PDA

View Full Version : Your teams biggest weakness


Jakey
10-19-2007, 03:11 PM
Simple... Just explain what you think is your teams biggest weakness, and explain your reasons. This is a thread for all those 'homers' out there to prove ppl wrong, they can critique thier own fav' team!

I'll start of with the Steelers:

They get away from the run too quickly if thier losing, a prime example was against 'Zona 3 weeks ago, they fell behind, then we got Ben throwing some crazy passes, he got picked off twice, and we lost the game. I think we would have been more successfull if we had pounded with the ball and threw in a few playactions and screens etc.etc.

P.s I'm intersested to see what Patriots fans think, what can they improve??? I also wanna hear from all those Cowboy fans... I've never heard one say a bad word about thier team! ;)

Moses
10-19-2007, 03:15 PM
Packers:

Offence:
The run game is horrendous. Both the play of the backs and the offensive line. They need to be able to run against the Cover 2 or the offence will stall like it did late against the Bears.

Defence:
They're vulnerable to the big play because they often leave their corners on an island in bump and run coverage. If the quarterback has a lot of time to throw, big plays can result. Also, they have trouble covering tight ends and their nickelback can be picked on in 3 receiver sets.

Jakey
10-19-2007, 03:16 PM
^ Like the honesty!

Shiver
10-19-2007, 03:18 PM
Falcons

Offense - Where to start? Anyway, no real QB, no power running game, an O-Line in transition. The only bright side is Roddy White and Laurent Robinson look good as the future 1-2 punch at WR.

Defense - The D-Line has been unable to stay healthy for three years running. If they were to play together at once they would be dominant. Keith Brooking is better suited as an OLB. The saftie tandem of Chris Crocker and Lawyer Milloy struggle in coverage.

neko4
10-19-2007, 03:24 PM
Packers:

Offence:
The run game is horrendous. Both the play of the backs and the offensive line. They need to be able to run against the Cover 2 or the offence will stall like it did late against the Bears.

Defence:
They're vulnerable to the big play because they often leave their corners on an island in bump and run coverage. If the quarterback has a lot of time to throw, big plays can result. Also, they have trouble covering tight ends and their nickelback can be picked on in 3 receiver sets.

Definitly agree, we have great starters, but no depth in the secondary.

Man_Of_Steel
10-19-2007, 03:27 PM
http://www.nfldraftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13730

Already a thread, died down a week or so ago but all the info you want is there.

scottyboy
10-19-2007, 03:28 PM
Giants: Depth at OL by far. We have no depth at really any position(except maybe Grey Rugemer). Many would think, "oh LT, Diehl isnt good there", i giggle at them and say LT aint such a weakness after all is it? perhaps LG to replace Richie 69, but if we did that, DD would go back to LG most likely, so then it'd be LT, but depth at OL is horrid for us

D: oh boy, where to go here. I'll go with Safety. Not SS, because Gibril should be there, not at FS. But Butler is even worse at FS than he is at SS so he's at strong. Could used more talent/youth at CB, and a possible LB. Mitchell is a one year guy, but we've got LOADS of young talent behind him

remix 6
10-19-2007, 03:30 PM
Patriots
Offense: OL consistency. They are never consistent in run or pass blocking.

Defense: TACKLING. Miss too many tackles letting the opponenets get extra yards easily. We dont swarm to the ball like Jacksonville or other teams do. Whoever is there will try to make a tackle..other people dont bust their ass to get to the ball as fast as they can.

yourfavestoner
10-19-2007, 03:49 PM
Jacksonville:
No playmaking wide receivers and a lack of depth at safety.

Ravens1991
10-19-2007, 03:51 PM
Ravens

offense:all of our QB suck.

defense:I guess pass defense, we havent gotten a lot of pressure which affects the CB.

Boston
10-19-2007, 03:57 PM
The Packers don't really have one glaring weakness...

yodabear
10-19-2007, 03:59 PM
We're 0-6, how the hell am I supposed to find one weakness. It would be harder to find a strength.

The Unseen
10-19-2007, 04:05 PM
Offense: Pass protection. Garrard's been sacked 15 times in 5 games. Tony Pashos is getting alot of heat, but I've heard that he's not the big problem, but just a collective issue.

Defense: Pass defense. I would say secondary, but I think the linebackers have a role to play. They definitely need to improve here on Monday.

GB12
10-19-2007, 04:09 PM
We're 0-6, how the hell am I supposed to find one weakness. It would be harder to find a strength.
Donnie Jones is averaging over 50 yards a punt.

Moses
10-19-2007, 04:24 PM
The Packers don't really have one glaring weakness...

Except for our league worst rushing attack...

neko4
10-19-2007, 04:27 PM
Except for our league worst rushing attack...
Thats cuz we throw it so much :)

BrownsTown
10-19-2007, 04:28 PM
Offense: Too awesome.

Defense: Too amazing.

P-L
10-19-2007, 05:04 PM
Take your pick.

OL, CB, SS, MLB, SLB, DE

Geo
10-19-2007, 05:06 PM
So what you're saying is, in the secondary, the Lions are fine at free safety?

;)

duckseason
10-19-2007, 05:09 PM
Offense: Pass protection. Garrard's been sacked 15 times in 5 games. Tony Pashos is getting alot of heat, but I've heard that he's not the big problem, but just a collective issue.

This, combined with the sub-par play of the receivers, makes Garrard's zero interceptions on the season that much more impressive.

Shahin
10-19-2007, 05:09 PM
We're 0-6, how the hell am I supposed to find one weakness. It would be harder to find a strength.

You are just an angry individual.

For the Bengals the most obvious problem would be the linebacker situation. Should get better with time, but when more than half your linebackers are injured, it's all bad.

Bills2083
10-19-2007, 05:13 PM
Offense: We NEED consistency at QB. Losman can throw the deep ball, but cant throw underneath. Edwards can throw underneath, but cant throw the deep ball. Also, we dont have good WR besides Evans. Parrish is great at slot, but we need to have a guy to take some pressure off of Lee, and we dont have that

Defense: Well, we have had A LOT of injuries to begin with. We need to work on tackling (Especially Ellison and Kelsay). Schobel goes to the sidelines every two plays. We need him in there to make plays. Our Run-D can be good at times, but it can also be horrendous. Our pass-defense isn't too great either.

You have to keep in mind that most of the players on defense have only been in the league a couple years, and that most of our starters have been injured... (Simpson, Posluszny, Webster, Leonhard, Denney, Ellison)

SuperMcGee
10-19-2007, 05:24 PM
Offense: We NEED consistency at QB. Losman can throw the deep ball, but cant throw underneath. Edwards can throw underneath, but cant throw the deep ball. Also, we dont have good WR besides Evans. Parrish is great at slot, but we need to have a guy to take some pressure off of Lee, and we dont have that


Losman has some problems with outlets and dumpoffs, but as far as short receiver routes go I think he does just fine.

It's too early to express what Edwards can and can not do.

Billingsley26
10-19-2007, 05:30 PM
Losman has some problems with outlets and dumpoffs, but as far as short receiver routes go I think he does just fine.

It's too early to express what Edwards can and can not do.

I agree with the Edwards part. Hes only started 2 games, I think over the next 2-3 games we'll get a good feeling. I dont think they will test deep this week, not with Ed Reed over top. I would be surprised if they do.

SuperMcGee
10-19-2007, 05:35 PM
I agree with the Edwards part. Hes only started 2 games, I think over the next 2-3 games we'll get a good feeling. I dont think they will test deep this week, not with Ed Reed over top. I would be surprised if they do.

Going deep against Detroit would be surprising at this point. I hope we do, though. Evans would need to pull out some moves, but he's capable and Baltimore can definitely give up a deep ball.

nfrillman
10-19-2007, 05:41 PM
Well, for the Rams I would say football in general.

Offense: Obviously the offensive line, which has exactly one starter remaining from the opening day starters, and he has switched positions. In addition to that, the WR's no longer seem able to get open and the playcalling is questionable at best.

Defense: The stats may not show it, but the Rams defense is much better than last season. Pass rush is probably the biggest issue right now. There is no pressure unless an extra man is coming.

Billingsley26
10-19-2007, 05:41 PM
Going deep against Detroit would be surprising at this point. I hope we do, though. Evans would need to pull out some moves, but he's capable and Baltimore can definitely give up a deep ball.

Against Detriot?? You mean Baltimore?


Yea I think its possible, If we're able to isolate Ed Reed, and say get a guy like Roscoe Parrish to go one-on-one with him, then he may be able to beat him. With Mcallister out, I think Lee could open it up. Hopefully.

SuperMcGee
10-19-2007, 05:44 PM
Against Detriot?? You mean Baltimore?


Yea I think its possible, If we're able to isolate Ed Reed, and say get a guy like Roscoe Parrish to go one-on-one with him, then he may be able to beat him. With Mcallister out, I think Lee could open it up. Hopefully.

I meant what I said. Point just comes across differently without inflection.

Since we have been so conservative, it would surprise me to go deep against a defense like Detroit's, let alone Baltimore. I hope we go deep regardless, though.

yo123
10-19-2007, 05:44 PM
Vikings- As of now our pass defense is terrible, and our passing game is terrible. We have no receivers that can catch the ball and the right side of our line is brutal in pass protection.

SeanTaylorRIP
10-19-2007, 05:54 PM
Redskins need to close games.

Moses
10-19-2007, 05:56 PM
This, combined with the sub-par play of the receivers, makes Garrard's zero interceptions on the season that much more impressive.

Hence why I don't understand people thinking the Jags need a new QB.

Gribble
10-19-2007, 06:39 PM
Cowboys

Offense: Early offense (1st quarter) and commitment to the running game.

Defense: Secondary depth, overall coverage, pass rush could be better.

Special Teams: Kickoffs aren't great- Austin returned one for a TD in the playoff game and he's a blocker; coverage is shaky, especially if we have injured players on special teams.

Don Vito
10-19-2007, 06:42 PM
Patriots

Secondary depth could hurt us, we have some talent at the top but we are always ravaged by injuries here. Meriweather is helpful because he can play anywhere in the secondary.

yodabear
10-19-2007, 06:51 PM
Donnie Jones is averaging over 50 yards a punt.

Touche young man, TOUCHE!

yodabear
10-19-2007, 06:52 PM
You are just an angry individual.

For the Bengals the most obvious problem would be the linebacker situation. Should get better with time, but when more than half your linebackers are injured, it's all bad.

I have a fabolous shrink though. Life long Lions fan.

PACKmanN
10-19-2007, 07:05 PM
The Packers don't really have one glaring weakness...

His name is Poppinga and he doesn't know how to cover TEs.

Nitschke-Hawk
10-19-2007, 07:14 PM
Packers aren't covering Tight End's well at all. Part of that is coaches using Tight End's more around the league this year also. Look at the numbers Tight End's are on pace for this year. I know that Winslow, Witten, Gates, all are on pace for well over 1,000 yards and others are on many more are having big years. The slot receiver/Tight End situation is becoming the most copied offensive strategy right now. The thing about it is the though, if your Tight End is the leading receiver against our defense your other guys aren't getting close to their regular numbers.

And our rushing offense situation is obvious.

Jughead10
10-19-2007, 07:15 PM
Giants: Depth at OL by far. We have no depth at really any position(except maybe Grey Rugemer). Many would think, "oh LT, Diehl isnt good there", i giggle at them and say LT aint such a weakness after all is it? perhaps LG to replace Richie 69, but if we did that, DD would go back to LG most likely, so then it'd be LT, but depth at OL is horrid for us

D: oh boy, where to go here. I'll go with Safety. Not SS, because Gibril should be there, not at FS. But Butler is even worse at FS than he is at SS so he's at strong. Could used more talent/youth at CB, and a possible LB. Mitchell is a one year guy, but we've got LOADS of young talent behind him

Do you really think we have loads of young talent at LB sitting on the bench? I'm not really sure. Wilkinson is starting to frustrate me. Only a second year guy but never sees the field.

scottyboy
10-19-2007, 07:17 PM
Do you really think we have loads of young talent at LB sitting on the bench? I'm not really sure. Wilkinson is starting to frustrate me. Only a second year guy but never sees the field.

eh loads is a huge over statement. I had DeOssie, Wilkinson and Blackburn in mind. I think they've got plenty of talent and one could replace Mitchell next year, but I'm not sure. Because of them, I put safety and CB as bigger needs.

osi+ap=allshallperish
10-19-2007, 07:29 PM
Giants

Offense:
We're to dependent on the deep ball instead of pounding teams with running game and letting eli establish rhythm with play action passes and intermediate throws that would let guys like shockey and moss get the ball in space.
LG, I like seubert but he definately could be upgraded and hopefully boothe is that upgrade, need more depth at OT as well

Defense:
We can't cover the middle at all, gibril's not superb in coverage and butler's horrible. Kawika is miscast as a cover guy, and outside of wilk we none of our backups have the quickness to cover.
Could use another young corner opposite Ross although Madison has had a good year.
could also use an upgrade at DT as we need someone to keep blockers off of ap.

TimD
10-19-2007, 07:29 PM
http://www.dkimages.com/discover/previews/938/706384.JPG
this should be fun

Weaknesses:
On offense I'll have to say QB, because Chad is obviously not the answer for Gang Green, and we're not really sure what Kellen can really do. Also our offensive line needs some help, specifically at RT and LG. On defense our DL in general is in dire need of some guys who fit the 3-4 defense. Also our CB have been playing really bad this season, minus Darrelle Revis. We also need a pass rushing 3-4 OLB to make our defense actually scary.

derza222
10-19-2007, 07:36 PM
The Jets' stubborn coaching staff has been a weakness that has hurt us on both sides of the ball. Offensively, we refuse to start Clemens and bench Pennington, and defensively we run a 3-4 when our personnel fits the 4-3 much better. As far as our personnel is a weakness, our run-blocking on offense isn't great and though better our pass-blocking hasn't exactly been stellar either. Defensively our line isn't that great and the front seven in general could use some work.

YAYareaRB
10-19-2007, 07:48 PM
Offense...

bigbluedefense
10-19-2007, 07:52 PM
This is easy for the Giants. TE coverage. We have no one who can cover the TE, and the middle of the field is open more often than not.

AkiliSmith
10-19-2007, 07:53 PM
Bengals

Offense: Pass protection, but this is mostly due to injuries to both starting tackles and new players starting at different positions on a weekly basis. Running game, or complete lack of. Rudi has been injured and less and less effective as the weeks go by. A change of pace of back would be great, and the two they drafted, Perry in the 1st round of 04 and Irons 2nd round of 07, are both hurt.

Defense: Other than having a guy that couldn't coach a pee wee football squad as the DC, there is a complete and utter lack of a pass rush. This could be because the best pass rusher had to be moved to linebacker due to the insane amount of injuries. Justin Smith completely blows. The defensive tackles put no pressure on the QB at all. Linebackers. They are dropping like flies, and even when healthy they still suck.

P-L
10-19-2007, 07:55 PM
So what you're saying is, in the secondary, the Lions are fine at free safety?

;)

Gerald Alexander is playing pretty well for a rookie. He hasn't been anything fantastic, but he's been solid. Aside from WLB, our only position in the back seven that I wouldn't call a weakness, is FS.

Caddy
10-19-2007, 08:15 PM
When you have Earnest Graham as your starting running back, it becomes quite obvious which position on your team is presently the weakest.

Vikes99ej
10-19-2007, 08:33 PM
QB, DE, RT, and RG in order of importance.

skinzzfan25
10-19-2007, 10:24 PM
For the Redskins:

Ourselves / Coaching

We had many dropped balls and crucial fumbles causing us to loose to virtually hand the Packers that win. And for the Giants lose, we sat on the lead and failed to put them away while we had all of the momentum.

The defense has been amazing this year, I have no beef with them.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
10-19-2007, 10:33 PM
For Denver: Just let us keep Cutler, Scheffler(and actually put him on the field, too), Walker, Champ, Bly, Marshall and DJ(put him at Will though). Replace everyone else.

PoopSandwich
10-19-2007, 11:03 PM
Browns - Run defense, tackling, pass rush... Plain and simple.

BrownsTown
10-19-2007, 11:07 PM
Browns - Run defense, tackling, pass rush... Plain and simple.

No, you're wrong. I already posted their weaknesses.

JK17
10-19-2007, 11:23 PM
Okay so Chargers....Coaching!....but other then that...

Obviously pass secondary has been horendous, and the passing offense has been average at best. The secondary has been playing better and hopefully hte addition of Chambers can help open things up but...those are the glaring holes as of now.

Average OT LB
10-19-2007, 11:25 PM
Okay so Chargers....Coaching!....but other then that...

Obviously pass secondary has been horendous, and the passing offense has been average at best. The secondary has been playing better and hopefully hte addition of Chambers can help open things up but...those are the glaring holes as of now.

I'd agree, but more specifically Id like to see a better right side of the oline. If the left wasnt amazing, i think wed see the right side as a glaring hole, but instead it seems as though nothing is all that wrong.. I dunno thats just my opinion..

yodabear
10-19-2007, 11:29 PM
Owner, GM, President, Offense, Defense, Coaching, Special Teams, Water Boy, Laundry Boy, Cheerleaders, PA Guy and Hugh Jackman. Think that covers it all.

JK17
10-19-2007, 11:31 PM
I'd agree, but more specifically Id like to see a better right side of the oline. If the left wasnt amazing, i think wed see the right side as a glaring hole, but instead it seems as though nothing is all that wrong.. I dunno thats just my opinion..

I complete agree, Goff and Olivea don't cut it for me. I'm a little tipsy so typing may be an issue here, if it is forigve me. I cna't stand Olivea consistnetly being beat, and Goff is gettng old. Time to fix that problem AJ...

Basileus777
10-20-2007, 12:00 AM
For the Chiefs:

One offense our weakness is the oline, especially the interior line and the right side. Wiegmann is done, Welbourne aint the same without the roids, and Turley/Terry are no good. Surprisingly we are pretty decent at LT. QB is a weakness with Huard in, and we don't know what we have in Croyle yet. And we have no blocking FB.

On defense our weakness is against the run, we are a little soft up the middle. Our young safeties have some lapses tackling and fall for the playaction a bit too much. Ty Law doesn't have much speed anymore and needs a big cushion to avoid getting beat deep.

Boston
10-20-2007, 12:01 AM
Owner, GM, President, Offense, Defense, Coaching, Special Teams, Water Boy, Laundry Boy, Cheerleaders, PA Guy and Hugh Jackman. Think that covers it all.

Supportive fans?

Dam8610
10-20-2007, 12:02 AM
Well, this should be interesting...

Colts:

Offense: Struggles to establish the run against good DLs, struggles in short yardage situations at times.

Defense: Much improved in this aspect, but still misses tackles at times, leading to bigger gains than should be allowed. Fails to get off the field on 3rd downs too often. Struggles against the run at times.

Not much to complain about when your team is 5-0 and wins by more than 2 TDs on the average.

yodabear
10-20-2007, 12:25 AM
Supportive fans?

When u are 0-6, u can't rely on supportive fans.

portermvp84
10-20-2007, 03:39 AM
Raiders- Dline is absolutly horrbile this season.

keylime_5
10-20-2007, 01:05 PM
Defense. Pass and Run, it's a tie. If I had to pick one, I say run defense. The D-Line is awful.

Addict
10-20-2007, 01:08 PM
lions...

defense (everything but DT and Sims) O-line, our QB is a gazillion years old, did I mention the O-line yet? And our defense?

Paul
10-20-2007, 01:59 PM
Owner, GM, President, Offense, Defense, Coaching, Special Teams, Water Boy, Laundry Boy, Cheerleaders, PA Guy and Hugh Jackman. Think that covers it all.

But Hugh Jackman is Wolverine...how dare you.

BlindSite
10-20-2007, 09:07 PM
The offense has talent in the front and in the receivers, but its not used correctly. Davidson is still feeling guys out, but we abandon the run too quickly and still have the problem of dropsies on third down.

The panthers could be a far better team if only they could get receivers to hold on to the damn ball.

remix 6
10-20-2007, 09:11 PM
The offense has talent in the front and in the receivers, but its not used correctly. Davidson is still feeling guys out, but we abandon the run too quickly and still have the problem of dropsies on third down.

The panthers could be a far better team if only they could get receivers to hold on to the damn ball.

panthers might have the most talented team all around but even at 4-2..they are not playing to potential

little dissapointed..especially by your D

ninerfan
10-21-2007, 01:26 AM
9ers:

WR: ability to run a route and get open
OL: protect the QB and not get him killed
HC / OC: grow some balls and attack ! I know its called football but Nolan needs to know it not just a kickers game

nfrillman
10-21-2007, 02:45 AM
Supportive fans?

Don't get at Rams fans about being supportive. I, as well as all my friends that are Rams fans, watch every single week, year after year. No matter how bad the team is, and that is dating back to the glory that was Tony Banks. There is a difference between being supportive and being dillusional. The Rams are a very bad football team right now, with problems that go all the way up to the front office. We are calling it like it is, that doesn't mean we don't support our team.

yodabear
10-21-2007, 09:59 AM
Don't get at Rams fans about being supportive. I, as well as all my friends that are Rams fans, watch every single week, year after year. No matter how bad the team is, and that is dating back to the glory that was Tony Banks. There is a difference between being supportive and being dillusional. The Rams are a very bad football team right now, with problems that go all the way up to the front office. We are calling it like it is, that doesn't mean we don't support our team.

