Last week, I wrote a somewhat scathing review of the Bears' come-from-behind win against the Packers in the Wild Card round of the playoffs. While most people were celebrating, I was critical. All year long, the Bears have been coasting on luck. Last week, I said that I suspect that luck to run out, and that I didn't believe that the Bears were actually good enough to compete with the likes of the Rams, 49ers, or Seahawks. Well, now I get to say "I told you so."

But I'm not annoyed that the Bears finally came crashing back down to Earth. I'm annoyed that I have to say "I told you so" about something else.

2 years ago, I wrote about my frustrations with 4th down decision-making. Put simply, I think that NFL coaches are far too willing to go for it on 4th down, and that they should kick field goals more often.

I bring this up because, in my opinion, it was the Bears' decision to go for it on 4th down multiple times last night that lost them the game. 3 times in the first half, the Bears were faced with 4th and short within easy field goal range. All 3 times, they went for it. Only once did they succeed. That success did lead to a touchdown.

But if the Bears had attempted all 3 field goals instead (taking back the touchdown they scored off the one successful conversion) (and assuming Cairo Santos made the kicks), then they would have scored a total of 9 points instead of 7. Had that been the case, Cole Khmet's miracle hail mary catch in the end zone with mere seconds left on the game clock would have put the Bears up by 2 points in regulation. Instead, it only tied the game, and the Bears lost in overtime.

Photo credit: AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh.

Cole Khmet's last-minute hail mary catch should have won the game, not tied it.

The most frustrating of these failed conversions was the first one, on the Bears' opening drive. The score was still 0-0, and the Bears had the opportunity to put the first points on the board. At this point, you have no idea how the game is going to go, and whether it's going to be a shoot-out or a defensive struggle. As such, I strongly feel that teams should just take the points. Get on the board. Let your defense play with a lead -- albeit a small lead.

The Bears managed to pull off yet another spectacular come-from-behind victory against the Packers in the Wild Card round of the playoffs. But I kind of wish they hadn't. Now, I'm going to be subjected to yet another 2 1/2 quarters of awful, depressing Bears' football next week.

This was the 7th such 4th quarter comeback this season, and it really does beg the question of whether the Bears are genuinely good, or if they are just lucky. Their play for the first 2 and a half quarters of football all year long has been abysmal. Fumbled snaps, penalties, receivers running the wrong routes or dropping open passes, and a defense that lets opponents march down the field with little-to-no resistance. At least special teams has been playing competently in the later stretches of the season. Cairos Santos has been reliably making his field goals, and the coverage teams aren't giving up huge returns or scores.

But then the end of the 3rd quarter rolls around, and the team goes into Madden-esque "turbo mode", and can suddenly do no wrong.

Photo credit: NFL, Amazon Prime.

Don't get cocky.

I love football. But as much as I love football, I hate watching bad football. I'm the kind of football fan who, while everyone else is clapping and cheering, I am actually yelling "What are you doing?!" at the other team when they do something stupid. Everyone else seems to think these Bears games are "thrilling"; I just think they're ugly. If this sort of thing happens once or twice per season, that's one thing. That builds character, and shows grit and determination. When almost half of the season is games like this, that signals that there is something fundamentally wrong with the team or its coaching. Just ask Vikings fans how easily this sort of "luck" can swing the other way in just a single season.

If this Bears team were genuinely good, I feel like they should be playing more competently in the first half, and then going "clutch" in the 4th quarter to seal the win. I would not expect a good team to be going down 21-3 at halftime, game after game, and relying on a fluke missed extra point to force the opponent to have to score a touchdown or bust in the closing minute to retake the lead.

If both defenses were playing great, and the halftime score were more like 10-3 or 13-6, that would be one thing. But the Bears' defense doesn't look great. They look like the proverbial stick of butter being bisected by a hot knife. The whole season, the defense's play has basically boiled down to "turnover or bust". They lead the league in takeaways, but if they don't get those takeaways, they typically give up a score.

The NFL regular season has ended. Teams are starting their annual fire sales on coaches and coordinators. Some of the early casualties include Patriots' head coach Bill Belichick, Chargers' head coach Brandon Staley, Washington Commanders' head coach Ron Rivera, Chicago Bears' offensive coordinator Luke Getsy, and others. That's on top of mid-season firings of Raiders' head coach Josh McDaniels and Carolina Panthers' head coach Frank Reich. During the second half of the season, speculation about which coaches would get fired was accompanied by fans arguing over whether these bad teams were "tanking" the season (or should tank the season) to improve their draft picks. The Bears were one of the most talked-about teams in this regard.

I don't pretend to know what goes on behind closed doors in NFL front offices, and no NFL front office has ever (to my knowledge) actually come out and said "we're deliberately tanking this season", so whether or not a team might be tanking is pure speculation. But if you ask me, no professional sports team should ever deliberately tank a season! And this goes double for any team that is operating with a 1st or 2nd year coaching staff or general manager, as is the case for the 2022 and 2023 Chicago Bears.

Many fans speculated (and even wanted) that the Bears would tank in 2022. And after a 1-5 start to the 2023 season, some fans even began to think the Bears were tanking this season too. Reddit was awash with posts insisting that the Bears' should tank in order to get the top 2 picks in the 2024 NFL draft (the Bears own the Panther's first round pick, in addition to their own pick). This would allow the Bears to cut Justin Fields and draft Caleb Williams, as well as get some other top-tier elite talent.

Photo credit: John McGillen, Photography LLC.

Many fans expect the Bears to cut or trade Justin Fields in order to draft Caleb Williams.

