision making, touchdown dances ;D
Not to mention, he has by far the best receiving corps in the NFL. Not saying he isn't an elite level QB, but give him the Bears or Lions offense around him and I doubt he's viewed as a top 3 QB.
-
Not to mention, he has by far the best receiving corps in the NFL. Not saying he isn't an elite level QB, but give him the Bears or Lions offense around him and I doubt he's viewed as a top 3 QB.
Guess it's the old Peyton Manning corrollary. Is it the QB that makes the WR's or the WR's that make the QB? In this case, with my green and gold goggles, Jennings and Finely are elite at their respective positions, while Driver, Jones, Cobb, and Nelson are fillers and anyone smart enough to run the right route and catch a ball that hits them in the chest could do what they do.
Now if you give the Bears WR corps, with Rodgers and the McCarthy scheme, I think he would still be top 3, plus he would have Forte the NFC's best RB this year ;)
-
Cutler is finally being properly managed/coached by Martz. He is a fine QB when you don't treat him as a gunslinger. have Matt Forte taking all the pressure off him. IMHO, he is the 2nd best QB in the Division considering he can just always check it down to Forte. He is playing awfully well right now, managing the game and running the offense giving the ball to Forte. He is more accurate when he is not always taking a 7 step drop and not giving the ball to Forte, waiting to get hit!
Fixed for accuracy and this Packer fan's shot across your bow.
-
I am curious by this statement, by premier arms do you mean they can throw a football further? If so, I agree, but in every other skill that is needed to be a QB in the NFL, Rodgers has them beat. Footwork, speed, checkdowns, reading defenses, accuracy, avoiding sacks, decision making, touchdown dances ;D
Part of Cutler's footwork and accuracy problems in the past were actually a result of him having such a good arm. He could make a lot of throws in terms of distance and pace needed to get the ball there either flat footed or not completely balaced. Other QBs would need to be lined up, feet set, and in correct position to make it. Not saying this alone makes Cutler a great QB or its an excuse for him struggling in the past, but dude has a cannon. Cutler has the ability to make throws Rodgers can't make. The reason that Rodgers is such a good QB though is that he knows his ability and doesn't try to make those throws. Its like Favre (and I'm not comparing Cutler to Favre explicitly, just in the "big arm and brazen attitude to use it" sort of way), he could fire a ball into window most people couldn't or wouldn't based on the arm needed to get it there. Cutler is the same way, he just needs to work on his decision making and pick his spots better to make those seemingly impossible throws (which he has to an extent this year).
Think of it like a kid who never had to study for a tests cause he naturally was smarter. He never develops study habits cause why does he need them? He is excelling as is. Then he gets to college and suddenly his natural aptitude doesn't always work. And those kids who were also quite smart, but still needed to study in HS to get those As suddenly were in a better position to success where you needed more than just smarts alone.
-
People here are making it seem like every throw that Rodgers makes Cutler could also make. That is laughable. Rodgers makes throws that Jay Cutler cannot even dream of making. Bears fans are making it sound like every completion Rodgers gets is to a wide open wide receiver and that he never throws the ball into small windows. In just one game (and it just so happens to be the biggest game of all) there are more ridiculous throws that Rodgers makes than Cutler has ever made in his life.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqGP13YHUXs
- The very first throw that goes right through Jordy's arms. Admittedly, Jordy had some seperation, but Rodgers put the ball absolutely perfectly for him to catch that in front of him.
- At 0:45. Talk about a small window to throw into. You can't defend that any better.
- At 2:45. That may be the most ridiculously thrown ball I have ever seen. And talk about an ARM. It is also a great catch, no doubt about that that ball gets dislodged with a lot of other wideouts, but the fact that he puts the ball where he does, over the diving defender and in front of the safety, is insane.
- 4:10. Once again, a drop, but you can't throw a better ball, against a guy who has it perfectly defended. And again, that's a laser.
- 6:15. Again, a Jordy drop. But a defender running in front of the wideout and Rodgers guns it right in front of him. Ridiculous arm.
- 7:40. These throws are as hard and on as straight of a line as you'll see a football thrown and they're going 20 yards (line of scrimmage is the 25, caught at the 45...he's throwing from the 18, so 27 yards).
Even Rodgers deep balls aren't just some pop up, let-it-fly. The trajectory is still fairly low. If you line up all NFL quarterbacks at 1 goal line and tell them to throw a ball as far as they can, Rodgers probably doesn't throw the ball the furthest. But if you ask all NFL quarterbacks to throw a dart 20 yards into a small window, there is nobody who throws a ball with as much heat as Rodgers does. And nobody throws the back shoulder (which is impossible to defend when executed well) better than Rodgers (which a lot of credit also has to go to the wide outs no doubt).
-
People here are making it seem like every throw that Rodgers makes Cutler could also make. That is laughable. Rodgers makes throws that Jay Cutler cannot even dream of making. Bears fans are making it sound like every completion Rodgers gets is to a wide open wide receiver and that he never throws the ball into small windows. In just one game (and it just so happens to be the biggest game of all) there are more ridiculous throws that Rodgers makes than Cutler has ever made in his life.
I don't think its that Bears fans, like myself, think Cutler can make all the throws Rodgers can. In fact, you ask most Bears fans and they'll tell you Rodgers is probably the best QB in the league, and if any hate him, its because he is so damn good. I think its more the fact that Packers fans are so, rightfully, in love with Rodgers that they view Cutler as some scout team level chucker. I mean, Cutler and Matt Flynn in the same discussion, give me an F-ing break. Plenty of people that get paid to know and talk about football remark about the strength of Cutler's arm. Rodgers has WAY more touch and accuracy than Cutler has, I'm not gonna doubt it, but please stop acting like Cutler isn't playing with one of the worst WR-OL combos in the league and still helping his team win alot of games.
-
Rodgers has WAY more touch and accuracy than Cutler has, I'm not gonna doubt it, but please stop acting like Cutler isn't playing with one of the worst WR-OL combos in the league and still helping his team win alot of games.. However, due to Forte, they are still winning games.
/beating that drum
//it's fun, you see
///Belt
-
I'm not sure how what I said got taken out of context, but welcome to an internet message board I suppose.
Fact is, and you can ask any NFL scout, Cutler has premier arm strength (Stafford too). Rodgers has above average arm strength.
By no means is it a knock on Rodgers, he's both the best QB in the NFL and has better accuracy than any QB period.
Why that makes Packer fans mad, I have no idea. No one is saying Cutler is better than Rodgers, give me a break. If you can't accept that Rodgers arm strength is above average and less than Cutler's, then you should probably find something else to worry about. Arm strength is a very important part of being a QB, but accuracy even more so.
If you can stop confusing accuracy with arm strength, I think some people would have better thoughts here.
-
I'm not sure how what I said got taken out of context, but welcome to an internet message board I suppose.
Fact is, and you can ask any NFL scout, Cutler has premier arm strength (Stafford too). Rodgers has above average arm strength.
By no means is it a knock on Rodgers, he's both the best QB in the NFL and has better accuracy than any QB period.
Why that makes Packer fans mad, I have no idea. No one is saying Cutler is better than Rodgers, give me a break. If you can't accept that Rodgers arm strength is above average and less than Cutler's, then you should probably find something else to worry about. Arm strength is a very important part of being a QB, but accuracy even more so.
If you can stop confusing accuracy with arm strength, I think some people would have better thoughts here.
I'm saying Rodgers throws the ball with more heat that Cutler does, which, to me, has to do with arm strength.
-
I'm not sure how what I said got taken out of context, but welcome to an internet message board I suppose.
Fact is, and you can ask any NFL scout, Cutler has premier arm strength (Stafford too). Rodgers has above average arm strength.
By no means is it a knock on Rodgers, he's both the best QB in the NFL and has better accuracy than any QB period.
Why that makes Packer fans mad, I have no idea. No one is saying Cutler is better than Rodgers, give me a break. If you can't accept that Rodgers arm strength is above average and less than Cutler's, then you should probably find something else to worry about. Arm strength is a very important part of being a QB, but accuracy even more so.
If you can stop confusing accuracy with arm strength, I think some people would have better thoughts here.
I think because you said premeir and not strength I misconstrued what you were trying to say, my bad. In terms of pure arm stength (distance, velocity) Cutler and Stafford may have betters arms than Rodgers, I don't know and I don't have a chance to talk to scouts. However, as long as a qb has the ability to make all the throws needed in the NFL (and Rodgers certainly does), I don't think it really matters much. Some of the greatest qb's in history didn't always have the strongest arms in the league and some qb's with great arm strength were awful. Cutler does appear to have a very strong arm, but he's only an average NFL starting qb.
-
I think because you said premeir and not strength I misconstrued what you were trying to say, my bad. In terms of pure arm stength (distance, velocity) Cutler and Stafford may have betters arms than Rodgers, I don't know and I don't have a chance to talk to scouts. However, as long as a qb has the ability to make all the throws needed in the NFL (and Rodgers certainly does), I don't think it really matters much. Some of the greatest qb's in history didn't always have the strongest arms in the league and some qb's with great arm strength were awful. Cutler does appear to have a very strong arm, but he's only an average NFL starting qb.
Cutler is definitely an above average quarterback, IMO. He's finally proving that this year. It gets said a lot, but he truly does have nothing to work with. I seriously doubt that any pass catchers on the Bears except for Forte would even crack the Packer's rotation.
-
so, how long until Suh gets suspended? does goodell meet with him again and tell us all what an upstanding gentleman he is? this is ridiculous. Suh and the lions are a dirty team and not shy about their style of play
-
Suh deserves whatever he gets. VandenBosch's hit on Rogers in the first half was clean and a reputation call. No other defense gets that call. Same with the chop block call. Morris cut the guy before the guard engaged. But, regardless, Detroit is who I thought they were. Not ready for prime time, can't handle the pressure.
-
Suh deserves whatever he gets. VandenBosch's hit on Rogers in the first half was clean and a reputation call. No other defense gets that call. Same with the chop block call. Morris cut the guy before the guard engaged. But, regardless, Detroit is who I thought they were. Not ready for prime time, can't handle the pressure.
If you look at the angle the official had on VandenBosch's hit, it was from behind. Looking from his angle, Rodgers head snaps back. To him, it appeared to be a hit to the head. I know they tell the officials to protect the QB, but you have to witness the hit to call it. He did not witness it, but assumed it. Wrong assumption.
The chop block was a bad call as well. He actually cuts him right before the lineman engages, not after. This crew was a flag happy crew. Hurt the flow of the game for awhile.
As for Suh, his postgame interview will likely hurt him more than help him with the Commish. That was really a pathetic excuse. I lost any respect I had for him after listening to him. I suspect his suspension will be significant.
-
The chop block was a bad call as well. He actually cuts him right before the lineman engages, not after. This crew was a flag happy crew. Hurt the flow of the game for awhile.
Found this in an ESPN article (not shockingly discussing a play by the Lions in a previous game):
First, let's get to the general definition of a chop block as stated in the NFL rule book: "A chop block is a foul by the offense in which one offense player (designated as A1 for purposes of this rule) blocks a defensive player in the area of the thigh or lower while another offensive player (A2) occupies that same defensive player."
Indeed, the widely-held understanding of a chop block is one offensive lineman cut-blocking a defensive lineman while another blocks him above the waist. It's a dangerous approach that can lead to the defensive lineman getting twisted unnaturally and injured.
On both occasions Sunday, Peterman (A1) cut-blocked Jets defensive lineman Shaun Ellis while a second Lions offensive lineman (A2) -- right tackle Gosder Cherilus on the first and center Dominic Raiola on the second -- stood nearby but did not engage.
Unfortunately for the Lions, that play falls under a secondary section of the chop block rule known as the "lure." (Dave Birkett of the Detroit Free Press pointed out the explanation earlier this week.) Here is how that scenario is worded: "On a forward pass play, A1 chops a defensive player while A2 confronts the defensive player in a pass-blocking posture but is not physically engaged with the defensive player (a 'lure')."
-
Thanks for the clarification.
-
A fine mess you've gotten yourself into, Erik Walden.
-
http://www.freep.com/article/20111127/SPORTS01/111127012/Report-Suh-could-slapped-minimum-two-game-suspension
IMO, he should be gone for the rest of the season. This is a gift.
-
the Bears are going to struggle without Cutler. though, in Hanie's defense, Martz's playcalling isn't exactly putting him in a great position to succeed.
-
2nd half was a lot better for Hanie. I think they still win at home vs KC, home vs SEA, @min, and @ Denver(I hope), but I have picked against Tebow every week and that hasn't gone so well.
edit to include games I forgot.
11 wins surely gets them in.
-
2nd half was a lot better for Hanie. I think they still win at home vs KC & @ Denver(I hope), but I have picked against Tebow every week and that hasn't gone so well.
i'm not sure 9 wins gets them in the playoffs
-
edit above.
-
2nd half was a lot better for Hanie. I think they still win at home vs KC & @ Denver(I hope), but I have picked against Tebow every week and that hasn't gone so well.
I think they'll go 3-2 down the stretch, losing to Denver and GB, but that should be enough to get them in the playoffs. Hanie was awful in the 1st half. If the Bears want to be successful they need to put him in better situations and just require him to be a game manager and not make the awful decisions that lead to turnovers. Just let the run game, short throws, and the other 2 phases win them the game; much like they were doing with Cutler.
-
That pick right before half was just a killer and the difference (6 point swing) in the game.
-
That pick right before half was just a killer and the difference (6 point swing) in the game.
Stupid play call there, run the ball, if you don't make it take the 3 and go into the half winning.
-
Despite the lose, good news is it didn't hurt the Bears in the playoff hunt. Their 6-3 conference record is clutch. They own tiebreakers right now with Atlanta, Detroit, NY Giants. They have 3 winable games coming up. There is absolutely no way they lose to Tebow, unless Hanie throws pick 6's. The Bears have way too much speed on defense and are too gap disciplined for that offense to work against the Bears. I actually think that Denver game might be the easiest of their next 3.
-
There is absolutely no way they lose to Tebow
I'll bet a lot of fans have said this. Typical Bear fan bluster.
-
I'll bet a lot of fans have said this. Typical Bear fan bluster.
Actually he backed it up some supporting evidence.
-
MUDish is nowhere near a koo-aid drinking, blustery Bears fan.
I think the Giants are going to be out. They will lose to the Saints tonight, and that will put them at 6-5. The Cowboys will win the NFC East. Also the Saints will win the South.
So that means you have two wildcard spots for the Lions, Bears and Falcons. Bears own the tiebreaker with the Falcons, but Falcons have a relatively easy end (at Houston, at Carolina, Jax, at NO and TB). I think they go 4-1.
Bears (KC, @Broncos, Seattle, @GB, @MN) could match that...can't see them doing worse than 3-2.
Lions (@NO, MN, @Oak, SD, @GB) at best will go 3-2. And the two losses would likely be to NO and GB, which will mean their conference record will be worse than the Bears.
So my guess is:
1. GB
2. SF
3. NO
4. Dallas
5. Atlanta
6. Chicago
-
MUDish is nowhere near a koo-aid drinking, blustery Bears fan.
I think the Giants are going to be out. They will lose to the Saints tonight, and that will put them at 6-5. The Cowboys will win the NFC East. Also the Saints will win the South.
So that means you have two wildcard spots for the Lions, Bears and Falcons. Bears own the tiebreaker with the Falcons, but Falcons have a relatively easy end (at Houston, at Carolina, Jax, at NO and TB). I think they go 4-1.
Bears (KC, @Broncos, Seattle, @GB, @MN) could match that...can't see them doing worse than 3-2.
Lions (@NO, MN, @Oak, SD, @GB) at best will go 3-2. And the two losses would likely be to NO and GB, which will mean their conference record will be worse than the Bears.
So my guess is:
1. GB
2. SF
3. NO
4. Dallas
5. Atlanta
6. Chicago
Agree on pretty much all points.
NYG needs to go 4-2 to have a shot. Their last 6 games are @NO, GB, @Dal, Was, @NYJ, Dal. If they go 4-2 with that schedule, they will definitely have earned their playoff spot.
Bears at Green Bay in the Divisional Playoffs? I like it! :)
-
I don't see the bears beating NO in the wild card
-
I don't see the bears beating NO in the wild card
If they could sneak up into the #5 given the tiebreaker over Atlanta, they could absolutely beat Dallas.
-
I don't see the bears beating NO in the wild card
I would like to see the Bears play NO. I think that would be a good game. NO is not invincible, but they have a damn impressive offense. The Bears D against that O would make for an entertaining game.
-
Based on the 7-9 Seahawks hosting a playoff game last season, the NFL didn't change the way teams are seeded this season, did they? As in, division winners may not necessarily be #1-4.
I remember there was some talk of that, but it may have just been media speculation/fiction-writing.
EDIT: Nevermind. Seeding format has not changed.
-
I would like to see the Bears play NO. I think that would be a good game. NO is not invincible, but they have a damn impressive offense. The Bears D against that O would make for an entertaining game.
NO smoked the Bears pretty well in Week 2. I'd just like to see the Bears make the playoffs, whatever happens from there on out, at least they give themselves a chance.
-
I am confident the follow conversation took place tonight...
Caleb: "I was awful."
Jay: "I am telling you that is why I don't throw it to Roy, unnatural carnal knowledge him."
WHat a freaking pathetic game.
-
I am confident the follow conversation took place tonight...
Caleb: "I was awful."
Jay: "I am telling you that is why I don't throw it to Roy, frack him."
WHat a freaking pathetic game.
Bears without Forte and Cutler just can't compete. You can't lose your two best offensive players (frankly the only ones with any consistent talent, Hester notwithstanding) and expect to win, no matter how bad the Chiefs are. It's too bad, cuz I'm really hoping the Bears can keep the Lions out of the playoffs.
Here's hoping the Forte injury isn't too serious, hate to see a guy get injured when he's battling to get the payday he deserves.
Edit: Just saw Forte is out 2-4 with a knee sprain. There goes my FF championship.
-
Not overturning that Driver TD catch was weak. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but if the same thing happens to Calvin Johnson, it is incomplete.
-
Not overturning that Driver TD catch was weak. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but if the same thing happens to Calvin Johnson, it is incomplete.
That is a conspiracy theory
-
I know.
-
Not overturning that Driver TD catch was weak. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but if the same thing happens to Calvin Johnson, it is incomplete.
Why should it have been overturned? He had both toes down.
-
Bears without Forte and Cutler just can't compete. You can't lose your two best offensive players (frankly the only ones with any consistent talent, Hester notwithstanding) and expect to win, no matter how bad the Chiefs are. It's too bad, cuz I'm really hoping the Bears can keep the Lions out of the playoffs.
Here's hoping the Forte injury isn't too serious, hate to see a guy get injured when he's battling to get the payday he deserves.
Edit: Just saw Forte is out 2-4 with a knee sprain. There goes my FF championship.
Hanie wasn't very good today (underthrew Knox on the INT, overthrew Bennett on a sure TD) but he wasn't to blame for Barber not being on the LOS or for Roy Williams not being on the sidelines. Those 2 plays were basically the game. Martz doesn't do much to help him out either. The Chiefs knew they were passing and just pinned their ears back and attacked the QB - no screens, no draws, just Hanie getting sacked or rolling to his right and firing passes into the sidelines.
No Forte. No Cutler. No Playoffs.
-
Why should it have been overturned? He had both toes down.
I agree. The Jennings TD was more questionable.
-
I think tower meant the Jennings TD, not the Driver one. He posted that soon after the Jennings TD. The main difference between the Jennings and Calvin catches was that Calvin went to the ground. Although, I still disagree with that rule.
-
Mea Culpa. I was talking about the juggling TD and typed too fast.
-
Not sure if any Packer fans had any doubt they would score on that last drive. That offense is The Terminator, it's ridiculous.
Not sure what to say about the Bears. I said (and stand by) that I don't think Tebow can beat them next week, but the Bears are going to have to find a way to score some points against that (becoming very good) Bronco defense.
Good news for the Bears is everyone (pending Detroit) lost, and the Bears lost to an AFC team.
Jason Garrett, wtf??? I thought he completely f'd up by letting 20 seconds tick off the clock (the Bryant reception to get them in FG range was with about 30 seconds left). They had 2 timeouts left and could have ran one other play at least. Freezing his own kicker, unreal.
-
Not sure if any Packer fans had any doubt they would score on that last drive. That offense is The Terminator, it's ridiculous.
I was happy to see Rodgers have to make a game winning drive this year, just to remind me that he can do it. So many blowouts this year, or at least games where we were up at the end, and it was on the defense, not the offense to close it out. Really happy to see that he thrives even more when the pressure is on. The Pack defense is suspect enough that they'll be down at some point in a big spot, good to see we can make the crunch time comeback.
-
I was happy to see Rodgers have to make a game winning drive this year, just to remind me that he can do it. So many blowouts this year, or at least games where we were up at the end, and it was on the defense, not the offense to close it out. Really happy to see that he thrives even more when the pressure is on. The Pack defense is suspect enough that they'll be down at some point in a big spot, good to see we can make the crunch time comeback.
McCarthy was very true to his "balanced attack" plan. That last drive has to make everyone else wonder why we even run sometimes. When you need points, just let Aaron unleash. I'll be one of those who says we should have won by a landslide if it were not for x, y & z. But anyone who thinks the Pack CAN'T win it all is just argumentative. It's all in our hands (despite the drops).
-
NFC North Champion Green Bay Packers.
-
NFC North Champion Green Bay Packers.
Semi surprised it's only their first since '07. That Lions team is out of control.
-
Not overturning that Driver TD catch was weak. I don't subscribe to conspiracy theories, but if the same thing happens to Calvin Johnson, it is incomplete.
What was wrong with the Driver TD?
-
Semi surprised it's only their first since '07. That Lions team is out of control.
Yeah, a 3 year drought is rough for the Packers. However, I think they might have won another significant championship in that time ;)
-
Mea Culpa. I was talking about the juggling TD and typed too fast.
I thought the Jennings call was correct. I would not have been surprised, though, had it been overturned. He had control and two feet down. If it was not slapped out, it would not have moved. There is no rule that says the ball is not controlled by the fingers and has to be in the palm.
That said, if the defender would have been on Jennings at the time of the reception and knocked the ball out, it would have been called incomplete. Or if he was on Jennings and Jennings loses it on the ground. That is how silly the reception rule is in the NFL right now.
-
What was wrong with the Driver TD?
He meant the Jennings TD and the problem was that he didn't catch it.
-
I thought the Jennings call was correct. I would not have been surprised, though, had it been overturned. He had control and two feet down.
He bobbled the ball the entire time right up until it was knocked out. He maybe took one 1/2 step with what looked to be "control".
-
He bobbled the ball the entire time right up until it was knocked out. He maybe took one 1/2 step with what looked to be "control".
Obviously you saw something different that the official and I saw. You could not be more wrong in your comment. If you recall, the official said "confirmed". Enough said. Dislike it, if you like, but it was the correct call.
And, how do you take a 1/2 step in football? That comment alone tells me all that I need to know. :o
-
Obviously you saw something different that the official and I saw. You could not be more wrong in your comment. If you recall, the official said "confirmed". Enough said. Whine if you like, but it was the correct call.
And, how do you take a 1/2 step in football? That comment alone tells me all that I need to know. :o
How was I whining? I made 1 comment about what I believe i saw in a replay. Sorry my use of "1/2 step" was insulting to your superior football mind.
-
How was I whining? I made 1 comment about what I believe i saw in a replay. Sorry my use of "1/2 step" was insulting to your superior football mind.
It wasn't insulting, there is no such thing. Superior mind or not. It was a hilarious comment. As I said, it told me all I needed to know when debating this subject with you.
As for the whining refernce, that was hyperbole and over the top. I will take that out of my prior comment.
-
Yeah, a 3 year drought is rough for the Packers. However, I think they might have won another significant championship in that time ;)
I meant it as more of a slight to the Vikings than anything. They fell hard in a short amount of time.
-
I meant it as more of a slight to the Vikings than anything. They fell hard in a short amount of time.
I know, I was just having some fun.
Definitely thought that Jennings call was going to be overturned. I didn't think there was a point in time when the ball was fully secured and wasn't moving. If it would have been ruled incomplete on the field, I highly doubt it would have been reversed. Oh well, as a Packers fan I'll take it.
-
How was I whining? I made 1 comment about what I believe i saw in a replay. Sorry my use of "1/2 step" was insulting to your superior football mind.
Don't ever question MUMac's knowledge of the NFL Rule Book! Right or wrong, he will tell you just how right he is!
-
Don't ever question MUMac's knowledge of the NFL Rule Book! Right or wrong, he will tell you just how right he is!
No, it will demonstrate how WRONG you are. A big difference. Arguing with fact and knowledge is a dangerous thing to you, I guess. You kept on and on without any knowledge or fact, and apparently your poor feelings are hurt. Heck, I even showed you where it was in the rules. Yet, you were either to obstenant or dense to understand. I apologize for using fact and knowledge against you to make you look like a fool.
I, though, suppose you know what a 1/2 step is in football, when making a catch, right? That would be something you could relate to and argue ... :o
-
No, it will demonstrate how WRONG you are. A big difference. Arguing with fact and knowledge is a dangerous thing to you, I guess. You kept on and on without any knowledge or fact, and apparently your poor feelings are hurt. Heck, I even showed you where it was in the rules. Yet, you were either to obstenant or dense to understand. I apologize for using fact and knowledge against you to make you look like a fool.
I, though, suppose you know what a 1/2 step is in football, when making a catch, right? That would be something you could relate to and argue ... :o
Lighten up, Mac. I'm just giving you a hard time. It's OK for you to admit being wrong every once in a while. No one will judge you.
-
I, though, suppose you know what a 1/2 step is in football, when making a catch, right? That would be something you could relate to and argue ... :o
Obviously this really bugs you, I would consider a 1/2 step when 1 of the foot is in the air completing the rest of his stride. I don't consider it a full step as one of the feet is already in the air.
edit - adds no value, so redacted
-
I know, I was just having some fun.
Definitely thought that Jennings call was going to be overturned. I didn't think there was a point in time when the ball was fully secured and wasn't moving. If it would have been ruled incomplete on the field, I highly doubt it would have been reversed. Oh well, as a Packers fan I'll take it.
Exactly... I think most people miss the fact that the video evidence must be indisputable; IMO in at least two-thirds of challenges where the call stands, had the opposite call been made, it too would have withstood a challenge.
Even in HD with super-slow-mo, it's difficult to tell with absolute certainty if someone has "control" of the football given that the ball cannot remain motionless when a receiver's body, arms, hands, etc. are all in variable motion (sometimes in different directions).
In other words, even if the referee was 95% confident that Jennings didn't have control, that's not enough to overturn the call on the field.
-
Even in HD with super-slow-mo, it's difficult to tell with absolute certainty if someone has "control" of the football given that the ball cannot remain motionless when a receiver's body, arms, hands, etc. are all in variable motion (sometimes in different directions).
I think is key and why the NFL rules are so stupid because they change the definitions of concepts based on location on the field. The ball doesn't have to be perfectly still to be under control nor does it have to be in contact with the palms. Jennings regripped during the catch but he never "lost control" as he was determining what the ball did. The rules suck because if he had been going to the ground that would definitely not been a catch.
Even if you think it wasn't a catch, lets call it even because the refs didn't see I think Jones being tackled at the 2 on that play.
-
FWIW, I was screaming at the Lions for the obvious facemask on the last play and then was stunned when there was no flag. I just kept waiting.....and waiting..... The ball was out before the facemask, does that make a difference on the call?
-
They have 3 winable games coming up. There is absolutely no way they lose to Tebow, unless Hanie throws pick 6's. The Bears have way too much speed on defense and are too gap disciplined for that offense to work against the Bears. I actually think that Denver game might be the easiest of their next 3.
oooooohhhh, BURN!
-
Tebowed. Again
-
oooooohhhh, BURN!
To be fair, that prediction was made prior to the realization that Caleb Hanie is not an NFL QB.
-
To be fair, that prediction was made prior to the realization that Caleb Hanie is not an NFL QB.
I doubt that. The prediction was made based on the Bears defense, not Hanie. I agreed completely with the prediction, and would co-sign again.
Signed, a Packers fan that respects the Bears.
-
oooooohhhh, BURN!
Not sure how I was burned on what I said, I was actually dead on the money. Did you watch the game? Bears defense did exactly what I predicted would happen. Instead of Hanie throwing pick 6's, Barber gift wrapped the game back to Denver.
If anything, I was validated in what I called on how the Bears D would play this game.
-
I doubt that. The prediction was made based on the Bears defense, not Hanie. I agreed completely with the prediction, and would co-sign again.
Signed, a Packers fan that respects the Bears.
I guess I interpreted it a different way. The Bears' D held Denver to 10 points in 60 minutes (same vs. KC last week). That would be good enough to get a W 95% of the time with an average QB. Considering Hanie does not appear to be average, the Bears' D would basically need to shut down the opposition and put points on the board. Not to mention that if Barber stays in bounds, the game ends and Tebow doesn't even get a shot to tie it.
That said, give credit to Denver and Tebow, they did what they needed to do.
-
I doubt that. The prediction was made based on the Bears defense, not Hanie. I agreed completely with the prediction, and would co-sign again.
Signed, a Packers fan that respects the Bears.
I'm only having some fun at the expense of a Bear fan (I'm sure not the only one) who said no way no how can The Broncos beat the Bears. I believe I called it typical Bear fan bluster. I am a Packer fan, and don't carry an unusual amount of Bear animus. I do enjoy seeing unusually confident Bear fans suffer. They are the same ones who abandon the Bears after a 7-9 year.
-
I said there was no way Tebow could beat the Bears, not the Broncos, but Tebow. Tebow didn't beat the Bears, Marion Barber beat the Bears.
-
Not sure how I was burned on what I said, I was actually dead on the money. Did you watch the game? Bears defense did exactly what I predicted would happen. Instead of Hanie throwing pick 6's, Barber gift wrapped the game back to Denver.
If anything, I was validated in what I called on how the Bears D would play this game.
The Bear defense did as you predicted. The Bears have a good defense and they ususally do. Not a tough call. Broncos Win. Broncos Win. Broncos Win. That is all that counts.
-
Hearing through a friend that Jennings tore his MCL, will be done for regular season at minimum.
-
Hearing through a friend that Jennings tore his MCL, will be done for regular season at minimum.
So they score 30 instead of 35 a game...still gonna dominate the next 3 weeks and only need 1 out of 3 to clinch home field..need him back for the playoffs but he has a month to heal.
-
A month to heal a torn MCL (if that s what it really is)? More like 6-8 weeks. I'd say at this point, he's a long shot to get back on the field this year. Time for Cobb and the TE's to step up a bit more.
-
And James Jones.... :-\
-
a serious question for packer fans:
Why do people buy "stock" in the Packers?
I only ask after reading this email in Bill Simmons' NFL picks column this week:
"On Tuesday Packers began offering stock to the public. Stock shares are available for purchase on the Packers web page. The 'stock' certificates are assigned to owners by name. Shares cannot appreciate and they pay no dividend. Shares can't be transferred. There is no exchange or marketplace, and you can only will them to family members. Basically, for $250 you get a piece of paper saying you own part of the team. Shareholders have no ability to buy tickets, no seat licenses, no special benefits, just the certificate that announces you were gullible enough to send the team money for nothing. You do get invited to an annual shareholder meeting, but the shareholders have no decision making ability regarding the future of the team or stadium. It's kind of like a big Facebook account, except Facebook is free. Now get ready for this — they sold $400,000 worth of 'stock' certificates in the first 11 minutes that they were available!"
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/11989/the-sports-guys-week-14-picks
-
a serious question for packer fans:
Why do people buy "stock" in the Packers?
I only ask after reading this email in Bill Simmons' NFL picks column this week:
"On Tuesday Packers began offering stock to the public. Stock shares are available for purchase on the Packers web page. The 'stock' certificates are assigned to owners by name. Shares cannot appreciate and they pay no dividend. Shares can't be transferred. There is no exchange or marketplace, and you can only will them to family members. Basically, for $250 you get a piece of paper saying you own part of the team. Shareholders have no ability to buy tickets, no seat licenses, no special benefits, just the certificate that announces you were gullible enough to send the team money for nothing. You do get invited to an annual shareholder meeting, but the shareholders have no decision making ability regarding the future of the team or stadium. It's kind of like a big Facebook account, except Facebook is free. Now get ready for this — they sold $400,000 worth of 'stock' certificates in the first 11 minutes that they were available!"
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/11989/the-sports-guys-week-14-picks
No idea, really. I guess grandfathers buy them for their grandchildren to make damn sure they grow up as Packer fans. Of the people I know that own a share, they frame it, throw it on their garage wall and use it as a talking point will drinking a beer with the neighbor. In a way, the Packers are cashing in on fan loyalty while testing the market value of it. Besides, you cant frame your pride and mount it on the wall....so thats where the certificate comes in handy.
-
a serious question for packer fans:
Why do people buy "stock" in the Packers?
I only ask after reading this email in Bill Simmons' NFL picks column this week:
"On Tuesday Packers began offering stock to the public. Stock shares are available for purchase on the Packers web page. The 'stock' certificates are assigned to owners by name. Shares cannot appreciate and they pay no dividend. Shares can't be transferred. There is no exchange or marketplace, and you can only will them to family members. Basically, for $250 you get a piece of paper saying you own part of the team. Shareholders have no ability to buy tickets, no seat licenses, no special benefits, just the certificate that announces you were gullible enough to send the team money for nothing. You do get invited to an annual shareholder meeting, but the shareholders have no decision making ability regarding the future of the team or stadium. It's kind of like a big Facebook account, except Facebook is free. Now get ready for this — they sold $400,000 worth of 'stock' certificates in the first 11 minutes that they were available!"
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/11989/the-sports-guys-week-14-picks
If it was the Bears (or your team of choice), wouldn't you consider this if you had the cash laying around? Or, at least you could understand it?
Let's look at it in a slight different, but somewhat analogous light. Let's say for $250 you could get a football program at Marquette (or it would ensure the continued competitiveness of it). Frankly, I contend that any donations to collegiate athletic programs are pretty similar to what Packers fans are doing by buying stock. It helps to ensure the team stays in GB, and can stay competitive.
-
If it was the Bears (or your team of choice), wouldn't you consider this if you had the cash laying around? Or, at least you could understand it?
To be honest, no. If I'm supporting my team monetarily, I want something from it, ie. jersey, hat, etc. Why should someone else profit of my money and I get nothing in return?
Of course, I'm also one of those who believe public money should never be used to build a sports stadium.
-
Well then you should love this. Instead of taxes, they raised money to expand the stadium through voluntary stock purchases.
-
a serious question for packer fans:
Why do people buy "stock" in the Packers?
I only ask after reading this email in Bill Simmons' NFL picks column this week:
"On Tuesday Packers began offering stock to the public. Stock shares are available for purchase on the Packers web page. The 'stock' certificates are assigned to owners by name. Shares cannot appreciate and they pay no dividend. Shares can't be transferred. There is no exchange or marketplace, and you can only will them to family members. Basically, for $250 you get a piece of paper saying you own part of the team. Shareholders have no ability to buy tickets, no seat licenses, no special benefits, just the certificate that announces you were gullible enough to send the team money for nothing. You do get invited to an annual shareholder meeting, but the shareholders have no decision making ability regarding the future of the team or stadium. It's kind of like a big Facebook account, except Facebook is free. Now get ready for this — they sold $400,000 worth of 'stock' certificates in the first 11 minutes that they were available!"
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/11989/the-sports-guys-week-14-picks
Plus, as an owner, you can never bet on football games again.
-
I said there was no way Tebow could beat the Bears, not the Broncos, but Tebow. Tebow didn't beat the Bears, Marion Barber beat the Bears.
Back, back, back to the warning track!!!! She's gone. I haven't seen this much back peddling in quite some time. Typical Bears fan.
-
Back, back, back to the warning track!!!! She's gone. I haven't seen this much back peddling in quite some time.
I have to agree. While Barber clearly is at fault, and Haney clearly sucks, when given the opportunity late in the game, Tebow most assuredly beat the Bears.
-
To be honest, no. If I'm supporting my team monetarily, I want something from it, ie. jersey, hat, etc. Why should someone else profit of my money and I get nothing in return?
Of course, I'm also one of those who believe public money should never be used to build a sports stadium.
I bought it the last time they sold it. Why? Just to say I have it and frame it. Same reason why I bought an autographed picture of Brett Favre and Bart Starr - framed and on display.
-
Losing Forte on top of Cutler killed the Bears. It is a shame. I thought they had a chance to do some damage in the Playoffs. They are a better team than either Detroit or Atlanta. If they had Forte, they beat the Chiefs and Broncos.
-
Despite the lose, good news is it didn't hurt the Bears in the playoff hunt. Their 6-3 conference record is clutch. They own tiebreakers right now with Atlanta, Detroit, NY Giants. They have 3 winable games coming up. There is absolutely no way they lose to Tebow, unless Hanie throws pick 6's. The Bears have way too much speed on defense and are too gap disciplined for that offense to work against the Bears. I actually think that Denver game might be the easiest of their next 3.
really guys? reading between the lines, I thought this game played out EXACTLY the way he predicted it would. the bears defense forced seven three-and-outs, and ten drives of five plays or less. They gave up just over 100 yards total on the ground. The offense that the Broncs were running at the time of the prediction (that read-option) has since been altered slightly to provide more passing opportunities. As of Nov 27, Tebow had averaged 128 yards through the air. So the speed/gap discipline of the bears forced Tebow to throw the ball literally twice as many times as in any other game this season (save the Lions debacle). Given all that, I'd be much more inclined to say that its too bad the bears weren't even minimally competent to put that game on ice, rather than point to 110 yards worth of Matt Prater as evidence he's backpedaling or somehow had a faulty analysis.
-
I bought it the last time they sold it. Why? Just to say I have it and frame it. Same reason why I bought an autographed picture of Brett Favre and Bart Starr - framed and on display.
I could have made you a stock owner certificate to hang on the wall for half of what you paid the Packers.
In fact, if anyone wants one, just let me know. Only $125 and you too can pretend to be an owner of an NFL franchise!
-
I could have made you a stock owner certificate to hang on the wall for half of what you paid the Packers.
In fact, if anyone wants one, just let me know. Only $125 and you too can pretend to be an owner of an NFL franchise!
I doubt anything you write up would have the 'awe' factor or prestige associated with it.
I would never buy any myself, but people buy things for all sorts of reasons.
At least they can now say without anyone crying about it that "WE WON THE SUPER BOWL!!!"
-
I doubt anything you write up would have the 'awe' factor or prestige associated with it.
I would never buy any myself, but people buy things for all sorts of reasons.
At least they can now say without anyone crying about it that "WE WON THE SUPER BOWL!!!"
One man's "awe factor and prestige" is another man's, "You paid 250 bucks for a worthless piece of paper?!"
You do have a point about the "we" debate though!
-
One man's "awe factor and prestige" is another man's, "You paid 250 bucks for a worthless piece of paper?!"
You do have a point about the "we" debate though!
Oh come now, if the Bears started selling stock, you know there would be a line down Michigan Ave. ;)
-
It would be hard to understand if you were a fan of a team other than the Packers. I would not be interested in something like this for the Bucks, Brewers or any other team. Or if I were a Bears fan, I would have zero interest in purchasing stock of the Bears.
Having been born, raised in Green Bay and a lifelong Packer fan, the money was inconsequential. The ability to purchase it and frame it was well worth the money spent. The fact they do not have an "owner" as other pro teams do, makes them unique. But, I suspect you have to live it to understand it.
-
I have to agree. While Barber clearly is at fault, and Haney clearly sucks, when given the opportunity late in the game, Tebow most assuredly beat the Bears.
I must have missed him kicking the mammoth field goals? Unless you want to talk about him making dump off throws against the prevent. He was at best the 3rd most responsible person for this win, AT BEST.
-
It would be hard to understand if you were a fan of a team other than the Packers. I would not be interested in something like this for the Bucks, Brewers or any other team. Or if I were a Bears fan, I would have zero interest in purchasing stock of the Bears.
Having been born, raised in Green Bay and a lifelong Packer fan, the money was inconsequential. The ability to purchase it and frame it was well worth the money spent. The fact they do not have an "owner" as other pro teams do, makes them unique. But, I suspect you have to live it to understand it.
I agree. I have a share on my office wall. To me, it's the equivalent of an autographed jersey.
-
I must have missed him kicking the mammoth field goals? Unless you want to talk about him making dump off throws against the prevent. He was at best the 3rd most responsible person for this win, AT BEST.
Apparently you were in the bathroom for the TD, and the 24 plays, and 135 yards that even put them in position to have shot at those FG's. It wasn't one drive, it was 3. I'll say again, when the opportunity presented it late in the game, Tebow beat the Bears. Of course nobody does it alone, but he made the plays he had to make.The argument was that he would not be able to beat the Bears' defense. Those 13 points at the end of the game certainly tell a different story.
-
Apparently you were in the bathroom for the TD, and the 24 plays, and 135 yards that even put them in position to have shot at those FG's. It wasn't one drive, it was 3. I'll say again, when the opportunity presented it late in the game, Tebow beat the Bears. Of course nobody does it alone, but he made the plays he had to make.The argument was that he would not be able to beat the Bears' defense. Those 13 points at the end of the game certainly tell a different story.
I'm not a Bears fan or a Broncos fan, but I sat down to watch this game. I spent three quarters just laughing at Tebow and those ducks he threw. He completed something like 3 or 4 passes through the first three quarters. Fourth quarter comes along, and he completes 70%+ for the rest of the game. I still think he looked like crap, and he misses receivers by a wider margin more often than anyone else in the league, but somehow he's got a switch.
Just ridiculous, although with Cutler and Forte I think the Bears win this game by 10.
-
Apparently you were in the bathroom for the TD, and the 24 plays, and 135 yards that even put them in position to have shot at those FG's. It wasn't one drive, it was 3. I'll say again, when the opportunity presented it late in the game, Tebow beat the Bears. Of course nobody does it alone, but he made the plays he had to make.The argument was that he would not be able to beat the Bears' defense. Those 13 points at the end of the game certainly tell a different story.
The Bears played a ridiculously soft prevent defense on the TD drive. I firmly put all the blame on the coaches for that one. If you watch those drives and compare them to the rest of the game, he didn't complete any exceptional throws or do anything different, the Bears just forced him to make more difficult throws all game and he didn't. And then the D softened up. Thats coaching. One of the main passes to get them into position for the tying FG was a horrific throw but an amazing catch by Thomas. This one is firmly on coaching, besides Barber, for me. The Bears D tightened up immediately as soon as they got near the 40-45, why they didn't play the same way earlier I'll never know. I hate the prevent with a passion unless there are 10 seconds left and you're up more than 3.
If you are honestly lauding a QB for getting his team in position for a SIXTY YARD FG, then yes, you are bought into the hype. There are probably 3 kickers in the league I trust to make that kick and unfortunately Prater is one of them. But lets focus more on Saint Timothy for getting them there.
-
Infinity % stand by what I said, I won't back down from it for a second. I'm not back pedaling at all, if you're not a Bears fan or a Packer fan, you know damn well that the Bears lost this game more than Tebow/Broncos won it.
Through 3 quarters, Tebow is 3 for 18 passing, fumble, pick. Tell me how that helped put the Broncos in position to win. Go to the 4th quarter, Bears go to prevent defense, Tebow goes 18-24 with a TD, his team is STILL down 3 with 2:08 left.
Bears either need 1 first down, or can take a knee 3 times and punt. If they do the latter, the Broncos get the ball back at their own 11 with at most 19 seconds on the clock, no time outs. Barber goes out of bounds, saving the Broncos a precious 40 seconds to get in FG range.
In OT, Bears are in FG range with the ball. Barber fumbles, giving the Broncos possession and only needing approx 30-35 yds to get in FG range.
Tell me what dynamic, game saving/game winning play Tim Tebow made to beat the Bears. This game was so much more lost by the Bears than won by the Broncos.
-
^ anyway.... I had a really good laugh after Cobb stepped out of bounds but the replay system was broke so the Raiders couldn't challenge the missed call
-
But lets focus more on Saint Timothy for getting them there.
Thanks for at least pointing out where the disdain is really coming from for you and so many others. For the life of me, I can't figure out what it is that makes people so uncomfortable, jealousy, bigotry, insecurity...I don't know, but it is clearly there for a whole lot of people.
-
I am a die-hard Packer fan. I don't own stock, but I've considered it. Frankly, it's not worth it to me... primarily because I like to gamble on sports.
In any event, to those of you wanting to criticize the stock offering and those who buy, I would suggest you take a look in your own closet before waging judgement upon others. If you don't have an otherwise "worthless" possession on which you have placed value, then you must lead a very sad and hollow life.
Honestly, I can't believe what some people pay for vintage Coca-Cola stuff, but indeed there's a demand for it... the stuff may trade hands through dealers a dozen times, but eventually, someone out there is going to be completely happy to shell out a cool grand so they can hang an old metal sign in their den. Same thing with an autographed baseball, game-worn jersey, stadium seat, old post card, vintage comic book, lock of hair, etc. If you think Packer stock is a waste of money, don't ever watch Pawn Stars... the crap they buy at the prices they charge will drive you completely insane and very likely send you on a murderous rampage.
Personally, I would have paid more than $725 to have the original
(http://www.auctions.cbssports.com/images/auctions/6/banner0509A.jpg)
even with no hope that I would ever see a return on that money, but that's what the banner sold for in 2009 - $725. To me, that's a steal... to nearly everyone else, that's a waste of $725.
I could have made you a stock owner certificate to hang on the wall for half of what you paid the Packers.
