adam Posted December 19, 2007 Report Share Posted December 19, 2007 http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...4&cset=true If you haven't heard the news, the Bears are the latest Super Bowl loser to miss the playoffs the season after a trip to the big game. Seven of the last eight runners-up failed to gain a postseason berth after their success the previous season. The Bears' 20-13 loss to Minnesota on Monday night officially put them in the club. You undoubtedly will read stories or hear people talking about why this happens so regularly to Super Bowl also-rans. Theories will be trotted out about teams resting on their laurels or players spending too much time in the off-season on the banquet circuit. And the theories even might be applicable to some of the Super Bowl losers that couldn't seem to handle success. But not to the Bears. The Bears are not a case study in the pitfalls facing Super Bowl losers. The Bears are a case study in bad football. The team's brass would love it if someone advanced the theory that the players got fat after losing to the Colts in Super Bowl XLI. Or that the hunger simply had been blunted by a taste of success. Or that the 2007 season is just an example of human nature doing what human nature tends to do. But it's none of that. This is a poorly coached, talent-thin organization that made poor decisions leading up to this season. This team is so removed from being in last season's Super Bowl, Halas Hall might as well be in Dubai. So, no, this isn't about a Super Bowl hangover. Please, no more of that nonsense. This is about two things: a good team that got lucky in a bad NFC last season and, from top to bottom, a lost organization this season. Looking back on it from the vantage point of this season, it seems so obvious now. The Bears were never in position to get better offensively because they had no playmakers on offense. And that includes returner extraordinaire Devin Hester, who apparently can't grasp the offense well enough to make a difference. Talk about a bad confluence: No talent and an offensive coordinator, Ron Turner, who can't adapt. Trust me, in the NFL a lack of ability and imagination is impossible to overcome. An aging offensive line has been awful this season. Forget Thomas Jones. With this line, it might not have made a difference if the Bears had the Minnesota version of Adrian Peterson. They still don't have a quarterback and didn't even when Rex Grossman was healthy. Head coach Lovie Smith wanted to mess with the defense in the off-season, wanted to put his own mark on it. So he got rid of Ron Rivera when he should have been paying more attention to the coordinator on the other side of the ball. That Brian Urlacher was not voted to the Pro Bowl on Tuesday is stunning, given that his popularity was thought to make him recession-proof. But he has an arthritic back, and opponents didn't seem quite so afraid of running at him this season. If you want to know how far the Bears have fallen, look no further than that. It adds a few more tremors to an already shaky future. Other injuries slowed down the Bears, obviously. Cornerback Nathan Vasher missed a large chunk of the season and defensive tackle Tommie Harris wasn't himself most of the year. But come on. A 5-9 record? From a team that talked about getting back to the Super Bowl as if it were a given? It had the commensurate cockiness that great teams have, just not the commensurate talent and coaching. I picked the Bears to go 12-4 this season. So shame on me for believing they had what it takes to take another step. They talked a good game, and I listened. When I made that prediction, I used it as a challenge to the Bears. Prove that last season wasn't a fluke, I said. It sure feels like a fluke right now. They need a quarterback and a running back, but they have a general manager in Jerry Angelo who can't identify talent at either position. And they have a head coach who doesn't seem to do much coaching. Other than that, bring on 2008! The Bears play Green Bay on Sunday. On Tuesday, Smith was talking about the possibility of sweeping the Packers this season. You can't blame him. When he was hired, fans and media wanted him to understand the importance of the rivalry with our neighbors to the north. Well, he gets it. He might not get how to coach, but he gets the rivalry. Whoopee. One of the Bears' themes this season was finishing what they had started in Super Bowl XLI. The new theme is to just finish. The sooner the better. Somewhat accurate, but I don't agree with "a good team that got lucky in a bad NFC last season". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearfanforlife Posted December 19, 2007 Report Share Posted December 19, 2007 http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/footb...4&cset=true Somewhat accurate, but I don't agree with "a good team that got lucky in a bad NFC last season". If they were lucky then they would not have gotten through the playoffs to the superbowl. The NFC was not as good as it is this year but the playoff teams normally weed out any team not good enough to be in the superbowl. I remember watching the San Deigo the first game of the season and thinking that our Defense was looking great. We had every starter on the field. Mike Brown was laying wood all over the place. The Dline looked very strong. The next week without Brown and Dusty the D looked a lot different. Then Vasher goes out and it started looking worse. Nagging injuries to Harris and Urlacher have slowed the D's performance, along with more and more injuries. I believe that if our D had not gone through all of these injuries our record would be a lot better. I cant think of which game but i recall at one point in the season we had our whole secondary out with injuries. I dont care how u look at it our D has been weakened by injuries. Take for example the last Vikings game with a injured Dline and the right defensive scheme we shut down AP, we forced them to go to the air and with Vasher back we forced turnovers and should have won that game. As for the Offense there is not much we can do with no running game. Unless you have a Brady or Manning at QB you are not going to win without a run game(not sure how much help either QB would have been with our oline). So we dont have a top tier QB, that tells me we better have a hell of a running game. The running game starts up front with the Oline which is IMO is the weakest link to this football team. I dont care if we had LT AP LJ no one could run behind this line that we have. I take that back Barry Sanders could have but he is the only RB to do so year in and year out in Detroit behind weak olines. I cant count how many times i saw Benson getting hit in the backfield right after taking the handoff. I am a firm believer that if the OLINE is fixed we can contend for the NFC next year. I would be willing to bet that if Benson had a good oline to run behind he could prove that he is not a bust. The biggest changes need for next year are up front with the oline. I hope we can lure Faneca from Pit and then draft a LT. Putting our staring oline at LT=draft, G=Faneca, C=Kruetz, G= Garza, RT=Tait. I wouldnt mind seeing this oline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenks Heat Posted December 19, 2007 Report Share Posted December 19, 2007 I am a firm believer that if the OLINE is fixed we can contend for the NFC next year. I would be willing to bet that if Benson had a good oline to run behind he could prove that he is not a bust. The biggest changes need for next year are up front with the oline. I hope we can lure Faneca from Pit and then draft a LT. Putting our staring oline at LT=draft, G=Faneca, C=Kruetz, G= Garza, RT=Tait. I wouldnt mind seeing this oline. Think Benson can stay healthy? Moreso than his production behind a very bad O line is the fact that he gets hurt on av ery regular basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balta1701-A Posted December 19, 2007 Report Share Posted December 19, 2007 Think Benson can stay healthy? Moreso than his production behind a very bad O line is the fact that he gets hurt on av ery regular basis. Rex Grossman couldn't stay healthy until he led the Bears to the Super Bowl. I have no idea if Benson can stay healthy. Thus far he hasn't been able to do so. The injury prone label certainly does apply to him at this point in his career. Can anyone tell me what the cap implications of dumping Benson this offseason would be? I still think the correct solution at this point is to focus like a laser on fixing the O-Line this offseason and give him one more shot next year as the starting back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Controlled Chaos Posted December 19, 2007 Report Share Posted December 19, 2007 Rex Grossman couldn't stay healthy until he led the Bears to the Super Bowl. I have no idea if Benson can stay healthy. Thus far he hasn't been able to do so. The injury prone label certainly does apply to him at this point in his career. Can anyone tell me what the cap implications of dumping Benson this offseason would be? I still think the correct solution at this point is to focus like a laser on fixing the O-Line this offseason and give him one more shot next year as the starting back. For sure. I just don't think it's fair to judge Benson with this line. They need to go out and spend on Oline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam Posted December 19, 2007 Author Report Share Posted December 19, 2007 I cant think of which game but i recall at one point in the season we had our whole secondary out with injuries. That was the Detroit game. Tillman, Vasher, Brown, and Archuleta were all injured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.