Was Seattle's Sunday Performance More Dominant Than the '85 Bears?

Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by JustAnotherBearsFan99, Feb 3, 2014.

  1. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,962
    Likes Received:
    2,627
    Ratings:
    +3,040 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,746ß
    This is being discussed by a lot of people today. I still believe the Bears '85 defense was a better than Seattle's, and the Super Bowl win that season, was a better defensive performance by Chicago, than Seattle had yesterday. But it sure was a beautiful defense to watch yesterday. That was Bears football to the max - at least it was like we used to have here in Chicago.

    • Like Like x 1
  2. omc1969

    omc1969 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    189
    Ratings:
    +216 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    37ß
    When one looks at the overall body of work it isn't even close. The 85 Bears allowed only 10 points in the ENTIRE playoff run and had shutouts as well. Seattle had this one single performance against a over-matched Denver "O" line. Peyton was running for his life the entire game.
    ;)
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,536
    Likes Received:
    2,974
    Ratings:
    +3,599 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,795ß
    Cannot even begin to compare the 2, there was no cap back then, it wasn't big to move between teams in FA(if even allowed back thn) and the rules didn't 100% favor the O back then. When you consider all that I think what Sea did, just this past Sunday, was amazing, especially to that qb.
  4. JustAnotherBearsFan99

    JustAnotherBearsFan99 Coordinator SuperFan DBS Writer

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    Messages:
    9,962
    Likes Received:
    2,627
    Ratings:
    +3,040 / 4 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,746ß
    I believe Seattle has the modern "blueprint" for sustained winning in the cap era. The way they have built this current team (players AND coaches) it is built for sustained success. They don't have a Jay Cutler, but they seem to be doing just fine - at all positions - with young, relatively affordable talent at so many positions. They made a point during the game yesterday, about how many of those starters for Seattle were mid and late round draft picks. They have the coaching staff in place to DEVELOP their draft picks, and the are astute scouting/evaluating talent. We have done well here in Chicago on offense. The defense is needing major work, and Emery has yet to prove he can do this - and Mel Tucker still needs to prove he is "The Guy" who can coach up the players given him here in Chicago.
  5. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,536
    Likes Received:
    2,974
    Ratings:
    +3,599 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,795ß
    no they do not have Jay Cutler, they have a better, cheaper version. They have a guy that can move the chains, w/out elite WR's and TE's, w/out throwing bad picks and fumbles. He's also cheaper. But b/c they don't have 20mil wrapped into 1 player, they can have a really good OL, a really good RB, and a really good all around D, starting w/DL, and followed up by DB's.
    • Winner Winner x 1
  6. omc1969

    omc1969 Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    189
    Ratings:
    +216 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    37ß
    I have always liked Wilson. Living in northern WI I watched all his games and knew that he would be a really good NFL QB bc of his overall ability. He is also still on his rookie contract so he is cheaper than Jay. I don't think he is "Better" but he IS good and certainly cheaper. He WILL get paid BIG BUCKs soon though and then we will see where the cap stands for Seattle. Remember that the Bears have Cliff Stein who is one of the best if not THE best at working the cap numbers. Only time will tell though.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. hoth

    hoth Veteran

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2007
    Messages:
    300
    Likes Received:
    52
    Ratings:
    +62 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    50ß
    Personally, I'd say this was the best secondary I've ever seen. Until this year, the best I'd seen was the 1994 49ers who had Merton Hanks, Tim McDonald & Deion (think the other corner was Toi Cook...?).
    I terms of front sevens, I don't think Seattle comes close to the '85 Bears, '86 Giants or '00 Ravens. But these Seahawks were the first great D I've seen where the secondary was the primary part of the domination.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Jimmors

    Jimmors The Rhymenoceros Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Messages:
    30,139
    Likes Received:
    4,336
    Ratings:
    +4,694 / 8 / -6
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,054ß
    :1033[1]:85 bears will always be top because of how dominant they were on defense and how good they were on offense. At least until another defense dominates on an even higher level.

    Still, it's good for other teams to come along and enter the debate and compare against them
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Trackguy

    Trackguy Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    Messages:
    143
    Likes Received:
    138
    Ratings:
    +173 / 1 / -1
    ßearz ßuckz:
    27ß
    I'm as big a Bear homer as anyone out there. But the 85 Patriot offense is not the 13 Bronco offense. The Seahawks absolutely shut down statistically the best scoring offense of all time...in an era when everything favors the offense. Personally though, I think there is a major difference between the two games. The 85 Bears dominated because they simply overmatched the Patriots. The 13 Seahawks dominated partly because the Broncos crapped their pants. That first play (which had nothing to do with Seattle) set the tone and they never seemed to mentally recover.

    Basically the Seahawk performance was more impressive on first glance. But really, the Broncos kind of helped the cause a little bit.
    • Like Like x 4
  10. mdbearz

    mdbearz Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    619
    Likes Received:
    267
    Ratings:
    +291 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    30ß
    How many QBs were "removed from the game" because of the Seattle defense?

    :3_12_22[1]:
    • Like Like x 2
  11. 4dabers

    4dabers Veteran DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2013
    Messages:
    690
    Likes Received:
    606
    Ratings:
    +747 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    90ß
    I think if you go back and watch that game, which I did earlier this year (I have the whole 1985 season on DVD), it would be clear. Yesterdays performance by the Seahawks was impressive, but I think the comparisons are only being made because of; 1. the score and 2. the length of time past. The memory of the 85 Bears is getting a little cloudy these days. I know I'm a homer, but Superbowl XX still stands as the most dominating Defensive spectacle in SB history.
    • Like Like x 4
  12. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,613
    Likes Received:
    744
    Ratings:
    +922 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    769ß
    He doesn't cost that now...but he will.
  13. Henry Burris

    Henry Burris Head Coach

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2007
    Messages:
    19,695
    Likes Received:
    2,370
    Ratings:
    +2,614 / 8 / -10
    ßearz ßuckz:
    674ß
    I would have to say 85 Bears, this Seahawks team, then the 00 Ravens. The Bears gave up a FG from a fumble and only gave up a TD when their backups were in. The starting QB was pulled, because he was shell shocked. Peyton Manning was clearly off of his game last night, so even a team with an average pass rush would have ended him early (he was forced to dink and dunk because he simply could not throw it deep, even without pressure). Not to say the Seahawks didn't completely destroy the Broncos, but the 85 bears went Genghis Khan on the Patriots, and even with a 2007 Tom Brady, weren't going to give up many points
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,536
    Likes Received:
    2,974
    Ratings:
    +3,599 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,795ß
    Butkus, depends, if young cheap qb's that don't produce huge #'s(kaep/wilson etc) continue to goto the sb and even win a few, the contracts for your average qb might go down. If Wilson does cost that much then they'll be in the Dal/Chi/SD range while teams that followed their model will be in the SB.
  15. butkus3595

    butkus3595 Pro-Bowler

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2013
    Messages:
    1,613
    Likes Received:
    744
    Ratings:
    +922 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    769ß
    He will cost that much...look at Flacco. As for the "model" how often do teams hit on 3rd round qb's?
  16. riczaj01

    riczaj01 DaBears Ditka DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2006
    Messages:
    22,536
    Likes Received:
    2,974
    Ratings:
    +3,599 / 10 / -8
    ßearz ßuckz:
    1,795ß
    New era, doesn't have to be a 3rd round, a 1st pick qb in todays draft is every bit cheaper then the FT cost of todays vet qb. Flacco and that teams rapid demise, as well as SF and Sea continued success are what is going to potentially turn the tide. If Sea/SF have to pay their qb's 16-20 mil, then they'll start to fail also, which will further the point that you cannot pay average qb's like they are tier 1 franchise guys.
  17. Bear_40

    Bear_40 Veteran

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2013
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    31
    Ratings:
    +45 / 1 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    74ß
    SF ans SEA both have their qb's for one more season on their rookie contracts I believe, then they'll be writing the big checks.
  18. short faced bear

    short faced bear Assistant Head Coach DBS Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Messages:
    10,471
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Ratings:
    +1,277 / 0 / -2
    ßearz ßuckz:
    223ß
    I'd say that's right on. The Bears only allowed 10 points in 3 playoff games and without starters Al Harris and Todd Bell. Another difference is the qb's back then would stand and deliver the pass then take the hit. Mr. Brittle Manning didn't even want anyone touching his shadow w/o getting happy feet and throwing the checkdown and bubble screen. Looked like a Mike Tice offense out there. :10_4_1[1]:
    • Like Like x 1
  19. 4th and 26

    4th and 26 George Halas Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    38,715
    Likes Received:
    639
    Ratings:
    +749 / 3 / -6
    ßearz ßuckz:
    626ß
    Ditka would pick the bears over the seahawks.
    • Like Like x 2
  20. kevperro

    kevperro Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Messages:
    272
    Likes Received:
    128
    Ratings:
    +166 / 0 / -0
    ßearz ßuckz:
    205ß
    It was better in terms of the quality of the opponent. If you look at the entire playoffs the 85 Bears were dominant in every game... not just one. And there was an inevitability about the 85 Bears that wasn't there with the Seahawks.
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page