BearFan PHX

this board? LOL

You act like we insulted a member of your family when we criticize the players. Like their feelings are hurt, and you need to defend them. Then you just tried to tell us all that "Time to jump on board instead of still questioning everything." so - no. This from the guy who was one of the last to give up on Fields - who didnt want Caleb? We are gonna question whatever we want to. We are gonna say things are good or bad. We are gonna wonder how this experiment is gonna work. All of us are optimistic about all of this too, which makes these reactions of yours even weirder. Also, you dont know whats fantasy and what isnt. You dont know who the Bears will trade or not. You say these things like they are absolute truths, and yet over and over when you and I have disagreed, I have ended up being right. At some point, you should at least respect my right to hold an opposing view, since youve been wrong so many times. I think I've earned that. Remember a few months ago when you told us that there would be no more than 2 new faces on the OL? You constantly want to tell us that people already on the roster are great, and just need another chance. "Theres no way the Bears..." how the hell do YOU know?! "Poles would never..." uh huh. So yes you are entitled to your opinion, but youre wrong all the time, so maybe lecturing us on whether we can say negative things is kinda cringey at this point? Stay in your lane!

yup. hopefully Kevin Warren is a buffer that keeps them out of most decisions. I still want to know if Poles chose to keep Flus last year, or if he was told he couldnt fire him with 3 years left on his deal by said owners.

Right, cuz even when it's going well, thats what sports talk is all about. Criticizing a team, or it's members isn't disloyalty - it's just normal guys talking sports. Somehow we've gotten to where talking about someone possibly getting traded or that they should be cut evokes a response like we've hurt someone's feelings. Like they need defending?

exactly. and while most teams have a run scheme they use, Johnson says he likes to use them all. that puts a lot on the Ol to understand their assignments, and a lot of the coaches to teach it. i love it.

Absolutely. Learning WHO to block and the blocking "rules" for the offense is extremely important, and something we've seen lacking in our team for a long time. PFF used to give Leno a good grade when he double teamed someone with the left guard, and that person was well blocked. They did not include in their analysis that Leno was supposed to block a different guy that came totally free and wrecked the backfield. You gotta know who you're supposed to block. That's tougher in a zone blocking scheme, and it's tough when the defense plays games like stunts and delayed blitzes. I have a lot of faith in Johnson and Roushar to get that right. I think they are good teachers. And this is the time of year for it!

amen. I also think it's noteworthy that the Bears are drafting players who may be trouble and need guidance - that's a new thing for us. And it seems like Johnson has the balls to lead players like this. I think all in all it's a very good sign.

What does this even mean on a discussion board?!

I agree with the second half of this, but im not sure how you can hire someone to watch film with you, if what was missing was the rationale for the week's gameplan. Youd need someone who understood it to point it out? A third party wouldnt know that? But then again, maybe there WAS no coherent offensive strategy. Maybe the didnt teach it because they didnt have one - just a collection of plays, but no real strategy. I am pretty sure Calebs comments about Flus and Waldron occurred before Ben Johnson was hired? The guy writing the book is why it's back in the press. Caleb isnt talking about it now? I agree with you about Calebs decision making last year too. Hopefully thats an area where Ben Johnson can really bring Caleb along. BUt i think the film watching that was missing wasnt regular generalized film watching, but rather a cohesive plan from the coaches that the offense could execute. That's how I read it anyway. Thank god those guys are gone!

agree a lot of it is his dad. and some of it was how unprofessional the coaching was last year too. I guess Caleb did let some inside stuff out. I am SO glad to hear players are getting chewed out. LOVE accountability. And I know, we have to see it on the field, but it sure seems like we arent going to be clowns like we usually are. At least we will be a pro football team. I'm excited too!

I am sure Williams knows how to watch tape generically. I'm sure he can look at generic film, and tell you everything just like J T O'Sullivan or Kurt Warner does. I took Williams meaning differently. I took him to mean that they weren't watching film on the defense of that week's opponent while relating that to the week's gameplan. For example, if the OC sees that a certain LBer always shades inside vs the TE against a certain offensive alignment, the OC might call some plays where the TE runs a quick out, accompanied by a WR running a go route on that side to drag defenders out of the area for the TE underneath. So he puts in the play. Does he tell Caleb, hey we see the LB leaning pre sanp so thats why were calling this play? Does he show him on film what the reasoning behind including this play is in the week's game plan? Or does he just tell Caleb, "learn this play, run it when we call it, the TE is read #1" and leave it at that. Because if he doesn't explain it, and Caleb comes to the line with that LB shading outside for once, he should know that the theory of the play means the gambit is off. Maybe, it makes Caleb more likely to audible to a run offtackle to the strong side so the TE has a good blocking angle on the shaded LB. So either 1) Caleb is a baby who cant read generic film, like identifying defenses and needs his hand held, and should have hired someone to do it, and is ridiculous for criticizing how he was developed by the fine staff of Eberflus and Waldron OR 2) Caleb is telling you something real, because he's the #1 pick QB who knows a shit ton about football, and it trying to tell you that Flus and Waldron did a crap job of teaching him, and preparing him for each week to understand the intention of the game plan. And what we saw is that there was no game plan in the first place. If it really was Caleb, and they thought Waldron was doing a great job of putting everyone in the best place to succeed, then he wouldnt have gotten fired so early in the season. They didn't develop Caleb. It's actually shocking. Waldron and Eberflus were complete frauds as OC and HC. I cant wait to see Johnson and Williams prove it to everyone.

This is the big question. What does gaining or losing Johnson do for an offense? adam, knowing your penchant for numbers, I wonder if there is a "Ben Johnson" multiplier, on various stats, that can be measured after this coming season? I know there are a ton of little things that swamp out being able to attribute the Bears' and Lions' offensive changes in fortune over last year to just Ben Johnson, but PFF does it so why cant we? LOL

Caleb is the starter. I am a huge fan of Tyson Bagent's as well. I think he is the backup. Case Keenum is here to provice Caleb with advice from his experience. So do we keep 3 QBs on the roster? If you put Bagent on the practice squad someone will steal him and make him QB2 somewhere. And Keenum is too old to even put on the PS. What do you think we will do? If we get a good trade offer for Bagent, then I understand that - but they JUST extended him, but I guess that also might help bring interest in a trade too... I think Bagent is a more valuable backup than Keenum, but is Keenum just for training camp?

Like I said, Im not saying to trade any of the per se. Not right now. All ive said is that Kmet is on the bubble, for next year, or possibly at the trade deadline. Also, the logic to trading Kmet (which Im not saying I would do right now!) is not just the draft pick you get, but also the cap space you open up. $10M gets you a very nice free agent, for example. but again, I am not at the decision point to trade Kmet, unless we get something big for him, like a 3rd or better. But if he was part of a package to get trey hendrickson here, for example, then his trade value and cap space would both be helpful. And to be clear, Im not saying we should trade for Hendrickson either. I would need to know how good he projects to be in 3 years, and that's for the medical staff and whatever who know better than I do. But just to be crystal clear - I've been predciting that the Bears will trade Kmet NEXT year or possible at the trade deadline this year, but I've also been super clear that he has this window to show what he can do for Johnson. So I think he could earn a spot here, but he has to work for it i think. For me, right now, without any more positive showing from him, he's gone next year. But if he balls out, then he will make the case to stay. Because everything "good" about him is what he COULD do if used properly. So that's a built in excuse, and maybe a fair one! But he has to show it now, and maybe he will. I'm just saying I havent seen it YET, and if it stays hows it's been, he will not be taking $11.6M worth of cap space next year. None of that says trade him now, or that his story is over. But that's my bet, based on what's been before. The future is of course, unknown.

Im not saying to trade any of these players per se, but I do want to make one point. A player is not more valuable because they are on the Bears roster already? It's Ok to trade good players if you get something more helpful in return. And then the new player will be on the roster, so you can be a fan of them then? I think about what the Bears still need (and no roster is ever perfect) and I think about players out there that can help us. we've been so terrible for so long, that as Bears fans we are used to wanting to keep anyone that can kinda play. But now, our roster is much fuller, and we are at the point where we will let good players go in trades. When you have a player that you know you arent goingt to pay big money to in the future, who is still a good player, it is better to get some trade value for them than to milk that last year out of them. Now I admit that compensatory picks do change that formula somewhat, so understanding that sometimes losing a player to free agency is a benefit in terms of compensatory picks, there will still be many cases where losing that last year of a players contract is worth what you get in trade. Eventually, when you're winning, you have to realize that you will lose your players to free agency, and replace them through the draft. Any sustainable winning formula requires it. So gaining extra draft capital, even in the 3rd, 4th and 5th rounds, is necessary. So I would say maybe be less attached to players just because they are on the roster when you follow a winning team, and think more about keeping the team going with new faces or you will age out and be back to mediocre where we lived for FAR too long. I get it that that could be a challenge for a fan who wants to develop a relationship with the players, but that loyalty doesnt keep teams relevant. At some point, the question has to be asked whether we root for the team, or the players on the team. For me, it's the team.

It's hard to say. Hendrickson is a superior player, but how many years does he have left in him? If he was 27 this would be a no brainer. So if you think he will decline, which is a good bet id say, then you probably go the way you say - a lesser DE one year deal. But if they think hes gonna be strong for 2 years and then have rotational value after that for example, you might do it?

If it is designated a post June 1st cut or trade, Kmet opens up $10M ($11.6M - $1.6M) And this is true if you do it this year, next year or the year after. Cut or trade him, and open $10M. If you Trade swift, with a post june 1st designation, you gain $8M in cap space. So there are some nuances in whether cut or trade them, and whether you use a post june 1st designation. But yes, there is potentially $33M of cap space with those three. YOu can also do contract stuff with players to open up cap space. If there is a stud player we want, we can trade for them, especially if one or more of those guys are part of the trade back. Like, Booker and Kmet for Trey Hendrickson for example. Im not saying we should make that trade - I dunno how may years Hendrickson has left. But if we wanted to, we could.

No thats fair, by stud, I should have said plus starter. We are in agreement i think.

it is always possible to open up cap room with extensions and strategic cuts. If they think Hendrickson is the answer, they will find a way to fit him under. But they have to truly believe in him, not just this year, but probably for a 4 year deal, and he is getting older.

yes. Hiring Warren seems to be the answer to McCaskey meddling. Would he have the juice now to decide something like firing Eberflus before last year? One hopes so, but these McCaskeys are a curse.

Fox was a real coach at least. In the end, he wasnt capable of putting together a modern offense, or apparently attracting a good OC, but these two were certainly better than the others.

I think the McCaskeys liked to hire people they felt they could control. People who showed deference. People who werent too confident or alpha. For a FOOTBALL team. Getting cold feet on people like McGinnis and Arians. It's pathetic. I think the hiring of Warren is supposed to be the end of their BS. We will see because Poles still couldnt fire Eberflus last year, and it is unproven whether Warren makes good decisions. Getting Ben Johnson was a really good move. Hopefully Johnson takes over the leadership role, and we dont need Poles for that anymore. Whether we got lucky, or what, we now have a real Qb and a real HC/OC, and for that matter a real staff and a pretty decent roster. We still need a few pieces, but if we dont sniff the playoffs this year, something is wrong.

I did forget Fox, and I thought "dont crap on Wanny, he wasnt THAT bad" but you know what? Youre right. We have been a joke for a LONG LONG time.

To me this was Poles biggest failure. Now Im reading more support for the idea that the McCaskeys simply said that he couldn't fire a guy with 3 years left on his contract. If so, that shields Poles from that decision, but then it calls into question why he agreed to Eberflus in the first place. I understand he was under ridiculous pressure, having just been hired and your boss has a guy picked out for you. Maybe its too much to hope that Poles would have put the brakes on at that point. I also read this week that Caleb was trying to get out of going to the Bears pre draft until he met with Poles, and that Poles, Warren and Cunningham all told Caleb that they knew the Bears were a shit show, and they were working to change that. If I read between the lines, it's its a hunch more than a fact, that Poles may even have said something about Eberflus and the future. probably something like "listen Caleb, either he is going to make it work here, or we will find you coaches that can" whatever it was, after that meeting Caleb texted friends that he could work with the Bears. So it's hard to triangulate Poles' part in this - whoever's fault it was, Eberflus was another in a long line of disasters. Maybe the last one(s?) a McCaskey gets to make? Moving forward things do seem to be progressing now. But look at this list: Eberflus Nagy Trestman Jauron Waldron Getsy Loggains Gase Kromer TIce Shea Shoop Crowton What. The. Hell.

? There definitely was a story that the coaches werent preparing him properly with film study. We are talking about it now. Waldron and Eberflus were TERRIBLE. And unprofessional. And inept. And in over their heads. Frauds.