raw

Now THIS makes no sense. The GMs job is to identify the best prior to the draft. It's literally the most important job a GM has for an NFL team as far as player acquisition goes. And you're the one that keeps saying I'm saying take a QB in the top 5 just to take a QB in the top 5. I've repeatedly said the Bears need to identify the best one and find a way to get him. If they determine the best one will be there in the 2nd round, fine. But they'd better be right about it. After all, jobs are at stake if they aren't. If they determine there's only 1 and he goes with the 1st pick, then that's another issue. But there better be a plan B.

Basically means, there's at least 1 solid starting QB in every draft. Other than 2007 and 2013 (and there's rumors of Mike Glennon getting double digit millions in free agency this offseason), every draft this century has had at least 1 long-term starter. Odds are, there's going to be at least 1 in this draft. Pace's job is to find that one. If he doesn't think any of these QBs are going to be a long-term starter, then to me, that is a cop out. That's basically telling me he's waiting on the next "can't miss" QB to fall in his lap. Which also tells me he plans on either having another really bad team (to get another top 5 pick where those guys tend to go) or he plans or using a ton of resources to either pay for someone else's developed QB or to trade multiple picks to get said QB.

I am taking more offense to the sentiment that the Bears aren't sold on any QB, or shouldn't be sold on any at #3. If they aren't sold on a QB, then they suck at evaluating football. If they do like Watson best, but know he won't go at 25, then yes they should take him 3-6, because they don't have a pick between 3-6 and 25 where he will likely go. Not getting a good QB is not acceptable. You can't just chalk it up as "oh, the guy we wanted didn't last til our 2nd pick". And trading up to get him requires 2 to tango and the loss of more resources. You can't argue getting value by waiting on a QB and then also advocate losing value by trading up. I don't see the point of stopgapping. Cutler is a stopgap. Pace's Bears gave him a legit shot to be the guy, but basically he would've been gone 2 years ago if not for the money owed to him. And developmental QBs in the 3rd-5th rounds don't exist. Those are the Matt Barkleys and Brian Hoyers of the world. Every once in a while you luck up and get a Russell Wilson, Dak Prescott or a Kirk Cousins (and Wilson and Prescott didn't develop they were just thrown in there and immediately delivered), but those are clearly the exceptions. I actually am not a huge fan of Kizer. I have him as the 3rd QB after Watson and Trubisky. I want Watson (and would take him 3-6), I'd be OK with Trubisky (and be ok with taking him 3-6), and I'd hope for the best with Kizer if the Bears do take him 3-6, but I wouldn't personally take him that high. I know it's not the end of the world if the Bears don't get any of the 3, but it sure as hell seems like a continuation of the current world where the QB is simply not good enough.

No. Forcing a fit is what the Bears have done for years. Forcing a fit is watching Couch, McNabb, Smith, and Culpepper go off the board and settling for McNown. The Bears pick 3rd, they can take any QB they want in this draft. They don't HAVE to take a QB. I've made a point in saying that they shouldn't draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. But if they do draft a QB (and all signs point to they will), they HAVE to draft the best one. The best way to draft the best one, is to draft the best one. Not wait to see who falls to you in the 2nd round. 1) There are 2 QB's supposedly even thought of as top 10 worthy. There's no guarantee EITHER will be there for us to take when we pick. Nor do we know IF we value them at that level. Drafting one of them could be the epitomy of forcing a fit. 2) If one isn't take at that point, all we can do is take one later as a developmental type. That leaves us having to fill our starters role in the immediate. A guy like Taylor, with upside and not a huge cost involved, seems like a good idea to me. Its not forcing a fit, because it doesn't set us back if he's a stopgap. You're still able to develop your guy and/or still use your 1st at a later time on a QB you truly want. Well obviously in this thread I'm not talking about a hypothetical situation where every top QB is gone (which would also require the Bears winning Sunday or result in the Bears getting the best player in the draft in Myles Garrett, which I would not complain about). I've repeatedly said taking the 1st or 2nd QB in the draft. And who cares about setting the team back? What's to set it back from? They already stink. If you draft a QB and he fails, you've lost nothing but a couple years. If you don't draft a QB and tread water, you've lost a couple years and still likely lose a couple more years when you do finally find this magical QB you've been waiting to fall in your lap.

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10. Much like overdrafting QBs who aren't deserving of top 3 picks over an actual elite player. Who says none of these QBs aren't deserving of a top 3 pick? Draft websites? Experts? F what they think. If Pace thinks one of these QBs could become even Andy Dalton, then he should take that player at 3 and not worry about if people think he's undeserving.

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10. But then you're forcing a fit in a QB class that's less than awe-inspiring too. Personally, I could see a trade for a Taylor and still take a QB in the 3rd or 4th. No. Forcing a fit is what the Bears have done for years. Forcing a fit is watching Couch, McNabb, Smith, and Culpepper go off the board and settling for McNown. The Bears pick 3rd, they can take any QB they want in this draft. They don't HAVE to take a QB. I've made a point in saying that they shouldn't draft a QB for the sake of drafting a QB. But if they do draft a QB (and all signs point to they will), they HAVE to draft the best one. The best way to draft the best one, is to draft the best one. Not wait to see who falls to you in the 2nd round.

Nope. Been there. Done that. Didn't work out. Hardly ever does. Plus, I think it's a foregone conclusion that Cleveland is going to make a deal for Garoppolo. They have 2 1sts and 2nds both of which will be in the top 10.

You basing your "LOL" on his 115 QB rating this year or you going to look at the rest of his career?

I got the "Fly the :flythew: " commemorative book. The commemorative SI. A really cool coffee mug with the names of the Cubs roster in the shape of the "W". And my wife also got me a skull cap that says........"Cubs 2016 NL Champions" ugh.

Oh and don't fool yourself. The Bears are essentially the Browns at this point. 14 wins in 3 years vs. 11 in 3 years. Both are terrible. The Bears are in no position to poke fun at Cleveland. And I never said you take a QB because you can. You take a QB because you can get the best one. If Pace and his scouts are good at their jobs, they will find the best one. Like I said before, Grossman was the 5th drafted QB in his class. McNown was the 4th (or vice versa). Since Harbaugh, the Bears have literally settled on their 1st round picks at QB, after 3 or 4 teams have already had their pick. You wait til the 2nd, you risk having 3 or 4 QBs picked over before you get a chance again. Which, again, is fine if you don't like the consensus top 3 or 4 guys as much as the guy that's going to be there in the 2nd. But you sure as hell better be right about that.

I said league average, but I should have expounded. I think a QB who can be consistently league average with the potential to be more would go a long way. Guys like Ryan, Dalton and Cousins are league average overall, but have all had seasons where they've been at or near elite level. Cutler has only been league average in his best years. That's the issue, IMO. I don't care about his body language, his salary, his arm....Cutler hasn't gotten the job done because of a lack of consistency. A consistent league average performer, with the ability to pull a very good season out is what I mean. Over the last several years, the consistently elite have been: Brees, Rodgers, Brady, P Manning, and Wilson. Then you have guys like Luck, Newton, Rivers, Roethlisberger, and Romo when healthy who have been consistently pretty good, and sometimes elite. The next group is what I'm talking about as the consistently "league average". Flacco, Dalton, Stafford (who could be argued in the group before this), and Ryan who have each had a bad season, but also have put together at least 1 great season and have overall been solidly in the 10-14 range of QBs. I think the problem is most people are looking for one of the first 2 group guys in a top 5 pick. That's not only unrealistic, it's also unnecessary for success. And I don't think you can sit back and wait until one of those falls into your lap. The Bears are as bad as anyone could have imagined this year and they still aren't bad enough to get that elite QB prospect, if there was one in this draft. That being said, I'm not saying you take a QB at 3 overall regardless of the situation. If Pace identifies Watson or Kaaya as the best QB in this draft, and all signs point to both being there in the 2nd or a reasonable trade up back into the late 1st, then by all means take another player with the 1st pick. The problem is, I don't see an actual elite talent (that's not a RB) at 3, assuming Myles Garrett goes 1 or 2. I love Jon Allen as a player, but I'd just as soon trade down than take a D-lineman on a team that plays 60% nickel with 2 down linemen.

And my point is that you can get a Dalton, Ryan, Cousins, or Prescott in the second on latter half of the first if not later. Take an elite player in the top four and then trade back up into the bottom of the first or take a QB in the second unless QB really is at the top of the board at four. My point is, if you know you aren't getting a Luck/Newton/Manning, then your best hope is a Dalton/Ryan type. Picking the 4th or 5th best in a class of non elites doesn't help you as much. Thats how the Bears ended up with McNown and Grossman. Picking 3rd, the Bears have their shot at either all or all but 1 of the QBs. The onus is on them to get the best one.

The whole, "I don't think any of these guys are franchise QBs" argument is dumb. If you are picking in the top 3, it's likely because you have no QB. If you have no QB, you can't not draft one because he's not Andrew Luck or Peyton Manning. Not liking any of the consensus top QBs is basically admitting your franchise is trash and doesn't know how to develop a QB, and admitting you want a ready made QB that's typically a once in a generational thing in the first place. Maybe there's no Manning in this draft, but there's certainly guys who can be the next Dalton, Prescott, David Carr, Matt Ryan, or Cousins. League average is better than the Bears have had almost every year of their history. And league average can win plenty of games and have win championships in the NFL. If you're a GM that approaches drafting a QB with the "there's no difference maker" mindset, then you're in the wrong occupation.

Complete agreement Makes 2 incorrect people.

All the roids, except for Clemens. horsefeathers Clemens.

This kinda wants me to see us get Bautista on a 1 year deal or 1+option. He's definitely getting less than EE. Move Heyward to CF and Almora/Jay are backups with Bustista in RF and Schwarber in LF. Have Bautista lead off who can replicate Fowler's OBP from last year. Bautista RF Schwarber LF Bryant 3B Rizzo 1B Zobrist 2B Russell SS Contreras C Heyward CF I've been wondering if a lot of these FAs sit out here longer than expected, if the Cubs might be more likely to pull a late surprise ala Fowler last spring. Maybe Joey Bats on a 1-year deal, Matt Wieters or even bringing Jason Hammel back.

Team blows a 3-1 lead in the championship series and then signs the best player from the team they beat in the semifinal series. Where have I heard this before?

The Cubs? They're playing Almora and Jay there. Are we not considering Heyward as the de facto full-time CF, with Zobrist in RF and Baez at 2B? Not that it matters in the grand scheme of things, but neither Jay nor Almora is likely to deserve more ABs than Javy over the course of the season.

Cole, Quintana, Taillon, Nova is a pretty good rotation, if the Pirates can pull it off.

Fun fact: Since, selecting Jim McMahon at #5 overall (1 pick after the 1st QB, Art Schlichter, went off the board in 1982), The Chicago Bears have NOT drafted the 1st, 2nd or 3rd QB taken in any draft. Even their 1st round picks (Grossman, McNown, Harbaugh) were the 4th or 5th QBs selected in the years they were drafted. Part of me really wants the Bears to take a QB at 4 or 5 or wherever they'll draft because they haven't had their chance at pick all the top guys before. And they've typically had to "settle" for whatever QB they liked that was left, or ignore the position entirely, or trade multiple 1st round picks for a QB. The typical response is "oh, I'm not sold any of these guys are franchise QBs". And honestly, I understand the sentiment. But I also feel the Bears have been sitting around waiting for this perfect QB prospect to fall in their laps for the franchise's entirety. And I think if the Bears do their job correctly and take the best guy available at 4 and develop them, that would be the ideal scenario. The top QBs all, while not ideal prospects, have something going for them. Kizer- prototype. 6'4", 230ish, huge arm, extremely mobile. Ton of upside Trubisky- accurate, mobile. Body type to hold up in the pocket. A lot of upside. Watson- extremely mobile. Ton of intangibles and experience. Winner. Big game performances. 3-year starter. That being said, if the rest of the league doesn't think these guys are that great, then even if you think one of these guys is a franchise QB, you might not have to get one at #4. You can wait for the 2nd (or more likely trade back up into the end of the 1st) and get your guy. The Browns are almost certainly taking Garrett at this point. They'll have another top 10 pick from the Rams, and can either get their QB there or (more likely IMO) trade that and/or one of their 2 other top 50 picks for Jimmy Garoppolo. So, if the Bears could get Jonathan Allen AND maybe Watson is still there (my top QB). If not, I am kinda intrigued by Kaaya and Mahomes and even Davis Webb.

Eh. I'm honestly not overly concerned about the tackles. Leno is serviceable. Massie has historically been a slow starter, who gets better as the season goes on. And 1st round picks on OTs have not panned out as well recently. Eric Fisher, Luke Joeckel, DJ Fluker (guard), Juwaun James, Greg Robinson, Ereck Flowers, Andrus Peat (guard), DJ Humphries, Cedric Ogbuehi are some of the tackles who haven't made it. While only guys like Taylor Lewan and Jake Matthews have panned out. Seems to be a lot more success recently from the 2nd and 3rd days of the draft. I think Robinson's probably a top 10 pick. McGlinchey probably in the 20s. Too rich for my blood. I'd probably keep both tackles and bring in a guy in the 3rd or 4th round to compete for a backup spot. I wouldn't cry about Massie being cast aside and money spent on a FA OT (Ricky Wagner at RT would look very good).

This is rather excellent.

That's what I'm saying.

He actually was contacted by the 49ers yesterday after Vance McDonald got put on IR. He was told if he got there yesterday and learned the playbook this week, he would start on Sunday for them. The only problem is it was a 1-year deal and he would be a FA after the year and play for a dumpster fire of an organization. He actually asked my advice and I told him to stay in Minnesota, with the guarantees and have a chance at the playoffs/championship. (To be fair, his agent also recommended he stay and I was his like 8th opinion. LOL). So, the Bears called this AM and gave him more of a guarantee for the future, and even though they are bad they did beat the Niners by like 20 last week and are not quite a disaster for the immediate future. Hopefully over the next 3 weeks the Bears give him a legit shot to catch the ball. I'm completely biased, but the kid can play. 4.58 in the 40, great after the catch. Just needs a chance. Had a good rapport with Bridgewater in camp and was working with the 1s a lot. But then sprained/tore his left MCL in the preseason. Missed 4-5 weeks. Came back for 2-3 weeks, then hurt his other MCL. When he got healthy, Norv Turner (the man responsible for drafting him in Minnesota) left as the OC, and MyCole was a few days later. Landed on the practice squad and has been itching to play ever since.

YESSIR!!!!! :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: :yahoo: So excited to sit in the freezing cold on Christmas Eve!