NFL  > Chicago Bears  > Will Bears throw another bone to Green Bay??? Despite his BEAT GREEN BAY PROMISE when he was hired?
December 29, 2010, 05:32 AM
Lovie did it before under simular circumstances so my guess it he will do it again. Why risk injury to our most important players against our most hated rival in the world? Plus it's in Green Bay and means almost nothing unless Atlanta and New Orleans both lose earlier on Sunday. Which then and only then would we have a chance to have home field through out the playoffs. So, if the game means nothing, I expect Lovie to say "sit down" to Cutler, Urlacher,Briggs,Peppers,Hester, and others. Then if we meet Green Bay again in the Playoffs it will be in Chicago and mean something. I know it's Green Bay (And there's NO ONE we love to beat more.) but Lovie has made and done this decision before. That was in our Super Bowl year 4 seasons ago when he threw the Packers a bone then too.
December 29, 2010  10:52 AM ET

With the Vikings win over the Eagles Tuesday night the Bears clinched a first rnd. bye so it will be interesting if the Bears play their starters now. The only thing left to play for would be the No. 1 seed but hinges on the Panthers beating the Falcons in the Georgia Dome and the Buccaneers beating the Saints in the Superdome. This could be a game time decision considering both the above mentioned games are the noon games and the Bears play at 3:15.

December 29, 2010  11:10 AM ET

If Lovie plays his starters and one of them say "Cutler, Urlacher, Peppers" gets hurt it could mean Lovies job. I don't want to see any teams laying down either but it happens and you have to look at it through the coaching staffs eyes rather than the fans "our" views. What would you do under the circumstances, not what would you rather see. I do know Lovie has said he will play the starters already but that was before last nights game. I'm just throwing out a what if is all, because in the end it matters not what we fans want or would like to see but what's in the best interest of the team and the coaches decision.

December 29, 2010  11:11 AM ET

The Bears aren't playing for a perfect season either!

December 29, 2010  11:19 AM ET
QUOTE:

neither were the Colts, but no one told Peyton and the boys til the 2nd quarter!

They weren't???

Jets End the Colts Perfect Season and Burst Into the Postseason Picture

December 29, 2010  11:34 AM ET
QUOTE:

they pulled the starters in the second quarter... you don't do that if you are going for a perfect season! That is my point! Irsay's got a call from goodell cause the precious, lucrative east coast market were missing several key teams. Giants, steelers in the playoff picture! Colts layed down like good puppets and let the Jets into the playoffs! ancient history! (sorta) still hurts

LIke you say it's history now, we could hash out the why fours all day, I did say I hoped the Bears didn't pull their starters, but looking at it from a coaches perspective and the possibility of losing your job over playing certain players in a game that really has no bearings on your placement in the playoff picture and a chance of getting one of your star players hurt which would more than likely end any chance of advancing any farther in the playoffs is kinda like playing Russian roulette.

December 29, 2010  12:06 PM ET
QUOTE:

everyday in the NFL is like russian roulette, what difference does it make??? Vikings beat Eagles with a back up in the Eagles house! It's what you do! You strap one on and get it done! or go home and play with your pud!

The fact they are already in the playoffs and have a first rnd. bye is the difference, you play all season to get to this point and hopefully beyond. Kudos to the Vikings for doing what they did with their back up but it's a rare thing to win with the back up odds are not in your favor.

December 29, 2010  12:33 PM ET

Let me say this. Every game day in the 16 game season, people take chances that they're going to get hurt and end their season on IR, or even end their career altogether.

What makes it any different near the end of the season? Just because it's near the play offs? Extra money to be made? The way I look at it is...let's use the Cowboys 13-3 season for example.

They pulled their starters out after wrapping up the division and the home field advantage throughout the playoffs. They should have been 15-1, with the lone defeat being to New England. But, Wade in his infinite wisdom, allowed the starters to "coast" (or sat them to keep from being hurt) and losing the last 2 games in the process while losing their momentum. They also took vacations to Cabo and wherever else. They should have continued on their roll and not let up until the end of the SB, if they had made it that far.

They ended up 1 and done. The Cowboys LOST their best shot at a SB back then, and I find it highly doubtful they'll ever get that close again.Not for a long while anyway. That's just the way I look at it. I don't think any team, if they want to be a contender or a SB winner, should ever sit their starters, and lose games on purpose, even if they're meaningless. Momentum is a fickle thing.

December 29, 2010  12:46 PM ET

I just don't think Lovie has that kind of a killer instinct to keep his starters in. He has shown to be political and try not to step on people's toes. He wants opponent coaches to respect him. Thus he helps the Packers and lets them into the playoffs. He's mostly is saying "We will see you in Chicago if you make it that far!!!" The thing that gripes me is he has done this twice!!! and both times it was against the Packers. The team I want to beat more than anyone. I remember years ago that one coach was fired just because he didn't beat the Packers one game. The rest of his record didn't matter, it was simply his record against the Packers. I know where GSH was coming from and I guess I have a little of him in me. I always want to beat the Packers by 40 or more. Yes I want our Division to be the strongest division in football,but this isn't my way of doing it. I want the games against Green Bay to mean something too!!! even if it's just pride and giving the Packers two games to me is enough to Fire Lovie on it's own!!! Even though I know Virginia will think it was the smart thing to do. After all George did it, so I say if the Bears don't win the super Bowl fire Lovie!!! lol Never happen huh.

December 29, 2010  12:49 PM ET

For the third time now I will say I hope they do not rest their starters! Now in a what if scenario Lovie does and Cutler for arguments sake goes down what will happen or be said, especially if they would happen to lose the first playoff game behind the back up, or Peppers or Urlacher? Of course it's all what ifs and uncertainties......Hindsight is 20-20.

Would the Colts have advanced to the Superbowl if Manning had gotten hurt, behind Painter?
Players can come out flat whether rested or not, look at last nights Eagles for example.

December 29, 2010  01:00 PM ET
QUOTE:

The chances of me getting hurt walking into lucas oil stadium drunked up are a 100 times greater than Peyton getting hurt! Should I send my back up drinker in?

Now we are getting ridiculous to try and make a point, should I not drive my car because I may get in an accident?

Hindsight is what we are talking about right? focusing back to football their is cases for both scenarios we fans are fickle and will find blame in either scenario regardless of the outcome unless that out come is go to and win the Superbowl. To rest or not to rest that is the question and debate, not drunk folks or driving cars.

December 29, 2010  01:18 PM ET
QUOTE:

Resting starters as far as I know has NEVER been a successful path!

2004 Patriots pulled most of their starters in the third quarter, they were up 21-7.

1994 Niners pulled several starters early in the second quarter lost that game 21-14 and went on to win.

1991 Redskins rested several starters and went on to win Mark Rypien did play but was yanked early in the third quarter.

December 29, 2010  01:22 PM ET
QUOTE:

I guess the odds are bad if only three times a success!

There is more but I would have to look them up and I'm being lazy, I think the 96 Broncos did as well but not 100% sure without looking.

December 29, 2010  01:32 PM ET
QUOTE:

1991 Super Bowl ChampionsScored 485 points (30.3/g), 1st of 28 in the NFL. Allowed 224 points (14.0/g), 2nd. Differential of 261 points (16.3/g), 1st. Expected W-L: 13.8-2.2.Record: 12-4-0, Finished 1st in AFC East Division NFL Season Summary 1991 sb championsScored 385 points (24.1/g), 7th of 32 in the NFL. Allowed 237 points (14.8/g), 2nd. Differential of 148 points (9.2/g), 4th. Expected W-L: 12.2-3.8. Takeaway/Giveaway Differential +8 (0.5/g), 4th.Simple Rating System: Total 10.2, Offense: 4.3, Defense: 5.9, SoS: 1.0, versus averages of 0.0.1994 Super Bowl ChampionsScored 505 points (31.6/g), 1st of 28 in the NFL. Allowed 296 points (18.5/g), 6th. Differential of 209 points (13.1/g), 1st. Expected W-L: 12.5-3.5. Takeaway/Giveaway Differential +11 (0.7/g), 3rd.Simple Rating System: Total 11.6, Offense: 9.9, Defense: 1.7, SoS: -1.4, versus averages of 0.0.Coached by George Seifert (13-3-0)Look at the numbers! I really don't think resting starters had anything to do with the baseline!

In simplest terms we were discussing who rested starters and who didn't, I wouldn't argue they weren't a dominate team that season.

December 29, 2010  01:39 PM ET

We can argue all day about the pros and cons of resting the starters, in the end it's a coaches decision and at the end of the day all we have is opinions and arguments with each other. For the fourth time I hope they don't and hope nobody gets hurt, as I do in every game, but I full well know what will be said if the starters play and one winds up injured. Commence oh speculations and witch hunting.

Comment #30 has been removed
December 29, 2010  02:51 PM ET

Is getting the first round bye considered resting your players since they get a week off?????

Comment #34 has been removed
Comment #35 has been removed
December 29, 2010  08:53 PM ET

I think the Packers will win because Lovie won't play our key players. They can say all they want now but on Sunday I'll believe what I see not what they say now. I think Lovie wants to get the Packers back to Chicago during the Playoffs to put in our starters. But what distresses me is that in twenty years or whatever someone's going to say well the Packers have won x number of games against the Bears and here we had two wins that Lovie gave them. I actually had some guy telling me that Lovie didn't do this 4 years ago!!! Now if his memory is so short what about others??? It just realy irritates me that we are GIVING our main rival wins!!! When we could sweep our entire division!!! Not once but TWICE!!! This just ain't right.

 
Comment #41 has been removed

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    D'Antoni's newest 'blunder'
    Views
    2709
    Comments
    866
  2. 2
    Bryant headed back to Germany
    Views
    2880
    Comments
    810
  3. 3
    Baseball's top 2015 free agent
    Views
    2380
    Comments
    527
  4. 4
    Shakeup looms for White Sox
    Views
    4911
    Comments
    329
  5. 5
    The NHL's model franchise?
    Views
    2218
    Comments
    139

SI.com

SI Photos