Hairyducked Idiot

I disagree with the idea that we owe fields or anyone a fair shot. If you like a QB in this draft more than you like fields, you pull the trigger, regardless of whether or not fields got a fair chance. If you like fields more, you don't. This doesn't have to be a knock on fields. He fell outside the top 10 and was the fourth QB drafted for reasons and those reasons weren't "some guy at ESPN said he didn't work hard.". It's perfectly possible that fields is a good QB prospect who hasn't gotten a fair chance yet on the bears but the bears just like a QB in this draft more, and if that's true, then taking the QB you like more is the right call

I mean the two with the biggest emotional attachment to him. And why do they have an emotional attachment to him? I can assure you Cade McNown didn’t have many Bears fans fighting for him. Is there some homerism involved? Sure. But I’d take the opinions of a Bears fan who’s seen all 28 or so Fields starts over a random fan of another team on Reddit who sees Fields highlights on ESPN and a box score and says “lol he’s a RB”. He's a charismatic and likable guy with a fun-to-watch, interesting skill set.

My take is extremely popular outside of Chicago Bears and Ohio State fandoms You mean the 2 fan bases who have watched Fields play the closest have a favorable opinion of him? I mean the two with the biggest emotional attachment to him.

It's pretty unfair to say I'm just being contrary when I was explicitly laying out the scenario I wanted and and how I wanted to avoid this exact scenario before we even drafted fields

Lol. That's what you're going with? Hurts doubled up Mahomes' passing yards in that game. You're intentionally being stupid and I'm done with this conversation. He lost a fumble while running the ball (fields fumbles a lot) and failed on a 3rd down conversion in the fourth quarter. That's all it takes to lose playoff games these days.

My take is extremely popular outside of Chicago Bears and Ohio State fandoms Congrats! But you aren't spouting this nonsense around non-Bears and Ohio State fans right now are you? I mean I could link you my reddit account but I feel like that would open up a whole bunch of new issues

It does sound a lot like Hurts. Who just lost the super bowl to *checks notes* the superior passing QB.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Fields was the fourth QB selected. He fell out of the top 10. Fields simply being a second-tier QB prospect is an infinitely simpler explanation than a complicated conspiracy to devalue him or NFL teams abandoning years of scouting and evaluation to listen to an ESPN analyst. And you ignored the biggest ding on him in the draft: His slow processing, which has continued to be a problem in the NFL. Yes, volume matters for a QB. You can't just throw 15 times a game in the NFL. The fact that he frequently pulled the ball down, the fact that that coaching staff didn't feel comfortable calling more pass plays, is partly on him. And sacks taken absolutely correlate strongly with QB style. It's not an independent variable in either film study or statistical analysis. He takes a lot of sacks because he holds onto the ball too long and doesn't pull the trigger (slow processor again) and has a preference for trying to hold out for big plays over taking simple throws. You're really hanging onto where he got drafted when Aaron Rodgers fell to 24 and Tom Brady went 199th? And you ignored HS rankings and pre-draft rankings that I pointed out. Fields was always 1B until he wasn't 1B on draft day. He wasn't 2nd tier to Trey Lance and Zach horsefeathering Wilson. The coaching staff not throwing is definitely not on him. You watched the same horsefeathering games I did and saw him getting hit or pressured at the last step of his drop. The Bears receivers were also statically the worst in the league at getting open (I'll find the tweet if I can). Again, I'm not saying he was the perfect prospect or is a sure fire star QB in the league, and many have said this many times, but you're clearly being contrarian for contrarian sake. You're like a flat earther disagreeing just because it's an unpopular side to take, and that's your brand. My take is extremely popular outside of Chicago Bears and Ohio State fandoms

What if fields is mediocre and we finish 7-10?

He's got the longest time to throw from the pocket in the league. One of the highest sack rates. He is accurate against zone but one of the worst against man All of that points very clearly to slow processing. It's 100% not fake news. That ringer article has simply been proven to be incorrect. If you have one piece of information that says "either Fields isn't that level of QB prospect or there's a reasonable explanation" then maybe it could be either one. But we have a lot of those pieces, and taken as a whole, you can't keep arguing that fields is simply the victim of luck and circumstances in each separate incident. Did fields fall out of the top 10 because he's a second-tier QB prospect or did he fall out of the top 10 because of a conspiracy of racists and because professional football teams abandoned years of scouting work to take Orlovsky's word? Is fields threatening records for sacks per pass attempt because he has the singularly worst pass blocking line in history or because he is slow to process and takes sacks? Did the team virtually abandon passing for long stretches because the other 10 personnel on the field are all that bad at it and fields is actually good, or was it because fields is bad at it too? Does fields rank near the bottom in multiple statistical measures of accuracy because he just can't bring himself to throw near receivers he doesn't trust, or is fields simply an inaccurate passer? (and speaking of fake news, the article about him being the most accurate passer in measured college history is contradicted by other pff articles using the same stat.) Is he absolutely brutal against man coverage because he struggles to process and pull the trigger if receivers aren't visibly in space, or is it the receivers/coaching staff/something else? At some point, the constant excuse making becomes absurd. He's not 1b to Lawrence. He's not a top-10 QB right now being held back by supporting cast. He's an elite athlete with great intangibles and a good deep ball who struggles with processing and pulling the trigger at the NFL level as well as having mechanical flaws that lead to inaccuracy on short and intermediate passes. He needs to either get noticeably better at those flaws or we need to figure out a way to work around them and win despite second-tier QB play

I mean, the 1B thing has some legitimacy. Fields was 1B to Lawrence in national recruiting rankings. He was considered 1B in the HS all-star showcase they played against each other (Fields won MVP). He was considered 1B coming out of college, until the draft actually happened. There was the stuff about Fields having a seizure at some point. There were erroneous reports (Orlavsky) about Fields being "last guy in, 1st guy out" type of player. There was Zach Wilson's pro day where he threw the ball pretty against no defense. As for the passing numbers, what numbers are "almost historically bad"? The only near historically bad numbers are counting stats. Stuff like passing yards and completions because the team throws the ball at modern historically low numbers. Stuff like sacks taken, which obviously are largely dependent on the guys around him. This is exactly what I'm talking about. Fields was the fourth QB selected. He fell out of the top 10. Fields simply being a second-tier QB prospect is an infinitely simpler explanation than a complicated conspiracy to devalue him or NFL teams abandoning years of scouting and evaluation to listen to an ESPN analyst. And you ignored the biggest ding on him in the draft: His slow processing, which has continued to be a problem in the NFL. Yes, volume matters for a QB. You can't just throw 15 times a game in the NFL. The fact that he frequently pulled the ball down, the fact that that coaching staff didn't feel comfortable calling more pass plays, is partly on him. And sacks taken absolutely correlate strongly with QB style. It's not an independent variable in either film study or statistical analysis. He takes a lot of sacks because he holds onto the ball too long and doesn't pull the trigger (slow processor again) and has a preference for trying to hold out for big plays over taking simple throws.

Nothing that points negatively to him is ever relevant. That's what is so exhausting well that’s plainly not true because the conversation to trade fields is happening all over the place if fields were impervious to criticism then it wouldn’t be a topic And among bears fans, that topic is being deemed completely crazy, unworthy of even the slightest consideration. It's asinine

Nothing that points negatively to him is ever relevant. That's what is so exhausting

I just wonder how many more situations we are going to see where I have to listen to complicated explanations for pieces of evidence where "fields isn't elite" would be a much simpler explanation. Sure, he was the fourth QB taken in his draft, but he was actually a generational 1b to Lawrence Sure, he's put up almost historically bad passing numbers, but he's not *actually* bad at passing

My problem with that, and I admire the creativity, is that given the shorter shelf life of running QBs and how bad the roster is, i don't really want to fast forward to a prime version of what we want fields to be

Except that if you are in Pole's shoes and you miss on the (not) Fields draft pick, you'll likely never work in the NFL again if you miss by keeping JF, you'll likely get a second chance. This is an example of a conflict of interest that does exist in the sports world. I think it's implied most of us are discussing the d desirability of moves relative to the Bears perspective and not Poles' personally

It's a sunk cost fallacy because it's privileging the person you already have as the default scenario. I know this is something some people struggle with, but you can come to the right conclusion with an invalid argument. "None of the college QBs impress me enough to want them more than fields" is a valid argument. "You have to be 100% certain to trade fields" is not this is crazy. what College prospect available this year is better than Fields? and I mean Fields as a college prospect 2 years ago or Fields as he is now? none of them are better than JF in either comparison. I don't mean this in a mean way, but we do not speak the same language and your responses never make sense to me as a response to what I said

I think that QB prediction is tricky enough and fields has enough flaws that thinking any of the top candidates are better is within the realm of not crazy I don't think they are, but it's close enough I won't think it's crazy if the bears do

"Hunch" is a rather biased way of saying "scouting." Maximizing your chance of getting an elite QB always trumps all those other factors. It's just too important. This is a league where you increasingly have to just never punt to win deep playoff games. You will need your QB to drop back in the pocket with 55 seconds and no timeouts in your own end and calmly pick apart the defense by making quick, precise reads and placing the ball in your receivers' hands. It you review the tape and think there's a guy out there with a better chance to become that guy than fields, then it makes all the logical sense in the world to pull the trigger on that guy and get what value you can for fields. Fields' fallback ability to drag you to a couple of 10-7 seasons with his legs if he doesn't become an elite passer does not enter into it If you don't think any of the QBs in the draft have a better chance to be that guy than fields, then you trade down l

This feels like some variant of sunk cost fallacy. You should make whichever decision you believe is best, neither deserves "you better be certain to not pick me" status. sunk fallacy based on what? What do you know about any of the college QBs that scream start over? I was watching some "best of" videos on FB because 1) I'm old and 2) horsefeathers the offseason and something stood out on me. Fields holds the ball, but when he does, hes good for at least 15 yards. Its like he does it on purpose. trade down bitches It's a sunk cost fallacy because it's privileging the person you already have as the default scenario. I know this is something some people struggle with, but you can come to the right conclusion with an invalid argument. "None of the college QBs impress me enough to want them more than fields" is a valid argument. "You have to be 100% certain to trade fields" is not

This is said so passively as if we don't have data about the actual players we're referencing. It's a 8+ at minimum on the crazy scale. If you are trading Fields you'd better be 100% certain that Fields is not the guy and that the guy you draft is the guy. You are basically staking your career to that decision. I like GMs that aren't afraid to take some risks but that is way too much of a gamble based on what we've seen from Fields so far. This feels like some variant of sunk cost fallacy. You should make whichever decision you believe is best, neither deserves "you better be certain to not pick me" status.

When you're hoping for an elite outcome, uncertainty is a feature not a bug Unless he's Fields or...? You just argued fields had less uncertainty. Now you're implying he has equal or more?

So if the data says they're all equally uncertain, why is it crazy? Because you should be more uncertain of the prospects. When you're hoping for an elite outcome, uncertainty is a feature not a bug

I honestly don't know what to believe. I'm not delusional enough to think I'm an expert QB scout. Bears fans and Trent Dilfer keep telling me I'm watching a crazy elite QB making excellent decisions who is on the verge of becoming a top-5 QB in the league the moment we bring in an adequate supporting cast and let him get his second year running the offense going. I can kind of see it. I can also kind of see a guy who was the 4th QB taken in his draft class who in two season has exactly zero games where he threw for 250 yards and 2 tds. I see a guy who was dinged for having a slow processor in college who still seems awfully slow to process. Who frequently looks uncomfortable throwing into windows or receivers' leverage if they aren't visibly open. Who has a great deep ball but both statistically and visually is one of the least accurate QBs in the league on short and intermediate throws.

To what data are you referring? Because I can come up with a lot of data that makes me uncomfortable committing fully to Justin fields as our QB long term Okay now run the same process on all of the NCAA prospects. It would be crazy, flat out. So if the data says they're all equally uncertain, why is it crazy?