Stripes Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 Was that a Bears bar, being in northern Indy? The place must have been on the verge of collapsing with the crazed barflies running around high fiving everyone in sight. Quote
Dan2330 Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 Jealous of that Bears D.... Grossman not only did not get the 1 fantasy point but in our league he actually lost 4 points.... hehe Quote
Kazkal Posted October 17, 2006 Author Report Posted October 17, 2006 It just doesn't seem right that a QB with 0 tds and 4 ints with 2 lost fumbles might be on the winning team.Hey he won them the game...as he drank gatorade on the bench not costing them the game.Can we resign peter warrick then try trade him to the bears for urlacher saying its only fair sense peter got drafted higher. Quote
B24 Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 It just doesn't seem right that a QB with 0 tds and 4 ints with 2 lost fumbles might be on the winning team.Hey he won them the game...as he drank gatorade on the bench not costing them the game.Can we resign peter warrick then try trade him to the bears for urlacher saying its only fair sense peter got drafted higher.He should be given no credit whatsoever in this win. They won despite his continued efforts to lose it. Quote
Stripes Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 Grossman was responsible for all six turnovers. Four interceptions and two fumbles. Yikes. Quote
Kazkal Posted October 17, 2006 Author Report Posted October 17, 2006 It just doesn't seem right that a QB with 0 tds and 4 ints with 2 lost fumbles might be on the winning team.Hey he won them the game...as he drank gatorade on the bench not costing them the game.Can we resign peter warrick then try trade him to the bears for urlacher saying its only fair sense peter got drafted higher.He should be given no credit whatsoever in this win. They won despite his continued efforts to lose it.dude I was joking though if he dident turn over the ball 6 times the defense and ST wouldent have put up 21 pts heh. Quote
B24 Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 It just doesn't seem right that a QB with 0 tds and 4 ints with 2 lost fumbles might be on the winning team.Hey he won them the game...as he drank gatorade on the bench not costing them the game.Can we resign peter warrick then try trade him to the bears for urlacher saying its only fair sense peter got drafted higher.He should be given no credit whatsoever in this win. They won despite his continued efforts to lose it.dude I was joking though if he dident turn over the ball 6 times the defense and ST wouldent have put up 21 pts heh.I know that. I wouldn't even jokingly give him any credit for the win. He looked worse than Orton has ever looked. Quote
Kazkal Posted October 17, 2006 Author Report Posted October 17, 2006 I would but thats just how i am. lol Quote
jjakq27 Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 It just doesn't seem right that a QB with 0 tds and 4 ints with 2 lost fumbles might be on the winning team.Hey he won them the game...as he drank gatorade on the bench not costing them the game.Can we resign peter warrick then try trade him to the bears for urlacher saying its only fair sense peter got drafted higher. I wish that we could. However we were already "loaded" at LB with Adrian Ross, TKO Spikes, Brian Simmons and Steve "Hit me with your best shot" Foley. Also, where are all of the cries about us getting rid of Neil Rackers, now? Quote
agreen_112 Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 lmao @ Rackers for missing that FG. Leinart played a good game and Rackers blew it.. Quote
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 lmao @ Rackers for missing that FG. Leinart played a good game and Rackers blew it..He's not the only one. Edge James gave up a fumble for a score, and also picked up the wrong guy on a blitz that got Leinart blown up. Quote
Edogger Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 Wow, that was a phenomenal game! Talk about your defense stepping up to the plate. Defense and special teams scored all of Chicago's 24 points...Well balanced... Quote
Tasher Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 Rackers missed from 40 yards!! (I am soooooooo glad we have Shayne)Still cannot come through in the CLUTCH!BTW he was 40-42 FGs last year! But how many of those were game winners and under pressure? How many games did AZ win last year? Strong leg, but Oy! Quote
BengalszoneBilly Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 Bears win.... $h*+!Oh man! I live out here in Arizona, and the folks out here are losing it! Quote
agreen_112 Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 lmao @ Rackers for missing that FG. Leinart played a good game and Rackers blew it..He's not the only one. Edge James gave up a fumble for a score, and also picked up the wrong guy on a blitz that got Leinart blown up.all that s**t is irelivant when there is only :30 seconds and a 40 yarder to win the game. Rackers blew it! Quote
DC_Bengals_Fan Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 lmao @ Rackers for missing that FG. Leinart played a good game and Rackers blew it..He's not the only one. Edge James gave up a fumble for a score, and also picked up the wrong guy on a blitz that got Leinart blown up.all that s**t is irelivant when there is only :30 seconds and a 40 yarder to win the game. Rackers blew it!Rackers didn't blow a 20 point lead by himself. He's responsible for 3 points of it. On the other hand, Edge James is responsible for at least 14 points of it (his fumble plus Leinart's fumble when Edge screwed up the blitz). Add to that the fact that he had absolutely no production, one could blame him for more than 14 points.Yes, Rackers should have made the 40, but blaming him for the collapse is a joke. Quote
Stripes Posted October 17, 2006 Report Posted October 17, 2006 lmao @ Rackers for missing that FG. Leinart played a good game and Rackers blew it..He's not the only one. Edge James gave up a fumble for a score, and also picked up the wrong guy on a blitz that got Leinart blown up.all that s**t is irelivant when there is only :30 seconds and a 40 yarder to win the game. Rackers blew it! Sure it's relevant. Had Edge not blown his blitz pickup, or had he held onto the ball later in the game... Rackers never has to try the winning field goal. He should have made the kick, but 40 yards isn't a chip shot. Blame Denny Green for being way too conservative after the Cardinals got turnovers on defense, and the punt coverage for allowing Hester to steal the game from them. Quote
Tasher Posted October 19, 2006 Report Posted October 19, 2006 Even the guys at NFL.com are talking about Racker's inability to make clutch kicks..."...In the fourth quarter with Arizona desperately trying to close out the game, the Cards had drives that lasted 3:10, :40, 1:47, :42, and 1:36. It was not until the Cardinals lost the lead for the first time and Chicago played pass defense did Leinart march the team down the field. I have no doubt after seeing the aggressive Cardinals defense, the talent of the young QB and the experience of the head coach, that this team will learn to close out opponents. Even kicker Neil Rackers is going to have to learn how to make game-winning kicks from distances he rarely missed at before. In a strange sense, the Cardinals are now good enough to learn how to win. In the last two games, Rackers has missed a 51-yard game-tying field goal and a 40-yard kick to win. Last year in far less meaningful games, he was 13 of 14 from 40 yards and 6 of 7 from over 50 yards. The Cardinals can almost touch success right now and everyone will just have to push a little harder."http://www.nfl.com/news/story/9735839 Quote
Stripes Posted October 19, 2006 Report Posted October 19, 2006 He couldn't even hit the easy ones in Cincinnati. Shayne-o-matic for the win. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.