I Hate Preseason When It's Not Polite

The Bears play their first preseason game tomorrow, which means it's time for all the sports media to show just how stupid they are by analyzing the game like the final score and victor are in any way the point of preseason games. Hint: they're not.

I watched a little bit of the St. Louis/Minnesota game today, and I have to say, Tavaris (or Tarvaris?) Jackson actually looked like he might know what he's doing behind center for the Vikings. Which was a little disheartening. I was hoping I'd get a season's worth of revenge for that Bears game we saw in the Metrodome when Henry Burris played the most comically bad game of football I've ever witnessed. Instead, Jackson looked fairly poised and ran the ball forward very effectively a few times. Of course, St. Louis didn't to much to make it difficult for him, so it's hard to tell how he'll react to a playoff-caliber defense, or even a halfway decent NFL quality defense. He didn't score any touchdowns, which is what the Strib article I read was mostly pissed about, but he was only in for a the first few drives, and they were his first ever starting for an NFL team, I think, right? Did he start a few games at the end of last season?

Anyway, I won't get to see any of the Bears game tomorrow, because I'm going to this, which I'd already decided to go to before I even knew it would be a possibility that I'd be able to watch the Bears game. Only one of the SOPcasts I tried worked today, so I'm just going to convince myself the Bears/Texans one wouldn't work tomorrow. But what's especially frustrating is that I'm not at all confident I'll be able to find anywhere a discussion of what happens in the game tomorrow that will actually discuss anything of possible importance that could happen tomorrow.

And, really, this is pretty much it:

-if Orton plays significantly better than Griese, it would be another significant step for claiming the backup spot, which would make him just one more Grossman freak accident from being the starter again. (At what point last season did the primary knock against Grossman switch from his inability to stay healthy to his neurotic brain? In any case, I wonder if he'll ever get to start a season with people thinking mostly positive things about him?) I'm kind of rooting for Orton to overtake Griese. Mainly because, I think, Orton said his dream vacation destination is Iowa. That's just so cute! Also, Griese's name is a homonym for greasy, which is a synonym for sleazy, which makes it hard for me not to think Griese must be a total sleaze ball.

-all those receivers battling it out for a roster position that may not even exist. I'd say it's only about a 50/50 shot the Bears will even keep a sixth receiver. If they do, I think it'll be because they don't expect Hester to end up being the type of receiver option they can count on as more than a novelty (even so, he'd be a hell of a novelty), and they want one more receiver who could potentially be an every-other-down receiver if injuries start to pile up. From the sounds of it, there are actually some pretty talented guys playing for the spot, especially David Ball and Mike Hass. Watching these guys try to make a play every single time they get to move should be pretty fun. And there might be three sentences about it in the Chicago Press.

Meanwhile, there will be a at least one entire article about how undominating the defense was against the hapless Texan offense. The article will make it sound like that matters. Get worried, Bears fans!

Dante Wesley to the Patriots?!

This sucks. I didn't feel all that strongly one way or the other about Dante Wesley, but just about the only weakness the Patriots appeared to possibly have this year was their secondary, what with Asante Samuel pulling a Lance Briggs over there and some other guy being all injured. The thing is, Wesley is actually good, and it seems likely he'll end up with significant playing time for the Pats. Which means now this will happen: When the Bears meet the Patriots in the Super Bowl, up by only three points with a minute and a half to go, Rex Grossman will get so excited that he'll forget you don't have to go deep for a TD when you have the ball and the lead with almost none time left, and he'll launch a deep ball directly to Wesley, who will then scamper back for a TD. Game over. Belichick will scowl boredly on the sidelines, hoping none of the guys can smell the pit odor wafting off his unwashed hoody/rag thing he wears, but then he'll figure, Fuck it, these guys don't matter to me, I'll smell however the hell bad I want to smell, I'm goddamn Bill Belichick and I just won more Super Bowls than Jesus, Hell, I'll just shit my pants right here on the sidelines because I can do that, normal rules just don't apply to me, no one can make me take a bath or wash my clothes, I don't want to enjoy anything, screw everybody here, God it's loud, God I hate it here. This will happen. Angelo just pretty much guaranteed it.

Laurence Holmes, on the Other Hand, is a Wonderful Camp Correspondent

The very end of Haugh's latest thing contains this little snippet:

"Even after seven seasons in Chicago, linebacker Brian Urlacher only reveals his personality in snippets. Another one came Monday night in an interview with Zach Zaidman on WSCR-AM's 'Bears All Access,' when Urlacher addressed the realities of his fame.

'I'll never be able to be the way I want to be or who I was,' Urlacher said. 'That's just the price you pay for the job I have.'

Of the Bears' signature Cover-2 defense, Urlacher summed it up well. 'I don't like it,' he said. 'But it works.'"

Especially interested to hear more of the context of Urlacher's quote about not liking the Cover-2, I decided to head on over to the WSCR website to see if the interview with Urlacher was archived anywhere. What I stumbled upon was so much cooler:

Laurence Holmes, who is apparently the host of something called "The Me Show," has been keepinga daily Bears Blog of camp so far. It's really good. He manages to give you a good sense of what the practices are like, of the personalities of the players and so on, along with tons of information of how practices are going and who's performing well, etc. Too bad the website is gross. It looks like it was designed in the mid-nineties. And, once again, no .rss feed... wtf?

David Haugh is a worthless camp correspondant

While Brandon McGowan was outplaying Chris Harris for the reserve safety spot, Haugh was whining about Briggs not offering the fans enough. The next day Haugh arrogantly post-covered the Harris trade as totally not surprising, saying that "the only people who didn't sense the inevitability of a move at the overstocked position seemed to be the ones who play it." While, them and you jackass! The story is mostly about how surprised Haugh is that the Bears are sold on Archuleta and McGowan. Maybe if he'd take the time to report on who's looking good in camp to those of us who aren't paid to watch training camp we could have seen it coming! Days later it turns out that Briggs is actually "High on the fans' list" and Dante Wesley wasn't even invited to Soldier Field and is offically on his way out the door. A development sprung on us after the fact due to a lack of reporting about McBride's leve of play. Another indication that Haugh has no idea how to do his fucking job!

Daily Herald Equals Daily (relatively) Awesome

I'd never checked it out before, but looking at the recent lists of articles they've posted, The Daily Herald has some pretty good sports reporting going on. They've even got an article about Wesley's demotion (which contained the fact, not mentioned elsewhere, that Wesley wasn't even at the Family Day practice tonight, he's that gone) and McBride's correspondent ascension. What's more, the article somehow manages to be informative without even mentioning(!) McBride's stuttering. If there were even the slightest chance that he'd read this, I'd say, "Hey, David Haugh! You should be taking notes!" Now if only The Daily Herald would join the modern world and publish an .rss feed...

David Haugh Longs to One Day Write Stories for a Rural Weekly

How else to explain Haugh's tendency to cling desperately to the softest angle he can find when turning in garbage like tonight's piece about Trumaine McBride.

What makes this piece especially galling is that there actually is a story about McBride that would be really interesting to read. Buried in John Mullin's tiny headlined piece about tonight's practice at Soldier Field is this little nugget:

"Cornerback Dante Wesley, signed by the Bears in 2006 from the Carolina Panthers, is headed elsewhere. He was made expendable by the rapid development of rookie Trumaine McBride. "Dante is not in our plans anymore," Smith said. "We're seeing what options there are out there for him."

Now, the last I'd read, it sounded like Wesley was having an extremely good camp. Whereas I can't remember hearing much about McBride before. The fact that Smith has apparently decided to trade Wesley really speaks to how well McBride must have been doing in camp so far. So if you also happen to be running an article about McBride, why not make it about how surprisingly well he's performed?

Mr. Haugh? "Because McBride is a stutterer!!! OMFGWTF!!! Who knew they even allow stutterers in the NFL?!! And, like, he has overcome his stuttering!!! To play in the NFL!!! While he stutters!!! Hoo-Doggy!!! This'll get me that Pulitzer for sure!!!"

It seems to me that, as compelling as McBride's stuttering may be, the way to do this article would be to make it about how McBride has been playing extremely well in camp. I mean, he was a seventh round pick that you wouldn't have been surprised to never hear about again, and he's playing so well that he's managed to already replace the guy in front of him—an entrenched backup who had been singled out multiple times over the last two years for performing exceedingly well in training camp. You throw in a few quotes from McBride about everything he's learned from the coaches, along with a few quotes from coaches about how surprisingly good he's looked, how he has picked up everything really fast. Then, to add a bit of the human angle to the story, throw in the interesting tidbit that McBride stutters, which, oh btw, is something he has in common with Adrian Peterson.

Instead, Haugh makes the stuttering the focus of the article. Every single quote in the article is about how McBride has had to overcome his stuttering. I counted only four sentences that mention McBride's football skills without also mentioning stuttering.

And how's this for unintentional irony: "As sensitive as Smith is to what McBride has overcome with his language, he doesn't want anybody to overlook how uncommon the statement he has made this early in his first NFL camp is either." Yeah. Congratulations, Haugh. You just did overlook that.

God I miss KC Johnson.

Bears Offense Sucks (Ssshhh!!!)

I'm currently enjoying a little schadenfreude reading about Moss's leg injury keeping him out of practice. I like Moss, but I don't know why the jerkface had to go and play for my two least favorite teams. And when he did go and play for a team I do like he spent the whole time slacking and being lame. I can't really hope a speedy recovery for him until either the Pats are firmly out of playoff contention or he's playing for another team, neither of which are likely to happen any time soon. So I guess that means I'm hoping that Moss's minor leg injury keeps him from playing football ever again. Wow I'm a jerk. But I am stubbornly hoping that the Patriots offense doesn't turn out to be as awesome as the consensus believes they will be.

On the other hand, I'm willing to buy all of the reports about the Bears offense looking really good so far this year. I have no problem believing that Grossman could have really gotten better in the off-season, mainly because it seemed obvious that his biggest problems were mental. When he felt comfortable it was fun to watch him; he seemed smooth. But it was obvious, as the season went on, he wasn't really able to make himself stay comfortable on the field for very long, culminating in the second Vikings game which was about as close as you'll ever get to seeing a professional athlete lose control of his bowels on national (or, what, regional? I watched it in San Francisco...) television. But, hey, I've been there. When I took Spanish my first semester at the University of South Dakota, I started off clean and smooth, picking everything up right away and not even having to study to stay ahead of the class. But we soon progressed to harder stuff and I got passes pretty quickly, so before I knew it I was sitting in front of a test quaking because I knew absolutely none of the answers. After that, even though I studied hard and managed to pull of a passing grade in the class, I never felt fully comfortable with any of it. A weird thing happened, though, during the year I took off of Spanish. It all sunk in. So when I came back and took Spanish 200, it was so much easier than I thought it'd be. I'd actually learned everything before, it was just that it took a while for my mind to become completely comfortable with it. And that has made all the difference.

Since quarterbacking an NFL team is so similar to trying to pass Spanish class, I've convinced myself something similar will happen with Grossman. He blew by the first few weeks, but then he thought he didn't need to learn anything new and got hopelessly behind, and so even though he actually did progress quite a bit in the last few games of the season and into the post-season (not counting the GB game, of course, which, I mean, come one, the game meant nothing, he's a person, can we really blame him for not caring?), but he just never managed to get completely comfortable with all of it. So now, after a break, his mind's had time to get fully wrapped around what he learned, and everything will probably seem a lot easier this season. Provided, of course, he doesn't get as cocky as what led to his downfall last season.

Plus, by all reports, the offense has gotten way faster. Berrian's looking even better; Bradley's healthy for the first time and having an amazing camp; Hester is looking like he'll work on offense much better than anyone hoped; and Greg Olsen is a 6'5" freak. At least if you believe everything coming out of mini-camp. Which I do. For fun.

But what's really got me excited about the Bears offense this season is that it's a commonly known fact that they suck. Grossman's terrible. Benson can't stay healthy. Their receivers suck. I don't know how much perceptions like that actually effect other teams' game planning, my guess is not all that much, but even if the Bears offense manages to play better than I think they will, it's still going to take until probably the tenth or eleventh week for that perception to waver. People will still expect them to start sucking until then. People probably will think that they suck all season anyway, even if they don't. They'll have no shot to win a playoff game. And not a chance in hell to win the Super Bowl. I hope that's how it turns out anyway, for the completely selfish reason that it's so much more fun to cheer for a team no one expects to do anything than a team everyone expects to dominate everybody. It makes me feel like I know something that other people don't.

It Worked!

"For he had healed many; insomuch that they pressed upon him for to touch him, as many as had plagues." Mark 3:10

Wow! Never again shall I doubt the power of prayer! I spent all day muttering to myself the Hamstring Healing Prayer, and lo and behold, Hester returned to practice this evening! Of course, it's hard for me not to see such immediate action from God as a veiled threat... Now, I must walk only the true strait and narrow, for fear that any wavering will result in a retaliatory smiting of Devin Hester's leg from Our Mighty Lord!

Also, Go Defense! The article that buried the mention of Hester's return to practice is really about how the defense rose to Bob Babich's challenge to get six turnovers in practice. That's what I like to hear! Bear Down!

A Prayer of Healing for Devin Hester's Hamstring

I have to admit, I'm getting a little bit scared about Devin Hester's hamstring.

In 2004, Urlacher's hamstring first asserted its presence during the first weeks of training camp, and it kept messing with Urlacher throughout the season. Everyone kept insisting it was getting better, but Urlacher just never seemed to be playing at full speed that season. Then his leg blew up in week 11, and he missed the most important game of the season against Inianapolis, leading to a 41-10 loss. Urlacher's hamstring wasn't mentioned, but hamstrings are like the mafia Dons of leg ligaments: nothing goes down without the hamstring's permission.

The reports about Hester's hamstring are not as ominous sounding as those of Urlacher's were, but Hester pretty much sat out of training camp all week. Lovie can say that it's more precaution than anything, but that sounds an awful lot like spin to me. Regardless of how amazing Hester initially looked with the offense, he's new to the position and if he's going to be an effective offensive weapon, he needs as much time as he can working with the offense. Each day Hester just hangs out on the sidelines yukking it up with Moose is a wasted day that could greatly diminish his effectiveness.

Hamstrings are a serious issue, and like many a scared helpless relative before me, I would like to turn my my worry about Hester's Hamstring over to The Lord. One need look no further than The New Jerusalem Church on the Rock to see the gravity of the situation. Here we see that "A big problem that naturally occurs when peoples are hamstrung without freedom to develop and become righteously productive is that the hardships are heavily, overly balanced through lack of the 'goodships', so that persons are not easily reached by proper, righteous, balanced reasoning." During the opening days of training camp, Hester was able to provide all of us Bears fans with plenty of goodships to be thankful for. But the Hamstring has become a tool of the devil, surrounding our hearts and Hester's body with heavy hardships. And so, I'd like to offer this evening a prayer of Healing for Devin Hester's Hamstring:

FATHER,

each and every day I see You
Working Miracles in lives, in hamstrings,
and I know that with You all things are Possible.

Therefore with great confidence, we do ask,
that You will Continue to Guide us,
we that love Your Righteousness and Freedom,
towards the hamstring healing that we need
for our spiritual and worldly Salvation.

As ever, we pray for all who are in harm's way,
and for them with an insufficient hamstrings,
we ask for Your Healing to Prevail among them.

Amen

(adapted from newjerusalemcity.org)

Preseason Viewing Guide

This could be one of the most entertaining seasons ever! With the exception of McKie and Hillenmeyer, the entire starting line-up could realistically make the Pro-bowl. It won't happen, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't.

Grossman's second year could be every bit as good as his sophomore year at Florida. It sounds like he fixed his irksome tendency to run backwards and throw against his body every fourth play or so, and all game every fourth game or so. And even if he didn't, Kyle Orton spent the entire offseason turning into an NFL quality backup. With shotgun back in and 10 wins under his belt already, the passing game seems in pretty good hands. My only question is, if Chris Leak plays well enough that he can't be hidden on the practice squad for a year will the Bears hold four quarterbacks or are Griese's days numbered?

Benson is ready for at least 1500 yards—probably more like 1800 if he gets the bulk of the carries, and if Ron Turner doesn't start to think that it's too fun to throw to the ridiculous receiving corps below and totally stop running around week 9. Peterson has always shown potential and will be a sufficient backup, and I'm seriously excited about seeing Wolfe and/or Hester in the backfield.

Berrian could be the best deep threat in the NFL. Hester might be better at Reggie Bush than Reggie Bush. Davis plays the slot very well and is a better sixth option than most teams have. Bradley's back in the exact same situation as last year and Muhammed is now barely mentioned as the sure-handed, wily vet who will probably do most of his damage on third down and in the end zone. The question here will be the fates of Hass, Ball and James, all of whom I'm excited about watching during preseason.

Olsen and Clark will prove unstoppable.

The only real concern for this season is the lack of depth and age of the OLine: if Tait goes down or if two of the starters get hurt the Bears will be vulnerable, but otherwise the Chargers, Eagles and Broncos games should be the only possible blemishes.

The defense should be back to their Craig Krenzel-Kyle Orton days of domination. Lovie's scheme is simple and relies on speed and athletecism more than brains. The Bears have a ton of the first two and just enough of the last, with probably one of the fastest rosters ever.

Tommie Harris is back. Walker is an upgrade at Nose, and Dvoracek and Adams are upgrades from Scott and Boone. Idonije is great depth. Garray and Bazuin better get healthy quick or they're likely to get cut or put on IR respectively.

The linebackers are great, everyone knows this, and Williams and Okwo will both be more than adequate cover by midseason.

And the defensive backfield fits Lovie perfectly with Archuleta back in his system and McGowan, Manning and Payne much more athletic reserves than Harris, Worrell and Johnson were. The interesting question will be if Wesley stays ahead of McBride and Graham.

