raw

Yeah, the scared coaches and GM...along with the lockerroom talk that the team was going to compete next year leads me to believe that Pace isn't going to trust his and Fox's future on a rookie QB. That draft is pretty darn good, but I don't know that the Bears actually take Allen either. I think if the Bears decide they don't want any of these guys at #3, I don't think they'll be picking at #3. Assuming Garrett goes #1, they'd be in a prime spot for trade down (unless SF hires McDaniels and trades for Garoppolo and they trade down first) to a team that wants one of the QBs. I have Allen as my #2 overall rated player, but I don't think he has enough position value or dynamic upside to be a "must pick" at 3. If staying at 3, I'd probably rather go with 1 of the safeties (Hooker/Adams) but both would be much more attractive down a few picks.

Newton is literally the only example of this working out. I had a list of the 4 QBs who have gone to the NFL with < 15 starts and the other 3 were busts.....though I can't remember who they were. Ryan Tannehill only started 1 year at QB at A&M (played WR at first just to get him on the field) but his NFL career is still TBD. He could be a successful QB or flame out in the next year or two. Tannehill got the starting QB job midway thru his JR year. He had 19 starts in college at QB.

I feel like this is an archaic way of thinking. First of all, it's completely disingenuous to say Watson "makes his living" with his legs. He's thrown for nearly 9000 yards in 2 years. He is a weapon with his legs, but he ran the ball last night because his RB could do nothing and showed horrible vision. Secondly, I think "QB who runs takes more hits, has shorter career" is overstated. The biggest issue with QBs that can run is that they can't throw well enough. Cunningham had a long career. Vick did, which would have been even longer without prison. Kaepernick, Steve Young, Russell Wilson, etc. Guys like Tyrod Taylor and Marcus Mariota have shown decent durability in 2 years as starters (though admittedly both ended the year hurt in the last game). Lastly, not only do I think that Watson will be less of a runner in the NFL (he was less of a runner in 2016 than 2015). But I also think Watson will slide more in the NFL. College QBs typically don't slide. It's just not a very big part of the college game. I think in the NFL he'll slide, and he won't be used on QB draws and off-tackle runs as the primary run game like he was at times last night.

Cam Newton immediately came to mind. Hmm... thought he started his sophomore year at Florida. I stand corrected then. Still scares me to draft Turbisky although I do like his tools/skill set. Newton is literally the only example of this working out. I had a list of the 4 QBs who have gone to the NFL with < 15 starts and the other 3 were busts.....though I can't remember who they were.

Upside = good black QB. Downside = bad black QB. No chance = good white QB.

It's always been funny to me how there's some great QBs that do stuff that you can't as a QB coach tell a player to mimic. Rivers' throwing motion. Marino's throwing motion. Rodgers' backfoot throws. Peyton's footwork.

I kind of like the Taylor idea, but I do think you are putting somewhat of a cap on your offense. That said, it should be a low turnover offense, so you just need to invest heavily in your D and try and win games that way. But you still have to find a way to put resources into your offense including a long term answer at QB. Yep. And Taylor won't have the type of salary that will kill you if he's a backup, especially if you have a starter on a rookie contract.

The thing about Osweiler's contract is that it was looked at universally as an overpay, and has proven to be such after this season. Taylor has much more experience than Osweiler did this time last year, but he's also 2 years older and has little upside, doesn't have the intriguing size/arm combo. I think Alex Smith's deal is the ballpark (4/68) you're looking at. That's pretty much established as the going rate for middle of the road QBs. 16-18Mil average per season. It's where Taylor already is, and it's a group that includes guys like Smith, Dalton, Bradford, Osweiler and Cutler.

I think he has 2/27 left on his deal (not guaranteed). So, yeah I'd think you'd need to guarantee him at least that much. I don't think he'd get quite what Osweiler got (4/72, 37M guaranteed). But I'm thinking 30M guaranteed and 15-16M average salary. 4-years/$63Mil, 32Mil guaranteed would probably get it done. Basically, that's committing to him for 2 years at a modest 16M each. Also, potentially allows him to be a FA before he turns 30, if he's gone after the guaranteed portion of his contract is over.

Heck... what QB in the NFL right now meet all 4? Russell Wilson? Some good QBs, apparently. Decided to look up a few guys at random and along with Wilson, Drew Brees, Eli Manning, Philip Rivers, Matt Ryan, Kirk Cousins and Dak Prescott met all 4. As redshirt juniors/academic seniors, I'd say Andrew Luck and Marcus Mariota fit the criteria too (they had the other 3). Tom Brady only went 2-for-4 and Jameis Winston went 1-for-4. When the top two QBs this decade go a combined 2-for-8 in this criteria, I'm not sure it should be used to prop up a guy in the top 3 who the so-called experts seem to think is a reach. I admitted it was outdated. But I don't understand the experts opinion of Watson. Obviously, you want a QB to have the tools. Arm strength, accuracy, mobility, ability read defenses, leadership, smart, intangibles, etc. But you also want them to prove all of this stuff by actually doing it on the field and winning games. Watson has all those tools. And he has shown them over the last 2 years, taking his team to back-to-back championship games. If he has another performance like he did against Alabama last year, I don't know how he can still be thought of as a borderline 1st rounder. This is so similar to the Teddy Bridgewater situation. "Experts" are finding every reason to knock him down despite the body of work being there that says otherwise. Granted, Bridgewater hasn't completely proven everyone wrong yet but he's also been handcuffed by an OC who wouldn't let him be more than a game manager and now an injury.

I don't think that the Bears will draft OT early, they are happy with their OT's and any early draft pick is going to sit behind those two for a while, barring any major injuries. They may draft 4-7 for depth, but I don't think that they see it as a need. 3 above average Interior linemen, 2 average tackles, I think that's fine, especially with those guys getting another year of experience together. I don't actually think they will either. Personally, I think its a mistake. I think we need better OT's than our current pair, when we actually throw a young QB out there. Hell, I'd make sure to draft an O-Line prospect every year, no matter what though. They do have 0 OT depth, but luckily for them, Leno played every snap and Massie missed minimal time. I think they'll pick up a developmental OT in the 4th or 5th round, but not much more than that unless they get a steal.

Order I think they come off the board? 1 Trubisky 2 Kizer 3 Watson 4 Mahomes 5 Kaaya If Allen comes out, I'd put him at 3. Order I'd take them? 1 Watson 2 Trubisky 3 Mahomes 4 Kizer 5 Kaaya Allen again at #3.

Looks like just a sprained ankle. So, I don't think it will factor in his draft status. However, his current draft status is that he hasn't yet declared. He and Juju Smith-Schuster are supposedly a package deal and if 1 comes back the other will, and vice versa. Adoree is interesting. Extremely fast, but I think he's more athlete than CB at this point. He has his moments when he makes great plays in coverage and has shutdown WRs at times. But he also gives up his fair share of plays. I'd take him at the top of the 2nd because he can be a top return man in the league right now and still develop as a CB.

1)Watson would be a huge over-reach at #3 imo 2)who would want to trade up to the third pick? It's an honest question On your 2nd part... Jets might move up to get their QB maybe? Then again.. if one of Garrett or Allen is available, I can see multiple teams calling, but not sure if they will offer enough for Bears to move down. I think we're in a great spot in the draft this year. I can't see Browns or 49ers moving so depending on which way the first 2 picks goes, the 3rd pick might be the spot where teams start calling to see if Bears will budge and after seeing Pace trade down a bunch in the 2nd last year, he'll move if the offer is right. Or we stay and get an elite talent. Watson is not a reach at #3, IMO. I feel he is the best QB in this draft, despite what the "experts" say. Bill Parcells has his criteria that all QBs must meet in order for his team to be interested (granted, it's a little outdated). 1. Must be a senior 2. Must be a graduate 3. Must be a 3-year starter 4. Must have 23 wins The only one Watson doesn't fit is a senior. He's also the only top QB who comes close to fitting any of these. As for #2, I think the Jets could trade up to 3. They did just take Petty and Hackenberg, but neither are the answer. They supposedly love Trubisky. Buffalo could trade up from 10. And the Browns, with their 2nd 1st rounder and 2 2nd round picks, could also trade back up and take the best QB in addition to drafting the best defensive player in the draft at #1 (Garrett). The Browns also supposedly love Trubisky.

No reason to be completely done with him. But also shouldn't make him a huge part of your team's plans. Let him come to camp and compete. Best case, he lives up to his first round ability. Worst case, he's not one of your top 6 CBs and you cut/trade him. Doesn't make a ton of money.

I'm starting to open up to the idea of Tyrod Taylor (assuming he's released and can be had for just money) and then drafting a guy like Patrick Mahomes. But that's mainly because I'm falling in love with Mahomes' upside. I'd still rather stay at 3 and take Watson (1A) or Trubisky (1B). But the Bears do need a lot of talent. And if the Bears think they can develop Mahomes from that Air Raid crap he ran at TT, then he could have the most upside in this draft. And if you can have an established QB like Taylor without giving up picks, potentially trade the #3 pick and still get a premium defensive talent (Solomon Thomas, Derek Barnett, Jamal Adams, Malik Hooker) in the top 10 and get a developmental QB.....that'd be an option I'd consider over a QB at 3.

I'm not sure what fantasy you think is being talked about here. If you think there's a better chance of winning games next year with either Hoyer, Barkley, or whatever they grab off the QB scrap heap than with him, then go you. I think you're very wrong. They're not gonna do better than him for his salary for one year. Also, not good enough for what? And little cap hit for cutting him? So what? What does that benefit anybody beyond ownership? I'm talking about Cutler and nothing else. Which is why I mentioned Cutler by name and nobody else.

There's a major problem with keeping Fox, IMO. The Bears have the #3 pick, a QB that hasn't worked out and a depth chart of FAs at the position. They need to find their QB of the future. The problem with QBs of the future is that they usually aren't very good in the current. If they aren't good in the current, Fox probably gets fired. If Fox gets fired, his offensive coordinator gets fired. If his OC gets fired, your QB of the future has his 2nd offensive scheme in 2 years (3rd in 3 going back to college assuming it's a rookie). So, I think there are 2 solutions here. 1. Keep Fox in 2017 and 2018. Hope to God he can woo McCoy to be his OC next year. That way you have offensive stability for your new QB. 2. Go with the status quo, team is either really good or really bad. If bad (most likely), Fox goes. You get a new HC, OC and QB all at the same time. Of course, Pace is at risk if things are too bad. One interesting thing is that Fox has never really had a developing QB. I know he's a defensive guy, but he had Tebow for what 1 year? then got Manning. He wants to win. Pace wants to win. I don't know that either of them wants a rookie QB. That scares me that they'll go after Kirk Cousins (for 20+Mil) or trade for Jimmy Garoppolo (probably would need to trade their high 2nd). Neither is a desirable option, IMO.

You guys need to let go of the Cutler fantasy. He's gone. He's not good enough. He never has been. He won the same number of games as the other 2 QBs, and didn't really play as well as either. Little cap hit for cutting him. There's literally 0 reason Cutler will or should be back. Give it up.

Hooker declared for the draft.

I don't like any safety at 3. But if I did.......

A lot of those needs are either/or propositions. 2 CBs aren't necessary. 1 good one would be sufficient. The Bears have some young guys that have shown various levels of promise. Callahan, Hall, Fuller, LeBlanc. Then Porter has shown to be serviceable for the most part. Same goes for just 1 safety. The Bears have Amos, Bush, and Jones-Quartey who are all SS's. Put them next to a good FS and let the best man win the job. I don't think the Bears need a DE and a NT. They play nickel with 2 DL 60% of the time. Goldman and Hicks are going to get the most snaps (if healthy). Bullard hopefully will step up and be the 3rd part of that rotation. In the base D, you can either add a DE (better than Bullard) or add a NT and move Goldman to DE (I like this idea). OLB isn't a huge "need". Another one would be nice as McPhee missed a lot of the year and Young is over 30. But not something they have to go crazy for. Same with TE. Miller has an injury history, but it's not a hugely important position. WR isn't a need if you re-sign Jeffery.

At 3? No.

This just changed my life.

Isn't this more of an element of always being several scores down in a game? It would be if that was true. The Bears have only been down multiple scores: - The last 6 minutes of the opener vs. the Texans. - The 2nd half of the Eagles game - The Cowboys game - The 4th quarter vs. Green Bay - The Tampa game - The Titans game - The 2nd half of the Redskins game this week Only 4 of those games came since the Bears inserted Jordan Howard into the starting RB role (the role where he's been the 2nd best rusher in the league). So, this argument doesn't work for 9 of the last 13 games.