wit

the only good teams they play is seattle, new england, and ny giants, minnesotta
then everybody else sucks, greenbay, detroit, etc
if they go undefeated that should not even be considered a big deal

10/12/2006 5:57:35 PM

shut up

10/12/2006 5:58:06 PM

buffalo, miami, arizona, san francisco, tampa bay,

are you freiking kidding me

10/12/2006 6:01:26 PM

It isn't the Bears' fault that their division sucks.

10/12/2006 6:03:45 PM

You're right. They probably wouldn't even make the playoffs in any other division.

10/12/2006 6:05:56 PM

I dunno.... Minnesota is a good team? They lost to the Bills.

10/12/2006 6:07:10 PM

doesnt matter, they will meet talent in the playoffs

10/12/2006 6:12:56 PM

^^ The Bills aren't exactly terrible. They can win games if you shoot yourself in the foot enough... the Vikings hardly had a leg to stand on after that game.

10/12/2006 6:15:20 PM

The Bills (not exactly terrible) defeat Minnesota (a good team?) <-- is my point.

[Edited on October 12, 2006 at 6:18 PM. Reason : woops]

10/12/2006 6:17:40 PM

Quote :

"It isn't the Bears' fault that their division sucks. "

i can understand that but how do you explain

Quote :

"buffalo, miami, arizona, san francisco, tampa bay,"

and add st louis, & Jets
and you'll have a dream schedule for anyone,

that being said they do deserve the hype for crushing seattle, but if they go undefeated you gotta say they had it easy

10/12/2006 6:19:49 PM

St. Louis isn't that bad (4-1 right now)

and the Jets aren't nearly as bad as last year (although they still aren't good, per se).

10/12/2006 6:21:00 PM

i think the NFL sometimes gears things up for one team to win it, of course chicago winning is good for the nfl, so i would doubt that theory. i actually think the nfl made it right for us, the panthers to go to the superbowl too.

10/12/2006 6:24:30 PM

The Bears aren't just beating these teams, they are castrating most of them

10/12/2006 6:30:38 PM

Quote :

"The Bills (not exactly terrible) defeat Minnesota (a good team?) <-- is my point."

Any Given Sunday...

It wasn't exactlya convincing win. The Bills won by 5 a game that, if you so much as switched the situations each team encountered in the game, would've won by a much larger margin.

(ie, if Buffalo shoots themselves in the foot the way Minny did, the Vikings would have won by 20)

10/12/2006 6:33:22 PM

all i'm saying is that I'm reluctant to say at this point Minnesota is a good team. Still early enough in the season though ... but at this point I wouldn't call them a good team for the fact that they did shoot themselves in the foot THAT many times in a single game against the "not EXACTLY terrible" Buffalo Bills. Either way though, Seattle/New England/NY Giants are waaaay better than Minnesota and should not be classified along side those teams.

10/12/2006 6:41:12 PM

and the panthers get pitttsburgh, cincinnatti, baltimore, nyg, redskins, cowboys, eagles and st. louis

10/12/2006 6:42:53 PM

^ exactly thats a bit skewed to me.

and minnesota, ny giants, st louis, & Jets are mediocre teams, right about where the panthers are now but we're about to leave them in the dust.

10/12/2006 6:51:38 PM

The NFC as a whole kinda blows this year.

After the Bears and Seahawks, its mostly garbage.

The AFC, on the other hand, is gonna be competitive again this year. Good teams will be left out of the playoffs.

10/12/2006 6:59:21 PM

all they can do is beat the everliving shit out of the teams they are scheduled to play

10/12/2006 7:17:56 PM

what is this, college football? It's not like Chicago has to blow out unranked teams to move up in the polls

10/12/2006 7:21:58 PM

the NFL's schedule is a formula

there's nothing even remotely fixed about it

they play their division games and then they play out of division games against teams in two other divisions generally

if you draw a weak division that year then so be it

this year the giants drew the Southern divisions in both conferences

you also have two games that arent broken down into certain divisions (maybe they have to be in-conference games)

and this year the giants got seattle and chicago

[Edited on October 12, 2006 at 7:46 PM. Reason : .]

10/12/2006 7:40:57 PM

The Bears went 13-3 last year. Their schedule should be tougher than it is, but it's weak because of their division and cross-conference matchups. All of the other teams who won their divisions last year have tougher schedules.

10/12/2006 7:46:37 PM

Quote :

"you also have two games that arent broken down into certain divisions (maybe they have to be in-conference games)"

you play the teams from the other 2 divisions in your conference that finished in the same place you finished the year before

10/12/2006 7:49:24 PM

It's like this...

Home/away vs. the teams in your division (6)
The four teams of two diff. divisions, I have no clue how this is chosen (8)
Two more teams that finished in the same place as you did the season before (2)


For example, the Saints draw:

Bucs/Falcons/Panthers, home/away (6)
AFC North, NFC East (8)
Packers, 49ers - both finished 4th in 2005 (2)

The two divisions are chosen so that you are guaranteed to play each division at least once every five years. Part of the reason for this was really random, like the fact that Tampa Bay had never played at Buffalo (or vice versa, but one of those teams had never played in the other's stadium).

The Bears drew the AFC East (Jets, Bills) and the NFC West (Cardinals, 49ers, may as well add in Seattle now). For finishing first in the NFC North, they got the Giants and the Bucs.

10/12/2006 8:27:41 PM

If you beat 16 NFL teams without losing Id say thats a pretty good fucking accomplishment.

Its not like they are WVU and going through the Big East.

10/12/2006 8:31:38 PM

Yeah these are all professoinal teams. Some 16-0 seasons could be more impressive than others, but in the end that does not even come close to mattering.

10/12/2006 11:11:41 PM