All around there is enough depth to lose two starters from each group and still have at least two pro-bowlers on the field.

The kickers are great. The returners are just as good. But the preseason fun will be watching Leak, Hass and Ball try to earn roster spots based on position play against both Ayanbadejo's, Wilson, Wesley, Graham and McBride working to make the team primarily on special teams.

Chris Harris Won't Have to Worry about Steve Smith Anymore

According to chicagosports.com the Bears have just traded Chris Harris to the Panthers for a 2008 draft pick. Harris played extremely well as a rookie in 2005, and I thought he was poised for a breakout season last year. But he pretty much failed to break out. With Brown and Archuleta as the starters and Manning and McGowan the apparent backups, it was hard to see where Harris would fit in this year. Still, I kind of liked the guy, largely because of this Every Play Counts article from Football Outsiders in 2005, and I hate to see him shucked off to that stinkhole Carolina. But Angelo does like his draft picks. He was down one after the Walker trade, and safety is a spot with kind of extra depth at this point, so from that standpoint the trade makes sense.

Now, if only we had readers... I just checked the Bears home page and the front page poll is "which safety will have the most interceptions in 2007?" One option is Chris Harris, who I then voted for because I just couldn't resist. There could be a campaign to get Harris the lead in votes before they switch the question! Oh that would be funny! Reality would probably collapse in on itself, and suddenly we'd find ourselves living in a world in which there never were any Carolina Panthers, and Chris Harris would be a lonely mechanic living in the Arizona desert, filled with some horrible feeling that this just wasn't how it was supposed to be, and he'd pause every ten minutes to wipe his forearm across his sweaty brow and stare off into the sun-baked distance, waiting for something he just couldn't name...

Let Us Now Praise Darwin Walker

He hasn't even played a game for the Bears yet, but already I'm in love with this guy. The Bears signed Walker to a long-term deal after having him for only like five days, so either they've suddenly gone crazy or they see something really special here. I'm willing to believe it's the latter.

But here's why I really love Walker today: he has his own website! And it's hilarious! Check out, especially, his To-Do-List, where he keeps track of all the quarterbacks he's faced and puts "SACKED!" across their face when he's got 'em. It's like those abortion-doctor hit-list sites, except not creepy and way funnier. I really hope he updates the site for the Bears season. Maybe he could convince other Bears defenders to set up similar sites.

Bizarro John Clayton Hearts Bears?

Apparently, John Clayton has been replaced by his Bizarro-world doppelgänger, because his little article about Bears camp is filled with nothing but praise for the Bears. Plus, there's this:

"The story of camp is Hester. Bears beat writer John Mullin officially named the 2007 camp, "The Devin Hester Experience." Watching him run routes is like listening to old Jimi Hendrix records -- explosive, exciting and unpredictable. Any fan would love to hang from the "Watchtower" to see the show."

There is no effing way John Clayton, the Mr. Mackey of the real world, has ever listened to old Jimi Hendrix records. I imagine that even if he sat there listening to Hendrix by himself, on headphones, he'd look around uncomfortably grinning and hunching his shoulders, waiting for the cool kids to come in and take the record away from him. "Silly Mr. Mackey! Hendrix is for stoners and jocks! Here's your favorite Burl Ives record. Do yourself a favor and stop pretending to be what your not!" Then, of course, they'd punch him on the shoulder and laugh-grunt their way out of the room.

And why the hell would you want to "hang" from the watchtower? Why not just stand on top of it, where it'd be easier to watch and you wouldn't have to worry about losing your grip and falling to your death?

It is kind of exciting to hear all this stuff about the Bears offense suddenly being so fast. Even though it makes me a little worried that the defense apparently isn't creaming them. Offense is all well and good, but the Bears just aren't as fun to watch when the other team's offense isn't clobbered into submission by midway through the third quarter...

Anderson vs. Brown: The Prestige

Sometimes I kind of like the stuff David Haugh writes for the Tribune, but a lot of his stuff is just too focused on analyzing the personalities of Bears players. And sometimes his articles leave me wondering if he even watches the games.

His analysis of five position battles to watch in Bears training camp mentions two spots on the line. In discussing the promotion of Anderson to starting right end over Brown, he says, "Anderson did have 12 sacks in limited time as a rookie, and likely will improve against the run. But how will he fare playing every down and being a pass-rusher offenses double-team or chip with a running back?" I've heard a few places that Bears coaches treat the line as more of a rotation than being necessarily about who starts and who's a backup, so this statement coming from Haugh seems really strange to me.

In later discussion of Dvoracek versus Adams, Haugh seems to express skepticism about Smith calling the line a "rotation." I have no idea where I'd find any statistics about the percentage of snaps each d-lineman saw, but from what I remember from the games last season, Anderson did see significant time on the field while he was technically a backup. I mean, it was amazing that he got 12 sacks, but it's not like he was getting a sack every other play he was on the field or anything. I expect that the same will hold for this season, and that Anderson's promotion to "starter" will really mean that Anderson and Brown will come closer to splitting time evenly at the position, with it being more likely that Anderson will play slightly more than Brown.

So, sure, it will be interesting to watch the battle between Anderson and Brown for the starting position, but any close observer of the Bears should know that it's not going be too significant of a thing w/r/t playing time for either player. It's mainly a matter of pride and, eventually, of contracts. So why doesn't Haugh just characterize it as that, instead of trying to drum it up into being about who gets to play and who has to watch all season from the sidelines?

Plus, his article would be way more interesting and informative if it had contained interviews or even quotes from the position coaches who'll be assessing these position battles during training camp. If I were a sportswriter I would be doing whatever I could to get to ask those guys a few questions, especially at this point in the season. Why is there exactly none of that in any coverage of the Bears that I've ever been able to find. Is it that papers think readers will be bored when they see an assistant-level coach quoted or something? Why is sports reporting so consistently shallow and uncurious?

When Men were (smaller) Men

I think Mike Tomlin is going to be a really effing good coach, and I couldn't be happier that the Stillers scooped him out of the clutches of the evil Vikings, and I can sort of understand the impulse as a new coach to assert your "I ain't goin' soft on nobody" attitude at the kickoff of training camp which apparently has caused Tomlin to run full-contact drills on the first day of camp. I seem to remember Lovie did something like that during his first training camp as coach of the Bears, which pretty quickly backfired when Mike Brown suffered the first of his season-destroying injuries and Brian Urlacher pulled a hamstring that bothered him for most of that season. I guess no one questioned Lovie's toughness, but part of the reason most training camps are not as intense as they apparently used to be is because present-age football players are way the fuck more gigantic and fast than they were back then, so they tend to get hurt more when they are made to run into each other repeatedly. It's not that they're a bunch of pussies. So, y'know, be careful Mike Tomlin.

ESPN is Dumb: Reason 47

And this one isn't even complaining about their Bears analysis. This is just about what they apparently think is the type of sports coverage they should be bragging about. This is from their front page today: "Today is Michael Vick Day on Hashmarks. Pinch-blogger Mike Sando will be live blogging MV throughout the day. And we'll have more than five hours of Vick coverage on ESPN and ESPNEWS." That's supposed to make me want to watch ESPN? Actually it made me glad that I don't have cable or ESPN just because that means there's no way that I might accidentally flip through it and be exposed to any more Michael Vick than I already have. Seriously, ESPN folks, wait until the story's happened, and then write about it. Just because Michael Vick is involved doesn't mean this is actually a sporting event that needs to be covered with play-by-play... Actually, now that I think about it, it would be pretty funny if they had Joe Buck doing play-by-play on Michael Vick's pre-trial hearing or whatever the hell is going on today. You'd probably have to alert the Guinness people because I'm sure Buck would reach new unheard of levels of righteous indignation. At least in this case it would kind of be appropriate...

At least I'm housebroken

Here's hoping it's true that Briggs signed a deal with the Bears and won't be holding out after all, if for no other reason than that all the members of the Chicago sports media will have to find something else to write about than the impending doom of the Bears defense without Lance Briggs. Now we will get to see if they'll try to stick with their angle and claim that the defense is going to truly drop a notch because of the loss of Terry Johnson, Alfonso Boone, and Ian Scott. Maybe their arguments will go something like this: Much like the Dude's rug, those three average tackles reeeeally tied the defense, which for the sake of this analogy is like a room, together. Now that they're gone, the defense, which is now like the Dude, will embark on some pointless quest which will put them in greater danger of peril before finally realizing after it's too late and Donny (Maybe Babich? No, Rivera!) is already dead that they just didn't need the fucking rug (Scott, Boone, Johnson) in the first place.

