All Things Bears

[Bronco Billy]

One of the biggest flaws talked about with Fields before his draft was his processing speed. It wasn’t that he held the ball for too long but rather that he didn’t process the ongoing play, read where his receivers would be and how the D was positioned, and be able to anticipate quickly enough, so that he wouldn’t get the ball out of his hand quickly enough because he had to see his receiver come open before he would throw. It’s a fatal flaw in the NFL for becoming a successful long term starter.

One of Caleb Williams’ biggest flaws? Processing speed.

I thought you were going to say wardrobe.

https://twitter.com/realbeaverswag/stat ... 3297768648

What is wrong with you that you find stuff like that on the interwebs?

[Anteaters]

Why did people defend Fields?

1. He was an exciting pick and held more promise than any QB since Mitch or Cutler. So, we were invested.
2. Many (including myself) weren't sure year 1 if it was him or bad OL/WR or bad scheme. It was both.
3. Year three didn't do much to support him aside from coaching.
4. This was the year we hoped he'd step up, year three, and he DID improve in many ways.
5. It just wasn't enough. Sacks, fumbles, missing open guys.

I read this:

1. He was an early pick that Chicago spent a lot to move up to, and we were excited.
2. Year 1 he was bad. Year 2 he was bad.
3. Year 3 he was supposed to finally be good.
4. It turns out he wasn't really that good in year 3.
5. Being more honest, it turns out year 3 was just like the first two years where he was bad.

It's ok to just say it. "Fields was never a good QB and still is not a good QB."

[FantasyFreak]

One of the biggest flaws talked about with Fields before his draft was his processing speed. It wasn’t that he held the ball for too long but rather that he didn’t process the ongoing play, read where his receivers would be and how the D was positioned, and be able to anticipate quickly enough, so that he wouldn’t get the ball out of his hand quickly enough because he had to see his receiver come open before he would throw. It’s a fatal flaw in the NFL for becoming a successful long term starter.

One of Caleb Williams’ biggest flaws? Processing speed.

I thought you were going to say wardrobe.

https://twitter.com/realbeaverswag/stat ... 3297768648

What is wrong with you that you find stuff like that on the interwebs?

[TheTroll]

One of the biggest flaws talked about with Fields before his draft was his processing speed. It wasn’t that he held the ball for too long but rather that he didn’t process the ongoing play, read where his receivers would be and how the D was positioned, and be able to anticipate quickly enough, so that he wouldn’t get the ball out of his hand quickly enough because he had to see his receiver come open before he would throw. It’s a fatal flaw in the NFL for becoming a successful long term starter.

One of Caleb Williams’ biggest flaws? Processing speed.

how Bearish of you to say Caleb isn't it.

I've heard that too.... it gives me chills thinking we might be doing this again in 3 years.

Caleb knows how to paint his finger nails... thats a plus

[Dynasty DeLorean]

As much as I dislike the Packers, watching them over the years has shown how sacks are just as much a QB stat as it is a line stat. Rodgers would always put his line in a position to succeed and knew what would be open before the snap.

Fields never seemed to grasp this and really struggled with it. He could make amazing plays to make up for his struggles. Hopefully the next QB can do better!

Been saying that for years on this forum…

And I know it’s boring, but IN GENERAL, good players will be good and bad players will be bad. Fields was bad for 3 years. He’s most likely bad. I’ve fallen into the excuse trap many of times, so no judgment.

I kind of disagree with a lot said here. Fields was certainly a pocket QB in college, he was just more of a 1 read type of qb and his first read was typically open. I think Fields might be the most talented QB in the draft in terms of arm talent and running ability but he was a slow processor in college (something everyone wanted to crush whoever said it during the draft process). They didn't totally redesign their offense like the Ravens did with Lamar but maybe they didn't think they had to. Fields didn't have more than 500 rushing yards in any single season in college while guys like Tebow and Lamar had close to 1,000 rushing yards or more in any given season. Fields was not a running QB in college he was a pocket QB that could run.

Fields has all the talent in the world but his processing speed is slow. I think it can improve though.

[mild]

Why did people defend Fields?

1. He was an exciting pick and held more promise than any QB since Mitch or Cutler. So, we were invested.
2. Many (including myself) weren't sure year 1 if it was him or bad OL/WR or bad scheme. It was both.
3. Year three didn't do much to support him aside from coaching.
4. This was the year we hoped he'd step up, year three, and he DID improve in many ways.
5. It just wasn't enough. Sacks, fumbles, missing open guys.

I read this:

1. He was an early pick that Chicago spent a lot to move up to, and we were excited.
2. Year 1 he was bad. Year 2 he was bad.
3. Year 3 he was supposed to finally be good.
4. It turns out he wasn't really that good in year 3.
5. Being more honest, it turns out year 3 was just like the first two years where he was bad.

It's ok to just say it. "Fields was never a good QB and still is not a good QB."

Brutal but fair.

But -also- to be fair to the Bears fans, Justin Fields was (probably?) the most exciting QB they've ever seen play in a Bears uniform. They've never really known any better. I understand why the Chicago faithful were both reluctant to stop death-gripping their Fields jerseys, and slow to accept that he was no longer a player with any real value.

To quote one of the more articulate Bears fans covering the game: "... that doesn't mean this is not the right move for the Bears... because excitement doesn't mean sustainability at the most important position in Sports."

Meanwhile, across the division, the Green Bay Packers are entering something like their 40th consecutive year of rolling out top-tier NFL QB play...

[TheTroll]

Why did people defend Fields?

1. He was an exciting pick and held more promise than any QB since Mitch or Cutler. So, we were invested.
2. Many (including myself) weren't sure year 1 if it was him or bad OL/WR or bad scheme. It was both.
3. Year three didn't do much to support him aside from coaching.
4. This was the year we hoped he'd step up, year three, and he DID improve in many ways.
5. It just wasn't enough. Sacks, fumbles, missing open guys.

I read this:

1. He was an early pick that Chicago spent a lot to move up to, and we were excited.
2. Year 1 he was bad. Year 2 he was bad.
3. Year 3 he was supposed to finally be good.
4. It turns out he wasn't really that good in year 3.
5. Being more honest, it turns out year 3 was just like the first two years where he was bad.

It's ok to just say it. "Fields was never a good QB and still is not a good QB."

Brutal but fair.

But -also- to be fair to the Bears fans, Justin Fields was (probably?) the most exciting QB they've ever seen play in a Bears uniform. They've never really known any better. I understand why the Chicago faithful were both reluctant to stop death-gripping their Fields jerseys, and slow to accept that he was no longer a player with any real value.

To quote one of the more articulate Bears fans covering the game: "... that doesn't mean this is not the right move for the Bears... because excitement doesn't mean sustainability at the most important position in Sports."

Meanwhile, across the division, the Green Bay Packers are entering something like their 40th consecutive year of rolling out top-tier NFL QB play...

This. Fook the Packers! Drives us crazy that the last mediocre QB was Don Majkowski! Lol

[wickerkat1212]

I think it was fair to give Fields three years to see what we really had. We found out. AND the fact that the league didn't respond with a big offer says they thought the same thing.

Caleb's flaws are a lot less than Fields. He may have some of the same weaknesses, but he's better at the stuff he's good at. He's more accurate, can process beyond first read, and in general is a higher-rated talent. So, his strengths are stronger, and his weaknesses are less weak. AND having DJM/Allen will help.

[Valhalla]

I think it was fair to give Fields three years to see what we really had. We found out. AND the fact that the league didn't respond with a big offer says they thought the same thing.

Caleb's flaws are a lot less than Fields. He may have some of the same weaknesses, but he's better at the stuff he's good at. He's more accurate, can process beyond first read, and in general is a higher-rated talent. So, his strengths are stronger, and his weaknesses are less weak. AND having DJM/Allen will help.

AND he’s got that “could be the Dennis Rodman of the NFL” going for him

[Ruggenater]

This. Fook the Packers! Drives us crazy that the last mediocre QB was Don Majkowski! Lol

I won’t stand for this Majik Man slander!

[wickerkat1212]

I think it was fair to give Fields three years to see what we really had. We found out. AND the fact that the league didn't respond with a big offer says they thought the same thing.

Caleb's flaws are a lot less than Fields. He may have some of the same weaknesses, but he's better at the stuff he's good at. He's more accurate, can process beyond first read, and in general is a higher-rated talent. So, his strengths are stronger, and his weaknesses are less weak. AND having DJM/Allen will help.

AND he’s got that “could be the Dennis Rodman of the NFL” going for him

I love it. This generation is much more open-minded. Dennis was one of the best rebounders in the NBA. Michael loved him. I'm not worried about Caleb. Every interview I've seen with him I liked him a little more. I'm not calling him Football Jesus yet, but if you can understand the drought in Chicago for QBs, it's easy to see why we're excited about him. AND putting him in a position to succeed.

Whether we get:

• Harrison, Nabers, or Odunze
• Alt, Fashanu, or Fuaga
• Turner or Verse

Those Blue Chip players will ALL help him. PERSONALLY, I say go OFF and keep going OFF.

[wickerkat1212]

Let's go. This is what I was talking about with the Bears DEF down the stretch AND the potential for this year.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1772629053167612195

[TheTroll]

Let's go. This is what I was talking about with the Bears DEF down the stretch AND the potential for this year.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1772629053167612195

Such a below the radar situation!

[killer_of_giants]

half of those stats or thereabouts must be thanks to dobbs...

i like the bears D and it has improved a lot, but extrapolating 6 games with 2 proper opponents and 4 garbage piles is maybe a bit misleading, eh?

[TheTroll]

half of those stats or thereabouts must be thanks to dobbs...

i like the bears D and it has improved a lot, but extrapolating 6 games with 2 proper opponents and 4 garbage piles is maybe a bit misleading, eh?

to be fair, 5 of the last 7 games they had 3+ Defensive TO's. Det x2, Min, CLE and ATL. I think we talked about this awhile ago too. They were starting to pound teams (defensively) that good teams should do to weaker ones.

Wick and I just happy that we were not pushovers anymore.