Bears offseason

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:28 am

Football Outsiders goes a bit further and ranks the Chicago line as the 7th best pass-blocking line in the NFL and 8th best run-blocking. They rank the Chicago line as the best in getting first downs on rushes of 2 yards or less on 3rd and 4th down.

Dallas, in comparison, ranks 13th in pass-blocking and 5th in run-blocking.

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol
Last edited by Stannis on Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:29 am

jersey cubs fan wrote:Also in the mind of people that fired the OL coach


well, I guess you can't argue with someone who is really really really wrong.
0 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:31 am

Gabriel was very surprised, as were others, that the Bears fired the line coach and chalked it up to unpopularity among the players. That doesn't mean he was bad, though.
0 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:35 am

it's like goony has his setting stuck on wrong.

I mean, I don't know how much more proof you'd need that the Bears were good pass blockers. I guess you can go the demagogue route and talk about their record some more.
0 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 12:41 am

Statistically speaking, Romo is safer in Chicago than in Dallas.
0 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

davell
Superstar
Posts: 19998
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:55 pm
x 1207
x 1631

Re: Bears offseason

Postby davell » Thu Jan 05, 2017 6:08 am

What teams are in need of a QB enough to use a top 3 round pick on one?(Bears)

Jets- This ones easy. Could see them go after a veteran though, leaving them flexibility with the draft.

Bills- Assuming they get rid of Taylor, are they going to give Manuel the job? He's a FA himself. Jones?

Browns- Dumpster fire, I'm confident they'll take one in the 2nd, at the latest. Maybe pick 12. Or trade for Garoppolo.

Texans- Possible they take one with Osweiler looking bad. But could wait a year. Doubt they'd use an early pick anyway.

Jags- I'm sure they'll give Bortles one more year and likely look towards 2018 to try again. But I could still see them taking a guy in the 2nd or 3rd, if they liked him.

Saints- Time to start looking for Brees' successor? I could see them using a pick this year.....But they can wait for 2018 too.

Chargers- Its time for them to look past Rivers. Still, my guess is they'll wait for 2018.

49ers- New management AND coach. They'll move on from Kaepernick. Wouldn't surprise me to see them move down and still get a guy in the 1st. Definitely will take a guy though in the early rounds....

Cardinals- Could see them take Palmers heir. At any point.

So, that's 9 teams, plus the Bears. If the Redskins don't keep Cousins, I'll be shocked. If somehow they don't, then one of these other teams fills their need long term anyway.

Teams likely to have a new starter in 2017

Bills, Jets, Browns, 49ers, maybe the Broncos(Bears)

FA Options

Glennon, Barkley, Hoyer

Guys to be cut or traded for cheaply

Taylor, Romo, Kaepernick, Fitzpatrick

Guys that are also trade bait

Garoppolo, McCarron

Top 3 Round options

Kizer, Trubisky, Watson, Mahomes, Webb, Josh Allen(if he declares), maybe Kayya

If you look at how many options there are, its a dangerous game of musical chairs for any of the above teams that think they're trying to compete next year.

The Broncos aren't going to draft another guy, but I could see them going after Romo. If they stand pat though, would the Jets or Bills be most likely to look at themselves as trying to win? If he goes anywhere, my guess is its one of those 3 teams.

Based on these options, I truly don't see why Buffalo isn't happy enough with Taylor, especially for 2017. They could keep him, try and compete, and draft a guy in 2018, if they want to.

Unless we keep Jay, or a team loses a QB in preseason, I'm not seeing a landing spot for him. Much less Kaepernick. Guess SF, Cleveland, or the Jets could use Cutler as a stopgap? Or they can just go younger immediately.

If Garoppolo gets dealt, it takes another team off the board for need obviously. But, the reason this is important to me, is it shows that we can wait things out and still get one of this group in the 2nd or even the 3rd. To me, it makes total sense to do just that, if there's not a ton of separation in the evals. Lots can change between now and after the combine. But, as of right now, it truly doesn't sound as if ANY of these guys are NFL-ready for 2017. Nor does it seem as if there's more than a top 15 true talent level guy and all of this group appears to have 2nd round grades at worst(outside of Kayya)

I didn't get much out of the horsefeathers PC today. But I did get that the Bears are going to spend money and they know they need to win more games. To me, that doesn't lend itself to taking a QB at 3. Especially not, if its even a perceived reach.

