-

Originally Posted by
Jimmors
They havent played well yet, so im hedging my bets by assuming they will continue that "trend" (since youre all about trends).
But youre right, you caught me...i cant "predict" they will play well, and neither can you. But what i DO know is that they havent played well YET, so to play well would actually mean they would have to change how they play to accomplish that goal, something i dont see as very likely. Now, seeing how they have been playing poor, then to play poor again only requires to simply continue doing what they have been, which is much more likely to accomplish, hence, im siding with the "keep doing what they have been doing" prediction, opposed to the "suddenly change how they have been playing" prediction. Feel free to pick which ever you want, guess we shall see which one happens on Sunday.
So trends matter for you when its convient and backs your view.. but when it doesn't we should ignore all trends because to quote you the other day "who cares? no one knows the future" and even if playing well doesn't mean it will continue.. but nownot playing well= it will continue..?
ahh the delicious irony of that.. : )
-
-

Originally Posted by
dabears54
So trends matter for you when its convient and backs your view.. but when it doesn't we should ignore all trends because to quote you the other day "who cares? no one knows the future" and even if playing well doesn't mean it will continue.. but nownot playing well= it will continue..?
ahh the delicious irony of that.. : )
Actually...i was being facetious, just to humor you. My real reasoning was stated below that part. The difference is, and ive state this numerous times to you before, is i dont assign any SIGNIFICANCE to trends. You asked me a question, and i answered based on probabilities...the probability that they will continue to do what they have been, but i also mentioned that no one can predict one way or the other. Thats the difference between us, i can appreciate that fact, you cant. You think a trend is some meaningful significant factor that trumps all, whereas i just see it as an interesting tidbit. Although, this little tidbit is hurting the team, therefore needs to be changed ASAP.
-
++ i dont assign any SIGNIFICANCE to trends+
actually you did
But what i DO know is that they havent played well YET, so to play well would actually mean they would have to change how they play to accomplish that goal, something i dont see as very likely.
-
How is that me assigning significance to a trend? I do know they havent played well yet, thats a fact. And to play well would mean they would need to change how they play, thats merely an observation. And i dont see that as very likely, which is simply my opinion.
-
I do know they havent played well yet, thats a fact
So if 3-1 isn't playing well and a fact.. and continues to 'trend" at that FACT,, i will struggle and live through a 12-4 season : ).. and will just think what "can" happen if they are 3-1 and FACTUALLY NOT playing well against good teams( dallas, packers and giants), what can happen if they "break the trend" and stating playing well.. : )
-

Originally Posted by
dabears54
So if 3-1 isn't playing well and a fact.. and continues to 'trend" at that FACT,, i will struggle and live through a 12-4 season : ).. and will just think what "can" happen if they are 3-1 and FACTUALLY NOT playing well against good teams( dallas, packers and giants), what can happen if they "break the trend" and stating playing well.. : )
I didnt say the team didnt play well. Our Defense is playing fantastic. Our special teams are playing fantastic (outside of a few plays). I said the OL isnt playing well.
And if that 3-1 includes a loss like Sunday...then yeah, its not very comforting to set a Bears record in sacks allowed and lose 2 QBs in one game. Thats one helluva shitty loss. We lost more then just the game Sunday night.
-

Originally Posted by
Jimmors
I didnt say the team didnt play well. Our Defense is playing fantastic. Our special teams are playing fantastic (outside of a few plays). I said the OL isnt playing well.
And if that 3-1 includes a loss like Sunday...then yeah, its not very comforting to set a Bears record in sacks allowed and lose 2 QBs in one game. Thats one helluva shitty loss. We lost more then just the game Sunday night.
agree 100% it was an awful loss and beyond awful line play, the 'good news" is it still only counts as one "L" and not style points or makes a difference if lose by 1 or 1,000. And while you may 'think' we lost more, be liek saying we won 'more" by going to dallas and beating dallas in their house when they needed that win- and you don't think that win was worth more
-
Could wind up costing us more than one game though if Cutler misses time.
-

Originally Posted by
Jimmors
They havent played well yet, so im hedging my bets by assuming they will continue that "trend" (since youre all about trends).
But youre right, you caught me...i cant "predict" they will play well, and neither can you. But what i DO know is that they havent played well YET, so to play well would actually mean they would have to change how they play to accomplish that goal, something i dont see as very likely. Now, seeing how they have been playing poor, then to play poor again only requires to simply continue doing what they have been, which is much more likely to accomplish, hence, im siding with the "keep doing what they have been doing" prediction, opposed to the "suddenly change how they have been playing" prediction. Feel free to pick which ever you want, guess we shall see which one happens on Sunday.
exactly up until sunday nights game the oline surprised me by playing below average. The sad part is they looked better once the cornerstone of our oline got injured. On sunday they played the way I thought they were talent wise. If they can keep things below average we can still make the playoffs. If they play up to their talent like they did on sunday...............we all know the answer to that
-
btw it must be hurting some "fans" that the 0-16 Marinelli is actually doing the best job I have seen as a DC since we had Rivera.
-
High Fives / Like - 0 BEAR DOWN!, 0 Dislikes
Nick High-fived for this post.