Excited Delirium Over Fields

For all things Chicago Bears

Moderator: wab

Locked
TheWorldBreaker
MVP
Posts: 1117
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2013 9:57 pm
Has thanked: 30 times
Been thanked: 119 times

RichH55 wrote: Tue May 25, 2021 6:04 pm
TheWorldBreaker wrote: Fri May 21, 2021 10:44 am

His WR’s were amazing but his offensive line was very unimpressive at pass blocking (and snapping in one game). Some of that is because of Covid protocols but that line got beaten badly by pass rushers multiple times in basically every game.

I’d be ecstatic to get either Olave or Wilson and have no interest in anyone on that line after watching all of Fields’ passing snaps.

Two of their Interior OL were drafted in the 2nd and 3rd Rounds respectively this year, the TE was drafted too - AND the Left Tackle is projected to be a relatively high pick

The longer you hold the ball - the better the pass rush will always look IMHO
The offensive line getting blown up off the ball will also make the pass rush look good.

You can literally watch every passing snap he took at Ohio State on YouTube and you can clearly see the pass blocking especially isn’t nearly as good in 2020. And they were definitely not dominant or even impressive against good teams.

Also, in the Michigan State game I don’t think he got a single clean shotgun snap. And Fields handled that very well.
User avatar
The Marshall Plan
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8411
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2014 11:47 am
Location: Parts Unknown
Has thanked: 909 times
Been thanked: 1277 times

IE wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 7:19 pm
The Marshall Plan wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 5:14 pm

Bitchin'! Lookin' good!

How did you get yours so fast? Where did you get it from?

The one I ordered from Fanatics won't be here until July.
Annie literally ordered it during the draft weekend, because I was on cloud 9! Or that Monday. She said she considered changing her order to a 3X after looking at my Walter jersey. She contacted them within a few hours and they said they could change it but then it would be July! So it's cool I just can't wear a hoodie under this one. It's for indoor games in Vegas and Detroit!
We were just talking about this the other day. When I bought the jersey Fanatics told me July. Then I get an email from them this morning saying that it's being delivered by FedEx today.

When's Opening Day dammit?

Image
Image
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

TheWorldBreaker wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 10:29 pm
RichH55 wrote: Tue May 25, 2021 6:04 pm


Two of their Interior OL were drafted in the 2nd and 3rd Rounds respectively this year, the TE was drafted too - AND the Left Tackle is projected to be a relatively high pick

The longer you hold the ball - the better the pass rush will always look IMHO
The offensive line getting blown up off the ball will also make the pass rush look good.

You can literally watch every passing snap he took at Ohio State on YouTube and you can clearly see the pass blocking especially isn’t nearly as good in 2020. And they were definitely not dominant or even impressive against good teams.

Also, in the Michigan State game I don’t think he got a single clean shotgun snap. And Fields handled that very well.
We disagree - and seemingly NFL Scouting departments did too
User avatar
G08
Hall of Famer
Posts: 20554
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:34 pm
Location: Football Hell
Has thanked: 209 times
Been thanked: 753 times



This play is sahhh-weet, you can do SO MUCH off this formation/look. Defenses won't know what's coming :evilgrin:
9 PLAYOFF APPEARANCES IN THE PAST 35 SEASONS

User avatar
WP.1
Player of the Month
Posts: 271
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:03 am
Been thanked: 1 time

RichH55 wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 5:20 pm
TheWorldBreaker wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 10:29 pm

The offensive line getting blown up off the ball will also make the pass rush look good.

You can literally watch every passing snap he took at Ohio State on YouTube and you can clearly see the pass blocking especially isn’t nearly as good in 2020. And they were definitely not dominant or even impressive against good teams.

Also, in the Michigan State game I don’t think he got a single clean shotgun snap. And Fields handled that very well.
We disagree - and seemingly NFL Scouting departments did too
both season
There are plenty of awful OL blocking plays. free rusher or zero chance of success.

like one Fields TD run escape - untouched NT straight forward rush.
User avatar
AZ_Bearfan
MVP
Posts: 1491
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:49 pm
Location: Mesa, AZ
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 77 times



3 of the top 5 jersey sales are Fields and the hype-train hasn't even left the station yet.
Image
User avatar
Rusty Trombagent
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7336
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:19 am
Location: Maine!
Has thanked: 554 times
Been thanked: 967 times

tebow being #1 and Lawrence being #14 will never not be funny to me.
Image
User avatar
docc
Head Coach
Posts: 3809
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 4:33 pm
Location: Outpost of Reality S.E. Arizona
Has thanked: 934 times
Been thanked: 168 times

TeeBlow will be a collector item..game unused Jersey..
Last edited by docc on Fri May 28, 2021 11:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
AZ_Bearfan
MVP
Posts: 1491
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 6:49 pm
Location: Mesa, AZ
Has thanked: 131 times
Been thanked: 77 times

Tebow may never play a snap, but you'll still see that jersey at home games for the next 20 years.
Image
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12016
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 2128 times

RichH55 wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 5:20 pm
TheWorldBreaker wrote: Wed May 26, 2021 10:29 pm

The offensive line getting blown up off the ball will also make the pass rush look good.

You can literally watch every passing snap he took at Ohio State on YouTube and you can clearly see the pass blocking especially isn’t nearly as good in 2020. And they were definitely not dominant or even impressive against good teams.

Also, in the Michigan State game I don’t think he got a single clean shotgun snap. And Fields handled that very well.
We disagree - and seemingly NFL Scouting departments did too
Clemson is second only to Alabama for churning out pro talent. Why don’t you ding Lawrence? I don’t get why you’re being so negative. You ding Fields for playing Rutgers all the time too, but don’t ding Lawrence for playing the Citidel. I just don’t get it, you’re a Bears fan and he’s our future?
User avatar
WP.1
Player of the Month
Posts: 271
Joined: Fri Sep 15, 2017 5:03 am
Been thanked: 1 time

or mighty Butler Bulldogs
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

dplank wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 9:03 pm
RichH55 wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 5:20 pm

We disagree - and seemingly NFL Scouting departments did too
Clemson is second only to Alabama for churning out pro talent. Why don’t you ding Lawrence? I don’t get why you’re being so negative. You ding Fields for playing Rutgers all the time too, but don’t ding Lawrence for playing the Citidel. I just don’t get it, you’re a Bears fan and he’s our future?
I absolutely do ding Lawrence for the talent around him and a good chunk of the schedule
(I wasnt the one who liked to ignore 17 INT against that similar inferior competition for most of the year when it was a different Clemson QB)

I'd note that when I praise Mac Jones or Trevor Lawrence (Who again didn't go #1 because he's white and has great hair) - you do NOT see me posted a highlight v. Citadel or Rutgers and then marveling either

Ohio State and Alabama actually produced the most Picks this year. 10 Each (*)

Clemson had 5.

All on Offense though (This is kind of a knock on Trevor and Fields - Trevor had talent around him - but Fields epic performance was against a Defense that also gave up 47 Points to Notre Dame and didn't have a single player Drafted)

(Yes, I know you need to look at more than this year - since there could be stud sophomores/juniors - though I think playing time is key to evaluation on what the player was "Surrounded" with - Like if the kid got 10 Snaps but then is a monster in 2022 - Did that really help out Lawrence or Fields or Mac Jones?)

(*) Two of Alabama's kids though missed a good chunk of the season - so that should be factored in - Granted Alabama's 3rd WR was pretty darn good too - but it's not quite the same as the Headline of "Two Top 10 pick WR!" either

I think the Alabama HB was the best of the bunch but Sermon looked great to me too - also Im not sure Harris can keep jumping defenders in the Pros

I thought both the Alabama LT and Clemson LT probably have to move to Guard in the Pros (WE WILL SEE ) - Whereas I think the tOSU kid if a good bet to stay there in the Pros (and he should be no later than Round 2 next year is the "current" thinking - which means very little admittedly

But if you are asking me should Mac Jones and Trevor Lawrence also be dinged for schedules (to some extent) and talent around them -

Yes. Absolutely
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

And yes I know their draft status - I think both of those Clemson WR were underrated - I know Powell lasted until the compensation picks in the 5th and Rodgers was "only" a mid 3rd

But I think both of them are going to be Good pros
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12500
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am
Location: Plymouth, MI
Has thanked: 523 times
Been thanked: 700 times
Contact:

RustinFields wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 7:14 pm tebow being #1 and Lawrence being #14 will never not be funny to me.
I think it's because it is based on bicep circumference.

Seriously though 34 is a fine age to play TE in the NFL. Ask Jimmy Graham. And this has to be a good sign for just turned 24 Jesper Horsted - who now has 10 more years to grow his biceps and learn to block.

But seriously seriously... what are they (Jax) doing with this Tebow thing? I can see no way it benefits the football team or their shiny new QB.
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
User avatar
wulfy
MVP
Posts: 1550
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2020 5:51 pm
Has thanked: 128 times
Been thanked: 271 times
Contact:

The Marshall Plan wrote: Thu May 27, 2021 3:52 pm
When's Opening Day dammit?
NFL Season kicks off in 100 Days!
HurricaneBear
Head Coach
Posts: 2160
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2012 6:56 am
Has thanked: 1845 times
Been thanked: 348 times

IE wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:21 am
RustinFields wrote: Fri May 28, 2021 7:14 pm tebow being #1 and Lawrence being #14 will never not be funny to me.
I think it's because it is based on bicep circumference.

Seriously though 34 is a fine age to play TE in the NFL. Ask Jimmy Graham. And this has to be a good sign for just turned 24 Jesper Horsted - who now has 10 more years to grow his biceps and learn to block.

But seriously seriously... what are they (Jax) doing with this Tebow thing? I can see no way it benefits the football team or their shiny new QB.
Someone else mentioned this and I think it makes some sense - having the Tebow sideshow takes all the attention off Lawrence. They probably hope that will lower the pressure for him and ease his transition.

Of course, imo, if your "generational talent, first overall, sure thing, future HoF" QB needs the attention taken off him thats a pretty bad sign. Can't picture Fields needing that. But then again, when they went head to head Fields always rose up to the challenge and out played the golden boy.
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12500
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am
Location: Plymouth, MI
Has thanked: 523 times
Been thanked: 700 times
Contact:

HurricaneBear wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:54 am
IE wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:21 am

I think it's because it is based on bicep circumference.

Seriously though 34 is a fine age to play TE in the NFL. Ask Jimmy Graham. And this has to be a good sign for just turned 24 Jesper Horsted - who now has 10 more years to grow his biceps and learn to block.

But seriously seriously... what are they (Jax) doing with this Tebow thing? I can see no way it benefits the football team or their shiny new QB.
Someone else mentioned this and I think it makes some sense - having the Tebow sideshow takes all the attention off Lawrence. They probably hope that will lower the pressure for him and ease his transition.

Of course, imo, if your "generational talent, first overall, sure thing, future HoF" QB needs the attention taken off him thats a pretty bad sign. Can't picture Fields needing that. But then again, when they went head to head Fields always rose up to the challenge and out played the golden boy.
I just don't see it being constructive from any angle. Creating an attention competition isn't usually something these egocentric QBs generally appreciate. And if he needs to be protected from pressure, just start Minshew. lol
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
User avatar
Otis Day
Hall of Famer
Posts: 8059
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 2:43 pm
Location: Armpit of IL.
Has thanked: 120 times
Been thanked: 306 times

It is not like Lawrence is begging for a diversion, this is something Meyer has brought on himself. Kind of gets Meyer off the hook a little as well (even though he was behind the signing). It has been all Tebow, Tebow, Tebow.
User avatar
wab
Mod
Posts: 29805
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:49 pm
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 1956 times

IE wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:21 am But seriously seriously... what are they (Jax) doing with this Tebow thing? I can see no way it benefits the football team or their shiny new QB.
I think it's pretty clear from the jersey sales alone...he's a marketing gimmick. Dude is a legend there, and he's going to sell tickets even if he barely plays.

When Jacksonville lines him up in the wildcat for the first time, that stadium is going to go bonkers.
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12016
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 2128 times

RichH55 wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 4:06 pm I absolutely do ding Lawrence for the talent around him and a good chunk of the schedule
(I wasnt the one who liked to ignore 17 INT against that similar inferior competition for most of the year when it was a different Clemson QB)
So, I'm going to appeal to your seeming attempt at better behavior and post this here for you to read again - I've mentioned it more than once but I'll give benefit of doubt that maybe you just didn't bother to read it. And after reading it now, I'd ask that you stop misrepresenting that I "like to ignore 17 INT" on Watson and not mention that again as it's a blatant lie. Thanks!
dplank wrote: In Watsons sophomore year, he had combined rushing/passing TD's: 47 against 13 picks.
In Watsons junior year, he had a combined rushing/passing TD's: 50 against 17 picks.
And yards combined, sophomore year was 5,214 and junior was almost identical.

