1/15 Round 2: Bears vs. Panthers

[Chocolate Milk]

As for the weather, weather.com went from saying a high of 38 to a high of 32 for Sunday. However, Tom Skilling is saying a high in the upper 40s. Someone's wrong.

 

Probably weather.com

CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown.

 

I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong.

 

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

 

I don't think the cold is an issue, I think that footing is an issue with the Bears. They are light and fast, if they can't get good footing they are going to get pushed around.

[rawaction]

As for the weather, weather.com went from saying a high of 38 to a high of 32 for Sunday. However, Tom Skilling is saying a high in the upper 40s. Someone's wrong.

 

Probably weather.com

CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown.

 

I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong.

 

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

 

Certainly looked like that in Pittsburgh.

[Jon]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold.

[Magnetic Curses]

As for the weather, weather.com went from saying a high of 38 to a high of 32 for Sunday. However, Tom Skilling is saying a high in the upper 40s. Someone's wrong.

 

Probably weather.com

CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown.

 

I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong.

 

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

 

I don't think the cold is an issue, I think that footing is an issue with the Bears. They are light and fast, if they can't get good footing they are going to get pushed around.

 

i think weather goes hand-in-hand with good field conditions. if it's unbearably cold (pardon the pun), ice could form on the field.

[Magnetic Curses]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold.

i guess that i think as long as the field conditions are good, i like the bears chances against pretty much any team they play, including pittsburgh, NE, or indy.

[Magnetic Curses]

As for the weather, weather.com went from saying a high of 38 to a high of 32 for Sunday. However, Tom Skilling is saying a high in the upper 40s. Someone's wrong.

 

Probably weather.com

CBS and NBC backup weather.com. We're getting a warmup for Thursday (near 50), but Skilling seems to be the only one who's saying that temps will rise dramatically again after a quick cooldown.

 

I love Skilling, but I hope he's wrong.

 

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

 

Certainly looked like that in Pittsburgh.

 

the steelers pushed them around like they were on sleds.

[goonys evil twin]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold.

i guess that i think as long as the field conditions are good, i like the bears chances against pretty much any team they play, including pittsburgh, NE, or indy.

 

The Atlanta game pretty much proved you wrong here. The weather was a big advantage for Chicago.

 

The Bears would get killed against Indy in Detroit. Even if they slowed Indy's attack, they'd give up 21 easily, and I don't think the offense can score 21 against a good team. They'd stand a chance against anybody else though. And very cold weather does help them against certain teams. Terrible conditions (the 49ers game, extreme snow, wind or rain) don't help anybody, unless you're playing Indy.

[ConstableRabbit]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold.

 

There was an article a little while back that basically said that the Bears really aren't that great in cold weather.

 

Mike Downy also noted that Charlotte's Sunday forecast calls for a low of 32 as it does in the winter anyway.

 

I don't really care as long as we win, which I am arrogantly expecting.

[goonys evil twin]

the steelers pushed them around like they were on sleds.

 

I didn't see them getting pushed around, at least not until late when the game was sealed. I saw pretty much the same defense, only they missed a lot of tackles. This team is very susceptible to really good run teams and patient passing attacks that protect the QB. The cover 2 is a bend but don't break offense that allows yards in small chunks, and relies on big plays in the d's favor to stop the O. Pester the other team into making mistakes. This team doesn't intercept passes that would otherwise be big gains for the O, they intercept passes that are forced up by desperate QBs trying to make something out of nothing (Vick, Delhomme, Favre). It also relies on an O that can do something with the ball, and in the Pitt game, they did nothing until 2 circus catches in the end. Big Ben and the Steelers were never frustrated enough to make a desperate play.

[Magnetic Curses]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold.

i guess that i think as long as the field conditions are good, i like the bears chances against pretty much any team they play, including pittsburgh, NE, or indy.

 

The Atlanta game pretty much proved you wrong here. The weather was a big advantage for Chicago.

 

The Bears would get killed against Indy in Detroit. Even if they slowed Indy's attack, they'd give up 21 easily, and I don't think the offense can score 21 against a good team. They'd stand a chance against anybody else though. And very cold weather does help them against certain teams. Terrible conditions (the 49ers game, extreme snow, wind or rain) don't help anybody, unless you're playing Indy.

 

what, the field conditions weren't good against atlanta?

 

for the record, i think the bears have an advantage against dome teams when playing outdoors due to the simple fact that they a majority of their games outdoors, and, in the winterm cold weather.

 

i think the bears defense is every bit as fast and talented as the colts offense. the bears actually match up very well with the colts no huddle system.

[Magnetic Curses]

the steelers pushed them around like they were on sleds.

 

I didn't see them getting pushed around, at least not until late when the game was sealed. I saw pretty much the same defense, only they missed a lot of tackles. This team is very susceptible to really good run teams and patient passing attacks that protect the QB. The cover 2 is a bend but don't break offense that allows yards in small chunks, and relies on big plays in the d's favor to stop the O. Pester the other team into making mistakes. This team doesn't intercept passes that would otherwise be big gains for the O, they intercept passes that are forced up by desperate QBs trying to make something out of nothing (Vick, Delhomme, Favre). It also relies on an O that can do something with the ball, and in the Pitt game, they did nothing until 2 circus catches in the end. Big Ben and the Steelers were never frustrated enough to make a desperate play.

 

then we were watching different games. the bears defense simply got run over. no pressure whatsoever on roethliberger, no ability to stop the run, the pitt line manahndled the bears front four. urlacher got bulldozed down after down, and when he was able to get a body on someone, they ran over him. you can say that was missing tackles, or you could say that was getting pushed around. the steelers shoved it down our throats.

 

yes, the bears could have had a chance if they would have had any kind of o to speak of.

[goonys evil twin]

what, the field conditions weren't good against atlanta?

 

 

You said they were warm weather, and possibly dome, when that's not even close to true. That game was the coldest of the year, people were sliding, Vick could not get comfortable, weather was clearly in their favor in that contest. Dome teams are not killer defense with minimal offense. Great dome teams don't rely on pounding it down your throats with the running game for 4 quarters in order to have any semblence of an attack. When I read Downey talk about this being a dome team I could not believe it, and so when you insinuated that was the case, I had to disagree.

[goonys evil twin]

then we were watching different games. the bears defense simply got run over. no pressure whatsoever on roethliberger, no ability to stop the run, the pitt line manahndled the bears front four. urlacher got bulldozed down after down, and when he was able to get a body on someone, they ran over him. you can say that was missing tackles, or you could say that was getting pushed around. the steelers shoved it down our throats.

 

yes, the bears could have had a chance if they would have had any kind of o to speak of.

 

Pitt didn't shove it down their throats anymore than Green Bay did. GB moved the ball at will, they were just forced into mistakes, and in the 2nd game, the Bears had an offense. The Bears were also probably at their worst physically for the Pittsburgh game, as the injuries all mounted and both starting safeties sat and I believe one of the lineman sat.

 

I just think there's a fine line between a game the Bears look like crap in, and a game they win. You can say it was a different team, but the loss to Cleveland was similar, in that the offense was incapable of doing anything, and the defense couldn't hold out any longer. The Bears ask the D to do so much, that they are always living on the edge. And when they play against a team that has a guy like Bettis, they can fall off that edge. They didn't lose to Pittsburgh because of getting pushed around in the weather. I was practically conceding that loss weeks in advance.

 

It's not a matter of these guys not being able to play in bad weather, as you insinuate, rather, it's a case of the D not being able to do it all on their own for 19 games, and being susceptible to a team that doesn't make mistakes. If your QB eats the ball everytime he's in trouble, you don't turn it over, and you run a lot, even if you've been frustrated early, you can beat the Bears. The Bears team that won 10 of 14 games won those games because the opposing offense made mistakes. That was their only chance. The wild card now, however, is whether Grossman can do enough to force the opposing offense to try to do too much. If he can lead the offense at all, then the opposition might feel the need to press and open things up, thus opening the window for the Bears defense to pounce and take over the game.

 

What we don't want to see is Carolina being happy running on 3rd and 6 all day, and patiently playing the field position game. We want to see them try and take chances, or we better hope that Grossman and the O can make things happen.

[Magnetic Curses]

Pitt didn't shove it down their throats anymore than Green Bay did. GB moved the ball at will, they were just forced into mistakes, and in the 2nd game, the Bears had an offense. The Bears were also probably at their worst physically for the Pittsburgh game, as the injuries all mounted and both starting safeties sat and I believe one of the lineman sat.

 

inaccurate assessment, the steelers ran for TWICE as many yards against the bears than did the packers. when i say, "shoved it down our throats", it means that they ran over us, pushed us around, won the battle at the line of scrimmage, etc. the packers simply used the more-than-able skills of brett favre to move down the field through the air.

 

furthermore, the steelers scored 21 points in the first three quarters against while running the ball. roethlisberger threw for 173 yards, just enough to keep a balance. the fact was that the field was snowy, there was no traction, the defense, based on speed and recovery time couldn't get going and got plowed under. the steelers ran it RIGHT at us, which is probably the best way to play the bears.

[CheeseHead Cubs Fan]

Ah...for those in argument that cold weather plays a role...

 

Let me introduce to you the Packers vs. Atlanta - Playoff game, Packers almost never lost a playoff game at home. Favre was something like 34-1 in games under the freezing mark. Atlanta was coming up from a dome, Vick liked to run and no way was he going to be able to run in those conditions.

 

We all know the outcome and the beginning of the Packers fall....

 

Carolina could care less about the weather...my pick Panthers 24 Bears 10

[Magnetic Curses]

what, the field conditions weren't good against atlanta?

 

 

You said they were warm weather, and possibly dome, when that's not even close to true. That game was the coldest of the year, people were sliding, Vick could not get comfortable, weather was clearly in their favor in that contest. Dome teams are not killer defense with minimal offense. Great dome teams don't rely on pounding it down your throats with the running game for 4 quarters in order to have any semblence of an attack. When I read Downey talk about this being a dome team I could not believe it, and so when you insinuated that was the case, I had to disagree.

 

i generally don't agree with anything that downey says, and honestly must have missed that article, but i must agree with him here. this is a track team on defense, and we are primarily a team based on the ability of the defense to perform up to speed.

 

to tell you the truth, despite the sub-zero temps at soldier field that day, there wasn't near as much ice and snow as was at heinz field. throw into the equation the fact that we were playing an actual dome, warm weather team, and we have the advantage anyway.

 

the bears do not have a conventional run-stopping defense. our tackles are small comparitively, our DE's aren't exactly the kind to study film on stopping anyone else's rushing offense. they rely on the speed of the front seven to disrupt plays in the backfield and to recover quickly if beaten by the run. this is directly affected by field conditions, to deny this is foolish.

[Magnetic Curses]

Ah...for those in argument that cold weather plays a role...

 

Let me introduce to you the Packers vs. Atlanta - Playoff game, Packers almost never lost a playoff game at home. Favre was something like 34-1 in games under the freezing mark. Atlanta was coming up from a dome, Vick liked to run and no way was he going to be able to run in those conditions.

 

We all know the outcome and the beginning of the Packers fall....

 

Carolina could care less about the weather...my pick Panthers 24 Bears 10

 

ah, so you're the type of fan that believes charles martin to be the greatest packer of all time?

[CheeseHead Cubs Fan]

Ah...for those in argument that cold weather plays a role...

 

Let me introduce to you the Packers vs. Atlanta - Playoff game, Packers almost never lost a playoff game at home. Favre was something like 34-1 in games under the freezing mark. Atlanta was coming up from a dome, Vick liked to run and no way was he going to be able to run in those conditions.

 

We all know the outcome and the beginning of the Packers fall....

 

Carolina could care less about the weather...my pick Panthers 24 Bears 10

 

ah, so you're the type of fan that believes charles martin to be the greatest packer of all time?

 

Absolutely not, in fact I was 6 years old when that play happend and living in Phoenix ...

[Magnetic Curses]

Ah...for those in argument that cold weather plays a role...

 

Let me introduce to you the Packers vs. Atlanta - Playoff game, Packers almost never lost a playoff game at home. Favre was something like 34-1 in games under the freezing mark. Atlanta was coming up from a dome, Vick liked to run and no way was he going to be able to run in those conditions.

 

We all know the outcome and the beginning of the Packers fall....

 

Carolina could care less about the weather...my pick Panthers 24 Bears 10

 

ah, so you're the type of fan that believes charles martin to be the greatest packer of all time?

 

Absolutely not, in fact I was 6 years old when that play happend and living in Phoenix ...

 

some packer fan told me that at lambeau, and he wasn't even trying to be a jerk or anything. i said, "dude, you're sick." and walked away.

[goonys evil twin]

the fact was that the field was snowy, there was no traction, the defense, based on speed and recovery time couldn't get going and got plowed under. the steelers ran it RIGHT at us, which is probably the best way to play the bears.

 

The fact was the game was over before the weather got real bad. Bettis was running over them early, they didn't make mistakes, which is what the Bears need the opposition to do in order to win, or at least what they needed to happen when Orton was QB.

[goonys evil twin]

they rely on the speed of the front seven to disrupt plays in the backfield and to recover quickly if beaten by the run. this is directly affected by field conditions, to deny this is foolish.

 

Then call me foolish.

 

They lost because they are a bad matchup with Pittsburgh, especially in a must-win game for Pittsburgh when the Bears aren't in a must-win situation and have multiple defensive starters sitting and/or nursing injuries. The weather did not lose that game. Domes do not favor the Bears, and the D can play very well in bad conditions.

[Jon]

contrary to popular belief, i don't think the bears are a cold weather team.

 

they're a warm-weather team, possibly even a dome team. i like their chances more in a warm setting, with good field conditions.

I agree about the good field conditions, but you don't think playing with a wind chill in the upper 20s would be an advantage over the Panthers? The Bears have shown they can dominate in very cold conditions. Assuming it was cold in Buffalo in late November, that would be Carolina's only win in cold weather. The wind chill was in the low 40s in New Jersey Sunday and they just don't have much experience playing in the cold.

 

There was an article a little while back that basically said that the Bears really aren't that great in cold weather.

 

Mike Downy also noted that Charlotte's Sunday forecast calls for a low of 32 as it does in the winter anyway.

 

I don't really care as long as we win, which I am arrogantly expecting.

I glanced through that article, but I was under the impression that the main reason they haven't been good in "Bear weather" was just because they haven't been good in recent history period.

 

I did read the Downy article, as well, sadly. He kinda neglected to mention the fact that the highs this week in Charlotte are in the mid 60s.

[goonys evil twin]

I did read the Downy article, as well, sadly. He kinda neglected to mention the fact that the highs this week in Charlotte are in the mid 60s.

 

I think the Downey article may have been more of a plea for a domed stadium to house the olympics than a rationale for calling the Bears a domed team.

[Magnetic Curses]

the fact was that the field was snowy, there was no traction, the defense, based on speed and recovery time couldn't get going and got plowed under. the steelers ran it RIGHT at us, which is probably the best way to play the bears.

 

The fact was the game was over before the weather got real bad. Bettis was running over them early, they didn't make mistakes, which is what the Bears need the opposition to do in order to win, or at least what they needed to happen when Orton was QB.

 

it was snowing fairly hard well before the game started.

 

i think the bottom line is that they ran for 200 yards against our defense, even if you didn't watch the game you could see that they clearly donimated the line of scrimmage, which doesn't usually happen, at least in fair weather.

[Magnetic Curses]

they rely on the speed of the front seven to disrupt plays in the backfield and to recover quickly if beaten by the run. this is directly affected by field conditions, to deny this is foolish.

 

Then call me foolish.

 

They lost because they are a bad matchup with Pittsburgh, especially in a must-win game for Pittsburgh when the Bears aren't in a must-win situation and have multiple defensive starters sitting and/or nursing injuries. The weather did not lose that game. Domes do not favor the Bears, and the D can play very well in bad conditions.

 

weather may not have lost that game, but it sure didn't help.