Chisoxfn

Shit. Shit. On the bright side I won’t have to hear about how Daniel is so much better then Mitch. I said it in the preseason, he’s okay for a game in the pinch but he is far from a starter. Lots of plays and points left on the field by the bears.

Would be great if the fucking bench players would have involved Lauri. Pathetic job getting him involved. Was great seeing him back though and you could already see better spacing for Levine. Lauri sets good screens and just knows how to play ball. Still rusty but man the bulls didn’t ever give him the ball when he had a beneficial switch. By the way have I ever mentioned how much I don’t like watching Blakeny. Probably one of my all time least favorite bulls. Such a ball hog.

Rip. Always classy and forever honorable!!!

Which we know I don't like. I think its a dangerous game to play in the NFL. That said, better knowing Mitch is okay. The real question is how his body responds tomorrow.

Great. Mitch threw!!! Pumped

Yes...what you said.. Just win baby!!! Just win!

Okay, so you did get the same vibe on the Bears being overly cautious as I did. The problem I have with the 538 number is the odds are so strong because we play the Giants and Niners. Or at least I think that is why they are so high. Of course, lets just beat the Giants and then we will all feel so much better. I will admit, when it comes to the Bears, I have too many bad memories that I have a built in bias to think downside so that if it does happen, I don't get dissapointed haha. It also makes me enjoy all the good wins so much more cause I very much am taking this whole season as just a bonus. Love what has been done and even if they miss the playoffs, I've told myself I'll still be jacked up about what is to come next year (albeit...at this point...don't miss the playoffs Chicago...please)

Ok...I get it...but if they lose to the Giants, here is who they play. Underdog in two of the games, so it isn't some massive hottake to say if they lose to the Giants a plausible scenario might exist where they only win one game. This is a good football team, but there are still major unknowns including injuries and in the NFL fluke happens. I hope I'm wrong and the Bears go on to destroy the Giants, shock the Rams and win out and get the 2nd seed. I legitimately could see that happening too. I'd probably be more surprised by them winning out then them winning just 1-2 more games from here on out (which is why I'm saying...if Mitch could play without risking injury..than you play him). - vs. Rams (Bears will not be favored unless Girley and Goff go down) - vs. Packers (we would be the favorites at this point, however, its the Packers and Rodgers has owned the Bears his entire career; I just can't say that such a game is a walk in a park) - @ San Francisco (Better win this game, even if it is on the road) - @ Vikings (my best guess would be Vikes favored by 3ish)

Tony...you got to go back to the immediate statements I made when the injury came out. I said, either this is something he should be back and playing quickly or this turns into a Ryan Tannehill situation and he misses a solid chunk of time. I don't see it being in-between. If it is a bruise, like is being reported, he should be able to play and the Bears are, potentially getting too cute. I totally got it with Robinson and Mack...this is our QB and he's a young QB who still needs a lot of reps, etc. I also don't believe in Chase Daniel as much as everyone else does. The more he plays, the worse he will play. Even Mitch's quotes yesterday, he basically said he isn't allowed to say much (which is fine) but it makes me suspicious. Either this injury is way worse then is leading on, or Bears are using this as an opportunity to force a bit more game planning out of the Giants. In the NFL, where you only have 16 games in the regular season, the notion that you can just sit your QB (@ 90%) because you think you can win without him just doesn't make any sense to me (and I'm not saying you have said that is the case, but a lot of fans seem to just think we can rest guys and win at ease...the NFL doesn't work that way, it doesn't and if the Bears somehow believe that and keep playing with fire, they will get burned). Basically put, either he's more injured than the various reports have been (in which case, fine, I get it and I stand corrected) or they are being overly cautious. Note: All of my aboves are clearly hot-takes since I have zero inside information.

I enjoy how he plays. A good find and someone nice to have come off the bench, who can bring energy, etc. He doesn't have the athleticism to start in this league, albeit his shot has really taken strides. That said, I'm not watching as much of the games as I usually do (I usually work and/or read while watching the Bulls games but lately my patience has been shorter). I've told myself I can't watch too much as I don't want to get too irritated and need to wait until the guys come back in the next week or two. I'm fired up to watch Lauri get back out there in a week. Good timing too cause things always slow down a bit more around the holidays (in terms of work schedule/time off, etc). Note: Being a west coaster, everything I watch is on record and late. I haven't been as good at not checking scores lately, which makes it hard too. Albeit Bulls have played well the last couple of games.

