Ricky O'Donnell: October 2009 Archives

It's hard to get too upset over the Blackhawks' 3-2 loss in Detroit yesterday. It was an exciting game - lots of back-and-forth action, plenty of scoring chances for both teams, ect. - and though the 'Hawks lost, they certainly didn't look overmatched. Throw in that Chicago was missing two of its better players in Dave Bolland and Marian Hossa, and nothing I saw last night discouraged me from what I've thought all along: the 'Hawks are going to be one of the best teams in the NHL this season, and they have a legitimate chance to win the Stanley Cup.

The last time I wrote about the Bulls while commandeering this ship, my outlook on the 2009 season was grim.

How grim was it?

So grim, in fact, that we didn't even talk about it.

I'm a big picture guy, you see. The present is alright, I suppose, but it's not nearly as cool as the future. Such is especially the case when we're talking about your Chicago Bulls. 2009-'10? Meh. It could be alright, I guess. But, barring a midseason trade roughly three times the magnitude of the one they made last year, this team isn't going anywhere.

"Nowhere" might be a little harsh, actually. The Bulls should go the playoffs, perhaps as high as the No. 4 seed. But, all things being equal, they're probably (definitely) not better than the Cavs, the Magic, or a healthy Celtics team.

This is the NBA we're talking about here, not the parity-ridden NFL or whatever you want to call the baseball playoffs. No 2006 St. Louis Cardinals stories to see here, folks. The better team almost always prevails in the NBA. It's part of the charm of the league. It can also be a little bit of a downer, particularly if your favorite team is ran by the people that run the Bulls.

Enough doom and gloom for one post? Hardly!

Hi friends, Ricky here once again. Stu is out doing his thing, so I'll be in all week. Keep it clean, please.

For the record, I'd like to point out that I hated Brett Favre before it was cool to hate Brett Favre. Nowadays, Favre hate is all the rage: whether we're mocking his Wranglers or the sports media that adores him (I'm looking at you, Peter King and Jon Gruden), it seems like you can't read anything football related on the Internets without seeing some punk blogger (kids these days!) take a shot at the ol' gunslinger.

I don't know how I feel about this. I suppose it's comforting that America is starting to build up the type of disdain I've held for Favre for years, but it's also a bit confusing. It's like watching your favorite band become super popular, only the exact opposite. You're telling me that everyone hates Brett Favre now? But I hated him first!

I have loathed this man for my whole life, you see. It's because I have never known a sports world in which Favre wasn't a central figure. He started tormenting me when I was young - that 99-yard heave to Robert Brooks at Solider Field may be my earliest Bears memory - and he continues to do so to this day. His waffling ruins my offseasons, his touchdown celebrations put a tiny damper on my happiness. Favre is a true sports villain in every sense; one that must be stopped.

The question is this: are the 2009 Bears the team to do it?

Hi friends, Ricky here once again. Stu is out doing his thing, so I'll be in all week. Keep it clean, please.

Lovie Smith likes to talk about how he views football seasons in quarters and the Bears just finished their first. It wasn't always pretty but it was certainly a success: a 3-1 start is probably all we could have hoped for, even if the games weren't as aesthetically pleasing as we might have liked.

This was far from an easy 3-1. For all the talk of the Bears heading into the 2009 season with the league's easiest schedule, Sunday's home bout against the Lions was the only cupcake the Bears had in their first four games. The other three games were close, hard fought contests. There is little shame in losing by six at Lambeau to a Packers team that could win 10 games this year. Playing in Seattle - Seneca Wallace or no Seneca Wallace - is never an easy task, either. And I don't think I need to defend the merits of a close victory at home against the defending champs.

If I were in the business of giving out grades, the Bears would earn an A- from me in quarter number one. It was good, sure, but there is still plenty of room for improvement. These Bears have a long way to climb before they reach their ceiling.