You can send your resume here:
1920 Football Dr
Lake Forest, IL
You can send your resume here:
Nobody cares about yours or anyone else's draft 'told-ya-so' nonsense.
There's something about listening to people on the radio, friends or family, etc, that always, always gotta announce that THEY were ahead, that THEY were smart, and if ONLY people had just listened to them, etc.
Looking at the stats like that is a little misleading... Wentz was over 100 as a passer in his second season... and wasn't as good in his first season as Trubisky was in his first season in the offense. The difference is Wentz exploded that second season and was on pace for an MVP type season until he got hurt... Trubisky opened season 2 in the offense looking like a guy who was making his first start as a rookie... it's confusing to me... I know the oline had some issues in the first game but Trubisky locked in on his pre-snap read and didn't look to a second option throughout the entire first half... when that pre-snap read was open, Trubisky threw confidently and made a couple nice passes but when he wasn't open, he wouldn't look around and try to adjust, he either took a sack holding the ball too long, or threw a bad pass... he could have easily had 1-2 more INTs in that game... and there were plays where other guys were running wide open and he could have made plays but he didn't even look...G08 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 9:30 amDoes this mean he'll explode in year 5 like Alex Smith? Or will he put up a 100+ rated season in year 3 like Wentz? Be a Super Bowl MVP like Foles?
No fucking idea. None. BUT... if you look at where he is in his development in this offense compared to these other QBs, he is right on par.
Apologies if this was too pointed; I meant it more generally and all-encompassing as something that generally irritates me.
The Mitch pick/trade isn't something I'm necessarily wanting to defend or debate, nor should anyone who defended the trade initially be too terribly keen on defending it at present. That said, those that feel the need to take a victory lap, "draft expert" from TV/print media all the way down to message board random, should probably abstain for the sake of decorum, unless there's some larger point they want to make beyond, "I was right about this thing, and I'd like to cash that in for some form of acknowledgement."
Who's rationalizing? You ignore all fact based logic and assume you simply "know" what happened in pre-draft discussions. You ignore the fact that, at the time, there were people that didn't even have Mahomes in R1. You ignore the fact that it was widely reported that Mitch was QB1 on multiple teams boards and that there were in fact teams wanting to move up to take him. Never mind the fact that the other two QB's went outside of the top 10, so a minimum of 10 other teams "failed" and "botched" their picks too.
“It’s also unfair to criticize a guy who was drafted to play in a system that runs the hell out of the ball and showcase his arm talent in the play action game outside the pocket. Because if you really watch the Bears, that’s not what we’re doing. That’s a byproduct of personnel…I couldn’t block. I wasn’t healthy enough. In the run game or the pass game.
When I was healthy? When Josh Sitton was here, when we were rolling, when we were putting up 300 rushing yards in Baltimore? That’s the offense Mitch was meant to play in. Pound the friggin rock and throw the ball downtown Julie Brown when everybody’s in the box and the next thing you know you’ve scored 40 points and that Bears defense has suffocated the life out of the opposition.”
“Matt Nagy was not brought in to run the I-formation and Mitch Trubisky potentially was brought in to run the I-formation. I think that’s where the miscommunication is.”
Because I look at the totality of his career. People act like he only playing in 2019.dplank wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 1:16 pmHow do you justify that POV when he was the 28th ranked QB in the NFL last year? You could maybe argue a double if we had a middle of the pack QB, but a near bottom guy? Here's the writeup from NFL.com...
2019 stats: 14 games | 62.6 pct | 2,931 pass yds | 6.1 ypa | 17 pass TD | 10 INT | 192 rush yds | 2 rush TD | 1 fumble lost
Parr: Trubisky did nothing in Week 16 to quiet those calling for his head in Chicago, as the Bears put a measly three points on the board in a blowout loss to close out their home schedule for 2019. The vitriol against the third-year passer was only made more vicious by the fact that this numbing defeat came at the hands of the reigning MVP QB whom the Bears passed on in favor of Trubisky in the 2017 draft. Trubisky's line for the night: 18 of 34 for 157 yards, no TDs, no INTs, 65.4 passer rating. He now has a league-leading nine starts this season with a sub-80 passer rating, and seems to follow up any performance in which he offers a glimmer of hope with a deflating dud. Mitchell has had a sub-70 passer rating in back-to-back games after having a passer rating of 115-plus in the previous two games. This team doesn't need sensational QB play to win (it's 4-1 this season when he has a rating of 80 or better), but it can't count on the former No. 2 overall pick to provide play that's in line with, or even slightly below, the league average (90.9 rating).
QBR equals the percentage of the chance a team has to win with a game with said QB... hence why it is never over 100... every team with a winning record normally has a QB with a higher QBRIE wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 1:46 pmSort these 2018 stats on QBR. Mitch is 3rd, which was awesome. Then look at all the stats in the top 10. His stats stand out as an anomaly across most of the stat areas. So there is something in the QBR calculations that strongly favor certain things he did last year. The one stat that seems to correlate is DPI (defensive PI, where the yards go into QBR). Another must be the rush yards that Mitch had last year that factor into the calculation but are not on the chart.
It's interesting. Any casual observer asked to pick the one that didn't belong, it would clearly be him. But for some reason his QBR calculated high.
Passer rating doesn't view sacks as a negative factor... so it's actually better for a passer rating to step out of bounds 8 yards behind the line of scrimmage than it is for the QB to throw the ball away...Per ESPN's total QBR breakdown
Finally, the per-play measure of efficiency is translated to a number on a 0-to-100 scale to produce a player’s Total QBR. The scaling process is a fairly standard logistic regression that produces a number that is easier to grasp. An average quarterback will have a QBR around 50, and a Pro Bowl-level player will have a QBR around 75 for the season. On a game level, however, a QBR of 75 means that holding all other factors constant (defense, offensive teammates, etc.), a quarterback’s team would be expected to win about 75 percent of time, given that level of QB play.
One could argue that "behind and playing catchup" is pretty much where he should be, considering he barely played in college, wasted his rookie year tutoring under Mike Glennon, Mark Sanchez, and Dowell Loggains, had a major shoulder injury, and has a crisis of confidence on an hourly basis as people will eternally compare him to Mahomes and Watson.
And rolling with Mitch is definitely a pragmatic decision for 2020 if for no other reason than the Bears are limited in resources to upgrade the position, let alone the other holes. So, I agree let's give him another whirl and hope he is a late developer, but G08 has tried to spin this system BS before and make Mitch's development look normal and it's just patently false. Other QBs in the Reid scheme have done just fine picking it up and seeing positive play fairly quickly.UOK wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:26 pmOne could argue that "behind and playing catchup" is pretty much where he should be, considering he barely played in college, wasted his rookie year tutoring under Mike Glennon, Mark Sanchez, and Dowell Loggains, had a major shoulder injury, and has a crisis of confidence on an hourly basis as people will eternally compare him to Mahomes and Watson.
I'm not saying Trubisky will develop to or exceed their level, but he needs time. Problem with the Bears is that their window is currently open, and closing fast, so you have to decide if the patience is worth risking wasting the primes of several great players around the roster.
Except at the moment, Dalton isn't affordable. He's going to cost a pick and come with a significant cap number.crueltyabc wrote: ↑Wed Feb 05, 2020 2:46 pmIf you believe Kyle's statement then Mitch was a good pick but the Nagy hire was a bad one. In that case I guess we should be in a different thread calling for Nagy to get fired and Gary Kubiak hired?
Ugh. Anyway. The reality is that Pace is keeping Nagy so the QB needs to fit or go.
I continue to feel like Dalton is a good fit with the team because he's an older guy who should be affordable and is a known commodity - an average talent with knowledge of the system. If he can truly beat out Mitch then Mitch isn't the guy and we're drafting a QB in 2021. Dalton is then our bridge QB.
The next guy drafted or signed needs to be an appropriate fit and/or learn the system quickly. The defense has a window based on Mack, Hicks, and Fuller.