Steelers were 6-2 in games decided by a touchdown or less last year. I wonder if that will be mentioned? I always thought that winning close games, especially when you do it year after year, was more indicative of one side of the ball being pretty good and carrying a weak other side of the ball. In the Bears case, a very good defense keeps what is usually a average at best offense in the game week after week after week. However I do think luck is applied quite a bit when you play so many close games because you are usually talking about 1 play that can change the game. The Bears have shown to have some talent considering they usually are in games with the best teams year after year after year at this point. Because of the way they play though I also do see where they have to rely on some element of luck. Then again, pretty much every good NFL team, except maybe the 2007 Patriots sans Super Bowl, has some luck on their side. I guess what I am saying is, as a Packers fan, I counted the Bears out last year but I'm not going to do that until they prove they deserve to be. Some of it's luck, sure. The Bears, however, should not have to pay for being a rather clutch team in close games. Being clutch is part of being good. Plus, like UM said, the Eagles score was close due to garbage time but the Bears dominated that game. The same can be said for the Dallas game in September.