Jump to content
North Side Baseball

Round 1: Eagles at Bears Sunday 3:40 on NBC

jersey cubs fan

By jersey cubs fan,
in Other Sports

 Share
jersey cubs fan GOAT

jersey cubs fan

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

Chicago whipped the Vikings for no other reason than they could, and their reward is to face the Vikings in the Wild Card round. The Bears are 5.5 point favorites, the biggest line of the weekend. The Eagles are being hyped as the hottest team I. The league because of a 3-game win streak, something many others have done and the Bears have bested. They beat the worthless Redskins twice this month, so I guess they get extra credit?

 

Philly isn’t the same team that trounced the Bears last year, and more importantly the Bears aren’t the same either. They do have Vic Fangio and many pieces from that woeful defensive performance and I think they will ready to pounce. Trubisky started to settle in as the season went along and with Kyle Long back, the running game looks to be better.

 

This is big. Nagy has to be ready to stomp on the gas and not let up.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 571
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Tim MVP

Tim

Site Manager
Posted
Posted

I might as well post this here, too...

 

While a team's point spread is a better measure of their dominance than the record (and better predictor of future success), I'd argue that there is a better measure than pure point spread. A point spread has to be placed in the context of the point environment for that team. A 100 point spread when a team only allows 10 points in a year (so 110 points scored vs 10 allowed) is a much, much better result than when they allow 500 (600 ps vs 500 pa).

 

A better measure of success is the point spread divided by the points allowed for each team. Here are the NFL leaders by that measure. The Bears just might be the best team in the NFL by a reasonable margin.

 

NFL Team              NPP
Chicago              48.8%
New Orleans          42.8%
Los Angeles Rams	  37.2%
Baltimore            35.5%
Kansas City          34.2%
New England          34.2%
Los Angeles Chargers 30.1%
Houston              27.2%
Indianapolis         25.9%
Seattle              23.3%
Pittsburgh           18.9%
Minnesota             5.6%
Philadelphia          5.5%
Dallas                4.6%
Tennessee             2.3%
Carolina             -1.6%
Atlanta              -2.1%
Denver               -5.7%
Green Bay            -6.0%
Cleveland            -8.4%
Detroit             -10.0%
New York            -10.4%
Tampa Bay           -14.7%
Cincinnati          -19.1%
San Francisco       -21.4%
Washington          -21.7%
Jacksonville        -22.5%
New York            -24.5%
Miami               -26.3%
Buffalo             -28.1%
Oakland             -37.9%
Arizona             -47.1%

WrigleyField 22 Knoxville Smokies

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
I might as well post this here, too...

 

While a team's point spread is a better measure of their dominance than the record (and better predictor of future success), I'd argue that there is a better measure than pure point spread. A point spread has to be placed in the context of the point environment for that team. A 100 point spread when a team only allows 10 points in a year (so 110 points scored vs 10 allowed) is a much, much better result than when they allow 500 (600 ps vs 500 pa).

 

A better measure of success is the point spread divided by the points allowed for each team. Here are the NFL leaders by that measure. The Bears just might be the best team in the NFL by a reasonable margin.

 

NFL Team              NPP
Chicago              48.8%
New Orleans          42.8%
Los Angeles Rams	  37.2%
Baltimore            35.5%
Kansas City          34.2%
New England          34.2%
Los Angeles Chargers 30.1%
Houston              27.2%
Indianapolis         25.9%
Seattle              23.3%
Pittsburgh           18.9%
Minnesota             5.6%
Philadelphia          5.5%
Dallas                4.6%
Tennessee             2.3%
Carolina             -1.6%
Atlanta              -2.1%
Denver               -5.7%
Green Bay            -6.0%
Cleveland            -8.4%
Detroit             -10.0%
New York            -10.4%
Tampa Bay           -14.7%
Cincinnati          -19.1%
San Francisco       -21.4%
Washington          -21.7%
Jacksonville        -22.5%
New York            -24.5%
Miami               -26.3%
Buffalo             -28.1%
Oakland             -37.9%
Arizona             -47.1%

Pythagoreum wins for playoffs teams.

 

Chiefs 10.7

Chargers 10.4

Patriots 10.7

Texans 10.2

Ravens 10.8

Colts 10.1

 

Saints 11.2

Rams 10.9

Bears 11.5

Cowboys 8.4

Seahawks 9.9

Eagles 8.5

Tim MVP

Tim

Site Manager
Posted
Posted
I might as well post this here, too...

 

While a team's point spread is a better measure of their dominance than the record (and better predictor of future success), I'd argue that there is a better measure than pure point spread. A point spread has to be placed in the context of the point environment for that team. A 100 point spread when a team only allows 10 points in a year (so 110 points scored vs 10 allowed) is a much, much better result than when they allow 500 (600 ps vs 500 pa).

 

A better measure of success is the point spread divided by the points allowed for each team. Here are the NFL leaders by that measure. The Bears just might be the best team in the NFL by a reasonable margin.

 

NFL Team              NPP
Chicago              48.8%
New Orleans          42.8%
Los Angeles Rams	  37.2%
Baltimore            35.5%
Kansas City          34.2%
New England          34.2%
Los Angeles Chargers 30.1%
Houston              27.2%
Indianapolis         25.9%
Seattle              23.3%
Pittsburgh           18.9%
Minnesota             5.6%
Philadelphia          5.5%
Dallas                4.6%
Tennessee             2.3%
Carolina             -1.6%
Atlanta              -2.1%
Denver               -5.7%
Green Bay            -6.0%
Cleveland            -8.4%
Detroit             -10.0%
New York            -10.4%
Tampa Bay           -14.7%
Cincinnati          -19.1%
San Francisco       -21.4%
Washington          -21.7%
Jacksonville        -22.5%
New York            -24.5%
Miami               -26.3%
Buffalo             -28.1%
Oakland             -37.9%
Arizona             -47.1%

Pythagoreum wins for playoffs teams.

 

Chiefs 10.7

Chargers 10.4

Patriots 10.7

Texans 10.2

Ravens 10.8

Colts 10.1

 

Saints 11.2

Rams 10.9

Bears 11.5

Cowboys 8.4

Seahawks 9.9

Eagles 8.5

Stupid hangover making me overlook pythag wins.

 

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

champaignchris Draft Eligible

champaignchris

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

 

Seemed pretty obvious to me that the Bears wanted to play Philly in the playoffs. Otherwise.........

 

I don’t think it had to do with Philly per se. More, beat the Vikings now so you don’t have to beat them later.

WrigleyField 22 Knoxville Smokies

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

 

Seemed pretty obvious to me that the Bears wanted to play Philly in the playoffs. Otherwise.........

 

I don’t think it had to do with Philly per se. More, beat the Vikings now so you don’t have to beat them later.

They just wanted more Club Dub to ring in the new year.

UMFan83 GOAT

UMFan83

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted

 

I turned on Philly Sports Radio this morning because....well that's just what I do. Anyways, the host was asking callers if they were going to go to Chicago for the game or just wait until next week to go to New Orleans.

 

Honestly though, I didn't read the articles but based on the headlines they should totally feel that way. It's like the Cubs in 2017, coming off a dominating championship season, having an off year but making the playoffs we kind of felt like that.

raw Myrtle Beach Pelicans

raw

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted

This is an interesting matchup. I read an article from the Philly perspective that this is probably the best potential matchup they could have had. They lost to Dallas twice this year already. They have a playoff experienced team going against a team with next to none. They have a playoff proven backup QB vs. a guy everyone is convinced sucks. Bears have home field, but the outdoor and weather advantage they would have had over the Vikings is not there. The Eagles have some pieces on the OL in Kelce, Johnson and Peters who have the pedigree to block the Bears upfront. They have veteran pieces on the DL (Long, Bennett, Cox, etc) who could give the Bears OL some trouble. And the coaches are from the same coaching tree, so the creative plays should be less so in this one.

 

These teams are kind of mirror images of each other in a lot of ways. But the Bears are younger, faster, and simply better across the board. They're just as hot and should be able to win this game based on those facts. Ertz worries me some and Tate has historically given the Bears problems. But a healthy Jackson and the ILB duo (Trevathan was hurt last year's matchup) will go a long way to easing those concerns.

Banedon GOAT

Banedon

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted
Honestly though, I didn't read the articles but based on the headlines they should totally feel that way. It's like the Cubs in 2017, coming off a dominating championship season, having an off year but making the playoffs we kind of felt like that.

 

The articles themselves were way more measured than the headlines.

gflore34 Myrtle Beach Pelicans

gflore34

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Yesterday former Bears GM Jerry DeAngelo was on the score, said Vikings could win with Cousins but, will not win because of Cousins, that's about right. He was worried about Foles, thought him to be dangerous, the type of QB teams win because of, not with. This is worrisome however, I've believe the Bears are going to be able control both lines of scrimmage thereby, minimizing what Foles can accomplish.
bukie All-Star

bukie

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
They're probably not the worst team in the WC round, but they're fine to play. It's the NFL and the Bears may find a way to break my heart but I'm not worried.

Oh they're definitely the worst team in the WC round by any metric you want to look at, by a significant margin. They're the only below average team in the playoffs by DVOA (Steelers, Vikings, Titans, Packers, Giants and Falcons rated better). They had a good win over the Rams and a comeback win over the Texans. That bumped them from a bad team to a slightly below average team.

 

Be real, the team nobody wants to play in the first round is the Bears.

raw Myrtle Beach Pelicans

raw

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted

This isn't meant to disregard the playoff game or even to lessen their chances, but i was going thru my stuff for the site I (seldom) write for, and man the Bears had/have a lot of "dead" spots on their roster.

 

They were carrying Tyler Bray for several weeks, who never played.

They carried both White and Wims all season on the 53 for them to be active a combined 13 games. They were only targeted in 4 different games combined, includes both being targeted yesterday as 1.

Eric Kush hasn't played an offensive snap since Week 8. The Bears have played an extra lineman and defensive players on offense several times since too.

Michael Burton has been on the team all year, 8 times active, 2 with exactly 1 snap, never more than 10

Rashaad Coward was on the 53 all year, but inactive in every game

Anyone remember Nick Williams made the team out of camp? Inactive every game but 2. Played only against Buffalo.

Kylie Fitts has been active 6 games, played 0 defensive snaps twice, and over 7 snaps twice. One of those was yesterday (the other Buffalo w/ Mack out)

Isaiah Irving was active 13 times, but played no snaps in 5 games. 3 times in double digit snaps, ironically Buffalo and yesterday were 2 of the 3.

Believe it or not, either Marcus Cooper or Marcus Williams has been on the 53 for every game this year. They played a total of 15 snaps on defense in the regular season.

 

Additionally, guys like Houston-Carson, Benny Cunningham, Daniel Brown, Ben Braunecker, and Joel Iyiejbuniwe have been special teams only type players for most of this year.

 

So, while the Bears have 19 free agents to replace next year (includes Zach Miller), with little cap space and few draft picks to fill those spots.....15 of them are replacement level players or slightly better (Bellamy). Lynch, Massie, Callahan and Amos are it until you go to the punter and long-snapper. Cut Dion Sims and restructure Kyle Long and the Bears can honestly probably afford to bring back literally every single player on the 53-man roster.

WrigleyField 22 Knoxville Smokies

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
This isn't meant to disregard the playoff game or even to lessen their chances, but i was going thru my stuff for the site I (seldom) write for, and man the Bears had/have a lot of "dead" spots on their roster.

 

They were carrying Tyler Bray for several weeks, who never played.

They carried both White and Wims all season on the 53 for them to be active a combined 13 games. They were only targeted in 4 different games combined, includes both being targeted yesterday as 1.

Eric Kush hasn't played an offensive snap since Week 8. The Bears have played an extra lineman and defensive players on offense several times since too.

Michael Burton has been on the team all year, 8 times active, 2 with exactly 1 snap, never more than 10

Rashaad Coward was on the 53 all year, but inactive in every game

Anyone remember Nick Williams made the team out of camp? Inactive every game but 2. Played only against Buffalo.

Kylie Fitts has been active 6 games, played 0 defensive snaps twice, and over 7 snaps twice. One of those was yesterday (the other Buffalo w/ Mack out)

Isaiah Irving was active 13 times, but played no snaps in 5 games. 3 times in double digit snaps, ironically Buffalo and yesterday were 2 of the 3.

Believe it or not, either Marcus Cooper or Marcus Williams has been on the 53 for every game this year. They played a total of 15 snaps on defense in the regular season.

 

Additionally, guys like Houston-Carson, Benny Cunningham, Daniel Brown, Ben Braunecker, and Joel Iyiejbuniwe have been special teams only type players for most of this year.

 

So, while the Bears have 19 free agents to replace next year (includes Zach Miller), with little cap space and few draft picks to fill those spots.....15 of them are replacement level players or slightly better (Bellamy). Lynch, Massie, Callahan and Amos are it until you go to the punter and long-snapper. Cut Dion Sims and restructure Kyle Long and the Bears can honestly probably afford to bring back literally every single player on the 53-man roster.

Seems like a reflection of finally having good health.

raw Myrtle Beach Pelicans

raw

Community Moderator
Posted
Posted

Just read a Fishbain tweet.....

 

Bears used only 56 players this season. Tied for lowest in the NFL. Everyone on the 53 now + Sims, Callahan & Acho (who was hurt in Week 1)

WrigleyField 22 Knoxville Smokies

WrigleyField 22

Old-Timey Member
Posted
Posted
Just read a Fishbain tweet.....

 

Bears used only 56 players this season. Tied for lowest in the NFL. Everyone on the 53 now + Sims, Callahan & Acho (who was hurt in Week 1)

I think they used Cooper also (or was he never active?) . And since they didn't use Bray or Coward, is there one other player that had active and later cut ala Cooper?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund
The North Side Baseball Caretaker Fund

You all care about this site. The next step is caring for it. We’re asking you to caretake this site so it can remain the premier Cubs community on the internet. Included with caretaking is ad-free browsing of North Side Baseball.

Become a Caretaker

  • Member Statistics

    6,793
    Total Members
    13,056
    Most Online
    Kevin OBrien
    Newest Member
    Kevin OBrien
    Joined
×
×
  • Create New...