fudgeripple2000

What I liked is that how Goodell responded to the idea of the boycott. Basically saying that they can ditch it if they want. We will still do it. Personally I don't care about seeing the players with their families and friends crying. If I wanted to watch Oprah I would watch Oprah. I love the commentary and over analysis of all the picks and flashes into the war rooms. I don't need players for that. There has also been talk that there will be a seperate event where the players would do interviews and the like. I wouldn't watch it. Also, I think it would be exceptionally poor form to have the NFL foot the bill for traveling to the draft and not do the hand shake/interview part.

Owners Reports that the owners have put enough money away to sustain them in the event the entire season is lost. Players State that it's obvious the owners were planning on locking out the players regardless. Mildly ironic that the players are judging the owners for the same thing the NFLPA advised the players to do during the season. Owners Reports that the players didn't even look at the final offer before decertification. Leading owners to believe decertification was in the plans all along. Players Drew Brees, "I think it was all a show, with no real intent to get a deal done, other than just to say they made a proposal that was no different than anything else that they proposed over the last couple years, couple months, couple weeks." Players Have contacted top 17 draft picks and advised them to boycott draft and not attend. NFL Has as always invited the top 15-20 picks and their families to the draft and as is customary payed their way. It is up to the player to decide if they are going to attend. This last one is the funniest to me. If I am a top 20 draft pick and I have dreamed of having my family in the green room with me on draft day and getting that hat from the commisioner, then to have someone previously unconnected to me ask that I deprive me and my family on that one time opportunity, I would laugh at them. I think it exceptionally selfish for anyone to ask that of a player.

Owners I own my own business and if my employee came to me and said they wanted to see my books so they could determine how much of a raise they wanted to get, that person would quickly be an ex-employee. My questions would be; where is your name on the bank loan, the lease of the building, the taxes to employ, insurance.... My point is that the risk falls on the owners. When players like Pacman Jones do stupid things with handguns in strip clubs the media reports it as "Pacman Jones of the Tennessee Titans......" Again the consequences of players actions is also shared with the owners because the player is diminishing the "product" which is the team perception. In Portland some years ago a few players got in trouble for pot. So to the media they were referred as the "jailblazers." So in my opinion where the risk falls so should the money. The players arguement is that there's is a sport that takes alot from their bodies and limits them in the future. Go talk to some open sea fishermen in alaska, coal miners, or some off shore drillers. All of these have a much higher fatality rate than the NFL and a higher diminished capacity the longer the employment. They do the job for the money. The reward outweighs the risk. The players know that it is a great opportunity to possibly make millions. People sympathize with Jamarcus Russell and hope he gets a second chance. I have never heard any remarks for the owner that paid him to suck (bad analogy. nobody feels bad for al davis). It's not the owners fault that 78% of nfl players go bankrupt within two years of retirement. When john stockton was drafted he lived in an apartment for years because he didn't know when his career would be over.

No thanks. Age + achilles surgery= slow re-tread. Achilles takes a year to recover from and full recovery for a lineman is asking too much.

The front office has in the past shown the propensity of drafting defense and targeting offense in the free agent pool. I like the idea of Mankins and Jackson in free agency. I can't wait to hear what the injury to cutler was. I played old timer weekend football with a taped up acl/mcl tear, so I can't imagine what the injury could be. I am against drafting a qb to develop. There are plenty of re-treads, and before anyone freaks out about having somebodies cast off, remember Kurt Warner was a cast off behind Leinart. Alex Smith has already been in a martz system.

Thanks for beating me to that. I made that statement, not based on what vegas had, but what I was hearing in the media. I hate/like Cowherd. He is able to be somewhat objective sometimes. He once said that, radio commentators are not in the business of being fans, but to lure listeners in with controversy and good stories. Point is that Seattle is a good story. 7-9 potentially going to the superbowl would be a story. I want the bears to be underdogs. I want all the media attention to be on the seahawks. The seahawks are happy just to be there. They know that if they lose they will be able to say 7-9 shouldn't take us far. The bears had a first round bye. If they lose, they lost to 7-9, in chicago.

Listening to sports radio this morning one would think the bears were the underdog. According to these "experts" the bears not only don't "deserve" to be there but that the seahawks should win here are some of the points they made. 1. Hasselback sees the bears defense very well and knows how to attack it. 2. If Hester hadn't scored the special teams TD the loss would have been worse. 3. The bears/cutler are due to have a let down. Here are the facts. 1. The only quarterback that "saw" our defense well was Brady. An 87.7% passer rating with only one TD does not make Matt the equivalent of Brady. 2. If we are counting "ifs" then what if we had gotten the onside kick and we won. I hope that Seattle treats the bears special teams with that mentality of Hester having a lucky break. 3. The three losses we had before the bye week were let downs. The loss to the Patriots was a let down only in the way we lost it. The patriots are great. The loss to the packer in green bay was not. We had nothing to play for other than pride and they had the playoffs riding on that game. I don't see the bears giving up 6 sacks again to seattle. I don't see the bears not getting 1 sack. I don't see Lynch getting over 100. I do see the bears out rushing the hawks. The hawks have been outrushed 7 times in the last 9 avg. 134 yds allowed. the bears averaged 110 yds in the same 9 game span and outrushed 5/9 times. I do see the bears winning the battle of special teams. If you kick to Manning or Hester they will get to the 40 on average. if you don't we will start at the 40 on average.

I have watched every bears game this year. When not on national tv I watch it on www.atdhe.net. I can see all the games no matter the team. I also watch my bulls games that way.

1. Packers 2. Trent Dilfer, Mark Schlereth, Chris Collinsworth 3. Hyper sensitive defensive penalties 4. The Cowboys 5. The thought of a lockout in 2011.

I may be in the minority but I like our schedule going forward. It's tough, that won't change but the sequence is what I like. New England--at chicago and after a blowout win I have the optimism that the pats will not be as sharp than if they had just been blown out. My concern is that what they beat the Jets with is what we used to beat the lions with. Over the middle routs in the zone. We have Urlacher to help that middle part of the cover two but if we don't tackle better than we are doomed. I still objectively feel like we have a great chance given that the bears have recently been playing at the level of their opponent. At Minnesota--we'll see if we are dealing with Brett or Tavaris. Either way I like our chances. New York Jets--if we follow the blueprint we have been using recently we should take care of the jets. Over the middle routs and running back dump offs with lots of pressure on Sanchez. At Green Bay--Being objective I see us losing this game. In green bay and with the way they are playing. I see us going 2-2 finishing 11-5. Green Bay has in my opinion, a tougher schedule. At Detroit At New England Giants Bears I see them finishing 2-2 also leaving them at 10-6. At 11-5, we could very easily have the second seed. The first seed will most likely come out of the NFC south. We take the second due to our win over philly and giants finishing 3/4 games on the road.

I have been listening to Cowherd since his days in oregon. Whenever I hear someone's opinion about anything I check the reference. I don't ask single people parenting advice. I don't ask life long employees how to open a business. And I don't listen to people that have a past of super-bias have opinions. So when Colin, an admitted non-sports fan, spouts off his opinion on the bears I click off. He hates cutler and the bears so much that he even criticizes Cutler's dating life. Dilfer, the poster boy of not losing a superbowl rather than winning a super bowl, has no business judging. He and Tim Hasselback are ridiculous.

I am recording it. But if you don't want to go through all that effort in case they play like they did against New York, go to www.atdhe.net. They show all the games on that site. I haven't missed a bears game yet.

I don't see how this organization will keep the same coach. We have lost two in a row at home against teams that we should beat. I don't know how lovie will be able to stand up there and say "tough loss." Two in a row at home and what is the plan? Do it again next week?

Sorry for not patting the coaching staff for developing a quarterback to the amazing end of 6.4 yds per completion from 5.0 yds his first year. Also denver has per their scheme has him at 8.1yds per completion. Again I have always equated Orton to Dilfer. He won't wow you but he won't kill you.

I was hoping that by using the stats of another ex-bears reciever, it would be more obvious that I was not wishing we hadn't traded for cutler. My statement was more of an indictment of how poorly this organization is at developing and using offensive talent.

I know we are 4-1. But lets be honest and objective, it hasn't been pretty. So far this year: Jay Cutler- 68/102 912 yds 6TD 3Int Kyle Orton- 118/175 1419 yds 6 TD 3Int Johnny Knox- 12 Rec 258 yds 0 TD Brandon Lloyd- 29 Rec 589 yds 3 TD Given, I would rather have a weaker quarterback and be 4-1. Both chicago and denver are equally abismal rushing. We are 31st and they are 32nd. This is just math.

As disgusted as I am with the whole performance of the offense, I, with a night to sleep on it gained a little perspective on last nights game and the league to this point. This first quarter of football has been just ugly. Call it parity. Call it working out the kinks. The packers looked like crap yesterday. The browns won, the rams won, indy lost. Our defense doesn't look bad. They generated turnovers but our offensive line is just bad.

From my view: 1. That game was produced and televised as though the packers won the game. pre-game and post game was all about the packers. The commentators couldn't help themselves. The material they had prepared was for the packers. 2. Commentators saying that Cutler should have been picked off 5 times. I can maybe buy that if the pass interferences on at least two of those "should have's" not been so obvious. He also "should have" had at least one more touchdown with the clark drop in the end zone. 3. I re-watched the game and saw at least five more passing plays (quit counting after five) in which peppers was held. 4. Part of a win is to be disciplined. Packers were not. How can you be considered to be such a great team if in the fourth quarter you commit let a team strip you or have obvious pass interference calls or silly personal fouls. Those are the results of a team that isn't mentally ready to play. Bottom line is that I am almost glad that we are still under appreciated. I hope new york feels the same.

I learned that the media truly gives no love to the bears. Last week the lions gave us a win instead of the bears pulling out a victory. This week the NFL network, NBC, and ESPN all talked about how the Dallas let that one slip away. I saw Romo hurried into passes he wasn't ready to make. The media will say his timing isn't right. Why not that the bears put pressure on him. My favorite was when all of the fox "experts" picked Dallas and then the main commentator said the because they all picked the cowboys that the bears would likely win.

My concern about Lovie is management of the game and management of the team. This is an undisciplined team. That goes against the coach's preparation. I think it is interesting how the bears have three coordinators (Tice, Martz, Marinelli) with head coaching experience. If I have to have an interim, I want Tice.

Nothing would make me happier than a backfield with Brett out of it and Tavaris in it. That means more in the box and a dialed up pass rush on a quarterback that not only has a history of lack of confidence but knows that he got his shot by default and not by earning it.

Pumped that the bears got him. As a fullback he will be great. Unlike fullbacks of bears recent past he hits people right in the mouth. I hate BYU but loved watching him flat out run over people. Doesn't waste time trying to juke people he knows he is 250. Love the pick up.

I am elated that the bears are so aggressive. However, I remember not too long ago when I and most other members here were asking for Lovie's head. Then when turner was let go and marinelli was made D coach it seemed that we were accepting that Lovie was a lame duck coach with the rest of his staff. If no playoffs then he goes and someone like Cowher would come in. That made sense. Then we hire martz who's approach is the antithesis of someone like cowher. We bring in Maleuna who is nothing like Olsen (high draft pick). Then we add Peppers who is a great 4-3 DE and not a pure fit for a 3-4. It is like we are adding pieces for the future. To summarize Parcell's analogy of chef chosing the groceries, it seems that we are building a burger joint and the most likely replacement for our coach, if things go badly, is a chef of a steakhouse.

I generally think that Trent Dilfer is an idiot wrapped in a moron but one thing he said after the game is that some teams have it in their DNA to turn the ball over. Literally that is idiotic. There is however something to it. AP puts the ball on the ground a lot, Favre has in the past thrown lots of picks. My point is that to have as great of a season as he did and to have had such a better statistic game and to still come up short has to eventually get to him.

RETIRE. You could see in the pre-game interview that he was tired. He got smacked often and now I am hoping that he summons the Danny Glover in him and says, "I'm too old for this s*#t." Call me a coward but I chose the path of least resistance for the bears. Next year will be hard enough.