FOOTBALL IS HERE !!!! ... TIME TO GET IT ON

[scratchswinger]

[quote name='baseballfrk8998' timestamp='1386624236' post='8274149']
[quote name='scratchswinger' timestamp='1386622402' post='8274027']
Being a number 1 seed certainly does not hurt. But in recent history it has not helped either. Seattle is different because of the huge advantage that they have at home. So in the case of the Seahawks, it really is vital that they wrap this up and get home field. Personally I believe the only NFC team that can go on the road and win is Seattle is the Niners. But they need to do a lot of things better if that were the case.

Super Bowl Winners Vs seed :

2013 2 seed
2011 4 seed
2010 6 seed
2009 1 seed
2008 2 seed
2007 5 seed
2006 3 seed
2005 6 seed
2004 2 seed
Get the point?
[/quote]

That's a great post.

The only thing I would disagree with is SF winning in Seattle. I don't think SF can't beat Seattle in Seattle. The last 2 times they've been to Seattle they've been handled rather easily (42-13, 29-3).

I like someone like NO or Carolina to have a better chance of beating Seattle in Seattle.
[/quote]

Admittedly I am biased towards the Niners... But I honestly believe that they have a better shot then anyone to win in Seattle. My logic is this... Most talent, best players, great coach, all around highest ceiling. Now they are finally getting healthy, having Crabtree just in the lineup has been huge for the entire offense. The last hurdle is to get Gore going like he has in the past. With all that said, the Niners have been to Seattle twice now to play this same Hawks team, they have heard the crowd. Yes there has been zero success to date, they have still learned a few things and experienced things that other teams have not. Kinda how the Giants got a crack at NE at the end of the regular season and that gave them a blue print for the Superbowl.

[bubbagump]

I hear a lot about at Seattle, but I never really hear it mentioned that Seattle has lost the last 5 in SF. Just thisnk that gets lost in the whole debate.

[baseballfrk8998]

[quote name='bubbagump' timestamp='1386629910' post='8274665']
I hear a lot about at Seattle, but I never really hear it mentioned that Seattle has lost the last 5 in SF. Just thisnk that gets lost in the whole debate.
[/quote]

It's because SF is most likely going to have to go through Seattle to reach a SB. If it was flip flopped, we would be talking about Seattle's losing streak at SF.

[scratchswinger]

[quote name='baseballfrk8998' timestamp='1386630013' post='8274683']
[quote name='bubbagump' timestamp='1386629910' post='8274665']
I hear a lot about at Seattle, but I never really hear it mentioned that Seattle has lost the last 5 in SF. Just thisnk that gets lost in the whole debate.
[/quote]

It's because SF is most likely going to have to go through Seattle to reach a SB. If it was flip flopped, we would be talking about Seattle's losing streak at SF.
[/quote]

Exactly... It's a moot point.

[baseballfrk8998]

[quote name='scratchswinger' timestamp='1386629254' post='8274597']
Admittedly I am biased towards the Niners... But I honestly believe that they have a better shot then anyone to win in Seattle. My logic is this... Most talent, best players, great coach, all around highest ceiling. Now they are finally getting healthy, having Crabtree just in the lineup has been huge for the entire offense. The last hurdle is to get Gore going like he has in the past. With all that said, the Niners have been to Seattle twice now to play this same Hawks team, they have heard the crowd. Yes there has been zero success to date, they have still learned a few things and experienced things that other teams have not. Kinda how the Giants got a crack at NE at the end of the regular season and that gave them a blue print for the Superbowl.
[/quote]

Once again, I agree with the premise. The difference between NE and NYG was a neutral field. SF will have to go into Seattle. History shows that, more often than not, the team that has won 2 in a row (read: Seattle at home) usually wins the 3rd.

Of course, none of this matters if Seattle or SF get bounced in the divisional round.

[bubbagump]

[quote name='baseballfrk8998' timestamp='1386630013' post='8274683']
[quote name='bubbagump' timestamp='1386629910' post='8274665']
I hear a lot about at Seattle, but I never really hear it mentioned that Seattle has lost the last 5 in SF. Just thisnk that gets lost in the whole debate.
[/quote]

It's because SF is most likely going to have to go through Seattle to reach a SB. If it was flip flopped, we would be talking about Seattle's losing streak at SF.
[/quote]

Understood, I just meant in the series rivalry debate especially from Seattle fans. I know that the road will go through Seattle in the playoffs. I like our chances if that were to happen.

