It is currently Mon Nov 25, 2024 2:57 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 154 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 11:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:
Chris "Difference-Maker" Harris looked absolutely putrid last night against Arizona. And Tommie Harris wasn't much better.


I love seeing "I told you so" after the 3rd preseason game. While I expect Chris Harris to continue to take awful routes to the ball (at times) I doubt he will have a problem tackling and will make a lot of impact plays. If the bar for Tommie Harris is set at his 2006 level of play then he will fail in your eyes no matter what.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:44 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Chris "Difference-Maker" Harris looked absolutely putrid last night against Arizona. And Tommie Harris wasn't much better.


I love seeing "I told you so" after the 3rd preseason game. While I expect Chris Harris to continue to take awful routes to the ball (at times) I doubt he will have a problem tackling and will make a lot of impact plays. If the bar for Tommie Harris is set at his 2006 level of play then he will fail in your eyes no matter what.


And I love seeing a prediction for a 12-4 season when it has no basis in reality.

Chris Harris, by the way, has never been a "difference maker" in the NFL.

What evidence suggests he'll be one now rather than continuing on the downward trajectory that caused the Panthers to jettison him? There is none.

But I'm the one who's jumping the gun on predictions, right?

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 12:48 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57239
So JohnKirk finally agreed to a bet. Nasova, you are a wise man to not trust JohnKirk.

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:
HOVA wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
Chris "Difference-Maker" Harris looked absolutely putrid last night against Arizona. And Tommie Harris wasn't much better.


I love seeing "I told you so" after the 3rd preseason game. While I expect Chris Harris to continue to take awful routes to the ball (at times) I doubt he will have a problem tackling and will make a lot of impact plays. If the bar for Tommie Harris is set at his 2006 level of play then he will fail in your eyes no matter what.


And I love seeing a prediction for a 12-4 season when it has no basis in reality.

Chris Harris, by the way, has never been a "difference maker" in the NFL.

What evidence suggests he'll be one now rather than continuing on the downward trajectory that caused the Panthers to jettison him? There is none.

But I'm the one who's jumping the gun on predictions, right?


There is. I'm looking at the talent on the Bears in comparison to the other teams and making an educated guess on how I think their season will turn out. You are predicting that their defense will be bad based on the way they are playing in the preseason. That's crazy. As I said before we've recently seen all time bad teams (Lions) go undefeated in the preseason and SB (Colts) not win one game. Your "predictions" of doom and gloom are not surprising though. You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16484
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
Hova,

Please reconsider accepting by bet offer. Actually, I will agree to any amount of money that you desire, just name the amount. If its $1 or $1000, I'm in.
Remember the rules...I have the Bears winning 6 games, you have them winning 12...closest wins.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Last edited by Scorehead on Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:51 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 4:11 pm
Posts: 57239
HOVA wrote:
You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.

:lol:

_________________
"He is a loathsome, offensive brute
--yet I can't look away."


Frank Coztansa wrote:
I have MANY years of experience in trying to appreciate steaming piles of dogshit.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:49 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2006 12:45 am
Posts: 13529
Location: People's Republic of Urbana
pizza_Place: Papa Dells
These guys are going to fucking blow, both offensively and defensively.

Doug and OB are gonna be appointment radio this season. I hope they both make it through without either one having an on-air grabber.

_________________
We all have private ails. The troublemakers are they who need public cures for their private ails.- Eric Hoffer


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 2:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
I'm more concerned about the offense. For the life of me I can't understand why Devin A isn't starting. He appears to get open on a lot of plays and has the size where you can throw him the ball even when he may not be open. I'm starting to believe Cutler may be more like Grossman than many of us want to believe. Hopefully we see Good Cutler more than we see Bad Cutler this season.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Sun Aug 29, 2010 3:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 10, 2006 7:56 pm
Posts: 37835
Location: ...
i don't know how well he can work in a martz system. he takes a lot of risks. and his o-line still sucks the root.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 2:17 pm
Posts: 602
Location: Born: Rockford Live: Aurora
pizza_Place: Lino's in Rockford
HOVA wrote:

As I said before we've recently seen all time bad teams (Lions) go undefeated in the preseason and SB (Colts) not win one game. Your "predictions" of doom and gloom are not surprising though. You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.


Gotta respectfully disagree.

Lions: Playing more of the starters more frequently and longer because they are figuring out talent and have tons of holes.

Colts: A legit and solid SB contender, playing the third and fourth lines more often in order to figure out who will get the last spots on the team. They have everything else already figured out and in order.


The Bears have just looked straight up terrible this pre-season, like skill wise and talent wise.

_________________
" THis poster said it's 90% that Bernstein goes national. He put a percentage on it. " - Beardown


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 11:48 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
HossasSlavicRage wrote:
HOVA wrote:

As I said before we've recently seen all time bad teams (Lions) go undefeated in the preseason and SB (Colts) not win one game. Your "predictions" of doom and gloom are not surprising though. You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.


Gotta respectfully disagree.

Lions: Playing more of the starters more frequently and longer because they are figuring out talent and have tons of holes.

Colts: A legit and solid SB contender, playing the third and fourth lines more often in order to figure out who will get the last spots on the team. They have everything else already figured out and in order.


The Bears have just looked straight up terrible this pre-season, like skill wise and talent wise.


Unfortunately this isn't true. All teams play there starters about the same amount of time. They want to get them ready for the regular season. You can go back and look at the box scores if you don't believe this is true.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:17 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:

There is. I'm looking at the talent on the Bears in comparison to the other teams and making an educated guess on how I think their season will turn out. You are predicting that their defense will be bad based on the way they are playing in the preseason. That's crazy. As I said before we've recently seen all time bad teams (Lions) go undefeated in the preseason and SB (Colts) not win one game. Your "predictions" of doom and gloom are not surprising though. You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.


But I'm not basing my entire opinion on the preseason. Rather, it's based on the last two years of below average defense played by the Bears and is informed by how certain key players have looked in preseason. Your opinion, however, seems entirely derived from statements made by Bears coaches, players, and the PR department. I have both the past and present on my side to support my opinion whereas your views are merely a product of wishful thinking. No wonder you were an Obama supporter...and Rex Grossman's biggest fan...and the leader of the Cubs World Series brigade...and on and on....You love style but apparently have no use for substance.

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:
HOVA wrote:

There is. I'm looking at the talent on the Bears in comparison to the other teams and making an educated guess on how I think their season will turn out. You are predicting that their defense will be bad based on the way they are playing in the preseason. That's crazy. As I said before we've recently seen all time bad teams (Lions) go undefeated in the preseason and SB (Colts) not win one game. Your "predictions" of doom and gloom are not surprising though. You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.


But I'm not basing my entire opinion on the preseason. Rather, it's based on the last two years of below average defense played by the Bears and is informed by how certain key players have looked in preseason. Your opinion, however, seems entirely derived from statements made by Bears coaches, players, and the PR department. I have both the past and present on my side to support my opinion whereas your views are merely a product of wishful thinking. No wonder you were an Obama supporter...and Rex Grossman's biggest fan...and the leader of the Cubs World Series brigade...and on and on....You love style but apparently have no use for substance.


I gave you substance. I didn't mention anything a player or coach said and I've never been one to base my opinion off of things like that. Saying this is terrible or that person sucks doesn't take a lot of effort. Silly me for expecting a little more thought from a guy like you. That's basically what you've said about all of the things above. Even now no one knows who or what you thought would have been better. Your default position on pretty much everything is to be negative. Also you were basing it off of their 2 1/2 quarters of preseason play. Saying anything else is being dishonest. As I said several times football is different from most sports when it comes to going from worst to first or mediocre to good. You can't look at last years results and predict the future.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:42 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
HOVA wrote:

There is. I'm looking at the talent on the Bears in comparison to the other teams and making an educated guess on how I think their season will turn out. You are predicting that their defense will be bad based on the way they are playing in the preseason. That's crazy. As I said before we've recently seen all time bad teams (Lions) go undefeated in the preseason and SB (Colts) not win one game. Your "predictions" of doom and gloom are not surprising though. You're pretty much negative about everything except tomatoes.


But I'm not basing my entire opinion on the preseason. Rather, it's based on the last two years of below average defense played by the Bears and is informed by how certain key players have looked in preseason. Your opinion, however, seems entirely derived from statements made by Bears coaches, players, and the PR department. I have both the past and present on my side to support my opinion whereas your views are merely a product of wishful thinking. No wonder you were an Obama supporter...and Rex Grossman's biggest fan...and the leader of the Cubs World Series brigade...and on and on....You love style but apparently have no use for substance.


I gave you substance. I didn't mention anything a player or coach said and I've never been one to base my opinion off of things like that. Saying this is terrible or that person sucks doesn't take a lot of effort. Silly me for expecting a little more thought from a guy like you. That's basically what you've said about all of the things above. Even now no one knows who or what you thought would have been better. Your default position on pretty much everything is to be negative. Also you were basing it off of their 2 1/2 quarters of preseason play. Saying anything else is being dishonest. As I said several times football is different from most sports when it comes to going from worst to first or mediocre to good. You can't look at last years results and predict the future.


1)Contrary to your claims, your responses have been entirely devoid of substance. All you've provided are projections based on wishful thinking. You have no evidence to support any of your embarrassingly naive views.

2)Whether or not it's "easy" to be negative is not relevant since the question at issue is one of realism. Given that you admit to being a homer in this thread and elsewhere, you've pretty much abandoned any claims to operating within the realm of reality.

3)While the past may not be a perfect predictor of the future, it's certainly a more accurate indicator than the schoolgirl fantasies to which you subscribe.

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 1:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:

1)Contrary to your claims, your responses have been entirely devoid of substance. All you've provided are projections based on wishful thinking. You have no evidence to support any of your embarrassingly naive views.

2)Whether or not it's "easy" to be negative is not relevant since the question at issue is one of realism. Given that you admit to being a homer in this thread and elsewhere, you've pretty much abandoned any claims to operating within the realm of reality.

3)While the past may not be a perfect predictor of the future, it's certainly a more accurate indicator than the schoolgirl fantasies to which you subscribe.


I apologize if it is hard for you to comprehend anything beyond X sucks. I countered all of your negative thoughts with information that should be helpful. You can choose to be stubborn and ignore it or you could actually try to learn something.

Reality? Not sure where else pessimism operates 24/7 except in your head but it is pointless being a fan of anything if you're always thinking the worse is going to happen. Maybe that helps your fragile psyche but that doesn't work for me. My optimism doesn't prevent me from being objective. In this very thread I listed some of my concerns I have with this Bears team. I would have thought you would have read them because they were negative.

When it comes to football you can throw the past out. So many things have changed with this Bears team to even make a reasonable assumption that you will get the same results based on watching 2 1/2 quarters of football and then screaming I told you so like a school girl after watching another 2 1/2 quarters.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:08 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:

1)Contrary to your claims, your responses have been entirely devoid of substance. All you've provided are projections based on wishful thinking. You have no evidence to support any of your embarrassingly naive views.

2)Whether or not it's "easy" to be negative is not relevant since the question at issue is one of realism. Given that you admit to being a homer in this thread and elsewhere, you've pretty much abandoned any claims to operating within the realm of reality.

3)While the past may not be a perfect predictor of the future, it's certainly a more accurate indicator than the schoolgirl fantasies to which you subscribe.


I apologize if it is hard for you to comprehend anything beyond X sucks. I countered all of your negative with information that should be helpful. You can choose to be stubborn and ignore it or you could actually try to learn something.

Reality? Not sure where else pessimism operates 24/7 except in your head but it is pointless being a fan of anything if you're always thinking the worse is going to happen. Maybe that helps your fragile psyche but that doesn't work for me. My optimism doesn't prevent me from being objective. In this very thread I listed some of my concerns I have with this Bears team. I would have thought you would have read them because they were negative.

When it comes to football you can throw the past out. So many things have changed with this Bears team to even make a reasonable assumption that you will get the same results based on watching 2 1/2 quarters of football and then screaming I told you so like a school girl after watching another 2 1/2 quarters.


You are a self-admitted homer who apparently can't distinguish information from speculation. Rather than continuing this discussion with me, you should retreat to your fantasy world where Rex Grossman is the NFL MVP, Dusty Baker led the Cubs to a championship, and Barack Obama is a competent leader. Your record in making predictions is as embarrassing as the "reasoning" that enables you to make such predictions.

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:12 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16484
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
Bearsss...16-0 my friend!!!

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:
HOVA wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:

1)Contrary to your claims, your responses have been entirely devoid of substance. All you've provided are projections based on wishful thinking. You have no evidence to support any of your embarrassingly naive views.

2)Whether or not it's "easy" to be negative is not relevant since the question at issue is one of realism. Given that you admit to being a homer in this thread and elsewhere, you've pretty much abandoned any claims to operating within the realm of reality.

3)While the past may not be a perfect predictor of the future, it's certainly a more accurate indicator than the schoolgirl fantasies to which you subscribe.


I apologize if it is hard for you to comprehend anything beyond X sucks. I countered all of your negative with information that should be helpful. You can choose to be stubborn and ignore it or you could actually try to learn something.

Reality? Not sure where else pessimism operates 24/7 except in your head but it is pointless being a fan of anything if you're always thinking the worse is going to happen. Maybe that helps your fragile psyche but that doesn't work for me. My optimism doesn't prevent me from being objective. In this very thread I listed some of my concerns I have with this Bears team. I would have thought you would have read them because they were negative.

When it comes to football you can throw the past out. So many things have changed with this Bears team to even make a reasonable assumption that you will get the same results based on watching 2 1/2 quarters of football and then screaming I told you so like a school girl after watching another 2 1/2 quarters.


You are a self-admitted homer who apparently can't distinguish information from speculation. Rather than continuing this discussion with me, you should retreat to your fantasy world where Rex Grossman is the NFL MVP, Dusty Baker led the Cubs to a championship, and Barack Obama is a competent leader. Your record in making predictions is as embarrassing as the "reasoning" that enables you to make such predictions.


I am a fan. Being a fan as I've said and shown many times doesn't stop me from being objective. If you're right and I'm wrong about this team I will not have a problem admitting it. Also it was Mark Prior and I never said Rex would be MVP. Let's at least try to get the facts that can be proven right. I'll put my record of actually saying something up against your X will suck any day of the week. I've been right more than I've been wrong and my predictions usually include a little more analysis than something will be terrible or it sucks. It's surprising that's all we get from a guy as smart as you.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16484
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
Hova...serious question...what do you know or see with this Bears team that no one else sees or knows?

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:31 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Scorehead wrote:
Hova...serious question...what do you know or see with this Bears team that no one else sees or knows?


No one else or the usual doom and gloom crowd?

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16484
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
HOVA wrote:
Scorehead wrote:
Hova...serious question...what do you know or see with this Bears team that no one else sees or knows?


No one else or the usual doom and gloom crowd?


I'm seriously curious what you see with this team that leads you to believe that they will finish 12-4. There isn't a Football expert, broadcaster, or fan who is predicting a winning season for the Bears. To Tall Midgets point, unless you can substantiate why you think the Bears will be a Super Bowl contender, which any 12-4 team is, then you just come off sounding like a meatball superfan.

