rawaction

Sounds like they just hate Marinelli and Martz. It's kinda understandable since they are both a part of their horrible recent history. But it's not like they squandered some great talent up there.

The whole area was still on a collective high from 85/86 to care as much about 88. I think you are completely overlooking the have never been there, haven't been there in a generation aspect that made those games huge. People think of the January 86 playoff games as formalities now, but that is not how they were at the time. After the loss in Miami, people were thrown for a loop. Doubt definitely crept in. And again, it was the first one ever in a depressingly title starved city. There were no Bulls rings to fall back on, there was no Stanley Cup. There were a couple of miserable failures by the White Sox and Cubs in the early 80's, and nothing. And nobody assumed anything with the Rex Grossman Bears. They were the most talented team, but the outcome was very much in doubt. Regardless, the level of confidence doesn't change the fact that we just did this a couple years ago, but in 85/86 and 06/07, Chicago was coming off very large droughts of football glory - and in the case of 85/86 any glory at all. It's tough, but what I remember about 85/86 was more intense than what I'm seeing now. And I think that's saying something, given that there wasn't the flood of media that there is today. I was too young to remember the hoopla surrounding 1985, but it just seemed to me that hype was more about solidifying the spot of "best team ever" and what could be the first year of a dynasty. I do buy the "first modern championship for a city that hasn't won anything" but the Bears/Rams game was probably much less stressful for fans leading up to the game.

How much do you consider the fact that he is 28 years old? He's at the age where he out of the "young guy overthrowing" arm injury and not yet at the point of "old guy who can't take the arm stress anymore" arm injury. It just seems like if the elbow or shoulder injury doesn't get a guy early, it's not going to get him until late in his career. Marmol has thrown this way for now 4 years thru heavy bullpen use.

In a game like this I don't think they'll call everything. They'll let them play to an extent and only call the really egregious penalties. I'm sure that will be the case as it seemed like it was vs. Seattle this past weekend. But GB had a lot of penalties that are going to get called no matter what. False starts, offsides, late hits will get called regardless of situation. Maybe a few holds are missed, but if Peppers is getting molested like last time, you can't overlook that either.

I have two jerseys. A blue Cutler one, and a white Urlacher one. The Cutler one was my gameday jersey through the first half of the season, but after the Redskins loss, I decided a change was necessary, so Urlacher is now my gameday jersey. Cutler is for Fridays at work. I wear mine per home and away. But only wear for important games. I think the Bears did pretty well when I wore the Forte. If they win this week, I want a Hester throwback and an Urlacher. So, I can wear a jersey or my Bears T every day of the week leading up to the SB.

Yeah, I wear whatever to work also. Got on my white Payton today. Will wear my blue Forte (because there is a home game this week) tomorrow.

Don't think I agree with that one, either. Granted, the NHL is well behind the NFL in overall interest, but game 5 of the Stanley Cup Finals was just 7 months ago, and that was a pretty big game. The White Sox had two World Series games in town 5 years back, and the Cubs played some pretty important NLCS games back in '03, too. On the NFL level, the 2006 NFC Championship 4 years ago was a pretty big deal, as well. Not to mention the playoff games in 85. That Rams game was enormous, even if it was in an entirely different era with regards to hype. The argument is that the NFC Championship games are all of equal value, except that being GB makes it bigger. The Blackhawks game wasn't a "win or go home" game, and therefore didn't have the same weight. Same for the White Sox games. This is a win or go home, for the SB, in Chicago, against the Bears biggest rival. Basically, by that argument, unless it's a game 7, there's no way a basketball, hockey, or baseball game could be "bigger". The Score is the one that's hyping it that way, btw. It's kind of a stupid argument. Either way, the Cubs had a game 6 and a game 7 in Chicago to win or go home. This is the 2nd NFCC game in 4 years, and the 4th in 25. The one in 85 was the first ever. They'd never been to a Super Bowl. The Bears have been there, and they've been beyond there recently. This must be coming out of the Jets talk. That was legit. The Jets are clearly the Patriots little brother. New England has all the recent titles, divisional dominance and the Jets haven't been to a Super Bowl in 2 generations. Nobody thought they stood a chance last year and ultimately they lost as expected in the championship game. The Packers adds to the story, but this isn't a bigger game than previous NFCC games or other games played in Chicago. It's another chance to win and go on, and those games have happened quite a bit. I think this is the biggest game in Chicago for the Bears in the modern era. I think it was a pretty safe assumption the 85 Bears would win. Anything but the Superbowl was just a formality (and that turned out to be that way with the Dolphins not being the opponent). I felt the 2006 NFCC was pretty close to a given to, with a dome team coming to Chicago . This year, you have an underdog team playing their longest and most hated rival. Sure, you lose the NFCC to anyone it's going to suck, but it will suck more to lose to GB. The only game that can really come close IMO is the 88 game vs. the 49ers

I do quite a bit. Big QBs that move well, with bad offensive lines. Ben has better weapons and a consistently better defense throughout his career to get to where he's been. Yeah, they are very similar. That's why I commented yesterday that Ben wasn't that great. Very similar to Cutler, but with better surrounding parts.

+1 I don't know how many people I have seen/heard already counting their 7th SB. Not a single one of them thought they could beat NE.

What do you expect them to show all day? It's the same thing with all of the league networks. They have to fill the crappy time slots and the offseasons with something. Not complaining about what NFL shows, just about people who shun anyone that watches ESPN at any time.

Still, it's stupid to rag on someone for watching something on ESPN. The NFL network top 10s are pretty stupid for the most part too.

Exactly. NFL Network blows the [expletive] out of whatever coverage is on ESPN. Most of the time, NFL Network is showing top 10 QBs with the last name J.

I've only seen 4-5 but most of them seem to be taking somebody other than an OL. Why do you call it reflexively taking a lineman? It's still a real need. I've probably seen every mock on the internet the last 2 months, and I'd say about 75% of them have the Bears not only taking OL, but taking an OT. I think most people who mock say "52 sacks? Bears need a franchise LT". Nevermind the fact that the Bears have 3 OTs under 27, with an interior line w/ 2 guys well over 30 and another playing out of position. Nevermind the fact that there is no such thing as a franchise LT taken after the 25th pick where the Bears have solidly been placed for a couple months.

The Bears national imprint is very large. They might not have a Sal Palentonio, who is a Philly guy because he's from Philly, but they will always attract one of the largest audiences in primetime. They are one of the biggest draws in Vegas as well. They were more or less a non-entity for 1.5 decades and when they splashed on the scene 4 years ago it was with defense, and very short lived. If Chicago turns into a consistent contender with offense, they will be as marketable as any team in American sports. Its really bizarre. As soon as the Bears are good they pull enormous numbers on primetime games (Eagles game, the Patriots game), yet they still don't really have a dedicated reporter from ESPN. Theres Michael Smith...sometimes. Both Packers and Bears fans should be pissed the NFL Live spent more time commiserating about the Patriots losing than on pregame for this game. I'm really not sure why you're watching NFL Live in the first place. I love the sentiment that you can't watch a show because it comes on ESPN. NFL Live isn't a good show, but it's still football. Plus, it comes on at a time when there ain't [expletive] else to watch.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft2011/insider/news/story?id=6036153 There's a Kiper mock too, but it's insider only. For some reason, even thought the McShay one says insider in the url, it let me see it. Kiper has the Bears taking CB, Aaron Williams of Texas. Corey Liuget is my first choice, but if he's gone, Nevis is a nice pick. Aaron Williams was pretty terrible this year, but he's an elite talent, and would be a solid pick if the Bears can develop him. If you feel you have to go OL, I'd look at Stefan Wisnewski and Mike Pouncey. But I don't think that it's a big dropoff from those 2 and a 2nd round guy like Ben Ijalana out of Villanova or Marcus Cannon out of TCU (both who provide T/G flexibility). The dropoff at DT and CB are huge in this draft.

A large part is the personality of the coaches and players. Bears got a lot more national attention when they had colorful characters like Ditka, Payton, McMahon, Fridge, McMichael, etc. Guys like Jauron, Wannstedt, and Lovie aren't media darlings like some other coaches (Rex Ryan). We've already talked about how Cutler doesn't engage the media. Peppers isn't a rah rah type of guy. Briggs is very entertaining to talk to, but he's not the defacto star of the D. Urlacher is, and he isn't even all that great to talk to. But when Urlacher was running thru banging celebrity women (Paris Hilton), the Bears got more attention then. Most of the attention in the NFL is paid to teams that provide soundbites (jets) or have compelling personalities that can't be found elsewhere (Cowboys, Colts, Pats), or have compelling stories attached to them (Eagles, Saints, Falcons). The Packers are getting the attention now because they are the flavor of the month.

The misconception that most of America has is that Cutler makes mistakes when you pressure him. If that was the case, why did he throw 26 INTs when sacked 35 times in 2009, but only threw 16 when he was sacked 52 times this year (1 every 21 throws in 09 vs. 1 ever 27 throws this year right around his career average)? Also, he threw 8 INTs in the 7 games he was sacked at least 4 times this year. He threw 8 in the 8 games he was sacked less than 4 times in. The problem has never been Jay being afraid or antsy at the sight of pressure (ala Grossman), the problem is he makes bad decisions.

I'm sure Al paid good money for that case of the herps.

Brady got traded to the Jets yesterday, didn't you hear? Roethlisberger isn't that great either.

That's a quick turnaround for a funeral.

Whoa...that's painting it in a pretty light. Out of 9 playoffs since the reorganization, 5 have included a #2 seed with 11 wins or fewer. True (and I think I was wrong and there have been 6 of them now including the Bears). But if you're an 11-5 team you still have to be in the right conference, in the right division, in the right year. Just like the Cubs can't plan to win 85-88 games and expect to win the division, it's a break when you get a bye going 11-5 because it doesn't happen to most teams that win that many games. 88 wins of 162 seems to be a lot different from 11 wins in 16 games.

Kevorkian'ed their asses! But yeah, I agree completely. I'm tired of the luck storyline. This is a damn good team, which has as good of a chance as anyone (despite what the odds say) of hoisting the Lombardi trophy in 2 1/2 weeks.

LOL. He only returned 2 punts. He had a 15 yard average per punt return, which still would have been a yard and a half better than 30 NFL teams had this year.

I like the strategy of letting Derrek Rose shoot every single shot.

It beats Hochuli, but that's still a joke. You do realize the Packers actually committed those penalties? They would have gotten their butts pounded if they didn't commit all those penalties keeping the Bears off them. Lots of people seem to be forgetting that those penalties weren't gifts. They were the result of a poorly coached team that was having a lot of trouble handling the Bears that night. And you do realize that the Packers are not a poorly coached team? Aside from that game, they average about 4 penalties per game. The Packers only had 4 penalties during the Bears/Packers game in Green Bay. If you think the Packers will commit anywhere close to 18 penalties next Sunday, you're in for quite a shock. I went thru all the penalties a couple weeks ago. I believe I counted at least 7 of those penalties were directly related to either keeping Julius Peppers off of Aaron Rodgers, or a false start trying to get a head start on keeping Peppers off of Aaron Rodgers. So, yeah if Julius Peppers decides he wants to manhandle your OTs again, you're in for quite a shock if you don't think there will either be penalties committed or a battered QB. Edit: