RealGM

Ok, big boy. I won our avatar bet last time and I'll win it again if you're up for it. I think I have a good feel for the team and I peg us a 10 win team. One less win than last year.

Divisional
Vikings 2-0
Lions 1-1
Packers 1-1

Others
v Falcons W
@ Saints L
v Panthers W
@ Bucs W
@ Eagles L
v Chargers L
@ Raiders W
v Chiefs W
@ Broncos L
v Seahawks W

If you feel this is 11+ win team, put your avatar on the line. Loser dons the winner's choice of avatar for 6 months.

Chewie wrote:If you feel this is 11+ win team, put your avatar on the line. Loser dons the winner's choice of avatar for 6 months.

What's this? Mr. pessimist Chewie predicting 10 wins???

I was certain you would be coming with a 7-9 or worse prediction. I guess the lack of posting in the O-Line thread means folks are coming around to my belief that this O-Line is looking good. As Tom Thayer said tonight, it will be one of the strengths of the team.

Well well. Since I'm going to put my window this year at 10-12 victories, I can take that bet, I'll be happy to lose my sig if the Bears win 10 games.

By the way, why on earth do you think we'll lose to the Broncos?


Divisional
Vikings 2-0
Lions 1-1
Packers 1-1

Others
v Falcons W (Could be a loss as their O can pick apart the cover-2)
@ Saints L
v Panthers W
@ Bucs W
@ Eagles L (Giving the loss but Vick won't be so good this year, we might get a win here)
v Chargers L (not sure on this game)
@ Raiders W
v Chiefs W
@ Broncos L
v Seahawks W

Wow Chewie, should we really be betting Avatars over 1 game difference (I'm likely 11-5 again this year) in predictions?

I'll be honest. Honestly, I had us down for 9 wins but I didn't want to lose my avatar so I quickly changed the Falcons game to a win and made it 10. I truly think we'll prob lose that one. So, yes, I think we're a 9 win team in my heart of hearts.

Regarding the Broncos game, I know we're a better team on neutral ground but I think it can be tough to go into Mile High.

And, for the record, I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. You're the optimist, through and through.

So, I'd be willing to give you 10+ wins in the bet if that'll make you feel better. I'm flexible that way.

I'll say 11 wins for me to provide you with a nice "Vote Bachmann 2012" avatar. 10 wins should be a push since you're really at 9? We'd both be happy about 10 wins so I doubt you'd want to route against the Bears if they're sitting at 9 right?

If you're a realist, then you've realistically been way off base the last 2 seasons my friend!

I'm already getting started on another Dream Team avatar for you!

Don't mean to get into what may be a personal thing, but the difference between 9-7 and 10-6 isn't all that controversial. Hardly worth "calling out."

I'd love to provide a low-end counterpoint for you two optimists, but so much depends on key injury avoidance that I'm too busy crossing my fingers.

As I see it, last year's Bears weren't all that good, but they were extraordinarily healthy. On paper, they're better this season, but they're one key injury (Cutler, Peppers or linebacker) away from disaster.

Go Bears, please.

transplant wrote:Don't mean to get into what may be a personal thing, but the difference between 9-7 and 10-6 isn't all that controversial. Hardly worth "calling out."

Well, I was hoping emperor would be even more optimistic than 10-6 to be fair.

As I see it, last year's Bears weren't all that good, but they were extraordinarily healthy. On paper, they're better this season, but they're one key injury (Cutler, Peppers or linebacker) away from disaster.

Shhhhhh.

transplant wrote:On paper, they're better this season, but they're one key injury (Cutler, Peppers or linebacker) away from disaster.

Go Bears, please.

Any competitive NFL team that loses it's starting QB/most dangerous offensive weapon, will face disaster.

emperorjones wrote:

transplant wrote:On paper, they're better this season, but they're one key injury (Cutler, Peppers or linebacker) away from disaster.

Go Bears, please.

Any competitive NFL team that loses it's starting QB/most dangerous offensive weapon, will face disaster. I think the strength of the defense is the line now, not the LBs.

emperorjones wrote:I'll say 11 wins for me to provide you with a nice "Vote Bachmann 2012" avatar. 10 wins should be a push since you're really at 9? We'd both be happy about 10 wins so I doubt you'd want to route against the Bears if they're sitting at 9 right?

If you're a realist, then you've realistically been way off base the last 2 seasons my friend!

I'm already getting started on another Dream Team avatar for you!

OK, 10 wins = push. 9 wins or less, I win. 11+ means you win. Makes it interesting at least.

And you have me pegged as being way into politics but that's just not the case though I certainly wouldn't want to call that avatar my own. Looks more like a sig anyway!

Which reminds me....we had a sig or avatar bet did we not?

Chewie wrote:Which reminds me....we had a sig or avatar bet did we not?

In the midst of this injury riddled end to this season, the evil Chewie strikes!

Yes. 9 wins or less and you win. I notified the Mods before I became one that I had this silly bet that I'd never lose with Chewie.....

*strokes beard* Was it for sig or avatar? Do I need to look it up?

I notice you have no avatar currently....

It was for a sig. Yes I see my avatar link is busted.

emperorjones wrote:It was for a sig. Yes I see my avatar link is busted.

I believe this belongs this you, playa. Shrink to size as needed.


Now let's get back on topic. I want to start hearing some rumors here. Clearly this is a decision that needs to be made ASAP in order to get scouts, draft and free agent strategy in place.

wow. Thats really big. Anyone know how to shrink this thing?

I'm really hating on Jonny Knox right now. Don't fall down and 1) Cutler's not hurt; 2) Forte doesn't get hurt, 3) Bears are playing the Giants next week, 4) I don't have to go look up who the hell Bella & jake are.

The only positive here is that the rest of you guys get to look at this sig as much as I do.

Aw, c'mon - you'd have to be living under a rock to know that's not a Twilight reference!

Put your pet rock away and get with the times, emperor.

Damn, that sig is so bad it's kinda scary.

Chewie wrote:Aw, c'mon - you'd have to be living under a rock to know that's not a Twilight reference!

Put your pet rock away and get with the times, emperor.

Well, luckily I must be living amongst many a rock. Not even sure exactly what Twilight is. So I guess this sig carries an even worse meaning than I thought. Good thing I'm clueless.

How the hell do I make it smaller.....

emperorjones wrote:

Chewie wrote:Aw, c'mon - you'd have to be living under a rock to know that's not a Twilight reference!

Put your pet rock away and get with the times, emperor.

Well, luckily I must be living amongst many a rock. Not even sure exactly what Twilight is. So I guess this sig carries an even worse meaning than I thought. Good thing I'm clueless.

How the hell do I make it smaller.....

Not a PhotoShop whiz of any sort. You'll have to deal.

Movie popular with tween girls:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twilight_%282008_film%29

That sig is awful... hahaha.

Since Chewie says he's not a Photoshop wiz, I'm assuming he didn't make it. So I wonder... Did the original creator make that as a joke? I can't really believe someone thought that sig was a good idea.