sammymvpknight Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 The Bears defense could keep him viable for a while...ala Jags/Bortles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
megatechpc Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 ...Is holding a clipboard on the Arizona Cardinals sideline (the place all QB's go to die) in a few years. Lol, I kid, I kid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOaktown_56 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 6 hours ago, Heinz D. said: It's incredibly important to a LOT of people that this is the case. It's pretty weird, actually. But that doesn't fit with your argument, so make sure you continue to ignore it. Seattle has a terrific, perhaps HOF level QB, and a lot of other good players. They won't win many games this year, but they'll most likely be competitive in about half of them. 6 hours ago, Heinz D. said: The first game really provided some better Trubisky highlights, but to anyone watching either game and declaring he doesn't have any potential, I'm at a loss as to what to say, except maybe forget about the trade, or his school, or the fact you hadn't watched him in college, or maybe I should suggest you pretend he's on a different team. The only thing I'm willing to label him is "not a sure-fire bust". But to dismiss him out of hand ignores what we've seen from him, and also his previous situation in Chicago. 1 Uhh... Potential based on what? He hit a few throws here and there and showed some mobility? Hate to break it to you but that doesn't mean jack as far as having potential. Any NFL qb can have a few good plays. Look at fitzpatrick. He's had 2 very good GAMES. And yet no one here is crowning him. If he can do that and we haven't given it heavy credence, why would we laud trubisky for his mediocre at best first 2 games? A "lot of other good players"? What a joke. Frank clark, wagner, wright, earl thomas, and wilson are the only "good" players on that roster right now. The team may have the worst OL in the NFL (giants are giving them a run). It's very talent deprived compared to the past. Definitely not an above average team. Trubisky has done absolutely NOTHING for anyone to suggest that he's a franchise qb thus far in his career. Doesn't mean he won't be, but you can't blame people for being down on him based on the on the field play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrOaktown_56 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 8 hours ago, Sugashane said: So? Darnold had a pretty good game his first game and then sucked the next two. Neither will crown him as elite in his prime or indite him as a bust. But from some of the posters here he was suddenly "their guy" in the draft. Now some of those same people are saying the same about Mayfield after his solid first game. But Goff also ended with a lower QBR than Mitchell and had MUCH more in game experience in college than Trubisky, so shouldn't he have been far ahead of Tru? He may have been accurate on a lot of throws, but he didn't handle pressure well and also had a lot of issues with consistency. I can't control what you hear, you should know better than most that people will parrot whatever they can in the media. It isn't about being right, it is about clicks and views. I guarantee you heard critic after critic (here or in the media) saying Goff was a bust. Sensationalism is what has kept Bayliss in business so long and making millions per year. The Bears forum wasn't even going on like that, we said we expected progression but knew Nagy had a tough system and Tru would be behind, but would catch up. We are looking for long-term improvements, not to suddenly go from worst to first in the NFC North. I don't believe I have read on Bears poster say they thought we were going to do that or Tru was going to put up crazy MVP-level numbers. Regardless if you like it or not they have produced similarly. I haven't said Tru was set to be an MVP candidate or anything of the sort. I said about 24 total TDs and 12-14 INTs is what I expected. He is about on pace for just that. My comparisons weren't to say they were the same, it was saying how ridiculous it is that people have made such knee jerk statements about a player with so little work in this new system. I heard Wentz and Goff were both poor QBs on the old forum and then after getting some time to develop and help around them they flourished. I believe Tru can as well, but don't believe he will have a significant jump until 2019. He will improve as the season goes on, and as he gets in sync with his 4 new targets that are also making mistakes in their routes (Robinson himself admitted he has had some knucklehead mental errors on routes). Goff last year had 9 TDs in 7 games and 1 game of over 300 yards passing. Then things really clicked for the team and he threw 21 TDs over his final 8. He went from looking good to looking elite. The players' comfort in the system and work together was the big reason for that. But here people are trashing Trubisky after just 2 games. Last year Goff accounted for 2 TDs and 1 INT over his first 2 games. It would have been stupid for people to dismiss him that early. THAT is my point. There are going to be similarities regardless if anyone wants to acknowledge them, but they are very different players with vastly different experiences. You can't pigeonhole a player based on someone else but you can use the original player as a reference at least. 