rawaction wrote:minnesotacubsfan wrote:UMFan83 wrote:
If 2018 is recent past he started 5 games and had a vastly better YPA (7.2 vs. 5.8 this year), completion percentage (72 vs 62) and QBR/Rating. Small Sample size, but he was also coming off the Super Bowl run the year prior where he performed like an elite QB. He was not actually an elite QB mind you, but the numbers he put up were elite.
2 years is a long time and the 2018 numbers wouldnt really constitute a very good QB but if he was performing at that level in Chicago this year it would make a big difference moving forward. Don't think he will for various reasons but he's probably capable of playing better than he has thus far.
He's had one short stint of great play and looong stretches of below average-mundane play. Bringing him on was simply trying to catch lightening in a bottle.
I still hate we traded for him when others like Dalton, Bridgewater, Newton either became available or were available.
Foles is better than all those guys though. Maybe not better than Bridgewater, but just clearly outplayed him head-to-head (of course didn't face the same caliber of defense). Not to mention a better fit.
I know this is unpopular, but I kinda feel like this is going to be a best case scenario type of season. Foles is winning games, but not playing so well that the Bears do something stupid like giving him more money or pretending he's a long-term answer. They should still go out and get a long-term QB in the draft, and they don't necessarily have to throw him on the field right away or have pressure to do so like they did with Trubisky, because they should have competent play ahead of the rookie. It's a lot better scenario than losing a bunch of games, still not losing enough to get the top QB, and not having a competent bridge guy for your potential franchise QB.
100%. This is our best case scenario right now.