BearsFansOnline.com

RustyTrubisky wrote: 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.

Mikefive wrote:
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.

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.[/quote]

I beg to differ on your first point. There are many more QBs who have been destroyed by throwing them out there right away. One of them named Carr, ironically. And let's remember what EVERYONE said about this draft... That there's no Peyton Mannings or Andrew Lucks. So those on your "started right away and did fine" list who came out with resumes like those guys, you should eliminate from your list as it's not a fair comparison.

In your second point, you say our running game and OL are good. Really? Is that what you saw when Mike Glennon was playing? I sure didn't. Last year was last year. Now is now. We need to assess based on what's happening today, not some other time. Now maybe they'll get it together and that stuff will come around when Kyle Long returns. That would be great. But we need to see it before we decide that's what we have.

Here's the thing... There's a point where Trubisky's degree of development in concert with the quality of the team around him makes it a winning proposition to play him. If you play him before that time, you will retard his development or damage him to the point of destroying his career. But if you play him after he's already been ready for some time, then you haven't lost anything long term, just development time. Do you think the Packers are kicking themselves for not playing Rodgers sooner? For me, I err on the side of caution and playing Biscuit when I feel comfortable that I'm not damaging him. He's a long term investment. And I'm looking through that lens when I'm deciding when to play him.

Trubisky did improve sitting on the sidelines at North Carolina to the degree his only college season made him a top draft pick.

mmmc_35 wrote:Trubisky did improve sitting on the sidelines at North Carolina to the degree his only college season made him a top draft pick.

but our bears guys were saying when he was drafted that if he had been playing for 3 years he'd most definitely have been the number one pick. it was fox or pace or someone high up.

Has Bears rookie Mitch Trubisky arrived earlier than expected?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



i thought this was good

Mitch had a poor day at practice yesterday gents.

mmmc_35 wrote:Mitch had a poor day at practice yesterday gents.

RustyTrubisky wrote:

mmmc_35 wrote:Trubisky did improve sitting on the sidelines at North Carolina to the degree his only college season made him a top draft pick.

but our bears guys were saying when he was drafted that if he had been playing for 3 years he'd most definitely have been the number one pick. it was fox or pace or someone high up.

That's a hypothetical... a guess. But even if it's true, the fact is that he DIDN'T start for 3 years. He started 13 games. And that matters a lot when it comes to judging how ready he is to start at the NFL level.

Mikefive wrote:

RustyTrubisky wrote:

mmmc_35 wrote:Trubisky did improve sitting on the sidelines at North Carolina to the degree his only college season made him a top draft pick.

but our bears guys were saying when he was drafted that if he had been playing for 3 years he'd most definitely have been the number one pick. it was fox or pace or someone high up.

That's a hypothetical... a guess. But even if it's true, the fact is that he DIDN'T start for 3 years. He started 13 games. And that matters a lot when it comes to judging how ready he is to start at the NFL level.

yeah, but you cant say he "improved on the bench" but then turn around and say he isnt good enough to start now because he sat on the bench. amirite.

RustyTrubisky wrote:Has Bears rookie Mitch Trubisky arrived earlier than expected?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



i thought this was good

Good stuff.

RustyTrubisky wrote:

karhu wrote: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!

Your signature has me laughing uncontrollably.

i dont remember who it's from. saw it on twitter awhile ago and saved it, and it feels like a pure distillation of this season to come.

RustyTrubisky wrote:

Mikefive wrote:

RustyTrubisky wrote:

mmmc_35 wrote:Trubisky did improve sitting on the sidelines at North Carolina to the degree his only college season made him a top draft pick.

but our bears guys were saying when he was drafted that if he had been playing for 3 years he'd most definitely have been the number one pick. it was fox or pace or someone high up.

That's a hypothetical... a guess. But even if it's true, the fact is that he DIDN'T start for 3 years. He started 13 games. And that matters a lot when it comes to judging how ready he is to start at the NFL level.

yeah, but you cant say he "improved on the bench" but then turn around and say he isnt good enough to start now because he sat on the bench. amirite.

No. "Improved over Freshman Trubisky" is not equal to "is a QB who is prepared to start right away like Peyton Manning". And thanks for making my point as admitting that he can improve while sitting on the bench adds to my argument.

Rusty... I appreciate you and your passion. But we need to give this one up for now until we have more information.

mike i'm worried you've never been right about anything in your entire life.

RustyTrubisky wrote:mike i'm worried you've never been right about anything in your entire life.

You mean like past threads where I agreed with you?

Dude... Your emotions are getting the better of you now. How about we take a chill pill on this one until after preseason game #2?

Mikefive wrote:

RustyTrubisky wrote:mike i'm worried you've never been right about anything in your entire life.

You mean like past threads where I agreed with you?

Dude... Your emotions are getting the better of you now. How about we take a chill pill on this one until after preseason game #2?

i'm just fucking around. i know there's value in him sitting. but we're talking about my instant gratification here, which if i'm being honest, is much more important.

i actually think, despite whatever happens in training camp and the preseason, that fox and pace wouldnt dream of sticking it to glennon by starting trubisky. this is glennon's world and we're all just living in it. *points to gif below me*

AdamHoge
Ryan Pace: "Mike (Glennon) is our starter and we’re rolling that way, but, hey, having competition (at) all positions is important."

UOK wrote:AdamHoge
Ryan Pace: "Mike (Glennon) is our starter and we’re rolling that way, but, hey, having competition (at) all positions is important."

that "competition is good" mantra is why I want to see Trubisky get a start with the first teamers in the preseason

and while sitting Trubisky in the regular season may be a good option for his learning curve, if he outplays Glennon why shouldn't he start? Aikman started as a rookie, got pounded, lost a lot of games, and turned into a damn fine QB ... Manning started as a rookie, got pounded, lost a lot of games, and turned into a damn fine QB ... and you can make an argument for both sides of this sit him/start him coin

we need to see him with the 1's, playing against the 1's, to really know for sure ... and I hope that happens

Feeding a player, especially a QB, to the wolves may work occasionally. However I believe it often stunts their growth. I think this can be understood in a lot of facets in life. When your new at something and you misstep it's always in the back of your mind. Until it's second nature.

Example first time you got rejected going to second base. You probably hesitated and waited around on first longer next time. The hesitating due to back of the mind thoughts for an NFL quarterback can compound those issues.

Now of course eventually you have to cut your teeth and go for it. However learning from a position out of the pressure surely has it's positives, and little negatives.

My opinion sometimes abstinence makes the heart grow fonder. Laugh.

Trubisky said in his presser today that the game was easier than practice since he was more familiar with the calls and the defenses were pretty basic. He said he still struggles a bit in practice and says he has a lot of work to do.

Can't start him before week 5, IMO.

Boris13c wrote:

UOK wrote:AdamHoge
Ryan Pace: "Mike (Glennon) is our starter and we’re rolling that way, but, hey, having competition (at) all positions is important."

that "competition is good" mantra is why I want to see Trubisky get a start with the first teamers in the preseason

and while sitting Trubisky in the regular season may be a good option for his learning curve, if he outplays Glennon why shouldn't he start? Aikman started as a rookie, got pounded, lost a lot of games, and turned into a damn fine QB ... Manning started as a rookie, got pounded, lost a lot of games, and turned into a damn fine QB ... and you can make an argument for both sides of this sit him/start him coin

we need to see him with the 1's, playing against the 1's, to really know for sure ... and I hope that happens

I think he will be ready when he is ready. Between him and the coaches will have a feel of it, when the time comes. More than less, once he shows himself comfortable with the entire playbook ect in practice ... also, when Glennon shits the bed in the first 3 games. The move will be made. That's my prediction and I have $100 on the Bears in Vegas to back that up.

If I was a betting man I'd say he'll start against Minnesota after the bye week giving him extra week to prepare.

At minimum, I think Trubisky being on the sidelines and in the QB room when going over film against live NFL defenses Glennon is facing will be invaluable for him. During the game he can study the defense pre-snap and post-snap and decide in his mind where he'd go with the ball. The following day or whenever they breakdown film, he can see if what his eyes and mind saw and deciphered was correct or not.

Earliest I would start him is week 5 at home against Minnesota... latest would be week 11 at home against the Lions. (this is all assuming Glennon is playing poorly)

http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Nice little read.

Really like where this kids head is...

A super high draft pick QB is the most important investment an NFL team will make. A failure in that endeavor is a double disaster, since a) you waste or a rare, high draft pick and b) you still need to fill the most important position on the team--a quality QB--which is a very difficult commodity to find as Bear fans should well know. As such, I think the right move is to ignore the accountants and fans and properly nurture and protect that investment by waiting until he is prepared to play. Saying week 5 or after the bye or 2018 are just relatively arbitrary times.

Let's see that he can fundamentally execute the entire offense properly. Then it's time.

Couldn't agree more MikeFive...... no matter how eager I am to see him out there.

46Blitz wrote:Couldn't agree more MikeFive...... no matter how eager I am to see him out there.

Same boat. I'd love to see him play. And he's very obviously the most talented qb we've got. But I don't mind giving him some time to get used to seeing the more complex defenses before he gets thrown into the fire.

I'm ambivalent as to whether he sits or starts but does anyone have a theory as to why sitting is a good thing rather than scant anecdotal evidence?

Mikefive wrote: Let's see that he can fundamentally execute the entire offense properly. Then it's time.

Shouldn't we wait until Glennon can fundamentally execute the entire offense properly before just declaring him the undisputed starter?










btw, I agree with you, but I could not resist

staleystarch wrote:

Mikefive wrote: Let's see that he can fundamentally execute the entire offense properly. Then it's time.

Shouldn't we wait until Glennon can fundamentally execute the entire offense properly before just declaring him the undisputed starter?

btw, I agree with you, but I could not resist

Glennon is a stop gap who represents a one year investment. He has been through several TCs and has enough starting experience to be signed as a starter. He's had his development time, as has Sanchez. He's rightfully expected to be able to play now. That's an unrealistic expectation for virtually all rookies.

Good article by Adam Hoge... Hoge’s 10 Bears Things: The Easy Way To Determine When Trubisky Should Start

An excerpt...

To me, the answer isn’t all that complicated. Trubisky should start when the answer to both of the following questions is unequivocally “YES”:

Does Trubisky understand the offensive system enough to execute at a high-level in regular season games?
Does Trubisky give the Bears the best chance to win on Sundays?

If the answer to either of those questions is “no” then he shouldn’t start.

Clearly, I agree with him on this and it gets to a point that has been made before here and in the media that the best possible scenario for the Bears is that Glennon plays well and keeps Trubisky on the bench, which is exactly right.