12th in preseason power rankings

[BearFan PHX]

Hey Grizz, I dont mean to imply that anyone that thinks Urlacher still had some left is a dick! You are entitled to your opinion, and you argue it well on here.

 

It was more to Jason calling someone else a dick, and generally being one.

 

You can share the same opinion he has, and do it in a different way, as you have. My apologies if you thought I meant you too.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Hey Grizz, I dont mean to imply that anyone that thinks Urlacher still had some left is a dick! You are entitled to your opinion, and you argue it well on here.

 

It was more to Jason calling someone else a dick, and generally being one.

 

You can share the same opinion he has, and do it in a different way, as you have. My apologies if you thought I meant you too.

 

Nah none needed. I understood. You're right, Jason can be a dick...but so can I at times... Ask Stinger. He's my personal shrink.

 

I've gone round and round with Jason before. But from time to time I agree with him. Hell I even agree with Terra sometimes. Hence why I have a shrink.

[BearFan PHX]

Right on

[Stinger226]

This talk of fantasy world coming from someone who was an active participant in the mock drafts. I wouldn't normally waste my time with a reply but knowing you would: You're a lout. Psychoanalyze that.

It really doesnt need psychoanalyzing, because it came out of your mouth. Mock drafts just kill the time until something better comes along. The FANTASY is saying Urlacher would have played well when that never happened. Just people living in the past, oh you were in on that argument werent you? go figure. I am not sure you have had an original thought on this blog. Your always the one to throw your little smart ass remarks into someones elses thought process. Somethings never change.

[Stinger226]

Urlacher sucked, was overrated and a locker room cancer. Just like all the washed up Bears and the soon to be like Cutler and Briggs. As you can see, I am being sarcastic and don't understand the lack of appreciation it seems a lot of Bears receive. I understand the Bears trying to move on like a Pittsburgh would do. I think they went about it in the wrong way. They shoulda being more clear before negotiations about there intent to move on and tried to force him into retirement. From my understanding, Brian wasn't going to put his body through another year of NFL without great compensation. In his eyes, he felt his body would play for 5 million, the Bears wouldn't budge off two. He was upset there was no counter offers. So be it... he is retired

I dont understand how the respect always has to come from the Bears but the players we speak about never has to be loyal back. Urlacher got paid well for being here and it was time to go. When a GM judges players and when its time to let them go, they dont respect them, but when players think they are worth lots more than there actual value, thats ok. It was his time to go,and that is not being disrespectful. Sometime the team needs to come first over RESPECTING players and this one was the right call. Its time to find new Hero and let the rest go.

[madlithuanian]

Good take LT2_3

 

 

 

I have a couple possible scenarios that could have happened had Url been re-signed.

 

1) Url could have gotten injured and missed some or all of the season. It's not out of the realm of possibility.

 

2) He could have had a negative effect on the locker room by not buying in to the new regime - like Peppers

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

I am not sure you have had an original thought on this blog. Your always the one to throw your little smart ass remarks into someones elses thought process.

 

Oh you mean like the time when I thought you were a douche? Oh you're right that wasn't an original thought.

 

Disclaimer: I don't mean to be jerky, just feeling sassy. The weather has been exceptional up here. No harm meant... Except to those directly affected. Mahalo hoapilis!

[BearFan PHX]

This is like that moment in training camp where everyone gets chippy. They're sick of hitting each other, and want real contact.

[LT2_3]

Fair enough...Like my 'well educated" colleague Stinger would say; "woulda, coulda, shoulda".

 

But to you I say, good points. Peppers didn't 'buy in'? I hadn't heard that.

 

Briggs made a comment in preseason that not everyone had bought in yet. After the season it was speculated that he was referring to Peppers.

 

I've seen many times in the corporate world where a new management team comes in and some of the existing employees (particularly really talented people) tend to groan and whine about all the changes. Their points usually tend to fall along the lines of "We've done this such and such a way for years and we've always performed at a high level." I've seen those types stay, I've seen them leave voluntarily, and I've seen them fired. The ones that stay tend to be miserable. The ones that leave end up better off because they find a new situation that they accept at face value because it's new.

 

Now in this instance, I have to imagine that Urlacher (who was very close to Lovie) might not be thrilled with ANYTHING that changed. And, being a leader, he could have had a negative influence on the younger guys simply by example. Now I for one would like to think that when games that count started, Urlacher's competitive spirit would take over and he would play at a high level. I'm just not sure that that fact alone could overcome the negatives that he might have displayed during TC that might have delayed the younger guys buying in and become a general distraction.

 

Personally, I was relieved when Urlacher wasn't re-signed - and in particular retired. I potentially saw a power struggle just because - well - Urlacher is kind of a vengeful dick.

 

As for why no other teams signed him, I think he still had enough in the tank to help some other team - and certainly the Bears if Lovie was still around. The problem may have come in where his accustomed position of leadership couldn't be given to a guy that might not even start, or would be a one year mercenary. And another concern would also have to be how much effort he would put into learning a new scheme if he was on a one year deal.

 

An example that comes to mind is Kreutz. He was THE leader on the offensive line for years. The Bears offered him less than he thought he was worth so he took a one year deal with the Saints for less than the Bears were offering. In October of that year, he quit the team. He just left the team because he wasn't feeling a love for the game any longer. Can anyone say bad signing by the Saints?

 

I'm not saying that would have happened with Urlacher either with the Bears under a new regime or with a new team, but there does seem to be the possibility that his pride may have gotten in the way and prevented him from being what he used to be on the field no matter who he may have played for.

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Briggs made a comment in preseason that not everyone had bought in yet. After the season it was speculated that he was referring to Peppers.

 

I've seen many times in the corporate world where a new management team comes in and some of the existing employees (particularly really talented people) tend to groan and whine about all the changes. Their points usually tend to fall along the lines of "We've done this such and such a way for years and we've always performed at a high level." I've seen those types stay, I've seen them leave voluntarily, and I've seen them fired. The ones that stay tend to be miserable. The ones that leave end up better off because they find a new situation that they accept at face value because it's new.

 

Now in this instance, I have to imagine that Urlacher (who was very close to Lovie) might not be thrilled with ANYTHING that changed. And, being a leader, he could have had a negative influence on the younger guys simply by example. Now I for one would like to think that when games that count started, Urlacher's competitive spirit would take over and he would play at a high level. I'm just not sure that that fact alone could overcome the negatives that he might have displayed during TC that might have delayed the younger guys buying in and become a general distraction.

 

Personally, I was relieved when Urlacher wasn't re-signed - and in particular retired. I potentially saw a power struggle just because - well - Urlacher is kind of a vengeful dick.

 

As for why no other teams signed him, I think he still had enough in the tank to help some other team - and certainly the Bears if Lovie was still around. The problem may have come in where his accustomed position of leadership couldn't be given to a guy that might not even start, or would be a one year mercenary. And another concern would also have to be how much effort he would put into learning a new scheme if he was on a one year deal.

 

An example that comes to mind is Kreutz. He was THE leader on the offensive line for years. The Bears offered him less than he thought he was worth so he took a one year deal with the Saints for less than the Bears were offering. In October of that year, he quit the team. He just left the team because he wasn't feeling a love for the game any longer. Can anyone say bad signing by the Saints?

 

I'm not saying that would have happened with Urlacher either with the Bears under a new regime or with a new team, but there does seem to be the possibility that his pride may have gotten in the way and prevented him from being what he used to be on the field no matter who he may have played for.

I agree with that assessment and I believe that since they didn't have a head coach in line, their communication process with Brian wasn't clear because they didn't know exactly which way they would go with him. If Marenelli stayed I think Brian would have had his fairwell year. I believe he would've held the D together better with Marenelli as DC, but not with Tucker. Moving on was for the best

[BearFan PHX]

I agree with that assessment and I believe that since they didn't have a head coach in line, their communication process with Brian wasn't clear because they didn't know exactly which way they would go with him. If Marenelli stayed I think Brian would have had his fairwell year. I believe he would've held the D together better with Marenelli as DC, but not with Tucker. Moving on was for the best

 

You know, you're absolutely right about this.

 

They DID ask Marinelli to stay, and is they were doing that, it stands to reason that they were going to let him keep as much continuity as possible.

 

The also DID offer Urlacher a contract, and it was better than any other offer he received.

 

I think it's evident that the Bears were open to Urlacher returning in some scenarios. So to say they just turned their backs on him, it's really not the case.

 

Some may feel that they should have given him $5 million and given him the season as his personal farewell tour. I get that, he was a hero and a leader on the team for a good while. But like all athletes, he got his glory on the field as the result of his ability and efforts, and when those fade, so does your value to that year's team.

 

I don't think you have to let an athlete play past the point where they can contribute just to honor their legacy. I don't think you should have to overpay them either. No, the same ruthless competitive spirit of sports that made Urlacher what he is also dictates that a time comes to say maybe you're not what you once were.

 

The Bears gave Urlacher a middle ground offer, but the person that really closed the door on his return was Marinelli, not the Bears.

 

Once the decision was made to go with Tucker, it was right to let Urlacher go. He does have a history of speaking his mind when he's unhappy, and his declining play wasnt worth the risk OR $5 million off of the cap to rebuild a new defense. Look at how Peppers may have given up too. His play certainly declined whether by attitude or age. He was another stud that made the Bears awesome, but given his play last year, I am thrilled to have Jared Allen in his place this year. If you want to throw urlacher scenarios around, consider Peppers as a model of what could have been.

 

And it's funny. I would MUCH rather have dinner with Peppers than Allen. But that's not the point. Winning is.

[LT2_3]

I agree with that assessment and I believe that since they didn't have a head coach in line, their communication process with Brian wasn't clear because they didn't know exactly which way they would go with him. If Marenelli stayed I think Brian would have had his fairwell year. I believe he would've held the D together better with Marenelli as DC, but not with Tucker. Moving on was for the best

 

Just to clarify the timeline, the coaching decisions were made in January and the situation with Urlacher happened in March after the start of free agency. There likely hadn't been much communication between the team and Url after all his coaches left.

 

I do agree though that had Maranelli stayed, Urlacher would have more likely returned for another season.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Interesting thought about Maranelli.

 

As much as it pains me I'm kinda glad things have gone the way they have. Personally losing URL and Lovie was painful but they have both moved on to better things. And after all is said and done so too shall the Bears. After watching Marshall's presser about Trestman makes me think the Bears are on the verge of something special. Especially on O... Which is weird for Chicago.

 

The D will probably be fine. I can't imagine they'll be any worse then last year. Really what did they lose? For what they lost they gained in players like Houston and Allen. And from the draft I feel one or two of the kids will probably make some noise. Should be a good year overall.

[Stinger226]

Oh you mean like the time when I thought you were a douche? Oh you're right that wasn't an original thought.

 

Disclaimer: I don't mean to be jerky, just feeling sassy. The weather has been exceptional up here. No harm meant... Except to those directly affected. Mahalo hoapilis!

Wow, Hawaiian, I take back any comments on an original contribution, you just had one.

[BearFan PHX]

Wow, Hawaiian, I take back any comments on an original contribution, you just had one.

 

Im not SO surprised that an Alaskan speaks Hawaiian, after all theyre right next to each other down there in the gulf of Mexico, just look at any map.

 

Sometimes you just have to take a minute to THINK about things, ya know?

[Pixote]

Im not SO surprised that an Alaskan speaks Hawaiian, after all theyre right next to each other down there in the gulf of Mexico, just look at any map.

 

Sometimes you just have to take a minute to THINK about things, ya know?

 

 

LOL, I am sure you are just joking around, however, ....

 

When I was working in a call center for a company processing credit card applications for Bank Of America...

 

I was on the help desk answering questions from our "ace" phone reps when I got a call saying a caller was upset when he told them they could not apply for a credit card. I asked the rep why he told them that they could not apply. He told me that they lived in Hawaii. I said, SO? He reminded me that we could not process applications for CCs unless the applicant lived in the US.

 

Needless to say they eventually had to let this rep go. LOL

 

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Im not SO surprised that an Alaskan speaks Hawaiian, after all theyre right next to each other down there in the gulf of Mexico, just look at any map.

 

Sometimes you just have to take a minute to THINK about things, ya know?

 

Haha... Gulf of Mexico... Good one. Hawaii and Alaska are connected by a land bridge so when the tide is out you can walk in between. And don't forget, we can all see Russia from our back yard.

 

 

 

[BearFan PHX]

Haha... Gulf of Mexico... Good one. Hawaii and Alaska are connected by a land bridge so when the tide is out you can walk in between. And don't forget, we can all see Russia from our back yard.

 

[jason]

NYC - If I'm a dick, then you're a giant crybaby. You've been that way since you bitched and whined on the last board because I took something overtly political out of your post, while leaving the remaining post and intent intact. What makes it ironic is you've since exposed your political leanings in other posts, and I actually agree with you politically. This, however, is not a board about politics - or at least it shouldn't be - and those posts should always be edited or removed (even if the current mods aren't doing it). BTW - If you go back on the board, nobody here was talking $5M for Urlacher. Most were saying just give him a little more than the low-ball, initial offer. If I recall, the majority were saying $2.5-$3 at very most. That likely would have helped Urlacher save face, the team would have done the right thing for a HOFer, and the team would have almost certainly benefitted as a result. Last but not least, to even compare Urlacher to Webb is ridiculously ignorant on various levels, and doesn't deserve to be justified in the slightest.

 

scs - Because of PFF's support of Webb, who obviously sucked for anyone who actually watched him play football, their stats will continue to be severely flawed. Any PFF stats used to support or detract from an opinion are moderately interesting at best, throw-away at worst. Just watching film and compiling numbers doesn't guarantee a meaningful result. I give them kudos for trying, and doing what others haven't done, or would like to do, but their final product still requires significant upgrading.

 

Ashkum - You gotta be shittin' me with that "locker room cancer" stuff. Urlacher was loved by pretty much all teammates (I haven't heard of a guy going against him, but I don't read everything so it's possible?). And as far as I know, all the coaches he played for loved him while he was in Chicago. Maybe our definitions of locker room cancer are different. He wasn't the best with the fans, but he was loved by teammates and cocahes.

 

LT2 - Both your scenarios are possible, but Urlacher looked better at the end of his last year than at the beginning. This tends to support the "Urlacher is back and healthy" argument. I had not heard Peppers became a bad locker room guy. You're also right that it's POSSIBLE Urlacher would have caused waves, but that, just like his production last year, are unknowns. His production on the field in previous seasons and during his last season supports the concept that he would have made the team better last year, but there is no real support - that I know of - for him actually causing problems in the clubhouse amongst teammates or coaches.

 

Alaska - Apparently you are the only one capable of actually grasping the very realistic concept that Urlacher, while diminished, was still better than anyone on the team last year, and almost certainly would have made the defense better. How much is anyone's guess. Nothing is a 100% certainty - nobody saw it coming when an "in his prime Knox" basically get retired on a single, spine-bending hit - but Urlacher's legacy, history, production, and upward trend towards the end of his last year say he would have helped the team.

[madlithuanian]

May I suggest we all move on to a different topic (Url one more year)?

 

We can speculate until the end of time of what would have happened if Url was retained for one more year. Odss are the D would have been better given the extreme amount of deficiencies due to injury, etc. COuldn't get much worse, could it? But we're not really sure how much better as we don't know if age/injury etc would have crept in.

 

Bottom line, it didn't happen. Both sides of the fence can easily justify their position. But it is over. It didn't happen. Odds are, at best, we would have inched into the playoffs to ultimately get destroyed by Seattle or SF. It was their years, not ours. Because of the drop off, we are probably experieincing an expedited re-build that might not have taken place until a year later. Overall, this is the concept we all should be embracing. The epic fail on D was the catalyst to make big moves to improve and add depth. We still might have done so, but maybe with less impetus. My thought is we would not be in as good a position today if the situation didn't play out as it did.

 

I cherish our past, but I look forward to our future. What we have is more than acceptable to win a championship. It's up to players coaches and a bit of luck to make it happen.

 

Greanted, news is slim pickins these days. But soon, camp will be on and it'll be time to embrace our future and let the legends of our past be something to look back fondly at.

 

We are legitimate contenders. Let's seal the deal!

 

 

 

 

 

 

NYC - If I'm a dick, then you're a giant crybaby. You've been that way since you bitched and whined on the last board because I took something overtly political out of your post, while leaving the remaining post and intent intact. What makes it ironic is you've since exposed your political leanings in other posts, and I actually agree with you politically. This, however, is not a board about politics - or at least it shouldn't be - and those posts should always be edited or removed (even if the current mods aren't doing it). BTW - If you go back on the board, nobody here was talking $5M for Urlacher. Most were saying just give him a little more than the low-ball, initial offer. If I recall, the majority were saying $2.5-$3 at very most. That likely would have helped Urlacher save face, the team would have done the right thing for a HOFer, and the team would have almost certainly benefitted as a result. Last but not least, to even compare Urlacher to Webb is ridiculously ignorant on various levels, and doesn't deserve to be justified in the slightest.

