WrigleyField 22

What if the boost was just the entire gameplan though. I'd have some concern with Fields taking every snap in a game with no Montgomery. I'm a coward that way. And Dalton with no Montongomery is... Well I guess I can at least just not turn on the TV that day.

What if the boost was just the entire gameplan though.

Welp

Yup. Fields obviously has the basics down just fine. He needs to improve his play speed recognition and its just such a hard argument to say he'll get there with practice snaps and on the bench. Luckily I don't think they have another Browns like D/front to play, so every game should provide ample learning experience for him and it is just wasting development to put Dalton out there.

Thats relatively good news if true, but still enough for me to very confidently say the Bears will be 2-6.

Humble brag, but I'm at 144 points (non PPR) with another 9 projected and am only at 68% odds to win per ESPN. Just gonna be one of those weeks where the number 2 scorer in the league loses.

Didn't look great. This offense without Montgomery....

Will they. I don’t want them to lol Hopefully they keep doing what they have been. And a lot of that will look like shell... Until you bust one. Well despite not punching in a TD that was promising...

Will they or should they? Will they. I don’t want them to lol Hopefully they keep doing what they have been. And a lot of that will look like shell... Until you bust one.

Will they or should they?

Interfering with the catch that was caught cleanly.

This Lions team just can't help themselves. Lol. Have fun today. Hope Nagy doesn't switch everything back next week and wait to see if this team is improved at all against a real team next week.

Who would become the coach? Lazor? I'm guessing Mike Pettine. He has experience as a HC. Though, I could see some value in seeing if Lazor or DeFilippo could run a team (especially if it happens this week) with 13 games to go, as there would still be time to turn things around in this season. And either of those guys could be potentially be a long-term hire if things go extremely well, while Pettine would certainly not ever be more than an interim. Yea, I'm thinking it would be Pettine as a caretaker and DeFillippo if they wanted to give someone a legit audition for the permanent role.

They're a running team this year at least. It should be their strength. Yea they're leaning a little hard right now, but it's working right now. Hopefully they'll be a really balanced team that passes and runs well next year with a new coach and a full season of snaps under Fields belt.

I think it's possible. Like if they just get embarrassed against Detroit, it could be as high as 50/50. And no I don't care about what they've done in the past because every situation is unique.

Is it possible the players are actually responsible for initiating this feedback/collaboration thing? https://www.sportsmockery.com/chicago-bears/nick-foles-apparently-confronted-matt-nagy-about-offenses-problems/

Nagy said it’s a game-time decision That's stupid. If there is any doubt that on Friday afternoon that Dalton can play he should just name Fields the starter at least privately. (and its possible he has and he's just being a galaxy brain about gamesmanship.) Hey man, any little competitive advantage you can gain a against *checks notes* the Detroit Lions, you just gotta do.

I think I posted earlier, but I'm sure there's a path where they have a Joint Venture partner(s) with some capital backing. The equity contributions will be small enough for the McCaskeys to be able to put up their share and that venture partner will probably put up significant debt as well. They'll get some NFL money too. All they can probably count on from AH is some tax preferences for the future. I'm sure they'll try from the state, and hopefully fail. And maybe the county will do some bare minimum capital improvement help to the site whether it's roads or infrastructure. That joint venture may even be someone prepared to own the franchise in time. A convertible debt like scenario perhaps (where the McCaskeys can still get a nice 12% ROI on whats there now but give up the upside of an eventual 5.5B valuation). As to the rest of the site development, whether it's sold off directly or leased to developers, yes I'm sure additional development partners are brought in to add capital for hotels/condos/whatevers with some recurring revenue streams set up to go back to the team/partnership. Whether it's sold or leased is likely just a question of tax consequences. But since this thing may take time and Virginia could probably go at any minute, it may just be that it's handed over to the next owner as a ready made solution and still has increased the franchise value more than the $200M they'll put up for it. And presumably that owner will still bring in developer partners, but get to keep more of the downstream revenue by financing more of it directly.

Still skeptical they'll put a full team there rather than just eventually get to a point where everyone has to make the annual trip each year.

I'm not gonna flip allegiances, but I go to as many Sox games as Cubs games since they're convenient and cheap as opposed to inconvenient and expenaive. It doesn't immediately need 2M die hard fans to be viable. If the Bears move up to AH, the new team could maybe play up a North Side/South Side thing similar to Cubs/Sox, especially if the Bears continue to lag behind the rest of the league in terms of actually developing a team. Though I'm not sure how attractive being the White Sox of the city is to a new owner. I guess what are the other cities that will vie for an NFL team expansions attention? San Antonio Portland San Diego Oakland/Bay area 2nd team St Louis OK City?

After all the bitching about how you can’t be a Cubs and White Sox fan for decades, it would be hard to draw a dedicated fanbase. Then again if the Bears continue to flounder and can’t build a modern NFL offense and this new team can, there’s a slight chance. I guess I'm just dumb enough to stick with "my" teams no matter how horsefeathers they are so I wouldn't really give a new team a chance. I'm not gonna flip allegiances, but I go to as many Sox games as Cubs games since they're convenient and cheap as opposed to inconvenient and expenaive. It doesn't immediately need 2M die hard fans to be viable.

Obviously they'd struggle. And theres probably 2 or 3 cities who could support one team better than a 2nd Chicago team, but I would think it should be up there on the options if NFL expands. Especially if the Bears have a top notch facility they can host as tenant or SF as a playable home field.. It makes some sense.

Chicago probably should have a second team, but any scenario where there's two monstrous football stadiums is dumb. Since a second Chicago team will have trouble filling the stands for a while anyways, maybe they could be a SF tenant. They'll get no special treatment other than a low lease offer though, and the responsibility to keep up the turf.

Its for sale. In any development that happens there the city probably will be involved too. It doesnt take a huge leap for the city to help negotiate the path presuming the seller is willing to part at a price that makes sense. Outside of the state of the land, the main area of consternation with the Bears having a new stadium anywhere in the city is going to be the team wanting money to help fund it, and the city and state's attitude being "go pound sand." An area of land simply being for sale or not isn't the issue/solution. Well they did anyways for SF. While the state/city funding zero would be great, wonder what the 600M could have done there circa 2000. Call it 1B including cleanup for the whole site, which could have then been partioned off to Private developers. And SF could have just hobbled along for occasional non marquee events. Maybe Lucas Muesum could have eventually found its way to the Muesum campus. But yea now, I wouldn't want the city state to give any funding. Maybe a tax credit directly related to the cleanup aspect, but that's about it.