Da BigHotDog.Com Saturday Show!

big hot dog.jpg

Just click here: BigHotDog.com 

 

On this show: Dick Clark's favorite song, "The Packer Dance" and all the usual stuff.  The Fantasy Playoff rosters available on the B-side.

Click here for the funniest Favre spoof I've seen on the internet.
Fantasy Playoffs Championship Round
There were some ballsy selections for this round, with several contestants leaving themselves with the possibility of no quarterback in the Super Bowl.  You'll notice a certain running back will be a dominant factor in this week's proceedings.  

Because of ChiTownHustler's inability to get his selections in on time this week, he has been granted my default selections.  I decided not to eliminate him and risk bad karma.

Top Four advance to the Super Bowl.

BigT 
Ben Roethlisberger -- Matt Forte -- Greg Jennings

ChiTownHustler
Mark Sanchez -- Chester Taylor -- Greg Olsen

Cormonster
Ben Roethliesberger -- Matt Forte -- Mike Wallace

Doshi
Jay Cutler -- Matt Forte -- Heath Miller

enderwiggin
Jay Cutler -- Matt Forte -- Devin Hester

IrishSweetness
Aaron Rodgers -- Rashard Mendenhall -- Jordy Nelson

Jimmy Newport
Aaron Rodgers -- Matt Forte -- Mike Wallace

MikeBrownhadaPosse
Jay Cutler -- Rashard Mendenhall -- Santonio Holmes

Sdwat52
Ben Roethlisberger -- Mewelde Moore -- Hines Ward

Shady
Jay Cutler -- Rashard Mendenhall -- Santonio Holmes

Viva
Jay Cutler -- Matt Forte -- Heath Miller

Comments

Leave a comment
  • This is a thing

    http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/5079/b8d3f3bcce265dae319372c.jpg

  • In reply to pongjinn:

    That's some funny shit.

  • In reply to pongjinn:

    haahaha. As my dad would always say "There are two kinds of music in this world: Country, and Western."

  • In reply to pongjinn:

    What should the Bears do if they get the choice to kick or receive to start the game? I see a few scenarios that might impact the decision:

    1. Crowd is too amped after Cornelison's anthem and won't shut up, so Bears should kick and let the D feed off the early game energy.

    2. The Packers might be more inclined to kickoff to the Bears returners early on and they may not have any other kickoffs the rest of the half anyway.

    3. Kick because it seems that the Bears have done better in drives to start the 2nd half than they have drives to start the game...any stats to back up my foggy recollection on this?

  • In reply to buckbear:

    I'd like to see them defer. The crowd is going to be amped and I'd always rather see the D be jittery than the o-line.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    +1

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Agreed.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Yup. Offenses usually start off more slowly, esp in big games, in bad weather and questionable turf, with 70,000 fans jeering against them...

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Bears are 8-0 when losing the coin toss...

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Zombo looks to be out and something happened to Woodson between Wed and Thurs practice. He was limited yesterday due to a toe injury. Have fun with that on our field.

  • In reply to Crowned:

    He's had a toe injury for 4 years. He never practices.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Hizoe

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    fo shizoe

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    I think it's time for a bit of Jim:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTi0FzT2EnM

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Surprisingly, that was just as good as the last time I saw it.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Should be even better Sunday - he'll be singing it twice.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    I don't care for all the comparing Aaron Rodgers to Cutler. It's like comparing apples to less ripened apples. Cutler has all the same talent Rodgers has, he just doesn't have the luxury of being in the same system for 6 years. I hope Martz sticks around for awhile and I really believe we're going to see great things out of him. But for now if we're calculating odds of whose going to have a worse game it's more likely to be Cutler however, if we look at who has the more complete team I think it's the Bears. James Starks has had one good game against a terrible Philly defense and Green Bay's special teams is sub-par. Defenses are both good but if Rodgers even has a remotely bad day the Packers are done.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    I kinda feel like Ditka on a post from a previous blog. There's going to be a winner, and there's going to be a loser. I believe the Bears have the better team and if they play at home like we know they are capable of, will beat the snot out of the Cheese. End of story.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I agree Trac. The Bears do have the better team if you go group by group on both teams and compare them. Measure the career and season of every starter in each group and the Bears are clearly better. Green bay does have a few advantages and a couple close ones, but there is no position grouping where the Bears are clearly overmatched. Defensive Line - Advantage Bears, Linebackers - Advantage Bears, Defensive backs - Push. Offensive line - Advantage Packers by a nose, Running back - Advantage Bears, Tight Ends - Advantage Bears, Quarterback - Advantage Packers Wide Receivers - Advantage Packers (but only in their #1 and #2 slots), Punter - Advantage Bears, Kicker - Advantage Bears, Return specialists - Advantage bears. The Bears are better Trac! You know it, I know it everyone who's paying attention knows it.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Defensive backs a push??????????

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    You know what's odd? This "the Packers are the hot team" logic. They held on to beat the Bears/Eagles in consecutive weeks with interceptions in the final seconds. And then beat up the Falcons. People make it sound like they've been blowing out the league.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    and in the Eagles game, they only won because the Pro Bowl kicker missed 2 Field goals.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    And in the games before their "hot streak" started they lost to New England and the Lions. A team immune from letdowns this aint.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    Damn Packers blowing out the Falcons at their house, who would have thought? White and Turner were having good games, then became irrelevant after half-time. Cost me my play-off fantasy picks...this round I would have gone with Sanchez, Wallace or Holmes and Mendehall, then, the SuperBowl, Culter, Forte, Hester!

    Damn yous Falcons...I had it all planned out...

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Falcons were pretenders all year long...

  • In reply to buckbear:

    It is sickening how delusional the rationalizations some of you have to make in order to have confidence in the Bears this weekend.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You have a knack for hyperbole.
    The Falcons weren't that good and the Packers revealed it. That's not a knock on Green Bay - the NFC South "powers" got to play Carolina twice each, the NFC West and the AFC North. That's not exactly a murderer's row for a schedule other than the Steelers and Ravens.
    The Falcons did not dominate either of their reasonably difficult home wins (Baltimore and GB) and lost both of their reasonably difficult road games (Pittsburgh and Philly).

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    But you're gonna sit here and tell me that the falcons are pretenders, and the bears aren't???? If the falcons are pretenders, who isn't? The Saints? The Eagles? The Giants? Who?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Must be the Seahawks right? They were the real deal, clearly.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Who's making THAT argument? Should we rename you TheBigStrawman?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    It was an assumption I made by extrapolating from your previous homer analysis.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Nice work, detective.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I'd say, although it wasn't very difficult.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You should move to Green Bay, you'd be mayor in no time.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    You know, they must not have any blogs for green bay fans because its really weird that they keep coming here.

    Ohh, I am positive its one of the normal guys on here because they get on here way too much they talk to us like we would normally talk to each other

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    GB and Chicago played essentially the same schedule and are going head to head in the NFC championship game. I think it's pretty clear that neither team is a "pretender".
    I'm obviously rooting for the Packers to get their teeth kicked in on Sunday, but the NFC West champs, the NFC East champs, and the two best NFC South teams are all sitting at home. The Giants folded like a deck of cards and Philly was blessed to be there when it happened. Both teams are products of East Coast media bullshit.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The Packers played in Atlanta, while the bears played carolina.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    OK - so had we lost in Atlanta like the Packers did, we would be the legitimate champs.
    Gotcha.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I was just saying that the schedule was not the same. The packers also had to go on the road against NE and NYJ, while the bears had them at home.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    The packers had road games against the Jets, Pats, Falcons, and Eagles.

    Chicago had to go on the road against the Giants so they could deliver them their solo "quality win" of the season. The schedules were not the same. The bears some how didn't even have to play in the metrodome. There were literally acts of god assisting the Bears this year.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Yeah, I'm sure Joe webb would've really taken it to chi in the dome, thank god it was outside. You and I both know the old man had no buisness trying to play in that game on short notice.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Yeah, act of god...thank goodness we didn't have to face the mighty Joe Webb in his thunder-dome, we'd be fucked.

  • In reply to bnjrmyn:

    I'm not saying the bears would have won, but anytime you can get the vikings outside instead of the metrodome is a big break. Favre's concussion was a result of the icy field w/ no heat coils, which is what everyone on hear was complaining about on this blog.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The Bears took care of the poweful NFC West Champs, the Packers did the rest of the easy lifting, we get the picture.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Now you're claiming credit for beating New Orleans too?
    You're an imbecile. Leave Cheesy and I to our discussion, dummy.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Where does it say anything about the Saints? Just showing how ignorant your arguments have been. I can see a nerve was struck.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    You are a moron. And you missed my point, you myopic twit.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Actually, I think you initially missed his first point...or to be more specific, you took his comment much too literally. When he said the packers did the rest of the easy lifting, he was referring to the eagles and falcons. Yes, the saints were also eliminated and not by the hands of the packers.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    My point is that we beat the NFC West champs who, in turn, had disposed of the second best team in the NFC South. It's hardly the Bears problem that they didn't have to play in the wildcard round. It's kind of a pointless discussion. You're supposed to be rewarded for winning your division by NOT having to win an extra game...so that's somehow supposed to count against them.
    Please explain.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The Bears had something to prove going into the playoffs in the first place (in my opinion, and most others).....I feel like they were fortunate to get the first round bye given how they played this year......I thought they were at least finally going to get a real challenge in the playoffs, even if it meant still getting to play at home (they're toughest road game was against NYG....so weak....) But Alas, they got the fucking seahawks in the divisional round. Now they have a chance to prove they are worthy

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I may or may not have posted this before, but no one gets called out when they talk about the Bears easy schedule and lucky breaks in the 2nd half of the schedule.
    Calling out now:
    1st - Buffalo Bills almost beat the Bears after the bye. What no one seems to mention is that Buffalo then proceeded to go 4-2 with one loss coming in OT to the Steelers.
    2nd - The Joe Webb excuse. The Vikings marched into Philadelphia the next week and defeated the Eagles rather comfortably.
    3rd - We squeaked by a weak Detroit team on the road by four points. The Green Bay Packers went into Detroit the very next week and lost by four points.
    The Bears played their schedule with no apologies and proved they were the best in their division. The strength of victory differential between the Bears and Packers is equal to the differential between the two teams records. Meaning Green Bay gets a bigger boost from their 1 victory over us than the Bears get for their 1 victory, because the Bears finished 1 game better in the win column.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Detroit went undefeated after they beat the Packers, watch out for the Lions next year.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Week 1. The bears actually lost to the Lions. Both teams 10-6, 4-2 in division, split head-to-head. Packers conference record: 8-4 Bears conference record: 7-5)

    Packers win NFC north.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Sometimes, revisionist history is a good thing..

  • In reply to buckbear:

    the best part of this whole thing is that we can all make valid points of why our teams SHOULD win. The players on the field Sunday don't play based on past stats or what Mike Florio thinks should happen. What is going to happen Sunday is going to happen because of the plays made on the field and the decisions made by the coaches that exact day. That is why I can sit back and say with full confidence that we are going to win.

    Guys can scream until they are hoarse that Rodgers is going to do this and that and the other and there is no guarantee of future success based off past returns...even though the returns were impressive.
    Guys can tell me that we were "lucky" because we played injured teams...well alot of teams played other injured teams. what the fuck is the point? I'll never convince papermill packer fan that we are going to win so why bother? I like talking shit with other Bears fans and don't need to engage in Yahoo-esque discourse with trolls that won't go anywhere. Greenbay guy and his thoughts don't mean shit come Sunday. My thoughts don't mean shit come Sunday. What will be will be and then we can sort out the bodies on Sunday night and the following days.

    On this blog we all know what the Bears can do and we are giddy because they aren't supposed to be able to do it. Yet, there is a huge fucking chance they will do just that.

    Game on motherfuckers.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Game on. No doubts.

    Here's to the pending celebration.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Waffle - you've been keeping it positive all year.
    Thanks for doing your thing, my man.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Bear down, Johnny!

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Their schedule consisted of the NFC West, their own division which includes Carolina twice and two against an overrated Tampa team, and AFC North. Two nice wins over Baltimore and Green Bay, their losses to upper echelon teams Saints at home, Pittsburgh (when Charlie Batch was QB) and the Eagles on the road. Not a very impressive schedule.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    This is exactly what I was talking about earlier. You are going to sit here and pick nits about other teams while you cry for more respect for the Bears. The Falcons also beat the saints and the Bucs on the road.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Tampa was even WORSE against the same damn schedule. Who gives a shit about Tampa? They had ZERO quality wins outside of the NFC South and some ugly losses.
    They're praised for not being as god-awful as they were predicted to be.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Perhaps you can enlighten us with your analysis of Packer victories and defeats.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Shouldn't that be your job? Or do you just start following them when the part-time work on the farm runs out?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    But your viewpoint is sooooooooo much more interesting. Please grace us with your expert analysis. Tell us how overrated the Packers have been all season.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    It is - which is why I'm a regular, and you're an inbred troll.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    you want QUALITY WINS?????????????

    The Bears beat the Jets and Eagles at home. They also beat the packers at home in which everyone outside of illinois would agree was a complete gift. The Eagles was a pretty impressive win. The Jets and Packers could have went either way (at best).

    So that's 3. All home games.

    Falcons: Saints and Bucs on the road, baltimore at home, packers at home. What's more important, they didn't lose to anyone shitty. They lost close ones to the saints and steelers, and got whupped by the eagles.

    Saints: Pitt at home, Falcons and Bucs on the road. Pretty weak, about as weak as the Bears, but they did have two on the road there.

    Eagles: Falcons at home, Swept the Giants, Indy at home.

    Packers: Eagles on the road, Jets on the road, Giants at home, Bears at home, Eagles on the road again, falcons on the road.

    The only team you can really call a pretender, without calling the Bears a pretender, is the New York Giants..because the only "quality win" that they have is over the overrated chicago bears.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    And you could call the bucs pretenders, of course.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    The only legitimate team is the Bears, all others are pretenders. You wasted your time with that "quality wins" post. Too bad, it was excellent....

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    They don't count as pretenders if they can't make the dance. They don't even really stack up to the Giants; at least New York had to underachieve to miss a playoff spot.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Not even sure how you classify "could have went either way (at best)" as far as quality wins go. So - the Packers win in Week 17 is a "at best" victory for the Packers too?
    Or is there some justification as to why that should have been a convincing win?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Quality wins are just wins against teams with winning records. I just nit picked about the bears close wins because you did the same for the falcons. In my opinion, week 3 was an absolute fucking joke. You can disagree I guess, but it was besides the point, I counted it as a quality win.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I don't think it was any more or any less convincing than Week 17.
    The one comment I have made about the last game is that the Packers had every card on the table. If they lost, they were staying home. The Bears literally shut down their own run game in the early third quarter and used the same play-book from week 3...and it still came down to a one score game again.
    If that leaves you brimming with confidence, so be it.
    It's all finished on Sunday afternoon.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Reminiscent of the Bears........

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    This has been quite a week...

    It's official. I DO hate the Peckers more than the Eagles.

    I waffled there for a while, and do have PTSD from that game at the Linc, but I am over it. That was one day, the Peckers are a lifetime of ick.

    Good to be home. GO BEARS!!!!!!!!!!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    You don't like peckers? I would have never suspected this.....

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Finally Sophia. Finally.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    I know Doc. It's tough being me.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    Doc, I love your hate for the Packers, especially since you didn't grow up with the border wars.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    I tell ya, the bears chose me, I didn't choose them.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    I know most of you guys have seen this article. Anyways, I was one of the few defending Urlacher last year when this controversy erupted. Glad to see Sayers realized he should have kept his pie hole shut. Don't get me wrong, I was doing a pretty good job criticizing the Bears myself last year but I wasn't a Hall of Fame Ex-Bear going public and sticking the proverbial dagger in the back of the team he once played for. Glad to see he almost said "I'm sorry".

    http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2011/01/gale-sayers-admits-he-was-wrong-about-bears-this-season/1

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Gale Sayers is far too full of himself.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Too right. He told Mike and Mike that he was better than Hester as a returner.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    He was honest, and correct.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    At this point, their careers are about equal, lengthwise, but as players, Sayers was better. Hester changes the game as a returner, but if Sayers hadn't been such a bad ass full time running back, he might've been even better. I'd give the nod to Sayers. If Hester has a long career, and keeps it up, I'll reconsider.

    I'd like to hear Albert, Jack, and any of the other ol' timers (no offense) way in on this.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    If they hadn't stitched him together with modeling glue and silly string, Sayers would've been the best RB of all time...then again, Bo Jackson without a hip injury would've been in contention too.
    It sucks for athletes to leave potential on the field.
    But the numbers, particularly in the modern era, are so clearly in Hester's court. Sayers may have had the talent, but the Windy City Flyer has the accomplishments.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I'll put my money on the Kansas Comet over the Windy City Flyer. No comparison, they shouldn't even be mentioned in the same breath...

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Agreed on the Bo Jackson thing. Its also like trying to argue that Mariano Rivera is the best pitcher of all time. Great pitcher no doubt, but he was a closer only. Sayers only returned kickoffs. Hester returns punts and kickoffs and at this point in their careers Hester and Sayers have the same number of Kickoff TDs, but only because they don't count the Super Bowl return in Hester's career stats, nor do they count the missed field goal attempt vs. the Giants. In total Hester has 17 special teams returns for touchdowns in only 6 seasons. Check his wikipedia page and all of the categories he leads in. The thing that cracks me up is the categories he ranks second in - behind himself!

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devin_Hester

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    And if Hester had remained a full-time returner, he would have even bigger numbers.

    I think Sayers' problem is he knows he will not be remembered as the best at his job and it frosts him. Especially since his teammate on the other side of the ball will be (by those that saw him play anyway).

    Granted I don't waste a lot of time reading sports stories, but I don't recall too many tales of Butkus running his mouth about how good he was. No need, of course. Just watch the film.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Butkus' could never run his mouth because his jaw could never shut; he was in a perpetual state of gape-mouthed awe due to Nitschke's superior talent.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    +1
    If you have to tell people you were good ...

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    Keeps it up? He's the all-time return leader.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Does this mean We gotta listen to Joe Buck and Troy Aikmen this sunday? I can already here the cocksucking fest there are about to dish out.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Fair and unbiased. Excellent, insightful coverage by two even handed commentators.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Bwahahahahaha....
    You finally said something amusing, Pecker-head. Nicely done.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Funny? I see no humor in that comment. Troy Aikman would never show favoritism! Very balanced.....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    He's horrendous. And Joe Buck...c'mon. You are being sarcastic now, right?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Of course it's sarcastic. Aikman has a crush on the Packers, and Rodgers in particular. He is a very intelligent man.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    They can both share a drool cup in about ten years.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Yep, no more feeding the trolls. You're not even trying.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Jeff, you took this blog to a whole another level this season. I would like to thank you for that. The picks, The playoff picks, and the Saturday show, are great!

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Speaking of cocksucking fest.....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    You have a family reunion coming up soon.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Why, you offering to service my family? Have kneepads will travel....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Francis, go sit at the kids table while the adults have a grownup conversation at football.
    At least Cheesy seems to follow the game.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Grownup conversation, arguable. Intelligent conversation on your part, nonexistant.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Right.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Does your sister take over after your mom's stomach is full of cheese scented jizz?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    You know honestly... i think it serves as a great compliment to the community of this blog, as well as the blogfather himself that packers fans continuously post on this site in full on discussion mode with the rest of us.

    They come here to read the same words we're reading, and talk about the same things. Even if their opinions are frivolous, Jeff does a tremendous job of keeping this place real workmanlike which is why we all, even the cheese, enjoy it.

    Props to you jeff and the fellow bloggers. Keep people reading.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    And James Jones dropped a gimme' TD pass; the outcome didn't come down to a couple of missed field goals. The whole gameplan would have changed if those kicks were made.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Oh, if he had made the field goals, Jones would have caught the pass...and what other butterfly effect theories do you have to share with us?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    No, nimrod. He means the packers would have played football instead of trying to run out the clock with their last two possessions if Akers had made those field goals.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I have a theory - go fuck yourself, Cheese Whiz.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    "I would but I'd have to wait for your mom to finish"

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Clever - did you pick all of these "I know you are but what am I" retorts up while getting shoved in lockers?
    There must be some reason a California kid would root for the hillbilly team of the league.
    Do you root for Boise State too?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Just think of all the bratwurst those Cheeseheads could have bought with their bets:

    http://www.lvrj.com/sports/bears-are-not-as-sorry-as-some-believe-114350674.html

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Hmmm. Don't know how to take that article sj. That cat may very well be trying to get a bounce for the Bears to cover his losses. Or it may just be the sinic coming out in me. Either way, Da Bears.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Vaccaro said he knows a few wiseguys in Las Vegas who love the Bears. Those wiseguys, he said, think the line is a little out of whack. But they could be waiting to get plus-4.

    There are wiseguys who also love the Packers, and they took minus-2 when that number opened offshore or minus-3 when Lucky's and other Las Vegas books opened it a point higher.

    The most important Packers-Bears game of my lifetime will mean a lot to the books. The game is shaping up as a classic case of the betting public on the favorite and the bookmakers on the junkyard 'dog.

    "Everybody is on the Packers. When everybody is on one side, you know that's a bad sign," said Mike Scalleat, a longtime Las Vegas handicapper. "Usually in the end, the books win."

    Scalleat is 31-17 this year. And as he says, in the end, the books win.

    I'll take the money guys over the pundits any day.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    20-17 Packers. Money still goes to the books

  • In reply to sjvl:

    If the favorites always won, there would be no bookies. Can we play the game first?

  • In reply to dutsami:

    I mean the Falcons/Packers game went off at Pick Em

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    You forget the week 16 Giant game......

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    and week 15 game, at NE with a backup qb.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I don't think Jeff was factoring your losses into the equation. But be my guest.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    I liked the Saturday show audio. But I don't think that commitment to the run is a stupid strategy. Especially early on to set up play action and those big explosive plays you are referring to. What the Bears have to avoid is running too often and setting up 3rd and 7 or greater. Those tend to be the situations that the Bears have struggled with.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    I agree. I don't get this Packers are 'hot' right now bullshit. One blowout win does not a hot team make. The Patriots were hailed as gods after they beat the Jets 45-3. Now what? I hope we can say that about the Packers Sunday night.

    Bear down. Can't wait!

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    That's probably because, before and after those two games, were: a 45-17 beatdown of the Giants for the last wildcard spot and a 48-21 drubbing of the Conference top seeded team on the road. That would make the Packers, over their last 4 games, 4-0 versus teams with a combined reg season record of 44-20, by a combined score of 124-57, with the last two being road playoff games.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Who is hotter than the packers?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    certainly not your mother, the whore

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Rumor has it, DaDouche grew that mustache to tickle the clitoris of whores during cunnilingus.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    TheBigCheesePussy and GreenGAYman, you know you only come to this blog, cause it is obvious that it is better than any of the Farmer John shit you guys could come up with. FUCK YOU!!!!!!!!

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    True Fresno, not everyday I can enjoy a post like the one above.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Any Farmer-John redneck insults are invalidated when you have the central valley represented in your profile name.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Dude Central Valley is Mexican's not hicks.

  • In reply to Vicp71:

    Why do you think the mexican's are there? Agriculture. FARMING.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Doc?

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Are you Snow White? Playing hide and seek?
    The only dwarves you will find in this blog are a whole passel of Dopeys and Grumpys. Sure as hell, there is no Doc in the bunch.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    I have hit just about every major sports site and I can not find one writer picking the Bears. Not even the homeys (well maybe Larry Mayer). I haven't seen it this lopsided since oh, the Patriots over the Browns earlier this year. I'm very nervous about this game and I'm almost afraid to be optimistic. But from my years in the commodities and Forex markets, when everyone is positioned one way in the market, that's when it heads in the opposite direction. I'm really hoping that will be the case Sunday....

  • In reply to tobijohn:

    Reminds me of the Bears vs Pats in Superbowl XX. We all remember what happened to the underdog in that one....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Your mom slept with them.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    that was a good one

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I know I said I was done but couldn't help that one.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    that's what she said

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Chock full of originality.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Your moms vag filled with chock

  • In reply to jbenton:

    your mom's vag is filled with chalk

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Your mom's vag is chock full of chalk**

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    sticking up for you fellow douche cheesy? What's the matter? Did I offend you guys? I keep hoping you guys will have some valuable input to the game but it's all insults so I figure why not be a dick too.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Actually I felt left out, so I thought I'd throw a few in there. And read the posts from the last few days hotshot, very few posters have given more "valuable input to the game" than I have." Quit being a little pussy bitch

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Big words out there in Califonia. I bet your 5 feet tall you fucking queer.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Oh man, I'm neither 5 ft tall nor a homosexual....but if I were, you would have really told me off.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Nor am I a "pussy bitch". You hurt my feelings with that talk. If you look at your posts you will see you actually try to force your opinion in people that jsut don't care what you have to say. You said earlier that there are other good Bears blogs so why don't you go there. As much as you like to think you have valid points, they are not. You and Green Bay Man feed off eachother and just are jsut trying to stir up trouble. Read your posts and you'll see what I mean.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You should have taken him up on his bet.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    If he's more than 5 feet and not a queer he would win. What's the prize? A date with greenbaymans whore mother?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Has this one been posted yet?

    http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/columns/story?columnist=jackson_scoop&id=6042534&dddddd

    thoughts?

  • In reply to bearsinwi:

    yeah it was last thread, and referenced earlier in this one. Ditka is trying to hop on the bandwagon also. These guys are split, see top of thread for discussion.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Kudos, for gettin' all the "regs" up to date.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    o.k settle down.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Interesting Dan Pompei mailbag this week. Here's an excerpt:

    "With O-Line and D-Line being the Bears' biggest areas of need this offseason, what are the chances, CBA issues aside, they try to acquire Albert Haynesworth? He has certainly been a malcontent and an awful locker room presence, but there is no doubt he is supremely talented. Moreover, the Bears need a difference maker at DT and Haynesworth could be back in the 4-3 system he pines for. With the presence of Rod Marinelli on the Bears' staff, and the strong veteran leadership on defense maybe he won't cause as much of a ruckus in Chicago. What are your thoughts on him Rick, Springfield, Mo.

    I don't think that's a bad idea. But in order for it to work, the trade compensation for Haynesworth would have to be reasonable. You wouldn't want to pay a premium for a player with a history like Haynesworth's. And the Bears need their draft picks. So far, the Redskins have wanted too much for Haynesworth. There wasn't a team in the entire league willing to meet their asking price, which was rumored to be a second-round pick. But I could see a scenario in which Rod Marinelli revives Haynesworth's career and makes him a great player again. If Haynesworth plays like he is capable, and Peppers plays like he did this year, they could form a lethal combination."

    My take:

    I've only been saying this since week 1. 3rd round pick, nothing higher. I can't imagine the Skins still trying to get a 2nd rounder after what Haynesworth put them through, unless they go AJ Smith on his ass.

    Another excerpt, regarding Oline FAs:

    "I see the O-line as being the Bears' biggest need. Besides the draft, are any available free agent linemen the Bears might target? Kevin Kotowski, Torrance, Calif.

    There are a number of offensive linemen with expiring contracts, but whether or not they actually become free agents is another issue. The best potential free agent offensive lineman of all is Patriots guard Logan Mankins. He's the best guard in the NFL, and the second best guard isn't close. The best center is Ryan Kalil of the Panthers. The best tackle probably is Jermon Bushrod of the Saints."

    My take:

    Getting Mankins would be awesome, but highly improbable (although the Pats own like 12 picks and may not want to pay Mankins). If we did get him, who do we then replace, Garza or Williams? Garza's getting old, and management is always reluctant to sit a 1st round pick, but Williams isn't exactly dominating, even at guard. If we can get Mankins, that would also mean that we can save a high-pick.

    Here's another excerpt from his Pompei's mailbag, just for Irish:

    "Please rate the chances of the Bears will move to upgrade their wide receiver corps by going after a taller, more physical wide-out in the Calvin Johnson, Mike Williams, Braylon Edwards mold? Lawrence Jesserton, Des Plaines

    I don't think it will be a high priority for the team in the offseason. It's possible they will use a mid to late round pick on a bigger receiver. But really, they have more important issues to address. The receivers on the Bears are pretty good, and they fit the offensive system. If Calvin Johnson fell into their laps though, I'm sure they would take him."

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Thanks 85. Really enjoyed that. I typed a brilliant reply and closed the web page by mistake and lost it all. Who knows what JA will actually do when it comes to the draft. I wouldn't be surprised if he does pretty much what he did last year. Re-stock the D, maybe a WR, Jerry more than likely will wait and select the best value for the O-line in the 6th or 7th rounds. We all know Jerry has a penchant for going after the best value on the board first, need last.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    ha ha, that happens to me too! annoying. Ideally, we get both Haynesworth and Mankins, and I think if they were available, we'd have a good shot.

    If you're Hanesworth (I know, scary thought, but bear with me) what 4-3 team is more alluring than ours? A team with a tradition for defense - check. A hall-of-fame counterpart in Peppers that will almost gaurantee single match-ups - check. A great D-line coach - check. A veteran team built to win a SB now - check. Many think that his contract is too big, but it was front-loaded - he received a 30mil bonus this year alone. The remainder of his contract is manageable.

    As for Mankins, that would be a dream come true, and while many "insiders" predict the Pats will keep him, I'm not sold. One, the Pats own 12 draft-picks, including 2 first rounders, and have been more than willing to release veteran stars to go cheaper and younger, so I don't think Mankins hitting FA is entirely out of the realm of possibilities...

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    I just had a funny thought as to why the Skins were so mad at Haynesworth. He didn't just take the money and run, he took the money and stayed! That's worse. That's like finding a burglar watching tv in your house, calling the cops, and they tell you, "oh no, we can't arrest him. Just give him some chips, and he'll eventually leave."

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    The Eagles fan at work is terrified that Haynesworth will end end up at DT for them next year.
    And it's going to happen.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The Skins still have to trade him away since they own his contract, so will they return the favor for McNabb? I don't see it happening.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    It's all kind of moot until the CBA gets figured out, but I think the Skins will be happy to cut him.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    His contract is a sunk cost, they would possibly cut his ass. But they will find a team with a GM sucker to dump him on.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    If he wasn't already a Redskin...
    which is why he will end up in Philly.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    There is nooooo way in heeeeel the Bears sign Haynesworth and you can take it to the bank my friend. Put it away, ain't gonna happen. As far as a FA o-lineman goes, I wouldn't be surprised if Jerry pulled off something like you suggest.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Jerry has hard ons for defensive-lineman, which like most hard-ons, make men do cooky things. Unless Harris goes crazy and gets like 6 sacks in these last two games, he'll more than likely be let go, so we're getting a DT, whether it be through the draft or FA, and I'd much rather do it through FA and save our draft for offensive line.

    Nothing against Toe or Adams, but our scheme thrives on a DT penetrating, and neither disrupt the qb like Harris once did. We gotta get that from somewhere, if not, Peppers will just be double-teamed forever.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    So, let me get this straight. We tire of Harris and his fat contract and his fat lazy underachieving ass who is too full of himself and replace him with a fatter, lazier, more spoiled guy who's so underachieving that he's prone to lay down on the field during the game and just wait for the play to end? And he's got a bigger contract?

    For a draft pick?

    Am I missing something?

    We weren't happy with Tommy giving a guy the 1-2 on the field, so we replace him with a guy who straight jumped on some dude's face?

    For a draft pick?

    Am I missing something?

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    ditto.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    the rap on Peppers was that he too was "lazy" and that a fat paycheck would make him more so - I think that turned out ok.

    In my opinion, I think Haynesworth is very much like Moss when he was with the Raiders. A lot of the criticisms I hear about Haynesworth now, I heard about Moss. He's too old now, he's lost a step, he's lazy, he's a bad locker-room presence etc I argued then that the Bears should pick him up, and I got similar responses "I wouldn't waste a draft pick on" - then he goes to the Patriots for like a 7th rounder, regains forms, breaks some records, turns almost into a locker-room leader, and everyone's surprised.

    Sometimes a good player (not a saint)simply needs a change of scenery to regain form. Harris, I think we can almost unanimously conclude, will not. So what options do we have? draft another 4rth, 7th rounder (which btw, will mean one less Olineman, Wr, S, Cb, etc) and wait about 2-3 yrs for him to develop (because DTs usually take that long - Suh was a MAJOR exception)? I think that our window is NOW, as in this year, and maybe 2-3 more - we have to take that into consideration. If I were a rebuilding team, I WOULDN'T take him, but we're not - and I wouldn't gamble on our all DTs being healthy in the coming years.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Then Moss went to the Vikings, stuck around for a couple of weeks...threw tantrums and ended up riding the pine in Tennessee the rest of the season.
    A head case is a head case is a head case. Fat Albert couldn't get motivated by a $21 million check. What's Lovie going to do?

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Twitter - changing the world.

    "HenMel Im gonna come stink it up RT @Jknox13: Enjoying my new couch. It was time for a new one!"

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    The rap on Peppers was his down to down work ethic (and it was false) but never his personal character. I work with mental health patients and I can tell you with certainty that there is no cure for what ails Haynesworth. There are meds for Axis 1 diagnoses, but not for Axis 2 and Haynesworth is definitely the latter.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_disorder

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    Isn't Tommie due a $6M bonus in June?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Ya, Tommie does, which is why a lot of ppl around the league are predicting we're going to cut him. We won't even be able to trade his ass, cuz no one is gonna pick up that bill. Well, maybe the Skins? lol

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    Sounds reasonable, Haynesworth would be an excellent addition to the Bears squad.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Hence Haynesworth does have a value for us.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Draft him now, Jerry.
    http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/20/jadeveon-clowney-takes-freak-to-a-new-level/

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    I checked it out, man alive! However, he's 6'5 and 250 pounds going up against, what, 5'10 190 highschool "tackles"?

    I'd like to see what he does in College - I'm definitely gonna keep an ear out for him.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Regardless of the size of his opponents, the speed and quickness this kid has at 6'5" 250 is frightening. It will be interesting to see whether he loses much of it when he bulks up for the big time.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    I think SJVL gets the MVP of the thread for the "I'm in love with a stripper" comment re: Peanut.
    I chuckled at that one.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    thanks for ruining my fantasy - I thought she was in love with an actual stripper, maybe her?

    http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS89kWikjvfylUQ78VXM6uhxLognMyK31rwnPw6AzK7FrkgwLlhUQ&t=1

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    My man Peanut is a stripper...

    24 forced fumbles? C'mon MAN!!!

    He's going to rock our worlds tomorrow. I will be in Orange 33 all day.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Yeah, that was quite funny.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Depends on the deal, Trac. Don't shoot the messenger before you hear what he has to say. Haynesworth has a value ... it's just not $100M ... but he does have a value. I'd like to see us push the boat out for Namdi Asomugha if we go hog wild in FA again though.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I don't even allow myself to entertain the thought of Awesome Asomugha being a Bear. Once he hits FA, then of course - I'll be his biggest agent.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Irish, the concept of signing a player of Haynesworthlessness from a talent stand point is what every GM considers, however, the risk/reward factor on him would have to change dramatically. Don't forget players on our team like Wooten. I think he's coming along in our system and I am tired of signing players and never giving them a chance to come up in our system. i.e., Shabba. This years draft will determine whether or not the Bears continue to be a strong contender. We are getting long in the tooth and some moves will have to occur to maintain our competitive balance.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    There's a finite amount of money in the store, Irish. There is NO way we can afford to keep signing these guys to record contracts. And he is not the ideal fit for a base cover 2 scheme anyway. It ain't happening.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Oh, I wouldn't sign Albert. Harris is what 26/27? We just need to get into his head more.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Stay away from Raider outcasts, the Bears db's are high caliber performers. No need for improvement on that front.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    For salary cap purposes,I believe the 30mil is spread over the length of the contract . The new collective bargaining agreement may change, but that is serious financial baggage as well as the other baggage Haynesworth carries. Good luck, the Bears should sign that bum....

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    "We all know Jerry has a penchant for going after the best value on the board first, need last."

    > ...and *still* frakking it up ....

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Interesting how Pompei assumes Jerry drafts like a person who drafts for need. Bennett is pretty good. Knox hasn't got great hands, isn't smart/doesn't have the 'feel' for improvisation, isn't strong. Hester never grew up as a receiver and is an ongoing project - he has another more important job to do anyway. Someone else can explain the Shabba situation to me. I just fail to see how not everyone would be onboard the big strong pro receiver train, somebody to get those jump balls, shield defenders and pull it in, I mean what's the argument for *not* getting one? Our stellar WR roster can't be messed with?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I thought that part of his mailbag would get you pumped up lol

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I'm pretty confident that Cutty will eventually speak up to the powers at be on this issue. This years draft will be very interesting. Martz and Tice will campaign for the right players and Jerry will have to listen to them in order to keep them on board.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Cutler doesn't have enough passion to give a damn'.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Martz doesn't want Cutler throwing jump balls, for one thing. The whole offense is predicated on timing, speed, and precision routes - three things that Shabba does not excel at...yet. If you can convince Martz to scrap this offense, I'm sure Shabba will get on the field more. Maybe an off-season in the system will change the situation for him - we'll have to wait and see. Martz will have more input into our draft than Cutler, you can bank on that.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    From a Packer fan viewpoint, the Bears should stay away from big, strong receivers. The team should not fill a glaring weakness; stay away from filling obvious needs. This is the secret of success in the NFL.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    downding
    All reports are that Harris has been a model Bear this season, at practice and during games; trying his best, studying, etc... His wheels are broken. He had his hamstring ripped from his leg bone and the next season got his knee trashed from a leg whip by Columbo.

    Personally I like Tommie, but right now he's a serviceable DT but not the kind of player they need at the 3. Haynesworth, if acquired and coached, could turn our D-line into the best 4-3 D-line in the league.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I had a dream last night that I was Devin Hester and the Packers were kicking punts straight up -- 10 yards long and 50 yards in the air. I stood right in the middle of the fray, caught it and bobbled it all the way to the goal line.

  • In reply to jdawg:

    Where the Packers proceeded to tackle you for a safety.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Unfortunately, I can't even allow myself the privilege of being considered a "reg" on here, but every once and again I like to add my 2 cents. Does that make me a bad bears fan? Maybe. But coming from a fudger, I'm not too concerned about how he views my status. But yes, cheese, thanks for getting me up to date!

  • In reply to bearsinwi:

    You froze your ass off at TCF - that's an automatic regular card in the mail.

    Stan Lee would approve.

  • In reply to bearsinwi:

    My apologies, didn't mean to offend you by falsely insinuating that you have been afforded the accolade of "reg" status; your hostility toward that libelous accusation is understandable. Therefore, I forgive your use of the fudger reference; this was an impulsive and uncontrollable reaction on your part.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Isn't it Sunday already?

  • In reply to sjvl:

    You called?

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    In error. But hey!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Not quite, but soon.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Jeff, I liked the show. Good job.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    This article claims that Clay Matthews is an overlooked star for the Packers...wha? I don't think anyone has overlooked Matthews this season. Reporters are stupid.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/23084/epicenter-of-humanity-overlooked-stars

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Who?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I think he's the son of that other famous Matthews, Dave Matthews.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I may have posted some of this earlier, but I didn't think it went through. My Dad, me, brother and sister, Grandma, and my Uncle and family are Bears fans. All other family members, living or dead, are Packers fans. It's Civil War week in the family. This game will have huge repercussions for years to come. Here's a great story about a Bears P@%$$kers game, to help fuel the fire. Sorry if it's long-winded.
    My Dad, his two brothers (one Packer fan, one Bear), and some friends went to a game at Lambeau in the late 70's. They sat in different areas. The Bears won on a last second field goal by Bob Thomas. My Dad and his buddy got jumped and stomped inside the stadium after the game ended because they had Bears hats on by 6-8 guys. My uncle (Bears fan who I'm going to game with) seen it through his binoculars in a different part of the stadium. After helping my Dad, he followed their leader to his car, punched through and broke the window and beat the shit out of the guy. My uncle says he doesn't know how he did it, and could probably never do it again. When they tried to leave, they were stopped by several police cars and brought over for a line-up by the guy who got his ass kicked. According to my uncle, he looked right at him, and told the police these were not the people who did it. My
    Dad's entire back was black and blue, and he probably had a few broken ribs. It's the only time I ever remember him missing work, for about two days. Another story I heard about the same day is that Bears and Packer fans were playing tackle football in the parking lot, on concrete, using a thermos bottle for a football. That must have been a crazy day. There is more stories from that day, but I better stop.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    Great Story. See, if not for this blog, I'd never really know of such stories.

    I say more. Many, many more.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    And that my friend is what Peter King and the rest of the media zombies will never experience much less report.

    Packers jump Bears, Bears avenge, Packers don't snitch. Great story. I especially enjoyed the part about your uncle punching through the window - stuff of urban legend. Imagine, sitting in your car quietly while it's idling, then, a fist comes crashing through the window!

    Damn, that's like Michael Myers strong!

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    Aah, the good old days!!!

    Amazing story! Can't believe the Pecker didn't snitch - must have had more character back in the day.

    Must be great hanging out with your family this week. Thanks for posting this.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    This appears to be an attempt to incite Soldier Field violence against innocent Packer Backers. This type of rhetoric should not be condoned. This is an example of appalling libel directed at meek Packer Faithful, world-renowned for the cordiallity accorded fans of the opposition. Green Bay extends warm greetings and respect to our football fan brethren to the south; an appropriate family atmosphere is the persistent norm at the hallowed grounds known as Lambeau Field. One can only hope a similar environment of courtesy and decency exists at Soldier Field this Sunday....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I beg to differ, greenbayman. 3 weeks ago on the way out of Lambeau, a dirty old packer fan grabbed my ass as he said the bears still suck. Needless to say I had to elbow him in the balls. Courtesy and decency? Try again.

  • In reply to bearsinwi:

    I agree. That was neither courteous nor decent. An elbow directed at the poor gentleman's genitals was an unnecessary overreaction. His hand possibly wandered due to crowd control issues, totally uncontrollable and unintentional on his part. Shame on you Bear fans!
    Would he have had a shot if he hadn't mentioned the Bear slur?
    By the way, that pointy elbow hurt like hell....

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    Just want to thank one and all for the great posts and all the harassment going on. Very entertaining reading. This couldn't be a better situation for either team that the one the Bears and Packers are in Sunday. One of them will represent the NFC north in the Super Bowl. I of course, hope it will be the Bears. but if by some miracle the Pack do pull a win out of their ASSES, I will be holding them to the wire as I would the Bears to the bigger goal of not letting those low life eastern ASSHOLE"S the Jets and especially the Steeler's win the Super Bowl!!! NFC North MUST prevail!!!

  • In reply to RogerMinton:

    Madd, I commend your diplomatic spirit, but no way I would root for the Cheeseturds. Not happening, regardless of the AFC team.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    You can sit out the Superbowl, I'll root enough for both of us.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    So The Sack Man is the honorary Captain Sunday....

    Hope he pitches in on the pregame pep talk too.

    http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/news/story?id=6046609&campaign=rss&source=NFLHeadlines

    Peppers!!! Channel your inner Dent!! GO BEARS!!!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Luckily, for Bear fans, judgement day is not here yet.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I told your Mom not to buy you a computer.

    A perfect example of why a pimp should NEVER let a bitch keep any of her money.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Shut up you're ugly.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    MB?

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    I found a great video of Cheesy and Greeny.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCZNw1sFiks&feature=related

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    This blog is not bad. Pretty good for a one many show. SB nation has some pretty good blogs for all teams of most sports. Windy City Gridiron is good, they update it a lot, much more so than acme packing company...

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    one man*

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Feel free to head to any of those.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Feel free to watch me stick around here

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    All four were essentially playoff elimination games.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    Even IF the Pack were blowing out the league Jeff, that hot team logic doesn't mean shit. Exhibit A, Patriots...

    Patriots, nationally favored, with a consensus great qb, coach, and wr corps...Jets, disrespected rival underdogs...sounds familiar...

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Patriots consensus great wr corps? Say what?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Wes Welker, Brando Tate, Edleman, and Branch (didn't he win superbowl mvp or something), Gronokowski, Hernandez, even Crumpler and Woodhead...not bad. I didn't say they were all hall of famers, but all the "experts" were talking about how bad ass they're receivers were...some are still debating that if Welker wasn't sidelined early, it would've made a difference.

    Anyhow, you get the jist. One team is invincible, another team is disrespected -

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    "their"

  • In reply to jbenton:

    The Packers offense is superior, as is the defense. Bears have the special teams edge, thanks to Hester. How are the Bears a more complete team?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    consult your mother, the whore

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Every time.....he get's me every time. Seriously, though, if the Bears can't force Rodgers into mistakes, errant throws and reads, and get him on the ground when they have the chance we could be in for a long day. I expect our offense to keep pace as long as Cutler and Olin take the extra second pre-snap to make their defense commit to where the rushers are coming from. Cutler is prone to snapping the ball prior to allowing the protection to get completely set. If our offense can stay turnover free and play smart fundamental football and our D can make sure tackles and get us an extra possession or two I think we win. GB 16 CHI 24. Bear Down.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    lmao @ VIVA! haha Your picks were fucking suspenseful. I though I was watching Law and order or some shit.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    I don't blame you, I wouldn't want to make the comparison if I had to defend Cutler; best you avoid that discussion, at all costs.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    bears fans have been pissed off all year because they feel that the team isn't getting any respect, due to the remarkable health of the team, "lucky breaks" (calvin johnson, 18 penalties, injury depleted opponents), and their fortunate path to the championship game. A win is a win, they say, and "no excuses." That's totally fine. I would agree....But then on the blog i'll hear (not from everyone) stuff like that. Oh, james starks had only 1 good game against a "terrible philly defense." Or i've also heard yeah, but Atlanta missed a bunch of sacks, rodgers was playing indoors, and so on and so on....if you wanna play that game this year, the Bears are always going to lose.

    First of all, James Starks wasn't activated until December, and he's only been the feature back for 3 games. He has over 250 yards in those three games. The Niners, Falcons, and Eagles don't have the best defenses out there, but I wouldn't say any of them are particularly weak. The packers running game is not impressive by any means, but they averaged virtually the same yards/game as the bears. And I've heard you comment that was because they had so few yards until Lovie had a stern talking to Martz and they started to run the ball more. Whatever, you could just as well say the packers were adjusting to losing their starting tailback. Bears the most complete team? I dunno about that. Green Bay certainly has a special teams weakness, but the weakness of the Chicago offensive line is just as big, if not bigger. The QB can play a good game, but he is still anything but a consistent QB. The Receiving corp is vastly inferior to the Packers, although they have an advantage at TE since Finley went down. I think on Defense, the front sevens are very comparable....but the secondary of chicago is beatable compared to the Packers. I'll give you an advantage at tailback, even though the stats don't show it. I think the glaring weaknesses are GB special teams, and chicago "pass game vulnerability (a word I just made up to describe protection issues combined with potential QB meltdown)."
    The more special teams is a factor in this game, the larger the advantage goes to the bears, because they are the best and the packers are one of the worst. But there are some games that come and go where special teams don't have the opportunity to make an impact. I doubt this one will be one of them. I will say though, that in Week 17, the packers special teams did outplay that of the Bears. I highly doubt it will happen again though.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Wasn't activated because in fact he's really not that good. He's pedestrian but he's the best turd in the bunch so there you go.

  • In reply to Crowned:

    Matthews has some split ends, too. Better take advantage....

  • In reply to Crowned:

    Damn I love the zoo.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5bmFxEfip8

  • In reply to Crowned:

    Rodgers had a zit. Oh oh, the Bears are going to use that to their advantage....

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Aaron Rodgers has been prone to throwing interceptions on longer passes this season, with 10 of his 11 picks coming on passes thrown 11 yards or more downfield. Rodgers saw a similar trend with the Bears, throwing an interception on passes of that length in each meeting.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Perfectly thrown passes that bounce off of wide receiver hands.....

  • In reply to sjvl:

    End of half, hail marys.

  • In reply to pongjinn:

    Artoo, it's your buddy from Endor ! Ask him if he wants to be a Bear receiver ....

    BTW - why doesn't the "I am in love with ..." section not contain blood relatives?

  • In reply to pongjinn:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upq-bHwBFcU&feature=related

    o you fickle media. and i bet Cutler hasn't even changed...it's just that the media is a bunch of dickheads....they root for who they want to root for and expect fans to deal with it.

  • In reply to FQD1911:

    Nice find, FQ.

  • In reply to FQD1911:

    Perhaps this is why Cutler gives the cold shoulder to the media because he has seen them from both sides now. Media = two faced a-holes.

  • Who will be the FIRST to knock out Rodgers on Sunday?? Cant wait to see...

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    Wouldn't it be great if it were Woot? He is the QB killer, after all.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Has the blog spread far enough to get a "Woot!Woot!" out of the crowd if it happens?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I HOPE SO!!

  • Oh and for the record I'm thinking #55 is going to have a monster game as is #71. Sunday cant come soon enough boys!

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    BOOM. I was thinking the exact thing last night Sac... Briggsy has been VEEERRRRY quiet in the last 2-3 games. It's time.

    Same for Pisa btw... can you say forced fumble and recovery?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I think #54 and #55 will spend some time in the backfield on Sunday. I think Tillman will have another pick or strip as well. He was so close on two of them against the Seahawks and we all know about the beauty he pulled off in week 17.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    What Would SC Do?
    WWSCD K?

  • In reply to buckbear:

    He would regress to the mean.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I'm in love with a stripper.

    Peanut is going to bring it.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Good one

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    So are you guys gonna let Ditka on the bandwagon after picking the packers to go to the superbowl for the last two years???

    http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/114355649.html

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Can't help myself:

    Ditka is driving the bandwagon, small cheese. I am happy he has come to his senses.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Oh no! what are you going to do??? He just disagreed with you, I thought you were supposed to be "on the same team!"

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    No. Him and Sayers can watch from their homes as we raise the Halas Trophy. When we win the SB, they can be let back in the field.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Hate to disagree --

    HOF Bears get to say what they like and are always welcome on the bandwagon. Not quite getting Sayers lately, but I can look the other way.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    Must ignore the fudge fans... remember that its not nice to pick on the menatlly retarded.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    I wouldn't be so condescending of "menatlly" retarded people there, tough guy; they could probably teach you a thing or two about spelling.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Until ChicagoNow has a spell-checker built into the comment code, everyone should STFU about typographical errors. They happen - please see several of your own posts.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I would agree that it's petty to point out spelling errors, but when you are calling someone mentally retarded, you should probably cover your own ass and at the very least spell those words correctly.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    Who is gonna make "the play" on sunday?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    your mom, the whore.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Ohh so it's gonna be a strip?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I would be surprised if Peppers doesn't.
    My gut feeling is Tillman will create a big turnover, likely by a GB running back...but Peppers has a fantastic opportunity because Baluga is skittish and slowfooted. And that's coming from a Bears fan - we know sub-par offensive tackles.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Peppers is (usually) lined up against Clifton...who had a great game in wk 17, not so great in wk

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Tauscher was still playing in week 3, wasn't he?
    Baluga looks like a penalty factory. I hope we get Peppers on that right side a bit more.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Baluga has looked awful MBP.

  • In reply to Crowned:

    I seem to recall him looking bad against the Eagles and some problems vs. us in week 17.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I'm going to go out on a limb and predict that Cutler has an outstanding performance--a QB rating of 100+ and two or three touchdowns in the air or on the ground. Why not? He's always had his good games in groups of two (as somebody pointed out earlier), we'll be using Olsen and Forte against the Packers LB's (who can't cover them, and in any case will complicate their blitzes), and--I do believe--Martz will unveil some new routes and formations similar to the ones we saw against the SeaHawks which were not in play during Week 17's vanilla gameplan.

  • In reply to jj320:

    You're right! Cutler has followed a 100+ passer rating with a 2nd on three separate occasions this season. Rejoice...you're not going out on a limb! I think it is possible that he can have that kind of game and have his 4th back to back 100+ passer rating pair. The Packers have a better D line by far than the Seahawks, but the Bears O Line was destroying Seattle last week, so there is no doubt they are progressing. The O-Line allowed only 3 sacks compared to 6 in the first meeting with Seattle and the Bears rushed for 176 in the second meeting compared to 61 in the first. Improvement of the O-line is indisputable. Many of the sacks the Packers had in week 17 could be related to difficulty dealing with crowd noise and communication...you hear that Soldier Field faithful? Shut your pieholes when the Bears have the ball!

  • In reply to jj320:

    Lets hope his good games start to come in groups of 19 or so. But right now I'll take 3.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    He had more than three pairs of good games this year, but they were just under 100 in terms of passer rating. Its an arbitrary limit to cut off for a "good" game. One thing to look at is that his bad games are getting further and further apart since last year.

  • In reply to jj320:

    Neither Cutler nor Rodgers has a good game when we meet. This will be old school Bear-Packer football and there'll be a gnat's testicle between us at the end.

  • Chester Taylor, Jeff?

    You gotta explain that one to us. I am all ears.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    They are default picks and I thought it unfair to give him any back selected by an opponent. I also wasn't picking a Packer. I also wasn't giving him who I think his top choice WOULD have been. He was penalized.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    Ah, I gotcha. I read more into your phrasing than that.
    Now, I'll be ok if Chester goes and vultures some TDs this week...it would sure make my path to the SB easier.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Chester gets the goal-line looks and will probably outscore Forte against a tough run D.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    Guys, common. Seriously, no troll feeding any more... JAB... just stop.

    It's completely pointless and makes this place brutal to read. Let them post to themselves.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I think JAB is still on the last thread, you might wanna go yell at him over there.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    Shady - you're a smart guy.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Great minds think alike.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The legend of Aaron Rodgers. He's going to have to leap tall buildings in a single bound to justify what the smart guys on TV are saying about him. But this is not the defense, or the surface, where you'd figure he'd be Atlanta good again this weekend.

    Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/01/21/conference-championships/index.html#ixzz1BhOyWsKU

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    The guy has the highest passer rating of all time. He will also most likely have the highest post-season passer rating of all time, barring catastrophe, when he gets the minimum attempts. You have to give it to the guy at this point. There is no telling what the future holds in store, but look at what he's done already. This is "championship sunday"? They have to write the fluff pieces. They even have to get on Mark Sanchez's and Jay Cutler's jock...I mean, c'mon. A "good game" for those guys is 16-25, 217 yards, 1 TD, 1INT.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You're right - 2 passing and 2 rushing tds last week wasn't very good.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    It was a very good game...for cutler. But even then, compare his line, at home, to the Seahawks...to Rodgers, 31-36, 366, 3TD, 1 Rushing TD....on the road, to the top seeded team in the conference. I mean, the guy has had, by an incredible marging, the hottest postseason start to his career in history. How can they not get on his jock? Cutler is a good quarterback, he's still not in the same league as Rodgers.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    "...for Cutler?"

    C'mon, man.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I guess what I should have said was "for a bears qb" since most everyone is always clamoring for them to just "not fuck it up." It seems to still be that way even for Cutler. "we just can't have a cutty meltdown."

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You could just say it was a damn fine performance, particularly for a QB playing the first playoff game of his career. 4 tds is 4 tds, whether it's Rodgers or Cutler throwing them.
    You have to entertain the idea that ATL and Philly were not the playoff juggernauts that the media made them out to be.
    I'm not arguing that Seattle was a great team, but I knew they had it in them to beat an overrated Saints team.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You're right MB, I usually don't do those things but being absent from the site and going back and reading all the posts made it difficult for me. I got it all out though and am good. I'd like to apologize to anyone besides cheesy and greenbay man that I offended as I fell for the troll bait.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Happened to me yesterday, Jab. No harm done.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    That's kind of what started it. Reading what was said to you and a few others that was uncalled for. Oh well,I guess I'm human after all.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Eh. I've heard worse. Not going to quit discussing the biggest game of our lives because some 'people' (term used loosely) are idiots.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    The biggest game of my life was the 85 SB. I would love Sunday's game to be the precursor to the Biggest Game in my life.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Sunday will be the precursor to the Biggest Game in the history of mankind, Superbowl XLV-Packers vs. Steelers!

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Thanks for the clarification, I was under the false impression that you were the son of Zeus. Glad we got that straight...

  • In reply to jbenton:

    There is no national registry for men falling for troll bait, so all is forgiven JAB.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Some men just wanna watch the blog burn...

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q3z4IP_nNU

  • In reply to buckbear:

    I'm taking names and kickin' ass.....

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Yes, he has had the hottest postseason start to HIS career in history. Tautology at its finest.

  • In reply to mikebdot:

    Love the tautology reference.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    If we stick to tautologies and syllogisms maybe these Fudgers will piss off ...

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    No denying that Rodgers is an outstanding QB. He is also lucky enough to have an outstanding defense and the deepest WR core in the league (imho); next year the Packers are going to be very good indeeed.
    BUT...however outstanding Rodgers has been, he's been only average against the Bears' defense, which suggests to me that it's a bit risky to project Rodgers' perfomrances against Phil and At. into this Sunday. I do think that if we run the ball effectively and if Cutler makes no mistakes, we'll win the game. Don't forget, we'll be starting almost drive at our own 40, and there'll be ample opportunities for Gould field-goals...

    But here's a question for you BigCheesy: how many points do you think the Packers' offense will have to score for them to win? (Obviously "more than the Bears"..but let's get specific: I see them as needing to score more than 20.)

  • In reply to jj320:

    I was speaking in this circumstance more towards the media's praise for him, not so much as a prognostication. Which is also what most sportswriters are doing; acknowledging the red-hot streak of rodgers, while also pointing out his average play against the bears, and the low-scoring affair that this should be.

    I think personally, Rodgers has played pretty well against the bears, the offense however, has not. Rodgers was slow for the first two weeks of this season, and then everyone in packer nation agreed he played one of the games of his life against the bears in week three, and we were all so dissappointed that it was all in vain. His INT was actually just a hail mary at the end of the half, he had at least on TD called back for holding, he rushed for a TD. The second meeting he had two big plays called back for penalties, a sure TD dropped by jennings, and some other big drops (the WRs have been pissing everyone off all year). I'm not worried about Rodgers against the bears. I might be worried about the offense, but not rodgers. He won't have an Atlanta game, because to reproduce that is almost impossible for anyone. But I think he will play well.

    I don't really like that question that much unless you are talking about the NBA, but I guess I would say that 17 will most likely be enough for them to win.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Your mom is a whore

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    your whore is a mom

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    This is eerily starting to remind me of the 2006 playoffs... 'Red hot team that couldn't possibly lose' vs 'This season's overachievers who, despite playing at home, have a shaky qb and average coaching'. We all know what happened then. LET'S HOPE FOR A F'NG REPEAT!!!

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Guys, please just ignore the trolls, even if they are bringing valuable discussions... they will just devolve into name calling once they lure you into the 'discussion'. Not worth your time and effort.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    This is textbook passive-aggressive troll feesing.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Your mother, the whore

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    You're hilarious, my mustachioed friend.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Am I the only one that continues to read DaCoach's posts in SNL's Connery voice from the Jeopardy skit? Priceless, continue your efforts as the last bastion against the trolls. Amen, Airborne.

  • In reply to MattySouthside:

    Matty - good call; I will do so from now on.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Bucks vs. Cavs tonight. Go Bucks!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Bucks are terrible. Go Bulls.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    KNICKS

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Well aren't you just a flavor of the month kinda guy?

    At least your buddy stays loyal to a state...

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    Been a knicks fan since steve francis joined the team. Worst record in the NBA, beeeyooootch

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    4 years! Excuse me for suggesting that you're fickle.

    Not sure he ever played a full season for the Knicks, and if you're such a huge Francis fan - why jump ship when the guy averages less than 10 pts/game?

    By your "beeeyotch" comment and the fact that you picked your favorite team 4 years ago, I'm guessing 16 years old?

    What's that sophomore? Do they even have grades in home school or do your parents just send you away when they can't afford the tuition?

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    I'm sure that college basketball started for Cheez-Whiz in 1998.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    On Wisconsin!

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Wait Wait, Is this BigCheesePussy the same guy that was around here in week 3, talking all kinds of shit and then when we beat them, he didnt show up anymore? This the same guy who wears his moms pink tights and parades around Santa Cruz, like a homo with his wiener tucked in? My offer still stands, I can meet you anywhere, bring you gear, I beat your ass and then piss on the ashes as I burn you pack shit.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    This is BigCheesePuss.
    http://people.tribe.net/7ad20da5-2646-43c6-b636-7077548a01dd/photos/e692c08f-1520-4592-8f4e-7699a3ce56a9

  • In reply to sjvl:

    I think I just made the decision to splurge on tickets

    Tomorrow's my B-Day and I say fuck it.

    I've lived enough moments in life saying 'I wish I would have done ______"

    NOT ANYMORE!

    NOT ME!

    I'M GOING TO THE GAME DAMN IT!

    BEAR DOWN AMERICA!

  • In reply to Shady:

    Are you gonna make a day of it and tail gate?

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    All day baby!

  • In reply to Shady:

    You'll be hitting the exits in the third quarter, just like the rest of the Bear "fans". Nothing but Green and Gold left in the stands to relish the Packers thorough thrashing of the Bears. Soldier Field filled with glowing cheeseheads, a glorious sight indeed, brings a tear to the eye....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    They won't make it out of there alive. I hope you go so you get your ass beat. In fact I'll meet you there if you want.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Are you pitching woo, big boy?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I figured you to be the catcher.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Careful, JAB - he might come after you on his riding lawnmower.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I bet it has a lift kit. He doesn't have time anyways, he's too busy beating his wife.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    He would need opposable thumbs to install a lift kit.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    They come equipped with those up there.

  • In reply to Shady:

    Money well spent, Shady!! Anybody born on the 22nd is alright by me. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!! Go Bears!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Thanks amigo. Everybody loves the double duece, including a certain Bears running back that rhymes with "what a play!". Bearsssss.

  • In reply to Shady:

    do it mang. make the commitment.

  • In reply to Shady:

    Do not return with vocal chords intact Shady!

  • In reply to buckbear:

    There will probably be many Chicago Bear fans there; return with your wallet intact.

  • In reply to Shady:

    How ya getting tickets mang? Scalpers? Connections? Do tell. And happy birthday. I think you'll get your wish.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    You can find most anything on the innerwebz for the right price.

    Needless to say I spent about 3 weeks of pay for this ticket.

  • In reply to Shady:

    Better send Jeff some photos from the stands, Shady - especially if you encounter any cheeseheads that mortgaged the farm to get in.

  • In reply to Shady:

    Woot! Have a great time!

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Aaron Rodgers is really good, so are the Packers. We'll see who wins Sunday. Yeah classic troll feesing indeed.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Also, the problem with Cutler is not that is "good" games are only mediocre. His good games are as good as any quarterback in the leage; the problem is that is bad games are really, really bad. This is why I still think the Bears can win *without* a stellar performance by Cutler, so long as he doesn't have one of his low-blood sugar shit the pants games.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Your mom is right up there in lifetime whoring rating

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Nice.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Not that I think peter king knows his ass from a hole in the ground, but it's going to be seriously tough for rodgers to pull off another Atlanta game. Same for the punter. Without insane games from both, and without a cutty meltdown, we will win this game.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    You forgot to add that you'll need the earth to open and swallow the entire Packer squad; then you may have a slight chance to win.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    I can't stand Rodgers, guy looks like a scrawny weasel, has a celebration move that looks like a gay trying layup drills, and can't even grow a real beard. But he makes damn good decisions with the ball and is an accurate little punk. If the Bears and more specifically Peppers, can

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Wow, kind of hard to tell this Sunday is gonna be one of the Biggest Games in Chicago Bears History. Where is everyone? Am I mistaken in my belief that this is the Best Fan Bear Blog on the net?

    Beat the Cheese. Ooohrah!!!!!!!!!!!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    "10 Things to Watch" ?

    Wow. That IS eye-opening.

    I didn't know Peter King could COUNT to 10.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    He had to borrow Don Banks' calculator.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Hands and feet?

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    you only need your hands to count to 10.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    That would require putting down the smoked ham hock he is continually gnawing on.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Wanna see my Danny Woodhead? Classic.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    On nfl, Theisman accidentally said I like Danny Woodcock in this jet's vs. the patriots.

    Hilarious.

  • In reply to Bears85Sweetness23:

    I saw that. Deion fell out of his chair laughing. Too bad he didn't hit his head and go into a coma.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    +1

    I am so over Neon.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Maybe he just watched Mr. Woodcock. What a terrible movie that was.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    If Neon is annoying then Michael Irvin is Guantanamo Bay.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    +500

  • In reply to Bears85Sweetness23:

    ha ha, who is Woodcock? Rhetorical question! Love that movie...

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Heres a game preview gents. After all the pregame bravado and postulating, this game might just end up being decided by the kicking game and special teams unit. Go figure.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xty9Aj6Lic&feature=related

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I love how down here in the south 3 inches of snow can cancel school and my cousin in MN have school after 14 inches of snow.

    Awesome like Chicago Bears.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    Wouldn't it be funny if Taylor scores 2 goaline TDs, then on the third he pulls up and throws for a TD throw to Olsen? lol

  • Looks like sdwat52 believes in the Jets more than Rex Ryan.

Leave a comment