Bear Digest

Podcaster's call: Caleb Williams will be out of Chicago in 3 years

A former NFL player took the story on Seth Wickersham's book as gospel truth and found reasons to fire a salvo at the Bears quarterback during a WSCR interview.
Gene Chamberlain|
Ross Tucker, former NFL lineman, and former NFL lineman Tony Boselli (left) speak an event in London. Tucker has plenty of doubts about Caleb Williams, many based on flimsy evidence.
Ross Tucker, former NFL lineman, and former NFL lineman Tony Boselli (left) speak an event in London. Tucker has plenty of doubts about Caleb Williams, many based on flimsy evidence. | Kirby Lee-Imagn Images

In this story:

Chicago Bears

Bears fans usually can't take much criticism of their players from outside sources, whether it's the local media, national media or opposing fans.

It's the old, "Hey, you can't trash our guys; only we can trash our guys," type of thing.

Still, what podcaster and former NFL player Ross Tucker said went to a new level of infuriating Bears fans on social media.

While making an appearance on WSCR's Mully & Haugh, Tucker did what really bothers Bears fans most and that's criticize Caleb Williams. He closed out his segment with a qualifier—disingenuous or otherwise—saying he hopes he's wrong, but then landed the insightful or inciteful blow.

"Like, if I had to bet, OK, is Caleb Williams going to be the Bears' starting quarterback in three years, I probably would bet 'No,' if I had to bet yes or no right now just based on what we've seen so far," Tucker told Mike Mulligan and David Haugh.

Tucker had begun his talk with what he called "bad news."

"I have major concerns about Caleb Williams," he said. "Like, major concerns. It feels to me like more often than not he does the wrong thing."

This was summarizing, in part, the entire Seth Wickersham book and story about it. It's difficult to argue his point about saying Williams does the wrong thing in this case. He definitely did here ... if he was the one who was actually talking to Wickersham at all. But that's the point.

"We can have an argument about whether or not it's an issue that he and his dad were thinking about trying to avoid the Bears," Tucker said. "I don't have any, like, problem with that. ... Why would you tell a writer this? Why would you be talking about this with a writer and then not go through with it. I mean, that's my biggest issue.

"I feel like he either gets really bad advice or his awareness rating on Madden needs to go down like 30 points because I also thought it was a really, really poor decision for him to not address it this week Because it's going to get addressed. Right? People are going to ask him about it the first time they're allowed to ask him about it. So why would you want to drag it on? Right?"

Tucker said Williams easily could have put it all away immediately and he's right in that regard.

"Like he should have Monday come on and 'Yep, you know, my dad was talking to a guy back then, I had some concerns but when I came out here to Halas Hall and met everybody I thought, nope, you know what? I want to do this but, yeah, we had some concerns early on just because of the history.' Boom. It's over."

The big problem with his criticism is he assumes too much of what might have been said by Carl Williams to Wickersham is gospel. None of that is clear and that's why this story by ESPN was a great teaser for the book that doesn't come out until September. No one can be sure about anything or the context.

Tucker should have quit while ahead or simply putting his faith in a story he knows nothing about. But he didn't quit there. He challenged the notion the former coaching staff was at fault for Williams not being able to watch film properly. And he tried to point more blame at Williams himself by defending Matt Eberflus at the end of the Thanksgiving game when he ate the timeout and the game ended.

No one really knows yet what exactly was meant by Williams when he supposedly told his father he was told how to simply turn on the game film and then they left him alone.

That is an entire unknown because of the sketchy way it is presented by the article on Wickersham's book. What does it mean? Could he not watch film at all, were the coaches not indicating anything to him, is he just a QB who skated all the way through USC and three years with Lincoln Riley without ever watching film?

None of this is clear from the ESPN story and won't be until the book comes out, but to use this as a reason or doubting Williams shows everything Tucker argues is drivel because it might based on something that possibly never happened.

He should stick with what he knows is true and one thing is certain—the coaching staff proved it couldn't handle the end of games so it's easy to believe they couldn't develop a quarterback.

Subsequent information to come out after the firing of Eberflus from other coaches confirmed Williams could not call timeouts at the end of the Lions game. The staff didn't allow him to do it. Eberflus had to call it. And Williams was doing the right thing with an audible because the play call never would have worked against Detroit's defense. He just didn't get it communicated in time to let a play like that work. What Williams should have done was simply said 'to hell with coaching rules, we're losing the game if we don't get a timeout' and called it himself.

Either way, Tucker comes across as not paying close enough attention to the terrible mistakes of the coaching staff before (Hail Mary) and also during that one game and gives too much credit to reported quotes that may have been second hand or sloppy interpretations of what someone other than Williams himself said.

He's assuming too much of the story on the book is gospel. You know what happens when you assume.

He's also giving way too much credit to a coach who went 14-32, and showed total incompetence by losing close games or games he led with two different starting QBs and with an upgraded defensive personnel.

Of course there's reason to believe Williams wasn't coached properly after three years of obvious slapstick. By September there could be reasons to wonder why anyone cared about something Williams' father said in the first quarter of 2024.

One thing is certain: There's no doubt who determines truth and fantasy at Halas Hall right now.

More Chicago Bears News

X: BearsOnSI

Published | Modified
Gene Chamberlain
GENE CHAMBERLAIN

Gene Chamberlain has covered the Chicago Bears full time as a beat writer since 1994 and prior to this on a part-time basis for 10 years. He covered the Bears as a beat writer for Suburban Chicago Newspapers, the Daily Southtown, Copley News Service and has been a contributor for the Daily Herald, the Associated Press, Bear Report, CBS Sports.com and The Sporting News. He also has worked a prep sports writer for Tribune Newspapers and Sun-Times newspapers.