Skip to content

Preseason Power Rankings No. 18: Chicago Bears

Chicago Bears Introduce Marc Trestman Getty Images

After missing the playoffs in five of the last six seasons, the Bears showed Lovie Smith the door and decided to start a new era with a new head coach, Marc Trestman. Now it’s time to see how the team Trestman inherited fits with the system he plans to implement.

The good news for the Bears is that there’s abundant talent on both sides of the ball, and on special teams. There are a whole lot of Pro Bowl-caliber players on this roster.

The bad news is that the talent was assembled for a different coaching staff, and the Bears may have some growing pains under Trestman.

Our six-person PFT panel voted the Bears in the bottom half of the league, at No. 18. We explore the reasons below.

Strengths.

Say this for Lovie Smith: The guy knew how to build a good defense. Chicago’s defense was excellent last season, and although Smith and Brian Urlacher are gone, most of the personnel remains.

Cornerback Charles Tillman was one of the best defensive players in the NFL in 2012. He routinely took on the opposing team’s best wide receiver, and almost always got the better end of the matchup. It’s telling that in Calvin Johnson’s record-setting season with the Lions, two of his worst games came against the Bears, when Tillman led the way in holding Johnson to 34 and 72 yards. (Johnson averaged 133 yards a game in the other 14 games of the season.) With Tillman at cornerback, the Bears are in good shape against any wide receiver who comes their way.

The Bears’ defensive front seven is also strong. Julius Peppers is 33, but he doesn’t appear to be slowing down and is still one of the league’s top pass rushers. Chicago should be able to count on Peppers for double-digit sacks. Like Peppers, Lance Briggs will turn 33 this season but remains in fine form. Briggs started all 16 games and had another strong season in 2012.

Henry Melton has emerged as one of the league’s best defensive tackles, with six sacks last year and seven the year before. A former college running back who tips the scales at 300 pounds, Melton has a rare burst for a guy who’s big enough to play defensive tackle in the NFL, and at age 26 he’s in the prime of his career.

The Bears have a very good pair of offensive skill position players in wide receiver Brandon Marshall and running back Matt Forte, both of whom are among the best in the league at what they do. Marshall is a tough and physical receiver who has long been Jay Cutler’s favorite target, and Forte is versatile enough to be both the Bears’ No. 1 running back and their No. 2 receiver.

Weaknesses.

After Marshall, the Bears don’t have any proven commodities at wide receiver. They’d love to see last year’s second-round pick, Alshon Jeffery, become a solid No. 2 receiver. They’d also love to see Earl Bennett, who plays very well at times but also disappears at times, become a more consistent part of the passing game. But until someone steps up, No. 2 receiver has to be considered one of the Bears’ weaknesses.

Tight end has been a weakness for the Bears the last couple of years, when Kellen Davis averaged barely more than one catch a game. The arrival of Martellus Bennett should make Chicago better there, but Bennett is a long way from elite.

The Bears’ offensive line has long been a weakness, and the No. 1 priority of the offseason was shoring that up. That’s why guard Kyle Long was Chicago’s first-round draft pick, and why left tackle Jermon Bushrod was Chicago’s first priority in free agency. The biggest issue with the offensive line being a weakness has been that it has exposed Jay Cutler to injuries, and backup quarterback has been a major weakness for the Bears. That remains the case this year: If Cutler goes down, Josh McCown will step in, and that’s a significant drop-off.

Changes.

By far the biggest change is the arrival of head coach Marc Trestman, who’s been coaching the Montreal Alouettes of the Canadian Football League for the last five years. Trestman has plenty of experience on NFL coaching staffs, but he hasn’t been with an NFL team since he was on the Dolphins’ staff in 2004. It’s not often that NFL teams reach into the CFL ranks for their head coaches, and it will be fascinating to see whether Trestman — who has a reputation as an innovative offensive mind — comes in with fresh ideas that take NFL defenses off guard.

The changes to the coaching staff are also significant, particularly on defense, where Lovie Smith and his Tampa 2 disciples are giving way to Trestman’s new defensive coordinator, Mel Tucker. But Tucker and Trestman have both said that they plan to run very similar schemes to what the Bears have been running during Smith’s time with the team.

