Magnetic Curses

The fact was the game was over before the weather got real bad. Bettis was running over them early, they didn't make mistakes, which is what the Bears need the opposition to do in order to win, or at least what they needed to happen when Orton was QB. it was snowing fairly hard well before the game started. i think the bottom line is that they ran for 200 yards against our defense, even if you didn't watch the game you could see that they clearly donimated the line of scrimmage, which doesn't usually happen, at least in fair weather.

ah, so you're the type of fan that believes charles martin to be the greatest packer of all time? Absolutely not, in fact I was 6 years old when that play happend and living in Phoenix ... some packer fan told me that at lambeau, and he wasn't even trying to be a jerk or anything. i said, "dude, you're sick." and walked away.

ah, so you're the type of fan that believes charles martin to be the greatest packer of all time?

You said they were warm weather, and possibly dome, when that's not even close to true. That game was the coldest of the year, people were sliding, Vick could not get comfortable, weather was clearly in their favor in that contest. Dome teams are not killer defense with minimal offense. Great dome teams don't rely on pounding it down your throats with the running game for 4 quarters in order to have any semblence of an attack. When I read Downey talk about this being a dome team I could not believe it, and so when you insinuated that was the case, I had to disagree. i generally don't agree with anything that downey says, and honestly must have missed that article, but i must agree with him here. this is a track team on defense, and we are primarily a team based on the ability of the defense to perform up to speed. to tell you the truth, despite the sub-zero temps at soldier field that day, there wasn't near as much ice and snow as was at heinz field. throw into the equation the fact that we were playing an actual dome, warm weather team, and we have the advantage anyway. the bears do not have a conventional run-stopping defense. our tackles are small comparitively, our DE's aren't exactly the kind to study film on stopping anyone else's rushing offense. they rely on the speed of the front seven to disrupt plays in the backfield and to recover quickly if beaten by the run. this is directly affected by field conditions, to deny this is foolish.

inaccurate assessment, the steelers ran for TWICE as many yards against the bears than did the packers. when i say, "shoved it down our throats", it means that they ran over us, pushed us around, won the battle at the line of scrimmage, etc. the packers simply used the more-than-able skills of brett favre to move down the field through the air. furthermore, the steelers scored 21 points in the first three quarters against while running the ball. roethlisberger threw for 173 yards, just enough to keep a balance. the fact was that the field was snowy, there was no traction, the defense, based on speed and recovery time couldn't get going and got plowed under. the steelers ran it RIGHT at us, which is probably the best way to play the bears.

I didn't see them getting pushed around, at least not until late when the game was sealed. I saw pretty much the same defense, only they missed a lot of tackles. This team is very susceptible to really good run teams and patient passing attacks that protect the QB. The cover 2 is a bend but don't break offense that allows yards in small chunks, and relies on big plays in the d's favor to stop the O. Pester the other team into making mistakes. This team doesn't intercept passes that would otherwise be big gains for the O, they intercept passes that are forced up by desperate QBs trying to make something out of nothing (Vick, Delhomme, Favre). It also relies on an O that can do something with the ball, and in the Pitt game, they did nothing until 2 circus catches in the end. Big Ben and the Steelers were never frustrated enough to make a desperate play. then we were watching different games. the bears defense simply got run over. no pressure whatsoever on roethliberger, no ability to stop the run, the pitt line manahndled the bears front four. urlacher got bulldozed down after down, and when he was able to get a body on someone, they ran over him. you can say that was missing tackles, or you could say that was getting pushed around. the steelers shoved it down our throats. yes, the bears could have had a chance if they would have had any kind of o to speak of.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold. i guess that i think as long as the field conditions are good, i like the bears chances against pretty much any team they play, including pittsburgh, NE, or indy. The Atlanta game pretty much proved you wrong here. The weather was a big advantage for Chicago. The Bears would get killed against Indy in Detroit. Even if they slowed Indy's attack, they'd give up 21 easily, and I don't think the offense can score 21 against a good team. They'd stand a chance against anybody else though. And very cold weather does help them against certain teams. Terrible conditions (the 49ers game, extreme snow, wind or rain) don't help anybody, unless you're playing Indy. what, the field conditions weren't good against atlanta? for the record, i think the bears have an advantage against dome teams when playing outdoors due to the simple fact that they a majority of their games outdoors, and, in the winterm cold weather. i think the bears defense is every bit as fast and talented as the colts offense. the bears actually match up very well with the colts no huddle system.

Probably weather.com CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown. I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong. contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team. they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions. Certainly looked like that in Pittsburgh. the steelers pushed them around like they were on sleds.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold. i guess that i think as long as the field conditions are good, i like the bears chances against pretty much any team they play, including pittsburgh, NE, or indy.

Probably weather.com CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown. I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong. contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team. they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions. I don't think the cold is an issue, I think that footing is an issue with the Bears. They are light and fast, if they can't get good footing they are going to get pushed around. i think weather goes hand-in-hand with good field conditions. if it's unbearably cold (pardon the pun), ice could form on the field.

My standards are obviously higher for the highest paid pitcher on the Cubs. so you have to be a HOFer to make 10 mil? there are quite a few pitchers out there who would disagree with you.

Probably weather.com CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown. I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong. contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team. they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

i think that they're similar players. rice was better offensively, dawson better defensively. i think rice is more deserving.

it's great that sutter got in, a damn shame that blyleven didn't.

so, let me get this straight........because damian miller was a lousy hitter, but good defensive catcher, he's negated as being able to judge kerry wood as having better stuff than randy johnson, curt schilling, or any of the oakland pitchers? doesn't make sense. moving on, nobody is saying kerry wood is a hall of famer, they're saying he is a very good pitcher. and 1. steve stone is OFTEN wrong. i know the "conventionally wise" cub fan will say that steve stone is God, which i just find incredibly depressing. 2. mike marshall is a raving lunatic who thinks that everyone has faulty mechanics. 3. i've never seen or heard any comment from tom seaver indicating that wood's mechanics are what's causing him to have injuries. again, any overhand pitcher could be considered to have "poor mechanics". it's a subjective thing.

And substantially better than Corey was at 26. Remember Corey at 22 and 23 was "untouchable" :( yes, but the fact remains, tavares is not a starting-caliber player.

right behind the camera rail? ouch. :lol: i know, i know, it sucks, but look on the bright side, it'll probably be a boring game anyway!

it would have been somewhat easier to simply have him shrink his zone. probably would have resulted in roughly the same amount of k's, but much more walks. corey paid lip service to this approach, but never utilized it.

right behind the camera rail? ouch.

if the o's asked us for prior, they should have been asking the stros for oswalt.

Huh? Who is Lidge going to close games for with the O's? And Taveras' stats are not good: http://www.baseballreference.com/t/taverwi01.shtml Because we all know a 24 year old rookie should be required to put up all-star numbers. Taveras will get better. And Lidge is special. It would have been a solid deal for the Orioles. ANY major league starter should be able to put up a .700+ OPS. anything below that is horrible for anyone, not just someone who starts everyday.

Huh? Who is Lidge going to close games for with the O's? And Taveras' stats are not good: http://www.baseballreference.com/t/taverwi01.shtml Taveras in his rookie year ('05) had very respectable #'s, and is great defensively. His #'s in the postseason where outstanding. Lidge is one of the best closer's in the game, regardless of his post-pujols-postseason demise. Miggy's #'s declined post-roid and may even further. How much would Lidge/Taveras get om '06? Then Miggy? Weigh the difference..... no he didn't. he had a decent average, but that's negated by his inability to get on base as a leadoff hitter. what's more is that even with his speed, he was unable to hit for extra-bases. he's a bench player that's been pushed into the starting lineup. no amount of infield hits will make him good. lidge may be one of the best closers in the game, but how is that worth a perrenial all-star shortstop?

time for a few people to change their screen names.

yes, i nominate you to start them.

one of the things that makes zambrano so effective is that he's willing to throw pitches out of the zone. also, his pitches have so much movement on them, it's hard to predict where they're going.