BearFan PHX

that is SO fair. Im trying to bend over sideways to not be negative, so maybe I went too far positive LOL maybe I could spin it like this? Poles got the two best candidates out there for these jobs. So he succeeded. Now whether they work out, is another thing? But yeah. Im not sold on Poles. I'd really like to know whether he was allowed to fire Flus last year or not. If he was, then he is definitely suspect. But maybe he wasnt, and I'll probably never know. Let's see how Dalman and Jackson look on the OL. We are assuming those holes are plugged now, but I thought Nate Davis' tape was awesome too. Youre right - lets wait and see. Like you said - looks good on paper, cant wait to see it on grass.

OK youre missing two very important details. 1) It was said AFTER the draft, not before. CC says she spoke to the dir of player personnel after the draft, and he said Loveland wasnt necessarily their first choice, that if Banks had fallen, for example, they would have taken him. I believe CC is not a liar. I feel like it may even have been partly on video, so you could see hm say it - Jeff something. 2) It matters who was available when, because we did trade down multiple times. *IF* we traded down thinking we would get a certain targeted HB at a lower pick, one who was still available on the board BEFORE the trade down, and we could have just picked them then, but instead if we traded down and then someone got in front of us and took the HB, then that means we read the situation poorly, and missed out on HBs we were targeting more than Monangai. If it happened multiple times, then it is fair to criticize the draft process as having misread the board, and missed out on players we mistakenly thought would be available later, got greedy, and missed the HB that was targeted. And even if that did happen, I'm not unhappy value-wise with the players we DID pick either, but if you're going to be evaluating the team, you gotta look into the places where they failed too. Is it fireable? No it's not. But that doesnt mean it isnt important. It's important in the continued evaluation of Poles who has done some amazing things, some good things, gotten lucky some, made some very questionable moves, and a few flat out bad decisions too. For me, right now, Poles is getting a B. Maybe a B+, and most of that is due to Caleb and Johnson, two massive pieces we got VERY right. But Caleb was luck as much as anything, and Johnson picked the Bears because of Caleb. So Poles could easily have lost both of them, if the Texans don't score a last minute touchdown in the last game of the season that didnt matter to them. For me, that all adds up to: Poles is worth keeping an eye on. I'm not totally sold on him or Warren. Not the way I am about the coaching staff, for example.

CC reported that Bears employees, including director of player personnel said they wanted players that were gone before they picked, and specifically Jeanty, Banks and Campbell, and Henderickson later. She named her source, and also exactly when he said it (immediately after the draft) So either you think she is lying, or youre just trying to ignore these facts because they dont fit your "everything is perfect" narrative. Now even if the Bears did get out maneuvered on the board, it doesnt mean the draft was a failure. Poles may have miscalculated who would be there at times, but we still stayed true to our board and got value. So this isnt me saying he was awful either. But reality is messy, and is almost never "they got it exactly how they wanted it, its perfect"

Jayden Daniels isnt that great. He is a lot like Justin Fields - amazing arm, great with his feet, but not ready to read a fully dimensional offense. Kliff Kingsbury has gotten the most out of him - really amazing results. Let's see if it continues this year. It's hard to make a QB look good consistently if they cant read a defense, eventually the NFL will catch up to what you're doing schematically, and force Daniels to play the position, and then i believe he will be exposed..

Ok, so I watched the episode. Lots of great highlight film on players. I was especially happy to see Turner's film. I think he was a steal. He should help us a lot. I do think the beginning where they say "Let's start with Loveland" was a little bit suspect. It's not clear that they started with him out of the gate, or if they were doing tight ends there, or what. We have heard from Courtney Cronin that the Bears would have taken Jeanty, Campbell or Banks over Loveland if any of them had been there, so I dunno if the film really says anything - it was edited tightly to the beginning of those words, and there is nothing from the draft before the pick. Still and all, the Bears were obviously very high on Loveland, and pleased that he was available for them. He's gonna be a great player for us, I believe. But I don't know that this film really does anything to dispel the idea that Poles miscalculated on HB availability through several trade downs. That's not to say that the players they did get were bad - they arent. It looks like a solid crop of rookies that can help us, including the HB we eventually did get, Monangai who looks great. I just don't think everything went perfectly according to plan on draft day either? Or at least, this film isn't proof that it did.

Burden has a ton of talent, and with the right guidance I hope he turns into a real weapon - he has it in him! But the reason he slipped to the second round is that he shows much sharper cuts when he's running with the ball than he does when he's running his routes, and he is a bit of a head case. Now to be fair, most stud WRs have giant egos and are head cases, so it's hopefully not a fatal flaw, but if he is coachable, he does have a ceiling to become a top WR in the NFL.

see THIS I totally agree with! Narratives! They create clicks, but they dont mean anything. Now it is clear that Caleb has a lot of developing to do. For example, Ben Johnson has changed his footwork. GOOD. He will also have to grow reading defenses and making quick decisive reads. But that's not a problem or a negative, it's right on time for a young QB who just started with his first pro mentor. Caleb is neither perfect nor a bust. He's just a guy with insane amounts of talent, who seems to be working very hard to get better. And I, for one, would not bet against him right now. Cant wait for the season to start so we can see whats working and what needs fixing. It sure looks good on paper. Can't wait to see it on grass.

Maybe if my posts are too long, you can find someone to help you read them. Or just sound out the letters. You know, you start this every time. I say something about the Bears, and you come back at me with some over confident idea that Poles will NEVER _________, but you dont know, and each time you do it, it turns out youre wrong. Your pattern seems to be everyone on the team is great if you just give them one more chance. Rah rah rah.

Here's how the cycle goes: 1) I say something to the group. Something I've noticed, someone i think isn't playing well. I dont say it to you. 2) You immediately tell me I'm wrong "there is no way Poles is going to..." and call me pessimistic or disloyal or something. You probably heard Greg Gabriel say it - in fact, that's the problem, you listen to the wrong sources, and get so confident in what youre saying because they said it. 3) I wait the prescribed amount of time until the thing is proven and i was right 4) You say Im dredging the past while you continue to tell me factually why i cant be right about this thing. repeat. You also like to say that i must be wrong because i take the time to say things clearly and with examples. That is not an argument a smart person would make. "You must be wrong becasue you give too many facts" OK, thats wild. But for the last several years, everything I say, you're so consistently arrogant about telling me im wrong, and yet over and over again it turns out like i said. I don't know everything. I'm not an oracle you can ask any question of and I can predict the future. I'm not even particularly good at calling things that are 60/40. But these havent been controversial ideas (except to you). That Fields sucked. I mean sheesh just look at the film. And Eberflus. Again, he blew 3 games TWO YEARS IN A ROW! How could they bring him back? How could anyone have thought that was a good idea? And yet, you called me all kinds of names for saying it at the time. I needed to just believe a little harder and the wins fairy would sprinkle love all over Eberflus and Fields. And then Caleb comes out, and if you watch the games you see he is a tremendous talent. He's gonna be the best QB the Bears have ever seen, and I say that, which again really inst controversial, and the next thing we know, youre telling me some first round picks are busts, so we should take a QB in a lower round, so our risk isnt as big. Seriously? There's a long list of things you've jumped on me for, and I had to wait my years and guess what? I was right on all of them. For a while it seemed like i was a negative person hating on everything, but now the things I was saying then are common knowledge now. And again, Im not so good at predicting, these things have been obvious and easy. Thats why its so frustrating to have to deal with your constant flat statements about how we all need to stop criticizing the team, and Poles would never do this or that. Im telling you now. Kmet is on the bubble. So is Braxton Jones. Either of them can play their way into staying, but the odds, in my view, are against it. I also think they are unlikely to be traded now, but next year. Maybe at the trade deadline. Instead of thinking how unfair that is for them, and getting mad at me about it, imagine instead the NEW Bears players we will get out of whatever we traded them for AND the increased cap space it brings. The new players will be Bears too, and we can root for them! Maybe they will be a missing piece on the DL that brings us into a SB window? It's not negative, it's not mean, it's not even controversial, the cap numbers and the depth chart make it kind of obvious?

NO NO NO. Youre making strawmen up and then arguing with your fake assumptions. I have ZERO problem with you disagreeing with me, or having opinions that i think are wrong. Thats FINE thats what this board is FOR. But you literally told us "Time to jump on board instead of still questioning everything." - like our questioning was a problem. Dont turn this around into our having a problem with you having an opinion - its the opposite. You tell me im pessimistic by nature, that i just want to crap on players. You say it ALL the time. Like it's not OK to have opinions you dont agree with. Have your opinion, Ill have mine, that makes the world go around. But stop telling us that we cant express concern about players on this team - this isnt a pep club. Its a bunch of fans, who as far as I can tell all LOVE the Bears, and spend a HUGE amount of time on them. So if we want to say that a player should be traded, or whatever, then thats OK. We dont need to get in line and be good little fans, I dont know where that crap comes from, but its ridiculous. And also, for the millionth time. I am not saying Kmet should be traded now. Did you read that? You continue to put words in my mouth. Im NOT saying he should be traded now. I AM saying that he is on the bubble, and he needs to show something or he will be gone next year, or possibly at the trade deadline. But mostly, your overly rosy viewpoint, the one where for years you keep telling us that what we have on the team is good enough is getting tired. Obviously Poles didnt agree. He didnt think "hey weve got to give Jenkins another chance" like you did. He didnt think "hey lets roll another year with Fields" like you did. He didnt think "Bates will be good at center this year, we dont need another player" like you did. He didnt think "Kmet is one of the top TEs int he league so we dont need to draft one high" like you did. He didn't think "Caleb holds the ball too long and shouldnt be a number one pick" like you did. And Eberflus didnt "just need another year" like you thought. I appreciate the optimism, but at some point, your homer fan's obsession with thinking everyone on the roster just needs another chance is ridiculous. Of course you are entitled to your opinion - but not your shaming us for not sharing it. We are entitled to our opinions too, and over the past few years, our track record is a LOT better than yours. We have been SO bad for SO long, we have every right to be cynical, and make projections about our players. And the funny thing is, I'm NOT a pessimist. I'm extremely excited about this season. I think our roster is better than it's been in many years. I think Caleb is going to be the best QB in Bears history. And I think we are opening a window to contend for a SB. So this nonsense that keeps coming from you about how we need to think differently, or hold our tongues, adjust our psychological perspectives or whatever the hell it is is unwelcome and inappropriate. At some point, after youve been wrong SO many times, maybe have the humility to realize that some other people on this board might know what they are talking about? I personally learn more form other members of this board than i do from the sports talking heads types in mainstream media. Idiots like Greg Gabriel, Kurt Warner, Boomer Esiason and the rest just repeat poorly thought out narratives.

this board? LOL

You act like we insulted a member of your family when we criticize the players. Like their feelings are hurt, and you need to defend them. Then you just tried to tell us all that "Time to jump on board instead of still questioning everything." so - no. This from the guy who was one of the last to give up on Fields - who didnt want Caleb? We are gonna question whatever we want to. We are gonna say things are good or bad. We are gonna wonder how this experiment is gonna work. All of us are optimistic about all of this too, which makes these reactions of yours even weirder. Also, you dont know whats fantasy and what isnt. You dont know who the Bears will trade or not. You say these things like they are absolute truths, and yet over and over when you and I have disagreed, I have ended up being right. At some point, you should at least respect my right to hold an opposing view, since youve been wrong so many times. I think I've earned that. Remember a few months ago when you told us that there would be no more than 2 new faces on the OL? You constantly want to tell us that people already on the roster are great, and just need another chance. "Theres no way the Bears..." how the hell do YOU know?! "Poles would never..." uh huh. So yes you are entitled to your opinion, but youre wrong all the time, so maybe lecturing us on whether we can say negative things is kinda cringey at this point? Stay in your lane!

yup. hopefully Kevin Warren is a buffer that keeps them out of most decisions. I still want to know if Poles chose to keep Flus last year, or if he was told he couldnt fire him with 3 years left on his deal by said owners.

Right, cuz even when it's going well, thats what sports talk is all about. Criticizing a team, or it's members isn't disloyalty - it's just normal guys talking sports. Somehow we've gotten to where talking about someone possibly getting traded or that they should be cut evokes a response like we've hurt someone's feelings. Like they need defending?

exactly. and while most teams have a run scheme they use, Johnson says he likes to use them all. that puts a lot on the Ol to understand their assignments, and a lot of the coaches to teach it. i love it.

Absolutely. Learning WHO to block and the blocking "rules" for the offense is extremely important, and something we've seen lacking in our team for a long time. PFF used to give Leno a good grade when he double teamed someone with the left guard, and that person was well blocked. They did not include in their analysis that Leno was supposed to block a different guy that came totally free and wrecked the backfield. You gotta know who you're supposed to block. That's tougher in a zone blocking scheme, and it's tough when the defense plays games like stunts and delayed blitzes. I have a lot of faith in Johnson and Roushar to get that right. I think they are good teachers. And this is the time of year for it!

amen. I also think it's noteworthy that the Bears are drafting players who may be trouble and need guidance - that's a new thing for us. And it seems like Johnson has the balls to lead players like this. I think all in all it's a very good sign.

What does this even mean on a discussion board?!

I agree with the second half of this, but im not sure how you can hire someone to watch film with you, if what was missing was the rationale for the week's gameplan. Youd need someone who understood it to point it out? A third party wouldnt know that? But then again, maybe there WAS no coherent offensive strategy. Maybe the didnt teach it because they didnt have one - just a collection of plays, but no real strategy. I am pretty sure Calebs comments about Flus and Waldron occurred before Ben Johnson was hired? The guy writing the book is why it's back in the press. Caleb isnt talking about it now? I agree with you about Calebs decision making last year too. Hopefully thats an area where Ben Johnson can really bring Caleb along. BUt i think the film watching that was missing wasnt regular generalized film watching, but rather a cohesive plan from the coaches that the offense could execute. That's how I read it anyway. Thank god those guys are gone!

agree a lot of it is his dad. and some of it was how unprofessional the coaching was last year too. I guess Caleb did let some inside stuff out. I am SO glad to hear players are getting chewed out. LOVE accountability. And I know, we have to see it on the field, but it sure seems like we arent going to be clowns like we usually are. At least we will be a pro football team. I'm excited too!

I am sure Williams knows how to watch tape generically. I'm sure he can look at generic film, and tell you everything just like J T O'Sullivan or Kurt Warner does. I took Williams meaning differently. I took him to mean that they weren't watching film on the defense of that week's opponent while relating that to the week's gameplan. For example, if the OC sees that a certain LBer always shades inside vs the TE against a certain offensive alignment, the OC might call some plays where the TE runs a quick out, accompanied by a WR running a go route on that side to drag defenders out of the area for the TE underneath. So he puts in the play. Does he tell Caleb, hey we see the LB leaning pre sanp so thats why were calling this play? Does he show him on film what the reasoning behind including this play is in the week's game plan? Or does he just tell Caleb, "learn this play, run it when we call it, the TE is read #1" and leave it at that. Because if he doesn't explain it, and Caleb comes to the line with that LB shading outside for once, he should know that the theory of the play means the gambit is off. Maybe, it makes Caleb more likely to audible to a run offtackle to the strong side so the TE has a good blocking angle on the shaded LB. So either 1) Caleb is a baby who cant read generic film, like identifying defenses and needs his hand held, and should have hired someone to do it, and is ridiculous for criticizing how he was developed by the fine staff of Eberflus and Waldron OR 2) Caleb is telling you something real, because he's the #1 pick QB who knows a shit ton about football, and it trying to tell you that Flus and Waldron did a crap job of teaching him, and preparing him for each week to understand the intention of the game plan. And what we saw is that there was no game plan in the first place. If it really was Caleb, and they thought Waldron was doing a great job of putting everyone in the best place to succeed, then he wouldnt have gotten fired so early in the season. They didn't develop Caleb. It's actually shocking. Waldron and Eberflus were complete frauds as OC and HC. I cant wait to see Johnson and Williams prove it to everyone.

This is the big question. What does gaining or losing Johnson do for an offense? adam, knowing your penchant for numbers, I wonder if there is a "Ben Johnson" multiplier, on various stats, that can be measured after this coming season? I know there are a ton of little things that swamp out being able to attribute the Bears' and Lions' offensive changes in fortune over last year to just Ben Johnson, but PFF does it so why cant we? LOL

Caleb is the starter. I am a huge fan of Tyson Bagent's as well. I think he is the backup. Case Keenum is here to provice Caleb with advice from his experience. So do we keep 3 QBs on the roster? If you put Bagent on the practice squad someone will steal him and make him QB2 somewhere. And Keenum is too old to even put on the PS. What do you think we will do? If we get a good trade offer for Bagent, then I understand that - but they JUST extended him, but I guess that also might help bring interest in a trade too... I think Bagent is a more valuable backup than Keenum, but is Keenum just for training camp?

Like I said, Im not saying to trade any of the per se. Not right now. All ive said is that Kmet is on the bubble, for next year, or possibly at the trade deadline. Also, the logic to trading Kmet (which Im not saying I would do right now!) is not just the draft pick you get, but also the cap space you open up. $10M gets you a very nice free agent, for example. but again, I am not at the decision point to trade Kmet, unless we get something big for him, like a 3rd or better. But if he was part of a package to get trey hendrickson here, for example, then his trade value and cap space would both be helpful. And to be clear, Im not saying we should trade for Hendrickson either. I would need to know how good he projects to be in 3 years, and that's for the medical staff and whatever who know better than I do. But just to be crystal clear - I've been predciting that the Bears will trade Kmet NEXT year or possible at the trade deadline this year, but I've also been super clear that he has this window to show what he can do for Johnson. So I think he could earn a spot here, but he has to work for it i think. For me, right now, without any more positive showing from him, he's gone next year. But if he balls out, then he will make the case to stay. Because everything "good" about him is what he COULD do if used properly. So that's a built in excuse, and maybe a fair one! But he has to show it now, and maybe he will. I'm just saying I havent seen it YET, and if it stays hows it's been, he will not be taking $11.6M worth of cap space next year. None of that says trade him now, or that his story is over. But that's my bet, based on what's been before. The future is of course, unknown.

Im not saying to trade any of these players per se, but I do want to make one point. A player is not more valuable because they are on the Bears roster already? It's Ok to trade good players if you get something more helpful in return. And then the new player will be on the roster, so you can be a fan of them then? I think about what the Bears still need (and no roster is ever perfect) and I think about players out there that can help us. we've been so terrible for so long, that as Bears fans we are used to wanting to keep anyone that can kinda play. But now, our roster is much fuller, and we are at the point where we will let good players go in trades. When you have a player that you know you arent goingt to pay big money to in the future, who is still a good player, it is better to get some trade value for them than to milk that last year out of them. Now I admit that compensatory picks do change that formula somewhat, so understanding that sometimes losing a player to free agency is a benefit in terms of compensatory picks, there will still be many cases where losing that last year of a players contract is worth what you get in trade. Eventually, when you're winning, you have to realize that you will lose your players to free agency, and replace them through the draft. Any sustainable winning formula requires it. So gaining extra draft capital, even in the 3rd, 4th and 5th rounds, is necessary. So I would say maybe be less attached to players just because they are on the roster when you follow a winning team, and think more about keeping the team going with new faces or you will age out and be back to mediocre where we lived for FAR too long. I get it that that could be a challenge for a fan who wants to develop a relationship with the players, but that loyalty doesnt keep teams relevant. At some point, the question has to be asked whether we root for the team, or the players on the team. For me, it's the team.