Jump to content

Mitchell Trubisky's Future


SmittyBacall

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

Nowhere in that did I say anything that said what he is now is what he'll be in the future.  You're seeing what you want to see.  In the first post, I made the statement "in this point of his career", which is clearly a qualifier.  In the second post, I said "throws yet" which is again a qualifier.  The third post is making a statement based on what he's done so far, so you really don't need to input the qualifier.  And the final one is a matter of fact, his tools pale in comparison to Josh Allen.  Not sure how that's debatable.

Sorry just giving you a quick lesson in "sample size". Thought you might need it. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, childofpudding said:

The backpedal is strong

It always will be, for fans or those who dislike a QB.

 

Watson got massive praise for unbelievable play, Mahomes has when few of us were his fans in college, Darnold has had people flipping, Mayfield has etc. When they hit a bad streak people will turn on them too.

 

When Tru has a far more modest game in the near future people without a real interest will flip back.

 

I liked the move up for Pace to get his guy. Mahomes and Tru were both guys I really liked, so I'm damn happy both are doing well. If Allen booms then I will have to eat some serious crow. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

When they hit a bad streak people will turn on them too.

Agree 100% - Deshaun Watson has accounted for nearly 1,200 yards of total offense over the last three weeks with a few TAST posters on his OL, and people are still holding him as an RG3-esque bust, simply because he had a bad game against New England. 

People are really quick to turn on a QB when they show even the slightest deficiency. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Agree 100% - Deshaun Watson has accounted for nearly 1,200 yards of total offense over the last three weeks with a few TAST posters on his OL, and people are still holding him as an RG3-esque bust, simply because he had a bad game against New England. 

People are really quick to turn on a QB when they show even the slightest deficiency. 

Just curious... what does "TAST" mean? I assume you mean that they are really bad, I'm just not familiar with this acronym.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TheKillerNacho said:

Just curious... what does "TAST" mean? I assume you mean that they are really bad, I'm just not familiar with this acronym.

This

Ain't

Sports

Talk

 

Just a guess. I've been wrong 3-4 times already today   lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought he was better than what people gave him credit for early in the season and that yesterday he's getting a little too much credit. I think he's somewhere in between but yesterday was definitely more a product of a bad Bucs team that was not ready to play. But Trubisky is trending toward being a league average starter which is a great thing for Bears fans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Simple principle for players just like it holds for teams - rarely as bad as their worst game....nor as good as their best game.   Definitely  holds here.

Tampa's pass D...is abysmal, and their pass rush is non existent.    Honestly, this tells me more about Tampa's D than it does about CHI's O.

I say the above as a guy who posted each and every time that it was way too soon to write Trubisky off.   But the extreme take now suddenly absolving him and acting like the Q's are no longer present vs. the Bucs D is kinda nuts.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By some of the logic in this thread Blake Bortles is the best QB in the league now I suppose.  It's the guys who do it week in a week out are the true franchise QB's.  Mitch has been more bad than good.  Maybe this is a turning point but only time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, CWood21 said:

Secondly, it's eviscerate if that's the word you're going for.  If you're going to try and get snippy with me, at least spell the word correctly.  Finally, the only thing you do by putting that last post is really show that you don't have much of an argument left.  I'm more than willing to discuss this in a civil manner with you.  My stance on Trubisky hasn't changed since the beginning of the year.  I think he needed to show notable improvement, and based on what my pre-draft evaluations and how he played last year, I wasn't confident that he was ever going to take that jump.  I haven't watched his game against Tampa Bay, but if he can continue to use that success and build upon it I'd be more than willing to admit I'm wrong.  But the number of Trubisky fans coming in here using this single game to support their stance needs a quick lesson in sample size.

Going spelling Nazi on me? Sigh...

My only argument was that it was too early to write him off, and that he had shown us plenty of splash plays to indicate he has the potential to be a good player. That's it. 

But tempering the game by pointing to Tampa's defense is a somewhat dishonest argument, based on the numbers. You could use the same sort of narrow view to nitpick the Packers' defensive performance yesterday--but it would be equally dishonest. They held the Bills to zero points. That's quite an accomplishment, and a big step for them. The Bills may have problems, but they're not an all-time bad team, or anything. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Humble_Beast said:

is Mitch a one game wonder or is this a sign of things to come... I'm think of fantasy here

Well...I think it's sort of doubtful he puts up those kind of numbers every week from here on out. 9_9

But the gist of your question really is--has he turned the corner, as far as his development goes? Based on everything we know, all I can give you is a tentative "probably?". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Humble_Beast said:

is Mitch a one game wonder or is this a sign of things to come... I'm think of fantasy here

Fantasy-wise, I'm sorry to say I see fool's gold this year.  I own ARob in redraft and own Miller in every one of my dynasty leagues (all PPR)...and I don't think Tru will help either reach their 2018 ceiling (Miller obv needs more time to reach his ceiling) much this year.   The schedule isn't that great, and more importantly, the CHI D is so good, I think we're going to see a lot of the 2H we saw this week (where the O is being asked to just take care of the ball, and sit on leads) - just not many 1H's where he's going to throw for 5 TD's.    Part of the appeal in fantasy lies in gamescripts that will keep the O going full throttle for 60 mins (for ATL and Matt Ryan, for example, it's all systems go this year in fantasy...that decimated ATL D is going to struggle).

What I really hope to see is the Nagy system go all-out next year - as a Miller owner, that would make me really happy (bummed at the Gabriel/Bellamy scores, at least 1-2 of them were Miller plays normally...oh well, it's a marathon, not a sprint esp. in dynasty).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Going spelling Nazi on me? Sigh...

My only argument was that it was too early to write him off, and that he had shown us plenty of splash plays to indicate he has the potential to be a good player. That's it. 

But tempering the game by pointing to Tampa's defense is a somewhat dishonest argument, based on the numbers. You could use the same sort of narrow view to nitpick the Packers' defensive performance yesterday--but it would be equally dishonest. They held the Bills to zero points. That's quite an accomplishment, and a big step for them. The Bills may have problems, but they're not an all-time bad team, or anything. 

If you're going to use a word to try and intimidate me or try and end the discussion, the least you can do is spell it right or use it right.  Just a personal pet peeve.  Only takes a few seconds to look it up and make sure it's spelled correctly.  Either way, we can move on from that part if you want.

As for your second point, he's also shown a TON that makes you cringe or give you reason to concern.  You choose to look at the optimistic side because you're a Bears' fan.  I choose to view more the pessimistic side because I wasn't a fan of his coming out of North Carolina.  Nowhere did I say that what I said should be taken as truth.  We're stating opinions here, and if you're not wanting to listen to my opinion than you're probably not on the right medium.

And no, I've got no extreme judgment to make about the Packers' D based strictly on the Bills' game.  In fact, I'd probably throw it out because it was a rookie QB who looked like a rookie QB.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ET80 said:

Agree 100% - Deshaun Watson has accounted for nearly 1,200 yards of total offense over the last three weeks with a few TAST posters on his OL, and people are still holding him as an RG3-esque bust, simply because he had a bad game against New England. 

People are really quick to turn on a QB when they show even the slightest deficiency. 

I mean he sucks so...

Or at least his clock management skills do xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...