BearFan PHX

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.

I dunno. On your side of the argument, Davis missed a lot of time, and that film clip was surely an ugly rep for Davis. On the other hand, Davis has been mauling people a lot this year in the run game, and i think he's a pretty good player. I dont think his mom is gonna die again, so hopefully that's a unique situation that wont be repeated. he isnt known to be injured a lot in his career.

I think that's a fair assessment regarding Poles and what he's done, but it leaves out if Warren has another guy he wants. That could tip the scales against Poles. Poles deserves more time i think, but I doubt anyone at the Bears cares what he deserves, and it's more about what the other options are too? If things don't turn around pretty quick, Warren will be on the chopping block too, so he will want his best options to win.

amen to all of that, but I could see the Bears taking MHJr with the top pick if we keep it.

I think we might use the top pick on MHJr and grab a QB with the next pick. I don't really want Williams (subject to change as I do my research this offseason) and from what I know now, Id be happy with a few of the other choices, which means no need to grab a QB with that #1 pick.

There are examples of every strategy working and not working. You cant say that Lance flamed out in SF because they sat him first. You cant say he would have been successful if they had put him in right away. You have to look at statistics and trends. In general, it does seem to be the common wisdom in the NFL that the rookies dont start week one, and generally are starting by week 8. That goes for rookies who play really well and for those that dont. Its just what almost always happens. The reason is that most rookies arent ready week one, and if youre gonna spend a first round pick on a player, when you think hes ready you want to see him. It sounds like now youre trying to protect Bagent. I get that once someone is a Bear you love them, but you gotta be smart. If we pick a top first round QB, theyre going to pay eventually. Im gonna make this easy so we dont have to go back and forth for the next 7 weeks. 1) Eberflus is gone after this year. 2) 70% Fields is gone after this year 3) 90% we will pick a rookie QB in the first 20 picks 4) That rookie QB will start a game by week 8 at that point, once we have all that data we can debate whether Bagent has grown enough to actually be better than the rookie or not. And youll have to give the rookie the same grace you give everyone else - a decent chance across multiple games to show himself and grow. That's what's going to happen. i think everyone knows it.

I would expect that would be the plan. If Bagent kept winning, then you'd keep the rookie as second string for a while. But at some point during the year, youd see how the rookie was doing in practice, and if you determine that he will be better than Bagent, then you start the rookie at that point even if Bagent is still playing well. Remember if you use a top first round pick on a rookie QB, your plan is eventually hes gonna be the guy, and as soon as he looks like it in practice, theyd make the switch. Mahomes sat the whole year behind Alex Smith. That would be the extreme example. Usually, by week 6 or 8, the rookie is in.

^5

Stinger, the good news is that after this offseason is over and training camp starts next year, you and I will be 100% aligned in optimism and patience for the new thing whatever it is.

Yeah, the OL has been playing really well. If you can trust Jenkins not to be injured, we have a really nice group. We obviously need to pick up a center, and some might say we need a LT if a really good one is available to us, maybe in the 2nd round. But there is no denying this unit could grow to be one of the best in the NFL. Our RBs are competitive too, and DJ Moore plus MHJr would give us a hell of an offensive roster. Harbaugh loves to run the ball. You can see that McCarthy threw half the number of passes as his peers on that list above, and they win every game. I think we should all watch the Michigan / Ohio State game this weekend - battle of 11-0 teams, should be insightful. MHJr too.

I dont think Justin is the problem. I think the coaching is the problem, if there has to be only one. This is more Eberflus' fault than Justin's for sure. But I additionally think that Fields isn't the guy to take you to the promised land. I see the talent and athleticism, but I'm still not seeing enough quarterbacking. And to keep Fields - not for another year tryout, but to plan on keeping him as the guy, youre gonna have to pay him big, and that will be a huge mistake in my opinion. Fields is fun to watch, and he is heroic. He improvises and his best plays are broken plays. But you cant live on that edge without losing your share too. Play a team with a good defensive front, and that can turn into a bloodbath quickly. I dont think you can make a living out of what they call "hero ball" - it takes a team, and that takes a QB. I used to tell a joke about Jay Cutler. It was that when Jay Cutler was little he dreamed of making an impossible 80 yard last second touchdown pass to win the Super Bowl. When Tom Brady was little, he dreamed of being up 35 points late in the 3rd quarter. I think Fields is dynamic as hell, but doesn't do the core job of QBing. He is a point guard, but not a top 10 QB to me. But for sure, we would have more wins with Fields if Eberflus and Getsy weren't running things. But could we regularly and reliably beat the good teams in the NFL with Justin? I don't think so. That chart tells me you don't need to go hog wild to get Williams. It tells me we might be able to get MHJr AND a great QB in this years draft. I havent settled on a name yet, but one intriguing idea is Harbaugh and McCarthy stay united and bring their collective 23-1 record to the league. They sure do know how to win together. What would that look like with our fearsome running game, and McCarthy executing Harbaugh's offense with Moore and MHJr?! That's just one scenario, but there will be others. We have a bright path forward.

OK here are some stats side by side. of course stats don't tell the whole story, you need to watch film on these guys, and I haven't yet. Still what pokes out is what a winning combination Harbaugh and McCarthy make. What also jumps out is that there are a bunch of good QBs here, at least by the numbers, and if we could take MHJr with the top pick (or slide down to #2 for him etc) we should be able to pick up a very good QB at #5. By the numbers, McCarthy sure does check a lot of boxes, but you can see that Williams and Daniels have been very good. look at some of those ratings. I never saw one over 200 before. But 6' 1" aint great, so if someone else wants Williams and we end up with MHJr and McCarthy or Daniels, especially with Harbaugh as coach, I think that would be amazing.

if he does, tell him to trade Fields too LOL

Exactly. I dont dislike Eberflus, he seems like a nice guy. he is a terrible coach though. It's like Mother Theresa or Ghandi. Who could hate them? They were amazing humans who brought love and a measure of peace to the planet. They were giants. But they would be terrible as army generals. None of this is a slight against Eberflus the man. For example, I consider myself to be a good person too, and despite all the stuff I know and have learned about football, I would be WAY over my head if I was the head coach of the Bears, and I would hope you would argue that I should be fired. If you care about the team, if you want to win, then you care less about the players and coaches and more about the process. For example, should the 49ers have kept Joe Montana a few more years? He was a football God who brought them 4 Super Bowl wins. But there came a time when it was best to move on from Montana, even though he was still good enough to start for Kansas City. They went another way, and the result was that the Steve Young era happened. Should they have gone with loyalty instead to Montana, and missed the window for Young and the Super Bowl HE won for them? So you gotta ask yourself in that situation, are you a fan of Montana the man, or the 49ers the team? They are in direct conflict with eachother - sometimes it's gotta be one or the other. Looking for positives when we are dead last in the league is an extreme form of this. I get that you are an optimist Stinger, me too in my daily life. I love stories of redemption, I believe positive outcomes are at hand in most things I do, even when things get tough. We are probably very alike in that way. I dont judge friends and neighbors the way I judge Bears players and coaches - because I dont require the level of discipline and excellence that is required to win a Super Bowl from my friends or family. That'd be insane. But at the same time, if you want us to stop being a joke of a franchise, people need to be held accountable for their performances. Looking for hope in Eberflus at this point, and giving him one more year is futile and misguided. I'm sure with more draft picks he might even achieve a 10th ranked defense or something. Incremental improvement is almost guaranteed when you are historically bad. But I can tell you this with 100% certainty. Matt Eberflus will never coach the Chicago Bears to a Super Bowl win. There is zero chance of that. If Poles doesn't fire Eberflus, then Poles should be fired too for gross incompetence. So you gotta ask yourself whether you are a fan of Eberflus the man or the Chicago Bears the team. I'm optimistic that the Bears can be great again. I'm positive about where the future is heading for the roster. I believe that with a new coach and QB this team can rise and become a contender. Im not being negative at all. We just need to get those two positions right, and I dont believe we currently have the guys to get it done at those positions. But I believe we will in the future. That's not pessimistic or being a hater, but it does require that the staff be replaced. And we will all have similar discussions about Fields too.

the defense is still 29th in the league in allowing scoring worst at stopping 3rd down worst in the red zone what youre seeing is just that the defensive roster has some talent now. that they are still ranked like that means the coaching is terrible