I find it strange how there are many fans are behind Fields but the sportswriters want him gone. Are they just tryng to generate a story?
Last edited:
LTHSALUM76 must be a sports writer! HahahahaI find it strange how there are many fans are behind Fields but the sportswriters want him gone. Are they just tryng to generate a story?
To me the question is: "Can the Bears do better than Fields, Eberflus and Getsy?" And I think the answer is yes on all three.
Get as many “dudes” the whole league is injured in Dec.. look the QBs playing.Can the Bears do better on their OL and DL?"
Let's not forget their are 22 positions on the field in these discussions and not just the 1 or 3 or 5 that everyone continuously talk about.
Take a look at Troy Aikman's record in his first three yeears - not a lot different from Fields.
That's about all those two have in commonTake a look at Troy Aikman's record in his first three yeears - not a lot different from Fields.
Bad pick there. Underthown
Agree. Running game looked great today, no need to get cute.I am not a fan of the wildcat 3rd and 1. Too cute and poorly blocked. Punt team.
After he threw 3 interceptions and fumbled twice. Cutler blows!Yes I'm sure if Kmet was in the game the play would be called for the larger target.
Cutler would average three turnovers a game.
Not exactly sure what I’d give up to get Crosby, but watching that game should be a reminder that a QB can’t do it all by himself. Mahomes looked like hot garbage out there today.Would you trade the Bears 2nd pick to the Raiders for Crosby? I would in a heartbeat! lol
Merry Christmas guys! Love to think about the Bears possibilities! This is a stretch but boy what a combo it would be with Sweat on one side and Crosby on the other. Wow
Yeah but at the same time it was close enough to keep his team in the game. He literally has no one in offense.Not exactly sure what I’d give up to get Crosby, but watching that game should be a reminder that a QB can’t do it all by himself. Mahomes looked like hot garbage out there today.
I think you are kinda making my point although I don’t know how much he kept his team in the game. He threw a pick 6, had numerous other bad throws that coulda got picked and they lost at home to the Raiders.Yeah but at the same time it was close enough to keep his team in the game. He literally has no one in offense.
Totally agree but where we might differ is a great QB will always keep you in a game and give you a chance. You won’t change the channel if Mahomes, Rogers, Brady, maybe Josh Allen or Joe Burrow regardless of the score because those guys can bring you back.I think you are kinda making my point although I don’t know how much he kept his team in the game. He threw a pick 6, had numerous other bad throws that coulda got picked and they lost at home to the Raiders.
He had very little time to throw for the most part and looked terrible. Of course it wasn’t all his fault, it’s just that almost any QB, even Mahomes, in a bad situation is gonna look … well… bad.
It was close because Vegas couldn’t move the ball at all for most of the game until the final drive.Yeah but at the same time it was close enough to keep his team in the game. He literally has no one in offense.
Prep writerIt was close because Vegas couldn’t move the ball at all for most of the game until the final drive.
ya, but he wasn’t good.Prep writer
I will take Mahomes in a close game. Just saying. I am sure you didn’t change the channel. 😂
NO QB has a good game every time. Mahomes' completion percentage and passer rating were still better than Justin Fields' numbers. And people call Fields game an improvement of sorts and Mahomes' game as a disaster. Let that sink in.I think you are kinda making my point although I don’t know how much he kept his team in the game. He threw a pick 6, had numerous other bad throws that coulda got picked and they lost at home to the Raiders.
He had very little time to throw for the most part and looked terrible. Of course it wasn’t all his fault, it’s just that almost any QB, even Mahomes, in a bad situation is gonna look … well… bad.
His numbers were better than Fields'. Better completion percentage and better passer rating. Goes to show you the low bar Fields has.I’m
ya, but he wasn’t good.
The Raiders didn't complete a pass after the 1st quarter and won without the offense scoring a TD. That hasn't happened to the Chiefs at Arrowhead in decades, or maybe ever.It was close because Vegas couldn’t move the ball at all for most of the game until the final drive.
Since all you care about is the numbers, the Bears also didn't need Fields to throw 44 times like Mahomes did since they ran for 250 yards and the Chiefs ran for 85 yards.NO QB has a good game every time. Mahomes' completion percentage and passer rating were still better than Justin Fields' numbers. And people call Fields game an improvement of sorts and Mahomes' game as a disaster. Let that sink in.
How did you know??? LOL! But check these threads and look at your past posts. Some of yours suggested the Bears get rid of Fields.LTHSALUM76 must be a sports writer! Hahahaha
So who in your opinion should the Bears get to replace him that makes the Bears better than they are right now?How did you know??? LOL! But check these threads and look at your past posts. Some of yours suggested the Bears get rid of Fields.
I read an interesting article in the Sun Times this morning about...Fields. In the article the writer said, "teams that don't know if they have the right QB usually don't." And Fields isn't the worst QB in the league. But he certainly isn't close to being the best either. I agree with the writer that Fields is in the middle. His passer rating at this point is just a touch below last year. So, this isn't going to be an easy decision although I don't think it should be that difficult either.
I can't help but wonder if the Bears knew Fields would be where he is today, when they drafted him, would they have done it? If the answer is yes, then keep him. If it's no, time to find a new QB.
Oh, you again. I am and always have been a "bottom line" guy. The numbers are the bottom line after wins and losses. You cannot deny my point if you picked it up. If not, Mahomes and Fields had very similar games in the numbers. Yet Mahomes' effort was a disaster in some minds and Fields' effort was an improvement. Once again it goes to show you the low bar Fields has. Do you get it now or do you need more help?Since all you care about is the numbers, the Bears also didn't need Fields to throw 44 times like Mahomes did since they ran for 250 yards and the Chiefs ran for 85 yards.
Gonna need help, oh wise one. If you ask anyone who knows anything who watched both games who had the better game this weekend, Fields or Mahomes, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that would say Mahomes even though he had better numbers. Once again, numbers don't always paint the full picture.Oh, you again. I am and always have been a "bottom line" guy. The numbers are the bottom line after wins and losses. You cannot deny my point if you picked it up. If not, Mahomes and Fields had very similar games in the numbers. Yet Mahomes' effort was a disaster in some minds and Fields' effort was an improvement. Once again it goes to show you the low bar Fields has. Do you get it now or do you need more help?
Lamar Jackson. LOL!! I mean what the hell? You asked.So who in your opinion should the Bears get to replace him that makes the Bears better than they are right now?
I didn't say Mahomes had a better game. You really need to learn how to read AND comprehend what you're reading and understand what the writer is saying. I am saying their numbers are similar but look at how people see those numbers. Neither of them had a "good game" ok? But in the eyes of a lot of fans Fields numbers were ok while Mahomes' numbers were disastrous. Once again, it really shows just how low the bar is for Fields.Gonna need help, oh wise one. If you ask anyone who knows anything who watched both games who had the better game this weekend, Fields or Mahomes, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that would say Mahomes even though he had better numbers. Once again, numbers don't always paint the full picture.
Glad you mentioned reading comprehension. Please cite the post where anyone here mentioned Mahomes' or Fields' numbers. No one did, other than you of course. Hell, I don't see where anyone here even said that Fields had a good game. So you're argument ofI didn't say Mahomes had a better game. You really need to learn how to read AND comprehend what you're reading and understand what the writer is saying. I am saying their numbers are similar but look at how people see those numbers. Neither of them had a "good game" ok? But in the eyes of a lot of fans Fields numbers were ok while Mahomes' numbers were disastrous. Once again, it really shows just how low the bar is for Fields.
is debunked. All anyone said was Mahomes had a bad game, which he did. Once again, numbers don't tell the whole story. The Bears and Chiefs game weren't even comparable, the Bears were playing from in front and didn't need Fields to do anything spectacular or put up big numbers, whereas Mahomes was directly responsible for both of the Raiders TD's, seven seconds apart. So later in the game he had to pass more, so it stands to reason he would have better numbers than Fields. One can have better numbers and still look worse.But in the eyes of a lot of fans Fields numbers were ok while Mahomes' numbers were disastrous.
So you have no thought on who the Bears should bring in or draft, that would be available, would make the Bears better than they are right now? So you're one of those that likes to complain just for the sake of complaining?Lamar Jackson. LOL!! I mean what the hell? You asked.
Getsy can’t call plays during the flow of the game, it’s maddening.Agree. Running game looked great today, no need to get cute.
He needs to be fired into the sun.Getsy can’t call plays during the flow of the game, it’s maddening.
I knowHow did you know??? LOL! But check these threads and look at your past posts. Some of yours suggested the Bears get rid of Fields.
I read an interesting article in the Sun Times this morning about...Fields. In the article the writer said, "teams that don't know if they have the right QB usually don't." And Fields isn't the worst QB in the league. But he certainly isn't close to being the best either. I agree with the writer that Fields is in the middle. His passer rating at this point is just a touch below last year. So, this isn't going to be an easy decision although I don't think it should be that difficult either.
I can't help but wonder if the Bears knew Fields would be where he is today, when they drafted him, would they have done it? If the answer is yes, then keep him. If it's no, time to find a new QB.
MarvinSo you have no thought on who the Bears should bring in or draft, that would be available, would make the Bears better than they are right now? So you're one of those that likes to complain just for the sake of complaining?
So who in your opinion should the Bears get to replace him that makes the Bears better than they are right now?