Will Seattle do what Bears, Ravens & Bucs could not? (1 Viewer)

[Ghost Rider]

I think most would agree that the four championships in the last 30 years that featured devastating, all-time great defenses are the 1985 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2013 Seahawks.

However, look at the following seasons of those teams:

1986 Bears: 14-2; lost their first playoff game, at home in the divisional round to the Redskins, 27-13.

2001 Ravens: 10-6; won at home Vs. Miami in the wild card round, but got drilled by the Steelers 27-10 in the divisional round.

2003 Bucs: 7-9; missed the playoffs.

So, none of those teams so much as even got back to the conference championship game, much less repeated.

So, will Seattle do what those teams could not?

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

 

[offdee]

Don't know the exact numbers, but saw a segment on ESPN talking about this same topic and the big difference between these teams was the age. The other 3 teams you reference had an avg age of 27+yrs old and the Seahwaks had an avg age of 23 yrs old. Talked about lots of that core defense started to fall off while the Seahawks are just coming into their primes. (again, don't quote me on the exactness of those numbers...going by memory)

 

[Hooper31]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

 

[Tau837]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

Not only that, Seattle has a better offense overall than all those teams. Wilson is a big reason, but not the only reason.

 

[habsfan]

"Will" is a strong word. They're definitely better positioned...

 

[tdmills]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

 

[msommer]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

Baltimore changed QB to Grbac IIRC so not a direct comparison

 

[Sabertooth]

I think most would agree that the four championships in the last 30 years that featured devastating, all-time great defenses are the 1985 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2013 Seahawks.

However, look at the following seasons of those teams:

1986 Bears: 14-2; lost their first playoff game, at home in the divisional round to the Redskins, 27-13.

2001 Ravens: 10-6; won at home Vs. Miami in the wild card round, but got drilled by the Steelers 27-10 in the divisional round.

2003 Bucs: 7-9; missed the playoffs.

So, none of those teams so much as even got back to the conference championship game, much less repeated.

So, will Seattle do what those teams could not?

Packers had #1 offense and defense in Super Bowl xxxi but alas they lost to the Broncos in Super Bowl xxxii.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

By far, yes. And they are getting back a dangerous offensive weapon that they didn't have for most of last year - Percy Harvin - so they have a great chance. Motivation will be the key, since teams often play differently once they are the hunter rather than the hunter, but Carroll is usually pretty good at keeping a team motivated and fresh.

I think most would agree that the four championships in the last 30 years that featured devastating, all-time great defenses are the 1985 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2013 Seahawks.

However, look at the following seasons of those teams:

1986 Bears: 14-2; lost their first playoff game, at home in the divisional round to the Redskins, 27-13.

2001 Ravens: 10-6; won at home Vs. Miami in the wild card round, but got drilled by the Steelers 27-10 in the divisional round.

2003 Bucs: 7-9; missed the playoffs.

So, none of those teams so much as even got back to the conference championship game, much less repeated.

So, will Seattle do what those teams could not?

Packers had #1 offense and defense in Super Bowl xxxi but alas they lost to the Broncos in Super Bowl xxxii.

No one, except maybe a few cheesehead homers, puts that Packer defense on the same level as the all-time great defenses we are talking about here.

 

[valhallan]

It will come down to turnovers:

Team          SB Year	Next Year85 Bear       +23 	 000 Ravens     +23	-802 Bucs       +17       +213 Seahawks   +20	 ?

 

[B Maverick]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

and forces you to go with Doug Flutie...

 

[Sabertooth]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

By far, yes. And they are getting back a dangerous offensive weapon that they didn't have for most of last year - Percy Harvin - so they have a great chance. Motivation will be the key, since teams often play differently once they are the hunter rather than the hunter, but Carroll is usually pretty good at keeping a team motivated and fresh.

I think most would agree that the four championships in the last 30 years that featured devastating, all-time great defenses are the 1985 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2013 Seahawks.

However, look at the following seasons of those teams:

1986 Bears: 14-2; lost their first playoff game, at home in the divisional round to the Redskins, 27-13.

2001 Ravens: 10-6; won at home Vs. Miami in the wild card round, but got drilled by the Steelers 27-10 in the divisional round.

2003 Bucs: 7-9; missed the playoffs.

So, none of those teams so much as even got back to the conference championship game, much less repeated.

So, will Seattle do what those teams could not?

Packers had #1 offense and defense in Super Bowl xxxi but alas they lost to the Broncos in Super Bowl xxxii.

No one, except maybe a few cheesehead homers, puts that Packer defense on the same level as the all-time great defenses we are talking about here.

They allowed fewer PPG than Seattle did last year?

 

[Sabertooth]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

Probably the single worst thing a Packer ever did on the field. What a shame. It's like when Warren Sapp took out Chad Clifton but even worse.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

By far, yes. And they are getting back a dangerous offensive weapon that they didn't have for most of last year - Percy Harvin - so they have a great chance. Motivation will be the key, since teams often play differently once they are the hunter rather than the hunter, but Carroll is usually pretty good at keeping a team motivated and fresh.

I think most would agree that the four championships in the last 30 years that featured devastating, all-time great defenses are the 1985 Bears, 2000 Ravens, 2002 Bucs and 2013 Seahawks.

However, look at the following seasons of those teams:

1986 Bears: 14-2; lost their first playoff game, at home in the divisional round to the Redskins, 27-13.

2001 Ravens: 10-6; won at home Vs. Miami in the wild card round, but got drilled by the Steelers 27-10 in the divisional round.

2003 Bucs: 7-9; missed the playoffs.

So, none of those teams so much as even got back to the conference championship game, much less repeated.

So, will Seattle do what those teams could not?

Packers had #1 offense and defense in Super Bowl xxxi but alas they lost to the Broncos in Super Bowl xxxii.

No one, except maybe a few cheesehead homers, puts that Packer defense on the same level as the all-time great defenses we are talking about here.

They allowed fewer PPG than Seattle did last year?

And?

You do realize that all-time great defenses punctuate that title with all-time great Super Bowl defensive performances, right?

The '85 Bears pitched a virtual shutout till NE scored a TD late in a 46-10 rout.

The '00 Ravens allowed zero points to the Giants offense.

The '02 Bucs made mincemeat out of the Raiders top-ranked offense, forcing five turnovers and scoring three defensive touchdowns.

The '13 Seahawks held the top offense in NFL history to 8 points.

The ''96 Packers allowed 21 points to a Drew Bledsoe-led offense.

Sorry, no cigar.

 

[Sabertooth]

Just trying to inject a little reality. I'll leave.

 

[Ghost Rider]

I don't think anyone would say that that Packers D wasn't great; it was. It just wasn't all-time great like the '85 Bears, '00 Ravens, etc.

 

[IHEARTFF]

Reality is that scoring was much lower in 1996 than 2013, so raw ppg is not a great comparison. League wide ppg was 20.43 in 96 and 23.41 in 2013. So by either % or total number below avg, Seattle ppg is more impressive.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Not to mention that Seattle faced much tougher quarterbacks in the playoffs than GB did:

Seattle held offenses led by Drew Brees and Peyton Manning to 23 points combined in two of the games, and Kaepernick, the other they faced, is no slouch.

GB went against Elvis Grbac, Kerry Collins and Drew Bledsoe (and allowed 8 more points in the playoffs).

 

[BoltBacker]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

Not only that, Seattle has a better offense overall than all those teams. Wilson is a big reason, but not the only reason.

... and better depth than most of the teams listed there.

A big thing working against them is the fact that not only do they have the second best team in the NFL in their conference, they have them in their division and have to face them twice a year so SEA winning the division is hardly a given. IMO the expected demise of SF is a bit premature. SF gave them all they could handle in the playoffs in Seattle. It would be hard for any rational person to argue that game wasn't the real Super Bowl.

 

[cloppbeast]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

Goodell would that defender for life.

 

[elmanx]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

I think that Brad Johnson at that point in his career was probably a better QB than Wilson is right now. Not by much though.

 

[Tau837]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

I think that Brad Johnson at that point in his career was probably a better QB than Wilson is right now. Not by much though.

There was no point in Brad Johnson's career that he was a better QB than Wilson is right now.

 

[Henry Ford]

If the league hadn't tightened up heavily on illegal contact, yes. As it is, going to be tough to shift their playing style and repeat.

