chuckywang
-
Posts
7,393 -
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 chuckywang
-
Bears vs. Seahawks, Sunday Jan 16 at noon
chuckywang replied to jersey cubs fan's topic in Other Sports
it scares me to see Chicago at the top of the NFC there. I dont want them to lose their edge (mental us-vs-them) Yeah, cause I'm sure the Bears players are really into DVOA analysis. -
Damn, that's shady and in a gray ethical area. The term "student-athlete" is a bad joke with the NCAA.
-
Oh don't tell me he's going to sell that too ...
-
The only way the Seahawks can get a winning record is to win the Super Bowl. Also, if you desire to see a Packers-Bears Super Bowl, you're going to be waiting quite a while.
-
they are the GREATEST #6 SEED EVER. I can see that. Steelers won the Super Bowl as the #6 seed in 2005.
-
funny you mention that, considering it was the jacobs fumble that was the turning point in the giants game. that was a hell of a bounce and a blind swat. Ok sure, but it was a 14 point game at the point. Given the final score, I don't think that was a huge turning point play.
-
Or bad coaching. Or poor performance when a game is close and late. Or lack of a running game to run out the clock. Or lack of a run defense to stop the other team from running out the clock... these posts just sound like confirmation bias, to me is it bad coaching that Flynn mismanaged the clock at the end of the NE game, or that the refs decided to eat their whistles on the PI no-call in the 2nd Lions game? (disclaimer: i thought it pretty poetic justice, because the Packers could have easily have lost to us the first go-around had either of two PI no-calls on Woodson been called at the end of the game. this just goes to show how much luck is involved in close wins) Don't forget the first Bears game either, when the Bears got that crucial fumble at the end that directly led to the winning FG. It wasn't luck that got the Bears the fumble since the Bears defense is probably the best in the league at stripping the ball out of a ball carrier's hands, but I will say it is bad luck that the Packers gave it up. If you ran that play 100 times, I bet 95 times he just gets tackled. james jones has fumbled 3 times against the bears with 15 catches. i'd say it's more like 80 times out of a hundred. And then how many of those 20 fumbles would the ball have inexplicably stayed in bounds?
-
Or bad coaching. Or poor performance when a game is close and late. Or lack of a running game to run out the clock. Or lack of a run defense to stop the other team from running out the clock... these posts just sound like confirmation bias, to me is it bad coaching that Flynn mismanaged the clock at the end of the NE game, or that the refs decided to eat their whistles on the PI no-call in the 2nd Lions game? (disclaimer: i thought it pretty poetic justice, because the Packers could have easily have lost to us the first go-around had either of two PI no-calls on Woodson been called at the end of the game. this just goes to show how much luck is involved in close wins) Don't forget the first Bears game either, when the Bears got that crucial fumble at the end that directly led to the winning FG. It wasn't luck that got the Bears the fumble since the Bears defense is probably the best in the league at stripping the ball out of a ball carrier's hands, but I will say it is bad luck that the Packers gave it up. If you ran that play 100 times, I bet 95 times he just gets tackled.
-
Nitpickey but wasn't Harris in the Nomar trade not the Aramis trade? Probably...while doing this on the fly, I actually did confused both trades...I had prospects from the Aramis trade going to the Twins and Montreal but corrected before posting... It was Bobby Hill in the Aramis trade right?
-
The Packers lost those 6 games by a combined 20 points. Has there been a team in history whose average margin of defeat was lower? Really? Is that a real question? I'll just give you some of the easy-math answers: 1984 49ers: 3 1998 Vikings: 3 1985 Bears: 14 2004 Steelers: 17 This year's Ravens lost 4 games by a combined 16 points, so they were right there with the Packers in margin of defeat. Average margin of defeat is what I am going for. I realize there might be some 15-1 team that lost a game by 3 points, but I guess that's not really the same since the Packers had 6 losses. so, the more loses you have, the better (or at least more acceptable) your average margin of defeat becomes? or is 6 a magic number? I'm so confused....I keep thinking its better to win games then to lose them. The only thing I've implied is that a 3-ish point average margin of defeat is much harder to obtain with multiple losses than with 1 loss. When a game is that close, both teams have pretty much played each other to a standstill. Any one bounce, call, or other similar intangible element could have gone one way or another and either team could have won. The Packers are 2-6 in games decided by 4 points or less. That, to me, seems like the Packers have been incredibly unlucky this year.
-
The Packers lost those 6 games by a combined 20 points. Has there been a team in history whose average margin of defeat was lower? Really? Is that a real question? I'll just give you some of the easy-math answers: 1984 49ers: 3 1998 Vikings: 3 1985 Bears: 14 2004 Steelers: 17 This year's Ravens lost 4 games by a combined 16 points, so they were right there with the Packers in margin of defeat. Average margin of defeat is what I am going for. I realize there might be some 15-1 team that lost a game by 3 points, but I guess that's not really the same since the Packers had 6 losses.
-
And...... LOL I'd much rather have a player that does the big things well.
-
Overplaying in a trade once in awhile isn't a bad thing. Remember this is only a 30 team market here, and the Rays have a very good farm system. Building up good will with them might be important down the road.
-
Yeah, I expect Garza's numbers to be better moving to the NL Central, but does that mean he has more value in the NL Central? It's all relative anyways. I expect all pitchers to be better in the NL Central than the AL East. I don't think that adds to Garza's value. His skill is his skill and should be evaluated in a vacuum.
-
The Packers lost those 6 games by a combined 20 points. Has there been a team in history whose average margin of defeat was lower?
-
Rex Ryan He talks a lot, but does he actually do those types of things on the field? I know the other two have no problem going against the status quo with stuff like going for it on 4th down. Didn't Andy Reid do an onside kick on the opening kickoff in Week 1 a few years ago? Granted, the stakes are a lot higher in playoff games ...
-
Now what if the Eagles went ahead and kicked a FG on the first possession of OT. Then the Rodgers throws an INT and the Eagles defensive player stupidly tries to run it back and fumbles and the Packers recover. Is the game over or what?
-
Oh, hmm ... I'm just not familiar with teams in the NFL.
-
What's the point of a clock then? Why have it timed at all? You could say the same thing about the old playoff overtime.
-
I think the rules are pretty clear cut. There is one scenario I thought about where it can cause confusion though: Say Aaron Rodgers throws an INT to Brian Dawkins in the first possession of OT. Dawkins tries to return it but then fumbles and the Packers recover. The Packers eventually kick a FG. Is the game over?
-
Well, I mean ... it did kinda work. The 4th quarter brought them back from a big deficit.
-
What a fartcrap ending
-
I friggin hate Deng
-
I'm hoping that the Meadowlands was the source of their bad fortunes, since they play at the Prudential Center now. Remember this?
-
By my calculations, there is a 119.8% chance of someone winning the Super Bowl. That is because Vegas always wins. I know, but geez ... what a ripoff. I thought 105% or 110% at the most, since it's the Super Bowl. But 120%? Wow.