Packers at Bears NFC Championship Preview

I won't sleep Saturday night and I might not sleep Friday night without the aid of my old friend Ethyl Alcohol.  If this were the Falcons on the opposing sideline, the Saints...who knows?  But it is the Green Bay Packers, the oldest rival of our beloved franchise, and I can't stomach the notion of Aaron Rodgers holding the Halas Trophy at Soldier Field.

Your 'On the Verge' 2010 Chicago Bears
over
The Green Bay Packers Football Club

Why Do I Like the Chicago Bears this Week?
  • I always like the Chicago Bears.
  • I think it's time to recognize the Bears have a significant home field advantage not only because of the crowd, wind and weather but also because their turf minimizes the speed of outside threats and restricts receivers from making slant cuts under the coverage.
  • Aaron Rodgers, outside a 37-point output in his first start, has scored 17, 21, 21, 17 and 10 in the subsequent five games against Lovie Smith's defenses.  This is the best Bears defense he'll have faced (better than Week 17).
  • I don't believe for a second James Starks is the real deal at running back and I think the Packers will need to move the ball continually through the air to generate long drives.  The Bears defense is not the Falcons defense.
  • Maybe I'm misguided, "drinking the Kool-Aid" as they say, but I believe in the corner combination of Charles Tillman and Tim Jennings.  They are being left in man-to-man situations far more than usual and truly excelling at times.
  • Julius Peppers.  The Green Bay offensive line was not great against Atlanta, relying on Rodgers' escapability to the outside.  I expect a big day from Orange Julius.  And when they kick and punt back to us...
  • Devin Hester.  When I saw Eric Weems return a kickoff 102 yards for a touchdown last week against the Packers, I sensed a long week of debate for Mike McCarthy.  For some reason I think the focal point of our conversations Monday morning will be Hester.
  • I do believe Matt Forte/Chester Taylor can improve on their 18 rush, 102-yard performance from Week 17 and I think it will be a product of usage.  With 8:10 remaining in that game and Bears facing a second-and-nine, the Bears were sacked on back-to-back plays ending the drive.  When they got the ball back, they ran twice to set up a third-and-one (with 3:59 on the clock) and never rushed the ball again.  Lovie believes they learned a lot in Week 17.  I think this sequence was a primary teacher.  
  • The Packers showed everything they had in the blitz department in Week 17 and I think the Bears will be prepared to attack with the short passing/screen game.  
  • I think I redeveloped my confidence in our return coverage with the unit's near-dominant handling of Leon Washington.
  • I really believe this game will be decided by one person: Jay Cutler.  While he outwardly dislikes the media and seems to shrug off his own failings, I believe embraces competition in the truest sense and I think he knows the ultimate middle finger to the world would be outplaying Aaron Rodgers Sunday.  I think he does.
Chicago Bears 27, Green Bay Packers 17

Editor's Note:  Fantasy Playoffs selections are due by 11:00 AM CST Friday.  Only ChiTown Hustler, Shady and MikeBrownhadaPosse are still outstanding.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Let me be FIRST to say I ALWAYS LOVE the Bears.

    Isn't it Sunday yet?

  • I pray we don't ave to SECOND guess any of our coaching decisions Monday morning.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    That being said, I really believe in this coaching staff as far as making adjustments and learning from week 17. That game should be a huge advantage for the Bears.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Considering the Packers have NEVER been behind by more than seven points at any point during the entire season, a 27-17 carebear victory is quite the bold prediction. Don't stop drinking the Kool-Aide, hitting the pipe, or imbibing whatever intoxicant that transports you to the euphoric fantasyland. The harshness of Realityville will set in Sunday; the effects of your imminent substance withdrawal will entail excruciating pain, rending of hair, wailing and gnashing of teeth ...GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Greenbayman, why don't you go back on your own site you troll. That's right, you inbred hillbilly fucks don't know enough about technology to start a web-site dedicated to your team. Also, how's that extra chromosome treating you.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Hey Jab, are you referring to your missing chromosome? You have my sympathy, Turner Syndrome is sad.....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOGWbzUM-y8

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Windy City Gridiron has Youtube of the CBS preview:
    http://www.windycitygridiron.com/

    Hint: they like the Packers. By a lot.

    Nobody outside Chicago thinks we can win. The national press hates us, I mean HATES us - don't think for a moment that the SI cover wasn't a deliberate gesture - and nobody is backing us. The Vegas line is 3 and a half, which is staggering for a wildcard team coming in against an opponent who beat them once in the regular season.

    Fuck it, make it 10. The only people betting our side of the line live in Chicago.

    I may not sleep either. I desperately want to win this one. I love it when nobody in the press, even Hub Arkish, picks us to win.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    By my count the Bears are 6-3 outright as underdogs this season.

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    Soon to be 6-4! GO PACK!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    sometimes you have to make bold predictions. I agree that we won't win by 3. We will win by at least 10. I feel like we will make the adjustments and will use the slots to make the Pack re-think their use of Woodson blitzing. Let's burn em. sunday can't come fast enough. If you truly love football you have to love this matchup.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    The Packers have never trailed by more than 7 at any game at ny point in the entire season, you are a dreamweaver waffle. Da' boars won't score a total of 10 points, let alone win by 10!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Even their graphic design departments suck up there.
    http://blogs.greenbaypressgazette.com/blogs/gpg/outofbounds/

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    That logo is really phallic looking. No surprise that there are repressed homo-erotic tendencies mixed with the subsequent self-loathing and hygiene issues with Packers fans.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    It looks like a cock and balls.....

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    It's very telling that NO ONE on their editirial staff noticed. It's also telling, from what I've read, that the general resposne was "so what" - meaning that it's run worse than a HS newspaper. But that's the town of GB for you. Seriously out classed except in football.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Sorry - shoudl have looked first. I thought you were linking to that "ON TO CHICACO" headline.

  • In reply to BillW:

    lol - that's even better.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Some facts to ponder

    Fact - The Bears are getting criticism in the media for outperforming most everyone's expectations while the Pack get love for under performing theirs. (Cognitive bias)

    Fact - The Bears are undefeated in January when Jim Cornelison sings the National Anthem.

    Fact - The Bears are undefeated when Jay Cutler has a 100+ Passer rating performance.

    Fact - Anne Hathaway is now Catwoman...wha?

    Fact - Each time jay Cutler had a 100+ passer rating performance this season he followed it with a 2nd...check it.

    Fact - Mr. Henry drives a Jaguar

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Anne Hathaway.... mmmmmmm

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Indeed

  • In reply to buckbear:

    You. Are. Kidding. Me.

    Do you find Gwyneth Paltrow sexy? Judy Garland?

  • In reply to buckbear:

    A video game of life in Santa Cruz

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOb-eJgnHYg&NR=1

  • In reply to gpldan:

    A video shoot of a woman from Santa Cruz

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=60CKXbCS1co

  • In reply to buckbear:

    First fact is very insightful. That sums it up very well. I want to add one more thing to that - "experts" feel that the "right" way to win a football game is with a dominant QB. Defense and special teams are "inferior" ways to win. The teams with the big name QBs get the respect. Even if the "big name QBs" are flashes in the pan (like Romo, Flacco, and maybe "Matty Choke". Amd Cutler is one game away from changing his image from disappointing QB to "big name QB".

  • In reply to BillW:

    The Packers are underperforming????

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Under performing their expectations to be division winners and the #1 or #2 seed. Yes.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    They are one win away from the Superbowl. They have beaten the best teams in the conference on the road. They lost 15 players to I.R.... 2nd best scoring defense in the league (best in conference). 2nd best points differential in the league (best in conference). Best record in the Conference against "quality teams."

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I guess technically you can be an ignorant boor and say that "they didn't win the division and they were supposed to so...no excuses," but you can't actually say they are UNDERPERFORMING. They are performing at an unbelievable level.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Not underperforming now - certainly not. But up until week 17 when they were the last team to make the playoffs, the writers who picked them to make the Super bowl looked to be wrong. And so they are now GB is benefitting from "saving" the writers.

