Bears Week 5 @ Vikings, Noon FOX

[UMFan83]

This will be the first of 2 games in 5 days as the Bears will quickly return home to prepare for the Commanders next Thursday (and then get a nice break before MNF in New England in week 7 to conclude Chicago's primetime appearances).

 

I'm seeing Vikings -6.5 so far which seems fair because despite being 3-1 the Vikings have looked a bit rough at times

[minnesotacubsfan]

in Minneapolis? do they mean -16.5 for the Vikings?

[UK]

That's easy money. They're saying that the bears are only -3.5 worse than the Vikings on a neutral site or basically a pick'em at home.

[raw]

This is the fun part of the season where just 2 days ago the Bears were a very winnable game away from a 3-1 start and are now potentially 10 days from being 2-4 and some big time frustrations setting in around Chicago.

 

The Vikings should beat the Bears pretty solidly. There's a lot of matchups in their favor in this one. They aren't running the ball that well, so the Bears run D may actually be decent. But they also aren't running as much as years past either. The matchups that scare me are in the passing game. Sounds like Jaylon Johnson may give it a go, but Jefferson isn't a great matchup for him. Thielen and Osborn vs. Gordon and Vildor scare me a lot. Vildor couldn't keep up with Smith-Marsette last year and Gordon hasn't kept up with anyone yet.

 

On defense, the Vikings have good defensive ends and strong coverage LBs, so running the ball will be paramount again. Fields did have a solid game against them last year, with a career high 285 passing yards, but fumbled all over the place and the Bears only put up 3 points until the final play of the game.

 

The biggest thing in the Bears favor here is that the Vikings are coming off a London game and maybe the travel and time difference plays a factor. Also the Vikings like to let teams hang around, and Cousins likes to throw to the opposite team a bunch. I'd probably still pick the over if I'm a gambler, but this has the makings of a late score either way messing with that line.

[Old Style]

That's easy money. They're saying that the bears are only -3.5 worse than the Vikings on a neutral site or basically a pick'em at home.

When the public thinks that they're usually wrong.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Look at Old Style calling the upset!

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The bears have just enough stupid dumb stuff like defense and running game to keep any game close and winnable. I hate it

[WrigleyField 22]

 

:|

[UMFan83]

The bears have just enough stupid dumb stuff like defense and running game to keep any game close and winnable. I hate it

 

I have no idea if this theory is actually sound but given the Bears ridiculously high reliance on the run, I imagine that leads to less possesions/overall plays. If that theory is correct then I'll make another assumption that less possessions means less opportunity to separate from your opponent, thus a spread that is lower than you might expect.

[WrigleyField 22]

The bears have just enough stupid dumb stuff like defense and running game to keep any game close and winnable. I hate it

 

I have no idea if this theory is actually sound but given the Bears ridiculously high reliance on the run, I imagine that leads to less possesions/overall plays. If that theory is correct then I'll make another assumption that less possessions means less opportunity to separate from your opponent, thus a spread that is lower than you might expect.

So they're the 13 seed mid major trying to grind games to a halt and play for variance.

[WrigleyField 22]

And I feel like I've made this point, but if you told me 5 weeks ago "Bears will lead the NFL in run rate" I'd have said, "no horsefeathers", but I might have thought it'd look better than it has.

 

I think Dilfer talking about getting throws in on more nuetral to run favored scenarios is key.

 

Or just go with a random play generator. You'll be unpredictable at least.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

And I feel like I've made this point, but if you told me 5 weeks ago "Bears will lead the NFL in run rate" I'd have said, "no horsefeathers", but I might have thought it'd look better than it has.

 

I think Dilfer talking about getting throws in on more nuetral to run favored scenarios is key.

 

Or just go with a random play generator. You'll be unpredictable at least.

Yea agree, would love to see how many times we’ve thrown on first down.

[UMFan83]

And I feel like I've made this point, but if you told me 5 weeks ago "Bears will lead the NFL in run rate" I'd have said, "no horsefeathers", but I might have thought it'd look better than it has.

 

I think Dilfer talking about getting throws in on more nuetral to run favored scenarios is key.

 

Or just go with a random play generator. You'll be unpredictable at least.

Yea agree, would love to see how many times we’ve thrown on first down.

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-first-down-pct

 

The Bears are 32nd in the NFL with a 28.81% pass percentage on 1st down. To compare, the Jets are 1st in the NFL at 71.95%. Only one other team besides the Bears is under 44%, the Giants at 35%.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

And I feel like I've made this point, but if you told me 5 weeks ago "Bears will lead the NFL in run rate" I'd have said, "no horsefeathers", but I might have thought it'd look better than it has.

 

I think Dilfer talking about getting throws in on more nuetral to run favored scenarios is key.

 

Or just go with a random play generator. You'll be unpredictable at least.

Yea agree, would love to see how many times we’ve thrown on first down.

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/passing-first-down-pct

 

The Bears are 32nd in the NFL with a 28.81% pass percentage on 1st down. To compare, the Jets are 1st in the NFL at 71.95%. Only one other team besides the Bears is under 44%, the Giants at 35%.

Thanks for digging up the numbers!

 

Those percentages are abysmal. As the play action completion to Mooney showed last Sunday, more first down passing might really help Justin in “don’t think, just throw” department and with probably fewer blitzes and pressure to make a big gain.

[WrigleyField 22]

Bears have so few passes I'm not even sure it's statistically relevant.

 

 

Depending on what the % of targets as pressure is, you can file this under "Fields has no time" or "Fields takes too many sacks" or "Fields bails on the pocket too quick"

[Brian707]

Vikings 24- Bears 17

 

Spread seems about right. Divisional games in the NFL usually are close(excluding Bears-Packers) home field is only worth about 1.5 points nowadays.

[Bertz]

I guess I could pull up the GB game thread but I'll put this here

 

[WrigleyField 22]

I guess I could pull up the GB game thread but I'll put this here

 

So those rates are at a yard or less... I'd suspect the difference between a yard and a foot or less is a pretty big difference in the "just reach over" decision.

 

At a yard, yea get the extra blocker. Down to a foot, or inches. Just get under center and reach.

[Old Style]

Look at Old Style calling the upset!

Ha! Certainly not calling it but I'm starting to get a weird feeling about this game. This NFL season has been extremely screwy already and this seems like a game the Bears have no business winning right now so I almost expect it to happen. Watch Fields come out and throw for 300+ yards and 3 TD's while Cousins has multiple picks and the Vikings fall flat on their face at home.

[Have a seat, Neifi]

Bears have so few passes I'm not even sure it's statistically relevant.

 

 

Depending on what the % of targets as pressure is, you can file this under "Fields has no time" or "Fields takes too many sacks" or "Fields bails on the pocket too quick"

Yea I think I saw a few tweets each quoting a different PFF statistic in this general arena. From what I remember, the situation boils down to (1) our receivers don't get open, (2) our offensive line is horrible in pass protection, but (3) Fields is holding onto the ball *way* too long--as in, like, a significant amount longer than the quarterback who holds onto the ball second-most.

 

In other words, Fields defenders are not wrong that Fields is stuck in a terrible situation, but Fields' weaknesses (which are consistent with what NFL scouts noted pre-draft) are exacerbating it.

[Tryptamine]

If Johnson isn't back then I fully expect Jefferson to put up monster numbers. 150 yards would actually be a success in my eyes. Gordon and Vildor are going to get absolutely torched all day long. Combine that with Dalvin Cook and the Bears inability to stop the run and I don't see anyway this defense keeps the Vikings under 30. I think there's very little chance this is a competitive game.

[raw]

I guess I could pull up the GB game thread but I'll put this here

 

So those rates are at a yard or less... I'd suspect the difference between a yard and a foot or less is a pretty big difference in the "just reach over" decision.

 

At a yard, yea get the extra blocker. Down to a foot, or inches. Just get under center and reach.

 

So, I actually get why teams do the shotgun run when they only need a yard. Out of the gun, you aren't really picking a hole before the play and running thru it. You are giving your RB a chance to pick his hole based on where the push is. Whereas under center, you are going thru a predetermined hole and hoping your OL blocks it up well enough.

 

My biggest issue with what the Bears did is more with the play call itself. They basically did a QB sneak from 4 yards away. Fields got to read the blocking a bit, but he's also not a RB. Snap it to Montgomery and let him go straight ahead or hand it off and like DM find the soft spot (he's actually not very good at this though).

[raw]

Look at Old Style calling the upset!

Ha! Certainly not calling it but I'm starting to get a weird feeling about this game. This NFL season has been extremely screwy already and this seems like a game the Bears have no business winning right now so I almost expect it to happen. Watch Fields come out and throw for 300+ yards and 3 TD's while Cousins has multiple picks and the Vikings fall flat on their face at home.

 

I feel like this is where things start to settle down a bit in the NFL. First 4 games, you have eternal optimism some teams are dealing with injuries/suspensions from the previous season. We've seen the Bears be 3-1 at this point only to finish 8-8. Cream starts rising to the top at this point in the season. Upsets will start to be more 1-offs.

[gflore34]

To me the score, or what the Vikings do on offense, etc. is immaterial, I'm interested in what offensive adjustments are going to made or, at least, attempted. Do not know if Harry is a go, if he is, maybe, the Bears will try to set up Jones on some pick plays with Harry as the picker. They're probably going to be facing quite a bit of 8-man boxes so, if they get the ball quick to Jones or Mooney, on a pick or a screen, that might have big play potential. At this point they've got to assume Mustipher cannot pass block and his assignment is going to be free within 2 or so seconds therefore, no drop backs or any other long developing pass plays.

[WrigleyField 22]

I guess I could pull up the GB game thread but I'll put this here

 

So those rates are at a yard or less... I'd suspect the difference between a yard and a foot or less is a pretty big difference in the "just reach over" decision.

 

At a yard, yea get the extra blocker. Down to a foot, or inches. Just get under center and reach.

 

So, I actually get why teams do the shotgun run when they only need a yard. Out of the gun, you aren't really picking a hole before the play and running thru it. You are giving your RB a chance to pick his hole based on where the push is. Whereas under center, you are going thru a predetermined hole and hoping your OL blocks it up well enough.

 

My biggest issue with what the Bears did is more with the play call itself. They basically did a QB sneak from 4 yards away. Fields got to read the blocking a bit, but he's also not a RB. Snap it to Montgomery and let him go straight ahead or hand it off and like DM find the soft spot (he's actually not very good at this though).

So I think the benefit of the QB taking a snap is you can clear some defenders by making them respect a wide out (I don't remember if Bears did in that play)

 

Obviously like you said, a RB is gonna read holes better.

 

But you definitely don't want a handoff. That removes a potential blocker. So direct shotgun snap is the best/logical play, but maybe you make the case for a Wildcat scenario where you remove the QB from the play completely. If a D REALLY sleeps on it you might have a RB who could still make a dump sideline pass if they leave a WR completely uncovered.