Jump to content
Join us for a livestream as we discuss the red-hot Cubs, starting at 4pm Central time! ×
North Side Baseball

USSoccer

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    17,655

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by USSoccer

  1. USSoccer
    The savvy veteran game manager makes another great decision!
  2. USSoccer
    man.....
  3. USSoccer
    You're going to blame Rex for that?? Of course. Everything is Rex's fault. Is Rex CT?
  4. USSoccer
    You're going to blame Rex for that??
  5. USSoccer
    DAMMIT.
  6. USSoccer
    11/9/2003: 15/27 131 yds 0 TD 3 INT 27.1 RAT 9/30/2002 35/53 328 yds 1 TD 3 INT 65.6 RAT 1/6/2002 16/32 151 yds 1 TD 4 INT 34.2 RAT Well done - you dug around and found four games (out of how many starts?) from 3 or more years ago that he played badly in. You could do a search and find the same for guys named Manning, Montana, Favre, Luckman, Tittle...just about anyone. Now go and show me where Griese has played this bad over an extended stretch as Rex has. What are Griese's career stats, please? Pretty much his entire 2005 was mediorce to bad. Also, Griese's got 10 points of rating and 10 YPG on Rex on their careers, and considering he has about 8 times the starts, that's not impressive.
  7. USSoccer
    11/9/2003: 15/27 131 yds 0 TD 3 INT 27.1 RAT 9/30/2002 35/53 328 yds 1 TD 3 INT 65.6 RAT 1/6/2002 16/32 151 yds 1 TD 4 INT 34.2 RAT Still better than a 0.0 RAT. If Rex finishes the game with a 0 RAT, you'll be right. However, I doubt that happens.
  8. USSoccer
    11/9/2003: 15/27 131 yds 0 TD 3 INT 27.1 RAT 9/30/2002 35/53 328 yds 1 TD 3 INT 65.6 RAT 1/6/2002 16/32 151 yds 1 TD 4 INT 34.2 RAT
  9. USSoccer
    This is a really good point that I was about to mention. The Bears are really set up to win THIS year. Hell, you know the defense is going to be worse next year, just based on the loss of Lance Briggs alone. They have to go for it this season, Grossman's development be damned. If Griese can help the team win more this year, they have to do that. So you'd advocate playing the inferior veteran over the younger player, when the veteran doesn't give you much over the younger player? winning with Lance Briggsat the expense of Developing Rex is not a good strategy for the long term health of the team.
  10. USSoccer
    not really. It's an awful lot easier to hide a slumping number 7 hitter than it is to hide a slumping qb. no it isn't. you just need an O coordinator willing to do so. are you really going to argue the Bears didn't effectively hide Orton last year? same damn thing. Another terrible idea - we should hide him through play calling? How long before defenses start teeing off on that? ah, so let Griese throw the ball down the field. Brilliant! You're right, let's dink and dunk within 7 yards of the line of scrimmage. Are you John Shoop? Brian Griese does not posses the arm nor the ability to make good enough decisions to run anything other than a radically scaled down offense.
  11. USSoccer
    not really. It's an awful lot easier to hide a slumping number 7 hitter than it is to hide a slumping qb. no it isn't. you just need an O coordinator willing to do so. are you really going to argue the Bears didn't effectively hide Orton last year? same damn thing. Another terrible idea - we should hide him through play calling? How long before defenses start teeing off on that? all Rex needs is to get a little momentum, a little confidence back. Dialing the offense back for a drive or two is not going to allow defenses to dial in on them.
  12. USSoccer
    not really. It's an awful lot easier to hide a slumping number 7 hitter than it is to hide a slumping qb. it is easier to do when your OC refuses to call plays designed to give him some momentum. call some slants, curls and rollouts.
  13. USSoccer
    Tree, the choice is between a young bad and an older, veteran bad. Why go with the older bad? because sometimes a change is in order? plus, you cant do worse than a 0 rating. Change for changes sake isn't always the right decision. If Matt Murton goes 2-23 over the course of a few games, is it right to yank him and play Angel Pagan? Of course it isn't. Young players go through bad stretches. You stick with him. You need to actually commit to developing a player, and not ditch him as soon as adversity happens. There's a huge difference between a slump/bad play as a hitter compared to a slump/bad play as a quarterback. not really.
  14. USSoccer
    Tree, the choice is between a young bad and an older, veteran bad. Why go with the older bad? It's about degrees of bad. I only wish Grossman was merely bad, unfortunately he has been worse than bad. I would argue that this is *PRECISELY* why we signed Griese. To come in if Rex is struggling this badly. No. They signed him to come in if Rex got hurt. That's not the only reason. I disagree, and so would Angelo and Lovie.
  15. USSoccer
    Tree, the choice is between a young bad and an older, veteran bad. Why go with the older bad? It's about degrees of bad. I only wish Grossman was merely bad, unfortunately he has been worse than bad. I would argue that this is *PRECISELY* why we signed Griese. To come in if Rex is struggling this badly. No. They signed him to come in if Rex got hurt.
  16. USSoccer
    Tree, the choice is between a young bad and an older, veteran bad. Why go with the older bad? because it seems pretty reasonable that he will be less bad. if orton was starting and playing this way, would you be saying "leave him in, griese is bad too?" Orton doesn't have a chance to be a long term solution at that position. Grossman does. This is the kind of thinking that leads to teams never developing young players at skill positions. You have to have more patience than this.
  17. USSoccer
    Tree, the choice is between a young bad and an older, veteran bad. Why go with the older bad? because sometimes a change is in order? plus, you cant do worse than a 0 rating. Change for changes sake isn't always the right decision. If Matt Murton goes 2-23 over the course of a few games, is it right to yank him and play Angel Pagan? Of course it isn't. Young players go through bad stretches. You stick with him. You need to actually commit to developing a player, and not ditch him as soon as adversity happens.
  18. USSoccer
    5 weeks ago I don't think they kneel there.
  19. USSoccer
    QFT How can you possibily defend Grossman's play so far in this game, the last sack notwithstanding. No, he's been bad. However, Griese isn't a long term answer and might not be better in the short term.
  20. USSoccer
    Tree, the choice is between a young bad and an older, veteran bad. Why go with the older bad?
  21. USSoccer
    Bench Harris, play Griese.
  22. USSoccer
    Griese would have levitated over the line and thrown a TD pass with his left hand. would have cured Cancer while doing it. Brian Griese once brought a puppy back to life with his smile. To Brian Griese! Football's answer to Carlos Beltran!
  23. USSoccer
    Griese would have levitated over the line and thrown a TD pass with his left hand.
  24. USSoccer
    a good 2 minute drill would be nice here...
  25. USSoccer
    C'mon Rex, finish the half strong.
×
×
  • Create New...