Skyfall: Is a Cold War relic still relevant today?

This installment of Bond asks if 007 and his era of spy craft are still relevant.  This leads into the theme, which is pretty in your face throughout the film, which is have the times past 007 and M?  It's the class of old school verses the new.  This theme seems appropriate in the fiftieth year of the Bond franchise.  Bond was created in the post-World War II, Cold War era.  It seems fair to ask how this Cold War invention play in today's digital terror era.

This theme plays itself most visible in the first scenes with Bond's new Q, which is the first Q of the Daniel Craig era.  Q in this film looks like he's straight out of college, as does the new Moneypenny by the way.  Bond meets Q in an art gallery as he stares at a painting of a old warship being brought in to be scraped, as I said the theme is pretty in your face.  Q gives Bond his gadgets for the mission, which are a gun and a radio distress signal.  Bond looks at Q and asks if that's it.  Q follows with a quip about not having any exploding pens.  Gadgets have been part of the lure of the Bond films I have seen.  You always ask what were the gadgets, who was the girl, who was the villian, and who sang the opening song (in this case Adele).  This is a very conscious departure from past films to emphasize the  conservative way Bond is being cast in this film.  They are basically sending him into the field with a gun, radio, and a good luck.  Of course, they didn't go completely old school as the gun will only fire if it reads Bond's fingerprints.

This movie just as much about Bond as it is M.  Both have story lines which questioning their usefulness at their advanced age and antiquated ways.  This actually increases the drama as you question if either of them will be around in a next film.  It had a very Dark Knight Rises feel to it.  As in that movie, Bond fails (and falls) on an early mission and is assumed dead, but in contrast to Bale's jail-hole dwelling Batman, Bond is living comfortably on a beach drinking his life away.  Bond returns to action after a terrorist attack on MI6.  His skills and mental state, however remain suspect, just as Batman's did throughout Dark Knight Rises.  M's ability and decision making choices are immediately questioned as she must choose whether to order a shot which could hit Bond or take out a target with sensitive information in the opening scenes.

The villain in this film is played by Javier Bardem who is a former MI6 agent, which M had sold out to the Chinese.  His mission is to destroy M, much the same way she destroyed him.  Bardem, who plays Silva, is reminiscent of Dark Knight's Joker and Dark Knight Rises' Bane, in that they have a grand plan and seem to be a step ahead of everyone.  You should skip ahead to the last two paragraphs if you don't want spoilers.


Other similarities include how Silva allows himself to be captured to compromise the new bunker MI6 and escape into London, much like the Joker in Dark Knight.  Silva has a Chinese island which was abandoned after he claimed there was a chemical leak, much like Bane is able to control an island in Dark Knight Rises.  Silva, in the end, is a little confusing to me.  Was his goal destroying the entire intelligence agency or just M?  It seems like he could have done either with a lot less grand planning.  It almost seems as though he planned the whole getting caught part to escape into London to kill M.  A plane ticket and hiding out in M's house, which Bond is always able to do, seems a lot easier.  Well, then maybe he got caught to trying to take down MI6 again, but he already did that once and there is no further story line about this motivation after Silva escapes into London.  In the end, he just seems obsessed with killing M, who is like a mom to both Bond and Silva.  This  doesn't seem like it would be that difficult with everything else he's accomplished.  But then again maybe I'm analyzing someone who isn't the most stable of people

That being said, the drama over Judy Dench's future role in the series is gripping.  The action scenes are wonderfully ridiculous.  Bond, M, and Bond's groundkeeper Kincaid preparing his boyhood home has a bit of a Home Alone/Saving Private Ryan feel as they prepare to defend against a much greater numbers.

The visuals in the film are pretty stunning and I'm not just talking about the scenery from Turkey to China to London.  The film expertly uses light and takes shots off glass and mirrors to show reflections.  The best scene is the assassination scene on the upper levels of a Shanghai skyscraper which shows glass, outside advertising, and obscured views.  There are also many other scenes at Bond's childhood home which wonderfully use of light through bullet holes and fog (in different scenes).

In someways its almost as if the film is asking us to believe that Bond is still relevant and he is.  Bond is still very alive in all of his gentlemanly brutish, British swagger.  He's classic and this movie shows how a tuxedo, a martini, and an Aston Martin never go out of style.  

Turning the House Upside Down: Bears vs. Seahawks

Flipping the House

During the Lovie Smith era, you can look at the Bears team as a house.  The defense is the foundation and the offense is the house that sits on top.  No matter how much the offense changed above ground (Shea/Turner/Martz/Tice, Orton/Grossman/Griese/Cutler, Jones/Benson/Forte), the base below (Urlacher/Briggs/Tillman) stayed the same.  No matter how  the offense looked,  we have always relied on the defense below to support the team to at least play .500 ball.  This game flipped the equation with the house holding up the foundation.   

Last week, I ended by saying, "Cutler can look in control throughout games, but I still doubt whether he has that elite quarterback ability to will his team to win in the last few minutes of a game."

I've always considered Cutler the key to the Bears becoming an elite team.  Sure the Bears can win games against inferior opponents, but can they win a close playoff game in Lambeau?  My gut told me that in a close game with Cutler needing to run a two-minute drill, the Bears would end up somewhere around midfield and end the game on a 4th down incompletion.  Cutler, at least for a week, proved me wrong.  In the last 24 seconds of the game, he and Brandon Marshall willed this team towards a victory.      

But they lost.  The Bears vaunted defense allowed a rookie quarterback to run all over them (literally) on them in two consecutive drives totaling 177 yards and 2 TDs when the game mattered most.  We've seen the defense falter before.  We've seen them give up play after play in soft prevent defense which allow opposing offenses to perilously march down the field.  However, I can't remember the last time the Bears defense seemingly fell apart so badly (a 97 yard drive, followed by a 12-play 80 yard drive) and it was the offense came to the rescue (temporarily).  For one week at least, it was the defense cracking and the offense providing the clutch plays.

Finding a Match

This was probably the most evenly matched team the Bears have played this year.  Most of the other teams, seemed superior (Green Bay, 49ers, Texans) or inferior (Titans, Jaguars, St. Louis).  The Seahawks seemed in that Goldilocks zone, which possibly informs where the Bears will eventually end up.  One good takeaway (only on fumble this week) from this game was that the Bears outplayed the Seahawks for most of this game.  They just couldn't reflect it on the scoreboard.  I remember midway in the 2nd quarter thinking, "Wow, the Bears are complete owning the game right now, yet the score is only 7-0."  Then when Seattle went in to half up 10-7, I remember thinking that the Bears won about 75% of that half, but lost the 25% which produced scoring.  In the 2nd half, its seemed like both teams played to a draw until Russell Wilson just decided to run free.  Cutler's and Marshall's heroics turned out to be a small respite, until Seattle methodically drove down the field in their first drive in overtime.  On a final note, while the game ended in a loss, this was easily the most exciting game this season.  For the first time this season, my hands were actually clammy as I listened to the last minutes of the fourth quarter and overtime.      

Vikings v. Bears: Back to normalcy and the necessity of Jay Cutler

Back to Normal

After two weeks of misery, the Bears seemed to get back to this season's norm; beating up lesser teams with overwhelming defense and efficient offense.  The Bears look like a completely different team against lesser teams.  The line between these two classes of Bears opponents seems to be the Viking, Lion, and Cowboy line.  Minnesota, Detroit, and Dallas are on the edge of the playoff picture looking in.  Against solid playoff teams like Green Bay, Houston, and San Francisco the Bears have looked very suspect.

The victory against the Vikings had all the markings of a quality 2012 Bears victory:  

1. Turnovers - 2 fumbles and 1 interception - Check
2. Dominating defense - 10 points allowed, with 3 coming after a Forte fumble - Check
3. Effective running game - 113 yards - Check
4. Time of Possession - 37:30 to 22:30 - Check
5. Efficient Offense - 3 TDs on 296 yards and 11-19 on 3rd downs  - Check 
6. Quality Special Teams - Blocked Field Goal, Fake Field Goal, Podlesh 43 yard Avg - Check
1. Although the Vikings also blocked a field goal.  

With a strong 1st half, the Bears were able to put this one on cruise control in the 2nd half.  While the Vikings game back a little, the Bears defense held its own and offense was able to lull this one into the victory column.  

Cutler and the Bears  - Confidence, Belief, and Doubt  

After an embarrassing loss last week, the Bears looked like different team.  No longer were they the team getting physically dominated, they were the team stopping the ball carrier short of the marker and getting two physical touchdowns near the goal line.  This play embodies what I am talking about.     http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-game-highlights/0ap2000000100069/Cutler-penalized-for-unsportsmanlike-conduct

It was stupid for Cutler to toss the ball at the defender after the game, but it was nice to see some swagger.  That's who Jay Cutler is, he's a jerk, but he's our jerk for better or worse.  The team needs  Jay Cutler and it's not necessarily because of his play.  The team attacks the game on both sides of the ball with so much more confidence when Jay is on the field.  The Bears have the feeling that with Cutler they have the potential to succeed in any situation, whereas Jason Campbell hasn't earned that yet. 

The Bears trust Cutler to get the job done.  It doesn't matter what his stats are, as Cutler only threw for 188 yards,  he scrambles when the pocket is closing, he finds the opens receivers, and he chucks its to Brandon Marshall through triple coverage somehow.  I still don't think of Cutler as a leader, because of the way he yells down to teammates and treats his coaches, but the team performs better when he is on  the field because they believe.  

In a way, I view Cutler as I view the Bears, both have enough potential to succeed, but I have doubts whether or not they will succeed.  This team can be Super Bowl contenders, in the same way that Jay Cutler has the tools to become an elite quarterback.  The Bears have shown they can systematically dominate lesser opponents, yet look weak against playoff opponents.  Cutler can look in control throughout games, but I still doubt whether he has that elite quarterback ability to will his team to win in the last few minutes of a game.  So while I have confidence in Jay and the Bears to win games, I'm doubtful they have the ability to win the big game.  

Degrees of Destruction: Bears v. 49ers

Now we know what the Titans felt like two weeks ago.  If there are degrees of defeat, this is probably next to worst.  While watching the last excruciating quarter of the Bears/49ers game, I came up with five factors with which to judge humiliating losses; general ineffectiveness, unforced errors, embarrassing plays, point differential, and physicality.  On a scale of ten, the Bears probably score near ten in most of these categories, but save a little face on point differential and unforced errors.  

General ineffectiveness is what we saw in the first quarter; a defense which looked helpless against a quarterback in his first start and an offense which couldn't muster 20 yards in the first half.  General ineffectiveness is playing without too many mistake, but just not being equal to the team on the other side of the field.  It was mystifying to see Colin Kaepernick pick apart the Bears defense.  It was more concerning when Kendall Hunter and Frank Gore began to find creases in the defense for big yards. But the offense didn't give the defense anytime to sit on the bench as a majority of the Bears drives ended up with negative yardage.  The Bears score a solid ten here.  I'm reminded of the Patriots/Bears game two years ago in a snowy Soldier Field for a good example of good butt kicking when the Patriots scored to close the half to make the score 33-0.             

Unforced errors is where the Bears could have looked worse.  Unforced mistakes are careless turnovers and pre/post penalties.  There were only 6 penalties and there weren't any false starts that I can remember; however, the Bears did call a couple timeouts when they couldn't get the right personnel on the field.  The worst unforced mistake was at the end of the game when JT Thomas jumped across the line denying the Bears the chance to at least attempt a touchdown return or morale's sake.  It was the final insult.  An example of this kind of loss is Charles Tillman's personal foul penalty overtime against Tampa Bay in 2008 which gave the Bucs a first down on third down and helped themI'll give them a four here.  

Embarrassing plays is where the Bears should have scored a fifteen on a ten point scale.  These are plays that make professionals look like amateurs.  I thought it was embarrassing in the second quarter when a Bears drive consisted of: Forte tackled for no gain by unblocked defender, Forte tackled for no gain by unblocked defender, then Forte tackled for no gain on the saddest looking screen play I've ever seen.  I didn't know what would await me in the 2nd half.  Devin Hester returned a punt for minus nine officially, but it looked like minus twenty.  J'Marcus Webb and Gabe Carimi getting pushed into Jason Campbell multiple times.  On one play Webb look like he was guarding Aldon Smith's shadow as he moved outside but Smith went inside.  Carimi didn't fare much better getting bull rushed too many times to count.  On his worst play, he gave up the sack and was still falling backwards for about ten yards as Campbell was getting annihilated.  The absolute worst play was the safety which we had to agonizingly watch over and over as it was reviewed.  First of all, the pocket absolutely collapsed and Campbell had no chance.  It turned to ridiculous (and no the the Devin Hester-type) when the ball squirted out and landed at Chilo Rachal's feet.  Rachal looked like he didn't know what he found as he momentarily stared at it.  He picked it up, lumbered forward, and guess it was ruled he forward passed it.  Whatever it was it was a mess, he gave the ball some type of forward movement.  The refs had a hard time classifying what had just happened.  The Bears earn a most definite ten in this category defined which can be defined by the infamous Bears/Giants game a couple years ago when many of the same linemen gave up 9 sacks in one half.  That game established and defined for a national audience the poor reputation the Bears O-Line has had ever since.        

Point differential is a category that while bad could have been a lot worse.  I remember at half thinking they are lucky to be down twenty to nothing right now.  Point differential is pretty self explanatory, any time a team runs up the score.  We'll again compare it to the Patriots game from a couple years ago or the 45-10 loss at the hands of a Carson Palmer led Bengals team in 2009.    Yes, a 32 to 7 loss is bad, but it could have been a lot worse.  The final point total wasn't has humiliating as the game.  Eight out of ten here.

Physicality is a category I would not have considered until watching the Bears destruction by the 49ers.  The 49ers just physically beat up on the Bears all game on both sides of the field.  Whether it was the Smiths bull rushing over the offensive line or Bowman and Willis thrashing down Forte or Bush, it was reminiscent of some Lions games of the past couple years.  The Bears defense was not exempt either as there were a number of broken tackles and huge clear out blocks in the run game.  Eight out of ten here as well.

So if you add it up that's 40 out of 50 for my ranking of next to worst, although right now I'm hard to imagine what a 50 out of 50 would look like.  

Review: Looper

Going into Looper I had just heard incredible things and I was excited see what was dubbed as a "smart action film".  Unfortunately, this caused me to watch the film too analytically, instead of merely sitting back and enjoying this film.  As I was watching this film, I constantly was asking myself, "Am I enjoying this ... I think so."  I spent the whole movie asking the question, I'm not sure what I actually thought about it at the end.

I did enjoy it, until I tried to explain the plot and the movie seemed completely ridiculous.  If you explain this film to someone who hasn't even seen the trailers, its easy to get completely lost.  Let me try.  You see it involves people called Loopers, who kill people sent back in time.  The mob in the future sends a person they want dead, back in time and Loopers shoot them.  Can everyone go back in time? No, time travel was outlawed so only the most powerful mobs can do it.   Why can't the mob kill someone in the future?   Because its hard to get rid of a body in the future.   You're saying its easier to time travel in the future than to kill someone.  Yes?  So anyways Loopers are called Loopers because their service is over after they kill their future self and then they have 30 years to enjoy their life until the mob sends them back in time so  they can be killed by their younger self and their Loop is closed.  (Confusion).  Basically, Bruce Willis gets sent back and Gordon-Levitt, who plays the same character 30 years apart, fails to kill Willis and the story continues.  Oh and then there is this plot about telekinesis, the Rainmaker, a little boy, killing children, post-apocalyptic society, and all the normal time travel issues any time travel movie will have.  Yes, this movie has a lot going on.  Even still, if you can ignore the plot holes and accept the basic framework of the setting, you can enjoy the film, that is if you can get past a modified Joseph Gordon-Levitt-to-look-like-Bruce Willis face.  (I never really did.)

After thinking about this film (and you will think about this film, which is a major plus for me for any film even if I decide i didn't like the film), I believe Looper is well made and has some great performances by Gordon-Levitt and Emily Blunt.  I couldn't believe Blunt transformed herself from a proper British woman to a blonde gun tote'n American farmer-mother.  I liked how the characters react to their situation and how they adapt to time travel and its consequences.  The characters are complex and there are few one note characters in the film.  Each has his or her own flaws, strengths, and desires.  There is no evil or good clearly established by the film, but just damaged people with selfish or sacrificing motives.  Its up to the viewer to judge these characters.  The game of chess between Willis and Gordon-Levitt is also fascinating to watch.  The Willis/Gordon-Levitt character literally can talk to his younger self to give him advice and its interesting which one of them makes the final move in the film.  In a way this film is all about consequences, because the characters are very conscious of the effect their actions will have on the future.      

I would not recommend this film if you get stuck on plot holes, inconsistencies, and logic.  But if you able to get past it, you can enjoy a film which intertwines a web of competing characters with competing interests trying to find the best future for themselves.  Looper lets the viewer decide the relative morality of each of these wonderfully complex characters.   

Far too late to do any good: NBC new show roundup

I thought I'd start a new section reviewing TV shows and movies, but since I don't see them until they are about to expire on Hulu, they are really out of date.  That being said, this year I decided to try out a few new NBC shows, mostly because they expire first on my Hulu.  It's pretty much how I determine most of what I watch.  Anyway, I figured I would test drive Go On, The New Normal, and Revolution.  My expectations going into each series were pretty low.  I expected to see Go On as another failed post-Friends cast member series, which didn't look very appealing at all, the New Normal, as a Modern Family knock off, which it probably is, and Revolution as another attempt to recreate Lost magic.
    

Go On

Go On actually is a strange mix, in my mind, of Community and sentimentality.  The group element is apparent with Matthew Perry playing the Joel McHale role of too cool for the group, but sees he might be a leader, but finally sees that he needs the group as much as anyone else.  However, Go On has the twist of this being a support group and Matthew Perry's character is trying to overcome the death of his wife.  I'm not sure if the mix works well.  There are many interesting characters in the support group as well as John Cho (Harold and Kumar) and Allison Miler (Terra Nova) who make up Perry's work unit.  Most of these characters seem like one note quirks, but it seems that there will be more layers added in future episodes.  Like I said before, I'm not sure the mix of comedy and sentimentality works like it did in shows like Scrubs.  The episodes so far seem very formulaic, Perry does something that everyone in the group likes, everything goes horribly wrong, Perry is apologetic with Laura Benati's character (Group therapist) fixing what she told Perry would go wrong, and finally Perry does something inspirational and good for someone in the group. Not that I don't appreciate formula but the first two episodes seemed too similar for me.  Anyway,  I've seen three episodes so far and I'm not sure if I'll continue.  It's loaded in my Hulu queue, but I'll probably let it expire.

The New Normal

This show was the show I was most reluctant to see because I'm not a big Modern Family fan and I heard that this was a knockoff.  After watching, I thought that this series might have the best chance of surviving.  Contrary Go On, this show has a better mix sentimentality and comedy.  The show is driven on Justin Bartha and Andrew Rannells' characters anxiety about become fathers.  These anxieties, at least to me, seems sincere.  Their experience through the pregnancy of their surrogate mother forms a solid storyline for the show. Their support of Georgia King's character, who is carrying their child, forms the emotional center of the show.  The comedy comes from these characters interactions with King's intolerant grandmother played by Ellen Barkin, King's daughter played by Bebe Wood who also provides sweetness and comedy, and  NeNe Leakes, as Andrew Rannells' assistant.  She plays against Rannells inattentiveness and Barkin's racist, homophobic attitude.  That being said, much of the comedy is based on making fun of stereotypes and many of the characters themselves are bordering on stereotypes themselves.  I'm not sure if I'll continue watching, but of the three new series I've seen, this had the most solid base with a good storyline.   

Revolution

I've only seen two episodes of Revolution, but I'm sure to be disappointed.  Revolution is another Lost-style show with a concept, nobody has power and doesn't know why it went out, and a lot of mysteries,  does somebody know how to turn the power on?  I can tell this show is designed to suck you in with mystery after mystery, in which you are continually seeking answers.  I actually like shows with a concept, I thought Terra Nova could have eventually made it even if the first 3/4s of the series weren't great, but I don't know if any storyline in Revolution really holds my interest.  I'm interested vaguely interested to see how they explain the power, but I'm not sure Tracy Spiridakos' journey to find her brother, which is driving the plot right now is a sufficient engine for this vehicle.  Giancarlo Esposito is excellent, but nothing else really stands out.  I can see certain plot lines already developing for better or worse and I'm tempted to cut myself off before I get sucked into too many weak episodes by last minute cliff hangers.    

Bears v. Titans

It was nice to get a easy win before things get tough in the next few weeks with the 7-1 Texans and the 6-2 49ers.  I'm not sure what you can say after a defensive/special teams performance like that.  Other than dominating and wow.

Defense

This was Charles Tillman's game with a team leading 9 tackles to go along with a ridiculous 4 forced fumbles.  Brian Urlacher still showed he could make headlines with 7 tackles, 1 forced fumble, and 1 interception for a touchdown.  But back to Tillman, I'm not sure how you force 4 fumbles in a game, but these were all legit forced fumbles and not some accidental elbow.  It definitely is the most dominant performance by a defensive back and maybe a defender I have ever seen.  When he got the last one in the fourth quarter, it was like this is getting ridiculous.  Anyway, Tillman probably just punched his ticket back to the Pro Bowl this year.

Special Teams 

Special Teams played well and scored the game's first points on a blocked punt by Sherrick McManis and recovered for a touchdown by Corey Wootton.  Hester set up the next touchdown, by almost bringing it back to the 8 yard line for a nice Matt Forte touchdown.  By the way, that TD was great with the whole team pushing Matt Forte across the line.  You can see the video below.  Back to special team, Robbie Gould also had a solid 3 for 3 day, not that it was needed.

Offense

That leaves the only unit that perhaps needs more polish.  As seen in the video above, the offensive line looks pretty good when moving forward, but gets in trouble when moving backwards, pass protecting. Cutler was sacked 3 times and there was a safety called on a J'Marcus Webb penalty in the endzone.  The offense did look good in the run averaging 4.4 yards per carry, which includes a few Jason Campbell kneel downs.  (By the way, I guess Lovie instituted the mercy rule after the 10 minute mark of the fourth quarter by having Armando Allen run the ball every single time, even on the Titans 10 yard line on fourth down.)  On passing plays, the pocket always seemed to close early on Cutler.  Whereas early in the season, Cutler may have been holding the ball for too long, it was apparent in this game that the pocket constantly constricting.  Cutler and Marshall did connect on three pretty impressive pass touchdowns to put this game into cruise control.  Watching these connections only shows hints at the potential the Bears have to put together a pretty decent offensive unit with threats on the ground and through the air.

Final Thoughts

Well the time is now.  With the Texans and Niners coming up in the next two weeks, we'll find out what this Bears team is all about.  Since the beginning of this season, we knew time was running out and the window was closing on this aging defense.  While it hasn't shown on the field too much, we can all assume that these defenders if not this year than in the near future are going to be past their primes.  These next two weeks will tell us what we can expect against two of the league's best.

I honestly believe this team has the talent to win a Super Bowl.  While in past seasons, I thought the Bears could get lucky and go on a hot streak, like the Giants did last year, I believe team has the talent to be true Super Bowl contender.  If they play up to it, is a different question.  Unfortunately, I'll miss all if not most of the game next week, so I'll have to wait to watch the Niners game.

Davis Square at Night

Bears v. Panthers

Talk about winning ugly.  I guess if you are going to have a bad game do it against a 1-5 team.  In a lot of ways this game mirrored the Lions game in reverse.  In the Lions game, it felt as if the Bears were always in control, but the score never reflected it.  In this game it felt as though the Bears kept trying to give this game away, but the score never reflected it.

For most of the 1st Quarter, it looked like the Bears were going to run away with this game, literally.
Running game was gashing the Panthers early on with a lot of nice runs.  Most of them seemed like sweeps to the outside.  Even though the Bears first drive ended in an interception of an under thrown Jay Cutler pass, the offense seemed to move at will.  After the Bears scored on a Matt Forte run, where he pretty much walked into the end zone, you just had the feeling this was going to be a rout.

Then came the sacks and the fumbles and the Bears ended up with 3 first half turnovers and negative passing yardage.  Meanwhile, the Bears defense was letting up too many points.  The Panthers had 3 consecutive scoring drives in the first half, but to the defenses credit, the score remained a reachable 13-7.  Throughout the game, the defense seemed to do just enough to keep the game within reach.  I want to give this group the benefit of the doubt and I'll blame the amount of scoring on the Panthers ability to slowly break down this older Bears defense, due to the offense's lack of ability to give the defense any rest on the sideline.

The offense was completely ineffective most of the game until the last couple drives.  The turning point was the Panthers punt of 6 yards.  After the punt went out of bounds, I just kept staring at the ref who kept on moving up the field until he got to the Panthers 38.  Speaking of special teams, the Panthers made an effort to avoid Hester, and it finally backfired for them on this drive.  For most of the game, Carolina kickoffs limited any return and were more effective when coupled with a Bears offense which couldn't move the ball.  Carolina was more cautious this year than last year when Hester returned a punt on them.  On the Bears side of the ball, Podlesh had a few good punts which pinned the Panthers pretty far into their own territory.  This was important as the Bears were not doing much to change field position throughout the game.

Back to the end of the 4th quarter.  Cutler was able to engineer a drive which started on the Panthers 38 and ended with a 12 yard pass to Kellen Davis for a Touchdown.  Cutler was mostly in the shotgun on this drive.  On the next Panthers possession, Cam Newton passed it to a wide open Tim Jennings for an interception return.  I couldn't believe it when it happened.  You have to remember, I'm seeing the game at a bar in Somerville, which is playing the Patriots game so I'm listening to Patriot game audio.  At the time, nothing was really happening in the Patriots game so for such a swing to happen was shocking.  I remember thinking, "Wait, we are up now?"  On the play, Steve Smith slipped and fell, leaving Tim Jennings an open interception and route to the end zone.  Better lucky than good.

The drama wasn't over as the Bears went for two and Cutler was intercepted.  I didn't know the NFL rule about converting 2 points and thought that the Panthers had just taken a two point lead on us, until someone at the bar said don't worry about it.  Remember, I can't hear the audio so it wasn't clear what had happened when they went to commercial.  The Panthers on the ensuing possession were able to drive down the field and kick a field goal to retake the lead.  In my mind, this was the biggest disappointment as I had hoped the Bears defense would be able to stop the Panthers in the clutch.  But once again, maybe they were just gassed.

When the Bears got the ball back I had a bad feeling.  I thought of multiple games in 2009, especially the Green Bay game and the Atlanta game, where Cutler had the opportunity to complete the two minute drill and put in the game winning score, in both cases the Bears lost. A lot of time has passed since then but the memory remains.  I previously have doubted the offense's ability to win games.  This seems like a front running offense good with the lead, questionable without it.  But Cutler and the offense proved me wrong and came through in the end of a game which the Bears should not have won.      

Last week, I said, "I don't think we'll learn much more against the 1-5 Panthers.  We'll hopefully only learn that the Bears are a veteran team that will take care of the games they are supposed to win." That was mostly true, but if we did learn something out of this stinker, it is that the offense can win a game in the end.  In the greater scheme of the game, the offense did not win the game, in fact it merely saved a game it almost threw away, but the offense, led by Cutler, was able to muster the necessary points in the 4th quarter; first with a TD then with Robbie Gould's game winning field goal as time expired. 

Bears v. Lions

I should be happier about a win, but I just can seem to get over the fact that we now know what kind of team this is.  It's as if the Lions game confirmed everything I suspected about this team.  This is a team that will be limited by its offense and defined by its defense.  Its a team that is led by defense and supported by offense.  In the spirit, but not the quote, of a former Cardinals/Vikings coach, "They are who we thought they weren't, and they almost had us hooked".  I feel like a broken record, but the expectations for this team were supposed to be blossoming offense and a defense which is holding the dam together.  Instead, the offense struggles with consistency and the defense has nearly proven the Lovie Smith "Bend, but not break" theory of sound defense.    

Bears Defense

Let's face it, this defense is good.  Currently, the Bears lead the league in points per game (13.9), takeaways (21), defensive TDs (5),  and rushing defense (71 yards per game).  7 points and 4 turnovers, pretty much tell the story, but the Bears still gave up 340 yards (see Bend, not break theory). In first quarter the Bears dominated on both sides of the ball.  For the rest of the game, they were able to stop the Lions on defense whenever ever they got close to the endzone.  One time literally at the endzone.   The defense played spectacular bend, but not break, however it would have been a different story if the Lions weren't so fumble happy and were able to put in a few field goals to make it more interesting at the end of the game.  

Bears Offense

Let's just call it enough at this point.  The Bears are decent in the run game, but underperforming in scoring.  It seems like they can move the ball by running, but tend to falter before the end zone or Gould-kicking zone.  

296 yards against the Lions isn't bad and with a solid run game of the 171 yards on the ground, the Bears did enough to win the time of possession battle 34:25 to 25:25.  It would be nice to see Cutler have more than 150 yards passing.  Right now this is a team that will beat you, but it won't stomp on you.  The reason for that is an offense which can't throw the final punch.  The defense provided plenty of opportunities  for the offense to put it a way with a TD, but the Bears had to settle for Robbie Gould field goals instead.  I get the feeling like the this team is underperforming when it comes to putting points on the board.

I don't think we'll learn much more against the 1-5 Panthers.  We'll hopefully only learn that the Bears are a veteran team that will take care of the games they are supposed to win.  The Bears just need to focus and put this one in the win column so we can take a commanding lead in the NFC North

Driving from NY to Boston

2001 Bears

One of my favorite Bears teams was the 2001 Bears.  The 2001 season was a magical season where everything seemed to bounce the Bears way.  The most memorable moments are the Mike Brown games where Brown returned inceptions for touchdowns in consecutive overtime games against the 49ers and Browns at Soldier Field. There's more on these comeback games later on at the bottom of the post and check down there, because these clips are even more remarkable when watched in the context of the rest of the game.  I posted the following video last week, but the best thing is to watch the fans.  I can only imagine how great it would have been to be there and how much the old Soldier Field was rockin'.  

