The autumn wind is a raider, and it’s favored by 3

[minnesotacubsfan]

Baeget, bignet, wtf his name is isn’t going to throw for more than 150 yards. He will, however, have about 3 ints and vastly more incompletions than completions.

 

we’ll still win because that’s what meatball Bear fans will somehow will into existence. That and LV sucks

 

 

[raw]

Davante Adams is unhappy about not getting the ball. So expect him to be force fed a bit. But he's also struggled vs Jaylon Johnson in the past, so this is a good chance for the Bears to either frustrate the Raiders best player some more or force a backup QB into some turnovers trying to make him happy. 

I actually don't think the gameplan will be as bad as you guys think. I expect some early down throws to try to keep the defense from pinning their ears back on potential 3rd and longs. Getsy can call the quick game he so dearly loves but his starting QB doesn't. Get the ball to DJ and Kmet early and often. Stay out of 3rd and long with Crosby on what could be backup OTs on both sides (Wright DNP today), and yes a lot of draw plays on 3rd and long. 

Script a good opening drive, play with a lead. Maybe score off a turnover on a short field. First team to 17 probably wins this game. 

[BigSlick]

I don't know, Getsy couldn't draw up a good gameplan consistently for a guy who's tremendously physically talented, I'm not sure I feel confident he can draw up a good gameplan for a guy who's significantly more limited than Fields. 

 

Also, this is very funny:

 

https://x.com/HogeAndJahns/status/1715371864225091836?s=20

Edited October 20, 2023 by BigSlick

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I'm gonna take a lot of crap for this, and so be it:

I don't think there's a problem with Getsy's game plans.  And I don't think nagy was all that bad.

I'm down to crucify our coaching staff for the lack of assignment discipline, but the game planning and playcalling?  There's just no good way to call plays for a bad qb, just like there's no good way to manage a bad bullpen.

Maybe Andy Reid has cracked the formula, but no one else has, everywhere else it's a QB league way more than it's a coaching league.  Bellichek started looking like an idiot the moment Brady left town.  The Packers mysteriously started having o-line problems the day love took over. 

If Williams comes in here and balls, whoever the coach is willing look like a genius.

 

 

 

[jersey cubs fan]

No, you don’t just come in as a QB and run the show. The QBs success or lack thereof is determined as much by circumstance as by their ability. Guys can become studs that determine the fate of the offense in their own, but very few just are that the day they show up. Coaches have to coach young QBs. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

4 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

No, you don’t just come in as a QB and run the show. The QBs success or lack thereof is determined as much by circumstance as by their ability. Guys can become studs that determine the fate of the offense in their own, but very few just are that the day they show up. Coaches have to coach young QBs. 

I just can't agree with this.  I don't think the historical record bears it out.  Martz never found another Warner.  Hoodie can't find another Brady.  Jordan Love sucks.  

I think that some QBs have it and others don't, and it's *very* hard to tell who is who before they get to the NFL because it's just so much faster and more complicated than college, but I don't think teams are out there ruining guys who would have had it in other scenarios.

[gflore34]

6 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

No, you don’t just come in as a QB and run the show. The QBs success or lack thereof is determined as much by circumstance as by their ability. Guys can become studs that determine the fate of the offense in their own, but very few just are that the day they show up. Coaches have to coach young QBs. 

I think the point is when a QB is fundamentally flawed it's hard to look good as a coach.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

and I don't think it's "environment" either. 

Newton went to a Panthers team without a 600-yard receiver and won an MVP dragging them to the SB in less than five years. Stafford went to the 0-16 Lions and had a pretty good career.

The good ones make their environment and coaches look better than they are, not the other way around.

[Brian707]

If Mahomes came to the Bears what does his career look like? How about the Bears as a franchise?

I think you need both a good QB and a competent coaching staff/ownership. 

 

Mahomes probably would just be an above average QB and the Bears a borderline playoff team in most years.

Edited October 20, 2023 by Brian707

[Hairyducked Idiot]

1 hour ago, Brian707 said:

If Mahomes came to the Bears what does his career look like? How about the Bears as a franchise?

I think you need both a good QB and a competent coaching staff/ownership. 

 

Mahomes probably would just be an above average QB and the Bears a borderline playoff team in most years.

