WrigleyField 22

The league wide improvement in passing efficiency. Pro-football has era-adjusted rating numbers. I'd probably chose ANY/A+, but they have several others too. Miller is a weird comp since he really just started one season, but he was a decent Bears-centric one. Not stylistically similar obviously. But the whole win 12-13 games and then lose to Philly ended up being poetic to the comparison too. Miller http://pfref.com/pi/share/ADNc2 Trubisky http://pfref.com/pi/share/0w4aI how do you generate that on PF? I'm having trouble pulling up Foles and Cutlers numbers for my own curiosity. eta: nvm, I found the chart in there bios. unsurprisingly, Foles and Trubisky are pretty close career-wise, Cutler ahead of both. Interestingly however, despite the benching, Trubisky has outplayed Foles this year by a decent margin in RATE+, 95 to 86 respectively. 100 being average QB play One of the surprising rate statistics for me was Miller's strong sack%. It's one of those things thats less O-Line dependent than you think, and ANY/A takes Sacks into account whereas passer rating doesn't, which is IMO it's biggest improvement over it. And Mitch, despite his legs, has crappy pocket awareness which passer eating doesnt dock him for. So even not adjusting for era, Mitch is still behind Kramer and Cutler in ANY/A and just barely ahead of McMahon.

what is "passer inflation" and how do you calculate it? I don't disagree that the league is far more QB friendly today then in the past, but I want to see those numbers on the Jim Miller claim The league wide improvement in passing efficiency. Pro-football has era-adjusted rating numbers. I'd probably chose ANY/A+, but they have several others too. Miller is a weird comp since he really just started one season, but he was a decent Bears-centric one. Not stylistically similar obviously. But the whole win 12-13 games and then lose to Philly ended up being poetic to the comparison too. Miller http://pfref.com/pi/share/ADNc2 Trubisky http://pfref.com/pi/share/0w4aI

rawaction mentioned in the Detroit thread that Mitch was now the Bears career leader in QB rating among players with at least 300 pass attempts. He’ll pass Ed Brown for 7th in all time passing yards this next game, Billy Wade for 6th if he starts another game after that, and probably Erik Kramer for 5th if he plays out the rest of the season. Of the four guys still above him - Cutler, Luckman, Harbaugh and McMahon - he’ll have a higher completion percentage and lower interception percentage. I realize all of this is way more a testament to how bad the Bears qbs have been than anything Mitch has achieved. That said, the biggest problem with Mitch remains the fact that the Bears traded up to get him with the 2nd overall pick. If he’d been taken with the 52nd pick, his performance would be deemed “fine.” You’d still want to bring in a better qb, but no one would be particularly disappointed in Mitch’s performance. Its also just a testament to general league wide improvement in passing numbers. I'd take Cutler obviously over him still. Kramer too. The rest I didnt really get to watch, but I'd probably take the lot of them as well. Adjusting for passer inflation he's basically a Jim Miller level QB. So yea, Kyle is right. A good backup and in a perfect storm can start and lead a 12/13 win team (with a great D obviously) and then lose to PHI in the playoffs.

Stop with the hot takes. This is Bears football. We run dive plays straight up the gut, bubble screens, and count on the Defense to score just like Papa Bear Halas intended.

That definitely sucks. Are they gonna go on as an independent league?

Right now, I'm feeling: Rick Smith- President of Football Operations (former Texans GM before O'Brien) Ed Dodds (Colts asst GM) or Joe Hortiz (Ravens asst GM)- GM Brandon Staley - HC (Rams DC, former Bears asst under Fangio) Shane Waldron- OC (Rams QB coach, passing game coordinator) Jay Rodgers- DC (Current Bears DL coach, former asst under Fangio) Dodds seemingly was a package deal with Robert Saleh last year when Cleveland was interested, but Cleveland went with another HC. So, he may be of a lot of interest to Detroit. If that's still the case, give me Hortiz. But yes, I went with a defensive head coach. He has Bears ties and his name is Staley! But the ideal pairing is a Fangio disciple led defense with an offensive coach from the Shanahan tree. Best of both worlds. Waldron could bring in a veteran consultant since all these guys are young. But Rodgers and Staley overlapped under Fangio, and allows the Bears to keep and promote maybe their only good position coach. I'm not convinced you'd be able to poach the likes of Dodd with what is effectively a number 2 role. Maybe Hortiz. I think if you like Smith you just make him the GM. Smith is an intriguing option though.

I don't think borrowing from the future will be a thing you have to worry about. Ryan Pace did that because he was desperately trying to win to save him and his coach's jobs. Assuming he's fired, I don't know of too many situations (maybe some past Cleveland GMs) where a guy comes in and starts throwing tons of money around. I guess what I'm saying is that I'm worried about Pace not being fired, then? I think we're being over-optimistic about the offense though, outside of Robinson, who probably won't be back. The offensive line is a dumpster-fire and it's *all* of them. They range from "below-average starter but definitely a starter" to "why is this guy in the league," but none of them are good. Montgomery is aggressively ordinary and average. Kmet and Mooney look like they could be useful guys but it's a long way from "useful" to "above-average starter." Everyone else can go away forever and not be missed for a second. And we still don't have a QB, which is by far the most important position. Foles is just Trubisky but with mobility instead of intelligence as his dump stat. You could probably fix all this in a couple of drafts, but by the time you do, the defense that is already too old will be in need of a complete overhaul. But focus on the offense first anyway because who cares about defense? If they keep Pace I don't know what to expect. But I'd be more concerned about possibly leveraging fuutre draft resources than future cap resources. That may not be a ringing endorsement, but that's where I am. Also if Pace is back I really really hope it's with an extension so hes not acting with his job on the line. If he's got a fresh 4-5 years hopefully he acts rationally, understanding he still hasn't addressed QB and doesn't have an obvious great route to do so yet.

Well that's a little more fair Kyle. I generally don't count accidental tank years, but if you include this season and then say next season is kind of shot, that should be the extent of it more or less. Pace may have been aggressive with cap maneuvering but those affects don't last that long as long as you commit to ripping off the bandaid. That said if Pace sticks around I'd generally expect him to continue to push the cap deferral limits since thats been the Saints approach. I'm not against sneaky cap manuevering; might as well stack cap resources into windows, even if it's a little boom or bust. The Saints would be on the extreme end, but theres a balance to strike I think where maybe you're doing a cap reset every 4-5 years and maximize 3-4 year windows in between those resets where you mini tank. That cap manuevering can happen in concert with the long term comp pick pipeline where you continually build draft capital and keep on getting picks back from the comp process, feeding the next group of comp pick getters. Considering what Pace inherited he set up that comp pick pipeline about as quick as you could expect.

THE TEAM LACKS DEPTH, AND THEY LACK DEPTH BECAUSE THEY'VE TRADED AWAY PICKS. THEY CANT AFFORD TO KEEP DOING THAT sry capslock eta: look at it this way, they don't have a #2 WR, no #2 RB, no #1 TE (there's hope for Kmet), and all of their OLine backups are 7th rd or UFA's. You know what helps a team fill out those backups at reasonable prices? draft picks. Sure, this off season could be different with the CAP being low, but you're just likely to get older players who will command more salary anyway Raw is absolutely right. You can and should trade up for a game-changing QB, just have to get the pick right. No one is saying Kansas City (10th overall for 27 overall, a 3rd rounder and a 1st rounder the next year) or Houston (12 for 27 and a first rounder the next year) traded too much for Mahomes and Watson. Obviously they should avoid trading a first rounder but they shouldn't have to at their current trajectory. They can and should backfill draft picks in other ways, yes (trade veterans, compensation picks, trade downs in non-QB scenarios). Also, if you don't have conviction on the QBs available, don't force one and work on filling the many other holes on the team. The Bears will probably get another chance at the top QBs in 2022. Good post except the word conviction is hereby banned post-Pace era. That is a dirty word now lol.

Its a tough task, but multi year tanks (intentional or not) don't really have a track record for the NFL either. And sometimes teams do get it together quicker than expected. So to me theres definitely a line where I don't have high expectations, but the right guy making the right moves is at least putting them into competition for the division by 2022, and a concerted multi year tank is dumb. With the average player arc just about every team is 2 years away from some component of their team being in shambles too. So, yea take some hits in 2021 is my plan, but then move on and keep building. Obviously they can get too aggressive too soon like trying another Mack type deal, but within reason they shouldn't be holding back by 2022 IMO.

Okay good cal raw, maybe the cap won't be 175M. https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2020/12/06/optimism-emerges-regarding-2021-salary-cap/ The implicit part is that can growth probably will still lag a bit. So certain teams like the Saints who's cap management was reliant on large growths like they've had the past decade are probably still in a no win spot. Bears at least get some breathing room at 195 though. I still wouldn't go all in, but they could maybe do something like sign a young bigger money OL to stabilize the line. Perhaps could sign Arob or at least have the cap space to confidently try a tag and trade situation.

Is team president really a carrot with appeal in the NFL? How many team presidents are real working GMs under 60? Football people are egomaniacs that want to make the decisions about players. Most teams that are good eventually become a head coach centric organization. I don't really see the opportunity to give a current successful GM a promotion to take over football ops and then hand over those ops to a GM. Yea, I think Indy could block that. It's basically just describing a GM with a fancy title. Maybe you could comp them to get him, but then they're not letting Dodds go along for the ride who they can make GM. If I was going to make a call into a long shot, it'd probably be Schneider from Seattle. He's technically the number 2 to Carrol so I don't even think they can block it, though he does seem pretty content in.his gig and Carrol is the oldest head coach, so maybe he thinks this most recent contract extension is the last hurrah. Rick Smith is an intriguing candidate from someone with experience. Maybe Rosman gets canned In Philly and he has a mixed record, but worth talking to. Otherwise I think you're likely back in the VP of Player personnel track like Pace/Ballard were.

The cap even being 195 would ease up a ton. I'd still probably look into accelerating some of the dead hits coming their way and not make any big splashes in FA for a year. A little detox, I guess you could say.

I was pointing this out earlier in this thread (I think), there are a ton of bad teams this year. Granted, there are more games to settle things out, chances are the Bears do better then most There is only 3 teams I see us having no shot to pass (JAX, NYJ, CIN). All the other teams are 3-8, 4-8 or tied at 5-7. A lot of these teams have games against each other too, and the Bears themselves have an opportunity to leap over Houston themselves. Presuming no ties, I think the worst the Bears could do (not officially just a guess based on the schedules) is pick 9th if they finish 5-11. I don't think the Bears will finish 5-11 though, they will win at least 1 more which sucks. Like I said earlier, most mock drafts have the top 4 QBs going in the top 10. I actually really like all 4 of them so I really want to be in position for one. I know it doesn't work this simply, but if you go to the NFL playoff machine and just chose Win% you end up with 10+ 5 win teams or worse. Sure one or two could outplay their record the rest of the way, but it doesn't seem promising to vault into the top 10 at 5-11 unless you win the SoS tiebreaker (not sure where the Bears will fall there). Those "projected" 5 win or worse teams; Jets, Chargers, Broncos, Bengals, Jaguars, Texans, Cowboys, Eagles, Lions, Panthers, Falcons. Bears actually going 5-11 flips Houston above them likely. So that helps. But there's a big glut around that 4 or 5 win mark that will be tough to pass.

Yea I think a lot of small positive changes or small negative changes seemingly have a way of cascading. Flip the easy negative things you can first and be prepared to pounce on the BIG game changers when they come up, like drafting a potential franchise QB.

FWIW, a couple posts I made on a Bears message board in regards to the cap. There's some context missing here where I was replying to specific things, but lays out either end of the extreme that they have with their cap options. Option 1- Accelerate hits and free up just enough cap to fill out roster with low salary/minimum salary and draft pool, with a small cushion; Option 2 - Double down and maximize 2021 cap. But specifically I was exploring how you could do it without cutting guys. Obviously some combination of cuts and restructures would be at play. So you can play around with the middle ground between those paths, but those are basically the barriers on either side of the 2021 cap management game.

I think a Mack trade saves a tiny amount still. About $4m I think. The trading team takes on guaranteed money, you just eat the dead cap hits from bonus pro-rations. Even if it was a slight dead cap in 2021 you could move around other stuff to reallocate cap hits and you're still saving in net a big chunk, and more importantly squeezing out some resources from him. The cap stuff is pretty fluid due to the rollforward nature of it and I think it's important to look at "unearned" savings rather than focusing too much on dead hits, which are a sunk cost. According to Spotrac, he costs us $26m if he's on the roster in 2021 and a $37m dead-cap hit if he's not: https://www.spotrac.com/nfl/chicago-bears/khalil-mack-14414/ We used most of our wiggle-room on the cap last year. It's not an infinite well. Fwiw I usually prefer OTC. They do a good job analyzing this stuff for the NFL specifically and spotrac is more a generalist and aggregator. https://overthecap.com/player/khalil-mack/2944/

I think a Mack trade saves a tiny amount still. About $4m I think. The trading team takes on guaranteed money, you just eat the dead cap hits from bonus pro-rations. Even if it was a slight dead cap in 2021 you could move around other stuff to reallocate cap hits and you're still saving in net a big chunk, and more importantly squeezing out some resources from him. The cap stuff is pretty fluid due to the rollforward nature of it and I think it's important to look at "unearned" savings rather than focusing too much on dead hits, which are a sunk cost.

Whoa slow down :lol: I do like Mooney a lot. And Kmet might still turn into something. Miller TBD. Montgomery, JAG who you should replace with another rookie contract player in a year.

I think a multi year concerted tank is never reality in the NFL. I honestly don't even like that "Process" style effort in the NBA (at least anymore with new lottery odds) but it's somewhat more defensible there. I think it should be a hard "reset" year where they do just shed as much of the dead caps as they can. To your point about replacing those guys the one positive is that like half the league is in a cap crunch this offseason because of covid. NO is going to be like 100M over and PHI 75M over before getting to cuts. So they will definitely be able to bargain shop for 1 year deals to replace those roster spots for a year, at which point, if they fully committed to it, cap sanity should be restored in 2022. So I'd say a mini tank. And figure out what your cost on Fuller and Mack is. Don't move them at any cost, but for a reasonable deal. Hicks get a late pick for if you can. Everyone else is young enough to keep or too worthless to trade. Of course there are ways for them to put together another half assed shot at it in 2021. I played around with it and they could free up enough to make a few second teir signings, maybe even for a new QB like a Brissett. Not a fan of that option AT ALL, but the cap could be manipulated to do such a thing. But anyways after that one year mini tank you'll have some cap space and a healthy balance sheet. You will have all all of your early picks in tact for two years. Should have several comp picks over 2 years and perhaps a few extra picks if you did manage to trade Mack/Fuller. The biggest question is QB, but teams frequently do quick builds in the NFL, without taking extreme shortcuts like a Khalil Mack type trade.

Yes? No? Maybe? Ultimately I think its McCaskeys vision and the president is just an extension of that. If he back filled that role its going to be someone who fulfills that vision and that's a very stable job thats not going to be as closely tied to W-L as GM/HC. So they can outlast a legacy GM and HC hire- its just a much bigger scale and long term hire. Which leads me to think it's a longer role to search for and you cant wait on that for GM/HC, unless you have an internal candidate, like perhaps Cliff Stein. Or you restructure the org where the GM no longer reports up through the president, but the operate more in parallel (like Cubs with Boyer-Kenney operating their sides), but I do think that setup requires more active management from ownership. Mostly I'm just prepping for the onslaught of hot takes that suggest replacing Phillips with basically a super GM role, some experienced football personnel exec. I think I may have made that same arguement 6 years ago, but do realize that's a simplistic way to think about it all.

I think the Phillips hate is usually some combination of misplaced or overstated. It's probably a role they could upgrade, though I don't think it's hugely important to football ops. From what I've looked around in many orgs a non "football person" being at the top between GM and owner isn't unusual. Some orgs do have a GM report directly to the owner, but those seem to typically be orgs with a much more hands on owner- how the Bears were until Phillips was named Pres- where a principal or minority owner was acting in that President role. So people need to think broadly about it as being another business hire primarily and not someone who's going to fix football personnel issues. That said, if they do replace Phillips and plan to have a President/CEO role between the top football exec and George, timing gets kind of interesting. I assume that the Pres search will be a longer search than a coach/GM search. If they fire Phillips tomorrow, maybe they have time to bring in a new President by the time the season ends and that person, with George, leads the GM search and subsequently HC hire. If they're all fired on Black Monday, not only will you be at 3rd and 4th choice GM/HC/assistant coach hires, but they'd be going into valuable offseason time for those new hires. So perhaps the other likely course is that if all 3 were fired black Friday, McCaskey announces that the two searches are separate and he immediately will start on the GM search with an Accorsi like advisor again and that a president would be named at a later date. That keeps them on a competetive timeline with other teams for coach/GM. OR as a slightly more unconventional route, go with an interim-like route. Fire just Phillips and Pace. Elevate a guy like Champ Kelly on the football side and Cliff Stein on the business ops side to act in acting/interim roles and that a President search won't be rushed and that person will make final decisions about personnel at the conclusion of 2021 season. Nagy stays on since he has 2 years and isn't a lame duck like Pace would have been. Or just fire Pace and Nagy on Black Monday and kind of just quietly start pushing Phillips aside, but don't make any formal announcements until the new GM is hired at which time you announce that in the new structure the GM will report directly to George and Phillips formally becomes just a glorified CFO/COO. Then in a year or two formally part ways with Phillips and then look to insert a new President/CEO. In any event, the worst combination would seem to be a Black Monday trifecta and then trying to replace all 3 in a like 6 week time span of successive hires, along with dozens of new FO staffers and assistants. So some other shoe seemingly has to drop from a timeline perspective.

Lol. Boars.

There's a lot of overlap with Coward in and out of the lineup with this too right? Little of column A. Little of column B.

Damn :( Good luck Len.