The retirement of longtime middle linebacker Brian Urlacher is a major change in the appearance of the defense, but it’s not a change that will have a huge effect on the field. Urlacher was once among the NFL’s best defensive players, but he was noticeably slower last season and didn’t have a lot left. The unfortunate thing about Urlacher’s departure is the way it happened: The Bears decided early in the offseason that they didn’t want him back, while Urlacher didn’t determine until later in the offseason that he was ready to walk away from the game. Urlacher was a great player who deserved the opportunity to say goodbye to the Bears on his own terms, and it was disappointing that it didn’t quite work out that way, as it did for Ray Lewis in Baltimore.

Camp Battles.

Replacing Urlacher at middle linebacker will fall to either D.J. Williams, the former Bronco signed in free agency, or rookie Jon Bostic, the second-round draft pick from Florida. Neither one of them is going to step right in and be the kind of player Urlacher was at his best, of course, but it’s easy to picture either player being an upgrade over the 2012 version of Urlacher.

As a first-round draft pick, Kyle Long is penciled in as a starting guard, but he’ll have to compete to earn the job. Derek Dennis, Edwin Williams and James Brown will all get an opportunity to beat out Long. Matt Slauson, who started all 16 games at guard each of the last three years for the Jets, is expected to be the other starting guard.

Prospects.

How well does Jay Cutler fit in Marc Trestman’s offense? And can Chicago’s offensive line keep Cutler healthy for 16 games? Those are the biggest questions facing the Bears this season.

Defensively, the Bears should look much like they looked last year, and that’s a very good sign. And the special teams, with punter Adam Podlesh, kicker Robbie Gould and returner Devin Hester, should be solid. There’s a lot of reason for optimism there.

But last year the strong defense and special teams weren’t enough to get the Bears into the playoffs thanks to a disappointing offense, and unless Trestman can make significant progress offensively, the Bears will probably fall just a bit short of the playoffs again this year.

Permalink 72 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Chicago Bears, Features, Top Stories
72 Responses to “Preseason Power Rankings No. 18: Chicago Bears”
  1. SilentMajority says: Jul 16, 2013 9:06 AM

    The Chicago Bears march to Super Bowl victory begins this Fall!

  2. jwcarlson says: Jul 16, 2013 9:12 AM

    They have 8 players between 26-100 in the “top 100″ while the Packers have 0… but they are below average according to preseason rankings.

    Something isn’t adding up.

  3. expertop says: Jul 16, 2013 9:14 AM

    I like Trestman. He is weird-looking, though.

  4. dezno24 says: Jul 16, 2013 9:18 AM

    18? This team missed the post season by one game last year. Cutler will have a good contract year and lead this team to the playoffs…..PLAYOFFS!

  5. ringwormsherm says: Jul 16, 2013 9:21 AM

    @denzo24- it’s simple. The packers have Rodgers and the Bears have Cutler.

  6. mp4pack says: Jul 16, 2013 9:22 AM

    If this coach was any good, he wouldn’t have been in Canada. I bet he can coach some hockey, though. 4-12.

  7. beardown2489 says: Jul 16, 2013 9:26 AM

    This ranking is too low. The 10-6 roster was improved from last year.

    No position on the offensive side of the ball has been downgraded, and the Oline, WR core, and TE group will all be improved this year.

    Defense should be strong again as well. I expect about the same as last year. Maybe a few less Pick 6′s, but still a strong unit sticking with the same scheme they’ve used for years.

    Im not delusional. The packers are obvious favorites. Thats what happens when you have have Rodgers. Hes that good. But the Bears can beat that team if they put it all together.

    18 is to low. Id say 10..ish

  8. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 9:26 AM

    I think even Packers fans will laugh at the idea of the Vikings being ranked higher on this list than the Bears.

    A 10-6 team with a top 5 defense last year just one spot ahead of the Titans…yep…seems legit.

  9. flaccotoboldin says: Jul 16, 2013 9:26 AM

    If the Bears had returned back Lovie, I’d put them somewhere in the low teens – maybe around 13 or 14.

    But losing Lovie and Urlacker, I just think there is potential for a hiccup there.

    And so its on Cutler and this new HC / OC.

    I’ll believe it when I see it, but thats a tough division to be in whilst trying to figure out your team identity. I’m not buying it so far.

  10. dallascowboysdishingthereal says: Jul 16, 2013 9:38 AM

    I’m a little surprised to see the Bears ranked as low as 18th however when you think about the absence of Lovie and their defensive line coach, the defense may experience a down turn.

  11. tenotnamedmiller says: Jul 16, 2013 9:40 AM

    So you’ve got Tennessee at 19 and Bears at 18. Bears roster way more talented and better coached as showed by last meeting.

  12. olhoss1884 says: Jul 16, 2013 9:41 AM

    I think with Cutler having some weapons (Jeffrey and Bennett) an improved (if only slightly) OL and for the first time in his Bears tenure a competent OC, the offense will be much better. The defense is getting older and has depth issues so I am not sure they are a playoff team (I think GB wins the division and MIN and SEA are the wildcards) but I still might put them a few spots higher.

  13. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 9:47 AM

    Just realized this also means the Cowboys will be ranked higher as well.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

  14. packerbackernj says: Jul 16, 2013 9:48 AM

    This is a joke. Bears at 18? I’m a lot more nervous when I see Chicago on the schedule then Minn. The only negative i see is they might miss the defensive play calling of Lovie Smith. So if the defense drops off a bit, but the offense picks up a bit they will be fine. I’m personally glad to see lovie Smith gone, because everytime i thought that defense would start getting worse, they got better. Good riddance. Bears should be good for #2 in the North.

  15. catchhester23 says: Jul 16, 2013 9:53 AM

    Packers are obliviously top team in the division until they get knocked down. Hurt to type that but it’s true. There is no way Vikings are a better team just because of Jennings. If Trestman has a heart beat the offense will be better, the bar wasn’t set all that high score more than 10 points a game (on offense) and its better. Bash cutler all you want if he has time like more than 2 sec. (More than an avg. of 5 snaps a game) he can pick apart any defense with the best of them. Plus there is a TE to throw too, that isn’t a big oger running down the field and falling.

  16. dezno24 says: Jul 16, 2013 9:55 AM

    @ringwormsherm

    True. We now have an offensive minded coach that knew that he needed to fix a terrible o-line and will adjust. We will see how those Packers vs BEARS game go this year!

  17. jayjayrooster says: Jul 16, 2013 10:03 AM

    New coach new energy. New players new postion battles, the O’line will be great just as our defense. Protect Cutler and make plays on defense… Nuff said

  18. glazerh8er says: Jul 16, 2013 10:07 AM

    Bears = Bucs. Seriously, almost the same team.

  19. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 10:13 AM

    Wait wait wait wait….this also means the Rams are ranked higher….I mean, i understand they put up a fight against the 9′ers…but…really?

  20. threedeep1998 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:14 AM

    Let us break down why Vikings might be ranked a tiny bit higher.
    What playoff/good teams did the bears beat outside of splitting with Minnesota and defeating Indy in Andrew Luck’s first game.

    Minnesota defeated some of the shared opponents in 2012: SF, HOU, and split with GB. Vikings were able to defeat quality teams and that was the difference maker in the end. Chicago looked awesome against NFL juggernauts like Jags, Lions, Cardinala, Titans, and Rama. When Bears are asked to play a good team they never rise to the occasion.

    I’m a Vikings fan, and I hate playing you guys over GB, because Cutler seems to love picking apart our defense. However I think we are built for the future a little better. You might say Ponder sucks, etc but its not like Cutler’s resume is that much scarier.

  21. threedeep1998 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:14 AM

    iPhone! Sorry for typos! ^^

  22. purplehaze28 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:16 AM

    “There is no way Vikings are a better team just because of Jennings.”
    ——————————————————–
    They have some guy named Adrian Peterson, too… (eh)

  23. filthymcnasty1 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:17 AM

    Da Bears aren’t a very good football team, and have questionable leadership. That’s why you see them ranked here.

  24. wegogreenbay says: Jul 16, 2013 10:26 AM

    “jwcarlson says: Jul 16, 2013 9:12 AM

    They have 8 players between 26-100 in the “top 100″ while the Packers have 0… but they are below average according to preseason rankings.

    Something isn’t adding up.”

    We’ve yet to see 1 – 25, I suspect that when we do see it, the Bears to Packers ratio will be markedly different.

    They’ve got a reputation that’s mostly based on luck, because the Bears still suck!

  25. jrock3x8 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:33 AM

    Bears have always loved the disrespect card – thanks for this.

  26. rextraordinaire says: Jul 16, 2013 10:50 AM

    18 seems low, but you made a really good argument for it. There are simply too many unknowns and maybe-or-maybe-nots. I can just as easily see them going 7-9 as I can see them going 13-3

    Only one way to find out. Hurry up and get here, football

  27. dockery23 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:53 AM

    lol@ at you clowns thinking the Bears are better than the Vikes. Better get your wins first.

  28. pencilmonkeymagic says: Jul 16, 2013 10:54 AM

    If I was a Bears fan, I’d be concerned about the lack of depth past the No.1 at RB and WR. An injury to either of those guys and you’re suddenly very one dimensional.

    On the plus side, their D wasn’t exactly terrible without Urlacher, (those 10 guys could fight for a place on most teams) so it can’t suffer that much of a drop off following his retirement.

  29. glazerh8er says: Jul 16, 2013 10:56 AM

    jazsrt says:
    Jul 16, 2013 9:47 AM
    Just realized this also means the Cowboys will be ranked higher as well.

    BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

    ———————————————–

    +1

  30. stevejjones says: Jul 16, 2013 10:56 AM

    To suggest Cutler isn’t going to be a starter for quite some time is silly. And talk of Cutler being a brat is equally silly. He doesn’t kow-tow to the media. I love that. He yells at coaches and players about…wait for it…how to win games. He’s a talented guy, who doesn’t suffer fools, and he cares about winning. A ton of teams would take him as their starter for his arm alone. Our best Chicago QB probably ever. Who is better? Sid Luckman? He didn’t play the modern game. Jim McMahon? McMahon had guts and toughness but wasn’t at the same level of talent

  31. glazerh8er says: Jul 16, 2013 10:57 AM

    Cowboys BARELY beat us (Bucs) last year at home, yes the 24th ranked Bucs who added Darrel Revis, Dashon Golston, and have Freeman in the 2nd year of a new system.

  32. 52lightsxout52 says: Jul 16, 2013 11:03 AM

    No. 18 ??? No effing way. The Bears have got to be somewhere between 10 and 15 in my book. They finally have an offensive minded coach, they have a some good weapons on offense, they seem to finally be trying to fix their issues on the offensive line. They have plenty of talent on defense. My only question about them is how well they are able to fill the departure of Brian Urlacher. That’s my analysis, and I am a Packer fan! :-D

  33. sowcrates says: Jul 16, 2013 11:03 AM

    Packers twice, 49ers, Vikings, texans, and Seahawks in overtime. That’s who Chicago lost to last season. So lets say Chicago is worse than these 5 teams plus the Broncos ravens and falcons. That’s 8 teams, who are the other 9 teams you want to say are better? Giants and Bengals? Sure, we can say that. That still leaves 7 teams…colts? Steelers? Ehhh on those, and you STILL have to name 4 more. 18 doesn’t work.

  34. sowcrates says: Jul 16, 2013 11:04 AM

    Packers twice, 49ers, Vikings, texans, and Seahawks in overtime. That’s who Chicago lost to last season. So lets say Chicago is worse than these 5 teams plus the Broncos ravens patriots and falcons. That’s 9 teams, who are the other 8 teams you want to say are better? Giants and Bengals? Sure, we can say that. That still leaves 6 teams…colts? Steelers? Ehhh on those, and you STILL have to name 4 more. 18 doesn’t work.

  35. whatjusthapped says: Jul 16, 2013 11:05 AM

    The biggest difference between the Bears and the Vikings, the Bears have a qB and no WR, the Vikings have WR’s and no QB.

    In a QB centric league, which team fares better over the long run, not last season, but the long run?

  36. 52lightsxout52 says: Jul 16, 2013 11:09 AM

    dockery23 says: Jul 16, 2013 10:53 AM

    lol@ at you clowns thinking the Bears are better than the Vikes. Better get your wins first.
    ___________________________________

    The clowns will be laughing when Chicago goes 2-0 against the Vikings…

  37. ColtsWinColtsWin!! says: Jul 16, 2013 11:18 AM

    The Colts are #1 without question. That is a fact. The fact that you go Ehhhh means you know nothing about football …NOTHING…The Bears are awful, they have no offense, their quarterback is offensive and crys like a lil baby every time he gets hit. Their defense has gotten worse, not better. They will be lucky to finish above last in their division, who are they better than? The Lions? no, the Viking? no, The Packers? HELLLLLLLLLLLL No. Quit crying you lil babies and realize that your team is gonna suck for a few more years.

  38. catchhester23 says: Jul 16, 2013 11:39 AM

    Minnesota defeated some of the shared opponents in 2012: SF, HOU, and split with GB. Vikings were able to defeat quality teams and that was the difference maker in the end. Chicago looked awesome against NFL juggernauts like Jags, Lions, Cardinala, Titans, and Rama. When Bears are asked to play a good team they never rise to the occasion.

    Some truth to that but….. Didn’t you beat the Alex Smith 49ers? Totally different animal with kapernick. The GB split doesn’t count because they gave you that last win. Because GB knew they didnt want to see Chicago in the first round with urlacher back. They stomped the vikes the very next week when it mattered…. in the playoffs.

  39. fwippel says: Jul 16, 2013 11:41 AM

    The Bears need to learn how to beat the Packers again. Then they’ll have a shot at the playoffs.

  40. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 11:45 AM

    ColtsWinColtsWin!! says:
    Jul 16, 2013 11:18 AM
    The Colts are #1 without question. That is a fact. The fact that you go Ehhhh means you know nothing about football …NOTHING…The Bears are awful, they have no offense, their quarterback is offensive and crys like a lil baby every time he gets hit. Their defense has gotten worse, not better. They will be lucky to finish above last in their division, who are they better than? The Lions? no, the Viking? no, The Packers? HELLLLLLLLLLLL No. Quit crying you lil babies and realize that your team is gonna suck for a few more years.

    ————————–

    This entire rambling of words you consider a post is proof you yourself know absolutely nothing about the game of football.

  41. bballnut50 says: Jul 16, 2013 12:15 PM

    Bears – no O line.

    Vikes – best young line in the game.

    Vikes over da bears….again!

  42. snaponrules says: Jul 16, 2013 12:22 PM

    The fact these idiots have the Cowboys and Rams ranked ahead of the Bears shows how clueless they are. Just look at the last 2 Bears/Cowboys games, its not even close. The ONLY stat Romo has better then Cutler is pay.
    And the RAMS? Seriously, they are the Cleveland browns of the NFC.

    Although it doesn’t shock me, it seems EVERY year the media pundits pick the Cowboys to make a deep playoff run. And EVERY YEAR for the last 16 years, they suck. As long as the have Jerrah and Romo they will never accomplish anything.

  43. moeman79 says: Jul 16, 2013 12:23 PM

    Listen by now all Bears fan should be used to being slighted by the media. 10-6 team last year but no post season is rough, we might never know the behind the scene with Cutty and Tice, This is the first year that Cutler needs the Bears more than the Bears need Cutler so i hope he is working well with Tressman. There is no arguing the Pack is still the top of the North but after that is open to all 3 teams, Minnesota needs Peterson to be a freak show again to be a contender. Lions are the Lions, and i think Green Bay lost more talent this off-season and have a crappy oline and last year a horrible Defense that they did not upgrade. That being said Arron Rodgers is the best QB around right now and that might be all they need.

  44. obsessedvikingfan says: Jul 16, 2013 12:36 PM

    Some truth to that but….. Didn’t you beat the Alex Smith 49ers? Totally different animal with kapernick. The GB split doesn’t count because they gave you that last win. Because GB knew they didnt want to see Chicago in the first round with urlacher back. They stomped the vikes the very next week when it mattered…. in the playoffs.
    _______________________________

    You are a special person aren’t you? GB didn’t give anything to MN. MN beat the Packers. If GB would have won, they would have had a bye and would NOT have faced the bears in the first round.

    Try to think before you type.

  45. snaponrules says: Jul 16, 2013 12:43 PM

    bballnut50 says:
    Jul 16, 2013 12:15 PM
    Bears – no O line.

    Vikes – best young line in the game.

