BigSlick

I think what ruins the Orange shirts are the white pants. Heres something to ponder: Orange shirts and blue pants. Didn't they do that for the Thanksgiving game against Dallas a few years back? I know it was the retro orange's, but I think they also wore the blue pants. Those unis were hideous. I really don't care much for the Packer uniforms so I don't think I can comment on that. The problem with the Orange shirt is that the Bear blue is so dark and the orange is too bright, it just looks better as piping. If the orange was darker it might work, but then we'd just be copying the Broncos.

I think what ruins the Orange shirts are the white pants. Heres something to ponder: Orange shirts and blue pants.

While interesting and all (and despite being purely subjective) it doesn't really mean much in terms of a football game. Lets say we win every position battle by the skin of our teeth and are really poor at one position. Lets say we barely have a a better O-line and they have an absurdly good D-line. We'd probably be the worse team despite being slightly better in every category.

I love the Blue on Blues, but we always seem to play like [expletive] in them. So I'd be fine if they never wear them again. I don't mind the white on whites anymore. I used to be bothered by them, and I always preferred the White T's and Blue pants, but white and white looked pretty good against the Rams. comparison: http://www.nbcsports.com/2006/1211/594279_240X320.jpg and http://www.heraldtimesonline.com/stories/2006/12/12/_ul_jp_rex1212+Z.jpg

I sorta wish we got to play the Eagles in the NFC Championship. They are so much easier to hate. :twisted: Plus their fans are a bunch of morans and would start trolling here non-stop, and once we beat them down we could lay the smack on them.

This. I don't want to say it, but I sorta feel like people that are fans of teams from all over the place aren't really... as good fans as those that are from the hometown team. I get into this hometown thing really strongly. Conciously thinking about it, I know that people are big fans even when they aren't from a certain place, but it just doesn't feel right to me. I don't want to disrespect anyone, but thats how I feel. EDIT: I don't want people coming in here to defend their fandom, because I know you guys are true fans. But it still don't feel right.

I believe it's "Sean" and not "Shawn." And if memory serves me correct but didn't Sean Payton used to be the Bears QB during the strike shorting season back in the 80s, under Mike Ditka? You're right. Sean, Shawn, whatever. But yea, he was a scab QB that year and he actually played against the Saints as a spare Bear. I'm actually from Skokie, but currently reside in Arlington Heights. Small world.

I don't think, even if he wanted to, Brady could do 4,000 yrds in a season, without it taking a severe toll on his arm. I believe Brady is more a system's QB then Peyton Manning. So, again, I'm standing the comparasion of Brady:: Pennington. Cause without Belichek, Brady would be a journeyman QB, prolly playing in Arizona right now. -------------------------+-----------------+ | Passing | Rushing | +----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+ | Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD | +----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+ | 2000 nwe | 1 | 1 3 33.3 6 2.0 0 0 | 0 0 0 | | 2001 nwe | 15 | 264 413 63.9 2843 6.9 18 12 | 36 43 0 | | 2002 nwe | 16 | 373 601 62.1 3764 6.3 28 14 | 42 110 1 | | 2003 nwe | 16 | 317 527 60.2 3620 6.9 23 12 | 42 63 1 | | 2004 nwe | 16 | 288 474 60.8 3692 7.8 28 14 | 43 28 0 | | 2005 nwe | 16 | 334 530 63.0 4110 7.8 26 14 | 27 89 1 | | 2006 nwe | 16 | 319 516 61.8 3529 6.8 24 12 | 49 102 0 |

You know...we could always have a thread during the week and open a new thread on game day? No? That would make too much sense? Ok.

It would be nice, no?

