Discussion in 'Chicago Bears' started by JustAnotherBearsFan99, Feb 3, 2014.
It sure didn't look like a Mel Tucker defense that Seattle was sporting though :-)
10 points allowed, 7 rushing yards, 116 passing for the 85 Bears
8 points allowed, 27 rushing yards, 280 passing yards for SeaHawks
Now THAT is impressive.
IIRC, the 85 Bears D held New England to NEGATIVE TOTAL YARDS into the 3rd quarter. The only reason they had 3 pts at half is that Payton fumbled away the 2nd snap of the game deep in our zone. Both great Ds but ill take the Bears version every time. Of course, the rules at the time were less favorable to offense than they are now.
It's always difficult to judge teams and players for that matter, from different eras. I just figure both defenses ('85 Bears and the '13 Seahawks) were exceptional. FWIW, I thought the '86 defense was even a bit better than the '85 one, even though we didn't do well at all in the playoffs that season.
Jabzz ,... there is no contest between the two ,... 85ersz hands down
Was the 2013 Seattle defense a better overall defense than the 1985 Bears defense? No.
Was the 2013 Seattle defense more dominant in the Super Bowl that the 1985 Bears defense? Yes. And here's why:
Seattle thoroughly dominated and nearly matched the Bears' margin of victory against the #1 offense IN THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE NFL. The 1985 Patriots offense? Ranked #10 in that season.
I believe the 84 Bears team with 72 sacks and had both Harris and Bell play was one of the most hardest hitting, intimidating, and dominant of them all. They lacked an offense and it hurt that D.
How can I ask did ya get the whole season on DVD? And is there a way to rip it and post it somewhere? We need a techies help!!!!!! I NEED THAT DVD!!!!!
I used to tape the games back then on a betamax recorder & had the entire '85 season and post season taped :)
I watched those games over-and-over-and-over, until the tapes finally were tossed & replaced with DVD's. I still watch them every year. The only taped game I never re-watched from the season was the Miami loss. Even after more than 25 years, I still can't bear to watch that one. And I never will.
When I watch those games it's really an amazing feeling. I love watching Walter, and I can't believe he's dead. It doesn't seem possible that somebody THAT alive and vibrant could be gone now.
It saddens me to look at how the Bears have failed since then. This is why I get upset when folks want to "settle" for anything less than a Super Bowl winning team in the modern era. It's also why I won't blindly trust coaches or GM's again until the prove they can deliver a championship. We get all excited with every new GM and the endless parade of coaches. And of course they fail and get fired - and we repeat the cycle again. It is heartbreaking that we are a second-rate team to Green Bay and they own our division, year after year now. It makes me crazy. I hate it. Now we have yet another set of coaches and another GM and folks blindly accept that THIS time it will be different. I hope so. I really do. But we've actually won 2 less games this season than we did under Lovie last year. I understand why this happened and am willing to give the new regime time to prove themselves - like we have done with every new set of coaches over the decades. Anyway, I watch those old games and think of how dominant and great we were, and it grinds salt into the wounds to realize how far we have fallen as a franchise. It sucks.
p.s. I'm a Chicago Cubs fan too. That double-sucks. Yet I still am a fan of those "lovable losers" who also fail to win a championship.
Well, to be honest I believe theres no real comparison, only 'problem' I see here is that '85 was pretty lonf ago, memories fade. But, no doubt, Bears were better
The cool thing is that I do believe this present GM and head coach may very well have what it takes to get us a Super Bowl win sooner rather than later. Like Seattle, it may take 3 or 4 years to build the kind of team we need to do that (it doesn't happen overnight). But I am excited about the possibilities here with this present regime. Of course I always feel this way when the Bears shuffle in new coaches or GM's.
Here here. I was at the game in Detroit. Of course, that game is not on the DVD. Why they would include the Miami game and not a division rival is insane. I would love to watch that Detroit game again, because although I was there, I was too inebriated to remember much.
As far as the OP Topic, No, IMO the Bears were better than the Seahags. I don't need to repeat the reasons, they've all been mentioned in this thread.
I cheated...I purchased the entire set off of ebay several years ago. I've never been sure that it was entirely legal. I think whoever was selling these sets, recorded the games on tape (commercials included) and then converted them to DVD, but ultimately, I really don't care. Some of the games are much better than others (video quality). The best thing about it is, my son, who wasn't around at the time, has been able to watch the great one (Walter) and understand why us old guys love him so much. Only 17 years old now, he loves Walter as much as the rest of us.
There has to be more news than this. Honestly, you could have many discussions on every aspect of the Superbowl.
Here are my issues with this comparison:
1) Who were the Seahawks before the Superbowl? Did they have any comparison before hand? No. Just because they play ONE good game, and Denver plays bad, all of a sudden the Seahawks are the best team EVER? You can salary cap this, FA that.. Bottom line, players could move where they wanted. The 85 bears were also younger than the Seahawks.
2) Lets look at the teams from the 80's the Bears faced compared to the Seahawks today. I just don't see any legacy teams today. You can argue the Patriots, but I'm not seeing it. I'm seeing a more diluted league.
3) One performance doesn't mean a team is great. How about Denver? Look at their offensive line. Manning can NOT play good at all when he has pressure. That's how you beat him. So they put pressure on him, he turns the ball over. No big deal. The Bears PHYSICALLY dominated!
4) If you didn't personally watch the 85 Bears, then you have no say in this conversation. The rubber meets the road watching the games. Not on paper. People FEARED the Bears. Who the hell says that now in the league? I mean teams publically voiced their fear of them. Seahawks don't have that at all.
5) The weather. The weather conditions may not have been a huge factor, but it wasn't the Superdome which is temperature controlled.
There is no comparison. The Bears were the MOST dominant. Those of us that grew up watching it, know it.
damn....well maybe your Son knows how to upload it somewhere LOL.....Thanks for the info I guess ill keep looking
I checked ebay, nothing... No full seasons...
Ski's new avatar is the most dominant
Separate names with a comma.