Jump to content
North Side Baseball

minnesotacubsfan

Old-Timey Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    25,105

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

 Content Type 

Profiles

Joomla Posts 1

Chicago Cubs Videos

Chicago Cubs Free Agent & Trade Rumors, Notes, & Tidbits

2026 Chicago Cubs Top Prospects Ranking

News

2023 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

Guides & Resources

2024 Chicago Cubs Draft Picks

The Chicago Cubs Players Project

2025 Chicago Cubs Draft Pick Tracker

2026 Chicago Cubs Draft Tracker: Picks & Bonuses

Blogs

Events

Forums

Store

Gallery

Everything posted by minnesotacubsfan

  1. minnesotacubsfan
    and on the Bears side, they would suddenly have a QB and surrounding talent to possibly dethrone GB ok I'm done daydreaming. call already Ryan
  2. minnesotacubsfan
    Ryan, why arent you on the phone?
  3. minnesotacubsfan
    i'd probably start somewhere around that then. My initial insitnct was 2 1st and 2 3rds. 4-5 1sts is like Hershell Walker territory (3 1sts and 3 2nds, among some players and other picks). I think if it's more than a net 3 pick loss it has to include picks the other way. So if it rally took 4 1sts, maybe Houston is sending back 2 2nds as well... Something along those lines. 4 firsts would cause me a lot of pain - not sure about that
  4. minnesotacubsfan
    Two firsts (one was 18 at the time), a 3rd, and Orton for Jay and a 5th. Based on talent level alone, Watson should demand more. With the contract and it being a trade demand, that could complicate the return, but I'm not sure to what extent it will. i'd probably start somewhere around that then.
  5. minnesotacubsfan
    honestly tho, what did Cutler cost? wouldn't that be a good precedent for Watson?
  6. minnesotacubsfan
    The guy who gave him away is gone. I'd use it against them in the negotiations regardless!
  7. minnesotacubsfan
    guys, this is Houston we are talking about. They gave Hopkins away, they aren't interested in running a competent organization. Dont overpay
  8. minnesotacubsfan
    mitch + 1 rd for dashawn
  9. minnesotacubsfan
    nah, it was a designed play
  10. minnesotacubsfan
    Maybe just with Mitch at QB. Looking at your pass charts, I’ve got Trubisky only completing 3 20+ yarders this season, including what looks to be a Hail Mary from last week. But Foles has 17 completions past that range. To be fair, like 14 of those 17 from Foles were against Atlanta in the 2nd half. and it wasnt a Hail Mary. but, yea
  11. minnesotacubsfan
    Pretty much. Something to consider, though, is that this week will be the first game since Week 1 that the Saints will have a their receiving corps healthy and on the field with Brees. Mike Thomas is 100% for the game. Oddly enough, Drew has been throwing the ball downfield more since returning from the broken ribs. I'm not sure if that has something to do with the practice squad receivers he's been throwing to, but some of these throws weren't happening early in the season. “Downfield” is still a relative term. But he’s certainly throwing more in the 15-20 yard range than he had been. Looking at his pass chart this season, he’s only completed 10 passes over 20 yards and just 1 over 30. that would be sea-change compared to how often the Bears go downfield
  12. minnesotacubsfan
    This plus aren't the Saints somewhat limited by Brees? Not in the same manner of the Bears of course, nevertheless, I thought there's throws, etc. Brees has trouble with? Maybe but isn't their offense more of a intermediate catch in space/YAC style? I could be way off. traditionally I think thats true, but I think this year with Brees aging, its been more Kamara. btw; NO is a team that I could see signing Trubisky and being successful with because of what you are describing.
  13. minnesotacubsfan
    this is the point that I have such an issue with, honestly. When the D knows you have to throw deep to catch up, it's easier for them to sit on it. It's not an excuse for Mitch, he has to improve his deep ball if he wants to stay in the league, but the coaching staff set the game up this way. They could have given him one-read deep routes on 1st down early in the game, much like the Mooney deep ball. but I digress
  14. minnesotacubsfan
    It's all you've got with Mitch, in what was, at the time, a must win game, what else could they do? Against the Saints I see no reason not to go balls to the walls aggressive with Mitch, who cares if it results in multiple TO's and Saints a route? We know the short passes, runs eat the clock rely on the defense won't work, for one game, the dip horsefeathers could look competent. Plus, in recent years, the Saints have found all kinds of new and creative ways to lose in the playoffs, wouldn't losing to Bears with Mitch playing the game of life just be the cherry on top? I'm confused why you think it was ok against the Packers but that they should go aggressive with the Saints who are a better pass defense. If the logic is to control TOP and slow the game down to offset a bad offense, I'd think that would be the same strategy against the Saints even if they potentially have a less explosive offense (though not dramatically with their playmakers) you arent going to control the TOP against a team who is going to shove Kamara down your throat
  15. minnesotacubsfan
    I'm not worried about that. Why would he take that job to be Pace's underling when there's several open gigs and he could be the unquestioned leader of a football ops? At the same time, if they did promote Pace and hire Borgonzi as a GM, the fact that he took that job would tell me he's comfortable with the level of control he'd have over the roster and other decisions going forward, so go for it. I cant see Ryan Pace giving up any control over roster decisions. Building the roster was supposedly why we hired him.
  16. minnesotacubsfan
    Bears have played in 5 Wild Card Games, this will be the 6th. They've won 2, in 1994 (beat MN 35-18) and 1990 (bet NO 16-6) I'm guessing we will be 2-4 after Sunday
  17. minnesotacubsfan
    I understand Graham fouling his responsibility was a disaster for that play on many levels, but thats the issue: since he f'ed up, the play had ZERO second choices. On a 4th down play, it's not the type of play design I would look to utilize. 1st down, maybe. What did you want, a QB sneak? Tell me, what is the second option on that play? Graham was probably the first, Robinson the second, or vice versa. I could see where Robinson was supposed to clear his guy out leaving Graham open on a short throw going inside. Graham's guy was playing off enough for that to work. On a critical 4th down, I'd prefer a pass play with two independent options: one short, one deep. Not two options that depend on each other. Or better yet, RPO. It's all Monday morning coaching, sure. But I hated it when they lined up for it.
  18. minnesotacubsfan
    If Graham picks his guy and then opens himself up as he's supposed to, he would be another option to convert and it's a super easy play. Plus, they had already converted one of the fourth downs on a pass earlier. Nobody seems to be complaining about that one. I understand Graham fouling his responsibility was a disaster for that play on many levels, but thats the issue: since he f'ed up, the play had ZERO second choices. On a 4th down play, it's not the type of play design I would look to utilize. 1st down, maybe.
  19. minnesotacubsfan
    It's Karma, not an omen
  20. minnesotacubsfan
    Doesn't look good for Mooney as in next week or worse?
  21. minnesotacubsfan
    I've criticized the Bears way too many times for running the ball up the middle to freak out over them deciding to do something different, especially after doing it on that very drive. That just seems like being upset over the loss and finding one thing that could have gone better, and heaping the whole thing on it. If people really think the game hinged upon the Bears running the conservative play, then maybe they should have just taken the FG. It would have put the Bears 2 points down. I wouldn't have faulted them for trying to run it on that 4th, they were having success doing so on previous 4ths. But it just points out the lunacy of Nagys game plan: ie run up the middle then try a stupid pick play on a 4th and short. Why? Why not try a roll out or play action on 1st down instead?
  22. minnesotacubsfan
    I agree with this, Graham f'ed his responsibility but the play design was stupid to begin with, at least for a 4th down.
  23. minnesotacubsfan
    no, it was a clean hit. I was just mad because I like Mooney so much and didn't want to see him injured. That, and since Amos was a Bear, it feels a bit "traitor-y"
  24. minnesotacubsfan
    this is true. Lovie for DC? Lol. Maybe Marinelli, I think he'll be available again. another thought I had about this, is there a difference in CB play between the two systems? I always thought the 4-3 meant a lot more zone/press coverage while the 3-4 meant a lot more man-to-man/off man coverage. Do the DB's we have make sense for a 4-3, or is there just not that much of a dif?
  25. minnesotacubsfan
    this is true. Lovie for DC?
×
×
  • Create New...