Again how is being ranked close to last in just about every offensive statistic considered mediocre. Ill tell you what, if this offense truly was mediocre our defense would look a TON better, as it is like you said they ranked in top3. Im not going to argue anymore, I just dont understand how outside of two games, one vs an 0-15 team and the other we still turned the ball over a ton, you can consider the offense overachieving.

Its overachieving based on expectations and based on what the numbers appear to be. We have a rookie RB, shotty OL, nothing close to a legit WR and an unproven QB who appears to be regressing as the season goes on, yet were tied for the division lead. If they werent exceeding expectations we would be scoring 10 points a game and only have a couple wins. Its pretty basic stuff here.

Its overachieving based on expectations and based on what the numbers appear to be. We have a rookie RB, shotty OL, nothing close to a legit WR and an unproven QB who appears to be regressing as the season goes on, yet were tied for the division lead. If they werent exceeding expectations we would be scoring 10 points a game and only have a couple wins. Its pretty basic stuff here.

About 100% what I was getting at, I didn't really think I was saying anything that complex or controversial.

Down in St. Louis til Monday. Does NFL.com let you pay to watch games on their site anywhere? The Rams/Falcon game will probably be on down here and wanna watch the Bears, obviously.

Down in St. Louis til Monday. Does NFL.com let you pay to watch games on their site anywhere? The Rams/Falcon game will probably be on down here and wanna watch the Bears, obviously.

I believe they have a package similar to mlb.tv...not sure, how much they'd charge you since it's week 17 though.

Down in St. Louis til Monday. Does NFL.com let you pay to watch games on their site anywhere? The Rams/Falcon game will probably be on down here and wanna watch the Bears, obviously.

If you know anyone with a slingbox they can give you their info and you can watch it through their tv.

I expected it, and why not? The guy was a machine and had me breathless everytime he touched it. Last night, he did the same when he almost broke one. And that was Dante Hall, and D'Angelo Hall.

 

Sorry, I was thinking about the disastrous overrated CB who robbed the Raiders. But yes, Dante is the one I was looking for.

Down in St. Louis til Monday. Does NFL.com let you pay to watch games on their site anywhere? The Rams/Falcon game will probably be on down here and wanna watch the Bears, obviously.

 

If you're free for the day, there's always the possibility of finding a bar with Sunday Ticket and an extra TV

If you're free for the day, there's always the possibility of finding a bar with Sunday Ticket and an extra TV

 

Good point.

homertv.net

Bwahahaha, Mike Brown was placed on injury reserve....again. I don't wish a man any injury, but it's funny that it has happened again to the Bears. I've never seen a team so patient with a player and injuries before.

Bwahahaha, Mike Brown was placed on injury reserve....again. I don't wish a man any injury, but it's funny that it has happened again to the Bears. I've never seen a team so patient with a player and injuries before.

http://www.suntimes.com/sports/football/be...-bear26.article

Bwahahaha, Mike Brown was placed on injury reserve....again. I don't wish a man any injury, but it's funny that it has happened again to the Bears. I've never seen a team so patient with a player and injuries before.

 

It's kinda like the sox with Joe Crede

It's kinda like the sox with Joe Crede

 

Not really. Joe has been injured the past two years with the same injury. He's not injury prone, he has just taken bad advice from his agent. Call him stupid, but it's not nearly the same situation. Brown has been injured numerous times in the past and I believe this is the first time in a while he has even played 15 games.

Not really. Joe has been injured the past two years with the same injury. He's not injury prone, he has just taken bad advice from his agent. Call him stupid, but it's not nearly the same situation. Brown has been injured numerous times in the past and I believe this is the first time in a while he has even played 15 games.

 

Crede has been hurt, with the same back injury, 4 straight years. He missed a few weeks in 2005, he was playing hurt down the stretch in 2006, missed most of 2007, and missed half of 2008. It's a pretty similar situation quite honestly.

Not really. Joe has been injured the past two years with the same injury. He's not injury prone, he has just taken bad advice from his agent. Call him stupid, but it's not nearly the same situation. Brown has been injured numerous times in the past and I believe this is the first time in a while he has even played 15 games.

 

Mike Brown has been hurt more than Crede, but to say Joe Crede "is not injury prone" is really stretching it.

Crede has been hurt, with the same back injury, 4 straight years. He missed a few weeks in 2005, he was playing hurt down the stretch in 2006, missed most of 2007, and missed half of 2008. It's a pretty similar situation quite honestly.

 

No it really is not. There's a difference between playing banged up and not being able to play at all. If Brown was able to play, there wouldn't be a problem, but he's not. He's injured a lot more without being able to play. A lot of guys play with injuries in all sports throughout the season, the difference is the ones who can't play through injuries because they are too severe. Crede missed a couple of games in '05, still played in '06, was injured 2007. In 2008, he played great while still being injured and missed half the season because he followed the advice of his agent instead of a doctor. He gambled and lost. His injury problems were based on stupidity, Brown's problems are not. He's injury prone, which to mean, is hurt to the point to where he can't play and that's happened for most of his career. And it's with different injuries which is the biggest difference. He'll tear this, break something else, then tear something else.

Dont get me wrong, I love Joe Crede, but he doesnt mean to the Sox what Mike Brown means to the Bears in terms of leadership.

Dont get me wrong, I love Joe Crede, but he doesnt mean to the Sox what Mike Brown means to the Bears in terms of leadership.

But when we needed a big hit in any situation, he usually came through. I actually think their impacts are similar. Brown as a leader of the D and Crede as the Sox Mr. Clutch.

Coughlin will pull Eli at halftime and not play Jacobs at all, it sounds like. David Carr to play the 2nd half.

Coughlin will pull Eli at halftime and not play Jacobs at all, it sounds like. David Carr to play the 2nd half.

Doesn't sound good...

Doesn't sound good...

I guess that Babich shouldn't have choked 3 times this year huh.

I guess that Babich shouldn't have choked 3 times this year huh.

So it was Babich's fault that Orton threw 3 INT's in Minnesota?

 

Babich's fault that Orton was terrible in Minnesota?

 

Babich's fault that Tillman decided to fight a guy on 4th down in OT vs Tampa?

 

Babich's fault Olsen fumbled twice in Carolina?

 

Or was it Babich's fault that Lovie squibbed with 11 seconds to go in Atlanta?

So it was Babich's fault that Orton threw 3 INT's in Minnesota?

 

Babich's fault that Orton was terrible in Minnesota?

 

Babich's fault that Tillman decided to fight a guy on 4th down in OT vs Tampa?

 

Babich's fault Olsen fumbled twice in Carolina?

 

Or was it Babich's fault that Lovie squibbed with 11 seconds to go in Atlanta?

Yes.

Who's in?

 

Inside the 5!

 

TOUCHDOWN!

Edited December 28, 200817 yr by tommy

So it was Babich's fault that Orton threw 3 INT's in Minnesota?

 

Babich's fault that Orton was terrible in Minnesota?

 

Babich's fault that Tillman decided to fight a guy on 4th down in OT vs Tampa?

 

Babich's fault Olsen fumbled twice in Carolina?

 

Or was it Babich's fault that Lovie squibbed with 11 seconds to go in Atlanta?

 

It was Babich's scheme that put the Bears in very bad situations.