jason

Bad news already?! I didn't see that video, and it doesn't surprise me.

Defense didn't look great the first drive. Manning just walked down the field, and there was very little pressure. Thankfully DJ Moore is still a ball-hawk and got his hand on a pass right before the goal-line. Credit that INT to Moore just as much as Wright.

Agreed. If he sucks, then the Tice love-crush needs to be called out.

Some would say the same about Marshall's chances in Chicago.

Moss: I'd take the under on yards and over on TDs. TO: I'd take the over on both.

Care to have a friendly "I told you so" wager? If so, what's the over/under on receptions, yards, TDs?

The debate was never about either Marshall OR one of TO/Moss. The debate was about having TO/Moss in addition to Marshall.

I saw. Pretty damn fast for an "old" guy. Just like I said, he has the physical tools. Anyone pretending otherwise is just fooling themselves. Now we'll see the season play out to determine if the distraction, the TO persona, the baggage, outweighs the production. I'm willing to bet the production outweighs the drama, and he puts in a very good year for the Seahawks.

Man, when did Tice file the adoption papers for Webb? How long does this guy have to suck for him to get replaced?

Kiper posted an article about the Bears offense.

I'm just saying that he was taller than two or three other WRs who will make the roster, and, yet, he was not in line for anything close to a starting gig. Which means his height wasn't an advantage over some shorter WRs. Therefore, he retired early. Oh, I mean, his medical problems made him retire.

I'm sure the fact that he was at best the fifth WR had nothing to do with it at all. Some things outweigh simply being taller after all.

Is there a way to link to Trib articles so that the popup doesn't come up, and then lead a viewer to the main page? It's infuriating to see the popup and then not get redirected to the page I want.

I don't think that's true, and I don't think it's one or the other. I think that a lot of time we get in such heated debates on this forum - I imagine it's the same on most forums - that we want to tell another users "I told you so" while high-fiving the same user for a Bears win. Personally, I'd rather see every single draft pick and free agency signing work out, while the Bears go on to a decade of Super Bowl dominance. But since that's not reality, and we ultimately have nothing to do with the players' success or failure, it comes down to our previous prognostications and evaluations. It's supporting evidence for our claims, our evaluations, and our desires for the Bears' future moves. For instance, I would LOVE if Webb turned into a dominant probowler on the left side. We could finally end the LT discussions. But all indications say that's not going to happen. And as long as the Bears stick to him, and people defend him, it's worth noting his failures. It's also worth noting how long the failures have existed, not to mention the subsequent hindrance to the team's success. So in future years, if I want the Bears to draft a LT I'll have a sound reason for it, and when others disagree I can't point to Webb's failings. The desire to see the Bears win supersedes the "I told you so." All things being equal, Terra and just about everyone else (I assume) would love if there were nothing to complain about. It'd be great to just watch Super Bowl after Super Bowl.

It's a good point you bring up. And I think it truly speaks to how bad Webb was that they're not even considering Williams at OG. They know they NEED Williams at the LT spot instead of Webb. Therefore, the OG spot is absolutely open. As for preferring Webb-Williams-Whatever, there is no way I agree with that. Webb just sucks, and shouldn't be starting on an NFL team at LT. I prefer any of the following: Williams - Rachal - Garza - Louis - Carimi Williams - Spencer - Garza - Louis - Carimi An equally interesting question is why they don't use this as an opportunity to put Garza back and his more familiar position (OG), and put Spencer in at his more familiar position ©. Afterall, Spencer was signed to replace Kreutz at Center, why not use him there? Ideally the line would be: Williams - Garza - Spencer - Louis - Carimi

These guys (Marvez and Kaufman) must not have watched a single game before Cutler and Forte went down. How in the world they got their jobs as sports analysts is beyond me. Dumbasses.

The Bears' immediate plans are to use rookie defensive end Shea McClellin as a situational pass- rusher. Wasn't that one of the initial problems that most people had with the McClellin selection?

He takes the step from "pretty good but under the radar DE" to "Warren Sapp creating chaos for QBs". In other words, he goes from being an appreciated but under-recognized DT in the NFL to one of the top handful of guys considered to be the best.

Again. The original post was filled of "what ifs" about the Bears. It was not a collection of "what ifs" about the Packers. If it were the latter, I likely wouldn't have spent much time in the thread unless people were posting photoshopped images of Farv, Rodgers, and Madden in a polygamous marriage ceremony. Because then the humor would have made the thread worth it.

I'm not seeing this list as anything other than completely accurate. 1. The OL has sucked for multiple years. Cutler has been pounded more than a girl on the bang bus. ---To be fair, Rodgers hasn't exactly been standing up straight for most of the past 2 years. Yes, his OL is better than the Bears' is, but it's not like it's better by light years. The packers OL was not mentioned in the original post. Hence, I did not address a comparison. The fact remains, the Bears OL has probably been the worst OL in the NFL over the past few years. 2. Marshall has a personality disorder, a DUI, suspicions of domestic abuse, more than one battery charge, and was stabbed by his wife. Not to mention other random run-ins with the law. ---Obviously, you're correct, but I guarantee no Bears player who will at a strip club on the South Side of the city after a loss. I have no proof, but I truly believe Marshall's violent days are by him. He has his best friend as his QB and he's already done more interviews than his whole career. On top of it, he's been very forthcoming on his negative image. Exactly. And I share the hope that he has put it all behind him. 3. Cutler is a sour-puss. I don't know if this really matters on the field, and I think it's been played up, but some on this board have even said his demeanor affects the team. ---I don't even know what this means anymore. A "sour puss." He wasn't a sour puss when they were a top 5 offense from weeks 4-8 last year. Watch the mic'd Cutler game vs Carolina. He and Urlacher are joking all game together. He hangs out with Moore and Bennett off the field. Does he make a mean face when he throws a pick? Yeah, and that's good. I'd much rather that than him throwing his teammates under the bus like Peyton Manning does every week. Does he call his OC out at times (Martz)? Yeah, and we all loved it because Martz was a dips***. Cutler is an intelligent guy. His moves are calculated. I don't think he's a sour puss. I think he's an ultra competitive guy who wants to lead a boring life off the field (which got 10x more difficult when he got Cavallari pregnant). Just because he doesn't open Jimmy John's all across North America like Brees or model Uggs and Under Armour like Brady doesn't make him a sour puss. The original post made no reference to the affect Cutler's pouty face has on his playing. I think it's been completely blown out of proportion. However, it has been a major media issue, and only someone who has missed all the Bears games would say Cutler is affable on the sideline. Quite often he looks like he's pouting. It could just be his facial structure. Ultimately, it means nothing, but it doesn't change the fact that he often looks sullen. 4. The defense is getting old. The window is closing. ---The defense is getting old? All 32 team's defenses got old this past year. They all added a year to their lives. Yes, their window is closing, as are many team's. If they hit on McClellin, Jeffery, and Hardin, it's not closing. Obviously everyone is getting chronologically older. The post was in reference to the "NFL-age" of the Bears defense. If you sort their roster by age, it's readily apparent the majority of the defensive stars are the oldest people on the team. 5. Until I see otherwise, I don't know for sure if the safeties can play. The Bears have been looking for a safety since Mike Brown left. ---Conte was pretty good last year. I believe SportingNews had him on their All-Rookie team. Don't forget, Green Bay might have the worst safeties in football outside of Minnesota. Yes, Conte was pretty good. But we've been relatively pleased with a rookie safety one or two times in the past. I want to see continued success before I go all-in. For now I'm cautiously optimistic. 6. I don't know if intelligence is the issue - and I certainly don't think the Randy Ratio is a bad idea (giving the ball to the most talented player in the league as much as possible is bad?) - but we have yet to see him call an offensive gameplan. And judging from his personnel decisions on the OL, I can't say I'm very confident he will be able to produce a product much better than before. ---Tice will still be the OL coach for the most part. He has the "OC" title, but he'll be primarily with the OL while Bates is the OC. Book it If you're right, then the OC hire/promotion/sham was a bad move by the Bears organization.