Agree on Brady. Brady is nothing more then Chad Pennington with SB rings. Does that mean Brady is a GREAT QB, of course, nor am I saying he is a bad QB, he is just overrated. Peyton Manning is still the better QB. I like the Patriots when they beat the Rams (due to the Rams being in St. Louis, come on Chicago, you can't ever root for a St. Lou team) and I was partially to Adam Vintieri. With that said, I should be thankful for the Patriots and the Ravens, seeing as Robbie Gould was given a shot with both clubs. Comparing him to Chad Pennington is a bit harsh. Watch Tom Brady play a bit more often, the guy can make some really great throws and pretty much has carried his team this year. I don't even like defending the guy, but someones gotta play devil's advocate. Tom Brady might be overrated, but he's still a fantastic QB. Look at how consistent his stats are. He always manages 28 or so TD's, lower than 14 Ints, and around 3500-4000 yards passing. He's done this for the past 6-7 years. Pennington's image is hurt by his injury history. Brady hasn't been hurt since he took the starting job from Bledsoe. Even while healthy, Penning hasn't even been CLOSE to Brady in production. Brady does it with worse receiving options to boot. He hasn't been as good, but he has been close. In 2002 (15 games) Pennington threw for 3120 yards and 22 TDs. Brady threw for 3764 yards and 28 TDs. This year (16 games) Pennington threw for 3352 yards and 17 TDs. Brady threw for 3529 yards and 24 TDs. And Pennington isn't exactly throwing to prolific receivers, he's got Lavernaeus (sp?) Coles, Jerricho Cotchery, Justin McCareins and Brad Smith. Brady has Jabar Gaffney, Reche Caldwell, Chad Jackson and Troy Brown. Pennington has better weapons, but not significantly. EDIT: Just FYI, in the same years Peyton has thrown for 4200 yards and 27 TDs (2002) and 4397 yards and 31 TDs (2006). Sure, Peyton can chuck the ball, but they play in different schemes. Brady isn't asked to throw for 4,000+ yards in his offensive system. With that said, its hard to compare anyone because of how much scheme, offensive line, wide receivers and running game weigh on someone's statistics.

Agree on Brady. Brady is nothing more then Chad Pennington with SB rings. Does that mean Brady is a GREAT QB, of course, nor am I saying he is a bad QB, he is just overrated. Peyton Manning is still the better QB. I like the Patriots when they beat the Rams (due to the Rams being in St. Louis, come on Chicago, you can't ever root for a St. Lou team) and I was partially to Adam Vintieri. With that said, I should be thankful for the Patriots and the Ravens, seeing as Robbie Gould was given a shot with both clubs. Comparing him to Chad Pennington is a bit harsh. Watch Tom Brady play a bit more often, the guy can make some really great throws and pretty much has carried his team this year. I don't even like defending the guy, but someones gotta play devil's advocate. Tom Brady might be overrated, but he's still a fantastic QB. Look at how consistent his stats are. He always manages 28 or so TD's, lower than 14 Ints, and around 3500-4000 yards passing. He's done this for the past 6-7 years. Pennington's image is hurt by his injury history. Brady hasn't been hurt since he took the starting job from Bledsoe. Even while healthy, Penning hasn't even been CLOSE to Brady in production. Brady does it with worse receiving options to boot.

Whatever, the episode is over. Go Bears! :lol:

Agree on Brady. Brady is nothing more then Chad Pennington with SB rings. Does that mean Brady is a GREAT QB, of course, nor am I saying he is a bad QB, he is just overrated. Peyton Manning is still the better QB. I like the Patriots when they beat the Rams (due to the Rams being in St. Louis, come on Chicago, you can't ever root for a St. Lou team) and I was partially to Adam Vintieri. With that said, I should be thankful for the Patriots and the Ravens, seeing as Robbie Gould was given a shot with both clubs. Comparing him to Chad Pennington is a bit harsh. Watch Tom Brady play a bit more often, the guy can make some really great throws and pretty much has carried his team this year. I don't even like defending the guy, but someones gotta play devil's advocate. Tom Brady might be overrated, but he's still a fantastic QB. Look at how consistent his stats are. He always manages 28 or so TD's, lower than 14 Ints, and around 3500-4000 yards passing. He's done this for the past 6-7 years.

Why do you have to act so smug?

Too bad I hate the Raiders, so that picture brings back only fond memories. :P I also dislike the Colts. I like Manning, but for some sadistic reason, I want to see the Colts' run of postseason futility continue for as long as possible. Plus, I think New England getting to the Superbowl gives the Bears the best chance for a win. Slightly. I too share this scheudenfreude with the Colts. I love to see them fail.

That is as much Rex's responsibility as anyones. He has to see where the blitz is coming from and adjust accordingly so that he's not getting drilled in the middle of his drop by an unblocked blitzer. Theres a difference between knowing where the pressure is coming from and doing what is needed of the situation...and completely letting rushers go free. See...one results in the other. If it wasn't for the O-line completley losing its head on those 3-4 set rushes, Grossman wouldn't have to make those tough choices.

That picture of Olin Kreutz leaping in joy makes me so goddarned happy. Him and Brian Urlacher deserve a Super Bowl ring more than anyone else. They have truly given their heart to this team for a long time.

