Matt Nagy in General and His Playcalling

[Yogi da Bear]

In general, I think that Matt Nagy is an excellent coach. Andy Reid called him the best, "most promising" of his disciples. He definitely brought "fun" back into the Bear locker room, and the players all seem to love him. His major weakness has been his play calling....

For the last twenty years it seems that the Bear play calling has been a pendulum. Remember when we brought in Gary Crowton to "open up" our offense? Then we went from that pass happy scheme to John Shoop and his two yard dive up the middle and a cloud of dust. Then we went to Terry Shea who got our QBs sacked 66 times! From there, we brought back the far more conservative Ron Turner for his second stint. From here, we brought in Mike Martz and his pass happy deep drop offense. We went back to run, run, run with Mike Tice. So we went pass happy again with Marc Trestman. Then we bring in John Fox to run, run, run again with an almost high school offense. Enter Matt Nagy and now all we hear is how we have to run the ball again.

For me, I love Nagy's trick plays, his creativity. He just overdoes it. A lot. Football is simply not that difficult. We I don't get is why he doesn't stick with what's working. It's what killed Jordan Howard's time with the Bears. Howard would crack off a ten yard run, a five run, and he'd be out of the game. WTF?! Stick with it. Same thing happed with Montgomery last year. Montgomery would hit for a burst, and be taken out. It's like a coach in basketball taking out the player with the hot hand.

I don't want the pendulum to swing the other way to a run, run, run philosophy. I've had enough of that. Just got through with four years of that shit with John Fox. But Nagy needs to learn to ride the horse who's successful. Let's not forget the I formation that was so successful last year. Let's not remove it from our offense. If running is working, stick with it until they stop it or the defense has to load up to stop it. THEN spring your trick play or play action pass.

Nagy needs to learn BALANCE. Not everything has to be some kind of gimmick, but don't give up on those gimmicks either. I don't want the pendulum to swing back to run, run, run, but goddammit Matt, don't forget the run either.

I am not writing Nagy off. I love him as a coach in general. I love his creativity in play calling, but just don't go overboard. If every thing is a gimmick, then that's what your offense becomes. And goddammit, learn to ride what's working. I think that Nagy can be the best offensive coach we've had since Papa Bear first installed the T Formation. But he needs to learn to run the ball more, not necessarily all the time, unless defenses can't stop us. Then just keep cramming it down their throats.

There, I said my piece.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

I'm with you all the way.

If Nagy fails and is fired it won't be because of his abilities as a head coach but because his ego has him convinced he is a great offensive co-ordinator/playcaller and it will have become clear that he isn't.

The primary reason he was hired was to develop Trubisky and he's failed miserably there. From year one to year two he's persisted with the same bad tendencies you've mentioned. In the running game in particular he's abandoned plays that have been effective and stuck with ones that haven't. His screen plays have become increasingly ineffective. Every player on the offense not named Allen Robinson was out-of-sync all season long and that was really worrying.

His in-game decision making has been highly questionable going all the way back to his very first game against Green Bay. The Bears were up 20-17 with 2:47 left and Green Bay had no timeouts. Already on that drive they had converted 3rd and 3 and 3rd and 2 by rushing and Jordan Howard had just broken off chunk runs of 16 and 11 yards. Yet on 3rd and 2 they throw the ball. The resulting incompletion stops the clock with 2:42 left. If they had run and converted the game was over. If they had run and failed then they would have been able to run the clock down to the 2 minute warning or at least mighty close to it before kicking the field goal. It was terrible game management.

At the time it was easy to put it down to an inexperienced playcaller in his first game as head coach, but we've continued to see odd and sometimes downright bizarre decisions from him. Settling for a 41 yard game-winning field goal attempt against the Chargers and not even knowing or asking his kicker where he wanted to kick from for example, a lack of awareness compounded by the fact that Pineiro had missed from just 33 yards earlier in the game. Only running the ball 7 times against the Saints when it was Trubisky's first game back after he dislocated his shoulder and the score was 12-10 at halftime. Pulling Trubisky at the end of the Rams game when it was already all but lost, basically humiliating a QB already struggling for confidence for no reason regardless of subsequent injury claims. The list goes on.

Nagy did the right thing clearing house and bringing in new offensive assistants, but ultimately he needs to address his own failings if this team is going to succeed.

[Kylo Bearen]

I like Nagy and think with the right quarterback and offensive linemen his offense can look pretty good. In the mean time he should try to tailor his offense to his personnel and their strengths and abilities to keep his gig.

[Richie]

I am still pro-Nagy. I believe that if you give him a competent NFL QB and O-line that he could be prolific as a HC.

Word on the street has been that Mitch never had the training wheels version of the offense taken off. I think Foles would at least allow Nagy to open everything up. I think Nagy's strength is in his play design (especially the passing game) and that he some bad "tendencies" in play calling. He's a young coach who is still probably learning. I think he will grow past those tendencies.

I also believe that a lot of his bad tendencies were magnified by the sheer desperation he felt on offense last year.

I think people also have to keep in mind that Nagy schemed guys open downfield a TON for Mitch last year and he missed on average (at least) a huge play downfield to a wide open WR per game. He played 14 full games and he 100% missed 14 streaking WR's at some point or another. NO, LAC, PHI, LAR and KC games had multiple plays like that.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

[BR0D1E86]

I'm at work but my shirt opinion on Nagy is he's a very good leader, a good play designer of passing plays in that he schemes guys open quite a bit, and a stubborn, inflexible play caller. Frankly a below average play caller.

[Umbali]

I dont mind the idea that a coach has to grow and develop just as you would expect a player to need time to grow and develop. I would rather give Nagy some time, because switching coaches and systems and players every few years does not work.

[spudbear]

Good post Yogi. I would go on further to say that his focus on play-calling has hurt his HC responsibilities: clock management, personnel decisions, managing ST's and D, taking a "big picture" of the game particularly on the flow of the offense. How can a QB acquire an instinct for the game when his HC is in his ear distracting him up to the snap? It feels like he's playing Madden on the XBox rather than a real NFL game.

Yes, you can run trick plays off the I-formation, running whatever misdirection seems to be effective against a particular team. The KC and Philly versions have All-Pros at TE while the Bears had some guy the Skins happened to release. Maybe it gets better this season with Graham, don't know.

Also don't know if Nagy's ego is too big to allow him to release the play calling abilities to someone else. Will he let Mitch be the scrambling QB that was successful 2 years ago?

[southdakbearfan]

His tendency to go away from the run game maddens the shit out of me at certain times, along with continually calling plays for Cohen on delayed runs up the middle. He did seem to lose some of his ingenuity last year vs the previous year.

I think he is a good coach that went through his sophomore slump where the NFL adjusted and caught up with his tendencies. If he is unwilling to adapt and learn he will flame out. If he learns and adjusts I think he could be great.

I do think he, like the QB, gets the load of the blame for last year. With the failings of the offensive line, tight ends, coaching and QB it was more of a total team failure than anything. It's hard to scheme with all those things failing at the same time.

[Atkins&Rebel]

If I had to guess, Nagy's philosophy is having the potential of a 50/50 split run vs pass every game. If he calls a RPO 25% of the time giving the QB full discretion to hand the ball off and not mandating a pass, and he calls 25% running plays on top of that, that should give him ~40% running plays on average.

My belief is that last season Trubisky wasn't able to run the RPO after he got hurt and the O line sucked so bad Nagy couldn't bring himself to run into a brick wall all game long.

[Yogi da Bear]

If I had to guess, Nagy's philosophy is having the potential of a 50/50 split run vs pass every game. If he calls a RPO 25% of the time giving the QB full discretion to hand the ball off and not mandating a pass, and he calls 25% running plays on top of that, that should give him ~40% running plays on average.

My belief is that last season Trubisky wasn't able to run the RPO after he got hurt and the O line sucked so bad Nagy couldn't bring himself to run into a brick wall all game long.

I really, really like Matt Nagy, but this reminds me of the one time I got the most pissed at him. It was after a game where we barely ran, and he said that he actually called more running plays, but they were RPOs.

WTF dude? Even if true, you don't throw you're young QB under the bus like that. And you're the fucking coach. If you're calling RPOs and you're QB is continuously exercising the pass option, FORCE him to make it a run option or call a straight run play. You're the coach. You can do that. In fact, if you see the team's throwing too much, it's your obligation to do that.

I certainly don't want to see us bang our head against the wall like we did with Fox. But what upsets me is how he's treated both Howard and Montgomery. Those guys are high volume backs. The play better the more they get the ball, and when they get on a roll, you ride them. With BOTH of those backs, if they strung a couple of plays together, he'd take them out and either pass it or run Cohen up the middle. Stop it. You aren't even keeping the threat of them on the field. I mean what is up with that? I don't want to bang our heads against the wall, but if the going's good, keep on going.

[Wounded Bear]

I’m kind of with the posters above who believe he got away from the run game because our oline sucked balls. Nagy’s short-comings were exposed when we had success running out of the I-formation and his refusal to commit to something that actufucking worked and then made a comment in the post game something to the effect that “I’m not getting paid to run plays out of the I-formation.” WTF?!!!

Anyhow Trubisky’s utter incompetence to be able to read when to run or throw out of the RPO’s compounded the problem frustrating Nagy to no end. With that said, if we see that again, Foles will not have that problem. And whether Trubisky or Foles starts the season, I am confident Foles will be ending the season.

[Richie]

I’m kind of with the posters above who believe he got away from the run game because our oline sucked balls. Nagy’s short-comings were exposed when we had success running out of the I-formation and his refusal to commit to something that actufucking worked and then made a comment in the post game something to the effect that “I’m not getting paid to run plays out of the I-formation.” WTF?!!!

He said that before he ever tried out the I-formation.

The Bears also never really had true success running the football out of the I. Only vs LAC which every team ran against. It was just that it went relatively better compared to the comical run game we displayed in the first 6 games.

I'm also fine with teams getting away from the run game when they can pass. The issue was that we couldn't pass either. We couldn't do anything...

[HisRoyalSweetness]

The Bears also never really had true success running the football out of the I. Only vs LAC which every team ran against. It was just that it went relatively better compared to the comical run game we displayed in the first 6 games.

I don't believe this was the case regarding the I formation (although agree wholeheartedly with the 'comical run game' in the first 6 games).

When the offense started having success running from the I and then Nagy appeared to keep giving up on it, I started charting the team's runs. Ultimately I didn't have time to do this for the whole season, but I do have records for the 3-game stretch covering the Chargers, Eagles and Lions games. Here's what I found with Montgomery as the ball carrier:

Chargers

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
7 carries, 49 yards, 7.0 ypc
0 carries for a loss or no gain (0%), 5 carries of at least 5 yards (71%), 2 carries of 10+ yards (29%)

Under center without Holtz:
7 carries, 6 yards, 0.9 ypc
2 carries for a loss or no gain (29%), 0 carries of at least 5 yards (0%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
13 carries, 81 yards, 6.2 ypc
3 carries for a loss or no gain (23%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (15%), 1 carry of 10+ yards (8%)
However these figures are skewed by that 1 carry of 10+ yards being a huge 55 yard gain. Without that the figures are:
12 carries, 26 yards, 2.2 ypc.

Eagles

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
9 carries, 38 yards, 4.2 ypc
1 carry for a loss or no gain (11%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (22%), 1 carry of 10+ yards (11%)

Under center without Holtz:
4 carries, 0 yards, 0.0 ypc
2 carries for a loss or no gain (50%), 0 carries of at least 5 yards (0%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
1 carry, 2 yards, 2.0 ypc

Lions

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
7 carries, 22 yards, 3.1 ypc
1 carry for a loss or no gain (11%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (22%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Under center without Holtz:
6 carries, 19 yards, 3.2 ypc
0 carries for a loss or no gain (0%), 1 carry of at least 5 yards (17%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
4 carries, 19 yards, 4.8 ypc
1 carry for a loss or no gain (25%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (50%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Totals over 3 games

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
23 carries, 109 yards, 4.7 ypc
3 carries for a loss or no gain (13%), 10 carries of at least 5 yards (44%), 3 carries of 10+ yards (13%)

Under center without Holtz:
17 carries, 25 yards, 1.5 ypc
4 carries for a loss or no gain (24%), 1 carry of at least 5 yards (6%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
18 carries, 102 yards, 5.7 ypc (With 55 yard run)
17 carries, 47 yards, 2.8 ypc (Without 55 yard run)
4 carries for a loss or no gain (22%), 4 carries of at least 5 yards (22%), 1 carries of 10+ yards (6%)

So it is clear that, aside from one huge run, the I formation resulted in by far the most productive and consistent running plays for Montgomery.

Running from under center without Holtz at fullback was an absolute disaster for Montgomery.

Obviously Nagy needed to mix up his playcalling, but the big problem was the opposing defense had no reason to worry about the run whatsoever whenever the Bears lined up with Trubisky under center without a fullback. This negatively impacted any play action passes run out of that formation. It would be interesting to know the success rate of those passes compared to others.

[Mikefive]

I’m kind of with the posters above who believe he got away from the run game because our oline sucked balls. Nagy’s short-comings were exposed when we had success running out of the I-formation and his refusal to commit to something that actufucking worked and then made a comment in the post game something to the effect that “I’m not getting paid to run plays out of the I-formation.” WTF?!!!

Anyhow Trubisky’s utter incompetence to be able to read when to run or throw out of the RPO’s compounded the problem frustrating Nagy to no end. With that said, if we see that again, Foles will not have that problem. And whether Trubisky or Foles starts the season, I am confident Foles will be ending the season.

I like Matt Nagy. I think he's smart and creative and seems to have fine leadership qualities.

The coach's principal job is to put the players in the best position to win. Coaches will always have their favorite system and make adaptations based on the skills of the players they have. However, what the I formation instances when he wouldn't go back to what worked shows is that Nagy is low on the spectrum of what he's willing to change to create mismatches. Obviously, he'll throw in some razzle dazzle. But he's very averse to going away from his fundamental scheme. He's Mike Martz-like in that way and I view it as a significant fault. It could be very interesting to see what he does without (or with a less adept speed merchant than) Taylor Gabriel. His WR core has no such guy unless you count RB Cohen.

I couldn't possibly know this for sure, but my belief is that he knows how to teach a QB and don't blame him for 10's lack of development. I think Biscuit just hasn't yet learned to effectively process the information in front of him.

[IE]

During the season I said it and I still believe it: I think Nagy was incredibly distracted and focusing on making something decent out of 10 when he was so clearly struggling. And then highly discombobulated by the performance of the team in general on top of that (and I believe BECAUSE of that). So I believe he has to get a pass on last season. How could he be balanced with a destination QB who can't produce and a running game getting all the priority attention from the defense?

I hated a lot of the play calling and abandoning the run and all predictable short passing ... but I don't really think he had much choice. With 10 under center the passing game was very little threat. I believe the reason the run game worked when they committed to it (esp with Holtz and I formation) is a combination of just plain having an extra blocker PLUS the element of surprise of Nagy going away from his apparent pass-wacky tendencies.

I expect with Foles under center Nagy will look a lot better. As will the line, the TE production and the run game.

[Richie]

The Bears also never really had true success running the football out of the I. Only vs LAC which every team ran against. It was just that it went relatively better compared to the comical run game we displayed in the first 6 games.

I don't believe this was the case regarding the I formation (although agree wholeheartedly with the 'comical run game' in the first 6 games).

When the offense started having success running from the I and then Nagy appeared to keep giving up on it, I started charting the team's runs. Ultimately I didn't have time to do this for the whole season, but I do have records for the 3-game stretch covering the Chargers, Eagles and Lions games. Here's what I found with Montgomery as the ball carrier:

Chargers

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
7 carries, 49 yards, 7.0 ypc
0 carries for a loss or no gain (0%), 5 carries of at least 5 yards (71%), 2 carries of 10+ yards (29%)

Under center without Holtz:
7 carries, 6 yards, 0.9 ypc
2 carries for a loss or no gain (29%), 0 carries of at least 5 yards (0%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
13 carries, 81 yards, 6.2 ypc
3 carries for a loss or no gain (23%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (15%), 1 carry of 10+ yards (8%)
However these figures are skewed by that 1 carry of 10+ yards being a huge 55 yard gain. Without that the figures are:
12 carries, 26 yards, 2.2 ypc.

Eagles

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
9 carries, 38 yards, 4.2 ypc
1 carry for a loss or no gain (11%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (22%), 1 carry of 10+ yards (11%)

Under center without Holtz:
4 carries, 0 yards, 0.0 ypc
2 carries for a loss or no gain (50%), 0 carries of at least 5 yards (0%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
1 carry, 2 yards, 2.0 ypc

Lions

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
7 carries, 22 yards, 3.1 ypc
1 carry for a loss or no gain (11%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (22%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Under center without Holtz:
6 carries, 19 yards, 3.2 ypc
0 carries for a loss or no gain (0%), 1 carry of at least 5 yards (17%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
4 carries, 19 yards, 4.8 ypc
1 carry for a loss or no gain (25%), 2 carries of at least 5 yards (50%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Totals over 3 games

I and Offset I with Holtz as FB:
23 carries, 109 yards, 4.7 ypc
3 carries for a loss or no gain (13%), 10 carries of at least 5 yards (44%), 3 carries of 10+ yards (13%)

Under center without Holtz:
17 carries, 25 yards, 1.5 ypc
4 carries for a loss or no gain (24%), 1 carry of at least 5 yards (6%), 0 carries of 10+ yards (0%)

Shotgun without Holtz:
18 carries, 102 yards, 5.7 ypc (With 55 yard run)
17 carries, 47 yards, 2.8 ypc (Without 55 yard run)
4 carries for a loss or no gain (22%), 4 carries of at least 5 yards (22%), 1 carries of 10+ yards (6%)

So it is clear that, aside from one huge run, the I formation resulted in by far the most productive and consistent running plays for Montgomery.

Running from under center without Holtz at fullback was an absolute disaster for Montgomery.

Obviously Nagy needed to mix up his playcalling, but the big problem was the opposing defense had no reason to worry about the run whatsoever whenever the Bears lined up with Trubisky under center without a fullback. This negatively impacted any play action passes run out of that formation. It would be interesting to know the success rate of those passes compared to others.

Well, I don't think you can just toss aside how important explosive/big plays are. Especially with how starved we were for them last season.

At the very least, you have to find a way to account for them and not remove them FULLY from your quotient. I agree that I-formation with Holtz was most effective, overall. However, I just feel wrong about taking the big play out. That play was executed phenomenally by our O-line and by Robinson getting in the middle and pushing out a LB. It worked exactly how it was supposed to. Again, you are correct. 4.7 YPC is much better than I thought we did. I knew it was improved but not to that point.

I also don't believe full-time I-formation is necessarily viable as a base offensive look in today's NFL if you want to go deep into the playoffs, though. It's mostly for slowly moving the chains and grinding out 17-14/20-16 type of football games. You can win doing that with a great D... but not a Super Bowl, IMO (maybe an historically great D could). It's much more catered to winning 20th century football.

You need to be able to spread it out, hit big plays and score fast. You're inevitably going to encounter games when that is necessary. Pat Mahomes is going to be playing in a handful of SB's this decade. I don't think you're beating him like that. Hell, look at how Baltimore managed with that style in the playoffs. And THAT team ran possibly the best version of it I've EVER seen. Shotgun/offset I and just murder you going downhill. Drop back out of play action and your TE's are wide open with 9 defenders taking their first steps forward.

FWIW, NFL game pass is free through 5/31 (no cc needed - just make a username) and I've been re-watching a lot of games (just watched the LAC game - puke). Throwing out of play action in the I definitely worked for some big chunk plays. However, "the running game working" was a small sample size. Clearly.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Well, I don't think you can just toss aside how important explosive/big plays are. Especially with how starved we were for them last season.

At the very least, you have to find a way to account for them and not remove them FULLY from your quotient. I agree that I-formation with Holtz was most effective, overall. However, I just feel wrong about taking the big play out. That play was executed phenomenally by our O-line and by Robinson getting in the middle and pushing out a LB. It worked exactly how it was supposed to. Again, you are correct. 4.7 YPC is much better than I thought we did. I knew it was improved but not to that point...

FWIW, NFL game pass is free through 5/31 (no cc needed - just make a username) and I've been re-watching a lot of games (just watched the LAC game - puke). Throwing out of play action in the I definitely worked for some big chunk plays. However, "the running game working" was a small sample size. Clearly.

