2022-2023 NFL Season

[DegenerateDish]

I acknowledge this is fluid, but yes, where you finish in the division matters with next years schedule, having 3 games determined on it.

Right now (again, this is fluid) the last place finisher in the North would get at Pittsburgh, at Washington, Rams (home)

3rd place: at Cleveland, at Dallas, Arizona (home)

2nd place: at Cincy, at NY Giants, San Francisco (home)

1st place: at Baltimore, at Philly, Seattle (home)

[withoutbias]

(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?

[JWags85]

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.

First of all, hands up, no you didn't.  That was WhiteTrash.  I confused my 2 word name posters starting with a W, thats my bad.

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.

Of course it changed the course of a game.  Any scoring play changes the course of the game.  All I said was it wasn't momentum changing.  It didn't kill a promising drive (they were buried 2nd and 18 in the shadow of their goal posts), the Bears immediately scored right after, and the Lions didn't do anything meaningful with that "momentum change" until 7 min of game time later.  It was an inexcusable, uncharacteristically bad (given the last 4 games) throw from Fields.  Nobody is debating or defending that.  But again, he was very good again, almost a 100 QB rating again, and made a ton of plays with his legs while showing composure and better game understanding.  If you're going to look at a game where a team scores 30 points and look at a single bad throw from a QB and go "ehh, I don't know about him as the guy", I think your expectations are whacked out.

And since you're playing what ifs with the Bears punting if he didn't throw that Pick 6.  If a NFL kicker makes a simple XP, then actually Fields gets the ball back, tie game, with 2:30 and 3 TOs.

Bears fans are supposedly going to great lengths to convince themselves Fields was awful, yet you're going great lengths to put that entire loss (and perception of Fields as the guy) on a single really bad throw.

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?

What does that even mean?  Oh they only gave up 24 this week, not 31 cause Fields sucks, so they really weren't the problem?  The point was the defense is horrific and porous.  And doesn't put the team, or Fields, in a position to win.

I didn't avoid the question. But yes, next year.  This year all you want to see from Fields is development and not getting hurt.  I could give a F*** if they finish 3-14 versus 6-11.  Moral victories are dumb when its the difference in 5-6 draft slots on a team desperate for talent.  Only meatball idiots or Virginia McCaskey hope to win every week when its clearly not a .500 football team.  The difference in this team from week to week compared to the Nagy teams is not even close.  That plus Fields growth is all reasonable and intelligent Bears fans need for next year.

 And maybe if the developmental QB was struggling in confidence and you want to see him get one.  But they suffered losses while he continues to improve tremendously week to week.

(Week 15: Fields goes 21/25 for 260 yards 3 TDs, rushes for 90 yards and a TD.  Bears lose 55-28 to the Eagles)
WithoutBias: "Can you really feel confident that Fields is a dude if the Bears don't win?  Dudes need to win and a Dude would win a game against a quality team like that"

[MU82]

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.

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.

[JWags85]

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 is good nuance.  I also think the way a QB runs is important in terms of health.  Cam Newton and Culpepper were MONSTERS, so they were perfectly happy to smash into people and run them over.  Which is great until its not.  Then have a smaller guy who is more of the modern running passer QB in RG3 who just never avoided hits.  He took WAYYY too many of them.

But Lamar Jackson has remained remarkably healthy so far.  His only significant injury was an ankle injury that had nothing to do with scrambling, it was on a simple rushed throw away from just out of the pocket.  Michael Vick, after breaking his leg in preseason early on in his career, was pretty injury free the majority of his career. 

I mentioned Russell Wilson before because of his use of the slide, he's never been injured (though thats probably due to his concussion water, naturally).  Given how often Fields slides this early in his career, I'd hope he'd mirror some of the same.

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

Plenty of only good running backs throw 8 tds in 4 weeks

[Jay Bee]

Never a doubt. SKOL Vikings! Hope we do well in the playoffs.

[wadesworld]

Plenty of only good running backs throw 8 tds in 4 weeks

2 TDs per week? Damn! I stand corrected!

[JWags85]

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...

[WhiteTrash]

I am a Bears fan who thought 0-17 was a possibility (not a probable win total) and predicted 3 wins (since changed to 4). As a fan I recognized and agreed with the GM to tear the roster down, bring in a bunch of rookies, get draft choices and free up massive cap space. The Bears constructed this team for the future with little or no regard for winning this year. I think they have accomplished all the goals. They deserve credit.

Does getting an A+ on the first steps of a rebuild guaranty future success? Hell no.

As for winning now. As a fan I'd like to see higher draft picks that a 3-4 win team gets than a 7-8 win team. The majority of this team will not be back next year, by design, so building up and upon wins doesn't matter much.

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

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

[Uncle Rico]

Almost like this is Green and gold hued goggles and not critical thinking

There are Packer fans that think this team can still win the Super Bowl this year

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

That’s throwing for 2 tds a week but also running for another 5 of them in that time span. It’s ok to admit when a disliked division opponent has a good performing player. Lord knows I’ve had to do it my whole life with Packers QBs.

[Herman Cain]

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/

[MU82]

This was a fun Fran Tarkenton memory . 
https://thevikingage.com/2021/10/27/fran-tarkenton-brawl-minnesota-vikings-1974/

He's lived an "interesting" life.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

There are Packer fans that think this team can still win the Super Bowl this year

Entitled Town, aina?

[Uncle Rico]

Entitled Town, aina?

Justin Fields can’t possibly be getting better but Christian Watson is now better than Davante Adams

[Herman Cain]

He's lived an "interesting" life.

2018 article on Fran.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/2018/01/29/fran-tarkenton-speaks-his-mind-doping-anthem-protests-and-tom-brady/1074005001/

[DegenerateDish]

All 4 NFC East teams could each easily be over 7 wins by Week 12. That was a huge win by Washington for the NFC playoff picture.

[PGsHeroes32]

Thank you WASH.

Still think its pretty slim the Vikes end up with the NFC best record and bye. But tonight definitely increased the chances.

[MU82]

Thanks to the Eagles' loss ...

In this, the 50th anniversary season of their 1972 undefeated campaign, the Dolphins officially will remain the only unbeaten, untied championship team in the history of major North American professional sports.

[muwarrior69]

This was a fun Fran Tarkenton memory . 
https://thevikingage.com/2021/10/27/fran-tarkenton-brawl-minnesota-vikings-1974/

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.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

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.

[Uncle Rico]

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.

Lololololol

[ChuckyChip]

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.

According to Pro Football Reference, Mira only played in Milwaukee once (1966) and did not throw a pass.  He had one rushing attempt for one yard.