The argument for Fields NOT being "Elite" and keeping him anyway.

[Mighty Joe Young]

Not saying that mediocrity is something to strive for.

But at some point, rather than getting caught up in hype, it's time to look at the objective facts.

The facts on Fields right now are as follows:

Pros -
* Elite deep ball
* Big Game Hunter
* Very coachable in the sense that he always tries to do what his coaches tell him
* Elite Speed and escabability
* Elite run threat
* Has shown improvement in areas of his game, such as short passes and at times, releasing the ball quicker.
* Will step up in pocket when given a pocket to step up into
* Won his last game from the pocket when it mattered
* Improving on getting rid of the ball

Negatives -
* Too. Many. Fumbles.
* Indecisive at times, else waits too long for something to develop, which has caused him to take bad sacks
* Has in the past forced the ball in places where he shouldn't with game on the line
* Inconsistent under pressure

Mitigating Factors -
* Has had back to back terrible offensive coordinators who each have tried to force Fields into the QB they want rather than building an offense around his unique skill sets
* Until this year, has played behind horrendous offensive lines, giving him no time and helping create an illusion that he always holds onto the ball too long, where the problem is really more sporadic
* Until this year, had not a lot around him to help him develop other than Kmet and Mooney.
* Because coaches are constantly trying to change him, has stated he was playing robotic and not fluid earlier in the year.
* It is still unclear whether Fields can't see the middle of the field or can completely read defenses because of the terrible offensive coordinators Fields has had - it's made an honest evaluation of this part almost impossible, because his current OC coaches his QBs to not throw to the middle of the field. This is proven by pass charts for not only Fields but also Tyson Bagent, and if you look at Nathaniel Hackett, he does the same thing with his quarterbacks in NY and did when he was head coach in Denver. The passing charts do not lie on this one.


So, being honest, Fields has some good traits, some bad ones, and some things that have been completely out of his control.

Yet, the loudest reason I keep hearing for the Bears to draft a new quarterback all seem to come from some sort of twisted FOMO:

"OMG the Bears will have the #1 over all pick! You HAVE to take a quarterback if you have the number one over all pick. Did you know the Bears might have the number one overall pick? Quarterback! Quarterback! Quarterback!"

Honestly, it seems like the people acting like this (and getting mad hateful and defensive when you poke holes in it) are more addicted to the adrenaline rush of drafting a quarterback with the #1 overall pick than they are in the practical matter that comes after that.

What practical matter?

* A new rookie QB resets the clock on everyone and you likely aren't going to be doing anything amazing year 1 as he learns.
* QBs have a very high bust rate and once the rush dies down and the rookie gets into camp, what if all the amazing things he did in college he can't do in the NFL because players are better and defensive coaches generally are smarter? If your QB Jesus busts, you have now wasted years of development at other positions.
* Even if the QB isn't a bust outright, he might not be great. He might just be ok. Carson Palmer comes to mind. Drafting a QB first overall doesn't guarantee anything.

Which brings me to Fields.

He isn't perfect, but he is still improving and has been in ill-fitting offensive systems his whole NFL career. He needs an offense with more slants, more moving and rolling pockets - hell, basically a Shannahan style offense.

You get him that and surround him with talent, and Fields, with the positives I already mentioned, can definitely perform RIGHT AWAY. You start getting wins and contending for the playoffs in 2024, with the way this defense and offensive line has come on. Add a pass rusher, add a center from free agency and another from the draft, give Fields another weapon, and give him a better offensive system that fits HIM rather than trying to change him to fit whatever the current crap OC wants, and now you actually have something that is going to win a lot of games.

I know this will never convince the people who need to see something happen first before they believe it, but for those who pay attention, like those who saw our secondary was playing really well earlier in the year despite the defensive issues and knew a pass rusher or two would unlock this defense, those types of people who actually understand football will get what I am saying.

I think it is more beneficial to keep Fields, full stop, warts and all, rather than going with some rookie QB who has faded down the stretch of their college football season, taking your pick of who you think I am talking about, because it could be either.

At least Fields has positive qualities proven on an NFL level that make him a QB you can win with, and occasionally because of.

The future draft picks aren't in the NFL yet, so they haven't proven shit.

A bird in the hand....

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

Ain't no one reading all that lmfao

 

[Butkus34]

Ain't no one reading all that lmfao

same reaction Claypool had when he got to Chicago and they gave him the playbook

 

[BaBaBlacksheep]

There is an argument to be made (and has been made numerous times) to both trade and keep Fields.

Still need to see where the Panthers pick is.

Still need to see what Poles could get in a trade for that pick or for Fields. (And we probably will never know this info)

Still need to see Fields play last 5 games.

We shall see in a month and half!

 

[Chicagosports89]

Thread 'The causes of Football Stupid, per Bernstein' The causes of Football Stupid, per Bernstein

 

[ijustposthere]

I'm not reading all of that but I'm happy for you or sorry that happened

 

[gmoney1994]

Not saying that mediocrity is something to strive for.

But at some point, rather than getting caught up in hype, it's time to look at the objective facts.

The facts on Fields right now are as follows:

Pros -
* Elite deep ball
* Big Game Hunter
* Very coachable in the sense that he always tries to do what his coaches tell him
* Elite Speed and escabability
* Elite run threat
* Has shown improvement in areas of his game, such as short passes and at times, releasing the ball quicker.
* Will step up in pocket when given a pocket to step up into
* Won his last game from the pocket when it mattered
* Improving on getting rid of the ball

Negatives -
* Too. Many. Fumbles.
* Indecisive at times, else waits too long for something to develop, which has caused him to take bad sacks
* Has in the past forced the ball in places where he shouldn't with game on the line
* Inconsistent under pressure

Mitigating Factors -
* Has had back to back terrible offensive coordinators who each have tried to force Fields into the QB they want rather than building an offense around his unique skill sets
* Until this year, has played behind horrendous offensive lines, giving him no time and helping create an illusion that he always holds onto the ball too long, where the problem is really more sporadic
* Until this year, had not a lot around him to help him develop other than Kmet and Mooney.
* Because coaches are constantly trying to change him, has stated he was playing robotic and not fluid earlier in the year.
* It is still unclear whether Fields can't see the middle of the field or can completely read defenses because of the terrible offensive coordinators Fields has had - it's made an honest evaluation of this part almost impossible, because his current OC coaches his QBs to not throw to the middle of the field. This is proven by pass charts for not only Fields but also Tyson Bagent, and if you look at Nathaniel Hackett, he does the same thing with his quarterbacks in NY and did when he was head coach in Denver. The passing charts do not lie on this one.


So, being honest, Fields has some good traits, some bad ones, and some things that have been completely out of his control.

Yet, the loudest reason I keep hearing for the Bears to draft a new quarterback all seem to come from some sort of twisted FOMO:

"OMG the Bears will have the #1 over all pick! You HAVE to take a quarterback if you have the number one over all pick. Did you know the Bears might have the number one overall pick? Quarterback! Quarterback! Quarterback!"

Honestly, it seems like the people acting like this (and getting mad hateful and defensive when you poke holes in it) are more addicted to the adrenaline rush of drafting a quarterback with the #1 overall pick than they are in the practical matter that comes after that.

What practical matter?

* A new rookie QB resets the clock on everyone and you likely aren't going to be doing anything amazing year 1 as he learns.
* QBs have a very high bust rate and once the rush dies down and the rookie gets into camp, what if all the amazing things he did in college he can't do in the NFL because players are better and defensive coaches generally are smarter? If your QB Jesus busts, you have now wasted years of development at other positions.
* Even if the QB isn't a bust outright, he might not be great. He might just be ok. Carson Palmer comes to mind. Drafting a QB first overall doesn't guarantee anything.

Which brings me to Fields.

He isn't perfect, but he is still improving and has been in ill-fitting offensive systems his whole NFL career. He needs an offense with more slants, more moving and rolling pockets - hell, basically a Shannahan style offense.

You get him that and surround him with talent, and Fields, with the positives I already mentioned, can definitely perform RIGHT AWAY. You start getting wins and contending for the playoffs in 2024, with the way this defense and offensive line has come on. Add a pass rusher, add a center from free agency and another from the draft, give Fields another weapon, and give him a better offensive system that fits HIM rather than trying to change him to fit whatever the current crap OC wants, and now you actually have something that is going to win a lot of games.

I know this will never convince the people who need to see something happen first before they believe it, but for those who pay attention, like those who saw our secondary was playing really well earlier in the year despite the defensive issues and knew a pass rusher or two would unlock this defense, those types of people who actually understand football will get what I am saying.

I think it is more beneficial to keep Fields, full stop, warts and all, rather than going with some rookie QB who has faded down the stretch of their college football season, taking your pick of who you think I am talking about, because it could be either.

At least Fields has positive qualities proven on an NFL level that make him a QB you can win with, and occasionally because of.

The future draft picks aren't in the NFL yet, so they haven't proven shit.

A bird in the hand....

None of what you said are “facts”. Show me some data. WTF is “elite deep ball” mean in terms of stats? Fields averages the second lowest yards per game passsing in the NFL 161. He’s clearly not connecting on deep ball if his yards per game are that low

His completion percentage is 61 percent. 2nd lowest in the NFL.

It sounds to me like this list is very biased at best and not of this reality


Everyone of your “Pros” are opp

 

[PhilEBuster]

Ain't no one reading all that lmfao

the shoopster read it. He will opine.

I agree, though, for someone with ADD like you it's gonna be a challenge . . .

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

the shoopster read it. He will opine.

I agree, though, for someone with ADD like you it's gonna be a challenge . . .

You're a long-winded blowhard idiot that nobody reads too

 

[PhilEBuster]

You're a long-winded blowhard idiot that nobody reads too

I'd like to stay loquacious, but sometimes the direct approach is better . . .

I'll tell you what you probably already know, ChiefWalkingSdick: you are just about the dumbest, most useless and pointless poster the shoopster's seen in his 20 years. You provide no football insight, humor, or even your own opinions, preferring instead to run around licking the boots of your equally insipid "Hall of Fame" compatriots. You are stupid, abusive, and a miserable fvvk. And your incessant stalking of the shoopster shows you for the weirdo you are. Get out of your basement and make a real friend, if you can.

Carry on, fella . . .

 

[Chief Walking Stick]

I'd like to stay loquacious, but sometimes the direct approach is better . . .

I'll tell you what you probably already know, ChiefWalkingSdick: you are just about the dumbest, most useless and pointless poster the shoopster's seen in his 20 years. You provide no football insight, humor, or even your own opinions, preferring instead to run around licking the boots of your equally insipid compatriots. You are stupid, abusive, and a miserable fvvk. And your incessant stalking of the shoopster shows you for the cipher you are. Get out of your basement and make a real friend, if you can.

Carry on, fella . . .

Not reading all that but sorry you're so upset lol

 

[PhilEBuster]

Not reading all that but sorry you're so upset lol

All that? "L," as they say on the internet, fella, "OL" . . .

You read it. You know you did. Hits home, don't it . . .

 

[bamainatlanta]

https://x.com/dave_bfr/status/1729511902932340776?s=46

I’d say he did well against the blitz

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1729533461076095125

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1729509874768212211

 

[The Galloping Ghost]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1729533461076095125

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1729509874768212211

When did Hurts throw "2 crippling interceptions?"

He threw one interception(in the 2nd quarter). Also, 3 passing tds, also two rushing ds.

But hey, oh saw something on Twitter that backed up your bias, so, who cares if it's true!

