Cutler cleared to play

Monk

I hate acronyms
Donator
Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
Posts:
15,976
Liked Posts:
6,451
Location:
Greenville, NC
I already told you what it meant. Rory was implying I didn't dispute anything. I am saying there are plenty of things I disputed. I simply didn't dispute people saying they wanted Prescott at the time of the draft. I disputed people using his current performance to criticize Pace not selecting him.

What should we use to criticize Pace for not selecting him? That's how it works on this planet. You want your favorite team to select a guy, your team doesn't, even with multiple chances in that round. The guy you wanted does well and shows his talent. Then you criticize the team for not selecting him, especially since he specifically said there were no QBs worth taking late.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

botfly10

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
32,873
Liked Posts:
26,851
I thought people had figured out to just leave the remy zone to B&I and not engage that shit on the main boards.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
What should we use to criticize Pace for not selecting him? That's how it works on this planet. You want your favorite team to select a guy, your team doesn't, even with multiple chances in that round. The guy you wanted does well and shows his talent. Then you criticize the team for not selecting him, especially since he specifically said there were no QBs worth taking late.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You should criticize him based on his thought process and information he had at the time of the draft. Teams miss on players all the time. What matters is not some isolated instance of them missing on a player but how they are doing overall IMO.

In addition, I don't see you or any fans coming on here and saying I wanted this player but he sucked ass so my bad for criticizing somone for not taking him. So it's just a self serving exercise.

I think we agree the Bears need a franchise QB. That guy is probably going to come from the 1st or 2nd round so I don't get all this angst over the fact Pace didn't think a 4th round QB was worth.

Again statistically most franchise QBs are being taken in the 4th round or later. Just because there are anecdotal instances of late round or undrafted QBs being good doesn't mean it's a good strategy for finding your franchise QBs.

Finally the teams like the Packers or Pats who I know some of you like to point out draft QBs a lot are doing so in part because they already have a franchise QB and they already are good. When you have the extreme lack of talent the Bears have and you still don't have a franchise QB, I don't think you have the luxury of trolling later rounds for lottery tickets. And even in those instances the most successful of their QBs are guys that were still high round picks like Rodgers and Garrapolo. You probably don't even remember the Rohan Daveys types ie the QBS they took in the later rounds that inevitably sucked ass which is the rule. The Pats and Pack can afford blowing picks like that when they have a Favre and Brady and when their roster is stacked with talent.

Now if I am mistaken and statistically the 4th round and later is where most teams are finding their franchise QB then let me know. Otherwise I find crying about an exception ie a 4th rounder actually becoming a franchise QB as if this was something Pace or anyone could reasonably predict based on the historical record of QB draft successes is dumb. Why? Because if you try to make a career out of trying to find exceptions then you'll probably be out of a job sooner rather than later because it's a recipe for failure in the long run.

Now to avoid the stupids from trolling, the above is speaking generally. There are always exceptions and if ultimately you've got a late round QB as the BPA on your board or relatively close then by all means take him. But I don't think expecting him to be the answer to your search for a franchise QB makes sense.
 

Monk

I hate acronyms
Donator
Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
Posts:
15,976
Liked Posts:
6,451
Location:
Greenville, NC
Deon Bush, Nick Kwiatkoski, and Deondre Hall. They all look promising sure. But if you substitute any one of those player with Prescott, even if he doesn't pan out, I'm not mad at all. The, he did the best he could with the information he had is BS. He didn't draft any QBs even though we obviously need a QB. You will never hit on a franchise QB if you don't draft QBs. It's really that simple.

And if you think not drafting a 4th round QB because you want to draft a first round QB next year is sound thinking, you're wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
22,134
Liked Posts:
13,356
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
Kinda hard to grab a franchise QB when don't draft one.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
Deon Bush, Nick Kwiatkoski, and Deondre Hall. They all look promising sure. But if you substitute any one of those player with Prescott, even if he doesn't pan out, I'm not mad at all. The, he did the best he could with the information he had is BS. He didn't draft any QBs even though we obviously need a QB. You will never hit on a franchise QB if you don't draft QBs. It's really that simple.

And if you think not drafting a 4th round QB because you want to draft a first round QB next year is sound thinking, you're wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pace isn't drafting to ensure your happiness.

I'm wrong based on what? Please go look at the success rate of QBs drafted in the first and second round versus the 4th round and later?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap30...n-draft-origins-for-starting-nfl-quarterbacks

And here is another link to QB draft history. Can you let me know of all the 4th round picks and later, how many ended up being good starters in the NFL?

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?type=position

So no I think you are hyping up what is an exception to the general rule that franchise QBs are typically high round picks and ignoring all evidence that proves it's a dumb strategy to be hanging your hat on.