I'm really not trying to argue with you, but rather am interested in why you think this team will be great.

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Scorehead wrote:
HOVA wrote:
Scorehead wrote:
Hova...serious question...what do you know or see with this Bears team that no one else sees or knows?


No one else or the usual doom and gloom crowd?


I'm seriously curious what you see with this team that leads you to believe that they will finish 12-4. There isn't a Football expert, broadcaster, or fan who is predicting a winning season for the Bears. To Tall Midgets point, unless you can substantiate why you think the Bears will be a Super Bowl contender, which any 12-4 team is, then you just come off sounding like a meatball superfan.

I'm really not trying to argue with you, but rather am interested in why you think this team will be great.


You're not interested in my thoughts. If you want to go game by game and tell me why you think they are going to lose I will be happy to counter that. Other than that I've posted my thoughts in this very thread on why I think their defense will play well and why I feel they will have a good season.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 2:42 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 7:05 pm
Posts: 12449
The Bears didn't look as bad against Arizona as I had thought. They should have had a pair of FG's and were in scoring position twice. Robbie Gould normally puts those down, so the Offense did well enough to make that a 7-6 halftime ball game. In the 2nd half, a huge chunk of backups were in for both teams for the rest of Arizona's scoring. Cutler was off a bit, but the pass protection wasn't that bad. Frank Omiyale played very well in this game, especially as a run blocker. Johnny Knox is the real deal. This guy is the Bears clear #1 receiver in my opinion. He catches everything, runs tight routes, creates enormous amounts of separation (relatively speaking at an NFL level) and has top end speed to take it to the house. He should have had 6 if Cutler hit him in stride and that out and up. He had Cromartie beat deep by 3 yards with no safety over the top, but had to come back and get it, was contacted prior to the ball arriving, and still made the catch.

The Bears Defense was solid. They played very well, especially in stuffing the run, and that was without our top two LB's in Briggs and Urlacher (Briggs left early in the game with an ankle). Tommie Harris looked better and I'm starting to wonder if Idonije and Peppers are our best DE combo, since both are huge freaks of athletic nature. CB's were OK, but Safety is still a concern to some degree. I'll be interested to see how long it takes before Major Wright is starting. I think he'll be starting by Week 3 at the latest.

All in all, I'd like to see more out of the Offense. Guys were still not on the same page and Cutler was rushing some throws even when he didn't have to. We had WR's running the wrong routes, etc.

Anyway, all in all, not as bad as it seemed when the stats flashed the screen, but we still have a lot of work to do.

I'm leaving my projection at 8-8, which is where it will probably remain until the season starts.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:24 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:
I am a fan. Being a fan as I've said and shown many times doesn't stop me from being objective. If you're right and I'm wrong about this team I will not have a problem admitting it. Also it was Mark Prior and I never said Rex would be MVP. Let's at least try to get the facts that can be proven right. I'll put my record of actually saying something up against your X will suck any day of the week. I've been right more than I've been wrong and my predictions usually include a little more analysis than something will be terrible or it sucks. It's surprising that's all we get from a guy as smart as you.


You are simply lying about what I've said. Your whole response in this discussion has been to claim "you can't judge anything from the preseason" and "all you say is that everything sucks." You distort because you have no evidence to support your weak attempts at counterargument. My "random thoughts" from the preseason were informed by the past few seasons of bad Bears football. If the team had been good the previous season, I wouldn't have generated such observations because there would be no evidence of an ongoing pattern of poor play. But the preseason suggests that the Bears have many of the same weaknesses today that they did last year. The past, in other words, shapes the present. And there is an obvious downward trend with regards to the Bears defense. But keep on denying this fact. I bet you believe gravity is a myth, too.

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 3:28 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:
Scorehead wrote:

I'm seriously curious what you see with this team that leads you to believe that they will finish 12-4. There isn't a Football expert, broadcaster, or fan who is predicting a winning season for the Bears. To Tall Midgets point, unless you can substantiate why you think the Bears will be a Super Bowl contender, which any 12-4 team is, then you just come off sounding like a meatball superfan.

