Funniest SB Thing This Week (1 Viewer)

[Joe Bryant]

"It seems we've been in this role all year," Smith said of the Bears' 7-point-underdog status vs. the Indianapolis Colts. Smith acknowledged that with weapons like Peyton Manning, the Colts probably rate a little edge, but "I have a harder time seeing how we've been in an underdog role all year with our record."

"If you look at most of our games," reported CHI LB Brian Urlacher, "we've been underdogs, unless we're playing at home, and then we'll be 2 1/2-point favorites."

Reality: The Bears have been the favorites in 16 of their 18 games this year. They were underdogs when they went to the Giants (who were red hot at the time) and then on the road to New England.

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/spo...ll/16577848.htm

Against hapless Arizona, favored by double digits, they needed an epic second-half comeback for a one-point victory. They were favored again, by 13 1/2 points, at home against the Miami Dolphins. They lost 31-13 in a game that did not seem as close as the final score.

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers came to Chicago with a 3-10 mark, underdogs by nearly two touchdowns in a game the Bears needed to clinch home-field advantage in the NFC playoffs. The Bears escaped with a 34-31 win in overtime.

The Bears may not have been ideally prepared for the Green Bay game, but their betting backers were certainly not prepared for the 26-7 pasting by the Packers with the Bears favored by a field goal. Favored by more than a touchdown against Seattle in the playoffs, they needed a defensive stop before pulling out a divisional-round win over a team they'd crushed 37-6 the first time they'd met.

You have to admire Smith's salesmanship if he can actually get Urlacher to buy that like he has. It still just seems funny.

J

 

[Ghost Rider]

Sounds like the Bears are playing the "we get no respect" card. It happens all of the time in pro sports.

 

[posty]

That is why it won the "Just Shut-up Award" on Mike and Mike in the Morning...

Heck, Lovie Smith would think the Bears were underdogs against the Illinois school of the blind and amputees...

 

[PatsWillWin]

It's worked for the Patriots.

 

[geoff8695]

"It seems we've been in this role all year," Smith said of the Bears' 7-point-underdog status vs. the Indianapolis Colts. Smith acknowledged that with weapons like Peyton Manning, the Colts probably rate a little edge, but "I have a harder time seeing how we've been in an underdog role all year with our record."

"If you look at most of our games," reported CHI LB Brian Urlacher, "we've been underdogs, unless we're playing at home, and then we'll be 2 1/2-point favorites."

Reality: The Bears have been the favorites in 16 of their 18 games this year. They were underdogs when they went to the Giants (who were red hot at the time) and then on the road to New England.

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/spo...ll/16577848.htm

Against hapless Arizona, favored by double digits, they needed an epic second-half comeback for a one-point victory. They were favored again, by 13 1/2 points, at home against the Miami Dolphins. They lost 31-13 in a game that did not seem as close as the final score.

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers came to Chicago with a 3-10 mark, underdogs by nearly two touchdowns in a game the Bears needed to clinch home-field advantage in the NFC playoffs. The Bears escaped with a 34-31 win in overtime.

The Bears may not have been ideally prepared for the Green Bay game, but their betting backers were certainly not prepared for the 26-7 pasting by the Packers with the Bears favored by a field goal. Favored by more than a touchdown against Seattle in the playoffs, they needed a defensive stop before pulling out a divisional-round win over a team they'd crushed 37-6 the first time they'd met.

You have to admire Smith's salesmanship if he can actually get Urlacher to buy that like he has. It still just seems funny.

J

The Bears believe they've earned more respect than they've been given. Urlacher is citing the 2 and 1/2 pt spread against NO at home, because being at home is typically considered to be worth a field goal. I think he's PO'd that the perception moving that betting line demonstrated that if the game had been played on a neutral site, then the Saints would have been favored over the Bears. Clearly it's not even debatable that the Bears have actually been favored in terms of point spreads (all year long), so I can see the humor in Urlacher using point spreads to bolster his view... Admittedly, it was probably not the best argument for him to make when trying to show how the Bears are 'disrespected'.Sometimes I listen to Mike-N-Mike in the morning on my drive to work and this was a topic they recently addressed on the radio. 'Greenie' tried to explain the Bears perspective on insisting they are disrespected and did a pretty good job of it. He pointed out that while the Bears came out of the gates fast and furious, that arguably the media has been 'searching' for someone to take the role of best in the NFC, rather than the Bears. It was going to be the Panthers once they got healthy, then the Seahawks, then it was going to be the Giants. As recently as a month ago the Cowboys were being pimped as the class of the NFC, and of course a few weeks ago it was going to be the Saints. Meanwhile the Bears just keep winning despite injuries and the loss of key pro-bowlers on defense, and the 'ups and downs' of a young QB playing his first full NFL season. This has made it easy for the Bears to feel slighted. They believe they have shown enough to statistically and certainly in terms of wins and losses to be viewed as the most balanced and strongest team in the NFC this season, and I would have to agree with them.

Coincidentally this week's "just shut up" award on the Mike-N-Mike show(given to those who are annoying, whiny, and/or in the wrong) went to:

DA BEARS - for playing the disrespected card.

ETA: because POSTY already mentioned the "just shut up" award in POST #3

 

[ericttspikes]

Lovie is right.

Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.

I don't blame the team for having a chip on their shoulder. Just look at the playoffs, most "experts" had them one and done vs. a now healthy Seahawks team bent on revenge. The Saints were locks to win according to a poll on this board and the national media in general. Grossman somehow is the worst QB ever to start a Super Bowl according to the "experts" (eventhough he has outplayed golden boy Manning in the playoffs).

It's not just the national media, it's also been on Chicago sports radio. This team has been doubted most of the second half. Listening to them the last several games of the season you heard; Lovie was an idiot for not benching Rex, Hester was bound to fumble away a game, Benson is a bust, the WRs are bums, the D is in free fall, Urlacher is over rated, weak schedule accounted for wins, etc. Compared to 85, this team has been doubted pretty much the whole way by everybody but the team itself.

 

[jurb26]

"It seems we've been in this role all year," Smith said of the Bears' 7-point-underdog status vs. the Indianapolis Colts. Smith acknowledged that with weapons like Peyton Manning, the Colts probably rate a little edge, but "I have a harder time seeing how we've been in an underdog role all year with our record."

"If you look at most of our games," reported CHI LB Brian Urlacher, "we've been underdogs, unless we're playing at home, and then we'll be 2 1/2-point favorites."

Reality: The Bears have been the favorites in 16 of their 18 games this year. They were underdogs when they went to the Giants (who were red hot at the time) and then on the road to New England.

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/spo...ll/16577848.htm

Against hapless Arizona, favored by double digits, they needed an epic second-half comeback for a one-point victory. They were favored again, by 13 1/2 points, at home against the Miami Dolphins. They lost 31-13 in a game that did not seem as close as the final score.

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers came to Chicago with a 3-10 mark, underdogs by nearly two touchdowns in a game the Bears needed to clinch home-field advantage in the NFC playoffs. The Bears escaped with a 34-31 win in overtime.

The Bears may not have been ideally prepared for the Green Bay game, but their betting backers were certainly not prepared for the 26-7 pasting by the Packers with the Bears favored by a field goal. Favored by more than a touchdown against Seattle in the playoffs, they needed a defensive stop before pulling out a divisional-round win over a team they'd crushed 37-6 the first time they'd met.

You have to admire Smith's salesmanship if he can actually get Urlacher to buy that like he has. It still just seems funny.

J

The poll on your very own website 2 weeks ago is proof positive that the Bears have in fact not been given the credit they deserve. That poll was very representative of just about every one I saw no matter what the site. NO was picked to win the game straight out by the large majority of the public.... 60%. Despite Chi having a better record, by far, and playing at home. That high a % is flat out a joke. We are seeing the same exact thing right now with Indy. I think more than 70% of people are picking them to win. How exactly is that giving Chi respect? Frankly, I'm tired of people getting so bent out of shape of teams playing this "card." It's a motivational tool and one that happens to work very well. Couple that with the fact that Chi actually is being dismissed by the vat majority and I don't see why this is so surprising to see them use it. Even if you don't like the fact that Chi is using it. You have to acknowledge that at least the Chi players are buying into it. I'm rather certain that the Chi coaching staff could care less about how silly them playing this card looks to others. The bottom line is that they have created an environment in which that perception has become their players reality. In other words, it has worked because the players do believe they are being disrespected. At the end of the day, isn't that the coaches job after all? To motivate they players in an attempt to get the most out of them.

 

[boubucarow]

Lovie is right.Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.I don't blame the team for having a chip on their shoulder. Just look at the playoffs, most "experts" had them one and done vs. a now healthy Seahawks team bent on revenge. The Saints were locks to win according to a poll on this board and the national media in general. Grossman somehow is the worst QB ever to start a Super Bowl according to the "experts" (eventhough he has outplayed golden boy Manning in the playoffs). It's not just the national media, it's also been on Chicago sports radio. This team has been doubted most of the second half. Listening to them the last several games of the season you heard; Lovie was an idiot for not benching Rex, Hester was bound to fumble away a game, Benson is a bust, the WRs are bums, the D is in free fall, Urlacher is over rated, weak schedule accounted for wins, etc. Compared to 85, this team has been doubted pretty much the whole way by everybody but the team itself.

Yes, Urlacher obviously exaggerated/outright lied about the point spread issue. Yet, the Bears have been getting less respect than they deserve since day one and now again in the Super Bowl. The Colts are not a better team than the Bears and there is no evidence to back up such a claim. Yet, they are underdogs and 90% of predictions have the Colts winning and a decent amount of those predict a good margin of victory.

 

[MarshallRob]

Is picking a team to lose synomous with disrespecting them? Can't one appreciate what a team has accomplished while simultaneously believing they are not quite as good as their opponent?

 

[trader jake]

Too often athletes confuse attention with respect, but if Lovie feels it can give his team an edge he'd be a fool not to push it.

Overall, the "respect" card gets too much respect.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Reality: The Bears have been the favorites in 16 of their 18 games this year. They were underdogs when they went to the Giants (who were red hot at the time) and then on the road to New England.You have to admire Smith's salesmanship if he can actually get Urlacher to buy that like he has. It still just seems funny.J

I thought the same thing. Underdog is the worng word. If the Bears want to say things like, "People didn't believe in us all year," that would be closer to the truth.Since underdog means:

un·der·dog [uhn-der-dawg, -dog] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation–noun1. a person who is expected to lose in a contest or conflict.2. a victim of social or political injustice: The underdogs were beginning to organize their protests.

