Bears offseason

[Guest]

 

I have a feeling he means "not", instead of " but" there.

 

Yeah, I knew what he meant, and I meant what I wrote.

 

So, you think Trubisky is a week 1 NFL starter?

 

I do. I think a lot of those with the opinion that he is a project are those who know he's a first-year starter, and that's about the scope of their understanding.

[davell]

 

Yeah, I knew what he meant, and I meant what I wrote.

 

So, you think Trubisky is a week 1 NFL starter?

 

I do. I think a lot of those with the opinion that he is a project are those who know he's a first-year starter, and that's about the scope of their understanding.

 

Moving from a spread to an NFL offense isn't necessarily easy. Plus, he's got some bad habits that'll get exposed big time without proper coaching. He floats balls, quite often. His foot work is lazy. His mechanics suck because he's all arm, not squaring up hardly at all.

 

He's a project. He's not starting in the NFL as a rookie, unless you want Goff or worse results.

 

The guy I'd say would be the best as a week 1 guy is Watson. But, I wouldn't want to see that either, on the Bears next year.

[Guest]

 

So, you think Trubisky is a week 1 NFL starter?

 

I do. I think a lot of those with the opinion that he is a project are those who know he's a first-year starter, and that's about the scope of their understanding.

 

Moving from a spread to an NFL offense isn't necessarily easy. Plus, he's got some bad habits that'll get exposed big time without proper coaching. He floats balls, quite often. His foot work is lazy. His mechanics suck because he's all arm, not squaring up hardly at all.

 

He's a project. He's not starting in the NFL as a rookie, unless you want Goff or worse results.

 

The guy I'd say would be the best as a week 1 guy is Watson. But, I wouldn't want to see that either, on the Bears next year.

 

nah, actually, come to think of it, one of his issues is not anticipating well enough, but his release is so quick, it makes up for it a lot of times.

 

I haven't seen lazy footwork, other than throwing off his back foot on occasion, with a man in his face, but I don't necessarily think that's entirely a bad thing. I haven't seen or heard that his mechanics suck at all. with his motion, he needs to get his hips into the ball, and he does that just fine.

 

Watson is a mechanics nightmare, though.

[davell]

Watson's track record gets him more of a pass from me. He's a leader, the intangible crap, blah, blah. I do think those things come into play, especially with QBs.

[minnesotacubsfan]

They do, but how does Turbisky not have those qualities?

[davell]

They do, but how does Turbisky not have those qualities?

 

As a guy who's watched most of his games and is obviously a fan of the program....It won't hurt me to see him leave. He's inconsistent. He loses confidence at times. I'm happy for him, because he's likely to be a high pick. But from a wins and losses standpoint, we obviously took a step back with him at the helm.

 

As an aside, I'll freely admit, that I tend to be hard on guys from my school to try and not show favoritism. But, as a Bears fan too, taking this guy in the 1st is a mistake.

[Thrilho]

 

So, you think Trubisky is a week 1 NFL starter?

 

I do. I think a lot of those with the opinion that he is a project are those who know he's a first-year starter, and that's about the scope of their understanding.

 

Moving from a spread to an NFL offense isn't necessarily easy. Plus, he's got some bad habits that'll get exposed big time without proper coaching. He floats balls, quite often. His foot work is lazy. His mechanics suck because he's all arm, not squaring up hardly at all.

 

He's a project. He's not starting in the NFL as a rookie, unless you want Goff or worse results.

 

The guy I'd say would be the best as a week 1 guy is Watson. But, I wouldn't want to see that either, on the Bears next year.

