Here we go again, getting ready for 2010!
The question: Who's afraid of the big, brown bear called the Chicago Bears?
Just in case you didn't know, a shift of two in the win-loss category put the Chicago Bears ahead of the Oakland Raiders in 2009.
Do you think that puts fear in the Raiders?
What it puts in the Raiders is a fierce determination to kick butt and take names in Aug. 2010.
Now, what do I mean when I say there is a shift by two units? Well, the win-loss record for the Oakland Raiders was 5-11, and the win-loss record for the Bears was 7-9. If you add two to the five wins for the Raiders, and then subtract two from the losses of the Raiders, you conclude with the 7-9 win-loss record for the Bears.
What does that mean to this researcher? It means, as I said before, that the Oakland Raiders must hit the ground, running and winning during the preseason. This, of course, would be uplifting to the morale of the Raider Nation.
It looks like the first two preseason games have the Raiders matched with some tough teams.
Are we going to be afraid?
We are going to be fiercely competitive and determined to shift the outcome in a postive direction for the Oakland Raiders.
Why I am writing about this so early?
The answer is: Do not take anything for granted.
Don't waste any time on the field during camp.
Prepare, prepare, prepare.
Study tapes, study tapes, study tapes.
Curiosity made this researcher look back to 2006.
Oh my goodness!
Here is the data:
Year Raiders Bears
2006 2-14 13-3
2007 4-12 7-9
Well, it can be said, I believe, that we were in better shape in 2009, and in 2010 than we were in 2007 and 2006.
Here is something else to peruse:
1. Oakland let its opponents get more points in 2009, but the distance between 2008 and 2009 was 57 points.
2. Chicago let its opponents get more points in 2009, but the distance between 2008 and 2009 was 73 points. In other words, in 2008, the Bears made more points than their opponents. But, in 2009, they were in the negative with -48, and the distance between a positive 25 and a negative 48 is 73.
3. The decline for the Oakland Raiders was less than the decline for the Bears, from 2008 to 2009 when you take this simplified look at the data.
4. So, one simplified conclusion is that the Oakland Raiders performance did not diminish as much as the performance of the Chicago Bears. (Does that make the Raider Nation feel better?)
So, who's afraid of the big, brown bear, called the Chicago Bears? It ain't us.