Under Smith, goal has gone from surpassing Packers to winning Super Bowl

At Bears coach Lovie Smith's introductory news conference, he daringly said his first goal was to beat the Packers.

That was 2004. This is 2011.

Things change, and it's time to let go what Smith said that day.

Smith has.

When media in Wisconsin asked about it this week, Smith was dismissive.

"OK, when I said that, the Packers were the defending champs," he said. "There's a rivalry you have, I don't care where you are, there's a team that is your No. 1 rival, you need to beat them. For us to achieve our goal of winning the Super Bowl I felt like we needed to beat them. You mentioned the division, it hasn't changed. We still want to beat our rivals. The Packers always will be contending for the division championship, but we want to beat Detroit, Minnesota just as much."

Good perspective. Unless the NFL starts counting a victory over Green Bay twice in the standings, beating the Packers is no more valuable to the Bears than whipping the Vikings or Lions.

The value of a victory Sunday to the Bears would not be in keeping the Packers out of the playoffs, or in showing them who's boss.

For the Bears, it can't be about the Packers. It has to be about the Bears entering the playoffs on a high and convincing themselves they are an elite team on the path to achieve their most important goal postseason success.

Given where the Bears are as an organization, Smith's first goal now should be winning the Super Bowl, not beating the Packers.

Comprehend the trend: Smith's record
Smith's agent, Frank Bauer, might want to take note of these numbers before he has lunch with Bears President Ted Phillips in the offseason.

In Smith's seven years with the Bears, he has won 63 regular-season games. Only seven clubs have won more over that period of time, and only two NFC teams. All but three have done it with more than one coach. The only coaches who have won more than Smith since 2004 are the Patriots' Bill Belichick (86), the Eagles' Andy Reid (67) and the Giants' Tom Coughlin (64).

Smith's winning percentage of .568 ranks 10th among NFL coaches with their current teams (excluding coaches who have yet to complete two full seasons).

How have the Bears fared in the NFC North under Smith? They have a 26-15 record. Since 2004 they have won the division more than any other team three times (compared to twice for the Packers, twice for the Vikings and no times for the Lions).

The Bears' .634 division winning percentage is tied for the fifth best in the NFL since 2004, and tied for best in the NFC. The only teams better are the Colts and Patriots (both .780), the Chargers (.732) and Steelers (.707).

Front office chess: Contract extensions
The Bears usually try to do a little business with free agents before the end of the budget year, and this year was no exception.

They reached out to a number of players with expiring contracts who looked like good candidates for extensions. "Signability" of a player always is a key factor in getting a deal done at this time.

The two players who were receptive to the Bears, long snapper Patrick Mannelly and defensive tackle Matt Toeaina, were given new deals.

The extension of Toeaina was most significant. He has been the team's best interior player at times and was to become a restricted free agent in the offseason.

Signing Toeaina is important because the Bears' tackle future is very uncertain. Toeaina and Henry Melton are the only tackles the team knows will be back next season. Anthony Adams can become an unrestricted free agent and Tommie Harris very well could be cut.

For now, the Bears are done with contract extensions. It's likely they will start a new round of talks with their own free agents before they can leave.

Numbers games: Packers-Bears rivalry
The Bears and Packers have met more than any teams in NFL history, and they usually give fans their money's worth.

In 180 games since 1921, the Bears have averaged 16.98 points per game against the Packers' 16.32 for an overall difference of 119. . The Bears hold the won-lost edge 92-82-6.

Since the NFL-AFL merger in 1970, the Bears and Packers have played to a dead heat they are 41-41 against one another.

An interesting note is that despite how competitive the series has been, the Bears have had a winning record against the Packers in seven of 10 decades, including in the last one, 11-9. The Packers have not led the series since 1932.

chicagotribune.com wrote:

It's important for Bears to play to win

Letting Packers beat them like a drum will do nothing for playoff confidence other than sow doubt

My unofficial Bears most valuable player ballot goes Jay Cutler, Julius Peppers, Brian Urlacher and Devin Hester.

But Vikings rookie quarterback Joe Webb might round out the top five.

How many guys on the Bears can say they played well enough to eliminate, effectively, one step to the Super Bowl?

That's what Webb did for the Bears on Tuesday night when he looked more like Michael Vick than Vick himself in beating the Eagles to clinch the NFC's No. 2 playoff seed for the Vikings' NFC North rival. Bears players should pool pocket change to come up with a playoff share for Webb.

"It's a free win," Urlacher said of the bye.

Suddenly a Week 17 matchup against the Packers is like a third exhibition game for the Bears. What a tangled web indeed.

The only thing that surprised me about the debate in the days that followed was that I have more in common with Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell than I realized. When it comes to the NFL, we indeed have become a nation of wusses.

The Bears will be playing for nothing but pride and health unless the Falcons and Saints both lose their noon games to put the No. 1 NFC seed there for the taking. But the Falcons play at home against the 2-13 Panthers and, sorry, Jimmy Clausen is no Joe Webb. Those are just the facts.

The incessant talk about whether the Bears should rest key players if playoff seeding isn't at stake makes me wonder if 54 is Urlacher's number or his age. Or does Cutler's long program come at halftime or between quarters? Is the French judge sitting in the press box?

Play football. Advocating that the Bears approach the Packers game with the idea of knocking a good team out of the playoffs doesn't ignore legitimate injury concerns. In the house of Lombardi, winning is neither everything nor the only thing for Bears. Surviving intact is. I get it.

But for every example of Patriots receiver Wes Welker tearing knee ligaments last year in a "meaningless'' Week 17 game, there is one of Jets safety Jim Leonhard breaking his right tibia at practice in early December. The Bears didn't stop practicing after that, did they?

The argument might be different if the game lacked meaning. It doesn't. If the Packers win, they join an up-for-grabs, six-team NFC playoff field. If you're obsessed with risk management, consider how much safer a place the playoffs will be for the Bears without the Packers involved.

But their elimination is less likely if all they have to worry about Sunday is Todd Collins handing off to Garrett Wolfe on an off-tackle run behind Kevin Shaffer. Do the Bears really want to face the possibility of looking back later this month after Aaron Rodgers scorches them and regretting resting starters Sunday?

If Bears players have legitimate injuries that need time to heal, by all means rest them. Let common sense prevail for unknown aches or pains and err on the side of caution. But sitting out a player who's not on the injury report stretches the bounds of cautiousness in a game inherently dangerous.

Forget factoring in momentum. These Bears have proved that's a myth from game to game or, in the case of Cutler, sometimes even from quarter to quarter. But a Bears offensive line still improving benefits from every snap together. A defense needs to regain its swagger. The confidence and timing Cutler and his receivers can continue to build matters too.

Going three weeks between meaningful competition at game speed isn't the best way to prepare for the playoffs.

At the very least, the Bears should treat Sunday like the third exhibition game and play the starters for two quarters. Let Matt Forte get 22 yards rushing and Johnny Knox 40 receiving so both crack the 1,000-yard plateau. Re-evaluate the situation at halftime. If the Bears lead, let them finish the job. If they trail by a touchdown or more, OK, empty the bench.

Whatever coach Lovie Smith decides, I acknowledge 11 victories have earned him the benefit of the doubt. Back in August I thought Smith would be deciding what font to use on his resume this week instead of whether to play his starters after clinching a playoff berth. Tempting as it is, I'm not going to throw back in Smith's face his words from Day 1 in 2004 about beating the Packers being the Bears' biggest goal.

That was pandering then and is apropos to nothing now, as Smith acknowledges. The Bears going all out Sunday is less about beating the Packers and more about improving their postseason chances by eliminating a potential playoff team with the NFC's hottest quarterback. The rivalry only provides a bonus.

Scale back the game plan. But let players play for the opportunity to become the first team to finish unbeaten within the NFC North since realignment. The competitor within every player wants to finish the job the right way. The Bear within them would relish ousting the Packers.

The Bears went 11-4 by playing with effort and purpose and abandon. They didn't win the division tiptoeing around cracks in the sidewalk. It seems silly to start now just because the Eagles couldn't stop Joe Webb.

ChicagoTribune.com wrote:

History Not on Side of the Giants

Despite my proclivity to rest the essentials for at least the second half of Sunday's showdown with the Packers at Lambeau, how can a Bears fan not like the words coming out of the current leadership's mouths? Jay Cutler: "We want to win the ball game. We don't want to take a step back as a team or as an offense." Pisa Tinoisamoa: "Green Bay has always been a rival and our goal is to sweep the division, so this one would be a huge one to be able to get that." And Devin Hester made it very clear in several interviews that he wants to knock the cheese from the tournament.

Vegas ain't buying it and (as predicted here) have jumped the spread on Sunday's game to ten points. The reason why is simple. In 2006, with his team knowing a first-round bye was coming the following weekend, Lovie spent a week telling reporters the Bears would be giving a complete effort against the Packers in primetime. (You may remember this as Brett Favre's last NFL game.) What happened? Brian Griese started the third quarter and it only takes a quick glance at the fourth quarter play-by-play to realize that all significant contributors on the defensive side of the ball had been lifted by then. That 2006 team found themselves playing in the Super Bowl and both Vegas and I believe that the head coach won't fix what wasn't broken.

How can the Bears be expected to match a good, desperate home team's intensity when they're playing for cosmetic reasons such as maintaining rhythm (foolish when an off-week is around the bend), sweeping the division (does anybody care about this?) and knocking the Packers out of the playoffs (and letting the dominant Giants front four in?). And does anybody believe that an excellent two quarters from the offense would mean less to their confidence as an excellent four quarters? I get the whole "play to win the game" thing but do we really want our club taking advice from Herm Edwards? Has that guy ever won anything?

My theory is Lovie will pull Cutler at halftime and give Caleb Hanie a quarters to play with this receiving corps. If the defense plays a solid first half, most of them will be off the field too. If they struggle out of the gate - which has become a recent trend - I think you'll see Urlacher & company start the third quarter. I think the game will very much mirror the contest with the Pack in 2006.

And for those of you who think playing the Packers three times in one year is a terrible thing, you couldn't be further off. Playing the Pack three times means we're hosting the NFC Championship Game. And I'll sign for that right now.

ChicagoNow.com wrote:

History Not on Side of the Giants
Playing the Pack three times means we're hosting the NFC Championship Game. And I'll sign for that right now.

ChicagoNow.com wrote:

Ohgodohgodohgod. How awesome would it be to kick the crap out of the Bears in the NFC Championship game?

I think I just peed a little...

"Since69" wrote: