Gird Your Loi(o)ns - 11/19 noon on Fox

[Old Style]

9 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

He was covered by Justin Fields standards, by which I mean there were defensive backs within 5 yards of him.   But a franchise NFL QB hits him and gets the first down 10/10 times 

Oh you’re still doing this schtick? Great. Welp, see you guys next week, I guess. 

[WrigleyField 22]

40 minutes ago, UMFan83 said:

if we’re still doing this…obsessing over OSullivan Fields breakdowns feels like a lifetime ago

Doesn't even hit the 60 minute mark? Pffft

[Hairyducked Idiot]

46 minutes ago, Old Style said:

Oh you’re still doing this schtick? Great. Welp, see you guys next week, I guess. 

oh no ... stop ... please come back...

[Thurman Merman]

10 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

He was covered by Justin Fields standards, by which I mean there were defensive backs within 5 yards of him.   But a franchise NFL QB hits him and gets the first down 10/10 times 

He looked open enough. Might've gotten tackled for before he got the first, but it's DJ Moore, get the ball to him there and give him a chance.

[jersey cubs fan]

4 hours ago, raw said:

 

I was really saying to intentionally start him over a 1st round pick. I just think the 1st round pick is going to start. Even if it's not Week 1, it won't be long (just like it wasn't long for Trubisky or Fields). Just that Bagent can start if you determine your draft pick isn't ready for a few weeks. It's not anyone's ideal scenario, but it's more probable than Fields holding a rookie's spot for any amount of time, especially when you can get picks for Fields THIS offseason and not next, unless you pick up his 5th year.....in which case, it doesn't make sense to draft a rookie anyway. 

Plus, I know it will be new coaches and all, but I don't think you can create a situation with Fields and Bagent in the same QB room, especially if Fields doesn't win at least 1/2 of the remaining games. Just a controversy waiting to happen with an obvious lame duck QB with like 8 wins in 40 games and his backup having won half his 4 starts.

are we still doing this? They barely beat the worst team in the league and Bagent did nothing to contribute. QB wins aren’t a thing. 

[raw]

10 hours ago, jersey cubs fan said:

are we still doing this? They barely beat the worst team in the league and Bagent did nothing to contribute. QB wins aren’t a thing. 

You know QB wins are not a thing. I know QB wins are not a thing. That wasn't the point. I know what Bagent is. He's not a QB you win because of. He's a guy who "not screwing up" is his biggest asset, until he screws up like in NOLA.

But the point is the optics of it all. I'm talking about the fan response to both on the roster. Maybe even the team response to wins/losses. I know it's all superficial BS that doesn't actual matter, but football is full of meatballs that this stuff matters to. And those voices are always the loudest and as much as teams should shut that out, it's not really worth it to hang onto a guy that's going to be looking over his shoulder with every loss. 

[jumbo]

15 hours ago, Thurman Merman said:

He looked open enough. Might've gotten tackled for before he got the first, but it's DJ Moore, get the ball to him there and give him a chance.

The same DJ Moore who broke ten tackles on a similar play for a third down conversion earlier in the game. Looking at the replay I see why Fields moved on from Moore, the safety was rolling down, but Moore is the best player on the team and probably could have gotten the first down. 

If the bomb was to Mooney instead of Scott maybe it's reeled in and Fields is a hero. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

15 hours ago, jersey cubs fan said:

are we still doing this? They barely beat the worst team in the league and Bagent did nothing to contribute. QB wins aren’t a thing. 

You know what's funny?  Until his traditional final minutes pants-pooping, Fields was having the most Bagentian game of his career.

Low passing yards, decent 3rd/4th down conversion rate, 0 sacks/0 turnovers through 3.5 quarters, tons of time of possession.

 

 

[Tryptamine]

53 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

You know what's funny?  Until his traditional final minutes pants-pooping, Fields was having the most Bagentian game of his career.

Low passing yards, decent 3rd/4th down conversion rate, 0 sacks/0 turnovers through 3.5 quarters, tons of time of possession.

 

 

Again, how is Darnell Wright getting absolutely destroyed, Fields failing? Wright even held and still got beat badly.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

8 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

Again, how is Darnell Wright getting absolutely destroyed, Fields failing? Wright even held and still got beat badly.

You're gonna hate this, but that was equally on fields.

He took his normal slow dropback and then had the pocket awareness of a light pole as the rusher came in from his face side.

Every actually good QB in the NFL would have seen it coming a mile away, taken one step forward in the pocket and Hutchinson flies right by.

 

Caleb Williams would have been great on that play, tbh

Edited November 21, 2023 by Hairyducked Idiot

[gflore34]

13 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

You're gonna hate this, but that was equally on fields.

He took his normal slow dropback and then had the pocket awareness of a light pole as the rusher came in from his face side.

Every actually good QB in the NFL would have seen it coming a mile away, taken one step forward in the pocket and Hutchinson flies right by.

 

Caleb Williams would have been great on that play, tbh

As the play was in process and taking a look at the replay I was wondering how Fields could not have seen Wright getting beat.  It had to be in his vision range, yet, he stands there, no attempt to move up in the pocket, nothing.

[BigSlick]

3 hours ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

You know what's funny?  Until his traditional final minutes pants-pooping, Fields was having the most Bagentian game of his career.

Low passing yards, decent 3rd/4th down conversion rate, 0 sacks/0 turnovers through 3.5 quarters, tons of time of possession.

 

 

This is an absurd comparison. He had 100+ yards rushing and hit a 39 yard touchdown on a dime that Bagent completely lacks the ability to complete. The type of game they were playing was also incomparable (both in good and bad ways) : there were almost no wide receiver screens and quick slants/outs. It wasn't the same type of game. 

Fields had a good game, in a way that Bagent would have been unable to duplicate - particularly because the traditional run game wasn't there on Sunday. Against one of the best teams in the conference, on the road! 

We don't need to play the make believe game. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

38 minutes ago, BigSlick said:

This is an absurd comparison. He had 100+ yards rushing and hit a 39 yard touchdown on a dime that Bagent completely lacks the ability to complete. The type of game they were playing was also incomparable (both in good and bad ways) : there were almost no wide receiver screens and quick slants/outs. It wasn't the same type of game. 

Fields had a good game, in a way that Bagent would have been unable to duplicate - particularly because the traditional run game wasn't there on Sunday. Against one of the best teams in the conference, on the road! 

We don't need to play the make believe game. 

Bagent has had 70 rushing yards in a game before. He can take off.

Our standards for "good game" are way too low.

[minnesotacubsfan]

31 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Bagent has had 70 rushing yards in a game before. He can take off.

Our standards for "good game" are way too low.

he hasnt had 1100 yards in an nfl season. again, sample size

 

There is a reason JF played at Ohio State and Bagent didnt. Bagent may develop into a fine backup nfl qb, he'll never be on JF's level

 

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

4 minutes ago, minnesotacubsfan said:

he hasnt had 1100 yards in an nfl season. again, sample size

 

There is a reason JF played at Ohio State and Bagent didnt. Bagent may develop into a fine backup nfl qb, he'll never be on JF's level

 

 

Correct. 

But none of that changes that Fields' game before the choking was more Bagent-like than his previous games 

[minnesotacubsfan]

Just now, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Correct. 

But none of that changes that Fields' game before the choking was more Bagent-like than his previous games 

coaches gameplan

[minnesotacubsfan]

btw, dont "correct" me. you seem to be the one learning

 

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

10 minutes ago, minnesotacubsfan said:

btw, dont "correct" me. you seem to be the one learning

 

 

Honestly I'm just happy when you post a coherent sentence. It's about a 50/50 shot 

[minnesotacubsfan]

11 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

Honestly I'm just happy when you post a coherent sentence. It's about a 50/50 shot 

Comparing Fields to Bagent is bonkers for any reason. I realize you are doing it because you want to play GM and draft your QB, but the reality is that the Bears are notoriously lousy at drafting and developing a QB....and you know that.

 

I'm tired of it. I want ownership to finally acknowledge the importance of the position and stop being so archaic...or sell. Until that happens every QB we draft will "fail". If they don't, it will take a very long time to develop one, and one thing you can't seem to recognize is Fields' growth. I have no idea where he will be next year, but I get the feeling he will find his place and it will be what we need...... probably in NYC or ATL.

 

Were those coherent sentences? better than 50/50 I'd guess

 

 

Edited November 22, 2023 by minnesotacubsfan

[Hairyducked Idiot]

5 minutes ago, minnesotacubsfan said:

Comparing Fields to Bagent is bonkers for any reason. I realize you are doing it because you want to play GM and draft your QB, but the reality is that the Bears are notoriously lousy at drafting and developing a QB....and you know that.

 

I'm tired of it. I want ownership to finally acknowledge the importance of the position and stop being so archaic...or sell. Until that happens every QB we draft will "fail". If they don't, it will take a very long time to develop one, and one thing you can't seem to recognize is Fields' growth. I have no idea where he will be next year, but I get the feeling he will his place and be what we need...... probably in NYC or ATL.

 

Were those coherent sentences? better than 50/50 I'd guess

 

 

They were coherent sentences but they were not ones you should be proud of.

A comparison doesn't mean "everything about these two players is completely identifical.".  It means "the specific aspects being referenced are similar, other aspects may be wildly different."

The idea that Fields might have learned something from watching Bagent and play a more mistake-free football was quite popular before the game.  And for 3.5 quarters, it seemed possibly warranted 

The only reason you're reacting negatively to it now is that it suddenly feels like a bad thing the way I said it. You're not thinking about the actual statement, you just know you don't like the vibes.

Ryan poles has never drafted a QB.  I'm not sure how the name on the checks or whatever other connection "the bears" have to previous QB failures is going to make the next QB fail.  Curses aren't real.  

He's not going to go start anywhere else and succeed for any length of time, just like a Trubisky didn't.  

Edited November 22, 2023 by Hairyducked Idiot

[minnesotacubsfan]

Ah I agree, curses aren't real, but idiotic unfocused franchises are real. I mean, it only took the Cubs a century.

 

Don't be so sure about Fields future success aligning with Trubisky's career trajectory, they were never comparable prospects.

 

 

[gflore34]

8 minutes ago, minnesotacubsfan said:

Ah I agree, curses aren't real, but idiotic unfocused franchises are real. I mean, it only took the Cubs a century.

 

Don't be so sure about Fields future success aligning with Trubisky's career trajectory, they were never comparable prospects.

 

 

Fields is a more athletic, smarter version of Trubisky otherwise, they're pretty closely aligned in where their games are flawed.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I actually don't think Fields and Trubisky are that similar.  Trubisky struggled to move past his first read, and he had those weird issues of being able to pass to one side of the field.  Fields struggles to make accurate reads, which is different from sticking on your priority target.  

It's more that "Wait till he gets to a new team and new coach, then he'll show all the haters" is just part of the standard NFL QB bust stages of grief.  The NFL brings in an average of 3 new first-round QBs per year and another 8-12 in subsequent rounds.  

That's a whole lot of busts floating around, and the vast majority of them are never going to get a second wind of success with a new team.  For every Tannehill, there's a lot more Blaine Gabberts, Jake Lockers, EJ Manuels and Josh Rosens.

[minnesotacubsfan]

7 minutes ago, gflore34 said:

Fields is a more athletic, smarter version of Trubisky otherwise, they're pretty closely aligned in where their games are flawed.

Thats odd, I never would have equated the two in performance at the NFL level. What I said about them being prospects is true.

 

How exactly, are they similar at the NFL level?

 

 

[minnesotacubsfan]

Just now, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I actually don't think Fields and Trubisky are that similar.  Trubisky struggled to move past his first read, and he had those weird issues of being able to pass to one side of the field.  Fields struggles to make accurate reads, which is different from sticking on your priority target.  

It's more that "Wait till he gets to a new team and new coach, then he'll show all the haters" is just part of the standard NFL QB bust stages of grief.  The NFL brings in an average of 3 new first-round QBs per year and another 8-12 in subsequent rounds.  

That's a whole lot of busts floating around, and the vast majority of them are never going to get a second wind of success with a new team.  For every Tannehill, there's a lot more Blaine Gabberts, Jake Lockers, EJ Manuels and Josh Rosens.

Fields (as a bust) just posed his 3rd out of 4 games above 100 passer rating. Again, sample size, but there aren't many "busts" at the QB position in the NFL who fail while doing that. I can't think of one....maybe you could provide a list?