It started after the Bears beat the Packers in a well-competed, albeit sloppily played game. The Bears became the last undefeated team in the NFC. They got a 1.5 game lead over the rest of the NFC North, and Jay Cutler, the most vilified, hated player in the league last year, was the winningest quarterback in the NFC in 2010.
I know this because I saw the game, with my own two eyes, sober and clear. The Bears did win that game, and I was there to see it. Thank God I did witness it, because everyone in the media, and across every swath of the footballing world (except for that area in Chicago) seems to think the Packers did. I mean, Steve Young and Trent Dilfer both said right after the game on ESPN that the Packers "dominated that game" (literally exactly what they said). Then Matt Millen said it, then the guys at Football Outsiders said it. Then the village dumbfuck of the NFL Media, aka Michael Lombardi (the man who used to run nationalfootballpost.com, as well as the man who was so dumb that the Raiders firing him was a good move, and the same man who would suck Bill Belichick dry for a ice cream cone) said that the "Packers dominated every part of that game, and cost themselves with huge mistakes." Finally, it became common knowledge that the Packers won every single aspect of that game (including the fight that ensued between Packers safety Nick Collins and a Bears fan who was elated after his teams alleged win), and that the Bears were extremely lucky. God, there was nothing more frustrating than this, almost as frustrating as when people still call Tom Brady better than Peyton Manning.
Most of the people who said the Packers were clearly the better team, other than the large reason that everyone orgasms at the sight of Aaron Rodgers (which I'll get to shortly), pointed out that the only reason the Packers lost were due to their own mistakes, dropped interceptions of Cutler, and the fact that the Packers outgained the Bears by 101 yards. All of those reasons were complete bullshit. The Packers lost becuase they didn't play as well as the Bears, and any other explanation is just false praise for a team that is quickly becoming very, very overrated.
Just because you outgain a team does not mean you outplayed them. Just because you committed clear penalties on plays that would have been interceptions, doesn't mean you deserve those incompletions. Just because your team has been anointed the next great dynasty to take over this league like Alexander the Great in Eastern Europe, does not mean you deserve to beat a team that played well. Outgaining a team means nothing. It especially means nothing when the Bears scored a nice touchdown without the ability to gain a single yard, which was the case when the Beast known as Devin Hester. Outgaining an opponent means nothing. Hell, four other teams outgained their opponent by more yards than Green Bay and lost those games. Herein lies the massive double standard.
The Broncos outgained the Colts by 150, but were labeled as a team that needed to grow up in the red zone. The Raiders outgained the Cardinals by 140, and were labeled as the same old choking Raiders after missing their field goal that could have won the game. And even like the Packers, the Raiders let up a special teams touchdown. The Giants outgained the Titans by exactly 200 yards, but were labeled a team in disarray, a team on the decline and a team wandering the lost frontier of an NFL gone bad. Hell, the Chargers outgained the Seahawks by two hundred and fifty fucking four yards, upped the Packers by giving up two special teams TDs, lost by a touchdown and were labeled the same old stiff Chargers. The Packers outgained their opposition by 100 yards (a lot less when you factor in the two pass interference penalties), and were labeled as a team still destined for a Super Bowl, but one unlucky to lose. Does anyone else see the gross double standard, or more accurately, quintuple-standard here?
The Packers are given the benefit of the doubt because people love them for some reason. Actually, here are the reasons. They play in a little cheese-manufacturing outpost in the prarie of Wisconsin. The play in a cute archaic cylinder in Lambeau. They have a good looking QB who had to, gasp, take over the job of replacing a QB who has, after leaving, gone 21-11 in two seasons, while Rodgers has gone 17-15. They have a nice defense that now features three long-haired hippy white outside linebackers (and we love white players playing historically black positions - let's take a break while I join Jim Nantz and do a dutch rudder to a picture of Wes Welker doing a tango with Jim Leohnard). They have a defense that likes to hit the QB so much they gave up 51 points in their most recent playoff game. The Giants are none of these things. The Chargers and Broncos are none of these things (especially becuase Jesus Tebow hasn't done shit yet), and good Lord the Raiders are none of these things.
Lost in the shuffle of the world's race to give the Packers a hug after (gasp, cries of horror of millions of dairy farmers everywhere) their loss, is that the Bears are back. Martz is working it. They were able to block the Packers well in the second half, and their defense is great. There is a reason why the Packers only put up 17 points. This is the one thing that the media has just basically decided did not happen. Despite the penalties, and Devin Hester, and white people, no one has any good explanation for why the Packers could only put up 17 points, with one turnover. Sure, there was a blocked field goal, but the Bears had a missed field goal as well. The reason: The Tampa Fucking Two. It is still the most effective way to limit the oppositions scoring. If you give up 60 yards a drive, but each one of those drives end up with 3 or 0 points, that means you are a great defense. The Bears are like this. Julius Peppers is a man, and he just abused Mark Tauscher into three holding penalties (about five un-called holding penalties) and two false starts. Those penalties weren't due to the Packers deciding to play the "Who can let the other team beat us the most" game. No, they were due to the Bears defense playing great. People can go on hating the Bears, hating a Tampa-2 "bend or don't break" defense, and keep on fellating the Packers on every turn, but that does not change the fact that the Bears were the better team, easily.
By the way, can Steve Young get Aaron Rodgers jock out of his mouth. He said on three different occasions after the game ended that "Aaron Rodgers played great, but got no help." Of course, when Peyton Manning had to live through years of having no help from his defense, and live through three straight years of having his team outgain their opponent but lose in the playoffs, he was called a choker (even by Young, who considers Brady the better player), but let's get back to Rodgers (who had a horrible intentional grounding penalty that stunted their final drive). Young also said on three different occasions that Rodgers is a "future hall of famer in the making." Are you fucking me? This guy has played two seasons in the league. He has not won a playoff game. He has put together three total game-winning drives. He's led just three career 4th-quarter comebacks. He's done nothing in the clutch. He just lost another game that he was supposed to win (his supposed-to-be record is about 75 and -3). He went 18-21 in the second half. That's great, but those passes went for 138 yards. That's a 7.7 yard-per-completion. 7.7 is a good yard-per-attempt, not the other way around. Giving up small gains is exactly what the Bears defense is built to do, becuase the Bears count on the fact that their opponent has to play perfectly to move the ball, and perfection is hard to sustain. Of course, for the Bears, in reality, perfection has been sustained through three weeks. For the Packers, in the media's mind, it has been sustained as well, but thankfully, reality still wins out.
