PDA

View Full Version : 2008 Chicago Bears Regular Season schedule


regoob2
04-15-2008, 06:18 PM
Chicago Bears Wk Date Matchup Time
1 Sept. 7 at Indianapolis Colts (http://www.nfl.com/teams/indianapoliscolts/profile?team=IND) 8:15 p.m.
2 Sept. 14 at Carolina Panthers 1 p.m.
3 Sept. 21 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 1 p.m.
4 Sept. 28 Philadelphia Eagles 8:15 p.m.
5 Oct. 5 at Detroit Lions 1 p.m.
6 Oct. 12 at Atlanta Falcons 1 p.m.
7 Oct. 19 Minnesota Vikings 1 p.m.
8 Oct. 26 Bye
9 Nov. 2 Detroit Lions 1 p.m.
10 Nov. 9 Tennessee Titans (http://www.nfl.com/teams/tennesseetitans/profile?team=TEN) 1 p.m.
11 Nov. 16 at Green Bay Packers 1 p.m.
12 Nov. 23 at St. Louis Rams 1 p.m.
13 Nov. 30 at Minnesota Vikings* 8:15 p.m.
14 Dec. 7 Jacksonville Jaguars (http://www.nfl.com/teams/jacksonvillejaguars/profile?team=JAC) 1 p.m.
15 Dec. 11 (Thurs.) New Orleans Saints 8:15 p.m.
16 Dec. 22 (Mon.) Green Bay Packers 8:30 p.m.
17 Dec. 28 at Houston Texans (http://www.nfl.com/teams/houstontexans/profile?team=HOU) 1 p.m.

bearfan
04-15-2008, 06:36 PM
Hmm, IMO decently tough based off of last years standings. I think this will be a tough year. The 1st 4 games will really test us, Carolina was hurt by some injuries last year, so I think they will bounce back. Not feeling to good about it

regoob2
04-15-2008, 06:45 PM
The Colts are the only team it's not a coin toss for me.

BeerBaron
04-15-2008, 06:49 PM
glad to see theres a few primetime games. not many other bears games ever get shown in western PA.....im always stuck watching the steelers, lol

regoob2
04-15-2008, 06:50 PM
glad to see theres a few primetime games. not many other bears games ever get shown in western PA.....im always stuck watching the steelers, lol
Ya I lived in FL for 2 years and with them having 3 teams I could never watch a game.

Race for the Heisman
04-15-2008, 07:08 PM
I'd say 8-8, give or take two wins. Could be worse (2-3 wins if the offense is awful), could be better, although if I had to guess I would say 9-7.

regoob2
04-15-2008, 07:12 PM
I think we're 7-9 with 2 games both ways.

bearfan
04-15-2008, 07:37 PM
I think we're 7-9 with 2 games both ways.

I agree, over on the Bears MB there was someone freaking out b/c of something being 6-10. I agree that most are toss ups, I think we are pretty evenly matched w/ most teams on the sched

BeerBaron
04-15-2008, 07:52 PM
my opinion:

with a healthy D and lackluster offense: 7-9 - 8-8
not so healthy D but better than expected offense: 8-8
if we get both.....i could see 10-6
if we get neither....ugh....hopefully a QB worth drafting high next year shows himself

Smokey Joe
04-15-2008, 08:02 PM
It may be the homer inside of me talking, but I have a feeling about next year... a good one.

bearsfan_51
04-15-2008, 08:04 PM
I'm getting tickets for the Sunday night game at the Metrodome. I've never been to a primetime game before. Maybe I'll see John Madden. BOOM!

Smokey Joe
04-15-2008, 08:10 PM
my day is complete now thanks to you 51...

awfullyquiet
04-16-2008, 01:59 PM
perfect.

i mean. legitimately we can go 16-0.

will we? not likely. any given sunday is the fact that although incessantly outmatched the bears seem to lose to the lions every year.

Gay Ork Wang
04-16-2008, 04:25 PM
I think down the strech, it could be really hard depending on how ARod does

BeerBaron
04-16-2008, 04:39 PM
I think the strecht could be really hard depending on how ARod does

????? huh??

Gay Ork Wang
04-16-2008, 04:47 PM
i meant the second part of the season

10 Nov. 9 Tennessee Titans 1 p.m.
11 Nov. 16 at Green Bay Packers 1 p.m.
12 Nov. 23 at St. Louis Rams 1 p.m.
13 Nov. 30 at Minnesota Vikings* 8:15 p.m.
14 Dec. 7 Jacksonville Jaguars 1 p.m.
15 Dec. 11 (Thurs.) New Orleans Saints 8:15 p.m.
16 Dec. 22 (Mon.) Green Bay Packers 8:30 p.m.
17 Dec. 28 at Houston Texans 1 p.m.

