Bears 2023 thread V

[jnrjr79]

Patrick Mahomes was 13-19 at Texas Tech. A cautionary tale on that stuff. But I do wonder about what this weird baggage of Williams's amounts to.

The point isn’t the record this year; it’s the regression. Yes, lots of highly coveted QBs come from meh teams (like Drake Maye this year). But when a guy leads a team to a stellar record and then the team takes a huge step back, people are going to wonder if the QB is somehow not as good as he seemed.

How much regression actually happened? He had a higher completion percentage this year, higher QB rating this year. Less touchdowns in less games, 20 less yards per game, and same amount of interceptions in less games. I don't think there was some monstrous drop people keep talking about. I think the team lost, and they don't want to differentiate between that and how Caleb played. Plus, after winning the Heisman, you can't really go up after that, only down in people's minds.

I'm speaking only about wins and losses. Williams may be playing basically the same, but the perception of his play changes when he goes from having a PAC-12-winning season to a middling season (regardless of whether it's his fault).

[mack2354]

Williams has had a lot of small negative things said about him this year. The team losing more games this year, him wanting partial ownership in the team that drafts him(even though it's not legal), the fingernails, the crying after lost games, etc. He may still be considered the best QB prospect but there is enough smoke around him that may make Poles believe he's more of a gamble then a sure thing.

Jalen Carter was the top ranked prospect and Poles passed on him because of the red flags. I wouldn't be surprised to see us take the sure thing pick in MHJ with the Carolina pick, then using our pick on Bo Nix or Jayden Daniels. Either let the rookie QB red shirt his first year and let Fields walk in Free Agency or let the 2 battle it out in training camp and trade Fields if he loses.

This route gives us 2 studs at WR and should guarantee us at least 1 average level quality QB going forward AT WORST. Poles spends the 3 picks on the O Line and Edge in hopes of hitting on a couple. 2 good Free Agency signings and we "should" be a competitive team next year. If we spend that Carolina pick on Williams/Maye and they either bust or take a while to develop at the next level, then Poles may not survive another 3 years. Poles and his scouting team would really have to believe in Willams or Maye to take them. So far, me personally, I don't think they are the sure things people claim them to be so it wouldn't surprise me if Poles doesn't either.

[TheSuzerain]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

[mack2354]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

In Bagent's 4 starts Mooney went 2-4, 5-6, 1-4, and 4-5 in completions-targets. Mooney has simply been hot/cold no matter who is at QB. Maybe it's Fields but maybe it's Mooney not getting open or maybe it's Getsy's scheme. I don't think it is fair to say that our #2 receiver not being maximized is all on Fields. There simply isn't enough evidence of that.

[panthermark]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

I'm not sure if he has a solid understanding (relative to being an NFL OC).

It could be Fields, but it wasn't like Bagent was out there throwing for +300 yards a game. In 4 starts, he averaged less than 200 yards a game.

[jnrjr79]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

I'm not sure if he has a solid understanding (relative to being an NFL OC).

It could be Fields, but it wasn't like Bagent was out there throwing for +300 yards a game. In 4 starts, he averaged less than 200 yards a game.

They showed a list of the shortest passing charts in the NFL this season. This past week, Fields was something like #5 in the league this year in at or behind the line of scrimmage attempts. One or two of Bagent's starts was ahead of him.

Fields is not the reason the ball didn't go down the field. This appears to be what Getsy thinks is best. This team should have fired Getsy this week and gotten an offensive assistant ready to try some new stuff for the rest of the season. If nothing else, you can't evaluate Fields properly when this is what you're asking him to do. If you think he can't handle downfield passing, don't just make it a theory, ask him to do it and see! It's all the more befuddling when the deep ball has all along been thing thing Fields is supposed to be good at.

[TheSuzerain]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

I'm not sure if he has a solid understanding (relative to being an NFL OC).

It could be Fields, but it wasn't like Bagent was out there throwing for +300 yards a game. In 4 starts, he averaged less than 200 yards a game.

"The passing game was much the same with an undrafted D2 rookie"

You guys are so close! You can do this!

[panthermark]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

I'm not sure if he has a solid understanding (relative to being an NFL OC).

It could be Fields, but it wasn't like Bagent was out there throwing for +300 yards a game. In 4 starts, he averaged less than 200 yards a game.

"The passing game was much the same with an undrafted D2 rookie"

You guys are so close! You can do this!

When Bagent was in, he ran the offense to perfection. That was the talk, was it not? BTW, I'm not an anti-Bagent person.
Fields has his faults, but it isn't like Bagent's 4 starts, Siemian's start (last year) or Peterman's start (last year) resulted in massive numbers.

Siemian threw for 179 yards with 1 passing TD, 1 pick and 2 sacks in a loss. (Week 12 loss)
Peterman threw for 114 yards with 1 passing TD, 0 picks and 1 sack in a loss. (Week 18 loss)
Bagent threw for 776 yards with 3 passing TD's, 5 picks, and 4 sacks going 2-2 in 4 games.

Maybe "Getsy's offense" only works if you have a HOF QB?

[Almost Retired]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

In Bagent's 4 starts Mooney went 2-4, 5-6, 1-4, and 4-5 in completions-targets. Mooney has simply been hot/cold no matter who is at QB. Maybe it's Fields but maybe it's Mooney not getting open or maybe it's Getsy's scheme. I don't think it is fair to say that our #2 receiver not being maximized is all on Fields. There simply isn't enough evidence of that.

Regarding Mooney. I wonder if he's worth the price to keep as a #3 receiver? He's not really good enough to be a #1B or #2 Receiver. This is a deep draft for WRs. Even if we don't get Harrison there is Rome Odunze, Xavier Legette, Malik Nabors, Keon Coleman, and Troy Franklin. And a host of other that we can get on Day 2 that could play the slot. Mooney makes about $3 Million a year, and doubtless would want a bigger contract from there. He's a UFA after this season, and may want to play elsewhere anyway in order to play for a team with a better passing attack. The game is probably no fun if you're a receiver that rarely get targeted.

[panthermark]

I think what might be best for this offense is a mix of short passes, moving pockets and vertical strikes, with the occasional mid range pass thrown in to mix it up. Combine that with the strong run game and OCCASIONAL QB keeper.

Screens, slants, hooks, quick outs, AND deep strikes. Keep moving the pocket. I think some of those screens need to go vertical. Maybe a fake to one side, while the opposite side streaks. Last weeks play calling was better, we just needed a few more slants one or two more vertical routes (like the one Scott could not reel in).

You want to protect Fields and the O-line = Short passing game and moving pockets....plus strong run game.
The short game/run leads to 8 or 9 in the box and tight coverage. That is what the deep passes are for..... to punish that behavior.
The short/long combo game allows for the occasional mid-range game since that is not the strength of this team unless it is wide open (which is why it is occasional, and should always have a check down RB out of the backfield. LB's are close due to the run game/short pass...but it is still a 2 high look. It opens space between LB's and safeties).

Basically, mix up the Detroit game plan with some of the Washington game plan (and add more slants, hooks, and quick outs instead of depending on 3 WR screens or 4 RB screens in a row).

[1985Bear]

I see some chatter here about trading back and still taking a QB in round 1. Or MHJ and another QB with our pick. This all seems like crazy talk.

If we are moving on from Fields, we are taking a QB with pick 1. No time in history did a QB needy team, move back in draft with top QB prospects on the board and then select the better QB in the draft. And if this was possible, would anyone think the Chicago Bears are savvy enough to pull it off?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[panthermark]

I think people understate the extent to which Fields is a limiting factor.

I don't really think he's the guy to maximize two legit WRs. Just not enough completions/targets. Look at how starved Mooney is this year.

And I'm not the biggest Getsy fan, but it's fair to say the guy has a solid understanding of NFL passing games. And it's abundantly clear that he views Fields as a limiting factor in terms of play-calling.

In Bagent's 4 starts Mooney went 2-4, 5-6, 1-4, and 4-5 in completions-targets. Mooney has simply been hot/cold no matter who is at QB. Maybe it's Fields but maybe it's Mooney not getting open or maybe it's Getsy's scheme. I don't think it is fair to say that our #2 receiver not being maximized is all on Fields. There simply isn't enough evidence of that.

Regarding Mooney. I wonder if he's worth the price to keep as a #3 receiver? He's not really good enough to be a #1B or #2 Receiver. This is a deep draft for WRs. Even if we don't get Harrison there is Rome Odunze, Xavier Legette, Malik Nabors, Keon Coleman, and Troy Franklin. And a host of other that we can get on Day 2 that could play the slot. Mooney makes about $3 Million a year, and doubtless would want a bigger contract from there. He's a UFA after this season, and may want to play elsewhere anyway in order to play for a team with a better passing attack. The game is probably no fun if you're a receiver that rarely get targeted.

Before Getsy, Mooney was tracking to be a beast. I don't think he was ever going to be a legit #1, but I thought he could be a solid #2.

1st year - 61 catches for 631 yards (16 games)
2nd year - 80 catches for 1055 yards (17 games) (Several games with Fields)
Insert new coaching staff
3rd year - 40 catches for 493 yards (12 games)
Current - 25 catches for 351 yards (12 games so far)

Agreed, If I am Mooney, I'm not sure if I want to come back here, especially if the plan is to draft a top notch WR.

BTW, Scott (10), Jones (3), ESB (4) Taylor (0) and Clayfool (4, who isn't even on the team) have a combined 21 catches between them. Under Getsy, if you are not WR#1, you don't see the rock.

[Dresden]

Good talking points about what the issue is on offense- is it the QB, the WR's, the OC, maybe it's the O line? It's hard to tell when you have so many unknowns. I think that is especially true when you are evaluating our WR's. Put Mooney or Scott on a team with a good passing attack and I have a feeling that they would be very productive. Mooney esp- he's fast, he's got great hands.

It seems like this question of why we don't throw it down the field comes up every year. Last year I think it was definitely at least partly the fault of the O line. This year, it could be partly the line, partly Fields not being able to make good, quick decisions or throw guys open. And it could be just Getsy's philosophy. Really hard to figure out.

But I think next year we'll have a new QB and a new OC, and hopefully a better line.

[mack2354]

I see some chatter here about trading back and still taking a QB in round 1. Or MHJ and another QB with our pick. This all seems like crazy talk.

If we are moving on from Fields, we are taking a QB with pick 1. No time in history did a QB needy team, move back in draft with top QB prospects on the board and then select the better QB in the draft. And if this was possible, would anyone think the Chicago Bears are savvy enough to pull it off?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What makes it crazy or not is if you believe the Bears are a "QB needy team" or not. Sure, if you think Fields is trash then you pick a QB that is rated the highest and hope for the best. If you think Fields is an "okay" QB that is being held back some by the scheme/play calling then picking the BPA regardless of position is the better call. By your logic it wouldn't make sense for any team ever to draft a QB in the 2nd or 3rd rounds if they owned a pick in the 1st round. If you needed a QB bad enough to draft so high why not take the better prospect in the first? If you didn't need a QB then why waste a pick in a round that usually projects to be a starter for a player you don't project to start on your team?

You are correct that teams who are QB needy won't pass on a higher rated prospect for a lower rated prospect. I'm not convinced the Bears have given up on Fields. We could have drafted Bryce Young or CJ Stroud if we thought Fields was trash. Although we have lost a lot of games and Fields hasn't been playing at a Pro Bowl Level he hasn't been playing like trash. His last 5 games have been actually very good minus the fumbles. If he plays at his current level and can clean up the fumbles for the rest of the season, I can totally see Poles giving Fields another year and maybe drafting a 2nd tier QB.

[biggestbullsfan]

Read on Twitter

[fleet]

Watch on YouTube

[Jimako10]

Read on Twitter

Incredible that the bears and broncos were both 1-5 when they played each other.

Sean Payton really turned around that ship.

Edit: 0-3 when they played each other, but both started 1-5.

[kyrv]

I think what might be best for this offense is a mix of short passes, moving pockets and vertical strikes, with the occasional mid range pass thrown in to mix it up. Combine that with the strong run game and OCCASIONAL QB keeper.

Screens, slants, hooks, quick outs, AND deep strikes. Keep moving the pocket. I think some of those screens need to go vertical. Maybe a fake to one side, while the opposite side streaks. Last weeks play calling was better, we just needed a few more slants one or two more vertical routes (like the one Scott could not reel in).

You want to protect Fields and the O-line = Short passing game and moving pockets....plus strong run game.
The short game/run leads to 8 or 9 in the box and tight coverage. That is what the deep passes are for..... to punish that behavior.
The short/long combo game allows for the occasional mid-range game since that is not the strength of this team unless it is wide open (which is why it is occasional, and should always have a check down RB out of the backfield. LB's are close due to the run game/short pass...but it is still a 2 high look. It opens space between LB's and safeties).

Basically, mix up the Detroit game plan with some of the Washington game plan (and add more slants, hooks, and quick outs instead of depending on 3 WR screens or 4 RB screens in a row).

There was a previous regime, can't recall who, but they were in love with the seldom working wide receiver screen. This past game brought back the nightmare.

I also thought throwing downfield was one of Fields' plusses. But as you said, at least find out.

[fleet]

Jeff Hughes reports Fields skepticism in the Building.

(3) Is the quarterback’s tenure in Chicago officially over? If the season ended Monday night, that answer would surely be yes; the lack of week-to-week consistency would not prohibit the Bears from using one of their high draft picks on a quarterback prospect. Fields has ability; he is a brilliant runner capable of making dynamic plays off-script. But if you listened to Troy Aikman on Monday night, you heard an analyst incredibly skeptical of Fields’ ability to play the position from the pocket. Folks in the building share that skepticism

https://www.dabearsblog.com/2023/five-questions-with-five-games-remaining

[Chi town]

Jeff Hughes reports Fields skepticism in the Building.

(3) Is the quarterback’s tenure in Chicago officially over? If the season ended Monday night, that answer would surely be yes; the lack of week-to-week consistency would not prohibit the Bears from using one of their high draft picks on a quarterback prospect. Fields has ability; he is a brilliant runner capable of making dynamic plays off-script. But if you listened to Troy Aikman on Monday night, you heard an analyst incredibly skeptical of Fields’ ability to play the position from the pocket. Folks in the building share that skepticism

https://www.dabearsblog.com/2023/five-questions-with-five-games-remaining

Justin doesn't pull the trigger. Doesn’t anticipate and throw his WRs open AND he turns it over.