raw

Because the general public and the mainstream sports media are filled with idiots. It's a lot like the narrative with Cutler's contract and the outrage over the dollar figure. Glennon is kind of inconsequential. But, if you were signing a guy JUST to placehold, why not just bring back Hoyer? You could have used the difference in money to have added Gilmore or one of the other guys you missed on. In the end, it won't matter. Pace gets judged on Trubisky. If he flops, Pace is gone after 2018. If he's good, the media will write the "Pace had serious stones" type of articles to admit they were wrong. I'm guessing the rationale is that Glennon at least gives you a shot to not be mediocre. Hoyer's definitely going to be mediocre. He's definitely going to checkdown and complete 67% of nothing passes. Glennon at least has a chance to put together a strong season. The statements about how he had such a bad situation in Tampa (bad defensive head coach, over his head OC, no weapons, mediocre OL) have some merit, even though the situation isn't much different here. Not sure why they paid as much as they did for a chance to not be mediocre, but it is what it is. And the money to Glennon didn't really stop them from signing anyone as they still have anywhere between 18-22 Mil in cap space depending on where you look.

Yeah, the only thing I could come up with as a true mark against him was the lack of experience. He has good enough height at 6'2". He's big and bulky enough and well built. He's mobile. He's got a good enough, above average arm. He's the most accurate in this class. He's demonstrated the ability to move thru progressions. He's shown some timing, anticipation and feel for pressure/blitz. Obviously, for any QB the ultimate floor is not being able to play in this league. But if not disaster, I see Trubisky's floor as Andy Dalton. A solid QB who you can win games with and maybe lead you to a deep playoff run if the rest of the team is strong enough (and the defense doesn't commit stupid penalties losing you playoff games in the last second). But I think he can be better as he has a better arm and better mobility than Dalton. Side note- I don't know if I posted it on here, but I wrote an article about a month ago about why I thought Trubisky was Pace's guy. Basically, Pace came from NO, who's offense works because Brees gets the ball out quickly and they routinely have been top 5 in yards after catch (YAC) since Payton has been there. The interest in Garoppolo further showed this as he plays in New England, who also run a YAC based offense built on a QB getting the ball out of his hands quickly and accurately to quick receivers. And honestly, this type of offense fits what Loggains would like to do but never had the talent to do in Tennesee (did see some success from Kendall Wright in YAC) or the personnel to do it in Chicago (not Cutler or Jeffery's strength). I think if the Bears offense works how it's supposed to, you'll see a lot more slants and crossing routes than you've seen in recent years. Jeffery and Marshall weren't fast/shifty enough to create separation for the team to have success laterally. And I think Trubisky, with his accuracy, best fits that type of offense as a QB moreso than any other QB in this draft.

Because Glennon sucks, and we had the 3rd pick THIS year. This isn't a Garoppolo situation where you don't have enough data to make a decision. Glennon has 18 starts, 630 pass attempts of mediocrity. And as I have said several times, the best chance to get the best QB is to take the best QB as high as you can, not take a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round and then wait for a class that would require several early entrants (and no fall off) from QBs to be as good as this one. This team looks bad on paper, and they're counting on a lot of health improvements to be better than 3 wins. But they played 4 QBs last year, including their starter only 37% of the time. They lost some of their best defenders in Goldman, McPhee, Trevathan, etc. for more than 1/3 of the season each. Lost their best OL for over half the season, and 2nd best for multiple games. And as bad as this team looks on paper, they aren't likely a 3-win team again. If they are NOT a 3-win team and manage to get even 5 or 6 victories, to even get one of the great QBs that everyone is jumping the gun on for next year, they'd have to trade that pick, a first in 2019 and much more. And people are complaining about trading 2 3rds this year. If they are a 3-win team next year, Pace and everyone else is fired and you potentially have a QB in place and are in a prime spot to trade down and get a ton of picks/talent to add to your QB. And if you're Pace and don't have a drafted QB in 3 years as GM for a team needing a QB, that's just stupid on his part. This was the best chance they had to get the best QB in any draft for the last 20 years. You can't pass on that chance based on a chance to be in the same position next year. Honestly, I complained about trading up because I didn't value this QB. I know you're of the mind this is possibly their only chance to draft the top QB but I don't think they're topping 5 wins for a few years. I think they would have had an opportunity to pick a QB high again next year with better options. And even if they had to trade up, I would rather it be for QBs the caliber of next year's class than Trubisky. I don't like the trade up either. I'd have called the Niners bluff. OK, you want to trade with Cleveland? Say Goodbye to Solomon Thomas. Say goodbye to Lattimore and anyone else you probably wanted at 3 (though apparently they really liked Foster, who they could have had at 12).

Because Glennon sucks, and we had the 3rd pick THIS year. This isn't a Garoppolo situation where you don't have enough data to make a decision. Glennon has 18 starts, 630 pass attempts of mediocrity. And as I have said several times, the best chance to get the best QB is to take the best QB as high as you can, not take a guy in the 2nd or 3rd round and then wait for a class that would require several early entrants (and no fall off) from QBs to be as good as this one. This team looks bad on paper, and they're counting on a lot of health improvements to be better than 3 wins. But they played 4 QBs last year, including their starter only 37% of the time. They lost some of their best defenders in Goldman, McPhee, Trevathan, etc. for more than 1/3 of the season each. Lost their best OL for over half the season, and 2nd best for multiple games. And as bad as this team looks on paper, they aren't likely a 3-win team again. If they are NOT a 3-win team and manage to get even 5 or 6 victories, to even get one of the great QBs that everyone is jumping the gun on for next year, they'd have to trade that pick, a first in 2019 and much more. And people are complaining about trading 2 3rds this year. If they are a 3-win team next year, Pace and everyone else is fired and you potentially have a QB in place and are in a prime spot to trade down and get a ton of picks/talent to add to your QB. And if you're Pace and don't have a drafted QB in 3 years as GM for a team needing a QB, that's just stupid on his part. This was the best chance they had to get the best QB in any draft for the last 20 years. You can't pass on that chance based on a chance to be in the same position next year.

I've had some time to process not only the draft, but this entire offseason. And while I do like some of the moves (going in a legitimate direction at the QB position), I think overall there's not a ton to like. It just seems like Pace is trying to play both sides of the fence a little too much. Spent more in free agency than any other team, but didn't really add any real building blocks. Showing loyalty to Fox by giving him a veteran QB, but then going all out for the top QB in the draft. I think I'd feel better if the future of this team wasn't ALL on Trubisky's back. Granted,the future of any team is on the QB regardless, but I think the Bears would be in a much better position had at least 1 of the following things happened: - New QB friendly coaching staff, with some history of developing a decent QB. John Fox is not a QB guy, and is too old for my liking. Loggains is nothing more than just "OK" as a QB coach/offensive coordinator. Nothing special. Had an opportunity and justification to get a new staff in here to develop a QB that was clearly going to be brought in thru the draft. - Big splash in Free agency. I know, you build teams thru the draft. But the Bears had a ton of money to spent, actually spent the money, but still don't have much to show for it. Basically a bunch of 1-year deals or guys who could be cut with minimal lost after this year. I would have greatly preferred if the Bears could add at least 1 CB, safety, WR or OL that you could etch in the starting lineup for the next 3 years. And the Bears clearly tried and failed to get Gilmore, Bouye, Jeffery, and others. - A less risky draft. I know every single pick is a risk to some extent. No pick is more likely to pan out than any other. But the Bears not only went from 7 to 5 picks on a team with needs at every position, they used 3 of the picks on guys who have to face a huge jump in competition. After going with an always risky QB pick early, I'd hope they'd follow it up with some more sure things types, if that even exists. I just don't think this is the best situation for Trubisky to succeed. It's a long shot for him to get much help from his draft class. He doesn't have many veteran pieces in place that are going to help him along the way. And he isn't likely to get much help from a coaching staff that isn't likely to be here for the entirety of his rookie contract. The future success on this team is squarely on the shoulders of Trubisky at this point. The only people here that I can see taking pressure off him are Howard, Whitehair, Long, Meredith, Floyd, and Goldman. Everyone else on the roster either hasn't shown much yet or isn't going to be on the roster this time in 2019 (exception is Hicks re-signing and/or Cooper taking a big step forward). Seems like these things don't often work out when a team doesn't full commit to one direction. That being said, if Trubisky is truly a stud....then everything else will fall into place. I just think the odds are more stacked against him than they should be at this point.

Ryan Pace be like: http://i3.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/022/138/reece.JPG The fans can't criticize my picks if they don't know who they are.

My 3rd ranked player on the board. Like Jackson. I'm guessing OT or RB next.

My top 10 remaining (for the Bears) for Day 3 of the draft: S/CB Desmond King, Iowa OT Roderick Johnson, Florida St S Eddie Jackson, Alabama DL Jaleel Johnson, Iowa OLB Carl Lawson, Auburn WR Josh Reynolds, Texas A&M OT Will Holden, Vanderbilt CB Howard Wilson, Houston OT Julie'n Davenport, Bucknell RB Marlon Mack, South Florida Only the top 5 names are potential contributors this year. I don't see anyone that would start for the Bears left on the board.

Yep, Ideal.

Trading back with Cardinals.

Obviously these are all "if he's there" types of scenarios but: Tampa (50) for Dalvin Cook Seattle (58) for Kevin King (if they take OL at 34) Bills (44), Cards (45), or even Browns (52) for Deshone Kizer/Davis Webb preference.

This is how I feel. Call their bluff. They have to balance getting their guy at 2, or going back to the drawing board at 12. Hell, KC was interested too and no way they were moving to 27 or whatever. I'd feel a lot better if the trade down and pick up a couple picks, but they'll still not get as good a player they would have had at 36 or 67.

No he was a safety in college. More FS than anything. He could project at CB. But he's definitely a safety, that can play some slot CB.

I like lots of the secondary left. Evans, King, and Williams are my favorite Safeties. Wilson and Awuzie are my favorite CB's left. But, there's plenty others of each I'd be fine with too. Wormley is a favorite of mine, but I'd pass on him, to add more picks. Last year, we went from 41 to 49, picking up 117 and a 2017 4th. Then moved from 49 to 56, getting 124 in return. I'd love to do the same, we'd still have some damn good players on the board, in the late 40's, early 50's. The extra 4ths would be nice too, maybe to grab a DL and a WR/TE. I like Obi and Marcus Maye at S. Evans is ultra athletic, but can't tackle for horsefeathers. I think he may be an NFL corner. King I'd take (not at 36), wish he was taller, but he's a guy that can play FS or nickel CB and he's going to play well. Great tackler too. Williams also can't tackle very well, but he'll get the job done. And if it wasn't for Malik Hooker being in this draft, people would be raving about his ball skills At CB, I like Tankersley. I think he's a 1st round talent. Very physical press coverage guy, that nobody seems to realize ran a 4.4 flat. Not sure why he wasn't more highly thought of. But yeah, I think you have to trade down and take your chances. It worked out last year with getting Whitehair in the late 2nd. I actually think Cleveland could make another move. Kizer's sitting out there. Not sure how much they like him, but they have picks 51, 52, and 65. If they can walk out of today with Garrett, Njoku, Peppers and Kizer and still have another pick (it would probably only take 51 and 65 to move to 36), they're sitting pretty.

My top 10 on the board (as it relates to the Bears) going into Day 2: DL Malik McDowell S Obi Melifonwu DL Chris Wormley CB Cordrea Tankersley OT Forrest Lamp (I think you play him at LT first) OT Cam Robinson CB Kevin King S Budda Baker OLB Tim Williams WR Juju Smith-Schuster Dalvin Cook is my BPA, but the Bears aren't taking a RB (then again, I didn't think they'd mortgage 2 potential starters to move up 1 pick). The Bears probably also aren't taking the 36th pick, as I think they trade back to recoup a 3rd. So, whatever.

Cleveland gonna trade both Texans 1s for Garoppolo. They are raping the Texans this offseason.

This logic is bad. Good NFL prospect and good college QB (especially in a spread scheme) is not close to comparable. Hell, maybe the best QB in NFL history couldn't beat out Brian Griese in college. Sure, if you use the outlier rather than the vast vast majority of successful NFL QB's, your logic is sound My logic is Marquise Williams was the prototype college gimmicky spread QB. He ran for several hundred yards and threw in an offense that didn't require him to read a defense. He won 10 games in 2015. It happens all the time.

This logic is bad. Good NFL prospect and good college QB (especially in a spread scheme) is not close to comparable. Hell, maybe the best QB in NFL history couldn't beat out Brian Griese in college.

Don't take the 1st QB off the board with 1 pick, but take the 4th QB off the board using 3 picks? So, they take the 1st QB off the board AND use 3 picks to get him.

Don't take the 1st QB off the board with 1 pick, but take the 4th QB off the board using 3 picks?

Good day for an ARRIETA dong

Some interesting calls late in the game that kept the Bulls from going away with that game. But this was the 1st round matchup I wanted once I figured the Bulls would get in. Celtics are good, but not unbeatable. No chance against the Cavs. Hell, I don't think they could beat Atlanta or Washington either, but since they're in, the Bulls might as well do something with it.

The Bears didn't keep Hoyer, because Hoyer sucks, has always sucked, and will never be good enough. I personally think Glennon won't be good enough either, but at least there's a chance he is. Glennon gives Fox his veteran QB so he feels like he's not rebuilding at 60-whatever years old. But it also gives Pace a guy who could potentially win some games and be a long-term option. You know there's no guarantee Kizer is there in the 2nd, right? You also know that if Kizer is the 4th or 5th QB taken in this draft, the odds are favorable that he plays like the 4th or 5th best QB in the draft class, which is to say, not very good. And while the 2018 very well may be better, the Bears aren't likely to be in the same position next year. They were pretty miserable last year and still weren't good enough to get one of the 1st 2 picks. With more health, better talent on the defensive side, a more stable QB (3 guys started 5 times last year)....the Bears are likely to pick outside of the top 10 (like they did just a year ago, before they traded to 9). So, even if this class is great, you're probably not going to have the 1 or 2 pick to get Darnold or Allen unless you trade multiple 1st round picks to trade up, which we have seen doesn't turn out well. If you stay put because this class is so great, you're still looking at the 4th or 5th best QB in the draft. You know who else was the 4th and 5th best QBs? Rex Grossman and Cade McNown. I don't understand why if you acknowledge the Bears need a QB, why you are intentionally willing to hope to have a shot at the 4th best guy when you are in the prime position to take the top QB in the draft. I understand BPA and all that, but this isn't DE vs. CB. This is by far the most important position in any sport.

I've thought this every year Grimm's been here. Grimm, Montgomery and Rondon are the non-setup relievers, right now. That's a half decent 7-8-9 inning for a lot of teams. And still have 1 of Strop/Uehara who wouldn't get in the last 3 innings if all went right.

Newsflash:. The Cubs are ridiculously good from the hole at SS to the 1b/RF bleachers when Almora, Heyward, and Baez are on the field together.