85 Bears vs 07 Pats

[madlithuanian]

All,

 

My friend lives in Boston and is readying himself for being hounded all game on why the pats would beat the Bears. If I could so humbley ask, would any of you be willing to throw some stats together to assist a fellow Bears fan show how the Bears would indeed kill 'em?

 

Much appreciated in advance!

[Controlled Chaos]

All,

 

My friend lives in Boston and is readying himself for being hounded all game on why the pats would beat the Bears. If I could so humbley ask, would any of you be willing to throw some stats together to assist a fellow Bears fan show how the Bears would indeed kill 'em?

 

Much appreciated in advance!

send him the hampton article

[madlithuanian]

Here's my article on it...admin's, feel free to post!

 

The 1985 Chicago Bears vs. The 2007 New England Patriots

By The Mad Lithuanian 1/31/08

 

Here we are, just days before the Super Bowl. The underdog New York Giants are taking on the New England Patriots juggernaut. At the moment, the Patriots are only favored by 12, and many seem to be taking the Giants and the points. But, for my money, I’m taking the Patriots to cover. Two weeks for the Pats to prepare, and two weeks for the Giants to cool off should result in an eventual blow out. I see it close in the first half, then I see the Pats running away with it. With this eventual win, what most people are asking is, “Are the 2007 Patriots the best team of all time?”. Well, they deserve to be considered and invited to the dance. But…no. They aren’t the best. With all due respect to the 49’ers, Steelers, and Cowboys greats…they are not the best. ’72 Dolphins, you say? They went perfect, but they were far from it. The Bills Super Bowl teams would have eaten them for dinner. And they never won. So, “Who?”, you say. The 1985 Chicago Bears, my friend; that’s who.

 

Let’s compare the rosters, shall we?

 

First the offense:

 

QB: Tom Brady (NE) vs. Jim McMahon (CHI). In a fight, Jimmy Mac would beat Brady like a Glass Joe. But in football, you’d give the edge to Brady. He’s just put up silly numbers with a silly corps of receivers. Brady got to throw to record breaking Moss, Mac threw to fast Willie Gault. Gault may have had world class speed, but certainly not world class hands. Jimmy was a better scrambler and didn’t mind getting hit…even though a cheap shot by a Packer eventually put his career in a tailspin. For toughness, Mad Mac, but for skill, Brady gets the edge. But, wouldn’t you much rather down a 12 pack with Jimmy Mac than swill a Cosmo with Tom Terrific?

Edge: Brady

 

RB: Lawrence Maroney (NE) vs. Walter Payton (CHI). ‘Nuff said. Walter. Next.

Edge: Payton

 

FB: Heath Evans (NE) vs. Matt Suey (CHI). - Evans is a nice big kid, but Suey’s a better blocker and had better hands.

Edge: Suey

 

WR: Randy Moss, Wes Welker, Donte Stallworth (NE) vs. Willie Gault, Dennis McKinnon, Dennis Gentry (CHI). No contest here. Future Hall of Famer, Moss, is better than all three Bears receivers put together. Heck, Welker probably is too. Gault is basically Stallworth.

Edge: Moss, Welker, Stallworth

 

TE: Ben Watson (NE) vs. Emery Moorehead (CHI). Moorehead’s a great guy, but not a great tight end. Watson is. After Gates, Clark and Witten, Watson’s the best in the league right now.

Edge: Watson

 

LT: Matt Light (NE) vs. Jim Covert (CHI.). It’s a wash. Both are exceptional.

Edge: None

 

LG: Logan Mankins (NE) vs. Mark Bortz (CHI). Another wash.

Edge: None

 

C: Dan Koppen (NE) vs. Jay Hilgenberg (CHI). See LT and LG.

Edge: None

 

RG: Stephen Neal (NE) vs. Tom Thayer (CHI). Maybe a slight edge to Thayer, but it’s a virtual wash again.

Edge: None

 

RT: Nick Kaczur (NE) vs. Keith Van Horne (CHI). Maybe another slight edge to Van Horne, but again, a virtual wash.

Edge: None

 

Overall all Offensive Edge: None. The Bears ran better and the Patriots threw better.

 

Now the defense:

 

DE: Richard Seymour, Ty Warren (NE) vs. Richard Dent, Dan Hampton (CHI). Seymour belongs in the company of Dent. But Danimal Hampton trumps ‘em all. The Hall of Famer is simply an animal!

Edge: Dent, Hampton

 

DT: Vince Wilfork, Rashad Moore (NE) vs. William Perry, Steve McMichael (CHI). Unless Wilfork’s playing dirty, The Fridge and Mongo win this battle. Not enough people credit the Fridge’s ability to stuff the run and get pressure on the QB. Besides peddling McDLT’s, the Fridge could play ball. Heck, he’s the Pat’s answer to Vrabel 20+ years ago… Mongo McMichael was also a force to be reckoned with. And not just in the ‘rasslin’ ring. He could bring it, and played with an abandon rarely seen these days.

Edge: Perry, McMichael

 

OLB: Mike Vrabel, Adalius Thomas (NE) vs. Wilbur Marshall, Otis Wilson (CHI.). Vrabel and Thomas are quite excellent. But they aren’t what pro bowlers Wilbur and Mama’s Boy Otis were! However, this isn’t a runaway for the Bears. All considered, it’s probably a virtual wash here too.

Edge: None

 

MLB: Tedy Bruschi, Junior Seau (NE) vs. Mike Singletary, Ron Rivera (CHI) This is a tough one. Bruschi’s a hell of a player. So is Seau. But this isn’t a youthful Seau. This is a Seau who got his arm broken by current Bears RB bust, Cedric Benson, just last season. Then comes Singletary. The eyes, man! Fear the eyes! Rivera’s not much other than a role player and the Bears didn’t play a 3-4, they played a 4-3. You have to go with the Hall of Famer and arguably, best of all time, Mike Singletary here. But, since Rivera isn’t the beast Samurai Mike is, let’s call this one a wash to throw New England a bone.

Edge: None

 

CB: Asante Samuel, Ellis Hobbs (NE) vs. Mike Richardson, Leslie Frazier (CHI). Samuel’s the best of the lot here, but the combo of Richardson and Frazier are better. Those guys could hit. And intercept. And sack.

Edge: Richardson, Frazier

 

S: Rodney Harrison, James Sanders (NE) vs. Gary Fencik, Dave Duerson (CHI). Harrison’s a hell of a player. Especially since not being on ‘roids. Sanders is just lucky to be in the line up. But Fencik and Duerson were all over the field delivered blows that would KO most heavyweight fighters. Again, the duo out-do the one.

Edge: Fencik, Duerson

 

Overall Defensive Edge: C’mon. The Bears easily.

 

K: Stephen Gostkoski (NE) vs. Kevin Butler (CHI). – Although Gostkotski’s got a great Chicago name, it’s But-head! He was always money! And he head-butted offensive linemen and Jimmy Mac! But, Gostkowski’s done well. Let’s call it a tie.

Edge: None

 

P: Let’s be honest, did these teams ever punt? Next…

 

KR/PR: Ellis Hobbs, Wes Welker (NE) vs. Dennis Gentry (CHI). Welker and Hobbs split duties while Gentry did it all. All 3 are quite decent. But none are Devin Hester. Let’s call it a wash.

Edge: None

 

Overall Special Teams Edge: None

 

Coaching: Bill Belichick (NE) vs. Mike Ditka, Buddy Ryan (CHI). In the coolness and toughness department, Ditka and Ryan would kick Bill’s butt. Even with Ryan’s poor punching skills are once seen against Kevin Gilbride when with the Oilers. But, you give the edge to the tactician, Belichick. He does have more rings. But, he a bigger a-hole.