One thing I think separates Trubisky from some of the guys who have been mentioned in the second round is the tools he's got to deal with pressure. He's consistently pretty good navigating a collapsing pocket, but then he's got serious wheels. To me, his ability to escape behind the line of scrimmage is close to what Watson has. According to this PFF article, he "finished the season ranked No. 1 in adjusted completion rate under pressure at 68.6 percent." It seems like the ability to handle pressure should allow an easier transition to the NFL.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/college-football-top-10-qbs-of-2016-baker-mayfield/

 

No matter what kind of line the NFL team has, you're going to be dealing with collapsing pockets and linemen who are fast enough to catch a QB with average or even slightly above average speed. I admittedly haven't watched a ton of Webb and Mahomes, but after you brought them up yesterday I watched a few games from each. And, to my untrained eye, it looks like both have the type of speed that would get tracked down by a lineman. Mahomes is faster for sure, but he doesn't look Trubisky/Watson fast. And it seemed like in the face of a collapsing pocket both threw off their back feet and into danger more often than you'd want. I've to watch more before saying that for sure, but that was my initial impression.

 

Then both Mahomes and Webb seemed to have good downfield arms, but relatively inconsistent mechanics. So Mahomes in particular hit on a lot of deep passes but threw more of them than I'd want and didn't hit on a high enough percentage. He has a decent 63-65% completion percentage the last two years, but looked like he went either deep ball or checkdown a lot. According to the PFF article below, Mahomes led the Power 5 in 2015 with 60% of his yards coming after catch. He was leading the nation again at 62% at the time of this article (after week 2) so not sure how he ended up in 2016, but seemed from the eye test that he did balance his love of deep balls with checkdowns. And, sort of like Watson, a lot of those check downs looked like one read plays.

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/college-football-lamar-jackson-leads-ranking-of-5-best-qb/

 

Webb looks a like Matt Barley-ish to me, where he's got a decent downfield arm when he has a chance to set himself, but his intermediate passes don't have a ton of zip on them. Like his throws to the sideline seem like they'd be picked fairly often. And, like Kaaya, my biggest problem with him is his lack of wheels.

 

I originally liked Watson a lot, but I'm not that big a fan of his intermediate to deep arm strength and accuracy. But if you want a guy to start right away he might be the best. He makes decisions quickly (can't remember where I read it but he averages under 2.5 seconds per dropback and was close to leading the nation there) and if you put him in a west coast offense with the Bears big receivers he could probably have some success. But I'm not a big enough fan of his throwing tools long term to put him ahead of Trubisky or Josh Allen. Still not sure about him vs Kizer or him vs elite level defensive guy, but I'd lean defensive guy or trade down if Trubisky's gone and Pace isn't sold on Kizer.

 

Then on Kizer. He's got some speed for escapability, and his frame makes him hard to bring down. But don't love his throwing motion and his passes don't seem as accurate as some of these other guys. Maybe a little bit of a Culpepper type. Or maybe a more mobile Byron Leftwich. Not sure on him yet, but not sold.

 

Josh Allen, love him. He's got that mobility and arm for days. Has played in an offense that required more than one read and where he was under center a decent amount. Had to play under pressure an awful lot due to a bad line. Throws off his back foot on the run a lot, but he makes incredibly accurate downfield throws a lot of times when he does it. He's got a rocket on throws to the sideline and in the intermediate, and a quick throwing motion. From my eyes he's the sort of guy who could end up a top 5 QB in the league if his head game gets worked out. Like in the Favre or Elway mold. But he could also easily be Cutler, whose got those Favre/Elway tools but a 10 cent head. So with Allen, I'll say that if Trubisky is off the board and the Bears like him enough to take him the I'll be real excited. But for now if anyone argues my ranking on him it'll be kind of tough to defend my position since it's all projection. I'd think he's a guy you'd have to wait until at least second half of the season to start though.

 

Then I'm going to throw in Ward. Dynamic runner and he's got a consistently high 60s completion rate. As that PFF top 10 article mentions, he's been good against pressure with a 109 QB rating against the blitz. Decent intermediate and deep ball. He's 5'11" 185, so not nearly the same readiness to stand up to NFL punishment as Watson. That could be the make or break factor with him. He's got the Senior Bowl to make his case though, where most of these guys won't. I'll say he goes before Webb and Kaaya for now, somewhere in the second.

 

So, lots of words but here's how I'd think they go off the board now, if Allen is in the draft:

 

Trubisky

Allen (potentially as high as the Bears)

Kizer

Watson

Mahomes

Ward

Webb

Kaaya

[Thrilho]

That was a post on the individual QBs, but I also just wanted to say that if you think one of the top QBs is much better than what will be available in the second round I'd much rather sacrifice the one round drop in talent on defense than on the QB. It's supposed to be a deep draft in the secondary, so you figure you'll still be able to get a pretty good guy there. But with QB you pretty much get:

 

1. Above average QB that you're tethered to a while

2. Average QB you're tethered to a while

3. Below average QB that you're trying to get rid of

4. Non contributing bench player

 

Put a percentage on each of those, and I'd say the chance of the second round guy being in group number 4 is much much higher than it would be for the #3 pick. If you miss on the corner back pick a little you're almost certain to get a starter or at least someone who can give you some plays. But if you pick a QB who can't start he's a nothing.

 

But then for QB, even if you're in group 3 with a second round pick you lost hard because you're almost certainly going to lose some games with a guy like that. Maybe a team thinks that QB is such a crapshoot they want to just end up in group 2. But if you see a guy at 3 that you think has a good shot of being in group 1 I think you just take him and accept the drop in talent on the defensive player from 3 to the 35. It's a gamble but it's got big upside.

[davell]

Obviously, if you have a guy a whole tier or two ahead of the rest, you take him. I'll be OK with whoever drops, because I just don't see enough separation between them.

 

I'm all about Allen at 3. He does make the front 7 a true strength. Which helps the secondary too. If we stay there and he's available, he's my guy. Garrett, Allen, and Hooker, in order, if we stay put.

[jersey cubs fan]

They do, but how does Turbisky not have those qualities?

 

As a guy who's watched most of his games and is obviously a fan of the program....It won't hurt me to see him leave. He's inconsistent. He loses confidence at times. I'm happy for him, because he's likely to be a high pick. But from a wins and losses standpoint, we obviously took a step back with him at the helm.

 

As an aside, I'll freely admit, that I tend to be hard on guys from my school to try and not show favoritism. But, as a Bears fan too, taking this guy in the 1st is a mistake.

A step back is one way to put it, but it's still better than most nc records.

 

 

What I'm saying is Tar Heels football sucks and you're delusional.

[Guest]

They do, but how does Turbisky not have those qualities?

 

As a guy who's watched most of his games and is obviously a fan of the program....It won't hurt me to see him leave. He's inconsistent. He loses confidence at times. I'm happy for him, because he's likely to be a high pick. But from a wins and losses standpoint, we obviously took a step back with him at the helm.

 

As an aside, I'll freely admit, that I tend to be hard on guys from my school to try and not show favoritism. But, as a Bears fan too, taking this guy in the 1st is a mistake.

A step back is one way to put it, but it's still better than most nc records.

 

 

What I'm saying is Tar Heels football sucks and you're delusional.

 

LOL, pretty much what I was thinking, but too nice to say.

[davell]

Delusional? Exactly WHERE did I boast about UNC's football program? They got worse with him. That's all. Don't think I said we were a contender. Don't think I said anything of the sort. So please......Either of you show me where I'm horsefeathering delusional.

 

We're a basketball school. And I'm absolutely fine with that.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Delusional? Exactly WHERE did I boast about UNC's football program? They got worse with him. That's all. Don't think I said we were a contender. Don't think I said anything of the sort. So please......Either of you show me where I'm horsefeathering delusional.

 

We're a basketball school. And I'm absolutely fine with that.

 

so the only change from 2015 to 2016 was Turbisky? no other drop of talent between those years?

[jersey cubs fan]

Delusional? Exactly WHERE did I boast about UNC's football program? They got worse with him. That's all. Don't think I said we were a contender. Don't think I said anything of the sort. So please......Either of you show me where I'm horsefeathering delusional.

 

We're a basketball school. And I'm absolutely fine with that.

 

[davell]

Delusional? Exactly WHERE did I boast about UNC's football program? They got worse with him. That's all. Don't think I said we were a contender. Don't think I said anything of the sort. So please......Either of you show me where I'm horsefeathering delusional.

 

We're a basketball school. And I'm absolutely fine with that.

 

 

Oh you're right. I'm a true homer when it comes to my school. Its the main reason I stay away from talking college sports lol.

