Jump to content

Prediction Time!


dawhizz

Recommended Posts

So, with Cutler and a huge contract, a porous OL, a new defensive scheme with tons of unknowns, definite holes at ILB and S if not also NT and 3-4 DE, an absence at WR now that Marshall is gone, and empirical evidence that trading up is a bad idea in terms of overall value added, yet you STILL want to trade up to get the second rated QB (and some question that because of the scheme) of a weak QB class?

 

That's insane.

Yea, I think Mariotta will turn out to be a great QB down the road. The Bears won't win when Cutler is on the team, too many holes, but Mariota can be groomed behind him ala Rodgers (another second rated QB) or he can start this year if Cutler is involved in a deal.

 

The OL has question marks at Center and RT. Neither of which is worth a 1st round pick. Defensively, they have soo many damn players they are trying to find the position for in the front 7, they may be fine there. They may not, just no way to tell really. There's not a Safety I want to see drafted at 7, and their is no reason to bring in a WR until you have your QB.

 

If the Mariotta falls to the skins, I'm not as certain that the Titans will get a good enough trade for the #2 over all pick, and I see the Bears have traded the Skins, I will be jumping for joy. If I see it at 2, despite what they give up, I'll be excited still because I think the Bears will have the best QB prospect in my time as a fan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not purely Cutler hate. If Mariota was taken first for some reason, I wouldn't want to see the Bears trade up for him. This is purely on what I think Mariota can be.

 

Well John Gruden agrees with you so you're not alone. It would be a complete reboot of the team which some might argue is what we need. I'd hoped for something a little less painful.

 

We'll know everything we need to know in a few short hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well John Gruden agrees with you so you're not alone. It would be a complete reboot of the team which some might argue is what we need. I'd hoped for something a little less painful.

 

We'll know everything we need to know in a few short hours.

what I meant to say is I don't want to see the Bears to trade up for Winston, if Mariota is taken. I just believe in mariota, not a give up a ransom to get someone other than Cutler.

 

Yea, Gruden has worked him out in his camps, had him running plays and worked with him. Saw a video on it a week or 2 back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, with Cutler and a huge contract, a porous OL, a new defensive scheme with tons of unknowns, definite holes at ILB and S if not also NT and 3-4 DE, an absence at WR now that Marshall is gone, and empirical evidence that trading up is a bad idea in terms of overall value added, yet you STILL want to trade up to get the second rated QB (and some question that because of the scheme) of a weak QB class?

 

That's insane.

 

Although I'm not a huge fan of Maiotta's I'm lesser of Cutler's, especially the amount of money he costs...and he just turned 32...and he hasn't proven anything worthy of his contract....despite all the OC's/Coaches he's played for...and all the catering he's had thus far....yadda yadda

 

The porous OL you always talk about is something, in your opinion, that never goes away. But just two years ago, when they managed to stay healthy, they didn't do all that bad. I'd rather not re-tread that path. Realistically though, in a 1st round such as this year's, can you make more difference in drafting a top notch OLman or a blue chip prospect like Mariotta? While getting rid of a money laden "non-franchise QB" in Cutler?

 

But before I commit myself to this argument, I would contend that there are other lesser-known QB's in the draft (Hundley, Petty, Grayson) who could be just as intriguing to replace Cutler.

 

I'm not sure the argument could be made there are numerous holes in the defense to fill with all the prospective FA's that were signed and not a few of them possibly sticking. Like the OL, I don't see one player in the draft making that much an impact. Unless its at Safety where I think Collins could be a huge long term difference maker.

 

I wouldn't deem it "insane" an idea, just not probable...unfortunately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what I meant to say is I don't want to see the Bears to trade up for Winston, if Mariota is taken. I just believe in mariota, not a give up a ransom to get someone other than Cutler.

 

Yea, Gruden has worked him out in his camps, had him running plays and worked with him. Saw a video on it a week or 2 back.

 

Yes thank you for clarifying. I was almost going to label you insane. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I'm not a huge fan of Maiotta's I'm lesser of Cutler's, especially the amount of money he costs...and he just turned 32...and he hasn't proven anything worthy of his contract....despite all the OC's/Coaches he's played for...and all the catering he's had thus far....yadda yadda

 

The porous OL you always talk about is something, in your opinion, that never goes away. But just two years ago, when they managed to stay healthy, they didn't do all that bad. I'd rather not re-tread that path. Realistically though, in a 1st round such as this year's, can you make more difference in drafting a top notch OLman or a blue chip prospect like Mariotta? While getting rid of a money laden "non-franchise QB" in Cutler?

 

But before I commit myself to this argument, I would contend that there are other lesser-known QB's in the draft (Hundley, Petty, Grayson) who could be just as intriguing to replace Cutler.

 

I'm not sure the argument could be made there are numerous holes in the defense to fill with all the prospective FA's that were signed and not a few of them possibly sticking. Like the OL, I don't see one player in the draft making that much an impact. Unless its at Safety where I think Collins could be a huge long term difference maker.

 

I wouldn't deem it "insane" an idea, just not probable...unfortunately.

 

Make no illusions; you're a Cutler hater. And giving up all that was mentioned originally would be insane.

 

As for the other stuff, the OL was good one year. One. Otherwise the two on the left have aged and degraded, and Mills got much worse. There is a reason Forte always gets hit in the backfield. Drafting a blue chip OL like Peat or Scherff would almost certainly improve the offense byconsiderable margins. Scherff next to Long would be a runner's dream, and something defenses would have to overload against.

 

I have said i dont like or want DL or OLB, but there is certainly uncertainty. And the flaws at S are as you noted; I still think Collins would make a huge impact.

 

Agreed about the second tier QBs. If the Bears want a QB, they should look outside of the 1st.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My guess is Vic Beasley. Because with Ray and Gregory hurting their stock, Cooper, White, Fowler and Williams go along with the QBs. Beasley is highly rated and too high to pass as bpa. If they can trade down, then it is a few spots down only.

 

Put me down also for Vic Beasley. Of course I'm convinced we are targeting an edge rusher (although us shopping the black unicorn gives me pause.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...