I think it's safe to say they are misusing the term.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It's worked for the Patriots.

Can't argue that, jets.It's still funny though.J

 

[Hairy Snowman]

It's worked for the Patriots.

Can't argue that, jets.It's still funny though.J

It is funny that even when the Bears are on the edge of doing great things they still get slighted for even saying they have gotten slighted during the year.Real or not, the Bears are coming out ticked. Especially the defense........

 

[Modog814]

Can I ask why people think Chicago doesn't get the respect that they have "earned"?

IMO Indy has earned more respect than Chicago has this year. Just look at their schedules. Yeah, Chicago won 1 more game than Indy did.

But Chicago played 9 teams who had a losing record this year! Indy played only 5.

Chicago played 3 teams with a winning record going 2-1 (one win against an Alexander-less Seattle team). Indy played played 5 winning teams, going 4-1.

The rest of the games were played against 8-8 teams.

Chicago played 4 teams with fewer than 6 wins, Indy played 1.

Chicago barely squeaked by Seattle in the Playoffs. And the NOr game was a lot closer than the score indicated, the game really turned on 2 plays (NOr missed fg to take the lead, and the safety on the next play)

Indy dominated KC, the beat Balt at there own game and then won a close one to NE.

Where exactly do people think Chicago has earned more respect?

From there defense that has allowed nearly 50 more ypg in the playoffs than in the regular season.

I just don't get it.

 

[RBM]

Lovie is right.Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.

Exaclty. Pretty sure nobody is referring to the Vegas lines. Referring to the perception around the league with fans and media and whatnot, that they arent good enough to win here, let alone be here. I realize they were "favored" over NO, but c'mon, nobody was giving them a shot to win that game

 

[Hairy Snowman]

Lovie is right.Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.

Exaclty. Pretty sure nobody is referring to the Vegas lines. Referring to the perception around the league with fans and media and whatnot, that they arent good enough to win here, let alone be here. I realize they were "favored" over NO, but c'mon, nobody was giving them a shot to win that game

And realistically, most people either seem to think the Colts will beat themselves or, more likely, the Colts will beat the Bears. Somehow, one way or the other, the Bears players really don't figure into the equation.Personally, I hope Rex gets the MVP and throws to D Clark all game long!

 

[David Yudkin]

Luckily they actually play the games so all this useless chatter and inane banter doesn't matter.

I do find it interesting that the two teams in the SB were the two hottest teams to start the season (Colts 9-0, Bears 7-0) but struggled some to end the year (Colts 3-4, Bears barely beating the Bucs and Lions and getting thumped by the Packers).

So much for the theory that you have to be hot entering the post-season.

 

[Joe Bryant]

It's worked for the Patriots.

Can't argue that, jets.It's still funny though.J

It is funny that even when the Bears are on the edge of doing great things they still get slighted for even saying they have gotten slighted during the year.Real or not, the Bears are coming out ticked. Especially the defense........

I don't think anyone is slighting them. We're just laughing at the idea of a team that was favored in almost all their games talking about being the underdog all year.Great sales job by Lovie Smith.J

 

[Chase Stuart]

Lovie is right.Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.

Exaclty. Pretty sure nobody is referring to the Vegas lines. Referring to the perception around the league with fans and media and whatnot, that they arent good enough to win here, let alone be here. I realize they were "favored" over NO, but c'mon, nobody was giving them a shot to win that game

What does "favored" mean? Most people thought the Bears would win the game, hence the favorite title. If nobody was giving them a shot to win, they wouldn't be favored. The funny part is the Colts have been doubted just as much, if not more, than the Bears. LJ was going to run for 200 yards and KC was the upset special pick of WC weekend. Then the Ravens were going to dominate the Colts, and the crowd was going to be so loud and karma was going to exact revenge on the Colts for leaving Baltimore. Finally, New England was going to beat the Colts because Brady and Belichick really wanted to win, and "nobody was giving them a shot to win that game".There are always doubters now. Lots of people said SD couldn't win in the playoffs, despite going 14-2, because of a rookie QB and the Schottenheimer-hate. People said the Saints couldn't win in the playoffs with that D and no experience, and the Ravens didn't have enough on offense to win. EVERY team is doubted by a large percentage of the media, and for good reason: the field is always better to pick than a specific team.But the Bears have not been "disrespected" more than the Colts, or really any other team this year. How many times did we hear "Dungy, Manning and that awful run D have absolutely no chance in the playoffs?"Selectively memory here by Bears fans. The 7 point line reflects the AFC's dominance over the NFC, and as far back as November I believe the line was still AFC -7.

 

[dnurk]

I don't think anyone is slighting them. We're just laughing at the idea of a team that was favored in almost all their games talking about being the underdog all year.

Great sales job by Lovie Smith.