5 No he's on pace for 16 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. If he makes a Wentz/Goff like jump, that will be the exception, not the norm. Not many qb's make massive strides in their 2nd year. Not discounting him for his awful situation his rookie year, but I've seen worse. The Raiders in 2014 for example had a far worse situation than Chicago last year. Trubisky's on the field play hasn't looked good. If you want to argue that he may improve as the season goes on, fine. But so far he's been mediocre at best. If the bears even had an average qb right now, I'd say they have a shot to make some noise. They really don't right now and it hurts to see because Mahomes and Deshaun Watson have shown a lot in their small sample sizes, though I can argue that Hopkins helps Watson and Mahomes has a pretty easy offense to play in with tons of weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAF-N72EX Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 5 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said: No he's on pace for 16 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. If your gonna box score scout atleast do the math right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 15 hours ago, Sugashane said: Rodgers was my favorite QB prospect - favorite offensive prospect - of all time, but he had a HUGE benefit from working under Favre (regardless if he was a mentor, you can pick up things from people you are constantly working with, Rodgers is far from too stupid to do it) and with guys like Clements and McCarthy for 2 years before playing any meaningful time. I'd love to bring him in slow like that, but outside of trading for Smith it wasn't feasible really. But there is no way in hell if starting immediately upon drafting with his first 14 games he would be on pace for the 28 TDs and 13 INTs he earned in his first season as the starter. He had 3 years of development prior to that. Tru at least deserves his first 3 seasons to develop. If he busts then go for another draft pick but the damning of him this early is crazy to me. I think it goes without saying that Rodgers benefited by playing behind Favre, but the Bears had that opportunity and instead chose to rush Trubisky into the starting lineup. So that train of logic that I support was thrown out the window because the Bears' FO was too impatient. That being said, you can't really make that comparison. The only thing my comment about the bust thing was we were saying the EXACT same thing for every other QB bust. We were told it was too early to tell on guys like JaMarcus Russell, Mark Sanchez, and Blaine Gabbert. We were told it was too early to give up on those players, despite many saying they weren't going to turn out. That's not me saying that I think Trubisky is going to be that level of bust, but I've been on record as saying I don't think he's much more than a game manager. He was awful in the Packers' game outside of the first quarter, and his second game wasn't much better against a defense that is a shell of it's former self. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 12 hours ago, Heinz D. said: It's incredibly important to a LOT of people that this is the case. It's pretty weird, actually. Making a hyperbole to prove a point doesn't actually prove a point, I would hope you know. Instead, it's a reasonable number of people who don't believe in Trubisky are stating their opinion. Even if you go back to him prior to being drafted, there were a LOT (myself included) that were skeptical of him as a prospect. Nothing he's done so far has changed my opinion, and I'd venture to guess that would be the same for the others. It has nothing to do with some arbitrary hate on Trubisky I can assure you that. 12 hours ago, Heinz D. said: The first game really provided some better Trubisky highlights, but to anyone watching either game and declaring he doesn't have any potential, I'm at a loss as to what to say, except maybe forget about the trade, or his school, or the fact you hadn't watched him in college, or maybe I should suggest you pretend he's on a different team. The only thing I'm willing to label him is "not a sure-fire bust". But to dismiss him out of hand ignores what we've seen from him, and also his previous situation in Chicago. I don't think anyone has labeled him as a "sure-fire bust". All that's being said is that in this point of his career, he's done little to justify his initial selection. There's very easily an argument to be made that he's the least impressive of the 3 first round QBs from 2017. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sugashane Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 6 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said: No he's on pace for 16 touchdowns and 16 interceptions. If he makes a Wentz/Goff like jump, that will be the exception, not the norm. Not many qb's make massive strides in their 2nd year. Not discounting him for his awful situation his rookie year, but I've seen worse. The Raiders in 2014 for example had a far worse situation than Chicago last year. Trubisky's on the field play hasn't looked good. If you want to argue that he may improve as the season goes on, fine. But so far he's been mediocre at best. If the bears even had an average qb right now, I'd say they have a shot to make some noise. They really don't right now and it hurts to see because Mahomes and Deshaun Watson have shown a lot in their small sample sizes, though I can argue that Hopkins helps Watson and Mahomes has a pretty easy offense to play in with tons of weapons. No, you're incorrect. Re-read my post. I said TOTAL touchdowns. He has passed for 2 and rushed for 1. IDC how the scores happen, and don't expect 8 rushing TDs of course, but that is 1.5 TOTAL TDs per game. 1.5 *16 = 24. 24 TDs and 16 INTs is pretty close to the 24/14 line I predicted. I simply expect the passing game to pick up as everyone gels. The Raiders that year are pretty comparable. I would give Olson the edge over Loggains in a heartbeat. It isn't like McVay or DeFilippo over Loggains but I'd bet most GMs would take Olson over Loggains if they were the two to choose from. At WR they at least had James Jones, who is absolutely better than Wright. Rivera was pretty close to Sims, neither should ever be starting but I would give the edge to Sims. Holmes is a better WR than Bellamy. Reese was a major feature in the game, clearly far superior to Michael Burton. I would absolutely take Howard/Cohen before the McFadden/Murray duo, but out wide the Raiders still were better than the Bears last year. So the offensive players around the QBs isn't anywhere near "far worse" than for either. The defense was trash for OAK that year, no doubt the Bears were far better there, but I have been speaking about the offense so I'm not sure if you were including that. I have been arguing that he could improve, and I never said he played really well. I showed how two other very high end young QBs were pretty damn comparable while being in better situations. He has had flashes but nothing more than that. I didn't believe we were going to the playoffs before the season without Rodgers having some freak injury. MIN is the best roster in the NFC North and Rodgers keeps the Packers as a top threat if he is healthy. If he goes down though the Bears immediately jump them. Some people seem to have had massive jump in expectations with the Mack trade, but I just don't think he makes us a playoff team in the NFC North - the division is just too top heavy. I said Nagy's offense being so complex and Tru's inexperience are going to be major road bumps for us. Next year I think we will be poised to challenge the NFC North, but Watson and Mahomes had a lot of college games to their credit, Tru did not. He played in something like 30 but started less than half of that. I'm not going to begrudge Watson with Hopkins/Fuller or Mahomes with his weapons. I was huge on Mahomes pre-draft and think Tru is just starting behind the ball overall. I'm looking at this long-term for him, his first 2 years aren't a major deal to me if he can develop and be a solid starter for us over 10+ years. I've waited for a good QB for the Bears since I started watching them in the 90s, I can wait another year. lol 18 minutes ago, CWood21 said: I think it goes without saying that Rodgers benefited by playing behind Favre, but the Bears had that opportunity and instead chose to rush Trubisky into the starting lineup. So that train of logic that I support was thrown out the window because the Bears' FO was too impatient. That being said, you can't really make that comparison. The only thing my comment about the bust thing was we were saying the EXACT same thing for every other QB bust. We were told it was too early to tell on guys like JaMarcus Russell, Mark Sanchez, and Blaine Gabbert. We were told it was too early to give up on those players, despite many saying they weren't going to turn out. That's not me saying that I think Trubisky is going to be that level of bust, but I've been on record as saying I don't think he's much more than a game manager. He was awful in the Packers' game outside of the first quarter, and his second game wasn't much better against a defense that is a shell of it's former self. I have to disagree. Glennon isn't someone you learn behind unless he is some gamefilm wizard who just is a terrible QB. Outside of finding some way to get Romo here in 2017 I don't think there is any way to justify sitting him behind the back ups. Maybe if they had faith that Fitz would get some of his 2015 mojo but I sure wouldn't have guessed him to do that or this explosion so far. It is easy to say many won't turn out (odds are in favor of them busting), there are a ton of guy that never do improve. But over 14 games many were writing off Goff, then you have guys who look great at first then fizzle out for a variety of reasons (Griffen III, Kaep, etc). Some guys like Alex Smith took a while to improve because they were in a bad situation for years. I'm not crowning him as a HOFer or anything, but I think he will be a good QB. I thought he showed talent in college and want to let him have 3 years to see what we have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CWood21 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 5 minutes ago, Sugashane said: I have to disagree. Glennon isn't someone you learn behind unless he is some gamefilm wizard who just is a terrible QB. Outside of finding some way to get Romo here in 2017 I don't think there is any way to justify sitting him behind the back ups. Maybe if they had faith that Fitz would get some of his 2015 mojo but I sure wouldn't have guessed him to do that or this explosion so far. It is easy to say many won't turn out (odds are in favor of them busting), there are a ton of guy that never do improve. But over 14 games many were writing off Goff, then you have guys who look great at first then fizzle out for a variety of reasons (Griffen III, Kaep, etc). Some guys like Alex Smith took a while to improve because they were in a bad situation for years. I'm not crowning him as a HOFer or anything, but I think he will be a good QB. I thought he showed talent in college and want to let him have 3 years to see what we have. You don't need a game film wizard ahead of Trubisky. You need someone whose going to show your young QB the ropes in terms of game prep, good habits in practice, etc. You don't need a world beater. I mean, guys like Kerry Collins made a career out of this. You find a QB whose a strong locker room presence, and you sign him as your stopgap QB. I mean, the Bears were going nowhere last year and I think most realized that John Fox was a lame duck coach. But the Bears' FO threw a BIG deal at Mike Glennon, and if he wasn't the veteran QB that could fit that role that's a big black eye for the FO. It's not about getting production out of that veteran QB. It's about getting those good habits to rub off on Trubisky. In the meantime, you don't want Trubisky to learn bad habits or have his confidence hurt. LIS before, those that liked Trubisky coming out of college are going to defend him with the exact examples you've pointed out. If you didn't like him, you're going to point to what he's done so far. I've seen a QB whose hitting his checkdown receivers a TON, missing a LOT of wide open WRs, and making some really bad decisions. There's just not enough "NFL caliber" throws yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaguarCrazy2832 Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 I feel like Chicago is coddling him too much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 People need to lighten up on Trubisky. He is a second-year QB, playing in a new offense, so he is essentially still a rookie as far as I'm concerned. Just give him a little time in that offense and I think he can be a good QB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heinz D. Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 6 hours ago, MrOaktown_56 said: Uhh... Potential based on what? He hit a few throws here and there and showed some mobility? Hate to break it to you but that doesn't mean jack as far as having potential. Any NFL qb can have a few good plays. Look at fitzpatrick. He's had 2 very good GAMES. And yet no one here is crowning him. If he can do that and we haven't given it heavy credence, why would we laud trubisky for his mediocre at best first 2 games? A "lot of other good players"? What a joke. Frank clark, wagner, wright, earl thomas, and wilson are the only "good" players on that roster right now. The team may have the worst OL in the NFL (giants are giving them a run). It's very talent deprived compared to the past. Definitely not an above average team. Trubisky has done absolutely NOTHING for anyone to suggest that he's a franchise qb thus far in his career. Doesn't mean he won't be, but you can't blame people for being down on him based on the on the field play. To respond to the bolded first--no, I can't blame anyone from being down on Trubisky based on his on-field play. I consider "being down" on him a lot different than claiming he's a sure fire bust, however. As to the rest--if not for making some good throws and showing some mobility, how exactly would you gauge a quarterback's "potential"? And Fitzpatrick is an odd choice for an example, as he's been in the league for a while. And as to your comments about the Seahawks, you're constructing that argument based upon an assumption that the NFL is a league where the superior team always crushes an inferior team. That league doesn't exist, and never has. You also put a lot of emphasis on the QB position, then disregard it when it comes to wilson and the Seahawks. 7 minutes ago, JaguarCrazy2832 said: I feel like Chicago is coddling him too much Maybe kind of? It is a new offense, his situation last year was bad, they're still figuring out what he's best at, etc. 28 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Making a hyperbole to prove a point doesn't actually prove a point, I would hope you know. Instead, it's a reasonable number of people who don't believe in Trubisky are stating their opinion. Even if you go back to him prior to being drafted, there were a LOT (myself included) that were skeptical of him as a prospect. Nothing he's done so far has changed my opinion, and I'd venture to guess that would be the same for the others. It has nothing to do with some arbitrary hate on Trubisky I can assure you that. I don't think anyone has labeled him as a "sure-fire bust". All that's being said is that in this point of his career, he's done little to justify his initial selection. There's very easily an argument to be made that he's the least impressive of the 3 first round QBs from 2017. It's not even close to hyperbole when I see those closely held opinions from the national football media to here on an internet forum. You then point out that a lot of people were down on him as a prospect--which pretty clearly steers what I said away from hyperbole. As far as you changing your own opinion, it seems to me that you have, stating his "brutal" play as a rookie would carry over into this season, and thus dooming the Bears (as they lack the first round picks to replace him)--and now you've labeled him a "game manager", which feels like you've given him a step up, to me. Also, he's obviously been the least impressive of the three first round QBs thus far. Depending on how things pan out, he may always be. Some things are hunches based on hunches, some things are closer to educated guesses... 28 minutes ago, CWood21 said: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanedorf Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 35 minutes ago, CWood21 said: You don't need a game film wizard ahead of Trubisky. You need someone whose going to show your young QB the ropes in terms of game prep, good habits in practice, etc. You don't need a world beater. .........There's just not enough "NFL caliber" throws yet. One of the things I've come across with Trubisky is that he didn't play a lot in college. Just not nearly as many reps as you'd like to see and that's where the mentoring really comes into play. Grab one of the McCown brothers, I think they've been in CHI before. Pairing him with Glennon just wasn't a good use of his rookie season. From Geoff Schwartz: "It’s hard to underrate how many reps Mayfield got in college. Had 5 years across two programs, and started ~48 games, translating to around 3,600 plays. And played in Os that, while not NFL complex, gave him lots of freedom/responsibility to change plays, routes, blocking, etc" Now compare that to Mitch Trubisky: Only 31 games played So for the bearsfans, their hope is that he will continue to develop over time into a talented NFL QB. For those that look at him now, it just seems a long ways off and there is a very real chance he never gets there. Nagy NOT playing him more in preseason is the smoking gun to me - if the guy is behind developmentally - then play him in August vs vanilla defenses. The bears made a different choice and there have been some football talking heads who suggested it was because they didn't want the rest of the league to see him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Ramster Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 5 hours ago, Uncle Buck said: People need to lighten up on Trubisky. He is a second-year QB, playing in a new offense, so he is essentially still a rookie as far as I'm concerned. Just give him a little time in that offense and I think he can be a good QB. This is the new NFL.. Either you got it or you don’t. They get rid of QBs ASAP. Look at the Browns. Kiser Sosay was cheeks and they knew he wasn’t a franchise QB! Outta here. This isn’t the 90s where a franchise is hostage to a developing QB. It’s either boom or bust. I don’t like Mitch. His game is ugly to me. I respect @Sugashane rebuttal and it might not even be that. My man sounds like me when I would defend Sam Bradford. I’ve seen Case Keenum, Nick Foles, Marc Bulger, Shaun Hill, Austin Davis and Kellen Clemens.. He’s hanging out for hope and I don’t want to sound like a doucheee. I’m just stating that In my eyes Mitch is horrendous. But it’s not my place to tell bear fans that as they’re just hanging on to dear hope and pray he develops. But when Matt Naggy says he’s holding back plays because his Qb is limited! That should raise some eye brows. Shane, Last year rams first 7 games were scoring wise. 46-9 Win 27-20 Loss 41-39 Win 35-30 Win 16-10 Loss (should have been a win if Kupp catches the ball). 27-17 Win (Jags on the road). 33-0 win. As you see the 9 TDS in misleading. The offense was on fire.. Not sure I could say about the curent bears despite having great weapons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted September 22, 2018 Share Posted September 22, 2018 https://www.businessinsider.com/top-nfl-draft-busts-2017-10 The version of this article 15 years from now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.