 

[Toast88]

https://x.com/dave_bfr/status/1729511902932340776?s=46

I’d say he did well against the blitz

Maybe the Bears can trick their opponents into blitzing him all the time?

 

[PhilEBuster]

The Fields debate is one without any real perspective anymore. It's gotten completely out of hand. Some of the stuff regarding conspiracy theories about the coaches sabotaging one horse (Fields) while pushing the other (Bagent), the wholehearted release of Fields from any reasonable responsibilities for his on-field play because of the poor coaching, the quarterback controversy that never was between Fields and an undrafted free agent backup, "social" accusations of those who question Fields ... everything is completely out of whack and not grounded in any sort of reality that will help answer the question as to whether the Bears build around Fields or start to plan for something else.

Now comes MJ with a reasoned analysis that is closer to the evaluation the Bears will make than whether the erstwhile debate about whether Fields is "elite" and, more to the point, worth the draft pick the Bears used on him. That's great message board fodder, but the reality is the Bears will look at all the factors MJ has, discount the emotion and possible disappointment over Fields's slow development compared to his contemporaries, and decide whether he is worth further investment. "Mediocrity" may be worth a rebuild.

Whether you agree with MJ on every point (and the shoopster doesn't - Fields's deep ball isn't "elite" - he can throw the football a long way but his deep ball is often inaccurate), kudos to the OP for avoiding the hyperbole and providing a reasoned analysis. the shoopster will do the same, but on Black Monday, after Fields has taken the rest of the season to try to earn the shoopster's not-uninfluential endorsement. Right now, the jury's still out . . .

 

[Bust]

MJY was frothing at the mouth when genius Brian Daboll was overlooked by the bears as well so . . . heh

bottomline, if the bears front office wants to fork over a 45 million cap hit, 300 million contract to a JUST A GUY player, good for them. The lovable loser fanbase will grow to accept it and if it doesn't work out the next offensive coordinator will get rekt on this board like all the others.

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

All that? "L," as they say on the internet, fella, "OL" . . .

You read it. You know you did. Hits home, don't it . . .

He's on a forum, but twice admits he can't read.

I guess him bragging about his own stupidity and then thinking its clever is one way to go....

 

[Mighty Joe Young]

The Fields debate is one without any real perspective anymore. It's gotten completely out of hand. Some of the stuff regarding conspiracy theories about the coaches sabotaging one horse (Fields) while pushing the other (Bagent), the wholehearted release of Fields from any reasonable responsibilities for his on-field play because of the poor coaching, the quarterback controversy that never was between Fields and an undrafted free agent backup, "social" accusations of those who question Fields ... everything is completely out of whack and not grounded in any sort of reality that will help answer the question as to whether the Bears build around Fields or start to plan for something else.

Now comes MJ with a reasoned analysis that is closer to the evaluation the Bears will make than whether the erstwhile debate about whether Fields is "elite" and, more to the point, worth the draft pick the Bears used on him. That's great message board fodder, but the reality is the Bears will look at all the factors MJ has, discount the emotion and possible disappointment over Fields's slow development compared to his contemporaries, and decide whether he is worth further investment. "Mediocrity" may be worth a rebuild.

Whether you agree with MJ on every point (and the shoopster doesn't - Fields's deep ball isn't "elite" - he can throw the football a long way but his deep ball is often inaccurate), kudos to the OP for avoiding the hyperbole and providing a reasoned analysis. the shoopster will do the same, but on Black Monday, after Fields has taken the rest of the season to try to earn the shoopster's not-uninfluential endorsement. Right now, the jury's still out . . .

I disagree that his deep ball is inaccurate - its in fact so accurate its one of the stronger points of his game - its all his short game stuff that has been a concern. But that also feeds into your point that we don't have to agree point for point to understand and accept the overall message conveyed.

People have become too polarized. I'll admit sometimes it makes for great fodder to poke at...