Jump to content

NFL Week Eleven


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 303
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Though now that I think about it, the Dodgers sucked before moving to California, while the Giants sucked after moving to California

 

That's kind of funny

Guest Vitamin X
Posted
Bears/Packers is the Yankees/Red Sox of the NFL.

While I can understand that the Bears/Packers rivalry is stronger than Vikings/Packers, your baseball analogy is much closer to the Vikings rivalry. The Packers have the rich championship history (like NY) while the Vikings have the "so close yet so far" history (like Boston before last year), and of course Packers fans love to remind Vikings fans of this at every opportunity (again, like NY to Boston)

 

The Packers and Bears both share rich championship history, so they'd be more like... I dunno actually.

 

Yeah, I know.

viking-trophycase.jpg

 

Tell me about it.

Posted

Blackhawks don't really have a championship history.

 

If you use hockey then I'd say Toronto and Montreal. Before '67, those were essentially the two teams of the NHL. Plus I know how much they (and their fans) hate each other

Posted
I don't live in Green Bay either, but Packers/Bears is much bigger than Packers/Vikings.  Green Bay has problems with both the Vikings and Lions, but the Bears will always be numero uno.  Bears/Packers is the Yankees/Red Sox of the NFL.  Honourable mention to Cowboys/Redskins.

 

Packers-Lions isn't much of a rivalry, but Packers-Vikings is the only rivalry in professional sports that's right at or near .500 all the time (waits for alkeiper to come in and refute this claim about some AA minor league baseball teams that have had one at .500 since 1936)

What amazes me is that many football teams have very close head to head records. Eagles/Cardinals is no kind of rivalry (unless you were a fan in 1947-48), but look at their matchup. 53 wins for the Eagles, 52 for the Cardinals, and 5 draws. That's simply amazing.

Posted

There's bad blood there, for sure, but they're not in the same division, and the Packers and Bears certainly couldn't meet in the Super Bowl

 

Up until 10 years ago that rivalry may have been the best in sports... Can't put Bears/Packers on that level.

That too

Guest Vitamin X
Posted

74-87 in favor of the Bears. This is definitely due to the 80's, by the way.

Guest Vitamin X
Posted

Huh. That's odd. I got my stats from the Packers' website, so they have to be pretty accurate.

 

Also of note, tonight's victory evened the Packers-Vikings rivalry at 44-44. The Packers are also tied with the Cowboys at 10-10 overall.

 

Interesting.

Guest Vitamin X
Posted

Ditto. How about that Monday Night game the following season (the Super Bowl one!) where they had their kicker go for an NFL record in field goals in a game just to rub it in the Packers' faces? Bastards.

 

It felt good to get them back 45-17 twice, in `98 and last year as well.

Posted

I like how teams like GB have multiple rivals dating back almost over 50+ years ago, while Cincinnati can't yet decide who it's #1 rival is, Cleveland or Pittsburgh but it doesn't matter because Cleveland/Pittsburgh is a bigger deal for those two franchises anyways.

 

Any teams in sports with absolute zero legit "rivals"? I'd imagine most of the recent expansion teams(last 30 years) in sports most likely fit that profile. They may have divison rivals but I mean RIVAL ala Yankees/Sox, Packers/Bears, Cowboys/Skins etc, etc.

Guest StylesMark
Posted

Ahman Green used to fumble all the time! This was retarded. They shit themselves in the foot tonight. 2-8 is not very hopefull.

Posted
You know, I love the Bears, but this team is worse than the 2001 Bears... seriously. The only thing they have going for them is their D. Then again "defenses win championships", so who knows?

I dunno, it seems like this year's team has fewer fluke wins than 2001, but I'd have to give it more thought. But geez, will we ever have a good quarterback.

Posted
Absolutely pathetic. The worst part about this, and probably the most telling, was the Packers' complete lack of a running game, forcing their offense to go one-dimensional. Oh, what about Samkon Gado, we're all asking?

 

He had one carry on the game and fumbled, so Sherman pulled this guy who just earned NFC Offensive Player of the Week honors last week, probably to "teach him a lesson". That's right. Samkon very well could've ignited the Packer offense a lot more, and gave the Packers a running game and of course control of the clock, but Sherman would rather throw a game and lose to a division archrival than GOD FORBID make the kid learn fumbling isn't a good thing. For christ's sake, Ahman Green was the starter, and he never got pulled no matter how many times he fumbled.

He had 10 carries for 7 yards and was completely ineffective, except for catching a 30-yard pass early in the first quarter. He deserved to be benched. No one else could have been much worse.

Posted
Bears/Packers is the Yankees/Red Sox of the NFL.

While I can understand that the Bears/Packers rivalry is stronger than Vikings/Packers, your baseball analogy is much closer to the Vikings rivalry. The Packers have the rich championship history (like NY) while the Vikings have the "so close yet so far" history (like Boston before last year), and of course Packers fans love to remind Vikings fans of this at every opportunity (again, like NY to Boston)

 

The Packers and Bears both share rich championship history, so they'd be more like... I dunno actually.

 

Yeah, I know.

viking-trophycase.jpg

 

Tell me about it.

 

:(

 

I miss the NFC Central. The Vikings and Bucs was always a good match, and Tampa being the only loss in the 15-1 season laid the groundwork for a big rivalry. Then, bam, here comes Houston. Those fuckers.

Posted

I remember Tony dungy pulling Tampa out of the basement and suddenly being competitive in the division, then Minnesota and Tampa starting having home-and-home wins (much like Minnesota and GB before last year).

 

One of the things that got me earlier this season was the Tampa loss in Week 1 and then realizing "oh wait, we don't get a second shot at them anymore"

Posted
You know, I love the Bears, but this team is worse than the 2001 Bears... seriously. The only thing they have going for them is their D. Then again "defenses win championships", so who knows?

I dunno, it seems like this year's team has fewer fluke wins than 2001, but I'd have to give it more thought. But geez, will we ever have a good quarterback.

 

Well you got Orton...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...