Yumcha

Pull_T: HEY, did Hester just return a kick for a TD again...?

Yumcha

But, it's against the Rams.


He's better than Rex...I know.
But, if he can't beat a good AFC team. I have one word for you: MEH.

Yumcha

See...I think Derek Anderson's better than Romo.

NetEditor

Too bad it's in a losing effort.

Yumcha

Not bad on a team without a QB and RB.

wndrlst

True dat, friend. He still looked good.

Yumcha

HONEY. REX GROSSMAN looked good against the the Rams last year. Even his stats were good against them last year.



Sorry.

But...like I said (in case Kumar and revvy e-jump me), Romo is indeed wayyyy better than Rex. No doubt.

But, compared to Anderson? Pffft.

Yumcha

Bears are 1-3...!

furious1smitul

You should pick more often with lack of sleep apparently... was definitely not expecting them to lose.

Yumcha

Memo to me: If I ever see Jerry Angelo, slap him with a diecast robot across the face for being a moron for letting Thomas Jones go and not pursuing a QB like Garcia and/or etc.

NetEditor

And apparently, no defense.

Yumcha

You're kidding, right?

The Bears were chasing Kitna all over the field today. They had 6 sacks on the guy. The Bears are losing because of Griese's turnovers and all the fumbles.

Yumcha

Well, you can't blame Chicago for trying.

NetEditor

Yeah, they scared him so bad that he went 20 for 24 for 247 yards, 2 TDs and zero INTs.

I hope the Bears don't scare all the opposing QBs like that.

Yumcha

You're not watching the game just quoting the box score, dude.

You can trash the Bears if you wish. But, don't trash them in areas where it's not applicable, mkay...?

NetEditor

Yeah, OK. That Bears defense was FANtastic today.

If that's the Bears defense on a good day, I'd hate to see them on a bad day.

Yumcha

Well, put it this way, tell me of any team (all-star defense and all) that can recover from the 4 fumbles and 3 INTs the offense coughed up.

Heck, even Belicheat's Pats would not win in a game like that.

NetEditor

But I thought the Bears were "chasing Kitna all over the field."

Yumcha

6 sacks sounds pretty good to me.

Yumcha

And since you're reading the box score, howabout you just reinforce my point about the points Kitna and the Lions O got off of turnovers against Chicago...?

So, like I said...not about the D playing poorly. It was the offense for the Bears that failed again.

NetEditor

Six sacks is pretty good, but it didn't translate into disrupting Kitna all that much.

The Lions got six sacks, too, but they DID succeed in disrupting Griese. There's the difference.

NetEditor

Whoa, whoa, hold on. I'm not blaming the defense for losing the game. There's a difference between saying the defense didn't really play that well and saying they are to blame for losing the game. Yes, overcoming all those turnovers is nearly impossible, but you have to admit that the Bears defense is more middle-of-the-pack now, especially compared to last year.

And you'd think the Bears D would be used to all the turnovers playing with Grossman.

Yumcha

My head hurts trying to discuss with you about this, dude. And I'm getting NEAR annoyed to negrep you too.

Okay...so, WHERE does this state that the Bears D sucked today then...? Did you watch the game? Seriously. Did you? If you did, you'll also note what Dick Stockton and the commentating crew was saying all game...the Bears O is in serious need of repairs. The D got so tired from repeated coming onto the field from fumbles on kick returns and short offensive series.

And oh, considering they were without a couple of Pro Bowlers on D, I think Chicago did quite nicely defending...

Yumcha

Say, what team do you cheer for...? Just wondering.

Yumcha

BTW, nice backpedalling:

NetEditor

Oh, I agree. The Bears have lost some very key people.

And as far as the defense getting tired, yes, you're right. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Bears defense performed well last year partly because they could control the ball with Thomas Jones. A defense, any defense, is not going to perform well if the offense sucks. That's a given.

But whether it's injuries, turnovers, being tired or having a horrible offense, the defense caved. It doesn't matter why. I didn't qualify my statement. I didn't say the Bears defense played poorly because their personnel sucked.

And if the defense played so well, why are you coming up with all these excuses?

Are they playing well under the circumstances? Yes.

NetEditor

Raiders.

NetEditor

What backpedaling? Sounds to me like you're overreacting. Don't take it out on me because your Bears are a mess.

Whiskers

Finally get to watch a full night game and its Eagles / Giants!!!

Yumcha

You're totalling backpedalling, bud. You just said way earlier that the Bears had NO DEFENSE in this game. I just countered that. And you continued to heckle and laugh at what I said in regards to that.

So, now...you've changed your statement to oh-they-played-alright. That is not the same as saying NO DEFENSE.

NetEditor

OK, if you believe I literally meant NO DEFENSE, you're definitely taking this TOO seriously. Sounds to me like the Bears' crappy play has your panties in a bunch.

Yumcha

Why would you make fun and then attempt to defend an aspect of a team that's actually not tidicule-worthy (as compared to the incompetence on offense) and then say that I took your comments too seriously...?

Yumcha

NetEditor: Like I said, discussing this with you makes my head hurt.

Stick to cheering for the Raiders, mkay?

husker1

NetEditor

I understand WHY the Bears defense isn't playing well.

NetEditor

Whatever. Sounds to me like you can't look at your own team objectively.

And I will continue to cheer for my Raiders. They have twice as many wins as your Bears.

Yumcha

WTF. So, defending their defense is not looking at the team objectively...?!?

I have always criticized the running game and recently the QB play esp. after the Dallas debacle. WTF are you talking about...?

Really...please do keep making up phantom stuff about what I say. Keep going!

Whiskers

Penis sword fight

NetEditor

OK, yes, the Bears defense is GREAT!!! 37 points to the Lions a week after giving up 34 to the Cowboys. Yep, that's great.

I'm saying they're not playing well. You're saying they're not playing well because of injuries, turnovers and a bad offense. Either way, they're not playing well. I understand WHY they're not playing well, but that doesn't deflect from the point that they're not playing well. It just so happens that they have valid excuses for not playing well.

Anyway, chalk up another victim to the Super Bowl runner-up hangover.

NetEditor

And I'm slightly confused by the points of the Bears defense being tired and overcoming turnovers. The Bears had the ball longer than the Lions (barely), ran more offense plays (80 vs. 55) and had only one more turnover (3 picks vs. 2 fumbles).