[scratchswinger]

[quote name='bubbagump' timestamp='1386630469' post='8274725']
[quote name='baseballfrk8998' timestamp='1386630013' post='8274683']
[quote name='bubbagump' timestamp='1386629910' post='8274665']
I hear a lot about at Seattle, but I never really hear it mentioned that Seattle has lost the last 5 in SF. Just thisnk that gets lost in the whole debate.
[/quote]

It's because SF is most likely going to have to go through Seattle to reach a SB. If it was flip flopped, we would be talking about Seattle's losing streak at SF.
[/quote]

Understood, I just meant in the series rivalry debate especially from Seattle fans. I know that the road will go through Seattle in the playoffs. I like our chances if that were to happen.
[/quote]

Let's just root for the Giants this week and then maybe Az or Stl can pull one out their a$$'s.

[hogans71]

Ditka in the house!

[baseballfrk8998]

The cowboys are awesome.

I hope they leave Monte Kiffin in Chicago. What's an embarrassment. Jerry Jones is a ******.

[hogans71]

As a (very) long time Bears fan, rooting against Green Bay is an absolute given. But something about the Dallas Cowboys brings out a bit of nastiness in me. Don't know if it's the "America's team" bull s*** or jerry jones himself, but man, tonight was satisfying...

[RJRJRJ]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386654987' post='8276771']
As a (very) long time Bears fan, rooting against Green Bay is an absolute given. But something about the Dallas Cowboys brings out a bit of nastiness in me. Don't know if it's the "America's team" bull s*** or jerry jones himself, but man, tonight was satisfying...
[/quote]

The cowboys have been a joke for quite a while now. I wonder when the murrica's team thing will finally go away.

[TheGameChanger]

That D is just awful. Really let the Bears score on every drive. Season over imo. Will get done by Green Bay this week.

[Imp]

So I just read that at this years Superbowl there will be no outdoor tailgating allowed (Meadowlands). All festivities must happen in your own vehicle (or Superbowl festivities).

Really? What the hell is this all about? What problem are they trying to solve? (I'm thinking parking if it snows... but still). Really? Grilling outside/Tailgating in the cold is a BASTION of FOOTBALL!!!

--kC

[SilverBullets]

[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386685000' post='8277529']
So I just read that at this years Superbowl there will be no outdoor tailgating allowed (Meadowlands). All festivities must happen in your own vehicle (or Superbowl festivities).

Really? What the hell is this all about? What problem are they trying to solve? (I'm thinking parking if it snows... but still). Really? Grilling outside/Tailgating in the cold is a BASTION of FOOTBALL!!!

--kC
[/quote]

On top of parking issues, my guess would be they want more fans to participate in the Fan Zones which I am sure they will have setup. Fan Zones are a large revenue stream for these major events because they typically bring in a bunch of advertisers to setup games and crap. I haven't been to the Super Bowl, but, at some of the major college football games and bowl games I have attended, they have fan zones setup that have bars and food stands. Admittance to the fan zones are free with a ticket. Obviously I would prefer my own tailgate over a fan zone, but, as long as there is a place to drink it can't be that bad.... can it?

[Imp]

I've been to Houston and Jacksonvill SB's to watch the Pats.

[QUOTE]but, as long as there is a place to drink it can't be that bad.... can it?
[/QUOTE]It can. 4 guys in a car farting up a storm, and most leaving their engines running because... hey, if we have to be inside, why stay dressed up?

--kC

[hogans71]

[quote name='SilverBullets' timestamp='1386685523' post='8277569']
[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386685000' post='8277529']
So I just read that at this years Superbowl there will be no outdoor tailgating allowed (Meadowlands). All festivities must happen in your own vehicle (or Superbowl festivities).

Really? What the hell is this all about? What problem are they trying to solve? (I'm thinking parking if it snows... but still). Really? Grilling outside/Tailgating in the cold is a BASTION of FOOTBALL!!!

--kC
[/quote]

On top of parking issues, my guess would be they want more fans to participate in the Fan Zones which I am sure they will have setup. Fan Zones are a large revenue stream for these major events because they typically bring in a bunch of advertisers to setup games and crap. I haven't been to the Super Bowl, but, at some of the major college football games and bowl games I have attended, they have fan zones setup that have bars and food stands. Admittance to the fan zones are free with a ticket. Obviously I would prefer my own tailgate over a fan zone, but, as long as there is a place to drink it can't be that bad.... can it?
[/quote]

You should check out the restrictions they've put on those attending the game. Laughably pathetic...

I hope it snows that day like we just witnessed in Philly...

[hogans71]

I just realized the Bears have put up more points than anyone in the league, aside from Denver...

What in gods name has happened to Chicago Bear D that they have six freaking losses.

Ridiculous.

[Imp]

Ya know, if the Meadowlands were closer to the city, I can see the requirement for public transportation, parking farther away, etc... There'd be so much other stuff to do and local businesses can be included in the revelry. However, unlike Jax and Houston, where there's a whole bunch of other places to go, sites to see before a game local to the stadium... Meadowlands?

But, it ain't. There is NOTHING near the meadowlands. Nothing.

[Imp]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386689797' post='8277857']
I just realized the Bears have put up more points than anyone in the league, aside from Denver...
[/quote]Umm... did you see the spread?

For total points per game, there's ....

Denver (515)
...
...
...
...
...
...
Chicago (368)
Dallas/Seattle (357)
New England (349)
Detroit (346)
Lots of others that are close.

Denver completely owns this statistic alone this year. No one else is near their total points.

Claiming that Chicago is 2nd is akin to saying you finished 2nd in a race while 2 laps down.

Looked at it another way... the difference between Denver and Chicago in points (147) is the difference between Chicago (2nd) and somewhere between the Jets (226 - 2nd to last in total points,) and Jacksonville (201 - Dead last in total points). In other words... almost the entire rest of the league fits in that gap.



--kC

[hogans71]

[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386692765' post='8278061']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386689797' post='8277857']
I just realized the Bears have put up more points than anyone in the league, aside from Denver...
[/quote]Umm... did you see the spread?

For total points per game, there's ....

Denver (515)
...
...
...
...
...
...
Chicago (368)
Dallas/Seattle (357)
New England (349)
Detroit (346)
Lots of others that are close.

Denver completely owns this statistic alone this year. No one else is near their total points.

Claiming that Chicago is 2nd is akin to saying you finished 2nd in a race while 2 laps down.

Looked at it another way... the difference between Denver and Chicago in points (147) is the difference between Chicago (2nd) and somewhere between the Jets (226 - 2nd to last in total points,) and Jacksonville (201 - Dead last in total points). In other words... almost the entire rest of the league fits in that gap.



--kC
[/quote]


Slow your roll there hoss...

At no point am I comparing Chicago to Denver. More importantly, I'm bringing to light the fact that the Chicago Bears, known throughout their history as a team that won games primarily riding the coat tails of their often vaunted defense, are now putting up points in bunches and still stand one game above .500....

If they had half the D they've had in the last decade, coupled with this type of offense that, quite frankly we haven't seen since 1985, they'd be running away with the NFC North and challenging Seattle for the top spot in the NFC...

Edit- CLEARLY I realize the gap between Chicago and Denver is pretty sizable. Moreover, not much separates the Bears from the next half dozen or so. But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...

[baseballfrk8998]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386699001' post='8278717']
[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386692765' post='8278061']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386689797' post='8277857']
I just realized the Bears have put up more points than anyone in the league, aside from Denver...
[/quote]Umm... did you see the spread?

For total points per game, there's ....

Denver (515)
...
...
...
...
...
...
Chicago (368)
Dallas/Seattle (357)
New England (349)
Detroit (346)
Lots of others that are close.

Denver completely owns this statistic alone this year. No one else is near their total points.

Claiming that Chicago is 2nd is akin to saying you finished 2nd in a race while 2 laps down.

Looked at it another way... the difference between Denver and Chicago in points (147) is the difference between Chicago (2nd) and somewhere between the Jets (226 - 2nd to last in total points,) and Jacksonville (201 - Dead last in total points). In other words... almost the entire rest of the league fits in that gap.



--kC
[/quote]


Slow your roll there hoss...

At no point am I comparing Chicago to Denver. More importantly, I'm bringing to light the fact that the Chicago Bears, known throughout their history as a team that won games primarily riding the coat tails of their often vaunted defense, are now putting up points in bunches and still stand one game above .500....

If they had half the D they've had in the last decade, coupled with this type of offense that, quite frankly we haven't seen since 1985, they'd be running away with the NFC North and challenging Seattle for the top spot in the NFC...

Edit- CLEARLY I realize the gap between Chicago and Denver is pretty sizable. Moreover, not much separates the Bears from the next half dozen or so. But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/quote]

They've scored 9 more points than Dallas and Dallas 1 game above .500 as well.

