Bear(ing) the News – A Chicago Bears Blog

• Kevin Fishbain at The Athletic makes his roster predictions.
  

  Quarterback (2)

  Justin Fields, Trevor Siemian

  Who will be the practice-squad quarterback?

  The Bears don’t have a good enough roster to keep a third quarterback. Nathan Peterman will help them get through
  camp and the preseason, and it might be nice to have a veteran to work with some of the third-team players. Peterman could be on the practice squad, and it appears — for this season at least — the Bears won’t have
  a rookie or younger quarterback to develop behind the first two.

  Considering Siemian’s experience, if Fields takes the step the Bears are hoping for, they’ll have a solid duo, but it’s important to have a
  third quarterback on the practice squad who knows the scheme, in case of emergency.

I’m disappointed that Peterman is the third option at quarterback on the roster. As I’ve made clear in previous posts, I think the Bears should always be doing everything they can to develop new young talent
at the quarterback position. I realize that a young practice squad quarterback is a long shot to develop into anything significant. But that’s all the more reason to evaluate as many as possible in a search
fro one to develop.

The only thing that I can figure is that the Bears want to
concentrate completely on developing Fields. I understand that. But I see no reason why efforts should be restricted to Fields alone. If necessary, the Bears could hire an extra coach to work with a potential
practice squad quarterback.

Once again, I have a sneaking suspicion that the Bears are not going
to do enough to find talent at the quarterback position. It’s all or nothing with Fields and they aren’t even looking for anyone else. If Fields is in year four and he doesn’t work out, Poles will be in the
same position that former GM Ryan Pace was. Desperate to find somebody at the position because he didn’t even look for anyone else.

Hopefully the Bears are planning on churning through a series of
young quarterbacks with tryouts as the year progresses in their continued search fro talent at the position.

• Fishbain continues.

Running back (5) David Montgomery, Khalil
Herbert, Darrynton Evans, Trestan
Ebner, Khari Blasingame (fullback)

Will the Bears keep five in the backfield?

The Bears claimed Evans off waivers from the Titans in March, signaling he’s someone the front office identified as being a good fit for the backfield and special teams. As a draft pick, Ebner also comes
with some cachet, and his pass-catching skills stood out in minicamp. He could also factor into the return competition.

Blasingame seems to be a lock as the fullback, and as long as Evans and Ebner are contributing on special teams, the Bears might go heavy in the backfield and lighter at tight end.

The only thing I will say here is that if the Bears choose to keep a full back in Blasingame then I hope that, unlike many previous regimes, they find a way to use him regularly. Too many times in the past the
Bears have decided to keep a full back that turned out to be wasted roster space. If they have a defined role for a full back and they’re going to play him, then by all means they should keep one. Otherwise
another tight end would be a better choice.

• Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions.
  

  With spots open at linebacker, right guard and defensive tackle, and salary cap space, do the Bears make more free-agent moves before camp?— @pilcher2700

  Who are they going to sign? With 32 teams having 90-man rosters right now, it’s not as if there are a bunch of guys on the street that look like Week 1 starters once they have a contract and a uniform. Yes, I expect this roster to be constantly evolving and that could mean players added because of injuries or other reasons. No, I don’t envision the Bears in 2022 adding a difference maker off the street right now. Maybe they get a player or two that can fit their system during roster cuts but it’s not as if the Bears are just biding their time waiting to pounce on potential free agents. Most of the moves at this point in the calendar are for camp depth.

  Given the hole at right guard, is the possibility of starting Braxton Jones at left tackle more about getting the best five O-linemen on the field and maybe means Larry Borom or Teven Jenkins plays guard? — @jtbcubs

  I see where you are going here but I don’t think you make a decision at left tackle, of all positions, because of a question you have at right guard. Left tackle is the premier position on the offensive line and you can make a case right guard is at the bottom of the list. I say this because some coaches really value an athletic player at left guard, making it more of a priority than the right guard position.

  Yes, the Bears need to find their five best linemen and get them on the field. They’ve yet to look at Borom or Jenkins at guard this spring, at least as far as I saw. Could that change on Day 1 of minicamp? Sure.
  Some I talked to when the Bears drafted Jenkins last year thought he might be best playing inside. But I don’t think you put a rookie fifth-round pick at left tackle unless you believe he’s your best option at that position, no matter what else you have going on along the line. Questions at left tackle trump questions at right guard. Maybe Jones excels when pads going on next month.

I realize that the Bears have had only non-contact practices so far. And I also realize that there’s only so much that you can evaluate in terms of offensive lineman when there’s no contact. But there are things
that you can evaluate and what evidence there is seems to indicate that the Bears are not sold on Jenkins.

He was a second round pick last year and if you’re going to take an offensive lineman and move him to the second team to make room for Jones to give him a look, you wouldn’t think that the highest draft pick on
the line would be the guy that you would move down.

True, the drills are non-contact but there are things that you can evaluate. You can evaluate movement skills physically but, perhaps more important at this time of year, you can evaluate coachability. This
situation may well be a measure of how many mistakes Jenkins has been making in practice and that is, in fact, a good part of what offensive line play is about. As much as any position on the field it is about
execution, consistency and technique. It is entirely possible that Ryan Poles scouted Jenkins last year and perhaps they weren’t sold on him then either.

Furthermore, I agree that the Bears are highly unlikely to sign anybody at any position who is likely to be very good. But from my perspective the Bears have to do something about offensive right
guard.

Sam Mustipher has been starting at the position and he is simply too
small for the position and is really more built to be a center. My understanding is that he’s gained weight in the off-season but my understanding is that it wasn’t enough. They have to have their eye open
for some sort of a veteran to plug into that role. Either that or they are hoping that Zac Thomas will be ready early in training camp or be planning to move a tackle like Teven
Jenkins to guard. A veteran may very well not be very good. Even if there is a really good veteran on the street to be signed, those guys are waiting for an opportunity with either a winning team or a huge
contract. Nevertheless, I think that they have to consider signing someone.

• Biggs continues:
  

  I feel the Bears are getting dumped on nationally and picked to be worse than the Jacksonville Jaguars. I believe Matt Eberflus will get them playing hard and Justin Fields can win
  more games than people think. Cincinnati Bengals-type season? — @dpeak1313

  The Bengals reached the Super Bowl last season. I do not believe the Bears are going to enjoy a similar resurgence in 2022 and ultimately be crowned NFC champions. There’s a heck of a lot of space in the middle, though, between being worse than Jacksonville and being as good as Cincinnati was in 2021. I agree Eberflus likely will get the team playing hard and that can create the kind of energy needed in the building to power through some rough spots in the schedule. The coaching staff has been really positive about Fields this spring and he has nowhere to go but up.

  I understand Bears fans, at least a good portion of them, are tired of hearing that this may be a season full of growing pains. From a national perspective, why would there be a different quick take on the team? They won six games last season. Statistically, Fields struggled as much as about any rookie quarterback has in the last decade. Some marquee defensive players departed and there are significant questions about an offensive line that struggled last season. The only additions to the O-line have been center Lucas Patrick, signed to a two-year, $8 million contract, and a quartet of Day 3 draft picks. If Fields takes some steps forward this season, the Bears can be competitive nearly every week and be close into the fourth quarter. Then, it’s about making plays.

I also keep hearing nationally that Bears fans are going to have to get used to the idea that they are going to be bad this year. But I really think the answer to this question depends on your definition of “bad”.

If you think that they’re only going to win two games. I would say that’s highly unlikely. It is true that the roster has lost a lot of talent but I think we can reasonably expect that the talent that they have will execute better than last year.

I’m sure the players liked Matt Nagy as much as I did but he wasn’t ready to be a head coach and its unlikely that he was getting the most out of the players. Indications are that Eberflus will
do a better job of that. Defensively he has shown himself to be a very good coach. And I like the direction that the offense is headed in. The Bears definitely need to incorporate a better running game and more play
action passing. It sounds like they are on their way to doing that.

Its true that last year’s six win team had more veteran talent on paper. But the over-under for wins in Las Vegas is still 6 1/2. I’d say with an easier schedule and the bump that you get in player performance with a first year head coach that six or seven wins is not unrealistic. If that’s what you call “bad“. Then yes they are going to have a bad year. But if it’s overall first round pick miserable, I’m going to be surprised.

Kevin Fishbain at The Athletic answers your questions.

Roquan Smith has really grown into the defense’s leader, but can we justify spending the going rate ($20M/season) on an inside linebacker? Are we better off putting that money on offense to support Fields and take the comp pick? — Brian L.

I don’t think it has to be an either/or situation considering the Bears’ healthy cap situation heading into the 2023 season and beyond. If the new front office deems Smith worthy of a top-of-the-market deal for an inside linebacker, like Darius Leonard received ($19.7 million per year), it shouldn’t preclude them from making aggressive moves next offseason at wide receiver, offensive tackle, etc.

Smith is only 25, is a leader for this team, seems to love Chicago, and has been one of the best players at his position in football. We could even see more impact plays from him in the new scheme. In a vacuum, he’s the type of player an organization wants to keep around.

It bothers me that the minute the Bears find a good, young player, fans immediately want to let him go to save money and get a “compensatory pick“.

The Bears have plenty of cap space next off-season and the best way to use that space by far is the sign their own when they have players that are worthy of it. The idea is that you reward your own players, something that fosters loyalty in the player and a positive attitude throughout the team as other players know that the team will take care of them.The more you do that the less you have to dip into free agency and take a chance on other teams rejects. This is the way that franchises that compete year in and year out do it.

Roquan Smith was a first round draft pick and is performing like one. The idea that even a third round compensatory pick and cap space saved that the Bears don’t need will compensate for his loss is not a sound one. Something similar same could be said for many other young players that we can all hope that the Bears will have that will be worthy of an extension.

Mike Florio at profootballtalk.com informs us about where the quarterbacks may be selected in the upcoming NFL draft.

“[Malik Willis] is the favorite to be the first quarterback selected, with current odds at -145. [Kenny] Pickett is at +135. Next comes Desmond Ridder at +1000, Matt Corral at +1800, and Sam Howell at +5000.

“Here’s where it gets intriguing. Even though Willis is the favorite to be the first quarterback drafted, Pickett has better odds to be selected at one specific position in the top 20.”

“At No. 6, Pickett is a +175 favorite to be the selection. Willis stands at +400. Thus, while the oddsmakers at PointsBet generally regard Willis as being viewed as more desirable, they think Carolina prefers Pickett to Willis.”

“At No. 20, where the Steelers pick, Willis is the favorite at +500. Pickett is just behind Willis, at +600.”

This was really interesting.

Although Willis is the favorite to be the first quarterback selected, it looks to me like Pickett is the favorite amongst the teams that need quarterbacks.

A couple of thoughts:

1. Recent rumors have it that the Steelers are really interested in Ridder at #20. Ridder is also seen as the Seahawks’ favorite. They pick at #9. So either these are smoke screens or both teams may be hoping to take Ridder in the second round.
2. These odds might suggest the possibility that a team will trade up to take Willis. It could be the Saints as the odds are a little better that Willis will go to them than Picket. The other possibility is that a team no one is thinking of will surprise the league by trading up on Thursday night to get Willis. Perhaps its my Bears-centric point of view but this draft looks in many ways like the 2018 draft when Kansas City and Houston surprised everyone by trading up to get the undervalued Patrick Mahomes and Deshaun Watson.

Although the Bears don’t have a pick on Thursday night, this whole thing should still be interesting to watch.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune talks about David Montgomery‘s potential role in the new Bears offense.

The Bears thought Montgomery was more suited for the inside zone and run-pass option scheme [former HC Matt] Nagy desired, and they billed him as a better fit in the passing game. The biggest difference between Montgomery and Aaron Jones — the featured running back for the Packers, for whom [OC Luke] Getsy worked the last three seasons — is that Jones is more dynamic in the passing game.

But Montgomery’s vision and patience should lead to ample success in the outside zone scheme the Bears will lean on heavily in the ground game, with second-year running back Khalil Herbert surely playing a role as well.

I think there are a couple of things that are worth noting here.

1. Although Montgomery is not as dynamic as Jones, it is worth noting that the Bears said that one of the reasons that they drafted Montgomery was because they believed that he had some ability to expand their passing game. They obviously thought that he could catch passes out of the backfield though they rarely used him that way in games. Perhaps Getsy will find that Montgomery has more talent in this area than expected and will use him in a way that the previous coaching staff for some reason did not.
2. The Bears absolutely, positively must do a better job of running the ball this year. The key to success for them is going to always be the play action pass while playing outdoors in Chicago. I’ll give Nagy credit for recognizing this last year and doing his best to set the offense up to succeed in this manner. Unfortunately I’m not sure that he or his staff knew how to coach the running game well enough to make it work and that was part of his downfall.

In any case, hopefully the new staff will be better be able to execute a vision for the offense and for Montgomery that better fits his skill set this year.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions.

Is there a position no one is talking about that the Bears could go to with their first pick in the NFL draft? — Greg W., Warrenville

You probably can rule a few spots out with the two second-round picks — and maybe even the third-round selection — on Day 2 of the draft. The Bears seem unlikely to target a quarterback, running back, tight end (it’s not a great group this year) or inside linebacker with those picks.

Everything else — wide receiver, offensive line, defensive line, pass rusher, cornerback and safety — can be considered a legitimate need. That means general manager Ryan Poles can remain true to his board and have a lot of possibilities when it comes to the highest-graded available player(s) when he’s on the clock. Maybe will provide a little flexibility to trade down. One thing I have wondered of late: If the strength of this draft is in the depth — Rounds 2 through 4 or so — will other teams be less inclined to want to trade up?

It’s an interesting question.

My gut feeling is that the answer is “No“. One of the things that bugged me about former Bears GM Ryan Pace the most was his tendency to fall in love with players and, as a result, aggressively trade up for them. Many, perhaps most, of the best GMs in the NFL will tell you that they try to never do this. Too often in the end the guys you fall in love with turns out to have had almost the same chance to fail or succeed as the guys that you could have had if you stayed put. I’m convinced that was true of many of the players that Pace simply couldn’t do without and it cost the Bears a lot of draft capital. See “Anthony Miller” as the poster boy.

So it depends upon the team. I always said that Pace was the type of GM that other GMs take advantage of. Well, there are a lot of other GMs out there who are exactly the same. It is my sincere hope that GM Ryan Poles turns out to be one of those smart GMs that makes hay at their expense. If he is, there should still be plenty of opportunity to take advantage of the aggressive nature of other GMs, regardless of the talent that you think is available.

Bottom line, I think there are plenty of general managers out there who will identify players that they think should’ve gone in the first round and who will try to trade up in the second to get that player before he disappears off the board regardless of the other “second round talent” that remains available. For Bears fans, probably the most interesting aspect of this draft will be seeing if Poles can use that and turn it into badly needed picks because it will tell us an awful lot, not just about the present, but about our future as well.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions.

“While going through another rebuild is very disappointing, I appreciate your insight into the process. One thing I can’t understand is Ryan Poles not re-signing more of the team’s own free agents, several of whom the rest of the league appears to be really excited about. I get that it is a two-way street and that a player such as Allen Robinson probably wanted a new start elsewhere. What I don’t understand is James Daniels and Bilal Nichols who seemed to meet the criteria for the future being young, affordable and with upside. Is this a case of them also wanting a new start or a case of Poles just clearing out the old management’s players? — Scott S.”

“By my count, 18 players that finished last season with the Bears have signed elsewhere in free agency. They have re-signed two players that were unrestricted free agents (defensive back DeAndre Houston-Carson and long snapper Patrick Scales) and also brought back three exclusive-rights free agents (tight end Jesper Horsted and offensive linemen Sam Mustipher and Lachavious Simmons).”

“I imagine you would probably feel a little differently about free agency had Poles signed a big name wide receiver or offensive lineman to mitigate the losses of Robinson (Los Angeles Rams) and Daniels (Pittsburgh Steelers) in free agency. It’s possible the team didn’t believe Nichols was an ideal fit for a 40 front. He headed to Las Vegas in free agency and the team has made some moves to shore up the front by signing Al-Quadin Muhammad and Justin Jones.

“What we are looking at is a large group of players signed to short-term contracts, many of them for only one season, and the hope is that a handful emerge as more than just bridge players and can be starters that the Bears can build around. Certainly it will not be the case for most of them, but between wide receiver Byron Pringle, linebacker Nicholas Morrow, offensive lineman Lucas Patrick as well as Muhammad and Jones, I would expect a couple to emerge as solid contributors.

“You’re going to see a lot of turnover next offseason with such a high number of players on one-year contracts. When the Bears kick off the 2023 season, the roster will look dramatically different than it did at the end of 2021. That is the goal and how the young players improve between now and then will go a long way toward determining how good the team is at that point.”

I identify with the questioner‘s feelings on this issue. I have an online friend how is a Pittsburgh Steelers fan who, after they signed Daniels, asked me “what the Bears have against resigning 24-year-old promising offensive lineman“.

There are a couple of reasons that I think may have led the Bears to let Daniels and Nichols leave as free agents. The first is a question of scheme. The Bears are changing the defense of scheme to a four-man front and, as Biggs points out, it could be that the Bears didn’t think that Nichols would fit that sort of a defensive front. Personally, I think he probably would’ve made a reasonably good nose guard in a four-man front but I’m not as qualified to make that judgment as the Bears coaches.

Similarly, it has been well publicized that the Bears are changing to an outside zone scheme. They have expressed a desire to acquire more mobile and athletic office of lineman. Again, I would’ve thought Daniels might have fit that sort of a profile. But evidently the coaches do not agree.

The second reason why these players may not have been resigned is because of the cap space that they may have occupied. In particular, many general managers do not like the idea of sinking inordinate amounts of money into one particular position. They would rather spread the money out. Former general manager Jerry Angelo was a fan of this philosophy. It could well be that the Bears figured that they already had enough money spent on the interior of the offensive line because of Cody Whitehair‘s contract. The choice very well may have been between resigning Daniels or keeping Whitehair and the Bers made their choice. If that is the case, I’d say they made the right decision. Whitehair is is probably the better player.

In any case it will be interesting to see how these players work out with their new teams and whether the Bears may end up regretting letting a couple of young players get away.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions.

Is the Bears’ starting middle linebacker on the roster yet? If not, how do you see that position being filled? — @mike__chicago

I expect Nicholas Morrow or Roquan Smith to fill the middle and weak-side linebacker positions. The team hasn’t announced a decision on how they will be aligned yet. You can’t rule out the possibility in certain situations they would flip. Depth is still needed but right now linebacker is one position the Bears are in pretty good shape.

Yes, this question of what the Bears need to do at linebacker is an interesting one. Given that the Bears plan to spend a lot of time in the nickel defense, you might claim that two starters are really all they need. However I would point out that new head coach Matt Eberflus said directly that he believes that strong side linebacker is an important part of the defense that he plans to run. In particular, he thought that finding a strong side linebacker who could slip inside in the nickel might be important. This could indicate that either Morrow or Smith may be moved to the bench when the Bears are in the nickel at least sometimes.

I recently participated in a mock draft where I was stuck in an interesting position with the second of the Bears second round picks. The best player on the board by a fairly big margin was Georgia linebacker Quay Walker. Even though I didn’t consider it to be a strong need for the Bears, I did consider it to be a need and I went ahead and selected him.

Something tells me that GM Ryan Poles might get roasted if he does something similar. But you wouldn’t see much criticism from me. I have a feeling that the third linebacker spot is very much in their plans and that it might be a bigger need than most fans in media members state.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions.

I see this season and next as being a rebuild. Evaluate the players on the roster in Year 1 and gut it again and fill out the roster with a bunch of one-year free-agent deals. Is 2024 when we can expect the Bears to compete again? — @illini8208

There’s no question the Bears are in the beginning stages of a rebuild, and with so many players being added to the roster this year on one-year contracts, there will be considerable overhaul again in 2023. The hope, of course, is that a handful of players they have added will emerge as good fits and be re-signed. The Bears will have a full complement of draft picks next year, and depending on how they advance on offense this season — assuming they do — they could be considerably improved in 2023, when [GM Ryan] Poles will have a ton of salary-cap flexibility to be more aggressive in free agency. The key will be seeing what kind of roots the team can put down on offense and defense in the year ahead.

I tend to agree with this in so far that I think I understand what the Bears are doing this year. They showed that they were willing to spend in spots where they thought they saw value with Larry Ogunjobe. But this is a rebuild year.

Where I hope I differ with many fans and media members is in guessing what the team wants to do in year two. After $45 million in dead cap comes off the books, many understand that the Bears will likely have a lot of space, though perhaps not as much as many people think after they fill out their entire roster this year.

What I think many people expect that the Bears will go on free agents free next year. I hope that that is not the case. I hope what they are planning to do is to spend money to retain players that they signed this year that work out and that they like. But I would hate to see them overpay and blow all kinds of cash on veteran free agents.

Free agency is not a good way to build a football team. The Bears need to develop the players that they are signing and drafting and get them to the point where they want to resign their own. I hope that next year will be the beginning of that process.

Brad Biggs at the Chicago Tribune answers your questions.

“With so many needs going into the draft, will Ryan Poles double up on any position? — @joe_vizo”

“I will be as direct as I can: It’s way more important for Poles to find players who can be contributors than it is for him to fill specific roster ‘needs’ that you and I can identity right now. Fast forward to the spring of 2024, and no one will look at his draft picks from this year and say, ‘Hey, they got these two guys and they plugged holes in 2022.’ We will look at the 2022 class and ask how many of those players are in a position to help the team win in 2024. Could they double up on certain positions? Sure. Are there positions where they need two or more players? No question. What’s most important is finding players who can stick and be part of the future — no matter what position they play.

I totally agree with this but I think it’s important to point out here that “drafting for need“ is something that the Bears will be doing almost no matter who they take in the draft this year.

There are generally two ideal approaches to the draft. You can plug all of your holes in free agency and then take the best player available. If you are a competitive team in good shape, this is the path you take. However, if you are a team like the Bears, you go for door number two. You leave all of your needs open and then take the best player available at a position of need. And, boy, do the Bears have needs.

They need players that all three levels of the defense, they need wide receivers and they need offensive lineman. There’s almost nowhere other than running back and quarterback where they won’t be looking for an upgrade drafting for depth at either of those positions is not out of the question. It’s really unlikely that the best player available won’t be filling a need.

Adam Jahns at The Athletic writes about his take always from an interview with GM Ryan Poles at the owner’s meetings.

“Extra point, Part 2: Poles has turned to Cliff Stein, the Bears’ senior vice president/general counsel, to handle player contract negotiations and the salary cap.”

“‘It was really cool to see Cliff back at it,’ Poles said. ‘You could tell he has a lot of respect from the agents from the time he did it before. They were excited to see him and hear his voice. And he has a wealth of knowledge that I know helped me and it helped Matt. And we have a nice little team that we’ve put together. So he was a big part of this.'”

Personally, I was glad to see this. Stein is far more conservative than what was needed in the Ryan Pace era where the Bears were constantly manipulating the cap to put off charges into the future. Stein dates back to the days when the Bears were far more financially responsible and rarely overpaid for a player.

Stein has actually talked to agents during the draft and told them that the Bears wouldn’t take their player without a promise that there wouldn’t be a hold out. I think we’re going to be back to the days when the Bears were among the first organizations to get all of their draft picks signed.