The Chicago Bears picked up a much-needed victory Sunday against the Las Vegas Raiders, evening their record at 2-2 after dropping their first two games. But plenty of questions remain.
What changes will the Bears make during their week off, specifically on the offensive line? Will Austin Booker be activated from injured reserve to potentially help the pass rush? Brad Biggs answers these questions and much more in his weekly mailbag.
Ozzy Trapilo looked good enough at right tackle to start. What about moving Darnell Wright to left tackle to replace Braxton Jones and using Theo Benedet as the swing tackle? — Chris R., Midlothian
A good number of folks wondered the same thing. Jones is headed to the bench for the Week 6 game at Washington and, I believe, Benedet will be the man to replace him. Wright’s status for the next game is up in the air. He missed the victory over the Las Vegas Raiders with a right elbow injury and did not participate in practice Tuesday.
It’s possible Wright will be back in action when the Bears are back on the field Tuesday, but we’ll have to wait and see. The good news is the club clearly doesn’t believe it’s something that will have him out too long. Otherwise, he would have been placed on injured reserve.
Switching Wright to the left side is something the Bears mulled publicly before the start of the offseason program. Then, we never saw him there. Jones, Trapilo, Kiran Amegadjie and finally Benedet all took turns at left tackle over the summer. That clearly told us the team’s preference was to keep Wright at right tackle.
Wright has been a little up and down this season, which isn’t unlike his first two years in the league. He can be an absolute physical force in the run game. Coach Ben Johnson recently raved about Wright’s elite athleticism for an offensive lineman and talked about doing stuff to get him in space in the running game because he moves so well.
However, Wright can be prone to lapses in play, something that hopefully smooths out soon because if you’re still saying that about a player going into Year 4, chances are that’s always going to be an issue.
Despite missing Week 4, he’s tied with Kansas City Chiefs right tackle Jawaan Taylor for the most penalties in the league with six. Wright has been called for two false starts, two holds (one was super iffy in Week 1), one illegal man downfield and a chop block.
Asking him to switch sides in the middle of the season and coming off an injury probably isn’t Plan A at Halas Hall. Instinct tells me Benedet, who played left tackle when Jones was removed from the game against the Raiders in the second quarter, will get the next shot at the job.
Could Wright be a consideration before the end of the season? Anything is possible, but if the Bears really liked this option, they probably would have been more proactive in the offseason when four other players got a shot on the left side.
If Benedet falters, the Bears might try Trapilo again at left tackle before switching Wright. Let’s see how Benedet does at left tackle and see where Wright is at health-wise next week.
Will Austin Booker be activated off injured reserve and be back for the Commanders game, or do you expect it to take longer for him to return to the field? — @rsicily
Bears defensive end Austin Booker celebrates his third sack of a preseason game against the Dolphins on Aug. 10, 2025, at Soldier Field. (Stacey Wescott/Chicago Tribune)
This was another popular question this week. The first step will be the Bears beginning a 21-day return-to-practice window for Booker. I think there is a chance that occurs this coming week, but no one has specifically addressed a timeline. After Booker was injured playing special teams in the second preseason game against the Buffalo Bills, I was told it could be up to a six-week injury. Those initial timelines always involve a little guesswork. If Booker returns to practice Tuesday, his status for the game would be dependent on how he looks and his stamina level. I’m sure he has been doing running and agility work on the side, but he has missed a substantial amount of practice and there’s a difference between being in shape and being in football shape.
Running back Travis Homer (calf) and linebacker Amen Ogbongbemiga (shoulder) also are eligible to start their return-to-practice clocks, but Booker might be the closest at this point. The Bears will have to clear a spot on the 53-man roster for Booker when they do add him (not when they start the return-to-practice window). They are carrying 10 defensive linemen right now if you count special teams standout Daniel Hardy, who also dabbles as a strong-side linebacker; it would be unusual to have 11 on the 53-man roster.
If Kyler Gordon missed four games, why wasn’t he placed on IR to maximize roster spots? — @sillydipper
Bears cornerback Kyler Gordon takes a video with a fan at the end of Bears Family Fest on Aug. 3, 2025, at Soldier Field. (Eileen T. Meslar/Chicago Tribune)
Good question. It’s not about maximizing roster spots, it’s about having a player to fill in to replace the guy who isn’t available because of injury. The Bears had Nick McCloud in place to fill the nickel role in Gordon’s absence, and behind him was Josh Blackwell, who has experience playing the slot. The 53-man roster isn’t what is important here, it’s the game-day roster. With a full practice squad, they were not short on bodies.
Keep in mind, teams are limited to designating eight players to return from injured reserve during the season. There are three players already in that mix — defensive end Austin Booker, running back Travis Homer and linebacker Amen Ogbingbemiga. In 2023, the Bears used their eighth and final designation on Nov. 18, so those can add up quickly if a team gets hit with a rash of injuries.
Plus, by putting Gordon on IR, it would have ensured he missed a minimum of four games. At the time of the re-injury of the hamstring, the Bears probably hoped he would only miss three games. I think they handled this right because it’s not as if they were going to be able to upgrade over McCloud with a free agent. There’s a reason McCloud made the team. The last thing the front office wants to do is use designation to return moves early in the season when they are not essential.
Gordon returned to practice last Friday and was a partial participant Tuesday. Barring something unexpected, I believe he will be in action against the Commanders on Oct. 13.
You mentioned the Bears defense has been good on third down. What coverage have they primarily been playing? — Mike F., Chicago
The Bears are No. 1 in the league on third down through four weeks, allowing opponents to convert 29.3% (12-for-41) of the time. The San Francisco 49ers ranked second at 32% entering their game Thursday night against the Los Angeles Rams.
It’s a little surprising given the fact the pass rush can be generously described as average. The defense, with many of the same players, ranked 13th on third down in 2024 at 37.6%.
Credit goes to defensive coordinator Dennis Allen and his assistants for the ability of the unit to get off the field in critical situations. Taking a close look at the numbers, the average is third-and-6.63 yards. The Bears have forced the opponent into third-and-8 or more 16 times. Here’s what really sticks out: Opponents have converted only 3 of 25 situations in which it was third-and-5 or more.
The Bears have played zone coverage on 64.5% of passing situations on third down. More specifically, they’ve been in Cover-2 29% of the time and Cover-4 19.4%. So, they’ve used a two-high shell on 58.6% of third downs, which is the third-highest rate in the league behind only the Los Angeles Chargers and Minnesota Vikings, a couple of pretty good defenses.
What does that tell you? The defenders have been really disciplined in zone coverage in terms of getting depth, keeping eyes on the quarterback and then breaking downhill on the football to take away windows at the second level. They’ve also tackled well in those situations. You can’t have the success the Bears have had, even with a small sample size, without those factors.
Where the Bears need to get better is on first down. They were gashed on first down in Week 2 in Detroit, and the numbers took a hit in Las Vegas when Ashton Jeanty had a 64-yard touchdown run on first down. The Bears are last in the league allowing opponents to average 8.37 yards on first down. There’s a big gap — 1.66 yards — before you get to the 31st-ranked Pittsburgh Steelers at 6.71 yards. That’s why the Bears have faced the fewest third downs in the league (41).
Do you see Cole Kmet’s drops and penalties affecting his playing time when Colston Loveland returns? — Jerry L., Chicago
Bears tight end Cole Kmet (85) is unable to pull in a pass near the goal line in the second quarter against the Raiders on Sept. 28, 2025, in Las Vegas. (Chris Sweda/Chicago Tribune)
Kmet had one dropped pass in the game and he would tell you it wasn’t his best showing as he was also called for two false starts, an issue that has plagued the offense as a whole. The Bears have nine false starts, one fewer than the Green Bay Packers, who lead the NFL.
I doubt Loveland’s return from a hip injury that kept him out Sunday will have a major impact on Kmet’s playing time. The good news is Loveland was a partial participant in Tuesday’s practice, which bodes well for his return in Week 6.
Kmet was on the field for all 68 snaps against the Raiders. In Loveland’s absense, Durham Smythe was on the field for 33 plays and Stephen Carlson, elevated from the practice squad, saw 10 snaps. Personnel usage is heavily dependent on the opponent and game plan, and the Bears are going to want to lean into their packages with two tight ends.
What also stood out: Kmet was targeted nine times by Caleb Williams, his highest total in 10 games dating to last season. He made only three catches for 46 yards (with a team-long 29-yarder) but he has been highly productive as a target in the past. I’d expect Kmet, who has been on the field for 93% of the snaps this season, to be better next time out.
The running game isn’t contributing enough to the Bears offense. Why isn’t Roschon Johnson getting touches, especially in short-yardage situations? — @martinvtorres
The running game hasn’t been what the Bears have desired to this point, especially in the last game, but the coaches have told you — by their personnel decisions — they don’t believe Johnson is the key to what ails the ground attack. Not to this point, anyway.
The offense has actually been solid with short-yardage opportunities. The Bears have run the ball five times on third-and-1 and gained 20 yards total, converting four first downs. The only failure came on a sneak by Caleb Williams. The Bears are 0-for-1 on fourth-and-1 run plays and, again, they came up short on a QB sneak.
With kickers in the NFL making longer kicks than ever before but those kicks requiring a lower trajectory — leading to more blocks — have NFL teams ever considered moving farther back than the typical 7 yards from scrimmage to kick? — @canuckboy670am
Bears cornerback Josh Blackwell (39) blocks a field-goal attempt by Raiders kicker Daniel Carlson to give the Bears a 25-24 win Sunday, Sept. 28, 2025, in Las Vegas. (Armando L. Sanchez/Chicago Tribune)
NFL kicks (field goals and extra points) are almost always placed 8 yards behind the line of scrimmage. It has been that way for nearly 40 years. Way back in the day, place kicks were spotted 7 yards behind the line.
Your question prompted me to go down a rabbit hole looking for when specifically it shifted to 8 yards behind the line of scrimmage from 7. Regular Mailbag enjoyer Pat Mannelly didn’t know. It has been 8 yards deep since he can remember, and he got to the NFL in 1998.
Eventually, I went through some old NFL game books (play-by-play) and found field goals by Kevin Butler during the 1985 season that were plus-17-yard kicks, meaning they were spotted 7 yards behind the line of scrimmage with 10 yards added for the length of the end zone. I found multiple field goals over multiple games that all fell into that category.
At the start of the 1986 season, Butler’s field goals were plus-18 yards in multiple games. So, as best I can tell, at least for the Bears, the subtle shift of 1 yard first appeared in 1986.
Timing of the operation — snap to placement to kick — is the key. From 8 yards, a smooth operation is run between 1.25 and 1.35 seconds. There are several factors for why the ball is not placed deeper on field-goal tries. For starters, long snappers are accustomed to one distance and they are so good at their craft, they can snap the ball so the laces are in the exact same spot when the holder catches the ball every time. That makes the operation much smoother as the holder can simply place the ball down for the kick instead of placing it down and having to rotate the ball to get the laces facing the goal post. If you start mixing up the distance of the snap, that’s going to make it more difficult for the long snapper to have that feel and touch needed every time. For instance, if you do a normal snap at 8 yards depth in the second quarter and in the fourth quarter you try to snap the ball with a depth of 9½ yards, the laces might not be perfect on the snap requiring the holder to rotate the ball.
Second, a deeper kicking point would make the angle for rushers coming off the edge easier to rush and potentially block a kick. While they would have a slightly greater distance to cover, the snap would take longer to get to the holder. Edge rushers really have to turn the corner in a hurry now to have a chance for a block at 8 yards, something Josh Blackwell did Sunday when the Raiders had shoddy protection. Move the snap back and the edge rusher doesn’t have to bend as much.
This exact topic came up in the Mailbag in 2019. Steve DeOssie, who is considered the godfather of modern long snappers, told me the distance he used in the 1980s and into the 1990s was based more on the holder than other factors. DeOssie played for a handful of teams, most notably the Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants and New England Patriots.
“When I was the Giants, (Jeff) Hostetler was good (at) about 7¾ yards,” DeOssie said. “That worked out perfect because the way he caught the ball, it made the laces go right where we wanted them. When (Scott) Zolak was with the Patriots holding, he wasn’t as good as Jeff, but once Scott got it down we noticed that he put the spot at 7½ yards, that’s when he got the laces forward and he didn’t have to make much of an adjustment. The only time we adjusted was when the holder needed to get another quarter revolution on the snap or something.
“The less they have to turn the snap, especially if you had a new holder, it was easier to adjust the back a half-yard or up a half-yard, whatever. The basic spot for us was 7¾ yards. I can’t ever remember it being 8 when I was snapping. I always had kickers that didn’t care. It was always important to get it right with the holder.”
Since it’s the bye week, can we talk about the new stadium renderings released by the team? How can a team adjacent to a city that celebrates its architecture like no other select such a generic, bland design that is neither innovative nor unique? — @mattharlin
I wasn’t really struck one way or the other by the renderings other than noting that it was the latest projected stadium complex in which it was impossible to see where parking will be. That’s one of the many glaring issues with Soldier Field, and in order to significantly improve the fan experience, I’d think the Bears would want to have many large asphalt surfaces within eyesight of the new stadium. The Union Pacific Northwest line runs to the projected site, but the percentage of folks who live anywhere near that Metra option has to be low.
As far as the design of the stadium, you’re probably asking the wrong guy. The aesthetic appeal of the outside of the building doesn’t do a whole lot for me. Does the outside view of Soldier Field turn you off, or are you more bothered by snarled traffic getting in and out of the area, having to walk forever to get inside after you’ve parked, bathroom lines, tight corridors inside the stadium, subpar video boards and more?
What to know about the Chicago Bears’ possible move from Soldier Field to suburban Arlington Heights
I’m more interested in what my view of the action from inside the stadium. Will bathroom lines stretch beyond what the eye can see? Is the concourse wide enough to handle concession lines and folks moving about? Are the video boards large and of high quality? I would guess the team is planning significant upgrades in all of these areas.
The Bears’ effort to build a new stadium isn’t a bid to win architectural awards. They want to construct a stadium that can generate revenue 365 days a year, and that means decisions are going to be based on functionality first and then ways to maximize profits with clubs, suites, VIP experiences and such. In what projects to be a sprawling entertainment district — if and after they get shovels in the dirt — this is about constructing a pyramid of money.
If you can get to your seat with greater ease and have a good view of the action, isn’t that what matters most?