Justin Fields

[AZBearsFan]

4 minutes ago, BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW said:

Ok, maybe don't call it a deadline, but certainly a decision moment or fork in the road.   If the Bears were in their Pace mode of not having a first round pick I think we'd probably be pleased or at least OK with where Fields is at.

I get the feeling if there is a trade with the Bears for #1 it might be somewhat of a record setter, I'm not sure they don't exceed your already high compensation if that happens. 

It would also be hilarious if the Bears just kept indefinitely trading away the first pick for a handful of years,  like imagine in that scenario where Williams busts for Washington and they have some injuries and a coaching shakeup etc. 

I think that’s the point - if you think you might have the QB the trade down and kicking that fork down the road another 12 months sets you up to continually strengthen the roster to where if you’re ultimately wrong about the current QB you can still replace him with a premium asset without crippling multiple years’ drafts, and if you’re right about the current QB that you can put premium assets everywhere else while not having crazy salary cap problems and can build an absolute Madden-like juggernaut. Both of those situations are really good ones in which to find oneself as GM. In alternate, if you’re Poles, if you trade Fields and miss on the next guy you’re almost surely gone in 2-3 years tops. Everyone talks about the QB clock for the GM like the only way he can extend his window by putting his foot in the ground now at quarterback while the opposite is true - if he builds the rest of the roster up this offseason and kicks the QB decision another 12 months and then resets at QB if JF isn’t it then he’s probably bought himself another 12 months. Whatever he does, if he gets the QB decision right he extends his window most, so if he has the opportunity to take more time and feels it necessary then doing just that probably makes the most sense for him.  

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

35 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I think that’s the point - if you think you might have the QB the trade down and kicking that fork down the road another 12 months sets you up to continually strengthen the roster to where if you’re ultimately wrong about the current QB you can still replace him with a premium asset without crippling multiple years’ drafts, and if you’re right about the current QB that you can put premium assets everywhere else while not having crazy salary cap problems and can build an absolute Madden-like juggernaut. Both of those situations are really good ones in which to find oneself as GM. In alternate, if you’re Poles, if you trade Fields and miss on the next guy you’re almost surely gone in 2-3 years tops. Everyone talks about the QB clock for the GM like the only way he can extend his window by putting his foot in the ground now at quarterback while the opposite is true - if he builds the rest of the roster up this offseason and kicks the QB decision another 12 months and then resets at QB if JF isn’t it then he’s probably bought himself another 12 months. Whatever he does, if he gets the QB decision right he extends his window most, so if he has the opportunity to take more time and feels it necessary then doing just that probably makes the most sense for him.  

I certainly wouldn't hate it, but we just don't know how Poles feels, or Flus really feels, about Justin Fields.

Kinda reminds me of that adage about climate change, but adapted for this situation it would be "What if we created a super deep talented roster relatively cheaply all for nothing?" 

Super interesting times for the Bears, and for once it seems like there might be multiple ways for things to go right for a change.  Cue the signing of Ryan Tannehill and drafting two LBs in the first round. 

[AZBearsFan]

31 minutes ago, BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW said:

I certainly wouldn't hate it, but we just don't know how Poles feels, or Flus really feels, about Justin Fields.

Kinda reminds me of that adage about climate change, but adapted for this situation it would be "What if we created a super deep talented roster relatively cheaply all for nothing?" 

Super interesting times for the Bears, and for once it seems like there might be multiple ways for things to go right for a change.  Cue the signing of Ryan Tannehill and drafting two LBs in the first round. 

LOL at the last part.

You’re right - we don’t know how Poles feels about Fields. He always speaks highly of him, but his role calls for such to happen even when it’s disingenuous too. All avenues have risk and all can be supported as the “best” decision.

Just get it right for once. 

[G08]

On 12/12/2023 at 8:03 AM, AZBearsFan said:

The goal is the same as any other - engagement. It’s the reason we get “content” from writers and bloggers and podcasters and tv personalities and draft analysts every single day. It’s how they get paid. Making Fields and Flus constant lightning rods makes it easier for those “content” producers to do their jobs. It’s why everything Fields/Flus do gets nitpicked to the nth degree every single week. They say/tweet/write it, and people just start to believe it because they hear it all the time.

Reality is, if we didn’t have the CAR pick, or if it wasn’t almost certain to be a top 2 pick, any discussion about replacing Fields internally would probably be reasonably non-existent. He’s not perfect, but no QB is.

Fields fumbles more than you’d like, but he fumbles less than Lamar Jackson does and nobody kills Lamar for it. Fields takes more sacks than you’d like, but the big play mindset that causes him to hold the ball too long at times also leads to most of his big plays with his legs and off script throws that he creates with his athleticism that basically nobody else can do. If you don’t like high risk high reward, then you wouldn’t like Josh Allen or the Greatest Show on Turf version of Kurt Warner either (Warner threw 22 INT in 2001 and he was MVP that season). Fields turns the ball over more than you’d like in general, but here’s where he sits in terms of turnovers per game in 2023 (INT thrown/fumbles lost/games played):

Fields 1.11 (6/4/9)

Hurts 1.15 (10/5/13)

Mahomes 1.00 (11/2/13)

Allen 1.31 (14/3/13)

LJax 0.92 (6/6/13)

Purdy 0.69 (7/2/13)

Tua 1.15 (10/5/13)

Burrow 0.60 (6/0/10)

Lawrence 1.08 (10/4/13)

Dak 0.54 (6/1/13)

Herbert 0.54 (6/1/13)

Outside of a few statistical outliers, he’s right in the same place as the top guys in the league. Perspective matters.

Is he “good enough”? This version of Fields should be 5-4 this year (he didn’t piss away the DEN or DET games on defense) with a still-a-year-away roster around him. Poles said before the season that what he’s looking for from Fields in 2023 is “growth.” The 2023 version of Fields is unquestionably better than last year’s version of Fields as a passer both on the eye test and statistically (3.1% jump in comp%, 31% reduction in INT%, 0.62 increase in TD:INT ratio, same YPA, 6.6 increase in QB rating) and in all likelihood isn’t as good as next year’s version of Fields with more weapons and the presumed further OL upgrades that would await in 2024 with or without a trade of CAR’s pick, and that doesn’t yet consider where this version of Fields ranks in the non-statistical elements (on which he ranks incredibly high) like leadership, character and ability to deal with all that comes with the Chicago media and fan base.

It isn’t hard to make a reasoned argument in favor of moving forward with him. At all. 

What an excellent post 🍻

 

This begs the question: what do you do at offensive coordinator? Do you run it back with Getsy and have Fields be in the same system for 3 years in a row (unheard of in Chicago)? Or do you fire the entire staff (perhaps save for Chris Morgan) and bring in a hopefuly revigorated Greg Roman and pray to the football Gods he learned how to develop a potent passing attack to match his running game prowess?

[malak1]

4 hours ago, BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW said:

Super interesting times for the Bears, and for once it seems like there might be multiple ways for things to go right for a change.  Cue the signing of Ryan Tannehill and drafting two LBs in the first round.

man.......

[AZBearsFan]

3 hours ago, G08 said:

What an excellent post 🍻

 

This begs the question: what do you do at offensive coordinator? Do you run it back with Getsy and have Fields be in the same system for 3 years in a row (unheard of in Chicago)? Or do you fire the entire staff (perhaps save for Chris Morgan) and bring in a hopefuly revigorated Greg Roman and pray to the football Gods he learned how to develop a potent passing attack to match his running game prowess?

I don’t want Getsy here next year regardless but there’s an argument for it (not one I think is a good one) if Fields is back. 

[G08]

5 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

I don’t want Getsy here next year regardless but there’s an argument for it (not one I think is a good one) if Fields is back. 

Who do you like as a replacement, assuming Getsy is fired.

[HuskieBear]

2 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

I don’t want Getsy here next year regardless but there’s an argument for it (not one I think is a good one) if Fields is back. 

i dont like getsy per se, but if flus and fields are back, i think you have to bring him back. it would be fields 3rd OC in 4 years and that's just as likely to screw him. 

[Madmike90]

2 hours ago, G08 said:

Who do you like as a replacement, assuming Getsy is fired.

Hmmm...here is the thing and I was thinking this as I was watching the Lions game but didn't really want to cross this bridge until we absolutely had too...Was listening to Hoge & Jahns today and they brought it up...

If Fields continues to look better over the remaining games of this year and we decide to roll with Flus & Fields...

Do we fire Getsy?

Now performance wish I 100% believe there is a valid case for it...but do you want to send an improving Fields into his 3rd OC in 4 seasons? We have seen what that does to QBs around the league...Getsy might not be great stability but he would provide a steadying option for Fields to continue to grow and maybe with more talent on the field wouldn't have to call games where we see 20 screens a game...maybe wouldn't have to try some stupid flip to a WR on 4th down...maybe could just keep things pretty simple but let the talent take over...

One thing is for sure...if we do keep Flus & Fields but get rid of Getsy we need to bring in someone else from that "Shanahan/McVay" scheme to try and keep some of the elements & verbiage the same.

[G08]

33 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

Hmmm...here is the thing and I was thinking this as I was watching the Lions game but didn't really want to cross this bridge until we absolutely had too...Was listening to Hoge & Jahns today and they brought it up...

If Fields continues to look better over the remaining games of this year and we decide to roll with Flus & Fields...

Do we fire Getsy?

Now performance wish I 100% believe there is a valid case for it...but do you want to send an improving Fields into his 3rd OC in 4 seasons? We have seen what that does to QBs around the league...Getsy might not be great stability but he would provide a steadying option for Fields to continue to grow and maybe with more talent on the field wouldn't have to call games where we see 20 screens a game...maybe wouldn't have to try some stupid flip to a WR on 4th down...maybe could just keep things pretty simple but let the talent take over...

One thing is for sure...if we do keep Flus & Fields but get rid of Getsy we need to bring in someone else from that "Shanahan/McVay" scheme to try and keep some of the elements & verbiage the same.

That's the issue I'm running into as well. I look at the Buffalo Bills and Josh Allen/Brian Daboll as an example:

Year 1 - 30th in scoring

Year 2 - 23rd in scoring

Year 3 - 2nd in scoring

 

Contrast that with Luke Getsy/Justin Fields:

Year 1 - 23rd in scoring

Year 2 - 20th in scoring

Year 3 - ???

 

I hate the idea of changing offensive coordinators for Justin Fields, but I just don't know if Luke Getsy is the guy to build an offense around his skillset. These final 4 games will be telling. On the flipside, Goff went from McVay to Lynn to Johnson and his best season wound up being under Johnson...

 

If Greg Roman could prove to me that he spent this year focused on building an innovative passing offense to accompany his elite running game, I'd hire him in a second. That is a huge, huge IF, though.

[beardown3231]

48 minutes ago, G08 said:

That's the issue I'm running into as well. I look at the Buffalo Bills and Josh Allen/Brian Daboll as an example:

Year 1 - 30th in scoring

Year 2 - 23rd in scoring

Year 3 - 2nd in scoring

 

Contrast that with Luke Getsy/Justin Fields:

Year 1 - 23rd in scoring

Year 2 - 20th in scoring

Year 3 - ???

 

I hate the idea of changing offensive coordinators for Justin Fields, but I just don't know if Luke Getsy is the guy to build an offense around his skillset. These final 4 games will be telling. On the flipside, Goff went from McVay to Lynn to Johnson and his best season wound up being under Johnson...

 

If Greg Roman could prove to me that he spent this year focused on building an innovative passing offense to accompany his elite running game, I'd hire him in a second. That is a huge, huge IF, though.

What is it right now in year 3? Forget season's end. What is the ranking now?

[CBears019]

12 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

What is it right now in year 3? Forget season's end. What is the ranking now?

This is only their second year together.

[dafreak]

This has probably already been discussed but if we didn't potentially have the #1 pick, what pick would it take for you to still consider drafting a QB to replace Fields? What if we only had our #1 pick, would drafting a QB still be a discussion?

[G08]

46 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

What is it right now in year 3? Forget season's end. What is the ranking now?

It's year 2 in Getsy's scheme currently.

[Epyon]

2 hours ago, dafreak said:

This has probably already been discussed but if we didn't potentially have the #1 pick, what pick would it take for you to still consider drafting a QB to replace Fields? What if we only had our #1 pick, would drafting a QB still be a discussion?

Probably not.  I'd at least look at the options, but honestly Caleb or MAYBE Maye are the only two I'd probably take over Fields right now and fairly certain Williams is going 1.1 and Maye is either going 1.2 or 1.3