Bears vs Vikings on MNF

[Tryptamine]

56 minutes ago, Bobson Dugnutt said:

Still #4…

 

 

They beat Washinton so I'm pretty sure 5th, unless I'm thinking playoffs and only SOS matters for draft order.

[Bobson Dugnutt]

2 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

They beat Washinton so I'm pretty sure 5th, unless I'm thinking playoffs and only SOS matters for draft order.

SOS is the tiebreaker 

[UMFan83]

lol I’m not sure who this is but dude is standing front and center literally playing on his phone while Eberflus is making his postgame speech 

[scarey]

1 hour ago, WrigleyField 22 said:

I don't think you're an apologist.  Terrible game plan that makes a fair evaluation of Fields passing game pretty tough tonight.

 

This is the truly frustrating component.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

Alright it's past midnight. Hope everyone had fun.  All wins are good wins, fields finally stepped up and did the thing with the game on the line. It'd be nice if he did it more than once a year, but I'm not gonna deny that he did it for this game.

The playcalling was, imo, what it had to be.  

Let's stipulate for now that the coaching staff's primary motivation is to win as many games as they can, they're not going to call a suboptimal game plan relative to that goal just to "see what they have" in fields or whatever. If someone wants to argue they should, cool, but that's a separate argument.

Minnesota is going to blitz and blitz often.  They blitz specifically so that they can take away your ability to run longer-developing passing plays. Those are simply not an option.

Normally, the best way to beat the blitz is to have your QB identify where the blitzer came from and hit a hot blitz-beating route in the area he vacated.

Justin Fields is really bad at that.  And before anyone says I'm making this up to be contrary, I got receipts.  Here's some quotes from his pre-draft scouting reports:

https://www.nfl.com/prospects/justin-fields/32004649-4576-9504-963d-c33127e80752

"Field vision is average in face of the blitz.

Missed open blitz beaters in the middle of the field against Indiana.

Gradual operation time prevents expedited release."

https://walterfootball.com/scoutingreport2021jfields.php

"Can get rattled by the pass rush

Can freeze when seeing the blitz

Must get better at passing in the face of the rush

Blitz recognition needs work"

So what's left? Screens and quick hits, and we ran a ton of both.

What else is there?

Bootlegs? We tried a few, I don't believe any resulted in a pass attempt. Which makes sense, because the weakness of the bootleg is that it makes it easier for the defense to cover everyone.

Max protect? Minnesota can either send more than you can block, or they can show bltiz and drop everyone and you've got a bunch of wasted blockers with no one to block and a couple of triple-covered receivers.  I've seen them do both to good effect this season.

Play-action? Just gives the blitz more time to get there.  We tried it once, it looked awful and we smartly gave it up.

Our non-screen dropbacks against the blitz were generally a disaster (no idea why they stopped blitzing on the final drive).  Sacks and fumbles and missed throws and all manner of bad things happening.

So the coaching staff went up against a defense that is one of the best at the thing fields struggles most with, came up with a game plan to help mitigate those issues and it gave them their best chance to win. Which, you know, they did.

 

 

[Thusly Boned]

As if it isn't obvious to everyone, but the most hilarious aspect of this dumpster fire is that in a lost season, where the only thing of real value to accomplish is development/assessment, they simply refuse to do even that.

Fields may not be the guy (probably isn't), but the staff seems hell bent on making that determination as murky as possible by confining him in a cage of inane offensive playcalling. If he is to fail, let him do it spectacularly. Or maybe he actually succeeds. But my guess is we won't be allowed to find out, and everyone will be left forever second guessing whatever decision is made after the season.

The whole thing is just a master class in incompetence, and if I hadn't emotionally distanced myself from the Bears long ago, it'd probably be making me insane.

[raw]

10 hours ago, Tim said:

JJ is giving a lot of tape as to why he doesn't earn a tippy-top CB contract.

I disagree with this. I was pretty anti-long term deal with Johnson for about 1/2 this season, but he is turning into a shutdown guy. Everyone drops INTs. Being in that position is what matters. He doesn't give up much of anything, other than his random defensive holding penalty per game.

8 hours ago, UK said:

Someone besides UMFan talk me out of wanting Harbaugh.

It's like going on a second date with an attractive woman that's Bat horsefeathers crazy. 

You know you shouldn't answer the phone but you do anyways.

The attractive woman also putting out on the first date and the sex being amazing make it even more accurate. 

After the last 4 coaches, we naturally are looking for a certain baseline level of competency. We know what Harbaugh will do. He will stick up for his players in the media, unlike Flus. He will be conservative to an extent, but ballsy when he needs to be, unlike Nagy. He will be able to control a lockeroom, unlike Trestman. And the game probably hasn't passed him by like Fox.

Harbaugh would likely lead a competitive team that wins more games than it loses. They'll be disciplined. They won't be a disaster on either side of the ball. But he ultimately won't win anything significant and will burn down all bridges to the organization when he's done, leading to another significant tear down and rebuild when he leaves town. But as Bears fans, we long for those 4-5 years of competency and competitive football. 

But the Bears should be taking a young QB. They should be getting a coach to develop and build around said young QB. Harbaugh hasn't really shown the ability to do either of those things. Harbaugh is a good short-term hire, but the Bears should be looking for the long-term, with a long-term QB in the fold. 

[raw]

7 hours ago, UMFan83 said:

lol I’m not sure who this is but dude is standing front and center literally playing on his phone while Eberflus is making his postgame speech 

Demarcus Walker

[jersey cubs fan]

18 minutes ago, raw said:

After the last 4 coaches, we naturally are looking for a certain baseline level of competency. We know what Harbaugh will do. He will stick up for his players in the media, unlike Flus. He will be conservative to an extent, but ballsy when he needs to be, unlike Nagy. He will be able to control a lockeroom, unlike Trestman. And the game probably hasn't passed him by like Fox.

Harbaugh would likely lead a competitive team that wins more games than it loses. They'll be disciplined. They won't be a disaster on either side of the ball. But he ultimately won't win anything significant and will burn down all bridges to the organization when he's done, leading to another significant tear down and rebuild when he leaves town. But as Bears fans, we long for those 4-5 years of competency and competitive football. 

But the Bears should be taking a young QB. They should be getting a coach to develop and build around said young QB. Harbaugh hasn't really shown the ability to do either of those things. Harbaugh is a good short-term hire, but the Bears should be looking for the long-term, with a long-term QB in the fold. 

Good summation. 

I kind of think of it this way:

hire Harbaugh = bring back Fields and surround him with more blue chippers while also taking multiple swings at non day one QBs in draft. Try and squeeze a playoff run out of next year. 
 

If you want to take a young QB, bring aboard a real competent offensive head coach who has competed and won in the NFL. Let that guy build his own staff and give that group through the 2025 season to be good. 
 

but what’s going to happen is Eberflus and Poles get to take their own guy this year, probably even bring back Getsy and a shiny new DC. That will reset their expectation to win clock with a qb on a rookie contract. 

[raw]

Was a weird feeling last night. I've been various levels of happy with Bears wins. I've even been indifferent to wins when it's a clear non-playoff season (or even when it's an 8-8 playoff season) and they win a game late to affect draft position. I've been relieved from winning a bad/boring game. But last night, I felt nothing. No happy, no relief, no indifference. Just nothing.

Obviously, you have players and coaches who are doing whatever they can to win....ahem, not lose games. But it's just so Bears to completely magnify the gray area. This season became about evaluating Justin Fields to everybody but Eberflus and Getsy the moment we all realized that Carolina would potentially be #1 pick bad. Hell, could argue it was about evaluating Fields simply because they actually added talent to try to win with him for the first time, with the 5th year option decision looming after the season.

So of course, he gets hurt after the best 2 game stretch of his career. Of course, he comes back with lame ass playcalling (not blaming Getsy really). We know if Fields is protected he can sit in the pocket and throw for 300 yards and 4 TDs. We know he can run for 100 yards on any given Sunday/Monday/Thursday. The team basically said they wanted to see him limit mistakes and produce in the 2-minute drill. He has eliminated mistakes in the passing game. The fumblers yesterday were obvious mistakes as well, and judging off Twitter (probably a bad thing to do anyway) most Bears fans pretty much assumed that was the last fumble was the lasting image of Justin Fields' Bears career. But then he puts together, for all intents and purposes, a 1-throw GW drive. 

Without getting into all the screens and all, we got what we wanted to see, but it still did nothing. Fields wasn't terrible. He wasn't great. He probably wasn't allowed a chance to be great. But there was also probably a reason why he wasn't, and it's likely he would not have been great if given the chance.

It went from "we'll see these last 6 weeks" to "we'll see these last 4 weeks". If I had to guess, Fields puts up another big time passing game (270+ yards, 3 TDs.....looking at you Arizona). I'm guessing he puts up another game like last night/Detroit where he's checking down, getting rid of the ball quickly, not making too many mistakes, but not doing anything special either. Maybe there's another uninspiring GW drive. But the GB game will end in a late mistake and a loss on an otherwise solid game. He'll be another "what if". He'll go to another terrible situation. Anti Fields people will say "i told you so", pro Fields people will blame the situation. Meanwhile, the Bears will be wowed by a bad coordinator who is over his head as a HC and they'll ruin another QB in Chicago.

[gflore34]

More QB pressures from Dexter, cheap roughing the passer call -yet, amazingly nothing called on, at least, two head shots on Fields - still, nevertheless, I think Poles can find players.  Which is why I'll be OK with him taking a QB,  But, the finding a coach part, not so good for Poles, hopefully, Warren can help improve on this aspect.

[CubinNY]

2 hours ago, XZero77 said:

 

Fields may not be the guy (probably isn't), but the staff seems hell bent on making that determination as murky as possible by confining him in a cage of inane offensive playcalling. If he is to fail, let him do it spectacularly. Or maybe he actually succeeds. But my guess is we won't be allowed to find out, and everyone will be left forever second guessing whatever decision is made after the season.

 

In this assessment of the coaching staff's tendency is your answer to what they think about Fields. Doing the "safe" things means they don't have the confidence to let him do the unsafe things. If they did, they would let him. I think it's less about winning and more about what they think he can and cannot do. 

From what I saw (I only watched the first half), Fields showed that he can do some of the things everyone wants him to do, but he's not consistent enough at them to be successful. I think this falls squarely on coaching.

Kyle is binary in his assessments and that's what makes people upset. It's either awful or great. Fields is neither, he's inconsistent. 

[BigSlick]

I’m not so sure that it’s a foregone conclusion that Poles is going to draft a QB. 
 

 

[BigbadB]

49 minutes ago, raw said:

Without getting into all the screens and all, we got what we wanted to see, but it still did nothing. Fields wasn't terrible. He wasn't great. He probably wasn't allowed a chance to be great. But there was also probably a reason why he wasn't, and it's likely he would not have been great if given the chance.

This paragraph is what I've been wanting to say for awhile now, without actually coming up with an easy way to say it, like you just did. 

We need to see if Fields can be a pocket passer who can go through his reads and hit his open targets consistently and move this offense and score points. Minnesota knows he doesn't do well with blitzes, and they exploited him twice now. Every other team now knows what to do when they face him. 

Getsy can't really be so stupid to think that these screen passes will work for this offense. The Bears have speedster WR's that can blow past defenders in one on one situations, which the Minnesota blitz consistently created. Minnesota put 8 and 9 guys in the box and Chicago's play calling made it easy for those 8 or 9 guys to stop the play. I've watched other Minnesota games. Their defense isn't complete shut down. They can be exposed. The absolute only time they got exposed in any way was when they didn't send extras and Fields had time for a receiver to get open somewhere in the 5 to 6 second range. That's unacceptable.

If Fields can't do better against blitzes, then his career is done. You can't win games throwing the ball behind the line of scrimmage over and over to beat the blitz. And it's quite possibly the least fun play to watch in the history of football. SO STOP DOING IT! 

This just can't all be on the coaching staff as much as I'd like to think or hope is the case. They are playing for their jobs, so whether Fields is the guy going forward isn't of their concern nearly as much as winning some games down the stretch. But, screen passes behind the line aren't plays that put you in a position to win games. They just aren't. I believe they are conservative because the QB has limitations that make their true play calls risky endeavors. It's the only thing it can be. I don't listen to press conferences, but how do they address such incompetence with the play calling? Blitzes in the NFL isn't something new where teams are clueless how to exploit them. But, that's how the Bears look when a team gets aggressive going after the QB. Why is that?

[BigbadB]

43 minutes ago, CubinNY said:

In this assessment of the coaching staff's tendency is your answer to what they think about Fields. Doing the "safe" things means they don't have the confidence to let him do the unsafe things. If they did, they would let him. I think it's less about winning and more about what they think he can and cannot do. 

This really is where I'm at right now. And it tells me we are probably drafting a QB in the first round in a few months.

[Tryptamine]

I'm curious to know how many times Getsy ran that WR screen last night because it felt like at least 7 or 8 times and once it was on back to back plays. 

[mul21]

2 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

I'm curious to know how many times Getsy ran that WR screen last night because it felt like at least 7 or 8 times and once it was on back to back plays. 

They weren't all screens obviously, but 18/37 passes were within a yard of the LOS or behind it.

[gflore34]

Raise you're hand if, while watching the game, you knew a Fields 4th quarter TO was imminent, sure things in life are death, taxes and a ball busting Fields 4th quarter TO.  This time he though the defense and the Vikings incompetence gave him a chance at redemption.

[Outshined_One]

Assuming the Bears end up picking Top 5 (i.e. they win, at most, only one more game this season), I just don't see how Kevin Warren can look at this roster and coaching staff, and think that it would be an awesome idea to get the band back together for another run in 2024.

Flus is a complete dolt, Getsy's play calling is maddeningly inconsistent, and there's no consensus on whether Fields is a lost cause.  Part of me would be fine with keeping Poles and giving him a crack at his own QB and a new coaching staff, but I'm really skeptical about his ability to put together a winning roster.

[Hairyducked Idiot]

One thing I will say is fields has gotten better at executing this Bagentian throws than he used to be.  2021 Fields would have missed some of those short throws 

[Brian707]

1 hour ago, BigSlick said:

I’m not so sure that it’s a foregone conclusion that Poles is going to draft a QB. 
 

 

I would say its 80%, the main reason is he buys himself some time and resets the QB clock.

[BigSlick]

My problem with Poles is far more related to his choice of head coach than talent acquisition.

maybe people are a little hyper fixated on the misses but through two drafts I’m….significantly more pleased with Poles’s talent acquisition than with any GM we’ve had in the past 20 years? Velus Jones is a miss. Chase Claypool was a gambling risk that missed, hard. The rest of the drafts? Pretty strong, and looking better and better with the play of Dexter, Roschon Johnson and Tyrique Stevenson of late. And the Sweat trade seems to have made sense, though it cost assets. 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

6 minutes ago, BigSlick said:

My problem with Poles is far more related to his choice of head coach than talent acquisition.

maybe people are a little hyper fixated on the misses but through two drafts I’m….significantly more pleased with Poles’s talent acquisition than with any GM we’ve had in the past 20 years? Velus Jones is a miss. Chase Claypool was a gambling risk that missed, hard. The rest of the drafts? Pretty strong, and looking better and better with the play of Dexter, Roschon Johnson and Tyrique Stevenson of late. And the Sweat trade seems to have made sense, though it cost assets. 

My stance for two years has been I mostly like the way he builds but hate what he's building toward.

Unless he comes through with the right QB pick in the draft next year, we are getting yet another iteration of trying to relive the Halas dream with rough and tough guys dragging games down into the mud and trying to win 12-10 every week.

 

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

1 hour ago, CubinNY said:

In this assessment of the coaching staff's tendency is your answer to what they think about Fields. Doing the "safe" things means they don't have the confidence to let him do the unsafe things. If they did, they would let him. I think it's less about winning and more about what they think he can and cannot do. 

From what I saw (I only watched the first half), Fields showed that he can do some of the things everyone wants him to do, but he's not consistent enough at them to be successful. I think this falls squarely on coaching.

Kyle is binary in his assessments and that's what makes people upset. It's either awful or great. Fields is neither, he's inconsistent. 

I would argue that inconsistent at the most important position in the sport is functionally the same as awful 

 

[CubinNY]

2 minutes ago, Hairyducked Idiot said:

I would argue that inconsistent at the most important position in the sport is functionally the same as awful 

 

Of course you would