NFC Championship: Bears vs. Saints - Sun Jan 21, 2 pm CST

[CDBears1259]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=teamrush&pos=def&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

 

NO has the 23rd ranked rushing defense.

This fact alone calls for a heavy dose of Benson and TJ to be in order. Not only are they weak against the run, but it keeps the ball out of the offense's hands. If the Bears get the lead, I'd hope for about a 3:1 run/pass ratio. Make it a real TOP battle.

[Banedon]

The Bears are the better team and they have been so all season long.

 

How do you figure? Our offense is ranked higher than your defense, and our defense is ranked higher than your offense.

 

Besides, the Bears were DEAD LAST in strength of schedule this year. The Saints were 3rd highest.

 

You beat a team in the Seahawks who were ranked 19th in the NFL and had lost 3 of their last 5 games, and only beat the Cowboys because Romo messed up.

 

Whereas the Saints beat the Eagles, the 9th ranked team in the NFL, who had won their last 6 games.

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff.php

[OleMissCub]

The Bears are the better team and they have been so all season long.

 

How do you figure? Our offense is ranked higher than your defense, and our defense is ranked higher than your offense.

 

Besides, the Bears were DEAD LAST in strength of schedule this year. The Saints were 3rd highest.

 

You beat a team in the Seahawks who were ranked 19th in the NFL and had lost 3 of their last 5 games, and only beat the Cowboys because Romo messed up.

 

Whereas the Saints beat the Eagles, the 9th ranked team in the NFL, who had won their last 6 games.

 

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/teameff.php

 

Ok, well that also shows that we beat the no.3 team in the NFL, and y'all beat the no.25 team.

[CP_414]

The Bears are the better team and they have been so all season long.

 

How do you figure? Our offense is ranked higher than your defense, and our defense is ranked higher than your offense.

 

Besides, the Bears were DEAD LAST in strength of schedule this year. The Saints were 3rd highest.

 

You beat a team in the Seahawks who were ranked 19th in the NFL and had lost 3 of their last 5 games, and only beat the Cowboys because Romo messed up.

 

Whereas the Saints beat the Eagles, the 9th ranked team in the NFL, who had won their last 6 games.

 

Our offense was better than your offense based on points, and our defense was better than your defense, and our special teams was better than your special teams. The Bears had a significantly better record than the Saints. What is so confusing about that?

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Our offense was better than your offense based on points, and our defense was better than your defense, and our special teams was better than your special teams. The Bears had a significantly better record than the Saints. What is so confusing about that?

 

Exactly, our defense was ranked at the top of the league all year until a few injuries and then the throwaway games. They've been worse lately, but the Bears have still only lost 3 games all year, and one of them was a meaningless last game of the regular season.

 

Saints offense was worse in terms of points. You can have all the yards in the world, but if you don't score as much as the opposition, you don't win.

 

This last few games thing is a pointless argument in my opinion. Teams that clinch playoff spots are going to play much differently than teams that are fighting to stay alive. The Saints had to fight to the end. The Bears were basically on cruise control for a while. Much different offensive and defensive schemes.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Ok, well that also shows that we beat the no.3 team in the NFL, and y'all beat the no.25 team.

That also shows that the Bears are the 4th best team in the league and the Saints are the 8th.

[David]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=pts&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

Chicago - 427

New Orleans - 413

 

Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

[CP_414]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

Well then our defense was even more dominant than they get credit for, because I would be willing to bet the Bears offense has given up more points and short fields than most teams due to Rex's awful games this season.

[David]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=pts&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

Chicago - 427

New Orleans - 413

 

Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

 

Yes, but as I said, the Bears scored a lot of points on defense and special teams. Not really the offense's doing.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=pts&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

Chicago - 427

New Orleans - 413

 

Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

 

Yes, but as I said, the Bears scored a lot of points on defense and special teams. Not really the offense's doing.

 

According to ESPN, that is offensive scoring. I might be mistaken, but that's what I'm finding on ESPN and NFL.com.

 

EDIT: Actually, you might be right. That might be overall scoring, but if that's the case, then I need to search a little harder next time. :lol:

[CubColtPacer]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=pts&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

Chicago - 427

New Orleans - 413

 

Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

 

Yes, but as I said, the Bears scored a lot of points on defense and special teams. Not really the offense's doing.

 

According to ESPN, that is offensive scoring. I might be mistaken, but that's what I'm finding on ESPN and NFL.com.

 

EDIT: Actually, you might be right. That might be overall scoring, but if that's the case, then I need to search a little harder next time. :lol:

 

That is also their total number of points. I looked at the standings, and they officially have the Bears as scoring 427 points, so those offensive rankings must count both defense and special teams TD's as well, which are at least 10 TD's I think for the Bears, if not more.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

That is also their total number of points. I looked at the standings, and they officially have the Bears as scoring 427 points, so those offensive rankings must count both defense and special teams TD's as well, which are at least 10 TD's I think for the Bears, if not more.

Touche, everyone ignore my post then. I only did a half @$$ed search as it was.

[soapy]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=pts&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

Chicago - 427

New Orleans - 413

 

Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

 

Yes, but as I said, the Bears scored a lot of points on defense and special teams. Not really the offense's doing.

 

According to ESPN, that is offensive scoring. I might be mistaken, but that's what I'm finding on ESPN and NFL.com.

 

EDIT: Actually, you might be right. That might be overall scoring, but if that's the case, then I need to search a little harder next time. :lol:

 

That is also their total number of points. I looked at the standings, and they officially have the Bears as scoring 427 points, so those offensive rankings must count both defense and special teams TD's as well, which are at least 10 TD's I think for the Bears, if not more.

 

The point remains, the Bears scored more points then any other team in the NFC (NO was 3rd), while allowing the fewest points in the NFC (NO was 3rd). But yes, by all means, let's hand the Saints the NFC Championship now. No need to play the game.

 

This should really be a great game.

[Derwood]

Wow, it's only Tuesday and I'm sick of reading about this game. I think I'll steer clear of this thread until gametime

[CP_414]

Our offense probably wasn't better in points (too lazy to look up the actual offensive points scored totals), guys. The Bears score a LOT on ST and defense. Doesn't matter, though. They all count.

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/statistics?stat=team&sort=pts&pos=off&league=nfl&season=2&year=2006

Chicago - 427

New Orleans - 413

 

Not a huge difference, but it's still a difference.

 

Yes, but as I said, the Bears scored a lot of points on defense and special teams. Not really the offense's doing.

 

According to ESPN, that is offensive scoring. I might be mistaken, but that's what I'm finding on ESPN and NFL.com.

 

EDIT: Actually, you might be right. That might be overall scoring, but if that's the case, then I need to search a little harder next time. :lol:

 

That is also their total number of points. I looked at the standings, and they officially have the Bears as scoring 427 points, so those offensive rankings must count both defense and special teams TD's as well, which are at least 10 TD's I think for the Bears, if not more.

 

The point remains the same, however we get the points. The Bears score more than the Saints, they allow less than the Saints, and they have won significantly more than the Saints.

 

Also, stop crying about the schedule, they both went 3-1 against playoff teams. Part of the reason our strength of scedule was so weak was that we gave those teams 13 losses. The difference between the Bears schedule and Saints schedule wouldn't have been as great if we lost 3 more games. What's the big deal anyway? We were beating 6-10 teams when the Saints were beating 7-9 teams, whooptie doo.

[OleMissCub]

Look, anyone who thinks that one side is going to destroy the other is foolish. It's going to be a tight game in my prediction and while I'd like the Saints to win, I honestly can't make an accurate prediction as to who will win. They are the 1 and 2 teams in the NFC for a reason.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

Look, anyone who thinks that one side is going to destroy the other is foolish. It's going to be a tight game in my prediction and while I'd like the Saints to win, I honestly can't make an accurate prediction as to who will win. They are the 1 and 2 teams in the NFC for a reason.

Yeah, I do love that we're debating points that really will have no impact on the game whatsoever. Saints offense could have 0 yards on sunday, and the Bears D could give up 600. Any given sunday...

 

Alright, shower time for me.

[David]

Look, anyone who thinks that one side is going to destroy the other is foolish. It's going to be a tight game in my prediction and while I'd like the Saints to win, I honestly can't make an accurate prediction as to who will win. They are the 1 and 2 teams in the NFC for a reason.

 

This is all I was trying to say and for whatever reason you decided to argue.

 

Can't we all just get along? :)

[OleMissCub]

Look, anyone who thinks that one side is going to destroy the other is foolish. It's going to be a tight game in my prediction and while I'd like the Saints to win, I honestly can't make an accurate prediction as to who will win. They are the 1 and 2 teams in the NFC for a reason.

 

This is all I was trying to say and for whatever reason you decided to argue.

 

Can't we all just get along? :)

 

You insulted our D as weak, which it is not. So I had to fight you over that.

[David]

 

You insulted our D as weak, which it is not. So I had to fight you over that.

 

Not to open another can of worms, but DVOA has the Saints defense as #19 in the league, FWIW. I didn't pull my assessment out of nowhere.

 

EDIT - In terms of weighted defense, which weighs the most recent part of the schedule a little more heavily, the Saints are ranked 17th.

[Omar]

T-minus 106.5 hours.

 

The nervous factor is still there. Like many here, I am constantly thinking about this game. I have a hard time sleeping. I promised myself to give up certain bad habits until the Bears lose. I havent visited those since, and I hopefully again.

 

Bears really need to find some weaknesses while watching tapes of the Saints this week. Especially in their HB, Deuce McAllister. Dont get me started about Brees..

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

The Bears seem to have the most problems with power backs instead of the dancing in the backfield guys. I see Deuce as being a bigger threat than Bush for that reason. Bush can cause problems of his own when he's catching passes though, and that's something the Bears need to be cautious of. Brees is going to get his yards, so I think the Bears need to make sure they limit the big plays. That's what the Tampa 2 defense is designed for though, so hopefully they can toughen up on 3rd downs again like they did last week.

 

If they can even get the Saints into a lot of 2nd and long and 3rd and long situations, then I like the Bears odds. That is when the defense just pins it's ears back and shuts down opponents. It's a defense built on speed, so those 5 yard dump off routes will hopefully stay at 5 yards.

[UMFan83]

If Reggie Bush tries to hit the side of the field Lance Briggs is on, he's not going to go anywhere.

[BleedCubbieBlue81]

If Reggie Bush tries to hit the side of the field Lance Briggs is on, he's not going to go anywhere.

The advantage I think the Bears have against a guy like Bush is their linebacking speed. You probably won't find a faster 3 linebackers than Briggs, Urlacher, and Hillenmeyer. They're very good at working from sideline to sideline.