For the 3rd time this season, the Chicago Bears held a 10+ point lead in the 4th quarter. For the 3rd time this season, they surrendered their lead and ultimately lost in regulation, with a final offensive rally falling flat.

Just like the Denver & Detroit games that predated their trip to Cleveland, ESPN’s analytics gave Chicago a 90+% of winning this game just as the 3rd quarter ended. But, just like those games, the Bears found a way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

These three games plainly hammer home the most frustrating part of the Bears’ 2023 season — the 5-9 Bears, currently the 5th-worst team in the NFL via draft order, are not a talentless bunch. They don’t lack playmakers, they don’t struggle to compete with the team across from them. If football games ended after the 3rd quarter, Chicago would be 8-6-1.

But, of course, that’s not how football works. NFL games are won & lost in the 4th quarter, and it tells you everything you need to know that the 2023 Chicago Bears have yet to win a game that weren’t already winning when they entered the 4th quarter. Combine that with yesterday’s NFL season record-tying third blown 10+ point lead in the 4th quarter, and you start to see a worrying trend — this roster has the talent to earn leads in this league, but it’s coaching staff can’t seem to close.

It’s never as simple as ‘just blaming the coaches’ — Robert Tonyan & Darnell Mooney dropped game-changing passes, TJ Edwards and Jaylon Johnson had opportunities to end the Browns’ early touchdown drive early via interceptions that got dropped, and Trent Taylor muffed two punts, with only one of those muffs coming back to bite him. The players need to execute, and everyone (including the quarterback) needs to own these rough results.

But fool me once against the Broncos, shame on you. Fool me twice in Detroit, shame on me. Fool me a third time in Cleveland, and I think it’s simple — with three strikes against him, Matt Ebeflus is likely out.

What that would mean for Justin Fields remains to be seen, but with Carolina’s pick looming large and Fields entering the 4th year of his rookie contract, I’d imagine the odds of him staying in Chicago under a new head coach are slim. If he wants to stay, he’ll have to prove it over these next 3 games.

Your Turn: How do you feel about yesterday’s game?

Last night I dove deep into the Bears’ tape from Monday’s big win over Detroit — throughout the stream I talked through:

• What are the Bears doing to create so much defensive chaos?
  • How much of their success is the players? How much is the coaching? Can it be both?
• How are the Bears’ attacking 3rd downs defensively? What has their shift in attitude done to their 3rd down production?
• Which young defenders have stepped up their game?
• Who (or what) fueled the good parts of the Bears’ Sunday offense?
• Where did Justin Fields win? Where did he struggle?
• Who stood out on the Bears’ offensive line? Who was left lacking?
• How much of what’s working for Chicago (both sides of the ball) is sustainable going forward?
• The usual rants & ravings about the future of the Bears
• And much, much more

Check it out and let me know what you think!

Your Turn: Have you jumped on the Bears’ playoff bandwagon?

Why Do I Like the Chicago Bears This Week?

I.

Always.

Like.

THE.

Chicago.

Bears.

Justin Fields. End of Story.

The Carolina Panthers are going to earn one of the top two picks in the 2024 NFL Draft. And that means – if you believe what has been written about this coming draft class – the Chicago Bears will be able to select one of the two “elite quarterback prospects” at the top of the draft: Caleb Williams or Drake Maye. And right now, it would be near impossible to see Ryan Poles passing on the position.

Justin Fields has five weeks to change that narrative.

Do you want to know what the league, at least those I know around the league, think about the situation? I sent two texts to individuals with other teams this week. Both texts were identical: “Do you think the Bears will pass on a QB and keep Fields?”

Response 1. “No.”

Response 2. “I think they might.”

I find it hard to believe the Bears have not already made their decision on Justin Fields, but if that’s the case, there’s very little left to watch over the remaining five games. So, let’s operate under the hypothetical that a verdict has yet to be reached. That creates a lovely bit of drama around the quarterback as we head into the new year.

