Nothing New Here from Cowherd, Move Along

The mouth that roared is doing so again.

Colin Cowherd of Fox is doing what he does and that's take a completely negative stance against a popular person or trend just to create argument and clicks or viewers. In earlier times they called that being a blowhard.

Cowherd has jumped right on the post-Super Bowl launch Justin Fields train. He is urging the Bears to trade their quarterback again.

"In two years, he's been bad and bad," Cowherd said.

If that was true, he'd be just like Cowherd's program.

Cowherd went on a tirade about all the ways Fields hasn't put up big numbers yet, said he hasn't improved enough and that his offensive line is rated 14th by Pro Football Focus and has improved but Fields still is having trouble avoiding sacks.

"You can't use the O-line (excuse) anymore," Cowherd said.

Cowherd did admit Fields has a problem at receiver. That was big of him.

"He's more a Youtube star: sensational plays but the little stuff, footwork, accuracy (are lacking)," Cowherd maintained.

"If he struggles next year you'll get nothing for him," Cowherd screamed.

That's because Fields will be in the third year of his contract and his option on the fifth year would come due. By three years, if a quarterback hasn't produced, the stock will inevitably drop.

There are several problems with Cowherd's argument beyond the fact he urged them to go forward and draft Bryce Young, a 5-foot-9 1/2 quarterback who weighs about 180 pounds and isn't as fast of a runner as Fields.

1. The Bears' Vaunted O-Line

First, the offensive line improvement stuff was pure garbage.

Pro Football Focus might have ranked the Bears 14th last year, but that line isn't even intact now and when it was the stats were inflated by Fields himself.

Riley Reiff is an old tackle who is a free agent and out of contract. They pulled together more in the second half of the season because his play was better than the play they'd been getting at the position, but as Hawk Harrelson would say, "he gone." Michael Schofield was another player they got mixed play from at either guard because of injuries. He's also gone. The line they intended to use never existed and never played together because of Lucas Patrick's injuries. Sam Mustipher is a lower-level restricted free agent center and as such he could wind up leaving. If they like him, they can afford to keep him, though.

So they're pretty much starting from scratch on the line next year, not stepping forward as PFF's 14th-ranked line as Cowherd would have you believe.

Cowherd claimed they spent "a lot of draft capital" on that line and it started to improve.

What draft capital?

The draft capital was a second-round pick for Teven Jenkins, who missed almost fie full games and did play well when he was moved to a different position than the one where he originally was intended to play. Then he got hurt again, as his 19 games played out of a possible 33 indicates.

As for the rest of the "draft capital," fifth-round offensive linemen are usually throw-ins for trades. Braxton Jones and Larry Borom were fifth-rounders. That's it. That's what they spent. That's their draft capital for the offensive line.

Cody Whitehair doesn't count. He's been there since John Fox was only in Chicago one year.

.@ColinCowherd gives 4 reasons why the Bears should consider moving off Justin Fields...

"Put your pom poms down in Chicago." pic.twitter.com/aluQcHHibB
— Herd w/Colin Cowherd (@TheHerd) February 14, 2023

Big draft capital would have been a few first-rounders and a second-rounder, not a couple of undrafted free agents, veteran castoffs from other teams and a second-rounder who failed as a tackle and can't stay off the injury report.

It was an average run-blocking offensive line. They only seemed to have a good run-blocking line. When they were in short-yardage situations this always was evident. They got little push in those situations.

It was one of the worst pass-blocking offensive lines and the PFF grading system reflected this.

Why was it regarded as a better run-blocking offensive line? It wasn't because of yardage David Montgomery and Khalil Herbert made. Montgomery actually was just below 4.0 per carry. Herbert had a great year at yards per carry because of several big runs he made when defense overcompensated their front. They were doing this to stop Fields from running on zone reads to the other side.

Fields gained more yards and made more first downs than any quarterback could be expected to get and it helped the running game work.

He got very little of that yardage through good blocking, especially the drive-extending scrambles on third downs for first downs. Those plays are basically a poor pass-blocking line failing to get the job done. So Fields did what he must on his own and run.

2. Faulty Comparison

Second, Cowherd claimed he didn't see the same thing from Fields as from Justin Herbert, Josh Allen or Jalen Hurts as a second-year player.

He needs to look harder. Fields got rid of the ball in exactly the same time as Hurts did in his second year, according to NextGen Stats. It was 3.12 seconds. Fields' second year of play almost mirrored Hurts' second year stat-wise when it comes to improvement.

His second year was better than Allen's in many ways. Fields had a better passer rating and yards per attempt than Allen after two years.

Herbert is better. There's no doubt about that. He's better than a good many quarterbacks because he sticks in the pocket and throws but has enough mobility to escape. He also has had really good receivers, just like Joe Burrow. The other three quarterbacks Cowherd mentioned all relied too much on their legs early in their careers. Two have grown out of it with improved teams. Now it's Fields' turn, if they can improve the team.

One aspect of his argument was Fields was a highlight reel who couldn't make shorter passes. Fields, himself, admitted this and said he needs more work at the shorter stuff and on footwork. He'll try that again in Year 3 but only Year 2 with this offense.

3. Losers

Really, Cowherd is basing virtually all of what he said on the Bears' 3-14 record and 10-game losing streak.

Duh. Of course they're bad. They gutted the defense. They were 3-4 after seven games and tore out their defense's heart by getting rid of both Roquan Smith and Robert Quinn because they could get something back in return and neither was a prototypical player for the role they played in this defensive scheme.

They were third in pass defense in the league with no pass rush, then had a rash of injuries to their secondary and collapsed. They finished the year with their first five players missing between two and five games down the stretch. Meanwhile, they slid from third to 18th against the pass.

They scored 29 points against Dallas' vaunted defense and got beat by 20 points.

They never won again because their defense couldn't stand up to any offense on the ground or otherwise. It meant very little what Fields and the offense did because in the end their defense couldn't stop anyone when it mattered.

Pick Up Fields' Option Now

If Fields was so bad, how does Cowherd explain almost 30 points a game over a six-game stretch with no receivers?

The truth is Fields not only should be the quarterback going forward, they should have given him a medal for courage in the wake of trying circumstances, or a boost in pay.

Or maybe they should just pick up his fifth-year option now.

Then the point will be moot and people like Cowherd can move on to making contrarian arguments about some other topic for the sake of ratings or clicks.

Twitter: BearDigest@BearsOnMaven