Jump to content

2017 NFL off season thread


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (shipps @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 11:31 AM)
Why should that stop them from taking a QB at 3?

Because 1. no QB is worth the #3 pick and 2. they have greater needs elsewhere and they could start this year, helping the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 652
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (ptatc @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 11:46 AM)
Because 1. no QB is worth the #3 pick and 2. they have greater needs elsewhere and they could start this year, helping the team.

 

Extremely short sided view of how to go about a draft IMO. If you think a QB is going to be good it definitely worth the 3rd pick. I am not saying take one just to take one but if you think he is good you do. If one of these guys wind up being good it will be one of the worst blunders on Pace's resume and hold the team back even further when they could have had their guy. Especially if its a guy that they actually liked but thought "oh well we cant take him because he isnt worth a number 3, he is really like a number 15-20 pick...oh and it will create a controversy within the fanbase"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (shipps @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 11:57 AM)
Extremely short sided view of how to go about a draft IMO. If you think a QB is going to be good it definitely worth the 3rd pick. I am not saying take one just to take one but if you think he is good you do. If one of these guys wind up being good it will be one of the worst blunders on Pace's resume and hold the team back even further when they could have had their guy. Especially if its a guy that they actually liked but thought "oh well we cant take him because he isnt worth a number 3, he is really like a number 15-20 pick...oh and it will create a controversy within the fanbase"

I think if they were going to take a QB with the #3 pick, they wouldn't spend the money on Glennon. Yes, you most likely will need a placeholder anyway, but I think they would sign a guy a tier or so lower in salary commitment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 12:01 PM)
I think if they were going to take a QB with the #3 pick, they wouldn't spend the money on Glennon. Yes, you most likely will need a placeholder anyway, but I think they would sign a guy a tier or so lower in salary commitment.

 

Probably true but you would sign Glennon if you have the mindset of wanting to win next year + develop definite QB of future. Plus the possibility that Glennon may actually be the QB of the future which is a complete long shot, I know, but then you would have QB u took with the 3rd pick as an asset to trade at that point.

 

I dont believe that any part of this situation is good btw. Its all just hoping at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (shipps @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 12:13 PM)
Probably true but you would sign Glennon if you have the mindset of wanting to win next year + develop definite QB of future. Plus the possibility that Glennon may actually be the QB of the future which is a complete long shot, I know, but then you would have QB u took with the 3rd pick as an asset to trade at that point.

 

I dont believe that any part of this situation is good btw. Its all just hoping at this point.

Almost nobody is giving any of the quarterbacks in this class a top 5 grade. The Bears should not reach there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 08:29 AM)
Supposedly it's 3 years/45 million for Glennon lol. All about guaranteed money though. I'm guessing it's only 1 year of guaranteed money.

If there is a ton of guaranteed money, I don't like it. If the guaranteed money is right, I have no major problem with it. If we just sign him and ignore QB in the draft, I'll be irate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Boogua @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 12:15 PM)
Almost nobody is giving any of the quarterbacks in this class a top 5 grade. The Bears should not reach there.

 

Which is fine but I swear to god if any of the top three wind up being good I am going to lose my mind that the Bears didnt "reach" to take him at 3. And I will make sure that you ALL will never hear the end of it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (shipps @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 08:35 AM)
Other than those top three guys which you may be able to choose from all 3 you are likely not to find anyone who is going to amount to anything in a weaker draft for QB's. You really think the Bears are going to find their Dak Prescott somewhere in there? Historically the best QB in the leagues come out of the first round and even that isnt a great chance but they have to address this QB issue for the long term instead of p**** footing around the issue by signing mediocre stop gaps and drafting guys in the mid rounds. This cycle will never end if they keep going this way. They need to grow some balls and key in on one the top three guys. If he isnt there at 3 then fine. Or if they REALLY believe there is no chance that any of the top three will amount to anything in the NFL then fine. But I just have a hard time believing that out of Kizer, Watson and Trubisky that none of them are going to stick in this league as a good QB.

One wildcard to all of this is QB's just aren't developed like they used to so it is almost harder to scout them today then it was 10 years ago. So many spread / non pro offenses that it is hard to project how they will adapt in an NFL system (and ultimately their is a ton of development that happens in the league). With that in mind, I think we'll see more guys emerge in later rounds then historically would have happened. That said, If we sign Glennon we need to be aggressive in also drafting the guy the front office likes and if that means moving up into the back end of the 1st to ensure you get that guy, then you do it. Ideally, I'd move down @ 3 (there needs to be someone on the board though that another team would move up for), so that you have the ammunition to move up later and get that QB. I'd then draft whichever top safety was on the board with the pick we moved down with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 10:01 AM)
I think if they were going to take a QB with the #3 pick, they wouldn't spend the money on Glennon. Yes, you most likely will need a placeholder anyway, but I think they would sign a guy a tier or so lower in salary commitment.

Agree..Glennon tells me we are either moving back into the end of the 1st or taking a guy with our 2nd round pick. We aren't signing Glennon and taking a QB at 3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 12:23 PM)
Agree..Glennon tells me we are either moving back into the end of the 1st or taking a guy with our 2nd round pick. We aren't signing Glennon and taking a QB at 3.

Nope, as well they shouldnt. They are taking best available, and my guess is a DB or DL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 11:48 AM)
The NFL is only surpassed by the NBA in terms of bad money for bad players.

No way, NFL players are so underpaid when you take into account long-term health and non-guaranteed contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 01:17 PM)
If there is a ton of guaranteed money, I don't like it. If the guaranteed money is right, I have no major problem with it. If we just sign him and ignore QB in the draft, I'll be irate.

Agreed. It's all about the guaranteed money for me.

 

Due to several draft misses in 2014/2015, we don't have many folks up for big contract renewal in the next 2 years. So let's say Glennon gets $30M guaranteed over 2 years (which I still think is bad, but hear me out...), we have so much cap space that it doesn't hurt us much. Where else are we going to spend that money?

 

Fuller? No. Ferguson? No. Sutton? No. Carey? No. Grasu? No. Langford? No. Amos. No. White? Maybe. Goldman. Probably.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (dasox24 @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 01:14 PM)
Agreed. It's all about the guaranteed money for me.

 

Due to several draft misses in 2014/2015, we don't have many folks up for big contract renewal in the next 2 years. So let's say Glennon gets $30M guaranteed over 2 years (which I still think is bad, but hear me out...), we have so much cap space that it doesn't hurt us much. Where else are we going to spend that money?

 

Fuller? No. Ferguson? No. Sutton? No. Carey? No. Grasu? No. Langford? No. Amos. No. White? Maybe. Goldman. Probably.

 

Alshon Jeffrey? Oh, never mind

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (shipps @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 02:02 PM)
Is this being floated out there right now?

 

That should make everyone hurl.

 

That was from dasox post, but I didn't quote it. Instead I am quoting you.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (SoxPride18 @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 10:29 AM)
Supposedly it's 3 years/45 million for Glennon lol. All about guaranteed money though. I'm guessing it's only 1 year of guaranteed money.

This'll make the dude like the 23rd highest-paid starting QB in the league. I guess it could be worse. With the cap going up the numbers will follow. Hope for better than league average production while guaranteeing pay below the top 15 and hopefully grooming a new draft pick or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Y2JImmy0 @ Mar 8, 2017 -> 02:21 PM)
I actually think Jeffery is coming back. Niners signed Garcon and Marquise Goodwin. Philly is signing Kenny Britt. Leaves the Bears and Titans for Jeffery

 

Havent the Titans been the favorite for a while though?

 

I hope he comes back it just seems like he doesnt want to be given all things equal. Maybe this will end up how the Lance Briggs contract situation went.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...