Chicago Bears 2023-2024

Status
Not open for further replies.
#876      

Illiniaaron

Geneseo, IL
Bears very fortunate to be down only 7-6 at half. Packers have moved the ball with ease and Bears offense with only 100 yards.
 
#879      

Mr. Tibbs

southeast DuPage
Bears still stink vs any team that’s 1/2 way decent
 
#889      
They didn't look like they cared at all. That's more frustrating than anything else

Why should they care? All of them are millionaires – and many have many multiples of millions. All they have to do is sit back and collect.

Trying to win takes the pride of being a Winner. This franchise has lacked pride and being a winner for nearly 40 years. And back then those guys didn’t make anywhere near what these slackers are making.

You can’t teach pride once you’re an adult. And these players are adults... well, at least if you count number of birthdays.

Bear fans have more pride and care more about this franchise than people associated with the franchise itself. All they care about is moving to the suburbs and making even more high piles of money with stadium real estate development.

Regardless of how the Bear decision-makers feel about Fields... when they are forced to make a decision about something it is usually the cheapest option that has the most appeal.
 
#890      
Here's what the 2024 home and road opponents will be for the Bears:

-Home: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Jaguars, Rams, Seahawks, Titans, Panthers, Patriots
-Road: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Cardinals, Texans, Colts, 49ers, Commanders
 
#892      

Illwinsagain

Cary, IL
Yesterday was very disappointing. I don't know how Fields could have done much better, considering the line was incredibly bad and he was running for his life. Yesterday, I was ready to fire the coaching staff and send Fields to ATL, or some other place. But, I really do not want to spend the #1 overall pick on a QB. There are some recent good examples of success with that pick, but also a long history of meh. I don't trust the Bears to pick the right QB, nor for them to be able to develop him. I would want to trade the #1 overall to someone that has a great chance to be in the Top 5 again next year, for a bunch of future first round picks/draft capital. Keep Fields as the starter for 1 more year, draft a QB you believe can be developed over the next year or two. It seems to work for GB. If it fails, you still likely have 1 or 2 picks in the top 10 next year, likely with a new coaching staff. If it works, you are a genius and building something sustainable.

ps - First round QBs.
2018 draft. #1 Baker Mayfield, #3 Sam Darnold, #7 Josh Allen, #10 Josh Rosen, #32 Lamar Jackson.
2019 draft. #1 Kyler Murray, #6 Daniel Jones, #15 Dwayne Haskins,
2020 draft. #1 Joe Burrow, #5 Tua Tagovailoa, #6 Justin Herbert, #26 Jordan Love
2021 draft. #1 Trevor Lawrence, #2 Zach Wilson, #3 Trey Lance, #11 Justin Fields, #15 Mac Jones,
 
#893      

Big Jack

Decatur
Still.agree about keeping Fields. No sense to go draft Williams and him have absolutely no one capable of blocking for him.. The problem on offense is the dang OL. They are horrendous at best. I still say sign Harrison and spend every last dime on the OL or Fields is gonna get hurt. Also high time Warren throws a fit about late hits as Fields is sliding.
 
#894      
I wouldn't want to be Ryan Poles right now. Very difficult decisions looming. One thing should be very clear after yesterday. Pay Jaylon Johnson his money. He was very clearly missed.
I think Flus will be back, barring Jim Harbaugh wanting the job.
I think Poles is taking the right approach by heavily scouting the QB class before making a decision on that position. Fields' trade market will also be a major factor. (I think one certainly exists) I don't think drafting a QB is a slam dunk, neither is betting on Fields. I'm okay with either option at this point.
I still think Getsy needs to go.
 
#895      

FlyNavy

Los Angeles
Here's what the 2024 home and road opponents will be for the Bears:

-Home: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Jaguars, Rams, Seahawks, Titans, Panthers, Patriots
-Road: Lions, Packers, Vikings, Cardinals, Texans, Colts, 49ers, Commanders

Observations:
- The four worst teams in the league are on that schedule
- Lots of young QBs including the top four drafted rookie QBs from 2023 (Young, Stroud, Richardson, Levis)
- Bears will face Devon Witherspoon and Quan Martin

Interesting note: if the Bears had beaten the Packers yesterday, they would've finished tied for 2nd in the North with GB AND would've held the tiebreaker (conference record 7-5 vs 6-6). Which means, instead of playing the worst 3 teams next year (Carolina/Washington/New England), they would've had to face New Orleans, Philly and Miami.
 
#897      
Yeah, this is really the hurdle I just can't get over.

So, then, just never pick a quarterback?

Fields stagnated this year. His passing rate stats are nearly identical to last year. His passing volume went up, but he was nowhere near the rushing threat this year than last. He was arguably a less valuable player this year than last despite a better (though still not good) offensive line and the addition of a legitimate stud WR in Moore.

The Bears have to choose whether to pickup Fields’ 5th year option this offseason. I don’t see any way they can possibly do that. So that puts them in the position of having their starting quarterback heading into his walk year coinciding with having the #1 pick in the draft.

It would be dereliction of duty not to use that first pick to obtain their next starting quarterback either directly through the draft or via trade.

I don’t think any of this is Fields’ fault. I think he was set up to fail. The Bears handled him about as badly as you possibly can handle a young qb. I like him and will enjoy watching him play wherever that may be next year. That said, his contract situation is what it is.
 
#899      

Mr. Tibbs

southeast DuPage
drafting or acquiring a capable & competent qb has been a problem for the Bears for well over 55 years .

for various reasons , it’s a franchise based issue & I don’t see it changing soon .

buckle up for a bumpy ride
 
#900      

FlyNavy

Los Angeles
drafting or acquiring a capable & competent qb has been a problem for the Bears for well over 55 years .

for various reasons , it’s a franchise based issue & I don’t see it changing soon .

buckle up for a bumpy ride
The one team that has been worse at developing QBs is the Browns, who have picked 6 QBs in the first two rounds since they were re-established in 1999 and whiffed badly all 6 times (Couch, Quinn, Weeded, Manziel, Kizer, Mayfield). The Bears aren't much better, drafting McNown, Grossman, and Trubisky in that time frame prior to Fields. The Jets, Commanders/Redskins and Bucs also have poor track records in QB development (though the Redskins get partial credit for picking Cousins in the same draft as RG3). Is it an issue with evaluation or development? Probably both...

On the flip side, the Saints haven't picked a QB in the first two rounds of any draft since they drafted Archie Manning in 1971 (!). Jake Delhomme was an undrafted free agent, and Drew Brees came via trade. Not saying that's the best option, just saying it's interesting...

My opinion, unless you are absolutely confident that you have a Peyton Manning/Andrew Luck type at #1, you trade down. The draft haul will make the team better no matter what, especially given Poles' draft performance so far. And that's not to say you're sticking with Fields - maybe they like someone in that second tier that they can get at #9 or mid-first if they trade back. And that QB would have a better team around him than Williams or Maye.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.