Realistic Expectations

[Madmike90]

3 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Make your list of preseason power rankings.  I am interested to see where you put the Bears.

Not Power Ranking by wins since the AFC West is going to kill itself but in terms of the best teams...

1	.Los Angeles Rams
2	.Buffalo Bills
3	.Tampa Bay Buccaneers
4	.Kansas City Chiefs
5	.Los Angeles Chargers
6	.Green Bay Packers
7	.Denver Broncos
8	.Baltimore Ravens
9	.Indianapolis Colts
10	.Tennessee Titans
11	.Cincinnati Bengals
12	.Las Vegas Raiders
13	.Dallas Cowboys
14	.San Francisco 49ers
15	.Cleveland Browns
16	.Miami Dolphins
17	.Philadelphia Eagles
18	.Minnesota Vikings
19	.Arizona Cardinals
20	.New England Patriots
21	.New Orleans Saints
22	.Chicago Bears
23	.Pittsburgh Steelers
24	.Washington Commies
25	.New York Jets
26	.Detroit Lions
27	.Seattle Seahawks
28	.Carolina Panthers
29	.New York Giants
30	.Jacksonville Jaguars
31	.Houston Texans
32	.Atlanta Falcons

[Sugashane]

On 5/9/2022 at 6:23 AM, Bigbear72 said:

 

     1. What would you view moving forward as success for the front office? 

     2. What would you view as a successful campaign for the coaching staff? What would be your criteria and how would you measure that success?

     3. How would you measure player success? What would you like to see from but the offensive and defensive side of the ball?

1. Consistent growth from players. Under Nagy the players repeatedly regressed. Outside of Roquan and Monty who played under him for 3 years and DIDN'T regress? We have some guys like Mooney and Kmet who stepped up in year two last year but even FAs and guys entering their prime were declining. 

If they can protect Fields and we see him play more consistently that will be a hell of a start. 

 

2. If we are a top 20 offense ill be ecstatic. To me we arent on that level talent wise so coaching would have stepped up a lot and players start to stand out. Gives us a better grasp on the roster for 2023. Defensively we see a better defense at week 16 than week 6 (likely with far different snap counts as we see who fits in Eberflus' scheme). I want to measure Fields' production in quarters and see a better player in the last two than the first two as he gets more comfortable in the system. 

 

3. Can go by stats but I want to see guys fighting more. I want to see OL blocking until the whistle or getting after guys who hit Fields. When someone goes down who steps up?

WRs need to fight through contact, get YAC, and i want to see non-routine catches being made.

Kmet. Get that mean streak you had as a rookie. Im not expecting Gronk or Kelce but I want more tham Desmond Clark. He has the talent to be an above average starter, just put it together and prove my predraft dislike all wrong. Do we have a viable #2?

Defensively I want to see building blocks jump out. We know Smith and Johnson are good but we lost a lot of talent. We have some young defenders and I want to see one stand out at each level step up. 

 

[JAF-N72EX]

41 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

WRs need to fight through contact, get YAC, and i want to see non-routine catches being made.

This is a good mention. Every year this team is near dead last in YAC across which takes away big plays and it's been this way for well over a decade and this is comes down to scheme.  Put these guys in the best position to get extra yards instead of using 4.3 guys to constantly run stick routes while a 35 year old TE with a bad knee runs a vertical.

I know we don't have the greatest weapons to pull it off just yet but I wanna see a glimpse of it this year at least.

[AZBearsFan]

1 hour ago, JAF-N72EX said:

This is a good mention. Every year this team is near dead last in YAC across which takes away big plays and it's been this way for well over a decade and this is comes down to scheme.  Put these guys in the best position to get extra yards instead of using 4.3 guys to constantly run stick routes while a 35 year old TE with a bad knee runs a vertical.

I know we don't have the greatest weapons to pull it off just yet but I wanna see a glimpse of it this year at least.

Agree wholeheartedly about putting our fast guys in position to get YAC. More drags and slants please.

I do think we have guys who can produce YAC though. Pringle’s career YAC/rec. numbers (4.75/rec.) measure up well with those of Adams and Lazard since 2018 (4.75 and 4.53, respectfully). Mooney’s (4.47) does as well, especially considering it’s probably lower than it should be because of the very same YAC-inefficient Nagy offense to which you referenced. I’m not sure what all Velus can do yet, but the one thing I’m pretty confident he can do is produce after the catch.

If we’re going to be that team though that wants to and maybe needs to win with speed on offense then we have to quicken up the playing surface at Soldier Field. I know they’re not changing it out, but it’s long had a reputation for having really long grass compared to other fields. It’s supposed to be a home field advantage - tailor it to your roster to the extent you can! 

[AZBearsFan]

How about this - what if we get in 2022 exactly what our receivers produced in 2021 yardage wise, and our RBs produce what GB’s RBs did receiving-wise (thinking we’ll use the RBs in the passing game the same way GB does, and I’d argue Monty’s receiving skills are at least on par with those of Jones/Dillon)?

Mooney 1055 yards

Pringle 568 yards

Kmet 612 yards 

Jones/Dillon (Monty/Herbert) 704 yards

That’s 2939 yards. Now, figure Velus for… let’s say 2.5 catches/week on average (lots of schemed YAC-type looks) averaging 10-12 ypc. That’s 425-510 yards, or 25-30 per game for a guy we expect is going to get top 3 WR reps much if not all of the season.

Now figure everyone else (WR4+, TE2+, RB3+) for a collective 20-25 yards/game over the course of the season. That’s another 340-425 yards. Modest, but probably pretty close. 

That puts us at 3704-3874 yards passing, assuming essentially zero growth. Assuming health, shouldn’t that be our floor expectation? 

[Epyon]

2 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

That puts us at 3704-3874 yards passing, assuming essentially zero growth. Assuming health, shouldn’t that be our floor expectation? 

Pretty sure that'd either be the record for a Bears QB in a single season or really close to it. We're the only team in the league without a 4,000 yard passer ever.

[JAF-N72EX]

4 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

How about this - what if we get in 2022 exactly what our receivers produced in 2021 yardage wise, and our RBs produce what GB’s RBs did receiving-wise (thinking we’ll use the RBs in the passing game the same way GB does, and I’d argue Monty’s receiving skills are at least on par with those of Jones/Dillon)?

Mooney 1055 yards

Pringle 568 yards

Kmet 612 yards 

Jones/Dillon (Monty/Herbert) 704 yards

That’s 2939 yards. Now, figure Velus for… let’s say 2.5 catches/week on average (lots of schemed YAC-type looks) averaging 10-12 ypc. That’s 425-510 yards, or 25-30 per game for a guy we expect is going to get top 3 WR reps much if not all of the season.

Now figure everyone else (WR4+, TE2+, RB3+) for a collective 20-25 yards/game over the course of the season. That’s another 340-425 yards. Modest, but probably pretty close. 

That puts us at 3704-3874 yards passing, assuming essentially zero growth. Assuming health, shouldn’t that be our floor expectation? 

Dalton/Fields/Foles threw for 3,635 yards, collectively, with a better cast but assumingly much worse staff. So if Fields only throws for 4,000 yards this year I wouldn't necessarily consider that growth if we're not seeing the growth in his game.

See for me it's not just about numbers. It's about how meaningful they are. What I mean is, Fields could throw for 4,000 yards and it may look good on paper but how meaningful are they in the scheme of things. Did he have to throw 600 times to get that yardage because we're down so much and so often that we're forced to throw? Is alot of this yardage coming late in the 4th when the defense takes it's foot off the gas? Is he still making the same mistakes as he made last year, despite the 4,000 yards?

There's been 24 different QBs to throw for 4,000 yards (or close to it) in the last 5 years.  It's 2022...it's a passing league....4,000 yards is not a great accomplishment anymore if doesn't mean much. See Winston, JG, Alex Smith. Cousins has done it 4 times. Mitch went from 2200 yards to 3200 yards from 2017 to 2018. On paper that shows growth. But was it really growth? Or was it just meaningless numbers in the end?

Context matters. I'd rather Fields show a big improvement in his game while throwing for only 3,200 yards than to not see much improvement at all and throwing for 4,000 yards.

 

[AZBearsFan]

1 hour ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Dalton/Fields/Foles threw for 3,635 yards, collectively, with a better cast but assumingly much worse staff. So if Fields only throws for 4,000 yards this year I wouldn't necessarily consider that growth if we're not seeing the growth in his game.

See for me it's not just about numbers. It's about how meaningful they are. What I mean is, Fields could throw for 4,000 yards and it may look good on paper but how meaningful are they in the scheme of things. Did he have to throw 600 times to get that yardage because we're down so much and so often that we're forced to throw? Is alot of this yardage coming late in the 4th when the defense takes it's foot off the gas? Is he still making the same mistakes as he made last year, despite the 4,000 yards?

There's been 24 different QBs to throw for 4,000 yards (or close to it) in the last 5 years.  It's 2022...it's a passing league....4,000 yards is not a great accomplishment anymore if doesn't mean much. See Winston, JG, Alex Smith. Cousins has done it 4 times. Mitch went from 2200 yards to 3200 yards from 2017 to 2018. On paper that shows growth. But was it really growth? Or was it just meaningless numbers in the end?

Context matters. I'd rather Fields show a big improvement in his game while throwing for only 3,200 yards than to not see much improvement at all and throwing for 4,000 yards.

 

Of course context matters and growth is more important than numbers, but my post was about realistic expectations, not their importance or relevance in growth. 

[AZBearsFan]

4 hours ago, Epyon said:

Pretty sure that'd either be the record for a Bears QB in a single season or really close to it. We're the only team in the league without a 4,000 yard passer ever.

There’s an extra game now too. 

[dll2000]

2 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Dalton/Fields/Foles threw for 3,635 yards, collectively, with a better cast but assumingly much worse staff. So if Fields only throws for 4,000 yards this year I wouldn't necessarily consider that growth if we're not seeing the growth in his game.

See for me it's not just about numbers. It's about how meaningful they are. What I mean is, Fields could throw for 4,000 yards and it may look good on paper but how meaningful are they in the scheme of things. Did he have to throw 600 times to get that yardage because we're down so much and so often that we're forced to throw? Is alot of this yardage coming late in the 4th when the defense takes it's foot off the gas? Is he still making the same mistakes as he made last year, despite the 4,000 yards?

There's been 24 different QBs to throw for 4,000 yards (or close to it) in the last 5 years.  It's 2022...it's a passing league....4,000 yards is not a great accomplishment anymore if doesn't mean much. See Winston, JG, Alex Smith. Cousins has done it 4 times. Mitch went from 2200 yards to 3200 yards from 2017 to 2018. On paper that shows growth. But was it really growth? Or was it just meaningless numbers in the end?

Context matters. I'd rather Fields show a big improvement in his game while throwing for only 3,200 yards than to not see much improvement at all and throwing for 4,000 yards.

 

Context is also Dalton was prepped to be starter and vast majority of practice efforts went toward that end and then he went down early and Fields was woefully unprepared.

Context is Oline was shaky to start and then got decimated in camp via injury making it completely discombobulated to start year. 

Context is arguably your best offensive football player, Robinson, was very unhappy and coaches were not happy with him leading him to not play anywhere near his best.  

Context is lame duck status of staff effected everything and everyone as many of us predicted when they were brought back.

The year was doomed from start.  This year seems doomed because of talent drain without adequate replacement, but it could surprise relative to last year because of differences from above.

[JAF-N72EX]

1 hour ago, dll2000 said:

This year seems doomed because of talent drain without adequate replacement, but it could surprise relative to last year because of differences from above

Your assuming all of those things will be better with a better coaching staff.  The assumption that we somehow got better this year is the same mistake a lot of fans seem to make every year around this time, only to find out their opinions were clouded by their rose colored glasses when the truth is the grass isn't always greener on the other side. I'm not saying your saying any of this, just stating in general.

This is the reality of the situation. Fields needs to be the focal point and show progression this year and if he doesn't then this staff failed him. We have a new inexperienced GM, a new inexperience HC, a new inexperienced OC, a new ST coach with a less than stellar track record, and a lack of weapons for Fields who will be playing in his 3rd system in as many years.  We could still be asking ourselves the same questions in 12 months as we are now and that's not progression to me.

Are all of these things listed above going to be used as excuse around this time next year?