 

I do think that if this guy was a legit franchise type QB though, that UNC should have been at least slightly better in a shitty conference.

[Thrilho]

Obviously, if you have a guy a whole tier or two ahead of the rest, you take him. I'll be OK with whoever drops, because I just don't see enough separation between them.

 

I'm all about Allen at 3. He does make the front 7 a true strength. Which helps the secondary too. If we stay there and he's available, he's my guy. Garrett, Allen, and Hooker, in order, if we stay put.

True, if Trubisky or Allen or whoever aren't a tier above the guys in the second round go defense. I keep saying I'm not a scout, but then sticking to my idea that Trubisky is #3 worthy. So if Pace agrees with you and a lot of other draft guys saying there are no QBs worthy of that spot then cool do something else.

 

Your other idea of Tyrod Taylor seems like a pretty good one if no QB at #3. The Bills came out and said they're getting rid of him and a lot of sources think they'll just cut rather than trade. If he's available for just money then you could get him and still have your top two picks for defense. I think that probably represents your best shot at getting to the playoffs next year.

 

I posted this earlier, but it was in between a bunch of words about draft prospects and a chest a tattoo, so it may have been lost. PFF's argument for keeping Taylor:

 

https://www.profootballfocus.com/pro-bills-should-build-around-tyrod-taylor-not-show-him-the-door/

 

Taylor ended the 2016 regular season with the 10th-best overall grade among all QBs, at 84.7. That’s higher than Alex Smith, Ben Roethlisberger, Jameis Winston, Andy Dalton and—here is the big one—Dak Prescott. Last year, Taylor was seventh (88.3).

This year, he recorded a passer rating of 80.1 when hurried; last season, it was 87.6. Those figures rank seventh and fifth in the league, respectively

For the big plays he makes, Taylor rarely puts the ball in harm’s way. His nine turnover-worthy plays this season represent the second-lowest percentage after Tom Brady, and when you look at the ratio of big plays to those turnover-worthy ones, he is fifth league-wide.

(37-12 TD to Int ratio last 2 years)

**Read from graphic** 95.8 QBR to deep middle / 99.3 QBR to deep right side

He is adding 550-plus yards to that run game himself each season

 

A young QB who has actually started the last two years (vs JG or McCarron) and been a steady game manager while also creating with his feet. If he's available in FA for just money I could definitely see Pace doing it. If he did then my top option would probably be Allen in the draft if was available or a trade down within the top 10ish to get Adams or Hooker if Allen was gone. Or just take Adams or Hooker at 3, but seems like you could get someone like the Jets to trade up for Trubisky.

 

I've seen a lot of talk about the 49ers getting both McDaniel and the Pats asst GM, then trading for JG. In that case you'd think they'd just pick Jonathan Allen. For Trubisky-hopers that could be good news, but if the Bears have already signed/traded for Taylor by draft time then you're probably just hoping for Jonathan Allen to fall. I agree that he'd be awesome in our front 7 and the line would really free up Floyd et al to fly around. I haven't checked out Adams or Hooker enough to know if it would be a good idea to take one of them instead, but it seems like there's so much talent in at the top of this draft that there's a good chance you could drop down in the top 10 and get one of them.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

1)Watson would be a huge over-reach at #3 imo

 

2)who would want to trade up to the third pick? It's an honest question

 

On your 2nd part... Jets might move up to get their QB maybe? Then again.. if one of Garrett or Allen is available, I can see multiple teams calling, but not sure if they will offer enough for Bears to move down.

 

I think we're in a great spot in the draft this year. I can't see Browns or 49ers moving so depending on which way the first 2 picks goes, the 3rd pick might be the spot where teams start calling to see if Bears will budge and after seeing Pace trade down a bunch in the 2nd last year, he'll move if the offer is right. Or we stay and get an elite talent.

 

Watson is not a reach at #3, IMO. I feel he is the best QB in this draft, despite what the "experts" say. Bill Parcells has his criteria that all QBs must meet in order for his team to be interested (granted, it's a little outdated).

 

1. Must be a senior

2. Must be a graduate

3. Must be a 3-year starter

4. Must have 23 wins

 

The only one Watson doesn't fit is a senior. He's also the only top QB who comes close to fitting any of these.

 

As for #2, I think the Jets could trade up to 3. They did just take Petty and Hackenberg, but neither are the answer. They supposedly love Trubisky. Buffalo could trade up from 10. And the Browns, with their 2nd 1st rounder and 2 2nd round picks, could also trade back up and take the best QB in addition to drafting the best defensive player in the draft at #1 (Garrett). The Browns also supposedly love Trubisky.

 

Aaron Rodgers went 0-for-4 in Bill Parcells' criteria.

[Splendid Splinter]

 

On your 2nd part... Jets might move up to get their QB maybe? Then again.. if one of Garrett or Allen is available, I can see multiple teams calling, but not sure if they will offer enough for Bears to move down.

 

I think we're in a great spot in the draft this year. I can't see Browns or 49ers moving so depending on which way the first 2 picks goes, the 3rd pick might be the spot where teams start calling to see if Bears will budge and after seeing Pace trade down a bunch in the 2nd last year, he'll move if the offer is right. Or we stay and get an elite talent.

 

Watson is not a reach at #3, IMO. I feel he is the best QB in this draft, despite what the "experts" say. Bill Parcells has his criteria that all QBs must meet in order for his team to be interested (granted, it's a little outdated).

 

1. Must be a senior

2. Must be a graduate

3. Must be a 3-year starter

4. Must have 23 wins

 

The only one Watson doesn't fit is a senior. He's also the only top QB who comes close to fitting any of these.

 

As for #2, I think the Jets could trade up to 3. They did just take Petty and Hackenberg, but neither are the answer. They supposedly love Trubisky. Buffalo could trade up from 10. And the Browns, with their 2nd 1st rounder and 2 2nd round picks, could also trade back up and take the best QB in addition to drafting the best defensive player in the draft at #1 (Garrett). The Browns also supposedly love Trubisky.

 

Aaron Rodgers went 0-for-4 in Bill Parcells' criteria.

 

Heck... what QB in the NFL right now meet all 4? Russell Wilson?

[CaliforniaRaisin]

 

Watson is not a reach at #3, IMO. I feel he is the best QB in this draft, despite what the "experts" say. Bill Parcells has his criteria that all QBs must meet in order for his team to be interested (granted, it's a little outdated).

 

1. Must be a senior

2. Must be a graduate

3. Must be a 3-year starter

4. Must have 23 wins

 

The only one Watson doesn't fit is a senior. He's also the only top QB who comes close to fitting any of these.

 

As for #2, I think the Jets could trade up to 3. They did just take Petty and Hackenberg, but neither are the answer. They supposedly love Trubisky. Buffalo could trade up from 10. And the Browns, with their 2nd 1st rounder and 2 2nd round picks, could also trade back up and take the best QB in addition to drafting the best defensive player in the draft at #1 (Garrett). The Browns also supposedly love Trubisky.

 

Aaron Rodgers went 0-for-4 in Bill Parcells' criteria.

 

Heck... what QB in the NFL right now meet all 4? Russell Wilson?

 

Some good QBs, apparently. Decided to look up a few guys at random and along with Wilson, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan, Kirk Cousins and Dak Prescott met all 4. As redshirt juniors/academic seniors, I'd say Andrew Luck and Marcus Mariota fit the criteria too (they had the other 3). Tom Brady only went 2-for-4 and Jameis Winston went 1-for-4.

 

When the top two QBs this decade go a combined 2-for-8 in this criteria, I'm not sure it should be used to prop up a guy in the top 3 who the so-called experts seem to think is a reach.

[WrigleyField 22]

 

Aaron Rodgers went 0-for-4 in Bill Parcells' criteria.

 

Heck... what QB in the NFL right now meet all 4? Russell Wilson?

 

Some good QBs, apparently. Decided to look up a few guys at random and along with Wilson, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan, Kirk Cousins and Dak Prescott met all 4. As redshirt juniors/academic seniors, I'd say Andrew Luck and Marcus Mariota fit the criteria too (they had the other 3). Tom Brady only went 2-for-4 and Jameis Winston went 1-for-4.

