Magnetic Curses

This is a very stupid post displaying an extreme lack of knowledge regarding NFL. this is a very stupid post. i know teams in the nfl can flop places quickly. but most of the meaningful free agents are already signed, and it was a thin free agent crop to begin with. given what the bears have done, or more accurately haven't done, how can you say that the bears are going to make up the gap on the packers in the next six months? please, enlighten us with another stupid post. without favre, the bears and packers are very similar teams. on defense, they have the same strengths--linebacker, cornerbacks, and each have a pro-bowler on their line. i would argue that tillman and vasher>woodson and harris urlacher and briggs>bennett and hawk kampman is better than either of the bears' ends but tommie harris is better than anything the packers have inside, and may be the best in the league when absolutely healthy. on offense, the packers have a much better receiving corp headed by driver. the respective lines are virtually a wash and i think the bears have a better qb pool with grossman and orton. orton outplayed favre late in the year in the arctic wind and i still believe benson to be a good back, no matter what his perfomrance was last year. however, the running backs are a wash. the bears huge edge is their special teams. i think the bears can win the north and, imo, are the favorites at this point. Packers' Oline is significantly better than ours, unfortunately. I do agree our ST will still be an advantage though. QBs -- I don't even know, you can't take the Dallas game where Rodgers came in with the Cowboys having seen zero tape of him and use that as a basis for anything. It's completely up in the air whether Rodgers is even going to make it. He could be anything from very good to terrible. With our Oline and no receivers though, it's a pretty good bet that Grossman and Orton will struggle. i wouldn't say their o-line is significantly better than anyone's. it has definitely been a problem for them and will continue to be. clifton is better than anyone we have, but after that, tauscher is better than fred miller, who will be replaced by tait, who's better than tauscher--and everyone else is really the same except for center, where the bears have an advantage. and before anyone goes off on how kreutz is on the backside of his career, he is, but he's still almost better than anyone else at the position in the league.

I bet you're happy. The Bears can't be his personal bitch anymore. except the part where he went 0-2 against them last year. How did the Bears do last season? You hang your hat on that 2-0 record in a "rivalry game" that none of the players really care about. i think the point is that favre lost his magic against the bears when lovie took over. he's like 6-2 against the pack since taking over. however, living in wisconsin, i DO like to remind everyone just who beat the pack this year. i always say that the bears can win 2 games a year, as long as they're agianst the pack.

This is a very stupid post displaying an extreme lack of knowledge regarding NFL. this is a very stupid post. i know teams in the nfl can flop places quickly. but most of the meaningful free agents are already signed, and it was a thin free agent crop to begin with. given what the bears have done, or more accurately haven't done, how can you say that the bears are going to make up the gap on the packers in the next six months? please, enlighten us with another stupid post. without favre, the bears and packers are very similar teams. on defense, they have the same strengths--linebacker, cornerbacks, and each have a pro-bowler on their line. i would argue that tillman and vasher>woodson and harris urlacher and briggs>bennett and hawk kampman is better than either of the bears' ends but tommie harris is better than anything the packers have inside, and may be the best in the league when absolutely healthy. on offense, the packers have a much better receiving corp headed by driver. the respective lines are virtually a wash and i think the bears have a better qb pool with grossman and orton. orton outplayed favre late in the year in the arctic wind and i still believe benson to be a good back, no matter what his perfomrance was last year. however, the running backs are a wash. the bears huge edge is their special teams. i think the bears can win the north and, imo, are the favorites at this point.

If we went RB in the first rd, I'd prefer Jonathon Stweart or Felix Jones. But if went Big Ten RB, I much rather WAIT till the 2nd rd. I am NOT convince that Meddenhall is 1st rd material. This is a guy who went from 845 yrds and 5 TDs combine between his Frosh/Sopho yrs, to 1681 yrds and 17 tds. So, colour me unconvinced about Meddenhall. Give me Felix Jones. In his frosh yr he had 626 yrds with 3 TDs. Soph/Junior yrs, he combine for 2330 yrds and 17 TDs. All the while in a PLATOON situation with Darren McFadden. So, IMO, Jones in a better back then Meddenhall. So, why rush for a RB with only one great yr of college, when you can get a better RB, like Stewart or Jones. Mendenhall's great improvement had more to do with the fact that there was abslutely zero in terms of other skill people or lineman to block for him on that Illinois team his 1st 2 years. Those young guys that Zook recruited and were playing when they should have been red shirted or riding the bench because they weren't strong enough got bigger and stronger and better last year and that had more to do with Illinois and Mendenhallbeing successful than anything (also the maturation of Juice). Big benefit of a RB with limited playing time is the limited wear and tear on him already. (Not that I'm advocating taking Mendenhall; heck, I'd prefer Stewart but I'd rather not get a RB at all.) how shocking, raisin prefers the west coast guy. :lol:

according to jay glazer, i'm holding my breath, though.

Yeah, running past him the other direction... i think they won both games he started. actually, it was one game, and we beat detroit 34-7 and had 6 tackles and 1 tackle for loss.

ayenbadejo deserves a chance to start somewhere. he was good when he stepped in for briggs a couple of times in 06. hester is really going to miss him.

we should also consider that maddux is old and could die soon and then it basically doesn't matter, unless you're implying that z will be outpitched by a corpse----even the corpse of a hall of famer. this z skepticism is mind-bottling.

I agree about Brohm as the top QB in the draft - I have yet to figure out why he's been forgotten about. Also, ya'll picked up Ben Hartsock today. Big time move for the Falcons. :D Brohm is not the top QB. Ryan is. Ryan's bigger, has a better arm, and is better in the pocket. Brohm only has a mobility advantage, but may be a system QB. Andre Woodson's stock is really dropping. He went from potential top 10 pick, to possibly 5th QB taken, and all the way down to the 3rd round. ....and I tried to tell people months ago he wasn't special, and got lambasted for it. Oh yes, here it comes: told ya. You got lambasted because you questioned Woodson because Tim Couch sucked and thus inferred all Kentucky QBs would struggle in the NFL (at least that's why I "lambasted" you). The holes in Woodson's game have nothing to do with the college he played at (keeping in mind that he played under a different head coach than Tim Couch). and woodson hasn't even taken a practice snap for an nfl team, yet. it's a little early for the "i told you so's" dontcha think?

He was fairly similar to what I thought he would be for the Bears. Not bad, but not good. If this was a very good team that just needed hand holding at QB, he could have done the job. Unfortunately, the Bears needed more than hand holding at QB. oh, come on, you were drinking the griese kool-aid along with everyone else after the win over philly. you even disagreed with my statement depicting him as an ordinary journeyman qb. haha. :wink:

LaDanian Tomlinson could be available and the Bears still shouldn't make that pick. With the passing game eroding and the offensive line coming off a relatively weak 2007 performance, defenses will be keying in on the Bears running game. The team should focus on solidifying the offensive line before any other offensive moves. I wouldn't go that far. You have to look at the value of the pick. I'm not convinced that with this OL fixed that Benson is the answer at RB. He has flashes where he looks, but the majority of the time he doesn't look good. There seems to be more depth in this draft at OL then play maker positions. If you have the opportunity to add a play maker to the offense and still add depth in later rounds I think you have to think about it. If McFadden's still sitting there at the Bears' pick, the best option for them might be to trade it. There are going to be teams lower down wanting McFadden and the Bears could fill a couple holes with that one pick. Jerry Jones might even hand over both firsts for McFadden. Those could turn into a solid O-lineman and a WR/RB/another OL. if mcfadden is still there at the bears pick, i hold a jerry jones-raping party.

yeah, but ucla has more titles than like any other school. it would have been nice to have gotten just one in champaign. :pig: As SSR is quick to remind me, I have only been alive for 1. :( true, and were you a fan of them at the time? i mean, have they been your college team since before you were a student? for the record, they screwed my pool that year, if arkansas had won it, i would have gotten like 500 bucks. do you know how much 500 bucks is to a 17 year old in 1995? it's like a million dollars. I was a fan of them in 1995 but not die hard or anything like I am now. In fact, I remember being more mad that the Bulls lost a regular season game (in the 72 win season) than UCLA losing to Princeton in the first round. And you should never bet on a team with Scoreless Corliss. yeah yeah, damn george zidek. now why would harrick have ever though that that would be a good idea?

yeah, but ucla has more titles than like any other school. it would have been nice to have gotten just one in champaign. :pig: As SSR is quick to remind me, I have only been alive for 1. :( true, and were you a fan of them at the time? i mean, have they been your college team since before you were a student? for the record, they screwed my pool that year, if arkansas had won it, i would have gotten like 500 bucks. do you know how much 500 bucks is to a 17 year old in 1995? it's like a million dollars.

yeah, but ucla has more titles than like any other school. it would have been nice to have gotten just one in champaign. :pig:

ucla=winning team. i don't want to hear it, rais. :wink:

You've already forgotten? http://media.collegepublisher.com/media/paper222/stills/329sm28z.jpg sorry for the meltdown, but since the cubs, who didn't really win all that much, it's been pretty much nothing for me. it's been 10 years since mj. i think it's time for something.

what does it feel like to root for a winning team? anyone? anyone? and the opponents can stop looking so freaking stoked all the time, i'm sick of them celebrating so goddamned much. screw you lebron, i hope you break your leg and it ruins the hopes of cav fans everywhere and they never win a championship because they don't deserve one.

i don't even know how to do that. i've never been able to get anything in with my tuner, and it should be pretty strong. My set-up is weird. I have cable, but I don't think I can get HD feeds with it. Even if it could, I have it jerry rigged to run through my computer so I can "Tivo" stuff. And after building a 6 point lead, Bulls fade away. so you probably have analog cable. you might want to call your cable company and order a cable card. it's like 2 bucks a month and you get the locals for free with that. it's like 8 bucks for rest of the hd channels.

every single poster here is a fan of at least 1 freaking winning team. how come i can't be one of those guys? and how come i know that my team is always going to blow it down the stretch. none of my teams have won a close game in about a year.

i don't even know how to do that. i've never been able to get anything in with my tuner, and it should be pretty strong.

do you have cable or sattelite?

yeah, i don't know how they're winning. larry hughes is good. and i don't know if thabo is hurt or not, i kind of hope he's dinged up a little and not benched, to be honest. and i'm wondering why abc is broadcasting the telethon on abc-hd (even though it's not in hd), and the game on regular old abc. am i missing something?

right? i start watching and they suck.

lebron is just a typical nba prima donna. geez, what a whiner. nobody touches him and he screams foul. it would be refreshing if he weren't like that.

haha, the illini can still play defense, at least. At least they played like they wanted to be there. How we could be that flat on senior's day against a rival is beyond me. Oh and you were smart enough to get it to Pruitt when he had position. We were allergic to getting Tate the ball. Still the free throws were just baffling and ultimately, maybe the difference in the game. can't be bad all the time, and you definitely can't be depending upon a team missing free throws to get a win.