Here's an article with stats on the increased use of 2 high safeties in the last couple of years - but again, that doesnt always mean playing vanilla cover 2, or doing it predictably. Eberflus still sucks, even if cover 2 is back in vogue LOL

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/nfl-offense-is-dead-but-its-unlikely-two-high-coverage-is-the-guilty-party/

That’s the goal of motion. Watch miami or the Rams

From watching some tape reviews, thru 3 quarters, Denver used mostly man, then shifted to more zone late, which led to the 3 and outs, fumble, INT, and Turnover on Downs. So hopefully Fields can do better against Zone because you know River Boat Ron is going to be ready for him.

28 minutes ago, adam said:

From watching some tape reviews, thru 3 quarters, Denver used mostly man, then shifted to more zone late, which led to the 3 and outs, fumble, INT, and Turnover on Downs. So hopefully Fields can do better against Zone because you know River Boat Ron is going to be ready for him.

I've lost faith that Fields and/or Getsy can adjust. Fields seems to lack the vision to find the open man when things get tough. And Getsy? Just another part of the coaching ineptitude. 

16 minutes ago, ChileBear said:

I've lost faith that Fields and/or Getsy can adjust. Fields seems to lack the vision to find the open man when things get tough. And Getsy? Just another part of the coaching ineptitude. 

It is so hard to separate cart from horse here. Is Getsy only calling plays he knows Fields can run, or is comfortable with? When he calls zone beaters, Fields doesn't throw the ball, like he is playing a 2D video game instead of 3D.

or is Getsy just completely terrible, making Fields look worse?

I am sure it is a little bit of both.

28 minutes ago, adam said:

Is Getsy just completely terrible, making Fields look worse?

I am sure it is a little bit of both.

Simple fix to test your hypothesis, let Getsy walk .

2 hours ago, ChileBear said:

I've lost faith that Fields and/or Getsy can adjust. Fields seems to lack the vision to find the open man when things get tough. And Getsy? Just another part of the coaching ineptitude. 

I feel like zone has consistently killed recent Bears QB's. Trubisky always struggled with zone - Fields is the same.  Cutler was never great against it either. Inverse was Trubisky was usually pretty solid when teams played more man defense. Made it easier for him to see and throw people open.  

The inverse is - I feel like Bears defense is awful when we play zone and good QB's torch us - because they know the soft spots in the zone and just torch you for it.  But a lot of nuances in disguising it, etc. But Rodgers would just torch us in zone.  

3 hours ago, adam said:

It is so hard to separate cart from horse here. Is Getsy only calling plays he knows Fields can run, or is comfortable with? When he calls zone beaters, Fields doesn't throw the ball, like he is playing a 2D video game instead of 3D.

or is Getsy just completely terrible, making Fields look worse?

I am sure it is a little bit of both.

The Matt LeFleur tree branch hasn't looked to good.  Nathaniel Hackett was a bust in Denver and Getsy has not done anything to say different.  Hiring offensive minds that came into position with all-time great QBs in place should now be  red flag for GMs.

17 minutes ago, ASHKUM BEAR said:

The Matt LeFleur tree branch hasn't looked to good.  Nathaniel Hackett was a bust in Denver and Getsy has not done anything to say different.  Hiring offensive minds that came into position with all-time great QBs in place should now be  red flag for GMs.

Agreed. It seems that Getsy struggles to put Fields in positions and situations to sucede. Problem is that most OCs out there only get attention under a capable QB. Saw and article that listed the Lions, Chargers and Bills OC as viable, and two of those have very good QBs.

Just now, ChileBear said:

Agreed. It seems that Getsy struggles to put Fields in positions and situations to sucede. Problem is that most OCs out there only get attention under a capable QB. Saw and article that listed the Lions, Chargers and Bills OC as viable, and two of those have very good QBs.

right! its a vicious circle. there are so few difference makers as coaches and coordinators and the ones that are proven arent available. so you gotta take a flyer on someone, and if you look for a winner, then youre taking someone who worked under a winning head coach who might be the reason (like Nagy) or someone who worked with a great QB who might be the reason (like Getsy) - its very hard to find.

And sometimes the right guy just isnt ready, like Belichick at the Browns.

It's extremely difficult to get right.

7 minutes ago, BearFan PHX said:

It's extremely difficult to get right.

Don't we know it. ?

Misery loves company, if you just look around the league, all but 5-6 teams have problems. The Bears just have 99 of them. 

Honestly, of all the issues this team could have, the biggest one for me is the lack of pass rush from the front 4. Hoge and Jahns had Josh Lucas on, he used to work for the Bears, and is very insightful. He noted that not one player on the DL has won a rep that has resulted in a sack, meaning Robinson beats the RT and goes in for a clean sack. They have zero of those in 4 games, 16 quarters. This dates back to last season, the Flus system is predicated on having an elite 3T, if you don't everything else seems to fail. 

I still can't believe they thought Green and Robinson were better options than Gipson and Lewis. It is clear they were wrong.

2 minutes ago, adam said:

I still can't believe they thought Green and Robinson were better options than Gipson and Lewis. It is clear they were wrong.

Those two would make better OLB if they change schemes after the season.