UMFan83

I've heard that it's harder for a west coast team to head east for a game than vice versa. Part of the explaination is that for a West Coast team to play a noon game in the east, that's 9AM Pacific time. Throws them out of rhythm. If that is a legit issue though, it makes the Cubs/Day games issue seem more legit.

Yeah a lot of that was partially in jest, with things made up where I couldnt make a good connection to the World Series champ. The only ones that really apply are 2005, 2006 and sorta 2009. 2005 and 2006 for sure because I think there were quotes or speculation that Hendry was trying to emulate the Red and White Sox those years after they won it all.

I wouldn't think of Seattle or Detroit as locks. Again, like I said....If they aren't locks for us, we're in a world of trouble. No doubt Detroit and Seattle are decent teams, but we *should* beat them if we want to make the playoffs. They are the 3 easiest games remaining on our schedule. Detroit we dominated in a game already everywhere but the scoreboard, an Seattle on the road has been awful, losing their 2 road games by a combined score of 51-17 (and they played Denver and St. Louis, not exactly the 98 Broncos and 99 Rams). We should beat all 3 of those teams. Maybe lock was a bad word. I meant it as "if we are a playoff caliber team, these games should be locks for us."

this site: http://www.sportsclubstats.com/NFL/NFC/North/Bears.html says that if we can finish the year 6-5, to end with a 10-6 record, we have a 97% chance at making the playoffs. If we finish 56, to end with a 9-7 record, we are looking at a 65% chance. So how likely are 6 more wins? Well, let's assume the following 3 games are locks. If they aren't we're in a world of trouble anyways: 1. Seattle 2. Buffalo 3. Detroit So that leaves us with needing to go 3-5 vs. these teams: Washington Green Bay Minnesota Minnesota New York Jets New England Miami Philadelphia I can definitely see us being good enough to win 3 of those games. I count 3 of them as being moderately difficult (Washington, Miami, Philadelphia), and the other 5 being challenging. Win 2 of the 3 moderately difficult and just one of the 5 challenging ones, and we're good.

That's exactly what he's been like as a Hawk. Infuriatingly inconsistent.

Was that 2004 or 2005? 2005 - post end of year meltdown, boombox, walkout, corked bat, fighting with broadcast team, etc. 2005 we looked for good character guys because of how 2004 ended and because the "idiot" Red Sox won the world series taking body shots off each other. 2006 after the White Sox won the World Series with speed and small ball, Hendry somehow decided that he needed to win with speed and small ball as well. So Pierre, Fast Freddie Bynum, Angel Pagan, Ronny Cedeno, Jerry Hairston, Tony Womack, and Neifi Perez all had roles on the team. 2007 after the Cardinals won the world series with gritty fielders like David Eckstein, Yadi Molina, Aaron Miles, Taguchi and Rolen, Hendry made the statement that he decided he "likes guys that can catch the ball". Thus guys like Jock Jones, Caesar Izturis, Koyie Hill, Ryan Theriot, Mark DeRosa found roles on the team. At some point here, Lou bitched out Hendry for being a reactionary bitch and the theme seemed to die down a bit as Lou was allowed to have his own input in the process. However, after the Red Sox won the WS in 2007 with multiple Japanese players playing a role, he went out and got Fukudome, and after the 2008 Phillies won the World Series employing several key lefty hitters, Hendry did start a mini-obsession with acquiring lefty and switch hitting bats in order to have a balanced lineup. Unfortunately, in order to get more balanced, we had to downgrade in several positions.

As a Titans fan, how do you feel about Vince Young as a whole? I don't know what to think of him. His passing numbers are mediocre for the most part, and doesn't seem to be a much of a running presence as I thought he would, yet when he plays the team wins. Is this in spite of him or does he play a big role in the Titans offensive success?

You state injuries as an issue that might keep the Packers from the playoffs yet despite this excuse you want McCarthy canned if he can't lead you to the playoffs?

I hear ya about the fakeness of towel waving. They did the same thing at the Bears Sunday Night Football games I've been to. The PA guy tells the crowd that the game is about to go live and on the count of 3, start going crazy so people across the country can see how rabid Bears fans are.

Great post!!!! If I hear David Kaplan say one more time : "The next Cub manager should understand the Cubs history." it makes me want to drive a stake thru his heart. What history? 102 years of losing history? Years of being the doormat? This franchise wallows in the 1969 history. Ernie, Fergie, Santo, Billy, Hundley..blah..blah. That was 41 years ago. I want a GM, manager, ownership and players who could care less about that and want to win today..each game and not take a nap during May-September. I do despise the glorification of the 1969 Cubs. Granted, they were a great team, but they choked. Same goes for the '84, '03, and '08 teams. Sure, I enjoyed every moment of the 2008 season, at least until October, but then again, Im sure the folks on the Titanic were having a grand old time up until the end of their ride, and in the end, thats what they(the survivors anyway) remembered it for. It does disturb me that the 69 Cubs are revered here in Chicago, despite having one of the biggest collapses in baseball history. It's mostly because 69 (and 70) were the closest shots the Cubs had of playing postseason basebal between 1946 and 1983. Sad but true. Anyways, I can't imagine another franchise that would have a team similar to the 69 Cubs be revered so much. I doubt the Phillies fans look back on the 64 Phils very fondly. But maybe I'm wrong.

Since the Cardinals won the World Series (groan), the NL Central teams are 1-15 in the playoffs. (assuming no Reds 9th inning rally. The NL Central champ will be 0-12 in that timespan. Makes me feel slightly better about the Cubs follies in 07 and 08.

When are people going to learn how to spell his first name? I don't know, but if 6.5 years as a key player on your team won't do it, nothing will.

You are right. Now that I think about it I meant 2005 during the Orton stretch. Now you're talking.

I don't think it looks much like 2006. I can't believe the memory of 2006 is winning ugly. They blew out a ton of teams in 2006. Off the top of my head: 26-0 over Green Bay 34-7 over Detroit 37-6 over Seattle (defending NFC champ) 40-7 over Buffalo 41-10 over San Francisco 38-20 over New York Giants 42-27 over St. Louis 39-14 over New Orleans Yes the domination wasn't as great as the season wore along and the Bears lost 2 of their key defensive players, Tommie Harris and Mike Brown. But that wasn't a team that won ugly much of the time. This 2010 has its own identity and I don't think it resembles 2006. Honestly more like a slightly better 2008 team IMO.

SAME HERE! Except my scoring must be different because I lost by 6.

I dont know. I was in on this convo before. Historically you convert a 2 point conversion 40% of the time. So I think statistically it makes sense to make the opposing team take the 40% gamble rather than you. This is all assuming an XP is 100% chance, which it's not but it's very very close. Think about it this way....either you are going to attempt to put the game away with a 2 point conversion, which is converted 40% of the time. If you get it, the game is over. So you have a 40% chance of the game being over if you go for two. Or you are going to give that opportunity to the opponents. If they don't convert their 40% gamble, then the game is still over (I'm assuming this argument is only valid in late game situations). So if the opponent scores a TD, you have a 60% chance of the game being over. 60% vs. 40% I take the 60%

A lot of stingy defenses this year. Here's a look at an updated PA/G Top 7: Steelers 12.5 PPG (4 games) Vikings 12.7 PPG (3) Falcons 14.0 PPG (5) Chiefs 14.3 PPG (4) Ravens 14.4 PPG (5) Bears 14.8 PPG (5) Jets 15.3 PPG (4)

Screw that. This isn't college. There's no rankings here. GB and Dallas can lose every game they have the rest of the way, and I'll be giddy...I hate both those teams. It's more because I'm still very unsure about how good this Bears team is. And seeing Dallas especially destroy their competition would make me feel a little better. I am learning more and more each week though....the defense is pretty good and the secondary seems to be getting better each week. I know Carolina had a pathetic air game today but the secondary for the most part did a great job covering the receivers. It's a big reason why we got so much pressure today. I wouldnt consider the sacks coverage sacks, but they didn't really give Claussen and Moore much opportunity to dump a pass off like Rodgers and Romo and Manning have done in previous games. The offense is probably mediocre but with Jay Cutler is inconsistently above average. Meaning they can be above average but they are flawed enough to have games where they look bad. Biggest flaw is obviously the O-line. If they had even an average o-line, I could see this offense averaging 25+ ppg for a season. Will this be good enough to get us to the playoffs? It's quite possible. Does it make us Super Bowl contenders? Probably not but I can't eliminate that possibility right now.

This Braves/Giants game (3) has been fantastic. The atmosphere in Atlanta has been awesome

Dammit Dallas and Green Bay, you are supposed to be our signature wins. Stop looking so bad. (On second thought, continue being bad Green Bay)

OK you have to officially be concerned if you are a Saints fan. Playing the same team that they demolished in the playoffs 10 months ago, except without their HOF CB, they look horrible and lose. They are now 3-2 and haven't played one dominating game all season. Drew Brees looks a level below what he has been the last couple of years, and the defense is really inconsistent.

Here are some bad ones...maybe not worse but some are: 2000 Shane Matthews vs. Buffalo: 11-24, 106 yards, 0 TD, 3 INT, 19.1 Rating 2002 Henry Burris vs. Tampa Bay: 7-19, 78 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT, 10.3 Rating 2004 Jonathan Quinn vs. Dallas: 10-21, 86 yards, 0 TD, 2 INT, 19.2 rating 2005 Kyle Orton vs. Cincinnati: 17-39, 149 yards, 0 TD, 5 INT, 14.7 Rating 2006 Rex Grossman vs. Arizona: 14-37, 144 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT, 10.2 Rating 2006 Rex Grossman vs. Minnesota: 6-19, 34 yards, 0 TD, 3 INT, 1.3 Rating 2006 Rex Grossman vs. Green Bay (only played 1st half): 2-12, 33 yards, 0 TD, 3 INT, 0.0 Rating 2009 Jay Cutler vs. Baltimore: 10-27, 97 yards, 0 TD, 3 INT, 7.9 Rating 2010 Todd Collins vs. Carolina: 6-16, 32 yards, 0 TD, 4 INT, 6.3 Rating

I doubt it. I bet I could 5 Bears QB performances that are worse within the last 10 seasons.

lol, there's a poll on the Trib sports page asking who should be the backup QB after Cutler comes back. So far the results are 602 for Haine, 11 for Collins.

Did you miss the games last week?