So the 00 Pats were better than the Rams of that year?'85 Bears, obviously. Walter Payton would run for 200 yards against that Patriots defense, and the Bears would get more than enough pressure on Brady to keep the Pats offense slightly in check.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
85 Bears vs. 07 Patriots (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter 3nOut
- Start date
Ghost Rider
Footballguy
Why would the 5-11 Patriots be considered better than the 10-6 Rams in '00?So the 00 Pats were better than the Rams of that year?'85 Bears, obviously. Walter Payton would run for 200 yards against that Patriots defense, and the Bears would get more than enough pressure on Brady to keep the Pats offense slightly in check.
But how do you do that? I mean, if you want to talk about the most DOMINANT team of all time- thats fine. But the 'best' team, i think most people want to know what would happen if they went head to head. I agree its silly and unfair, but its also a pretty forgone conclusion that the old guys couldnt hang.
3nOut
Footballguy
Tell that to every player on the receiving end of one of their hits.
stevegamer
Footballguy
Bears:
Buddy bounties Brady.
Moss folds like a house of cards.
Welker keeps getting up from big hits all game long, but it's not enough.
Buddy bounties Brady.
Moss folds like a house of cards.
Welker keeps getting up from big hits all game long, but it's not enough.
phthalatemagic
Footballguy
Most of them weren't even football fans in 1985
I'm 44, went to New Orleans for Super Bowl XX with my (now) wife and have been a life-long Bears fan.I voted NE.Simple reason - multiple WR sets can expose the weakness/flaw of the "46". Offenses that spread out and used multiple WR's made the "46" obsolete. The advantage may not necessarily come from WR1 vs. CB1, but in WR2 & WR3 vs. Bear CB's 2 & 3 (LA Richardson and Reggie Phillips). 3 and 5 step drops before the rush can get to you and Stallworth/Welker would be the guys that would have killed the Bears of '85 (just like Nat Moore the Dolphins WR3 did on MNF).
pats3in4
Footballguy
I voted for NE and I did see the Bears play in 1985. But I should note that I think there are a handful of teams since 1985 that would beat those Bears: 1989 49ers, 1991 Redskins, 1992 Cowboys, 1994 49ers, 1996 Packers, 1998 Broncos and the 2004 Patriots. I'm even taking into consideration an "era normalization factor" to account for and eliminate differences in size of the players...When people talk about the 1985 Bears, everyone talks about their defense for good reason. They had an awesome front 7 and two great run-supporting and blitzing safeties. They would shut down running games and blitz the bejeesus out of QBs. A big part of their game was intimidation. Offenses fell apart when facing the Bears, often defeated mentally before the opening kickoff. So to beat this Bears team, you had to have a QB that wouldn't wilt under the heat. I think each of these teams had such QBs, at least for the years in question (e.g. Mark Rypien in 1991 was solid, the rest of his career notwithstanding). The next thing you needed were top-notch skill players that would force the Bears out of their 46 defense. This meant going with 3-wideouts (something not seen much in 1985, BTW - and also what Miami did in beating them as the Bears LBs couldn't cover Miami's extra wideouts). Mike Ditka himself said on a pregame show either last week or the week before that the 2007 Pats would have forced the Bears out of their 46 with their spread formations. I'm sure these other teams would have as well. Going with these three wideouts and forcing the Bears out of their 46 would have exposed the position I had yet to mention on that D...their very average cornerbacks. Tom Brady would beg the 1985 Bears to blitz all day if it meant Randy Moss is seeing single coverage by Mike Richardson. As would Montana with 1989 Jerry Rice (remember in 1985, Rice was a rookie with very questionable hands) or Aikman with Michael Irvin. These teams also had the offensive creativity and precise execution to keep that Bears blitz off balance with screens, especially to WRs. I think these teams would have forced the Bears to back off with the heat and play a more conventional D (as they were more than capable of as they proved under Vince Tobin in 1986 and actually were statistically better than the 1985 D). If teams these teams were successful in keeping the 46 blitz at bay as I expect, they would have also exposed another flaw in that D...the safeties' pass coverage skills. Duerson and Fencik couldn't stay with any of the TEs on these squads, let alone the 3rd WR and likely would have just had to play deep.3nOut said:
The 1985 Bears postseason opponents consisted of 1) a Giants squad who ran the ball with Joe Morris, but were dead meat if they were forced to throw to their lame group of WRs, 2) a Rams team that ran the ball with Eric Dickerson, but were dead meat if Dieter Brock had to win the game throwing to a bunch of non-descript WRs and 3) Tony Eason's Pats (Tony Eason?). The Bears had an impressive romp through that postseason, but didn't face any offense nearly as talented as the ones I posted above.
Having said all that, the biggest problem that Bears team would have had against these teams would have been on offense. Walter Payton and that OL were excellent and Jim McMahon (when he actually played...he missed quite a few games in 1985) was good that year. The WRs and TE weren't going to cut it against the above teams, though. Track star Willie Gault was a legit deep threat, but a one-trick pony that wouldn't get behind any of those Ds. McKinnon and Moorehead were nothing special. In that playoff romp, the Bears offense put up 14 on the Giants (7 more came on an infamous Sean Landetta whiffed punt returned for a TD) and 17 on the Rams (7 more came on a fumble return by the D). Even in SB20, the Pats O turned the ball over deep in their territory repeatedly and when they didn't, they stupidly single-covered Gault with Ronnie Lippett (instead of Raymond Clayborn) on two deep bombs to set up other scores. The above teams would take away Payton and dare McMahon to beat them in the air and he'd have a tough time doing that against those defenses with the weapons he had to throw to.
The 1985 Bears had an amazing season and definitely deserve recognition as arguably the best one-year team ever. However, they faced some extremely one-dimensional offenses in the postseason and didn't exactly light it up on offense themselves. I wish they had to face a team of the caliber of those listed above. Would have been fun to watch.
Come on! Didn't you hear? Brady is the greatest QB of all time, Belichick, the greatest coach of all time, '07 Patriots the greatest team of all time.Last year the Bears had the greatest D of all time, LT was the greatest rb of all time. the year before, Manning.Rinse. repeat.Let's get some perspective, people.Oh, Bears in a landslide.
Southside Stosh
Footballguy
I've watched Da Bears since the year Abe Gibron was HC.If the 07 Patriots were transported back in time to Soldier Field and played by today's rules, the Patsies win over Da Bears, no question. The Patsies would control the line of scrimage on both sides of the ball. Brady play action deep to Randy Moss all day long.The speed and strength of a modern NFL team would overwelm any of the great NFL teams of the past.3nOut said:
MCguidance
Footballguy
If my grade school grammar teacher ever saw this post, she might literally have a heart attack. Nonetheless, valid points. 1985 Bears.Young 8 said:
Last edited by a moderator:
phthalatemagic
Footballguy
Why do people say these things? If you are giving current teams the benefit of superior medicine and nutrition, then I'll give them the detriment of being born too late and they must play as children.
God I love Bears homers! And i mean that! That superfans sketch isnt a parody, parody requires exaggeration. Heck, football is supposed to be fun, i enjoy people that really buy into the sport.But come on. I watched the 85 Bears play, I have much love, but did they hit any harder than Ray Lewis? And Mike Richardson running with Randy Moss? Those safeties wont get many shots at him when he is running down the sideline for 50 yard tds. And lets not forget cover 2 hasnt been invented yet3nOut said:
We're also forgetting the other side of the equation- that Bears o-line against Adelius Thomas and co? Jim McMahon is the QB most likely to be carted off the field I think. You better hope Steve Fuller sure can.Say what? Stop being philosophical and just look at what is obvious. Live in the new era my friend.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
concur.The athleticism of todays NFL player,cannot compare to players from 20 years ago.Pats and it wouldn't be that close.
BelichicksRevenge
Footballguy
The Bears struggled with some mediocre teams during the season as well plus they were blown out in the 1st half by Miami.Bears had number 1 defense and number 6 offense. pats have number 1 offense and number 6 defense. Tough to say who would win but if you are a pats fan you gotta like the advantage you have at head coach
Last edited by a moderator:
3nOut
Footballguy
No, and Ray Lewis doesn't hit harder then they did either. Thats my point. I responded to your statement about size. Size doesn't matter. A hard hit is a hard hit.God I love Bears homers! And i mean that! That superfans sketch isnt a parody, parody requires exaggeration. Heck, football is supposed to be fun, i enjoy people that really buy into the sport.But come on. I watched the 85 Bears play, I have much love, but did they hit any harder than Ray Lewis? And Mike Richardson running with Randy Moss? Those safeties wont get many shots at him when he is running down the sideline for 50 yard tds. And lets not forget cover 2 hasnt been invented yet3nOut said:
We're also forgetting the other side of the equation- that Bears o-line against Adelius Thomas and co? Jim McMahon is the QB most likely to be carted off the field I think. You better hope Steve Fuller sure can.
I think you have a physics problem here. Force = mass x acceleration. Guys are quantitatively bigger and faster than they were 20 years ago, the math is pretty clear. And a hard hit is indeed a hard hit. These guys just played Ray Lewis and somehow walked away- i think they could handle the Bears without undue risk of injury.No, and Ray Lewis doesn't hit harder then they did either. Thats my point. I responded to your statement about size. Size doesn't matter. A hard hit is a hard hit.God I love Bears homers! And i mean that! That superfans sketch isnt a parody, parody requires exaggeration. Heck, football is supposed to be fun, i enjoy people that really buy into the sport.But come on. I watched the 85 Bears play, I have much love, but did they hit any harder than Ray Lewis? And Mike Richardson running with Randy Moss? Those safeties wont get many shots at him when he is running down the sideline for 50 yard tds. And lets not forget cover 2 hasnt been invented yet3nOut said:
We're also forgetting the other side of the equation- that Bears o-line against Adelius Thomas and co? Jim McMahon is the QB most likely to be carted off the field I think. You better hope Steve Fuller sure can.
phthalatemagic
Footballguy
OKWho was better?2003 Iraqi crappy soldiersor300 BC (or whenever) Spartan Hoplites?
hitmenssharpshooters
Footballguy
Both lose to '85 Dolphins
GregR_2
Footballguy
If it is the actual 07 Pats vs the actual 85 Bears, both teams plucked out of time, the Pats win because of the difference in size/strength, and because the Bears would not be familiar with the ways to defense a spread offense, while the Pats coaching staff would be familiar with how to play against the Bears offense.
However, if we're talking about which team was better in their era and against their peers, the Bears were the better team. Both sides have a legenday unit (Pats offense and Bears defense), but the Pats D is just a good one while the Bears had a great offense to go with the defense.
However, if we're talking about which team was better in their era and against their peers, the Bears were the better team. Both sides have a legenday unit (Pats offense and Bears defense), but the Pats D is just a good one while the Bears had a great offense to go with the defense.
No one in this thread, including you, saw the Bears play that year. That's because the "you" who saw the 1985 Bears play is a very, very different person from the "you" who is currently watching the 2007 Patriots play. Take me for example. When "I" watched the 1985 Bears play, every one of their players was about a foot taller than me, and many of them were the same age as my teachers. When "I" watch the 2007 Patriots, some of the players are the same age as my students. How in the world can "I" do any kind of meaningful comparison between the two sets of observations? I was 14 in 1985 and am 36 now. But that's irrelevant. If you were 34 and are now 56, or were 64 and are now 86, I'll bet you've changed a whole lot in the last 22 years.3nOut said:
Also, not only are "my" memories of the Bears those of a 14-year-old boy instead of a [gundy]36-year-old man[/gundy], they're also 22 years old. My mind doesn't have room for everything, so it only remembers the important stuff: the Bears were a scary great team. I'm sure the Bears played some games (at least one which I do remember) where they looked very vulnerable, as vulnerable and flawed as the Pats have looked for the last two weeks. I just don't remember those because they're not particularly important in the grand scheme of things. Looking at the numbers, I see that they trailed in the 4th quarter against an 8-8 Packers team. They were tied at halftime (and only won by 7) at home against a 2-14 Colts team. They gave up 445 yards to 7-9 Vikings team that ranked 16th in the league in offense. Had someone posted an "85 Bears vs. 67 Packers" poll after one of those games, it would probably have read a lot like this thread, but with the Bears' role flopped.
None of this is an argument for the Pats or against the Bears or anything else. Just an observation about the futility of trying to answer a question like this (which I do understand is part of the fun of it).
phthalatemagic
Footballguy
party pooper
nibbomydaets
Footballguy
Thats deep. And by deep, I mean the odd and weird look into your mind. I don't think the fact that the Pats have struggled has anything to do with how they compare to teams of the past. Even great teams have their struggles. They take teams lightly. There are injuries and other outside factors that play a part in how teams play over the course of a season.
hove
Footballguy
And the salary cap, free agency and 32 teams evolved the league into parity. I'm very impressed with what the Pats have done over this decade but the Cowboys of the 90s or the Steelers of the 70s would wipe them up.
ninerfanatic492000
Footballguy
i wonder how many penalties the 85 bears aggresive style would accrue if the could play in today's tick tacky penalty-fest. that rabid bunch may kill a referee
Raider Nation
Devil's Advocate
It's not pretty in there... but that's part of the genius.