Everyone is tired of NE, tired of Brady winning and tired of Belichick. Most everyone I see roots for Peyton to get his ring, get that playoff monkey off his back. I'm the exact opposite. I hate Peyton Manning. I hate the Colts. I hate the way they play football, and I love storylines. I love how New England is the magic genie standing between Manning and his ring. I hope Manning never even makes it to the Super Bowl. Theres some drama there. In this scenario I'll be rooting for the two "bad" teams this week. Chicago will be the "bad guy" trying to end the magical Saints season. New England is the evil empire that has been oppressing the Colts for the past half decade. That, and I think we could take New England in a match up. They are a much weaker team than Indy. :lol:

Well, Drew Brees is used to playing in the cold after his time at Purdue. As a southerner myself who usually played his sports in warm weather, I can attest to the fact that it does matter a bit. However, in the games where I've played baseball in frigid temps (road trips normally), your adrenaline is so high that it doesn't affect you as much as you would think it would. That said, the temperature is the main thing that scares me....and oh ya, Devin Hester. He should have had another TD this past week #-o Although if not for Ricky Manning's block in the back, he probably would have been tackled.

I couldn't agree more. I'm scared of the Saints, honestly. Our defense wasn't HORRIBLE this past week, but they sure aren't what they used to be. Our safeties need to play better, and Urlacher was downright steamrolled on a few Alexander runs up the middle. Heres my opinion: If the Bears can keep the Saints under 24 points, we have a good shot. If they don't, we probably lose.

All I know is, there aren't many Saints fans who give a crap about the "feel-good" story. We don't want to be the cinderalla team, we want respect for being a good football team. "omg omg tragedy give them superbowl "- analysts whether you like it or not, the media will portray it like that. I'm worried about our defense just getting tore to pieces by Drew Brees, but there isn't much I can do about it right now. Hopefully we can keep their offense off the field long enough and we can put up 27+ points and that'll give us a good shot to win. It will be a battle.

Baltimore was only favored by 3.5 over the Colts and they were at home. That translates into basically a toss up game if it was on a neutral field. The Bears are favored by 9 over Seattle not to mention that they pounded Seattle earlier this year. The Ravens and Colts were the 2 and 3 seeds while the Bears and Seahawks are the 1 and 4 seeds. The only reason the Colts win is considered an upset is because they were playing on the road. If the Bears were on the road they would still be favored over the Seahawks. It's not a double standard and the Ravens are not the biggest disappointment every. Your homerism is horribly clouding your judgment here. Thats not what I'm complaining about, I'm complaining about the fact that if the team has a bye and loses they should get the same treatment the Bears got last year. They were favored by just about as much as the Ravens were in this past game. Well first you said "if the Bears lose" which led me to believe you were talking about this year and not last year. Second, I don't remember everybody calling the Bears " the biggest failures in the universe" after they lost to Carolina last year. But if I was to guess why the Bears loss to the Panthers was a worse loss than the Ravens to the Colts it would be because of one thing: Steve Smith. Everybody knew the only offensive weapon the Panthers had was Steve Smith and that's it. Nothing else. But the Bears didn't do anything to take him out of the game like Seattle did and just let him do whatever he wanted. Maybe its my paranoid crazy homer Bear fandom (quoting soccer) but I honestly do feel like Chicago gets a (at least slightly) worse rap by the media. I don't know why this is. It might because we let them down (somewhat) during the middle of the season after everyone was calling for us to sweep through the NFL and win everything. (Which we basically did anyway but not...impressive enough or something) It's nowhere near as bad as everybody calling Peyton Manning the next Dan Marino as well as his inability to beat Brady and Belichick and win the big one. Or the Colts for not being able to stop the run and choking in the postseason. I will agree with you on this. There is nothing special about the Postseason that make the Colts play magically worse. They just play better teams. It has less to do with choking and more to do with being outplayed. However, the Colts were far worse at stopping the run and no one could have predicted them to play...this much better. Rex Grossman has (I hate to say this but, at time) played very well, and it shouldn't be THAT suprising if he has an even average game.

Seriously, are you out of your mind? You're a Bears fan, and most football media you read or watch will be about the Bears. Inevitably, discussion of the Bears will eventually turn to the fact that they've gotten severely inconsistent and unpredictable play out of their QB this season, and that play is likely to have a big effect on whether the Bears win or lose tomorrow. No one has talked about Rivers because LDT is a deity. If Rex had someone like LaDainian to give the ball, I suspect he wouldn't have to deal with as many questions either. And I have never, once in my life, heard anyone, anywhere, say anything about Rex Grossman throwing five picks a game. Since he hasn't done that this year at all, I'm guessing you're either making this up in your head or...making this up in your head. I'm too upset to respond anymore. I can only pray for a playoff win so the media can flip the tables again and put the Bears inexplicably in the number 1 spot again.

Don't you know? The Bears lost a playoff game LAST year, and their Qb had a bad game the last game of the season. How the hell can you expect them to win?