Bears 53

[Superman(DH23)]

8 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I know what we have but I don't think you do.  You are notorious for being a massive homer who overrates Bears players and always want to believe the Bears are one of the best teams in the league. 

I'll let the season speak for me.  When this team finishes with a bottom 10 record then we can talk about all of this talent that you seem think we have.

I never claimed the Bears had one of the best teams in the league.  And I have never had an issue calling a fault for one that is.   And yeah I'm a Homer bc I'm a fan.  If you are truly a fan it's impossible not to be one.  Again nothing I have shied away from.  But you literally post a clearly incorrect depth chart, I ask you to call out ones who are closer to 4s you name 1 guy who you know is not the starting center.  You name a practice squad player.  You name the #1 Sam, who by your own admission won't see much of the field.  You name a DT who is probably a 1 on the depth chart but moves have already been made to replace him and push him to a 2.  You either don't know what we have, or are being incredibly disingenuous.  I think we both know which one it is.  

We all love to hate on Sam Mustipher, but as I said, he's a fine backup at center.  How many teams have a better backup center, where the offense can continue to function if the starter goes down.  Sam has over 20 starts as a 4th year player including a full season of starts with this QB.  That's not a bad situation for a backup.  Is Sam starter quality?  No of course not, no matter Olin Kreutz says.  But if we need him to put the ball in Justin's hands for a few games he is capable.  

And when we don't have a bottom 10 record, will you be here to apologize?

[JAF-N72EX]

51 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

I never claimed the Bears had one of the best teams in the league.  And I have never had an issue calling a fault for one that is.   And yeah I'm a Homer bc I'm a fan.  If you are truly a fan it's impossible not to be one.  Again nothing I have shied away from.  But you literally post a clearly incorrect depth chart, I ask you to call out ones who are closer to 4s you name 1 guy who you know is not the starting center.  You name a practice squad player.  You name the #1 Sam, who by your own admission won't see much of the field.  You name a DT who is probably a 1 on the depth chart but moves have already been made to replace him and push him to a 2.  You either don't know what we have, or are being incredibly disingenuous.  I think we both know which one it is.  

We all love to hate on Sam Mustipher, but as I said, he's a fine backup at center.  How many teams have a better backup center, where the offense can continue to function if the starter goes down.  Sam has over 20 starts as a 4th year player including a full season of starts with this QB.  That's not a bad situation for a backup.  Is Sam starter quality?  No of course not, no matter Olin Kreutz says.  But if we need him to put the ball in Justin's hands for a few games he is capable.  

And when we don't have a bottom 10 record, will you be here to apologize?

The depth chart was not posted to be accurate. I already said this and you continue to fail at reading. The depth chart was to show that not many of these guys will be here next year and that the roster is filled with bandages.

Mustipher will start if Patrick isn't ready to go. Which by the sound of it, he wont.  So he will be our 1.  I agree he's a decent backup but he is not someone who should be starting but we don't have a choice because he's the best option. Why is he our best option? Because the roster is a disaster.

Who's replacing Blackson? A PS guy who just got here a few days ago? That's what your counting on? That alone should tell you just how talent deprived this roster really is.

Morrow is our #1 but he is not a GOOD #1.  He is good depth player at best. But he's starting because, once again, he's the best option we have.

Vildor will be the #1, not 2 like you claim (both boundary and NB in this system should be considered 1s. Vildor's best work came when he was a nickel but when he was moved outside he was not good. His ceiling is that of a good depth player at nickel (which is essentially #4 on the depth chart) but, once again, he has start because we have nobody else.

You asked who are these 4s playing 1 spots and it's funny how you ignored all of this, including ESB and Pringle.

All of this is before injuries eventually start piling up.  You seem to think people saying that this is a bad roster is somehow based on an agenda when it's not. It's simply the truth. As expected with any rebuilding team in it's first year. But you seem to have a problem accepting this.

Coaching can only so far. A team needs talent and we lack quite a bit of it.

Here's an article from OTC that Fitzgerald just posted yesterday:

https://overthecap.com/2022-nfl-season-preview-building-teams-via-the-draft

Quote

The NFL average in this category is about 59% on the active roster and 57% if we also include the practice squad. I’d consider any team over 65% to be a standout in this category and those under 52% to be a bit of a disaster.  I do think it is worth pointing out that being very high in this category can also mean that the team is not focusing enough outside the organization (Dallas probably fits that billing this year) and maybe putting too much stock in their own talent, but generally teams that do feature their own picks are the far more stable teams. The lower range teams more often than not need all the stars to align to get it right. The positive for the Jets, Texans, Dolphins, Bears, and Steelers is that each does have a young QB that hope provides that alignment. It is harder when you don’t have that untapped potential.

The Bears are 47.5% (4th lowest in the league next to the likes of OTHER rebuilding teams such as Jets and Texans).

55.8% of the Bears roster is literally made up of 5th, 6th round picks and UDFA's. Which is the most in the league.

 

Quote

And when we don't have a bottom 10 record, will you be here to apologize?

I will be here and I hope I am wrong.  But if we do have a bottom 10 record, will you be here to apologize as well?

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2022 by JAF-N72EX

[JAF-N72EX]

I know this will also get ignored because some people don't wanna hear it, but....here's a breakdown of each teams roster makeup separated by rounds and UDFAs.

I don't care where players are drafted...talent can be found in any round... but the likelihood of finding talent diminishes exponentially in later rounds, and right now 65.6% of the Bears roster is made up of players drafted in the 5th, 6th, 7th rounds and UDFAs. The most in the league by a good margin (WAS 61.3% is 2nd).

Team	RD 1-2	RK	RD 3-4	RK	RD 5-6	RK	RD 7-UDFA	RK
Saints	35.5%	1	17.7%	28	3.2%	32	43.5%	1
Cardinals	35.0%	2	18.4%	27	11.6%	28	35.0%	14
Buccaneers	34.4%	3	25.8%	11	15.5%	21	24.1%	30
Dolphins	32.2%	4	19.4%	23	11.3%	30	37.1%	10
Jets	31.6%	5	21.6%	21	28.3%	1	18.4%	32
Panthers	30.5%	6	20.4%	22	17.0%	16	32.2%	17
Chiefs	30.3%	7	26.8%	9	16.1%	19	26.7%	25
Packers	29.0%	8	16.2%	30	21.0%	8	33.9%	15
Falcons	28.6%	9	19.0%	26	14.3%	23	38.1%	6
Seahawks	27.9%	10	22.9%	17	16.4%	17	32.8%	16
Ravens	27.5%	11	38.7%	1	8.0%	31	25.8%	27
Vikings	27.2%	12	27.2%	8	15.3%	22	30.5%	19
Eagles	27.2%	12	23.8%	14	20.3%	10	28.8%	23
Cowboys	27.1%	14	30.5%	3	18.7%	12	23.7%	31
Steelers	27.1%	14	30.5%	4	11.9%	27	30.5%	19
Colts	26.3%	16	19.3%	25	17.5%	15	36.8%	11
Bills	26.3%	16	17.6%	29	26.3%	3	29.8%	21
Browns	25.8%	18	32.3%	2	17.8%	14	24.2%	29
Titans	25.8%	18	24.2%	13	13.8%	26	36.2%	12
Patriots	25.5%	20	22.1%	19	23.8%	5	28.8%	23
Bengals	25.4%	21	23.8%	14	25.4%	4	25.3%	28
Chargers	25.4%	21	15.3%	31	18.7%	12	40.7%	3
Jaguars	24.5%	23	22.8%	18	14.1%	25	38.6%	5
Lions	23.8%	24	23.8%	14	14.2%	24	38.1%	6
49ers	23.8%	24	22.1%	19	23.8%	5	30.5%	18
Giants	23.0%	26	27.9%	6	19.7%	11	29.6%	22
Broncos	21.3%	27	24.6%	12	16.4%	17	37.7%	8
Bears	21.3%	27	13.1%	32	27.9%	2	37.7%	8
Raiders	20.7%	29	27.5%	7	15.5%	20	36.2%	12
Texans	20.0%	30	30.0%	5	23.3%	7	26.7%	25
Rams	19.7%	31	26.3%	10	11.5%	29	42.6%	2
Commanders	19.4%	32	19.4%	23	21.0%	8	40.3%	4

 

[Superman(DH23)]

