adam

I love Briggs, and I think this is his chance to shine as the leader on defense. He is also able to back up anything he says with his play.

I think we will win and have some long sustained drives with about 400 yards of total offense. Bears 27-13 Also, the 2nd TE will get a few grabs.

At the time, the Moose signing was actually pretty good. He was arguably the best WR in 2004, leading the league in yards and TDs and made the Pro Bowl on a losing team. The first two years on the Bears we had a record of 24-8 with him. In 2004, our leading receiver was Terrell (Moose had more yards in 2004 than our top 2 receivers combined). The problem was we bought high. He was never going to achieve that again, and if you look at his stats, he only has 3 true standout years. He either had over 90 catches or less than 70 catches, no in between. With the Bears, and ever since 2004, he has been the latter. Also, we got him at age 32. That is about where you see some drop-off in production. So if you compare him relatively to what we had in 2004, he was a huge upgrade. We got to the SB with him, so I wouldn't say it was a complete bust. The QB carousel must also affect WRs. As much as we've had QB's since McMahon, you can say the same thing about receivers. WRs since 2000 no longer on team: Lloyd, Booker, Berrian, Moose, Bradley, Gage, Wade, Terrell, White, Robinson, Kennison Also, think about the continuity. How many of these guys played on the team multiple years with the same QB? Booker?

Jay Cutler and Johnny Knox for Kyle Orton, Robert Ayers - LB, Richard Quinn -TE, and next year's first rounder. Denver also traded away their own first rounder next year for Alphonso Smith-CB. So their only first rounder is ours next year. Stats-wise: Ayers and Quinn have no stats, but seem to be on the roster. Smith has 6 tackles. So right now it is Cutler and Knox vs Orton.

No way, Gould is automatic.

Thank you Denver x2!

Congrats man, great story.

Also, you can look at the QB-WR equation and say that normally the more difficult side of the equation has the bigger impact on success. So on any given play, who's job is more difficult to execute? The QB has to worry about the entire offense and defense on every play, then has to make an accurate throw to the receiver. The receiver, if a passing play, just has to execute their route and catch the ball.

Would be really nice not to have Hasselbeck for Week 3. Per Rotoworld:

Yeah, Knox and Davis were huge. Manning is kind of a mixed bag, but he had more bad plays than good. For the run, I think the other teams are completely taking away the run and are making the Bears beat them with the pass. I think you will see more holes for him in the coming weeks as teams will have to start honoring the pass. For Brooks, I don't know. That was the first game without Urlacher, so I think it is too early to pass judgement on the LBs, especially with Pisa out. Also, the Defense only allowed 2 TDs, and one was after that missed holding call that freed Mendenhall. He doesn't even get 5 yards without that hold. I like our chances when opponents score less than 20.

Great game for the Bears all around. Somewhat ugly, but they were the defending SB champs coming in on long rest. The best part about this win is that this team will only get better as the season goes on. Davis and Knox looked great, and others had some huge plays (Olsen, Hester, AP). The defense only allowed 2 TDs, and one was after a completely bogus missed holding call against PIT. Other than that, they played pretty well PU (Post-Urlacher). Briggs was hitting people hard, Brown with 2 Sacks, and Tillman with an INT. If we can clean up the penalties and tighten up the coverage team, this team is going to be hard to beat. Especially if they get Forte going.

I LOVE KNOX!

Its the calls.

It is really hard to overcome bad calls like that.

How the f%$^ do they miss that in the hole. He had his heads around his head from behind. Such BS.

A must win this weekend. At home, and the possibility of going 2 down on 2 Division opponents in 2 weeks.

and finish their routes.

I wouldn't call what we gave up mortgaging the farm. That would be something like what Minnesota did for Walker or New Orleans did for Williams. If you look at the schedule, PIT was already one of the possible losses, and so was @ GB to be honest. I was figuring we would split vs MIN and GB, and win 2 against DET going 4-2 in the Division. For the other 10 games, 6-4 was a pretty reasonable assessment. That would be a 10-6 season with losses to GB, MIN, PIT, ATL, PHI, BAL.

Per Rotoworld:

Good link describing Urlacher's injury: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-url...,180731.graphic

Wale beat the Tackle and the RB on one of those plays that was silly. They looked like cones; go left past the tackle, then right past the RB, then smash QB. Also, for all the WRs, they can only get better as the season goes on. Hester and Bennett may be legit 1-2's by the end of the year. Just for reference, 4 out of the last 10 SB winners lost their first game of the season, but only 2 lost their last game of the season. Much better to be hot at the end of the year than the beginning.

That is true, I just thought it was funny because he doesn't even seem like a #4 WR let alone someone we would want.

Saw this nugget in a Westbrook article: http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/rumors/post/Ea...?urn=nfl,189901 Is this guy really that good, and would he actually be an upgrade for us?

That would be an interesting girls name.

Congrats! At least you won't lose any sleep during the season.