I do. It's typical sportwriter tripe. Rather than praising Knox for his catches or discussing the amazing growth a 5th round pick from Abilene Christian has made, Haugh weaves his pro-Knox article into a broader story about who is making who better, the WR or the QB. He has a flawed premise, but he sticks with it inserts the Knox story into his narrative -- irrespective of facts or game conditions. I've long been a fan of the Sun Times coverage of the Bears over the Tribune's. After reading this article, I've pretty much concluded that Haugh and Tribune aren't worth the bother. Why is it so hard to find good Bears coverage? He'd already done that article last week: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-21-tab-haugh-bearssep21,0,2870980.column He can't write the same stuff every week, so instead he writes about how the receivers sometimes help the QB. Again, I'm not seeing the issue. Nobody is saying that Cutler isn't good. Haugh is a good columnist. Tribune has a lot of bad writers...Haugh isn't one of them. I will say I have grown to like Biggs better though.