Man that was nice!
Man that was nice!
Draft Brandin Cooks WR OSU!
Last year I said the best thing about the Vikings success was that they got Brad Childress an extension. This year I said the best thing about the Bears success is that they got Lovie an extension. Although to be fair Lovie is still a better coach the Childress.
I tend to agree about the unwarranted Lovie hate. He seems to get his teams to over-achieve. As the guy who wrote the article noted, the always play the Packers tough.
Still sweet to read though. Bear and Viking fans are gonna hate the Pack even more, assuming that's possible.
Lovie's not a terrible coach, but their personnel department is gawdawful. I think Angelo's contract expires after next year though, so he may not get an extension.
</delurk>
Detroit should be better but you never know. All I know is that the Bears were the only defense that gave Rodgers fits, 3 different times! That defense is one to be reckoned with and if Cutler ever becomes a decent QB (i.e. takes care of the football) they could be in the hunt again next year. I dont know the Bears roster situation as far as age, free agency status, etc. but I dont think they will be basement dwellers next year.Originally Posted by rbaloha
I know the first game against them was sloppy, plus 18 penalties, and we had the W in our hands a few different times only for them to come back. But the last two games against them, the Bears could have won just as easily if a couple plays went their way. I would not count them out just yet.
The Bears are getting old at key positions. Peppers, Urlacher, and Briggs are all over 30 now I believe. I don't think Cutler will ever change from what he is. They were amaziingly healthy last year, and seemed to get a lot of breaks in terms of facing teams when key players were out, etc. None of that means they're going to drop off the side of a cliff next year though.
The Lions became a damn tough team the second half of the season. They won their last 4 games and barely lost to the Bears before that. They gave the Patriots all they could handle for 3 quarters too in the 2nd half of the year. Jets too, though they lost by a field goal. They have some young studs that are growing up. Still weak in the defensive backfield. I tend to agree with those that say they'll be a team to be reckoned with next year.
The Bears would be scary with a good offensive line. I think a good part of the reason Cutler plays so skittish is because his line doesn't protect him. Can only hope that defense needs to restock by the time they get the oline worked out. Unbelievable that they spent all those picks on Cutler and have done almost nothing to protect him.
The bears still suck, the bears still suck, the bears still suck, the bears still suck, they really really really really really really suck, the bears...Still....SUCK!
I either read or heard a Cutler comment out of Chicago a couple days ago. The gist of it was that physically there is nothing that Rodgers can do that Cutler can't do, but that mentally and professional there seems to be little that Rodgers does that Cutler has shown the capability/desire of doing.
I'm with ya on the Bears. I think they'll age out of contention soon, very possibly next year, and go the way of the Vikings.
The Lions' arrow is pointing up for sure but I think they're a couple of drafts away from being a true contender. They'll be a better team but I see them at 9-7 next year and struggling to beat quality opponents who will take them seriously.
I remember the "tough" Lions going 3-13 and considered an improving squad under Rod Marinelli and look how that turned out. I'm not saying they arent an up and comer, but I wouldn't annoint them a contender just yet. Staffords injury problems are a huge concern.
I agree that the Bears were a bit of an aberration this year. They were a solid team this year that stayed healthy, had a favorable schedule, and got some breaks (the Lions games come to mind). The clock might have struck midnight when Shields intercepted that ball, but I'm not convinced it did either. The only thing I really feel strongly about is that the author of this article is clearly overreacting.
He makes reference more than once to the fact that the Packers were so bitten by the injury bug and the Bears still couldn't manage to beat them. He is referring to the Super Bowl Champs! More than a few teams couldn't manage to beat them down the stretch. That same injury riddled team spanked the Giants and Falcons, went toe-to-toe with the Patriots on the road without their quarterback, and beat an experienced Steelers team to win the Super Bowl. It could be argued that the toughest part of the last 7 games were the two Bears games.
I think I could agree with the article more if it was pointed more towards how difficult it would be for the Bears to get past the Packers next year, not how terrible the #2 seed in the playoffs were.
BTW, I hope he is right. I hate the Bears. We should just try to imagine how we would react to this article if the roles were reversed.
Last edited by Packman_26; 02-14-2011 at 10:46 PM.
Excellent post.
Keep up the good commentary. It is in the packerrats tradition of challenging the professional media and coming out ahead.
[QUOTE=George Cumby] ...every draft (Ted) would pick a solid, dependable, smart, athletically limited linebacker...the guy who isn't doing drugs, going to strip bars, knocking around his girlfriend or making any plays of game changing significance.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote