The "I've seen enough, start Trubisky" Thread

[mmmc_35]

Ken Mastrole looked great roo

[karhu]

Some third-string preseason rookie QB debuts:

2/7, 7 yards, 0 TD, 0 Int
3/4, 28 yards, 0 TD, 0 Int
11/23, 169 yards, 0 TD, 1 Int
[DNP]
3/4, 88 yards, 0 TD, 0 Int
8/19, 134, 0 TD, 0 Int

You get the idea, names aren't really necessary.

No one's seen enough. Especially Trubisky.

[beardownbilly]

It's so easy to jump on this bandwagon after that performance (and I know it wasn't against a starting defence) but here is the one thing that I think outweighs everything else, Trubisky showed he will give us a chance to win but more importantly he showed he won't cost us the game. And that alone gives me a lot more confidence than Glennon.

[IotaNet]

A fandom that has been starved for a young franchise qb. I am not riding the "start Trubisky train" after one pre-season game. He looked good. Made some hellish throws, but pre-season, against some scrubs. He did what he was supposed to do and I am happy about that. Before I even buy a ticket for this train, I need to see him against the opponent's 1s. I can watch all the college tape I want, but college ain't pro.

No offense to anyone on the train, but I will be happy to wait for awhile. The guy is a talent for sure and the future, but lets slow the roll.

Totally agreed here. Bisquick looked great but so have a lot of rookie QB's against preseason scrubs.

That said, I'll agree that it was really nice to see a Bears QB making things happen as though he knew what he was doing. There was a certain crispness and spark to the offense when he was in that we hadn't seen with Glennon.

My biggest optimism comes from the fact that what we saw last night was exactly why Pace said he drafted the guy. I continue to trust that Pace is an excellent talent evaluator (Tarik Cohen, anyone?) and that he knew what he was doing in this draft.

It won't be boring, that's for sure.

[46Blitz]

Can't say I disagree. But I have no problem having him sit until "needed". I also have no problem with him starting.

Really like this guy, I wasn't even upset about what they gave up to move up one spot in the draft. Just felt they liked someone and they went and got him (plus he is who I wanted so....)

That said, just feel he has the "IT" thing going for him. Kinda like the in the Zone thing that can't be explained. You just have it or you don't.

I am excited as everyone else, but let's not get ahead of ourselves. He will without a doubt be a starter at some point this season, hopefully he PROVES himself quicker rather than later. And make no mistake, if he forces the hand they will plug him in no matter what they say.

I got excited enough to drop $100 on Bears winning the division last night. 22/1 odds. Hey, anything can happen. Lmao

[G08]

It's so early but if this type of play continues, I have no problem making him QB-2 this season and elevating him to QB1 if Glennon looks like dog shit.

Question is when... Earliest for me is week 5 at home against the Vikings, but that defense is no fuckin joke.

[LacertineForest]

I don't know - I still think he should sit the year, learn, and develop. I'm okay with netting top-5 draft position again and getting another stud to really bring this team along.

That being said, it's hard not to be excited about last night. I wouldn't be upset with the Bears either way - unless Glennon is consistently as bad as he showed last night. We'll know more as the preseason goes along.

Also, PFF looked at how the rookie QBs handled pressure in their Preseason debuts: https://www.profootballfocus.com/news/p ... son-debuts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Trubisky's numbers are really hurt by a pair of drops and just overall small sample size.

Here's another PFF graphic:

[Funkster]

It's so easy to jump on this bandwagon after that performance (and I know it wasn't against a starting defence) but here is the one thing that I think outweighs everything else, Trubisky showed he will give us a chance to win but more importantly he showed he won't cost us the game. And that alone gives me a lot more confidence than Glennon.

You my friend get it, you TRUly get it.

[DaSuperfan]

Agreed that we can't get carried away after one preseason game against backups, no game planning and vanilla man to man coverage.

Remember, in his last game at UNC - the bowl game against Stanford - they confused him a bit with some zone blitz looks and he threw 2 picks (1 of them was a pick-six). He's still got a lot of growing to do - but man, that was a heckuva start. He was really impressive.

[o-pus #40 in B major]

I need to make a statement. I was a big critic when we moved up to draft the kid. I was wrong as hell - my apologies to Ryan Pace.

