Are Chicago Bears frontrunners? And is it OK if they are?

What do you guys think?

[quote]
LINK to the article

Are Chicago Bears frontrunners? And is it OK if they are?

By Matt Trowbridge

http://d2om8tvz4lgco4.cloudfront.net...64f61ab050.jpg

Chicago Bears cornerback Charles Tillman (33) eludes a tackle by Detroit Lions wide receiver Calvin Johnson (81)
after intercepting a pass in the second half of an NFL football game in Chicago, Sunday, Sept. 12, 2010.

The Chicago Bears blew out the Cowboys in Dallas on Monday Night Football. That seems like a momentous win, but the Bears are surprisingly good on MNF under Lovie Smith. What does this win mean in the big scheme? I think it means that the Chicago Bears can beat anyone in the NFL -- but only if they lead at halftime.

That's really nothing new. The Bears are now 53-10 when leading at the half under Lovie Smith and 13-42 when they are behind. The MNF crew said Chicago is 16-1 when leading after the first quarter under Lovie.


In other words, this became almost a sure win the second Charles Tillman returned an interception for a touchdown, long before Lance Briggs returned an interception for a touchdown. And it may have even begun to turn before Tillman's interception. If Dez Bryant hadn't kept dropping passes, the Bears would have had a far tougher time.


Dez Bryant apparently also ran the wrong route on Tillman's interception for a TD.


Because the defense made this win so easy, I don't want to make too much of it. Except for the fact that the defense made this so easy.


I've been the one voice in the wilderness saying all along that Chicago's defense would be better than it's offense. Chicago's defense is always better. The Bears haven't had a top-14 offense in more than a decade. One receiver wasn't going to change that. No one ever explained how Brandon Marshall could do that much all by himself; everyone (but me) just wrote that he would.


But no one else ever explained either why the defense would fall off the face of the earth just because it's one year older. It's been an old defense for two or three years now, but remains as good as ever.


How good?


The Bears lead the NFL in both interceptions (11) and turnovers (14). They also lead with three interceptions returned for a touchdown.


But the problem is that type of defense works best with a lead. We saw that in Green Bay last year. The Packers' 31 interceptions were eight more than any team in the NFL, but the Packers also gave up the most yards in the NFL.


http://d2om8tvz4lgco4.cloudfront.net...ad52509197.jpg


Chicago Bears linebacker Brian Urlacher celebrates alongside teammate Charles Tillman after intercepting a pass Nov. 23, 2008, against the Rams in St. Louis.

If the Bears are to show some of their old dominant form on defense, Tillman, Urlacher and Tommie Harris need to be healthy.

But, with a lead, the Packers felt free to jump pass routes and gamble on interceptions. And other teams had to pass, making those gambles more sensible.


And Green Bay's great offense put teams in the catch-up mode all year long. Until the playoffs, when the Packers fell behind the Giants and could never get going.


It's OK to be a front-running team. The Packers got out front and stayed out front all the way to the 2010 Super Bowl title. The Patriots may have lost their last two Super Bowls, but they got there by taking early leads and burying teams.


The Bears don't have great special teams to help them come from behind -- or take early leads -- any more. But their defense is as good as its been since early in the 2006 season. It's not nearly as good as early-2006 good -- you have to go back to the 1980s for a Chicago defense to be that good -- but it's at least as good as that defense was the last third of the season and the playoffs, when the Bears dropped off drastically but still made it to the Super Bowl.


And they had only 55 yards passing in the first three quarters of that Super Bowl. And almost won. And only 37 yards passing at halftime of that NFC championship game and won.


The Bears know how to lead with defense.


And their offense is much better than it was in 2006 when it challenged the Trent Dilfer Ravens as perhaps the worst-ever Super Bowl offense.


So, yes, the big win in Big D shows the Bears can contend for a Super Bowl this year. But they'll need to do so from the lead. Staying ahead takes the pressure off Chicago's porous offense line, it keeps Jay Cutler from trying to force things and it prevents the need for Lovie Smith to come up with brilliant halftime adjustments.


The Bears can win it all. As long as they get ahead and stay ahead.

What about the addition of Michael Bush and Alshon Jeffery and a new offensive coordinator? A little more than "just adding one receiver". How about adding a capable backup in Jason Campbell? This guy has some good stats, but his analysis is somewhat off. The Bears kicking game is as good as it has been in the last ten years. Gould is at the top of the league at his position and Podlesh is performing very well this season. The returns haven't been as good as they've been in recent years, but you can't expect those types of things; especially with the kickoff being moved shorter. The Bears if healthy will have a top ten offense by year's end, in points scored and yards gained.

Many reporters, radio guys and analysts, had this team as SB contenders this year, I cannot imagine how they are not front runners, if the OC and QB come in w/a good gameplan they can live up to those expectations also. But if they get all pass happy b/c of their "weapons" then it's going to be over quick.

Tommie Harris, wtf?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Burris

Tommie Harris, wtf?

---

Double WTF?

I also call WTF on this statement: "The Bears can win it all. As long as they get ahead and stay ahead."
Isn't that the secret to any game?

sometimes Shark, I'd say most the time; but a stat was given either monday night or tuesday morning that the Lovies bears win 90% of the time when leading at 1/2. Now flip that, when they are down at half they are not going to come back b/c 90% of their wins are off 1/2 time leads.

I'm okay with being front runners, if the guys will work even harder to maintain that status. I'd love to see us lead the league in both sacks and turnovers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henry Burris

Tommie Harris, wtf?

---

yeah...kinda threw me for a loop too. Maybe they secretly hired him as Gatorade mixologist, seeing as how he is a Gator and all, and a healthy Tommie means our players are adequately quenched?

Btw, is toe inactive? I don't think it could hurt to much to bring tommie in at a vet minimum, because if he could get anywhere to his halfass days with us, that only further solidifies the line. Then again, he is the only player i have seen lovie give multiple one game suspensions....

Well right now, we don't need another DT. If we wanted/needed another one, we would've kept Brian Price. It looked like DT was gonna be a weakness, but now it might be our deepest position.