Nick Foles Will Start/Jonathan Wood Analysis

[Sugashane]

13 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Can you tell me of one that happened to? 

Are we counting like the end of the career kind of moves? Like Eli being benched after 200+ consecutive starts for Jones? But coming off their rookie deals and re-signing as a number 2 option would be much harder to find I'd imaging. 

 

I'd actually like to see Tru move on. Shanahan and McVay seem to run systems that he might not be great in but could use his legs to help be a crutch for his passing. I'd be annoyed if he went to KC and Reid was able to correct him to be honest. 

[beardown3231]

2 hours ago, Sugashane said:

Are we counting like the end of the career kind of moves? Like Eli being benched after 200+ consecutive starts for Jones? But coming off their rookie deals and re-signing as a number 2 option would be much harder to find I'd imaging. 

 

I'd actually like to see Tru move on. Shanahan and McVay seem to run systems that he might not be great in but could use his legs to help be a crutch for his passing. I'd be annoyed if he went to KC and Reid was able to correct him to be honest. 

Good point. The Chiefs do need a QB. 

[soulman]

20 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

Can you tell me of one that happened to? 

Tannehill is another I believe.  But I can't go back through 70 years of NFL history to come up with all of them.  Best I can do is maybe look at some of the Bears QBs who've been benched after having been drafted and become a starter.

[soulman]

To be honest I have no real insight into Mitch's future in Chicago and realistically no one else here does either.

Now that the NFL has reduced the preseason to just two games we might see that as an advantage for Mitch vs Foles.  But until they actually start winging the ball around in camp and we see them in a game we're all just guessing at who may look better then the other.  Personally I believe that while they're very different style QBs at this point in time there isn't all that much that separates them as potential starters.  Neither of them is all that likely to be ranked a top ten passer in 2020 but one will edge out the other.

After this season has finished we'll all have a better read on what may happen in 2021 but all we know at the moment is Foles will still be under contract (albeit with an out) whereas Mitch will not.  Let's face it.  This is gonna be a flakey season for every team.  Those who are the best prepared and can avoid major injuries should rise to the top but every year at least a handful of team disappoint.  It was our turn in 2019.  Whether or not we repeat that in 2020 can't really be known yet or who the #1 QB will be.

So I'm not willing to predict who'll be back in 2021 any more than Pace would be willing to do right now other than to say all options should remain on the table.

Edited July 2, 2020 by soulman

[Heinz D.]

7 hours ago, Sugashane said:

Are we counting like the end of the career kind of moves? 

No, that doesn't really count. Different situation. You could even say Montana was benched late in his career.

30 minutes ago, soulman said:

Tannehill is another I believe.  But I can't go back through 70 years of NFL history to come up with all of them.  Best I can do is maybe look at some of the Bears QBs who've been benched after having been drafted and become a starter.

Tannehill is tricky, because of the injuries. And injuries are mostly the reasons the Dolphins claimed he was on the bench. That doesn't matter anyway, because the Dolphins get rid of him after that season.

The Bears have had a pretty sorry history at QB, to be sure. But even Grossman didn't stick around long after he was benched. He was off to Washington. 

14 minutes ago, soulman said:

To be honest I have no real insight into Mitch's future in Chicago and realistically no one else here does either.

That's an odd claim to make for someone so tuned into the team.

If Mitch and Foles are close, at all, in camp then they'll give it to Mitch and see what happens.

What likely happens next is Mitch melts down under all the pressure (again), and Foles comes in and saves the season.

The more likely scenario is that Foles is superior in every way to Mitch, and comes in as the clear starter, and this is Mitch's last season in Chicago.

I'd be thrilled if I was dead wrong in that prediction, but I don't think I will be. 

[Sugashane]

8 hours ago, beardown3231 said:

Good point. The Chiefs do need a QB. 

Lol. All jokes aside Mahomes has always been known to take hits to deliver the ball rather than short-arming it. He gets some big shots and it's hard to expect a Manning-like consecutive start streak. I'd imagine with all the abuse he takes Reid would like a better back up than Henne to help secure the first round byes if possible. 

