So let's ignore the fact that we had 18+ players on IR?
It be different if we had at most 5 players on IR and had 3 wins. When your impact players are gone this is what happens.
Was the Cowboys a team that lack talent last year to end up 4-12?
Seeing that they're 13-3 this year I say no...
We don't have a QB... no matter who was on the field.
Those Players on IR... how many were our talented STARTERS?
Not just that, but how many of those talented players missed how many games; and how many were just thrown on IR at the end of the season to up the #'s?
Dallas lost their qb early on last year, sure Bears lost Cutler, but that's not the same lvl of loss as Romo is. Doesn't matter how good your team is when you lose your franchise qb it's ova. See Indy and the suck for luck year. Team had been a constant playoff contender, loses manning, #1 pick in the draft.
Bears don't have a franchise qb, so there is no comparison about losing to winning seasons. Bears draft Watson/Kizer/Trib then they just might have a huge upswing in wins.
We don't have a QB... no matter who was on the field.
Those Players on IR... how many were our talented STARTERS?
Not just that, but how many of those talented players missed how many games; and how many were just thrown on IR at the end of the season to up the #'s?
Dallas lost their qb early on last year, sure Bears lost Cutler, but that's not the same lvl of loss as Romo is. Doesn't matter how good your team is when you lose your franchise qb it's ova. See Indy and the suck for luck year. Team had been a constant playoff contender, loses manning, #1 pick in the draft.
Bears don't have a franchise qb, so there is no comparison about losing to winning seasons. Bears draft Watson/Kizer/Trib then they just might have a huge upswing in wins.
yeah, it is for a SB win, but should not be for wins in a relatively easy schedule. You won't win them all, but you should win some. And that number should be larger than 3.
Not just that, but how many of those talented players missed how many games; and how many were just thrown on IR at the end of the season to up the #'s?
Dallas lost their qb early on last year, sure Bears lost Cutler, but that's not the same lvl of loss as Romo is. Doesn't matter how good your team is when you lose your franchise qb it's ova. See Indy and the suck for luck year. Team had been a constant playoff contender, loses manning, #1 pick in the draft.
Bears don't have a franchise qb, so there is no comparison about losing to winning seasons. Bears draft Watson/Kizer/Trib then they just might have a huge upswing in wins.
yeah, it is for a SB win, but should not be for wins in a relatively easy schedule. You won't win them all, but you should win some. And that number should be larger than 3.
History says otherwise, again look at Indy in the Suck for Luck tour. That team had all sorts of talent, Painter comes in instead of Manning, ova. Dallas loses Romo, 4 wins, and that team was WAY more talented then the Bears are.
yeah, it is for a SB win, but should not be for wins in a relatively easy schedule. You won't win them all, but you should win some. And that number should be larger than 3.
History says otherwise, again look at Indy in the Suck for Luck tour. That team had all sorts of talent, Painter comes in instead of Manning, ova. Dallas loses Romo, 4 wins, and that team was WAY more talented then the Bears are.
you are saying 4-5 Ws was the best case for this Team this season? Knowing that Cutler is done, Hoyer is nothing and Barkley...
History says otherwise, again look at Indy in the Suck for Luck tour. That team had all sorts of talent, Painter comes in instead of Manning, ova. Dallas loses Romo, 4 wins, and that team was WAY more talented then the Bears are.
you are saying 4-5 Ws was the best case for this Team this season? Knowing that Cutler is done, Hoyer is nothing and Barkley...
yeah, it is for a SB win, but should not be for wins in a relatively easy schedule. You won't win them all, but you should win some. And that number should be larger than 3.
History says otherwise, again look at Indy in the Suck for Luck tour. That team had all sorts of talent, Painter comes in instead of Manning, ova. Dallas loses Romo, 4 wins, and that team was WAY more talented then the Bears are.
Never that easy or straightforward. Who were they playing? I can't remember if the team Dallas had was post rebuild or before at that time. Dallas did not have a very good team for a while Romo was QBing the team.
I can show times where teams kept going with their backups also. NE always does it. We actually did it under Trestman with McCown. It works both ways. You can't just point to one set of stats and ignore the opposite. And those are not the only ones. Just as the tanking examples you gave are not the only ones. As I said, it is not a black and white scenario that plays out the same in every team. It depends on the rest of the players, the BU QB, the coaches, and the opponents.
Cowboys have been to the playoffs 5 times since Romo has been starting for them, and have had 4 10 win seasons and 6 8 to 9 win seasons and 2 losing seasons, one of which was last year(their worst record w/Romo at the helm).
Cowboys have been to the playoffs 5 times since Romo has been starting for them, and have had 4 10 win seasons and 6 8 to 9 win seasons and 2 losing seasons, one of which was last year(their worst record w/Romo at the helm).
ALL that proves is that a good QB makes a big difference --- which we both know and agree on.