WrigleyField 22

Not surprised at all they went RB day three. They had lots of visits with day 3 scat back/ third down back types. I think Langford is safe. If Howard is injured or has a sophmore slump, Langford is the only back on this tean who could do a number one back, 20 carries a game type act, and I think this O will plan to run a lot. Thst said 4 backs seems likely with a battle between Cunningham, Carey, and Cohen. I'd say Carey has the biggest hill to climb.

Seems like a flurry of UDFA already; http://bearswire.usatoday.com/2017/04/29/2017-nfl-draft-bears-undrafted-free-agent-tracker/ My depth chart including unofficial reported UDFA http://i1280.photobucket.com/albums/a481/karstenszr/depth_zpsmr620wcf.png That's 87 names. Most obvious chance for an UDFA to make it would have to be K. After that, probably DL. I'd count about 42 names that should be fairly safe, of those about 30 are virtual locks. Around 7-10 definite cuts. So looking at nearly 40 guys fighting for 11 roster spots and 10 practice squad spots as the roster bubble. They still have cap room left, so they could still sign late-cut vets, and injuries obviously always end up red-shirting guys and what not before we even get to the season opener. Most interesting roster bubbles to watch Mark Sanchez vs special team contributor. The decision to keep 3 QBs vs keeping a guy who might actually contribute on Sunday afternoons. This could have just as much to do with how Trubisky looks as well - whether they want that additional buffer between Trubisky and NFL snaps. Paul Lasike/Freddie Stevenson v relevance. Especially on a team with as many TEs as the Bears now... they're fighting to even prove the value of their position, on top of against each other. TE Royal Rumble. There's 9 guys and at least 6 are interesting to some degree, but you will likely only keep 3, maybe 4. Zach Miller being cut could end up being the big surprise of camp, and honestly he's one of our best receiving threats, so it would be a shame. Though with his history, he could just as likely not end up on the 53 by way of the IR. Kyle Fuller. With his 5th option year not being picked up, it would seem to be an increased chance he doesn't make the 53 man. He certainly doesn't seem to be a serious threat to the starting job, even nickle. Second safety spot. After Demps, its a whole lot of jumbled guys. You could legitimately end up with guys competing for the opposite starting spot one week and competing for a roster spot the next. Amos has the best shot at claiming that second starting spot early, but if he doesn't lock it down, things could get weird.

Jackson pick seems solid. Cohen, meh.

I definitely want the dude named Corn Elder

With the picks and the recent FA moves from the past few weeks, depth chart going into tomorrow; http://i1280.photobucket.com/albums/a481/karstenszr/Depth_zpsuhkshimh.png

Man, they really aren't messing around.

Okay this was kinda funny; For David; Kyle (@Ky1eLong) tweeted at 7:55 PM on Fri, Apr 28, 2017: Adam shaheen killed the dinosaurs 65 million years ago

I dont love this.

Upon further review I believe Pace has the confidence of George to see this thing through, including keeping Mitch on the sidelines while Fox muddles through 2017 with Gannon, and then he will have his pick of coaches to take on the job of actually winning football games. I don't believe this staff will be able to develop the QB, but it won't hurt him to be in an NFL room with 2 vets and these coaches, breaking down film. Mission 1A for 2017 is keeping Mitch off the field, meaning they have to keep Glennon safe at all costs. Depending on how they're doing in a hypothetical Glennon injury, I could see them turning to Sanchez.

Yeah, I'd like to see how he got to that number. I think fans just love hording picks and its always more appealing than the name who gets attached to it draft day.

I also totally dont buy his 99% claim.

Yup. Pace's biggest mistake was going with the Fox-Gase combo instead of cutting the dead weight (disclaimer : I liked the choice at the time)

I miss out on so much because he got mad at me over a mildly negative reply to a Tweet of his about lebron's mental toughness nah, the dude has gone off the rails and tweets gibberish I just blame it on him being a millenial.

He retweeted Trubiskys tweet and apparently is going to call him "Rich" Cliff notes because hes made like 50 tweets in the last 18 hours.

Pretty cheesy video, but he better really have been number 1 on all those guys boards to do that trade. Yes but they all said number 1 QB on the board, not necessarily number 1 (or 2) guy on the board. Leads me to believe they were QB or bust in the 1st round which is exactly the type of drafting philosophy Pace has spent 3 years telling us he avoids. Well, yea. I mean, hopefully he was also top 10 overall on everyones board too.

Pretty cheesy video, but he better really have been number 1 on all those guys boards to do that trade.

Steelers, Saints, Browns, or Cardinals trading up for QB? i guess it's one of those things that'll be heavily dictated by how the situation plays itself out. Yea, I'm not sure anyone trades up for Kizer, but maybe if he goes within the 1st three we can start the run. Again, I'm not counting on anything.

Steelers, Saints, Browns, or Cardinals trading up for QB?

we only had the pick because we lost a heartbreaker to Jacksonville. True, I guess. What Barkley taketh, Bellamy gave back. Bellamy for GM.

Man someone just reminded me that we had that pick because we beat SF during the season. Thanks a lot Pace/Fox/Barkley

Quick release? Nah just cannons for arms.

Is that from the Gruden tape? He loves to love on QBs. Everything with a block of salt, lol.

The way people have generally used it, its a trait. That just doesn't make any sense to me. Guys starting for 2+ years is how you get a lot of tape and a lot of confidence in your judgement of that tape. I'm not knocking him for only 13 games, I'm doubting highly how this front office could be that in love to make that trade for him with such limited data. Its the Parcell example. He must be a senior He must be a graduate He must be a three-year starter He must have at least 23 wins I read that and it reads like a trait. Anytime that its brought up, people use it like a trait to draw a historical profile to make a prediction on the outcome of the player, and basically say, well only one great QB has ever had so few college starts, so he doesn't meet the profile of franchise QB. What you're describing is a legitimate concern, which is uncertainty. But to the original question, if thats the biggest knock and everyhting else is really positive, are you just obsessing over that one knock? Or is there another big knock on Trubisky outside of that and not running a pro offense (like most college QBs)

At least you were honest about the horrible music. That highlight reel is not all that impressive to me. The first throw was real nice, but then you've got a couple high school caliber throws and a whole bunch of guys were open by 7+ yards passes for his biggest highlights. Damn that guy didn't seem to face many teams that could cover receivers. Maybe this guy turns out to be great, but the problem is they wasted this free agency season spending on a QB plus all the picks when this team needed lots of help elsewhere so now all we can do is sit around for 3 years and hope it works. They didnt miss out on anyhing they could have wanted in FA because of the 15M cap hit or whatever they are taking on Glennon.

13 starts isn't a trait. 13 starts means there isn't enough data to draw a confident conclusion about his actual traits. The way people have generally used it, its a trait.