 

scs - Because of PFF's support of Webb, who obviously sucked for anyone who actually watched him play football, their stats will continue to be severely flawed. Any PFF stats used to support or detract from an opinion are moderately interesting at best, throw-away at worst. Just watching film and compiling numbers doesn't guarantee a meaningful result. I give them kudos for trying, and doing what others haven't done, or would like to do, but their final product still requires significant upgrading.

 

Ashkum - You gotta be shittin' me with that "locker room cancer" stuff. Urlacher was loved by pretty much all teammates (I haven't heard of a guy going against him, but I don't read everything so it's possible?). And as far as I know, all the coaches he played for loved him while he was in Chicago. Maybe our definitions of locker room cancer are different. He wasn't the best with the fans, but he was loved by teammates and cocahes.

 

LT2 - Both your scenarios are possible, but Urlacher looked better at the end of his last year than at the beginning. This tends to support the "Urlacher is back and healthy" argument. I had not heard Peppers became a bad locker room guy. You're also right that it's POSSIBLE Urlacher would have caused waves, but that, just like his production last year, are unknowns. His production on the field in previous seasons and during his last season supports the concept that he would have made the team better last year, but there is no real support - that I know of - for him actually causing problems in the clubhouse amongst teammates or coaches.

 

Alaska - Apparently you are the only one capable of actually grasping the very realistic concept that Urlacher, while diminished, was still better than anyone on the team last year, and almost certainly would have made the defense better. How much is anyone's guess. Nothing is a 100% certainty - nobody saw it coming when an "in his prime Knox" basically get retired on a single, spine-bending hit - but Urlacher's legacy, history, production, and upward trend towards the end of his last year say he would have helped the team.

 

[Daventry]

NYC - If I'm a dick, then you're a giant crybaby. You've been that way since you bitched and whined on the last board because I took something overtly political out of your post, while leaving the remaining post and intent intact. What makes it ironic is you've since exposed your political leanings in other posts, and I actually agree with you politically. This, however, is not a board about politics - or at least it shouldn't be - and those posts should always be edited or removed (even if the current mods aren't doing it). BTW - If you go back on the board, nobody here was talking $5M for Urlacher. Most were saying just give him a little more than the low-ball, initial offer. If I recall, the majority were saying $2.5-$3 at very most. That likely would have helped Urlacher save face, the team would have done the right thing for a HOFer, and the team would have almost certainly benefitted as a result. Last but not least, to even compare Urlacher to Webb is ridiculously ignorant on various levels, and doesn't deserve to be justified in the slightest.

 

scs - Because of PFF's support of Webb, who obviously sucked for anyone who actually watched him play football, their stats will continue to be severely flawed. Any PFF stats used to support or detract from an opinion are moderately interesting at best, throw-away at worst. Just watching film and compiling numbers doesn't guarantee a meaningful result. I give them kudos for trying, and doing what others haven't done, or would like to do, but their final product still requires significant upgrading.

 

Ashkum - You gotta be shittin' me with that "locker room cancer" stuff. Urlacher was loved by pretty much all teammates (I haven't heard of a guy going against him, but I don't read everything so it's possible?). And as far as I know, all the coaches he played for loved him while he was in Chicago. Maybe our definitions of locker room cancer are different. He wasn't the best with the fans, but he was loved by teammates and cocahes.

 

LT2 - Both your scenarios are possible, but Urlacher looked better at the end of his last year than at the beginning. This tends to support the "Urlacher is back and healthy" argument. I had not heard Peppers became a bad locker room guy. You're also right that it's POSSIBLE Urlacher would have caused waves, but that, just like his production last year, are unknowns. His production on the field in previous seasons and during his last season supports the concept that he would have made the team better last year, but there is no real support - that I know of - for him actually causing problems in the clubhouse amongst teammates or coaches.

 

Alaska - Apparently you are the only one capable of actually grasping the very realistic concept that Urlacher, while diminished, was still better than anyone on the team last year, and almost certainly would have made the defense better. How much is anyone's guess. Nothing is a 100% certainty - nobody saw it coming when an "in his prime Knox" basically get retired on a single, spine-bending hit - but Urlacher's legacy, history, production, and upward trend towards the end of his last year say he would have helped the team.

 

Jason...you are a very smart guy, read more statistics and probably watch more games than I....as do some others around these parts.

 

Just be careful what you are saying to some good guys that have legit opinions, you know what I mean?

 

In the end...we are all at the pub....drinking......having a beer. Laughing........having a good time.

 

We all love the Bears....and will spill blood over that.

 

So....to argue with our own? Why? They love you man....and I know they love you too.

 

Have a great day buddy. Bears fan, one to another.

 

And BTW....look at my record, I have gotten tossed off here once, and am ready to do so again.

 

Take care Jason, you are a bright guy.....let's stick together.

[adam]

May I suggest we all move on to a different topic (Url one more year)?

So how about, we should've kept McCown and traded Cutler?

[madlithuanian]

Troll!

 

But to answer the question...no. You keep the more consistent and younger talent, not the one year back-up wonder (see Scott Mitchell, etc...). Not to mention keeping Marshall happy... And we all like a happy Marshall!

 

 

 

So how about, we should've kept McCown and traded Cutler?

 

[ASHKUM BEAR]

NYC - If I'm a dick, then you're a giant crybaby. You've been that way since you bitched and whined on the last board because I took something overtly political out of your post, while leaving the remaining post and intent intact. What makes it ironic is you've since exposed your political leanings in other posts, and I actually agree with you politically. This, however, is not a board about politics - or at least it shouldn't be - and those posts should always be edited or removed (even if the current mods aren't doing it). BTW - If you go back on the board, nobody here was talking $5M for Urlacher. Most were saying just give him a little more than the low-ball, initial offer. If I recall, the majority were saying $2.5-$3 at very most. That likely would have helped Urlacher save face, the team would have done the right thing for a HOFer, and the team would have almost certainly benefitted as a result. Last but not least, to even compare Urlacher to Webb is ridiculously ignorant on various levels, and doesn't deserve to be justified in the slightest. scs - Because of PFF's support of Webb, who obviously sucked for anyone who actually watched him play football, their stats will continue to be severely flawed. Any PFF stats used to support or detract from an opinion are moderately interesting at best, throw-away at worst. Just watching film and compiling numbers doesn't guarantee a meaningful result. I give them kudos for trying, and doing what others haven't done, or would like to do, but their final product still requires significant upgrading. Ashkum - You gotta be shittin' me with that "locker room cancer" stuff. Urlacher was loved by pretty much all teammates (I haven't heard of a guy going against him, but I don't read everything so it's possible?). And as far as I know, all the coaches he played for loved him while he was in Chicago. Maybe our definitions of locker room cancer are different. He wasn't the best with the fans, but he was loved by teammates and cocahes. LT2 - Both your scenarios are possible, but Urlacher looked better at the end of his last year than at the beginning. This tends to support the "Urlacher is back and healthy" argument. I had not heard Peppers became a bad locker room guy. You're also right that it's POSSIBLE Urlacher would have caused waves, but that, just like his production last year, are unknowns. His production on the field in previous seasons and during his last season supports the concept that he would have made the team better last year, but there is no real support - that I know of - for him actually causing problems in the clubhouse amongst teammates or coaches. Alaska - Apparently you are the only one capable of actually grasping the very realistic concept that Urlacher, while diminished, was still better than anyone on the team last year, and almost certainly would have made the defense better. How much is anyone's guess. Nothing is a 100% certainty - nobody saw it coming when an "in his prime Knox" basically get retired on a single, spine-bending hit - but Urlacher's legacy, history, production, and upward trend towards the end of his last year say he would have helped the team.

 

You must not have read that post clearly because it said "if you can't tell I am being sarcastic" which was a tongue in cheek, overboard mockery of some of the bashing I see on certain Bears at times.

 

 

[Daventry]

Troll!

 

But to answer the question...no. You keep the more consistent and younger talent, not the one year back-up wonder (see Scott Mitchell, etc...). Not to mention keeping Marshall happy... And we all like a happy Marshall!

 

 

Yep