Monday, December 18, 2006
Anyone but the Bears
I'm totally baffled. Last year, the Bears had a solid season. It ended poorly in the playoffs against Carolina, but Chicago returned everyone of significance from that team.
When the early season favorites for the NFC were mentioned, we heard about Seattle, New York and Carolina. Then the season started, and those three teams slipped due to injuries or a general lack of depth. The Bears started off 7-0 and got a little bit of recognition, but it was always accompanied by grumblings of "how long can this really last?"
Well, the Bears are now 12-2. And all along the way, writers have tried to find a new NFC favorite. First it was the Giants. Then Minnesota. Then the Falcons (!). Then it was Dallas. Then New Orleans. And now ...
Don Banks, over at Spanish-Yes.com, writes that the Philadelphia Eagles may now be the favorites in the NFC.
Like I said, I'm just baffled at this point. I guess the predominant theory is that it's best to pick anyone but the Bears.
I know the NFC is bad. And I understand the Bears are a flawed team. Their defense is riddled with injuries and has struggled against both the run and pass as of late. Rex Grossman has been the embodiment of inconsistent this season. And if you're the type who places a lot of weight on off-the-field distractions, then the Tank Johnson saga is certainly one of the biggest distractions out there.
But you know what? The Bears are still a good team.
The defense still has plenty of playmakers, injuries aside. The Bears might have the best 1-2 running back punch in football, outside of San Diego. The receiving core is both deep and talented, for the first time in the history of Bears football. And Rex Grossman, for all his inconsistencies, has posted seven games this season with a QB rating above 100.
That, kiddies, is best in the NFL.
But I guess Philly, led by the game-managing corpse of Jeff Garcia, seems to be more impressive than the team with the best record in football. Maybe it has something to do with old quarterbacks.
Because the media loves -- really, they loooove -- fawning over old quarterbacks. Brad Johnson (who was benched for the third time this season yesterday) received much of it early in the year. Brett Favre is in every single one of Peter King's dreams. And we are now faced with the lovefest over Jeff Garcia.
I'm thinking that the Bears would be better served (in the media's eyes) if they were being guided by Jeff George. Or Doug Flutie. Or Terry Bradshaw.
Of course, they'd be far worse on the field. But the media's old-man lust would definitely be satiated.
Granted, I don't actually care all that much about what the sports media thinks. I think it's been proven time and time again that sportswriters are generally very ill-informed.
But it's Monday, and I need something to complain about. And that's what I'm doing.
So, in the meantime, remember to live every day like Tank Johnson. And go Bears.
(The 12-2, No. 1 seed in the NFC, home-field-advantage-throughout-the-playoffs Bears. Just in case you forgot.)
Read or Post a Comment
I was gonna post this the other day, but I somehow didn't. Anyway, I think it's OK that the Bears perpetually fly "under the radar" as it were because, as you said, the teams the pundits, experts and ex-QBs on TV always pick never seem to win anything. I'm smelling a Baltimore-Chicago Super Bowl for that reason.