adam

Regardless if we keep Fields and he becomes the franchise QB, or we draft one, I don't care where we draft him, as long as he becomes our franchise QB. Maybe we go the Washington route and draft one in the 2nd (after a trade back) and another in the 5th or 6th. Use the 1st rounders on WR, Edge, or DT, then use the 3rd and 4th on a Center or Safety.

Goff is 8th in QB Rating, 10th in QBR, 4th in passing yards, 20 TD, to 8 INT. That seems like top 10 to me. I personally don't think he is, but his numbers say otherwise. Now those are the top teams, but there are some really good QBs on bad teams, Allen, Herbert, Stafford, would all fit that category. At the end of the day, you need great QBs, great teams, coaches, and organizations. The Bears are not there yet, but they seem to be trending in the right direction, and after the most losses the team has ever experienced in a 2 year window, getting some additional wins down the stretch should be seen as a success. If you are under 40, you didn't even get to experience the 85 team, and you have seen more losing than winning, so we need to celebrate the wins when they come. I am hoping and praying, holding crystals in both hands with incense lit that the Bears can win out, Justin balls out and the entire narrative gets flipped.

There are a few ways to cut the data. The way I did it was franchise QBs in the 1st vs franchise QBs everywhere else. You can also go 1st round pick QB hits / first round QB overall picks. and you can do it your way: 1st round QB failures / all other round QB failures I will look into it, but I believe the ratio will be similar. There were 14 QBs drafted in 2023. Stroud currently looks like the only real deal. So 1/3 chance vs 0/11 chance. Going back to Fields year, you could say at this time it is 1/5 in the first (TLaw only), and 0/5 everywhere else. Fields still has a chance, and would bump the success rate up significantly. Ultimately, the likelihood of getting a franchise QB in the first, and in the top 5 is exponentially higher. However, in order to have a large enough sample size, you probably have to do a 10 year review. Looking at just the 2 years I did, it was 1/4 chance in the 1st, and 0/16 chance outside of the first just using that data set. Knowing Purdy is in 2022, if I add that year into the numbers, it goes to 2/9 (22.2%) for the first round (Pickett added), and to 1/24 (4.2%) outside of the 1st for the last 3 years. Now to get failures, you just flip the data. So in the first there is a 77.8% failure rate, for all other rounds, there is a 95.8% failure rate. I didn't include UDFAs, but their failure rate is even higher.

I was joking. I didn't include him in the numbers.

This is what Love did to "WIN" against KC: 4th quarter, close and late: 7-15, 46.7%, 80 yds, 5.3 Y/A, 0 TD, 2 Sacks (both sacks resulted in longer FG attempts). If Fields did that, the Bears lose. Against the Lions, Fields orchestrated an 8+ min FG drive in the 4th quarter that ate up more time than all of GB's drives combined against KC while they milked the lead. The difference was with the defenses (and officials). The Bears defense failed twice (2x 70+ yard TD drives in under 4 mins) and the officials never help the Bears (Cassius Marsh where are you?).

So while looking up some Jordan Love stats, I realized something about the GB defense and how their performance has correlated more to their wins and losses than anything Jordan Love does. Love has improved as the season has gone on and is now 14th in QBR, slightly higher than Minshew, Geno Smith, and Dobbs. That seems to be about right for him. Now looking at their defense, is has allowed 27 or more points in only one game this season (34 in a loss to DET). I was shocked to see that. Did anyone else know that their defense has been THAT good? The Bears defense have done that 6 times (all losses). The Packers are 0-4 when their defense allows 23 or more (Bears are 0-6 - yikes), and 6-2 when they hold opponents to 22 or less (Bears are 4-2). So the team's outcomes are very similar, the differences have been the defenses and offensive turnovers. As good as the media is making Love out to be, their offense has scored more than 30 only once (Week 1 vs Da Bears), the same as the Bears anemic offense. Since that week, they have 11 straight games with 29 or less. In the game they scored 29 in, they had a defensive TD. In the Bears game, they had a pick-6, so their highest offensive output was 31 (and only 4 TD game), then the next highest was 27 against KC. GB is 4-1 in their last 5, but 3-0 at home and 1-1 on the road. They play 3 of their last 5 on the road. If any of you have watched their last game, Love had some great protection and got really lucky on a few passes. On the season he has had a TD pass go thru a defender's hands right into his receivers, another one tipped and caught by a completely different receiver, and in the last game, he threw up a desperation moon shot (not waxing) that was played terribly by the defenders who both whiffed on it to be caught for like a 50 yard gain with the WR on his back. Way too lucky for me. They talk about Fields performances not being sustainable, but if you are living off of several lucky TDs and huge chunk passes, those will both dry up eventually and turn into turnovers in a heartbeat. I think Love will be a decent QB, but nothing tells me he is the 3rd coming of Brett Favre. I think he will live in that 2nd tier of QBs (11-15 range) with an occasionally great game or two.

If you look at the top QBs from this season, and some other very young QBs who are looking the part, there are 10/14 from the 1st round, Hurts from the 2nd, 2x from the 4th, and Purdy. I think Purdy is an anomaly and very dependent on Shanahan and that team as a whole. I doubt he looks half as good on the Bears from 2022. Even so, you are 3 times as likely to get a QB in the 1st than all other rounds combined. Considering rounds 3-7 have more than 32 picks, that ratio is even larger. Prescott - 4th Allen - 1st Mahomes - 1st Herbert - 1st Cousins - 4th Tua - 1st Hurts - 2nd Goff - 1st Stafford - 1st Trubisky - 1st Jackson - 1st Burrow - 1st -------------- Purdy - 7th Stroud - 1st Lawrence - 1st If you go a step further, 9 out of 10 were top 10 (Jackson was the only one not in top 10), 6 were top 5, 5 were top 2, and 4 were #1 picks. So you are just as likely to hit on a franchise QB at #1 than you are in every pick from the 2nd to 7th rounds combined (on average). So 1/1 vs 1/229. That's pretty wild.

This season has flown by, we are already into our final regular season week this weekend (first game on Thursday night). Right now there are 3 teams that clinched a playoff spot and 4 others vying for the remaining 3 slots. Both the first two teams have enough wins to ensure they both get a bye, the only jockeying would be for the seeding. The next 4 teams can finish as high as 3rd and as low as 6th. The Bunny is still mathematically eligible, but it seems like the only realistic shot would be for them to win and for PapaBear to lose and The Bunny's PF is 107 pts more than PapaBear's this week. If that is not achieved, The Bunny is eliminated. There has been a two-team PF difference of 107 or more two times this year, (Week 5 and Week 13), so it is possible. 2023 TB Keepers Playoff Picture 1. SAVAGEw/LOOSEMORALS! 9-4 vs Nopper 4-9 2. Nips&Tips 9-4 vs MotM 8-5 ------------------------------------------- 3. MotM 8-5 vs Nips&Tips 9-4 4. Comfortably Dumb 7-6 vs The Mad Lithuanians 5-8 5. Fields of Dreams 7-6 vs The Bunny 6-7 6. PapaBear 7-6 vs Victorious Secret 3-10 -------------------------------------------- 7. The Bunny 6-7 vs Fields of Dreams 7-6 Potential Outcomes 1. SAVAGEw/LOOSEMORALS!- 1 or 2 2. Nips&Tips- 1 or 2 3. MotM- 3-6 4. Comfortably Dumb- 3-6 5. Fields of Dreams- 3-6 6. PapaBear- 3-6 7. The Bunny- 6

that's so funny, I just randomly thought about the moon after I looked into the weather. I have no clue that curse existed, but unlike that lady on the plane, that mother-f'er is real!

Yeah, that makes sense. Trading back is always beneficial if you can get more bang for your buck. I wouldn't mind a 2nd round QB, but it is nice having the 5th year option, though more teams are locking QBs up before then, thus killing the benefit.

Yes, absolutely, make a lifesize voodoo doll of Goff, and on every passing play, you have to jump on the doll, basically sack the doll, even teabag if you have to. The Bears need all the help they can get from the universe. I will be playing binaural beats on every Lions 3rd Down to distract them.

That's hilarious, I made that crap up lol. It will actually be Waning Crescent on the 10th.

The moon will be at waning gibbous, which favors the Bears by 3.

Sunday weather: Rain and snow transitioning to snow showers in the afternoon. Temps in the mid 30s with winds 15-25mph. Weather will be a factor.

Oh wow, Goff is terrible in the cold. 40F or below: 7 games, 65.8 QB Rating, 53.7% Comp, 194 yds/g, 6.0 Y/A, 6 TD, 8 INT for his career. So QB Rating down almost 30 from his average, Comp% down 11 pct, yds/g down 66 yds, and for his career he has a 175 TD to 78 INT ratio, so for him to be 6 and 8 is a huge drop off for both sides, down to less than 1 TD per game and more than 1 INT per game.

Me checking splits now.

Yep, the first one is probably a better solution and hedges better with the rookie deals. The 2nd one is like the Dalton/Glennon debacles that never worked out. However, someone like Browning would not slot in above Fields. However, if he outplayed him in the offseason or preseason, then he would deserve to move up. Drafting one, trading Fields; drafting one, keeping Fields, or keeping Fields without drafting one are the most 3 likely scenarios.

Compared to other teams, the Bears have added Moore and Sweat as "extra" pieces assuming each team has relatively the same amount of picks in the first 3 rounds that yield similar results. So it looks like Poles will get at least that again with 2x first rounders, maybe more. So if they go into 2024 with 4+5 "extra" blue chippers than the rest of the league, they will be a playoff team with some nice depth regardless of the QB position.

One scenario is drafting a QB while keeping Fields, then let the best QB win, if Fields wins, let the rookie sit and learn. If the rookie wins, you trade Fields. Another scenario is to bring in a FA to compete with Fields. Browning would be interesting because he has the pedigree. He just wasn't highly sought after, similar to Purdy.

He did come out of Folsom HS, I guess that is a QB factory. I wouldn't trade Fields for him though, or a 2nd rounder that we don't have.

Good point, maybe it could be a delay of game or unsportsmanlike penalty, or make a new penalty for the failed challenge as a 10-yard penalty? A runoff could be used against the offense, but not defense.

The Velus pick will always be a head scratcher for me. You draft players with the hope they get a 2nd contract from you because they played that good. Velus would be 29 on the first year of his 2nd contract. Just say he would sign another 4 year deal, to get 8 years out of the draft pick, he would be 32 on the final year of that 2nd deal. WR's peak at 26-27, and rarely do they stay productive beyond 30. So why are you drafting a guy knowing if you sign him to a 2nd contract, you would likely only get 1-2 more years out of him. That just seems like a really short-sighted pick. To put that into perspective, Allen Robinson is 30 this season for PIT, after his 29 yr old season with the Rams last year. Another weird fact, Robinson is the same age as Cooper Kupp (who came out at 24). Kupp has been slightly better than Velus has thru their first 2 seasons.

It is ridiculous that team's can't challenge a non-call like that (the DPI no calls). Each team should get one (Silver Bullet) in the last two minutes of a game that is not tied to their timeouts. Everything should be reviewable and challenge-able. They also need to add a few more mandatory camera views to use for reviews. I want IR and thermal views too lol (easier to see the ball in a pile or hand under ball).

A 9-3 team is playing at a 4-8 team and is only favored by 3? A 5-win disparity and only a 3 point line is pretty interesting. Vegas really thinks this game is going to be close. The Bears couldn't win with a +3 turnover margin and double the TOP, so if they want to win this game they more than likely are going to have to do it without that large of a turnover margin and TOP. DET ended up with more total yards, 8-11 on 3rd Downs, a 5.7 yards per play, so they were way more efficient. Montgomery can't average 6.3 yards a carry and they need to shutdown St. Brown. He always seems to burn the Bears. LaPorta was huge this week but only had 3-18 against the Bears. Of all the games to this point in the Flus era, this one has the most on the line for the Bears. It is either going to show that the last game was a fluke or it was real progress. It will be at home against a Division opponent (the Bears have yet to win against a division foe at home under Flus). They will be coming off the bye, and the team should be the healthiest it has been in any other week this season. Fields got two more weeks to heal that thumb. A lot is on the line for Fields, if he has a great game, it will boost his chances significantly, but if he has a stinker or multiple turnovers, it will probably be the game that decides his fate for 2024 and beyond. The Lions have had a multiple game Division lead for most of the season. With a loss and MIN or GB win, that lead is down to one game, with multiple division games left. I am going Bears 27-20 in an upset. The Bears held DET to 14 pts for 57 minutes, then allowed 17 in 3 minutes. I think they can do it again, but this time close them out.

I have seen a few scenarios where the Bears get MHJ AND Bowers, then sign Chase Young in free agency to fill 3 holes with some blue chippers.