So basically you want to go back to the Grossman/Orton era?
I think most would enjoy competing for conference titles and playoff births. That was a good time.
So basically you want to go back to the Grossman/Orton era?
I think most would enjoy competing for conference titles and playoff births. That was a good time.
I'll predict a 4-12 finish. Wins against Tennessee, Philadelphia, and Detroit, with a random win thrown in the mix.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/b...we-are-going-to-win-the-super-bowl-next-year/
I'll have what Alshon's having. It will be interesting to see what Pace does with Alshon and it could tell a lot. If Pace let's him go then it's a sign that we are still 2 or 3 years away IMO. He will be 27 next month and there is no need to spend on him with Cam Meredith and Kevin White already in the fold. But if Alshon gets a nice contract then hopefully that means Pace thinks we are ready to compete right now. Maybe I'm reading too much into it.
Bears coaches will be the coaching staff for the North team in the Senior Bowl at the end of this month. The Browns coaches will be the coaching staff for the South team.
The NFL came out with its All-Pro teams today. Ridiculously, they had David Johnson as the first team "flex" player and the second team running back. Looking at the stats for the year I think you could make a good case for Jordan Howard as the second team running back.
So guys? Watson at 3?
So guys? Watson at 3?
Please no. Drafting QB's is kind of a crapshoot and the 3rd pick isn't the spot to be rolling dice. Either pick a guy that you are 99% sure he can contribute or trade down.
You need an elite QB to have a legit shot in the NFL. I'm fine with drafting a QB. Figure out the QB and you can build around him. Building a solid team with no answer at quarterback puts you in the spin cycle of 8-8 records with no high draft picks. Draft the best QB you see and if he misses you will suck again next year and get another shot at it. If you find a good young QB there is plenty of $ to build a decent roster around him.
The roster is so far from a Super Bowl that you can't just take the best QB. If there was a truly elite QB, you take him. For example, if Peyton Manning is available you can draft him. But he's not. If you think Kizer or Watson is a truly elite QB then draft him. But drafting the best QB can backfire. You can get Sam Bradford or J. Russel or the first Carr brother, or any other failed first round QB.
On the other hand, if you get your roster to the point that you only need a QB you can at that time trade a first-round pick for the Garappolo or Romo or Manning or whatever QB is available.
Of course there can be a bust at any position, but it seems to me that QB busts set teams back more than any other position.
Trading a first round pick for a super bowl caliber quarterback is not how this works. It's not how any of this works. Garappolo is going to cost a team dearly in picks and he is nothing more than a wild card at this point too. Teams dont trade quarterbacks that are elite. It just doesn't happen.
I think the fallacy there is knowing that there is no elite QB QB in this draft. I'm not saying you have to take one in the first round but I would sure be taking one in the first three rounds and keep doing it until you find your guy. Getting your team to be "competitive" can be the kiss of death. I'm not crossing my fingers that the Bears can get to 9-7 next year and miss the playoffs by a game or get bounced in the wild card round. I want the Bears to get to 13-3 and have legitimate shots at winning for multiple years. In my opinion you don't build that without an elite QB at the heart of your team.
First three rounds is much different than with the 3rd overall pick in the draft which is where this discussion started. I don't think anyone would argue against using a pick in the first 3 rounds on a QB. It's #3 overall that is the problem. Heck, I'd be OK with taking a QB in the first round if you can trade back to around 20/25 and get extra picks. But if you stay put at #3, you have to hit on a big time contributor. There are no sure fire hits at QB in this draft. Is there likely to be a good QB, sure. But I don't think that anyone can say with any certainty who that will be.
I realize the Bears suck at drafting and have for a long time but how many guys have been good enough that they have drafted that you wouldn't trade them in a few years later for a lottery ticket on a great quarterback. I would challenge you to come up with 10 names from the last 20 years. That's 140 picks, give or take. When you are lost at QB it is malpractice to not address it in each draft. Your opportunity cost is minimal.