WrigleyField 22

Pretty much procedural. There was no way they were gonna keep him at 14M salary owed.

Maybe it's a growing city but how many are actually Titan fans? Sure but I would have thought that if they were going to invest in a new domed stadium they'd want one that can host a Super Bowl. That said many of these stadiums have smaller capacities but room to expand for an event like that. Allegiant Stadium is like that too I think. Apparently the NFL told them they'd get a SB despite the size, according to lots of people on Twitter. But I'm sure just the one. Like realistically the NFL would prefer to host it in like 5 or 6 southern cities on a rotation and occassionally throw a bone to a northern city that gets a new stadium.

Titans interior is only gonna hold 60,000 apparently. Current capacity is 67,000+. Do they struggle to fill it? Seems like Nashville has grown like crazy and could support a big crowd.

Titans' looks like a top golf. I like the Bills design even if it's an outdoor stadium in horsefeathering Buffalo. Heard they are going grass so that's good. Any word on what surface Nashville will be?

IDK why that matters. They were picking up ALL the salary if they kept him on the team, plus carrying whatever dead cap next year when they inevitably cut him after this season. A 4th is perfectly fine. the cap space you gain is worthless if you don’t spend it and it will be nigh on impossible for Poles to spend the cap space he has available. There are only so many Lucas Patricks out there.Yup. Their cash hole to meet the min is now like 120. Let's say that they'll use 10 for practice squad and in season additions- which is conservative. So they have 110 in new FA money to hand out (the 120 already accounts for a draft pool estimate too). They have 33 under contract and 7 draft picks. So 13 roster spots to fill in FA. So in AAV terms call it 110 for 13 players. So 13 8.5m players. Now you can forward cash a bit on the contracts but that usually isn't done to a significant degree except for longer/larger deals. But they're obviously not going to find that many "big money" deals. But just to try: Let's say Roquan on a 4/80 deal but with 30M Y1 cash Montgomery on 4/48 but with 16M Y1 cash A free agent WR and OL at 3/45 with 20M Y1 cash each A DT at 4/48 and 16M Y1 cash That would basically get them there and the rest of their FA money could be small deals. But aso includes a ton of money at a RB. Thats just to meet the minimum cash requirement. You're also basically frontloading cash you wouldn't necessarily otherwise. If that comes with low Y2 cash amounts it balances out and is just timing thing. If not, you've basically taken on unnecessary risk by frontloading on big money deals.

Sure Velus has been injured and not productive but at least he's... Checks notes.... Only 25 years old. Any where's theres like 4 or 5 actual good GMs and then at any given time 10 or so lucky ones and 17-18 unlucky ones.

Yea but look at how awesome Muhammad has coincided the kids by eating up all the paying time at DE And Pringle? Yea he'll be awesome! (Someday....at something) Patrick. Ahhhh Patrick. You lasted 6 games Maybe Pace was better then Poles, he just had the wrong coach (?) I'm probably more Pace friendly than most, but it was time. Even if it was "just the wrong coach", how do you give him a third? And heck no, I don't buy the theory Fox was forced upon him.

They might get the very last comp pick as a net value loss pick, but the status of that pick is tenuous even. So yea, pick any two of Pringle, Muhammad, Jones, Patrick, Morrow and that's the difference of maybe getting the Mr Irrelevant pick and a 3rd or 4th comp and maybe a 5th. To be clear they should have just signed more better players and also not had a comp pick, but had a few more decent players.

Yep. Annoying to spend as little as they did and not design a comp strategy around ARob and Daniels departures. Basically the entire FA prioritized familiarity with the coaching/FO staff. That's worth a 3/4th and 5th comp pick I guess.

Good trade. They should now go flip another mid round pick for a young WR.

If you build an offense to Fields's strengths, the question is will they be able to stop it even with adjustments? Like you can build a great game plan to stop prime Tom Brady but he's still going to beat you because he knows what his strengths are and plays to them perfectly. Guys like Lamar and Hurts have been running offenses that frequently use a variety of QB runs to a lot of success. Watching that O'Sullivan video last night, what stood out to me was him pointing out areas where Fields is uber-elite while running. For example, the implication was that a lesser running QB would not have scored on that 3 yard QB misdirection TD. But the fact that Fields was able to find the hole, cut and go upfield without losing much if any speed is an elite trait and is what allowed him to score. Lamar and Hurts are better passers (but not by a ton in Lamar's case) so maybe they are better equipped when teams take away the run. I could be way off base here. There are teams (like Dallas probably) that can limit this part of the game and rely on their elite secondary to cover up any gaps in the pass game but I'm not sure they will be able to completely eliminate it. For sure his athleticism and innate ability are just gonna win often. But to the extent scheme is unlocking a more productive tier on that run game, it doesn't seem ideal if you're ripping a gameplan from elsewhere rather than having a deeper concept of why it works. Maybe the more they steal the better they understand it and incorporate into their natural package, but the element of surprise must have had some impact on a team not prepared for what they were seeing.

What's going to play a huge factor I think is how teams respond to this new offensive play mix. Through six games, teams basically conceded the RB run game and the Bears couldn't really make them pay in the air. If teams are still conceding the RB run game, are they also just going to concede 80 yards on the QB run game too? While it's not necessarily my favorite long term play for Fields development, it could lead to short term results. So if Cowboys adjust to the RB and/or QB run game, does it finally open up the receiving game enough? Right now the intermediate passing game of the Bears is good enough I don't think teams can ignore it. If they somehow design their scheme to basically concede the short passing game though, can they also combat a combined the QB/RB run game package? Or can the Bears be at a position that teams are gonna give them something that they just need to be patient and take over and over. Obviously teams will adapt so hopefully Getsy has got ideas not reliant on stealing from the Ravens run game. I would also like to see how well the game plan works in games where you don't get a +3 turnover ratio and recover all 6 fumbles. That's not gonna happen every time. Well 6 fumbles is a lot. I kind of expect them to get a higher than average amount of fumbles with Fields having to do some much escaping and improvising, but not 6 either.

What's going to play a huge factor I think is how teams respond to this new offensive play mix. Through six games, teams basically conceded the RB run game and the Bears couldn't really make them pay in the air. If teams are still conceding the RB run game, are they also just going to concede 80 yards on the QB run game too? While it's not necessarily my favorite long term play for Fields development, it could lead to short term results. So if Cowboys adjust to the RB and/or QB run game, does it finally open up the receiving game enough? Right now the intermediate passing game of the Bears is good enough I don't think teams can ignore it. If they somehow design their scheme to basically concede the short passing game though, can they also combat a combined the QB/RB run game package? Or can the Bears be at a position that teams are gonna give them something that they just need to be patient and take over and over. Obviously teams will adapt so hopefully Getsy has got ideas not reliant on stealing from the Ravens run game.

I had him in an auction league. Just picked up my first loss this week, which he contributed to, obviously So I have a trade out for Kelce utilizing my RB depth (in addition to auction, it's keeper). Have Henry, Taylor, Stevenson, and Walker, with CPatt on IR and Henderson as my 5/6. So I offered Walker for Kelce and Bills DST. Of course Kelce is on bye so I'd roll out Pitts one last time. If the guy accepts I really won't have to make any lineup decisions each week other than a few remaining byes, and of course for injury. No more D streaming either, which has hurt me at times this year. I'd be: Hurts, Henry, Taylor, Stevenson, Olave, Diggs, Kelce, Bills, kicker. My bench would be Mooney, Samuel, Gallup, Rondale Moore, Henderson, Patterson, Pitts (? If I don't just cut him), and I'll be able to make another add once I drop my current D. Walker will be hard to part with, especially as he'll have elite keeper value in this league, but I've never won the league and I'm ready to go all in.

On Fields holding the ball front: There were 2 interesting signs based on the PFF splits re: TTT. It was only 5 blitzes, but on those 5 blitzes, Fields threw quickly (1.57 compared to 3.41 on the season) This should be an easy area to coach quick decisions as you know on a blitz where the extra defender is lost and where to throw hot. Hope that's a real change and not sample size noise. He also actually had a quicker TTT on play action than non play action (3.05 v 3.88). This is somewhat bizarre, but I guess importantly the PA TTT was appropriate time and not dead last in league time as it has been. For the year he has been 3.59 TTT on PA. So both of these were positive micro signs on the TTT front. And I think in both cases they are designed to be quicker/simpler reads and in the case of PA also generally help your pass protectors and receivers. Perhaps good indicators that on the true pass set, his line and receivers are really having a much larger impact. So scheme did a lot of help last night. Big increase in designed runs. About a 10% swing towards PA. And in limited opportunities Fields did better making quick throws on the blitz. So right now he's probably still like an F true pass set QB, especially due to the erratic short throws. But he's an A+ runner and if he can be like a B/C+ PA passer, there's hopefully blocks to build on, especially once he has real talent around him.

Yeah and it was actually just his 17th start. With how our offense is set up, we should find consistent success with a game plan similar to what we saw last night with the Greg Roman/heavy designed runs for Fields and constant motion in the background to create confusion. Our line is well suited for that type of attack. And his passing game will thrive off of that as well.Add in that it's a different OC from last season as well. Always frustrated me how much was expected of him around here based on the circumstances. I'm not saying everything has to be roses & unicorn farts but it's like he was expected to be MVP Rodgers this season when A-A-ron himself is struggling in a better situation right now. I think like 2-3 legit surrounding pieces on O and we could have expected more from him. Even on the games he's looked decent now there are some material issues you still want to see addressed, but it's still tough to figure out how much is just because of a horsefeathers cast around him. Like right now his best case scenario for 2022 feels like being an A runner and C passer. With a little more talent, could we have had a B passer? And is that development just being paused or possibly regressing (on some metrics you can probably argue regression based on the advanced stats data) So his development is doing something the last few weeks, but it feels to me making lemonade of lemons scenario.

Yea they were absolute dead last in Team DVOA going into last night. That bumped them up to 28. 31st on Offense DVOA. 15th on D. Re Fields: Early peak at TTT data from PFF for last night shows he was still holding the ball too long in the pocket, on average. While there were moments I thought that was the case, I thought he did look more decisive. Be interesting how the tape watchers grade him on some of those decisions (was he holding for throws that were there or nothing was there?) Also thought that while he took a few sacks, he smartly threw a few away, and obviously extended a few. So a net overall balanced night picking his spots on when to extend plays.

Missed that one damn play because of a nut shut by a dirty mid QB.

Imagine Poles putting a modicum of effort in putting some pieces on offense too.

When the Pats went up 14-10 it just felt like a moment so many Bears teams would have folded over. Fun game.

Delaying letting Belichick pass him and now going back up +1 on the all time franchise win list against Green Bay.

Last 23 games have been frustrating enough it's easy to forget they did this 3 straight games in 2020 (against some bad teams but...)

Wanted my Velus or Harry prop bet! Broke even tonight.

No it won't. Jones will continue to be bad. But so is Frank Zappa.