Jump to content

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, Tony said:

Bears need to be making serious phone calls to Atlanta about Matt Ryan. I'd be all over that, and may overpay to make it happen. 

yeah I was talking to my friend about that yesterday. The bears just are likely better off finding serviceability or a "top 15" qb as the vikes attempted. The Matt Ryan/Dalton/Newton/Foles route seems likely to be available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think those are conversations you have in the off-season. I don't think you have that conversation now.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Chisoxfn said:

I think those are conversations you have in the off-season. I don't think you have that conversation now.  

Ideally, but every year you waste in this window is costing you. The future is RIGHT now. It's evident to most Mitch isn't the guy long term, so if something presents itself I think you have to make a move. I know a QB change during the season is incredibly difficult, I just don't think you have anymore time to waste on "figuring it out" with Mitch. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Tony said:

Ideally, but every year you waste in this window is costing you. The future is RIGHT now. It's evident to most Mitch isn't the guy long term, so if something presents itself I think you have to make a move. I know a QB change during the season is incredibly difficult, I just don't think you have anymore time to waste on "figuring it out" with Mitch. 

I don't think you can upgrade QB during the season. Too much complications with system changes, etc. I also am not ready to jump to any conclusions based upon 3 games (one of which was pretty good - the Vikings game).  Plus, Trubisky played against all good defenses this year (with exception of the Redskins game and in that game, he did exactly what he needed to).  

The Bears offense has issues though and the fastest way to correct it is for Trubisky to take a step or two forward vs. the step back he took to start the year.  The big question mark is how limited will he be coming back from his injury.  I'm curious how he will be able to run and whether his mechanics will be impacted by the left shoulder injury.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chisoxfn said:

I don't think you can upgrade QB during the season. Too much complications with system changes, etc. I also am not ready to jump to any conclusions based upon 3 games (one of which was pretty good - the Vikings game).  Plus, Trubisky played against all good defenses this year (with exception of the Redskins game and in that game, he did exactly what he needed to).  

The Bears offense has issues though and the fastest way to correct it is for Trubisky to take a step or two forward vs. the step back he took to start the year.  The big question mark is how limited will he be coming back from his injury.  I'm curious how he will be able to run and whether his mechanics will be impacted by the left shoulder injury.  

If I were the Bears, I would look at drafting a QB early again, mainly because I believe you could strategize an approach where you focus on defense and leverage young, cheap QB's for the next few years (unless you have a truly transcendent QB).  I really think the new model is...win with a solid young QB on the cheap or win with a truly great QB who is paid at that level.  IF you get caught in between (which is what a ton of teams do...see Stafford, Goff (potentially), Ryan, etc), you end up not ever being able to field a good enough team around that above average, but not elite QB.  Heck, even the elite QB's can have a hard time overcoming the cap implications.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

Is there any way the Bears could pull that off with the salary cap?

Kyle Long + Chase Daniel?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Chisoxfn said:

If I were the Bears, I would look at drafting a QB early again, mainly because I believe you could strategize an approach where you focus on defense and leverage young, cheap QB's for the next few years (unless you have a truly transcendent QB).  I really think the new model is...win with a solid young QB on the cheap or win with a truly great QB who is paid at that level.  IF you get caught in between (which is what a ton of teams do...see Stafford, Goff (potentially), Ryan, etc), you end up not ever being able to field a good enough team around that above average, but not elite QB.  Heck, even the elite QB's can have a hard time overcoming the cap implications.  

This is true but there is going to be a crapton of QB movement this offseason and some very serviceable guys may be available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bmags said:

This is true but there is going to be a crapton of QB movement this offseason and some very serviceable guys may be available.

If I am the Bears, regardless of how Trubisky does, I probably bring in a guy on a one year deal that is serviceable.  With this D, you need a better contingent plan than Chase Daniel and you need to be prepared for the risk that Trubisky doesn't pan out.  

Mariotta & Carr are two guys that clearly could be out there, along with Matt Ryan.  Mariotta was someone the Bears brass liked previously (not sure whether Nagy did). HE clearly has struggled in the pro's.  That said, he's never been surrounded with strong offensive coaches/schemes.  The Titans (and injuries) have turned him into more of a pocket passer than he should be. Than again, the Bears (or other teams defensive schemes) have done the same to Mitch this year as well.  

I do think Nagy probably has had his own challenges from having a guy like Smith as his QB for so long. Very very savy vet who could handle any defensive scheme is a huge difference from a young QB (in this era).  I honestly think people drastically underestimate how long it takes for a QB to be "savy" at reads and how much you need to use scheme and simplicity early in a QB's career.  I think Matt wants to go heavy heavy and the reality is, it takes YEAR(S) to get there.  Even Mahomes, you've seen him more limited when teams hold him to the pocket (not that there are many cases of that) and make him truly dissect a d.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Chisoxfn said:

If I am the Bears, regardless of how Trubisky does, I probably bring in a guy on a one year deal that is serviceable.  With this D, you need a better contingent plan than Chase Daniel and you need to be prepared for the risk that Trubisky doesn't pan out.  

Mariotta & Carr are two guys that clearly could be out there, along with Matt Ryan.  Mariotta was someone the Bears brass liked previously (not sure whether Nagy did). HE clearly has struggled in the pro's.  That said, he's never been surrounded with strong offensive coaches/schemes.  The Titans (and injuries) have turned him into more of a pocket passer than he should be. Than again, the Bears (or other teams defensive schemes) have done the same to Mitch this year as well.  

I do think Nagy probably has had his own challenges from having a guy like Smith as his QB for so long. Very very savy vet who could handle any defensive scheme is a huge difference from a young QB (in this era).  I honestly think people drastically underestimate how long it takes for a QB to be "savy" at reads and how much you need to use scheme and simplicity early in a QB's career.  I think Matt wants to go heavy heavy and the reality is, it takes YEAR(S) to get there.  Even Mahomes, you've seen him more limited when teams hold him to the pocket (not that there are many cases of that) and make him truly dissect a d.  

Mariota, Winston are obvious, but then you have Foles possibly moving with Minshew's play. Flyers on josh rosen, too.

Then some big question marks: Does Kyle Allen's play have them move on from Newton? Does Alex Smith get traded? Does Matt Ryan become available? Does Philip Rivers become available? Does Andy Dalton become available?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Chisoxfn said:

If I were the Bears, I would look at drafting a QB early again, mainly because I believe you could strategize an approach where you focus on defense and leverage young, cheap QB's for the next few years (unless you have a truly transcendent QB).  I really think the new model is...win with a solid young QB on the cheap or win with a truly great QB who is paid at that level.  IF you get caught in between (which is what a ton of teams do...see Stafford, Goff (potentially), Ryan, etc), you end up not ever being able to field a good enough team around that above average, but not elite QB.  Heck, even the elite QB's can have a hard time overcoming the cap implications.  

I think I would start with the offensive line first. They really aren't getting it done. There have been no hole for the RB to run. I can't remember an inside run where the RB didn't get hit at the line or behind it. This offense won't go until play action works, I don't care who the QB is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ptatc said:

I think I would start with the offensive line first. They really aren't getting it done. There have been no hole for the RB to run. I can't remember an inside run where the RB didn't get hit at the line or behind it. This offense won't go until play action works, I don't care who the QB is.

How much of that is the line and how much of that is not having a straight ahead runner like Howard any more who can take the first little bit of contact without going down?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Balta1701 said:

How much of that is the line and how much of that is not having a straight ahead runner like Howard any more who can take the first little bit of contact without going down?

They had the same line last year and couldn't run block for Howard either. Run blocking has been poor last year and this year.  The major "if" is that last years oline (sans Daniels) was essentially the same oline that was pretty darn good at run blocking under John Fox and Adam Gase's scheme. Some of me thinks, some of the line issues are really related to scheme and prioritization on the run.  

I say that because Long is the only guy who "physically" has degraded and Daniels has all of the talent in the world at center.  I absolutely don't believe the Bears blocking issues are "talent" issues, however, they might be crap scheme and lack of commitment to the run issues (combined with poor fundamental play by certain players this year (see Leno). Again, I'm excluding Long from this since he clearly had significant issues.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Balta1701 said:

How much of that is the line and how much of that is not having a straight ahead runner like Howard any more who can take the first little bit of contact without going down?

It's the line.  There haven't been any holes. Hunt wasn't a straight ahead runner and thrived in a similar offense. Same with shady McCoy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Balta1701 said:

How much of that is the line and how much of that is not having a straight ahead runner like Howard any more who can take the first little bit of contact without going down?

Look at the holes the packers RBS get to run through tonight. The bears RBS haven't had one of those this entire year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lol at how rigged this game was with those two phantom hands to the face calls, the second when the DE was getting facemasked

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SoxAce said:

That was a terrible call and it's going to cost Detroit the game.

That’s about 4 calls tonight all went GB way as always 

Edited by Soxfest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Soxfest said:

That’s about 4 calls all went GB way as always 

Yep. One of the worst officiated games I've seen in quite sometime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked Booger McFarland. He spoke the truth about those crap calls. Doesn’t happen very often, imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know every team gets the benefit of the doubt on questionable calls here and there (and vice versa) but is it me or do the Packers seem to get way more favorable calls than get screwed by bad calls? Maybe the Patriots too? Those two penalties were so bad, you really have to start wondering...

Edited by MexSoxFan#1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×