Bears offseason

[raw]

I'm starting to open up to the idea of Tyrod Taylor (assuming he's released and can be had for just money) and then drafting a guy like Patrick Mahomes. But that's mainly because I'm falling in love with Mahomes' upside. I'd still rather stay at 3 and take Watson (1A) or Trubisky (1B). But the Bears do need a lot of talent. And if the Bears think they can develop Mahomes from that Air Raid crap he ran at TT, then he could have the most upside in this draft. And if you can have an established QB like Taylor without giving up picks, potentially trade the #3 pick and still get a premium defensive talent (Solomon Thomas, Derek Barnett, Jamal Adams, Malik Hooker) in the top 10 and get a developmental QB.....that'd be an option I'd consider over a QB at 3.

 

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 Bill Parcells has his criteria that all QBs must meet in order for his team to be interested (granted, it's a little outdated).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.

[Guest]

but anyway, Minny, the bears just need a QB for the offense to work. Maybe another TE or for Miller to be healthy all season. If White can come back and be average and Jeffery re-signs, well....it will be a pretty good group.

 

QB is the toughest spot to fill, but i think a lot of guys could do it behind the Bears line.

 

The only group that is a mess on this team are the DBs, and one of the starters is good. you don't need 4 great dbs, or even 1, you just need a couple average guys, an above average guy and maybe even 1 simply below average guy. Getting Berry gets 2 above average safeties, getting King gets an average CB. So the last guy doesn't even need to be very good, just capable. They could probably fill that spot with Fuller and see how it goes.

 

 

I agree on the QB being the hitch pin to offensive success to a point. I think our line, albeit potentially solid, is thin. I wouldn't mind Allen in Rd 1, but that would be a huge get. How could SF not take him? I'd look at Tabor even. But if Allen and Garrett go 1-2 (not respectively), are you sure you pass on all the available QBs? I'd probably grab Kizer.

 

I'd take either Trubisky or Kizer if Allen wasn't available, both are big time talents who won't fall to the second round. However, I see SF taking either one of them and letting Allen slip to us. That guy is just too much of a monster to let go, and, make no mistake, he makes the line elite.

[davell]

I dont know enough about Taylor to be pos or neg on him. Whats his story? good arm? mobility? does he read the d well? whats his weaknesses?

 

Above average arm. Short for a QB. Gets a bunch of passes batted down. Not real comfortable inside the pocket and gets sacked a lot, while just drifting into guys. Runs VERY well. Excellent outside of the pocket. Throws a very good deep ball. Does NOT throw picks.

 

He's a mid level starter in the NFL. He's heading into his prime and conceivably can still get better. I brought him up originally because I thought he was a realistic option and could be paired with a developmental guy.

 

The more I look at it, Buffalo would be stupid to let him go. Unless they grab Romo, I've got to think they wind up holding onto him. Guess they could look at Jay? But, they're trying to make the playoffs and I don't see an option better than Taylor out there. Who knows though? I'd much prefer him to Romo for the Bears though, if he does wind up available. Younger, still has some upside, can scramble extremely well, if the line has injuries or isn't very good.

 

If he DOES wind up available, my guess is Buffalo will be able to deal him. He's basically got a 2/27 contract, then zero dead money after that, but a reasonable deal, if he deserves to stick around. I think he'd cost a 4th or 5th, because Buffalo is shooting themselves and his value in the ass.

[raw]

Does anybody know how far will Adoree Jackson fall after his injury? I would love the Bears to get him.

 

Looks like just a sprained ankle. So, I don't think it will factor in his draft status. However, his current draft status is that he hasn't yet declared. He and Juju Smith-Schuster are supposedly a package deal and if 1 comes back the other will, and vice versa. Adoree is interesting. Extremely fast, but I think he's more athlete than CB at this point. He has his moments when he makes great plays in coverage and has shutdown WRs at times. But he also gives up his fair share of plays. I'd take him at the top of the 2nd because he can be a top return man in the league right now and still develop as a CB.

[Guest]

 

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.

 

if the Browns love Trubisky, then see if they'd be interested in trading up from 12 to get him. Maybe they'd deal 12/33/52.

 

At 12, you could grab best DB available: Humphrey/Hooker/Adams/Lattimore/Peppers/Jones/Wilson.

 

Then get DeShaun Watson, King, and Jourdan Lewis at 33/36/52. That would really help the secondary in terms of depth and starters, plus we snag a potential QB of the future. Although, now, I'm kind of in love with the idea of drafting Jonathan Allen.

