Jump to content

Bears to decline Trub's 5th year option


malagabears

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

Mitch did fine in the playoff game. Let's not pull our hair out arguing about something that is, in the scheme of things, so minor...

Performance in a playoff game isn't minor. He also didn't do fine. He was poor for the entire game except the final drive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

Mitch did fine in the playoff game. Let's not pull our hair out arguing about something that is, in the scheme of things, so minor...

He played poorly for 3 quarters and was one of the biggest reasons the top defense in the NFL was squandered. We lost with a 2 TO advantage even, with is a 3 to 1 odd favorite usually.  Idk how its minor, that was only the 5th postseason appearance we've had in the last 25 years or so. Its frustrating that THAT level of play is considered acceptable by a fanbase. Bad part of it is that it was still likely in the top half of the perfromances in his career. 

 

The bar is set so damn low in Chicago and our QBs still trip over it. Lol. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, beardown3231 said:

Performance in a playoff game isn't minor. He also didn't do fine. He was poor for the entire game except the final drive.

Exactly. That isn't saying he had a ton of help but our offense was carried by ARob, and Tru was a negative impact as much as a positive. He will pepper in some great throws then short arm a 6 yarder or ruin a wide open receiver's efforts by under-throwing them with Grossman-like regularity. 

 

As a person you cant ask for much more, he's loved by teammates from what I've read and clearly has put a ton of time into it. But if that was enough then Tebow would be challenging Brady's GOAT status. There is a level of consistency and natural ability to run a pro game and I don't believe Tru has it. I wish he did.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, beardown3231 said:

Performance in a playoff game isn't minor. He also didn't do fine. He was poor for the entire game except the final drive.

 

14 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

He played poorly for 3 quarters and was one of the biggest reasons the top defense in the NFL was squandered. We lost with a 2 TO advantage even, with is a 3 to 1 odd favorite usually.  Idk how its minor, that was only the 5th postseason appearance we've had in the last 25 years or so. Its frustrating that THAT level of play is considered acceptable by a fanbase. Bad part of it is that it was still likely in the top half of the perfromances in his career. 

 

The bar is set so damn low in Chicago and our QBs still trip over it. Lol. 

You guys are acting like the Philadelphia game is a big deal when Mitch played even worse than that for the first seven games last season? 

QwS3NEONSpWWOy70wkKY32cK7zE9Q4QoARh1NP5Z

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

 

You guys are acting like the Philadelphia game is a big deal when Mitch played even worse than that for the first seven games last season? 

QwS3NEONSpWWOy70wkKY32cK7zE9Q4QoARh1NP5Z

What? Have we not torn apart the 2019 performances enough? The argument is he isn't good enough and people citing the Eagles game as a positive must just be looking at the box score. 

The Philly game was the cherry on top of a mediocre 2018 that led to a bad 2019.

Edited by beardown3231
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Performance in a playoff game isn't minor. He also didn't do fine. He was poor for the entire game except the final drive.

3 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

people citing the Eagles game as a positive must just be looking at the box score. 

tenor.gif

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, JustAnotherFan said:

tenor.gif

 

Anytime you can have a 4.56 ypa in the first half, have an INT or two dropped during the entirety of the game, and score 1 TD in 60 minutes including making poor throws on your best starting field position of the night in the 1st quarter which led to a punt, you definitely celebrate that & realize you have a keeper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

What? Have we not torn apart the 2019 performances enough? The argument is he isn't good enough and people citing the Eagles game as a positive must just be looking at the box score. 

The Philly game was the cherry on top of a mediocre 2018 that led to a bad 2019.

Mediocre according to beardown3231: Pro Bowl Alternate season, 11-3 record as a starter, NFC North Championship, 66.6%/3223 yards/24 TDs/12 INTs/7.4 YPA/95.4 rating

If Trubisky played all 16 games and you extrapolated the stats, 12-4 record, 3,683 yards/27 TDs/13 INTs

"Yeah but if you remove this game, stand on your head/watch upside you'll really see that overall he sucks at QB"

 

The Philly game really was the cherry on top... lose your 'U' tight end before the start of the game, defense adjusts and takes Cohen out, your coach doesn't really find an answer until the 8th drive in the game with 1:33 to go in quarter 3. The kid still throws for over 300 yards, 60%+ completion, 1 TD, 0 INTs and make clutch throws at the end of the game to put your team in position to win the game.

Edited by G08
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Anytime you can have a 4.56 ypa in the first half, have an INT or two dropped during the entirety of the game, and score 1 TD in 60 minutes including making poor throws on your best starting field position of the night in the 1st quarter which led to a punt, you definitely celebrate that & realize you have a keeper.

Between this and claiming that he played poorly the entire game except on the last drive is the exact definition of box score scouting, and that's a terrible look for someone trying to call out others for it.

I am no Mitch apologist but he did not play bad in that game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/15/2020 at 12:27 PM, JustAnotherFan said:

The Mack trade has nothing to do with Trubisky. This is only you assuming Pace doesn't trade for Mack without Mitch and I would argue that Pace makes that move regardless of who the QB was. It's not often that a potential hall of fame talent at a prime position becomes available. 

Except they're tied together whether you want them to or not.  Them giving up the amount of draft capital (and contract) essentially fortified their commitment to Mack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

Except they're tied together whether you want them to or not.  Them giving up the amount of draft capital (and contract) essentially fortified their commitment to Mack.

No, they are not tied together. This is only you assuming that is. 

The trade had nothing to do with Mitch at all and this is backed up by the fact that Pace was more than willing to go into the season without Mack. Hell... Pace, Champ Kelly, and Josh Lucas didn't even really think getting Mack was realistic at all. They kept making the calls to the Raiders and wrote it off as a pipe dream.  It wasn't until the night of the first preseason game against the Bills on a Thursday that they got the call telling them to come up with a offer and that they're going to make their decision Friday night. 

Pace is making that trade regardless. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JustAnotherFan said:

No, they are not tied together. This is only you assuming that is. 

The trade had nothing to do with Mitch at all and this is backed up by the fact that Pace was more than willing to go into the season without Mack. Hell... Pace, Champ Kelly, and Josh Lucas didn't even really think getting Mack was realistic at all. They kept making the calls to the Raiders and wrote it off as a pipe dream.  It wasn't until the night of the first preseason game against the Bills on a Thursday that they got the call telling them to come up with a offer and that they're going to make their decision Friday night. 

Pace is making that trade regardless. 

If you think Pace makes that trade without belieiving in Trubisky, I've got a bridge to sell you.  You don't give up that kind of draft capital without a QB in place.  That's why the Steelers trade for Minkah Fitzpatrick met so much negative publicity.  When you gave up all those draft picks for Khalil Mack, you effectively took the ability to go get a QB in the draft since the success rate of non-1st round QBs is astronomically low.  If the Bears believed that Dwayne Haskins was a franchise QB, they'd have the draft capital to maneuver to select him.  And when the Bears committed $140M+ to Mack, they effectively took a large chunk of their salary cap with it.  The Bears didn't have the cap space (IIRC) without pretty much completely ignoring the rest of their team to sign Tom Brady.  There's only so much cap space to go around, and when you use that money on a non-QB, that leaves less for other positions.  Reportedly, the Bears and Packers were the two final teams interested in Mack, and the Raiders opted for the Bears because they didn't believe in Trubisky.  Ergo, they're tied together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

If you think Pace makes that trade without belieiving in Trubisky, I've got a bridge to sell you.  You don't give up that kind of draft capital without a QB in place.  That's why the Steelers trade for Minkah Fitzpatrick met so much negative publicity.  When you gave up all those draft picks for Khalil Mack, you effectively took the ability to go get a QB in the draft since the success rate of non-1st round QBs is astronomically low.  If the Bears believed that Dwayne Haskins was a franchise QB, they'd have the draft capital to maneuver to select him.  And when the Bears committed $140M+ to Mack, they effectively took a large chunk of their salary cap with it.  The Bears didn't have the cap space (IIRC) without pretty much completely ignoring the rest of their team to sign Tom Brady.  There's only so much cap space to go around, and when you use that money on a non-QB, that leaves less for other positions.  Reportedly, the Bears and Packers were the two final teams interested in Mack, and the Raiders opted for the Bears because they didn't believe in Trubisky.  Ergo, they're tied together.

No, they didn't believe in the TEAM. They thought the Bears were going to have a worse record than the Packers in 2018 and they would end up with a high draft pick. Needless to say, they were wrong.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...