2012 NFC North/NFL Thread

[Dish]

For the record, I am one who thinks the Bear defense is good; I do not think they are the second coming of the 85 bears like some do.

I agree with most of what you say above. The Packer offensive line is better than you think. Sitton and Bulaga are above average to near pro bowl players, Saturday and Lang are serviceable and Newhouse is still improving.  The packers run game would be better if they committed to it, but that is not McCarthy's philosophy. Run attempts are as important as run yards in their mind. They would rather use a short passing game to serve as their run game.  Lack of running game has been a criticism of Packer teams under the west coast offense for years; it is not what they do especially under McCarthy.
The Bears are formidable especially the defense. I think the number of turnovers they get will come back to the mean and they will lose some games against better competition.  I cannot see a Cutler led team winning the super bowl.  

As far as your bias, how can someone with Ditka for an avatar be unbiased?



The Ditka avatar is actually a joke. I used to work for the Bears (not that it matters), and met Ditka a few times. He's nice enough, but a meatball who's played the part to a tee, and it's made him millions of dollars. I use the Ditka avatar because more than anything how fake tan he is in that picture. It's not an endorsement of the guy per se.

[Dish]

Who's been more disappointing this year, Finley or Carimi?

I'd say Carimi, because the Bears need him to be good/great. Finley had shown flashes of greatness, but the Pack can get by without him.

[ATWizJr]

Has Carimi been injured?

[Dish]

He's coming off knee surgery from a year ago, but has stated he is 100% now.

[MerrittsMustache]

He's coming off knee surgery from a year ago, but has stated he is 100% now.

I hope he's lying.

[Hards Alumni]

Finley has been a mess.  I haven't seen any flashes of greatness this year.  He drops most everything that hits him in the hands.

[Real Chilly Podcast]

Finley has been a mess.  I haven't seen any flashes of greatness this year.  He drops most everything that hits him in the hands.

As a Lions fan, exposed to plenty of players whose mental abilities never caught up with their physical talents, I have loved watching every snap that Finley plays.  He is so far removed from the humbleness and "act like you've been there before" attitude that makes the Packers franchise great.  For what you packers fans view as his "spontaneous combustion" you must have not been paying attention to what he's really like: a clown who legitimately thinks he's the greatest TE of all time and is too arrogant and straight up stupid to ever admit his own mistakes.

I would be hard pressed to think of a player in the NFL that I respect less than Finley

[GGGG]

I don't think many Packer fans feel very positive about Jermichael Finley.

[Sir Lawrence]

Bulaga out for the season.

[ringout]

This is as much fun as listening to Chicago sports radio after a loss.

[Spotcheck Billy]

This is as much fun as listening to Chicago sports radio after a loss.

that IS alot of fun! (for Packer fans)

[hairy worthen]

that IS alot of fun! (for Packer fans)

The only time I listen to Chicago radio is after a Bear loss. Very entertaining, even more so after a defeat at the hands of the packers. Me Likey.

[MU B2002]

I like listening to the Wisconsin sports radio channels after a Packers loss. Hilarious.


You see what I did up there?  It's funny right...


fucking packer fans.

[jmayer1]

I'm glad you can be this confident, because I still am not exactly sure about the Packers.  

Sorry, you said how much more impressive they were 2 years ago through 5 games than they were this year and that they had much more significant weaknesses this year than they did then. That was 4 straight wins ago. We'll see about the next 7 games, but so far I feel pretty good about what I said then. Injuries are a concern right now no doubt, but I'll take my chances with Rodgers and Matthews (hopefully he's back soon).

[Hards Alumni]

As a Lions fan, exposed to plenty of players whose mental abilities never caught up with their physical talents, I have loved watching every snap that Finley plays.  He is so far removed from the humbleness and "act like you've been there before" attitude that makes the Packers franchise great.  For what you packers fans view as his "spontaneous combustion" you must have not been paying attention to what he's really like: a clown who legitimately thinks he's the greatest TE of all time and is too arrogant and straight up stupid to ever admit his own mistakes.

I would be hard pressed to think of a player in the NFL that I respect less than Finley

Please don't pretend like we enjoy his childish antics.  Its all fine if he is playing well, but to get up from every 4th pass and dance around... he is a clown.

I'm going to catch flack for this one... but the same goes for Donald Driver.  Whew, I feel better, I've been wanting to get that off my chest for years.

[hairy worthen]

Please don't pretend like we enjoy his childish antics.  Its all fine if he is playing well, but to get up from every 4th pass and dance around... he is a clown.

