Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Rex Grossman

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Rex Grossman

    I fail to see how Dallas is an average team. They've been nothing short of fantastic ever since Romo took over. Sure, defenses will figure him out sooner or later, but Romo and the emergence of Marion Barber in goal-line situations make that team extremely good. I don't really care about the bears, but to say they wouldn't make the playoffs in the AFC is just plain stupid. They have arguably the best defense in the league. With the exception of their weak QB play, the team has no weakness. And the QB problems are more the offensive coordinators fault then anything else. Telling Rex to throw 60 yard floaters all game isn't going to win you games. I think once the Bears go to a more conservative, west-coast type offense, they will be a tough team to play in the playoffs. Not to mention, Rex is a different QB at home..and the Bears should enjoy home field advantage most of the playoffs. The last game against the Vikings is the first time all year hes struggled at home. Wouldn't be surprised to see him maul the Rams this weekend.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Rex Grossman

      Yeah - hard to argue that Dallas is a mediocre team. Hard to argue that with Seattle either, especially after considering they spent 5 weeks without their starting QB or last year's MVP.

      Chicago's another story. They're not exactly mediocre but they have a huge, exploitable hole - unless they get homefield and the weather is lousy.
      The poster formerly known as Rimfire

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Rex Grossman

        We could arrange for 11 guys from PD to hold the NFC North and the rest of the Bears' schedule to less than 12 points per game. The Bears "D" has done thier job, they've held high-school caliber offenses to a very low number of points. I'm not convinced the Bears defense is all that good, though, against NFL caliber offenses.

        I haven't really seen Dallas since the game Romo replaced Bledsoe. If there is a team I've refused to watch in principle since the 1970s, its the Cowboys. Maybe, however, the Cowboys would make the AFC playoffs. Parcells *is* an excellent coach and he seems to have them coming together.

        But to say the Bears would make the playoffs if they played in the AFC is not really helped by the Bears head-to-head against the AFC over the past few years. In AFC North, they'd trail Baltimore and Cincy, and if Pittsburgh didn't lead the league in giveaways this year (fascinating that the Steelers lead the league in both giveaways AND number of plays from scrimmage with gains greater than 10 yards : ) the Bears would be battling Cleveland to stay out of the AFC North cellar. You may think its a stupid comment, but its really not. The Bears are NOT better than any of Jacksonville, Cincy, and Denver, and two of those teams will probably miss the playoffs in the AFC. The Bears are not really any better than Pittsburgh, either. And when the Bears turn the ball over the way the Steelers have turned the ball over this year, they lose to (or barely beat) bad teams. Of course, you can say that about any Super Bowl contending team, if they suddenly find themselves leading the leauge in giveaways they'll find themselves missing the playoffs.

        The Bears have lots of weaknesses that will get exposed when they play "better" teams. And I'm not sure Grossman/ QB is really one of them, he's just in a slump but he's a fine QB. But they have an inflated record and the hype that comes with it.
        Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
        Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
        Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
        Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
        And life itself, rushing over me
        Life itself, the wind in black elms,
        Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Rex Grossman

          Originally posted by Shade View Post
          They're 10-2.

          We're 10-2.

          And they're winning DESPITE their QB, not BECAUSE of him.
          And we are winning despite our defense.
          The best exercise of the human heart is reaching down and picking someone else up.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Rex Grossman

            Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
            We could arrange for 11 guys from PD to hold the NFC North and the rest of the Bears' schedule to less than 12 points per game. The Bears "D" has done thier job, they've held high-school caliber offenses to a very low number of points. I'm not convinced the Bears defense is all that good, though, against NFL caliber offenses.

            I haven't really seen Dallas since the game Romo replaced Bledsoe. If there is a team I've refused to watch in principle since the 1970s, its the Cowboys. Maybe, however, the Cowboys would make the AFC playoffs. Parcells *is* an excellent coach and he seems to have them coming together.

            But to say the Bears would make the playoffs if they played in the AFC is not really helped by the Bears head-to-head against the AFC over the past few years. In AFC North, they'd trail Baltimore and Cincy, and if Pittsburgh didn't lead the league in giveaways this year (fascinating that the Steelers lead the league in both giveaways AND number of plays from scrimmage with gains greater than 10 yards : ) the Bears would be battling Cleveland to stay out of the AFC North cellar. You may think its a stupid comment, but its really not. The Bears are NOT better than any of Jacksonville, Cincy, and Denver, and two of those teams will probably miss the playoffs in the AFC. The Bears are not really any better than Pittsburgh, either. And when the Bears turn the ball over the way the Steelers have turned the ball over this year, they lose to (or barely beat) bad teams. Of course, you can say that about any Super Bowl contending team, if they suddenly find themselves leading the leauge in giveaways they'll find themselves missing the playoffs.

            The Bears have lots of weaknesses that will get exposed when they play "better" teams. And I'm not sure Grossman/ QB is really one of them, he's just in a slump but he's a fine QB. But they have an inflated record and the hype that comes with it.
            I don't even know what to say to convince you, but there is a reason they made the playoffs 2 years straight. The NFC is a weaker conference, but they are not as weak as you make them out to be. The Bears are evenly matched with the high calibre teams of the AFC in my opinion..so I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. We'll see how the Bears do when the playoffs come around.

            On a side note, I am not a Bears fan...so that's not why I am defending them. It just pains me to see such injustice said about such a great team. They have a top 2 defense and special teams in the league, and until recently, a top offense..which is more then enough to win you alot of football games.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Rex Grossman

              Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
              We could arrange for 11 guys from PD to hold the NFC North and the rest of the Bears' schedule to less than 12 points per game. The Bears "D" has done thier job, they've held high-school caliber offenses to a very low number of points. I'm not convinced the Bears defense is all that good, though, against NFL caliber offenses.

              I haven't really seen Dallas since the game Romo replaced Bledsoe. If there is a team I've refused to watch in principle since the 1970s, its the Cowboys. Maybe, however, the Cowboys would make the AFC playoffs. Parcells *is* an excellent coach and he seems to have them coming together.

              But to say the Bears would make the playoffs if they played in the AFC is not really helped by the Bears head-to-head against the AFC over the past few years. In AFC North, they'd trail Baltimore and Cincy, and if Pittsburgh didn't lead the league in giveaways this year (fascinating that the Steelers lead the league in both giveaways AND number of plays from scrimmage with gains greater than 10 yards : ) the Bears would be battling Cleveland to stay out of the AFC North cellar. You may think its a stupid comment, but its really not. The Bears are NOT better than any of Jacksonville, Cincy, and Denver, and two of those teams will probably miss the playoffs in the AFC. The Bears are not really any better than Pittsburgh, either. And when the Bears turn the ball over the way the Steelers have turned the ball over this year, they lose to (or barely beat) bad teams. Of course, you can say that about any Super Bowl contending team, if they suddenly find themselves leading the leauge in giveaways they'll find themselves missing the playoffs.

              The Bears have lots of weaknesses that will get exposed when they play "better" teams. And I'm not sure Grossman/ QB is really one of them, he's just in a slump but he's a fine QB. But they have an inflated record and the hype that comes with it.
              Much of what you state there is a bit laughable but I'll play nice and just say you are entitled to your opinions.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Rex Grossman

                Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                We could arrange for 11 guys from PD to hold the NFC North and the rest of the Bears' schedule to less than 12 points per game. The Bears "D" has done thier job, they've held high-school caliber offenses to a very low number of points. I'm not convinced the Bears defense is all that good, though, against NFL caliber offenses.

                I haven't really seen Dallas since the game Romo replaced Bledsoe. If there is a team I've refused to watch in principle since the 1970s, its the Cowboys. Maybe, however, the Cowboys would make the AFC playoffs. Parcells *is* an excellent coach and he seems to have them coming together.

                But to say the Bears would make the playoffs if they played in the AFC is not really helped by the Bears head-to-head against the AFC over the past few years. In AFC North, they'd trail Baltimore and Cincy, and if Pittsburgh didn't lead the league in giveaways this year (fascinating that the Steelers lead the league in both giveaways AND number of plays from scrimmage with gains greater than 10 yards : ) the Bears would be battling Cleveland to stay out of the AFC North cellar. You may think its a stupid comment, but its really not. The Bears are NOT better than any of Jacksonville, Cincy, and Denver, and two of those teams will probably miss the playoffs in the AFC. The Bears are not really any better than Pittsburgh, either. And when the Bears turn the ball over the way the Steelers have turned the ball over this year, they lose to (or barely beat) bad teams. Of course, you can say that about any Super Bowl contending team, if they suddenly find themselves leading the leauge in giveaways they'll find themselves missing the playoffs.

                The Bears have lots of weaknesses that will get exposed when they play "better" teams. And I'm not sure Grossman/ QB is really one of them, he's just in a slump but he's a fine QB. But they have an inflated record and the hype that comes with it.
                hahahahahahahahahahahaha

                bitter much?
                STARBURY

                08 and Beyond

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Rex Grossman

                  Originally posted by Big Smooth View Post
                  Much of what you state there is a bit laughable but I'll play nice and just say you are entitled to your opinions.
                  Well, he is entitled to his opinions..however wrong and misguided they may be.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Rex Grossman

                    Originally posted by Robertmto View Post
                    hahahahahahahahahahahaha

                    bitter much?
                    No. I like wearing my Jerome Bettis jersey around town, then asking people wearing Urlacher jerseys if I can pick them up and carry them six yards into the end zone like Jerome did.

                    As bad as this season has gone in terms of moving the ball (leading the league in plays from scrimmage > 10 yards) then turning it over (leading the league in turnovers and red zone turnovers), at least I can remember fondly the final year of the Jerome Bettis era.

                    Smooth,

                    What's laughable? The Bears look much better agains the Detroits, GBs, Minnesotas, Buffalos, etc. of the world than the rest of the league.

                    Moses,

                    The Bears have been far from "evenly matched with the high calibre teams of the AFC" in recent seasons. Look, you're guilty here of what you often accuse me of, the Bears were reasonably competitive against the team you follow closest. But you should've heard the talk radio here the morning after that game - the fans realized the rest of the NFL is playing at a different level than the NFC North and even the normally very-confident Bears fans aren't sure their team will do much in the playoffs.

                    2006:
                    Buffalo W 40-7. Buffalo is clearly not a high caliber AFC team.
                    Miami L 13-31. Neither is Miami.
                    @ NY Jets W 10-0. Nobody knows what to think about the Jets, they weren't supposed to be as good as their record.
                    @ New England L 13-17. One contending team this season, 0-1, close game.

                    2005:
                    Cincinnati L 7-24. Cincy won AFC North and made the playoffs. Blowout loss at home.
                    @ Cleveland L 10-20. Cleveland hasn't beaten very many teams in recent years.
                    Baltimore W 10-6. Baltimore struggled year last year.
                    @ Pittsburgh L 9-21. First of the eight-game winning streak leading to a Super Bowl championship, so no shame in getting blown out.

                    2004:
                    The Bears went 5-11, so these are not really meaningful anyway...
                    @ Tennessee, OT win
                    Indianapolis, L, blow out
                    @ Jacksonville, L, blow out
                    Houston, L, was that score really 5-24? five points?

                    You guys may not like what I've got to say, but I'm right. I'm certainly not wrong nor misguided just because I can see that the Bears are an average team.

                    Call me delusional if you want, but the NFC North is a lot like the NBA's Atlantic Division right now. If the Bears really had to play every NFL team once, instead of feasting on awful teams in their division, they'd be leading that division with a below 0.500 record.

                    They're hardly "great."

                    Let's try something different though. Make a counter argument instead of poking fun at me/ my opinions. Tell me why the Bears, which are 4-8 against the AFC in recent years and either 0-4 or 1-4, depending on whether or not the Jets make the playoffs, against AFC playoff teams in recent seasons, would make the playoffs in the AFC.

