Jump to content

Trubisky Rumor


AZ54

Recommended Posts

NFL Network Charlie Casserly says he's hearing quite a bit about the Bears liking Trubisky. This is the start of the disinformation period before the draft but it's also about the time last year when we first started hearing the Bears liked Leonard Floyd. I thought all that was smoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I just can't see the Bears taking a QB at #3. Fox and Pace need to start turning this franchise around. I would be shocked if they used the first pick on a player that would be least likely to help this team this year.

 

One other thing I don't really get about the people who want a QB at #3: I keep hearing the argument that the Bears won't be picking at #3 again, so they have to take advantage and take the QB. But it seems to me that either (a) Glennon will do well, which will lessen the need for a QB, or (2) Glennon will do poorly, in which case we're probably picking high again next year. I personally don't think 4 QBs are going in the first round, so I think you take an impact player at #3 (if you can't trade down), and then target a QB in the second round or trade back into the back of the first round if a guy you love is there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Garrett at #3 would be a dream come true.

 

No doubt, if Cleveland is that stupid which we know they possibly are. And if SF some how ops to pass as well, it's a literal no brainer that you take Garrett at #3. I doubt it happens though. Cleveland has the picks to trade for an additional later first round pick in order to take Garrett at #1 and taking Trubisky later in the first.

 

In the same vein we could stay at 3 and take BPA, and trade up from our 2nd (36th) pick into the mid/lower first round and take a QB there. Nabbing a Defensive stud at 3, and getting a QB to groom behind Glennon would be a good start. We could even trade down a few slots from 3 still get a stud, and pick up extra picks. There definitely will be options available especially depending who's there at 3 and Pace's phone starts ringing. I wish the draft were this weekend 15 more days. This is when the rumor mill starts going nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just can't see the Bears taking a QB at #3. Fox and Pace need to start turning this franchise around. I would be shocked if they used the first pick on a player that would be least likely to help this team this year.

 

If Pace & Fox think any of the QBs are franchise Hall of Fame types, they'd be nuts not to take him at #3.

 

I dont think any of them are, but the idea that someone needs to play right away to turn the team around doesnt make sense. They need to do whatever they think will be in the long term interest of the team, thats what all this rebuilding has been about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Pace & Fox think any of the QBs are franchise Hall of Fame types, they'd be nuts not to take him at #3.

 

I dont think any of them are, but the idea that someone needs to play right away to turn the team around doesnt make sense. They need to do whatever they think will be in the long term interest of the team, thats what all this rebuilding has been about.

 

Agreed. And the argument about picking a QB early this year versus next is extremely valid. Why else do you think they set up Glennon's contract with an 'escape clause' like they did? If they decide a QB is worthy of the #3 pick this year then they can get him now and either use him if need or have him ready next year if need. Presumably Glennon will do 'just enough' not to lose; ergo be a game manager where he could theoretically become a backup next year or off the team entirely. If he bombs out and we need a younger QB who has had time in the system, we're already set. I for one don't see the team playing less than .500 because if they do, I don't see John Fox (and quite possibly Pace) returning next year.

 

Of course all that being said you have to look at trends and who has the most influence on the Bears staff. Fox and Fangio are defensive minded guys. Both have led teams (or parts of teams) to Super Bowls. One has been and is an HC. The other has been considered a few times as an HC. His (Fangios) defenses have a history of dominating in the past. The same can't be said about Loggains and his offensive acumen. The 'trend' factor plays in that more and more teams are putting more money on the defense. OLBs and pass rushers are fast becoming the hot commodity (thanks to Von Miller). However I don't think that guarantees we pick an OLB/pass rusher or Dlineman first (already did that last year) but I would be willing to bet that first pick will be a defensive player.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with drafting a player at 3 to sit behind a starter! I say try and trade back in round one for the red shirt player so you can get the 5th year option. With Glennon's contract and next years' more talented QB class are also a good situation with the prospects of the team being that bad it would be in line with the long term goals of the team to take a prospect this year and go for a franchise QB next year like Tampa did with Glennon and Winston. IMO you go impact at 3 and try to get back in round 1 or take a player in round 2 or 3 to learn the position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with drafting a player at 3 to sit behind a starter! I say try and trade back in round one for the red shirt player so you can get the 5th year option. With Glennon's contract and next years' more talented QB class are also a good situation with the prospects of the team being that bad it would be in line with the long term goals of the team to take a prospect this year and go for a franchise QB next year like Tampa did with Glennon and Winston. IMO you go impact at 3 and try to get back in round 1 or take a player in round 2 or 3 to learn the position.

 

I think it just matters what they think of the QB prospects. I think you're probably right that they dont value any of them that highly, and wont take a QB at #3, but if they DO think any of these guys is the man, then having Glennon on the squad shouldnt make any difference to the pick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't agree with drafting a player at 3 to sit behind a starter! I say try and trade back in round one for the red shirt player so you can get the 5th year option. With Glennon's contract and next years' more talented QB class are also a good situation with the prospects of the team being that bad it would be in line with the long term goals of the team to take a prospect this year and go for a franchise QB next year like Tampa did with Glennon and Winston. IMO you go impact at 3 and try to get back in round 1 or take a player in round 2 or 3 to learn the position.

 

I keep hearing that 'next years' QB class is supposed to be better. I have to ask, who are these prospects and what have they done to make them that much better?

 

The guy I like, Watson, played pretty much consistent through the last two years AND did that while playing Alabama in the last two championships. You realize how many of those same Alabama players will probably be picked in the first round? And how many more will be starting in the NFL next year?

 

Who right now, in the college ranks is doing that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just can't see the Bears taking a QB at #3.

 

Agree. It would be stupid to pay Glennon all that cash and then pick a QB at #3. You're essentially saying, "Hey first rounder, you're worthy of the #3 pick in the entire draft, which means you're one of the best players in the nation, but we don't think you can beat out a multi-year NFL backup or help us this year."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Pace & Fox think any of the QBs are franchise Hall of Fame types, they'd be nuts not to take him at #3.

 

I dont think any of them are, but the idea that someone needs to play right away to turn the team around doesnt make sense. They need to do whatever they think will be in the long term interest of the team, thats what all this rebuilding has been about.

 

If they truly thought that, then they were nuts for signing Glennon to the big deal. The could have stuck with mediocre guys and journeymen, anticipating a #3 QB pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep hearing that 'next years' QB class is supposed to be better. I have to ask, who are these prospects and what have they done to make them that much better?

 

The guy I like, Watson, played pretty much consistent through the last two years AND did that while playing Alabama in the last two championships. You realize how many of those same Alabama players will probably be picked in the first round? And how many more will be starting in the NFL next year?

 

Who right now, in the college ranks is doing that?

 

Agree. That's why I'm hoping he drops like many are saying, and he's there late first or early second. That's where the Bears should really be targeting him (or Kizer).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep hearing that 'next years' QB class is supposed to be better. I have to ask, who are these prospects and what have they done to make them that much better?

 

The guy I like, Watson, played pretty much consistent through the last two years AND did that while playing Alabama in the last two championships. You realize how many of those same Alabama players will probably be picked in the first round? And how many more will be starting in the NFL next year?

 

Who right now, in the college ranks is doing that?

I don't buy the next QB class stuff either. Last year at this time we were told how Brad Kaaya was going to be the next best thing and look were he's projected. I agree there will be a lot more higher end prospects because many who were thought of entering the draft this year decided to return to school. If they think one of these QBs taken at 3 will be better than what we can draft at 15 next year then maybe they draft one.

If the draft pick takes time to develop before throwing him in, thats fine too. The goal is long term success which might mean it takes a Bullard a year to adjust. When they took Kevin White, I think it was known he was going to take some time before becoming a starter. Quarterbacks should be expected to have the longest adjustment period because they have to learn so much more at the most critical position (mechanics, playbook, protections, etc)

Now, who do we take at 3??? It is a cluster and whoever gets the pick right will be king! Lol Go safe or go big it's a guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree. It would be stupid to pay Glennon all that cash and then pick a QB at #3. You're essentially saying, "Hey first rounder, you're worthy of the #3 pick in the entire draft, which means you're one of the best players in the nation, but we don't think you can beat out a multi-year NFL backup or help us this year."

 

Cash really isn't an issue with the Bears. We've spent a ton, have a ton we could still spend, and have even more to spend next year.

 

 

While i don't think we take a QB at #3, it is possible, and if we do it's also possible we just declare, 'You ain't playing this year.' None of the QB's are ready so i have no problem with that. And we can easily dump mike Glennon after this year. No big deal

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NFL Network Charlie Casserly says he's hearing quite a bit about the Bears liking Trubisky. This is the start of the disinformation period before the draft but it's also about the time last year when we first started hearing the Bears liked Leonard Floyd. I thought all that was smoke.

 

Does anyone really believe the browns are considering Trubisky? This is like the worst smoke screen ever.

 

The only thing this story does for me is point to the #1 consensus QB. We may finally have a clear front-runner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy the next QB class stuff either. Last year at this time we were told how Brad Kaaya was going to be the next best thing and look were he's projected. I agree there will be a lot more higher end prospects because many who were thought of entering the draft this year decided to return to school. If they think one of these QBs taken at 3 will be better than what we can draft at 15 next year then maybe they draft one.

If the draft pick takes time to develop before throwing him in, thats fine too. The goal is long term success which might mean it takes a Bullard a year to adjust. When they took Kevin White, I think it was known he was going to take some time before becoming a starter. Quarterbacks should be expected to have the longest adjustment period because they have to learn so much more at the most critical position (mechanics, playbook, protections, etc)

Now, who do we take at 3??? It is a cluster and whoever gets the pick right will be king! Lol Go safe or go big it's a guess.

 

Something I saw yesterday on NFL network said there is more 1st round talent than there are actual 1st round picks. I didn't hear if that was position or defense/offense specific; but given how potentially early the Bears will pick in the first two rounds we could certainly end up with quality players in those first two rounds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cash really isn't an issue with the Bears. We've spent a ton, have a ton we could still spend, and have even more to spend next year.

 

 

While i don't think we take a QB at #3, it is possible, and if we do it's also possible we just declare, 'You ain't playing this year.' None of the QB's are ready so i have no problem with that. And we can easily dump mike Glennon after this year. No big deal

 

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something I saw yesterday on NFL network said there is more 1st round talent than there are actual 1st round picks. I didn't hear if that was position or defense/offense specific; but given how potentially early the Bears will pick in the first two rounds we could certainly end up with quality players in those first two rounds.

 

Yep. That absolutely helps us in round 2. The problem is, while there is an over-abundance of round one talent, there is a void of top tier talent. Which means it sucks to have the #3 pick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't buy the next QB class stuff either. Last year at this time we were told how Brad Kaaya was going to be the next best thing and look were he's projected. I agree there will be a lot more higher end prospects because many who were thought of entering the draft this year decided to return to school. If they think one of these QBs taken at 3 will be better than what we can draft at 15 next year then maybe they draft one.

 

But can't you make the same argument about the guys who came out early this year? I mean, Kaaya looked like a stud as a freshman and sophomore, then didn't progress as a junior and now he looks like a mid-round pick. But no one has a problem with Kizer or Trubisky as first round picks, yet another disappointing year by Kizer or another 13 games to pick apart for Trubisky might have landed them the same fate. And would a third year of Mahomes playing sandlot football with mechanics all over the place still look so endearing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But can't you make the same argument about the guys who came out early this year? I mean, Kaaya looked like a stud as a freshman and sophomore, then didn't progress as a junior and now he looks like a mid-round pick. But no one has a problem with Kizer or Trubisky as first round picks, yet another disappointing year by Kizer or another 13 games to pick apart for Trubisky might have landed them the same fate. And would a third year of Mahomes playing sandlot football with mechanics all over the place still look so endearing?

 

I don't want those guys, I want Watson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cash really isn't an issue with the Bears. We've spent a ton, have a ton we could still spend, and have even more to spend next year.

 

 

While i don't think we take a QB at #3, it is possible, and if we do it's also possible we just declare, 'You ain't playing this year.' None of the QB's are ready so i have no problem with that. And we can easily dump mike Glennon after this year. No big deal

 

You're right about the cash not being an issue, but that's not a sound way to run a franchise. You don't spend huge money on someone you plan on sitting on the bench just because you have extra cash.

 

If the Bears pick a QB at #3 this year, I'll be very upset. It will be a bad move for a variety of reasons, one of which is the Glennon signing. A #3 pick should be a person that comes in and start immediately. If it's a non-QB, that person should make an immediate impact because, presumably, they're better than the player at the position at which they were drafted. If it's a QB, you want that guy in immediately to get as many reps and knowledge as possible. Sure, there are some guys who have sat for a few years and have become very good, but the general consensus is that a 1st round QB needs to get in and get the reps.

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...