ryan@fremen.DEC (DTN 264-8280 MK01-2/E25) (01/18/86)
Replies to comments by various people: >Does any New England Patriots fan out there seriously think there is a chance >the Pats will win the Super Bowl? > Yep. Sure going to be tougher than Miami, though. >-->Make no mistake about one thing. New England is the best team in >-->the AFC. > > Only a true, loyal Patriots fan would write something like that. >The best team in the AFC this year is the Los Angeles Raiders. The New >England Patriots have saved their best games for the playoffs and therefore >will represent the AFC in the Bowl of Super. Sigh. Another Raider fan that won't admit defeat. At least the players realized they had been beaten by a better team. By the way, what do you call a team that plays their best in the playoffs? I'd always heard those teams referred to as "winners". As a matter of fact, didn't the Raiders used to be one of them:-)? Raiders fans are proud that their team was the first wild card team ever to make (and win) the Super Bowl - they certainly ought to appreciate what it took to do that one better and win three consecutive road playoff games to make it, the last a solid thrashing of a team that has the best home advantage of any team (just ask the Bears!). > I wonder how important those factors will be when the game is decided. >It seems to me the game will turn on whether the New England special teams >will force the Bears to leave the ball on the ground. The New England offense >hasn't shown the capability to score 3 to 4 touchdowns as a result of medium >to long drives, so they'll need help. The Jets, Raiders, and Dolphins have >provided that help. If the Bears do too, then the Patriots have a chance. Excuses prepared and ready to fire - if the Bears lose because of turnovers, that means the Pats got help from them, not that the Pats are the better team. As far as I'm concerned, the team that wins the Super Bowl is the best team in pro football. > Oh really ? The Bears need no excuses. I don't believe that >any professional team can or should go unbeaten in a season of greater >than 3 contests. This game was on the road, in a stadium that is notoriously >diffucult for any visitor to win in. Plus, the home team was coached on that >night by Don Shula, one of the three best motivators in sports (incidently, >his team last Sunday looked like it was coached by someone else). Plus, the >Dolphin crowd was as supportive as I have ever seen a home crowd. The gods >were definitely against the Bears that night. Yep, it's sure tough in the Orange Bowl. So why is it so hard to believe that the only visiting team to win in the Orange Bowl this year (and quite convincingly at that), who also lost a game there that they were closer to winning than anyone else was, has a legitimate shot to beat the Bears? > The Dolphins were not the superior team, even on that night. However, >they did execute their game plan better and wound up scoring more points than >did the Bears. That's funny, I always thought that the team that executed better and scored more points was the superior team by definition, if only for that one game... >> I have long contended that teams that get to the playoffs and win >> playoff games by relying on turnovers are not what Super Bowl winners >> are made of. Again, the definition of the better team is the one that scores more points - it doesn't matter how they score them. Since when do points scored following turnovers count less than points scored following punts or kickoffs? I don't have it handy, but take a look at how the Pats and Bears did against common opponents before picking a Bears blow-out. From memory, the Pats did better against Miami, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay, they were about even against Green Bay and Detroit, and the Bears did better against the Jets. Let's face it, besides the Bears the best the NFC could manage this year were the Rams, Giants, and Cowboys; a definite step down from the Raiders, Dolphins, and Jets. Now, to my prediction. The Pats held the Bears to 20 points in Chicago the last time they played, despite the fact that the Bears offense probably was on the field close to 40 minutes. The defense has improved since then, and I expect the Bears to be held to 13-17 points. Payton has never gained more than 50 yards against the Patriots, and their linebackers and defensive coaching are too good to let McMahon burn them with his scrambling. The Patriots offense has improved tremendously since then - Tony Eason has found the poise and confidence that had eluded him, Craig James was given the opportunity to use his talent and made the most of it, and the offensive line is now healthy. No one seems to have noticed, but Eason set a playoff record for completion percentage against Miami! The great part of this game will be when the Pats are in offense, because we'll be seeing the best rushing defense in the NFL against the best rushing offense in the NFL. I expect it to be something of a standstill - the Bears won't shut the Pats running game down completely, but they won't be gaining 250 yards on Dent, Singletary, & Co. either. They won't score many touchdowns, but they'll get into field goal range often enough to keep it close. Don't underestimate the passing game, either; the only reason it hasn't been used much is because it hasn't been needed. And oh yes, turnovers. I doubt there'll be many; neither of these teams tends to allow opponents to take the ball away. The Pats may end up with a +1 or +2 advantage (2-1, 4-2,...), but I don't think turnovers will be a big factor. It'll be a matter simply of execution. My expectation: 13-13 going into OT, next team to make a mistake loses (random pick is Pats field goal in second OT). Of course, I could be wrong about all this - we'll see come next Sunday who is the better team. Mike Ryan ARPA: ryan%fremen.DEC@DECWRL.ARPA UUCP: {decvax,allegra,ihnp4,ucbvax,...}!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-fremen!ryan
t820@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (tuow ting) (01/21/86)
********** Mike Ryan writes: >I don't have it handy, but take a look at how the Pats and Bears did against >common opponents before picking a Bears blow-out. From memory, the Pats did >better against Miami, Indianapolis, Tampa Bay, they were about even against >Green Bay and Detroit, and the Bears did better against the Jets. Let's face >it, besides the Bears the best the NFC could manage this year were the Rams, >Giants, and Cowboys; a definite step down from the Raiders, Dolphins, and >Jets. Why bother comparing common opponents? How about comparing the Bears and Pats HEAD TO HEAD? (the Bears won 20 - 7) Is it because the comparison would prove that: >Again, the definition of the better team is the one that scores more points (taken from Mr. Ryan's article) As for the NFC's playoff teams being "a definite step down" from the AFC playoff teams. Mr. Ryan failed to mention that the NFC also sent the S.F. 'Niners (last years champs) whereas the AFC sent the Cleveland Browns (no details needed). All pregame hype aside, I hope this will finally be an exciting Super Bowl featuring two well-deserved teams. Final score: BEARS 17, PATS 14. Tuow Ting The University of Chicago