Matchup of the past 30 years

[Hunter2_1]

These two have been voted the winners of their respective polls, looking for the best teams since 1981. 

Classic defense vs offense. Perhaps the quintessential defense vs offense.

 

Obviously these are different eras, but lets do our best to rationalise. 

[mse326]

I know the Bears were great at defending the pass, but the passing was so different. I don't see them having a chance at stoping the Pats offense.

[iknowcool]

If the Bears played the same defense, the Patriots offense would do what the Marino Dolphins did except even better. It would be a horrible match-up for the Bears. 

Logically the Bears wouldn’t stay in the 46, but I’m not sure I can assume they would be effecting slowing down the Patriots while changing what helped make the defense so good. The talent on D (Marshall, Singletary, Dent, etc.) would help but it would be a lot to overcome.

 

[Hunter2_1]

I guess their forte was stopping the run and short-range passes

[lancerman]

Idk. I really don't. The Bears would need to adapt to a modern version of a better offense than they played that year. The Patriots would play their most stacked defensive challenge. 2007 Belichick with hindsight.... 

[Jlowe22]

If no one adapted to different eras, Patriots would win, and pretty easily IMO.  If you assume the Bears could and would have adapted(and maintained their dominance in the process), then that's a completely different story.  The Patriots did lose the superbowl after all.

[Carmen Cygni]

To put it into some corny catch phrase: NE would spread 'em and shred 'em.

The weaknesses of the 46 defense are the strengths of the '07 Patriots. Simply put, the 46 lends to man coverage, and is susceptible the spread and quick passing game. Not to mention there is a constant C gap bubble on each side which I'm sure Belichick would exploit as well.

[LaserFocus]

On 11/10/2017 at 1:57 PM, Hunter2_1 said:

These two have been voted the winners of their respective polls, looking for the best teams since 1981. 

Classic defense vs offense. Perhaps the quintessential defense vs offense.

 

Obviously these are different eras, but lets do our best to rationalise. 

This question has everything to do with how the game would be officiated, and under what rules we're talking about. Enormous difference between 1985 and 2007, the "46" wouldn't be nearly as effective if we're talking about playing under modern rules, and that Bears team would be penalized to the hilt. However, the advantage swings back to Chicago big time if they get to play under the more defensive-friendly 1985 era rules. Wes Welker was no Mark Duper or Mark Clayton when it came to separation, and Randy Moss wasn't a physical receiver. I think the pressure would have gotten to Tom Brady, and the game would have resembled SB 42. Offensively, the Bears would have received enough rushing by Walter Payton to shorten the game, and Chicago wins.

People like to talk about Chicago's only loss in 1985, but replicating those conditions would be very difficult. The Bears weren't playing on turf, and Miami had the psychological advantage of defending the perfect record team of 1972. Everything was aligned for Miami that night, it's unfortunate we didn't get a rematch in the SB that season. As cruel as this sounds, I think the Bears would have targeted Marino, and his bad knees.     

[Hunter2_1]

49 minutes ago, LaserFocus said:

This question has everything to do with how the game would be officiated, and under what rules we're talking about. Enormous difference between 1985 and 2007, the "46" wouldn't be nearly as effective if we're talking about playing under modern rules, and that Bears team would be penalized to the hilt. However, the advantage swings back to Chicago big time if they get to play under the more defensive-friendly 1985 era rules. Wes Welker was no Mark Duper or Mark Clayton when it came to separation, and Randy Moss wasn't a physical receiver. I think the pressure would have gotten to Tom Brady, and the game would have resembled SB 42. Offensively, the Bears would have received enough rushing by Walter Payton to shorten the game, and Chicago wins.

People like to talk about Chicago's only loss in 1985, but replicating those conditions would be very difficult. The Bears weren't playing on turf, and Miami had the psychological advantage of defending the perfect record team of 1972. Everything was aligned for Miami that night, it's unfortunate we didn't get a rematch in the SB that season. As cruel as this sounds, I think the Bears would have targeted Marino, and his bad knees.     

Good post.

I think if it were played with 85 rules, the quick Patriot teceivers would get brutalised before they could even get into their routes. I still think Moss would do well, because of his jump-ball ability. Tom would just heave it in the area a lot of the time even in 2007. On the other side, Patriots did have a defender that was 85-eque in Wilfork. He's stuffing runs in any decade. I think it would be a fantastic game in 85 rules.

Modern rules, it's a mismatch because NE would just spread the formation. Bears would need 6 DBs. Did they even use the nickel and dime all that much? 

[iknowcool]

 It is still a schematic mis-match. You can’t play the 46 defense against a 4 or 5 wide set. You would be asking one of your corners to man up on Moss, sometimes with no help over top. It would be an enormous mis-match, especially if they tried to press Moss. 

Bears would have to change up their defense, which they had the talent for but it’s just hard to know for sure how they would have fared.

[iknowcool]

1 hour ago, Hunter2_1 said:

 

Modern rules, it's a mismatch because NE would just spread the formation. Bears would need 6 DBs. Did they even use the nickel and dime all that much? 

What is stopping them from spreading the formation with 80s rules? 

Schemes just weren’t that evolved at the time, it doesn’t mean you couldn’t. And the Blount rule was in place by the 80s anyway. The idea that receivers were just getting wrecked at the LOS is a huge exaggeration, and there were plenty of quick receivers who found success then. No DC is gonna ask his corner (unless he is THAT good) to consistently try to press ‘07 Moss. Not a DC that doesn’t want to see Moss get behind his defense at least 5 times. 

[Hunter2_1]

14 minutes ago, iknowcool said:

What is stopping them from spreading the formation with 80s rules? 

Schemes just weren’t that evolved at the time, it doesn’t mean you couldn’t. And the Blount rule was in place by the 80s anyway. The idea that receivers were just getting wrecked at the LOS is a huge exaggeration, and there were plenty of quick receivers who found success then. No DC is gonna ask his corner (unless he is THAT good) to consistently try to press ‘07 Moss. Not a DC that doesn’t want to see Moss get behind his defense at least 5 times. 

Yeah didn't mean rules, just schemes/style. They wouldn't have seen anything like what NE do, I doubt. But in 80's rules, they could negate the shifty receivers by literally decking them. In modern rules, the receivers are protected in comparison. 

[LaserFocus]

9 hours ago, Hunter2_1 said:

Yeah didn't mean rules, just schemes/style. They wouldn't have seen anything like what NE do, I doubt. But in 80's rules, they could negate the shifty receivers by literally decking them. In modern rules, the receivers are protected in comparison. 

New England's schemes simply won't be as effective under 1985 rules, those short completions to untouched receivers just became more difficult. Brady would be forced to hold the ball longer, and would be hit much more often. Let's also not forget in 1985, officials didn't nearly protect QBs the way they do today. And as great as Randy Moss was, he's not accustomed to the level of physicality and redirection he's going to see in this fantasy game. Honestly, I see a frustrated Moss losing his cool with those hits from the Chicago safeties. Yes, Moss had the speed to get behind any defense, but that's assuming Brady has time to deliver that long pass. That Bears defense would be delivering countless hits which would be penalized today, there's simply no comparison. Everyone knew how to beat the Bears defense in 1985, it wasn't a secret. But for that season, the execution of that Chicago defense was just unbelievable. Yes, the Blount Rule was in effect, and passing was on the rise, but it was still a more difficult era to throw compared with today. I have no doubt under 1985 rules, the 2007 Patriots would be shut down against that juggernaut Chicago defense. In fact, I'm not sure Brady lasts the entire game.    

[PatriotsWin!]

Any average team with a modern west coast offense would smoke that defense. Can't imagine what the Pats would do to them.

[Danger]

Patriots would demolish them in todays game, but they'd win a close game in 1985 rules.