BearsFansOnline.com

If the Bears take a QB, they need to look at someone who can challenge Trubisky from the start, not a developmental project. Worse case, Trubisky beats the guy out and the Bears have a future trade chip. Fromm and Eason might still be available at 43.

No thanks to Fromm. He's the epitome of mediocrity. If we're drafting a QB to compete with Mitch from the get go, we need to aim higher and Fromm ain't it, IMO. Eason on the other hand would be enticing because of his arm talent and ceiling. His problem seems to be more mental than anything else. Overconfidence in his arm and questionable decision making (sounds familiar to a particular QB the Bears had previously). Perhaps a guy like Flip can coach him up to be more consistent, who knows.

I'm actually on board with taking a flier on Anthony Gordon in the R4-R5 if he's available. I think he's the type of developmental QB that can pay off down the line, in a potential trade or ends up being a longer term answer.

DaSuperfan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:11 pm No thanks to Fromm. He's the epitome of mediocrity. If we're drafting a QB to compete with Mitch from the get go, we need to aim higher and Fromm ain't it, IMO. Eason on the other hand would be enticing because of his arm talent and ceiling. His problem seems to be more mental than anything else. Overconfidence in his arm and questionable decision making (sounds familiar to a particular QB the Bears had previously). Perhaps a guy like Flip can coach him up to be more consistent, who knows.

I'm actually on board with taking a flier on Anthony Gordon in the R4-R5 if he's available. I think he's the type of developmental QB that can pay off down the line, in a potential trade or ends up being a longer term answer.

Georgia doesn't use an offense heavy on the QB making big plays. Fromm has 3 years playing at a top university against tough competition. Very good TD:INT ratios and yards per pass. I like Eason (who Fromm beat out at Georgia, necessitating his transfer to Washington) but he was more inconsistent this year. Strong arm, poor decision making at times, seemed to get rattled after interceptions but a talent. Less starting experience than Fromm but it was in big time programs also.

Grizzled wrote: ↑Fri Jan 17, 2020 9:53 am

DaSuperfan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:11 pm No thanks to Fromm. He's the epitome of mediocrity. If we're drafting a QB to compete with Mitch from the get go, we need to aim higher and Fromm ain't it, IMO. Eason on the other hand would be enticing because of his arm talent and ceiling. His problem seems to be more mental than anything else. Overconfidence in his arm and questionable decision making (sounds familiar to a particular QB the Bears had previously). Perhaps a guy like Flip can coach him up to be more consistent, who knows.

I'm actually on board with taking a flier on Anthony Gordon in the R4-R5 if he's available. I think he's the type of developmental QB that can pay off down the line, in a potential trade or ends up being a longer term answer.

Georgia doesn't use an offense heavy on the QB making big plays. Fromm has 3 years playing at a top university against tough competition. Very good TD:INT ratios and yards per pass. I like Eason (who Fromm beat out at Georgia, necessitating his transfer to Washington) but he was more inconsistent this year. Strong arm, poor decision making at times, seemed to get rattled after interceptions but a talent. Less starting experience than Fromm but it was in big time programs also.

Fromm to me is someone you have to watch the tape and ignore the stat line. He doesn't have any elite traits. Average arm strength, average athleticism, average size, average processing skills - he's just sort of meh all the way around IMO. If we want to replace Mitch, why settle for a prospect that might actually be worse than Mitch? At lease Mitch has some athleticism to his game and can run around to avoid pressure. I just don't see how Fromm is a major upgrade over Mitch. Again, if you're drafting a QB in R2, either you draft a guy who you think can be an elite starter down the line and compete against Mitch this year. Or you take a developmental high upside prospect in R4-R6. Fromm doesn't fall in either category, you're just going to be looking to replace Fromm at some point in the near future - so why draft him at all and waste a pick?

I like Fromm a lot, but I wouldn't draft him with the intent to replace Mitch. On Day 1 he replaces Chase Daniel unless if we can get Alex Smith. Ideally I'd give Fromm a tablet to study from for a year and then if Mitch shits the bed in 2020 Fromm starts in 2021.

Georgia runs a pro-like offense so he's not going to have inflated stats. Fromm has seen a lot of top grade competition week in and week out. He also beat out Eason.

I think Fromm may need his own thread. He is going to a love / hate guy. I still believe he goes much higher then expected, but the critiques are valid concerns. I personally think they are over stated.

https://thedraftnetwork.com/player/jake ... ZWU1pttLiq

Arm Accuracy - Accuracy is negatively impacted when he tries to throw with heat or has to get the ball out quickly. He's most accurate within 10 yards of the LOS where he can quickly dish to backs in the flats, out breaking patterns or shallow crosses. Really struggles working deep over the MOF to drive the ball with accuracy.

Decision Making - He's hardly ever going to put the ball in jeopardy, which is nice but comes at the cost of a lot of chunk plays down the field. He's sharp in the red zone and does do well to read and key zone defenders to ID and anticipate where to throw. Willing to eat sacks and won't panic under duress.

Progressions - Works through the full field of play and maximizes his targets effectively. Trusts his backside reads and typically knows what he's going to get when he works to the end of progressions, quickly and efficiently moving from one option to the next. He's a cerebral, pro capable player.

Anticipation - A lot of reps are won in the presnap, understanding where he's got leverage and knowing where targets are going to be. Spot throws in the quick timing game are pretty on point, but the longer you make him hold the ball, the less he's able to really guide the ball into favorable spots for receivers.

Poise - Doesn't live in chaos but is well composed to avoid it all together. Wish he had a little something extra to him when plays get off script but limitations here are due to lack of physical skills, not because he panics or is incapable. Heady with ball security under pressure and isn't going to kill you in the heat of the moment.

Arm Strength - Doesn't have the juice you'd prefer to see, far sideline throws and 15+ yard targets take a LONG time for the ball to get there, he'll have DBs jumping and attacking the football at a much higher rate in the NFL, which will risk seeing him fall further into his shell with lack of aggressiveness to drive the football.

Pocket Awareness - Appreciate his sense of pressure to know when to protect the ball but his ability to slide within the pocket is only modest. He'll break off his platform versus pressure and has barely enough mobility to get outside the pocket. Generally should be considered a pocket passer and nothing more.

Mechanics - Seems to fight the ball a bit when he's got to go quick. Has habit of flipping the ball on his drops, seems subconscious to get ball where he wants it in his hands but quick pressure could create security issues there. His delivery is clean, though — compact and capable of throwing amid bodies and traffic.

Footwork - Drops aren't always taken with urgency and doesn't have the natural foot quickness or stride depth to get distance at the snap. He's got the needed weight distribution in clean pockets and with protection to get himself set up and stride to targets with rhythm and timing to hit back foot and trigger a throw.

Run Ability - 40 rushing yards for his career says it all — not a threat as a ball carrier. Doesn't have the size in short yardage to churn the pile in QB sneaks, either. Lacks short area quickness and long speed and isn't going to beat you with his legs if he's tasked with getting outside the pocket.

---

Best Trait - Decision Making

Worst Trait - Arm Talent

Best Film - Alabama (2018)

Worst Film - LSU (2019)

Red Flags - None

Player Summary - Jake Fromm is a "what you see is what you get" quarterback prospect. Offenses in need of stability, consistent decision making and intelligent pre-snap work will be drawn to Fromm, but his physical tools will leave you wanting more and there's an inherent lack of consistent killer instinct to play in attack mode as a passer. Fromm offers modest upside as a starting quarterback and would be best implemented in a WCO, where quick game and RAC can help to boost pass game productivity.

From the get-go, Georgia brought in QB after QB to compete with and unseat Fromm. Fields transferred to Ohio State and showed his talent. Eason transferred to Washington and did pretty well this year. It falls into that area of intangibles again, Fromm is a leader and a winner. I don't know if he can unseat Mitch but he would provide needed competition.

The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Tue Jan 21, 2020 6:12 pm I like Fromm a lot, but I wouldn't draft him with the intent to replace Mitch. On Day 1 he replaces Chase Daniel unless if we can get Alex Smith. Ideally I'd give Fromm a tablet to study from for a year and then if Mitch shits the bed in 2020 Fromm starts in 2021.

Georgia runs a pro-like offense so he's not going to have inflated stats. Fromm has seen a lot of top grade competition week in and week out. He also beat out Eason.

Why waste a R2 pick on a QB to just be backup to Mitch? We can find someone else to fill that role without wasting a high draft pick. Again, Fromm isn't starter quality - even if he sits a year. He's going to be a career backup IMO.

Jake Fromm State Farm?

G08 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 3:16 pm Jake Fromm State Farm?

This is hanging in my office...

G08 wrote: ↑Wed Jan 22, 2020 3:16 pm Jake Fromm State Farm?

Anyone who thinks Fromm cant be better then Trubisky perplexes me.

mmmc_35 wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 9:47 am Anyone who thinks Fromm cant be better then Trubisky perplexes me.

I don't. He gives me that "Matt Barkley" vibe.

I think he is better then Barkley by a wide margin but it's a good counter.

Arm strength and accuracy issues, no thanks.

And I don't see us picking a QB period. They roll with Mitch and a FA backup, possibly daniels again.

If you are down to your backup in the nfl you are screwed anyway for any extended period of time. They haven't been able to develop a first round talent, what in the world makes anyone think they can with a guy with more flaws.

southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:53 pm Arm strength and accuracy issues, no thanks.

And I don't see us picking a QB period. They roll with Mitch and a FA backup, possibly daniels again.

If you are down to your backup in the nfl you are screwed anyway for any extended period of time. They haven't been able to develop a first round talent, what in the world makes anyone think they can with a guy with more flaws.

But Mitch clearly wasn’t a first round talent. Fromm has performed better against better competition than Mitch who was erratic against basketball schools but who scouts talked themselves into because of his athleticism.

Having a smart player that is consistent and makes good decisions with the football wouldn’t be the worst thing for the Bears to have.

I’m not overly enamored with any of the QBs that could be available but to be completely dismissive of a guy who beat out two guys who could end up being first round picks because he has too many flaws to beat out Mitch Trubisky seems pretty absurd to me.

Were we watching the same Trubisky who couldn’t throw deep with any accuracy, had no pocket presence, erratic footwork, poor field vision, misread the defensive end on option plays in consecutive weeks, and who failed to even look off the safety in the red zone against the Packers.

TheWorldBreaker wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:57 pm

southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:53 pm Arm strength and accuracy issues, no thanks.

And I don't see us picking a QB period. They roll with Mitch and a FA backup, possibly daniels again.

If you are down to your backup in the nfl you are screwed anyway for any extended period of time. They haven't been able to develop a first round talent, what in the world makes anyone think they can with a guy with more flaws.

But Mitch clearly wasn’t a first round talent. Fromm has performed better against better competition than Mitch who was erratic against basketball schools but who scouts talked themselves into because of his athleticism.

Having a smart player that is consistent and makes good decisions with the football wouldn’t be the worst thing for the Bears to have.

I’m not overly enamored with any of the QBs that could be available but to be completely dismissive of a guy who beat out two guys who could end up being first round picks because he has too many flaws to beat out Mitch Trubisky seems pretty absurd to me.

Were we watching the same Trubisky who couldn’t throw deep with any accuracy, had no pocket presence, erratic footwork, poor field vision, misread the defensive end on option plays in consecutive weeks, and who failed to even look off the safety in the red zone against the Packers.

I lol at this notion that Mitch is basically a poor mans Henry Burris.

southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:53 pm Arm strength and accuracy issues, no thanks.

Accuracy issues? I dont think that's a problem. Arm strength I think is an over criticized issue. I think he has enough arm as it stands, and is poised to get better. He doesnt drive with his hips as much as he could. Strength and mechanical tweaks will improve. Watch some video.

Interesting game to watch. Starts off terrible. Second half is fantastic. You also see the difference in the offense and play calling.

Watch at 6:50. Weak arm? That shit was magic.

8:00 watch those damn TD attepts.

TheWorldBreaker wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:57 pm

southdakbearfan wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:53 pm Arm strength and accuracy issues, no thanks.

And I don't see us picking a QB period. They roll with Mitch and a FA backup, possibly daniels again.

If you are down to your backup in the nfl you are screwed anyway for any extended period of time. They haven't been able to develop a first round talent, what in the world makes anyone think they can with a guy with more flaws.

But Mitch clearly wasn’t a first round talent. Fromm has performed better against better competition than Mitch who was erratic against basketball schools but who scouts talked themselves into because of his athleticism.

Having a smart player that is consistent and makes good decisions with the football wouldn’t be the worst thing for the Bears to have.

I’m not overly enamored with any of the QBs that could be available but to be completely dismissive of a guy who beat out two guys who could end up being first round picks because he has too many flaws to beat out Mitch Trubisky seems pretty absurd to me.

Were we watching the same Trubisky who couldn’t throw deep with any accuracy, had no pocket presence, erratic footwork, poor field vision, misread the defensive end on option plays in consecutive weeks, and who failed to even look off the safety in the red zone against the Packers.

Hindsight is 20/20. The experts also said Mahomes and Watson really weren’t first round talents either but obviously they were.

QB drafting is dicey at best in the first round and success levels outside the first drop severely.

For a team with a number 2 pick invested, and major holes elsewhere it makes zero sense to spend draft capital on a backup/developmental player. They need impact starters from round 2 right now.

If I am a gm on a relatively warm seat like this team has, there is no way I am using a second on a qb. Not when I could fill line issues and other holes that could make my #2 pick qb look a lot better and get me an extension.

If pace drafts a qb in the second and Mitch has another bad year pace is probably looking for a new job.

wab wrote: ↑Fri Jan 24, 2020 12:03 am

TheWorldBreaker wrote: ↑Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:57 pm

But Mitch clearly wasn’t a first round talent. Fromm has performed better against better competition than Mitch who was erratic against basketball schools but who scouts talked themselves into because of his athleticism.

Having a smart player that is consistent and makes good decisions with the football wouldn’t be the worst thing for the Bears to have.

I’m not overly enamored with any of the QBs that could be available but to be completely dismissive of a guy who beat out two guys who could end up being first round picks because he has too many flaws to beat out Mitch Trubisky seems pretty absurd to me.

Were we watching the same Trubisky who couldn’t throw deep with any accuracy, had no pocket presence, erratic footwork, poor field vision, misread the defensive end on option plays in consecutive weeks, and who failed to even look off the safety in the red zone against the Packers.

I lol at this notion that Mitch is basically a poor mans Henry Burris.

Don’t be ridiculous, there’s no comparison Burris was a much better runner.

But seriously, Trubisky is not good at playing QB. He’s so bad that outlets have suggested Jameis Winston would be an upgrade over Trubisky worth the Bears pursuing.

And if the NFL did a do over of the 2017 draft not only would the Bears not pick Trubisky, no other team would either.

So I just find the notion that no second rounder could possibly come in and unseat him to be ridiculous.

If both Fromm and Eason were available at either 43 or 50, which QB would you prefer for the team? I'd go Eason although I wouldn't be disappointed with Fromm.

Grizzled wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:22 am If both Fromm and Eason were available at either 43 or 50, which QB would you prefer for the team? I'd go Eason although I wouldn't be disappointed with Fromm.

From my arm chair position, I take the bigger swing with Eason. But there's a ton more that goes into it, starting with extensive film study and ending with an exhaustive search of these guys personality and drive.

Grizzled wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:22 am If both Fromm and Eason were available at either 43 or 50, which QB would you prefer for the team? I'd go Eason although I wouldn't be disappointed with Fromm.

Neither

Grizzled wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:22 am If both Fromm and Eason were available at either 43 or 50, which QB would you prefer for the team? I'd go Eason although I wouldn't be disappointed with Fromm.

I go back and forth on this.

I was all-in on Eason two weeks ago. Then I started looking hard at Fromm. I'd be elated with either, but I like the idea that Fromm came from that pro offense and the experience he has with high level competition.

The Marshall Plan wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 1:52 pm

Grizzled wrote: ↑Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:22 am If both Fromm and Eason were available at either 43 or 50, which QB would you prefer for the team? I'd go Eason although I wouldn't be disappointed with Fromm.

I go back and forth on this.

I was all-in on Eason two weeks ago. Then I started looking hard at Fromm. I'd be elated with either, but I like the idea that Fromm came from that pro offense and the experience he has with high level competition.

University of Washington played a pro style offense also. I don't like how Alabama ended up beating Georgia in that FBS championship game several years ago but I don't put that on Fromm. More like when the Falcons were beating the Pats 28-3 in the Super Bowl and didn't do what they needed to do in the 2nd half to hold the lead. I think either would be a good choice. Eason has the arm, Fromm has great leadership qualities.

I think a lot of fans are going to be upset when we don't draft a QB until day 3 -- if at all.

G08 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2020 11:22 pm I think a lot of fans are going to be upset when we don't draft a QB until day 3 -- if at all.

Total agreement and I'll be one of them unless there's a notable veteran signed to be the backup. (Alex Smith, somebody like that.)

If the Pace & Nagy Regime has taught me anything its that there's a huge gap between what should be done and what they will do.

None of the vets available are long term solutions. The Bears can't roll the dice yet again on a lower round or FA QB prospect, they need to bring in a legitimate candidate who can start if needed. Unless they're willing to roll the dice with Trubisky this year and tear it all down in '21.