QB Caleb Williams, CHI (15 Viewers)

[Faust]

Caleb Williams, Chicago Bears won’t abandon plan after Week 1 loss

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

Interesting take. If we're talking about JUST the outcome of 1.01 picks, what is your threshold for frustration? Are fantasy GMs this frustrated about Trevor Lawrence, Justin FIelds/Trey Lance/Zach Wilson from the 2021 draft? Has Breece Hall produced up to a 1.01 level? He certainly had high hopes...maybe not GENERATIONAL hopes. The consternation over Williams has been incredibly overblown vs his 'lack of production'. As @pinkstapler mentioned, Williams had a historically solid 2024 season for a rookie NFL QB. That season was not without it's flaws both by Caleb and by the staff.

No, I don't think they are as frustrated. First, we have to set parameters here. I don't think (I could be wrong) that people get cross-positionally worked up. People don't get mad if they pick an RB and a WR or two are better picks. And they generally feel okay if, like Breece Hall, it's due to injury and the guy was clearly the best at his position that year and was on his way to a great career like Breece was. So they haven't reacted to Trevor Lawrence because no QB behind Trevor from that class has done anything of note. And that's a problem for Caleb because of the unfortunate fact that he's now got FIVE quarterbacks that look more promising than he does. That's quite a miss. Daniels, Maye, Nix, McCarthy, and I forget the other off of the top of my head.

That's why people react. Because they feel like there were so many and the process was sort of closed by the Bears owner and GM and really, they feel like they were sold a lemon. And I know you're a Bears fan and I'd actually like to say I think the hackles are being raised at the wrong people. Perhaps this is a generational or temperamental thing, but have you read what I've written about my team and ownership when this anonymous stuff comes out? Woody Johnson and the nepotism that enabled him to be the owner and the nepotism he's about to show and has shown his children that he indulges in the worst way with the operation of the Jets organization? I'm furious not at the sources or the writer, but at Woody and his obnoxious kids.

I can assure you I'm not blaming a pesky sportswriter nor the people that believe or lend credence to his or her reporting. I'd suggest that addressing the ownership and GM and the process that led to this story and (thus far) failed experiment is the appropriate response—not condemning the writer. I just . . . I'm always confused by people who defer like that. It's weird to me. I get fans of the player getting worked up about it. It's like a myth or illusion shattered. I'm sympathetic to it. But fans of the team?

These weird complaints that this is a one-sided piece and that the piece isn't balanced are bizarre and I think show the people with the real agenda. The truth isn't balanced or nuanced. You might assert that the only way to get to the truth is to hear both sides of a story, and I'd consider that a legitimate response and bone of contention, but then I'd respond that not everything has two sides. Truth is what happened. Sometimes an event is an event and words are words spoken and there's no negotiating them away by hearing each side and coming to an agreement about what happened. That's not journalism.

Anyway, that was a longer response that addressed more than your question but anonymous sources are how journalism has been done for a long, long time. Having a problem with that is really having a problem with industry standards and whether those standards safeguard truth. That's a debate you're welcome to have; but I'm okay with it as it is. And for pinkstapler to dislike it because he thinks people had a bad motive—well, I can understand if bad motive causes one to lie, but motive is often independent of truth, and that's just bizarrely soft and trigger warning-esque. It's way too sensitive for this world and real reporting. Anyway, that's my two cents.

 

[Faust]

Caleb Williams, Bears fizzle after hot start vs. Vikings; QB vows to 'keep growing'

 

[Pietaster2]

Mind-blowing Bears’ Caleb Williams ‘overthrow’ stat will destroy all hope in Chicago

Over the last year & 1 week, Caleb Williams leads NFL quarterbacks with 52 incompletions due to an overthrow (per TruMedia). 17 more than the next highest and added 5 more last night

 

[rockaction]

Actually, this was very interesting. From a journalist who thinks Dunne is full of it and that he's not only unethical but quite possibly deliberately so. Interesting thread. From a guy named Jack Silverstein that FBG's Matt Waldman linked to. This is the other side of the argument about whether or not Dunne is a legitimate reporter using legitimate methods, or if he's compromising his own trustworthiness through his use of anonymous sources and refusal to examine those sources to make sure he's not being used, or worse, if he's deliberately not investigating because he wants to print a hit piece. It's a question of standards, ethics, and ignorance or deliberateness. I'd encourage people to give it a look. Doesn't mean this guy is the end-all be-all of journalism ethics or that I've fully changed my mind because I take him at face value, but his credentials and the points he raises are issues that some people here have raised intuitively and they deserve a listen or at least an examination whether or not his claims are true and applicable here.

https://x.com/readjack/status/1965095012192190469

 

[ProstheticRGK]

Actually, this was very interesting. From a journalist who thinks Dunne is full of it and that he's not only unethical but quite possibly deliberately so. Interesting thread. From a guy named Jack Silverstein that FBG's Matt Waldman linked to. This is the other side of the argument about whether or not Dunne is a legitimate reporter using legitimate methods, or if he's compromising his own trustworthiness through his use of anonymous sources and refusal to examine those sources to make sure he's not being used, or worse, if he's deliberately not investigating because he wants to print a hit piece. It's a question of standards, ethics, and ignorance or deliberateness. I'd encourage people to give it a look. Doesn't mean this guy is the end-all be-all of journalism ethics or that I've fully changed my mind because I take him at face value, but his credentials and the points he raises are issues that some people here have raised intuitively and they deserve a listen or at least an examination whether or not his claims are true and applicable here.

https://x.com/readjack/status/1965095012192190469

I’m at work rn and can’t watch this, but I would find it absolutely hysterical if Silverstein used a bunch of anonymous sources to discredit Dunne.

I have zero axes to grind, and tend to want to believe Dunne’s story because it fits my confirmation bias. But, I would find it very funny.

 

[pinkstapler]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

 

[King of the Jungle]

New coach with a highly touted QB he did not draft. He did however make a point to extend the backup prior to the season. Do what you will with that information. Not saying they like Bagent more, but anything is possible. New coach wants to win and prove his worthiness, if Caleb does not show improvement this year I do not see Ben having a lot of patience with the position. Obviously one game in a new system is not enough to evaluate, but things could interesting if struggles continue.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

 

[renesauz]

I'd be happy if the main takeaway from all this is no one ever uses the adjective "generational" to describe a football player, ever again. I realize we live in a world where commonplace daily experiences are now typically described as being "amazing" but the term "generational" has a specific meaning and it doesn't happen before he's taken a snap in the league.

I thought it was fair with Saquon but it seems like once that actually seemed true that we then decided to apply it to everybody and everything. I think Saquon's 2,000 yards and his reverse aerial over that dude last year sort of justified all of that in retrospect.

Maybe the term isn't as well-defined as I thought. For me, you can't say Barkley is 'Generational' when we were alive to see Payton, Sanders and Smith. You can argue about who is best, but none of them are unicorns so long as the others exist.

Well, Barkley is a Millennial. Payton and Sanders are different generations themselves. Emmitt and Barry are the same generation. Just use the standard generation dates. Your example is well-intentioned and I agree with its sentiment but Barkley truly is generational, IMO.

I wasn't even looking to argue, really. I was just sort of admiring Barkley, but he actually does fit the descriptor. Walter Payton is his generation's talent also. Unless we're counting OJ. But Barry and Emmitt are definitely of the same generation. I'd still argue it's Barry because he was twice the runner Emmitt was, IMO.

But yeah, simple dates and general consensus suffices. Sanders is Gen X. Barkley is a Millennial. Payton is something different; I'd have to look it up.

Agreed, but it shouldnt have needed to be said. Considering Barkley to be even close to the same generation as Payton or Smith seems bizarre. more like the poster doesn't understand what generational means at all

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

Interesting take. If we're talking about JUST the outcome of 1.01 picks, what is your threshold for frustration? Are fantasy GMs this frustrated about Trevor Lawrence, Justin FIelds/Trey Lance/Zach Wilson from the 2021 draft? Has Breece Hall produced up to a 1.01 level? He certainly had high hopes...maybe not GENERATIONAL hopes. The consternation over Williams has been incredibly overblown vs his 'lack of production'. As @pinkstapler mentioned, Williams had a historically solid 2024 season for a rookie NFL QB. That season was not without it's flaws both by Caleb and by the staff.

