Jump to content

Bill Lazor; The Plan To Develop Justin Fields


Recommended Posts

If they follow this primer it could help Fields development.

Pretty much don't try to force a square peg into a round hole, like with Mitch.  And considering Nagy, himself, was all in for JF it shouldn't be that much of a change for either party.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, FosterTheSkins said:

If they follow this primer it could help Fields development.

Pretty much don't try to force a square peg into a round hole, like with Mitch.  And considering Nagy, himself, was all in for JF it shouldn't be that much of a change for either party.

Nagy is close with Ryan Day and has said that he's going to incorporate what Fields did well at Ohio State into our offense. So I'm expecting to see a lot of carry over from what Fields did there, plus with Nagy's own spin on it -- concepts and plays that build off Fields' bread and butter at Ohio State.

At least he'd better ******* do that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, G08 said:

Nagy is close with Ryan Day and has said that he's going to incorporate what Fields did well at Ohio State into our offense. So I'm expecting to see a lot of carry over from what Fields did there, plus with Nagy's own spin on it -- concepts and plays that build off Fields' bread and butter at Ohio State.

At least he'd better ******* do that.

This has been secret sauce to getting rookie QBs developed faster and getting them on field from day 1.  

You run base plays and concepts they ran in college with your verbiage so you can play from go and then you add your stuff on top.

Believe it or not there will be overlap somewhere.  There are only so many passing concepts and most everyone runs zone reads and IZ and OZ zone.  

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at what QB cap hits are turning into of late.

Having a good rookie QB will be more of an advantage than ever with fast escalating QB salaries.

Waiting 3 years like Rodgers did or what might happen to Love is a bad idea now.

I would have never drafted Love and kept trying to win SB with Rodgers like TB is doing with Brady.  

But now that is done if he is any good at all I would have traded Rodgers to Broncos pre-draft for all kinds of stuff.   

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Look at what QB cap hits are turning into of late.

Having a good rookie QB will be more of an advantage than ever with fast escalating QB salaries.

Waiting 3 years like Rodgers did or what might happen to Love is a bad idea now.

I would have never drafted Love and kept trying to win SB with Rodgers like TB is doing with Brady.  

But now that is done if he is any good at all I would have traded Rodgers to Broncos pre-draft for all kinds of stuff.   

 

Maximizing the window is key.

You can be competitive with a highly paid QB, but they have to be a difference maker and you need to draft well. There is little room for error.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

Maximizing the window is key.

You can be competitive with a highly paid QB, but they have to be a difference maker and you need to draft well. There is little room for error.

You can do it with 2nd contracts, but you have to be creative with structure so cap hits are manageable.

Void years and spreading signing bonus and all that.

But the 40+ cap hits hurt even with all games you can play with cap.

Plus, there is reality of actually paying money.   Not all owners are willing to pay whatever in real dollars.  They want profits.   They don't all make same in local or unshared revenue to help their bottom lines either.

Jerry Jones can spend a lot more because he makes a lot more from Cowboys than McCaskey's do from Bears.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Facts:

Naming Dalton starter means he gets starter reps.  Nagy has confirmed this.   Starter reps means bulk of reps and with first team.

Ratios can vary, but it is still less.   

So by not being starter Fields will get less practice time or he will physically be there, but be receiving less reps in practice.   

Theory:  it is better to go slow for a new QB so there is less pressure and he can learn at his pace without the pressure to play.

Theory:  It is better to play from get go.  

Evidence always presented is Rodgers and Mahomes.   Teams went slow with them and they succeeded.   They say it was good for them because they got to learn slow at their own pace, etc.  

Counter evidence is Wilson, Manning, Manning, Rivers, Roethlisberger ... and many other guys who started right away and succeeded.   They all say they it was good they got reps and played.   it was trial by fire and forced them to work really hard.  

Counter evidence to that is guys who started right away and busted - many examples.  

Counter evidence to that is guys who didn't start right away and still busted - many examples.

Correlation can be attributed to either method and is not conclusive.   People just pick their favorite.

____

There are many studies on learning skills and teaching (which is what bulk of coaching is).

You would have to find me a study that says watching is most efficient way to learn something. 

East example,  I watch youtube videos on how to fix things on car or around house and i have to watch it a bunch before I can actually do it.    Once I do it, if I did it again it would take my like 15 minutes.

If I had a handyman that could watch and coach me while I did it, it would cut the time way down.   Because I could just dive in.    If I just watched him do it, and then tried it myself it is same as watching the youtube video.  Takes longer.    

Some form of doing with instruction is best and fastest way to get better at something.   

You don't really need studies to know this.   This is common sense.

This is what I am trying to say.    Yes it worked for Mahomes and Rodgers.   But they could have gotten to Mahomes and Rodgers faster by getting more practice reps.

The concerns are all mental and are valid.   Losing the player due to repeated failure before they are ready.  Then perhaps bad habits develop due to pressing or pressure.

These are legit concerns.   I am sure many players were ruined by playing them too quickly or behind a subpar O line.  

But it doesn't change fact that you are choosing the slower learning method.

I think these concerns and the risk involved in starting right away are offset by benefit of having a player ready to go faster under a rookie contract.

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

Let's correct some stuff, Eli Manning sat for 9 games behind Kurt Warner, and every guy on that team will tell you he should have sat all 16, that ended up being a team that just barely missed the playoffs at 7-9 after a 5-4 start w/ Warner.  Rivers sat nearly an entire year and only got a chance to start because Brees injured his shoulder late in the season, Brees was phenomenal that year.  That was the year that earned Brees a starting gig w/ NO even w/ questions about his shoulder.  Roethlisberger was supposed to sit, but Maddox was hurt week 1 and he ended up starting 15 games, going 15-0 and nearly made the Superbowl.  As for the "started right away evidence"  the only truly successful examples are Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck in anything resembling recency, are Peyton Manning and Andrew Luck, all the other guys who entered TC as the Starter didnt do too well, and the guys who started early were typically due to injury.  (Caveat RG3 was an immediate starter and had a good season, but never achieved that level of play again)

As for your learning example, I'm not sure what studies your referencing that says people learn better by doing, but they arent very good ones.  In common understanding of learning there are 6 identifiable learning styles.  Most of the time we reference 4.  Some people are heavily weighted towards 1, others are mixture of multiple styles, some are well balanced learners and can learn from just about any teaching method.  What you're talking about is a hands on learner.  Hands on learners would prefer to just get out there and do it.  That's the only way they learn.  Some people are visual learners, while it may take you a few times of watching a video to learn something, they can watch it once and have a complete grasp. some are auditory learners, they learn best in a lecture based classroom environment.  And then you have the new breed, the "why" learner.  They have to know the "why" of what they are doing to understand it.  Now I want you to think about how we coach football.  You have been equipped to reach all of these types, and you didnt even know it.  We practice, that's for the hands on learner, so they can go out, make mistakes, correct them and move on.  We watch film for visual learners.  That's the best way for them to understand what they are doing wrong and how to fix it.  And we have team meetings for the auditory and the "why" learners.  

Now I'm not saying I disagree w/your point about more reps being better for Fields, obviously that's true.  But you cant lie to the players, if Fields isnt ready, they will know just as much as if he is.  Fields should start when hes ready and not before.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

You can do it with 2nd contracts, but you have to be creative with structure so cap hits are manageable.

Void years and spreading signing bonus and all that.

But the 40+ cap hits hurt even with all games you can play with cap.

Plus, there is reality of actually paying money.   Not all owners are willing to pay whatever in real dollars.  They want profits.   They don't all make same in local or unshared revenue to help their bottom lines either.

Jerry Jones can spend a lot more because he makes a lot more from Cowboys than McCaskey's do from Bears.

 

 

 

 

Idk I would say "a lot" more.  Cowboys are the most profitable franchise, but the Bears are #6.  You could say even that is underperforming since by all rights they probably should be #1 when factory in  history, prestige, and that they occupy the largest solo media market in the league.  But you also have to remember they have the smallest stadium, historical site, cant sell naming rights, and they dont own the stadium.   In terms of real dollars spent, the McCaskeys arent cheap or poor, that's a narrative that needs to die, the Bears almost always operate above 90% of the cap.  They spend money, and the cap is real dollars, it's all just how you structure it to make it fit in the cap, but cap space is real money spent.  But real dollars is what is inevitably going to lead to the Bears moving into their own stadium at some point in the not so distant future.  As I said, they should be the most profitable franchise, and building a massive palace that they can control, and earn revenue from solely, instead of paying a lease on, will be a huge step to becoming #1

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

 

Now I'm not saying I disagree w/your point about more reps being better for Fields, obviously that's true.  But you cant lie to the players, if Fields isnt ready, they will know just as much as if he is.  Fields should start when hes ready and not before.

I don't care if he plays right away.  I want him to have more reps.  And quality reps at that.   Not back up or scout team reps and not zero reps just watching.   

Nagy is saying he is giving Dalton starter's reps.   That is what i have a problem with.   A major problem.  

Fields is the investment, not Dalton.   

Give Dalton enough reps to be competent if Fields isn't ready.   But focus on Fields development.   

This isn't 80s where a QB sits for 3 - 5 years.   We need Fields playing ASAP.

What I fear is Dalton gets bulk of reps as is tradition and practice, Fields watches.  Dalton sucks and Fields gets thrown into season half trained having had far less reps leading up to that point.  

That is scenario I see playing out under current announced plan.

Because I don't think Dalton is a plug and play QB or is not likely to be one.   So like Glennon, though Dalton is better than Glennon, Dalton is going to need a lot of attention to be successful.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

Idk I would say "a lot" more.  Cowboys are the most profitable franchise, but the Bears are #6.  You could say even that is underperforming since by all rights they probably should be #1 when factory in  history, prestige, and that they occupy the largest solo media market in the league.  But you also have to remember they have the smallest stadium, historical site, cant sell naming rights, and they dont own the stadium.   In terms of real dollars spent, the McCaskeys arent cheap or poor, that's a narrative that needs to die, the Bears almost always operate above 90% of the cap.  They spend money, and the cap is real dollars, it's all just how you structure it to make it fit in the cap, but cap space is real money spent.  But real dollars is what is inevitably going to lead to the Bears moving into their own stadium at some point in the not so distant future.  As I said, they should be the most profitable franchise, and building a massive palace that they can control, and earn revenue from solely, instead of paying a lease on, will be a huge step to becoming #1

   I think it is inevitable that they will eventually move out of Soldier Field unless city and state throw buckets of free money and tax incentives at them.

  Both are essentially broke though.   We shall see.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Look at what QB cap hits are turning into of late.

Having a good rookie QB will be more of an advantage than ever with fast escalating QB salaries.

Waiting 3 years like Rodgers did or what might happen to Love is a bad idea now.

I would have never drafted Love and kept trying to win SB with Rodgers like TB is doing with Brady.  

But now that is done if he is any good at all I would have traded Rodgers to Broncos pre-draft for all kinds of stuff.   

 

the packers also managed rodger's first contracts beautifully. His rookie contract was 5 years/ ~$8m, then they gave him an enew contract after the third year, when he began starting, that was 6 years/ ~$63M. Getting rodgers for roughly 9 years at $70m to begin his career was a coup.

Fields' first contract is 4/18. we really do need to take advantage of the first couple years of that when he's much cheaper, and if he proves worthy of an extension (god willing) we can use the last year and 5th year option as ways to manage the cap hit while also providing him a contract he deserves at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What ever the plan is for Fields I don’t really care right now, I just want him to be what almost everyone thinks he can be. This just has a different feel than when Trubisky was drafted and I am long for the right to see it all play out. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, blkwdw13 said:

What ever the plan is for Fields I don’t really care right now, I just want him to be what almost everyone thinks he can be. This just has a different feel than when Trubisky was drafted and I am long for the right to see it all play out. 

I think he can be a top 5 QB in the NFL.

The NFL has never seen an athlete like this at QB.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, FosterTheSkins said:

If they follow this primer it could help Fields development.

Pretty much don't try to force a square peg into a round hole, like with Mitch.  And considering Nagy, himself, was all in for JF it shouldn't be that much of a change for either party.

I'll try not to hate on him only because he's a Cheesehead but to be honest I couldn't stomach more than 5 minutes of his stuff.  In reality he should be far more focused on his own team and their QB chaos right now than on Matt Nagy and the Bears QB.

The only thing I believe we can all agree on without the need to have Tundra Tommy there to tells us is that Matt Nagy's offensive concepts have been a massive failure as has been his work with Mitch Trubisky and adapting his schemes to fit Mitch's best talents.

Even the fact that Nagy says he's gonna take back play calling and whatever other claims he need to make to soothe his ego and need to be in charge doesn't bother me as much as it did over the past two seasons.  Why not?

Because now that Pace has delivered to him the QB of his choice and also worked to rebuild the OL around bigger tougher blockers and the WR core around smaller faster WR all of the potential for success hinges on how well Nagy can utilize his tools.

IMHO Matt Nagy's future as the Bears HC is now perched on the head of a pin.  If his development of Fields and the offense falters now he's as good as gone.  Pace did his job this offseason and saved his career so now it's up to Nagy to do the same or die trying.  He won't get another chance.

JMHO

Edited by soulman
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, dll2000 said:

But the 40+ cap hits hurt even with all games you can play with cap.

According to the "experts" when the cap hit for you're #1 QB is greater than 14% of your cap the chances of winning a championship with him begin to decline significantly.

If top starting QBs are demanding contract that can cost their team as much as 20% of their total cap they're also imposing a lid on just how much talent will surround them.

Brady is one guy who seems to have realized this and has been willing to forego more money in order to keep collecting rings.  Safe to say Aaron Rodgers isn't that same guy.

If Rodgers is pissed that he's not been getting the support he'd like he needs to look in the mirror.  At his pay grade he's expected to make mid level talent much much better.

Smart GMs and their Capologists can often shift numbers around long enough to keep championship windows open but eventually that money needs to be accounted for.

Cap limits were rising at a healthy pace for many years and then COVID happened and instead of a healthy $210 mil cap everyone got rolled back to a $180 mil cap.  Whoops.

That contributed to our losing Kyle Fuller and may also have had it's impact on an extension for ARob although it's tought to see how his $18 mil tag is helping anything.

Having a QB and at least one starting OT on rookie deals is huge but it won't begin to pay off 'til 2022 when we can shirk some other high salaries like Dalton's as well.

Also, lack a 2022 1st round pick will reduce the amount of rookie reserve we'd need for that contract which can then be used in FA or to extend our own impending FA.

Overall we're in a good spot and Pace has stepped up and steered us there.  Now the question is can Nagy and his staff take advantage of it or is he about to be one and  done if he can't somehow juice up his offense and put points on the board again?

Edited by soulman
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...