raw

Mack and Jackson better play or else they should have been put on short-term IR. This would be Mack's 3rd game missed (minimum for IR) and if Jackson doesn't practice this week, I don't see him playing 4 days later on Thanksgiving, which would be his 3rd full game missed. I'm guessing/hoping the vets are just getting an extra day to come back from the off week. Hoping all (Mack, Jackson, Hicks) are at least practicing on a limited basis tomorrow.

He wasn't listed in the boxscore, only DNP was Tyler Cook. So, IDK if Marko was the move to get Coby on the active roster

I meant to ask the other day...What were Daniels' issues at center? Was it aptitude, strength, movement, something else? I like the Jenkins at LG idea, but this swing tackle idea might be the higher upside play? If he comes in and shows competence, there's a 40 YO LT with G experience playing a 17 game schedule who may not mind shifting inside to close the season Apparently it was making line calls. Possibly related to youth/inexperience, but also apparently literally that he was to quiet. Yeah, I read the biggest issue was that they simply couldn't hear him make the line calls, while also having trouble with the calls as a rookie, wasn't a good combo. Seems weird as he was a center at one of the best coached OL schools for 3 years. It's not like he never did it before or was calling them out for a small school with 6000 people in the stands.

This sounds like the plan is to make him the swing tackle for now.

I mean there's definitely something to be learned from paper, but yea a guy needs reps. I can make the case for a lot of different alignments. Unfortunately in a perfect world Peters would be sat, but he's been the best lineman and ya you wanna protect Fields pocket. So Mustipher is the weakest link, but that creates probably the most movement in alignment. I'm not too worried about L/R alignment between Borom and Jenkins. So I keep Borom at RT. If Peters stays at LT, and Mustipher out then Daniels or Whitehair has to move to C. Whitehair probably has had more success there and then you avoid two rookies next to each other. So: Peters-Jenkins-Whitehair-Daniels-Borom But I could make the case to move Daniels to C. I could also could make the case to get Jenkins in at RT if they think thats where he ultimately ends up. Or I say forget L/R alignment. If Borom looks good at RT don't mess with it. Stick with the (presumably original) plan of Jenkins at LT, but play him at G the rest of this year. Still gets work on the L/R muscle memory, just from the inside spot, then kicks out to T in 2022. And you prioritize stabilizing LG next to him in FA in 22. I'd probably do that line you suggest, putting Jenkins at LG. One thing to remember though is that Jason Peters played guard last year for the Eagles, I believe it was on the right side though. I do think Whitehair at C makes much more sense than Daniels, not only because he played the position better previously, but also because he's under contract for 2022 unlike Daniels.

Ah yeah, forgot about the Thanksgiving game. But the Bears weren't shy at all about getting Borom in there quickly. Granted, much different injury situations and Jenkins hasn't practiced since like June; but Borom missed a bunch of camp, almost all of preseason then just had 10 snaps in week 1 before 7 weeks off and only needed 2-3 practices before getting a start. And the Bears have been pretty consistent with guys being activated the Sunday (Monday in Montgomery's case) after starting their return from IR window.

Deon Bush and oh yeah, TEVEN JENKINS are practicing today, opening up their 21 day window to return to the active roster. Be interesting to see where/if they'll play Jenkins. I'd move Whitehair back to center (bench Mustipher) and probably put Jenkins at LT, with Peters sliding inside to LG. But I'm going to assume they'll put Jenkins at LG because the 39-year old vet with no future on the team has earned respect or something

I pulled up the Vikings/Chargers on ESPN and on the side it has the division standings for the 2 teams playing. And it's pretty crazy. GB is 7-2 with a +19 point differential Minnesota is 3-5 at +3 Bears are 3-6 at -74. Chargers are 5-3 with a -2 Raiders are 5-3 at +7 KC is 5-4 at -6 Denver is in last place with a +34 Looking at the rest of the league 3-6 Eagles are +9 Saints are +44 and just a game up over the -85 Falcons Seattle is 3-5 at +12 Granted a lot of this is influenced by today's scores, but it's wild how much variance there is this year.

I was just looking at this last night. This may be the toughest schedule anyone has played in the history of football. All the playoff teams. The back and forth home-away schedule. The MNF game on the road before a bye. Playing a team not coming off a bye but only get 2 more days rest than them. Playing a day game the following Thursday after coming off a bye (same thing the Ravens just did and looked horrible the 2nd game). Throw in the fact that the Bears lead the league in the new taunting penalties despite probably having the fewest diva players in the league + the fewest things to celebrate.....and it makes you start to believe in conspiracy theories. #OnlyMyTeams

I haven't really had a chance to look at the offseason yet (was going to do so over the next couple weeks), but off the top, I think you probably still have to cut Quinn. Foles and Trevathan are obvious cuts. I'd probably bring back Nichols, even though he's done next to nothing this year, and probably cut Mario Edwards. While half of them are questionable, Edwards has just had too many dumb penalties and is just generally an a-hole.

Signing is done. I'd imagine he'd get at least a couple starts in a few weeks with Darnold out for a while.

A couple things I didn't agree with JT on. 1. He put part of the blame of that Watt unblocked sack on Fields. While he did blame the play design as well, he got on Fields for not getting vertical enough to run away from Watt and for him thinking he can just break the tackle. Sorry, but that was 100% on the design. You can't unblock a guy like Watt for one. The other issue is the other edge guy completely beat Montgomery and would have been there had Fields gotten vertical, which means a bigger loss of yardage. 2. The Mooney TD, he was going on about Fields should have been the one running the wildcat play instead of Montgomery. But the reason that play works is because you have a RB back there with a 165lb WR. They ran that play before and nobody thinks you're going to give the ball to a tiny speed WR when you have a bruising inside runner and are pulling linemen toward the other side. If you have Fields back there with a RB, the defense has to respect that either could run the ball. Agree with 1. For 2 I think that it was part of a larger complaint about the QB run plays the Bears are calling for Fields. I see what you are saying about that specific play but I think he was saying the Bears read option plays were very basic and low ceiling type of designs Yeah, that makes sense. I also thought of that fact that this is QB School, not offense school. He probably glossed over the other couple wildcat plays, which went to set up that TD run because they didn't have Fields at QB.

A couple things I didn't agree with JT on. 1. He put part of the blame of that Watt unblocked sack on Fields. While he did blame the play design as well, he got on Fields for not getting vertical enough to run away from Watt and for him thinking he can just break the tackle. Sorry, but that was 100% on the design. You can't unblock a guy like Watt for one. The other issue is the other edge guy completely beat Montgomery and would have been there had Fields gotten vertical, which means a bigger loss of yardage. 2. The Mooney TD, he was going on about Fields should have been the one running the wildcat play instead of Montgomery. But the reason that play works is because you have a RB back there with a 165lb WR. They ran that play before and nobody thinks you're going to give the ball to a tiny speed WR when you have a bruising inside runner and are pulling linemen toward the other side. If you have Fields back there with a RB, the defense has to respect that either could run the ball.

I think I talked about this before, but this is definitely the most interesting decision the Bears have this offseason. The Bears need to build a strong OL. Borom has shown enough in just 2 starts that he's got a spot for the near future. Jenkins has the draft status and pedigree that he's got a spot in the near future. Whitehair has the contract that says he's going to be here. That leaves Mustipher and Daniels as the only guys who can logically be replaced. Mustipher is bad. You can replace him with a better C, but the issue here is that you can't really draft a C to fill this spot. Daniels was supposed to be the C of the future, but couldn't handle certain things at the position. Mustipher is also young, so I don't think young C is going to be the answer. You can move Whitehair back to C and go out and get another guard, but the only thing that really moves the needle is a stud. Whitehair is what he is. Solid, not a stud. You can hold out hope that Jenkins and/or Borom becomes a stud. But what complicates things is Daniels is a FA. Daniels isn't quite what he is, though he's probably never going to be a stud, pro bowl level OG. But he's also going to be literally the youngest FA in the league this offseason. And due to his age, solid performance the last 2 years when healthy, and still having a bit of upside; it makes this an either/or proposition. Either you sign Daniels OR you get a true stud on the OL. Probably can't afford both, unless you go really cheap at WR and get no CB help (remember no draft picks either). Given that a couple studs in Cleveland just got taken off the market, combined with the fact that it's very few studs in general out there, I think you have to re-sign Daniels. The whole "bird in the hand". They'll probably have to develop a stud OL between the rookie OTs and any future draft picks on the interior, but that's probably the way to go.

Hate Mushmouth Perkins. He's terrible. I used to watch him argue with Max Kellerman just because I could feel that one day he would call Max an MF'er or say the N-word on TV (trust me, Perkins uses this word a LOT, based on several factors). I did hear him say "God damnit" on the air once with no repercussions.

This all sounds good to me.

That last part of your last sentence gives him the edge for me right now. He has run a top 3 offense in 2 of the last 3 years. He has some ties to the Fangio defense. And the Ravens are simply the best run franchise in the sport right now. I trust him more to build a great staff than Daboll at this point. The one thing I do worry about with Roman though is he puts a TON on his QB. I know the Ravens RB situation is a mess, but Lamar has almost twice as many carries as anyone else on that team. He had the most carries on the team last year when they had 3 legit and healthy backs. I mean Daboll is probably still top 3 for me, or top 5 at worst. Roughly speaking its probably Roman Daboll Bowles Morris Toub Those would be my top 5 if I was broadening it past just Offensive guys, which I think they should. Moore has some intrigue, but I do worry he's too green. Hackett has some intrigue. Pick another name out of the Shannahan/McVay hat if you're feeling trendy I guess, but I guess its no accident my top two offensive choicess are serving under D head coaches. There's zero doubt they are running their show currently. Didn't mean to apply I don't like Daboll. Because he's probably a close 2nd to Roman right now, for me. Roman Daboll Morris Moore Bowles That would probably be my top 5. Kevin O'Connell (former NFL QB and current Rams OC) would be interesting, but he only has 2 years as OC and hasn't called plays. Not too worried about Moore being raw. I think if you're going for the next McVay, he's probably that guy. There's rumors than Shanahan could be gone if the Niners don't do anything this year. I'm not even a huge Shanahan guy, but I'd take him in a heartbeat.

I'll admit I don't know much about the president of football operations role but how does the potential move stuff apply? Seems like that would create a unique type of role to deal with all of that stuff.

I think it's TBD if theyre a package deal. I could easily see where Pace is back, in which case I'm sure he'll have full authority to make a move at HC, and I'm sure he would. It's just hard to envision any scenario where Nagy is back. Whether they wait it out til the bitter end or not though, is unknown. I know decisions certainly not made using logic at Halas Hall but I cant believe they would keep Pace. It's his 6th year and the team has holes all over, is cap strapped and little draft capital. It's great that he got Fields, but you need to take advantage of his rookie contract and the guy that wastes ridiculous amounts of resources is not the guy to do that. One rumor going around is that the Bears move Pace up in a director of football operations type of position and potentially hire a GM from within underneath him (Champ Kelly is a popular name here). Part of me really likes this idea. The Bears do actually have a decent scouting department and Kelly is well respected around the league and probably gets some GM interviews this offseason. If the Bears clean house, he won't be jobless for long. Part of me really likes this move. With all going on with a potential new stadium and all Pace has done for the off-field product (Halas Hall), I think some continuity could be a good thing. But also, wouldn't have him as the primary guy selecting his 3rd coach.

That last part of your last sentence gives him the edge for me right now. He has run a top 3 offense in 2 of the last 3 years. He has some ties to the Fangio defense. And the Ravens are simply the best run franchise in the sport right now. I trust him more to build a great staff than Daboll at this point. The one thing I do worry about with Roman though is he puts a TON on his QB. I know the Ravens RB situation is a mess, but Lamar has almost twice as many carries as anyone else on that team. He had the most carries on the team last year when they had 3 legit and healthy backs.

I see a lot of people saying this but he was clearly reaching to grab his flag before the contact. Unless you are saying he initiated contact to make the flag he threw more justified? The taunting rule is horsefeathering stupid and should not be used to alter the outcome of games. Yes, he was grabbing for his flag before the contact, but he didn't throw it until he initiated the contact. That says to me he threw it to more justify it. I think he was going to let the sideline stuff go. And I don't really buy that certain calls shouldn't alter the outcome of games. Been 9 weeks, players know the taunting rule. Can't do it with the game in the balance and give a team an automatic 1st down. That being said, I agree in general that the league needs to have as few "judgement call" rules as humanly possible.

Was a fun game to attend. I knew the game was officiated poorly (aren't they all at this point?), but oh man seeing some of the highlights. Bears got screwed. I did catch the Daniels BS penalty. I was screaming "what is illegal about that?" You can block low in the TE box, which he was in. Secondly, he didn't even tough him! That's literally a 4-point swing in a 2-point game. I caught the BS DPI call. Johnson turned his head at one point to look for the ball, but then faced the WR but the WR was the aggressor and making contact. That was a big reason the Steelers scored 3 points....in a 2-point game. I didn't catch the roughing the passer call on Fields, though the hit on the sidelines I was screaming for a flag. Didn't lead with his head, but hit Fields in the head with his hands. The offsides calls on Quinn were iffy based on still photos I've seen. His head looks to be right at the ball, not over it. And we were told this was not a penalty in the GB game when Fields threw an INT on what should have been a free play. But one thing I will say is that I think the taunting penalty was the right call. I thought they called it for the kick. But Corrente said he called it because Marsh stared down the Steelers bench and lingered on the field.....which he did. The punter had to wait for him to leave the field to get in position to kick. That being said, Corrente very clearly and obviously didn't throw the flag until after contact that HE initiated. If the call was because of the stare down, then the flag should have been out long before the contact he made. But hey, Justin Fields is probably good. Larry Borom is probably good. Cole Kmet had a great game. Jaylon Johnson and Roquan Smith are good. Eddie Goldman dominated in the run game. The Bears actually look to have some good young pieces, especially from the last 2 drafts. I'm excited for this team with some of the dead weight gone and a better coaching staff (please choose a better coaching staff).

This has been one of my favorite Twitter days in my 9 years on the site. You done messed up A-A Ron!

Build around Lance and Chase. Maybe Hockenson, but I subscribe to that TEs aren't that big a deal unless you get one that gives you WR value (Kelce, healthy Kittle, Waller like a #3 WR). So, if someone is TE needy, I'd definitely see if they'd give something of solid value for Hock. AJ Brown is your big trade piece. I'd get all the picks/players (RB/QB) you can get for him. Herbert is an interesting sell high candidate with Montgomery due back soon, but you can also keep him if you feel Herbert can be the Hunt to Monty's Chubb. I said build around Lance at QB, but don't shy away from getting another QB and put all your eggs in the Lance basket. He may start late in the year and then you can have a side-by-side comparison to decide who leads your team in the future. **** this is assuming 1 QB, PPR league****

Yeah, plus the documentary was always framed/marketed that it was about Jordan first, and that last season/the Bulls second. The dude acting like he thought it was going to be equally about all of them is practically delusional, and, more likely, is just a straight up lie. Maybe it's just me, but I didn't expect it to be so Jordan heavy going in. I legit expected it to be about the entire team. Obviously, Jordan was always going to get the most face time, but I expected a lot more Pippen, Phil and Rodman at the very least. But I agree, it kinda is what it is at this point. Scottie's career is in no way diminished by playing with Jordan. He's a top 50 player of all time. A Dream Teamer. You're a legend Scottie, it's OK.