Updated Draft Order

[adam]

1. Browns 0-15

2. Giants 2-12 (ARZ/WAS)

3. Colts 3-12 (HOU)

-----------------------

4. 49ers 4-10 (JAX/LAR)

5. Texans 4-10 (PIT/IND)

6. Bucs 4-11 (NO)

-----------------------

7. Broncos 5-10 (KC)

8. Jets 5-10 (NE)

9. Bears 5-10 (MIN)

 

*Updated 12/24

[Connorbear]

1. Browns 0-11

2. 49ers 1-9 (vs SEA)

3. Giants 2-9

4. Colts 3-8

5. Bears 3-8

6. Broncos 3-7 (at OAK)

---------------------------

7. Raiders 4-6 (vs DEN)

8. Cardinals 4-6 (vs JAX)

 

Unfortunately, we have the toughest SOS of the group and would lose the tiebreaker against every team. So a Broncos win keeps us in 5th. With so many needs, we need the best draft slot as possible.

 

I think we win 2 more games this season which will still give us a top 10 pick.

 

Peace

[AZ54]

https://www.burntorangenation.com/2017/11/2...texas-longhorns

 

Ready for him to be a Bear.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2745231...-regular-season

[jason]

https://www.burntorangenation.com/2017/11/2...texas-longhorns

 

Ready for him to be a Bear.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2745231...-regular-season

 

 

I don't like the fact that he came back to play, and is now essentially quitting on his team for the rest of the season. It's selfish and shows a lack of passion for football, IMO. Not only that, but enough with drafting OL with injury history (e.g. Carimi, Williams).

 

I'd rather see the Bears trade back and get McGlinchey. And given 6 QBs are drafted in the 1st round, the trade back should be ripe for the picking.

[AZ54]

I don't like the fact that he came back to play, and is now essentially quitting on his team for the rest of the season. It's selfish and shows a lack of passion for football, IMO. Not only that, but enough with drafting OL with injury history (e.g. Carimi, Williams).

 

I'd rather see the Bears trade back and get McGlinchey. And given 6 QBs are drafted in the 1st round, the trade back should be ripe for the picking.

 

It is an odd decision to play in a regular season game coming off that injury but then pass up a bowl game. Seeing how his 2nd game back was very poor it is quite possible he came back too early and now realizes he has to take the time off to get his knee healthy before the draft. If that's true, we can't really expect him to be talking about how bad his knee is right now because that also hurts his draft status. His agent, if he has any common sense, will tell him to hide behind the "no bowl game risk for me" statement.

 

---------

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/te...nking-nfl-fits/

His health. Williams injured his MCL and PCL against the Trojans on September 16 and though he returned in a big way with an excellent game against West Virginia, he had his worst game of his collegiate career the following week against Texas Tech.

---------

 

 

I've seen a couple games of McGlinchey and he just looks like he has really slow feet. Maybe I watched the wrong games and he's had better performances. I think he'll end up as a RT, and possibly get kicked inside, because he doesn't have the athleticism needed for LT. Trading back puts him on the radar late 1st early 2nd. Still, I don't want Massie 2.0 on our roster so I have more work to do to see if he fits what we need (IMHO).

[ASHKUM BEAR]

It is an odd decision to play in a regular season game coming off that injury but then pass up a bowl game. Seeing how his 2nd game back was very poor it is quite possible he came back too early and now realizes he has to take the time off to get his knee healthy before the draft. If that's true, we can't really expect him to be talking about how bad his knee is right now because that also hurts his draft status. His agent, if he has any common sense, will tell him to hide behind the "no bowl game risk for me" statement. --------- https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/news/te...nking-nfl-fits/ His health. Williams injured his MCL and PCL against the Trojans on September 16 and though he returned in a big way with an excellent game against West Virginia, he had his worst game of his collegiate career the following week against Texas Tech. --------- I've seen a couple games of McGlinchey and he just looks like he has really slow feet. Maybe I watched the wrong games and he's had better performances. I think he'll end up as a RT, and possibly get kicked inside, because he doesn't have the athleticism needed for LT. Trading back puts him on the radar late 1st early 2nd. Still, I don't want Massie 2.0 on our roster so I have more work to do to see if he fits what we need (IMHO).

 

Orlando Brown OLT has been flying up the draft boards as of late. He is massive and a force in the run game, but with his length he is tough to get around. I also like Mitch Hyatt out of Clemson. Hyatt would be similar to Leno Jr, both around 6'4 305 size, which they both only would suit playing LT. Hyatt has shut down some of the top pass rushing prospects.

 

Sitting at a top 6 pick right now, I would highly consider Brown to play RT/LT. It would be a hard choice because I would also like Chubb or Key to play the opposite OLB. The damning thought is this draft may go down the drains defensively if we do fire Fox. The new coach may switch the Bears back to a 4-3 front, meaning we will need Ends and ILBs.

 

 

[bowlingtwig]

Orlando Brown OLT has been flying up the draft boards as of late. He is massive and a force in the run game, but with his length he is tough to get around. I also like Mitch Hyatt out of Clemson. Hyatt would be similar to Leno Jr, both around 6'4 305 size, which they both only would suit playing LT. Hyatt has shut down some of the top pass rushing prospects.

 

 

Sitting at a top 6 pick right now, I would highly consider Brown to play RT/LT. It would be a hard choice because I would also like Chubb or Key to play the opposite OLB. The damning thought is this draft may go down the drains defensively if we do fire Fox. The new coach may switch the Bears back to a 4-3 front, meaning we will need Ends and ILBs.

 

That last sentence is what I'm afraid of. We've put in all this work towards a 3-4 to go back to a 4-3 would really suck and the defense as a whole world be completely blown up again. I'm ok with moving on from Fangio although I wish he could stay but more important the next DC runs something in the 3-4 tree

[adam]

1. Browns 0-11

2. 49ers 2-10 (HOU/TEN/JAX/LAR)

3. Giants 2-10 (DAL/PHI/ARZ/WAS)

4. Colts 3-9 (BUF/DEN/BAL/HOU)

5. Broncos 3-9 (NYJ/IND/WAS/KC)

6. Bears 3-9 (CIN/DET/CLE/MIN)

---------------------------

7. Texans 4-8 (SF/JAX/PIT/IND)

8. Bucs 4-8 (DET/ATL/CAR/NO)

 

*Updated 12/3

[ChileBear]

1. Browns 0-11

2. 49ers 2-10 (HOU/TEN/JAX/LAR)

3. Giants 2-9 (OAK/DAL/PHI/ARZ/WAS)

4. Colts 3-9 (BUF/DEN/BAL/HOU)

5. Broncos 3-9 (NYJ/IND/WAS/KC)

6. Bears 3-9 (CIN/DET/CLE/MIN)

---------------------------

7. Texans 4-8 (SF/JAX/PIT/IND)

8. Bucs 4-8 (DET/ATL/CAR/NO)

 

*Updated 12/3

Thank you Adam. Now I have something to ponder while Fox and Fangio tank this team.

[adam]

Bears win with Texans and Bucs losses slide us to 8th. SoS still kills us as we lose SOS tiebreaker to every team with the hardest schedule in the NFL. I believe the only team that can surpass us is by the end of the year are the Redskins.

 

1. Browns 0-12 (Doesn't matter) .521 SOS

2. Giants 2-10 (PHI/ARZ/WAS) .503 SOS

3. 49ers 3-10 (TEN/JAX/LAR) .485 SOS

4. Colts 3-10 (DEN/BAL/HOU) .515 SOS

5. Texans 4-9 (JAX/PIT/IND) .494 SOS

6. Broncos 4-9 (IND/WAS/KC) .509 SOS

7. Bucs 4-9 (ATL/CAR/NO) .533 SOS

8. Bears 4-9 (DET/CLE/MIN) .580 SOS

-------------------------------

9. Bengals 5-8 (MIN/DET/BAL) .444 SOS

10. Jets 5-8 (NO/LAC/NE) .488 SOS

11. Redskins 5-8 (ARZ/DEN/NYG) .574 SOS

12. Dolphins 5-7 (NE/BUF/KC/BUF) .529 SOS

 

*Updated 12/10/BUF) .542 SOS

 

*Updated 12/10

 

I hate to say this, but I think we end up picking 10th or 11th instead of 5th or 6th. I don't know if the Bengals or Jets will win another game, and I believe we will at least win one and maybe two.

[Stinger226]

I don't like the fact that he came back to play, and is now essentially quitting on his team for the rest of the season. It's selfish and shows a lack of passion for football, IMO. Not only that, but enough with drafting OL with injury history (e.g. Carimi, Williams).

 

I'd rather see the Bears trade back and get McGlinchey. And given 6 QBs are drafted in the 1st round, the trade back should be ripe for the picking.

if we will a couple of more wins, you can kiss that top 10 pick good bye and the chances of trading our pick is much less. There will be 4 QBs taken in the first round and if will all be in the top 10

[ASHKUM BEAR]

Bears win with Texans and Bucs losses slide us to 8th. SoS still kills us as we lose SOS tiebreaker to every team with the hardest schedule in the NFL. I believe the only team that can surpass us is by the end of the year are the Redskins.

 

1. Browns 0-12 (Doesn't matter) .535 SOS

2. Giants 2-10 (PHI/ARZ/WAS) .493 SOS

3. 49ers 3-10 (TEN/JAX/LAR) .500 SOS

4. Colts 3-10 (DEN/BAL/HOU) .521 SOS

5. Broncos 4-9 (IND/WAS/KC) .514 SOS

6. Bucs 4-9 (ATL/CAR/NO) .528 SOS

7. Texans 4-9 (JAX/PIT/IND) .535 SOS

8. Bears 4-9 (DET/CLE/MIN) .590 SOS

-------------------------------

9. Bengals 5-8 (MIN/DET/BAL) .451 SOS

10. Jets 5-8 (NO/LAC/NE) .493 SOS

11. Redskins 5-8 (ARZ/DEN/NYG) .583 SOS

12. Dolphins 5-7 (NE/BUF/KC/BUF) .542 SOS

 

*Updated 12/10

 

I hate to say this, but I think we end up picking 10th or 11th instead of 5th or 6th. I don't know if the Bengals or Jets will win another game, and I believe we will at least win one and maybe two.

I think we have a chance for one more win. A trade down would be best for this team, but it is looking dim. We are close to being decent, gonna need health, luck, and another good draft class.

[adam]

I think we have a chance for one more win. A trade down would be best for this team, but it is looking dim. We are close to being decent, gonna need health, luck, and another good draft class.

We are playing at Detroit on Saturday, then Cleveland and Minnesota. Minnesota has basically clinched the division and in the #2 seed with a bye as of this week.

 

We lost to Detroit on a Barth missed FG, so we can win that game. We should win against Cleveland, and even have a chance to end the season on a high note against Minnesota (who only beat us on a last minute FG). So I think we have a chance to win 2, and winning 1 or 3 would not surprise me. If we lose out, we would draft around #5 or #6, win 1 and draft #8 or #9, win 2, draft #10 or #11, and win out, we could draft as low as 14. So our range is 5-14 right now.

[adam]

I believe the only team that can surpass us is by the end of the year are the Redskins.

 

I just checked this and right now the 3 teams we have left (DET/CLE/MIN) have a combined 17-22 record, and the Redskins opponents (ARZ/DEN/NYG) have a combined 12-27 record. So we will finish the season with the toughest SOS and lose every tiebreaker.

 

[jason]

I just checked this and right now the 3 teams we have left (DET/CLE/MIN) have a combined 17-22 record, and the Redskins opponents (ARZ/DEN/NYG) have a combined 12-27 record. So we will finish the season with the toughest SOS and lose every tiebreaker.

 

That seems completely backwards. The rule should be the team with the toughest SOS gets the advantage in tie-breakers, not the other way around. I don't understand the reasoning of that decision.

[madlithuanian]

I think the logic is one would expect you to lose against a tough team. So losing, while playing an easier schedule grants you the better pick because it would seem you are a worse team than the squad that gets beat by better teams.

 

 

That seems completely backwards. The rule should be the team with the toughest SOS gets the advantage in tie-breakers, not the other way around. I don't understand the reasoning of that decision.

 

[adam]

That seems completely backwards. The rule should be the team with the toughest SOS gets the advantage in tie-breakers, not the other way around. I don't understand the reasoning of that decision.

It definitely sucks, because you end up getting punished twice, once with the tough schedule, and then with the lesser pick. However, that is how they determine the "better" team. I would rather see head to head first, then common opponents second, followed by SOS last.

[BearFan PHX]

That seems completely backwards. The rule should be the team with the toughest SOS gets the advantage in tie-breakers, not the other way around. I don't understand the reasoning of that decision.

 

If two teams finish with the same record, it stands to reason that the team who played an easier schedule and still lost the same number of games is inferior to a team that managed the same record against tougher opponents.

 

In other words, team X lost to the Patriots, and team Y lost to the Browns, so team X might be a better team and still lose, but we KNOW Y is terrible if they lost to the Browns.

 

Does it make sense now? And given that you didn't understand it, maybe ease up on telling us all how wrong we are about everything, since you didnt really even understand this.

[Mongo3451]

If two teams finish with the same record, it stands to reason that the team who played an easier schedule and still lost the same number of games is inferior to a team that managed the same record against tougher opponents.

 

In other words, team X lost to the Patriots, and team Y lost to the Browns, so team X might be a better team and still lose, but we KNOW Y is terrible if they lost to the Browns.

 

Does it make sense now? And given that you didn't understand it, maybe ease up on telling us all how wrong we are about everything, since you didnt really even understand this.

Lol, was that necessary?

[50england50]

If we win out at the end of the season and end up 7-9 isn’t that better for the team next year. There is nothing like building confidence and surely having a team ascending upwards will attract the better free agents. If Trubisky has actually turned the corner and is starting to read defense better wouldn’t players recognise that and want to come to us.

To build a sustainable winning culture it needs to be done via the draft but if Pace picks a good player whatever the position does it really matter if it’s the 6th or 16th pick.

Picking high hasn’t helped the Browns and picking low hasn’t exactly crippled the Patriots.

When you have a high level free agent with multiple teams wanting him and willing to pay a similar salary it will then come down to the ability to be successful i.e. winning.

The player I would like to target this year is Davante Adams. I wonder if Green Bay will pay him this year and I think he could be a no. 1 receiver. Does anyone else agree?

[McGowan]

If we win out at the end of the season and end up 7-9 isn’t that better for the team next year. There is nothing like building confidence and surely having a team ascending upwards will attract the better free agents. If Trubisky has actually turned the corner and is starting to read defense better wouldn’t players recognise that and want to come to us.

To build a sustainable winning culture it needs to be done via the draft but if Pace picks a good player whatever the position does it really matter if it’s the 6th or 16th pick.

Picking high hasn’t helped the Browns and picking low hasn’t exactly crippled the Patriots.

When you have a high level free agent with multiple teams wanting him and willing to pay a similar salary it will then come down to the ability to be successful i.e. winning.

The player I would like to target this year is Davante Adams. I wonder if Green Bay will pay him this year and I think he could be a no. 1 receiver. Does anyone else agree?

No. This had a chance to be a franchise-altering draft for the Bears, with a trade down with a team coming up to get a QB, they may have received 1-2 additional 1st rounders, plus other picks. It would have more than made up for what Pace gave up for Trubisky.........Now that is not going to happen, as the QBs will all be gone by the time the Bears pick. They are probably going to be picking in the 12-16 range now because I don't see them losing to Cleveland. 5-11 at worst(record wise) and 7-9 at best(or worst if you look at it that way) and with the strongest SOS, Bears will be picking at the end of that pack. Finishing 7-9 could have them picking as low as 18.

[bowlingtwig]

If we win out at the end of the season and end up 7-9 isn’t that better for the team next year. There is nothing like building confidence and surely having a team ascending upwards will attract the better free agents. If Trubisky has actually turned the corner and is starting to read defense better wouldn’t players recognise that and want to come to us.

To build a sustainable winning culture it needs to be done via the draft but if Pace picks a good player whatever the position does it really matter if it’s the 6th or 16th pick.

Picking high hasn’t helped the Browns and picking low hasn’t exactly crippled the Patriots.

When you have a high level free agent with multiple teams wanting him and willing to pay a similar salary it will then come down to the ability to be successful i.e. winning.

The player I would like to target this year is Davante Adams. I wonder if Green Bay will pay him this year and I think he could be a no. 1 receiver. Does anyone else agree?

You make a good point about finishing on an upswing and I would add that by winning out we would be in a position to still take 1 of the to receivers without considering a reach or without hoping we can find a willing trade partner.

 

Regarding Adams I don't believe he's a #1. But I do think he's very good #2. In GB he plays more of the slot receiver and kills LB's but what I love is that on broken plays you see him break off his route and finds a way to get open. He's extremely dangerous that way especially with a QB like Rodgers

[BearFan PHX]

Lol, was that necessary?

 

Probably not, but I am so sick of being lectured from above on the oversimplified sports writer truisms.

[jason]

If two teams finish with the same record, it stands to reason that the team who played an easier schedule and still lost the same number of games is inferior to a team that managed the same record against tougher opponents.

 

In other words, team X lost to the Patriots, and team Y lost to the Browns, so team X might be a better team and still lose, but we KNOW Y is terrible if they lost to the Browns.

 

Does it make sense now? And given that you didn't understand it, maybe ease up on telling us all how wrong we are about everything, since you didnt really even understand this.

 

Or maybe you could take a step back and kiss your own ass. I understood HOW it works, but when I said “I don’t understand the reasoning of that decision,” I meant “I don’t understand how they thought that decision was right considering it’s essentially double jeopardy,” as Adam pointed out.

[BearFan PHX]

Or maybe you could take a step back and kiss your own ass. I understood HOW it works, but when I said “I don’t understand the reasoning of that decision,” I meant “I don’t understand how they thought that decision was right considering it’s essentially double jeopardy,” as Adam pointed out.

 

LOL still my meaty friend.

 

The draft is set to try to provide the worst teams with the first shot at talent.

 

If you cant see that past your doublethink, then I think that just goes right along with my premise.