Bears or Saints?

[RichBrewer]

Looks like the Bears are going to take this one.

 

[Cheesefood]

that field is a mess. guys are a slipping on both sides. I'm pleasantly surprised how the Bears played the 1st half but that last drive by the Saints must have really given them some confidence. I've stopped screaming at the tv, hopefully the lead doesn't get any smaller to so I can remain calm.

You can't really see it on TV, but it's snowing pretty steadily here.

 

[Cheesefood]

Looks like the Bears are going to take this one.

Yep.

 

[RichBrewer]

Yep.

If the patriots make it I'll be rooting for the Bears.

 

[user 574]

Congrats Bear Fans!

 

[Dude]

Wow, gotta give Lovie (and turner) credit. They gave the gameplan to Thomas Jones and he dominated.

 

[Ize]

No dog in this fight but it was an excellent game. Time for Round 2...

Ize

 

[Cheesefood]

Bears. Sausage. Lovie.

Daaaaaaa Superbowl.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

Man, I loved that game! Go Bears!!!!

I'll tell ya, I went into this week thinking the Bears had a tiny shot at maybe eeking out a victory against the Saints, but the more I listened to The Score (WSCR AM670), the more I started to drink the kool-aid. A few points they hammered home:

1. The Saints have 6 losses. The Bears have 3. So no way, no how, can you expect the Saints to dominate. They're a 6-loss team.

2. There are FOUR, not two, 1st round draft picks in the backfield (Bush, McAllister, Jones, and Benson).

3. The Bears practiced outside, the Saints practiced inside... oh and look! It's wet, nasty, and snowing outside!!!

4. The Bears have the better D... no question. And linebackers will be the ones who are plugging the holes being made for the runningbacks.. and who's got the better LB's?

5. Over 50% of the Saints' passes go for less than 10 yards. That means the safeties are only there for mop-up duties. Short passes, again, are best defensed by a team with better LB's.

6. Prior to this game, dome teams were 0-9 in NFC Title games.


After all that, I just didn't see why people were so high on the Saints... But now, for the Superbowl, all bets are off... it's gonna be a heck of a game!!!

 

[RichBrewer]

Man, I loved that game! Go Bears!!!!

I'll tell ya, I went into this week thinking the Bears had a tiny shot at maybe eeking out a victory against the Saints, but the more I listened to The Score (WSCR AM670), the more I started to drink the kool-aid. A few points they hammered home:

1. The Saints have 6 losses. The Bears have 3. So no way, no how, can you expect the Saints to dominate. They're a 6-loss team.

2. There are FOUR, not two, 1st round draft picks in the backfield (Bush, McAllister, Jones, and Benson).

3. The Bears practiced outside, the Saints practiced inside... oh and look! It's wet, nasty, and snowing outside!!!

4. The Bears have the better D... no question. And linebackers will be the ones who are plugging the holes being made for the runningbacks.. and who's got the better LB's?

5. Over 50% of the Saints' passes go for less than 10 yards. That means the safeties are only there for mop-up duties. Short passes, again, are best defensed by a team with better LB's.

6. Prior to this game, dome teams were 0-9 in NFC Title games.


After all that, I just didn't see why people were so high on the Saints... But now, for the Superbowl, all bets are off... it's gonna be a heck of a game!!!

It's all mute. The Colts are going to win.

 

[Pumbaa]

I'm holding my hatred for the Bears aside.

You sir have been away from the great white homeland too long . . . . How much longer b4 you get out of the Air Force? You need to come home so we can get you right again

 

[Dude]

You sir have been away from the great white homeland too long . . . . How much longer b4 you get out of the Air Force? You need to come home so we can get you right again

Yeah, WTF was I thinking? GO COLTS!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

I personally was a little peaved about the whole "African-American coach" angle. It was pertinent back before there were any African-American coaches. Back then, the hiring of an African-American coach WAS a big deal. And there sort of were questions about what the coach would bring to a team in terms of outlook, relationships to players, etc. But over the years, those questions were answered. The answer was: It doesn't make a difference. The white players don't revolt at the thought of playing for a black coach, the blacks don't suddenly start running the team, neither blacks nor whites miraculously get more playing time... everything stays the same.