I don't think that was aimed at me, u, NGSeiler, and other Rams fans at this site. I think it was at the non sell outs the last few games. Also, did u see the Bears game last year? It was 50-50 at best. St. Louis is and always will be a baseball city. Their stadium is much nicer, but also they have been in St. Louis for years. The Rams have only been here for 13, and yes, they have a super bowl to show for it, but since then, its been a lot of nothing, especially this year.

nfrillman
10-21-2007, 11:44 AM
I don't think that was aimed at me, u, NGSeiler, and other Rams fans at this site. I think it was at the non sell outs the last few games. Also, did u see the Bears game last year? It was 50-50 at best. St. Louis is and always will be a baseball city. Their stadium is much nicer, but also they have been in St. Louis for years. The Rams have only been here for 13, and yes, they have a super bowl to show for it, but since then, its been a lot of nothing, especially this year.

I do agree with St. Louis always being a baseball city. I think St. Louis sports fans unconditionally love the Blues more than the Rams as well. The reason for this though is the performance of the teams. The Blues had those 26 years in a row making the playoffs but not winning the Stanley Cup, the fans sort of grew to accept that the Blues would always be pretty good but not the best. When the Rams won the Superbowl and went to another, the fans began to expect greatness and really really wanted to keep winning.

LionSmack
10-21-2007, 11:50 AM
For the Lions, there is only one answer to this question.

Ownership.

All the other weaknesses follow from there.

bearsfan_51
10-21-2007, 11:53 AM
Oh geez....about the only thing that is good right now is Devin Hester. The passing game looks good and the pass rush is still solid. That's about it.

I would say our biggest problems are:

1)Secondary- Nathan Vasher has been hurt for weeks. Mike Brown is done. Adam Archuleta still can't cover. Danieal Manning is softer than a baby's bottom.

2)Tackling- It's like we forgot how. As unoriginal as Ron Rivera was, at least he preached fundamentals. I'm not putting this on Babich, but it's like we forgot how to hit anyone.

3)Coaching- I've never been a big fan of Lovie Smith. I'm definately not now. He's unoriginal, far too conservative, and pampers his players far too much. He's a nice man, I think he's an ok head coach, but I believe he is now in the top 5 salaries for coaches and that's absurd. And people called the Bears cheap all offseason. What a joke.

4)Cedric Benson- Benson has been better, but it's like the team doesn't trust him in any important situations, instead subbing him with Adrian Peterson. He's not a bad player, but he's very average, and top 5 picks aren't supposed to be average.

osi+ap=allshallperish
10-21-2007, 12:13 PM
Oh geez....about the only thing that is good right now is Devin Hester. The passing game looks good and the pass rush is still solid. That's about it.

I would say our biggest problems are:

1)Secondary- Nathan Vasher has been hurt for weeks. Mike Brown is done. Adam Archuleta still can't cover. Danieal Manning is softer than a baby's bottom.

2)Tackling- It's like we forgot how. As unoriginal as Ron Rivera was, at least he preached fundamentals. I'm not putting this on Babich, but it's like we forgot how to hit anyone.

3)Coaching- I've never been a big fan of Lovie Smith. I'm definately not now. He's unoriginal, far too conservative, and pampers his players far too much. He's a nice man, I think he's an ok head coach, but I believe he is now in the top 5 salaries for coaches and that's absurd. And people called the Bears cheap all offseason. What a joke.

4)Cedric Benson- Benson has been better, but it's like the team doesn't trust him in any important situations, instead subbing him with Adrian Peterson. He's not a bad player, but he's very average, and top 5 picks aren't supposed to be average.

I think that benson's issues can also be attributed to the oline not beating up on teams and the less dominant defense. I'm sure the bears won a lot of games just because defenses thought that no matter how well they did shutting down the offense the bears defense and special teams would find a way to win, see hears v titans in 05 or bears v cards last year. The bears don't have that clock of invinsibility this year and so they're doesn't have a psychological advantage.

And I still don't get what emmitt was trying to say in the quote in your sig.

bearsfan_51
10-21-2007, 12:22 PM
And I still don't get what emmitt was trying to say in the quote in your sig.
He was trying to say that they are a formidable opponent.