|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243514 is a reply to message #243508] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 12:33   |
 |
*Metal Vixen*
Messages: 12
Registered: July 2006
Location: Baltimore
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| j_ball430 wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 14:22 |
| fl00d3d wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 13:48 |
Yeah, they got lucky getting to the Superbowl with ONLY a one-sided team ....... 
|
*cough* 2000-2001 Baltimore Ravens *cough*
|
WHOA! I don't think so, buddy. I'm a proud Baltimore native and I can DEFINITELY say they didn't get to the Super Bowl by LUCK.
(Can you say 1,364-yard rushing season?). And you forget that our defense is ranked BEST in the NFL. The Ravens broke two Chicago Bears records...which says that the Bears are GOOD, (but the Ravens are better  ). The year that we made it to the SuperBowl, we had a 12-4 record. I don't call that luck. We won 34-7...and I also wouldn't call that luck. I'd say that's a good offense AND defense. We have Steve McNair, one of the best QB's in the biz. Granted, our baseball teams sucks...but the Ravens are excellent, a highly favored team and certainly not one-sided.
~I love my fl00d3d!~
[Updated on: Mon, 05 February 2007 12:33] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243562 is a reply to message #243555] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 14:17 |
 |
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| fl00d3d wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 16:08 |
| j_ball430 wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 14:38 |
When they won the Super Bowl, they were certainly one-sided. Their offense was HORRIBLE. Their offense may be getting better now, but it wasn't the case in their Super Bowl year.
Besides this Super Bowl, the 2001 Super Bowl showcased two horrible teams.
I really don't care what anybody says about a team making it to the Super Bowl. The teams that should have ended in the Super Bowl are the Saints and Patriots or the Chargers. The Colts and Bears suck.
|
But neither of them made it to the Superbowl because they were owned (not beaten) by the Bears and Colts. 
|
Yes, because a last minute field goal means you "owned" that team.
Also, late scoring drives made off of mistakes sure is called "owning" a team, too.
whoa.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243579 is a reply to message #240448] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 15:27 |
 |
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
packers
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243586 is a reply to message #240448] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 15:46 |
fl00d3d
Messages: 1107
Registered: August 2003
Location: Iowa, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
The Bears crushed the Saints, what are you talking about? I'm guessing you're talking about the Patriots/Colts game. And, yes, I was upset because the Patriots were my 3rd overall pick this year.
(Bears, Ravens, Patriots)
But then again, in the previous game, the Colts completely sat on the Ravens ... so I think both the Colts and the Bears made it to the Superbowl fairly and deservingly. I think the weather did have a factor in the game; as well as the fact that Grossman cracked under the pressure because he's not a Superbowl-quality GB. But saying that both teams sucked is a bit of a stretch. They both defintely deserved to play in that game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243597 is a reply to message #243586] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 16:01 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507
Registered: March 2003
Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
| fl00d3d wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 17:46 |
The Bears crushed the Saints, what are you talking about? I'm guessing you're talking about the Patriots/Colts game. And, yes, I was upset because the Patriots were my 3rd overall pick this year.
(Bears, Ravens, Patriots)
But then again, in the previous game, the Colts completely sat on the Ravens ... so I think both the Colts and the Bears made it to the Superbowl fairly and deservingly. I think the weather did have a factor in the game; as well as the fact that Grossman cracked under the pressure because he's not a Superbowl-quality GB. But saying that both teams sucked is a bit of a stretch. They both defintely deserved to play in that game.
|
Oh, I meant the Bears' game against Seattle. >.>
If anybody had an advantage with the weather, it was the Bears.
Grossman cracked under pressure because he's not a good quarterback. He was pretty good at Florida, but he was an idiot to leave too soon.
Both teams are not Super Bowl caliber.
whoa.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243613 is a reply to message #240448] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 16:47 |
|
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
lions
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243635 is a reply to message #243615] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 18:56 |
|
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| j_ball430 wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 17:51 |
| Sniper_De7 wrote on Mon, 05 February 2007 18:47 |
lions
|
I disowned them years ago.
|
playing against and watching barry was pretty entertaining
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243642 is a reply to message #240448] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 19:23 |
fl00d3d
Messages: 1107
Registered: August 2003
Location: Iowa, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
|
Winning by a last minute field goal is not "cheap". I don't see how you can possibly argue that - so I don't think I even need to explain my position here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243653 is a reply to message #240448] |
Mon, 05 February 2007 20:03 |
|
*Metal Vixen*
Messages: 12
Registered: July 2006
Location: Baltimore
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
The Patriots should have made it....but we can all thank Caldwell for their loss. And possibly Brady's moronic interception in the end...not that it would have made a difference.
~I love my fl00d3d!~
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #243706 is a reply to message #240448] |
Tue, 06 February 2007 03:49 |
 |
JohnDoe
Messages: 1416
Registered: May 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
I like how the stans are blaming Grossman when their defence was nowhere near what it claimed to be...NFC sucked more than usual this year, plain and simple.
lol
|
|
|
|
| Re: Da Bears [message #244165 is a reply to message #240448] |
Thu, 08 February 2007 08:02 |
 |
DarkKnight
Messages: 754
Registered: May 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Thought you all might enjoy this
Bears fan loses bet and must change his name
| Quote: |
DECATUR, Ill., Feb. 8, 2007
(AP) Scott Wiese, a die-hard Chicago Bears fan, will legally change his name to that of Indianapolis Colts quarterback Peyton Manning after signing a pledge in front of a crowd at a Decatur bar last Friday night. He vowed to adopt Manning's name if the Bears lost Sunday's Super Bowl.
The final score was Colts 29, Bears 17.
So on Tuesday, Wiese went to the Macon County Courts Facility and started the process of changing his name.
"I made the bet, and now I've got to keep it," said the 26-year-old, who lives in Forsyth, just north of Decatur.
Wiese will now have to advertise his intention in the local newspaper _ the Herald & Review _ for several weeks and then have a judge give him the OK to become, legally anyway, Peyton Manning.
The men have little in common, Wiese acknowledges.
Manning the quarterback is 30 years old, stands 6-foot-5 and has a contract with the Colts worth more than $100 million.
Wiese is 5-foot-11 and works at a Staples office-supply store for somewhat less.
"I think I kind of represent all Bears fans," he said. "Not that I'm saying they're all idiots like me, but I represent their passion because I really care about my team, you know?"
While he pledged to take on the new identity, Wiese didn't make any promises about how long he would keep it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