 

I agree that Watson is a great QB, and what like about him is that even if he's shaky through the air, he has the ability to run a bit, and his instincts are tremendous.

[Guest]

I'd much prefer him to Romo for the Bears though, if he does wind up available. Younger, still has some upside, can scramble extremely well, if the line has injuries or isn't very good.

 

Why does this myth that the Bears line isn't very good, persist? they would have to suffer a lot of injuries to not be very good, as they were still very good even with Ted Larsen seeing significant time.

[davell]

Rank the QB's in what order you think they come off the board.....

 

1 Kizer

2 Watson

3 Mahomes

4 Trubisky

5 Webb

 

I'll put Allen 2nd, if he does come out.

[Guest]

I would put Watson third behind Kizer and Trubisky, but it seems like he'll go in the first round.

[minnesotacubsfan]

Rank the QB's in what order you think they come off the board.....

 

1 Kizer

2 Watson

3 Mahomes

4 Trubisky

5 Webb

 

I'll put Allen 2nd, if he does come out.

 

 

This would be easier on Jan 10, but;

 

Trubisky

Watson

Kizer

Mahomes

Webb

[davell]

I'd much prefer him to Romo for the Bears though, if he does wind up available. Younger, still has some upside, can scramble extremely well, if the line has injuries or isn't very good.

 

Why does this myth that the Bears line isn't very good, persist? they would have to suffer a lot of injuries to not be very good, as they were still very good even with Ted Larsen seeing significant time.

 

I am far from trusting Leno and Massie. I would love to find an OT in the 2nd personally. The old guy from Utah would be a good get, but only if we trade down and add an extra 2nd.

 

1st w/ tradedown- best DB available

2nd- QB and OT

3Rd- TE

4th- DB and D-Line

[Derwood]

All I hear about Trubisky makes him sound like a project, but a guy who is your QB week one

[Guest]

I'd much prefer him to Romo for the Bears though, if he does wind up available. Younger, still has some upside, can scramble extremely well, if the line has injuries or isn't very good.

 

Why does this myth that the Bears line isn't very good, persist? they would have to suffer a lot of injuries to not be very good, as they were still very good even with Ted Larsen seeing significant time.

 

I am far from trusting Leno and Massie. I would love to find an OT in the 2nd personally. The old guy from Utah would be a good get, but only if we trade down and add an extra 2nd.

 

1st w/ tradedown- best DB available

2nd- QB and OT

3Rd- TE

4th- DB and D-Line

 

I don't think that the Bears will draft OT early, they are happy with their OT's and any early draft pick is going to sit behind those two for a while, barring any major injuries. They may draft 4-7 for depth, but I don't think that they see it as a need. 3 above average Interior linemen, 2 average tackles, I think that's fine, especially with those guys getting another year of experience together.

[Guest]

All I hear about Trubisky makes him sound like a project, but a guy who is your QB week one

 

I hear otherwise.

[davell]

All I hear about Trubisky makes him sound like a project, but a guy who is your QB week one

 

I hear otherwise.

 

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

[raw]

Rank the QB's in what order you think they come off the board.....

 

1 Kizer

2 Watson

3 Mahomes

4 Trubisky

5 Webb

 

I'll put Allen 2nd, if he does come out.

 

Order I think they come off the board?

 

1 Trubisky

2 Kizer

3 Watson

4 Mahomes

5 Kaaya

 

If Allen comes out, I'd put him at 3.

 

Order I'd take them?

 

1 Watson

2 Trubisky

3 Mahomes

4 Kizer

5 Kaaya

 

Allen again at #3.

[Guest]

Voch Lombardi has some film of Trubisky looking off his receivers and making several reads downfield on a consistent basis. That's generally a good indicator of what kind of success they'll have at the pro level. Trubisky is calm in the pocket, has a quick, beautiful release, and can make all of the throws.

[Guest]

All I hear about Trubisky makes him sound like a project, but a guy who is your QB week one

 

I hear otherwise.

 

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

 

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

[davell]

 

Why does this myth that the Bears line isn't very good, persist? they would have to suffer a lot of injuries to not be very good, as they were still very good even with Ted Larsen seeing significant time.

 

I am far from trusting Leno and Massie. I would love to find an OT in the 2nd personally. The old guy from Utah would be a good get, but only if we trade down and add an extra 2nd.

 

1st w/ tradedown- best DB available

2nd- QB and OT

3Rd- TE

4th- DB and D-Line

 

I don't think that the Bears will draft OT early, they are happy with their OT's and any early draft pick is going to sit behind those two for a while, barring any major injuries. They may draft 4-7 for depth, but I don't think that they see it as a need. 3 above average Interior linemen, 2 average tackles, I think that's fine, especially with those guys getting another year of experience together.

 

I don't actually think they will either. Personally, I think its a mistake. I think we need better OT's than our current pair, when we actually throw a young QB out there. Hell, I'd make sure to draft an O-Line prospect every year, no matter what though.

[raw]

 

I am far from trusting Leno and Massie. I would love to find an OT in the 2nd personally. The old guy from Utah would be a good get, but only if we trade down and add an extra 2nd.

 

1st w/ tradedown- best DB available

2nd- QB and OT

3Rd- TE

4th- DB and D-Line

 

I don't think that the Bears will draft OT early, they are happy with their OT's and any early draft pick is going to sit behind those two for a while, barring any major injuries. They may draft 4-7 for depth, but I don't think that they see it as a need. 3 above average Interior linemen, 2 average tackles, I think that's fine, especially with those guys getting another year of experience together.

 

I don't actually think they will either. Personally, I think its a mistake. I think we need better OT's than our current pair, when we actually throw a young QB out there. Hell, I'd make sure to draft an O-Line prospect every year, no matter what though.

 

They do have 0 OT depth, but luckily for them, Leno played every snap and Massie missed minimal time. I think they'll pick up a developmental OT in the 4th or 5th round, but not much more than that unless they get a steal.

[Guest]

 

I am far from trusting Leno and Massie. I would love to find an OT in the 2nd personally. The old guy from Utah would be a good get, but only if we trade down and add an extra 2nd.

 

1st w/ tradedown- best DB available

2nd- QB and OT

3Rd- TE

4th- DB and D-Line

 

I don't think that the Bears will draft OT early, they are happy with their OT's and any early draft pick is going to sit behind those two for a while, barring any major injuries. They may draft 4-7 for depth, but I don't think that they see it as a need. 3 above average Interior linemen, 2 average tackles, I think that's fine, especially with those guys getting another year of experience together.

 

I don't actually think they will either. Personally, I think its a mistake. I think we need better OT's than our current pair, when we actually throw a young QB out there. Hell, I'd make sure to draft an O-Line prospect every year, no matter what though.

 

But my point is that the line is higher-rated in pass protection than Dallas's line, and I doubt you'd have much problem throwing a promising rookie out there behind them.

 

Just finished the film on Trubisky, and wow. We need to take him.

[minnesotacubsfan]

 

I don't think that the Bears will draft OT early, they are happy with their OT's and any early draft pick is going to sit behind those two for a while, barring any major injuries. They may draft 4-7 for depth, but I don't think that they see it as a need. 3 above average Interior linemen, 2 average tackles, I think that's fine, especially with those guys getting another year of experience together.

 

I don't actually think they will either. Personally, I think its a mistake. I think we need better OT's than our current pair, when we actually throw a young QB out there. Hell, I'd make sure to draft an O-Line prospect every year, no matter what though.

 

But my point is that the line is higher-rated in pass protection than Dallas's line, and I doubt you'd have much problem throwing a promising rookie out there behind them.

 

Just finished the film on Trubisky, and wow. We need to take him.

 

Would you take him over Allen?

 

 

Would you take him if SF takes Allen?

[Guest]

good problem to have, since either will be available.

 

Trubisky can run, throw, read defenses, he keeps his eyes downfield, he's got instincts, and he's confident in looking off receivers .This guy is going to be huge

[minnesotacubsfan]

good problem to have, since either will be available.

 

Trubisky can run, throw, read defenses, he keeps his eyes downfield, he's got instincts, and he's confident in looking off receivers .This guy is going to be huge

 

 

When he fucks up, what kind of mistakes does he make?

[Guest]

good problem to have, since either will be available.

 

Trubisky can run, throw, read defenses, he keeps his eyes downfield, he's got instincts, and he's confident in looking off receivers .This guy is going to be huge

 

 

When he horsefeathers up, what kind of mistakes does he make?

 

well, there was only one instance where he was staring down a receiver from what I saw, but he doesn't make many bad decisions. I guess his main opportunity is calibrating his internal clock.

[davell]

 

I hear otherwise.

 

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?