Soul

In tonight's practice Hester had a couple more nice catches, though there was one drop in traffic. Rex is looking very sharp. They're really pushing the pass game with him -- many more deep throws than I remember in previous years (not bombs, just deeper routes). Greg Olsen had another excellent grab on a deep route tonight. Robbie Gould was at practice, but for some reason I only saw Novak during the ST drills tonight. I'm not sure if he was held out or if I just didn't see him kicking... Garrett Wolfe also did not practice. I learned later he tweaked his hammy slightly; then I remembered he was limping ever so slightly during the morning practice. They must have held him out as a precaution. The workout was shoulder pads only, so no real hitting and hence, no drama surrounding Ced getting hit too hard by the defense ;) Benson did catch the ball much better out of the backfield than he did on Friday.

Yeah but this guy hits for average as well. Crew will take Braun, happily. And they'll win with him too. He's a better player than any positional player we've churned out since Grace. And he's not even the best player the Crew recently developed, either. The Crew are making us look like idiots.

i seem to have different standards than most people on this board. Yeah, that seems to be a bit low of a bar to set for happiness to me as well. Merely playing meaningful games in August is, well, meaningless. To me, at least.

This is horrendous. We're now losing games like we were earlier, by letting normally crappy pitchers punk us and then giving the game away on stupid plays. Arroyo was having his worst year as a pro, until tonight. We should have done much, much better against him, but of course not! If this is how we're going to play? We're going to slide down the standings double-quick. Total freaking crap.

That was a good throw, right at me as I was sitting on the far side burm. Overall the QBs looked predictably pretty rusty, but each had some good throws too. It was a real light workout, no hitting at all, no pads, and everyone seemed to be in a good mood. Hester was catching everything I saw thrown his way :) And Olsen just seems to be real smooth catching the ball -- he makes it look really, really natural. One random, inconsequential thing: I never noticed how short Leak is, or how long (but quick) his throwing motion is. He's weird, he whips the ball from way back but brings it very quickly through. He looked like he might even be shorter than Grossman. I guess I'm not very observant of college guys. Wasn't all the big of a crowd, I guess the crush starts tomorrow.

Nah, this little stumble is just what the Dr. ordered to get Hendry to make a move on a big bat before the deadline. Oooohhh you did not just say that. Little stumble? We're finished now.

http://blogs.chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports_hardball/2007/07/bonds-blasts-co.html Like this is the first time he's thrown around curse words? More likely, Bonds has no way to argue the facts of his steroid use, so he must resort to calling names and throwing up red herrings in the hopes that people won't notice he can't deny the actual truth of his cheating.

Oh my God, how convenient is that for us? Wow. Too bad he got hurt though, he was having a great year.

I'm heading to camp Friday through Sunday, I'll report anything that is of note, although everyone usually gets pretty good updates just following the postings of the reporters who will be there. Sometimes I get a good heads-up though: last year it was obvious to me from the very first day that Gould had upped his game a couple notches. That certainly carried through the season.

Why does Lou deserve credit? Unless he suggested something to JJ that changed his approach or something, I think the credit goes to JJ for having a great month. Of course, if I'm going to tell JJ "great job in July" I also get to tell him "you sucked hard in June...and May...and you were bad in April too." To be fair, Lou supposedly changed Jacque's swing near the end of June, so there potentially could be credit to Lou for that. Jacque still needs the power to come around, but I really like what I am seeing in other areas of his game. Some sharp hits to the opposite field, walks, and not looking completely helpless against the left-handed relievers he has been facing recently. He still does his ground it to first or second a lot, but the shortening of his swing may have helped cause his strikeouts to go down (4 in 45 AB's this month, and 6 BB's). I don't think it's just luck that has propelled him into this streak-it's a definite change in his approach (although he lapses back at times and has some pretty bad swings, he was doing that every swing earlier in the year). I have absolutely no idea if he'll go right back to what he was doing whenever he struggles though, so I'm not sure if he can sustain this production or not. It could switch off like a light, I'm just enjoying what he's giving us know and praying it continues. I did rather enjoy his catch in CF last night on Pujols. =D>

meh, you still have Hawk dragging down the broadcast, I don't care how good Stone is. I think the potential for amazingness is about the pairing of personalities in Stone with Hawk, and has little to do with how good (or not) Stone is himself. Point noted. Though I don't expect him to call Hawk out or anything, considering he might want to do this full time next year. You might be able to sense the tension though. Like, prolonged silence after Hawk says something particularly homer-ish. I have a feeling we will at least be able to tell when Stone is biting his tongue.

I thought the discussion was refreshingly civil, actually 8-)

The whole "losing super bowl team struggles" theory is very weak in my opinion. Seattle came back and made the playoffs. Philly had already been pressing it's luck with the whole 4-6 year window of opportunity thing that teams tend to follow. They'd been on the verge for so long that it was almost inevitable they'd suffer a setback. The Panthers were a bit of a surprise team making the Super Bowl, and they did miss the playoffs, but bounced right back the next year. Oakland was an old team on the verge of breaking down anyway, and they probably never should have made the playoffs. The Rams had been around for quite a while when they lost after the 2001 season. They were also an offensively minded team in the middle of an offensive turnover, going from Warner to Bulger. I really don't see the Bears being similar to any of those teams. An injury could change things, but they are a very good team probably right in the middle of their window of opportunity. They have steadily improved under the Angelo/Smith regime, and are probably poised to have their best year this season. Pretty good points. The Bears are definitely in the heart of their window right now. And we've got Rusty and his voodoo to keep away the injury demons.

Jones negated a lot of his quickness advantage, by dancing. Benson hit the hole much faster. I don't want to simply trash Jones though, he was a good Bear and always worked real hard. That might be his biggest advantage going over to the Jets -- he keeps himself in fine shape every year. Maybe that will let him perform at a high level longer. Didn't we eventually turn the Jones trade into like 4 picks though? I can't see any way someone who is objective could call that being 'pilfered'

I do like TJ, but from what I was watching last year, Benson looked to have the clear edge in power and just better downhill running. I do admit Jones is quicker, though I've always been a bit disappointed with his top-end speed.

I could have sworn I heard on the news that Tex is a rental...and the Rangers want the world for him, too. Someone was saying Boras might start negotiations @ 20mil/yr for him.

This could be amazing.

He's a guy who has said you can't win in the postseason with Grossman, both before and after the Bears won in the postseason with Grossman. He hates Grossman, with a passion. And he's relied heavily on the "terrible offseason" myth. I don't think I've ever seen a QB's good performances get ignored to the extent that Rex Grossman's have.

Dr. Z, of SI, has talked about a feud with people inside the Bears organization a while back, and has referred to a disagreement with Jerry Angelo when he was with the Giants. Peter King is a Patriots/Cowboys lover. Anything they do is gold. New England perhaps rightfully so. But he's a generalist. He talks about headlines and such and doesn't really investigate much. He's an entertaining writer, but not a good football writer. He'd fit right in with the PR types running ESPN. Rick Reilly simply doesn't no jack squat about sports. He knows things that happened in the 60's. And he knows about handicapped and otherwise challenged people who try and participate in sports. But he doesn't know anything about organized sports right now. Traditionally speaking the Bears are a poorly run team. They had a chance of fielding a dynasty in the mid 80's but blew it on stupidity. Then went in the toilet thanks to the Ditka/ownership feud and Wannstedt failures. It's the tried and true storyline. But for some reason none of them have realized that Ted Philips (a non-football guy), Jerry Angelo and Lovie Smith have completely blown away the old stereotype of Bears mismanagement. Don Banks might be the fairest football writer on CNNsi, and he still likes to get his Grossman digs in. The others probably make him sit in a corner if he doesn't. :roll:

I must say, as much as the media continues to dog this team, there could be a significant upside. If it keeps us hungry, and with a large chip on our shoulder, then I'll take it. I don't remember the other Super Bowl losing teams getting raked over the coals like this. It was celebration time for them. If being lambasted by everyone gives us an edge, then bring it on. Position by position, I don't see how this year's Bear team is any worse than last year's. There actually could be significant upgrades here & there. As usual, it all comes down to health.

It seems clear the national media holds a grudge against us, and I can't figure out why. Is there some long-held hatred of Chicago nationally that I never realized existed? It doesn't seem like the national reporters hate the Cubs this much, so maybe people hate on the Bears still from the 1985 days? What really starts to bother me is when our local reports begin to buy in to it. You're right, who the hell could possibly argue Grossman can't take us to a Super Bowl when he just did? That's the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard in my life.

There's a chance he could return to his career numbers

I'm glad Pie's tearing it up @ AAA and I want to see him back up here again, too. I just don't think it was a blind luck decision by Lou, that's all. Everything's a gamble, when you come down to it. He gambled Jones would bounce back. Now I'm with you guys, praying Jones either continues to be hot, or if he's traded we bring Pie up and he stays hot like he is @ AAA. I'm not against a Jones trade while he's hot.

I agree...if by "right" you mean "lucky." JJ hit .176/.250/.275 during June. Pie was sent down (despite having better June #s: .218/.296/.333), so Lou had no other options and played JJ. It's not like JJ hasn't had a hot month or two in the past. If he can have an .800+ OPS as our everyday CF for the next 2 months - that'd be great. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath. Understood. However, Lou was called an idiot on these boards for that move, and there was clearly a chance Jones could at least give us something, which he has. I hope it continues, but you're right, Jones could easily fall back into a mega slump again. Find where someone called Lou and idiot. The thing is that we can't go back and change history. JJ may have cost the Cubs more wins than he's contributed to but we'll never know for sure. I just don't get "it worked out fine so it must be good" logic. That's not the logic. The logic is, Lou knows what he's doing, Jones has hit well in the past, it's not ridiculous to think he could hit well again. Since you want me to go digging through old posts, here's one: It wasn't a terrible gamble, and it wasn't one Lou shouldn't have made. And the movie certainly didn't end like you thought it would. The proof is in the fact that Jones began to hit again at his career levels, which was not at all unreasonable to project. What are you going to do if JJ reverts back? He's had three weeks of success and three months of sustained bad paly. I still don't get the logic. My point stands. I understand that, and I agree. He could revert back. I'm just glad he's giving us something now. I honestly don't get how it's beyond comprehension that a guy who was hitting miles below his career numbers might bounce back. That happens all the time. For the record, I still have high hopes for Pie so I'd like to see him get right and then come back and start contributing.

I agree...if by "right" you mean "lucky." JJ hit .176/.250/.275 during June. Pie was sent down (despite having better June #s: .218/.296/.333), so Lou had no other options and played JJ. It's not like JJ hasn't had a hot month or two in the past. If he can have an .800+ OPS as our everyday CF for the next 2 months - that'd be great. Forgive me if I don't hold my breath. Understood. However, Lou was called an idiot on these boards for that move, and there was clearly a chance Jones could at least give us something, which he has. I hope it continues, but you're right, Jones could easily fall back into a mega slump again. Find where someone called Lou and idiot. The thing is that we can't go back and change history. JJ may have cost the Cubs more wins than he's contributed to but we'll never know for sure. I just don't get "it worked out fine so it must be good" logic. That's not the logic. The logic is, Lou knows what he's doing, Jones has hit well in the past, it's not ridiculous to think he could hit well again. Since you want me to go digging through old posts, here's one: It wasn't a terrible gamble, and it wasn't one Lou shouldn't have made. And the movie certainly didn't end like you thought it would. The proof is in the fact that Jones began to hit again at his career levels, which was not at all unreasonable to project.