Jump to content

Future QB Discussion


G08

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

There have been some "reading the field" criticisms on him, but a lot of that is the whole "QB on a VERY good team" dilemma, as far as evaluation goes.

We now know that Fields has epilepsy, and many GMs are worried that concussions will complicate that condition. I think that's the real reason Fields' has fallen down some boards. 

No one seems to be saying he can't read defenses only that he wasn't required to at OSU so it becomes a developmental issue that whoever drafts him will need to deal with eventually.

I'm not a neurologist but I believe whatever studies that have been done tend to indicate that a concussion is not a typical trigger for an epileptic seizure or at least not in the near term.

The epilepsy issue would not be my primary reason for avoiding Fields.

But it may be a moot point as far as the Bears are concerned.  They'd probably have to move up to #6 to be assured of getting him and that's provided SF doesn't take him and that possibility exists as well.

Like I said.  It's gonna be an interesting couple of hours once the opening bell rings.  If there is a run on QBs it's gonna happen in those first ten picks so if Pace wants one of them he's gotta have his ducks lined up ahead of time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, soulman said:

I'm not a neurologist but I believe whatever studies that have been done tend to indicate that a concussion is not a typical trigger for an epileptic seizure or at least not in the near term.

What I've read so far is that teams are worried about concussions on top of the disorder. That may be wrong, or those teams might be misguided...or whatever. Maybe it's much ado about nothing, but right now it seems to be influencing teams opinions about Fields as a draft prospect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

What I've read so far is that teams are worried about concussions on top of the disorder. That may be wrong, or those teams might be misguided...or whatever. Maybe it's much ado about nothing, but right now it seems to be influencing teams opinions about Fields as a draft prospect. 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29557322/

Background: Epidemiologic studies have suggested that concussion, or mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), is associated with a twofold or greater increase in relative risk for the development of post-traumatic epilepsy. To assess the clinical validity of these findings, we analyzed the incidence of epilepsy in a large cohort of post-concussion patients in whom concussion was strictly defined according to international guidelines.

(The actual study is discussed in detail in the link)

Conclusion: In this large cohort of post-concussion patients we found no increased incidence of epilepsy. For at least the first 5-10 years post-injury, concussion/mTBI should not be considered a significant risk factor for epilepsy. In patients with epilepsy and a past history of concussion, the epilepsy should not be presumed to be post-traumatic.

 

Granted this is only one study but it did cover 330 patients.  Despite this I can see how some teams might be concerned about the potential for multiple concussions being sustained by a running QB and for that reason may decide not to risk drafting him.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He legitimately may have out grown it. Many seizure disorders go away in the early twenties when the brain finalizes its development. His other family members grew out of it.

It probably isn’t worth test it by stopping mediation, but it might not even be a thing anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

He legitimately may have out grown it. Many seizure disorders go away in the early twenties when the brain finalizes its development. His other family members grew out of it.

It probably isn’t worth test it by stopping mediation, but it might not even be a thing anymore.

And that is entirely possible too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, soulman said:

Granted this is only one study but it did cover 330 patients.  Despite this I can see how some teams might be concerned about the potential for multiple concussions being sustained by a running QB and for that reason may decide not to risk drafting him.

I'm merely sharing what I've seen reported. And when you look at it from a GMs perspective (as slanted as that would be)...is it worth taking that risk on Fields, when you could simply have Wilson, Jones, or Lance instead? 

12 hours ago, WindyCity said:

He legitimately may have out grown it. Many seizure disorders go away in the early twenties when the brain finalizes its development. His other family members grew out of it.

It probably isn’t worth test it by stopping mediation, but it might not even be a thing anymore.

From what I read, he hasn't outgrown it yet, but everybody expects he will soon. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Heinz D. said:

'm merely sharing what I've seen reported. And when you look at it from a GMs perspective (as slanted as that would be)...is it worth taking that risk on Fields, when you could simply have Wilson, Jones, or Lance instead? 

We should know on Thursday.  If SF doesn't take him I'm betting he'll be the next QB off the board.   All kinds of rumors and info get released in the media in the week or two prior to the draft.  Most of it is meaningless other than an attempt to drive a player draft position lower so you might as whose behind this info?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, soulman said:

We should know on Thursday.  If SF doesn't take him I'm betting he'll be the next QB off the board.   All kinds of rumors and info get released in the media in the week or two prior to the draft.  Most of it is meaningless other than an attempt to drive a player draft position lower so you might as whose behind this info?

I don't think any qb needy team has our unique combination of terrible draft position, combined with coach /gm combo being so desperate to save their jobs.... 

Wouldn't be at all surprised if we (as in Chicago) where largely responsible for any negative info getting leaked about qb prospects, in a desperate attempt to get some one to fall into draftable ranges

Edited by Epyon
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Epyon said:

I don't think any qb needy team has our unique combination of terrible draft position, combined with coach /gm combo being so desperate to save their jobs.... 

Wouldn't be at all surprised if we (as in Chicago) where largely responsible for any negative info getting leaked about qb prospects, in a desperate attempt to get some one to fall into draftable ranges

I'm curious to know where other than in the media there's been any expression of a threat that Pace and Nagy will be fired unless X happens?  The "desperation" rumors also make for a very good smoke screen relative to their plan for the draft.

All we've heard out of GMcC and Teddy Bears is a need to see some undefined "progress" which could mean most anything based on an 8-8 2020 season.  I'm not gonna assume I know precisely what their target for "progress" is right now.

While it's possible the opposing thinking would be that 1) GMcC dislikes having to fire people and hire new ones.  They aren't very good at it. 2) Even another .500 season would still leave Pace/Nagy with a winning record and two playoff appearances.

A solid draft and some key wins like maybe beating GB and showing significant improvement on offense may be enough "progress" for GMcC to hide behind for at least one more year and in reality if he's privately given Pace another year so that his contract terminates after the 2022 season like Nagy's they may get two more years.

Conversely, if the Dalton deal doesn't go well and the defense continues to slide under Desai maybe GMcC and Teddy do throw in the towel on both but if so I also believe they would have to have identified another GM prospect whom they believe will be far better than Pace.  After all they have declared him as head of all football ops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Epyon said:

I don't think any qb needy team has our unique combination of terrible draft position, combined with coach /gm combo being so desperate to save their jobs.... 

Wouldn't be at all surprised if we (as in Chicago) where largely responsible for any negative info getting leaked about qb prospects, in a desperate attempt to get some one to fall into draftable ranges

It is a little unique.

But most GMs don’t survive a Trubisky level miss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, soulman said:

I'm curious to know where other than in the media there's been any expression of a threat that Pace and Nagy will be fired unless X happens?  The "desperation" rumors also make for a very good smoke screen relative to their plan for the draft.

All we've heard out of GMcC and Teddy Bears is a need to see some undefined "progress" which could mean most anything based on an 8-8 2020 season.  I'm not gonna assume I know precisely what their target for "progress" is right now.

While it's possible the opposing thinking would be that 1) GMcC dislikes having to fire people and hire new ones.  They aren't very good at it. 2) Even another .500 season would still leave Pace/Nagy with a winning record and two playoff appearances.

A solid draft and some key wins like maybe beating GB and showing significant improvement on offense may be enough "progress" for GMcC to hide behind for at least one more year and in reality if he's privately given Pace another year so that his contract terminates after the 2022 season like Nagy's they may get two more years.

Conversely, if the Dalton deal doesn't go well and the defense continues to slide under Desai maybe GMcC and Teddy do throw in the towel on both but if so I also believe they would have to have identified another GM prospect whom they believe will be far better than Pace.  After all they have declared him as head of all football ops.

You are right. We do not know the exact target for progress.

But we do know winning 8 games and having mediocre QB play is not progress, that is exactly what they had last season.

My assumption is they either need to show more in the win column or at the QB spot, as those were the 2 things both George and Ted focused on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

You are right. We do not know the exact target for progress.

But we do know winning 8 games and having mediocre QB play is not progress, that is exactly what they had last season.

My assumption is they either need to show more in the win column or at the QB spot, as those were the 2 things both George and Ted focused on.

Fair enough.

But since we haven't had a look at the schedule just yet it's tough to make calls on the W/L probabilities so let's go a different route that simply says .500 is how we end up and I would take that to be either 9-8 or 8-9 based on 17 games.

If under Dalton the offense shows progress to the point of averaging 24 points per game as opposed to the 17 or less we have been putting up would that show enough progress despite a .500 W/L?  Seven points more per game might vindicate Nagy and his play calling at least for one season.

Given that the defense will lack some of the talent we've had and will also be run by a rookie DC we could score more points per game yet still not gain in the W/L column simply because the defense has slipped so any gain on offense gets offset by the decline on defense.  This is a distinct possibility.

And from yet another perspective.

Suppose we skip trading up instead hanging our hat on Dalton, Foles, and rookie taken from the 2nd or 3rd tier group and instead add a highly ranked CB, a solid OT, and a speedy Slot WR plus some depth elsewhere and those players start sometime in year one as quite a few others have before them. 

Is that enough to also show progress via smart drafting that will pay off in 2022 and beyond?  If Pace is unable to trade up IMHO this looks like his best alternative to claim significant progress building on his roster weaknesses has been accomplished.  I still believe GMcC will look for any and all reasons he can use not to fire Ryan Pace.

JMHO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree George doesn’t want to fire Pace, but progress has to be more tangible than some nuanced breakdowns of offensive improvement. It is the fans that will force his hand. The 10k-15k no shows in December, like they had with Trestman and Fox will force it. The getting booed off the field on prime time games will force something.

I think fans will want something more tangible in December, either a playoff team or showing up to see a young exciting QB.

I don’t think a similar record with 3-4 more points per game is going to get people out in December or keep them from selling their tickets to Packers fans for week 17.

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...