All offseason all I heard was how bad the Bears O was, how subpar Grossman was and whatever did the bears fan see in this guy to be so sure he was a NFL QB....2 games against pretty decent Ds....551 yards passing for 5 TDs and 2 solid wins, (not to mention the best play-action fake in the NFL) you can question his ability to stay healthy and it is perfectly valid, but his ability to be an NFL QB should be clear.
according to many of the resident experts the Bears had a terrible draft, they didn't get a TE and they needed one desperately....REALLY? I made the arguement at the time that none of the guys there were any better than D.Clark and why overpay for a position you got filled...2 games in, here's how they stack up
Davis-1st RD-5 catches- 37 yards-1 TD
Fasano-2nd Rd-3 catches-39 yards
Pope-3rd RD-1 catch-9yards
Klopfenstein-3rd Rd-2 catches 34 yards
Desmond Clark-already there-10 catches-162 yards-1 TD (not to mention the other 2 TDs that the back-up has caught)
Oh but the Bears blew thier draft by not getting a TE...Instead, they got D. Hester instead of a TE they didn't need....a win-win situation
Blown out by who in the NFC? There's not a team in the NFC that we cannot beat. The AFC is another story. I'm not very confident we can survive a shootout with Indy but at the same time they lost Edge so I dunno.
Indy's defense is starting to look like the defense of old, so I don't know if it would be a shootout. If you can pressure Manning, you can beat the Colts. That hasn't changed, and likely never will.
Any further questions? It's week 2 and the two teams the Bears beat are combined 0-4. I like the Bears to get the #1 seed in the NFC and probably go to the Super Bowl but slow down man.
throwdown at the dome! the bears look VERY solid so far, but yeah they have beat some crappy teams. unlike the Purple who beat 2 preseason favs to go far in the post-season. it'll be a good game this sunday, i'm looking forward to seeinghow good the purple really are, chicago may very well be for real, but if we can hang then it's gonna be an interesting year.
The Bears have not done anything yet. They keep Grossman healthy into the playoffs they can talk to me, otherwise a good defense and a terrible offense will get you nowhere.
As far as NFC teams that can beat the Bears:
Seahawks (with their eyes closed)
Eagles
Giants
Falcons
That is 25% of the NFC that could beat them off the top of my head. Let's see how the Vikings advance, and maybe them too.
Plus you are talking playoffs, anything could happen between now and then, and history has shown that the Bears cannot absorb injuries, a few guys go out and you'll be dropping games to scrubs in no time at all.
It seems you are having some reading comprehension problems. I said there is no team in the NFC that the Bears cannot beat, I did not say that no team in the NFC could beat the Bears, HUGE difference.
As far as the Seahawks beating us with their eyes closed, are you still watching last year's tapes? The Lions defense looked incredible against Seattle and their offense almost scored 40 points on them, haven't you heard? Those are the same Lions that the Bears clubbed yesterday.
Your statement that "history has shown that the Bears cannot absorb injuries" is freakin retarded to say the least. As I recall, the Bears went 11-5 last year after losing Rex Grossman for the majority of the season, Thomas Jones for one game and a few quarters, and Mike Brown for several games. I'll go out on a limb and say that's not too shabby. You'd be hard pressed to find a team that can be as successful if they had to start their 3rd string 4th round rookie for most of the season.
Talk to me after the bears play someone....The Packers and the lions are not the true test of the Bears. After yeaterdays debacle in Phili, I would take them down a notch as to whether they could beat the bears. and if the Freak is out, it could get worse for them.
Would have to agree with the other posts, nice wins, but, they haven't played anybody yet.
The D in unquestioned, but Grossman's play action the best . . .? I think your getting ahead of yourself.
As for a shootout with the Colts, while the Chicago defense is a touch better, didn't the Colts pretty much anihilate them in Chicago a couple years ago? (Easy Galason, I'm not a Pack Fan).
Haven't played anyone yet?.....The green bay fans have told us time and again that they had the #8 D in the league last year and ony added to it, with Farve getting 340 yds and 3 TDs yesterday I can say he still can get it down the field. Yet when they played the bears they stunk at all 3 facets of the game....I'll get back to that
Detroit #1 was the new darling D....held Seattle to 9 points, showed promise on O against a known tough D in seattle, yet this week they stunk on the Offensive and defensive sides of the ball.....both of these teams showed some life against teams other than the Bears, but yet looked horrible against them.... both teams? Lets not give any credit to the common denominator (or dominator, as the case may be) should we?
Seattle with its eyes closed? if they don't look better then they have so far ( as in Detroit) they will be leaving Chicago in 2 weeks with thier eyes closed....not wanting to see the scoreboard
Indy clubbed us good a few years ago...hey, everyone was clubbing us a few years ago, add to that, that Indy was clubbing EVERYONE (cept The Pats) a few years ago
Grossman has a money play action pass, haven't seen better in years, might want to watch it a few times.....very smooth and believable.
Leroy & Phole....E. James DE Vikings....torn ACL ....gone for the season.
You'd be hard pressed to find a team that can be as successful if they had to start their 3rd string 4th round rookie for most of the season.
2004 Patriots had 44 starters........ and a Lombardi.
If you meant QB, then 2001 Patriots. 6th rnd.
-- Edited by JetBlackNinja at 17:27, 2006-09-18
Again with the reading comprehension....
Was Tom Brady a rookie? No, it was his second year in the league. HUGE difference.
Was Tom Brady the third string QB? No, he was Bledsoe's backup.
Regardless, he turned out to be a diamond in the rough, what does that prove? Those Pats teams won because of Brady, not in spite of him, which is usually the case when teams lose key starters. Tell me where your beloved Pats will be if they lose Brady this year. Will Matt Cassel get you passed the first round of the playoffs? I doubt it.
no doubt...the difference between being in a system for 2 years..minis, training camps ect
vs a 4th round rookie, with 0 snaps in training camp (they were getting Grossman and Hutchinson to play...well Grossman at least, Hutchinson couldn't play if he had 6 years to get ready) until Grossman was out and they cut Hutchinson...all of a sudden he is the starter and needs to learn an offense on the fly...that 10 game wall that rookies hit comes quicker when you have to play 2 preseason games....try learning something when exhausted, not to mention the expectations that started to be put on that kid
In defense of the pats, and believe me, I am not a pats fan at all, Matt Cassell is pretty solid from what i have watched in him. Hes no tom brady, but with maroney and dillon, he probably wouldnt have to be.
I agree Cassel looks solid, but at the same time we could be wrong. The second string QB always seems to look great coming in off the bench because teams haven't game planned for them. Once they play a game or two, we find out why they are backups. Not saying that's always the case, but it happens more often than not. I've seen alot of here in Miami and remember Fitzpatrick and Martin in St Louis? Those are just a couple of examples.
The point was, the Pats won't go far in the playoffs without Brady, he is clearly what keeps that offense going. The running game would likely stall if he was injured.
Vick?...if you need to see how to handle Vick watch a freakin replay of the Bears/Falcons game last year. Keep containment and rush up the middle, he can't beat you with his arm, and he can't handle a middle rush...2 games 232 yards of passing combined...and 175 yds rushing...LOL and they still call him a QB?
After the ****-pounding he took last year in Chicago, if they had to play in chicago in the playoffs, i think vick "strains" his hammy and stays home. But thier D is looking good....if Abraham can stay healthy...he is dealing with a chronic groin problem and it has flaired up again. Defensive injuries are hard to get past during the playoffs......that is unless you wasted your draft getting D depth....tee hee tee hee...all the way to the bank
I agree with Iowa, the Falcons have never been a concern to the Bears during the Vick era. The only teams I see as real competition for the Bears in the NFC are the Giants and Eagles. The Eagles scare me a little more though.
