Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Nope, it's just that standards are so low up there that even writers and editors aren't expected to be literate. The article was probably originally written in crayon.http://backporch.fanhouse.com/2011/01/19/g...ded-to-chicaco/Probably photo shopped.DrJ said:
Well at least the editor isn't dumb enough to think the Bears weren't actually trying to score on their last drive week 17 against the Packers.Nope, it's just that standards are so low up there that even writers and editors aren't expected to be literate. The article was probably originally written in crayon.http://backporch.fanhouse.com/2011/01/19/g...ded-to-chicaco/Probably photo shopped.DrJ said:
Like most Packer fans, he's probably drunk enough that he doesn't bother to think. There's a reason you are renowned for your alcohol consumption and not your educational system.Well at least the editor isn't dumb enough to think the Bears weren't actually trying to score on their last drive week 17 against the Packers.Nope, it's just that standards are so low up there that even writers and editors aren't expected to be literate. The article was probably originally written in crayon.http://backporch.fanhouse.com/2011/01/19/g...ded-to-chicaco/Probably photo shopped.DrJ said:
Good for him because at least he has an excuse! You don't have an excuse for your absurd belief the Bears weren't trying to score on that final drive. I like the idea of having you tell that to the Bear players and watching them pound you into the ground. I'd even pay to see that.Like most Packer fans, he's probably drunk enough that he doesn't bother to think. There's a reason you are renowned for your alcohol consumption and not your educational system.Well at least the editor isn't dumb enough to think the Bears weren't actually trying to score on their last drive week 17 against the Packers.Nope, it's just that standards are so low up there that even writers and editors aren't expected to be literate. The article was probably originally written in crayon.http://backporch.fanhouse.com/2011/01/19/g...ded-to-chicaco/Probably photo shopped.DrJ said:
Of course he does - Packer fans have an excuse for everything.Good for him because at least he has an excuse! You don't have an excuse for your absurd belief the Bears weren't trying to score on that final drive. I like the idea of having you tell that to the Bear players and watching them pound you into the ground. I'd even pay to see that.
Just let the board know when you set up the time to tell the Bears players they weren't trying to score on that final drive. I want front row seats for that beat down.Of course he does - Packer fans have an excuse for everything.Good for him because at least he has an excuse! You don't have an excuse for your absurd belief the Bears weren't trying to score on that final drive. I like the idea of having you tell that to the Bear players and watching them pound you into the ground. I'd even pay to see that.
I'd pay to see him tell them that as well. After they beat him they'd send him to the nut house.Just let the board know when you set up the time to tell the Bears players they weren't trying to score on that final drive. I want front row seats for that beat down.Of course he does - Packer fans have an excuse for everything.Good for him because at least he has an excuse! You don't have an excuse for your absurd belief the Bears weren't trying to score on that final drive. I like the idea of having you tell that to the Bear players and watching them pound you into the ground. I'd even pay to see that.
How much are you willing to pay? How about you buy all of us tickets to the Bear Fan convention in the offseason, pay for me to get a couple jerseys autographed, and I'll tell the autographee that I didn't think they were trying on that final drive.I'd pay to see him tell them that as well. After they beat him they'd send him to the nut house.Just let the board know when you set up the time to tell the Bears players they weren't trying to score on that final drive. I want front row seats for that beat down.Of course he does - Packer fans have an excuse for everything.Good for him because at least he has an excuse! You don't have an excuse for your absurd belief the Bears weren't trying to score on that final drive. I like the idea of having you tell that to the Bear players and watching them pound you into the ground. I'd even pay to see that.
RankingsLike most Packer fans, he's probably drunk enough that he doesn't bother to think. There's a reason you are renowned for your alcohol consumption and not your educational system.Well at least the editor isn't dumb enough to think the Bears weren't actually trying to score on their last drive week 17 against the Packers.Nope, it's just that standards are so low up there that even writers and editors aren't expected to be literate. The article was probably originally written in crayon.http://backporch.fanhouse.com/2011/01/19/g...ded-to-chicaco/Probably photo shopped.DrJ said:
RankingsLike most Packer fans, he's probably drunk enough that he doesn't bother to think. There's a reason you are renowned for your alcohol consumption and not your educational system.Nope, it's just that standards are so low up there that even writers and editors aren't expected to be literate. The article was probably originally written in crayon.http://backporch.fanhouse.com/2011/01/19/g...ded-to-chicaco/Probably photo shopped.DrJ said:
In DrJ's defense, he probably thinks Illinois ranked 32nd is better than Wisconsin ranked 8th But he also came through the Illinois educational systemRankingsLike most Packer fans, he's probably drunk enough that he doesn't bother to think. There's a reason you are renowned for your alcohol consumption and not your educational system.Well at least the editor isn't dumb enough to think the Bears weren't actually trying to score on their last drive week 17 against the Packers.
fans) I'll be cheering for that team as they are from the NFC North and we need to shut up the biased media that still claims the NFC East and NFC South are the tougher NFC Divisions.. 
Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
You had better prepare yourself mentally for that. Because it is going to happen. T&P.Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not thefans) I'll be cheering for that team as they are from the NFC North
Yeah, but it's easier when you're graded on a curve against other kids spelling things like "Chicaco".
There's no way to prepare for it, and yes I think it will happen.You had better prepare yourself mentally for that. Because it is going to happen. T&P.Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
Sabertooth said:
Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
Really, once the Vikings are out I'll cheer for the NFC North every time. Drives the Packer fans around me 
.. Remember I live in Western Wisconsin.When the Packers won their last Superbowl a couple of them came over to try and rub it in.. Still don't understand why you can't just enjoy the Championship without trying to rub salt in a wound But I just shook their hand, said congratulations enjoy the feeling as I remember it well from when the Twins won! Leaves them 
Really??I mean I hate the Bears, and losing to them would truly suck. But IF the Bears were to win, it wouldn't ruin my life. I would probably not take it very well right away because I know the Packers are a better team, but going in, if i knew the Bears were a better team, it would be easier to take.Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not thefans) I'll be cheering for that team as they are from the NFC North
Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
Losing this weekend means a lifetime, I mean a LIFETIME, of crap from the FIBS. The only difference is IF the Bears go to the Super Bowl, they will surely get mopped. IF the Packers go to the SB, I think, (and many others "may"agree) that they have a fighting chance against either AFC opponent.Just my opinion.
But of course.Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
Not sure if I'm denial, but I mentioned in another thread that I would have been 10X more devastated if the Bears lost last week and deprived me of seeing this game.I have myself mentally prepared that whether the Bears win or lose this game, I'm going to walk out of Soldier Field happy I was there to see it.
Not sure if I'm denial, but I mentioned in another thread that I would have been 10X more devastated if the Bears lost last week and deprived me of seeing this game.I have myself mentally prepared that whether the Bears win or lose this game, I'm going to walk out of Soldier Field happy I was there to see it.Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
You realize that the Bears already beat one of the possible two AFC opponents, right?Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
1Snogger, it's intelligent fans like you that truly "get it." Cheers to that, seriously.
Not me. Not even close.Not sure if I'm denial, but I mentioned in another thread that I would have been 10X more devastated if the Bears lost last week and deprived me of seeing this game.I have myself mentally prepared that whether the Bears win or lose this game, I'm going to walk out of Soldier Field happy I was there to see it.Wow, you're a better person than I am. As I've mentioned before the Bears losing this game would inflict a lifelong wound that will never quite heal. The only thing in this world that would bring slight relief would be Green Bay getting absolutely destroyed in the Super Bowl. The thought of Chicago flaming out to a team they could have eliminated in the regular season and watching the Packers hoist the Lombardi makes me ill. I can't think of a worse scenario than that.No matter who wins this Dog fight( The teams, not the
I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
Same crap I heard from Falcons' fans on another board. No respect. Boo Hoo.
Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17.I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
I liked it. IIRC, there's a youtube video of him singing during the 1991 NHL All-Star game and the cheering was deafening.Now, if we could pass a big American flag through the crowd like they do for Candiens games.
No one is going to listen to you on this subject due to your whacked belief the Bears weren't even trying to score on the final drive in that game.Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17.I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
A few thoughts I have heard on this subject, most of which are at least plausible (from one extreme to the other).Starting with the most extreme and least beleiveable:1) The Bears wanted to let GB into the playoffs and keep the Giants (who had already won their game) out, as the Bears feared the Giants more than GB. They played their starters simply to appease the "meatball" Chicago fans that would have been infuriated and "giving" a game to the "hated" Packers.2) The Bears jogged out their starters, but really weren't trying to win at any point - again, mainly to appease "meatball" fans who would not have liked to see the Bears roll over (well, and appease Giant fans).3) The Bears played their starters the entire game, hoping to win. Not really needing a win, however they worked on some things offensively that they felt needed some cleaning up before the playoffs. Defensively, they did the same. In both cases not really "gameplanning" against the Packers, as using the game as a "game speed" scrimmage against a desperate team that was trying to win.4) The Bears played their starters in the hopes of knocking off the Packers. The added benefit to playing their starters was that the Bears, if they didn't win, could at least keep the game close enough to see what types of offensive and defensive schemes the Packers would run in "must win" games. The Bears could also run various things schematically giving other playoff teams more plays/formations/adjustments to look at on film and have to account for in their game planning.5) The Bears played at 100%. Coaches, players - even the waterboy, gave it everything they had to beat the Packers. But they lost anyway.While some Bears fans are insane enough to believe 1 or 2, and Packer fans hope 5 is true, I beleive the truth lies somewhere in the middle - around 3 or 4.To those that keep spouting about "trying to win on the final drive" and week 17 in general a few things:- A game is more than one drive - its is very likely that the Bears had more than one goal in this game. To deny that possibility is to lack understanding of the NFL, game planning and the ultimate objective - to win a Superbowl. The Bears had already accomplished Lovie's first 2 goals in a season - they had already beaten the Packers, they had already won the division.- There is s difference between "trying" to win and "needing to win to keep your season alive" In week 17 only one of the teams needed to win, this week, they both do.- In week 17 the Packers were playing at home. There is a reason they call it "homefield advantage". Welcome to Chicago.No one is going to listen to you on this subject due to your whacked belief the Bears weren't even trying to score on the final drive in that game.Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17.I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
Please tell us you aren't insane as well and believe the Bears WERE NOT trying to score on that final drive.To those that keep spouting about "trying to win on the final drive" and week 17 in general a few things:- A game is more than one drive - its is very likely that the Bears had more than one goal in this game. To deny that possibility is to lack understanding of the NFL, game planning and the ultimate objective - to win a Superbowl. The Bears had already accomplished Lovie's first 2 goals in a season - they had already beaten the Packers, they had already won the division.No one is going to listen to you on this subject due to your whacked belief the Bears weren't even trying to score on the final drive in that game.Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17.I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
Dude, enough with Bear fans trying to make excuses for the loss in Green Bay. No one cares anymore. The fact that any football fan or Bear fan thinks they weren't trying to score on that final drive is one of the most absurd things I have ever seen in the SP.A few thoughts I have heard on this subject, most of which are at least plausible (from one extreme to the other).Starting with the most extreme and least beleiveable:1) The Bears wanted to let GB into the playoffs and keep the Giants (who had already won their game) out, as the Bears feared the Giants more than GB. They played their starters simply to appease the "meatball" Chicago fans that would have been infuriated and "giving" a game to the "hated" Packers.2) The Bears jogged out their starters, but really weren't trying to win at any point - again, mainly to appease "meatball" fans who would not have liked to see the Bears roll over (well, and appease Giant fans).3) The Bears played their starters the entire game, hoping to win. Not really needing a win, however they worked on some things offensively that they felt needed some cleaning up before the playoffs. Defensively, they did the same. In both cases not really "gameplanning" against the Packers, as using the game as a "game speed" scrimmage against a desperate team that was trying to win.4) The Bears played their starters in the hopes of knocking off the Packers. The added benefit to playing their starters was that the Bears, if they didn't win, could at least keep the game close enough to see what types of offensive and defensive schemes the Packers would run in "must win" games. The Bears could also run various things schematically giving other playoff teams more plays/formations/adjustments to look at on film and have to account for in their game planning.5) The Bears played at 100%. Coaches, players - even the waterboy, gave it everything they had to beat the Packers. But they lost anyway.While some Bears fans are insane enough to believe 1 or 2, and Packer fans hope 5 is true, I beleive the truth lies somewhere in the middle - around 3 or 4.To those that keep spouting about "trying to win on the final drive" and week 17 in general a few things:- A game is more than one drive - its is very likely that the Bears had more than one goal in this game. To deny that possibility is to lack understanding of the NFL, game planning and the ultimate objective - to win a Superbowl. The Bears had already accomplished Lovie's first 2 goals in a season - they had already beaten the Packers, they had already won the division.- There is s difference between "trying" to win and "needing to win to keep your season alive" In week 17 only one of the teams needed to win, this week, they both do.- In week 17 the Packers were playing at home. There is a reason they call it "homefield advantage". Welcome to Chicago.No one is going to listen to you on this subject due to your whacked belief the Bears weren't even trying to score on the final drive in that game.Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17.I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
Shocking. Two Packer fans read (and I use the term loosely) and respond - and come back with the same response...which generally shows that neither actually read any of the post. Please reread the post, then make comments - it really helps the discussion. HINT: At no point in the above did I say the Bears were not trying to score on the final drive.
The Packers edge is in the passing game. Rodgers is the better QB. Cutler, Martz offense, and Capers defense can be a bad combination. The Bears edge is special teams. The Bears have explosive returners and solid play throughout while the Packers are near the bottom of such rankings.So a huge aspect of the game is which team exploits there advantage to a greater degree. The Packers winning the special teams battle or Cutler outplaying Rodgers are complete game changers.The mystery in this game is the running games. In general, the Packers have a slight edge in running efficiency and the Bears have a slight edge in stopping the run. I think us fans all have hopes involved in this but there is little telling what the running games will really look like on Sunday.Then of course, there are turnovers and penalties. The Packers are "favored" to win the turnover battle and were penalized a bit less than the Bears. But both aspects have a ton of unpredictability.I think the Packers are rightfully favored in this game and I also think they have a more likely chance to win in a blowout. But I also think the Bears could establish a running game while stoning the Packer run game, pass the ball just enough, and dominate on special teams on the way to the Super Bowl.
I agree. A big part of both the previous games was the Packers ability or inability to control Hester. To be honest, I'd try to punt every single ball out of bounds. I would gladly take 30 yards net on every single punt just to keep the ball out of Hester's hands.
Very well said.The last lines there about penalties are big. Since that first meeting, Green Bay has cut down on penalties big time. I think they ended up something like 4th best in the NFL in terms of penalties against. They cannot afford another one of those mistake filled games.
You keep responding, so obviously you're listening. Let me know when you book those tickets for the Bears fan convention, sport.No one is going to listen to you on this subject due to your whacked belief the Bears weren't even trying to score on the final drive in that game.Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17.I'm tired of people saying Chicago had nothing to play for in Week 17. They were playing to keep their oldest and most hated rival out of the playoffs. Yeah, I can see how you'd think that's nothing. If it meant nothing why would the Bears play their starters for the entire game? So they risked injury to their starters for a "nothing" game? Okay, then.
