Not a single major sports reporter picks the Bears to beat the Packers

[norton63]

Da Bears win 28-17.

 

[Spitta Andretti]

Well, he kinda is.

He's playing a 3 win team?

 

[Britbuffguy]

Honestly who would pick the Bears?It's OK to peacock around here with all that flim flam talk. But if ya had to put your money where your mouth is I'd say 99.9% of folks would pick the pack.
Now if the Bears somehow come out of this game on top, I'd say the narrative will certainly change. But for now, Erin Wrodgers name is still on the deed.

I think if they lose but put a fight to the final minutes, it will still be a big win for this team. Just looking like they belong on the same field, as so many felt they did not most of the offseason.

 

[Collins77]

I think if they lose but put a fight to the final minutes, it will still be a big win for this team. Just looking like they belong on the same field, as so many felt they did not most of the offseason.

Without a doubt. Hell, I think if the D can get some good hits on Aaron we make it a game. Not saying a win is impossible, just improbable. Hell if we can get the run game going, and stop their run we can win this game. I think shutting down their two backs is going to be key.

 

[FozzyBear]

the only prediction that matters is mine. Bears 45, Packers 9

 

[Menchifus]

3 factors that will help the Bears win aren't being talked about:

1. Half (or more) of the Bears team are new faces. Some of these guys Green Bay has never faced before so the advantage of player tendencies are not there.

2. All new coaching staff. New schemes. There's very little tape on this Bears team.

3. Luke Getsy. The guy knows the Green Bay offense and defense like the back of his hand. This is why revenge games oftentimes work for the returning player or coach. Because they're familiar with what they're facing from having seen it a thousand times before in practice.

 

[Bearly]

Don't see how the Packers are 9.5 point favorites. They couldn't even score that much in last week's game. They really don't have much of an offense and I like how we stack up against them. With the HITS philosophy ingrained in the guys, I like our defense's ability to minimize Aaron Jones' effect on the game both as a runner and a passer. Then, its their rookie wide receivers vs our young secondary. The biggest key for me is how much pressure we can get on Rodgers. You give Rodgers the edge on this, but if the secondary can hold up and give the DLine some time to get home then maybe we can get to him. Also, I expect more blitzes this game.

Offensively, it may be a bit of a struggle. But the more we use Justin as an active as a runner the more success we will have. I also don't think we will need to score alot to win this game. I'm most concerned with our receiver's ability to seperate. Only 1 catch and 8 yards for Mooney last week was rough. I think we will do well in the run game and control the LOS. But if we can't do much in play action, then GB will just creep into the box and make life difficult for us.

In the end, I'm wholly confident this game is much closer than a 9.5 point spread. I'm thinking it is a low scoring affair. Something like 21-17 with either team able to come out on top. Its all about who do you think will step up....GBs WR corp or our WR corp? Rodgers has an edge with experience and at home. Justin has mobility.

Last year. They lost their 1st game to the Saints 38-3 and then went on to win 7 straight including against the 49ers, Steelers, Bengals and Cardinals.

 

[vabearsfan15]

Last year. They lost their 1st game to the Saints 38-3 and then went on to win 7 straight including against the 49ers, Steelers, Bengals and Cardinals.

And last year they had Devante Adams, MVS, and Lucas Patrick. I dont see their offense being able to recover like it did last year at times

 

[Bearly]

And last year they had Devante Adams, MVS, and Lucas Patrick. I dont see their offense being able to recover like it did last year at times

They let Patrick go because he was deemed a fringe starter so doesn't mean much . That said, they have other issues on the OL and Watson dropped an easy TD. If he catches that , the entire complexion of that game may have changed.

It's still 4 time MVP Rodgers behind an questionable line and WRs vs Fields behind a questionable line and WRs running a new scheme for the 2nd time.

What neutral party would pick Fields over Rodgers?

We currently have 2 interior guys playing worse than the guy that GB let go. Mustipher and Whitehair. Honestly, if they want to give Patrick G reps, they may be looking at the wrong side.

 

[ThatGuyRyan]

Packers without both starting tackles and no one wants to bet against them. Very telling.

Rodgers is working with Lazard, old man Cobb, and 29 year old, journeyman Sammy Watkins. Somehow Rodgers will pass for 3 or more TDs.

He did great last week without a supporting cast, oh ya you don’t watch football

 

[sevvy]

I'm picking the Bears to win. If I had money on it, I would not pick the Bears to win. Lol.

 

[mecha]

He did great last week without a supporting cast, oh ya you don’t watch football

I think Rodgers had like a 67 QBR

we expected their situation to be bad, but that's like baffling.

 

[Black Rainbow]

He did great last week without a supporting cast, oh ya you don’t watch football

I don't watch the Packers. I know a lot of you guys do. ?

 

[KittiesKorner]

creepy and toxic way to spend a Friday evening. I'm lighting up and having my bros set up the digital projector in the new yard tomorrow

 

[Raskolnikov]

I caution on the cover, because the bears offense is also having issues, some talent issues in certain positions, and transitioning.

Then you have a “volatile “ numbers player in Rodgers. Who can put up the ten in a couple minutes at any time.

I look at both -10 and +10 as high risk with this.

 

[Raskolnikov]

I think Rodgers had like a 67 QBR

we expected their situation to be bad, but that's like baffling.

Lazard/Watkins/Cobb are not that good.

Watkins was good until he put on adult weight.
Cobb used to be good but has lost two steps, not just one.
Lazard is in his prime but average.

Doubs and Watson have high talent and don’t know shit.

The Packers treat TE with even more disdain than the Bears.

No o-tackles.

But Rodgers and a deep receiver room with 2 running backs still scary.

I would say “under” is the pick.

 

[KittiesKorner]

Lazard/Watkins/Cobb are not that good.

Watkins was good until he put on adult weight.
Cobb used to be good but has lost two steps, not just one.
Lazard is in his prime but average.

Doubs and Watson have high talent and don’t know shit.

The Packers treat TE with even more disdain than the Bears.

No o-tackles.

But Rodgers and a deep receiver room with 2 running backs still scary.

I would say “under” is the pick.

Now do our receivers

 

[Bearly]

I think Rodgers had like a 67 QBR

we expected their situation to be bad, but that's like baffling.

Not trying to be a dick but this is a call out to the board. When you use 'Passer Rating', please don't call it 'QBR' or even 'Quarterback Rating'. They are distinctively different ratings. QBR is an ESPN originated overall rating that includes rushing, situation etc. Passer Rating has been the accepted passing standard for decades.

 

[DrGonzo]

Fair question if week one means the Packers got worse, but no one thinks it could mean the Vikings got better? That could end up being the big story in the NFCN this year.

As for the Bears, GB can't just circle the calendar and treat them like this is the week to iron out all their problems and start rolling. I don't think they are good enough to scare good teams but they are good enough to make good teams pay if they let down.

 

[Bearly]

Fair question if week one means the Packers got worse, but no one thinks it could mean the Vikings got better? That could end up being the big story in the NFCN this year.

As for the Bears, GB can't just circle the calendar and treat them like this is the week to iron out all their problems and start rolling. I don't think they are good enough to scare good teams but they are good enough to make good teams pay if they let down.

Vikings definitely got better and Packers worse but last week was not representative of the amount of either.