Norm Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 3 minutes ago, Sasquatch said: Perhaps you didn't really read my post. I was referring to Bucky, the dude who wrote the article that I was referencing, and a few other writers who've referred to Love as a "franchise QB". I THINK the idea is, when you take a QB R1, that's what your plan is, not that anyone thinks that's exactly what he is right now, I'm sure Bucky would say the same thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Norm said: I THINK the idea is, when you take a QB R1, that's what your plan is, not that anyone thinks that's exactly what he is right now, I'm sure Bucky would say the same thing No doubt. I agree. It’s just one of those things that bugs me. Love has “potential”, and until otherwise proven, that’s it at this point. Edited May 3, 2020 by Sasquatch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incognito_man Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 30 minutes ago, Sasquatch said: No doubt. I agree. It’s just one of those things that bugs me. Love has “potential”, and until otherwise proven, that’s it at this point. I dunno, he is a franchise QB. Doesn't mean he will be a good one, but the franchise (front office) effectively staked their careers on him (with the understanding he could bust and our FO finds another solution at the position and survive, but they're all-in on him now). That's how Ive always defined it internally. If a QB busts and his coaches and GM get fired, that's a significant effect on the franchise ha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 (edited) 21 minutes ago, incognito_man said: I dunno, he is a franchise QB. Doesn't mean he will be a good one, but the franchise (front office) effectively staked their careers on him (with the understanding he could bust and our FO finds another solution at the position and survive, but they're all-in on him now). That's how Ive always defined it internally. If a QB busts and his coaches and GM get fired, that's a significant effect on the franchise ha. I’m not sure I agree (yet) but you make a damn good point. It’ll be interesting to see if Pace and Nagy are canned over the Trubisky deal. I suppose their fate may well rest on whether Foles can step in and bail them out. Perhaps my reticence with calling Love a franchise QB “now” rests with my feelings about his potential - I watched quite a bit of footage from both 2018 and 2019 to know he has talent, but I’m honestly unable to see a strong correlation with him and Mahomes, or other Blue Chip QB’s I’ve seen. It’s all good - it’s just my personal opinion. I’ll get fully on board with the franchise deal if and when he passes the clipboard to someone else and succeeds Rodgers as our legit starter. Edited May 3, 2020 by Sasquatch Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 Jaire Alexander had a game sealing interception with 16 seconds left. Packers were ahead 28-23 and had to punt with 1:38 left. Ravens marched downfield and got it to the 23 yard line. This time my Madden season will come true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTwoSixFive Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 2 hours ago, Sasquatch said: Perhaps you didn't really read my post. I was referring to Bucky, the dude who wrote the article that I was referencing, and a few other writers who've referred to Love as a "franchise QB". I did read the post and Bucky's comments. He said he 'could be' not that he would be, so no-one is ordaining anything........which is my point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 6 minutes ago, OneTwoSixFive said: I did read the post and Bucky's comments. He said he 'could be' not that he would be, so no-one is ordaining anything........which is my point. Huh, how was that the point of your post? All you said was you hadn’t seen anyone on this forum call Love a “franchise QB”. You never referenced Bucky’s post - I did. And Incognito just called Love a Franchise QB a few comments up, so I guess we DO have folks here that believe that. Which I’m cool with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 12 minutes ago, Sasquatch said: Huh, how was that the point of your post? All you said was you hadn’t seen anyone on this forum call Love a “franchise QB”. You never referenced Bucky’s post - I did. And Incognito just called Love a Franchise QB a few comments up, so I guess we DO have folks here that believe that. Which I’m cool with. I think it depends on the nebulous definition of Franchise QB. Some view it as a stud QB. Others view it as a guy that the franchise is tethered to for a significant number of years. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sasquatch Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 1 minute ago, AlexGreen#20 said: I think it depends on the nebulous definition of Franchise QB. Some view it as a stud QB. Others view it as a guy that the franchise is tethered to for a significant number of years. Wholeheartedly agree - it is nebulous - nobody is right or wrong to call a QB selected in the first round a franchise QB. I just find it premature, and even a bit cringe-worthy, but I admit that’s just my take. I’m more of the ilk that it’s a guy that’s proven in the NFL to earn the starting role for the GB Packers, right, wrong or indifferent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FinneasGage Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 guys i'd like to sign wr paul richardson wr taylor gabriel wr jarius wright te luke stocker t jared veldheer t laadrian waddle dl damion square dl damon harrison lb nigel bradham lb clay matthews lb wesley woodyard cb logan ryan cb tramon williams cb prince amukamara cb dre kirkpatrick cb