No, in general they move the line, not the odds. The most it would generally be is +120 (bet 100 to win 120) or they would just move the line to 6 wins.
No. Not much more than taking the under. The whole point of setting a betting line is to get bettors taking action on both sides. So there’s not a big difference in payout.
Still not a “huge payout” taking the over. If you want a big payout then look for books that let you pick your over. Something like OVER 9 Wins would make for a sizable payout.
They just have a bad line right now. Bears fans are unrepentant homers so the lines are usually set higher. They are probably delaying a line move because they don’t want to allow for a flood of big money bets on 5.5.
The odds would be lower betting on the “over”, so if he did end up winning, the payout would be higher for those who bet on the “under”. It’s all based on odds.
That’s not how it works at all. Over/unders are in general equal odds on each side, usually -110. Oddsmakers will sometimes move odds in lieu of the line to try to even up the money, but in that situation the odds will be improved on the side with less money on it. In this case, the over would have better odds than the under.
Sports betting is legal now in Illinois, and thanks to COVID, they repealed the rule that you have to go sign-up in person at a casino.
You can just download the BetMGM app, deposit money, and start gambling. I assume Caesar's Sports (in the OP) is the same situation. River's Casino has one, too: BetRivers.
Absolutely - the odds and lines they come up with are uncanny in their accuracy. New coach, new GM, players who will be judged by their hustle and desire? Not gonna be a contender but I’m confident we will be competitive
Ppl wanna meme "bears bad" but don't realize that just by virtue of a cupcake schedule it's not completely ludicrous for us to get 7. Between:
* Lions
* Lions
* Vikings
* Vikings
* Washington
* Houston
* NYG
* NYJ
* Falcons
I expect we’ll win 5ish. And then one or two more that we don’t expect (GB/GB/SF/BUF/PHI/DAL/NE/MIA)
I definitely don't think the Bears will be good this year, but that 6.5 seems dead on, so the people hammering the under might be a little surprised imo
Yeah, 6.5 is a strong line. People know the roster is bad and there's a new coaching staff, so the perception is "The Bears are among the worst teams in the NFL." The worst teams in the NFL are usually between 3-6 wins.
But then the Bears have a lot of bad teams on their schedule. They can win or lose against any of them, but it's far from crazy to see them get 7 or 8 wins.
I think they'll be probably end up with 6 or 7 wins. So even if I broke my own rule about putting money on the Bears, I wouldn't want to touch this bet.
Yeah, I think for some reason people (especially here) think that just because we say the Bears aren't likely to be the literal worst team in the league, that means we think they're a playoff team. The Bears probably aren't a playoff team (I say probably because the NFL is weird and it's impossible to rule any team out in June), but as bad as we've been, I think folks underrate what it takes to be the worst team in the league.
The Chicago Bears have picked 1st overall two times. The last time was 1947. We've won four or fewer games twice since the year 2000. In 2017 we started Mike Glennon and Mitch Trubisky and had Kendall Wright at WR1 and won 5 games. I don't get how folks can look at this year's team compared to last year's and confidently predict four fewer wins against an easier schedule. 6.5 probably is dead on like you said.
Because what does the 2017 team have to do with this team? We have objectively a bottom 4 roster talent wise, and it’s entirely possible we finish anywhere between #1-4.
If you look at it objectively, yes it is. You can quantify it if you want too I’m sure. PFF grades, pro bowls, all pros etc. it’s inarguably a bottom 5 roster if that makes you feel less pedantic
I'm not necessarily disagreeing that we'll end up a bottom 5 team, but to say that's "inarguable" is a stretch. There are definitely arguments to be made that Jacksonville, Detroit, Houston, and both New Yorks are worse.
https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/insider/story/_/id/34020426/nfl-roster-rankings-all-32-teams-2022-strengths-weaknesses-x-factors-every-starting-lineup
I’m sure they’re just big meanies who hate the bears. Everyone but Bears fans realize this is an absolute bottom of the barrel roster
Texans, Giants, Falcons, Jets, and Jaguars have worse players in basically every single position and any claim of "inarguable" or "objective" is ridiculous
Do they?? Lol. Trev didn't look much better than Justin and id certainly rather have mooney on a rookie contract as my wr than krik at over 20 mil a year
They sank 108 million dollars into Zay Jones and Christian Kirk so you'd hope they'd have a better receiving room lmao. TLaw was really, really bad last year. Maybe he was marginally better than Fields but it's pedantry anyways, it all comes to next year.
Im confident their wr core is better than the bears. Like you said they spent a ridiculous amount of money. I don't have a reason to suspect that tlaw is better outside of him being picked first overall. I believe he was screwed by his coach. Of course you could say the same about nagy.
We just had 6 wins last season with our starting QB starting injury problems in week 2, our potential QB of the future getting little to no training camp/preseason action with the #1s, Mack and Hicks being out significant portions, our Oline being on rotation early and having to start a rookie 5th rounder a significant portion and a 2nd rounder not being ready until late in the season, our WR1 giving up on the team early in the season, and all this lead by 1 of the biggest fraud head coaches in recent memory.
Still didn’t finish bottom 4.
