Time to face the facts about the Bears.

[Fritz]

The way I took Patler's original post is that fans and sports casters and talking heads around the NFL need to just acknowledge that the Bears are good. We can talk all we want about luck, injuries, close games and all that, but the fact is, the Bears are 9-3.

That's a good team.

[Scott Campbell]

If the Packers beat the Bears Jan. 2, I believe they'll win the division. If they don't, they don't deserve to win the division.

There's a lot of football to be played between now and then.




And congratulations to Jay Cutler for his first winning season since high school. It's been a very long time coming.

[Patler]

The way I took Patler's original post is that fans and sports casters and talking heads around the NFL need to just acknowledge that the Bears are good. We can talk all we want about luck, injuries, close games and all that, but the fact is, the Bears are 9-3.

That's a good team.

That's exactly right. For a half season, comments about being the worst 5-3 team ever and such can make some sense, because we have all seen teams that start fast and then fade. But the Bears just continue to win. It's not always pretty, but after 3/4 of the season they are still riding high, and that is all that matters. I expect the Bears to finish no worse than 11-5. I expect the Packers will finish no better than 11-5. That means I think the best the Packers can do is tie the Bears for the Division.

I hope the Bears make a fool out of me and lose at least 3 of the next 4, and I really think Cutler is a guy who can do it for me if he puts his best screw-up effort toward it! It would be a sort of fitting Cutler-like ending, to be a game up with four to play and then not even make the playoffs!

[Joemailman]

I don't think Cutler necessarily has to screw up for the Bears to lose 2 of the next 3. Home games against the Patriots and Jets (Bears have a better road record than home record), and a trip to Minnesota against a revitalized Viking team where the Bears have lost 4 of their last 5. They do get a bit of a break in that they will play a Patriots team coming off what should be a very physical Monday Night game against the Jets.

[Patler]

I don't think Cutler necessarily has to screw up for the Bears to lose 2 of the next 3. Home games against the Patriots and Jets (Bears have a better road record than home record), and a trip to Minnesota against a revitalized Viking team where the Bears have lost 4 of their last 5. They do get a bit of a break in that they will play a Patriots team coming off what should be a very physical Monday Night game against the Jets.

That bit of a break might be all they need this year, or, more likely the way this year has gone, Brady will get even more dinged up against the Jets and miss the Bear game. Can they lose two of the next 3? Sure, but I thought the Eagles would take it to them, and that didn't happen. This just seems like a year the Bears are on a roll. To have any chance to overtake the Bears, I think the Packers have to win out; otherwise the best they will do is tie them.

As an aside, I'm not sure the Packers will do better than 2-2 from here, especially if the lose Jenkins for a while now, too.

[MichiganPackerFan]

I believe that if the Packers win out, including beating the Bears in that last game, they win the division. Even if the Bears win their other games -- Pats, Vikes, and Jets.

The Packers have a pretty tough slate as well but not quite like that.

Sucks that the Packers had to play on the road against the Jets, Patriots and Falcons while in the comparable part of the schedule, the Bears got the Jets & Patriots at home and Carolina on the road.

That call against Suh yesterday was completely ridiculous.

Packers have to win 3 of 4 (including against the bears)

[denverYooper]

Sucks that the Packers had to play on the road against the Jets, Patriots and Falcons while in the comparable part of the schedule, the Bears got the Jets & Patriots at home and Carolina on the road.

That call against Suh yesterday was completely ridiculous.

Packers have to win 3 of 4 (including against the bears)

Yeah. They probably will need to beat the Bears, Giants, and Lions.

[denverYooper]

On one hand it's unfortunate that the Bears are doing so well this year because the Packers could've run away with it given that the Vikings fell off. On the other hand, it means that the Packers have pressure every week to play their best ball or face elimination. I think that will make them stronger come playoff time should they make it.

[mmmdk]

On one hand it's unfortunate that the Bears are doing so well this year because the Packers could've run away with it given that the Vikings fell off. On the other hand, it means that the Packers have pressure every week to play their best ball or face elimination. I think that will make them stronger come playoff time should they make it.

Great argument & I second it.

