You know full well I often go days without posting here.  Nothing "ironic."  I've probably posted more after that Bears football "game" than most others, including Wardi, so it's not exactly like I've been hiding.

Dink people are just sick of the nonsense..and either stopped psoting here and psot elsewhere  or post rarely, the quality of posts is gone and now jsut mostly childish trolling and inciting back and forth, who needs it?

And most have caught on to the "games".. but that means less attention, so now begging for it, which I personally find very funny!!!...oh well it makes me smile

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	6	1	0	.857	206	148	3-0	3-1	2-1	4-0	2-0	Lost 1
PACKERS	4	2	0	.667	161	96	2-1	2-1	1-1	3-1	2-1	Won 2
BEARS	3	3	0	.500	142	144	2-0	1-2	1-1	2-2	1-1	Lost 2
LIONS	1	5	0	.167	103	188	1-2	0-3	0-1	1-3	0-3	Lost 3

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

What happens next week? The Bears have their only weak opponent in the next five weeks - the Browns at home. The angry and embarrassed Bears are going to run up the score and win easily. The Rams visit Detroit. Call me crazy. But I'm going to pick the Lions to win a game. And then the rematch in Green Bay - Vikings at Packers. I really want to pick the Packers in this game. But I just can't. The Vikings are a far superior team. Still, I give the Packers a fighting chance. They played them tough the first time. And you have to think Rodgers want a little revenge. But still, I have to go with Favre and Minnesota.

 

 

I see you finally picked the Lions to win...then again, they are at home against the worst team in the NFL, so I won't call you "crazy."  Just another "prediction" where you pick a favorite to win without giving any points.

 

The Vikings win is one of the only dogs you have predicted to win all season...and you tempered that with coments such as you give the Packers a fighting chance.  This puts you in fine position to argue next week that you are a master at prediction in the event of a Packer loss, and to argue that the Packers are exceeding your expectations in the event of a win, and that you "predicted" the Packers would play tough.

Dinkpass:

IHATETHEBEARS:

What happens next week? The Bears have their only weak opponent in the next five weeks - the Browns at home. The angry and embarrassed Bears are going to run up the score and win easily. The Rams visit Detroit. Call me crazy. But I'm going to pick the Lions to win a game. And then the rematch in Green Bay - Vikings at Packers. I really want to pick the Packers in this game. But I just can't. The Vikings are a far superior team. Still, I give the Packers a fighting chance. They played them tough the first time. And you have to think Rodgers want a little revenge. But still, I have to go with Favre and Minnesota.

 

 

I see you finally picked the Lions to win...then again, they are at home against the worst team in the NFL, so I won't call you "crazy."  Just another "prediction" where you pick a favorite to win without giving any points.

 

The Vikings win is one of the only dogs you have predicted to win all season...and you tempered that with coments such as you give the Packers a fighting chance.  This puts you in fine position to argue next week that you are a master at prediction in the event of a Packer loss, and to argue that the Packers are exceeding your expectations in the event of a win, and that you "predicted" the Packers would play tough.

What is this obsession with points and such? I'm not a gambler. I couldn't care less. I think the Bears will win. I'm assuming they're favorites to win. You want me to pick the Browns or "take the points" in the game? I'll be honest with you Dinky. I have no clue what "take the points" even means. That sort of gambling has zero interest to me.

It's simply wins and losses with my Dinky. If the Packers win, then my prediction on the game will (happily) be WRONG.

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

Dinkpass:

IHATETHEBEARS:

What happens next week? The Bears have their only weak opponent in the next five weeks - the Browns at home. The angry and embarrassed Bears are going to run up the score and win easily. The Rams visit Detroit. Call me crazy. But I'm going to pick the Lions to win a game. And then the rematch in Green Bay - Vikings at Packers. I really want to pick the Packers in this game. But I just can't. The Vikings are a far superior team. Still, I give the Packers a fighting chance. They played them tough the first time. And you have to think Rodgers want a little revenge. But still, I have to go with Favre and Minnesota.

 

 

I see you finally picked the Lions to win...then again, they are at home against the worst team in the NFL, so I won't call you "crazy."  Just another "prediction" where you pick a favorite to win without giving any points.

 

The Vikings win is one of the only dogs you have predicted to win all season...and you tempered that with coments such as you give the Packers a fighting chance.  This puts you in fine position to argue next week that you are a master at prediction in the event of a Packer loss, and to argue that the Packers are exceeding your expectations in the event of a win, and that you "predicted" the Packers would play tough.

What is this obsession with points and such? I'm not a gambler. I couldn't care less. I think the Bears will win. I'm assuming they're favorites to win. You want me to pick the Browns or "take the points" in the game? I'll be honest with you Dinky. I have no clue what "take the points" even means. That sort of gambling has zero interest to me.

It's simply wins and losses with my Dinky. If the Packers win, then my prediction on the game will (happily) be WRONG.

 

The point is pretty much everybody would pick the Bears to beat the Browns, and the Lions to beat the Rams in Detroit.  You always pick the favorites...which is fine..but you have this need to pat yourself on the back as if what you are doing is some great accomplishment.  It isn't. 

I always pick the favorites? Didn't you just say earlier today that I picked the underdog Vikings?

Here's some news for you Dinky. I have absolutely no idea if I'm picking favorites or underdogs. And there's a good reason for that. I don't visit gambling websites. I don't look at lines. When I update this thread, I grab my handy pocket-sized 2009 NFL Schedule which is sitting next to my monitor, look at who's playing who, then make a prediction. I base my prediction on the records of each team, the records of their upcoming opponent, where the game is taking place, and perhaps a few intangibles. If my line of thinking is the same as the experts who set the betting lines, then I must be pretty good. Because I'm on the same page as them.

Cheers!

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

I always pick the favorites? Didn't you just say earlier today that I picked the underdog Vikings?

Here's some news for you Dinky. I have absolutely no idea if I'm picking favorites or underdogs. And there's a good reason for that. I don't visit gambling websites. I don't look at lines. When I update this thread, I grab my handy pocket-sized 2009 NFL Schedule which is sitting next to my monitor, look at who's playing who, then make a prediction. I base my prediction on the records of each team, the records of their upcoming opponent, where the game is taking place, and perhaps a few intangibles. If my line of thinking is the same as the experts who set the betting lines, then I must be pretty good. Because I'm on the same page as them.

Cheers!

 

Wow.  When the Eagle play the Redskins, the Bear play the Lions, the Bucs play New England, and the Packers play the Rams, nobody has to look at any odds to figure out who is the favorite.  Like last week...I did not have to consuly the odds makers to figure the Bears would be dogs on the road to the Bengals.  Most games are clear who should win.

 

That is why they have points.  Because it is so clear who is the better team, Vegas needs to add points to the dogs score just to get people to bet them.

Again, anybody can pick favorites.  And when I said you always pick favorites..I really meant like 90% of the time. 

Hey, no one's arguing. It is what it is. I only make predictions for the teams in the NFC North. And sure, when a team like the Bears plays a team like the Browns, I expect the Bears to blowout the Browns. I can't help it if it's a mismatch. It's on the schedule.

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

Dinkpass:

PapaBear.OR:

IHATETHEBEARS:

PapaBear.OR:

: (

You'll be smiling again in five days. No worries.

Not really........ I don't think I'll be finding much solace in beating the Browns. Maybe 12 days from now, but not five.

 

Well...we just better hope the Bears beat the Browns...don't look too far ahead, Papa.

 

 

Agreed, as I recall the Browns gave Cincy a run for their money, but I still won't gain much solace should we beat them.

---

Butkus never wore an earring

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	6	1	0	.857	206	148	3-0	3-1	2-1	4-0	2-0	Lost 1
PACKERS	4	2	0	.667	161	96	2-1	2-1	1-1	3-1	2-1	Won 2
BEARS	3	3	0	.500	142	144	2-0	1-2	1-1	2-2	1-1	Lost 2
LIONS	1	5	0	.167	103	188	1-2	0-3	0-1	1-3	0-3	Lost 3

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

Will the Packers get revenge against Favre this weekend? 91% of the nation will be receiving this game in their homes.

 

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	6	1	0	.857	206	148	3-0	3-1	2-1	4-0	2-0	Lost 1
PACKERS	4	2	0	.667	161	96	2-1	2-1	1-1	3-1	2-1	Won 2
BEARS	3	3	0	.500	142	144	2-0	1-2	1-1	2-2	1-1	Lost 2
LIONS	1	5	0	.167	103	188	1-2	0-3	0-1	1-3	0-3	Lost 3

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

I think you mean the game will be available to 91% of the homes in the U.S.

I seriously doubt that 277 million people will be watching this game, which is what your statement "receiving this game in their homes" tends to imply.

1985AllOverAgain:

I think you mean the game will be available to 91% of the homes in the U.S.

I seriously doubt that 277 million people will be watching this game, which is what your statement "receiving this game in their homes" tends to imply.

LOL - I actually thought of that beofre I typed it. My instinct was to say "91% will be watching." But I knew that wasn't right. So I changed it to "receiving." Whether they watch it or not, their household will be receiving it.

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

1985AllOverAgain:

I think you mean the game will be available to 91% of the homes in the U.S.

I seriously doubt that 277 million people will be watching this game, which is what your statement "receiving this game in their homes" tends to imply.

LOL - I actually thought of that beofre I typed it. My instinct was to say "91% will be watching." But I knew that wasn't right. So I changed it to "receiving." Whether they watch it or not, their household will be receiving it.

I don't know if that is technically true either.  I assume FOX is a standard channel in most cable packages, but don't some satellite subscribers still not get local channels?  And don't some households in America still not have a television (as weird as that sounds)?  And don't some of those people who have televisions, despite the digital conversion, still not receive FOX?

The more accurate statement may be that FOX is broadcasting it as the late game in 91% of it's markets.

But, I'm not an expert on broadcasting, so you may be right.  It just doesn't sound right for some reason.

1985AllOverAgain:

IHATETHEBEARS:

1985AllOverAgain:

I think you mean the game will be available to 91% of the homes in the U.S.

I seriously doubt that 277 million people will be watching this game, which is what your statement "receiving this game in their homes" tends to imply.

LOL - I actually thought of that beofre I typed it. My instinct was to say "91% will be watching." But I knew that wasn't right. So I changed it to "receiving." Whether they watch it or not, their household will be receiving it.

I don't know if that is technically true either.  I assume FOX is a standard channel in most cable packages, but don't some satellite subscribers still not get local channels?  And don't some households in America still not have a television (as weird as that sounds)?  And don't some of those people who have televisions, despite the digital conversion, still not receive FOX?

The more accurate statement may be that FOX is broadcasting it as the late game in 91% of it's markets.

But, I'm not an expert on broadcasting, so you may be right.  It just doesn't sound right for some reason.

I have absolutely no idea. All I know is what I heard the other day - either NFL Network or ESPN quoted it. I think we can safely say without argument that 91% of the U.S. markets have it.

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

The Packers are apparently favored to win this game. Is anyone else surprised by that?

 

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	6	1	0	.857	206	148	3-0	3-1	2-1	4-0	2-0	Lost 1
PACKERS	4	2	0	.667	161	96	2-1	2-1	1-1	3-1	2-1	Won 2
BEARS	3	3	0	.500	142	144	2-0	1-2	1-1	2-2	1-1	Lost 2
LIONS	1	5	0	.167	103	188	1-2	0-3	0-1	1-3	0-3	Lost 3

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

The Packers are apparently favored to win this game. Is anyone else surprised by that?

 

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	6	1	0	.857	206	148	3-0	3-1	2-1	4-0	2-0	Lost 1
PACKERS	4	2	0	.667	161	96	2-1	2-1	1-1	3-1	2-1	Won 2
BEARS	3	3	0	.500	142	144	2-0	1-2	1-1	2-2	1-1	Lost 2
LIONS	1	5	0	.167	103	188	1-2	0-3	0-1	1-3	0-3	Lost 3

I am not surprised.  The Vikings are overrated.

---

Dear Ron Turner:

We have our franchise QB now. Please don't screw this season up. We are counting on you.

Sincerely,

Bears fans

So you think the Packers should win this game? Personally I think they certainly can. But I think the Vikings are better and should be favored as such.

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

 

Well for the first time in five weeks I called a game wrong. Only my fourth wrong call all season though. I'll take that.

Those awful Lions - why did I pick them? How bad are they? The lost at home to the winless Rams? So much for their starting quarterback making a difference. They may be worst than last year. I think they're one more loss from being called the Wannabes again. Stinky.

I watched the entire Bears game. And as expected, they blewout the hapless Browns. I've watched the Browns two weeks in a row now. I pray I don't see another this year. I don't know how Browns fans can watch that crap each and every week. The Bears defense played great, forcing several turnovers and coming within an awful punt of pitching a shutout. Like I said last week. It doesn't matter who your opponent is. A shutout is impressive. I was less impressed with the Bears offensive line. The Browns couldn't touch Aaron Rodgers a week ago, in spite of the Packers' awful line. Yet they had no problem putting Cutler on his back all day. And I counted. I heard the boo birds for the Bears offense at the end of seven different offensive series'.

The Vikings and Packers played a boring first half. But the second half was far more entertaining. Favre was brilliant as usual. Peterson was great as well. The Packers offensive line was dreadful. What did Allen have, three sacks? Jesus. At least Rodgers doesn't throw interceptions. I'll take the sacks any day. Like the first game, Favre wasn't sacked, nor did he throw an interception. He's playing a lot smarter this year. The Packers did manage to get some pressure on him finally. And that probably made the game closer than it should have been. It was a nice little comeback by the Packers. But the defense couldn't stop Brett from doing what he's always done - throw touchdowns and win football games. The Vikings are by far the class of this division. They're undefeated at home and 4-1 on the road. The Bears and Packers have no chance at catching them.

