The article also says Marinelli is not a candidate due to his age. And I can’t imagine Lovie Smith needs the money nor would have any desire to do any favors for the team that fired him after a 10-6 season.
My prediction: Leslie Frazier.
At this stage in the season, his only option is going to be out of work old heads. Eberflus is close with Marinelli, and he brought the name up. Lovie and Marinelli are basically the same guy, Lovie is just younger and seems interested in still working in the league. Connecting the dots, I have to think if Eberflus were chatting with Marinelli, it might have been so Eberflus could do some background work on Lovie (or get other recommendations). Frazier is of course a very similar candidate and worked under Lovie himself, so you can’t rule him out either.
If they do in fact plan to hire a part-time remote work guy, both Lovie and Frasier make sense. They can cash some checks without the pressure of being at Halas Hall at 4:30 AM every day. Sounds pretty cushy and just the kind of gig a guy with one foot out the door might want. Frasier definitely wants another crack at being a DC and probably even an HC, I don’t know if being associated with the awful Bears defense even as a consultant is the way to go.
I’d love it if they found some young analytics minded geek to bring in, but I have to guess any guy worth his salt is on an NFL or Power 5 team’s payroll already. Though the uniqueness of this situation could open the door for an unconventional candidate, not that I think anyone on this staff is well connected enough to source that kind of talent.
I wonder if Kris Richard would be interested? He has been out of work since February and has been a DC before, and he’s pretty young.
Interesting option, though he’s not a Tampa 2/Cover 2 guy. Hopefully we’re not too close-minded on that point. He’s certainly more enticing than these has-beens. Though Richard hasn’t exactly been lighting the world on fire since his Seattle days.
As a Tampa fan… the Tampa 2 is dead anyway. It was designed to beat the West Coast system, and it’s way too vulnerable to the modern RPO look.
I think that’s a little bit of an over simplification. Every defense today needs to be multiple. The main issue is that the scheme requires unicorns at 2 key positions, 3-technique and MLB. Tampa 2 was much more of an answer to the Greatest Show on Turf era offenses than WCO.
So, with Fields’ abysmal performance Sunday and his thumb injury, which could keep him out 3-4 weeks, the question is more or less settled. I can’t imagine him coming back and doing anything to prove he’s fixed all the flaws in his game that have been evident the past 2+ seasons.
Let the Tyson Bagent era begin!
Going strictly by the poll, options 2 and 3 are both on the table still. But yeah, he’s done here. I’m still not totally convinced that he won’t go to another team and turn into a star once he gets a coaching staff that can use him right. That said, he’s inherently limited as a QB so even if he finds some success, I don’t love the idea of a franchise QB who can only succeed under perfect circumstances.
And now Caleb Williams is starting to show that he’s not a perfect prospect just in time for the Bears to get further screwed up.
If the Bears end up with the first two picks next year, maybe they should use both on QBs to double their odds of finally drafting one who can play. 
We’d get clowned for it, but jesus I’m on board.
I voted that Fields would get hurt. I must be a psychic.
Not really – he missed time in both his previous seasons, too.
I was being sarcastic; I just picked the obvious choice.
Yep, should have caught that. #NeedMoreCoffee
So, I got my wish. And I think we have an answer. I included the first self-quote from above because this game I think illustrated the point. Bagent in his first start looks like a professional QB behind this line, with these WRs and with these coaches calling ceaseless screens.
The numbers weren’t eye popping, and the Raiders defense isn’t exactly elite, but Bagent was calm, collected and efficient. When plays went sideways he usually managed to complete a pass for a short gain or at least not take a crippling sack. His balls were accurate (72.4 completion %; 97.2 rating) and when he was checking down or throwing screens, he got the ball out quick and in a catchable position so that the receiver could get upfield for positive yardage. He used his legs effectively and he completed passes to 8 different players. He didn’t attack anything downfield all game but I’m sure that was the conservative game plan with the running game working so well. And importantly, he didn’t show even show a hint of nerves, dude played with swagger, which is saying something considering his last 6 regular season opponents were East Stroudsburg, Bloomsburg, West Chester, Millersville, Lock Haven, and Shippensburg.
After just one start the jury is of course still out on Bagent. We need to see him do it consistently and under more adverse circumstances. We need to see him in a come-from-behind situation. We need to see him with the governors off to see if he can make splash plays. We need to see him do it in Lambeau. But I immediately feel like we have a better chance to win with Bagent out there over Fields.
Linking the above hyperbole from the original Preseason thread…
The world is officially on notice.
I agree with your whole post. That’s how the wide zone offense is supposed to look. For one game at least, against a very mediocre defense, Bagent ran it better than Fields.
I’m not ready to anoint him the new Brock Purdy, but he’ll do until reality proves otherwise.
Question: If you’re in charge, and both Fields and Bagent are healthy, who do you start next week?
Brutal question, but it has to be Fields. You don’t bench NFL starters after one week missed for an injury, or you risk losing the trust of every veteran in the locker room.
Also, as refreshing as it was to this fan’s eyes to see Bagent play well, the coaches will likely see plenty on tape that Fields would have done better. I’m confident Fields could have also had a good day against the Raiders.
I’m not at all. With the way Fields holds the ball, Crosby probably would have had a 3 sack day. With Fields slow delivery and scattershot accuracy on short throws, none of those screens and checks would have produced first downs.
Fields would have had a completely different game plan and I don’t know why we should think it would work better against the Raiders than it did against the Broncos or Vikings. The Raiders defense isn’t elite, but they are middle of the pack. Maybe the entire team woke up on the right side of the bed, or maybe we just match up insanely well against the Raiders and we would have dominated with any competent QB. But I doubt it.
To @Hamlet’s question…it’s a really tough one. I think it comes down to the teams goals. If you want to end the season with the most wins, maybe hoping for a respectable 7-10 record, you start Bagent until he proves he’s a pumpkin. If you want to go into 2024 with a clear go forward plan at QB, you start Fields.
Maybe the Bears offense is getting healthy and starting to gel. Fields steps in and proves to be a much more dynamic option, basically doing 80% of what Bagent did a little better. Maybe Fields steps in and reverts to the same garbage that he has been for every game besides Washington. Either way, the team knows exactly what to do with him next offseason. That’s still what needs to happen. Bagent can enter 2024 either as a reliable backup to Fields or competing for the starting job with Drake Maye.
It also helps when the other team’s QB is Brian Hoyer.