Bears have worst pass pro in NFL

[G08]

Agree with everything there. Nothing they said talked about ruining him as a future player because he’s playing now.

I watched it yea, what am I missing? They talk about how he's struggling behind the worst OL in football, and how him as a rookie being rushed has this compounding effect on his performance where he's stacking mistakes. They talk about playing more max protect and stuff, they don't say "sit him" and they don't say "his future is in trouble" - Greeny even tried to get them there the way he phrased the question and they didn't go there. Where in there do they talk about his future getting ruined by this experience? You're reading into that part - they never say it.

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

[Ditka’s dictaphone]

I understand why our O line is not ready and therefore exposes Fields to defenders.

What I don’t understand is why he wouldn’t be “ready” to start?
Is it your position that it was never the intention to start him and therefore he had no pre-season with the starters? Is that why he’s not ready?

The thing that’s bugging me is why is Fields “not ready” but Lawrence, Wilson, Lance and Jones are ready to start?

Is it just the line thing or the unscheduled start?
Or is there something else?

Thanks

Not having watched those other QBs as close, it would be hard to judge their readiness. I dont know if we can judge Fields readiness 100% either. If we judge Fields based on Daltons limited play I say he was behind Dalton. Dalton is a starting level QB.

There are several reasons why a QB might not be ready to start. The big one is the play book. Some coaches are clearly better then others. I personally dont think the Bears have done much to help Fields. You dont see quick routes, clearing routes, 2 read or run schemes, half Field reads/ a moving pocket.

Fields may have an abbreviated play book. We dont really know as fans. But I dont see things in the offense that are designed to give him some rookie QB opportunities.

Thanks mmmc_35.

I agree Dalton is ahead, I thought we’d go back to Dalton after his injury and maybe that would have been the way to go.
I also agree we’ve done nothing to help Fields settle. He probably isn’t “ready” but the question is how do we get him to that point?

I’m a big believer that you learn more from defeats and it builds your resilience - just as long as you don’t get disheartened.

I don’t think Fields will get disheartened, he certainly gets disappointed but he says all the right things about going back to work. Someone needs to monitor his mentality and keep him focussed. This season is about development and familiarisation. If you get sacked 20 times a game, throw a dozen picks, it doesn’t matter as long as you’re continually learning.

I don’t think taking big hits or sacks are hurting him mentally. I think it’ll help him grow and adapt. Will watching Dalton get sacked help him? Dalton to me has a quicker release so perhaps the pressure and the sacks won’t register in Fields head. Watching Dalton get it away rapidly won’t help Fields understand that his release is too slow IMO. I think he’ll learn that from game time, feeling the pressure, analysing the tapes and working with the coaches.

But who knows? It could make him or it could break him.

[The Cooler King]

I watched it yea, what am I missing? They talk about how he's struggling behind the worst OL in football, and how him as a rookie being rushed has this compounding effect on his performance where he's stacking mistakes. They talk about playing more max protect and stuff, they don't say "sit him" and they don't say "his future is in trouble" - Greeny even tried to get them there the way he phrased the question and they didn't go there. Where in there do they talk about his future getting ruined by this experience? You're reading into that part - they never say it.

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

Yet none of those guys claim long term detriment, and importantly all seem to believe proper coaching could help a ton.

[TheWorldBreaker]

I watched it yea, what am I missing? They talk about how he's struggling behind the worst OL in football, and how him as a rookie being rushed has this compounding effect on his performance where he's stacking mistakes. They talk about playing more max protect and stuff, they don't say "sit him" and they don't say "his future is in trouble" - Greeny even tried to get them there the way he phrased the question and they didn't go there. Where in there do they talk about his future getting ruined by this experience? You're reading into that part - they never say it.

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

You can literally see this happen in games. After he’s been hit he rushes and doesn’t get his feet set properly and sails throws.

If the Bears incompetence doesn’t ruin another QB and he’s able to come out on the other side of this, I think a bright side of being thrown into hell fire is that this could result in him getting rid of the ball a lot quicker in future seasons.

[G08]

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

You can literally see this happen in games. After he’s been hit he rushes and doesn’t get his feet set properly and sails throws.

If the Bears incompetence doesn’t ruin another QB and he’s able to come out on the other side of this, I think a bright side of being thrown into hell fire is that this could result in him getting rid of the ball a lot quicker in future seasons.

Exactly. His footwork falters, his accuracy goes to shit, and he (understandably) doesn't want to sit in the pocket and make his reads because he's concerned about getting drilled.

This is How To Ruin A QB 101.

[G08]

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

Yet none of those guys claim long term detriment, and importantly all seem to believe proper coaching could help a ton.

If it stops, then sure. If it persists? Could you imagine taking 25-30 more snaps per game, for 10 more games, knowing you're going to get your ass kicked. I don't care who you are, that will fuck you up.

[The Cooler King]

But there's zero excuse for that to happen. If it's solvable, let's demand it's solved.

Look, we're not in control here. While maybe I'd say Fields on the bench is better than Fields with Nagy, that actually isn't the best move. The best move is to drop Nagy and continue to play Fields. That they basically replicated the Cleveland game plan shows me Nagy won't grow and learn. It's time to end the expiriment.

[wab]

Fields is going to get hurt. It's just unavoidable if he keeps getting beat up like he is.

That's my concern.

[HurricaneBear]

Fields can get hurt getting out of bed tomorrow. Worrying about it can't change that.

There ARE solutions to the protection problems that don't involve benching Fields that have been listed time and time again by people on both sides of the sit/play Fields argument.

The problem isn't if he should or shouldnt play. The problem is Matt Nagy.

So instead of arguing over if he should or shouldnt play, or worry or not worrying if he we will be hurt long term, lets argue about firing Nagy.

Oh, wait, you say no one disagrees that Nagy should be fired immediately?

Well then, fuck.

Nagy can't even get fired right.

[TheWorldBreaker]

Fields can get hurt getting out of bed tomorrow. Worrying about it can't change that.

There ARE solutions to the protection problems that don't involve benching Fields that have been listed time and time again by people on both sides of the sit/play Fields argument.

The problem isn't if he should or shouldnt play. The problem is Matt Nagy.

So instead of arguing over if he should or shouldnt play, or worry or not worrying if he we will be hurt long term, lets argue about firing Nagy.

Oh, wait, you say no one disagrees that Nagy should be fired immediately?

Well then, fuck.

Nagy can't even get fired right.

The problem is that they actually have implemented the solutions that have been suggested and he’s still gotten lit up. On the first strip sack he took in about two seconds, the Bears were in max protect, for example.

And Nagy isn’t getting fired until the end of the season because that’s how the McCaskey’s do business so all of the hand wringing about it is futile.

[dplank]

I watched it yea, what am I missing? They talk about how he's struggling behind the worst OL in football, and how him as a rookie being rushed has this compounding effect on his performance where he's stacking mistakes. They talk about playing more max protect and stuff, they don't say "sit him" and they don't say "his future is in trouble" - Greeny even tried to get them there the way he phrased the question and they didn't go there. Where in there do they talk about his future getting ruined by this experience? You're reading into that part - they never say it.

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

Correct, agree 100%. So where do they say that having that problem right now means he’s damaged goods beyond right now?

[dplank]

Fields is going to get hurt. It's just unavoidable if he keeps getting beat up like he is.

That's my concern.

Same here

[G08]

Getting hit, repeatedly, speeds up your processor, which throws off your timing, which ruins how you play QB.

Correct, agree 100%. So where do they say that having that problem right now means he’s damaged goods beyond right now?

ex·trap·o·late
/ikˈstrapəˌlāt/
verb

extend the application of (a method or conclusion, especially one based on statistics) to an unknown situation by assuming that existing trends will continue or similar methods will be applicable.
"the results cannot be extrapolated to other patient groups"

estimate or conclude (something) by extrapolating.
"attempts to extrapolate likely human cancers from laboratory studies"

MATHEMATICS

extend (a graph, curve, or range of values) by inferring unknown values from trends in the known data.
"a set of extrapolated values"

[Burl]

The idea that repeated and consistent physical pounding and performance failures won't affect a player's long term development is so absurd I've never really even considered it.

[wab]

Fields can get hurt getting out of bed tomorrow. Worrying about it can't change that.

There ARE solutions to the protection problems that don't involve benching Fields that have been listed time and time again by people on both sides of the sit/play Fields argument.

The problem isn't if he should or shouldnt play. The problem is Matt Nagy.

So instead of arguing over if he should or shouldnt play, or worry or not worrying if he we will be hurt long term, lets argue about firing Nagy.

Oh, wait, you say no one disagrees that Nagy should be fired immediately?

Well then, fuck.

Nagy can't even get fired right.

What are you even talking about? Fields getting hurt behind an "AT BEST" wildly inconsistent OL shouldn't be a concern? Cool...got it. I also didn't say anything in this thread about whether he should play or sit.

As far as Nagy goes, which I assume you are talking to yourself about because I've also mentioned nothing about that either in this thread, but I'm pretty sure I'm in the camp of "he should be fired right now but won't be".

But please, proceed with what I assume is day-drinking.

[dplank]

Ok, so the video didn’t at all say what you wanted it to say. Extrapolate all you want, that’s pure conjecture on your part which was my point. The video you posted never says or even implies future problems here, it only talks about right now - you just made up the rest.

For Burly, please explain why your snark only applies to the QB position and no other. Other positions see that butt whooping as a growth recipe and rite of passage of sorts.

I agree with the injury angle, that’s it.

[Burl]

For Burly, please explain why your snark only applies to the QB position and no other. Other positions see that butt whooping as a growth recipe and rite of passage of sorts.

I agree with the injury angle, that’s it.

First, I'm not being snarky. I truly can't understand how you don't think such would be detrimental to a player's development. But maybe my imagination is just limited and plenty of QBs start out getting the shit kicked out of them while not knowing where to go with the ball and then turn things around. I know you mentioned Manning's INTs earlier but he also had 26 TD passes to go with his 28 ints and if we were looking at a roughly 1:1 ratio of such with Fields, you probably wouldn't be seeing all this concern. Stafford maybe? But he was also really productive too.

And I think I already explained why this specifically applies to QBs. Fields clearly has the physical talent to play QB. I mean if Foles can physically do it, then clearly Fields can. But that's not the concern is it? It's can he mentally digest what the offense is supposed to do, how the defense is reacting and then accurately deliver the ball where it needs to go considering those factors. There is a mental component of playing every other position, sure, but I'm guessing with the exception of maybe kicker, if one can consistently, physically best the opponent across from you, you will see good results. QB is not that way.

[wab]

Ok, so the video didn’t at all say what you wanted it to say. Extrapolate all you want, that’s pure conjecture on your part which was my point. The video you posted never says or even implies future problems here, it only talks about right now - you just made up the rest.

For Burly, please explain why your snark only applies to the QB position and no other. Other positions see that butt whooping as a growth recipe and rite of passage of sorts.

I agree with the injury angle, that’s it.

Burl is kinda right on this one.

JF1 is on pace to throw for 2200 yards and 7.5 TDs. Oh and 15 INTs, 15 fumbles, and 60 sacks. Sixty. Sacks. Yeah, it's not the 76 that Carr took, but it would be the most by a rookie since Tim Couch in 99.

I don't think those are the records we hoped for when we were talking in the offseason about JF setting franchise records.

And sure, those averages are pretty bleak and aren't necessarily going to turn out like that...but it doesn't look good.

It's also conjecture on your part to say (or imply) that this won't affect his long term development, because out of the 11 rookie QB's that were sacked 40 or more times since Couch in 1999...only Kylar Murry turned out to be any good. Well, Andrew Luck too...but he retired because he was tired of, you know, getting sacked.

[wab]

And for the record, I think Fields actually does know where to go with the ball, and that he can digest the playbook, and that he can read defenses and all that QB stuff that makes a good QB.

I think the root of the issue is:
1 - he holds the ball to long waiting for the big play to develop
2 - he hesitates on his throws because he doesn't trust anyone but Mooney
3 - he doesn't trust his protection
4 - he has an inconsistent release
5 - he's missing things because his internal clock has sped up because he knows he's about to get crushed

These ARE things that can be fixed, but they have to be fixed RIGHT NOW or he has the very real chance of being ruined the way so many other QBs were that got sacked into oblivion.

And if the Bears can't fix these things right now, they shouldn't play him.

[dplank]

For Burly, please explain why your snark only applies to the QB position and no other. Other positions see that butt whooping as a growth recipe and rite of passage of sorts.

I agree with the injury angle, that’s it.

First, I'm not being snarky. I truly can't understand how you don't think such would be detrimental to a player's development. But maybe my imagination is just limited and plenty of QBs start out getting the shit kicked out of them while not knowing where to go with the ball and then turn things around. I know you mentioned Manning's INTs earlier but he also had 26 TD passes to go with his 28 ints and if we were looking at a roughly 1:1 ratio of such with Fields, you probably wouldn't be seeing all this concern. Stafford maybe? But he was also really productive too.

And I think I already explained why this specifically applies to QBs. Fields clearly has the physical talent to play QB. I mean if Foles can physically do it, then clearly Fields can. But that's not the concern is it? It's can he mentally digest what the offense is supposed to do, how the defense is reacting and then accurately deliver the ball where it needs to go considering those factors. There is a mental component of playing every other position, sure, but I'm guessing with the exception of maybe kicker, if one can consistently, physically best the opponent across from you, you will see good results. QB is not that way.

You really haven't explained what I'm asking about Burly. You've explained why QB is harder to play as a position, mentally in particular. That's never been questioned though, I've agreed with this from the beginning. What you haven't explained is why QB is the only position that you think you ruin a players future, you mentioned confidence in particular, by having a "baptism by fire".

The other positions have their own unique issues, specific to each position, that create challenges for rookies. OL/DL they might need to physically mature, gain strength/good weight, improve technique that maybe got them by in college but not in the pro's, etc. And until they develop further, they are likely to get their asses kicked up and down the football field.

My question is: Why is it OK for those players to get their asses kicked, learn, and improve from that experience - but it's not OK for QB's to do go through the same learning experience? Why do you see QB's as mentally fragile, where their confidence is shot by going through this process but OL/DL/CB etc don't have THEIR confidence shattered? I can't understand why you think it would be detrimental to a QB's development but not to a OL or DL players development.

[G08]

My question is: Why is it OK for those players to get their asses kicked, learn, and improve from that experience - but it's not OK for QB's to do go through the same learning experience? Why do you see QB's as mentally fragile, where their confidence is shot by going through this process but OL/DL/CB etc don't have THEIR confidence shattered?

Buddy, you are completely missing the point. You're on Mars right now.

[dplank]

My question is: Why is it OK for those players to get their asses kicked, learn, and improve from that experience - but it's not OK for QB's to do go through the same learning experience? Why do you see QB's as mentally fragile, where their confidence is shot by going through this process but OL/DL/CB etc don't have THEIR confidence shattered?

Buddy, you are completely missing the point. You're on Mars right now.

I agree we aren't connecting here, but I'm not thinking I'm the one missing the point. But maybe I am, so help me understand what exactly is your point?

[TheWorldBreaker]

First, I'm not being snarky. I truly can't understand how you don't think such would be detrimental to a player's development. But maybe my imagination is just limited and plenty of QBs start out getting the shit kicked out of them while not knowing where to go with the ball and then turn things around. I know you mentioned Manning's INTs earlier but he also had 26 TD passes to go with his 28 ints and if we were looking at a roughly 1:1 ratio of such with Fields, you probably wouldn't be seeing all this concern. Stafford maybe? But he was also really productive too.

And I think I already explained why this specifically applies to QBs. Fields clearly has the physical talent to play QB. I mean if Foles can physically do it, then clearly Fields can. But that's not the concern is it? It's can he mentally digest what the offense is supposed to do, how the defense is reacting and then accurately deliver the ball where it needs to go considering those factors. There is a mental component of playing every other position, sure, but I'm guessing with the exception of maybe kicker, if one can consistently, physically best the opponent across from you, you will see good results. QB is not that way.

You really haven't explained what I'm asking about Burly. You've explained why QB is harder to play as a position, mentally in particular. That's never been questioned though, I've agreed with this from the beginning. What you haven't explained is why QB is the only position that you think you ruin a players future, you mentioned confidence in particular, by having a "baptism by fire".

The other positions have their own unique issues, specific to each position, that create challenges for rookies. OL/DL they might need to physically mature, gain strength/good weight, improve technique that maybe got them by in college but not in the pro's, etc. And until they develop further, they are likely to get their asses kicked up and down the football field.

My question is: Why is it OK for those players to get their asses kicked, learn, and improve from that experience - but it's not OK for QB's to do go through the same learning experience? Why do you see QB's as mentally fragile, where their confidence is shot by going through this process but OL/DL/CB etc don't have THEIR confidence shattered?

It’s because QB is the most important position on the roster, so the spotlight and pressure on them is far greater because they’re the face of the franchise.

Lachavious Simmons was abysmal on Sunday, he got benched and people locally questioned why he was on the roster but nationally nobody cared and most have already moved on.

If Fields throws four interceptions and takes five sacks in the first half on Sunday and then they bench him for Dalton…the media frenzy locally will be insane and there will be multiple segments about it on ESPN and FS1 for probably multiple days.

It’s not just a bad game for Fields, it’s literally national news.

The difference in pressure and scrutiny just isn’t comparable. Everyone wants him to be immediately successful, so he can’t just quietly work on getting better like other players, he’s constantly got to answer questions about it and deal with people constantly talking about him in public—which even if he ignores his entire family and circle of friends.

And we have seen the physical hits and mental stress break guys.

[dplank]

And we have seen players overcome that mental stress and have great careers also! If that mental stress breaks a guy, my position is that he wasn't cut out to be a great player anyways. I have yet to hear anyone directly refute that point. But this "stress breaks guys" point keeps getting repeated - I don't believe it's true. It didn't break Peyton Manning. It didn't break Josh Allen, who as has been discussed, statistically was just as bad as Fields his first 5 starts. Rather, they learned from it and got better.

This is the point I keep coming back to. Then the convo ends up straying off. But this is it - some folks believe that the stress of failure will break Fields. I think that's BS and if it were true that he wasn't cut out to be a great player anyways. If it were true as many think, Josh Allen would have been ruined - he wasn't. Others have claimed that early failure will create bad habits, and I can easily point to multiple examples where that isn't true either. It MAY happen, I'm not claiming it's impossible, but it's not a determining factor in whether or not it will. Others have claimed that they fear injury. On this point I agree, and I'm new to this position. I didn't believe it at first, but watching this OL shit the bed has made me change my mind on it.

[Burl]

But this is it - some folks believe that the stress of failure will break Fields. I think that's BS and if it were true that he wasn't cut out to be a great player anyways.

So your basic reasoning is like the medieval witch test, where you toss the accused in a rushing river, and if they sink into the water and drown, that means they weren’t a witch. If they float, that means they are a witch, so you haul them out and burn them at the stake.

[Moriarty]

The other positions have their own unique issues, specific to each position, that create challenges for rookies. OL/DL they might need to physically mature, gain strength/good weight, improve technique that maybe got them by in college but not in the pro's, etc. And until they develop further, they are likely to get their asses kicked up and down the football field.

My question is: Why is it OK for those players to get their asses kicked, learn, and improve from that experience - but it's not OK for QB's to do go through the same learning experience? Why do you see QB's as mentally fragile, where their confidence is shot by going through this process but OL/DL/CB etc don't have THEIR confidence shattered? I can't understand why you think it would be detrimental to a QB's development but not to a OL or DL players development.

I think there's a lot of answers to that:

) The attention and pressure on QBs is far greater than any other position

) The mental demands of QBs is far greater than any other position - not just withstanding scrutiny, but leadership, timing, processing, everything

) You can't just out-physical the guy across from you when you're a QB. If you're a rookie elite 6'4 4.45 WR, for example, you can need a lot of work on route running, blocking, adjusting routes, etc - but you're still probably going to get your share of catches regardless, based in large part on physical superiority.

) QB has a much tougher learning curve than most positions. If you're an 11th pick at QB (or top 10), you have A LOT to pick up before you get good. It virtually never happens straight out of the gate. If you're a top 11 OT, you'd better be - and they usually are - capable of playing respectably very quickly.

) When you're 'getting your ass kicked' at other positions, you don't change how you play the game as much as you do at QB, because what you do is so, so, so much more limited than a QB. If a CB is struggling because WRs are bigger and more physical going up for the ball than they were used to in college...you just work on that part of your game somehow (leaping, getting stronger, getting better position). You don't radically change other key aspects of your game. A QB who's getting rattled by exotic schemes or bad blocking starts messing with everything they do - not being decisive because of fear of making the wrong read, not making enough progressions, fleeing the pocket too soon, always going to a checkdown/security blanket, adjusting/not adjusting the play incorrectly, etc.

) Most importantly - QB is the most interconnected and dependent position on the field. What all 21 other guys are doing matters deeply to what you need to do. If you're an edge rusher coming on a passing down, ok there's a few things around you that impact you - stunting, a RB or TE helping on blocks, etc. But mostly your job is what it is, regardless of how well other people near you are doing their jobs. For a QB, any made/missed block can completely change the play for you, whether someone is rushing or dropping back changes everything, just one receiver getting open/not/falling down/running the wrong route changes everything. Your play is so dependent on everything happening around you. When they suck, the job you're trying to do is totally different from the job you're trying to do if they are competent.

[dplank]

But this is it - some folks believe that the stress of failure will break Fields. I think that's BS and if it were true that he wasn't cut out to be a great player anyways.

So your basic reasoning is like the medieval witch test, where you toss the accused in a rushing river, and if they sink into the water and drown, that means they weren’t a witch. If they float, that means they are a witch, so you haul them out and burn them at the stake.

Again with the snark. Let me ask you...how do you explain Josh Allen having the same type of start to his career, yet overcoming it to become one of the best QB's in the league? According to you this isn't possible, and yet here we are.

[TheWorldBreaker]

So your basic reasoning is like the medieval witch test, where you toss the accused in a rushing river, and if they sink into the water and drown, that means they weren’t a witch. If they float, that means they are a witch, so you haul them out and burn them at the stake.

Again with the snark. Let me ask you...how do you explain Josh Allen having the same type of start to his career, yet overcoming it to become one of the best QB's in the league? According to you this isn't possible, and yet here we are.

How do you explain David Carr?

[dplank]

Again with the snark. Let me ask you...how do you explain Josh Allen having the same type of start to his career, yet overcoming it to become one of the best QB's in the league? According to you this isn't possible, and yet here we are.

How do you explain David Carr?

I've learned never to play this game, you answer mine and then I'll answer yours. That move is disingenuous. So, how do you explain Josh Allen?

[Moriarty]

The answer is that treating the problem as an ALL or NOTHING is silly.
Players who face ___X____ (ALWAYS/NEVER) ____Y____ is a nonsense choice.
X simply makes Y more/less/much more/much less likely. Single cases don't end the debate about how important something is.


Very promising prospects sometimes implode after being surrounded by incompetence in their formative years.


You can claim that being surrounded by incompetence in their formative years is irrelevant and the ones who fail must not have been good anyway. But that's just choosing what you want to believe, instead of having any knowledge. Knowing what college QBs have it and which don't is possibly the hardest thing to know in sports.