Take this and stuff it in your pipes!

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by BradMustersGhost, Oct 29, 2013.

  1. BradMustersGhost

    BradMustersGhost
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    321
    Please Register or Log in to Remove this Advertisement!
    ricza, with all due respect, the Eagles defense had a sick amount of talent which Buddy drafted. The reason why the Eagles didn't win more can be summed up in one word: Offense. Buddy did NOTHING to build up the offense. They had a mediocre offensive line, mediocre receivers and mediocre rbs. Buddy's offensive game plan was to let Randall "run around and just do something amazing to score a TD." Sandlot, disorganized offensive football isn't going to win many games (especially against quality teams/defenses) in the NFL. Ask any Eagles fan and they will tell you that it was the Eagles offense which held those teams back, not the defense.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  2. riczaj01

    riczaj01
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    25,289
    Likes Received:
    4,213
    BMG, I know the Philly D was good, but NO D had so much talent at all levels as the Bears 85 D, other then maybe those early Balt Raven's D's. What you described their O as...that was his D, let his D playmakers run around and make a play, that was the 85 D in a nutshell, have so many playmakers that 1 is going to make a play somewhere.

    The D wasn't revolutionary, b/c it was never repeated, b/c it couldn't be b/c no team could get that kind of talent that Bears had at that time. It actually got worse for him b/c Wash figured out how to beat it, and teams started mirroring what Wash was doing.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. BradMustersGhost

    BradMustersGhost
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    321
    "that was his D, let his D playmakers run around and make a play, that was the 85 D in a nutshell, have so many playmakers that 1 is going to make a play somewhere."


    riczaj01, you're a good guy, but I think we are going to just have to agree to disagree here. Buddy's defensive schemes were a HECK of a lot more complex than that!^^ He continued to enjoy success with his defensive schemes (including the 46) with the 93 Houston Oilers (4th in points allowed, playing LIGHTS OUT by the end of the season after a slow start...sound familiar? the HOUSE OF PAIN!!!! ) and the 1994 Cardinals (4th in points allowed, 3rd in yardage allowed). No less an authority than the legendary offensive mastermind Bill Walsh, referred to the 46 as "a singular achievement in football strategy." He was also quoted as saying: "It took every ounce of football knowledge and energy I had, just to prepare to face that defense." It was a heck of a lot more complicated than Buddy merely instructing Wilbur, Otis, Mike and Co. to "fly around the field and make plays." Buddy was a genius, the same way Don Coryell was a genius. God Bless You, Buddy. I still love you. :)
     
  4. riczaj01

    riczaj01
    Expand Collapse
    DaBears Ditka
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    25,289
    Likes Received:
    4,213
    I'm not taking anything away from Buddy or the 46, but again if it was this great revolutionary thing, then it would have been copied and still be in use today. It's not and there is a very real reason for that.

    Much love back BMG, and trust me disagreeing w/you and not liking you are 2 very completely different things ;), we can disagree and still be cool.
     
  5. BradMustersGhost

    BradMustersGhost
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    321
    RIcza, variations of the 46 are STILL used today. Buddy, himself, would use it (at most) on only 25-33% of the opposing offense's snaps. It was NEVER meant to be an every down defense. As Ron Jaworski himself, noted in his excellent book, The Games that Changed the Game, WHENEVER you see any exotic blitz package (such as an overload blitz), you are still seeing the influence of the 46 defense.

    You're a good guy, riczaj. Always a pleasure chatting with you. At least you aren't obsessed with Chad Pennington AND Pennywise!
     
  6. omc1969

    omc1969
    Expand Collapse
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    196
    Unlike the teams of today where the "D" simply "HITS" the "O" player, the Bears of that day actually wrapped up a player after hitting him. It's called "TACKLING" !
    ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. JPosh2012

    JPosh2012
    Expand Collapse
    Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    77
    I still wonder (I wasn't around in 85) how many more Super Bowl's we would have won if Buddy still had been DC in Chicago and we actually had a QB.
     
  8. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99
    Expand Collapse
    Assistant Head Coach
    SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    13,606
    Likes Received:
    4,334
    JPosh, the Bears defense was, arguably, better in '86 after Buddy left. They held opponents to fewer yards and fewer points in '86 after Buddy was gone. They were again the #1 defense in the NFL, even though Buddy was long gone to the Eagles. And Buddy's defense in Philly wasn't even a top-10 defense that '86 season, but the Bears "D" was still stellar and the best in the entire NFL. In '87, in Buddy's 2nd season with the Eagles, their defense dropped to one of the worst in the entire NFL - 25th ranked "D" that year. They actually got worse after Buddy got there. Yet the Bears still had a top-5 defense in the 2nd season with Buddy gone.

    Primarily, it's all about the talent. In the mid-80's we had an obscene amount of it on our defenses. Without the talent-laden defense, Buddy's Eagles were not so hot on defense.

    That's why it was so heartbreaking when McMahon went down to injury - effectively killing our 1986 season. I will always believe the '86 team was better than the '85 team, if only McMahon had not been hurt. The defense in '86 had great talent - again. Buddy really wasn't missed so much, IMHO. It was all about the talent, not so much the scheme. John Madden was right about that.

    LINK: 1985 NFL Defensive Rankings
    LINK: 1986 NFL Defensive Rankings
    LINK: 1987 NFL Defensive Rankings
     
    #18 JustAnotherBearsFan99, Oct 31, 2013
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2013
    • Like Like x 3
  9. omc1969

    omc1969
    Expand Collapse
    Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    363
    Likes Received:
    196
    Thank Forrest Gregg and the asshole who body-slammed Jim for that. Should have been kicked out of the league for that !
    :mad:
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. BradMustersGhost

    BradMustersGhost
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2013
    Messages:
    805
    Likes Received:
    321
    With all due respect, there is a reason why the 1985 Defense (with Buddy as DC) was considered the MOST DOMINANT DEFENSE in the history of the NFL. Yeah, they got off to a slow start in the 1985 season, which obviously affected their "end of year" statistics. Singletary, Hampton and Co. basically admitted that they were on "cruise control" to start the season, and that they had to wake up and realize that they weren't going to simply be able to dominate teams by simply showing up. Once they did "wake up", they put on a show the likes of which the world will never see again. They REMAIN the only defense to shut-out every opponent on the way to the Super Bowl, and they WOULD have shut out the Patriots had it not been for Payton's 1st QTR fumble. You can quite all of the "statistical rankings" you want, but the fact remains that the 1985 Defense will never be matched. Like it or not, Buddy Ryan's coaching was a LARGE PART of that success. Regarding those 1986 and 1987 defenses under Tobin, how did they fare in CRUNCH TIME? How did they perform in the playoffs against Redskins teams QB'ed by Jay freakin' Schroeder and Doug Williams? As I recall, Tobin's defenses looked QUITE mortal in those two playoff games. Quite a far cry from how Ryan's defenses performed against the offenses they faced in the 1985 postseason (one of which, the Phil Simms-led Giants attack, would go on to win the Super Bowl the following year). By your logic, the 2001 Ravens were the GREATEST DEFENSE of all-time, because they gave up fewer ppg than the '86 Bears. Or what about the "Gritz Blitz" Falcons, they must have been the most dominant defense in history, because they STILL hold the record for fewest ppg given up over a complete NFL season. Statistics can be quite helpful and enlightening, HOWEVER, they NEVER give you the COMPLETE PICTURE. Ask Otis, Hampton, Singletary, et. al. about the differences between Tobin and Ryan, and then decide for yourself just how much Buddy was missed by this team. They would know far better than you or I.
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page