raw

Guessing because it was hit in the outfield. Legit outfield, not inbetween area

There were force outs at 2nd and 3rd for the last two outs of the inning. We got unlucky that the ball was hidden behind Pham rather than rolling away where the runners could see it. Yep, from a scoring perspective, it has the same effect as a routine inning-ending 6-4-3 double play. I thought the key was getting the guy out at 1st though. A 6-4-3 means getting the batter out at first. The batter reached first, I thought that was the determining factor. Ah, nevermind. I'm stupid.

Wait, why wouldn't that run count?

Listening to Padres broadcast and they somehow think the game is still tied.

Bears showing interest in CBs (Steven Nelson and Breshaud Breeland) and had OT Morgan Moses in to visit today. Leno officially off the books today, the Bears have about 8.4Mil in cap space (9M saved from Leno cut, 600K salary takes his spot on the to 51 salaries which are counted toward the cap). The Bears need to sign all their draft picks, so that money is even less. Fields and Jenkins are the main salary cap hits upcoming as the 5th-7th round rookies won't fit in the top 51 salaries at their draft slots....at least not yet. So, interesting that the Bears are looking at FAs still when they essentially have 4.5-5Mil in effective space when accounting for rookies. CB and OT are the biggest needs IMO. Need a CB so the Bears only have to replace 1 DB spot instead of outside CB across from Johnson and slot CB with the recently bad and old, Trufant, and the cast of late picks and UDFAs they have. And they have 0 experience at LT, so depth behind Jenkins would also be ideal. Moses is actually really good too, so he would be an upgrade over Ifedi at RT, and has played LT in the past in a pinch. Be interested to see if they make Ifedi a $4.5M swing tackle or put him back at RG and move Daniels or Whitehair back to C.

Ryan Tepera for MVP!

I don't just blame the first baseman the more I watch that play. The catcher gotta know what's going on. They're supposed to be the smartest/captain on the field. He's asking for the throw home. He has no reason to even be there, it's not a true rundown situation. Let Javy go all the way to the plate, it doesn't even matter. It's like Javy depending on them being stupid, and they were.

First place!

Why didn't he just step on the bag? Why did he not tag him when he was right next to him? He could have tagged him several times before the run scored and there was 2 outs so it didn't even horsefeathering matter when he tagged him. He just had to tag him or the base before Javy touched the base. Literally the worst defensive play in MLB history. My son's team allowed this to kind of happen in a game Monday (they are 11-12). Strike out reached 2nd base because they were too afraid of the guy stealing home if they threw it to first....with 2 outs. Oh and this happened 4 times in the game! His team struck out 20 guys in a 6 inning game.

Yes sir and next week live on ESPN you can see my nephew (freshman LB) and #2 Sam Houston St. take on 3-time defending champions, North Dakota St. My nephew is a national champion!

I really don't want to jump the gun with Fields, especially given the Bears history but damn a lot of teams made some questionable decisions leading to the Bears getting him. Teams that either picked in the top 10 or at a very similar slot as the Bears traded assets for Carson Wentz, Teddy Bridgewater, and Sam Darnold over taking a chance to draft Justin Fields. Washington has a loaded defense, great OL, and some promising young weapons and they are throwing out a QB who turns 39 in season on a 1-year deal instead of trading a similar package for Fields. The Niners and Jets potentially took the wrong QB. The Falcons know Matt Ryan is on his last legs at 36, yet passed on Fields. The Vikings would have potentially taken Fields if he fell, but could have made a modest move up with Cousins clearly, not it and also old and expensive. The Dolphins, Giants, and Eagles (Denver and Carolina probably count too) all are sticking with QBs that are probably bad instead of making a Cardinals like move and going after Fields. In theory, this is very similar to the 2017 on paper. 49ers went with CJ Beathard and eventually traded for Garoppolo instead of picking Mahomes/Watson. Jags stuck with Bortles. Browns waited a round to take Deshone Kizer. Titans stuck with Mariota who was probably already not good enough in 2017. Chargers stuck with aging Philip Rivers. Bengals stuck with aging and mediocre Dalton. Jets started Josh McCown for 13 games. Buffalo stuck with Tyrod Taylor (granted, they got Josh Allen the next year). NFL teams do some wacky things when it comes to QBs. In hindsight, those 2017 decisions look terrible for all the teams that could have had Mahomes or pre-raping Watson....but all those teams clearly needed or were clearly going to very soon need franchise QBs that year. Again, Fields has to perform to make them regret their decisions, but I find it ironic that he went 11th, while Mahomes and Watson went 10th and 12th respectively.

Man, I'm not usually one to eat up all the media stuff but my God, I love the Bears first 2 picks. Jenkins is so funny, down-to-Earth, mild-mannered off the field and violent on the field. Fields is just a horsefeathering assassin. "I'm built for this" when asked about being a QB in the spotlight. They definitely said all the right stuff in the just ended press conferences, not a bunch of cliche' answers to things that don't involve actual coaching decisions.

Very weird. But I love the schedule. This is about as good as the 3rd toughest schedule can get.

Would LOVE this move. He's quite good. Be OK with him in the slot or outside.

2 Sunday Nights 2 Monday Nights 1 Thanksgiving Day Assuming they'll have to play a Thursday night at some point as well. Also, interesting that the games that have leaked so far have been almost all road games. 8 road games and 1 home have been leaked (9 on the road this year due to 17th game added). Safe assumption that weeks 6, 8, 13, and 17 are at home with 1 being their bye week (sandwiched between road games). Also no week 2-4 announced, so I'd guess the last road game we don't know (@ Browns) is likely in that window, unless the Bears have a 3-straight road game stretch

Star ain't happening. Word is they will go big after a PG this offseason. I've heard Lonzo Ball and I've heard potential trade for Malcolm Brogdon. I think they bring back Theis for toughness. Not sure how restricted FA works, but I wonder if they'd try a sign and trade type thing for Lauri. But anyway, I think they'll ride with: Ball/Brogdon, LaVine, find a role player at SF, Williams, Vucevic with White, Young and Theis as the main guys off the bench. I'd love for them to bring back Temple and give Troy Brown a bigger role. But I think they'll give this team a 2 or 3 year run making tweaks to the role players if needed, and then see where they are when Lavine is approaching 30 (need to be re-signed), guys like Vuc and Williams need to be re-signed or not and they finally get to draft in the 1st round again.

Nah, if it's Fields, it's no turning back. I don't think the playoff pressure is as big as the pressure to show progress offensively. And the pressure won't come from the fans, because nobody wants to see Dalton. If Fields struggles in 2 of the first 3 starts, then he probably wasn't ready to play and they made a bad decision.

touche Granted, my confidence is based solely on the fact that my theory about Pace/Nagy and their future together based on McCaskey wanting continuity seems to be coming true this year. I always thought they'd get a shot to draft a QB together. I think they will have a chance to develop that QB. It seems fairly obvious Dalton was brought in to start a couple games as a competent veteran until the rookie is ready. Nagy loves the Mahomes got to sit and learn storyline. All they really have to do is show progress on offense this year. So, if they lose a couple games with Dalton early as the defense takes a step back, but then go to Fields and the offense looks interesting, they are coming back in 2022. I don't think the goal was for Dalton to start a couple games when they signed him. They didn't even know they'd have a rookie QB until 13 days ago. Dalton was the "bird in the hand". If the Bears HAD to start him a couple games or more, they signed him because they were OK with that. But I don't think that was necessarily the plan when they got him in March. If Fields is clearly ready and outplays Dalton in camp, I sure as hell hope they don't go with Dalton just because of some ideal plan or what happened 4 years ago with an actual competent QB for a perennial 10-win team.

The point was more of you can't look at the schedule and say, "oh we can't start Fields because Aaron Donald is on the other team, and it's on the road and in primetime, it may be too much for the rookie". The 2nd paragraph was more of a general statement about people wanting a rookie to sit simply because he's a rookie. Fans and coaches, including our very own Nagy who keeps talking about how Mahomes sitting helped him, think this way and there's really no semblance of proof that sitting for the sake of sitting actually does anything positive or negative. Like Mitch didn't suck because he was thrown in Week 5 instead of sitting all season as originally planned. I would mostly disagree that you can ruin rookies, but I do believe there have been extreme cases (David Carr the most glaring one) where rookies have been ruined by what they are surrounded by (coaches, teammates, bad OL, bad WRs). I don't think the Bears are that much of a disaster that they will ruin Fields by throwing him in week 1 vs. week 14. Obviously, you wait until he's completely ready as a QB but I think it's a dangerous proposition to wait until Jenkins is ready. There's a chance Jenkins can never handle his job. He could be just a bad player. You can't keep Fields off the field because your rookie tackle can't play. That's like sitting Cutler until Chris Williams proved he could handle his job. Obviously, it's the line as a whole, but Cutler's line was pretty bad pretty much the whole time he was here. Granted, he wasn't an inexperienced rookie but I think the point remains. Waiting on the OL to solidify is similar to waiting for a home game against an easy opponent. Those have nothing to do with the QBs ability to run the offense correctly (successfully is a different story). What does Cutler have to do with anything? I'm talking about giving a rookie a few games. And you can't say you disagree you can ruin rookies and then point out it's possible to ruin rookies. You can ruin rookies. Fields wasn't starting Week 1 regardless of timeslot or opponent. That they get the RAms out of the way with that is all for the better. Let Dalton pay the Dalton tax. I mean, I clearly said what I think Cutler has to do with things. You might not think it's relevant, but oh well. And I also said I "mostly" disagree, me pointing out that it's possible is why it's mostly and not fully. Not sure why you're acting like I'm being unclear. Also not sure what a "Dalton tax" is or why that's a legit reason why Fields shouldn't start Week 1. You know he's better and he's the long-term future at the position. You haven't even suggested that he might not be physically or mentally capable of handling the job by Week 1. All you've said is the OL might not be good or Dalton has to play because you paid him. The reasons you give have nothing to do with Fields. Reasons to start Fields: 1. He's ready to run the offense competently 2. He's the best QB option on the team. Reasons to NOT start Fields. 1. He's not ready to run the offense compently 2. He's not the best QB option on the team. I don't care about anything else.

Also, appears Bears are in Vegas against the Raiders Week 5 (Sunday 10/10)

Rumors of Cowboys/Raiders, Bills/Saints, and of course.....Bears/Lions on Thanksgiving this year.

Yeah, Stafford has put up consistent numbers against the Bears with no run game or WRs at times and certainly never had this type of defense.

The point was more of you can't look at the schedule and say, "oh we can't start Fields because Aaron Donald is on the other team, and it's on the road and in primetime, it may be too much for the rookie". The 2nd paragraph was more of a general statement about people wanting a rookie to sit simply because he's a rookie. Fans and coaches, including our very own Nagy who keeps talking about how Mahomes sitting helped him, think this way and there's really no semblance of proof that sitting for the sake of sitting actually does anything positive or negative. Like Mitch didn't suck because he was thrown in Week 5 instead of sitting all season as originally planned. I would mostly disagree that you can ruin rookies, but I do believe there have been extreme cases (David Carr the most glaring one) where rookies have been ruined by what they are surrounded by (coaches, teammates, bad OL, bad WRs). I don't think the Bears are that much of a disaster that they will ruin Fields by throwing him in week 1 vs. week 14. Obviously, you wait until he's completely ready as a QB but I think it's a dangerous proposition to wait until Jenkins is ready. There's a chance Jenkins can never handle his job. He could be just a bad player. You can't keep Fields off the field because your rookie tackle can't play. That's like sitting Cutler until Chris Williams proved he could handle his job. Obviously, it's the line as a whole, but Cutler's line was pretty bad pretty much the whole time he was here. Granted, he wasn't an inexperienced rookie but I think the point remains. Waiting on the OL to solidify is similar to waiting for a home game against an easy opponent. Those have nothing to do with the QBs ability to run the offense correctly (successfully is a different story).