Thread: We Haven't Played Anybody!

We can only play the teams the the league puts on our schedule, when they tell us to play them. If a team isn't at good as others, it should provide us with good practice and a chance to develop depth.


But I've got a question for you - What if we had played the top 5 teams in the league already and we were 1-4, would you be rationalizing the record w/ the level of competition?


If not, then your whole thread premise is kinda destroyed, no?

I'm not going to argue with this point at all. The only thing I really take issue with is the argument for Martz over Tice, but I will not disagree with your original premise.

In 2006, our beloved Bears went to the Superbowl with a guy named Rex Grossman at QB. How does that happen? You get fat winning against bad teams. Until we got into the playoffs, we played a total of 4 teams with records of 9-7 or better. On my old board, one of the guys took a lot of time to go back and look at Lovie Smiths win-loss record against good teams. This was his argument AGAINST Lovie to those that claimed we should extend him because he is the third winningest coach we've ever had. However, his attractive win loss record has been padded by the fact that our Division was so weak for so long. Regardless, Lovie has a record of only .318 (or something like that) against teams with a 9-7 record or better. The weak schedule we've had so far plays into that. We are often good enough to beat the bad teams, but seldom good enough to beat the good ones. We'll see how this season plays out.

If you look at our schedule, it's possible with the way things are playing out this year, that we could make it to 10-6 or even 11-5 without winning a single game against a winning team.

If anything we are gaining traction, confidence, and momentum. Were going through fits and starts now on offense and thankfully have a easier schedule to work on some things with an ok record to show for it. Plus the bye week will help heal up Pep,Urlacher, and others.

Originally Posted by 4DaBERS

I'm not going to argue with this point at all. The only thing I really take issue with is the argument for Martz over Tice, but I will not disagree with your original premise.

In 2006, our beloved Bears went to the Superbowl with a guy named Rex Grossman at QB. How does that happen? You get fat winning against bad teams. Until we got into the playoffs, we played a total of 4 teams with records of 9-7 or better. On my old board, one of the guys took a lot of time to go back and look at Lovie Smiths win-loss record against good teams. This was his argument AGAINST Lovie to those that claimed we should extend him because he is the third winningest coach we've ever had. However, his attractive win loss record has been padded by the fact that our Division was so weak for so long. Regardless, Lovie has a record of only .318 (or something like that) against teams with a 9-7 record or better. The weak schedule we've had so far plays into that. We are often good enough to beat the bad teams, but seldom good enough to beat the good ones. We'll see how this season plays out.

If you look at our schedule, it's possible with the way things are playing out this year, that we could make it to 10-6 or even 11-5 without winning a single game against a winning team.

Well, I hear what you are saying, but there are far too many factors to make the stat meaningful. Who was injured when we played them, for either team? Was that teams that were 9-7 in the 16 games before we met or the season we met them in? Who was their competition for either span? What was the weather like in the games? Were they playing at night or day? How many games were in domes? Were there replacement refs officiating? Who were the coordinators for each phase? Were any of the wins/loses in overtime? Who did the teams played gain/lose in free agency or the draft?

In general, I'd argue that strength of schedule is a meaningless stat. Proof positive is a current year opponent - The Packers. They were 15-1 last year, or 14-2 in the 16 games leading up to this year, they are 2-3 this year, they have had significant turnover on the oline from last year, they have G.Jennings (probowl WR from last year) that has been injured most of the year, I think they drafted really well, Urlacher was still recovering, Peppers has been battling Plantar Fascitis. What do you make of a team like that from a "strength of schedule" standpoint? Is your arguement still valid if they suddenly start winning the majority of games? What about if they continue to slide a bit?

Bottom line, you play who is printed on your schedule, with the folks that are available to play. The only fair measurement is the score on the scoreboard at the end of the game. The rest is messageboard fodder that can't be measured for accuracy.

These are NFL teams, and with the parity in the league there are no easy games. Oh, they may look easy, but they are all games where you need to take care of business.

And we have.

As some here have pointed out. We don't get to pick our schedule. You play the team they put on your schedule. Regarding Martz, well, I don't know what to say about that comment. He's not an NLF-level OC anymore. That's why nobody is touching him with a 10 foot pole right now. Stick a fork in him. He's done.

Regarding Tice, I'm very pleased with how he's adapted over these 4 games. We have a lot of new moving parts on offense, a new scheme and a new offensive coordinator. It is to be expected, that it takes a few games to get this offense in sync. Anytime the offense puts up 500+ yards the OC is doing something right. It is delusional to think otherwise.

Relax. Enjoy a great season. More wins are coming. It's a great time to be a Bears fan.