What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

***Chicago Bears Thread*** Ben Johnson hired. The Resurrection Begins! (8 Viewers)

flapgreen said:
Mark another one off the list. 

USC source says Darnold is unlikely to leave this year.

Baker Mayfield, Lamar Jackson, Josh Rosen left. 
Click to expand...
Man, even I gotta say just let it die, we have Mitch, done it's over.  I'll even admit I was on the wait until next year bandwagon, and that may have been 100% wrong...

I was also on the don't draft Watson, that may have been wrong too, and I thought Mariotta would not turn out good...  Yeah, I'm not great at QB's.

 
The Tick said:
Man, even I gotta say just let it die, we have Mitch, done it's over.  I'll even admit I was on the wait until next year bandwagon, and that may have been 100% wrong...

I was also on the don't draft Watson, that may have been wrong too, and I thought Mariotta would not turn out good...  Yeah, I'm not great at QB's.
Click to expand...
NFL GMs get fired one after one after another for picking the wrong one. Has to be the most difficult position to project and play. 

 
flapgreen said:
I really lose track of who says what and when they said it. I'm banging on you because you responded earlier more than anything. I have no idea what your view was during draft. 

There's nothing delusional about what I said. The entire point from the beginning was the ridiculous point of view taken during the draft that the Bears needed to wait until the next draft class because it was so much better than this one, according to analysts.  A lot of people had that mindset. It was never accurate and it's now obvious the team scouts didn't see it that way either. There will end up being multiple good qbs from the current draft.  If Kizer continues down the road he's on, I'll admit being wrong on him.   
Click to expand...
Well, you might want to make sure the person you're "banging on" actually said the things you're claiming, otherwise you come across as delusional.

My entire point from the beginning is that it's waaaaay too early to make a clear determination about the QB class this year or next, and I would think you of all people should see that since the very limited evidence so far points to you being dead wrong about Watson and Kizer. You don't get to claim victory on Tribisky and the college QBs now but then get to wait and see on Kizer and Watson. Time will tell on ALL of them.

 
flapgreen said:
I'll concede that. It's better than not playing at all. Lol.  
Click to expand...
Exactly.  The whole process is just at a much slower pace than most fans want.  The problem with most fan bases is that we do not always have that much patience and we're not all that logical.  We want results now.

 
humpback said:
Well, you might want to make sure the person you're "banging on" actually said the things you're claiming, otherwise you come across as delusional.

My entire point from the beginning is that it's waaaaay too early to make a clear determination about the QB class this year or next, and I would think you of all people should see that since the very limited evidence so far points to you being dead wrong about Watson and Kizer. You don't get to claim victory on Tribisky and the college QBs now but then get to wait and see on Kizer and Watson. Time will tell on ALL of them.
Click to expand...
I don't get the tough talk about these young QBs yet either.  It's Winston's 4th year now, I think, and we still don't even know for sure if he's all that great yet or not.  Goff was terrible his rookie year and looking pretty good this year but he could still be terrible long term.

 
humpback said:
Well, you might want to make sure the person you're "banging on" actually said the things you're claiming, otherwise you come across as delusional.

My entire point from the beginning is that it's waaaaay too early to make a clear determination about the QB class this year or next, and I would think you of all people should see that since the very limited evidence so far points to you being dead wrong about Watson and Kizer. You don't get to claim victory on Tribisky and the college QBs now but then get to wait and see on Kizer and Watson. Time will tell on ALL of them.
Click to expand...
:mellow:

 
Hawkeye21 said:
Except Glennon kept turning the ball over because he couldn't move in the pocket at all.
Click to expand...
Yeah but that's the difference. He was dropping back and passing at least a bit. I'm just saying Glennon could have probably just handed the ball off too and passed 7 times in a game if limiting TOs was all that matters. They've actually dialled back through offense even more after switching to a better QB.

 
RushHour said:
Yeah but that's the difference. He was dropping back and passing at least a bit. I'm just saying Glennon could have probably just handed the ball off too and passed 7 times in a game if limiting TOs was all that matters. They've actually dialled back through offense even more after switching to a better QB.
Click to expand...
The argument many people had for putting Trubisky in was that the Bears were running a very vanilla offense and Glennon was still turning the ball over so they might as well let Trubisky do it.  Now that they put Turbisky in they made the offense even more vanilla.  I agree with turning it up a few more notches but there is absolutely no reason to put Glennon back in there.  I'm not even sure why anyone would want that.

 
Hawkeye21 said:
The argument many people had for putting Trubisky in was that the Bears were running a very vanilla offense and Glennon was still turning the ball over so they might as well let Trubisky do it.  Now that they put Turbisky in they made the offense even more vanilla.  I agree with turning it up a few more notches but there is absolutely no reason to put Glennon back in there.  I'm not even sure why anyone would want that.
Click to expand...
Oh no, don't get me wrong. I don't want that. Nobody does!

 
Strangely Deonte Thompson had 4 receptions for 107 yards for Buffalo yesterday.

Given the lack of options the Bears have at WR seems weird that they let him go, as apparently he can make plays.

 
You can argue winning games is the most important thing and tanking a season to let your franchise QB develop is sacrilege.

You can argue letting the rookie QB open up and throw the ball all over the field (and very very likely turn the ball over multiple times) is more important than winning.

But I dont see how you can argue both.

 
Can we all agree you can't win games regularly with how they're calling the offense currently, and that there's a better way to handle a rookie QB? 

 
flapgreen said:
Can we all agree you can't win games regularly with how they're calling the offense currently, and that there's a better way to handle a rookie QB? 
Click to expand...
We can agree theyve won the last two games. We can agree rookie QBs with terrible receivers turn the ball over. We can agree turning the ball over makes you lose games.

My point is, there is a very good case that minimizing what your rookie QB does is the best way to maximize wins.

That might mean you get your doors blown off in other games, but if you objective is to eek out as many wins as possible, that isnt really relevant.

Moreover, its a long season. If this is what we see in week 15, i'll be a lot more upset. Right now, i dont really care. But i am confused by the complaints that the Bears arent winning enough and also that they arent letting their rookie sling the ball all over the field when their defense is smothering opponents.

 
Would you guys rather see:

1)Trubisky put up yesterdays stat line and the Bears win.

2)Trubisky throw for, say, 250y 2td, 3 turnovers and lose by 10.

Honestly curious.

 
flapgreen said:
Can we all agree you can't win games regularly with how they're calling the offense currently, and that there's a better way to handle a rookie QB? 
Click to expand...
I do. This whole thing has been an issue my entire life as a Bears fan. This kind of playcalling should deserve punishment, but as usual our defense wins the day and enables coaches like Fox. Martz and Trestman are the only Bears signal callers I can think of that ever understood the concept of setting up the run with the pass. Short little confidence boosters on early downs. Sigh. I hate John Fox.

 
mbuehner said:
We can agree theyve won the last two games. We can agree rookie QBs with terrible receivers turn the ball over. We can agree turning the ball over makes you lose games.

My point is, there is a very good case that minimizing what your rookie QB does is the best way to maximize wins.

That might mean you get your doors blown off in other games, but if you objective is to eek out as many wins as possible, that isnt really relevant.

Moreover, its a long season. If this is what we see in week 15, i'll be a lot more upset. Right now, i dont really care. But i am confused by the complaints that the Bears arent winning enough and also that they arent letting their rookie sling the ball all over the field when their defense is smothering opponents.
Click to expand...
I think it's a losing formula and I feel like the Bears have proven this for years. And years. And years. Selling yourself short in order to keep games close. It absolutely will win a few more games than opening up. But there will be zero growth and zero upside for a potential playoff run. Perpetual mediocrity is what that is.

 
mbuehner said:
We can agree theyve won the last two games. We can agree rookie QBs with terrible receivers turn the ball over. We can agree turning the ball over makes you lose games.

My point is, there is a very good case that minimizing what your rookie QB does is the best way to maximize wins.

That might mean you get your doors blown off in other games, but if you objective is to eek out as many wins as possible, that isnt really relevant.

Moreover, its a long season. If this is what we see in week 15, i'll be a lot more upset. Right now, i dont really care. But i am confused by the complaints that the Bears arent winning enough and also that they arent letting their rookie sling the ball all over the field when their defense is smothering opponents.
Click to expand...
Shouldn't be confusing to you at all.  That's not how you develop a qb. I haven't seen anyone saying they should be letting him "sling the ball all over the field."   People want to see some semblance of an offense where the qb is an integral part of the offense.  Short passes, quick releases,  playaction, mix it up, don't leave your QB in 3rd and long all the time. Nothing confusing about that. Pretty basic stuff and how most teams develop QBs early on.  Keep up this nonsense and you'll see that smothering defense disappear and all be injured. 

 
SaintsInDome2006 said:
That's kind of amazing.
Click to expand...
Its odd as myself and others noticed some chemistry between him and Trubisky in preseason, that was speculated might carry over when Trubisky got the starting job.

Nope.

Makes me curious why Thompson was released by the Bears?

Only thing I could think of is that Thompson is 28 years old. Doesn;t seem like a good reason to me though. Just another one of those head scratcher moves.

Trying to let this go though so flaps head won't explode.

 
mbuehner said:
Would you guys rather see:

1)Trubisky put up yesterdays stat line and the Bears win.

2)Trubisky throw for, say, 250y 2td, 3 turnovers and lose by 10.

Honestly curious.
Click to expand...
Just those 2 options? What world do you live in that those are the only 2 outcomes? 

 
Biabreakable said:
Its odd as myself and others noticed some chemistry between him and Trubisky in preseason, that was speculated might carry over when Trubisky got the starting job.

Nope.

Makes me curious why Thompson was released by the Bears?

Only thing I could think of is that Thompson is 28 years old. Doesn;t seem like a good reason to me though. Just another one of those head scratcher moves.

Trying to let this go though so flaps head won't explode.
Click to expand...
Lol thanks 

 
The 7 passes goes beyond Trubisky, IMO. By refusing to throw, the Bears seem to be admitting, in a logical world, they have no receivers worthy of development, i.e. Gentry and McBride. We are left to believe the roster was constructed with Meredith, White and zero other usable pieces of any value. How can that be possible?

 
flapgreen said:
Just those 2 options? What world do you live in that those are the only 2 outcomes? 
Click to expand...
There are a world of outcomes, but a limited number of ways to manage a game. Fox is going to win as many games as possible and this is how he believes he can do it. He's 2-1 with Mitch. One would expect the playbook to open up both as the kid improved and game situation dictates. For the moment, it's been demonstrably effective, and it's hard to argue with success.

Personally think winning is unimportant this season and developing Trubisky is paramount. I still have hopes that there are plenty of games this season, and by seasons end it will be a very different offense. Teams rarely, almost never have an opportunity to bring along a QB this deliberately. 

IF it works, how can you argue with it? From a 'you ain't getting this kid good enough to take you to a Superbowl this season, so get over it' point of view,  taking time makes sense to me and I don't care that he won't be ready to go into a shootout with New Orleans if the D comes back to earth. 

 
mbuehner said:
You can argue winning games is the most important thing and tanking a season to let your franchise QB develop is sacrilege.

You can argue letting the rookie QB open up and throw the ball all over the field (and very very likely turn the ball over multiple times) is more important than winning.

But I dont see how you can argue both.
Click to expand...
come on, there is obviously a middle ground in there that our idiot head coach is unable to find. No one wants Trubisky dropping back and throwing every play, but he has to do something. I'd personally like to see two deep throws a game get the kid some tape on what happens when he drops back and throws.

the future of this team is Mitch, and John Fox has to at least attempt to develop him or he will quickly get his ### canned, and maybe not even after the season.

 
mbuehner said:
Would you guys rather see:

1)Trubisky put up yesterdays stat line and the Bears win.

2)Trubisky throw for, say, 250y 2td, 3 turnovers and lose by 10.

Honestly curious.
Click to expand...
If those were the only two options I'd take #2. Pace has set the direction that the future of this team is Mitch. He is going to have growing pains if the start to let him lose now or next year. Better to start doing it soon if we are going to have him on the field.

 
The Tick said:
come on, there is obviously a middle ground in there that our idiot head coach is unable to find. No one wants Trubisky dropping back and throwing every play, but he has to do something. I'd personally like to see two deep throws a game get the kid some tape on what happens when he drops back and throws.

the future of this team is Mitch, and John Fox has to at least attempt to develop him or he will quickly get his ### canned, and maybe not even after the season.
Click to expand...
Yuuup. All the stuff I listed with a couple deep throws mixed in to change things up. So common sense, or so you would think...

 
mbuehner said:
There are a world of outcomes, but a limited number of ways to manage a game. Fox is going to win as many games as possible and this is how he believes he can do it. He's 2-1 with Mitch. One would expect the playbook to open up both as the kid improved and game situation dictates. For the moment, it's been demonstrably effective, and it's hard to argue with success.

Personally think winning is unimportant this season and developing Trubisky is paramount. I still have hopes that there are plenty of games this season, and by seasons end it will be a very different offense. Teams rarely, almost never have an opportunity to bring along a QB this deliberately. 

IF it works, how can you argue with it? From a 'you ain't getting this kid good enough to take you to a Superbowl this season, so get over it' point of view,  taking time makes sense to me and I don't care that he won't be ready to go into a shootout with New Orleans if the D comes back to earth. 
Click to expand...
We're just going to have to disagree here. 

 
Just run the offense they were running with Glennon. I don't understand why it has to be scaled back dramatically because Trubisky is in there now. Sure, there's more scope for turnovers if you actually attempt passes, but that's football. I'm positive Trubisky is more capable than Glennon of protecting the ball. Fox is only interested in keeping his job and he sees this dark ages offense as a way to do that. Coaches like him are risk averse to a fault.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
RushHour said:
Just run the offense they were running with Glennon. I don't understand why it has to be scaled back dramatically because Trubisky is in there now. Sure, there's more scope for turnovers if you actually attempt passes, but that's football. I'm positive Trubisky is more capable than Glennon of protecting the ball. Fox is only interested in keeping his job and he sees this dark ages offense as a way to do that. Coaches like him are risk averse to a fault.
Click to expand...
and the funny thing is he's probably more likely to lose this job not for his win/loss record, but that conservative football viewpoint, just like in Denver.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Love seeing how Pederson calls the offense. This is EXACTLY how it's supposed to be done. Really hope we can get someone like that next year. 

 
You see that read option the Eagles are running with Wentz, Noggains? You stupid or something? Why won't you put a real game plan together? 

 
mbuehner said:
We can agree theyve won the last two games. We can agree rookie QBs with terrible receivers turn the ball over. We can agree turning the ball over makes you lose games.

My point is, there is a very good case that minimizing what your rookie QB does is the best way to maximize wins.

That might mean you get your doors blown off in other games, but if you objective is to eek out as many wins as possible, that isnt really relevant.

Moreover, its a long season. If this is what we see in week 15, i'll be a lot more upset. Right now, i dont really care. But i am confused by the complaints that the Bears arent winning enough and also that they arent letting their rookie sling the ball all over the field when their defense is smothering opponents.
Click to expand...
I really don't care if the Bears win this year. Or make the playoffs. Winning means nothing if your QB is not developing. Running the offense like this will limit his growth and Trubisky will essentially still be a rookie next year with the Bears unsure of his capabilities. 

 
Only 3 QBs in last 30 years have won games completing 4 or fewer passes: Weinke (4), Tebow (2), Trubisky (4).

John Fox was HC all 3 times.

 
flapgreen said:
Only 3 QBs in last 30 years have won games completing 4 or fewer passes: Weinke (4), Tebow (2), Trubisky (4).

John Fox was HC all 3 times.
Click to expand...
That is a sad, sad list and I really hate to see Trubisky's name on it, even though I know means little in the grand scheme of things.

 
The Tick said:
That is a sad, sad list and I really hate to see Trubisky's name on it, even though I know means little in the grand scheme of things.
Click to expand...
Looks like Fox's strategy really worked for those guys.  Apparently, Fox uses the same approach with all young QBs, regardless of their skill set. Great idea, moron. Get this idiot out of here already. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
flapgreen said:
Only 3 QBs in last 30 years have won games completing 4 or fewer passes: Weinke (4), Tebow (2), Trubisky (4).

John Fox was HC all 3 times.
Click to expand...
Yaknow, it's actually sort of cool that football is actually still a kind rugby.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
1 Hot Take Per Team(pre-FA)
Replies
25
Views
2K
Anarchy99
Anarchy99
T
Travdogg's Free Agency Predictions and 2 round mock (updated 4/8/22)
2
Replies
73
Views
6K
rockaction
rockaction
T
My final 2022 mock draft, 3 rounds
2
Replies
56
Views
6K
travdogg
T

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Back
Top