BearsFansOnline.com

I DO hate not having a franchise QB. It's pretty clear that is required far more often than not to get to the holy land.

I boil the Foles thing down to that: He isn't a franchise, but he HAS been to the holy land, and won. He doesn't shrink from the hardest tasks. That intangible may be the most valuable attribute in a QB.

I also believe that a franchise QB must be drafted. Or rather, QBs must be drafted until you get one. That includes circumstances where there is limited draft capital. It is just the most important thing. This year my guy is Hurts. He drips with intangibles. Half his weight is intangibles. While other suckers in the draft make decisions based on the perfect spiral and mechanics and other such stuff, I hope Pace sees the error of his ways and picks an unflappable winner.

I also believe that a franchise QB must be drafted. Or rather, QBs must be drafted until you get one. That includes circumstances where there is limited draft capital. It is just the most important thing.

I agree. I'm only kind of kidding when I say they should draft a QB every two/three years in R1 until they find the guy.

IE wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 8:08 am This year my guy is Hurts. He drips with intangibles. Half his weight is intangibles. While other suckers in the draft make decisions based on the perfect spiral and mechanics and other such stuff, I hope Pace sees the error of his ways and picks an unflappable winner.

Error of his ways?
Pace already picked a R1 QB whose tools were nothing special, because he was so in love with his intangibles

Moriarty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am

IE wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 8:08 am This year my guy is Hurts. He drips with intangibles. Half his weight is intangibles. While other suckers in the draft make decisions based on the perfect spiral and mechanics and other such stuff, I hope Pace sees the error of his ways and picks an unflappable winner.

Error of his ways?
Pace already picked a R1 QB whose tools were nothing special, because he was so in love with his intangibles

His tools were special actually. Along with his intangibles. It was his extreme lack of experience that made him a wild card.

To pretend like he wasn't a top 5 prospect at the time is just baffling.

wab wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:45 am

Moriarty wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am

Error of his ways?
Pace already picked a R1 QB whose tools were nothing special, because he was so in love with his intangibles

His tools were special actually. Along with his intangibles. It was his extreme lack of experience that made him a wild card.

To pretend like he wasn't a top 5 prospect at the time is just baffling.

He was considered a R1 prospect (by most, although not all), but it wasn't because of great tools.

He doesn't have great size, he doesn't have a cannon arm, his accuracy has been talked up by some people but he doesn't actually display it (consistently, and that's the whole point of "accuracy").

His running/athleticism is the one argument you can make for a high quality tool. Even there, by comparison:
He's not as fast as Hurts, who was given in the post I was replaying to as an example of the supreme intangibles guy
And Mitch didn't rack up anywhere near as many rushing yards or ypc as someone like Watson, from the same draft.

His physical skills were all "fine", "not a problem", "ok", "adequate", or "good", at best, but nothing "great" or "special".


Well-roundedness/lack of major weaknesses and intangibles were his supposed strong points.

dupe

Don't confuse "amiable personality and saying the right things" with "intangibles".

10 was ALL tangibles / measurables plus "really nice guy - we like having dinner with him" - he just had no history of top level experience or demonstrated success.

This is "intangibles":
- Random, nit-picking critics speaking: "... but this guy isn't super-accurate, can't make all the throws like a prototype roboQB... and he might be a little surly at times"
- Actual performance speaking" "but he keeps on demonstrating leadership, showing poise at almost all times, and consistently has success at the highest level"

I was a huge Patrick Mahomes and wanted him desperately at #3, but even I accept that Trubisky was the consensus best QB in the draft by all the pundits. I favored Mahomes anyway.

After Trubisky was drafted, it was reported that Ryan Pace said he just drafted "a young Drew Brees". He knew the player needed experience and development, but he was enamored with Trubisky's athleticism, talent, work ethic and leadership.

Clearly, there is more to being a top tier QB in the NFL than athleticism, talent, work ethic and leadership.

I am hoping we see an offense that focuses more on the run (with success, I might add), sprinkles in play-action and boot-action and shots deep. This is where, IMO, this kid thrives. Look at what Ryan Tannehill did in that type of an offensive approach, ditto Jimmy Garoppolo.

Will Trubisky win you a Super Bowl himself? No... but how many QBs will do that? Can you win one with him? I believe you can, yes.

wab wrote:His tools were special actually. Along with his intangibles. It was his extreme lack of experience that made him a wild card.

To pretend like he wasn't a top 5 prospect at the time is just baffling.

Yep.

wab wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 11:45 am His tools were special actually. Along with his intangibles. It was his extreme lack of experience that made him a wild card.

To pretend like he wasn't a top 5 prospect at the time is just baffling.

This.

Trubisky was a swing for the fences because he had all the tools desired at QB, save experience. The gamble was that the game would slow down for him. It just hasn't.

I was a Watson guy in 2017, but claiming Trubisky wasn't a top 5 prospect is absolutely revisionist history.

This would be why I haven't given up on him yet.

His rookie year he was suppose to sit, but we had John Fox, no WR talent, and he played, that's about it he played and looked like a lost rookie a lot of the time.

His second year was pretty good. His legs helped him a lot but he played well.

Last year he went backwards, and so did the entire offense aside from allen robinson. blocking sucked, QB play sucked, TE play was abysmal and the running game sucked.

If they get the line fixed and he still stinks then I will be done with him.

southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:18 pm This would be why I haven't given up on him yet.

His rookie year he was suppose to sit, but we had John Fox, no WR talent, and he played, that's about it he played and looked like a lost rookie a lot of the time.

His second year was pretty good. His legs helped him a lot but he played well.

Last year he went backwards, and so did the entire offense aside from allen robinson. blocking sucked, QB play sucked, TE play was abysmal and the running game sucked.

If they get the line fixed and he still stinks then I will be done with him.

Same here... he's got 6 games to show some semblance of growth in this offense. If he's shitting the bed and it's costing us games, it will be time to cut bait.

I'm sorry I can't wrap my mind around the assumptions that 10 will be starting even one game. So he wins a competition with Foles? Or is he just handed the starting role without winning it like he has his entire career?

I'm hoping to see examples of when a team has brought in and made guarantees to a far-more-expensive QB with a better record of performance against top competition deliberately to sit behind a guy who has been struggling so openly.

And then there is the presence of two coaches with background and experience with new expensive guy. So... all that simply to "challenge" the struggling guy, let him burn through a big chunk of the season & hope the light comes on? So Pace and Nagy are going to bet 40% of their "or else" season on the number 10 and spin the wheel?

That makes no sense. The only thing that make sense to me here, in context, is "struggling guy has nothing more than the camp and preseason opportunity to step up on his own and beat the new guy clearly". Otherwise, he's the backup. Or gone.

Honestly what real evidence do we have that 10 can even beat Bray in a straight up competition?

IE wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:00 am Honestly what real evidence do we have that 10 can even beat Bray in a straight up competition?

We can be honest about Mitch without being too hyperbolic here. There isn't a ton of direct evidence on Bray, but I think if we plugged in guys with his profile into a database, the results would spit out overwhelmingly guys who would struggle to put up even Mitch's career 85 passer rating.

IE wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:00 am I'm sorry I can't wrap my mind around the assumptions that 10 will be starting even one game. So he wins a competition with Foles? Or is he just handed the starting role without winning it like he has his entire career?

I'm hoping to see examples of when a team has brought in and made guarantees to a far-more-expensive QB with a better record of performance against top competition deliberately to sit behind a guy who has been struggling so openly.

And then there is the presence of two coaches with background and experience with new expensive guy. So... all that simply to "challenge" the struggling guy, let him burn through a big chunk of the season & hope the light comes on? So Pace and Nagy are going to bet 40% of their "or else" season on the number 10 and spin the wheel?

That makes no sense. The only thing that make sense to me here, in context, is "struggling guy has nothing more than the camp and preseason opportunity to step up on his own and beat the new guy clearly". Otherwise, he's the backup. Or gone.

Honestly what real evidence do we have that 10 can even beat Bray in a straight up competition?

Foles is pretty much a career backup and was beaten out by a 6th rnd flyer at qb last year. Let’s not act like he is some perennial top 15 QB. He’s had one good season which was a long time ago and had a 6-7 game hot streak. He is a top backup fringe starter that has both performance and injury warts on his resume.

All those coaches also have the Nagy/Reid connection. Not just a connection to foles. Nagy wanted guys versed in his system.

Foles literally is a career backup. Has everyone gone batshit crazy around here??

He's never started a full 16 game season. The most he's ever played is 11.

He played REALLY well his second year in the NFL for 10 games. Eight years ago.

He got hot in the playoffs a couple years ago and yes, he won a Super Bowl.

PS - Only Peyton Manning has ever won a Super Bowl with two different teams. Nick Foles is.... not Peyton Manning.

IE wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:00 am Honestly what real evidence do we have that 10 can even beat Bray in a straight up competition?

Posts like this are why I find it extremely difficult to find value in your perspective.

wab wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 12:39 pm Foles literally is a career backup. Has everyone gone batshit crazy around here??

He's never started a full 16 game season. The most he's ever played is 11.

He played REALLY well his second year in the NFL for 10 games. Eight years ago.

He got hot in the playoffs a couple years ago and yes, he won a Super Bowl.

PS - Only Peyton Manning has ever won a Super Bowl with two different teams. Nick Foles is.... not Peyton Manning.

It's the beautiful meatball Chicago Bears cocktail of two parts "we hate Mitch" and three parts "put in the backup!!!"

IE wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 11:00 am I'm sorry I can't wrap my mind around the assumptions that 10 will be starting even one game. So he wins a competition with Foles? Or is he just handed the starting role without winning it like he has his entire career?

I'm hoping to see examples of when a team has brought in and made guarantees to a far-more-expensive QB with a better record of performance against top competition deliberately to sit behind a guy who has been struggling so openly.

And then there is the presence of two coaches with background and experience with new expensive guy. So... all that simply to "challenge" the struggling guy, let him burn through a big chunk of the season & hope the light comes on? So Pace and Nagy are going to bet 40% of their "or else" season on the number 10 and spin the wheel?

That makes no sense. The only thing that make sense to me here, in context, is "struggling guy has nothing more than the camp and preseason opportunity to step up on his own and beat the new guy clearly". Otherwise, he's the backup. Or gone.

Honestly what real evidence do we have that 10 can even beat Bray in a straight up competition?

The money difference can be summed up in two ways.

First one guy is still on a rookie deal, the other is not and is getting bottom barrel non rookie contract starter money or top backup money whichever way you wish to take it. Remember what we paid giraffe neck to start 4 games?

Second, foles is the backup plan in case Trubisky doesn’t show growth. If Mitch doesn’t show growth and the team tanks both pace and Nagy are fired. Foles is the backup plan to that situation for both pace and Nagy to have another possibility to keeping their jobs.

If Mitch wasn’t going to be the starter headed into preseason he would already be gone via trade. And yes there would be a trade market for him at his salary.

Foles was brought in to Jacksonville to be a starter just 1 year ago, and paid well to do so. So we weren't the only franchise that thought he could be the guy. He happened to get hurt, and Minshew Mania went down and that was that. I think Jacksonville will regret that BTW. And I think Foles caught a break getting out of Jacksonville, which is a bad fit.

As a backup in Philly, he was excellent obviously which led to his being signed as the starter in Jax. He's won a super bowl. He has a 27TD, 2INT, 119 QBR season under his belt for pete's sake - Mitch hasn't sniffed that type of success. And has seen far more on field action than a typical backup, so he's not an unknown nor is he inexperienced like many backups are. He has also excelled when put in the right offense with the right staff, and Chicago has that precise offense AND has the coaches who have gotten the best out of him before. It's not unreasonable or "meathead" AT ALL to think he can repeat that success given those circumstances.

All of these things add up to people thinking he has the best shot at being the Bears starter over Mitch - who had an indisputably terrible season. It's not meathead or crazy at all.

It's still true that our best outcome is Mitch turning his career around and actually winning the job in a legit competition. Foles sets the performance floor, if Mitch can do better than GREAT!! I don't see it, but it's certainly possible.

And fole’s latest season where he started 10 or more games he planted an awesome 69.0 rating in an offense with similar talent issues to Chicago last year.

He was also 0-4 with a worse rating last year as well.

southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:16 pm And fole’s latest season where he started 10 or more games he planted an awesome 69.0 rating in an offense with similar talent issues to Chicago last year.

He was also 0-4 with a worse rating last year as well.

So you want to point to the one year he had where he sucked in LA? OK, have fun with that. Scan his career numbers and you see that is a clear outlier.

Also, last years comp, simply wrong...Not sure what level math you competed at the math olympics, but 84.6 > 83.0 (Mitch's 2019 number). And Foles still bested him on a team that had QUIT for the last 3 starts he played. And after 12 weeks off with a broken collarbone. Bad take dude.

Look, I don't care what you think and I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. If you want to scan through 8 years of stats and pull out the one nit you can find that supports whatever POV you have, go for it. Whatever makes you happy. Trying to convince people of things on the internet is like trying to convince Homer Simpson not to eat a donut.

I was just replying to the sentiment that folks were saying it was stupid/meathead to think Foles could succeed here. Because it's not. That doesn't mean I'd bet the farm on him winning MVP or anything (although, he has won a Super Bowl MVP before, but what does that matter right?). But the reality is that Trubisky has set a really easy bar to clear for seeing 'improvement' from the position. I'd argue that the only meathead take is thinking that Mitch is ever going to live up to his draft status when he's shown absolutely nothing, even in 2018, to justify that.

I would agree that claiming Mitch can't beat out Bray in an honest competition is a bad take though, sorry IE. We've only seen Bray play against absolute garbage time, not making the roster, preseason scrubs - you really can't project anything from that.

Never call the baby ugly.

He also was outplayed by butt fumble the following season in philly and was shipped to the Rams where he was outplayed by case Keenum. He never sees the field if Wentz doesn’t go down and was thoroughly outplayed and replaced by Minshew last year.

His one awesome year he had a 1600 yd rusher, deshawn Jackson, two stud tight ends an a coupl other pretty decent receiving options.

There is a reason this guy is often available and often replaced.

I am just saying those that think he is some sort of savior or a significant upgrade are going to be severely disappointed.

IE wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 1:40 pm Never call the baby ugly.

Especially when blind.

You won't convince me, certainly not by being so patently wrong on various facts as you try so hard.

"...and was thoroughly outplayed and replaced by Minshew last year."

I'll just let you correct yourself on this beauty. Yikes that's bad. You'll notice I don't have to fabricate anything to make my points, just the facts ma'am ~Joe Friday

Anyhow, we'll see who's right...I think he'll be a significant upgrade.

Also, Mitch is the new butt fumble. He butt fumbled the Chargers game away in horrific fashion.

Personally, I think that people are deluded if they think this is going to be a straight up competition between Foles and Trubisky. The Bears still want Trubisky to succeed. Defilippo was brought in for that reason. Foles was brought in to push Mitchell and as insurance in case Mitchell craps down his leg like he did last year. If their respective performances are even remotely close, Mitchell's going to get the nod. The situation will be handled like the Titans handled Mariota/Tannehill last year.

Yogi da Bear wrote: ↑Fri Mar 27, 2020 2:18 pm Personally, I think that people are deluded if they think this is going to be a straight up competition between Foles and Trubisky. The Bears still want Trubisky to succeed. Defilippo was brought in for that reason. Foles was brought in to push Mitchell and as insurance in case Mitchell craps down his leg like he did last year. If their respective performances are even remotely close, Mitchell's going to get the nod. The situation will be handled like the Titans handled Mariota/Tannehill last year.

Yea most likely. We'll know when camp starts if they are getting even practice time or not, if not then they are forcing Mitch and going to let him play a few games to see if he turns it around. He'll have a short leash in that case. If it's a real competition, I don't see Mitch winning, but you never know. Maybe 4th year is the charm? Lol...I can't imagine the leash a guy like Foles would get if he had a 27TD 2INT 119 QBR season AND a Super Bowl MVP under his belt here in Chicago. People still cling to Mitch and he's given them nothing at all.

Butt fumble. Never even touched. And this play was immediately after he missed a WIDE OPEN TD which would have sealed the game.

You know one good thing about this "competition," Trubisky should actually take preseason snaps. In fact, they both should. I still think it's criminal for where Mitchell was in his development that he didn't play last preseason. He was clearly not even close to being ready opening day against the Packers.