For the second time in three weeks, it’s the Chicago Bears against the Green Bay Packers with the winner grabbing first place in the NFC North.

The Bears could clinch a playoff berth with a victory Saturday night at Soldier Field, combined with a Detroit Lions loss Sunday to the Pittsburgh Steelers. But has a series of lesser opponents — and opposing quarterbacks — steeled the Bears for the postseason?

The Tribune’s Brad Biggs begins his weekly Bears mailbag there.

Shedeur Sanders, Jordan Love, Jalen Hurts, Mason Rudolph, J.J. McCarthy, Russell Wilson, Joe Flacco, Tyler Huntley, Spencer Rattler, Jayden Daniels. Do these prepare the Bears for a playoff run? — DunningMar47239

One problem with your list is games against Love and Hurts very much prepare the Bears for the kind of tests they could face in the postseason. And at the time they played in Washington, Daniels was still very much a threat. Here’s what I would say: Hurts, Love (twice), Brock Purdy and Jared Goff is a very good list of quarterbacks the Bears will have faced through the stretch run of the season.

Those who doubt the Bears’ viability as a threat in the NFC cite the schedule and how they squeaked out close victories over some of the quarterbacks you listed. Questions about the level of competition will be answered in the final three weeks. The Bears’ strength of schedule (.400) is the third-lowest in the league — just ahead of New England (.371) and Denver (.393) — so the same questions apply to the Patriots and Broncos.

It’s the Bears’ schedule to date that probably creates a difference of opinion about the team locally and elsewhere. But as they continue to run the ball with success and collect takeaways in bunches while Caleb Williams puts together an array of dazzling plays, outside perception slowly is changing.

To borrow from Bill Parcells, you are what your record says you are. Parcells’ wisdom is irrespective of a team’s schedule.

One concern: The Bears had 250 yards of offense in the first half against Cleveland and only 14 points. It’s been a problem all season. Lots of yards that don’t produce points. — Tim S., Chicago

Not exactly a question here but I will tackle it. The Bears rank fifth in the league in total offense (which is simply yardage), averaging 369.1 yards per game. They are ninth in scoring at 26.1 points per game. I’d say those rankings are pretty close. As a side note, the Bears have averaged more yards per game only once: in 2013, when they averaged 381.8 in a 16-game season.

To your point, they’ve left some points on the field or, as the players and coaches like to say, some meat on the bone. The 26-14 win over the New Orleans Saints and the 24-20 win over the New York Giants come to mind as examples of games that probably could have had a larger margin based on how the offense moved the ball.

“We’ve had some spurts like that where it’s been challenging to move the ball and score the points,” Ben Johnson said Monday. “But it was just a matter of time for us. We moved the ball really well in the first half. We had a couple opportunities there before halftime that we’ll address when we get a chance to (Tuesday) with the group that we felt like we left something out there.”

This is something every team goes through on a weekly basis, dissecting why more possessions didn’t end with a touchdown. The Bears rank 15th in the red zone at 59.2%. It’s something to keep an eye on because if you start trading touchdowns for field goals in a close game against a good opponent, that’s a quick way to lose. But I don’t think the issue has been as pervasive as you might imagine.

Is it me or does Ozzy Trapilo look a little lost at left tackle? I totally get that Myles Garrett is the best in the business. Of course Ozzy looked silly a few times. But just wondering what the view is in the building. — Josh G.

Bears left tackle Ozzy Trapilo blocks Browns defensive end Myles Garrett in the fourth quarter Sunday, Dec. 14, 2025, at Soldier Field. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune)

I’ve seen a lot of left tackles who looked sillier over the years than Trapilo has in a four-start stretch in which the Bears faced Garrett, Micah Parsons, T.J. Watt and a defense designed by Vic Fangio. And let me be clear, “silly” is your word, not mine. No need to list the left tackles I’m thinking of either.

The coaching staff has done a ton to assist Trapilo, especially the last two weeks against Garrett and Parsons, keeping him out of positions where he could be overwhelmed. It was nearly an entire-11 project in blocking Garrett last week. You saw every tight end, running back and wide receiver join in blocking him at some point, and with Garrett lined up so wide, it made it easier for wide receivers and tight ends to provide chip help on him. You saw Garrett looking to the outside before plays started because he wasn’t certain where all of the blockers were coming from.

The Bears were predominantly right-handed with their running game and still made Garrett a marked man when they went away from him. On the first snap of the second series, tight end Cole Kmet came in motion and cut-blocked Garrett on a toss play to the other side.

So it was kind of an incomplete game for Trapilo from the sense that you didn’t see him performing a lot of one-on-one tasks that a left tackle is asked to do more regularly in a normal game. That’s fine. It was the plan, just as it was a week earlier at Lambeau Field.

Ben Johnson isn’t going to ask Trapilo to solo block Garrett on third-and-8. That’s a recipe for a negative play. But you’d like to see him be able to handle that chore on occasion against good players who don’t wear a Superman cape.

There was a handful of questions about Trapilo this week, and many folks are looking for a snap judgment: Can he be the starting left tackle in Week 1 in 2026? The Bears aren’t focused on that, and with three regular-season games remaining and a potential playoff run, you’re looking at having 250 or more snaps to add to his library and evaluate.

It’s not where the Bears need it right now, but they’re making do and that’s a credit to Trapilo, the other players on offense and the design created by the coaches.

Chicago Bears offensive line and CB Nahshon Wright see strong support in Pro Bowl fan voting

The medical/training staff again pushed players to return when a week further would have been sensible. That needs clearing up immediately, maybe change of staff as it’s not an isolated incident. — @bigdelboy46

I wish I had as much deep insight into precisely what went wrong with wide receiver Rome Odunze on Sunday when the team ruled him out after declaring inactives for the game. Here’s what I do know: It’s a delicate business when players have injuries and are working to get back on the field. I can tell you for a fact there have been Bears head coaches in the past who got upset with the training staff at various times for not pushing players hard enough to get back on the field sooner.

There’s this idea that the medical and training staffs have failed the Bears this season because of a series of soft-tissue injuries that have cost cornerbacks Jaylon Johnson and Kyler Gordon and linebacker T.J. Edwards a lot of time on the field. Odunze’s situation with a foot injury is different.

As I’ve written in this space previously, there’s no question the Bears will evaluate their entire operation at the end of the season and study each unique situation to determine if a different course of action was more appropriate. That’s an annual practice teams go through whether they were blitzed with injuries (the Bears have not been) or were very healthy.

D’Marco Jackson has been playing at such a high level, it’s hard to take him off the field. How do you think they will deploy him, T.J. Edwards, and Tremaine Edmunds when Tremaine is back on game days? — @michael16824439

Bears linebacker D’Marco Jackson makes an interception against the Browns in the third quarter Sunday, Dec. 14, 2025, at Soldier Field. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune)

Edwards and Edmunds look like the starters to me when both are fully healthy. The Bears opened the return-to-practice window for Edmunds (groin) on Monday, and if all goes well this week in practices Wednesday and Thursday, it wouldn’t surprise me if he’s restored to the 53-man roster in time to play against the Packers.

The Bears aren’t going to put one of their highly paid linebackers on the shelf to keep Jackson on the field. Let’s not forget how well Edmunds was playing before he was injured at the end of the Week 11 game in Minnesota. Fortunately he has missed only four games.

If Edmunds is eased back on some kind of snap count, there would be room for Jackson to play, and I would agree he has done more than enough to warrant being involved. Potentially you could see him in scenarios in which the team has three linebackers on the field, although the Bears have leaned heavily into their nickel and even dime packages all season.

Jackson’s contribution to the defense is a terrific story for a player who had to bide his time for an opportunity. The Bears claimed him off waivers because he was a really good special teams player in New Orleans. He has proved to be more than that, and it’s another good example of how the team’s depth has really stood out for the first time in several years.

Are you surprised the Packers are still favored on Saturday night with Micah Parsons out? The game two weeks ago went down to the final minute. — Blake, Bloomington, Ill.

The Week 14 matchup in Green Bay did go down to the wire, and the Packers, who opened as a 6½-point favorite, won by seven. This week the Packers were installed as a three-point favorite Sunday night at Westgate SuperBook in Las Vegas. The line moved pretty quickly, and as of midday Tuesday you could find Green Bay by 1½ or one point, depending on where you looked.

To get a better understanding of the situation and hopefully explain this to folks who believe oddsmakers have it out for the Bears, I turned to Joe Fortenbaugh, a betting expert at ESPN.

“Let’s look at like this: The look-ahead line for this game (posted during the middle of last week) was three,” Fortenbaugh said. “That was before there were any injuries or any data points (from Week 15). The Bears were expected to beat the Browns and the Packers were in a toss-up game at Denver. That could have gone either way, and the results were not going to shock anyone there either way.

“So it was Green Bay minus-three on the look-ahead, and when they posted it Sunday evening, that number came out right as Parsons was leaving the game injured. People were smart enough to realize there was something wrong with Parsons. It was a noncontact injury. They hung the number at three and it got hit immediately and it’s down to one. That’s only two points but it’s moving off of three, which is a big move in itself.”

Fortenbaugh explained that in the NFL, an injury to a quarterback is the only thing that would dramatically shift the point spread. And those big shifts happen only when elite quarterbacks are involved. He emphasized that having the line come off the key number of three was a big deal.

Related Articles

Today in History: Chicago Bears play first NFL championship game

Green Bay Packers’ Josh Jacobs says he hurt his knee again, but he still wants to play the Chicago Bears

5 things we learned from the Chicago Bears, including why Caleb Williams is OK with being a little ‘arrogant’

Why the Chicago Bears will make a playoff run — and why they won’t: 5 pressing questions for Week 16

Chicago Bears offensive line and CB Nahshon Wright see strong support in Pro Bowl fan voting

“If we were talking about the spread in what was expected to be a blowout college game where the number went from 16 up to 19, that’s a bunch of dead numbers,” he said. “It really doesn’t matter. Moving from four to six is relatively dead when you’re moving through five. But when you’re coming off three down to one, it’s a two-point move — but you’re coming off the key number of three, which has more value to it.

“I can’t say Parsons is worth more than like a point because non-quarterbacks are not going to be worth a whole lot. That’s still very respectful to say he’s worth at least a point off of three, and the market is telling you he’s probably worth two because it has dropped to one.”

Sportsbooks don’t set a number based on who they think will win or whom they prefer. They set lines with a goal of attracting even money on both sides. That’s the case 99.9% of the time.

“Most of these shops would be thrilled if they had $1 million on the Packers and $1 million on the Bears and they could collect their 10% and have no risk whatsoever,” Fortenbaugh said. “There are shops that will occasionally take a position on a game. There was a guy that used to run a book in Las Vegas that was great with college football. He would have a couple games every season where he would offer the best possible price on one side. He would tell you, ‘I want your Oregon money because I’ve got USC here.’ That’s generally not what is happening. They are looking for the balancing of the action.”

Bears fans aren’t alone. Broncos fans were mystified last week how their team was a home underdog against Green Bay.

“One thing to keep in mind with this, and it’s not just Bears fans, people can’t seem to figure out the love for the Packers,” Fortenbaugh said. “Analytically, they are a darling of sharp sports bettors. When you go deep into EPA and all these analytics, the Packers check so many boxes. Last year the sharp guys loved them. This year the sharp guys love them.

“That could change with the Parsons injury, but Denver fans were so disrespected last week (because Green Bay was favored). It’s not about your team, it’s about how much love there is for this Packers team among guys who really know what they’re doing.”

Why did the Bears let the clock run down to seven seconds at the end of the first half only to attempt a trick play when they could have taken one of two timeouts and gotten off another play to get into better field-goal range? — @hokatoka

Bears coach Ben Johnson greets tight end Colston Loveland before the game against the Browns on Dec. 14, 2025, at Soldier Field. (Brian Cassella/Chicago Tribune)

The problem was it was fourth-and-3 after a 7-yard pass to Luther Burden III put the Bears on the Cleveland 42-yard line with about 15 seconds remaining in the second quarter. The Browns also had two timeouts. Let’s say Ben Johnson calls a timeout immediately and Caleb Williams throws an incomplete pass. In that scenario, the Browns could complete one pass and potentially stop the clock and attempt a long field goal on the final play of the half.

I didn’t have any issue with the way Johnson managed the clock. In fact, he has been really sharp with game management all season. The Bears have gotten a real upgrade in that area.

As it was, the Bears let the clock run down to three seconds — not seven — before using their second timeout. That ensured they would run the final play of the half, and the options were a Hail Mary or a gadget play. Johnson chose the latter.

I’d also point out that the Bears were completely dominating the action, so taking any risky chances there would not have been advisable. The Browns had one first down in the first half. Why try something that might backfire and risk breathing even a little life into an opponent that was trailing 14-0?

What does the NFL rulebook say happens if a pass happens to strike something on the field of play, perhaps a pigeon, during a game? Incomplete pass, replay the down or a secret third thing? — @bschultzy

Fortunately the pesky pigeons — or whatever type of annoying birds that decided to hang out on the field during a portion of Sunday’s game — didn’t get that involved in the action. They sure weren’t bothered by the 22 players and officials on the field.

Digging through the NFL rules, it appears that if a thrown or kicked ball happened to strike a bird, the play would be ruled dead and the down would be replayed. The bird likely would be headed to injured reserve.

While the rules don’t specifically account for unwelcome flying visitors, here is Rule 7, Section 2, Article 1R:

“If a loose ball in play strikes a video board, guide wire, sky cam or any other object, the ball will be dead immediately and the down will be replayed at the previous spot. In the event the down is replayed, the game clock will be reset to the time remaining when the snap occurred, and the clock will start on the snap. All penalties will be disregarded, except for personal fouls or unsportsmanlike conduct fouls, which will be administered prior to the replaying of the down.”

I’m pretty certain we can lump a bird under the category of “other object.” For what it’s worth, the play would be reviewable.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/12/17/chicago-bears-mailbag-schedule-packers-point-spread/