If there's not a huge separator between these guys, I can see us waiting until the 3rd to draft a guy. Because we should still see a guy or two on this list to try and groom.

And with the intent of winning more games, it definitely tells me that we're using a stopgap for 2017. I can see either of Hoyer or Barkley coming back. But not as a starter.

I've obviously been beating Taylor's drum. He's easily the best option, in my eyes. But, the more I look at things, the harder it gets for me to think Buffalo drops him.

I agree with Goony that Romo is far from ideal for the Bears. Not saying it can't happen though. Having him to help groom our drafted guy wouldn't be horrible, I suppose.

Outside of him or Taylor though.....Jay IS the best option, but I don't think he's back under any circumstance, to be honest.

So, if its NOT Romo or Taylor or Jay......WTF? The rookies aren't ready, Pace likely needs a solid showing to be safe for next year(Fox likely needs a playoff appearance and will be gone). What do you guys WANT to do?
0 x
Additional rule: you have to have one or the other.The only exception is you have an amazing board name. davell, I'm looking at you; put up a [expletive] avatar or something if your name only sounds like somebody tried say Dave as they lapsed into a coma.

User avatar
Thrilho
Starter
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:48 am
Location: Logan Square
x 149
x 163

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Thrilho » Thu Jan 05, 2017 1:36 pm

After being pretty ambivalent about the Bears for most of the season, I've been reading practically everything I can get my hands on and youtubing up all these prospects the last couple weeks. Been meaning to get my thoughts out in a more convincing fashion than this post will be, but after that post by davell I thought this was a good spot to jump in with some information.

Personally, my top QB option in the draft far and away is Trubisky. I think he's got good pocket presence, good touch on the ball at every level, good deep ball, great escapability, good mechanics, and decent height. Only threw 4 picks during the regular season, so decision making pretty good. I think Voch Lombardi does a pretty good job breaking down all the QBs in the draft. Below is his video on Trubisky (and a lot of what I say above I'm just parroting).



I think Trubisky could start the second half of the season and be Wentz level decent, if they went with a stop gap like Hoyer or Cutler. Other than Mitch, not in love with any of the other QBs but would be ok taking if Pace dug them. Right now, if he came out, my number guy 2 would probably be Josh Allen. I've watched 4 of his full games and he's a lot like Jay or Flacco physically. Basically, elite level arm where he can make every throw on the run, played in a pro-style offense, but line sucked and he's got a penchant for taking off early and throwing across his body downfield. If Pace thinks he could coach the Jay out of him, he could be the best QB in this class rather easily I think and a potential top level guy.

Other than that, I'm probably at Kizer over Watson right now, but not floored with either. If Trubisky goes ahead of the Bears that means Allen or Garrett is on the board. So would have to really like one of those guys to take them there. Not a big fan of the rd 2 or later guys, especially Kaaya. I'll put more of my thoughts out on these guys later.

But what I really wanted to post was this article in support of davell's Taylor idea. I love PFF and they're seriously into Taylor. Some good stuff at the link below. Could see this being a better option than is being given credit for.

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-bi ... -the-door/

Then, not sure if you guys saw this, but Polian says his top route over all QBs on the market and in the draft is AJ McCarron. Hadn't given him much thought, but Polian is a smart dude. McCarron had 19-9 TD-Int ratio in his rookie year (which we'd all be floored with out of our rookie) and a 77-15 TD-Int ratio in college. He's got a large gaudy chest tattoo, so I need to find out more before endorsing, but could be a decent option.

http://cin.247sports.com/Bolt/Bill-Poli ... s-50272938

If the Bears draft a QB at 3, I could see keeping Cutty, getting Romo, or a half season of Hoyer before giving way to the rookie all being options. I don't see why everyone is so concerned with getting really good next year though. I can see why Pace and Fox are, because Fox especially is on the hot seat. But the Bears have sucked hard at drafting for 10 years. You can't turn that all around with a couple good drafts.

If Pace is able to finally hit on a legit QB I don't really care what the record is next year. What I don't want though is just a wasted mid-round (or even 2nd round) pick on some guy they're lukewarm on just to say they've got a developmental QB. In this draft, where the second round pick could be a very good player, it seems a lot smarter to get the QB you're sold on in the first and fill in the secondary in the second.

Last thing that doesn't make any sense to me. I see a lot of people bringing up Darnold and Rosen as alternatives to this draft class. Well those guys are going to go in the top 5 (maybe 1-2), and I really don't anticipate being near there next year. So unless you plan on giving up a king's those guys aren't likely to be available to the Bears. This year, they can grab whoever they want. So I like the idea of looking very closely at these QBs rather than just saying "it's not an elite class....NEXT."
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10973
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1097
x 336

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:11 pm

Wait you need to find out more about AJ McCarrons chest tattoo before endorsing?

:-k
1 x
Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55879
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1481
x 4751

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:32 pm

Is it a tattoo of Antoni Gaudi or the Basilica he created in Barcelona?
1 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
JonJayCutler
All-Star
Posts: 4109
Joined: Mon May 25, 2009 10:58 pm
x 15
x 113

Re: Bears offseason

Postby JonJayCutler » Thu Jan 05, 2017 2:52 pm

davell wrote:Unless we keep Jay, or a team loses a QB in preseason, I'm not seeing a landing spot for him. Much less Kaepernick. Guess SF, Cleveland, or the Jets could use Cutler as a stopgap? Or they can just go younger immediately.


Assuming he receives a clean bill of health (apparently rehabbing very well) and doesn't have any setbacks with the shoulder in TC, I guarantee he'll be starting somewhere next year.
0 x
Formerly CubsBearsMagic. 66.6% of those teams aren't worthy of a username, but two lovable average players are.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10973
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1097
x 336

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:03 pm

CubsBearsMagic wrote:
davell wrote:Unless we keep Jay, or a team loses a QB in preseason, I'm not seeing a landing spot for him. Much less Kaepernick. Guess SF, Cleveland, or the Jets could use Cutler as a stopgap? Or they can just go younger immediately.


Assuming he receives a clean bill of health (apparently rehabbing very well) and doesn't have any setbacks with the shoulder in TC, I guarantee he'll be starting somewhere next year.

I'd say its somewhere between these two statements. There's certainly several possible landing spots, but also each team could probably come up with a reason not to take Cutler, or find a better alternative. The biggest factor is probably when the Bears cut him. If its early March, there is a much better chance he lands on his feet with a secure starting gig than if he's cut in late April or after.
0 x
Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55879
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1481
x 4751

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:06 pm

Thrilho wrote: I don't see why everyone is so concerned with getting really good next year though. I can see why Pace and Fox are, because Fox especially is on the hot seat. But the Bears have sucked hard at drafting for 10 years. You can't turn that all around with a couple good drafts.

If Pace is able to finally hit on a legit QB I don't really care what the record is next year. What I don't want though is just a wasted mid-round (or even 2nd round) pick on some guy they're lukewarm on just to say they've got a developmental QB. In this draft, where the second round pick could be a very good player, it seems a lot smarter to get the QB you're sold on in the first and fill in the secondary in the second.


What do you mean by "really good"? They need to get significantly better, bu I don't see anybody calling for 12-4 or bust. If it takes you more than 3 seasons to make a team go from 5 win territory to 9-10 win territory, you've done a really bad job of building a team. There's no reason why this team can't contend for a wild card next year, and going by the looks of this incredibly mediocre division, they could host a playoff game. They should be in that discussion.

This isn't baseball. People need to get that "it takes time" mentality, that actually holds true in baseball, and throw it in the trash when it comes to talking about football.

There was maybe 5-6 teams that were never in the discussion to have any sort of chance at a wild card this year. The Bears don't have to be in that group if they do their jobs.

That being said, they aren't doing themselves any favors, especially with regards to potentially building around a new franchise QB, by sticking with this coaching staff.
1 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:16 pm

Well, now I'm convinced the OLine is a strength, both in run and pass blocking. Apparently, Massie played at a high level during the second half of the year, and Leno grades out as average, which is fine if you have the interior the Bears have.

I'm thinking that whichever QB they take, and now I'm liking Trubisky a lot, his release is just too pretty and he's too accurate, and he has tons of arm strength, especially if they take one early, they will start him right away.

This guy has an Aaron Rodgers thing about him. With a release that's Jeff George-esque. And Jeff George had the fastest, prettiest release of any QB, ever.
1 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

User avatar
Thrilho
Starter
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:48 am
Location: Logan Square
x 149
x 163

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Thrilho » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:22 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:What do you mean by "really good"? They need to get significantly better, bu I don't see anybody calling for 12-4 or bust. If it takes you more than 3 seasons to make a team go from 5 win territory to 9-10 win territory, you've done a really bad job of building a team. There's no reason why this team can't contend for a wild card next year, and going by the looks of this incredibly mediocre division, they could host a playoff game. They should be in that discussion.


I'm saying I don't care if they get to the 9-10 win territory next year. And if they don't, if they draft a QB, play him for half the season and end up with 6 wins or something and the QB looks good for the future that's fine for me. If they go defense in the first, play Cutler another year, and end up with 9-10 wins but have no QB for the future I think that's a worse position.

So basically, I think the fans ought to be taking a long term view. The "you've done a bad job building a team" if it takes more than 3 years to get to winning is dumb. There is pretty much just Kyle Long as a holdover from pre-Pace, and they've got no QB. If you want to say that it's a really bad job building a team if they don't create an entire playoff team with 3 drafts and free agency then I think you've got some high expectations.

This is like a public company, where you can run it looking just at the next quarter to appease the shareholders and keep your job, or you can look at the long term view. A lot of times you exchange mediocre for the short and long term for good in the long term. If they get a QB that can win for the long term then you've basically got something the Bears have never had, and set up to be really good when the rest of the team is ready. This would be my preferred route.
0 x

User avatar
Thrilho
Starter
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:48 am
Location: Logan Square
x 149
x 163

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Thrilho » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:Wait you need to find out more about AJ McCarrons chest tattoo before endorsing?

:-k


Bad ordering of my words there. I mean I don't know a ton about McCarron, so want to learn more before offering a full opinion. But character/leadership is big for QBs and having a big dumb chest tattoo could speak to the kind of guy he is. I slipped that line in there at the end as sort of a joke though, and it really doesn't play huge into my evaluation.

But I typed a lot of stuff there. Was there anything else that jumped out?
Last edited by Thrilho on Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55879
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1481
x 4751

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:27 pm

Thrilho wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:What do you mean by "really good"? They need to get significantly better, bu I don't see anybody calling for 12-4 or bust. If it takes you more than 3 seasons to make a team go from 5 win territory to 9-10 win territory, you've done a really bad job of building a team. There's no reason why this team can't contend for a wild card next year, and going by the looks of this incredibly mediocre division, they could host a playoff game. They should be in that discussion.


I'm saying I don't care if they get to the 9-10 win territory next year. And if they don't, if they draft a QB, play him for half the season and end up with 6 wins or something and the QB looks good for the future that's fine for me. If they go defense in the first, play Cutler another year, and end up with 9-10 wins but have no QB for the future I think that's a worse position.

So basically, I think the fans ought to be taking a long term view. The "you've done a bad job building a team" if it takes more than 3 years to get to winning is dumb. There is pretty much just Kyle Long as a holdover from pre-Pace, and they've got no QB. If you want to say that it's a really bad job building a team if they don't create an entire playoff team with 3 drafts and free agency then I think you've got some high expectations.

This is like a public company, where you can run it looking just at the next quarter to appease the shareholders and keep your job, or you can look at the long term view. A lot of times you exchange mediocre for the short and long term for good in the long term. If they get a QB that can win for the long term then you've basically got something the Bears have never had, and set up to be really good when the rest of the team is ready. This would be my preferred route.


This is a ridiculous assertion.

This isn't at all like a public company where you look quarter to quarter, if it were this front office would have been ousted long ago.

You are blinded by the Cubs situation. Football isn't baseball. It doesn't take 6 years to build a team.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55879
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1481
x 4751

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:28 pm

Thrilho wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:Wait you need to find out more about AJ McCarrons chest tattoo before endorsing?

:-k


Bad ordering of my words there. I mean I don't know a ton about McCarron, so want to learn more before offering a full opinion. But character/leadership is big for QBs and having a big dumb chest tattoo could speak to the kind of guy he is. I slipped that line in there at the end as sort of a joke though, and it really doesn't play huge into my evaluation.

But I typed a lot of stuff there. Was there anything else that jumped out?


ridiculous
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10973
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1097
x 336

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:28 pm

Stannis wrote:Well, now I'm convinced the OLine is a strength. Apparently, Massie played at a high level during the second half of the year, and Leno grades out as average, which is fine if you have the interior the Bears have.

I'm thinking that whichever QB they take, and now I'm liking Trubisky a lot, his release is just too pretty and he's too accurate, and he has tons of arm strength, especially if they take one early, they will start him right away.

This guy has an Aaron Rodgers thing about him. With a release that's Jeff George-esque. And Jeff George had the fastest, prettiest release of any QB, ever.

Can we still keep Jay for a year and try and compete while giving Trubisky time to develop? <600 NCAA pass attempts and then rushing into a 3-13 team with a coach on the hot seat does not sound good developmemt situation.

Although if all that ends up being true/consensus about Trubisky, he probably is going 1 or 2, if not to Cle or SF, then in a trade.
0 x
Image

User avatar
Thrilho
Starter
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:48 am
Location: Logan Square
x 149
x 163

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Thrilho » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:29 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:This is a ridiculous assertion.

This isn't at all like a public company where you look quarter to quarter, if it were this front office would have been ousted long ago.

You are blinded by the Cubs situation. Football isn't baseball. It doesn't take 6 years to build a team.

I'm not saying they're doing that, I'm saying you're doing that. Focus on next year, be cool with keeping Jay around and not finding that great QB. You'll be stuck in the mud forever.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55879
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1481
x 4751

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:31 pm

Thrilho wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:This is a ridiculous assertion.

This isn't at all like a public company where you look quarter to quarter, if it were this front office would have been ousted long ago.

You are blinded by the Cubs situation. Football isn't baseball. It doesn't take 6 years to build a team.

I'm not saying they're doing that, I'm saying you're doing that. Focus on next year, be cool with keeping Jay around and not finding that great QB. You'll be stuck in the mud forever.


This is year 3 you goober. This isn't the third quarter of them having control. You are acting as if they just stepped into the job and should be given a lot of leeway. They've been around for a long time, the results have gotten worse under their watch and they need to show improvement now.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
Stannis
RIP Sulley
Posts: 45657
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 2:17 pm
Location: Winterfell
x 135
x 398

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Stannis » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:37 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
Stannis wrote:Well, now I'm convinced the OLine is a strength. Apparently, Massie played at a high level during the second half of the year, and Leno grades out as average, which is fine if you have the interior the Bears have.

I'm thinking that whichever QB they take, and now I'm liking Trubisky a lot, his release is just too pretty and he's too accurate, and he has tons of arm strength, especially if they take one early, they will start him right away.

This guy has an Aaron Rodgers thing about him. With a release that's Jeff George-esque. And Jeff George had the fastest, prettiest release of any QB, ever.

Can we still keep Jay for a year and try and compete while giving Trubisky time to develop? <600 NCAA pass attempts and then rushing into a 3-13 team with a coach on the hot seat does not sound good developmemt situation.

Although if all that ends up being true/consensus about Trubisky, he probably is going 1 or 2, if not to Cle or SF, then in a trade.


I don't really know if the development thing is really a thing.

