it was hampton that led the anti-flutie side and his and others' take was basically: "we can't get behind this and don't believe in him, because he's terrible...we see it at practice every day. a deer in headlights". i'm sure you remember that. the deer in headlights comment.

the 1984 playoffs - fuller was 'decent' against the redskins in d.c., then, looked terrible in the nfc championship game in s.f. to be fair to fuller, the whole offense was shit that day. in 86, the hampton side wanted fuller. we'll win 9-3. they got flutie instead. i don't believe tomczak was considered as a starting candidate by either side pulling the team apart.

back then, tomczak spent more time with grobstein on his WLS radio show. media willing to pay the 3rd string QB for radio time. that's how popular they were.

Sometimes, sometimes not. But I agree it's a foundational axiom.

It wasn’t just Dan Campbell, though he’s been the face of their turnaround.

Organizationally they changed everything, a complete tear down and rebuild of the way they do things. They basically went from a team where ownership meddled constantly with nebulous and sometimes peculiar motives (WHOA DOES THAT SOUND FAMILIAR???) to a system of pure accountability and meritocracy. No goal or motive but to just win.

“Guy Who Watches the Linemen During an NFL Broadcast” should’ve been a tournament of bad entry.

_________________

Kind of embarrassing reading some to the takes here, it is painfully obvious that the top teams have quality interior offensive and/or defensive lineman.

Let's take a look at the lead twirlers in the NFL, you find they have one thing in common, Pro Bowl level talent on the offensive and defensive lines.
KC has maybe the top DT in Chris Jones and Pro Bowl offensive lineman.

Detroit, Philly, and Baltimore has top interior o line talent.

Building the lines is a lot easier said than done, and it just takes so much time to develop guys. Penei Sewell was kinda ass when he got into the league, he really turned it on his third year and now he’s full-on stud in his fourth—but that took a fucking long time and there were some moments in there I remember the b-word getting tossed around.

Look at somebody like JJ Watt, he took a year to adjust to the physicality and strength of the NFL.

Realistically guys whatever you do on the OL/DL in the coming draft won’t really bear any fruit until 2026 or more realistically 2027. And that’s not just like “oh he’ll be an average player until one day he’s just gonna be super fucking good”…there will be some real low moments in there and you won’t know what the outcome is going to be.

The time to do all this was years ago.

You should be able to multitask and watch everything, have to understand the game a bit to understand what you are watching, so not surprised you don't get it.

Let's see if we can get out the primary color crayons and break it down so you will understand, let's use the Bears for example.

Watch how the Lions came out and double teamed the Bears hapless DT's all game long and shoved them 5 yards backwards, then watch a TE handle the DE which opens up a lane even you could walk through and get a yard or two, but is an easy 5-10 yards for an NFL level RB.

Then, now stay with me young fella, watch how the Lions viciously bull rushed the undersized Bears o lineman in the first half, you rarely see NFL level offensive lineman get pancaked, but you saw that plenty. Hard to run a play when your center, OG, or OT is shoved into your lap.

Now tell me how you shouldn't watch line play, the Lions dominated the line of scrimmage in the first half, sorry you missed it.

You will get tells early on in a players career if you pay attention to the right guys. Heard Thayer say repeatedly that there was no way Borom or Jenkins could play OT in the NFL, did not have the footwork, he also hinted around about Braxton Jones, he uses the code "needs to commit to an NFL level strength program" when he talks about the guys that are not NFL level yet.

Don't be embarrassed. Go watch Woody Hayes youtubes. It's fine. JORR likes watching Bill Russell. It's cool.

Sure, but by the time these guys come around and start contributing, if they are even cut out for the league in the first place, you’re in a whole different place as a franchise. What the Bears have allowed to happen on the lines on both sides of the ball is malpractice. And then to just blow tenth overall on a guy who has the ceiling of Bobbie Massie…wtf was that.

I mean all we’ve done here for the last several years is lament how our quarterbacks don’t stand a chance because guys are getting blown up immediately at the point of attack and in the quarterbacks face before they even take three steps back or how awful our run defense is because guys are getting blown off the ball. This isn’t quantum physics we’re dealing with here. If you’re strong on the line, your team is more than likely going to be good.

_________________
Proud member of the white guy grievance committee

It aint the six minutes. Its what happens in those six minutes.

Mid 80's Bears talk, love it. I guess Bernstein would find me a problem. But as a youth you were shocked when the Bears lost. Now it is the opposite.

Yes the Ditka years were so bad....7 winning seasons and 7 playoff appearances in an 8 year span. Oh the horror! Lets remember the times before Ditka....`14 years before Ditka and only two winning seasons. Or the time after Ditka....9 winning seasons in 32 years.

Ditka actually had a decent eye for quarterbacks. As a free agent Tomczak had a better career than anyone could have expected. Flutie would have a decent NFL career, and he shoved it up Hampton and the Bear defense's ass in '88 when he threw 4 touchdown passes against the them. A good quarterback never came out of Michigan before Harbaugh and there were doubts about him, yet he would lead the league in passing one year with the colts.

The problem was all three of these QB's were to young to contribute in the Bears in their championship window. Unlike the Redskins or 49ers who traded for backups at the time who would eventually win Super Bowls for them (Williams and Young) the Bears were to arrogant and felt that even without McMahon their defense and running game would be enough. But in an era of great coaches, Gibbs, Walsh, Parcells and great teams, the Bears were short in the passing game.

Fuller would not have made a difference in '86. He started two games, the Bears lost both..23-7 at Minnesota and at home 20-17 to a Ram team that was not an elite NFC club. Fuller was benched in the third quarter of that game having thrown almost as many interceptions as points scored (2/3).

I think Ditka did his best jobs coaching in '90 and '91, when the Super Bowl Bears were near the end and the younger players picked in high in the draft, like Armstrong and Wendell Davis, were good
but not great. Teams like Minnesota had much more talent.

This year's Bears? They need to spend the draft and free agency on the lines. Nothing else. Detroit's offensive line pushed them around on Thanksgiving and the Bears offensive line....well nothing needs to be said that already isn't already known.

I do think the Bears need a Dan Campbell or yes Ditka type. Outside John Fox, it seems like every Bear coach since Lovie espouses a philosophy on offense that they would rather trick the opposition rather than physically beat them (I don't think Fox had the talent on the Bears but his prior history would indicate he was more inclined to use blunt force). I do think attitude is important in the
game of football, moreso than like baseball, and quite frankly the Bears appear soft mentally and physically.

You're right. I don't dispute the foundational axiom. However, Baltimore is 8-5 with penalties, misplays, and turnovers. There's more to football than lineman drooling and grunting. You need discipline, you needing coaching, and you need twirlers.

Already nominated; save that stuff for the vote.

_________________

I wondering if there's a novel marketing ploy whereby the NFL could increase viewership by incorporating famously rotund people from other genres of celebrity as linemen. All the better if they have stage names paying homage to delectable pastries.

yeah hi Dan and Terry ah how come the Bears won't move Jelly Roll to linebacker?

_________________

_________________

i understand your overall point about ditka's decade of success, yet you seem to forget what finks, ryan and vainisi did for the club during those glory years. no doubt, ditka was THE most important piece of the new bears in 1982. a perfectionist, not afraid to cut the deadwood (ricky watts episode) and at the time, an excellent talent (offense and special teams - you could tell ditka couldn't wait to cut K bob thomas) evaluator. finks had built a solid base around the 70's viking school of defense with armstrong and ryan...rejuvenated alan page at DT - super DT combo with osbourne, (older and maybe 220lbs. at most, made hartenstein a better DE) and then the 83 draft. things didn't get better, they got much better.

i felt the ditka did his best from mid 1983 through 84-85, into 1986, up until mcmahon/martin. these guys were considered up and coming and they were whipping recent and current super bowl champs (1983 victory over the 1982 super bowl winners 49ers montana and walsh), the previous nfc representative in the super bowl..previous afc super bowl representative in regular season play and the playoffs...etc...etc. in november of 84 saw the bloodbath victory over the then super bowl champ raiders at soldier field and mcmahon peeing blood with a lacerated kidney and on to fuller. ditka went into d.c. and beat gibbs/theisman in the playoffs, the redskins representing the nfc in the super bowl earlier in the year. of course, the 1985 season and the playoffs - kudos to ditka. it seemed as though some indirectly distracted the club (holdouts/fridge/mcmahon), ditka kept the ship relatively steady.

that was all ditka. what recent pedigree did the bears have with all those outrageous victories? none, ditka had a huge role in creating the new culture.

we saw players carrying off the head coach and the def. coordinator in new orleans. the def coordinator went to philly. the day after martin dumped mcmahon on his shoulder, everything went pear-shaped. i felt flutie was a mistake. he didn't make adjustments to joe gibbs' nuanced 5-man DL. hilgenburg made a big deal about this some time after the fact, the OL was clueless and ditka couldn't sort it out. ditka had flutie and a bum-flipper mcmahon, gibbs had jay schroeder and doug williams and gibbs beat the bears 2 years in a row at soldier field in the playoffs - despite the bears defense. that was it. the ship left port. after that, the club was really a pretender, after jan. 86, not winning another playoff game until the fucking fog bowl. needing fog to beat randall and ryan. majkowski beat the bears and we were in shock. i felt flutie was all about ego and to me, it was the start of the end of a great story.

i want to say the tomczak for mayor stuff came out of the bears victory against parcells/simms/bavaro/taylor, on MNF in the fall of 1987. after the strike. the nation watched the previous 2 super bowl winners and the bears and ditka impressed a national audience for the last time - for a long time. i believe that game had the highest ever MNF viwer rating, up to that time.

Realizing how little most of the posters actually know about football and why most of the football discussion here is akin to a bunch of teenage girls fawning over Taylor Swift at a Chiefs game.

The Claw will continue to add at least some actual applicable football discussion when he gets bored, but the responses here are predictable and expose the posters lack of football acumen.

If you do not possess a rudimental understanding of basic fundamentals, you will always be limited in your ability to process what you see on Sundays, the posters here prove that on a daily, no make that hourly basis.

Almost comical that a grown ass football fan cannot watch all of the players on a given play and understand the play design and how the play does or does not work, here is a hint for the dumbasses here, it has a lot to do with the abilities of the lineman.

Here is one to grown on for the tepid football thinkers, why is LT considered a skill position and why do they make so much money? Watch the Niners with Trent Williams and then without, or the Rams with Aaron Donald and without, thanks for your call.

Claw out here grinding the tape explains why he almost had his own era.

_________________

First, they have a great OL and a good (after the injuries) DL.

Second, their OC takes full advantage of a good OL and a great RB in Gibbs.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.

That Mike Ditka sure proved is mastery of NFL coaching in New Orleans

_________________

[/quote]

i understand your overall point about ditka's decade of success, yet you seem to forget what finks, ryan and vainisi did for the club during those glory years. no doubt, ditka was THE most important piece of the new bears in 1982. a perfectionist, not afraid to cut the deadwood (ricky watts episode) and at the time, an excellent talent (offense and special teams - you could tell ditka couldn't wait to cut K bob thomas) evaluator. finks had built a solid base around the 70's viking school of defense with armstrong and ryan...rejuvenated alan page at DT - super DT combo with osbourne, (older and maybe 220lbs. at most, made hartenstein a better DE) and then the 83 draft. things didn't get better, they got much better.

[/quote]

I think we agree on most things. I do think there is this urge to completely diminish Ditka's contribution to those Bear teams <cough> Bernstein <cough>. Ditka wasn't Gibbs, Parcells or Walsh, but he was a good coach for the Bears.

I give credit to Finks to bringing in most of the players to the Super Bowl team. And I certainly give credit to Ryan. But if Finks would have found a good quarterback in the 70's, the Bears probably would have won a division title or two before Ditka. For a former quarterback, he was lousy in picking them for the Bears until McMahon was available, and who knows if Finks would have drafted a QB that high if Ditka and Halas didn't have a say.

Ryan was also here four years before Ditka, and they didn't win really anything. Ryan also would have kept Len Walterscheid instead of Dave Duerson. And I think Ditka pushed Ryan to replace
Jim Osborne with Steve McMichael. So Ryan wasn't infallible. And Ditka's offenses did move and control the football for the most part, which helped the defense. I think the four years under Armstrong, the Bears never finished better than 22nd in total yards on offense. From 1983 thru Ditka's last year, they never finished below 13th in total yards.

Vainisi was an accountant, not a player personnel guy. He was Ditka's confidant. Actually if McCaskey doesn't fire Vainisi at the end of the 1986 season, Vainisi may have convinced Ditka to handle the 1987 strike a bit differently, not be so pro Spare Bear.

And drafting.

_________________

Finding your football knowledge to be similar to my wife and her pals, but at least they understand when I teach them how to watch football.

I imagine you to look an awful lot like Ed Grimley, a tiny guy who is afraid to go outside, banging on your triangle trying to tread in the land of the football bigfoots...stay in your lane lil' fella, you are embarrassing yourself.

Your flaccid football thoughts will be quite amusing when I share them with old o line teammates the next time we get together.

But his bride...

_________________
Hawaii (fuck) You

I don’t think it would be possible for me to vote any harder for you at this point.

_________________

You may not play your triangle Mr. Grimley, leave the actual football talk to the grown ass men.

There is a pair of 1-pound dumbbells for you to use in the corner, maybe you can squeeze out a rep or two of bicep curls.

On their off days, O line does physics experiments. Or hunt. Maybe slap some towels.

Wrassle.