darqueze dennard cb ross cockrell cb javien elliott s tavon wilson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted May 3, 2020 Author Share Posted May 3, 2020 9 hours ago, Sasquatch said: It’ll be interesting to see if Pace and Nagy are canned over the Trubisky deal. Why? Because they made a bad talent eval and drafted the wrong guy? Drafted this guy when they should have (or could have) drafted this other guy (?) - which just so happens to happen all the time...or alot. The Bears havent fared terribly. It's not like they turned the organization into bottom feeders. I think their fate should be decided by the bulk of the organizational / individual decisions/moves and results. Not a single talent (mis)judgement / decision - which happens all the time. Trubisky's not a bum. He's just not developed into the player they thought he'd become - or was capable of becoming. He didnt turn into Patrick or Deshaun - but the draft is *loaded* with those player to player: "Why'd we draft this guy when this guy was still on the board?" possibilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachbuns Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 8 hours ago, Sasquatch said: Wholeheartedly agree - it is nebulous - nobody is right or wrong to call a QB selected in the first round a franchise QB. I just find it premature, and even a bit cringe-worthy, but I admit that’s just my take. I’m more of the ilk that it’s a guy that’s proven in the NFL to earn the starting role for the GB Packers, right, wrong or indifferent. I'll say this about Gute drafting Love, even if he turns out to be a "decent" qb down the road, it was worth the choice. Look at the teams struggling to find their qb around the league that drafted much much higher over the years. A team to the south is a good example and a team to the west is paying $30 for one that who knows. Down the road, if he learns and "proven" to earn the job ... what a pick. If he doesn't, Rodgers will probably still be there flinging it around. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coachbuns Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 19 minutes ago, Leader said: Why? Because they made a bad talent eval and drafted the wrong guy? Drafted this guy when they should have (or could have) drafted this other guy (?) - which just so happens to happen all the time...or alot. The Bears havent fared terribly. It's not like they turned the organization into bottom feeders. I think their fate should be decided by the bulk of the organizational / individual decisions/moves and results. Not a single talent (mis)judgement / decision - which happens all the time. Trubisky's not a bum. He's just not developed into the player they thought he'd become - or was capable of becoming. He didnt turn into Patrick or Deshaun - but the draft is *loaded* with those player to player: "Why'd we draft this guy when this guy was still on the board?" possibilities. Absolutely. This was a huge mistake on their part drafting somebody so high (moving up besides) for an unproven qb commodity. Then they traded for Mack betting on the come that Trubisky was their qb of the future. One can argue that trade too but the draft choices lost and monies spent elsewhere hasn't produced much of anything for them. One guy maybe doesn't get anybody fired but it sure puts them on notice if other personnel problems arise. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leader Posted May 3, 2020 Author Share Posted May 3, 2020 4 minutes ago, coachbuns said: Absolutely. This was a huge mistake on their part drafting somebody so high (moving up besides) for an unproven qb commodity. Then they traded for Mack betting on the come that Trubisky was their qb of the future. One can argue that trade too but the draft choices lost and monies spent elsewhere hasn't produced much of anything for them. One guy maybe doesn't get anybody fired but it sure puts them on notice if other personnel problems arise. I've not made it a practice to study the CHI roster moves, but as said previously - they've not become bottom feeders. The Trubisky decision hasnt panned out the way they envisioned - but the roster has some talent on it and the W+L's havent been atrocious. Was the roster constructed with good financial (or value) considerations? A subjective matter for others to haggle over - but I'd posit that if Trubisky was just a notch better.....or consistent than he's shown he's capable of too date...it would put the Mack trade (and its outlay of draft talent/expense) in an entirely different light. In other words the primary thing holding CHI back has been Trubisky IMO - so does that one decision and the failure of it to live up to hopes and dreams equate into a firing offense? I dont think so myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlexGreen#20 Posted May 3, 2020 Share Posted May 3, 2020 37 minutes ago, Leader said: Why? Because they made a bad talent eval and drafted the wrong guy? Drafted this guy when they should have (or could have) drafted this other guy (?) - which just so happens to happen all the time...or alot. The Bears havent fared terribly. It's not like they turned the organization into bottom feeders. I think their fate should be decided by the bulk of the organizational / individual decisions/moves and results. Not a single talent (mis)judgement / decision - which happens all the time. Trubisky's not a bum. He's just not developed into the player they thought he'd become - or was capable of becoming. He didnt turn into Patrick or Deshaun - but the draft is *loaded* with those player to player: "Why'd we draft this guy when this guy was still on the board?" possibilities. Eh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.