gflore34

A change in ownership is not a thing the public can lobby got or something we can expect. There are plenty of more hands on owners with as bad or worse results. Calling for an ownership change is pointless and unnecessary. There is no reason why these people can’t hire better football people on their own. They’ve done better and they’ve done worse. They can do better. There is some reason they haven't done well and of course, they can do better. Are they capable of doing better?

In the long run this probably seals Nagy' fate and hopefully, Pace'',Trubisky' gone regardless. But, consider this : the Bears, the Bears were talking, have to hit on a GM who, in turn, has to hit on a HC. Given they've been unable to lately hit on a GM, what evidence is there that this ownership is going to be able to find the right GM the next time around? I wonder if, ultimately, a change in ownership is required for success.

I cant tell what's serious and whats joking around with this post. sure, OL can last many years, but QB? Not for the Bears. Sure, GB can have generational talent. Pittsburgh too! even a second tier small market team like NO can pull that rabbit out of a hat. But not the Bears. Never, ever the Bears. Well, I'm kind of operating under the assumption that the Bears aren't under some sort of curse that will never let them hit on a QB pick. If they are, then yeah, we'll have to do something different They are not cursed, someday it'll happen maybe, not in our lifetimes, maybe not even this century but, it'll happen.

Was curious as to how valuable Mack would be, to that end, started looking at some statistics, found, Leonard Floyd. horsefeathering Leonard Floyd is arguably having a better season, its depressing, Mack is longer the elite defensive player every offense has to plan around. Really, do not believe he has much trade value also found horsefeathering GB has 12 sacks all season. They had only 9 going into the Bears game, just underlines the joke the Bears call an OL. Floyd always had talent, but by now its pretty clear that Pagano needs to be coaching dominoes, not an NFL team. Everything that man touches dies On the other hand, Roquan Smith is leading the league in tackles for loss, tied for second in solo tackles, that's something positive.

It of course just depends on circumstance. If they have a cloud of 4 that are very close maybe you consider trading down 3 for an extra mid round pick from 15 to 18. Later in the draft, popping on a trade up and parting with a 6th, where they probably have 3-4 sixths, knock yourself out. Either way, I don't think trading down is going to dramatically improve their draft strength. If they want to actually improve draft capital it's by figuring out which vets, who could be gone in a year anyways, might net something. Thats how you are more likely to significantly alter your draft capital. Mack and Fuller are probably the only significant guys who might net you something interesting. So gotta figure out your price. Anyone else might get you some late picks... Just a matter of taking what you could get if you might be cutting them anyways (see, Hicks) I tend to discredit the later round picks so much that I wouldn't even think to package them to move up, but I also didn't realize they had any additional picks in those later rounds. That being said, what would (2) 6th round picks get you? I cant imagine too much, 5 slots in the 3rd? Was curious as to how valuable Mack would be, to that end, started looking at some statistics, found, Leonard Floyd. horsefeathering Leonard Floyd is arguably having a better season, its depressing, Mack is no longer the feared, elite defensive player every offense has to plan around. Really, do not believe he has much trade value also found horsefeathering GB has 12 sacks all season. They had only 9 going into the Bears game, just underlines the joke the Bears call an OL.

how do you feel about Lazor's play calling? Granted, it could be hard to judge based on the junk time he had on Sunday night, but could the combo of Nagy HC and Lazor play caller work going forward? I thought Lazor dialed up some good plays, some Mitch hit on, others he completely missed. Which begs the question, can Mitch grow with Lazor or is he just flat out too stupid? I never thought playcalling was the problem really with Nagy. It's just a general offensive philosophy that doesn't really have a go-to, bread-and-butter type play or concept. And I judge that based on the fact that Bears can't even script points. They don't score consistently in the first half of games, even this week got their TD with seconds left in the half. They don't score at all in the 3rd quarter. First and third quarters are supposed to be when you script the first 10-15 plays designed to score points. In the last 1 2/3 seasons they've been abysmal in those scripted plays. And I guess I'm not really concerned about the Mitch/Lazor combination. Best case scenario is Mitch is here 6 more games (5 regular season and if they win enough of them a 1-and-done playoff game). I don't think the Nagy/Lazor can work out. Still the same issue the last 2 games of no early points, nothing out of halftime. The OL is terrible that's a big factor, I'm certain Lazor can see what's available, what can be exploited but, when you've got a line that's unable block it's pretty difficult to execute those plays. Then there's Mitch, it's too fast and complicated for him out there, opposing defenses know he's unable to do things that'll hurt them. They'll leave those holes open taking away the limited number of Mitch things is capable of, with such limitations its not hard to see why it seems like a small miracle every time they score a TD.

Which is kinda what I said. They deliberately traded a #1 to get an unknown in Favre. And deliberately took a QB in the 1st round even though they had a HoFer currently on roster. Of course it worked out better than expected. But I'd hardly call it a horseshoe. yes, but here's our point and I'm going to say this directly because you are on a Chicago sports message board: when the bears trade picks to "get their guy" at QB, it becomes a catastrophic event that sends the team reeling backward with nothing gained. It kills all enthusiasm we can have for the team, and in general, it looks horsefeathering terrible, no matter who the poor unlucky sap happens to be horseshoe or no horseshoe, horsefeathers GB Bingo, well said.

That's a pretty sure bet. Hope you're correct, regardless of Packer fan' post they've had horseshoes up their asses with Farve and Rodgers. I'm not saying Farve and Rodgers were shots in the dark but, as great as they turned out? No.

Not certain what you mean with "pulling ...out of thin air". The Packers traded the 19th overall pick for a QB taken the year before in the second round. And that guy threw 4 passes, completing two of them to the other team (1 returned for a TD), so it's not like he "showed something" on his brief stint in ATL. GM Ron Wolf clearly thought highly enough of him to go after him with a 1st Rounder, thinking he might be the cornerstone QB for rookie HC Mike Holmgren. Regarding AR, there was back and forth for months leading up to the draft as to which QB would be taken first overall - Alex Smith or AR. Smith it was, and AR happened to fall all the way to GB. I give Ted Thompson a ton of credit for using a 1st Round pick on a QB when they still had an elite QB on the roster. He clearly felt AR was the BPA. Had the Niners taken AR and Smith fell, would TT taken Smith? We'll never know. But the AR pick was intentional. I don't think anyone would've wagered both would be first ballot HoFs, but I think both were expected to be highly successful QBs for the Packers. I say similar props to the Packers if Jordan Love turns out to be an elite QB. They traded up specifically to get him. No offense but, boy, I'd love to see Love blow up in their faces and their string of HOF QB's stop at two.

I remember being extremely puzzled by Wannstedt trading for Mirer. he flat out sucked and I couldn't figure out why he HAD to be the guy I think they decided that they HAD to have a QB that offseason and all the ones in the draft were garbage so he used his 1st rounder on him. But obviously like you said, he flat out sucked in 4 seasons with Seattle. If they weren't trading him, they had to be strongly thinking about flat out cutting him, he was that bad. This is not hindsight, I remember this being universally panned immediately afterwards. But anyways you could write a whole book with stories of the Bears choosing or signing the wrong guy at QB. I'm so unbelievably frustrated with it and I'm close to my breaking point as a Bears fan. Like I've always complained about not having good QBs, but I've always felt at least a small amount of hope that we'd somehow luck into one. I don't feel that anymore and its eating away at me as a fan. It doesn't help that Michigan is having similar issues putting together a competent QB/offense and really making me question why I follow football outside of my fantasy team. Seems nearly impossible, regardless of the front office they've unable to find a QB guess that leaves lucking into one chances of which are slim to none.

You'd think that they'd accidentally get it right at least once. But no, 23 years ago they traded a 1st round pick for a QB that was legitimately awful his first 4 years in the league and now today they are still making terrible decisions in the face of better options. (to be fair, the 97 draft was historically awful for QBs, I believe the best one taken was Plummer but still doesn't excuse targeting that dude with your first round pick) That '97 team was fun to look up. Mirer started 3 games(games 4-6) en route to an 0-7 start. After sitting at 1-10, tied with the Colts for worst record in the NFL, they'd close the season 3-2, chasing down the Cardinals, Chargers, and Raiders, dropping to the 5th overall pick(while losing the 4 way tiebreaker at 4-12)...which they used on Curtis Enis. Who, besides Ryan Leaf, turned out to be the worst player in the top ten of the 98 draft.

Well, the Cowboys probably won't draft a QB in Rd 1 even with Dak returning from a bad injury. Giants may stick with Daniel Jones. Eagles could be in the market, or could believe Wentz still has enough. Gotta root for Washington to win that division and thus pick behind the Bears. my point had more to do with the idea that there will be LOTS of crappy teams drafting before the Bears do and that will deplete the QB market by the time they draft. Unless the bears lose out, then they might have a shot at the 3rd or 4th best QB in the draft, ie table scraps I can see Pace trading up already Maybe the approach needs to start with the OL instead of a QB, yeah Mitch sucks but, Pace patch work garbage OL's aren't helping.

he drove a used toyota camry. pace liked his modesty I woke up this morning thinking on the bright side, if the bears tank the rest of the season they have a legit shot at a QB in the 1st round worth drafting. Then I remembered that the NFC East existed and now I'm depressed again Well, the Cowboys probably won't draft a QB in Rd 1 even with Dak returning from a bad injury. Giants may stick with Daniel Jones. Eagles could be in the market, or could believe Wentz still has enough. Gotta root for Washington to win that division and thus pick behind the Bears. And we do not know for certain Pace/Nagy will be gone, if they're around doing the drafting of a QB the result will not be good. This is the biggest obstacle to getting it correct, not those teams drafting ahead of the Bears.

its stunning, in all of professional sports, the Bears are the WORST at evaluating the most important position predicating the teams success, and they've been the worse at doing so for horsefeathering decades You'd think that they'd accidentally get it right at least once. But no, 23 years ago they traded a 1st round pick for a QB that was legitimately awful his first 4 years in the league and now today they are still making terrible decisions in the face of better options. (to be fair, the 97 draft was historically awful for QBs, I believe the best one taken was Plummer but still doesn't excuse targeting that dude with your first round pick) I was thinking along the same lines, how did the Bears manage to draft the worst starting QB AGAIN. It's got to be something beyond scouting, there has to be some other factor.

What made Mitch so attractive to Pace in the first place? We've seen the pro game is too fast and complicated for him, not to mention he just plain horsefeathering sucks, surely there must have been hints at possible troubles in film studies.

Regarding some of the attempts at offense last night those starting behind or at the LOS are puzzling. You've got an OL struggling to block anything given this, to me, it doesn't make much sense to try running such plays, I don't get it. Did the Vikings give them a look they thought favorable? Even so, with current state of OL, why even consider such plays? I'm just a somewhat OK youth lacrosse coach however, it doesn't take coaching expertise to observe and question these things.

Think they'll probably lose and we're headed to yet another iteration of GM, HC and QB. Under the current ownership don't know if they'll ever get it right, the Bears being sold may be the best hope for a franchise QB, etc.

No doubt however, I'm not sold on Wisconsin being a top ten team, that's not so say they won't be good. Because they will be very good, they did get some scheduling breaks last season which may have slightly inflated their conference record. Well see.

Makes sense, at times, as many have mentioned, the offense appears capable, then goes back to not capable, how much of a factor is Nagy' play calling and how much the QB? I'd say maybe 80 - 20, at times he takes his foot off the gas, why? Go for the kill, if you can score 40 on a team do it because, they, sure as horsefeathers, will dump 40 on your ass.

It does, Foles is nothing special but, he's average, able to make the correct reads most of the time, make most of the throws, average. If Mitch played yesterday I'm certain they don't score a TD after that interception in the 1st QT, in fact they have still may won the game but, the score probably would have been 17-16. Don't know why, but to me, 17 points seems to be Mitch' specialty, it's not true but, just seems about right every time Mitch starts. Checked the game logs, they've scored 17 points - 3 times, 16-5, 19-1 and 20-2 that's 11 of his 44 starts with only 16-20 points, didn't even want to look at 15,14,etc. was already depressing enough.

I've been disappointed, frustrated with him most of the season, last night he was the monster we expected. Don't know what was more significant Monster Mack or the flag for him being held, it's almost miraculous, I was just shocked.

They’ve had guys wide open the whole time and the QB can’t deliver the ball. At times the Bears WR have not helped the QB but, basically they're open almost all the time, it's the QB.

Totally irrational on my part but, currently, its seems as if every team in baseball except, of course, the Cubs, is able to find and develop these hard tossing relievers. If every other team manages to do so it can't be all that difficult.

Trestman, 2013 They seemed pretty legit 3-1 at the time, they just faded big time. Also, I just went through their game log, and holy hell I forgot how bad that Rush D was. 6 games with at least 198 Rush Yards allowed. Only 4 games with less that 100 yards rushing and 3 were in the first 5 weeks of the season. And here I naively thought we might see a rebound from the defense, for the most part its been very disappointing. There's little to no pressures on the QB, how many deep completions have they given up in four weeks? At least one per game. Couple this with Nagy still thinking he has an elite defense and his play calling, doesn't bode well for the remainder of the season.

What's with all the targets to Burton? It's almost as if the Colts are trying to get back the Bears for Burton, sure, it was Bears fault he was a useless POS.