| Chicago Fanatics Message Board https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
| Rumblin' Bumblin' Stumblin' Hanley https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=6461 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Woodridge Ryan [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 11:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Rumblin' Bumblin' Stumblin' Hanley |
I think they got to put the ax on Hanley reading e-mails. It's just non-stop stumbling over words and he inserts his own words throughout the e-mail as if it was written that way. That's not too big of a deal, but the reading..my god, worse than Carm. With that said, I've really been enjoying this show since I left the disaster on ESPN 1000. Can't wait for Bears reg season with these guys. |
|
| Author: | Woodridge Ryan [ Tue Aug 22, 2006 9:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
Agreed |
|
| Author: | Sleuth [ Thu Aug 24, 2006 9:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like these two a lot together. God I wish Murphy didn't get good ratings, cause if it were up to me I'd axe his show, eat his contract, kick him to the curb...and put Mully and Hanley on from 10-2. |
|
| Author: | RodeoVann [ Wed Oct 25, 2006 9:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think Hanley is just a Boers wannabe, which I know has been said before. I just dont like this show, its pretty much a bitchfest how the Cubs suck and a bunch of other stuff that we already know. |
|
| Author: | Brian's Mojito [ Mon Oct 30, 2006 10:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I didn't like their take on things today. The hammered Benson. Cedric Benson might be a tool, but Ron Turner said Ced would have a larger role against San Francisco. Eight carries? Just three in the second half with the team holding a 41-0 lead. Why was Jones -- or Grossman -- in the game in the second half. This would have been a perfect time to see Benson. Brian talked about that Benson has been here for a while. No. Benson is in his second season, and he was lost for a while with a knee injury last year. We haven't seen a lot of Benson. If the team is willing to keep his large salary in the mix, let the guy play. If he sucks, fine, but he really hasn't been given that many opportunities. As for Jones, he's nowhere near last year's numbers -- and those were a career high. Jones has mainly been a bust for most of his NFL career, until last year. This year, he's on a pace for around 1,000 yards -- not that great for 16 games. I thought their reasoning today was misguided, and that bothers me, since Mully is a Bears beat writer. |
|
| Author: | Mr. Reason [ Mon Oct 30, 2006 11:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I think if Lovie had any reason to play Benson he would. Lovie has shown that he will make a change if it is necessary. I can't see him leaving Benson on the bench just for personal reasons. If Benson looked good in practice he would play, in my opinion. I don't think there is a power play going on between Lovie and Jerry. Lovie doesn't strike me as the type of person who would do not play Benson just out of spite. Benson will play when and if he proves himself, barring TJ injury. Maybe Benson has a sense of entitlement coupled with a lack of desire that rubs Lovie the wrong way. That would explain alot to me. I can't think of any other reason he would not be getting more carries. Unless he is a bust and the coach's know it. I don't think that is the case but we will all see soon. |
|
| Author: | Brian's Mojito [ Mon Oct 30, 2006 11:42 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
He had a perfect reason to play him yesterday: avoid injuries to starters in a blowout. He could also give some others some reps. This type of situation will not present itself on a weekly basis. |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|