Here's why drafting Brock Bowers at No. 9 isn't that crazy of an idea

Good morning!

I sat at the keyboard today, trying to decide what I wanted my big thought of the day to be, and I couldn’t land on one thing. As I continue experimenting with the daily newsletter format, I’ve been running into this occasionally and concluded that I don’t have to always have one big thought for the day.

So, here are some shorter thoughts on various things that caught my interest recently.

No-go on Fangio …

The Miami Dolphins and Vic Fangio agreed to part ways on Wednesday. The immediate reaction from Bears fans was: “Bring him home!”

I get that. Fangio was the author of the 2018 Bears defense that forced 36 turnovers and helped Chicago win the NFC North. It was a bright spot in an otherwise disappointing era of Bears football. The Bears have a DC spot open; Fangio is a free agent… But it’s not happening.

First and foremost, Fangio runs a 3-4 defense, and the Bears have spent the last two-plus years building out the personnel for a 4-3 defense with a heavy emphasis on Cover 2.

Secondly, while Nick Sirianni was non-committal on the idea on Wednesday, Adam Schefter has already reported that the Dolphins let Fangio out of his deal with the knowledge that he was planning on taking the Eagles DC job so that he could be closer to his family in Pennsylvania.

So, 2018 nostalgia aside, a Fangio “homecoming” simply isn’t a fit for the Chicago Bears.

The Bears drafting Brock Bowers at No. 9 isn’t that wild of an idea …

On Tuesday, I wrote about what the Bears could do with the ninth pick in the NFL Draft. I broke the story into categories: offensive weapon, offensive tackle, and edge rusher, and left the window open on a potential trade back (without getting into detail on what that might look like).

Along with Washington wide receiver Rome Odunze — and a handful of other receivers — I mentioned Brock Bowers as a potential target for the Bears at No. 9. There was some pushback on that, and I think that’s something I want to revisit here.

The contrarian argument is that the Bears have Cole Kmet, whom they signed to a four-year, $50 million extension last summer, so why would the Bears draft another tight end when they just extended their “starting tight end.” The first issue with that logic is that there can only be one “starting” tight end in the Bears’ offense.

Shane Waldron’s offense operated predominantly in 11 personnel (1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR) in 2023. That grouping accounted for 63.5 percent of their offensive snaps, and that’s normal for the modern-day NFL offense. Waldron’s offense’s use of 11 personnel ranked 17th in the league last season, so that 63.5 percent number isn’t as large as you would think.

Waldron’s offense ran 31.6 percent of his offensive snaps in either 12 or 13 personnel. 12 personnel features 1 RB, 2 TE, and 2 WR. 13 personnel features 1 RB, 3 TE, and 1 WR. So, Waldron was lining up two or more tight ends 31.6 percent of the time last season. The idea that the Bears can’t add another “starting” tight end is an archaic belief.

Cole Kmet is a very good tight end. I lobbied for him to get an extension, and he had a solid 2023 season. However, Kmet is not the dynamic, yards-after-the-catch playmaker that Brock Bowers is. Adding Bowers’ dynamic after the catch ability would add another dynamic weapon to the Bears’ offense. Bowers’ 689 yards after contact is the most by a college tight end in the last decade. The next closest tight end was Sam LaPorta, who turned out to be one heck of a player for the Detroit Lions this season.

Also …