My Ten Favorite Film Discoveries of 2023

One thing that becomes incredibly apparent as you engage any academic discipline, whether that be film studies or molecular biology, is that it’s incredibly difficult to know EVERYTHING. Every time I rewatch the films in my areas of expertise – All That Jazz, Umbrellas of Cherbourg, 12 Angry Men, etc. – there’s another film slipping through the cracks.

I didn’t see enough of the films of 2023 to compile a coherent list. But I did see about 100 films this year I had not previously seen. These were the ten most memorable for me.

Leningrad Cowboys Go America (Aki Kaurismaki, 1989). The Blues Brothers directed by Werner Herzog. On Criterion Channel.

A Moment of Innocence (Mohsen Makhmalbaf, 1996). Stands with Abbas Kiarostami’s Close-Up as the most remarkable cinematic achievements of post-revolutionary Iran. Rentable on Vimeo.

The Secret in Their Eyes (Juan Jose Campanella, 2009). The Academy Award-winning Argentine masterpiece. On Prime.

The Cancer Journals Revisited (Lana Lin, 2018). A harrowing, beautiful salute to Audre Lorde and survival. On Kanopy.

Woyzeck (Werner Herzog, 1979). The unsung collaboration of Herzog and Kinski. It is on this list because I spent months working with it and have grown to love every frame. On Kanopy.

Killers of the Flower Moon (Martin Scorsese, 2023). There will be time, years, to write about this film. For now, I just encourage everyone to see it.

The Murderers are Among Us (Wolfgang Staudte, 1946). The most essential of the German “rubble films.” On Kanopy.

Rush to Judgment (Emile de Antonio, 1967). Emile de Antonio’s and Mark Lane’s stirring indictment of the Warren Commission’s conclusions. It is currently unavailable for home consumption.

The China Syndrome (James Bridges, 1979). One of the great 1970s American paranoia pictures, putting it in a corpus that includes The Parallax View, Three Days of the Condor, Marathon Man, etc. Rentable everywhere.

Deadline at Dawn (Harold Clurman, 1946). The only cinematic work of Group Theater founder Harold Clurman, Dawn is a brilliant example of post-war feminist noir. Sadly, it’s also impossible to find if you’re not studying cinema at the university level or above.

Read More …

As we inch ever closer towards Sunday’s game, the Chicago Bears stand a pivot point — the results of these next 5 games may very well decide the direction of the biggest Bears offseason in recent memory, and if Head Coach Matt Eberflus wants to be on the safe side of that decision he’ll need to start winning games soon.

Could the Bears spark a win streak off of a divisional home defense? Cole Kmet seems to think so, but with a hungry Detroit team visiting town on a day that’s slated for snowy, cold weather, all we should expect is a knock-down, drag-out fight.

Anything could happen — after all, if Chicago manages to finish the season 9-8 they may very well land an NFC Wild Card spot. But before us fans dare to dream of the playoffs, first Chicago must force these Lions to settle a debt Detroit incurred only a few weeks ago. The Bears had the Lions within their grasp but let them slip away… if they’re to surge this season, they’ll have to start by winning on Sunday.

There’s enough within this game to unpack that Nick & I managed to record our longest Bear With Us episode yet — in this episode, Nick and I dive into…

• How can we work to talk about Justin Fields as rationally as possible? What does he need to show by the end of the year?
• What on earth has happened to the Lions’ defense?
• Where are the Lions winning on offense? Where are they losing?
• How does a healthy Bears team match up with this Detroit squad?
• What does this game mean for every Bear involved
• What have we learned about defense in the NFL from Eberflus’ 2023 season?
• Is the league as down on Luke Getsy as most Bears fans are?
• And much, much more…

I know I say this often, but this really is one of our best episodes yet — check it out and let me know what you think!

Your Turn: How do you feel about this weekend’s contest?

If the Chicago Bears have a Top 2 pick in the 2024 NFL Draft, chances are strong that I’ll advocate for a move at quarterback this offseason. Why? Because I love what both Drake Maye & Caleb Williams have put on tape.