[Joemailman]

I don't know that there's really any evidence that that helps. Saints, Colts and Vikings all coasted down the stretch last year and made it to the Conference title game. Jets were 2-2 in their last 4. Packers on the other hand were 7-1 down the stretch and lost in the 1st round. Maybe it helps to have a bit of a breather before the playoffs start. I think if the Packers could get a first round bye that would help a lot.

[HarveyWallbangers]

The way I took Patler's original post is that fans and sports casters and talking heads around the NFL need to just acknowledge that the Bears are good. We can talk all we want about luck, injuries, close games and all that, but the fact is, the Bears are 9-3.

That's a good team.

They are a good team, but I think we are better. The Bears got a lot of breaks early, and it's snowballed. That often happens in the NFL. If the last game is for the division title, I'd favor us to win it.

[denverYooper]

Yes, the Packers coulda, woulda shoulda beaten them the first time around, but they didn't.
Same for the Lions the first time around.
Maybe the same can be said for the Lions today.
Maybe the same for a couple other Bear games this year.

But the fact remains that the Bears have found ways to win the close games, something the Packers really haven't done. Often the Bears have won it with ST play. Often the Packers have lost their chances late in games because of their ST play.

Things are falling right for the Bears this year, and they have taken advantage of it. Catching and overtaking the Bears will be tough with just three games remaining before the final showdown with them.

I hate tie breakers, and it very well might come down to that.

If anything, this year has shown how important ST is. I can think of at least one killer ST problem in each Packer loss (and average starting field position)
v Bears - 2 big returns from Hester, 1 for a TD (CHI 36 - GB 21)
v Was - Crosby FG miss @ end of regulation (WAS 31 - GB 26)
v Mia - Francois lined up over LS and gave the ball back to Mia, which then scored (MIA 32 - GB 23)
v Atl - Weems runback + facemask (ATL 30 - GB 17)

While you can point to other factors that contributed to those losses (18 penalties vs Chi, several drops vs Was, Rodgers fumble vs Atl) it's not a stretch to say that GB ends up winning at least 2 of those close games with even mediocre performance on ST.

The Chargers are also showing the importance of ST play. Top 5 O and D by many metrics and (IMO) worse ST play out there in San Diego.

[denverYooper]

GBPG has tiebreaker scenarios posted:

http://blogs.greenbaypressgazette.com/blogs/gpg/insider/2010/12/06/packers-control-playoff-destiny/

The upshot is that if the Packers win the final game vs the Bears resulting in a tie, the only way the Bears get the tiebreaker is this:

The only tiebreaker scenario I have uncovered, in which the Packers beat the Bears in the season finale and Chicago wins the tiebreaker, is this one:
A Packers’ loss to the Lions next week, coupled with a Bears’ win over the Vikings in two weeks, would give the Bears the edge in division record, 5-1 to 4-2.

The Packers need to take care of business against the Lions, that much is crystal.

[pbmax]

The Bears are gaining some benefit from the schedule, but the Packers put themselves in this position. If they just stop shooting themselves in the foot (or just catch an INT without committing a personal foul) then they are in the drivers seat. Outside of Home/Away, the only differences are Falcons/Panthers and 49ers/Seashawks. While the Falcons game is clearly the toughest, the Packers getting the 49ers is very on par with the Seaturkeys this year.

That was the troubling thing about yesterday. It started like the other unnecessary losses. Mistake after miscue after misstep. Beside the result and Starks, the best thing was that they stopped self destructing earlier than normal.

[MichiganPackerFan]

The Bears are gaining some benefit from the schedule, but the Packers put themselves in this position. If they just stop shooting themselves in the foot (or just catch an INT without committing a personal foul) then they are in the drivers seat. Outside of Home/Away, the only differences are Falcons/Panthers and 49ers/Seashawks. While the Falcons game is clearly the toughest, the Packers getting the 49ers is very on par with the Seaturkeys this year.

That was the troubling thing about yesterday. It started like the other unnecessary losses. Mistake after miscue after misstep. Beside the result and Starks, the best thing was that they stopped self destructing earlier than normal.

I think the way the league schedules are made up is incredibly logical, fair and competitive. One of my biggest complaints of an expanded season is it would wreck how artfully balanced the schedule now is. I was just pointing out an unfortunate coincidence for us this year.