BearFan PHX

Oh for sure. The players are good! They ARE fun to watch! I just think the scheme isnt so great - but the players are playing hard.

For those saying Eberflus has a top Defense, here are some stats... The (seeming) good news: Bears have the 11th best defense overall for yards allowed Bears have the 2nd best defense for rushing yards allowed The back to earth context of those numbers: Bears have the 25th best defense for passing yards allowed Bears have the 27th best defense for scoring allowed (which is the one that really matters) Bears have the 32nd best (the worst!) defense for TD% in the Red Zone (teams score a TD 73.5% of the time on us) Bears have the 30th best defense on 3rd down (teams convert 46.1% of the time against us on 3rd down) So if we cant stop anyone on 3rd down or in the red zone, how do we have the 11th best vs total yards? It means poor field position because of the offense. We are not the 11th best defense in the league. Teams convert and score on us as much as any team in the league. They were just somehow closer on average to the end zone when they started those drives! Now by the eye test, I see massive improvement. The roster is growing in experience and you can see that on the field. I just can't in good faith give a lot of credit to Eberflus - mostly because, by the numbers - there isn't that much to praise. I think the roster is getting good. I think we are so used to seeing awful football that something that looks like it has some hope looks really good to us. Wait for the next coach to come in, and hopefully then we'll see something from this group that makes what we're seeing this year fade into a memory quickly.

well it would be best if the franchise QB was a walk on free agent and we didnt even need to spend a draft pick on him - and ditto for Hall of Famers at every position. I hope we get lots of amazing players at bargain prices. But in the real world, we kinda gotta be looking at a QB in the top 10 picks.

My answer was statistical, not determinative. So it IS fact, but not without exceptions - the point being that those exceptions are quantifiably, and exceedingly rare? The only fact Im claiming is that you are much much more likely to find a franchise or elite QB in the top 10 picks of the draft than anywhere else. It IS possible, but it is only 19% in the second round, 6% in the third round, and worse after that. Also, Grizz I sent you a message...

of course. It's funny we are even discussing it. And I think pretty much everyone is agreeing. I mean there's always that one holdout that thinks 2+2=5. but what are you gonna do?

That list certainly proves the point that top 10 QBs are MUCH more likely to be franchise QBs than any others. And Im not sure thats even the cleanest way to measure it? I think what you do is take the number of QBs drafted in each round and then find the percentage that become franchise QBs. You can also see who becomes a productive starter. Then you'll see that while there are plenty of busts in the first round, they overwhelm the stats for each subsequent round. Here's a quote from a 30 year study from Harvard about this. Admittedly the study is from 2011, but it tracked 30 years of draft and performance data. So it's a start anyway. It concludes: 60% of number one pick QBs become elite (27% become middle of the pack, only 13% bust) 39% first round QBs become elite (22% become middle of the pack, 39% bust) 19% second round QBs become elite 6% third round QBs become elite That's about the coin flip boom or bust (39%/22%/39%) we expect from first round QBs. It's hard to know what you're getting. But it becomes much much worse after the first round, where less than 1 in 5 become elite. Here's from the Harvard study "Looking back on the last thirty years of the draft, it turns out that 39% of QBs taken in the first round became “elite” QBs (4,000 season passing yards, 60% completion percentage, a certain “put-the-team-on-my-back”-itude) while 39% become “busts”; the remaining 22% become middle-of-the-pack players. In fact, the first pick is the best time to take a QB: nine out of the fifteen QBs selected first overall in the past thirty years have become elite while only two have turned into busts. After the first round, the chances of selecting an elite quarterback plummet to 19% in the second, 6% in the third, and dwindle to 1% in the seventh round. Contrary to what many believe, the earlier you select a QB, the better the odds that he is actually good. Drafting an elite quarterback pays immediate dividends, as average win percentage rises from 41% to 52% in two years. It takes teams, on average, eight years to reach 0.500 after drafting a bust QB. Drafting a quarterback is a necessary gamble that most teams lose, but they must try anyway in hopes of landing a player who will transform their franchise." Basically these two things are true: 1) You need an elite QB to win Super Bowls 2) You're 60% likely to get one with the first pick overall and it goes down quickly from there, to 39% for the rest of the first round, only 19% in the second round dropping below 6% lower than that. Look at the QBs going to the playoffs this year. Most will be first rounders, most will be top 10 picks. As Adam just showed, more than 75% of the top QBs were first rounders. 90% of those were top 10 picks. I mean this isnt rocket science. To those who say that former players know what they are talking about, consider that current GMs know even more about the players in the draft. They may bust first round QB picks 4 out of 10 times, but they win with their top pick QBs a LOT more, like 3 to 1 over all other rounds. You're not gonna find a QB to take you to the Super Bowl in the 2nd round or later. It's a dream. 4 to 1 against, and then it plummets to 19 to 1 after that.

lol

drafting a QB is always a risk, but for sure youre MUCH MUCH less likely to find a franchise QB after the first round?

ahahaha

LOL I just wonder how likely it is to find a franchise QB in later rounds? It feels more like a gesture to justify not spending one of the top two picks on a QB? For me, I think the QBs Im interested in will be gone by the middle of the first round. I would think about taking MHJr with the #1 overall, and a QB with the second first rounder. I know it means no trade down for a huge haul, but if it means a franchise QB and a dominant WR, that's still a pretty good haul.

Velus and Claypool were both reaches with short term on the mind. The kind of move you never want to make, but if you wanted to hope to evaluate Fields last year during the teardown, you had to hope you could find some receivers without really having the draft or cap capital to do it right long term. I know why he reached, and reaching is why things like that fail. But he had to take the swing, and it didnt really cost that much looking forward. But is Velus done? For sure.

right. I dunno what exactly the penalty should be, but it should be enough that you wouldn't use it for an extra timeout. I suppose this is why there are no challenges inside 2 minutes in the first place. My point of view on last minute heroics and penalties is that you really want a team that can stay at least two scores ahead of their opponent, so little mistakes cant cost you a game. I know that's a lot to ask, but I am really hoping that we are building a truly dominant team. I want another hit of that sweet 1985 feeling. They didnt need challenges in the last minute to destroy the morale of their opponents.

the only problem with that is that it just becomes a 4th timeout. Maybe add a 10 second runoff if the challenge isn't upheld?

The draft site I looked at has Penix going at pick number 9, the 4th QB off the board. People who think these QBs will drop into later rounds are forgetting the QB hype that happens every year. If anyone thinks Penix, undefeated and in Heisman contention is going to be the 8th QB taken, I think that's really silly, but people have all kinds of opinions out there I guess.

It's so early, but don't sleep on Michael Penix either. Hes played 46 games, started 43 of them, has a record of 36-7 including being undefeated this year 13-0. He's got a cannon for an arm and makes fast reads - the ball comes out on time and on target. His RTG the last five years are: 157.6, 136.5, 101.9, 151.3 and 161.4 this year. His career RTG vs AP top 25 teams is 144. 4,641 yards last year and 31 TDs 8 INT 4,218 yards this year and 33 TDs 9 INT And did I mention he has a cannon for an arm? 6' 3" 213 pounds NFL Draft Buzz has him as the 4th best QB, predicted to go 10th overall. "Outstanding quick processor - he goes through his progressions like an experienced vet." "effectively looks off defenders. He's also a natural in leading receivers and his timing is elite" "From a physical standpoint, a prototypical modern quarterback" "Has an impressive ability to buy time and avoid the pass rush. Doesn't look to run and is patient waiting for his receivers to get open" "strong right arm and is capable of making every NFL throw easily. Can drive the deep out to the sideline from the opposite hash and has no problem threading the needle between closing defenders" They say Williams, Maye, Daniels, Penix I also read injury concerns, but he started so many games... hmmm more to research but look at the arm strength...

That IS the question (or one of them!) I was just seeing if you had any wiggle room in the no WR at #1, and you do. I need to watch more film before i can really participate in these discussions. Im sure Ill have more formulated opinions as we get closer to the draft

cool, cuz Id take Randy Moss in a heartbeat, and MHJr looks really good, and I dont know exactly what he will be in the NFL. He looks like he's gonna be dominant, but that's just a guess of course until we see it. Glad we agree that if you KNEW it was Moss, we'd both take him.

Well I cant say MHJr will be Randy Moss, but if you knew it was gonna be Randy Moss, would you consider that WR at #1?

lol thats hilarious

Where Im at right now I agree about Williams and Maye. I do like Daniels a lot, and I need to watch more film. I agree we can get the right QB later than the first few pics, but Im not sure we can get them as low as the second round after the QB hype machine rolls through the combine etc. I personally think it might be smart to take MHJr with the #1 overall, and then trade #5(?) down to around 8 or 10 and get the QB. We might not get the bonanza of picks, but if we get a franchise QB and the next Randy Moss out of the first round, that wouldnt suck. Then you grab that Center, and then draft FS and BPA Of course this is all not knowing what Free Agency will bring either.

Patriots are the bigger threat now to steal it from CAR. It's so hard to believe the Pats arent gonna win like 3 games. Just so weird to see them so bad.

ha I was just gonna say that too The ghosts of Halas and Payton work in mysterious ways...

Oh I should add this too: As we all agree, JF has some incredible talents, and some areas are lacking. Given that, consider that Chase Daniel doesnt want to be seen as bashing Fields. He probably would like to do his analysis by being a QB guide, and not someone who rests on the negative. He wants to get clicks, and he likely doesnt want to be a traitor to his position unless or until someone is on their way out of the league. JT OSullivan walks a similar line too. He is always careful to give the benefit of the doubt, and when there are things to praise, that's where he puts his focus. And there are plenty of sportswriters on both sides of the JF question, just today Im seeing a bunch of articles talking about trading Fields. You can feel the media narrative starting to turn. My bet is in a month I'll seem like I was early on what becomes conventional wisdom? But whatever anyone thinks, there are plenty of sportswriters and former player commentators on both sides of this, so the argument of authority (an expert thinks X so they must be right over a non expert, which is a classic logical fallacy) doesnt work since there are experts on each side and cant all be right?

Oh, yeah, I was just saying please don't think I'm a NYer! lol I lived there way too long. Not a big fan of how it is currently there. I'll put your quotes here in bold italics, and respond to your points. Now with regards to your breakdown. You said every play you watched Justin missed a read. And you qualified it by saying you only watched the first 10 mins. I would agree to some level. It had been posted here as an example of what a great game JF had, and what I saw was a loss that became a win on one dumb luck blown coverage at the end, after he'd almost given the game away twice in the previous few minutes with fumbles, and hadnt managed a single touchdown all game. That's why I said "Bears win, we all lose" it felt to me like we hadnt grown or accomplished anything on offense, and just possibly pushed our draft pick lower instead. The defense has been playing much better since we got Sweat. We all knew the roster was short at least one good edge, and the before and after has been night and day. So feeling that way, I tried to watch the video, and after 10 minutes (4 plays) it felt so backward to me with Daniel praising broken and risky plays that had worked and Fields just didnt pull the trigger, I had to stop. And I posted that I had seen that and in every single one of the four plays I saw - and keep in mind i didnt pick these plays as bad examples, they were posted by someone else as examples of good plays - and I said that on every single play, Fields missed the read. And of course I always say too that Fields is amazing at broken plays, and in many of those same plays, Fields got the first down in heroic manner. That's why people like him I assume. That's why they are "highlight" plays. It's exciting. But it's risky, and it's great to have when -plays dont work, receivers are covered, pressure comes. But my thesis all along is that Fields holds the ball, passes the point where the ball should have been thrown as designed, and then has to do something risky - and often succeeds at it! I think that's all just true. So the question of opinion is whether you can base an offense on that. I say no. Some say yes. Thats all good. I still think the facts on those four plays are facts though. Let's get into it... Of the "four plays" you watched; I would think he did in fact miss at least one read (the first one). The others? Maybe not. There was something like 50 total plays to analyze and I can safely say (assume) he didn't miss EVERY open player. I'd have to see the others on all 22, and I know he didn't miss the many many screen passes. Those are timing plays with no read. He almost threw an INT into a DE's chest on one of them though. So I really do question his processing. And of course I'm not saying that he did miss every read in the game - this all stems from a one off comment where I said "I watched it for 10 minutes, and every one of the first four plays were examples of what Ive been saying and I couldnt watch any more." Then you challenged the statement, since it was a strong "every one" kind of statement. And I love that. That's specific and based on logical arguments and what makes these boards fun for me. So I was procrastinating doing something else I was supposed to do, and went down the rabbit hole. And I went back to specifically diagram and describe each play. Part of what I was looking for in your screenshots was to see what Justin was looking at or having to deal with while he was trying to read the field. Remember the part about him being blitzed nearly '60% of the plays'? That has to count for something. And in each one he has a clean pocket, an open receiver, his head is facing that receiver, and his hips are aligned to that receiver, because they were the first read. Minnesota does blitz a lot, but on those four plays, in the photos you can see all the elements I just wrote above. The pictures have a title on the lower right corner, so tell me in which one he was unable to throw? And like Chase said to be able to 'make magic' in those situations, should be considered. Fields is an awesome broken play QB. I always have said it. If you can add that ability to a guy who can pull the trigger on the intentions of the plays as diagrammed in a play that requires a read, then he would be truly unstoppable. I know that. But Fields' drawback going all the way to draft scouting from his college game is that he doesnt process. He holds the ball too long. He doenst run the offense. And also Ive been very clear that whether this is enough to have success is an opinion, unlike the facts of those four plays - what to do about it is opinion. I can offer that Fields' style has only won a small number of games, I can say that for 35 starts he has 35 fumbles. I can say that he's not putting up points. But the scrambling is great, elite, there is no doubt. In fact, the idea that he didn't turn the ball over more in the form of INTs is pretty incredible. When he doesnt throw the ball, and runs instead, then he fumbles instead of throwing INTs. 35 games, 35 Fields fumbles. While being rushed he 'read the field' the best he could and made plays while under some pretty remarkable pressure. In the four plays I am talking about he was not under pressure when the receiver was open and the play called for the ball to be thrown. Not once. For example, that one play where you thought Scott was open and Justin dumped it off to Kmet(?). I think Chase and AZ both said the same thing I saw. Scott was a bit further down the field and had a safety trailing him by a few steps. Justin probably thought (in the .5 seconds he had to analyze it) may have thought that was riskier a throw than was to dump it off to a surer handed Kmet. This is a terrible argument, and a huge reach. Scott is as open as any WR could hope to be in the NFL. The defender is not only FIVE yards away, but positioned opposite the angle of the break, so as Scott turns he has inside position as well as a FIVE yard cushion. At his break he is 2 yards past the sticks for what would be a 9 yard completion by stats if he didnt get YAC. Of course he was set to have huge YAC, but even still, a wide open cant wish it to be better situation. And it was 3rd down. Kmet instead was thrown later, and with a number o fdefenders on top of him. That is no sure 3rd down. More times than not you're punting after not getting the first with that throw. There was nothing risky about the throw to Scott. It's not even close. The defender was literally FIVE yards off him at the break where Justin is looking right at him. Daniel eveb identifies him as the first read. Then a minute later, says maybe being 2 yards past the sticks is a little deep. Thats crazy talk. Ive never heard anyone say that about an uncontested receiver. Thats a comment for when youve got a defender draped on you and you could have cut in shorter to get better position. But Scott was literally the perfect choice there. Justin just didn't pull the trigger. To those reading who doubt what Im saying, please go back and look at the screenshots I posted. It's all crystal clear. Had he thrown that pass (to Scott) and been picked (or missed) we'd be asking why he didn't go for a surer pass. (To me he's in a catch-22 in those situations). We're not talking about a 30 yard route here. Scott was the higher percentage read, not Kmet. Scott was an easy first down, and as the primary read, he was the POINT of the play. Kmet had to drag defenders with another miracle to get there. There was no threat of an INT on that play. He was much more open than receivers usually are when other QBs complete passes. I gotta say, when we get new coaches, and a new QB who can make reads, youre gonna see that these guys like Kmet and Moore are even better than you thought. Theyve been making first downs by incredible effort that shouldnt have been so hard int he first place. Their heroic efforts and Fields' heroic efforts are masking a huge deficiency in Fields' game. I get where your frustration has grown with what looks like he will never get over the hump of being able to scan the field. Yeah this is my worry. 100% He did more issues with that early on, but I think he's gotten better. Oh I think he's regressed. I think he was trying harder earlier in the season, and wasnt able to do it, so now hes playing "less robotic" and "freer" meaning caring even less about the reads, and playing more hero ball. HIs talent is undeniable. Exactly. He is one of the best hero ball players ever. His numbers are better because hes relying on that even more the second half of the season. And that goes along with having regressed at making reads. It's just we dont really see it because after be breaks the play he does amazing things and is often successful at more. It's incredible. Like Superman. But the debate (and this is the opinion part) is whether you can beat good teams with that style. I say you cant. others can rightfully disagree. But I think this IS the question, and the idea that he is making his reads is a false one. And what concerns me about getting another QB currently in the college ranks to replace him is I have a hard time finding anyone that has proven themselves to the level Justin did while in college. Oh hell yes. I cant tell you which college QBs are going to work out in the NFL. It's a big risk. The only reason Im confident in it is that I feel I know with certainty that JF will never win a Super Bowl in Chicago. That's the only thing I take as known in this, and it drives my decision. I cant tell you the next guy is going ot be the guy were looking for, or whether Bagent will develop and force us to realize how good he is, or whether we will be right back here in a couple years talking abut the next Bears QB. I know that doesn't mean everything when it comes to making it in the NFL but to me, that proves he can perform in the most challenging of atmospheres. Except this isnt draft day 2021. We've seen him in the NFL for three seasons now not performing. I mean the best you can say about JF is what you think he might change into. You cant seriously say that with a record of 8-27 that he has performed. What you can say is that maybe it wasnt his fault. The coaching, and talent around him werent good enough etc. But you cant say hes done it. It is not proven that he can perform in the most challenging of atmospheres in the NFL at all. Only that you might think he will in the future. Lastly. there's nothing wrong with wanting to 'defend this hill' if you feel passionate about it. Like Mongo said, I've 'been there done that'. I took some barbs for bailing on Trubisky, being a fan of Lovie's and exchanged heat with Jason over olinemen vs skill players. It happens. I trust you when you say you want Justin to succeed but you want a real strong plan A in place it doesn't work out. Yeah I cant predict the future, but nothing Ive seen tells me he will get better at processing and reading defenses, and throwing the ball on time or with anticipation. And I fully believe that is a fatal flaw, despite everything else. But yes of course I dont hate Fields the person. I kinda fell bad for him. He is so talented and seems like a really good kid. He works very hard, hes a good locker room leader. And if he was great, wed be in an amazing position going into next season. Especially not having to use a high pick on QB. I wish that was true. But it just seems so painfully obvious to me that he does not have that one necessary skill. In college the receivers are so open, it's hard to project to the pros. You can say the same thing about Caleb Williams the surefire generational talent! Who knows?! But too the main tiny point - I still think those four plays all show the exact thing Im talking about in about as stark a contrast as I could imagine. A lot of times things are grey, and it's hard to be sure. But that Scott play for example, which Ill post again below, couldnt be clearer. If you dont throw that ball because a defender is 5 yards away positioned on the wrong side of the break, because its too risky, then you cant throw any pass at all, they would ALL be too risky. The only receiver I saw more open that that was St Brown on one of the other plays I diagrammed! LOL But yeah this talk that I dont like Fields, or I want him to fail becaue I need to win an argument or any of that nonsense aint it. I just think the emperor is stark naked and it seems so clear to my eyes. Like Ive said, you dont see the receivers on the TV coverage as well, watching the game the first time, I tend to follow the ball, so I get how people see Fields running around making plays. But once you go back and take a minute with the all 22, this glaring weakness sticks out on almost every play that has a read, and you start to realize, sadly, that JF has a fatal flaw and there is no evidence so far that he's gonna fix it. Ill also say that he often looks like he has it beat int he first few plays of the games, when we are in the scripted plays. Justin can spend extra time thinking about them so his processing can seem better, like in Detroit. But once you get past that first drive, it's a lot of holding the ball and broken plays. And Getsy trying to force the ball out with non read plays like screens. Thanks for reading all of this. Play 2 to Scott below. At that frame, throw the ball. Look at Fields' hips and head. This is his read. Why isn't he throwing it?

4 is too few. 8 would have been OK with me too, but 12 certainly gets the job done.