 

[ImTheScientist]

They will repeat.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

I think that Brad Johnson at that point in his career was probably a better QB than Wilson is right now. Not by much though.

And that's why you play fantasy football and don't work in an NFL front office.

 

[elmanx]

I think Seattle has a better QB than all those teams so that helps.

I think that Brad Johnson at that point in his career was probably a better QB than Wilson is right now. Not by much though.

And that's why you play fantasy football and don't work in an NFL front office.

Well I'm sure there are others. I'm curious though, what's the reason you don't work in an NFL front office?

 

[cr8f]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

If they happen to catch one of the league's greatest chokers gift wrapping a couple td they've got a great chance.

 

[Gene Sackman]

They will repeat.

No, no they wont.

 

[tdmills]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

Probably the single worst thing a Packer ever did on the field. What a shame. It's like when Warren Sapp took out Chad Clifton but even worse.

I don't think sapp/Clifton is even close honestly.

One team is great, Chicago was 14-2 in 1986. The other was terrible, GB was 4-12 and their point differential was worse than their record.

Quarterback is much more important than left tackle, especially in the mid 1980's when the NFL was run centered.

This was done in late November by a rival to the favorite. After the play, teammates are high fiving Martin for the play...

Lastly, agree with it or not, sapp's play was legal. It was just away from the ball and unnecessary.

 

[tdmills]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

While they may not repeat, I certainly think they can win another superbowl in the next couple of years.

 

[Fireinside]

I think they have team that is good enough to do it, but Packers, 49ers and maybe Saints will make it really hard for Seattle to re-Pete.

In the end it may come to one stupid flag thrown in the wrong place, which will make football fans say that Seahawks weren't good enough this year.

Winning it all does not matter, but can they be there playing a close game in the playoffs that will go either way, I sure think/hope so.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The refs and the NFL seem to have it out for limiting what DBs can do in the preseason, curious how this affects Seattle in the first couple games or so.

 

[Hooper31]

The refs and the NFL seem to have it out for limiting what DBs can do in the preseason, curious how this affects Seattle in the first couple games or so.

I predict better than other teams. The Seattle DBs aren't being brought down to the level of other teams.The skill the Seattle DBs have is going to make the gap perhaps wider. The notion that Seattle DBs were getting away with stuff is wrong. Sherman in particular is an excellent technical CB. His ability to get a WR on his back shoulder and turn into the WR on deep plays is an art form. They haven't been guilty of any extra hand action down field that other teams aren't doing. All the teams are going to have to play by the same rules, just like they have in the past.

 

[BoltBacker]

The refs and the NFL seem to have it out for limiting what DBs can do in the preseason, curious how this affects Seattle in the first couple games or so.

It kind of makes you wonder if the NFL will be happy with every team passing for 5,000 yards or they will just keep going. What year is the over/under for a 6,000yard QB? Everyone thinks Andy Dalton "stinks" and he already got 4,300 with the old rules. My guess is 2017.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

Yep, it was very cheap, but do the Bears really repeat if that doesn't happen? McMahon was playing awful that year anyway, and they lost 27-13 in the playoffs, so their defense didn't exactly "bring it" in that loss.

 

[Dondante]

The refs and the NFL seem to have it out for limiting what DBs can do in the preseason, curious how this affects Seattle in the first couple games or so.

It kind of makes you wonder if the NFL will be happy with every team passing for 5,000 yards or they will just keep going. What year is the over/under for a 6,000yard QB? Everyone thinks Andy Dalton "stinks" and he already got 4,300 with the old rules. My guess is 2017.

Well, It already has Carroll crying so I support it.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

Yep, it was very cheap, but do the Bears really repeat if that doesn't happen? McMahon was playing awful that year anyway, and they lost 27-13 in the playoffs, so their defense didn't exactly "bring it" in that loss.

Bears were 14-2 that season. Both McMahon and the Bears D were bringing it all season until Martin ended McMahon's season with that moronic act. Would think the Bears would have had a much better shot getting past the Redskins in the playoffs and beyond with McMahon behind center than without him.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

The refs and the NFL seem to have it out for limiting what DBs can do in the preseason, curious how this affects Seattle in the first couple games or so.

I predict better than other teams. The Seattle DBs aren't being brought down to the level of other teams.The skill the Seattle DBs have is going to make the gap perhaps wider. The notion that Seattle DBs were getting away with stuff is wrong. Sherman in particular is an excellent technical CB. His ability to get a WR on his back shoulder and turn into the WR on deep plays is an art form. They haven't been guilty of any extra hand action down field that other teams aren't doing. All the teams are going to have to play by the same rules, just like they have in the past.

Hey I have nothing but respect for the Hawks' DBs' technique, but the NFL seems to have an agenda. That's why I said first couple games.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

Yep, it was very cheap, but do the Bears really repeat if that doesn't happen? McMahon was playing awful that year anyway, and they lost 27-13 in the playoffs, so their defense didn't exactly "bring it" in that loss.

Bears were 14-2 that season. Both McMahon and the Bears D were bringing it all season until Martin ended McMahon's season with that moronic act. Would think the Bears would have had a much better shot getting past the Redskins in the playoffs and beyond with McMahon behind center than without him.

McMahon was bringing it when he played less than six games and was terrible in the majority of them? Hell, he was 12 of 32 for 95 yards and 3 INTs in the game where he got hurt. Even by 1986 standards, when passing numbers were far less gaudy, that is pretty awful.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

Yep, it was very cheap, but do the Bears really repeat if that doesn't happen? McMahon was playing awful that year anyway, and they lost 27-13 in the playoffs, so their defense didn't exactly "bring it" in that loss.

Bears were 14-2 that season. Both McMahon and the Bears D were bringing it all season until Martin ended McMahon's season with that moronic act. Would think the Bears would have had a much better shot getting past the Redskins in the playoffs and beyond with McMahon behind center than without him.

McMahon was bringing it when he played less than six games and was terrible in the majority of them? Hell, he was 12 of 32 for 95 yards and 3 INTs in the game where he got hurt. Even by 1986 standards, when passing numbers were far less gaudy, that is pretty awful.

Hard to believe but Mike Tomczak was 7-0 that year. The Bears defense was allowing 13 or fewer points almost every game.

• Tomczak's stats: 50.2 QBR, 2 TD, 10 INT, 49% completion rate.

They lost one game to the Rams by 3 points that Fuller started, & he, Tomczak and Payton went 11/28/130/0/2 (Int). The Rams went 6/25/137/1/2. The Rams won a fumble return TD and a 65 yard TD pass that accounted for almost half their passing.

Not sure if Tomczak and Fuller got hurt too but Flutie started the playoff game. He went 11/31/134/1/2, and all but 84 yards came on a single pass. They led 13-7 at half.

They absolutely go all the way with a healthy McMahon.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

Yep, it was very cheap, but do the Bears really repeat if that doesn't happen? McMahon was playing awful that year anyway, and they lost 27-13 in the playoffs, so their defense didn't exactly "bring it" in that loss.

Bears were 14-2 that season. Both McMahon and the Bears D were bringing it all season until Martin ended McMahon's season with that moronic act. Would think the Bears would have had a much better shot getting past the Redskins in the playoffs and beyond with McMahon behind center than without him.

McMahon was bringing it when he played less than six games and was terrible in the majority of them? Hell, he was 12 of 32 for 95 yards and 3 INTs in the game where he got hurt. Even by 1986 standards, when passing numbers were far less gaudy, that is pretty awful.

Putting aside your continued focus on one single game, yes, McMahon only played 6 games. Tomczak started 7. They both had 0 losses, and threw nearly the same yardage (McMahon with 995, Tomczak 1105), had the same attempts (150 to 151) and completion % (51% to 49%).

However, McMahon had a much better TD to INT ratio (5:8 vs Tomzack's 2:10). He was also the best QB the bears had on the roster, and arguably, outside of Sid Luckman, was the Bears best QB, ever. So yes, I think they go farther with him under center than anyone else on that roster at the time.

He was no Manning or Brady in their prime, or to your point, as good as a passer as Marino, Elway or Montana (or Shroeder) that year -- that was never what made McMahon or the Bears of that era great. That was their D and Walter Payton.

What did make McMahon great was his ability to field marshal the offense -- he was great at the line reading Ds, was a fiery competitor and a pro bowl leader among leaders on that time. This, and his playoff-tested mettle, makes me think he takes this team farther than they went without him, regardless of his stats in wk 12 of that season.

 

[Ghost Rider]

Well, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it; I just don't agree.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Well, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it; I just don't agree.

Absolutely. My opinion is no more valid than yours.



PS, Seattle does not repeat.

 

[moleculo]

like with other great teams ('85 Bears included), it comes down to health. Seattle was fortunate to be relatively healthy last year. They had some guys miss a few games during the regular season, but came into the playoffs pretty damn close to full strength.

If Seattle can stay healthy, they've got as good a chance as anyone.

 

[ImTheScientist]

like with other great teams ('85 Bears included), it comes down to health. Seattle was fortunate to be relatively healthy last year. They had some guys miss a few games during the regular season, but came into the playoffs pretty damn close to full strength.

If Seattle can stay healthy, they've got as good a chance as anyone.

Not true at all....although I can see how a Bronco's fan would hope that.

 

[moleculo]

like with other great teams ('85 Bears included), it comes down to health. Seattle was fortunate to be relatively healthy last year. They had some guys miss a few games during the regular season, but came into the playoffs pretty damn close to full strength.

If Seattle can stay healthy, they've got as good a chance as anyone.

Not true at all....although I can see how a Bronco's fan would hope that.

they weren't relatively healthy?

out of all teams that made the playoffs, only KC, Cincy, and Philly missed fewer games. (link) Sea had 10 fewer AGL than Carolina, 22 fewer than SF or Den, 26 fewer than NO, and 30 of fewer than SD, NE, GB, or IND. The only major injuries Seattle worked thru was Harvin for most of the season, Okung for a good chunk, Browner for a few games, Giacomini for a stretch, and KJ wright for a few games... and they had all of these guys back by the time they were in the NFCCG.

btw, I would never hope anyone gets injured. please don't assume I'm cheering for injuries on any team.

 

[tdmills]

Kinda hard to repeat when something this illegal happens to your starting qb

Jim McMahon body slammed by Charles Martin Bears …: http://youtu.be/wilIF30NLRU

And no other QB was ever thrown to the ground. Sure it was a low blow but common, this is football.

Then you get a poster like this. Seriously, football is body slamming a qb 4 seconds after he throws the football onto his hurt shoulder? Did u notice charles Martin's hit list on his towel with bears players numbers.

I can't think of one single act of football worse than this I've ever seen.

Yep, it was very cheap, but do the Bears really repeat if that doesn't happen? McMahon was playing awful that year anyway, and they lost 27-13 in the playoffs, so their defense didn't exactly "bring it" in that loss.

Bears were 14-2 that season. Both McMahon and the Bears D were bringing it all season until Martin ended McMahon's season with that moronic act. Would think the Bears would have had a much better shot getting past the Redskins in the playoffs and beyond with McMahon behind center than without him.

McMahon was bringing it when he played less than six games and was terrible in the majority of them? Hell, he was 12 of 32 for 95 yards and 3 INTs in the game where he got hurt. Even by 1986 standards, when passing numbers were far less gaudy, that is pretty awful.

Putting aside your continued focus on one single game, yes, McMahon only played 6 games. Tomczak started 7. They both had 0 losses, and threw nearly the same yardage (McMahon with 995, Tomczak 1105), had the same attempts (150 to 151) and completion % (51% to 49%).

However, McMahon had a much better TD to INT ratio (5:8 vs Tomzack's 2:10). He was also the best QB the bears had on the roster, and arguably, outside of Sid Luckman, was the Bears best QB, ever. So yes, I think they go farther with him under center than anyone else on that roster at the time.

He was no Manning or Brady in their prime, or to your point, as good as a passer as Marino, Elway or Montana (or Shroeder) that year -- that was never what made McMahon or the Bears of that era great. That was their D and Walter Payton.

What did make McMahon great was his ability to field marshal the offense -- he was great at the line reading Ds, was a fiery competitor and a pro bowl leader among leaders on that time. This, and his playoff-tested mettle, makes me think he takes this team farther than they went without him, regardless of his stats in wk 12 of that season.

Exactly, the other part is would the entire team feel confident with their starting QB or a 3rd stringer. I'm sure they were pressing to make plays, etc.