Chicago Bears Q&A: Is it too soon to talk about Matt Eberflus being fired? How much longer does Justin Fields have to figure it out?
After an ugly 0-2 start to the season, the Chicago Bears head to Kansas City to face the reigning Super Bowl champion Chiefs on Sunday.
Needless to say, most of the questions in Brad Biggs’ weekly mailbag are about what changes the Bears might make — and when.
If the Bears continue to be winless, what game do you see Matt Eberflus being fired? Generally they don’t fire coaches midseason but he’s lost 12 straight. What can we point to that is working? — @joshua726_gs
I never thought we would be here on Sept. 20 at the beginning of Eberflus’ second season with the mailbag jammed full of questions about firing the coach. But with the Bears 0-2 and having lost in jarring fashion to the rival Green Bay Packers in the opener and then falling 27-17 to the Tampa Bay Buccaneers on Sunday at Raymond James Stadium, here we are trying to sort through the mess. Identifying the issues isn’t a problem. Finding solutions and a path to growth, especially in season, is the challenge.
I didn’t think the Bucs game was as close as the score indicated, but the Bears had the ball trailing by only three points with 2:24 remaining. Of course they were starting from their 7-yard line, and based on the offense’s performance in similar situations, hope was slim.
Before I dive deeper, it’s important to point out that while a 12-game losing streak is relevant, we need to separate the 2022 season from the current one when talking about Eberflus’ job performance. Am I suggesting we use selective amnesia and forget last year altogether? Not at all. That 3-14 is on his record and always will be. But expectations were very low with a stripped-down roster. After Roquan Smith was traded and injuries hit, I don’t know who would have done much of anything at the helm.
Is last season a factor in the big picture? Sure. Much more pertinent is how the Bears are performing this season. They’re not off to an encouraging start, though it is just two games.
Back to the specifics of your question. You say the Bears “generally” do not fire coaches midseason. More accurately, they never have fired a head coach in season. I’m sure that won’t be the case from here to eternity, but you have to figure that into the equation as you consider what the power brokers — starting with Chairman George McCaskey — are thinking at Halas Hall.
My first question in this scenario is if the Bears fired Eberflus, who would be promoted to interim head coach? Offensive coordinator Luke Getsy has his hands full trying to get a struggling unit and quarterback going. Defensive coordinator Alan Williams has been on a personal absence since at least Thursday, and I can’t tell you when we will see him next. You want to see special teams coordinator Richard Hightower in charge? He has a big job as it is. I suppose the Bears could consider giving the title to a position coach, but then who handles that role? Until we get some clarity on what’s going on with Williams — and the team has offered nothing on that matter — this is an even more difficult question to answer than it would be otherwise.
The Bears didn’t terminate Matt Nagy’s contract in the final two months of a dead-end 2021 season when the eventual outcome was clear. They also didn’t send Marc Trestman out early during the 2014 season when it was evident the team was in disarray. It’s rare for an NFL team to fire its head coach in the first month of the season, but there are four instances since 2000:
In 2008, the St. Louis Rams fired Scott Linehan after an 0-4 start.
That same year, the Oakland Raiders canned Lane Kiffin after a 1-3 start.
In 2014, the Raiders used a quick trigger again, firing Dennis Allen after an 0-4 start.
In 2020, the Houston Texans fired GM/coach Bill O’Brien after an 0-4 start.
That being said, firings are not uncommon as the midway point of the season approaches. A head coach has been fired in October in each of the last five years. The Carolina Panthers fired Matt Rhule after a 1-4 start last season, and two more in-season changes followed as the Indianapolis Colts parted ways with Frank Reich after Week 9 and the Denver Broncos ousted Nathaniel Hackett after Week 16.
An 0-2 start against the opponents the Bears faced is ominous, especially with Sunday’s trip to Kansas City on deck. It’s bad, but my hunch is it would have to get worse for the team to consider a change because I simply don’t know what move it would make at this point. You don’t fire a coach just to give angry fans some blood. Trust me, folks at every layer of the organization are unsettled by the 0-2 start.
What’s working right now? Not enough and that’s a major issue. One thing I pointed to coming out of the loss to the Buccaneers is that Eberflus and his staff need to get some of the younger players on the roster playing better. They need to be able to point to tangible progress for guys who are getting a lot of playing time. Even if the results continue to trend in the wrong direction, they need to be able to show evidence of development. That’s what is missing through a small sample size of two games. That’s troubling and it no doubt has Eberflus under tremendous pressure.
Finally, a reminder of something I’ve said in the past, although never this early in the season: It won’t be productive to have a weekly referendum on Eberflus’ job status in the mailbag. I do my best to answer the pressing questions, the hard questions, the ones people are talking about, the oddball questions. But writing a similar answer to the same question every week gets a little tedious.
The Bears know what they have by now in Justin Fields and Nathan Peterman. And it isn’t good. It is also alarmingly clear that this team looks as bad or worse than last year’s three-win team. Given these factors, why not find out what they have in Tyson Bagent? How could things be any worse with him under center? It would also give the Bears brass a chance to find out what they have in him. — Jim A., Plymouth, Minn.
Many readers asked about what Bagent can do, and I think it’s premature. If the undrafted rookie from Division II Shepherd were in his second season, he might be an option worth exploring in the coming weeks. The risk in thrusting Bagent into action now — minus an injury necessitating a move — is that could blow up on the Bears. Bagent showed promise in the offseason, training camp and preseason, but he still has so much to learn.
In an ideal situation — and I readily admit there is nothing ideal about the spot the Bears are in right now — they would allow Bagent to develop and steady himself as a rookie and take their time before getting a close look at him. Exposing Bagent too soon to regular-season action could be detrimental to hopes that he might be able to emerge as a true diamond in the rough. I would not rule out the idea of perhaps giving Bagent a shot at some point in the second half of the season if things are still off the rails, but now isn’t the time.
How much longer does Justin Fields have to figure it out? — @hruskocy2
The clock is ticking on Fields to show the Bears he’s a solid option to be the starting quarterback in 2024 and give them reason to consider the fifth-year option in his contract for 2025. A TON of football remains to be played — 15 games over 16 weeks. I don’t think anyone wants to see the Nathan Peterman show, and as I explained above, it’s too early to consider a move to Tyson Bagent.
But Fields needs to begin performing better. We’ve seen glimpses. He hit two nice passes to DJ Moore, nothing fancy but effective, on the first possession at Tampa Bay. You can point to consecutive good plays when the Bears drove for a touchdown in the fourth quarter. That’s the issue here. You have to hunt too often to find examples of Fields and the offense stringing together enough good plays on a single drive.
The coaches have to find a formula that clicks for him and the offense as a whole. He has to begin reading defenses better post-snap and delivering the ball with timing. The Bears lack rhythm on offense, and that’s a difficult thing to achieve.
Let’s talk about a quarterback who can fix this problem, or the chances of landing that quarterback. What are the odds the Bears land the No. 1 pick in the draft? Give me some reason to find light at the end of the tunnel. — Max H., Glen Ellyn
I don’t see the Bears earning the No. 1 pick with their own selection. We don’t know what all of their opponents will look like as the season unfolds, but there look to be some winnable games against teams that are not very competitive. Eight other teams are 0-2 and the Bears have six games against them: the Minnesota Vikings (two), Denver Broncos, Los Angeles Chargers, Arizona Cardinals and Carolina Panthers. Add games against the Washington Commanders, Cleveland Browns, Atlanta Falcons, Las Vegas Raiders, New Orleans Saints and a rematch with the Packers, and I see a whole bunch of opponents that look average — at best.
We’ll have to keep a close eye on the Panthers, as the Bears own their first-round pick. They’re struggling through the beginning stages of a rebuild with rookie quarterback Bryce Young. The Cardinals look like they could be in the thick of things for the top pick. A couple of key games to keep an eye on: The Houston Texans play at Carolina in Week 8 and host the Cardinals in Week 11. The Texans (0-2) also are just starting a rebuild with rookie quarterback C.J. Stroud and are rough just about everywhere on the roster.
The Cardinals own the Texans’ first-round pick, putting them in a position where they should have two very high picks — maybe even Nos 1. and 2. That would be a jackpot, right? It wasn’t when the Indianapolis Colts had the first two picks in the 1992 draft.
In the past, ownership has been against releasing coaches and GMs midseason. Could we see that change under the leadership of Kevin Warren? — @chicityslooper
I get the impression Warren probably will spend a year — or close to it, as he officially started in April — examining all facets of the team’s operation. My guess is he will have moves in mind, across a variety of departments, beginning in January or February. The focus is on football operations. Let’s recall that GM Ryan Poles and coach Matt Eberflus inherited quarterback Justin Fields. As bad as things look right now, I explained above why it’s probably early to talk in-depth about a firing.
You get the sense that Warren and Poles work well together. I’d be a little surprised if Poles is in jeopardy. We don’t know the length of the contracts Poles and Eberflus received — probably four or five years — and firing both would be expensive for a franchise that has been hesitant to make moves like that in the past. Let’s see what kind of vision, and more importantly actions, Warren has in mind.
I can’t stress enough that talk about firings two games into Season 2 is really out of the norm. Poles laid out a vision and long-term plan to bring the Bears back to relevance. That will take a lot more time than 19 games. If someone thought Poles could come in and have the Bears competing legitimately at this point, well, they were swigging from a special batch of spiked Kool-Aid.
At what point will Matt Eberflus decide to take away play-calling duties from Luke Getsy? The offense has regressed and he seems to be unwilling to adapt to the talents of his roster? — @sput23
The mailbag also was jammed with questions about Getsy’s performance and the likelihood the Bears could switch out play callers sooner rather than later. I wrote last week about the flowchart of blame when it comes to the Bears and their offense. The cycle has reached the point where many fingers are pointed at Getsy, who is in the same position many who came before him experienced. The quarterback is struggling. The offense isn’t producing points. Must be the coordinator’s fault.
Getsy will be the first to admit he has to do a better job. Some of the stuff you see that looks wrong — Justin Fields holding the ball too long and not identifying open receivers — is hard to pile on Getsy. Finding ways to get more out of Fields with what he has done well in the past, finding more ways to get the ball to DJ Moore and other skill-position players, getting a powerful outside-zone running game going — that is on Getsy. Contrary to the opinion of some, I think Getsy is attempting to adapt to the talents of the roster. We saw the offense get hot in the middle of last season. It wasn’t sustainable but it happened. The Bears need to find that spark before late October this year.
It’s probably not the answer you’re seeking, but I doubt Eberflus would name quarterbacks coach Andrew Janocko or some other offensive assistant the play caller soon. That would be almost a last-ditch move for Eberflus, who is under his own pressure. The three-game stretch against the Broncos, Commanders and Vikings will be huge for Getsy and the offense.
Matt Eberflus needs to be replaced. Ryan Poles gets one more chance at a head coaching hire. What are the chances he’d consider trading first-round picks and try to get someone like Sean McVay from the Los Angeles Rams? What are the chances the Bears throw everything at a guy like Jim Harbaugh to pry him away from Michigan? Those two may be more valuable than Caleb Williams. — @rtindenverco
I went ahead and answered this question as an example of how deep we are into the firing/hiring questions before Week 3 kicks off. I will admit, I have no clue if the Rams would consider allowing McVay to walk out of the building or what would make the Bears enticing to him in the least if they had no shot at an elite quarterback in the draft. Harbaugh has been a man of mystery. The Broncos tried like heck to lure him this past offseason. I imagine he would want a huge contract, and that hasn’t been the Bears’ style. I think Williams would be the most valuable chip the Bears could get after this season.
Is it realistic for Justin Fields to be fixed in season? He seems broken operating within the offense currently, which is beyond disappointing as a fan to watch. — @mmesq11
It’s not unrealistic, but the chances of Fields pulling out of this tailspin he and the offense are in — it’s 11 guys out there, not one — seem rather unlikely to me. Everywhere you looked this offseason, expectations for Fields seemed almost unattainably dreamy. The MVP talk, the idea he could emerge like Jalen Hurts did a year ago or Josh Allen did after a bumpy start in Buffalo? It all made for great fodder and it fueled wild projections. I will borrow from what I wrote last week about the blame game for QB play at Halas Hall:
Hype surrounding Fields entering this season was immense, based on incredible athleticism and a bunch of explosive plays he created last season. The enthusiasm wasn’t based on a 75-yard touchdown drive he directed in the final two minutes to beat the Atlanta Falcons. The Bears’ bid to win in the two-minute drill ended with an interception on the third play. Two weeks earlier, the Bears trailed the Dolphins by three points in the final two minutes and turned the ball over on downs on their side of the field.
Optimism for Fields has been based on traits that could help him become an elite performer — not established, consistent quarterback play with what was a subpar surrounding cast a year ago. Fields was so electric at times in 2022, opponents schemed in the offseason to consider how to defend him. That shouldn’t be lost on anyone. He’s not going to stun defenses with his athleticism like he did in the middle of last season. He might beat teams with his abilities, but they’re going to be expecting it.
The Bears are in a tough spot and have to figure out how to become more productive on offense. They need a little help from the defense too. How about some takeaways and occasional short fields?
I realize the Bears have been through some painfully bad offensive slumps. Can you recall one where everything seems to be so wrong and in so much need of fixing? — Michael B., Chicago
The Bears have not scored more than 20 points in eight consecutive games dating to Week 11 of the 2022 season, a 27-24 loss in Atlanta. They went nine straight games in 2005 without reaching 21 points. They had rookie Kyle Orton at quarterback that season, but he was supported by a great defense and a powerful running game. There was another nine-game stretch that spanned the end of the 2002 season and the start of 2003. There was a 10-game stretch of 20 points or fewer in 1994 and another eight-game stretch in 1993, so it has happened.
Maybe the bigger issue is the Bears have allowed 25 points or more in each game of their current 12-game losing streak. That’s the longest stretch in franchise history. Only one other team has had such a rough stretch in terms of points allowed: The Broncos, when they were in the AFL, allowed 25 or more in 13 consecutive games spanning the 1963 and 1964 seasons. The Bears will join them if the Chiefs put up 25 or more points Sunday. The over/under for the Chiefs total is 30 1/2.
You’ve said that the Bears run D is improved but I think this is a statistical mirage. They couldn’t stop Aaron Jones in the third quarter of the season opener when they knew he was the only dangerous Packers player. And they couldn’t stop an inept Bucs rushing attack in the first half. Is this is a scheme problem? — @tecatitostack
The run defense hasn’t been amazing, but you have to give them credit when they are making strides. The Bears are allowing 106 yards per game, 16th in the NFL, but consider opponents are averaging only 3.21 yards per carry. That ranks fifth in the league. They surrendered 157.3 rushing yards per game (31st) and 4.93 per carry (27th) last season. That’s a pretty big jump.
Jones had three carries for 10 yards (one a 1-yard touchdown) in the third quarter of the opener. The damage he did was on two big pass plays. The Bucs had 90 yards on 20 carries (4.5 average) in the first half last week. Trying to milk a lead in the second half, they carried 14 times for 30 yards. So the defense tightened.
The scheme — Matt Eberflus is rooted in the Tampa-2 — can have issues against the run. We all know that. But the scheme isn’t the problem for this defense. The trouble is it doesn’t have players stepping up to make game-changing plays or big plays on third down. The run defense is heading in the right direction.
Why do the Bears refuse to blitz if they can’t get pressure with the front four? Zone defense does not work with no pressure. — @andrewc37779434
The Bears brought a little more pressure against Baker Mayfield than they did against Jordan Love, and there were too many missed opportunities. Mayfield was 6 of 6 for 132 yards and a touchdown against the blitz, so with both safeties out for much of the game and the top two nickel cornerbacks sidelined, I’m not sure heating up the quarterback more was the solution.
The Bears defensive linemen aren’t winning enough one-on-one matchups, and when they do, they’re not finishing the play. I know more pressure and more blitzes is always everyone’s go-to fix for defensive issues. It’s why every time there is a change in defensive coaches or scheme, everyone expects the new one to be more aggressive. The Bears are what they are philosophically. What they need to do is play better.
Despite giving up lots of yards to the Bucs, the defense looks like they are progressing as a unit. Even the pass rush got several pressures and just missed on a couple sacks. What’s your thoughts on this? — @margasmike
The biggest difference from the opener against the Packers is you didn’t see Bucs receivers running wide open because of missed assignments or communication breakdowns. Mike Evans deserved an offensive pass interference penalty on the 70-yard play. Were there plays on which the defense should have done better? Yes.
On Evans’ 32-yard touchdown on third-and-14, rookie cornerback Tyrique Stevenson looked like he was anticipating Evans breaking off his route near the sticks between, say, 12 and 15 yards. Instead, Evans was headed to the end zone and Stevenson got dusted. Baker Mayfield didn’t make a good throw, so Stevenson nearly recovered to make a play. But it was a touchdown.
There was a little bit of progress, and Mayfield has two crafty veteran receivers in Evans and Chris Godwin. The biggest improvement from my vantage point was fewer communication busts. It’s good they cleaned that up.
What aren’t we seeing Roschon Johnson start? Clearly he would be better served as the meat-and-potatoes back with the smaller, quicker (Khalil) Herbert being the change-of-pace back. Down the list of offensive problems, I realize, but Roschon is clearly the best back they have. — @themoxconnor1
A week after Johnson got more snaps than any other running back, Herbert had the most in Tampa with 32. Johnson got 22. Herbert had seven carries for 35 yards and a 23-yard reception. He didn’t do anything to warrant less playing time.
Johnson’s time will come. I would focus more on snap counts than who is in the starting lineup, and the playing time has been distributed pretty evenly. Johnson clearly got a bump when the team made D’Onta Foreman inactive too. I agree this is a very minimal issue with what is going on offensively.
I feel that lost in the anxiety over Justin Fields, the play calling and the defensive problems is the evaluation of Darnell Wright. Camp reviews were mostly positive but he didn’t see much preseason action. What’s the consensus after two games? Is he meeting expectations or falling behind? — @bwoj8187
I don’t think you can reach a consensus after two games. Wright has looked fine to me. He had a false-start penalty in each game, and Sunday’s game against the Chiefs will be challenging because Arrowhead Stadium is one of the louder venues in the league. He will get that cleaned up. What do they say about offensive linemen? When people aren’t talking about them much, they’re probably doing a pretty good job. He will have some learning lessons this season, but it looks to me that Wright is fitting in.
The Bears pass rush was lacking in 2022 and looks no better and maybe worse so far in 2023. So why did they get rid of Trevis Gipson, who played well in the preseason? — Bill F., Waynesboro, Va.
The Bears felt like Gipson was a bit of a square peg in a round hole at defensive end. They thought he profiled better as an outside linebacker in a 3-4 scheme. Matt Eberflus tends to prefer stouter ends in his 4-3 scheme, although Yannick Ngakoue would be an exception. Gipson probably wouldn’t have made much of a difference the first two weeks. He was very productive in 2021 playing opposite Robert Quinn, who set a franchise record with 18 1/2 sacks. It’s worth wondering if some of the plays Gipson made were opportunities his veteran teammate created. The Tennessee Titans signed Gipson, who logged seven snaps in the opener and was inactive last week.
What’s the justification to leave Equanimeous St. Brown inactive? If the Bears are throwing screen passes and running the ball, wouldn’t they want a strong blocking WR? — @kking182
Talk about one of the more overblown in-week stories of the past couple years — the possible elevation of St. Brown. Yes, Matt Eberflus opened the door to the possibility three days after the loss to the Packers when he wouldn’t rule out Chase Claypool being inactive in Week 2. Claypool earned every bit of scrutiny he got after a poor effort in the opener. But the Bears went with the more proven wide receiver, and Claypool’s effort seemed to match the moment in Tampa. Is he great? No. Will the Bears win the trade with the Pittsburgh Steelers? Nope. You can’t win ‘em all.
But St. Brown has been a dependable wide receiver during only portions of his career. I’m talking about catching the ball. Yes, he’s a good blocker. The Bears need more than that. They need explosive plays, and that’s why they gave Velus Jones a shot on the game-day roster. You have to aim higher than having a wide receiver on the field because he blocks. I was surprised St. Brown made the 53-man roster.