Ridiculous? Nobody sided with the Packers. Nobody mentioned their offense or defense in the original post. To say someone on this board is a "so-called Bears fan" - and the implication is that you're referring to me - is ridiculous. And to be quite frank, you shove it. I'm one of the most die-hard Bears fans you'll ever meet. My house is littered with Bears' gear. I got my entire family cheering for them. I turned relatives from Packer fans. My sister bought a Farv jersey and I made her return it. I taught non-football friends the Bears fight song. I sing the same song to my newborn. I travel every year from the southeast for at least one game. I went bare-chested and painted up to the coldest game in Bears history. What's ridiculous is your reading comprehension. If you don't realize from my linked post that the list from the packer's fan is nothing more than a bunch of worst-case scenario situations that have been commented on and agreed with by nearly this entire board, then you haven't been paying attention. One doesn't have to be a 100% optimist and team-defender to be a loyal fan. The team is not above being questioned. Every item on the list is a true statement. IF one of those items doesn't come true, the Bears will have a difficult time this year. BrianBear did a quick-and-dirty version of what it would like for a Bears fan to make a similar list for the Packers.

1. Cutler is concerned. Williams is moving back to LT. and the Bears OL was ranked 27th. It's a legit statement. 2. Flea agrees and Connorbear says there is baggage with Marshall. 3. selection7 says Jay has a pouty, mopey on-field demeanor 4. Mongo is concerned about our defense 5. An entire thread about the Bears' recent problems at Safety 6. Bears4Ever's worst fear is Mike Tice being our OC

I'm not trolling; I'm serious. Every one of the original debate points were made by Bears fans on this board. 1. The 7-3 record can be explained many ways. It's true the OL played better during the winning streak, but don't pretend they played great. This topic has been covered a hundred times in the past, and you could easily go back and see where individual games were broken down, graded, and discussed by more than one person. How can it be explained? The D, ST, QB, RB, WR, etc. made one more play in various games, and the OL didn't suck enough to cause the loss. 2. So you know Marshall personally? Where there is smoke there is fire. 3. I'm not debating the implications of the pouty face. I'm just saying it's true that Cutler has a pouty face almost all the time. That was the original point. There is no debating this. 4. You're losing track of what the original post was about. It was "The Bears will be good if..." And one of those ifs is whether the D can beat back father time for another year. They are, in NFL terms, older. The key pieces are getting older and don't have many more productive years left. So, the original point is completely valid. The Bears defense doesn't have many years left and they will be good as long as (read: if) they don't take that sudden negative turn many older players suddenly take. 5. Again, you aren't paying attention to the original post. The Bears will be good if the Safeties can actually play. There is nothing even remotely up for debate on this one, because, like most teams, the Bears will need good production from their safeties in order to field a good defense. What's so difficult to understand about that? They may be future studs (I hope so), two Fenciks (please let it be), but I won't hold my breath until they make the Pro Bowl, that's for damn sure. 6. The Tice thing is like evaluating backup QBs. And as the saying goes, everyone loves the backup QB. The fact remains that we don't know what Tice can or will do as an OC. He may talk positive, and feed us what we want to hear, and feed Cutler what he wants to hear, and then call a 80% run / 20% pass game. We simply don't know. It's not like we haven't been upset with OCs in the past. BTW - Did you notice I didn't mention the ending portion of the original packer post? I just mentioned the list. I think the Bears should be damn good, but that's if all of the above works out.

My point was that those numbers were in existence last season when the Bears had Barber, a RB who is very much similar to Bush in many ways. If the status quo exists, I see no particular reason why Forte's chances at the EZ won't be close to what they were. And that's where the luck factor plays in. I'm convinced his numbers will improve if he just gets a few good blocks inside the ten, and gets lucky a few times on the breakaway runs.

Which is why I hate the way the contracts are negotiated from the players' side. They want long term contracts AND all the money up front. The team obliges them because there is a give-and-take, and the team will get the benefit of the contract in the later years. But when those later years show up, and the pay is less, the player acts like he's been paid that much the entire time and completely forgets about the massive amount of front-loading done.