NatronIsMean
Footballguy
Bears 83-2. Tough break for the Bears not getting the shutout.
Assani Fisher
Footballguy
No, and Ray Lewis doesn't hit harder then they did either. Thats my point. I responded to your statement about size. Size doesn't matter. A hard hit is a hard hit.God I love Bears homers! And i mean that! That superfans sketch isnt a parody, parody requires exaggeration. Heck, football is supposed to be fun, i enjoy people that really buy into the sport.But come on. I watched the 85 Bears play, I have much love, but did they hit any harder than Ray Lewis? And Mike Richardson running with Randy Moss? Those safeties wont get many shots at him when he is running down the sideline for 50 yard tds. And lets not forget cover 2 hasnt been invented yet
We're also forgetting the other side of the equation- that Bears o-line against Adelius Thomas and co? Jim McMahon is the QB most likely to be carted off the field I think. You better hope Steve Fuller sure can.
Are you really saying that size and strength don't help you hit someone harder???
amphibianbri
Footballguy
Glad to see most members of this board (over 70% at this point) have voted Bears. Here's why I did. You can't really compare teams across different eras, so you compare according to dominance in your own. For that 85 season, the Bears were #2 in offense averaging almost 29 ppg, and of course #1 in defense, allowing only 12. They were great on both sides of the ball. New England, for all of their offensive greatness, which teams have found the last two weeks how to expose somewhat, as the blowouts have subsided for the time being, is not studly defensively. They are above average, but not dominant. If you took a team with the stat line of the 85 Bears, it would be like putting this years Cowboys offense with this years Pittsburgh defense and making it one team. Bears would run like crazy and keep Brady guessing all day long. Da Bears!
3nOut
Footballguy
I undestand what you are trying to say but I was 20 at the time (about the same age as many of the NE supports heere now) and I remember things differently than a 14 year old and differently than an 40 year old back then. However, I still remember a lot from that year.
Fantaholic
Footballguy
Bears, and it's not even close.
The Great Snook
Footballguy
It all depends on the rules of the poll.
If the 85 team was transported through time to 2007 the Pats would absolutely destroy them. They Pats are bigger, stronger, and faster (I'm starting to hear the sound effects from the Six Million Dollar Man).
If the 2007 Pats were sent back in time and shrunken down to the 1985 standard, the Bears would beat them.
For all those who think the Bears would win in a landslide, are you implying that the 1985 Patriots would give the 2007 Patriots a run for their money???
If the 85 team was transported through time to 2007 the Pats would absolutely destroy them. They Pats are bigger, stronger, and faster (I'm starting to hear the sound effects from the Six Million Dollar Man).
If the 2007 Pats were sent back in time and shrunken down to the 1985 standard, the Bears would beat them.
For all those who think the Bears would win in a landslide, are you implying that the 1985 Patriots would give the 2007 Patriots a run for their money???
RudeDog
Footballguy
Pocket Hercules destroys Shawn Merriman on pass block.Tell me once again about physics, and I'll explain heart to youI think you have a physics problem here. Force = mass x acceleration. Guys are quantitatively bigger and faster than they were 20 years ago, the math is pretty clear. And a hard hit is indeed a hard hit. These guys just played Ray Lewis and somehow walked away- i think they could handle the Bears without undue risk of injury.No, and Ray Lewis doesn't hit harder then they did either. Thats my point. I responded to your statement about size. Size doesn't matter. A hard hit is a hard hit.God I love Bears homers! And i mean that! That superfans sketch isnt a parody, parody requires exaggeration. Heck, football is supposed to be fun, i enjoy people that really buy into the sport.But come on. I watched the 85 Bears play, I have much love, but did they hit any harder than Ray Lewis? And Mike Richardson running with Randy Moss? Those safeties wont get many shots at him when he is running down the sideline for 50 yard tds. And lets not forget cover 2 hasnt been invented yet
We're also forgetting the other side of the equation- that Bears o-line against Adelius Thomas and co? Jim McMahon is the QB most likely to be carted off the field I think. You better hope Steve Fuller sure can.
Routilla
Footballguy
Agreed.
