Banedon
-
Posts
65,184 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
24
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
2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker
Blogs
Events
Forums
Store
Gallery
Everything posted by Banedon
-
Most of the time, both teams get possession in OT, going by these figures. Hooray for "most of the time"! So, 27% of the time the team that won the flip, went down and scored a FG on the first posession and won the game in OT. That sucks. That's a huge number of times that the other teams offense isn't even getting on the field for an overtime game. And don't forget, the defense is already gimped in OT thanks to the kickoffs being at the 30 instead of the 35. So the team that wins the flip doesn't even have to go as far to get a FG in OT as they would in regulation.
-
Sorry man, I completely disagree. Both teams play to a tie, and all a team needs to do to win is win a coin toss, move the ball...what 30-40 yards for a field goal? That's dumb. Except for the fact that this isn't nearly as easy as people are suggesting, and of course, not a problem. There is nothing unfair. They had 60 minutes to win the game, and they didn't. A coin toss does not determine the winner, and taking possession does not win the game. There is no perfect ending, and suggestions that they should just keep playing non-sudden death overtimes periods are just incredibly stupid. Both teams had 60 minutes to win the game, and neither did. So why should one team be provided with an advantage? We can debate how big the advantage is, but there is one...there's no debating that...and I'm all for striving to eliminate that advantage.
-
Sorry man, I completely disagree. Both teams play to a tie, and all a team needs to do to win is win a coin toss, move the ball...what 30-40 yards for a field goal? That's dumb. Like you pointed out, these guys are exhausted by then, especially the defense. The odds are very much in favor of the team that wins the coin flip, and all the numbers bear that out. And any fan is going to feel like their team lost unfairly if their QB never even gets to get on the field during OT. Even if you forget about fairness (you and I obviously disagree on that point)...it's just not exciting. The NFL has the most boring OT of the "big 4" professional sports.
-
That's a bad idea. Other sports aren't like football. Football players are dead after games. You can't play back to back in that sport, or even 2 days later. The uproar against sudden death is the stupidest media/fan criticism of how a sport is run I have ever heard. Well I wasn't suggesting they play back to back games...just a few more minutes. I realize they're tired...so are basketball players and hockey players in the 3rd OT or whatever. They're paid well to play while tired. I understand the criticism of the current system...and I do think a change was needed. But I think the change as implemented is clunky.
-
The change is ok, but I think they should have just gone to a 6 or 7 minute OT period without sudden death. You play the full OT and go from there. You'll have some tired guys without a doubt, but you do in other sports too, and they manage double and triple OT's. And it makes it so you don't have special rules for OT.
-
This statement tells me you aren't as grown as you think you are.
-
I have Urlacher and Cutler. Those are my only Bears jerseys.
-
Another Bear jersey of mine goes from the active player pile to the former player pile. That's what I came here to post. What a terrible jersey purchase. I bought it right before the 2006 season after his big 2005 season. I wore it through 2007 and then after that it was really too embarrassing to wear. I think my most stable jersey has been my Robbie Gould jersey. My wife has been pestering me for a year or more now to get her a Gould jersey. I told her she could get one as soon as we came across one in a store somewhere. She doesn't have one yet.
-
If you're gonna sign a veteran WR, bring in someone that the young guys on the team can learn from and use as a resource for their development. TO is not that guy. In other news, Danieal Manning wants a new contract, and will skip offseason workouts. http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/football/bears/ct-spt-0317-bears-chicago--20100316-7,0,3055776.story
-
He'll play in the Masters.
-
-
Well it's been clearly defined now...but he was drafted, given the starting job after a few games when Warner sucked, was pretty mediocre, but was a rookie. Got injured the next season, and never really got a chance to try to improve, because Warner had a good camp. Maybe "yanked around" isn't the right phrase. But I don't think he's been given a great shot to develop as you'd expect a #1 pick to get.
-
-
Matt Leinart says hello.
-
I think most of us already had this figured, but...
-
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/tom_verducci/03/09/floating-realignment/
-
Jones was saying yesterday morning that he was going to compete for the job or something, and I was thinking "are you delusional? You're gone dude..."
-
I curious about the definition of injury. If he gets a bad charlie horse, is that enough to guarantee the money?
-
The only way that happens if the Bears get a 2nd rd pick in next years draft. Otherwise, giving away Olsen late round pick does not benefit the Bears. I rather hold onto Olsen then to give him away. Bernstein thinks they'll have to trade him. If they aren't starting him, and he can't play special teams, they can't hold onto him, or so goes his reasoning.
-
If Dan Bernstein is to be believed, the Bears have been shopping Olsen for the past couple of days, and the best offers they've been able to get is 5th or 6th rounders.
-
I know it was a 5 year deal (which of course means nothing in the NFL), but I hadn't heard the money. EDIT: Found it. Yep...5/$17 million....$6million guaranteed.
-
Ron Artest = Dennis Rodman wannabe http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/artest-hair.jpg
-
Yep...they'll both get carries, but I'd put heavy money that, barring injury, Taylor ends up with more carries than Forte on the season.
-
You guys are deluding yourself if you think that Forte is gonna start over Taylor. They didn't go spend that much money for a backup RB. He's gonna be the main guy, and Forte is gonna be the "complimentary" back.
-
Bradley is not on the team anymore? Why is there 5 pages of blathering and foaming at the mouth about him?