[beardown3231]

3 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

No, that doesn't really count. Different situation. You could even say Montana was benched late in his career.

Tannehill is tricky, because of the injuries. And injuries are mostly the reasons the Dolphins claimed he was on the bench. That doesn't matter anyway, because the Dolphins get rid of him after that season.

The Bears have had a pretty sorry history at QB, to be sure. But even Grossman didn't stick around long after he was benched. He was off to Washington. 

That's an odd claim to make for someone so tuned into the team.

If Mitch and Foles are close, at all, in camp then they'll give it to Mitch and see what happens.

What likely happens next is Mitch melts down under all the pressure (again), and Foles comes in and saves the season.

The more likely scenario is that Foles is superior in every way to Mitch, and comes in as the clear starter, and this is Mitch's last season in Chicago.

I'd be thrilled if I was dead wrong in that prediction, but I don't think I will be. 

Grossman was benched in 2007 and didn't leave for 2 years, and he left for Houston first, not Washington.

I think Soul is saying he has no real insight because he doesn't and none of us do. Why is that an odd claim? We might have a *feeling* of what may happen which is what you're confusing with *insight*, but it's really meaningless. It's not like we personally know Nagy or anything.

[soulman]

On 7/2/2020 at 4:01 PM, Heinz D. said:

No, that doesn't really count. Different situation. You could even say Montana was benched late in his career.

Tannehill is tricky, because of the injuries. And injuries are mostly the reasons the Dolphins claimed he was on the bench. That doesn't matter anyway, because the Dolphins get rid of him after that season.

The Bears have had a pretty sorry history at QB, to be sure. But even Grossman didn't stick around long after he was benched. He was off to Washington. 

That's an odd claim to make for someone so tuned into the team.

If Mitch and Foles are close, at all, in camp then they'll give it to Mitch and see what happens.

What likely happens next is Mitch melts down under all the pressure (again), and Foles comes in and saves the season.

The more likely scenario is that Foles is superior in every way to Mitch, and comes in as the clear starter, and this is Mitch's last season in Chicago.

I'd be thrilled if I was dead wrong in that prediction, but I don't think I will be. 

Ya'  know Heinz.  It's kind of useless to debate whether or not Mitch will be re=signed or not at this point in time.  We have no idea at all what this year holds beyond an educated guess which will vary depending on both one's opinion and their level of NFL education.  We have at least one frequent poster here who has an elementary school level knowledge of football yet believes he's a PhD.

What you say "is likely to happen" is based on your own logic and personal opinion which doesn't necessarily agree with my own.  I'm not gonna guess at "likely scenarios" before camp or before I've even seen them play one down of regular season football.  Right now I'm accepting the party line that they are equals in an open competition for the  #1 spot.  Beyond that I have no predictions but I might have a bet I'd be willing to lay.

I'd lay $20 on neither of them playing all 16 games.  Why?  Because Mitch likes to run and Foles can't run.  That tells me both are gonna take some shots and there's a good likelihood that one of those shots will result in an injury severe enough to either cause the #2 to come in or to start a game or two while the other heals.  So IMHO we may not have the best QB in the NFCN  but we may well have the best two QBs in the NFCN.

You wanna take that bet? 

[dll2000]

6 hours ago, soulman said:

Ya'  know Heinz.  It's kind of useless to debate whether or not Mitch will be re=signed or not at this point in time.  We have no idea at all what this year holds beyond an educated guess which will vary depending on both one's opinion and their level of NFL education.  We have at least one frequent poster here who has an elementary school level knowledge of football yet believes he's a PhD.

What you say "is likely to happen" is based on your own logic and personal opinion which doesn't necessarily agree with my own.  I'm not gonna guess at "likely scenarios" before camp or before I've even seen them play one down of regular season football.  Right now I'm accepting the party line that they are equals in an open competition for the  #1 spot.  Beyond that I have no predictions but I might have a bet I'd be willing to lay.

I'd lay $20 on neither of them playing all 16 games.  Why?  Because Mitch likes to run and Foles can't run.  That tells me both are gonna take some shots and there's a good likelihood that one of those shots will result in an injury severe enough to either cause the #2 to come in or to start a game or two while the other heals.  So IMHO we may not have the best QB in the NFCN  but we may well have the best two QBs in the NFCN.

You wanna take that bet? 

You are in a gambling mood lately.  LOL.  Neither one has ever played a full season so you would have to lay some good odds on that one.

Especially after watching Massie try to block good DEs last year.   This might be Foles last year.  

[soulman]

52 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

You are in a gambling mood lately.  LOL.  Neither one has ever played a full season so you would have to lay some good odds on that one.

Especially after watching Massie try to block good DEs last year.   This might be Foles last year.  

Haha, well my Mama didn't raise a dummy.  I like odds that are hugely in my favor.

It's also why as an investor for my own account I liked bottom fishing.  A CPA friend of mine and I used to scour the market for near hopeless causes where the only real downside is they'd cease to exist at all.  We had some minor successes that made us a few hundred bucks on each of them but the one biggie at least for us was a stock selling for $.75 (that's cents LOL) but looking at it's financials they had cash enough to survive.  So we each bought 1000 shares which for me at that time supporting four kids was a reach.  When it recovered to $5 a share the institutions began to buy it again and we eventually got out at about $14 a share.  It topped out a couple of bucks higher then dropped like a rock back to $6 when people dumped it to take their profit.

So we took our wives out for a $100 dinner, I kept a couple of grand to keep playing stock options with (that was more my thing) and the rest went into a mutual fund for some college expenses.  We never found another flyer quite like that one but that's OK.  Pigs get fat and hogs get slaughtered. 

I love brother Heinz but I'll be more than happy to take $20 off him if he wants to take my bet.   LOL

[Heinz D.]

On 7/2/2020 at 8:22 PM, beardown3231 said:

Grossman was benched in 2007 and didn't leave for 2 years, and he left for Houston first, not Washington.

I think Soul is saying he has no real insight because he doesn't and none of us do. Why is that an odd claim? We might have a *feeling* of what may happen which is what you're confusing with *insight*, but it's really meaningless. It's not like we personally know Nagy or anything.

I thought Grossman was only around for a single season, and my forgetting he went to Houston first doesn't enter in it. Regardless, teams keeping failed first round quarterbacks around as their backups rarely happens, and we both know it. 

And, we don't know Nagy, but we did all see what happened to Trubisky out there on the field last year. Whether you call my position a feeling, or insight, I'm guessing that what happened to Mitch represents the sort of setback they he'll never totally recover from. Hey, I could certainly be wrong about that. Mitch could end up getting his act together and become a good quarterback--which is the path that I personally thought he was on before the 2019 meltdown. 

I'd be delighted to be wrong about Mitch.

10 hours ago, soulman said:

Ya'  know Heinz.  It's kind of useless to debate whether or not Mitch will be re=signed or not at this point in time.  We have no idea at all what this year holds beyond an educated guess which will vary depending on both one's opinion and their level of NFL education.  We have at least one frequent poster here who has an elementary school level knowledge of football yet believes he's a PhD.

What you say "is likely to happen" is based on your own logic and personal opinion which doesn't necessarily agree with my own.  I'm not gonna guess at "likely scenarios" before camp or before I've even seen them play one down of regular season football.  Right now I'm accepting the party line that they are equals in an open competition for the  #1 spot.  Beyond that I have no predictions but I might have a bet I'd be willing to lay.

I'd lay $20 on neither of them playing all 16 games.  Why?  Because Mitch likes to run and Foles can't run.  That tells me both are gonna take some shots and there's a good likelihood that one of those shots will result in an injury severe enough to either cause the #2 to come in or to start a game or two while the other heals.  So IMHO we may not have the best QB in the NFCN  but we may well have the best two QBs in the NFCN.

You wanna take that bet? 

The normal odds of the NFL indicate that both QBs will play next season, for sure. You may have a point about a two-pronged approach at QB being a good one, in the end. That's not a real long-term solution though, unfortunately. 

You do make an interesting point that it's impossible to know just how much faith Nagy and Pace actually have in Mitch. In other words, whether they have faith he'll regroup (as they claim publicly), or if they're simply hoping for the best because cutting him would be kind of a stupid move. 

As I said above, I'd be tickled pink if I end up being wrong about Mitch. 

[dll2000]

6 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

I thought Grossman was only around for a single season, and my forgetting he went to Houston first doesn't enter in it. Regardless, teams keeping failed first round quarterbacks around as their backups rarely happens, and we both know it. 

And, we don't know Nagy, but we did all see what happened to Trubisky out there on the field last year. Whether you call my position a feeling, or insight, I'm guessing that what happened to Mitch represents the sort of setback they he'll never totally recover from. Hey, I could certainly be wrong about that. Mitch could end up getting his act together and become a good quarterback--which is the path that I personally thought he was on before the 2019 meltdown. 

I'd be delighted to be wrong about Mitch.

The normal odds of the NFL indicate that both QBs will play next season, for sure. You may have a point about a two-pronged approach at QB being a good one, in the end. That's not a real long-term solution though, unfortunately. 

You do make an interesting point that it's impossible to know just how much faith Nagy and Pace actually have in Mitch. In other words, whether they have faith he'll regroup (as they claim publicly), or if they're simply hoping for the best because cutting him would be kind of a stupid move. 

As I said above, I'd be tickled pink if I end up being wrong about Mitch. 

Watching Bears O last two years is so frustrating.    Mitch clearly can make plays and throws sometimes, but he is just so inconsistent.  Then when he finally looks good someone else on O is screwing up.   Then they get their act together and he has happy feet and a big play is left on field.

Its like 9 guys are doing good and 2 are sucking on most plays.   And the two that are sucking are sucking so bad the play is completely disrupted.    And it isn’t always same two.  Rarely is everyone playing good or at least not bad at same time.

 

  

 

[Heinz D.]

56 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

Watching Bears O last two years is so frustrating.    Mitch clearly can make plays and throws sometimes, but he is just so inconsistent.  Then when he finally looks good someone else on O is screwing up.   Then they get their act together and he has happy feet and a big play is left on field.

Its like 9 guys are doing good and 2 are sucking on most plays.   And the two that are sucking are sucking so bad the play is completely disrupted.    And it isn’t always same two.  Rarely is everyone playing good or at least not bad at same time.

I'd qualify that as a very fair assessment. Unfortunately a lot (and I mean A LOT) of that lack of cohesiveness comes back to Mitch as well. He's the quarterback. Gotta keep stuff together.

What happened with him is pretty staggering. We've seen highly touted prospects break down mentally right out of the gate (Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf), and we've seen guys get battered into submission (David Carr, Chuck Long), but I've never seen a Trubisky situation before. It's a weird one. 

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

10 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

I'd qualify that as a very fair assessment. Unfortunately a lot (and I mean A LOT) of that lack of cohesiveness comes back to Mitch as well. He's the quarterback. Gotta keep stuff together.

What happened with him is pretty staggering. We've seen highly touted prospects break down mentally right out of the gate (Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf), and we've seen guys get battered into submission (David Carr, Chuck Long), but I've never seen a Trubisky situation before. It's a weird one. 

I highly recommend windy City gridiron's "halas to Mack" podcast.

It's a decade by decade Bears history cast, and while it sounds boring it's actually really entertaining. 

The one common thread for literally 90 percent of it is that the Bears miss on the quarterback.

[dll2000]

11 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

I'd qualify that as a very fair assessment. Unfortunately a lot (and I mean A LOT) of that lack of cohesiveness comes back to Mitch as well. He's the quarterback. Gotta keep stuff together.

What happened with him is pretty staggering. We've seen highly touted prospects break down mentally right out of the gate (Jamarcus Russell, Ryan Leaf), and we've seen guys get battered into submission (David Carr, Chuck Long), but I've never seen a Trubisky situation before. It's a weird one. 

I blame Mitch when blame is due.  But when a DL beats his man clean I put blame for that on OLmen that got beat.