Fox & Co are a given...is Pace?

['TD']

I'll defend Trubisky against anyone, I really think he has potential to be the next Russell Wilson or better with what he has displayed so far. That's why I will also be ok with John Fox being let go.

 

I loved John Fox as a higher, as I thought he would be a good presence through the transition of a total roster rebuild. However, I feel he got lazy. His specialty is the D side of the ball, and Fangio has covered that well. Offensively, "Low Gains" has been inept. Fox hasn't shown the pull or interest in bringing in better offensive players, doesn't have the team prepared week to week, and the coaching decisions he makes are usually rather poor.

 

I'll also debate Pace's competence with anyone that feels the need. It's pointless, but the talent level of this roster is based on him. His best pro additions to the team IMHO were Hicks and Trevathan, which were players from his old team or his HC's old team. He has no true talent at evaluating talent.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Damning Pace for cutting Gould for example is a mistake. At the time he'd missed a bunch of kicks, seemed to be declining, and had a cap number WAY out of line for a kicker. It made sense to cut him. That the other player drew that missing card to fill the inside straight is too bad, but it was still the right bet at the time.

 

I don’t get the betting analogy but no matter. Sure, at the time it may have seemed reasonable (wouldn’t say wise) to cut Gould when they did. But many questioned it at the time and with many head-scratching moves since then (including bringing in and keeping Barth on the roster) we have to doubt Pace’s judgement. The fact that Gould has done pretty darn well since then only solidifies that doubt. Remember, Pace’s forte is supposed to be talent scouting right? (Speaking of Forte; Pace was the same one convinced Langford could replace Matt). I digress.

 

Same with Glennon and Trubisky. He went out and made sure we had a QB. He hedged bets, and spent draft picks. Ive heard people here say with certainty that Trubisky would be there at #3. But we know the Browns were trying to trade up, and we have heard that they were offering us packages too. I think if Trubisky blossoms next year, it won't look so bad.

 

That’s a mighty big IF that you and Pace are ‘betting’ on. And I have a hard time being convinced Glennon was perused by other NFL teams. Just like I don’t buy others were clamoring for Trubiisky.

 

Pace is doing fine. He's drafted quite a few players who will be very good for us, and identified players to extend from our roster. Soon we will have a team, something we haven't seen in a long time. I don't just mean that they will be good, I mean that they will have been developed from inside, the way the Packers, Patriots and other solid franchises do it.[\quote]

 

If in 2 or 3 years we are still terrible, then Pace will be judged. Right now, he's doing pretty well in my book.

I’m curious who these ‘quite a few players are’. I’m with TD that Pace could be a liability to this team.

[50england50]

I know the kicker situation has been poor at best but all things considered I’m glad we moved on from Gould and here are my reasons.

After the game he stated being released was a good thing because it meant he needed to look at is technique especially his foot placement. We are talking about one of the best paid kickers in the game on a contract that many were stating was over valued.

At the time he was considered a leader on the team. If you can’t work to be at the top of your game and you are losing us games by missing kicks then any team is going to look at changing kickers. By all accounts Barth was Fox’s man but as a team we went in the wrong direction but I would have still moved on from Gould because with the talent level on our roster we needed to try to spend money on players that would have more of an impact during the game i.e. playing more snaps unfortunately that hasn’t exactly worked out with some of our free agents not panning out.

[AZ54]

I don’t get the betting analogy but no matter. Sure, at the time it may have seemed reasonable (wouldn’t say wise) to cut Gould when they did. But many questioned it at the time and with many head-scratching moves since then (including bringing in and keeping Barth on the roster) we have to doubt Pace’s judgement. The fact that Gould has done pretty darn well since then only solidifies that doubt. Remember, Pace’s forte is supposed to be talent scouting right? (Speaking of Forte; Pace was the same one convinced Langford could replace Matt). I digress.

 

 

 

That’s a mighty big IF that you and Pace are ‘betting’ on. And I have a hard time being convinced Glennon was perused by other NFL teams. Just like I don’t buy others were clamoring for Trubiisky.

 

I’m curious who these ‘quite a few players are’. I’m with TD that Pace could be a liability to this team.

 

 

Pace was so convinced of Langford as a starter that he drafted Howard. He was so convinced of Howard that he drafted Cohen the next year, and signed Cunningham to challenge Langford.