Why can't our teams play defense?!

[Imp]

[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386699001' post='8278717']Slow your roll there hoss...

At no point am I comparing Chicago to Denver. More importantly, I'm bringing to light the fact that the Chicago Bears, known throughout their history as a team that won games primarily riding the coat tails of their often vaunted defense, are now putting up points in bunches and still stand one game above .500....

If they had half the D they've had in the last decade, coupled with this type of offense that, quite frankly we haven't seen since 1985, they'd be running away with the NFC North and challenging Seattle for the top spot in the NFC...

Edit- CLEARLY I realize the gap between Chicago and Denver is pretty sizable. Moreover, not much separates the Bears from the next half dozen or so. But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/quote]And I'm saying that being 2nd this year is not the big accomplishment you intended it to be from the original post. "Lofty perch" indeed. That perch is only 1/2 way up the tree.

[QUOTE]But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/QUOTE]I'm a Pats fan. I've been a Pats fan since 1976 going back as far as I can remember seeing football on TV at home (I was 7). The Pats(ies) had been the whipping boy of the NFL for generations. We still loved them.

I FEEL YOUR PAIN!!!

--kC

[hogans71]

[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386703560' post='8279053']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386699001' post='8278717']Slow your roll there hoss...

At no point am I comparing Chicago to Denver. More importantly, I'm bringing to light the fact that the Chicago Bears, known throughout their history as a team that won games primarily riding the coat tails of their often vaunted defense, are now putting up points in bunches and still stand one game above .500....

If they had half the D they've had in the last decade, coupled with this type of offense that, quite frankly we haven't seen since 1985, they'd be running away with the NFC North and challenging Seattle for the top spot in the NFC...

Edit- CLEARLY I realize the gap between Chicago and Denver is pretty sizable. Moreover, not much separates the Bears from the next half dozen or so. But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/quote]And I'm saying that being 2nd this year is not the big accomplishment you intended it to be from the original post. "Lofty perch" indeed. That perch is only 1/2 way up the tree.

[QUOTE]But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/QUOTE]I'm a Pats fan. I've been a Pats fan since 1976 going back as far as I can remember seeing football on TV at home (I was 7). The Pats(ies) had been the whipping boy of the NFL for generations. We still loved them.

I FEEL YOUR PAIN!!!

--kC
[/quote][quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386703560' post='8279053']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386699001' post='8278717']Slow your roll there hoss...

At no point am I comparing Chicago to Denver. More importantly, I'm bringing to light the fact that the Chicago Bears, known throughout their history as a team that won games primarily riding the coat tails of their often vaunted defense, are now putting up points in bunches and still stand one game above .500....

If they had half the D they've had in the last decade, coupled with this type of offense that, quite frankly we haven't seen since 1985, they'd be running away with the NFC North and challenging Seattle for the top spot in the NFC...

Edit- CLEARLY I realize the gap between Chicago and Denver is pretty sizable. Moreover, not much separates the Bears from the next half dozen or so. But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...


[/quote]And I'm saying that being 2nd this year is not the big accomplishment you intended it to be from the original post. "Lofty perch" indeed. That perch is only 1/2 way up the tree.

[/quote]

I don't have the stats in front to me but I'd venture to say that this Bears offense is damn near doubling their offensive output compared the last decade- in less than one year of its implementation. With a back up qb.

And seeing as I was in high school the last time we had such studs on offense... Yeah, I'm impressed.

[baseballfrk8998]

The Bears were 2nd in the league in PPG in 2006, averaging 26.7/game.

Before that year, they went 4-5 years without averaging over 20 PPG. Since then, they've averaged under 20 PPG once.

Just to add some perspective. I would venture to say that a decent amount of those points in 2006 came from Hester and also from the defense.

[Imp]

[quote name='freddyottawa' timestamp='1386623356' post='8274093']
Are there any Browns here? Surely there has to bet at least one one other person feeling sick after yesterdays game!
[/quote]I was at that game and as Pats fan, I'm sick also. Cleaveland should have won that game.

--kC

[TheGameChanger]

Very cool to see Wilson get drafted by the Rangers in the MLB today. Kap was a decent Baseballer too wasn't he? Same with Locker from Tennessee. Brady was good too.

[hogans71]

[quote name='baseballfrk8998' timestamp='1386710359' post='8279607']
The Bears were 2nd in the league in PPG in 2006, averaging 26.7/game.

Before that year, they went 4-5 years without averaging over 20 PPG. Since then, they've averaged under 20 PPG once.

Just to add some perspective. I would venture to say that a decent amount of those points in 2006 came from Hester and also from the defense.
[/quote]


The Bears o hasn't passed the smell test for decades, save for very, VERY recently. The obscenely long list of mediocre to pathetic at best qb's we've witnessed as fans was absolutely mind boggling. If it came down to the wire, it better have been up to their usual stout defense as they had neither the playmakers, schemes or offensive coaches to pull it out on that side of the ball. And if they didn't have one of the most accurate place kickers In the history of the game, it would have been far worse...

They have a bit of a window here if they can shore up the d a bit. Peppers may come back, Briggs as well. Tillman is a question mark. Need some luck staying healthy. And for all that is good and holy, get rid of Chris Conte. He does not have the size nor the closing speed to play free safety with all these big receivers nowadays...

[Jim Clark]

[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386703560' post='8279053']
[quote name='hogans71' timestamp='1386699001' post='8278717']Slow your roll there hoss...

At no point am I comparing Chicago to Denver. More importantly, I'm bringing to light the fact that the Chicago Bears, known throughout their history as a team that won games primarily riding the coat tails of their often vaunted defense, are now putting up points in bunches and still stand one game above .500....

If they had half the D they've had in the last decade, coupled with this type of offense that, quite frankly we haven't seen since 1985, they'd be running away with the NFC North and challenging Seattle for the top spot in the NFC...

Edit- CLEARLY I realize the gap between Chicago and Denver is pretty sizable. Moreover, not much separates the Bears from the next half dozen or so. But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/quote]And I'm saying that being 2nd this year is not the big accomplishment you intended it to be from the original post. "Lofty perch" indeed. That perch is only 1/2 way up the tree.

[QUOTE]But if you had to watch your team play incredible d FOR DECADES, and experience such offensive ineptitude, you'd make note of such a lofty perch...
[/QUOTE]I'm a Pats fan. I've been a Pats fan since 1976 going back as far as I can remember seeing football on TV at home (I was 7). The Pats(ies) had been the whipping boy of the NFL for generations. We still loved them.

I FEEL YOUR PAIN!!!

--kC
[/quote]

Also a long time Pats fan, lived in Boston for many years. There were many lean years when they had great individual talent but couldn't put it together as a team. The Belichick/Brady era has been great.

This year has been tough with key injuries. Losing Welker to the Broncos also hurt. They won a real good comeback against the Broncos, but they barely beat the Texans and Browns. They'll have the Ravens in Baltimore next Sunday, they certainly won't be a pushover. Hopeful for the rest of the season but not very optimistic.

[bubbagump]

Things just got interesting in the NFC West.

[Imp]

[quote name='Imp' timestamp='1386610473' post='8273027']
[quote name='baseballfrk8998' timestamp='1386608650' post='8272857']
[quote name='bubbagump' timestamp='1386607397' post='8272725']
I really have no idea what you are trying to point out. Not sure it made any sense.

Regular season means nothing once playoffs come (thats my "logic"). Everybody gets their seed based off of the regular season performance, but then each game is win or go home.....Running through the regular season doesnt give you anything. Ask the Falcons, Patriots, Broncos etc.

Has nothing to do with discrediting, but once the playoffs are set having a great regular season really doesnt mean much. That was my logic, since it appears you didnt understand it.
[/quote]

The regular season is very important though. It's going to be a real challenge for any team to go into Seattle and beat them.
[/quote]To me, the regular season is qualification to the post season. That's it. You have to make it to the post season to considered a good team. Seattle earned that.

Now, of the 13 games so far for Sea, 6 of those games were against teams with winning records, and 2 of those were losses (SF and Indy). So, less than 1/2 of the games (wins) were against teams with losing records. That really speaks volumes to me, and not to the strength of the team. They're going to have a hard time in the post season and I'd be surprised if they make it past the 1st round. They haven't really played to a hard schedule. NYG next week might be a joke (out of the playoffs), but they've been on a winning streak. They've lost 2 of their last 7. Could be interesting.

Then there's the rematch with Ari fighting for a wildcard spot. If they bring it to Sea and then surprise SF, they're in.

I think Sea (or Sea fans) are going to be really disappointed after their bye week in the playoffs when they play a team that has a very good winning record in a hard season.

--kC
[/quote]*cough*

--kC