The Bears need a QB next year because they would never have dumped Cutler and taken a 20 million + cap hit this year. I would have loved if they had drafted a QB to groom this year but if they wanted to do that then I would have wanted them to draft one of the QBs available in the high rounds.

Since they didn't and knowing this year was always going to likely be a lost year, I have no problem with the Bears deferring their QB search to next year but they better be looking at the 1st and 2nd round for a QB IMO given the history.

This is a major decision they have. They shouldnt draft their franchise QB unless they are pretty confident on the pick because frankly if they fuck this up then they will probably all be fired.
 

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
22,134
Liked Posts:
13,356
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
If Pace drafted a QB, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

This team is last place team until we get our franchise QB. Imagine what would've happened if Pace would've traded up for Wentz...instead of Floyd?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Monk

I hate acronyms
Donator
Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
Posts:
15,976
Liked Posts:
6,451
Location:
Greenville, NC
Here's a link for you.

www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/dak-prescott?id=2555260

Projected in round 3. Thought of as an ideal backup. Cowboys were rumored to prefer him as Romo's backup from the beginning.

No he's not drafting for my happiness. He's apparently drafting to not get better. You do realize there would have been 0 reason to dump Cutler this year after drafting Dak right. Statistics do not matter. We're talking about a real life situation that we see the result.

Are you seriously going to say our three 4th round draft picks we're a better decision than picking Prescott? And that it's because of statistics? The Cowboys didn't draft him to start this year and neither would we have. But to not draft any QB and say there were none worth talking is a joke.

I'm not even saying Prescott is going to be a good starter going forward. But he's has way more potential than any QB we have and he would not hinder selecting a QB in the first round this year.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
If Pace drafted a QB, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

This team is last place team until we get our franchise QB. Imagine what would've happened if Pace would've traded up for Wentz...instead of Floyd?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes and that to me is a better criticism than crying about a 4th round QB.

There is a better argument to be made that he should have just given up whatever he needed to do to get Mariotta when he was trying to get him 2 years ago or that he should have traded up for one of the top QBs this year.

Having said that, he better address it in next year's draft or via trade or he's probably not long for the Bears. And he may have lucked out that we will be so bad this year that we may be able to get a top QB without having to give up draft picks.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
Here's a link for you.

www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/dak-prescott?id=2555260

Projected in round 3. Thought of as an ideal backup. Cowboys were rumored to prefer him as Romo's backup from the beginning.

No he's not drafting for my happiness. He's apparently drafting to not get better. You do realize there would have been 0 reason to dump Cutler this year after drafting Dak right. Statistics do not matter. We're talking about a real life situation that we see the result.

Are you seriously going to say our three 4th round draft picks we're a better decision than picking Prescott? And that it's because of statistics? The Cowboys didn't draft him to start this year and neither would we have. But to not draft any QB and say there were none worth talking is a joke.

I'm not even saying Prescott is going to be a good starter going forward. But he's has way more potential than any QB we have and he would not hinder selecting a QB in the first round this year.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And yet he lasted to the end of the 4th round.

We didn't need an ideal backup because we knew we could sign Hoyer. We needed someone we believed could be the franchise QB after we dump Cutler next year.

And I am not saying they would have cut Cutler if they drafted Dak. I am saying they ultimately knew they had some time because Cutler was stuck here this year.

Next year they know they have to get a QB because Cutler can be cut for minimal cap hit and there is no way they can really justify keeping him beyond this year.

So drafting an ideal backup QB this year was not a necessity. We werent competing for the playoffs this year.
 

Monk

I hate acronyms
Donator
Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
Posts:
15,976
Liked Posts:
6,451
Location:
Greenville, NC
So Hoyer is an ideal backup?

Nobody in the 4th round should be a necessity. I'm saying the better move would have been Prescott over any of our 4th round picks. Even if he ends up being a good backup his whole career and you pick the starter next year, you have two guys growing up in your system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Bearly

Dissed membered
Donator
Joined:
Aug 17, 2011
Posts:
41,488
Liked Posts:
23,781
Location:
Palatine, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
I never 'blamed' Pace and I'm sure many here don't as well. Just wished he was ours at the time and now. It sure looked like we needed a Safety and the other 2 guys are solid but I would have preferred Prescott to Bush. I hope they prove me wrong. We had 3 picks, they got their solid guy in Kwiatkoski, took a high potential guy in Hall but Bush, while solid enough against the run isn't really a cover guy and the NFL is a passing league. He was a little bit of a reach and fill a need pick and that could as easily been less of a reach at a more important position. 3 picks is like playing with house money. Use one for the big payoff.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
So Hoyer is an ideal backup?

Nobody in the 4th round should be a necessity. I'm saying the better move would have been Prescott over any of our 4th round picks. Even if he ends up being a good backup his whole career and you pick the starter next year, you have two guys growing up in your system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What system? I'm not convinced Loggains is even here next year because the main reason he got promoted seems to be because of Cutler. So what Prescott learns Loggains system and then a next system next year?

The best move would be to draft players you have graded higher than other players. That apparently was the 3 guys we got. The Bears don't have the luxury to draft players based on Monk's ranking of them rather than their own. The 3 guys drafted can at least play special teams while they develop.

Look you can want whoever you want Monk. However Pace's decision here isn't as egregious as you are making it out to be. I don't think getting a young back up QB is as high on the list as getting getting a franchise QB and getting more talent on the team.
 

onebud34

Packer Fan
Donator
Joined:
Aug 16, 2011
Posts:
22,134
Liked Posts:
13,356
Location:
Favorite Corner Bar
My favorite teams
  1. Minnesota Twins
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Minnesota Wild
Promoting Loggains because of Cutler is just a bad football decision in itself.

Prescott seems like a pretty bright football guy, so I'm sure it wouldn't be so tough picking up on another system for him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
I never 'blamed' Pace and I'm sure many here don't as well. Just wished he was ours at the time and now. It sure looked like we needed a Safety and the other 2 guys are solid but I would have preferred Prescott to Bush. I hope they prove me wrong. We had 3 picks, they got their solid guy in Kwiatkoski, took a high potential guy in Hall but Bush, while solid enough against the run isn't really a cover guy and the NFL is a passing league. He was a little bit of a reach and fill a need pick and that could as easily been less of a reach at a more important position. 3 picks is like playing with house money. Use one for the big payoff.

I wasn't talking to you. I am talking to Monk. He seems to be blaming Pace given the tone of his comments.

I already told you several times now that I don't take issue with your position because you at least try to understand things from Paces perspective at the time.

So I honestly don't know why you keep jumping in like I am talking to you.

It's Monk who is acting like Pace was just dumb for not picking Prescott. If he said what you said above then we wouldn't be having this debate.
 

remydat

CCS Hall of Fame
Donator
CCS Hall of Fame '19
Joined:
Sep 15, 2012
Posts:
58,081
Liked Posts:
38,088
Promoting Loggains because of Cutler is just a bad football decision in itself.

Prescott seems like a pretty bright football guy, so I'm sure it wouldn't be so tough picking up on another system for him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well I presume the thought process was to keep some sense of continuity. Honestly I don't care though because again I think it was a lost year regardless. Now if they keep him as OC next year once they bring in the new QB then I would find that stupid as shit unless he somehow turns into a great OC by the end of the season.

And I agree Prescott would be able to learn a new system. I just pointed it out because Monk talked about having Prescott grow up in your system so was just noting I don't think that would be the case as I don't think Loggains is going to be OC beyond this year.
 

Monk

I hate acronyms
Donator
Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
Posts:
15,976
Liked Posts:
6,451
Location:
Greenville, NC
Cutler is the starter.

What system? I'm not convinced Loggains is even here next year because the main reason he got promoted seems to be because of Cutler. So what Prescott learns Loggains system and then a next system next year?

The best move would be to draft players you have graded higher than other players. That apparently was the 3 guys we got. The Bears don't have the luxury to draft players based on Monk's ranking of them rather than their own. The 3 guys drafted can at least play special teams while they develop.

Look you can want whoever you want Monk. However Pace's decision here isn't as egregious as you are making it out to be. I don't think getting a young back up QB is as high on the list as getting getting a franchise QB and getting more talent on the team.

It was a bad decision. The proof is there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Monk

I hate acronyms
Donator
Joined:
Oct 17, 2010
Posts:
15,976
Liked Posts:
6,451
Location:
Greenville, NC
I wasn't talking to you. I am talking to Monk. He seems to be blaming Pace given the tone of his comments.

I already told you several times now that I don't take issue with your position because you at least try to understand things from Paces perspective at the time.

So I honestly don't know why you keep jumping in like I am talking to you.

It's Monk who is acting like Pace was just dumb for not picking Prescott. If he said what you said above then we wouldn't be having this debate.

Who do I blame for not having any future potential at the QB position on the roster? Yes I'm blaming Pace. I'm not sold on his tenure so far. I'm not saying he can't turn it around but he won't if he can get a QB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Run the ball

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Jun 19, 2011
Posts:
9,943
Liked Posts:
3,897
Who do I blame for not having any future potential at the QB position on the roster? Yes I'm blaming Pace. I'm not sold on his tenure so far. I'm not saying he can't turn it around but he won't if he can get a QB


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A GM needs to be hired long term, enough of this needing to blame someone other than the players.

Successful franchises don't change underwear every other year. Lets give Pace a real chance.
 

Top