Weekly Musings from a Reflective Blogger

by ChiFan13 on Jun 22, 2009 10:17 AM CDT Comment 31 comments

This week, I discuss the long-term strategy of the Bears, our backup QB situation, Roger Goodell's punishment system, ranking 670 The Score's personalities, and the Cretin of the Week.

Let's get to it.

Long-Term Strategy

This past week, members on this blog argued and bantered about getting a wide receiver to pair with Jay Cutler. On Thursday, Terry Boers and Dan Bernstein had a message for those people with one word: Chill. Their theory was that we now have a long-term solution at the quarterback position, thus we can fill in our holes when we need to. Our window for winning a championship, in their eyes, is and will remain wide open. I agree with their sentiment for the remainder of this offseason and next season, but we'll need to get some talent infused after that.

When I was brainstorming this week's column, I talked with GeauxBears on B&B's principle. He agreed, saying that we have a great QB, RB, TE's, and young talent at the WR position. He's spot on IMO minus the WR assessment. I'm not willing to say that we have talent at that position quite yet. Once they show it on the field, I'll crown them.

Legitimate options to make the final 53-man roster:

1) Devin Hester

2) Earl Bennett

3) Juaquin Iglesias

4) Johnny Knox

5) Rashied Davis

6) Derek Kinder??

7) Brandon Rideau??

I'm not sold on that lineup.

However, B&B went on to say that we don't need a WR this year to be successful. I believe that to be correct. No need to mortgage the future when the future looks brighter than ever at this point. Will Cutler and Co. be OK this year? Absolutely. We will have a better offensive line than last year, a stud RB with his backup ready to go, and two good TE's. However, I'm giving this crew a free pass this next season to see how they perform. If they're better than expected, we can focus on more pressing needs next offseason (such as free safety). If not, we can bang the drum for a better WR next offseason.

I have a request for the MSM and all of you: Let's not get too excited about the OTA or training camp studs this year, please. I know Johnny Knox was Stud OTA Player of 2009, but I'd rather see these guys put up numbers on the field. After going through the Earl Bennett saga last summer, I'd rather not go through it again.

The Backup QB Situation

I know we've had this chat in the past, but there's no better time to bring it up.

It looks as though Caleb Hanie and Brett Basanez will be the backup QB's in 2009. Are you satisfied with that?

Personally, I liked what I saw from Hanie last preseason. I realize it's preseason, but he looked to possess good intangibles. I'm not saying that he's going to be a stud if Cutler goes down, but let's at least see how he performs in preseason before we start clamoring for a new backup QB.

Goodell's Punishment System

Donte' Stallworth has been suspended by the NFL indefinitely. It's not really a big surprise, considering that Goodell was hellbent on cleaning up the NFL's image.

I don't want to get into the legal arguments that have been made around NFL circles regarding Stallworth. However, do you see him being reinstated to the NFL? I could see it after a year or two, but not before then. Stallworth settled with the victim's family before sentencing occurred, but that's not enough to rush him back into the league in my eyes. Plus, the guy's going to be a wee bit busy with the two year's house arrest and eight years of probation on top of 1000 hours of community service he must perform.

670 The Score: Ranking the Personalities

In one of my past columns, I ranked some of the MSM reporters who follow the Bears. This is more of a general ranking, but I wanted to get your thoughts on your favorite Score personalities.

Daily Lineup:

1. Boers and Bernstein

I know, I know, they're both pompous jackasses. However, a majority of the time, they're dead-on. Their style of crude and rather discriminatory behavior may reek childish to some, but I like their edginess. In this age of PC, it's somewhat refreshing to see them taking advantage of it. Makes for good comedy if nothing else.

2. Mully and Hanley

I like Mully and Hanley because a) I listen to them everyday when I really don't want to be working and b) they bring some interesting discussions to the table. They're not always right, but they're solid enough to warrant a #2 spot from me.

3. The Danny Mac Show

Yeesh....what a disaster. That was the first thing I thought of when reflecting on their first week back at The Score. Matt Spiegel seems pretty intelligent, but his constant music talk put me to sleep rather quickly. I wanted Dan McNeil to show his past edge, but it's not to be found. Here's hoping they get into a rhythm quickly, otherwise history will show this as an awful move by Mitch Rosen and The Score's executives.

Individual:

1. Laurence Holmes - A little goofy, but he's a knowledgeable Bears guy, so he's up at #1.

2. Jason Goff/Matt Abbatacola - The producers of the B&B show should truly have their own show. They are knowledgeable, funny, and not as self-righteous as B&B.

Maybe I'm the only Score guy floating around this blog, but if you do tune in, what do your rankings look like?

Cretin of the Week

This week's award goes to Chad Ochocinco.

Why? He predicted that the Bengals would go to the playoffs this year. Every summer, Chad always seems to make the news, whether he's proclaiming that he's going to calm down or he's going to have a record-setting season. Chad, just stop. Perform on the field first before you open your mouth.

0 recs | Comment 31 comments | Share

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

B&B kinda suck...imo

The pompous, jackass-ness is just too much to handle.

by MuleTrain on Jun 22, 2009 10:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Thank you

they should title that show “tool time”…anybody who doesn’t think them is spit on stomped on. Who made them right on everything?? Danny mac?? Disaster..cut loose from espn becuase the guy can’t get along with enyone..Can’t that they get any real talent over there?? I would love to come back but can’t take the mornings and afternoons.

by tfrabotta on Jun 22, 2009 12:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

As far as radio personalities,

I prefer intelligent discussions versus fart jokes and juvenile behavior.

As far as your COW, Chad Sillylastname is definitely a doofus… but the Bungles could very well surprise some folks this year.

Be nice. Flag comments that you think are offensive. Use the "reply" button. Drink plenty of water. Compliment others. "Rec" comments and posts you like. Don't call people names. If you don't like someone's comment, attack the comment and not the commentor. Learn the difference in your/you're, then/than, to/too. Exercise. Relax. Stretch often. Find good in the world.

by Dane Noble on Jun 22, 2009 10:34 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

They had an okay ‘D’ last year, even with their pathetic offense sending them on the field all the time.

They get a substantial upgrade at QB (Palmers return), LT (the fat kid Smith), MLB (Maualuga), with Keith Rivers returning from his post-Ray-Lewis-hospital-visit last year. If you look past losing Housh and having Drunken Ced at RB, I think they’d rock the NFC West if given the chance. PIT and BAL really hurts their chances..

by Mathias-K on Jun 22, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Hines ward happened.

Ray Lewis took out mendenhall

When I played I was a triple threat.... Stumble.... Fumble.....Grumble....

by scespy12 on Jun 22, 2009 11:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Surprise, sure

but they aren’t making the playoffs.

There is no infinity button for failing in sports. At some point, things turn. They always do. - Bill Simmons

by Allie on Jun 22, 2009 1:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I know I'm going to get killed for this but,

I don’t think we can definitely say we have a great QB yet. I’m excited about Cutler and he has tremendous talent, but we still haven’t seen him play here and in this system. There’s been talk that the systems are similar and that should help, but I’ve seen a lot of players over the years that are very good on one team and not so great on another. The opposite has been true in many cases as well. I’m not saying he won’t be great, the odds are that he will be, but until we actually see him in game situations in this system, with this receiving corp, in one of the highest visibility markets in the NFL, it’s not a sure thing yet.

Regarding the backup situation, I like Hanie also, but in case Cutler were to go down I’d feel more comfortable with someone who has at least been there before. I’d hate to see Hanie be the man and then we find out he really can’t play at the level we need him to and then have Basenez as your only other option.

by BearFan611 on Jun 22, 2009 11:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

If Hanie get's thrown in the mix

Turner will adjust the play calling to fit him. He should have a good understanding of the playbook by now and would be a better fit than a newcomer.

by luckie815 on Jun 22, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I see where you are going with the Cutler statement and

I think in a way you could be right. We should play the wait and see game. I for one don’t want to high of hopes only to see Cutler fail and be twice as bummed as I be if KO were still the QB. But I will say look at the enigma that is Randy Moss. In Minnesota he’s a freak, ends up in OAK and not so happy so let’s just say not his best effort. Opportunity knocks and Randy ends up in NE with Tom Brady, Randy is a freak again.

All I’m saying is that maybe Cutler being somewhere where he is wanted and he wants to be will translate into good play. Maybe Cutler will be better than he was in Denver who knows. But I’m hoping that he is more relaxed and is very successful. I too will give this team a bit of a pass this year, but only this year. If things aren’t good, then the organization will need to make some changes to the coaching staff and players.

I'm teaching fools some basic rules.- MR.T

by Ditkavsworld on Jun 22, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Agree 100% about this being the year

if they tank, Lovie and the boys have to go.

by BearFan611 on Jun 22, 2009 2:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

I have no problem with the BEars backup QB situation… let them battle it out for #2, and besides who is really out there better?

I’ve always enjoyed Laurence Holmes on the score, I haven’t heard B& B in a while, I work and am on the train during their show, but I liked them then

by wiltfongjr on Jun 22, 2009 12:04 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Boers and Bernstein

These guys act as though their opinions are always right. And I get tired of them bashing callers with different opinions all the time. I do think its funny when Lovie addresses the media and they play it but make comments the whole time.

by DorianB on Jun 22, 2009 12:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I can only stand so much of them..

They can be clever and funny at times but overly sarcastic and cynical most of the time— especially when dealing with Joe Public. I think they’re at their best when doing interviews.

by The Kaiser on Jun 22, 2009 1:07 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I don't like the Score at all

I find it has all the worst qualities of sports talk radio. Jackasses who thrive on very borderline stuff.

I do like some things on ESPN1000 though. Waddle & Silvy are good, usually. Esp during football. And I love Tirico & Van Pelt.

There is no infinity button for failing in sports. At some point, things turn. They always do. - Bill Simmons

by Allie on Jun 22, 2009 1:41 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

I like

Mully and Hanley the best of the score personalities. They are fairly smart, the are interested in things I’m interested in (like THE DRAFT!), and they don’t resort to childishness just to cater to the lowest common denominator.

I liked the Mac, Jurko and Harry show, and like Mac on it, but I hated his show this week. It seemed like he and his partner were madly in love with themselves, acted like the invented sports radio, and spent the week trying to stir up trouble. I’m guessign they’ll improve though.

I don’t like Boers and Bernstein. I don’t find Boers to be insightful, interesting or funny. I usually like the show better when he’s replaced by a guest host. Bernstein is good when he isn’t having the producer screen in stupid callers for him to bully.

I liked the Me and Z show when that was on. I like Lawrence Holmes (when he’s with someone—I can’t listen to solo-hosted sports radio), I really like the work Zach Z does reporting, and I like Brian Peruc (when he’s talking to someone, not solo).

I am really, really, really glad they finally got rid of Mike Murphy.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Jun 22, 2009 2:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Murphy's gone?

I didn’t know that, but that’s just awesome.

To me, 670 is far superior to ESPN’s local coverage (heck, even their national coverage). Other than Danny Mac, they have some very good shows on there. And really, the only people B&B go off on are the goofballs with the VERY stupid opinions. You know, the people clamoring for Kyle Orton when he hadn’t shown us anything more than Rex Grossman. Or the people who would boo and scream obscenities at Grossman. They also would go off on the folks that hated Lovie not screaming and yelling like a Ditka-doof on the sidelines.

I’m sorry, but those people deserve the tongue lashings and the mocking. Sure, B&B may go overboard, but who on the radio is infallible? To be quite honest, though, I think the show goes up when Jason Goff or Matt Abattacola take over for Terry. I love TB. I mean, I think he’s hilarious. But he adds nothing but the random “my guys say this” or a joke. And that’s necessary, sure, but he’s getting a little less articulate as time goes by. Danny, though, is great at teaching you stuff about whatever sport.

And one big bonus is that these guys aren’t at all bias. Except against idiots.

by jake1823 on Jun 22, 2009 3:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Meatballs not welcome

Agreed, Boers and Bernstien is only suited for the intelligent and pragmatic sports fan. You cant just call into a show , spout off nonsence and expect the host to listen and respond to your idiotic points. They don’t bully, they just like to argue with people who hold opinions opposite to theirs. Unfortunatly theyre detractors counter-points are so illogical and poorly constructed that they end up being ripped to peices, as should any moron trying pass themselves off as intelligent. Who are these morons you may ask? The “Fire Lovie”! crowd, The “Everybody BOO Rex”! crowd, etc

by BlackTom on Jun 22, 2009 5:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

agreed

B&B will call a spade a spade. or a jackass a jackass. when you call in they expect your opinion to be fact based and not just a feeling you have. if you are not prepared they will eat you alive. the voice overs they do that are interruptions do get pretty annoying

The Mulley and Hanley show is an upgrade from the Mike North show even though i feel that Mike North had more overall knowledge than M&H. but the morning shows has a hard time keeping my attention.

