Thread: Dent: Blame Ditka For Bears Not Repeating As Super Bowl Champs

Long evaporated water under the bridge now. Hell, to this day I still wish we had a shutout in the 85 SB with Bell and Harris playing.

Nope. I've been blaming that Mike McCaskey for over 25 years and I see no reason to change my mind now.

We didn't have another QB on the roster who was worth squat. Tomczak and Fuller were no replacement for McMahon. Yes, we could sometimes win anyway, but it was a game changer in key games. I've always liked Ditka, but he really wasn't a great coach. Without Buddy Ryan's defense, and Walter Payton on offense, Ditka wouldn't have had great success in Chicago. He was a great player, and I think he's a great person.

The bears gave up fewer points in 86, than 85, didnt they? But i always think if they would've grabbed one of the class of '83, preferably marino, they easily would've had 5 sbs. Also, what part of a qb scouting report that includes "legally blind in one eye" makes you want to draft him?

Originally Posted by Henry Burris

The bears gave up fewer points in 86, than 85, didnt they? But i always think if they would've grabbed one of the class of '83, preferably marino, they easily would've had 5 sbs. Also, what part of a qb scouting report that includes "legally blind in one eye" makes you want to draft him?

I've always believed that the 1986 defense was better than '85. It broke my heart when McMahon got injured. Charles Martin killed our season when he took McMahon out. He got suspended for 2 games, but it didn't matter squat. He killed our season with that 1 play.

There was NO player on our roster who could replace McMahon. That's why I'm glad we paid the big bucks this year and got Campbell. It's worth every penny to have a credible #2 QB. Other wise your season rests on these starting QB's who go down to injury all the time. They drop like flies in the NFL every year.

Wow, Richard Dent calling Ditka out. Well, if your talking in this thread, then your probably old enough (like me) to remember those beautiful glory days in Chicago Bear history. Like me, you also remember those games where Richard became known as one who takes games off. Richard, perhaps if you had shown up for a few more games, maybe you would have won more games. After time goes by, we often forget those little things that pissed us off and we only remember the good things. There is a reason it took so long for him the reach the HOF.

Ditka is often derided for the hard edged coach that he was, but those comments usually come from people with modern standards. His coaching style would not fit in the modern "treat the players like prima dona's" world in which we now live. It's much like comparing Dick Butkus to modern Linebackers...it can't be done. Butkus was as mean and nasty as they came back then, and he would be fined every week in today's game, in fact, he would be ejected in many games. The play against the Lions when Suh sacked Cutler was powder puff compared to what Butkus would have done. That said, many of Ditka's detractors blame his "screamer" mentality for their poor opinion of him. I suggest they go back on watch some film of the above referenced Vince Lombardi. Ditka was no more harsh or critical than Vince was, yet Vince is heralded for that "whip cracking" persona.

For Dent to come out and blame Ditka, when some of the personnel moves that handcuffed that team were so notoriously known to be the work of Mike McCaskey is simply disingenuous and wrong. It sounds like Dent has a personal bone to pick with the Coach, and now that he has his place in the HOF he thinks he can speak freely. Well Richard, you can speak freely, but that doesn't mean some of us wont call BS when we hear it.

Originally Posted by Henry Burris

The bears gave up fewer points in 86, than 85, didnt they? But i always think if they would've grabbed one of the class of '83, preferably marino, they easily would've had 5 sbs. Also, what part of a qb scouting report that includes "legally blind in one eye" makes you want to draft him?

We'd need to ask GSH that but I guess we can't. Mac was a winner and I'd say that's what the old man saw in him. I wouldn't say he was wrong either. He was a winner alright but a very fragile one.

Well, i think the logic of what he says makes sense...they started a qb that wasn't on the team long, over established backups. Btw, we have chad pennington back then, we win every sb from XIX to XXVI. FACT!