Johnny Carwash wrote:Looking forward to the entire league being 3-3 after this week.
I think this would be excellent!
Can't be bothered to look it up, but we've seen this sort of scenario before. I know, because it's how the Bills always end up "In The Hunt" in week 13.
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
Brontoburglar wrote:last night was one of the one or two games the Chiefs lose this year because of Eric Berry's absence
Romo blamed just about every positive Steelers offensive play last week on Eric Berry's absence.
And the unicorns shall come down with them, and the bullocks with the bulls; and their land shall be soaked with blood, and their dust made fat with fatness. - God
It's great to have alert playmakers on defense and gadget play touchdowns are fun, but it's really just gonna give the Bears shittier picks because they'll win games with their junior high (feels generous, but running with it - wink, wink) offense.
“The running, the jumping... a celebration of life.”
Speaking of the Bears, that TD run by Trubisky was overturned. 4th and Goal from the 2, Bears up 14-3, 1:10 left in the first half, and they’re receiving the second half kickoff.
Take a guess what John Fox did there.
My avatar corresponds on my place in the Swamp posting list with the all-time Home Run list. Number 45 is Paul Konerko with 439.
L-Jam3 wrote:Speaking of the Bears, that TD run by Trubisky was overturned. 4th and Goal from the 2, Bears up 14-3, 1:10 left in the first half, and they’re receiving the second half kickoff.
Take a guess what John Fox did there.
All the more reason to hate their gimmick shit. Lucky wins are gonna create the illusion that they're close and subsequently keep Fox (and Ryan Pace) on the payroll.
“The running, the jumping... a celebration of life.”
Bears had 153 yards of offense yesterday, 70 coming on one play, while Eddie Jackson's two returns for scores covered 151 yards. They ran 37 plays on offense, so they averaged 4.1 yards per play overall and 2.3 yards per play when you remove the longest play.
I hate John Fox (and that field goal was with the ball about 18" from the end zone).
“The running, the jumping... a celebration of life.”
The irony of John Fox engineering two of the most unlikeliest division titles (at least as far as the usefulness of his QB) with two different teams would be off the charts. So at least from that perspective I get it.
Regardless of the standings or the games played to this point I think you could almost throw a dart at the four teams in the NFC North and have as likely a chance as anything at picking who wins the division.
ETA: I mean we use that example or construct sarcastically or jokingly often but I think it's literally true. I don't know that any of these four teams I would give a better than 30 percent probability to of winning the division at this point. Nor a likelihood of higher than about 80 percent to NOT win it. And even that might be too conservative.
Gunpowder wrote:I'd definitely bet on Minnesota if anyone wanted to bet against them.
The sports books definitely agree with you. From William Hill this morning:
Vikings -225 Lions +300 Packers +600 Bears +2000
First, I might drop $10 or $20 on the Bears solely on a value play there. Second, while I agree the Vikings should be the favorite I really do believe -225 is too high. Lions odds seem about right. Honestly, $10 on the Packers as a bet that Rodgers might be able to come back by Week 15 or 16 and steal the division wouldn't be the worst bet either.
My wife had a psychic flash that the Bills will win the Super Bowl. I think she's excited about this because she knows that I would immediately drop dead if it happened. (The result of a stupid deal I made with God almost 30 years ago).
66/1 to win. 33/1 to make it. I still see them finishing 8-8, but may be worth flyer...
"beautiful, with an exotic-yet-familiar facial structure and an arresting gaze."
