2024 NFL Draft

[jersey cubs fan]

The Athletic has the Bears picking 1 and 3.ESPN has the bears at 1 and 5 and in a mock they grab Williams and Dallas Turner 

 

[Hairyducked Idiot]

I think there's a real chance neither of our picks end up that high.

Carolina is our best hope. They look ready to give up and firesale.  But I did like how Bryce Young looked last week and he might be starting to pull it together a bit.

After seven games last season, the Bears were 3-4 and not picking in the top 10 at this point.  The Lions were in the 10A spot and ended up just barely missing the playoffs.

[raw]

Yeah, Carolina's schedule opens up a bit after last week's bye. They only have 3 games left vs. teams that currently have a winning record. One the 4-3 Falcons. One Week 16 vs a Jags team that may have sewn up that division by then. I'd feel a lot better about the Bears chances to get that #1 pick if Carolina loses this week to the 3-3 Texans and Arizona somehow beats the Ravens giving every team a 2-game cushion over the Panthers. 

[PackLandVA]

“And ‘Run Packers Run’ is making her move on the back stretch from the outside!!!! “

[soccer10k]

7 hours ago, PackLandVA said:

“And ‘Run Packers Run’ is making her move on the back stretch from the outside!!!! “

Bears fans laughing about Jordan Love sucking in 2023 only for Love to suck so bad the Packers get to draft their next franchise QB would be quite hilarious.

[NorthsideAvenger]

4 hours ago, soccer10k said:

Bears fans laughing about Jordan Love sucking in 2023 only for Love to suck so bad the Packers get to draft their next franchise QB would be quite hilarious.

To be honest, I'm not concerned about the Packers drafting a QB. Other than Starr and Rodgers, GB history at drafting QBs is spotty at best. 

[jersey cubs fan]

1 hour ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

To be honest, I'm not concerned about the Packers drafting a QB. Other than Starr and Rodgers, GB history at drafting QBs is spotty at best. 

30 years of HOF play sort of negates the need to swim in those waters. 

[NorthsideAvenger]

28 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

30 years of HOF play sort of negates the need to swim in those waters. 

If the Bears do their jobs correctly (and that is a big IF), it won't matter what GB does. I am more interested in seeing the Bears fixed their problems over worrying about what GB does. 

Edited October 27, 2023 by NorthsideAvenger

[PackLandVA]

6 hours ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

To be honest, I'm not concerned about the Packers drafting a QB. Other than Starr and Rodgers, GB history at drafting QBs is spotty at best. 

 

4 hours ago, jersey cubs fan said:

30 years of HOF play sort of negates the need to swim in those waters. 

 

Since 1992, the Packers have drafted the following QBs (when drafting wasn't really a need):

1992 - Ty Detmer - 9th Round  great for a 9th rounder 8-year career, 25 starts, 34 TDs 11-14 record

1993 - Mark Brunell - 5th Round  Excellent pick, 17-year career, 3x Pro Bowl, 184 TDs, 78-73 record

1995 - Jay Barker - 5th Round

1996 - Kyle Wacholtz - 5th Round

1997 Ronnie McAda - 7th Round

1998 - Matt Hasselbeck - 6th Round  Excellent Pick, 17-year career, 3x Pro Bowl, 212 TDs, 85-75 record

1999 Aaron Brooks - 4th Round  Pretty solid 4th Rounder, 7-year career, 90 starts, 123 TDs

2002 - Craig Nall  - 5th Round

2005 - Aaron Rodgers - 1st Round 

2006 - Ingle Martin - 5th Round

2008 - Brian Brohm - 2nd Round (BAD PICK, complete bust) 

2008 - Matt Flynn -  7th Round 7-year career, 17 TDs, 3-4 record, very good backup for GB

2012 - BJ Coleman - 7th Round

2015 - Brett Hundley - 5th Round

2020 - Jordan Love - 1st Round

2023 - Sean Clifford - 5th Round

 

Two First Round picks and a Second Rounder netted: AR (HoF), Brohm (bad pick), and Love (current starter with 7 starts in career)

The remaining picks were 1 Fourth and a bunch of Fifth Rounders or later.  The fact that they've grabbed Brunell, Hassellbeck, Brooks, and Detmer in those picks is pretty solid drafting when they weren't drafting for need in those years.

[PackLandVA]

And I'll add Don Majowski, a 10th Rounder from 1987 as a pretty good draft pick who was "Wally Pipped" by another HoF'er. Injured throwing shoulder and never recovered fully.

