Professional Football Researchers Association Forum

In a 9 year stretch from 1984-1991, Chicago made the playoffs 8 times in 9 years.

Sandwiched in between was a year when as like years before and after they came out roaring at 4-0

But unlike other years they fell off and fell fast to 6-10 with their defense giving up 40 points 2x and 30 points 5x

It culminated in an unthinkable 2 game sweep by Tampa Bay the only time it ever happened in the Creamsicle era

So what the heck happened in 89?

Dan Hampton got injured

Yea huge dropoff on the defense. Danimal only played 4 games. Replaced by rookie Trace Armstrong. Rookie Woolford at CB. Two rookies needing the learning curve their first wear??
DC and DL coaches were the same.

Next year Danimal was back and the rookies had a year under their belt?
The pass defense gave up about 50 more catches on about the same attempts against '89 vs '88.
The D line with the 21 run TDs given up in 1989 was the big dropoff imo

The defense dropped off but I feel the team missed McMahon as well. Yes, his prime was over and teammates were tired of his injuries but he was also one of the guys and could keep things light when Ditka was being DITKA ... Tomzcak and Harbaugh never could really take over the team and stand up to Big Mike like Jimmy Mac. Of course its hard for either QB to do alot when the team doesnt have any weapons at receiver, though Harbaugh got better with playing time.

It culminated in an unthinkable 2 game sweep by Tampa Bay the only time it ever happened in the Creamsicle era.

They also got swept by Green Bay that year (one of those was the controversial "step over the line" TD pass by Majik). Before 89, that had only happened four times since 1967 (their last SB winning year): 1969, 71, 72, and 81.

Still that 1989 Bears team was 6-4 heading into week 11...and then suffered an awful wild gut punch loss to Tampa Bay 32-31. Bucs had 23-10 and 29-17 leads in the 4th...Tomczak came into the game and went an insane 6/7 153 yards and 3 touchdowns...Chicago grabbed the lead 31-29 before Donald Igwebuike kicked the winning field goal. Other than playing Green Bay close through 3 quarters a few weeks later, Chicago was not really competitive over their final 5 games

I wonder if they won that game and are 7-4, do they collapse anyway?

I wonder if they won that game and are 7-4, do they collapse anyway?

It's very possible. After Tampa, they would have to play four teams that finished with a winning record (Wash, Minn, GB, and SF. Three of those were on the road) along with the surging Lions.

7DnBrnc53 wrote: ↑Fri Oct 04, 2024 4:19 am

I wonder if they won that game and are 7-4, do they collapse anyway?

It's very possible. After Tampa, they would have to play four teams that finished with a winning record (Wash, Minn, GB, and SF. Three of those were on the road) along with the surging Lions.

They had beaten Washington the year before at RFK and going there off a win as opposed to a gutpunch loss would have made a difference

Plus the 89 Redskins felt like a fools gold 10 win team

The '89 Bears were a decent team although their record didn't show it at 6-10. Every single non divisional opponent the Bears played was .500 or better

The 1988 Redskins might have been the worst teams for the Gibbs One era.

The 1989 Redskins had 3 receivers with at least 79 catches and 1100 yards. They beat the Bears by 24 and had 300 yards more in total offense that game.
For the year, Washington was +1300 yards in total offense and +5 in turnovers. Run defense gave up 3.5 per carry. One of the best teams to not have made the playoffs in the expanded playoff era.

I was at the game when they lost to the 1-15 Cowboys. My buddies dad had season tickets but his dad didn't go to any games in 1989. We went to most of the games in 1990 but after that we didn't get to see any.