Trevor Lawrence sophomore year, about 4,200 combined yards, 45 TD against 8 picks
Trevor Lawrence junior year, about 3,400 combined yards, 32 TD against 5 picks

When I look at these numbers and put them in context of the team they played on, I see Watson as the better player. Now, I can see the value in the reduced INT's from Lawrence, I'm not blind to it, but he's behind every other category, BIG in some cases, and the fact is Lawrence had a GREAT defense so he didn't have to force it as much. That plays both ways, meaning that fact would also suppress his yardage/TD numbers as well as the INT numbers because he wasn't having to run up the score as much and take as many chances. These things go hand in hand, context matters.

You may feel Lawrence is the better player, that's fine and that's NOT the point here. So please save it and focus on the actual point being made. The point is that the national media has anointed Lawrence a "generational talent" (the last one was Andrew Luck, hmmmmm) and found all sorts of reasons to ding Watson - many so much so that they sandbagged him as a 2nd rounder LMAO. It's very difficult to justify that when objectively looking at the two players, but that's exactly what happened. And we know the rest of the story now.
And now back to the issue - I've never heard you actually ding Lawrence. Maybe you have and I haven't read it, if so please feel free to quote yourself and I'll retract. All I recall you ever saying about him is that he's "generational". No dings or downgrades or qualifications about opposing talent / team talent disparity or anything else. Not until after you were called out for it.
User avatar
IE
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12500
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 8:46 am
Location: Plymouth, MI
Has thanked: 523 times
Been thanked: 700 times
Contact:

wab wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:27 am
IE wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 8:21 am But seriously seriously... what are they (Jax) doing with this Tebow thing? I can see no way it benefits the football team or their shiny new QB.
I think it's pretty clear from the jersey sales alone...he's a marketing gimmick. Dude is a legend there, and he's going to sell tickets even if he barely plays.

When Jacksonville lines him up in the wildcat for the first time, that stadium is going to go bonkers.
I do understand the money and circus part of it. On the face it seems maybe harmless fun. But I'm thinking maybe it is also sort of a slight to the rookie? So Lawrence gets cheers and such... but then Tebow gets more when he comes in and it just seems like such a weird message. I do believe Lawrence will intellectually "understand" the Tebow love... but human nature being what it is it could still be in his head as an irritant. I find that strange and think the rookie baby jesus should get all the love befitting a franchise savior.
2023 Chicago Bears... emerging from a long hibernation, and hungry!
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

dplank wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 11:36 am
RichH55 wrote: Mon May 31, 2021 4:06 pm I absolutely do ding Lawrence for the talent around him and a good chunk of the schedule
(I wasnt the one who liked to ignore 17 INT against that similar inferior competition for most of the year when it was a different Clemson QB)
So, I'm going to appeal to your seeming attempt at better behavior and post this here for you to read again - I've mentioned it more than once but I'll give benefit of doubt that maybe you just didn't bother to read it. And after reading it now, I'd ask that you stop misrepresenting that I "like to ignore 17 INT" on Watson and not mention that again as it's a blatant lie. Thanks!
dplank wrote: In Watsons sophomore year, he had combined rushing/passing TD's: 47 against 13 picks.
In Watsons junior year, he had a combined rushing/passing TD's: 50 against 17 picks.
And yards combined, sophomore year was 5,214 and junior was almost identical.

Trevor Lawrence sophomore year, about 4,200 combined yards, 45 TD against 8 picks
Trevor Lawrence junior year, about 3,400 combined yards, 32 TD against 5 picks

When I look at these numbers and put them in context of the team they played on, I see Watson as the better player. Now, I can see the value in the reduced INT's from Lawrence, I'm not blind to it, but he's behind every other category, BIG in some cases, and the fact is Lawrence had a GREAT defense so he didn't have to force it as much. That plays both ways, meaning that fact would also suppress his yardage/TD numbers as well as the INT numbers because he wasn't having to run up the score as much and take as many chances. These things go hand in hand, context matters.

