When Nagy was with the Chiefs - not the Bears - in 2017, this is how he ranked the QB's...when he was with the Chiefs.

[G08]

I heard an interesting nugget on a podcast this morning (perhaps this is old news for some). Matt Nagy's QB board from 2017 went as follows:

1. Patrick Mahomes
2. Deshaun Watson
3. Mitchell Trubisky (Nagy was very intrigued with his talent and skill-set)


This begs the question... if Nagy was here in 2017, would Mahomes have been our pick?

Would we still have traded up?

If Nagy realizes Mitch isn't his guy after this season, do we allow him to hand-pick his QB going into 2021?

[wab]

If Mitch fails to the extent that they feel the need to move on after 2020, I'm almost 100% certain that Nagy would get to pick his guy.

[UOK]

"Doesn't matter. Fire Nagy/Pace!"

/thread

---

To give you an actual answer, I would assume Nagy would get to choose his guy, but who the hell knows. I can't pontificate on abstract theories beyond 2020 anymore. Giving me an ulcer.

[Z Bear]

Doubt Mahommes would be a Bear. Fox was kept in the dark on the Trubisky pick and later went on to say Watson was the guy he liked most of the three. If Pace went against Fox, doubt he would of followed Nagy's advice.

[Drone7]

Whats' the source?

If true, that's a much better order. Sounds like KC's board though.

A disturbing possibility is allowing Pace and his Dept. to pick another QB.

[wab]

Doubt Mahommes would be a Bear. Fox was kept in the dark on the Trubisky pick and later went on to say Watson was the guy he liked most of the three. If Pace went against Fox, doubt he would of followed Nagy's advice.

Eh, Fox was kind of forced on Pace. Nagy and Pace are in this together, for better or worse.

[wab]

Whats' the source?

If true, that's a much better order. Sounds like KC's board though.

A disturbing possibility is allowing Pace and his Dept. to pick another QB.

That is KC's board. Because Nagy was with...KC.

[Drone7]

So I guess you are suggesting the title be reworded?

[wab]

So I guess you are suggesting the title be reworded?

Why? This was Nagy's ranking when Nagy was with the Chiefs.

[The Marshall Plan]

I heard an interesting nugget on a podcast this morning (perhaps this is old news for some). Matt Nagy's QB board from 2017 went as follows:

1. Patrick Mahomes
2. Deshaun Watson
3. Mitchell Trubisky (Nagy was very intrigued with his talent and skill-set)


This begs the question... if Nagy was here in 2017, would Mahomes have been our pick?

Would we still have traded up?

If Nagy realizes Mitch isn't his guy after this season, do we allow him to hand-pick his QB going into 2021?

Since Pace seems to do what Nagy wants (see Howard, Jordan), I would say yes that Mahomes would’ve been drafted. I don’t subscribe to the idea that if the Bears would’ve drafted Mahomes that he would’ve sucked here. Maybe he wouldn’t have been as great because I’m sure being around Andy Reid has helped him tremendously. But there are other factors at play like support system (RB, OL, TE, etc.). Even if we got 70% of what Mahomes is now, I think we’d all be really happy.

Pace would’ve traded up. He lost out on Amari Cooper and took Kevin White in 2015 which I think scarred him for life because he then follows up by trading up for Floyd and then Mitch.

If Mitch isn’t the guy, Nagy could get his guy but with a different GM doing the signing. You can’t have consistent whiffing like Pace has, including a VERY visible hypothetical failure with a QB while the other 2 you passed on are succeeding, and keep your job.

But, Mitch not being Nagy’s guy, isn’t why things went tits up last year. (I know you didn’t say that originally.)

[G08]

So I guess you are suggesting the title be reworded?

Was "Nagy's QB board from 2017" not clear enough for you?

[wab]

So I guess you are suggesting the title be reworded?

Was "Nagy's QB board from 2017" not clear enough for you?

Should be now.

[dplank]

QB coaches don't set the draft board guys, that's the GM and scouting team who do that. Sometimes they take input from coaches, sometimes the don't. But even if they do, it's the GM's board not the coaches (unless it's a coach/GM sorta deal, which Nagy was most certainly not).

So it's a valid question to ask. Was this Nagy's view of the prospects or the GM's view of the prospects? Because it looks like it was the GM's board here, and if so that does not mean that Nagy shared that view. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. We just talked about Fox and Pace not being agreed on the board, so it's not a given that Nagy and their GM saw it the same way just because it ended up that way on the main board. It's a fair clarification to ask.

[wab]

Why is a simple thread being so over-complicated?

[UOK]

Why is a simple thread being so over-complicated?

Because the QB position is one that brings out the worst in all of us. Around Chicago it's such a magnet for hate or praise, and it reflects on coaching and the front office.

It's the biggest circlejerk subject the city has, and until the position is settled with an equivalent of Peyton Manning/Tom Brady, we'll all be divided about how to address it.

It's also incredibly tiresome, but as a grizzled Bears forum veteran, if this is what people want to talk about, have at it, I guess.

[Richie]

There's so much uncertainty surrounding Mitch/Nagy/Pace and their outcomes are very intertwined together. So, it's hard to know exactly what "Mitch failing" would mean for any of them.

You would have to think it means the end for Mitch. But how does the scenario play out beyond that?

Do we win due to our defense and the emergence of our running game? Despite Mitch playing in a subpar fashion all year?

Do we bench Mitch after September or October and then go on a run like Tennessee did with Tannehill?

In either of the above scenarios - I think Nagy/Pace remain and that Nagy has a good chance at selecting his own QB to move forward with.

If Mitch fails and that leads to the team failing collectively? I could see us just clearing house.

So, it's impossible to really answer the question unless we know how 2020 unfolds. As in, literally, down to every detail.

[Boris13c]

Why is a simple thread being so over-complicated?

Because the QB position is one that brings out the worst in all of us. Around Chicago it's such a magnet for hate or praise, and it reflects on coaching and the front office.

It's the biggest circlejerk subject the city has, and until the position is settled with an equivalent of Peyton Manning/Tom Brady, we'll all be divided about how to address it.

It's also incredibly tiresome, but as a grizzled Bears forum veteran, if this is what people want to talk about, have at it, I guess.

well you have to admit, the position has been a failure more times than it has been a success so there is a valid reason people go nuts when discussing it

maybe that's why most would be happy with a Jim Miller or Brian Hoyer ... someone competent and reasonably safe ... the Bears have succeeded with such types at the position and have generally failed when they swung for the fences with high draft picks or trades

maybe there is some curse in place ... like the Billy Goat for the Cubs, but with the Bears curse not being common knowledge or a topic of discussion ... just go look at the list of Bears starting QB's for some possible verification of such a curse ... 2004 is a particularly fetid entry

[BamaBear09]

maybe there is some curse in place ... like the Billy Goat for the Cubs, but with the Bears curse not being common knowledge or a topic of discussion ... just go look at the list of Bears starting QB's for some possible verification of such a curse ... 2004 is a particularly fetid entry

I have a feeling it may just be a curse... always seems like the timing is always off...

1983 - 2 possible HOF QBs and two very solid pro QBs on the board when Chicago selected at #6, but not going to take a QB this year as they used #5 overall the season before on McMahon...
1997 - 1-10 Bears win 3 of their final 5 games to finish 4-12 and end up with the 5th pick and miss out on Peyton Manning...
2005 - Bears let Aaron Rodgers fall past them because they are still trying to figure out what they have with Rex Grossman...

Maybe it is a curse... but who placed it??

[AZ_Bearfan]

What year was it placed? Looks like around 1948 when Sid Luckman fell off a cliff.

[IE]

Damn, G. What a tease that is.

One thing about Nagy that I both hate and like - he seems to know what he wants to do. Which is why I'd guess he wanted Mahomes. The only part I really don't like is when he does what he wants to do even when it is clear it isn't working at that time. That does explain his large assistant swap.

As long as we're regretting history, the Bears also could have drafted Favre instead of Stan Thomas in '91, and that probably would have fit and worked out pretty well.

[BamaBear09]

Damn, G. What a tease that is.

One thing about Nagy that I both hate and like - he seems to know what he wants to do. Which is why I'd guess he wanted Mahomes. The only part I really don't like is when he does what he wants to do even when it is clear it isn't working at that time. That does explain his large assistant swap.

As long as we're regretting history, the Bears also could have drafted Favre instead of Stan Thomas in '91, and that probably would have fit and worked out pretty well.

Ugh... didn't even think about that one... prob didn't bother looking at Favre because we had former first round pick Jim Harbaugh entering his 5th season as the unquestioned starter... definitely didn't need to look at replacing him...

[Drone7]

Since Finks, I haven't believed in any Bears' de facto GM. That's a LONG time.

Until they luck into a GM that can evaluate QBs and not just one side of the ball well, they are going to row in the doldrums of mediocrity.

[G08]

Evaluating QBs is one of the most difficult -- if not the most difficult -- skills to harness in all of professional sports. This isn't the NBA where LeBron James will be a superstar wherever he goes.

I don't think Tom Brady would have become TOM BRADY if he was drafted by this regime, just like I don't think Aaron Rodgers or Patrick Mahomes would have had the same careers they have had if they were drafted by the Chicago Bears.

You need talent, you need the right scheme, proper weapons around them and a coach that knows how to teach/train/mentor quarterbacks. Way too many variables to conquer than just asking for a GM who knows how to evaluate QBs.

[Drone7]

Valid points, but Pace had 3-5 years to put better players and coaches around Trubisky than he did.

As stated, I respect Pace's work building a defense. Just believe he has blind spots understanding how to put together an offense, which is even more orchestrated. Also question whether he knows how to build a good Personnel Dept. Other guys signed off not just on Trubisky, but other missed O FA and draftees. Where is the accountability? Hidden from our view.

My residual hope for Trubisky is basically the following happens: Pace patches the O better this offseason. Lazor game plans better than Helfrich and convinces Nagy to play to his player's' strengths instead of running his ideal offense--less complexity, trickery and finesse; more emphasis on power and execution. DeFilippo devises new drill work and film study that improves his footwork and field smarts.

Never believed in Ragone as a high caliber QB coach. Pace needs to provide competition at QB so Trubisky sees it's up or out as a starter in Chicago. People work even harder when they fear getting replaced.

Wouldn't go so far as to say that supreme talents like Rodgers and Mahomes wouldn't succeed here btw. Hypothetical path that's not for me to go down. But it would have been harder, no question.