What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

***Chicago Bears Thread*** Poles is playing 5D chess! (19 Viewers)

3nOut said:
I'm starting to warm up to the idea of taking a QB at 3. I've read that this is one of the best classes of DBs (S and CB) EVER. If that's the case, it seems a waste to take one that high when you can still get a very good one in the second.

Lets swing for the fences. Not much has worked in past years, why not try something different, something they haven't tried in, what, 30 years? If it doesn't work, I'd rather fail trying. And if Glennon is not the answer, you'll get a high pick again next year and can try again.

That said, I still think it would be best to do everything you can to get a deal going with Cleveland to move down to their #12, while picking up extra picks along the way. At 12, take the best QB available.

And flap, this ones for you: http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/columnists/ct-bears-should-draft-quarterback-biggs-spt-0425-20170424-column.html
Click to expand...
Meanwhile in the Browns thread...

How many picks have we blown on QBs since 1999 ?  Be nice to get it right once since coming back.  Just draft best player available and stop wasting picks on QBs that do nothing and amount to nothing.
Click to expand...

 
Hawkeye21 said:
And the thing is, they don't NEED a QB.  They need to find a long term, franchise QB but not one just to fill the position.  Glennon is that guy right now which allows the Bears a small cushion to select the exact QB they want to be their next franchise guy.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure why a Bears' fan would not be content to pass on a QB this year (at 3 overall) and see what Glennon brings to the table. It's unlikely that he will be a stud franchise level QB, but based on how he's already looked in the NF, an Andy Dalton/Joe Flacco type of career doesn't seem like a stretch and those guys are perennial playoff QBs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You think Bears fans should be content sticking with Mike Glennon and passing on a qb this year? No. Not in this lifetime. 

 
flapgreen said:
You think Bears fans should be content sticking with Mike Glennon and passing on a qb this year? No. Not in this lifetime. 
Click to expand...
at 1.03?, sure. Honestly I'm not very good at predicting how college QBs will transition to the NFL, but based on everything you read from "experts" this is not the draft to take a QB that high.

I think Glennon has already shown enough in the NFL to think he can succeed. I like Watson a lot but I have no idea if he'll be the next Aaron Rodger or the next Vince Young. I personally would not be shocked if Mike Glennon wins more NFL games than Trubisky, Kizer, Mahomes or Watson. Of course there's a decent chance, at least one of them will end up being the better option, but there's also a great chance the Bears end up with the wrong one.

 
Dr. Octopus said:
at 1.03?, sure. Honestly I'm not very good at predicting how college QBs will transition to the NFL, but based on everything you read from "experts" this is not the draft to take a QB that high.

I think Glennon has already shown enough in the NFL to think he can succeed. I like Watson a lot but I have no idea if he'll be the next Aaron Rodger or the next Vince Young. I personally would not be shocked if Mike Glennon wins more NFL games than Trubisky, Kizer, Mahomes or Watson. Of course there's a decent chance, at least one of them will end up being the better option, but there's also a great chance the Bears end up with the wrong one.
Click to expand...
There's a good chance any team that drafts a qb in any draft won't succeed. Hardest position in sports to project. Doesn't mean you shouldn't try or go 15 years without drafting one. There's no perfect spot. 

 
I want Watson if they can't trade back and Mahomes if they can.  Anything other than a QB will be a huge letdown. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also something else to remember. The defense wasn't bad last year. Middle of pack.  I'm all for improving defense, but it won't mean a thing if we can't score over 17. The defense is way ahead of the offense at this point. We need a ton on offense to catch up with just an OK defense. 

 
Watson has always been the guy I've felt they should take. Upside is too high, and he screams winner. 

However I'm not going to be upset with any of the big 5 defenders. I think all 5 are worthy of the 3 pick. This should be fun as it's looking like we're almost in a no-lose situation. 

Although I wouldn't be thrilled if it's Trubisky. 

 
Thanks to flap ( ;) ), I want to be entertained during the draft tomorrow. If, at 3, the Bears take anyone other than a QB or don't trade down, I think I will be disappointed. I want to feel excited. Trading down, even if they don't take a QB with the extra pick(s) would make watching the draft fun. The anticipation of waiting for our next pick and seeing who gets taken before us would be exciting. 

C'mon Bears (Pace), you haven't entertained me in a while. Please do so on Thursday night.

 
flapgreen said:
Also something else to remember. The defense wasn't bad last year. Middle of pack.  I'm all for improving defense, but it won't mean a thing if we can't score over 17. The defense is way ahead of the offense at this point. We need a ton on offense to catch up with just an OK defense. 
Click to expand...
No QB taken in this draft is going to make an impact for the offense until at a minimum next year, unless Glennon sucks terrible or gets hurt.  Not likely though, because they'll put Sanchez in then.  The 3rd overall pick getting used on a project player just makes me more nervous than another position.  This doesn't mean I'll be upset with the pick, just more nervous about it.

 
Hawkeye21 said:
No QB taken in this draft is going to make an impact for the offense until at a minimum next year, unless Glennon sucks terrible or gets hurt.  Not likely though, because they'll put Sanchez in then.  The 3rd overall pick getting used on a project player just makes me more nervous than another position.  This doesn't mean I'll be upset with the pick, just more nervous about it.
Click to expand...
What?  Every qb ever drafted could be viewed as a "project" coming in. That's how the position works. 

 
Hawkeye21 said:
No QB taken in this draft is going to make an impact for the offense until at a minimum next year, unless Glennon sucks terrible or gets hurt.  Not likely though, because they'll put Sanchez in then.  The 3rd overall pick getting used on a project player just makes me more nervous than another position.  This doesn't mean I'll be upset with the pick, just more nervous about it.
Click to expand...
Project?  No qb is ever a sure thing. 

 
flapgreen said:
There's a good chance any team that drafts a qb in any draft won't succeed. Hardest position in sports to project. Doesn't mean you shouldn't try or go 15 years without drafting one. There's no perfect spot. 
Click to expand...
Hope you guys go Watson or Trubisky if Cleveland doesn't. The more non-QBs that fall to us (Carolina) the better. That said, if I was a Bears fan, I'd agree. I'd rather take a risk on Watson becoming a solid QB than pick a safety 3rd. Especially in this draft, where there are a ton of safeties who could be solid starters. The difference between Adams and the round 2 safeties isn't > than taking a risk on a QB.

 
That man changes his mind with every whisper he hears.  If Lattimore didn't have an injury history, I could see it. But he does.  Anything other than a qb, Thomas, or trade down and I might walk next door and throw dirt on my neighbor's car. 

 
flapgreen said:
Don't see Pace taking anyone but Watson at 3
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be opposed to Trubiskey honestly, with a year of learning behind Glennon and ummm, Sanchez. If Trubiskey is still on the board at 3, I'd get on the phone with the Browns and offer them the third, telling them they're considering taking Trubiskey. If no deal, take him.

 
3nOut said:
I wouldn't be opposed to Trubiskey honestly, with a year of learning behind Glennon and ummm, Sanchez. If Trubiskey is still on the board at 3, I'd get on the phone with the Browns and offer them the third, telling them they're considering taking Trubiskey. If no deal, take him.
Click to expand...
Trubisky would really shock me with all of the talk Pace has done on experience and intangibles. 

 
FTR I like Kizer, but hes taken a tumble for a reason that I'm completely lost at.  He's gonna make a lot of teams look dumb one day. 

 
3nOut said:
What about Garrett if he falls? Won't happen but let me throw 2 more names at you: TE OJ Howard and WR Davis. Just wanna hear your thoughts.
Click to expand...
I could go for Howard at 12, if they pull off a trade down, but 3 no way.  He's the best TE prospect to come out in many years, but it's another position that doesn't go early in drafts for a reason.  He's special, though.   Could easily end up being the best TE in the league eventually.  As with the DB class, however, the TE class is also deep.  It's hard for me to think of drafting a TE or DB in the first when there's so much depth. 

I can't say I've watched much of Davis.  Sounds like he'll be the first one off.  If the Bears were stocked full of talent everywhere else, then probably give him a look, but they're not.  When it comes to drafting an early round player, WR is far down the list of needs for the Bears. 

If Garrett falls and the first 2 picks are qbs, of course you run to the podium screaming his name.  Or, you trade down and get a huge haul for him, which I'd probably do first. 

 
Trading back to 12 or wherever and taking a qb there makes no sense to me.  If a guy's your franchise qb at 12, he's your franchise qb at 3.  Taking that chance and hoping your guy falls to wherever you're at doesn't give me confidence you think he's your guy.  Go ahead and trade down. Fine. You're Pace and you think all of the QBs blow. Don't take one in the first at all. But don't take one with your trade down pick.  Now that would be a really "Bears" thing to do. 

 
I hope the Bears take a close look at  Taylor Moton after the first. Would start right away.  Also have to look at Derek Rivers if they don't take Edge guy in the first.  Budda Baker could be a future pro Bowler available after the first 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
3nOut said:
I wouldn't be opposed to Trubiskey honestly, with a year of learning behind Glennon and ummm, Sanchez. If Trubiskey is still on the board at 3, I'd get on the phone with the Browns and offer them the third, telling them they're considering taking Trubiskey. If no deal, take him.
Click to expand...
How do wound ducks on Lake Michigan in December?

 
flapgreen said:
FTR I like Kizer, but hes taken a tumble for a reason that I'm completely lost at.  He's gonna make a lot of teams look dumb one day. 
Click to expand...
Just speculating, but perhaps his interviews have soured some teams. Reports that he seems more about building a brand than being a qb, compared himself to Brady/cam in the same sentence, and is all about the Benjamins. 

 
flapgreen said:
Trading back to 12 or wherever and taking a qb there makes no sense to me.  If a guy's your franchise qb at 12, he's your franchise qb at 3.  Taking that chance and hoping your guy falls to wherever you're at doesn't give me confidence you think he's your guy.  Go ahead and trade down. Fine. You're Pace and you think all of the QBs blow. Don't take one in the first at all. But don't take one with your trade down pick.  Now that would be a really "Bears" thing to do. 
Click to expand...
This is playing checkers when the other guys are playing chess.

I would expect an average GM to take his QB at 3. I would expect the great GM to maximize the draft pick and know what other team are going to do. If that allows them to trade down and still get their QB, then that's what they should do. 

 
flapgreen said:
What?  Every qb ever drafted could be viewed as a "project" coming in. That's how the position works. 
Click to expand...
Yes, but generally QBs that are taken that high are meant to be starters right away.  The teams at the top usually don't have a starting QB so they draft them high.  The Bears do have a starting QB right now which allows them to take a QB in the second round if they feel a guy is still good enough there.

Once again, I am not saying they shouldn't take a QB 3rd or that I would be mad if they did.  All I'm saying is that it's just not as exciting and it's not a move that makes the team better right away.  Hopefully it's a move that makes the team significantly better in a year or two though.

 
KCitons said:
This is playing checkers when the other guys are playing chess.

I would expect an average GM to take his QB at 3. I would expect the great GM to maximize the draft pick and know what other team are going to do. If that allows them to trade down and still get their QB, then that's what they should do. 
Click to expand...
I completely agree with this.  If the opportunity is there to trade down and still get a QB you like while gaining extra picks then you just maximized your draft.  It could be a gamble but I think it's unlikely 3 QBs are going in the top 11.

 
Snorkelson said:
Just speculating, but perhaps his interviews have soured some teams. Reports that he seems more about building a brand than being a qb, compared himself to Brady/cam in the same sentence, and is all about the Benjamins. 
Click to expand...
A couple weeks before that, people were saying he lacks confidence and hears voices in his head. Watson said teams will regret taking Trubisky ahead of himself.  It's a lot of noise coming from a lot of different places. I just don't buy everything I hear. 

 
KCitons said:
This is playing checkers when the other guys are playing chess.

I would expect an average GM to take his QB at 3. I would expect the great GM to maximize the draft pick and know what other team are going to do. If that allows them to trade down and still get their QB, then that's what they should do. 
Click to expand...
None of that applies to drafting a qb. Checkers to chess are nothing like this. No GM knows exactly how things will play out.  Checkers is risking missing your qb while trying to get more picks. Chess is already having your qb and then making moves to acquire more picks to build around him. 

 
Hawkeye21 said:
I completely agree with this.  If the opportunity is there to trade down and still get a QB you like while gaining extra picks then you just maximized your draft.  It could be a gamble but I think it's unlikely 3 QBs are going in the top 11.
Click to expand...
If you lose that gamble and miss out on your qb, you're screwed for years to come. It's why teams give up a ton of picks just for a shot at a qb.  Not unlikely 3 qbs go early. No one knows. 

 
flapgreen said:
If you lose that gamble and miss out on your qb, you're screwed for years to come. It's why teams give up a ton of picks just for a shot at a qb.  Not unlikely 3 qbs go early. No one knows. 
Click to expand...
Teams only give up a bunch of picks when they feel there is one special QB in the draft.  I'm not sure this is that year.  So far it sounds like there are 4 pretty good QBs that everyone has different opinions on.

 
Yeah highly doubt there will be an opportunity for a trade down with the depth of this class. Browns seem to be the one team I've heard wanting to move up and that's just to get Trubisky with Garrett. But now the word is they might just grab Trubisky at 1. 

Only other team that might just want to move is Carolina, to get ahead of Jacks for Fournette. But thats highly doubtful. 

 
William Munny said:
Yeah highly doubt there will be an opportunity for a trade down with the depth of this class. Browns seem to be the one team I've heard wanting to move up and that's just to get Trubisky with Garrett. But now the word is they might just grab Trubisky at 1. 

Only other team that might just want to move is Carolina, to get ahead of Jacks for Fournette. But thats highly doubtful. 
Click to expand...
If I were the Bears I'd be telling everyone I'm taking Trubisky.  Hopefully that forces a team like the Browns to offer a trade or just take him at 1 which would allow a better player to fall to the Bears.  The Browns seriously wanting Trubisky could be a great deal for the Bears.

 
Hawkeye21 said:
If I were the Bears I'd be telling everyone I'm taking Trubisky.  Hopefully that forces a team like the Browns to offer a trade or just take him at 1 which would allow a better player to fall to the Bears.  The Browns seriously wanting Trubisky could be a great deal for the Bears.
Click to expand...
I think the Bears would lose all leverage if the Browns take Trubisky and the 49ers take Garrett.  Now if Browns stick with Garrett and 49ers take another defensive player, the Bears are in a great spot. 

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Travdogg's 3 round mock draft
2
Replies
68
Views
2K
Deamon
Deamon
T
Travdogg's 2023 Mock draft as of 3/31
2 3
Replies
100
Views
4K
Largent
Largent
Ministry of Pain
Redraft-WR2/3s after about 20 come off the board. ADP 5th Rd thru the 9th Rd
Replies
4
Views
566
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 19 (members: 1, guests: 18)
Top