Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
RedRamage

Are the Bears for real?

Recommended Posts

Ten years ago I really wasn't that angry with Chicago... in fact, in some ways I preferred them over some other opposing teams. Lately though, I've come really dislike Chicago more and more and more. This year the Bears are right up there with my disliked teams. I'm sure a large part of it is because of the way the Lions got hosed by the refs in both Lions games (in my opinion). I'm sure part of it is just because Chicago is such a natural rival. Whatever the reason, I find myself hoping to see the Bears make a quick exit from the NFL season this year.

So the question is, are the Bears for real or can I expect an early exit? The easy answer is: Yes, the bears are for real. They are in the playoffs with two weeks to go. They're 10-4... and have a good chance to have a bye in the first week of the playoffs. They are the first NFC team to clinch their division.

But I don't know if so easy to say the Bears are a good team. Let's look at their games:

Week:

  1. : Just barely beat out the Lions (should have lost) with the Lions losing Stafford.
  2. : Beat a Cowboys team that was in disarray at the beginning of the season.
  3. : Just barely got a win at home against the Packers. First win against a team with a winning record right now.
  4. : Lost badly to the Giants. Managed only a FG.
  5. : Destroyed a bad Panthers team.
  6. : Lost to the Seahawks, a team with a losing record, at home.
  7. : Lost to the Redskins, another losing record team, at home.
  8. : -- bye --
  9. : Barely won against a bad bills team.
  10. : Solid win against the Vikings
  11. : Very solid win against the Dolphins, a team currently at .500
  12. : Good win against the Eagles, their second win against a team that currently has a winning record.
  13. : Close win against the Lions
  14. : Huge loss against the Pats... totally destroyed.
  15. : Huge win against the Vikings who were on their emergency QB.
  16. : ??? -- Jets at Home
  17. : ??? -- at Packers

So there you have it... the Bears have two "quality" wins. Only twice did they beat a team with a winning record. Perhaps you can say three if you want to include the Dolphins who are 7-7 right now.

Now of course you can say that the Bears have no control over their schedule. They've beaten most of the teams they have faced and it's not their fault that they have had to face bad teams. Further, one might say that they are part of the reason some of those teams have losing records.

But if you look at the fact that they've only beaten two teams with a winning record and when they face average-to-good teams they either lose or barely sneak out a win, well... I just don't see the Bears as a good team.

That said, this is the NFL, not the BCS. You're not judged on how you win, just if you win. And the Bears are in the playoffs... given the right luck, they could easily be in the Super Bowl again this year. I don't see them beating whoever comes out of the AFC, but as the saying goes: Any given Sunday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are some factually incorrect comments in your post, but I won't pick it apart.

The Bears' talent level does not match their record. And they certainly have some flaws. But they have an above average defense anchored by good DL and LB units, as well as above average special teams. Pretty trademark Bear team, really.

They don't jump out at anyone as a superbowl contender, but you can't really rule them out either. Particularly if they get a home game, which might be the case, and if they get favorable weather conditions against a warm-weather team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the Bears are a good NFC team. No way they match with the top teams in the AFC. But this argument could be made for the two teams in the NFC South* also. But like you said, its not the Bears' fault they got their schedule, just like its not their fault they got dealt against games with backup QB's. So, its not really fair to say they would of lost those games that had back ups and third stringers. And it was the Bears whom knocked out Stafford week 1. I don't think the refs gave the Bears that game in Detroit. They gained what? 7 yards from that call? Besides, the Lions got held to 49 yards in the second half, the refs didn't do that. But anyway, I think with that Cutler has been able to do with a lack of tool around him a bottom ranked offense should tell something of his ability. When the line got expoited (Giants, Patriots) he got pressured and concussed. Imagine if he had a decent line? Not to mention the Bears defense held its own, caused take-a-ways and has been out standing. I think the Bears can hold their own against anyone in the NFC. If they get the Superbowl and have to face an AFC team is another story....

EDIT: And I realize this is a divsional rival's board, so I'm not really counting on too many people here saying they're for real. And thats fine, people have rights to their own opinion.

Edited by whitesox901

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bears are for real as far as winning the NFC North. They will lose their first playoff game though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like the Bears, but once we get into "close win to a bad team" and "should have lost" territory, you're just looking for reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm looking for reasons... that's the whole point of the thread! :classic: :classic:

I'm specifically looking for reasons to explain why I think the Bears aren't as good as their record shows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bears are for real in terms of being a better than average team, they are not however a serious SB contender. Guess it depends what standards you are putting them against.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not think the Bears are for real.

I define a 'for real' team as one that stands a good chance to win the whole ball of wax.

How do you define "good chance"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Off the top of my head, better than 10% in my estimation.

Well, ultimately Vegas will tell us who those teams are, but I think it could just be the Patriots. Maybe the Falcons too.

In terms of the NFC, I see the Falcons above everyone. The Bears, Philly, NYG, New Orleans and Green Bay (even though they will miss the play-offs, most likely), are all in a pack. I don't think any of those teams are better than the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Bears are who we thought they were.

rkbvw9.jpg&t=1

In all honesty though, I don't think they would come out with a win if they played Atlanta, New Orleans or Philly (even though they did beat them a few weeks ago).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd say the Bears are a good NFC team. No way they match with the top teams in the AFC. But this argument could be made for the two teams in the NFC South* also. But like you said, its not the Bears' fault they got their schedule, just like its not their fault they got dealt against games with backup QB's. So, its not really fair to say they would of lost those games that had back ups and third stringers. And it was the Bears whom knocked out Stafford week 1. I don't think the refs gave the Bears that game in Detroit. They gained what? 7 yards from that call? Besides, the Lions got held to 49 yards in the second half, the refs didn't do that. But anyway, I think with that Cutler has been able to do with a lack of tool around him a bottom ranked offense should tell something of his ability. When the line got expoited (Giants, Patriots) he got pressured and concussed. Imagine if he had a decent line? Not to mention the Bears defense held its own, caused take-a-ways and has been out standing. I think the Bears can hold their own against anyone in the NFC. If they get the Superbowl and have to face an AFC team is another story....

EDIT: And I realize this is a divsional rival's board, so I'm not really counting on too many people here saying they're for real. And thats fine, people have rights to their own opinion.

For the record, Cutler does not have a lack of tool* around him. He sees one every time he looks in the mirror. Pa-rum-pum-pum.

I will stick by my prediction that the Cutler-Martz marriage will not end well. Of course I also predicted the Lions would finish ahead of the Bears this season, & that the Lions would win a Super Bowl under Matt Millen - so my track record isn't exactly stellar. :happy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I believe the bears are for real. After yesterdays win against the Jets, they proved they can beat good teams with above average defenses.

Do I think the bears will win a playoff game?

Yes.

However, Do I think they are superbowl contenders?

Possibly.

It all depends what happens in the NFC SOUTH, The falcons and the saints are two really great teams that will be for surely going into the playoffs and that division seems to get better and better.

But if the bears play the Falcons at atlanta, then it's over for the bears.

No way is anyone going to go into their house and beat them, especially in the playoffs. At home the falcons are practically unstoppable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't changed my mind on the Bears, they're good but not likely as good as their record indicates.

But I laugh at these NFL analysts like Tim Hasselbeck and others who can't buy into the Bears being a superbowl contender. Yet when asked about the Seahawks chances, "they can do some damage". And what's happened to everyone's favorite, Philadelphia Eagles? Analysts seem to be okay with annointing them as a superbowl contender, yet they aren't playing well down the stretch (outside of 7 1/2 minutes at the NYG).

In my opinion, outside of Seattle/St Louis and Tampa (depending who is in), I wouldn't be surprised to see any of the NFC teams in the play-offs make it to the superbowl. A lot of parity at the top. I'd probably give the edge to Atlanta, but the rest is a toss up to me. It could come down to injuries, who is hot, and homefield advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...