Anything comments

[Stinger226]

37 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

all this is true. He does have some idea what hes gonna do.

Of course our filters are different on that decision. I think keeping Fields is a mistake, so if thats where he's leaning, or already decided, and he makes that choice, Im gonna think its partially because he isnt maintaining professional emotional distance. I could be wrong about either of those things or both of course.

But if we get to next year, and I was right, and Justin is the same as he was this past year, that's gonna really suck and the repercussions to the plan we bought with that awful 2022 season will be devastating, and we will be back to mediocrity for many years. We wont have a #1 pick, and we will oscillate as we have for decades between 6-11 seasons followed by 9-8 seasons as we get harder and easier schedules each year. We've been caught in that cycle for many many years. Decades. Surely you're sick of it too! We cant keep thinking like McCaskeys, buying the same narrative we've been sold forever. This has to be about winning Superbowls and not selling tickets and feeding the Chicago Sports Media machine. I know in New England they had a lot of years where they didnt say "Keep or trade Brady?!" The writers will find other things to write about if we get a great QB.

I'm not sold on Williams. I have a lot more investigating to do, including seeing a bunch of videos that havent even been made yet! But I think keeping Fields will be a mistake, and if Poles does that, I'm gonna think that the reason he made the mistake was this possible problem I wonder about.

And if he drafts a QB, he needs to get the right one. And that is a really complicated problem this year in particular with so many good names.

The other way to see that is that there may be more than one great QB here for the taking, and that increases our odds of getting one, IF we take one early. I think we have to. I hope Poles thinks so too.

Everything you stated is true but Poles is not building a team to just be competitive. No one thinks that way. He's doing things his way and it may not follow your plans

[BearFan PHX]

27 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

Everything you stated is true but Poles is not building a team to just be competitive. No one thinks that way. He's doing things his way and it may not follow your plans

I have no doubt Poles is doing what he thinks is right.

What I said was that if he keeps FIelds and is wrong, then we will be stuck in that cycle because THIS is the year we have the #1 pick, not every year.

Ask yourself this - why have the Bears been stuck in mediocrity for so long? What are the common factors about the cycle we have been trapped in?

I think it's because we held on to mid level stuff that kept us JUST good enough to not be able to get a top pick to find a great QB. We tried and whiffed with Trubisky, but before that? We were trapped in the middle layer like a lot of teams.

But then we paid the price to get out of the cycle - we tanked the 2022 season hard. It was miserable. But we bought ourselves a chance to swing for the fences and be GOOD. We had the #1 pick last year. And Poles thought that passing on Young and Stroud was the right move and giving Fields another year, and a Pro Bowl level WR, and help on the OL would give him the chance to prove himself. And that made sense.

But that experiment ran last year already. And the results are in.

Now we have the #1 pick again. And interestingly there are a bunch of intriguing QBs this year - more than most years, so we might even find our stud in a pick below the #1 pick, if we find a guy other than Williams to believe in.

So Poles can play the draft and still get a top QB, so Im not dogged that it has to be Williams (yet?) or with the #1 pick. But if we walk away from this draft without a true candidate for franchise QB, and stick with Fields instead, and it doesnt work out, we wont be in a position to have a #1 pick again.

If we end up there, were are doomed to sit in the middle again for several years unless we tank again, which pretty much would bring us then to 2026 or 2027 before we had a functional starting QB and all the players we all like would be going to free agency not to mention wed have to trade them to tank hard, we arent winning 3 games with this defense, we will win more *OR* we will have to mortgage a future draft to get up to get a guy if the teams who have those picks are even willing to let go of a #1 guy in trade, and they usually arent. That's what we usually do. Cutler, Mack, Trubisky. And it kills our future drafts for 2 or 3 years without any number one pick.

Both tickets out of purgatory are awful.

So this is the moment. Its not always going to be like this. The train is leaving the station, and if you keep Fields and it doesn't work out, Poles is possibly fired, and the whole roster is into their second deals.

We simply HAVE to take a shot at a great QB right now. if you keep Fields you gotta think he is going to be great fast, better by far than hes ever been, or it all goes to hell for another several years.

With the defense we have, even if Fields sucks we will NOT have the #1 pick again. And you've watched that movie with me for the past 30 years. I cant just McCaskey this again for another 30. Arent we all sick to death of that?!

Playing it safe right now is the absolute wrong thing to do - and Fields is not a safe choice to be great anyway.

When you think about the haul of players and picks wed get from trading the #1 pick, ask yourself - why would the team giving all that to us think it's a winning move for them to give all that for just a single pick? It's because it's WORTH it because they can take a swing at a franchise QB who might take you to the promised land.

That should be us doing that.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Was thinking the oddity of these highly touted OCs not taking HC gigs elsewhere and how Bill Belichick is still sitting out there unemployed.
 

Meanwhile, as Stinger reported earlier, it appears we’ll get at least one more year with Ian Cunningham.  Which to me is a good thing.  He and Poles have been spotted heavily scouting the Senior Bowl together.

 

[Stinger226]

12 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

I have no doubt Poles is doing what he thinks is right.

What I said was that if he keeps FIelds and is wrong, then we will be stuck in that cycle because THIS is the year we have the #1 pick, not every year.

Ask yourself this - why have the Bears been stuck in mediocrity for so long? What are the common factors about the cycle we have been trapped in?

I think it's because we held on to mid level stuff that kept us JUST good enough to not be able to get a top pick to find a great QB. We tried and whiffed with Trubisky, but before that? We were trapped in the middle layer like a lot of teams.

But then we paid the price to get out of the cycle - we tanked the 2022 season hard. It was miserable. But we bought ourselves a chance to swing for the fences and be GOOD. We had the #1 pick last year. And Poles thought that passing on Young and Stroud was the right move and giving Fields another year, and a Pro Bowl level WR, and help on the OL would give him the chance to prove himself. And that made sense.

But that experiment ran last year already. And the results are in.

Now we have the #1 pick again. And interestingly there are a bunch of intriguing QBs this year - more than most years, so we might even find our stud in a pick below the #1 pick, if we find a guy other than Williams to believe in.

So Poles can play the draft and still get a top QB, so Im not dogged that it has to be Williams (yet?) or with the #1 pick. But if we walk away from this draft without a true candidate for franchise QB, and stick with Fields instead, and it doesnt work out, we wont be in a position to have a #1 pick again.

If we end up there, were are doomed to sit in the middle again for several years unless we tank again, which pretty much would bring us then to 2026 or 2027 before we had a functional starting QB and all the players we all like would be going to free agency not to mention wed have to trade them to tank hard, we arent winning 3 games with this defense, we will win more *OR* we will have to mortgage a future draft to get up to get a guy if the teams who have those picks are even willing to let go of a #1 guy in trade, and they usually arent. That's what we usually do. Cutler, Mack, Trubisky. And it kills our future drafts for 2 or 3 years without any number one pick.

Both tickets out of purgatory are awful.

So this is the moment. Its not always going to be like this. The train is leaving the station, and if you keep Fields and it doesn't work out, Poles is possibly fired, and the whole roster is into their second deals.

We simply HAVE to take a shot at a great QB right now. if you keep Fields you gotta think he is going to be great fast, better by far than hes ever been, or it all goes to hell for another several years.

With the defense we have, even if Fields sucks we will NOT have the #1 pick again. And you've watched that movie with me for the past 30 years. I cant just McCaskey this again for another 30. Arent we all sick to death of that?!

Playing it safe right now is the absolute wrong thing to do - and Fields is not a safe choice to be great anyway.

When you think about the haul of players and picks wed get from trading the #1 pick, ask yourself - why would the team giving all that to us think it's a winning move for them to give all that for just a single pick? It's because it's WORTH it because they can take a swing at a franchise QB who might take you to the promised land.

That should be us doing that.

Since Poles took over, he's not grouped in the past, he clearly has a different vision than past regimes. It may end up having the same results but not taking the same path. The last regime had an offensive coach, a top 2 picked QB and we only got one good year out of it. Now many fans want to do the same thing that got everyone fired, new coach, new QB ( top pick). BUT now everyone says repeating the past will have new results and claim it's different. 

What's different is Poles sticking with a coach he thinks will be successful and ( maybe) allowing a QB to fully develop instead repeatedly continuing the cycle of our past. I'll trust him to make the right decisions whether it's Williams or Fields, or a surprise pick. Poles fixed the cap hell and draft assets in 2 years and now people say he doesn't know what he's doing because he doesn't do what they want. I'm not one of them. He will do the right choice.

[BearFan PHX]

So taking a top pick QB is a mistake because Trubisky didn't work out?
Can we have that conversation again about statistics and likelihoods again?

You cant take a single example and assert that it stands for the most likely outcome. We've got to understand this basic stuff.

We agree that Poles did a great job tearing down.
We agree that Poles has done a great job in acquisition.
I think Poles should have moved on from Eberflus, but he has done a great job of bringing in coordinators and assistants.

I still think Poles needs to take a top QB in the draft. If he misses on this, we are going to be stuck in the same old cycle until we can have a 3 win season and can try again. And with this defense, that could be quite a while.

This is an inflection moment for the Bears, and it will determine Poles' future and the next 5 or 10 years for our franchise.

Otherwise we get caught in the endless 6-11, 9-8 loop that half the teams in the league cant escape.

You say that Poles has a different vision than the past. But that doesnt rebut the dynamic of that whirlpool, it exists, and if Poles doesnt get that QB, he just takes us right back there - even if he found a different way to do it, we will still be stuck there.

We have all lived through it. Havent we had enough? Are we really gonna step up for another chapter of McCaskey safe middle ball? "Oh if only a fumble goes our way we might..." I've been happily playing along with that for years. I posted on this board with excitement for Jerry Angelo, and Mark Trestman, and Matt Nagy and so many others. "If we can just build on the good stuff from last year..." I cant just walk down that path again.

Some franchises insist on excellence. You can fired for a 9-8 season there. They dont care if you're "doing pretty good" or "keep the team together through a long losing streak" they insist on excellence, and they keep trying people until they find it.

Why does ESPNs Courtney Cronin say she has personally spoken to a handful of NFL GMs and none say Fields is worth even a single first round pick?

There's the sportswriters narrative "Justin stay of go?" that generates a lot of clicks. But it's a mirage.

This isn't about hating on Justin. It's about hating on mediocrity - it's about having a commitment to excellence. It's about real accountability. It's about telling the truth about what's working and what isn't.

Insist on excellence. It's hard to find. You try, and it doesnt work out, so you try again, and you keep trying until we have one of the baddest MFers throwing the ball and the story changes from "maybe if we can add some pieces and grow a little" to " The Bears are the clear favorites to win the Superbowl in August"

Dont you want to be like the 49ers and Cowboys in the 80s and 90s? Or the Patriots with Brady? Or the Chiefs? Isnt that the goal? Is incremental progress and hope ever gonna get us there?

We need to be looking for a dominant QB. There are several options in this years draft. Poles needs to identify one and get him.

[Stinger226]

18 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

So taking a top pick QB is a mistake because Trubisky didn't work out?
Can we have that conversation again about statistics and likelihoods again?

You cant take a single example and assert that it stands for the most likely outcome. We've got to understand this basic stuff.

We agree that Poles did a great job tearing down.
We agree that Poles has done a great job in acquisition.
I think Poles should have moved on from Eberflus, but he has done a great job of bringing in coordinators and assistants.

I still think Poles needs to take a top QB in the draft. If he misses on this, we are going to be stuck in the same old cycle until we can have a 3 win season and can try again. And with this defense, that could be quite a while.

This is an inflection moment for the Bears, and it will determine Poles' future and the next 5 or 10 years for our franchise.

Otherwise we get caught in the endless 6-11, 9-8 loop that half the teams in the league cant escape.

You say that Poles has a different vision than the past. But that doesnt rebut the dynamic of that whirlpool, it exists, and if Poles doesnt get that QB, he just takes us right back there - even if he found a different way to do it, we will still be stuck there.

We have all lived through it. Havent we had enough? Are we really gonna step up for another chapter of McCaskey safe middle ball? "Oh if only a fumble goes our way we might..." I've been happily playing along with that for years. I posted on this board with excitement for Jerry Angelo, and Mark Trestman, and Matt Nagy and so many others. "If we can just build on the good stuff from last year..." I cant just walk down that path again.

Some franchises insist on excellence. You can fired for a 9-8 season there. They dont care if you're "doing pretty good" or "keep the team together through a long losing streak" they insist on excellence, and they keep trying people until they find it.

Why does ESPNs Courtney Cronin say she has personally spoken to a handful of NFL GMs and none say Fields is worth even a single first round pick?

There's the sportswriters narrative "Justin stay of go?" that generates a lot of clicks. But it's a mirage.

This isn't about hating on Justin. It's about hating on mediocrity - it's about having a commitment to excellence. It's about real accountability. It's about telling the truth about what's working and what isn't.

Insist on excellence. It's hard to find. You try, and it doesnt work out, so you try again, and you keep trying until we have one of the baddest MFers throwing the ball and the story changes from "maybe if we can add some pieces and grow a little" to " The Bears are the clear favorites to win the Superbowl in August"

Dont you want to be like the 49ers and Cowboys in the 80s and 90s? Or the Patriots with Brady? Or the Chiefs? Isnt that the goal? Is incremental progress and hope ever gonna get us there?

We need to be looking for a dominant QB. There are several options in this years draft. Poles needs to identify one and get him.

The point I made  ( it's not the same old Bears) that you claim because he stuck with Flus and may keep Fields, that that is mediocrity. He will make the best choice for the future and it might be picks and Justin. I think we win with either choice but you don't allow that that is possible unless we draft a high pick QB.

So if he gets rid of Fields and drafts Williams then it fails? Your answer to that?  If Justin plays well somewhere else? Neither of us know how it turns out , I am allowing all options to work out. 

[BearFan PHX]

4 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

The point I made  ( it's not the same old Bears) that you claim because he stuck with Flus and may keep Fields, that that is mediocrity. He will make the best choice for the future and it might be picks and Justin. I think we win with either choice but you don't allow that that is possible unless we draft a high pick QB.

So if he gets rid of Fields and drafts Williams then it fails? Your answer to that?  If Justin plays well somewhere else? Neither of us know how it turns out , I am allowing all options to work out. 

All options don't have the same chance of happening!

When you flip a coin, there are three options; heads, tails and landing on the edge and standing there. But almost all the time it's heads or tails, even though the edge landing IS an option. But its not a likely option.

You keep arguing whats possible. ANYTHING is possible. That's not the basis of a strategy! You gotta think one outcome is more LIKELY than another.

Otherwise, why not trade Fields and sign Trubisky? It's because Fields has a much better chance to be great than Trubisky does. And I dont think Fields has much of a chance to be great. It's not equally likely that Caleb or Maye will be great as Fields. Fields has three years in the league. Hes had a chance. Hes not new and unknown like a rookie. He's already a lot more known.

Yes there is a chance that Fields will play better somewhere else and our rookie will bust. But it isnt an equal chance. The smart bet is to take a rookie QB in the draft. And if he busts, you do it again until you have that guy.

Poles will do what he THINKS is the best choice for the future, but he could be wrong. If he doesn't draft a top rookie QB that has a good chance to be a franchise QB, then I think that's a huge mistake that should cost him his job.

[Mongo3451]

27 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Poles will do what he THINKS is the best choice for the future, but he could be wrong. If he doesn't draft a top rookie QB that has a good chance to be a franchise QB, then I think that's a huge mistake that should cost him his job.

Something I greatly fear is that the family gets involved.  Keeping Justin Fields is the sure thing for getting back to the playoffs.  Mikey and his Harvard business degree love a team that produces sell outs, swag sales and lots of concessions.  It's in the business model.  Rookie QBs will generate buzz,  with potential greatness.  Nothing feeds the coffers like a playoff game or two.

[BearFan PHX]

18 minutes ago, Mongo3451 said:

Something I greatly fear is that the family gets involved.  Keeping Justin Fields is the sure thing for getting back to the playoffs.  Mikey and his Harvard business degree love a team that produces sell outs, swag sales and lots of concessions.  It's in the business model.  Rookie QBs will generate buzz,  with potential greatness.  Nothing feeds the coffers like a playoff game or two.

yeah its very true. its the McCaskey middle way. Cheap, safe, stuck in the vortex between 6-11 and 10-7, sells seats, and cicks on and on it goes.

We are all so brainwashed to keep going around with it. It's been 30+ years of this nonsense.

I'll say this though - if Kevin Warren sits around and lets it just happen ongoing into the future, then I dunno what he's even doing here. I know he probably cant shake everything up right now, has to let Poles play his vision out.

Come on Poles. You gotta know we need that QB. Come on dude.

[Stinger226]

2 hours ago, BearFan PHX said:

All options don't have the same chance of happening!

When you flip a coin, there are three options; heads, tails and landing on the edge and standing there. But almost all the time it's heads or tails, even though the edge landing IS an option. But its not a likely option.

You keep arguing whats possible. ANYTHING is possible. That's not the basis of a strategy! You gotta think one outcome is more LIKELY than another.

Otherwise, why not trade Fields and sign Trubisky? It's because Fields has a much better chance to be great than Trubisky does. And I dont think Fields has much of a chance to be great. It's not equally likely that Caleb or Maye will be great as Fields. Fields has three years in the league. Hes had a chance. Hes not new and unknown like a rookie. He's already a lot more known.

Yes there is a chance that Fields will play better somewhere else and our rookie will bust. But it isnt an equal chance. The smart bet is to take a rookie QB in the draft. And if he busts, you do it again until you have that guy.

Poles will do what he THINKS is the best choice for the future, but he could be wrong. If he doesn't draft a top rookie QB that has a good chance to be a franchise QB, then I think that's a huge mistake that should cost him his job.

When someone said you only think in absolutes, they weren't wrong. 

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:

When someone said you only think in absolutes, they weren't wrong. 

thats so odd. the whole point of statistics and likelihoods is that they take the exceptions into account, and express them as a percentage of likelihood too. So they are the opposite of dealing in absolutes.

If I say there is an 80% chance of something happening, it also implies that I know there is a 20% chance it wont.

Statistics are how you try to handle multiple possibilities, so you can see which ones are more likely and weight them accordingly. Specifically so you DON'T have to think in absolutes.

You seem to think all possible outcomes are equally likely? That if there are 2 QBs, you never know which one could be better so there is no reason to prefer one over the other? But what if one has a 20% chance to be great and the other one has an 80% chance to be great? Is it possible that the 20%er will be great, and the 80%er will bust? Sure. But that's only gonna happen 16% of the time. 80% of the time the expected one WILL succeed. and 64% of the time the 80%er will succeed AND the 20%er will fail.

So you should want to go with the 80% guy. Just because the 20%er is possible, doesnt mean it's likely.

To support keeping Justin, you gotta say why it's LIKELY that he's gonna take a huge step next year. "It's possible" isn't enough. And showing a few anecdotal examples of other QBs who did it only proves it's POSSIBLE, but not that it's LIKELY.

Justin doesnt just need to improve his play overall, he specifically needs to take a HUGE jump in a skill he has barely shown an ability in. The pocket passing in structure in tempo thing. We saw the tiniest glimpses of it, never a lot, never consistently. We didnt see it in 4th quarter comebacks, or lifting the team on his shoulders to win in the 4th?

So what on earth do you see that tells you he is gonna make a huge jump next year at that? Dont tell me it's POSSIBLE, tell me why you'd EXPECT it enough to pass on a rookie QB who has a good chance to be good or great for us?

What indication is there that we should trade that #1 pick QB away and keep Justin?

[Stinger226]

I very well know your position on Fields and Flus, you have a well thought out argument for your opinion. What ever your last post is, it's just repetitive language and I'm not going to read it. It's quite simple, I think Fields can improve and if Poles goes that way that means he does to. If he drafts Williams, im all in on that also, it's okay to like all of his options, I don't need to pick a lane.

Here's what I would like to see happen:

We trade back to 3 (NE) and still draft MHJ , he is, by many considered the top player in the draft. Get a second round pick( 34), and a first next year.

At 9 we trade back with LV, to 14, get a second round pick (44) and a second round next year.

We draft Jared Verse with pick 14.

In the second round at pick 34 we draft Bo Nix and with pick 44 we get Jackson Powers-Johnson . 

We run back with Justin and develop Bo Nix. 

We improved our WR room, edge and OL, plus have a very successful rookie QB to develop. I know the odds aren't good that he becomes a tier 1 QB but it does happen sometimes. 

In 2025 we have 2 first round picks, 3-- 2 nd round picks and we could still go after another QB if things aren't working out. We will have a winning season next year, if you want to move on from Fields at that time , he could be part of the move up to get a higher pick. Lots of assumptions in this scenario but there are assumptions when you take a first pick QB also but now you have MHJ and a stellar OL to work with, and a top 5 defense.

 

[Daventry]

8 hours ago, Stinger226 said:

I very well know your position on Fields and Flus, you have a well thought out argument for your opinion. What ever your last post is, it's just repetitive language and I'm not going to read it. It's quite simple, I think Fields can improve and if Poles goes that way that means he does to. If he drafts Williams, im all in on that also, it's okay to like all of his options, I don't need to pick a lane.

Here's what I would like to see happen:

We trade back to 3 (NE) and still draft MHJ , he is, by many considered the top player in the draft. Get a second round pick( 34), and a first next year.

At 9 we trade back with LV, to 14, get a second round pick (44) and a second round next year.

We draft Jared Verse with pick 14.

In the second round at pick 34 we draft Bo Nix and with pick 44 we get Jackson Powers-Johnson . 

We run back with Justin and develop Bo Nix. 

We improved our WR room, edge and OL, plus have a very successful rookie QB to develop. I know the odds aren't good that he becomes a tier 1 QB but it does happen sometimes. 

In 2025 we have 2 first round picks, 3-- 2 nd round picks and we could still go after another QB if things aren't working out. We will have a winning season next year, if you want to move on from Fields at that time , he could be part of the move up to get a higher pick. Lots of assumptions in this scenario but there are assumptions when you take a first pick QB also but now you have MHJ and a stellar OL to work with, and a top 5 defense.

 

I have to give you credit, that scenario at least makes sense.  I don’t agree, but it is at least plausible.  Please refrain from your other illogical techniques.

[Stinger226]

2 hours ago, Daventry said:

I have to give you credit, that scenario at least makes sense.  I don’t agree, but it is at least plausible.  Please refrain from your other illogical techniques.

I'm glad to see you're over a thousand posts, you add so much to conversation. Keep up the good work.

[Daventry]

18 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I'm glad to see you're over a thousand posts, you add so much to conversation. Keep up the good work.

Is that supposed to bother me?  You have been playing the victim so well, be careful of your image 

[Stinger226]

Just now, Daventry said:

Is that supposed to bother me?  You have been playing the victim so well, be careful of your image 

If you think anything you say bothers me , you aren't paying attention. You have been on this  site the same amount  of time  I have. I totally get this is the kind of content you add , you don't have much to say, you're a follower, you don't create much. I encourage you to try critically thinking , it helps  in forming ideas.

[Daventry]

2 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

If you think anything you say bothers me , you aren't paying attention. You have been on this  site the same amount  of time  I have. I totally get this is the kind of content you add , you don't have much to say, you're a follower, you don't create much. I encourage you to try critically thinking , it helps  in forming ideas.

I have probably been here much longer than you think, but I don’t base my self esteem on the length of my membership here.  I simply contribute when I feel I am able or have something meaningful to say.  I don’t need your advice, although you seem anxious to offer it I am doing just fine.  I would suggest that repeating your view, in ways you might feel subtle or not, gets boring to tolerate.  I enjoy reading most posts.  But here I am, expressing my fatigue with yours.  Hasn’t happened with anyone else.  Think

[BearFan PHX]

1 hour ago, Stinger226 said:

I'm glad to see you're over a thousand posts, you add so much to conversation. Keep up the good work.

imagine thinking this makes any sense in a debate: "You dont talk enough. You dont have enough standing."

You gotta take on the ideas on their own merits. Make valid arguments against them. Dont get mad if your arguments dont add up and get beaten, and dont refuse to engage the value of someone elses arguments based on authority or credentials, or social standing.

"Hey Guys! I can prove the Earth is round! Look at this math!

"Well, Froederick here has transcribed Homer's Iliad like 1,000 times, so I'm just gonna listen to him. He's the authority on writing stuff. No need to look at your proofs or anything like that. If you want us to take what you say seriously, you need to say a lot more stuff first."

It's the appeal to authority over and over.

That and anecdotal evidence.

Two classic logical fallacies, but I've never seen them used exclusively to all other possible arguments.

Just say what you mean and why. The rest of this is awful.

[Stinger226]

Just now, Daventry said:

I have probably been here much longer than you think, but I don’t base my self esteem on the length of my membership here.  I simply contribute when I feel I am able or have something meaningful to say.  I don’t need your advice, although you seem anxious to offer it I am doing just fine.  I would suggest that repeating your view, in ways you might feel subtle or not, gets boring to tolerate.  I enjoy reading most posts.  But here I am, expressing my fatigue with yours.  Hasn’t happened with anyone else.  Thin

I looked thru  3 threads so far trying to find anything you actually contributed to for  content, yet I haven't found anything . I'll keep looking, I'm sure I'll find something. I don't have to go to the airport until 9 AM. so I have the time.

I butt heads with BFPHX all the time, but he actually puts intelligent content on here continuously.  It's kinda of a waste of time responding to you because you add nothing. ( so far) Im still looking. 

[BearFan PHX]

14 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I butt heads with BFPHX all the time, but he actually puts intelligent content on here continuously.  It's kinda of a waste of time responding to you because you add nothing.

Thank you first of all.

Secondly, he is saying your argument makes no sense. That IS contributing!

If a scientist makes a discovery, thats great, but it isnt science yet. Then he (or she) has to publish exactly what they did and why they think it happened.

And then other "mean" scientists try to disprove the first one. They try as hard as they can to find holes in anything the first scientist said.

Then even more "mean" scientists try to tell the first mean group why they were wrong.

And eventually, if an idea survives all of that, it is thought to be of higher value because it survived the critiquing. Rather than just taking the first scientist's word for it. Often the first scientist is mostly right, but the critiques force him to present the ideas in a more specific way to avoid oversweeping claims. The claims are then stronger for having been damaged. Theyre tighter, and fully formed.

and if the idea doesnt withstand the heat, then the process successfully weeded out a poor idea.

I learn more about the Bears here than most places. People here say all kinds of stuff here, some is smart, some is not. Some is right, some is downright false. But it frames questions for me to think about and prove or disprove in my own mind too.

And when I advance a theory of my own, and people argue against it, I listen. If I think they made sense, it may change my mind, or force me to recalculate exactly what I'm saying. it doesn't make me mad if someone simply disagrees with me.

For example, I WAS saying "we need to trade Fields or we are screwed" and I am now saying "we need to draft a top rookie QB or we are screwed, and I dont think we should keep Fields, but as long as we get the rookie QB, thats really where the risk is most for me" That nuance came from people arguing with what I was saying. The opposition HELPs.

It's the emotional right-fighting, and appeals to authority that frustrate. The anecdotal evidence presented as predictive. That's the kind of stuff this discourse is meant to filter out! To clear up the picture.

But if in the middle of this great parallel processing experiment of opinions, people start feeling like they need to defend their individual selves, as if the arguments were their actual selves, or if they feel they need to defend the assumed feelings of a player or coach that someone is a "fan" of, then it gets more like "what did you say to my girlfriend!?!" and less like "well, maybe Poles should do _______"

And that's when it gets personal, and soon everyone actually IS defending their "self" and that's when it gets awful and crosses the line.

[Daventry]

12 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

I looked thru  3 threads so far trying to find anything you actually contributed to for  content, yet I haven't found anything . I'll keep looking, I'm sure I'll find something. I don't have to go to the airport until 9 AM. so I have the time.

I butt heads with BFPHX all the time, but he actually puts intelligent content on here continuously.  It's kinda of a waste of time responding to you because you add nothing. ( so far) Im still looking. 

Why are you responding then?  I am quite different to you, I comment when I have something meaningful to say.  You might find that staying silent is quite an advantage in many ways.  I do find it highly amusing that you are able to make a positive comment about the poster you noted, anyone reading this will appreciate the irony.  Stop and think 

[Stinger226]

5 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

Thank you first of all.

Secondly, he is saying your argument makes no sense. That IS contributing?!

If a scientist makes a discovery, thats great, but it isnt science yet.

then he (or she) has to publish exactly what they did and why they think it happened.

then other "mean" scientists try to disprove the first one. they try as hard as they can to find holes in anything the first scientist said.

Then other "mean" scientists try to tell the first mean group why they were wrong.

and eventually, if an idea survives all of that, it is thought to be of higher value because it survived the critiquing. Rather than just taking the first scientists word for it.

and if it doesnt, then the process weeded out a wrong idea.

I learn more about the Bears here than most places. Poeple here say all kinds of stuff, some is smart, some is not. Some is right, some is downright false. But it frames questions for me to think about and prove or disprove in my own mind too.

And when I advance a theory of my own, and people argue against it, I listen. If I think they made sense, it may change my mind, or force me to recalculate exactly what Im saying. it doesnt make me mad if someone disagrees with me.

For example, I WAS saying "we need to trade Fields or we are screwed" and I am now saying "we need to draft a top rookie QB or we are screwed, and I dont think we should keep Fields, but as long as we get the rookie QB, thats really where the risk is most for me" That came from people arguing with what i was saying. The opposition HELPs.

It's the emotional right-fighting, and appeals to authority that frustrate. The anecdotal evidence presented as predictive. That's the kind of stuff this discourse is meant to filter out! To clear up the picture.

But if in the middle of this great parallel processing experiment of opinions, people start feeling like they need to defend their individual selves, as if the arguments were their actual selves, or if they feel they need to defend the assumed feelings of a player or coach that someone is a "fan" of, then it gets more like "what did you say to my girlfriend!?!" and less like "well, maybe Poles should do _______"

And that's when it gets personal, and soon everyone actually IS defending their "self" and that's when it gets awful and crosses the line.

Now when you make a comment, you make points, he just stating my argument sucks. I'm not sure that's considered, having a conversation. 

[Stinger226]

4 minutes ago, Daventry said:

Why are you responding then?  I am quite different to you, I comment when I have something meaningful to say.  You might find that staying silent is quite an advantage in many ways.  I do find it highly amusing that you are able to make a positive comment about the poster you noted, anyone reading this will appreciate the irony.  Stop and think 

So far I haven't seen anything meaningful you said tonight, what am I missing?  I will say, your silence over the years have impressed me. I'm not  here to tell people their opinions suck, I compliment him because he adds good content to a conversation, we don't  have to agree to respect that. This isn't a competition, I didn't keep Flus, Poles did, I just try to state why he did. I trying to show the argument ( other people stated) about keeping Fields, it's not my original thought.

[Daventry]

2 minutes ago, Stinger226 said:

So far I haven't seen anything meaningful you said tonight, what am I missing?  I will say, your silence over the years have impressed me. I'm not  here to tell people their opinions suck, I compliment him because he adds good content to a conversation, we don't  have to agree to respect that. This isn't a competition, I didn't keep Flus, Poles did, I just try to state why he did. I trying to show the argument ( other people stated) about keeping Fields, it's not my original thought.

If I haven’t said anything meaningful, why do you respond?  I commented because your repeating of the same messages finally irritated me to the point of response.

I knew a bit about football.  I have been a Bears fan for decades, like most if not all here.

I have said what annoys me about your comments.  The more you respond, the more obvious the problem.  Think about what I have said and then do what you will.  But please remember, make your comments worthwhile.  I have not been arguing with people here generally, for many years.

[Stinger226]

8 hours ago, Daventry said:

If I haven’t said anything meaningful, why do you respond?  I commented because your repeating of the same messages finally irritated me to the point of response.

I knew a bit about football.  I have been a Bears fan for decades, like most if not all here.

I have said what annoys me about your comments.  The more you respond, the more obvious the problem.  Think about what I have said and then do what you will.  But please remember, make your comments worthwhile.  I have not been arguing with people here generally, for many years.

I've never questioned your knowledge on football. This all started when you called my opinions ridiculous. If they annoy you put your seatbelt on we have 10 weeks until the draft. Everything will be repeated until nausea. I didn't create the Fields or even Flus conversations, the media blew this up , I just give my opinions and refer to other people that think like me. No way do I think Fields is  a tier 1 QB but I see the possibility of Poles bringing him back because of ( draft report on Williams), potential haul he gets for the pick, the concept that better coaching and better weapons will allow Fields to play better. To be clear, I still don't think he will be a top 5 QB with that help but it's about winning games and they can do that if they decide to keep him.

If Williams is Mahomes 2, I would love that pick but to assume he is because some experts said that is dangerous. They get shit wrong all the time and are not accountable with their opinions just roll into year with the next great QB. Poles loses his job by any decision he makes  if it goes bad,  so he's going to do what he thinks is best , not either one of our opinions.