There was also the Keith "Tractor" Traylor interception return, which was a pretty funny play, but also an extremely smart, athletic play by Traylor.  First, he recognizes the screen.  Then, he has the ability to tip the ball and catch it, while falling backwards.  Next, he breaks two tackles and the rest, well is not too athletic, and probably is the slowest interception return in history.

After looking closer and trying to remember those games, it's clear 2001 was a season of change.  The 2001 season was the last season in front of the colonnades, before the spaceship landed in the middle of the current Soldier Field.  2001 was also the last season of the old NFC Central and the loss of the Buccaneers as a division rival.  2001 was the beginning of the current Patriots dynasty, with Tom Brady taking over for an injured Drew Bledsoe.  He would lead the underdog Patriots all the way to the Super Bowl and past the heavily (extremely heavily) favored Rams.  2001, of course, was also when 9-11 happened, which set a different tone for the entire country and delayed Week 2 games.

2001 was a season of change inside the Bears too.  Personnel director Mark Hatley left and Bears President Ted Philips hired Jerry Angelo, who would remake the team.  In 2000, the Bears offense featured Cade McNown at QB, James Allen and Curtis Enis at running back, and Marcus Robinson at wide receiver.  Brian Urlacher and Mike Brown were promising rookies.  In 2001, the Bears offense featured the QB tandem of Shane Mathews and Jim Miller, the Rookie of the Year Anthony Thomas (a Hatley pick), and a new deep threat in Marty Booker who had 100 catches after only 47 the year before.  The defense was literally anchored by Ted Washington and Keith Traylor.  The immovable wall, listed at 365 and 340 respectively, shut down the inside of the line and allowed linebackers Brian Urlacher (90 tackles), Roosevelt Colvin (10.5 sacks), and Warrick Holdman (95 tackles) to move unblocked throughout the field.  

The previous season, the Bears had trudged through a 5-11 season and most people didn't expect much better out of this team.  But the 2001 Bears, somehow finished 13-3, behind a remarkable defense, a rookie running back (A-Train 1183 yards), a new offensive threat in Miller to Booker, and a never give up attitude.  Here's a good recap from I assume NFL Films.  It's long, but a good trip down memory lane.

Improbable Comebacks:
Below are clips from ESPN from each of the comeback games.  It's notable both games started with an sack/fumble recovery by the 49ers/Browns for a TD and ends with a Mike Brown TD in overtime.  Be sure to watch the Browns game which is truly remarkable.  The Bears pull off a miracle after being down 21-7 with under a minute left in the game.  The Bears came back with a Marty Booker touchdown with 33 seconds left, a onside recovery, and a Shane Matthews Hail Mary to James Allen which is caught after being tipped.  Of course, in overtime Mike Brown would return an interception for a touchdown.

San Francisco Game (It's great watching TO miss the ball fearing an Urlacher hit, which results in Brown's interception)

Cleveland Game

Bears v. Jaguars

I didn't see most of the Cowboys game and I only caught the last ten minutes or so because I was traveling back to Boston, so I didn't write a review last week.

I saw all of the Jaguars game on Sunday and it looked like Bears outplayed the Jaguars for 3 of 4 quarters.  The 1st Quarter the Bears seemed to be the more dominate team, but the score just didn't show it.  They were able go on a 6-minute drive to the Jacksonville 14, but could only manage a Robbie Gould field goal.  At the end of the 1st Quarter and in the 2nd Quarter, the Jaguars had some success driving the ball and were able to get into Bears territory twice.  One ended up in a field goal, the 2nd time was saved by a Corey Wootton forced fumble.  (I was thinking the bend not break worked again).  At the end of the first half, I gave 1st Quarter to the Bears and the 2nd Quarter to the Jags.  The offense seemed to able to run the ball well and Cutler was finding an open Kellen Davis in a couple key situations, but the offense seemed unable to finish any drive.  The defense seemed to be giving up too much yardage, and it didn't seem like they could get off the field in 3rd Down situations.  In the two long drives the Jaguars had in the 1st Half, Jacksonville went 5 for 6 on 3rd Down.  That being said the score at halftime was still 3-3.

The tone was set by the offense on the first drive which lasted 9 minutes, 17 plays, and only resulted in a field goal, but had to take some toll on the Jaguars' defense in the 100 degree heat (which is hard to imagine this time of year).  At the time a 6-3 lead seemed tenuous, especially since MJD had gone off for a couple nice runs in the 1st half.  Charles Tillman changed that with a repeat performance, taking a QB-WR miscued interception to the end zone.  It was disastrous beginning to the 2nd half as the Jaguars' first two possessions consisted of 2 penalties, 1 interception, 1 sack, 1 incompletion, and 1 completion for 5 yards.

After the Tillman pick, the tide had clearly turned.  The Bears, after another uninspired Jags drive, were able to ram it down the field behind Michael Bush and ended up with Alshon Jeffrey TD.  The next Bears possession, it was Forte's turn as he nearly single-handedly drove the Bears down the field for a Brandon Marshall TD.  At this point, it was pretty much game over, but Lance Briggs put an exclamation mark on it by returning another interception for a TD.  It was the first time in NFL history where teammates return TDs in consecutive weeks.  Of course, I was thinking Mike Brown from 2001 in consecutive weeks.

Of course, that was a lot more exciting because of how and when it happened.  After the Briggs TD, the only highlights left was the Armando Allen TD.          

Bears Defense

Obviously, the defense came up big again only letting up 3 points, 189 yards, and with 2 TDs of their own.  Anytime your defense outscores your opponent's offense its going to be a pretty good day.  If I am to nitpick, the defense probably would have wanted to get to Gabbert more often during the game and improve on their 3rd Down percentage in the first half.  

The defense also provided momentum changing plays.  The first was the sack-fumble by Wootton.  At the time the Jaguars were driving, well into field goal range, on the Bear 21.  It was their 2nd drive of the half that they had come the length of the field.  With only 2 minutes left, the Bears faced the possibility of going into halftime down 6-3 after a made field goal.  Corey Wootton made sure it didn't happen.  

In the 2nd half, after a Bears field goal making the score 6-3, Tillman comes up big with a pick-6, making the score 13-3, and beginning the rout.    

Bears Offense

As in past games, the Bears running game was effective, setting the stage for later success through the air.  Forte rushed for 107 yards, averaging 4.9 yards per carry, while Michael Bush rushed for 26 yards on 4 carries.  Brandon Marshall had huge day with 12 receptions for 144 yards and 1 TD.  Cutler went to Kellen Davis early in the game, but didn't connect after that.  Alshon Jeffery had a nice TD reception late in the game on a slant where Jeffery got the inside position by sealing the corner from the ball and making the TD a slam dunk.  The offensive line performed well, opening up holes for Forte and Bush, while also providing sufficient pass protection.  Carimi seemed to have a bad game however, getting called for multiple penalties and giving up a sack.  

My one thought on the offense, is that they don't seem to be able to carry the team.  In the past two weeks, the offense has been unable to capture the lead until the defense has provided the momentum shift.  After the Bears have captured the lead, it seems that the offense gets on track and everything starts clicking.  This is a front running offense, we saw last week against Dallas.  In St. Louis, it was a 13-6 game until a Major Wright interception blew it wide open.  It would be nice, and it would greatly improve my confidence in this team, to see the offense take the lead without the defense providing the game changing lift.      