                    They're not better than Indy, New England, the Ravens, or the Chargers. They're not better than most of the teams in wild card contention.

                    Lastly, Moses, there is a reason the Bears have made the playoffs two years straight. I've already covered it but I'll say it again:

                    The combined record of the other three teams in their division is 31-56. I started the year saying that four of the six worst teams in the NFL were in the NFC North. Since then I've raised the Bears to the middle of the pack, where they belong. I'll give credit where credit is due.

                    Regardless, three of the six worst teams in the NFL (along with Arizona, Oakland, and Buffalo, although the Jets were supposed to be on this list too but they've at least gone 3-1 against the hapless NFC North) reside in that division.

                    If you guys can't see that the Bears have inflated thier reputation against the dregs of the league, then go ahead and follow the pack. Buy into the hype around the Bears. But don't act surprised when they make another early playoff exit, because I'm telling you why to expect one. Or, as I said above, make a counter-argument.
                    Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                    Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                    Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                    Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                    And life itself, rushing over me
                    Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                    Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Rex Grossman

                      Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                      No. I like wearing my Jerome Bettis jersey around town, then asking people wearing Urlacher jerseys if I can pick them up and carry them six yards into the end zone like Jerome did.

                      As bad as this season has gone in terms of moving the ball (leading the league in plays from scrimmage > 10 yards) then turning it over (leading the league in turnovers and red zone turnovers), at least I can remember fondly the final year of the Jerome Bettis era.

                      Smooth,

                      What's laughable? The Bears look much better agains the Detroits, GBs, Minnesotas, Buffalos, etc. of the world than the rest of the league.

                      Moses,

                      The Bears have been far from "evenly matched with the high calibre teams of the AFC" in recent seasons. Look, you're guilty here of what you often accuse me of, the Bears were reasonably competitive against the team you follow closest. But you should've heard the talk radio here the morning after that game - the fans realized the rest of the NFL is playing at a different level than the NFC North and even the normally very-confident Bears fans aren't sure their team will do much in the playoffs.

                      2006:
                      Buffalo W 40-7. Buffalo is clearly not a high caliber AFC team.
                      Miami L 13-31. Neither is Miami.
                      @ NY Jets W 10-0. Nobody knows what to think about the Jets, they weren't supposed to be as good as their record.
                      @ New England L 13-17. One contending team this season, 0-1, close game.

                      2005:
                      Cincinnati L 7-24. Cincy won AFC North and made the playoffs. Blowout loss at home.
                      @ Cleveland L 10-20. Cleveland hasn't beaten very many teams in recent years.
                      Baltimore W 10-6. Baltimore struggled year last year.
                      @ Pittsburgh L 9-21. First of the eight-game winning streak leading to a Super Bowl championship, so no shame in getting blown out.

                      2004:
                      The Bears went 5-11, so these are not really meaningful anyway...
                      @ Tennessee, OT win
                      Indianapolis, L, blow out
                      @ Jacksonville, L, blow out
                      Houston, L, was that score really 5-24? five points?

                      You guys may not like what I've got to say, but I'm right. I'm certainly not wrong nor misguided just because I can see that the Bears are an average team.

                      Call me delusional if you want, but the NFC North is a lot like the NBA's Atlantic Division right now. If the Bears really had to play every NFL team once, instead of feasting on awful teams in their division, they'd be leading that division with a below 0.500 record.

                      They're hardly "great."

                      Let's try something different though. Make a counter argument instead of poking fun at me/ my opinions. Tell me why the Bears, which are 4-8 against the AFC in recent years and either 0-4 or 1-4, depending on whether or not the Jets make the playoffs, against AFC playoff teams in recent seasons, would make the playoffs in the AFC.

                      They're not better than Indy, New England, the Ravens, or the Chargers. They're not better than most of the teams in wild card contention.

                      Lastly, Moses, there is a reason the Bears have made the playoffs two years straight. I've already covered it but I'll say it again:

                      The combined record of the other three teams in their division is 31-56. I started the year saying that four of the six worst teams in the NFL were in the NFC North. Since then I've raised the Bears to the middle of the pack, where they belong. I'll give credit where credit is due.

                      Regardless, three of the six worst teams in the NFL (along with Arizona, Oakland, and Buffalo, although the Jets were supposed to be on this list too but they've at least gone 3-1 against the hapless NFC North) reside in that division.

                      If you guys can't see that the Bears have inflated thier reputation against the dregs of the league, then go ahead and follow the pack. Buy into the hype around the Bears. But don't act surprised when they make another early playoff exit, because I'm telling you why to expect one. Or, as I said above, make a counter-argument.
                      Ok, Miami, Buffalo and the Jets are all decent teams. Miami's defense has re-emerged..Buffalo has been playing alot of very good teams close this year..and the Jets defense is really under-rated.

                      You act like the Bears have a choice in what division they play in. What do you want them to do? Lose the games? Make them close? They blow out weaker opponents because they are that much better. I don't see any elite AFC teams blowing the cellar-dwellar teams of the NFC out by 35 points like the Bears were doing.

                      I'm talking about 2006 and the present. I don't care what they have done in the past because they were a team completely dependant on defense..and they still almost are. If Grossman can play consistently, I don't see how they aren't the best team in the NFC and a top 3 team overall in the league. They have the best special teams in the league and they have a top 2 defense in the league.

                      I'm sure you watched the Rams game. They blew out the Rams with great special teams play and an efficient offense..despite missing 4 or so starters on defense. So the Bears are benefitting from playing in a weaker conference..it's not their fault they are in it. Would they be 11-2 in the AFC? Probably not. But they would definitely be 3-4 games above .500. The Bears are capitalizing on a weak schedule...just like Seattle did last year...and just like Seattle is doing this year. I still don't understand how an 11-2 team can be mediocre. It's just not possible. Mediocre teams consistently lose to teams they should beat.

                      Nobody will win this fight until we see what the Bears do in the playoffs. They will murder every team in the NFC if Grossman doesn't loft 60 yard floaters over the middle of the field just waiting to get picked off. Defense and Special teams can win championships right? Grossman just needs to play average the Bears have a pretty easy ride to the SB.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Rex Grossman

                        I don't see why everyone is so surprised Rex is having thess issues. I think he is a wonderful QB but he needs experience. Despite it being his 4th year, this is basically his rookie season, due to all of his previous injuries. Give him time, if he doesn't get better with experience (by mid next season at least) then bench him. If they go to Griese yes, they will win right now but they will have to find another franchise QB and go through the "experience" again.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Rex Grossman

                          Originally posted by BoomBaby31 View Post
                          I don't see why everyone is so surprised Rex is having thess issues. I think he is a wonderful QB but he needs experience. Despite it being his 4th year, this is basically his rookie season, due to all of his previous injuries. Give him time, if he doesn't get better with experience (by mid next season at least) then bench him. If they go to Griese yes, they will win right now but they will have to find another franchise QB and go through the "experience" again.
                          Those are my thoughts. If the Bears don't make noise this year, they will definitely make some next year when Rex has had more experience.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Rex Grossman

                            Originally posted by Moses View Post
                            -snip-You act like the Bears have a choice in what division they play in. What do you want them to do? Lose the games? Make them close? They blow out weaker opponents because they are that much better. I don't see any elite AFC teams blowing the cellar-dwellar teams of the NFC out by 35 points like the Bears were doing.
                            Originally posted by Jay
                            The Bears "D" has done thier job, they've held high-school caliber offenses to a very low number of points.
                            Okay, we agree.

                            I'm talking about 2006 and the present. I don't care what they have done in the past because they were a team completely dependant on defense..and they still almost are. If Grossman can play consistently, I don't see how they aren't the best team in the NFC and a top 3 team overall in the league. They have the best special teams in the league and they have a top 2 defense in the league.
                            Top 2? No way. You're saying that's the second best defense in the league after Baltimore's? Wow. No way.

                            I'm sure you watched the Rams game. They blew out the Rams with great special teams play and an efficient offense..despite missing 4 or so starters on defense. So the Bears are benefitting from playing in a weaker conference..it's not their fault they are in it. Would they be 11-2 in the AFC? Probably not. But they would definitely be 3-4 games above .500. The Bears are capitalizing on a weak schedule...just like Seattle did last year...and just like Seattle is doing this year. I still don't understand how an 11-2 team can be mediocre. It's just not possible. Mediocre teams consistently lose to teams they should beat.
                            Not really, but I know what happened. I was at a client dinner in Atlanta. But if I'd been in Chicago that night, I would've been at the UC cheering on the depleted Pacers. Mediocre teams are "average", e.g. 0.500. I've never seen *that* defininton of mediocre. The Steelers are one of only two teams - along with San Diego - in the top-ten in both offense and defense (yards), yet are below 0.500. I'm not sure they're mediocre, either. (Turnover prone? Yes.) If the Bears were in the AFC they'd be in the hunt for a wild card spot. There is not a single AFC division they'd be leading.

                            Nobody will win this fight until we see what the Bears do in the playoffs. They will murder every team in the NFC if Grossman doesn't loft 60 yard floaters over the middle of the field just waiting to get picked off. Defense and Special teams can win championships right? Grossman just needs to play average the Bears have a pretty easy ride to the SB.
                            Right. Although I'm not particuarly impressed with the Bears' defense, and that's been my point all along. Above average defense? Yes. Great? No. I'm telling you now that I'm very, very confident that the Bears will not have much postseason success this year.

                            Clearly, giving Grossman more time to mature is going to help that team a lot in the future. And Lovie Smith deserves a lot of credit for getting everything out of that roster that he has.
                            Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                            Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                            Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                            Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                            And life itself, rushing over me
                            Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                            Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Rex Grossman

                              Originally posted by Jay@Section19 View Post
                              Okay, we agree.



                              Top 2? No way. You're saying that's the second best defense in the league after Baltimore's? Wow. No way.



                              Not really, but I know what happened. I was at a client dinner in Atlanta. But if I'd been in Chicago that night, I would've been at the UC cheering on the depleted Pacers. Mediocre teams are "average", e.g. 0.500. I've never seen *that* defininton of mediocre. The Steelers are one of only two teams - along with San Diego - in the top-ten in both offense and defense (yards), yet are below 0.500. I'm not sure they're mediocre, either. (Turnover prone? Yes.) If the Bears were in the AFC they'd be in the hunt for a wild card spot. There is not a single AFC division they'd be leading.



                              Right. Although I'm not particuarly impressed with the Bears' defense, and that's been my point all along. Above average defense? Yes. Great? No. I'm telling you now that I'm very, very confident that the Bears will not have much postseason success this year.

                              Clearly, giving Grossman more time to mature is going to help that team a lot in the future. And Lovie Smith deserves a lot of credit for getting everything out of that roster that he has.
                              You're the only person I know that says the Bears don't have a top 3 defense in the league. They are one of the best in the league at stopping opponents in the red-zone by getting turnovers. The reason they blew so many teams out is because that defense completely shut down a ton of teams.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Rex Grossman

                                Originally posted by Moses
                                You're the only person I know that says the Bears don't have a top 3 defense in the league. They are one of the best in the league at stopping opponents in the red-zone by getting turnovers. The reason they blew so many teams out is because that defense completely shut down a ton of teams.
                                I think Baltimore and Jacksonville are at the top.

                                I think San Diego, New England, Pittsburgh, and perhaps Miami are at the next level. Not sure what to think about Minnesota's defense because, again, I don't think they are as good as the stats indicate.

                                Top-seven? Yes. Top-three? No. I think they are overrated and have been overachieving.
                                Why do the things that we treasure most, slip away in time
                                Till to the music we grow deaf, to God's beauty blind
                                Why do the things that connect us slowly pull us apart?
                                Till we fall away in our own darkness, a stranger to our own hearts
                                And life itself, rushing over me
                                Life itself, the wind in black elms,
                                Life itself in your heart and in your eyes, I can't make it without you

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X