Larry Mayer at chicagobears.com answers you questions:
“The thing that surprised me the most about Sunday’s game was that the Bears and Patriots looked like they were playing under different field conditions. The Bears looked like they were playing in the snow while the Patriots looked like they had a dry field. Can you explain that? –Jim, Seattle, Washington
“Everyone talks about “Bear weather,” and while the Bears have had a lot of success in cold and windy conditions, they really aren’t accustomed to playing in the snow. I’ve covered them since 1992 and watched them long before that, and I don’t remember a “snow game” at Soldier Field like the one Sunday since the 1979 finale against the St. Louis Cardinals. The only recent “snow game” on the road that I recall was a 2005 loss to the Steelers in Pittsburgh. On the other hand, the Patriots have played extremely well in snow games, most notably a 59-0 rout of the Tennessee Titans last season. I’m not making excuses—the Bears got dominated in all phases and likely would have lost to the Patriots wherever the game was played—but the above information may explain a little why New England seemed more at home in the conditions.”
Though I agree with this statement, Mayer didn’t answer the question. The Patriots looked like they had much better traction. What did they do differently? I guess we may never know.
On a related note Neil Hayes at the Chicago Sun-Times reports that the Bears are practicing at Northwestern to “simulate conditions”. Here’s hoping that they left some snow on the ground. There’s an 80% chance of it falling tomorrow in the area with a 60% chance of it being there at game time.