J

Yep, and the Bears fans posting in this thread have bought into it too. Even though the line is 7 points, there are a TON of people picking the Bears to win, including a good number of people "in the know" Pat Kirwan has an article on NFL.com talking about what each team does well. Toward the end he shares the results of him asking all the guests on his radio show for their prediction. The majority of NFL coachs and NFL personnel people are picking the Bears to win.

http://www.superbowl.com/news/story/9966425

So for anyone to say they are being "disrespected" is just foolish.

 

[guderian]

Most NFL teams act as if they are "disrespected" unless everyone is throwing rose petals at their feet. It does seem like the Bears have taken this to a new level though--especially during the Saints game in which they were favored by 2 1/2 points. To remind them, the most important indicator of who people think will win a game is those that are willing to put money on the line.

I also found it interesting that the Bears D admitted that they needed to use Reggie Bush's "taunting" as motivation. This team does seem to care a great deal about how others feel about them.

 

[3nOut]

Most NFL teams act as if they are "disrespected" unless everyone is throwing rose petals at their feet. It does seem like the Bears have taken this to a new level though--especially during the Saints game in which they were favored by 2 1/2 points. To remind them, the most important indicator of who people think will win a game is those that are willing to put money on the line. I also found it interesting that the Bears D admitted that they needed to use Reggie Bush's "taunting" as motivation. This team does seem to care a great deal about how others feel about them.

Home teams usually get 3 points in the spread just for playing at home. The Bears getting only 2.5 AT HOME vs NO says that without any spread the Saints are favored.

 

[Hairy Snowman]

I don't think anyone is slighting them. We're just laughing at the idea of a team that was favored in almost all their games talking about being the underdog all year.

Great sales job by Lovie Smith.

J

Yep, and the Bears fans posting in this thread have bought into it too. Even though the line is 7 points, there are a TON of people picking the Bears to win, including a good number of people "in the know" Pat Kirwan has an article on NFL.com talking about what each team does well. Toward the end he shares the results of him asking all the guests on his radio show for their prediction. The majority of NFL coachs and NFL personnel people are picking the Bears to win.

http://www.superbowl.com/news/story/9966425

So for anyone to say they are being "disrespected" is just foolish.

The past is the past, but the consequences of actions taken in the past are carried into the present.There is a good post regarding how the media wanted ANYONE but the Bears to be the representative of the NFC.

There was always someone else who was supposed to be better than them. Carolina, NO, the Giants, even Dallas towards the end of the year.

All they have done is keep the best record in the NFL the entire year. And still, a 7 point underdog on a neutral field????

Thank G they didn't have to play these Colts, which lost to Texas and Tennessee, at Indy!

Maybe some of the NFL "experts" realize the media may have taken things a little too far this year and that the Bears will have tremendous motivation going into this game.

Plus there are personal reasons the Bears D wants another shot at the Colts O. Think of it as a do over. A chance to do right where they did wrong. (Yes, most of the Bears remember the media coverage after the last game against the Colts when the Bears D was "exposed" by the record setting Colts). 41 points at home.

Mariotti was particuliarly brutal. If you want some links I can probaly go fish them up somewhere.

Some people would say the media fallout lifted the Colts offensive rep and pushed back the Bears defensive rep.

Im just saying payback is a #####.

R

PS Yes, Im a homer - sorry. But I speak the troof!

GO BEARS! GO GATORS!

 

[guderian]

Most NFL teams act as if they are "disrespected" unless everyone is throwing rose petals at their feet. It does seem like the Bears have taken this to a new level though--especially during the Saints game in which they were favored by 2 1/2 points. To remind them, the most important indicator of who people think will win a game is those that are willing to put money on the line. I also found it interesting that the Bears D admitted that they needed to use Reggie Bush's "taunting" as motivation. This team does seem to care a great deal about how others feel about them.

Home teams usually get 3 points in the spread just for playing at home. The Bears getting only 2.5 AT HOME vs NO says that without any spread the Saints are favored.

No, it says that the bettors think the Saints would win on a neutral field. The Bears were favored to win the game. It doesn't say that the Saints were favored in the game.

 

[3nOut]

Most NFL teams act as if they are "disrespected" unless everyone is throwing rose petals at their feet. It does seem like the Bears have taken this to a new level though--especially during the Saints game in which they were favored by 2 1/2 points. To remind them, the most important indicator of who people think will win a game is those that are willing to put money on the line.

I also found it interesting that the Bears D admitted that they needed to use Reggie Bush's "taunting" as motivation. This team does seem to care a great deal about how others feel about them.

Home teams usually get 3 points in the spread just for playing at home. The Bears getting only 2.5 AT HOME vs NO says that without any spread the Saints are favored.

No, it says that the bettors think the Saints would win on a neutral field. The Bears were favored to win the game. It doesn't say that the Saints were favored in the game.

If the Bears were expected to win, they would have to win by at least a field goal. If they were expected to win wouldn't the odds makers put the spread at at least 3 so they could at worst break even?

 

[3nOut]

It's worked for the Patriots.

Can't argue that, jets.It's still funny though.

J

It is funny that even when the Bears are on the edge of doing great things they still get slighted for even saying they have gotten slighted during the year.Real or not, the Bears are coming out ticked. Especially the defense........

I don't think anyone is slighting them. We're just laughing at the idea of a team that was favored in almost all their games talking about being the underdog all year.Great sales job by Lovie Smith.

J

Are you kidding me? Since before the first game of the season people on this board were dissing the Bears. They were always looking for some reason the Bears would lose or why they think they suck. And this was all season long. Take a look at this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=264466Here are some of the highlights:

diesel7982 - 7 more days until the Bears lose their opener to the hated Green Bay Packers.

barndog - Which alternative universe are you reporting from? Here on Earth, only teams with viable OFFs make the SB.

Shick! - ...the Chicago Bears are on the clock for the first pick in the 2007 NFL draft?

Peyton Marino - LOL @ bears homers thinking they win anything more than a first round bye this year.

Captain Quinoa - Teams that would win in Chicago come playoff time: Philly, Dallas, NYG, Carolina, New Orleans, Seattle, St Louis

Captain Quinoa - LOL at the whiny Burrs fans. You really think Grossman to Berrian is going to win playoff games? SOrry but playoff teams block your defensive end, cover punts, make FG's, etc... Nowhere to go but down.

Resident ##### - They will lose to the Rams.

BassNBrew - J-E-T-S...Jets! Jets! Jets!. Mark it down!

Hairy Snowman - I still think the first loss will be at the Giants.

wilked - ...they have been exposed for the team that they are, which is a good team in a weak division that plays an easy schedule. They are obviously not a great team...

cantrell - They lose those 3 road games in a row.

Zigg - Do Bear fans have any faith in Rex come January? Sorry, but this is not a great team. They overwhelm bad teams, but will lose their first playoff games like seasons past.

zoonation - The Bears got exposed today just like they did in Arizona. They are a good team, no doubt. They are not a great or superbowl team IMO.

culdeus - BTW I'm not at all afraid of facing this team in the playoffs.

Captain Quinoa - Once again the Bears have been exposed. Just like in '01/'02 and '05/'06 a gaudy regular season record based on a weak schedule, weak division, and fluke victories will result in a swift dismissal from the playoffs. [Goodbye] Bears.

wilked - Wow, talk about an overrated team. How many teams have they beaten with a winning record? 2. They played exactly one good team this year - the Pats. Anyone remember how that game turned out?...

The Scientist - [Goodbye] Bears ..... thanks for the free pass to the NFC Championship!

MrPack - One n' done as usual [goodbye]

And that's just some of the posts...

 

[Mungo Burrows]

Based on the Random Shots columns, I'd say Joe B has a fairly sharp wit and good eye for humor when it presents itself.

That said, the fact that this is what he considers the "Funniest SB thing this week" shows just how boring and tight to the vest these two teams are. It may make for good football, but it makes for a relatively lousy 2 weeks waiting for the football to happen.

 

[Raider Nation]

If I may slightly hijack, the first Super Bowl I clearly remember watching and understanding was SB X between Dallas and Pittsburgh. So I've seen over 30 Super Bowls. In all that time, I can never recall having no opinion whatsoever on the big game. I usually love one side or the other from a betting standpoint.

This year, I'm completely

I would hate to HAVE to bet this game heavily in order to square the tab with my bookie. I would not be surprised in the least if Indy wins by 17, nor would I be shocked if the Bears win by 14. I can't get a read on this matchup at all. Just hoping for a great game though.

 

[Kai's Hero]

Lovie is right.Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.I don't blame the team for having a chip on their shoulder. Just look at the playoffs, most "experts" had them one and done vs. a now healthy Seahawks team bent on revenge. The Saints were locks to win according to a poll on this board and the national media in general. Grossman somehow is the worst QB ever to start a Super Bowl according to the "experts" (eventhough he has outplayed golden boy Manning in the playoffs). It's not just the national media, it's also been on Chicago sports radio. This team has been doubted most of the second half. Listening to them the last several games of the season you heard; Lovie was an idiot for not benching Rex, Hester was bound to fumble away a game, Benson is a bust, the WRs are bums, the D is in free fall, Urlacher is over rated, weak schedule accounted for wins, etc. Compared to 85, this team has been doubted pretty much the whole way by everybody but the team itself.

Yes, Urlacher obviously exaggerated/outright lied about the point spread issue. Yet, the Bears have been getting less respect than they deserve since day one and now again in the Super Bowl. The Colts are not a better team than the Bears and there is no evidence to back up such a claim. Yet, they are underdogs and 90% of predictions have the Colts winning and a decent amount of those predict a good margin of victory.

The only reason why the Bears don't get the respect as they think they deserve is because they have a starting QB who not only is inconsistent but when he has a bad game it is normally really bad. The national perception, whether it's true or not, is that the Bears win despite Rex Grossman. He is solely responsible for the Bears "lack of respect".

 

[pizzatyme]

Lovie is right.Regardless of what Vegas laid, the Bears have been doubted at every turn. The three games you highlighted added to that perception.I don't blame the team for having a chip on their shoulder. Just look at the playoffs, most "experts" had them one and done vs. a now healthy Seahawks team bent on revenge. The Saints were locks to win according to a poll on this board and the national media in general. Grossman somehow is the worst QB ever to start a Super Bowl according to the "experts" (eventhough he has outplayed golden boy Manning in the playoffs). It's not just the national media, it's also been on Chicago sports radio. This team has been doubted most of the second half. Listening to them the last several games of the season you heard; Lovie was an idiot for not benching Rex, Hester was bound to fumble away a game, Benson is a bust, the WRs are bums, the D is in free fall, Urlacher is over rated, weak schedule accounted for wins, etc. Compared to 85, this team has been doubted pretty much the whole way by everybody but the team itself.

Yes, Urlacher obviously exaggerated/outright lied about the point spread issue. Yet, the Bears have been getting less respect than they deserve since day one and now again in the Super Bowl. The Colts are not a better team than the Bears and there is no evidence to back up such a claim. Yet, they are underdogs and 90% of predictions have the Colts winning and a decent amount of those predict a good margin of victory.

The only reason why the Bears don't get the respect as they think they deserve is because they have a starting QB who not only is inconsistent but when he has a bad game it is normally really bad. The national perception, whether it's true or not, is that the Bears win despite Rex Grossman. He is solely responsible for the Bears "lack of respect".

This one hits it on the head! I'm a Colts homer and I'd be picking the Bears to win if they'd switched to Griese 3 weeks ago and he performed even marginally.Since it is Grossman, I think RaiderNation hit it too. It could be a 2 TD win either way.All in all, I think I'm going with a margin of victory bet if the odds hold any value.I also think, on a neutral field, the Saints would have beaten the Bears. Since I don't expect both QBs to play exceptionally well in the game, this is why I tend to agree with the "blowout" theory. It just depends on which QB is on.As good as the Bears Defense is, if Manning is on his game early, this game is OVER by halftime. Since this would force the Bears out of their running game first mentality and put the pressure squarely onto Rex's shoulders. Rex has played well with a lead, not from behind.Go Colts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[BassNBrew]

Are you kidding me? Since before the first game of the season people on this board were dissing the Bears. They were always looking for some reason the Bears would lose or why they think they suck. And this was all season long. Take a look at this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=264466

BassNBrew - J-E-T-S...Jets! Jets! Jets!. Mark it down!

Dissing the Bears? That thread was about which team they'd lose to first. I actually gave them too much respect as they lost a full two weeks before the date I predicted. Most of the other posts were similiar in nature. If you're going to play the disrespect card, at least get your facts straight before you post drivel.Nov 5 Miami Lost 13-31

Nov 12 @N.Y. Giants Won 38-20

Nov 19 @N.Y. Jets Won 10-0

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

The Bears used the wrong term when they deemed themselves 'underdogs'.

When they were winning earlier in the year, most national media types said it was because 'the NFC is a joke'.

Then when the Bears started faltering, everybody (including fans) were all over Rex Grossman - as they should have been.

They got ripped unmercifully after laying an egg against Green Bay on Week 17.

A lot of people didn't give the Bears any 'love' because they've been one and done in the playoffs since the mid 90s.

Then when they beat Seattle and get that monkey off their back - they are a 2.5 point favorite, or in all actuality a 'pick em' on a neutral site, as the home team typically is a three point favorite if they're the same or equal.

And ALL national media members for the most part picked New Orleans.

as most are now taking the Colts.

Despite the Bears winning FIFTEEN GAMES this year - and to bring it full circle - against the lowly NFC.

Have the Bears been 'underdogs'? No.

Have the Bears been shown LITTLE IF ANY RESPECT since they played without one of their starting CBs in December through the playoffs? Absolutely.

They can step up and shut everybody up on Sunday.

...and then rather than be given credit, the Colts will be criticized for not stopping the run - or Goober Manning will be called a choker.

Book it... etch it in stone - KNOCK IT DOWN!

 

[GRIDIRON ASSASSIN]

And one other point, Rex Grossman has a higher QB rating in the playoffs this year than Peyton Manning.

But nobody wants to discuss that FACT.

 

[pizzatyme]

And one other point, Rex Grossman has a higher QB rating in the playoffs this year than Peyton Manning.But nobody wants to discuss that FACT.

Yes, and he has only been able to manage being 9 points higher than Manning and he has 5 less INTs!Geez, that is terrible! Look at it this way, Manning is only 9 points behind Gross-man and has thrown 5 more picks!Manning is much better, night and day better, than Gross-man. But you cannot accept that!

 

[nygiants56]

"It seems we've been in this role all year," Smith said of the Bears' 7-point-underdog status vs. the Indianapolis Colts. Smith acknowledged that with weapons like Peyton Manning, the Colts probably rate a little edge, but "I have a harder time seeing how we've been in an underdog role all year with our record."

"If you look at most of our games," reported CHI LB Brian Urlacher, "we've been underdogs, unless we're playing at home, and then we'll be 2 1/2-point favorites."

Reality: The Bears have been the favorites in 16 of their 18 games this year. They were underdogs when they went to the Giants (who were red hot at the time) and then on the road to New England.

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/spo...ll/16577848.htm

Against hapless Arizona, favored by double digits, they needed an epic second-half comeback for a one-point victory. They were favored again, by 13 1/2 points, at home against the Miami Dolphins. They lost 31-13 in a game that did not seem as close as the final score.

The Tampa Bay Buccaneers came to Chicago with a 3-10 mark, underdogs by nearly two touchdowns in a game the Bears needed to clinch home-field advantage in the NFC playoffs. The Bears escaped with a 34-31 win in overtime.

The Bears may not have been ideally prepared for the Green Bay game, but their betting backers were certainly not prepared for the 26-7 pasting by the Packers with the Bears favored by a field goal. Favored by more than a touchdown against Seattle in the playoffs, they needed a defensive stop before pulling out a divisional-round win over a team they'd crushed 37-6 the first time they'd met.

You have to admire Smith's salesmanship if he can actually get Urlacher to buy that like he has. It still just seems funny.

J

Joesounds like you were listening to Mike and Mike on Espn radio this week! This is exactly what Greeney said on Wednesday morning; word for word,about the 'no respect/we're underdogs' thing.

 

[Tibereas]

Can I ask why people think Chicago doesn't get the respect that they have "earned"? IMO Indy has earned more respect than Chicago has this year. Just look at their schedules. Yeah, Chicago won 1 more game than Indy did.But Chicago played 9 teams who had a losing record this year! Indy played only 5. Chicago played 3 teams with a winning record going 2-1 (one win against an Alexander-less Seattle team). Indy played played 5 winning teams, going 4-1. The rest of the games were played against 8-8 teams. Chicago played 4 teams with fewer than 6 wins, Indy played 1. Chicago barely squeaked by Seattle in the Playoffs. And the NOr game was a lot closer than the score indicated, the game really turned on 2 plays (NOr missed fg to take the lead, and the safety on the next play)Indy dominated KC, the beat Balt at there own game and then won a close one to NE. Where exactly do people think Chicago has earned more respect? From there defense that has allowed nearly 50 more ypg in the playoffs than in the regular season. I just don't get it.

Ya I should respect the Colts for loosing to Jax, Tenn and Houston. Those are 3 very good teams so I understand your point.

 

[3nOut]

Are you kidding me? Since before the first game of the season people on this board were dissing the Bears. They were always looking for some reason the Bears would lose or why they think they suck. And this was all season long. Take a look at this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=264466

BassNBrew - J-E-T-S...Jets! Jets! Jets!. Mark it down!

Dissing the Bears? That thread was about which team they'd lose to first. I actually gave them too much respect as they lost a full two weeks before the date I predicted. Most of the other posts were similiar in nature. If you're going to play the disrespect card, at least get your facts straight before you post drivel.Nov 5 Miami Lost 13-31

Nov 12 @N.Y. Giants Won 38-20

Nov 19 @N.Y. Jets Won 10-0

Drivel? Did you read the entire thread? The thread was named " *** 2006 Chicago Bears Thread ***, :MERGED: All Bears, All the time". Ony part of the thread was about when and who'd they lose to. Sorry that you don't like that i just happened to pick your quote as one of the examples. The fact remains, most people didn't think the Bears were as good as their record showed and they looked for reasons not to like them. To be fair, a number of people gave the Bears some credit, but I'd say the majority didn't.

 

[BassNBrew]

Are you kidding me? Since before the first game of the season people on this board were dissing the Bears. They were always looking for some reason the Bears would lose or why they think they suck. And this was all season long. Take a look at this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=264466

BassNBrew - J-E-T-S...Jets! Jets! Jets!. Mark it down!

Dissing the Bears? That thread was about which team they'd lose to first. I actually gave them too much respect as they lost a full two weeks before the date I predicted. Most of the other posts were similiar in nature. If you're going to play the disrespect card, at least get your facts straight before you post drivel.Nov 5 Miami Lost 13-31

Nov 12 @N.Y. Giants Won 38-20

Nov 19 @N.Y. Jets Won 10-0

Drivel? Did you read the entire thread? The thread was named " *** 2006 Chicago Bears Thread ***, :MERGED: All Bears, All the time". Ony part of the thread was about when and who'd they lose to. Sorry that you don't like that i just happened to pick your quote as one of the examples. The fact remains, most people didn't think the Bears were as good as their record showed and they looked for reasons not to like them. To be fair, a number of people gave the Bears some credit, but I'd say the majority didn't.

You got me on not re-reading the thread for a merge. As I said, I actually gave the Bears too much credit. There's a good chance that I was a Bear's fan long before you as I go back to the Evans and Avellini days...yes I probably butchered the spelling. The problem with the Bears is knowing which defense will show up on Sunday. I think this defense is inferior to last year's group. I'll probably take the Bears and the 7.5 points and then hope for the best.

 

[Modog814]

Can I ask why people think Chicago doesn't get the respect that they have "earned"? IMO Indy has earned more respect than Chicago has this year. Just look at their schedules. Yeah, Chicago won 1 more game than Indy did.But Chicago played 9 teams who had a losing record this year! Indy played only 5. Chicago played 3 teams with a winning record going 2-1 (one win against an Alexander-less Seattle team). Indy played played 5 winning teams, going 4-1. The rest of the games were played against 8-8 teams. Chicago played 4 teams with fewer than 6 wins, Indy played 1. Chicago barely squeaked by Seattle in the Playoffs. And the NOr game was a lot closer than the score indicated, the game really turned on 2 plays (NOr missed fg to take the lead, and the safety on the next play)Indy dominated KC, the beat Balt at there own game and then won a close one to NE. Where exactly do people think Chicago has earned more respect? From there defense that has allowed nearly 50 more ypg in the playoffs than in the regular season. I just don't get it.