You put him behind a line that will protect him, like Dak Prescott, and you let him develop on the job. And this line, with a year together under their belt, will protect him.
Last edited by Stannis on Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.
0 x
“I am not without mercy,” thundered he who was notoriously without mercy.

User avatar
Thrilho
Starter
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu May 26, 2011 3:48 am
Location: Logan Square
x 149
x 163

Re: Bears offseason

Postby Thrilho » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:39 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
Thrilho wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:Wait you need to find out more about AJ McCarrons chest tattoo before endorsing?

:-k


Bad ordering of my words there. I mean I don't know a ton about McCarron, so want to learn more before offering a full opinion. But character/leadership is big for QBs and having a big dumb chest tattoo could speak to the kind of guy he is. I slipped that line in there at the end as sort of a joke though, and it really doesn't play huge into my evaluation.

But I typed a lot of stuff there. Was there anything else that jumped out?


ridiculous

Again, I'm not making McCarron my top option, just something I threw in there because I read what Polian said. The chest tattoo thing was jokey but this is a solid lesson that when you make a throw away comment that it's dumb idea to go back and defend. So I'm done doing that.

My top option would be get Trubisky. Number 2 is probably going after Josh Allen if he enters the draft. Still evaluating the other guys at 3 or the possibility of trading down in the top 10 to grab Kizer or Watson. Any of the trades would be behind that. McCarron is an option but not one I've fully vetted. He's got an ugly chest tattoo but we'll just say that's not a part of my evaluation. Feel free to respond on any of that other stuff though.
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10973
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1097
x 336

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:39 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
Thrilho wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:What do you mean by "really good"? They need to get significantly better, bu I don't see anybody calling for 12-4 or bust. If it takes you more than 3 seasons to make a team go from 5 win territory to 9-10 win territory, you've done a really bad job of building a team. There's no reason why this team can't contend for a wild card next year, and going by the looks of this incredibly mediocre division, they could host a playoff game. They should be in that discussion.


I'm saying I don't care if they get to the 9-10 win territory next year. And if they don't, if they draft a QB, play him for half the season and end up with 6 wins or something and the QB looks good for the future that's fine for me. If they go defense in the first, play Cutler another year, and end up with 9-10 wins but have no QB for the future I think that's a worse position.

So basically, I think the fans ought to be taking a long term view. The "you've done a bad job building a team" if it takes more than 3 years to get to winning is dumb. There is pretty much just Kyle Long as a holdover from pre-Pace, and they've got no QB. If you want to say that it's a really bad job building a team if they don't create an entire playoff team with 3 drafts and free agency then I think you've got some high expectations.

This is like a public company, where you can run it looking just at the next quarter to appease the shareholders and keep your job, or you can look at the long term view. A lot of times you exchange mediocre for the short and long term for good in the long term. If they get a QB that can win for the long term then you've basically got something the Bears have never had, and set up to be really good when the rest of the team is ready. This would be my preferred route.


This is a ridiculous assertion.

This isn't at all like a public company where you look quarter to quarter, if it were this front office would have been ousted long ago.

You are blinded by the Cubs situation. Football isn't baseball. It doesn't take 6 years to build a team.

While I agree with you in general, I would agree with Thrillo's hypothetical that a 6 win season where it looks like we ID'd a franchise QB would be a better overall position than winning 9-10 games with some stop gap and still no long term answer at QB. And under that scenario I'd give Pace the opportunity to get one more HC hire even though 15-33 is usually enough to get a GM fired.
0 x
Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 55879
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 1481
x 4751

Re: Bears offseason

Postby jersey cubs fan » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:39 pm

Stannis wrote:I don't really know if the development thing is really a thing.

You put him behind a line that will protect him, like Dak Prescott, and you let him develop on the job.

Dak played twice as much in college, has a better offensive line, better receivers and better running back than Trubisky would theoretically have with the Bears.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 10973
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1097
x 336

Re: Bears offseason

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Thu Jan 05, 2017 3:42 pm

And I wouldn't be opposed to Trubisky winning the job, but some legit competition could hypothetically be good for both guys.
0 x
Image


Return to “Other Sports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest