minnesotacubsfan

no franchise tag? Danieal Manning? or can you not franchise a UFA? http://www.chicagobreakingsports.com/2011/02/bears-wont-use-franchise-tag-on-free-agents.html

nice

I mean, we HAD to lose to sulley's team for cryin out loud

wwwwwwwwwwhy [expletive] gophers. way to coug it

HIDE THE WOMEN AND CHILDREN

http://www.thesportsbank.net/core/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Tony-Bennett.jpg WHO IS THIS GUY

cougin it I think the Gophers are right now, jesus

yes, I noticed Lo Pan. but its OK I FORGIVE YOU. and ssr, no. Washington State. its in Eastern Washington, YO

HEY GUYS, ALMOST FORGOT THIS GAME WAS ON!!!

http://www.flagguys.com/img/minnesota.gif

I posted this earlier. YOU DONT COUNT.

O COMON! NOW YOU WANT TO TRASH CUTLER????!!!

lol

you just want to be accepted?

he'd go first if he was a Gopher. I'M JUST SAYING

drop williams. draft Derek Sherrod. also, that Illinois DT looks like he's going to go upper/mid rd 1 http://www.sportingnews.com/nfl/feed/2011-01/2011-nfl-draft/story/draft-dish-illinois-corey-liuget-flying-up-boards

no he's not.

Mike Martz. Trade ya straight up.

yea but thats way cooler.

If Cutler did that, you'd call him a douche. Jay Cutler is dating Kristen Cavaleri. That's indisputable evidence of his douchebaggery. talk about bitter jealousy Rodgers gets the title, Cutler gets a fantastic looking lay.

If Stafford can stay healthy for a full season, they could be a playoff team within the next year or two. add to that that I think it could take 11 wins to be assured the wild card anymore. considering GB and Chi could teeter-totter 1-2 in the division, and 11 wins is a good amount for Chicago, if Detroit gets better and splits the series with Chicago, Chicago doesn't get the WC. The vikings, on the other hand, are headed for a rough time considering their stadium situation, aging players (D-line) and lack of QB. as I've said, anything to keep Detroit down. Buy japanese cars, fly southwest, just keep Detroit down (I'm kidding here)

Detroit actually worries me. I think they could really pick up steam

I guess my chagrin in this came from the assertion that the packers had all pros at every position and were likely to repeat multiple times. To that, I wanted to point out the parity that exists in the NFL as pointed out by the fact that relative unknowns can often play a season at a very high level. But that doesn't guarantee any lingering success. It just felt like your arguments were placing the Packers at the elite-abandon-all-hope-for competing-with-them levels. Bishop had a good year. It is their opinion that he should have gone to the Pro-Bowl. we can agree on that, cant we?

Me either, but after the year he had running behind that line, he has to be top 10 easily. I suppose if you consider his receiving abilities out of the backfield you could make a case for top 5. he was ranked their 6th-best RB for the season http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/01/21/undercover-mvps-matt-forte/ i'd like to hear specifically what of that write-up you disagree with, minny He said he's not a top 3 back. Your link says he's ranked 6th. What exactly is the point you're trying to make? i was clarifying Minny's mix-up, their specifics actually line up well with my perceptions of Forte (middle of the road runner, great in pass pro, catching) unless they make their claim anywhere else, this is the only place I see them saying Bishop is all world (and Forte is "top 3"): http://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2011/01/26/nfc-pro-bowl-who-you-should-have-been-watching-or-not-watching-in-hawaii/ Granted, they have another article stating they really believe Forte is a top 6 back. That leads me to believe that your assessment of Bishop being "among the very best" is only based on your own eyes and an article written to rebuke the 2010 Pro Bowl selections. But I don't think that is solid proof. there are other portions of the website I cant access (I get a malicious website warning when I try to go into the "top players by rankings" area), but to say Bishop is "among the very best" is to me hyperbole.

6 is about the highest I would think of him. Your earlier post suggested they thought he could have been a top 3. I think the first article you posted is just their way of rebuking the Pro Bowl entries, and maybe we are making too much of it to say they actually believe Bishop is among the very best. I think they were really just saying his play should have earned him a Pro Bowl appearance, which there is an argument for. But I don't think they believe either Forte or Bishop will continue to be at that level or have been enough to be the very best in the league.