I think they’re the kinds of quarterbacks you wait years to draft, each squarely in the realm of Joe Burrow and Trevor Lawrence. Both are cuts above your standard prospect, but through overuse of the word “generational” many have recently begun to view both Williams and Maye as “Overhyped”, “Not That Good”, and all kinds of other derogatory phrases.

Let’s set the record straight: Drake Maye has one of the gaudiest arms on the planet. Not only can he make any throw on the football field, he does make every throw on a week to week basis. Caleb Williams, on the other hand, processes the game at an outstanding level while consistently showing off a sublime combination pocket movement, arm talent, and awareness that allows him to make plays that other QBs truly can’t dream of making.

If the Bears have the option to take one of these two players, I want them to go for it. I think these players are worth it.

But, and here’s the key point I’m trying to make, wanting Chicago to draft a QB if given the chance doesn’t mean “Robert hates Justin Fields” — Fields is a Top 20 QB & a bona-fide starter, but he’s also a limited passer that takes a ton of hits & needs an offense to cater to him more than his peers do. He’s a dynamic runner, but we’ve seen most running QBs struggle to sustain rushing (while staying healthy) over the course of a 17-game season.

Too many have made this quarterback conversation obnoxiously black and white — it’s devolved into split sides shouting “Well actually Caleb & Drake suck” or “Fields can’t play”… but neither statement is true. The kids are good, and Justin Fields has played well enough in Chicago to become a topic of trade conversations around the league. Regardless of what you prefer the Bears do at quarterback this offseason, neither answer is objectively bad & neither side needs to be treated as such.

I personally think the Bears have the opportunity to build an ideal landing spot for a rookie QB. Exciting WRs, a talented young OL, and a proven safety valve TE should make up a strong supporting cast. Drafting any QB this high is risky, but I think these rookies are worth the risk involved in moving on from Justin — especially since sticking with Justin is no sure thing either.

But despite my personal preference, it’s also possible that the Bears could build such a strong team around Justin that not winning more games would be nearly impossible. I personally think this team would struggle to keep the QB healthy (Fields’ average time to throw went up against a blitz-heavy team in Minnesota) and would eventually face defenses they don’t have answers for on offense, but until the Bears line up, play, and lose those games there’s no sense treating a Fields-led unit as if it’s doomed to fail.

A Fields-led 2024-2025 team has a better shot of winning 9-10 games & making the playoffs each year than drafting a rookie QB does — if that’s the direction Chicago goes, it’ll be the best pair of seasons they’ve had since 2005 & 2006. It’s been that long since Chicago won 9+ games in consecutive years — this result would not be “bad”.

But I also think the opportunity Caleb Williams & Drake Maye present gives Chicago a better shot at becoming a Super Bowl contender than sticking with Fields does. Explaining why each quarterback excites me so much will take full scouting reports, so we’ll save that for the offseason — but the prospects’ talent & the opportunity to reset the rookie contract clock (allowing Chicago to pay for an extra pair of Free Agents) allows Chicago to build a team that can compete with (and beat) the Chiefs, Ravens, and 49ers by 2025.

Regardless of which ‘side’ you’re on, I think that’s an exciting thing to talk about.

Your Turn: How do you feel about Chicago’s signal-caller?

(1) What do we make of Matt Eberflus’ defensive success? The Bears are now 9th in yards allowed per game, with the game’s best rush defense. The addition of Montez Sweat has dramatically improved their pass rush, seeing sack and interception totals rise. Eberflus has been a net-minus as a head coach, but he’s been a net-plus as the defensive coordinator, with only the late-game collapses against Denver and Detroit marring his 2023 record. This defensive program is clearly working. Will continued success over the final five games be enough for him to keep his job?

(2) What about the availability of high-profile offensive minds? Frank Reich, a terrific OC with clear ties to Eberflus, is now available. Josh McDaniels, a bad head coach but good OC, is now available. Eric Bienemy will be available (and should be in demand as a head coaching candidate) come January. Could Eberflus sell the front office on his defensive success with a retooled offensive structure?

(3) Is the quarterback’s tenure in Chicago officially over? If the season ended Monday night, that answer would surely be yes; the lack of week-to-week consistency would not prohibit the Bears from using one of their high draft picks on a quarterback prospect. Fields has ability; he is a brilliant runner capable of making dynamic plays off-script. But if you listened to Troy Aikman on Monday night, you heard an analyst incredibly skeptical of Fields’ ability to play the position from the pocket. Folks in the building share that skepticism.

(4) Where will the Carolina pick land? The Bears don’t have a particularly good team left on their schedule. It is likely they finish 2-3 or 3-2 over the final five, with the latter moving their own draft pick outside the top ten. Carolina’s finish will play an important role in the composition of the 2024 roster. If they finish with a top two pick, it feels a sure thing that the Bears hit restart at the quarterback position. But what if Carolina win a few games down the stretch and that pick falls outside the Caleb Williams/Drake Maye realm? (Side note: I’ll be rooting for the Bears to take Drake because then we can call him The Hotel.)

(5) How much money are the drops costing Jaylon Johnson? If Johnson could catch, he would be a pick-six machine, and those drops are the only thing preventing him from entering the “best corner in the league” conversation. Eddie Jackson’s career is over, but the Bears have productive young players throughout their secondary. Poles should just suck it up and Johnson what he wants to avoid the tag ballet that follows situations like this. The dropped pick sixes have actually rendered Johnson cheaper than he should be.

Last night’s gritty, ugly 12-10 win over the Vikings may soon become a career-defining game for their Head Coach — Matt Eberflus took the helm in Chicago and immediately articulated a plan to create a tenacious, turnover-hungry defense that would win games behind a balanced ball-control offense, and that’s exactly the plan we saw in action on Monday Night.

Can this plan work forever? We’ll know more in two weeks’ time as they take their second shot at the Lions. For now, sit back and enjoy a rare victory Tuesday — we never get enough of them.

Your Turn: How do you feel about yesterday’s game?

To be honest with you, I still can’t believe the Bears managed to lose that game yesterday.

Statistically speaking, it was a historic loss — it’s the first time any team lost in regulation with a +3 turnover margin and 40+ minutes time of possession (Teams were 48-0 prior to Sunday), it’s a loss that saw ESPN qualify Chicago with an even higher Win Probability than their peak in the Denver game (98.4% today versus 98.1% in Week 4), and because it’s a divisional game you can be sure Lions fans will never allow this game to be forgotten.

But beyond that, beyond the nearly historic levels of embarrassment that Matt Eberflus has left the franchise answering questions about in postgame press conferences, today’s loss was a grim reminder of a truth we’ve all known for some time now:

Matt Eberflus’ football identity simply does not win in the modern NFL.

Eberflus coaches like every coach I grew up watching back in the early 2000s — defensively, he wants a team that’s simultaneously passive in their zone coverages but also aggressive in taking the ball away. Offensively, he wants a ball-control ground attack that eats up clock, churns out 1st downs, and protects the football at all costs. Today, he couldn’tve asked for more from his team:

• Four turnovers on defense (finishing +3 on the day)
• Clean game from his offense (one turnover, more 1st downs than Detroit)
• 250+ combined yards from his QB
• & and outstanding clock-killing drive late that left Detroit with less than 4:15 on the clock to pull off a miracle.

But, despite nearly everything playing out exactly according to Eberflus’ plan, Flus’ conservative nature continued to leave the door open for Detroit to creep back into the game because of the decisions Flus made in the highest leverage situations.

When Chicago scored in the late 3rd quarter to go up 19-14, Chicago very obviously should’ve attempted a 2-point conversion and tried to go up a full 7 points. A 5-point lead is as good as a 6-point lead, but a 7-point lead protects you against a potential opposing score — instead, Chicago kicked the extra point. Surely that won’t come into play later.

Then, as Chicago failed to convert a 3rd & 1 on their ensuing drive, the difference between a 6-point lead and a 7-point lead began to affect Eberflus’ decision-making — despite the Bears’ excellent record since Week 2 in 4th & 1/inches situations, Eberflus needed protection against an opposing touchdown. A 9-point lead is a 2-score game, whereas a failed conversion (no matter how unlikely) would’ve left the Bears vulnerable. Eberflus kicked, thus setting up what ultimately became Flus’ defining moment in this football game.