Edge: Belichick

 

So let’s check the scoreboard…

 

Offense:

NE : QB, WR, TE (3)

CHI: RB, FB (2)

 

Defense:

NE: None (0)

CHI: DE, DT, CB, S, Overall Edge (5)

 

Special Teams:

NE: None (0)

CHI: None (0)

 

Coaching:

NE: Belichick (1)

 

NE Total: 4

CHI Total: 7

 

Looks like a Chicago win. Again.

 

Now that we know the 1985 Bears are better than the 2007 Patriots, how will they both be known?

 

The Patriots are undefeated. The Bears only lost one game without its starting QB.

 

The Patriots got caught cheating and didn’t have to forfeit a game or have its coach suspended. The Bears just beat teams without cheating.

 

The Patriots had one of the all time best offenses. The Bears had one of the best all time defenses.

 

The Patriots had a genius coach that no one likes. The Bears had 2 great coaches that everyone likes…except one another.

 

The Patriots continually look for ways they’ve been slighted to find an edge. The Bears went out drinking heavily before games and just kicked butt because that’s what they do.

 

The Patriots big media event was wondering how Brady and his supermodel girl are doing. The Bears big media event was McMahon mooning reporters. Don’t we wish it was a combo, and the supermodel girl mooned the media?

 

The Patriots got introduced as a team, rebuking individuality. The Bears had the Super Bowl Shuffle, and allowed every individual to shine on the team. Sounds like communism vs American-ism.

 

The Patriots have a credit card commercial. The Bears have a Saturday Night Live skit.

 

The Patriots are from Boston. The Bears are from Chicago.

 

In the regular season the Patriots were ranked 1 in offense, 13 in rushing, 1 in passing, 4 in defense, 10 in d rush and 6 in d passing. In the regular season, the Bears were ranked 7 in offense, 1 in rushing, 20 in passing, 1 in defense, 1 in d rush and 3 in d passing.

 

Getting to the Super bowl, the Patriots won by a total of 52-32 (20pt margin, 10 per game). Going to the Super Bowl, the Bears won by a total of 45-0 (45pt margin, 22.5 per game)…not including a 46-10 win against the Pats in the Super Bowl.

 

The Patriots have a fan in Ben Affleck. The Bears have a fan in Bill Murray.

 

…it could go one forever.

 

But as you can clearly tell…while the 2007 Patriots are a fantastic all time great team, they still aren’t better than the 1985 Bears!

 

 

All,

 

My friend lives in Boston and is readying himself for being hounded all game on why the pats would beat the Bears. If I could so humbley ask, would any of you be willing to throw some stats together to assist a fellow Bears fan show how the Bears would indeed kill 'em?

 

Much appreciated in advance!

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

Sorry to say it, but the current Pats would win by 2-3 touchdowns

[jason]

Sorry to say it, but the current Pats would win by 2-3 touchdowns

 

I'm convinced by this post that you are a very young guy who has no idea about football in the mid-80s, and didn't actually see the 85 Bears. And after looking at your profile, the thought is confirmed.

 

No disrespect intended, but there is no team in the history of football, and may never be, that would beat a fully healthy 85 Bears team by 2 or 3 touchdowns as a simple matter of fact. To say otherwise shows a serious lack of football knowledge, a lack of historical perspective, and just a bit of ignorance.

[Ed Hochuli 3:16]

I'm convinced by this post that you are a very young guy who has no idea about football in the mid-80s, and didn't actually see the 85 Bears. And after looking at your profile, the thought is confirmed.

 

No disrespect intended, but there is no team in the history of football, and may never be, that would beat a fully healthy 85 Bears team by 2 or 3 touchdowns as a simple matter of fact. To say otherwise shows a serious lack of football knowledge, a lack of historical perspective, and just a bit of ignorance.

Actually, I'm 29 and I've been going to the games since I was 7, which means the first year I started going was 1985. I saw them play, remember them pretty well, yet I just think that Belichick would have been able to take Payton out of the game (for the most part), and made Mac throw it around the yard, which is then I think NE would force some TOs. I think the NE OL right now would give Brady time, enough time, to be able to hit Welker, Moss, Stallworth, etc.

 

Maybe the Bears do win, however, with the current speed of the game now, I just don't see how it would happen.

[madlithuanian]

I simply beg to differ.

 

I'd love to see the game...and I bet that Brady's uni wouldn't be clean after that game.

 

Sorry to say it, but the current Pats would win by 2-3 touchdowns

[madlithuanian]

I'm not so sure Belichecik would take Walter out of the game. That 85 Pat's squad has some gamers on it. The '07 version has allowed some yards. ...and it's PAYTON, not Michael Turner or Maurice Jones-Drew! Mac threw it all over the yard agasint most teams that year...I have no reason to think he couldn't do it against the 07 Pats. Mac didn't have any turnovers in the playoffs...Brady has. I think the Bears would be the ones forcing turnovers.

 

 

 

Actually, I'm 29 and I've been going to the games since I was 7, which means the first year I started going was 1985. I saw them play, remember them pretty well, yet I just think that Belichick would have been able to take Payton out of the game (for the most part), and made Mac throw it around the yard, which is then I think NE would force some TOs. I think the NE OL right now would give Brady time, enough time, to be able to hit Welker, Moss, Stallworth, etc.

 

Maybe the Bears do win, however, with the current speed of the game now, I just don't see how it would happen.

[barnesat]

Actually, I'm 29 and I've been going to the games since I was 7, which means the first year I started going was 1985. I saw them play, remember them pretty well, yet I just think that Belichick would have been able to take Payton out of the game (for the most part), and made Mac throw it around the yard, which is then I think NE would force some TOs. I think the NE OL right now would give Brady time, enough time, to be able to hit Welker, Moss, Stallworth, etc.

 

Maybe the Bears do win, however, with the current speed of the game now, I just don't see how it would happen.

 

I see your point, but my question to you is have you seen the 85 Bears game recently. I recorded it off of NFL network a couple weeks ago as they played the entire 85 superbowl minus a few insignificant plays. I have heard stories and am only 24 so I don't clearly remember the game. The 85 patriots for all intensive purposes did take Payton out of that game. The same thing that the current pats would do. They even started off by getting the first couple of turnovers which gave them 3 of there 10 points. The bears knew they would take Payton out and so they handed of to Suhey and used Payton as a decoy. I really see nothing different here than what the current pats would do. The bottom line is that the rest of the team around Payton was good enought to dominate the pats defense. As for the pats offense against the bears d. Seriously, Brady is a great qb, and is very composed, but those guys put a serious hit on the two qbs back then on almost every single snap of the ball. They were ridiculous, and Brady who is not used to getting hit a lot would just get slaughtered. It really is hard to throw the ball when you are laying on your back. My opinion is watch the 85 game, and tell me that those bears wouldn't win. I don't think you can do it, and I have a lot of respect for the current Patriots and what they have accomplished as a team. Moss would get hit once by the old bears dbs and he would be done for the game. The 85 pats had negative overrall yardage after the entire first half, and the only reason they were close was because of a 30 some yard pass right before half time. The current pats have been getting through the playoffs by running because teams have been game planning for Brady and Moss. Moss has been a non factor. The old bears could do the same. The only problem is, they wouldn't be able to run on them. Nobody ran on the 85 bears. So for what it is worth, NE is nothing without their offense, and the old bears d would send the offense home crying, which leaves nobody to win the game for the pats. The only way I see the 85 bears losing is if todays rules were used. That could honestly be the deciding factor. The bears D would be so penalized under todays rules that a lot of their intimidation and ferocity would be taken a way, which is the only way that D could be beat. So if under todays rules, it would be a close game, if under 85 rules, bears dominate.

[madlithuanian]

Well said...