 

And what happens next week? The Cardinals come to Chicago. I'm sorry Bears fans. I don't think your team is going to win. The Cardinals aren't as good as they were last year. But I think they're better than the Bears. I suspect it will be an entertaining game. The Lions head out to Seattle. Seattle's not that great. But the Lions are absolute crap. Whatever happened to those few Lions fans who were here during the off season? As Wisc is fond of pointing out, they're usually gone by October. Spot on Wisc. The Packers head south to Tampa. That should be a win for Green Bay. And the Vikings finally have their bye week.

 

As for the Favre/Cutler touchdown/interception ratio race, after today's games they stand at:

FAVRE: 480 touchdowns, 313 interceptions

CUTLER: 65 touchdowns, 48 interceptions

At Cutler's current touchdown/interception pace, if he were to reach 479 touchdowns, he would have 354 interceptions - or 41 more than Favre. Cutler loses a lot of ground again this week.

Cheers!

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

 

The Bears have the longest current streak of giving up a sack - 24 games. Can the Cardinals make it 25?

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

 

The Bears have the longest current streak of giving up a sack - 24 games. Can the Cardinals make it 25?

Wow, a Packer fan making fun of another team for SACKS.   That's funny. How many for Rodgers now?

---

Religion and sex are power plays
Manipulate the people for the money they pay
Selling skin, selling God
The numbers look the same on their credit cards
--- Queensryche

Mozart1220:

IHATETHEBEARS:

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

 

The Bears have the longest current streak of giving up a sack - 24 games. Can the Cardinals make it 25?

Wow, a Packer fan making fun of another team for SACKS.   That's funny. How many for Rodgers now?

I believe 31. Why do you ask?

---

ROLL ON THUNDER
SHINE ON LIGHTNING
THE DAYS ARE LONG
AND THE NIGHTS ARE FRIGHTENING
NOTHING MATTERS ANYWAY
AND THAT'S THE HELL OF IT

I was at the grocery store buying eight apples, and the clerk asked me if I would like a bag. And I said, "No, man, I juggle! But I can only juggle eight. If I'm ever here buying nine apples, bag 'em up!"

IHATETHEBEARS:

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

 

The Bears have the longest current streak of giving up a sack - 24 games. Can the Cardinals make it 25?

LOL, giving up A sack... whoopie.

The Bears gave up 4 sacks on Sunday and all of sudden people are going postal about a 4 sack game. So like Nick Burntoastett, IHTB tries to piles on.

I don't want to see this happen every week to Cutler, oops sorry IHTB but that was a zinger towards you because well.. you do see it every week from your heroes. But let's put this sack thing in perspective. There are 10 QB's who have been sacked more this year than Cutler. Besides the obvious QB whose team is trying to shatter the Guiness Book of World Records- Aaron Rodgers..

Favre, Big Ben, Phillip Rivers... I will just stop there. Heck, I could have stopped at Favre because he plays for the invinsible Minnesota Vikings.

Nice try. Cheers.

---

"It's obvious by what occurred on Sept. 13th that Geno supports the far superior team being the Green Bay Packers. I wish him and the Packers my very best as they continue their quest towards Championship #13."

wisco:

IHATETHEBEARS:

2009 STANDINGS

NFC NORTH
Team	W	L	T	PCT	PF	PA	Home	Road	AFC	NFC	DIV	Streak
VIKINGS	7	1	0	.875	244	174	3-0	4-1	2-1	5-0	3-0	Won 1
PACKERS	4	3	0	.571	187	134	2-2	2-1	1-1	3-2	2-2	Lost 1
BEARS	4	3	0	.571	159	150	3-0	1-2	2-1	2-2	1-1	Won 1
LIONS	1	6	0	.143	113	205	1-3	0-3	0-1	1-4	0-3	Lost 4

 

The Bears have the longest current streak of giving up a sack - 24 games. Can the Cardinals make it 25?

LOL, giving up A sack... whoopie. The Bears gave up 4 sacks on Sunday and all of sudden people are going postal about a 4 sack game. So like Nick Burntoastett, IHTB tries to piles on. I don't want to see this happen every week to Cutler, oops sorry IHTB but that was a zinger towards you because well.. you do see it every week from your heroes. But let's put this sack thing in perspective. There are 10 QB's who have been sacked more this year than Cutler. Besides the obvious QB whose team is trying to shatter the Guiness Book of World Records- Aaron Rodgers.. Favre, Big Ben, Phillip Rivers... I will just stop there. Heck, I could have stopped at Favre because he plays for the invinsible Minnesota Vikings. Nice try. Cheers.

What's the saying?  "Any port in a storm!"

Desperation brings out the ugliest in most people.  Unfortunately for this poster, it makes his trolling even more obvious than usual.