Bears have only 10% chance of winning a Super Bowl in the next 3 years says TheScore

[gwharris2254]

2020 Super Bowl odds to win:

New England Patriots 6-1
Kansas City Chiefs 6-1
Los Angeles Rams 8-1
New Orleans Saints 9-1
Indianapolis Colts 10-1
Chicago Bears 14-1
Philadelphia Eagles 14-1
Green Bay Packers 14-1
Los Angeles Chargers 16-1
Cleveland Browns 16-1
Pittsburgh Steelers 20-1
Dallas Cowboys 25-1
San Francisco 49ers 25-1
Seattle Seahawks 25-1
Minnesota Vikings 25-1
Houston Texans 30-1
Baltimore Ravens 40-1
Atlanta Falcons 40-1
Carolina Panthers 60-1
Jacksonville Jaguars 60-1
New York Jets 80-1
Oakland Raiders 80-1
Denver Broncos 80-1
Cincinnati Bengals 100-1
Buffalo Bills 100-1
New York Giants 100-1
Detroit Lions 100-1
Tampa Bay Buccaneers 100-1
Washington Redskins 100-1
Tennessee Titans 100-1
Arizona Cardinals 200-1
Miami Dolphins 200-1

I guess Oddsmakers have a differing opinion of us winning the SuperBowl this year..... @14 : 1 that means out of 15 they win once, So in One Year, our chances are being put at 6.67 % ... I don't like to write 3-6s ...

Anyways, over a Three Year Period this should mean that each year the BEARs have 6.67 + 6.67 + 6.67 = 20.01 % One Chance in FIVE if we don't regress and continually improve. I'd say these ODDs are absolutely Fabulous !!!! What a CHANGE from previous REGIMEs

((( Please note that if in any one year, your chances of getting struck by lightning were 6.67 % or 1 in 15 and if that same probability continues then in year Two your chances would be 1 in 15 also BUT the probability of it Happening in Year One AND / OR Year Two is the sum of both those so that would be 2/15ths and at this point I would be wearing a rubber suit when I go round up those goats amidst the corn or runaway hens However at THREE years the probability of the BEARs goin to the Big One i.e. Promised Land is 3/15ths set by OddsMakers ))) ...... so WOW !!!!!!

...... That is like a Five Shooter with One bullet in it,. Would you play DEEERHUNTER on us and deny the fact that those probabilities are pretty f+++in Good ?
GO BEARs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

REALITY, today, THIS is where Pace and Nagy have "steered" us Thank You So Much !!!!

 

[Raskolnikov]

Doesn't really work that way but

That = 100% over 32 years. Somebody should have told that to the Lions. Patriots can't possibly ever win another one.

if doing the math in this basic way while looking at 3 or 32 year chunks...you have to remember that each year you don't win the percentage goes down.

So yes...by oddsmakers you have about 20% chance if looking ahead 3 years.
But at the end of 2019-20 season, if you didn't win...your odds go down to 13.32% for the remaining two year chunk.

There is a better formula I don't remember exactly, that divides by degrees of freedom or something.

 

[Bort]

I guess Oddsmakers have a differing opinion of us winning the SuperBowl this year..... @14 : 1 that means out of 15 they win once, So in One Year, our chances are being put at 6.67 % ... I don't like to write 3-6s ...

Anyways, over a Three Year Period this should mean that each year the BEARs have 6.67 + 6.67 + 6.67 = 20.01 % One Chance in FIVE if we don't regress and continually improve. I'd say these ODDs are absolutely Fabulous !!!! What a CHANGE from previous REGIMEs

Does anyone else remember anything they learned in stats class in college and find this as funny as I do?

 

[gwharris2254]

Does anyone else remember anything they learned in stats class in college and find this as funny as I do?

I am just Happy you find it funny For Any Reason Charlie Brown


BUT>>>>> You didn't quote this part which is more of my favorite ......

((( Please note that if in any one year, your chances of getting struck by lightning were 6.67 % or 1 in 15 and if that same probability continues then in year Two your chances would be 1 in 15 also BUT the probability of it Happening in Year One AND / OR Year Two is the sum of both those so that would be 2/15ths and at this point I would be wearing a rubber suit when I go round up those goats amidst the corn or runaway hens However at THREE years the probability of the BEARs goin to the Big One i.e. Promised Land is 3/15ths set by OddsMakers ))) ...... so WOW !!!!!!

...... That is like a Five Shooter with One bullet in it,. Would you play DEEERHUNTER on us and deny the fact that those probabilities are pretty f+++in Good ?
GO BEARs !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

REALITY, today, THIS is where Pace and Nagy have "steered" us Thank You So Much !!!!

 

[number51]

Anyway, currently the Bears, like all teams, have just over a 3% chance of winning. There is 1 champion and 32 teams, so without getting too complicated 1/32 = 3.125%.

You want to give me 32:1 odds on the Pats? If you really do believe your own BS, I think you would get a lot of takers on that line.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

2018/2019 Bears = 2017/2018 Jaguars

Trubisky = Bortles

Nagy has never been truly defeated, tho

 

[Leon Sandcastle]

Only shitty QB's have bad games. Its just "facts"

 

[bearmick]

And last year was year one in a new system that Nagy has said takes 3 years to master. DOme people don't get it.

Imagine a new head coach buying himself some time in case the QB isn't the right guy. . Who would have thought?

It didn't seem to take Mahomes three years.

 

[gallagher]

Imagine a new head coach buying himself some time in case the QB isn't the right guy. . Who would have thought?

It didn't seem to take Mahomes three years.

I don't want to take anything away from Mahomes, and I also don't want to wait three years for the bears to fire on all cylinders. But come on, dude came into an offense where he was the final piece to the puzzle to make a Superbowl run. And he had an entire year to learn that playbook from the bench.

He did a lot of great things last year and took the league by storm, but he came into a situation that contributed to his swift success. Mitch has had a different kind of journey and Nagy deserves some time to put everything together.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

Mahomes wasn't groomed by Glennon, tho

 

[bearmick]

I don't want to take anything away from Mahomes, and I also don't want to wait three years for the bears to fire on all cylinders. But come on, dude came into an offense where he was the final piece to the puzzle to make a Superbowl run. And he had an entire year to learn that playbook from the bench.

He did a lot of great things last year and took the league by storm, but he came into a situation that contributed to his swift success. Mitch has had a different kind of journey and Nagy deserves some time to put everything together.

I agree, and a Mahomes comparison isn't reasonable because he's far more talented than trubisky, but i don't buy the whole 3 years thing. With another full offseason and the talent on this roster there's really no excuse for him not to be good this year. At least going into year 3 we're finally over talking about his lack of college experience.

 

[The Doctor]

Imagine a new head coach buying himself some time in case the QB isn't the right guy. . Who would have thought?

It didn't seem to take Mahomes three years.

I usually don't get involved in these kinds of arguments because I think they're pointless, but for cripes sake Mick! You're better than this! Trying to pass off an apples and oranges comparison through a filter that appeals only to those whose agenda is to hate Mitch. Patrick had the advantage of sitting a year behind Alex Smith, and with guys that had time in the system, and really learn. To his credit he learned it very well. Mitch didn't have that. Mahomes is a wonderful QB and I thoroughly enjoy watching him play but the Bears don't need him. Remember Dan Marino? Great QB but only went to one Super Bowl and lost. We had Jim McMahon and won and I've never been happier. Mitch may never be as good as Patrick but it doesn't matter and I'm OK with that. You should be too.
So c'mon guys -- get over being butt hurt because the Bears didn't draft your guy and get behind this team (fyi they're pretty good). Be critical if you have to be in ways that make sense and not this "We shoulda drafted Mahomes nonsense" and all the attendant BS that comes with it.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

I usually don't get involved in these kinds of arguments because I think they're pointless, but for cripes sake Mick! You're better than this! Trying to pass off an apples and oranges comparison through a filter that appeals only to those whose agenda is to hate Mitch. Patrick had the advantage of sitting a year behind Alex Smith, and with guys that had time in the system, and really learn. To his credit he learned it very well. Mitch didn't have that. Mahomes is a wonderful QB and I thoroughly enjoy watching him play but the Bears don't need him. Remember Dan Marino? Great QB but only went to one Super Bowl and lost. We had Jim McMahon and won and I've never been happier. Mitch may never be as good as Patrick but it doesn't matter and I'm OK with that. You should be too.
So c'mon guys -- get over being butt hurt because the Bears didn't draft your guy and get behind this team (fyi they're pretty good). Be critical if you have to be in ways that make sense and not this "We shoulda drafted Mahomes nonsense" and all the attendant BS that comes with it.

Bears haven't really won anything under Trubisky, though. Mahomes is very good at making decisions after a play breaks down...not sure if sitting behind Alex Smith has anything to do with that.

 

[bearmick]

I didn't say we should have drafted Mahomes. It was always going to be a big gamble because air raid QBs have historically flunked in the NFL. Nor am i expecting Trubisky to ever be as good as him. But nor do i want to give another underwhelming QB a three year pass before anything is expected of him.

With Cutler it was the line and no receivers. Trubisky has a solid pass blocking line and plenty of talent around him. Be good now please. Be what you'd expect from a 2nd overall pick, which is a high level franchise QB.

 

[The Doctor]

Bears haven't really won anything under Trubisky, though. Mahomes is very good at making decisions after a play breaks down...not sure if sitting behind Alex Smith has anything to do with that.

You're right of course, Rory. Mitch hasn't won anything. Yet. And Mahomes is terrific at making something out of nothing but every system has bail out options and he's really good at finding them. I tip my cap to him. As I said, maybe Mitch is never going to be that good but, at the risk of sounding like a blind homer, I have enjoyed watching Mitch evolve. I think he will be more than good enough to get us to a Super Bowl and win.

I didn't say we should have drafted Mahomes. It was always going to be a big gamble because air raid QBs have historically flunked in the NFL. Nor am i expecting Trubisky to ever be as good as him. But nor do i want to give another underwhelming QB a three year pass before anything is expected of him.

With Cutler it was the line and no receivers. Trubisky has a solid pass blocking line and plenty of talent around him. Be good now please. Be what you'd expect from a 2nd overall pick, which is a high level franchise QB.

Mick, I never said you were one of the "we should have drafted Mahomes crowd," just that your argument was presented in a way that would appeal to that crowd. You and Rory are right. Mitch has a lot to prove still but I, for one, am enjoying watching his growth, uneven as it has been. There have been peaks and valleys but in general the arc is, in my opinion, trending in the right direction. I guess history will determine if he was worth being selected 2nd.

 

[gallagher]

I agree, and a Mahomes comparison isn't reasonable because he's far more talented than trubisky, but i don't buy the whole 3 years thing. With another full offseason and the talent on this roster there's really no excuse for him not to be good this year. At least going into year 3 we're finally over talking about his lack of college experience.

I'm not gonna argue the talent comment, that's not really measurable and I'm sure we define it differently or look for different things. What is inarguable is that Mahomes has "it" going off of one explosive year in a great offense, and Trubisky is still on his way. I am very excited to see what Trubisky brings to the table going into how second year in a professional offense.

If we're putting numbers to it, anything less than 30 TD tosses is unacceptable, because he needs to step up in the red zone. But other than that, I'm giving it more of an eye test and not relying on stats for him. There's too many moving parts for me to put any other qualifier on it.

 

[Rory Sparrow]

I'm not gonna argue the talent comment, that's not really measurable and I'm sure we define it differently or look for different things. What is inarguable is that Mahomes has "it" going off of one explosive year in a great offense, and Trubisky is still on his way. I am very excited to see what Trubisky brings to the table going into how second year in a professional offense.

If we're putting numbers to it, anything less than 30 TD tosses is unacceptable, because he needs to step up in the red zone. But other than that, I'm giving it more of an eye test and not relying on stats for him. There's too many moving parts for me to put any other qualifier on it.

What if you don't put any qualifiers on it, and don't even try to predict what the future will bring? Is it reasonable to say that if the 2018 Bears had Mahomes at QB instead of Trubisky, they would have been facing off against the Patriots in the Super Bowl, with a decent chance of winning? I think it is. What sticks out to me last year is how the Bears demolished the Rams with Trubisky playing terribly...and then the Rams end up in the Super Bowl and have a similar anemic offensive performance. 2018 might have been the Bears best chance to get a championship.

 

[gallagher]

What if you don't put any qualifiers on it, and don't even try to predict what the future will bring? Is it reasonable to say that if the 2018 Bears had Mahomes at QB instead of Trubisky, they would have been facing off against the Patriots in the Super Bowl, with a decent chance of winning? I think it is. What sticks out to me last year is how the Bears demolished the Rams with Trubisky playing terribly...and then the Rams end up in the Super Bowl and have a similar anemic offensive performance. 2018 might have been the Bears best chance to get a championship.

I really don't want to answer this question!

Let me sidestep and offer that Fox would have seen Mahomes arm talent and decided to amputate his throwing arm.

 

[TheWinman]

again, you appear to be clueless. LIke I said it, not worth it.

 

[Bearin' Down]

What you are arguing isn't quantifiable, and the metric used by the article is conjecture. Odds and probabilities are a function of math.

What is quantifiable is that there are 32 teams and one winner. Probability isn't affected by how sports writers feel about your team, as they have no affect on outcomes.

The Patriots and the Giants, the Bears and the Packers, the Browns and the Ravens all have equal odds at winning the Superbowl. Roughly 3%. This is a failure of language that makes people look like they disavow math.

That would be true if the teams were randomly assigned players each year. But that's not the case. Certain teams have certain players that make them more competitive than not.

If the Giants spend 3 years overhauling, there's an outside chance that by year 3 they will be a competitive team. However what the Packers need to be competitive over the next three years is far less, even though you could argue their overall talent pool is less than the Giants because they have Aaron.