Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

User avatar
Brian
Hall of Fame
Posts: 28877
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago
x 42
x 4952
Contact:

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Brian » Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:48 pm

They waived Abdullah Anderson yesterday, one was to assume to bring Bray up to the 53.

But they just rostered Sowell again.

Maybe they've decided if Chase gets hurt in London they'll just say f it and go wildcat the rest of the game.
0 x

User avatar
Wilson A2000
Superstar
Posts: 10146
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2003 4:11 am
Location: Chicago
x 5
x 48

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Wilson A2000 » Tue Oct 01, 2019 3:54 pm

Roquan out indefinitely. Hasn’t been acting like himself for weeks. Luckily Kwiatkowski is playing well in his place.
0 x

User avatar
BigbadB
Hall of Fame
Posts: 24608
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2003 2:38 am
Location: San Diego
x 21
x 154

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby BigbadB » Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:43 pm

Wilson A2000 wrote:Roquan out indefinitely. Hasn’t been acting like himself for weeks. Luckily Kwiatkowski is playing well in his place.


Kwiatkoski deserved a game ball on Sunday. He looked like ass in preseason, so that was a pleasant surprise. I've always liked him. Thought he played well the last few years. It was just this preseason that had me concerned.
1 x

User avatar
David
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61569
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:33 am
Location: Chicago
x 8973
x 5260

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby David » Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:49 pm



1 x

User avatar
David
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61569
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:33 am
Location: Chicago
x 8973
x 5260

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby David » Tue Oct 01, 2019 4:50 pm

BigbadB wrote:
Wilson A2000 wrote:Roquan out indefinitely. Hasn’t been acting like himself for weeks. Luckily Kwiatkowski is playing well in his place.


Kwiatkoski deserved a game ball on Sunday. He looked like ass in preseason, so that was a pleasant surprise. I've always liked him. Thought he played well the last few years. It was just this preseason that had me concerned.


It was a perfect matchup for him with a team that reliant on their running back. I don't want him out there actually having to cover people, though.
0 x

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13015
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1936
x 1019

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:08 pm

David wrote:
BigbadB wrote:
Wilson A2000 wrote:Roquan out indefinitely. Hasn’t been acting like himself for weeks. Luckily Kwiatkowski is playing well in his place.


Kwiatkoski deserved a game ball on Sunday. He looked like ass in preseason, so that was a pleasant surprise. I've always liked him. Thought he played well the last few years. It was just this preseason that had me concerned.


It was a perfect matchup for him with a team that reliant on their running back. I don't want him out there actually having to cover people, though.

I just listened on the radio, but sounds like Pierre Louis was subbing in on the obvious passing downs?
0 x
Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61081
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3048
x 10685

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby jersey cubs fan » Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:11 pm

David wrote:https://twitter.com/danwiederer/status/1179074263690743809?s=20


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

BigSlick
Superstar
Posts: 14763
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:04 pm
x 3145
x 525

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby BigSlick » Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:29 pm

I don't think you can say the trade for Khalil Mack was premature - opportunities like that just don't come around and you were taking a gamble on Trubisky, which hasn't really panned out.

Mack on the other hand has *exceeded* expectations - very rarely does a big time trade like that for a player who's already made a name for themselves even pay off at all. He's been even better than expected, and is disproportionately responsible for the Bears being competitive.

The coolest/most hilarious thing the Bears could do is sign Colin Kaepernick, but we all know they wont do that.
1 x
Image
"The only good sabermetrician is a dead one." --Andrew Jackson, 1776.

I have to admit its getting better...it can't get no worse - The Beatles (On the Cubs)

User avatar
Brian
Hall of Fame
Posts: 28877
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago
x 42
x 4952
Contact:

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Brian » Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:36 pm

Kaepernick spent his last two seasons in the league being benched in favor of Blaine Gabbert and that was over 2 years ago with no football since then. He should have been in the league this time, but he's not the answer for the Bears right now.
0 x

BigSlick
Superstar
Posts: 14763
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 7:04 pm
x 3145
x 525

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby BigSlick » Tue Oct 01, 2019 5:45 pm

Brian wrote:Kaepernick spent his last two seasons in the league being benched in favor of Blaine Gabbert and that was over 2 years ago with no football since then. He should have been in the league this time, but he's not the answer for the Bears right now.

Yes I don't think he's actually very good, but I do think he's better than Chase Daniel, and it would be a great story and piss off the right people
0 x
Image
"The only good sabermetrician is a dead one." --Andrew Jackson, 1776.

I have to admit its getting better...it can't get no worse - The Beatles (On the Cubs)

User avatar
Brian
Hall of Fame
Posts: 28877
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago
x 42
x 4952
Contact:

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Brian » Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:09 pm

When Nagy's offense was humming last season and he was busting out crazy plays every week I thought they should bring him in as a guy that could run the ball, maybe play a little WR and throw the ball every once in a while. But now that describes what Patterson is supposed to be doing.
0 x

User avatar
minnesotacubsfan
Superstar
Posts: 17726
Joined: Sat Jul 19, 2003 2:27 pm
Location: THE HONORABLE JUDGE PRICK
x 1659
x 778

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby minnesotacubsfan » Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:19 pm

maybe a little homeristic, but do you know who is good at running the RPO? Tanner Morgan
0 x
Image

UK
Hall of Fame
Posts: 20912
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 2:38 pm
x 175
x 512

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby UK » Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:30 pm

Brian wrote:Kaepernick spent his last two seasons in the league being benched in favor of Blaine Gabbert and that was over 2 years ago with no football since then. He should have been in the league this time, but he's not the answer for the Bears right now.


I think Sam Bradford would be more likely at this point over Kaepernick but there's no chance of that either.
0 x
"It was kind of weird to look in the mirror the first time I tried my hat on." - Mark Bellhorn

Have a seat, Neifi
All-Star
Posts: 1012
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:21 pm
Location: Outstanding!
x 1
x 8

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Have a seat, Neifi » Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:08 pm

Regarding Mitch, I'll parrot what Robert Mays opined on one of the (many) Ringer podcasts; while I don't think Mitch is the "Answer" at QB or even particularly good as a starting NFL quarterback, I'm glad he apparently won't be out for a substantial length of time. Assuming Mitch comes back in 2-4 weeks and then continues to play at roughly the same meh/below meh level he's played the first four weeks of this season, you'd have to think it makes it more likely that this off-season the front office spends resources trying to find another QB, either as a new starter or at least someone who can nominally "challenge" Mitch as starting QB. If Mitch were out a substantial length of time, I'd fear the front office would use his absence as an excuse for giving him another season as the unequivocal/undisputed starting QB, which I frankly just don't think he's shown to be good enough to be.

It's so frustrating to (once again) have a Super Bowl-caliber defense and a legitimate 10+ win team but with no legitimate, even top-half-type quarterback. Random, mid-tier NFL quarterbacks like Andy Dalton or Gardner Minshew would represent massive upgrades over Mitch, particularly given how much Nagy has dumbed down and scaled back the offense to hide his continuing weaknesses and inconsistencies.
1 x

Chocolate Milk
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 6629
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: At the Planetarium with Some Ladies
x 282
x 184

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Chocolate Milk » Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:42 pm

Have a seat, Neifi wrote:Regarding Mitch, I'll parrot what Robert Mays opined on one of the (many) Ringer podcasts; while I don't think Mitch is the "Answer" at QB or even particularly good as a starting NFL quarterback, I'm glad he apparently won't be out for a substantial length of time. Assuming Mitch comes back in 2-4 weeks and then continues to play at roughly the same meh/below meh level he's played the first four weeks of this season, you'd have to think it makes it more likely that this off-season the front office spends resources trying to find another QB, either as a new starter or at least someone who can nominally "challenge" Mitch as starting QB. If Mitch were out a substantial length of time, I'd fear the front office would use his absence as an excuse for giving him another season as the unequivocal/undisputed starting QB, which I frankly just don't think he's shown to be good enough to be.

It's so frustrating to (once again) have a Super Bowl-caliber defense and a legitimate 10+ win team but with no legitimate, even top-half-type quarterback. Random, mid-tier NFL quarterbacks like Andy Dalton or Gardner Minshew would represent massive upgrades over Mitch, particularly given how much Nagy has dumbed down and scaled back the offense to hide his continuing weaknesses and inconsistencies.


This might be overly optimistic, but my hope is that they went into the season optimistic that Mitch would be able to build on the successes he had last year and refine some of his issues and take a major step forward. I don't think their preseason praise of Mitch was insincere - I think they were legitimately hopeful. Their game plan for the Packers supports that they expected a lot out of Mitch this year. Their rapid about face after that game shows me that they have changed their outlook on him. They are stuck with him this year so disregard what they say about him publicly. They can say whatever they want but when the games roll around, their plan is to put a leash on him and hope he doesn't lose the game for them. Ultimately their confidence in him is reflected in the game plan. They don't have confidence in him.

I don't get the sense from this regime that they will just bull ahead with him next year and just cross their fingers. That's what they did this year and they got burned by it. Barring some miraculous turnaround, I expect them to either bring someone like Mariota in for competition, or package those 2nd round picks to jump up into the first to get another QB.
0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61081
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3048
x 10685

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby jersey cubs fan » Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:51 pm

Have a seat, Neifi wrote:Regarding Mitch, I'll parrot what Robert Mays opined on one of the (many) Ringer podcasts; while I don't think Mitch is the "Answer" at QB or even particularly good as a starting NFL quarterback, I'm glad he apparently won't be out for a substantial length of time. Assuming Mitch comes back in 2-4 weeks and then continues to play at roughly the same meh/below meh level he's played the first four weeks of this season, you'd have to think it makes it more likely that this off-season the front office spends resources trying to find another QB, either as a new starter or at least someone who can nominally "challenge" Mitch as starting QB. If Mitch were out a substantial length of time, I'd fear the front office would use his absence as an excuse for giving him another season as the unequivocal/undisputed starting QB, which I frankly just don't think he's shown to be good enough to be.


Maybe this is naive but I do not think this leadership group, Pace and Nagy, would take a prolonged injury as an excuse to stick with Mitch.

I've heard from people who know people that the offensive powers that be were very skeptical of Mitch when they came into the job. I think there is a sincere belief/faith that if Mitch isn't the guy, then Nagy and Pace will be able to come together and choose the next guy. They aren't going to stay wedded to Mitch out of some desperate attempt to keep their jobs. I'd bet ownership is pretty happy with the overall talent improvement brought about by Pace's group, and the general caliber of quality.

That being said, they aren't going to be able to spend any real resources on the next "GUY" this offseason. They might get a one year lotto ticket, but the next guy will be in the 2021 draft.
1 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
UMFan83
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 79370
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2003 8:42 pm
Location: Southport Ave
x 3084
x 4950
Contact:

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby UMFan83 » Wed Oct 02, 2019 4:59 pm

Sucks that Oakland started out 2-2. We need to win this one to better our 2nd round pick we get from them this year.....there are already 8 teams with a worse record than them, including 6 that are winless.
0 x
Win it for Fred

User avatar
Old Style
5-Time All-Star
Posts: 9752
Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 4:57 pm
Location: Bedford, TX
x 5349
x 631

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Old Style » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:00 pm

Roquan Smith participating in practice today
0 x
"I'm sorry, folks outside of SEC country, but a few facts are incontrovertible. They smoke better barbecue than you. Their women are prettier than your women. They play football better than your schools play football." - Andy Staples, SI

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13015
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1936
x 1019

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:00 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
Have a seat, Neifi wrote:Regarding Mitch, I'll parrot what Robert Mays opined on one of the (many) Ringer podcasts; while I don't think Mitch is the "Answer" at QB or even particularly good as a starting NFL quarterback, I'm glad he apparently won't be out for a substantial length of time. Assuming Mitch comes back in 2-4 weeks and then continues to play at roughly the same meh/below meh level he's played the first four weeks of this season, you'd have to think it makes it more likely that this off-season the front office spends resources trying to find another QB, either as a new starter or at least someone who can nominally "challenge" Mitch as starting QB. If Mitch were out a substantial length of time, I'd fear the front office would use his absence as an excuse for giving him another season as the unequivocal/undisputed starting QB, which I frankly just don't think he's shown to be good enough to be.


Maybe this is naive but I do not think this leadership group, Pace and Nagy, would take a prolonged injury as an excuse to stick with Mitch.

I've heard from people who know people that the offensive powers that be were very skeptical of Mitch when they came into the job. I think there is a sincere belief/faith that if Mitch isn't the guy, then Nagy and Pace will be able to come together and choose the next guy. They aren't going to stay wedded to Mitch out of some desperate attempt to keep their jobs. I'd bet ownership is pretty happy with the overall talent improvement brought about by Pace's group, and the general caliber of quality.

That being said, they aren't going to be able to spend any real resources on the next "GUY" this offseason. They might get a one year lotto ticket, but the next guy will be in the 2021 draft.

If "their guy" is available around spot 10-15, they would obviously try and move up for them. Oak 2nd and next year's first is a reasonable starting point of a trade up, unless Oak dramatically improves their record. Short of a tank/reset year you're almost always stuck trading an extra first to draft a QB high, so they can spend real resources this offseason.
0 x
Image

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61081
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3048
x 10685

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby jersey cubs fan » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:05 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:
Have a seat, Neifi wrote:Regarding Mitch, I'll parrot what Robert Mays opined on one of the (many) Ringer podcasts; while I don't think Mitch is the "Answer" at QB or even particularly good as a starting NFL quarterback, I'm glad he apparently won't be out for a substantial length of time. Assuming Mitch comes back in 2-4 weeks and then continues to play at roughly the same meh/below meh level he's played the first four weeks of this season, you'd have to think it makes it more likely that this off-season the front office spends resources trying to find another QB, either as a new starter or at least someone who can nominally "challenge" Mitch as starting QB. If Mitch were out a substantial length of time, I'd fear the front office would use his absence as an excuse for giving him another season as the unequivocal/undisputed starting QB, which I frankly just don't think he's shown to be good enough to be.


Maybe this is naive but I do not think this leadership group, Pace and Nagy, would take a prolonged injury as an excuse to stick with Mitch.

I've heard from people who know people that the offensive powers that be were very skeptical of Mitch when they came into the job. I think there is a sincere belief/faith that if Mitch isn't the guy, then Nagy and Pace will be able to come together and choose the next guy. They aren't going to stay wedded to Mitch out of some desperate attempt to keep their jobs. I'd bet ownership is pretty happy with the overall talent improvement brought about by Pace's group, and the general caliber of quality.

That being said, they aren't going to be able to spend any real resources on the next "GUY" this offseason. They might get a one year lotto ticket, but the next guy will be in the 2021 draft.

If "their guy" is available around spot 10-15, they would obviously try and move up for them. Oak 2nd and next year's first is a reasonable starting point of a trade up, unless Oak dramatically improves their record. Short of a tank/reset year you're almost always stuck trading an extra first to draft a QB high, so they can spend real resources this offseason.

They cannot afford to spend future draft picks this season. It's a vicious never ending cycle that will kill them in 2020 and beyond. They have to use the upcoming picks on 2020 starters and depth and if they have to draft a QB in 2021, they can do it then.
1 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13015
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1936
x 1019

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:11 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:
Maybe this is naive but I do not think this leadership group, Pace and Nagy, would take a prolonged injury as an excuse to stick with Mitch.

I've heard from people who know people that the offensive powers that be were very skeptical of Mitch when they came into the job. I think there is a sincere belief/faith that if Mitch isn't the guy, then Nagy and Pace will be able to come together and choose the next guy. They aren't going to stay wedded to Mitch out of some desperate attempt to keep their jobs. I'd bet ownership is pretty happy with the overall talent improvement brought about by Pace's group, and the general caliber of quality.

That being said, they aren't going to be able to spend any real resources on the next "GUY" this offseason. They might get a one year lotto ticket, but the next guy will be in the 2021 draft.

If "their guy" is available around spot 10-15, they would obviously try and move up for them. Oak 2nd and next year's first is a reasonable starting point of a trade up, unless Oak dramatically improves their record. Short of a tank/reset year you're almost always stuck trading an extra first to draft a QB high, so they can spend real resources this offseason.

They cannot afford to spend future draft picks this season. It's a vicious never ending cycle that will kill them in 2020 and beyond. They have to use the upcoming picks on 2020 starters and depth and if they have to draft a QB in 2021, they can do it then.

That 2021 pick could be another late round pick though. Unless they're just gonna take whatever QB who drops to them, they'll likely spend an extra pick or 2 to target a QB at some point. Does that extra pick in 21 or 22 really make that much of a difference if you already identified Mitch as not the guy and you ID'd a guy you really like in 2020?
0 x
Image

User avatar
David
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61569
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2003 12:33 am
Location: Chicago
x 8973
x 5260

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby David » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:16 pm

0 x

User avatar
jersey cubs fan
Inner-Circle HOF
Posts: 61081
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:38 pm
Location: Hoboken squat cobbler
x 3048
x 10685

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby jersey cubs fan » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:17 pm

WrigleyField 22 wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:If "their guy" is available around spot 10-15, they would obviously try and move up for them. Oak 2nd and next year's first is a reasonable starting point of a trade up, unless Oak dramatically improves their record. Short of a tank/reset year you're almost always stuck trading an extra first to draft a QB high, so they can spend real resources this offseason.

They cannot afford to spend future draft picks this season. It's a vicious never ending cycle that will kill them in 2020 and beyond. They have to use the upcoming picks on 2020 starters and depth and if they have to draft a QB in 2021, they can do it then.

That 2021 pick could be another late round pick though. Unless they're just gonna take whatever QB who drops to them, they'll likely spend an extra pick or 2 to target a QB at some point. Does that extra pick in 21 or 22 really make that much of a difference if you already identified Mitch as not the guy and you ID'd a guy you really like in 2020?

It's one thing to trade up from late in the first, it's entirely different to trade up from the middle of the 2nd. The Oakland pick isn't going to be top 5 in the 2nd, it might end up being 45-50 or worse. And hopefully the Bears own 2nd will be the high 50s. At least 2021 they will have their own 1st to begin with.
0 x
longhotsummer wrote:I realize now, any opposing viewpoint, will not be tolerated.

User avatar
WrigleyField 22
Superstar
Posts: 13015
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2003 10:48 pm
Location: hnderstabxcwhsg
x 1936
x 1019

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby WrigleyField 22 » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:26 pm

jersey cubs fan wrote:
WrigleyField 22 wrote:
jersey cubs fan wrote:They cannot afford to spend future draft picks this season. It's a vicious never ending cycle that will kill them in 2020 and beyond. They have to use the upcoming picks on 2020 starters and depth and if they have to draft a QB in 2021, they can do it then.

That 2021 pick could be another late round pick though. Unless they're just gonna take whatever QB who drops to them, they'll likely spend an extra pick or 2 to target a QB at some point. Does that extra pick in 21 or 22 really make that much of a difference if you already identified Mitch as not the guy and you ID'd a guy you really like in 2020?

It's one thing to trade up from late in the first, it's entirely different to trade up from the middle of the 2nd. The Oakland pick isn't going to be top 5 in the 2nd, it might end up being 45-50 or worse. And hopefully the Bears own 2nd will be the high 50s. At least 2021 they will have their own 1st to begin with.

Its currently 41. I think it will go up from there. Something like both seconds + 2021 first for a 10-15 pick and a 3rd or 4th rounder would meet the "traditional" value chart (and be very similar to the Mahomes deal) Difference is doing the 2nd for 3/4 swap since the Bears don't have their own 3rd to add, but it still could line up.

We could talk for days about the merits of that move, but they'll definitely have the capital to do something in that 10-15 range at least, and Pace ain't afraid to move up. Now if we start talking top 5 range, it becomes unrealistic without talking about multiple future firsts.
0 x
Image

User avatar
Brian
Hall of Fame
Posts: 28877
Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago
x 42
x 4952
Contact:

Re: Week 5: Bears at Raiders in London (noon on Fox)

Postby Brian » Wed Oct 02, 2019 5:29 pm



2 x


Return to “Other Sports”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: David and 10 guests