@JAF-N72EX you do realize watts is not some practice squad guy right?  That he was a starting DT w/ 6 sacks last year in a defense simar to ours?  That he was only made available bc Minny is changing schemes?  And again I'm not sure what your point is w/ Vildor.  He's either the #3 CB out of 6 or he's a #1 bc he's a starter and by your own admission he's a pretty good backup option, which would make him closer to a 2 than a 4.  And you posted an article with an opinion dude.  Let's talk about what that article actually says.  So in the piece you provided.  8 teams were above the 65% threshold, 4 if which made the playoffs last year.  7 teams were below the 52% cutoff 3 of which made the playoffs.  The Bears udfa make up is actually lower than the Chiefs, Chargers, Raiders, and Broncos to name a few.  This dude has an opinion on what this means and he's certainly entitled to it, but he provided no statistical analysis to show how any of the info is relevant to results.  You're better than this dude.

[JAF-N72EX]

This also showcases Pace's biggest problem as well.

[Superman(DH23)]

5 minutes ago, JAF-N72EX said:

I know this will also get ignored because some people don't wanna hear it, but....here's a breakdown of each teams roster makeup separated by rounds and UDFAs.

I don't care where players are drafted...talent can be found in any round... but the likelihood of finding talent diminishes exponentially in later rounds, and right now 65.6% of the Bears roster is made up of players drafted in the 5th, 6th, 7th rounds and UDFAs. The most in the league by a good margin (WAS 61.3% is 2nd).

 

Team	RD 1-2	RK	RD 3-4	RK	RD 5-6	RK	RD 7-UDFA	RK
Saints	35.5%	1	17.7%	28	3.2%	32	43.5%	1
Cardinals	35.0%	2	18.4%	27	11.6%	28	35.0%	14
Buccaneers	34.4%	3	25.8%	11	15.5%	21	24.1%	30
Dolphins	32.2%	4	19.4%	23	11.3%	30	37.1%	10
Jets	31.6%	5	21.6%	21	28.3%	1	18.4%	32
Panthers	30.5%	6	20.4%	22	17.0%	16	32.2%	17
Chiefs	30.3%	7	26.8%	9	16.1%	19	26.7%	25
Packers	29.0%	8	16.2%	30	21.0%	8	33.9%	15
Falcons	28.6%	9	19.0%	26	14.3%	23	38.1%	6
Seahawks	27.9%	10	22.9%	17	16.4%	17	32.8%	16
Ravens	27.5%	11	38.7%	1	8.0%	31	25.8%	27
Vikings	27.2%	12	27.2%	8	15.3%	22	30.5%	19
Eagles	27.2%	12	23.8%	14	20.3%	10	28.8%	23
Cowboys	27.1%	14	30.5%	3	18.7%	12	23.7%	31
Steelers	27.1%	14	30.5%	4	11.9%	27	30.5%	19
Colts	26.3%	16	19.3%	25	17.5%	15	36.8%	11
Bills	26.3%	16	17.6%	29	26.3%	3	29.8%	21
Browns	25.8%	18	32.3%	2	17.8%	14	24.2%	29
Titans	25.8%	18	24.2%	13	13.8%	26	36.2%	12
Patriots	25.5%	20	22.1%	19	23.8%	5	28.8%	23
Bengals	25.4%	21	23.8%	14	25.4%	4	25.3%	28
Chargers	25.4%	21	15.3%	31	18.7%	12	40.7%	3
Jaguars	24.5%	23	22.8%	18	14.1%	25	38.6%	5
Lions	23.8%	24	23.8%	14	14.2%	24	38.1%	6
49ers	23.8%	24	22.1%	19	23.8%	5	30.5%	18
Giants	23.0%	26	27.9%	6	19.7%	11	29.6%	22
Broncos	21.3%	27	24.6%	12	16.4%	17	37.7%	8
Bears	21.3%	27	13.1%	32	27.9%	2	37.7%	8
Raiders	20.7%	29	27.5%	7	15.5%	20	36.2%	12
Texans	20.0%	30	30.0%	5	23.3%	7	26.7%	25
Rams	19.7%	31	26.3%	10	11.5%	29	42.6%	2
Commanders	19.4%	32	19.4%	23	21.0%	8	40.3%	4

 

What does this mean exactly to you, there's no correlation to success in any of these numbers.  If anything it proves that it doesn't really matter where you focus your attention on getting players as long as you get the right players.

[JAF-N72EX]

Just now, Superman(DH23) said:

@JAF-N72EX you do realize watts is not some practice squad guy right?  That he was a starting DT w/ 6 sacks last year in a defense simar to ours?  That he was only made available bc Minny is changing schemes?  And again I'm not sure what your point is w/ Vildor.  He's either the #3 CB out of 6 or he's a #1 bc he's a starter and by your own admission he's a pretty good backup option, which would make him closer to a 2 than a 4.  And you posted an article with an opinion dude.  Let's talk about what that article actually says.  So in the piece you provided.  8 teams were above the 65% threshold, 4 if which made the playoffs last year.  7 teams were below the 52% cutoff 3 of which made the playoffs.  The Bears udfa make up is actually lower than the Chiefs, Chargers, Raiders, and Broncos to name a few.  This dude has an opinion on what this means and he's certainly entitled to it, but he provided no statistical analysis to show how any of the info is relevant to results.  You're better than this dude.

I'm saying Vildor is our #1 at boundary but I don't think he should be. I think he should be a NB because he was actually solid there (with growing pains). Moving him to the outside was a mistake by the last regime. And this regime is also making a mistake by starting him there but I don't think they have a better option either (well kinda not because Graham was a better outside corner than him).

The 2 starting CBs and 1 starting nickel back should be considered 1s. Backups would be 2s but 4th on the depth chart. That's what I'm saying.

The numbers used in the article are not opinion based.  He is a capologist who uses team cap numbers and nothing more. Which is why I brought up his article in the first place because he was the least subjective.

[JAF-N72EX]

11 minutes ago, Superman(DH23) said:

What does this mean exactly to you, there's no correlation to success in any of these numbers.  If anything it proves that it doesn't really matter where you focus your attention on getting players as long as you get the right players.

It proves that this team is in a rebuilding stage and Poles held back because he wants to use this season as a stepping stone to see where he should go from here next year.

[JAF-N72EX]

I dont even think Poles is expecting wins this year. This is a "lets see where we're at" kinda year.  I'm still not convinced that he or the staff is fully sold on Fields either (although they should be which has been my biggest issue).

The entire roster is on notice and by the look of things....chances are the change over next year is going to be massive.

Edited September 6, 2022 by JAF-N72EX

[Madmike90]

 

[Madmike90]

 

 

 

Edited September 9, 2022 by Madmike90

[Madmike90]

 

 

[Sugashane]

On 9/5/2022 at 10:48 PM, JAF-N72EX said:

It proves that this team is in a rebuilding stage and Poles held back because he wants to use this season as a stepping stone to see where he should go from here next year.

Agreed. And outside of my (still current) concerns with OL and WR im all for it. Pace needed to fix Emery's mess and clean house, and while there was more talent than Emery inherited if Poles wants this to be built HIS way ASAP there had to be some drawbacks. The reliance on young and unproven guys is one thing that will definitely hurt in the short term (and a few potential wins imo) but if he finds a few gems then by all means it can be a massive boost for the long-term. Could make 2023s draft and FA much more direct to succeed. 

[Sugashane]

On 9/7/2022 at 12:26 PM, Madmike90 said:

 

Pretty much slams the door on moving Quinn unless he publicly requests it IMO. Im fine with that too, especially if he is really working with the young guys we have. 

[JAF-N72EX]

13 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

Agreed. And outside of my (still current) concerns with OL and WR im all for it. Pace needed to fix Emery's mess and clean house, and while there was more talent than Emery inherited if Poles wants this to be built HIS way ASAP there had to be some drawbacks. The reliance on young and unproven guys is one thing that will definitely hurt in the short term (and a few potential wins imo) but if he finds a few gems then by all means it can be a massive boost for the long-term. Could make 2023s draft and FA much more direct to succeed. 

Yep. Not having many good receiving options outside of Mooney will give him a real chance to prove whether he can be a #1 or not because true #1s can still produce regardless of what's around them.  If he can then that's great for next season cause finding a #2 is a hell of a lot easier than finding a #1.  And If Braxton and Borom can prove to be long-term fixtures at edge then that's only a bonus.

It would be great to go into next offseason without the need of a #1 WR and both tackle positions. This would give Poles a ton of options in the draft.