3 Road games in a row and all those teams besides two are better than .500 with the Saints being 7-9 and the Rams a strong contender. If Aaron Rodgers plays fine, this will be really hard

BeerBaron
04-16-2008, 05:59 PM
i meant the second part of the season

10 Nov. 9 Tennessee Titans 1 p.m.
11 Nov. 16 at Green Bay Packers 1 p.m.
12 Nov. 23 at St. Louis Rams 1 p.m.
13 Nov. 30 at Minnesota Vikings* 8:15 p.m.
14 Dec. 7 Jacksonville Jaguars 1 p.m.
15 Dec. 11 (Thurs.) New Orleans Saints 8:15 p.m.
16 Dec. 22 (Mon.) Green Bay Packers 8:30 p.m.
17 Dec. 28 at Houston Texans 1 p.m.

3 Road games in a row and all those teams besides two are better than .500 with the Saints being 7-9 and the Rams a strong contender. If Aaron Rodgers plays fine, this will be really hard

eh. i wouldnt gurantee that any of those teams are going to be contenders though. The titans hopes ride on VY developing more as a passer and if he doesnt do that, theyre beatable. green bay...eh...depends on rogers. we schooled em last year when they had favre. we should come away with 1 win again between the 2 GB games. the rams...eh. if their offense is healthy they could be challenging but theyre still not a great team. vikes....eh. depends on tavaris, i doubt AP runs over us when we're all healthy and by then, he might not even be. jacksonville will be tough, you get taht one. NO....maybe. their defense still isnt all that great. vilma helps....but if we can pass at all we should be able to pass on them. and houston.....eh.

not that bad of stretch....if all of those teams are at their best possible then yes, but i doubt that...

DaBears9654
04-16-2008, 09:22 PM
This is @ least the 2nd year in a row they've scheduled the home game vs. the Vikings fairly early in the year. Come on! Make those panzy Vikings come to Chicago & play outside in December.

bearsfan_51
04-17-2008, 12:20 PM
The Vikings are not a team you want to play in the snow. Best power running game in the NFL and the ability to completely shut down the run? Yeah...

DaBears9654
04-17-2008, 08:37 PM
It may be the homer inside of me talking, but I have a feeling about next year... a good one.
I hope you're right.

awfullyquiet
04-18-2008, 03:26 PM
The Vikings are not a team you want to play in the snow. Best power running game in the NFL and the ability to completely shut down the run? Yeah...

sure.

but they still play in a dome.
so. don't worry.

SFbear
04-18-2008, 04:25 PM
Well looks like the Vikings are acquiring Jared Allen to amp up their pass rush. I'll make a bold prediction and say:

Vikings D-line in 2008 > Bears O-line in 2008

regoob2
04-18-2008, 05:26 PM
Well looks like the Vikings are acquiring Jared Allen to amp up their pass rush. I'll make a bold prediction and say:

Vikings D-line in 2008 > Bears O-line in 2008
lol, ya that's a pretty safe assumption.

DaBears9654
04-19-2008, 09:56 PM
Did the schedule makers realize they gave the Bears not 1 but 2 3-game homestands# -- albeit 1 interrupted by the bye week -- and a 3-game road trip*?

# - weeks 7, 9, & 10 vs. the Vikings, Lions, & Titans and weeks 14-16 vs. the Jaguars, Saints, & Packers
* - Weeks 11-13 @ the Packers, Rams, & Vikings

awfullyquiet
04-20-2008, 12:14 AM
Well looks like the Vikings are acquiring Jared Allen to amp up their pass rush. I'll make a bold prediction and say:

Vikings D-line in 2008 > Bears O-line in 2008

Watch. Allen turns into Javon Kearse... and then... well. there goes the lemonade.

DMBZeppelin
04-28-2008, 04:54 AM
If the O-line protects Rex, I can see this team going 11-5 or 12-4 with a healthy defense.

regoob2
04-28-2008, 07:29 AM
If the O-line protects Rex, I can see this team going 11-5 or 12-4 with a healthy defense.
I'm hoping for .500 at this point, any thing else is gravy.

BeerBaron
04-28-2008, 08:29 AM
if the o-line protects KYLE and opens up some holes for forte, i think at least .500 would be nice.

we could still win our very winnable division...ive been saying that for a while but i think its real possible.

the vikings are the team that scare me the most and in all honesty, tavaris might be worse at QB than either of the guys we have. if he doesn't drastically improve to the level of the rest of that team, he could hold them back. (you've seen awful QBs hold us back before....)

and GB, we whipped them last year when they had favre. and theres no indication to me that rodgers is anything worthwhile yet. he could but, but hes basically just starting his rookie year in terms of starts.

and the lions...theyre the lions.....

very winnable division imo. we have our own questions to answer jsut as they do, but its entirely possible we win it.

VoteLynnSwan
04-28-2008, 08:33 AM
in an open quarterback competition Rex Grossman will probably win... he's definitely the better, more talented, and more experienced quarterback...

BeerBaron
04-28-2008, 08:42 AM
in an open quarterback competition Rex Grossman will probably win... he's definitely the better, more talented, and more experienced quarterback...

does he really give us a better chance to win though? he gives away about as many games as he wins...

VoteLynnSwan
04-28-2008, 10:02 AM
does he really give us a better chance to win though? he gives away about as many games as he wins...

well with Orton starting... the Defense is going to have to win the game for us... Grossman is capable of winning games with his arm... ultimately though both options suck.

BeerBaron
04-28-2008, 10:27 AM
well with Orton starting... the Defense is going to have to win the game for us... Grossman is capable of winning games with his arm... ultimately though both options suck.

our defense CAN win us those games as long as teh offense is competent enough to stay on the field and let the defense rest.

with grossman, that defense can play a great 3 and out just to have rex turn it over right away again...thats why our defense wore down and got so hurt IMO was because they were on the field way too much

MidwayMonster31
04-28-2008, 12:03 PM
The biggest problem is that the division doesn't suck as much as it did in the 2006 season. The defense will still probably be on the field for a long time. They should be better, even though it may not lead to more wins.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 12:16 PM
I'm sick and tired of leaning on the defense to win ball games, I really am and it wears the guys down if you constantly rely on them to make up for the offensive struggles. And if we had a better running game I'd be more ok with Orton, but our offense is anemic with KO in there. At least Rex gives us some fire power on offense, yeah he makes stupid mistakes at times but he also gives our offense a dimension Orton doesn't.

And people are acting like Orton doesn't turn the ball over, he has a tendency to throw some interceptions when he's in the game.

In an open competition though I think Rex wins because he's the more talented and experienced QB, whether you like it or not I think Rexy will be our starter come Week 1. Both guys have their weaknesses but the reason I go with Rex is that he gives the offense a dimension Orton doesn't, he can actually win a game with his arm, Kyle can't...at least not right now.

Rex really looked good when he came back after being benched in my opinion. So hopefully his play carries over to this upcoming season.

bearsfan_51
04-28-2008, 12:51 PM
We scored 33 points against the Saints with Orton at quarterback and Adrian Peterson (the bad one) at runningback.

The idea that our offense is more productive with Grossman at quarterback is statistically incorrect. Grossman had a nice 4-5 game run at the beginning of the 2006 season, but other than that it's been closer to the early games last year against the Chargers and Chiefs (23 total points, 7 from Hester).

Grossman will give us more YPA (6.6), Orton is (5.2) considerably lower. That is not a stat to sneeze at. In fact, next to INT% and 3rd down conversion ratio I would consider it the most important stat for a quarterback.

Grossman has thrown 33 interceptions in 900 career attempts. That's one interception for every 27 attempts, which actually isn't terrible. Orton has thrown 15 interceptions on 448 attempts, which is an interception every 30 attempts.

So, on the odds, Grossman is statistically the better quarterback. But it's worth keeping in mind that Orton was doing that in his rookie season before Berrian developed and before Tait was moved over to the left side. Both did wonders for Grossman's ability. It's also worth noting that Orton took 32 sacks, while Grossman took a whopping 56. So Orton definately has the better ability to get rid of the ball, though not by much.

Having an open competition makes sense for both guys. This is probably the only team in the NFL where both wouldn't be immediate backups. At this point the only real reason I'm leaning Orton is because he's more of an unknown. I already know Grossman sucks. Orton at least showed something last year, and I think is more deserving of a second chance to rebound from his awful rookie season.

Gay Ork Wang
04-28-2008, 01:05 PM
but, the evil u know is always better than the evil u dont know ;) j/k

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 01:15 PM
I'm not getting the Tait thing, Grossman had him on the left side for two seasons I believe when Fred Miller came in, so wouldn't that hinder Rex more?

Idk, I wouldn't be upset if Orton got the job but I'd rather have Grossman. But hey, if Kyle wins it fair and square I'm ok with that.

It's a double edged sword. Kyle won't win you a ball game but he won't lose it either with turnovers. Rex can win you a game with his arm but his turnovers can lose you a game as well. It's six and one half dozen of the other.

bearsfan_51
04-28-2008, 01:56 PM
Tait on the left side is a good thing. Orton had Qasim Mitchell.

Tait > Qasim Mitchell.

My point was that Grossman had better talent around him than Orton did his rookie season, added on to the fact that it was his rookie season. Grossman throws too many picks and takes too many sacks. Orton seems to have fixed both of those deficiencies. Now he just needs to be more accurate. I'd rather give him a chance. Rex sucks. His career is over.

bearsfan_51
04-28-2008, 01:57 PM
And I can't think of more than one or two games where I honestly felt like Grossman was intregal to us winning. The Seahawks game in the playoffs. Maybe the Packers game back in 2006. That's about it.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 02:29 PM
Tait was terrible on the left side this year, he needs to stay on the right side.

Idk, I just don't see Orton beating out Rex in Training Camp but that's me. If he does, fantastic but I don't see it.

SFbear
04-28-2008, 03:15 PM
And I can't think of more than one or two games where I honestly felt like Grossman was intregal to us winning. The Seahawks game in the playoffs. Maybe the Packers game back in 2006. That's about it.

Actually Tait started on the left side for Orton's rookie season. I felt he got snubbed for the Pro Bowl that year. Fred Miller had a decent year too.

bearsfan_51
04-28-2008, 03:17 PM
Ah yes. I've gotten that mixed up before too.

Point remains, Grossman had a better situation than Orton to work with, and didn't really do statistically better. Orton seems to be improving, whereas Grossman has only gotten progressively worse since the start of 2006.

BeerBaron
04-28-2008, 03:26 PM
take away the bengals game from orton's rookie year and i really don't think he had a bad year for a rookie QB thrust in from game 1...10-5 as a starter that year not losing us games was adequate for me.

a healthy defense + hester + orton not losing us games could be a winning recipe.

i think our division is clearly better than it was that year but theyre not without their crippling flaws.

minnesota could be amazlingly great, but they have tavaris who can and will hold them back if he doesn't show a little something somehow.....and rodgers is basically a rookie in terms of game experience. I think the packers definitally outplayed their talent level and experience last year and with what is basically a rookie QB in there now, they could slip.

and the lions are the lions.

sweetness34
04-28-2008, 03:28 PM
Ah yes. I've gotten that mixed up before too.

Point remains, Grossman had a better situation than Orton to work with, and didn't really do statistically better. Orton seems to be improving, whereas Grossman has only gotten progressively worse since the start of 2006.

Eh...Orton looked a lot like he did his rookie season in the final 2 games of this year.

Grossman went from Pro Bowler early in 2006, to horrible during the middle and end of the season, then back to solid in the first two playoff games, to bad in the Super Bowl. Then he started off bad in 2007 and after he came back actually looked pretty good before his injury.

We'll see come TC but I'll wager money that Orton doesn't beat out Grossman.

SFbear
04-28-2008, 03:36 PM
Ah yes. I've gotten that mixed up before too.

Point remains, Grossman had a better situation than Orton to work with, and didn't really do statistically better. Orton seems to be improving, whereas Grossman has only gotten progressively worse since the start of 2006.

Grossman looked ok right before he got hurt. Who knows how he'll play without having the long bomb to Berrian in his repertoire. Orton started rusty but actually showed some accuracy after a few games which I agree shows he's capable of improving. Orton also seemed to have a good chemistry with Bradley. Ive called for both of their heads at different times so I don't have a favorite between the two. We all know Grossman is a training camp superstar so he will probably get the nod when all is said and done. How long he lasts after that is a question mark.

Wouldn't it be awesome if both the Packers and Viking had QB controversy's for the next couple years now that they have young guys sitting behind shaky starters?

DaBear89
04-28-2008, 06:02 PM
also, when do we go back to the probability that rex is injury prone? 04 ACL injury in game 3 of the season...done. 05 broken ankle in preseason, missed first 13 games of the season(ortons rookie year) 06 injury free. 07 sprained mcl...shut down for rest of year.