Jump to content

Official 2018-19 NFL Thread


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Jack Parkman said:

Nobody does, because we're not a fly on the wall. That doesn't mean that a GM isn't beyond criticism by anyone other than ownership. We make do with the data that is available to us as fans. 

You are criticizing something that might happen in two years.  That in itself should tell you that your criticism is a bit overreactionary and silly.

 

Im done here.   This bears season is exciting and i am not gonna keep responding to you constantly shitting on it because the Bears might not have enough money in 2020 to replace Mitch trubisky if he might suck

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kyyle23 said:

You are criticizing something that might happen in two years.  That in itself should tell you that your criticism is a bit overreactionary and silly.

 

Im done here.   This bears season is exciting and i am not gonna keep responding to you constantly shitting on it because the Bears might not have enough money in 2020 to replace Mitch trubisky if he might suck

I'm not trying to shit upon it. I agree let's just watch and enjoy the remainder of this season and let it play out. I'm done posting in this thread until after they play NE in 3 weeks. See you then. 

I don't see anything wrong with saying they shouldn't waste a great defensive unit for the second time in 15 years because of incompetence at QB. It isn't to that point yet, but they should be prepared for the possibility that it occurs.  Pace should learn from Angelo's mistakes. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I'm not trying to shit upon it. I agree let's just watch and enjoy the remainder of this season and let it play out. I'm done posting in this thread until after they play NE in 3 weeks. See you then. 

I don't see anything wrong with saying they shouldn't waste a great defensive unit for the second time in 15 years because of incompetence at QB. Pace should learn from Angelo's mistakes. 

Without trading for Mack, this would have been a barely top 10 defense instead of top 3. So you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

No. He needs to have a contingency plan in 2019-2020 if Mitch hasn't shown enough by then. I don't think he should have drafted his successor, it isn't time for that yet. Depending on #10's performance the remainder of this season he should in a top notch vet backup next year(he should probably do that regardless in event of injury), and if Mitch still sucks by 2020, he should have a decent option to replace him. No QB should be drafted early until 2020 at earliest. I just wish they had a 1st rounder just in case. Maybe they can trade to the bottom half if need be with their 2 2nds. I just don't want them to waste this defense's prime. They need to have a quick trigger finger on Mitch in order to maximize the defense's best years. Pace has made his own bed with this roster construction and salary structure. He needs to make the right moves accordingly with where they are now. If Mitch is great, none of this matters but I'm just saying I hope he has a plan B that he can break the glass of in case of emergency. 

So what exactly are you ranting about here?  What is this plan?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Nobody does, because we're not a fly on the wall. That doesn't mean that a GM isn't beyond criticism by anyone other than ownership. We make do with the data that is available to us as fans.  Ownership and the other people in the FO are the only ones that have a complete data set. Are you saying that they are the only ones qualified to evaluate a GM's performance? I guess we should all STFU and say they know more about their respective sport than we ever will and take whatever they say as gospel. 

Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? 

I agree with this part of your post, though not for the reasons you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Without trading for Mack, this would have been a barely top 10 defense instead of top 3. So you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Agreed. Not arguing that. Again, I argued for acquiring Mack in August. The trade itself was great. All I was saying is that the success and failure of this team all comes down to Trubisky, and they should have an "in case of emergency, break glass" plan B in the event he sucks badly enough that they're going to waste the defense. That shouldn't be controversial or a ridiculous thought. I hope it doesn't come to that, but we have to see. I just hope if that does occur, he has a plan to create the cap space to acquire a QB that can do enough to win one SB for them. 

Again No more questions. I don't want to make another post in this thread until after they play NE at Soldier Field in 3 weeks. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

He has to have the depth necessary to create the cap space to have that option if it comes to that. Don't ask any more questions. I'm out until after the NE game in 3 weeks. 

Is this really going back to the draft picks for Mack?  That the Bears won't be able to draft another quarterback in two years because of this?  Is that what this means?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Is this really going back to the draft picks for Mack?  That the Bears won't be able to draft another quarterback in two years because of this?  Is that what this means?

No. More about the cap space and salary structure.  Just leave me alone and ruminate amongst yourselves until after the NE game. I'll make an appearance after I have 2 more games to evaluate Trubisky on. I really want to see him against a Belichick defense before making any more judgment calls on him. I've said what I am going to say. 

Edited by Jack Parkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

Agreed. Not arguing that. Again, I argued for acquiring Mack in August. The trade itself was great. All I was saying is that the success and failure of this team all comes down to Trubisky, and they should have an "in case of emergency, break glass" plan B in the event he sucks badly enough that they're going to waste the defense. That shouldn't be controversial or a ridiculous thought. I hope it doesn't come to that, but we have to see. I just hope if that does occur, he has a plan to create the cap space to acquire a QB that can do enough to win one SB for them. 

Again No more questions. I don't want to make another post in this thread until after they play NE at Soldier Field in 3 weeks. 

“No more questions”

*answers question 4 minutes later*

You’re waiting for the Pats game? So, what, if they lose 23-20, you were right and we’re all stupid?

What are you going for here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Jack Parkman said:

I'm not trying to shit upon it. I agree let's just watch and enjoy the remainder of this season and let it play out. I'm done posting in this thread until after they play NE in 3 weeks. See you then. 

I don't see anything wrong with saying they shouldn't waste a great defensive unit for the second time in 15 years because of incompetence at QB. It isn't to that point yet, but they should be prepared for the possibility that it occurs.  Pace should learn from Angelo's mistakes. 

You can’t have both Jack.  Either you can acquire Mack (costing cap space & draft resources) and build an elite defense or you can save those assets for a rainy day if our GM is wrong & Mitch ultimately flops.  I’m not sure what the latter really accomplishes if your goal is to win a championship.  I’d rather trust our front offices evaluation of Mitch and go for it while he has a cheap contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, soxfan49 said:

“No more questions”

*answers question 4 minutes later*

You’re waiting for the Pats game? So, what, if they lose 23-20, you were right and we’re all stupid?

What are you going for here?

Of course, because it the game they are most likely to look bad in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Chicago White Sox said:

You can’t have both Jack.  Either you can acquire Mack (costing cap space & draft resources) and build an elite defense or you can save those assets for a rainy day if our GM is wrong & Mitch ultimately flops.  I’m not sure what the latter really accomplishes if your goal is to win a championship.  I’d rather trust our front offices evaluation of Mitch and go for it while he has a cheap contract.

Somebody previously mentioned Seattle as a good comp, where they had extra money to spend because of Wilson being cheap, and they took full advantage of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Of course, because it the game they are most likely to look bad in.

Can’t wait to leave Soldier Field on 10/21, open this thread, and see “I told you so” from Jack Parkman. Awesome!

Edited by soxfan49
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kyyle23 said:

Broncos should be pissed though, the play clock definitely hit zero on the last drive and they were not penalized

That is so common though. It was bad but it was probably within .5 a second.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Jack Parkman said:

Agreed. Not arguing that. Again, I argued for acquiring Mack in August. The trade itself was great. All I was saying is that the success and failure of this team all comes down to Trubisky, and they should have an "in case of emergency, break glass" plan B in the event he sucks badly enough that they're going to waste the defense. That shouldn't be controversial or a ridiculous thought. I hope it doesn't come to that, but we have to see. I just hope if that does occur, he has a plan to create the cap space to acquire a QB that can do enough to win one SB for them. 

Again No more questions. I don't want to make another post in this thread until after they play NE at Soldier Field in 3 weeks. 

have you seen the QB depth in next years draft?  He's a hint...it sucks ass.  The year after that should be better but a long way off and the Bears wouldn't be in any position to draft one of the top QBs anyway.  Plan B is a moot point.  Like I said earlier...the only other think I would have done is snatched up Luke Falk when the Titans cut him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thxfrthmmrs said:

Without trading for Mack, this would have been a barely top 10 defense instead of top 3. So you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

Mack is what Ditka traded his entire draft for way back when.  Shit happens but that trade was straight up highway robbery.  Going to keep Vic employed and looking like Dick Labeau. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Harry Chappas said:

Mack is what Ditka traded his entire draft for way back when.  Shit happens but that trade was straight up highway robbery.  Going to keep Vic employed and looking like Dick Labeau. 

 

 

wait what?  Ditka traded his entire draft for Ricky Williams, and they all got fired because of that.  I dont really see how its the same thing, because it looks like Mack is going to keep everyone employed.

 

This is the packers getting Reggie White.   Except, just coming into his prime Reggie White, as opposed to just a few years left Reggie White

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...