I think there's a good chance we get as close a look at this scenario as we could ever get starting next draft 

[UMFan83]

Fields, Roschon, Nate Davis all declared out.  Wright is questionable.  Seems like the Bears always just get leveled by injuries from the same positon groups at the same time.  Earlier it was the entire secondary out.  Now our top 3 RB and 3/5 of our line are out or struggling with injuries.

[gflore34]

3 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I think there's a good chance we get as close a look at this scenario as we could ever get starting next draft 

Hopefully, the Bears ownership plays no part in the selection of the HC, possibly GM, and its left to Warren.  Don't know if I have confidence in Warren to make the correct choices either but, he's not the McCaskeys which is a good place to start.

[gflore34]

1 hour ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

and I don't think it's "environment" either. 

Newton went to a Panthers team without a 600-yard receiver and won an MVP dragging them to the SB in less than five years. Stafford went to the 0-16 Lions and had a pretty good career.

The good ones make their environment and coaches look better than they are, not the other way around.

I agree, biggest load of BS ever, you cannot coach processing slowness or lack of awareness into someone.  All these pundits, and Williams' father spewing this nonsense are jackasses.  Although in the case of Williams' father it may be more of a nod towards future negotiations.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

The FIelds thing is a whole thing, but I don't super care about our running backs being out.  Davis hurts. If Wright plays, the whole thing feels salvageable.

If we're running a line of Borom/Jenkins/Patrick/Whitehair/Collins in front of the pride of Shepherd University, then we might be getting shut out.
 

[BigSlick]

5 hours ago, Brian707 said:

If Mahomes came to the Bears what does his career look like? How about the Bears as a franchise?

I think you need both a good QB and a competent coaching staff/ownership. 

 

Mahomes probably would just be an above average QB and the Bears a borderline playoff team in most years.

When you watch Mahomes play.....I don't think there's any way the Bears could have ruined that guy. It's clearly not just scheme and coaching, the guy processes information lightning fast, has insanely good accuracy, feel in the pocket, and does stupid stuff like no-look passes that are right on the money. I think he's easily a HOF player and would have made Matt Nagy look like an offensive genius.

I think when it comes down to QBs, you can break them up into three categories: Guys who were never gonna make it, Guys who with proper coaching could be above average to very good, and Dudes who were always gonna be Dudes. I think that middle category is likely smaller than we'd like to think. Mitch Trubisky, I think, is in that first category. No amount of amazing coaching is going to change the fact Mitch doesn't have that special talent to be a starter in the NFL. Buuuuuut, it's possible Fields is in that middle category of guys where coaching matters. It's kind of one of those things you can usually only tell after the guys career is pretty much over already. 

[UMFan83]

33 minutes ago, BigSlick said:

When you watch Mahomes play.....I don't think there's any way the Bears could have ruined that guy. It's clearly not just scheme and coaching, the guy processes information lightning fast, has insanely good accuracy, feel in the pocket, and does stupid stuff like no-look passes that are right on the money. I think he's easily a HOF player and would have made Matt Nagy look like an offensive genius.

I think when it comes down to QBs, you can break them up into three categories: Guys who were never gonna make it, Guys who with proper coaching could be above average to very good, and Dudes who were always gonna be Dudes. I think that middle category is likely smaller than we'd like to think. Mitch Trubisky, I think, is in that first category. No amount of amazing coaching is going to change the fact Mitch doesn't have that special talent to be a starter in the NFL. Buuuuuut, it's possible Fields is in that middle category of guys where coaching matters. It's kind of one of those things you can usually only tell after the guys career is pretty much over already. 

This whole discussion is what’s so frustrating about developing QBs. We talk about development and teams that fail to develop, but since virtually no 1st round QBs have ever failed on their first team and then became a star on their second team it’s hard to say for sure. 
 

Or you can look at 2 QBs who are remarkably similar in style and traits and one becomes a HOFer and the other one is a bust. It all feels so random and whenever I feel like there’s a tiny bit of science to it, it seemingly is proven wrong. Other than a couple of no doubt QBs it seems like luck of the draw. 
 

of course it would be a little less frustrating if the Bears ever even once came out on top with their selected QB. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

There's only 16 above-average starting QBs and the great ones tend to last for a long, long time.  So you're looking at 1-2 QBs who even become above-average, let alone great, out of every draft class.

You have to take in an unreasonably dense amount of information with a wall of large men in front of you and *instantly* know where the ball should go on and in what timing and you have to shift in the pocket to the right spot to do it. 

NFL plays are freaking *complicated*.  Most of them have some sort of check where they can be switched to a different play at the line depending on the look the defense gives.  Many of them involve different sets of routes in different parts of the field and it's up to the QB to decide which set of routes to read their progression through.   And the routes themselves often change post-snap.

Every time you get something right, defenses are taking note of it and will be trying to fool you by presenting you that same look but finding a sneaky way to take away the thing that worked.

I believe the reason so many QBs bust is that it's just impossible to tell who really has that ability to process information of that complexity at that speed on the field until they get here, because college football is just nowhere close to replicating the experience.  

I've been watching a lot of Caleb Williams video and I totally get why the scouts rave about him, but a lot of the stuff he is rewarded for doing will be punished severely in the pros.  He will have to reinvent himself and adapt  If he can, you have Mahomes 2.0, and if you can't he's a bust and you wasted your pick and 2-4 years.  And that's true for every other QB you could draft.

But if you can find a QB who can do it, it breaks the sport.  Every offensive play is entirely in their hands, and they can make up for almost everyone else's shortcomings.  If you take out their first year as starters and their last year before retirement, Manning, Brady and Rodgers played 50 NFL seasons and 49 of them ended with winning records.  It didn't matter who the coaches were, or the offensive line, or the receivers, or the defenses.

 

[Thurman Merman]

Some day soon, someone is going to come up with some sort of VR/AI program that can put QB draft prospects through some simulations to better figure out how they will handle the NFL. And the person who comes up with that program is going to make a bazillion dollars.

[Rex Buckingham]

9 hours ago, Brian707 said:

If Mahomes came to the Bears what does his career look like? How about the Bears as a franchise?

I think you need both a good QB and a competent coaching staff/ownership. 

 

Mahomes probably would just be an above average QB and the Bears a borderline playoff team in most years.

Think Mahomes would be Stafford-ish if the Bears had drafted him? 

[raw]

This is a good discussion and it sucks that I'm late to it, but not to cop out, but I think it's both. Some QBs are successful by nature and some are by nurture. And I think a lot of it depends on which positive traits (and how much in the positive) the QB has. And I guess that also means how well the strength of the offensive coaching fits to the QB.

Like we praise Andy Reid and Kyle Shanahan, but Reid couldn't get over the hump with McNabb or Alex Smith. He made them better, but not good enough. Shanahan couldn't do anything with the most moldable, 20-year old, QB in the world at the time, but is a SB favorite with the equivalent of D1 Tyson Bagent, who was picked 1 slot ahead of the UDFAs.

But a lot is finding a way to get the most out of what a QB naturally does well, while minimizing the need for the QB to be put in positions to have to do things he doesn't do well too often. Also, I think you should NOT spend much time trying to correct what a QB doesn't do well to fit in your scheme. With Fields in particular, you have an OC who wants to throw quick to playmakers potentially in small windows, while you have a QB that wants things to open up down the field. I think Getsy did a good job of calling to Fields' strengths the previous 2 weeks, but it's pretty hard to do when the other team is sending more guys than you can block in front of him. And obviously, Fields' weaknesses mean he can't make the adjustments necessary to combat that, which seems to be his fatal flaw that takes him off of this team.

But you also can't consistently run an offense to your QBs strength that likes to hold onto the ball if you have below average OL talent and WRs who can't separate. Then you throw on injuries on top of that and it's been a disaster for 2 years between getting the most out of Fields and the most out of the offense. And that part is not on him. Poles scouted him in college. There was every indication there he liked to hold onto the ball and they put him in a terrible situation to succeed almost intentionally.

And if you think Fields likes to hold onto the ball too long, Caleb Williams has the record for time to throw since it's been calculated. He does seem to have enough of that Mahomes ability to adapt and get the ball out quickly when he needs to or the situation dictates it, but you never know until you put him in that situation. And if you put him behind remedial centers, a bottom 10 LT and you have injury prone players at both guard spots, you're going to find out in a hurry if he can overcome his negative traits well enough. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Holding the ball a long time and extending plays isn't by default a bad thing. A lot of very good QBs do it.  Fields problems come mostly from turning down open receivers and a bit from slow execution on dropbacks and short throws.  If he was holding the ball for four seconds then finding the guy who broke down the defense and hitting him, it wouldn't be a problem.  He could make all the same decisions 25% faster and they would still be the wrong decisions.  The length of the plays is the symptom of a QB not processing NFL reads, not the cause.

I think they *are* calling plays to his strengths, there's just not a lot you can do.  Call the deep and intermediate throws and pray this is the day he feels like throwing them and doesn't just eat sacks, and mix in screens because it's his least objectionable short play.  Designed run when you have to but use them sparingly because he's prone to both fumbles and injuries.

What else is there?

He's brutal with hot reads. His slow dropback and release screws with quick timing throws like slants.  

I hate his rpo execution.

Play action takes away processing time. Rollouts are gimmicks that make life easier for the defense.

What's left?

[raw]

2 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Holding the ball a long time and extending plays isn't by default a bad thing. A lot of very good QBs do it.  Fields problems come mostly from turning down open receivers and a bit from slow execution on dropbacks and short throws.  If he was holding the ball for four seconds then finding the guy who broke down the defense and hitting him, it wouldn't be a problem.  He could make all the same decisions 25% faster and they would still be the wrong decisions.  The length of the plays is the symptom of a QB not processing NFL reads, not the cause.

I think they *are* calling plays to his strengths, there's just not a lot you can do.  Call the deep and intermediate throws and pray this is the day he feels like throwing them and doesn't just eat sacks, and mix in screens because it's his least objectionable short play.  Designed run when you have to but use them sparingly because he's prone to both fumbles and injuries.

What else is there?

He's brutal with hot reads. His slow dropback and release screws with quick timing throws like slants.  

I hate his rpo execution.

Play action takes away processing time. Rollouts are gimmicks that make life easier for the defense.

What's left?

IDK if this was in response to me, but I didn't say holding onto the ball was a bad thing. Nor did I say they weren't calling to his strengths. I literally said the opposite and that it's hard to continue to do that when a team forces the action by making him get the ball out faster than he wants. 

But yeah, I agree he's brutal with hot reads. And I said on Twitter this week when people were complaining about the playbook changing after Bagent got in to include more screens and RPOs, that Fields somehow isn't good at executing the RPO, despite running plenty of it in college. 

Basically it comes down to, round peg in a square hole. I mean, I think Fields has shown enough that I think he can get by in this league. He had 600+ and 6 TDs in a span of 4 days. He put together a 1000 yard rushing season. But if he's not going to be good enough with hot reads, RPOs, and the quick game in general, you better get him the best OL money and draft picks can by. The Bears didn't do that for him. Fields didn't make the adjustments to combat this. I don't blame the team for him not making adjustments. He knows he's taking a beating, but has essentially refused to do anything to protect himself. And it's his own damn stupidity/inability.

[jersey cubs fan]

How is this game only 2.5 point spread now?

[CubinNY]

19 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Holding the ball a long time and extending plays isn't by default a bad thing. A lot of very good QBs do it.  Fields problems come mostly from turning down open receivers and a bit from slow execution on dropbacks and short throws.  If he was holding the ball for four seconds then finding the guy who broke down the defense and hitting him, it wouldn't be a problem.  He could make all the same decisions 25% faster and they would still be the wrong decisions.  The length of the plays is the symptom of a QB not processing NFL reads, not the cause.

I think they *are* calling plays to his strengths, there's just not a lot you can do.  Call the deep and intermediate throws and pray this is the day he feels like throwing them and doesn't just eat sacks, and mix in screens because it's his least objectionable short play.  Designed run when you have to but use them sparingly because he's prone to both fumbles and injuries.

What else is there?

He's brutal with hot reads. His slow dropback and release screws with quick timing throws like slants.  

I hate his rpo execution.

Play action takes away processing time. Rollouts are gimmicks that make life easier for the defense.

What's left?

Change to 3 step drop backs. 

[BigbadB]

On 10/19/2023 at 6:16 PM, minnesotacubsfan said:

Baeget, bignet, wtf his name is isn’t going to throw for more than 150 yards. He will, however, have about 3 ints and vastly more incompletions than completions.

 

we’ll still win because that’s what meatball Bear fans will somehow will into existence. That and LV sucks

 

 

If it's that difficult, why not just call him T-Bag? I know, worst nickname in sports history.