That's why I didn't ignore the big play and listed the yards and averages with and without it. It was such a large statistical outlier that not to acknowledge it would have skewed the average to give the impression that running out of the shotgun formation was significantly more effective than it typically was (2.8 ypc versus 5.7 ypc)

Interesting to hear your observation about throwing off play-action from the I formation. I have Game Pass; I gathered the breakdown above from the coaches film. If I have time at some point I might revisit some more games and look specifically at those passes.

During the season I said it and I still believe it: I think Nagy was incredibly distracted and focusing on making something decent out of 10 when he was so clearly struggling. And then highly discombobulated by the performance of the team in general on top of that (and I believe BECAUSE of that). So I believe he has to get a pass on last season. How could he be balanced with a destination QB who can't produce and a running game getting all the priority attention from the defense?

I hated a lot of the play calling and abandoning the run and all predictable short passing ... but I don't really think he had much choice. With 10 under center the passing game was very little threat. I believe the reason the run game worked when they committed to it (esp with Holtz and I formation) is a combination of just plain having an extra blocker PLUS the element of surprise of Nagy going away from his apparent pass-wacky tendencies.

I expect with Foles under center Nagy will look a lot better. As will the line, the TE production and the run game.

Personally I think you place too much blame on Trubisky's shortcomings. Compared to the previous season, the offensive line plummeted in the rankings from both PFF (11th to 25th) and Football Outsiders (7th to 21st in pass protection) and the number of dropped passes sky-rocketed from 13 to 32 according to Fox Sports. Expecting Trubisky to maintain his 2018 standard let alone progress when all around him his team-mates (other than Robinson) were performing significantly worse is a big, some might say, unrealistic ask.

Blaming Trubisky for all around regression is letting Nagy off the hook in my opinion. He had his team poorly prepared and his in-game decisions were often baffling.

Everyone recalls the Saints game when they ran the ball just 7 times in Trubisky's first game back from injury and after their bye-week, but let's not forget the very first game of the season against the Packers. Nagy had a choice not to abandon the run in that one too, yet he did precisely that. They only ran the ball 15 times in that game (including a Trubisky scramble) and 11 carries came in the first quarter! Every one gained yardage with 7 of them gaining at least 4 yards. Yet in a game that finished 10 - 3 they only ran 4 more times the rest of the game. That's simply ridiculous. Frankly if you do things like that then you're setting your young QB up to fail instead of helping him get into a rhythm and building his confidence.

[Richie]

Personally I think you place too much blame on Trubisky's shortcomings. Compared to the previous season, the offensive line plummeted in the rankings from both PFF (11th to 25th) and Football Outsiders (7th to 21st in pass protection) and the number of dropped passes sky-rocketed from 13 to 32 according to Fox Sports. Expecting Trubisky to maintain his 2018 standard let alone progress when all around him his team-mates (other than Robinson) were performing significantly worse is a big, some might say, unrealistic ask.

Blaming Trubisky for all around regression is letting Nagy off the hook in my opinion. He had his team poorly prepared and his in-game decisions were often baffling.

Everyone recalls the Saints game when they ran the ball just 7 times in Trubisky's first game back from injury and after their bye-week, but let's not forget the very first game of the season against the Packers. Nagy had a choice not to abandon the run in that one too, yet he did precisely that. They only ran the ball 15 times in that game (including a Trubisky scramble) and 11 carries came in the first quarter! Every one gained yardage with 7 of them gaining at least 4 yards. Yet in a game that finished 10 - 3 they only ran 4 more times the rest of the game. That's simply ridiculous. Frankly if you do things like that then you're setting your young QB up to fail instead of helping him get into a rhythm and building his confidence.

the number of dropped passes sky-rocketed from 13 to 32 according to Fox Sports

The dropped passes line is a bit deceiving, IMO. Trubisky had a very short average depth of target and Cohen led the way with 6. He was the only one with an abnormal amount of drops and most of his targets were around the LOS. I honestly only remember Gabriel having an impactful drop downfield (vs Detroit for a would be 1st) and he had 2 all year.

Robinson did have 4 but #1 WR's are usually on the higher end of the drops list with how much they are targeted. That's in the ballpark of Julio, Michael Thomas, Diggs, CMC, Cooper, Evans, etc.

Rarely do I recall watching games in 2019 and feeling we were cheated by drops.

Trubisky did not get much help from his line. However, that's sort of nullified by how poorly he threw the ball when he DID have a clean pocket. Every game there were glaring misfires when he was able to step into his throw. Especially when you're talking about throwing the ball to the sidelines or downfield.

It's also been said that Mitch's slow progression has kept Nagy from opening up the entire playbook. I think that has to hurt the offense as well.

There's other reasons besides Mitch. However, it can't be understated how much he killed us. There's QB's with below average pass protecting O-lines (21st is probably labeled as that) who still manage to play good football and not look like Mitch did in 2019.

There's "hurting your QB" but there's also a standard of play that you still have to be able to meet.

I also sort of reject the notion that Mitch "dropped off" in 2019. It implies that he was good in 2018. Which he wasn't. He had 3 blow up games where he looked good vs bad teams and then the rest was about par with 2019 where only had 1 blow up game (maybe two if you include Thanksgiving). Mitch's body of work has not been very volatile outside of a few outlying good games and a few outlying extremely bad games. 90% of his body of work has simply been "not good". I don't think he's progressed or regressed much, at all.

[IE]

We can slice and dice stats and finger-point any way we want. But the fact remains that they went out and got a pricey experienced guy that they are comfortable with personally. All the rationale in defense of 10 just rings hollow in the light of that move. I don't know if the rumors of them trying to trade 10 are true - but if they are that is also devastating to your rationale. It is fairly clear they disagree with you, HRS.

They just aren't going to sit Foles behind 10 with that paycheck. At the very least they're going to make them compete. But this isn't Smith, Wentz or even Minshew, and Mitch hasn't ever beat another QB out for the starter job (maybe in HS).

How awesome would it be if Mitch Trubisky went into camp and legitimately beat Nick Foles out for the starting job - and then kept earning the spot on the field? That would be awesome. That would be great for the Bears.

It just ain't going to happen. There's zero evidence it will happen.

[southdakbearfan]

We can slice and dice stats and finger-point any way we want. But the fact remains that they went out and got a pricey experienced guy that they are comfortable with personally. All the rationale in defense of 10 just rings hollow in the light of that move. I don't know if the rumors of them trying to trade 10 are true - but if they are that is also devastating to your rationale. It is fairly clear they disagree with you, HRS.

They just aren't going to sit Foles behind 10 with that paycheck. At the very least they're going to make them compete. But this isn't Smith, Wentz or even Minshew, and Mitch hasn't ever beat another QB out for the starter job (maybe in HS).

How awesome would it be if Mitch Trubisky went into camp and legitimately beat Nick Foles out for the starting job - and then kept earning the spot on the field? That would be awesome. That would be great for the Bears.

It just ain't going to happen. There's zero evidence it will happen.

Pay isn't going to matter one bit.

Whomever they are comfortable with, that will help them keep their jobs will play.

Be it Trubisky or Foles.

[Yogi da Bear]

The dropped passes line is a bit deceiving, IMO. Trubisky had a very short average depth of target and Cohen led the way with 6. He was the only one with an abnormal amount of drops and most of his targets were around the LOS. I honestly only remember Gabriel having an impactful drop downfield (vs Detroit for a would be 1st) and he had 2 all year.

Robinson did have 4 but #1 WR's are usually on the higher end of the drops list with how much they are targeted. That's in the ballpark of Julio, Michael Thomas, Diggs, CMC, Cooper, Evans, etc.

Rarely do I recall watching games in 2019 and feeling we were cheated by drops.

Trubisky did not get much help from his line. However, that's sort of nullified by how poorly he threw the ball when he DID have a clean pocket. Every game there were glaring misfires when he was able to step into his throw. Especially when you're talking about throwing the ball to the sidelines or downfield.

Have to disagree on both points. First, dropped passes are ALWAYS impactful. If you have a short little pass that's dropped on first down, you're facing a second and ten versus a second and four or five. Big difference. Same with second down, and on third, it could be difference between a punt or a new set of downs.

I remember thinking in 2018 how sticky fingered our receivers were. I'd never seen a Bear receiving corps with that good of hands. It's like we never dropped a ball. In that sense, I guess I might have been the kiss of death for our WRs (knock on wood).

I think your claim that every game there were "glaring misfires" is more hyperbolic and anecdotal than based in reality. In his four best games--the two Lion games, the Skins, and Dallas--he had better than a 115 rating and at least 70% completion percentage (first Detroit game was 69.57 but hey I rounded up ).

I've been told that's because those defenses sucked (still don't think that's true in Dallas' case). But even if that's true, doesn't that still show that Trubisky can be accurate if relieved from pressure. You know, anecdotally, even if he misfires while not pressured in a game where he was otherwise pressured, it could very well be because of the anxiety created from the pressure he was under for the rest of the game.

Pressure due to an ineffective offensive line, can't really be looked at in an isolated context. You also have to look at the cumulative effect that that pressure creates in a QB--Please see the demise of David Carr for reference.

Another thing to consider with respect to Trubisky's inaccuracy is the disparity in physical characteristics of our receiving corps. We have short and speed ones (Cohen and Gabriel). We have taller, physical ones like Robinson. And we have some somewhere in between in Miller. I'm not even going to get into our TEs because they simply don't deserve it. It has to be difficult adjusting to the routes of a Miller and Robinson versus a couple of dwarf speed merchants. lol Cutler certainly had an easier task of it throwing to Alshon and Brandon all the time. Certainly adjusting to the disparity of receiver types would be much easier without worrying about where the next hit from a missed block is coming from. I think a big safety blanket like Graham could make a huge difference. And a little actual blocking might help as well.

Just saying.

[Wounded Bear]

I couldn't possibly know this for sure, but my belief is that he knows how to teach a QB and don't blame him for 10's lack of development. I think Biscuit just hasn't yet learned to effectively process the information in front of him.

Totally agree with this. It seems to me that he may have became so frustrated with his inability to coach up Trubisky that it affected his play-calling. Well, that as well as an offensive line that was playing like complete shit. I think he felt like there was only so much a play-caller can do.

It reminded me of the old Star Trek episodes where Captain Kirk would yell at the doctor and the doctor would respond, "Damn it Jim, I'm a doctor, not a magician!" Nagy's a decent play-caller, but he's not a magician.

I think he'll find sanity with Foles.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

The dropped passes line is a bit deceiving, IMO. Trubisky had a very short average depth of target and Cohen led the way with 6. He was the only one with an abnormal amount of drops and most of his targets were around the LOS. I honestly only remember Gabriel having an impactful drop downfield (vs Detroit for a would be 1st) and he had 2 all year.

Robinson did have 4 but #1 WR's are usually on the higher end of the drops list with how much they are targeted. That's in the ballpark of Julio, Michael Thomas, Diggs, CMC, Cooper, Evans, etc.

Rarely do I recall watching games in 2019 and feeling we were cheated by drops.

Trubisky did not get much help from his line. However, that's sort of nullified by how poorly he threw the ball when he DID have a clean pocket. Every game there were glaring misfires when he was able to step into his throw. Especially when you're talking about throwing the ball to the sidelines or downfield.

Have to disagree on both points. First, dropped passes are ALWAYS impactful. If you have a short little pass that's dropped on first down, you're facing a second and ten versus a second and four or five. Big difference. Same with second down, and on third, it could be difference between a punt or a new set of downs.

I remember thinking in 2018 how sticky fingered our receivers were. I'd never seen a Bear receiving corps with that good of hands. It's like we never dropped a ball. In that sense, I guess I might have been the kiss of death for our WRs (knock on wood).

I think your claim that every game there were "glaring misfires" is more hyperbolic and anecdotal than based in reality. In his four best games--the two Lion games, the Skins, and Dallas--he had better than a 115 rating and at least 70% completion percentage (first Detroit game was 69.57 but hey I rounded up ).

I've been told that's because those defenses sucked (still don't think that's true in Dallas' case). But even if that's true, doesn't that still show that Trubisky can be accurate if relieved from pressure. You know, anecdotally, even if he misfires while not pressured in a game where he was otherwise pressured, it could very well be because of the anxiety created from the pressure he was under for the rest of the game.

Pressure due to an ineffective offensive line, can't really be looked at in an isolated context. You also have to look at the cumulative effect that that pressure creates in a QB--Please see the demise of David Carr for reference.

Another thing to consider with respect to Trubisky's inaccuracy is the disparity in physical characteristics of our receiving corps. We have short and speed ones (Cohen and Gabriel). We have taller, physical ones like Robinson. And we have some somewhere in between in Miller. I'm not even going to get into our TEs because they simply don't deserve it. It has to be difficult adjusting to the routes of a Miller and Robinson versus a couple of dwarf speed merchants. lol Cutler certainly had an easier task of it throwing to Alshon and Brandon all the time. Certainly adjusting to the disparity of receiver types would be much easier without worrying about where the next hit from a missed block is coming from. I think a big safety blanket like Graham could make a huge difference. And a little actual blocking might help as well.

Just saying.

Yes, this is where I'm coming from too. I can also point to a number of occasions off the top of my head where players other than Cohen dropped 3rd down passes and killed drives, including some which probably don't even get classed as drops.

Trubisky threw a rainbow between two defenders to Robinson that would have been a 23 yard gain, but Robinson took too big a step back and the heel of his second foot landed out of bounds. Trubisky moved well to escape the pocket under pressure and found Burton but he jumped unnecessarily, bringing his knees practically up to his chest, and when his feet came down one landed on top of a defender and he was ruled out of bounds. Montgomery dropped a perfectly executed screen that was all set to go for 20+ yards. Gabriel dropped a perfectly thrown ball that hit him in the hands. It wasn't just one player.

Taking Fox Sports drop stats, receivers dropped 19 more passes in 2019 than in 2018. If they had dropped the same number as they did in 2018 then Trubisky's completion percentage would have been 66.9% rather than 63.2% and would have placed him 8th in the league amongst QBs with at least 100 pass attempts rather than 20th. I wonder if that would have changed the narrative about his accuracy just a little.

Ultimately I just struggle with the notion that Trubisky got worse because he's simply a lousy QB and it's all on him. Media and Bears fans alike highlight all his failings and regression whilst minimising all the failings of those around him and their regression. The collapse in the o-line ratings, the inability of any RB to gain even 4 yards a carry, the escalation in the number of drops, WRs reportedly not running the right routes, the complete dearth of talent at TE without a healthy Burton... all these things factor into Trubisky's regression.

But this thread is about Nagy and his playcalling...

I'm concerned that he still kept giving up on the run even in close games and when the passing game was struggling, just as he did in his first year.

I'm concerned that he didn't stick with strategies that were working.

I'm concerned with the number of occasions where his players still didn't seem sure of their assignments.

I'm concerned with his overcautious approach at the end of the Chargers game when his kicker had already missed a lot shorter kick earlier in the game and that he didn't even consider the kicker's preference when it came to spotting the ball, which smacks of a lack of attention to detail.

I'm concerned with the way he handled Trubisky at the end of the Rams game.

I'm concerned that his entire offense regressed instead of getting better in Year 2, despite having almost all the same personnel back plus a supposedly much better fit at RB.

I'm concerned that there were commentators talking about how his playcalling seemed random and disconnected rather than part of a coherent strategy.

I'm concerned that he has singularly failed to develop a young, highly-drafted QB when this was a key, perhaps the key, reason he was hired.

I'm concerned that Trubisky still has lapses in his mechanics and yet despite this Nagy's promoted the QB coach who has worked with him since the day he was drafted.

On the plus side, he has now brought in new assistant coaches who he has worked with before and who have NFL track records. Hopefully they will help him sort out the issues with assignment confusion, the running game, and Trubisky's mechanics and ability to read defenses. The fact that receivers dropped so many passes and players were making assignment mistakes gives me encouragement that Nagy's playcalling might actually be fine if they sort these other issues out.

[IE]

We can slice and dice stats and finger-point any way we want. But the fact remains that they went out and got a pricey experienced guy that they are comfortable with personally. All the rationale in defense of 10 just rings hollow in the light of that move. I don't know if the rumors of them trying to trade 10 are true - but if they are that is also devastating to your rationale. It is fairly clear they disagree with you, HRS.

They just aren't going to sit Foles behind 10 with that paycheck. At the very least they're going to make them compete. But this isn't Smith, Wentz or even Minshew, and Mitch hasn't ever beat another QB out for the starter job (maybe in HS).

How awesome would it be if Mitch Trubisky went into camp and legitimately beat Nick Foles out for the starting job - and then kept earning the spot on the field? That would be awesome. That would be great for the Bears.

It just ain't going to happen. There's zero evidence it will happen.

Pay isn't going to matter one bit.

Whomever they are comfortable with, that will help them keep their jobs will play.

Be it Trubisky or Foles.

OK well neither one of our opinions matters to anyone who counts - so we'll just leave it at "we completely disagree on this one".

[southdakbearfan]

Pay isn't going to matter one bit.

Whomever they are comfortable with, that will help them keep their jobs will play.

Be it Trubisky or Foles.

OK well neither one of our opinions matters to anyone who counts - so we'll just leave it at "we completely disagree on this one".

So you are saying since trubisky is actually making more money than foles he is the unquestioned starter?

[IE]

Doesn't seem like you even read or tried to understand what you quoted from me. Start there.

[G08]

OK well neither one of our opinions matters to anyone who counts - so we'll just leave it at "we completely disagree on this one".

So you are saying since trubisky is actually making more money than foles he is the unquestioned starter?

I laughed so hard when the details of the contract re-negotiation came out and Mitch was making more money

[Moriarty]

I'm with you all the way.

If Nagy fails and is fired it won't be because of his abilities as a head coach but because his ego has him convinced he is a great offensive co-ordinator/playcaller and it will have become clear that he isn't.

The primary reason he was hired was to develop Trubisky and he's failed miserably there. From year one to year two he's persisted with the same bad tendencies you've mentioned. In the running game in particular he's abandoned plays that have been effective and stuck with ones that haven't. His screen plays have become increasingly ineffective. Every player on the offense not named Allen Robinson was out-of-sync all season long and that was really worrying.

His in-game decision making has been highly questionable going all the way back to his very first game against Green Bay. The Bears were up 20-17 with 2:47 left and Green Bay had no timeouts. Already on that drive they had converted 3rd and 3 and 3rd and 2 by rushing and Jordan Howard had just broken off chunk runs of 16 and 11 yards. Yet on 3rd and 2 they throw the ball. The resulting incompletion stops the clock with 2:42 left. If they had run and converted the game was over. If they had run and failed then they would have been able to run the clock down to the 2 minute warning or at least mighty close to it before kicking the field goal. It was terrible game management.

At the time it was easy to put it down to an inexperienced playcaller in his first game as head coach, but we've continued to see odd and sometimes downright bizarre decisions from him. Settling for a 41 yard game-winning field goal attempt against the Chargers and not even knowing or asking his kicker where he wanted to kick from for example, a lack of awareness compounded by the fact that Pineiro had missed from just 33 yards earlier in the game. Only running the ball 7 times against the Saints when it was Trubisky's first game back after he dislocated his shoulder and the score was 12-10 at halftime. Pulling Trubisky at the end of the Rams game when it was already all but lost, basically humiliating a QB already struggling for confidence for no reason regardless of subsequent injury claims. The list goes on.

Nagy did the right thing clearing house and bringing in new offensive assistants, but ultimately he needs to address his own failings if this team is going to succeed.

[HisRoyalSweetness]

Let's hope Matt Nagy pays attention to the most successful coach in the modern era:

Everything we did, every single decision we made in terms of major planning, was made with the idea of how to make things best for Tom Brady. Now, with that being said, we've had several situations where we had to play and we knew Tom wasn't going to be the quarterback. So, that would go back to [Matt] Cassel and Jimmy [Garoppolo] and Jacoby [Brissett] and situations like that. And so, in those situations, now they were in season -- although Matt Cassel's situation ended up being for 15 games -- but whatever those situations were, we adapted what we had to the player and -- Cassel would be a good example -- we geared everything towards doing what was best for him, just like we always geared everything for doing what was best for Tom and to help our offense there.

I don't really see that changing. Whoever the quarterback is, we'll try to make things work smoothly and efficiently for that player and take advantage of his strengths and his skills. Each of us has different skills. Each quarterback has a different skill set, and whatever things that particular player does well, we'll try to work towards and feature, or at least give him an opportunity to do those.

- Bill Belichick (April 2020)