Do you want the Bears to start the rookie right away? If not then who should be the starter, Tyson Bagent or Brett Rypien? Or should they sign a veteran to start this year?
By all means, let them start Bagent or Rypien. That way when they are 0-4 and Williams starts game 5 with one a week of reps with the ones he's be in prime position to go 13-0 the rest of the way. Just like with Mitch and Fields!!!
By all means, let them start Bagent or Rypien. That way when they are 0-4 and Williams starts game 5 with one a week of reps with the ones he's be in prime position to go 13-0 the rest of the way. Just like with Mitch and Fields!!!
Mitch has always been a threat. It’s just that he is mostly a threat to the team he’s playing for
Post by bearsinhouston on Apr 3, 2024 20:05:33 GMT -6
A Peter King article about not rushing Williams. It points to a not so great game from Williams against Notre Dame, so for you guys that aren't able to read anything even remotely negative about him, you may want to pass.
A Peter King article about not rushing Williams. It points to a not so great game from Williams against Notre Dame, so for you guys that aren't able to read anything even remotely negative about him, you may want to pass.
I'm okay with the negative. But it has to make sense. There is context here.
It seemed like a "water is wet" article. Of course you don't WANT to (as he puts it here) "rush a guy into playing before he's ready." I agree with that Mahomes type introduction to the NFL. It's probably not going to happen. Caleb will more than likely start day-1 here like Houston did with C.J. Stroud. I will say this. Caleb Williams will have a team, at least as good as Stroud had in Houston last year as a rookie. JMO.
I did find it laughable though, regarding Peter King's comments here:
"He also voiced his concerns about Williams after watching the Notre Dame game. “Look, Caleb Williams is obviously a fantastic prospect,” King continued. “But if you go back and watch the Caleb Williams tape in the game against Notre Dame, where Notre Dame just rushed the passer just great that day, and Caleb Williams couldn’t get anything done, that’s one of the reasons I thought, hang onto Fields and build around him with a bunch of draft choices over the next two years and build a great offensive line. Now, their offensive line is okay, but I wouldn’t say it’s great. So if your offensive line is getting the quarterback beat up, then don’t rush Caleb Williams in there.”
I am a Notre Dame fan going back over 60 years and I watched the USC game he's talking about here live and later watched the film. I've also watched the top guys break down that Caleb Williams ND film multiple times (multiple guys). The consensus from people who seem very knowledgeable in breaking down QB film (former great players) point to a few notable things - basically this was not Caleb Williams falling apart in a game. In fact THE EXACT OPPOSITE was pointed out. The team imploded around Caleb and he actually did some VERY good things in that game. Yes, it was his worst game.
1. This Peter King is cherry-picking a QB's worst game here. It is not representative of his play in college. 2. This was not a Caleb Williams failure but a USC team failure where (as some of these guys noted) Caleb Williams actually did a number of good things considering his team folded like a lawn chair. It was a worst-case scenario for a QB. 3. He threw 3 ints. In the NFL he will have some 3 int days. All QBs have that from time to time. Not good but if you pick an NFL player's worst game then yes, it won't be pretty to watch. For context Tom Brady had 6 games where he threw 4 ints. Aaron Rodgers, Patrick Mahomes... every great QB has bad games (Hall of Famer Brett Favre has had 4 and 5 int games). Yes stuff happens, even with elite QB1s. 4. In this "worst game" Caleb threw for a 62.2% completion percentage. In his worst game. Let that one sink in. 5. In this "worst game" he still accounted for 235 yards of total offense. Again, this is his worst game.
I'm not calling Peter King an idiot here. I am just trying to get some context for his comments. And I'm not (at all) upset with negative comments when they make sense.
A Peter King article about not rushing Williams. It points to a not so great game from Williams against Notre Dame, so for you guys that aren't able to read anything even remotely negative about him, you may want to pass.
I'm okay with the negative. But it has to make sense. There is context here.
It seemed like a "water is wet" article. Of course you don't WANT to (as he puts it here) "rush a guy into playing before he's ready." I agree with that Mahomes type introduction to the NFL. It's probably not going to happen. Caleb will more than likely start day-1 here like Houston did with C.J. Stroud. I will say this. Caleb Williams will have a team, at least as good as Stroud had in Houston last year as a rookie. JMO.
I did find it laughable though, regarding Peter King's comments here:
"He also voiced his concerns about Williams after watching the Notre Dame game. “Look, Caleb Williams is obviously a fantastic prospect,” King continued. “But if you go back and watch the Caleb Williams tape in the game against Notre Dame, where Notre Dame just rushed the passer just great that day, and Caleb Williams couldn’t get anything done, that’s one of the reasons I thought, hang onto Fields and build around him with a bunch of draft choices over the next two years and build a great offensive line. Now, their offensive line is okay, but I wouldn’t say it’s great. So if your offensive line is getting the quarterback beat up, then don’t rush Caleb Williams in there.”
I am a Notre Dame fan going back over 60 years and I watched the USC game he's talking about here live and later watched the film. I've also watched the top guys break down that Caleb Williams ND film multiple times (multiple guys). The consensus from people who seem very knowledgeable in breaking down QB film (former great players) point to a few notable things - basically this was not Caleb Williams falling apart in a game. In fact THE EXACT OPPOSITE was pointed out. The team imploded around Caleb and he actually did some VERY good things in that game. Yes, it was his worst game.
1. This Peter King is cherry-picking a QB's worst game here. It is not representative of his play in college. 2. This was not a Caleb Williams failure but a USC team failure where (as some of these guys noted) Caleb Williams actually did a number of good things considering his team folded like a lawn chair. It was a worst-case scenario for a QB. 3. He threw 3 ints. In the NFL he will have some 3 int days. All QBs have that from time to time. Not good but if you pick an NFL player's worst game then yes, it won't be pretty to watch. 4. In this "worst game" Caleb threw for a 62.2% completion percentage. In his worst game. Let that one sink in. 5. In this "worst game" he still accounted for 235 yards of total offense. Again, this is his worst game.
I'm not calling Peter King an idiot here. I am just trying to get some context for his comments. And I'm not (at all) upset with negative comments when they make sense.
Well said, JABF.
The Bears drafted a QB in 2017 who only had one year of starting experience at UNC and couldn't beat out a guy who later went undrafted.
In 2021 the Bears traded up to draft a QB who couldn't beat out Jake Fromm in Georgia and then had a ridiculously good OL and WR group at OSU.
Caleb's "worst game" was better than most "good games" by those guys.
The reality is the fans don't actually matter. Unless he comes out looking just abysmal he's going to be given 3 years to get things right, like pretty much every other high prospect QB. So they can be grumpy all they want, it's not going to change anything.
I don't expect he'll be that bad though. He doesn't have to be great. He just has to exceeds JF's performance, which is a pretty low bar.
+1 Great way to put it. He doesn't have to light it up day-1 and be great right out of the chute. And you are right about him getting 3 years to get things right.
Williams doesn’t need to play great immediately, but Bears do need to win games. A 1-4 start would be hard on everyone, especially Williams. He will be scrutinized by Chicago sports media, and it could get ugly.
+1 Great way to put it. He doesn't have to light it up day-1 and be great right out of the chute. And you are right about him getting 3 years to get things right.
Williams doesn’t need to play great immediately, but Bears do need to win games. A 1-4 start would be hard on everyone, especially Williams. He will be scrutinized by Chicago sports media, and it could get ugly.
Of course. But a rookie will have some tough games anyway. If fans want to act like idiots, then that's sad but some fans are idiots.
A Peter King article about not rushing Williams. It points to a not so great game from Williams against Notre Dame, so for you guys that aren't able to read anything even remotely negative about him, you may want to pass.
I'm okay with the negative. But it has to make sense. There is context here.
It seemed like a "water is wet" article. Of course you don't WANT to (as he puts it here) "rush a guy into playing before he's ready." I agree with that Mahomes type introduction to the NFL. It's probably not going to happen. Caleb will more than likely start day-1 here like Houston did with C.J. Stroud. I will say this. Caleb Williams will have a team, at least as good as Stroud had in Houston last year as a rookie. JMO.
I did find it laughable though, regarding Peter King's comments here:
"He also voiced his concerns about Williams after watching the Notre Dame game. “Look, Caleb Williams is obviously a fantastic prospect,” King continued. “But if you go back and watch the Caleb Williams tape in the game against Notre Dame, where Notre Dame just rushed the passer just great that day, and Caleb Williams couldn’t get anything done, that’s one of the reasons I thought, hang onto Fields and build around him with a bunch of draft choices over the next two years and build a great offensive line. Now, their offensive line is okay, but I wouldn’t say it’s great. So if your offensive line is getting the quarterback beat up, then don’t rush Caleb Williams in there.”
I am a Notre Dame fan going back over 60 years and I watched the USC game he's talking about here live and later watched the film. I've also watched the top guys break down that Caleb Williams ND film multiple times (multiple guys). The consensus from people who seem very knowledgeable in breaking down QB film (former great players) point to a few notable things - basically this was not Caleb Williams falling apart in a game. In fact THE EXACT OPPOSITE was pointed out. The team imploded around Caleb and he actually did some VERY good things in that game. Yes, it was his worst game.
1. This Peter King is cherry-picking a QB's worst game here. It is not representative of his play in college. 2. This was not a Caleb Williams failure but a USC team failure where (as some of these guys noted) Caleb Williams actually did a number of good things considering his team folded like a lawn chair. It was a worst-case scenario for a QB. 3. He threw 3 ints. In the NFL he will have some 3 int days. All QBs have that from time to time. Not good but if you pick an NFL player's worst game then yes, it won't be pretty to watch. For context Tom Brady had 6 games where he threw 4 ints. Aaron Rodgers, Patrick Mahomes... every great QB has bad games (Hall of Famer Brett Favre has had 4 and 5 int games). Yes stuff happens, even with elite QB1s. 4. In this "worst game" Caleb threw for a 62.2% completion percentage. In his worst game. Let that one sink in. 5. In this "worst game" he still accounted for 235 yards of total offense. Again, this is his worst game.
I'm not calling Peter King an idiot here. I am just trying to get some context for his comments. And I'm not (at all) upset with negative comments when they make sense.
I figured I could count on reasons why the critcism was not worthy of Williams
Hey, I like the guy. If we have to go with a new QB, I have come around to him being the one. But it is still entertaining.
Williams doesn’t need to play great immediately, but Bears do need to win games. A 1-4 start would be hard on everyone, especially Williams. He will be scrutinized by Chicago sports media, and it could get ugly.
Of course. But a rookie will have some tough games anyway. If fans want to act like idiots, then that's sad but some fans are idiots.
He can have tough games and nobody will care so long as Bears win those games. But I guarantee you that it won’t be just a few idiot fans who would be upset with a 1-4 start. There will be loads of media scrutiny on everything inside the team, including Williams.
I figured I could count on reasons why the critcism was not worthy of Williams