BearFan PHX

So far I think Poles has done an excellent job. He tore down the bloated roster. Took the heat for having an inept 2022 season, built a large part of the supporting roster out while maintaining discipline, not overspending or overreaching. All excellent. But Poles is at an inflection point now. All of what he's done so far was reasonably obvious strategically, even as it required a deft hand in execution and choices. He did well. But now the big decisions come. Coaches and QB. he will be remembered for what he does going forward from here, more than for trading Roquan, or giving Fields last year to prove himself. In my mind, he's already stumbled on the coaching decision. For sure it can be mitigated with successful coordinator hires. But up until the Eberflus decision, I would be giving Poles an A+. But all those things, difficult as they were, are small compared to this upcoming round of decisions. Who will be the Bears Head Coach and Starting QB in 2025 and 2026? How many wins will we have in those seasons? The answers to those questions will be the yardstick by which Poles will be measured, and if he gets them right, the 2024 season will probably be bright and full of hope. But if he gets the wrong, he squanders everything else he's done. So this is new territory for Poles. The training wheels are off, and the big tough decisions lie ahead. Who of us can say what Caleb Williams will be? I sure cant. No one can. But Poles will get a raise or be fired if he cant answer that (unanswerable!) question, and the related ones correctly. To me, keeping Eberflus was the first mistake. So let's see how this goes from here. It's a lot of pressure, and to be fair, it's almost impossible to know what the rookies will be. But we kinda know who Fields is. If he gets the 5th year extension for example, that's would be a giant bet for Poles.

I agree with everything you've both said until that last line. Owners can be trusted to be greedy and work in self interest. People can certainly be ignorant, and maybe their race filter makes them wrongly not see minority talent in front of them, but there is no way any NFL team would pick a less qualified white guy because hes white. These guys would sell their own mothers for an extra win a year. The Rooney rule is great because it puts candidates in front of decision makers, and that helps ease the first problem I mentioned above. If youre unconsciously blind to something for example, that really helps. But this new rule where you get 2 x 3rd round picks for hiring a minority assistant GM who is then hired away seems wrong to me. In my view it's not necessary, again, because these guys want the best talent, and wont consciously let race get in their way to having the best people. What it does instead, is incentivize hiring someone who may be less qualified in order to get those picks. If two candidates are equally qualified it gives an edge to the minority hire - not even sure I love that. Seems illegal. A Rooney rule for GM and assistant GM hiring would be preferable in my view. Of course, I'm all for minority people in the NFL. That seems almost a silly thing to say out loud since so many players are not white, and former players make up a good part of the pool from which future leadership positions are drawn. This isn't 1940s basketball for example. Let me also say that the NFL was not always color blind. No one can say that in the 70s or beyond that there wasn't a stigma around black QBs for example. That was a real shame too. It was stupid. And racist. But we got past it just by our culture evolving and the hyper competitive nature of winning in the NFL. And we didnt have to give free draft picks to teams to do it either. Pure greed for wins overcomes everything else, as it should be. But as long as there are free draft picks available, I expect teams to want them. Given multiple candidates that are all equally qualified, I hope the Bears use this rule and get more picks. But I think the rule isn't helping as much as intended. It will make people wonder whether the guy that got hired really was the best for the job, or if they got hired for the picks - and I think that does more damage to the NFL group-think about the value of minority GMs than it helps. What will really help things continue to change are Super Bowl winning GMs of all colors. And rule or no rule, that is going to happen either way. I should also add that by all accounts Ian Cunningham did an exceptional job for us, and is being considered for GM positions because he was not simply qualified, but one of the best (if not the best) assistant GM in the league. To the point where I have wondered to myself whether if Poles retains Eberflus AND FIelds, and fumbles the coordinator jobs, that I might not consider calling for Poles to be fired, and replaced by Cunningham!

for sure on keeping Justin last year - it would have been stupid not to. we needed to see who he was, how he could grow. you cant just walk away from that kind of athletic talent without at least seeing him with something around him. Now this year, thats a different story. But who is the right rookie? Who the heck knows. Maybe the best one this year will end up to be Mccarthy in the second round, or maybe its Williams at #1 etc. My crystal ball is entirely cloudy.

I completely agree. I think Poles did the right thing. My comment was just that his answer now was a little slick because he is saying he'd rather have had a haul that includes this years number one, which he didnt know would be #1, and passing on Stroud which time may tell (in hindsight) was a miss. If he'd said it was the right decision at the time, Im 100% agreed. But if he'd known this would be a #1 pick, then hed have known Stroud would be this good too. ANd again, Im not even saying Stroud is gonna be great either. It was just a little slick, giving himself credit for something he couldnt have known, and a pass on something else he couldnt have known either. But for example, every team that didnt draft Brady in the first 5 rounds could easily and rightly say "at the time, it was the right decision" who could argue that? Not even the Patriots who passed on him through 5 rounds. But to look back now and say "Im still happy with the 5th round pick I took back then rather than taking Brady" is a less sustainable statement. But again, to be clear, I think Poles did exactly the right thing last year, I was just commenting on the statement being a little slick. In general these discussion seem to feel like you love someone or you hate them, and iw as just injecting a tiny bit of nuance. Nothing important, and nothing that changes my opinion of Poles. Keeping Eberflus on the other hand, and what he does with Justin are different issues, but this statement? Just a little too slick - not even a 5 yard penalty tho. But hypothetically, if in two years Stroud is the best QB in the league, then no one could say theyd rather have that haul including Moore etc. In that case, the right answer is the QB. Again, no one could know at the time, nor could they know the CAR pick would be the #1 pick either.

read again where I said "And it's not like you could see it coming either." Also Poles' statement was made now when we all have hindsight including Poles making the statement. For example, he includes the #1 overall pick this year, also not knowable last year. This is Poles this year, talking about what we now know. And my point was about the quarterback position in general, you dont have to protect Poles' feelings from me. I think it's just best for you not to comment on my posts since you seem to misunderstand them constantly.

I agree with all of this too. Since there is luck involved, if you have Trubisky and Mahomes rated similarly, you let the one that falls to you be your pick You need to really have conviction to trade up, and with Trubisky how could they have with the limited sample size? We tend to think these professionals have some secret sauce that we are missing, and to be sure they have TONS of data we dont have, but in the end, that data doesnt seem to be cutting through the fog. Wouldnt it be refreshing for them to admit that it is unknowable and value where to pick a position on that from a tier of players? Or maybe it makes sense, in addition to your regular addressing of QBs with high picks when the position is open, to also take a flyer on a 6th or 7th round QB every other year? Or every year? I'm still wondering what Bagent can do too.

sure, and hes not gonna say anything "true" in this predraft period either. Im just saying, more good players is good, but a GOAT QB is everything. Im not really criticizing Poles as much as making the point about the QB. And if it means he is thinking of trading down again, it's a similar thought from me. Of course all that hinges on there being a Tom Brady int he draft, and there almost never is. But then again, you never know who they are until you already have them, or have passed on them. Im not saying it's easy. its about as difficult as anything is.

Moore, Wright, Stevenson and this years #1 and the 2025 pick is a serious haul. It's the kind of thing that builds rosters. But this league is all about QBs. Not that there are dominant GOATs easily found. But if you knew you had Joe Montana, or Tom Brady, or Payton Manning, they would easily be worth more than 3 firsts. Youd pay almost anything to get one. And they'd be worth the price. Now maybe hes saying that Stroud isnt one of those QBs, and probably he;d be right. But given that Stroud did what he did in his first year, no one can say for sure that he isn't. And it's not like you could see it coming either. Every rookie QB is a gamble, and almost none will be a GOAT. So while it's an easy thing to list all those good impact players, I think it's a little disingenuous. To be fair to Poles, there hasnt been a QB in years that fits the mold Im talking about, and Im surely not saying I know that Stroud is one. But until you find a QB like that, every team has to be looking for one, and if you find one you believe in, the price almost doesnt matter.

well theres that. This is the same old Bears thinking. If we dont reach for greatness from this pit we are in, we will get trapped at 9-8 for the next decade. Just good enough to say "well get em next year" and "at least we got to the playoffs" and bad enough to miss out on the top talent and ever get GOOD. You know the story, we've all lived it for DECADES. We bought a ticket for change by living through the 2022 season - remember that? We stripped down and endured it so we could be here, and what do they do? They revert to safe loserthink. This is Poles version of a big prevent zone. If they keep Fields we are screwed and all this talent we have will be too expensive to keep by the time a QB is ready.

all good points.

I was as big a proponent of firing Eberflus as anyone here, but the errors he made should be mitigated by good coordinators. It's not a reason to keep someone as head coach in my opinion, but I dont think it dooms us either. If the coordinators are experienced and strong in the room, then the worst about Eberflus is the missed opportunity to have someone better in there, but I dont think Eberflus will sink the ship. When he wants to be overcautious, Ron Rivera or Leslie Frasier or someone like that should be able to push back. As long as they get the coordinators right, I am much more worried about the Fields decision hurting us in the long run.

So now that it's a done deal... If you bring in good experienced coordinators who will balance (what I think are) Eberflus' poor choices, there is no reason the coaching couldnt be fine. In spite of Eberflus, not because of, but still. Guys like Ron Rivera or Leslie Frasier will not be milquetoasts and if they think Eberflus is asking them to be too safe, they will have a ton of input too. So that mitigates any real negative influence Eberflus could have. Ditto on a guy like Frank Reich on the offensive side of the ball. In my view it's a missed opportunity to add a difference maker at head coach, but assuming Flus isnt the DC too next year, this could very well work out fine with the coaches. I do fear they are gonna bring Fields back. i can see the positives in their eyes - you dont have to deal with Williams, or they dont believe in Williams, you get a ton for that first pick, get more players etc. It's all "OK" with me as long as they get a projected high first rounder next year so they can get another QB high if they need to, even if it means packaging both first rounders next year to move up - same plan as last year. It also means if it doesnt work, your coaches and new QB will both be in year 1 next year. Or if they keep the coaches, it wont be the coaching staff last year during the QBs first year like it might be this year. But all in all i think keeping Fields is just going to put the development of a rookie QB one year behind the rest of this window. Maybe they will trade Fields and call the new OC the first year, ignoring Flus' tenure. I guess that makes sense, and aligns the timeline for the OC and new QB - and if you were worried you were gonna lose that OC, you might even fire Flus and promote the OC to HC next year or the year after. I mean it's almost like they are firing the coaches but letting Flus stay. Maybe that's to keep all the defensive assistants who have definitely been doing an excellent job. Maybe we can work around Eberflus' shortcomings, but I don't think Fields is ever gonna be the guy. i think this is gonna be a lost year if they keep him. And if they do keep Fields, and coach well with (despite?) Eberflus, and if I'm right about all of this with Fields, then my point about Poles hugging players and getting too close may well prove to be prescient. If on the other hand, they trade Fields, and the coordinators have wills of their own, then maybe this will work. It certainly preserves the defensive assistants. Not sure that's the best way to value a head coach, and keep in mind, whoever the coordinators coming in will be could still have been hired under a different new head coach too - so Im not really sure of the benefit other than not eating Eberflus' salary. But once we know what they do with Fields it will be more clear to me whether this was a tricky way around the prorlem that could work, or a full blown loyalty fest that will all burn together, including Poles at that point. And if that's the outcome, then one wonders if Warren was stupid and on the train, or setting the stage for his guys coming next without seeming like an overreaching tyrant, and without taking too much blame early if that plan doesn't work. In other words, looking like he had to replace Poles, and hiding the rope he gave Poles to hang himself with.

having final say, youre correct, certainly not. it will be Poles and Warren that have the final say on Fields and/or which rookie to take. But they will want an OC that is all in on the plan, so from that point of view, the OC will have "input" in the sense that if they dont see things the same way, theyre not gonna get the job. I do expect if they pick a guy like Frank Reich, and decide to move on from Fields, that he will have major input into which QB to take. All this scares me that they're keeping Fields too. And if we do, we have to get a first rounder next year out of some trade, so we can get a QB in the top picks next year if this doesnt work, and then align coaches and QB on the same timeline.

To the point that we are thru only year 2 in the rebuild: No one is suggesting cleaning out the roster. No matter who is coach, we would be in year 3. I just didnt see anything from Eberflus that tells me he's the guy. I dread being right about this.

yes, if you're the guy who turned the Bears offense around, then you will get HC offers. The lame duck part comes in when you consider that you probably only have one offseason to do it and have to hit the ground running (and winning) - and you have to do that with either Justin Fields, who would have to entirely change his stripes, or a rookie who will probably have growing pains. If they dont, then you failed and everyone is probably gone next year. Of course, in any subsequent interviews you can always say "well it WAS the Bears..." And THAT is the decades old problem.

I understand the optimism. With all new coordinators, we might be thinking "Eberflus doesnt have to do anything" - that's a hell of a thing to say as a reason for optimism about your head coach - that others will make it good FOR him.

History is full of examples where bad coaching staffs weren't fired and then remained bad. If it was as simple as hiring anyone, then having two crappy years and simply not firing them turned them into Dick Vermeil, then this would be easy. Eberflus will never win a Super Bowl with this team. I respect that people disagree with me, but I strongly think in time they will regret it. This franchise sucks. I love the team, but the franchise is just amateur hour.

This is very disappointing. It smells of McCaskey-ism. Not saying that Warren wasnt in charge, just saying it's the same old kind of decision from the same old team. Saying "they have a plan" is ridiculous. Every team has a plan. Nagy had a plan. So did Trestman. etc etc lather rinse repeat. If Harbaugh doesnt stay at Michigan then this whole team should be sued for incompetence.

So Mel Kiper (Bill Tobin: "Who the hell is Mel Kiper?!) says that he thinks we can trade Justin Fields to Atlanta for their #8 overall pick. I think Mel's hair is on too tight. But just for fun - Imagine taking a QB with #1, and having #8 and #9 to play with? The other thought I'm gonna put in this crazy post is that we've been saying Caleb Williams is just another Justin Fields, that he has the same problems. Another way to look at that is that he has the same possibilities as Justin Fields - like setting the clock back and getting a second swing at the same thing? For the record, I know both of these items are silly. But while we wait for coaching news - have at it

and if they do get a guy like Harbaugh, or honestly anyone else, either their opinion of Fields is going to be part of this, or they will be picked because they share Poles and Warrens view?

Hey Pix, Some good points there for sure. The first half is well argued. The list of NFL organizations that signed on to Williams is long. It is unfair to think Eberflus could have predicted it. I guess, I mean I dont know what actually happened, but yes, youre almost certainly right about that. Still some organizations would move on anyway. But your point is well taken, and I am willing to concede it. So I'd say you removed that argument off the table. The second point is different I feel. The defense has certainly gotten better, but the defensive playcalling at the ends of games has been awful. Both could be attributable to Eberflus. The increase of talent level on the roster is also of Poles' doing of course, and the player development also of position coaches' work. So in both cases Eberflus shares credit at least? But the defensive playcalling is all him. He's also made some atrocious decisions on the offensive side of the ball too. Game management, situational football, going for it when he should have taken the FG, sitting Sweat... But none more damning than the general play it safe culture of coaching we've seen across both sides of the ball. Brisker was complaining that they were being coached to give the receivers too much of a cushion this week for example. That's not just about zone vs man etc, but that's about a general play not to lose vibe. It's classic Cover 2 thinking. Keep it in front of you. Bend dont break. etc. It has also been punctuated by some really foolhardy decisions that were over-aggressive, mostly on 3rd and 4th and short. My guess is Eberflus wanted to "not be safe" but I think that being foolhardy between episodes of protective calls is not the same thing as being more aggressive in tone. I feel like having the DBs creep up 2 yards as a matter of course in your alignments is more along the lines of what Im talking about. Let the players use their talents. But mostly its the conservative style that lost us three games we easily had in hand. That would put us in the playoffs. We got to a huge prevent way too early in historically significant ways. I think you want your coach to be a difference maker. What I see in Eberflus is a professional to be sure. Being head coach is more than calling plays (it's not supposed to be that at all usually, but ok...) it's about organizing meetings, keeping player relationships, staying the course when things get rough - Eberflus has done a good job of all these things. Maybe even an excellent job. It's probably why people want to keep him. But all of this is secondary in my mind to the product on the field. I don't personally see Eberflus as a guy who gives you an edge in winning. Multiple former players have said that Belichick would tell his guys all week "when X happens, then theyre going to do Y. Go to Z and youll make a huge play" and then in the game it would happen just as he described it. I never saw any Bears play this year where it seemed like the Bears knew what was coming on offense or defense ahead of time and had a ready answer for it. We lose the Rock Paper Scissors part of it way more than we should. What I saw was an increasingly talented roster in regular plays executing and having success. But I didnt see Eberflus outcoaching anyone at any point. So that's why I think he should be fired. As to whether the next guy would be better, you hope there are good candidates out there and that we find the right one, but for me, if you know a guy is never going to be elite, you gotta give the chance to someone else or you are guaranteeing you wont have an elite player or coach at that position. Eberflus seems like a nice guy, hes a professional, organized, taking care of the players. All good stuff. But does anyone think he will ever be an elite difference maker? Or is the argument just that incremental change might get you to the playoffs and then some upsets could magically happen and we might claw our way to success? I want an organization that builds until they are the team to be feared in the playoffs. I dont see that even in the most optimistic scenarios for Eberflus? Oh and last, I know we all agree that if you can get a known special difference make like Harbaugh, that makes the decision much easier of course! But if we cant, this is the debate. Do you keep "getting better" if you know "elite" isnt in the cards, or do people disagree and think "elite" is in Eberflus' future? I would say personally that Fields has some chance to end up elite. I wouldnt bet on it, but I wouldnt put it at 0% either. But for me, I dont see any evidence that Eberflus will ever be elite?

OK I googled him, and here he is on TV, and yeah he talks reeeeaaaalllllllyyyyy sllllooooooooowwwww LOL So it's him. But what he knows about how Pace did things doesnt necessarily translate to Poles' and Warren's timeline. We will all know soon enough I think. But damn i wanna know right now! lol

It does make sense to have a rookie QB sit behind a veteran starter to learn the ropes. I think it's common practice. We did it with Trubisky and Fields. So what youre saying makes a lot of sense in general. I think that Fields is a special case though. he doesnt make reads or execute the offense, so Im not sure hes a role model. He's also got so much love in the locker room it seems, and can you imagine if Caleb Williams is an ego and a head case and anyone even gives a whiff of rejection to him as hes sitting? Or support to Fields and he takes it as rejection? It sounds like a disaster waiting to happen. I do like the idea of a rookie sitting behind Bagent, or whatever free agent journeyman QB they want to bring in, but Fields is so young hes of Williams' generation and so unorthodox in style, it seems like a bad idea to me? Then again bringing in a rookie as the coach is on the hot seat is a bad idea too, and theyve done that multiple times in our history too.

LOL so maybe it wasnt even him?

as to Eberflus and his hires that exited etc - its not just about whether Eberflus should have known, because I get that he wouldnt. But whether it's Eberflus, or Fields or whatever, we dont see much accountability. We dont see a standard being held, we just see nice guys that we want to protect. It comes down to this same question - if you know a coach or players isnt bad but isnt great, do you give them more chances, or do you fire them, not because they were terrible, but simply because you dont believe they will ever be elite? Being elite means top 5 or whatever, so of 32 teams, 27 professional starters are not elite. You might say firing them all is crazy. You might say who will you find that you know will be elite? And my answer would be, I dunno. No one elite is just sitting there without a job. But I think you have to keep searching and trying to find elite, and that means firing competent mediocrity. It's not "fair" but it's the only way to find elite players and coaches. And on top of this both Fields and Eberflus have shown their share of incompetence too.