Bye week shenanigans are underway. And while I’m planning on doing my best to keep my complaints to a minimum, that I’m already having issues with hotel wi-fi connectivity feels like an inauspicious start. Nope. I don’t like that at all.
If Justin Fields emerging from Sunday’s game vs. the Packers was the most important thing to happen, then the second most important thing to come from it was growth from Fields. And I think NBC Sports Chicago’s Josh Schrock puts it well:
Fields’ line: 20-for-25 (80%), 254 yards (10.2 Y/A), 0 TD, 2 INT, and a 75.7 rating. We’ve seen Fields have better days in the passer rating column. And you don’t love the two interceptions, but everything needs context. Should we really dock points for Fields’ first interception, which came after Equanimeous St. Brown ran a not-so-crispy route? What about his second pick, which came in a desperation situation? I absolutely want Fields to clean that stuff up so we can discuss future performances without such caveats. But until the receiver’s room gets upgraded, that context matters.
Chris Emma (Marquee) has a handful of takeaways from Sunday’s loss to the Packers, including more signs of growth from Fields:
Fields’ 254 passing yards marked the most he has thrown for in 2022 and the second-highest mark of his young career. The success through the air was the product of Fields playing with increased confidence in his playmaking abilities and the structure of this scheme.
Though it came in a losing effort, Fields revealed the blueprint moving forward for how the Bears can find success on offense through his dynamic talents. It’s about keeping a defense off balance. Fields’ rushing threat has been well established this season, but now teams know to respect the throwing abilities.
The late bye week will allow Fields to enter the time off on a high note — while also giving him something to work on when he gets back to work after the bye. It’s the best of both worlds as far as I’m concerned.
This was a tank win and I’ll hear nothing to the contrary:
And to think, this offense left a whole bunch of points on the board. When the Bears put up 16 first-half points, I was dreaming of another 30-burger going up on the scoreboard. Instead, they scored three measly points. Lame.
I wish I could fully understand what was going through Luke Getsy’s head in the second half. Chicago’s offensive coordinator didn’t look like he was calling plays in a similar manner as he did in the first half. It was a more conservative look from the Bears, which aided the Packers in getting into an offensive groove, taking the lead, and eventually winning the game. Maybe the highs and lows are what comes with a first-year play caller. Or perhaps the second half was a subtle tank job. Almost as if to say we saw what we needed to see from Justin Fields in the first half, so let’s reel it in after halftime.
Seriously, something was off about some of the playcalling throughout that game:
Every Fields snap that had him dropping back and/or running had me holding my breath. So maybe it’s a good thing he was limited to just three rushing attempts on Sunday.
Perhaps Getsy was trying to protect Fields? I can vibe with that (if that’s the case). Because, after all, isn’t Fields’ health the most important thing to come from yesterday? For anyone worrying about Fields rushing back, yesterday provided enough evidence for those folks to take a breather.
On the other side of the ball, the Bears got no sacks or QB hits on Aaron Rodgers. And yet, Rodgers completed just 58.1% of his passes (18/31) for 182 yards (5.9 Y/A) and had just 1 TD to go with a meh-worthy 85.7 passer rating.
After rattling off Rodgers’ stat line, I’m going to read this tweet as a sign that Rodgers is cooked:
No, you won’t see me claiming things would be different if the Bears had Larry Ogunjobi. But I can’t front. The guy makes some splash plays from time-to-time, which end up on this Twitter page:
Ogunjobi in 11 games this year: 0.5 sacks, 32 tackles (17 solos), three tackles-for-loss, and eight quarterback hits. Justin Jones, the player the Bears, signed after Ogunjobi failed his physical: 2 sacks, 38 tackles (20 solos), eight tackles-for-loss, and five quarterback hits in 13 games. However you slice it, the Bears need to beef up the interior of that defensive line with the swiftness this offseason.
I’ll admit I missed Rodgers’ salute while rage tweeting, but someone had to be rage tweeting at the time:
Would you rather watch 48 minutes of LeBron begging for calls or 60 minutes of Rodgers doing the same after every incompletion? This might be a poll question for our friends at BN Bulls.
Thanks, I hate it:
Call it a gut feeling: The lead will change hands a bunch in the coming years. And if the Bears play their cards right, they could take an edge and never give it back. Hey, please don’t give me that look. GM Ryan Poles said the Bears would “take the North and never give it back” at his introductory press conference. So if he has that type of confidence, why shouldn’t I feel the same? See the dream, then execute it.
Would I have preferred the Bears to win yesterday? Sure. But will I gladly accept the outcome considering the NFL Draft implications? Absolutely. Chicago’s loss allowed the team to maintain its spot as owners of the second overall pick in the 2023 NFL Draft. And it knocked Green Bay from having the eighth pick to having the 11th selection. Cheesedoodles can’t even properly execute a tank. What a shame.
OK, so draft positioning isn’t the best consolation prize, but it is the best I can do right now. Should the Bears lose out moving forward, the worst they can do is lose a tie-breaker and own the third overall pick in the upcoming draft. Again … things could be better for Chicago’s football team. But things could be worse!
In a sense, things are still pretty bad:
Is being built to bottom out an excuse for losing 9 of 10? No. Is it a reason that helps explain why they’ve lost 9 of 10? I’d say so. Don’t give me a pound of ground chuck and think I’m going to make you filet mignon for dinner.
And, yes, Fields needs to learn to finish what he started. But that he is getting the Bears to these turning point moments despite what he has around him speaks volumes about how well he is playing. I consider this to be part of the developmental process. And I don’t think it is hurting him one bit.
Cole Kmet is trying to end the year on a high note:
“I’m frustrated because, at the moment, we have three wins,” Kmet said, via 670 The Score’s Cam Ellis. “I don’t look at it like a rebuild or whatever. I want to win, and I want to win now. Obviously, (the fans) have their expectations, but at the end of the day, we have our expectations here in the locker room. So that’s what we hold ourselves to. Everyone here is disappointed with where we’re at. We think we could have been way better up to this point in the year … We’ve got these last four to show what we can do.”
Between his passion for getting this thing turned around and the improvement in his play, I’m starting to want to see Kmet here for the long haul.
N’Keal Harry made the most of a limited snap share by joining an elite club:
I wish Fields had his own Justin Jefferson:
For your listening pleasure:
Dang! And I thought the Bears had a rough fourth quarter on Sunday:
Yikes, Colts!
Xander Bogaerts is quietly moving up my free-agent shortstop power rankings. And it appears as if the Cubs have an interest in him, too:
Fred McGriff slashed .276/.361/.518 with a 130 OPS+ in 191 games with the Cubs in 2001 and 2002. And now, he is a Hall of Famer.
The Bulls feel like a broken team right now. What a difference a year makes:
NEWSLETTER