In fact, if anyone wants one, just let me know. Only $125 and you too can pretend to be an owner of an NFL franchise!
If you forge an autograph or make a replica of something, it has virtually no value at all... even to a serious collector. Even something that is "worthless" has value if it's authentic.
-
Thanks for at least pointing out where the disdain is really coming from for you and so many others. For the life of me, I can't figure out what it is that makes people so uncomfortable, jealousy, bigotry, insecurity...I don't know, but it is clearly there for a whole lot of people.
I think it is more the over-the-top reporting of Tebow than any disdain for him personally. Tom Jackson said something like "something is going on here that's unexplainable." ESPN also uses words like "miracle" to describe yesterday. Essentially they are implying that God is on his side.
-
If you are honestly lauding a QB for getting his team in position for a SIXTY YARD FG, then yes, you are bought into the hype. There are probably 3 kickers in the league I trust to make that kick and unfortunately Prater is one of them. But lets focus more on Saint Timothy for getting them there.
For people who feel they have to dislike Tim Tebow for reasons I cannot begin to understand, I suppose it does have to be one or the other. For others like me, I think it can be both. Will I give a guy credit for getting his team into position to attempt a tying FG in 53 seconds with no timeouts? You bet. Just as a give credit to the kicker (and the altitude). Aaron Rodgers did it last week, and people were wetting themselves. By no means am I comparing the two QB's, just how people react to the two QBs. I don't happen to believe Tebow is an NFL QB. Unfortunately, its clear to me that much (most) of the hatred is not about his abilities as a football player.
-
I think it is more the over-the-top reporting of Tebow than any disdain for him personally. Tom Jackson said something like "something is going on here that's unexplainable." ESPN also uses words like "miracle" to describe yesterday. Essentially they are implying that God is on his side.
I would buy that if the attacks did not happen until these comments. Fact is, they happenned immediately. See the Lions D-Line when they sacked Tebow, as an example.
Tebow has taken a strong religious position. Especially a Christian position. Unfortunately, in America today that means you are subject to ridicule.
I have listenned to interviews with Tebow. Very impressive how he handles himself and the comments/derision passed his way.
-
Thanks for at least pointing out where the disdain is really coming from for you and so many others. For the life of me, I can't figure out what it is that makes people so uncomfortable, jealousy, bigotry, insecurity...I don't know, but it is clearly there for a whole lot of people.
Tebow comes across as a religious, goody two shoes and the media has deified him (for lack of a better term) due to his on-field success. Those things individually rub many people the wrong way so when they're combined, it's more than some people can handle. On top of that, he doesn't fit the style of the prototypical NFL QB - he's not throwing beautiful spirals down the field that hit WRs perfectly in stride. He throws ducks, has poor accuracy and has absolutely no issue with firing the ball out of bounds if nothing's there as opposed to trying to force something and "make a play." He also runs like a RB and is built like a TE. That's not the type of QB that people are used to seeing. Many die-hard NFL fans scoff at college football with it's spread offenses and QB options because that kind of Pop Warner offense would never fly in their league. The fact that it's working for Denver right now is incomprehensible to them and, frankly, they don't want to accept it.
That said, I don't blame Elway for not being entirely sold on Tebow. Teams with little margin for error that count on the ball bouncing their way and seem to have tremendous luck rarely have sustained success in any sport.
-
I think it is more the over-the-top reporting of Tebow than any disdain for him personally. Tom Jackson said something like "something is going on here that's unexplainable." ESPN also uses words like "miracle" to describe yesterday. Essentially they are implying that God is on his side.
First off, ESPN is over the top on anything and everything. They should be the standard for nothing. However, good catch changing the word inferring to implying, because that seems to be where the breakdown is occurring. Tom Jackson said, “I don’t want to get overly dramatic, but there is something magical about what (Tebow) is able to do.”
People can choose to infer that they and others are saying that God is on his side, but that is not the way I see it. I know some will joke about it, but you and I both know that's exactly what they are doing. Fact is, I can't explain how a guy who can't play, gets it done week after week, and I don't believe for one second God is playing a role. From where I'm sitting, people are using the coverage as an excuse for their own insecurity, bigotry...whatever it is. I just don't get the whole thing. The guy never did anything to anyone, yet he may be the most disliked player in the NFL. That too is unexplainable.
-
I would buy that if the attacks did not happen until these comments. Fact is, they happenned immediately. See the Lions D-Line when they sacked Tebow, as an example.
The over the top media stuff was happening way back in college. From his freshman year at Florida. It isn't new.
-
I would buy that if the attacks did not happen until these comments. Fact is, they happenned immediately. See the Lions D-Line when they sacked Tebow, as an example.
Tebow has taken a strong religious position. Especially a Christian position. Unfortunately, in America today that means you are subject to ridicule.
I have listenned to interviews with Tebow. Very impressive how he handles himself and the comments/derision passed his way.
Not trying to change the subject, but are you really suggested that Christians are subject to ridicule here in the United States? A group that comprises over 80% of all Americans?
-
The over the top media stuff was happening way back in college. From his freshman year at Florida. It isn't new.
The over the top was more the hype on his play. Not his religious beliefs. You did not see the derission thrown his way in college due to his wearing Christianity on his sleeve. You see him mocked and that is acceptable. Yet, the guy who celebrates and is immediately chastised by the press and public is the one who makes fun of Plaxico Burress. Really?
-
People can choose to infer that they and others are saying that God is on his side, but that is not the way I see it. I know some will joke about it, but you and I both know that's exactly what they are doing. Fact is, I can't explain how a guy who can't play, gets it done week after week, and I don't believe for one second God is playing a role.
It's not that inexplicable. Denver has a great defense that keeps it close, and Tebow does well in a two-minute style offense where he can be more instinctive and isn't processing the game too much. This is hardly unprecedented in the NFL. When Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl for the Ravens, he had a lower QB rating than Tebow does now.
-
The over the top was more the hype on his play. Not his religious beliefs.
I am going to have to disagree with you on that. In fact, one of the first things I remember hearing about him was that he was a child of religious missionaries.
-
Not trying to change the subject, but are you really suggested that Christians are subject to ridicule here in the United States? A group that comprises over 80% of all Americans?
Is this a serious question? Have you paid any attention to the media, politics, etc.?
-
Not trying to change the subject, but are you really suggested that Christians are subject to ridicule here in the United States? A group that comprises over 80% of all Americans?
Yes, in the media. It is far easier to ridicule Christianity. That is my opinion. Try and mock other faith's and you will see the press come down strong and hard.
But, you are correct. Make that a different thread if you like. I am only responding to that one time so as not to change this thread.
-
I am going to have to disagree with you on that. In fact, one of the first things I remember hearing about him was that he was a child of religious missionaries.
I guess the perspective is that you heard about it. Yes, he even had biblical versus on his black eye patches. The point I was referencing is he was not mocked for it in college. He is now. The mocking came before the press started invoking the comments in the post that I responded to. That there is divine intervention ... That was the point that was made, that was the point I discussed.
-
Not trying to change the subject, but are you really suggested that Christians are subject to ridicule here in the United States? A group that comprises over 80% of all Americans?
Vocal minority, my friend. Religion is a touchy subject. While a vast majority of Americans have no problem with the term "Christmas tree," if such a decoration is put up at a federal building and not called a "holiday tree," there are going to be loud, angry protests. If they call it a "holiday tree" to begin with, that silent majority roll their eyes and go about their business.
If an openly religious football player films a pro-life commercial, it's "controversial" and he's "pushing his religion on the masses." No one cares that part of the reason the football player feels so strongly is because his mother was advised to get an abortion when she was pregnant with him but ignored the advice. It's all about religion.
-
If an openly religious football player films a pro-life commercial, it's "controversial" and he's "pushing his religion on the masses." No one cares that part of the reason the football player feels so strongly is because his mother was advised to get an abortion when she was pregnant with him but ignored the advice. It's all about religion.
On the money!
Here is an interesting read on the topic:
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Tim-Tebow-why-the-heck-do-we-hate-him-110211 (http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/Tim-Tebow-why-the-heck-do-we-hate-him-110211)
As is this:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-12-08/sports/ct-spt-1209-dan-mcneil--20111209_1_tim-tebow-tebowmania-kyle-orton (http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011-12-08/sports/ct-spt-1209-dan-mcneil--20111209_1_tim-tebow-tebowmania-kyle-orton)
That also goes for the haters. When I'm battling rush-hour commutes, I don't want ridiculously ill-placed vitriol making the ride with me. I don't browse the Internet, looking for the next joker to take a shot at Tebow, most likely for the QB's affection for Jesus Christ.
Bigotry isn't attractive.
I have been neither inspired nor irritated by anything I've heard Tebow say. Why anybody would allow blood pressure to rise over what an athlete or any entertainer says about religion, abortion or politics is incomprehensible. Yet the deep-seeded venom that spills from so many when discussing the quarterback is all over the place.
-
Good stuff guys, food for thought, no need to derail any further.
Back to the NFC talk.
Apparently Urlacher thinks Tebow is a helluva running back.
-
Good stuff guys, food for thought, no need to derail any further.
Back to the NFC talk.
Apparently Urlacher thinks Tebow is a helluva running back.
Urlacher stopped short of saying: "Tebow is a great running back. He doesn't fumble in OT and he stays in bounds with the lead to help run out the clock."
-
Tebow's team will follow him through a cement block wall. That is leadership. He is a winner. He is handling all the hubub magnificently. He is giving credit where credit is due (Defense, O Line, etc.)
There are hundreds of examples of guys with great measurables for the QB position who failed (Todd Marinovitch for those that watched his documentary this weekend).
Long Term, if he doesn't improve his skills, he won't survive. But he has heart, and that's what's winning now.
I would take a room full of Tebows in my business. He will be a success at whatever he chooses.
-
People hate hearing tebow talk about religion, abortion, etc for the same reason its not allowed on muscoop. Only problem is you can't lock the threads on your TV when Tebow is talking about religion while keeping the ones open when he is playing football (to carry the comparison through). It all blend together, and that's only gotten more true since he became known as the Bronco's "miracle worker." I think its unfair to denounce people as bigots when they are simply searching for the same thing out of Tebow and the Broncos in the media that we search for out of MU here.
edited to mention that I'm personally a huge Tebrow fan more for the legend than the religious, political stuff, and actually i think that kind obfuscates what a badass he is
-
I think the problem that a lot of people have with the Tebow thing is that I am watching football to escape for 3 hours on Sunday (more if I have time) and I really don't need any lecture about how Christian someone is or is not.
A lot of the same could be said about the propaganda that gets thrown around most college sports (football the most).
I consider myself a proud American, but I really could do without all the nationalism.
Time to walk away from the fire I probably just started.
-
I don't like Tebow only because I think he's a terrible NFL quarterback. If I don't want to hear about his religious views, I turn a deaf ear.
I also applaud the Packers for their stock sale. It's incredibly smart business, strike while the iron is hot. I've said it on here before, but the Packers are a first class run organization.
-
I think the problem that a lot of people have with the Tebow thing is that I am watching football to escape for 3 hours on Sunday (more if I have time) and I really don't need any lecture about how Christian someone is or is not.
A lot of the same could be said about the propaganda that gets thrown around most college sports (football the most).
I consider myself a proud American, but I really could do without all the nationalism.
Time to walk away from the fire I probably just started.
I think that's an honest assessment and I don't think you are being unfair.
With this said, Tebow is highly religious, and I think it's interwoven into who he is. I don't know if he consciously talks about God, or if it just comes out because it's his number one priority.
If I get up in the morning and it's nice out, I think "alright!" If he gets up in the morning and it's nice out, he thinks "thank you Jesus!". I think it's just who he is.
A lot of players are always promoting a drink, a car, an album, a clothing line, hunting shows (jared allen), or even McDonald's (Donald Driver).
I think I can live with a guy promoting his faith. He seems genuine, and isn't hurting anybody.
-
I think everything has been said here ad nauseum, but I feel the need to say one more thing after Navin so graciously accused me of being bigoted for calling him "Saint Timothy" when every media outlet seems to find the need to tie improbable victories to his piety. Its impossible to dislike him as an overrated QB these days without being accused of ulterior motives.
I myself am a religious person and have no problem with an athlete thanking God for a victory, an award, whatever. I do however get annoyed when its done in such a self-aggrandizing manner and when the media latches onto as some secret to his success, in jest or not. Tebow's incredibly outspoken manner, and subsequent attention as a result, kind of does a disservice to every other Christian player who doesn't feel the need to drop to a knee cause he got a first down. I have no problem with his faith and would respect him for it if I didn't disagree with how he went about it. Aaron Rodgers had a good quote on it.
Additionally, people are quick to criticize self-centered celebrations but when Tebow does it, he is lauded as an intense competitor despite running around 10 yds away from anyone. Ive thought the media held him by a double standard going back to his UF days.
If this is too off-topic or what not, feel free to delete it. I just bristle at being accused of f-ing bigotry cause I don't like him as a player and feel the media's latching onto his religious beliefs to play up his legend is unnecessary.
-
I think the problem that a lot of people have with the Tebow thing is that I am watching football to escape for 3 hours on Sunday (more if I have time) and I really don't need any lecture about how Christian someone is or is not.
A lot of the same could be said about the propaganda that gets thrown around most college sports (football the most).
I consider myself a proud American, but I really could do without all the nationalism.
Time to walk away from the fire I probably just started.
I don't see any fire started. Frankly, I agree completely with you. I would also include politics. I can't stand it when the athlete or sportswriter politicize their views. I watch sports to escape that. That is also why I detest a White House visit. It usually is more about who doesn't attend and why. Make the damn phone call like they used to do and call it a day.
Oops, I guess I just brought politics and religion into this thread. :o
-
I don't like Tebow only because I think he's a terrible NFL quarterback. If I don't want to hear about his religious views, I turn a deaf ear.
I also applaud the Packers for their stock sale. It's incredibly smart business, strike while the iron is hot. I've said it on here before, but the Packers are a first class run organization.
Agree with everything. Tebow is a terrble NFL QB. He wins, but with his talent level, the luck will run out. He just is not that good. I also do tune out the religion discussions I am not interested in.
-
I myself am a religious person and have no problem with an athlete thanking God for a victory, an award, whatever. I do however get annoyed when its done in such a self-aggrandizing manner and when the media latches onto as some secret to his success, in jest or not. Tebow's incredibly outspoken manner, and subsequent attention as a result, kind of does a disservice to every other Christian player who doesn't feel the need to drop to a knee cause he got a first down. I have no problem with his faith and would respect him for it if I didn't disagree with how he went about it. Aaron Rodgers had a good quote on it.
As a friend of mine says, just because the product is good doesn't mean that you don't get tired of the advertising.
-
I do however get annoyed when its done in such a self-aggrandizing manner and when the media latches onto as some secret to his success, in jest or not. Tebow's incredibly outspoken manner, and subsequent attention as a result, kind of does a disservice to every other Christian player who doesn't feel the need to drop to a knee cause he got a first down. I have no problem with his faith and would respect him for it if I didn't disagree with how he went about it. Aaron Rodgers had a good quote on it.
Tebow may be the LEAST self aggrandizing nominally Christian athlete in the NFL. I am much more critical of those who point to heaven after a TD and do nothing else to support supposed Christian values.
-
I blame Reggie White for starting all of this.
-
http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/football (http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/football)
sigh...
-
even with no hope that I would ever see a return on that money, but that's what the banner sold for in 2009 - $725. To me, that's a steal... to nearly everyone else, that's a waste of $725.
If you forge an autograph or make a replica of something, it has virtually no value at all... even to a serious collector. Even something that is "worthless" has value if it's authentic.
That's reason number 1 for me. It's an authentic piece of memorabilia I will own my whole life.
2. It's donating to "my program." I know the differences between an educational institution and a professional business, but it's donating to a stadium fund which is very similar to donating to the AL. Besides all the BS, we donated because we want a good bball program, not for academics.
3. You get to go to the share holders meeting and free tour. I find them interesting and by law they have to break down everything for investors. I went 4 times with 3 guest each time using my tickets. Value the presentation and tour at $10 per person and I have paid for it on that alone. Plan on going once every 5 years in the future. (Not this year since all the newbies will be going)
-
http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/football (http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/football)
sigh...
ESPN is magnificent at trolling. It really is down to a science with the Mothership.
-
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-rodgers-aim-keep-bears-out-of-playoffs-20111215,0,1579354.story
Awesome.
“I'll just say that I think, as players, we would probably like to finish this thing out if we get a chance,” Rodgers said Wednesday of the team's goals for the stretch run, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “And (have) a chance to maybe keep the Bears and the Lions out of the playoffs like the Bears tried to do to us last year.”
-
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-rodgers-aim-keep-bears-out-of-playoffs-20111215,0,1579354.story
Awesome.
“I'll just say that I think, as players, we would probably like to finish this thing out if we get a chance,” Rodgers said Wednesday of the team's goals for the stretch run, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “And (have) a chance to maybe keep the Bears and the Lions out of the playoffs like the Bears tried to do to us last year.”
So they're going to do limited game-planning and shoot for individual milestones? ;)
-
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-rodgers-aim-keep-bears-out-of-playoffs-20111215,0,1579354.story
Awesome.
“I'll just say that I think, as players, we would probably like to finish this thing out if we get a chance,” Rodgers said Wednesday of the team's goals for the stretch run, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “And (have) a chance to maybe keep the Bears and the Lions out of the playoffs like the Bears tried to do to us last year.”
the bears didn't try very hard in week 17 last year. and it cost them a damn super bowl.
-
I've been cynical and critical of the Lions all year. I've been disappointed too many times. Like a lot of guys do in regards to MU, I do to the Lions. I see all of the problems and none of the strengths. No running game. Immature. Stupid penalties. Too many drops. But they set a record today by becoming the first team to ever come from 13+ behind and win 4 times in the same season. The cynic in me says they shouldn't fall that far behind in the first damned place. But the bottom line is if they beat the Chargers next week, they make the playoffs for the first time this millenium. I still don't think they win a playoff game, but they've come a long way in the last 3 years. Good on ya.
-
Josh McCown will be starting for the Bears at Lambeau on Christmas night. You've been warned, Packers fans!
The warning is because you've likely not seen an opposing QB this bad since, well, Todd Collins 11 months ago.
-
Is Rodgers/starters going to play the entire game? My assumption is yes, but haven't paid close enough attention this week. Only interesting portion of the game will be to see the Pack offense vs Bears defense. I'm going to guess Packers 20, Bears 3.
Enderlee should be starting, it's a joke that he's not.
-
Is Rodgers/starters going to play the entire game? My assumption is yes, but haven't paid close enough attention this week. Only interesting portion of the game will be to see the Pack offense vs Bears defense. I'm going to guess Packers 20, Bears 3.
Enderlee should be starting, it's a joke that he's not.
McCarthy has not stated his plan, other than he says he has one. I would guess that it depends, in part, whether or not they clinched home field before kick off.
-
Totally depends on how SF plays.
-
Why is Enderlee not starting? Isn't it time to see what they have in him, and not the retread?
-
Why is Enderlee not starting? Isn't it time to see what they have in him, and not the retread?
IMO, Enderle is not starting because either 1) he's absolutely terrible or 2) the Bears don't want to give the impression that they're packing it in this season and planning for the future when they still have a shot at the playoffs.
If it's #1, that falls on Angelo and Martz (Martz worked with Enderle in the past and pushed for the Bears to draft him). #2 would be understandable if they brought in McNabb or some other QB who had actually played in the NFL over the last 3+ seasons.
My guess is that the Bears can't move the ball and Packers are up by 14-17 points in the second half and eventually McCown turns into a TO machine, the D packs it in and the final ends up 38-3 or something equally ugly.
-
I think the NFC Championship Game gave Angelo the false hope that Hanie was actually good, when in reality, he only had one good series.
-
I think the NFC Championship Game gave Angelo the false hope that Hanie was actually good, when in reality, he only had one good series.
When he should have been thinking, "If we had a decent back-up QB, we would have gone to the Super Bowl last season."
-
I think the NFC Championship Game gave Angelo the false hope that Hanie was actually good, when in reality, he only had one good series.
in regards to Hanie... there must be a reason that Martz believed Todd Collins to be better than Hanie, having made Hanie #3 last season. Again this preseason, Hanie was demoted and there was no #2 QB for a while before Martz believed Hanie had "deserved" it before the regular season started. Martz may not be the best OCoord in the league, but you've gotta think he knows how to evaluate talent. I believe that Angelo/Lovie believed in Hanie (God knows why...), while Martz had no faith in him. I think the 4 games Hanie started proves why Martz didn't trust him.
-
It ticks me off that Enderlee isn't starting. If he sucks, fine, who cares. The point is, we don't know, we have no idea. Why waste a draft pick if you're not going to play him? This is the NFL, he's not red shirting. Bears aren't going to the playoffs, so throw him out there. What they're protecting him from, I don't know. If he's worse than Hanie, who cares. Hanie sucks, we've seen enough of a sample size to come to that conclussion. Drives me nuts.
-
http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/36243/counterintuitive-struggles-for-caleb-hanie
interesting stats from hanie. he's good under pressure, awful in the opposite situation
-
When he should have been thinking, "If we had a decent back-up QB, we would have gone to the Super Bowl last season."
How do you come to that conclusion? The Packers were up 14-0 at halftime with Cutler in there. Unless you believe that a decent backup quarterback is significantly better than Jay Cutler, I don't think coming to the conclusion that if the Bears had one they would've been in the Super Bowl. Heine played as well as a backup possibly could have in an NFC Championship game. Do you think the Bears would have went to the Super Bowl if Jay Cutler had not been hurt? If the answer is yes, then why were the Bears down 14-0 at the half with Cutler playing?
I get it, my green and gold sunglasses are blinding me from reality. I just honestly cannot see the logic that with Cutler in the game the Bears were clearly not on the path to win that game, so the 2nd half would have been drastically different or that some other backup quarterback would have made the Bears more than +14 to win the game in the 2nd half. What backup quarterback in the NFL would have done that? I can't think of any. Matt Flynn is possibly the best backup quarterback in the NFL right now, and I will tell you that he would not have brought the Bears back from down 14 points in the NFC Championship game with the receiving targets the Bears had.
-
i think Maybe he is referring to the 1 or 2 wasted possessions the Bears had with Collins in the game.
<edit for awful mobile post punctuation/spelling>
-
i think Maybe he i. Referring t. the 1 or 2 wasted possessions the Bears had with Collins in the game.
That is a fair point.
-
How do you come to that conclusion? The Packers were up 14-0 at halftime with Cutler in there. Unless you believe that a decent backup quarterback is significantly better than Jay Cutler, I don't think coming to the conclusion that if the Bears had one they would've been in the Super Bowl. Heine played as well as a backup possibly could have in an NFC Championship game. Do you think the Bears would have went to the Super Bowl if Jay Cutler had not been hurt? If the answer is yes, then why were the Bears down 14-0 at the half with Cutler playing?
I get it, my green and gold sunglasses are blinding me from reality. I just honestly cannot see the logic that with Cutler in the game the Bears were clearly not on the path to win that game, so the 2nd half would have been drastically different or that some other backup quarterback would have made the Bears more than +14 to win the game in the 2nd half. What backup quarterback in the NFL would have done that? I can't think of any. Matt Flynn is possibly the best backup quarterback in the NFL right now, and I will tell you that he would not have brought the Bears back from down 14 points in the NFC Championship game with the receiving targets the Bears had.
MU B2002 hit the nail on the head. The Bears wasted possessions with Collins in the game (including one where they took over near midfield after Urlacher's INT) and Hanie missed a wide-open Forte on Raji's pick six. Don't forget that the Hanie-led Bears outscored the Packers 14-7 in the 2nd half. If the Bears kick a FG after the Urlacher pick and the back-up QB doesn't throw the ball to Raji, Bears 17-14. Even with those plays, the Bears were getting close to the red zone when Hanie threw another pick. I realize that there are if's in there and that the game wouldn't have played out exactly the same way, etc, etc but to act like it's inconceivable for the Bears to have come back is just ignorant.
Oh and Matt Flynn? Seriously?
-
Oh and Matt Flynn? Seriously?
Bleacher report thinks he's top five in the back up category:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/968422-5-best-backup-quarterbacks-in-the-nfl/page/6
-
Bleacher Report???? Cmon....
-
Bleacher Report???? Cmon....
It was also on Bleacher Report where someone wrote that the Cubs could trade Dempster and Colvin for Felix Hernandez.
-
The only reason for hope in that NFC title game for the Bears was the awful second half from Rodgers and the Green Bay offense. No team plays better against Rodgers than the Bears.
Clearly Cutler wasn't great by any stretch in the first half (and injured) and Rodgers was on fire. Who knows if Cutler would have done anything (if healthy) in the second half. The only reason Hanie kept the Bears in the game was because of how poor Rodgers was.
-
MU B2002 hit the nail on the head. The Bears wasted possessions with Collins in the game (including one where they took over near midfield after Urlacher's INT) and Hanie missed a wide-open Forte on Raji's pick six. Don't forget that the Hanie-led Bears outscored the Packers 14-7 in the 2nd half. If the Bears kick a FG after the Urlacher pick and the back-up QB doesn't throw the ball to Raji, Bears 17-14. Even with those plays, the Bears were getting close to the red zone when Hanie threw another pick. I realize that there are if's in there and that the game wouldn't have played out exactly the same way, etc, etc but to act like it's inconceivable for the Bears to have come back is just ignorant.
Oh and Matt Flynn? Seriously?
Fair enough. Like you said, there are an awful lot of "if's" in there. Rodgers made basically the same interception throw to Urlacher inside the 10 (he has like 81 touchdowns to 3 interceptions on his career in the red zone) that Heine made to Raji. So Rodgers took away 7 points and Heine's added 7 points. If we're going into hypotheticals about what would have happened if one play wasn't made, those 2 even each other out. Like Dish said, no way to know if Cutler picks his game up if he's healthy in the 2nd half or what happens. I just don't think a different backup quarterback makes a difference.
Also, list better backup quarterbacks in the NFL. I can't think of many. It's easy to say "Really?" and not provide any options to consider.
-
At the end of the day, the Packers were the better team and won, and went on to be world champions. Cutler/No Cutler, good Bears defense...didn't matter in the end.
All I want to see this Sunday is Enderlee under center. The only meaning this game has as a Bears fan is if they wasted yet another draft pick. Packers will be on their way to the 1 seed and have bigger fish to fry down the road.
-
Fair enough. Like you said, there are an awful lot of "if's" in there. Rodgers made basically the same interception throw to Urlacher inside the 10 (he has like 81 touchdowns to 3 interceptions on his career in the red zone) that Heine made to Raji. So Rodgers took away 7 points and Heine's added 7 points. If we're going into hypotheticals about what would have happened if one play wasn't made, those 2 even each other out. Like Dish said, no way to know if Cutler picks his game up if he's healthy in the 2nd half or what happens. I just don't think a different backup quarterback makes a difference.
Also, list better backup quarterbacks in the NFL. I can't think of many. It's easy to say "Really?" and not provide any options to consider.
You're missing your own point. You said that a better back-up QB wouldn't have made a difference in the game's outcome. I detailed how it very well could have (wasted field position, making a poor read). Did Cutler's injury or a better back-up QB have an effect on Rodger's endzone INT? No! I can say that if Rodgers threw 5 INTs, all of which were returned for TDs, the Bears would have won with me at QB in the second half. That's not the issue though.
Flynn has 1 NFL start (a loss), has thrown all of 88 passes and he has 3 TDs to 4 INTs. He hasn't really proven anything at the NFL level. I'm not saying he'll never be a good player. I'm saying that he's an unknown commodity. If he's forced into action for 4-5 straight games and performs well then I'd have no problem saying that he's one of the top back-ups in the league. One start, albeit a good one, and some garbage time is not enough of a sampling for me. Until he actually does something consistently on an NFL field, it would be hard to say that he's better than John Skelton, Chris Redman, Seneca Wallace, Matt Moore, Vince Young or David Carr. Kyle Orton and Jason Campbell will be back-ups somewhere next season and I'd rank them ahead of Flynn too. Based on limited action, quite a few football people thought that Hanie was a very good back-up and we've all seen how that's turned out.
-
Also, list better backup quarterbacks in the NFL. I can't think of many. It's easy to say "Really?" and not provide any options to consider.
I'm utterly shocked that no one has yet made the argument: "...duuhhh, Tim Tebow was a backup at the beginning of the season and he's better than Matt Flynn....duuurrrrrr."
If you look at strictly at backup QB's - specifically excluding guys who were promoted/demoted during the season - Matt Flynn is the best backup in the NFL. If you don't believe this, wait until he becomes a FA and watch how many teams go after him.
-
... To be a backup.
-
Better back up QB's? The list starts with Shaun Hill. With Stafford staying relatively healthy, he just hasn't played much this year. Sure am glad the Lions have him, though.
-
Is Billy Volek still a backup in SD? Wasn't he thought to be a hot name backup QB at one time?
-
... To be a backup.
Best position in football, the backup QB. People over estimate your talents, because you do not have to display them on a weekly basis. When the team is playing poorly, all the expert coaches, aka fans, know want the backup QB to play, because it is obvious he is better.
That said, I am not sold on Matt Flynn. He had the one game against NE where he played well. Still, on the goal line when the Packers had a chance to put it away, they did not allow him to turn it over - thus they kicked a FG and NE won. He played alright against the Lions the week earlier when he filled in for Rodgers. He threw the pick on the goal line and missed the receiver late in the game.
Personally, I think he is still very much an unknown. Teams now have film on him from the Regular Season. See how they game plan him and how he performs. Haine was regarded highly due to the NFC Championship Game. Now, though, there is film on him and he is not playing at the same level because of that. Flynn is better than Haine, merely for the fact that he has not played this year, so people think he would perform at the level of the NE game. Maybe, maybe not. McCarthy and Thompson really like him, which is the one reason why I think he might be decent.
-
Any opinions on who I should start in my FF Super Bowl, Eli or Rodgers?
-
Someone will pay Matt Flynn some money this off season, and he will be a starting QB.
-
Not when there are so many young starters and really good draft prospects.
-
Hards, just curious what team would that be with?
-
Hards, just curious what team would that be with?
I'm not sure why I have to name a team. Someone will pay him.
-
Was just curious if u had a specific team in mind, but u were just making a general statement. No big deal.
Just for the sake of argument let's look: (I have a lot of free time since the entire Bears offense is pretty much out for the year)
No: DET, CHI, MIN, GB, NOL, ATL, CAR, SF, STL, ARI, DAL, NYG, PHI, PIT, BAL, CIN, NE, NYJ, BUF, TEN, HOU, IND, JAX, OAK, DEN, SD, KC
Maybe: TB, SEA, WAS, CLE, MIA
Current Starters of the 'maybes'
NFC
TB: Freeman. Candidate #1
Sea: T Jax
Was: Grossman
AFC
North
Cle: McCoy
South
Jax: Not sold on Gabbert, but hard to see them dumping a first round pick one year in. Other than MJD he has very little help. I think they try and draft Blackmon and give him 1 more year.
East
MIA: Moore - Had a decent end to the season, will be curious to see if they let him battle with Henne for #1 next season.
Buf: They would have to do something with Fitz and that crapload of money they just paid him.
Have Luck, RGIII, and Landry Jones likely available in the draft as 1st round talent.
-
Any opinions on who I should start in my FF Super Bowl, Eli or Rodgers?
Eli: Jets are rated 7th against the pass, and you have to think Cruz has fired Revis and company up for this week.
Rodgers: Bears 27th against the pass in just looking at yards per game and the safeties have been beat up as of late. Playing at home just looking at stats, location and D this would seem to be the better matchup. But, if the Packers clinch home field prior to the game Sunday night does he play the whole game?
I would say Eli.
-
Any opinions on who I should start in my FF Super Bowl, Eli or Rodgers?
Rodgers. Don't overthink it. Go with the horse that got you here.
-
Rodgers. Don't overthink it. Go with the horse that got you here.
Went with your advice, ride or die with Rodgers.
-
Went with your advice, ride or die with Rodgers.
The Bears defense knows the Packers offense (and how to slow it down) better than any other team. That 100 yard touchdown to Cruz would've been nice to have.
-
The Bears defense knows the Packers offense (and how to slow it down) better than any other team. That 100 yard touchdown to Cruz would've been nice to have.
Truth. The Bengals Defense and CJ Spiller are picking up the slack ;D
-
Someone will pay Matt Flynn some money this off season, and he will be a starting QB.
Care to place a bet on this?
-
Lions are in. Stunned giddiness ensues.
-
Lions are in. Stunned giddiness ensues.
Congrats Tower. I had hoped the Bears would have joined the Lions as a Wildcard making the NFC North the top Division. Damn injuries!
-
They still have a chance right? 2 losses by Atlanta and 2 wins by Chi and they are in. Although I was seen nothing to indicate Bears are going to win 1 more, let alone 2.
-
They still have a chance right? 2 losses by Atlanta and 2 wins by Chi and they are in. Although I was seen nothing to indicate Bears are going to win 1 more, let alone 2.
Chance? Yes. Realistic? No. Until the injuries, they were far better than Atlanta.
-
Lions are in. Stunned giddiness ensues.
If the cubs win the world series in '12, we will all know the Mayans are correct.
-
Congrats Tower. I had hoped the Bears would have joined the Lions as a Wildcard making the NFC North the top Division. Damn injuries!
And I was told I had no football IQ when I said that the NFC North was anything but mediocre and was instead the best in the NFC. If not for injuries, the Packers are the best team in the NFC, the Saints the 2nd, and the Bears very well may have been the 3rd. I'm not sold on the 49ers, especially as a playoff team. Defense and ball control can get you into the playoffs, but as we have seen time and time again, you need a quarterback who can win you games to win in the playoffs. They remind me of the Falcons last year, although with a better defense but far worse offense, and we all know how that went for the Falcons.
-
And I was told I had no football IQ when I said that the NFC North was anything but mediocre and was instead the best in the NFC. If not for injuries, the Packers are the best team in the NFC, the Saints the 2nd, and the Bears very well may have been the 3rd. I'm not sold on the 49ers, especially as a playoff team. Defense and ball control can get you into the playoffs, but as we have seen time and time again, you need a quarterback who can win you games to win in the playoffs. They remind me of the Falcons last year, although with a better defense but far worse offense, and we all know how that went for the Falcons.
I agree with your order. To me, the Packers, Saints and Bears were the top 3. I would put the Lions not that far behind, either. The Niners are overrated, to me. I am not sold on anyone in the East, though the Giants have some potential.
-
The Niners D is for real and their pass rush could cause the Pack real problems. Alex Smith is holding them back though, with how much the Pack's D has regressed this year though they have a chance to pull it out against us.
-
Lions are in. Stunned giddiness ensues.
Hey Tower, interested in: ;)
(http://www.blogoneanother.com/eat-crow.jpg)
Lion fan here who has been saying all year that we aren't as good as everybody thinks. The activities are nothing new (OK, Stafford throwing a tantrum like a 2 year old is). I see 2007 redux, 6-2 first half, 1-7 second half. No running game, QB channeling his inner Joey Harrington, defense making bush league plays. Suh hasn't even been dirty today. Fairley drilled Cutler. Briggs evened that right up. Stafford throwing a tantrum and the DB to the ground.... I wish I was surprised.
Edit: 3-5 second half. We beat Carolina and Minnesota at home, probably Oakland on the road. . Lose today, lose twice to GB, lose to NO, lose to SD,
-
Thrilled to be wrong. Put the right microbrew with that and it would be dang tasty.
-
Had a great Christmas morning/day with the family. Ate early so I had no distractions for the Bulls victory or the Bears/Pack game. Great game so far.
-
Hey Mike Martz, see what happens when you set up the pass with the run? And frack can u get the play call in a little quicker, I mean 15 games into the season should be enough time to work out the kinks.
-
Watching this game tonight, I think the Niners will give the Pack a great game if they meet up. Not saying they win, but it'd be a game.
-
The Bears defense knows the Packers offense (and how to slow it down) better than any other team. That 100 yard touchdown to Cruz would've been nice to have.
Not quite as nice as Rodgers' 5 td's though! :)
-
Watching this game tonight, I think the Niners will give the Pack a great game if they meet up. Not saying they win, but it'd be a game.
The Niners have a good defense, but their offense is suspect. Yes, the Packers D is not playing well, but they will get Pickett back. He is the key to the run defense.
I am not so sure that the Niners could stop the Packers O enough. Alex Smith will make the mistakes, though.
I am more concerned about NO. Because their O can keep up with the Packers O. Don't discount that most other offenses feel pressure to put points on the board to keep up with the Packers. That, IMHO, is why the Packers created turnovers. NO will not be concerned about that and will not make those mistakes.
-
I'll be honest, I'm shocked how the Bears are shredding the Pack defense. I say that about the Niners because the Bears are doing this with a third string QB and third and fourth string backs.
-
I'll be honest, I'm shocked how the Bears are shredding the Pack defense. I say that about the Niners because the Bears are doing this with a third string QB and third and fourth string backs.
If Josh McCown starts since Cutler went out, Bears are in the playoffs.
-
I'll be honest, I'm shocked how the Bears are shredding the Pack defense. I say that about the Niners because the Bears are doing this with a third string QB and third and fourth string backs.
I don't know what to make of the Packers defensive performance the past two weeks. I think the loss of Pickett has hurt, as has the lack of continuity with the LB's. The DB's. though, continue to make mistakes and slip at inopportune times.
That said, I don't see the Niners outscoring the Packers. Other than the egg they laid last week, no one has slowed this offense down. The Niners have not faced an offense as powerful as the Packers. Plus, it's in Lambeau. As I said, NO is the one team that concerns me. Can the Niners win? Yes, it's the Playoffs. But the odds are MUCH less likely they could pull it off than NO.
-
Thing about the Niners is they will play great D, and limit possessions with their run game. Can't see Pack losing to Dal/NYG/Atl/Det in divisional round.
-
Thing about the Niners is they will play great D, and limit possessions with their run game. Can't see Pack losing to Dal/NYG/Atl/Det in divisional round.
Their run game is my point. Pickett will be back - the Packers best run defender. Neal was hurt today. The D-line rotation was razor thin. The Packers played much of the game with Soto at LB. First real game experience for him. Bishop returned, but did not play like Bishop. I am not concerned about the Niners run game. The Packers go up two scores and the Niners need to rely on Smith more - and he will make mistakes.
Don't get me wrong. The Packers D really concerns me. Just not against the Niners. Yes, they have a good defense, but again, I just don't see them stopping the Packers. Jennings will be healthy (some talk that his knee was fine this week - I doubt he plays next week, though). The Niners may have a good defense, but the Packers have a much better offense. Add to that, Rodgers is playing at an elite level right now.
As I stated, the only team that concerns me is NO. They have the type of offense that can hang with the Packers offense.
I also wonder how much the Packers took the Bears O for granted. After the past few weeks and now down to the 3rd string QB and RB, I could see that they would - even though they have some injuries themselves.
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Packers have the 2 best quarterbacks in the NFC North. You Bears fans can tell me how lacking my football IQ is (just like when I questioned how anybody could say this is a mediocre division before the season started after it was an all NFC North NFC Championship game...looks like those high football IQs were wrong about that too...if not for injuries to Cutler and Forte this division is looking at 3 playoff teams...too bad Jay Bee's Queens have to bring this division down), but Matt Flynn outplayed Matthew Staford, who, in my low-football-IQ-mind, is the 2nd best quarterback in the division when he is healthy. And now everyone will talk about how it's just one game. Just like it was just one game last year at New England. The guy can play. And he will play next year after he is paid in the off season. Anybody who thought otherwise was just wrong. Without a doubt the best backup quarterback in the NFL, and better than a number of starting quarterbacks.
136.4 passer rating today against a front 4 that is supposed to be as good as they come.
Packers the first team ever to sweep through the NFC North. Beat the 2nd place team with their top 5 players on the bench.
F you, Ted Thompson. Right Stone Cold?
Get even more healthy over the bye week and get ready for the playoffs. Hoping to see the NFC East winner and then the 49ers. We'll see.
-
Someone will pay Matt Flynn some money this off season, and he will be a starting QB.
M. Flynn 31/44 480 yards passing 10.9 yards/reception 6 TDs 1 INT 136.4 Passer rating.
wot?
-
By the way, how is Jordy Nelson not a Pro Bowler?
-
By the way, how is Jordy Nelson not a Pro Bowler?
Should be over Jennings.
Trade Flynn for a high pick, but he is not better than Cutler. Third best QB in the division for sure.
-
Should be over Jennings.
Trade Flynn for a high pick, but he is not better than Cutler. Third best QB in the division for sure.
Flynn is a UFA this year. Likely just played himself out of Green Bay, which is good for him. A lot of good QB's coming out of College this year, but two impressive starts for Flynn now, someone will want him.
Wadesworld, I was a skeptic as well. I thought he needed more of a body of work for me to decide. Oddly, I was really comfortable when the Packers had the ball. He certainly was impressive. Shows again what good coaching can do to develop a QB.
Set Packer records for TD's and yards in a game. And the Lions were actually playing for something.
-
I've said it before and I'll say it again, the Packers have the 2 best quarterbacks in the NFC North. You Bears fans can tell me how lacking my football IQ is (just like when I questioned how anybody could say this is a mediocre division before the season started after it was an all NFC North NFC Championship game...looks like those high football IQs were wrong about that too...if not for injuries to Cutler and Forte this division is looking at 3 playoff teams...too bad Jay Bee's Queens have to bring this division down), but Matt Flynn outplayed Matthew Staford, who, in my low-football-IQ-mind, is the 2nd best quarterback in the division when he is healthy. And now everyone will talk about how it's just one game. Just like it was just one game last year at New England. The guy can play. And he will play next year after he is paid in the off season. Anybody who thought otherwise was just wrong. Without a doubt the best backup quarterback in the NFL, and better than a number of starting quarterbacks.
136.4 passer rating today against a front 4 that is supposed to be as good as they come.
Packers the first team ever to sweep through the NFC North. Beat the 2nd place team with their top 5 players on the bench.
F you, Ted Thompson. Right Stone Cold?
Get even more healthy over the bye week and get ready for the playoffs. Hoping to see the NFC East winner and then the 49ers. We'll see.
Give me a break. Rodgers, Cutler and Stafford are all better than Flynn.
Chad Hutchinson once put up a 115 passer rating against a playoff-bound Vikings team led by 2004 All Pro, Duante Culpepper. You know what that means, right? Absolutely nothing.
-
Should be over Jennings.
Trade Flynn for a high pick, but he is not better than Cutler. Third best QB in the division for sure.
That's fair. It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers he would put up with the Bears offense. Much better receivers to throw to, but Forte is the ultimate bailout for a quarterback. He wouldn't be putting up 500 yards and 6 touchdowns. But we'll see next year. I truly believe he'll prove to have been the 2nd best quarterback in the division. Just like Rodgers was when he was sitting under Favre. Watching the best quarterback in the NFL in practice every single day for 3 years gives them a huge advantage.
-
That's fair. It would be interesting to see what kind of numbers he would put up with the Bears offense. Much better receivers to throw to, but Forte is the ultimate bailout for a quarterback. He wouldn't be putting up 500 yards and 6 touchdowns. But we'll see next year. I truly believe he'll prove to have been the 2nd best quarterback in the division. Just like Rodgers was when he was sitting under Favre. Watching the best quarterback in the NFL in practice every single day for 3 years gives them a huge advantage.
Really think Favre was the best those three years?....probably not.
-
Really think Favre was the best those three years?....probably not.
'07 he was one of the best. But you're right, he wasn't the best quarterback in the NFL anymore. But he was learning from one of the best who had been the best over the past decade and watched him in practice every day. Fortunately, the Packers didn't let him show up when he wanted to like some other franchise...Otherwise Rodgers would've been the one taking the snaps in practices (just had to throw that in there).
-
Really think Favre was the best those three years?....probably not.
Favre was close, at least. His last year as a Packer was one of the best I saw him play. Did not end on a positive, but that does not take away from his play that year.
I don't think you could learn from Favre, though. At least nothing tangible. His mechanics were something he could get away with. Rodgers may have learned the importance of taking care of the ball. Most of the development, though, was due to the coaching. They broke his form down and rebuilt it. Pretty impressive coaching, if you ask me.
-
Should be over Jennings.
Trade Flynn for a high pick, but he is not better than Cutler. Third best QB in the division for sure.
I'd take Stafford over Cutler, Cutler over Flynn, and my high school qb over anybody the Vikes are trotting out these days.
-
I'd take Stafford over Cutler, Cutler over Flynn, and my high school qb over anybody the Vikes are trotting out these days.
I agree with that. Stafford really showed his development this year. He has a nice arm, but also has a nice touch. He is a very good QB right now. Some of his decision making is still questionable. But, he has the tools and weapons to continue to have success.
I am surprised, though, at Detroits D. They are not what I thought they would be. The D-line is not nearly as strong as most predicted. They gave up a ton of points this year (based upon their reputation).
-
Detroit's defense has been decent, but the D-line has failed to dominate like they need to. D-coordinator Gunther Cunningham has been reluctant to blitz, particularly against QB's who get the ball out quick, but if they only rush 4 against Brees next week, they will lose big. Fun game today. I don't think either fanbase is going to have positive things to say about the refs, but you can say that most weeks.
-
Detroit's defense has been decent, but the D-line has failed to dominate like they need to. D-coordinator Gunther Cunningham has been reluctant to blitz, particularly against QB's who get the ball out quick, but if they only rush 4 against Brees next week, they will lose big. Fun game today. I don't think either fanbase is going to have positive things to say about the refs, but you can say that most weeks.
It really was a fun game to watch. Both offenses were exciting. I also agree about the officiating. It really was a poor effort today. Both teams deserved better.
-
Game was pretty disturbing, more than entertaining (then again I prefer defense, in f-ball and b-ball but realize Matthews & Woodson weren't in).
Only possible reasons I can think of for GB's D regression this year are:
1) Jenkins/ no pass rush
2) thus Capers has to blitz, vacating space and O coordinators know it.
3) Dave Redding the established S&C coach retired, the previously demoted S&C coach took control again. (hard to prove or disprove but we've been getting run on all year and Lovat was demoted previously)
Been a frustrating year to watch our D with much the same personnel go from a top 10 unit to what we saw from them this year.
Buckle your belts a playoff run is far from a sure thing for the Pack.
-
Game was pretty disturbing, more than entertaining (then again I prefer defense, in f-ball and b-ball but realize Matthews & Woodson weren't in).
Only possible reasons I can think of for GB's D regression this year are:
1) Jenkins/ no pass rush
2) thus Capers has to blitz, vacating space and O coordinators know it.
3) Dave Redding the established S&C coach retired, the previously demoted S&C coach took control again. (hard to prove or disprove but we've been getting run on all year and Lovat was demoted previously)
Been a frustrating year to watch our D with much the same personnel go from a top 10 unit to what we saw from them this year.
Buckle your belts a playoff run is far from a sure thing for the Pack.
I think it is more a combination of loss of Jenkins and Collins. With either, the D would be different. With both, much different. Last year Pehprah was able to adequately replace Burnett, because he had Collins back there to make up for mistakes. Burnett, currently, does not have that same capability. That, to me, has been a HUGE loss in both the pass and run game.
Add to that, TWilliams and Shields have not played as well. Woodson has lost a step, but still can make huge plays. Still, he is susceptible to giving up big plays.
TT did make a mistake not resigning Jenkins. I always wanted him to resign. I think TT calculated that the market would be higher for him than it was. In addition, I think the loss of Neal has hurt. He is still, for practical purposes, in his first year of football and missed most of this years camp. He does not play with strength, power, or explosion that I expected.
Jenkins would definitely have made Raji and Pickett better players.
The D is the one concern I have with getting to the SB, much less repeating.
-
I agree with Collins being a big loss in the secondary. Not much we can do about it now but I hope obviously TT focuses on D in the draft and Lovat is replaced. I feel Capers deserves another shot next year and if we win out I'm sure he will, if not I don't know.
wonder what we could've gotten for Flynn this off season if he wasn't a FA. Holy crap. :o
-
I agree with Collins being a big loss in the secondary. Not much we can do about it now but I hope obviously TT focuses on D in the draft and Lovat is replaced. I feel Capers deserves another shot next year and if we win out I'm sure he will, if not I don't know.
wonder what we could've gotten for Flynn this off season if he wasn't a FA. Holy crap. :o
Capers will absolutely, 100% be back no matter what happens, unless he gets a hc job or retires, both of which seem unlikely.
-
I hope looks at the draft and goes D in Rd's 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Gurley and Simpson are in place if Driver retires. With Sherrod's injury, the OL has a minor concern. Otherwise, D all the way.
Capers will be back. It's not scheme, it's personnel. The loss of Jenkins showed that the Packers do not have a right side LB. Jenkins created push from the right side, allowing Raji to collapse the middle with Matthews on the left. The lack of any right side threat has allowed offenses to shift to Raji and Matthews. That is personnel, not scheme. TT knows it.
-
Tower, I hope you don't mind my question. What are your impressions of Schwarz? I am more interested in a Lions fan perspective. I will admit, up front, my impression is that he brings a lot of positives, but his emotions need to be checked a bit more - both on and off the field. The tantrum that cost them a TO when the officials blew the TD call should not happen at that level. His emotions play into the players and that, IMHO, is a reason why I think the Lions are getting a reputation for being cheap and dirty.
The reason for the question is I heard some of his press conference from today. I was not impressed. He threw everyone under the bus. After the way he acted on the field, well I just wanted your perspective ...
-
Tower, I hope you don't mind my question. What are your impressions of Schwarz? I am more interested in a Lions fan perspective. I will admit, up front, my impression is that he brings a lot of positives, but his emotions need to be checked a bit more - both on and off the field. The tantrum that cost them a TO when the officials blew the TD call should not happen at that level. His emotions play into the players and that, IMHO, is a reason why I think the Lions are getting a reputation for being cheap and dirty.
The reason for the question is I heard some of his press conference from today. I was not impressed. He threw everyone under the bus. After the way he acted on the field, well I just wanted your perspective ...
Bill Simmons of ESPN's Grantland agrees with you(on Schwartz acting like a hothead) and has been pushing this for about 1/2 the season.
-
I was wondering if Flynn hurt Rodgers MVP chances today. Too bad for GB they won't get solid compensation for Flynn this offseason (other than late round comp pick).
-
Capers will absolutely, 100% be back no matter what happens, unless he gets a hc job or retires, both of which seem unlikely.
It really wouldn't be consistent with the "philosophy" of the Packers to fire their defensive coordinator after a 15-1 season even if they lose in the Divisional round of the playoffs.
-
Compared to what we've had.... he's an improvement. Little trivia here. No head coach of the Lions has EVER been a head coach again in the NFL after he leaves the Lions. Morninwheg at Philly may be the first. Graveyard of coaches. There is something to the idea that a team reflects its coach. Especially on a team like Detroit that really only had two veterans, and no one who had ever been to the playoffs when he arrived. Not a lot of experienced team leaders in the locker room so they really became an extension of the coach. I think he is a good coach who lets his emotions get the better of him. He needs to learn to control himself.
He is usually brutally honest in his pressers. He didn't say anything about his defense that wasn't true, he just said it publicly whereas other coaches look for more diplomatic ways to say it or don't say it at all. He sounded like a fan on MUScoop referencing MU's last performance instead of a head coach. I can see him burning himself out. Only a few NFL coaches last 10 years in any one spot and considering the amount of effort he has put into turning this team around from 0-16, I can see him only lasting a couple more years.
So, like all of us, he is a work in progress.
-
Dish, don't you think the pack will franchise flynn and then trade him to the highest bidder?
-
Dish, don't you think the pack will franchise flynn and then trade him to the highest bidder?
The franchise tag requires paying the average of the last five years of the highest player at the position. I doubt the Packers are willing to risk somewhere between $14-16M for Flynn on the chance that another team will provide a more lucrative offer. That's a lot of money to pay a backup, and I doubt another team will match such a lucrative offer. Flynn has no risk of taking it, as teams will just wait one more year to sign him, high potential quarterbacks are always in demand.
Plus, you've got Jermichael Finley and Scott Wells coming up as Unrestricted Free Agents.
-
Dish, don't you think the pack will franchise flynn and then trade him to the highest bidder?
I am not Dish, but my answer is no. Flynn is not worth the Franchise amount. Far too risky.
The Packers made the decision in the off season to keep Flynn rather than trade him. That would have been the time to do it, to get some value. They felt it was too important to have him as a backup and worth the opportunity cost.
-
Plus, you've got Jermichael Finley and Scott Wells coming up as Unrestricted Free Agents.
I would be surprised if Finley is in a GB uniform next year. I think someone will overpay for him.
-
I would be surprised if Finley is in a GB uniform next year. I think someone will overpay for him.
The only way Finley is in a Packer uniform is if they Franchise him. I don't see them giving him big bucks and a long term contract. I could see them franchising him and paying him one year. See if the drops were an anomaly or not.
-
The only way Finley is in a Packer uniform is if they Franchise him. I don't see them giving him big bucks and a long term contract. I could see them franchising him and paying him one year. See if the drops were an anomaly or not.
I think they would franchise Wells before Finley.
-
I think they would franchise Wells before Finley.
I would guess they come to an agreement with Wells before they would Finley. I doubt Wells sees FA.
-
The franchise tag requires paying the average of the last five years of the highest player at the position. I doubt the Packers are willing to risk somewhere between $14-16M for Flynn on the chance that another team will provide a more lucrative offer. That's a lot of money to pay a backup, and I doubt another team will match such a lucrative offer. Flynn has no risk of taking it, as teams will just wait one more year to sign him, high potential quarterbacks are always in demand.
Plus, you've got Jermichael Finley and Scott Wells coming up as Unrestricted Free Agents.
It's a big risk and I don't see the Pack doing it (I think there is a very good chance they'll franchise Finley) but there is precedent with Cassell and the Patriots/Chiefs trade.
-
I'd be shocked if the Packers didnt franchise Finley. He's got too much athleticism/upside at what is becoming too important a position in the NFL, particularly for pass-heavy offenses. Sure the drops are a bummer, but 1) i think they go away and 2) he still does wonders in creating matchup problems and helping open things up. When you look around the league, all the pass heavy offenses are investing in young, dynamic pass catching TEs. NO with Jimmy Graham, NE with Gronk & Hernandez, Det with Pettigrew. If the Pack don't intend to extend Finley long term, I think they'll have to franchise him and look for a replacement in the draft this spring.
On a related note, Finley's appeal to be classified as a WR rather than a TE for franchise purposes could get interested. Dude lines up in the slot a ton, and certainly seems to do a lot of his damage through the air from there. I don't have any stats on the subject in front of me, but the narrowing gap between what makes a TE not a WR is an interesting development given the guys I just mentioned and the trend toward spread offenses.
-
Packers won a Super Bowl w/o Finley. I don't think he's worth franchise money.
-
Packers won a Super Bowl w/o Finley. I don't think he's worth franchise money.
The injury to Quarless may factor into the Packers decision. I like DJ Williams potential, but he is not nearly ready. The Packers need a #1 TE, and they don't have that guy on the roster, other than Finley, right now. Quarless could be, but he is in question right now.
-
It's a big risk and I don't see the Pack doing it (I think there is a very good chance they'll franchise Finley) but there is precedent with Cassell and the Patriots/Chiefs trade.
Here's an article by the JS that explains in more detail how you might do this.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/flynn-departure-may-not-aid-packers-k43ld06-136557403.html
In my book it's still a very risky strategy. The Cassel trade was a little unique in that Pioli went from NE to KC and already had a desire to grab Cassel and had seen him on a daily basis.
-
I think the article stated the situation fairly well.
The one way that the Packers could get it done is to sign Flynn before the start of FA. Work out an arrangement with Flynn that they will sign him to a contract worthy of a starting QB, perhaps even a one year contract to allow Flyn some negotiating flexibiliy with his new team. They would then need to work out a trade with a select group of teams that Flynn would be able to go in as the starting QB.
Now, for that to work, Flynn would need to show loyalty to the Packer organization for developing him and giving him the opportunity. His agent would also need to be on board. It is less risky that the Franchise designation, but still a risk to both parties. It also requires a type of willingness on behalf of a player/agent that we don't see in pro sports very often.
-
BTW, pursuant to Scharz's meltdown on Sunday. It was appropriate. The officials had so completely messed up the call, and had compounded it in that situation by not taking the safe, default route of simply calling a touchdown and letting replay sort it out. Watching other games this year, it has appeared that they are taking that route more often, as it is the path of least resistance. Call it a TD and let replay confirm or overturn. Sometimes coaches lose their minds. Basketball coaches get technicals and ejected, baseball managers get run, it happens.
Bigger picture, is he a hothead? And to answer that, I refer to my previous post.
-
BTW, pursuant to Scharz's meltdown on Sunday. It was appropriate. The officials had so completely messed up the call, and had compounded it in that situation by not taking the safe, default route of simply calling a touchdown and letting replay sort it out. Watching other games this year, it has appeared that they are taking that route more often, as it is the path of least resistance. Call it a TD and let replay confirm or overturn. Sometimes coaches lose their minds. Basketball coaches get technicals and ejected, baseball managers get run, it happens.
Bigger picture, is he a hothead? And to answer that, I refer to my previous post.
I agree completely they botched the call - in all regards. Unfortunately, it was far from the only call they botched. I also agree with Billick (did I really say that?) who said the NFL should review all plays within the end zone envelope.
Actually, I prefer the NFL would go to the college version of replay. I know some sentiment is that they tried that approach and it did not work. Now, though, it doesn't seem that college reviews take quite as long, nor do they disrupt the flow of the game as much as the NFL's replay system does.
-
Actually, I prefer the NFL would go to the college version of replay. I know some sentiment is that they tried that approach and it did not work. Now, though, it doesn't seem that college reviews take quite as long, nor do they disrupt the flow of the game as much as the NFL's replay system does.
The NFL could do that, but would probably have to eliminate some of their commercial breaks to allow for the added replay time. We know that will never happen, as the NFL loves money more than it cares about pissed off coaches.
-
Looks like Jerry Angelo's reign as Bears GM is finally over. I wonder if Lovie is done as well.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-jerry-angelo-out-as-bears-gm-20120103,0,3365211.story
-
Looks like Jerry Angelo's reign as Bears GM is finally over. I wonder if Lovie is done as well.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-jerry-angelo-out-as-bears-gm-20120103,0,3365211.story
Jeff Fisher to the Bears...
-
Jeff Fisher to the Bears...
I was thinking that same thing.
While I do like Lovie and believe he's an underrated coach who's accomplished a lot without having the most talent-laden rosters, I wouldn't be heartbroken if he were shown the door.
-
Jeff Fisher to the Bears...
As a football fan, I really like Lovie. I think he is a very good coach. Always has the Bears playing at a high level. If injuries to Cutler and Forte did not kill this offense, no way anyone talks about replacing him. He is one year removed from an NFC Championship. I enjoy the Packer-Bears games in part due to Lovie's comments when he was hired. Taking a shot at the Packers - then he has backed it up.
If he is let go, Fischer is another coach that I like and respect.
-
Someone will pay Matt Flynn some money this off season, and he will be a starting QB.
Care to place a bet on this?
Hards --- swear to God, I hope you took this bet.
-
Hards --- swear to God, I hope you took this bet.
Nope, I always feel bad taking people's money.
I just like knowing im awesome.
-
As a football fan, I really like Lovie. I think he is a very good coach. Always has the Bears playing at a high level. If injuries to Cutler and Forte did not kill this offense, no way anyone talks about replacing him. He is one year removed from an NFC Championship. I enjoy the Packer-Bears games in part due to Lovie's comments when he was hired. Taking a shot at the Packers - then he has backed it up.
If he is let go, Fischer is another coach that I like and respect.
Lovie is a mediocre coach that has had a great defense to work with.
-
Jeff Fisher to the Bears...
Would Fisher really be all that different from Lovie? I mean, he is a veteran head coach with past success, that's defensive minded. On a quick comparison, Fisher and Lovie are extremely similar.
If Lovie is replaced, time to go another route and go with a guy from the offensive side of the ball.
-
Nope, I always feel bad taking people's money.
I just like knowing im awesome.
glad you didn't. my crow is a little on the rare side for my liking...
-
Would Fisher really be all that different from Lovie? I mean, he is a veteran head coach with past success, that's defensive minded. On a quick comparison, Fisher and Lovie are extremely similar.
If Lovie is replaced, time to go another route and go with a guy from the offensive side of the ball.
1 big difference I see is emotion. Lovie appears to display none. Not saying I need Rex Ryan or Schwartz screaming on the Bears sideline, but give me something.
I think if available the Bears would be a perfect fit for Fisher: established QB, solid (but aging D), all pro RB. Martz will most surely be gone I would think.
I think it all depends on the GM.
-
1 big difference I see is emotion. Lovie appears to display none. Not saying I need Rex Ryan or Schwartz screaming on the Bears sideline, but give me something.
I think if available the Bears would be a perfect fit for Fisher: established QB, solid (but aging D), all pro RB. Martz will most surely be gone I would think.
I think it all depends on the GM.
IMO, emotion is highly, highly overrated. It's something of a lot of fans like to point to, but I don't think makes a bit of difference when it comes to winning and losing. If anything, it can be a negative (See Ryan or Schwartz).
I will say this about Lovie, he doesn't have that outward passion, but in his 8 years with Bears, his teams have never quit on him.
-
Surprised by the Angelo news, but not shocked. Believe Ruskell is gone too, but have not gotten full confirmation.
Hearing Reggie McKenzie's name, a lot, in the last hour. If it is McKenzie, I believe Lovie will coach at least the next season, but that's a lot of speculation right now. Can't see the Bears going after a Parcells type (not that they'd go after Parcells). They won't want to spend that kind of money (with Angelo's buyout) and they already have Phillips in place as team president.
-
I will say this about Lovie, he doesn't have that outward passion, but in his 8 years with Bears, his teams have never quit on him.
Agree.
-
Surprised by the Angelo news, but not shocked. Believe Ruskell is gone too, but have not gotten full confirmation.
Hearing Reggie McKenzie's name, a lot, in the last hour. If it is McKenzie, I believe Lovie will coach at least the next season, but that's a lot of speculation right now. Can't see the Bears going after a Parcells type (not that they'd go after Parcells). They won't want to spend that kind of money (with Angelo's buyout) and they already have Phillips in place as team president.
McKenzie would be a very nice fit for the Bears. I would hate to see it, and prefer he go to the Raiders as has been speculated. Any way you look at it, though, he is well overdue the opportunity.
-
IMO, emotion is highly, highly overrated. It's something of a lot of fans like to point to, but I don't think makes a bit of difference when it comes to winning and losing. If anything, it can be a negative (See Ryan or Schwartz).
I will say this about Lovie, he doesn't have that outward passion, but in his 8 years with Bears, his teams have never quit on him.
I agree with all you stated in your past two posts.
As for emotion, for an NFL coach, that is far overrated. There are ways to get it done without showing emotion. Fans always want to see more than the coaches provide. The fans, though, are not the ones that get fired.
-
ChiTrib article...Lovie to stay. Presser at 4
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-jerry-angelo-out-as-bears-gm-20120103,0,3365211.story
-
ChiTrib article...Lovie to stay. Presser at 4
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/chi-jerry-angelo-out-as-bears-gm-20120103,0,3365211.story
Lovie to stay ... for now. Whoever the new GM is, unless that has already been decided and they signed off on Lovie, will ultimately decide the fate of Lovie. Or else they would be fools to accept the job.
-
Lovie to stay ... for now. Whoever the new GM is, unless that has already been decided and they signed off on Lovie, will ultimately decide the fate of Lovie. Or else they would be fools to accept the job.
This is the Bears...Virginia thinks of Lovie as her son. He stays.
-
Packers won a Super Bowl w/o Finley. I don't think he's worth franchise money.
$5.5 million for a year looks pretty reasonable to me.
-
TT might franchise Tim Mashtay.
-
TT might franchise Tim Mashtay.
Your apparent dislike for a GM who built a team that won a SB last year and a 15-1 team this year is awfully silly in my eyes.
-
$5.5 million for a year looks pretty reasonable to me.
Sign him up. TT has no reason not to franchise Finley.
-
Your apparent dislike for a GM who built a team that won a SB last year and a 15-1 team this year is awfully silly in my eyes.
It's OK, he won the MUScoop Fantasy Football league. He knows what he's doing. Better than Ted Thompson.
-
TT makes his share of mistakes. Luckily McCarthy is an offensive genius.
Until someone beats me in MU Scoop FF I will assume I am best at assembling an NFL team. Sign up early for 12-13.
-
Sign him up. TT has no reason not to franchise Finley.
Finley is reported to want the Franchise Designation of a WR. Citing how frequently the Packers play him outside. It might go to arbitration.
The concern I have with Finley is his maturity. He has done some really dumb things in the press. I don't know (meaning I don't know) how he plays inside the locker room. With his drops this season, would TT view him as more of a negative or a positive to the organization? Those are questions that I believe exist with him right now. It is a reason, as well, to Franchise him and play him under that contract. Give him another year to determine his long term worth. I doubt, though, that Finley would like that, though.
-
TT makes his share of mistakes. Luckily McCarthy is an offensive genius.
Until someone beats me in MU Scoop FF I will assume I am best at assembling an NFL team. Sign up early for 12-13.
I may have to put you on ignore for how offensively large your sig is.
-
I may have to put you on ignore for how offensively large your sig is.
AND it is purple. No self respecting Packer fan would have a signature like that. I think he is a fake!
-
Martz resigned.
-
There can be only one I in CHAMPION fellas, and that's Stone Cold!
-
Martz resigned.
That's a shame. I really liked what he has done with the Bears offense.
-
That's a shame. I really liked what he has done with the Bears offense.
Except the McCaskeys want to be a hard-nosed running offense that excels so well in today's NFL.
-
Except the McCaskeys want to be a hard-nosed running offense that excels so well in today's NFL.
Maybe they want an OC that can actually get plays in so that his team doesn't have to waste TOs every 1st and 3rd quarter.
-
I think MUMac was being sarcastic.
If you're a Packer fan, Martz's antiquated 7-step drop and no audible offense was great. As a Bear's fan and more importantly, a Bears QB, not so much.
-
With the more WR friendly pass defense rules and increased PI calls in the NFL you can see why the pass rules and qb's are breaking records left and right.
-
I think MUMac was being sarcastic.
If you're a Packer fan, Martz's antiquated 7-step drop and no audible offense was great. As a Bear's fan and more importantly, a Bears QB, not so much.
Correct.
For the record, as a football fan, I have always despised Martz as a coach, especially as a HC. As an OC, he reminds me of Bob Schnelker, the coach killer. As a Packer fan, though, I have come to love Martz as OC of the Bears. ;D Even with that, I am more than happy to see him off the Bears, even if that means and improved offense for the Bears.
-
With the more WR friendly pass defense rules and increased PI calls in the NFL you can see why the pass rules and qb's are breaking records left and right.
Good read on the now-required heavy passing in the NFL in today's TMQ.
http://espn.go.com/espn/page2/story/_/id/7415167/green-bay-new-england-make-history-strong-offenses-weak-defenses
-
Martz resigned.
Along with the QB coach.
Sad that the offense/Jay Cutler has to learn yet another new offense (3 in 4 years). Hope they really hit the nail on the head with the GM/Dir. of Operations hiring. Should be interesting to see the power struggle between Lovie/new GM on the hiring/direction of the new OC/QB coach. I personally hope Lovie doesn't have much control in the matter.
-
Pretty crazy day. Martz "resigned" which isn't true because his contract was up and the Bears informed him this afternoon he wasn't going to be re-signed.
They're going to go hard after McKenzie, that was the first thing I heard as soon as Angelo was let go, and I still believe it now. McKenzie is going to be in very high demand. Lovie and McKenzie are tight, for what it's worth. Hearing if it is McKenzie, they'll (again) go after Clements for the OC gig (they asked two years ago if they could interview him, I believe Packers said no if I recall correctly).
-
Pretty crazy day. Martz "resigned" which isn't true because his contract was up and the Bears informed him this afternoon he wasn't going to be re-signed.
Even though the show was cancelled decades ago, society is really getting some mileage out of the whole George Jetson "you can't fire me, I quit" routine.
(http://annabellemagazine.com/annabelle%20issue%2013/firedsm.jpg)
-
Bears name Tice OC.
-
Bears name Tice OC.
Good move...
With a new GM coming in and Lovie's future (after 2012) certainly in question, I don't think the OC job was going to be very attractive to outside candidates.
At least, Tice will design an offense and call plays to the ability of his OL. Martz didn't seem to care. Also, under Tice, the Bears running game has certainly improved.
-
Bears name Tice OC.
Well.. this organization surely screwed the pooch again. No new OC would want this opening with a new GM and the current coach. How would that work? What a sad lame-duck situation. McKenzie is going to the Raiders and DeCosta just stated he was staying in Baltimore.
I'm not going to be surprised in the least when Ruskell is promoted to GM. What new GM wants to be stuck with the current coach and have to get approved by the current coach??
If the Bears hire an outside GM, I feel bad for Jay Cutler. The "franchise" QB is going to have to learn his 4th new offense in 5 seasons with the Bears because I really doubt Lovie/coaching staff would be back if the new GM has his say in 2013.
Also, Tice is getting paired with a "passing game coach".. whatever the hell that is.
What a joke. F'ing McCaskeys screwing up another situation.
-
I personally hope Lovie doesn't have much control in the matter.
When Lovie Smith hired Mike Martz two years ago, it was clearly his choice at the end of a month-long process in which Jerry Angelo suggested other candidates.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0105-offensive-coordinator-bears-chicago--20120105,0,5880222.story
-
When Lovie Smith hired Mike Martz two years ago, it was clearly his choice at the end of a month-long process in which Jerry Angelo suggested other candidates.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0105-offensive-coordinator-bears-chicago--20120105,0,5880222.story
Exactly why I had hoped he didn't have any say in this candidate. Just ludicrous. Where else does a head coach have such power. To be able to name all of his (unqualified) friends as coaching staff and only allow a GM whom he approves of.
-
Wasn't the Bear offense operating pretty good before you lost Forte and Cutler?
Martz has a better history than Tice.
-
Wasn't the Bear offense operating pretty good before you lost Forte and Cutler?
Martz has a better history than Tice.
It was operating cause Cutler was doing a lot of stuff on the fly and making plays, not because Martz was doing anything different or better.
This is a meh hire for me, but again, like people have said, there weren't people knocking down the door for the job. This is just a rough situation for Bears fans to deal with. A cleaning of house would have excited people and given hope after this mess to end the year, but its clear the Lovie is running the show, and thats not very excited.
Ted Phillips and the McCaskeys are lame to put it nicely and synonyms for cats if you want my unfiltered opinion.
-
Wasn't the Bear offense operating pretty good before you lost Forte and Cutler?
Martz has a better history than Tice.
I always thought Tice was a good Offensive Coach. Horrible Head Coach. I did not care anything for Martz. I suspect the players felt the same.
-
I always thought Tice was a good Offensive Coach. Horrible Head Coach. I did not care anything for Martz. I suspect the players felt the same.
This is Tice's first coordinator job....although he was an asst. head coach in Jax but not the OC. Tight ends coach, O line coach and head coach. He did do a good job this year with a rotating O line though. He could do the same as Marinelli....coordinator and line coach.
-
This is Tice's first coordinator job....although he was an asst. head coach in Jax but not the OC. Tight ends coach, O line coach and head coach. He did do a good job this year with a rotating O line though. He could do the same as Marinelli....coordinator and line coach.
I never said he was an Offensive Coordinator.
-
I never said he was an Offensive Coordinator.
I know that and I was agreeing with you...I was just saying that he has never been an OC. He did call plays for the Vikings and he is a former college QB so he has a lot of background with offense. It will be intersting to see his play calling philosophy as a full time OC.
-
I know that and I was agreeing with you...I was just saying that he has never been an OC. He did call plays for the Vikings and he is a former college QB so he has a lot of background with offense. It will be intersting to see his play calling philosophy as a full time OC.
Sorry, misinterpretted.
-
I know that and I was agreeing with you...I was just saying that he has never been an OC. He did call plays for the Vikings and he is a former college QB so he has a lot of background with offense. It will be intersting to see his play calling philosophy as a full time OC.
just pissing into the wind here, but i dont see him being particularly creative/wide open. I would think that he'd let his big uglies open up holes and that the bears will be heavily dependent on the run and likely move into incorporating play action. not to say this generic description isnt most NFL offenses as i read it back, i just think that the offense will be much more traditional than what martz was looking to run/what the pack/pats, etc use. There will likely need to be a little turnover from martz system guys to do that - but then again maybe not since it never seemed like martz had the right guys for what he was trying to do anyway.
-
just pissing into the wind here, but i dont see him being particularly creative/wide open. I would think that he'd let his big uglies open up holes and that the bears will be heavily dependent on the run and likely move into incorporating play action. not to say this generic description isnt most NFL offenses as i read it back, i just think that the offense will be much more traditional than what martz was looking to run/what the pack/pats, etc use. There will likely need to be a little turnover from martz system guys to do that - but then again maybe not since it never seemed like martz had the right guys for what he was trying to do anyway.
I agree.....fits with their current personnel and I have a feeling after the Martz tenure Lovie is going to want to be more traditional also.
-
So.......who should Packer fans root for this weekend? Lions/Saints: My brain says Lions, my heart says Saints. Giants/Falcons: NY the only true cold weather team left, and they seem to have the mojo right now.
-
Squeezing hard for the Lions this weekend.
-
I agree.....fits with their current personnel and I have a feeling after the Martz tenure Lovie is going to want to be more traditional also.
Unfortunately, "traditional" isn't what equates to a high level of success in today's NFL. Martz's offense was closer to that than Tice/Lovie will be.
-
Unfortunately, "traditional" isn't what equates to a high level of success in today's NFL. Martz's offense was closer to that than Tice/Lovie will be.
Which is why they both may be gone next year.
-
Which is why they both may be gone next year.
Virginia loves Lovie like a son, will be a rough separation.
-
Warning: Those of you who feel Ted Thompson stands above reproach may not want to read today's article by the best in the biz, Bob McGinn.
A scathing piece describing how Thompson totally screwed the pooch this off season destroying any chance for a dynasty in cooperation with our record setting offense.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/plenty-share-blame-for-packers-titlekilling-defense-7l3sfap-137833503.html (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/plenty-share-blame-for-packers-titlekilling-defense-7l3sfap-137833503.html)
-
Warning: Those of you who feel Ted Thompson stands above reproach may not want to read today's article by the best in the biz, Bob McGinn.
A scathing piece describing how Thompson totally screwed the pooch this off season destroying any chance for a dynasty in cooperation with our record setting offense.
http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/plenty-share-blame-for-packers-titlekilling-defense-7l3sfap-137833503.html (http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/plenty-share-blame-for-packers-titlekilling-defense-7l3sfap-137833503.html)
Hahaha, the highlighted part tells me all I need to know about your football acumen. McGinn puts a ton of hatchetjobs out there and will change his "convictions" as much as the wind blows. Rodgers will never be Brett Favre after the Arizona game (even though he had a phenomenal game) but then he's one of the greatest quarterbacks ever when he's the run-away MVP this year? Ted Thompson is the GM presiding over a possible dynasty a year ago but now he's ended any chance for a dynasty with a couple offseason moves or lack of moves on the defensive side? This article is another emotionial hatchetjob, filled with a lot of opions, supportted by very little factual evidence.
So, TT caused the total demise of this defense by
-not resigning an aging inside linebacker who had season-ending injuries 2 of the previous 3 years and was not part of the Super Bowl stretch run last year, but instead gave AJ Hawk $8 million in guaranteed money
-letting the oft-injured Jenkins go in free agency so he could sign other young guys
Not resigning Jenkins definitely hurt the defense, especially at that money, but the rest of the defense's downfall was a combination of injuries, bad coaching, and bad performance--3 things TT has very little control over in-season.