BearFan PHX

Amen

I thought Fields had one of his best games as a passer. I know the interceptions happened, but he was taking big risks because it was an end of game scenario. Also, Fields is not known for throwing the ball into risky areas. If anything he is hesitant to pull the trigger. Today he looked more in rhythm and confident as a passer. Good. Leatherwood looked good from what I saw too. That's a positive to build on going forward. Also, consider that a lot of these starters will be depth next year, and we will have one of the most experienced benches. Some of the players in the secondary today held their own. That's good news too. But mostly, we dont look like a 3-10 team. Our roster is depleted but I see effort and stuff to build on everywhere. It's a no brainer to think that if you put 8 new improved starters on this team, they'd look a LOT different. And just like there are only a few real difference makers at QB in this league, there are only a few real difference makers on the D line too. Most teams dont have a top 5 QB or a top 5 DL, we might be in line to have both. And that's a recipe for real sustained success. I like where we are going, and I liked what I saw today, and Im glad we also lost.

yup - we need tryouts and we need to have "decent" players at every position before the draft. All GMs do that. They fill holes with worst case scenario guys so they have the freedom to go best player available or some version of it.

Yeah I don't want to trade that high pick for a meaningless win. Hopefully our secondary is so depleted that Rogers can pick us apart.

I agree with all of this, but I dont know what Bears scouts think about this years' QBs, and what they think about where Fields is headed. From my perspective in the cheap seats, I agree with you, but Poles will do his due diligence on every possible scenario, and Id love to be a fly on the wall for those discussions.

There is also another interesting scenario. I want to make clear this is NOT what I want, or what i predict, but it's out there and worth mentioning. Poles could keep #2, draft one of the QBs and trade Fields for 2 firsts+. Now I'm not suggesting that he would do that just for the extra first round pick. That would be way too cute and risky. But if he truly doesnt think Fields will ever become a real passer (I think he will!) or if he is 100% sure the QB being drafted is the next Payton Manning, then it's a move he could consider. If it was me, I'd trade back to #4 or something and snag one of the top DL, while getting something extra for the trouble. But Id be happy with just staying at 3 or wherever we end up and taking the DL too. But Poles didn't draft Fields, and he now knows a lot more about his upside, and about the potential in these rookie QBs, than I do, so I thought it was worth mentioning that this is at least an option that Poles has to consider, even if he is as sure as I am that keeping Fields is ultimately the right decision.

absolutely!

I think he is a WLB, not fast enough to take TEs in man

Thanks for the stats. maybe he CAN be Lance Briggs. Kwit and Hillenmeyer never played WLB, so I guess my comparisons are wrong! I hope Sanborn IS a stud for us!

Theyve been playing a lot of zone. thats why we keep seeing 10 yard passes where our guy(s) are just a beat late. And more than one arrive for the tackle at the same time. Everyone knows we are in zone. Consequently, I havent seen Sanborn beaten or looking bad yet. But I also havent seen the coaching staff putting him in that position. I think the staff is really smart, and they are holding 90% of their mojo back because we dont have the players yet for it. I like where we are heading. And I'm a Sanborn fan, I just dont think he will be here very long.

So again, I really like Sanborn. He has all the attributes except speed. The problem with keeping him at MLB or WLB is that you cant put him in man coverage. You can hide him in a zone, but when we get to where we are going next year, we will need to be able to switch up defensive schemes. Nick Kwitkowski was great too. He had everything except the speed. And we all saw what happened. Any time we played man, they ran a drag route on him and it was an easy first down. And if you know you're gonna see zone before the snap, well we can all see what that looks like this year. I really wish the speed fairy would come and bless Sanborn with a few fewer tenths of a second on his forty time. But there is a reason he wasnt drafted, despite his college productivity. He just isnt fast enough. We are all fans of his talent and effort. He is built like Urlacher too. He looks big and imposing and he is a sure tackler. But he is not the future for us, not as a starter. It pains me to say it, but it's the truth.

this is true. its sad because you love the guy - hes such a Rudy - he works his tail off, hes got everything you want except speed, and in the long run that makes him Hunter Hillenmeyer or Nick Kwitkowski. And like you said thats GREAT value for an UDFA, but not someone you build around. Great depth, and until the roster is complete, a decent placeholder.

I dont have a lot of faith in Jones. He is fast, but i dont think he is a football player.

Let's start with Eislen at center!

Let's GO! or stop. or whatever the right way to say it is! lol

yes. Ive been waiting for Claypool to show up. This is good news.

I agree we are definitely not one D lineman away - we have holes all over. But if the mission is to build a superbowl winner, you do need at least one true blue chip All Pro D lineman on the team. Its OK to start building with major pieces, even as other holes need filling too. Otherwise you end up with a 10-7 team that wins one playoff game and youre trapped in the cycle weve been in for decades. I dont want to be decent quick, I want to be dominant and sustainable.

I agree with both points.

Maybe they let Fields play, but without any scripted QB runs. Let him grow as a pocket passer if you can protect him.

Yes for sure Manning did. He has a bit of an excuse which is that Brady was in his way in the AFC. Rodgers is a choke artist when it comes to big games - Im hardly the first person to say it.

I'm just saying, Rodgers underachieved. His ranking on all time QBs is higher than his influence on winning games that matter.

I think that is more than fair.

I cant help but wonder if they arent looking at the draft ranking too. Either way, it looked like they wanted to see Fields be a pocket passer this week, and the pass protection was just awful. Wanting to work on his passing against the Falcons was a smart game plan - not to beat them necessarily, but to develop Fields. Unfortunately, it got out of hand. Also, looks like Claypool is taking a while to learn the offense. Yikes.

LOL Mongo

If you think a player will be elite, you dont trade down, if there is a run on QBs, we might be able to drop down a couple of slots and still get one of the blue chip DLs. That is if you value them equally of course. You can operate from fear that you'll reach for Aaron Donald and get Tommie Harris instead, but if you are in position to take your swings, early on in the tenure of your GMship, then you gotta go with what your scouting tells you and swing for greatness! Conversely, if your intel says neither of the DLs are that good, and there's a player at a different position you like at a slightly lower pick, you trade out. I think it all comes down to the internal ratings and projections. But if you think it's Aaron Donald, you gotta take him.