Lansdowne
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Jan 18, 2005
- Messages
- 4,390
- Reaction score
- 1,429
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.How freaking stupid is that?!? It's the '85 Bears first of all. Second, times and technology have definitely changed the way players are trained and healed. Are you serious? It's like saying that Steven Hawking would whoop Albert Einstein in a science fair.
Brady would've picked apart the 46 defense.
I think its fair to say that Brady would pick apart the '85 Bears playing the 4-6 defense. I just don't think any coach today would put that exceptional group of players in the 4-6. Their front 4 was exceptional at penetrating all by themselves. That's a tremendous foundation to build on. Now add in those Linebackers.
What put them near the top as a unit might have been some temporary 4-6 smoke and mirrors, but even if they played the 10-1, 1-10 or even the 'everyone just do whatever you feel like doing' defense, they would have been formidable. Too much talent.
This was actually put to the test the following year. Buddy Ryan left after SB20 to coach the Eagles so Vince Tobin became the Bears' DC for the '86 season. Vince scrapped the 46 in favor of more conventional 4-3 defenses. The '86 Bears D surpassed the '85 D statistically in both yards allowed and points allowed as the team went 14-2 almost exclusively on the back of the D due to the offensive struggles that season (QB issues galore). Indeed that D was talented.I think its fair to say that Brady would pick apart the '85 Bears playing the 4-6 defense. I just don't think any coach today would put that exceptional group of players in the 4-6. Their front 4 was exceptional at penetrating all by themselves. That's a tremendous foundation to build on. Now add in those Linebackers.
What put them near the top as a unit might have been some temporary 4-6 smoke and mirrors, but even if they played the 10-1, 1-10 or even the 'everyone just do whatever you feel like doing' defense, they would have been formidable. Too much talent.
Thanx for posting this....couldn't agree more.
first off, all the players admitted they felt relieved to have lost a game, because it took a lot of pressure off them in the playoffs.
second, they didn't lose to Miami because of a let down....that game was a HUGE Monday night game with tons of hype (the 72 fins were in attendance)....they lost because it was a bad match up for them.
Had Miami made it to the SB that year it would've been a ring for Marino....a rematch would've been the Bears worst nightmare, they were so relieved that we took care fo the Fins for them.
The 07 Pats have been able to match up with EVERY opponent, no matter how they are attacked. They have been surprised and have been able to adapt, they have been at times worn out but overcame all.
You can't be predictable against the Pats offense with the blitz....our offense would've been a terrible match up for the 85 Bears....the Pats would've put 50 on the board before half time....bombs away.
And I'm sick of hearing how much more "dominant" they were. One team has the largest average point differential for a season, 07 Pats, and they did it despite facing 8 of the 11 other playoff teams....winning each game. case closed.
it's nostalgia....For Dr. Z to suggest the 07 Pats aren't even in the discussion as greatest team, you can't tell me that doesn't expose a clear anti-Pats bias....whether he doesn't like the coach or his media policies or is jealous or just looking for attention or all of the above.
The measure of a team is what they do in the playoffs.
Margin of victory is not even close in the playoffs comparing Pats vs Bears. The Bears had a 27 point differential per game.
Margin of victory is not a meaningful statistic when you are talking about Champions.
The game is about winning. How much you win by is severely overrated.
The Bears won the championship that year. That's a given. They did it by utterly dominating their playoff competition like no team has ever done. Two shutouts and allowing 3 points a game in the playoffs is an absolutely insane accomplishment. They made a mockery of the playoffs. What you do in the playoffs is much more important and impressive than what you do in the regular season.
Pats are the greatest team of this era. Bears were the greatest team of that era. The '71 Chevy Chevelle was the greatest domestic of that era. The Corvette Z06 is the greatest domestic of this era. Do you see how out of wack the comparison is now? Pioneering a "great" before todays technology holds more water with a lot of older folks...get it? Ask an old school muscle car guy.
True. But in one game that year THEY were utterly dominated. That's gotta count for something, no?
The Bears averaged 30 in the playoffs and gave up 3. That's a 27 point differential per playoff game. The Pats played their best ball in the first part of the regular season. The Bears played their best ball in the playoffs and Superbowl dominating the best competition.
89 Niners averaged 42 and won by average of 33 in playoffs. I guess they were the best then...
Unprepared yes. Inept no. John Hannah was on D& C this morning and said the '85 Pats had won nine games in a row under Grogan that year relying primarily on the run. The playoffs culminated in a 31-14 win in MIA in the AFCCG where, amazingly, he said the Pats rushed less than ten times the entire game! He said most of the players were ecstatic that Grogan was cleared as healthy for the SB and wanted him to start ahead of Eason. The coaches saw it differently and panicked. They decided to go away from what had got them there and come out pass happy in the SB with Eason slinging it around. You know the rest of the story. Very interesting prospective from a former all time greast player.