So... where do the Bears go from here?

[QuikSand]

The Bears are 5-0, and you'd have to be including some carryover impressions from previous years to conclude anything but the Bears are playing the best of anyone in the NFL right now.

Plenty of football left to play, though. Here, post your predictions on what you think the Bears season will look like, when it's all said and done.

- - - - -

Regular season record:
NFC Playoff seeding:
Total offense rank:
Total defense rank:
How far do they go in the playoffs:

Other comments:

[Eaglesfan27]

Assuming no major injuries:


Regular Season Record: 14-2 (I think the Patriots might beat them as well as one other game where the Bears are just flat.)

NFC Playoff Seeding: #1

Total Offense Rank: 10th

Total Defense Rank: 1st

How Far they go in the playoffs: My heart wants to say the Eagles beat them in the NFC Championship Game. However, I think they go to the Superbowl and win it.

[st.cronin]

Regular Season Record: 13-3

NFC Playoff Seed: 1

Total Offense Rank: 7

Total Defense Rank: 1

How far they go in the playoffs: They will lose in the Super Bowl, 23-17.

[k0ruptr]

Regular Season Record: 5-11

that is all.

[LionsFan10]

Regular season record: 13-3 (lose outright to the Patriots, and maybe drop a game or two after the division, and possibly home field advantage is locked up due to resting starters.)
NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 9th or 10th(??)
Total defense rank: 1
How far do they go in the playoffs: NFC championship game.

Other comments: The Bears are good this year, but I don't see them making it to, or winning the Super Bowl. A lot of them still lack any real play-off experience (unless you count the Caronlina annihilation last year )

I really don't think the Bears' offensive production will hold up for the next 11 weeks. Although it probably won't take much scoring to win ball games when your defense allows less than 10 ppg. The NFC North is a terrible division, and two games each against teams like the Lions is only going to help their record look even better. I don't think this is "the year" for the Bears, but I do believe they're definitely on their way.

[st.cronin]

Originally Posted by k0ruptr

Regular Season Record: 5-11

that is all.

I admire your optimism!

[timmynausea]

Regular season record: 12-4
NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 6th
Total defense rank: 1st
How far do they go in the playoffs: Super Bowl

[Coffee Warlord]

Regular season record: 16-0
NFC Playoff seeding: #1
Total offense rank: #6
Total defense rank: #1
How far do they go in the playoffs: Super Bowl

This is the year someone shuts up the 'Fins.

[dervack]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Regular season record: 16-0
NFC Playoff seeding: #1
Total offense rank: #6
Total defense rank: #1
How far do they go in the playoffs: Super Bowl

This is the year someone shuts up the 'Fins.

Which would be something, since the 'Fins are the team that ruined the Bears chances to go undefeated in 85.

[digamma]

14-2
#1
8th
1st
Super Bowl

[boberot]

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Regular season record: 16-0
NFC Playoff seeding: #1
Total offense rank: #6
Total defense rank: #1
How far do they go in the playoffs: Super Bowl

This is the year someone shuts up the 'Fins.

Well, I'm a Bills fan so I watched this game with a sense of disgusted awe. I also saw the Bears dismantle the Seahawks last week. It's the first time since the Ravens ca. 2000 when I really, really, enjoyed watching a D play. They are SCARY in the true sense of the word.

Season record: 13-3
NFC seed: 1
O Rank: 10
D Rank: 1

I think they win the Super Bowl. Grossman is solid, and their WRs are underrated.

[watravaler]

Barring injury to Urlacher, Grossman, Briggs, or Tommie Harris...

15-1

Super Bowl champs

[Desnudo]

With that schedule, 14-2 at least.

[Neuqua]

Regular season record: 13-3

NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 10
Total defense rank: 1
How far do they go in the playoffs: NFC Championship.

[RPI-Fan]

Record: 14-2
Offense Rank: 4th
Defense Rank: 5th
Playoffs: Lose in the Super Bowl

[Travis]

Regular season record: 13-3
NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 8
Total defense rank: 1
How far do they go in the playoffs: Loss to Seattle in the NFC Championship game (yes, I have faith the Seahawk offense will be both healthy and clicking by then).

[PineTar]

I am very biased, so I won't add my opinion here, but did want to chime in that the single biggest injury impact would come from losing LT John Tait.

[liquid_zen01]

Regular Season Record: 16-0
NFC Playoff Seeding: #1
Total Offense Rank: #1
Total Defense Rank: #1
How far they go: Bears win the Superbowl when Coach Ditka comes out of retirement during the playoffs. Bears win the Super Bowl 264-0 against the Green Bay Packers (Coach Ditka has the league realigned so that this can happen).

Bears go on to win the Stanley Cup, NBA Finals, and World Series (Coach Ditka pitches a perfect game 4 against the Tigers).

[Northwood_DK]

Originally Posted by liquid_zen01

Regular Season Record: 16-0
NFC Playoff Seeding: #1
Total Offense Rank: #1
Total Defense Rank: #1
How far they go: Bears win the Superbowl when Coach Ditka comes out of retirement during the playoffs. Bears win the Super Bowl 264-0 against the Green Bay Packers (Coach Ditka has the league realigned so that this can happen).

Bears go on to win the Stanley Cup, NBA Finals, and World Series (Coach Ditka pitches a perfect game 4 against the Tigers).

You have been waiting since Dec03 to make this your first post?

[liquid_zen01]

Originally Posted by Northwood_DK

You have been waiting since Dec03 to make this your first post?

Yeah, that was about the time that I realized that the Bears were going to win the Superbowl in 2006, but I didn't want to give it away too soon.

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by liquid_zen01

Yeah, that was about the time that I realized that the Bears were going to win the Superbowl in 2006, but I didn't want to give it away too soon.

This is potentially the best second post ever.

[Chief Rum]

If Ditka were to pitch to Chuck Norris in the World Series, what would happen?

[Darkiller]

Their big win against Seattle last week was the eye-opener that they are for real. Sunday's blowout of the Bills was just the confirmation that they are, really, really tough on both sides of the ball.

At this point, I can see them being the #1 seed in the NFC. And this time, I doubt they'd drop a home Playoff game as they did the last two times they had to play one.

They really have the looks of a SuperBowl team.

[ChiMatt]

The only times they probably won't be favored the rest of the year is @ NY Giants and @ New England.

Regular season record: 13-3
NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 9
Total defense rank: 1
How far do they go in the playoffs: Lose NFC Championship

Rex Grossman still needs to prove he can stay healthy for a whole season. Also, with that weak schedule they play and in the division that plays like the WAC in terms of difficulty they will probably have clinched the playoffs by early December. It will be a number of weeks between playing meaningful games for them.

[Oilers9911]

They'll go 6-5 the rest of the way and finish just ahead of the 10-6 Raiders.

[QuikSand]

Well, I certainly have to concede that the team is far better than I had ever imagined they would be, even if I'm not totally sold on them myself. A fairly soft schedule makes it tough to be terribly pessimistic about them from here on out, too.

Regular season record: 14-2
NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 11
Total defense rank: 2
How far do they go in the playoffs: Lose in NFC Conference Championship

Other comments: I'm not hedging with statements like "well, assuming no injuries..." - this is football, every team is going to have injuries. This looks like a very good team, but it's not always the team who looks best through five games who hits the playoffs with momentum and in great form. The NFC doesn't look all that tough, but I'm probably taking the under on any reasonable Bears proposition right now. Very good defense, offense playing far better than anticipated... that's a fine formula for success, overall, but I'm still not buying quite yet.

[Butter]

You have to hedge with the Bears. Grossman needs to stay healthy for them, and if he does, 14-2 is certainly possible. If he doesn't, they could go right into the tank.

[Daimyo]

All evidence points to the Bears as the best team so far, but its a bit like the Colts last year in that their early strength of schedule has been among the worst in the league. Luckily for the Bears the schedule doesn't get much tougher from here out so I expect they'll finish 14-2, but wouldn't be surprised by 13-3 or 15-1.

Regular season record: 14-2
NFC Playoff seeding: 1
Total offense rank: 8
Total defense rank: 2
How far do they go in the playoffs: Lose in Super Bowl

[st.cronin]

I don't think Grossman is that important, actually. I think they could make it to the Super Bowl without him.

[Desnudo]

Who is Plan B?

[QuikSand]

Brian Greise is Plan B, and he looked very sharp in preseason. I don't see the health of Grossman as the be-all, end-all to the season. I think their offensive success is substantially a function of them just playing well in every facet of the game, not just one guy stepping up his game.