 

[dll2000]

11 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Your assuming all of those things will be better with a better coaching staff.  The assumption that we somehow got better this year is the same mistake a lot of fans seem to make every year around this time, only to find out their opinions were clouded by their rose colored glasses when the truth is the grass isn't always greener on the other side. I'm not saying your saying any of this, just stating in general.

This is the reality of the situation. Fields needs to be the focal point and show progression this year and if he doesn't then this staff failed him. We have a new inexperienced GM, a new inexperience HC, a new inexperienced OC, a new ST coach with a less than stellar track record, and a lack of weapons for Fields who will be playing in his 3rd system in as many years.  We could still be asking ourselves the same questions in 12 months as we are now and that's not progression to me.

Are all of these things listed above going to be used as excuse around this time next year?

 

I am saying a lot of things outside of player/roster talent went into making last year not great.

I think the overall roster talent is less than last year, however; my point is various factors that went into making last year bad may not be present this year.

My feeling or argument is not that all the coaches last year were super horrible and all the coaches this year are the bees knees therefore this year will be better.  These coaches are unproven.   

 It was that a totality of circumstances and decisions led to last years on field performances; lame duck, contracts, injuries, attitude, coaching, practice time, playing time ...

Facts are we no longer have Robinson, Hicks, Peters, Daniels, Mack, Nichols or Goldman and those are talented football players no longer on roster.

But facts are also that due to age, injury, attitude or some combination many of them did not contribute to their paper talent level in 2021.  Probably all of them excepting Nichols.  

Peters for example performed admirably much of time, but had he come in in Spring rather than off a retirement fishing boat in August I imagine he would have been better and Oline as a whole would have been better. 

Had Robinson been happy with his contract/coaches and Fields been unquestioned starter from jump maybe they have a connection and Robinson has a much better season, but neither of those happened.

I don't have to go through each individual circumstance, but you all get the picture.

Their will be plusses and minuses with this staff and injury and circumstance too.  There always is.

But major plusses are that Fields is getting reps this year with starters.  He is getting 98% of coaching attention in offseason rather than watching Dalton and learning that way.  He should still struggle some, given it is new system and new coaches and he is still newbie QB.   He also has less proven talent at WR around him.   But even given that, it is hard to believe he will play worse than last year given totality of circumstances.   

So my argument based on all of above is season may not necessarily be worse than last year even though talent is less as a whole.  It may be a disaster.  The national media is certainly predicting that based on power rankings and polls.

But more I look, and it may be rose colored glasses and optimism, more I think team may be slightly improved relative to 2021 - not based on roster talent, but based on the whole.

I say that with cavaet that I also think GB, MN and Detroit are all better than Bears at this time and Detroit was much worse than Bears last year.   So even though I think 2022 Bears may be better than 2021 Bears, I also think 2022 Lions are much better than 2021 Lions, MN is probably roughly same leaning a bit better and GB is probably a little worse due to loss of Adams, but still much better than Bears.

Easier overall schedule should help with record though.

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

[Bfan]

14 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

I am saying a lot of things outside of player/roster talent went into making last year not great.

I think the overall roster talent is less than last year, however; my point is various factors that went into making last year bad may not be present this year.

My feeling or argument is not that all the coaches last year were super horrible and all the coaches this year are the bees knees therefore this year will be better.  These coaches are unproven.   

 It was that a totality of circumstances and decisions led to last years on field performances; lame duck, contracts, injuries, attitude, coaching, practice time, playing time ...

Facts are we no longer have Robinson, Hicks, Peters, Daniels, Mack, Nichols or Goldman and those are talented football players no longer on roster.

But facts are also that due to age, injury, attitude or some combination many of them did not contribute to their paper talent level in 2021.  Probably all of them excepting Nichols.  

Peters for example performed admirably much of time, but had he come in in Spring rather than off a retirement fishing boat in August I imagine he would have been better and Oline as a whole would have been better. 

Had Robinson been happy with his contract/coaches and Fields been unquestioned starter from jump maybe they have a connection and Robinson has a much better season, but neither of those happened.

I don't have to go through each individual circumstance, but you all get the picture.

Their will be plusses and minuses with this staff and injury and circumstance too.  There always is.

But major plusses are that Fields is getting reps this year with starters.  He is getting 98% of coaching attention in offseason rather than watching Dalton and learning that way.  He should still struggle some, given it is new system and new coaches and he is still newbie QB.   He also has less proven talent at WR around him.   But even given that, it is hard to believe he will play worse than last year given totality of circumstances.   

