Game #12 KC Chiefs @ CHICAGO BEARS 1:00 PM

[Banedon]

"When I came around the linebacker, I didn't see the ball until late,'' Williams said. "I just tried to put my hands up. There was no way I could knock it down or anything else. A had a linebacker right in my face. When I came around him, all I saw was a big brown thing coming in front of me. I just tried to stop it.''

 

Dude always has an excuse. Always.

[jersey cubs fan]

Seriously, you're a wide receiver playing a football game and in the middle of a pass play in which you are running a route. When you look back in the general direction of where your QB was the last time you saw him, you can probably assume any brown things coming toward you is a football, and you shouldn't knock it down.

[Banedon]

Seriously, you're a wide receiver playing a football game and in the middle of a pass play in which you are running a route. When you look back in the general direction of where your QB was the last time you saw him, you can probably assume any brown things coming toward you is a football, and you shouldn't knock it down.

 

And he saw the ball! He caught it and then bumbled it. It was in his hands....

 

Total BS from him.

[Theo]

That makes me want to punch my keyboard.

[kujay]

[expletive] you Roy Williams. Get off my team.

[Theo]

Question, when the Chargers fire Norv Turner, is there any way he could forgive the Bears for firing his bro and sign on as offensive coordinator? He would be such a perfect fit. (Terrible head coach yes, but history as a great coordinator)

[Banedon]

Devin Hester said on Mike and Mike in the Morning that he doesn’t think there’s any way McNabb could show up in Chicago this week and get up to speed fast enough with the Bears’ offense to make a difference. And Hester even suggested that McNabb’s arrival could be counterproductive, as any time spent working with McNabb would take away from time the rest of the offense needs to work with Caleb Hanie, who is struggling in his role as the replacement for the injured Jay Cutler.

 

“It’s going to be tough right now to pick up a quarterback that hasn’t played in the Mike Martz offense,” Hester said. “This is a difficult offense to run, so as far as a quarterback who hasn’t played in the offense, right now it’s going to be a waste of time.”

[Theo]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I'm sure you could put together a package of 20-30 plays for McNabb, who knows it would probably would be a disaster, but we have to try something.

[Banedon]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I'm sure you could put together a package of 20-30 plays for McNabb, who knows it would probably would be a disaster, but we have to try something.

 

Well sure, but any other OC would change up the offense with Hanie in there too, and that hasn't happened. Martz is going to call the same offense, no matter who's in there. Cutler is the only one with enough weight to get him to change anything, and even that only happened after repeated O-line failures that threatened Jay's life.

 

$20 that Moon Mullin's source was Martz, wanting to get anyone but Hanie in here.

[jersey cubs fan]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I'm sure you could put together a package of 20-30 plays for McNabb, who knows it would probably would be a disaster, but we have to try something.

 

Maybe sign 3-4 new offensive linemen and some wide recievers?

 

McNabb won't be ready for this week, and he probably shouldn't be counted on for the following week either. If they signed him today and let the QB coach work with him to catch him up to speed, then maybe he's ready to play a game manager role in Green Bay. But at that point, they won't be needing a game manager, they will need to score to win. Had they managed to win ugly yesterday I could see the point in bringing in McNabb to try and boost the team's chances by the final game, if Cutler is still out. But the Bears shot themselves in the foot and have very little chance of making the playoffs now. There's very little point.

[kujay]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I had the exact same thought.

[Guest]

And all along, I thought the thing that would annoy me most about Roy Williams was his annoying 1st down signals. How many of those has he even gotten for us this year? Ugh.

[Banedon]

MRI confirmed Forte has a knee sprain. Grade 2. No ACL damage. They're saying 2-6 weeks, but it's really just a pain thing. Thomas Jones had the same injury in 2005 and played the following week, but he had Benson coming up behind him. Forte may not be motivated to play hurt, being that he doesn't have a contract for next year.

[kujay]

MRI confirmed Forte has a knee sprain. Grade 2. No ACL damage. They're saying 2-6 weeks, but it's really just a pain thing. Thomas Jones had the same injury in 2005 and played the following week, but he had Benson coming up behind him. Forte may not be motivated to play hurt, being that he doesn't have a contract for next year.

 

There's no way I play if I'm Forte. And as a fan, I'm 100% fine with that. The Bears have fucked with him. He owes them nothing.

[Banedon]

MRI confirmed Forte has a knee sprain. Grade 2. No ACL damage. They're saying 2-6 weeks, but it's really just a pain thing. Thomas Jones had the same injury in 2005 and played the following week, but he had Benson coming up behind him. Forte may not be motivated to play hurt, being that he doesn't have a contract for next year.

 

There's no way I play if I'm Forte. And as a fan, I'm 100% fine with that. The Bears have [expletive] with him. He owes them nothing.

 

He did turn down a contract offer, so it's not completely on the Bears. But I understand if he doesn't rush back.

[jersey cubs fan]

MRI confirmed Forte has a knee sprain. Grade 2. No ACL damage. They're saying 2-6 weeks, but it's really just a pain thing. Thomas Jones had the same injury in 2005 and played the following week, but he had Benson coming up behind him. Forte may not be motivated to play hurt, being that he doesn't have a contract for next year.

 

There's no way I play if I'm Forte. And as a fan, I'm 100% fine with that. The Bears have [expletive] with him. He owes them nothing.

 

That is complete nonsense. Sure, it's understandable if he doesn't play. But the Bears offered a fair contract and it would be absolutely stupid of them to pay him what he wanted. He had the opportunity to cash in and he chose not to.

[SouthSideRyan]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I had the exact same thought.

 

So did jaydee.

[kujay]

MRI confirmed Forte has a knee sprain. Grade 2. No ACL damage. They're saying 2-6 weeks, but it's really just a pain thing. Thomas Jones had the same injury in 2005 and played the following week, but he had Benson coming up behind him. Forte may not be motivated to play hurt, being that he doesn't have a contract for next year.

 

There's no way I play if I'm Forte. And as a fan, I'm 100% fine with that. The Bears have [expletive] with him. He owes them nothing.

 

That is complete nonsense. Sure, it's understandable if he doesn't play. But the Bears offered a fair contract and it would be absolutely stupid of them to pay him what he wanted. He had the opportunity to cash in and he chose not to.

 

"Fair" is certainly questionable. I don't typically have much sympathy for pro athletes when they hold out or whine about contracts, but it's different with the NFL. These contracts aren't fully guaranteed and the careers are so short. I think we generally agree though -- he shouldn't rush back if there is a medical risk.

[jersey cubs fan]

"Fair" is certainly questionable.

 

How is it questionable? They offered a lot of money but he wanted elite money. Everybody who signs RBs to elite money regrets it. Forte is a nice RB in a system that caters to him. He had a chance to cash in and he chose not to. It's not like the Bears refused to play ball, they just refused to be stupid. I can't imagine any reasonable fan having a problem with their team doing the smart thing.

[mul21]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I had the exact same thought.

 

Yeah, on the other hand, if someone who is borderline [expletive] knows that, how obvious is it?

[treebird]

Devin Hester is coming from the angle of someone that is border line [expletive] though.

 

I had the exact same thought.

 

So did jaydee.

 

8.5

[17 Seconds]

haha roy williams is the worst. that's a routine catch if you're willing to take the hit.

[Butterscup1679666578]

So despite currently being in a playoff spot, the Bears officially do not control their own destiny. If the Lions, Bears and Falcons win out, the Lions and Falcons will advance to the playoffs.

 

Is that even with the assumed Lions loss tonight? (24-10 Saints currently)

 

Yeah. Sorry I should have clarified that. The Lions have lost and the Bears still do not control their own destiny. In fact, if all 3 teams win next week (Lions against Minnesota, Falcons against Carolina), the Bears will relinquish their playoff spot they now hold to Detroit due to the Division record tiebreaker.

 

How would ATL have the tiebreaker over us again?

 

Although the Bears hold the tiebreaker over the Falcons, they lose out in a 3 team tiebreaker with Atlanta and Detroit. Because all 3 teams are tied at 7-5 right now, if all 3 won out the Bears would lose the tiebreaker.

 

The first step in a 3 team tiebreaker is to eliminate one team if 2 teams are in the same division. In that case, the Lions would win the tiebreaker over the Bears due to record against common teams. Then if there was only 1 playoff spot available, the Falcons would win by virtue of beating the Lions. But since there are 2 playoff spots at play, they would both make it, leaving the Bears on the outside.

 

I know it kind of sucks to go 2-1 against the teams were tied with and be on the outside looking in, especially when the Lions went 1-2 and the Falcons 1-1, but that's the way they draw it up.

 

So it goes right to the 3-team tiebreaker? They don't look at conference record at all? Just curious, this stuff always confuses me.

 

edit: Nevermind. Think I figured it out.

 

If both teams win out:

 

Bears will be 8-4.

Wins against ATL, CAR, MIN, TB, SD, DEN, GB, MIN

Losses against: NO, GB, OAK, KC

 

Lions will be 9-3:

Wins against TB, KC, MIN, DEN, CAR, MIN, OAK, SD, GB

Losses against: ATL, GB, NO

Edited December 5, 2011 by Butterscup

[minnesotacubsfan]

yea, I don't get that. so if the Bears have the head to head with Atlanta, they still lose out because of Detroit? That really doesn't make much sense

[UMFan83]

 

Is that even with the assumed Lions loss tonight? (24-10 Saints currently)

 

Yeah. Sorry I should have clarified that. The Lions have lost and the Bears still do not control their own destiny. In fact, if all 3 teams win next week (Lions against Minnesota, Falcons against Carolina), the Bears will relinquish their playoff spot they now hold to Detroit due to the Division record tiebreaker.

 

How would ATL have the tiebreaker over us again?

 

Although the Bears hold the tiebreaker over the Falcons, they lose out in a 3 team tiebreaker with Atlanta and Detroit. Because all 3 teams are tied at 7-5 right now, if all 3 won out the Bears would lose the tiebreaker.

 

The first step in a 3 team tiebreaker is to eliminate one team if 2 teams are in the same division. In that case, the Lions would win the tiebreaker over the Bears due to record against common teams. Then if there was only 1 playoff spot available, the Falcons would win by virtue of beating the Lions. But since there are 2 playoff spots at play, they would both make it, leaving the Bears on the outside.

 

I know it kind of sucks to go 2-1 against the teams were tied with and be on the outside looking in, especially when the Lions went 1-2 and the Falcons 1-1, but that's the way they draw it up.

 

So it goes right to the 3-team tiebreaker? They don't look at conference record at all? Just curious, this stuff always confuses me.

 

No worries. It is confusing and sometimes illogical.

 

http://www.nfl.com/standings/tiebreakingprocedures

 

Three or More Clubs

 

(Note: If two clubs remain tied after third or other clubs are eliminated, tie breaker reverts to step 1 of applicable two-club format.)

 

Apply division tie breaker to eliminate all but the highest ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2. The original seeding within a division upon application of the division tie breaker remains the same for all subsequent applications of the procedure that are necessary to identify the two Wild-Card participants.

Head-to-head sweep. (Applicable only if one club has defeated each of the others or if one club has lost to each of the others.)

Best won-lost-tied percentage in games played within the conference.

Best won-lost-tied percentage in common games, minimum of four.

Strength of victory.

Strength of schedule.

Best combined ranking among conference teams in points scored and points allowed.

Best combined ranking among all teams in points scored and points allowed.

Best net points in conference games.

Best net points in all games.

Best net touchdowns in all games.

Coin toss

When the first Wild-Card team has been identified, the procedure is repeated to name the second Wild-Card, i.e., eliminate all but the highest-ranked club in each division prior to proceeding to step 2.

 

So basically the first thing a 3 team tiebreaker aims to do is eliminate teams from the same division. In this case, they are sort of determining who came in 2nd place in the NFC North. So they apply the division tiebreakers first which the Lions have likely won over the Bears unless: Chicago unexpectedly beats Green Bay, Detroit unexpectedly loses to Minnesota, or the Bears finish with the same record as Detroit but lose their game to Seattle (explained at the beginning of last weeks thread). Its slightly more complicated than that but those are the 3 most likely ways that Chicago could actually win the tiebreaker over Detroit.

 

So the Bears get eliminated and Detroit advances to a 2 team tiebreaker with Atlanta. But that doesn't matter because there are 2 playoff spots at play.

 

I think its idiotic that one team can tie with 2 other teams for 2 playoff spots, go 2-1 against the other two teams and not get in, but I don't make the rules.