ADVERTISEMENT

Bears Football Talk

They had a chance to win every one of those game in the last AB.
And they didn't. That's where the "execution" comes in. The Sox had the A's down 3-0 in the 4th inning of game 3 and didn't put them away. We're talking about an elimination game. If you get a team down one game to none in a three game series you should finish them off. My oldest son and I talked after game one and we both agreed if Keuchel didn't win game 2, Oakland was probably going to win game 3 as well.
 
I don't think that is safe to say at all. I expected them to struggle during a portion of the season, was just hoping it wouldn't be the end of the season, unfortunately it was. You can also argue through a full season, Robert likely becomes more consistent, Encarnacion begins to get less PT OR He gets hot for a stretch, probably let Dunning and Cease settle into the rotation, likely make a trade at the deadline to bring in needed help, Madrigal plays better defense, Moncada gets stronger with time (after COVID) and that Eloy, Anderson, Moncada and Robert will all be healthy at the same time.
I don't agree with all that. Do you remember who the manager and pitching coach were? So do I. They would have finished under .500.

This team had a history of fading in the second half.
 
And they didn't. That's where the "execution" comes in. The Sox had the A's down 3-0 in the 4th inning of game 3 and didn't put them away. We're talking about an elimination game. If you get a team down one game to none in a three game series you should finish them off. My oldest son and I talked after game one and we both agreed if Keuchel didn't win game 2, Oakland was probably going to win game 3 as well.
Almost every writer in baseball thought we were doomed in game three and yes they were up 3-0 and the manager (who as we know will not be around again) made mistake after mistake with the pitching staff. Of course execution is crucial and as I'm sure you've seen a lot over your time, sometimes even the best don't execute at the most crucial times. It also doesn't help to not have 1 home game in a 3 game series and lose one of your two most productive hitters for all but 2 AB's. I don't think this group in nearly as far off as you do.
 
I don't agree with all that. Do you remember who the manager and pitching coach were? So do I. They would have finished under .500.

This team had a history of fading in the second half.
THIS current team does not have that history. For you to say flat out they would have been under .500 is laughable. Could it have happened? Sure, but it's doubtful.
 
I was talking about 1977 not 1983. The '77 team were the Southside Hit men. That 1977 team didn't win their division and I said so in my earlier post. The '83 team played the Orioles in the playoffs.

Got it. I remember the 77 team too.
 
THIS current team does not have that history. For you to say flat out they would have been under .500 is laughable. Could it have happened? Sure, but it's doubtful.
It's not laughable at all. It's not like I didn't trust the players. I didn't trust the field manager or his pitching coach. Those two couldn't with with the talent of the 1998 Yankees.
 
I agree they won in spite of Renteria and Coop's days have past, but the talent on that team wasn't sub-500 and it wasn't lightning in a bottle. I just don't think it's close to be a guarantee like you suggested.
 
The '78 Yankees were an exciting team, coming back from the depths of hell--11 games out in August--to first win the pennant and then beat the Dodgers in a classic World Series. Reggie Jackson, Lou Pinella, and Bucky Dent were some of the key players. During another exciting summer, the '61 Yankees had Mantle and Maris in a pre-steroid race to beat the mighty Ruth. And let's not forget the '05 Sox, a team as good in Chicago lore as the '85 Bears.
 
I am glad you both acknowledge that you hijacked my Bears post. Lol 😂

Let’s get back talking about the Bears. I for one am very happy where they are currently. Yes I would like a better offensive line but the Bears showed me something against Carolina. They played that game with a chip on their shoulder. I think they are getting better each week and I do think they will beat the Rams this Monday night. This is something I wouldn’t of said after the first 3 games, but with Foles at QB they are improving and the team is starting to rally around him. We may not be SB bound but we are having a fun competitive season.
Let’s hear what you experts think.
Da Bears!
 
  • Like
Reactions: markmacaluso
The '78 Yankees were an exciting team, coming back from the depths of hell--11 games out in August--to first win the pennant and then beat the Dodgers in a classic World Series. Reggie Jackson, Lou Pinella, and Bucky Dent were some of the key players. During another exciting summer, the '61 Yankees had Mantle and Maris in a pre-steroid race to beat the mighty Ruth. And let's not forget the '05 Sox, a team as good in Chicago lore as the '85 Bears.
I would disagree with your last sentence. The 2005 Sox were nowhere near the 1985 Bears. Many NFL experts agree that, for one season, the 1985 Bears were a top 5 team of all time. Some had them as high as number 2. That team totally dominated the league all season and pitched two shutouts in the playoffs. They gave up a total of 10 points in three post season games. Those points came in the SB. If that isn't a record it has to be close. If you look at those 10 points, 3 came after Payton fumbled deep on the Chicago zone. The other 7 were garbage time points.

The Sox had a good team in 2005 and everything just happened to fall in place. But most of the players had career years that year. And most of them didn't produce near that level afterwards. It was a true one and done. But I give them credit. They got it done. It was fortunate they didn't run into the Yankees in the playoffs that year. That was the only team that really worried me.

IMO the two best Sox teams in my lifetime were the 2005 and 1983 teams. And there were two defining moments for me for each team in the playoffs. In 1983 in game 3 in Chicago in the 1st inning Eddie Murray hit either a 2-0 or 2-1 fastball off Richard Dotson into the upper deck in right center field for a 3-run HR. I remember the explosive sound of the ball hitting the bat. Right then, for the first time, I felt Baltimore could beat the Sox. They pounded the Sox that night and we all know what happened in game 4.

In 2005 in game 3 in Anaheim against the Angels in the 1st inning, the Sox scored a run and then Paul Konerko hit a 2-run HR off John Lackey to give them a 3 run lead. The sound was almost identical to Murray's HR. And again, that was the moment I felt the Sox were going to the WS.
 
I am glad you both acknowledge that you hijacked my Bears post. Lol 😂

Let’s get back talking about the Bears. I for one am very happy where they are currently. Yes I would like a better offensive line but the Bears showed me something against Carolina. They played that game with a chip on their shoulder. I think they are getting better each week and I do think they will beat the Rams this Monday night. This is something I wouldn’t of said after the first 3 games, but with Foles at QB they are improving and the team is starting to rally around him. We may not be SB bound but we are having a fun competitive season.
Let’s hear what you experts think.
Da Bears!
I am picking the Rams to beat the Bears on Monday night. LA is coming off a road loss to the 49ers last Sunday. I do think the Rams are a better team. If that offensive line can't stop Aaron Donald, it will be a long night and a long night for Foles...who hasn't been sacked once by Donald.
 
I agree they won in spite of Renteria and Coop's days have past, but the talent on that team wasn't sub-500 and it wasn't lightning in a bottle. I just don't think it's close to be a guarantee like you suggested.
Please re-read my post. I never said it was a guarantee. What I said was in my opinion it was safe to say they wouldn't have finished above 500. They didn't have enough pitching. I also think in the end, Houston probably would have ended up with a better record in a 162 game season.
 
and in a later post, you typed that "they would" end up under .500. That's a pretty confident take.
 
and in a later post, you typed that "they would" end up under .500. That's a pretty confident take.
Oh for Christ's sake, Seriously, you are arguing like a woman. And you are attempting to win an argument...just like a woman. Lighten up Francis. I still think they would have ended up under 500. You don't. OK fine. Neither of us can say for sure what would have happened. Guess we'll have to see next year. But, I am making no predictions now.
 
Oh for Christ's sake, Seriously, you are arguing like a woman. And you are attempting to win an argument...just like a woman. Lighten up Francis. I still think they would have ended up under 500. You don't. OK fine. Neither of us can say for sure what would have happened. Guess we'll have to see next year. But, I am making no predictions now.
Ha, I'm not the one getting upset with my own words. I agree, neither of can say for sure, which is why I thought your confidence in your statement was off-base. I'll agree to disagree with out any name calling or temper tantrums.
 
Ha, I'm not the one getting upset with my own words. I agree, neither of can say for sure, which is why I thought your confidence in your statement was off-base. I'll agree to disagree with out any name calling or temper tantrums.
I am not upset about my words. To me, this whole thing is laughable. But I shouldn't have said you were arguing like a woman. I should have, instead, said you're arguing like a bad girlfriend. There are many good women. But a bad girlfriend is...well...a bad girlfriend.
 
I am not upset about my words. To me, this whole thing is laughable. But I shouldn't have said you were arguing like a woman. I should have, instead, said you're arguing like a bad girlfriend. There are many good women. But a bad girlfriend is...well...a bad girlfriend.
Whatever makes you feel good, I'm not the triggered one.
 
Whatever makes you feel good, I'm not the triggered one.
Like I said. This is laughable. Seriously, you're the one who went off when I said the Sox wouldn't have finished over .500 in a 162 game season. And I still say that. They didn't have enough pitching and their on field manager and pitching coach were awful. That is a recipe for failure over a longer haul. And I also still think Houston would have ended up with a better record. They did advance further in the playoffs.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: missingwalter
Seriously, you're the one who went off when I said the Sox wouldn't have finished over .500 in a 162 game season. And I still say that.

At the risk of being called a "bad girlfriend", it's my humble opinion that you sir, are incorrect. Helen Keller could have coached that team to a .500 or better record.

Now, back to football... Bears and Rams will be a close game. The edge will go the the Rams based on the matchup of their defense vs. the Bears offense (no blocking and questionable play calling won't be overcome). The Bears D will keep them in the game but no magical 4th quarter comeback in this one. Rams 24 Bears 17.