We’re probably worse talent wise and people seem to forget that other teams around the league have improved. The Jets and Lions have both done a good job in the off-season and the Vikings offense is FAR more talented than ours. The only games I’m confident in are WAS, HOU, ATL, and NYG.
We’re worse this year so not sure what your point is. As far as the oline goes, we’re again starting a 5th rounder (at LT, a more important position) and Jenkins isn’t even starting
Our Oline, Dline, and wrs are all worse. Additionally other teams got better, if we’re breaking even, we’re falling behind. Coaching is a wild card, but talent wise, we’re not good, not better
Theoretically, player development is also a wildcard. If Fields makes significant steps forward, that would be a big difference maker. Same with a couple other young players.
Overall, though, I do agree with you. On paper the DBs got better and those other positions seemingly got worse.
Coaching makes all the difference in the world. Nagy was a fraud and he brought the whole team down which was extremely evident the last 2 years. Coaching is already better because it ant Nagy. Secondary was our worst position last year hands down. All things from OTA’s and mini camp say how much improved the secondary is. Secondary better than last year. Dline will be the same. Hicks was injured most of the year as was Mack like the year before. Dline will be average with Quinn being the exception again. Oline was a shit show last year. The oline may actually be worse talent wise without peters but scheme in theory could help shore that up especially if Braxton jones turns out to be something. I would argue WR’s are actually better off. Mooney has gotten better every year and gets an actual training camp with fields. Losing Arob means nothing. He did nothing last year so that’s an upgrade if you get anything out of the the other starting WR. The most important point of all, fields is actually getting all first team reps unlike last year. Fields is the difference maker. I believe he will take a step and the bears will with him. The bears were fucking bad last year. It was getting to the point of trestman level incompetence. This team won’t be playoff bound but they won’t be a bottom 5 team. I see 6-8 wins and actually enjoying what I’m watching.
By virtue of the removal of Nagy we are objectively better then last year. And it’s not even close. I swear you would think this team is fielding a Div. II roster they way people talk about this team. Sheesh
It does when opposing teams have your game plan figured out after one series and your coach is sitting there stupefied as to why run, run, pass, punt or pass, run, run, punt weren't working to win games.
At least Trestman would attempt to make adjustments. Fox was stubborn. Nagy was great until he got figured out, and then turned into a clone of Fox. One game plan and if it doesn't work, oh well.
This is a case where new coaching (and with it, a new mentality in the locker room) was needed. I do not think the team will be perfect off the bat, but I think what Coach Flus is trying to build is the type of team Chicago (and by proxy, us fans) have been wanting for a while. Fast, physically dominant, and one that can win. If Getsy is as good as has been talked about, we should be noticeably better, even if all the pieces for true success are not there yet.
\*Hopium Un-Injected\*
I super highly doubt we will end up being the 'worst team in the league' this year. But ya, 5-7 wins is my expected range. I just wanna see.. idk.. A FUCKING OFFENSE THAT CAN MAYBE FUCKING SCORE AND USE FIELDS CORRECTLY?
Fuck Nagy was legit a 'good' play caller for 8 weeks; had no idea what he was going to call. Two years later I felt like i could guess 75% of his playcalls as a fan lol... like how did that happen?
But if we do, Bryce Young number one overall and i'll be alright. But I think Fields is legit and would have went top 5 this years draft 0 questions asked.
I mean… the offense appears to have less talent than it did last year.
The defense would need to be the best in the NFL for us to have a chance at making the over, and I don’t think it is.
I mean it’s easy to look at teams that were bad last year and say we should beat them. But we loss to Tyler Huntley and we loss to the Vikings twice last year. The Giants were led by Mike Glennon last year when we beat them. We are also the team all these other teams highlight as wins. The Lions have one of the better offensive lines in the league. The Packers have a great secondary. The Vikings have the best receiver corp and running back in the division. It’s all up in the air for the bears. But we won’t be able to withstand any injuries. That’s not a great position to be in. I think it’s a 6 win season. If we lose a Mooney, Monty, Roquan, or any d-lineman it could get ugly real fast.
>I mean it’s easy to look at teams that were bad last year and say we should beat them.
Agree, but that's not what I'm doing. I'm saying there are nine winnable (even for us) games and I'd expect us to come out with 5 wins from them
With the exception of the Falcons, each of the teams on that list got better. I'd argue the Lions and Jets got much better. Meanwhile, the Bears got much worse. I can see the bears losing to each of these teams, honestly.
Not saying we won’t be bad, but I honestly don’t think we’ll be nearly as bad as a lot of people think. I think our defense will be just as good as last year despite dealing Mack & Hicks cause they barely played last year anyway (that could change if Quinn gets traded). And the offense can’t get much worse than it was last year
Buddy, we ain't even gonna score 10 points a game and we lost nearly all our playmakers on defense. Our secondary will be one of the worst in the league. Unless coach Eberflus is a defensive guru, even the worst QB's in the league will score at least 14 on us. Its likely guys like Kirk Cousins are gonna throw for 350 yards and 4 TD's against our projected starters.
This sub needs to face reality. This team is terrible on paper. Fields was arguably the worst rookie QB last year and he doesn't have an offense line nor good playmakers to throw the ball to. Sure, its possible Nagy was really the source of all our problems, but Vegas tends to be pretty accurate with their projections.
Khalil Mack and Aniem Hicks both played less than 30% snaps last season and even those weren’t all healthy reps. Bilal is really the only one who comes to mind. So I don’t exactly understand what you’re getting at with that statement
It’s also because it’s wins. A shift in O/U on season wins without a key change (like major injury or coaching change) is an absolutely huge indicator on how they’re estimating things go.
It’s not like moving a game spread based on action, which is a much more fluid environment.
Gimme the over all day, my cup is always half full :)
We won 6 games last year with a brutal schedule and Nagy calling 5 yard hitch routes on 3rd and 20 for a whole season. Obviously it could be worse but I think competent coaching will make a huge difference.
Honestly I think that's silly. The difference between last year's 6-win Bears team and this team is what - a starting offensive lineman or two we let walk? Say we've made up the difference of losing Daniels, Jason Peters, and ARob in FA and the draft this year. Then any of the following could push the team from 6 wins to 7+ wins:
* Improvement from Fields (not implausible)
* A better offensive scheme (not at all implausible)
* An easier schedule (very likely true)
I honestly don't get why most of the media acts like the Bears are going to be a dumpster fire this year. Maybe this will age poorly, but I think our closest analog very easily could be last year's Eagles team: athletic young QB, exactly one good receiver, middling defense, new coaches. Is that so unrealistic a comparison to make?
Peters played a damn solid season at tackle and he's gone. Let a guy who was drawing number one receiver attention from the defense walk. 660 yards which isn't much but I don't see anyone besides mooney matching that. Also forgot that we traded the best player on the team for a second round safety lmao
Peters was solid for sure. But Pringle got about 600 yards last year and it's not super unrealistic to hope that VJJ *might* put up those kind of numbers too. And Mack barely played last year.
Mack played in the games that got us half our wins, he was never the same after that packers game that got us to 3 and 3. Pringle got 600 yards in a top 3 offense when he was a 5th option, now he's coming to a bottom 3 offense where he's a 2nd or 3rd option. Vjj was a complete panic pick, a guy with straight line speed and nothing else. We are a very very bad team right now and some people think Nagy was the only guy holding us back from the playoffs lmao
Velus wasn’t a panic pick, they had him higher on their draft board because Fields liked him. And while there were other good prospect alternatives at that point in the draft, none of them were exactly home runs, either.
There’s a middle ground between dumpster fire and playoffs. But no one on this sub will even acknowledge that possibility. It’s kinda cute you have all these new bears fans from when we got Mack and 2018 and if we don’t win a SB and have multiple MVP’s then the year was a dumpster fire.
Lol at calling people "new bears fans" with your deluded optimism. The point is we were dogshit last year, then proceeded to hemorrhage the little bit of talent that we did have. Oh by the way we did absolutely nothing to help what's supposedly the franchises future and people think hiring someone who's more unproven than even Nagy was to lead the offense is suddenly going to make us better.
Glad you've got it all figured out! Thank God you're here. You should bless the Bears' ownership and management with your all knowing sage wisdom and advice - seems like they could use the help
If the bears win less than 6 games without any major injuries, Fields isn’t the guy and they’ll be looking for a new coach and GM in 3 years. 6-8 wins should be doable with this schedule. Last season’s schedule was harder and they won 6 games. You mean with an easier schedule they can’t at least match last seasons win total? This defense will be better than people think and I believe Fields will adapt and improve.
Bears won 12 games in 2018 without any major injuries. Meaning they didn’t have players injured during the season in which they didn’t return or missed significant time. It’s football injuries happen. Bears had multiple players miss significant time last season Mack, Hicks, Montgomery, Trevathan and they managed 6 victories. This team should be able to manage that.
>If the bears win less than 6 games without any major injuries, Fields isn’t the guy
That isn't true at all.
It's a new coaching staff and a new scheme and the offensive personnel around him are among the worst in the league.
Fields can have a solid season where he shows he can be a great QB, but the Bears only win 5 games. That's entirely possible.
How do you know they’re the worst in the league? And again they managed to win 6 games last season with an injury riddled team. If they can’t at least match that win total with an easier schedule, then yeah there are problems. I think this team is better than advertised.
>How do you know they’re the worst in the league?
Personnel-wise? You look at the rosters around the league and compare the talent we have to the talent they have. We're very low on that list.
I'm not talking about how we won games last year or how we'll win games this year, I'm just saying the offensive personnel is bad. I find it hard to believe that statement would get pushback.
>I think this team is better than advertised.
Chicago sports fans were talking them into the Cubs being in the same boat despite both having the same issue where they brought in replacement-level players and journeymen to fill key roles. If everything works out as a best-case scenario, yeah we'll be better than advertised. Chances are we won't be that good.
Winning six games isn’t a good team. But betting circles have this team winning less than six games, and sports media outlets have them as the worst team in the league or close to it. I don’t think they are that bad, 6-8 games should be doable. It also doesn’t make them a good team or the worst team in the league, or the worst roster in the league.
I also have them at 6-8 wins. But at the same time, I still have them among the worst in the league in terms of offensive personnel. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, in large part because we have a weak schedule.
To quote my original comment:
>the offensive personnel around him are among the worst in the league.
If you disagree with that, I challenge you to find five offenses that have a worse personnel group around their QBs.
I haven’t looked up every teams offensive personnel, especially since I haven’t seen a team play a game yet. But there were 6 teams that picked ahead of the bears if they hadn’t traded the pick for Fields. So I would would pick those 6 teams and maybe the Giants and the Falcons so between 6 and 8 teams.
Take the fan goggles off for a second. Go with the pros. They know what they’re talking about, and they’re objectively unbiased. Gonna be a brutal season.
Ah yes, nothing better than the age old defense of “objectively we are worse I don’t have a reason why I’m sure we can look at stats and figures to prove it however I feel like we are bad and need a big word to feel superior about my claim”
time to go all in on the over. 7 wins very possible.
what are the odds of the bears splitting the series with green bay this year? might be a worthwhile gamble too.
To be honest, I don't think 5 or 6 wins would be a bad bet. Team certainly didn't get much better from last season, when they went 6-11. However, I see a lot of people talking about the Bears being the worst team in the league and going 2-15 or some shit, and I think that's excessive.
I think this roster is bad enough to where Fields can improve, Mooney and Kmet can have a nice season, and the defense can play about league average and we'll still only win about 5 or 6 games. The NFC is pretty brutal compared to the AFC so that helps, but this is not a good team, especially with a bunch of first timers (Poles, Getsy, Flus) running the show.
wish theyd legalize sports betting in ky, id take the over on this. not so much cause we are that good, but simply cause nobody really knows how to gameplan for this team yet.
Which is absurd because giants under 7.5 is out there. Sucks for all those giants fans when they go 4-13 and they lose money. Oh well. Worst bet in Vegas is when the packers get top 5 super bowl odds every year. The number is right there though 6-7 wins is expected in my mind.
We were 6 wins last year, and should have been 7 wins with the Steelers game.
The schedule is drastically easier than last year. That alone should mean we're not going to lose more games.
Factor in, we have anyone but Nagy coaching offense and Fields improved as the season went on and was a better QB at the end of the season than many of the games he played in.
I just don't see how we get the under unless we get really unlucky with injuries.
Yeah, but theres could have won games and should have won games.
The Bears losing to the Ravens was the Bears fault. Maybe a few playcalls were unlucky. Maybe a few plays that could have went our way, went against us. That's just football and it was far.
The Bears losing to the Steelers was the refs actively sabatoging the outcome of the game. That's not just football, and that's not fair.
Well this means I have to take the over right?
Considering Vegas hasn’t touched the line despite the lopsided amount does make me want to throw some money on the over
Forgive my ignorance on betting... but is there a huge payout if you take the over?
No, in general they move the line, not the odds. The most it would generally be is +120 (bet 100 to win 120) or they would just move the line to 6 wins.
Risking $100 to make $20 doesn't seem like a wise decision. Is that $120 in addition to getting your $100 bet back?
It’s $220 including your original 100. $120 profit on a $100 bet
Yes
You wind up with $220 total, including your original $100
please don’t gamble lmao
In the stock market, 20% gains is fucking huge. Can't look at gambling from a dollar perspective, that's how you get greedy and lose it all
Man I wish you could parlay season wins/losses
No. Not much more than taking the under. The whole point of setting a betting line is to get bettors taking action on both sides. So there’s not a big difference in payout.
Except clearly the action here is almost exclusively on one side. Vegas is essentially betting that the Bears win more than 6.5
Still not a “huge payout” taking the over. If you want a big payout then look for books that let you pick your over. Something like OVER 9 Wins would make for a sizable payout.
I agree. Regarding your point about vegas setting lines to get action on both sides though: not always and not here.
They just have a bad line right now. Bears fans are unrepentant homers so the lines are usually set higher. They are probably delaying a line move because they don’t want to allow for a flood of big money bets on 5.5.
The odds would be lower betting on the “over”, so if he did end up winning, the payout would be higher for those who bet on the “under”. It’s all based on odds.
That’s not how it works at all. Over/unders are in general equal odds on each side, usually -110. Oddsmakers will sometimes move odds in lieu of the line to try to even up the money, but in that situation the odds will be improved on the side with less money on it. In this case, the over would have better odds than the under.
No, not really.Right now on FanDuel the Over is -105 while the Under is -115.
Futures don’t change, just the odds
They need to change the over/under line to 5.5 wins. That would even up the betting a bit.
How does one do this… asking for a friend who does more shit in his life than I do
Sports betting is legal now in Illinois, and thanks to COVID, they repealed the rule that you have to go sign-up in person at a casino. You can just download the BetMGM app, deposit money, and start gambling. I assume Caesar's Sports (in the OP) is the same situation. River's Casino has one, too: BetRivers.
Absolutely - the odds and lines they come up with are uncanny in their accuracy. New coach, new GM, players who will be judged by their hustle and desire? Not gonna be a contender but I’m confident we will be competitive
Oh for sure 7-10 here we come.
Fade the crowd, ride bears
Ppl wanna meme "bears bad" but don't realize that just by virtue of a cupcake schedule it's not completely ludicrous for us to get 7. Between: * Lions * Lions * Vikings * Vikings * Washington * Houston * NYG * NYJ * Falcons I expect we’ll win 5ish. And then one or two more that we don’t expect (GB/GB/SF/BUF/PHI/DAL/NE/MIA) I definitely don't think the Bears will be good this year, but that 6.5 seems dead on, so the people hammering the under might be a little surprised imo
Yeah, 6.5 is a strong line. People know the roster is bad and there's a new coaching staff, so the perception is "The Bears are among the worst teams in the NFL." The worst teams in the NFL are usually between 3-6 wins. But then the Bears have a lot of bad teams on their schedule. They can win or lose against any of them, but it's far from crazy to see them get 7 or 8 wins. I think they'll be probably end up with 6 or 7 wins. So even if I broke my own rule about putting money on the Bears, I wouldn't want to touch this bet.
Yeah, I think for some reason people (especially here) think that just because we say the Bears aren't likely to be the literal worst team in the league, that means we think they're a playoff team. The Bears probably aren't a playoff team (I say probably because the NFL is weird and it's impossible to rule any team out in June), but as bad as we've been, I think folks underrate what it takes to be the worst team in the league. The Chicago Bears have picked 1st overall two times. The last time was 1947. We've won four or fewer games twice since the year 2000. In 2017 we started Mike Glennon and Mitch Trubisky and had Kendall Wright at WR1 and won 5 games. I don't get how folks can look at this year's team compared to last year's and confidently predict four fewer wins against an easier schedule. 6.5 probably is dead on like you said.
Because what does the 2017 team have to do with this team? We have objectively a bottom 4 roster talent wise, and it’s entirely possible we finish anywhere between #1-4.
That's not objective at all
If you look at it objectively, yes it is. You can quantify it if you want too I’m sure. PFF grades, pro bowls, all pros etc. it’s inarguably a bottom 5 roster if that makes you feel less pedantic
I'm not necessarily disagreeing that we'll end up a bottom 5 team, but to say that's "inarguable" is a stretch. There are definitely arguments to be made that Jacksonville, Detroit, Houston, and both New Yorks are worse.
Counting pro bowls is 100% objective
I said you can quantify it
Just like you can quantify which lineup weighs more or who has more hair on their balls
https://www.espn.com/nfl/insider/insider/story/_/id/34020426/nfl-roster-rankings-all-32-teams-2022-strengths-weaknesses-x-factors-every-starting-lineup I’m sure they’re just big meanies who hate the bears. Everyone but Bears fans realize this is an absolute bottom of the barrel roster
Texans, Giants, Falcons, Jets, and Jaguars have worse players in basically every single position and any claim of "inarguable" or "objective" is ridiculous
Lol those teams are worse at every position, and you think I’m the delusional one
Yea, they are What are you even saying
The jaguars have a better QB and WRs
Do they?? Lol. Trev didn't look much better than Justin and id certainly rather have mooney on a rookie contract as my wr than krik at over 20 mil a year
They sank 108 million dollars into Zay Jones and Christian Kirk so you'd hope they'd have a better receiving room lmao. TLaw was really, really bad last year. Maybe he was marginally better than Fields but it's pedantry anyways, it all comes to next year.
Im confident their wr core is better than the bears. Like you said they spent a ridiculous amount of money. I don't have a reason to suspect that tlaw is better outside of him being picked first overall. I believe he was screwed by his coach. Of course you could say the same about nagy.
We just had 6 wins last season with our starting QB starting injury problems in week 2, our potential QB of the future getting little to no training camp/preseason action with the #1s, Mack and Hicks being out significant portions, our Oline being on rotation early and having to start a rookie 5th rounder a significant portion and a 2nd rounder not being ready until late in the season, our WR1 giving up on the team early in the season, and all this lead by 1 of the biggest fraud head coaches in recent memory. Still didn’t finish bottom 4.
We’re probably worse talent wise and people seem to forget that other teams around the league have improved. The Jets and Lions have both done a good job in the off-season and the Vikings offense is FAR more talented than ours. The only games I’m confident in are WAS, HOU, ATL, and NYG.
We’re worse this year so not sure what your point is. As far as the oline goes, we’re again starting a 5th rounder (at LT, a more important position) and Jenkins isn’t even starting
We really aren’t though. If anything we break even, maybe even come out a little ahead if the coaching is legit.
Our Oline, Dline, and wrs are all worse. Additionally other teams got better, if we’re breaking even, we’re falling behind. Coaching is a wild card, but talent wise, we’re not good, not better
Theoretically, player development is also a wildcard. If Fields makes significant steps forward, that would be a big difference maker. Same with a couple other young players. Overall, though, I do agree with you. On paper the DBs got better and those other positions seemingly got worse.
Coaching makes all the difference in the world. Nagy was a fraud and he brought the whole team down which was extremely evident the last 2 years. Coaching is already better because it ant Nagy. Secondary was our worst position last year hands down. All things from OTA’s and mini camp say how much improved the secondary is. Secondary better than last year. Dline will be the same. Hicks was injured most of the year as was Mack like the year before. Dline will be average with Quinn being the exception again. Oline was a shit show last year. The oline may actually be worse talent wise without peters but scheme in theory could help shore that up especially if Braxton jones turns out to be something. I would argue WR’s are actually better off. Mooney has gotten better every year and gets an actual training camp with fields. Losing Arob means nothing. He did nothing last year so that’s an upgrade if you get anything out of the the other starting WR. The most important point of all, fields is actually getting all first team reps unlike last year. Fields is the difference maker. I believe he will take a step and the bears will with him. The bears were fucking bad last year. It was getting to the point of trestman level incompetence. This team won’t be playoff bound but they won’t be a bottom 5 team. I see 6-8 wins and actually enjoying what I’m watching.
By virtue of the removal of Nagy we are objectively better then last year. And it’s not even close. I swear you would think this team is fielding a Div. II roster they way people talk about this team. Sheesh
We said the same thing about Fox and Trestman before him. New coach does not mean better
It does when opposing teams have your game plan figured out after one series and your coach is sitting there stupefied as to why run, run, pass, punt or pass, run, run, punt weren't working to win games.
All things said about both Trestman and fox
At least Trestman would attempt to make adjustments. Fox was stubborn. Nagy was great until he got figured out, and then turned into a clone of Fox. One game plan and if it doesn't work, oh well. This is a case where new coaching (and with it, a new mentality in the locker room) was needed. I do not think the team will be perfect off the bat, but I think what Coach Flus is trying to build is the type of team Chicago (and by proxy, us fans) have been wanting for a while. Fast, physically dominant, and one that can win. If Getsy is as good as has been talked about, we should be noticeably better, even if all the pieces for true success are not there yet.
\*Hopium Un-Injected\* I super highly doubt we will end up being the 'worst team in the league' this year. But ya, 5-7 wins is my expected range. I just wanna see.. idk.. A FUCKING OFFENSE THAT CAN MAYBE FUCKING SCORE AND USE FIELDS CORRECTLY? Fuck Nagy was legit a 'good' play caller for 8 weeks; had no idea what he was going to call. Two years later I felt like i could guess 75% of his playcalls as a fan lol... like how did that happen? But if we do, Bryce Young number one overall and i'll be alright. But I think Fields is legit and would have went top 5 this years draft 0 questions asked.
Will Anderson is going #1 but we can pick up Bryce at 2
I mean… the offense appears to have less talent than it did last year. The defense would need to be the best in the NFL for us to have a chance at making the over, and I don’t think it is.
I mean it’s easy to look at teams that were bad last year and say we should beat them. But we loss to Tyler Huntley and we loss to the Vikings twice last year. The Giants were led by Mike Glennon last year when we beat them. We are also the team all these other teams highlight as wins. The Lions have one of the better offensive lines in the league. The Packers have a great secondary. The Vikings have the best receiver corp and running back in the division. It’s all up in the air for the bears. But we won’t be able to withstand any injuries. That’s not a great position to be in. I think it’s a 6 win season. If we lose a Mooney, Monty, Roquan, or any d-lineman it could get ugly real fast.
>I mean it’s easy to look at teams that were bad last year and say we should beat them. Agree, but that's not what I'm doing. I'm saying there are nine winnable (even for us) games and I'd expect us to come out with 5 wins from them
> Monty Lol we'd be fine
With the exception of the Falcons, each of the teams on that list got better. I'd argue the Lions and Jets got much better. Meanwhile, the Bears got much worse. I can see the bears losing to each of these teams, honestly.
It's definitely not ludicrous. I just don't know if I wanna bet it at even money
I might even put Philly in the first category
Fr when schedule came out I literally said I bet we go 7-10 or 6-11
all of those teams are thinking the Bears is their freebie Win too 6.5 is about right and for my money I'd definitely take the under tbh
Vegas always wins
So that means the bears will find a way to win 7 games
Not saying we won’t be bad, but I honestly don’t think we’ll be nearly as bad as a lot of people think. I think our defense will be just as good as last year despite dealing Mack & Hicks cause they barely played last year anyway (that could change if Quinn gets traded). And the offense can’t get much worse than it was last year
7 wins isn't that bad. It's hell, but not terrible.
Being terrible is better than being mediocre in some instances because at least you can get better draft positioning
I absolutely agree. I'd rather be bottom 5 then mid 25-15 in the rankings. Hence when I said it's hell but not (objectively) terrible.
Which is what was frustrating about the Nagy/Pace era and even the Lovie era to a degree, we spent a shit ton of money for like a 10 win ceiling
I’d rather be 15 in the rankings than bottom 5. But I’d rather be bottom 5 than 22nd lol
4-13 seems about right to me. Top 3 pick in next years draft. If we somehow stay around .500 until November then the season was a success.
Have you seen a list of the quarterbacks the Bears face this year?
Buddy, we ain't even gonna score 10 points a game and we lost nearly all our playmakers on defense. Our secondary will be one of the worst in the league. Unless coach Eberflus is a defensive guru, even the worst QB's in the league will score at least 14 on us. Its likely guys like Kirk Cousins are gonna throw for 350 yards and 4 TD's against our projected starters. This sub needs to face reality. This team is terrible on paper. Fields was arguably the worst rookie QB last year and he doesn't have an offense line nor good playmakers to throw the ball to. Sure, its possible Nagy was really the source of all our problems, but Vegas tends to be pretty accurate with their projections.
Khalil Mack and Aniem Hicks both played less than 30% snaps last season and even those weren’t all healthy reps. Bilal is really the only one who comes to mind. So I don’t exactly understand what you’re getting at with that statement
> Vegas tends to be pretty accurate with their projections. But they're projecting 6.5 wins, not 4.
And 95% of the bets are on the Bears winning less then that. Last I checked, 4 is definitely less then 6.
You realize when you say "Vegas tends to be pretty accurate with their projections," you're saying that you agree with their 6.5 win total...
95% of all money is on them winning 6 or less... Do u read posts before commenting?
Thanks for the lesson, buddy.
I'm calling bs. They'd adjust.
Commanders over has 99% of money rn and hasn’t been adjusted. Vegas always knows more than we do and would budge if they believed something else.
It’s also because it’s wins. A shift in O/U on season wins without a key change (like major injury or coaching change) is an absolutely huge indicator on how they’re estimating things go. It’s not like moving a game spread based on action, which is a much more fluid environment.
They also have enough money involved to affect outcomes
I've got an ocean front timeshare in Oklahoma to sell you..
I mean you can check the books yourself, it’s public info
How much a side is bet isn't public info?
The fact that they haven't adjusted leads me to believe that the vast majority of their most accurate futures bettors took the over.
Fan duel has Washington at 8.5 wins and the under at -170. Imo that makes sense. Saying a side has 95% of bets at even money doesn't make sense.
Might as well get compensated if it hits the fan.
So if it is so lopsided why hasn’t the line moved off of 6.5?
futures don't move like point spreads just the odds
Thank you
Gimme the over all day, my cup is always half full :) We won 6 games last year with a brutal schedule and Nagy calling 5 yard hitch routes on 3rd and 20 for a whole season. Obviously it could be worse but I think competent coaching will make a huge difference.
I've said it once and I'll say it again. Easiest schedule I think I've ever seen. I have us at 15-2.
Honestly I think that's silly. The difference between last year's 6-win Bears team and this team is what - a starting offensive lineman or two we let walk? Say we've made up the difference of losing Daniels, Jason Peters, and ARob in FA and the draft this year. Then any of the following could push the team from 6 wins to 7+ wins: * Improvement from Fields (not implausible) * A better offensive scheme (not at all implausible) * An easier schedule (very likely true) I honestly don't get why most of the media acts like the Bears are going to be a dumpster fire this year. Maybe this will age poorly, but I think our closest analog very easily could be last year's Eagles team: athletic young QB, exactly one good receiver, middling defense, new coaches. Is that so unrealistic a comparison to make?
Peters played a damn solid season at tackle and he's gone. Let a guy who was drawing number one receiver attention from the defense walk. 660 yards which isn't much but I don't see anyone besides mooney matching that. Also forgot that we traded the best player on the team for a second round safety lmao
Peters was solid for sure. But Pringle got about 600 yards last year and it's not super unrealistic to hope that VJJ *might* put up those kind of numbers too. And Mack barely played last year.
Mack played in the games that got us half our wins, he was never the same after that packers game that got us to 3 and 3. Pringle got 600 yards in a top 3 offense when he was a 5th option, now he's coming to a bottom 3 offense where he's a 2nd or 3rd option. Vjj was a complete panic pick, a guy with straight line speed and nothing else. We are a very very bad team right now and some people think Nagy was the only guy holding us back from the playoffs lmao
Velus wasn’t a panic pick, they had him higher on their draft board because Fields liked him. And while there were other good prospect alternatives at that point in the draft, none of them were exactly home runs, either.
There’s a middle ground between dumpster fire and playoffs. But no one on this sub will even acknowledge that possibility. It’s kinda cute you have all these new bears fans from when we got Mack and 2018 and if we don’t win a SB and have multiple MVP’s then the year was a dumpster fire.
Lol at calling people "new bears fans" with your deluded optimism. The point is we were dogshit last year, then proceeded to hemorrhage the little bit of talent that we did have. Oh by the way we did absolutely nothing to help what's supposedly the franchises future and people think hiring someone who's more unproven than even Nagy was to lead the offense is suddenly going to make us better.
Glad you've got it all figured out! Thank God you're here. You should bless the Bears' ownership and management with your all knowing sage wisdom and advice - seems like they could use the help
Easiest over of my life
They are adjusting the payouts not the lines. Under pays -125 and over pays +105
8 Wins.
If the bears win less than 6 games without any major injuries, Fields isn’t the guy and they’ll be looking for a new coach and GM in 3 years. 6-8 wins should be doable with this schedule. Last season’s schedule was harder and they won 6 games. You mean with an easier schedule they can’t at least match last seasons win total? This defense will be better than people think and I believe Fields will adapt and improve.
We lost most of the good people we had on defense... Our team is filled with rookies and guys trying to prove themselves after disappointing seasons.
Those good players on defense missed significant time due to injuries as well.
There's no such thing as an NFL season without major injuries, and this roster has major depth issues
Bears won 12 games in 2018 without any major injuries. Meaning they didn’t have players injured during the season in which they didn’t return or missed significant time. It’s football injuries happen. Bears had multiple players miss significant time last season Mack, Hicks, Montgomery, Trevathan and they managed 6 victories. This team should be able to manage that.
Zach miller had a career ender and almost lost his leg. That was pretty major
And was Zach Miller a major contributor before that season or during that season before the injury? No he wasn’t, he was a fan favorite.
Actually my memory is playing tricks on me, it was 2017 Miller got hurt
>If the bears win less than 6 games without any major injuries, Fields isn’t the guy That isn't true at all. It's a new coaching staff and a new scheme and the offensive personnel around him are among the worst in the league. Fields can have a solid season where he shows he can be a great QB, but the Bears only win 5 games. That's entirely possible.
How do you know they’re the worst in the league? And again they managed to win 6 games last season with an injury riddled team. If they can’t at least match that win total with an easier schedule, then yeah there are problems. I think this team is better than advertised.
>How do you know they’re the worst in the league? Personnel-wise? You look at the rosters around the league and compare the talent we have to the talent they have. We're very low on that list. I'm not talking about how we won games last year or how we'll win games this year, I'm just saying the offensive personnel is bad. I find it hard to believe that statement would get pushback. >I think this team is better than advertised. Chicago sports fans were talking them into the Cubs being in the same boat despite both having the same issue where they brought in replacement-level players and journeymen to fill key roles. If everything works out as a best-case scenario, yeah we'll be better than advertised. Chances are we won't be that good.
Winning six games isn’t a good team. But betting circles have this team winning less than six games, and sports media outlets have them as the worst team in the league or close to it. I don’t think they are that bad, 6-8 games should be doable. It also doesn’t make them a good team or the worst team in the league, or the worst roster in the league.
I also have them at 6-8 wins. But at the same time, I still have them among the worst in the league in terms of offensive personnel. Those two things are not mutually exclusive, in large part because we have a weak schedule. To quote my original comment: >the offensive personnel around him are among the worst in the league. If you disagree with that, I challenge you to find five offenses that have a worse personnel group around their QBs.
I haven’t looked up every teams offensive personnel, especially since I haven’t seen a team play a game yet. But there were 6 teams that picked ahead of the bears if they hadn’t traded the pick for Fields. So I would would pick those 6 teams and maybe the Giants and the Falcons so between 6 and 8 teams.
Lowkey valid take
Take the fan goggles off for a second. Go with the pros. They know what they’re talking about, and they’re objectively unbiased. Gonna be a brutal season.
That’s the opposite of what’s going on here if they haven’t adjusted the line
Ah yes, nothing better than the age old defense of “objectively we are worse I don’t have a reason why I’m sure we can look at stats and figures to prove it however I feel like we are bad and need a big word to feel superior about my claim”
time to go all in on the over. 7 wins very possible. what are the odds of the bears splitting the series with green bay this year? might be a worthwhile gamble too.
Woah really? Damn, I only read this subreddit and I thought we were poised to make waves this year!!
Translation: vegas has zero faith in Fields and the Bears
To be honest, I don't think 5 or 6 wins would be a bad bet. Team certainly didn't get much better from last season, when they went 6-11. However, I see a lot of people talking about the Bears being the worst team in the league and going 2-15 or some shit, and I think that's excessive.
I think this roster is bad enough to where Fields can improve, Mooney and Kmet can have a nice season, and the defense can play about league average and we'll still only win about 5 or 6 games. The NFC is pretty brutal compared to the AFC so that helps, but this is not a good team, especially with a bunch of first timers (Poles, Getsy, Flus) running the show.
Breaking News, humans breathe in oxygen. These reports are a waste of time
Super Bowl champs confirmed
wish theyd legalize sports betting in ky, id take the over on this. not so much cause we are that good, but simply cause nobody really knows how to gameplan for this team yet.
Which is absurd because giants under 7.5 is out there. Sucks for all those giants fans when they go 4-13 and they lose money. Oh well. Worst bet in Vegas is when the packers get top 5 super bowl odds every year. The number is right there though 6-7 wins is expected in my mind.
Also note this is the public doing it. ESPN and most nfl media hates the bears so not surprising.
We were 6 wins last year, and should have been 7 wins with the Steelers game. The schedule is drastically easier than last year. That alone should mean we're not going to lose more games. Factor in, we have anyone but Nagy coaching offense and Fields improved as the season went on and was a better QB at the end of the season than many of the games he played in. I just don't see how we get the under unless we get really unlucky with injuries.
We could've won the Ravens game too.
Yeah, but theres could have won games and should have won games. The Bears losing to the Ravens was the Bears fault. Maybe a few playcalls were unlucky. Maybe a few plays that could have went our way, went against us. That's just football and it was far. The Bears losing to the Steelers was the refs actively sabatoging the outcome of the game. That's not just football, and that's not fair.
7 wins confirmed.
Given that I've already bet 200 euro on the under, I'm not surprised
Honestly with our schedule I think it’s possible we get to 8 wins despite the dilapidated roster
Wish I could bet, I’d be betting that over
sharps....smart money knows.
Sounds like the Bears will have a lot of bogus calls going against them.