I'm really not trying to argue with you, but rather am interested in why you think this team will be great.


You're not interested in my thoughts. If you want to go game by game and tell me why you think they are going to lose I will be happy to counter that. Other than that I've posted my thoughts in this very thread on why I think their defense will play well and why I feel they will have a good season.


:lol: :lol:

Way to avoid the question. By the way, do you realize that one of your defensive difference-makers, the great Mark Anderson, will apparently be replaced in the starting lineup by Israel Idonije. He must be a Hall of Fame-level talent to beat out an impact player like that, eh? :lol: :lol:

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:
HOVA wrote:
I am a fan. Being a fan as I've said and shown many times doesn't stop me from being objective. If you're right and I'm wrong about this team I will not have a problem admitting it. Also it was Mark Prior and I never said Rex would be MVP. Let's at least try to get the facts that can be proven right. I'll put my record of actually saying something up against your X will suck any day of the week. I've been right more than I've been wrong and my predictions usually include a little more analysis than something will be terrible or it sucks. It's surprising that's all we get from a guy as smart as you.


You are simply lying about what I've said. Your whole response in this discussion has been to claim "you can't judge anything from the preseason" and "all you say is that everything sucks." You distort because you have no evidence to support your weak attempts at counterargument. My "random thoughts" from the preseason were informed by the past few seasons of bad Bears football. If the team had been good the previous season, I wouldn't have generated such observations because there would be no evidence of an ongoing pattern of poor play. But the preseason suggests that the Bears have many of the same weaknesses today that they did last year. The past, in other words, shapes the present. And there is an obvious downward trend with regards to the Bears defense. But keep on denying this fact. I bet you believe gravity is a myth, too.


Chicken Little I pretty much quoted you verbatim minus the :lol:'s. TM you've had the same opinion about the Bears and every other team even when they are good. Fact is regardless of team or past performances you pick them to be bad or mediocre. The year they went to the SB we had a similar debate. That year I also made a similar prediction and they ended up winning 1 more game than I predicted.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Tall Midget wrote:

:lol: :lol:

Way to avoid the question. By the way, do you realize that one of your defensive difference-makers, the great Mark Anderson, will apparently be replaced in the starting lineup by Israel Idonije. He must be a Hall of Fame-level talent to beat out an impact player like that, eh? :lol: :lol:


I did answer the question. Maybe you didn't like it because it didn't include your type of negativity. More I told you so's before the end of the preseason. You're staking your reputation to something that Scorehead said. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: Now I know I have you on the ropes. Do yourself a favor fall and stay down. It's embarrassing. :lol: :lol:

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 03, 2009 9:33 pm
Posts: 16484
Location: Chicago, Illinois
pizza_Place: Salernos, Oak Park
Scorehead wrote:
I'm seriously curious what you see with this team that leads you to believe that they will finish 12-4. There isn't a Football expert, broadcaster, or fan who is predicting a winning season for the Bears. To Tall Midgets point, unless you can substantiate why you think the Bears will be a Super Bowl contender, which any 12-4 team is, then you just come off sounding like a meatball superfan.

I'm really not trying to argue with you, but rather am interested in why you think this team will be great.


HOVA wrote:
You're not interested in my thoughts. If you want to go game by game and tell me why you think they are going to lose I will be happy to counter that. Other than that I've posted my thoughts in this very thread on why I think their defense will play well and why I feel they will have a good season.


Yes I am interested in your thoughts. I enjoy discussion without the usual name calling & wise cracks. I went back through this thread & I don't see any football analyses to back up your 12-4 Bears prediction for this season. I'm just curious what you see that no one else does.
Look, I drink the Bear Kool Aid too, but I also have played & coached enough football to know what I am seeing on the field from a schematic & technique standpoint. You must see something that I am missing.
Why cant you tell me what it is?

