Bears vs. Seahawks, Sunday Jan 16 at noon

[mhuber92211]

People should just not post after 2 hours of sleep and a fussy 3 month old in your arms! UGH, I know I ramble at times but I was seriously incoherent this morning....

 

Anywho... backhanded compliment (?) or not, I still firmly believe the Seahawks have a chance here. With the Week off and the Seahawks having some momentum it is not outside of the realm of possibility that they get off to a quick start and the Bears will need to catch up. This might play into the Seahawks hands by taking Forte out of the mix some and forcing Cutler into some bad decisions.

 

Obviously, it is also within the realm of possibility that the Bears come out poised and ready for football and to prove that they are the class of the NFC and stomp all over the clearly less talented team.

 

I am holding out hope for the first scenario.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

I don't see any way the Seahawks beat the Bears, but I also didn't see any way they could beat the Saints.

 

I'd much rather go into next season hearing how the Saints stumbled in the playoffs rather than how the Seahawks were some sort of Cinderella for making it to the NFC championship game. Don't piss me off, Bears.

 

While the Saints had a 12-4 record, their team was nowhere near the team that won it all the previous year.

But they played Seattle. Seattle.

[UMFan83]

People should just not post after 2 hours of sleep and a fussy 3 month old in your arms! UGH, I know I ramble at times but I was seriously incoherent this morning....

 

Anywho... backhanded compliment (?) or not, I still firmly believe the Seahawks have a chance here. With the Week off and the Seahawks having some momentum it is not outside of the realm of possibility that they get off to a quick start and the Bears will need to catch up. This might play into the Seahawks hands by taking Forte out of the mix some and forcing Cutler into some bad decisions.

 

Obviously, it is also within the realm of possibility that the Bears come out poised and ready for football and to prove that they are the class of the NFC and stomp all over the clearly less talented team.

 

I am holding out hope for the first scenario.

 

There's no doubt the Seahawks have a shot of winning. And that's not just me saying that to not feel overconfident. They really can win. But as you said, I think the Bears are clearly the better team and if it plays up to its abilities, will win. But if the Seahawks play as well (at least offensively) as they did last week, and the Bears play a mediocre or worse game, they will lose.

[bukie]

Updated FO playoff odds: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

 

Updated DVOA: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/dvoa-ratings/2011/week-18-dvoa-ratings

[minnesotacubsfan]

Updated FO playoff odds: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

 

it scares me to see Chicago at the top of the NFC there. I dont want them to lose their edge (mental us-vs-them)

[Keener98]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

[UMFan83]

When is the last time Chicago had a 92% chance to win a game...a playoff game no less. It's almost scary to be this much of a favorite, even when it's a computer calculating the odds.

[jersey cubs fan]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

[UMFan83]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

 

I don't know if you can definitively say that post-concussion Cutler was the biggest issue. We simply don't know how severe the concussion was 2 weeks prior. Rodgers returned 2 weeks after his 2nd concussion of the year and threw for 400 yards and 4 TDs. I'm willing to accept it as a possibility, but I don't think you can say with certainty the concussion affected Cutler any more than a crappy o-line, lack of running game and bad playcalling did.

[Keener98]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

Also it was Chris Williams 1st game at guard and Roberto Garza didn't play either. Basically what I'm saying is that game really means nothing. This is still a 7-9 team from the worst division in football going on the road. It shouldn't be close

[Banedon]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

 

Yeah...the Seahawks might be the easiest road. But I really would've enjoyed beating the Saints in Chicago again.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

 

I don't know if you can definitively say that post-concussion Cutler was the biggest issue. We simply don't know how severe the concussion was 2 weeks prior. Rodgers returned 2 weeks after his 2nd concussion of the year and threw for 400 yards and 4 TDs. I'm willing to accept it as a possibility, but I don't think you can say with certainty the concussion affected Cutler any more than a crappy o-line, lack of running game and bad playcalling did.