Personally, I am willing to go on the record as saying that I do not agree with this popular consensus that the Bears should draft Caleb Williams. I am still on the fence about Justin Fields' potential, and would like to see him stay with the team. I would prefer that the Bears trade down to get more draft capital, and focus on taking an elite receiver (Marvin Harrison Jr.), offensive lineman, pass rusher, and/or cornerback. But my feelings on the Bears' specific 2024 strategy is neither here nor there. The main point is that regardless of the Bears' plans with Justin Fields (or any teams' plans with any roster), no team should ever deliberately tank a season.

The thing about tanking is that "tanking" is practically indistinguishable from actually sucking.

Philadelphia Eagles fans are apparently upset that the officials in SuperBowl XVII "decided the game" by calling a defensive holding on James Bradberry (Eagles DB) in the final minute of the game. The Chiefs were already well inside field goal range, so there was little question that they would score to break the tie. But this penalty on a 3rd down gave the Chiefs an automatic first down, and which allowed the Chiefs to run out the clock before kicking that game-winning field goal, thus, preventing the Eagles from having an opportunity to respond with their own scoring drive.

Yeah, sure, it always sucks when a penalty makes or breaks a game, but this was a reasonable penalty to call. We can debate all day whether the tug of the jersey was enough to impede the receiver's ability to run his route and get to the ball, or if the ball was even catchable to begin with. Either way, the tug of the jersey was obvious. By letter of the rule, it is a penalty. Case closed.

This slight tug of the jersey gave the Chiefs an automatic first down, to run out the clock on SuperBowl XVII.

While Eagles fans are upset by this one call, I'm more upset with the inconsistent rulings of the NFL officials throughout the entire 2022-2023 playoffs -- specifically where pass interference and defensive holding are concerned.

Earlier in the playoffs, the refs were apparently letting defenders get away with almost anything, supposedly on the grounds of "letting the players play". The refs were letting slide defensive actions that, in the regular season, would have been called as penalties. Even the commentators were talking about how the officiating tends to be a bit more lax in the playoffs because they don't want a penalty deciding the outcome of a playoff game. Even earlier in the SuperBowl, defenders on both sides got away with more flagrant fouls than the one that eventually decided the outcome of the championship. Heck, I don't think there is a single playoff team that doesn't have a grievance against the officiating in the playoffs -- whether they won the game or not.

So here's my question. (Or questions, I guess.) Are defensive holding and pass interference supposed to be penalties or not?!

Here we go again. The NFL is modifying its overtime rules. Now, both teams will have an opportunity to possess the ball in overtime. Even if the winner of the coin toss scores a touchdown on the opening drive of overtime, they will still have to kick off to the other team, who will now have an opportunity to match with a touchdown of their own, or potentially win the game if they convert a 2-point conversion.

The rule change is in response to the Chiefs' victory over the Bills in last season's AFC Divisional Playoff. If you recall, the 4th quarter of that game was a shootout with 5 lead-changes. The Bills scored what should have been the game-winning touchdown with 13 seconds left in regulation. The Chiefs then gained 44 yards in 2 plays and kicked a game-tying 49-yard field goal to trigger overtime. The Chiefs received the opening kickoff, drove down the field, and scored a game-winning touchdown against the exhausted Bills' defense. The Bills never got to possess the ball in overtime because, according to the old rule, if the opening drive results in a touchdown, the game ends.

Photo Credit: William Purnell/Icon Sportswire

The Chiefs beat the Bills in overtime of the 2022 AFC Divisional Playoff.

Fans have complained about NFL overtime rules for a very long time. The common complaint is that the winner of the game often comes down to a coin toss. But this is only partially true. In fact, in the regular season, the winning percentage of the team receiving the overtime kickoff is only barely more than 50% (86-67-10). This percentage changes to over 90% (10-1) in the playoffs (since the current hybrid sudden death rule went into effect). The disparity probably results from playoff teams being generally better and having better offenses.

So what else can be done to change the rules? I've already expressed my distaste for proposals to implement college overtime rules. I'm not going to rehash that here, since that isn't what the NFL is doing. Other proposals include making overtime an extension of the 4th quarter, which just gives an overwhelming advantage to the team who possesses the ball at the end of the 4th quarter, and removes any pressure for that team to execute in the final minute or so. Or maybe overtime should just be decided by a field goal shootout? Just take the offenses and defenses out of the equation entirely, and let the kickers decide the winner!

Really though, the NFL's new rule still doesn't solve the underlying problem: which is the coin flip. Now, if both offenses score, the game still goes into sudden death, and the team that gets the tie-breaking 3rd possession was still determined by the coin toss. In that Chiefs vs Bills Divisional Playoff game, even if the Bills had scored a TD to match the Chiefs in overtime, the Chiefs would still get the ball next, and it would be sudden death. The Chiefs would probably still win against a tired Bills defense that was completely incapable of stopping them. The game would just go on longer, the defenses would be even more tired, and the risk of injury would be greater. So here's my proposal:

I propose the NFL get rid of coin tosses.

Get rid of the coin toss

I think the NFL should go back to having sudden death overtime, and should get rid of the coin toss entirely. Instead of having a coin toss, the visiting team should just be able to chose whether it wants to receive the opening kickoff, and the home team should be able to chose whether they want to receive the overtime kickoff. This might sound unfair, but the idea here is to remove a coin toss from the equation, and make the opening possession of overtime become a part of a team's home-field advantage.

In regular season games, teams play half their games at home -- or at least they do over a 2-year average, since the NFL added a 17th game to the schedule. This means each team will have a 50/50 change of getting the opening possession in regular season overtimes, so it's fair. In the post-season, the home team is determined by playoff seeding, which is a function of the teams' regular season records. The team with the better regular season record gets homefield in a playoff matchup. This means that getting the opening kickoff in a playoff overtime will be a privilege that the home team will have earned by having the better record (or the seeding tie-breaker).