Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
soulman

What Matt Nagy Sees In Mitch Many Others Don't

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Sugashane said:

With the RB corps there should be a solirld run game and Tru should feel much better about dumping the ball off for a 4-5 yard gain. If you can consistently start off 2nd and 6 or better you're setting yourself up for success. 

 

I don't have the stats to back up my thought but I believe we were 2nd and 8 or worse more than 2/3 of the league. That's a bad way to try and keep a drive going. 

On top of the passing ypg he may also match up with the rushing yards too. It adds up after a season. 

2nd and 8-10 is also predominantly a passing down. 2nd and 4-5 opens up the playbook a whole lot more and creates a greater level of predictability. From a general sense, we should be a more difficult team to defend against in 2019 than in 2018. That should be to the benefit of everyone, and I think the point guard analogy for what Mitch (or any QB in this system) will be asked to do is a good one.

More so than having additional viable check down options to me (which are huge IMO) should be the ability to have an actual screen game. It was basically non-existent last year with Howard but has always been a staple of Reid and now Nagy offense. The 23-yard screen play from week 1 with Montgomery is a great example. That play just frankly was a far less appealing option for Nagy and Mitch last year (both because Howard doesn’t catch well and because he has zero shiftiness to his game) unless Cohen was on the field, and then it was more expected. That play with Howard goes for 4 yards or less, not a chunk gain. Not only is a viable screen game going to present another element for our opponents to have to account for but it will also give Mitch another tool with which to counter the blitz and elite pass rushers. You’d be crazy IMO to think in week 2 against Miller and Chubb that the RB screen game with Montgomery and/or Davis won’t play a significant role in the game plan. We couldn’t do that last year. 

People tend to spin our personnel moves on offense to being about the development of Mitch, and while that’s certainly true it’s also been about getting better personnel in general. Better receivers makes the running game better, and vise versa. Diverse skill sets create greater play call flexibility which makes the defense have to think more, react slower and become more susceptible to being beat. The NFL has been going this way for 25 years - we are just finally catching up with the times. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we can all agree that Mitch has every opportunity to succeed. This isn't a Jay Cutler situation. He has the coach, the defense, the weapons etc. If he fails its 100% on him. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Nads786 said:

I think we can all agree that Mitch has every opportunity to succeed. This isn't a Jay Cutler situation. He has the coach, the defense, the weapons etc. If he fails its 100% on him. 

I agree, and then the question becomes, what constitutes success for him? Short of an MVP award in a season in which he wins the Super Bowl in a game where he’s also MVP there will always be some who would say he has not succeeded. If he’s an all pro but underwhelms in a playoff game, is that success? If he’s about the same as last year overall, but balls out for a playoff run, is that success? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AZBearsFan said:

I agree, and then the question becomes, what constitutes success for him? Short of an MVP award in a season in which he wins the Super Bowl in a game where he’s also MVP there will always be some who would say he has not succeeded. If he’s an all pro but underwhelms in a playoff game, is that success? If he’s about the same as last year overall, but balls out for a playoff run, is that success? 

Jared Goff from last year is my version of success. A pro bowl alternate (a legit one) and across board "good" QB. He doesn't have to be Rodgers of 2010 or Brees of 2009 to be considered successful. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nads786 said:

Jared Goff from last year is my version of success. A pro bowl alternate (a legit one) and across board "good" QB. He doesn't have to be Rodgers of 2010 or Brees of 2009 to be considered successful. 

Last year Goff was 4th in pass yards, 6th in TDs, 8th in QB Rating and was 13-3. My standards for success statistically not quite that high. Statistically for me for Mitch numbers to more closely reflect 2018 Tom Brady’s are more my expectations (65.8% comp., 4355 yds 29 TD 11 INT, 97.7 QB Rating). I am NOT saying I expect him to be Tom Brady with that. I'm saying I expect stats closely resembling those in that they all fall into about that 8th to 12th range among league leaders. Statistically that would constitute success to me. Beyond stats I expect there to be at least a few games where he is the reason we win, whether that’s a great overall performance, 4th quarter GW drives, etc. Some of those you know them when you see them moments. I’m expecting some of those this year. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

Last year Goff was 4th in pass yards, 6th in TDs, 8th in QB Rating and was 13-3. My standards for success statistically not quite that high. Statistically for me for Mitch numbers to more closely reflect 2018 Tom Brady’s are more my expectations (65.8% comp., 4355 yds 29 TD 11 INT, 97.7 QB Rating). I am NOT saying I expect him to be Tom Brady with that. I'm saying I expect stats closely resembling those in that they all fall into about that 8th to 12th range among league leaders. Statistically that would constitute success to me. Beyond stats I expect there to be at least a few games where he is the reason we win, whether that’s a great overall performance, 4th quarter GW drives, etc. Some of those you know them when you see them moments. I’m expecting some of those this year. 

I actually agree with you from a statistic perspective. I didn't realize Goff's numbers were that good. I was viewing Goff through the qualitative lens, which is definitely biased when I watched him against the Bears and the Patriots in the Superbowl. I think statistics are great, but the eye test is what I'm more interested in.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Haugh had a good column about Mitch in the Friday Trib.  I though he made two great points with which I'll agree and I'll highlight both.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/bears/ct-bears-mitch-trubisky-20190822-pkffc5kxfbakffaunp3gadt4pa-story.html

Column: The Bears can be great in 2019 if Mitch Trubisky is merely good

Everyone exhale. General manager Ryan Pace trading up in the 2017 draft to select Trubisky second overall caused many to predict boom or bust for his career. But the Bears can contend for a Super Bowl if their quarterback simply keeps his play close to the league median. Trubisky doesn’t need to be among the NFL’s 10 best quarterbacks. Sure, it would make life easier for everyone if he avoids being among the 10 worst. But meeting in the middle might lead to a February date in Miami. The Bears can be great if Trubisky merely is good.

That doesn’t minimize his role as much as magnify two other truisms more significant than Trubisky: 1) The NFL’s strongest defense will drive the Bears more than any offensive player, and 2) The star of the Bears offense remains the offense itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moon Mullen said Pace isn't playing starters in preseason because he is hiding MT who according to Moon is playing bad. 

I guess strategy is to surprise opponents in regular season with your bad players. 

Instead of, you know, this:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, dll2000 said:

Moon Mullen said Pace isn't playing starters in preseason because he is hiding MT who according to Moon is playing bad. 

I guess strategy is to surprise opponents in regular season with your bad players. 

Instead of, you know, this:

 

Lombardi tried saying this last year, too.  So what's the reasoning in sitting literally EVERY OTHER STARTER.  These guys are jokes at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean I get it - it’s hard for beat reporters in preseason to write articles that interest the public when all the regular players are sitting. Still though... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I mean I get it - it’s hard for beat reporters in preseason to write articles that interest the public when all the regular players are sitting. Still though... 

His partner on podcast disagreed.  It was a really bad take.

Okay you think Mitch is playing bad in practice, but hiding him is a stupid theory that makes no sense. 

Real reason he thinks MT should play is simply that is what Belichick does and Belichick is best so everything he does is correct.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Trubisky 1) has a 2:1 TD:INT ratio or better and 2) his he throws 30 or more touchdowns, he's a success

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I typically respect John Mullin's opinions but in this case no.  Nagy has been all through this as far as how far they were willing to go in camp pushing the offensive envelope so they'd know both it and Mitch's limitations.

It's an effective technique for anyone attempting to train someone in a new job.  You want to know just what they can handle and what they can't and you plan accordingly from that knowledge then work on slowly expanding on it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×