Justin Fields’ make or break camp begins

[Tim]

3 minutes ago, Derwood said:

I'm not saying he is, but that particular play is about 90/10 Moore/Fields

That play is about 85% blocking, 10% Moore, 5% Fields.

[UK]

Glad to see Bagent play. He's had a good camp and has the arm, accuracy, and athleticism to stay in the NFL.

I hope the Bears use a PS spot for him.

[Tim]

Heck, that's not even true. A lot of the credit there is the timing of the play call and anticipating what the defense will be doing at that point.

[Derwood]

3 minutes ago, Tim said:

That play is about 85% blocking, 10% Moore, 5% Fields.

Okay, so that doesn't make the "Fields' numbers look good because of his teammates" comment wrong

[Tim]

Just now, Derwood said:

Okay, so that doesn't make the "Fields' numbers look good because of his teammates" comment wrong

Every QB's numbers only look good if their receivers catch the ball, run after the catch, etc. The comment is true, it's just...unnecessary.

[bukie]

23 minutes ago, Tim said:

Every QB's numbers only look good if their receivers catch the ball, run after the catch, etc. The comment is true, it's just...unnecessary.

Petition to change Derwoods title to "It's just...unnecessary"

[Derwood]

14 minutes ago, bukie said:

Petition to change Derwoods title to "It's just...unnecessary"

Sums up my 20+ years on this site

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 hours ago, Derwood said:

I mean, his 62 yard TD pass to Moore was a 3 yard dump off

That he threw inaccurately, low and behind the receiver.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 hours ago, Tim said:

That play is about 85% blocking, 10% Moore, 5% Fields.

The 5% that was Fields he screwed up, too. Moore bailed him out.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

2 hours ago, Tim said:

Every QB's numbers only look good if their receivers catch the ball, run after the catch, etc. The comment is true, it's just...unnecessary.

It's preseason. Everything about it is unnecessary.

[Old Style]

Man, why can’t Fields be more like Mahomes who throws deep bombs all game long with perfect accuracy? 

[Tim]

2 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

That he threw inaccurately, low and behind the receiver.

Which was still an improvement on last year. 

More seriously, he threw it away from the defense and put it where only his receiver could get a hand on it.

[UMFan83]

1 hour ago, Old Style said:

Man, why can’t Fields be more like Mahomes who throws deep bombs all game long with perfect accuracy? 

I obviously know this is sarcasm, but it reminded me of a crazy stat I saw today.  Mahomes average air yards per TD pass last year was 4.5 yards

[minnesotacubsfan]

3/3 with 2 tds hard to complain about #1 

[bukie]

2 hours ago, Tim said:

Which was still an improvement on last year. 

More seriously, he threw it away from the defense and put it where only his receiver could get a hand on it.

If only Fields had hit Moore in stride, he may have taken it all the way for a TD.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I mean, if you wanna say "scoreboard" on the stat line, that makes more sense than pretending he didn't make a bad throw.

[Thurman Merman]

I'm kinda with Kyle here. I saw the box score and thought holy horsefeathers that's awesome. Then I heard the play was a screen and said, ok, maybe not a jf thing, but cool we have an offense that can execute a screen now. Then I saw the pass and that kinda took the wind out of my sails. How do he struggle so much with those short passes?

[Old Style]

It was one horsefeathers pass. Jesus Christ, some of you are insufferable. 

[gflore34]

5 minutes ago, Old Style said:

It was one horsefeathers pass. Jesus Christ, some of you are insufferable. 

Because you know, Mahomes or Rodgers, NEVER throw ****** short passes that are caught and made into something by the receiver.  Whereas, every short pass or, pass, for that matter, that Fields attempts is horsefeathers in the air.  Holy horsefeathers horsefeathers.

[jersey cubs fan]

I see the discourse is starting out hot 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

It fascinates me how people react to simple statements of (more or less) fact.

"It was an inaccurate throw."

"Wellllll i'm SORRY he's not PATRICK MAHOMES and he's not allowed to EVER make a bad throw"

OK? That's not ... a meaningful statement or an argument in any way. It's just weird emotional manipulation, I think?

"I don't think it was a bad throw, he put it away from the defense" makes sense as a response. "It doesn't matter, it's preseason" makes sense as a response.  "It's still important to show that the offense can put up numbers with playmakers outside of him, which is something every QB needs to have" makes sense as a response.

 

[Tryptamine]

1 hour ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

It fascinates me how people react to simple statements of (more or less) fact.

"It was an inaccurate throw."

"Wellllll i'm SORRY he's not PATRICK MAHOMES and he's not allowed to EVER make a bad throw"

OK? That's not ... a meaningful statement or an argument in any way. It's just weird emotional manipulation, I think?

"I don't think it was a bad throw, he put it away from the defense" makes sense as a response. "It doesn't matter, it's preseason" makes sense as a response.  "It's still important to show that the offense can put up numbers with playmakers outside of him, which is something every QB needs to have" makes sense as a response.

 

It fascinates me that Fields can go 3-3 for 129 yards and 2 TDs and you can still only focus on a negative, that wasn't even that negative in the first place.

[UMFan83]

14 hours ago, Thurman Merman said:

I'm kinda with Kyle here. I saw the box score and thought holy horsefeathers that's awesome. Then I heard the play was a screen and said, ok, maybe not a jf thing, but cool we have an offense that can execute a screen now. Then I saw the pass and that kinda took the wind out of my sails. How do he struggle so much with those short passes?

I think the other 2 were fine. I know he’s struggled in the past but we’re putting a lot of weight on one pass attempt. If he’s been working on mechanics all offseason to improve we’ll hopefully see it as he gets more game action. 

[gflore34]

28 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

It fascinates me that Fields can go 3-3 for 129 yards and 2 TDs and you can still only focus on a negative, that wasn't even that negative in the first place.

Really that's the MO of media, most especially the Chicago media, don't know what's it's going to take for it to change.  Fields could go 28-35, 450, 4TD's, 1INT, in leading the Bears to win and we'll still read about the pass that was intercepted along with him missing open receivers on various plays.

Edited August 13, 2023 by gflore34

[Hairyducked Idiot]

1 hour ago, gflore34 said:

Really that's the MO of media, most especially the Chicago media, don't know what's it's going to take for it to change.  Fields could go 28-35, 450, 4TD's, 1INT, in leading the Bears to win and we'll still read about the pass that was intercepted along with him missing open receivers on various plays.

Negative emotions are a more reliable driver of engagement than positive ones.  Modern media is literally designed to upset you, sports media included.

The truth is that it's pre-season and there will be absolutely no relevant, interesting or worthwhile Bears data until the season starts, outside of roster moves and depth chart announcements, but there's a lot of pixels that need to be spilled.