WrigleyField 22

On the broadcast tonight they said no risk of further damage.

Oh God, I can't believe they almost pulled it off. I wanna go back to the UC bad now. That seemed electric. Bulls Knicks back? When was the last time both teams were good?

I believe the Hawks have disputed the reference part and that civil litigation is still ongoing.

Maybe promising for the line play going forward.

I get neither likely had first time reps, but given they were down to Wilk wouldn't you give some reps to whoever is the swing guy for that game? Even if just scout reps? And if the answer is that Bars was the swing guy, did they over think it by having Simmons jump him? Yes they absolutely overthought it. Bars has been the "extra" linemen on a bunch of plays recently so they probably wanted to keep him in that role. It does make sense to get the healthy backup(s) some practice reps, but when the starter is bad...that guy needs all the reps he can get as well. More important to give Wilkinson reps to improve since he's the one supposed to play than give Simmons/Bars minimal reps. Could just be though that Peters is wrong. His statement made it seem like Simmons has never played RT, when he played entire games there in the preseason. Yea definitely considering they never even used to extra lineman set. And Simmons had something like 22 snaps so it's not like they just didn't get around to it. Anyways seems like big "you don't use a closer in a tie game" type energy.

There's people making out Lachavious Simmons not getting any practice at RT into a thing. Like who cares? He was the 5th option to play RT this season. That's akin to complaining that Nick Foles is getting no practice reps. He's not supposed to be playing, don't waste your time when the guy in front of him needs all the reps he can get (talking about Fields and Wilkinson). Wilkinson went out with Covid like an hour before the game. It's not a miscarriage of justice that Simmons wasn't prepared to start. He had no reason to be prepared to start. You can argue that Simmons over Bars was a bad decision, but Bars likely had no RT practice snaps either. Simmons at least played entire preseason games at RT this year. He didn't suck because of lack of practice, he sucked because lack of ability. I get neither likely had first time reps, but given they were down to Wilk wouldn't you give some reps to whoever is the swing guy for that game? Even if just scout reps? And if the answer is that Bars was the swing guy, did they over think it by having Simmons jump him?

Look either Matt is kidnapped by a local terrorist cell and being told to not tip his hand or he's a fool. Take your pick.

Surprised about Ogeltree.

No anyone who says he's the entire problem is wrong. But still, 3.5 years in and if I was forced to say what they're good at, it's the running game over the past 7. And I see very little evidence that I'm supposed to primarily credit Nagy for that. Even squinting I can't tell if there's an area where we could say there's some positive track record. Even with below average talent I'd expect a guy specifically brought in to be a guru show something with what he's given. Edit - basically even the most charitable case I can come up with is Nagy is an averagish offensive mind in a terrible situation. If that's the case, I can get a new HC and find plenty of averagish OC to do the same thing and if I'm lucky, find better.

Wait, why would he be allowed at HH anyways? What are the protocols?

Ah damn, I didn't realize that. So without Mack, if Sunday turns into an embarrassing loss there will basically be a running clock of 48 hours to trade off any pieces as they'll be sitting at 3-5 with a battered D that's supposed to be the strength of the team. And while the schedule eases up a little bit they still have @GNB and ARI games and an O that's already been shut out of the endzone multiple times this year.

And they're discussing an IR stint. Luckily a 3 week IR stint would only be 2 games as they have the bye. But if they IR Mack, even for the 3 games, and lose to SF Sunday, they actually should conduct a firesale. Shop Quinn, Ogeltree, Hicks, Nichols, Goldman. Really any D piece, but those are the guys who might have positive value. Few are pending FA anyways. ARob will be tricky to deal because of his salary (unless they took a contract back). And I'm inclined to only deal from the D and not take a weapon away from Fields (even one that he hasn't clicked with).

It's not even like they did a ton with the young talent GarPax left them either. -Lauri was let go in a S+T trade but they got back a late 1st and a player who hasn't done anything for the team this year, so that move isn't responsible for any team success -WCJ and OPJ were obviously a big pieces of the Vuc trade, but I don't necessarily think the trade was made because Orlando had to have those guys. Porter is already on another team. WCJ did sign an extension but he's not exactly balling out for Orlando. If the Bulls had taken another player with that draft pick I don't think it ruins the chances of completing a Vuc trade -Give a bit of credit to GarPax for having a least a couple of ok contracts that were desirable enough to include in trades if only for salary matching purposes. Thad Young was a piece in the DeRozan trade. Sato was a piece in the Lonzo trade. Kornet, Gafford and Hutchison went out in the Javonte Green/Troy Brown trade. It's not nothing...having those types of contracts helps with flexibility in trades, but I don't see any of them singularly being needed to complete those trades. Denzel, Arcidiacono, Felicio were let go in FA. Valentine has played 4 minutes for the Cavs so far, Arch was waived by the Celtics during the preseason, Felicio is back in Brazil I'm pretty sure. While GarPax didn't draft Patrick Williams, their crappy season put the new FO in a position to take him. AKME took a bunch of crap and a few first round picks and turned it into a team that's 4-0 and on an upward trajectory. Credit GarPax for also not parting with picks. AKME had a full slate to work with.

Yea it's not totally clear to me if the context is then former or currently former. Anyway. No one us gonna be made public who doesn't want to be. Let's hope poor internet doxxing doesn't occur and out the wrong people (victim or perpetrator)

Thanks, I know a guy who is defending Nagy by saying this decision was taken out of his hands. I do not believe it matters, we'd see the same results from any QB in Nagy' system - lack of preparation, not putting your players in a position to succeed, calling for snaps on things that aren't there, etc. - that's all on him. Yep. I'm willing to admit we know a lot less about predicting future success than we think, and that these evaluations are complex with many moving parts. But it's hard to figure out an area that Nagy's offense is supposed to hang its hat on when making the case. Who's the one player or concept developed. Is it supposed to be the run game thus year? That's like the first consistently strong offensive output we've seen anywhere in 4 years.

The 2014 incident was not John Doe, but "Black Ace 1".

Jesus christ there are way too many identifying details.

It's not a detail I've sought out, but AFAIK the identify of John Doe was never leaked. Speculation though that details are in the public report that aren't redacted and will reveal who it is? That's really unfortunate

Yea there's no good possible response from Stan. Better to just stay quiet.

Kind of weak. I think the part where he notes Bowman cooperated with the investigation while others did not was fairly interesting. I don't have a problem pointing out that you think he would have done the right thing in other circumstances. I mean at least they're having him take some ownership for the mistakes. I guess in an alternate universe something like that is used as an excuse for not having consequences, which is why it comes off poorly.

I don't think pressure rate is a perfect stat, but this was still an interesting few charts:

Kind of weak.

Well pleasantly surprised. I'm sure USA Hockey will follow suit as well (which they should have done first, especially considering there are minors in that development program). Hopefully it's sincere change and it's just not a fall guy (totally without regard to any hockey implication).

I think Stan will be gone You really think so?