Football Outsiders hates on the Bears some more

Football Outsiders just ranked the Bears defensive line at ninth in the league, which makes me pissed off beyond any reasonable level. Of course it's not too surprising to see New England at the top of the list. They're total Patriots homers over at FO, and are at least generally willing to admit that it might affect their analysis of the Patriots, so I'm willing to allow that since the Pats d-line probably does belong in the top five you might as well put them at number one if you're a fan. But ranking the Vikings at sixth? The Vikings are supposed to have a better d-line than the Bears? That is just utter bullshit. They've got two linemen who are worth anything: the Williams fellows. And, sure, because of them, you can't really run up the middle against the Vikes. But Kevin Williams' major selling point is that he shares a last name with the All-Pro playing next to him. The Vikes' ends could be traded out with ends from half a dozen other teams around the league and no one would notice or care. So, if the Vikes are ranked sixth for being Pat Williams and a bunch of mediocre to better than average guys, why are the Bears, who have Tommie Harris playing the Pat Williams roles, not to mention Mark Anderson, Alex Brown, and Adewale Ogunleye rotating in and out on the ends, why are they ranked ninth? Well, according to Mr. Macey's explanation, it seems to be that the Bears have been ranked at the average of where they would be ranked with Tommie Harris and without Tommie Harris, since their line clearly declined with Tommie Harris sidelined during the second half of the season last year. Actually, I think ninth is more like where they should be ranked if you just figure that Harris isn't going to play this year, which would be stupid to figure, but how come the Bears' hypothetical ranking is suffering based on a hypothetical injury? Especially when, say, Carolina, who Macey ranks third and then goes on to describe every single member of their line as being surrounded by injury questions, is ranked where they'd be if their whole line suddenly got way better. So, Chicago's d-line loses rank because their best player was injured last year, but Carolina, whose entire line has problems staying healthy, is given the benefit of every doubt?

Man, I can't wait for football season.

ESPN is Dumb: Reasons 45 & 46

45:So, I was bored, and I wanted to see some more football coverage, so I thought I'd check out ESPN's Scouts, Inc.'s rankings of teams by position, and the only link anywhere I could find was the one for special teams. Of course the Bears are ranked number one; anyone who would even bother trying to argue just obviously doesn't know what they're talking about. But ESPN's reasoning for why Bears special teams are good mentions three names before they even get to mentioning Dave Toub. Robbie Gould, Brendon Ayenbadejo, and Devin Hester. I suppose there's not too much of a problem with putting Devin Hester in there, since he, at least last season, was playing on a completely different level than any other returner. So, fine. But what I think is annoying about this is that the Bears special teams is so good primarily because of how Dave Toub coaches and how the organization in general treats special teams. A player's ability to contribute on special teams makes a major difference in where the Bears draft him, even for early-round picks. The Bears coaching staff sees special teams as nearly or just as important as defense and offense. ST is not just this afterthought that you let your bench players do so they can feel like they're contributing. So, anyway, the fact that there's not even a mention of the major difference between Bears special teams philosophy and nearly every other team in the league is, I think, a really stupid absence.

46:ESPN is having this sportsnation vote thing about each NFL Team, and in their "Key Additions" column for the Bears, they mention Obafami Ayenbadejo, Dan Bazuin, and Greg Olsen. No mention of Adam Archuleta? wtf? I know he didn't work in Washington's system, but he was great under Smith in Smith's system at St. Louis. No reason to assume he won't at least be an upgrade at the position for the Bears, behind Brown. And given the importance of the Safety position in Smith's defense, Archuleta surely merits mention before Ayenbadejo. Dumb.

re: ESPN's Hashmarks Offseason Power Rankings

Well, I had a dream last night wherein I was reading some misguided analysis of the Bears defense, centering largely on the possible absence of Lance Briggs, which is an interesting variation on the Bears dreams I've had during past summers. But apparently I'm caring about this again. And then while fiddling around on the internet I stumbled across ESPN's little pre-preseason power rankings thing by Matt Mosley. So I'm just going to correct a few things he seems to think.

Not surprisingly the entire entry on the Bears, whom he ranks 6th, 3rd best in the NFC, is concerned only with Briggs and Tank Johnson. No mention of picking up Archuleta, which will allow the Bears to either have the best Safety tandem in the league (Archuleta/Brown), or at the very least, not to have a significant fall-off in that area should either suffer an injury. Smith's whole scheme is built pretty heavily around the safety, so an upgrade like this easily balances out the potential loss of Briggs. Briggs is an amazing player who plays a position that on this defense is largely about being in the right spot. Having Briggs in that spot is actually more gaudy than essential. Which is kind of why I can understand why, from his position, he might want to go play on a different team, where he could make full use of his potential. But, whatever. A potential holdout by Briggs would at worst be a mild distraction for a game or two, until it becomes obvious that he wasn't necessary for the proper running of the defense.

As far as Tank goes. The Bears were totally stacked at the line with Tank, and they're still pretty much stacked at the line without him. None of their tackles are as good as Tank was. Except, of course, for Tommie Harris. Who is the best in the league. So it's not like they're really hurting. No one knows how good Dvoracek will be, but it seems about an even bet that he'll end up being at least as good as Tank going by Angelos track record in drafting defensive linemen. Just like with Briggs, losing Tank merely downgrades the Bears defense at one position from gaudy to easily in the top four or five in the league, and with the type of upgrade they got at safety, I'd say that overall the changes in the defense amount to--at worst--a wash.

They were pretty clearly the best team in the NFC for the majority of the season, and proved it when it mattered. How exactly the Tank and Briggs thing is supposed to be big enough of a deal that they could be moved down below New Orleans and Philadelphia is not exactly clear to me. New Orleans will likely be as good as they were last season; maybe even better. They'll not have the huge emotional boost they had at the beginning of the season, but they'll be able to build on what was obviously a really good team after that wore off. So I couldn't say for sure that the Bears deserve a higher spot than New Orleans, although I'm pretty sure they do. But Philadelphia is three or four years removed from their peak, and have had two seasons in a row killed by a serious injury to McNabb. If McNabb stays healthy for the whole season, they'll be in the competition with New Orleans and Chicago for the top spot, but I think they have to prove it.

People are so disappointing sometimes

The new little "poll" on the chicagosports website asks the question, "Who do you want starting at strong safety for the Bears?" (it should be "whom," but whatever... I guess it wouldn't bother me in spoken language...) the options are Archuleta and Brown. Nearly 75% of the answerers said Brown. what? Do they not really understand the question? It's not like a zero-sum thing of Brown or Archuleta starting, although the stupidly worded question does kind of sound that way... obviously, ideally both Brown and Archuleta will be starters, and Brown would clearly be better at free safety than would Archuleta. And Archuleta was clearly brought in to be a strong safety anyway; that's what he excells at. Are the people who answered the question thinking that only one of them can be on the field or something? I just don't get it...

I just have to say that the possibility of having Archuleta at strong safety and Brown at free safety is just about giving me wet dreams. Seriously, that defense would be amazing. Regardless of just about anything else that happens on their defense. And then Urlacher in the middle, Tommie Harris, Alex Brown, Mark Anderson, and Ogunleye on the line... (and I actually even forgot to mention Tillman and Vasher, who made an insanely small number of mistakes this last season and are probably the least appreciated members of the defense (maybe because their jobs seem to be geared more for containment than any other part of the defense?) ...) I know there are more question marks elsewhere than I really expected there to be in the off-season, but with those players as the core for the defense? Wow. I can hardly imagine the Bears defense not being a better unit this year, whether or not Briggs decides to hold out for the imaginary billions he thinks he deserves. He'd be an idiot not to want to play for that kind of defense. (Seriously. I get pretty annoyed when people get mad at players for wanting more money, and Briggs has every right to do so, but I mean, this defense is very much within grasping distance of being Historic, and he's going to get enough money anyway that with just a tiny bit of smart investing, he would have more money for the rest of his life than he could possibly figure out what to do with... so, really, he would be stupid not to play for these guys, and play fucking hard. Not immoral or anything, just stupid.)

Without too much distance from the disappointing end I wanted to take a bit to gather my thoughts.
I think more than anything, more even than Rex's turnovers the Bears lost this game due to poor game planning. It's time to put faith back into the secondary and stop calling conservative cover 2 defences in big games. This strategy obviously works throughout most of the regular season, but any good, experienced QB in the league knows how to pick it apart by now. Either Ron Rivera must go, or he has to bring the blitzing edge he had his first two years back. Leslie Frazier would also make a perfect replacement for him if he heads to Dallas.
On the other side, the most important decision facing the Bears of 2007 is who to name as starting QB. They have three QB's with varied talent and experience who have all proven that they are capable of winning in the NFL. Wade Wilson has five years of coaching experience and has yet to show that he knows what he's doing. I would love to see someone with a track record brought in to develop all three QB's. This off- and pre-season must be looked at as an straight-up tryout for the starting QB job. It's up to Lovie and Turner to decide which QB gives this team the best chance to win every single game that they play.
The RB situation should be simple. If Jones wants to come back, offer him a one year extension in which he makes the exact same over the next two seasons as Benson. Get rid of the starting/reserve idea and play Jones and Benson completely interchangeably, and sometimes at the same time. After next season, if the price is too steep, trade one of them and commit to the other.
As for WR's, Lovie needs to sit down with Hester and have a conversation with him about how he can most help the Bears. I know he wants to play DB, but Lovie needs to decide if he can help the team more at WR. I'm sure he could make a hell of a fifth receiver. I like Moose, Berrian, Bradly, Davis, Hester, and Currie as a receiving corps. But there's always room for a rookie if Hester or Currie aren't available.
The TE's and OL are fine, not a lot of depth so finding more of that would be nice.
On the defensive side the DT's are the biggest area of concern. Tommie Harris is obviously irreplaceable and I really like Tank DD and Idonije. That leaves room for a first day DT to slot into the rotation.
The DE's are great, but there's definitely room on the roster for an outside rush specialist/outside LB to add some depth.
Briggs and Urlacher are the best in the league, unfortunately Hillenmeyer is not. I'd love to see Wilson, Joe, Williams, Ayanbadejo and a first day LB battle for the third LB spot. Hillenmeyer adds great depth and could probably turn into a pretty decent Special teamer.
The secondary is top notch. Peanut, Vash and Manning are the probably the top three DB's on one team in the entire league. Wesley looked like he could play last summer. And Daniel Manning, Vash or Todd Johnson can fill in at nickel. Brown is irreplaceable, but McGowen did a much better job than Harris or Johnson.
I think Brown and Manning with McGowen as backup to both is about as good as we can hope for. Let Harris, Johnson and Worell battle a first day rookie for roster spots and see what happens.
This is still the top team in the NFC; they only need a few tweaks to turn into a full-season steamroller and make everyone forget yesterday and the "dominance of the AFC."

This is this week's comment from the DVOA's for the Chargers: "That's about as bad as their quarterback can play, and they won the game convincingly. Super Bowl, here we come."

This is a comment about the Bears from a few weeks ago: "Here's my opinion on the Chicago quarterback controversy: Brian Griese is going to be much more consistent than Rex Grossman. But just as the lows won't be as low, the highs won't be as high. The Bears have almost no chance of winning the Super Bowl if Evil Rex shows up during the playoffs, but their deep passing game becomes useless with Griese under center. To win it all, the Bears need to figure out how to get the Good Rex every week."

Fuck. You. Football. Sportswriters. Everywhere. The only reason that everyone is raving about how awesome San Diego is that they can when even when their new great quarterback sucks it up like a giant black hole is that there isn't there isn't a big media frenzy about whether or not Rivers's backup (who is who, exactly? exactly.) should be starting in his place. Well, maybe that and LaDanian Tomlinson. But, anyway, because the Chicago sportswriters are fucking d-bags and think the only way to cover a team is to act at all times like it is falling apart unless it's blowing away all of its opponents by thirty points, because that, they write all this useless shit about how Grossman needs to be benched because he had some bad games, which then makes it so the Bears coaches have to address that bullshit in press conferences so then national writers and tv folks use those as their cues to talk about it like its actually an issue, which of course then managed to visibly eat away at Grossman's confidence until he almost literally shit his pants on the field against Minnesota, so then instead of people talking about how incredible the Bears defense and special teams are and that they have a solid enough running game now that they actually have a fucking offense for the first time since like 1993, all anyone says is that they probably can't win the Super Bowl with Rex as their quarterback because he's not a great quarterback. Bullshit.

It is probably true that the only team with a similar shot at winning the Super Bowl this year as the Bears is the San Diego. And both teams are in that position because the entire teams are really good so it just doesn't matter all that much if the quarterback has an off day. Any part of either team can win a game for the team.

I don't know why, but I've never been so pissed off about sports coverage as I am this week. I haven't read any article, anywhere, talking about how now that the Bears have given themselves home field through the playoffs they've done everything they could've done up to this point to give them a good shot through to the super bowl. It would not matter if they'd won every single game that they've won by two hundred points and if they'd not given up a single yard in any of those games. Their defense has been dominating most of the time that it has needed to be, and even when it wasn't dominating it has been one of the top three defenses in the league. Their special teams has actually won a few games for them, which is probably more than any other team in the league could hope for. And their offense has even chipped in a few times. All of that adds up, quite reasonably, to the best record in the league.

Yes. The Bears can be beaten. But why is it that being a beatable team means, for the Bears, that they are actually terrible and don't deserve to have their record, whereas other teams are allowed to be beatable and destined for the Super Bowl at the same time? AAAUUUGGGHHH!!! Why are sportswriters all so goddamn worthless!!!

Every single one of the Tribune's and the Sun-Times' columnists write today that the Bears need to cut/fire/nix/git rid of Tank Johnson. Aside from the fact that sportswriters tend to relish every opportunity to take the "moral high ground" and condemn the players they write about, I don't quite understand why they're all so uppity about the Tank thing. Yes, he had a bunch of guns that he failed to procure a license for, although the licenses that he didn't have are licenses that aren't even required by most states. They weren't purchases illegally or anything; it's just that Illinois has this extra gun-licensing thing and he didn't get that license. If he lived in Utah, people would by getting ready to storm the police station if they tried to charge a guy for gun possession--except that he's black, so, who knows... His only other crime was having a pot-smoking friend and owning some pitbulls... I mean, yeah, all of it might seem kind of stupid if you're an educated urbane white guy, but none of it is actually illegal, or even, really, in violation of any moral standards, either. I mean, Ricky Manning Jr. actually helped his friends beat up a guy, and there was nothing like this journalistic outcry for his head.

It seems weirdest to me that the fact that Johnson's friend got killed is being written about as clinching proof that the Bears need to get rid of him, even though the police have gone out of their way to state that it appears Johnson had nothing to do with the shooting. I suppose it probably just makes them feel better to write about how Johnson is a terrible person as they reflect on the fact that they themselves aren't friends with any black felons and they don't go to those types of clubs... I mean, just look at this garbage:

"The team employs nutritionists, masseuses, security guards and all sorts of other personnel intended to meet their players' every need. They could use more baby-sitters.

They need to consider restricting the independence of players who lose the benefit of the doubt the way Johnson did after he was arrested twice before Thursday's incident. Johnson evidently is not as equipped to handle adulthood as many of his teammates. It's one thing to tell him to just grow up. It's another to show him how.

The shooting death early Saturday morning of Posey, who described himself as Johnson's bodyguard, sadly reinforced how concerned the Bears need to be about the company Johnson keeps."

I'm still pulling for SF to win their division. And with their convincing victory over Seattle, it could still happen! Now all SF has to do is beat Arizona, which shouldn't be a problem, and then beat Denver, which would be a little tougher, but Denver won't be playing for anything since they'll likely be out of wild card contention at that point (cross fingers!). Also, Seattle has to lose to San Diego, who'll be playing to clinch home-field in the playoffs, and then they have to lose to Tampa... That last one is probably the most unlikely, and I'd really hate to see Seattle win their division because they beat a shitty team like Tampa... but, then again, they are playing at Tampa, and that's a pretty long trip to make, and I wouldn't put it past Seattle to lose to pretty much anyone... I don't know why I want this to happen so badly, but, for some reason, I just hate Seattle this year...

Um... so Tank had a bunch of guns that he didn't properly obtain a permit for, and he kept some of them loaded and without proper safety things, etc., and possibly was shooting them in his backyard. So, um, he's kinda dumb and he loves guns, and apparently is too stupid to bother buying the guns by legal means, or to file the proper paperwork or whatever. But, um, why is the Chicago press acting like this is the hugest deal ever, but they were pretty silent about Ricky Manning Jr. actually beating up a guy for no reason? And also, people on the message boards seem angrier about this than they did about Manning. Um. What?

This is from the FO forums, about the possibility of putting Hester in on offense as well: "They should just replace their entire offense with their kick/punt return unit whenever Evil Rex shows up. The long snapper could just hike the ball deep to Hester on each play! Think about it! He would even get three chances." The funniest thing about it is that it almost seems like an actually good idea...

In the middle of the Dallas NO game it has just occured to me that there really isn't a team in the NFC that is capable of beating the bears. NO is crushing Dallas because the NO offence is pretty good and the Dallas defence isn't great. These are the two other best teams but their both good because of offence. The great thing about the Bears is that their defence is simply amazing. No one can put up more than 20 points on them and if they have to they can score 21 with help from Hester. The AFC is a little more tricky because New England and Baltimore have very good defences, not as good as the Bears but close enough that Chicago might need a competent offence, at least one that can stay on the field and punt, to beat them. The NFC is a complete lock though, the Bears are already in the Super Bowl. The only question will be if Rex can settle down and get them there or if Griese will have to do it.
I have a good feeling about Grossman as well. The thing I don't like is that we have no idea how practice has looked for Grossman the last month. It would be nice to know if he's struggling all the time or only on game days. It sounds to me, based upon last week's interviews that he spent all week struggling before the Minnesota game. I think this because no one really sounded like they were too surprised with his performance. It was as if they knew that he had been feeling pressure and simply wasn't playing like he had been and it sounded like he was really questioning what was going on, why he sucked. Turner said after the first practice this week that Grossman had had a very loose and good practice so hopefully that has continued. My prediction is that the day off watching early-season film combined with last weekend's total collapse will have Rex playing without pressure. I think that he'll feel like he just needs to play and if he's good he'll do well if not he simply isn't good enough to finish out the season.
Either way this season has been amazing, but most of the actual games have been weirdly boring because I absolutely believe that the Bears will be in the superbowl and it's almost like the games don't matter because I already know the result. All year it's been like the games are on delay and the score already flashed on the bottom of screen.

