- Joined:
- Apr 19, 2014
- Posts:
- 19,713
- Liked Posts:
- 11,017
If this is their system you can almost count on it being a joke in a year or two. The Bears' approach is guys pretending to be data scientists using analytics.


I get what you're saying - Bears should be doing everything in their power to build around Fields so they can actually assess him. Because, as you said, we know he can run.Fair enough but soon Poles will need to decide if he is going to exercise JF's 5th year option, and giving him an at least competent O-Line to work behind would help. And if it doesn't fit your "scheme", change your scheme. Because what ever "scheme" they trotted out on the field last year was a massive fail. Can you imagine how anemic the Bears O is, if JF's isn't a scrambling fool?
Imagine thinking that a guard signed for $10 mil per year isn't an upgrade to one of the worst lines in football last year.No, Davis is a solid pickup that perfectly matches the scheme. Again, not every team can suck year after year, allowing them to get top 10 players every single year, most often top 5. Sometimes, solid is good enough.
Fair point, but it's not the entire offensive scheme, just the blocking scheme. Nagy refused to use Fields' running ability, and at a time, did the same with Trubisky. Getsy used that to his advantage and we all saw the results, even with a shitty line.Keep in mind, the common complaint about Nagy was not adjusting his scheme to fit his players...so now we're excited about only finding players that fit our scheme? Seems like a lot of talent would be instantly excluded.
Sorry, putting scheme over talent seems like a loser to me.
Yes, when nothing else worked, Getsy let JF run.Fair point, but it's not the entire offensive scheme, just the blocking scheme. Nagy refused to use Fields' running ability, and at a time, did the same with Trubisky. Getsy used that to his advantage and we all saw the results, even with a shitty line.
Have you ever said anything worthwhile?Yes, when nothing else worked, Getsy let JF run.
Brilliant!!
As a result, what do we know about Justin Fields the passer?
Not much.
Newsflash Luke, this isn't Aaron Rodgers your working with, you actually have to "develop" JF.
I am not sure how running for his life is part of his development.
And how did this collaborative effort work out last year?
How did it work out on the trade for Claypool?
Proof is in the pudding.
Adding to this: the outside zone blocking scheme would mean you're looking for more of a specific type of back as well, which is perhaps one reason we let Montgomery go in favor of a guy like Foreman.Fair point, but it's not the entire offensive scheme, just the blocking scheme. Nagy refused to use Fields' running ability, and at a time, did the same with Trubisky. Getsy used that to his advantage and we all saw the results, even with a shitty line.
Which became...We ended up with the No 1 pick and 100m in cap.
I dig this as well. Its a smart way to use analytics in football as pertains to the team.
Honestly, it highlights one of the biggest beefs I have with 3rd party analytics in football, trying to grade players etc.
Sure, there's some positions that can work well - sacks for a defensive lineman for instance.
But the analytics for Offensive linemen are pure atrocity. And there's good reason for it - as much as fans and analysts want to simplify it, there are different types of offensive lines all across the NFL, playing different schemes and if even in the same scheme might have a variety of assignments.
The analytics on offensive line play, by my eye, take NONE of that into account and simply seem to grade it by whether or not a member of the defense whom the 3rd party THINKS you were supposed to block got by you - and if you get in between them and the QB, even if you get pushed back 50 yards and into the quarterback, they still grade it as "successful" - which is how we got such a high grade for Charles Leno Jr a few years ago when most of us watching knew he was ass, and it was also how Braxton Jones got such a high grade despite getting bullrushed all the time and needing help all season.
Sorry, got off topic there.
Point I am making, is that the analytics are specialized to every team, and I love the way Poles has gone about maximizing it.
you're*Yes, when nothing else worked, Getsy let JF run.
Brilliant!!
As a result, what do we know about Justin Fields the passer?
Not much.
Newsflash Luke, this isn't Aaron Rodgers your working with, you actually have to "develop" JF.
I am not sure how running for his life is part of his development.
Except of course the Bears metrics on Jones seems to be aligned with what 3rd party sites say as they are content with him starting.
Of course teams will have their own analytics and data but the reality is most of the team these guys are never as bad as fans claim. Fans tend to turn on players and then imagine everything they do is bad. Case in point Leno still is finding work and is considered an adequate LT in NFL circles.
dAta scIentIstS usIng ANALyitics duuurrrrThe Bears' approach is guys pretending to be data scientists using analytics.
Keep in mind, the common complaint about Nagy was not adjusting his scheme to fit his players...so now we're excited about only finding players that fit our scheme? Seems like a lot of talent would be instantly excluded.
Sorry, putting scheme over talent seems like a loser to me.
Sorry but it is better.If's but's and nuts. To date, the Bears O-line is not any better than it was in 2022. The point is, it should have been a focus, not paying top dollar for a LB'er.
Have you ever said anything worthwhile?
I’m pretty sure that this is the exact opposite of Belichik and his system. He’s always going to find guys that fit his system.Keep in mind, the common complaint about Nagy was not adjusting his scheme to fit his players...so now we're excited about only finding players that fit our scheme? Seems like a lot of talent would be instantly excluded.
Sorry, putting scheme over talent seems like a loser to me.
And you pissed away both......We ended up with the No 1 pick and 100m in cap.
Sorry but it is better.