OT: Bears Talk - Justin Fields era begins

[nomorezorro]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

[Chicago-Bull-E]

that was in 2003. i recall at the time thinking "people still see race at the QB position?" because even then i hadn't heard it brought up in what seemed like ages.

i mean, one of the big stories of the nfl over the next 15+ years from this point was coaches very gradually realizing that offenses could be tailored to skills traditionally associated with black quarterbacks who had previously been dismissed as legitimate top-tier players/prospects at the position.

you could argue semantics — it's not like there's a pure racial breakdown of white guy = pocket passer; black guy = scrambling qb. designing an offense around a traditional pocket passer isn't an overtly racist act, you can have legitimate concerns about the viability of a mobile quarterback over a long time horizon, good nfl teams have been quick to adopt more flexible schemes once it was clear that the league had undervalued certain skills at the position. even if you were willing to admit that race played a role in determining who got to play qb in the nfl, you could argue that role was largely confined to lower levels, where you'd be more likely to find a bad decision maker whose backward thinking would steer him away from starting a black kid at qb (or from empowering that kid to play the position in the same way he would a white kid).

but, functionally, the end result is the same: for most of the history of the nfl, there was a power structure in place that failed to capitalize on the talent pool at the quarterback position, and that failure led to an underrepresentation of black quarterbacks relative to modern levels. that's a racialized bias.

i think it's inarguable there has been a shift in the racial dynamic at the position, and that presumably can be tied to a shift in the way players are developed and prospects have been evaluated. a dozen teams didn't have a black starting qb prior to the 21st century. no black qb was picked no. 1 before michael vick; there have been 4 in the past 15 years. there were 10 black starting qbs on opening day 2020, the most in league history.

given all that, i think it's very reasonable to believe that racial biases in player evaluation weren't completely eradicated over the course of 20 years or whatever. it's not like all the guys who had jobs in 2000 are out of the league now, or didn't influence the makeup of front office personnel that followed them. it's obviously inarguable that there are far fewer race-based obstacles for black quarterbacks, but among the many factors that shape the very human decision-making process of nfl teams, it's naive to insist that race couldn't possibly still play a role.

Fair enough. But the aformentioned Trey Lance being taken 3rd sort of smashes concerns of modern prototype Fields dropping all the way to 11 for race reasons. Some fans are so hopeful over this guy they seemingly can't look at the possible football aspect and are reaching for something else nefarious. The modern NFL prototype might actually be a black quarterback.

Spoiler:

I think you’re giving the race thirsty folk too much credit, they likely weren’t aware Trey Lance was black. Not very detailed oriented folk.

[dice]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

even to say that one SUSPECTS that race played a factor is perfectly legitimate. but to flat out assume it goes beyond the realm of logic in my opinion

when a black kid with potential character issues, who only played 2 years of college, wasn't particularly accurate and threw 25 TD vs 18 INT his sophomore season goes #1...i think it's safe to say that there's not a whole lot of nit-picking along racial lines anymore



so why does jameis winston go #1 while justin fields falls to #11? your guess is as good as mine

[dice]

the bigger question than "why did fields fall to 11" in my mind is "why did lance get picked ahead of fields?" and i think it has a lot to do with people romanticizing untapped potential

[dougthonus]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

Agree with this completely. It wouldn't shock me to find out race played some factor.

Before we start trying to decide if people passed on him out of racism because he's black, it'd be nice to first see that the decision to pass on him is actually a bad one. I personally think that will be the case I'd have taken Fields if the Bears were picking #2. However, I'd like to see that play out on the field before saying everyone wrongly passed on him.

[dice]

so what kind of career should bears fans be content with from fields? obviously if he's the next matt ryan you're thrilled. i suspect that him being the next jay cutler would be somewhat disappointing, though it's hard to complain much about drafting even a lower-level franchise QB. i'd think you'd have to accept a carson palmer-like career. with more team success, of course

[CaPiTanAK]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

even to say that one SUSPECTS that race played a factor is perfectly legitimate. but to flat out assume it goes beyond the realm of logic in my opinion

when a black kid with potential character issues, who only played 2 years of college, wasn't particularly accurate and threw 25 TD vs 18 INT his sophomore season goes #1...i think it's safe to say that there's not a whole lot of nit-picking along racial lines anymore



so why does jameis winston go #1 while justin fields falls to #11? your guess is as good as mine

Simple. Lovie Smith is an African American who isn't prejudice against black QBs.

[dice]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

even to say that one SUSPECTS that race played a factor is perfectly legitimate. but to flat out assume it goes beyond the realm of logic in my opinion

when a black kid with potential character issues, who only played 2 years of college, wasn't particularly accurate and threw 25 TD vs 18 INT his sophomore season goes #1...i think it's safe to say that there's not a whole lot of nit-picking along racial lines anymore



so why does jameis winston go #1 while justin fields falls to #11? your guess is as good as mine

Simple. Lovie Smith is an African American who isn't prejudice against black QBs.

lovie smith didn't make the decision. this guy did:



there was even a conspiracy theory that the guy above was covertly running a jameis winston superfan site. so no, not at all simple. your view of race in the nfl, is, however, quite simple-minded

[Hold That]

so what kind of career should bears fans be content with from fields? obviously if he's the next matt ryan you're thrilled. i suspect that him being the next jay cutler would be somewhat disappointing, though it's hard to complain much about drafting even a lower-level franchise QB. i'd think you'd have to accept a carson palmer-like career. with more team success, of course

instead of trying to compare his career to a specific player to determine his value, I’d say if hes a top 10 QB for majority of his career and can crack the top 5 for a couple of seasons in his prime, id be content.

[Hold That]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

even to say that one SUSPECTS that race played a factor is perfectly legitimate. but to flat out assume it goes beyond the realm of logic in my opinion

when a black kid with potential character issues, who only played 2 years of college, wasn't particularly accurate and threw 25 TD vs 18 INT his sophomore season goes #1...i think it's safe to say that there's not a whole lot of nit-picking along racial lines anymore



so why does jameis winston go #1 while justin fields falls to #11? your guess is as good as mine

I don’t think it’s about race more so than it’s simply about shying away from overly athletic players at the QB position. I think most of the players who are athletic freaks with great running ability will get nit-picked.. a lot of GMs seem fearful that these players won’t develop their pocket passing abilities and rely on their legs because it’s simply easy for them to do so. Race can play a factor in some instances but not always and it works for particular positions. Even christian mcaffrey was told he should possibly switch to WR because of the lack of success that white RBs have had historically. Tim Teabow was told he should be a TE because of his overly athletic ability. We saw what Lamar went through and even Tim Crouch back in the day from Nebraska who was another overly athletic white QB(ran 4.47)was told to play WR. Race does play a factor sometimes but not nearly as much as people would like to suggest and definitely not as much present day. I feel like it’s more about GMs thinking this guy might be too athletic for the position to the point where he doesn’t fully develop the pocket passing skill set.

Jameis is the perfect example, he’s black, not overly athletic, won a National championship, and was the best pocket passer in the nation when he came out. GMs care about pocket passing above all and your race is secondary. Byron Leftwitch and Jamarcus Russell are other non overly athletic QBs that went top 10 that really didn’t get nit picked due to them being known as pocket passers.

Justin Fields was slotted top 3 in all the mocks and soon as he ran his 4.4 on pro day the classic doubts came out and excuses. It’s not a color thing it’s an athletic thing.

[dice]

yeah i don't think it's useful to use race to completely wave away negative scouting assessments of fields before we have any sense of how he'll perform in the nfl. and again, obviously things have changed to the point it's unreasonable to say a player fell because teams don't value black qb prospects as a rule. there are a million different factors shaping how a draft shakes out, and they vary from team to team.

i don't think i would say anything stronger than "it's possible that race played a role in fields falling outside of the top 10." but i also think that's a very reasonable thing to say!

even to say that one SUSPECTS that race played a factor is perfectly legitimate. but to flat out assume it goes beyond the realm of logic in my opinion

when a black kid with potential character issues, who only played 2 years of college, wasn't particularly accurate and threw 25 TD vs 18 INT his sophomore season goes #1...i think it's safe to say that there's not a whole lot of nit-picking along racial lines anymore



so why does jameis winston go #1 while justin fields falls to #11? your guess is as good as mine

I don’t think it’s about race more so than it’s simply about shying away from overly athletic players at the QB position. I think most of the players who are athletic freaks with great running ability will get nit-picked.. a lot of GMs seem fearful that these players won’t develop their pocket passing abilities and rely on their legs because it’s simply easy for them to do so. Race can play a factor in some instances but not always and it works for particular positions. Even christian mcaffrey was told he should possibly switch to WR because of the lack of success that white RBs have had historically. Tim Teabow was told he should be a TE because of his overly athletic ability. We saw what Lamar went through and even Tim Crouch back in the day from Nebraska who was another overly athletic white QB(ran 4.47)was told to play WR. Race does play a factor sometimes but not nearly as much as people would like to suggest and definitely not as much present day. I feel like it’s more about GMs thinking this guy might be too athletic for the position to the point where he doesn’t fully develop the pocket passing skill set.

Jameis is the perfect example, he’s black, not overly athletic, won a National championship, and was the best pocket passer in the nation when he came out. GMs care about pocket passing above all and your race is secondary. Byron Leftwitch and Jamarcus Russell are other non overly athletic QBs that went top 10 that really didn’t get nit picked due to them being known as pocket passers.

Justin Fields was slotted top 3 in all the mocks and soon as he ran his 4.4 on pro day the classic doubts came out and excuses. It’s not a color thing it’s an athletic thing.

eh, kyler murray is super fast too. so was RGIII. and vick

[dice]

so what kind of career should bears fans be content with from fields? obviously if he's the next matt ryan you're thrilled. i suspect that him being the next jay cutler would be somewhat disappointing, though it's hard to complain much about drafting even a lower-level franchise QB. i'd think you'd have to accept a carson palmer-like career. with more team success, of course

instead of trying to compare his career to a specific player to determine his value, I’d say if hes a top 10 QB for majority of his career and can crack the top 5 for a couple of seasons in his prime, id be content.

mighty high bar. damn. a lot of #1 overall picks don't even get there

[thedarkstark]

How is Fields falling a race thing when Lance went #3?

Guys like Lance and Wilson don't have nearly as much tape, certainly not against top-tier competition, so there's less to nitpick. Fields played top competition and has a lot of tape. In some instances he didn't look great but that's understandable considering who he had to play, but it gave doubters something to criticize.

I think there may also be a bit of an OSU bias, they've not had a stellar history of producing good NFL QBs.

[JohnnyTapwater]

I think race comes into play when a player is categorized as being too "chatty". An Uncontrollable negro is frightening to some people.

It's so nuanced. I don't know enough about the personalities of these kids to comment with more than anecdotal evidence and experience.

[Hold That]

even to say that one SUSPECTS that race played a factor is perfectly legitimate. but to flat out assume it goes beyond the realm of logic in my opinion

when a black kid with potential character issues, who only played 2 years of college, wasn't particularly accurate and threw 25 TD vs 18 INT his sophomore season goes #1...i think it's safe to say that there's not a whole lot of nit-picking along racial lines anymore



so why does jameis winston go #1 while justin fields falls to #11? your guess is as good as mine

I don’t think it’s about race more so than it’s simply about shying away from overly athletic players at the QB position. I think most of the players who are athletic freaks with great running ability will get nit-picked.. a lot of GMs seem fearful that these players won’t develop their pocket passing abilities and rely on their legs because it’s simply easy for them to do so. Race can play a factor in some instances but not always and it works for particular positions. Even christian mcaffrey was told he should possibly switch to WR because of the lack of success that white RBs have had historically. Tim Teabow was told he should be a TE because of his overly athletic ability. We saw what Lamar went through and even Tim Crouch back in the day from Nebraska who was another overly athletic white QB(ran 4.47)was told to play WR. Race does play a factor sometimes but not nearly as much as people would like to suggest and definitely not as much present day. I feel like it’s more about GMs thinking this guy might be too athletic for the position to the point where he doesn’t fully develop the pocket passing skill set.

Jameis is the perfect example, he’s black, not overly athletic, won a National championship, and was the best pocket passer in the nation when he came out. GMs care about pocket passing above all and your race is secondary. Byron Leftwitch and Jamarcus Russell are other non overly athletic QBs that went top 10 that really didn’t get nit picked due to them being known as pocket passers.

Justin Fields was slotted top 3 in all the mocks and soon as he ran his 4.4 on pro day the classic doubts came out and excuses. It’s not a color thing it’s an athletic thing.

eh, kyler murray is super fast too. so was RGIII. and vick

Kyler Murray was nit picked and was blessed to have his former college coach have the #1 pick and ignore the noise about him not being worthy of the #1 pick. Vick was exceptional and definitely the “first of his kind” and then got scrutinized in his career for his lack of reading defenses, which I honestly felt lead as a domino effect to other “mobile QBs” not going as high for the next 5 drafts. RG3 broke records in college and at Baylor his talent was undeniable and had a similar college career as Fields. But we saw his failures and also made people back off of mobile QBs for the next couple of drafts.

[Hold That]

so what kind of career should bears fans be content with from fields? obviously if he's the next matt ryan you're thrilled. i suspect that him being the next jay cutler would be somewhat disappointing, though it's hard to complain much about drafting even a lower-level franchise QB. i'd think you'd have to accept a carson palmer-like career. with more team success, of course

instead of trying to compare his career to a specific player to determine his value, I’d say if hes a top 10 QB for majority of his career and can crack the top 5 for a couple of seasons in his prime, id be content.

mighty high bar. damn. a lot of #1 overall picks don't even get there

High bar but that’s the reality. If you aren’t scratching the surface of the top 10 your team is likely looking to replace you or shuffle you out for someone who has the potential to be that. Look up the top 10 list and check out the guys who fall outside of that list. If they have more than 4 years of experience we’ve likely heard those teams looking to move those players or they’ve been traded within the last two seasons already. At some point you better been recognized as a top 10 QB for multiple seasons to be considered a success. The bar is high but that’s why their contracts are high. And why damn near every new QB contract is setting the record for the “highest paid QB” until Mahomes came on the scene

[Dominator83]

How is Fields falling a race thing when Lance went #3?

Guys like Lance and Wilson don't have nearly as much tape, certainly not against top-tier competition, so there's less to nitpick. Fields played top competition and has a lot of tape. In some instances he didn't look great but that's understandable considering who he had to play, but it gave doubters something to criticize.

I think there may also be a bit of an OSU bias, they've not had a stellar history of producing good NFL QBs.

Yea that is for real. Way too many people fall in love with "the unknown". They always feel like the less you've seen, the more potential there is. Hell, how often on these very forums do we see fans of teams not wanting to do hypothetical trades of their young players for solid vets? Everybody always thinks these young prospects are all going to be the next big thing, when usually they just turn out to be scrubs. Lots of draft people had Mitch ranked high, partially because there wasn't much tape to go on and he "had the tools". If he played the schedule that Fields played, his warts would have been fully exposed.

[2018C3]

When it comes down to it. On most draft picks, I'd rather see a black wide receiver picked over any other nationality. I'd also rather see a black running back picked over any other nationality. In most positions my favorite athlete to draft is usually black.

When it comes to Quarterback's, I'm indifferent. I just hope the best guy is picked. I think Justin Fields is the best option at the Bears previous pick. The Bears have never had a great quarterback in my lifetime. I hope Justin is the first.

When I look through stats, numbers, and potential, most often times my choice is a Black athlete.

------------------------------------------------

Also, When the Bulls make draft picks, I usually look more favorably on black athletes, over white athletes. In this last draft I went against the grain, and was against Deni Avdija. I failed to see any advantages in his highlights.

I'm just being honest, and I guess noticing a general trend in the performance of black athletes, over others. This can somehow also make me racist?

Generally, I believe Black athletes are better, I do not know why. Further studies will need to be made on whether it is a pure physical advantage, or a socioeconomic trend that allows today's athletes to succeed. I'm open to either option.

In 2020, the Nba athletes are 74.2 percent black. In the NFL 57.5 percent are black.

One thing no one with a open mind can deny, is black athletes are excelling in these sports.

I only follow the the NBA, and NFL. I really have no interest at all in watching any other sporting events.

[Susan]

Read on Twitter

Forgot about the epilepsy leak that 100% hurt his stock. This thread is a good one that explains the fall.

The Jets going from #1 to #2 was massive, the Jags probably would have taken Fields at #2 from what I've read. Wilson played against worse comp, had a shoulder issue, didn't win **** in college, played well off script but IMO isn't as refined as Fields is right now + is absolutely a worse athlete. They saw the off script stuff and his arm and fell in love.

No idea what SF is doing, don't really care either but that's a very risky pick to make based on size + physical traits. He was a year away from the game more or less, in way substandard comp and looked like crap in this only game this year. If we made that pick, I'd be freaking leery as all get out.

Atlanta keeps Ryan, restructures his contract to make his cap hit even worse next year + the year after, drafts a TE and trades Julio Jones. No freaking clue what they're trying to do but I'm glad I'm not rooting for them.

Detroit is fine with trying to win with Goff?? WTF?
Carolina is fine with trying to win with Sam Darnold?? WTF?
Denver is fine trying to win with Drew Lock/Teddy Bridgewater?? This only looks fine if Rodgers gets traded THIS year, otherwise wtf are they doing?
I wouldn't trust Hurts/Smith all that much if I were Philly considering Smith's size.

Hell if I were a Miami or Giants fan I'd be questioning passing on Fields. Tua is small and had a pretty intense injury in college and Daniel Jones sucks.

[dice]

Read on Twitter

Forgot about the epilepsy leak that 100% hurt his stock. This thread is a good one that explains the fall.

The Jets going from #1 to #2 was massive, the Jags probably would have taken Fields at #2 from what I've read. Wilson played against worse comp, had a shoulder issue, didn't win **** in college, played well off script but IMO isn't as refined as Fields is right now + is absolutely a worse athlete. They saw the off script stuff and his arm and fell in love.

No idea what SF is doing, don't really care either but that's a very risky pick to make based on size + physical traits. He was a year away from the game more or less, in way substandard comp and looked like crap in this only game this year. If we made that pick, I'd be freaking leery as all get out.

Atlanta keeps Ryan, restructures his contract to make his cap hit even worse next year + the year after, drafts a TE and trades Julio Jones. No freaking clue what they're trying to do but I'm glad I'm not rooting for them.

Detroit is fine with trying to win with Goff?? WTF?
Carolina is fine with trying to win with Sam Darnold?? WTF?
Denver is fine trying to win with Drew Lock/Teddy Bridgewater?? This only looks fine if Rodgers gets traded THIS year, otherwise wtf are they doing?
I wouldn't trust Hurts/Smith all that much if I were Philly considering Smith's size.

Hell if I were a Miami or Giants fan I'd be questioning passing on Fields. Tua is small and had a pretty intense injury in college and Daniel Jones sucks.

as already discussed, jones has actually been quite good early on. i agree with a lot of the other critiques