 

Gould was missing extra points, and easy FGs, two seasons in a row. If he wasn't motivated by the $3 or $4million dollars the Bears were paying him to fix his issues then what was Pace supposed to do? Like I said to many Bears fans...when did you ever see him kickoff the ball that deep in (or even out of) the endzone like he was doing for the 49ers? Early in his career he was lucky if he got the kickoff to the goal line. At his best for the Bears we saw kickoffs 5yds deep in the endzone. Clearly he has done something different to find the kicking fountain of youth but it is odd that at his age (35) he can suddenly kick further than ever.

 

 

[Stinger226]

Pace was so convinced of Langford as a starter that he drafted Howard. He was so convinced of Howard that he drafted Cohen the next year, and signed Cunningham to challenge Langford.

 

Gould was missing extra points, and easy FGs, two seasons in a row. If he wasn't motivated by the $3 or $4million dollars the Bears were paying him to fix his issues then what was Pace supposed to do? Like I said to many Bears fans...when did you ever see him kickoff the ball that deep in (or even out of) the endzone like he was doing for the 49ers? Early in his career he was lucky if he got the kickoff to the goal line. At his best for the Bears we saw kickoffs 5yds deep in the endzone. Clearly he has done something different to find the kicking fountain of youth but it is odd that at his age (35) he can suddenly kick further than ever.

I never had a problem moving on from Gould, he was not good for two years, he even said in a interview that he had to get his shit together and now is showing the hard work by being relevant again.

What I didnt like is hanging on to Barth as long as we did when he wasn't good.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Pace was so convinced of Langford as a starter that he drafted Howard. He was so convinced of Howard that he drafted Cohen the next year, and signed Cunningham to challenge Langford.

 

Gould was missing extra points, and easy FGs, two seasons in a row. If he wasn't motivated by the $3 or $4million dollars the Bears were paying him to fix his issues then what was Pace supposed to do? Like I said to many Bears fans...when did you ever see him kickoff the ball that deep in (or even out of) the endzone like he was doing for the 49ers? Early in his career he was lucky if he got the kickoff to the goal line. At his best for the Bears we saw kickoffs 5yds deep in the endzone. Clearly he has done something different to find the kicking fountain of youth but it is odd that at his age (35) he can suddenly kick further than ever.

 

Addressing the Gould point first and taking into account what Stinger says after you. Skeptics like me will question whether it was a good idea to keep Gould or not especially considering how well he’s doing now (and has been) and then, as Stinger says, keep a player like Barth as long as they did. I have the benefit of ‘hindsight’ to make my judgement; he allegedly is a talent scout and should be able to predict better what will or won’t happen. Too bad if it’s not fair but I don’t get paid millions for my ‘opinion’.

 

So if I understand you correctly, you’re defending Pace on his picks as RBS? If that be the case; remember Fox is an RBC coach and would as soon draft RBs every year if he could. Pace usually pulls the trigger on those draft picks and personnel moves. He made a choice to draft Langford and let go Forte. He saw Langford struggle and realized he needed someone else and went with Howard the next year (a great pick in my book). But then, for whatever reason, reached into the shallow well of the D2 talent and found Cohen. (Im still not sold on him yet). Anyhow some will say he got Cohen because he thought of

Sproles and the success he had at Nola. Others will insist he (Cohen) should be catching more passes as a wideout or slot receiver. Not sure that is the solution either (Hester). But yes you bring up the fact that Cunningham is still on the team and that’s a valid and concerning point. Why is that?

[lemonej]

I know some may not want to hear this but, if Pace announces the changes in the organization then a 2yr extension may be in the offing (didn't this play out with Angelo?) because no coach will take the job on a 3yr contract. So if the rumblings are true that upper management suggested that Pace strongly consider Fox after he suddenly became available per Accorsi then Pace deserves a true chance to hire his on guy that you can hog tie him to. There is no way I believe that a guy who comes from the Saints organization wouldn't want something more along the lines of the organization that he came from. This play not to lose and hope the defense gives you field position is Fox's style every where he has been a head coach as well as running back by committee.

 

So we should brace ourselves come Jan 2 to see Pace work out his whole contract and then some whether we believe it to be right or wrong. Remember Teddy is still running this organization.

[bowlingtwig]

I know some may not want to hear this but, if Pace announces the changes in the organization then a 2yr extension may be in the offing (didn't this play out with Angelo?) because no coach will take the job on a 3yr contract. So if the rumblings are true that upper management suggested that Pace strongly consider Fox after he suddenly became available per Accorsi then Pace deserves a true chance to hire his on guy that you can hog tie him to. There is no way I believe that a guy who comes from the Saints organization wouldn't want something more along the lines of the organization that he came from. This play not to lose and hope the defense gives you field position is Fox's style every where he has been a head coach as well as running back by committee.

 

So we should brace ourselves come Jan 2 to see Pace work out his whole contract and then some whether we believe it to be right or wrong. Remember Teddy is still running this organization.

If he gets an extension I'll puke. He's got 2 more yrs on his current contract which is enough time to determine if we are at least headed in the right direction

[AZ54]

Addressing the Gould point first and taking into account what Stinger says after you. Skeptics like me will question whether it was a good idea to keep Gould or not especially considering how well he’s doing now (and has been) and then, as Stinger says, keep a player like Barth as long as they did. I have the benefit of ‘hindsight’ to make my judgement; he allegedly is a talent scout and should be able to predict better what will or won’t happen. Too bad if it’s not fair but I don’t get paid millions for my ‘opinion’.

 

So if I understand you correctly, you’re defending Pace on his picks as RBS? If that be the case; remember Fox is an RBC coach and would as soon draft RBs every year if he could. Pace usually pulls the trigger on those draft picks and personnel moves. He made a choice to draft Langford and let go Forte. He saw Langford struggle and realized he needed someone else and went with Howard the next year (a great pick in my book). But then, for whatever reason, reached into the shallow well of the D2 talent and found Cohen. (Im still not sold on him yet). Anyhow some will say he got Cohen because he thought of

Sproles and the success he had at Nola. Others will insist he (Cohen) should be catching more passes as a wideout or slot receiver. Not sure that is the solution either (Hester). But yes you bring up the fact that Cunningham is still on the team and that’s a valid and concerning point. Why is that?

 

FG Made %

Connor Barth 2014 94% 2015 82% 2016 78%

Robbie Gould 2014 75% 2015 84% 2016 83% preseason (cut)

 

Touchbacks/Returns

Connor Barth 2015 - 32/30 2016 - 26/35 2017 - 17/20

Robbie Gould 2014 21/28 2015 - 39/39 2016 - 19/32 2017 - data disappears?

 

If Barth is bad when his FG Made % is in the 80's then why wasn't Gould a problem when he was at 75% and then 84%, followed by a preseason at 83%? When he was cut nobody wanted Gould until Week 7 or so. Barth was not an upgrade, although his 2014 season indicated he might be, but he at least offered similar performance for a lot less money. I still have no issues with cutting him. Bears carried his bad performance for 2 seasons and granted him a 3rd effort to prove he could still kick and he failed.

 

My issue with Pace is that I wanted better competition for Barth this year and all we got was a guy who can ski.

 

----------

 

I'm not sure what you mean by RBS. I am defending Pace by saying that his actions (drafting RBs when he had Langford) speak to the fact that even though the word was Langford was the starter he wasn't satisfied that he could hold that role. Nor did he think Forte was worth multiyear deal worth ~$4mil/yr to hold that role and his performance for NYJ has proven that to be correct.

For a rebuilding team I believe this is the right path to take with RBs.

 

I have zero issues with Cunningham. He's played well, mostly on special teams but also on offense, when given opportunities and has earned his keep at just $855k for the year. Cohen has stolen many of his snaps and I'm ok with that too. What are you looking for out of a minimum wage 3rd RB? Or should we spend much more to put a guy on the bench?

 

Cohen gets criticized here and there but fans (and I'll include you in this) are impatient with rookies as they learn the ropes of the NFL. We are fortunate that Cohen is a far better player than Sproles was his first few years in the league.

 

2005 Sproles 8 rush 50 yds, 3 receptions on 4 targets for 10 yds. looks like Sproles was injured in 2006

2007 Sproles 37 rush 167 yds, 10 rec on 12 targets for 31 yds.

 

2017 Cohen 68 rush 267 yds, 39 rec on 53 targets for 311 yds.

 

I'm not saying Cohen is great but he is fulfilling the "Sproles" role very well for a rookie. He'll only get better.

 

(stats are from NFL.com or pro-football-reference.com https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play...S/SproDa00.htm)

[ASHKUM BEAR]

FG Made %

Connor Barth 2014 94% 2015 82% 2016 78%

Robbie Gould 2014 75% 2015 84% 2016 83% preseason (cut)

 

Touchbacks/Returns

Connor Barth 2015 - 32/30 2016 - 26/35 2017 - 17/20

Robbie Gould 2014 21/28 2015 - 39/39 2016 - 19/32 2017 - data disappears?

 

If Barth is bad when his FG Made % is in the 80's then why wasn't Gould a problem when he was at 75% and then 84%, followed by a preseason at 83%? When he was cut nobody wanted Gould until Week 7 or so. Barth was not an upgrade, although his 2014 season indicated he might be, but he at least offered similar performance for a lot less money. I still have no issues with cutting him. Bears carried his bad performance for 2 seasons and granted him a 3rd effort to prove he could still kick and he failed.

 

My issue with Pace is that I wanted better competition for Barth this year and all we got was a guy who can ski.

 

----------

 

I'm not sure what you mean by RBS. I am defending Pace by saying that his actions (drafting RBs when he had Langford) speak to the fact that even though the word was Langford was the starter he wasn't satisfied that he could hold that role. Nor did he think Forte was worth multiyear deal worth ~$4mil/yr to hold that role and his performance for NYJ has proven that to be correct.

For a rebuilding team I believe this is the right path to take with RBs.

 

I have zero issues with Cunningham. He's played well, mostly on special teams but also on offense, when given opportunities and has earned his keep at just $855k for the year. Cohen has stolen many of his snaps and I'm ok with that too. What are you looking for out of a minimum wage 3rd RB? Or should we spend much more to put a guy on the bench?

 

Cohen gets criticized here and there but fans (and I'll include you in this) are impatient with rookies as they learn the ropes of the NFL. We are fortunate that Cohen is a far better player than Sproles was his first few years in the league.

 

2005 Sproles 8 rush 50 yds, 3 receptions on 4 targets for 10 yds. looks like Sproles was injured in 2006

2007 Sproles 37 rush 167 yds, 10 rec on 12 targets for 31 yds.

 

2017 Cohen 68 rush 267 yds, 39 rec on 53 targets for 311 yds.

 

I'm not saying Cohen is great but he is fulfilling the "Sproles" role very well for a rookie. He'll only get better.

 

(stats are from NFL.com or pro-football-reference.com https://www.pro-football-reference.com/play...S/SproDa00.htm)

I love that we are finding RBs in the 4th and 5th rounds. No one has powers to see how a RB will turn out after a year or two, if that was the case Benson was supposed to put up Ricky Williams type numbers. Langford had a lot of the same traits as Forte, he sure looked the role early on, but I think the brass wanted to get away from that. By taking shots in the draft, we have found a guy this year every defense keys in on in Cohen and a top 5 RB in Howard. I would not be surprised if the Bears draft another RB this year or next in the 4th-7th rd to replace Cunningham, RBs have a short career life.

[jason]

Same with Glennon and Trubisky. He went out and made sure we had a QB. He hedged bets, and spent draft picks. Ive heard people here say with certainty that Trubisky would be there at #3. But we know the Browns were trying to trade up, and we have heard that they were offering us packages too. I think if Trubisky blossoms next year, it won't look so bad.

 

Still wrong according to common sense and the draft trade chart.

http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?...st&p=166749

 

No way Cleveland was trading up to #3. And nobody else had the fire power in terms of picks to do it either. Unless, of course, they were willing to pull a Ditka. In which case, the Bears were stupid to turn down such a deal.

 

 

[adam]

Still wrong according to common sense and the draft trade chart.

http://www.talkbears.com/forums/index.php?...st&p=166749

 

No way Cleveland was trading up to #3. And nobody else had the fire power in terms of picks to do it either. Unless, of course, they were willing to pull a Ditka. In which case, the Bears were stupid to turn down such a deal.

 

Why would the Bears have been concerned with Cleveland moving up to #3 when we had that pick? If they moved up, it would've been to #2, which would've cost even more draft capital, making that scenario almost impossible. Also, know Cleveland was using analytics guys, where more picks have statistically better odds, so there was no way in hell they were moving up to #2.

 

Once they passed on Trubisky at #1, we had him at #3. Now what we will never know is if SF really wanted Trubisky, thought we would take Solomon Thomas at #2, and thought they were in the perfect position to trade down and still get Trubisky. During the live video of the War Room, they believed we were taking Thomas, and shocked when we didn't. Of course, they would never publicly say that, but that is the only scenario where the Bears made the right choice (if SF wanted Trubisky).

 

Luckily for us it wasn't a huge amount to give up and we got some back when we moved down in the 2nd. If we make one trade down in April, that trade will be a wash.

[AZ54]

Why would the Bears have been concerned with Cleveland moving up to #3 when we had that pick? If they moved up, it would've been to #2, which would've cost even more draft capital, making that scenario almost impossible. Also, know Cleveland was using analytics guys, where more picks have statistically better odds, so there was no way in hell they were moving up to #2.

 

Once they passed on Trubisky at #1, we had him at #3. Now what we will never know is if SF really wanted Trubisky, thought we would take Solomon Thomas at #2, and thought they were in the perfect position to trade down and still get Trubisky. During the live video of the War Room, they believed we were taking Thomas, and shocked when we didn't. Of course, they would never publicly say that, but that is the only scenario where the Bears made the right choice (if SF wanted Trubisky).

 

Luckily for us it wasn't a huge amount to give up and we got some back when we moved down in the 2nd. If we make one trade down in April, that trade will be a wash.

 

Because Cleveland called them to inquire about trading up for the 3rd pick. In the last month before the draft there were many rumors that a serious debate was going on within the Cleveland organization because quite a few wanted Trubisky #1 overall. The logical reason for Cleveland to trade up was to get the QB they most valued. By all accounts that was clearly Trubisky. People dismissed all the talk as pre-draft chatter.

 

Now if Pace said no immediately to their offer and told them he wanted to wait and see who was available then he was showing his hand and Cleveland knows he likely wants Trubisky. In that case it was quite likely Cleveland calls SF and trades up for #2. Pace was adamant he wanted Trubisky, clearly evidenced by the great lengths he went to keep the Bears interest quiet, so he kept Cleveland on one phone line negotiating a trade down deal while on the other phone line he called SF and traded up for #2.

 

Draft analytics killed the Cleveland front office in the end but the statement they didn't have the draft capital to trade up to #2 when we know they were already willing to trade up to #3 overall is ridiculous. They had plenty of picks to give SF between 2017 and 2018. People said Houston didn't have the draft capital to trade up for Watson. If Cleveland was so married to their analytics then why were they on the phone trying to trade up to #3? No one was worth trading up for.

 

We know they were trying to trade up for someone. If it was just a question of Cleveland taking any one of the top 3 QBs because their grades were similar then why did they trade away from Watson? Why didn't they trade up and grab Mahomes? Or since we took Trubisky and SF took Thomas why didn't they trade into #4 overall to get whoever else it was they coveted because they were still on the board and that trade to #4 or #5 overall was cheaper than the move to #3. They passed twice on Kizer late in the 1st Rd so clearly he wasn't high on their board.

 

You are right the picks we gave up make no difference. One thing we know from teams with very good QBs...they win a lot. If Pace is right it's a fact he's was extremely unlikely to find a player, or players with those picks who can make as much positive difference to the team. If he's wrong,

then he'd have been just as wrong and likely to get fired for not finding his Cutler replacement in 3 years. If Trubisky has a couple more games like today's then that deal, as well as the big trades KC and Houston made for QBs, will be talked about non-stop leading up to the draft.

[jason]

Why would the Bears have been concerned with Cleveland moving up to #3 when we had that pick? If they moved up, it would've been to #2, which would've cost even more draft capital, making that scenario almost impossible. Also, know Cleveland was using analytics guys, where more picks have statistically better odds, so there was no way in hell they were moving up to #2.

 

Once they passed on Trubisky at #1, we had him at #3. Now what we will never know is if SF really wanted Trubisky, thought we would take Solomon Thomas at #2, and thought they were in the perfect position to trade down and still get Trubisky. During the live video of the War Room, they believed we were taking Thomas, and shocked when we didn't. Of course, they would never publicly say that, but that is the only scenario where the Bears made the right choice (if SF wanted Trubisky).

 

Luckily for us it wasn't a huge amount to give up and we got some back when we moved down in the 2nd. If we make one trade down in April, that trade will be a wash.

 

If it's #2 or #3, it's still a dream scenario. We agree on everything.

[jason]

Because Cleveland called them to inquire about trading up for the 3rd pick. In the last month before the draft there were many rumors that a serious debate was going on within the Cleveland organization because quite a few wanted Trubisky #1 overall. The logical reason for Cleveland to trade up was to get the QB they most valued. By all accounts that was clearly Trubisky. People dismissed all the talk as pre-draft chatter.

 

Now if Pace said no immediately to their offer and told them he wanted to wait and see who was available then he was showing his hand and Cleveland knows he likely wants Trubisky. In that case it was quite likely Cleveland calls SF and trades up for #2. Pace was adamant he wanted Trubisky, clearly evidenced by the great lengths he went to keep the Bears interest quiet, so he kept Cleveland on one phone line negotiating a trade down deal while on the other phone line he called SF and traded up for #2.

 

Draft analytics killed the Cleveland front office in the end but the statement they didn't have the draft capital to trade up to #2 when we know they were already willing to trade up to #3 overall is ridiculous. They had plenty of picks to give SF between 2017 and 2018. People said Houston didn't have the draft capital to trade up for Watson. If Cleveland was so married to their analytics then why were they on the phone trying to trade up to #3? No one was worth trading up for.

 

We know they were trying to trade up for someone. If it was just a question of Cleveland taking any one of the top 3 QBs because their grades were similar then why did they trade away from Watson? Why didn't they trade up and grab Mahomes? Or since we took Trubisky and SF took Thomas why didn't they trade into #4 overall to get whoever else it was they coveted because they were still on the board and that trade to #4 or #5 overall was cheaper than the move to #3. They passed twice on Kizer late in the 1st Rd so clearly he wasn't high on their board.

 

You are right the picks we gave up make no difference. One thing we know from teams with very good QBs...they win a lot. If Pace is right it's a fact he's was extremely unlikely to find a player, or players with those picks who can make as much positive difference to the team. If he's wrong,

then he'd have been just as wrong and likely to get fired for not finding his Cutler replacement in 3 years. If Trubisky has a couple more games like today's then that deal, as well as the big trades KC and Houston made for QBs, will be talked about non-stop leading up to the draft.

 

I just simply can't agree with the bolded. Realistically, ANY team has the draft capital to move up if they are willing to mortgage their future for a player. So, sure, technically you're right. The Browns could have traded the rest of their 2017 draft, and then something significant in 2018, to move up to #2 or #3. Sure, it's possible. But so is winning the powerball. Long story short, what's possible is not probable. They weren't going to give up that much to move back into the top 3.

[bowlingtwig]

Are we seriously still arguing about this some 7 months later. All of this is simple. If trubisky pans out and becomes the franchise QB that pace envisioned it was a fantastic move. If trubisky doesn't pan out then pace will be heavily criticized. Will lose his job likely to never become a gm again. Well unless Cleveland calls lol

[jason]

Are we seriously still arguing about this some 7 months later. All of this is simple. If trubisky pans out and becomes the franchise QB that pace envisioned it was a fantastic move. If trubisky doesn't pan out then pace will be heavily criticized. Will lose his job likely to never become a gm again. Well unless Cleveland calls lol

 

It's a Bears message board. It's a part of the the Trubisky trade. Of course we're still talking about it. We will always talk about it, especially when the near impossibility of Cleveland trading up to #2 comes up. And that's regardless of whether or not Trubisky turns out to be a stud.

 

 

[Chitownhustla]

Not being a fan may a bit harsh. I actually meant it more to reflect where he was picked. Which really isn’t his doing. I’m still stale to his play. Haven’t seen anything ... yet ... to make me feel warm and fuzzy to call him out ‘future’.

 

Did your fan meter improve after this game? Its only one game but I loved what I saw.

[Alaskan Grizzly]

Did your fan meter improve after this game? Its only one game but I loved what I saw.

 

I was impressed. The same could be said about Cutler... occasionally. Sometimes he would be good and I’d love it...then all too often he’d be bad. I’m not saying I see the same traits but I believe in sustained and continued performance before I’ll buy in. That being said; the whole team came to play. The line, as patchwork as it was, Kyle Fuller (talk about sporadic play), the D overall even with all the holes it had, Shaheen, Kendall Wright and others all significantly contributed. To me this looked like a team that had finally met its potential. Whether or not that’s true is yet to be seen.

[bowlingtwig]

It's a Bears message board. It's a part of the the Trubisky trade. Of course we're still talking about it. We will always talk about it, especially when the near impossibility of Cleveland trading up to #2 comes up. And that's regardless of whether or not Trubisky turns out to be a stud.

I get that it's part of the trade. I'm sorry but how do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt what Cleveland was going to do. All kinds of analyst have said this and that about Cleveland but over the past 10+ yes Cleveland has taught me 1 thing. They are unpredictable in the best of situations. The simple fact is you don't actually know what any team was going to do unless your in that's teams war room. Now I take it your not in there war room either. Which means we are all just guessing to best of our knowledge. While facts remain that if trubisky becomes that franchise guy it was very much worth that trade cost. If trubisky becomes elite I would have given up more and still been happy. How long have we been starving for a franchise QB? Most of all of our lives. Sad but true. If he didn't pan it then we can all question it. Overall I'm not a big pace fan but in this case I applaud him for having the cahones to move up to guarantee he gets his guy. Not time will tell if it works out and I'm for one excited because I like what I'm seeing from trubisky

[jason]

I get that it's part of the trade. I'm sorry but how do you know beyond a shadow of a doubt what Cleveland was going to do. All kinds of analyst have said this and that about Cleveland but over the past 10+ yes Cleveland has taught me 1 thing. They are unpredictable in the best of situations. The simple fact is you don't actually know what any team was going to do unless your in that's teams war room. Now I take it your not in there war room either. Which means we are all just guessing to best of our knowledge. While facts remain that if trubisky becomes that franchise guy it was very much worth that trade cost. If trubisky becomes elite I would have given up more and still been happy. How long have we been starving for a franchise QB? Most of all of our lives. Sad but true. If he didn't pan it then we can all question it. Overall I'm not a big pace fan but in this case I applaud him for having the cahones to move up to guarantee he gets his guy. Not time will tell if it works out and I'm for one excited because I like what I'm seeing from trubisky

 

 

Of course it’s a possibility that Cleveland, because they are Cleveland, decided to eschew all other common sense, draft value charts, common practice, and the future of their franchise. But that seems crazy even for them.

[bowlingtwig]

Of course it’s a possibility that Cleveland, because they are Cleveland, decided to eschew all other common sense, draft value charts, common practice, and the future of their franchise. But that seems crazy even for them.

I honestly don't think it's crazy talk for them. We've all seen them so dumber stuff

[Chitownhustla]

I honestly don't think it's crazy talk for them. We've all seen them so dumber stuff

 

Trubisky was Pace's guy....He got his guy. The rest doesn't matter. It's done, if Pace was right he will go down in the history books as the GM that finally figured out the QB position for the Bears. If he was wrong....someone else already said he wont get another GM job.

[bowlingtwig]

Trubisky was Pace's guy....He got his guy. The rest doesn't matter. It's done, if Pace was right he will go down in the history books as the GM that finally figured out the QB position for the Bears. If he was wrong....someone else already said he wont get another GM job.

Exactly what I've been saying

[Lucky Luciano]

Of course it’s a possibility that Cleveland, because they are Cleveland, decided to eschew all other common sense, draft value charts, common practice, and the future of their franchise. But that seems crazy even for them.

 

i really don't see it as being that far out of the realm of possibility that cleveland would move up and pick a considered franchise qb along with the touted best player in the draft (a defensive pass rusher).

 

why wouldn't they? there are so many configurations for them to move up and make that trade. if you get a franchise defensive player AND a franchise QB in one draft how is that a bad thing? they had plenty of ammo to make drastic trades up without doing a ditka. no one would predict cleveland was going to turn it around in one year so their trade bait was high picks from the 2018 draft also.

 

i would do it.