Packers/Bears playoff games

[74_75_78_79_]

I'm excited about these upcoming playoffs as I've already exclaimed in another recent post. '80-like indeed as I also already exclaimed (just get that Rams@Car out the way with LA needing to win that, and we're OFF)!

The Packers & Bears being one of the upcoming matches definitely helps make this the case! This is just the third time that both will be playing in a playoff game in their long tradition-filled history. All three games being in Chicago. Of course, '41 & '10 being the two others. The latter of both was a close game, or at least close-enough. However, I think we can all agree that the former was more intriguing, at least pre-game-hype-wise, in that we're talking of a 10-1 vs 10-1 affair in which both split during the regular season with the road team winning each game (TRUE rivalry). Unlike the latter championship game, the '41 game had to have been seen as the "real" Super Bowl, I mean, League Championship Game! Not just that, but maybe the winner being seen by at least myself as..."the best team of All-Time" (yes, I have already given my Historic take on those 1941 Chicago Bears)!

Both could have appeared in the playoffs other times if the wind would have blown a slightly different way. They weren't far from playing in a tie-breaker in '63; and sure-enough that match-up would, at least, have been looked back at on the same caliber as '41.

In '94, with four teams from the NFC Central getting into the playoffs albeit neither being any better than plain 'good' if even that (de facto four-game division tourney, actually), both teams could have maybe met.

The following year, had Atlanta not had a better record vs-common-opponents than Chicago, both Bears & Packers would have met at Green Bay in the #6@#3 1st-Rd match.

Those are about the closest examples if not the only significant examples to give; correct me if wrong.

Never has there been a 'play-IN' game between both; correct if wrong on that as well.

[CSKreager]

Both could have appeared in the playoffs other times if the wind would have blown a slightly different way. They weren't far from playing in a tie-breaker in '63; and sure-enough that match-up would, at least, have been looked back at on the same caliber as '41.

In '94, with four teams from the NFC Central getting into the playoffs albeit neither being any better than plain 'good' if even that (de facto four-game division tourney, actually), both teams could have maybe met.

The following year, had Atlanta not had a better record vs-common-opponents than Chicago, both Bears & Packers would have met at Green Bay in the #6@#3 1st-Rd match.

Those are about the closest examples if not the only significant examples to give; correct me if wrong.

They actually would have met in 94 AND 95 had two week 17 games gone the other way: SF/MIN on the final Monday Night of 1994 and SF/ATL 1995, which also cost the 49ers homefield

[Brian wolf]

We are both excited for this game and these playoffs, 74_75_78_79 ... If you want, you do the Wild Card Weekend post.
I think the Packers will prevail but if the Packers get their butts kicked, I feel they will try to bring in Harbaugh as HC. We will see if LaFleur's players fight for him ...

[74_75_78_79_]

We are both excited for this game and these playoffs, 74_75_78_79 ... If you want, you do the Wild Card Weekend post.
I think the Packers will prevail but if the Packers get their butts kicked, I feel they will try to bring in Harbaugh as HC. We will see if LaFleur's players fight for him ...

I'm sure that you or others in here will throw a name or two (or three) at me that'll make me say, "oh yeah", but these 'play-calling' HCs...it seems that they still doing that very thing is what may hinder them from further success if success at all. Same with college HCs (USC comes to mind).

You're the HC now, perhaps sit in on more defense and special-teams meetings and delegate the play-calling duties to an aspiring-HC that you yourself once where who shares your philosophy who you can trust.

What's more hindering, taking on HC and play-calling, or taking on HC and front office?

Maybe I'm wrong, but maybe LeFleur, Kyle, etc, would have more success otherwise. If Kingsbury becomes a HC again, is he going to call plays again as well??

Yeah, I'll do WC weekend, Wolf, if you want. Up to you. Don't really have much an intro post in mind, you can go start it now if you got one.

[Brian wolf]

Not yet, was gonna wait and see near gametime but will make my predictions again as well ... I have to restrict by blabbering but juss like talking football, especially this month of the year!