Hampton and Holmes was good during football season but not so much there towards the end.

couldn’t stand Mike Murphy. (haven’t caught enough of Danny Mac yet to form an opinion. never listened to him the last time he was on either)

and i gotta hear the Zack Zadman Bears reports.(both the morning and afternoon segments) i do like what little info he gives us throughout training camp and the season.

by coolgjc on Jun 22, 2009 7:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's the thing

they intentionally put the idiot callers through so the hosts can berate them. That’s their schtick. They aren’t calling a spade a spade, they are looking for stupid people to put up what amounts to a straw man argument so they can tear it down.

They have producers to screen calls. If they weren’t looking for stupid callers, that wouldn’t be all they got.

DEJESUS!!!

by tomas21 on Jun 22, 2009 9:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

i see your point

but i guess i’ve also seen (or in this case heard) callers get on there and get into a heated debate only to have them both thank them for the call recognizing the callers points and saying that it was a valid point of view. that view being well thought out with a point of view that has references as to why they feel the way they do.

but i’m sure there is quite a bit of baiting going on.

and if thats the case, learn how to play the system to beat them at their own game. one can only help but think that the type of callers on any given day will dictate what direction the show will go in. look at the "Who you crappin’ " segment.

by coolgjc on Jun 22, 2009 10:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

That's pretty common in talk radio

They screen for people who agree with them, or who disagree but will do so unintelligibly so they appear to be furthering their point by the callers stupidity. It’s done constantly in political talk as well.

"Well, we didn't block real good but we made up for it by not tackling."
- John McKay

by JerBear50 on Jun 23, 2009 2:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the bears need to

cut their losses and fire davis…he has been useless up to this point..drops the ball way too much its time to move on and give the other guys on the roster (80 man) a chance…its time to move on..go play in the ufl rashied davis…go join adam archaletta

Bring back our honey bears...sick and tired of hearing about the dallas cowboy cheerleaders and the bars they go work at when they quit. cold weather + cheerleaders in skimpy outfits = lots of fun

by tomh115 on Jun 22, 2009 3:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Wait..

don’t cut the only other wr on the team who has ever caught a ball in the nfl until you know what you have in the other kids…makes no sense. keep him on the roster this season…once iglesias or knox steps up and proves they can produce in the nfl in the slot, put Davis on the bench and cut him in the off season. Cutting him now would be foolish.

by The Kaiser on Jun 23, 2009 6:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the knox and iglesias situation is different

After going through the Earl Bennett saga last summer, I’d rather not go through it again.

i think we can be safer in expecting something from them this year, the difference is the QB. cutler has a track record of making rookie WR’s into pros, orton definitely does not and never will.

by genetic on Jun 23, 2009 2:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

Kind of harsh on Orton, huh?

by Dane Noble on Jun 23, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

the truth hurts

and if you don’t agree i guess we’ll find out this fall. orton will have the same weapons that cutler did last year with a year more experience, i think it will be fair to compare their stats at the end of the year.

by genetic on Jun 23, 2009 3:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

d'oh!

guess i forgot to hit ‘reply’

by genetic on Jun 23, 2009 3:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs

Okay...

Your original comment was that Cutler could potentially make our rookie WRs into “pros”… and I agree with you 100%.

But then you said that Orton never will be able to do that. My comment was that was kind of harsh.

If for some strange reason your litmus test for seeing what Orton can do in Denver is to compare his 2009 numbers with Cutler’s 2008 numbers, well go ahead.

But that wouldn’t make any sense to your original comment about rookie WRs. Secondly, Cutler is a Pro Bowl caliber QB, and Orton has yet to show that kind of talent. Why try and compare the two? And thirdly, Cutler threw the ball 600 times last year because the Broncos sent something like 7 RBs to the IR. Cutler will likely never do that again in his career.

Do I think Cutler is a vastly superior QB to Orton? Of course I do. But that does not mean that Orton “never will” have the ability to transform rookie (or any) WRs into “pros” as you put it.

by Dane Noble on Jun 23, 2009 4:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs