The Three Potential Opponents: Volume One

Fantasy Playoffs start this week with a chance to win a guest column this offseason.  For Rules & Regulations, check here.  You'll be able to select your players starting Friday morning.

Now we begin breaking down the reasons why the Chicago Bears would and would not want to face their three potential opponents in the Divisional Round of the postseason.  We'll start with the City of Brotherly Love But No Love For Your Brother's Basset Hound.

#3 Seed
PHILADELPHIA EAGLES
Why?
  1. We enter the game with the confidence of having beaten them soundly for 90% of our earlier-season contest and if not for a borderline miracle touchdown pass by Terrier Vick into triple coverage, the score would have reflected the one-sidedness better.
  2. I doubt Beagle Vick's ability to come to Chicago in the middle of January and be productive in frigid temperatures.  I haven't trusted him in conditions since those images on the sideline in 2005 on the fated night of Rex Grossman's reemergence which featured him draped in blankets and looking like he was preparing to eat his teammates to survive.  Add to the mix that Dachshund Vick has been taking a beaten, a big beaten, over his past two starts and you have the make-up of a meltdown.
  3. The Bears defensive structure/turf is devised to contain the Eagles primary strength: downfield speed.  It already worked once.
  4. Matt Forte delivered his finest performance of the year against the Eagles, 14-for-117, and the Bears are a dynamic offense when he's running at 8.4 yards a clip.
  5. Andy Reid.  I know he's got a lot of fans out there but I continue to contend that Reid is one of the worst in-game coaches in the sport and the bigger the stage the more Reid looks like an obscenely-large deer in the headlights.  There are reasons they've never won a championship during this era.  One is current the third-string QB in Washington.  The other is still the head coach.
Why Not?
  1. Asante Samuel is a game-changing corner and the Bears avoided him on the first go-round.  Samuel is the kind of player who can find ways to trick our chance-taking quarterback into untimely mistakes and the Eagles may follow the Packers model of using him on edge blitzes.
  2. Our coverage units simply are not as good as they used to be (still waiting for anyone to provide reasons) and DeSean Jackson is capable of scoring every time he touches the ball.
  3. Big playoff games in poor conditions are moments for big kickers and the only kicker trusted by his team more than Robbie Gould is probably David Akers.  Akers can confidently line up, in any conditions, and knock em through from fifty plus.
  4. With all due respect to Michael Turner, LeSean McCoy is the conference back I most fear in the postseason.  He's physical, he's quick and he catches the ball brilliantly out of the backfield.  The Bears have shown a penchant for arm-tackling backs of late and that won't fly here.
  5. Brent Celek.  He had only 3-for-50 and a TD (on a miracle toss) but Celek is the type of tight end that has killed the Lovie Deuce scheme for years.  If Celek gets free in the seam, it could make for a long day.
Tomorrow we preview the #5 seed New Orleans Saints.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • I hope the Fish don't take Harbaugh FIRST

    http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d81d740c6/article/dolphins-exploring-jim-harbaugh-as-coaching-option

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Because I despise the Fish. Even without Tuna, the fish smell bad.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    The Narcissus soap:
    Skank pile on after the initial hit: 10 yards and loss of dignity

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/01/04/earlyshow/leisure/celebspot/main7211589.shtml

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I love it. Hope more come forward and make his life truly miserable. He deserves it all and more.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    best line of the article:

    According to Scavo, Favre "eyed her like a hanging slab of beef"

    Didn't know that was sexual harassment, but trying to have a threesome with two massage therapist - bravo Favre, bravo...no wonder he never got injured.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    It says he tried, 85. Doesn't mean he did.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Anybody see Forte on Jim Rome this afternoon? He gave a good interview.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Did Rome call him "Matty" or "Matsua" and tell him to smack his gloss?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Amazingly enough, no. Rome was not his usual smarmy self. It was pretty straight forward and Matty gave great answers. He represented really well.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Sorry folks... put this on the wrong message above

    http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5989146&categoryid=2459789

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Michigan's AD Dave Brandon promised the alums a new head coach in 30 minutes or its' on the house.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    +50

  • In reply to gpldan:

    It's lookin' less and less like Harbaugh.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    I know Harbaugh is a Mich Alum but he would be a moron to take that job. He's aiming for the NFL.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    UM is fucked. They need another total overhaul and reversion to Pro Style football. It will take 5 years and nobody who could actually pull it off wants to.

    The OSU rivalry died 4 years ago, but this should put the nails in the coffin nice and tight.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    This one's for crown... crown, where are you: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHOUnaD6SXU

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Reading this has inspired me to write story for kids based around the moral of having your chickens coming home to roost, reaping what you sow etc. Thanks.

    And no, it won't begin "Once upon a time there was a boy who loved himself very much, and he handed out photos of his special-place to all the girls he liked ..."

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Mangina douched by Holmgren:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/03/AR2011010305169.html

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Acapulco Gold Rickey calls Brandon Marshall a locker room cancer:

    http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/01/04/1999716/ricky-williams-indicates-it-may.html

  • In reply to gpldan:

    "Said the pot to the kettle"?

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    you said 'pot'. hee hee... uuuummmm... yeah.... he he he he...

  • In reply to gpldan:

    The Eagles spent the stretch run getting nicked up, most notably out-for-the-season-replaced-by-a-rookie, linebacker, Stuart Bradley. Now Mr. Vick hurting, not too mention that, except for that Giants' 4th quarter meltdown, defenses seem to have come up with a formula for kryptonite. Philly JUST got Samuel back so you have to wonder what % he's running on and I'll bet it's not 100.

    I'll be surprised if we see them again.

  • In reply to gpldan:
  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    A bunch of level headed if not entirely engaging gentlemen that understand the importance of humility and won't sell one another out. Unfortunately there's a red flag in all of this; their clocks never seem to work right (poor management I guess).

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Intresting Synopsis Jeff. I'll be looking forward to the Saints write up. I'd still rather face the Eagles than the Pack. I don't know what it is about Rogers that really worries me. Just a bad feeling. Vick is no push over either but Rogers gives me the willies.

  • In reply to Reichwolff:

    Rodgers is better than Manning. I could care less about stats and games-won and playoff appearances. The only thing his playoff appearances tells me is how many superbowls he's failed to win. And he's scared to run/can't run/ looks like he should be running in the other olympics.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I'll bet Denver is eyeballing him big time as well. Especially with Elway now in the front office.

  • In reply to Reichwolff:

    Lloyd Carr pissed in Harbaugh's wheaties back in the day. Put him down in public or something after Harbaugh applied for an asst. coaching position.

    Harbaugh retaliated by saying Michigan's vaunted academics were a joke. It left a good amount of blood in the water and may derail the Michigan's AD from having any chance in the Harbaugh sweepstakes going on now.

    Nevertheless, after that Bowl slapdown, Richie Rich will be gone from A2 by the time spring camps start.

  • In reply to Reichwolff:

    Can the Broncos afford him? Harbaugh is going to command the kind of money that the Bears never want to pay and Denver is still paying off their last TWO coaches.

  • In reply to Reichwolff:

    Wouldn't that be Elway's job?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    In my head, I know I should be rooting for the Eagles and the Dog Killer. Our chances against the Eagles are better than they are against the Cheesedogs, but I simply CANNOT root for the Eagles EVER.

    So they say the Dog Killer is at about 75%, but will play Sunday. I will still back the Cheese Sunday and will continuously cross my fingers until one of those Eagles thugs takes Mr. Rodgers out with his third and season-ending concussion. A win-win for us all.

    By the way, I back GP for the monthly column thing. I haven't ever done Fantasy Football in any nature, so probably won't participate in the big contest. Still thinking about it though...

  • In reply to sjvl:

    It would be miraculous were we to play anyone other than the Saints. I really don't see the Seahawks winning that game, despite how ferociously vociferous the Qwest Field faithful can be.

    I just read that the Seahawks have retired jersey #12 in honor of the "12th man" - their fans. Pretty cool, I think.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    That crowd SHOULD make up for lost time vs. the Saints.
    But I keep wondering:
    How the hell did we lose to them at Soldier Field again?
    Ugh - I thought I'd put that one out of my mind, but now I want to see Devin's punt return (and the blowup of the punter) again.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    OMG... SOOOO, like, Awesome!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WcAxbxx9yo&feature=related

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Fast actin' Tanactin!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Here's a very bold question no one has asked before.

    Is it Devin Hester ? Or is it Dave Toub? Is it the blocking compadres? Watching that runback I was thinking, Eric Weems looks faster. A couple of guys look faster. Would they have more TDs than Devin if they played for the Bears? But then you see those returns where he jinks around on the sidelines and dances through a crowd of people, and you wonder if the other great returners could do that. Probably not. I wonder how many TDs he'd have if Lovie hadn't tried to invent an ordinary receiver instead of nurturing a great return man.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I hope Dave Toub doesn't assume that he can be a great HC because he's a great ST coach. I don't want to lose him so he can go chasing rainbows. That's the mistake 99% of coaches make. I blame mothers telling their sons they can be anything they want to be.

    Lovie: "I want to be an astronaut mom ..."
    Mrs. Smith : "Look, son .... oh I'm sorry baby ... when you were born see ...do you know what 'Oxygen' is baby... ?"

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I have heard this question asked quite a bit actually. I heard it mostly after Hester's record breaking return in Minnesota. That people would try to diminish Hester's ability whilst simultaneously boosting Toub's is patently ridiculous. They are both great at what they do, but Hester is the one who's legs are moving, one in front of the other, down on the field. Hester owns two of the top five season for average punt return yardage in NFL history with only five seasons in the league. The receiver experiment is beginning to pay off. But his stint at WR is more about dollars and cents than it is about some hidden talent the coaches saw in him. No team could rightly pay 2nd tier receiver money for a player who only returned punts and kicks (even if he is the best ever). But for a Return man/Wide Receiver combo they can justify the money he got in his extension.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Carmonster, Brownie. I stand corrected, thank you. After thinking about our comments concerning taxpayer financed stadiums, I did some checking around. I did not know the the NFL has a tax exempt status and does not pay any taxes on its profits. I also found out that while generating Billions of dollars of revenue, whenever a NFL city hosts a game, Tax revenue for the City's hosting the games actually go down for the day of the game. The reason why teams try to get tax payers to finance new stadiums is because they are able to get lower interest rates when they do so. Another item to consider is the fact that while in theory most corporation do pay taxes, it's really not them that are paying the taxes because the cost is passed onto the consumer. Keeping this in mind really makes the corporate income tax argument moot from the standpoint of the rich not paying enough because no matter how much they pay, any tax increase is passed onto the consumer(you and me). So on one hand, when a person argues for higher tax rates for the quote on quote "Rich", what they are actually doing is raising the price of goods and services they themselves purchase in order to pay for higher taxes. So while it is true that the NFL makes a huge positive contribution to the U.S economy, they definitely have found a way to milk the system. One could argue that even with a tax exempt status, the NFL more than pays for it's existence due in part to the fact that nobody can claim that on the whole, the NFL has a far greater positive impact has on the US economy than if it didn't exist at all. I can definitely see valid points from both sides of this argument.

    http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/unsportsmanlike-conduct-the-nfl-bends-the-rules-when-it-comes-to-paying-taxes/

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    "Keeping this in mind really makes the corporate income tax argument moot from the standpoint of the rich not paying enough because no matter how much they pay, any tax increase is passed onto the consumer(you and me)."

    Wow.

    By that logic, the mean corporate tax rate on US Corporations would be directly linked to inflation.

    If you tax companies more, they don't just get to "make it up" by charging more for their products. There is competition.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Not exactly what I was implying GP. There is a point of diminishing returns. I happen to thing all that tax rate bullshit is a smoke screen. Everything in life comes down to the choices we make and our quality of life should never depend on what someone else says our tax rate should be.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Inflation is caused by the debt owed to the Federal Reserve, which can never be paid off because every dollar printed by the Fed is then lent to the government at interest, and which is then paid right back to the Fed as interest repayments. Catch 22. The Federal Reserve act of 1913 was a scam. America has been bankrupt since 1933 when the Fed took ownership of the dollar from the American people and it was no longer backed by gold. The Fed just prints paper - they have the printing machine - and they charge you interest to use your own money. Money that has never, and will never exist. Cool, eh? Ostensibly introduced to curb inflation, it skyrocketed inflation instead. Because the interest repayments on a loan taken out by the government in 1933 are getting so huge, the Government has to ask the Fed to print new record amounts of money each year - just to pay off the interest payments. The more money that gets printed, the further and further American citizens are plunged into debt. All of your birth certs, national parks, forests and Federal territories are held as collateral on that loan ... which by its very nature, can never be paid off. Not to mention your former Gold reserves, which are listed by the Federal Reserve on its assets sheet. Not only is America broke, it's getting broker by the minute.

    All of your county's problems, and by association, the rest of the world's - are because of the Federal Resrve act which just GAVE AWAY control of the supply of your currency to the Federal Reserve (which isn't Federal at all). It's a private conglomeration of banks :

    1. Rothschild Banks of London and Berlin
    2. Lazard Brothers Bank of Paris
    3. Israel Moses Sieff Banks of Italy
    4. Warburg Bank of Hamburg, Germany and Amsterdam
    5. Kuhn Loeb Bank of New York
    6. Lehman Brothers Bank of New York
    7. Goldman Sachs Bank of New York
    8. Chase Manhattan Bank of New York (Controlled By Rockefellers)

    That's an old list obviously, I haven't got the new one handy, it includes the HSBC bank, etc, and three more I think. Clearly Lehman Bros were 'consolidated'. These guys OWN you and America itself.

    It's unconstitutional for anyone other than Congress to control money supply, yet there they are, private banks, and they own the people and property of the USA. Mind-blower, isn't it?

    And it's completely fixable. You ask your Congressman to repeal the Federal Reserve act of 1913. Cancel the debt. Problem solved. JFK wanted to bring in the silver standard and take back control of the problem. So they shot him, and shot his baby brother too. Nothing to do with pulling out of Vietnam. That's pocket change compared to the trillions of dollars these guys are making off your backs.

    And how do they finance the interest repayments? By using above-the-law-gangsters (IRS) to collect unconstitutional income taxes. The sixteenth amendment did not allow for any new taxes. Prior to that, any income tax was only to be levied on profit or gain, not on wages and labor. Legally, the IRS are obliged to give you a receipt listing exactly what your money was spent on. They don't hand them out because your income tax goes to the Fed as interest repayments mostly. Indirect taxation pays for everything else. So if the 16th amendment didn't allow for any new taxes, and there was no tax allowed on wages and labor before that, then there is legally no 'income tax' as we know it.

    I researched this shit for years for a book I wrote - I'll be happy to point people at the relevant information if they want to check out the greatest scam of all time for themselves, as you should.

    Meyer Amschel Rothschild said:

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Addendum :

    No new un-apportioned taxes, that is.

    and "then there is legally no 'income tax' as we know it." Should be "'income tax' as we know it is unconstitutional".

    You would need to get to the Supreme Court to argue successfully that you were not required to file taxes, but of course you'll never get that far.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Thanks for the info. What is the title of your book?

    I had read that the Kennedy thing was about creating "Gold Certificates" that were akin to Silver Certificates. Not really important I suppose, since Kennedy was dead either was as control would not be with the cabal you reference.

    The entire matter of fiat currencies is going to come to a head soon. Own gold, and silver, in nice shiny coins or bars.

    To quote Gandalf: "Keep it safe, keep it secret"

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Oh I just finished it Dave, and it's a novel, not a constitutional tax tome! It won't see the light of day I'm sure. People need to know what's going on though. There's no good reason for hardship in America, it's just criminal what's going on. The little man always gets it up the jaxie.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    You should play assassin's creed brotherhood. Some fun political stuff in the puzzles.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    From Wall Street 2 - Gordon Gekko's credit crunch speech -

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rst5UcgHUm0

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Carmonster, Brownie. I stand corrected, thank you. After thinking about our comments concerning taxpayer financed stadiums, I did some checking around. I did not know the the NFL has a tax exempt status and does not pay any taxes on its profits. I also found out that while generating Billions of dollars of revenue, whenever a NFL city hosts a game, Tax revenue for the City's hosting the games actually go down for the day of the game. The reason why teams try to get tax payers to finance new stadiums is because they are able to get lower interest rates when they do so. Another item to consider is the fact that while in theory most corporation do pay taxes, it's really not them that are paying the taxes because the cost is passed onto the consumer. Keeping this in mind really makes the corporate income tax argument moot from the standpoint of the rich not paying enough because no matter how much they pay, any tax increase is passed onto the consumer(you and me). So on one hand, when a person argues for higher tax rates for the quote on quote "Rich", what they are actually doing is raising the price of goods and services they themselves purchase in order to pay for higher taxes. So while it is true that the NFL makes a huge positive contribution to the U.S economy, they definitely have found a way to milk the system. One could argue that even with a tax exempt status, the NFL more than pays for it's existence due in part to the fact that nobody can claim that on the whole, the NFL has a far greater positive impact has on the US economy than if it didn't exist at all. I can definitely see valid points from both sides of this argument.

    http://www.care2.com/causes/politics/blog/unsportsmanlike-conduct-the-nfl-bends-the-rules-when-it-comes-to-paying-taxes/

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    nobody can claim the NFL doesn't have a far greater positive economical impact than if it didn't exist.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I wouldn't ever make that argument. But I would make the argument that they do not need the preferential treatment that non-profit status provides them (which the individual teams do NOT have, btw). The non-profit status for the NFL organization is a different specific issue than the stadium financing and tax-exemptions that individual states and communities provide to teams in order to retain them in their local markets.
    Should the fat guy at the table get a free pizza because he's good for the restaurant?

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    An assumption behind analysis of the economic impact of anything seems to be that the money spent would not have been spent elsewhere in the economy. To say "the NFL contributed $50B (or whatever) to the economy" assumes the $50B would not exist if the NFL did not. I suspect the money would have been blown somewhere else.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Very deep Dave. Very deep indeed. There is a product involved though and it's really no different from a factory baking cookies. Whenever you create something there is a value. The X-factor is time. We pay dearly to be entertained just to escape from the day to day rigors or life as we know it. Ultimately we are slaves to the Government and society and the NFL offers a break from the monotonous day to day grind. So in a way Football has become a religion in itself and from that standpoint it could be argued that it's tax exempt status is justified. Tongue in cheek boys.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Are you not entertained? Are you not entertained? Is this not why you are here?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I love that movie. One of my all time favorites.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Does NFL revenue appear on the GDP? A factory baking cookies' revenue will appear as a contributor to GDP. Does the NFL 'generate' money? It gets paid money all right. It offers neither goods nor services. 'Product' is a branding/media word - 'product' is not the same as 'goods' which are listed in GDP and GNP figures. The 'service' of entertainment it provides you certainly does not appear as part of the GDP.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I've got a book at home that I think you would enjoy (it's, IMHO, very nonpartisan):
    http://www.amazon.com/Free-Lunch-Wealthiest-Themselves-Government/dp/1591842484/ref=pd_sim_b_11

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The problem with so many of these books is that all of are guided by an ideology of one form or another. Everyone has an angle type of thing. Like it or not, society has to be governed by a set of rules and there will always be winners and losers. Unless they are taught from a very young age there is not such think as winners and losers. Hmmmmm. Kind of reminds me of little league sports.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    The title is far more inflammatory than the contents. It basically is an argument for fairness in tax policy and government spending.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    And while I did not read this article, my opinion is that no corporations should pay tax at all making the entire thing moot. As for the rest of us, tax only consumption.

    See http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_main

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Constitutionally speaking, Corporations are required to pay taxes. Personal income tax actually violates the private property takings specified in the 5th amendment.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Trac -

    I got something for you, in all seriousness. You will like it. It's called the Fair Tax. Here's the rundown:

    http://musings.denninger.net/archives/6-Taxes,-Taxes,-I-Hate-Taxes!.html

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Almost anything would be better than the cracker jack tax system we have now GP.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    But the FairTax is WAY better. Please go read it. You guys never see much politics from me, but this one is my hot button. The only political matter that I actually care about (well, before Obamacare anyway).

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    I am very familiar with it. Still don't think tax's are the root SC. Love of money is my friend. Not money in itself but the love of it.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Under which amendment are corporations required to pay taxes? The 16th?

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    The tax code was originally framed with the constitution as a guide. Interstate commerce clause? General Welfare?

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    There's actually a taxing and spending clause. Taxes are lawful provided they are for the "general wellfare."

  • In reply to mottystone:

    As long as tax laws don't violate the personal property clause which is exactly what current day personal income tax does. By definition, a mans labor was considered private property and was considered verbotten as a taxable revenue source by the framers. How far we have fallen from that wonderful intent our founding father desired when they came up with the Constitution. Truly was a masterpiece. I say was because it's currently heading out the door.

  • In reply to mottystone:

    At the time the Consitution was writted, I'm pretty sure the concept was that all taxes would be duties and/or tariffs - i.e. consumption taxes.

    But I'm not an expert. The point IMO is not whether corporations can be taxes, but whether they SHOULD be. There is no advantage to anyone other than accountants and tax lawyers for corporations to pay taxes - it is pure administative overhead.

    When an additional $1 of tax is assessed on a corporation (outside a Federal Reserve Bank, but THAT is another story) there are only three possible sources for that money:

    1) Customers through higher prices
    2) Workers through reduced benefits
    3) Owners through reduced ROI

    So some *person* always pays, not a "faceless" corporation. And pays more since an entire layer of bureaucracy must be paid to do all the paperwork, and another entire bureaucracy does the useless work of checking all the paperwork once submitted.

    It's all really rather insane when you think about it. Problem is people don't.

    [okay, I'll shut up now]

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Other than whining about all my typos! Sorry!!

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Not at all Dave, I likey.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    God I love this blog. You don't see this shit on Fan Nation. Constitutional tax law debates! Hey Big Cheesy ! Stop hosing your sister and join in!

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    I agree that corporations should not be taxed. But, if that is the case, they should also not be allowed to fund our elections either. Individuals have a right to speech, not corporations.

    Which is to say I think both sides are logically inconsistent.

    For the right, if a corporation has a "right" to speech and can thus fund a political candidate then that corporation is a person and as such should be taxed like the rest of us.

    For the left, if we should tax the crap out of a corporation we should also allow them to speak out to politicians to try to reduce their tax burden as much as they can.

    For what it is worth, I think the fair tax is a decent idea. But, ultimately, we need a certain amount of money to operate the government. The question is how much crap do we want the government doing? Then you have to answer where do you want that money to come from.

    The constitution gives congress the power to tax. I don't see how income or corporate taxes are unconstitutional as some claim.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Bingo.

    If people peeled away the layers of this thing and actually knew what was going on, there would be blood on the streets in 24 hours.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I read a Henry Ford quote in The Creature from Jeckyll Island in response to the Federal Reserve Act (or whatever it was that created the dreaded monster) along the lines of:

    "If the American public knew what this meant, there would be revolution by morning."

    Nearly 100 years later and the cabal is still enslaving us.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    This one is for GP, because I know he loves him so much:

    http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2011/01/sis-king-packers-will-best-bears-for-nfc-title.html

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Viva... hold me back! Help me man!

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Don't read those ducheynes MB, don't even read them. Why do it to yourself? It's like someone saying "Hear what the village idiot said?" and then everybody runs after the idiot until he's a got a tribe behind him. Who's the idiot then? Not you, but you feel me ...

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Viva and I have this little game going on... I only do it to mess with him now Irish.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Back to football.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/05/williams-wall-expected-to-break-up/

    I have a feeling the Queens and Lions are about to change places in the North.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    The future is Smokin' Joe King!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2011/jan/04/clary-among-several-key-chargers-air/

    This is the guy that was in our Lamaze class with my first child. He's a fucking house... and so is his wife (Amazon, not fat).

    They had their baby around the same time as us... if memory serves, I think they had a... teenager.

    Lot's of FAs this year (if there's football) gents.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Tucker-Carlson-doesn-t-actually-think-Vick-shoul?urn=nfl-303312

    Aaaaaaaasssshooooooole.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    2 for2.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Tuck -

    Save you racism for Michael Steele. I know, Steele isn't actually black, but you Coulter which tit suckers like to think so.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Attention Peter King haters:

    http://czabe.com/

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Holy shit, King must have free cheddar for life.

    Packers are going to run the table and go to the Super Bowl? With no running game and a QB who has been concussed nearly one too many times.

    I will send a CRATE of Egg Nog for King to clog his heart up with if that happens.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I have vague memories of Marshawn Lynch gashing us.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    The Eagles won't need a miracle to beat the Packers. The Packers can't run the ball or stop the run. The Eagles can certainly run, and shouldn't have any problems with the Packers rushing "attack". Not a recipe for a close Packers win, and I can't see them coming in and blowing the Eagles out of the water.

    I say we'll be playing the Eagles in two weeks.

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    +1

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    agreed. Matthews is fast, but he aint Vick fast. The second the pass rush gets near Vick, he's darting down the field while two LBs are left in the backfield. GB would really have to play a DISCIPLINED game against Vick, like we did, but I'm not sure they can.

    The score will end up 34-37, something along those lines.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    There's long hair, rock-n-roll hair ... and then there's female-looking long hair. Clay, son ...

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    I know i resolved to not swear in 2011 but that is an unreasonable goal so i have tweaked it. I have made a new resolution to only swear when it is about the bears and how much we are going to fucking kill the first team we play in the playoffs. Defense is flying around and Martz, if he knows what is good for him, will go back to a balanced attack. One win and we are in the NFC championship. Punters won't always have their best game ever so Hester is bound to make dudes spring fear boners.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    Another resolution in the shitter.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    but i really think i can accomplish the new revised version. if i screw that one up i am useless.

  • In reply to hollywood1:

    I fucked up all of my resolutions on the first day, better luck next year.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Better luck?!? Sounds like optimum efficiency to me!

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    i dont like you

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    :o)

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    :^(

  • In reply to hollywood1:
  • In reply to tobijohn:

    +100 for the Samuel Langhorne Clemens quote TJ. My second favorite author

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    First?

  • In reply to tobijohn:

    I guess our Samuel said 'Fuck' a lot then ....

    Brilliant quote, I hadn't heard that one before.

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    I really don't care who we play in the NFC, I just have that awful feeling that the Pats will be waiting for us in Dallas, with a 25 year old debt that will get re-paid in full. I'd rather meet the Colts and settle our own. I'll reserve a concussion-boner for Turtlehead. One game at a time though ...

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    I think they feel a bit left out of the 'retiring jerseys' deal, not having many legendary players to boast about. I can only think of one, shame on me. I should clarify that's Largeant, and not Boz ....

  • In reply to sjvl:

    It may be worth it to hold your nose and root against the Eagles. If the Pack win, as low seed they go to the ATL.

    I would love to see them knock off the birds, and they actually have the team to do it. I don't think it will happen, but anything is possible and the Pack stand the best chance of it.

    That would have us playing Seattle, who I honestly think is going to rise up and kick the Saints in the teeth just because of the amount of disrespect they are getting this week.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    That sounds like a Kool-Aid scenario, but I think I like it! At least the part that brings the Seahawks back to Soldier Field. That would be pay-back time!

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I think the disrespect card will be maxed out before that talent gap is covered.

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    Yeah, but then all the Seahawks get a free pizza.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    As much Lovie disdain as there is, imagine being Natti fan. At least we got a playoff run, they got fucking coal in their stocking this year.

    Yet, Lewis is coming back.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/04/bengals-expect-marvin-lewis-to-return/

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Yeah, sounds exactly like last year... but I was.... inverted.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I will be rooting for the Eagles. Not from fear of the pack but from fear of the Saints. I would much rather have to face the Saints or the Falcons not both to even get to the big dance; and if the Pack manages to get past Vick and falls flat in Georgia that is exactly what we will have to do.

    My personal favorite for Superbowl matchup would be Bears Cheifs. Can you imagine that, oh man 2 teams picked to finish toward the bottom of their own division squaring off for the crown. Oh man that would be hysterical. No magical Favre, or Rodgers leading a 6th seed, or Manning magic, or MVP Brady to talk about and ass kiss all day. I don't know what would happen, they'd have to just talk about the game and the plays as they happened; what a dream.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    Headline for such match-up: "The Two Worst Teams in a SuperBowl Ever", written by Trent the Penis Dilfer.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    :o)

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Or Rosendoom's headline :

    "Oi! Can we forfeit the game already? As if."

  • In reply to dutsami:

    I may be mistaken, but doesn't the Philly field SUCK just as much as ours? That would not be good for them.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    You're thinking of that garbage that passed for synthetic turf and destroyed Wenedll Davis' career at now-departed, Veterans Stadium.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    Yeah, LFF is newfangled grass blended together with fibers...I've never heard any complaints about it. Not finding a bunch of Philly fans bitching about it online either, so it must stay drained and in decent condition.
    That plays to their personnel...unlike a certain field we won't mention.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    From the STATISTICS ARE FOR LOSERS deprtment:

    Houston had the league's LEADING rusher, Arian foster, and 9th rated passer (4th in yards passing), Matt Schaub, but they will be spectators for the post season.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    Schaub also had a pathetic fantasy season, because of INTs and the fact his yards piled up in blowouts, but sucked in big games.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Hey now I won the whole thing in dabearsblog2 fantasy and I am no ashamed to stand up there and say "Matt is our quarterback"

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    And the Raiders swept their division. Big whoop.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    I didn't see Arian Foster coming. Jamaal Charles was on all of my teams this year, and Jerome Harrison got dropped fairly smartly.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    Word is that Kyle Orton is on the market for a 2nd round pick. I can't blaim Denver, but gotta feel for the guy.

    Orton and McNabb are both quality free agent QBs. Can't say we've got a spot for either of them, but I gotta wonder where they'll end up.

  • In reply to mottystone:

    If he'd have us, I'd give up a second for Orton in a hot second. We just can't expect to win games if Cutler isn't playing - it's hard enough when he is. No spot for Orton? What, Todd Collins is a keeper? In this league you have to have a guy ready to go if your #1 is out. You basically need two #1s to cover your ass - anything else and you're not prepared.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Irish, you can not give up a second rounder for someone to ride the bench. He is a backup and never will be the guy to bring you back from 20 down in the fourth quarter. I'd say there is no one in the league going to give up a second rounder for Orton.

  • In reply to iamndmurff:

    Yeah, no way. Orton is a baller, but backups can be had for cash, not picks.

  • In reply to iamndmurff:

    But if Cutty goes down, neckbeard isn't riding the bench anymore - he's your franchise ...

  • In reply to mottystone:

    I think Kyle ends up at the Vikings. Frasier is part of the Dungy group, lots of cover 2, big run ratio, and a good game manager at QB. Vikings are pretty much set except one piece. Orton.

  • In reply to Church:

    Oh no.......Favre #2.......

  • In reply to Church:

    That makes a lot of sense, but I could also see them taking a quarterback high up in the draft.

  • In reply to Church:

    Not cool. Not in our division. He'd like that too.

  • In reply to mottystone:

    McNabb is done. Finished! He is this years Mark Brunell. A veteran that would now make a good backup.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    MB how is he an asshole? He indisputably said that Vick should NOT be executed.
    And if anyone really believes Vick is "Rehabilitated" they are seriously delusional.

  • In reply to A7Xthebest:

    He didn't rape anybody. Didn't kill anybody. Fat Ben got a four game suspension. Vick did two years. Is it even illegal to kill dogs? Is it illegal in every State in America?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    It's not only that he killed them, but how many, in what manner, and why.

    He killed quite a few, by horrendous means, for greed and sick thrills. He has issues.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Sylvia,

    Spend some time on a farm. Farmers kill cows, chickens, pigs - without mercy. Ever been to a slaughterhouse? Cows scream because they know they are getting the knife.

    I appreciate that dogs are special to humans, but Pig Ben held a girl - a human girl - down in a men's john, bent her over and jammed his unsheathed willie up her twat unprotected while she begged him not to.

    Big difference.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Can we all agree that they are both over-indulged, self-centered sociopaths?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    What a lucky girl?!?
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/01/04/ben.roethlisberger.engagement.ap/index.html

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Obviously that's in reference to the fiance.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    I wouldn't talk about my personal life if I was rapist either Ben ...

  • In reply to gpldan:

    without trying to start a riot GP, it's all in the Bible.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Dude, I used to live within earshot of a pig farm. Come slaughter time I sat there one day listening to all the pigs screaming because the farmer started killing pigs. They went crazy. The screaming gets more hysterical as the pigs get fewer and fewer, and when it get down to the last pig witnessing the second pig getting stuck, it sounds like a person screaming.

    And +1 on Pig Ben GP - a four game suspension is a sick joke, should have been double, quadruple Vick's sentence. He should at least have to wear 'Rapist' on the back of his jersey so that people don't forget who they're dealing with. It sends the message that rape carries a four game suspension? If you murder someone are you out for the season? If you maim someone maliciously can you get back in for the playoffs?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Ray Lewis killed a man. He didn't get suspended for a season...

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Was he directly involved in all that ? Like he attended dog fights? Or was it just his cousins or whatever using his property?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    No, he not only personally ran it, he personally with his own two hands strangled, drowned, shot, beat to death, and hung dogs in the process.
    He was not a bad landlord.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    TC is an a-hole, but primarily for this reason - he didn't believe what he was saying about Vick even when he was saying it. Why? Because it's his job to stir shit up without believing it.
    Vick will always be a monster, on the other hand, and your questions of legality on that front are irrelevant. We both know better.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Two days ago, Michael Steele sat right next to Tucker Carlson at a forum for GOP chairmanship and said that Charles Dickens wrote War and Peace.

    And Tucker said nothing, just made a stupid smirk.

    Race baiting is fun, unless its' one of your own I guess.

  • In reply to gpldan:

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

    There's the video. I see this all the time from political hacks in both parties. Its unfortunate when you listen to an alderman or state senator in Illinois speak and its clear they would barely finish high school if they went back.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    That was my mid-season pick, nice colors in the SB. tough matchup. Close one. I like the Chiefs. Always wanted a Christian Okoye. Every team should have one.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I'd love to see a rematch of the '85 SB... with a similar outcome. We're talking dream scenarios right?

    I think GP had a realistic scenario. I think falcons/Pats isn't too farfetched either. If we pull off a miracle and all phases show up for the next three games, who knows. An '85 rematch would be a pretty great story, exactly 25 years after the original - the outcome would be the only thing that would worry me.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    No dream if all three phases play lights out in the same game. It could happen.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Nah. Colts. Payback. Manning. Dead.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    And Big George just wrote me back! I mail George Foreman every year and tell him how great he is. Chuffed!

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    GP -
    Thank you and I agree in supporting the Player's Union during a time when labor unions are blamed for everything including bad weather.

    The anti-union garbage on Chicago Now, for example, is beneath contempt. Send a hemlock mocha up to the owner's box.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    the beard alone makes him worth picking up: http://www.nj.com/jets/index.ssf/2010/09/dalessandro_braylon_edwardss_d.html

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    And the venue of the photo is why we shouldn't.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    We couldn't even stomach CenBen being toasted, and he was on his own boat (parked in dock) when the Texas popo came a-knockin'

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I mostly just liked his beard. I think I'm gonna bust one when I can.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Ahhh, memories. Used to have a beard. Enjoyed it, too. But, eventually, the 'salt' drove out the 'pepper' and it had to go.

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    Interesting: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/01/03/goodell-email.ap/index.html?eref=sihp

    Wonder how much is propaganda.

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Almost all of it.

    All of Goodell's rhetoric comes down on the owner's side. The facts are that the owners made record profits this year and last. The externalities of the economy do not factor in if you are still selling out despite the ticket prices and luxury box revenue, not to mention what NBC and ESPN are forking out in the pool and all the tax breaks negotiated in each state.

    This is a fuck over for labor. All they want is to keep the system in place as-is, and the owner's want to make more money.

    I hope the PU stands strong, refuses to change anything, and forces the owner's to lock-out. I really do. I'd like to see in this economy how that plays in the press. This time, there is no legal recourse to hire scabs, we would just have no football in 2011.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    +10000

    ...though the press is such a corporate whore, it probably would cast the lock-out as the players being "selfish"

  • In reply to jj320:

    If Goodell wanted to do something decent for the league and help it, he'd shut the Jacksonville Jags down - where the city doesn't give a fuck about that team and shrink the league.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    An 18-game schedule will kill the UFL, btw...not that anyone cares, but all of the extra roster spots that the NFLPA negotiates into the CBA will be taken by UFL "stars". That and actual regular season games will overlap the new, earlier UFL schedule they were going to try next season.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Move them to L.A.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    L.A. Jags ?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Cleveland Ravens?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    That's messed up. You win your divison and your not in?

  • In reply to Bears85Sweetness23:

    They didn't win it, they swept it...which is as crazy as it sounds.
    We would have done both.

    A parting shot for some regs re: the great debate of the Packers game.
    Do you really think that if Martz/Lovie were pulling out all the stops and not thinking strategically, that they would not have changed, oh, say, lemme think, ONE of the hot routes from game #1 vs. the Packers?

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    If they were playing to win, they would have kept giving the ball to Forte. Simple as that. Unless they're both dumber than in our worst fears.

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    Exactly. And if they're that stupid...we're screwed anyway.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Either way, both scary thoughts. ha

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I really couldn't envision Lovie 'not trying to win'. If he doesn't want to win he has an easy out - rest the starters. Or just rest Cutler. Instant loss.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    It wasn't about winning or losing - it was about keeping momentum and getting game-speed reps in an otherwise meaningless game for the Bears. There's only so many guys you can rest, and honestly, it was nice to see Cutler work with Davis on the first string in the event that Bennett's ankle doesn't heal up quickly.
    Either way, it's moot now. I just don't see any possible way that Martz was running the same game plan that he would have if it had been week 16 or a playoff game. You can't tell me he is that stupid that he left the same hot reads in because he didn't think the Packers would adjust.
    One of my favorite college basketball coaches and a certain NBA coach are notorious for leaving guys in during the regular season when games get out of hand to make them learn how to fight through adversity.
    I think that was a large part of what went on Sunday.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The Bears site addressed some of our questions about play calling MikeBrown.

    http://www.chicagobears.com/news/ChalkTalkStory.asp?story_id=7457

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Yeah, the fact that Larry says they didn't hold back reinforces for me that they did. I think they were saving tread on Matt's tires and putting the OL under stress among other things.

  • In reply to Ufficio:

    I believe:
    Seattle is going to shock the world and beat New Orleans with....a running game that has been mostly nonexistent this year and a phenomenal ST performance.
    Green Bay is going to take it to Philly in spite of the lack of a ground game and Capers will destroy Vick with the same Woodson blitz between the Tackle and Guard that worked against us.
    We beat Seattle handily then unleash the Dragon on Green Bay in game #3.
    And that we will be playing our Darth Vader in the swamp, Tom Brady's Patriots in the Super Boal.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Highly unlikely that Seattle wins. They are a joke A

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I think it's incredibly improbable...but I believe it's going to happen. If this wasn't a home game for them I wouldn't even entertain the idea.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Don't forget possible weather factor and the previously mentioned (by me at least) Saints being a southern dome team. I certainly think it can happen.

  • In reply to PhilfromSATX:

    When they do it, you and me, Phil...we're gonna break out the "told you so" hats and dance like it's 2007.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    What does that make us Trac?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    4 Games Better.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Touche.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Just thinking about Christian Okoye, I'm amazed that it's not every team's priority to have a guy like that on their roster. I remember watching that guy and thinking "this is the future of the position". Just a faster version of Jim Brown really.

    I love what Forte does outside and receiving and all that, but watching him go up the middle makes you wonder why they bother calling the play. He can do half the job. He's a scat-back. Okoye got 1500 yards running between the bookends. 260-270lbs with the speed of a sprinter. But our top three backs all look the same, our fourth guy is a midget. Both our big-ish guys go down pre-season and nothing is done to replace the hole in the roster.

    In soccer, the big teams have youth academies. They find kids, and provide them with training throughout their whole childhoods. They groom them. Find the talent, nurture it, brainwash it. When the kid is eighteen, he's ready to run through walls and crawl across broken glass for you, he's already polished and ready to play on the world stage.

    One would think that multi-billion dollar organisation such as NFL teams would search the globe far and wide for physically suitable specimens, offer them a new life, pay them a small stipend (which would go a long way to helping their families for many years) give them an education, training camps, and then reap the rewards with excellent rosters full of special talent that you scoured the globe for. Invest in kids, not fevered spoilt egos. And before the suggestion is made, understandably, that 'What if the kid turns around and signs for somebody else?' - that's a very Western way of thinking, and you can't judge other cultures by your own values. 'Show me the Money!' is a western concept. Loyalty and roots are far more important in African and Asian countries. It takes a whole village to raise a child - but that child will die for you if you ask them.

    This guy didn't hear of the NFL until he was 21. It can be done.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OO-w04DUv4

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I hear what you are saying Irish. But know this. today's society has one goal and one goal only, to make merchandise of our children. There is not a government on this earth that doesn't do this in one form or another. Bottom line, it is impossible to stop the abuse of this exploitation of our Children for financial gain without having a moral and free society. I know what some of you are thinking already, "what is morality and freedom"? Therein lies the Quatrillion Dollar Question.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    And his NFL career lasted all of five years because of the beating he took. He was amazing though..if anyone can find the Atwater-Okoye hit, please post it.
    I think your soccer theory has an prominent colonial bent to it, and I highly suspect that's one reason it has never taken hold here. We like our exploitation dressed up in politically correct clothing.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Wow, we ain't so different after all Brownie.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvPxzQBIafo
    Atwater v Okoye

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Thanks, Irish!

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Or a short skirt put on illegal tang...cough...miley circus...what a gross piece of crap. I no longer have cable or watch network television. It is the best thing to happen to my psyche in my entire life.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Irish... this experiment is still happening in the NFL, just without the African village farming piece... his name is Brandon Jackobs and he plays for the NY Giants (all hail the New York Giants! ((movie?)) )

    He's 6'4" and 265.... he has 9 TD and an almost 6 yrd avg this year: http://www.nfl.com/players/brandonjacobs/profile?id=JAC705688

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    Glad we won't be seeing him again in the playoffs.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Wow, the Bronco's are really having a hard time letting go of the past. Could be they needed Elway to rally the fan base. I imagine Bronco's fans are fed up with the state of that organization.

    http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/01/05/broncos-give-the-keys-to-john-elway/

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I wonder where all the grown men wearing "Cry Baby Cutler" diapers have gone now.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    He owns all the freakin car dealerships out there. Why not the team, Bowlen has Alzheimers and is a couple years away from the dribble cup. Golden John is the savior.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    You, my friend, have an illegal Christian Okaye boner. A faster Jim Brown? I just peed down my leg from laughing so hard at that comment. Forte is better right now than the Nigerian Nightmare ever was.

  • In reply to MASOCHR:

    Never saw Forte knock someone over, Okoye has 50 lbs on Forte. We need a banger ... we practically need a new offense. Jim Brown played in a time where they don't have the specimens they have today. Okoye was unquestionably faster than Jim Brown though.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Props to Matty for being the only Bear other than Payton to top 1000 yds rushing and 500 yds passing in the same season. Pretty impressive 2010 for Forte. And as a random thought... it really annoys me when people *cough TROYAIKMAN cough* pronounce his name all weird like Matt FOURtay.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    *500 yds receiving... not passing sorry

  • In reply to dutsami:

    The stick, and the continued 'wussification' of our nation: http://www.fannation.com/truth_and_rumors/view/258850-niners-were-scared-of-singletary?xid=cnnbin&hpt=Sbin

  • In reply to MB30SD:

    "Maybe we should chug on over to mamby-pamby land where maybe we can find some confidence for you, you jackwagon."

  • In reply to dutsami:

    you're lucky you're not a mets fan, having to listen to jon miller mis-pronounce carlos beltran's name every time they're on sunday night baseball.

  • In reply to dutsami:

    http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5989146&categoryid=2459789

  • In reply to dutsami:

    ?? FOURtay. That's how it's pronounced. It's French for strength. Or was he over-emphasising the 'four'? - I don't remember.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    yah he puts weird emphasis on the end of the first syllable instead of just at the end like fortAY

  • In reply to dutsami:

    Well, he *is* a tool ....

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I'm really curious to hear figures on that. Are the revenues public? I think it would be great PR for one side or the other to show exactly how much money is being made or lost in the "bad" economy.

    Have to say, there were quite a few blackout games this season. I don't know what that means in terms of total numbers, especially when you factor in television sales, but somebody isn't selling tickets.

    Either way, it seems to me that there are owners willing to pay players big money (see Sam Bradford), so they can't be too broke.

  • In reply to mottystone:

    Don't they make like $220-$250 million a year? It's money for old rope. Greed. Plain and simple.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    I could care less how they resolve this dispute. I just want to see the elimination of taxpayer money subsidizing the players and owners.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    YES.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    You're welcome Brownie.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    Its very misleading to say that using Tax payer to build a stadium is a bad thing. The state makes their money back and then some. Plus a lot of contractors keep food on the table for more than a few employees, so on and so forth. It makes for nice political sound bites when the word tax payer funded stadium is used but in reality its a money maker for the State,local economy, and fans. The NFL generates Billions of dinaro for Uncle Sam to blow.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    That's just not true Trac, aside from Uncle Sam blowing money. It's corporate welfare, plain and simple.

  • In reply to TheFifth:

    Well said Cor. The world has given up on social welfare and focuses purely on corporate welfare. We're all just cattle.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Mooo....

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    Coron is totally on point. The McCaskeys made off like bandits in the SF deal, and unless you think we're making all back on parking, but do the math.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Meet Irish's new man-crush:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Petermang

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Uh, minus the G on the end...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Peterman

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    The guy we cut? What about him? Cutting Freddie Barnes was dumb. I'm approaching getting over Brandon Rideau. There's an awful lot of WR talent hitting the market in FA this year. I'm afraid I'll be heading for the clock tower with my M50 Barrat if I hear the words "We like our receivers - we'll take it from there" coming from Angelo's mouth again.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Peterman is the PS replacement for Juaquin Iglesias.

  • In reply to MikeBrownhadaPosse:

    Where is that guy?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Vikings picked him up off the PS a week ago.

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Lewis MUST have compromising photos of Mike Brown with animals or such.

  • In reply to Albertintucson:

    Man, we've all got THAT skeleton in our closet ... sheesh ...

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Truly, unbelievable. The Texans kept Kubiak, but fired all the defensive coaches, so at least there's a scapegoat. Who can Lewis blame?

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    It is my understanding that Houston fans are NOT happy about keeping Kubiak.

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    It's a new tactic you will see more and more teams employ until the collective bargaining agreement is wrapped. The McCaskey's have set the precedent. I call it the LDL principle.

  • In reply to ImissButkus:

    I don't follow ANY of the info on that because we really don't get any. What are your thoughts on all this, guys? Gut feeling. Football next year or no?

  • In reply to KissMyButkus:

    Lewis has lots of people to point the finger at over there. He should start in the mirror though. Hey, another kid's tale that hasn't been done ....

  • In reply to gpldan:

    Hold my nose, get a barf bucket, and surgery to wipe out my powers of reasoning and memory THEN I will root for the Eagles.

    Not happenin'. Live in PA one week and you will see why.

  • In reply to sjvl:

    is it cause the "hot" pretzels they sell outside the linc are never actually hot? that pisses me off.

  • In reply to evantonio:

    That's reason #4,765.....

  • In reply to sjvl:

    I dont give a fuck who wins these games. I have a enough confidence in our team that we can go out their and beat anyone of them. Pack and Eagles are gunna beat eachother up, and the Saints and Falcons are definately beatable. BEARS BABY BEARS BABY! BEST D, SOLID RUN GAME, AND SPEED PASS GAME, OH AND DEVIN HESTER BABY.. ILL TAKE OUR CHANCES

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Dude, are you speedballin' Mountain Dew again?

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Fres, for G*d's sake, don't go #16 on us!!

    BEAR DOWN LOL LOL LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    my opinions. Im just saying I dont care who wins, all I know is the Bears will be Ultimate champions.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    Of the conference, perhaps. But how do we beat the Patriots Fres? How, man? They destroyed us, and I've heard all the excuses. They got a great start ... wrong cleats ... our pass rush couldn't get going on the ice yada yada yada. There was no ice in Lambeau and there was still no pass rush. Their 3-4 would be a lot more effective in Dallas too. We don't do 3-4 teams very well.

    The Pats have a great QB, great O-line, great roster, great coach, all the things we don't have. They've already carved our defense up like a Thanksgiving turkey, and there's no reason they couldn't do it again in better conditions. Our D would be better? So would their O.

    As for the Eagles ...

    "The Bears defensive structure/turf is devised to contain the Eagles primary strength: downfield speed. It already worked once."

    > It also impedes our pass rush. And our 'top' two receivers only have speed as attributes. So that's our pass rush and WRs negated.

    "Matt Forte delivered his finest performance of the year against the Eagles, 14-for-117, and the Bears are a dynamic offense when he's running at 8.4 yards a clip."

    > God knows he's the only thing working on offense. We should go tot he well many times with Forte this post-season. Screens, wheel routes, outside runs, but please no more egotistical runs up the middle with him. You need a line and a strong runner for that.

    "With all due respect to Michael Turner, LeSean McCoy is the conference back I most fear in the postseason."

    > He's a great back. Turner has the 0-line though. Three fifths of which are free agents this year, including the best side, the right side.

    > Brent Celek = Greg Olsen. A couple of weeks of the year you'll get a decent Fantasy game from them. The rest of the year it's The Invisible Man. Show ponies.

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Irish you make an excellent point. I agree that the Pats are the team to beat. Do I want the Bears to face them in the Super Bowl as a re-play of the 85 Bears showing? No. I want the Bears in the Super Bowl of course but I truely dread facing the Pats as they are now. Very Scarey. I'd hate to have the Bears humiliated like the 85 Bears humiliated the Pats. I know there is a chance that if we did face them in the big one we might be able to win, but it's a stretch in anyones book.

    I'm hoping for some sort of AFC upset to eliminate the Pats before they make it to the SB. Maybe the Colts or Pitt can get them out before they can get there. It's happened before.

  • In reply to Reichwolff:

    Yup, the Colts would be nice. Pay them back, not let the Pats pay us back.

  • In reply to Grizzly559:

    We don't look too solid up the middle where it's most important to be solid. Teams will realise that and seal up the outsides and close us down ... if they're smart. It seems no one has figured out that yet. take away the outside from us and we don't have shit, no blocking, no fullbacks. Someone explain to me why Angelo never got us a FB after two went on IR? No wait, I got it ... FAIL!

  • In reply to sjvl:

    Great, great post Jeff.

    Vick's a bitch, simple as that. If we end up playing the Eagles I will be extremely confident.

  • In reply to Dmband:

    Vick doesn't deserve the name bitch - that is an affront to all female dogs.

    Sick twisted bastard is a bit closer, but I'm in a rush...

  • In reply to sjvl:

    I think he meant Be-atch, Sarah Jane Victoria Lynn. he was in a rush ...

    And nobody got Victoria Lynn yet, c'mon guys/gals I'm disappointed ... no googling now .... who was she ?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    I googled her and still don't know....

    Wedding Photographer?

  • In reply to IrishBearsFan:

    Perhaps I'm delusional, but didn't I guess that a few threads back?

  • In reply to Mastodon:

    If so, I missed it.

    Come on Irish, spill it!!

  • Blogfather, what of Kolb? How does the game change with the Eagles if he gets the start?

  • In reply to gpldan:

    He stinks, I think.

  • In reply to JeffHughes:

    That's what you said about the Giants before we played them. I don't think the Bears can go into any over their games without preparing for the best in our opponents and hoping we can have 3 good all around performance's in every phase of the game. No matter what teams we draw, they will all be winnable games because we have a special teams and defensive unit that can play lights out on any given Sunday. If God willing, we get Cutler's best in the next month and a half, we'll all be kissing Lovie's arse and chanting "Hail to the Champs" come February.

Leave a comment