Packers-Bears From My Perspective

Sports Guy had a chat yesterday on ESPN.com and there were many questions surrounding the Packers-Bears rivalry. For the first time in I don't know how long, I had to quit reading something Bill Simmons wrote. He basically dismissed the Packer-Bear rivalry, saying it wasn't a rivalry because they haven't been good at the same time on a lot of occasions.

He, and anyone that doesn't live in Wisconsin or Illinois just doesn't understand how much this game means. Teams being good doesn't make something a "rivalry". Having games on ESPN six times a year doesn't make something a rivalry. History, familiarity, locale and hatred make a rivalry.

Would a non-rivalry game produce what is reported to be the "toughest ticket in Chicago sports history"? Would a non-rivalry produce some of the classic You Tube videos I've just shown? Would a non-rivalry make me physically ill about an upcoming game? Can a matchup that pits two franchises against each other more than any other two teams in NFL history, and two teams with the most championships and hall of famers not be called a rivalry? The answer to all of these is NO.

The four games on the schedule every year that matter most to Packer fans are the two where we play the Vikings and the Bears. Admittedly the Viking rivalry was taken to a new level in the past 20 years, but that doesn't mean the Bears rivalry went away. And I would argue that today, the roles have been reversed pretty significantly. Someone that hasn't had an entire life of dealing with FIBS and living in NFL North country cannot understand. Just like I don't consider any other rivalry above Packers-Bears, even though there may be bigger ones. So I would kindly ask Bill Simmons to concentrate on what he knows: Boston sports, the NBA and pop culture references, and keep the Packers and Bears out of his mouth. Because he just doesn't understand.

Cutler and the "Other" League

So the Broncos came out and said they are going to trade Cutler. Here are the pros and cons as I see it, broken down in list form:

CON: The Broncos gave up all of their leverage as far as getting a decent offer.
PRO: It could have been intentional in order to fuck over Cutler, so they can use the excuse they didn't get any good offers. And if they didn't want to trade him, painting him as being a fuckbag (like they did) is a good way to scare teams off.

The Lions are considering offering the number one overall pick.

PRO: I guess from the Lions standpoint, they are getting a somewhat proven commodity. They get no worse than a competent starting QB, and could have a perennial Pro Bowler. With the first pick, they could get another Joey Harrington in Matt Stafford. The Broncos get the number one pick for giving up a player they don't want anyway.

CON: That is a pretty steep fucking price to pay for a guy who has never been to the playoffs, and seems like a bit of a headcase. The Lions would have to get something additional I would think (player, pick, etc.). I can't think of anyone other than another pick being traded for the number one overall pick. The Lions better be pretty sure there isn't anyone they could pick that would be better than Cutler. Right now, here are the list of players who would be worthy of trading the number one pick straight up for: Peyton Manning, Adrian Peterson, Tom Brady (if 100% healthy). That's the list.

The most important question: How might this affect Green Bay?

PRO: It won't unless one of the NFC North teams trade for him, and all three have been rumored to be trading for every QB on every team in the past two years or so. All three have shitty quarterbacks. If one of the other teams do trade for him, and it doesn't work out, the fallout will be spectacular.

CON: If it did work out, and he turns out to be great, then we have to face him twice a year for 10 years or so. That would suck.

In conclusion, Thompson should offer the Broncos his first, second and third for their 4th through 7th round picks. Plus a 6th and 7th next year. It would work out perfect. Fuck Jay Cutler.

IN "OTHER" LEAGUE NEWS:

So I'm in that "other" fantasy baseball league. We had an online draft the other night, which took three plus hours because all 12 guys showed up, and all took the entire allotted amount of time on every pick (except for me). I got ripped for taking Ryan Braun at number 5, when another dude took Manny at 8. Everyone else was drafting "prospects" in the early-ish rounds. Guys that are going to be great for a half year, or next year (David Price, etc.). In the comments, they justified every pick with spring training stats. My comment was continuously that spring training stats don't count. Everyone is convinced that J.J. Hardy is going to hit .381 with 60 HRs because he is hitting well in Spring Training. My response was that he will hit 52 of those in a two week stretch, and then hit .112 the rest of the year. Their mindsets are incredible.

So the draft was two days ago. Some dude got up at 5:30 a.m. this morning to pick up Pudge fucking Rodriguez, and then bragged about it. It is going to be pretty difficult to completely bite my tongue for the whole season.

Fake Gambling and the "Williams Wall"

Last Week: 13-3!!!!

Overall: 94-94-4 (Don't call it a comeback bitches!)

Oak (+9), Chi (-6.5), Min (NL), Hou (+5.5), Ten (-14), Ind (-13.5), Atl (+3), NYG (-6.5), Den (-9), Mia (+1), NYJ (-4), NE (-4.5), Ari (-14), Pit (-3), Bal (-5), Car (-3)

I don't know if those fat dudes from Minnesota are going to play again or not. Even though they were granted their temporary injunction, it doesn't seem to me that their "The NFL didn't tell us" argument is bullshit. If 50% of the players in the league had this problem, I might buy it, but SIX tested positive, meaning that the Williamses were doing something that isn't particularly common in the first place. Plus, from what I've read, the NLFPA bargained for this testing policy, and the policy is "you are responsible for what you put in your body". I would ALMOST feel bad for them if a) they didn't play for an arch rival and b) they have a gay nickname.

Now, the question is, assuming they don't play, does this give the Packers a better chance in the division? I have been shocked by the number of locals that are convinced that this is the case. My thoughts: I don't think it hurts to have Minnesota playing short handed. But even if Minnesota goes 1-3 (because we all know they won't lose to Detroit even if the Williamses wives start at D-tackle), that means the Packers have to go 3-1 (including a win over Chicago), and hope Chicago goes 2-2. Would it shock me? No. But I think the hardest part of that equation is to have the Packers win all those games. Even though they have a favorable-ish schedule, I don't have particular confidence in them stringing wins together. They've shown me nothing to make me think they have that ability.

In other news, my fucking goddaughter's mother scheduled a birthday party at 2:30 p.m. next Sunday, which is directly in the middle of the Packers-Jags game. I fucking hate inconsiderate people. Its not like you don't live in the area, and aren't aware that the Packer season is in full swing. Christ.

Finally, last college basketball season, I had Time Warner Cable. The advantage was that I had ESPNU, which allowed me to see like 3 Creighton games. But I had no Big10 Network, which forced me to not see like 20 UW games. This year I have Dish, so my situation is opposite....And now fucking UW-Marquette is on ESPNU, and there has been exactly ONE game on Big10. Sucks. My. Balls. It will be me and my clock radio Saturday night I guess.

ESPN's Crack Staff

Coors Light Cold Hard Facts today. #5: John Clayton, which team will win the NFC Central? John's response was the Packers. That response was only partially correct. The answer should have been: "Well Greeny, you fucking moron, the NFC fucking CENTRAL hasn't existed in 6 fucking years. But the Packers will probably win it."

I mean seriously, doesn't ESPN have a team of editors or at least fucking college intern's or something to get that stuff straight. Even the graphic said NFC Central. And even if the editor, producer and intern all missed it, couldn't Mike Greenberg do something besides just read whatever the telestrator said? Doesn't he think at all on the air? I don't pretend to know what it is like to be on live TV. But if you do it every day, one would think you could prevent that error.

Question #6 was which team will represent the AFL in the NFL-AFL World Championship game.