No, I don't think they are as frustrated. First, we have to set parameters here. I don't think (I could be wrong) that people get cross-positionally worked up. People don't get mad if they pick an RB and a WR or two are better picks. And they generally feel okay if, like Breece Hall, it's due to injury and the guy was clearly the best at his position that year and was on his way to a great career like Breece was. So they haven't reacted to Trevor Lawrence because no QB behind Trevor from that class has done anything of note. And that's a problem for Caleb because of the unfortunate fact that he's now got FIVE quarterbacks that look more promising than he does. That's quite a miss. Daniels, Maye, Nix, McCarthy, and I forget the other off of the top of my head.

That's why people react. Because they feel like there were so many and the process was sort of closed by the Bears owner and GM and really, they feel like they were sold a lemon. And I know you're a Bears fan and I'd actually like to say I think the hackles are being raised at the wrong people. Perhaps this is a generational or temperamental thing, but have you read what I've written about my team and ownership when this anonymous stuff comes out? Woody Johnson and the nepotism that enabled him to be the owner and the nepotism he's about to show and has shown his children that he indulges in the worst way with the operation of the Jets organization? I'm furious not at the sources or the writer, but at Woody and his obnoxious kids.

I can assure you I'm not blaming a pesky sportswriter nor the people that believe or lend credence to his or her reporting. I'd suggest that addressing the ownership and GM and the process that led to this story and (thus far) failed experiment is the appropriate response—not condemning the writer. I just . . . I'm always confused by people who defer like that. It's weird to me. I get fans of the player getting worked up about it. It's like a myth or illusion shattered. I'm sympathetic to it. But fans of the team?

These weird complaints that this is a one-sided piece and that the piece isn't balanced are bizarre and I think show the people with the real agenda. The truth isn't balanced or nuanced. You might assert that the only way to get to the truth is to hear both sides of a story, and I'd consider that a legitimate response and bone of contention, but then I'd respond that not everything has two sides. Truth is what happened. Sometimes an event is an event and words are words spoken and there's no negotiating them away by hearing each side and coming to an agreement about what happened. That's not journalism.

Anyway, that was a longer response that addressed more than your question but anonymous sources are how journalism has been done for a long, long time. Having a problem with that is really having a problem with industry standards and whether those standards safeguard truth. That's a debate you're welcome to have; but I'm okay with it as it is. And for pinkstapler to dislike it because he thinks people had a bad motive—well, I can understand if bad motive causes one to lie, but motive is often independent of truth, and that's just bizarrely soft and trigger warning-esque. It's way too sensitive for this world and real reporting. Anyway, that's my two cents.

Two things:

1. I have appreciated your thoughtful writing over the years. I strive (and often fail) to write in such a manner.

2. It's unfair that fantasy football GMs are 'upset' with Caleb because 5 possible QBs behind him (3 of which have less than a full season under their belt) are potentially better. It's also incredibly apropos that fantasy GMs, like most of the NFL fanbase, are down on a QB who's had 18 starts, posted a reasonable rookie campaign, and has shown improvement. But the hate thrown at Williams goes further than his production on the field. All you need to to is peruse this thread to see blatant homophobia based on nothing other than a 22-23 year old kid painting his nails. This thread is riddled with drive by comments from posters who have no vested interest other than throwing out homophobic comments. Dunne's article is also littered with similar comments and as a professional, he should know better and do better.

 

[renesauz]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Dude. he cant be THAT bad in fantasy because he's surrounded with quality players. 'Not that bad in fantasy" when he should be AWESOME in fantasy. It's too early to call him a bust, he he sure as *^$% looks like a bust. And those owners are upset because he was the consensus #1 from virtually every service and ranking out there, called "generational" by most. The last generational QB (Lawrence) has been disapointing but nobody would call him a bust. This kid...smells like a bust

 

[renesauz]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

Interesting take. If we're talking about JUST the outcome of 1.01 picks, what is your threshold for frustration? Are fantasy GMs this frustrated about Trevor Lawrence, Justin FIelds/Trey Lance/Zach Wilson from the 2021 draft? Has Breece Hall produced up to a 1.01 level? He certainly had high hopes...maybe not GENERATIONAL hopes. The consternation over Williams has been incredibly overblown vs his 'lack of production'. As @pinkstapler mentioned, Williams had a historically solid 2024 season for a rookie NFL QB. That season was not without it's flaws both by Caleb and by the staff.

No, I don't think they are as frustrated. First, we have to set parameters here. I don't think (I could be wrong) that people get cross-positionally worked up. People don't get mad if they pick an RB and a WR or two are better picks. And they generally feel okay if, like Breece Hall, it's due to injury and the guy was clearly the best at his position that year and was on his way to a great career like Breece was. So they haven't reacted to Trevor Lawrence because no QB behind Trevor from that class has done anything of note. And that's a problem for Caleb because of the unfortunate fact that he's now got FIVE quarterbacks that look more promising than he does. That's quite a miss. Daniels, Maye, Nix, McCarthy, and I forget the other off of the top of my head.

That's why people react. Because they feel like there were so many and the process was sort of closed by the Bears owner and GM and really, they feel like they were sold a lemon. And I know you're a Bears fan and I'd actually like to say I think the hackles are being raised at the wrong people. Perhaps this is a generational or temperamental thing, but have you read what I've written about my team and ownership when this anonymous stuff comes out? Woody Johnson and the nepotism that enabled him to be the owner and the nepotism he's about to show and has shown his children that he indulges in the worst way with the operation of the Jets organization? I'm furious not at the sources or the writer, but at Woody and his obnoxious kids.

I can assure you I'm not blaming a pesky sportswriter nor the people that believe or lend credence to his or her reporting. I'd suggest that addressing the ownership and GM and the process that led to this story and (thus far) failed experiment is the appropriate response—not condemning the writer. I just . . . I'm always confused by people who defer like that. It's weird to me. I get fans of the player getting worked up about it. It's like a myth or illusion shattered. I'm sympathetic to it. But fans of the team?

These weird complaints that this is a one-sided piece and that the piece isn't balanced are bizarre and I think show the people with the real agenda. The truth isn't balanced or nuanced. You might assert that the only way to get to the truth is to hear both sides of a story, and I'd consider that a legitimate response and bone of contention, but then I'd respond that not everything has two sides. Truth is what happened. Sometimes an event is an event and words are words spoken and there's no negotiating them away by hearing each side and coming to an agreement about what happened. That's not journalism.

Anyway, that was a longer response that addressed more than your question but anonymous sources are how journalism has been done for a long, long time. Having a problem with that is really having a problem with industry standards and whether those standards safeguard truth. That's a debate you're welcome to have; but I'm okay with it as it is. And for pinkstapler to dislike it because he thinks people had a bad motive—well, I can understand if bad motive causes one to lie, but motive is often independent of truth, and that's just bizarrely soft and trigger warning-esque. It's way too sensitive for this world and real reporting. Anyway, that's my two cents.

Two things:

1. I have appreciated your thoughtful writing over the years. I strive (and often fail) to write in such a manner.

2. It's unfair that fantasy football GMs are 'upset' with Caleb because 5 possible QBs behind him (3 of which have less than a full season under their belt) are potentially better. It's also incredibly apropos that fantasy GMs, like most of the NFL fanbase, are down on a QB who's had 18 starts, posted a reasonable rookie campaign, and has shown improvement. But the hate thrown at Williams goes further than his production on the field. All you need to to is peruse this thread to see blatant homophobia based on nothing other than a 22-23 year old kid painting his nails. This thread is riddled with drive by comments from posters who have no vested interest other than throwing out homophobic comments. Dunne's article is also littered with similar comments and as a professional, he should know better and do better.

Your kidding yourself, I dont give two flying whatevers about his nails. I care about how he cant hit the broad side of a barn with ANY pressure on him whatsoever. Those kind of yips are rarely fixed to satisfaction. Rookies with promise make the throws he's missing. His fantasy stats might look serviceable, but that was one of the worst performances I've ever seen for a top pick, like Jamarcus Russell Ryan Leaf level BAD

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Anyone find video of Caleb using his own cadence last year? It didn't sound like it last night but, I admit I wasn't really paying attention.

NFL+ replays for 2024 are available. I watched through 4 or 5 games last season and his cadence was indeed ready, set, go, although that is simplistic. The ball was snapped on any of the 3 words and occasionally after the word 'go' on a delayed count. The cadence also was different between shotgun snaps and under center snaps. Honestly, I think this is a nothing burger. During Monday night's game, his cadence used different words which seemed to be a mixture of colors, numbers, and I think I heard the word turbo a few times.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

Interesting take. If we're talking about JUST the outcome of 1.01 picks, what is your threshold for frustration? Are fantasy GMs this frustrated about Trevor Lawrence, Justin FIelds/Trey Lance/Zach Wilson from the 2021 draft? Has Breece Hall produced up to a 1.01 level? He certainly had high hopes...maybe not GENERATIONAL hopes. The consternation over Williams has been incredibly overblown vs his 'lack of production'. As @pinkstapler mentioned, Williams had a historically solid 2024 season for a rookie NFL QB. That season was not without it's flaws both by Caleb and by the staff.

No, I don't think they are as frustrated. First, we have to set parameters here. I don't think (I could be wrong) that people get cross-positionally worked up. People don't get mad if they pick an RB and a WR or two are better picks. And they generally feel okay if, like Breece Hall, it's due to injury and the guy was clearly the best at his position that year and was on his way to a great career like Breece was. So they haven't reacted to Trevor Lawrence because no QB behind Trevor from that class has done anything of note. And that's a problem for Caleb because of the unfortunate fact that he's now got FIVE quarterbacks that look more promising than he does. That's quite a miss. Daniels, Maye, Nix, McCarthy, and I forget the other off of the top of my head.

That's why people react. Because they feel like there were so many and the process was sort of closed by the Bears owner and GM and really, they feel like they were sold a lemon. And I know you're a Bears fan and I'd actually like to say I think the hackles are being raised at the wrong people. Perhaps this is a generational or temperamental thing, but have you read what I've written about my team and ownership when this anonymous stuff comes out? Woody Johnson and the nepotism that enabled him to be the owner and the nepotism he's about to show and has shown his children that he indulges in the worst way with the operation of the Jets organization? I'm furious not at the sources or the writer, but at Woody and his obnoxious kids.

I can assure you I'm not blaming a pesky sportswriter nor the people that believe or lend credence to his or her reporting. I'd suggest that addressing the ownership and GM and the process that led to this story and (thus far) failed experiment is the appropriate response—not condemning the writer. I just . . . I'm always confused by people who defer like that. It's weird to me. I get fans of the player getting worked up about it. It's like a myth or illusion shattered. I'm sympathetic to it. But fans of the team?

These weird complaints that this is a one-sided piece and that the piece isn't balanced are bizarre and I think show the people with the real agenda. The truth isn't balanced or nuanced. You might assert that the only way to get to the truth is to hear both sides of a story, and I'd consider that a legitimate response and bone of contention, but then I'd respond that not everything has two sides. Truth is what happened. Sometimes an event is an event and words are words spoken and there's no negotiating them away by hearing each side and coming to an agreement about what happened. That's not journalism.

Anyway, that was a longer response that addressed more than your question but anonymous sources are how journalism has been done for a long, long time. Having a problem with that is really having a problem with industry standards and whether those standards safeguard truth. That's a debate you're welcome to have; but I'm okay with it as it is. And for pinkstapler to dislike it because he thinks people had a bad motive—well, I can understand if bad motive causes one to lie, but motive is often independent of truth, and that's just bizarrely soft and trigger warning-esque. It's way too sensitive for this world and real reporting. Anyway, that's my two cents.

Two things:

1. I have appreciated your thoughtful writing over the years. I strive (and often fail) to write in such a manner.

2. It's unfair that fantasy football GMs are 'upset' with Caleb because 5 possible QBs behind him (3 of which have less than a full season under their belt) are potentially better. It's also incredibly apropos that fantasy GMs, like most of the NFL fanbase, are down on a QB who's had 18 starts, posted a reasonable rookie campaign, and has shown improvement. But the hate thrown at Williams goes further than his production on the field. All you need to to is peruse this thread to see blatant homophobia based on nothing other than a 22-23 year old kid painting his nails. This thread is riddled with drive by comments from posters who have no vested interest other than throwing out homophobic comments. Dunne's article is also littered with similar comments and as a professional, he should know better and do better.

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent. What’s amazing is I actually think that the people that didn’t care for the kid (like me) have to wade through a manufactured ******** smear in order to dislike the kid on other grounds. I see this all the time. If I think Taylor Swift is a bankrupt twit, I’m a misogynist rather than somebody who hates vapid pop culture. It’s a tactic I see all the time and it’s extraordinarily cynical and does so much damage to the real instances of those attitudes occurring. I don’t think people who level that charge realize how much damage they do. Because this kid wasn’t disliked for his nails at first. It was his ******* attitude and sort of ungrateful family.

I think then you had a couple of idiots say something about his nails and it was cynically seized upon and became an insulation for him against legit complaints. This keeps happening in society and frankly those who accuse people of bad motive or ill intent do untold damage.

I sort of couldn’t care less anymore about it and I see it for what it is, which is a power grab by nothing more than millionaires with media savvy and clout who refuse accountability. I cry them no teary rivers.

 

[Chaka]

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent

@InDitkaWeTrust is talking about homophobic comments made in this thread. As recently as yesterday. You haven't seen any of it?

What about on Twitter? I almost never wade into that cesspool but, I can't imagine it isn't filled with anything but the worst examples of cruelty and inhumanity, when discussing Caleb or, probably anything.

I don't recall hearing anything along those lines in the national, or SoCal local media but, that makes sense and it also makes it difficult because, if it is happening in here it certainly reflects opinions in the larger population where people can't hide behind the anonymity of the keyboard.


Also, Taylor Swift is a national treasure!!!

 

[pinkstapler]

New coach with a highly touted QB he did not draft. He did however make a point to extend the backup prior to the season. Do what you will with that information. Not saying they like Bagent more, but anything is possible. New coach wants to win and prove his worthiness, if Caleb does not show improvement this year I do not see Ben having a lot of patience with the position. Obviously one game in a new system is not enough to evaluate, but things could interesting if struggles continue.

Circling back to actual fantasy talk; the one league I own Caleb in I 100% picked up Bagent when he got the two year extension (we have deep rosters). Also funny now typing it contrasting with my posts on this thread, even dating back to last year when I went pretty hard at Joe for negging Caleb; I was never high on him as a player lol. I'm in 7 leagues, 3 dynasties, and 2 SF. And I own one share across all of them. So I'm certainly not a ride or die for him talent wise. I could probably dig out posts from here where coming into the 2024 rookie draft I was actually much higher on Bo Nix and JJ McCarthy as my QB targets of that draft class relative to their costs to acquire. Of course I was also not high on Jayden Daniels, so what the hell do I know

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

Interesting take. If we're talking about JUST the outcome of 1.01 picks, what is your threshold for frustration? Are fantasy GMs this frustrated about Trevor Lawrence, Justin FIelds/Trey Lance/Zach Wilson from the 2021 draft? Has Breece Hall produced up to a 1.01 level? He certainly had high hopes...maybe not GENERATIONAL hopes. The consternation over Williams has been incredibly overblown vs his 'lack of production'. As @pinkstapler mentioned, Williams had a historically solid 2024 season for a rookie NFL QB. That season was not without it's flaws both by Caleb and by the staff.

No, I don't think they are as frustrated. First, we have to set parameters here. I don't think (I could be wrong) that people get cross-positionally worked up. People don't get mad if they pick an RB and a WR or two are better picks. And they generally feel okay if, like Breece Hall, it's due to injury and the guy was clearly the best at his position that year and was on his way to a great career like Breece was. So they haven't reacted to Trevor Lawrence because no QB behind Trevor from that class has done anything of note. And that's a problem for Caleb because of the unfortunate fact that he's now got FIVE quarterbacks that look more promising than he does. That's quite a miss. Daniels, Maye, Nix, McCarthy, and I forget the other off of the top of my head.

That's why people react. Because they feel like there were so many and the process was sort of closed by the Bears owner and GM and really, they feel like they were sold a lemon. And I know you're a Bears fan and I'd actually like to say I think the hackles are being raised at the wrong people. Perhaps this is a generational or temperamental thing, but have you read what I've written about my team and ownership when this anonymous stuff comes out? Woody Johnson and the nepotism that enabled him to be the owner and the nepotism he's about to show and has shown his children that he indulges in the worst way with the operation of the Jets organization? I'm furious not at the sources or the writer, but at Woody and his obnoxious kids.

I can assure you I'm not blaming a pesky sportswriter nor the people that believe or lend credence to his or her reporting. I'd suggest that addressing the ownership and GM and the process that led to this story and (thus far) failed experiment is the appropriate response—not condemning the writer. I just . . . I'm always confused by people who defer like that. It's weird to me. I get fans of the player getting worked up about it. It's like a myth or illusion shattered. I'm sympathetic to it. But fans of the team?

These weird complaints that this is a one-sided piece and that the piece isn't balanced are bizarre and I think show the people with the real agenda. The truth isn't balanced or nuanced. You might assert that the only way to get to the truth is to hear both sides of a story, and I'd consider that a legitimate response and bone of contention, but then I'd respond that not everything has two sides. Truth is what happened. Sometimes an event is an event and words are words spoken and there's no negotiating them away by hearing each side and coming to an agreement about what happened. That's not journalism.

Anyway, that was a longer response that addressed more than your question but anonymous sources are how journalism has been done for a long, long time. Having a problem with that is really having a problem with industry standards and whether those standards safeguard truth. That's a debate you're welcome to have; but I'm okay with it as it is. And for pinkstapler to dislike it because he thinks people had a bad motive—well, I can understand if bad motive causes one to lie, but motive is often independent of truth, and that's just bizarrely soft and trigger warning-esque. It's way too sensitive for this world and real reporting. Anyway, that's my two cents.

Two things:

1. I have appreciated your thoughtful writing over the years. I strive (and often fail) to write in such a manner.

2. It's unfair that fantasy football GMs are 'upset' with Caleb because 5 possible QBs behind him (3 of which have less than a full season under their belt) are potentially better. It's also incredibly apropos that fantasy GMs, like most of the NFL fanbase, are down on a QB who's had 18 starts, posted a reasonable rookie campaign, and has shown improvement. But the hate thrown at Williams goes further than his production on the field. All you need to to is peruse this thread to see blatant homophobia based on nothing other than a 22-23 year old kid painting his nails. This thread is riddled with drive by comments from posters who have no vested interest other than throwing out homophobic comments. Dunne's article is also littered with similar comments and as a professional, he should know better and do better.

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent. What’s amazing is I actually think that the people that didn’t care for the kid (like me) have to wade through a manufactured ******** smear in order to dislike the kid on other grounds. I see this all the time. If I think Taylor Swift is a bankrupt twit, I’m a misogynist rather than somebody who hates vapid pop culture. It’s a tactic I see all the time and it’s extraordinarily cynical and does so much damage to the real instances of those attitudes occurring. I don’t think people who level that charge realize how much damage they do. Because this kid wasn’t disliked for his nails at first. It was his ******* attitude and sort of ungrateful family.

I think then you had a couple of idiots say something about his nails and it was cynically seized upon and became an insulation for him against legit complaints. This keeps happening in society and frankly those who accuse people of bad motive or ill intent do untold damage.

I sort of couldn’t care less anymore about it and I see it for what it is, which is a power grab by nothing more than millionaires with media savvy and clout who refuse accountability. I cry them no teary rivers.

Go back 5-6 pages in this thread. There's a ton of straight up homophobic content from regular posters on this board. I tried to quote and redact usernames, but apparently that isn't possible on this board. Their words are in thread for all to see, no need to call them out directly. And yes, I get your perspective. There can and will be over proclamation of the "isms" and "phobias". In this case, though, there's content to back it up as well as phrases like "sashaying" and "glitzy gazelle" by seasoned writers like Dunne.

Bears fans, for the most part, are giving Williams grace both in personality traits and playing flaws because we have to. We're stuck with him for at least another year or two until we trade him to Pittsburgh for peanuts.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

Actually, this was very interesting. From a journalist who thinks Dunne is full of it and that he's not only unethical but quite possibly deliberately so. Interesting thread. From a guy named Jack Silverstein that FBG's Matt Waldman linked to. This is the other side of the argument about whether or not Dunne is a legitimate reporter using legitimate methods, or if he's compromising his own trustworthiness through his use of anonymous sources and refusal to examine those sources to make sure he's not being used, or worse, if he's deliberately not investigating because he wants to print a hit piece. It's a question of standards, ethics, and ignorance or deliberateness. I'd encourage people to give it a look. Doesn't mean this guy is the end-all be-all of journalism ethics or that I've fully changed my mind because I take him at face value, but his credentials and the points he raises are issues that some people here have raised intuitively and they deserve a listen or at least an examination whether or not his claims are true and applicable here.

https://x.com/readjack/status/1965095012192190469

Thanks for linking this podcast. It's a bit longwinded, but explains some of the finer points of journalism, with which, I have little experience. I assume most outside of journalistic communities do not have that experience either.

 

[Big Nate]

Stats don't tell the whole story, obviously; although IMO for a fantasy football forum they do hold more weight in assessment/argument than real world football.

19/30 for 233 with 1 TD 0 Int and 11 for 68 on the ground
21/35 for 210 with 1 TD 0 Int and 6 for 58 on the ground with another TD

For such similar stat lines, the discourse around these two QBs after the first week seems..... excessive? histrionic? Did I miss all the posts by people claiming Caleb would be Lamar Jackson week 1? That a few months with a new coach was going to immediately fix problems in his game he's had since college; even before last years coaching flubs? You'd think scorned owners drafted Williams at QB6 not QB16 like his ADP the whole off-season.

I don't know the exact word, but lord, ignoring the numbers and just going by statements online/on tv you'd think that top stat line should be getting fit for his HoF jacket already while the other should be relegated to the arena league in another week or two. This whole thread in particular is bringing out my internal Sancho Panza, with the phrase "tilting at windmills" coming to mind.

Not really. You know I'm pretty reasonable. You're not just talking QB16 in redraft. You're talking to Superflex dynasty owners that took him 1.01 over Daniels and every other player in that draft class. This isn't just a redraft thing. The people that took him 1.01 and read the Dunne article feel totally snowed. I was skeptical of this dude because I'm relatively local to Los Angeles, but all of the family stuff and weird behavior was supposedly vetted by the Bears and now you're getting the downstream effect of it.

Shouldn't be surprising at all.

That's true. To be fair though Caleb actually had a solid year statistically in 2024. 3,500 yards, 20 TDs, 6 INT, 489 on the ground. And people have been freaking out about it. Jayden and Nix had great rookie seasons, kudos to them but Caleb didn't suck in the stat column and our hobby is based on stats not NFL efficiency.

I am happy to discuss his flaws, and I have at length, but, it is fair to say there has been a ton of Chicken Littling going on from the people who invested in him.

Yep, good points here.

Also fun fact if you started Caleb you got 24pts. If you started Nix you got 6. Daniels got 20. FF is fun.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent

@InDitkaWeTrust is talking about homophobic comments made in this thread. As recently as yesterday. You haven't seen any of it?

What about on Twitter? I almost never wade into that cesspool but, I can't imagine it isn't filled with anything but the worst examples of cruelty and inhumanity, when discussing Caleb or, probably anything.

I don't recall hearing anything along those lines in the national, or SoCal local media but, that makes sense and it also makes it difficult because, if it is happening in here it certainly reflects opinions in the larger population where people can't hide behind the anonymity of the keyboard.


Also, Taylor Swift is a national treasure!!!

In all seriousness I haven’t read the entire thread but I was aware of it when massraider started flipping out about something and was acting irrationally, That was two days ago? Yeah, around there. I had never seen it on Twitter, which I often either quit or am oblivious to the garbage on it. Seriously only have FF guys on there and if they get political they get muted. Never heard a word on the news about it. That’s why my antennae get up about it. Because the reaction doesn’t seem anywhere near organic and all I see (honestly) are you guys in a pique about people disliking a very easily dislikable guy who has gobs of money and media clout. It’s weird, but that’s how I know this has become a pc or “woke” (I loathe using that word) issue. I don’t hear the homophobia—I hear you guys personally upset by something.

And that is NOT a knock on you guys. It just lets me know there’s something politically personal coming from some media source, be it social, left, or right. And I don’t know what to tell you nor do I have any suggestions to make anyone happy. It just is.

 

[Gally]

that was one of the worst performances I've ever seen for a top pick, like Jamarcus Russell Ryan Leaf level BAD

I think you need to go back and refresh your memory on Russell and Leaf. This was nowhere near their level of incompetence. I don't believe either of them ever came close to 10 straight completions at any time. I agree some plays were Russell/Leaf level bad but the game as a whole is nowhere near to being that bad.

 

[rschroeder1]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

 

[Joe Schmo]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

Huh, you don't sound gay

 

[ProstheticRGK]

Y’all are gonna turn me into a Caleb apologist. The hyperbole around how bad he was Monday is a little silly. He’s inconsistent as all get out. He doesn’t seem to process quickly or well. He doesn’t seem to be much of a leader or have the kind of internal motivation that helps him shake off adversity.

But he didn’t look god-awful. Just really inconsistent. I don’t think he’s gonna be a starter long in the NFL, but jury’s still out.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

His play has been uneven going back to his last year at USC. He's not exactly trending up.

 

[Chaka]

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent

@InDitkaWeTrust is talking about homophobic comments made in this thread. As recently as yesterday. You haven't seen any of it?

What about on Twitter? I almost never wade into that cesspool but, I can't imagine it isn't filled with anything but the worst examples of cruelty and inhumanity, when discussing Caleb or, probably anything.

I don't recall hearing anything along those lines in the national, or SoCal local media but, that makes sense and it also makes it difficult because, if it is happening in here it certainly reflects opinions in the larger population where people can't hide behind the anonymity of the keyboard.


Also, Taylor Swift is a national treasure!!!

In all seriousness I haven’t read the entire thread but I was aware of it when massraider started flipping out about something and was acting irrationally, That was two days ago? Yeah, around there. I had never seen it on Twitter, which I often either quit or am oblivious to the garbage on it. Seriously only have FF guys on there and if they get political they get muted. Never heard a word on the news about it. That’s why my antennae get up about it. Because the reaction doesn’t seem anywhere near organic and all I see (honestly) are you guys in a pique about people disliking a very easily dislikable guy who has gobs of money and media clout. It’s weird, but that’s how I know this has become a pc or “woke” (I loathe using that word) issue. I don’t hear the homophobia—I hear you guys personally upset by something.

And that is NOT a knock on you guys. It just lets me know there’s something politically personal coming from some media source, be it social, left, or right. And I don’t know what to tell you nor do I have any suggestions to make anyone happy. It just is.

But that's kinda the whole point. A lot of the "easily dislikable" stuff comes from the homophobia or perceived effeminate nature of the person. Considering your contributions to the discussion I find it truly surprising that you have kept yourself that insulated from it. Good on you for managing that.

As I said to a troll above, there is a great conversation to be had about Caleb that never needs to leave the playing field.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

I guess it’s a question of if you’re cognizant of the issue at hand. If you’re conscious and have identified an anti-homosexual agenda behind the article then sure you’ll think that. I have no problem if the issue is clearly in play and you put the article down because it is gay bait. My point—and this is my experience with the material—is that if you aren’t cognizant of the issue or the flashpoint then you might think the word choice an embellishment, but you might need the cultural awareness about Williams and underlying anti-gay bias before you can see and notice loaded words designed to instigate or provoke.

That’s seriously me. The only way I thought it was weird was because some guy turned the article into a jumping off point for his own “bear” gay porn fan fic. No BS.

 

[rockaction]

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent

@InDitkaWeTrust is talking about homophobic comments made in this thread. As recently as yesterday. You haven't seen any of it?

What about on Twitter? I almost never wade into that cesspool but, I can't imagine it isn't filled with anything but the worst examples of cruelty and inhumanity, when discussing Caleb or, probably anything.

I don't recall hearing anything along those lines in the national, or SoCal local media but, that makes sense and it also makes it difficult because, if it is happening in here it certainly reflects opinions in the larger population where people can't hide behind the anonymity of the keyboard.


Also, Taylor Swift is a national treasure!!!

In all seriousness I haven’t read the entire thread but I was aware of it when massraider started flipping out about something and was acting irrationally, That was two days ago? Yeah, around there. I had never seen it on Twitter, which I often either quit or am oblivious to the garbage on it. Seriously only have FF guys on there and if they get political they get muted. Never heard a word on the news about it. That’s why my antennae get up about it. Because the reaction doesn’t seem anywhere near organic and all I see (honestly) are you guys in a pique about people disliking a very easily dislikable guy who has gobs of money and media clout. It’s weird, but that’s how I know this has become a pc or “woke” (I loathe using that word) issue. I don’t hear the homophobia—I hear you guys personally upset by something.

And that is NOT a knock on you guys. It just lets me know there’s something politically personal coming from some media source, be it social, left, or right. And I don’t know what to tell you nor do I have any suggestions to make anyone happy. It just is.

But that's kinda the whole point. A lot of the "easily dislikable" stuff comes from the homophobia or perceived effeminate nature of the person. Considering your contributions to the discussion I find it truly surprising that you have kept yourself that insulated from it. Good on you for managing that.

As I said to a troll above, there is a great conversation to be had about Caleb that never needs to leave the playing field.

No, and you’ve just proven my point. Once somebody cynically does this, you HAVE to defend yourself against the charge of being anti-gay. The burden shifts from the complete ******* cynical millionaire to behave like a human on to me to explain why I hate the complete ******* millionaire.

Do you get how insidious that is?

 

[Chaka]

Yeah, you know what? I gotta tell you that I was unaware of that and what’s bizarre is I follow football like crazy, followed him because I live in So Cal, and never caught the homophobia undercurrent

@InDitkaWeTrust is talking about homophobic comments made in this thread. As recently as yesterday. You haven't seen any of it?

What about on Twitter? I almost never wade into that cesspool but, I can't imagine it isn't filled with anything but the worst examples of cruelty and inhumanity, when discussing Caleb or, probably anything.

I don't recall hearing anything along those lines in the national, or SoCal local media but, that makes sense and it also makes it difficult because, if it is happening in here it certainly reflects opinions in the larger population where people can't hide behind the anonymity of the keyboard.


Also, Taylor Swift is a national treasure!!!

In all seriousness I haven’t read the entire thread but I was aware of it when massraider started flipping out about something and was acting irrationally, That was two days ago? Yeah, around there. I had never seen it on Twitter, which I often either quit or am oblivious to the garbage on it. Seriously only have FF guys on there and if they get political they get muted. Never heard a word on the news about it. That’s why my antennae get up about it. Because the reaction doesn’t seem anywhere near organic and all I see (honestly) are you guys in a pique about people disliking a very easily dislikable guy who has gobs of money and media clout. It’s weird, but that’s how I know this has become a pc or “woke” (I loathe using that word) issue. I don’t hear the homophobia—I hear you guys personally upset by something.

And that is NOT a knock on you guys. It just lets me know there’s something politically personal coming from some media source, be it social, left, or right. And I don’t know what to tell you nor do I have any suggestions to make anyone happy. It just is.

But that's kinda the whole point. A lot of the "easily dislikable" stuff comes from the homophobia or perceived effeminate nature of the person. Considering your contributions to the discussion I find it truly surprising that you have kept yourself that insulated from it. Good on you for managing that.

As I said to a troll above, there is a great conversation to be had about Caleb that never needs to leave the playing field.

