Truth be Told - Bears have some Talent. And SHIT Coaching.

Washington

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 22, 2016
Posts:
3,722
Liked Posts:
2,682
The only spots that you really don't need to focus on are RB (Howard, Cohen, Cunningham) and DL (Unrein, Hicks, Goldman, Bullard leading the way).

So basically, Pace needs to focus on 90% of the positions. That is not a team loaded with talent. We have very little talent.

We have digressed since the rebuild started. We were decimated with injuries last year, yet the D was better last year. We were better in 2015 than we are now. We lack talent across the board save for RB and the DL. We are a fucking mess and nowhere even close to being pertinent again.
 

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
33,785
Liked Posts:
-1,061
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
I'll take a stab at what I see:

QB--Trubisky--Rookie QB playing like a rookie QB. Learning despite getting shit coaching and has unteachable accuracy and disposition. I believe he can be developed into a top level QB. That he was so badly mishandled by this coaching staff and not given more in pre-season/training camp is an indictment on this coaching staff. Get the right offensive HC in here and give him a full offseason with Trubisky, and you will see a Wentz-like jump.

WR--Only decent receivers are Inman and Wright, and both are suited for Slot receiver. Inman has a better rapport with Trubisky and is a far superior route runner to Wright. I cut everyone but Cam and Inman this offseason, extend Inman, and pursue 2 FA WRs in the offseason. Team still will not have that dynamic WR threat as I draft OT in Rd 1 if best is on the board - the line needs to be rebuilt. I may draft a WR later in the draft, but I don't draft for the home run WR until 2019 - there was a draft statistic out there for a while that the best chances at getting a receiver are between 15-25, as 1-15 have a greater bust rate. And I don't anoint Cam the #1 WR. Cam will have to earn his spot all over again.

RB--J.Howard/T.Cohen-- This is fine - both are playmakers, and Cohen has All pro ability, but needs a TON of coaching. In the right hands, he can be molded into a lethal weapon on offense.

TE--D.Simms, A.Shaheen, D.Brown - Of the group, I like what little I have seen of Shaheen, but it is an indictment of the coaching staff that we do not see Shaheen more. I think Brown and Simms are replacement level, but you can find veteran tight ends off the street - smart play here is to see what the incoming head coach wants, and grab those TE types in free agency.

O-line--C.Leno, J.Sitton, C.Whitehair, K.Long, Massie - Only Whitehair belongs on the line of the future here, and I believe it will be at left guard, although if the incoming coach wants to keep him at Center, I will trust that. Long needs to be shut down now and go under the knife to fix his shoulder. However, the ankle surgery had so many complications, there is word he is scared to go under the knife again to fix his shoulder. If that is the case, Long is DONE. Sitton is getting older and while ok, needs to be replaced. For as much shit as Leno gets, he is perfect as a back up left tackle/swing tackle. Overpaid? Sure, but Bears have nothing but cap space and I am good with an overpriced backup with all that starting experience. However, going into this offseason, I draft the future LT in Rd 1, and somewhere starting in Rd 4, I pick up a starting center and another guard in this draft. I also pick up a Guard or two and another tackle in FA - not top end, but guys who can at least do the job, and sign them to short term deals as Pace does. You want to bridge the gap to the 2019 draft, where you should pick up a RT in one of the first 2 rounds. Aside from WR, the line is the weakest positions on the team. I know you drafted Jordan Morgan in the 5th round last year, but I am one who believes you need to draft either a tackle or guard every year in the mid rounds - to keep competition going and sort the wheat from the chaff. If Morgan can step up to fill in for Sitton or Long, great. Doesn't mean you shouldn't keep drafting tackles and guards, and may the best win.



Secondary--E.Jackson, A.Amos, Q.Demps, K.Fuller, P.Amukamra, M.Cooper - I re-sign Prince. Demps can go, and Fuller I think I let walk - I think better teams figured out his aggressive tendencies and as we saw mid season, can use this to pick on him and wreck him. Not buying the contract fools gold. Eddie Jackson is finally a good starting safety, and Amos ideally is a backup. What we thought was a weakness going into 2017 actually ended up not being horrible, and that's thanks to who Pace signed in free agency. Fill in here in free agency.

ILBer--D.Trevathon, J.Freeman, C.Jones, N.Kwiatkowski, J.Timu Freeman I believe will be gone due to his P.E.D. suspension issues. Some good players here. No superstars, but no one who would embarrass you either.

OLB--L.Floyd, P.McPhee, W.Young - I think the Bears should draft an OLB in Rd 2. Also supplement with FA. 2018 draft should be geared towards rebuilding the O line, but getting an OLB in Rd 2 makes too much sense.

D-Line--A.Hicks, E.Goldman, J.Bullard, M.Unrein, RRH - Bears are solid here. Hicks is a legit beast.



So, the reality is this - for all this bitching about the Bears having a lack of talent, it is the offense that lacks talent, particularly O Line and WR. The talent they do have is mitigated by REALLY shit coaching.

On defense, the Bears are actually ok. In 2016, Bears ranked 9th in D in terms of Points per game. This year so far in the same category, they rank 14th.

While not lights out, the defense is good enough and not nearly as talent-deficient as people think.

The Bears need WRs, O Line, and OLB. Beyond that, they need depth and some more playmakers at any position, and coaches that can bring it out of them. WRs and better coaches will make all the difference in the world, and even moreso if you can better protect your QB.

The Bears have talent but need play makers especially at WR, OLB and although we could win with this secondary it would be nice to have a play maker back there as well. E.Jackson could be that guy but hard to tell in his rookie season. We gotta have play makers though cause when you have those star players it rubs off on the guys around them. I'd like to see them let K.Fuller walk but only if they sign T.Johnson (Rams CB) in free agency and then bring Prince back as well.
 

dabears70

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 31, 2013
Posts:
33,785
Liked Posts:
-1,061
Location:
Orlando
My favorite teams
  1. New York Mets
  1. New York Knicks
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. New York Rangers
  1. Syracuse Orange
So basically, Pace needs to focus on 90% of the positions. That is not a team loaded with talent. We have very little talent.

We have digressed since the rebuild started. We were decimated with injuries last year, yet the D was better last year. We were better in 2015 than we are now. We lack talent across the board save for RB and the DL. We are a fucking mess and nowhere even close to being pertinent again.

So there's no talent in D.Trevathon, C.Jones, E.Jackson, P.Amukamara, K.Fuller, L.Floyd, C.Whitehair, K.Long, J.Sitton, C.Leno, C.Meredith, M.Trubsiky, A.Shaheen......................Damn it man, i thought all those guys had some talent but i guess we should cut them all because they have no talent. Thanks for pointing that out cause i would have never noticed without you. lol
 

Washington

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 22, 2016
Posts:
3,722
Liked Posts:
2,682
So there's no talent in D.Trevathon, C.Jones, E.Jackson, P.Amukamara, K.Fuller, L.Floyd, C.Whitehair, K.Long, J.Sitton, C.Leno, C.Meredith, M.Trubsiky, A.Shaheen......................Damn it man, i thought all those guys had some talent but i guess we should cut them all because they have no talent. Thanks for pointing that out cause i would have never noticed without you. lol

Define talent. Are these difference makers? We don't have a single guy in our secondary with more than 1 INT. Floyd flashes but he can't stay on the field and he's not consistent. I don't believe Meredith has a catch this year. Whitehair digressed. What has Shaheen shown you making you think he can be elite? Trevathon has been injured in each season with us and played like crap last year. He can't be counted on. Sitton is solid but old but overall, the OL, is not good. Jackson has potential but he's had some bad games and only has 1 INT too.

Just because people play and start on the Bears does not mean they are making a difference. Those are all role players. That does not mean they have no talent. It means their talent level is not good enough to make us a winning team. We are a terrible team right now that lacks difference makers.
 

Teddy KGB

Cultural Icon
Joined:
Apr 25, 2011
Posts:
7,801
Liked Posts:
4,579
That's a lot of work to try to convince me a 13-and-32 team is good on talent . . .

. . . I'll look at the record . . .
Its not always about talent. A team that goes from 6-10 one year to 10-6 the next doesn't do so because one year they had no talent and the next suddenly they did. Just looking at the record is lazy. It doesn't bother to understand WHY a team is that record, and instead just caters to one's own preconceptions.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
 

Teddy KGB

Cultural Icon
Joined:
Apr 25, 2011
Posts:
7,801
Liked Posts:
4,579
Define talent. Are these difference makers? We don't have a single guy in our secondary with more than 1 INT. Floyd flashes but he can't stay on the field and he's not consistent. I don't believe Meredith has a catch this year. Whitehair digressed. What has Shaheen shown you making you think he can be elite? Trevathon has been injured in each season with us and played like crap last year. He can't be counted on. Sitton is solid but old but overall, the OL, is not good. Jackson has potential but he's had some bad games and only has 1 INT too.

Just because people play and start on the Bears does not mean they are making a difference. Those are all role players. That does not mean they have no talent. It means their talent level is not good enough to make us a winning team. We are a terrible team right now that lacks difference makers.
You used talent as a measuring stick, but now you want HIM to define it? How about YOU define it, so rather than arguing in circles we can get on the same page?

1 question- where does talent end and coaching begin? To put it another way, how do you tell the difference between a player with no talent, and a poorly coached player who has talent?

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
 

Matt2012

Well-known member
Joined:
Nov 4, 2012
Posts:
675
Liked Posts:
683
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Wisconsin Badgers
I'm in agreement with you. The talent on this team is not actually bad, especially among the younger players. Pace has done a fantastic job in the draft, which we have sorely missed.
The problem has been awful coaching and terrible FA (and injuries too of course). Pace needs to bring in the right coaches and being willing to spend some big money this offseason so that we can get this offense moving. We are not far away from where we want to be.
 

Teddy KGB

Cultural Icon
Joined:
Apr 25, 2011
Posts:
7,801
Liked Posts:
4,579
I'm in agreement with you. The talent on this team is not actually bad, especially among the younger players. Pace has done a fantastic job in the draft, which we have sorely missed.
The problem has been awful coaching and terrible FA (and injuries too of course). Pace needs to bring in the right coaches and being willing to spend some big money this offseason so that we can get this offense moving. We are not far away from where we want to be.
Agreed. There is a lack of play makers on defense, but the overall talent level is about average, which is better than pure shit.

Get better coaching and team will make a jump. Get playmakers and it makes another jump. If right decisions are made, team will make playoffs next year, and will win in the playoffs the following year.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
 

Washington

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 22, 2016
Posts:
3,722
Liked Posts:
2,682
You used talent as a measuring stick, but now you want HIM to define it? How about YOU define it, so rather than arguing in circles we can get on the same page?

1 question- where does talent end and coaching begin? To put it another way, how do you tell the difference between a player with no talent, and a poorly coached player who has talent?

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

First off, I never said we had no talent. bears70 said I said that. I said we have limited talent. Therefore, I wanted to know what talent meant to him. I think the level of talent on our team equates to having a last place team in the NFCN as well as being one of the worst teams in the league.

To me, a difference maker is a guy who the other team has to game plan and account for. Howard would be that. Perhaps Floyd will become that. A good WR is that. A shutdown CB is that. You get the drift. Those guys have more talent than others who are mostly just role players. Typically, difference makers are those you see making the most money, getting voted to the Pro Bowl, etc. Our team lacks difference makers but has a handful of supporting role players enough of such to keep us firmly planted in last place.

If others without bias towards our team rated our players versus the rest of the league, I believe you'd see a low overall rating. Fair enough?
 

Washington

Well-known member
Joined:
Mar 22, 2016
Posts:
3,722
Liked Posts:
2,682
Bottom 5, certainly. Which, after three years of supposedly rebuilding, is awful, and an indictment on Pace.

One would certainly expect more building blocks after 3 drafts and 3 FA periods. Much of what people are calling building blocks and talented players are simply "nice" players.

Perhaps better coaching can turn these nice players into better players. Hopefully, we'll find out next year. Better play calling will be paramount too.

Nobody is saying we are devoid of talent. We just don't have as much good talent as the homers are trying to make people believe. We have enough talent to be one of the worst teams in the league.
 

HeHateMe

He/Himz/Hiz
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
55,636
Liked Posts:
60,403
One would certainly expect more building blocks after 3 drafts and 3 FA periods. Much of what people are calling building blocks and talented players are simply "nice" players.

Perhaps better coaching can turn these nice players into better players. Hopefully, we'll find out next year. Better play calling will be paramount too.

Nobody is saying we are devoid of talent. We just don't have as much good talent as the homers are trying to make people believe. We have enough talent to be one of the worst teams in the league.

This is exactly why literally everyone give or take a few members here doesn't trust the credibility of TEDDY KFC postings on here, among other reasons, it is evidenced in his very own words in his own postings that he admittingly does not watch other NFL teams or players or follow NFL personnel unless it is the Bears players so his frame of reference in "analyzing" talent and coaches and GMs and literally anything in the NFL versus what he "sees" on the bears (which is very biased, opinionated and subjective in terms of his general perspective) offers really a limited amount of credibility and one could actually venture to offer an estimation of his credibility to be around ZERO when it comes to observations of talent and skill level of Bears personnel versus that of other teams in the NFL or an NFL average or what have you.
 