I'm going to catch flack for this one... but the same goes for Donald Driver.  Whew, I feel better, I've been wanting to get that off my chance for years.

i agree with you somewhat about Driver so you are not alone. The difference is that Driver has actually done something in the NFL and dosen't spout his mouth off. I hope like hell the packers part ways with finley after the season, not worth the headache

[wadesworld]

For the record, I was agreeing with Sultan. How someone can argue the Bears defense is no good is laughable. If a Bears fan came on here and said the Packers passing game sucked, I'd rip the guy to shreds.

At 2-3, the Packers looked dead in the water, they absolutely did. The second half of the Colts game said it all, they were flat out struggling at that point.

Packers, to their credit, have started to right the ship. I actually think the lose of Jennings helped their offense, I really do. They are now a playoff team. I said it on this board, because I believe it, Cobb is on the verge of being a superstar, I love his game. On offense, he's what Hester should have been. Hester is not even close to Cobb.

Packers have scabs with their offensive line and poor running game. Come playoff time though, there's a couple of NFC teams that play better on the road, I think both the Packers and Giants are better road teams than home teams, I firmly believe that. If the Pack don't win the division and have to go on the road, they'll be tough to deal with.

I think it might've helped to lose Jennings for a while for the reason of seeing just how efficient/valuable Cobb can be (and, to his credit, just how good James Jones really can be...he's having a really great, underrated season), but I disagree that we are better off without him overall.  Even with Cobb playing like he is, he isn't a star receiver who you can just throw the ball to when you absolutely need it like Jennings is.  Jordy looked like he could be that guy while Jennings was on the field, and still shows flashes of it playing the #1 receiver roll, but he's not nearly as productive/efficient as he was when Jennings was getting all of the attention as the #1 receiver.  There are still times, even during this winning streak, where the Packers offense stalls for a number of drives in a row, which rarely happened with Jennings on the field over the past 3 years.  I think if Jennings came back this week and really got back into form within the next few weeks, that added dimension would make the Packers passing game insanely scary as opposed to the very, very good that it is right now.

I also disagree that the Packers were ever not a Playoff team.  When they were 2-3 (should've been 3-2), were they playing like a Playoff team?  No.  But it's a 16 game season and did I ever feel like we weren't going to be in the Playoffs?  I can honestly say absolutely not.  In fact, I have never doubted that the Packers were/are still going to win the NFC North.  I really haven't.  There's just too much talent, especially offensive, and the defense looks a lot better this year (haven't even compared the numbers, just based on watching them...not that the defense is lights out, but it's serviceable this year unlike last year).

As far as the Cobb/Hester (early in his career) comparison, maybe I am overrating Cobb as a player, but from day 1 he seemed to be more physical than Hester has ever been (not that his physicality is his best trait by any means), and Cobb seems to also be a much better route runner than Hester ever has been.  It seems like the only route Hester can run is a fly route.  Again, I could be completely wrong on this, but it just seems like Cobb came in as a more polished wideout and Hester just came in as a speed demon.

As far as Jermichael Finley, that guy is the biggest waste of physical talent that I have ever seen.  I don't think you could possibly find a bigger headcase who is more delusional about his productivity.  As a Packers fan, I have come to just laugh and enjoy the moment when Jermichael drops 3/4 of the passes thrown to him.  I could catch 1/2 of the passes he drops.  All you have to do with Rodgers throwing you the ball is get your hands out.  He'll hit them.  Finley can't catch the ball.  Friggin headcase...can't wait for DJ Williams to be the starter next year.

And as far as the Bears defense and whether they are a good team, it's a silly argument.  The Bears have played 9 teams and won 7 games.  The Packers have played 9 teams and won 6 games (well, really 7, but officially 6).  The Bears are a good team.  The Bears are led by their defense, which is very good.  I DO agree that they are an overrated defense, but that does not mean I don't think they have a great defense.  Why do I think they are overrated?  I think that because I don't think they are as good as their numbers suggest, and I don't look at the Bears defense and think of them as a 2000s (or even more recently than that) Baltimore Ravens defense that is going to shut down any and every offense they face.  If the Bears had a historically good defense, in my opinion (they will end up with the NUMBERS of a historically good defense, but to me it's about more than numbers), they could be playing the Packers or Patriots or whoever and I would think to myself the Packers/Patriots need to hold the Bears offense to 14 or under or they aren't going to win.  I don't feel that way with the Bears.  I definitely feel confident that good (not even great) offenses can put up a pretty solid amount (24+) of points on the Bears (although the Packers never seem to do that, no matter how good or bad the Bears defense is).  The Bears are a good team.  I do not think they are a Super Bowl team (I don't know if I will ever truly fear them with Jay Cutler throwing the ball for them, as Chuck Woodson said, Jay is still Jay), but I do think they're a team that could go to the NFC Championship game behind their defense, especially if they win the Division and have home field advantage.

[GGGG]

As far as the Cobb/Hester (early in his career) comparison, maybe I am overrating Cobb as a player, but from day 1 he seemed to be more physical than Hester has ever been (not that his physicality is his best trait by any means), and Cobb seems to also be a much better route runner than Hester ever has been.  It seems like the only route Hester can run is a fly route.  Again, I could be completely wrong on this, but it just seems like Cobb came in as a more polished wideout and Hester just came in as a speed demon.

Cobb was a receiver in college...and a very good one.  Was first team all SEC ahead of Julio Jones his senior year.  Hester was an average college defensive back, but a great returner.  There really is no comparison.

[Sir Lawrence]

Any word on Cutler? 
I've watched the hit he took a bunch of times, and I cannot figure out how he continued to play.  I'm not a big fan, but he is one tough caballero.

I'm worried about the Packer's O-line against Suh. 

[MU B2002]

He is improving, but doubtful to play.

[jesmu84]

I think that because I don't think they are as good as their numbers suggest, and I don't look at the Bears defense and think of them as a 2000s (or even more recently than that) Baltimore Ravens defense that is going to shut down any and every offense they face.  If the Bears had a historically good defense, in my opinion (they will end up with the NUMBERS of a historically good defense, but to me it's about more than numbers)...

I'm confused here. you don't think they are a historically good defense, even though you think they will end up with historic numbers? and all this in an era when the game is historically biased to the offense?

when i think of historic defenses, i think of mean, tough, hard-hitting teams - ravens in the 2000s, bears in the 80s, etc. however, due to the changing of the rules/game, i think the new definition of historic defenses will be takeaways/scoring. and i think this bears defense does that as well as, if not better than, any defense.

[wadesworld]

I'm confused here. you don't think they are a historically good defense, even though you think they will end up with historic numbers? and all this in an era when the game is historically biased to the offense?

when i think of historic defenses, i think of mean, tough, hard-hitting teams - ravens in the 2000s, bears in the 80s, etc. however, due to the changing of the rules/game, i think the new definition of historic defenses will be takeaways/scoring. and i think this bears defense does that as well as, if not better than, any defense.

That's a good point. I think they will end up with historic numbers in takeaway and defensive touchdowns (they basically already have both), but in my opinion they aren't an intimidating, impenetrable defense that nobody can score on, which is what I consider to be a "historically good defense." I don't think offenses see the schedule and are like "crap we have to play the Bears defense" like I feel like offenses used to for the Ravens earlier in the 2000s. Obviously, I don't think teams are celebrating to see the defense coming up on their schedule, either. But like you said, the game is changing and keeping teams off of the scoreboard is harder now than it once was.

Personally, I don't even think this Bear's defense is as good as the one that led them to the Super Bowl with Rex Grossman running the offense. Just the fact that Rex Grossman made it to a Super Bowl tells you how good that defense was.

[Hards Alumni]

I'm confused here. you don't think they are a historically good defense, even though you think they will end up with historic numbers? and all this in an era when the game is historically biased to the offense?

when i think of historic defenses, i think of mean, tough, hard-hitting teams - ravens in the 2000s, bears in the 80s, etc. however, due to the changing of the rules/game, i think the new definition of historic defenses will be takeaways/scoring. and i think this bears defense does that as well as, if not better than, any defense.

This is a really great point, but the counterpoint to it is that with more passing there will naturally be more interceptions and turnovers.

[Dish]

Cutler out for Monday, which is the right decision. Shouldn't be flying across the country coming off a concussion, let alone playing.

Will say that even with Cutler, I think Niners would beat the Bears Monday night. Bears haven't won at Candlestick since '85, never play good there. I see a 13-10 kinda game.

[jesmu84]

This is a really great point, but the counterpoint to it is that with more passing there will naturally be more interceptions and turnovers.

I agree with more interceptions, but would it necessarily mean more turnovers overall? Do statistics say that there are more interceptions that occur per passes versus fumbles per run? Theoretically, the number of turnovers could stay the same, or even decrease, seeing as the number of fumbles would decrease with more passing.