I'm Sorry, But Justin Fields Is Still Not The Guy

Quinn Harris. Getty Images.

This thought popped into my head this morning and it's REALLY bothering me right now: If you ask Chief and a lot of other people why Tom Brady is the GOAT, they'll say "because he has 7 rings!!!" and it's so goddamn stupid to me. They won't mention how he played until he was 100 at an all pro level, his myriad passing records, or even his regular season W/L record…

…It's rings. People boil his career down to a 7 win sample instead of the other gazillion games he played in. 

It makes ZERO sense to me. I DETEST the "rings" argument for Brady because it takes 54 other players, a coaching staff and a front office all working in near perfect cohesion to win a Super Bowl. Just go look at a few of the rings Brady won where he wasn't great in the game. Then go look at a few of the Super Bowls he was on the losing end while lighting it the FUCK up through the air. 

Well if winning football games is first and foremost what makes a QB great, then Justin Fields completely SUCKS by that logic, as he's a paltry 11-28 in his career as a starter. 

You can't have it both ways, Chief. 

On a more specific note, a lot of Bears fans, myself included, feel that Sunday was Fields' best game as a Chicago Bear. He put up a great lil slash line of this: 

20-32 for 268 yards, 1 score, with 45 rush yards and a score 

Time and time again he made shit happen through the air and with his legs. It was a great performance and a performance that, once again, has shifted a lot of Chicago firmly into "Fields is the guy" territory, at least based on this poll: 

I don't understand it, personally. Fields was fantastic yesterday - but it was in week 17 against Taylor Heineke, Desmond Ridder and the 7-9 Atlanta Falcons. 

I'm sorry, it's just a day late and a dollar short from me. I've seen this movie time and time again, and very recently, in fact. I mean… just NINE DAYS AGO he only threw for 170 with a score and pick against the dog shit Cardinals. The week prior to that he was 19-40 for 166 against the Browns with no scores. 

In fact, you'd have to go all the way back to 10/5 where he threw for more 2 scores in a game and he's only thrown for more than 2 scores in a game twice all year, and it was in back to back games against DEN and WASH in early October. 

Next week the Bears travel to Lambeau Field. If Fields goes for say…21/32 for ~190 and a pick, are these people going to change their mind on Fields again? Because if we're following trends, that's the type of game we should expect out of Fields on Sunday. I hope I'm wrong because FUCK the Packers, but I won't be shocked if I'm not and neither should you. 

Eddie asked me on the last Midshow prior to the break if there was anything Fields could do in his final two games to make me change my stance on him. I honestly didn't think so, as ~40 starts, the new contract on the horizon, and the last chance to pick 1st overall for what is hopefully a long while is way too much for Fields to overcome for me personally. 

BUT WHAT ABOUT IF THEY ADD TO THE OFFENSIVE LINE AND RECEIVER CORPS THIS WINTER YOU ASSHOLE!!!!

Uhhhh… they did these things last offseason and when fans were saying the exact same thing. They have a legit 1 in Moore, extended Kmet, and had Mooney back in his contract year. Also drafted Scott, improved the OL through FA and the draft, and his numbers have only marginally improved, if that: 

Now, to a small extent, I'm using these "face value" stats (as I like to call them) to advance a narrative. Everyone on the other side of the fence does the exact same thing though. Sure, Fields has been better this year. Marginally, but he's been better. Some star that's gonna put the franchise on his back and make them Super Bowl contenders from now through his retirement?

Uhhhh no shot. At least not to me. 

I'm just pretty positive at this point that he's not a guy that will march through the playoffs, should he ever even get there. Is Williams that guy? Maybe? No idea, but I don't know that they're NOT the guy, either. Nevertheless, we'll see what Poles thinks over the next 3-4 months. I'll roll with whatever he decides is best. 

Until then, let the debates begin continue.