    The same writers picked the Bears to have a losing record and be looking for a new coach. Winning the division and getting the number 2 seed makes them look dumb. So they keep predicting them to lose figuring they will eventually be right.

    Trust me - if they win Sunday, by Tuesday we'll be reading how they no chance at all against the Steelers or Jets.

  • In reply to BillW:

    At 10-6, the packers were still performing at an incredibly high level. they never lost a game by more than 4 points. They still had the second highest point differential in the league. They had a brutal schedule. They were up against the odds. They PERFORMED very well.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Under performing the expectations foisted upon them by the media...after this I'm done with you. You're selective quoting yesterday was really pathetic, but from now on I'm done with you.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Of course you are done. You got told. Repeatedly. You even tried to prove your point with a freakin' podcast, and all it did was reiterate the same thing that I did. Did you even listen to your "source." You're not "done with me." You were done by me.

    You're misundertanding is rooted in your ambiguous language. "Underperforming" is a poor choice of words to use for the Packer's this year. It's ignorant.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    We can agree to disagree; but they were preseason SB favorite of many but needed a week 17 win to get into the playoffs. In the other conference, the preseason SB favorite(s) got in much sooner.

    All we are saying (and I'm not quoting Lennon) is that based on expectations the Packers shoudl have had a better than 10-6 record and should have clinched the division around week 15. Instead they were the last ones.

    So that was not perfroming as expected.

    Now obviously there are reasons why - but that's not the point. The point is the expectations were they'd perform liek SB contenders all year and they did not.

    However, now they are. As are the Bears, Steelers, and Jets.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    A smell that sweet breeze Coach. Truly class act! Thanks for the refreshing change of tone.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Beat the best teams int he conference on the road? Nope. Haven't beaten us on the road. The #2 seed.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    That achievement occurs this Sunday. By the way, how many did the Favre-led Packers win in a row down in Illinois?

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Hathaway as Catwoman, I just saw that. The most asexual woman in movies. Probably an icon for gay men everywhere. Ever noticed why models are so ugly? Because gay men are picking them.

    J-Lo on American Idol? Yes I would.

    Are there any QBs that have been defeated when they throw a rating of 100+ though ? Just curious.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Why did Milwaukee get turned down to have a professional football team?

    The comissioner said,"sorry but then Green Bay will want one too."

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    That would be funny if the Packers didn't have the most championships of all time.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I know. Can't wait til Sunday. On a more serious note, that Kuhn dude is pretty good. He's the wild card in my opinion, I hope the Bears don't get caught napping and let him get free in the red zone.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Touche'.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Kuhn lacks talent, and is in fact, a licker of man balls.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Yah, kuhn is expendable.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I'd sign him.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Seriously Coach. He scored 2 TD's when the Cheese beat the G-Men and he was used effectively in the week 3 matchup against us. We did shut him down in week 17 though. I think its gonna come down to the team than can work in a few new little wrinkles effectively that will determine the outcome of the game.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    you wanna know why Kuhn is such a big deal??? The media thinks he is a big fan favorite because everyone cheers so loud for him to get the ball (even on the road). Most people in the business don't have time to learn/understand/watch every player on every team for an extensive amount of time. So the rational for someone like that when they don't know all too much about a player is to assume that he must be playing a very effective (yet marginal) role if the fans love him so much. The truth is that he is pretty pedestrian but the fans just love the opportunity to scream "COOOOON" and get away with it.

    Either that, or it's because he is getting better and better in short yardage situations.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I agree - if I was a marginal player I'd change my name to something that had that OOOOO sound so the fans would chant my name. I seem to recall Kuhn getting several carries for negative yardage in week 17.

  • In reply to BillW:

    uhh, it's not the "OOOOO" that they like....it's the slur.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Well, I guess then you are characterizing Packer fans as bigotted rednecks. But I guess you'd know better than I would.

    However - in the same spirit, I recall Emery Morehaed being a fan favorite in Chicago (at least in the stands) so we could chant "More Head!!" everytime he caught a pass.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    nah it's the ooo the damn Lions saps do it for Suh and we used to do that crap for Mushin.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    That reminds me of a mustache, a shock absorber for a blowjob.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Narcissus puckers up....

    http://czabe.com/

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/22971/big-question-the-return-of-terry-mcaulay

    An excuse waiting to happen for Packer's fans.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Great read. The ref from the 18 penalty game will do this game. But later in the article they say he was in the middle as far as penalty calling compared ot other crews.

    In oter words, the reason the Packers got 18 penalties in that game is not becuase of the ref, but becuase they committed 18 penalties.

    Probably more - that was 18 accepted penalties. Several were false starts or holds; the Julius Peppers effect, and even Bear basher Peter King realized his affect and named him his defensive player of the year.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Hey Cheesy, know any of uh, these guys?

    http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/show-me-chicago/2011/01/beware-of-men-wearing-green-pictures-and-trivia-showcasing-packer-fans-in-chicago.html#slide-

    Ahem....look away boys.

  • In reply to BillW:

    That's right Bill, nobody outclasses the Packers in football. Especially that team just past our southern border....

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    A homeless person was sitting on a sidewalk in front of Lambeau Field. A Packer fan was returning from Packer Stadium with a duck. The hobo said, "nice pig". The Cheesehead said "this is a duck, not a pig, you hobo". The hobo replied, "I was talking to the duck".

  • In reply to gpldan:

    The press just can't give any credence to the theory that the NFC East and South were highly overrated this year. Had the rotation of divisional matchups been different, ATL would have had no shot at a #1 seed. Not to take anything away from Green Bay for beating them up in the Georgia Dome, but the Falcons (and the Saints for that matter) had 6 profoundly easy games on their schedule and went a game over .500 against the rest of it. Match the NFC South up with the North this year, and I'm confident that the NFC North would've held both the #1 and no less than the #4 seeds.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    You can't have the #1 and #4 seeds come from the same division. If you could, the saints and falcons would have been #1 and #2

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You're right - that was dumb. Not enough caffeine.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Excellent analogy.
    Packers #1, Bears #4!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Hey Jeff! Sorry I have been in absentia from commenting, I've been roaming Central America as I often do in the winter time. I just read all of your posts since and again I largely agree with you. Here is a little clip that will be of tantamount importance to Sunday's game. Peppers and Rodgers have been rivals since his pre Bears days... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YYy8O7lBK8

  • In reply to irootedforjayin09:

    RODGERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    FUCKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    oh, and Rooted, stop trolling Central America for anonymous sexual trysts with young male prostitutes. we've got plenty of willing young men up in WI that can help with that.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Damn.... ???... I think IRFJ is one of us mang.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    i know he is. i just think he may catch something serious as he looks for love or a "under the table bj" in El Salvador. i am just looking out for him.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Oh that's different... you're a fucking prince baby!

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    It's always appreciated. I'll watch out for all of the dangerous gay male prostitutes next time I'm on vacation with my wife and you watch out for straight sex with Packer pigs. :) lol

  • In reply to irootedforjayin09:

    nothing more dangerous than nicarauguan street slots. i've already fallen victim to a doe eyed porker from up north. the fatties from wisconsin are so sick of being beaten during packer season when they lose and when hunting season is over that they flock south and just give you a sob story and yadda yadda yadda I wake up with pulled pork sandwich wrappers all around me and this blonde heffer named Gustafson or some shit is just laying there squealing in joy with all the pork and cheese fries she was able to buy. the make up wore off a bit and she definitely had the remnants of an old hunting shiner.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Fucking hilarious, Johnny.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Jeff you're right about the Cutler thing. Before I was sure that we had so many people to step up other than Cutler that he would be first among many contributors. But the only way we can overcome a poor showing by Mr. Cutler is if these Bears have another Arizon miracle in them.
    On the defensive side I would add that another performance of 2006 Tommie Harris would be a welcome addition to Mr. Peppers performance. Since regaining the starting position he has gradually been improving. I sincerely hope his performance against the Seahawks was an indication that he has turned a corner.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Buckbear prays for miracle. Pleas remain unanswered. Packers Win!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Without the Bears there would be no Packers. They owe their very existence to Mr. Halas. All should pay homage to us.

    Say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism, Dude, at least it's an ethos.

    But to come on a Bears blog and talk all kinds of stupid shit, what kind of ethos is that? I blame the internets.

    Get...the fuck...away from...our water cooler...you swine.

  • In reply to mikebdot:

    It's like having drunken assholes on your porch at Halloween. You want to stick a shotgun in their face and go all Gran Torino on them, but you know this is the one evening they get to roam around.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Eastwood, man. Awesome. Just watched 'Hereafter' - nice movie. Surprised to find out Clint directed it.

  • In reply to mikebdot:

    I respect Mr.Halas, great man. Helped the Packers, no doubt. But the Packers are an icon, he realized this fact. Who knows, without the Packers, maybe the Bears and the NFL wouldn't have survived. That was Mr. Halas' train of thought; I don't mean to intimate that he was self-motivated in helping out the Pack. I'm just messing around anyway, a bunch of Bear fans invaded our board, just getting a little revenge. I'll cease and desist now. It should be a great game on Sunday! GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Some truth to this - Halas knew that the small town college level feel in GB was going to give the NFL something that baseball did not have. Don't forget all the clubs started in small towns (liek Decatur, Canton, Portsmouth) and moved. Pack woudl have moved had the town not approved a new stadium (now Lambeau Field) in the mid fifties. Halas went uo there to help lobby for it. In part to thank the Packers for loaning him $1500 when he had trouble making payroll.

    To Halas, the success of the NFL was his dream and vision. He needed a rival - though he had the Cardinals in Chicago at the time, I think he doubted that Chicago coudl keep two football teams.

    Fascinating history. Few really know it. Hard to beleive that the NFL was a very minor sport for decades.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    All sports fans are dicks. So, no harm done. It comes with the territory. Wampeters as far as the eye can see. Every single one of us.

    Plus, I just wanted to quote the big lebowski.

  • In reply to mikebdot:

    Amen

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Just toying with the enemy FQ. Let them enjoy themselves while they can. Sunday will be Armageddon for them.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    lol yea i know. the thing is: win, lose, or draw, we stay here and take our lumps. when GB loses, all the trolls scurry about like roaches when the lights come on

    for example: when GB lost to Detroit? man....how funny was that shit (and it's funny how the media can talk all kind of shit about the Bears losing to the 'Hawks & 'Skins, but GB lost to Detroit 7-3 and it gets swept under the rug).

    it's all good...come Sunday, the blog will return to normal (or semi-normal...the Cheese will start the "you got lucky...you won't win the SB" stuff).

  • In reply to FQD1911:

    I think no one talks about that because Flynn entered in the 2nd quarter.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    With a minute left in the second quarter. And you hadn't scored at all at that point.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    Packers always start slow. The game was tied 0-0 when Rodgers left. Do you think Caleb hanie would have come in an won the game had Cutler come in at half time WHEN THE BEARS WERE TRAILING. Not to mention the Week 1 debacle when the lions were completely robbed of a W @ Soldier field.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    had Cutler gone down*

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    This is pretty funny. This guy picks the Cheese to win the game and thinks the game will come down to Starks. Starks? Really? What a tool.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Sorry, forgot the link.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/peter_king/01/20/nfl-championship-game-picks/index.html

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I was with him all the way (except the score) until he said that about Starks. This is the same guy who picked the Vikings over the Bears because Joe Webb proved to be such a great QB. I am serious - look it up.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    A question: which team's offense suffers worse if their QB has a rating in the 80's?

  • In reply to jdawg:

    easily the Pack

  • In reply to jdawg:

    If Rodgers rating is in the 80s we win. Period. No matter what Jay's rating is.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Rodgers had an 89.7 in week 17. And the packers won. "Period."

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    If a number is .5 or higher you round up. Also, I would target that game as a bit of an outlier.

  • In reply to jdawg:

    Actually, you only round up when you currently have more decimal places than the concept of significant figures allows. Passer ratings are always expressed with a "tenths" digit. Soooo FAIL

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I was referring to the game we need to win; not the game that didnt' matter to us.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Then I guess you probably should have stipulated that before you threw down your "period," smart guy.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Dunno if it's been said here this week, but our safeties must be patient in the Cover-2. Too often they bite on the shallow crossing routes only to fail to help on deep balls. It's a conservative scheme and they must be in the right place to break up the pass or make the TD-preventing tackle.

    And what are our corners doing or how are they being coached, when they let the receiver run right by them? They don't even cover them for a few steps sometimes, immediately passing them off to the safety. I wish I had some film to demonstrate this but I've seen it a few times.

  • In reply to Jokey:

    The Bears must tackle well, the Packers receivers gained a ton of yards after the catch, it's their bread and butter...

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    That hasn't been too much of an issue for the D this year. One of the reasons that GBs offense is ordinary against the Bears D.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Must be depressing living up in that frozen, God forsaken, tundra called Wisconsin. Nothing to do all day but troll the sites of better teams in better cities and try and convince yourself there's something to live for. You hold on to that dream and when Monday rolls around and you find the only glimmer of hope in your sad sad existence has been extinguished I hope you start to consider relocating and building a life away from the computer in your moms frozen basement.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    How's that deli tray coming? I want pics!

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    It's a shame that you have two teams in you vacinity, yet you root for a team 2000 miles away.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Nice try, but the real shame is the two teams in my vacinity. I don't fault Packer's fans (respectful ones at least) because they actually have a legacy to fall back on and a future to look forward to. Bengals and Browns fans that make noise are just plain pathetic.
    Also I haven't always been in this vacinity and still have family in Chicago. I've been to Soldier Field on gameday more than most out of state fans get to see their clubs and tickets ain't cheap.

    Next.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    He was talking to Sacramento's #1 Bears Fan (niners/raiders)

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Cheesy lives in Cali as well, but he roots for the Pack. I thought you two were fuck buddies, didn't you know that about him?

    Time for that STD test, I guess.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    This was not bad. It's no question you are their only hope.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    Sacramento, while certainly a cut above Fresno's Central Valley, is nothing to beat your chest about; The Colonial, The BEAT records on 16th and J, and Joe's Crab Shack are about the only things worth saving should that wanna-be metropolis burn to the ground.....and I'm still not sure joe's is worth it.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I go skiing in the winter, hit class 4-5 rapids in the spring, surf in the summer... and I'll take the ladies of Sacramento and the rest of Cali over whatever water buffalo you have up there. There's a reason no one is flocking to Wisconsin.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    I'm from Santa Cruz.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    Nobody is flocking here except those damn' FIBS from just south of the Wisconsin border. Worse than a plague of locusts!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Bears have tackled better than most teams I've seen (most being Bears opponents). Packers also have been a solid tackling team. I think this game will live up the hype.

  • In reply to Jokey:

    The packer fans are punishing this blog.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Not so much as paying attention to them is.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Bada-bing! And true.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Not neccessarily, Cutler could throw numerous interceptions that compensate, with interest, for Rodgers incompletions.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Interceptions are punished in the QB rating far more than incompletions. If Rodgers has a rating in the 80s thoguh it's likely due to lack of TD passes since he rarely throws INTs.

  • In reply to BillW:

    No including the QB's, what player do you think would be the most devastating to the Packers and the Bears should they go down early in the game with an injury?

    Packers - Clay Mathews because that would totally disrupt their pass rush.
    Bears - Peanut because his skill set cannot be replaced on the field by any other player on our roster.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    FYI, Cullen Jenkins has pass rush abilities, he was out for about a month, he should be at full strength. Raji has been a pass rush force in the middle of the line. The Pack had 47 sacks this year.....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    How many sacks came without designed blitz packages?

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    With only 3 down linemsn, most plays will include a blitz. The pressure will force Cutler to make quick decisions. The packers have excellent db's that can cover one on one. Cutler better study, and be able to find the open man. This could be a coming out part for Cutler. or it could be a step back...

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Wasn't your sister on 47 sacks this year too?

  • In reply to Vicp71:

    I don't know, I was sacking your mother.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    You're his mom's boss?

  • In reply to mikebdot:

    Are you really gonna set him up like that?

    "Well that's what she calls me."

    "Well I do pay her for her labor"

    "Of course; she does whatever I tell her"

    yikes.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Finally found a reasoned analysis rather than one that jumps all over Rodgers recent games against teams other than the Bears.

    You know - the writer actually looks at the fact that the Packers are playing the Bears, not the Eagles or Falcons.

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth/post/_/id/23008/epicenter-of-humanity-bears-pass-defense

  • In reply to BillW:

    Good read Bill.

  • In reply to BillW:

    If I see another writer refer to our defense as 'Tampa 2' I will fucking puke. Chicago 2 or Cover 2. We play in Illinois. Or call it the Steel Curtain Defense/Pittsburgh 2 because that's where Dungy took it from.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I can hear some of you guys getting edging with that kind of a question but lets be real, you know there's gonna be some serious hitting going on and there ain't no way a player or two won't be carted into the locker room at some point in time during the game.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Interesting choice on Peanut. I would pick Julius Peppers. We have a solid D Line rotation, but if the Pack can double someone besides Peppers then our pass rush is toast and we are going to live and die by disrupting Rodgers passing game.
    On the Pack I would say Charles Woodson would be a huge loss for GB. An absence of his blitzing and coverage skills would be a benefit to our Offense in every way imaginable.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    If Peppers does his job and disrupts Rodgers, the Bears are in good shape. Rodgers is elusive and can throw accurately on the run. Peppers better catch him, not just chase him.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Agreed - Rodgers made Atlanta pay for getting close but not finishing.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I see what you're saying and agree. Peppers can disrupt Rodgers and "catch" him with a hurry or hit (per normal statistical definitions) and not necessarily have to get a sack. If Peppers can "catch" Vick he won't have an issue "catching" Rodgers.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Vick is straightforward fast, looks to run. Rodgers is elusive,constantly looks downfield and releases the ball in an instant; accurate to boot. He can dishearten a defense.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    You're not going to win the argument: Who's more elusive? Vick or Rodgers.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Downfield, Vick without a doubt. In the pocket.....I would probably actually say Rodgers, but it depends. Rodgers definitely has much more awareness, and a much easier time feeling the pressure than Vick, which definitely helps is elusiveness. Does it make him more elusive than Vick? I dunno, I'd probably say yes, but i really haven't looked into it.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Vick had a terrible time against the blitz toward the end of this season, especially against minnesota

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Vick has a bigger arm than Rodgers, and looks more accurate. They're both great QBs though. I'm not going to slag off Rodgers for the sake of it.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Stronger arm? More accurate? Have you ever watched a game, or do you strictly listen on the radio? This Irish idiocy isn't even worth commenting on...

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Rodger's has a better knack of finding receivers when on the run. Rodger's is also second in rushing yardage for a QB. Can he run like Vick, No. But Vick can't throw on the run like Rodgers. I think Rodgers intelligence is what sets him apart. Not to change the subject, but I think Cutler has a chance of being great, but he doesn't use his head as well as Rodgers. Rodgers just never throws a ball up for grabs, he is truly amazing.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Kind of an anti-Favre attribute. If Rodgers learned anything from watching Favre, it is to protect the ball, every possession is precious.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Very well said.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    i can respond to posts like this that have honest opinions and valid points about real football situations. I love Rodger's awareness and his mechanics on the run. His arm may be stronger than Cutlers. His pocket presence is solid and he is stoic in the face on impending danger. On the D side i love Woodson and everyone on this blog knows my man crush on Matthews. I love that Woodson may have the most control over his athleticism of an football player i've ever seen if you know what i'm talking about. His awareness and physical skills combined with his football IQ makes him an insane football player. I love the whole Matthews family as it pertains to football.
    HOWEVER, i feel like we have the Pack's number and if Tommie can play like last week combined with Peppers and the rest of the D line bunch this is going to be a fist fight. If we let Jennings or Driver get behind the D for an easy score we would be in trouble. If the bears get bennett, Olsen and Forte the ball in passing situations we will be looking good. Establishing the run in paramount as i feel the week 17 outing would have had a different outcome with some creative short passing and additional running from the Bears. that fuck up is on Martz with credit to the aggressive woodson play and the d lineman getting their hands up. Martz made Waldren look like Reggie White by continually dropping 7 steps to pass. that won't happen again. Starks will be a non factor so it will be up to Rodgers and your never ending line up of talented wide receivers. Good luck because this is for all the cheese curds.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I wouldn't be so quick to disregard Starks. His mere presence in the play-action will make him effective. I see both teams offensive lines being a weak link, although Tice has shored up the Bears, somewhat. I think the Packers offense has more weapons to compensate for their lines inadequacies. No offense to Bear fans, but the Bear's offense doesn't exactly strike fear into the hearts of the Packer defensive players. Green Bay has shown the capability to shut down the Bears, I see no reason to believe this will change on Sunday. Forte has just never impressed me. He is adequate, that's about all, he can be contained; Martz cannot give up on the run game, however. Olsen could be a problem for the Packers, tight ends have shown to be effective, he may be used to sustain drives on third down. I like Knox, but Green Bay's db's are more than capable of shutting him down, same with Hester. The Bears simply don't have enough playmakers. Cutler's tendency, when pressured, to throw the ball up for grabs will haunt the Bears. The Packers db's won't drop the interception opportunities granted by Cutler. The Packers have been in "Playoff Mode" for the last 4 games; they are battle tested and ready. The Bears had a week off and then played the Seahawks, 'nuff said. The Packers had an extra day off this week, that should not be discounted either, they are the healthiest they have been for some time. I think this game hinges on Cutler, if he turns the ball over, the
    Bears are in trouble. Field position will be important, with Hester, the Bears may win that battle. If he runs wild on returns, the Packers are in trouble. I believe the Packers are more capable of sustaining long drives, this should alleviate the Bears field position advantage, as long as the Packer receivers hold onto the ball. The receiver depth will challenge the Bears defensive backfield, this could be a huge problem for Chicago. We'll find out soon. But not soon enough for me!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    It kills me that Angelo drafted Pepe Le Peu instead of Starks, after having Starks earmarked for drafting. Tool!

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Angelo will live to regret that disrespectful act. This Sunday will be Starks first opportunity for revenge....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Agreed - when Rodgers runs he is thinking/anticipating where the open man will be. I hope Cutler (or more accuarately, his recievers) get better at that.

  • In reply to BillW:

    Rocgers understands defensive concepts, he knows where the defenders are located at all times. His intelligence and study habits allow him to "see" the X's and O's as the play progresses. He is on the same page as his recievers. This explains his incredible qb rating. He also has extraordinary physical abilities, that kinda' helps too.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    The Packers are a one dimensional team who relies on yards after the catch to move the chains. The Bears have an opportunistic defense who will try and limit those extra yards. Will Rodgers put up yards against the Bears? Probably. Will they get into the endzone? Thats another story.

    The Pack have a definite advantage in the secondary. BUT, they are young and inexperienced, that holding sack of shit Woodson can't be everywhere. If Cutler is on his game he could expose these clowns. They have been know to give up the big play.

    The D lines are probably a push. They have that goon ClayRaper, we have Ghost Peppers. That leaves the running game.

    Are the Packers really going to put the ball in the hands of the rookie Starks and rely on him to move the chains against this Bear D? Umm good luck with that.

    The Packers special teams is atrocious, nuff said.

    Coaching is a push, both squads have issues with clock management and challenges.

    Qb's. Well lets see. Cutler can turn into Jekyll and Hyde while Rodgers holds on to the ball too long and has fumbled in key moments. See Pack vs Cards. Advantage Mr. Rodgers. Slightly.

    Cheesy you smug sack, get off your high horse cause the Packers just aren't that good. Hey look, I can do this too. THE PACK STILL SUCK. THE CHEESE WIZZ. PACKER FANS ARE INBRED TOOTHLESS HILLBILLIES. AARON RODGERS IS MY SECRET GAY LOVER. CLAY MATTHEWS LOOKS LIKE A LESBIAN SURFER..blah blah blah

  • In reply to Joseph:

    The Bears averaged a whole 6/10 of a yard rushing per game more than the Packers. A total of 10 yards over the entire season! That is something to hang your hat on, if you are a Bear fan. That extra 10 yards must make the Bears 2 dimensional and keeps the Packers one dimensional.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Yea with a new line coach, two rookies on the line, now one...and a new coordinator Mike Martz for christ sake. Check the stats after the bye

  • In reply to Joseph:

    I can sit here and decry the fact that Grant was injured in the first game of the season. I can't wait for Starks' coming out party against the Bears this Sunday! He's leading the league in post-season rushing!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Against the limp dick Eagles Run D.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    of course your will decry it, you will shout it from the rooftops the way you pussies have from day 1. pre-emptively making excuses of why you could lose after talking prodigious amounts of shit is a BS move and would get your punched in the throat in the real world.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    This reply is moronic. He just said if he wanted to make excuses (Like your fellow Bears fan just did) he could say that......

    He was also, in effect, saying don't make excuses.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Cheesy, i have heard so many excuses that it is a forgone conclusion at this point that a Packers loss will bring out every excuse ever dreamt of. I want to hear the Morgan Burnett excuse personally. Don't make excuses when the team loses. I know you will want to very badly. Don't do it. It's not the refs, the field or the injuries. It is the fact that the Bears brought the heat. Take it like a man.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.purplepride.org/forums/gallery/1971_21_08_07_8_00_47.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/community-lounge-introductions-general-discussion/118963-chicago-bears-bad-football-team.html&usg=__Kr7vJiGCdcOTqCRZgejBhRaj-yA=&h=552&w=400&sz=185&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=AMLvjuYDBRMNXM:&tbnh=135&tbnw=95&ei=4r84TfK_IYL4sAPL-fjdAw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpackers%2Bsuck%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D566%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=410&oei=L784TfOvGYrCsAOHuJiRAw&esq=15&page=1&ndsp=19&ved=1t:429,r:8,s:0&tx=69&ty=76

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    http://www.purplepride.org/forums/gallery/1971_21_08_07_8_00_47.jpg

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Joseph was pissin' and moanin' about a "new line coach, two rookies on the line, now one...and a new coordinator Mike Martz for christ sake", I just off-handedly mention the fact that the Packers lost their leading rusher in week 1 and, for "making excuses", get threatened with physical violence. I was merely pointing out that the Packers don't make excuses, we plug in replacements. Such is the case when a team has a quality GM, a luxury never afforded the Bears.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Why oh why do I listen to Boers & Fuckstein...

    Re: Erin Rodger's "belt" celebration (which makes me pray for paralysis or stray bullets) -

    "Is there ANYTHING about this guy that would suggest he would have such a celebration?"
    "No. No way."

    How about the fact he's a complete smirking chimp, douchebag, who eerily resembles the check-out girl at my neighborhood Hy-Vee market?

    I think once you begin doing douchey, egotistical celebrations like that, you eliminate all doubt about your "down to earth"-iness and your "low key", "laid back", "good ol' boy" persona.

    Can you IMAGINE if Jay pulled that nonsense? Crucified by the meedjuh. Even more.

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    Didja' ever wonder, how does Cutler's chinstrap remain in place when he has no chin? It is rather miraculous, maybe da' lord is on da' bears side.........

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    http://i45.tinypic.com/bhhnx3.gif

    Don't fight the feeling

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Great link cheesy, gotta' love it, I predict 5 similar performances on Sunday......

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    This has become a Yahoo Message board. This is what i get for staying home sick today and disobeying SC Dave. I can't bear these guys for over 2 more days. I'm sorry for letting your down Dave.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I wonder how long these Packer fans are going to stick around when the Bears are beating the Packers? Don't worry, I guarantee they won't be around then.

  • In reply to EVILteddie:

    I wonder how long Lovie is gonna stick around after McCarthy wipes his ass with soldier field?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Wow, and you guys have the maturity level of a 3rd grader. Way to represent the Packers buddy.

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    Jay Cutler's face is too fucking fat to pull off any sort of stylish celebration

  • In reply to Joseph:

    i'm signing off until Saturday. I will leave you with facts:

    1. Starks is a rookie 6th round pick. It will be obvious on Sunday much to the whining, bitching and groaning of Packers fans everywhere. Cries of "If we only had Ryan Grant" will be heard throughout Packerdom.
    2. Rodgers is a great quarterback but he is fucking dead and won't make it through the game. Who is going to be the knockout punch? Izzy? Melton? Harris? Big Toe? Pep? Lach? Woottoon? A mystery to be solved.
    3. Driver or Jennings will surely fuck up a big play by fumbling after a routine great catch and run.
    4. How many fucking penalties will Green Bay have that are called? How many will they get away with? You know they are going to hold on every play because of their huge fear boners for Peppers.
    5. Hester or Manning is taking one to the house. The only question is whether the TV camera will catch McCarthy mouthing the words, "fuck me".
    6. Bennett will make up for missing the last game. We needed him to help move the chains and he will oblige us Sunday.
    7. Matthews will have 1 sack and no other game changing plays.
    8. Forte will run for over 100 yards and Chester will add 30. Forte will catch 5 balls out of the backfield and the result will be a big one. The bears offense that supposedly can't run the ball will do so against the Pack.
    9. Trolls will scatter and disappear save the gayest of the gay. These types will still spout the same 7th grade retorts that got the fuck beat out of them back in the day.

    Here's to a great game with NO EXCUSES. I'm talking to you all your pre-emptive excuse making pussy motherfucking trolls. Just accept defeat graciously like adults.

    Bye!

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Too-da-loo!

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    remember cheese. DON'T MAKE EXCUSES.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Huh? Oh, you're still here? I thought...

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    parting shot, had to do it

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    more of a friendly reminder. it will help you in life and with the Packers. you will always have more credibility if you stop making excuses. that little ditty was free but the next one will cost you.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Jeff, I don't mean to be rude, but for the sake of the blog...please make a new post and stop the bleeding. We're getting hammered.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Suck it easy.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You just made a liar out of me Cheesy.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit huffing glue.

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    We need some Ramones music. "All I want is to sniff some glue" or "I wanna' be sedated". I predict a run on Chicago area hardware stores after the game....

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    Greatest Bear - Walter Payton
    Greatest Packer - Brett Farve

    Case, rested.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Don Hutson is the Greatest Packer.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Don Hutson created aids when he fucked that monkey

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Don Hutson couldn't make a practice squad in today's nfl. And he created aids when he fucked that monkey.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Said Monkey? Curious George Halas.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Don Hutson created every pass pattern run today; set records that held up for 50 and 60 years. I agree, he couldn't make any practice squads, but he would start for da' boars of shitcago!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Jerry Rice of his day in fairness. Perhaps more.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Honesty and intelligence. A rarely exhibited on blogs, particularly this one. A rare attribute of blindly devoted Bear fans, Kudos to Irish....

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Free Mustache Rides

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    I was just about to say that ...

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    Ha!

    That reminds me. I noticed some weird looking dude who reminded me of Dave Mustaine, walk up to the back of the bus I was taking and take a big whiff of exhaust. Wierd world. Also, has any body seen the Philip Seymour Hoffman movie about getting addicted to gasoline fumes? Good picture, but depressing like Leaving Las Vegas.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    I still can't believe Mustaine's tearful whining in Some Kind of Monster. What a pussy. I'l credit the guy for writing "In my darkest hour" and maybe one or two more, but what an annoying little bitch.

    Seymour Hoffman is the man! Forget the name of the movie he was sniffing fumes in - ah "love Liza", just googled it. That threw up the name "Gummo" see that movie? Awesome.

    Hoffman was excellent in everything. Loved his performance in that movie, name escapes again, where he plays De Niro's speech therapist.

  • In reply to JohnGalt:

    Fully acknowledging this would most likely remove many of my comments, perhaps Jeff might want to hit delete on a bunch of comments?

    Comment policy on the site:

    Your Comment May Get Removed If . . .

    It is hateful, racist, abusive, excessively foul or otherwise off-topic: We welcome all kinds of opinion as long as you remain within the realm of propriety, stay on-topic and keep your comments about the content rather than the blogger or other community members.

    It contains self-promotion or spam: We want to hear what you have to say about the post in question. However, if you would like more exposure for your site, services, or product, please contact our ad sales team so we can help you achieve your goals.

    It divulges or exposes personal information: We work hard to preserve the privacy of all our community members and you should respect the boundaries set by other members. Do not divulge unnecessary information about yourself or expose the personal information of another user. Making sensitive information available to the public can lead to unsafe situations.

    It does not make a contribution to the conversation: Legitimate criticism of content is welcome but comments like "you suck," "this is stupid," "fail," and so on are not welcome, do not contribute to the conversation and may be removed.

    Read more: http://www.chicagonow.com/comment-policy.html#ixzz1BcEHDX7o

  • In reply to mikebdot:

    Well said our Mike. But let us have the F-bomb. Let's not be WCG with Dale Hitler.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Like that will change anything. At least there are several Cheese fans than are offering decent information from their perspective with a cordial tone. I think it's kind of refreshing.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    The hemorrhaging won't end until after the game on Sunday. Then the Bears will be put out of their misery. Sorry...

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    In game blogs by Cheese fans are strickly verbotten.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    no worries FM, the bleeding stops in a couple of days. can you feel the pressure growing? the statistical vomiting? a sign that even though the Pack are SUPPOSED to win they will not. It is going to be infuriating for pundits as well as Packer fans.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Woodson is irreplaceable. He is all over the field. The Packers don't have enough corner depth to replace him.

  • In reply to buckbear:
  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    54 for the Bears. Jennings for the Pack

  • In reply to jdawg:

    Jennings is replaceable. The Packers are five deep at receiver. TE Quarless could step out there as a fifth wideout, and be effective, in a pinch.

  • In reply to BillW:

    What if it's 3?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    You have a right to fantasize.......

  • In reply to jdawg:

    It depends on why the rating is not higher:

    If it's incompletions I think Packers are worse off.

    If it's turnovers I think Bears are worse off.

    If it's no passing touchdowns then Packers are worse off.

    On the whole the pack needs a dominant performance from Rodgers more. The Bears certainly need it too but just not as much.

    I think that it's pretty likely that both Quarterbacks will have low 90's high 80's performances this weekend.

  • In reply to buckbear:

    Reasonable!

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    yeah -- that's sort of what I was getting at. I think the Bear's can withstand a ho-hum performance from Cutler if Forte is running OK. The GB offense is Rogers, and deservedly so.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I don't think Starks breaks 40 yards in this game. LBs up close shutting down the run, DBs back protecting the deep stuff. Big hole in the middle.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    da' boars are gonna' regret hangin' Starks out to dry. He's got vengeance on his mind. Shows the classiness of the Bears organization, the way they treated Starks on draft day. Every decent member of society should be rooting for Starks on Sunday.......

  • In reply to FQD1911:

    Wrong. If the sun were to rise in the west and the Bears were to beat the Packers, I, for one, would root for the Bears in the Superbowl. Until that doomsday occurs......
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Lets face it, a lot of us would root for the Cheese, specially if they went up against fat boy.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Not me, Trac. No way.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Me neither. No fucking way.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    Sorry, I'm with the rapist in that game ...

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Classy!!!!!!!!!!!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    stop being a fag!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    damn...saw so many Packers posts, thought i was in the wrong spot. this is DBB, right?

  • In reply to FQD1911:

    DBB=Dumbass Beaten Bitches
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Astronaut Rodman says fuck off

    http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/comment/12/2011/01/0dd7ee6156bc800e04b3d0f2c233db42/340x.jpg

  • In reply to irootedforjayin09:

    Bears: 24
    Pack: 10

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    MB awakens from football fantasy dream, noticeable stain in crotch area. Scratches scrotum. Watches Packers Slaughter carebears. Final score: Packers 42, da' boars 3! Blubbers like baby. Slits wrists....
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    So you noticed his crotch? Spend a lot of time thinking about guys crotches?

  • In reply to iamndmurff:

    You, sir.....are clearly out of answers.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Bears 20-17

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Fres.. youre killing me! You knlow the Bears D will show up. Pack had a hard time just getting 10 last time and that was for their play-off lives. That plus Cutler will want to show his wares so I predict 35-10 Chicago Bears

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    35-10?

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    Cutler will show his wares alright.... like: "wares" he throwing that one? and "wares" da' bears offense?
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    and "wares" my mommy?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    and "wares" my offensive line?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    and "wares" my pacifier?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    And "wares" those Packer trolls now that their asses are kicked? Not here saying good game I'll wager.

  • In reply to DocNitty34:

    Well doc, I didn't intend to rub your noses in it. I would rather be a gentleman, but if you insist, and it is proper protocol, I shall return after the Packer victory and remind you that it was a good gane and "THE BEARS STILL SUCK!"

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Jeff, you are 100% right on Starks too, while he is about as fast as Jackson which MAY pose a continued running threat, he is not NEARLY as strong as Jackson. Against a VERY physical Bears D-line this will be kind of a big deal. In face, he is not as strong a MANY successful NFL running backs.

  • In reply to irootedforjayin09:

    Stark's doesn't hesitate, he has a burst and hits the hole decisively. Jackson dances in the backfield...

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Hittin the hold decisively, kinda like you and your sister.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Stark is literally less than 85% of the strength of Jackson. Jackson dances because he can break a hit and hold onto the ball if he does get stuffed. Stark is risking a lot with speed "burst" if that is his main advantage. Good luck holding onto that ball boy. Urlacher wants it.

  • In reply to irootedforjayin09:

    How the hell did you deduce this 85%. Physics of force is simple, velocity and mass are the variables, Starks exceeds Jackson. You'll never see Starks get knocked back, he always falls forward. That's strength....

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I spilled my heart out in this blog and I cannot write anything else that I have not already said.

    I cannot wait to hear the anthem, LIVE from the stands on Sunday...I cannot wait to cheer with my fellow Bear fans...I cannot wait to sing after we score, score and keep scoring. I cannot wait to see Cutty hold the George Halas Trophy above his head.

    BEAR DOWN!!!

  • In reply to Reichwolff:

    BEARS DOWN!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Regs... I seriously don't get packer trolls?!?! Wht the fuck would you waste your time finding a bears blog to comment on... I just don't get the utter waste of your life. Jesus.

    btw, I think cheesy is different, he has family ties... he wants to be a Bears fan.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    cheesey hated the Bucs? The fucking Bucs cheesey? Holy Shit man, pick your fucking battles. I am both sick and in sales (read: filthy rich...like owning 10 cows in Wisconsin rich) so i can fucking blog all day. I don't get the trolls though. If i lived in SANTA CRUZ i would be battling sharks and sewage in the surf rather than on ANOTHER teams blog. Cheeseball at least stepped up with some semi intelligent shit the last couple of posts though but to me he is still the little italian prick from jersey that you see in a bar with a skin tight underarmour shirt on that you have to trip or punch even if he is not directly bothering you. his very existence bothers you.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    hee hee

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    It is funny to see all these pundits trying to make stories out of the teams that are left now. The media just caught with it's pants down as they have been all season, I mean the Chargers and Cowboys boy are they going to be tough to stop this year and oh that NFC north, how can you not like Favre and AP to get the queens to the top again there, even at the end of the season it's gosh I don't know why anyone is playing except for the Pats and Falcons and Saints, gotta be one of those three. Gone, all of em, dead. I can't think of a much more fitting ending for the media than a Bears - Jets superbowl, one with a who gives a crap about media QB and bland head coach, the other with a who gives a crap head coach and a bland QB. I do think it'll be closer than 10 points though, I see an 3rd quarter lead for the Bears that almost evaporates and the Pack ending up a missed FG short of OT.

    Bears win 27-24

  • In reply to dutsami:

    I'll take it FTW. As long as it's Bears > Pack... I'm good. A one point diff in the last second is just fine too.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I repeat WARREN SAPP

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    At SI.COM this website is linked to the Bears page, in recent news. I think thats how alot of the fucks are finding us.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Is the article full of words like: useless, pitiful, despicable, pathetic, losers, etc.? That's what we think of da' boars!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    What's worse, boar fans respond!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I am going to be making a few predictions leading up to the game

    1) Forte will again be in the wildcat. He will drop back to fake the pass and sprint up the middle for 5 - 15 yards.

  • In reply to jdawg:

    ....and Forte fumbles! Scooped by Charles Woodson, Touchdown Packers!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    oh pshaw... I didn't say he was going to take it to the house. Martz has run the wildcat at least once a game all season. I assume he'll run it Sunday but do something different. Also, Forte had fumble-itis last season, not this.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    When have you ever seen Forte fumble?

  • In reply to jdawg:

    This will be Aaron Rodgers on sunday.....

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

  • In reply to jdawg:

    Or, Forte will pump-fake, then run 15 yards!

  • In reply to Jokey:

    Or he'll throw another pick.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    His forte is throwing picks!

  • In reply to Jokey:

    Did anyone notice the similarities between Greenbayman and #16? Either he has switched allegiance, or there is inbreeding in the family and Greenbayman is the result of that coupling!

  • In reply to iamndmurff:

    You know I really don't have a problem with Green Bay fans being on here and bantering back and forth as long as they back up their statements with facts. I for one as probably many of us on here have no interest in going into another teams site to talk smack joking or not. I would rather talk about my team with fellow fans than be a douche and just try to irritate people.
    I really think this is going to be a close game and I wish we would have knocked them out when we had the chance in week 17. This game does scare the crap out of me as all it takes is one bad game and the dream is over.

  • In reply to jbenton:

    Well, no matter who we played in the game I'd be nervous. A bad game agaisnt anyone and the dream is over. Might feel worse coming against the Pack, but beating them in week 17 just to avoid this may have given us a road game in the Georgia Dome. I like this being at home agaisnt a team we beat once and held ot 10 points when they were desparate.

  • In reply to iamndmurff:

    the tone of the odd retorts were awkward and rushed. eerily reminiscent of #16

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    And he finishes every post with GO PACK all in caps like #16

  • In reply to Jokey:

    Matt Forte on Jim Rome in an hour.

    After Rome has been sucking on Aaron Rodgers for the last 1.5 hours....

  • In reply to gpldan:

    No one hates the bears (well I do), they just know they are inferior. When everyone picked against the seahawks, did that mean they hated them? The Bears can win this game, obviously....I'd say they have a 39% chance (that's about what the accuscore predictions are. But why if you had $$$, would you put it on the Bears unless you are a fan? Why on earth would an analyst pick the Bears other than to be different and say thump his chest if they do win? On paper, this game goes to the Pack. You can have a gut feeling the Bears will win, and there is nothing wrong with this. But the Packers are a better team. They have a significant edge on offense, especially at the QB position. Statistically, their defense is slightly better, and while I have no problem with calling it a wash on the defensive side of the ball, I give my edge to the packers because their pass defense is better and I like that advantage when the QBs are hot. Special teams, the turf and the crowd are the Bears advantages...will it be enough? It certainly can be, but I wouldn't put my money on it.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Well done Cheesy. A very good reasoned analysis. I agree in general. The Bears certainly CAN win; the Packers are the "safe" pick.

    I just wish I could read an analysis that focused on the last Bears / Packers game and not washed over 16 game stats and irrelevant comparisons based on GB/Atl and Chgo/Seattle.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Duh, did you ever stop to ponder why nobody picks da' carebears to win? There remains one undeniable fact................
    DA' BEARS STILL SUCK!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Truth Bomb

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    cheeseball you had so much promise and then you go and let some inferior blogger drag you back down. ugh.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    There is no sounder logic than THE BEARS STILL SUCK

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    'Sounder'.....your mom?

  • In reply to sjvl:

    I don't get it? I even urban dic'd 'sounder' to see what I was missing. All I got was "person from puget sound."

    Are you trying to say my mom is sounder logic? That doesn't make sense. You could say something like "your mom is a safer bet?" That would make sense. Although, I don't know why a 60 year old mother would even make a mom joke. Is your mom still alive? Because if not, that's just not fair. And you ARE a mom; You are the butt of the joke.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    OH, DUH!!!

    Sounder is a dog, idiot. From this really cool invention they may not yet have in Cheeseville: a book. Oooooh. Book. Heard of it?

    My mom is not alive, and I am not anywhere near 60, ass. I am a mom though, so I can make as many mom jokes as I like.

    You are the butt of all my jokes.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Thank you, WGN:

    http://www.wgntv.com/sports/football/bears/wgntv-bears-sports-illustrated-cover-jinx-jan20,0,6177812.story

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Here's the thing about this game. Cutler has NOT played well at all against GB defense, as their combination of blitz packages and extraordinary corner play attacks the two weakest elements of our offense: our OLine and our lack of a legitimate receiving core/Jay's throwing into traffic.

    I really (obviously) want the Bears to win, but I don't see them doing so unless we can offset the blitz packages and corner play with a consistent outside running game, AND if Cutler can rise to the occasion and make the pass that's open. I haven't seen him to this consistently, and I'm still not sold that Martz will give Forte as many touches as he needs for us to win, so I'm ambivalent about our chances.

    I think we will hold the Pack to under 20 points. The real difficulty will be scoring more than 20 ourselves. So I understand why no one is picking the Bears for this game, and I probably wouldn't either, if I wasn't a fan of the team.

    I agree that GB is personnel-wise a better overall team than the Bears, more talent at more positions, a deeper receiving core, etc. But the Bears' Defense is a wild-card: they have games where it all clicks and they'll score or create 10 points themselves. We need this on Sunday.

  • In reply to jj320:

    BEARS D-Line if you don't know by now I am not listing the sea of talent lining up on the other side of Rodgers. The Bears are putting up a W.

  • In reply to jj320:

    damn you and your logic jj!

  • In reply to jj320:

    I still don't understand all the disrespect for the Bear receivers. I just don't get it. Perhaps you are just trying to piss them all off to make them play better?

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    They are pedestrian.

  • In reply to jj320:

    Well put. If Forte can find running room to the outside, the Bears will be formidable. But I don't think they can sustain a running attack against the Packers. The Packers db's, as well as being excellent at coverage, are more than competent at racing to the ball and making tackles in the run game. Not to mention the fact that Matthews and Woodson are men possessed, they make plays all over the field. I think the scoring will be low, if it gets up in the 20-30 range, I think the Bears are in trouble. If Martz tries to lay it all on the back of Cutler, the Packers win.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    We'll see. In the last meeting, Forte was unstoppable until we stopped going to him. Plus, establishing our commitment to running to the outside will complicate Woodson's blitzes and will create the opportunity for shorter pass routes up the seam and across the middle. I don't think you can stop Forte as easily as you seem to think--assuming we don't run him up the gut, which never works.

  • In reply to jj320:

    Forte doesn't have the speed to get to the corner; of course, that overgrazed cow pasture of a field could assist him. No offense intended...

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    None taken. You've just described the state of Wisconsin. In any case, Forte's best runs are neither corner driven nor up the got but just outside the pile. I agree that he doesn't have the speed to beat everybody to the corner, but it may not be necessary assuming (a big assumption) that our OLines and Tight Ends make their blocks.

    Anyway, it's the best chance I see us as moving the ball and keeping Rodgers off the field.

  • In reply to jj320:

    He's fast enough to take the corner on a team playing 3-4 single-high faking the blitz. Nobody contains like the Bears defense. Somebody fraks up on the GB D and Forte is gone.

  • In reply to jj320:

    Guys - I'm gonna sign off until after the game. I'll read Jeff's stuff.

    Cheese noise is too loud, it's too hard to discuss stuff.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Dude don't get off. The fun has just begun. The Packers are a mirage/flash in the pan team. And Packer fans are little grains of sand on the tiny island of Greenbay. They were shitting their pants only a couple of weeks ago until we LET them in the bonus round. Fuck the Pack

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Don't let them Charles Martin you off the blog GP!

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Martin still strikes fear into the hearts of boar fans!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Your teams were fucking awful back then. Can you please dig up forrest greg and have him coach your squad next year? Oh, and fire Capers while your at it cause that 3-4 scheme obviously isn't working...

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Dave Wannstedt calls your forest Gregg, and I raise you, Abe Gibron.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Perhaps if these prayers of yours were answered prior to this Sunday, da' boars would have a fighting chance to compete.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    it's a shame that Martin is revered by some Packers fans. what a pos human being. Just for that i can guarantee that Karma is coming back for uni-b.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    This coming from the guy that screams RODGERS! DEAD! PEPPERS, KILL HIM! STAFFORD STYLE! every single fucking post.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Waffle is the standard bearer for the hypocratic boar fans....

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    it's a running joke on this blog between the guys on here you fucking faggot. oh my god just fucking leave.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Not from the mass of worms sitting inside his skull case he doesn't.

  • In reply to jj320:

    Rodgers hasn't played well against us either. It's a street fight between two morbidly obese heavyweights with their feet in cement, make no mistake.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Then again it could be another Jets game ...

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Are you referring to the Packers shutout of the Jets? How many points did the Jets put on the board against the Bears? I forgot.....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Jay and I raise the ultimate middle finger to Green Bay and its trolls.

    Hey there ho there ya hey hey stay in Milwaukee and die.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    We all know where you stick those fingers.........
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    mostly in your sisters ass hole.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Then spend Superbowl Sunday with your butt-buddies, sniffing your fingers and watching the Packers kick ass!!!
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    in your ass when we beat you fucks!

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    This is Fresno's ultimate fantasy! GO PACK!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Did someone comment on my statement?

    I could smell cheese, but couldn't make out anything intelligible. And my finger? In your eye, dickweed.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Head to the packers forum and hit on your sister. Rent that carpet cleaner from the Wal Mart and get all the crust out of your shag carpet before the big game.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Cool McMahon image. You must enjoy Packer benchwarming sliverpickers! GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    This is a good one, you have to admit.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    He was the best QB they ever had. Fuck Brett Favre.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I'm sure da' boers would like to fuck Brett Favre, lord knows they could never beat him.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    The patriots a couple years ago had NEVER lost a game in the entire season... until it mattered. We will see, if Rodgers is the new Favre, expect playoff chokage.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    Chokage? Like the imminent Cutler picksix? GO PACK!

  • I'll take it!

  • Back in your tree hole, you little hog wart!

    Pretend you didn't see that Cheesy.

    Our blog has Hobbits and a garden Gnome. It's weird, I know. They see Bears and they come...

  • In reply to gpldan:

    A buddy just brought up a statistic that is quite interesting. Did you know that Rodgers is not really effective in passing situations when sitting on the bench with a fucking concussion?

    Peppers! Fucking kill him. Stafford style.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Exactly. Bounce that noggin off our fabulous turf.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Matt would Flynnish the job

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    yeah, we wouldn't want to see the dreaded Matt Flynn come into the game.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    the dreaded Matt Flynn has a passer rating than Jay Cutler 4 points lower than Jay Cutler....and the majority of his snaps were on the road against the best team in the league.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    that lost to Cleveland. So now i can take 1 game snapshots of stats cheese? too stupid to even continue this. i have to go, peace out until you come back to sheepishly stick your hand out to get slapped on monday.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    It's not a snapshot if it's the majority of his career, dipshit.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Can we all agree that the "Instant Replay Game" is one of the greatest performances ever displayed on the gridiron?
    GO PACK!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Agreed

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    It wasn't until then, and only then, that we could arrive at the official, indisputable, straight-from-the-tape conclusion that THE BEARS STILL SUCK

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    I thought the irrefutable evidence was displayed when the boars chose shitcago as their permanent residency. I stand corrected Cheesy.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    You are really going to say Chi town is shitty? Its cousin banging territory in the great north known as Green Bay.

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Jeff - delete these guys. Many of their posts are indeed violations -

  • In reply to BillW:

    Virtually every single poster on this blog regularly violates those rules. And they should.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    OH OH, BEWARE, the censor police are on the prowl....

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Special Teams

    Bears Ranked 1
    Packers Ranked 27

    http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcnorth

    Pretty sure your cheesedick punter won't have the game of his life 2 times against the bears this year. You are fucked

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Let's all pray that the bears' special bus doesn't crash on the way to the game so the Bears might have a chance.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    They searched and searched, finally, DaDouche found a statistical advantage! I better hedge my bets!!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    ahahahha nice one

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I LOLed GP... Brilliant.

    Now will you two please stop flirting... it's almost like Romeo and Juliet for fuck sake.

  • Say what you will, troll as obnoxiously as you like.

    I am fully aware of my team's strengths and weaknesses. I still say every game is a game, and I refuse to concede a freaking inch.

    No apologies, no doubts. Fuck off, Cheeseheads.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    It wasn't too long ago that everyone else on here was telling you to "fuck off" after you showed up as soon as free tickets were on the line. Yeah, been postin' on this bad boy since Week 3....so you can fuck off.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Everybody has to start somewhere, right? I read the blog for a long time - just didn't comment.

    You are really boring.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    umm, no cheese, that is not how it works. SJ shows up regularly now and is a lifelong bears fan. You are a troll and show up whenever you think the Packers are doing well enough to talk shit. You can feel free to fucking leave whenever you'd like.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You've been a troll since September 25th of 2011. Put that on your resume' tough guy.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    I don't have the flux capacitor to pull off a procedure like that.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    88 MPH!

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    It seems humorous to me. Da' boars are resting there hopes on special teams! Hilarious!

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    McCarthy didn't find it too hilarious last time. check the tape. his neck fat couldn't stop trembling.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    and get a better avatar and please don't make it of your hero Favre awkwardly trying to use his celebrity to get some college skank that blew the resident pot dealer at FSU on the fucking reg. to do the same for him...over the phone...and via text...unsuccessfully. my god your hero and how far he's fallen.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Fortunately Green Bay likes to stock up on heroic qb's, so that their fanbase doesn't have to watch the position boast a higher turnover rate than that of a kamikaze pilot. Moses Moreno, anybody?

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    using kamikaze pilots who go down in flames and using that word in the same sentence that references Favre made me chuckle a little.

    DON'T MAKE EXCUSES

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Raider Head Coaches or Bear Starting Quarterbacks, which has the higher turnover rate?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    Big part of the game. Bears had the best starting field position in the NFL. There are mnay ways to win, not just the "preferred" way of having a strong QB. No matter how it's done, the goal is to have at least one more point than the other team.

  • In reply to BillW:

    There is no doubt that the special teams advantage is a big one.... especially if the packer's aren't able to move the ball down the field. If they go 3 and out very often they are so fucked.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Punting from inside their own 20 to the Bears is an automatic 3 points.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    You are forgetting the subsequent Cutler interception. Shame on you....

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    So you've been a troll since September 25th 2011. Put that on your resume' and run out to the pasture to tell your mama. Sure she'll be moooooved.

  • In reply to Jlehr:

    A double post! So nice, he did it twice.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Can we all agree that da' boars have no prayer of competing with the Marauding Green and Gold Horde from up north?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    you mean the colors I shit after eating a bean and cheese burrito?

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    No, the colors you shit out after Mike McCarthy butt thrusts you.

  • In reply to brocklanders:

    Do you know this from your own experience, or did your pal greenbayman show you the ziplocked goods?

  • In reply to greenbayman:

    The term "horde" is more representative of fudge fans than the team. Or is it herd? Tell your sister to put ona shirt!

    http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/deadspin/2009/08/pg2_a_packersfan_580.jpg

  • This is a winner

Leave a comment