RealGM

DuckIII wrote:

Dresden wrote:

biggestbullsfan wrote:
This bothers me. They haven’t even reached training camp and they’re suggesting using him for special teams. It’s rude af. I hate this for him.

is it worse than getting traded for a 6th round draft pick?

Um, absolutely? They traded him for that so he could land in a place where he would have a chance to still be a starting QB. They did him a widely acknowledged favor. It wasn’t an insult.

A young QB on his rookie deal being asked (if he is actually asked which I doubt will happen) to return kicks, on the other hand, would sting pretty bad.

I get all the “just be happy to be in the NFL” stuff but come on. He’s not at that stage in his career yet. Indeed, I think there’s a better than 50/50 shot he still ends up a solid NFL starter. About the only guy who got crapped on worse by his franchise was Mac Jones.

Fields may end up a bum. But the notion that he should just be happy to have a uniform is kinda ridiculous at this point.

Agree with your general point, but you say the Bears both crapped on Justin, and did him a favor? I know it wasn't the best situation to be a young Bears QB (and now may actually be that best situation... them's the breaks). But I thought they supported him pretty well, to the degree that we talked for 400 posts about whether they might actually keep him and trade down, a decision that seems more obvious in hindsight. They gave him a chance every week to be the starter and face of the franchise, which apparently nobody else is willing to do. They never really benched him or jerked him around that I recall. They got the best talent they could to try to win games at the time, which, even if those players weren't on offense, I wouldn't call that crapping on him, exactly. And they just gave him an absolute golden handshake on the way out the door, as you mention. I think they did pretty well by Justin. They just stumbled onto Caleb, is all. Maybe I missed the dirt they did him.

If Carolina earned the 14th pick instead of the first, is he still here? I don't know what else we would have done. I'd rather have Justin than Mac.

I strongly doubt the Steelers have determined that Fields isn't worthy of being QB2 before he even suits up for them.

Watching the Rome Odunze interview on the Pivot Podcast from 2 weeks. Near the end Rome says his coach suggested Rome wear a mesh bag over his head to help his focus on catching balls. Mesh bag is just what you think, a bag you might use for laundry or keeping sports equiptment in. Rome says the bag helped a lot and he now uses it routinely when catching from the jugs machine. Early on in the interview he was asked what receivers he likes to learn/watch from. Mentioned Dante Adams, Julio Jones and Keenan Allen; Keenan for his precise route running.

DuckIII wrote:

Dresden wrote:

biggestbullsfan wrote:
This bothers me. They haven’t even reached training camp and they’re suggesting using him for special teams. It’s rude af. I hate this for him.

is it worse than getting traded for a 6th round draft pick?

Um, absolutely? They traded him for that so he could land in a place where he would have a chance to still be a starting QB. They did him a widely acknowledged favor. It wasn’t an insult.

A young QB on his rookie deal being asked (if he is actually asked which I doubt will happen) to return kicks, on the other hand, would sting pretty bad.

I get all the “just be happy to be in the NFL” stuff but come on. He’s not at that stage in his career yet. Indeed, I think there’s a better than 50/50 shot he still ends up a solid NFL starter. About the only guy who got crapped on worse by his franchise was Mac Jones.

Fields may end up a bum. But the notion that he should just be happy to have a uniform is kinda ridiculous at this point.

I doubt he'll be asked to, too, but I think in the specific instance of Fields, I don't think the idea that "he's not at that stage in his career yet" really applies. First, he's starting out as a backup, so this is an opportunity to get the ball in his hands and get some benefit from his special abilities as a runner. Second, with the kickoff rule changes next season, I assume teams think there is less of a reason to try to protect players from injury on returns, because theoretically the high-speed collision aspect of it should be no longer a major concern.

DuckIII wrote:Fields may end up a bum. But the notion that he should just be happy to have a uniform is kinda ridiculous at this point.

I don't think he should be "happy to have a uniform on", but he's definitely backup caliber right now. That said, a backup QB makes more than a special teams player by a pretty wide margin, so it's still an insult.

I also don't think he'd be all that great at it. As a QB he's incredibly fast and mobile. Compared to incredibly fast and mobile guys that don't need to have some ability to play QB, he is not incredibly fast and mobile.

dougthonus wrote:

DuckIII wrote:Fields may end up a bum. But the notion that he should just be happy to have a uniform is kinda ridiculous at this point.

I don't think he should be "happy to have a uniform on", but he's definitely backup caliber right now. That said, a backup QB makes more than a special teams player by a pretty wide margin, so it's still an insult.

I also don't think he'd be all that great at it. As a QB he's incredibly fast and mobile. Compared to incredibly fast and mobile guys that don't need to have some ability to play QB, he is not incredibly fast and mobile.

He's probably still above-average when it comes to "fast and mobile" for kick returners, since you also have to have the hands element (which who knows if he even does). He ran a 4.44 40, hit 21.23 mph on a run in 2022, and pursuant to Next Gen Stats was the "most explosive" rusher in the NFL.

https://www.nfl.com/news/2022-nfl-season-s-top-10-most-explosive-rushers-bears-qb-justin-fields-leads-gro

molepharmer wrote:Watching the Rome Odunze interview on the Pivot Podcast from 2 weeks. Near the end Rome says his coach suggested Rome wear a mesh bag over his head to help his focus on catching balls. Mesh bag is just what you think, a bag you might use for laundry or keeping sports equiptment in. Rome says the bag helped a lot and he now uses it routinely when catching from the jugs machine. Early on in the interview he was asked what receivers he likes to learn/watch from. Mentioned Dante Adams, Julio Jones and Keenan Allen; Keenan for his precise route running.

Playmaker for sure. Size. 6' 3" 215 lbs. Fast. 4.4/40 and DJ Houshmandzade says he's capable of a 4.3. Wants to be great. Has an opportunity to learn from accomplished vets. He's humble. Will absorb coaching like a sponge. No flashy egg head. Barring injury he is a future All-Pro.

molepharmer wrote:Watching the Rome Odunze interview on the Pivot Podcast from 2 weeks. Near the end Rome says his coach suggested Rome wear a mesh bag over his head to help his focus on catching balls. Mesh bag is just what you think, a bag you might use for laundry or keeping sports equiptment in. Rome says the bag helped a lot and he now uses it routinely when catching from the jugs machine. Early on in the interview he was asked what receivers he likes to learn/watch from. Mentioned Dante Adams, Julio Jones and Keenan Allen; Keenan for his precise route running.

Keenan Allen can run the routes without hitting the cone so he is in awe!

i said it first, but here ya go:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/40052203/should-teams-trade-nfl-draft-lessons-deals-2024-class-winners-losers

"There's one more thorny problem: How should we value future picks? The common trope is to suggest devaluing future picks by one round per year, although I'm not sure that plays out as often in practice as is suggested. (Nobody was offering teams a 2026 first-round pick for their third-rounder last weekend.) From a team perspective, there's no reason current picks should be worth more than future selections; the focus on present value is a product of impatience by general managers who have their jobs riding on the line."

and also by GMs whose jobs AREN'T in immediate danger (poles) but get suckered by opposition GMs who insist on adhering to the fraudulent "rule"

"Don't sacrifice future picks for lesser picks in the current year's draft. If there's any rule an executive should take away from this article, it's this one. Teams can incur the moral hazard of general managers and front office people making decisions that increase their chances of holding on to their jobs at the expense of the organization's long-term viability. Handing out a backloaded deal would be an example of that sort of decision, allowing an executive to build a better team now while restricting a team's spending long after that front office person has likely left the club.

The same holds true for trades in which teams make deals that are obvious losses on paper."

dice wrote:i said it first, but here ya go:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/40052203/should-teams-trade-nfl-draft-lessons-deals-2024-class-winners-losers

"There's one more thorny problem: How should we value future picks? The common trope is to suggest devaluing future picks by one round per year, although I'm not sure that plays out as often in practice as is suggested. (Nobody was offering teams a 2026 first-round pick for their third-rounder last weekend.) From a team perspective, there's no reason current picks should be worth more than future selections; the focus on present value is a product of impatience by general managers who have their jobs riding on the line."

and also by GMs whose jobs AREN'T in immediate danger (poles) but get suckered by opposition GMs who reference the fraudulent "rule"

Is it about impatience or about increasing the championship window right into next season? Also, Booker fell. Considering that he would have been an extreme value in the 5th, he's at least an "okay" value for the price we paid. What I'm getting from Poles is that he's not a nitpicker who needs to win every deal, but his general sensibilities seem right on target. We're at the place where we are because of him. Why not respect it? Also, I'm not expecting any prospect from the 4th or 5th rounds to make much of an impact.

TheJordanRule wrote:

dice wrote:i said it first, but here ya go:

https://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/40052203/should-teams-trade-nfl-draft-lessons-deals-2024-class-winners-losers

"There's one more thorny problem: How should we value future picks? The common trope is to suggest devaluing future picks by one round per year, although I'm not sure that plays out as often in practice as is suggested. (Nobody was offering teams a 2026 first-round pick for their third-rounder last weekend.) From a team perspective, there's no reason current picks should be worth more than future selections; the focus on present value is a product of impatience by general managers who have their jobs riding on the line."

and also by GMs whose jobs AREN'T in immediate danger (poles) but get suckered by opposition GMs who reference the fraudulent "rule"

Is it about impatience or about increasing the championship window right into next season?

could be either! but the bears championship window is certainly not confined to next season (IF the team is actually a contender next season - a defensive regression from the turnover machine at end of last season is a likelihood, as it was in 2019). as things look now the window should only be expanding BEYOND this season

Also, Booker fell.

he did. probably for a reason. the bears valued him more in line with prognosticators than what other teams did. see the "sure, but my team..." section in the article i provided

and even if he IS a legit 3rd round talent, that doesn't explain why poles took a freaking punter in the 4th over him! i don't recall anyone here or in the media advocating for that weird move. despite the bears having a poor punter

We're at the place where we are because of him. Why not respect it?

i'm not going to rehash this, but we're in the optimistic place we are because we have caleb and, to a much lesser extent, odunze. elite talent playing on huge bargain contracts

we have caleb because...

1) poles held onto roquan too long, leading to his starring role in a win over the texans, nearly costing us the #1 pick...but was bailed out by a miracle ending in a season-ender houston inexplicably tried to win (thanks lovie!)

2) poles chose justin fields over bryce and CJ, a reasonable but ultimately incorrect decision. poles and the panthers then made a perfectly reasonable trade from both sides, which it just so happens the panthers lost dreadfully due to bryce and the team being unexpectedly awful (miracle #2). although the end results of the trade might still be open to substantial historical revision given that poles reportedly passed on NEXT year's panthers #1 pick in favor of a WR 1 year into his new contract. now, DJ moore was terrific last season (i though he deserved pro bowl). but if that panthers pick ends up at or near the top again...

we have odunze because the bears pitifully underperformed in the first half of the year (bad offseason/early season prep? poles was at least partially responsible for the eberflus hire). then got lucky in the draft (thanks harbaugh!) despite the panicky sweat addition potentially costing them draft position

so the real question is "why not as a fan just enjoy the reality that the bears (and poles) benefitted from off the charts luck?" poles's grade should be based on how he navigates his incredible good fortune way more than the role he had in making it happen. and thus far i think he's made short-sighted decisions toward that objective (mainly trading picks for established market value performers rather than simply doing the hard evaluation/negotiation work in free agency and saving the picks). he seems to have abandoned the initial long-term planning approach that resulted in his good fortune in favor of instant gratification. claypool, sweat, allen, now booker...

dice wrote:
and even if he IS a legit 3rd round talent, that doesn't explain why poles took a freaking punter in the 4th over him! i don't recall anyone here or in the media advocating for that weird move. despite the bears having a poor punter

It's been stated that he took Taylor first, with the plan to trade back in to get Booker down the line, because he felt that Taylor would come off the board in the next few picks, while Booker would be available for a trade up later. In which case, he used this year's and next year's 4th to get the two players he wanted in the 4th round. Not ideal, but at least not dreadful.

biggestbullsfan wrote:

Read on Twitter

If Caleb and Odunze are humming, and DJ maintains, it will be difficult to resist the money saved by letting him go, and drafting a rookie receiver. His money can go to possible extensions for guys like Tevin Jenkins and DJ.

NesimLE wrote:

dice wrote:
and even if he IS a legit 3rd round talent, that doesn't explain why poles took a freaking punter in the 4th over him! i don't recall anyone here or in the media advocating for that weird move. despite the bears having a poor punter

It's been stated that he took Taylor first, with the plan to trade back in to get Booker down the line, because he felt that Taylor would come off the board in the next few picks, while Booker would be available for a trade up later. In which case, he used this year's and next year's 4th to get the two players he wanted in the 4th round. Not ideal, but at least not dreadful.

why would he think that taylor was about to be drafted? or that booker wasn't, for that matter?

fleet wrote:

biggestbullsfan wrote:

Read on Twitter

If Caleb and Odunze are humming, and DJ maintains, it will be difficult to resist the money saved by letting him go, and drafting a rookie receiver. His money can go to possible extensions for guys like Tevin Jenkins and DJ.

...and kmet maintains, and waldron's 2 TE-heavy system is a success...then having 3 strong WR options is redundant

should'a saved the pick and cap space and signed a hybrid WR2/WR3. it's not like landing odunze wasn't a 50/50 proposition. now we've got 3 WRs who should all be featured

NecessaryEvil wrote:

Read on Twitter

good news. here's hoping for a 5th!

dice wrote:and even if he IS a legit 3rd round talent, that doesn't explain why poles took a freaking punter in the 4th over him! i don't recall anyone here or in the media advocating for that weird move. despite the bears having a poor punter

.

Poles said he took the punter because he thought the punter would be gone in the next few picks, and he apparently had reason to believe Booker might last to the 5th round, where he could trade back in and take him.

And plenty of people in the media since the draft have been positive towards Poles taking that punter.