Bears...good or just lucky? (1 Viewer)

[MikeAlletto]

Well they almost lost to Detroit today to have Detroit miss a field goal at the end that would have tied up the game. So are the bears this year just really lucky or are they actually good? I can't figure it out. They've had a bunch of wins this season that have been pure luck. Much more than I've seen in a long time. I LOVE that they are winning and are 9-2! Thats awesome, but I'm worried about the playoffs. Anyways, go Bears!

 

[Jeff_A]

Bears...good or just lucky?

Both.

 

[Mark Tomlin]

Luck is winning the lottery. In football (and sports in general), luck really doesn't play a factor. Hanson missing the field-goal today was not luck (good or bad, depending on if you are a Lion fan or Bear fan) but could have been due to a bad snap, bad placement or bad mechanics. If the ball is going through the uprights and then a bird flying by knocks it off track, that's luck. Early in the year when Mike Brown returned those two picks for TD's and the Bears special teams put the Bears in a position to win games there was not luck involved but excellent coaching and football instincts by the Bear players. Brown was in a position to make those INT's and return them for TD's because he is a intelligent player playing in a system implemented by the coaches that put him in the position to make those plays. I hate to admit it (I'm a Packer fan) but the Bears are the real deal. A very fun team to watch with their aggressiveness on defense.

 

[Bruce Hedtke]

The Bears are doing well. It's no mystery that if you hang around in a game, that a few lucky bounces or breaks can win you a ball game. But, it takes good playing to stay in games. So, they are playing well at times and getting lucky bounces. A hard combination to beat. But, they better watch out. History states that lucky bounces can quickly turn against you if you need them to win. Are they good enough to win without alot of luck? That hasn't been proven yet.

Prediction on next weeks tilt at Green Bay:

Green Bay 22 Chicago 14

Bruce

 

[Sean Conklin]

I actually see Chicago beating Green Bay next week!

 

[Philip_G]

what? the bears WINNING a game?
I didn't think they knew how it had been so long

 

[John Johnson]

Aw, Hell, neither being good nor lucky had anything to do with the Bears winning that game. It had everything to do with the Lions' ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. 0-16!!! Yeah, I love living in Detroit...

Luckily moving to St. Louis right around playoff time - better watch out cuz I'm leaping onto the Rams bandwagon!

 

[Brian Perry]

Detroit has some talent, but is just a stupid team. Their punt returner obviously hasn't been told that you don't return or fair catch a punt within your own 10 yard line. Add in a bunch of dumb penalties, and you end up with an 0-11 team.

 

[Dean DeMass]

The Bears are last years New York Giants. The Giants had a 5th place schedule last year and were able to get embarrased in the Super Bowl. The Giants get a 1st place schedule this year and they have the same team as last year, but they suck. Why? Because a team with an average offense, a good defense, and a 5th place schedule can go a long way. Lets put it this way, the Bears could only muster up 2 touchdowns against the Lions and the Vikings. The Bears are good, but after seeing their performance in the last two weeks, they will not make it past their 1st game in the playoffs.
Next year the Bears will come back down to earth when they don't have a 5th place schedule. To show you how dillusional Bear fans are, I actually had a couple tell me that they run the same offense as the Rams. :rolleyes
BTW, Packers win next week by 10.
-Dean-

 

[Scott Merryfield]

The Bears have a very good defense, but they are also extremely fortunate. Jason Hanson is one of the most consistent kickers in the NFL, and he missed 3 field goals (the first two very badly). When you add the two overtime games won on interceptions and one other wild comeback, the Bears could easily be 5-6 had the breaks gone the other way. But, that's football.

Detroit has some talent, but is just a stupid team. Their punt returner obviously hasn't been told that you don't return or fair catch a punt within your own 10 yard line. Add in a bunch of dumb penalties, and you end up with an 0-11 team.

There is very little talent on the Detroit team, especially with all the injuries. The punt returner (Terry Fair) was only fielding punts because the regular returner (Desmond Howard) is hurt. As for the dumb penalties, that's normal Lions football. We've been watching them beat themselves for the past 40 years.

As for talent, they only have 3 decent starters on offense (Morton, Stewart and Backus) and a few on defense (Porcher, Rogers, Claiborne and maybe Luther Ellis). This is a very bad football team.

 

[John Besse]

The Bears are the most over rated team in the NFL this season. Or wait, is it San Francisco?
Anyways, neither team have played anyone worth while. Well, that's not true either. The Bears played Green Bay and lost. And the 49ers played St. Louis and lost. However, the 49ers did manage to pull off a victory against New Orleans by one point. I guess that's the 49er's claim to fame this season.
Neither team has had a challenging schedule this season. A whole mess of the Bears wins have came from a last second play to win the game. Two of their wins came from Overtime, and most football fans agree that the NFL overtime rules are lame. San Fran has 4 OT wins also.
The Bears are just lucky this season. I dont give them half the credit everyone else does. I'm glad to see them doing well, and I'd love to see them in the Super Bowl. Miami, St. Louis and Oakland... There are the good teams this season!!! My Super Bowl pick. Raiders and Saints still. The Saints need to get their sh*t together so they can win the Wild card and beat the Rams like the usually do and make it to the Super Bowl. However, I'd love to see Miami and Chicago in the Bowl, but that will never happen :frowning:

 

[Samuel Des]

The Saints need to get their sh*t together so they can win the Wild card and beat the Rams like the usually do and make it to the Super Bowl.

Not to be confrontational, but this isn't a valid point. There is a chasm between potential and results. You can be 19-0 in talent, but still record an 0-16 mark.

Ask the 94 Steelers about the AFC Championship game.

Ask the 92 Oilers about the AFC Wildcard game.

Ask the 90 Bills about SB 25.

Ask the 00 Rams about the NFC Wildcard game.

Ask the 63 Packers about the final regular season game against the Bears -- a loss that eliminated them from the championship game (Bears over Giants 14 to 10, at Chicago).

Ask the 72 Dolphins about their opponent winning percentage (0.396! Lowest among all Super Bowl champions! Who had the second easiest schedule of all Super Bowl winners? The 74 Dolphins.)

There have been a lot of teams loaded with potential who lose to lesser teams. And there has been at least one team that has won it all against very weak competition.

 

[Mike Broadman]

Let's put this into perspective: all of these teams are professional football teams, the best players in the world. To say that a team has a weak schedule or hasn't played anyone worthwhile is a bit silly. All these teams are great. They just may look weak when playing against an even better team. But that's sports: the better team wins.

As a Giants fan, I was royally pissed when everyone complained that they didn't "deserve" to get into the Superbowl, or that they got lucky. I'm sorry, but if you beat all the other teams, you are the best. They, in turn, were defeated by an even stronger team: the Ravens. Therefore, they lost. What's the problem?

Remember, the Superbowl isn't about having the two best teams in the league play against each other. It's about having the best team in each conference play each other. Last year, the Giants were the best team in the NFC. Whay? Because they won the NFC championship, fair and square. Bitching and moaning doesn't change that fact that they won.

So, even though I have a traditionally rivalvrous anti-Bears sentiment, I have to give them their deserved props: They are 9-2, and have earned it. Luck has little, if anything, to do with it. I for one don't believe in some mystical forces of Fate, or, contrary to what the players may think, Jesus Christ, sabotaging athletic competitions to satisfy their desires. Even if they get a "good bounce" or a bad referee call in their favor, it means nothing if they don't know how to capitalise on it and put themselves in a position to take advantage of it.

This same school of thought applies to the situation of a close game where the last play will determine the outcome, or the receiver drops the ball, losing the game. So now everyone will yell at the receiver for losing the game. Well, what about the other 59.8 minutes of play? The team was behind before the guy dropped the ball. He is but one person on the whole team responsible for losing.

Simply put: teams that win more are better.

 

[AdrianJ]

the Bears could only muster up 2 touchdowns against the Lions and the Vikings.

You have to realize that they did play these two games without their best running back--Anthony Thomas. James Allen is never going to be a quality starting back. The Bears are much better with Thomas in the lineup.

 

[Denward]

Branch Rickey: "Luck is the residue of preparation."

Well prepared teams/people/companies are more often in better position to take advantage of unpredictable events.

 

[Dean DeMass]

You have to realize that they did play these two games without their best running back--Anthony Thomas. James Allen is never going to be a quality starting back. The Bears are much better with Thomas in the lineup.

Here are James Allen's numbers this week (vs. Lions).
25 carries, 93 yards, 3.7 average
Week 11 (@Minn.)
27 carries, 107 yards, 4.0 average
A-Trains numbers in his last two games
Week 10 (@ Tampa Bay)
23 carries, 58 yards, 2.5 average
Week 9 (vs. Green Bay)
22 carries, 45 yards, 2.0 average
You were saying?
I like A-train and I hope he does well (have him in Fantasy Football), but until the Bears learn how to throw the ball against weak defenses, they will not make it to a Super Bowl with their rushing offense and good (not great) defense.
BTW, I can't believe I wasted my 1700th post on the Bears.
-Dean-

 

[Scott Merryfield]

Dean,

Comparing Allen's rushing output against Detroit and Minnesota to A-Train's yardage against Green Bay and Tampa Bay doesn't really help your argument. The Viking's and Lion's defenses are nowhere near as good as the Pac's or Buc's defenses.

That being said, it would not be surprising to see Anthony Thomas slow down. Many NFL rookie backs "hit the wall" later in the season, since they are not used to the longer season (including more practices, minicamps, etc.).

 

[Dean DeMass]

Scott,
I will then say again, The Bears could only muster up one touchdown against Minnesota and one against Detroit, yet you say that their defenses are weaker than the Bucs and Pack.
I will also mention that the Bears failed to even get in the end-zone against Green Bay and they played in Chicago. However, they were able to put up three TD's against the Bucs in Tampa. The Bears show no steady flow of offensive production.
What does all this rambling mean? The Bears are overrated and they will not win their division, that honor belongs to the Pack!
BTW, impressive come-from-behind win last night orchestarted by the best QB in football. I had a feeling the Pack would get caught looking ahead to Sunday's match-up and it showed in the 1st half. But they came alive in the 2nd and Favre showed he has a legit shot at being the leage MVP again.
-Dean-

 

[Samuel Des]

they came alive in the 2nd and Favre showed he has a legit shot at being the leage MVP again.

You're probably right. Off the top of my head, I can't think of another player as valuable to his team as Fav-er. er... Farve... er... Fava... uh Favre Bean?
I'm going to be checking out the numbers on the Pack shortly. Any predictions?

 

[AdrianJ]

Dean,

I forgot to mention that the Bears have also lost their number 1 receiver in Marcus Robinson. How well do you think the Pack would do without Ahman Green and their number 1 receiver, whoever that may be!! :BG: