Trubisky 2019 season development & growth thread

[dll2000]

I don't want any part of Rosen or Alex Smith.

I would kick tires on Mariota or Foles.

I would like to see what MT can do this year with an O line giving him adequate protection before any decisions are made.

Otherwise keep bringing in rookies and stack the rest of your team with FAs and try to win in spite of QB.

 

 

 

 

[Sugashane]

3 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Not sure what cost difference would be, but assuming its on par would you rather have Mariota or Foles?

Foles is nearing end of the line, but he seems to thrive in this system.   

I think you train Bars to be an OT until he proves he can't hack it then move him to guard.   OTs are way more difficult to find than guards in this league.  

Let Coward play OG.  He is probably most physically strong OL we have and while he looked decent at OT last year, he looked miserable there this year.  Not sure if he is/was hurt or out of shape, or last year was an aberration.  I suspect by looking at him in camp he came in out of shape.  His gut was pretty big compared to last year.  

I think we also have to keep in mind that Bars is coming off knee surgery.  Theoretically he should be better next year off that alone.  He could possibly supplant Massie or Leno next year if Bears would actually have legit competitions for positions on OL and not gift them like they did for Long this year.

If not they have a good reserve.

This is why I want to almost exclusively OTs, you can have most of them kick inside but rarely can an OG kick out and play well. Now if it is a guy like Nelson I would be fine drafting him of course but get the guys who have learned to play in space and forced to do more one-on-one blocking to stack the OL with.

That being said I am more than willing to put Bars at OT and give him a shot, hell put him at TE and let him block so someone can block worth a damn there if he isn't going to push for an OT or the RG spot right now, get him out there and getting reps on the outside for experience at least. You can still pass a lot with blocking TEs, Martz did, and no one here is expecting our roster to compete with the Greatest Show on Turf. Right now I'd just be content to have an average offense. Regardless, the blocking has to improve substantially. Pace has really neglected the OL with draft capital since he was hired, he needs to fix that this year.  Unless he can attack FA and get some damn good values, I think his draft will need to be more for needs this year than before.

 

I like Tru a lot, but he hasn't earned a big payday yet and his numbers should be fairly easy to replicate with young guys for MUCH less pay (rookie scale compared to what he will get in his big deal) and improved talent elsewhere. Nagy needs to prove he can develop a QB or he is essentially useless as a HC here. Pagano can rah rah the team but Nagy was brought in to develop Tru and get a system to run consistently for the offense. Neither has happened, hopefully he can turn these terrible performances around with Tru and just square it away now.

Edited October 17, 2019 by Sugashane

[abstract_thought]

IIRC the analytics says forget about blocking TEs - you're better off putting an extra receiver out there to force teams to take a guy out of the box. Running success is heavily correlated with the number of defenders in the box.

I'd rather just see the Bears spread teams out and use their depth of receiving options to create easy run opportunities. Nagy and Mitch just need to figure some things out before that happens.

[Heinz D.]

5 hours ago, topwop1 said:

Anything is possible but the chances of that actually happening are very slim IMO.

Are you sour on the possible candidates coming out? Remember what we hashed out in the QB thread, too--a LOT of teams currently have young QBs they're committed to. 

5 hours ago, topwop1 said:

Rosen hasn't exactly been put in great situations during his first 2 seasons in the NFL, but I haven't seen anything from him so far that leads me to believe he has "it".  Not even a glimmer whereas I've seen that with Mitch.

Huh? He played okay versus our very own Bears, in his first NFL action, just last year. People that are writing off Rosen are nearly as silly as those writing off Trubisky. 

5 hours ago, dll2000 said:

Foles is nearing end of the line, but he seems to thrive in this system.   

Isn't Foles, like, thirty? 

[beardown3231]

4 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Are you sour on the possible candidates coming out? Remember what we hashed out in the QB thread, too--a LOT of teams currently have young QBs they're committed to. 

Huh? He played okay versus our very own Bears, in his first NFL action, just last year. People that are writing off Rosen are nearly as silly as those writing off Trubisky. 

Isn't Foles, like, thirty? 

Rosen was 4-7 for 31 yards and an INT in the Bears game last year. Bradford started that game.

I agree with you. I'd be ok with bringing him in but it'd have to be for a late rounder.

[Heinz D.]

7 minutes ago, beardown3231 said:

I agree with you. I'd be ok with bringing him in but it'd have to be for a late rounder.

For the Bears, yeah, they really couldn't give a whole for him. (Not what he's probably worth, what other teams would give.) 

If they're spending a premium pick (or more), it's most likely on a rookie. 

[WindyCity]

Please, lets all stop with Foles and Rosen. They are expensive and not good enough.

You draft someone to eventually replace Mitch. That is the only way to secure someone better then him.

[abstract_thought]

29 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

Please, lets all stop with Foles and Rosen. They are expensive and not good enough.

You draft someone to eventually replace Mitch. That is the only way to secure someone better then him.

Given his familiarity with this offense, Foles is a short-term option who could help this season if the rails completely fall off for Mitch.

[WindyCity]

12 minutes ago, abstract_thought said:

Given his familiarity with this offense, Foles is a short-term option who could help this season if the rails completely fall off for Mitch.

At a price tag of 20 million which costs you guys off the defense needed to carry him.

[dll2000]

32 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

At a price tag of 20 million which costs you guys off the defense needed to carry him.

I wasn't thinking Bears would pay whole thing.  If that was case forget it.

I was thinking Bears would pay some and Jags would pay some so Jags could move on and save some money.  

That is just spit balling though TBH.  

I would rather upgrade O line and TE, OL upgrades may already be mostly on roster, pay the defense and ride Mitch for 2020.

Not sure he will be able to handle the pressure of a really bad 2019 (if it continues) though.   Not sure coaching and GM can handle it either.  It's hard.

I believe QB play would have been mediocre regardless thus far, but I think we would be happy with Offensive output and product if O line and TEs were performing.  I think we would be 4-1 or better.

A lot of people have laid an egg, but none bigger than the O line and TEs.  Washington game was only decent performance.  That was game Long was out, so perhaps there is hope.

I see little point in keeping Daniel at back up QB going forward.  But Nagy probably will want to anyway.  He is a great coach IMO, but a bit too loyal for this job

 

 

 

 

 

[soulman]

Well on topic as far as Mitch's "development and growth" goes there hasn't been any.  If anything he's regressed badly which to me is a really good sign that he has not been developed very well at all so far.

He's was by far the least NFL ready of the three top QBs in his draft but the basics where all there to be honed into a franchise NFL QB.  So why are we failing so miserably at doing that?  Why are we once again taking a young albeit inexperienced QB who also made a Pro Bowl early is his career and seemingly screwing up all over again?  Did we fail to learn our lessons via Cutler?

IMHO we are now no better staffed at QB on game day with Mitch starting than we are with Daniel and more reps coupled with more offensive failures won't contribute to Mitch's development at all.  In fact it may only hurt it more.  If there was ever a time to sit him and make him watch Daniel while being coached on the sideline during game conditions this is it.

Daniel will be gone in 2020 replaced, we hope, by another vet who can quite easily compete with Mitch and push him or beat him out for the #1 slot.  Mitch was virtually handed a starting role as a rookie that he's never been completely prepared to execute well and if we don't call a pause and begin doing that IMHO he may never play up to his initial potential.

Right now I'm half in and half out as far as Trubisky's future as a franchise QB but I'm all in on thinking it's never gonna happen the way we're going about it.  Once again......we're screwing up with yet another young QB.

 

[malagabears]

Wow, Trubisky's press conferences are becoming the excuse bowl and atrocious. Umm, ummm I don't know why plays don't translate out on the field. I'll you why Mitch, you don't have a clue against NFL defenses and now you are embarrassing yourself with these lame excuses after every piss poor performance. You are entering bust territory and not only local beat but national reporters are starting to figure that out. /Rant over

Edited October 21, 2019 by malagabears

[abstract_thought]

5 hours ago, soulman said:

Well on topic as far as Mitch's "development and growth" goes there hasn't been any.  If anything he's regressed badly which to me is a really good sign that he has not been developed very well at all so far.

He's was by far the least NFL ready of the three top QBs in his draft but the basics where all there to be honed into a franchise NFL QB.  So why are we failing so miserably at doing that?  Why are we once again taking a young albeit inexperienced QB who also made a Pro Bowl early is his career and seemingly screwing up all over again?  Did we fail to learn our lessons via Cutler?

IMHO we are now no better staffed at QB on game day with Mitch starting than we are with Daniel and more reps coupled with more offensive failures won't contribute to Mitch's development at all.  In fact it may only hurt it more.  If there was ever a time to sit him and make him watch Daniel while being coached on the sideline during game conditions this is it.

Daniel will be gone in 2020 replaced, we hope, by another vet who can quite easily compete with Mitch and push him or beat him out for the #1 slot.  Mitch was virtually handed a starting role as a rookie that he's never been completely prepared to execute well and if we don't call a pause and begin doing that IMHO he may never play up to his initial potential.

Right now I'm half in and half out as far as Trubisky's future as a franchise QB but I'm all in on thinking it's never gonna happen the way we're going about it.  Once again......we're screwing up with yet another young QB.

 

There were some analysts who were down on Trubisky's performance last season. While the raw numbers looked good, I think all Bears fans can agree that the issues we see now were evident last season. He simply hasn't made any progress and the schedule and surrounding talent aren't weighing as heavily in his favor.

[WindyCity]

[beardown3231]