XZero771679666304

No. Hester needs to concentrate on catching the ball, plus the Superbowl isn't the place for experimentation.

Google is your friend.

Are you old enough to remember 85'? This is the stuff that makes me feel old, and I am not even that old. 1985 seems like it wasn't that long ago....but it was.

I can't even wrap my brain around this. I can't imagine what it'd look like. Photoshop anybody? Two words: Violet Beauregarde.

Too bad. I like the navy+navy unis better.

But was it the right call? According to the rules, yes. But that doesn't make it any easier to digest. I think the rules should be amended to give more discretion to the officials.

It was still a ticky-tack penalty. Ticky-tack suggest a subjective call though-like pass interference where the guy barely touches the player, and so it can technically be called that but it really shouldn't. The rules on a blow to the head have it as an objective call-if any contact is made to the head, no matter how small, the referees have to call it. If the referees see it, they simply do not have the discretion to not make that call, no matter if the rule is ridiculous or not. Ok, we'll play semantics. It was a ridiculous call made necessary by a ridiculous rule. Seeing a team get 15 yards on a crucial playoff drive over such feeble contact was preposterous. If the roles had been reversed, Colt fans would feel the same way.

It was still a ticky-tack penalty.

PS2, PS3, XBox, XBox 360, PSP, GBA, Nintendo DS No Wii? get used to it what's up with your wii hate? you're not a ps3 fanboy, are you? The Wii won't be getting a lot of titles that the Sony and Microsoft systems will. It has nothing to do with being a fanboy. This is why you should own a 360/PS3 and a Wii.

my drunkeness assumes it has to do with the farm system. Are you drunk every night, or just the weekends? :P

i stopped reading there. LOL. The Cards are two more Albert Pujols and another Chris Carpenter from being a powerhouse. No one if this division projects to be a powerhouse.

And Sosa, Ramirez, Borowski and Grudz. Didn't Walker also miss some time? 2004 was a disaster. As far as how the Cubs did, they scored enough runs and stopped enough runs to have a pythagorean w-l as 94-68 Unfortunately as nice as stats are, the game is played on the field, not in a calculator. The offense was streaky, and frustratingly inconsistent.

And Sosa, Ramirez, Borowski and Grudz. Didn't Walker also miss some time? 2004 was a disaster. I'll happily take 2004 again (in terms of standings) sans its last 2 weeks (those were the real disaster) over anything we've had since, and probably 2007, too. 2004 was a disaster in terms of what could (or should have) been. With even half the injuries, they could have won 100 games. 110+ If Wood and Prior has made even 30 starts apiece.

And Sosa, Ramirez, Borowski and Grudz. Didn't Walker also miss some time? 2004 was a disaster.

My point was that heading into 2004, we had every right to think we would have a very productive offense. Things rarely work out just like they're supposed to, though. It'd be foolish to assume they will, or that the odds we get a ton of career years from people is more likely than getting injury-plagued half-seasons from important players. So comparing positions, based on the preseason expectations, we would have ended up with this. Pos 2004 vs 2007 C Barrett = Barrett 1b Lee = Lee 2b Walker >>> DeRosa SS Gonzalez = Izturis 3b Aram = Aram RF Sosa >>> Soriano CF CPatt >>> Jones LF Alou >>> Murton You can make the argument again that 2004 didn't turn out well... but that's kinda my point. We had a much better group then and didn't get near the production we were looking for. Do you really think this ragtag bunch of misfits is more likely to give us that production than the 2004 group was? While I agree with you for the most part, I think it's fair to point out that both Lee and Ramirez were lesser offensive players pre-2004. I think that most people would have expected a .270/.360/.880 line from Lee in 2004, and about a .270/.330/.800 line from Ramirez. Either of those lines would be sorely disappointing in 2007. So counting expectations as equal pre-2004 and now for those players would be inaccurate, IMO. I expected Patterson to be really good in 2004, and I expected AGon to at least hit 20 homers, making him better than Izturis. I expected Walker to be better than I expect DeRosa to be. Also, Sosa was in pretty clear decline. I don't expect his 2003 numbers to be as good as Soriano's 2007, numbers, and I sure didn't expect his 2004 numbers to be either. Barrett was also an unknown quantity. I didn't expect much from him in 2004, except to be better than Miller/Bako, which is saying very little. I didn't expect Alou to produce like he did on 2004, either. Here's my relative expectation chart: 2007 2004 C Barrett >>> Barrett 1B Lee >> Lee 2B DeRosa << Walker SS Izturis < Gonzo 3B Ramirez >> Ramirez RF Soriano > Sosa CF Jones << Patterson LF Murton < Alou And the lack of expected production in 2004 had a lot to do with injury as well.

Hester is more likely to bring one back, but he is also more likely to muff one and turn it over. You all are talking about the guy who set an NFL record for returns for td. Hester averaged 12.9 ypr to Bush's 7.7. Out of all the positions, you guys picked a bad one to argue. Huh? I wasn't arguing that Hester wasn't as good (he's better), just more likely to turn the ball over on a return.

Hester is more likely to bring one back, but he is also more likely to muff one and turn it over.

Agreed. As much as I love the Bears, and I really do love the Bears, simply seeing the Cubs make the playoffs would be just a little better. IDK about that. It would be close. The Cubs making the World Series would have more of a Surreal feel to it, but the excitement of either team making the "Pinnacle" of their sports championships games, would blow Chicago to the moon. And I hope I live long enough to see both happen, again. It seems like only yesterday the Bears were winning the 85' Superbowl. Our grandparents don't even remember the Cubs last WS win. Cubs WS win >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bears SB win. No contest. Also, if the Bears lose Sunday, it won't be nearly as painful as the 2003 NLCS. This is mostly because the Bears don't have the equivalent of a 3-1 series lead. The only way it would compare is if the Bears pulled an Oilers and blew a ridiculous lead. Probably not even then. There are so many facets to the Cubs' futility that a WS win would be just monumental. A Bears championship would be absolutely awesome, but not reality altering, like a Cubs championship would be.

Too bad I hate the Raiders, so that picture brings back only fond memories. :P I also dislike the Colts. I like Manning, but for some sadistic reason, I want to see the Colts' run of postseason futility continue for as long as possible. Plus, I think New England getting to the Superbowl gives the Bears the best chance for a win. Slightly.

Saints offense is ranked higher than the Bears defense and the Saints D is ranked higher than the Bears offense. The weather is going to be the toughest thing for the Saints in my opinion. Considering the fact that the Saints have not played in VERY COLD WEATHER all yr (disadvantage for teams in the NFC/AFC South, come playoff time, IMO), I think it will be the "cold weather" that hurts the Saints. Playoff time plus cold weather in the midwest is a different brand of football, then regular season plus warm weather in the southern states. I just doubt the ability of the Saints to play smash-mouth football in January. My opinion is...the Bears/Saints game won't be a high scoring game. I believe the Bears will win Sunday, and I don't think it will be as close as some WANT it to be. I'm thinking something like 24-7. I love the Bears, but if they hold the Saints to 7 points, I'll...I don't know what I'll do. It isn't going to happen. The Seahawks scored 24, and the Saints have a much better offense than they do. I hope the Bears shut them down cold, but I can't see that happening.

Great to see Rex play well today, and the Bears get a win. I would like to see more Benson, but I'll live. I really hope the defense plays better next week. If Brees gets the looks Hasselbeck got today, it will be really ugly. That secondary MUST tighten it up if the Bears want to make it to the superbowl.

The Cards will be fortunate to finish much above .500 this year. Then again, so will any of the Central teams. I don't think the Cards are any better than last year, the Cubs will be better, the Astros worse, the Brewers about the same, as well as the Bucs. The Reds will be worse. Who's the favorite? Who knows. It's a crapshoot, with extra emphasis on the crap.

Everyone has a bad game every now and then, but Rex has four games under 30 this year. There were 8 qualified QB's who finished the season with QB ratings lower than Rex's. Half of them lost their jobs during the season. One (Joey Harrington) won't be a starter next year, and another (Charlie Frye) will probably have to compete for a job. ding ding ding, you win the prize. Rex Grossman was God-awful for five starts; Philip Rivers was awful in one, maybe two. Rivers had the #8 passer rating in the NFL (#5 among guys who played the entire year) and made the Pro Bowl. Rex Grossman was worse than most of the quarterbacks in the NFL, and is considerably worse than every other quarterback left in the playoffs. He turned the ball over than everyone not named Jon Kitna. Maybe it's not a media conspiracy to make him look bad - maybe he IS bad. As a Bears fan, I hope they acquire a QB, maybe by trading up in the draft.

I am a Bears fan too, but the media skepticism is justified at this point. At the beginning of the season, the defense was filthy and Rex looked like a pro bowler. In the second half of the season, the defense has looked pretty porous, and Rex has had good games, but several bad ones. And we're not talking just bad, but godawful, as-bad-as-I-have-ever-seen-a-QB-play horrendous. So we've gone from having the best defense in the game and an emerging star QB heading a dynamic offense to having a vulnerable defense with an inconsistent enigma at QB who could almost single handedly lose a game at any time. Jones and Benson are good, but not good enough to shoulder all the load should abysmal Rex make an appearance in the playoffs. It's harsh, but it's the truth. On a personal level, I have gone from anticipating a SB win to hoping the Bears make it and don't get routed too badly by the AFC representative. Good Rex may well show up and the Bears would roll. But if Bad Rex does and Lovie doesn't yank him, things would not be good. I think Rex can be goaded into simply managing the game, and the return of the injured defensive starters will shore up the D. But you have to understand the media skepticism.

i don't think ray lewis needs advice from colts fans, he has won a superbowl. something peyton manning will never be do in all likelyhood. Peyton may win one, but not in Indianapolis.