Future QB Discussion

[WindyCity]

5 hours ago, G08 said:

 

Sounds like more Howie Roseman bull****

[AZBearsFan]

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

Sounds like more Howie Roseman bull****

My thoughts too. 

[JAF-N72EX]

21 hours ago, WindyCity said:

II don’t blame anyone for assuming Pace will fail to add a decent QB this offseason. That is an evidence based opinion. All he has done at QB is repeatedly fail.

Wut? This had nothing to do with what I said. Just more Windy gibberish and the same ignorant sheep who follows......

[Pool]

20 hours ago, dll2000 said:

@G08Honestly, I hope he does succeed somewhere else.  

If he gets another shot though I think it will likely be due to injury or maybe a team looking for a bridge or stop gap QB.  

I think he will find success somewhere and prove what we already know. These coaches suck.

[WindyCity]

3 hours ago, JAF-N72EX said:

Wut? This had nothing to do with what I said. Just more Windy gibberish and the same ignorant sheep who follows......

Let me paraphrase
 

Certain idiotic fans: a bunch of things about not having faith in Pace being able to address the QB spot.

Me (you): Don’t worry, there will be options, you just want to hate. 

That is literally what you wrote. Just longer and more self congratulatory.

 

My point is those who have doubts about Pace’s ability to address the QB spot in a satisfactory manner are living in an evidence based world. The GM is bad, the options are limited, and the resources are not abundant.

Edited February 13, 2021 by WindyCity

[Superman(DH23)]

11 hours ago, Forge said:

Nobody should be picking up that fifth year option period, regardless of what they trade for him. It's like 25 million and remember that those are now fully guaranteed. Not just for injury any more. So you have to pick up a fully guaranteed option for 2022 in the next couple of months and if he bombs, you're just stuck with him at 25 million or whatever the next year. No bueno. Makes more sense to turn it down and if he plays well spend a couple million more on a franchise tag the following year. 

I'm not saying they should (I'm strongly anti-Sam Darnold), I'm saying they will.  There are a couple reasons.  #1 messaging.  If you trade for Sam Darnold, you are sending a clear message.  We believe Darnold is a franchise QB and is going to be here for a long time.  If after trading a 2nd or 3rd, you then turn around and dont pick up the option, you are sending out a message that we dont believe in Sam Darnold and we just threw away a 2nd or 3rd on a whim and prayer.  While that may be true, that's not the message you want to send on a whim and prayer.   

#2 Josh Allen is probably going to be extended this offseason for more than Mahomes.  That's going to drive the price on the tag up probably over $30M, If Baker or Jackson are extended it could be over $32M.  And those #s are also fully guaranteed.  

I would say it's almost a certainty that the Team acquiring Darnold will pick up the option.  The one scenario I could see where that doesnt happen is if NYJ decline his option, and then trade him, but the asset received would be significantly less.  

[Heinz D.]

20 hours ago, WindyCity said:

If we are replacing someone on the defense who makes comparable money that would be fine.

But we cannot add more resources to the defense.

It's entirely possible he would play for cheap. But still...yeah, you'd probably need to shed somebody's contract.

19 hours ago, topwop1 said:

Ryan also counts a guaranteed $45M against Atlanta's cap over the next 2 years so he's not going anywhere.

The Eagles are taking a $33 million hit by trading Wentz. So, it's not entirely out of the question that Atlanta would move Ryan. However, with Wentz, and probably Darnold and Garropolo, on the move, I doubt there would be many takers for Ryan.

16 hours ago, G08 said:

 

The direct response was, "We made a better offer"? Is that supposed to make sense? Does he mean they received a better offer than two seconds, plus a potential third or fourth? Or does he mean they countered that offer with a bigger one?

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

My point is those who have doubts about Pace’s ability to address the QB spot in a satisfactory manner are living in an evidence based world. The GM is bad, the options are limited, and the resources are not abundant.

Ehh, I don't know. He's only tried once, on a guy that a bunch of other people were also sold on. And it's not like Mitch had a bunch of warning signs that Pace simply chose to ignore, like Beathered with Ryan Leaf, Davis with JaMarcus Russell, or Clark with Tim Couch. 

The really disturbing part is that Pace only tried once. 

[AZBearsFan]

16 minutes ago, Heinz D. said:

It's entirely possible he would play for cheap. But still...yeah, you'd probably need to shed somebody's contract.

The Eagles are taking a $33 million hit by trading Wentz. So, it's not entirely out of the question that Atlanta would move Ryan. However, with Wentz, and probably Darnold and Garropolo, on the move, I doubt there would be many takers for Ryan.

The direct response was, "We made a better offer"? Is that supposed to make sense? Does he mean they received a better offer than two seconds, plus a potential third or fourth? Or does he mean they countered that offer with a bigger one?

Ehh, I don't know. He's only tried once, on a guy that a bunch of other people were also sold on. And it's not like Mitch had a bunch of warning signs that Pace simply chose to ignore, like Beathered with Ryan Leaf, Davis with JaMarcus Russell, or Clark with Tim Couch. 

The really disturbing part is that Pace only tried once. 

He’s only tried once in the draft. I agree that that is disturbing. My bigger concern is that once it was apparent that didn’t work the subsequent move (to date) wasn’t a significant one. Foles was never a potential long term option. Whether or not Pace should be the GM anymore or whether the chance he gets it right is good or not is irrelevant. He is, and this is his call.

For me, I’m all in favor of bold moves to get QB right until we actually get it right, and bold moves come with risk. Wentz is a bold move. A trade up for Fields is a bold move. Darnold or Minshew? Kinda bold, but with a lower expectation for success to me. Mariota or Winston same but even lower on the expectations. Fitzpatrick is a bandage move in a more fun package than Foles. 

[abstract_thought]

1 hour ago, Superman(DH23) said:

I'm not saying they should (I'm strongly anti-Sam Darnold), I'm saying they will.  There are a couple reasons.  #1 messaging.  If you trade for Sam Darnold, you are sending a clear message.  We believe Darnold is a franchise QB and is going to be here for a long time.  If after trading a 2nd or 3rd, you then turn around and dont pick up the option, you are sending out a message that we dont believe in Sam Darnold and we just threw away a 2nd or 3rd on a whim and prayer.  While that may be true, that's not the message you want to send on a whim and prayer.   

#2 Josh Allen is probably going to be extended this offseason for more than Mahomes.  That's going to drive the price on the tag up probably over $30M, If Baker or Jackson are extended it could be over $32M.  And those #s are also fully guaranteed.  

I would say it's almost a certainty that the Team acquiring Darnold will pick up the option.  The one scenario I could see where that doesnt happen is if NYJ decline his option, and then trade him, but the asset received would be significantly less.  

I don't assume any team is trading for Darnold with the idea of him being a sure-fire QB of the future. It's a shot in the dark option for teams that don't have the resources to go for an established guy.

[Heinz D.]

20 minutes ago, AZBearsFan said:

For me, I’m all in favor of bold moves to get QB right until we actually get it right, and bold moves come with risk. Wentz is a bold move. A trade up for Fields is a bold move. Darnold or Minshew? Kinda bold, but with a lower expectation for success to me. Mariota or Winston same but even lower on the expectations. Fitzpatrick is a bandage move in a more fun package than Foles. 

This thread has sort of become a monster, with stuff flying in all directions, but I've long maintained that what I'd most like to see happen is a move into the top three for Wilson or Fields, preferably Wilson--who I think has a legit chance to be even better than Lawrence. A lot of other things would have to occur for that to go down, and the likelihood would be that one of those things is that Watson ends up with the Jets or the Dolphins. (If I ran the Jets, I'd keep Darnold and trade #2 to the Bears for picks and young players in a crackhead heartbeat...but I don't run the Jets. 😁)

I'm becoming even more convinced that I'd rather they grab Darnold and/or Minshew than Wentz. The whole Wentz thing is too scary, too much of a gamble, imo. And Nagy isn't Frank Reich, who'd likely have more success anyway.

Fitzpatrick would be fine as a bridge, in the case the Bears got Jones or Trask and wanted to have the rookie sit. Lance scares me. I want no part of Mariota or Winston. 

[WindyCity]

Mike Glennon and Nick Foles happened whether people want to pretend they don’t.

All moves count.

If Pace gets credit for nice cheap finds in Urban and Mario Edwards he gets dinged for big mistakes in Glennon and Foles.

He has made 3 significant moves at QB and all 3 have sucked.

[G08]

1 hour ago, Heinz D. said:

The direct response was, "We made a better offer"? Is that supposed to make sense? Does he mean they received a better offer than two seconds, plus a potential third or fourth? Or does he mean they countered that offer with a bigger one?

My interpretation was that it's "known" that the Colts offered two second round picks plus a potential third or fourth.

The team he spoke to said that we (being the other team) made a better offer than the reported Colts offer.

[BEAR FACE DOWN ARROW]

The big failure being Mitch, I think that was just luck of the draw on QBs,  if I'm remembering correctly he was the conensus top QB, with Watson as 2.  That was just how things work in the draft sometimes, easy to find the faults after the fact. 

That said, heere's a partial list of QBs that have been here while Pace has:  Cutler, Clausen, Hoyer, Glennon, Trubsiky, Foles, Fales, Bray, Daniel, Barkley. That list sucks, and not partially.  The best QB on that list is still bad.  I think Pace is setup to fail again this year, and I don't get why he's still here.  Either we cripple future drafts, or we get insanely lucky at pick 20 (or move and also get insanely lucky).  Do the Bears seem like a lucky team?

[WindyCity]

4 minutes ago, RunningVaccs said:

The big failure being Mitch, I think that was just luck of the draw on QBs,  if I'm remembering correctly he was the conensus top QB, with Watson as 2.  That was just how things work in the draft sometimes, easy to find the faults after the fact. 

That said, heere's a partial list of QBs that have been here while Pace has:  Cutler, Clausen, Hoyer, Glennon, Trubsiky, Foles, Fales, Bray, Daniel, Barkley. That list sucks, and not partially.  The best QB on that list is still bad.  I think Pace is setup to fail again this year, and I don't get why he's still here.  Either we cripple future drafts, or we get insanely lucky at pick 20 (or move and also get insanely lucky).  Do the Bears seem like a lucky team?

Mitch was a bad pick.

But his development plan was moronic as well.

He spent his rookie year with Fox and the worst weapons in the entire world.

He spent the next 3 years with a knock off version of Andy Reid and an OL that couldn’t execute the system.

Mitch isn’t good. But he had no chance with the plan that was in place.

[G08]

Dave Wannstedt:

"I’ve talked to some people in Philly. They’re adamant about moving him. He’s adamant about moving. It sounds like he would like to go to the Colts, but the Colts are not gonna budge on what they are willing to give up. So I think … I would expect it to happen for the Bears this week."