2021 Bears season

[raw]

Anyway, Bears Rams has always felt like a good matchup because the Bears can more or less shut down a Goff led offense and stay in the game. But Stafford is going to light them up, right? They have to be getting a touchdown in that one, maybe more.

 

Yeah, Stafford has put up consistent numbers against the Bears with no run game or WRs at times and certainly never had this type of defense.

[raw]

Rumors of Cowboys/Raiders, Bills/Saints, and of course.....Bears/Lions on Thanksgiving this year.

 

[David]

I do not understand lamenting the loss of Leno so you can start Jenkins right away. I'm fine with that move. But Jenkins and Fields on day one with no real running game to fall back on and extremely limited weapons is a recipe for disaster.

 

no real running game?

 

i mean, it may or may not be very good. montgomery was pretty damn good last year. but i'd say there's enough there (plus with cohen back and herbert looks like a guy you can plug in there too) to qualify as "real" whatever that really means.

 

and robinson, mooney (to say nothing of guys like miller - who has been a disappointment but seems talented enough to be *fine* as a 3rd guy on the depth chart) is as good a WR tandem as I've seen the bears have short of the marshall/alshon years. byrd should be a decent speed/taylor gabriel-ish guy.

 

kmet may or may not turn into something but i don't *hate* our TE situation.

 

i guess my qualm is with calling those skill position situations "extremely limited." maybe i'm a little biased because of how bad the bears historically have been on offense but i think they're far from devoid of guys to get the ball to. they're far from stacked like the chiefs or anything but yeah. this is an org we've watched go into seasons with scrap heap roy williams and devin hester as a #1 WR. those teams were extremely limited in weapons. this is just kinda maybe average-ish or maybe much better with a good QB.

 

edit - forgot about damien williams in that RB room. he's a solid guy to have in the rotation too.

Edited May 12, 2021 by David

[raw]

Also, appears Bears are in Vegas against the Raiders Week 5 (Sunday 10/10)

[David]

Anyway, Bears Rams has always felt like a good matchup because the Bears can more or less shut down a Goff led offense and stay in the game. But Stafford is going to light them up, right? They have to be getting a touchdown in that one, maybe more.

 

Yeah, Stafford has put up consistent numbers against the Bears with no run game or WRs at times and certainly never had this type of defense.

 

i'm pretty interested to see what stafford and mcvay look like without one arm tied behind their backs.

[WrigleyField 22]

I do not understand lamenting the loss of Leno so you can start Jenkins right away. I'm fine with that move. But Jenkins and Fields on day one with no real running game to fall back on and extremely limited weapons is a recipe for disaster.

 

no real running game?

 

i mean, it may or may not be very good. montgomery was pretty damn good last year. but i'd say there's enough there (plus with cohen back and herbert looks like a guy you can plug in there too) to qualify as "real" whatever that really means.

 

and robinson, mooney (to say nothing of guys like miller - who has been a disappointment but seems talented enough to be *fine* as a 3rd guy on the depth chart) is as good a WR tandem as I've seen the bears have short of the marshall/alshon years. then there's guys like byrd and even dumb ass wims who are cromulent relative to their spots on the depth chart.

 

kmet may or may not turn into something but i don't hate our TE situation.

 

i guess my qualm is with calling those skill position situations "extremely limited." maybe i'm a little biased because of how bad the bears historically have been on offense but i think they're far from devoid of guys to get the ball to. they're far from stacked like the chiefs or anything but yeah. this is an org we've watched go into seasons with scrap heap roy williams and devin hester as a #1 WR. those teams were extremely limited in weapons. this is just kinda maybe average-ish or maybe much better with a good QB.

And of course it's also possible that Fields, not Dalton is who will maximize those other skill players.

 

I get this ultimately ends up being a ton of counterfactual arguments here, but it's worthwhile to be agressive with Fields and Jenkins developments. I don't particularly think eithers draft slots is that reflective of their talent and the Bears were incredibly luck to get both. Use 'em, IMO. Now sure Fields has to bear out Dalton. And Jenkins. I guess Wilkerson? But presumably they show undeniable skill and compentanct over the playbook. Let's go.

[David]

I do not understand lamenting the loss of Leno so you can start Jenkins right away. I'm fine with that move. But Jenkins and Fields on day one with no real running game to fall back on and extremely limited weapons is a recipe for disaster.

 

no real running game?

 

i mean, it may or may not be very good. montgomery was pretty damn good last year. but i'd say there's enough there (plus with cohen back and herbert looks like a guy you can plug in there too) to qualify as "real" whatever that really means.

 

and robinson, mooney (to say nothing of guys like miller - who has been a disappointment but seems talented enough to be *fine* as a 3rd guy on the depth chart) is as good a WR tandem as I've seen the bears have short of the marshall/alshon years. then there's guys like byrd and even dumb ass wims who are cromulent relative to their spots on the depth chart.

 

kmet may or may not turn into something but i don't hate our TE situation.

 

i guess my qualm is with calling those skill position situations "extremely limited." maybe i'm a little biased because of how bad the bears historically have been on offense but i think they're far from devoid of guys to get the ball to. they're far from stacked like the chiefs or anything but yeah. this is an org we've watched go into seasons with scrap heap roy williams and devin hester as a #1 WR. those teams were extremely limited in weapons. this is just kinda maybe average-ish or maybe much better with a good QB.

And of course it's also possible that Fields, not Dalton is who will maximize those other skill players.

 

I get this ultimately ends up being a ton of counterfactual arguments here, but it's worthwhile to be agressive with Fields and Jenkins developments. I don't particularly think eithers draft slots is that reflective of their talent and the Bears were incredibly luck to get both. Use 'em, IMO. Now sure Fields has to bear out Dalton. And Jenkins. I guess Wilkerson? But presumably they show undeniable skill and compentanct over the playbook. Let's go.

 

i think fields is going to immediately look so head and shoulders better than the two other dolts in camp that he's going to make it very hard on them. everything he's great it is stuff that will absolutely shine extra in camp, especially against two shlubs like those. good luck getting the team bought in on andy dalton after they get eyes on fields.

[raw]

Anyway, Bears Rams has always felt like a good matchup because the Bears can more or less shut down a Goff led offense and stay in the game. But Stafford is going to light them up, right? They have to be getting a touchdown in that one, maybe more.

 

[David]

 

:dontknow: hope so

 

 

[David]

 

gonna have this one circled on my calendar if i can manage to get tickets.

[David]

[jersey cubs fan]

I completely disagree with your assessment. You can ruin rookies by throwing them into the fire. It's easy to say that if he sucks from the start he was going to suck regardless, because the baseline is still that player sucking.

 

Especially this year when there is limited offseason work available AND when they are throwing out rookies on the offensive line which is still a work in progress, you do not want to throw your rookie QB to the wolves in week 1. You have to have 100% confidence that Jenkins can handle his job before you can throw Fields into his. And you cannot have that confidence until Jenkins is on the field.

 

I do not understand lamenting the loss of Leno so you can start Jenkins right away. I'm fine with that move. But Jenkins and Fields on day one with no real running game to fall back on and extremely limited weapons is a recipe for disaster.

 

The point was more of you can't look at the schedule and say, "oh we can't start Fields because Aaron Donald is on the other team, and it's on the road and in primetime, it may be too much for the rookie". The 2nd paragraph was more of a general statement about people wanting a rookie to sit simply because he's a rookie. Fans and coaches, including our very own Nagy who keeps talking about how Mahomes sitting helped him, think this way and there's really no semblance of proof that sitting for the sake of sitting actually does anything positive or negative. Like Mitch didn't suck because he was thrown in Week 5 instead of sitting all season as originally planned.

 

I would mostly disagree that you can ruin rookies, but I do believe there have been extreme cases (David Carr the most glaring one) where rookies have been ruined by what they are surrounded by (coaches, teammates, bad OL, bad WRs). I don't think the Bears are that much of a disaster that they will ruin Fields by throwing him in week 1 vs. week 14. Obviously, you wait until he's completely ready as a QB but I think it's a dangerous proposition to wait until Jenkins is ready. There's a chance Jenkins can never handle his job. He could be just a bad player. You can't keep Fields off the field because your rookie tackle can't play. That's like sitting Cutler until Chris Williams proved he could handle his job. Obviously, it's the line as a whole, but Cutler's line was pretty bad pretty much the whole time he was here. Granted, he wasn't an inexperienced rookie but I think the point remains. Waiting on the OL to solidify is similar to waiting for a home game against an easy opponent. Those have nothing to do with the QBs ability to run the offense correctly (successfully is a different story).

What does Cutler have to do with anything? I'm talking about giving a rookie a few games.

 

And you can't say you disagree you can ruin rookies and then point out it's possible to ruin rookies.

 

You can ruin rookies. Fields wasn't starting Week 1 regardless of timeslot or opponent. That they get the RAms out of the way with that is all for the better. Let Dalton pay the Dalton tax.

[David]

You can ruin rookies. Fields wasn't starting Week 1 regardless of timeslot or opponent. That they get the RAms out of the way with that is all for the better. Let Dalton pay the Dalton tax.

 

if you're that sure of that, you can get pretty reasonable betting odds on dalton as the week one guy bc the books aren't that convinced (he's the favorite but far from a lock).

[jersey cubs fan]

You can ruin rookies. Fields wasn't starting Week 1 regardless of timeslot or opponent. That they get the RAms out of the way with that is all for the better. Let Dalton pay the Dalton tax.

 

if you're that sure of that, you can get pretty reasonable betting odds on dalton as the week one guy bc the books aren't that convinced (he's the favorite but far from a lock).

I'd rather wait until the first "Fields lights up training camp" tweets.

[UMFan83]

Anyway, Bears Rams has always felt like a good matchup because the Bears can more or less shut down a Goff led offense and stay in the game. But Stafford is going to light them up, right? They have to be getting a touchdown in that one, maybe more.

 

 

So the Bears are tied for the biggest underdogs of week 1? lol

[David]

You can ruin rookies. Fields wasn't starting Week 1 regardless of timeslot or opponent. That they get the RAms out of the way with that is all for the better. Let Dalton pay the Dalton tax.

 

if you're that sure of that, you can get pretty reasonable betting odds on dalton as the week one guy bc the books aren't that convinced (he's the favorite but far from a lock).

I'd rather wait until the first "Fields lights up training camp" tweets.

 

touche

[jersey cubs fan]

 

if you're that sure of that, you can get pretty reasonable betting odds on dalton as the week one guy bc the books aren't that convinced (he's the favorite but far from a lock).

I'd rather wait until the first "Fields lights up training camp" tweets.

 

touche

Granted, my confidence is based solely on the fact that my theory about Pace/Nagy and their future together based on McCaskey wanting continuity seems to be coming true this year.

 

I always thought they'd get a shot to draft a QB together. I think they will have a chance to develop that QB. It seems fairly obvious Dalton was brought in to start a couple games as a competent veteran until the rookie is ready. Nagy loves the Mahomes got to sit and learn storyline. All they really have to do is show progress on offense this year. So, if they lose a couple games with Dalton early as the defense takes a step back, but then go to Fields and the offense looks interesting, they are coming back in 2022.

[David]

I'd rather wait until the first "Fields lights up training camp" tweets.

 

touche

Granted, my confidence is based solely on the fact that my theory about Pace/Nagy and their future together based on McCaskey wanting continuity seems to be coming true this year.

 

I always thought they'd get a shot to draft a QB together. I think they will have a chance to develop that QB. It seems fairly obvious Dalton was brought in to start a couple games as a competent veteran until the rookie is ready. Nagy loves the Mahomes got to sit and learn storyline. All they really have to do is show progress on offense this year. So, if they lose a couple games with Dalton early as the defense takes a step back, but then go to Fields and the offense looks interesting, they are coming back in 2022.

 

i think it's the most likely scenario, but all the same, i am not THAT confident in it. i'm like 75% that dalton starts 3-4 games and then that's it.

[raw]

I completely disagree with your assessment. You can ruin rookies by throwing them into the fire. It's easy to say that if he sucks from the start he was going to suck regardless, because the baseline is still that player sucking.

 

Especially this year when there is limited offseason work available AND when they are throwing out rookies on the offensive line which is still a work in progress, you do not want to throw your rookie QB to the wolves in week 1. You have to have 100% confidence that Jenkins can handle his job before you can throw Fields into his. And you cannot have that confidence until Jenkins is on the field.

 

I do not understand lamenting the loss of Leno so you can start Jenkins right away. I'm fine with that move. But Jenkins and Fields on day one with no real running game to fall back on and extremely limited weapons is a recipe for disaster.

 

The point was more of you can't look at the schedule and say, "oh we can't start Fields because Aaron Donald is on the other team, and it's on the road and in primetime, it may be too much for the rookie". The 2nd paragraph was more of a general statement about people wanting a rookie to sit simply because he's a rookie. Fans and coaches, including our very own Nagy who keeps talking about how Mahomes sitting helped him, think this way and there's really no semblance of proof that sitting for the sake of sitting actually does anything positive or negative. Like Mitch didn't suck because he was thrown in Week 5 instead of sitting all season as originally planned.

 

I would mostly disagree that you can ruin rookies, but I do believe there have been extreme cases (David Carr the most glaring one) where rookies have been ruined by what they are surrounded by (coaches, teammates, bad OL, bad WRs). I don't think the Bears are that much of a disaster that they will ruin Fields by throwing him in week 1 vs. week 14. Obviously, you wait until he's completely ready as a QB but I think it's a dangerous proposition to wait until Jenkins is ready. There's a chance Jenkins can never handle his job. He could be just a bad player. You can't keep Fields off the field because your rookie tackle can't play. That's like sitting Cutler until Chris Williams proved he could handle his job. Obviously, it's the line as a whole, but Cutler's line was pretty bad pretty much the whole time he was here. Granted, he wasn't an inexperienced rookie but I think the point remains. Waiting on the OL to solidify is similar to waiting for a home game against an easy opponent. Those have nothing to do with the QBs ability to run the offense correctly (successfully is a different story).

What does Cutler have to do with anything? I'm talking about giving a rookie a few games.

 

And you can't say you disagree you can ruin rookies and then point out it's possible to ruin rookies.

 

You can ruin rookies. Fields wasn't starting Week 1 regardless of timeslot or opponent. That they get the RAms out of the way with that is all for the better. Let Dalton pay the Dalton tax.

 

I mean, I clearly said what I think Cutler has to do with things. You might not think it's relevant, but oh well. And I also said I "mostly" disagree, me pointing out that it's possible is why it's mostly and not fully. Not sure why you're acting like I'm being unclear. Also not sure what a "Dalton tax" is or why that's a legit reason why Fields shouldn't start Week 1. You know he's better and he's the long-term future at the position. You haven't even suggested that he might not be physically or mentally capable of handling the job by Week 1. All you've said is the OL might not be good or Dalton has to play because you paid him. The reasons you give have nothing to do with Fields.

 

Reasons to start Fields:

1. He's ready to run the offense competently

2. He's the best QB option on the team.

 

Reasons to NOT start Fields.

1. He's not ready to run the offense compently

2. He's not the best QB option on the team.

 

I don't care about anything else.

[CubColtPacer]

The other thing that has not been mentioned is the grass is greener effect. If Fields starts and struggles in two of his first three games, but the Bears look fairly solid otherwise, there will be a lot of pressure to put Dalton in the game and not throw away a possible playoff season. It doesn't really matter if it's a Foles like situation last year where the backup clearly wasn't the answer, there just has to be a perception he might be. Then you just have a controversy every week.

 

While if you let Dalton start and fall on his face, Fields comes in without feeling like somebody is breathing down his neck every week (assuming Foles is gone, if he isn't it gets very complicated).

[raw]

I'd rather wait until the first "Fields lights up training camp" tweets.

 

touche

Granted, my confidence is based solely on the fact that my theory about Pace/Nagy and their future together based on McCaskey wanting continuity seems to be coming true this year.

 

I always thought they'd get a shot to draft a QB together. I think they will have a chance to develop that QB. It seems fairly obvious Dalton was brought in to start a couple games as a competent veteran until the rookie is ready. Nagy loves the Mahomes got to sit and learn storyline. All they really have to do is show progress on offense this year. So, if they lose a couple games with Dalton early as the defense takes a step back, but then go to Fields and the offense looks interesting, they are coming back in 2022.

 

I don't think the goal was for Dalton to start a couple games when they signed him. They didn't even know they'd have a rookie QB until 13 days ago. Dalton was the "bird in the hand". If the Bears HAD to start him a couple games or more, they signed him because they were OK with that. But I don't think that was necessarily the plan when they got him in March. If Fields is clearly ready and outplays Dalton in camp, I sure as hell hope they don't go with Dalton just because of some ideal plan or what happened 4 years ago with an actual competent QB for a perennial 10-win team.

[raw]

The other thing that has not been mentioned is the grass is greener effect. If Fields starts and struggles in two of his first three games, but the Bears look fairly solid otherwise, there will be a lot of pressure to put Dalton in the game and not throw away a possible playoff season. It doesn't really matter if it's a Foles like situation last year where the backup clearly wasn't the answer, there just has to be a perception he might be. Then you just have a controversy every week.

 

While if you let Dalton start and fall on his face, Fields comes in without feeling like somebody is breathing down his neck every week (assuming Foles is gone, if he isn't it gets very complicated).

 

Nah, if it's Fields, it's no turning back. I don't think the playoff pressure is as big as the pressure to show progress offensively. And the pressure won't come from the fans, because nobody wants to see Dalton. If Fields struggles in 2 of the first 3 starts, then he probably wasn't ready to play and they made a bad decision.

[Old Style]

Another horsefeathering Thanksgiving game in Detroit. Ugh.

[jersey cubs fan]

I don't think the goal was for Dalton to start a couple games when they signed him. They didn't even know they'd have a rookie QB until 13 days ago.

 

They were absolutely without a doubt 100% taking a QB early in this draft. They may not have felt confident that it would be somebody as good as Fields, but they were getting one. I didn't mean to say the plan all along was a couple games of Dalton. That number would vary depending on which QB they got. But I absolutely think he's going to start the season unless he looks like trash in camp.

[jersey cubs fan]

The other thing that has not been mentioned is the grass is greener effect. If Fields starts and struggles in two of his first three games, but the Bears look fairly solid otherwise,

 

I don't think that is going to be an issue. If Fields starts and struggles the Bears are going to be losing big every game.