 

I see your point, but my question to you is have you seen the 85 Bears game recently. I recorded it off of NFL network a couple weeks ago as they played the entire 85 superbowl minus a few insignificant plays. I have heard stories and am only 24 so I don't clearly remember the game. The 85 patriots for all intensive purposes did take Payton out of that game. The same thing that the current pats would do. They even started off by getting the first couple of turnovers which gave them 3 of there 10 points. The bears knew they would take Payton out and so they handed of to Suhey and used Payton as a decoy. I really see nothing different here than what the current pats would do. The bottom line is that the rest of the team around Payton was good enought to dominate the pats defense. As for the pats offense against the bears d. Seriously, Brady is a great qb, and is very composed, but those guys put a serious hit on the two qbs back then on almost every single snap of the ball. They were ridiculous, and Brady who is not used to getting hit a lot would just get slaughtered. It really is hard to throw the ball when you are laying on your back. My opinion is watch the 85 game, and tell me that those bears wouldn't win. I don't think you can do it, and I have a lot of respect for the current Patriots and what they have accomplished as a team. Moss would get hit once by the old bears dbs and he would be done for the game. The 85 pats had negative overrall yardage after the entire first half, and the only reason they were close was because of a 30 some yard pass right before half time. The current pats have been getting through the playoffs by running because teams have been game planning for Brady and Moss. Moss has been a non factor. The old bears could do the same. The only problem is, they wouldn't be able to run on them. Nobody ran on the 85 bears. So for what it is worth, NE is nothing without their offense, and the old bears d would send the offense home crying, which leaves nobody to win the game for the pats. The only way I see the 85 bears losing is if todays rules were used. That could honestly be the deciding factor. The bears D would be so penalized under todays rules that a lot of their intimidation and ferocity would be taken a way, which is the only way that D could be beat. So if under todays rules, it would be a close game, if under 85 rules, bears dominate.

[DrunkBomber]

They key to the game would be if the Bears line could create pressure on Brady alone. Considering the Ravens and Eagles of this year were able to Im pretty sure the 85 Bears would be able to.

[adam]

91-10

[madlithuanian]

...and the Giants did a decent job as well.

 

They key to the game would be if the Bears line could create pressure on Brady alone. Considering the Ravens and Eagles of this year were able to Im pretty sure the 85 Bears would be able to.

[madlithuanian]

10?!

 

91-10

[Bears4Ever_34]

Different eras.. The newer Era will prlly win everytime unless your comparing the Chicago Bulls teams to any other dynasty, they'd win everytime..

[selection7]

Different eras.. The newer Era will prlly win everytime unless your comparing the Chicago Bulls teams to any other dynasty, they'd win everytime..

I think we have to take eras into account or else like you say, it's not an interestig argument. It's possible the 2007 Bears could've beat the 1985 Bears. Offenses, gameplans, and offseason work ethic are so much more developed these days. A rookie Regrigerator Perry wouldn't even be considered big these days.

 

At the beginning of the year I would've said Patriots hands down. I'd never seen anything like it. 50-0 drubbings week after week and Belichek getting criticized for running up the score. But what happened? The Patriots looked anything but unbeatable during the playoffs. Didn't the Bears shutout everyteam they played in the playoffs (or some such nonesense) before going on to destroy the Pats in the second most lopsided SB win ever? Based on where the Pats are now (and accounting for different eras), there's no way you could go with the '07 Pats over the '85 Bears.

[adam]

I think we have to take eras into account or else like you say, it's not an interestig argument. It's possible the 2007 Bears could've beat the 1985 Bears. Offenses, gameplans, and offseason work ethic are so much more developed these days. A rookie Regrigerator Perry wouldn't even be considered big these days.

 

At the beginning of the year I would've said Patriots hands down. I'd never seen anything like it. 50-0 drubbings week after week and Belichek getting criticized for running up the score. But what happened? The Patriots looked anything but unbeatable during the playoffs. Didn't the Bears shutout everyteam they played in the playoffs (or some such nonesense) before going on to destroy the Pats in the second most lopsided SB win ever? Based on where the Pats are now (and accounting for different eras), there's no way you could go with the '07 Pats over the '85 Bears.

It was 44-3 after 3 quarters. The Pats had -19 total offensive yards in the 1st half. That is how dominant the game was.

[BearSox]

There is a mismatch though... the 85 bears D was one that shut down the run and forced the other team to pass. And back then most teams were run teams. However, the Pats are a pass offense... It would be an interesting game though.

[selection7]

There is a mismatch though... the 85 bears D was one that shut down the run and forced the other team to pass. And back then most teams were run teams. However, the Pats are a pass offense... It would be an interesting game though.

Well I guess the '07 Pats made the answer easy for us. You don't get to talk about being better than the '85 Super Bowl champs if you can't even beat the '07 Giants in the big game.

 

I have no idea what happened to the '07 Pats. It was a pretty huge fall from glory to go from where they were midseason to losing to Eli Manning in the end. I'm sure over the next weeks we'll hear all the pundits break the game down and give their opinions.

[selection7]

Maybe the Pats advatage from cheating wore out over the season as other teams had time to evolve new signals and gameplans. It's a question that has to be at least asked, becuase otherwise it certainly is a very large coincidence. I personally don't think so because I think the Pats main advantage by stealing signals and taping run-throughs would be to help out their defense, and the Super Bowl Pats had offensive, not defensive problems.

[NeoBear]

Maybe the Pats advatage from cheating wore out over the season as other teams had time to evolve new signals and gameplans. It's a question that has to be at least asked, becuase otherwise it certainly is a very large coincidence. I personally don't think so because I think the Pats main advantage by stealing signals and taping run-throughs would be to help out their defense, and the Super Bowl Pats had offensive, not defensive problems.

They were stealing other teams defensive signals is what thry were doing.

[selection7]

They were stealing other teams defensive signals is what thry were doing.

Very interesting.

[adam]

Some things to note. NE has some age, and it seems like as the season wore on they got worse. The NE Defense looked completely winded after that first series vs the NYG.

 

Think about how beat up SD was (Rivers, Gates, and LT all injured), yet the Pats barely beat them. They also didn't dominate the Jags like expected. It was almost like they were playing teams at just the right time. With a healthly LT, Rivers, and Gates, SD probably wins that game.

 

Regardless, the 85 Bears can still say they are the best team of all time.

[Controlled Chaos]

This game just goes to show that the 85 bears could have easily beat the Pats. The Giants Defense shut em down. Imagine what the Bears would do. People don't get how close they were to shutting out every team in the playoffs. Are you kidding me? Can some of you not comprehend that. These are the best teams of the year in the playoffs and they couldn't score 1 point against the Bears Def?? They couldn't get in position to kick one fuckin field goal?? That fluke fumble at the beginning of the SB is the only reason that game wasn't a shutout. They would have easily kept that game scoreless if not for already giving up those 3 points. New England only ran 21 plays in the first half(only 4 of which resulted in positive yardage), -19 total offensive yards, 2 pass completions, 1 first down, and 3 points. Meanwhile, Chicago gained 236 yards and scored 23 points themselves.

 

I'm sorry Hester 3:16, but for anyone to say the Bears would lose by 2-3 touchdowns is just crazy. I mean if you want to argue it would be a close game...fine you can try and make that point, but to say the bears D would get dominated is crazy. Maybe you need to go rewatch the games. Take a look at how Montana and the prolific San Fran offense did against the Bears.

[madlithuanian]

The concept of "cheating" floated around the room where I saw the game. Many mentioned that is was odd that when they won (assuming with tapes), were by 3 points, and when they lost (assuming without tapes), was a 3 point loss. I know the numbers aen't exact, but the overall concept is there. Did they indeed get help with tapes in the past? It's sure to be a hop item once the hoopla dies down and Goodell, and the guy from Hawaii meet with Sen. Arlen...

 

Maybe the Pats advatage from cheating wore out over the season as other teams had time to evolve new signals and gameplans. It's a question that has to be at least asked, becuase otherwise it certainly is a very large coincidence. I personally don't think so because I think the Pats main advantage by stealing signals and taping run-throughs would be to help out their defense, and the Super Bowl Pats had offensive, not defensive problems.