Teddy KGB

Cultural Icon
Joined:
Apr 25, 2011
Posts:
7,801
Liked Posts:
4,579
First off, I never said we had no talent. bears70 said I said that. I said we have limited talent. Therefore, I wanted to know what talent meant to him. I think the level of talent on our team equates to having a last place team in the NFCN as well as being one of the worst teams in the league.

To me, a difference maker is a guy who the other team has to game plan and account for. Howard would be that. Perhaps Floyd will become that. A good WR is that. A shutdown CB is that. You get the drift. Those guys have more talent than others who are mostly just role players. Typically, difference makers are those you see making the most money, getting voted to the Pro Bowl, etc. Our team lacks difference makers but has a handful of supporting role players enough of such to keep us firmly planted in last place.

If others without bias towards our team rated our players versus the rest of the league, I believe you'd see a low overall rating. Fair enough?
I'll beg to differ. I think we lack the playmakers other teams have, but in terms of talent, middle of the pack on defense, offense needs some love.

But again, where does talent end and coaching begin? How do you tell the difference between a player with no talent, and one who has talent but is poorly coached?

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
 

Teddy KGB

Cultural Icon
Joined:
Apr 25, 2011
Posts:
7,801
Liked Posts:
4,579
One would certainly expect more building blocks after 3 drafts and 3 FA periods. Much of what people are calling building blocks and talented players are simply "nice" players.

Perhaps better coaching can turn these nice players into better players. Hopefully, we'll find out next year. Better play calling will be paramount too.

Nobody is saying we are devoid of talent. We just don't have as much good talent as the homers are trying to make people believe. We have enough talent to be one of the worst teams in the league.
I think based on your last 2 posts, I figured out whats going on.

People are conflating the word talent with the word playmakers.

The Bears have talent. They have a solid foundation on defense and RB, and a couple pieces with potential on offense. What they lack are playmakers, and I agree on this.

Confirmed playmakers to me are Howard, Cohen, Trevathan and Hicks. I see potential with better coaching with Mitch, Shaheen, Floyd, and Jackson. Yes, there needs to be more playmakers.

But you also need to field a team.

Any idiot who says they expected the Bears to be further along is ignoring the 7 years before Pace, where close to 99% of the picks made in that time period AREN'T EVEN IN THE LEAGUE ANYMORE.

You don't recover from that talent deficit in 3 years, modern NFL or not.

That said, look at the number of games the Bears lost by less than a touchdown. They are close. They do need playmakers, but they need better coaching too. Under better coaching, this team is 7-9, 8-8 this year. The coaching has been THAT bad.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
 

Starion

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Aug 29, 2012
Posts:
4,217
Liked Posts:
2,669
Location:
Fort Myers, FL
We don't have a single guy in our secondary with more than 1 INT.

Floyd flashes but he can't stay on the field and he's not consistent.
I don't believe Meredith has a catch this year.
Whitehair digressed.
What has Shaheen shown you making you think he can be elite?
Trevathon has been injured in each season with us and played like crap last year. He can't be counted on.
Sitton is solid but old but overall, the OL, is not good.
Jackson has potential but he's had some bad games and only has 1 INT too.

Floyd - often injured, now out
Cam - IR before season began, so correct - no catches
Cody- often hurt or playing out of position due to injuries next to him (Long)
Shaheen - shit coaching = bench & no development
Trevathan - injured
Sitton - aging out, but solid when not injured
Jackson - see point below regarding INTs...



...INTS: The classic dislike. Nancy "one part = sum of whole results" blame-theory.


Same as saying, the alternator is good, but we didn't win the Grand Prix (by 1 score of less most times btw).
Better scrap the alternator and rebuild the whole damn car from the ground up. (rolls eyes)


It's called cause & effect. It's cumulative with 11 guys. INTs come in droves when there is a pass rush. Missing OLBs, ILBs, DBs, and best edge rushers don't make the system work, hence few INTs. :thinking:

There's more to it than ___player X can't get INTs! Impossible when other WRs are open due to no pass rush and backup DBs playing next to you. Opportunities vanish regardless of individual talent. Show me stats on individual player targets/completions/INTs vs. league average and we'll talk talent. Subjective holistic statements are just ignorant.