I still think Mitch ends up playing on Sunday. Call me crazy but I'm calling it now.

I actually went through the Bears season that Monday before and had the Bears almost exactly at our record (debating between whether they'd have one more loss or not). Unfortunately from this point forward, I had them spiraling downhill pretty quickly. The next 3 weeks could end up being a disaster. I don't see the Bears beating the Rams and games against Vikes and Packers (until we start beating them I'll always say it) are going to be tough. This game against the Giants is not going to be easy, but if we lose this, we might be looking at a multi-game losing streak coming. I very much hope I am wrong.

Giants have film on Daniels, its another road game, and Giants are playing hungry. I don't like not playing Mitch if he is good to play. Now if he has a high reinjury rate, then I get it, but part of playing in the NFL is playing through pain, etc.

I usually am a softy on injuries but I think the Bears are babying this and Mitch needs to learn to play through this. That or the Bears have been misleading as to the severity.

What is limited participation. I think Mitch plays this week and this is more about a misinformation battle.

Its very hard for me to evaluate the Bulls with the mess of a roster they have (with a lot of that driven by injuries to 3 guys who were going to play heavy minutes...plus Valentine who was going to be a key piece off the bench). I'll hold any judgement until we at least get Lauri / Dunn back and see how those two emerge as the season goes. One plus is Ryan A. is looking like a solid bench/role player. And on Lavine....I think he is struggling with the fact that the Bulls have so few offensive pieces on the current roster and with teams doubling like crazy and just getting that much attention (especially in late game situations), that he just doesn't know how to deal with that yet. Hopefully better talent helps as does just more experience dealing with these situations. It will also be important for the coaches to use these moments as teaching moments to continue his development. I've never believed the Bulls have a talent development issue and that includes during the Hoiberg era.

Damn it Rock. I was extremely worried. I need to come up with like an emergency email for all the long-time regulars cause I think the email addy I had for you was so freaking old that it probably got burried somewhere in cyber land. That said...glad to see you back and very cool that you were working on something you are extremely passionate about!!!

Please don't let this be a Tannehill situation. He's missed like 5 games with what was originally a "mild" shoulder injury. Stupid dirty hit. Than again, it is the absolute risk you have when your QB runs as much as Mitch does. No matter how good he is at it, the probability for an injury goes up.

I hope we see positive news come out and we are watching Mitchell kick some ass on Thursday!

I read that as a bad sign. I presume if they want "misinformation" out there, they would remain mum on his status, so the Lions spend a bit of time scouting Chase Daniels. In the case we put out an unnecessary report of our optimism, it makes me worried we actually want Lions to think Trubisky is playing while we quietly are prepping Daniels and hoping Lions are a bit surprised? Hopefully this is all me over-analyzing and there is just pure truth that Trubisky will be fine and good to go on Thursday, he'll play well (as will the Bears), and they'll than get 10 days to rest their bodies for the next game.

Not only a legend on the field but juts a guy who loved the game and was a true joy to watch. One of the all time greats!!!

Rams and Chiefs are so explosive. Saints too. By far the 3 best teams in football, imo.

I always get worried about things like this. Remember when the Bears were about to play Tannehill...there were reports at the beginning of the week he had a sore shoulder...next thing you know he missed that game and then went on to miss quite a few games. Hopefully whatever it is, is extremely minor and Mitch bounces back quickly!

This is not good and that was a late hit. It is the one thing that worries me with Mitch (the fact that he is such a great runner...is both great but bad at the same time).

Gabriel has been an effective deep threat, but you just got to be cognizant of the match-up. He is the guy you throw to in single coverage, not when he's double / triple covered. Technically in double coverage, you also throw to him when he is already over the top of the D. Also it should be pointed, going deep to him has worked plenty this season and it also opens up the more underneath stuff for him as well (as the opposition has to respect his ability to get over the top). It was just a bad throw. No way around it.