I can't recall being less invested in the outcome of a Super Bowl than this one.

Second!

Are we getting DVOA this week?

Is this basically the ultimate test of "defense wins championships?"

I like Indy by 8 or more, but then again, I liked the Saints too. At least this time the field will be fast(er).

I can't recall being MORE invested in the outcome of a Super Bowl than this one!!! Colts Fan.

My money is on Bob Sanders twisting his ankle at a club three days before the game.

3
no, because with the exception of the Saints game, the Bears have been ordinary defensively since Tommie Harris went down.
So if Indy lights them up, the critics can say, "look, Harris and Mike Brown were injured, and the Saints game was a fluke because of the cold weather-dome team factor."
I thought that the Colts-Ravens game was a test of that (obviously one game can't be a complete test), and what we learned is that defense does win, you just need to score more than six points.

All offense and just enough defense vs all defense and just enough offense. Seems like this could answer an age old question or something. I suppose I want Peyton to win so his haters have to put at least a little bit of a sock in it. But I also would kind of like the Bears to win because their fans at the extreme are more enjoyable. Also they'd have reason to bring back the Super Fans sketch on SNL. But they just did get a world series win too, and there's something to be said for spreading the love around.

2: Nope. Aaron said in this week's Quick Reads that there won't be another ranking/commentary for the season.

Ditka vs. a hurricane - who wins?

9 - Ditka. But what if it's Hurricane Butkus?

Truly the question the city of New Orleans wakes up asking itself every day. Does Ditka have the use of a Palm frond or other device suitable for fanning?

#1.

For me, the most uninteresting Super Bowl was XXXIII, with the Broncos and Falcons. I was not interested in the teams or in listening to Madden and Summerall falling over each other to stick their noses into a certain orifice belonging to a John A. Elway. Everyone pretty much predicted a slaughter, and that's exactly what happened.

But enough about ancient history: I expect a Bears victory. Call me crazy, as bad as their offense is, their return team has a good chance of matching their regular season total in this one game against that awful Colts kick/punt coverage.

But they just did get a world series win too, and there’s something to be said for spreading the love around.

The White Sox don't count.

I can't wait until the Prince concert, I mean Super Bowl.

#11 - he's got a clipboard, and one of dem giant foam fingers.

Why I think that Chicago is much more likely to win:

[1] From NFL Matchup (TB vs OAK) SB post-game:
Top 3 Offense is 0-9 vs. Top 3 Defense in Super Bowls!
[2] Bears have a decided advantage in Special Teams.
[3] Bears have 8 Stomp/Doms vs 5 for the Colts
[4] Bears running game vs. Colts running D.

The only advantage that the Colts have is that Chaotic Evil Rex may show up. But Happy Feet Manning might show up as well. So that's a wash.

Unfortunately I don't think that me wanting Dungy/Manning to win so that I don't have to hear about them not being able to win the big one is going to count for much.

13: I completely agree. Most Bears fans are not White Sox fans. Cubs fans significantly outnumber White Sox fans in the Bears' fan base. And Cubs fans (like me) were not rooting for the White Sox to win and did not enjoy their championship at all. But we did have the Bulls' dynasty in the not too distant past.

Bears win. Defensively, the Bear win all Defensive rankings save passing D. Colts have worst rushing defense in the league. Hello. Bears are 11th against the pass. Rex has a great game every other game and 10 completions in the win versus the Saints (and the offense still scored 37 points) means he may have a great game in the SuperBowl. The Bears win a close one...

The player on the Bears who scares me the most is Hester. I say don't kick it to him (i.e. stick to squib kick-offs and angled punts), even if the Bears start with pretty good field position most of the time. The Colts D has responded quite well in the playoffs when starting in bad field position, but it's the big return that they can do little about.

I thought that the Colts' coverage had improved recently, but the Pats game demonstrated that it is still weak, particularly on kick-offs.

#10 - I'd still have to say Ditka 28-14.

#6 - Though Chicago's D is bendable, it hardly breaks. The unit is clutch and it can stop opponents when it's absolutely mandatory. Brees passed for over 350 yards and, still, couldn't score more than 14 points. Plus, the unit produces turnover after turnover. It IS an ultimate test that a defense wins championships; if Chicago is forced to get into a shootout, they're goners.

Like in the Saints-Bears matchup, Chicago has the edge in every department but one. Indy's passing game is better than Chicago's pass defense. However, Chicago's rushing defense is above average and should hold up against Indy's above average running game; Chicago's passing offense is mediocre but so is Indy's passing defense, Chicago's rushing offense is very good whilst Indy's rushing defense is average, above average at best; and Chicago has a definitive edge in special teams (except in field goals kicking).

Indy's D is fast but, in its Cover 2 scheme, it's vulnerable against the run. I think it'll be particularly vulnerable against Benson's pounding up the middle, or Jones attacking Cato Junes' side. If the Bears can run the ball, they'll keep both their D fresh and Manning on his toes. Thus, the key for the Bears to win is to run the ball effectively. On the other hand, if Indy stops the Bears' running game, they'll force the D to be on the field most of the game and, by the 4th quarter, they'll be on their heels. Indy's key for winning the game is stopping the opponent's running game.

Though other things may come into play (special teams, Good Rex or Bad Rex, Manning playing a bad game), I think it comes down to that.

lifelong rabid Bears fan says:

agreed with Tal - if it becomes a shootout the Bears are done. but if not, Bears have a decent shot. but they still have to have it all click: offense, defense, special teams. if Hester can have a big game, if defense can get a couple turnovers, if the running game continues to dominate, if if if...

the Patriots achilles' heel finally caught up with them: they depend way too much on Tom Brady. the Colts are built like that too. the Bears most definitely do not depend on their quarterback to win. Kyle Orton = 10 wins in 2005. need I say more?

anyhow, go Lovie! you keep proving everybody wrong.

Are we going to need a separate comment thread by the time we get to the game itself? :)

Wow! The Colts beats the No.1 & No.2 stingiest defenses in the league (Ravens and the Pats) and are the No.1 DVOA offense and i see not too much love for them.

People are stating that the Bears are going to win this one!

While it might pain me as a Pats fan to say this, i think we need to be ready for the "Is 1 SB / 2 MVPs greater than 3 rings" discussion from mid-Feb.

Let's pretend one lives in Cleveland, but one's deep depression keeps one from seeking means of escape. What kind of currency does "I'm not one of the people from Chicago who give a crap about the White Sox" have? My suspicion is little to none.

I thought the Colts coverage teams had improved in the playoffs because of the personnel changes as well. The NE game definitely exposed that it's still pretty poor. They should just kick it out of bounds, punt or kickoff. The 40 is nothing. I thought they should do this a couple years ago when their coverage was even worse and they should do it now, they're just too overmatched vs. Chicago.

21:

In my view, the Pats lost because of their LBs. The CBs kept the high profile WRs in check, the DL generated as much pass rush as a 3 man front can, but the lack of plays (pass defensed, forced incompletes, sacks) from the LBs meant that Peyton could move the chains from the middle of second quarter.

If you examined Pats past success, LBs made numerous big plays and kept the running game and the short dunk & run passes in check and that was a key factor for the victory. The Pats did not have adequate resources in LB spot to effect that strategy in the game.

For the record, did Bruschi & Vrabel turn up for the game? They were completely missing. The only LB who had an average outing was Colvin.

PS: This is not to take away credit from the colts. They beat the Pats fair-and-square.

The thing is the Bears and Colts both play a similar style of big opportunity defense. Both teams are prone to giving up the big play, but also excel at creating a great deal of big turnovers. I wouldn't be surprised to see a high-scoring game with each offense steady while managing a big play every now and then and benefiting from a few key takeaways. This won't be a field position game; it'll turn into an aggressive game for both teams pretty quickly.

#16: The problem with [2] and in some part [1] is that Chicago plays in the NFC. They really, really should have more stomps than Indy, because the bad teams are just so much... uh... badder.

#27: I think the Bears have to avoid exactly that. If it turns into a shootout, Grossman will start taking shots downfield, which will give the pass rush more time, which will lead to more Grossmans.

I feel like I'm hoping against hope that the Colts can win this thing. I HATE the "choke" talk, and I think this would end it once and for all. But I just have visions of Vasher and Hester scoring touchdowns and Grossman laughing all the way to a trophy.

Because all Rex Grossman does is win.

"The unit is clutch and it can stop opponents when it’s absolutely mandatory."

Is that why they have one of the worst dropoffs of any team in redzone defense? They also barely improve at all when it's close and late. That's not to say it isn't a great defense, because it obviously is, but I don't know why you would think they've shown much clutchness.

Also, don't they run a Tampa-2 scheme just like the Colts? Doesn't seem to hurt their run defense much. The actual Tampa defense is also way better against the run than the pass.

Anyway, I agree with most of your post... the Bears will most likely require a good performance from the running game just to be in it, because their slightly-above-average pass D will probably give up some points. However, that matchup is so simple (the Bears run game should be expected to do well, and if they don't the game is very seriously over) I think the most important matchup is still Evil Rex vs. Not Evil Rex. The passing game doesn't have to do WELL, but it will need to produce some, because I think it's inevitable that Peyton scores.
I also think Hester will have a good day returning (even without a TD) which will help both aspects of the offense.

18: "Rex has a great game every other game"

I assume you mean that in a law of averages sense, not literally, but still... since week 10, Rex has had two "great" games (100+ QB rating), three "average" games (75+), one subpar (the Saints) and three atrocious ones (

16: In addition to what Fnor and Kalyan said above, you're pinning your hopes on happy feet Manning emerging instead of Bad Rex? Have you watched any football this season? How many times has HFM emerged? Zero. Bad Rex, oh he of four sub-40 QB rating games this season? (including a zero rating game)

And two of Manning's best games were the two first playoff games--he was a superb game manager. He gets credit for the last game in the media because his gross numbers were splashy and it was a great game, but in all three he was more than competent. No happy feet vs. big bad Balt or NE.

The special teams could be a HUGE factor, but if Hester gets one kick returned for a TD (which would surprise... nobody), any smart coach will kick all the rest OB and make the O beat them. Cue Bad Rex, enter stage right.

Indy stuffed 2.5 more or less "run first" playoff teams in the past three games, where as Chicago went into OT with Seattle, at home. I said Seattle--Seattle, generally regarded as one of the poorer playoff teams and the lowest ranked team here--granted part of that ranking included vast stretches without their former pro-bowl RB or QB, but their D backfield in the playoffs included a scarecrow, a tin woodsman, and a cowardly lion all signed the previous week. And it was at home for Chicago. And that was with Rex having a decent game and Hester recovering THREE fumbles/muffs. Will the luck hold?

I'm not enamored of the 7 point spread and I'm not a bettor, but I would not advise betting on Chicago to cover or win.

While Rex tends to suck against good defenses, the Colts wouldn't seem to be the type of team to make Rex suck; however, Rex's main strength is throwing the deep ball down the sidelines, which is what the Colts D is all about stopping.

I think if you force Rex to keep on checking down underneath the Bears drives will stall, his short passes have terrible touch and accuracy and he doesn't always seem to notice whether a reciever is covered or not.

I also wouldn't use the NO game as a blueprint for the Colts. Playing a dome team in freezing snowy weather in Chicago is a world apart from Miami.

jonnyblazin, for an AFC guy you show good knowledge of the NFC. How do you have the time? Envious.

Or wait, I forget, are you a Ravens fan living in Chicago? That might explain it.

Bob Cook,
Your article linked at my name deeply wounds me. The fact that your son wrestles almost makes up for it;-)

And why wouldn't you get a mortgage from a guy whose sole qualification is getting the Fridge to pose for a picture with him? I mean, would you prefer a guy who knows Craig Krenzel or Kyle Orton? That just shows he has bad judgement. Come to think of it, maybe that's just what you need to get that 150% LTV loan!

Too be honest I think that the bears probably need about three touchdowns from their defence and/or special teams to win this one. If they can do that they should win unless Mad Rex shows up and loses the game for them.

Now scoring three non-offensive TDs in one game is pretty hard, but given the Chicago D and special teams certanly not impossible. Even so I'd take Indy if I had to bet it, but hardly by 7+ pts.

I just win baby...

So do I.

OK, I'll make the case for the Bears. (Not that I believe it, but it almost wins me over.)

1) Thus far in the playoffs, Peyton Manning has showed himself as somebody who can be stopped. Against the Chiefs, Ravens, and Patriots he had 10 weak quarters of football followed by 2 strong ones. The Bears have a better defense than the Pats do and could reasonably be expected to slow down the Colts' offense.

2) The Colts are still vulnerable to a power running game. They haven't really faced one yet, except for Herm Edwards' uninventive approach. The Bears have had the best running game in the playoffs (well, except for the Chargers.) It's certainly possible that they will be able to run on the Colts.

3) The Colts can be beaten deep. Bernard Berrian is better than any receiver the Colts have had to face in this year's playoffs. If he gets open deep, even Evil Rex can find him.

4) The Bears have an excellent special teams unit. As we saw in the AFC championship game, the Colts' kick return coverage can be atrocious. Expect Devin Hester to run back at least one TD.

Of these four points, I'm the most confident of the last one, and the least confident of 2). I think the outcome will depend on the Bears' ability to force turnovers. If they can force 3 or more, or if they force 2 or more and get special teams play, I think they'll win.

Bears fan living in Colts territory here. I couldn't have more invested in this game. I'm so excited for the Bears, the next week and a half needs to fly by. I really dislike the Colts, more accurately most Colts fans(no offense to anyone here), but if any other NFC team had made it, I'd be rooting for the Colts/Manning/Dungy to win and get rid of all these stupid choke discussions.
I really believe the Bears have a good chance of winning this one. They can play their base defense all game and have Urlacher and Briggs take care of Utecht, Clark. And with 3 linebackers they'll absolutely shutdown the running game. I think Vasher matches up well against Wayne and can hold him to a sub par day. I'm very concerned about Tillman vs Harrison though, I can see Harrison getting 14 catches in the game, the key will be limiting his yardage. It comes down to the Bears pass rush disrupting Manning. They haven't been consistent enough to completely shut him down, but they'll get their enough to stop a few drives. If Manning has all day, he'll be able to manipulate our safeties.
The bears offense needs to learn from the Titans and Texans, lots of screens and draws- try to limit the number of drives in the game. Jones and Benson can be successful doing this.
As others have said, we need at least an average game from Grossman and for Hester to have an impact. The Colts should be the favorites, but this game could go either way.

As a Patriots fan, I would like to state that several of the Pats had the flu on gameday and the temp in the dome didnt help any. the real question is now present...who do you pick? offense? defense? Indy? or Chicago? warm weather temp vs. cold weather team? I'll take Indy as much as I hate doing it. Manning will quiet the critics with a stellar performance. Manning will break records and win Superbowl MVP.

I think I will help 39 in not believing his case:

1) Thus far in the playoffs, Manning has shown an ability to adapt to situations. He's also faced the Baltimore defense, which isn't known for giving away anything. Neither KC nor NE could keep the Colts out of the end zone. In addition, the Bears are below league average in defending against #1 recievers, which is a pity when facing a team that has two of them.

2) New England were going with power rather than speed against the Colts, and their run DVOA is higher than Chicago's. Baltimore certainly have a power running game, though they aren't very good at it.

3) It doesn't happen very often. I can't offhand remember a deep completion against the Colts this year, just a lot of long runs. PAR also disagrees with you about Berrian (the best reciever the Colts have faced is Eddie Kennison), but then PAR tends to dislike deep threat wideouts because they have a lower catch%.

4) Well, yes. But the same thing was said about Seattle last year, and Antwaan Randle El didn't get a big runback.

re: 42

As I said, it's not a fairly strong case. I do think Manning can be held under check by the Bears better than the Pats did. I also think it's not exactly right to look at season-long DVOA for the running game, as Maroney simply was not the same back after his bizarre injury, and he was a non-factor on Sunday. I don't think the Pats' abandonment of the running game should translate to the Bears.

The point about deep threats is taken. The Colts play to prevent the deep threat, so the only way the Bears will get a long pass is if they are really lucky.

I have more confidence that the Bears will dominate special teams. The downside is that they will probably have a lot of opportunities at kickoff returns. :(

So basically, Bears fans should be hoping for turnovers and great special teams play. That's really not a lot to hang a hat on.

I have heard this for three games straight. The Chiefs were supposed to run. The Ravens defense was supposed to dominate. The Patriots & Brady & Belichick's mind games. Once and for all.......the COLTS are the Team that's going to win the Superbowl.

Colts 38 Bears 21

Come back here after the game is over. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong. But, I don't think so. Colts win.

42:

Both Thomas Jones and Cedric Benson have more DPAR than any New England running back. So, I think it could be fair to say that the Bears have a better rushing attack.

The Colts have the 18th passing DVOA, so I doubt we'll see Evil Rex come out, especially given his knack for having good games after poor ones.

The only the Colts moved the ball consistently against the Pats was deep throws to Dallas Clark over the middle, right where Brian Urlacher is waiting.

DPAR doesn't measure talent, just value. While Kennison may have been more valuable this year, Berrian is more talented.

44:

The Ravens defense did dominate, unless you consider 15 points and no touchdowns a good outing by the offense.

Both Thomas Jones and Cedric Benson have more DPAR than any New England running back. So, I think it could be fair to say that the Bears have a better rushing attack.

Addai: 36.1 DPAR
Jones: 25.5 DPAR
Benson: 17.9 DPAR

Are you saying that Jones and Benson had more DPAR combined? That much is true, but they had 227 more carries.

Addai also led the league in success rate, and added 10.4 receiving DPAR. Actually, looking up the numbers for this post made me realize how awesome he was this year.

Oh god. Missed the key words "New England." Please ignore the last post.

::Hangs head in shame::

At least I learned that Addai is good.

Does Devin Hester completely negate the Adam Vinatieri signing? Can the Colts really afford to attempt any field goals in this game, knowing that they will have to kickoff if they make it?

There should be a separate board for playoff games, with no link and the url given out in week 7.

of course I'm a lurker being uppity but the quality of discussion just drops so much.

Just so that the post has some content, I think the bears need 2 return touchdowns (or something close), combined on defense and special teams, to pull this out. Which is just the cliche of winning the turnover battle, I guess, but what I am trying to get at is that they need some breaks which would be lucky but not at all surprising.

even if the bears defense is on it and Manning looks like he did the first 10 quarters of the playoffs, I don't think the Bears have the sort of consistency to sustain long drives on offense, and the corners are not the place to attack the Colts D, at least recently.

but a few hauntingly familiar manning/reciever miscommunications and/or special teams disasters and this will turn into a replica of the NFC championship, warm weather stadium or no.

re: 45
Agree with point about Berrian. Berrian's DVOA is hampered by the fact he can only catch passes thrown by Rex Grossman.

Of course, he's stuck with that problem in the Super Bowl.

My god, doesn't anyone else think that Manning will completely pick apart Chicago's Tampa-2 zone that he's been able to practice against for four years playing for the coach who created it?!

And hello, weren't more of you paying attention in class when Aaron and pals told us a)The Colts don't give up big passing plays and b)Rex has really really bad touch on medium and short range passes ?

I'm just saying, if you're going to talk Bears win you had darn well better mention special teams.

I'm a Bears fan and a White Sox fan. Don't stop believin'!

re: 52
I think you'll see that I mentioned special teams in both posts 39 and 43.

And yeah, I do think the Colts will win. I'm just trying to maintain an interest level by pleading the Bears' case. But I think this Colts team is too good and too motivated to lose.

as a neutral fan, i'm rooting for the colts. i can't stand boring, defensive, field position football. give me passing! how's that for sophisticated analysis? ;)

Actually I think Rick and I have almost exactly the same opinion. I can see how the Bears *can* win, I just don't think they're going to. It is true that the Bears' record and talent suggests that they'll do well at keeping Clark quiet; unfortunately there is no reason (other than MH's habit of disappearing in the playoffs) to suspect they can do the same to Harrison and Wayne. The only comparable wideout corps the Bears have faced this year is Boldin and Fitzgerald, and that didn't exactly work out well for them. It is true that the Bears have a strong running game, but that didn't help Kansas City. It is true that the Bears have a good deep threat reciever, but the Colts play to take away the big pass play. Special Teams may be the Bears best bet.

For those of you wondering, no, I'm a Steelers fan. But (just to merge in the Audibles thread) my rooting calculus does go something like:
1) Steelers
2) Colts until Manning wins an SB
3) Cardinals
4) AFC teams that aren't the Ravens
So there is a definite bias going on here.

The Ravens defense did NOT dominate. They did a great job stopping the colts in the red zone, but they gave up 5 scoring drives. PLUS the colts managed a 7 minute drive against them with 7 minutes left. That last drive by the colts against Baltimore made quite a statement, and likely gave them the confidence to run on the last 3 plays of their game winning drive Sunday.

BTW, I'd like to see Manning get an SB, but I doubt I'm the only one who doesn't want to see Irsay holding the trophy. Can someone arrange to have Irsay hit by a bus in the next 10 days?

Does Devin Hester completely negate the Adam Vinatieri signing? Can the Colts really afford to attempt any field goals in this game, knowing that they will have to kickoff if they make it?

I don't think the Colts kickoff coverage problems are all Vinatieri. Vinatieri's kickoffs are relatively short, but Colts have had kickoff coverage problems for a long time. You can have great kickoff coverage on short kicks. You can have relatively bad kickoff coverage on long kicks. The Colts just have the worst of both worlds.

In fact, I want an Every Play Counts on the Colts kickoff coverage. I don't think people realize how consistently abysmal the Colts kickoff coverage has been (and you'd think they'd know considering how much they kick off!):

2006: -15.7
2005: -10.0
2004: -10.2
2003: -9.2
2002: -6.3

How do you suck that bad, this consistently?

56:

I think Holt and Bruce would be a much better comparison to Wayne and Harrison. Although the stats look like they didn't do so well that game either, most of the Ram's scoring was done in garbage time.

There's the other Hester factor with field goals: will the Colts attempt one from 50+ if the Bears stick Hester in the end zone?

Re: 55 - Here, here! I am rooting for the Colts, but am much more interested these days in whether or not McNabb is PO'd at the Eagles, as several recent news reports claim.

That said, GO COLTS!

60

Also, Holt did his damage with Hester covering him. With the Bears CB's healthy, we won't see Hester on D again. I still don't think they can defend Harrison and Wayne one-on-one, but it won't be as bad as Hester covering one of the 5 best receivers in football.

Here in Michiana, there's not a lot of talk yet. The focus remains college and prep Mens Basketball.

Not really much to add to the discussion, just wanted to say Hi.

Looking at Team DVOA, I think Colts offense vs. Bears Defense is simple. If Harrison manages to hold on to the ball, he will have an outstanding game. Look for the Bear LBs (will it be Briggs?) to shut down Dallas Clark. There will be lots and lots of Rhodes.

Bears Offense vs Colts Defense
Run, Run, Run. Chuck it deep. Indy's defensive pass DVOA is 19.8% (29th) against #1 WR and 12.7% (22nd) against #2 WR.

Side Note: Briggs will sure look good in Green and Gold next season.

60. And a lot of the Rams scoring was done with Devin Hester playing CB. *shudders*

I'll preface this by saying I'm a Colts fan. I think they'll win, but I certainly can see a scenario playing out where the Bears win. As someone else said, it will take two return type scores, turnovers or special teams, for the Bears to have a chance. I can certainly see that happening though. Then the running game will have to dominate and keep Manning off the field.

I'm still not convinced by the Colts running D. I've seen some highlights the last couple of weeks of some nice blocking by the Bears TE on long runs. I fully expect to see Cato June being embarrassed several times in the run game. I have to admit, though, I was impressed that the Colts held the Pats to 3 yards on 9 carries over the last 40 minutes of that game. The D isn't great, but it seems to at least not be 375-yards rushing bad anymore. They've gotten a lot more stops on first down during the playoffs then they did during the regular season. The Bears will have to come out throwing to loosen up the Defense like Patriots did and the Steelers did last year. If they just try to go jumbo on the Colts, I don't think it will work well enough.

At the end of the day though, against Tampa-2 type defenses, it comes down to sustaining long drives, since big plays aren't going to be there. I just have more faith that Manning will be able to put together 10+ play drives then I do that Grossman will.

Two things that I haven't seen mentioned yet on this thread, which I think will have an impact on this game:

1) The Bears play a base 4-3 defense, which the Colts have had a lot of recent success against. (Moreso than the 3-4, anyway.)

2) Colts CB Nick Harper will miss the game, which means that a lot of the DVOA numbers for the regular season Colts defense against #1 and #2 receivers are less meaningful. Harper has also been good in run support recently, particularly in the playoffs.

(Full disclosure: Colts fan here.)

62: I have a feeling that not a word of the McNabb stuff is even remotely true. AS's blog post about the trade-to-Minny rumor comes immediately to mind. Donovan himself should clear it up at the Super Bowl, in between hearty bites of delicious Campbell's Chunky Soup.

Why can't the Eagles just have a normal off-season???

Oh, in keeping with the subject...

Does comparing DVOA for the Bears and Colts completely account for the gap between the conferences? Obviously it's better than any conventional stat, but I just wonder if the fact that 3/4 of games are played in-conference means that the difference doesn't show up as much as it should.

Or maybe I'm assuming too big a gap in the first place. Any comments?

#49, 59: So what would be the DPAR of Robo-Kickoff-Specialist, who has 15 seconds of hang time on every kick, which each land at the 1 yard line? It would definitely be higher for games played outdoors...

Could be worse 68, they could have the normal Bengals offseason. Which is of course already hitting its stride.

#69: That's a good question for Aaron, actually. Ask for the average DVOA of "AFC vs NFC, AFC vs AFC, NFC vs NFC". Or something like that.

I think the gap actually is smaller than people think. Remember, Dallas actually beat Indianapolis. And the CHI/NE game wasn't exactly a blowout.

since week 10, Rex has had two “great� games (100+ QB rating), three “average� games (75+), one subpar (the Saints) and three atrocious ones

The "subpar" game against the Saints was actually not much different from the average games, at least as far as QB rating goes. He put up a 73.2 rating in that game, as opposed to a 76.9 against the Seahawks. Not turning the ball over really helps your QB rating.

The last two Bears games should have put to rest the notion that either Evil Rex or Good Rex will show up in any given game. He seems to have settled in, for the moment, at Mediocre Rex.

I hate the way you guys think that the Rex-has-a-good-game-after-he-has-a-bad-game thing actually has predicative value. And I hate it more that you think he had a bad game against the Saints.

As both a Bears fan and a White Sox fan I'd like to say that if Cubs fans make up a large portion of the Bears fan base, that has to do with there being more Cubs fan in the city. It's not like there are people who like the White Sox, but not the Bears. Everyone in Chicago likes the Bears, in a city with horrible de facto segregation, it's pretty much the thing that brings the city together.

Also, can we stop making any mention of Hester playing defensive back? How can someone be so fast, yet always be chasing a 30 year old?

I'd just like to apologise.....during the week of the Divisional playoffs I posted the question that apart from Bears, Colts and Pats fans, was there anybody who didn't want to see a Chargers v Saints Superbowl. Since then, everything has pretty much turned to ratshit. I blame myself.....but not for Prince or Simms and Nantz. That's someone else's responsibility.

I'm amused that I'm a Packer fan living in Chicago and I'm almost completely indifferent to who wins. Must be my maturity.

The more I think about it, the more it seems the Bears match up well, and should win. They should be able to run, they should get a couple turnovers, and with the special teams discrepancy they should have a huge edge in field position. The best reason to go with the Colts is that they're from the better conference, so there's the whole ,need to correct for how the teams look' thing, which is legitimate, I think. But where does that leave us?

I'm trying to be as objective about this as possible...in the broadest sense, I would be comfortable rooting for the Bears because the success of their team cannot be isolated and correlated to the play of one individual, despite the fact that mainstream media puts everything on Rex's shoulders. They have playmakers all over the field: on offense, defense, and special teams. Conversely, if Manning plays poorly, the Colts are done (Captain Obvious over here).

#70: If he plays for the Colts, somehow, the ball would get out to the 30 every time anyway.

That Bears D is a joke without Tommy Harris. I'm going to drop back and pick them apart all day and then star in another cheesy commercial.

Lights out.

The Super Bowl that this most reminds me of is 49ers-Chargers. Aside from the eerie circumstantial similarities-the Colts finally breaking through against their nemesis and getting to follow up against a clearly inferior team from an inferior conference-I just get the same feeling going in that the Bears defense has little to no chance to stop Indy from doing whatever they want to do. I understand that this is a somewhat different defense from the one Peyton put 41 up on in 2004. But it's not that different. At best, the Bears could put in a performance like Kansas City did, where they play in a deep shell and concentrate on taking Harrison and Wayne out of the game, but if they do, the Colts will be more than happy to run the ball and to work the middle of the field with Dallas Clark and Joseph Addai. Yes, the Bears have had success with the tight end, but it's a different game when you have a nasty pass catching tight end, a running back that is a major threat as a receiving option and a quarterback who makes quick and decisive reads. For the Bears defense to be effective, they are going to need to get pressure with their front four, but I don't think they will. Basically, the Tampa Cover 2 is a disaster waiting to happen against the Colts offense.

On the other hand, the defense is very well equipped to negate what the Bears do on offense. There is no good Rex or bad Rex in terms of his decision making; it's always the same guy. Rex doesn't read the field well, and he only throws a couple of routes. He'll chuck up the deep ball, he'll hit a receiver running the seam route and he'll check down-usually after holding the ball a second or two too long. That about covers his repetiore. Harrison or Wayne can threaten to go up the field and then comeback to the ball and be wide open all day, but Berrian is just going deep and that's that. Well, the Cover 2 is more or less designed to take the only explosive play in the Bears offense away. The Bears can run the football some, but as FO rule #1 clearly states, you don't run to win, you run when you are winning. The Colts have had success stopping the run by crashing their defensive ends, and there's no back on the Bears that will make them pay for it by busting a run outside. And the reality is that the Colts pass rush is mroe likely to get to Grossman than the Bears pass rush is to get to Manning.

About the only area where Chicago has a clear and decisive advantage is on special teams. But I have a hard time seeing that being enough to even keep the game competitive.

This defense isn't that different from the one the Colts put up 41 on in 2004, huh?

Well, Urlacher is playing. Both the starting safeties on this team are new. Mark "12 sacks my rookie year" Anderson has been added to the team. And both our starting corners were battling injuries that year (Azumah and Tillman). Not to mention the team has had 3 years to learn Lovie/Rivera's defense, and the coaches have been able to add to it over the years.

Bobman, you have johnnyblazin and I confused -- I'm the Ravens fan that lives in Chicago. There's only about five of us out here on FO, but you have been distracted with trying to show that Manning played well against the Ravens -- GAME MANAGER? on this site? You know better than that -- so I'm guessing that's where you lost track.

It's interesting to see that for Steeler fans, those who have bothered to list their preferences, "whoever's playing the Ravens" ranks high on their list, and the Browns and Bengals don't rate at all, except as a pity SUPPORT. I really thought that wouldn't be the case, since this time last year, all we were hearing was that there wasn't a "real" rivalry there. Amazing what being on the right end of the two worst beatdowns of the season can do for you, huh?

FWIW, here goes:

1. Ravens
2. Saints (3 years at LSU can do that to you, and it was the early Mora years, too)
3. Bears (self-preservation? Some, but that 1985 team WAS as good as any that ever played.)
4. AFC North -- the better they are, the better the Ravens are when they beat them.
5. Anyone playing Indy.
6. San Diego in powder blue.
7-32. San Diego not in powder blue and everyone else in the league, save one team.
33. West Nile virus.
34. Encephalitic fever.
35. Ebola.
36. Flesh-eating bacteria.
37-46. The ten plagues in the Book of Exodus.
47-53. The seven seals in the Book of Revelation.
54-56. The False Prophet, the whore of Babylon, and the Beast whose mark is 666.
57. Dick Cheney.
58. Indianapolis -- and that's because I have no animosity towards Tony Dungy. Otherwise, they'd be lower.

Re 82: Fair enough. Let's say it's not so different from the one Arizona put up 23 on, Miami put up 31 on, St. Louis put up 27 on, Tampa Bay put up 31 on and Green Bay put up 26 on.

Then let's extrapolate.

#83 Tom, ahead of the Colts you could also have added rustlers, cut throats, murderers, bounty hunters, desperados, mugs, pugs, thugs, nitwits, halfwits, dimwits, vipers, snipers, con men, Indian agents, Mexican bandits, muggers, buggerers, bushwhackers, hornswogglers, horse thieves, bull dykes, train robbers, bank robbers, ass-kickers, shit-kickers and Methodists.

Your post alludes to a thread where people have posted their least favourite teams...I've always wondered which team that would be.

85 London Paul:

Well, I do admire Dungy, so there is a reason for that. But if they were coached by Hedy Lamarr ........

I am from Chicago so naturally I am a Bears fan. I also root for Indianapolis because I have followed Tony Dungy's career since he was Def. Coordinator in Minnesota. At about
8:45 or 9:00pm on Feb 4th, I will be a happy man regardless.

That said while the Colts should be favored
the Bears CAN win this game. For starters the Bears can run the football very well against the Colts D. I know KC struggled but the Chiefs never really let Trent Green open up the field against the Colts. They just kept running LJ into the middle of the defense. The Ravens offense was never going to score much anyway, plus Jamal Lewis is no longer a franchise running back and New England basically decided to put the game into Tom Brady's hands.

I think you will see the Bears employ a much more balanced attack. For one I think Rex can do very well against the Colts D. They play the most basic of Cover 2 defenses, they do not blitz much
and the pass defense is misleading since most teams chose to simply run the ball down Indy's throat. I would expect that once the Colts D gets loosened up Benson and Jones will find much sucess against the run defense. The Bears will score on offense. And the special teams will have sucess. I expect a slugfest between the two teams. In fact, do not be surprised if this SuperBowl goes down as being on the best Superbowls ever.

Re: 84

Sean,

Many of those scores are a bit misleading.The Arizona game is legit. The Miami game is a classic case where the Dolphins got a 5 yard TD drive because of a Devin Hester fumble. Then the next series Jason Taylor picked off Rex for a 10 yard TD return. Of the next 4 turnovers for the Bears that day about 3 of them were in Bears territory. The Bears D just was put into bad position most of the day. The Tampa and Green Bay games were essentially meaningless. And give St. Louis and even Seattle ( in the playoffs ) credit. Those were good offensive teams but the Bears found ways to make critical defensive stops in critical moments. That is the mark of a clutch defensive team.