    Vikes over da bears….again!
    ——————————————————————————————————

    Vikes one of the weakest and worst QB’s in the game.
    You guys are one AP injury away from a 2-14 season. But with amount of HGH his system, if he broke his leg clean off in the first half he would be back in the second half with after growing a new one.
    Vikes will finish last in the division AGAIN, a spot the rarely leave.

  46. mp4pack says: Jul 16, 2013 12:46 PM

    The bears and Vikings will tie for last in the divison at 0-16. Book it.

  47. greenandyellowarebabypoopcolorsiwouldrathrwearpink says: Jul 16, 2013 12:59 PM

    Vikes one of the weakest and worst QB’s in the game.
    You guys are one AP injury away from a 2-14 season. But with amount of HGH his system, if he broke his leg clean off in the first half he would be back in the second half with after growing a new one.
    Vikes will finish last in the division AGAIN, a spot the rarely leave.

    *****************************************
    ^^^^^
    this guy up here must be trying out his stand up material….news for ya bud…its not open mic nite
    Last yr Q.B stats

    comp% TD INT RATE y/G
    62.1 18 12 81.2 183.4
    58.8 19 14 81.3 202.2

    So…the bears fans “have a q.B but the vikes dont?
    Stats would say these Q.Bs are pretty similar

  48. greenandyellowarebabypoopcolorsiwouldrathrwearpink says: Jul 16, 2013 1:00 PM

    oppps rates were 81.2 and 81.3

  49. xxsweepthelegxx says: Jul 16, 2013 1:03 PM

    sowcrates says:
    Jul 16, 2013 11:04 AM
    Packers twice, 49ers, Vikings, texans, and Seahawks in overtime. That’s who Chicago lost to last season. So lets say Chicago is worse than these 5 teams plus the Broncos ravens patriots and falcons. That’s 9 teams, who are the other 8 teams you want to say are better? Giants and Bengals? Sure, we can say that. That still leaves 6 teams…colts? Steelers? Ehhh on those, and you STILL have to name 4 more. 18 doesn’t work.
    ————————————————-
    Teaser Alert: Stay tuned to PFT for an update on the other 17 teams that are better than the Bears!

  50. emoney826 says: Jul 16, 2013 1:09 PM

    I love listening to bears and Viking fans argue. You bash my team so much, that I sometimes think you two like each other.

  51. 808raiderinparadise says: Jul 16, 2013 1:19 PM

    jwcarlson says:
    Jul 16, 2013 9:12 AM
    They have 8 players between 26-100 in the “top 100″ while the Packers have 0… but they are below average according to preseason rankings.

    Something isn’t adding up
    ———–

    Cheifs had 6 pro bowlers last year and won 2 games.

    Still these kinds of things are important to wins?

  52. imsmarterthanyou says: Jul 16, 2013 1:52 PM

    This makes complete sense. The Bears are one spot higher than the Titans…because…the Bears beat the Titans 51-20 last season. There you have it. It’s clear that these two teams are relatively equal.

    Happy to clear things up for everyone.

  53. imsmarterthanyou says: Jul 16, 2013 1:56 PM

    mp4pack says:
    Jul 16, 2013 12:46 PM
    The bears and Vikings will tie for last in the divison at 0-16. Book it.

    —————————————————-

    by sheer magic I suppose? they play each other twice…remember that? Book it.

    Shocking that you have the word “pack” in your screen name.

  54. jmak79 says: Jul 16, 2013 2:02 PM

    As a Viking Fan, my concern isn’t that the Bears are below or ahead of us in this poll since it only got the two bottom teams right

    The NFC north is getting no respect. NFC East and West will always be favored by the bias of the large media markets. Other than the Giants, they haven’t done anything in the last decade!

    Bears fans’ dont kid yourself, the changing of coaches rarely results in a winning season let alone playoff appearances. And, just so you know Trestman is a viking fan!

  55. 4ever85 (aka Butch DeadLift) says: Jul 16, 2013 2:06 PM

    Packers twice, 49ers, Vikings, texans, and Seahawks in overtime. That’s who Chicago lost to last season.
    —————————–
    And let’s take a closer look at those losses.

    Both of the Packer games were close, but the Bears lost @ GB 10-23 and @ CHI 13-21.

    It’s not as if Rodgers scored 40 on them like everyone else.

    Bears lost @ Vikes 13-21. Playing a division rival is always tough, but playing a division rival for a playoff spot in Dec at their dome is always tougher, and even then the Bears barely lost that game.

    The Bears got totally dominated by the Texans 6-13 (that’s sarcasm, btw) and that was WITH Campbell starting for a concussed Cutler (because of the horrible Oline). Campbell, who might not even be a 3rd string QB on the Browns this season.

    The Bears got totally dominated (no sarcasm) by the 9ers 7-32 because of said putrid Oline where Aldon Smith single handedly made Chilo Rachel quit and the Bears trade Carimi this year. Oh, and Jason Campbell also “started” that game. I put that in quotes because he looked like a scared little girl dumping it off as fast as he can (for all you Cutler haters, watch that game, and you’ll gain a new respect for what he’s had to deal with for the last few years).

    Finally, the Bears BARELY lost to the Hawks in OT 17-23 in a classic, and it was literally the flip of a coin that decided that game. The Bears’ D was just gassed out at the end, and the Hawks got the ball first in OT.

    Keep in mind that in those losses the D kept many of the studs on the other teams in check, the same D that will be in place this year, except for FrakenLacher.

    Also keep in mind that the Oline will have 3 new starters, and Webb where he should have been all along, at RT PLUS and offensive minded coach who will score more than 13 points a game, who knows how to utilize weapons like Marshall, Forte, the Bennetts, and Alshon, and who will minimize the sacks/injuries to Cutler.

    Oh, and they still won 10 freaking games last year! But yeah, the Rams and Cowboys will be better, right?

  56. packerbackernj says: Jul 16, 2013 2:08 PM

    @mp4pack

    Are you stupid? The lines and Vikings are in the same division, how dafuq are they both going to go 0-16? Both can go 1-15.

  57. mp4pack says: Jul 16, 2013 2:28 PM

    Oh, they are in the same division and can’t both go 0-16. I guess I’ll have to adjust my predictions a little bit. Thanks a lot for your help, guys. Best of luck with that sense of humor deficiency.

  58. jimmysee says: Jul 16, 2013 2:58 PM

    SilentMajority says:
    Jul 16, 2013 9:06 AM

    The Chicago Bears march to Super Bowl victory begins this Fall!

    ———————————————————

    My sentiments exactly!

    But it’s a march that will take six to ten years.

    Bear down Bears!

  59. shadowcell says: Jul 16, 2013 3:19 PM

    I would’ve liked to see more analysis of how Trestman might fit in from his time in the CFL. He got the Alouettes to three Grey Cups and won two of them, so he must’ve been doing something right, and since the CFL is a passing league one would think he knows how to get the most out of an offensive line and receiving team. Granted, the CFL game is fairly different from the NFL, but maybe that relatively outsider’s perspective would help.

  60. 2ruefan says: Jul 16, 2013 3:41 PM

    For all your (fake) Packers fans (I suspect you really are Bear’s fans) posting “Should be higher than the Vikings, I’m more worried about the Bears, yada, yada, yada..

    You DO realize that the Packers SWEPT the Bears last season (pretty easily BTW), right?

    And the Pack split with the Vikes (costing them the number two seed, and possible the reason they lost in SanFran) and.. the fact that the Bears were swept is also the reason the were not IN the playoffs with the same record as the Vikings.

    So, let’s stop the dopey comparisons. The Vikings last year put more harm on the Pack than the toothless Bears did and the Bears should not be ranked in preseason higher than any team that made the playoffs. Pure and simple.

  61. larryboodry says: Jul 16, 2013 4:04 PM

    whatjusthapped says: Jul 16, 2013 11:05 AM

    “The biggest difference between the Bears and the Vikings, the Bears have a qB and no WR…”

    I had to stop reading at that point, tears of laughter made it impossible to see.

  62. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 4:38 PM

    2ruefan says:
    Jul 16, 2013 3:41 PM
    For all your (fake) Packers fans (I suspect you really are Bear’s fans) posting “Should be higher than the Vikings, I’m more worried about the Bears, yada, yada, yada..

    You DO realize that the Packers SWEPT the Bears last season (pretty easily BTW), right?

    And the Pack split with the Vikes (costing them the number two seed, and possible the reason they lost in SanFran) and.. the fact that the Bears were swept is also the reason the were not IN the playoffs with the same record as the Vikings.

    So, let’s stop the dopey comparisons. The Vikings last year put more harm on the Pack than the toothless Bears did and the Bears should not be ranked in preseason higher than any team that made the playoffs. Pure and simple.

    _____________________________

    Yes, that last second field goal for the win was a huge blow the the Green Bay Packers…so much so, the very next weekend they crushed the Vikings in their first playoff appearance in some time.

    Also, from all the interviews I’ve seen, I’m pretty sure the Bears players have all their teeth.

  63. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 4:47 PM

    2ruefan says:
    Jul 16, 2013 3:41 PM
    For all your (fake) Packers fans (I suspect you really are Bear’s fans) posting “Should be higher than the Vikings, I’m more worried about the Bears, yada, yada, yada..

    You DO realize that the Packers SWEPT the Bears last season (pretty easily BTW), right?

    And the Pack split with the Vikes (costing them the number two seed, and possible the reason they lost in SanFran) and.. the fact that the Bears were swept is also the reason the were not IN the playoffs with the same record as the Vikings.

    So, let’s stop the dopey comparisons. The Vikings last year put more harm on the Pack than the toothless Bears did and the Bears should not be ranked in preseason higher than any team that made the playoffs. Pure and simple.

    ________________________________

    Also, I will be sure to re-post this when the Vikings are ranked behind the Giants, a team who did not make the playoffs last year, but will surely be ranked higher.

  64. 2ruefan says: Jul 16, 2013 4:48 PM

    Yes, and they got to watch the playoffs from the couch.

  65. 2ruefan says: Jul 16, 2013 4:49 PM

    And the Packers went INTO SF and got crushed. So, you kind of missed the point.

    How would they have done if they played without Rodgers, BTW? Not exactly a great victory when the starting QB was Joe (I can jump real high) Webb?

  66. jazsrt says: Jul 16, 2013 5:01 PM

    2ruefan says:
    Jul 16, 2013 4:49 PM
    And the Packers went INTO SF and got crushed. So, you kind of missed the point.

    How would they have done if they played without Rodgers, BTW? Not exactly a great victory when the starting QB was Joe (I can jump real high) Webb?

    _________________________________

    Still would have beaten the Vikings.

    Oh yeah, The Saints and Cowboys will also be ahead of your team on this ranking as well…both of which also did not make the playoffs. The point you made above regarding the Bears is null and void.

    Have a nice day.

  67. larryboodry says: Jul 16, 2013 5:14 PM

    Are the Bears a lock for the playoffs? No. Are they the 18th. best team in the NFL? No. IMO they should be ranked somewhere between 10-13, but their
    ultimate rank among teams in their own conference is what really matters.

    My picks for the top 8 NFC teams, in no particular order, are SF, GB, Atlanta, NYG, Seattle, Chicago, New Orleans, and MN…Of these, I think the Giants are the only lock to win their division (sorry, logicalvoice).

    So that leaves 7 teams fighting for 5 spots, and let’s say SF, GB, and Atlanta are the three other division winners…That leaves the Bears, Vikes, Saints, and Seattle as Wild Card contenders, with either Chicago or Minnie losing out.

  68. larryboodry says: Jul 16, 2013 5:22 PM

    Oh, and my reason for saying the Giants will win the East has more to do with the other teams in that division than with the Giants talent level…They could very well have the worst record of the teams I mentioned.

  69. moeman79 says: Jul 16, 2013 6:33 PM

    The only division in the NFL where all 4 teams are preseason playoff contenders is the NFC North, I understand coaching changes but this team should be a little worse on defence and alot better on offense as long as the new oline gels. This rank is garbage.

  70. evansvc says: Jul 16, 2013 6:35 PM

    If you are looking for a good backup quarterback… This guy can help…
    Vince Young… He is the best quarterback on the market… He’s a “LOW COST- HIGH REWARD” type of guy…. Vince will push the starting quarterback to be the best he can be…

  71. larryboodry says: Jul 16, 2013 7:54 PM

    After some thinking, I see Washington as
    another playoff contender from the NFC East, which would leave Minnie out of luck. Sorry Heidis.

  72. ecallaert says: Jul 16, 2013 9:32 PM

    I am quite sure that “ingenuitive” is not an actual word.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!