[Brian wolf]

Ugly game for McManus. At least the 55yrd miss was more excusable. If Philly wins tomorrow they go to Chicago. They goofed not try trying to win the finale against Washington.

[74_75_78_79_]

Is Caleb Williams already the '3rd-best' Bears QB ever (has he passed Cutler)?

[Brian wolf]

Is Caleb Williams already the '3rd-best' Bears QB ever (has he passed Cutler)?

Readjack may disagree, but nobody touches Luckman at #1 followed by McMahon(winning pct) then Brown--A 1950s Jay Cutler--then Cutler. I know, its hard to judge McMahon, who like Wade, benefitted from a great defense, but was more a winner and leader than talented passer.

Wade at least has a championship. His numbers are actually similar to Trubisky, who never won a playoff game. Williams might get in this list, but not yet. Like Cutler, he can at least win a divisional playoff. Cutler has the numbers, but wasnt a real leader to me. I thought he was better in Denver before his diabetes sapped some of his arm strength/mobility. Others may disagree.

Ed Brown, like Cutler, had a powerful arm but was erratic. His winning pct as starter, was good, and he had to be good to keep Blanda and Bratkowski on the bench. Just didnt play well in the 1956 Championship game.

On the other side of the coin, Douglass and Evans were two of the worst QBs ever, and not just Bear's QBs, but Fields might be right there with them, though a great athlete. Maybe I am being harsh?

[74_75_78_79_]

Is Caleb Williams already the '3rd-best' Bears QB ever (has he passed Cutler)?

Readjack may disagree, but nobody touches Luckman at #1 followed by McMahon(winning pct) then Brown--A 1950s Jay Cutler--then Cutler. I know, its hard to judge McMahon, who like Wade, benefitted from a great defense, but was more a winner and leader than talented passer.

Wade at least has a championship. His numbers are actually similar to Trubisky, who never won a playoff game. Williams might get in this list, but not yet. Like Cutler, he can at least win a divisional playoff. Cutler has the numbers, but wasnt a real leader to me. I thought he was better in Denver before his diabetes sapped some of his arm strength/mobility. Others may disagree.

Ed Brown, like Cutler, had a powerful arm but was erratic. His winning pct as starter, was good, and he had to be good to keep Blanda and Bratkowski on the bench. Just didnt play well in the 1956 Championship game.

On the other side of the coin, Douglass and Evans were two of the worst QBs ever, and not just Bear's QBs, but Fields might be right there with them, though a great athlete. Maybe I am being harsh?

https://www.bearstalk.com/2024/06/19/ch ... -nfl-2024/

"Despite the passing of time, Luckman still holds some passing records. His career touchdown percentage of 7.9% is still unmatched and likely never will be. If Tom Brady had that same record, he would have thrown 952 career touchdown passes instead of 649. Luckman also holds the single-season touchdown percentage, an absurd 13.9%. If Peyton Manning had done the same in his record-breaking 55-touchdown season in 2013, his total number of touchdowns would have been an unthinkable 92."

Sick!

Yes, Wolf, Luckman of course is the clear #1 Bears QB. Caleb has such a long way to get there. But a simple stroke, or two, ought to get him at Cutler, I'd think. Those other QBs you mention are worthy ones. Yes, didn't really think of them; should have.

McMahon? If Caleb actually wins a SB, especially if he's named MVP, I'd like to think that can get him past JIm if only because Jim's career was cut short of potential/great years due to injuries.

Yes, Caleb should worry about getting by Sid before reaching/surpassing Brady. But if you're a Bears-fan, you should love Caleb's ambition to win 8 Super Bowls thus win one more than Tom. He has been showing 'clutch'-ness thus far. Pretty encouraging!

[Brian wolf]

To some Bear's fans, I might be harsh on Cutler but he had talent on both sides of the ball and still was .500 ... Forte and Olsen helped him out alot. Forte was fun to watch and I really feel he would have had a HOF case had the Bears kept Lovie Smith as HC.