[DaSuperfan]

I need to make a statement. I was a big critic when we moved up to draft the kid. I was wrong as hell - my apologies to Ryan Pace.

No one is wrong or right yet - it's been one preseason game. I think we all just need to take a deep breath and let this play out. It was an exciting debut but that doesn't mean we should be booking our tickets to Canton in 20 years for his HOF enshrinement.

[mmmc_35]

So I believe he should still sit, and we have not seen enough to anoint him. Obviously I am super optimistic with what I have seen. He actually kind of moves and looks like Rodgers.


Analogy

Vasyl Lomachenko in my opinion will go down as the greatest boxer of this current generation and he has 8 wins and one loss. You tube him he is a freak.

Lomachenko had a lot of preseason work. 395 amateur wins. However in his second professional fight it was for a championship belt. He lost. Most boxers don't get the chance to recover from a loss. It will tarnish his record because he stepped up to a level to quickly and was not ready for a sly vet dog fight. He won a belt his next fight.

[G08]

I was bullshitting with someone and he brought up an interesting point... what do we gain from winning a game or two with Glennon? Isn't the best approach to put Trubisky out there, let him learn on the job (while hopefully winning some games)? We aren't a Super Bowl team... losses with Trubisky developing will hurt less (and get me a better draft pick, which is a highly debated subject).

I was completely on the "sit Trubisky until week 11" train but shit man... if he's looking good and Glennon shits the bed early on in the season, I might start him week 6 (@Ravens, vs Panthers, @Saints, BYE WEEK, vs Packers).

[bearsfaninaz]

I'm thinking by week 6 he'll be playing unless Glennon turns it around. Which I'm just not thinking will happen

[Mikefive]

I was bullshitting with someone and he brought up an interesting point... what do we gain from winning a game or two with Glennon? Isn't the best approach to put Trubisky out there, let him learn on the job (while hopefully winning some games)? We aren't a Super Bowl team... losses with Trubisky developing will hurt less (and get me a better draft pick, which is a highly debated subject).

I was completely on the "sit Trubisky until week 11" train but shit man... if he's looking good and Glennon shits the bed early on in the season, I might start him week 6 (@Ravens, vs Panthers, @Saints, BYE WEEK, vs Packers).

The answer to this question should depend on the state of the offense. If the OL is playing like it played with Glennon in the first PS game, absolutely positively leave Trubisky on the bench. I'd say that playing Trubisky this year should depend on three factors in order of importance...
1. The OL needs to be playing reasonably well.
2. The running game needs to be decent and reliable.
3. He needs to have a go to receiver.

Sending him out there with a bad OL is a prescription for disaster. He'll develop bad habits and his confidence could be crushed. I'd much rather Mike Glennon get destroyed by a poor OL than Mitch Trubisky. Having #1 should yield #2. You can't send a rookie out there in an offense that has to pass an inordinant amount to have a chance of succeeding. Balance is HUGE for a rookie QB. And finally, it really helps if he had a reliable target. I'm thinking it would be Zach Miller and the TE group, because I don't see reliability in any of the other WRs vs. #1 and #2 CBs.

The above argument doesn't acknowledge that QBs are DESTROYED by throwing them out there too early. But it happens. Way too often.

[staleystarch]

My take is Sunday Trubisky had a small repertoire of plays and came in against a team with no tape of him as a pro. Teams are going to make adjustments and each week Trubisky's repertoire of plays and reads is going to grow. At a certain point, and I don't know long from now, Trubisky will have enough of the playbook and reads down to start. I don't think it will take more than a few games into the season if that for him to go into the fire and prove he has it.

One more thing I'd like to address, of those who bring up the example of Aaron Rodgers sitting behind Bret Farve and how that helped him. How do you know he would not have ended up just as good if he started as a rookie? He isn't sitting behind Brett Farve.

[Hematite]

I was bullshitting with someone and he brought up an interesting point... what do we gain from winning a game or two with Glennon? Isn't the best approach to put Trubisky out there, let him learn on the job (while hopefully winning some games)? We aren't a Super Bowl team... losses with Trubisky developing will hurt less (and get me a better draft pick, which is a highly debated subject).

I was completely on the "sit Trubisky until week 11" train but shit man... if he's looking good and Glennon shits the bed early on in the season, I might start him week 6 (@Ravens, vs Panthers, @Saints, BYE WEEK, vs Packers).

The answer to this question should depend on the state of the offense. If the OL is playing like it played with Glennon in the first PS game, absolutely positively leave Trubisky on the bench. I'd say that playing Trubisky this year should depend on three factors in order of importance...
1. The OL needs to be playing reasonably well.
2. The running game needs to be decent and reliable.
3. He needs to have a go to receiver.

Sending him out there with a bad OL is a prescription for disaster. He'll develop bad habits and his confidence could be crushed. I'd much rather Mike Glennon get destroyed by a poor OL than Mitch Trubisky. Having #1 should yield #2. You can't send a rookie out there in an offense that has to pass an inordinant amount to have a chance of succeeding. Balance is HUGE for a rookie QB. And finally, it really helps if he had a reliable target. I'm thinking it would be Zach Miller and the TE group, because I don't see reliability in any of the other WRs vs. #1 and #2 CBs.

The above argument doesn't acknowledge that QBs are DESTROYED by throwing them out there too early. But it happens. Way too often.

Yep!

[Atkins&Rebel]

Actually I don't think Trubisky is the only part of the equation for him to start. If Glennon keeps coming out and putting up 2/8 with a turnover kind of numbers, might as well start Trubisky. I'm not leaving the kid on the bench just for the sake of him sitting if Glennon is going to be worse.

[Moriarty]

I was bullshitting with someone and he brought up an interesting point... what do we gain from winning a game or two with Glennon? Isn't the best approach to put Trubisky out there, let him learn on the job (while hopefully winning some games)? We aren't a Super Bowl team... losses with Trubisky developing will hurt less (and get me a better draft pick, which is a highly debated subject).

I was completely on the "sit Trubisky until week 11" train but shit man... if he's looking good and Glennon shits the bed early on in the season, I might start him week 6 (@Ravens, vs Panthers, @Saints, BYE WEEK, vs Packers).

You get nothing from Ws, but that isn't the point.

The point is the belief that he's not ready yet and. if played too much too soon, he'll start developing bad habits and progress worse than if he gets time to practice playing pro under center QB.

[karhu]

Yep, what good could it do to have Trubisky sit behind Marquise Willi-

Erp.

[KOP_Snake]

If we still had Cutler I'd be saying "wait a minute guys not so fast"... but we have Mike Glennon so fuck it put Trubisky in.

[Adipost]

If we still had Cutler I'd be saying "wait a minute guys not so fast"... but we have Mike Glennon so fuck it put Trubisky in.

[ramentaschen]

Nice analysis done by adipost

I will say that scrambling QB's are far more likely to get injured than those that stay in the pocket but Trubisky looked thrilling to watch

[Bears Whiskey Nut]

I was bullshitting with someone and he brought up an interesting point... what do we gain from winning a game or two with Glennon? Isn't the best approach to put Trubisky out there, let him learn on the job (while hopefully winning some games)? We aren't a Super Bowl team... losses with Trubisky developing will hurt less (and get me a better draft pick, which is a highly debated subject).

I was completely on the "sit Trubisky until week 11" train but shit man... if he's looking good and Glennon shits the bed early on in the season, I might start him week 6 (@Ravens, vs Panthers, @Saints, BYE WEEK, vs Packers).

The answer to this question should depend on the state of the offense. If the OL is playing like it played with Glennon in the first PS game, absolutely positively leave Trubisky on the bench. I'd say that playing Trubisky this year should depend on three factors in order of importance...
1. The OL needs to be playing reasonably well.
2. The running game needs to be decent and reliable.
3. He needs to have a go to receiver.

Sending him out there with a bad OL is a prescription for disaster. He'll develop bad habits and his confidence could be crushed. I'd much rather Mike Glennon get destroyed by a poor OL than Mitch Trubisky. Having #1 should yield #2. You can't send a rookie out there in an offense that has to pass an inordinant amount to have a chance of succeeding. Balance is HUGE for a rookie QB. And finally, it really helps if he had a reliable target. I'm thinking it would be Zach Miller and the TE group, because I don't see reliability in any of the other WRs vs. #1 and #2 CBs.

The above argument doesn't acknowledge that QBs are DESTROYED by throwing them out there too early. But it happens. Way too often.

I agree with this ALL DAY LONG. You just drafted, who you think will be, the face of the franchise for the next 12 years. Your #1 goal right now is to set him up for success, and NOT to listen to meatheads like us. Mitch needs AT LEAST 8-12 games on the sidelines before you would ever think of putting him in. MikeFive is absolutely right. If the OL sucks this year, sit Trubisky until 2018.

[Rusty Trombagent]

Yep, what good could it do to have Trubisky sit behind Marquise Willi-

Erp.

oh man, if we sit trubisky for the majority of his nfl career, think of how good he'll be when he joins atkins & rebel's rec league! i'm salivating!

[Rusty Trombagent]

Rich Campbell‏@Rich_Campbell Aug 10
I think it's fair to say Trubisky was better tonight than he has been in any practice we've watched. Turns out dude's a gamer.


This is why I'm not worried about mitch starting this season. For every aarron rodgers who sat for awhile, there's a roethlisberger, wilson, matt ryan, stafford, prescott, carr, luck, manning etc who's been thrown in the fire and done very well.

I was completely on the "sit Trubisky until week 11" train but shit man... if he's looking good and Glennon shits the bed early on in the season, I might start him week 6 (@Ravens, vs Panthers, @Saints, BYE WEEK, vs Packers).

The answer to this question should depend on the state of the offense. If the OL is playing like it played with Glennon in the first PS game, absolutely positively leave Trubisky on the bench. I'd say that playing Trubisky this year should depend on three factors in order of importance...
1. The OL needs to be playing reasonably well.
2. The running game needs to be decent and reliable.
3. He needs to have a go to receiver.

Sending him out there with a bad OL is a prescription for disaster. [/quote]


Here's the thing; we do have an above average OL, and we do have an above average running game. we may not have a true #1 WR, but it's not the complete group of scrubs that people make it out to be. We have very good TE's as well.

Actually most importantly, we have an OC who is going to play to mitch's strengths instead of some mike martz motherfucker pushing a square peg into a round hole.

Mitch is a fuckin gamer. He needs reps against real NFL defenses, he doesnt need to be leading the scout team. Dowell will slowly bring him along each week adding new concepts as we go. Mike Glennon will cry himself to sleep every night on a large pile of money and maybe eke out a career as the next ryan fitzpatrick.

It's basically rex vs orton all over again and it's time to unleash the dragon.

[Funkster]

Nice analysis done by adipost

I will say that scrambling QB's are far more likely to get injured than those that stay in the pocket but Trubisky looked thrilling to watch

I agree, however I don't see Trubisky as a scrambler. He wants to throw first, he keeps his eyes down field. They methodical moved the pocket to create space. He has the ability to run but from what I've seen, he uses his legs as a last resort and I'm 100fine with that.

[Atkins&Rebel]

Yep, what good could it do to have Trubisky sit behind Marquise Willi-

Erp.

oh man, if we sit trubisky for the majority of his nfl career, think of how good he'll be when he joins atkins & rebel's rec league! i'm salivating!

[46Blitz]

in all honesty, I would rather Glennon play well and have a good situation on our hands.

If Glennon can't get the offense going in preseason, and shits the bed in first few games of season... I think that's the way it will play out if we see Trub in there (provided he continues to progress well). The kid is a gamer and it shows, mentally and physically he has the tools. As much as I would like to see him in there, I have no problems with him sitting for the right time to go in. We waited this long as fans, we can handle waiting halfway through the season when it's crystal clear that Glennon sucks. Then there are absolutely no doubts and Trub will be there in for good.

[Middleguard]

I disagree with the contention that Trubisky should be started immediately because he plays better "for real" than "in camp." He played better in his first preseason game because Loggains designed plays to make him look good, including lots of shotgun snaps, rollouts, and at least one play that he ran in college; and not plays that could survive a season's worth of scrutiny. By contrast, in camp, he's being taught concepts that Loggains believes will work all season.

I'm not suggesting that Wentz has been set back in the least by starting last year. It's impossible to know because there are no reset/undo buttons for a QB's development. But he rated 104 in his first 4 games when there was little tape on him (and the playbook was probably reduced and tailored for his strengths), and only 72 in his last 12 games when he was better known. [And I realize he was playing against mostly inferior competition (including the Bears) in those first 4 games , but his best game of the year was in there against the Steelers.]