What really is being "blob" mean?

[TheWinman]

We have a poster on here who calls the Bears a blob team. What does it really mean?

Sent from my RCT6703W13 using Tapatalk

 

[HeHateMe]

We have a poster on here who calls the Bears a blob team. What does it really mean?

Sent from my RCT6703W13 using Tapatalk

Are you ****ing dumb?

 

[bearmick]

If you read the thread I said that in, you would have seen that I explained exactly what it is.

There are always about 6 to 8 good teams, 6 to 8 tomato cans, and the other half of the league is an indistinguishable blob a couple of games within .500 where the order can vary week to week. The Bears are a blob team until they separate themselves from the blob teams by beating good teams.

 

[bamainatlanta]

It's another take on "meh" or "blah"
We should be familiar with it, since it is mediocrity. Which the Bears haven't even been mediocre since 2013.
If you couldn't figure that out, I'm not sure that I can help you.

 

[iueyedoc]

Since it is a CCS poster that stated it, here is a link to your answer:

PM that fucking member and stop making useless page cluttering threads

 

[Rise]

Yeah a blob team has a +81 point differential...

Just don’t even bother, some people just always spin the negative because they care more about their status as a poster than the team they root for.

In sports if you take the negative side of the coin you will be right almost all of the time, because let’s face it success in sports is not a 50/50 flip. The odds are decidedly on the side of disappointment year after year.

 

[bearmick]

Yeah a blob team has a +81 point differential...

In 15 years of posting on CBMB/CCS, I've literally never seen anyone mention point differential until the year that the Bears' one flatters their results. Now it's suddenly the benchmark lol.

Washington are also a 5-3 team in first place (who actually have a win against a team with a winning record). Does it offend you that I consider them a blob team too?

 

[Aesopian]

Thread starter is an idiot.

 

[Rise]

What really is being "blob" mean?

In 15 years of posting on CBMB/CCS, I've literally never seen anyone mention point differential until the year that the Bears' one flatters their results. Now it's suddenly the benchmark lol.

Washington are also a 5-3 team in first place (who actually have a win against a team with a winning record). Does it offend you that I consider them a blob team too?

You don’t offend me, I laugh at how much you post on here honestly. I assume you’re just an old man who has seen a lot of bad Bears football and has to much time on his hands. You have probably forgotten more football than I know, for that I do respect you.

Washington is 5-3 but it’s because they have a smart team led by a veteran qb who knows how to win. They don’t have near the talent of this Bears team.

If you don’t think point differential is an important stat I don’t know what to say to you. It’s not a benchmark but it does have predictability data to back up its importance. Bottom line though, and the point of my post is that odds are you will be proven “right” because as I said, the odds of negativity prevailing in sports is almost a certainty.

Let me ask you this. What do you need to see this year to feel good about where our Bears are heading? What needs to happen to give you some positivity in your posts?

 

[Novoitus]

You don’t offend me, I laugh at how much you post on here honestly. I assume you’re just an old man who has seen a lot of bad Bears football and has to much time on his hands. You have probably forgotten more football than I know, for that I do respect you.

Washington is 5-3 but it’s because they have a smart team led by a veteran qb who knows how to win. They don’t have near the talent of this Bears team.

If you don’t think point differential is an important stat I don’t know what to say to you. It’s not a benchmark but it does have predictability data to back up its importance. Bottom line though, and the point of my post is that odds are you will be proven “right” because as I said, the odds of negativity prevailing in sports is almost a certainty.

Let me ask you this. What do you need to see this year to feel good about where our Bears are heading? What needs to happen to give you some positivity in your posts?

I think it’s pretty clear - beat teams with winning records.

 

[Rise]

What really is being "blob" mean?

I think it’s pretty clear - beat teams with winning records.

I think it’s pretty clear, the bar keeps getting raised with a hyper focus on whatever is negative. I think the Bears have surpassed preseason expectations so far this season myself.

They can only play the games in front of them. They did crush the first place Bucs who did have a winning record. The other two games went right down to the last play so it isn’t like they can’t compete against good teams.

They have to get better at situational football in order to close out the close games. That’s fairly common with young up and coming teams.

I am still trying to understand why anyone would feel down about the Bears at this point. If you were expecting 8-0 and a Super Bowl before this season started I guess I get it. But I’d just say that was foolish and wishful thinking.

 

[bearmick]

Let me ask you this. What do you need to see this year to feel good about where our Bears are heading? What needs to happen to give you some positivity in your posts?

I'm not as negative as you think. I speak what I consider to be honest and objective opinion based on the facts. Yes my tone (which is different from content) is more towards the negative on this board than it is in real life, and that's a counterweight to the homerism on here, which is off the charts and annoys me. There are some posters who keep it rational and apply the same honest standards to the Bears as to other teams, but many, probably most, do not.

Btw, I'm not an old man, but I do take that as a compliment in this context.

As to what would make me view the Bears as a legit playoff caliber team instead of a blob team? Beat good teams. Get two out of the four Min/LAR/Min/GB games. So far they're 0-1 against legit playoff teams, 1-2 against blob teams and 4-0 against crap teams. That's the results of a blob team.

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Thread starter is an idiot.

 

[bearmick]

I think it’s pretty clear, the bar keeps getting raised with a hyper focus on whatever is negative. I think the Bears have surpassed preseason expectations so far this season myself.

They can only play the games in front of them. They did crush the first place Bucs who did have a winning record. The other two games went right down to the last play so it isn’t like they can’t compete against good teams.

They have to get better at situational football in order to close out the close games. That’s fairly common with young up and coming teams.

I am still trying to understand why anyone would feel down about the Bears at this point. If you were expecting 8-0 and a Super Bowl before this season started I guess I get it. But I’d just say that was foolish and wishful thinking.

The Bucs have the worst defense in football. They're awful. They got a couple of early wins because Fitzpatrick had his moment of magic he does every few years, but they're going to end up a 5-11 team.

 

[bamainatlanta]

In 15 years of posting on CBMB/CCS, I've literally never seen anyone mention point differential until the year that the Bears' one flatters their results. Now it's suddenly the benchmark lol.

Washington are also a 5-3 team in first place (who actually have a win against a team with a winning record). Does it offend you that I consider them a blob team too?

It was talked about a lot in 2012 when the Bears had the best point Differential for most of the season. Also, some posters here discuss it in the off-season (not much though), because Vegas likes to use it as an indicator(part of the formula) for the next season's win-loss record. Every Barnwell article uses it as well.

 

[bearmick]

It was talked about a lot in 2012 when the Bears had the best point Differential for most of the season. Also, some posters here discuss it in the off-season (not much though), because Vegas likes to use it as an indicator(part of the formula) for the next season's win-loss record. Every Barnwell article uses it as well.

Fair enough, I really don't pay attention to gambling odds and don't know what Barnwell is, I'm just saying it's really not something that's taken as a big deal generally but now it's mentioned in every thread because the Bears happen to have a good one.

Years ago when we used to squeak out close wins with special teams TDs, it was all "stats and margins don't matter, good teams find ways to win close games, period". Now that they have the type of team that's built the other way, all we hear about about is statistical rankings and point differentials, and ignoring the fact that they've failed to beat a good team, have lost the close ones against blob teams, and have bumslayed the tomato cans into stat euphoria.

As I said above, posters on this board simply don't apply the same logical standards to the Bears as they would to other teams. It's a homer fest around here and dissent is not tolerated.

 

[Black Rainbow]

I think it’s pretty clear, the bar keeps getting raised with a hyper focus on whatever is negative. I think the Bears have surpassed preseason expectations so far this season myself.

They can only play the games in front of them. They did crush the first place Bucs who did have a winning record. The other two games went right down to the last play so it isn’t like they can’t compete against good teams.

They have to get better at situational football in order to close out the close games. That’s fairly common with young up and coming teams.

I am still trying to understand why anyone would feel down about the Bears at this point. If you were expecting 8-0 and a Super Bowl before this season started I guess I get it. But I’d just say that was foolish and wishful thinking.

I agree with you about the bar being constantly raised. Believe it or not, when I posted on another forum I was accused of "being a sunshine fan" because I defended Lovie and Cutler and others until their last few seasons respectively. One thing I noticed back then, and I don't want to do it myself, is pessimists can always redraw the line in the sand and win any argument because "the Bears didn't win the Super Bowl."

I'll try to keep myself grounded. All I really wanted was an 8-8 team this year. That was my lowest expectation. But keep in mind, sometimes posters are very hyper-sensitive about any Trubisky critiques and fly off the deep end. There's a difference between team expectations and player expectations, and sometimes posters who are complaining about negativity are lumping to two together when labeling a fan as "pessimistic."

 

[iueyedoc]

I think it’s pretty clear - beat teams with winning records.

The Bears could reach 10-6 and make the playoffs with never having beat a winning team. What then?

 

[bamainatlanta]

Fair enough, I really don't pay attention to gambling odds and don't know what Barnwell is, I'm just saying it's really not something that's taken as a big deal generally but now it's mentioned in every thread because the Bears happen to have a good one.

Years ago when we used to squeak out close wins with special teams TDs, it was all "stats and margins don't matter, good teams find ways to win close games, period". Now that they have the type of team that's built the other way, all we hear about about is statistical rankings and point differentials, and ignoring the fact that they've failed to beat a good team, have lost the close ones against blob teams, and have bumslayed the tomato cans into stat euphoria.

As I said above, posters on this board simply don't apply the same logical standards to the Bears as they would to other teams. It's a homer fest around here and dissent is not tolerated.

Basically, its a good stat. A team that wins a bunch of close games one year, is bound to regress and lose those close games the next year and vice versa(not always though). 2016 Miami was one of those teams--they we're actually outscored that year but made the playoffs. 2017 they regressed(although Cutler was the main reason).

 

[Chief Walking Stick]