Bears 12.0

[Susan]

Both because Jeff has had conversations with people in the building, and that he’s a Caleb Williams guy, this take was interesting. Media seem more apt to be giving all of this more of a serious view than Bears fans are.

Read on Twitter

When the Bears beat is effectively just PR for the team, they don't report the bad and leaves room for hit pieces like this to have actual relevancy.

The day the Bears had their extremely hard practice (the one that Roschon got injured at and hasn't practiced since) - nearly every beat reporter tweeted out how "this was the hardest practice they've ever seen" all at the same time. If the PR department controls the media - the media doesn't have the balls to tell the fans what's actually happening in the midst of a 10 game losing streak (the second one of Poles' 3 year career, this time with a better than average roster) and at the end of the day - the truth will come out.

ESPCIALLY when Caleb's people are out there bashing professional coaches - saying how poorly he was coached and playing the victim. Those dudes have every right to get their lick back and I'm not surprised at all they did it this way.

This kid has made some serious enemies with how he carries himself as has Poles. I saw this **** coming a mile away.

[dougthonus]

I've never liked Poles, but I think this article strikes me as a bunch of sensationalist trash wrapped around an actual truth. I only read the free parts FWIW.

The truth: The Bears decided on Caleb Williams without ever seriously considering anyone else.

The trash: Everything else. A quote of anyone with eyes could see Jayden Daniels was a better QB? Get the heck out of here. We interviewed a guy currently coaching Jayden Daniels about his view of Jayden Daniels vs Caleb Williams . "Anyone with eyes"? The world at large had Caleb Williams as vastly superior to everyone else (right or wrong).

So whatever, I think Poles sucked before this, and I'll think he sucks after this. I was actually in camp "trade down" instead of taking Caleb Williams and Daniels was the guy I wanted to trade down for, and even I still think this reads like a worthless hit piece of sensationalistic journalism trying to magnify a bad outcome as if it was 1000x worse and more nonsensical than it was in reality.

(also, to be clear, still think Poles sucked and has always sucked)

[Chi town]

Ben’s Bears… well said. All that matters now.

The parent has finally entered the room. No more tails wagging the dog.

Let’s watch some winning football now instead of the not to lose garbage we watched with Flus.

[Susan]

I've never liked Poles, but I think this article strikes me as a bunch of sensationalist trash wrapped around an actual truth. I only read the free parts FWIW.

The truth: The Bears decided on Caleb Williams without ever seriously considering anyone else.

The trash: Everything else. A quote of anyone with eyes could see Jayden Daniels was a better QB? Get the heck out of here. We interviewed a guy currently coaching Jayden Daniels about his view of Jayden Daniels vs Caleb Williams . "Anyone with eyes"? The world at large had Caleb Williams as vastly superior to everyone else (right or wrong).

So whatever, I think Poles sucked before this, and I'll think he sucks after this. I was actually in camp "trade down" instead of taking Caleb Williams and Daniels was the guy I wanted to trade down for, and even I still think this reads like a worthless hit piece of sensationalistic journalism trying to magnify a bad outcome as if it was 1000x worse and more nonsensical than it was in reality.

(also, to be clear, still think Poles sucked and has always sucked)

I mean, Jayden won the Heisman in 2023 and Caleb didn't receive a single vote after winning it the year before.

https://www.heisman.com/heisman-winners/jayden-daniels/

The fact that Poles had his mind made up gave the media no reason to talk about a debate but there were people that said that Daniels was the superior prospect - Dan Orlovsky and Louis Riddick.

Read on Twitter

[jnrjr79]

I've never liked Poles, but I think this article strikes me as a bunch of sensationalist trash wrapped around an actual truth. I only read the free parts FWIW.

The truth: The Bears decided on Caleb Williams without ever seriously considering anyone else.

The trash: Everything else. A quote of anyone with eyes could see Jayden Daniels was a better QB? Get the heck out of here. We interviewed a guy currently coaching Jayden Daniels about his view of Jayden Daniels vs Caleb Williams . "Anyone with eyes"? The world at large had Caleb Williams as vastly superior to everyone else (right or wrong).

So whatever, I think Poles sucked before this, and I'll think he sucks after this. I was actually in camp "trade down" instead of taking Caleb Williams and Daniels was the guy I wanted to trade down for, and even I still think this reads like a worthless hit piece of sensationalistic journalism trying to magnify a bad outcome as if it was 1000x worse and more nonsensical than it was in reality.

(also, to be clear, still think Poles sucked and has always sucked)

I mean, Jayden won the Heisman in 2023 and Caleb didn't receive a single vote after winning it the year before.

https://www.heisman.com/heisman-winners/jayden-daniels/

The fact that Poles had his mind made up gave the media no reason to talk about a debate but there were people that said that Daniels was the superior prospect - Dan Orlovsky and Louis Riddick.

Read on Twitter

2 things can be true:

1) the Bears should have done more due diligence, and
2) Caleb was the overwhelming favorite to go #1

The fact that a couple of talking heads had a different view doesn’t mean that Caleb wasn’t the near-consensus choice.

[dougthonus]

I mean, Jayden won the Heisman in 2023 and Caleb didn't receive a single vote after winning it the year before.

https://www.heisman.com/heisman-winners/jayden-daniels/

The fact that Poles had his mind made up gave the media no reason to talk about a debate but there were people that said that Daniels was the superior prospect - Dan Orlovsky and Louis Riddick.

FWIW, I agree with what you're saying so I'll state it again this way:
1: I think Poles sucks (and have said that more or less from day 1, when his team building approach was to overpay in trades for impending FAs)
2: I think this process to select Caleb sucked, and I question their process to do anything

On the flip side I think:
1: The parts of this article I have read seem like absolute sensationalistic trash
2: It appears to make broad overstatements that are objectively false on the surface
3: The language used looks to maximize negativity and I find it unlikely to be a balanced view of actual events
4: The only named source could not possibly be any more conflicted professionally
5: Because of points #1-#4, I don't take the article seriously, because it isn't a serious piece of journalism

[Dresden]

I think there's no doubt Daniels had a better season in college his last year. I always saw two problems with Daniels though: 1) he only performed at that high level for one season, and he did so when he had two WR's who would both be drafted high in the NFL draft. And 2) so much of his success was because he was an excellent runner, but being built as slight as he is, how long would that hold up in the NFL? We saw with RG3 that it just took one injury to ruin his career. And we had just been through a tough stretch where our QB's main weapon was running.

So for those reasons, I thought Caleb was the better option, and so did about 98% of commentators. We're just one year into their careers, too, so it's way too soon to say the Bears made a mistake. I'm not so sure if the Bears had taken Daniels and Caleb had gone to WAS, right now we wouldn't be wondering "What were the Bears thinking? Why didn't they just do what everyone else thought they should do and take the once in a generation prospect, Caleb Williams? Only the Bears could have screwed this up. Poles should be fired immediately."

[jnrjr79]

I mean, Jayden won the Heisman in 2023 and Caleb didn't receive a single vote after winning it the year before.

https://www.heisman.com/heisman-winners/jayden-daniels/

The fact that Poles had his mind made up gave the media no reason to talk about a debate but there were people that said that Daniels was the superior prospect - Dan Orlovsky and Louis Riddick.

FWIW, I agree with what you're saying so I'll state it again this way:
1: I think Poles sucks (and have said that more or less from day 1, when his team building approach was to overpay in trades for impending FAs)
2: I think this process to select Caleb sucked, and I question their process to do anything

On the flip side I think:
1: The parts of this article I have read seem like absolute sensationalistic trash
2: It appears to make broad overstatements that are objectively false on the surface
3: The language used looks to maximize negativity and I find it unlikely to be a balanced view of actual events
4: The only named source could not possibly be any more conflicted professionally
5: Because of points #1-#4, I don't take the article seriously, because it isn't a serious piece of journalism

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

[Dresden]

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

Curious what you're basing that conclusion on.

[Dresden]

FWIW, I agree with what you're saying so I'll state it again this way:
1: I think Poles sucks (and have said that more or less from day 1, when his team building approach was to overpay in trades for impending FAs)

I never saw the problem with this. In free agency, you're competing with any number of teams for free agents. That alone makes it likely you will overpay for premium players. By trading for a player on an expiring contract, you are able to pay less in a trade than normal, due to his contract status, and by then re-signing that player, you're doing it before they hit the open market, and therefore increase your odds of getting a good deal.

A case in point in 2 or 3 years ago in FA when the Bears had a ton of cap space, and desperately needed off. lineman, and yet failed to get anyone of note in FA because they good ones all went for exorbitant prices, and it was probably good Poles didn't win any of those bids. It's the same with pass rushers- the good ones are almost always overpaid in free agency. He locked up Sweat at what was then a reasonable contract, and didn't have to overpay. The price to do that was a second round pick. In order to guarantee you'll get the player you want, that doesnt' seem like too high of a price. Of course, whether Sweat was worth it or not is another question.

[jnrjr79]

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

Curious what you're basing that conclusion on.

This offseason’s personnel moves, primarily.

[dougthonus]

I never saw the problem with this. In free agency, you're competing with any number of teams for free agents. That alone makes it likely you will overpay for premium players. By trading for a player on an expiring contract, you are able to pay less in a trade than normal, due to his contract status, and by then re-signing that player, you're doing it before they hit the open market, and therefore increase your odds of getting a good deal.

A case in point in 2 or 3 years ago in FA when the Bears had a ton of cap space, and desperately needed off. lineman, and yet failed to get anyone of note in FA because they good ones all went for exorbitant prices, and it was probably good Poles didn't win any of those bids. It's the same with pass rushers- the good ones are almost always overpaid in free agency. He locked up Sweat at what was then a reasonable contract, and didn't have to overpay. The price to do that was a second round pick. In order to guarantee you'll get the player you want, that doesnt' seem like too high of a price. Of course, whether Sweat was worth it or not is another question.

Mathematically it is a terrible idea to give up high value assets for the right to pay market value for a player even if you cannot get that player in FA at the same value. Overall, when you repeat this transaction you lose total value. Yes, you might miss out on this guy, but over time you will have the option to get a different guy and have more total value. There are times when that is fine because you are aiming for a title immediately and thus you need to maximize value in a short term window, the Bears have not been in that position under Poles.

[molepharmer]

B Johnson in his presser a few minutes ago said TJ will be listed as 'doubtful' on the injury front and again, wouldn't say whether Jaylon will be playing or not; just said JJ has been practicing. Ben also said he trusts Monongai at this point and has no problem running the ball with B Brown. [note - I didn't think Brown made the 53 man, maybe he did. Johnson referenced Brown after saying he was hopefully Roschon would become available soon]. Really not much info during presser.

[Dresden]

I never saw the problem with this. In free agency, you're competing with any number of teams for free agents. That alone makes it likely you will overpay for premium players. By trading for a player on an expiring contract, you are able to pay less in a trade than normal, due to his contract status, and by then re-signing that player, you're doing it before they hit the open market, and therefore increase your odds of getting a good deal.

A case in point in 2 or 3 years ago in FA when the Bears had a ton of cap space, and desperately needed off. lineman, and yet failed to get anyone of note in FA because they good ones all went for exorbitant prices, and it was probably good Poles didn't win any of those bids. It's the same with pass rushers- the good ones are almost always overpaid in free agency. He locked up Sweat at what was then a reasonable contract, and didn't have to overpay. The price to do that was a second round pick. In order to guarantee you'll get the player you want, that doesnt' seem like too high of a price. Of course, whether Sweat was worth it or not is another question.

Mathematically it is a terrible idea to give up high value assets for the right to pay market value for a player even if you cannot get that player in FA at the same value. Overall, when you repeat this transaction you lose total value. Yes, you might miss out on this guy, but over time you will have the option to get a different guy and have more total value. There are times when that is fine because you are aiming for a title immediately and thus you need to maximize value in a short term window, the Bears have not been in that position under Poles.

To my knowledge, Poles has only done this once- with Sweat. The Claypool trade was just a trade- we didn't sign him to an extension.

What I question is the notion that you are giving up assets only to pay market value. I think you are giving up assets to pay less than market value. It's like getting an option to buy a stock right before it has its IPO. You're giving up something to get that stock at a certain price that you feel is better than the price you'll pay after its IPO. Of course there's some risk- maybe that player would get less than what you paid for him on the open market, or maybe they aren't what you paid for him. But the idea of market value itself is very questionable. You don't know what Sweat would have received in free agency. You're giving up an asset to sign him for a price you think is a good deal. Instead of waiting to FA where, you are betting, you would have to pay more due to the competition.

[fleet]

I mean, Jayden won the Heisman in 2023 and Caleb didn't receive a single vote after winning it the year before.

https://www.heisman.com/heisman-winners/jayden-daniels/

The fact that Poles had his mind made up gave the media no reason to talk about a debate but there were people that said that Daniels was the superior prospect - Dan Orlovsky and Louis Riddick.

FWIW, I agree with what you're saying so I'll state it again this way:
1: I think Poles sucks (and have said that more or less from day 1, when his team building approach was to overpay in trades for impending FAs)
2: I think this process to select Caleb sucked, and I question their process to do anything

On the flip side I think:
1: The parts of this article I have read seem like absolute sensationalistic trash
2: It appears to make broad overstatements that are objectively false on the surface
3: The language used looks to maximize negativity and I find it unlikely to be a balanced view of actual events
4: The only named source could not possibly be any more conflicted professionally
5: Because of points #1-#4, I don't take the article seriously, because it isn't a serious piece of journalism

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

Yes. And fwiw, while I would have fired Poles last year, I am somewhat accepting of a team where Poles runs the scouting/personnel acquisitions department, and Ben oversees the decisions and direction. Poles gets into trouble when he is faced with considering or seeking contradictory data on players and people he likes, so Poles needs someone like Ben to challenge him, keep him honest

Read on Twitter

[dougthonus]

To my knowledge, Poles has only done this once- with Sweat. The Claypool trade was just a trade- we didn't sign him to an extension.

Mack, Sweat, Claypool are the famous ones, but to do this type of trade 3x with major assets to me is a mistake.

What I question is the notion that you are giving up assets only to pay market value. I think you are giving up assets to pay less than market value. It's like getting an option to buy a stock right before it has its IPO. You're giving up something to get that stock at a certain price that you feel is better than the price you'll pay after its IPO. Of course there's some risk- maybe that player would get less than what you paid for him on the open market, or maybe they aren't what you paid for him. But the idea of market value itself is very questionable. You don't know what Sweat would have received in free agency. You're giving up an asset to sign him for a price you think is a good deal. Instead of waiting to FA where, you are betting, you would have to pay more due to the competition.

Okay, then let me rephase it this way, if you are giving up 1st and 2nd round picks to bid on a player early, then I think it's a terrible idea. I don't think you necessarily need to wait until FA to sign big guys. Use all your draft picks to get your star talent and use FA to sign value guys on the margins.

[molepharmer]

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

Curious what you're basing that conclusion on.

This offseason’s personnel moves, primarily.

Other posters seem to have this view. So does this include both the good and the questionable moves ???? because there have been several off-season moves that some can certainly question. For example:
- trading a 4th rd pick and extending Thuney before he plays a snap
- signing J Jackson to $52 mil
- signing Odeyingbo to $48 mil
- drafting a TE at #10 when the lines could have used an upgrade
- drafting a college RT and hoping he can play LT
- drafting who many regard as a reach in Hyppolite

[MAQ]

To my knowledge, Poles has only done this once- with Sweat. The Claypool trade was just a trade- we didn't sign him to an extension.

Mack, Sweat, Claypool are the famous ones, but to do this type of trade 3x with major assets to me is a mistake.
.

Khalil Mack was a different regime.

Poles's 1st year was 2022. In fact, Poles actually traded Mack for a 2nd and 6th round pick as his 1st move of business.

[Dresden]

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

Curious what you're basing that conclusion on.

This offseason’s personnel moves, primarily.

So the evidence is just by inference then? I think that's a hard argument to make with any certainty. I can see the pick of Loveland being Johnson lead, but it doesn't necessarily mean Johnson has supplanted Poles as the primary decision maker on personnel moves. The same with the additions to the O line- Poles might finally have realized, after seeing his prized rookie get sacked 68 times, that he has to be more aggressive in fixing that problem. Although I don't doubt that BJ being there might have put additional pressure on him to fix this in a major way.

[fleet]

Nothing to do with the article, but re: your initial points 1-2, one thing that seems apparent now is that Poles has effectively been cucked by Johnson. It wouldn’t shock me if the reality at this point is Johnson is more influential in personnel decisions than Poles.

Curious what you're basing that conclusion on.

This offseason’s personnel moves, primarily.

Ben Johnson basically just hired all the coaches he wanted to, there was no kangaroo committee with an endless line of candidates for these positions as has been a Poles process. Ben just called his shots. So there’s that too.