QB Prospect Discussion: Deshaun Watson, Clemson

[crueltyabc]

I was just arguing that we may be reading too much into the signing. Pace needed to sign a guy, and he had limited options. So maybe he did the best he could. Adipost was talking like Pace sleeps in a mike Glennon jersey with the sweet sound of glennon college highlight vids playing on his Sonos


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rusty Trombagent]

I was just arguing that we may be reading too much into the signing. Pace needed to sign a guy, and he had limited options. So maybe he did the best he could. Adipost was talking like Pace sleeps in a mike Glennon jersey with the sweet sound of glennon college highlight vids playing on his Sonos


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yeah, a local new orleans paper mentions that his scouting office had a "high" grade on him and the internet runs with it. look at the 2013 qb class:
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/20 ... -disaster/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

it's very possible that mike was their scouting department's top graded qb that year. it's also very possible that in context that doesnt really mean anything.

[G08]

" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mike Lombardi talking about Watson from the 8:00 minute mark to the 13:00 minute mark.

[malk]

I was just arguing that we may be reading too much into the signing. Pace needed to sign a guy, and he had limited options. So maybe he did the best he could. Adipost was talking like Pace sleeps in a mike Glennon jersey with the sweet sound of glennon college highlight vids playing on his Sonos


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't quite understand Pace needing to sign a guy being fulfilled by Glennon. Glennon is already under the cosh from the fans so he's got no leeway there. The only thing making him a viable starter right now is the implied value from his contract.

It's better that we can get away from this shitty deal sooner rather than being trapped but if we don't draft a QB high we're seeing two years of Longneck the Red regardless of how he plays.

I'll say it again. Signing mediocre players to expensive contracts is bad regardless of whether those contracts are market rate.

Does anyone want to give me an over/under on how many years before a top five paid QB wins a ring again?

[britbear]

Have a listen, if you haven't already, to the latest Bear Download podcast by Rich Campbell and Dan Wiederer of the Trib. Available from the usual podcast sources or at http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
This week the guys talk through the Bears QB situation and make some very persuasive comments about why the Bears should go for Watson at #3. Rich points out that Pace and Fox are both on record as saying that they want a QB who elevates the program,and he doesn't think that guy is in the QB room yet. But he reckons Watson is that guy. He is a winner and both Rich and Dan seem to think his accuracy issues can be coached out of him.
For me the most telling point they made was - let's assume the Bears don't pick Watson (or Trubisky or Kizer for that matter) at #3, and then that guy goes on the become a star somewhere else. They said that would be catastrophic for the Bears organisation.
I have to say, I am really starting to get on board the Watson train. If they do pick him, that will be the marquee guy the fan base needs to pin their future hopes on. If they don't, you really have to wonder where this franchise is headed.

[IotaNet]

Have a listen, if you haven't already, to the latest Bear Download podcast by Rich Campbell and Dan Wiederer of the Trib. Available from the usual podcast sources or at http://www.chicagotribune.com/sports/fo ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;.
This week the guys talk through the Bears QB situation and make some very persuasive comments about why the Bears should go for Watson at #3. Rich points out that Pace and Fox are both on record as saying that they want a QB who elevates the program,and he doesn't think that guy is in the QB room yet. But he reckons Watson is that guy. He is a winner and both Rich and Dan seem to think his accuracy issues can be coached out of him.
For me the most telling point they made was - let's assume the Bears don't pick Watson (or Trubisky or Kizer for that matter) at #3, and then that guy goes on the become a star somewhere else. They said that would be catastrophic for the Bears organisation.
I have to say, I am really starting to get on board the Watson train. If they do pick him, that will be the marquee guy the fan base needs to pin their future hopes on. If they don't, you really have to wonder where this franchise is headed.

Haven't listened to the podcast yet but the logic is spot on. I think that Glennon is a placeholder who can get the Bears to .500 or slightly above while Watson sits for a season to get ready for his NFL star-turn.

People keep mentioning Barkley or Hoyer as "should-have-been" placeholders but they both stunk and Pace can't afford another stinky season. OTOH, the fan base will accept 8-8/9-7 if the QB of the future is waiting in the wings and Glennon is just serviceable enough to get us there.

[wab]

Taking a QB with the 3rd pick in the draft and essentially making him the scout team QB for at least a year is how GM's get fired.

[G08]

My/our Watson pipe-dream is over, unless he somehow falls to us at pick #36.

[Rusty Trombagent]

i'm a nice guy, and i like you fellows ok, so i want you to know that when we take a qb in the first two rounds, i am absolutely not going to dig up all the times you said we werent going to.

scouts honor.

[G08]

Hey if we end up with one of Watson/Trubisky/Mahomes I will gladly eat crow.

[wab]

Hey if we end up with one of Watson/Trubisky/Mahomes I will gladly eat crow.

Samsies.

It would completely confuse me based on the moves the Bears have made, and I'd be convinced that they don't have any semblance of a plan...but I'd happy join G08 in the eating of the crow.

[IotaNet]

Have a listen, if you haven't already, to the latest Bear Download podcast by Rich Campbell and Dan Wiederer of the Trib ...

I broke down and listened to the podcast. They make an excellent case for taking Watson. I especially liked the part where they challenged the notion of "Watson being a better value later in the first round." Like them, I say that if Watson is your guy -- the guy you think us your future -- you take him wherever you an get him.

This whole concept of "trade back, trade back, trade back" ... like you can wave a wand and magically somebody will hand you the trade of your your dreams.

The Bears don't need the QB of the future to start today ... they just need him to be visible and developing. Joe Montana couldn't take this team to the SB this year -- we need too many pieces. Draft Watson, let him develop, and when he's ready (and we have a few more pieces around him), send him out there.

[UOK]

https://theringer.com/2017-nfl-draft-qu ... 0d45a52fa5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For those wanting some Watson fap material.

[Rusty Trombagent]

https://theringer.com/2017-nfl-draft-qu ... 0d45a52fa5

For those wanting some Watson fap material.

soooo, i'm going to take a wild guess that kizer isnt lombardi's top qb in this draft.

[Rusty Trombagent]

hey im starting to like this lombardi guy:

Why They Did It:
Matt Barkley, QB, San Francisco 49ers (no terms released)

I know, I know. The end of the 2016 season wasn’t kind to Barkley. He made Jay Cutler look like a ball protector, giving the ball away 12 times in his final three Bears games. But there were also real flashes of good play in Barkley’s six starts. And since new 49ers head coach Kyle Shanahan can bring out the best in quarterbacks, I actually like the move. Barkley needs the right scheme to succeed, and Shanahan’s fits him perfectly. Unless the Niners overpaid (and I doubt they did), they made a solid gamble on a young QB with potential. Could Barkley become a late bloomer like Rich Gannon or Trent Green? It’s worth the risk to find out.

https://theringer.com/why-nfl-teams-she ... e60519216b" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Boris13c]

Could Barkley become a late bloomer like Rich Gannon or Trent Green? It’s worth the risk to find out.

I would have preferred the Bears had been smart enough to take that risk to find out ... keep Barkley, draft the future with the #3 pick ... and I know I am not the only person here who had that thinking

I'm with Lombardi on Barkley, and I think he will be the just fine and will most likely beat out Hoyer for the 49ers starter job

[malk]

Could Barkley become a late bloomer like Rich Gannon or Trent Green? It’s worth the risk to find out.

I would have preferred the Bears had been smart enough to take that risk to find out ... keep Barkley, draft the future with the #3 pick ... and I know I am not the only person here who had that thinking

I'm with Lombardi on Barkley, and I think he will be the just fine and will most likely beat out Hoyer for the 49ers starter job

You're not and I'm still salty about it!

[wab]

I would have preferred Hoyer/Barkley/Shaw/#3 pick...and letting the four of them fight it out in camp. I mean, that's basically what Shanny is doing. And he's the guy many around here wanted.

But hey. Mike Glennon, Mark Sanchez, Shaw, and some UDFA level pick taken about 3 rounds too high should do it.

[dplank]

Wildcard Charlie. Awesome.

[ysleblanc]

Could Barkley become a late bloomer like Rich Gannon or Trent Green? It’s worth the risk to find out.

I would have preferred the Bears had been smart enough to take that risk to find out ... keep Barkley, draft the future with the #3 pick ... and I know I am not the only person here who had that thinking

I'm with Lombardi on Barkley, and I think he will be the just fine and will most likely beat out Hoyer for the 49ers starter job

I would rather have Barkley on the roster than Sanchez.

[ysleblanc]

When I hear the discussion about Trubisky and Kizer possibly going ahead of Watson, I shake my head...didn't this guy slice and dice an Alabama defense with a bunch of guys that will play in the NFL? Is he not a 3 year starter, not a one and done guy?

I just don't see how DW is not the clear cut #1 QB.

[Moriarty]

When I hear the discussion about Trubisky and Kizer possibly going ahead of Watson, I shake my head...didn't this guy slice and dice an Alabama defense with a bunch of guys that will play in the NFL? Is he not a 3 year starter, not a one and done guy?

I just don't see how DW is not the clear cut #1 QB.

Successful college QBing isn't as predictive of successful pro QBing as you think it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_H ... hy_winners" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[wab]

If Watson doesn't make it in the NFL, it won't be for lack of effort on his part. That's what I love about him. His drive. A lot of QB's had success in college that didn't translate to the NFL because they thought they could get by on talent and not put in the effort.

That's not Watson.

[BamaBear09]

When I hear the discussion about Trubisky and Kizer possibly going ahead of Watson, I shake my head...didn't this guy slice and dice an Alabama defense with a bunch of guys that will play in the NFL? Is he not a 3 year starter, not a one and done guy?

I just don't see how DW is not the clear cut #1 QB.

The issue with Watson is he may not have the physical tools to be an NFL level QB... the 49 MPH at the combine does not bode well... especially since it seems that since 2008 only one QB who threw the ball at the combine under 54 MPH is a starter in the NFL, Tyrod Taylor, and he was a 5th round pick who bounced around the league a couple years before he finally won a starting spot and that said, there are some who would even question how successful he has been... Now I'm not saying it is a cut and dry stat considering that there are plenty QBs who never threw at the combine and thus there is no recorded number for their velocity but based on the data we do have, 49 MPH doesn't look good. If Watson ends up in the first round, he will be the first QB with a recorded under 50 MPH to go in the first... and that's based on his college performance and his mental make up but if his arm isn't enough, it could be enough to prevent him from becoming a great QB... that's where the questions come from...

Also not sure if anyone has said this but everyone here's new favorite whipping boy also threw it 49 MPH at the combine in 2013... and we see how excited everyone here is at getting Glennon now, it's possible he's an example of how Watson will be viewed 4 years from now...

[wab]

But Glennon has a big arm!

[thunderspirit]

But Glennon has a big arm!

Except no, he does not.
#preachingtothechoir

[G08]

Oh God damn it with the MPH bullshit.

And Glennon does have a solid arm, just watch his games.

[BamaBear09]

Oh God damn it with the MPH bullshit.

And Glennon does have a solid arm, just watch his games.

I'm just going off the available data and the fact is of the recorded velocity tests, almost all the guys who throw under 54 MPH haven't had success in the NFL.

http://www.pass2win.com/ball-velocity-e ... er-qb.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[G08]

I have two questions:

Were they all asked to throw max velocity? Or were they being monitored more for their release and accuracy?

[wab]

Shane Carden is on that list. Remember when he was going to be the next Brett Favre?