Peter King's MMQB

[CPT]

Okay, I'm trying not to let this bug me, but it bugs me.  Look through this and tell me if you know for sure whether or not the Bears even played on Sunday.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/09/10/mmqb.week1/index.html

Now, I'm not saying that we know everything about the Bears from their defeat of a bad opponent, but it seems bizarre to me that King basically says we know nothing about the Bears, but concludes from the Ravens defeat of Tampa Bay (featuring the comic stylings of Chris Simms) that the Ravens are as good as they were in 2000 and will probably kill us all and eat our bones.  The Bears beat Brett Favre, probably the greatest QB ever on Sunday, shutting him out for the first time ever as a Packer.  Didn't Peter get the memo that Brett Favre is the bestest quarterback in league history?  Of course he did, because he wrote that fucking memo.

[tjbrown]

Okay, I'm trying not to let this bug me, but it bugs me. Look through this and tell me if you know for sure whether or not the Bears even played on Sunday.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/09/10/mmqb.week1/index.html

Now, I'm not saying that we know everything about the Bears from their defeat of a bad opponent, but it seems bizarre to me that King basically says we know nothing about the Bears, but concludes from the Ravens defeat of Tampa Bay (featuring the comic stylings of Chris Simms) that the Ravens are as good as they were in 2000 and will probably kill us all and eat our bones. The Bears beat Brett Favre, probably the greatest QB ever on Sunday, shutting him out for the first time ever as a Packer. Didn't Peter get the memo that Brett Favre is the bestest quarterback in league history? Of course he did, because he wrote that f@#$ing memo.

The funny thing is, and I know I'll get torched for saying it, but... The Packers didn't look all that bad on offense. Their defense will be challenged all year, but with Driver, Green, Bubba Franks, Robert Ferguson and Favre, they shouldn't be as bad as they were last year.

[JS]

Okay, I'm trying not to let this bug me, but it bugs me.  Look through this and tell me if you know for sure whether or not the Bears even played on Sunday.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/09/10/mmqb.week1/index.html

Now, I'm not saying that we know everything about the Bears from their defeat of a bad opponent, but it seems bizarre to me that King basically says we know nothing about the Bears, but concludes from the Ravens defeat of Tampa Bay (featuring the comic stylings of Chris Simms) that the Ravens are as good as they were in 2000 and will probably kill us all and eat our bones.  The Bears beat Brett Favre, probably the greatest QB ever on Sunday, shutting him out for the first time ever as a Packer.  Didn't Peter get the memo that Brett Favre is the bestest quarterback in league history?  Of course he did, because he wrote that f@#$ing memo.

That's because Chris Simms is Peter King's next Brett Favre.

[forkserker]

Okay, I'm trying not to let this bug me, but it bugs me.  Look through this and tell me if you know for sure whether or not the Bears even played on Sunday.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/writers/peter_king/09/10/mmqb.week1/index.html

Now, I'm not saying that we know everything about the Bears from their defeat of a bad opponent, but it seems bizarre to me that King basically says we know nothing about the Bears, but concludes from the Ravens defeat of Tampa Bay (featuring the comic stylings of Chris Simms) that the Ravens are as good as they were in 2000 and will probably kill us all and eat our bones.  The Bears beat Brett Favre, probably the greatest QB ever on Sunday, shutting him out for the first time ever as a Packer.  Didn't Peter get the memo that Brett Favre is the bestest quarterback in league history?  Of course he did, because he wrote that f@#$ing memo.

That's because Chris Simms is Peter King's next Brett Favre.

Chris Simms isn't even Phil Simms' next Brett Favre.

[Indolent Reader]

Chris Simms isn't even Molly Simms' next Brett Favre.

[thehawk]

My guess is that he didn't even watch St. Farve and the Bears play, as he was preparing for Football Night In America In a Studio In New York where Dick Ebersol Flew Me In the Company Jet.  His comments were mostly about the early games.

One of the dumbest of which was the following:

• Seattle struggled on the offensive line. No Steve Hutchinson. We knew that. The all-pro guard went to Minnesota in free agency. But when Walter Jones went out for a few series with a sprained ankle in Detroit, the left side of the offensive line was Tom Ashworth at tackle and Pork Chop Womack at guard. That was ugly. So was the time of the game, Matt Hasselbeck told me. "First game of the year, East Coast game, 5 a.m. wake-up calls for us, our time, and not a Starbucks in sight,'' he said. "Not to make excuses, but these Eastern road games are tough for a West Coast team.''

I know that global warming may cause the oceans to rise, but I'm pretty sure the Atlantic is not lapping against Detroit yet, nor did the time zone change.  But Hasselbeck did throw in the gratuitous Starbucks reference, give credit for him knowing his audience.

Still the Bears do best when they are unheralded,  so if Peter King cares to ignore them to a 19-0 seasons, I can live with that.

[The Slak]

So who is more infuriating to read? Simmons or King? Probably King because Simmons only dedicates 80% of his articles of making assinine predictions like the Packers will cover the spread vs. the Bears because he just visited Lambeau...uh, what? I hope he wasn't actually gambling with those picks.

