Thoughts on Tyson Bagent As One Reporter Has Me Sitting Up and Paying a Little More Attention

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune has 10 thoughts after Sunday’s loss to the Buccaneers:

“In talking with a handful of national and college scouts the last two weeks about quarterback Tyson Bagent, they all gave the Bears props for landing the undrafted rookie from Division II Shepherd University. Last week in 10 thoughts, offensive coordinator Luke Getsy outlined the plan for developing Bagent in practice and as the current No. 3 quarterback on the depth chart.

“I was curious what they saw in Bagent and how their reports read back in the spring when he wasn’t selected in a draft that saw 14 quarterbacks selected, including one in Round 6 (Tanner McKee by the Philadelphia Eagles) and one in Round 7 (Max Duggan by the Los Angeles Chargers).”

There’s a lot of good stuff here including quotes from a few scouts about Bagent’s evaluation and his potential in the NFL. But it wasn’t the content of this section that stuck me. It was the fact that it was there at all.

Bagent was already on my radar (along with that of every other fan in the city of Chicago). I liked what I saw of Bagent in the preseason. I like the way he moves in the pocket, I like his accuracy, I like the way he carries himself. But I like a lot of quarterbacks and I don’t see the practices. So needless to say that the fact that I like the look of a guy doesn’t mean that they’re going to be any good in the NFL.

But it’s notable that Biggs has brought Bagent up in this column two weeks in a row. Rooting for the Bears over a number of years, you develop a sense for which journalists in Chicago who know what they’re talking about and, to be honest, I don’t think there are many that do. Don’t get me wrong. As far as I can tell, they’re almost all good reporters. But when it comes to editorializing about football… well, lets just say that you could often get the same opinions from a typical fan and leave it at that.

In my opinion, Biggs and one of two others are different.

There’s a reason why so many of my blog posts start with a quote from one of one of Biggs’ articles. Based upon what he writes, Biggs seems to be more insightful and intelligent that most and he has been around a long time. He has seen some things. I trust him and when he starts paying attention in season to a third string undrafted rookie quarterback who hasn’t been on the field, it might be time for the rest of us to start paying attention, as well.

Usually when fans and media get over their skis about an undrafted rookie quarterback, my automatic reaction is to think, “Yeah, typical media. Typical fans. The back up is always the most popular quarterback in town. And if this guy is so good, why didn’t someone draft him?” But my antennae are up now. Bagent could be different.

Bears Running Game Is a Work in Progress with Apparent Change in Scheme

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune shares 10 thoughts after the Bears loss on Sunday

“I’m surprised the Bears don’t have better rushing totals through two games. That looked like an emphasis of the off-season to me: Add DJ Moore and other wide receivers, but maintain an identity as a powerful rushing offense. They struggled running the ball against the Packers and we covered that ground — seven of their 14 runs on first-and-10 against Green Bay went for 1 yard, no gain or a loss. There were only 16 carries in this game for 67 yards. Tampa Bay’s a tough front to run against and rookie Roschon Johnson’s 29-yard run was the only time a back got through to the third level.”

One of the things that Adam Hoge mentioned on the Hoge and Jahns podcast was that the Bears aren’t running as much outside zone as they were last year. It was a good point. This was supposed to be the foundation of the running game last year and they ran it a lot. And this year we haven’t seen it.

I’m pretty sure that the Bears decided in the off-season that they wanted to transition away from outside zone to the power running game. They signed Nate Davis whose strength isn’t outside zone blocking, though I’m sure he can do it. But Davis strikes me as more of a downhill, power running game kind of blocker. Tevin Jenkins also fits this profile and Cody Whitehair, though not very big as a guard, is a reasonably large powerful guy at center. This would’ve been the interior of their offensive line on week one according to the Bears plan.

But that that plan has been completely disrupted. Jenkins is injured and Davis didn’t play Sunday. Without Jenkins they’ve shifted Whitehair to guard with Lucas Patrick at center. This is not an ideal combination and I think it completely threw the plan for the power running game off kilter.

It will be interesting to see where they go from here. Obviously whey think they can live with the combination that they have but the lack of success on the ground might call for a change.

I will add one thing. Eleven runs isn’t much of a sample size and ordinarily you’d like to keep pounding on the run throughout the game. After a while, eventually success often starts to come. I’m not saying that the Bears gave up on the run because they only had 27 plays. But they’re going to have to string together more attempts to build on if they want to see more success.

Tyreek Stevenson Needs Work But It Wasn’t as Bad as It Looked

Brad Biggs has 10 thoughts after the Bears Loss to the Buccaneers on Sunday:

“[Cornerback Tyreek] Stevenson was worked over pretty good by wide receivers Mike Evans and Chris Godwin. Mayfield completed 5 of 7 passes going against Stevenson for 140 yards and a touchdown. That’s an awful day for the rookie, but I think a strong case can be made the yardage total should be cut in half. Sure looked like officials could have called Evans for offensive pass interference on the 70-yard gainer he had when he pushed Stevenson down to catch Mayfield’s pass. Maybe it’s a lesson in how strong some NFL receivers are for the second-round pick.”

“Evans also cooked Stevenson for a 32-yard touchdown in the third quarter on a third-and-14 play.”

“’Just bad technique,’ Stevenson said when asked what happened. ‘Bad eyes on my end. I’ve got to do a better job of my coverage. They were just able to find, I guess, the open receiver at the moment.’

“Stevenson said he’s going to remain positive, but rest assured upcoming opponents are going to find him — and test him. Evans and Godwin are seasoned veterans and there has to be a long list of young cornerbacks they’ve baptized over the years. We’ll see how Stevenson responds because I like him as a player. He’s strong and physical and can move. He’s got to see if he can avoid making the same mistakes twice.”

I’ve read a lot of criticism of Stevenson and some of it appears to me to be well-deserved. However, I do think that there are some circumstances to note in his defense.

Its hard to tell on television but it looked to me like the Bears were playing heavy cover two zone. And it would be logical to expect that with head coach Matt Eberflus calling plays.

Time after time receivers would take the ball behind the cornerback along the side line. This is a classic cover two beater. It looks bad but fans, especially those who were around for the Lovie Smith days, should remember that the cornerback’s job in that defense is to bump the wide receiver off the line and redirect him to the inside. After that the cornerback sinks into coverage, passing the receiver off to the safety. It can be a bad look if the safety is late coming over and with both Eddie Jackson and Jaquan Brisker off the field, Stevenson didn’t get much help.

That’s not to say that Stevenson doesn’t have things to work on. He does. It just isn’t as bad as it probably looked to some people on Sunday.