As if out of an attempt to hold my prediction bravado in check, last night I had a dream that Grossman went out against the Rams, threw two passes for two touchdowns, and after the second one he was hit by a lineman and ended up lying on the ground with with both of his knees bent completely backwards. And then Griese went on to dominate the Rams for the rest of the game. So... I guess now we get to find out whether my intuition or my dreams have the greater predictive power!

Not for any reason other than that I have a "feeling" about it, I'm going to go ahead and call Monday's game to be a huge rebound game for Grossman. Mainly because, there's not really any way a quarterback could have a worse game than he had last week, so he's got to have realized he's basically hit bottom, and also that he's just really not actually that bad, so he doesn't really have anything to lose. I'm imagining him throwing an interception on the first drive of the game because of some weird fluke, and then suddenly it will click again. The last three quarters of the game will look like the first halves of the games against the Bills and the 49ers. That's what I see happening.

It's funny, because there's no way that anything could possibly convince me that that won't happen until the game actually happens. It's one of those weird things where I just feel like it's an objective fact, even though I have no really good reason to believe that it's true. Exactly like the belief I've had since they lost to the Panthers in the playoffs last year that they are going to win the Super Bowl this year.

The Bears have a two game lead over the entire NFC and if Dallas beats NO sunday they have the tie breaker over any team that is two games behind allowing them to loose two games without dropping in the standings. Rex Grossman is the quarterback unless he has three turnovers that are definitely his fault in the first half of any game until they loose or, more likely, clinch homefield in the NFC. Lovie knows that this defence and special teams are the best in the leauge and can probably win any of their remaining regardless of the offence. Lovie has the luxury of allowing Rex at least two more games to prove he can still play. If Rex sucks the move to Griese will be made for the final two games of the season ensuring homefield in the NFC or just allowing Griese to work the rust off.

Possibly the most worthwhile thing Aaron Schatz has ever said about the Bears? "I'm sure he's a nice fellow, but is it possibly time to question Wade Wilson's qualifications as a quarterback coach? In three years in Chicago, he's had bad middle-aged quarterbacks (Jonathan Quinn), bad young quarterbacks (Craig Krenzel, Kyle Orton), and imploding young quarterbacks (Rex Grossman). He was also quarterbacks coach in Dallas from 2000-2002, where he mentored (so to say) Ryan Leaf, Quincy Carter, Anthony Wright, Clint Stoerner, and Chad Hutchinson."

For Not Benching Grossman

While the Chicago sports media is busy calling for Lovie's head because he keeps stating that "Rex is our quarterback" with little elaboration, I can't help but wonder if they're really all so nearsighted as to not have noticed that Lovie isn't exactly interested in discussing every nuance of his decision-making process with the press. Frankly, I doubt that the reason Lovie is standing behind his quarterback is that he has failed to notice how shitty he's been. It's probably more along the lines of "he needs to play through this slump" type of a thing. And, I guess, I can sort of understand that. Personally, I would've benched Grossman at halftime in the last game. He was just so obviously messed up in the head that you could quite literally see his self-doubt affecting the way the ball flew out of his hands. He did not once set himself in the pocket and throw the ball. In fact, it even got to the point that he tripped over his own legs dropping back to hand the ball off. But I would have benched him out of pity for him and not because I thought it would be better for the team. From the very beginning of the game, it was pretty obvious that the Bears defense was going to be able to handle anything that the Vikings did, and really it wasn't going to be necessary for Grossman to do anything for the Bears to win. And, looking beyond that, judging by the rate at which the team has been able to win over the past two seasons without an offense, there's not really any reason to expect that they won't make the playoffs, no matter what Grossman does. Which basically means that the Bears have to really figure out what they have in Grossman. We already no what we have in Griese: a pretty competent quarterback who plays at a steady average level, one who could in all likelihood manage the offense Turner gave to Orton last season with the same level of aptitude. That offense will manage not to lose games for the Bears, and if they switched to Griese now, they'd go into the playoffs knowing that they can't rely on the offense to ever win the game for them, so they just have to hope that the Defense and special teams would manage to pull out wins. Frankly, I like their chances even given that possibility to at least make it to the NFC championship game, where, worst-case scenario, they'd face Romo and the Cowboys, a team that I'm pretty sure they could handle as well. The thing is, with Grossman, we have seen that he has the potential to be pretty damn good and run a pretty spectacular offense. At this point, it is obvious that the only thing holding Grossman back is himself. So, really, I think you kind of have to let him try to play through it. If he hasn't managed to pull himself out of it in the next two games, then I think you have to pretty much pull the plug on the guy for good. He's just not able to handle the pressure of the league, at this point. Maybe give him some intense sessions with a sports psychologist over the off-season, try to bring in a legitimate long-term option to compete with him for the starting spot next season and then see what happens. But, if you bench Grossman now, you still won't know what you have with him. Is he capable of becoming the great quarterback he obviously has the talent to become? Grossman has been an unknown quantity for the Bears for the last several seasons, and there's not really any reason to continue having him on as an unknown quantity. Give him every last chance in the world to correct himself, and if he doesn't, he's done.

Or something like that. I think Lovie has a much more complicated idea for what's going on than what he expresses to the media, and I think he's done enough in the past that it's probably okay to trust that he'll make a good decision when it comes time for the decision to be made. But, really, there's just no reason for that decision to be made immediately.

Ugh. Why is the Chicago sports media so terrible? After a week of articles following the loss to the Pats in which they seemed to be talking about an underperforming team that was blowing its shot at the playoffs, Rick Morrissey actually has the nerve to write his article for the Tribune about how the Bears need to lighten up because they're acting pretty grumpy for a 9-2 team. And of course, there was David Haugh's weekly article about how Benson is such a terrible distraction to the team and his big mouth is dragging them down. I think Haugh must be jealous of all the articles that people get to right about TO, or all the articles the Mpls journalists got to write about Randy Moss, and has just decided that he's going act as if there is such a person on the Bears, and that person is Benson. Seriously, though, why would you decide, during your first season as the beat writer for a franchise in one of the biggest markets in the country, to make your mark by singling out a player and trying to blow him up into the Villain on the team? It either has to be personal, like Benson said some asshole thing directly to Haugh, or else Haugh is just lazy and decided that it's a lot easier to just pick a guy to rag on and run with it than it is to actually write up some meaningful analysis of the team. Frankly, the Tribune owes it to the Bears fans who read their paper to fire Haugh at the end of the season and to try to find an actually good sports journalist to be their Bears beat writer.

I just wanted to say how much fun I thought last night's game was. Seriously. It was the type of game that I don't think has really happened with the Bears in a long time. It was a game against a high-quality opponent, and really the only important thing about the game was pride. Sure, I would have liked to see the Bears win, but it wasn't like they got blown out or demonstrated any glarins weaknesses. They played really well against the Pats, and maybe if Grossman hadn't hurt his hand or not fumbled that snap they would've won, but it really wouldn't have made too much of a difference. The game was really fun to watch, but it was a game between two teams who both know they're going to the playoffs and with little likelihood of effecting either team's seed in the playoffs. So, essentially, it was a practice game for the playoffs. Before I get back to feeling sad about the fact that the Bears didn't beat the Patriots, I want to be sure to really enjoy the fact that the Bears were in the position to be playing a playoff primer game. This team is really good, and I really think they're going to make it at least to the NFC championship game, which is something that has seemed basically impossible for so many years. Also, it seems pretty safe to say that they will be contenders for the next few years, and so, I guess, I just want to make sure that I enjoy it while it is happening, instead of wringing my hands over every little hiccup and then, in eight or nine years, when the Bears go back to stinking it up and looking up hopelessly at Green Bay and Minnesota, thinking how much better it was back when the Bears were at least competetive. I'd love to see a Super Bowl, but really I'm happy with the fact that the Bears are finally one of the best teams in the league, and look to be so for the near future.

Nobody's talking about Rex's hand. It seemed like he was playing really well until he hurt his hand, and after that all of his throws were really off. After they came back from the first half, though, and the sideline lady said the Bears had said Rex's hand was fine, there wasn't another mention made of his hand. All those downfielf throws didn't quite work because none of the throws were quite on target, and it seems like if he'd hurt his hand and it was hurting his accuracy, he's got to realize that and change his game appropriately, or the coaching staff's got to make a decision to put in Griese. Also, although I do think it's stupid that they went for the big throw when they had a full two minutes left to try to get a drive going, Davis did have Samuel beat and if the throw'd gone to the right spot it would've been a sweet play. Which brings up, again, the question of if Rex's hand was hurt and if that was effecting his accuracy, and if so, why he was still in the game if he wasn't capable of doing what he needed to do. Oh, well. I just don't think this loss was a very big deal.

Over at the FO blog, Aaron Schatz confirms statistically what was already obvious to anyone who has watched all of the Bears games this year: Rex Grossman is way worse when playing from behind than playing with a lead, and especially worse when playing from more than a touchdown behind. Mr. Schatz thinks that as a Bears fan I should be worried by this, since the Bears will be more likely to fall behind playing a good team in the playoffs than when playing a shitty team. While that claim may seem to be kind of a truism, if you look at recent Bears history I'm not so sure that it's as obvious of a truth as it seems at first. It seems pretty obvious that the biggest weakness the Bears have right now is overconfidence, and going back to last season, it has seemed like when they face a really good team their defense gets all amped and freaks out all over everything and pretty much makes it impossible for the other team to do anything. I fully expect that to happen in the playoffs this year. If that does indeed happen, the only thing that Rex Grossman has to do is not turn the ball over. Hell, he could throw only incomplete passes, but as long as they're handing the ball off to Thomas Jones enough to give the defense a little time for rest here and there, the Bears will win. They may not win by thirty points, but they'll probably win. That is, of course, barring some sort of random turn of events like DBs tripping over their shoelaces.

Even though this next week's game might be just about the least meaningful game on the rest of their schedule, I really really really hope the Bears hand it to Tom Brady and the Great Satans. I mean Patriots. Seriously. I hate New England. I hope they shut them out. Probably they won't though. I expect New England to put a little more into the game than the Bears do, and the Bears will at best walk away with an unconvincing victory. And it won't matter at all. The closest team(s) in the NFC is 6-4.

LOL! Patriots fans are so funny! The Jets managed to cream the Patriots last week, but instead of everyone realizing that the Patriots are just not all that good of a team, they've all decided that the Jets are actually really good. I mean, I already thought that the Jets were better than everyone gave them credit for, but they're just running around with all of the slightly-better-than-mediocre teams, which make up about 90% of the league. Anyway, the Jets beat the Patriots last week and so this week Bill Simmons talks about how the Jets are actually really good and makes fun of Jets fans who don't think that the Jets are really good, and then he goes on to pick the Jets over the Bears! Which I think is pretty frickin' hilarious. For one, there's no way that the Bears fall into the same trap they did with Miami and Arizona, because no one thinks that the Jets are absolutely godawful. Some people are actually picking the Jets to win. Lovie Smith's 2006 Bears only lose games when they're unanimous picks and when the '85 Bears crap reaches a certain level.

The last sentence of Aaron Schatz's comment about the Bears in this week's foxsports dvoa commentary, "Here's what would worry me if I were a Chicago fan: can you really trust the inconsistent Rex Grossman to play well in three straight games?," is another example of the offensive bias seemingly everyone brings to their understanding of football. The fact is, Chicago does not need Grossman to play well in order to close out the season as the number one seed going into the playoffs; Chicago needs Grossman to not be ridiculously awful. Specifically, they need him to avoid turnovers. With the defense the Bears have, there is no way that they will lose another game this season unless the offense turns the ball over. There have been so few times that a team legitimately drove down the field and scored a touchdown against the Bears this season that the only one I can think of right now is the three- or four-play drive the Giants had yesterday that ended with B.Jacobs's longest run of the season. The scary thing, though, is that it has seemed sometimes that Turner does not recognize this fact, and therefore does not impress it strongly enough on the trigger-happy Grossman. Someone needs to impress upon Grossman that losing yards, failing to get the first down, throwing incomplete passes, none of those things is very bad when you have the caliber of defense behind you that he does. The absolute most important thing for him to do, possibly even more important than scoring points, is avoiding turnovers.

Anyway, I'm only so hard on FO because I think they're easily the smartest football analysis site anywhere, and it's annoying to see them making such simple mistakes sometimes. A simple look at Chicago's record and DVOA rankings in offense, defense, and special teams, even if one had not watched a Chicago game all season, should be enough to tell someone that the Bears' quarterback is not the most important player on their team, even if you're a Patriots fan and so trying to imagine another team winning w/o a Tom Brady-level quarterback stretches your noodle a little bit...

While watching the first part of the game last night I found myself thinking, "wow, the Giants really schemed the first part of the game incredibly well, I just hope that once the Bears adjust they turn out to be enough better than the Giants to win," which, I guess turned out to be kinda right. It made me wonder a little bit, though, if the Bears ever actually do work out specific schemes or game plans for each game, and how smart/dumb of a strategy that is. They always talk about how they don't really cater their system to specific opponents, but I think I've always kind of figured they were just blowing smoke, but it does sort of seemt that Lovie's brilliance lies in his scheme and general strategy. He doesn't appear to expend much energy on creating specific plans for specific teams. I don't know too much about Coughlin, but he seems more like the opposite kind of guy. I know from various media reports that he's absurdly anal and a total control freak, and that type of person would probably want to script as much of a game as he possibly could, which could never be more than very much of the first quarter, and then his ability to deal with what's happening in front of him would kind of fall apart as the game progressed, which is pretty obviously what happened last night. Although I don't know if it applies to any of his other games this season. It's hard to really tell how good the Bears are at half-time adjustments and things like that. They fell apart after the first half of the Miami game when they didn't have to and would have been served better by just focusing on what they normally do and continuing to do it, which is what they seemed to do last night. But in the Arizona game it seemed like they came out in the second half and, at least the defense/special teams, really went after a win. Pretty much the rest of the games this season they've been so far ahead at halftime that there wasn't anythign to adjust to.

Mainly, though, I wonder if the overall shape of last night's game (and last week's game) is something we should get used to for the second half of the season. It's been pretty obvious that the way to beat the Bears is to go all crazy at the beginning of the game and freak out their O-line and make Rex panic, which results in turnovers galore, so any team with a non-comatose coaching staff is going to come out doing exactly that. It won't matter, though, if Rex manages to reign himself in or calm down or whatever, like he did yesterday, and play like the good version of himself. But can he do that every game? And did he really manage to calm down yesterday or is it just that when Madison got injured the Giants' didn't feel they could keep blitzing because they didn't trust their nickel? I think, after the giddy first half of the season, it's going to become obvious again that what wins games for the Bears is their defense, since it's going to be up to Defense to play extremely well while Rex figures out each game if he's going to spiral downwards that day or if he's going to focus and make the defense really beat him instead of just scare him. We already know that the defense can win some games all by itself, so it's not so much of a worry to realize that Grossman's got some king-size flaws, but I can't imagine we're going to keep seeing the type of win we saw so many times in the first half of the season.

In other news, how funny is it that the 49ers just beat other NFC North teams two weeks in a row? Seriously, the Bears might have enough wins already to make it to the playoffs...

LOL! John Madden on Giants' Madison getting beat by Mark Bradley for a touchdown: "He was beaten! He was beaten! He blew a hamstring, granted, but... he still got beat."

I'm so excited for the game tonight Although, for the first time all season, I'm actually kind of nervous about the game as well. There is a pretty decent chance that this will be the most important game the Bears play during this regular season, since it's possible that the Bears and the Giants could end up tied for best record in the NFC, in which case the winner of this game gets homefield advantage during the playoffs, and judging by how the Bears have played at home versus how they've played away so far this year, that is a pretty big advantage for them to have. I would absolutely love to see them beat the Patriots in two weeks, since I hate the Patriots so much, but there's just not much of a chance that game could end up meaning much of anything. It just effects the win/loss column. And that makes it kind of insignificant, especially considering how easily they've been beating pretty much everyone else all season and that there's every reason to believe that will continue as they play the rest of their games against bad opponents. So, basically, this game tonight is the most important game they'll play until the first playoff game, and I hope they realize that and come out like they did last season against Carolina/Atlanta, and how they did against the Seahawks in week three. A loss tonight would be so incredibly annoying. I might even cry.

So the lead-in blurb or whatever it would be called for John Clayton's mini-article about the Bears/Giants game on ESPN.com says, "Everyone expected the Bears to be what they are: perhaps the NFC's best team. But the Giants?" Um, really, everyone expected that? ESPN's Preseason power rankings put the Bears at number 13, with five NFC teams (including the Giants) ranked above them. After the preseason, the Bears were still at 13 with five NFC teams above them, this time including the Bucs instead of Washington. They did jump five spots after their week one humiliation of the Packers, and every NFC team that had been above them except for the Seahawks dropped tremendously. I think it's just kind of annoying for ESPN to be all like, "Yeah. We saw the Bears coming," when I don't remember anything on ESPN before the season started talking about how the Bears would probably be the best team in the NFC, or even be in the running. I think they mostly talked about how they had a decent chance to be in the playoffs because everyone else in their division was terrible, but they'd been "exposed" by the Panthers in the playoffs, and they screwed up their draft, so they would just not be as good this year as last. Why not just admit that you totally screwed up in your assessment of a team that has clearly become a powerhouse.

I finally got around to reading the AGS. Somehow I missed it when they posted it. I'd been looking forward to it, because I'd been thinking there'd been some good stuff on FO lately, but I actually thought the AGS was pretty terrible. It doesn't offer a very good explanation of how the Dolphins won the game, nor does it provide any useful insight to the Bears or Dolphins teams in general. I kind of wonder if he even watched the game or if he just analyzed the game based on box scores and FO statistics.

The stupidest part of the article is when Macey discusses the Bears special teams. He actually seems to say that the reason they fumbled so many times is because their special teams had been playing at such a high level before, so there had to be some kind of correction to that freakishly high level. This is a very common cognitive mistake people make all the time when they think about averages and things like that, but I'm surprised to see it pop up on a site where everyone gets all high and mighty about their superior statistical analysis. While the Bears special teams may not be able to maintain their mutant-like level of play for an entire season, they have proven that their a solid unit. We can probably expect that they'll drop off a little bit, but it's more likely that they'll play at a closer-to-average level than that they'll suddenly be terrible. Macey: "One final problem for the Bears is that much of their early success has been the result of an extraordinarily high level of special teams play. They have excelled in almost all aspects up to this point, creating enormous field position advantages for both their offense and defense. That is a problem because it is simply unsustainable." Hey! Idiot! It is never a "problem" when one aspect of your team is playing at a high level. Think about how blatantly stupid this would sound of someone wrote "One final problem for the Colts is that much of their early success has been the result of an extraordinarily high level of quarterback play. That is a problem because it is simply unsustainable." Macy goes on to mention that the previous high for special teams over a season was 7.8%, and that the Bears had been playing at 13.7%. He then says, "Their DVOA started to drop early in the second quarter." He seems to be assuming that the 7.8% level is some kind of actual concrete thing toward which the Bears will be pulled, and that they will actually be penalized for overachieving by having all sorts of things go wrong as DVOA asserts its omnipotence over their special teams skills. That's just not how numbers like this work. Probably more things will go wrong for the Bears special teams during the second half of the season than did during the first half, just because a way higher number of things went right for the special teams than one could normally expect. That does not mean, however, that they will have some kind of overcorrection of loads and loads of bad things go wrong in order to bring the average back to the center. Really, I'm just pissed off that FO published such an obviously stupid bit of analysis.

The other major thing that bothered me about this article is that it didn't really do much to describe the way the game actually went. Macey makes it sound like the Bears lost because they failed to stop the rush. That's not really what happened at all. The Bears only gave up one big drive that resulted in points: a field goal. The only other big drive the Bears gave up ended in ABrown's interception. The Dolphins scored one touchdown when they were given the ball within the Bears ten-yard line, and pretty much immediately scored another when Taylor got a great read on Grossman's throw. Obviously, the Bears defense will stop most teams from getting a touchdown out of that fumble more times that most other defenses would, but it's still a pretty high-percentage shot that the Dolphins get seven points. At that point in the game, the Bears were down 14-3 despite outplaying the Dolphins pretty significantly. Grossman's first interception, even, wasn't that horrible of a play on his part; it was a very good defensive play by a very good defensive player. The drive when the Bears scored, to get the game to 10-14, proved that the Bears were in control of the game, and if both teams had gone out and executed similar game plans to what they had in the first half, the Bears would've very likely won the game. The Dolphins didn't appear to change much, but the Bears did. Instead of calming things down at half time, the Bears came out and looked jittery and scared, like they didn't know how the win the game. It was actually kind of weird. It really bothers me that there isn't any mention of this aspect of the game in the AGS article. Instead, the Bears lost because their offense never worked w/o Berrian and because they couldn't stop Ronnie Brown and because Grossman was terrible. That's just not how the game was decided. That's only a description of the fourth quarter. And what especially irks me is that, over at the FO blog, Aaron Schatz, in his annoyingly neverending campaign to justify DVOA to people who are never going to buy it anyway (why is it, by the way, that FO's spent so much time trying to justify themselves, by the way? it's like they're more concerned with all the people out there who really don't want to inject intelligence into their football analysis and who probably don't even read what they say. anyway), Schatz wrote in his explanation of DVOA a fake description of a game in which a team outplays another but still loses the game. The funny thing is that his fake description works as a more accurate description of the first half of the Dolphins/Bears game, with just a tweak of minor details, than the AGS article this week.

Especially annoying, too, is that now I'm kind of suspicious of any analysis this Ned Macey guy does. If he fucked up this game so badly, why would I trust him on any other games that I don't watch...

This weeks AGS feature on footballoutsiders is pretty well done but it fails to offer insight into anything but why the bears lost to the dolphins. Looking forward they failed to notice that chris harris and mark bradley were both inactive for the game. I would like to hear the coaching staff's explination for this, which I can only assume is health because otherwise it's incompitance, as bradley is clearly the second best deep threat on the roster and berrian has a tendency to get hurt at least once a season. also, Davis has apparently never practiced in the X slot and Gage is worthless unless griese is throwing. The whole situation is dubious to say the least. I can't remember exactly why turner was a bad head coach, but I think his player management was part of it. It seems that Lovie is going to have to step up on this front for the team to continue their early season form.
The bears run defense clearly suffered this game, though i don't think quite as badly as the numbers show. I don't really remember more than one sucessful run per possession for Miami, so I don't think there's too much to worry about. But I hope Harris is healthy next week because Johnson just isn't a starter. I didn't even know McGowen was practicing and suddenly he's active on sunday before Harris?
Anyway, I still think the bears are the most solid team in the NFL. Though they have one obvious weakness. They seem to lack composure. Every week that Rex has struggled the only answer provided after the game is "We'll have to look at the film, then we'll let you know what went wrong." What went wrong was that when you get down you forget that there's still time to win the game and Turner and Rex go all crazy. The coaching staff needs to step up their preperation level and more importantly their in game awareness level. When Rex starts to rush, Turner needs to slow down. Let the line block for Jones, maybe even call three running plays in a row!
Sorry, this post is a little rambly. I clearly should have mapped my thoughts a bit before writing.

Well, that kinda sucked. The most annoying thing, I think, is that now that they've lost to the Dolphins, if they keep winning, it's just going to increase all the annoying '85 talk.

That was a really weird game, though. I would have felt worse if they'd lost to the Cards, I think, than I do about this game, because at least the Bears weren't really outplayed this game. Though Grossman failed to come through in the end to give them the win, it's not like he really threw the game away, either. The Bears were still very much in the game in the second half of the third quarter, down 21-13, and if Turner wouldn't have panicked and decided that they absolutely had to win this game immediately and started calling only passes, allowing the Dolphins to blitz every down and make Grossman feel uncomfortable, and an uncomfortable Grossman is a very bad Grossman, if Turner would have instead have stuck with what had been working all game, was a run-heavy balanced offense, the Bears could have easily won the game. The Dolphins offense only really earned 3 of its points all game. Grossman's first interception was a bad Grossman mistake, but the other two important turnovers were jsut kind of freak things. It seems like, this year, the Bears haven't played a game in which the breaks went both ways. Either everything is going the Bears' way or nothing is going the Bears' way.

I guess you just have to figure that, most games, you're not going to have such a ridiculous number of breaks go the other way, so you can't get too worried about this game. It revealed very little about any weaknesses the Bears have. But it did show us, once again, that Turner doesn't know how to call plays from behind in such a way to give his quarterback a good comfortable shot at winning. Which is kind of troubling. But it's not the type of thing that can't be worked out, if someone around there is willing to work it out.

Next week against the Giants, though, is suddenly far more important than it would've been if the gods hadn't decided to spit all over the Bears this week.

how pathetic are the dolphins?

I just looked over the bears schedule and they literally have two difficult games on the entire thing. The Giants in NY in two weeks and two weeks after that NE at foxboro. Before the season this looked like the toughest spell of the year, which it is, but it looked far more daunting with a tough miami team coming to town before the three game east coast trip. The 'fins are dancing very close to the 2007 first overall pick and certainly aren't going to change that on sunday, but it's the old dolphins the undefeated dolphins who are really pathetic. They accomplished something amazing 34 years ago, 13 years before the bears last were dominant, and they spend every year getting together to celebrate the final first loss of every season. This isn't just a private ritual either, they make a big deal out of this event, and apparently they even feel qualified to weigh in on each teams chances of accomplishing what they did. Great guys you were good two generations ago, let it go! You don't know any more about the current NFL than Mark Schlereth and hes a flippin moron. This years bears probably wont go undefeated, but they have a very legitimate chance of doing it. The giants seem to me to be a solid team, but nowhere near the bears level. Eli has never taken apart a great defence and Tiki barber is merely good, not even great, and hes afraid of playing next year, so each week and each hard hitting defence he sees hes going to think of the end being oh so near. And Tom Brady and the Pats are going to lose to Peyton and the Colts, exposing all their defensive shortcomings and the bears are going to come in rested after the bye week that is the NY jets and Urlacher will, single handedly if necessary, ensure that Tom Brady starts to think the studio doesn't look so bad by the end of his pathetic day. Or maybe the bears won't come through in the end, either way i will still think the 72 dolphins players are pathetic human beings.