You may feel Lawrence is the better player, that's fine and that's NOT the point here. So please save it and focus on the actual point being made. The point is that the national media has anointed Lawrence a "generational talent" (the last one was Andrew Luck, hmmmmm) and found all sorts of reasons to ding Watson - many so much so that they sandbagged him as a 2nd rounder LMAO. It's very difficult to justify that when objectively looking at the two players, but that's exactly what happened. And we know the rest of the story now.
And now back to the issue - I've never heard you actually ding Lawrence. Maybe you have and I haven't read it, if so please feel free to quote yourself and I'll retract. All I recall you ever saying about him is that he's "generational". No dings or downgrades or qualifications about opposing talent / team talent disparity or anything else. Not until after you were called out for it.

IMHO Yeah it's largely glossing over the INT thing and then saying things like the other stuff clearly shows Watson is better!!!!

17 INT in 1 College Season these days - especially when a team plays a schedule like Clemson does - Is Simply A Lot. No two ways about that (even when you try and piggyback in Runnings Stats - but Make sure to not note that they fell markedly in Watsons Jr Year in both Yards and YPC). And with Running Stats for QBs - that is something to be careful about for College numbers Not coo about - especially when the guy is more of a Good Athlete than a Great one (this wasn't Lamar Jackson or Vick or even the Size of Cam Newton)

Nor is it clear why running numbers defer away from Interception numbers -

The above analysis is iffy based on some bias IMHO

For instance - I do have a preference in the players - But
I don't have a strong opinion on
Player A. 69% Completion, 9.4 YPA, 169 Rating (**)
Player B 67% Completely, 7.9 YPA, 151.1 Rating

Not really - both are really good numbers - Video Game basically - but Player A is Lawrence there and B is Watson so its weird when that is read as Watson is clearly the better player -But to me those numbers just say both were really good in College

As far as context mattering - Watsons numbers got worse in many of these categories from Sophomore Year to Junior year - Never addressed of course (at least not in the above post - maybe elsewhere)- but that is also a negative thing

(Watson threw for 400 more yards and 6 more TD his Junior year - but his Rushing yards fell markedly (40+%), he threw more INT, completion %/ YPA/ Passer Rating all fell (in fairness some only by a little)


But this statement - Lawrence is "he's behind every other category" - is demonstrably false





(**) I think the Rate stat is absolute garbage - but you seem to like it so weird that its not more prominent in the above analysis

It's also really a red flag to look at Junior years and total yardage - but not acknowledge that one guy played 15 Games that year and the other played 10 - Weird Choice but ok (And yes even in Sophomore year and true Freshman year Lawrence threw 12 INT TOTAL in 30 Games) Maybe Watson was just that much better at not getting Covid?!??


Defense point

Lawrence's "GREAT " Defense - 0 Players drafted. 2 players did get 1st team ACC (Kendrick was dismissed from the team and missed multiple 2020 games due to Disciplinary Reasons - but he was first team ACC). We both agree the ACC isn't the best of conferences right? (For both Lawrence and Watsons tenures)
No national award winners, No All-Americans
(***) In fairness I fully expect the Sophomore DT they have who WAS 1st team ACC to probably be a very high draft pick so we should add that in for sure

All awards and such taken from Wikipedia (so apologies if they missed anything pertinent - happy to add it in!!!)

Watson's Lesser Defense? (Based on context we can assume it wasn't GREAT) -
2 Defensive Players drafted in 2017 (3rd and 4th Rounds respectively)
Ben Boulware (not drafted) - Did win the Lambert Award, Co-Defensive ACC Defensive Player of the Year
Wilkins - future 1st Round pick, All American
Dexter Lawrence - future 1st Round pick, Freshman All American,

Whats messed up - Watson was only 2nd team ACC his Junior Year - Wild - I certainly don't agree there but he was (even with the INT and the lesser running numbers his Junior year he was a helluva College QB and the ACC isn't that great)(***)

(***) Editor's Note: Looked up who was 1st Team ACC that year: Lamar Jackson. Fair enough

All Americans 2016 Clemson
All-Americans
CB Cordrea Tankersley: 1st Team - USA Today; 2nd Team - Fox Sports; 3rd Team - AP, Athlon
QB Deshaun Watson: 1st Team - Scout.com; 2nd Team - AP, AFCA, Athlon, Sporting News, Sports Illustrated, Walter Camp
DT Carlos Watkins: 1st Team - CBS Sports; 2nd Team - AP, Athlon
DE Christian Wilkins: 1st Team - AFCA, FWAA; 2nd Team - Fox Sports, Sporting News, USA Today, Walter Camp; 3rd Team - AP, Athlon
LB Ben Boulware: 2nd Team - AFCA, FWAA, USA Today, Walter Camp; 3rd Team - AP, Athlon
TE Jordan Leggett: 2nd Team - CBS Sports; 3rd Team - Athlon
WR Mike Williams: 2nd Team - Walter Camp; 3rd Team - Athlon
DT Dexter Lawrence: Freshman - FWAA, ESPN, Scout.com, USA Today


So the whole Trevor Lawrence had a great Defense and Watson had markedly less - just seems like more Bias to me

Especially if we are using 2020 as the benchmark (which to bring it back to the Fields context - We basically are.- No one wants to talk about Fields when he lost to Clemson)

Clemson had more defensive talent in 2019 and 2018 than 2020 - but I think that was true in 2016 too - I think 2020 was a pretty average (for their standards) Clemson defense

At the very, very least - I'd say the Defenses were at least not showing a particular advantage for Trevor Lawrence
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12016
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 2128 times

Dude. Not reading all that, a simple acknowledgment that the claim that I “ignored 17 INT” is simply false is all that is needed. We can still disagree without devolving or misrepresentation.

If you re read my finishing sentences you’ll see that I can see why some may prefer Lawrence over Watson. What I can’t see is why one is “generational” and the other was dinged and nit picked into a second round grade. That was my point. I prefer Watson by a smidge because he beat Lawrence in 2 of the 3 most important categories: yards and TDs go to Watson, INTs goes to Lawrence.

I want Lawrence to fail.
Last edited by dplank on Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

And yes to me Lawrence is generational - There aren't alot of dings to find on those types of guys

Would it have been better if he won Multiple Championships rather than a pedestrian one? Or shouldn't have gotten Covid?

It's also the nature of this being a Bears Board

For instance - even though I like Lawrence as generational - if some Jags homer was posting that Lawerence is a Home Run because of
A) his Pro Day
B) his Citadel/Rutgers performances
C) Press Conferences

I feel like you know I wouldn't be able to resist saying those were foolish reasons

I will say the ACC is not very good - and Clemson's SOS leaves a lot to be desired - those are legit dings - Helps that he played in the College Playoffs every year though


And I really liked Mac Jones - I ding him for all sorts of things (I think we'd both agree Alabama has clearly better Talent than Clemson did). Mac's arm is "Fine". His athleticism is "Fine". Alabama has monster talent around him- I didn't like Tua and AJ McCarron was one of my least favorite QB prospects in recent memory

It's tough to ding the generational talents though - I don't really see negatives around Lawrence - He's the damn Prototype of what you would want a QB prospect to have in his quiver
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12016
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 2128 times

RichH55 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:01 pm And yes to me Lawrence is generational - There aren't alot of dings to find on those types of guys

Would it have been better if he won Multiple Championships rather than a pedestrian one? Or shouldn't have gotten Covid?

It's also the nature of this being a Bears Board

For instance - even though I like Lawrence as generational - if some Jags homer was posting that Lawerence is a Home Run because of
A) his Pro Day
B) his Citadel/Rutgers performances
C) Press Conferences

I feel like you know I wouldn't be able to resist saying those were foolish reasons

I will say the ACC is not very good - and Clemson's SOS leaves a lot to be desired - those are legit dings - Helps that he played in the College Playoffs every year though


And I really liked Mac Jones - I ding him for all sorts of things (I think we'd both agree Alabama has clearly better Talent than Clemson did). Mac's arm is "Fine". His athleticism is "Fine". Alabama has monster talent around him- I didn't like Tua and AJ McCarron was one of my least favorite QB prospects in recent memory

It's tough to ding the generational talents though - I don't really see negatives around Lawrence - He's the damn Prototype of what you would want a QB prospect to have in his quiver
Well for starters, I take issue with the fact that Watson both out gained and out scored Lawrence. That can’t be waived off. Same team, same coach, same everything. I’d turn this around and ask “how many championships does Watson need to win”?

My problem isn’t with your love of Lawrence, it’s the disrespect to Watson (and now Fields).

I do have a ding on Lawrence. I’m not so sure he has the desire/make up to be great. Seems interested in a lot of things other than football, and to be great you have to be obsessed. Just a hunch, we’ll see
Last edited by dplank on Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

dplank wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:55 pm Dude. Not reading all that, a simple acknowledgment that the claim that I “ignored 17 INT” is simply false is all that is needed. We can still disagree without devolving or misrepresentation.

If you re read my finishing sentences you’ll see that I can see why some may prefer Lawrence over Watson. What I can’t see is why one is “generational” and the other was dinged and nit picked into a second round grade. That was my point. I prefer Watson by a smidge because he beat Lawrence in 2 of the 3 most important categories: yards and TDs go to Watson, INTs goes to Lawrence.
Real question - aside from those being counting stats and Lawrence only playing 10 games as a Junior due to Covid). Or that you'd prefer not to read a post rather than answer its substance

(The one having a Great defense and the other not - is foolish)

But lets go over 3 scenarios:

You would really see a difference between a College QB
4400 Yards, 32 TD
4000 Yards, 29 Td

or if 1 guys was 68.5 % and the other 67%

My take: I think all these numbers are pretty great - None of them are so outta whack that I could tell a true difference from Stats there


and if it was:
4400 Yards, 32 TD, 17 INT
4000 Yards, 29 TD, 8 INT

You'd say well the one guy has more yards and more TD (scoring offense omitted for some reason) so he wins 2 of 3 catergories - Hes better!

Really?

My Take: There is a real red flag there on the one player


3rd Question:

If an NFL QB put up 5000+ Yards and 30+ TD - thats a star no question right? Under the logic were are using here. Or at the least he's better than a guy with 4000 and 29 TD right?
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12016
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 2128 times

RichH55 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:10 pm
dplank wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 4:55 pm Dude. Not reading all that, a simple acknowledgment that the claim that I “ignored 17 INT” is simply false is all that is needed. We can still disagree without devolving or misrepresentation.

If you re read my finishing sentences you’ll see that I can see why some may prefer Lawrence over Watson. What I can’t see is why one is “generational” and the other was dinged and nit picked into a second round grade. That was my point. I prefer Watson by a smidge because he beat Lawrence in 2 of the 3 most important categories: yards and TDs go to Watson, INTs goes to Lawrence.
Real question - aside from those being counting stats and Lawrence only playing 10 games as a Junior due to Covid). Or that you'd prefer not to read a post rather than answer its substance

(The one having a Great defense and the other not - is foolish)

But lets go over 3 scenarios:

You would really see a difference between a College QB
4400 Yards, 32 TD
4000 Yards, 29 Td

or if 1 guys was 68.5 % and the other 67%

My take: I think all these numbers are pretty great - None of them are so outta whack that I could tell a true difference from Stats there


and if it was:
4400 Yards, 32 TD, 17 INT
4000 Yards, 29 TD, 8 INT

You'd say well the one guy has more yards and more TD (scoring offense omitted for some reason) so he wins 2 of 3 catergories - Hes better!

Really?

My Take: There is a real red flag there on the one player


3rd Question:

If an NFL QB put up 5000+ Yards and 30+ TD - thats a star no question right? Under the logic were are using here. Or at the least he's better than a guy with 4000 and 29 TD right?
I don’t know how else to put it so that you understand. No, I don’t see a difference!! YOU see a difference. I’m saying that there’s almost no distinction between Watson and Lawrence NCAA resumes. I’m not the one calling one guy generational and the other guy a turd. I just don’t know how else to make you understand. Lawrence is a great prospect, SO WAS WATSON.
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

dplank wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:05 pm
RichH55 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:01 pm And yes to me Lawrence is generational - There aren't alot of dings to find on those types of guys

Would it have been better if he won Multiple Championships rather than a pedestrian one? Or shouldn't have gotten Covid?

It's also the nature of this being a Bears Board

For instance - even though I like Lawrence as generational - if some Jags homer was posting that Lawerence is a Home Run because of
A) his Pro Day
B) his Citadel/Rutgers performances
C) Press Conferences

I feel like you know I wouldn't be able to resist saying those were foolish reasons

I will say the ACC is not very good - and Clemson's SOS leaves a lot to be desired - those are legit dings - Helps that he played in the College Playoffs every year though


And I really liked Mac Jones - I ding him for all sorts of things (I think we'd both agree Alabama has clearly better Talent than Clemson did). Mac's arm is "Fine". His athleticism is "Fine". Alabama has monster talent around him- I didn't like Tua and AJ McCarron was one of my least favorite QB prospects in recent memory

It's tough to ding the generational talents though - I don't really see negatives around Lawrence - He's the damn Prototype of what you would want a QB prospect to have in his quiver
Well for starters, I take issue with the fact that Watson both out gained and out scored Lawrence. That can’t be waived off. Same team, same coach, same everything. I’d turn this around and ask “how many championships does Watson need to win”?

My problem isn’t with your love of Lawrence, it’s the disrespect to Watson (and now Fields).


You waive off Watson's Offense in Texas not even being Top 15 in Points Scored despite playing the Lions, Jags (twice) and Titans (twice - secretly one of the most scored upon defenses last season) - so why not that

There just isn't a blemish in the Lawrence resume

You don't have to explain away one- two years of too many INT, Or why he rushing numbers dropped 40% or if he has the frame to hold up - Or if his a decent chunk of his game can translate. Or why his INT rate went up Junior year while his Completion % went down and YPA went down and Rushing went down(*)

(All those things you would have had to explain for Watson btw)

(*) We can agree that Watson was better numbers wise as a Sophomore than Junior right?

Watson's rushing numbers as a Sophomore for example - TREMENDOUS - Great- Fantastic - Superb

He's not the biggest framed guy - not as fast as you think - So that was a pretty good chunk (NOT ALL - but pretty good) of his Sophomore success

So you get 3 questions right off the bat:
1) Will that running style translate to the NFL or does it MOSTLY have to be left in College
2) If it does translate - Can that body hold up? This isn't Cam Newton we are talking
3). Why did his rushing numbers drop so drastically his Junior Year

That's 3 questions (Legit ones) on one major aspect of his game alone
RichH55
Hall of Famer
Posts: 7942
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 4:23 pm
Has thanked: 511 times
Been thanked: 598 times

dplank wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:14 pm
RichH55 wrote: Tue Jun 01, 2021 5:10 pm

Real question - aside from those being counting stats and Lawrence only playing 10 games as a Junior due to Covid). Or that you'd prefer not to read a post rather than answer its substance

(The one having a Great defense and the other not - is foolish)

But lets go over 3 scenarios:

You would really see a difference between a College QB
4400 Yards, 32 TD
4000 Yards, 29 Td

or if 1 guys was 68.5 % and the other 67%

My take: I think all these numbers are pretty great - None of them are so outta whack that I could tell a true difference from Stats there


and if it was:
4400 Yards, 32 TD, 17 INT
4000 Yards, 29 TD, 8 INT

You'd say well the one guy has more yards and more TD (scoring offense omitted for some reason) so he wins 2 of 3 catergories - Hes better!

Really?

My Take: There is a real red flag there on the one player


3rd Question:

If an NFL QB put up 5000+ Yards and 30+ TD - thats a star no question right? Under the logic were are using here. Or at the least he's better than a guy with 4000 and 29 TD right?
I don’t know how else to put it so that you understand. No, I don’t see a difference!! YOU see a difference. I’m saying that there’s almost no distinction between Watson and Lawrence NCAA resumes. I’m not the one calling one guy generational and the other guy a turd. I just don’t know how else to make you understand. Lawrence is a great prospect, SO WAS WATSON.
Watson was a good prospect - Lawrence is generational - That's the difference

There are no question marks on Lawrence

The INT thing is a red flag on Watson - especially because that was one of the few knocks on him as a Sophomore (13 INT was a bit high too in today's college game especially with that Offense and that level of general competition).

It got worse as a Junior

The Rushing game for Watson is a ? (See above post)

There are others as well

But Lawrence was the highest rated QB recruit ever - he won the National Title as a True Freshman (that was Freshman not Sophomore year right?). He was in the Bowl Playoffs every year

Heck even the thing Bears fans love (Fields beat him head to head in the Playoff!) I think only evened that up

There's just no box unchecked on Lawrence- He's bigger, stronger and has the better arm too

Is he the ABSOLUTE best at every facet? No. Fields is faster, Mac Jones is more accurate - but he's also no slouch in either area

All boxes checked
User avatar
dplank
Hall of Famer
Posts: 12016
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 9:19 am
Has thanked: 1199 times
Been thanked: 2128 times

I was foolish to try. Back to block list.
Locked