Week 13: Jimmy Garoppolo's 49ers @ John Fox's Bears Noon CBS

[r_mack]

The 1-10 49ers and (probably) Jimmy Garoppolo come into Chicago against the 3-9 Bears. Should be a classic at Soldier Field.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Can they cover the spread?

[Soul]

Available on ESPN 4 with insider subscription

[r_mack]

Can they cover the spread?

Bears were favored by 5.5 but that was before the Beathard injury, wonder if that goes down with Garoppolo potentially starting?

[UK]

Go 49'ers....

[jersey cubs fan]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a shitshow.

[UK]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a horsefeathers.

 

As much blame as Fox gets (he deserves it), it extends well beyond him. Pace deserves blame as does the ownership.

[jersey cubs fan]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a horsefeathers.

 

As much blame as Fox gets (he deserves it), it extends well beyond him. Pace deserves blame as does the ownership.

This is why I didn't like all the praise Pace got for being bold and trading up to draft Trubisky. Aside from all the questions about him as a franchise QB, that was an extremely safe and conservative move for a GM to make. He's already 3 years in and we can still talk about the jury being out for at least another season, and he will almost certainly get an opportunity to fire Fox and hire another guy, and then 2-3 years to see if that next hire can get the most out of Mitch. Waiting 3 drafts to make that pick, and then deliberately sitting that pick behind a worthless veteran and giving him zero skill position players and an ultra conservative coach pretty much guaranteed we'd see next to nothing this season.

[UK]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a horsefeathers.

 

As much blame as Fox gets (he deserves it), it extends well beyond him. Pace deserves blame as does the ownership.

This is why I didn't like all the praise Pace got for being bold and trading up to draft Trubisky. Aside from all the questions about him as a franchise QB, that was an extremely safe and conservative move for a GM to make. He's already 3 years in and we can still talk about the jury being out for at least another season, and he will almost certainly get an opportunity to fire Fox and hire another guy, and then 2-3 years to see if that next hire can get the most out of Mitch. Waiting 3 drafts to make that pick, and then deliberately sitting that pick behind a worthless veteran and giving him zero skill position players and an ultra conservative coach pretty much guaranteed we'd see next to nothing this season.

 

I would not complain if they unloaded Pace.

[UMFan83]

Can't wait for Bears Twitter to flip out when Jimmy has a better game than Mitch and beats the Bears after the Niners acquired him for less than the Bears did for Mitch.

[davell]

Can't wait for Bears Twitter to flip out when Jimmy has a better game than Mitch and beats the Bears after the Niners acquired him for less than the Bears did for Mitch.

 

If that happens, its kind of justified, isn't it?

 

If Garoppolo IS a good QB and could have been had for a 2nd, versus a 1st and a 3rd for Trubisky, it seems reasonable to me, to question things. He's older, likelier to be ready quicker, and the team could conceivably had a quicker path to success under him.

 

I'm not saying he WILL be good or that Mitch won't be either. But, IF Garappolo does wind up good, its not a great look for Pace and this super slow rebuild. Especially when its not certain Mitch does wind up good, even if I think he'll get there in a year or two.

[UMFan83]

Can't wait for Bears Twitter to flip out when Jimmy has a better game than Mitch and beats the Bears after the Niners acquired him for less than the Bears did for Mitch.

 

If that happens, its kind of justified, isn't it?

 

If Garoppolo IS a good QB and could have been had for a 2nd, versus a 1st and a 3rd for Trubisky, it seems reasonable to me, to question things. He's older, likelier to be ready quicker, and the team could conceivably had a quicker path to success under him.

 

I'm not saying he WILL be good or that Mitch won't be either. But, IF Garappolo does wind up good, its not a great look for Pace and this super slow rebuild. Especially when its not certain Mitch does wind up good, even if I think he'll get there in a year or two.

 

Oh yeah totally. I guess you could assume that if the Pats held onto him into the current season, that they would either have to trade Jimmy for a lesser amount (because of his FA status) or tag him to be the backup QB. In that case the value would certainly drop unless a number of teams were willing to bid for him mid-season.

 

I think it was Bill Simmons that speculated that Belichick rationalized that Brady could play at a high level for 2-4 more years and that at 65 currently, he would just retire at the top whenever Brady is done, so he doesn't care about the long term QB situation.

[jersey cubs fan]

[David]

I'm so horsefeathering jealous of this coaching staff

 

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[jersey cubs fan]

[UMFan83]

[r_mack]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[UMFan83]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

 

Too easy

[raw]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a horsefeathers.

 

While I agree with all of this, "2 losses by 7+" is pretty disingenious. One by 7, one by 8, both 1 score losses where they had a chance to win with the ball late.

[jersey cubs fan]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a horsefeathers.

 

While I agree with all of this, "2 losses by 7+" is pretty disingenious. One by 7, one by 8, both 1 score losses where they had a chance to win with the ball late.

"Chance to win" should go on fox's tombstone. It's a meaningless construct when you don't actually ever win.

[raw]

3 years in and this team looks like it is as bad as the worst Emery teams. For all the talk of staying in games and having a chance to win, they've been blown out 3 times and lost by 7+ in 2 other games. I didn't expect them to be good this year, but this team is disturbingly weak.

 

What a horsefeathers.

 

While I agree with all of this, "2 losses by 7+" is pretty disingenious. One by 7, one by 8, both 1 score losses where they had a chance to win with the ball late.

"Chance to win" should go on fox's tombstone. It's a meaningless construct when you don't actually ever win.

 

Agreed. And that wasn't what I was trying to say. But I do feel like a better coach would win over half of the close games. Close games are typically more luck based than anything, but IMO many of these games are only close because the Bears miss opportunities early in games, get conservative in the middle of games, and don't have the talent or scheme to do what it takes to get a GW score or make a game saving stop.

[jersey cubs fan]

 

While I agree with all of this, "2 losses by 7+" is pretty disingenious. One by 7, one by 8, both 1 score losses where they had a chance to win with the ball late.

"Chance to win" should go on fox's tombstone. It's a meaningless construct when you don't actually ever win.

 

Agreed. And that wasn't what I was trying to say. But I do feel like a better coach would win over half of the close games. Close games are typically more luck based than anything, but IMO many of these games are only close because the Bears miss opportunities early in games, get conservative in the middle of games, and don't have the talent or scheme to do what it takes to get a GW score or make a game saving stop.

well thats 5 losses by 7 or more.

In the other 6 they've won half, 2 in overtime. I'd say they've won as many as they should have. The coaching is weak in game strategy and tactics, but they aren't leaving a ton of wins on the field.

[David]

[tweet]https://twitter.com/BearsLink82/status/935510048234668032[/tweet]

[jersey cubs fan]

it's hard to get worked up over players doing stuff like this when the organization has shown so little interest in winning games this year anyway.

 

 

 

also, philly strip club bouncer calling into the score is less reliable than bernstein and all his guys at halas hall

[David]

[tweet]

[/tweet]