Thread: Knox- 8th ranked NFL deep passes 2010

Soul, here is a thread with what 'at time" posters and media thought about dallas and game day predictions in real time before game.. find it funny how "at time" dallas thought to kill bears by most media/posters,, but now thought of as weak and bad.. funny how that happens with hindsight:

http://www.dabears.com/showthread.php?t=33077&page=3

Originally Posted by soulman

I can say it because it was the second game of the season so they were just 0-1 going into the game. Can you honestly say that you knew they would lose 7 of their first 8 games and tank the season before it started. They were picked as favorites in the East right along with Philly and ahead of NY as I remember. We also played them in Dallas and at that point I wouldn't have seen it as an easy game. Historically we don't do well when we play Dallas on the road.

As for the rest, you put down every other team we played who had winning records using your own criteria for evaluating then right down to dissing the Jets and Rex Ryan because you don't like him. Those are your personal opinions and not what their records would indicate. Actually we beat most of the more difficult teams and lost to those who you call cream puffs. We won 11 games and came within a td of playing in the Super Bowl. On the basis of that most everyone we played except the Pack were worse than us.

If you're just using this rationale as an excuse for your contention that they won't do as well this year you don't need to do it by putting down last years success. Personally I think you're wrong. I think we can win 10-12 games this year and that we'll be in the playoffs again.

I can honestly say Dallas was and is overrated. I have given several reasons on why we played a cream puff schedule. I did the jets because I don't like the fat HC with the big mouth and I don't think Sanchez is really that great like the media always talks about. They won their share of ugly games and the needed OT wins vs crappy teams.

Originally Posted by soulman

You know what's incongrous in your comments. You detract from Hanie's performance against the Pack and give THEM an out by saying that he only did as well because they'd never played against him before and you imply they may not have known what to expect. Then you detract from OUR record by slamming the backup 3rd string guys we played some games against. Why wouldn't the same have been true for the Bears as was true for the Pack when it came to playing unknown quantities?

Come on 4th, you can't have it both ways. I can't believe you continue to grouse over what happened last season. We almost made the Super Bowl which was a hell of a lot better than the 3 seasons previous to the last one and it wasn't just by sheer luck.

Maybe just maybe if Hanie would play more than just a half of a game I would give him more props but he only play half of a game and he made just as many mistakes as he made good plays. The way people talk about this kid we should trade Jay because this kid almost won a game against the packers. Almost if the key word.

Originally Posted by soulman

Then what teams could we have been scheduled to play last year who weren't cream puffs? Those top five teams I listed won an average of 11 games last year the same as we did. Even the lesser teams won an average of 5.5. And talk about your ugly games, what would you call those home losses to Seattle and Washington. That's much worse than the Jets OT wins. I guess we just have different criteria for evaluating last years performance.

I would say the bears had their share of ugly games like the first meeting between the lions. Talk about a ugly win. As for the 5 teams you listed what more can I say about them?

Originally Posted by 4th and 26

I would say the bears had their share of ugly games like the first meeting between the lions. Talk about a ugly win. As for the 5 teams you listed what more can I say about them?

bears outgained the lions 3-1 that day, put the wood to to them most of the day, it was turnover's that hurt them and kept it close.. Id say beating the lions, sure beats losing to them like the packers did though..i'll take an 'ugly win( and that's just your opinion) over a pretty lose each and every time.

Originally Posted by soulman

Six games against teams with an average record equal to our own and four more against two other division opponents which are usually not easy games as the Lions game will attest to isn't exactly as easy schedule. Two of the cream puffs that we should have beaten handily at home we lost to. To me Carolina and Buffalo were the only truly weak teams we beat. Dallas and Miami weren't horrible and we played both on the road so those weren't walk over games IMO.

Actually we only played two teams that had the same record or better than the bears. Every year some teams have a great win/loss record and people slate them as being good teams the next year yet I don't see it that way. The vikings won the divisions and were one score away from going to the superbowl but favre choked. Last year he was begged to come back and the viking sucked. The lions are a team stacked with talent yet they do not have the experience or a healthy qb. Until the have a winning record they will be refered to as the same ol lions. I don't see Miami as a good team yet they seem to show up in some games and totally look like crap in others. Seattle and Washington are suck ass teams and if we should not have lost to either but we did. Now if the bears had blown out more of the weaker teams I would give them better props.