Hairyducked Idiot

They do a great job torching that play in this video: and there's another plan later that's even more egregious. The play call is an option run left. Simple concept: isolate the left edge defender and force him to commit to either the QB or RB, then keep/pitch to keep it away from him. But when they get to the line, the Vikings have two linebackers looming outside the left edge. Anyone remember tecmo bowl for nes where if the defense guesses your play, you get swarmed right off the snap? That's what is happening here. Which is why checks exist. The playcall has a second play built in that should work against defenses that defeat the first play. But nope, fields calmly runs the play straight into the teeth of the defense, pitches to his RB, RB eats a -5. Fields' stats are not touched. Fields is a career killer because he can't operate the offense and give people a chance to do their jobs. This is why every single coach and offensive player over the last 2.5 seasons has left town with a worse reputation than they arrived with.

I have zero desire to see Bagent take another snap for the Bears after this season unless he improves dramatically.

Fun fact: in the two games in which Bagent started and the Bears won, Bagent had 0 INTs, 0 and 1 sacks. and 0 fumbles. In 31 career starts, Justin Fields has never had a game where he met all three of those criteria (0 INTs, 1 or fewer sacks, 0 fumbles), and he only met two of the three 5 times.

I think that's standard coach non-commitalism and he's starting if he's practicing.

The fighting off sacks things is something I've noticed too. He tries to just stand tall and shrug off defenders. NFL defensive lineman are going to break him of that habit fast.

Without looking, can you guess which of these scouting report lines come from Justin Fields and which come from Caleb Williams? ",,, is an excellent scrambler however he often takes too long to decide who to throw to putting huge pressure on the offensive line" "Occasionally hesitates and misses opportunities with delays on his trigger." "He’s often slow in his progressions and had trouble with some relatively simple coverage rotations, and when his first read isn't open he struggles to get to the next guy" "Field vision, progression speed, and anticipation are not yet elite."

consistent poker winnings are a lot more plausible than sports-betting winnings.

I'll waer this one: Fields isn't capable of running the game plan we used to win the Carolina and Oakland games. You're never going to win a super bowl that way, but minimizing mistakes and milking clock is a way to avoid going, say, 6-25. Would the Bears with Bagent be .500 the rest of the way? Absolutely not. But was going 2-2 with him after going 6-25 with Fields entirely independent of their intrinsic QB traits? I don't believe so. Fields has had exactly one start in his career in which he took zero sacks. That was a loss to Green Bay last season, where the Bears had a two-score lead going into the fourth quarter and lost while the offense had possessions of 3:01, 1:57 and 1:07, two of which ended in Fields interceptions. It doesn't matter though. All that matters is that neither of them starts another game for the Bears after this season.

Atlanta takes the lead with a little over 2 left. It's all up to one last Kyler Murray drive

Blackhawks need to start looking now at Edmonton and to a lesser degree Toronto and start planning on how to avoid their issues. You don't wanna be "oops all forwards" in Bedard's prime.

lol jordan love

if anyone could actually turn 1k into 10k reliably with sports betting, they'd be the richest man in the world in under 10 years.

I have zero idea what's going on with the Bulls. So, probably.

That puts him back up to PPG. I wasn't kidding when I said 100 was in his wheelhouse as a rookie. Also puts him tied 8th in the NHL in goals

Surely the Patriots can't out-tank us. Giants might be able to.

That's the second time in two games he's created a goal off stealing the puck with hands so fast it made an NHL player look bad.

Drake Maye looks about 12 years old. He makes pro throws though. You never know how he'll react to pro speed, but he looks darn good.

re: Bagent's raw arm strength: https://www.ourlads.com/story/default/Quarterback-Ball-Velocity-at-NFL-Combine-2008-2017/10243/dh/ Bagent's raw veloity at the combine was pretty good. Roughly the same as Stroud, Herbert and Mahomes. (side note, JFC Josh Allen is on another level).

Teams are really taking away those quick 5-10 yard out routes he loves to throw. I'm not an expert on defensive calls, but O'Sullivan keeps referring to it as a "cloud corner" staying shallow and covering that exact route. Bagent threw a pick on it against San Diego, should have had at least one more that game, and then should have thrown one on the first series this week too. You punish those coverages by throwing deep on the outside and intermediate across the middle, both of which Bagent has struggled mightily with. It's just a classic case of NFL defenses saying "oh, you're good at this one thing? We'll take that away, now what?" And Bagent can't answer that. I *still* like him as a long-term, lottery-ticket project. I think his erratic and soft throws are a product of bad mechanics, not raw arm strength, and he might be able to clean that up wtih time.

In before Fields is sacked 5 times and we argue over whether the offensive line was actually getting better or not

Probably, but they're ultimately judged by results, and QBs get results.

If poles hits on his QB pick next season, no one will remember his dumb shenanigans in years 1-2 And if he doesn't, a dozen montez sweats won't salvage it

That first third down throw that should have been an easy pick spooked him imo I

So your sliding scale on what constitutes "good" is based on whether it it *sufficiently* effusive to meet your standards, not whether it's literally a good thing or not. Thank you for admitting that words mean nothing to you and you're just calvinballing opinions. I knew that, but it's nice to see you admit it.

I mean ... I think there's a *tiny* grain of truth to it. Not a lot. Bagent would lose a lot of games if you kept sending him out there and he didn't start playing better. One of the things that statistical analysis of football often misses is that the goal of football play is always contextual. The reason baseball lends itself to statistical analysis so easily is that the optimal strategy almost never changes outside of some very specific niche scenarios: Get outs/avoid outs. It's a lot more subtle in football, where there's a push/pull between accumulating points and controlling the clock. One of the reasons Fields loses so many games is that his skill set is poorly suited to dealing with those fluctuating game states. He's too boom/bust on plays to reliably control the clock, and he's too sack-prone and poor at reading defenses to come back when you're behind. Bagent at least can do one of those things well. We call it "game managing" but he's doing is allowing his team to control the clock by minimizing mistakes and negative plays. So while he's completely screwed if you need him to go out and put up points, he's actually been pretty effective at milking clocks with leads. That's something that Fields can't do, as we saw in the Denver game. Bagent had 0 sacks and 0 turnovers yesterday, which is a feat Fields has never achieved in 31 starts.