But I think, for some, the early coaches are/were a worthwhile milestone. I think, for some, it was something that needed to be brought out into the open and celebrated and recognized. But now... all this talk about the first African-American coach to win a Superbowl? That's like talking about the first African-American to eat at a restaurant after the end of segregation. Once the color barrier is broken, who gets there first is kind of irrelevent. The important milestone has NOTHING to do with individual accomplishment and EVERYTHING to do with the right to compete on a level playing field.

Can the average joe name a single record held by Jackie Robinson? Probably not... because his personal records didn't mean a damned thing more than anyone else's records. What mattered was the fact that he was there.



That's not intended to denigrate the success of either coach in the Superbowl, or any athlete. I'm just saying that it's kind of weird to talk about it. Getting excited about the fact that the winning coach is going to be African-American just puts us back into the knuckle-dragging race-hating past. It opens old wounds.


How do I feel about the fact that a black coach is going to win the Superbowl? Personally, I couldn't care less. But go ahead and ask me how I feel about Lovie Smith or Tony Dungy winning the Superbowl and I'll give you a different answer. I'll say this: I think they are two of the most deserving coaches in the NFL. Lovie has made some gutsy calls in personnel and they've paid off. Dungy has had a rough past few years. I'd like them both to win.

In this case, people start to talk about race and I just turn off the TV... I think it is almost as silly as talking about Bellicheck's wardrobe. I mean, really, who cares?




Sorry for the rant.

 

[olllllo]

But now... all this talk about the first African-American coach to win a Superbowl?

I agree.

Irrelevant who's the first to win the Superbowl. After all, either Smith or Dungy will be the first black coach to win the coin toss well before the outcome of the game is decided.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

It's all mute. The Colts are going to win.

The Colts are going to win? Win what? A free pair of grandma's panties? Surely you're not talking about the Superbowl. The Colts aren't going to win the Superbowl. You must think we are talking about Grandma's panties. Actually though, we're talking about the Superbowl. And it's going to be da Bears who win the Superbowl.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

To put it more succinctly...

Anybody who still believes blacks can't coach football is not going to be swayed in their opinion by a Superbowl victory. They won't even be swayed by a dozen consecutive Superbowl victories. Because their opinion has no basis in logic or reality. So, really, the African-American victory in the Superbowl means nothing... because it won't open a single set of eyes to anything new. Those who still refuse to open their eyes will still be unable to see.


So what are you doing by playing up that angle except race-bating and opening old wounds? There are STILL places where race is a major issue and concern. There are still places where such accomplishments as these ought to be celebrated. Corporate boardrooms come to mind as one such place. But on a Superbowl football field? The race card is totally irrelevent. You might as well be talking about who has the most third down conversions on night games occuring under full moons. Who the hell cares?



And Bellechick is neither a "Belle" nor a "chick". :cross:

 

[Brewer3401]

I'm from NOLA. I think we didn't realize how good Chicago was, or they would not be in a playoff game.......duh...
I am glad to see the Saints at their highest poing in 40 so years. Maybe our team is starting to gel.
Thought the start of the 3rd quarter that Chicago had lost it, but they pulled it together by the 4th.
Hey, it's only sports.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

True enough. One thing I have not been saying about the Bears, but I've been feeling ever since their mini slide in the latter half of the season, is that the Bears had the NFC Central wrapped up by midseason. What were they supposed to do? Throw their bodies at every down, risking life and limb in meaningless games?

Grossman got reamed in the press after the Packer's game for basically saying, "I didn't prepare because the game wasn't important". But, truth be told, I'd been feeling like the Bears defense has been doing that in every game since the Cardinals game (though in that one, they did have to step back up during the second half- whoops!).

It doesn't really surprise me that the Bears defense was able to step up the way it did. I wasn't certain it could, but it didn't surprise me. I'd been feeling for a while that they just simply had not been playing up to their ability.

In short, the Bears were coasting through the majority of the regular season. It is now clear that we must base our perception of the Bears defense upon the first few games of the season, not the latter games. Of course, there's the injuries and that makes a difference. The Bears don't have the potential they did at the start of the season... but they're still a lot closer to being the team that shut out the Packers than the team who lost to Miami. And I don't think anybody can argue otherwise on that point.


But even with that, my head still says Colts are the better team. I wouldn't bet on them though. What I do believe is this:

1. The Bears offense is capable of putting up 36+ points on the Colts D.
2. The Bears offense is also capable of self-destructing and putting up less than 21 points.
3. The Bears D will show up ready to play and will not give up 32 points.
4. The Colts will have a hard time killing the clock against the Bears and that could be the difference maker. I could easily envision a game, with 9 minutes left, where the Bears hold the Colts to three chipshot fieldgoals in exchange for 2 quick-strike touchdowns. The Colts just aren't going to be able to run...

 

[Dude]

True enough. One thing I have not been saying about the Bears, but I've been feeling ever since their mini slide in the latter half of the season, is that the Bears had the NFC Central wrapped up by midseason. What were they supposed to do? Throw their bodies at every down, risking life and limb in meaningless games?

Grossman got reamed in the press after the Packer's game for basically saying, "I didn't prepare because the game wasn't important". But, truth be told, I'd been feeling like the Bears defense has been doing that in every game since the Cardinals game (though in that one, they did have to step back up during the second half- whoops!).

It doesn't really surprise me that the Bears defense was able to step up the way it did. I wasn't certain it could, but it didn't surprise me. I'd been feeling for a while that they just simply had not been playing up to their ability.

In short, the Bears were coasting through the majority of the regular season. It is now clear that we must base our perception of the Bears defense upon the first few games of the season, not the latter games. Of course, there's the injuries and that makes a difference. The Bears don't have the potential they did at the start of the season... but they're still a lot closer to being the team that shut out the Packers than the team who lost to Miami. And I don't think anybody can argue otherwise on that point.


But even with that, my head still says Colts are the better team. I wouldn't bet on them though. What I do believe is this:

1. The Bears offense is capable of putting up 36+ points on the Colts D.
2. The Bears offense is also capable of self-destructing and putting up less than 21 points.
3. The Bears D will show up ready to play and will not give up 32 points.
4. The Colts will have a hard time killing the clock against the Bears and that could be the difference maker. I could easily envision a game, with 9 minutes left, where the Bears hold the Colts to three chipshot fieldgoals in exchange for 2 quick-strike touchdowns. The Colts just aren't going to be able to run...

Good analysis.I give Lovie credit, he had a great gameplan against the Saints. He kept the ball out of Grossman's hands. Did you see how many receivers Grossman flat out missed yesterday? He throws a damn pretty deep ball but everything else, well.....I think Dungy will stack the box against the Bears and let Grossman beat them. Peyton and company are such a quick strike offense that I can see a shoot-out happening. I'm chalking this game up to the level of competition of the AFC over the NFC. It doesn't matter the representative from the NFC, any AFC playoff team would beat the NFC Super Bowl representative. The Patriots manhandled the Bears. I think even non-playoff AFC teams (like Cincinnati and Denver) would have beat the NFC representative.Colts 44 Bares 20

 

[Dude]

You sir have been away from the great white homeland too long . . . . How much longer b4 you get out of the Air Force? You need to come home so we can get you right again

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

The Patriots manhandled the Bears. I think even non-playoff AFC teams (like Cincinnati and Denver) would have beat the NFC representative.Colts 44 Bares 20

Remember, at the time, that was, arguably, the least important game on the Bears' schedule. They'd already locked up the division, and being an out-of-conference game, it had no bearing on home field advantage in the conference championship. So why should they have gone balls-out? The Bears had no reason to tip their hand or go for the jugular. They kept with a very straight forward gamed plan with minimal surprises.

edit to add: and one of our talented corners (where we lack depth this year) elected to serve his suspension during this game. Sure, he could've protested his suspension and served it at a later date, but he deliberately agreed to just shut up and serve the suspension. Against the Patriots. And this was at Lovie Smith's urging!! So... what do you think the coaching staff was thinking about going into the Patriot's game? Nothing at all... except getting over their wounds and getting healthy.

The AFC is the better conference, sure.... but there's no way the Colts put up 40 on the Bears. I don't think they'll hit 32. Remember.. the Bears will be running a lot... if for no other reason than to keep the ball out of Peyton Manning's hands. That means no 40 points. No way, no how. Especially not with the Colt's poor run defense. Better team or not, the Colts just won't have enough possessions to put up that many points. Unless the Colts can get more turnovers than I think they they will...

Again, the Bears are the turnover specialists. Expect to see a 5 minute drive or two end up with a turnover. Also, expect to see the Bears make a couple 5 minute drives. There just won't be time for the Colts to score 40 points. It's wishful thinking, IMHO.

 

[Dude]

Remember, at the time, that was, arguably, the least important game on the Bears' schedule. They'd already locked up the division, and being an out-of-conference game, it had no bearing on home field advantage in the conference championship. So why should they have gone balls-out? The Bears had no reason to tip their hand or go for the jugular. They kept with a very straight forward gamed plan with minimal surprises.

The AFC is the better conference, sure.... but there's no way the Colts put up 40 on the Bears. I don't think they'll hit 32. Remember.. the Bears will be running a lot... if for no other reason than to keep the ball out of Peyton Manning's hands. That means no 40 points. No way, no how. Especially not with the Colt's poor run defense. Better team or not, the Colts just won't have enough possessions to put up that many points. Unless the Colts can get more turnovers than I think they they will...

Again, the Bears are the turnover specialists. Expect to see a 5 minute drive or two end up with a turnover. Also, expect to see the Bears make a couple 5 minute drives. There just won't be time for the Colts to score 40 points. It's wishful thinking, IMHO.

Wanna bet some beer?

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

That the Colts won't score 40? You're on!

 

[Cheesefood]

That the Colts won't score 40? You're on!

<homer>Mmmmm...Colt 45....arrgghllll....</homer>

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

But before I steal your beer, I ask you to think rationally for a moment. The Colts only scored 40 one out of two times against the Houston Texans. Is the Bears Defense comparable to the Houston Texans'?

Or that of the Eagles?

Those are the only times the Colts touched 40 points. I just think you're a little too over-enthusiastic if you think the Bears defense is on par with the likes of the Eagles and the Texans. Far be it from me to say the Bears' D is among the best ever.. I really don't believe it is... but I think it's better than average for the NFL this year...

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

Oh.. and, by the way, the Bears scored 40 points in a game more often than the Colts did this year. Sure, that's all about beating up on the weaklings. I know that, but each team had a fair number of weaklings on their schedule. At the top, the AFC is stronger. At the bottom, I don't think there's much difference at all. Packers versus the Texans? You can't tell me the AFC is better on the bottom of the divisions.

The Bears' average is just a hair under 26 points a game. You really think the Colts offense is that much ABOVE average that they'll hold the Bears to 26? I think they'll be lucky to hold the Bears to 30.


And then, on top of all this, factor in the Bears' recently-discovered running attack. Running the ball eats up clock and leads to lower-scoring games. Another reason the Colts won't hit 40 pionts.

 

[Sir Humpsalot]

Toot's predictions (subject to change upon further consideration):

1. The Bears will be within 10 of the Colts- one way or the other.

2. The Bears might (I said might) score 40. The Colts certainly will not.

3. The Bears will out-rush the Colts

4. The Colts will commit more turnovers than the Bears.

5. I'm going out on a limb here.... one of the teams won't even score 30 points.


I'm still not ready to predict a final score or a winner though. Hesitantly, I say, the final will be... 34-27.

But at this time I decline to predict the winner.

 

[Rhoobarb]

Should be a good game. Bears by 5 points. Peyton "cut's that meat", but still can't pull off the big one. 'Nuff said.

 

[the_bird]

I think Peyton will be fine. Not to disrespect the Bears, but the Pats were the team he needed to beat when it counted. I'll be rooting for the Bears, but I just don't see it happening for them. As good as the Bears D has been for most of the year, the Colts' offense is just too balanced. They can throw to Harrison and Wayne, they can use the tight ends, they can run well enough to keep everyone honest. The game is indoors, which you have to figure is a huge advantage for them (last weekend's game might have been different were it in Foxboro).

Can Grossman make enough plays? That'll be the key; I'll be surprised if the Colts don't put up close to thirty points.

 

[olllllo]

The game is indoors, which you have to figure is a huge advantage for them (last weekend's game might have been different were it in Foxboro).

Indoors?

www.stadiumsofnfl.com/afc/DolphinsStadium.htm