StrangeSox

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:52 PM) That's the whole crux of my argument. As an unbiased fan of the game, I saw a player that didn't look very injured, was walking around with no medical attention on the sidelines, no icing, no crutches, and seemed content with not being out on the field in the most important game of his career...one game away from the Super Bowl. I am certain other QBs in that same situation would have continued to play (i.e., Favre, Rivers, Brees). We see players play injured all of the time. You're telling me they couldn't have used a 3 step drop game plan that they used against Dallas in order to keep their best arm out on the field? How bad does a player with a minor concussion look on the sidelines? How about Urlacher with his wrist injury last year? Medical judgements from someone who isn't even in the medical field who's watching TV don't really mean much.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:47 PM) Secondly, a conspiracy theory is just your way of making this sound far-fethched. There is a reason that the Fox commentators, players from around the league, and millions of fans immediately thought he quit on his team. Because his behavior up to this point doesn't exactly make that such a huge leap. See, that just doesn't follow. The criticism came out immediately following him being pulled from the game. And, prior to that, he's never done anything to indicate he's a quitter or that he won't stay in the game even when he's getting his ass kicked every other play. So it is a pretty huge leap from "the guy's a dick and aloof" to "he's a p****"

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:39 PM) And that's most likely all I will ever have, SS. Speculation. But all sorts of things have happened in the sports world and in other well-documented events, that all we can do is speculate about. There is no proof. Edit: And come on, SS...as if I haven't argued my position ad nauseum. I know you've argued your position, I just haven't seen any support for it. To have a good theory, your idea needs to be consistent with what reliable evidence is known, and it needs to explain that evidence. You also need to have good reason for dismissing any evidence that goes against your idea. All you've given so far is personal incredulity, and that's not really support for an argument.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:28 PM) Seriously, you and Illini are just being incredibly ridiculous with your burden of proof. It's as if an organization has never misled anyone to protect itself or their players. It's as if players have never refused to throw their teammates under the bus. It's as if reporters have never looked the other way when they knew damn well what the organization was spinning was bs (umm, steroids, people?). I'm just asking for any evidence. All you've got is speculation. Yeah, the Bears are usually evasive and give little to no information. I wouldn't expect team management/coaching to do anything but protect their QB right now. But that doesn't explain the reaction by the players. It doesn't support your claims that he was moping and not doing anything almost the entire second half (partially because there are reports and video of him doing things in the second half). It doesn't explain that he was actually injured in a way that impacts a QB's performance. It's my intention to try to figure out what evidence you're basing your opinion on.

QUOTE (fathom @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:24 PM) I still question what in the living hell were the Bears trainers doing by not putting him on crutches or in a brace? Say the Bears win, wouldn't you want to limit any further damage that could have been done walking on the sideline or shaking hands with the Packers players after the game in order to get him ready for the Super Bowl? If you take that line to the logical conclusion, you've got three possibilities: 1) Lovie's dumb mind games 2) Incompetent training staff 3) They're still lying about the injury and he really doesn't have a Grade II MCL Sprain Either way, they're still saying 6-8 weeks before he's healed, so he probably wouldn't be playing in the SB regardless. Again, I'd look for more from ptatc, but maybe the risk of injury while just walking back and forth is low, since there wouldn't be much lateral movement.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:21 PM) You don't think there'd be a few people who threw Jay under the bus, at least in the anonymous quote sense, if they thought he really had given up on them? There's also a difference between repeating the company line and being evasive or vague and the anger that the Bears players are reacting with.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:20 PM) And you keep believing everything the organization tells you. As if they had a choice to say anything else. How long did it take for it to leak that Benson pulled himself in the SB? How many players were adamantly defending him after the game?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 02:07 PM) I was waiting for this. I understand the media presents a game as "theater" and will often play up the drama, etc. But they had the guy on film, almost the entire half, doing nothing. I mean, it's not like this was just one point in time where this occurred. This was immediately after he came out. This was while Collins was in. This was while Hanie was in. This was while the Bears were coming back. This was several times when the Bears defense was in. Seriously, there is just tons and tons and tons of actual live video that was shot, photos that were shot. They just could not have tried to play that angle up (and yes, they certainly played that angle up) unless Jay was complying! And he did! For almost the entire second half! But I am to believe that this was done to fool the Packers into thinking he was going to come back? Here's the problem: you don't know this. You don't know that they had him on film, almost the entire half, doing nothing. That's just a blind assertion by you. What you know is that for about a total of a minute in the second half (however long they had Jay on camera), he wasn't always sitting with Hanie or going over plays. But sometimes he was talking to Hanie, cheering him on, in those brief snippets we do have. So it kinda blows your whole theory. As far as it being a giant conspiracy, even after the official "Grade II MCL" report came out, you were still questioning the severity of the injury, even though we knew exactly how severe it was, by definition of "Grade II MCL Sprain". You still ask "why was he walking around without braces and ice?" The only implication there that I can see is that you don't believe he really has a Grade II MCL Sprain. The reporters and some in the media (like B&B) have been saying that the Bears should have handled it differently and made the severity of Jay's injury clear as soon as possible to avert all this nonsense and to avoid tarnishing the reputation of their star QB. They're not advocating that the Bears should have lied about his injury, in fact they're doing just the opposite. They're chastising Lovie and Co. for playing their stupid mind games and letting this get out of hand.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 01:54 PM) Ok, you're right man. I didn't see constant shots of the guy standing by himself sulking. Every time Jay stopped teaching Hanie how to dissect the Packers' defense, the producer yelled out "Go to camera 5!" because he wanted to catch Jay doing nothing again. There is a vast conspiracy by Fox Sports to make Jay appear as though he quit on the Bears. In fact, I bet that video they were showing was taken from a preseason game earlier this season when Jay was on the bench, and then they changed the background to make it appear as though he was on the bench milling around during the game Sunday! The media produces and presents the narratives they want. "Good Jay/Bad Jay" is one. As the broadcast was going on, "Jay is a quitter" developed. But, ironically, you're dismissing that as conspiracy while buying into a much bigger one--a cover up by the medical staff, coaches, all other players including Hanie, management, and various sideline reporters.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 01:50 PM) You're also cherry picking facts that help your case. Why discount the perspective of someone that was actually at the game? Because Barkley wasn't on the sideline and didn't have the access that others who contradict what he's saying did? He even references "shots" of Cutler on the sideline, indicating that he wasn't looking at him from long periods of time from wherever he was sitting. edit: But none of that has any effect on why Cutler wasn't playing football any more.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jan 25, 2011 -> 09:44 AM) Nobody cares about the first two, and Del Toro isn't original, either, by your rational. All lift ideas from others, therefore their originality is lost in translation. Eternal Sunshine wasn't original either. Del Toro directed Blade II and Helboy II. Original? Why? Because of Pan's Lab? Del Toro did a pretty good job with Hellboy II, but a lot of the monsters were derivatives of Pan monsters.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jan 13, 2011 -> 03:26 PM) I am so very glad I do not live in Cook County. I am so very glad I do not live in Chicago.

Glenn Beck: George Soros runs Shadow Government!

QUOTE (T R U @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 10:52 PM) cant we just all agree the Bears are who we thought they were and the only people who thought they were any good were Bears fans? Miami

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 07:56 PM) I dunno. I guess it's a coincidence we lost to Seattle and Washington when Briggs was out with his injury. The defense has been bad for years whenever Urlacher is out. Last year wasn't very good all year, same in previous years where Urlacher's missed chunks of games (2005 maybe?)

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 07:46 PM) I'd like someone to correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure the MCL and ACL both stabilize the knees on sideways movements. Walking straight forward and standing aren't bothered like sideways movements are. I know we had a guy in our softball league tear his ACL and MCL in a game who tried to keep playing. He could stand without pain, and walk without pain, but he went sideways at all, his knee literally collapsed. Yep. There was just a doc on Holmes show (one of the Bulls/Sox docs, I think). It's lateral movements that the MCL stabilizes. So big linemen can have their knees heavily braced and play with a bad MCL, but QB's and RB's are going to be a lot worse off. Since it wasn't a complete tear, his knee wasn't going to just slide apart, but he likely couldn't put lateral pressure on it without serious pain.

The Sam linebacker just isn't nearly as critical as the Mike in this scheme. Briggs is a fantastic player and him being out hurts the defense for sure, but just by nature of his position he isn't as important as Urlacher.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 07:31 PM) I told you exactly what I wanted. Why is it so important to you that you change my mind on this? I am doubtful that the injury is such that, had things been going a little differently, he would have been sitting out the second half. I have explained my reasoning for this in every possible manner I can think of. What more do you want? I guess I'm looking to see if there's anything ever that would change your mind on this. Sworn affidavits from the AT's saying they didn't want him to play? Statements from doctors saying "yeah, probably not going to be a good QB with a Grade II MCL Sprain"? It seems like you've entrenched yourself in this position that there's nothing that can ever change your mind that Cutler pussed out.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 07:17 PM) The injury he sustained was also a bit different. Again, Rivers is a class guy. He's not going to call Jay names or say what Jay should have done. What he did say, was that he would have been out there playing if he could walk. He basically says he would have done things entirely different but felt bad for Jay because he wasn't at 100%. Doesn't really side with him at all. But he says and what Phillip Rivers actually did in a similar situation are two different things. What more do you want? We have an injury report telling you exactly what was wrong with his knee. We know it effects lateral stability, and that's something a mobile QB playing behind that Bears O-line is going to need. Everything we've heard is that the medical staff didn't even want him playing in the 2nd half, but Cutler insisted on giving it a shot. It didn't work. Granted, that's coming from the Bears, but what else do we have to go on here? What are you basing your doubts on? It's not what anyone remotely close to the situation has said. It's not the actual injury. It's not Jay's history, because he's always been one to play through stuff in the past. Jay Cutler the person seems like a douche. Jay Cutler the player has been somewhat of a disappointment here in Chicago. He can get rattled after taking hits and try to force things. But one thing he's never done is quit or play soft. I just don't understand where this is coming from at all.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 06:55 PM) That's what would have bothered me most if I were a Bears fan. The guy was walking around with no discernible limp and didn't look like he was in any pain. If he was told that they were going with the backup I would have wanted to see him go nuts on the sideline telling Lovie that there's no way he's sitting this one out. You don't necessarily have to be in constant pain or unable to walk to be unable to play effectively. When Urlacher's hand was messed up last year, he wasn't in constant pain. He wasn't making a scene on the sidelines. By all accounts, he looked perfectly fine standing there. But he also risked serious injury if he tried to keep playing. You can't rely on if a guy looks injured walking around on the sidelines over medical evaluations. We still have no reason to think Jay, and not the coaching staff, pulled him from the game for medical reasons. How long did it take to leak out that Benson had pulled himself?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 06:34 PM) I can agree with that. But Urlacher is the guy who gets all the media hype. Which is why I believe he is overrated. Not saying he hasn't been a hell of a player over the course of his career, but I just don't think he's as good as the media likes to portray him to be. If I had to choose one to keep, it would be Briggs. Maybe given their ages (Briggs is several years younger, right?) but look at how far the defense falls off whenever Urlacher's been out. It takes a bigger hit than when Briggs has missed a game. I think that's just the nature of their different positions and the scheme the bears have run for years, though.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 05:19 PM) I really think the Bears handled this poorly. Had they just said during the game "we believe he's torn a ligament based on our evaluations and he can't come back in the game" everybody would've known what was going on. But they told the commentators that his return was "questionable" which sounds like he could've come back in if he wanted to. In reality he tried and could barely move. Or as Lawrence Holmes just suggested, if you want to play the stupid mind games, leak the info to the sideline reporters so that the network can report on it but the Packers are kept in the dark.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 04:16 PM) Yeah, probably the case. But still not right. I don't like the fact that the thread was closed. I have nothing against you SS, and I thought we were debating the issue without calling one another names. It was a spirited argument. I thought that is why I came here. No hard feelings.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 03:58 PM) Nobody knows the answer to this, and I hate to break this to you but that includes you. People are stating their opinions, which they have every right to. But some opinions are supported by evidence and others aren't. What reasoning, what evidence are you using to continue questioning why Cutler was pulled?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jan 24, 2011 -> 03:57 PM) Oh, you totally just won the debate! He is injured! No one has ever played injured before! This post: Made it seem like you were questioning if he was really injured or if his sprain was more than a little stretch or discomfort. It was.