Next week's a bye, but I might have an idea for a Bears post next week.  

Bears v. Rams

Well after a long absence I'm back and this time from Boston.  I'm hoping to write a bunch more so check back often.

First off, this was my first Bears game in Boston.  Luckily, I found a bar around the corner that plays every NFL game.  It was actually kinda exciting being in a bar with so many people watching different games.  You'd hear cheers and shouts randomly and glance over to see the Redskins, Colts or Bills make good on a play.  It made me wonder if how much excitement is happening across the country at any one moment as a reaction to a play.  Its incredible to stop and think of millions of fans watching in separate homes and cities having the same emotional, shared response at the same time.   Now onto the game.

There were no huge moments in this game compared to the other games around the NFL this week.  (Packers, Lions)  The Bears won this game the old-fashioned way or at least the old-fashioned Lovie Smith way; with great defensive play and a serviceable offense.  The Bears defense kept them in this game while the offense did just enough not to lose.  This is a familiar storyline that was not supposed to be replayed again this season.  But after two below average to dismal games for the Bears passing attack, its a replay of the Lovie Smith Bears.  The excitement is now gone, but the potential is still there.    We are hanging for dear life on to that offensive attack the Colts which produced 314 yards and 2 TDs through the air.  

Bears Defense

Let's start with the good.  The defense won this game for the Bears.  In the 1st half, they played according to plan.  The Bears let up small gains and closed out the Rams on 3rd downs.  The Rams were 3 for 13 on 3rd Down.  They were also able to get consistent pressure on Bradford.  Particularly, Okoye had a nice sack in the 1st quarter where he clearly beat his man on a four-man rush.  Besides Okoye, its seemed like the rotation of D-Linemen got the job done from Peppers to Paea to the rookie McClellin to Idonije.  By the way, I could have sworn a I saw a play were McClellin played standing up in a more linebacker position at the end of the half, but I could be wrong.  Briggs had another solid game, including a play where he shed a lineman's block to make a stop.

I'm also launching my official Tim Jennings Pro Bowl campaign.  By my count he has 4 interceptions and 2 deflections for interceptions.   Obviously there's still a lot of football to be played, but he gets my pick for Pro Bowl right now.  On an odd note, Peppers had an uncharacteristic personal foul penalty which extended the drive.  If it wasn't Peppers I'd be angry, but Peppers has been so good its hard to remember he's a Bear.  I guess I just have an assumption that all-star free agent pickups are supposed to fail for the Bears.

Bears Offense

Again, lets start with the good.  I thought Michael Bush and the offensive line played well when rushing the ball.  It seemed like they had early success running the ball, but went away from it.  Early in the game the Bears seemed to barely string together drives and were able to put up a less than inspiring 3 points.  It seemed like the Bears realized that they should have been running the ball more and finally ran the ball and used screens in a 7 minute drive in the 2nd quarter.  This helped them when the time of possession game in the first half.   It's hard to believe Bush only had 55 yards on 18 carries, because the running game seemed much more effective.  The Bears also made good use of a couple screens and rookie Evan Rodriguez seemed to make some key blocks like he did Week 1.

That leaves the bad which is pretty much the passing game.  Both Cutler and the receivers deserve blame here.  Cutler was off the mark all day and the receivers dropped ball when the should have been caught.

Game Thoughts

This game seemed closer than it should have been against a sub par opponent.  So who is this team after three games.  Well, better than average, but not elite yet.  The Dallas game will tell us more.  

As for this week, the team relied too much on the defense.   It looked as though the Rams could win the game by defensive attrition when they were down 10-6, but the defense was able to seal the victory with a couple late interceptions and sacks.  Like they had all game, the defense gave up some small gains, but in the end were able to make the key plays when it mattered.    

     

Iowa

I've been a bit busy recently so I haven't really thought of what to do for a post, but I was in Iowa this weekend so here's a bunch of Iowa stuff.   If you're interested, here's a bunch of places I was at this weekend.  Des Moines Farmer's Market.  Celebrasian.  Machine Shed Restaurant.

This was kinda of cool too.  Read the article.  This happened last month.  

Iowa fight song for a certain somebody I know.  

Here's a list of famous Iowans.  Herbert Hoover, John Wayne, Ashton Kutcher, Elijah Wood, Buffalo Bill Cody, and Glenn Miller headline the list.  

Here's a list of historical events in Iowa.  As you can see nothing too historical has ever taken place in Iowa. 

How did come to this?

That's the question I asked myself during the closing minutes of Game 3 as I watched everyone clear the lane waiting for John Lucas III to breakdown the 76ers defense.  How did the season get to the point where playoff aspirations are put on the back of a 5-11 third string point guard?  This is how you lose to the eight seed when you are the one seed.  Just last week I still expected the Bulls to advance to the conference finals.  Now that seems like a pipe dream.

The Players
Last week I said we need to see Deng and Watson step up.  Well they haven't.  In Game 2, Deng had 8 points and Watson had 12.  In Game 3, Watson was scoreless and Deng had 5 points.  In Game 4, Watson came alive in the 2nd half to score 17, while Deng still had only 11.  Boozer stepped up in Game 4, with 23 points, but couldn't convert when it was needed.  (Well then there's this too.)    Noah upped his game in Game 2 and 3 until he got hurt and never should came back into the game.  Neither Korver or Lucas has provided that much of a spark off the bench.

The Games 
Here's just a quick recap of why I think the Bulls have lost the last three games:
Game 2 - Horrible 3rd Quarter, not really sure why they came out so flat
Game 3 - Nobody stepped up at the end of the game when they needed somebody to start hitting shots down the stretch
Game 4 - Fought well, but again nobody made shots down the stretch when they needed it.  The Bulls also got hosed on the foul calls at the end of the game.  (Short rant - Boozer gets hit with some pretty severe contact when he was taking it to the rim with about a minute left.  On the next play down, a foul is called on a questionable bump on Jrue Holiday.  Next the Bulls try and intentionally foul, but nothing is called until there is a call on Asik as the shot clock is expiring.  While there was probably a foul on Asik with the body, it was less of a foul than on Boozer and the refs didn't give the Bulls an intentional foul earlier in the possession.  Anyways, rant over.)

Bottom line is nobody stepped up in the crunch.  So this is where we are, facing elimination without our MVP and starting center.  Beyond that, they lack any confidence.  The regular season Bulls would have reeled teams in if they fell behind or beat them up my halftime.  This seems like a team which looks lost on the offensive end.  It's a team looking for someone instead of being that someone.  The only good signs have been that Watson seemed to come alive at the end of the game after being completely lost the last 6 quarters or so and the defense has been there in the past two games.  The Bulls just need to get a few baskets down the stretch or its "wait 'til next year" time.  

Roseless

The biggest basketball news over the weekend was the loss of Derrick Rose for the season and into next season.  While this is disappointing and severely reduces the Bulls chances of a championship, I am strangely excited about the opportunity for the Bulls to show how good they can be even without the reigning MVP.  I'm probably in denial, but I'm still excited to see what they can do.  If they can continue to win in the post season they have the chance to be one of my all time favorite teams; winning with defense, hustle, and a deep bench.  I can't remember a team with a bench as deep.

Should Rose have been out there?
The biggest question was did Rose have to be out there and the answer is no.  With a 12 point lead with about 90 seconds left, the game was in pencil in the win column.  The 76ers had come back a little and momentum can change fast, but this game was probably over.  However, I'm with Coach Thibs on this one.  (BTW check out this article about him that was sent to me by my friend Art about Coach Thibs).  Rose did not have to be out there, but I'm okay with the judgment call of leaving him out there to finish the game.   Over the course of the season, Thibs has left players in too long in my opinion.  I would have like to see Thibs use the bench more often to see if the bench could carry the Bulls the rest of the way in some blowout victories.  In this situation, however I probably would have done the same for multiple reasons.  One, this is the playoffs and you want to ensure the victory, it would have been inexcusable to let the 76ers steal this game at home in the last minute.  Two, this is the playoffs and you don't want the other team carrying any positive momentum into the next game if they are able to get a few steals or if they are able to get a few more shots to fall.  Stuff like that can sometimes carry over into the next game.  Three, Derrick came in late in the 4th quarter and had not been in unusually long.  Coach Thibs has played his guys with a philosophy  to ensure each and every victory.  He's created a culture where losses seem unusual and nearly catastrophic.  When the Bulls lose, it seemed as though an intervention is necessary.  There must be something wrong with this team and it couldn't just be an off night.  If you didn't like Rose being out there, then you should be prepared to surrender the title of best record in the NBA for the past two seasons.

How far can they go?
I still expect this team can go as far as I originally predicted, the Eastern Conference Finals.  They have won all season with different guys stepping up.  While the regular season and the post season are definitely two different animals, I still believe they can get past the 76ers and Celtics/Hawks.  The 76ers are already one game down and as long as the Bulls defense is solid, I believe they can produce enough offense (maybe with messy possessions and Joakim Noah tips) to get past the 76ers.  I think the Hawks are too unreliable to count on.  The Celtics would be the most dangerous match up, but if the Bulls can contain Rondo and Allen I think they can move past them.  A Celtics-Bulls match up would be interesting parallel to the 2009 playoffs where a Garnett-less Celtic team took on a full strength Bulls team.  In a matchup versus Miami, the Heat clearly have the advantage and would be heavily favored to win however the Bulls do have a few things going for them.  All the pressure would be on the Heat to win.  With Rose out of the picture and the Heat have no excuse not to get to the Finals and win.  The Bulls have no pressure on them now.  They can play loose because there are no expectations and a team without anything to lose is very dangerous.

Who steps up?
Very simply everyone will have to, but specifically it will have to be Watson and Deng.  Watson will have to be the player we saw glimpses of last year, a player who yearns to play 40 minutes because he believes he can play 40 minutes better than 4 minutes.  Last year, CJ seemed to play well when given more time.  This year, he has gotten more time than he knows what to do with, but has seemed lately to get lost out there, seemingly pounding the ball into the ground.  He has to be the guy that's a legit offensive threat to have breakout 20-30 point games if you don't attend to him.  Deng simply has to step up and carry this team on his back.  This is his team now and he has to show that he can get it done when it counts.  The front line will need to have monster games on the board and Lucas and Korver will need to provide that instant offense.

The biggest question now is who step up in winning time.  I don't know if I have an answer for that, but I'm strangely excited to find out.  My favorite basketball teams win with smart play, defense, and effort.  That is what I'm hoping to see in the Bulls; to prove these qualities win championships and can overcome superior talent.

Chicago the New Boston?

I read a couple articles in the past week which made me realize how much Chicago sports teams have taken from Boston teams in the past year or two.  The connections I am aware of:

Bulls - Coach Thibodeau, assistant under Doc Rivers with the Celtics
Cubs - President of Baseball Operations Theo Epstein and crew, former GM of the Red Sox
Bears - GM Phil Emery, who's scouting philosophy is "rooted in the 'Patriot system'"

Now I know the Boston teams have been successful in the past decade...
Celtics - 2008 NBA Champions; 2010 Eastern Conference Champions
Patriots - 2001, 2003, 2004 Super Bowl Champions; 2007, 2011 AFC Champions
Red Sox - 2004, 2007 World Series Champions
Bruins - 2011 Stanley Cup Champions

But something just makes me cringe a little bit when I read articles like this.  Bears GM Phil Emery is rooted in Patriotic approach or Emanuel’s ‘Fenway Plan’ for Wrigley is a hit at Fenway.

I think Belichick bothers every non-Patriots fan with his Patriots hoodie and cutoff sleeves.  Part of it is jealousy, which I admit, part of it is annoyance with commentators crowning him a genius, and part of it is SpyGate.  The Belichick  - Genius thing just gets under my skin because you know that its partially true, that the Patriots have been successful and his unconventional thinking has seemed to work.
 

The example of the Patriot system in the Bears article bothered me because it just reminds me of the Genius - Belichick thing again.  From the article,    

"When the Patriots stacked their draft board, Belichick often would get frustrated because the game had changed, emphasizing and de-emphasizing different positions. The third cornerback, for example, could play 60 percent of the defensive snaps in a game."  

“So the third corner is a starter in today’s game,” Pioli said. “We were talking about guys who were third corners and weren’t given high-enough grades.


“It’s not anything that’s genius. It’s just trying to look at today’s league and understanding matching value versus just saying, ‘He’s a starting running back.’ ”


I would have hoped that the Bears had taken examples like this this into account before.  Like it says, "It's not anything that's genius."  It seems like a common sense philosophy, not a Boston or Chicago Philosophy.  

I also have to mention a classic Lovie Smith quote from the article:


“I don’t know what the Patriot Way is,” coach Lovie Smith said. “But I know about the Bear Way, and I’m excited about that."

You wouldn't even have to tell me it was Lovie.  It sounds like a classic Lovieism.  You have the (1) side step of the issue and (2) the ending of the quote with a positive but general sentiment.  But its the last part I agree with.  I would be excited about the Bears being successfully following the "Bear Way".  I'm just less excited about the Bears following the "Patriot Way"  

Really, its the Bears and Cubs connections which bother me.  Although Thibs is associated with Boston, I feel that his coaching method seems in line with the Bulls overall philosophy of player accountability and character.  With the Bears and Cubs its seems as though we are just trying to replicate the Boston success in Chicago.  I would love to see a World Series or Super Bowl champion, but it just seems like we are selling out to win a championship.  Don't get me it seem like the smart thing do to, I just wish we would do things the "Chicago way" (cue Sean Connery well the phrase, not exactly the actions) rather than the Boston way.

Random Vids of the Day

I couldn't really think of anything to post so I thought I would just post some random videos.  The first is of course "The Shot".   It seems that most teams are trying to get across the finish line for the playoffs (And the Bulls barely surviving by hitting two three pointers to send the game to overtime in the past two games.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qaIkHtUwtjQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekmH7V1Bdbc) so maybe this will provide a little more excitement for the playoffs.  It's odd, Craig Ehlo scored 15 points in the fourth quarter including two 3 pointers and a layup to take the lead at around the 3:00 minute mark of this video.  If Jordan would have missed the shot, which starts at around the 5:00 minute mark of this video, this would have been known as the Ehlo game, but Jordan made it and the rest is history.  

The second is the Taxman by the Beatles for obvious reasons.

The third is a probably the most intense scene from Clear and Present Danger which was on this weekend.

Mistake of the Day

If you are going to shop at Target or Meijer, do not wear a red polo.

My Week in Chicago

I spent last week working downtown and commuting from my parents house in the suburbs by Metra.  I've worked in the city before, but usually just for one day.  It was odd that I was able to do it for an entire week.  Before I went, I viewed it as an unusual opportunity to catch up with a few friends that live and work in the city.  But the experience was odd for a different reason.    

I think its partially because when I was young I always saw people standing at the Metra stop and it seemed like a very grown up thing to do.  It seemed like that something business people did.  It's definitely not something I ever dreamed of doing.  It's more like a childhood conception than a childhood dream.  It's something you picture yourself doing when you get older.  

That conception died a long time ago and I've gotten used to what my modern day conception of work is, well because I live it everyday.  But for a week I was able to live my childhood conception to see if it matched reality.

For the most part it did not.  I pretty much felt like I was secretly posing as a member of a group which I did not belong.  There were many reasons for this.  First of all, everyone knew where to stand; which platform and where the doors would open.  Second, I didn't have a monthly pass, which set me apart from everyone else.  Third, everyone seemed to know what to do; where to find the open seats and not to pick the seats that directly faced the sun while on the train.  For the most part, I felt like a tourist who is trying to fit in which is ironic because this was my hometown.  I was doing enough to just fit in.  

My second impression of commuting was how herd-like it was.  People walking out of the train station seemed like cattle being herded through specific gates then subdivided at each intersection.  Some would split off left, some would go right, and some would go straight.  All of which was decided by red lights, green lights, blinking orange hands and white walk symbols.    

And that leads me to my third impression, "What do all these people do?"  I remember that after campaigning in a town of less than 10,000 I drove into Springfield and I thought briefly, "Wow, Springfield is actually a pretty big town.  You can go to a Target and Best Buy.  They have a lot of restaurants you can try too."  It was like adjusting your eyes to the darkness after being in a bright room.  So after a while things seemed normal.  I had the same reaction when I was walking to work one day, "Wow, Chicago is a large city."  But instead my reaction was,  "What do these people do?  What jobs do they have?  How can this many people have jobs down here?  Is there really that much work to be done?"  Then, you realize that you only see the people in one of the Metra stations and this doesn't include car commuters or EL or Pace riders.  It's at this point where I start to realize maybe I've spent too much time in Springfield, because Chicago just seems to large.    

Which leads me to my final realization that while I've grown older the commuter life and life working in a big city still remains a conception, just a different one from my youth.  I can't live it just for a week.  To me, I was still just an outside posing as a commuter.  It's a conception which was interesting to see and experience, but I'll be okay with my 10 minute walk to work tomorrow, rather than the 2 hours of commuting per day. 
       

Homeland

This week I went through the whole season of the Golden Globe winning Homeland.  I had to because it was about to expire on Showtime On Demand.  It's an interesting way to watch a TV series because it feels like a need, instead of a want.  It reminded me of the weekend in college when I watched the whole first season of the Sopranos.  It was the exact opposite situation, I wanted to watch the whole thing.  Every episode would end and I would hesitantly turn off the TV only to turn it back on and play another episode.  The situation I found myself for Homeland felt different, it felt more calculated.  I needed to watch a certain amount of episodes each night or not be able to see the whole season.  That being said I enjoyed the first season of Homeland.

Homeland is definitely a show that is not afraid to run through plots or story lines.  In topic, it reminded me of the failed AMC show Rubicon, which I loved in concept.  It unfortunately was uneven.  It was about a group of intelligence analysts working in this nondescript building.  I loved the set, because it wasn't fancy with 3D graphics or streamlined design, it looked like it had been lived in since the 60's.  Rubicon thrived on conspiracy theories and questions who was on who's side, much like Homeland.  However, Homeland began its series the exact opposite of Rubicon.  In Rubicon, the show slowly and painstakingly built momentum, to the point where the audience is asking "When is something going to actually happen?" It would just leave these points that had to mean something, but nothing would come of it for episodes at a time.  Homeland, on the other hand, is a show that is not afraid to run through plot.  They would drop a small hint, like a glance or a small line, in one show and completely resolve it in the next.  

***Spoiler Alert:  If you haven't watched any of this season this is where I will start talking about the plot.***  

For example, in Episode 4 Carrie and Brody have a small flirtation.  Something I expected the writers to develop over the course of the season, but by Episode 6 they are together and by Episode 7 the relationship is over.  I can see why they did so fast because it entangles the two main characters for the rest of the series.  It connects the two halves of the show, something Rubicon failed to do until too late.  

Homeland also accomplishes something remarkable, it gets the audience to see things from the eyes of a terrorist.  It presents a 360 view of Brody's journey.  Brody is not a some automatized, one-dimensional character set on destroying the world.  He has reasons and struggles and is not always sure he is doing the right thing.  You can tell that he is struggling to fit back in, like anyone who has been held captive for 8 years would, but more so he is dealing with the reality of what he has vowed to do.  It helps that the audience is unsure of whether or not he is a terrorist throughout the season.  I, like most viewers, suspected it all along, but the show does enough to leave doubt in your mind and makes Carrie just Beautiful Mindish enough to believe that maybe she's chasing ghosts and creating plots.  In this way, it is like Rubicon, where you guessing who is on who's side.           

The Characters/Actors

Damian Lewis plays Brody with just the right amount of oddity that gives viewers the correct amount of suspicion.  Lewis has an unsettling, unnaturally natural look, which plays right into who his character is.  Claire Danes is wonderful as Carrie a driven, bipolar intelligence officer who as set her sights unknowingly on the right person.  To her, her job is not a job its a calling.  In a way, she has as much motivation as a terrorist.  It is a matter of life and death to stop the next attack and she is willing to sacrifice her career, social norms, and practically everything else to do it.  When she is playing by the rules it feels like a dog that is leashed but not happy about it.  As a Firefly fan, its always good to see Inara (Morena Baccarin) in a TV show.  She plays a wife (Jessica Brody) struggling to deal with the fact that her husband (Damian Lewis), who was presumed to be dead, is now alive when she, not so secretly, had moved on in her life with his best friend.  This plot, which is secondary to the main Carrie-Brody plot, is seamlessly integrated into the story.  The best character is Saul (Mandy Patinkin).  He is the character everyone wants to be; a smart, weathered intelligence veteran who is always composed and looked upon for advice.  The only answers he doesn't have are the ones at home.    

Season Conclusion

I did not at all see it coming that Tom Walker was still alive.  I also loved that after Tom Walker's capture was botched, it was Carrie who saw him as a ruse and that there was a larger objective in Abu Nazir's mind, something which made a lot of sense to me.  This elevated the whole show in my mind, the masterstroke Abu Nazir was trying to accomplish perfectly complimented Brody's guardedness and Carrie's growing paranoia and insecurities.  It was fun to see it all come together, to the point where Brody is in the room with a bomb and his finger on the trigger.  Now, and this is definitely a spoiler, I knew that he couldn't do it.  I think.  When I was watching the show I was thinking there is no way he does this, you can't kill a main character in Season 1.  But the show dragged it along enough for my mind to wander and think, we'll maybe they are pulling Dexter with a season long protagonist/special guest star.  I think this is an example of how the show puts that little bit of drama and doubt in your mind.  It's odd but in a sense, you almost want him to pull the trigger because everything works out for the main characters.  Carrie can prove she not insane.  Brody would get his revenge.  But this doesn't happen and Brody's daughter talks him off the edge.  Carrie is utterly destroyed and Brody convinces Abu Nazir of a grander plot.  Brody survives and Carrie loses.  

Final Thoughts

It will be interesting where they take the show next season.  There is no longer a guessing game on whether Brody is with Abu Nazir or not.  He is.  There is also not going to be a threat of a bomb or attack, because Brody's plan is more sophisticated than a crude weapon.  Next season will have to be smarter in that sense.  The question of where Carrie fits in is the biggest.  Without a job and some of her memories, what will she do.  I'm sure become more obsessed with Brody is the answer further complicating her "I'm in love with him, but I suspect him of being all I'm here to protect against" feelings for him.  I'll be watching, but I'm not ready to embrace this show like Breaking Bad or Dexter through the first 4 seasons.  I'm not sure, but there is something that hasn't convinced me yet that this is a show that belongs in my top tier.  Hopefully next season will convince me.