hawkeyecub

Look at Suppan's innings over the past eight years and the rest of his stats over the past four seasons. He's been the model of consistency and is not at all the gamble the other SP's have been thus far. With Suppan you know what you're getting: ~190 IP ~110K ~60 BB ~4.00 ERA 31-32 Starts ~14 wins With the Cubs, you don't know that last one to be true. Also remember that he was with the Cards. Figure in the extra year of age and the change of scenery to the northside, and standard metrics project his numbers with the Cubs in '07 to be along the lines of: ~75 IP ~35K ~60BB ~6.35 ERA ~17 starts ~5 wins ~2.5 months on the DL So you're just going to throw numbers around arbitrarily? Those are based on absolutely nothing. All of the sudden his bb/K ratio is going to flip flop? Standard metrics couldn't possibly be more wrong if this is the case. So based on this theory, or metric, would Carlos Zambrano be a 30-game winner if he joined the cards? Would he then strike out 300 hitters because he was a cardinal? Would he be twice the horse and throw more innings (300?) while staying even more healthy? Um, I'm pretty sure he was just joking.

Sickening loss for Iowa last night to UNI, 57-55 to break our 21-game home winning streak (3rd longest in the country). This is the second game (Arizona State being the other) where we've had a 12-point lead with 5 or less minutes to play and have found a way to lose.

That's exactly what I was getting at Banedon. I didn't rave about the Vikings pass defense and never once said they shut down Grossman. I just posted the numbers from the game and asked the question. The reason I posed that question about which defense performed better was to see how Bears fans rationalized it. I assumed they would just say that Grossman played horribly and not say it was a result of good defense by the Vikings. While the Bears defense is MUCH better against the pass this year, Grossman and Johnson are almost identical in QB rating and Grossman has been more prone to the INT. Both QB's played horribly on Sunday. I think the turnovers on both sides were more a result of awful QB play than anything the defense was doing particularly well. That's it.

Find a way to win, now? It used to be "run away with the game." You are missing that everyone has made in this thread. Quarterbacks don't play average against the Bears. They don't. The Bears have the best Passing D in the NFL by a wide margin. They have held opposing QB's to a 54 QB rating. They have the #1 DVOA against the pass. Opposing QB's play terribly against the Bears because they are good. Do you get it yet? You're acting like an average QB preformance is easy to acheive against the Bears. It's not. It wasn't the Vikings making the QB look bad, it was the Bears. It's been happening all year. You say if you had average production out of the QB position you would have "run away with the game". Well whoop de do! If my Aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle! Almost no one has had average QB production against the Bears. What does that tell you? The Bears don't ALLOW average QB production and that's why you didn't win the game. You're whole sour grapes schtick here is pretty sad. Correct and a 54 QB rating would have won this game. That's my point. I guess I'll re-word my statement from an average QB to a typical performance of an opposing QB against the Bears. If they average giving up a 54 rating, then it's not out of the ordinary and that kind of performance would have won the game. How many times have I said in this thread that the Bears defense is as good as there is and they're a very good team? That doesn't change the fact that a team has never won a game in NFL history where they gain less than 110 and turn it over 5 times. Never. The Bears average giving up a 54 QB rating? Well anything close to that would have won this game, that's my point. Sour grapes? Yeah that's it.

Once again, you completely miss the point. No, it doesn't mean anything. Goony said he would have been blown up after taking one step. One look at the tape shows that's false. I'm merely clarifying that.

LOL, yep that's EXACTLY what I said. Excellent reading comprehension! No an average QB wouldn't have shredded them. But an average QB would find a way to win a game when his defense allows 107 total (yes total) yards AND 5 turnovers. That's why this was the first time that's ever happened in the history of the NFL. Hell the Vikings would have been better off running on 1st and 2nd down and punting everytime on 3rd down. For everyone saying that you could say "If the Bears had an average QB they would have blown the Vikings out", well yeah of course they would have. I'm well aware of that. That's also the reason why an otherwise great team will have an extremely difficult time winning a game in the playoffs.

You are delusional. He would have been lucky to take one step forward before losing his head. False. I have it on DVR and just slowed it down right now. Duggan is at the 34 yard line when the ball bounces off his pads. Briggs is 6 yards behind him, just across the 40. Vasher is at the 36, but about 7-8 yards toward the sideline. The safety is all the way upfield at the 25. He had 5 yards before he got hit by anyone and I doubt Vasher was going to knock him out, nor was Briggs when he was chasing him from behind. Do you think players instantaneously make catches and turn up field? Do you not realize how notoriously effective the Bears closing speed is? Seriously, you're in dream land. Your team got the crap kicked out of it by a team with a QB playing like a high schooler. Oh they did? I had absolutely no idea. Wow, that really stung deep. That's a zinger. You said he would have been lucky to take one step before losing his head. That's totally wrong and has nothing to do with the Bears beating the Vikings. No I don't think players instantaneously make catches and turn up field. I do think they can get up field rather quickly when they're ALREADY turning their shoulders as the ball clanks off their pads. Do you think players instantaneously turn and get 7 yards up field while hitting the reciever in one motion? Apparently. I guess I didn't know Nathan Vasher could cover 7 yards in one step from a guy who was already turning his shoulders upfield. I didn't know Lance Briggs was going to cover 6 yards in one step and knock his head off from behind. I didn't know their safety was going to cover 10 yards with a single step and knock his head off either. You're right, I really underestimated the "notoriously effective" closing speed of the Bears. Even though I've never seen any of those above things happen in my life of playing and watching football, I just haven't been watching these superhuman Bears. Foolish me.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: funny stuff :lol: :lol: Is it? How often do teams win games when their offense puts up 107 total yards and turns the ball over 5 times?

You are delusional. He would have been lucky to take one step forward before losing his head. False. I have it on DVR and just slowed it down right now. Duggan is at the 34 yard line when the ball bounces off his pads. Briggs is 6 yards behind him, just across the 40. Vasher is at the 36, but about 7-8 yards toward the sideline. The safety is all the way upfield at the 25. He had 5 yards before he got hit by anyone and I doubt Vasher was going to knock him out, nor was Briggs when he was chasing him from behind.

Between the Bears and Vikings? Are you serious? Well partially. The question was designed to get a different response, but it really isn't so outrageous when you hold a team to approximately 100 yards: Team A: Allowed 6 offensive points while it was competitive Team B: Allowed 7 offensive points while it was competitive Team A: Allowed 348 total yards Team B: Allowed 107 total yards Team A: Allowed 5.5 yards per rush Team B: Allowed 3.3 yards per rush Team A: Allowed starting QB to go 11/26, 73 yards, 4 INT, 10.3 Rating Team B: Allowed starting QB to go 6/19, 34 yards, 3 INT, 1.3 Rating The difference was the Bears basically getting 9 points from their special teams and the Vikings getting none. The Vikings defense allowed the Bears to score 7 points set up by their offense, and that was on a drive where they got the ball at the Vikings 25 or 30.

The game wasn't close. You keep saying a mediocre QB would have beaten the Bears. I can play that game too. Any kind of mediocre QB performance from the Bears and we slaughter you by 30 points. So there. If BOTH teams had mediocre QB performances, what do you get? Probably a 10 point Bears win. I'm sure I'm a bit biased, but it does seem that you are playing what-ifs with the Vikes, while ignoring the fact that the Bears played their worst football of the year and still took out the Vikes with little trouble at all. I'm not playing what-ifs with the Vikes. That's what you guys are missing. I'm simply saying the Bears defense didn't play outstanding yesterday and the Vikings own ineptitude was more to blame. And the game was close for the most part. It was 7-6 and the Vikings had the ball at midfield with momentum and a few minutes left in the 3rd. Then the Bears put on a heck of a blitz in about a 4 minute span to put it away. But for 3 quarters it was very close. Chocolate Milk you're completely fixated on one comment out of about 100 I made. Yes, I already said I shouldn't have said "all day." That's been one of the major knocks on Johnson, even when he has time he doesn't find an open man. When he does have an open man, he doesn't hit him. When he does hit him, they drop the ball 1/3 of the time. If you really think I'm saying the Bears got lucky on pass defense, I didn't say the Bears got lucky on pass defense. Our passing game is anemic. I said that those turnovers were more of an indictment on Johnson and our passing game (Manning's was the best play by the defense) than any great defensive play. You really have a hard time comprehending all of this, don't you? Yep, saying that they have a top 2-3 defense in the league is really dogging them. Man, I'm giving them no respect. Of course Bears fans are paranoid about getting their just due from outside sources. I'll simply ask you guys this and await your answer: Which defense do you think played better yesterday?

By the way for clarification, I'm not arguing that the Bears defense isn't one of, if not the best in the league. I'm talking about yesterday's performance in particular. It's also been clear for a month now that this Vikings team wasn't going anywhere so I'm not distraught about it. At least Johnson was benched (again) and Bollinger was injured so we got to see Tarvaris. I just don't think the Bears defense was that impressive yesterday. They allowed the Vikings to run the ball better than they have all year long, especially when you consider the circumstances. That's not good. They won't play against that poor of a QB and WR group in the playoffs.

There you go. Instead of actually discussing anything or providing reasons for why I'm wrong, go back to the usual sarcastic responses. That really is impressive and intelligent. :roll: No Duggan was not about to get put in the hospital. Get out a tape or DVR recording and watch that play again. He was wide open and had 5 yards of room.

I'm not concerned about the "gashing" it's par for the course with the Bears, who tend to give up chunks of yards on the ground, but still destroy the other team with turnovers. Many of those yards were gained because of all the time they had to spend on the field (since the offense and special teams seemed to either score right away or turn it over right away) or after the Bears had a huge lead. The Bears just kicked the crap out of the Vikings despite a horrible game from their QB. You can pretend the Vikes should have won, but the Bears have a tendancy to make QB's give games away. I'm not pretending the Vikings should have won. I'm saying anything close to a league-average QB wins that game handily. Even with an awful QB performance, any coach that's willing to stick with what isn't being stopped, has a very good shot at winning that game. The Bears are a much better team than the Vikings. The Vikings are a team with an elite run defense, an awful pass defense, an average to above-average run game and an awful pass game. I don't have any illusions of the Vikings making some run to the playoffs or doing anything if they should somehow squeak in. I just don't think the Bears defensive performance yesterday was all that impressive, especially when you put it in the context of what the Vikings have done offensively this year. Their special teams were great as they have been, no question about that. For clarification, they didn't get many of those rushing yards after the Bears had a huge lead. We only had 25 yards on 6 carries after the Bears made it a 14-6 game.

Were you at the game? Yes they did. I probably shouldn't have said "all day", but when they were and Johnson had time, he still missed them. The one time he saw the man wide open, he overthrew Marcus Robinson streaking down the sideline uncovered inside the 20. Our recievers also dropped 8 passes yesterday. You're right, the Bears did get pressure and that was impressive. But he wasn't pressured on the Manning INT for 6. What pressure caused the INT that went off Duggan's pads? He had plenty of time and Duggan was wide open. I'll give you the other two although he had completely escaped the pressure on the first INT. On the final INT he was almost pulled down, escaped and threw it 5 yards over the head of Chester Taylor who was standing 5 yards away. I just wouldn't be that excited about that defensive performance if I were you. The Vikings without a doubt have the worst WR corps in the league and now have a QB that is playing as badly as anyone in the league. Look at what our offense has done in previous weeks and compare it with yesterday.

No it really doesn't. It shows you how incompetent Brad Johnson was and has been. Your defense really wasn't very impressive yesterday. It was a result of Brad Johnson being incredibly bad and poor play-calling on the part of Childress more than any great defensive performance. We completely gashed you on the ground all day long. Our three running backs had 31 carries for 187 yards (6 yards a carry). Ciatrick Fason had 1 carry all year and he had 75 yards on 11 carries yesterday, and his long was only 14. Chester Taylor gashed you, Fason gashed you and Moore gashed you. Holes were there all day long and the Bears tackling was poor. For some inexplicable reason, Childress went away from it. Second half play-calling was awful. We carried it 5 times for 25 yards in the opening drive of the second half. Then Harris went out. Then we get the INT and the ball across midfield where we throw an INT on 1st down. Oh well, defense gets the ball back down 7-6 midway through the 3rd. We bust runs of 13, 13 and 6 setting up 2nd and 4 at your 45. Instead of staying on the ground we nearly throw a pick and then Manning takes the next pass back for 6. We get the ball back down 14-6 and throw on 1st down again, right to Urlacher. Honestly look at the turnovers you forced, it was Johnson handing you the ball. One was a pass to a wide open tight end (in field goal range) who let the ball bounce off his pads into the air for an interception. Another was Johnson throwing a dump pass 8 yards too long to Urlacher. The first one was thrown right to a safety with no one in the vicinity. The Manning one was just Johnson being clueless. Wow that was a long rant. You're right, the Bears defense and special teams never make plays and that was all about Johnson. Yeah because that's clearly what I was saying. Way to avoid all the points about awful quarterbacking and poor play calling and just come back with a sarcastic one-liner though. So you were impressed by your defense being repeatedly gashed yesterday by a struggling offensive line and a running back who had 1 carry on the year? You're impressed by giving up 6 yards a carry and nearly 200 yards AT HOME to a team that hadn't sniffed that kind of success all year? If you want to puff your chest out about how great your defense is because we have maybe the only starting QB worse than Grossman right now, then go ahead, it's just wrong. The INT to Duggan was a great defensive play, wasn't it? Yeah we had our 3rd-string TE streaking across the 30, wide open but somehow you caused the ball to bounce off his pads straight into the air for a pick. If the Vikings have a quarterback even close to league average, they run away with that game yesterday.

No it really doesn't. It shows you how incompetent Brad Johnson was and has been. Your defense really wasn't very impressive yesterday. It was a result of Brad Johnson being incredibly bad and poor play-calling on the part of Childress more than any great defensive performance. We completely gashed you on the ground all day long even though the Bears were repeatedly bringing an 8th man into the box. Our three running backs had 31 carries for 187 yards (6 yards a carry). Ciatrick Fason had 1 carry all year and he had 75 yards on 11 carries yesterday, and his long was only 14. Chester Taylor gashed you, Fason gashed you and Moore gashed you. Holes were there all day long and the Bears tackling was poor. For some inexplicable reason, Childress went away from it. Second half play-calling was awful. We carried it 5 times for 25 yards in the opening drive of the second half. Then Harris went out. Then we get the INT and the ball across midfield where we throw an INT on 1st down. Oh well, defense gets the ball back down 7-6 midway through the 3rd. We bust runs of 13, 13 and 6 setting up 2nd and 4 at your 45. Instead of staying on the ground we nearly throw a pick and then Manning takes the next pass back for 6. We get the ball back down 14-6 and throw on 1st down again, right to Urlacher. Honestly look at the turnovers you forced, it was Johnson handing you the ball. One was a pass to a wide open tight end (in field goal range) who let the ball bounce off his pads into the air for an interception. Another was Johnson throwing a dump pass 8 yards too long to Urlacher. The first one was thrown right to a safety with no one in the vicinity. The Manning one was just Johnson being clueless. We had recievers open all day but Johnson either missed them, threw a poor pass or they dropped it. Wow that was a long rant.

Well Texas will be playing Iowa in the Alamo Bowl. We don't deserve a bowl game after going 2-6 in the Big Ten, but this gives them a chance to get a win over a very good team in a solid bowl. McCoy's status is questionable and Snead transferred and won't be around for the bowl game, so they could be using a senior walk-on (also named McCoy).

Two games gives you that opinion, yet you were completely sold on him this summer just based on the things you heard from KSU fans? No one could convince you that Huggins had any negative traits. That deliberate, dirty punch by one of Huggy's thugs is just the beginning.

This happens every year in the Big Ten/ACC Challenge. It seems like the Big Ten teams always find ways to lose close games or games they should win. Indiana had tons of opportunities to win that game and just blew it. Illinois could do nothing in the final three minutes tonight. Michigan wouldn't have lost to that NC State team if they hadn't played like dog meat in the middle 30 minutes. Now Northwestern is folding down the stretch after having a 10 point lead with about 2 minutes to go. I didn't think the Big Ten had a shot this year, but this could easily be 3-3 or 4-2 in favor of the Big Ten.

I'm a Pistons fan, but I felt that contract they gave him was a bad idea from the start. His window to be very productive was two more years, and they had to hope he made up for the second half of the contract with a great first half. It's early, but he's not looking great. For one, once he hits 35 he simply won't have the athleticism/explosion that he relies on to play above his size. Secondly part of what made him such a great player was that he played with such hunger and attitude. Many in Detroit felt that was really declining last year and a new fat contract wouldn't help with some of those problems, including problems with coaching. His teammates in Detroit could counteract some of that, I don't know if the group in Chicago will. As far as the headband fiasco, the rule doesn't make any sense. But it's apparently Paxson's rule and it's Ben's job to follow those rules when they gave him an enormous contract.

I heard a little bit of Salisbury and Rosenbloom and they made reference to Schmidt possibly recieving a $15M/year offer. They were talking about Zito and what he might get and how that might set the market and then said "maybe Schmidt will decide to just take the $15 million and sign". This doesn't mean much, but apparently the people at ESPN1000 are thinking that he recieved that offer.

Iowa got thumped by Villanova 89-60 tonight in the 3rd place game for the Paradise Jam. They played horribly in every facet of the game. Defense was awful and 'Nova couldn't miss a 3 (started 14-24). When 'Nova did miss, they got offensive rebounds. We had 25 turnovers or so and still didn't shoot very well. I knew there would be nights like this early on with this team. Just have to hope they continue to improve and play more like they did in the first three games than they did tonight.

Iowa lost to #10 Alabama 72-60 in the Paradise Jam. It was an encouraging loss though. We were getting open looks all night but shot 7-30 from 3. Adam Haluska is going through a slump like he's never seen. He's 4-28 in the two games in the Paradise Jam and most of them have been good shots. Looby and Tate both were in foul trouble all night so our thin front line was really stretched thin. Tyler Smith scored 19 tonight (plus 7 boards, 4 assists, 2 steals) following up his 28 point performance against Toledo on Friday. He's been even better than expected. He just plays so smart. Alabama is friggin good. Incredible athleticism. Steele is an All-America PG, they got their all-SEC center back tonight and this Gee kid was their best player tonight with 21 points. I have no idea how Iowa stayed in that game when they shot that poorly and had their bigs in foul trouble.

any of you hawk fans go to the game? I heard for a Hawk fan on the iB there were only about 400 fans. That can't be right, can it? No. It was very empty, but the estimates are that it was around 5,000 or so.