top dawg

That's another issue. We were right to let Foreman go.

No, we should've let Hubbard take over the lead and brought in someone else besides Foreman.

Doesn't matter. I know damned well Chuba could do it.

You don't bench him. He needs all the seasoning that he can get. Benching him would probably be the worst thing that we could do

Because he's an experienced vet that was always an excellent route runner and has seamlessly transitioned to the slot.

I never said that a WR1 will be out there that I'm willing to pay for (I actually said the opposite), but if an opportunity arises to get Bryce some help, and it provides good value---the key point, then we can't dismiss it out of hand just because our season is over.

There is no point in which you should say "no" to a good value, season over or not. Every transaction is about value. Moreover, if the goal is to ultimately give Bryce Young a legit weapon to aid in his development, there are worse ideas.

Didn't you already say that? Keep in mind that Smith was going to apologize to Jeudy for referring to him as JAG. Jeudy may be overrated based upon his draft position and expectations, but he isn't without talent. Michael Irving and Keyshaun Johnson even alluded to his talent, early career injuries and QB situation, making a parallel with 89's career. I will admit that reports about his work ethic is concerning, but I don't think that anyone can deny his talent and the relative cheap cost of his acquisition.

I don't believe we're trading for him either, but my thing is how people are just proclaiming that he's going to better than Bryce. It is possible that he could end up being better than Bryce, but based upon everything that we know about Fields, I simply don't see how expecting him to just immediately (if ever) be hands down better than Bryce makes a lot of sense right now. The evidence doesn't justify that belief.

I don't believe this. We'll get at least a first. Young effective edge rushers aren't a dime a dozen. We'll get at least a first and a second if not two firsts.

https://www.the33rdteam.com/category/analysis/2023-nfl-week-1-time-is-running-out-for-bears-justin-fields/ Seriously, some of it is perhaps the play calling--not playing to your QB's strength, but most of seems like Fields just is slow to process or (at best) scared to let it rip. Fields has his issues. That's why I scoff when people just assume he's going to be a better QB than Young. He certainly hasn't proved it, and unlike Young---who has only played around a third of a season---Fields is in his third season. Moreover, the belief that Fields was a slow processor was one of the very thingd that caused him to slide in the draft. When people are complaining pre-draft, and then you come in the NFL and start proving them right, more and more questions will arise about your ability to be a franchise QB, and this is why I just wouldn't trade any more than a day three pick to get him. Well, this and his injury history.

I simply have lost faith in Fitt's deal evaluation. And if Tepper is driving this, it's just a continuation of foolishness due to his impatience. We're always trying to rob Peter to pay Paul instead of having some fiscal responsibility as it pertains to draft capital.

I totally agree, but...what I will say is that it's all about value. If we could get a good to great value, then you think about pulling the trigger. But that's not likely to happen at all, and Higgins isn't the player I'd think of that will be a huge difference maker in the long term. I'd much rather keep our assets, and possibly draft a receiver.

Higgins is fine, but I don't see him as changing much. He's a 50-50 ball master, but he's not an elite route runner. I'm hoping that Mingo could develop into the beast of a 50-50 catch guy. I would like an elite route runner. Don't get me wrong, I'll take Higgins, but not at the exorbitant price that he may command.

I agree, but how many young WRs, assuming they are a WR1 or have WR1 potential, are really out there? I don't know if they've talked to Detroit or Houston, but I like the thought of Jameson Williams and John Metchie with Young back together again.

Yeah, LOL

I mean, that's reasonable, but he looked like a helluva lot better passer in that game than he has in the NFL. I think that it may ultimately be due to his lack of processing on the pro level.

I don't think it's a matter of being told how to deal with losing. Everyone has a right to say their piece, but at the end of the day the Huddle is a football discussion board, not a beat-a-dead-horse board.

I do see one scenario, and that's where Tepper decides to clean house. A new GM/HC may not want Bryce Young.

But it can help clean up the place, and steer it in the right direction. Moderation, by it's very nature, is supposed to be about keeping things in the middle. It's about trying to steer people from the extremes towards the center. That way, people can express their opinions without being subjected to sheer clownery.

The fake USC's (University of South Carolina) QB, who used to play in front of Caleb Williams at OU as the Heisman frontrunner, got benched against rival TX due to sucky play (I was watching that game), lost his starting job to Williams permanently, got mad and went to SC where he's also been up and down, but has a couple of signature wins against UT and Clemson. For me, he's always thrown too many INTs. He was looking good for awhile there at OU, but it all went to poo. He has some talent, but will have to be developed. I think that he'll be drafted, but the expectation will likely be as a backup with some starter upside if developed correctly.

You're being funny right?

Fields ain't showed poo in the NFL, except that he's a pretty effective running back that happens to pass on occasion.

I agree, but for probably different reasons. I think that it says more about some Huddlers and their knowledge about football and how it works. Being very interested in human nature, as I believe that certain elements of human nature can be applied to any situation, I also don't believe that some people understand how much human nature plays a part in the things that people do and don't do. But, getting back to your general point, this thread, the Hurst thread and so many others, in my opinion, have basically reflected very badly on what's supposed to be a football discussion board. As for Fields, I don't mind competition, but I don't think that he's proven to be a gem in the NFL, and he also comes with an injury history. Of course I'm not oblivious to his less than stellar situation that has played a part in his inconsistent play, bad decision making, suspect processing and injuries, so he's a project, and unlike Bryce, he's had an appreciable amount of games to get his act together. All that being said, I'm not even convinced that Fields would be worth trading for. I don't know that what he's shown--or hasn't--is worth the distraction and upset to the franchise and Bryce Young. Now, that being said, if we were to trade for him, I personally wouldn't give anything more than a day three pick (or two, and lesser players). But, in general I don't think that's the kind of move that you make unless you've essentially given up on your guy. The only way that I'd fully support it is in the case of firings and bringing in new people who actually want Fields.

Good points, and food for thought. I'm not trying to be sarcastic, but when you run in the pile, run in the pile, then throw a screen, it's not too difficult for the other team to figure you out. If you don't take shots down the field, that just compresses the field because the defense doesn't have to worry about players getting behind them. Also, I realize that Brown helped develop the playbook, but it has not been fully opened for Bryce. @WUnderhill pointed out in another thread that Dalton asked Reich to make sure that he had more deep balls when they were installing the plan of attack against the Seahawks. Dalton would have never done that if the playbook had been wide open. Moreover, just because Brown helped to design the playbook doesn't mean that the plays that Reich chose to use were being used effectively. Play calling is such a chess game and plays should be strategic and deployed at the right time to have the greatest effect and bring about the desired results. One of my big problems with Reich is that I just don't think that he knows how to counter on the fly. Situationally, he just doesn't seem to know what he's doing with the plays or the personnel. Admittedly, he has probably jaundiced my opinion of his play calling this season, but there is something about "putting players into a position to succeed" that rings true in coaching, otherwise NFL types wouldn't say it. Again, just so you know I'm not trying to be dismissive, I thought your points are good and something to consider.