I am sick of hearing about the 86 Bears

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

Before anyone says that this just proves statistics are meaningless when evaluating QBs,

Your post did exactly that. Eason barely threw the ball that entire postseason as the running game was outright dominant and the D was forcing 5 or 6 turnovers a game. In the AFCCG vs. Miami, Eason threw 3 TDs from inside the 5yd line as the Dolphins were loading up to stop the run; As they should since the Pats ran for 250yds that day. Against LA, Craig James topped 100yds while Eason again played the caretaker role.

Pretty much any QB could have had Eason's rating that '85 postseason, considering how easy he had it.

Regards,
Chris

 

[Patsrock]

Let me first say that I like Steve Grogan and that I do not think that Tony Eason was a great quarterback. However, Eason has been demonized to an extent that is not warranted by his performance. In the three playoff games leading up to the 86 Superbowl, Eason had quarterback ratings of 132 (vs the NYJs), 102 (vs the Raiders), and 131 (vs Miami). In those games he threw a total of 5 TDs and NO interceptions. After taking over for Eason, against the Bears, Grogan threw for 1 TD, and 2 interceptions. His QB rating was 57 for the game. The Patriots were not going to win no matter who started, but Eason's perfomance in the three preceeding playoff games was strong enough for the coaching staff to pick him to start the Superbowl.

By the way, in the next season, when Eason led the Patriots to a division title and an 11-5 record, they lost their first playoff game to the Broncos, but Eason's QB rating in that game was 109, with 2 TDs and again NO interceptions. His career playoff QB rating (including the disaster of the Superbowl was 115.6 - better than Brady's 88.5 playoff QB rating! Grogan's QB rating in 4 playoff games was 49.1.

Before anyone says that this just proves statistics are meaningless when evaluating QBs, I will agree that Tony Eason in no way compares with Tom Brady. But I don't think that difference in actual production between Eason and Grogan is significant. People like Grogan more because of his attitude.

I posted this in another thread but here is Tony Eason's stats from the 3 playoff games

vs NYJ 12/16 for 179 1 TD 0 Ints
vs LA 7/14 for 117 1 TD 0 Int's
vs Mia 10/12 for 71 yds 3 TD 0 Ints.

Running Attack
39/99 yds vs NYJ
49/156 vs LA
59/255 vs Miami


I credit the ball hawking special teams and defense causing 16 turnovers those three games. While the Pats turned it over only 4 times.

 

[PittPatriot]

Let me first say that I like Steve Grogan and that I do not think that Tony Eason was a great quarterback. However, Eason has been demonized to an extent that is not warranted by his performance. In the three playoff games leading up to the 86 Superbowl, Eason had quarterback ratings of 132 (vs the NYJs), 102 (vs the Raiders), and 131 (vs Miami). In those games he threw a total of 5 TDs and NO interceptions. After taking over for Eason, against the Bears, Grogan threw for 1 TD, and 2 interceptions. His QB rating was 57 for the game. The Patriots were not going to win no matter who started, but Eason's perfomance in the three preceeding playoff games was strong enough for the coaching staff to pick him to start the Superbowl.

By the way, in the next season, when Eason led the Patriots to a division title and an 11-5 record, they lost their first playoff game to the Broncos, but Eason's QB rating in that game was 109, with 2 TDs and again NO interceptions. His career playoff QB rating (including the disaster of the Superbowl was 115.6 - better than Brady's 88.5 playoff QB rating! Grogan's QB rating in 4 playoff games was 49.1.

Before anyone says that this just proves statistics are meaningless when evaluating QBs, I will agree that Tony Eason in no way compares with Tom Brady. But I don't think that difference in actual production between Eason and Grogan is significant. People like Grogan more because of his attitude.

Great points!
Coming out of U of I, Tony Eason was recognized as one of the most pure passers in the class...the same 1983 Dream QB Class of Elway, Marino, Kelly, etc. I think Eason got screwed over by our love for Grogan...and then our blind faith in Doug Flutie. I remember we boo'ed Eason (at Sullivan Stadium) with chants for Flutie to come on out. The only time Flutie would come out is for end of half/end of game hail mary throws because Grogan was too old to make them by that point.

 

[PittPatriot]

Your post did exactly that. Eason barely threw the ball that entire postseason as the running game was outright dominant and the D was forcing 5 or 6 turnovers a game. In the AFCCG vs. Miami, Eason threw 3 TDs from inside the 5yd line as the Dolphins were loading up to stop the run; As they should since the Pats ran for 250yds that day. Against LA, Craig James topped 100yds while Eason again played the caretaker role.

Pretty much any QB could have had Eason's rating that '85 postseason, considering how easy he had it.

Regards,
Chris

Oh, we are not counting TD's from inside the 5 yard line as 'meaningful'? How many close range TD's does Tom have this year? How about when the game was decided and we were throwing on 4th and 1.
I am not saying either is bad...but why do we go so far out of our way to demonize Tony Eason? He was the last decent QB for the Pats until Bledsoe came along.

 

[billikens]

A huge problem for Eason was he did not like getting hit. It wasn't just Grogan's attitude, but Grogan was tough. Eason was not and is why he is not considered a good quarterback. He melted under the Bears defense.

I agree about comparing different teams from different eras, and it's possible that the 2007 Pats could make a go at the 1985 Bears. But I remember the Bears that year. They were formidable. It was their time. It was inevitable. Their dominance was palpable through the tv screen (as I got miserably drunk and then sick, being the only Pats fan in a room of Bears lovers). So to use statistics to say the Pats would have beaten them, I don't know. It was an intangilbe that's hard to describe, but the Bears had mojo that year that would have been extremely hard to overcome.

At the same time, I agree about the lost game. It is significant. There's no such thing as a meaningless regular season game. It's why they play. Losing one is significant. The playoffs are important, too. But the regular season counts.

 

[NormZauchin]

I posted this in another thread but here is Tony Eason's stats from the 3 playoff games

vs NYJ 12/16 for 179 1 TD 0 Ints
vs LA 7/14 for 117 1 TD 0 Int's
vs Mia 10/12 for 71 yds 3 TD 0 Ints.

Running Attack
39/99 yds vs NYJ
49/156 vs LA
59/255 vs Miami


I credit the ball hawking special teams and defense causing 16 turnovers those three games. While the Pats turned it over only 4 times.

I agree that the turnovers were the key to the Patriot victories. My post never stated that Eason was. I merely brought up the fact that he played quite well, not spectacularly, in the three playoff games. The term we use now is that he "managed" the game. The turnover differential would not have been so favorable if he had been throwing interceptions.

 

[spacecrime]

it's a mute point since they're from a different era.

You mean it's a "moot" point.

Yeah, not very many mute points made around here. They're mostly pretty loud. (Not that there is anything wrong with that.)

 

[Giants6timeworldchamps]

The Bears beat the Tony Eason led Pats in the SB, and shut out the Deiter Brock led Rams in the NFC Championship....The current Pats would lay 50+ on those teams - even accounting for inflation...

Those Bears shut out the next seasons super bowl champs the Giants in the playoffs. That was a great team. Impossible to compare eras. To be honest with you that Bear team might not be the Jets this season. Coaches know so much more about football now. They scheme totally different. The players are bigger, stronger, faster, etc. You can only compare on what that team did in their own era compared to what your team did in their era.

 

[TommyD4207]

Let me first say that I like Steve Grogan and that I do not think that Tony Eason was a great quarterback. However, Eason has been demonized to an extent that is not warranted by his performance. In the three playoff games leading up to the 86 Superbowl, Eason had quarterback ratings of 132 (vs the NYJs), 102 (vs the Raiders), and 131 (vs Miami). In those games he threw a total of 5 TDs and NO interceptions. After taking over for Eason, against the Bears, Grogan threw for 1 TD, and 2 interceptions. His QB rating was 57 for the game. The Patriots were not going to win no matter who started, but Eason's perfomance in the three preceeding playoff games was strong enough for the coaching staff to pick him to start the Superbowl.

By the way, in the next season, when Eason led the Patriots to a division title and an 11-5 record, they lost their first playoff game to the Broncos, but Eason's QB rating in that game was 109, with 2 TDs and again NO interceptions. His career playoff QB rating (including the disaster of the Superbowl was 115.6 - better than Brady's 88.5 playoff QB rating! Grogan's QB rating in 4 playoff games was 49.1.

Before anyone says that this just proves statistics are meaningless when evaluating QBs, I will agree that Tony Eason in no way compares with Tom Brady. But I don't think that difference in actual production between Eason and Grogan is significant. People like Grogan more because of his attitude.

Eason barely threw the whole playoffs.
Also, Eason was a *****. Think Tomlinson, if Tomlinson were also a 9-year old girl after someone stole her dolly. That's "Champaign" Tony Eason.

 

[chris_in_sunnyvale]

Those Bears shut out the next seasons super bowl champs the Giants in the playoffs.

Granted I don't think the '85 Giants were beating those Bears in Chicago, but the biggest reason they got shut out was because that game was played in a hurricane. The Giants' only chance to put points on the board was to throw since nobody was running on that D, but the 50MPH winds made it impossible. Remember Sean Landetta's whiffed punt that Shaun Gayle returned for a TD?

Regards,
Chris

 

[strongside]

Mel kiper on Mike and Mike this AM not only put the 85 bears ahead of the Pats but also the 79 Steelers

 

[JackPMiller]

We would have kicked their ass. Seriously, I don't think they would have scored. I just had to get that off my chest. Sey would have set the tone by headbutting Ditka before the game and then we would have laid the smack down.

Also the 1978 Pittsburgh Steelers get alot of pub as well. They were the only ones that most of analysts say that would have the best chance to beat you guys.

 

[Yehoodi]

the problem I have with the 85 Bears was that they never had to play the 85 Dolphins in the playoffs. The 85 Fish where the only team to beat them, and had they played in the SB and the fish beat them, the 80's Bears would be the 80's version of the 70 vikings and 90'' bills. Fortunately for the bears they did not have to face the fish . . .

 

[italian pat patriot]

However, Eason has been demonized to an extent that is not warranted by his performance. In the three playoff games leading up to the 86 Superbowl, Eason had quarterback ratings of 132 (vs the NYJs), 102 (vs the Raiders), and 131 (vs Miami). In those games he threw a total of 5 TDs and NO interceptions. After taking over for Eason, against the Bears, Grogan threw for 1 TD, and 2 interceptions. His QB rating was 57 for the game. The Patriots were not going to win no matter who started, but Eason's perfomance in the three preceeding playoff games was strong enough for the coaching staff to pick him to start the Superbowl.

By the way, in the next season, when Eason led the Patriots to a division title and an 11-5 record, they lost their first playoff game to the Broncos, but Eason's QB rating in that game was 109, with 2 TDs and again NO interceptions. His career playoff QB rating (including the disaster of the Superbowl was 115.6 - better than Brady's 88.5 playoff QB rating! Grogan's QB rating in 4 playoff games was 49.1.

Before anyone says that this just proves statistics are meaningless when evaluating QBs, I will agree that Tony Eason in no way compares with Tom Brady. But I don't think that difference in actual production between Eason and Grogan is significant. People like Grogan more because of his attitude.

nice post: i agree. and personally i respect Eason a lot (he made two very good seasons); he surely was very talented and the season after the Super Bowl he was very good

after Brady and Bledose he is my number 3; i put Grogan at number 4

 

[BeantownRox]

You mean it's a "moot" point.

No, a "mute" point. You cant hear it.

Okay, that was pretty bad. :bricks: