Kolek planning to go pro
(super pessimistic "Bears have a great chance of being 0-17" fan has entered the chat) This team was never going anywhere this year. Id like them to win games after they secure another top 10 pick.And more revisionist history. Again, the pick 6 was terrible, but the Bears had already let Detroit go 65 yards on 6 plays for a TD the drive before. The pick 6 wasn't the jolt to jumpstart them. And, not only that, Fields immediately returned and lead them to a TD to go back up 6 after Santos shanked the XP. Then the Bears forced a 3 and out right after. There were 3 full possessions after the Pick 6 where Detroit had no momentum, maybe negative momentum. The Lions really only showed life after the Bears let them inexplicably complete a 44 yard pass to a nobody backup WR on 3rd and long with 3 min to play.Since the Commanders game, Fields has been 59/92 for 620 yards with 8 TDs to 2 INTs and a 105 Passer Rating. Then add 467 yards rushing and another 5 TDs on the ground. The Bears have averaged 31 points a game. I'm not sure what else you want him to do or why Bears fans should expect to see "wins from their dude" when the defense has given up 38 points a game the last 3 weeks. He isn't playing Mike LB or FS. Besides the fact that the Bears losing for a better draft pick is the best thing for their long term future, I'm not sure why Bears should feel poorly in any way about his performance, given those stats, just cause a bad team isn't winning.
I certainly never said the Bears have a chance at 0-17. I'm saying 5-12 because...well, frankly, they're on pace to go 5.1-11.9. So sorry if rounding down from 5.1 to 5.0, since there aren't 1/10th of wins out there to get, is super pessimistic I guess.
You really don't think the pick 6 changed the course of that football game? My god. I mean, the lengths fans will go to tell themselves Fields was awesome is hysterical. He lofted up a horrendous pass that literally put 7 points on the board for the Lions in a game they lost by one! But that loss is to be celebrated, so job well done, the pick 6 didn't matter in the end result...or something. If the Bears simply go 3 and out and punt the ball away that's an entirely different game. I'm just saying, if I'm a Bears fan yes it's better to lose games than to finish like 7-10 (too pessimistic still?). BUT if I think Justin Fields is a dude and I see my 14 point second half lead cut to 7 and then he throws that pick? Yeah, I'm not celebrating that loss. That's a game that we should have won and a game I want to see my team win if I want to build with my dude as a QB.
I guess good job Justin. The Bears may be giving up 38/game the last 3 weeks, but the defense wasn't even on the field for 7 of those. But that's on the defense and not on Justin I guess.You gave a really long winded answer avoiding the question. When do you want to see your dude start to win? Is it next year when they blow a ton of money on free agents and have another top 10 draft pick with a 4th place schedule? At some point, dudes need to win to be a dude. So I'm wondering, when is that point for Chicago fans?
Fields has been a dude lately. I just have an issue trusting QBs that are better runners than passers. They are fun to watch (watching Manziel was some of my favorite college football memories) and can win you a good amount of games, but I don't think they can win you a super bowl. Russell Wilson is the only one I can think of to ever win the big one. Kaep, Newton, and McNabb are the only other ones I can think of who made it to the Super Bowl. I also think they have a much shorter shelf life than other QBs.
But there really aren't many of those. And most don't have enough longevity to stay healthy and/or great long enough for championship-level teams to be built around them. Cam Newton and Duante Culpepper seemed indestructible ... until they weren't.The best of all worlds is a guy like Mahomes -- he's great in a normal pocket, great in a moving pocket, and a great scrambler when he has to be. But he's not a big guy, and I hope he has lasting power because he sure is fun to watch.
Plenty of only good running backs throw 8 tds in 4 weeks
2 TDs per week? Damn! I stand corrected!
You realize there are only 2 QBs that are averaging more than 2 Passing TDs a week? 5 of the Pro Bowl selections last year at QB didn't average 2 passing TDs a game. This isn't the own you think it is...
Almost like this is Green and gold hued goggles and not critical thinking
I guess it depends on how you define running QBs. Steve Young, a spectacular runner, won a Super Bowl. Fran Tarkenton got to 3 Super Bowls. Roger Staubach -- often criticized in his younger days for scrambling too much -- was a multiple-time champion.None of the above was a "better runner than passer," especially by the time he had his most career success, but neither was Wilson nor McNabb.Plenty of other great-running QBs, including Vick, Cunningham and Culpepper, were good enough to get their teams to conference championship games -- which is as far as all-time great non-run-first QB Aaron Rodgers has taken the Packers in any of the last 11 years.A team can win, and win pretty big, with a great running QB. But yes, it's very difficult to go all the way with one, especially one who'd truly be defined as a "better runner than passer" QB. But there really aren't many of those. And most don't have enough longevity to stay healthy and/or great long enough for championship-level teams to be built around them. Cam Newton and Duante Culpepper seemed indestructible ... until they weren't.The best of all worlds is a guy like Mahomes -- he's great in a normal pocket, great in a moving pocket, and a great scrambler when he has to be. But he's not a big guy, and I hope he has lasting power because he sure is fun to watch.
This was a fun Fran Tarkenton memory . https://thevikingage.com/2021/10/27/fran-tarkenton-brawl-minnesota-vikings-1974/
There are Packer fans that think this team can still win the Super Bowl this year
Entitled Town, aina?
He's lived an "interesting" life.
George Mira was a roving QB as well. Played for SF in the late 60s. Saw him play against the Packers when they played in Milwaukee. Not as a good as Fran but gave the Packer defense fits as he always seemed to find an open receiver. SF was a pretty poor team back then which is why not to many people remember George.
People don’t remember him because he started a total of 8 games in his entire career and had a QB rating of 57.4. He sucked.