'85 Dolphins v. Bears

[Bryan]

One thing I think it would have done even if the Bears still ended up winning is that I don't think there would be nearly as many arguments now for the '85 Bears being the best Super Bowl team of all time. I think if the Dolphins had played that Bears team the best Super Bowl team of all time arguments would be entirely with those '70 Steelers teams and '80's '9ers teams.

I think it could go either way, depending on how the Bears-Dolphins Super Bowl played out. If the Bears would have soundly defeated the Dolphins in the Super Bowl (like the Colts avenging their lone loss to the Browns in the 68 NFL 'title game'), then you could say the regular season loss to the Dolphins was a fluke and the Bears proved their greatness. I think if the Bears win a close game over the Dolphins in the Super Bowl, then the thought might be the Bears were lucky to defeat Marino a second time and were equally lucky to have avoided strong offensive teams (Niners, Skins) in the NFC. In general, the 1985 Bears' place in history is puzzling to me.

[lastcat3]

One thing I think it would have done even if the Bears still ended up winning is that I don't think there would be nearly as many arguments now for the '85 Bears being the best Super Bowl team of all time. I think if the Dolphins had played that Bears team the best Super Bowl team of all time arguments would be entirely with those '70 Steelers teams and '80's '9ers teams.

I think it could go either way, depending on how the Bears-Dolphins Super Bowl played out. If the Bears would have soundly defeated the Dolphins in the Super Bowl (like the Colts avenging their lone loss to the Browns in the 68 NFL 'title game'), then you could say the regular season loss to the Dolphins was a fluke and the Bears proved their greatness. I think if the Bears win a close game over the Dolphins in the Super Bowl, then the thought might be the Bears were lucky to defeat Marino a second time and were equally lucky to have avoided strong offensive teams (Niners, Skins) in the NFC. In general, the 1985 Bears' place in history is puzzling to me.

I have talked to people that are adament that they are the best Super Bowl team of all time without question. Then I have talked to others that don't think so highly of them. I personally put them about second or third. I will always consider the '78 Steelers to be the best Super Bowl team ever and that likely will never change. Not only did the '78 Steelers have a defense that was almost as dominant as the Bears but they also had a HOF qb at the point in his career when he was playing like a Hall of Famer and had a great running game and great receivers on top of that.


I often debate with myself between the '85 Bears and '89 49ers as being the second best Super Bowl team ever.

[sheajets]

Well for a lot of people the fact that the Steelers lost 2 and the Bears lost 1 is the key piece of data keeping the 78 Steelers for challenging for that greatest team of all time slot

[lastcat3]

Well for a lot of people the fact that the Steelers lost 2 and the Bears lost 1 is the key piece of data keeping the 78 Steelers for challenging for that greatest team of all time slot

I personally don't think there is much difference between having one loss during a season or two.....or even three. Especially if those extra losses they had were close games.


I normally put 15-1 through 13-3 in the same category. 12-4 through 10-6 in the same category. And 9-7 through 7-9 in the same category. I think in many cases the only thing that separates those types of teams within each category is how the ball bounced a few times.

[7DnBrnc53]

Well for a lot of people the fact that the Steelers lost 2 and the Bears lost 1 is the key piece of data keeping the 78 Steelers for challenging for that greatest team of all time slot

I personally don't think there is much difference between having one loss during a season or two.....or even three. Especially if those extra losses they had were close games.


I normally put 15-1 through 13-3 in the same category. 12-4 through 10-6 in the same category. And 9-7 through 7-9 in the same category. I think in many cases the only thing that separates those types of teams within each category is how the ball bounced a few times.

And the division they played in. The 85 Bears played in a weaker division than the 78 Steelers. The 72 Dolphins and 07 Pats did, too. That's why they were able to either go undefeated or only lose one (while the 70's Steelers didn't do either).

[sheajets]

But do you factor when the ball bounces the other way as well and a team gets lucky wins? Or do undeserved wins count as much as blowout wins but unlucky losses can be minimized? To me when you're deciding something as lofty as the greatest team ever, an important separating point is a 1 loss team vs a 2 loss team.

The Bears played the AFC Champions twice that year and beat them both times. They had 12 games where they held their opponent to 10 points or less. That's just insane

That 1985 NFC Central wasn't that bad. Packers were 8-8. Vikings and Lions were 7-9. And let's not forget the reason they had those records was because they played the Bears twice and the Bears beat each team twice. A great team in a division will make average and good teams in the same division appear worse.

To me we're strictly looking at the year and not a second before or after, so Bradshaw and the Steelers dynasty and HOF player pedigree means nothing to this argument. We're talking about one great year teams had and which team among those had the best

That Bear team held Dickerson who ran for 1800 and 2100 yards the previous years to just 40. Ellard caught 1 pass for 5 yards. Joe Morris rushed for 1300+ and 21td's and they held him to 30. They held San Fran to 180 yards of total offense. The Bears didn't just beat the league's best. They made fools of them.

[lastcat3]

But do you factor when the ball bounces the other way as well and a team gets lucky wins? Or do undeserved wins count as much as blowout wins but unlucky losses can be minimized? To me when you're deciding something as lofty as the greatest team ever, an important separating point is a 1 loss team vs a 2 loss team.

The Bears played the AFC Champions twice that year and beat them both times. They had 12 games where they held their opponent to 10 points or less. That's just insane

That 1985 NFC Central wasn't that bad. Packers were 8-8. Vikings and Lions were 7-9. And let's not forget the reason they had those records was because they played the Bears twice and the Bears beat each team twice. A great team in a division will make average and good teams in the same division appear worse.

To me we're strictly looking at the year and not a second before or after, so Bradshaw and the Steelers dynasty and HOF player pedigree means nothing to this argument. We're talking about one great year teams had and which team among those had the best

That Bear team held Dickerson who ran for 1800 and 2100 yards the previous years to just 40. Ellard caught 1 pass for 5 yards. Joe Morris rushed for 1300+ and 21td's and they held him to 30. They held San Fran to 180 yards of total offense. The Bears didn't just beat the league's best. They made fools of them.

1978 was the year in which many of those Steeler Hall of Famers were at their peak so it makes perfect sense to include how much more Hall of Fame talent they had on their roster than the '85 Bears did. The Steelers also gave up fewer points than the Bears (195 to 198). They also had a team in their division that beat two 11-5 teams in the playoffs only to lose to the Steelers in the AFC championship game by 29 points. And the Steelers beat one of the best non Super Bowl winning teams in the '78 Cowboys (who in themselves would probably be considered one of the top 10/15 best teams of all time had they been able to pull off an upset).

[74_75_78_79_]

IMO, it’s 1978 Steelers #1 then 1989 Forty Niners #2, or Pitt ‘1a’ SF ‘1b’, or both tied for first - take your pick.

3rd place, to me, is most likely them ’85 Bears but ’84 SF, ’91 Wash, ’92/’93 Cowboys and ’94 SF each have a real strong argument for 3rd as well. Have them 5 play in a bunch of round-robin tournaments, I think da Bears end up with more tournament wins than the others, but not by much. Each the other four get their share of wins as well.

[L.C. Greenwood]

One thing I think it would have done even if the Bears still ended up winning is that I don't think there would be nearly as many arguments now for the '85 Bears being the best Super Bowl team of all time. I think if the Dolphins had played that Bears team the best Super Bowl team of all time arguments would be entirely with those '70 Steelers teams and '80's '9ers teams.

I think it could go either way, depending on how the Bears-Dolphins Super Bowl played out. If the Bears would have soundly defeated the Dolphins in the Super Bowl (like the Colts avenging their lone loss to the Browns in the 68 NFL 'title game'), then you could say the regular season loss to the Dolphins was a fluke and the Bears proved their greatness. I think if the Bears win a close game over the Dolphins in the Super Bowl, then the thought might be the Bears were lucky to defeat Marino a second time and were equally lucky to have avoided strong offensive teams (Niners, Skins) in the NFC. In general, the 1985 Bears' place in history is puzzling to me.

Everyone kind of knew the Patriots' only hope in that SB was to force the kind of turnovers which were their bread and butter in 1985. Despite having seen the Bears in the regular season, the Patriots were just outclassed. Shutting down Walter Payton was about all they did right. Tony Eason looked like he was scared from the beginning, no fire, and that offensive line play was disappointing. I do think the 1985 Bears were truly great, but I cannot put them above teams with more HOF offensive skill.

[Rupert Patrick]

But do you factor when the ball bounces the other way as well and a team gets lucky wins? Or do undeserved wins count as much as blowout wins but unlucky losses can be minimized? To me when you're deciding something as lofty as the greatest team ever, an important separating point is a 1 loss team vs a 2 loss team.

The Bears played the AFC Champions twice that year and beat them both times. They had 12 games where they held their opponent to 10 points or less. That's just insane

That 1985 NFC Central wasn't that bad. Packers were 8-8. Vikings and Lions were 7-9. And let's not forget the reason they had those records was because they played the Bears twice and the Bears beat each team twice. A great team in a division will make average and good teams in the same division appear worse.

To me we're strictly looking at the year and not a second before or after, so Bradshaw and the Steelers dynasty and HOF player pedigree means nothing to this argument. We're talking about one great year teams had and which team among those had the best

That Bear team held Dickerson who ran for 1800 and 2100 yards the previous years to just 40. Ellard caught 1 pass for 5 yards. Joe Morris rushed for 1300+ and 21td's and they held him to 30. They held San Fran to 180 yards of total offense. The Bears didn't just beat the league's best. They made fools of them.

1978 was the year in which many of those Steeler Hall of Famers were at their peak so it makes perfect sense to include how much more Hall of Fame talent they had on their roster than the '85 Bears did. The Steelers also gave up fewer points than the Bears (195 to 198). They also had a team in their division that beat two 11-5 teams in the playoffs only to lose to the Steelers in the AFC championship game by 29 points. And the Steelers beat one of the best non Super Bowl winning teams in the '78 Cowboys (who in themselves would probably be considered one of the top 10/15 best teams of all time had they been able to pull off an upset).

I think the 1978 Cowboys might have been the best Cowboy team of the Landry era, and are arguably among the ten best Super Bowl losers. However, they went up against the 1978 Steelers in the Super Bowl. The Steelers of the 70's hit their peak when they polished off Houston 34-5 in the AFC Championship Game, and Super Bowl XIII was one of the great Super Bowls. I think if the 78 Steelers had faced off against the 85 Bears in a neutral site, the Steelers offense and Bears defense would have held each other to a stalemate of sorts, cancelled each other out. However, the Bears offense against the Steelers defense would be no match, and the Steelers defense would have found a way to win the game. It would have been like a 14-7 game, and the Steelers would have won.

Because the Bears offense wasn't at a par with the 78 Steelers or 72 Dolphins, I just can't rate it above them. The 85 Bears were second in the NFL in points scored, but a lot of their points were due to their defense, 5 TD's from interceptions and fumble returns, and also from good field position due to interceptions and fumbles. Their offense in reality were above average. Jim McMahon was 11-0 as a starter regular season with a 15-11 TD/INT ratio. Payton was Payton (1500 yards, 4.8 average), and led the team with 49 catches. Gault/McKinnon/Moorehead isn't Swann/Stallworth/Cunningham or Rice/Taylor/Brent Jones.

The 85 Bears defense was in my opinion one of the four best single-season since the 1970 merger, the others being the 1976 Steelers, the 2000 Ravens and 2000 Titans, but it is not enough to overcome the fact Jim McMahon and their receiving corps weren't what one really expects of the greatest team ever.

I've never done a position by position comparison of the great teams in Pro Football history, if you pick one team one season (78 Steelers or 85 Bears) as opposed to picking 1960's Packers or 50's Browns. I think if you do, the 78 Steelers may very well be the greatest of all time. I remember Steve Sabol always said the 78 Steelers were the greatest team he ever saw. The 78 Steelers biggest weakness was at kicker as they held onto Roy Gerela one season too many; Gerela cost the Steelers about ten points during the 78 season.