Re: Update: Carson Wentz traded to Colts
Posted: Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:30 pm
Sam Howell, Desmond Ridder, Brock Purdy, Dustin Crum, and maybe even Zerrick Cooper all say hello.
Over 10 Years of Bearing Down
https://www.bearsfansonline.com/forum/
Sam Howell, Desmond Ridder, Brock Purdy, Dustin Crum, and maybe even Zerrick Cooper all say hello.
Jayden Daniels, Kedon Slovis, and Spencer Rattler too (Daniels is gonna be goooood).thunderspirit wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:30 pmSam Howell, Desmond Ridder, Brock Purdy, Dustin Crum, and maybe even Zerrick Cooper all say hello.
They can both be iffy evaluation toolsdplank wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:45 am I'm not going to defend QB Ratings as the end all QB stat and I recognize the flaws in the stat, but it's far more meaningful than wins/losses. And there's a lot of folks that point to wins/losses as a primary QB evaluation tool and it's mind blowingly moronic to me. Just read the Twittersphere, every time a Mitch conversation comes up you'll see someone pop on and point to wins. Kyle Orton had a similar dynamic here, and we saw how good a QB he turned out to be.
My POV is that even if Mitch is one of the better options in the FA QB market, he can't come back here. HIs time here is over, it didn't work, best of luck elsewhere.
thunderspirit wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:30 pmSam Howell, Desmond Ridder, Brock Purdy, Dustin Crum, and maybe even Zerrick Cooper all say hello.
Well played, sir.RustyTrubisky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:31 pmthunderspirit wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 3:30 pm
Sam Howell, Desmond Ridder, Brock Purdy, Dustin Crum, and maybe even Zerrick Cooper all say hello.
Yes - agreed, some W/L scoring examples can be informative on their own. Those results will show in the stats as well. I don't think 23-20 tells you much, really. It probably comes down to who made one or two big plays -and that is usually the QB. But it might be the D or ST so it's hard to tell.RichH55 wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:53 pmThey can both be iffy evaluation toolsdplank wrote: ↑Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:45 am I'm not going to defend QB Ratings as the end all QB stat and I recognize the flaws in the stat, but it's far more meaningful than wins/losses. And there's a lot of folks that point to wins/losses as a primary QB evaluation tool and it's mind blowingly moronic to me. Just read the Twittersphere, every time a Mitch conversation comes up you'll see someone pop on and point to wins. Kyle Orton had a similar dynamic here, and we saw how good a QB he turned out to be.
My POV is that even if Mitch is one of the better options in the FA QB market, he can't come back here. HIs time here is over, it didn't work, best of luck elsewhere.
Do you give no merit to wins/losses though at all? If a team loses 10-7 - Maybe thats a little on the QB?
You get boatraced 38-31....fair enough
What about a 23-20 loss?
He was never the best decision maker, and now that his physical skills are deteriorating...he's kinda just a guy. You could get by with him for a year, but I don't think he has much left in the tank.cblaz11 wrote: ↑Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:10 am Just out of curiosity, is Cam Newton an option for anyone?
He’s probably more talented then most QBs available, he’s got a proven track record, and his teammates seem to like him.
With our defense, WRs, and RBs, I’d be interested to see him here. Signing him would also be cheap....It would enable us to keep all of our picks and continue to build.
Thoughts? He’s only 32 I believe.
He did say last season that Chicago was one of his preferred destinations.
I absolutely could be wrong, and I did forget about him getting Covid.RustyTrubisky wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 6:53 am yeah it's the weirdest thing. i love cam, i would have welcomed him with open arms last year. I live in patriot's land and was atleast excited to see him playing here. i watched a handful of pats games this past year. Dude (atleast externally) had a great attitude all year and bought in completely. And like, I dont have a fuckin clue what went wrong.
I think saying his physical skills are diminishing is an easy answer that doesnt feel right. I saw him rifle stuff, i saw him plow over dudes. He was throwing to bums all year. Belichick could not draft a wr to save his life and I think that's a hilarious blind spot. He absolutely wasnt the same player after covid.
REGARDLESS, i'm firmly in the "start foles, draft SOMEBODY" camp. no more bandaids from the expired med kit.
I'm 100% with you on Watson, he's simply a great player and would solve our QB problem instantly. And no, I don't buy the whole "you won't be able to build around him" argument, even if the cost is 3 first round picks and a couple players. You could add up the value for every first round pick we've taken over the last 10 years and it still wouldn't be equal to the value of Watson. Or Russell Wilson. Or, to a slightly lesser degree, Dak Prescott.The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:30 pm Cam Newton is a hard “no” for me because I want to FIX the problem. I don’t want a new QB in two or three years. I want The Guy.
Newton is 31 and on the downside of his career.
Watson obviously fixes the problem. Like big.
Minshew is only 24(?) and if he takes care of business, with OL help, he also fixes the problem just in a different way.
I don't disagree at all. I'm just not sure the Texans would be interested in anything the Bears can offer.dplank wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:48 pmI'm 100% with you on Watson, he's simply a great player and would solve our QB problem instantly. And no, I don't buy the whole "you won't be able to build around him" argument, even if the cost is 3 first round picks and a couple players. You could add up the value for every first round pick we've taken over the last 10 years and it still wouldn't be equal to the value of Watson. Or Russell Wilson. Or, to a slightly lesser degree, Dak Prescott.The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:30 pm Cam Newton is a hard “no” for me because I want to FIX the problem. I don’t want a new QB in two or three years. I want The Guy.
Newton is 31 and on the downside of his career.
Watson obviously fixes the problem. Like big.
Minshew is only 24(?) and if he takes care of business, with OL help, he also fixes the problem just in a different way.
If I'm Pace, I'm thinking legacy here. Like, I can be THE GUY who FINALLY solves the QB quandary in Chicago! He'd be a legend. It would require bold action and huge cahones. The nahsayers will come out for sure, but, frankly, fuck them.
Watson can be built around. If the cost is three 1sts and Roquan we could totally do it. Build the OL with 2nd and 3rd round picks.dplank wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:48 pmI'm 100% with you on Watson, he's simply a great player and would solve our QB problem instantly. And no, I don't buy the whole "you won't be able to build around him" argument, even if the cost is 3 first round picks and a couple players. You could add up the value for every first round pick we've taken over the last 10 years and it still wouldn't be equal to the value of Watson. Or Russell Wilson. Or, to a slightly lesser degree, Dak Prescott.The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:30 pm Cam Newton is a hard “no” for me because I want to FIX the problem. I don’t want a new QB in two or three years. I want The Guy.
Newton is 31 and on the downside of his career.
Watson obviously fixes the problem. Like big.
Minshew is only 24(?) and if he takes care of business, with OL help, he also fixes the problem just in a different way.
If I'm Pace, I'm thinking legacy here. Like, I can be THE GUY who FINALLY solves the QB quandary in Chicago! He'd be a legend. It would require bold action and huge cahones. The nahsayers will come out for sure, but, frankly, fuck them.
The thing I think a lot of people miss in this conversation is that we don't have to solve everything in one off season if we got Watson now. First, Watson can cover up for a lot of other issues on your team (not too many obviously, he couldn't carry the Texans to a winning record by himself last year so there are limits here). But if we got Watson, at his age, we conceivably have a 12 year window with elite QB play in Chicago. So yea, maybe we can't solve everything this first offseason, but there will be a lot of winning opportunities in that span of time and we'd have the one element that everyone agrees is a must have to win a super bowl - a top notch QB. This has eluded us for a century now, so let's not pretend we can just draft one and keep all those assets - we have proven we can't! Or, at best, it's a longshot that we after all these years get it right! IMO we have to buy our way out of this mess.The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:10 pmWatson can be built around. If the cost is three 1sts and Roquan we could totally do it. Build the OL with 2nd and 3rd round picks.dplank wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:48 pm
I'm 100% with you on Watson, he's simply a great player and would solve our QB problem instantly. And no, I don't buy the whole "you won't be able to build around him" argument, even if the cost is 3 first round picks and a couple players. You could add up the value for every first round pick we've taken over the last 10 years and it still wouldn't be equal to the value of Watson. Or Russell Wilson. Or, to a slightly lesser degree, Dak Prescott.
If I'm Pace, I'm thinking legacy here. Like, I can be THE GUY who FINALLY solves the QB quandary in Chicago! He'd be a legend. It would require bold action and huge cahones. The nahsayers will come out for sure, but, frankly, fuck them.
FAs would also love to come here and play with him.
A prime age future HOF QB covers a lot of warts. Ever heard the phrase, “Sales floats on top of shit.”? That’s a guy like Watson. He makes the WRs better, the RB better, the OL better. The whole effing thing.
Watson might actually save Pace’s job. Nagy’s too.
Regarding the opportunity cost, you’re exactly right. How many first rounders just bust out?
He’d be the face of the Bears and Chicago sports for a decade. And if he wins a Super Bowl here there will be a statue of him just like Jordan. He’s that big of a deal. These opportunities only come around once every blue moon. If there’s even a fool’s hope of getting him Pace better call the Texans every damn day until they say yes.
Figure it out Pace.
Exactly. We’ve got him for 12 years.dplank wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:15 pmThe thing I think a lot of people miss in this conversation is that we don't have to solve everything in one off season if we got Watson now. First, Watson can cover up for a lot of other issues on your team (not too many obviously, he couldn't carry the Texans to a winning record by himself last year so there are limits here). But if we got Watson, at his age, we conceivably have a 12 year window with elite QB play in Chicago. So yea, maybe we can't solve everything this first offseason, but there will be a lot of winning opportunities in that span of time and we'd have the one element that everyone agrees is a must have to win a super bowl - a top notch QB. This has eluded us for a century now, so let's not pretend we can just draft one and keep all those assets - we have proven we can't! Or, at best, it's a longshot that we after all these years get it right! IMO we have to buy our way out of this mess.The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 4:10 pm
Watson can be built around. If the cost is three 1sts and Roquan we could totally do it. Build the OL with 2nd and 3rd round picks.
FAs would also love to come here and play with him.
A prime age future HOF QB covers a lot of warts. Ever heard the phrase, “Sales floats on top of shit.”? That’s a guy like Watson. He makes the WRs better, the RB better, the OL better. The whole effing thing.
Watson might actually save Pace’s job. Nagy’s too.
Regarding the opportunity cost, you’re exactly right. How many first rounders just bust out?
He’d be the face of the Bears and Chicago sports for a decade. And if he wins a Super Bowl here there will be a statue of him just like Jordan. He’s that big of a deal. These opportunities only come around once every blue moon. If there’s even a fool’s hope of getting him Pace better call the Texans every damn day until they say yes.
Figure it out Pace.
dplank wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 1:48 pmI'm 100% with you on Watson, he's simply a great player and would solve our QB problem instantly. And no, I don't buy the whole "you won't be able to build around him" argument, even if the cost is 3 first round picks and a couple players. You could add up the value for every first round pick we've taken over the last 10 years and it still wouldn't be equal to the value of Watson.The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:30 pm Cam Newton is a hard “no” for me because I want to FIX the problem. I don’t want a new QB in two or three years. I want The Guy.
Newton is 31 and on the downside of his career.
Watson obviously fixes the problem. Like big.
Minshew is only 24(?) and if he takes care of business, with OL help, he also fixes the problem just in a different way.