raw

Agree with every word. Shane Waldron has been perfectly competent, if not even good as an OC. He took Geno Smith from a laughable bust to a probowl QB. Of course he can take the best QB prospect of the last 5 years to success.......but Bears.

Arizona doesn't apply pressure. Last in the league in pressures (not last in sacks though). I also think the questions on the OL were overblown. I mean you had Jenkins health questions, Davis desire questions, questions on who would start at C, and then if the tackles could take a step. But all 6 of the guys who competed to start in camp were guys who have been average-ish or better in their careers. The injuries were predictable, but every team has had them.

Stats are weird when you completely tank 1 season and start 0-5 the next season. They don't have an issue winning on the road on Sundays. They have an issue winning, because almost half the time, they weren't capable of it. Since they've been capable of winning games (aka not tanking, not having a UDFA rookie starting, and taking out 0-5 start last year), they are 8-6 with 3 games they had a 90%+ chance to win.

So far the formula for the Bears is: Feast on bad defensive coordinators. Bend but don't break against good offenses. Really need turnovers in their favor to beat teams without far inferior talent on the field. That formula would means wins vs Arizona (bad defense), NE (bad defense, turn the ball over), and Seattle (mediocre D, turns ball over). Other games: SF with their injuries kinda levels out that talent matchup a bit, assuming the Bears get healthy by then. But they are a great D and don't give you the ball. GB gives you a chance 2x, because Love will give you the ball. But it's Green Bay Min, I still don't know what they are. Good defense/great DC, but they've allowed 29+ three of the last 4 games. Darnold is probably good for 1 turnover if you get pressure on him. Injured LT Detroit looks like a juggernaut, so I don't even think the Bears can fall back on last year's performance against them. Obviously, things can change between now and when they actually play. And flukes apparently happen as well. But I'd go into AZ, NE, SEA expecting wins. I'd go into both DET games expecting losses. I'm expecting a loss at SF. That puts them at 7-6. I think they can get 1 from both GB and MIN, which puts them at 9-8. But every team either has a better record than them or are within 1/2 game record wise, except NE. They could also spiral and lose a bunch of these games.

So, I was resigned to the fact that when Flus was retained last year that this was at least a 2 year thing. But Poles seems like the type that would really value what the players are saying. So far, off the top my head, you have Jaylon questioning why he can't travel with top WRs. Byard questioning just allowing the play before the Hail Mary. Kmet questioning players' discipline. DJ questioning the handoff to Kramer. Those are your leaders. Their words speak volumes. If they continue to question Flus, all bets are off. The defense, cited as a reason you couldn't change coaches, would probably see very little drop off, especially initially. The Bears actually have ALL 11 starters under contract for next year. The only contributors who are FAs after the year are Darrell Taylor and Jack Sanborn, 2 pretty replaceable players. So if you don't drastically change the scheme, you shouldn't have much drop off on the defense. Also a big factor could be how Caleb and the guys feel about Waldron. There was the captains meeting earlier in the year with him. You can't allow Flus to hire a 3rd offensive coordinator, so that could seal his fate as well. You also can't risk Caleb having a 3rd OC in 3 years, and that potentially happens if you let Flus hire a new OC and then he's fired the year after. Ultimately, I think this is a similar decision to Fields. Poles wasn't 100% sure he was the guy. A better guy became available and he moved on. Gotta look at Flus the same way. If you aren't 100% sure he's the head coach of your next Superbowl team, then move on. I'm not sure who the better coach is though. Who's the Craig Counsell to Flus' David Ross? Feels like they'd go with experience, but all the experienced guys are DCs as well. It kinda feels like Ben Johnson or bust. But Johnson doesn't have HC experience. Don't know if Poles would gamble with another 1st time coach after putting so much faith in another.

Just started watching this. And man, I still hate that it feels like Keenan is the primary on most plays. DJ has stuff schemed for him, but it's all screen horsefeathers. But they are literally running DJ and Rome on decoys to open up Keenan, when it should be the other way due to speed reasons. Like the screen throwaway was DJ blocking for Allen. You run it the other way, you get a bigger blocker and a faster receiver being targeted

Guessing it's the playing in front of his hometown. His HS was there. It had to be a tough situation. But that's the last time he should get that excuse. He was nervous first home game. Nervous first road game, first primetime game, first dome game, first game in his hometown. I guess first division rival game could have nerves. But for a guy who says he never gets nervous, he's been noticeably nervous (or too amped) 4 times in 7 games.

If it makes you feel better, I am more upset this morning than I was yesterday.

Keep losing games with 90% win probability, at some point it's not a fluke.

Rourke is one of those guys that looks like a middle of Day 3 pick (5th or 6th round) and is an NFL backup for 10 years. Very smart, experienced QB who makes the right reads/throws. As for Oregon, yeah that's one of those bad matchups for this team. IU does have decent team speed. But Oregon is a track team.

Yeah, he's probably missing those. And there's probably a good reason teams are running that blitz at his side.

I will agree that Flus probably isn't a good coach. He's easily the worst coach in the division which is why I didn't necessarily like hanging on to him and completely punting that advantage. But my point is, you probably aren't going to get a ready made great coach anywhere. If you get rid of him, you're probably going with an offensive guy, and likely one who has never been a HC either. So, it's not a given that guy can be any better overall. You're betting on the offense being better, but it could come at the expense of a top 7 defense.....and we saw how that went last time with Marc Trestman. The control of your players thing is nonsense. I understand the discipline stuff. These are still grown ass millionaires who are going to do whatever they want for the most part. I know it's not on the field, but Andy Reid is widely considered the best coach in the league. He's had players beat their GF and break their kids arm. He's signed a guy after kicking his GF. He has Rashee Rice and his 119mph driving which hurt people and gave him a bigger role in the offense before he got hurt this year. And IDK how reliable this site I found is, but among the league leaders in personal fouls last year was Buffalo, Miami, Houston, and Green Bay...all playoff teams considered to have good coaches.

Wasn't making fun of anyone. Just saying some of the people lauded as great head coaches aren't all that great in-game either. And if they miss the playoffs by 1 game, it's going to be because he didn't do well enough vs the teams he needs to be in the division. If they go 3-3 in the division, then he should have gone 4-2. If they go 4-2 in the division, they'll probably be in the playoffs and this game in October doesn't really matter all that much. If they go worse than 3-3 in the division, then this game also doesn't matter because they clearly weren't good enough anyway.

You know he's DC too right? That role is much more important than his HC role. Just like any coach in any sport. Install the gameplan and build the infrastructure. Players win games and make them look good. Players lose game, they look bad. If the players had stopped 1 single miracle play, nobody would have anything negative to say about him as a HC as his defense held the top scoring offense 20 points below their season average. And if you knock him for losing this one, then you gotta give him props for his defense winning Week 1.

#17 IU beat #12 Tennessee in an exhibition game in Knoxville this weekend. It was apparently in front of fans as well. They went 0-11 in 3s in the first half, then 4-8 in the second half. They were also missing 3 players that are likely in their regular season rotation.

I understand the emotion of losing a game on a Hail Mary, but maybe sleep it off a bit? Like they aren't going to fire Eberflus because he's 4-3 with a miracle loss, when the team has only been trying for 7 games, all with a rookie QB. He's still the coach because he still hasn't allowed more than 21 points in now 15 games, which is his primary job. Obviously, he needs to be better at decision making. But there are several coaches who are bad at gameday decisions. Kyle Shanahan has had multiple, very public coaching failures. Detroit lost a chance at a SB in part due to coaching decisions. Zac Taylor made a SB and is atrocious in-game. McCarthy is trash and has a SB ring. Stevenson isn't going to get cut and probably not benched. He's a 2nd round pick who has been slightly below to slightly above average so far in his career. He screwed up. So did several other players. Bottom line, if Caleb is the guy, he will be able to carry Eberflus to success. Caleb didn't play well today, but he also led 2 go ahead TD drives in the 4th quarter (one taken away by a somehow worse GL call than a speed option). If not for the miracle play, nobody is calling for Flus' or Stevenson's jobs.

Not in this position often, but these polls piss me off. The voting is clearly influenced by helmet scouting and not what's happening on the field. Ohio St struggled with a Nebraska team IU beat by 50. I know that's not the end-all, be-all and IU may never get to prove they are better than the teams ahead of them, but they have a better resume than at least 3-4 teams ahead of them.

horsefeathers HELL

I didn't say holding them under 20 is the "goal". I said if they hold them under 20, they would win. They don't "need" to do that to win, which is why I didn't say that. Not saying you said I said that, but that's not where this team is anymore. Washington has put up numbers vs bad defenses. The Bears are the best they will see. The Bears have put up numbers vs bad defenses as well. Analytically, Washington is a bad defense. The Commanders may very well score their league-leading season average of 32 points, but I don't know why you guys are acting like it would be a surprise if they didn't against the Bears, when they've literally held everyone to 21 or less in the last 13.

Same thing was said about the Houston offense, and the Bears held them under 20. Granted, they had Brisker and Gordon then. But if the Bears can keep Washington under 20 they win. And Daniels hasn't practiced. I don't think 7 games is enough of a sample size where he can take a week off and be right back without missing a beat. Which may just mean early struggles, but again, that could be enough if that keeps them under 20.

With it looking like Daniels will be at QB today, the Bears job just got a bit tougher. Obviously, still a winnable game, but on the road against a good offense team with the betting line trending toward even, this game is as much of a toss up as the Bears have had in a long time. On offense, the formula is the same as it was against Jacksonville. Throw the ball quickly. Get it to your playmakers. I'll guess the gameplan will be much different that last year when the Commanders were just like, "OK, we're going to line up in man and dare you to beat us". And Justin Fields and DJ Moore continuously did as they stubbornly tried to stop DJ on an island. They do have a new HC/defense with Dan Quinn. Quinn will likely try to bring the blitz. And if they don't get home, I have the confidence that Caleb can pick them apart through the air or with the scramble. Washington does not cover well. Mike Sainristil, a rookie, has been their best cover guy, but the Bears have 3 guys that are pretty tough to cover. I don't think Sainristil can handle the veteran nuance that DJ and Keenan bring, and I don't think he can handle Rome's size. Odunze has shown he can get open, even though that connection with Caleb hasn't quite been there since the Colts game in Week 3 while trying to focus on getting the veterans more involved. Washington also hasn't been anything special in the run game either. They are 27th in yards per attempt allowed. So the Bears also have the ability to sustain drives by mixing up the run and quick passing game. Conversely, the Commanders have been really good both on the ground and in the air. Brian Robinson isn't a Jonathan Taylor level runningback, and their OL isn't Colts level, but the combination of the 2 plus the QB run has been top 3-5 in the league. And that will likely give the Bears trouble. Even if Daniels isn't 100%, you have to account for him, which means one fewer player in the box on zone reads and 1 less man in coverage if you have to use a spy on him. In the pass game, it's a lot of Scary Terry. I do like the Bears secondary to hold him in check. They have faced each other the last 2 years and the Bears have held him to a combined 7 catches for 90 yards, with 46 of those yards coming last year after they got down 16+. Daniels does spread the ball around a decent bit though as there's just enough Ekeler out of the backfield, Ertz at TE, Noah Brown on 3rd down, and Dyami Brown down the field to keep teams honest. Ertz against a backup safety and Noah Brown vs a backup nickel will be key matchups that the Commanders may try to exploit. If Daniels is behind center, the Bears need to hit him, and hit him a lot. He has shown in college that he isn't good at protecting himself. Their tackles are weak, so there will be chances to get after him off the edge. I expect them to move the pocket a bunch, but that can also lead to extra hits. Again, the oddsmakers think this is a pretty even game. Considering the game is in Washington, that's a slight nod to the Bears here. The Bears are coming off a bye week, but the Commanders are coming off playing the Panthers so not much difference there. The Caleb Williams homecoming and Montez Sweat revenge factors are big potential momentum shifters. This figures to be a 1-score game and the Bears have played more close games than the Commanders, though it's been a while. The Bears haven't really gone out and won a close game with their offense taking a late lead. The Commanders have. This is easily the best defense Washington has faced, but also the best offense the Bears have seen. If the Bears can continue their streak of holding teams below 21 points, they should score enough to win this game.

Hardest of passes. Talking prime Dan Marino in a tight window hard.

I like the Bears chances either way. But I think the difference between Daniels and Mariota is like 24-20 or 31-13. The Bears D should make Mariota's life miserable and he doesn't have the deep ball or athleticism (still very athletic, but not to Daniels' level) to really threaten the Bears defense at all levels.

The risk is re-injury. It didn't look too bad for Gordon last game, to be honest. They haven't really said if it was a pull or soreness or just a strain. If it's not a pull, he should be able to play after 2 weeks of rest.

Stevenson being able to walk thru Monday is pretty big. It's a day earlier than they usually get on the practice field. So, I'd guess that's good news for his status this week. Flus had good stuff to say about Brisker. Gordon more iffy, I'd guess. "Brisker is still going through protocol. He's got a couple more steps to go, but looks good. Kyler, again, is working through his hamstring. We'll see where that is on Wednesday."