Ya I should respect the Colts for loosing to Jax, Tenn and Houston. Those are 3 very good teams so I understand your point.

Jax and Tenn were both 8-8, hardly terrible and both in the playoff hunt. And Houston had the same record as Miami, a team who beat Chicago. Besides, the post was not about respecting the colts. It was about how people figure Chicago gets not respect.

 

[Bob Henry]

It worked for Florida in the BCS title game. Why not!? You could even argue the same phenomenon worked for the Colts defense getting no respect as the playoffs got started. I'm not saying I buy into all of it, but I think there's something to be said about hearing something so much that a team can carry an extra little chip on their shoulder. It's the same thing with locker room material (when the other team flaps their gums).

 

[Ghost Rider]

And one other point, Rex Grossman has a higher QB rating in the playoffs this year than Peyton Manning.But nobody wants to discuss that FACT.

Yes, and he has only been able to manage being 9 points higher than Manning and he has 5 less INTs!Geez, that is terrible! Look at it this way, Manning is only 9 points behind Gross-man and has thrown 5 more picks!Manning is much better, night and day better, than Gross-man. But you cannot accept that!

I think everyone, including GA, knows that, but if the Colts defense is being given all kinds of kudos for playing better in the playoffs than they did down the stretch in the regular season, why isn't Grossman being given the same courtesy?

 

[BigRed]

It still just seems funny.

I was thinking "laughably ridiculous" but funny is more concise....LMAO @ the Bears underdogs let alone by a TD. Win or lose, God bless that I'll at least win some coin today.

 

[3nOut]

Are you kidding me? Since before the first game of the season people on this board were dissing the Bears. They were always looking for some reason the Bears would lose or why they think they suck. And this was all season long. Take a look at this thread: http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...howtopic=264466

BassNBrew - J-E-T-S...Jets! Jets! Jets!. Mark it down!

Dissing the Bears? That thread was about which team they'd lose to first. I actually gave them too much respect as they lost a full two weeks before the date I predicted. Most of the other posts were similiar in nature. If you're going to play the disrespect card, at least get your facts straight before you post drivel.Nov 5 Miami Lost 13-31

Nov 12 @N.Y. Giants Won 38-20

Nov 19 @N.Y. Jets Won 10-0

Drivel? Did you read the entire thread? The thread was named " *** 2006 Chicago Bears Thread ***, :MERGED: All Bears, All the time". Ony part of the thread was about when and who'd they lose to. Sorry that you don't like that i just happened to pick your quote as one of the examples. The fact remains, most people didn't think the Bears were as good as their record showed and they looked for reasons not to like them. To be fair, a number of people gave the Bears some credit, but I'd say the majority didn't.

You got me on not re-reading the thread for a merge. As I said, I actually gave the Bears too much credit. There's a good chance that I was a Bear's fan long before you as I go back to the Evans and Avellini days...yes I probably butchered the spelling. The problem with the Bears is knowing which defense will show up on Sunday. I think this defense is inferior to last year's group. I'll probably take the Bears and the 7.5 points and then hope for the best.

Yikes! I thought I was the only dinosaur here. I remember those days as well, but I'd probably be better off forgetting them. Now if you compare Grossman to Bob Avellini, everyone would be saying that Rex is a future HOFer. And yes you are correct, we don't know which Bears D will show up (or which QB for that matter), but you could also ask which Colts D will show up as well. Which Bears D shjows up all dpeends on HOW they want to play the Colts. Early in the season when they had Harris putting pressure up front, they were able to play the style of D their personnel called for. Once he went down, they were forced to pay more man-to-man and ended up giving up a lot more yards. Against NO, when they were able to put pressure on Brees, they ended up forcing turnovers and were able to pay the type of D they wanted to. This is what it all boils down to: HOW will they play the Colts.

 

[BigRed]

The Bears used the wrong term when they deemed themselves 'underdogs'.When they were winning earlier in the year, most national media types said it was because 'the NFC is a joke'.Then when the Bears started faltering, everybody (including fans) were all over Rex Grossman - as they should have been.They got ripped unmercifully after laying an egg against Green Bay on Week 17.A lot of people didn't give the Bears any 'love' because they've been one and done in the playoffs since the mid 90s.Then when they beat Seattle and get that monkey off their back - they are a 2.5 point favorite, or in all actuality a 'pick em' on a neutral site, as the home team typically is a three point favorite if they're the same or equal.And ALL national media members for the most part picked New Orleans.as most are now taking the Colts.Despite the Bears winning FIFTEEN GAMES this year - and to bring it full circle - against the lowly NFC.Have the Bears been 'underdogs'? No.Have the Bears been shown LITTLE IF ANY RESPECT since they played without one of their starting CBs in December through the playoffs? Absolutely.They can step up and shut everybody up on Sunday....and then rather than be given credit, the Colts will be criticized for not stopping the run - or Goober Manning will be called a choker.Book it... etch it in stone - KNOCK IT DOWN!

Safe to say grid that at diff times to one degree or other, NEITHER team has "gotten enough respect" ie believed to be a SB team. I admit myself I expected a NE/NO SB. Neither team winning will surprise me in the least though. Just about anything can happen in this one IMO.