So my argument based on all of above is season may not necessarily be worse than last year even though talent is less as a whole.  It may be a disaster.  The national media is certainly predicting that based on power rankings and polls.

But more I look, and it may be rose colored glasses and optimism, more I think team may be slightly improved relative to 2021 - not based on roster talent, but based on the whole.

I say that with cavaet that I also think GB, MN and Detroit are all better than Bears at this time and Detroit was much worse than Bears last year.   So even though I think 2022 Bears may be better than 2021 Bears, I also think 2022 Lions are much better than 2021 Lions, MN is probably roughly same leaning a bit better and GB is probably a little worse due to loss of Adams, but still much better than Bears.

Easier overall schedule should help with record though.

 

 

   

 

 

 

 

As usual when you don'thave proven talent and don't have proven  coaches or front office it is all about the "ifs'.  If the players we are looking to perform, such as Jenkins, Borem and Fields, can?  More important can the coaching staff see who is making strides even if the wlins/losses  and stats don't necessarily show that improvement?  This may be particularly important with Fields.  The most important if of all is if Eberflus and Poles will do the right thing, and do it quickly, with those player who don't imropve?  All the other "ifs" will possibly set us back a year or two the last "if" will set us back to ground zero in three years.  How's that for taking off the rose  colored glassea?

[dll2000]

1 hour ago, Bfan said:

As usual when you don'thave proven talent and don't have proven  coaches or front office it is all about the "ifs'.  If the players we are looking to perform, such as Jenkins, Borem and Fields, can?  More important can the coaching staff see who is making strides even if the wlins/losses  and stats don't necessarily show that improvement?  This may be particularly important with Fields.  The most important if of all is if Eberflus and Poles will do the right thing, and do it quickly, with those player who don't imropve?  All the other "ifs" will possibly set us back a year or two the last "if" will set us back to ground zero in three years.  How's that for taking off the rose  colored glassea?

Last 'if' being Fields you are saying?

Yes, if Fields busts that is catastrophic and everyone is probably fired or should be.   But not like old days when you paid rookie QBs like vet QBs.  More even.    It could set you back a decade.

I mean here we are today without Trubisky starting over.  The hope is we are back on the ball and competing for playoffs in 2023.  

I think the trick is identifying if QB is your guy before 2nd contract.   Even then Philly escaped Wentz and Rams escaped Goff.  Both teams made monumental trades to get those guys in draft in first place too.  Much more than Bears did for Trubisky or Fields.

Rams even escaped whats his name after paying him a mint ... Bradford.  They got value back for Bradford to Vikings if memory serves ... yeah they got a first and a 4th from Vikings.  Crazy.  

I sometimes feel like Bears are still recovering from Cade McNown and Rex Grossman. 

 

 

[Bfan]

2 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Last 'if' being Fields you are saying?

Yes, if Fields busts that is catastrophic and everyone is probably fired or should be.   But not like old days when you paid rookie QBs like vet QBs.  More even.    It could set you back a decade.

I mean here we are today without Trubisky starting over.  The hope is we are back on the ball and competing for playoffs in 2023.  

I think the trick is identifying if QB is your guy before 2nd contract.   Even then Philly escaped Wentz and Rams escaped Goff.  Both teams made monumental trades to get those guys in draft in first place too.  Much more than Bears did for Trubisky or Fields.

Rams even escaped whats his name after paying him a mint ... Bradford.  They got value back for Bradford to Vikings if memory serves ... yeah they got a first and a 4th from Vikings.  Crazy.  

I sometimes feel like Bears are still recovering from Cade McNown and Rex Grossman. 

 

 

Just so you know I'm not so certain Feilds is a guanteed quality QB.  I do think its likely but but not certain.  I also belive  if Fields turns out to be less then a legitimate starter Poles will get anther bite as long as he does a good job of getting talent.  Feilds being a bust will set us back to the next chance to brant another QB high, but if Poles buggers building the rest of team that will set us back to looking for a decent GM.  You tell me how long it has been since we had a decent GM.  My first thought is maybe Angelo's first few years but you could also make the argument for Finns and Vainisi.