Chicago Bears Are Frauds: Good Fortune in the NFL Exclusive To Team (Satire)
For several weeks, many people in the media and general public have loudly disputed the success of the Chicago Bears for a myriad of reasons.
Initially, much of the chatter got on my nerves, as it seemed like a lot of people were attempting to rob my beloved team of the credit I felt they deserved.
My frustration grew further, when just hours after what I believed to be a thoroughly impressive 31-26 home win over the Eagles, an acquaintance of mine informed me that "of all the teams in the playoff hunt, the Bears are by far the least worthy of being there."
When I asked him to elaborate, he pointed out (four times) how they lucked out with the "process of the catch" controversy against Detroit in Week 1. He also mentioned how "good teams don't ever catch breaks like that, they dominate every week."
And while I didn't want to agree, I must admit, his impeccable reasoning led me to turn a complete 180 on my beloved squad's playoff hopes. He made me see how undeserving of praise the 2010 Bears are, especially when you take into consideration the fortune the Bears have seen in comparison to some actual elite teams.
Sorry everyone, the Bears are frauds, and here are several reasons why.
Good teams never win via good fortune, they win by making their own breaks. You think the Jets have been aided by luck at any point this season? If I were a New York fan and someone made such a statement to me, I'd "Suh" their ass for defamation.
Could you claim Atlanta has been aided by forces beyond their control? If so, I'd "Hartly" be able to prevent my fist from violently striking their falsity spreading face.
Had the Bears lost their season opener as well as the momentum which accompanied it, they obviously wouldn't have had the wherewithal to recover. They lack the intestinal fortitude of a team like San Diego, who is currently on the rise after an awful start.
Don't even try to locate so much as one single solitary parallel between the beginning of winning ways for these two teams, unless you enjoy wasting precious hours of your life.
Another problem this conversation brought to light for me was that the Bears haven't beaten anybody good. Sure, the Packers and Eagles technically are good teams, but if you are of the impression the Bears actually earned those wins, you are crazy.
Steve Young was right on the money when he pointed out that inexplicable officiating was the culprit of the Green Bay outcome. Same with Trent Dilfer and Tom Jackson's assessment of inadequate cleats causing the outcome of Sunday's game. How could the Eagles have prepared for this? They never play at Soldier Field. Ever.
Fraudulent wins the both of them.
It's been in their three losses where the Bears have shown their true colors. Would Green Bay have lost to a team like Washington? Never. Would Philly? Please, they dismantled the Redskins 59-28 on the road. No way they would lose to a team like this, especially not at home.
And Chicago certainly didn't impress by losing 23-20 to a less-than-stellar Seattle squad back in Week 6. I don't care if it was early in the season and there's still 10 games to rebound, good teams don't have setbacks.
And how could we possibly forget the Week 4 sack fest against the Giants (also of the zero bad losses club) which resulted in a Jay Cutler concussion? Look, I don't care they have shown improvement in pass protection since then. These deficiencies never go away and teams never recover from them. Even if the Bears find a way into the playoffs, it's not as if they can overcome inconsistent blocking and find success once they get there.
So there you have it everyone.
Indisputable evidence proving the 2010 Bears have struggled at times in a ways elite teams never dream of struggling.
Like it or not, one truth is becoming inevitable; when it comes time for Wild Card games to be played, there's a very real chance Chicago will be watching the action unfold from their homes.
Author's Note: I was hopeful people would pick up on the point I was trying to make with this article but thus far it is apparent they are not. So at the risk of undercutting the intended humor of the piece, I ask anyone who reads this and feels compelled to call me an idiot to please go back and look at any one of the links I posted above, so as to unveil the true meaning of this post.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?