UMFan83

And if Rose fouled him trying to block the attempt it probably turns into an and 1 and people are ripping on him for his bad basketball iq or something. I don't know wtf he was doing on the last offensive possession though. That's unacceptable.

What an awful night for Rose despite the decent shooting night. Nice 32-18 quarter in favor of the Nets. Since 2002-2003, the Bulls are 11-6 against the Nets at the United Center, and 1-14 in New Jersey.

Guess it wasn't just the Meadowlands.

I'm hoping that the Meadowlands was the source of their bad fortunes, since they play at the Prudential Center now. Remember this? Yeah I didn't want the 2 seed anyways...much happier playing Miami and Detroit than Washington without Arenas and Butler and New Jersey.

I'm hoping that the Meadowlands was the source of their bad fortunes, since they play at the Prudential Center now.

How are they gonna fit a soccer field at Wrigley if they couldnt fit a football field? Isn't it longer and wider?

I'll take a 20 point win anyday. They played well throughout except for briefly in the third. They pulled the starters for the 4th because it's the first of 4 in 5 nights.

Last year the only OT that would have made sense at the position the Bears would have picked would have been Anthony Davis, who the 49ers picked in the Bears slot. He was a huge disappointment and was one of the most penalized lineman in football this year. We got enough of that from Webb. The only other OT taken after Davis in the 1st round was Bryan Bulaga, who went 23 to the Packers and we've all heard about the struggles he's had.

Obviously Cutler is better than Orton, but I wouldn't be surprised if Orton could have got the Bears in the playoffs with two first round linemen the Bears would have had. what makes you think they would have take lineman, and if they did what makes you think they would pan out?

Yeah I read an interview on ESPN the Magazine (I was really bored waiting for my haircut) talking about that the other day. He said he does it because it pisses of the people who went to Idaho State, who want free publicity from him or something. He's a strange dude. And no, the people that say "THE Ohio State" (along with everyone else that went to Ohio State) are just giant douchebags.

Bulls games are boring now that they just win every game. I'm just kidding, this is awesome. Taj looks like a completely different player than the one we've seen since Boozer came back. Wonder what they told him.

Well that's certainly interesting. They can't not fire him at this point can they? That would be embarassing for the team. This article is fairly optimistic about Harbaugh to UM, but of course it was posted before Rich Rod/fired rumors started. http://www.freep.com/article/20110103/SPORTS06/110103017

Are you hearing anything EJ? I haven't had a lot of time to scour the internet for rumors of potential hires.

To me it will all depend on who the next hire is. If they have someone specifically in mind (obviously Harbaugh comes to mind) then I am ok with the firing. If they were firing him just because they were fed up with the results, then I am not sure if they gave Rodriguez enough time. I don't want to be [expletive], but I accepted that there would be 2 years to transition into a spread offense. The results of the last 2 years didn't bother me. The fact that our defense was 108th in the nation this year did bother me, and I didn't really consider going 7-6 a success in year 3. But you've knowing punting away 2 years of a program that never punts away years to make the switch to the spread, and the third year doesn't go their way and he's fired? Now what? You hire a coach to run a traditional offense and punt another year going back (I am assuming its easier to go back than to switch to one)? Blah, at least the offseason will be interesting. To me the move only makes sense if they already have Harbaugh in their back pocket. Otherwise it seems that they are taking a tremendous risk which could blow up. I agree. The coaching search for Rodriguez was a disaster with people publically turning UM down left and right. I can only imagine how fun this one will be if they don't have someone in their back pocket.

I feel like everyone most people expect either expect the Eagles to flame out in the first round or the rest expect them to make the Super Bowl. I am kind of down on them. I feel like teams have figured out a way to contain Vick and have figured out if you cut out the deep ball you can slow down their offense significantly. Their defense isn't anything special (only 4 teams in the NFC gave up more points than the Eagles), and their offense can be limited. Considering if the Eagles win, they are going to Chicago, I think that's a really tough match for them considering that their entire defense is designed to shut down the big plays. Lo and behold, the 2 teams to beat the Eagles when Vick started were the Bears and Vikings, teams that still run the Tampa 2. In fact, the Bears and Vikings held the Eagles to their lowest post totals of the season in games Vick started.

