Well, that was easy.
The Chicago Bears welcomed the Carolina Panthers to Soldier Field on Sunday and then sent them home with a 36-10 loss as a parting gift, delivering a performance that was as impressive as it was dominant.
The Bears offense rolled up more than 400 yards and scored five touchdowns while the defense contributed four sacks and three takeaways. That blowout gave the Bears a pretty strong tailwind as they now head to the United Kingdom for a Week 6 clash against Jacksonville.
There’s a lot to unpack after Sunday’s game. Tribune reporters Colleen Kane and Dan Wiederer work through four true-or-false questions ahead of the London trip.
True or false? DJ Moore’s breakout performance Sunday showed that the talk of his early season frustrations was overblown.
Colleen Kane: False.
OK, if you’re talking about some of the social media investigations into Moore’s facial expressions and body language, that was maybe a little overblown. But even Moore admitted last week it was “a little bit” hard to be patient as he and Williams tried to get on the same page.
“And then it’s (also) not,” Moore said, “because we were all rookies at one point, being a vet. So I know what he’s going through. You can’t be too frustrated. I mean, you can be frustrated within the way you’re playing as a player, but not at a young guy who’s still coming along.”
It’s only natural that a player who has topped 1,150 receiving yards four times in his career would be anxious to get going when he had just 189 receiving yards through four games. It certainly was worth keeping an eye on to see if any frustrations boiled over.
That’s why Sunday’s breakthrough, in which Moore had five catches for 105 yards and two touchdowns, was so big for the Bears. You captured the scene after Moore’s 30-yard touchdown catch — his second of the day after a 34-yarder in the first quarter — well after the game.
Moore’s celebration was a release of all of the emotions that had built up as he struggled to get going last month.
Dan Wiederer: That howl Moore let out after his second score Sunday was reminiscent of the one Williams let out the moment he was drafted by the Bears in April. It was so genuine and emotion-filled. And when I asked Moore about the heightened energy he felt in that moment, he smiled wide.
“I had a lot of energy (right there),” Moore said. “You know why? Because we had been hoping on that play. And we finally connected on it.”
There’s no doubt it was a “Finally!” moment for both players as they work on their connection. Moore considers himself a pretty patient dude overall. But in Week 4, while dismissing the suggestion that his patience was being tested in the season’s first month, he did offer this.
“I mean it’s a thin line. And I think I’m below the line (by) like two inches.”
After Sunday, he may have dropped seven or eight inches below that line.
I said throughout last week that I wasn’t concerned about Moore’s frustrations becoming a bigger issue. But I did want to keep an eye on how he handled his impatience and channeled his energy in ways that were productive for him individually, for Williams and for the team as a whole. Sunday’s production should offer satisfaction and the opportunity to decompress briefly. Now Moore and Williams will work to continue building on their chemistry going forward.
True or false? The degree of difficulty of Sunday’s blowout win over Carolina must remain a big part of the evaluation of the Bears’ performance.
Wiederer: True. No doubt about this one whatsoever.
We were commenting from the press box in real time about just how unimpressive the Panthers were. And then they went from bad to worse and injured with players dropping left and right within the game.
You heard me repeat several times last week that, while there are no layup wins in the NFL, this one qualified as a lightly contested 10-foot jumper. But to the Bears’ credit, they squared their shoulders, took their time and drained the shot without anxiety. All net. And that counts for something.
The Bears held a lead of 20 points or more for the entire second half and never left the door open even a crack for a Carolina rally. That’s the sign of a focused team that now has the ability to thump significantly inferior opponents without needing to empty the tank.
Through a Week 5 lens only, the Bears certainly owe no one any apologies for the team that appeared on their schedule and showed up in their home stadium. They can only play the game that’s in front of them. And the Bears did that in impressive fashion across the board Sunday.
Through a bigger picture view, however, there must be an understanding that much greater challenges are ahead. And so long as the Bears acknowledge that and don’t grow overly intoxicated with Sunday’s win, they’ll be fine.
Kane: I think the Bears can do both things simultaneously. They can look at the injury-plagued opponent they just beat by 26 points and understand they have far more difficult matchups ahead, particularly as they move into division play in November. And they can use the win as a confidence builder — because they did what they were supposed to do against an inferior opponent.
Caleb Williams threw for 304 yards, cemented the aforementioned connection with Moore and most importantly looked like he is learning, improving and adding new elements to his NFL game each week. For the second week in a row, the running game found success, with 128 rushing yards and three touchdowns. And the defense continues to get huge plays from all over the place as they added three more takeaways to their season total. They now have 11, ranked third in the NFL through Sunday night.
Those things are nothing to sniff at, even if they came against the lowly Panthers.
I’ve said this before, but I think the team’s leadership is made up of some very grounded players, including veterans who know what it takes to win week in and week out. They’ll need them to make sure the team doesn’t get overly confident. And if they do, this feels like another win the Bears can build on against the Jaguars — as long as they don’t get too thrown off by the disruption of the London week.
True or false? The Bears are taking the right approach by arriving in London on Tuesday for Sunday’s game against the Jaguars.
Kane: True. At least it seems like the right approach to me to have the team fly out Monday night, arrive Tuesday morning and have a few days to acclimate to the time difference.
The Athletic just did a study on this and reported that in 36 games in London, the teams arrived on the same day 17 times. But for the other 19 games, the team that arrived earlier won 12 of the games.
Now, the Jaguars are pros at the London trip, having played 11 games there since 2013, and they’re arriving Friday for their two-game stint. They did the same last year and won both of their games.
So maybe they know better. But it seems to me it can’t hurt to have the team get settled in there, even if it does present more opportunities for distractions being in a different city and country.
Wiederer: The downside to leaving so early is the disruption of the usual game-week routine, which some teams subscribe to with great dedication. But I think the Bears can manage their London schedule in a way that keeps them locked in on their preparation for Sunday’s game while also allowing the time to adjust their body clocks in a way that’s productive.
In 2019, when we headed to London late in the week for Bears-Raiders, I still vividly recall how wrecked I was by the jet lag and wondered how Bears players were going to respond in the heat of a high-intensity NFL game. As it turns out, they didn’t respond so well. In what was an undeniably lethargic performance in the first half, the Bears had only 44 yards and two first downs and fell behind 17-0.
They rallied to take the lead with a 21-point explosion in the third quarter but ultimately lost 24-21, bringing a flood of questions about their travel strategy.
We’ll see how Matt Eberflus’ group does with this week’s itinerary. But, for me, it sure feels like the leave-early approach has more pros than cons.
True or false? The NFLPA’s desire to push media interviews with players out of team locker rooms is understandable.
Wiederer: True. On the surface? I get it. There is — and has always been — a bit of an awkward dynamic of holding conversations within a space where players get dressed and undressed. And it can be particularly uncomfortable with the massive scrums that occur for high-profile players in a market as big as ours.
I truly believe there’s an opening here for the players’ union and the Pro Football Writers of America to engage in a productive conversation about what kinds of alternatives might be feasible, particularly if both sides are genuinely solution-oriented and not dug in with a combative posture.
The issue here, though, is less about the forum of availability for player interviews than it is about the availability itself. And if the NFLPA and its members are aggressively trying to use this moment to dodge their contractual responsibilities for speaking with reporters, then we have a much different discussion here. The biggest concern, from a media perspective, is that too many players are simply looking for a way out from having to regularly talk with reporters. And that part, I don’t really get.
I’ve said it a thousand times during my time covering the NFL and high-level college hoops before that. I don’t need to be inside a team locker room just to say that I’m inside the locker room. But I would like for reporters to have the opportunity to do their jobs properly and responsibly. That means having the access to players that has been agreed upon, which offers the chance to build relationships and connect with a team in ways that provide informed insight and perspective to tell the stories we’re trying to tell.
There’s a solution here that can work for both sides. I’m sure of it. Both sides just need to be engaged in this conversation in good faith.
Kane: I’m with you. For players, having reporters — some with cameras — in a place where they dress is undoubtedly uncomfortable, though I do think most reporters are respectful of athletes by not approaching them while they change. And of course, it can be uncomfortable for reporters too.
If locker room access goes away, the question, as you mentioned, is how do we create a forum where reporters still can have casual conversations with players that will help inform their work? How can we ensure that we will be able to speak with the players we need to in order to write our stories on a daily basis?
In a locker room session done the right way — when players are present at their lockers — a reporter should be able to speak with multiple players. If reporters are moved out of the locker room, it would require the team’s staff to do even more work than they already do to make sure the players that are needed are available, especially with a media corps as large as the one in Chicago.
I understand why there can be a disconnect between players and reporters about media access, beyond just the awkwardness that comes from reporters questioning players about how they do their jobs. Players have so much they need to focus each day during a football week. Media access is just a blip in their days between recovery, training, film sessions and practices. Meanwhile, a reporter’s entire plan for the day of work sometimes can hinge on whether he or she gets a five-minute interview with a player.
I hope a solution can be agreed upon that respects both groups trying to do their jobs at their places of work. Because, yes, the locker room is the players’ space. But it also — for a very long time — has been the place where reporters do their jobs.