 

that crappy line probably was scaring the [expletive] out of Cutler all game

[jersey cubs fan]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

 

I don't know if you can definitively say that post-concussion Cutler was the biggest issue. We simply don't know how severe the concussion was 2 weeks prior. Rodgers returned 2 weeks after his 2nd concussion of the year and threw for 400 yards and 4 TDs. I'm willing to accept it as a possibility, but I don't think you can say with certainty the concussion affected Cutler any more than a crappy o-line, lack of running game and bad playcalling did.

He sure as hell looked goofy to me. They were still developing as an offense and the concussion delayed that development by a few weeks at least.

[chuckywang]

Updated FO playoff odds: http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/playoffodds

 

it scares me to see Chicago at the top of the NFC there. I dont want them to lose their edge (mental us-vs-them)

 

Yeah, cause I'm sure the Bears players are really into DVOA analysis.

[UMFan83]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

 

I don't know if you can definitively say that post-concussion Cutler was the biggest issue. We simply don't know how severe the concussion was 2 weeks prior. Rodgers returned 2 weeks after his 2nd concussion of the year and threw for 400 yards and 4 TDs. I'm willing to accept it as a possibility, but I don't think you can say with certainty the concussion affected Cutler any more than a crappy o-line, lack of running game and bad playcalling did.

He sure as hell looked goofy to me. They were still developing as an offense and the concussion delayed that development by a few weeks at least.

 

And if he was loopy, calling 39 passing plays, regardless of the fact they trailed for most of the game, certainly didn't help the Bears cause. So the two things go hand in hand. But you are completely right that the concussion delayed things by a couple of weeks.

[UMFan83]

Something to remember about the 1st Bears-Seahawks game. Seahawks were coming off a bye and had 2 weeks to prepare for one, also Lance Briggs didn't play either. 2 pretty important factors about that 1st game in my opinion.

 

Post-concussion Cutler is the biggest, but those two mattered as well.

 

I would have preferred to face New Orleans in Chicago again, but I think the Bears show up and impress this weekend.

 

Yeah...the Seahawks might be the easiest road. But I really would've enjoyed beating the Saints in Chicago again.

 

There's nothing worse than getting a bye and losing the first game. We felt that pain in 01 and 05. You have this great year, then get to skip an entire round of the playoffs, and get a home game in at least the 2nd round, meaning you only have to win 2 games to get to the Super Bowl, so you start to feel like you are goig to make it and then you lose. Shitty feeling. I'd rather play the easiest possible team and get that first win off our backs and be 1 game from the Super Bowl.

[jersey cubs fan]

And if he was loopy, calling 39 passing plays, regardless of the fact they trailed for most of the game, certainly didn't help the Bears cause. So the two things go hand in hand. But you are completely right that the concussion delayed things by a couple of weeks.

 

I'm not even sure if it was about being loopy. But gun shy is more what I would describe it as. And the lack of cohesiveness for an offense with a new coordinator, no established receivers and an ever changing line made for a sloppy game. Briggs is important but it's not like the defense gave up a ton of points without him. Seattle's offense scored 21.

[UMFan83]

And if he was loopy, calling 39 passing plays, regardless of the fact they trailed for most of the game, certainly didn't help the Bears cause. So the two things go hand in hand. But you are completely right that the concussion delayed things by a couple of weeks.

 

I'm not even sure if it was about being loopy. But gun shy is more what I would describe it as. And the lack of cohesiveness for an offense with a new coordinator, no established receivers and an ever changing line made for a sloppy game. Briggs is important but it's not like the defense gave up a ton of points without him. Seattle's offense scored 21.

 

True, but you'd have to think with Briggs in there it would help in the defense getting off the field faster. Although the Seahawks only scored 21 on offense, they dominated time of possession 34-25. Of course part of that is because the Bears had several really short drives, and punted I believe 6 times.

[jersey cubs fan]

And if he was loopy, calling 39 passing plays, regardless of the fact they trailed for most of the game, certainly didn't help the Bears cause. So the two things go hand in hand. But you are completely right that the concussion delayed things by a couple of weeks.

 

I'm not even sure if it was about being loopy. But gun shy is more what I would describe it as. And the lack of cohesiveness for an offense with a new coordinator, no established receivers and an ever changing line made for a sloppy game. Briggs is important but it's not like the defense gave up a ton of points without him. Seattle's offense scored 21.

 

True, but you'd have to think with Briggs in there it would help in the defense getting off the field faster. Although the Seahawks only scored 21 on offense, they dominated time of possession 34-25. Of course part of that is because the Bears had several really short drives, and punted I believe 6 times.

 

The defense gave up 3.6 yards per rush, which is less than their 3.7 season average. They were beaten through the air because they didn't touch Hasselback and it's not like Briggs makes a huge difference in pressuring the QB. Seattle needed a lot to win that game. Chicago's offense was still developing, and they were dealing with a QB coming off a concussion in his first game back. The line was in shambles and Briggs was out. They also had the bye week to prepare. On its own I really think a more stable and established Cutler makes the biggest difference now. The other stuff just adds to the reasons why Chicago should handle the Seahawks. A loss would be a huge disappointment and should at least take years off the inevitable Lovie extension. Maybe they only add one season. Getting to the conf championship game will get him 3.

[JonJayCutler]

Also let's not forget the vast difference of weather from the first game to Sunday's game. I'm almost positive the week 6 game was played on an unseasonably warm day with temps in the high 60s. Right now they're calling for a high of 20 for Sunday's game. You'd have to think cold weather favors the Bears here. It does get cold in Seattle, but usually not that cold.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Also let's not forget the vast difference of weather from the first game to Sunday's game. I'm almost positive the week 6 game was played on an unseasonably warm day with temps in the high 60s. Right now they're calling for a high of 20 for Sunday's game. You'd have to think cold weather favors the Bears here. It does get cold in Seattle, but usually not that cold.

 

its that cold now, well, 30 degrees anyway.

 

wont the colder temp help the field surface? will it be harder, and thus less slippery / muddy / loose sod, or will it just be an ice rink a la TCF?

[JonJayCutler]

Also let's not forget the vast difference of weather from the first game to Sunday's game. I'm almost positive the week 6 game was played on an unseasonably warm day with temps in the high 60s. Right now they're calling for a high of 20 for Sunday's game. You'd have to think cold weather favors the Bears here. It does get cold in Seattle, but usually not that cold.

 

its that cold now, well, 30 degrees anyway.

 

wont the colder temp help the field surface? will it be harder, and thus less slippery / muddy / loose sod, or will it just be an ice rink a la TCF?

 

Probably, which is good news for the Bears. Get the surface to be as dome-like as possible.

[UMFan83]

Also let's not forget the vast difference of weather from the first game to Sunday's game. I'm almost positive the week 6 game was played on an unseasonably warm day with temps in the high 60s. Right now they're calling for a high of 20 for Sunday's game. You'd have to think cold weather favors the Bears here. It does get cold in Seattle, but usually not that cold.

 

its that cold now, well, 30 degrees anyway.

 

wont the colder temp help the field surface? will it be harder, and thus less slippery / muddy / loose sod, or will it just be an ice rink a la TCF?

 

Haha not at all like TCF because Soldier Field was actually built with heating coils under the field to keep the field from completely freezing over.

[minnesotacubsfan]

oh [expletive] I forgot that.

[Banedon]

Dreaming of a Packers-Bears showdown

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/35602/dreaming-of-a-packers-bears-showdown

 

Do you realize that in the 89-year history of the rivalry, the Bears and Packers have played exactly one playoff game against each other? In fact, as the chart at the bottom of this post illustrates, there have been only four occasions when both teams have made the playoffs in the same season.

 

Even that one head-to-head matchup was played only because the Packers and Bears finished tied atop the Western Division in (yes) 1941. They had split their regular-season games, each accounting for the other's only loss that season, and thus were scheduled for a one-game playoff to determine who advanced to the NFL Championship Game.