collapse

Resources

Recent Posts

More conference realignment talk by muwarrior69
[Today at 09:31:16 AM]


Congrats to Royce by Jay Bee
[Today at 09:27:39 AM]


Scouting Report: Ian Miletic by mug644
[May 20, 2025, 06:40:19 PM]


Recruiting as of 5/15/25 by MuggsyB
[May 20, 2025, 06:27:04 PM]


NM by marqfan22
[May 20, 2025, 05:53:46 PM]


Marquette vs Oklahoma by dgies9156
[May 20, 2025, 12:25:50 PM]


What is the actual gap between Marquette and the top of the Big East by MU82
[May 20, 2025, 11:09:52 AM]

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address. We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or signup NOW!


MU B2002

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.

:D :D :D



It was hard to see him since he spent the whole game "in Cutler's ass".
"VPI"
- Mike Hunt

GGGG

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.

FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.


No excuses here.  Obvious penalties on both INTs...the dropped one by Woodson (Collins?) on the last drive was a killer.

And Matthews had a very good game.  You don't have to get the sacks to affect the passing game.

MU B2002

Quote from: The Sultan of South Wayne on September 28, 2010, 09:07:25 AM

And Matthews had a very good game.  You don't have to get the sacks to affect the passing game.

Agree, I kept waiting for him to actually get a hit on Cutler, but I thought the OL did a pretty good job on him.  This is one of the first games that I have paid attention to him, and I guess I never knew he was that quick.  But damn kid, get a haircut.
"VPI"
- Mike Hunt

shiloh26

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.

FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.

Make all the excuses you want, at the end of the day, the Bears are still 3-0.


I don't think anyone would say it wasn't a big deal... the Packers had that game, and blew it time after time after time.  That is a very big deal.  And I don't think anyone is making excuses... no one here has, or even has a case, to argue with those pass interference penalties, or the roughing the passer, or the intentional grounding, or the called back touchdown.  

The point is that the Packers played probably the most undisciplined game I've ever seen and they were still just 3 points away.  Take away just one of any of about 10 mistakes and that game goes the other way. Given that, I think some of the postgame reaction (ahem Kevin Seifert) was a little premature (The Packers Fall from grace? Seriously?) in destroying the Packers and elevating the Bears.  

Everyone has their own take on a big loss.  While it was a terrible loss, I don't think it has the ramifications that everyone seems to think it will.  Congrats to the Bears, enjoy 3-0, but hopefully we've reinstated the Cutler that the rest of the division knows and loves.  

MerrittsMustache

#179
Quote from: MU B2002 on September 28, 2010, 09:19:11 AM
Agree, I kept waiting for him to actually get a hit on Cutler, but I thought the OL did a pretty good job on him.  This is one of the first games that I have paid attention to him, and I guess I never knew he was that quick.  But damn kid, get a haircut.

Peppers didn't have any sacks either but he was probably the Bears' MVP last night. He pressured Rodgers several times, caused a ton penalties (holds, false starts) and blocked a FG. His stat line shows 2 tackles, but that doesn't even remotely show how well he played.

Matthews, on the other hand, played a decent game, nothing spectacular. My comment was directed at the Packer fans who spouted off about how Matthews would single-handedly win the game for GB. Oh, and I assume he's growing his hair that long in an attempt to cover his steroid-related backne.

ChicosBailBonds

Quote from: tower912 on September 28, 2010, 08:17:39 AM
Would have liked to have watched, but the Dish Network Satellite feed at the fire station went out from 5:30-10:30, so by the time we actually COULD watch, I didn't care anymore.

California not paying the bills...budget cuts?

wadesworld

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 09:32:42 AM
Matthews, on the other hand, played a decent game, nothing spectacular. My comment was directed at the Packer fans who spouted off about how Matthews would single-handedly win the game for GB. Oh, and I assume he's growing his hair that long in an attempt to cover his steroid-related backne.


Already made my comments on the game so I'll leave those parts alone.  But you are right, Matthews is definitely on steroids.  I mean, the only way a man is that strong with that much speed is by taking steroids.  It has nothing to do with playing football for his whole life and being on diet and weight lifting programs for the last 6 years of his life.  Also, the only way somebody gets that fast, big, and strong is through genetics, so the guy would have to have had a dad and an uncle who played in the NFL and have a younger brother who will soon follow suit and be in the NFL...wait a minute...

GOMU1104

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 08:49:19 AM
One of the best parts about beating the Packers is listening to Packer fans make excuses and act like it was no big deal.

FWIW - Both INTs were called back due to penalties that directly affected the play (and were very obvious to everyone...except Charles Woodson). It wasn't like they were offsides or holding away from the play. Personally, I think GB probably would have won if Clay Matthews had played.

Make all the excuses you want, at the end of the day, the Bears are still 3-0.



Not making excuses. Excuses would be blaming the officials, which I dont do.

The first INT was the result of pressure from Frank Zombo...Cutler got rushed and got picked off. Had Zombo hit him a little lower...no penalty and the pick still would have been thrown.  It was the right call. It was definitely an illegal hit.

The pass interference on Burnett was also the right call...but that doesn't change the fact that Cutler lobbed it into double coverage, nowhere near the WR, and got bailed out.


MerrittsMustache

Quote from: wadesworld on September 28, 2010, 10:10:42 AM
Already made my comments on the game so I'll leave those parts alone.  But you are right, Matthews is definitely on steroids.  I mean, the only way a man is that strong with that much speed is by taking steroids.  It has nothing to do with playing football for his whole life and being on diet and weight lifting programs for the last 6 years of his life.  Also, the only way somebody gets that fast, big, and strong is through genetics, so the guy would have to have had a dad and an uncle who played in the NFL and have a younger brother who will soon follow suit and be in the NFL...wait a minute...

According to several sources and at least one NFL team, he failed a drug test at the combine (though this has been disputed). He wasn't a starter in HS, walked-on at USC and gained something like 70+ pounds of muscle, while gaining athleticism. He's close with, and was college teammates with Brian Cushing who was busted for PEDs and had been linked to them for quite some time. Plus, he had the pressure of living up to his father and uncle as a football player despite being small and not very good as a teen. There are plenty of red flags. I'm not just making this up...and I think it's funny to tease Packer fans about it too.

shiloh26

Quote from: MerrittsMustache on September 28, 2010, 10:24:57 AM
According to several sources and at least one NFL team, he failed a drug test at the combine (though this has been disputed). He wasn't a starter in HS, walked-on at USC and gained something like 70+ pounds of muscle, while gaining athleticism. He's close with, and was college teammates with Brian Cushing who was busted for PEDs and had been linked to them for quite some time. Plus, he had the pressure of living up to his father and uncle as a football player despite being small and not very good as a teen. There are plenty of red flags. I'm not just making this up...and I think it's funny to tease Packer fans about it too.


What does that even mean?  Did you watch him in HS or as a freshman at USC so that you could make that statement?  About the only thing you've said there that is actually substantiated is a friendship with Cushing (maybe Sanchize is roiding up too?... please, everyone in profressional sports in the last 15 years has probably had a relationship with someone who has taken steroids), and his growth in college (I think we all know guys who got bigger in their 20's, and I'll bet that they were not the son of an NFL linebacker and the nephew of an NFL offensive lineman). 

And your little story about living up to his father's expectations... As a couple of old school players, I think its at least as likely that Dad and Uncle would have kicked is ass handily for even looking at PED's. 

NavinRJohnson

Has this really devolved into a discussion of an NFL player taking PEDs? Lets put it this way...if he did, do you really think he is the only one? Of course he isn't, and I can assure you the list will also include a handful of your Chicago Bear heroes.

I realize it is a position that is impossible to reconcile, but for some reason I do feel differently about PEDs where football and baseball are concerned. I unfortunately see it as just pat of the game in football, but not for baseball. Stupid, I know.

Dish

As a Bears fan who got a semi amount of sleep and reflecting on what this game meant, it's most important to me that they are 3-0 in the conference (and would own a tiebreaker with Dallas). I'd be shocked in Green Bay didn't win this division. Bears need to take advantage of this schedule coming up (hard not think they have a let down at NYG this Sunday night). But with Carolina, Seattle (in Chicago, different Seahawks team on the road), Washington, Buffalo coming up, Bears "should" be no worse than 6-2. They have a killer end of season schedule, so they have to put money in the bank now. One advantage the Bears have schedule wise over the Pack is the Bears get both the Jets and Pats in Chicago, and Pack goes on the road to both.

MerrittsMustache

Quote from: shiloh26 on September 28, 2010, 10:38:43 AM
What does that even mean?  Did you watch him in HS or as a freshman at USC so that you could make that statement?  About the only thing you've said there that is actually substantiated is a friendship with Cushing (maybe Sanchize is roiding up too?... please, everyone in profressional sports in the last 15 years has probably had a relationship with someone who has taken steroids), and his growth in college (I think we all know guys who got bigger in their 20's, and I'll bet that they were not the son of an NFL linebacker and the nephew of an NFL offensive lineman). 

And your little story about living up to his father's expectations... As a couple of old school players, I think its at least as likely that Dad and Uncle would have kicked is ass handily for even looking at PED's. 


Quote from: NavinRJohnson on September 28, 2010, 10:45:43 AM
Has this really devolved into a discussion of an NFL player taking PEDs? Lets put it this way...if he did, do you really think he is the only one? Of course he isn't, and I can assure you the list will also include a handful of your Chicago Bear heroes.

I realize it is a position that is impossible to reconcile, but for some reason I do feel differently about PEDs where football and baseball are concerned. I unfortunately see it as just pat of the game in football, but not for baseball. Stupid, I know.

I'm not saying Matthews is the only NFL player suspected of using PEDs. He's just a specific case that has a lot of red flags, whether you are willing to acknowledge them or not. You believe what you want to believe and I'll believe what I want to believe.

Something that is indisputable: The Bears are 3-0 and in first place after beating the Packers last night.

tower912

Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on September 28, 2010, 09:42:14 AM
California not paying the bills...budget cuts?

Nah, the firefighters pay the bills at each station for the cable/dish.   It just cuts out for no apparent reason for a few hours every month or so.   Last night was just the night. 
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

ChicosBailBonds

Quote from: tower912 on September 28, 2010, 11:31:45 AM
Nah, the firefighters pay the bills at each station for the cable/dish.   It just cuts out for no apparent reason for a few hours every month or so.   Last night was just the night. 

You guys should ask them to do a service call and get that fixed.  I'm not as familiar with their technology, but that flat out shouldn't be happening.

MUEng92

Quote from: tower912 on September 28, 2010, 11:31:45 AM
Nah, the firefighters pay the bills at each station for the cable/dish.

I would hope the friendly dish companies would give a Fire house some sort of discount off the normal rates, if not free!  (I am a son of a firefigher, so I may be a little biased)

tower912

Nope.   AAMOF, we are with Dish Network because Comcast changed their policy and wanted to charge fire stations the same rate as they charge sportsbars, i.e. the commercial rate, which was roughly the same rate per month as I pay at home for my cable/internet/phone bundle.    Grrrrrr.   Ah, well, how about those Lions?    Improved, but not good enough to overcome the loss of Stafford and Best, as well as stupid mistakes.    The Bears are 3-0 and should be happy, but not too happy.    The Vikings need to feed AP the ball until either his legs fall off or Favre wakes up.   The Pack can still be the best team in the division, but they need to tighten up.   
Luke 6:45   ...A good man produces goodness from the good in his heart; an evil man produces evil out of his store of evil.   Each man speaks from his heart's abundance...

It is better to be fearless and cheerful than cheerless and fearful.

Dish

Who'd have thought the Lions are giving the Pack everything they can handle? If Stafford was playing in this one, Lions might be leading this one. Pack up 2 with 12 mins left currently

wadesworld

It's comical hearing Mike McCarthy talking about getting better on special teams every single week since the start of last year and all through the summer.  2 fumbles lost on special teams today.  It's a joke.

At least we don't have 17+ penalties this week.

wadesworld

Also am I crazy or do the Packers need to make a move for a running back?  Jackson with 33 yards rushing, Kuhn with 28 yards rushing.  Other than that Rodgers has 21.  You simply need more than that out of your running backs if you're truly playing for the Super Bowl.  We have 2 running backs on the entire roster, and one is a fullback.  There needs to be some balance.  And about 60% of those rushing yards have been on this last drive.  There is literally 0% chance the Packers can win the NFC Championship with this running back group.

GGGG

Quote from: MUDish on October 03, 2010, 02:39:00 PM
Who'd have thought the Lions are giving the Pack everything they can handle? If Stafford was playing in this one, Lions might be leading this one. Pack up 2 with 12 mins left currently

I don't think so.  Hill played pretty damn good.

Jay Bee

If Shaun Hill (Vikings signee) can look that good against Green Bey, I can't wait to see Brett again this year... unfortunately, when Allen gets a million sacks like he did last year against the Packirs, he may not be doing the calf roping:

"The Vikings were informed by Vice President of Officiating Carl Johnson that Jared Allen's demonstration, in which he goes to the ground on one knee, is unsportsmanlike conduct as defined by NFL rules. Rule 12, Section 3, Article 1 (d) of the NFL Rule Book states: "Players are prohibited from engaging in any celebrations while on the ground." Demonstrations of this kind by any player will result in an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty (loss of 15 yards) and are subject to potential fines."
The portal is NOT closed.

IAmMarquette

Quote from: wadesworld on October 03, 2010, 02:51:20 PM
It's comical hearing Mike McCarthy talking about getting better on special teams every single week since the start of last year and all through the summer.  2 fumbles lost on special teams today.  It's a joke.

At least we don't have 17+ penalties this week.

You're not really blaming the entire special teams unit for 2 weak fumbles by Jordy Nelson, are you?

GGGG

Quote from: wadesworld on October 03, 2010, 03:02:24 PM
Also am I crazy or do the Packers need to make a move for a running back?  Jackson with 33 yards rushing, Kuhn with 28 yards rushing.  Other than that Rodgers has 21.  You simply need more than that out of your running backs if you're truly playing for the Super Bowl.  We have 2 running backs on the entire roster, and one is a fullback.  There needs to be some balance.  And about 60% of those rushing yards have been on this last drive.  There is literally 0% chance the Packers can win the NFC Championship with this running back group.


I didn't think so when Grant got hurt, but Jackson is too tentative for the zone blocking scheme.  Screw the future...they need to set themselves up to win now.

wadesworld

Quote from: IAmMarquette on October 03, 2010, 03:15:29 PM
You're not really blaming the entire special teams unit for 2 weak fumbles by Jordy Nelson, are you?

Not the entire unit, no, but we simply can't lose 2 fumbles on special teams.  And that follows a week in which we give up a punt return touchdown that ended up being the deciding touchdown in the game and another punt return inside 2 minutes that set up a touchdown to end the 1st half.  Our special teams are atrocious, and McCarthy loves to point out that it's a point of emphasis...yet it seemingly only gets worse.

Previous topic - Next topic