Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
The only down part is that for the rest of year we're gonna have Manning telling us how much we can save by switching to Geico. Or how much better a flat screen plasma TV looks in a living room. 🙁
"Like Peyton Manning. That guy's pretty good. If you like six-foot.....yadadayadada.....with a Super Bowl ring."
Originally posted by Smasandian
Take away 2 plays by the Bears, the score would of been 29-3. The Bears got raped.
They couldnt stop the run at all. Urlacher is suppose to be able to cover anybody, but somehow the Colts were getting first down after first down from Addai, Clark and Rhodes.The Colts had 165 more yards than the Bears. Colts had 13 more first downs, 17:00 minutes more of possesion and I'm pretty sure the Bears had only four possesions in the 2nd and 3rd quarter equalling a total of 30 yards. The game's score isnt the true story of the game.
The Bears didnt do anything at all. They sucked on defense, couldnt tackle at all, never got any pressure at all and couldnt stop 3rd down coversions. The offense on the other hand was bad. Outside of the last two drives in the 4th, the Bears had only 1 good drive.
The only thing that the Bears did well was special teams.
Take away 2 plays from the Colts and the score would have been different as well. Whats you're point? Oh wait thats right you don't have one.
The bears didn't do anything? So they didn't score 17 points or nearly win the game right?
They couldn't rush Manning because if they did they would have left their backfield wide open and the Colts would score every time. The defense played as well as they could against the best offense in the league, and they weren't given many options.
You're shallow argument only proves you're bias viewpoint
Originally posted by Grimm22
Take away 2 plays from the Colts and the score would have been different as well. Whats you're point? Oh wait thats right you don't have one.The bears didn't do anything? So they didn't score 17 points or nearly win the game right?
They couldn't rush Manning because if they did they would have left their backfield wide open and the Colts would score every time. The defense played as well as they could against the best offense in the league, and they weren't given many options.
You're shallow argument only proves you're bias viewpoint
I'm biased?
Why? Because I said something bad about your Bears, which lost the big game pretty badly?
That's funny. You know the Colts won right?
Um no. The Colts dominated the Bears defense. Having 81 plays against the defense is a very good thing. My point is that the defense of the Bears played horribly. They got run over by the Colts. You disagree?
You know anything about football? If you did, you would know that to generally win most games, you need to pressure the QB. If you dont, usually you dont win. Case in point, the Superbowl. Manning had ample amounts of time because of the lack of d-line pressure and well, you know the rest. The Bears on the other hand had pressure all night which was the main reason for Grossman threw up bricks.
As I said before, and many have, the Colts won the game easily. Like I said before, take away 2 plays, and the Colts would of won by alot more.
Originally posted by Smasandian
I'm biased?Why? Because I said something bad about your Bears, which lost the big game pretty badly?
That's funny. You know the Colts won right?
Um no. The Colts dominated the Bears defense. Having 81 plays against the defense is a very good thing. My point is that the defense of the Bears played horribly. They got run over by the Colts. You disagree?
You know anything about football? If you did, you would know that to generally win most games, you need to pressure the QB. If you dont, usually you dont win. Case in point, the Superbowl. Manning had ample amounts of time because of the lack of d-line pressure and well, you know the rest. The Bears on the other hand had pressure all night which was the main reason for Grossman threw up bricks.
As I said before, and many have, the Colts won the game easily. Like I said before, take away 2 plays, and the Colts would of won by alot more.
You're point is basically that the Colts won and have better numbers, which is true.
But like I said; a 12 point lead isn't exactly something to brag about. It's nothing astonishing.
This is probally going to get overshadowed by all the superbowl talk, but it was a damn shame that Art Monk didn't get into the hall of fame again. What the **** is wrong with these sports writers. They vote Michael Irvin in, and not Art Monk. Monk has more career receptions than Irvin, and I think even more career YDS, and TDs, and has just as many Super bowl rings as Irvin as well. Not to take anything away from Irvin because he belongs in there as well, but Monk is just as, if not, more deserving than Irvin, ****in ridiculous.
Well i changed my favorite team about 2 years ago and switch over to the bears since i do live close to chicago i should have been a fan all my life but really liked brett farve. and this last game which happened to be the superbowl was just awful
Rex grossman can hardel get the snap off right let along find an open reciver and get the ball to them. he is deffintly great and getting the ball turned over. really the only people that came to play the day was hester and jone and unforutunitly ****ing benson got hurt and couldnt even begin to show his stuff so bad game could have gone way better for da bears but at least i won money on the squares i entered
Originally posted by Grimm22
Take away 2 plays from the Colts and the score would have been different as well. Whats you're point? Oh wait thats right you don't have one.
His point was that the colts dominated the game. One the scoreboard it was very close for a while and the Bears were in the game almost the entire way through. But the bears were getting their ass handed to them on both sides of the ball all game. If you didnt see that you watched a different game.
-side note
I cant wait for this thread to get back to normal.
Originally posted by botankus
Cast my vote for Colts Dominated The Game. After the second Grossman pick with about 11 minutes left, I turned to my wife and said "it's over."And I never say it's over. Not after Houston/Buffalo Jan '93, Pittsburgh/Cleveland Jan '03, and countless others.
I would even say that the Colts won it when the Colts scored that TD in the second quarter.
Like I said before, the Colts dominated the Bears. Outside of the Hester TD (which probably hurt them more than helped in the long run), the Bears had one good drive, which was pretty much from one play, the Jones run. Other than that, what did the Bears do all game? Absolutly nothing. A team that gets dominated is the team that doesnt touch the ball for a whole quarter.
Grossman should get blamed for the loss, but he is definitly not the only person who should get blamed. Lovie Smith should get the blame. Did he watch any tape at all? Or, try something new on the defense, ( i dont know, maybe not letting the safeties play 20 yards deep and get ass raped from Addai and Rhodes)
It's kinda of refreshing to have an Superbowl where everybody knows who won the game. They're is no conterversy, nothing. It's great.
Lovie Smith will probably be pursuing a contract extension in the $3.5-$4.5 million range, as opposed to getting fired. Right now he is the lowest paid coach (from last year's numbers, I believe).
As far as no controversy in this game, I am glad as well. There was this one moment in the first half after a fumble where a Colts lineman looked enraged and ran smack into the official, and the official looked to be reaching towards the flag but decided against it. Eventually, it appeared the Colts player was chasing a Bears player who thought the ball was still loose, but at first glance it looked as if he were pissed.
Originally posted by botankus
Lovie Smith will probably be pursuing a contract extension in the $3.5-$4.5 million range, as opposed to getting fired. Right now he is the lowest paid coach (from last year's numbers, I believe).As far as no controversy in this game, I am glad as well. There was this one moment in the first half after a fumble where a Colts lineman looked enraged and ran smack into the official, and the official looked to be reaching towards the flag but decided against it. Eventually, it appeared the Colts player was chasing a Bears player who thought the ball was still loose, but at first glance it looked as if he were pissed.
He deserves it also. He has done a great job with the Bears, just not a great job at the Superbowl.
Didnt see that play.