THE BEARS ARE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE

Sunday, January 21, 2007

THE BEARS ARE WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE

26-0
34-7
37-6
40-7
41-10
38-20
42-27
39-14

Those are scores from eight different Bears' wins from this season. Eight out of the now 15! The Bears have won 15 games this year. And lost three. And they'll probably be viewed as underdogs in February 4th's Super Bowl. And I'm fine with that. They've certainly handled the doubting well so far.

The Bears have had one dominant season. They jumped out to the fast start, and so the initial national media talk was about their chances of an undefeated season. Really? No, that wasn't going to happen. But it gives them something to talk about. Then the Bears were the first to clinch a playoff spot, first to win their division, first to clinch home field...so on and so forth. But somewhere along the line the Bears went from being regarded as the league powerhouse to everyone's favorite team to rip on.

I've heard different people refer to the "lull" that the Bears ran into there for awhile. When was that?! Seriously. They dominated their schedule from week one. So when was the rough patch? Was it when the Dolphins caught the Bears sleepwalking through their week 9 game to interrupt their would-be perfect season? Was it three weeks later when the Bears were finishing a grueling three game east coast road stretch at New England? And they had a chance to steal that win deep into the fourth quarter? Was that the mis-step? Or was it the completely meaningless New Year's Eve game against Green Bay that the Packers had won by halftime so the Bears rested their starters?

See there were no losing streaks this year. Not even in preseason (they lost one, won one, lost one, and won one in that order). Sure they benefited from a little luck in the regular season Arizona win, but still they have rebounded from every single loss with a win. And usually another.

A rough patch would be like when the Patriots lost two crucial games in a row in November (Colts and Jets), or when the Colts lost four of six (including two in a row in the division), or like the Saints finishing the season by losing two of three. But the Bears? Not really. The Bears were just going through their schedule and clinching milestones along the way.

So to recap, they started quickly, lost a couple three times, had some crucial injuries, won a couple lucky games, won some more games, made the playoffs, clinched home field advantage, and now...made the Super Bowl. Good defense. Good special teams. Two good running backs. And a complimentary (sometimes flashy) passing game. Wire to wire. The best team in the NFC and one of the top teams in the NFL. Start to finish. The Bears are who we thought they were.

Rex Grossman's biggest problem was not Rex Grossman. It was Phillip Rivers and Tony Romo. If those two hadn't been overachieving as first time starters, people would have likely cut Rex a lot more slack. But because Rivers and Romo were playing unreasonably well, Rex suddenly was stripped of the excuse of being young. This was Rex' first full year as a starter. That's all you need to know. He played well, poorly and in between. And won. Because the Bears surrounded him with the right people.

And that reminds me, he did have some games were he was "just OK." (See Sunday's game v. New Orleans.) How many times did you hear the ESPNers say, "HAHAHAHA...all the Bears needs is some mediocrity from Rex Grossman!!!! He's either really good or really bad!!! There's just no in between!!!" Then they would spout off the stat of seven games with a QB rating of over 100, and then the five of below 37. "There's just no in between!!!" they would again proclaim. Let's see...seven plus five equals twelve. Last I checked the Bears have played 18 games, no? So needless to say, Rex has been "good enough" several times as well. I don't know what more you could ask out of the guy lately. If you throw out the weightless Green Bay game, he has only thrown one interception since week 13 (and that was the one that Muhammad dropped last week). That's outstanding work under pressure. And those seven games with a rating of over 100? That's second in the NFL this year.

Tommie Harris and Mike Brown. Sure there are other injuries, but those two guys were so huge on defense back when the Bears were dominant on that side of the ball early this season. And now they're gone. So you just replace them??? Well, the Bears have done well enough, I suppose. It would be frightening to see how well they'd be playing if they had Harris' pass rush and Brown at safety to help with the run defense and deep pass coverage. See there is a reason why certain guys start. Because they're better. And they provide identity to a particular unit. Just like Bob Sanders. It's no coincidence that the Colts can all of a sudden stop the run.

The funny thing to me is...when Mike Brown got hurt in the Arizona game, I heard someone on TV say, "well that's a big loss to the Bear defense, blah blah blah...a couple years ago when Brown went down it became a lot easier to run the ball on the Bears, blah blah blah..." And I thought, "You know, he's exactly right. I remember the defense looked average after that." Mike Brown is a huge part of this defensive identity. Not only is he the veteran leader, but he's the most versatile guy in the secondary. So slowly but surely the Bears' defense became more leaky. And shockingly all of the pundits seemed beside themselves as to the reason why. Duh. But inexplicably you didn't hear much if anything about the loss of Mike Brown.

And Tommie Harris. Lovie Smith said that the loss of Tommie Harris made the Bear defense go from special to normal ("just like everybody else"). Turns out, the Bears couldn't generate any kind of consistent pass rush without him. And they became much more vulnerable up the middle. But you play on.

And you keep winning. And you still blow a couple more people out. And you're still the underdogs. But now you made the Super Bowl.

I feel better about it going down this way. Every year after the Bears are out of it I root for the two best representatives from each conference to make it to the Super Bowl. I want history to be able to look back on a given year and remember what a good year the two Super Bowl teams had in that particular campaign. That's why I hate it when a team like the 2005 Steelers absolutely backs their way into the Super Bowl by stringing together some wins at the end of the year.

So the fact that the Bears were--talking Super Bowl from day one of Training Camp, began the year on fire, blew people out, won the NFC in the regular season, and now are rewarded with a trip to Miami... it just feels right that way. Nothing cheap about it. Easy division? Sure? Easy schedule? No question. But the Bears dominated their schedule. And they beat the Saints by 25 points. It's been a superb year any way you cut it.

Now we get to see them play for the big ring to put a lid on a dream season two weeks from today. And so win or lose, the Bears are indeed who we thought they were.