I hope I'm wrong and that score gets flipped around. This is the beginning of a tough stretch on that schedule but they are good enough to win 2 of the next 4 (Saint and Vikings?) putting them at 7 - 3 after 10 games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: missingwalter
At the risk of being called a "bad girlfriend", it's my humble opinion that you sir, are incorrect. Helen Keller could have coached that team to a .500 or better record.

Now, back to football... Bears and Rams will be a close game. The edge will go the the Rams based on the matchup of their defense vs. the Bears offense (no blocking and questionable play calling won't be overcome). The Bears D will keep them in the game but no magical 4th quarter comeback in this one. Rams 24 Bears 17.

I hope I'm wrong and that score gets flipped around. This is the beginning of a tough stretch on that schedule but they are good enough to win 2 of the next 4 (Saint and Vikings?) putting them at 7 - 3 after 10 games.
Mark, that's your opinion and that's fine. But none of us can prove we are right. But they were headed in the wrong direction. They were the number one seed in the playoffs remember? In a matter of a couple weeks they fell all the way down to 7th. That's a tailspin I don't think they would have come out of. Plus their schedule would have been much different in a 162 game season. So, no one can say for sure. However I do agree with one thing. Yeah, Helen Keller could coach them to a record above .500. She would have been an improvement over what we had.

As for the Bears, I don't think they'll win either. I suspect it will be close. But they won't score enough points to help a defense that will hold the Rams down.
 
Da Bears! Question
How does a Cub fan start a thread about the Bears then gets his thread hijacked by White Soxs fans?
IMO the Bears will give the Rams all they can handle and I for one won’t be surprised if they win. 😊
 
  • Like
Reactions: markmacaluso
Da Bears! Question
How does a Cub fan start a thread about the Bears then gets his thread hijacked by White Soxs fans?
IMO the Bears will give the Rams all they can handle and I for one won’t be surprised if they win. 😊
Well Corey, if you would stop talking about the hijacking it might end. LOL :)
 
Rams vs Bears is one of the toughest games of the week to pick because of one person, Aaron Donald.

Things I hope I don't see on offense tonight (besides for Aaron Donald killing Foles) are:

1) Short passes behind the line of scrimmage or only 2 yards past the line of scrimmage on third down and long.
2) Our running backs getting tackled a spilt second after getting the handoff.
3) Patterson trying to run up the middle. He's a tall guy that runs so high, he's going to get his head taken off.
4) Nagy being forced to make important clock management decisions.
5) Any play that relies on Charles Leno Jr staying on a block for more than 2 seconds.

I don't pick them to win the game tonight but that isn't going to stop me from hoping, praying and cheering for them on every play and like every Bears fan, screaming at my television in frustration while my wife rolls her eyes and leaves the room.
 
Rams vs Bears is one of the toughest games of the week to pick because of one person, Aaron Donald.
I actually took about a second to pick L.A. I thought the Detroit, Atlanta game was a tough one. I got lucky and Picked the Lions. In the end Atlanta succeeded over the Lions in trying to lose. I thought the Buccaneers, Raiders game was also a tough one to call. Got that one wrong. The other one I have gotten wrong this week was the 49ers at New England. I suspect a lot of people got that one wrong. I flipped a coin for the Dallas, Washington game and it came up Washington. I shouldn't have had to. Dallas is a mess.

I like the fact the Bears are 5-1. But in no way am I sold on them. I think L.A. is a better team and Goff is playing better than Foles. Hate to say this but I am thinking the Bears will lose two of the next three games. Hope I am wrong.
 
I actually took about a second to pick L.A. I thought the Detroit, Atlanta game was a tough one. I got lucky and Picked the Lions. In the end Atlanta succeeded over the Lions in trying to lose. I thought the Buccaneers, Raiders game was also a tough one to call. Got that one wrong. The other one I have gotten wrong this week was the 49ers at New England. I suspect a lot of people got that one wrong. I flipped a coin for the Dallas, Washington game and it came up Washington. I shouldn't have had to. Dallas is a mess.

I like the fact the Bears are 5-1. But in no way am I sold on them. I think L.A. is a better team and Goff is playing better than Foles. Hate to say this but I am thinking the Bears will lose two of the next three games. Hope I am wrong.

what did you see out of Goff vs SF that would give you the impression that he’s playing well? Keep in mind SF playedwith only one healthy starter in the secondary.

Also his wins of late are over the Giants and Washington.
Additionally he’s been a dumpster fire vs Chicago the last two years.

won’t be a very high scoring game but I like the way Nick is playing vs the way Goff has.
 
what did you see out of Goff vs SF that would give you the impression that he’s playing well? Keep in mind SF playedwith only one healthy starter in the secondary.

Also his wins of late are over the Giants and Washington.
Additionally he’s been a dumpster fire vs Chicago the last two years.

won’t be a very high scoring game but I like the way Nick is playing vs the way Goff has.
The Rams have literally only beaten teams from the NFC East.
 
I can see the Bears getting to 11-5 since their schedule is manageable but then who do they beat in the playoffs?
 
ADVERTISEMENT