No, and you’ve just proven my point. Once somebody cynically does this, you HAVE to defend yourself against the charge of being anti-gay. The burden shifts from the complete ******* cynical millionaire to behave like a human on to me to explain why I hate the complete ******* millionaire.

Do you get how insidious that is?

Thread derailing. I'll DM you.

 

[General Malaise]

Stats don't tell the whole story, obviously; although IMO for a fantasy football forum they do hold more weight in assessment/argument than real world football.

19/30 for 233 with 1 TD 0 Int and 11 for 68 on the ground
21/35 for 210 with 1 TD 0 Int and 6 for 58 on the ground with another TD

For such similar stat lines, the discourse around these two QBs after the first week seems..... excessive? histrionic? Did I miss all the posts by people claiming Caleb would be Lamar Jackson week 1? That a few months with a new coach was going to immediately fix problems in his game he's had since college; even before last years coaching flubs? You'd think scorned owners drafted Williams at QB6 not QB16 like his ADP the whole off-season.

I don't know the exact word, but lord, ignoring the numbers and just going by statements online/on tv you'd think that top stat line should be getting fit for his HoF jacket already while the other should be relegated to the arena league in another week or two. This whole thread in particular is bringing out my internal Sancho Panza, with the phrase "tilting at windmills" coming to mind.

Not really. You know I'm pretty reasonable. You're not just talking QB16 in redraft. You're talking to Superflex dynasty owners that took him 1.01 over Daniels and every other player in that draft class. This isn't just a redraft thing. The people that took him 1.01 and read the Dunne article feel totally snowed. I was skeptical of this dude because I'm relatively local to Los Angeles, but all of the family stuff and weird behavior was supposedly vetted by the Bears and now you're getting the downstream effect of it.

Shouldn't be surprising at all.

That's true. To be fair though Caleb actually had a solid year statistically in 2024. 3,500 yards, 20 TDs, 6 INT, 489 on the ground. And people have been freaking out about it. Jayden and Nix had great rookie seasons, kudos to them but Caleb didn't suck in the stat column and our hobby is based on stats not NFL efficiency.

I am happy to discuss his flaws, and I have at length, but, it is fair to say there has been a ton of Chicken Littling going on from the people who invested in him.

68 sacks in 2024.

If he cuts that number down through improved OL play, faster decision making, getting rid of the ball on time, etc. then yes, we are looking at a good to potentially great fantasy QB.

But man....that is a staggering amount of punishment for a body to absorb. The injury risk is augmented but there is also an erosion of confidence that chased other top talents out of starting roles early; David Carr is a great example of this, though he was about as mobile as me.

I also worry that a failure to reduce the sack rate could lead to a change at QB. How many press conferences have we witnessed where a backup QB made headlines for inking a nice extension? Not too many.

If the hit piece on Caleb is accurate, how long before this coaching regime considers a change? The OL might have some opinions too.

Does your league penalize the QB for sacks. I know some do, but I don't think it's the norm.

In the dynasty league I have him in, yes. Sacks are negative points. But that's not my major concern....Injury and erosion of confidence worry me more than negative sack points. I'm not forced to play Caleb but I'd sure like him to stick around and not bow out early like Cam Newton because his body got wrecked.

 

[FarFromHome]

In the dynasty league I have him in, yes. Sacks are negative points.

No kidding. Never played in that scoring format. Interesting factor and definitely an actual factor.

 

[tommyGunZ]

M

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

I guess it’s a question of if you’re cognizant of the issue at hand. If you’re conscious and have identified an anti-homosexual agenda behind the article then sure you’ll think that. I have no problem if the issue is clearly in play and you put the article down because it is gay bait. My point—and this is my experience with the material—is that if you aren’t cognizant of the issue or the flashpoint then you might think the word choice an embellishment, but you might need the cultural awareness about Williams and underlying anti-gay bias before you can see and notice loaded words designed to instigate or provoke.

That’s seriously me. The only way I thought it was weird was because some guy turned the article into a jumping off point for his own “bear” gay porn fan fic. No BS.

Yeah, that's the way subtle homophobia and racism works. Insinuations with creative word choices to color discussions a certain way without being overtly homophobic or racist. Provides plausible deniability for the homophobe and it's subtle enough that people with anti-gay views just nod along.

This is actually a great example of what the term "woke" meant before it became politicized. Being "awake" enough to understand subtle racism/homophobia/etc. when it's being used, and calling it out for what it is. Thanks @rschroeder1 for pointing out Dunne's sleaziness.

 

[tommyGunZ]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

 

[Joe Schmo]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

In comparison to the 3rd overall pick last year:
Williams
18 gms, 62.3% compl, 3751 yds, 21 td, 6 int, 87 ru, 547 yds, 1 td, 10 fu
Maye
14 gms, 66.4% comp, 2563 yds, 16 td, 11 int, 58 ru, 432 yds, 2 td, 10 fu

Pretty much the same player except one has prettier nails.

 

[rockaction]

M

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

I guess it’s a question of if you’re cognizant of the issue at hand. If you’re conscious and have identified an anti-homosexual agenda behind the article then sure you’ll think that. I have no problem if the issue is clearly in play and you put the article down because it is gay bait. My point—and this is my experience with the material—is that if you aren’t cognizant of the issue or the flashpoint then you might think the word choice an embellishment, but you might need the cultural awareness about Williams and underlying anti-gay bias before you can see and notice loaded words designed to instigate or provoke.

That’s seriously me. The only way I thought it was weird was because some guy turned the article into a jumping off point for his own “bear” gay porn fan fic. No BS.

Yeah, that's the way subtle homophobia and racism works. Insinuations with creative word choices to color discussions a certain way without being overtly homophobic or racist. Provides plausible deniability for the homophobe and it's subtle enough that people with anti-gay views just nod along.

This is actually a great example of what the term "woke" meant before it became politicized. Being "awake" enough to understand subtle racism/homophobia/etc. when it's being used, and calling it out for what it is. Thanks @rschroeder1 for pointing out Dunne's sleaziness.

Actually, I'm totally familiar with where the word "woke" comes from. That's amusing. And once the context of the article is pointed out to me then I'm able to look for loaded language. But you wouldn't know why Dunne might be using those words if you weren't aware Caleb had cultural baggage that followed him and that it was an issue. And I know how language and plausible deniability works. I don't need the condescension nor your explanation. Why would you think I do? Don't bother answering. I don't care.

That you think I need these things clarified lets me know I'm dealing with an argumentative guy who I'd never hang out with and who couldn't possibly know that I know these things because I'd kick my own *** out of everywhere you tried to give your unearned, tendentiously pious lecture.

Here. Have a high horse on me. It's the only thing you're missing.

Seriously, that just leaves me laughing.

 

[Ray Barboni]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

I would prefer he threw the picks. QB’s playing scared, will never learn. He’s got all the arm talent in the world - but it’s useless if he’s afraid to challenge every part of the field.

 

[Joe Schmo]

M

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

I guess it’s a question of if you’re cognizant of the issue at hand. If you’re conscious and have identified an anti-homosexual agenda behind the article then sure you’ll think that. I have no problem if the issue is clearly in play and you put the article down because it is gay bait. My point—and this is my experience with the material—is that if you aren’t cognizant of the issue or the flashpoint then you might think the word choice an embellishment, but you might need the cultural awareness about Williams and underlying anti-gay bias before you can see and notice loaded words designed to instigate or provoke.

That’s seriously me. The only way I thought it was weird was because some guy turned the article into a jumping off point for his own “bear” gay porn fan fic. No BS.

Yeah, that's the way subtle homophobia and racism works. Insinuations with creative word choices to color discussions a certain way without being overtly homophobic or racist. Provides plausible deniability for the homophobe and it's subtle enough that people with anti-gay views just nod along.

This is actually a great example of what the term "woke" meant before it became politicized. Being "awake" enough to understand subtle racism/homophobia/etc. when it's being used, and calling it out for what it is. Thanks @rschroeder1 for pointing out Dunne's sleaziness.

Actually, I'm totally familiar with where the word "woke" comes from. That's amusing. And once the context of the article is pointed out to me then I'm able to look for loaded language. But you wouldn't know why Dunne might be using those words if you weren't aware Caleb had cultural baggage that followed him and that it was an issue. And I know how language and plausible deniability works. I don't need the condescension nor your explanation. Why would you think I do? Don't bother answering. I don't care.