I gotta say, Simmons makes my blood boil sometimes. Not to mention a few weeks ago in his thumbs up/thumbs down column he told everyone to read David Foster Wallace, further sending me over the edge. That's MY author you prick. Lucky most of his audience couldn't make it through 10 pages of Wallace.

[TG]

Hasselbeck's excuse is stupid, but Detroit is on Eastern time.

[thehawk]

Hasselbeck's excuse is stupid, but Detroit is on Eastern time.

Clearly, I need to drink more. 

[Indolent Reader]

So who is more infuriating to read? Simmons or King? Probably King because Simmons only dedicates 80% of his articles of making assinine predictions like the Packers will cover the spread vs. the Bears because he just visited Lambeau...uh, what? I hope he wasn't actually gambling with those picks.

I gotta say, Simmons makes my blood boil sometimes. Not to mention a few weeks ago in his thumbs up/thumbs down column he told everyone to read David Foster Wallace, further sending me over the edge. That's MY author you prick. Lucky most of his audience couldn't make it through 10 pages of Wallace.

Last year, Simmons picked the Bears as his surprise team.  He usually mentions it every other paragraph of so, and at least once every time he discusses the Bears.  He's the sole reason why the Patriots are becoming my most despised AFC team.

[JS]

So who is more infuriating to read? Simmons or King? Probably King because Simmons only dedicates 80% of his articles of making assinine predictions like the Packers will cover the spread vs. the Bears because he just visited Lambeau...uh, what? I hope he wasn't actually gambling with those picks.

I gotta say, Simmons makes my blood boil sometimes. Not to mention a few weeks ago in his thumbs up/thumbs down column he told everyone to read David Foster Wallace, further sending me over the edge. That's MY author you prick. Lucky most of his audience couldn't make it through 10 pages of Wallace.

Then Simmons writes articles wondering why he generally doesn't have success picking games.

[The Slak]

So who is more infuriating to read? Simmons or King? Probably King because Simmons only dedicates 80% of his articles of making assinine predictions like the Packers will cover the spread vs. the Bears because he just visited Lambeau...uh, what? I hope he wasn't actually gambling with those picks.

I gotta say, Simmons makes my blood boil sometimes. Not to mention a few weeks ago in his thumbs up/thumbs down column he told everyone to read David Foster Wallace, further sending me over the edge. That's MY author you prick. Lucky most of his audience couldn't make it through 10 pages of Wallace.

Last year, Simmons picked the Bears as his surprise team.  He usually mentions it every other paragraph of so, and at least once every time he discusses the Bears.  He's the sole reason why the Patriots are becoming my most despised AFC team.

Yeah so now he's riding the Rams, and it was evident in his first week's picks he's going to keep harping on it. Not only do I hate the Rams, and hated them before I read this, now I hate them even more. And even more still that they actually fucking won.

Also, his reasons for picking KC to cover vs. the Bengals was because teams always struggle when they have legal issues with a bunch of their players. Great, that's logical. Forget that the Chiefs blow and the Bengals are loaded.

Of course, I'm saying all this in hindsight. Maybe I should write an article every week on Tuesday ripping Simmons' picks that turned out wrong.

[JS]

So who is more infuriating to read? Simmons or King? Probably King because Simmons only dedicates 80% of his articles of making assinine predictions like the Packers will cover the spread vs. the Bears because he just visited Lambeau...uh, what? I hope he wasn't actually gambling with those picks.

I gotta say, Simmons makes my blood boil sometimes. Not to mention a few weeks ago in his thumbs up/thumbs down column he told everyone to read David Foster Wallace, further sending me over the edge. That's MY author you prick. Lucky most of his audience couldn't make it through 10 pages of Wallace.

Last year, Simmons picked the Bears as his surprise team.  He usually mentions it every other paragraph of so, and at least once every time he discusses the Bears.  He's the sole reason why the Patriots are becoming my most despised AFC team.

Yeah so now he's riding the Rams, and it was evident in his first week's picks he's going to keep harping on it. Not only do I hate the Rams, and hated them before I read this, now I hate them even more. And even more still that they actually f@#$ing won.

Also, his reasons for picking KC to cover vs. the Bengals was because teams always struggle when they have legal issues with a bunch of their players. Great, that's logical. Forget that the Chiefs blow and the Bengals are loaded.

Of course, I'm saying all this in hindsight. Maybe I should write an article every week on Tuesday ripping Simmons' picks that turned out wrong.

I'm all for this.

[Huey]

It's not that I'm dyslexic, but seeing the "Q" in there threw me off, and in my mind's eye, I reversed it with the "B" and thought this was a thread about Peter King's "Monday Morning Barbecue" (MMBQ) which, were it true, would be one of the longest articles ever written.

Oh, and Peter King's a douche.

[CPT]

It's not that I'm dyslexic, but seeing the "Q" in there threw me off, and in my mind's eye, I reversed it with the "B" and thought this was a thread about Peter King's "Monday Morning Barbecue" (MMBQ) which, were it true, would be one of the longest articles ever written.

Oh, and Peter King's a douche.

I believe that it's Peter King's Monday Morning BBBQ.

I'd love to read a Slaky reaction to Simmons picks.  Or to just about anything he writes.