adam

Some of those numbers are surprising, especially Andy Reid, but it still leads me to believe that strength of schedule has decided the Bears fate more than anything since 2006. Now this may apply to more than just the Bears obviously, but it is interesting nonetheless. The Bears were never worse than 7-9 since 2006 and no better than 13-3, but their records basically correlated with where they finished the year before.

True, I would rather have someone like Flynn (with GB experience) than any of the other options (as a backup).

Green Bay is 23-25 since 2006, but was 1-6 in 2006. So they are 22-19 since 2007. Pittsburgh is 24-24 since 2006. Indy was 24-21 in the same timeframe. New England was 25-17. Baltimore was 22-27 (which included a 1-7 run in 2007). New Orleans was 21-22 (which includes a 1-6 run this season).

Alex Smith and Matt Flynn should be available as well. Just some other names to consider. I like Tebow, but he needs to be in the right system.

I would assume .500 would be the standard for good teams, but 21-40, that is brutal. Is there some type of stat sorter, or did you to that manually?

GB beat 4 winning teams, PHI, NYJ, NYG, and CHI, and actually beat NYG and CHI back to back to finish the season and slip into the playoffs. NYG beat only 1 winning team last year (NE), but beat 5x 8-8 teams.

He is a big joke. I assume he is not very bright, so something like hard work is beyond him.

Basically our only tiebreaker is against Dallas?

I was thinking today at how the wins this season have been sort of "hollow", either we've played bad teams or teams at the right time (Indy Week 1), etc. So I took a look back until 2006 to see how many winning teams we beat during the season, and I found an interesting trend, we beat either 2 or 3 teams every season, no more, no less, regardless of our record. Check this out: 2006 - 2 wins, SEA and NYJ as we go 13-3. Can you believe we won 11 games against teams at 8-8 or worse? 2007 - 2 wins, both vs a 13-3 Green Bay team (we accounted for 2 of their 3 losses as we floundered to a 7-9 record) 2008 - 3 wins, vs IND Week 1, PHI, and MIN. We went 9-7 and missed the playoffs with 2 wins against the 0-16 Lions. 2009 - 2 wins, vs PIT and MIN. We go back to a 7-9 record and miss the playoffs. 2010 - 3 wins, GB, PHI, and NYJ. We go 11-5 and win the division, but lose to GB in Week 17 allowing them into the playoffs, and we know the rest 2011 - 2 wins, ATL Week 1 and DET. We finish 8-8 and miss the playoffs after a 7-3. This sort of makes me sick because I did not realize those were are only 2 "good" wins all year. 2012 - 3 wins, IND Week 1, DAL and MIN. Now at this point we cannot have anymore, but both DAL and MIN could end up 8-8 reducing it to 1 win. Odds are it is between 2-3. To me it seems like a few things are at play, one is strength of schedule. We have been following a bad year with a decent to good year consistently since the Super Bowl run in 2006. We had a tougher schedule the next season and went 7-9. That put us in last, giving us an easier schedule in 2008 when we went 9-7 and finished in 2nd. The following year, we drop back to 7-9 and 3rd place due to the tougher schedule. This sets us up for an easy schedule in 2010 where we go 11-5 and win the division. This sets us up for a tougher schedule resulting in an 8-8 record and another 3rd place finish. Which leads us to this season which we should finish with 9 or 10 wins. I don't recall any team in recent history with that sort of flip flopping every season. So essentially we have been the same team for the last 6-7 seasons, but the level of our opponents has actually determined our record more than anything else. Based on that trend, an aging defense, and many holes to fill in the offseason (probably more than anyone anticipated), I would predict a 6-7 win season next year without some drastic changes and acquisitions this offseason.

Signing him and Campbell instead of addressing the OLine was also a huge miscalculation as well.

To me this just shows how bad it has gotten, when the average fan is finally fed up with the performance on the field, you know it is time for change.

The Bears have to go 10-6 with MIN and one of WAS or NYG going 9-7. Based on the remaining schedules, I could see this playing out: 1. ATL (14-2) 2. SF (12-3-1) 3. GB (12-4) 4. WAS (10-6) 5. SEA (10-6) 6. NYG (10-6) 7. CHI (10-6) 8. DAL (9-7) 9. MIN (8-8)

I expect more in weeks to come. He clearly needs to go. The Super Bowl run was a fluke season with some crazy games going our way.

Where are you getting your numbers from? Yahoo Sports says: NE - 22 CHI - 20 DEN - 18 http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/byteam?g...&timeframe= Either way, it is not "Lovie Smith's" defense. It has been Tillman+ whoever else gets a turnover.

I agree, I don't know if I want a 10-6 Wild Card loss team who keeps the same staff or an 8-8 team that cleans house. I am leaning towards 8-8.

Bears are expected to re-sign RB Kahlil Bell today, according to league source. https://twitter.com/seankjensen/statuses/281041940387082242

He is an idiot, you just lost 2 straight games at home to division opponents, and a non-divisional game away is now important. We are technically out of the playoffs right now and even 10-6 does not guarantee us anything. The only thing saving our ass right now is we play 2 bad teams (ARZ and DET) where the other 8-6 teams have a tougher road. MIN plays HOU and GB (these games are dependent on how many players the playoff teams sit) WAS plays PHI and DAL (one team of WAS and DAL can finish no better than 9-7) DAL plays NO and WAS (one team of WAS and DAL can finish no better than 9-7) NYG plays BAL and PHI (Baltimore already clinched playoff spot)

Urlacher is the not the brightest tool in the shed. He probably thinks the Packer fans are booing when Kuhn gets a carry too. "Oooo, look at the bright light" However, he is entitled to his opinion, and I would assume no athlete wants to be booed. I also think he is implying something when he says the media and fans don't know what they are talking about. Like he knows something about the coaching situation that we don't know. Maybe the coaches have already been told they are not coming back?

I agree, there is no way any rusher should've even sniffed his panties on that play. It actually looked like the OLine was just casually playing out the game, not really attempting to block. I believe 2 of the OLine were blocking air, and the air did a swim move and helped with the sack. I can't imagine how practice looks when tackling dummies and sleds are getting past the OLine.

A win keeps slim playoff hopes alive, a loss basically eliminates the team from the post season.

Last year was bad enough, we could've picked 14, but that one win dropped us to 19. At least this year we are pretty much locked into 17-21. I am just torn over a 10-6 playoff Wild Card only to lose the first game and have the staff return next year or an 8-8 season where the staff is fired.

My only concerns would be the college coaches, because most don't make the transition very well.

Just as long as we don't announce the coach before he signs.

Yeah, 9-7 would be even worse because that would not be enough to get into the playoffs, and probably bump us down to the last non-playoff slot at 20.

** UPDATED 23DEC ** 1. KC 2-13 2. JAX 2-13 3. OAK 4-11 4. PHI 4-11 5. DET 4-11 6. BUF 5-10 7. CLE 5-10 8. TEN 5-10 9. ARZ 5-10 10. SD 6-9 11. NYJ 6-9 12. TB 6-9 13. CAR 6-9 14. MIA 7-8 15. PIT 7-8 16. NO 7-8 17. STL 7-7-1 18. DAL 8-7 19. NYG 8-7 20. CHI 9-6 21. MIN 9-6^ 22. WAS 9-6^ 23. CIN 9-6* 24. SEA 10-5* 25. BAL 10-5* 26. IND 10-5* 27. SF 10-4-1* 28. NE 11-4* 29. GB 11-4* 30. DEN 12-3* 31. HOU 12-3* 32. ATL 13-2* *-Clinched playoff spot ^-Projected playoff spot Assuming we don't make the playoffs, it looks like we will be picking between 18-20 which is exactly where we picked last year (19). I hate this position, just good enough not to get elite talent, and just bad enough to not make the playoffs.