jjgman21

who's this TO of which you speak? j/k

tongue firmly in cheek, but come on. http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/powerranking http://www.sportsline.com/nfl/powerrankings http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/powerRankings http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/dr_z/09/27/power.ranks1/index.html after week 2 it's not enough to be within the top two of everybody's power rankings or to be the pre-season superbowl pick for one third of the prognosticators I guess. if the Seahawks have fallen in the eyes of any, it is because of the way they have played the past three weeks. both the Detroit and AZ performances were lackluster to say the least, and last week was a function of converting three short fields into 21 points. while that execution is admirable, they did it against one of the leagues worst defenses to date (granted the Giants have started with three tough games). I'm not in agreement with most. I don't know which team will do it, but I think one side or the other may find a way to exploit the other and have a relatively easy go of it. not sure which team that will be though. if I were a betting man I wouldn't touch this one with a ten foot pole.

Thayer's been using every opportunity to point out that Benson can catch the ball and is a good receiver out of the backfield, so there's a reason right there to put him in on passing downs.

such fun watching the officiating in my favorite pro team's game the day after watching the officiating in my favorite college team's game. if I had to choose which was worse, I'd have to stick with the BigTen officials from UW - UM.

Benson...spewing the typical 'hasn't proved anything' veteran 'you don't know unless you've played' crap with vicious vitriol about a callers suggestion that Benson be given moreof a shot. I fear that Benson will never gain the favor of this team, and Hampton was doing his part to ensure that. just let the holdout go and see what the guy can do.

I'm also surprised Peterson hasn't been getting his one series a game. He averaged over 5 yards a game last year, you'd think he would at least have gotten a taste with how bad Jones was. Jones is completely on my crap list. he left 30-35 yards out on the field today. it's like watching late career Neil Anderson out there. inside runs go to the middle of a defenders chest instead of to the daylight two yards away, outside runs are strung out until he goes out of bounds when he could have had 3-4 cutting upfield. there haven't been alot of holes, but thost that have been there, particularly today, were missed. edit - it was good to see Benson in the middle of the congrats to Grossman after the TD. at least gives the illusion he's involved and not completely ostricized. Hapton's criticism of Benson after the game on WGN was over the top unnecessary.

Really? I'm probably the most hopeless Bear fan on the planet. But what exactly did we win last year? I'm certainly not satisfied with a division championship and a quick, unceremonious exit from the playoffs. look at the context of my statement and put 2 and 2 together. I for one didn't think the Bears would make the playoffs until after beating Tampa on the road, despite beating Carolina the week before. I think alot of Bears fans would have agreed. and I am having a difficult time reconciling your statements. are you a hopeless Bears fan or are you an unsatisfied Bears fan? if you thought the Bears were hopeless, shouldn't you at least be somewhat satisfied with winning the division? or is it just a case of wanting to bitch no matter what happens? for clarification, the difference is Bears fans didn't think their 'make no mistake' quarterback play was going to get them to the playoffs until late in the season. thus, most Bears fans were wrong as the Bears did in fact get into the post season, with the second best record in the NFC. the fact that you consider the division championship irrelevant or apparently 'not getting it done' has nothing to do with my point, and your interjection inexplicable. I think you're having trouble reconciling my statements because you're having trouble picking up the correct meaning of them. Hopeless Bear fan = HUGE Bear fan. Any Bear fan for life, like myself, should not be satisfied with winning a division and then getting raped in the playoffs. I did misinterpret what you meant by hopeless. I am a Bear fan for life, and the Bears far exceded my expectations last year, and I was therefore satisfied. the playoff loss was tough to take, but that doesn't mean the fans shouldn't be at least somewhat satisfied with the way the season turned out, especially considering how bad everyone said they would be before the season started. I'm sure if I told you in late August last year that I had a crystal ball and the Bears would win the division with the second best record in the NFC, you would have been satisfied. if I used the same crystal ball on Dec. 1, it's total crap, not good enough. such is the fickleness of sports fans.

Really? I'm probably the most hopeless Bear fan on the planet. But what exactly did we win last year? I'm certainly not satisfied with a division championship and a quick, unceremonious exit from the playoffs. look at the context of my statement and put 2 and 2 together. I for one didn't think the Bears would make the playoffs until after beating Tampa on the road, despite beating Carolina the week before. I think alot of Bears fans would have agreed. and I am having a difficult time reconciling your statements. are you a hopeless Bears fan or are you an unsatisfied Bears fan? if you thought the Bears were hopeless, shouldn't you at least be somewhat satisfied with winning the division? or is it just a case of wanting to bitch no matter what happens? for clarification, the difference is Bears fans didn't think their 'make no mistake' quarterback play was going to get them to the playoffs until late in the season. thus, most Bears fans were wrong as the Bears did in fact get into the post season, with the second best record in the NFC. the fact that you consider the division championship irrelevant or apparently 'not getting it done' has nothing to do with my point, and your interjection inexplicable.

I stopped watching. what are you actually saying? what happened?

c'mon. Michigan's a better team and probably wins this game without the refs help, but what happens in this game if not for the refereeing. nice second efforts by Hart on that drive, but it was a fricken bear hug fest out there. that's why he wasn't stopped on first contact. all the pursuit was being tackled to the ground or pounded in the back.

welcome to big ten football games against michigan at least they are being original. usually it's just non calls on holding and offensive pass interference. they're really mixing it up today between picking up flags, not seeing face masks and late hits, and really concentrating on special teams. and as I see this play, back to the commentators...the yellow line on the original play was a foot and a half shorter than the yellow line on the replay.

damn. bring that in and its six.

the Badgers, the refs, or both?

"we managed to see the reaction, but didn't see both flyers being blatantly held. more yards for Michigan. first down. time out."

I'm glad you noticed that, for a minute I thought I was seeing things. These announcers have been pretty weird. like the blind club to the head downfield after the play was over being called a "love tap" or whatever he said. and no comment about how two plays before that there should have been a roughing the passer called on the screen play.

Meh...you USSoccer thought the Lions would be a tough game....:wink: If Detroit doesn't play stupid football and rack up a ton of penalties the score looks a lot different. And again, reverse jinx. both teams had 2 first downs by penalty. that means that Detroit's panalties came on offense, which is what I recall. that being the case, you can't say that the Bears would have scored significantly fewer points. so the question is whether the Lions would have scored more, and considering the Bears defense and all cover 2's play their best football when defending a shorter field, saying the Lions would have scored more is nothing other than speculation. both the Bears and the anti-Bears sentiments are being a little hypocritical, but the thing is, I don't recall many Bears fans last year saying just squeeking by is all that matters. what I recall is Bears fans having alot of reservations at the way the Bears were winning games and saying the offense has to improve if they are going anywhere. and that is the difference between the Bears of last year. Vikings fans this year are saying 'if we just sustain, we might make the playoffs.' Bears fans last year were saying 'this isn't going to get it done.' turns out, those Bears fans were wrong. as for the Bears offense, sure it was GB and Detroit, but I don't think any unbiased observer can honsestly say the Bears offense hasn't looked considerable better this year, but the Vikings will pose a bigger challenge. even so, the Vikings defense should have reason for consern. their DBs are making all their tackles. stacking the box against the Bears offense these first two games has turned out to be a huge mistake. the Vikings defense won't be facing an incapable Washington O-line or a Steve Smith-less Delhomme. Bears 23 Vikings 13 - at least three of which comes on an a turn over by the Bears. my biggest consern in this game is the knee eatting Metrodome turf.

Stocco has really regressed from last year. Orr and Williams probably made him look better than he actually was. Got a call there. Make up call maybe. Regressed? No. Wisconsin graduated a bunch of key OL and WR's last year. If you've watched any of the games prior to this, you would of seen Stocco getting pressure constantly and WR's dropping balls. This is just a very young offensive unit for Wisconsin, but as of right now, they're playing Michigan very well. I've always thought Wisconsin's QBs sucked rocks and been simply amazed that two of them are serving as NFL backups. I was never impressed at any point with Stocco. this is the first game I've watched this year, and I have to say he looks as good as he ever had. if anything, Orr and Williams made Stocco look good, not the other way around.

ugh

Badgers are going to have to start cutting some of these runs back against the grain or they'll never gain a rushing yard.

this is "if there are no upsets it's OSU v. Michigan for another chance at a national championship out of the Big Ten" refereeing. edit - there's no doubt Michigan is outplaying them, but what you say hits the nail on the head.

This guy knows things. All tied up now. and how many flags are the refs going to pick up to benefit Michigan today. you'd think after the UofO-UO debacle they would be minding their Ps and Qs. and a flagrant face mask not called as I typed that.

This guy knows things. All tied up now. and how many flags are the refs going to pick up to benefit Michigan today. you'd think after the UofO-UO debacle they would be minding their Ps and Qs.

I think the loss of Lee can not be underestimated. the Cubs got second base production out of firstbase and Neifi production out of secondbase after Lee went down. since the ASB, Mabry and Nevin have played the bulk of firstbase, Mabry with a .754 OPS, Nevin with a .886 OPS. not sure that anyone has noticed, but the Cubs are sixth in the NL in runs scored since the ASB. with firstbase hitting somewhat respectably, the offense also has been somewhat respectable. it's easy to say 'well Pierre, Aram, Murton and Barrett have been hot and that's the reason' but at the same time Jones, Cedeno, Neifi/Izturis and many others have fallen off the face of the earth since the ASB. don't get me wrong, I would have liked a better offense going into the year, but the loss of DLee is a gigantic part of this teams offensive woes this year. the OBP out of first has been .308 on the season. replace that with Lee's expected OBP, and the expected OBP we would have had out of second if Walker was playing there, and even that stat would probably be middling overall in the NL. the loss of Lee was huge on this offense. take away any teams best offensive player, and they would probably be in the same position as the Cubs right now.

I didn't see the play, but I have to believe the mistake was missing the sign, not a mental mistake regarding stealing of bases. this is a Dusty Baker lead team, Theriot is a rookie that doesn't have track star speed. I am sure it is abundantly clear to him that he has the permanent red light unless told otherwise. it's hard to imagine he was stealing that base on his own.

I just saw the pitch on the highlights. didn't look like that terrible of a call to me. hit the mitt low, but had alot of late downward bite on the pitch, and probably was a strike when it got to the plate. maybe the Tigers got some beneficial calls, but with two similar pitchers going, I think the critique has to be all about consistency of the strikezone. were there pitches Rogers got that whiney didn't? also, your statement seems to sort of contradict itself. you say the Tigers got the calls, but Rogers located his pitches.