 

When the top two QBs this decade go a combined 2-for-8 in this criteria, I'm not sure it should be used to prop up a guy in the top 3 who the so-called experts seem to think is a reach.

And that doesn't even dig into the criteria of bad QBs who met all 4 (hey Matt Barkley!)

[Guest]

It should also be noted that Buffalo was woeful in pass protection last season.

 

What could Taylor do behind an actual, capable offensive line?

 

The great news for the Bears is that they don't have to go out into that QB wasteland, as several realistic, starting-caliber options are available

[raw]

 

Aaron Rodgers went 0-for-4 in Bill Parcells' criteria.

 

Heck... what QB in the NFL right now meet all 4? Russell Wilson?

 

Some good QBs, apparently. Decided to look up a few guys at random and along with Wilson, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan, Kirk Cousins and Dak Prescott met all 4. As redshirt juniors/academic seniors, I'd say Andrew Luck and Marcus Mariota fit the criteria too (they had the other 3). Tom Brady only went 2-for-4 and Jameis Winston went 1-for-4.

 

When the top two QBs this decade go a combined 2-for-8 in this criteria, I'm not sure it should be used to prop up a guy in the top 3 who the so-called experts seem to think is a reach.

 

I admitted it was outdated. But I don't understand the experts opinion of Watson. Obviously, you want a QB to have the tools. Arm strength, accuracy, mobility, ability read defenses, leadership, smart, intangibles, etc. But you also want them to prove all of this stuff by actually doing it on the field and winning games. Watson has all those tools. And he has shown them over the last 2 years, taking his team to back-to-back championship games. If he has another performance like he did against Alabama last year, I don't know how he can still be thought of as a borderline 1st rounder.

 

This is so similar to the Teddy Bridgewater situation. "Experts" are finding every reason to knock him down despite the body of work being there that says otherwise. Granted, Bridgewater hasn't completely proven everyone wrong yet but he's also been handcuffed by an OC who wouldn't let him be more than a game manager and now an injury.

[WrigleyField 22]

How much does Taylor get on the open market? Something similiar to his contract extension? 5/92 (15.5 guaranteed). AAV might be similar, but I'm guessing you are at least doubling the guaranteed money, right?

[raw]

How much does Taylor get on the open market? Something similiar to his contract extension? 5/92 (15.5 guaranteed). AAV might be similar, but I'm guessing you are at least doubling the guaranteed money, right?

 

I think he has 2/27 left on his deal (not guaranteed). So, yeah I'd think you'd need to guarantee him at least that much. I don't think he'd get quite what Osweiler got (4/72, 37M guaranteed). But I'm thinking 30M guaranteed and 15-16M average salary. 4-years/$63Mil, 32Mil guaranteed would probably get it done. Basically, that's committing to him for 2 years at a modest 16M each. Also, potentially allows him to be a FA before he turns 30, if he's gone after the guaranteed portion of his contract is over.

[WrigleyField 22]

How much does Taylor get on the open market? Something similiar to his contract extension? 5/92 (15.5 guaranteed). AAV might be similar, but I'm guessing you are at least doubling the guaranteed money, right?

 

I think he has 2/27 left on his deal (not guaranteed). So, yeah I'd think you'd need to guarantee him at least that much. I don't think he'd get quite what Osweiler got (4/72, 37M guaranteed). But I'm thinking 30M guaranteed and 15-16M average salary. 4-years/$63Mil, 32Mil guaranteed would probably get it done. Basically, that's committing to him for 2 years at a modest 16M each. Also, potentially allows him to be a FA before he turns 30, if he's gone after the guaranteed portion of his contract is over.

Spotrac is saying that the extension still doesn't kick in until next year. He got some guaranteed upfront this year, then that full 30M extra guarantee is what is kicking in March 12 and has a hit through the next 5 years.

 

If its less than Osweiler, with a structure thats front loaded like you propose, Id definitely be on board, but I think things could get silly on the open market quickly.