Surprising preseason rankings from Peter King

[Partial]

Bears: 4
Packers: 14
Vikings: 15

view the whole article here.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/peter_king/05/10/may11/index.html

[hoosier]

Peter King clearly didn't watch the Bears defense last year. :lol:

[LL2]

Peter King clearly didn't watch the Bears defense last year. :lol:

For real..I was thinking GB should've been higher.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.

[Scott Campbell]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.

[Bossman641]

Wow, and here I thought only Bear fans were that delusional about their team.

The Bear defense did 2 things well last year: stop the run and force turnovers, but they could be passed on all day. They didn't give up big plays as much as teams were able to dink and dunk down the field.


This is a team with far better talent than six wins, and I expect Aaron Rodgers to be better in the fourth quarter this year than last, by the sheer experience factor.

Noooo. That couldn't be.

[Dabaddestbear]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.

[Dabaddestbear]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

[cheesner]

Although I think that Peter King is one of the best writers covering football, I think he ranks pretty low on the football knowledge scale. His opinions and analysis sometimes leaves me scratching my head.

He also puts out incorrect information:


I don't trust Clay Matthews, but we'll see. Why? He walked onto the USC campus weighing 161 pounds. Is his frame fine, adding 80 pounds in such a short time?

[hoosier]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:

[Deputy Nutz]

Clay Mathews addressed the weight issue and said he certainly didn't walk on at USC weighing 161 pounds. When he was a junior in high school he weighed 161 pounds and his father wouldn't play him because he was too small. He hit a small growth spurt between his junior and senior year, he got taller and put on a little weight. He said he showed up at USC barely under 200 pounds.

the Guy grew 6 inches in his late teens. He worked out quite a bit. It is pretty explainable when you factor in the gains he made with his height. Certainly there hasn't been a proven drug out there to add gains in height. If so I would have been all over it.

Looking at Mathews he still looks a little lean. I would like to see another 15 pounds added to his frame in the next year or so.

[Dabaddestbear]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:
Well the third doesnt count since it was actually traded for their 5th.

And I agree the Bears draft picks up that high has not been impressive, but overall as a drafter he has done much better than the Packers GM TT.

[pasquale]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.

i agree with craig. i don't argue with putting them ahead of the pack and vikes in the rankings, but at 4? that's a joke.

[Dabaddestbear]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.

i agree with craig. i don't argue with putting them ahead of the pack and vikes in the rankings, but at 4? that's a joke.

hey, I never said they justified being at #4....lol.
Call it a joke would mean its too far fetched of thought. But one could debate the position they are placed. I predict at least 12 wins, with a surprise from Hester for all to watch.

[run pMc]

I like reading Peter King for his access to the players and some of his insights, but he's terrible as a prognosticator or scout. He's too fanboyish and a little too much East Coast bias for me.

Oh, and King's man crush on Fav_e is a little annoying.

I have trouble imagining 12 wins for CHI. Cutler is a great talent, but he hasn't been much of a winner in college or the pros thus far. He upgrades the offense, but he had a stronger supporting cast in DEN than he does now. When Urlacher tells him to STFU, will he? Does he cry to his agent?

Meh. MIN and GB aren't gonna roll over and give them 4 wins, and I think at #4 they're overrated. At the very least the games will be hard fought and entertaining.

Whatever, I think these ratings will be far, far off from reality.

[Dabaddestbear]

I like reading Peter King for his access to the players and some of his insights, but he's terrible as a prognosticator or scout. He's too fanboyish and a little too much East Coast bias for me.

I have trouble imagining 12 wins for CHI. Cutler is a great talent, but he hasn't been much of a winner in college or the pros thus far. He upgrades the offense, but he had a stronger supporting cast in DEN than he does now. When Urlacher tells him to STFU, will he? Does he cry to his agent?

Meh. MIN and GB aren't gonna roll over and give them 4 wins, and I think at #4 they're overrated.

Oh, and the man crush on Fav_e is a little annoying.

Whatever, I think these ratings will be far, far off from reality.
This win lost column thing per QB debate is tiring. This is a team sport, not a one on one contest. In that case Rodgers was crap last year since HE only got 6 wins.

Cutler is a piece to the puzzle the Bears needed. They no longer have to look for a QB EVERY damn season, and can now concentrate on other areas of the team unlike before. JA has did a good job this off season, and it will show when the season starts.

[hoosier]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:
Well the third doesnt count since it was actually traded for their 5th.

And I agree the Bears draft picks up that high has not been impressive, but overall as a drafter he has done much better than the Packers GM TT.

Let's compare their records since 2005 when TT became GM for the Packers. In that time Angelo's successful picks for the Bears have included Forte, Hester and Olsen. Am I forgetting any other obvious successes? Mark Anderson looked great his first year but seems to have regressed since then, but since he was a late round pick I guess we can include him. That's four. Thompson's clear successes include Jennings, Rodgers, Collins, Hawk. There are also a bunch who seem to have potential but aren't yet fully established: Colledge, Spitz (you could arguably call these two successes), Jones, Nelson, Jackson, Blackmon.

My take is that Thompson has had as good or better success ratio with his picks, and that his biggest advantage over Angelo is that he has consistently accumulated more picks--and thus a bigger, deeper group of young players ready to emerge. The Bears, by contrast, have an aging core group of players with relatively few good up and coming players (Cutler, Forte, maybe Olsen).

[cheesner]

Okay, here is Peter King's list from last year.

1. New England.
2. Indianapolis.
3. Jacksonville
4. Dallas
5. San Diego.
6. New York Giants
7. Minnesota.
8. Green Bay.
9. Cleveland.
10. Carolina.
11. Philadelphia.
12. Pittsburgh.
13. Buffalo.
14. New York Jets.
15. Seattle.
16. New Orleans.
17. Tampa Bay
18. Washington.
19. Houston.
20. Tennessee.
21. Arizona.
22. Baltimore
23. Denver
24. Cincinnati.
25. Chicago.
26. Detroit.
27. Miami.
28. San Francisco.
29. St. Louis.
30. Oakland.
31. Kansas City
32. Atlanta




http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/writers/peter_king/05/02/rankings/index.html


In his top 10, 6 missed the playoffs, 3 were drafting in the top 9, and 2 teams not in the top 10? the two superbowl teams.

[Bossman641]

Just curious DBB, but where do you see the Bears' 12 wins coming from?

@ GB
Pitt
@ Sea
Det
BYE
@ Atl
@ Cin
Cle
Ari
@ SF
Phi
@ Min
Stl
GB
@ Bal
Min
@ Det

[Partial]

I would put the rankings as follows:
Minn
GB/Chicago push

[Dabaddestbear]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:
Well the third doesnt count since it was actually traded for their 5th.

And I agree the Bears draft picks up that high has not been impressive, but overall as a drafter he has done much better than the Packers GM TT.

Let's compare their records since 2005 when TT became GM for the Packers. In that time Angelo's successful picks for the Bears have included Forte, Hester and Olsen. Am I forgetting any other obvious successes? Mark Anderson looked great his first year but seems to have regressed since then, but since he was a late round pick I guess we can include him. That's four. Thompson's clear successes include Jennings, Rodgers, Collins, Hawk. There are also a bunch who seem to have potential but aren't yet fully established: Colledge, Spitz (you could arguably call these two successes), Jones, Nelson, Jackson, Blackmon.

My take is that Thompson has had as good or better success ratio with his picks, and that his biggest advantage over Angelo is that he has consistently accumulated more picks--and thus a bigger, deeper group of young players ready to emerge. The Bears, by contrast, have an aging core group of players with relatively few good up and coming players (Cutler, Forte, maybe Olsen).

Ted Thompson has picked 43 players in his four drafts as general manager of the Green Bay Packers, and while 10 remain regular starters, only one – safety Nick Collins (a second-round pick in 2005) has made the Pro-Bowl.

A break down of TT picks.....courtesy of a buddy of mine.
Brett Swain (seventh round, 2008): Drafted to be a Wes Welker-type receiver but couldn’t catch the ball and spent last season on the practice squad.

Justin Harrell (first round, 2007): Perhaps Thompson’s worst pick. Defensive tackle taken 16th overall has played in just 13 games in two years largely due to injuries, which were a concern when he came out of college.

Brandon Jackson (second round, 2007): Decent third-down running back but hasn’t shown anything to make anyone think he can be a full-time, every-down back, which second-round picks should be.

Aaron Rouse (third round, 2007): Has made a few big plays but gives up way too many and has yet to challenge for the starting safety spot next to Collins.

Allen Barbre (fourth round, 2007): Went into training camp last season battling with Colledge for a starting guard spot but never provided much competition.

David Clowney (fifth round, 2007): Fifth rounders should at least make the team, but this receiver couldn’t. He’s with the Jets now but still hasn’t done anything.

Desmond Bishop (sixth round, 2007): Has been a contributor on special teams but hasn’t excelled in his few opportunities at linebacker.

DeShawn Wynn (seventh round, 2007): Production hasn’t been the problem (he has a 5.4-yard rushing average) but staying healthy has been.

Clark Harris (seventh round, 2007): Tight end spent less than two weeks on the practice squad as a rookie but eventually hooked on with the Texans as a long snapper.

A.J. Hawk (first round, 2006): Not a bad player but not what you’d expect from the fifth overall pick in the draft. If injuries were the problem last season, then still has a chance to be the impact player you’re supposed to get at the top of the draft.

Abdul Hodge (third round, 2006): Knee injuries derailed his career but he was an unproductive linebacker even before that. Caught on with the Bengals last season.

Cory Rodgers (fourth round, 2006): See David Clowney, only worse. The highest-picked player not to make the team under Thompson. Later played in the CFL.

Ingle Martin (fifth round, 2006): Third-stringer for a year who has since spent time on the Titans’ practice squad. Doesn’t look like an NFL starter.

Tony Moll (fifth round, 2006): Had several chances to win starting jobs at multiple positions on the offensive line but lost out every time.

Tyrone Culver (sixth round, 2006): Played on special teams as a rookie, spent 2007 on injured reserve and then was released.

Dave Tollefson (seventh round, 2006): Spent rookie season on the practice squad but eventually landed with the Giants in 2007 and played in Super Bowl XLII.
================================================== ===
Angelo's probowl players

Lance briggs charles tillman, nathan vasher tommie harris, devin hester, Alex Brown (probowl alternate)

ted thompsons:

nick collins

angelo record since teddy been in greenbay 40-26

teddy's record- 21-33

Angelo's done a better job both by wins( and w's are what matter, right?) or once again will the parmeter switch.. now that shows packers and terrible teddy in a bad light.

[Spaulding]

I like reading Peter King for his access to the players and some of his insights, but he's terrible as a prognosticator or scout. He's too fanboyish and a little too much East Coast bias for me.

I have trouble imagining 12 wins for CHI. Cutler is a great talent, but he hasn't been much of a winner in college or the pros thus far. He upgrades the offense, but he had a stronger supporting cast in DEN than he does now. When Urlacher tells him to STFU, will he? Does he cry to his agent?

Meh. MIN and GB aren't gonna roll over and give them 4 wins, and I think at #4 they're overrated.

Oh, and the man crush on Fav_e is a little annoying.

Whatever, I think these ratings will be far, far off from reality.
This win lost column thing per QB debate is tiring. This is a team sport, not a one on one contest. In that case Rodgers was crap last year since HE only got 6 wins.

Cutler is a piece to the puzzle the Bears needed. They no longer have to look for a QB EVERY damn season, and can now concentrate on other areas of the team unlike before. JA has did a good job this off season, and it will show when the season starts.

No offense but you have to be a little bit on the homer side to see 12 wins for the Bears. This is a team that continues to regress defensively but I do agree that with the signing of Cutler it does legitimize the offense a bit.

The big question is does the addition of Cutler but lack of proven #1 receiver (Hester is still raw) offset the likely continued decline defensively?

Playing Hester full time at WR seems to have reduced his impact on special teams (or at least it did last year - is this a trend or abberation?).

Brian needs to stay healthy on defense and Tommie needs to return to form for this team to really be a 10+ win team (well that and avoiding the injury bug which seems to affect the Bears secondary every other year).

I see a much more competitive NFC North with the Bears/Vikes/Pack all having an equal shot at winning the division. Twelve wins though? Just don't see it. 10-6 will probably win the division this year.

[Partial]

Just curious DBB, but where do you see the Bears' 12 wins coming from?

@ GB
Pitt
@ Sea
Det
BYE
@ Atl
@ Cin
Cle
Ari
@ SF
Phi
@ Min
Stl
GB
@ Bal
Min
@ Det

They only have 5 tough games imo. With a little luck and good health its possible I guess.
@bal loss
@minn loss
pitt loss
philly loss
@atl - tossup
ari - tossup

[hoosier]

Ted Thompson has picked 43 players in his four drafts as general manager of the Green Bay Packers, and while 10 remain regular starters, only one – safety Nick Collins (a second-round pick in 2005) has made the Pro-Bowl.

A break down of TT picks.....courtesy of a buddy of mine.
Brett Swain (seventh round, 2008): Drafted to be a Wes Welker-type receiver but couldn’t catch the ball and spent last season on the practice squad.

Justin Harrell (first round, 2007): Perhaps Thompson’s worst pick. Defensive tackle taken 16th overall has played in just 13 games in two years largely due to injuries, which were a concern when he came out of college.

Brandon Jackson (second round, 2007): Decent third-down running back but hasn’t shown anything to make anyone think he can be a full-time, every-down back, which second-round picks should be.

Aaron Rouse (third round, 2007): Has made a few big plays but gives up way too many and has yet to challenge for the starting safety spot next to Collins.

Allen Barbre (fourth round, 2007): Went into training camp last season battling with Colledge for a starting guard spot but never provided much competition.

David Clowney (fifth round, 2007): Fifth rounders should at least make the team, but this receiver couldn’t. He’s with the Jets now but still hasn’t done anything.

Desmond Bishop (sixth round, 2007): Has been a contributor on special teams but hasn’t excelled in his few opportunities at linebacker.

DeShawn Wynn (seventh round, 2007): Production hasn’t been the problem (he has a 5.4-yard rushing average) but staying healthy has been.

Clark Harris (seventh round, 2007): Tight end spent less than two weeks on the practice squad as a rookie but eventually hooked on with the Texans as a long snapper.

A.J. Hawk (first round, 2006): Not a bad player but not what you’d expect from the fifth overall pick in the draft. If injuries were the problem last season, then still has a chance to be the impact player you’re supposed to get at the top of the draft.

Abdul Hodge (third round, 2006): Knee injuries derailed his career but he was an unproductive linebacker even before that. Caught on with the Bengals last season.

Cory Rodgers (fourth round, 2006): See David Clowney, only worse. The highest-picked player not to make the team under Thompson. Later played in the CFL.

Ingle Martin (fifth round, 2006): Third-stringer for a year who has since spent time on the Titans’ practice squad. Doesn’t look like an NFL starter.

Tony Moll (fifth round, 2006): Had several chances to win starting jobs at multiple positions on the offensive line but lost out every time.

Tyrone Culver (sixth round, 2006): Played on special teams as a rookie, spent 2007 on injured reserve and then was released.

Dave Tollefson (seventh round, 2006): Spent rookie season on the practice squad but eventually landed with the Giants in 2007 and played in Super Bowl XLII.
================================================== ===
Angelo's probowl players

Lance briggs charles tillman, nathan vasher tommie harris, devin hester, Alex Brown (probowl alternate)

ted thompsons:

nick collins

angelo record since teddy been in greenbay 40-26

teddy's record- 21-33

Angelo's done a better job both by wins( and w's are what matter, right?) or once again will the parmeter switch.. now that shows packers and terrible teddy in a bad light.

I thought we were talking about who's done a better job of drafting. That's certainly related to winning but they're not the same thing. Who's switching parameters again?

One problem with your "comparison" is that you're including guys like Briggs, Harris and Brown who were drafted before 2005. If you want to do that you'll have to include guys the Seahawks drafted before '05 as well, guys like Hutchinson, Alexander, Jackson, Trufant, Hamlin, Lucas. You want to extend the comparison? I think things will look even worse for Angelo if you do.

Your "breakdown" of TT's drafts is pretty meaningless since it only focuses on picks that haven't worked out as well as originally hoped. You even include the 7th rounders that were cut! Since every team has those, you're not going to learn much from looking at just them. Let me just say I'm glad you never graded one of my school projects. :lol:

[Bossman641]

Come on DBB, you're better than that.

Angelo has been the GM since 2001, TT since 2005.

Looking at Angelo's drafts over the same time frame, his picks have been pretty shitty. Angelo has one Pro Bowl player from the same period and he made it as a returner.

2008
Rnd Name College Note
1 Chris Williams Vanderbilt
2 Matt Forte Tulane
3 Earl Bennett Vanderbilt
3 Marcus Harrison Arkansas
4 Craig Steltz Louisiana State
5 Zackary Bowman Nebraska
5 Kellen Davis Michigan State
7 Ervin Baldwin Michigan State
7 Chester Adams Georgia
7 Joey LaRocque Oregon State
7 Kirk Barton Ohio State
7 Marcus Monk Arkansas

2007
Rnd Name College Note
1 Greg Olsen Miami (Fla.)
2 Dan Bazuin Central Michigan
3 Garrett Wolfe Northern Illinois
3 Michael Okwo Stanford
4 Josh Beekman Boston College
5 Kevin Payne Louisiana-Monroe
5 Corey Graham New Hampshire
7 Trumaine McBride Mississippi
7 Aaron Brant Iowa State

2006
Rnd Name College Note
2 Danieal Manning Abilene Christian
2 Devin Hester Miami (FL)
3 Dusty Dvoracek Oklahoma
4 Jamar Williams Arizona State
5 Mark Anderson Alabama
6 J.D. Runnels Oklahoma
6 Tyler Reed Penn State

2005
Rnd Name College Note
1 Cedric Benson Texas
2 Mark Bradley Oklahoma
4 Kyle Orton Purdue
5 Airese Currie Clemson
6 Chris Harris Louisiana-Monroe
7 Rodriques Wilson South Carolina

[Packnut]

I would put the rankings as follows:
Minn
GB/Chicago push

Agreed. All 3 are equal right now. Really, IF you want to argue putting one team slightly ahead, it would be the Vikes with a proven run stop D and a proven run game.

[Bossman641]

Just curious DBB, but where do you see the Bears' 12 wins coming from?

@ GB
Pitt
@ Sea
Det
BYE
@ Atl
@ Cin
Cle
Ari
@ SF
Phi
@ Min
Stl
GB
@ Bal
Min
@ Det

They only have 5 tough games imo. With a little luck and good health its possible I guess.
@bal loss
@minn loss
pitt loss
philly loss
@atl - tossup
ari - tossup

Count me a homer but I'd include both Packer games as tough as well.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.
Umm, no they weren't.

Per Football Outsiders:
Run blocking - Chi 24th, GB 18th
Pass blocking - Chi 11th, GB 14th

I dare say that overall, the GB OL was better than the Bears last year.

As far as WRs go, they have some of the poorest in the NFL.

[Partial]

Count me a homer but I'd include both Packer games as tough as well.

I would call you a homer because the Bears have had a great level of success again the Packers in their recent history. I think they'll split.

[cpk1994]

Just curious DBB, but where do you see the Bears' 12 wins coming from?

@ GB
Pitt
@ Sea
Det
BYE
@ Atl
@ Cin
Cle
Ari
@ SF
Phi
@ Min
Stl
GB
@ Bal
Min
@ Det

They only have 5 tough games imo. With a little luck and good health its possible I guess.
@bal loss
@minn loss
pitt loss
philly loss
@atl - tossup
ari - tossup

Count me a homer but I'd include both Packer games as tough as well.You don't have to be a homer to see the GB-Bears games will be tough. The PAckers were one blocked FG from sweeping the Bears. Cutler isn't going to make that big a difference by himself.

THe reason Partial doesn't is simple. Roadgers hater + man-crush on Cutler = Pacxkers not tough in Partial's book.

[Partial]

2004 - 1-1
2005 - 0-2
2006 - 1-1
2007 - 0-2
2008 - 1-1

record past 5 years: 3-7

Recent history shows the Bears have played us very tough. It has nothing to do with Rodgers or Cutler or anything like that. One field goal away... woulda shoulda coulda.. almost only counts in horseshoes my friend. You lose games that you almost win.

I think they'll split, like I said. So cut the BS and thinking you can read people's minds.

[Scott Campbell]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:


They also gave up Orton, who at the very least looks like a reliable backup. Bear fans are in full spin mode on this deal. It's like my wives when they go to the store and come back with a truckload of crap - and tell me how much money I "saved".

[Scott Campbell]

I would put the rankings as follows:
Minn
GB/Chicago push

Agreed. All 3 are equal right now. Really, IF you want to argue putting one team slightly ahead, it would be the Vikes with a proven run stop D and a proven run game.


Holy crap - I agree with Packnut!

[Dabaddestbear]

Just curious DBB, but where do you see the Bears' 12 wins coming from?

@ GB
Pitt
@ Sea
Det
BYE
@ Atl
@ Cin
Cle
Ari
@ SF
Phi
@ Min
Stl
GB
@ Bal
Min
@ Det

I hate to predict games before seeing at least some pre-season practices(they are not games cuz they are meaningless), but here goes.

@ GB --W, Get the packers before they get their new defense together and b4 they get film on how to stop Cutler on the Bears.
Pitt--L Pitt got new weapons on offense, should make it hard to pull one off
@ Sea-- W, nothing suggest that Seattle will improve much from last year this early in the season.
Det-- W, Bears get the Kittens before they realize what they have in the new team.
BYE
@ Atl -- After a week of rest they are back for a grudge match and vengeance for the win they let escaped them last year.
@ Cin --- W, why would they lose? Seriously?
Cle-- W Shambles of a team that could be only going down from here.
Ari-- L, I just think they are even stronger this year
@ SF-- W, they are dealing with what the bears had to deal with for so long...No true answer at QB.
Phi-- W, only cuz it will be at home
@ Min-- L, until we find a way to stop AP in Minny
Stl--- W, they are truly rebuilding
GB-- L, just hard to think you guys havent improved.
@ Bal-- W, this team is not as talented as one thinks.
Min-- W, at home the Bears would be ready for a rival game that may decide position in the playoffs.
@ Det-- W, if Bears are resting players then this will be a loss.

[Dabaddestbear]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:


They also gave up Orton, who at the very least looks like a reliable backup. Bear fans are in full spin mode on this deal. It's like my wives when they go to the store and come back with a truckload of crap - and tell me how much money I "saved".
I didnt know you were a polygamist? Must be nice.

[Dabaddestbear]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.
Umm, no they weren't.

Per Football Outsiders:
Run blocking - Chi 24th, GB 18th
Pass blocking - Chi 11th, GB 14th

I dare say that overall, the GB OL was better than the Bears last year.

As far as WRs go, they have some of the poorest in the NFL.
Um, did you look up false starts, and how many times the O-line virtually cost you guys the game because of them?

[cpk1994]

2004 - 1-1
2005 - 0-2
2006 - 1-1
2007 - 0-2
2008 - 1-1

record past 5 years: 3-7

Recent history shows the Bears have played us very tough. It has nothing to do with Rodgers or Cutler or anything like that. One field goal away... woulda shoulda coulda.. almost only counts in horseshoes my friend. You lose games that you almost win.

I think they'll split, like I said. So cut the BS and thinking you can read people's minds.Well, you are the one who said the Bears only had 5 games that were tough, and neither game against the Packers was listed.

The Packers whopped the Bears ass 34-3 last year in game one. That's playing tough? The Bears were handed game two. The Packers were han dling them until until McCarthy's brain went dead.

Packers have handled Cuteler bnefore and he had better recievers then and the Packers had the liability knwon as ABob Sanders running the defense. I don't see the Beras anything more than they were last year, even with Cutler because Cutler is overated imo. Your mancrush on Cutler is almost making you a Bears homer.

[Scott Campbell]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:


They also gave up Orton, who at the very least looks like a reliable backup. Bear fans are in full spin mode on this deal. It's like my wives when they go to the store and come back with a truckload of crap - and tell me how much money I "saved".
I didnt know you were a polygamist? Must be nice.


In theory - you'd think so.

[Lurker64]

I personally see the three way race in the NFC North as being very competitive. Anybody could take it. It'll probably come down to who stays healthy and who gets hot at the right time, though the Vikes might be in trouble if they have to play the first four without the Williamses.

I don't think there's a clear favorite at this point.

[Dabaddestbear]

2004 - 1-1
2005 - 0-2
2006 - 1-1
2007 - 0-2
2008 - 1-1

record past 5 years: 3-7

Recent history shows the Bears have played us very tough. It has nothing to do with Rodgers or Cutler or anything like that. One field goal away... woulda shoulda coulda.. almost only counts in horseshoes my friend. You lose games that you almost win.

I think they'll split, like I said. So cut the BS and thinking you can read people's minds.Well, you are the one who said the Bears only had 5 games that were tough, and neither game against the Packers was listed.

The Packers whopped the Bears ass 34-3 last year in game one. That's playing tough? The Bears were handed game two. The Packers were han dling them until until McCarthy's brain went dead.

Packers have handled Cuteler bnefore and he had better recievers then and the Packers had the liability knwon as ABob Sanders running the defense. I don't see the Beras anything more than they were last year, even with Cutler because Cutler is overated imo. Your mancrush on Cutler is almost making you a Bears homer.
I just have to say that why is it WHENEVER the Bears win against the Pack its because of what the Packers didnt do rather than what the Bears did?
I give credit where credit is due. I can just say that that the Bears didnt show up for that blowout game and didnt feel like playing, thats the only reason why they lost, but that would sound just as stupid as always making excuses when the Bears beat the Packers.

[Partial]

Where is the homerism? I posted a cold hard fact with their recent record. It's undeniable the Packers have struggled against the Bears in recent years.

Even when our team was spectacular and went to the championship game, 2 of our 3 losses were to the Bears.

Like I said, they'll probably split.

[wist43]

King tends to get caught up in hyperbole... Bears trade for Cutler, e.g. they must be SB contenders.

Don't think he really knows much about the game.

[Tyrone Bigguns]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.
Umm, no they weren't.

Per Football Outsiders:
Run blocking - Chi 24th, GB 18th
Pass blocking - Chi 11th, GB 14th

I dare say that overall, the GB OL was better than the Bears last year.

As far as WRs go, they have some of the poorest in the NFL.
Um, did you look up false starts, and how many times the O-line virtually cost you guys the game because of them?

Why dont' you provide them to us. This should be good.

[Scott Campbell]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

[cpk1994]

Where is the homerism? I posted a cold hard fact with their recent record. It's undeniable the Packers have struggled against the Bears in recent years.

Even when our team was spectacular and went to the championship game, 2 of our 3 losses were to the Bears.

Like I said, they'll probably split.Except last year. Based on that, since that is ARod's results against them, I think the Packers will sweep. Cutler or no Cutler.

[cpk1994]

King tends to get caught up in hyperbole... Bears trade for Cutler, e.g. they must be SB contenders.

Don't think he really knows much about the game.I agree with Wist. I guess I am going to hell now. :wink:

[pbmax]

King tends to get caught up in hyperbole... Bears trade for Cutler, e.g. they must be SB contenders.

Don't think he really knows much about the game.
The Winner! Forget Steve "The Homer" True, Peter King is the President of the Overeaction Club. Bear's will be better, but 12 wins means an awful lot of other things have to go well. I also don't buy those defensive stats he uses as definitive, but I haven't looked it up either, so I have no counter argument. My eyeballs did not believe they were watching a top ten defense last season while watching the Bears.

It was nice to see a Packer's fan come to the defense of the O Line, which has been playing much better in the last 2 years. They aren't the 2003 team yet, but its getting way better. If Rodgers pocket awareness increases, those sack totals will come down as well.

[StPaulPackFan]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?

[Dabaddestbear]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.
Credit given.

Now lets talk about the past 5-10 years.

[Dabaddestbear]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

[StPaulPackFan]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

You have to admit, Scott had a pretty clever comeback. I acknowledged it.

Since you set the parameters, the Packers are 92-68 over the past 10 years. Your beloved bears are 80-80. I guess the real question is how old are you?

[ThunderDan]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

Packers up 11-9

Last 15 years, 21-9

[Bossman641]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

Can you please state that to the rest of your Bear brethren so they will finally STFU about 1985? It was 24 years ago and most still talk like it happened yesterday.

[Packnut]

I would put the rankings as follows:
Minn
GB/Chicago push

Agreed. All 3 are equal right now. Really, IF you want to argue putting one team slightly ahead, it would be the Vikes with a proven run stop D and a proven run game.


Holy crap - I agree with Packnut!

Even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then............ :shock:

[Dabaddestbear]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

You have to admit, Scott had a pretty clever comeback. I acknowledged it.

Since you set the parameters, the Packers are 92-68 over the past 10 years. Your beloved bears are 80-80. I guess the real question is how old are you?
I asked because what grown man or woman says "OWNED"?

And I said the last 10 years just so you guys can stop talking about the Past. Now in the even more recent years, past 5, the Bears are #2 in the NFC in wins. Now go ahead and dig that up, but I am sure you already did.... :wink:

[Dabaddestbear]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

Can you please state that to the rest of your Bear brethren so they will finally STFU about 1985? It was 24 years ago and most still talk like it happened yesterday.
lol...when I speak on 85' I only get pissed about Payton not getting a TD.
You never can find a post on here where I ever bragged about 85. Now I will debate if they were the greatest SB team ever, but thats another story.

[StPaulPackFan]

I give credit where credit is due.


Then I'd like credit for 3 Lombardi Trophies, 12 world titles, and a general concession that the Packers have the superior NFL franchise.

DBB, can you say O-W-N-E-D?
Um, How old are you?
He stated things from the past, I suggest we live within the past 10 years at least.

You have to admit, Scott had a pretty clever comeback. I acknowledged it.

Since you set the parameters, the Packers are 92-68 over the past 10 years. Your beloved bears are 80-80. I guess the real question is how old are you?
I asked because what grown man or woman says "OWNED"?

And I said the last 10 years just so you guys can stop talking about the Past. Now in the even more recent years, past 5, the Bears are #2 in the NFC in wins. Now go ahead and dig that up, but I am sure you already did.... :wink:

I'll say it again, you set the parameters, not me. I stated a fact that contradicted your arrogant statement. Now you conveniently change the parameters to fit your argument. Good job. At least you figured out how to use google before shooting off your mouth a second time.

BTW, maybe you shouldn't be asking what grown man or woman says "OWNED". Maybe you should be asking yourself why you spend so much time on a Packer forum. :wink:

[KYPack]

I asked because what grown man or woman says "OWNED"?



Snake would say "PWNED", which is the proper way to say it in Snakeville.

[pbmax]

I asked because what grown man or woman says "OWNED"?



Snake would say "PWNED", which is the proper way to say it in Snakeville.
I have never understood that, and I actually get quite a few internet memes, more than someone my age should get. I can't even guess how to say it.

[Fritz]

Let them hype the Bears. They deserve the additional pressure having gambled away so many picks this year.
They gave up two picks over 3 years. Yep thats really a whole lot. :roll:

The Bears gave up three picks in two years: first rounders in 2009 and 2010, and a third 2009. They also got back a five from Denver in 2009. Given how the Bears first round picks have turned out lately, you could argue they didn't lose very much in giving those picks to Denver. :lol:
Well the third doesnt count since it was actually traded for their 5th.

And I agree the Bears draft picks up that high has not been impressive, but overall as a drafter he has done much better than the Packers GM TT.

Let's compare their records since 2005 when TT became GM for the Packers. In that time Angelo's successful picks for the Bears have included Forte, Hester and Olsen. Am I forgetting any other obvious successes? Mark Anderson looked great his first year but seems to have regressed since then, but since he was a late round pick I guess we can include him. That's four. Thompson's clear successes include Jennings, Rodgers, Collins, Hawk. There are also a bunch who seem to have potential but aren't yet fully established: Colledge, Spitz (you could arguably call these two successes), Jones, Nelson, Jackson, Blackmon.

My take is that Thompson has had as good or better success ratio with his picks, and that his biggest advantage over Angelo is that he has consistently accumulated more picks--and thus a bigger, deeper group of young players ready to emerge. The Bears, by contrast, have an aging core group of players with relatively few good up and coming players (Cutler, Forte, maybe Olsen).

Ted Thompson has picked 43 players in his four drafts as general manager of the Green Bay Packers, and while 10 remain regular starters, only one – safety Nick Collins (a second-round pick in 2005) has made the Pro-Bowl.

A break down of TT picks.....courtesy of a buddy of mine.
Brett Swain (seventh round, 2008): Drafted to be a Wes Welker-type receiver but couldn’t catch the ball and spent last season on the practice squad.

Justin Harrell (first round, 2007): Perhaps Thompson’s worst pick. Defensive tackle taken 16th overall has played in just 13 games in two years largely due to injuries, which were a concern when he came out of college.

Brandon Jackson (second round, 2007): Decent third-down running back but hasn’t shown anything to make anyone think he can be a full-time, every-down back, which second-round picks should be.

Aaron Rouse (third round, 2007): Has made a few big plays but gives up way too many and has yet to challenge for the starting safety spot next to Collins.

Allen Barbre (fourth round, 2007): Went into training camp last season battling with Colledge for a starting guard spot but never provided much competition.

David Clowney (fifth round, 2007): Fifth rounders should at least make the team, but this receiver couldn’t. He’s with the Jets now but still hasn’t done anything.

Desmond Bishop (sixth round, 2007): Has been a contributor on special teams but hasn’t excelled in his few opportunities at linebacker.

DeShawn Wynn (seventh round, 2007): Production hasn’t been the problem (he has a 5.4-yard rushing average) but staying healthy has been.

Clark Harris (seventh round, 2007): Tight end spent less than two weeks on the practice squad as a rookie but eventually hooked on with the Texans as a long snapper.

A.J. Hawk (first round, 2006): Not a bad player but not what you’d expect from the fifth overall pick in the draft. If injuries were the problem last season, then still has a chance to be the impact player you’re supposed to get at the top of the draft.

Abdul Hodge (third round, 2006): Knee injuries derailed his career but he was an unproductive linebacker even before that. Caught on with the Bengals last season.

Cory Rodgers (fourth round, 2006): See David Clowney, only worse. The highest-picked player not to make the team under Thompson. Later played in the CFL.

Ingle Martin (fifth round, 2006): Third-stringer for a year who has since spent time on the Titans’ practice squad. Doesn’t look like an NFL starter.

Tony Moll (fifth round, 2006): Had several chances to win starting jobs at multiple positions on the offensive line but lost out every time.

Tyrone Culver (sixth round, 2006): Played on special teams as a rookie, spent 2007 on injured reserve and then was released.

Dave Tollefson (seventh round, 2006): Spent rookie season on the practice squad but eventually landed with the Giants in 2007 and played in Super Bowl XLII.
================================================== ===
Angelo's probowl players

Lance briggs charles tillman, nathan vasher tommie harris, devin hester, Alex Brown (probowl alternate)

ted thompsons:

nick collins

angelo record since teddy been in greenbay 40-26

teddy's record- 21-33

Angelo's done a better job both by wins( and w's are what matter, right?) or once again will the parmeter switch.. now that shows packers and terrible teddy in a bad light.

Coupla things...first of all that line about "the third doesn't count..." So you're saying that giving up the third round pick doesn't count as a cost for Cutler since it was merely exchanged for a fifth? Wow. I hope Thompson starts calling Angelo up, then. "Hey, Jerry, I'll give you my fifth next year for your third. I heard you did that with Denver."

As for that list of your buddy's....okay. Take any GM, ever. Let's go with Pioli/Belichek, shall we?

2005 - 7. (255) Andy Stokes, TE William & Penn, (170) Ryan Claridge, LB Nevada-Las Vegas

2006 - 2 4 36 Chad Jackson WR Florida - oooh, chad jackson. NE passed on Greg Jennings for this guy. 6 22 191 Jeremy Mincey DE Florida

2007 - 6 6 34 208 Justise Hairston RB Central Connecticut St.
7 6 35 209 Corey Hilliard T Oklahoma State
8 7 1 211 Oscar Lua LB USC

2008 - 3 31 94 Kevin O'Connell QB San Diego State

Man, New England sucks at drafting.

[Zool]

I asked because what grown man or woman says "OWNED"?



Snake would say "PWNED", which is the proper way to say it in Snakeville.
I have never understood that, and I actually get quite a few internet memes, more than someone my age should get. I can't even guess how to say it.

its pronounced powned. Its trying to type owned but missing.

Also pzwnd...not sure why that iteration came about.

[Cheesehead Craig]

I really don't get the Bears at #4. Sure they got Cutler but they still have poor WRs and an OL that isn't that great. I think the defense is fairly overrated and no way they are a 12 win team.
Umm, their offensive line was better than the Packers last year. And they improved that. And who knows how poor the WR's will be since their will be new starters outside of Hester.
Umm, no they weren't.

Per Football Outsiders:
Run blocking - Chi 24th, GB 18th
Pass blocking - Chi 11th, GB 14th

I dare say that overall, the GB OL was better than the Bears last year.

As far as WRs go, they have some of the poorest in the NFL.
Um, did you look up false starts, and how many times the O-line virtually cost you guys the game because of them?
Um, I just provided proof that the Packers OL is better than the Bears. If you would like to dispute that, please do your own research.

Oh, and nice job completely avoiding the WR issue. I take it by your silence you are in complete agreement with me.

[sheepshead]

maybe this has been said, and I like King, but the Lions better than the Browns? We have a credibility gap here.

[Pacopete4]

maybe this has been said, and I like King, but the Lions better than the Browns? We have a credibility gap here.


I dunno if I agree they'll be better than the browns, but I think the Lions are gonna surprise people with their play this year. I'm not sure how many wins, but I think they'll be OK this season.

[Guiness]

its pronounced powned. Its trying to type owned but missing.

Also pzwnd...not sure why that iteration came about.

I would think it's a derivation of 'Ownz you'. But I'm over 30. What do I know?