Welcome to PatsFans.com

85 Bears vs 07 Pats....and some myth busting

Discussion in 'PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum' started by patfanken, Jan 27, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. patfanken

    patfanken On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    5,649
    Likes Received:
    135
    Ratings:
    +259 / 14 / -8

    #91 Jersey

    I have seen a few commentators talking about which team is ultimately the Best team ever for a single season. To my mind it is WITHOUT question that the Bears are the best single season team...thus far. They DOMINATED their season. AND then they CRUSHED ALL of their playoff opponents. I think it will still be a tough call even when the Pats finish off the Giants. However I never hear the following observations mentioned in this discussion.

    1. I contend that the main reason the Bears Dominated so much that year was the fact they ran a defense that was revolutionary at the time, the 4-6 defense. It wasn't the personel that Dominated, it was the fact teams couldn't figure out how do effectively scheme a defense they hadn't encounted before. Granted the personel was very good, but the fact remains that after that totally dominating season, they didn't win another playoff game until '88 and NEVER again got to an NFCCG.... until last year.

    Over the next 2 years the league simply caught up with newness of the defense and because the players themselves weren't that dominating, they came back down to earth, and though they had some decent years (11-5), they were never again a "special" in any way. This is shown later when Ryan took his 4-6 to Philly as the head coach and while he got to the playoffs in 3 of his 5 years there, he NEVER won a playoff game.

    2. Now days technology allows all the "quality control" people to break down
    teams in so much detail that it doesn't take an off season to start to catch up with any team that creates a scheme that gives them an advantage. You can bet that within a few games, teams will start to catch up with any new innovations.

    I just mention this because the question of the 85 Bears and the 07 Pats WILL come up after this next game. So when you get into that argument and some Bears fan starts throwing you all those defensive Stats at you, you will have something to come back with that will make him at least think a little. ;)

    Myth 1....And speaking about arguements, one of the loudest arguements that I keep hearing from those analysts that want to make the case for the Giants, is that the Pats can be run on. WHY DO THEY KEEP SAYING THAT??? It just isn't so.

    Somehow that myth got started back in the Philly game despite the fact the Eagles managed a whopping 52 yds on the ground :eek:a Right after that was a game when the Pats running defense DID suck, the 162yds by the Ravens. Then when the Steelers posted 157 of mostly garbage time running yardage the Myth REALLY got legs.

    HOWEVER in the last 5 games the Pats HAVE NOT allowed a SINGLE 100 yd rusher, they haven't even allowed a single opponent a COMBINED total of 100 yds by their RBs. Jets -67, Miami 97 (alot of it in garbage time) NYG - 67, Jax-66 (2nd best running attack iin the league), and SD- 99 of which 32 of those yds came on 2 runs against the "prevent" defense at the end of the 1st half. BOTTOM LINE: The Pats run defense has been every bit as good as the Giants...if not better over the last month, but somehow that message hasn't gotten to the folks at ESPN, Fox, NFLN, etc.

    The other big myth has beem the play of Manning. While he obviously has greatly improved his play, the fact is that INCLUDING his miracle game against the Pats he hasn't thrown for more than 260 yds in the last 4 games. In fact in 2 of those games he didn't make it to 200 passing yds.

    Now I'm not saying he hasn't done a great job at the end of the season, but the fact is his production isn't matching the hype he's receiving. He certainly isn't the kind of QB who is likely be able to match production in good conditions with Tom Brady et al.

    The last myth I want to debunk is the over hype about the Giants pass rush. Hey, I think its a great pass rush, but nothing more than a lot of other teams have shown us, and not as good as the Chargers. The fact is that the Giants over the last 4 game have managed to sack the QB exactly 4 times (at least that's what I heard in a report, so I may be off by one) Excuse me, but that stat just doesn't scare me, or make me think that in ideal conditions Tom Brady will be phased by the Giant's pass rush.

    Like I said in a priot post, I won't shocked if they get a couple of sacks, nor will I stary sweating if they get 3-4 hits on him as well. All I know that for most of 30+ time that Brady will be dropping back to pass he is going to have all the time he needs to throw the ball...and that ISN'T good news for the Giants. In fact the Giant's pass rush was SOOOOOO intimidating, that Brady only managed to throw for 360+ yds just a month ago. :rolleyes:

    BTW- that being said, I DO NOT think that the Giants will sit back like the Jags in order to die a slow death rather than a fast one. Look for this. Look for the Giants to overload a side on passing downs. ie putting 4 men to one side of the ball, and only one to the other - To one side it looks like a total blitz, but the defense still is dropping back 6 guys. This kind of blitz has the same zone blitz principles where they try to get numbers in one area, while at the same time get the offense to commit OLmen to block players that aren't rushing. Its a great strategy.

    Jim Johnson used this strategy with some success in the Philly game, and their DC is a JJ desciple. In fact, we MIGHT have even seen this in the NYG game. I'll check it out for sure one of the "ten" times the NFLN will show the Pats/Giants game this coming week. In fact I think its on tomorrow

    That's it for now folks. Its hard to believe that the hype machine we endured this past week will only increase. But think of it as good news. It will only narrow the spread and make it easier to get back any of the money you lost during the 2-7 stretch over the last 9 weeks. :D
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2008
  2. TommyD4207

    TommyD4207 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Everyone forgets the the Bears were so "amazing" because they had a Gimmick defense.

    Great post.
  3. Metaphors

    Metaphors Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2005
    Messages:
    3,670
    Likes Received:
    8
    Ratings:
    +8 / 0 / -0

    In the Ravens game, 1st half run D was good. 4th quarter run D was great. The problem was the run D was sleepwalking through the Ravens' two 3rd quarter drives.

    No dismissing your point...just saying that the Pats' run D was not overmatched against the Ravens. Just completely fell asleep coming out of halftime. If the Pats couldn't stop the Ravens rush offense, they would have been losing at halftime and not have been able to piece together four 4th quarter possessions to pull out the win.
  4. patfanken

    patfanken On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    5,649
    Likes Received:
    135
    Ratings:
    +259 / 14 / -8

    #91 Jersey

    Thanks for the info, Most of my memories from that game were just plain ugly. If what you say is true, it only makes my point more clearly. That is, if any Giant fan is thinking that the Giants will be able have a huge day running the ball....is going to be DISAPPOINTED.
  5. Deus Irae

    Deus Irae PatsFans.com Retired Jersey Club PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    41,430
    Likes Received:
    282
    Ratings:
    +716 / 44 / -47

    Disable Jersey

    I've got to disagree on the Bears thing.....

    The Bears were 15-1 the year they won the Super Bowl and 14-2 the following season, despite losing McMahon for the season due to injury in week 12. 1987 was the strike season, and the Bears lost to the eventual NFL Champion Washington Redskins by a score of 21-17. Both the Bears and the Redskins were 11-4 during the season.

    The Bears defense was #3 in 1984 (248 points), #1 in 1985 (198 points), #1 in 1986 (187 points), #4 in 1987 (282 points) and #1 in 1988 (215 points).

    That Chicago defense was no myth or one hit wonder, and it was better in terms of both scoring and yards per play the year following the Super Bowl than it was the year they won it all. Injuries and age took their toll, but that team had the kind of talent that could have won multiple Lombardis had those things not gotten in the way. Their point differentials during these years were 9th, 1st, 1st, 6th and 4th.
  6. unoriginal

    unoriginal Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2006
    Messages:
    3,209
    Likes Received:
    25
    Ratings:
    +41 / 2 / -1

    The 46 isn't a "gimmick" defense, its just poorly suited to stop modern passing offenses. That's like calling the "spread" a gimmick offense.
  7. TommyD4207

    TommyD4207 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2007
    Messages:
    407
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    It is, to a degree, IMO.
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2008
  8. sanvara

    sanvara Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    854
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Gimmicks are used to catch an opposing team by surprise. That defense was no joke or gimmick, it just kicked your ass. It's amazing how people try to tear down the 85 Bears by saying they played a gimmick defense and that it was the gimmick that no one could figure out how to counter and not the personnel that was the reason for their success. That's absurd. The front seven was extremely talented and the defense was dominant for five years, not just one year. It doesn't take much more than a few games of film for coaches to figure out how to exploit weaknesses and that Bears defense had very few weaknesses to exploit.
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2008
  9. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    25,596
    Likes Received:
    67
    Ratings:
    +140 / 1 / -8

    I've said this several times previously on this board but obviously people keep forgetting or aren't paying attention.

    "If" the Patriots win the super bowl, they WILL be the greatest & most dominant team in the history of the NFL. This would be based upon 3 factors:

    1. Strength of schedule/quality of opponents

    2. Record...19-0 would be the best record in NFL history

    3. Point differential - The Patriots hold the highest margin of victory in the history of the league.

    *The above doesn't even take into consideration all the team & individual records this team has set in 2007.

    Feel free to "try" to debunk these facts.:rolleyes:
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2008
  10. RayClay

    RayClay On the Roster

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    Messages:
    17,909
    Likes Received:
    168
    Ratings:
    +354 / 6 / -8

    #75 Jersey

    I had to work, so I missed the first 90% of the Ravens game (lucky, I guess).

    The panic about our run defense came when we were blowing people out and playing nickel and dime defenses most of the game.

    Our run defense with Wilfork and the vet linebackers and other linemen has been stout.

    Quick guys like Sproles and Addai have given some trouble, but we did a great job on Drew and Taylor with Jax.

    No way anyone runs wild on us. A little slowness in the middle has been helped by Rodney and Meriweather's athleticism IMO. Whatever works.
  11. sanvara

    sanvara Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    854
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    The Pats could be considered the most dominant regular season team but the 85 Bears will easily get the nod over the Pats for most dominant postseason performance. They crushed and humiliated all the best teams when it mattered most.
    Last edited: Jan 27, 2008
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>