The Cowboys beat the Colts by 7. The Saints beat the Cowboys by 25. The Bears beat the Saints by 25.

So I'm calling this one for the Bears by 57. Let's make it 64-7: Manning gets a garbage-time touchdown.

83 - For me at least, it's a bit more complicated than that.

The Browns are too pathetic to be worthy of any significant thoughts of rivalry yet. I'm sure you agree. The Bengals, though...I'd rather beat the Bengals than the Ravens. Much rather. Beating them both is naturally preferable. However, the Bengals play an attractive sort of offense (when it works) and Ocho Cinco's antics amuse me. So I don't really mind them winning games except against the Steelers; whereas the Ravens have established a sort of "nobody-likes-us-and-we-don't-care" mentality, so I'm happy to not like them.

Jeff,

Honestly, I'm not so interested in the points. I've seen that Chicago defense plenty over the last few years, and I've always come away with the same impression- they are very effective against mediocre or poor offenses, but they are overmatched talent-wise and schematically against good offenses. They're about to play the best offense in the league, one that can attack them at every spot on the field. Their corners aren't good enough to handle the Indy receivers without the safety help, and I don't think their pass rush will get to Manning with any kind of consistency.

As for the Bears defense not being wholly responsible for those point totals because they were put in bad position by offensive turnovers, that's fair. The problem is that they are likely to be put in that same spot again. Even if they don't have a case of the yips (and they look like a team that will have the yips), Grossman is going to turn the ball over at least once and probably more.

85: Good one.

86: "That's Hedley!"

Re 91:
Grossman has turned the ball over so much in the playoffs of course.

I'm not sure how this game's going to go, but I really doubt it's a blowout either way. The Colts have a good offense, the Bears have a good defense, and the Bears have spectacular special teams - hopefully we'll see some great moments.

Re: 67

Is it definite that Harper is out? I hadn't seen that reported anywhere. He got stabbed the night before the game last year and still played well so I was just wanting confirmation ;o) If so, that's a big blow, the backup corners on the Colts are not impressive.

Almost all Super Bowls are won by the team that scores first, but that is probably just due to the fact that a superior team tends to score first. In this case, however, I think that scoring first will confer a larger advantage than the norm, and that a lead of more than seven points will be even more significant than the norm. The Bears simply can't be put into a position where the Colts don't have to pay as much attention to stopping the run, while Grossman has to make plays when Freeney and Mathis can split out wide and speed rush. The Colts can't get into a game where the Bears can run the ball with the lead, and then take big shots downfield when the Colts get desperate to get the ball back, and thus sell out to stop the run.

Who will prevail? I dunno, although if I was forced to wager, I guess I would go with my usual rule, which is to take the points when the dog has clearly superior defense. This game certainly doesn't remind me of games where I correctly invested in the favorite.

I remember the first time the Bills played the Cowboys for the trophy, and whatever "experts" were on whatever network (NBC?) had the game were giving reasons just before kickoff as to why the Bills might win. When Ditka's turn came, he scoffed at all those who preceded him, and said that Dallas had almost no chance of losing, because their football players, on average, were much better than Buffalo's. I laughed because I agreed wholeheartedly.

I can't get nearly as much feel for this game, due to the Grand Canyon-sized gap at the most important position, offset by opposing Grand Canyon gaps in the defenses, especially at linebacker. If Harris was playing, and in top form, I'd definitely think the Bears were worth a large investment, but if that situation existed, the betting line wouldn't be where it is at. I think I'll sit this one out.

88 and 84:

Don't forget the Bears defense scored 14 points of it's own against the Cards and most of the points were scored from very short fields due to turnovers. 14 of the points the Packers scored were pick 6s courtesy of Rex Grossman.

I think the Tampa Bay game can be chalked up to a fluke game, or the starters just didn't care that day.

It's pretty simple. Go look at the Bears schedule, then look at the Colts. The Colts played only 5 games that the teams were .500 or under. The Bears played 9. The Bears played 2 playoff teams during the regular season. The Jets 10-6, which thet won 10-0. The other team was the Patriots 12-4, which they lost 17-13. Then take a look at the Colts. They won, when they had to win, in big games. Peyton Manning is quieting his critics. Everything they said he couldn't do, he has done. It will be a great game. I just don't see the Bears winning this. On paper anyways. But this is for all the marbles. Good luck to the Bears & Colts, you both had a great season. Too bad it will have to end.

The Bears defense has a big task in front of it, going up against a team that scored 427 points in the regular season. They don't have all the healthy pieces they once had, but they are still a good unit.

The Colts defense also has a big task in front of it, going up against a team that scored 427 points in the regular season. They are healthier than they were for large parts of the regular season, but they still allowed 100+ more points than the Bears defense.

Rex Grossman's struggles are related to the opposing teams ability to get pressure on him via the blitz. He has problems seeing where the blitz is coming from, and knowing how to handle it. The Colts, by and large aren't a blitzing defense. If they do blitz, who knows what will happen, but if they don't, Rex can play his game.

The Super Bowl is an ad-extravaganza. It has more and longer breaks than any other game. This favors the defenses, which favors the Bears.

This thread is the closest thing to "network talking head analysis" that I've seen all year on this website.

Someone pulls a "Rex Grossman just wins games" out of their ass and we are officially jumping the shark.

83: Well, speaking as one Steelers fan, I can tell you I've hated the Ravens for years, not just after this year's double embarrassment. The rivalry with Cincinnati has really only developed in the last couple years (and Carson Palmer's constant boasting after a loss doesn't help), and as somebody else said, who cares about Cleveland?

73/4: Well, I wanted to characterize the Saints game as a "bad" performance, but it obviously wasn't so bad as his 0 rating games, and by QB rating it looks decent. Really though... 44% completions? 5.5 y/att? That's pretty poor. If Peyton had done that, we'd call him a choking loser, but because it's Rex, and he didn't throw 3 picks, I guess we don't think it's that bad.

My point was just to say that it's wrong to suggest he's good about half the time... he's been great 2/9, okay 4/9, and bad 3/9. I think it's pretty clear that Rex has indeed settled into "mediocre rex" and will probably show us nothing special next sunday, even if he's playing with a lead.

95: I think I made basically the same post as your first paragraph, but unfortunately it got eaten when I used the greater-than symbol (Unless I posted it elsewhere on this site, but I can't remember now). I agree completely, the momentum in this game will be incredibly important due to the difference in offensive styles/talent levels. If Peyton ends up behind, and has to start forcing things against a very good, turnover-based defense, this game could go horribly wrong for the Colts. Also, as you said, because Grossman can handle passing relatively few times, using PA over the top. On the other hand, if the Colts jump out to a lead, and Rex has to start trying to carry the offense, he'll probably revert to evil Rex, and the Bears' greatest strength (running, in my opinion a foregone conclusion to be successful) will soon be worthless.

It's a key point in my opinion that it isn't even "will the Colts stop the Bears' run," but "will the Bears have the chance to run, and even if they run well, will Rex put up a few points?"

Can we see a breakdown for how much the Colts offense gets paid and a breakdown for the Bears defense? Where is the money being spent and is it being used wisely?
I saw someone ask how could Manning not win a Super Bowl ring compared to Rex Grossman? How much are each of them being paid? I suspect a lot of the money taken by Manning could have been spent on improving the Colts defense (and special teams).

Re: 98

Actually, the biggest problem the Colts defense has had this year is tiring (cite their 1st & 3rd quarter DVOA vs. their 2nd & 4th quarter DVOA), so I think overall more rest during the game helps the Colts.

83/85/86 and damn, in 92 Marko beat me to it!

Tom K I don't like your list bt I admire it. At least you have your shit in order. And sorry for mixing you up. Your pixels all look the same.

The sheriff is a-- GONG!
The sheriff is a-- GONG!
I think he said the sheriff is coming.

Re:91

Sean,

Those are fair points you make. Although speaking to the Bears D against " good " offenses I think they tend to do fine. Most
" good " defenses struggle to an extent against explosive offenses. Against the Seahawks the Bears managed to make plays when they absolutely had to and they throttled a very good Saints offense.

In terms of the Colts the key as you pointed out will be how much pressure the Bears front four can get on Manning. I think they can get to him fairly well. Sacks are huge of course but if they can get Manning nervous and if the Manning " happy feet " makes an appearance then I believe Manning can get rattled. The true key to this game comes down to the line of scrimmage. Whichever team wins the offensive/defensive line battles will be the team that wins.

Well, the Bears appear to be relishing their underdog role and playing the disrespect card, but weirdly Indy can also play the disreapect card.

As noted by some posters here and in the linked Chicago Trib article, Chicago seems happier to face Indy than NE. Take THAT, Indy D. Well, it's not the Ravens' "pain and hot sauce" comments, but it'll do.

(Not unlike my feelings toward NE and SD in the playoffs--matchups)

#103: Turbohappy, that is exactly one of the problems they solved by their long grinding drives in the playoffs--not only does it ALSO limit the other team's O chances--making an all-run gameplan a little riskier vis-a-vis time for the oppnents, but it keeps the D fresher. It's a beautiful thing and as much as I like the 60-yard TD strike, for holistic team well-being, I prefer the 10-play drives. Bet the D does too.

OMO - well said. On the bright side, it reminds me of why I love most of this site.

#102 - from Ian Whetstone's salary cap data (link in my name), the Colts spent about $52 million on their offense and $38 million on their defense, while the Bears spent about $46 million on offense and $42 million on defense. I suspect the low number for the Bears' defense is because many of the stars are young, and thus still on their rookie contracts.

#70: I hate the term "kickoff specialist." We don't call the punter a "punt specialist," even though all he does is punt. We don't call the long snapper a "long snap specialist," even though all he does is long snaps. I say we get rid of the term "kickoff specialist."

Call 'em "kickoffers". It sounds as stupid as the position is. ("OK, we need someone whose only qualification is that he can kick a ball, sitting on a tee, a long way. No, he doesn't have to be particularly accurate, as long as it doesn't go more than 80 feet left or right. No, he doesn't have to have good timing - he just runs up and kicks the ball whenever he's ready.")

The Bears are 1-1 against AFC playoff teams. The win was a shutout and the loss was by 4 points in a game where both teams committed lots of turnovers. The Bears can hang with the AFC.

I guess it is a matter of only remembering the last thing you see, but Peyton Manning has a worse QB rating during the playoffs this year than Rex Grossman does. He has thrown 6 picks, averaging 2 a game. Now he faces the top turnover creating team in the NFL. They will probably rack up the passing yardage, but so did the Saints. Indy will turn it over about 3 times. 4 if they are too quick to abandon a run game that is likely to have some difficulty. The Bears will have good field position all day due to Hester (or kicks out of bounds/pooched), and the Colts will have poor field position due to the Bears strong coverage team. Perhaps most importantly there seems to be a new QB for the Bears. Average Rex. From Player of the Month Rex to Abysmal Rex, Average Rex has been the one that the Bears needed. Average Rex does not turn the ball over. Average Rex doesn't kill the team. Average Rex combined with the advantage in the running game, on defense, and on special teams will squeeze out a victory. Average Rex has enough ability to bomb over any attempts to sell out against the run.

Let me reiterate. Manning has been bad so far in the playoffs. 3 picks vs the Chiefs. 2 picks, 50% completion, 170 yards vs the Ravens. 1 pick, below 50% completion, 87 yards in the 1st half against the Pats. The only success he has had was against a depleted Pats D in the 2nd half. Assuming that injury/illness does not wipe out the Bears D, I expect him to have a bad game. Meanwhile, this is the "strength" of the Colts that is supposed to outweigh all the Bears advantges?

Bears 30 Colts 23.

#94 The early word around here is that it's a high ankle sprain. If that's true, he's out for the game. But as far as I know, no, it is not official.