[cthomer5000]

Much like the Seahawks last year, i will fail to believe this until the very end. I see another early playoff exit.

[Butter]

OK, but the Bears were an 11-5 team last year with Kyle Orton, possibly the worst starting QB in the NFL. So, you don't think that having the 2nd rated passer in the NFC now leading the offense has anything to do with their improvement?

WTF?

[Eaglesfan27]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Brian Greise is Plan B, and he looked very sharp in preseason. I don't see the health of Grossman as the be-all, end-all to the season. I think their offensive success is substantially a function of them just playing well in every facet of the game, not just one guy stepping up his game.

Grossman has played spectacularly. Over a 100 passer rating. Top 6 in passing yards. Not just managing games but making big throws. I don't see that solely as a function of them playing well in all other facets of the game. Griese has proven that he is not an elite QB, but Grossman is looking like he can be, if he can stay healthy. That is why I hedged. I think Grossman's production cannot be overlooked and that he would be the single biggest injury blow.

[QuikSand]

So, you take this pretty fence-straddling statement:

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I think their offensive success is substantially a function of them just playing well in every facet of the game, not just one guy stepping up his game.

...and decide to rephrase it:

Originally Posted by Butter_of_69

So, you don't think that having the 2nd rated passer in the NFC now leading the offense has anything to do with their improvement?

WTF?

Yeah, I'm with you on the WTF... just that it's you who earned it, pal. (And why I'm even bothering to engage in the "debate" earns me one also)

Yes, Grossman has played very well. Yes, he has a high passer rating. I don't think there's any debate there.

My general argument is just that their whole team is clickming. On offense, the line is playing well, their running game is keeping defenses honest, their receivers are playing better than last season ... and their defense is playing so well that their offense gets the luxury of better field position, playing against a more tired defense, maybe more unwise risk-taking by the opposing defenses, and so forth. Football is like that... one thing works well for your team, and good things start to happen elsewhere. That's my point, as my first statement above was apparently too difficult to follow.

If those things are true, and you drop Grossman due to injury and replace him with someone else... Orton, Griese, Craig Krenzel, Trent Dilfer, whomever... and you still have a team that's capable of winning a bunch of games. Which is essentially my point -- it's not like this is a bunch of nobodies out there being led by a demigod at QB who is doing it all. It's a good team playing well across the board. Exactly the sort of team that probably could most afford to lose a key player, even at QB. Hell, your Orton example essentially helps to make my case.

[Eaglesfan27]

I agree with those points, QS. I just think that Grossman is a significant part of taking their offense to the "next level." They lose 2 or 3 more games without Grossman, and I think they lose earlier in the playoffs (most likely in the division game, perhaps the Conference Championship.) Hence, my "hedging statement."

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Eaglesfan27

I agree with those points, QS. I just think that Grossman is a significant part of taking their offense to the "next level." They lose 2 or 3 more games without Grossman, and I think they lose earlier in the playoffs (most likely in the division game, perhaps the Conference Championship.)

That's fair.

[Butter]

Quik, you can take your condescension and save it for somebody else. I know perfectly well what you said. And what you said is that Grossman is not solely responsible for the team's improvement. I disagree. I think that Grossman's play is precisely what's been missing from this team to elevate it to Super Bowl contender. Without him, they are merely good enough to win the weakest division in the NFL and lose in the first game of the playoffs. With him, they could go all the way.

[QuikSand]

If you had said that to begin with, I would have spared you my trademark condescension, really. If you think the difference is 100% Grossman, then fine, we disagree on the magnitude of his contribution. Interpreting my statement above to mean that Grossman had nothing to do with it was what got me all in a huff.

Sorry to snap.

[Warhammer]

I agree with Butter. The majority of the difference is Grossman. Last year, teams could stack 8 in the box and dare the Bears to pass and they couldn't. This year, if teams do that, Grossman makes them pay. If they sit back in pass coverage, they gash them up the middle. Heck, Grossman could be an average QB and he could make enough of a difference to get them to the NFC Championship game or the Super Bowl. The fact that he has been so good is just icing on the cake.

[nilodor]

Here is an interesting article on what the future might hold for the bears.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/wordpress/

[Karlifornia]

I don't follow the Bears closely enough to break them down, but I am pulling for them because of Rashied Davis, who I used to work with. Success couldn't be happening to a nicer guy.

[QuikSand]

So... as the end of the season approaches, where are we here?

Regular season record: 13-2, with one to play
NFC Playoff seeding: 1st
Total offense rank: 13th
Total defense rank: 5th
How far do they go in the playoffs: TBA


And while the display wasn't exactly what I imagined at the time, nor excatly what the other side was claiming at the time... it's certainly starting to look like Grossman is indeed the "difference maker" on this team. Which is to say that when it's "good Rex" they look like a pretty sold team, but when it's "bad Rex" they look awfully beatable. The NFC certainly doesn't look all that intimidating to me, though, no matter how much you disparage any one team -- is there anyone out there who really looks all that sharp? New Orleans?

[albionmoonlight]

Having watched New Orleans play this year, they certainly could stand up and beat any team in the league (let alone the NFC) right now. But they are certainly not without their warts.

Philadephia and the ageless Jeff Garcia are the only other team that seems at all capable of beating the Bears right now.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Philadephia and the ageless Jeff Garcia are the only other team that seems at all capable of beating the Bears right now.

I'm assuming you mean NFC teams?

[flere-imsaho]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

it's certainly starting to look like Grossman is indeed the "difference maker" on this team. Which is to say that when it's "good Rex" they look like a pretty sold team, but when it's "bad Rex" they look awfully beatable.

Having seen every Bears' game this season, my opinion (and I think CW will back me up here), is that the difference between "Good Rex" and "Bad Rex" hinges greatly on how soon, each game, Ron Turner decides to get away from the run and go all pass-wacky.

In the games the Bears' O has done well, they've established the run early, and then run a fair amount of play-action, which has Rex making (relatively) easy passes into single coverage. In the games the Bears' O has done poorly, they've gone all "West-Coast", and with each incompletion you can see Rex getting more and more anxious, which usually results in him either a) trying to force a pass into a hole that isn't here or b) launching long bombs into triple coverage.

I really do think it's (relatively) as simple as that, and that's the same reason I don't think Griese would necessarily be a panacea.

[kcchief19]

Originally Posted by Maple Leafs

I'm assuming you mean NFC teams?

For a league built on the concept of parity, I'm amazed at the chasm between the AFC and NFC right now. Going into the final week of the season, it's likely that at least one 9-7 team in the AFC will miss the playoffs while at least one 8-8 team will make it in the NFC, with the potential for 8-8 being good enough to win a division and 7-9 good enough for a wild card in worse-case scenario.

I give Chicago credit for winning the games they're supposed to win, but ... dear god ... the third toughest team they played this year was Seattle. They've won some games by a nice margin, but given the Jekyl and Hyde nature of their offense, I think the Bears would have to be the No. 1 pick for the most likely playoff "upset." Of course, no one in the NFC really has a "quality" win since no win the NFC is a "quality" win.

Which obviously means the table is set for the Bears or the Saints win the Super Bowl. Any potential playoff team in the AFC looks like a TD favorite over anyone in the NFC, which can only mean that the fickle finger of fate will look kindly on the NFC.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

When playoff pressure arrives (including what comes with being the number 1 seed), it is more likely than not that the bad Rex will show up instead of the good Rex. I'm not saying it will, but more likely. Of course, if good Rex shows up then you have yourself a keeper there.

Sadly, a bad Rex is good enough to beat the other teams in the NFC to get to the Superbowl.

[Coffee Warlord]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Having seen every Bears' game this season, my opinion (and I think CW will back me up here), is that the difference between "Good Rex" and "Bad Rex" hinges greatly on how soon, each game, Ron Turner decides to get away from the run and go all pass-wacky.

Purty much on target here. Ron Turner is definately...odd. His playcalling some games has been fantastic, other games, he just goes batshit insane and calls bombs for 10 straight possessions. I frankly think his trouble is the fact that early on (read: before teams saw that they could DO this) the bombs worked. Now, defenses know this and plan accordingly. Turner apparently sometimes forgets that little fact, and you get Bad Rex coming out to play.

Rex has been pretty decent at routes across the middle (Hi Desmond Clark) and has been able to get yards on short outs all season. He's moderately accurate at the deep ball, but, as noted above, the deep ball is covered a helluva lot more than it was early in the year.

I'll not go as far to say it's all playcalling, but Turner definately gets some blame for some of Rex's piss poor games.

[st.cronin]

Does anybody know the overall record of AFC teams vs. NFC teams this year?