New Years Eve Eve GDT - Bears/Falcons

[Madmike90]

3 hours ago, Sugashane said:

I was able to get behind every point but that one. I think Smith was a fine fit schematically (of course there was an adjustment period but thatvwasnt unexpected), but he had complete trash in front of him. When Justin Jones is far and away the best player on your DL then the LB is going to suffer. It was the same thing early on until the DL gelled for Edmunds and Edwards. Clearly the talent was there for them but they didnt look right, almost disjointed. DL improved and added Sweat, playcalling improved with Flubby taking the reigns, and now they look like studs. Jones is like the 4th or 5th best DL this year, so the talent up front was juat massively improved. Smith would 100% be in the same boat IMO.

That being said I am still completely good with Poles moving on from Smith, his off-field antics would have been too damn annoying to deal with if I was the GM too.

I just think Smith looked really slow when playing in this scheme…he was slow to read…slow to fill his gap…slow even sideline to sideline…one of the weirdest things I have seen because to a man we all thought he was going to be an excellent fit…just goes to show how much football is about situation…leaves for Baltimore’s 3-4 and again looks great…both teams came out that trade really well…so did all three LBs to be fair.

[StLunatic88]

14 hours ago, Sugashane said:

think Smith was a fine fit schematically

Would you be happy shelling out the Highest Paid LB contract for “fine”?

It’s more than we are paying Sweat. I think that was more of his point

[Sugashane]

1 hour ago, StLunatic88 said:

Would you be happy shelling out the Highest Paid LB contract for “fine”?

It’s more than we are paying Sweat. I think that was more of his point

I'll pretty much always pick an EDGE over an offball LB if they're about equal in talent. Positional value is just higher there.

What I'm saying is that I believe Smith would still outperform Edmunds or Edwards with this talent around him, and they would have played far less impressively with the garbage DL in front of them. His play would have made a significant jump with the increased talent imo.

Do you disagree?

[Madmike90]

45 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

I'll pretty much always pick an EDGE over an offball LB if they're about equal in talent. Positional value is just higher there.

What I'm saying is that I believe Smith would still outperform Edmunds or Edwards with this talent around him, and they would have played far less impressively with the garbage DL in front of them. His play would have made a significant jump with the increased talent imo.

Do you disagree?

I disagree...the reason being we saw a number of plays where the defence done it's job and got him into position to make plays and he was either too slow to the hole or he missed the tackle...I just think he is one of those guys who is a better fit in a 3-4...nothing wrong with that because he was excellent under Fangio and has been great in Baltimore.

[Sugashane]

32 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

I disagree...the reason being we saw a number of plays where the defence done it's job and got him into position to make plays and he was either too slow to the hole or he missed the tackle...I just think he is one of those guys who is a better fit in a 3-4...nothing wrong with that because he was excellent under Fangio and has been great in Baltimore.

We will have to agree to disagree then because i feel like this is more of a "jilted lover" kind of situation than objective fact. It was a complete scheme change so he was going to need time to make it seem instincual out there. Reads, responsibikities, calls, etc were different so there was going to be an adjustment period. Not to mention look at the difference with Williams being out and Eberflus making the calls. Do you not believe Smith would have benefitted from that change as well?

I mean really if there are reads Fields misses and throws he missed when everyone did their job (as there are basically every game) then it's being kind of crazy to bash Smith for missing an occasional tackle or not getting to a hole. Just as saying Fields lacks talent around him compared to what Smith had around him last year. Smith was in a WAY worse situation than Fields was this year like it was borderline even with Tru during his rookie year. Smith was highly productive most games and the Bears averaged 22.6 ppg given up when he was here. They ended the season at over 27. Smith carried the defense. He's a douchebag but he was a stud on the field.

[Madmike90]

1 minute ago, Sugashane said:

We will have to agree to disagree then because i feel like this is more of a "jilted lover" kind of situation than objective fact. It was a complete scheme change so he was going to need time to make it seem instincual out there. Reads, responsibikities, calls, etc were different so there was going to be an adjustment period. Not to mention look at the difference with Williams being out and Eberflus making the calls. Do you not believe Smith would have benefitted from that change as well?

I mean really if there are reads Fields misses and throws he missed when everyone did their job (as there are basically every game) then it's being kind of crazy to bash Smith for missing an occasional tackle or not getting to a hole. Just as saying Fields lacks talent around him compared to what Smith had around him last year. Smith was in a WAY worse situation than Fields was this year like it was borderline even with Tru during his rookie year. Smith was highly productive most games and the Bears averaged 22.6 ppg given up when he was here. They ended the season at over 27. Smith carried the defense. He's a douchebag but he was a stud on the field.

Again this isn't a Roquan wasn't a stud for us and isn't a stud now sort of situation...I loved Roquan when he was here...I wanted to pay him in the offseason Flus got here because on paper he should have been a great fit...and now he is in Baltimore it is a ton of fun watching him and Queen make plays all over the field...I just think to get the very best out of him he needs to play in that 3-4 D...

Same as to get the best out of Fields he needs to play in a scheme that allows him to throw the ball deep, uses mesh & crossing concepts and attacks the seams of the defence rather than Getsy's Shanahan/WCO offence...a ton of football is about scheme fit...it's why so many 1st round picks bust because too many people just see great players and not great scheme fits.

[Sugashane]

9 minutes ago, Madmike90 said:

Same as to get the best out of Fields he needs to play in a scheme that allows him to throw the ball deep, uses mesh & crossing concepts and attacks the seams of the defence rather than Getsy's Shanahan/WCO offence...a ton of football is about scheme fit...it's why so many 1st round picks bust because too many people just see great players and not great scheme fits.

It does piss me off that for both Tru and Fields the Bears have gone away from what made them 1st round picks. Tru wasn't going to be a stud but Fields has more talent than Tru ever has had. But Nagy and Getsy both try to avoid their athletic talents to force them into pocket passers.

I get wanting development, you don't want to Cam Newton them into playing like they're physically 8 years older than they really are. But you can gradually adjust the playcalls as they develop and improve their passing/reading defenses. Make a plan and develop them slowly. Stop the baptism by fire ****.