Week 3: Green Bay Packers @ Chicago Bears

[Bellsprout]

You guys sound like Mike Vick after his game...

[SidVish]

Yikes. It's very clear that the Packers are the better team. Blaming the refs is not giving credit to Green Bay which isn't fair. They made the plays and Chicago didn't.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by mKoz26

No... no it isn't. It's usually only called if it occurs after the catch. If the gunner jammer (don't know what to call that position) isn't holding on a PR, he isn't doing his job.

I happen to agree and usually it's a 2 against 1 boxing match all the way down the field. However, on this play, Knox broke away to catch the ball, while 21 was left on a island to try to block Bush.

Players can get away with it more when it's 2 against 1.

My take.

[mKoz26]

Quote: Originally Posted by roadman

I happen to agree and usually it's a 2 against 1 boxing match all the way down the field. However, on this play, Knox broke away to catch the ball, while 21 was left on a island to try to block Bush. Players can get away with it more when it's 2 against 1. My take.

I agree for sure.

Another bad call that escaped me earlier was when Finley was blocking a DB 3 yards down the field and then turned around and nabbed a touchdown catch. It was a very clear pass interference not called and went far beyond the usual jostling of a jam at the line.

Just pointing it out. Before Dayman compares me to Michael Vick: I don't think the Bears were the better team today.

[f1sh1000]

Bears cover the Vegas spread if they scored on the Punt Return, Enough said...

[K0ZZ]

Just because I said the game could've went the other way doesn't mean I felt the Bears were the better team. That would be like me saying the Bears were the better team against the Saints. I'd be worried for both teams personally. The Packers should've slaughtered the Bears with how badly they played. That's why I'm saying it's going to be a Lions, Packers, Bears 1.2.3. finish.

If you saw the first post I clearly said the Packers were the better team. With how the game played out, the Bears could've won if the calls went the other way and the referees weren't so bad. Key word, could've. Notice the C instead of the W. The Packers were / are the better team.'

I still stand by my statement though, if the Bears had an offensive line, we would be favorites to win the Super Bowl. Our offensive line is so bad, it's weighing us down to a low end playoff squad at best. This is a year that three teams could emerge from the North in the playoffs and I wouldn't be surprised.

[roadman]

Quote: Originally Posted by chicagopax

Just because I said the game could've went the other way doesn't mean I felt the Bears were the better team. That would be like me saying the Bears were the better team against the Saints. I'd be worried for both teams personally. The Packers should've slaughtered the Bears with how badly they played. That's why I'm saying it's going to be a Lions, Packers, Bears 1.2.3. finish. If you saw the first post I clearly said the Packers were the better team. With how the game played out, the Bears could've won if the calls went the other way and the referees weren't so bad. Key word, could've. Notice the C instead of the W. The Packers were / are the better team.' I still stand by my statement though, if the Bears had an offensive line, we would be favorites to win the Super Bowl. Our offensive line is so bad, it's weighing us down to a low end playoff squad at best. This is a year that three teams could emerge from the North in the playoffs and I wouldn't be surprised.

When you make statements like these on a messageboard:

I feel that the referees mistakes influenced the outcome well enough that the final score was impacted.

Do I completely agree with the outcome? Not at all

I'm saying if the calls went the other way the Bears would've won.

(Key word here would've, see the W?)

your statement about the Packers were the better team that won becomes very shallow.

As was explained earlier about the PR holding, the call was on #21, who was on an island vs being 2 vs 1 against Bush. #21 could have gotten away with that call if it was 2 vs 1, but he wasn't, it was more visible to the refs.

To me, those three statements you made overshadowed your one statement that the Packers were the better team that won. In my opinion, your statements meant that the refs handed the game to the Packers.

[Jistic]

Yeah some calls (or no calls) were embarrassingly atrocious. Might have they impacted the outcome? Maybe, but that's the NFL EVERY WEEK. We lost because we suck at too many positions. I don't see an NFL receiver on the roster besides maybe Earl Bennet and Swarzenbacher. Notice I didn't say #1 receiver, I just mean receiver. These guys are terrible. Beyond the fact that they can't catch, they can't run routes or get any separation.

The Hester experiment needs to just be done. Let him return kicks and maybe use him as a 5th receiver, other than that I see no reason why he's wasting space. Johnny Knox is never going to be a competent NFL receiver either. You could have some guys like this on your roster IF you actually had some real receivers around them but we don't.

On top of our offensive line being crap the receivers are right there with them. We have nothing but experiments at that position and it shows. I can't blame Cutler for much of this stuff.

The Packers beat us because they're better...a LOT better.