pittmike wrote:
veganfan21 wrote:
Finally someone speaking truth to power on this station. Wierderer reciting Fields' embarrassing fourth quarter stats and generally remarking that statistically speaking the overall QB performance was bottom tier. Thank you thank you thank you. None of this "oh yeah Fields is still maybe drew brees and the opposing players fear him so obviously he's a threat the bears haven't unlocked yet".
Why is this so? It is so weird like the Fields camp has stuff on the local media. You can’t even claim race as he will likely get replaced by Caleb. So why all the Score etc angst?
I look at it like this:
Mully/Haugh/Parkins/Speegs:
Open to replacing Fields and mainly cite "resetting the QB clock" as the selling point. Occasionally give props to Fields (oh he could have did what Lamar did to Houston in the playoffs or Fields was screwed by the Bears) as a way to pander to the sizable Fields cult but they seem genuinely open to the idea that Fields just isn't that good.
Bernstein/Holmes/Rahimi:
Their pro-Fields stance seems purely agenda-driven. You can tell it's agenda-driven because for hosts that pride themselves as data-obsessed, they actually cite no data whatsoever when Fields comes up. Deep down, despite their dishonesty, they know data is kryptonite to any pro-Fields point of view, so they steer away from it. The agenda seems to have the following pillars:
1) Fields is good but has been ruined by Eberflus and Getsy. It's impossible that a guy with Fields athletic prowess could be bad, so let's just generate content bashing coaches for failing to "develop" Fields.
2) Fields is not performing well because Bears, so let's recycle some anti-McCaskey/etc content to fill the time. if only we had a VP of Football Ops who supervised a GM who supervised the HC, and if everyone were hired in proper order, then Fields wouldn't voluntarily take sacks and be bad.
3) People wanted to see what Bagent could do because racism, which is another obstacle Fields faces in Chicago. This allows them to sidestep the data issue because any criticism of Fields - regardless of the data behind it - must be racist. So this becomes another pro-Fields talking point.
They have the most dishonest Fields content in the city.
ESPN 1000 shows:
Slightly more open to the idea of getting rid of Fields and part of me thinks they have to be that way because as the "home of the Bears" they don't want to risk being perceived as oppposed to drafting Williams. In other words, they have less creative freedom than guys like Bernstein and Holmes who can spew all sorts of dumb anti-Caleb propaganda because they don't have to worry about offending the Bears, they only offend the intellect.
Ex-players: They're going to back their own. The ones who step out and say what they really think (Alex Brown) are the honest ones.