That you think I need these things clarified lets me know I'm know I'm dealing with an argumentative guy who I'd never hang out with and who couldn't possibly know that I know these things because I'd kick my own *** out of everywhere you tried to give your unearned, tendentiously pious lecture.

Here. Have a high horse on me. It's the only thing you're missing.

Seriously, that just leaves me laughing.

Are you the pot or the kettle?

 

[tommyGunZ]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

I would prefer he threw the picks. QB’s playing scared, will never learn. He’s got all the arm talent in the world - but it’s useless if he’s afraid to challenge every part of the field.

That's fair. I don't know where I fall. I'd like him to be more aggressive but hard to blame a young QB for taking care of the football.

 

[Gally]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

I would prefer he threw the picks. QB’s playing scared, will never learn. He’s got all the arm talent in the world - but it’s useless if he’s afraid to challenge every part of the field.

That's fair. I don't know where I fall. I'd like him to be more aggressive but hard to blame a young QB for taking care of the football.

and not all interceptions are created equal. i wouldn't have an issue with more interceptions if they are due to being aggresive with correct reads and trying to make plays. More interceptions because of just poor throws or poor decisions would be worse. There is a happy medium here.

 

[InDitkaWeTrust]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

I would prefer he threw the picks. QB’s playing scared, will never learn. He’s got all the arm talent in the world - but it’s useless if he’s afraid to challenge every part of the field.

That's fair. I don't know where I fall. I'd like him to be more aggressive but hard to blame a young QB for taking care of the football.

and not all interceptions are created equal. i wouldn't have an issue with more interceptions if they are due to being aggresive with correct reads and trying to make plays. More interceptions because of just poor throws or poor decisions would be worse. There is a happy medium here.

Yesterday I listened to Tim Jenkins on Twitter breaking down Caleb's play in game 1. One of his takes is that the timing is currently a bit off. In the snaps, Caleb seems to be aiming his eyes in the correct direction, but often gets off of reads before they develop resulting in missed opportunities for open receivers. I suspect reps in Johnson's offense will cure that. IMO, the accuracy issue stems from the previous coaching staff who preached ZERO TURNOVERS. If you watch Caleb's misses on the intermediate to long throws, they are generally high or wide toward the sideline. On inside throws he more often than not missed low. These thing scream, "I don't want to turn the ball over" to me. Again, I think that's a fixable flaw with confidence in the system and from coach.

 

[tommyGunZ]

How much are Caleb's efforts to limit turnovers contributing to his lack of development? I.E. - would we prefer he just started slinging it, and throw 30 picks a la a young Peyton Manning? In 18 career games at age 23, he's now at 22 TDs vs only 6 picks. Would we like him more if he was at 30-30 TD:INT?

I would prefer he threw the picks. QB’s playing scared, will never learn. He’s got all the arm talent in the world - but it’s useless if he’s afraid to challenge every part of the field.

That's fair. I don't know where I fall. I'd like him to be more aggressive but hard to blame a young QB for taking care of the football.

and not all interceptions are created equal. i wouldn't have an issue with more interceptions if they are due to being aggresive with correct reads and trying to make plays. More interceptions because of just poor throws or poor decisions would be worse. There is a happy medium here.

That’s likely the optimal point Ben Johnson is trying to steer him to. It’s interesting when you look at his year 1 TD, INT, and yardage numbers, and the closest year 1 I can find is CJ Stroud.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

The assertion that Ty Dunne is homophobic based on his use of a few words taken out of context in a 7,000 word piece is deplorable to me. I'm not saying its a masterpiece but to go ad hominin while ignoring context and content is lazy and disgusting. To say that Dunne "randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" as @rschroeder1 does above is hyperbolic nonsense. The author has done nothing of the sort and you have to be desperately seeking offense to take that from the piece. I understand why Bears fans or others who hate the message prefer to attack the messenger though because it is a damning piece for the organization, particularly the second and third parts. I saw the same from Packer fans ten years ago when he wrote his story about Rodgers. I also think we've become so accustomed to bland, crappy sports writing that good long-form journalism based on over 8 months of investigation and hard work is something most of us aren't use to anymore and don't have the attention span to appreciate. We prefer to form an opinion and dismiss the entirety based on a small sound-bite. Half the sports writing we see these days is either AI generated or purely focused on engagement rather than quality. Dunne reminds me of old-school guys like Deford and Reilly, not just a dying breed but nearly non-existent in sports reporting today. I would like to say more and paste some context but don't want to derail this further. As JB has said, its going to be a fascinating year seeing the Williams/Johnson partnership play out in Chicago and the battle of NFC North rivalries which now involve four good quarterbacks (3 of them very young) and 4 good coaches.

 

[Ghost Rider]

M

Yeah, that was a long answer that sort of isn't the point. You're wondering why people are getting down on the "QB16 in redraft." They're not. They're getting down on a significant asset for their dynasty team who they think has sort of nuked it or has given the guy behind them a great advantage. And they're basing it on what may be a dubious hit piece but that wasn't what your original problem with them was. You gave your sort of specific objection and now you've widened your objection.

Which is fine. I feel very ambivalent about the piece, but something tells me that if it were really untrue his teammates would have said something about it. And none of this would be allowed to fester in any way.

But forget how I feel about the piece. That's not relevant to my point of this current post which is that if you felt that way then I wouldn't have explained to you what the dynasty players' frustration with it all was. You already knew. The more I think about it, you assigned everybody a position of irrationality about the subject when you actually were smuggling in a dissatisfaction with the story and the circus. You ought to have just said that instead of making peoples' arguments into a straw man you could complain about.

Because that's effectively what you did.

Now, I don't care a whole ton. You're not a bad guy. Your argument just wasn't entirely honest and mischaracterized other arguments as irrational. You should have just said you thought the whole thing was garbage and the story was biased and ******** and you didn't like it. That would have been an honest representation of your thoughts.

That's all. Sorry I had to point this out and you're probably not going to care for it—and I like your posts—but this is in effect what you did if your read the progression of your argument. I can't help but shrug about it. It's a touchy subject and touchy issue.

eta* by the way, the last thing I want to be is confrontational about this. I just don't really know how else to answer this other than addressing it. I could be wrong. That's just how I'm taking it.

I feel like there are busts at QB every year. And every year there are plenty of fantasy players who obviously draft those guys. People seem to be taking this one much more personally; and they are attacking that player that busted on them for much more things than just their performance on the field. And realistically, looking at his fantasy scoring, he's not really THAT bad. That's all. I referenced the article because you added it to the conversation. Feels like you're connecting a lot of dots and coming to a different picture than I intended on painting, some of it feeling like it paints me a little... underhanded? Which circles back to how this feels way too personal for people. I also offered the article as an olive branch to acknowledge I am ALSO personalizing the whole fiasco more than I'd like to, and as a reason why I'd like to step away from the discourse all together. Appreciate the civility though; still one of the best places on the internet to have an actual convo. Which to be fair isn't a super high bar to clear lolol, but still should be acknowledged as a nice thing about these boards. (although I haven't read all the replies to my verbal vomit yet, so maybe I'll take this back in a few minutes haha).

*edit and should have made a point to clarify it's not all FF owners of Caleb attacking him for more than just poor performance on the field. In reality it's probably a minority of them. Just another instance of a loud minority sounding more prominent than they are. And again, mixed with my personal frustration when the angle being taken is some attack on "manhood" and "masculinity" doing mental gymnastics to tie it into what it takes to be a leader. So it stands out to me more than maybe when people attack a player for other off the field concerns.

Sure. It’s entirely possible I’ve attributed a motive to you that I’m wrong about. Motive or intent is usually the last thing I try and address because it can be so wrong and so personal. I hope you note that: a) I try not to be too definitive because I might have your intent wrong and b) I’m trying to have a good faith argument by finding and alerting people to the possibility that your suspicion is correct and this person is not acting ethically or professionally. I’m not an expert so I am not in a position to judge but I will gladly present that side that I came across in the interest of earnest inquiry and full disclosure.

I have no overwhelming desire to be right about my previous position for the sake of being right. I’m sort of calling a potential foul on myself in pick-up basketball. I think if Dunne acted unprofessionally or unethically then it should be known. I just don’t know whether he did.

To be very specific as to the Dunne article, he wrote that Williams "sashayed" from the sideline to the huddle after a timeout, and also referred to Williams as a "glitzy gazelle."

As someone with a journalism degree and with work experience as a print and broadcast journalist...this is a mockery of journalism. Dunne simply made up those descriptors, and I would guess he knew exactly what he was doing.

Also as a gay man, it gets pretty tiring to read a purportedly serious article that randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" Suffice to say, I stopped reading pretty quick.

Also as a Bears fan...please play better Caleb, as this is getting exhausting way too quick!

I guess it’s a question of if you’re cognizant of the issue at hand. If you’re conscious and have identified an anti-homosexual agenda behind the article then sure you’ll think that. I have no problem if the issue is clearly in play and you put the article down because it is gay bait. My point—and this is my experience with the material—is that if you aren’t cognizant of the issue or the flashpoint then you might think the word choice an embellishment, but you might need the cultural awareness about Williams and underlying anti-gay bias before you can see and notice loaded words designed to instigate or provoke.

That’s seriously me. The only way I thought it was weird was because some guy turned the article into a jumping off point for his own “bear” gay porn fan fic. No BS.

Yeah, that's the way subtle homophobia and racism works. Insinuations with creative word choices to color discussions a certain way without being overtly homophobic or racist. Provides plausible deniability for the homophobe and it's subtle enough that people with anti-gay views just nod along.

This is actually a great example of what the term "woke" meant before it became politicized. Being "awake" enough to understand subtle racism/homophobia/etc. when it's being used, and calling it out for what it is. Thanks @rschroeder1 for pointing out Dunne's sleaziness.

Thinking like this is what is wrong with the world. You can say anything is racist, homophobic, etc. by using the "Well, he didn't say it, but it's a coded language," which means you can say anything you don't like is x, y or z. Feel free to blather back with a retort about how you are the enlightened one once again and how those who are not as enlightened as you are those colorfully worded insults that you always keep in your back pocket.

 

[rschroeder1]

The assertion that Ty Dunne is homophobic based on his use of a few words taken out of context in a 7,000 word piece is deplorable to me. I'm not saying its a masterpiece but to go ad hominin while ignoring context and content is lazy and disgusting. To say that Dunne "randomly inserts the assertion that "GAY PEOPLE WALK DIFFERENTLY THAN THE REST OF US!" as @rschroeder1 does above is hyperbolic nonsense. The author has done nothing of the sort and you have to be desperately seeking offense to take that from the piece. I understand why Bears fans or others who hate the message prefer to attack the messenger though because it is a damning piece for the organization, particularly the second and third parts. I saw the same from Packer fans ten years ago when he wrote his story about Rodgers. I also think we've become so accustomed to bland, crappy sports writing that good long-form journalism based on over 8 months of investigation and hard work is something most of us aren't use to anymore and don't have the attention span to appreciate. We prefer to form an opinion and dismiss the entirety based on a small sound-bite. Half the sports writing we see these days is either AI generated or purely focused on engagement rather than quality. Dunne reminds me of old-school guys like Deford and Reilly, not just a dying breed but nearly non-existent in sports reporting today. I would like to say more and paste some context but don't want to derail this further. As JB has said, its going to be a fascinating year seeing the Williams/Johnson partnership play out in Chicago and the battle of NFC North rivalries which now involve four good quarterbacks (3 of them very young) and 4 good coaches.

The dictionary definition of "sashay" as "walk in an ostentatious yet casual manner, typically with exaggerated movements of the hips and shoulders," or "to strut and move about in a conspicuous manner."

The dictionary examples in general pertain to how a woman might walk in a dress.

The very simple question is, when did this happen in the Seahawks-Bears as the author says it did? It shouldn't be that hard to isolate. The author doesn't say exactly when, but since it had to be during a stoppage of play, we can reasonably ascertain it took place coming out of a TV timeout, quarter break, and/or after a Bears or Seahawks timeout.

I don't have access to the full game replay, so I couldn't tell you that I just rewatched it. But I did watch that game in its entirety, and to be honest I can't recall a moment when Williams was "walking with exaggerated movements of his hips and shoulders." Oddly enough, there are no media reports of this in the aftermath of the game.

So, it seems we can reasonably conclude one of the following:

- Williams "sashayed" from the sidelines during a TV timeout, when people wouldn't notice on television. With that said, Dunne doesn't say in his article he was live in person at Soldier Field. He lives in western New York, so did he attend this game as credentialed media? Seems unlikely he attended as a fan. Likewise, no other credentialed media seemed to notice this weird form of walking he adopted at the game.

- Williams "sashayed" from the sidelines, but nobody else seemed to notice except for Dunne watching on television. This seems exceedingly unlikely, given that the game was a nationally broadcast Thursday night game the night after Christmas. Likewise, seems really unlikely the cameras and broadcast crew wouldn't pick up on it.

- Williams walked like a normal person, and Dunne just randomly chose a verb generally associated with women wearing dresses to describe a football player whose sexuality has been questioned in the past. It was a complete coincidence.

What you are asking us to believe defies credulity. Again, as someone who has worked as both a journalist and as a sports journalist, "I decided to use random verbs" is generally not an accepted practice.

 

[Faust]

Caleb Williams struggles, as Bears and everyone else continue to wait for his star turn

 

[Faust]

Courtney Cronin
Ben Johnson on Caleb Williams' accuracy and footwork syncing up: "There was a lot of good that came out of it. When he was doing it properly, the ball came out on time and I thought he was delivering accurate footballs. But it’s still not 100 percent all the time and that’s something that we’re working through."

https://x.com/courtneyrcronin/status/1965870039401402760?s=61

 

[massraider]

Williams "sashayed" from the sidelines, but nobody else seemed to notice except for Dunne watching on television

Nah, Tyler Dunne spoke to 32 very smart football people who also noticed him sashaying, but as luck would have it, they were all anonymous!

Dang it!! Perhaps next time he 'catwalks' to the huddle, someone will go on record.

 

[cdclopper]

Williams "sashayed" from the sidelines, but nobody else seemed to notice except for Dunne watching on television

Nah, Tyler Dunne spoke to 32 very smart football people who also noticed him sashaying, but as luck would have it, they were all anonymous!

Dang it!! Perhaps next time he 'catwalks' to the huddle, someone will go on record.

Its like listening to a whole 3 hour episode of Joe Rogan and then hearing about what clips ppl are talking about it on Twitter. I vaguely remember anything about "sayshaying" from article. How is this the takeaway?

In any event, assuming Dunne is a homophobe, alt-right Nazis, this reporter shed light on Caleb Williams having some defects as a person, a teammate and a professional athlete. Besides painting his nails of course. Unless Dunne is also a liar which is a hell of a thing to say about somebody.

 

[massraider]

Williams "sashayed" from the sidelines, but nobody else seemed to notice except for Dunne watching on television

Nah, Tyler Dunne spoke to 32 very smart football people who also noticed him sashaying, but as luck would have it, they were all anonymous!

Dang it!! Perhaps next time he 'catwalks' to the huddle, someone will go on record.

Its like listening to a whole 3 hour episode of Joe Rogan and then hearing about what clips ppl are talking about it on Twitter. I vaguely remember anything about "sayshaying" from article. How is this the takeaway?

In any event, assuming Dunne is a homophobe, alt-right Nazis, this reporter shed light on Caleb Williams having some defects as a person, a teammate and a professional athlete. Besides painting his nails of course. Unless Dunne is also a liar which is a hell of a thing to say about somebody.

Well there's also the part where he claims Caleb has some form of learning disability, as diagnosed by anonymous football coaches, the last word in that sort of thing.

Look, I have nothing to say about this homophobia thing, I was more commenting on the fact that no one went on record for such a serious piece of investigative journalism.

Which is what Bob McGinn has done his whole career. Makes sense this is where Dunne is. Most people don't care about that sort of ethics.