God with money on the Hawks this week?

by Billy Everyteen on Sep 27, 2006 10:47 AM PDT Comment 24 comments

Per Sando, so you've probably all seen this already: Shaun says the power of prayer may have healed his foot 4-6 weeks ahead of schedule.

For diplomatic purposes, count me as an agnostic on the power of prayer to affect NFL rushing totals. I do believe, however, in the power of NOT MAKING YOUR DAMN FOOT ANY WORSE. Which is aided by the power of STAYING ON YOUR DAMN CRUTCHES FOR A COUPLE WEEKS.

But if God took the Hawks to beat the spread at Soldier Field, who am I to argue?

A place to bury strangers.

0 recs | Comment 24 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Shaun's awesome.

I'm not much of a religious man myself, but you gotta give respect to a guy who believes so completely. Hey, and if his foot is healed, who am I to say he's reading too much into things?

by Phildopip on Sep 27, 2006 10:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Agreed fully on his awesomeness

And if he was praying that hard to play on a foot that was supposed to keep him out for a month, it's just one more strike against the ridiculous idea that he's "soft."

All I'm saying is, while I have great respect for his desire to play, I have even greater respect for the idea of medical professionals deciding when it would actually be a good idea for him to do so, because I have still greater respect for the idea of not losing him for the season.

**BACON VERY IMPORTANT THAT BACON BE AVAILABLE AT EVERY MEAL AND DURING DAY

by Billy Everyteen on Sep 27, 2006 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

even if he is 95%

I would say sit him and wait till after the bye

But if he really wants to keep his consectutive games played streak put him in like Randy Moss

by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 27, 2006 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Sure...

If you want to lose a game. Please sit away...

WindyCityGridIron.com the place for real football talk

by Chad on Sep 27, 2006 3:33 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I think

you're either overestimating Shaun Alexander, or underestimating Maurice Morris.

by Phildopip on Sep 27, 2006 3:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

MVP

Need I say more?

WindyCityGridIron.com the place for real football talk

by Chad on Sep 27, 2006 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Yeah, actually, you do.

The Seahawks have won three games without much of a running game. It may be argued putting him in the lineup on Sunday will hurt the team rather than help it.

--Shrug

by Shrug on Sep 27, 2006 4:12 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Oh

have fun with our spread offense

Didn't you have a problem covering Steve Smith? Try covering 4 recivers with equal amount of talent

by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 27, 2006 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Equal amount of talent...

Its so funny how Seahawks fans overrate their wide receivers. All are decent and not one is a superstar. You think if you put Darrell Jackson on the Panthers last year instead of Steve Smith the Jackson would have lead the league? HA!

Don't get me wrong, they are all decent but 'equal amount of talent'? Dude you so crazy!

Not to mention that when a team needs to put 8 men in the box to defend against the more UNDER-rated running back in football (late games do that to a player) Matty H. has an easy time.

You won't see that against the Bears. Our front four will have no problem keeping "Mercury" Morris in check.

And once again, this is no cakewalk, I just feel relieved that the reigning MVP is not going to be playing in this one.

Get used to losing in Soldier Field boys! It's gonna happen again in January.

GO BEARS!

WindyCityGridIron.com the place for real football talk

by Chad on Sep 27, 2006 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Well, allow me to retort!

I really don't know of anyone who's hyping the Seahawk receivers. I'm wondering if maybe you're talking about some of the more... trying to be careful here with the phrase... um, how about, somewhat less ironic Seahawk fan sites? You know... the ones that keep petitions about the Super Bowl refs that they're still planning to submit to the league? You seen ads for "Horrible Foul" towels on these sites?

This ain't one of 'em.

I conditionally agree with you about the Seahawks not having a superstar receiver. We don't have a Smith, or a Rice, or a Chad Johnson, or a genius who mixes up his painkillers with his Flintstones. Not right now, at any rate. That's kind of how our overall scheme is constructed. They're a good quality bunch of guys and I'm proud of 'em, though.

I covered this question in my responses to Windy City Gridiron's Seahawks questions, so I won't scoop that site. But you're not altogether wrong.

However, I don't know any Seahawk fan anywhere who's over-praising the receivers. I'm interested in where you're reading that. We love the Seahawks here and root them on, but I think we're pretty realistic -- at least here. We all play in grunge bands. And jerk espresso for day jobs.

Dammit, where'd I put the heroin?

--Shrug

by Shrug on Sep 28, 2006 12:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

2 things:

"They're a good quality bunch of guys"

I would totally agree with that. And as a core, one of the best units in football.

Secondly, boy, don't you find it coincidental that a question was posed to you at WCG? Crrraaaazzzy. I wonder how those things happen.

WindyCityGridIron.com the place for real football talk

by Chad on Sep 28, 2006 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Your corners

are your D's weak point, and we have four receivers good enough to get separation from them, and to create mismatches with linebackers and nickelbacks. That's all I'll say.

Anyway, that's why they play the game instead of leaving it up to us internet folks to decide. Should be fun.

**BACON VERY IMPORTANT THAT BACON BE AVAILABLE AT EVERY MEAL AND DURING DAY

by Billy Everyteen on Sep 28, 2006 5:55 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Forget that letting them play BS

lets play some madden and we will see who wins.

Please Mr. Marshall, let the boys play in a 46 defense.

by Christian on Sep 28, 2006 7:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Now yer talkin'

**BACON VERY IMPORTANT THAT BACON BE AVAILABLE AT EVERY MEAL AND DURING DAY

by Billy Everyteen on Sep 28, 2006 7:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

The Bears suck in Madden

Please Mr. Marshall, let the boys play in a 46 defense.

by Christian on Sep 28, 2006 9:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

I suppose it's also possible

that he's just messing with the Chicago defensive coordinators' heads a little.

Which I fully support.

**BACON VERY IMPORTANT THAT BACON BE AVAILABLE AT EVERY MEAL AND DURING DAY

by Billy Everyteen on Sep 27, 2006 11:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Ladies and Gentlemen

I give you Kevin Bentley and DD Lewis. The best defense for Steve Smith.

Please Mr. Marshall, let the boys play in a 46 defense.

by Christian on Sep 28, 2006 9:26 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Bingo

I should of worded that better. I went to the dentist for a root canal and the pain killers are getting to me. Or the Jack in the box tacos not really sure.

I didn't mean to say each reciver has equal talent to Steve Smith. But our top 4 would be a great number 2 reciver on any other team.

D Jack to me is a elite reciver in this system. (probably not in others) With some of the throws Matt makes to him are only throws that D Jack would catch because of there repore with one another. And thats what you want out of your number 1

by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 28, 2006 10:08 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

OK....

Then the comment makes no sense what so ever.

Here is what you tried to say (after you explained yourself)

The Bears had trouble covering the best (last year) WR in football.

Therefore we will have trouble covering the Seattle WRs on Sunday.

You continue to say that they have 'equal amounts of talent' yet none of them are as good as Steve Smith. So...

I will take from that that you are saying that the Bear will have trouble covering the Seattle WRs, not cause they are as good as Steve Smith but because you have 4 good WRs.

So Steve Smith doesn't really figure in you argument.

WindyCityGridIron.com the place for real football talk

by Chad on Sep 28, 2006 10:45 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs

Maybe

if you add them all together, they equal Steve Smith.

"And the Seahawks have a Optimus Prime-type receiver in Darreleionatebby Burlacksongramanch."

by Phildopip on Sep 28, 2006 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

Coincidently

I was thinking of naming my next cat that.

**BACON VERY IMPORTANT THAT BACON BE AVAILABLE AT EVERY MEAL AND DURING DAY

by Billy Everyteen on Sep 28, 2006 11:26 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

No Steve figures in because

you couldn't cover 1 guy aka Steve Smith who we completely shut down.

So how are you going to cover 4 guys that all can get open and catch the ball? You can't double team all of them

by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 28, 2006 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

once again...

Let's just say this:

Steve Smith (last year) was a 100 out of 100.

They Bears couldn't cover a 100.

They can cover 90's and below.

The question is: Is any Seahawk receiver a 90+? Maybe.

But Steve Smith has nothing to do with this equation.

WindyCityGridIron.com the place for real football talk

by Chad on Sep 28, 2006 11:27 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

n/s

Jackson, Burleson, Engram and Branch > Smith

I think he fits in the equation just fine :)

Ok so throw out Smith. I guess what I was getting at was you can't just focus on one of our recivers because they all have the potential for big games.

by Scruffy Lefty on Sep 28, 2006 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs