Christmas Eve: Washington Football Team @ Bears

[WrigleyField 22]

How many other teams legitimately look to be shopping QB in the first round. San Fran seems like a given. Cleveland again? Houston? Denver? Jets?

 

What are the possibilities of trading down a handful of spots and still getting one of the top QB's? Are there any teams that would trade up to draft one of those guys?

If they identify a guy they like, dont mess around, take him at 3 (or 4).

[Derwood]

How many other teams legitimately look to be shopping QB in the first round. San Fran seems like a given. Cleveland again? Houston? Denver? Jets?

 

What are the possibilities of trading down a handful of spots and still getting one of the top QB's? Are there any teams that would trade up to draft one of those guys?

If they identify a guy they like, dont mess around, take him at 3 (or 4).

 

The general consensus seems to be that there are a clump of teams in the top 5-7 who will likely take QB's, and then a gap until the early 20's

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

If you don't mind, let me give you my perspective from a non-Bears fan.

 

If the Bears rate a QB in the draft as a difference maker, future franchise QB, then they should trust their scouts and take him.

 

However, if they do not feel there is one of those, I would not trade back to get one in the middle of the first. They should take the best player on their board, improve the talent of the team and get the best QB they can later- even if that means they trade back up into the back half of the first round.

 

Reaching for a QB or giving up the chance to take an elite player by trading back isn't going to help the franchise.

[WrigleyField 22]

If you don't mind, let me give you my perspective from a non-Bears fan.

 

If the Bears rate a QB in the draft as a difference maker, future franchise QB, then they should trust their scouts and take him.

 

However, if they do not feel there is one of those, I would not trade back to get one in the middle of the first. They should take the best player on their board, improve the talent of the team and get the best QB they can later- even if that means they trade back up into the back half of the first round.

 

Reaching for a QB or giving up the chance to take an elite player by trading back isn't going to help the franchise.

They need to take a QB in the first 4 rounds, at minimum, IMO.

[raw]

The whole, "I don't think any of these guys are franchise QBs" argument is dumb. If you are picking in the top 3, it's likely because you have no QB. If you have no QB, you can't not draft one because he's not Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning. Not liking any of the consensus top QBs is basically admitting your franchise is trash and doesn't know how to develop a QB, and admitting you want a ready made QB that's typically a once in a generational thing in the first place.

 

Maybe there's no Manning in this draft, but there's certainly guys who can be the next Dalton, Prescott, David Carr, Matt Ryan, or Cousins. League average is better than the Bears have had almost every year of their history. And league average can win plenty of games and have win championships in the NFL.

 

If you're a GM that approaches drafting a QB with the "there's no difference maker" mindset, then you're in the wrong occupation.

[vance_the_cubs_fan]

The whole, "I don't think any of these guys are franchise QBs" argument is dumb. If you are picking in the top 3, it's likely because you have no QB. If you have no QB, you can't not draft one because he's not Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning. Not liking any of the consensus top QBs is basically admitting your franchise is trash and doesn't know how to develop a QB, and admitting you want a ready made QB that's typically a once in a generational thing in the first place.

 

Maybe there's no Manning in this draft, but there's certainly guys who can be the next Dalton, Prescott, David Carr, Matt Ryan, or Cousins. League average is better than the Bears have had almost every year of their history. And league average can win plenty of games and have win championships in the NFL.

 

If you're a GM that approaches drafting a QB with the "there's no difference maker" mindset, then you're in the wrong occupation.

 

And my point is that you can get a Dalton, Ryan, Cousins, or Prescott in the second on latter half of the first if not later. Take an elite player in the top four and then trade back up into the bottom of the first or take a QB in the second unless QB really is at the top of the board at four.

[raw]

The whole, "I don't think any of these guys are franchise QBs" argument is dumb. If you are picking in the top 3, it's likely because you have no QB. If you have no QB, you can't not draft one because he's not Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning. Not liking any of the consensus top QBs is basically admitting your franchise is trash and doesn't know how to develop a QB, and admitting you want a ready made QB that's typically a once in a generational thing in the first place.

 

Maybe there's no Manning in this draft, but there's certainly guys who can be the next Dalton, Prescott, David Carr, Matt Ryan, or Cousins. League average is better than the Bears have had almost every year of their history. And league average can win plenty of games and have win championships in the NFL.

 

If you're a GM that approaches drafting a QB with the "there's no difference maker" mindset, then you're in the wrong occupation.

 

And my point is that you can get a Dalton, Ryan, Cousins, or Prescott in the second on latter half of the first if not later. Take an elite player in the top four and then trade back up into the bottom of the first or take a QB in the second unless QB really is at the top of the board at four.

 

My point is, if you know you aren't getting a Luck/Newton/Manning, then your best hope is a Dalton/Ryan type. Picking the 4th or 5th best in a class of non elites doesn't help you as much. Thats how the Bears ended up with McNown and Grossman. Picking 3rd, the Bears have their shot at either all or all but 1 of the QBs. The onus is on them to get the best one.

[jersey cubs fan]

Raw, your theory on this is a great way to emulate the Browns. You don't take qb because you can. Hell, if league average is fine with you keep cutler through his contract and use the picks on actual elite talent.

 

Looking for league average qb play out of a top 5 pick is dumb.

[David]

Raw, your theory on this is a great way to emulate the Browns. You don't take qb because you can. Hell, if league average is fine with you keep cutler through his contract and use the picks on actual elite talent.

 

Looking for league average qb play out of a top 5 pick is dumb.

 

100% right

 

horsefeathers (most) first round QBs

[raw]

Raw, your theory on this is a great way to emulate the Browns. You don't take qb because you can. Hell, if league average is fine with you keep cutler through his contract and use the picks on actual elite talent.

 

Looking for league average qb play out of a top 5 pick is dumb.

 

I said league average, but I should have expounded. I think a QB who can be consistently league average with the potential to be more would go a long way. Guys like Ryan, Dalton and Cousins are league average overall, but have all had seasons where they've been at or near elite level. Cutler has only been league average in his best years. That's the issue, IMO. I don't care about his body language, his salary, his arm....Cutler hasn't gotten the job done because of a lack of consistency. A consistent league average performer, with the ability to pull a very good season out is what I mean.

 

Over the last several years, the consistently elite have been: Brees, Rodgers, Brady, P Manning, and Wilson. Then you have guys like Luck, Newton, Rivers, Roethlisberger, and Romo when healthy who have been consistently pretty good, and sometimes elite. The next group is what I'm talking about as the consistently "league average". Flacco, Dalton, Stafford (who could be argued in the group before this), and Ryan who have each had a bad season, but also have put together at least 1 great season and have overall been solidly in the 10-14 range of QBs.

 

I think the problem is most people are looking for one of the first 2 group guys in a top 5 pick. That's not only unrealistic, it's also unnecessary for success. And I don't think you can sit back and wait until one of those falls into your lap. The Bears are as bad as anyone could have imagined this year and they still aren't bad enough to get that elite QB prospect, if there was one in this draft.

 

That being said, I'm not saying you take a QB at 3 overall regardless of the situation. If Pace identifies Watson or Kaaya as the best QB in this draft, and all signs point to both being there in the 2nd or a reasonable trade up back into the late 1st, then by all means take another player with the 1st pick. The problem is, I don't see an actual elite talent (that's not a RB) at 3, assuming Myles Garrett goes 1 or 2. I love Jon Allen as a player, but I'd just as soon trade down than take a D-lineman on a team that plays 60% nickel with 2 down linemen.

[raw]

Raw, your theory on this is a great way to emulate the Browns. You don't take qb because you can. Hell, if league average is fine with you keep cutler through his contract and use the picks on actual elite talent.

 

Looking for league average qb play out of a top 5 pick is dumb.

 

Oh and don't fool yourself. The Bears are essentially the Browns at this point. 14 wins in 3 years vs. 11 in 3 years. Both are terrible. The Bears are in no position to poke fun at Cleveland. And I never said you take a QB because you can. You take a QB because you can get the best one. If Pace and his scouts are good at their jobs, they will find the best one. Like I said before, Grossman was the 5th drafted QB in his class. McNown was the 4th (or vice versa). Since Harbaugh, the Bears have literally settled on their 1st round picks at QB, after 3 or 4 teams have already had their pick. You wait til the 2nd, you risk having 3 or 4 QBs picked over before you get a chance again. Which, again, is fine if you don't like the consensus top 3 or 4 guys as much as the guy that's going to be there in the 2nd. But you sure as hell better be right about that.

[jersey cubs fan]

Raw, your theory on this is a great way to emulate the Browns. You don't take qb because you can. Hell, if league average is fine with you keep cutler through his contract and use the picks on actual elite talent.

 

Looking for league average qb play out of a top 5 pick is dumb.

 

Oh and don't fool yourself. The Bears are essentially the Browns at this point. 14 wins in 3 years vs. 11 in 3 years. Both are terrible. The Bears are in no position to poke fun at Cleveland. And I never said you take a QB because you can. You take a QB because you can get the best one. If Pace and his scouts are good at their jobs, they will find the best one. Like I said before, Grossman was the 5th drafted QB in his class. McNown was the 4th (or vice versa). Since Harbaugh, the Bears have literally settled on their 1st round picks at QB, after 3 or 4 teams have already had their pick. You wait til the 2nd, you risk having 3 or 4 QBs picked over before you get a chance again. Which, again, is fine if you don't like the consensus top 3 or 4 guys as much as the guy that's going to be there in the 2nd. But you sure as hell better be right about that.

the Bears have been a joke for three years, Cleveland had been Cleveland since Ohio was founded.

 

The best qb in any class may not be any good, and even still the Bears may have to settle for 2nd best if they insist on taking one and letting an actual elite talent walk.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

lol @ Matt Ryan being league average

[raw]

lol @ Matt Ryan being league average

 

You basing your "LOL" on his 115 QB rating this year or you going to look at the rest of his career?

[WrigleyField 22]

If you think one of those guys has a reasonable chance of a Flacco/Ryan type career, you pull the trigger if Garrett/Allen go 1-2. But yea, you definitely don't want to be forcing a QB at the top pick. That said, I think they really need to pick a QB by round 4 (regardless of whatever else they decide about the position). After round 4 is where even finding a serviceable starter all but goes out the window. And I'd even be alright forcing in the 2nd or 3rd round.

[davell]

How about trading for a guy? Garoppolo is likely going to be super expensive(2nd Rder+?)but what about Tyrod Taylor? I think he could be a pretty solid fit.

[raw]

How about trading for a guy? Garoppolo is likely going to be super expensive(2nd Rder+?)but what about Tyrod Taylor? I think he could be a pretty solid fit.

 

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

[BigbadB]

but there's certainly guys who can be the next Dalton, Prescott, David Carr, Matt Ryan, or Cousins.

 

I'm sure you meant Derek, but that you gave him a first name, but not Dalton or Prescott, and that he was a first pick bust kinda makes this funny. But it's also relevant to the discussion.

[davell]

How about trading for a guy? Garoppolo is likely going to be super expensive(2nd Rder+?)but what about Tyrod Taylor? I think he could be a pretty solid fit.

 

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

 

But then you're forcing a fit in a QB class that's less than awe-inspiring too. Personally, I could see a trade for a Taylor and still take a QB in the 3rd or 4th.

[David]

How about trading for a guy? Garoppolo is likely going to be super expensive(2nd Rder+?)but what about Tyrod Taylor? I think he could be a pretty solid fit.

 

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

 

Much like overdrafting QBs who aren't deserving of top 3 picks over an actual elite player.

[David]

[tweet]

[/tweet]

[CaliforniaRaisin]

If the Bears beat Minnesota, they could slide as far as the 6th pick.

[raw]

How about trading for a guy? Garoppolo is likely going to be super expensive(2nd Rder+?)but what about Tyrod Taylor? I think he could be a pretty solid fit.

 

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

 

But then you're forcing a fit in a QB class that's less than awe-inspiring too. Personally, I could see a trade for a Taylor and still take a QB in the 3rd or 4th.

 

No. Forcing a fit is what the Bears have done for years. Forcing a fit is watching Couch, McNabb, Smith, and Culpepper go off the board and settling for McNown. The Bears pick 3rd, they can take any QB they want in this draft. They don't HAVE to take a QB. I've made a point in saying that they shouldn't draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. But if they do draft a QB (and all signs point to they will), they HAVE to draft the best one. The best way to draft the best one, is to draft the best one. Not wait to see who falls to you in the 2nd round.

[raw]

How about trading for a guy? Garoppolo is likely going to be super expensive(2nd Rder+?)but what about Tyrod Taylor? I think he could be a pretty solid fit.

 

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

 

Much like overdrafting QBs who aren't deserving of top 3 picks over an actual elite player.

 

Who says none of these QBs aren't deserving of a top 3 pick? Draft websites? Experts? F what they think. If Pace thinks one of these QBs could become even Andy Dalton, then he should take that player at 3 and not worry about if people think he's undeserving.

[davell]

 

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

 

But then you're forcing a fit in a QB class that's less than awe-inspiring too. Personally, I could see a trade for a Taylor and still take a QB in the 3rd or 4th.

 

No. Forcing a fit is what the Bears have done for years. Forcing a fit is watching Couch, McNabb, Smith, and Culpepper go off the board and settling for McNown. The Bears pick 3rd, they can take any QB they want in this draft. They don't HAVE to take a QB. I've made a point in saying that they shouldn't draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. But if they do draft a QB (and all signs point to they will), they HAVE to draft the best one. The best way to draft the best one, is to draft the best one. Not wait to see who falls to you in the 2nd round.

 

1) There are 2 QB's supposedly even thought of as top 10 worthy. There's no guarantee EITHER will be there for us to take when we pick. Nor do we know IF we value them at that level. Drafting one of them could be the epitomy of forcing a fit.

 

2) If one isn't take at that point, all we can do is take one later as a developmental type. That leaves us having to fill our starters role in the immediate. A guy like Taylor, with upside and not a huge cost involved, seems like a good idea to me. Its not forcing a fit, because it doesn't set us back if he's a stopgap. You're still able to develop your guy and/or still use your 1st at a later time on a QB you truly want.