Bear down, Chicago backers: Your team is not Super Bowl bound

The ageless wonder, former professional wrestler Ric Flair (woo!), is well-known for this saying: "To be the man, you gotta beat the man!" In this case, the Vikings are Flair and the Chicago Bears are Barry Windham. Despite finishing No. 28 in total defense in 2007 and No. 21 a year ago, Chicago is the trendy choice of many fans/media personalities to unseat the Vikings as division champs and win the NFC. One of the foremost authorities on the NFL, Sports Illustrated's Peter King who spent time at their training camp, is among those on board.
Flair has another saying that represents my reaction to King's prediction: "Oh my god. Oh - my - god!" The Bears are better and playoff-worthy, but not Super Bowl-worthy (I hope this doesn't mean that I've lost all my Alary's privileges).
Start with this: Devin Hester is not a No. 1 receiver. Earl Bennett, the No. 2 receiver, had as many catches last year as I did. We've seen teams win big before without having above-average receivers -- the 1999 Tennessee Titans and 2000 Baltimore Ravens come to mind -- but there typically needs to be a dominant running game in place. RB Matt Forte, for as wonderful as his rookie season was last year, averaged less than four yards per carry. Forte and TE Greg Olsen should be solid pass-catching options, but when Chicago badly needs points and is in its two-minute drill, can either be trusted more than ten yards downfield? If you think left tackle Orlando Pace is still in the upper echelon at his position, I've got a Betamax player to sell you. Baltimore wanted Pace badly in the offseason -- to play right tackle. Pace has had his issues in the preseason meaning questions remain about whether he can protect QB Jay Cutler's backside. Also, can he remain healthy? Pace missed 23 games in 2006 and 2007 and two games last year. It's hard to say anything bad about Cutler. He's a great addition who should make Forte and the average group of receivers better, but Super Bowl-contending better?
Defensively, they were last good in '06. Head coach Lovie Smith takes over the calling of the defensive signals. That's supposed to have a huge positive impact? Also, can new defensive line coach Rod Marinelli really make that much of a difference? The D-line couldn't generate a pass rush in '08. Footballoutsiders.com reports that they blitzed on almost 39 percent of their plays. Only two teams blitzed more -- Dallas and Washington, and neither runs the Tampa-2 defense. The key to the Tampa-2 is to create a good pass rush from your front four. The Bears finished No. 23 in sacks. DE Adewale Ogunleye, a free agent after the year, was not signed to an extension. There must be a reason why for that. LB Brian Urlacher did not have a sack or force a fumble in 2008. His play has gone down a level or two from '06, maybe because he hasn't been 100 percent healthy. He allegedly is the healthiest he's been in three years heading into this season. I'll believe it when I see it. DT Tommie Harris is great when healthy, but has been bothered by bad knees his entire five-year career. At this point, it has to be hard to trust him.
The defensive unit worth nitpicking the most: The secondary. CB Charles Tillman had back surgery in mid-June and is a question mark to start in Green Bay for the opener. CB Nathan Vasher was last good in 2005 when he made the Pro Bowl. It's no secret that Vasher could lose his starting job, or worse, his roster spot. Smith has been keeping hush-hush on his starting defensive backfield, but rookie sixth-round pick Al Afalava could earn one of the safety assignments. Undoubtedly, he'll experience a couple "welcome to the NFL" moments. Even if Marinelli motivates the D-line enough, I'm not convinced that can fully make up for the holes in the secondary which finished No. 30 against the pass last year. Footballoutsiders.com, with its elaborate analysis, claims the defense wasn't as bad as some of the conventional numbers indicate. While loving statistical reports, I also enjoy applying the human element to things. Watching enough of the Bears last year, they did not have a good defense.
The Bears are worth following all year, but in the ultra-competitive NFC North they are not better than the Vikings. A quick positional breakdown only gives Chicago the edge at quarterback and possibly tight end. Chicago also is more dynamic in the return game, but that's it.
Da Bears in da playoffs? That seems plausible. Da Bears in da Super Bowl? That seems asinine.