Happy New Year to Bears fans everywhere. May 2025 be a season of change for the better in Chicago because, frankly, 2024 couldn’t have gone much worse.

The Bears fell well below lofty expectations, cratering after the blown Hail Mary in Washington. The Bears fired a coordinator and then a head coach. Nothing coursecorrected a downward trajectory, and it’s entirely possible the Bears end their campaign on an 11-game losing streak after starting the season at 4-2.

RELATED CONTENT:

• Overreactions: Ownership selling the team, Ryan Poles and more
• Counting on Caleb Williams: Two throw show QB’s vast potential
• NFL schedule set for Bears-Packers clash in Week 18
• Why Caleb Williams will play Week 18 game against Packers

What a terrible turn. There are huge decisions ahead for this franchise simply must get right after messing it up so many times before.

We’re obviously looking forward in the first (of oh, so many) Bair Mail installments of the year. Let’s get to your questions in this Wednesday mailbag:

Danny Parish from Bourbonnais, Ill.

Would Bears extend Poles to match new coach hire to create some sort of continuity heading forward?

Bair: While that seems crazy to some Bears fans, who would look at an extension as a reward for a poorly constructed roster, it makes more sense than one would initially think.

If Kevin Warren’s statement from November that Ryan Poles will be the Bears GM moving forward still stands – I believe it does – it would make sense to align contracts for the GM and a new head coach.

That’s a real partnership between two people, and coaching candidates with the leverage of multiple opportunities want stability. Getting rid of Poles in the next few seasons would be a mess, with a new GM possibly saddled with a coach they didn’t pick.

If Ben Johnson’s the top option, we keep hearing national reporters say he wants alignment with the GM and the organization on how they’re going to fix problems. The Bears have time and again drafted a quarterback and then fired the head coach the next year. That creates chaos this team doesn’t need.

If Poles is the guy, lock him up to a longer term. If he’s not, part ways right now and start over.

Paul Bernacki from Chicago

Why has there been talk about replacing Cairo Santos? He was recently signed to a 4 year contract. Why? If you’re now planning on releasing him. And my big question is why didn’t the Bears trot him out there for a game tying FG against Seattle? I thought he was pretty good as far as a Bears scoring chances this year. I know this is the least of their issues, but I don’t understand why?

Bair: I don’t think Cairo Santos is a major problem on this team. He’s under contract for some time, through 2027 after the extension you mentioned, and has been pretty good this season. He’s 20-for-24 through 16 games, though two of those misses were blocks. He’s also 7-of-8 from 50-plus, which isn’t bad.

In terms of why he didn’t attempt a field goal late in the Seahawks game, they hadn’t reached his range. He wasn’t hitting from deep from that side of the field in pregame warmups, and Thomas Brown was clearly trying to win the game in regulation over a tie.

Santos may not have a bomber leg as others in the NFL do, but there are bigger issues with the team than the kicker. He’s operating under a relatively friendly contract

Michael Steinmann from Myrtle Beach, S.C.

It’s an overeaction for fans to want the team sold after 40+ years of dismal ineptitude from the overmatched McCaskey family? How long should we wait, Mr. McCaskey lapdog masquerading as a reporter? Will 80 years be enough?

Bair: Michael’s question refers to this article about Bears overreactions – you can read it here — a generally fun, easy read where I mentioned the prospect of the McCaskeys selling the team. Let’s clarify a little bit.

It is not an overreaction for Bears fans to want an ownership change. That’s totally fair, considering the team’s track record under George McCaskey, especially with the series of misses on quarterback and head coach, and a cycle of having the HC fired a year after the QB was drafted.

All that makes sense and I understand and empathize with the fan sentiment. I just don’t think there’s any way that actually happens. Can’t see the McCaskeys selling the team. That’s why it was dubbed an “overreaction,” because I don’t think we’ll see a sale.

Robert Juchcinski  from Round Lake Beach, Ill.

Why have they stopped throwing the ball to Cole Kmet?

Bair: That one is a real mystery in this season that I can’t figure out. Tight end Cole Kmet has been productive when targeted, but the volume has slowed. He has three targets in the last four games. He has run 441 routes, 74 more than  the last two seasons, but has just 53 targets. By constrast, he had 90 targets in 367 routes run last season.

He also had 45 catches on 53 targets so he’s reliable, with positives in most advanced starts. His target share is down to 12 percent of the pass attempts, as it was 24.5 percent last season. His yards of separation is almost equal to last season, too, so it’s a bit confusing that he hasn’t been as involved. Some of that has to do with an improved receiver corps, but Kmet should be more involved than he has. The team is better when he’s productive.