adam

If the Bears plan was the have Trubisky hand off 10 times out of 14, for the game, then Mission accomplished. Of the 4 passes he has attempted, they all have been of the dink and dunk variety. I am still confused. Why not install some sort of game plan, have a normal mix of runs and passes, etc? Didn't the O-Line need work on Pass Pro, RB's picking up blitzes, etc? Shaw already in, Trubisky's night already done. What was the point?

9 straight runs to start the game, 3x 3 and outs.

8 straight runs.

So Trubisky starts and we run 6 straight times for 2x 3 and outs. What the hell is this? That was the game plan coming in? Why would they not have some scripted plays? I am so confused. So they use 6 offensive plays to see how Trubisky hands off? WTF

To add insult to injury, Cleveland is not playing Kizer tonight vs the Bears because he has been named the Week 1 starter. I find that funny because he could use the reps more than Trubisky at this point (they both equally need the experience).

I was asking more than telling, and I think with the Meredith injury that he would fill the hole before Cruz who is more of a slot receiver. I didn't know Wheaton's or Bellamy's status so I put them under the cut line. With Bellamy's ST duties, he obviously has more value. I believe Gentry has played on ST as well.

No starters play in the 4th preseason game, unfortunately. Most of the players will be vying for the final spots on the 53-man and PS.

With the tough loss of Meredith, it looks like we will carry 6 WRs? 1. White 2. Wright 3. Gentry 4. Thompson --------------- 5. Cruz 6. Davis/Bellamy/Wheaton Wheaton hasn't played as far as I know, and Bellamy is also hurt. 2 QB Glennon/Trubisky 4 RB Howard/Cohen/Langford/Cunningham 4 TE Sims/Miller/Shaheen/Brown 6 WR White/Wright/Gentry/Thompson/Cruz/Davis 8 OL Whitehair/Long/Sutton/Leno/Massie/Compton/Grasu/Morgan 1 Flex (1 of Stevenson-FB/Bellamy-WR/Wheaton-WR/Braunecker-TE)

Stats so far: Mitchell Trubisky - 34-48, 354, 70.8%, 7.4, 3-0 Mike Glennon - 26-44, 243, 59.1%, 5.5, 2-2 Glennon is a lock for opening day at this point, and will probably start the first few games. He definitely has some red flags that come out in the stats. 11% less in completion percentage (and he had easier throws), almost 2 yds less per attempt (dink and dunk game plan in game 2) and a TD-INT of 1:1. Those are all bad. You won't win very many games with those numbers. For the completion pct, that puts Glennon between Siemian and Osweiler/Bortles from 201. Ironically the same as Jay Cutler last year. That would be good for 30th for qualified leaders. The 5.5 yds per attempt is so low that the closest QB's last year were Goff at 5.3 and Osweiler at 5.8. No other QB with 200 or more attempts was under 6.2. Those are alarming numbers. The inability to complete a pass will lead to a lot of missed 3rd downs. The low average per attempt will impact the running game with an extra guy in the box. The only other thing that could be happening is that the Bears don't want to show their hand and want teams to think we are a dink and dunk offense and Glennon comes out Week 1 throwing bombs. We would all be fooled.

Two guys hit him below the waist and that's not a cheap hit? One goes right for the knee from one side (initial contact with helmet was on the knee), the 2nd guy hits him thigh high and that's with him going down. If he is still upright, the 2nd dude hits him square in the knee as well. Take a look at this: https://twitter.com/BarstoolChief/status/901862496511905792

Meredith out, most likely for the season sucks. That high low hit was cheap. Now it looks like guys on the bubble Cruz/Wheaton will make the team. Time for Kevin White to step up and be a #1.

Now that is the Glennon I was looking for. 9-12 for 107 yds and a TD. Even the incompletions were decent throws.

I get it and no objections there, however, each one had their own unique situation to deal with. Brees had Jake the Snake, Brady had Bledsoe, Rodgers had Favre, etc. If we were a franchise in that situation, it would make sense to sit Trubisky behind someone of that stature to learn from the best. What is Trubisky going to get from sitting behind Glennon? That's my point. He might as well be out there getting the actual reps because he is better than Glennon already. Will he be better in 2018 if he doesn't start a single game in 2017 or will he be better in 2018 if he starts from Day One? It is hard to imagine that he would be worse off in 2018 by having more experience.

Sorry, you can't be in the HoF while playing. There are zero current players in the HoF.

I just thought 5-6mil would've been sufficient based on others of his caliber at the time of the signing. He has been a bottom half LT so far, so unless he improves, this will be a below average signing.

Even if you don't count Peyton, here are the recent group of QB's to start Week 1: Matt Ryan Joe Flacco Matthew Stafford Mark Sanchez Sam Bradford Cam Newton Andy Dalton Andrew Luck Robert Griffin III Russell Wilson Ryan Tannehill Derek Carr Jameis Winston Marcus Mariota Carson Wentz That is a pretty solid group and I believe 13 of them are current starters. That alone throws out the theory that you need to wait or hold them out for a few weeks, year, etc. These guys came in day one and are still starters. I also don't think it is a knee jerk reaction and only based on a few preseason snaps. Put the best players on the field for Week 1 based on what you know after the TEN game. This goes for all positions. I am ok if they wait, but not if Glennon is worse than Trubisky.

Leno now the highest paid Bear other than Glennon.

The pictures just show Manning was with Glennon, not that he gave him any pointers. I assume he was just talking with the WR's, like a meet and greet. Maybe asking them about joining the Papa John's team?

"Because this is how it was done for over 50 years" sounds like Kodak or the newspaper industry. I don't know if that is even a valid argument with the complexities and variables involved in the QB position. If anything, that would almost disprove itself. That is the very reason to start Trubisky. I don't think there is one defined method or process that makes a franchise QB, and there is nothing saying that any of those QB's listed would've performed any worse if they started Day 1. They just didn't have the opportunity. Also, how many of those guys clearly beat out the incumbent or "anointed" starter in the preseason before being relegated to the clipboard for up to 2 years? "Sorry Russell Wilson, you have looked way better than Matt Flynn in the preseason, so the logical thing is to start Matt Flynn for your rookie year", not stated by Seattle GM. Lastly, do you actually believe a coach would deem a player "not ready" who outplays the older player, but somehow that older player performs worse, but is "ready". I just don't know how live game action would make a QB worse or degrade his learning. He gets immediate feedback from the sidelines and can watch tape on what he experienced. Also, is Glennon the appropriate role model for Trubisky to watch? When they break down the tape of the Atlanta game, wouldn't it be more productive for Trubisky to see himself and know what he did and why he did it versus seeing Glennon, who could react differently (and wrong) which would further confuse Trubisky on the play? It seems like you are adding an extra variable into the process that doesn't need to be there. Now I understand there are other factors involved in the process that play a part in this (salary, etc), so it is not a cut and dry decision. At the end of the day, the best players need to be on the field, regardless of experience.

Cutler Game #2, did look better, but first couple of drives were pretty bad, lost a fumble on a sack, and almost threw a pick. He seems to be about the same as always, boom or bust. 5-8, 105 yds, 1 TD, 0 INT, 1 Sack, 1 FL 72 yard pass play, 2 dropped INTs, 1x 65yd DPI call, 1 sack-fumble So 2 huge chunk plays, 2 horrible throws, and barely touched on the sack fumble. Miami is going to love his big play ability but hate the mistakes. Sound familiar?

Interestingly, we actually have somewhat of a light defensive schedule this year with not too many top defenses outside of the division. BAL and PIT are the only defenses we face that ranked in the top 12 in yards last year (PIT was 12th). If we solely went off defenses, Week 7, at home against CAR seems like a good place to bring in Trubisky, if he doesn't start earlier. The obvious logical place is after the Week 9 Bye, at home, against GB in Week 10 where we go 7-1 and Trubisy leads us to a SB victory over Cutler's Dolphins as Cutler throws a Pick-6 to Fuller. 1 - ATL - 25th 2 - @TB - 23rd 3 - PIT - 12th 4 - @GB - 22nd 5 - MIN - 3rd 6 - @BAL - 7th 7 - CAR - 21st 8 - @NO - 27th 9 - BYE - 10 - GB - 22nd 11 - DET - 18th 12 - @PHI - 13th 13 - SF - 32nd 14 - @CIN - 17th 15 - @DET - 18th 16 - CLE - 31st 17 - MIN - 3rd

If he is worthless then why start him? Why even have him on the team? If he has no value, then cut him and take the salary hit this year.

Did you not find it odd that Manning was giving Trubisky pointers about the offense and not Glennon. Even he knows what's up. http://chicago.suntimes.com/sports/bears-m...-some-pointers/

I have really soured on Glennon. I understand you are upset at how everything transpired, from the draft day invite, etc, however, he has had every chance as the "anointed" starter to "win" the job. All he had to do was be average and he couldn't do that. He has looked up and down in practice and at TC, and looked down right horrible in the preseason. Now that he is feeling the heat at the position, his attitude/personality is coming out. He has never been good at competitions, which is odd based on him playing a sport for a living, but he threatened to quit at NC State, got beat out by Winston in TB, and is now getting beat out by Trubisky here. Hindsight being better now. It seems that the Bears did not have the draft plan in place when they signed Glennon on March 10th, they met with Trubisky after that. I believe that is when they came up with the plan to draft him if Trubisky was not selected by CLE at #1. The Glennon deal, especially the money, indicated that the Bears had a starter and didn't need one in the 1st. This set the Bears up to take Trubisky and shock the world (they shocked me). Also, I don't envision the Bears thought Glennon would be this bad and for Trubisky to be this good/confident so early. My vote is for Trubisky, and if Glennon has a hissy fit, you trade him and retain a bunch of salary for this year. You go with Trubsiky/Sanchez/Shaw.

I don't understand how working with the 2nd and 3rd team and standing on the sidelines is better than 1st team reps and playing on Sundays. I also don't know of a metric that measures QB readiness, if there is one, I would love to see it [Place in oven for one year or until completely cooked, then remove Franchise QB from oven]. You can make a case for any position in this situation and be right. Trubisky can hang on the bench for a year and still suck, or he can start Game 1, struggle, and never improve. I don't think there is any magic formula out there. I believe our running game and offensive line are built to support a young QB. He is not going to get wrecked on every play and should be able to learn on the fly as he builds a rapport with his receivers. It is not like Glennon has much on him there. It is hard to build that when you can't hit them. Another benefit to starting him early is you will know sooner than later if he is legit, and not spend years hoping. You can move on to the next one. If he sits and ends up struggling anyway, we wasted a few years for no reason.