WrigleyField 22

Why don't you like good players though?

You'll miss out on lots of talent upgrade opportunities then. Unfortunately I don't know that Sweat is high second + contract worthy, although he is very good. But to get elite "FA talent", it's normally getting done with a pick and extension and not true FA.

Oh an extension is almost certainly gonna follow. So I don't think it's a playoff or bust move. Sweat is a high quality edge and you often do need to trade capital to not let a guy hit FA. But that's still a steep price. Like, at least should be balanced with a pick swap if you're giving up a possible 33-38 range pick.

Pick 33 tracking time. 😑 Poles panic buying at the trade deadline for non playoff teams two straight years because FA spending scares him is certainly a choice.

Not enough emphasis on dumb imo

Probably Sweat

Yea, they did reinstate that rule after initially being waived during covid years and still kept last year. But I'm not sure that's a justification really either.

I went to that Clausen start! (in my Cutler jersey)

I'm pretty sure it's specifically barred by CBA. Was it the NBA or NFL players union that talked about wanting to get pathways to ownership in next CBA? I think it was NBA. But NFL union should fight for that too, absolutely. So yea isn't happening.

At the end of the day I feel like generational gets used every time it's a consensus #1 guy. So a guy like Lawrence or Burrow werent viewed quite like Luck, but they were no brainer #1 picks so generational just got thrown around. The hype for Williams seems as crazy as since Luck though. Burrow obviously only came onto scene late, but people were already talking about Lawrence going #1 basically from his freshman year in and there was lots of talk of tanking for him. But people are throwing around the Mahomes type expectations for Williams, which seems like a totally unrealistic expectation.

This is for @Hairyducked Idiot

Speaking of rigged hockey events, they totally rigged this slot machine pull

Bears giving 3 and Panthers deciding Moore was the one I remember from the Athletic article after the trade. But I guess other rumors have said Bears insisted on Moore. The other rumor was the negotiation over which 2nd rounder the Bears got back in 2023 between 61 and 38(?) and Carolina ownership throwing in the 2025 2nd to keep 38 instead of 61, which is just incredible value for Bears IMO.

To be fair,it's possible it's worth less than zero. I can guess how it probably went in this one. One random article talks about the recent success of the O and wonders "how did it take Getsy and Fields 3 weeks to start targeting their best weapon?" SM: Fields has to ask Getsy to target DJ Moore more.

So worth zero.

I mean I think I saw NGS had that as a 25% completion probability throw. Even with Moore it's basically a toss up throw. He has thrown endzone balls like that plenty. Having Moore is a big difference (though Mooney has occassionally been capable of grabbing those, not to the standard of Moore). You do T see that type of throw much outside the redzone. But Fields has done fine with those from my recollection.

I mean, I don't think this play is the best example to the point you're trying to make. This is a redzone placement throw to his stud wideout. It's absolutely the type of throw that just having a great WR makes easier. Fields biggest issue hasn't been placing those type of balls. It's the type of throw that really only gets called in the endzone.

I mean the think with Trace also, is I think, he's legitimately a "power agent" in the coach and exec space. I haven't seen a list, but probably tripping over him as representation when interviewing up and coming candidates. Anyways, even the Fox rumors have always been really poorly supported IMO. I went back and looked a few times and Greg Gabriel is one of the biggest insiders I've seen who's adamant on it, but I've also seen him say Fox was hired first when in actuality he was still Denvers coach when Pace got hired. Then he does his normal appeal to authority nonsense. Fair to wonder if he is indeed just a confused old man. DBB also recently called Pace-Fox an arranged marriage. While I'm inclined to believe a lot of what he says cuz he's broken verifiable facts before, its also assumed he sat really close to Phillips or McCaskey family and has at times pushed out a pretty Pace apologetic view. So it has big BS vibes to me given the hiring timeline and that these rumors first popped up as soon as Pace's seat was hot. Anyways, will be my hottest take to end days to say that ownership probably isn't forcing these guys together, but also if they are I really don't care either.

On the Emery front. A GM being forced on a successful head coach is not at all uncommon. Off top of my head, GB just had that with the finally McCarthy year as an example. No one's panties should be in a bunch about that "forced pairing" and I doubt Emery's was. He was allowed to make the change a year after going 10-6. Not exactly like ownership was pulling strings there. So for all we know most GMs might prefer it that way be cause they have an easy out year after getting the organizational side established in year 1 while not really having to be concerned with staff stability. That's assuming the coach is a known/solid commodity.

My assumption is that at most, Flus was a common bond between Bears and Poles that made the bond strong. Not being forced on it. We know it wasn't a purely linear process and they never claimed it was going to be. Teams often do just fine (Detroit had a similar process arguably with a heaver President hand, and look to have done pretty well with their pairing). But it makes sense they were basically cross checking lists during the process. And Poles said as much. But to create the conspiracy we have to believe Poles agreed not only to a forced pairing but to REALLY carry ownerships water on this. I believe a guy might accept to "forced terms" on a head coach, but Poles reported spurned Minnys follow up overtures to focus on Chicago. Bears have never had a problem getting highly valued GM-HC commodities from the "rising ranks". If ownership was as meddling as people want to believe AND was constantly requiring to engage said coaches and GMs in their media cover ups, I feel like you'd probably see guys turning down interviews.

Actually the 6th example also started out 0-5 too, it's just that the coach (McAdoo) was canned much later (2-10) whereas the other 5 examples were canned by that 5th loss. The other thing is it often isn't planned around byes and such, even though we all naturally look at those opportunities. In the McAdoo example, they had a bye going into 1-6 followed by a home game off the bye. Obvious opportunity. But they held onto him until week 13, which was exactly one week AFTER a mini-bye. so they just transitioned on a normal week, instead of a week earlier on a 10 day break, lol. Coincidentally said mini-bye was off of a Thursday night matchup against : Washington.

Well again, 5 of the 6 where the GM did ultimately follow the HC out the door were really poor starts, of the 0-5 variety (roughly). So a Flus firing could still be accompanied by a Poles firing and be "normal". But perhaps be a last ditch effort by someone to change the direction. But more to the fact where many got very impatient with Nagy/Trestman. They actually started out middling not 0-fer. And then they faded hard, but by that point the GM seat was also red hot and yea, suddenly the benefits of getting an extended look at players in.s new setting or a interim coach is entirely moot because the GM making those evals isn't in the door. The whole thing can burn down... once you're likely to being in a new GM, it's all gonna get tuned over anyways.

Oh and then there's also John Fox: So you could make argument he fits criteria. But I think it's also important to look at what is gained. 1) getting a different look at your roster. Given both of Fox's coordinators had control I don't know if this would be a big factor. Pace wasn't gonna get a new look at his O or D. 2) getting a look at a interim coach. Now maybe you can argue Fangio here should have gotten look, but I think Pace always knew he was gonna go O anyways. And we can probably guess he had an inkling he may want to keep Fangio on and an interim tag could burn that opportunity. And as it is, that's exactly what happened. Also wasn't like Fox lost locker room or got off to a a slow start, two common criteria.

Well raw guessed it in Twitter so I'll share. Most in-season firings happen with a GM in place who is in his role into at least the next year. It's almost never done with a GM in place who's also about to lose his job. So Nagy and Trestman aren't unusual by that criteria. 26*/37 were fired with a GM who was in place through the next season (*technically Whaley in Buffalo only made it through 2017 draft, but in counting that as he was there to hire next coach). 5 the Coaches were the De facto GM and often someone in house was ready to be GM (like Kelly-Roseman in Philly) So just 6 were fired with a GM who also was replaced by the end of the year. And 5 of those 6 were 1-6 or worse (avg 0.4-4.6 record). Nagy/Trestman also didn't have those types of starts. Ditka firing also coincided with GM change Of the firings where the GM wasn't also being shown door: Lovie was obviously in a playoff hunt until last game before being fired. Jauron you can argue maybe should have been fired as he had the classic slow start. But ironically, he turned it around and kept team competetive, finishing with 7-9 record. Then Wanny really there isn't much justification. Bad record. Poor start. Don't remember if locker room was a horsefeathers show or not. But FO definitely was a horsefeathers show as that ended up being Mike McCaskey's final ride as Pres before horsefeathers up McGinnis hiring and being pushed aside. Then everything else before that was Halas and he was the coach himself for like 60% of those seasons. Why he never wanted to fire mid year when he wasn't the coach? Probably because he was cheap. Or maybe he respected the role too much. Either way, not sure that is still a factor today.