BearFan PHX

dude. I dunno how it would end, but Id be excited as hell next year if we got Harbaugh, #1 and #2 - my optimism would be off the charts.

I dunno, I think whoever you're developing next year as #1 needs the #1 reps, and an offense tailored to what they do best. And there are egos involved too. It seems like it could blow up.

hahaha it sure has been a great week, and happy holidays!

preach!

I think this is right. We put off the #1 pick by one year last year. We are getting lucky and seem to be getting it or something like it again in a year with many QB options. I dont think you can close the door to those possibilities based on the hope that Fields style of play completely changes and he does things he hasnt done consistently well. Justin is exciting as hell to watch, but I want a surgeon out there, not a magician. The surgeon calmly dissects the defense, the magician does amazing things that make highlight reels. But how can you think to have your core identity to be that plays will break and your guy will scramble around and make something happen? The whole reason it makes highlights is that it is so implausible. That means that a fair percent of the time, a good defensive line will punish you for it. If you needed a heart transplant would you want the guy who calmly does it all doay, or someone amazing who keeps somehow miraculously pulling operations through right when they look like the patient is going to die? I get the excitement, and why people love it. They see him as a hero, defying odds and somehow finding a way to be successful in a storm of adversity. But the thing is, he isnt even doing that. We are losing games. Its not as if hes not out there improvising 35 points a game. But while my opinion on Fields' future remains just that - only my opinion, I think it is fair to say that keeping Justin for another year is more than just seeing things through - it also costs you a top pick QB and the development of that player. So the decision isn't a free no brainr one year more to see what hes got - it also costs you the opportunity cost. And in that light, youre 100% right. THIS was his year to show that and take the job in an undeniable way. And I dont think anyone can say he has done that yet.

I agree with a lot of this, but I think you have to consider the opportunity you have to draft a QB, which you might not have next year or the year after. So if you keep Fields, you have to figure in opportunity costs too. If you wait and see with Fields, and pass these opportunities, you're pretty much betting that he will be worth $40 Million a year in two years. If you bet right, its a home run. If Fields does eventually become that top 5 guy, then of course the bet paid off, and youre Super Bowl bound. But if he is just decent or pretty good, then you wasted this window, and passed on getting one of those top QBs. So the bet isn't just "can Fields get better?" it's also "will he be worth $40+ Million in two years" because if he isnt, then youre back to square one, with no Fields and without 2 top picks in one of the deepest QB drafts in memory. I dont think throwing a mid round developmental QB is a likely strategy for finding a great one. It has happened, but the odds are low. So while people may disagree fairly about what Fields will become, it's pretty clear that if you keep him this year, you're putting all your eggs into that basket vs a bunch of other options. I cant say what Fields would become, all I can say is that keeping him isnt a "wait and see" bet, its functionally an all in on Fields bet. And in that light, I don't have enough faith.

can you imagine having #1 and #2? Wow. With all that salary cap room, and an already improving roster? I would imagine any coach or GM would love to step in right now. I wonder what Kevin Warren has up his sleeve.

I like McCarthy and Daniels, but by the time all the draft hype is done, I wonder if either of them slips past, say, pick 15.

It's not a stat, for all I know it's 90%, I was speaking figuratively. I didn't intend it to be taken literally. But it's easy to see while watching that we are in Cover 2 on most snaps. And the opponent knows it too.

I think you can also take MHJr at #1 and then get one of the top QBs at 4 or 5?

Thanks for that - I thought Dungy was first, but youre right! I also appreciate and agree about the difference between the Cover 2 and the Tampa 2. I thought when we got Edmunds that he would be playing that deep middle Urlacher style, but Eberflus couldnt even get that right. Also, Edwards plays the Will of course, and thats the position that the cover 2 funnels tackles to. I had mistakenly typed SLB, and then I realized I meant WLB, and went up and fixed that.

I dont know why you want to fight about specifically everything I say. Thats up to you. Im really not interested in returning fire. Its dumb. Im not even talking down Edwards. Hes great. I said so. In fact the whole reason we are talking about him on this thread right now is because *I* posted that he is leading the league in tackles and praised poles for dumping Roquan and getting the same production without him for a lot less $. I also said, in addition to scheme funneling tackles to that position, that we have too many plays on defense in general, so that also inflates numbers. Leading the league in tackles isn't necessarily the sign of a great defense. Somehow you took this as criticism of Edwards, of you, I dunno what. But its really getting old. I cant help it if your feelings are hurt by these facts. I couldnt have even imagined that they would have. I figured you were gonna agree. Naive I guess. But I am going to continue to talk about the Bears here. I keep trying to ignore this one way fight you seem to be in with me. Soon Im just not gonna respond to you at all if you cant sort out your emotions. Either that or Im gonna stop being so polite about it and be more direct. Not mean, but direct. Can I ask you, and I mean this seriously, NOT as a dig: do you drink while youre posting?

no Im saying you have to mix it up. There is nothing wrong with cover 2, but if you call it more than 85% of the time, youre gonna lose. For every defensive play, there is an offensive play that will beat it. If you become too predictable on defense, offenses will eat you alive. it doesnt matter if you are predictably cover 2 or man or cover 3 or cover 4 or whatever. Edwards is a good LB, and he will do well in any system. When we arent running cover 2 on every play he wont lead the league in tackles, but the defense will rank better in all categories.

MHJr and Moore would give us one of the best receiver rooms in the league.

yes, but cover 2 specifically funnels all the tackles to the WLB spot. When you have a team that calls cover 2 as part of their defense, but not every play is cover 2, then the WLB totals will decrease. Also, if the defense can get off the field there will be fewer tackles to go around in general too, and that will be a GOOD thing. And I didn't say anything about 3-4? There are all kinds of defenses you can run out of a 4-3 front, and we are in nickel most of the time anyway. But they still play cover 2, out of the 4-3 and nickel, most plays, and predictably. That's what will hopefully change with new coaches. This isn't the 1990s anymore. Tony Dungy brought the cover 2 to prominence in the mid 90s in Tampa Bay. That defensive staff included Monte Kiffen, Rod Marinelli and Lovie Smith. Tony then went to Indianapolis and installed the cover 2 there. Eberflus was at the cowboys in the 2010s under Monte Kiffen, and helped install the cover 2 in Dallas, transitioning out of a 3-4. And Eberflus ended up in Indianapolis, because they were a cover 2 team and had been since Dungy was there. You see these names over and over as related to the Cover 2; Dungy, Kiffen, Marinelli, Smith and Eberflus. A few years ago, as the NFL had high powered offenses like the Rams routinely scoring 30+ points, Vic Fangio went back to the old(er) idea of having 2 safeties deep on more plays. That limited offenses abilities to make a lot of big plays. As a result, the copycat league saw a resurgence of cover 2 calls. Everything in the NFL evolves quickly. Fads come and go. What works one season is already obsolete by the end of that season. You cannot base your defense on one concept and succeed for very long without adapting. The truth is that there is no play call that is better or that always works. It'd be like saying "Rock is better than paper or scissors" Lets imagine that you have some statistical information that tells you that people pick scissors 40% of the time. Then, statistically, calling rock will be a winning move. BUT if your opponent scouts you and sees that you're calling rock all the time, expect a heavy dose of paper. If you dont make adjustments, you're gonna lose. So there is no one play thats good on defense - you gotta mix it up. Create rhythms and expectations and then break them. Cover 2 is a great play and it should definitely be a part of your mix. But if you call it (or ANY defense) 85% of the time, you're gonna lose. A lot of these coaches get stubborn - they have their way of doing things, and they dont adapt. And the coaches that do adapt beat them. So you could see the Eberflus way, if he is given two more years, go to 9-8 and see a playoff game. If they execute on a high level, they might advance a round or two in the playoffs. But that way will never beat the top teams who adapt and do more than one thing. We've seen it for so many years. The best possible was the year Lovie snuck us into the Super Bowl, and there you saw how a real offense (Ironically head coach Dungy made the adjustments!) picked our cover 2 apart. We never had a chance in that Super Bowl, even with Hester spotting us a 7 point lead. No one but fans thought the Bears would win that game, and they didn't. Contrast this with Belichick coached defenses that play all kinds of different styles year to year depending on who is on the roster. Watch how he plays divisional opponents twice a year and unveils a completely different game plan the second time they play that year. That's coaching.

I think Edmunds will be great. He's had injuries this year, and the scheme hasn't really done anything for him. Next year i think this roster is going to show you what they can do, what they could have done if they were used properly. Edwards is doing well, but his numbers will likely drop next year. He will still be a great player, but probably not lead the league again. This constant cover 2 does two things to boost his numbers; it funnels all the tackles to his WLB position, and since we cant get off the field on 3rd down, it gives him more plays to make tackles. I think both those guys are very good.

Interesting fact: TJ Edwards leads the NFL in tackles with 121 #2 is Roquan Smith with 118 I guess we saved a bunch of money and Poles was right - even as Roquan is doing great too.

Maybe a few weeks ago, but not anymore, his stock is rising daily, and people are saying he might win the Heisman. You know all the hype around these QBs ebbs and flows and by the time we get to draft day, no way Daniels goes in the second round.

Bo Nix is also on my list above, but I havent seen him play yet. Hes got the best completion percentage this year out of all of them at 78.1% and the second best QB rating just below Daniels at 191.35 which is monstrous. His winning percentage is good and he has played 58 games so theres lots of film on him.

If I had to pick one or two, I'd pick Daniels or McCarthy. That's where I am right now, I haven't seen enough film and analysis yet to be sure. But whoever we take will be better throwing to Moore and MHJr, and I'd take that over my first QB pick without MHJr?

for sure. Maye and McCarthy are pretty fleet of foot too - and of course Williams is too. But Justin is still better at that than most or all of them. So first they have to be actual pocket passing with rhythm and anticipation QBs, not Wildcat QBs. Then you can add in the extras, and to your point, a lot of these guys have that and the extras too. It's a very good class. With this grouping of talent, and my worries about Williams being a head case and a little short, I don't really see a need to pick a QB with the #1 pick. And unless Arizona is on fire for a QB, we cant get MHJr with a trade down even to 2. So I can see us taking MHJr at #1 and then playing games to get one of the guys on that list, whoever falls. Depending on how it goes, 5 might be as far as we can fall, but I havent done the board, so maybe 8 or 11 or something like that would work. I dunno.

yeah, if Warren is pushing coaching hires, QBs or top draft picks he is playing GM when he shouldnt.

Ultimately it's the eye test that matters, and I havent seen enough of any of these guys yet, but if you scroll up and look at the chart I posted with stats, Daniels is killing it this year. He leads them all in 2023 with a 208 QB rating! I didnt know it went that high! With a 73% completion percentage and a leading 11.8 yards per attempt. And the guy is 6' 4" Now that Williams has lost a few games (well his team did) there is a lot of talk of Daniels for the Heisman. Ill repaste the chart here to make it easier for everyone. There are a lot of impressive numbers there, for a bunch of guys.

Yeah, there are a bunch of pocket passers this year. Some of them are deceptively good with their feet too, but they are still pocket passers. Maye, Penix, McCarthy all fit that mold. Dont sleep on Daniels either. I dont see any of those guys making it out of the first round.

Well I guess it all comes down to what Warren thinks of Poles, and compared to whoever else he has on his list. As to the having everyone in the same window, argument that makes sense if you're saying the coach came before the GM, and QB etc, but since Poles is the top link in that chain, if Warren likes him, he can easily align his contract to any incoming coach and QB from here, so Im not sure that's an argument like it would be for hiring a coach before a GM for example? I know Flus and his staff are gone. I am pretty sure Fields is gone too. Im 50/50 on Poles, and again that's mostly because I don't know who Warrens other options are. Poles has been doing pretty well in my opinion. I also want to say I'm a little nervous to hear that Warren wants to be more involved in football operations. If that means looking at a new GM, so be it. That's definitely his job. If it means telling Poles he must fire Eberflus, if Poles needed to be told that, then he should be fired just for that. So unless it specifically only means firing Poles and replacing him it's a problem. In other words if it means being more involved than that, then I think Warren is out of his lane and could be an issue. Warren is President, not GM. Presidents negotiate stadium deals, and concern themselves with ticket prices, and advertising, promotions stuff like that. They are marketers, and relationship makers. They do the daily nitty gritty job of operating the team. And they hire and fire the GM. That's it. If he does try to stick his fingers into the pie it could be a disaster, and if it means he is only looking at coaches that will let him do that, then we've just created a monster in the form of new powerful figure at Halas Hall doing EXACTLY what the McCaskeys and Ted Phillips were doing. Please say it aint so.