To me it will all depend on who the next hire is. If they have someone specifically in mind (obviously Harbaugh comes to mind) then I am ok with the firing. If they were firing him just because they were fed up with the results, then I am not sure if they gave Rodriguez enough time. I don't want to be shitty, but I accepted that there would be 2 years to transition into a spread offense. The results of the last 2 years didn't bother me. The fact that our defense was 108th in the nation this year did bother me, and I didn't really consider going 7-6 a success in year 3. But you've knowing punting away 2 years of a program that never punts away years to make the switch to the spread, and the third year doesn't go their way and he's fired? Now what? You hire a coach to run a traditional offense and punt another year going back (I am assuming its easier to go back than to switch to one)? Blah, at least the offseason will be interesting.

Yeah...Saints over Bears at Soldier Field in January would be quite surprising. As would Baltimore beating the Pats in Foxborough. Not to mention the whole "Packers winning 3 road games plus the SB" thing. I'm sure he's picking the Pats to lose because he cant see the Packers beating them.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/story?columnist=clayton_john&id=5972554 John "Ponytail" Clayton rated all the NFL starting QBs, as he does a couple of times a year, and put Cutler into the 2nd of 3 levels he defines as "Elite", "Chad Pennington" (Cutler was here), and "Hit or Miss" Overall Cutler was ranked 16th after names like Carson Palmer, San Bradford, Josh Freeman, Eli Manning, Matt Schaub, Joe Flacco and Tony Romo (all names I think should be below Cutler). [expletive] you Clayton. Oh and this is his remarks on Cutler: So 16 is too many interceptions, but 4 other people above Cutler threw more than him this year. Eli Manning threw 9 more interceptions than Cutler, but he's still improbably living off his fluke Super Bowl title from 4 years ago.

I was looking at the Football Outsider rankings today and noticed that if the Bears Pass Blocking didn't regress for the GB game, we might have actually finished 31st in the league in Pass Protection over Carolina. This is an amazing improvement because the Bears were in last place by a pretty significant margin around week 7-8.

If it goes to 18 games, I'd imagine that instead of the 1st place teams playing the other 1st place teams in its conference (i.e. Bears vs. Eagles and Seattle next year), the 1st and 2nd place teams in each division will play the 1st and 2nd place teams in the other divisions in the conference. And the 3rd and 4th play 3rd and 4th in the other divisions. Only adds 2 games because you are already playing 1 entire division. In that case, I am assuming that the H/R games would be opposite the H/R games for the 1st place teams meaning the Bears would play @ St. Louis and at home against the Giants.

You and your stupid numbers. Fair enough. My thoughts were based on the fact that KC has been a fantastic home team. Until this weekend in a game with only some meaning, they were undefeated at home with a +100 point differential (Average margin of victory of +14). Compare that to on the road where they were 3-5 with a -34 point differential. What I didn't realize is, like you pointed out, they haven't played anyone that good. Baltimore is a fantastic team as we all know, so I guess I am going out on a big limb here picking the Chiefs, but I am going to anyways.

I think I am like the only person in the world picking either the Jets or the Chiefs, but for some reason I just can't shake picking them both. Especially KC. I think they are going to surprise people. As for the Colts, I am just not sure they are all that good this year. Of course neither are the Jets, so in that case the home team would be the safe option, so I can see why they are the popular pick.

Wow I didn't even see this thread yesterday. I was wondering when it was going up. I wonder what the schedule will look like if they goto 18 games or if they chop off a couple due to an extended lockout.

New Orleans lost to 3 non-playoff teams, and beat 5 non-playoff teams by less than a touchdown. They beat Seattle by 15 at the dome, and home field is typically worth about a FG or so(plus Qwest is one of the biggest HFA). This is the NFL, random results are the norm. I respect those points. To me, Seattle is one of the worst teams in the NFL and the Saints are one of the best. This will be a playoff game, so NO is going to go all out, which might not have happened in their regular season meeting. Seattle is going to go all out too but is much much less talented than NO. If the Pats could be more than 10.5 point underdogs in the Super Bowl against the Rams in 2001, I don't see why the defending champions should only be favored by 10.5 points against one of the worst teams in the league, regardless of whether they are playing at home. I'll be cheering for the Seahawks though of course. If a miracle happens and the Hawks lose, I become the biggest Packer fan in the world.

Wow the line on the Saints/Seahawks game is only 10.5. I honestly cannot see the Seahawks staying within 20 of the Saints. But I just have a particularly negative impression of the Seahawks.