Same with QB stats partially based on need for talented & healthy OL, WRs, RBs, TEs. These have each been identified as needs. We agree that more playmakers are needed. Can't have ALL studs at every position, much less in 3 years.
Yet some on here (not saying it's you) even bitch that Mitch is THE problem. :confused:
 

LiverpoolBearsFAn

Well-known member
Joined:
Dec 16, 2014
Posts:
957
Liked Posts:
734
Location:
Liverpool, England
Perfect example of everything that's bad about our current coaching:

Sims has been total and utter dogshit all season. Shaheen started to look good in recent weeks.

Sims returns from injury on Sunday, starts whilst Shaheen gets 9 snaps. Sims is, once again, shit.

You only need a functioning brain to see this stuff, you don't even really have to know much about football. There's only one out of those two players who has the potential to do some good things, and there's nothing to play for. So why the fuck would you favour Sims (whose best use would be melting down for glue) ahead of your second round draft pick, who you want to develop some chemistry with the QB you drafted with him in the 1st round?

Its inexplicable - some form of dementia is the only possible excuse.
 

HeHateMe

He/Himz/Hiz
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '20
Joined:
Aug 20, 2012
Posts:
55,636
Liked Posts:
60,403
I think based on your last 2 posts, I figured out whats going on.

People are conflating the word talent with the word playmakers.

The Bears have talent. They have a solid foundation on defense and RB, and a couple pieces with potential on offense. What they lack are playmakers, and I agree on this.

Confirmed playmakers to me are Howard, Cohen, Trevathan and Hicks. I see potential with better coaching with Mitch, Shaheen, Floyd, and Jackson. Yes, there needs to be more playmakers.

But you also need to field a team.

Any idiot who says they expected the Bears to be further along is ignoring the 7 years before Pace, where close to 99% of the picks made in that time period AREN'T EVEN IN THE LEAGUE ANYMORE.

You don't recover from that talent deficit in 3 years, modern NFL or not.

That said, look at the number of games the Bears lost by less than a touchdown. They are close. They do need playmakers, but they need better coaching too. Under better coaching, this team is 7-9, 8-8 this year. The coaching has been THAT bad.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk

So basically, you are essentially saying that the bears need playmakers and that in THREE YEARS of his rebuild RYAN PACE has drafted TWO playmakers and signed in free agency TWO playmakers as free agents for a total of FOUR PLAYMAKERS per your observation in THREE YEARS, two on offense and two on defense. So I would venture to guess that this is acceptable to you in a rebuilding process yet more playmakers are needed according to your assessment, which begs the question, if the Bears do not have enough playmakers at this point in 3 years of the rebuild then what is the total number of playmakers you would set as an expectation at the end of the rebuilding process, and how much time are you allowing for RYAN PACE to complete this?
 

Teddy KGB

Cultural Icon
Joined:
Apr 25, 2011
Posts:
7,801
Liked Posts:
4,579
So basically, you are essentially saying that the bears need playmakers and that in THREE YEARS of his rebuild RYAN PACE has drafted TWO playmakers and signed in free agency TWO playmakers as free agents for a total of FOUR PLAYMAKERS per your observation in THREE YEARS, two on offense and two on defense. So I would venture to guess that this is acceptable to you in a rebuilding process yet more playmakers are needed according to your assessment, which begs the question, if the Bears do not have enough playmakers at this point in 3 years of the rebuild then what is the total number of playmakers you would set as an expectation at the end of the rebuilding process, and how much time are you allowing for RYAN PACE to complete this?
As much time as it takes for you to learn proper punctuation.

Sent from my SM-G920T using Tapatalk
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
No, he is not. You already have a group of people that don't like you for a variety of reasons, so do I, making up ghosts of enemies past and seeing them everywhere is unnecessary and comes off as creepy.

You're right I did mention him first ITT to take a shot at Teddy who thinks everyone is novak, you don't want to go there, it's a small, dark, sad place.

Wait a minute......you don't like me? Well damn it all, there goes my day. What will i do with myself now....wah wah wah.

Tell NoSack i said hi.......what am i saying, he'll see this post for himself.

GO BAERZ....lol

I tried. You and Teddy enjoy your feud with a guy that hasn't been here in months. Whatever he did to you two really messed you guys up.
 

number51

Señor Member
Donator
Joined:
Aug 25, 2012
Posts:
16,895
Liked Posts:
11,717
Location:
Funk & Wagnalls' porch
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Notre Dame Fighting Irish
A thread based on the fact that the Bears have 'some talent' lives on. Did I mention that the 0-16 Lions had some talent, every single team that has ever been in the NFL has some talent. It's like saying the Bears are going to be okay because they have blocking sleds.
 

Top