how many of those teams have offensive lines that are built with talent better then 7th rd picks? my point is this (and why I hate trading up for a QB): you an either draft a once in a lifetime QB (good luck) or you can surround a QB with talent with even better or equal talent. I just don't think the Bears can afford to trade up. The Bears OL to start the season was a 1st rounder, 2 2nd rounders, a 4th rounder, and a 7th. Granted that 1st rounder was a failed pick playing a new position, but they paid both their tackles good money, paid their C, and used a 2nd round pick on a guard. Also, what you say isn't really true. SF doesn't have receiver weapons (outside of Kittle, who was a 5th round pick), they had a UDFA RB leading them to the SB. Ravens probably have the worst WR group in the league. Arizona's weapons were pretty bad until they traded for Drake and Hopkins and they still were the 16th offense. OL isn't great either. Goff doesn't have amazing weapons or OL. Titans lost their best 2 OL (both tackles) to injury early on and free agency before the season. Only the Saints and Browns really fit into a team surrounding their QB with great talent. What these teams have is a great scheme that plays to their strengths. I'm not even completely unconvinced a good enough coach couldn't scheme to Trubisky and Foles' strengths. It looked like Nagy was doing that with Trubisky and a coach actually won a SB with Foles. And they can afford to trade up for a QB. What they can't afford to do is pick the wrong QB. THE TEAM LACKS DEPTH, AND THEY LACK DEPTH BECAUSE THEY'VE TRADED AWAY PICKS. THEY CANT AFFORD TO KEEP DOING THAT sry capslock eta: look at it this way, they don't have a #2 WR, no #2 RB, no #1 TE (there's hope for Kmet), and all of their OLine backups are 7th rd or UFA's. You know what helps a team fill out those backups at reasonable prices? draft picks. Sure, this off season could be different with the CAP being low, but you're just likely to get older players who will command more salary anyway