[NorthsideAvenger]

10 hours ago, PackLandVA said:

 

 

Since 1992, the Packers have drafted the following QBs (when drafting wasn't really a need):

1992 - Ty Detmer - 9th Round  great for a 9th rounder 8-year career, 25 starts, 34 TDs 11-14 record

1993 - Mark Brunell - 5th Round  Excellent pick, 17-year career, 3x Pro Bowl, 184 TDs, 78-73 record

1995 - Jay Barker - 5th Round

1996 - Kyle Wacholtz - 5th Round

1997 Ronnie McAda - 7th Round

1998 - Matt Hasselbeck - 6th Round  Excellent Pick, 17-year career, 3x Pro Bowl, 212 TDs, 85-75 record

1999 Aaron Brooks - 4th Round  Pretty solid 4th Rounder, 7-year career, 90 starts, 123 TDs

2002 - Craig Nall  - 5th Round

2005 - Aaron Rodgers - 1st Round 

2006 - Ingle Martin - 5th Round

2008 - Brian Brohm - 2nd Round (BAD PICK, complete bust) 

2008 - Matt Flynn -  7th Round 7-year career, 17 TDs, 3-4 record, very good backup for GB

2012 - BJ Coleman - 7th Round

2015 - Brett Hundley - 5th Round

2020 - Jordan Love - 1st Round

2023 - Sean Clifford - 5th Round

 

Two First Round picks and a Second Rounder netted: AR (HoF), Brohm (bad pick), and Love (current starter with 7 starts in career)

The remaining picks were 1 Fourth and a bunch of Fifth Rounders or later.  The fact that they've grabbed Brunell, Hassellbeck, Brooks, and Detmer in those picks is pretty solid drafting when they weren't drafting for need in those years.

I acknowledge that, it is why I said spotty at best instead of crap.

[jersey cubs fan]

11 hours ago, NorthsideAvenger said:

I acknowledge that, it is why I said spotty at best instead of crap.

The list looks way better than spotty to me. Bare minimum, it’s spotty at worst. But Rodgers and Flynn alone is a better track record in the past 25 seasons than probably all but a handful of teams. Throw in two solid guys in the 90s that went on to good careers and I’d say it’s darn right exemplary. 
 

Who has done better? The Chargers? Indy? Maybe Dallas. 

Regardless, the organization’s history of drafting QBs is meaningless when it comes to what to expect in 2024. The same is true for the Bears. 

[jersey cubs fan]

Cardinals look to have a pretty solid grasp on number 1 pick. The giants are going to be right there along with the Patriots. Tampa and Tennessee could also muddy the waters at the top. 
 

the Bears pick could definitely slide closer to 10 by end of season. Gonna be devastated when Poles trades up 

[Tryptamine]

43 minutes ago, jersey cubs fan said:

Cardinals look to have a pretty solid grasp on number 1 pick. The giants are going to be right there along with the Patriots. Tampa and Tennessee could also muddy the waters at the top. 
 

the Bears pick could definitely slide closer to 10 by end of season. Gonna be devastated when Poles trades up 

Daniel Jones with the Giants is terrible, without Daniel Jones they're a special level of awful. This is not at all an endorsement of Jones being anything other than incredibly mediocre.

[jumbo]

35 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

Daniel Jones with the Giants is terrible, without Daniel Jones they're a special level of awful. This is not at all an endorsement of Jones being anything other than incredibly mediocre.

I still can't believe that they signed him to that extension. I realize they had him and Saquan on expiring deals, but I'd much rather reach a contract with Saquan and franchise Jones than the other way around. 

[Tryptamine]

As of right now the Bears would have #2 and #4 and they're pretty much forced to take a QB. So I'd probably be grabbing Maye and Fashanu. Adding Fashanu would probably make the OL among the best in the league if they can add a center who isn't absolutely terrible.

[We Got The Whole 9]

5 hours ago, jersey cubs fan said:

Cardinals look to have a pretty solid grasp on number 1 pick. The giants are going to be right there along with the Patriots. Tampa and Tennessee could also muddy the waters at the top. 
 

the Bears pick could definitely slide closer to 10 by end of season. Gonna be devastated when Poles trades up 

If the Cardinals and Panthers both end with 1 win what decides the tiebreaker?

[PackLandVA]

41 minutes ago, We Got The Whole 9 said:

If the Cardinals and Panthers both end with 1 win what decides the tiebreaker?

I believe strength of schedule.

[Andy]

7 hours ago, PackLandVA said:

I believe strength of schedule.

I have to think the Panthers would 'win' that tiebreaker due to the NFC South being atrocious.

[Tryptamine]

If I had to guess today, I think it's going to finish like this

1. Cardinals( They are absolutely awful and without Dobbs they're even worse) 

2. Giants(The offense was a train wreck with Jones, without Jones they literally may not average double digit points a game)

3. Rams(if Stafford is out for an extended period, good god is their backup awful)

4. Panthers(I would have have them more like 6 or 7 last week, but that game by Young was two steps back)

5. Bears(I wouldn't be shocked if they won 6 and I wouldn't be shocked if they stayed at 2)

6. Patriots(Despite two blowout losses earlier in the year, I think they're a bit better than their 2 wins)

 

[Rex Buckingham]

22 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

If I had to guess today, I think it's going to finish like this

1. Cardinals( They are absolutely awful and without Dobbs they're even worse) 

2. Giants(The offense was a train wreck with Jones, without Jones they literally may not average double digit points a game)

3. Rams(if Stafford is out for an extended period, good god is their backup awful)

4. Panthers(I would have have them more like 6 or 7 last week, but that game by Young was two steps back)

5. Bears(I wouldn't be shocked if they won 6 and I wouldn't be shocked if they stayed at 2)

6. Patriots(Despite two blowout losses earlier in the year, I think they're a bit better than their 2 wins)

 

Basically a disaster scenario for the Bears. At that point, do you look to trade down from one of those picks and angle for McCarthy or whoever you think is the 3rd best QB? Or do you have to take the best prospect (Fashanu? Harrison Jr somehow? Dallas Turner? Bowers?) and the 3rd QB at 4 and 5 in whichever order?

[Tryptamine]

20 minutes ago, Rex Buckingham said:

Basically a disaster scenario for the Bears. At that point, do you look to trade down from one of those picks and angle for McCarthy or whoever you think is the 3rd best QB? Or do you have to take the best prospect (Fashanu? Harrison Jr somehow? Dallas Turner? Bowers?) and the 3rd QB at 4 and 5 in whichever order?

MHJ is gone by 4 and almost guaranteed so are Williams and Drake. There's a significant chance Fashanu is gone as well if the Bears don't pick until 5. That would be the absolute worst case scenario. At that point I'm taking 2 of Bowers/Alt/Laiatu because this team needs stars not to trade back for more depth. Then maybe if someone like Nix slides to the 2nd, you trade up for them. 

Edited November 6, 2023 by Tryptamine

[jersey cubs fan]

I would not trade down. I’d take two best players available and try to build an all around solid team then keep taking swings at QB. 

[raw]

52 minutes ago, Tryptamine said:

If I had to guess today, I think it's going to finish like this

1. Cardinals( They are absolutely awful and without Dobbs they're even worse) 

2. Giants(The offense was a train wreck with Jones, without Jones they literally may not average double digit points a game)

3. Rams(if Stafford is out for an extended period, good god is their backup awful)

4. Panthers(I would have have them more like 6 or 7 last week, but that game by Young was two steps back)

5. Bears(I wouldn't be shocked if they won 6 and I wouldn't be shocked if they stayed at 2)

6. Patriots(Despite two blowout losses earlier in the year, I think they're a bit better than their 2 wins)

 

Eh. Cards are a bad team, but they are getting Kyler Murray back, likely this coming week. He was 3-7 last year in games he started and finished, but they only scored less than 21 three times, they've only scored more than 21 three times without him. Plus, they'll lose the SOS battle to Carolina if they end up tied, and they essentially are with Arizona only have 1 more loss because they've played 1 fewer game.

Rams already have a game or 2 in hand over the rest of the top 6 with 3 wins already. They have a tough schedule (SOS not in their favor), but they also play Arizona and NYG.

Giants and Patriots are teams I worry about. Giants have AT LEAST 3 more games with DeVito at QB. They play NE and LAR, but those look like the only winnable games they have left, and that's only if Tyrod Taylor comes back.

I don't expect the Bears' pick to be in contention for #1, I think they'll win at least 3 more. It's all about the Carolina pick, IMO. 

[CubColtPacer]

 

1 hour ago, Tryptamine said:

If I had to guess today, I think it's going to finish like this

1. Cardinals( They are absolutely awful and without Dobbs they're even worse) 

2. Giants(The offense was a train wreck with Jones, without Jones they literally may not average double digit points a game)

3. Rams(if Stafford is out for an extended period, good god is their backup awful)

4. Panthers(I would have have them more like 6 or 7 last week, but that game by Young was two steps back)

5. Bears(I wouldn't be shocked if they won 6 and I wouldn't be shocked if they stayed at 2)

6. Patriots(Despite two blowout losses earlier in the year, I think they're a bit better than their 2 wins)

 

The Cardinals are expected to get Kyler back next week.  Who knows what he will look like coming off the torn ACL, but that should help them win a game or two.  Early indications are that Stafford will be back after the bye.