The Bears offense grinds their way down to the Detroit 23 to set up a 3rd & 7. The score is 23-14 and Chicago has killed almost 7 minutes of clock — a first down almost assuredly wins this game, as a conversion and the ensuing 3 plays would cost Detroit too much time (brings the clock near 2 minutes or begins burning timeouts). But what did Matt Eberflus do?

They ran the ball between the tackles into a 7-man box. They had 6 blockers. The free man picked up RB Roschon Johnson immediately and the play was stopped for a 2-yard gain. They played for the Field Goal, and they got what they wanted.

Holding only a 9-point lead, Matt Eberflus coached his team afraid of a Detroit reversal. Kicking the field goal ensured that Detroit needed 2 touchdowns to win. But had Chicago shown any aggression earlier in going for the 2-point conversion up 5, they could’ve entered that 3rd down with a 10-point lead and might have coached 3rd & 7 unafraid of Detroit scoring a touchdown & field goal in quick succession. They could’ve played to win the game.

But instead, they played not to lose it. They followed a decision-making pattern that’s become antiquated and they got punished for doing so. Once the Lions scored to bring the game within 5, nothing could’ve been more predictable than Chicago’s back-to-back runs up the gut that landed the Bears in an impossible 3rd & 10 with too much time left on the clock. Unsurprisingly, Chicago failed to convert, surrendered the lead, and lost a game that even Eberflus’ harshest critics thought he had in the bag.

This is Matt Eberflus’ legacy — he’s a true throwback to 2006, a conservative defensive mind that emphasizes playing hard within archaic defensive schemes & ground-and-pound offense, but his total lack of aggression speaks to his failure to innovate on both sides of the ball. In a league of innovators, he will always be (at least) one step behind.

He’s not the guy. He simply cannot stay past 2023. Thankfully, with now two games like this on Eberflus’ 3-8 record, George McCaskey would be hard-pressed to keep him.

Watching the Bears’ tape is a mess — nothing meshes together. What Getsy wants to do isn’t what Fields wants to do, and the Bears can’t do anything that Fields wants to do well against blitzing teams.

You can tell Getsy’s answers to Minnesota’s blitzes were quick throws out wide, but Fields couldn’t execute some of them and Whitehair’s snaps ruined others.

Then, the Bears pivoted towards more max protect. Fields looked more comfortable, but the OL couldn’t ID blitzes properly and gave away bad matchups (like Foreman on Hunter/Foreman on a blitzer with runway) leading to more pressure, no throws downfield, and the QB taking more hits.

Some of the above is still on Getsy, because plenty of routes too WAY too long to resolve against the blitz — Mooney jukes the air in the red zone, Trent Taylor runs the longest whip route in existence, etc. Of course, neither is open in time to beat the pressure (and one leads to the INT).

It’s easy to make this out to be a QB-only problem, but it’s the same problem we’ve seen all season — when the Bears’ initial plan doesn’t work, Getsy and Fields’ philosophical disagreements result in awful football that can’t even compete with opposing defenses.

Of course, this magnifies every mistake that the OL makes — if CHI doesn’t get the exact look they want and perfect protection up front, the play might as well be over. It doesn’t feel like there’s much chemistry between the QB and his outlets when things go haywire.

But if all the above wasn’t bad enough, sometimes the Bears do get the exact look they want with perfect protection up front, like the play shown below (Yes, it’s the tweet that includes this very thread):

Watching the #Bears tape is a mess — nothing meshes together. What Getsy wants to do isn't what Fields wants to do, and the Bears can't do what Fields wants to do well against blitzing teams.

You can tell Getsy's answers to Minnesota's blitzes were quick throws out wide, but… pic.twitter.com/KMYgfPPQLx

— Robert Schmitz (@robertkschmitz) October 17, 2023

Read More …