By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The Bears just might win the Super Bowl

rocketpig said:
Euphoria14 said:
amp316 said:
psrock said:

They need to beat the best team in Football right now first.

Explain to me why everyone says this?

The Packers were the sixth seeded team in the NFC (split with the Bears and won one less game then them as I stated in the OP). 

I am a Bears fan, but if I were to be asked who the best remaining team is, I'd have to say the Steelers.  They are by far the most balanced team.  

Because Aaron Rogers is the big name going right now, just like Drew Brees earlier this year.

Just give it time. If he loses people will forget about him and the current praising will disappear like a fart in the wind, just like with Brees.

Rodgers has improved every season he's been a starter and is now one a top 5 QB in the NFL, top 10 at the very least (because there are just so many great QBs playing right now). No one with a brain is any more down on Brees because of his 2010. He threw more picks, which is to be expected after his amazing 2009 season. He's still a top QB and he had a hell of a good season in 2010.


I agree that Rodgers has been getting better than that Brees still a top notch QB, but who is the top guy in the media and amongst the buying population changes so quickly.

If Green Bay gets knocked out by the Bears and the Jets get by Big Ben and the Steelers we could be hearing all about Sanchez next week, especially considering he would become the only QB in history to win 5 playoff games on the road.



iPhone = Great gaming device. Don't agree? Who cares, because you're wrong.

Currently playing:

Final Fantasy VI (iOS), Final Fantasy: Record Keeper (iOS) & Dragon Quest V (iOS)     

    

Got a retro room? Post it here!

Around the Network
rocketpig said:
amp316 said:

Interesting that you'd say that.  The true measure of consistency for a team is their win/loss record over an entire season.

That's not true at all. The NFL season is too short and the schedule too unbalanced to be considered the hallmark of a great team.

The Packers played the Eagles, Jets, Falcons, Patriots on the road and the Giants at home. That's brutal.

The Bears played the Giants on the road and the Jets, Eagles, and Patriots at home.

Not even close to the same thing. The Bears didn't even play the Falcons and got the majority of good teams at home (and were still annihilated by the Pats). The two teams' schedules weren't even close to being equal. That's just the nature of the NFL but it's another reason why the regular season has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Despite that more difficult schedule, the Packers scored far more points and allowed far fewer points than the Bears and ended up just one game behind Chicago. On paper and on the field, the Packers look like a better team. That doesn't mean they'll win on Sunday but that does explain why they're favored to do so.


What he said. Not to mention we lost our starting RB and TE key starters throughout the season. Yet still never lost by more than 4 points this season. A-rod is posting godly post season numbers too ...highest passer rating in nfl history atm.



I was hoping the seahawks would win it all just for the comedic effect



And that's the only thing I need is *this*. I don't need this or this. Just this PS4... And this gaming PC. - The PS4 and the Gaming PC and that's all I need... And this Xbox 360. - The PS4, the Gaming PC, and the Xbox 360, and that's all I need... And these PS3's. - The PS4, and these PS3's, and the Gaming PC, and the Xbox 360... And this Nintendo DS. - The PS4, this Xbox 360, and the Gaming PC, and the PS3's, and that's all *I* need. And that's *all* I need too. I don't need one other thing, not one... I need this. - The Gaming PC and PS4, and Xbox 360, and thePS3's . Well what are you looking at? What do you think I'm some kind of a jerk or something! - And this. That's all I need.

Obligatory dick measuring Gaming Laptop Specs: Sager NP8270-GTX: 17.3" FULL HD (1920X1080) LED Matte LC, nVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M, Intel Core i7-4700MQ, 16GB (2x8GB) DDR3, 750GB SATA II 3GB/s 7,200 RPM Hard Drive

brawl4life said:
rocketpig said:
amp316 said:

Interesting that you'd say that.  The true measure of consistency for a team is their win/loss record over an entire season.

That's not true at all. The NFL season is too short and the schedule too unbalanced to be considered the hallmark of a great team.

The Packers played the Eagles, Jets, Falcons, Patriots on the road and the Giants at home. That's brutal.

The Bears played the Giants on the road and the Jets, Eagles, and Patriots at home.

Not even close to the same thing. The Bears didn't even play the Falcons and got the majority of good teams at home (and were still annihilated by the Pats). The two teams' schedules weren't even close to being equal. That's just the nature of the NFL but it's another reason why the regular season has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Despite that more difficult schedule, the Packers scored far more points and allowed far fewer points than the Bears and ended up just one game behind Chicago. On paper and on the field, the Packers look like a better team. That doesn't mean they'll win on Sunday but that does explain why they're favored to do so.


What he said. Not to mention we lost our starting RB and TE key starters throughout the season. Yet still never lost by more than 4 points this season. A-rod is posting godly post season numbers too ...highest passer rating in nfl history atm.


Not to mention the fact that Aaron Rodgers has already been knocked out of multiple games this year due to concussions.



themanwithnoname's law: As an America's sales or NPD thread grows longer, the probabilty of the comment "America = World" [sarcasticly] being made approaches 1.

themanwithnoname said:
brawl4life said:
rocketpig said:
amp316 said:

Interesting that you'd say that.  The true measure of consistency for a team is their win/loss record over an entire season.

That's not true at all. The NFL season is too short and the schedule too unbalanced to be considered the hallmark of a great team.

The Packers played the Eagles, Jets, Falcons, Patriots on the road and the Giants at home. That's brutal.

The Bears played the Giants on the road and the Jets, Eagles, and Patriots at home.

Not even close to the same thing. The Bears didn't even play the Falcons and got the majority of good teams at home (and were still annihilated by the Pats). The two teams' schedules weren't even close to being equal. That's just the nature of the NFL but it's another reason why the regular season has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Despite that more difficult schedule, the Packers scored far more points and allowed far fewer points than the Bears and ended up just one game behind Chicago. On paper and on the field, the Packers look like a better team. That doesn't mean they'll win on Sunday but that does explain why they're favored to do so.


What he said. Not to mention we lost our starting RB and TE key starters throughout the season. Yet still never lost by more than 4 points this season. A-rod is posting godly post season numbers too ...highest passer rating in nfl history atm.


Not to mention the fact that Aaron Rodgers has already been knocked out of multiple games this year due to concussions.

One more concussion and he's not allowed to play the rest of the season.  Did anyone know that rule?



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

Around the Network

I am hearing about the Packers tougher schedule and really it's not as tough as you think:

The Packers played the Eagles on the road and the Bears played them at home you say.  I say that the Eagles faced the Kevin Kolb led Eagles and barely won.  The Bears steamrolled the much better Eagles led by Michael Vick.  It's not the same thing. 

The Packers and Bears both played the Giants with the Packers winning and the Bears losing won in those respective games you say.  I say that the Bears played the extremely tough early season Giants.  The Packers played the late season creampuff Giants.  It's not the same thing. 

The Packers lost to the Falcons in the regular season and the Bears didn't play them.  You got me there.

Both teams beat the Jets. 

The Bears had their worst game against the Patriots (this is true) and the Packers nearly beat them.  Why?  New England didn't even show up and took them lightly.  They saw that Errol Flynn, or whatever his name is, was playing and thought that it would be a cake walk.  The Patriots have the tendancy to underestimate teams and play badly.  Look at that game, the game against the Browns, the playoff game against the Jets, and the Super Bowl game against the Giants.  Basically, what I'm saying is that despite that and the fact that it was a must win game for the Packers, they lost.

Oh, also both teams played the Lions twice and I only saw the Packers losing to them.  You know what they say; If you can lose to the Lions, you can lose to anybody.

Another thing I have heard all year is that how all of the games that the Packers have lost this year have been close.  This isn't exactly something to be proud of.  When you repeatedly lose close games it says one of two things:

1)  The QB is bad.

2)  The coach is bad.

Pick one.  I'm sure that you won't pick the bad QB choice and I'd agree.  Let's face it, the Packers dodged bullets against the Bears in the last regular season game and against the Eagles.  Clock mismanagement and hoping that the other team screws up is not the way to win close games.  I remember the Packers two or three years ago being up on the Bears by I think that it was 7 with around 5 minutes left.  It was fourth and goal and instead of kicking the field goal they went for it.  They didn't make it and wound up losing because of McCarthy's decision.  Championship teams normally win close games. 

Rodgers is a fine QB, but don't start with his highest passer rating ever in the playoffs stuff.  He's hardly played any playoff games.  I could say that Jay Cutler has the best W/L percentage in the playoffs ever and how would you react to that?  Rodgers played a great game against the Falcons, but don't expect him to put the same kinds of numbers up against the Bears.  He won't be 31 for 35 or whatever he was.  Trust me on this one.   

I'm not saying that they will, but the Packers just might lose this Sunday. 



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

amp316 said:

I am hearing about the Packers tougher schedule and really it's not as tough as you think:

The Packers played the Eagles on the road and the Bears played them at home you say.  I say that the Eagles faced the Kevin Kolb led Eagles and barely won.  The Bears steamrolled the much better Eagles led by Michael Vick.  It's not the same thing. 

The Packers and Bears both played the Giants with the Packers winning and the Bears losing won in those respective games you say.  I say that the Bears played the extremely tough early season Giants.  The Packers played the late season creampuff Giants.  It's not the same thing. 

The Packers lost to the Falcons in the regular season and the Bears didn't play them.  You got me there.

Both teams beat the Jets. 

The Bears had their worst game against the Patriots (this is true) and the Packers nearly beat them.  Why?  New England didn't even show up and took them lightly.  They saw that Errol Flynn, or whatever his name is, was playing and thought that it would be a cake walk.  The Patriots have the tendancy to underestimate teams and play badly.  Look at that game, the game against the Browns, the playoff game against the Jets, and the Super Bowl game against the Giants.  Basically, what I'm saying is that despite that and the fact that it was a must win game for the Packers, they lost.

Oh, also both teams played the Lions twice and I only saw the Packers losing to them.  You know what they say; If you can lose to the Lions, you can lose to anybody.

Another thing I have heard all year is that how all of the games that the Packers have lost this year have been close.  This isn't exactly something to be proud of.  When you repeatedly lose close games it says one of two things:

1)  The QB is bad.

2)  The coach is bad.

Pick one.  I'm sure that you won't pick the bad QB choice and I'd agree.  Let's face it, the Packers dodged bullets against the Bears in the last regular season game and against the Eagles.  Clock mismanagement and hoping that the other team screws up is not the way to win close games.  I remember the Packers two or three years ago being up on the Bears by I think that it was 7 with around 5 minutes left.  It was fourth and goal and instead of kicking the field goal they went for it.  They didn't make it and wound up losing because of McCarthy's decision.  Championship teams normally win close games. 

Rodgers is a fine QB, but don't start with his highest passer rating ever in the playoffs stuff.  He's hardly played any playoff games.  I could say that Jay Cutler has the best W/L percentage in the playoffs ever and how would you react to that?  Rodgers played a great game against the Falcons, but don't expect him to put the same kinds of numbers up against the Bears.  He won't be 31 for 35 or whatever he was.  Trust me on this one.   

I'm not saying that they will, but the Packers just might lose this Sunday. 

Kolb was injured against the Packers and Vick played most of the game.

The Bears put up three points against the Giants. I don't care when and where they played them, that's a bad showing.

Yes, the Packers lost to the Lions. That was pretty pathetic, losing a game against Detroit 3-7.

The Patriots give away games? Have you been watching the same Belichick-coached games as the rest of the world? He's the only guy ever to go 16-0 in a season and is NOTORIOUS for preparing his players for EVERY game, no matter who they're playing. That statement is just ridiculous.

Teams sometimes lose close games. It happens. But the fact remains that the team KEPT themselves in that game and gave themselves the chance to win. There were a few Bears games they couldn't even manage that. Give me a close loss any day over a blowout (and I bet every player polled in the NFL would say the same thing).

The two teams are close, there's no doubt about that. But, despite your attempts to shore up the schedule differences, the Bears had a lot of tough teams at home while the Packers had a lot of tough teams on the road. The Packers also scored more points and allowed fewer points over the course of the season (about 100 over the Bears so about a 6 point difference per game, in other words, A LOT).

There's a reason the Packers are favored in this game. Vegas odds-makers aren't stupid.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

@ rocketpig  Depite disagreeing about a few things, I will agree that both teams are close and I do think that it will be a close game. 

I do think that the real reason that you came into this thread though is because I use a double space after each sentence.  Sorry.  It's how I was taught to do it.



Proud member of the SONIC SUPPORT SQUAD

Tag "Sorry man. Someone pissed in my Wheaties."

"There are like ten games a year that sell over a million units."  High Voltage CEO -  Eric Nofsinger

rocketpig said:
amp316 said:

I am hearing about the Packers tougher schedule and really it's not as tough as you think:

The Packers played the Eagles on the road and the Bears played them at home you say.  I say that the Eagles faced the Kevin Kolb led Eagles and barely won.  The Bears steamrolled the much better Eagles led by Michael Vick.  It's not the same thing. 

The Packers and Bears both played the Giants with the Packers winning and the Bears losing won in those respective games you say.  I say that the Bears played the extremely tough early season Giants.  The Packers played the late season creampuff Giants.  It's not the same thing. 

The Packers lost to the Falcons in the regular season and the Bears didn't play them.  You got me there.

Both teams beat the Jets. 

The Bears had their worst game against the Patriots (this is true) and the Packers nearly beat them.  Why?  New England didn't even show up and took them lightly.  They saw that Errol Flynn, or whatever his name is, was playing and thought that it would be a cake walk.  The Patriots have the tendancy to underestimate teams and play badly.  Look at that game, the game against the Browns, the playoff game against the Jets, and the Super Bowl game against the Giants.  Basically, what I'm saying is that despite that and the fact that it was a must win game for the Packers, they lost.

Oh, also both teams played the Lions twice and I only saw the Packers losing to them.  You know what they say; If you can lose to the Lions, you can lose to anybody.

Another thing I have heard all year is that how all of the games that the Packers have lost this year have been close.  This isn't exactly something to be proud of.  When you repeatedly lose close games it says one of two things:

1)  The QB is bad.

2)  The coach is bad.

Pick one.  I'm sure that you won't pick the bad QB choice and I'd agree.  Let's face it, the Packers dodged bullets against the Bears in the last regular season game and against the Eagles.  Clock mismanagement and hoping that the other team screws up is not the way to win close games.  I remember the Packers two or three years ago being up on the Bears by I think that it was 7 with around 5 minutes left.  It was fourth and goal and instead of kicking the field goal they went for it.  They didn't make it and wound up losing because of McCarthy's decision.  Championship teams normally win close games. 

Rodgers is a fine QB, but don't start with his highest passer rating ever in the playoffs stuff.  He's hardly played any playoff games.  I could say that Jay Cutler has the best W/L percentage in the playoffs ever and how would you react to that?  Rodgers played a great game against the Falcons, but don't expect him to put the same kinds of numbers up against the Bears.  He won't be 31 for 35 or whatever he was.  Trust me on this one.   

I'm not saying that they will, but the Packers just might lose this Sunday. 

Kolb was injured against the Packers and Vick played most of the game.

The Bears put up three points against the Giants. I don't care when and where they played them, that's a bad showing.

Yes, the Packers lost to the Lions. That was pretty pathetic, losing a game against Detroit 3-7.

The Patriots give away games? Have you been watching the same Belichick-coached games as the rest of the world? He's the only guy ever to go 16-0 in a season and is NOTORIOUS for preparing his players for EVERY game, no matter who they're playing. That statement is just ridiculous.

Teams sometimes lose close games. It happens. But the fact remains that the team KEPT themselves in that game and gave themselves the chance to win. There were a few Bears games they couldn't even manage that. Give me a close loss any day over a blowout (and I bet every player polled in the NFL would say the same thing).

The two teams are close, there's no doubt about that. But, despite your attempts to shore up the schedule differences, the Bears had a lot of tough teams at home while the Packers had a lot of tough teams on the road. The Packers also scored more points and allowed fewer points over the course of the season (about 100 over the Bears so about a 6 point difference per game, in other words, A LOT).

There's a reason the Packers are favored in this game. Vegas odds-makers aren't stupid.

True, however, I've seem them be wrong many times these playoffs so far and to bet against the home team in an intense rivalry.....

I really can't wait for Sunday.



This is why I think the pack will beat the bears.

Rogers has it all over cutler.  There is nothing that Cutler can do that Rogers can't do, even scrambling I think rogers has it.

The Pack dismantled the 13-3 Falcons, they held the atlanta to under 200 yards.

My feeling is the pack have a better than slight edge on offense and the bears have a slight edge on defense.  Offense wins it for the pack

As for the jets I don't think jets will beat the steelers twice in one season

Plus the best defensive player in the league (imho) Troy P missed the previous tilt with the jets

I believe he will be playing this time

Pack and steelers in super bowl, I hope the pack win but i think this is a toss up