_________________
CSFMB 2014 Nascar Pick 'em Champion

We don’t have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven’t taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. — Ronald Reagan


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 11:49 pm
Posts: 7806
Location: Permanent hiatus
pizza_Place: Ban me
Scorehead wrote:
Scorehead wrote:
I'm seriously curious what you see with this team that leads you to believe that they will finish 12-4. There isn't a Football expert, broadcaster, or fan who is predicting a winning season for the Bears. To Tall Midgets point, unless you can substantiate why you think the Bears will be a Super Bowl contender, which any 12-4 team is, then you just come off sounding like a meatball superfan.

I'm really not trying to argue with you, but rather am interested in why you think this team will be great.


HOVA wrote:
You're not interested in my thoughts. If you want to go game by game and tell me why you think they are going to lose I will be happy to counter that. Other than that I've posted my thoughts in this very thread on why I think their defense will play well and why I feel they will have a good season.


Yes I am interested in your thoughts. I enjoy discussion without the usual name calling & wise cracks. I went back through this thread & I don't see any football analyses to back up your 12-4 Bears prediction for this season. I'm just curious what you see that no one else does.
Look, I drink the Bear Kool Aid too, but I also have played & coached enough football to know what I am seeing on the field from a schematic & technique standpoint. You must see something that I am missing.
Why cant you tell me what it is?


For the 3rd time (in this thread) if you want to go game by game with me and tell me why you think they will win or lose I will be glad to agree or counter your argument. Beyond that I'm not going to go week by week with my record prediction. I'll save that for the week of the games. When you told me the Bears were going to suck again this season you didn't provide me with any additional analysis. I've also played and coached football so that really doesn't work with me. Did I mention I am a really good Madden player and usually fair well in 20 team fantasy sports leagues and Pick'em leagues? Does that make me more of an expert? I didn't think it did.

_________________
spanky wrote:
Elmhurst Steve wrote:
In the grand SCEME (not scope, Dumbass) pf things

Awesome.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Defense Concerns
PostPosted: Mon Aug 30, 2010 5:45 pm 
Offline
1000 CLUB
User avatar

Joined: Mon Sep 26, 2005 12:55 pm
Posts: 29461
pizza_Place: Zaffiro's
HOVA wrote:
Tall Midget wrote:
HOVA wrote:
I am a fan. Being a fan as I've said and shown many times doesn't stop me from being objective. If you're right and I'm wrong about this team I will not have a problem admitting it. Also it was Mark Prior and I never said Rex would be MVP. Let's at least try to get the facts that can be proven right. I'll put my record of actually saying something up against your X will suck any day of the week. I've been right more than I've been wrong and my predictions usually include a little more analysis than something will be terrible or it sucks. It's surprising that's all we get from a guy as smart as you.


You are simply lying about what I've said. Your whole response in this discussion has been to claim "you can't judge anything from the preseason" and "all you say is that everything sucks." You distort because you have no evidence to support your weak attempts at counterargument. My "random thoughts" from the preseason were informed by the past few seasons of bad Bears football. If the team had been good the previous season, I wouldn't have generated such observations because there would be no evidence of an ongoing pattern of poor play. But the preseason suggests that the Bears have many of the same weaknesses today that they did last year. The past, in other words, shapes the present. And there is an obvious downward trend with regards to the Bears defense. But keep on denying this fact. I bet you believe gravity is a myth, too.


Chicken Little I pretty much quoted you verbatim minus the :lol:'s. TM you've had the same opinion about the Bears and every other team even when they are good. Fact is regardless of team or past performances you pick them to be bad or mediocre. The year they went to the SB we had a similar debate. That year I also made a similar prediction and they ended up winning 1 more game than I predicted.


Umm, look at my first comment in this thread. You either have a bad memory or are a bad liar.

_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 154 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 34 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group