Reply With Quote
eh...just wanted something obnoxious for awhile...
Oh Katy! You must be feverish(since your cheeks are so pink in your avatar...) There can never be TOO MUCH REX!!!!
eh...just wanted something obnoxious for awhile...
i was slightlyand yes i was joking, though you're right about dungy
you aint worried about getting busted for your sig?
IND 26
CHI 23
Bears--27
Colts--24
And bad news for the folks actually going to the game:
Tailgating has been banned within a mile of the stadium by the No Fun League
http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/story?id=2831711&page=1
when do the interviews start?
Tuesday.
Colts seemed pretty relaxed in their interviews, Freeney was good, and Peyton answered everything great
bears are gonna get ed
bears 28 colts 20, ced benson MVP
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/playof...ory?id=2751064
Tony Parker picks the Colts. Smart man.
All my guy friends ( at least the ones that I've talked to about this ) are rooting for the Bears. I have been rooting for the Colts...
He probably knows the NFL a lot better than most of the people going "LOL DA BEARS!!!111Tony knows the NFL?
yeah the colts don't have many bandwagon fans at all either.He probably knows the NFL a lot better than most of the people going "LOL DA BEARS!!!111
Moreso than the temperature, the Colts defense is REALLY horrible on grass. If this game were on turf, I'd probably go with Indy. As it's on natural grass, the speed of their D-line is going to be limited. They depend on cutting moves based on speed to get penetration. Freeney is essentially a stock DE on grass, while he's a monster on turf.
The Bears O-line is huge, and with not two but three backs who are capable of running the ball (don't forget about Adrian Peterson), they could have the Colts D wore down by the second quarter. No one plays the kind of grind out game that the Bears do, except perhaps the Ravens, who decided to run the ball only 13 times with their main back, despite the fact that he averaged over 4 yards a carry. They played right into the Colts hands by passing all day long. The Bears won't do that, and the Colts D (who has a tendency to overpursue) might find themselves the victim of play-action passing for much of the 2nd half, when their front four are so wore down they can't even slow the run (another area where Freeney is pretty useless).
If there is one consistent fact in Superbowls, it's that QBs are important, but they don't determine the game. Defense does. Defense would have nearly every MVP ring of the Super Bowl, but you can't give it to 11 guys.
Manning has been less than stellar in the playoffs, despite his win over the Pats. The Colts have been pounded on by some of the best Ds in the league. This week is no different, with the Bears, who hit just as hard as the Ravens do. And don't forget, the Colts have had to play 3 games to get here, the Bears just two. That may make a difference in the 4th Quarter, be it Manning being just a tick off with a receiver, or the half a step Berrian gains on his cover. Grossman has been able to throw the deep ball all year, and if the running game is effective, there is no way Indy can settle back in a cover 2.
The Bears are unarguably better on the D-line, Linebackers, and Cornerbacks. The safetys would normally favor the Colts, except their standout is injured... Sanders may be completely ineffective, but even under the best cir stances, he probably won't be 95%. The special teams match up like a Pro-bowl team against a Rookie squad -- Bears, best in the league, Colts -- very possibly the worst, PK aside.
What else? Oh yes. The Bears O-line is at least as good as the Colts. And the running game is no contest.
The Colts are better at wideout and quarterback, both by large margins. However, the only other area where they equal the Bears is O-line. Everything else is against them here, including injuries and rest. If anything, the heat should help the Bears. There is nothing harder to stop than a power running game in the middle of the afternoon.
It should be a very tough game, because Peyton won't let his team go away so easily. Bears still win. Defense and power running take Super Bowl XLI, 28-24.
Yeah, you're right. The team with the gritty running game and the hard-hitting defense is the one that will gain bandwagon fans over the high powered flashy offense that analysts have been picking to win it all as a no-brainer for 6 years. Right.He probably knows the NFL a lot better than most of the people going "LOL DA BEARS!!!111
You ARE a Spurs fan, right? A Spurs fan... who thinks... defense.... gains a lot of fans....
I don't know what kind of point you're trying to prove here. I'm saying a Bears win is about as likely to happen as a pornstar having a premature ejaculation, and I can't seem to find out why so many people think the Bears are going to win (pretty sure the NO game when the Saints turned it over 4 times has a lot to do with ppl thinking the Bears D is as good as it was at the beginning of the season when it's actually not). We'll see, but my money is on the Colts and we'll see what happens on Sunday.Yeah, you're right. The team with the gritty running game and the hard-hitting defense is the one that will gain bandwagon fans over the high powered flashy offense that analysts have been picking to win it all as a no-brainer for 6 years. Right.
You ARE a Spurs fan, right? A Spurs fan... who thinks... defense.... gains a lot of fans....
"Defense wins championships" is probably the most played out cliche in professional sports and if the '06 NBA Finals proved anything, it proved that cliche can be proven wrong.
You state that Tony Parker knows a lot more about the NFL than a lot of people on this forum. While that point has absolutely no validity, it should be known that Phil Jackson picked the Bears. Why? Defense wins championships. As much as I love Tony, I'd probably go with Phil in terms of overall knowledge of sports here. But again, that is mostly conjecture.
You also said that the Bears had gathered a ton of bandwaggon supporters. To which I responded that defense and running the ball well has never historically attracted a ton of fans to their sideline, much like the Spurs have not ever received the kind of media hype that other teams have, and yet have 3 rings in the past 8 years. The comparison has several parallels as well: Both the Bears and Spurs (well, the Spurs of the past) have relied on defense first to win games. Meanwhile, teams like the Colts and Suns have been very offensive minded as of late. Now, which teams get more hype (and therefore more bandwaggon fans)? I'm sure this isn't that difficult to figure out... then again you didn't understand it the first time I said it.
Just a quick tidbit: Colts & Suns combined = 0 les. Bears and Spurs: Potentially 5, after Sunday. And that's not counting the numerous NFL Championships Chicago won before the AFL-AFC joined the league. Notice a trend? Yeah. The 85 Bears did it with defense, too. You say last year's NBA Finals "disproved" it, but that is one year. Look back. 05 Spurs - Great defense. 04 Pistons - Great defense. 03 Spurs... the Laker Dynasty with Shaq in the middle.... the Spurs again with the Twin Towers plugging the lane.... the Bulls dynasty that saw two (three with Rodman) of the best defenders in the NBA on the same team... the Rockets with Hakeem....
Are you following yet? But no, you're right, last year definitely proved it wrong.
I could say the Rams "Greatest Show on Turf" proved it wrong too, but the ans weren't particularly dominant on defense that year either.
"I'm saying a Bears win is about as likely to happen as a pornstar having a premature ejaculation, and I can't seem to find out why so many people think the Bears are going to win..."
The Bears are 7 point dogs in the Superbowl. That's a decent margin, but nowhere near what some teams have been. When Broadway Joe lit up Miami, the Jets were 21 point underdogs. They dominated the game and won by 9.
And need I point out to you what happened when four Hall of Fame Lakers took the court against the Pistons in 2004? That was supposed to be an afterthought. People said the Pistons MIGHT steal a game. Instead, it was the series known as the 5 game sweep, minus the Kobe Bryant buzzer beater.
Perhaps the thing that your post lacks most... is anything substantial. I just listed a good quarter page breakdown of the matchups of this Superbowl, and the Bears hold a clear edge in most of them. Meanwhile, you're wanking to Peyton Manning, the "unstoppable" Colts offense that couldn't muster a single touchdown against Baltimore, despite an anemic performance by McNair that resulted in the Colts completely dominating the time of possession, not to mention the fact that the Ravens only ran the ball 17 times between their two lead backs.
Perhaps it needs to be said again. All 8 analysts for ESPN picked the Saints to beat the Bears. Why? Well, the Saints have the #1 offense in the league. They're unstoppable, and the Bears don't have the speed to keep up with them. Several analysts predicted a trouncing. One said, "There is no way the Bears can beat the Saints."
Yet after a long touchdown pass in the second quarter that saw a certain young running back taunt the Bears, the Saints never reached the endzone again. If you think that wasn't a statement made by the Bears, you don't watch much football.
"pretty sure the NO game when the Saints turned it over 4 times has a lot to do with ppl thinking the Bears D is as good as it was at the beginning of the season when it's actually not)."
Uh. You do realize you completely contradict yourself with this, right? That's kind of like saying.... "Yeah... that team was SO awesome last week... but they aren't very good."
Please work on your logic before you attempt to make bets in Vegas. You'll lose a lot less money that way. And for the record, as a Spurs fan, it's disgraceful of you to say that defense wins championships is overused. It also shows a complete lack of knowledge about the 3 major American sports. But I guess that's your call.
I have studied in France, they don't watch American football.
Did you really say that the Colts have zero les in a post where you berate somebody about "lack of knowledge?"
Please tell me when the Indianapolis Colts have won a le.Did you really say that the Colts have zero les in a post where you berate somebody about "lack of knowledge?"
Oooooh... that right's... a team that won several decades ago in a different city is somehow supposed to be considered the "same team". Sorry, doesn't count.
How many of the 1985 Bears are still on the roster?
By the way, the correct response would have been to say "Oops," laugh at yourself, and move on, rather than being a bag and digging yourself into a deeper hole by claiming that the Indianapolis Colts are not the same franchise as the Baltimore Colts, and by claiming that winning a lot time ago doesn't count for the Colts, but it does for the Bears.
Same city. Same fans. Same type of team. The person I was replying to was speaking about how defense wins championships was an overrated addage.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
