Just to be clear, I've never suggested that Trubisky's 2019 season was an anomaly. I've tried to fathom why he performed worse statistically from Year 1 to Year 2 under Nagy. You may prove to be correct that Trubisky performed better in Year 1 than will prove to be the norm for him. There is obviously not enough data to make a determination at this stage. However the expectation is that a young QB in his second year in a system will have a better grasp of it and perform better. This is why the emphasis is on that second year drop off. It has nothing to do with me 'liking' the first year as a starting point.dplank wrote: ↑Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:39 am @HRH and G08....
Something for you both to consider. You both talk about how he went from 17 to 31, then go on to pontificate about reasons for the decline and why you think it's an anomaly - I get that, and a lot of what you say has a lot of truth to it.
HOWEVER, AFAICT you aren't considering the possibility of the opposite side of that coin. Which is: What if the 31 isn't the anomaly but the 17 is? Why is it ok to spin yarns about how this or that could be an explanation for Mitch dropping from 17 to 31, but it's not ok to spin yarns about how Mitch got his 17 to begin with? Isn't it more consistent to question both? Accepting his prior 17 as his 'actual' starting point because you like it, and only questioning his 31 because you don't like it, isn't sound logic. You either consider surrounding circumstances in both or neither if you want to be consistent and fair in your evaluation.
I've been arguing, without any response to it that I can recall, that Mitch's 17 was highly suspect and artificially fluffed by a high TD number that he didn't fully earn. I don't accept 17 as his starting point.That's because our defense literally had a historic turnover year and placed the offense in opposing territory frequently, and Nagy's first year play calls/trick plays WORKED at a very high rate. These two factors boosted his TD numbers artificially, which in turn boosted his QB rating artificially. Without that boost, what would his 2017 rating be and where would he rank ? I dunno, but I'm guessing low 20's (23/24 something like that).
In Nagy 1.0, Trubisky had to learn a new system and develop a rapport with a completely new group of receivers, so it was never expected that this would be his ceiling. His passer rating climbed from 77.8 to 95.4 and his QBR from 32.4 to 71.0, helped by factors including the overhauled receiving corps and the defense improving from top 10 in his rookie season to essentially the best in the league in his second.
In his third year everything around him got significantly worse and so did his statistics. Given that, MikeFive could be right that Trubisky actually didn't regress as an individual, but as you've pointed out dplank we don't know how many of the issues were a result of his play. This is the mystery right now.
What we do know is what the statistics and the tape tell us. The offensive line was bad. Leno got called for a lot more penalties, the Daniels/Whitehair switch was a failure and they had to change back, Long was so poor they sent him to IR five games into the season and replaced him with Coward, an undrafted, converted DL project who had never played o-line before. Their run blocking remained one of the worst according to Football Outsiders and their pass blocking grade fell significantly. PFF corroborated this assessment of the line. None of the running backs could average more than 4 yards per carry, a statistically significant factor in QB success I've demonstrated in other posts, and Cohen kept running towards the sidelines instead of fighting for yards upfield. Miller had issues running routes as mentioned by the coaches. The receivers as a whole dropped a ton more passes. The TE position, considered crucial in this offense, was a disaster area without a healthy Burton. The defense didn't perform so well outside of the first 4 games. The deck was stacked against Trubisky regardless of his own efforts. That's why I find it so difficult to judge him at this stage.
Football is the ultimate team game. How everyone around you performs impacts how you perform. I'm far from convinced that Foles will have any more success than Trubisky unless the coaching and level of play from the rest of the team improves. If that happens and Foles starts the season then the narrative will very much be that Trubisky was the issue, which may not actually be true. Trubisky might then end up playing well for another team while the Bears are left with a stop-gap in Foles while they search for another young QB. On the other hand, Trubisky may be the bust so many think he is. Only time will tell.
